Tory loses by-election and resigns
Last Thursday, John Tory lost the by-election in Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock, which is a rural riding located in Central Ontario. This is one of the safest Conservative ridings in all of Ontario, so if he cannot win there, I don't know where he can win. This has been in their top 10 best showings in Ontario for the Conservatives both federally and provincially in recent elections. In addition, I generally believe that when a leader performs below expectations in a general election they should resign. Tory didn't need to win the election to stay on, but he certainly needed to perform better than he did. So I think what happened was simply long overdue. However, getting rid of Tory will not automatically bring the Ontario PCs back to becoming a strong contender for power in 2011, in fact his loss may have put the party in a lose-lose situation. Unfortunately, it appears much of the party brass feels the party needs to move to the right to win the next election and return to the Harris era of smaller government. This may make the base happy, but will make winning the election in 2011 far more difficult. Now it is quite possible the party could choose a moderate such as Elizabeth Witmer, in fact that would be my pick. The party simply needs someone with Tory's moderate views, but better political judgement. Bill Davis was a moderate and was quite successful in winning elections so this nonsense that only right wing Tories can win is just that. If anything, the recent economic crsis has probably made people more wary of smaller government as many rightly or wrongly blame lack of government oversight and regulation for causing it. So why would they want someone who advocates the same ideology they believe caused the mess? I know some will say this was not the reason, but that is besides the point, whether it was the reason or not, most in the public believe it was the reason. Also simple math and understanding of electoral politics would show why choosing a moderate leader, not right wing one would increase their chances of winning the next election. The right wing base contend Tory lost due to the fact many of them stayed home. While it is true that this may have contributed to him losing really badly, it is highly unlikely that a better turnout from this group would be large enough to overcome the gap between the Ontario PCs and Liberals. As noisy as they may be, this group is far smaller than most right wingers claim it to be.
How the Ontario PCs will win the next election is two fold
1. Attract more Liberals and Green voters
2. Ensure the NDP and Green vote splits enough of the Liberal vote to win
By staying close to the centre, they can appeal to many Blue Liberals as well as some right of centre Green voters who simply voted Green Party due to their dissatisfaction with both McGuinty and Tory. Moving hard to the right will ensure those voters don't switch to the Ontario PCs. This will also achieve the second objective as with a moderate Tory, NDP and Green voters are likely to have little to fear in electing in a PC government, so they won't feel the need to vote strategically. When Bill Davis was in power, the NDP was far stronger than when Mike Harris was in power in part because many NDPers were quite content to have Bill Davis win over his Liberal opponent, whereas in the 90s, many NDPers voted strategically Liberal simply to kick Harris out of office (albeit they failed). If they choose a right winger, the centre-left vote will likely coalesce around the Liberals like it did under Harris and that might work if the PCs can get above 45% as Harris did, but won't work if they only get 40% of the popular vote which is far more realistic for them. By contrast with a moderate Tory, 40% would probably be sufficient enough to get a majority government. The reality is moderate Tories have a lower floor in terms of votes than right wing ones since they fail to energize their base, but they also have a higher ceiling than right wing ones due to their ability to appeal to swing voters. A party that simply wants to exist as a perennial opposition party may focus on its floor more than ceiling such as the NDP, but one that wishes to form government should focus more on its ceiling rather than floor.
I am a Liberal federally, but as a former Progressive Conservative federally, I would happily vote for the Ontario PCs if they choose someone moderate like Elizabeth Witmer, but not likely if they choose a Harrisite such as Tim Hudak and definitely not if they choose a right wing knuckle dragger like Randy Hillier. That is not to say cutbacks and privatization may not be necessary after the recession is over if the deficit becomes too large in which case another Harris style government may be needed, but this should only be done if absolutely necessary, not as a first option and having not seen how bad the recession will be, how quick and how soon recovery will come, or how much the debt will grow, it is premature to comment on the type of cuts and privatization that may be needed if any at all.
