From: brewnoser2@gmail.com   
      
   June 28, 2015 - By National Post, Michael Den Tandt   
      
      
   Michael Den Tandt: Mulcair, Notley and the Goldilocks point   
      
      
   Polls confirm that if a federal election were held today, Thomas Mulcair would   
   become Canada's 23rd prime minister. This is unchartered territory   
      
   So, it's for real.  A succession of polls, most recently one Friday from   
   Ipsos, confirm that if a federal election were held today, Thomas Mulcair   
   would become Canada's 23rd prime minister.   
      
   Mulcair now has the support of 35 per cent of the electorate, give or take,   
   with both Liberals and Tories trailing in the high 20s. Even if these numbers   
   don't hold, which they of course may not, the very fact of this being a   
   wide-open three-way race,    
   with numerous possible outcomes, makes it uncharted territory.   
      
   It's all the more fascinating because there's such great uncertainty about the   
   cause.  Former Paul Martin communications director Scott Reid summed it up   
   Friday in the Ottawa Citizen: "The terrifying truth for today's not-so-stupid   
   political strategist    
   is that federal politics is suddenly in the mad grip of a phenomenon," Reid   
   wrote.  "And smart strategists hate being in the mad grip of a phenomenon,   
   even when it's working in their favour.  Because, by definition, a phenomenon   
   can't be controlled."   
      
   More than any other single factor, New Democrat Rachel Notley's historic   
   victory May 5 in Alberta is held to be the trigger that got this ball rolling   
   nationwide.  Intuitively, if the Dippers can be trusted to govern Canada's   
   most conservative province,    
   then why not the whole country?  The timing cannot be coincidental.   
      
   But it seems sensible to explore whether there aren't other factors at work,   
   too.  It seems to me there probably are - and that telltale evidence can be   
   discerned in the play-by-play of the April 23 TV leadership debate in which   
   Notley turned the tide in    
   Alberta.   
      
   Charisma, likeability and charm are most often deemed intangibles, too   
   ineffable to measure or reproduce systematically.  That's true, to a point.    
   But there are clear archetypes and patterns of successful, and failed, leaders   
   in our culture.  Some of    
   the clearest are found in Shakespeare.   
      
   Hamlet, for example, is a near-perfect model of the gigantic brain who   
   overthinks and can't win for losing, though facing far less cultivated   
   opponents - something Michael Ignatieff might appreciate.  Macbeth is the   
   consummate hard man, who ultimately    
   falls due to lack of scruple and runaway ambition.  And Henry V, whom we first   
   meet as the feckless Prince Hal in Henry IV, may be the perfect Shakespearean   
   leader, in whom qualities of fortitude and martial prowess are evenly balanced   
   by principle,    
   selflessness and compassion.   
      
   If one reviews the coverage of Notley's pivotal debate victory, one is struck   
   by the degree to which Shakespeare's model of leadership - in a word, balance   
   - was reflected, albeit absent swords and bucklers, in her performance.   
      
   She came across as strong, not angry; combative, not harsh; intelligent, not   
   arrogant; determined, not stubborn.  As a display of balance, in the heat of   
   the political combat, it was close to pitch-perfect.   
      
   Now, consider Mulcair, Harper and Trudeau.  What would constitute balance for   
   each?   
      
   Trudeau during his early political career was deemed to be on the soft, left   
   side of his party, because of his support for Gerard Kennedy in the 2006   
   Liberal leadership race.  Then he punched out Senator Patrick Brazeau in a   
   charity boxing match and    
   began making noises like a classical liberal on issues of trade and, in   
   particular, support for oil sands development.   
      
   So a soft leader, but with some demonstrated personal toughness and hard   
   policies; this leavening coincided with Trudeau's ascent in the polls.  His   
   difficulties began when he tacked sharply left last year in the debate over   
   the bombing mission in Iraq -    
   pushing him back into soft territory.  Most media photos of Trudeau, by the   
   way, reinforce this, showing him smiling or laughing. He would do better to   
   scowl occasionally.  He lacks balance because he's too soft.   
      
   Harper, most observers would agree, has the hard bit nailed.  When he tries to   
   visibly soften up, as in the famous blue sweater-vest ads of the 2008   
   campaign, it falls flat.  His musical forays have been moderately helpful in   
   this regard, but even this    
   is muted by the fact he does them infrequently, and typically only before   
   partisan Conservative audiences.   
      
   Harper could of course inject softness by speaking more openly, personally and   
   often.  He need not make himself a dancing bear.  But for whatever reason,   
   this PM won't go there.  He lacks balance because he's too hard.   
      
   But Mulcair?  He entered politics with a reputation as a tough guy - The   
   Grizzly, they called him during his stint in Quebec City - and he has   
   reinforced this with cutting performances in the House of Commons.  His   
   combativeness is obvious.   
      
   But Mulcair has in the past year evened this out by smiling brightly whenever   
   he spots a camera, emphasizing he's a grandfather, and highlighting the   
   compassionate aspects of his platform.  A soft platform advanced by a hard   
   man, who has rounded off his    
   sharpest edges; that looks something like balance.   
      
   Whether by luck or design or a little of both, Mulcair has created a balanced   
   persona.  It's no wonder Canadians, faced with porridge that seems either a   
   little too hot or a little too cold, are taking a closer look at the bowl in   
   the middle.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)