Wed Mar 28, 2012, 08:10 PM
CHIMO (9,065 posts)
Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair: pit bulls in Parliament
If the Liberals do the right thing and give Bob Rae the permanent nod as leader, the House of Commons will be featuring a new political play entitled “two pit bulls and the statesman” over the next few years. Whether this play will be a tragedy or a comedy will naturally depend on the public’s review down the road.
Thomas Mulcair’s ascendancy to his party’s leadership has been greeted with remarkable optimism from the ranks of the NDP and the media alike. Ringing notions that Stephen Harper has met his match abound, that Mulcair is the one who can bring the NDP to power in three and a half years. Holy hyperbole!
“Tom is the guy who can hit the ground running” is the rallying cry for the idea that Mulcair is about to hit more than the ground as he prepares for political fisticuffs with the Prime Minister.
I even heard NDP pundits talk about Mulcair as the guy who matches up well with the late Jack Layton. How so? Layton was about love over anger. He was indeed a happy warrior and that was what was so attractive to many who have recently come into the NDP fold. The politics of “nice.”
3 replies, 754 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair: pit bulls in Parliament (Original post)
|Joe Shlabotnik||Mar 2012||#2|
Response to CHIMO (Original post)
Wed Mar 28, 2012, 08:35 PM
laundry_queen (5,147 posts)
1. Yeah, Mulcair isn't in the same realm as Layton. At all.
But I think that's for the best right now. And I do know very little about him, I liked Nathan Cullen much better, but so far I've been pretty impressed. I disagree with the premise of the article - that Canadians want 'nice guys'. Not the Canadians I know. Jack Layton was able to pull it off but I think we can all agree that Jack broke the mold. I think Canadian politics is moving in a more American direction (unfortunately) where the anger and negativity will be more in the open. I also think that part of the reason Mulcair will do well is that people in the West LOVE angry leaders, and the NDP is setting its sights on a few more seats out West.
As for Bob Rae, I think he'd do well as permanent Liberal leader. I like him. It will be interesting to see the contrast between Bob Rae and Mulcair and how they critique the cons.
"My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world." ~ Jack Layton
Response to CHIMO (Original post)
Wed Mar 28, 2012, 09:01 PM
Joe Shlabotnik (2,877 posts)
2. This is a very partisan Liberal article, and a bit tough to swallow.
I understand it was an opinion piece, but I think it made some pretty simplistic statements and comparisons of Harper, Mulcair, and Layton, and didn't give any solid analysis as to why Rae gets a free pass. If anyone believes that Layton was all sunshine and rainbows, and lacked political opportunism then they really haven't followed Layton and the NDP's ascent over the last decade. And the assumption that Canadians want a 'nice' leader ignores the fact that many Canadians ARE angry, and feel betrayed by the waffling leadership, pandering, broken campaign promises, corruption and stagnation in Ottawa. Since parliament has resumed, Mulcair has demonstrated that he is nothing like Harper and the Conservatives, but rather articulate, focused and representing the concerns of everyday Canadians. I find that refreshing.
~ If we do not do the impossible, we shall be faced with the unthinkable. ~