Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

New political power paradigm could be on shaky ground if progressives coalesce, say Big Shift authors

The Tories have built a winning coalition between Ontario’s new Canadian suburbanites and the West, but Big Shift authors Darrell Bricker and John Ibbitson admit that the majority governing Conservatives’ mastery of Canada’s new power paradigm could be on shaky ground if progressive voters coalesce around one leader.

Mr. Bricker and Mr. Ibbitson have got tongues wagging in Ottawa with their bestselling book, The Big Shift: The Seismic Change in Canadian Politics, Business, and Culture and What It Means for Our Future, a bold revisioning of Canada’s political landscape.

National power no longer resides in Ontario and Quebec, but Ontario and the West, they reckon. The ‘Laurentian consensus’ on public policy is no longer dictated by the political class of urban Eastern Canada, but by the top-of-mind priorities apparently shared by new Canadians and the Conservatives’ western base: the economy, law and order, and less government.

Still, the new Conservative coalition benefits from a divided left. While the Tories won a commanding majority with 39 per cent of the vote in 2011, Liberals and New Democrats combined for 49 per cent of the popular vote.

“Anything that unites the progressive vote—which happens to be a bit larger than the Conservative vote—makes it difficult for the government to get re-elected,” said Mr. Bricker, a pollster with Ipsos Public Affairs, in an interview with The Hill Times.

But cooperation on the left remains a long shot for 2015, Mr. Ibbitson said.

“Right now, the values that are displayed both by the Western Conservative base and by these middle-class suburban immigrant voters are in alignment. It remains a permanent fact that it will advantage Conservatives until progressives can find a way to break that up, and at this point we don’t see how they can,” The Globe and Mail political affairs columnist told The Hill Times.

If their thesis is correct then 2011 was the year of the Big Shift. The Tories won a majority government with only five seats in Quebec, and the 2011 census numbers and a new electoral redistribution formula will give 15 seats to Ontario, six to both Alberta and B.C., and only three to Quebec in the next federal election in 2015.

Of the 30 new ridings currently being drafted, the Tories would have won 25 of them in 2011, according to data analysis by Conservative strategist Mitch Wexler of Politrain Consulting.

Mr. Wexler agreed that the new population identified in The Big Shift—some 2.5-million immigrants to Canada every decade, predominantly from China, India, and the Philippines—identify with the Conservatives’ platform right now, but he predicts that other parties will begin to adopt this demographic’s values to form government in the future.

“Right now the Conservative Party is the best party to do that, and the NDP, to a certain extent, does that as well,” Mr. Wexler told The Hill Times. “The Conservatives need to make sure that they’re still engaged with those communities and speaking to their values.”

The emergence of the West as an economic and political power may be long lasting, but The Big Shift’s authors agree that the Tories’ hold on this new political alliance is not guaranteed.

Mr. Bricker described Liberal leadership front-runner Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) as a “dangerous candidate” to challenge the Conservatives. Mr. Trudeau may have a tough time breaking through in Alberta and Saskatchewan, but he may also have what it takes to unite progressives and reverse recent Tory gains in Ontario.

“The reason he’s dangerous is because he has the type of profile that can potentially consolidate the progressive vote. The person in the short term who needs to be most worried about him is Thomas Mulcair, not Stephen Harper,” Mr. Bricker said.

Mr. Ibbitson agreed that Mr. Trudeau is a political force, but he still has a long way to go if he’s ever to wrestle support from the NDP and power from the Conservatives, and ultimately reinstate the Liberals as the governing party.

“Justin Trudeau is attempting to appeal to Millennial voters—those voters under the age of 35 who became a vital component of Barack Obama’s electoral constituency,” Mr. Ibbitson observed. “As yet, there is no compelling evidence that this is happening.”

In the new political landscape, future progressive governments will need to rely on a combination of Quebec, and hard-won gains in every province west of Quebec. That sets the stage for a battle between the Liberals and the NDP in the next election, while the Tories can remain above the fray by building on the Big Shift.

“If there is a progressive government, a progressive coalition in this country, it’ll have a French accent,” said Mr. Bricker.

While the No. 1 issue for Canadians continues to be health care, the economy remains the No. 1 issue that Canadians feel the government can do something about, according to one poll presented in The Big Shift. It’s irrelevant that the Conservatives haven’t balanced a budget since 2007, Mr. Bricker said, because the Conservatives are still considered the best party on that issue.

“It’s not that you have to be objectively great at it, you have to be competitively great at it,” he said. “If you’re seen as being the party that’s best able to [manage the economy], that’s more important politically than actually being able to do it. There’s no other party that’s even close to the Tories on this question.”

But if ability to manage the economy is the top issue, recent polling by Nanos Research suggests a decline in the Prime Minister’s popularity and an opportunity for his rivals.

Mr. Harper’s leadership score—an aggregate of his polling scores on trust, competence, and vision —has been trending downward in recent months after a spike in his public approval last fall. Of the 1,000 respondents polled last month, 31.7 per cent said the Prime Minister was the most competent leader, down from 38.1 per cent in January.

NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair (Outremont, Que.) and outgoing interim Liberal leader Bob Rae (Toronto Centre, Ont.), both hailing from core ‘Laurentian consensus’ ridings, continue to poll in the mid teens on competence, but 24.5 per cent of respondents told Nanos researchers that they were undecided on who the most competent leader is.

Mr. Trudeau, considered a lock to take over the reins of Liberal leadership when his party announces the results of its leadership vote on April 14, will inherit an opportunity to pick up on Mr. Rae’s support, and possibly a share of the nearly one-in-four people who currently don’t have faith in any of the national leaders’ competence.

The latest Nanos poll did not pitch Mr. Trudeau as a hypothetical candidate like many other polls have since before he entered the leadership race last fall. Polls have suggested that Mr. Trudeau’s popularity could catapult his party ahead of both the NDP and Conservatives.

Even if Mr. Trudeau doesn’t have a breakthrough in competence, his leadership threatens to be a disruptive force to the current political landscape.

Mr. Wexler said that Mr. Trudeau’s charisma could sway voters, be they part of the Big Shift or not, to vote on emotion rather than issues.

“In the end, if someone at a personal level can make an appeal that people really identify with in some way, then that can supersede everything else,” he said. “Emotion can play a big role in voting, but it’s still going to be a challenge for him because I think people are looking for real solutions.”

Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com
Author:  CHRIS PLECASH

No comments:

Post a Comment