On durability

David Olive takes issue with the theory that the Harper Cons' coalition will be more durable than the one assembled under previous leaders such as Brian Mulroney. But it seems to me that the two arguments can be relatively easily reconciled.

The argument for the Cons having a durable base of support relies on the reality that at least since 2006, Harper has built a fairly consistent brand that has ensured that his party never drops below about 30% in the polls, and can rally another 5-10% of voters come election time. And while we always need to be careful about assuming that anything is impossible, there's little indication that the Cons will have any difficulty keeping that coalition of voters together if they keep up their current direction - meaning that a PC-style wipeout does seem fairly remote for the moment.

But the possibility that the Cons can rely on a support base in the 30s isn't mutually exclusive with a majority of the general public being opposed to Harper's direction. And, indeed all indications are that Harper has cultivated exactly that scenario as his means of winning and holding power in the face of a fragmented political system.

So yes, we should figure that at least for now, Harper has a larger and more solid base than his conservative predecessors. But that doesn't mean he has the upper hand in the longer term. And indeed, if the NDP can build on its election results to provide an alternative government which far more closely reflects the values of Canadians in general, Harper may have little choice but to risk some of his party's cohesiveness in an effort to expand its reach.