How the Ontario PCs will win the next election is two fold
1. Attract more Liberals and Green voters
2. Ensure the NDP and Green vote splits enough of the Liberal vote to win
By staying close to the centre, they can appeal to many Blue Liberals as well as some right of centre Green voters who simply voted Green Party due to their dissatisfaction with both McGuinty and Tory. Moving hard to the right will ensure those voters don't switch to the Ontario PCs. This will also achieve the second objective as with a moderate Tory, NDP and Green voters are likely to have little to fear in electing in a PC government, so they won't feel the need to vote strategically. When Bill Davis was in power, the NDP was far stronger than when Mike Harris was in power in part because many NDPers were quite content to have Bill Davis win over his Liberal opponent, whereas in the 90s, many NDPers voted strategically Liberal simply to kick Harris out of office (albeit they failed). If they choose a right winger, the centre-left vote will likely coalesce around the Liberals like it did under Harris and that might work if the PCs can get above 45% as Harris did, but won't work if they only get 40% of the popular vote which is far more realistic for them. By contrast with a moderate Tory, 40% would probably be sufficient enough to get a majority government. The reality is moderate Tories have a lower floor in terms of votes than right wing ones since they fail to energize their base, but they also have a higher ceiling than right wing ones due to their ability to appeal to swing voters. A party that simply wants to exist as a perennial opposition party may focus on its floor more than ceiling such as the NDP, but one that wishes to form government should focus more on its ceiling rather than floor.
I am a Liberal federally, but as a former Progressive Conservative federally, I would happily vote for the Ontario PCs if they choose someone moderate like Elizabeth Witmer, but not likely if they choose a Harrisite such as Tim Hudak and definitely not if they choose a right wing knuckle dragger like Randy Hillier. That is not to say cutbacks and privatization may not be necessary after the recession is over if the deficit becomes too large in which case another Harris style government may be needed, but this should only be done if absolutely necessary, not as a first option and having not seen how bad the recession will be, how quick and how soon recovery will come, or how much the debt will grow, it is premature to comment on the type of cuts and privatization that may be needed if any at all.
posted by Monkey Loves to Fight at 5:26 PM
2 Comments:
Some problems with your argument:
*Bill Davis was from a different generation. No Red Tory has won an election in Ontario in 28 years. In fact, the four times a Red Tory ran since 1982 none of them got more than 26 seats. Three of the four times a solid conservative ran, he formed government (one of them didn't last long though).
*Looking at the numbers in that riding, it was definitely the Conservative vote staying home that played the role in Tory's defeat. The Liberals only gained about 1,500 votes from the election while the PC's lost over 9,000 votes. If that is repeated across rural ridings in Ontario, the PC's get demolished for sure and likely would lose party status.
*The base has threatened to split off if another Red Tory is chosen. While they would have no chance of forming a government, even if they got 10% of the vote (a conservative estimate), it would ensure crushing Liberal majorities for a long time.
*With the economic crisis, a 1995-like scenario may be setting up. If the PC's choose a Liberal clone, they would be seen as not much change at all. That could create shocking results like an NDP victory.
Bill Davis was from a different generation. No Red Tory has won an election in Ontario in 28 years. In fact, the four times a Red Tory ran since 1982 none of them got more than 26 seats. Three of the four times a solid conservative ran, he formed government (one of them didn't last long though
Ontario has changed since the days of Bill Davis but I don't buy your argument that it has swung hard to the right. Some places such as Britain and the United States up until recently did become considerably more conservative but in the case of Ontario it probably only moved slightly to the right and considering pretty much every Western democracy moved to the right since then, that is largely meaningless. Besides if anything the political climate for a right wing conservative is probably less favourable not more favourable than in the 80s. Ontario is more urban than it was then and the WASP population (which make up the overwhelming majority of right wingers) has declined as a percentage of the population. Many non-WASPs are centre-right, but few are hard right, in fact most events with hard right people are made up of largely older white males, hardly representative of modern Ontario. In the case of Frank Miller, he was reduced to a narrow minority and losing the popular vote whereas Bill Davis had won a majority four years earlier, so if anything I would argue the party's move to the right is what cost them the 1985 election. Mike Harris in 1990 got only 3 more seats than Larry Grossman and a lower share of the popular vote. It was only in 1995 he was successful after Bob Rae was by many seen as a disaster. Ernie Eves lost due to the fact most Ontarioans were sick and tired of the Common Sense Revolution, so matter who the Ontario PCs choose, they would have lost. His lost had nothing to do with him being a Red Tory, in fact only hard core right wingers consider him a Red Tory. Most non-political Ontarioans see him as too conservative not as not conservative enough. John Tory lost due to the religious school funding promise, not for not being right wing enough.
