Once again, the Conservatives have fired up their attack machine to drive down an Opposition leader -- this time, NDP leader Tom Mulcair and his alleged support for a "carbon tax." Though the tactic has been called out as a blatant lie and an insult to Canadians' intelligence, so too were the attacks against Liberal leaders -- and they worked.
Note the interesting difference here, though, between the attacks on Mulcair and the attacks on Stephane Dion and Michael Ignatieff. While the insults to the Liberals were on personal traits ("not a leader" or "just visiting"), the Conservatives are attacking the NDP leader on a matter of policy.
What can we learn from this? Anyone have any theories on the difference in tactics?
One possible motive: the polarized policy world works better for Conservatives. Anything they can do to portray the next election as a stark choice between left and right is presumably in their interests.
Oh and here's a cheery thought: the next election is 37 months from tomorrow. So we have three years and 31 days to enjoy all these antics.