Dinning has gone negative in exactly the wrong fashion. He has ignored the fact that he will need the voters he is slamming. It is exactly this arrogance against social conservatives that gave this province an Alliance MLA.
William McBeath over at Noises on the Right takes a part the latest hatchet job.
I hope PCs realize that their government is dependent on largely rural social conservatives 62 MLAs 41 of whom do not come from Edmonton or Calgary. Even if you discount a few of the urban left like Lethbridge West and Fort McMurray there are still a great deal of seats that are dependent on social conservatives for votes. Seats that allow the Tories to have government.
Imagine if 20 of those forty got split between the Liberals and the Alliance... Suddenly you have a weak government clinging to a majority by 1 seat (which would be forfitted to the Speaker) having to rely on the Alliance to make sure legislation passed?
If the Tories think they have it hard now... just wait.
The hatchet job Dinning is trying to do has almost by default put Ted Morton in the front runner position. It my mind it smacks of desperation, you are afraid you cannot win so you go negative to push the air out of the others campaign.
The stupidest thing in my mind, Dinning has gone and done almost exactly the same campaign tactic used by Paul Martin and Jean Chretien. I cannot see that winning over votes. If these voters are already angry this will just make them more committed to come out and vote.
In other words they have just took a stick to a hornets nest. It is a fools errand. If anything it will bring more votes to Morton while sending votes to Stelmach because Dinning will be seen as too negative.
Negative campaigns usually are to motivate your base and deflate the other guys... not sure this will do either.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
John, you've got an interesting analysis of Dinning's change of tactics, but I'm a bit confused. Didn't Dr. Morton open the door to this kind of campaign when he went on the personal offensive against Dinning a couple of weeks ago? Firing off barbs like "liberal lite" and calling Jim a "corporate backroom boy" don't exactly sound like straight forward challenges of Dinning's policy announcements.
Seems to me that you guys in Ted's camp were cheering him on at the forums when he lined up his sights on Dinning and took some jabs. But now that Dinning is turning the tables and shining a mirror on Ted's policy platform you guys are all draped in sanctimony.
I just don't understand how a man as principled as Dr. Morton can be so hypocritical. It disappoints me.
Oh please Negative campaigning is a part of all politics. What I have issue with is it is "exactly the wrong fashion" of campaigning.
Using the scary social conservative tactic is a time worn LIBERAL tradtion. So why would a PCer use it? There are many other ways he could poke holes.
Post a Comment