Looking at the numbers in that riding, it was definitely the Conservative vote staying home that played the role in Tory's defeat. The Liberals only gained about 1,500 votes from the election while the PC's lost over 9,000 votes. If that is repeated across rural ridings in Ontario, the PC's get demolished for sure and likely would lose party status.
John Tory lost mainly because he was seen as someone from Toronto who had little knowledge or understanding of the riding. A hard core right winger like Rob Ford or John Snobelen probably would have seen similiar results while a Red Tory with deep local roots probably would have won. After all, Laurie Scott was a Red Tory and she had little difficulty winning the riding, so this is more because John Tory was seen as a parachute candidate, not because he wasn't right wing enough. Rural Ontario is more conservative than Urban Ontario, but it is not made up of a bunch of right wing hicks. Rather it is centre-right as opposed to centre-left like Toronto. Never mind, many in Rural Ontario rely heavily on government services so slash and burn policies are not as popular in Rural Ontario as some think they are. I don't think Rural Ontarioans like seeing their hospitals and schools closed down and I suspect right wing policies such as privatizing electricity or the postal service (which is federal) or two tiered health care would have more support in urban Ontario than Rural Ontario. Not that I disagree with those policies, as I generally support the above, but my point that Rural Ontario is not full of right wing ideologues.
The base has threatened to split off if another Red Tory is chosen. While they would have no chance of forming a government, even if they got 10% of the vote (a conservative estimate), it would ensure crushing Liberal majorities for a long time.
Dream on in terms of support a new right wing party would get. In Alberta, this was tried via the Alberta Alliance and later the Wildrose Alliance and even in Alberta it couldn't crack the 10% mark. If a more right wing party couldn't break the 10% mark in Alberta, it most definitely won't in Ontario. Try more like 2-3% of the popular vote. And more importantly, even if a Red Tory did lose 2-3% of the vote due to the right wing base, they would also be more acceptable to soft Liberal voters who are what the Tories need to win as well as NDP and Green voters would be less likely to strategically vote if they had a Red Tory leader as opposed to a right wing one.
With the economic crisis, a 1995-like scenario may be setting up. If the PC's choose a Liberal clone, they would be seen as not much change at all. That could create shocking results like an NDP victory.
During the 90s, many felt it was due to too much government that caused the economic crisis. By contrast, many believe it was due to too little government rather than too much government that caused the current economic crisis. In addition your idea that choosing a Red Tory would result in an NDP win while a hard right one could win makes no logical sense.
In addition to your points, I think you ignore the fundamental realities of Ontario and I would argue Canada as a whole as well. Red Tories usually have a small gender gap i.e. Bill Davis and Joe Clark, whereas the gender gap is usually over 10% for right wing Tories and the reality is the Tories cannot win if they do poorly amongst female voters. Most Ontarioans like most Canadians are not highly ideological and judge politicians based on their personality, ideas, policy, and platform. Only the political partisans care whether a politician is right wing or left wing, most Ontarioans and Canadians don't. And considering only 3% of the population belong to any political party, that group is largely irrelevant. The only advantage I can see with electing a right wing Tory over a Red Tory is Red Tories are usually about consensus and compromise thus they aren't likely to engage in nasty attack ads and gutter tactics whereas right wing Tories despise anyone who doesn't think like them and have no difficulty engaging in attack ads and gutter tactics and unfortunately this does seem to work. Although choosing a right wing Tory would also give the Liberals far more ammo in terms of attack ads as opposed to choosing a moderate. The next leader needs to be seen as a successor to Bill Davis who is still well liked in Ontario, not Mike Harris who 60% of the population dislikes, the other 20% see him as a necessary evil based on the circumstances at the time and only 20% actually would like to return to such a government irrespective of the conditions.
Post a Comment
<< Home