Thomas Mulcair might have a problem. There isn’t a vast amount of data available to conclusively tell why Canadians don’t seem that interested in him, but he appears to be having a difficult time defining himself for potential voters nationwide. If he doesn’t address the issue soon, it might only grow.

“A decent profile in Ottawa doesn’t always translate to a decent profile in the living rooms of Canadians,” Robin MacLachlan, consultant for Summa Strategies (and former NDP communications assistant) points out that it’s “relevant that Mr. Mulcair’s the first opposition leader under Stephen Harper’s term as prime minister that’s had the opportunity to define himself, as opposed to being defined by government attacks.”

But has he done a very good job of that?

Recent Angus Reid numbers show 27 per cent of Canadians are “not sure” about Mulcair’s performance overall (that’s up from 22 per cent earlier this year). Abacus Data’s most recent federal figures show that while 30 per cent of Canadians have a favourable impression of Mulcair, “the plurality of respondents continue to either have a neutral impression or are unaware of the NDP leader.” Similarly, a poll this month from EKOS shows a somewhat different story. Nationally, 43.3 per cent of Canadians “don’t know” whether they approve or disapprove of Mulcair’s handling of his job as Opposition leader.

Building a profile

Approval and disapproval numbers are weird things, and not necessarily enough on which to hang definitive conclusions, particularly about the possible turnout of the next election two years from now. However, even internally, some in the NDP recognize that Mulcair has not been able to craft a suitably definable public persona over the last 10 months since his election as leader.

Part of that could be due to the fact that, for the NDP, the focus following Mulcair’s election (and following months of general upheaval after former leader Jack Layton’s death) was on building the backroom infrastructure necessary for the Official Opposition to operate. That team has now been built. It includes a lot of new young staffers, a few members of Mulcair’s leadership campaign team and some Layton-loyal holdovers who rode the transition. And, importantly, the team lacks a few key old guard figures, including some of Layton’s big idea and branding strategists, who have gradually departed after Mulcair took over.

That kind of shift can be a distraction from the Constant Campaign mode necessary in modern politics, but since the House returned in September, there’s been time for Mulcair to forge an identity. For Layton, that was mostly about being the guy working to fight for better lives for middle class families. Mulcair’s message lately – particularly to the all-important Quebec voters – has been simply “on continue,” a slogan that inherently suggests he is less important than the party’s overall vision.

Which would be all well and good, but people vote for a leader.

For all its apparent frivolity, Hill watchers should make note of how the Conservatives used Twitter recently to perform an end-run around the NDP, the party that has been most open about being online, constantly building apps and new web ads to promote the party. Out of nowhere, the Conservatives executed a simplistic but effective Twitter “day in the life” narrative, showing off the prime minister in his more private moments as the man behind the job.

Not only did the Conservatives corner that specific propaganda avenue, but the exercise also served as a way to prop up the Stephen Harper Story. It was also reminder of how little Canadians see or know of Mulcair outside of his political appearances, where he is often all business – a problem, it might be worth remembering, Harper also suffered from not long ago.

So, what does he do?

Lately, Mulcair has delivered specific policy-based speeches across the country to very particular kinds of crowds – ones that probably would usually look upon the NDP as a bit of a joke – to massage the idea that his party might one day be asked to provide leadership on a range of policy topics.

Earlier this month he was in Montreal, speaking to the Council on Foreign Relations. He blasted the Conservatives for having “turned their back on the open and progressive multilateralism Canada was famous for” and reprimanded Foreign Affairs Minister for trashing the former Liberal Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson’s reputation on international affairs.

But how’s he doing in Quebec? Just over one third of the 1,797 Quebecers polled recently by EKOS approved of Mulcair. However, a full 48.3 per cent didn’t know what they thought about him. This, in the province did so much for the party in 2011, and where he served as a provincial cabinet minister for years.

Mulcair also stopped in Calgary to talk to the Chamber of Commerce about how the New Democrats would set about drafting clearer foreign investment rules – something he argued would help Canada protect more of its sovereignty in the oil sands. As might be expected, his approval there is abysmal. Only 17.2 per cent of Albertans approve of Mulcair, and 38.5 per cent have no opinion of him.

Mulcair’s is also planning a trip to Washington, D.C., where he hopes to have a meeting with Secretary of State, John Kerry. It’s a move that MacLachlan speculates will stress how Mulcair sees the NDP falling in line with the Obama administration’s approach to sustainable development. A strong connection to Canada’s biggest trading partner might help Mulcair boost his image as a prime minister-in-waiting, but he’ll soon have a challenger there as well – one Canadians may already know much better.

The Liberals

The looming arrival of a big name Liberal leader on the federal scene could mean Mulcair is looking a much tighter time frame with which he can forge out a spot on the Canadian political landscape, by linking particular policy issues to his own personal brand.

Last week, EKOS tracked the Liberals at 24.6 per cent overall approval, just under two points back of the NDP’s 26.3 per cent. Angus Reid put the difference between the two parties at seven points, with the NDP at 29 per cent, the Liberals at 22, but only the latter of the two had experience a bump in popularity since the firm’s prior survey. Abacus Data measured a wider gulf, with its February poll showing 10 points separating the two parties (NDP: 31 per cent; Liberals: 21 per cent).

Whatever the difference now, once that race is over, Mulcair is at risk of watching his more centrist policy positions (like the ones he has articulated lately, and that arguably might make him more appealing to a broader spectrum of Canadian voters) erode, or be stolen from underneath him by a party with more definable historical record on things like foreign investment and international relations.

Most importantly of all is the branding that looms close on the horizon should at least one Liberal become leader.

Where the Conservatives and Stephen Harper have “jobs, growth and the economy,” and Layton had a “better lives for working class families,” theme, Mulcair has yet to successfully link his policy positions with his own personal brand. The emptiness begs to be filled, and all that talk of building better lives for middle class Canadian families wafting over recently from a front-running Liberal camp should not only be very familiar to Mulcair, but also potentially quite dangerous.