THE hard-nosed, frontiersman’s personality of Stephen Harper has dominated Canadian politics for a decade. However it turns out, therefore, the federal election on October 19th will be fateful. If the Conservative prime minister wins a fourth consecutive term in office, he will be the first leader to do so since 1908. If he loses, it will be the end of an era, and what comes next will be very different. The election might well bring to power the left-wing New Democratic Party (NDP), which has never governed Canada before.

To forestall that prospect, Mr Harper triggered the campaign earlier than he had to. On August 2nd he asked the governor-general to dissolve parliament, giving his Conservative Party 11 weeks to put its case to the voters. That is double the length of recent election campaigns.

He needs the extra time. The slogan emblazoned on the Conservative campaign bus is “Safer Canada/Stronger Economy”. Although the country feels relatively secure, its economy is hardly vigorous. As the world’s fifth-largest producer of oil, Canada has been hurt by the collapse in prices. The economy contracted in the first five months of 2015. Confidence among consumers and small businesses is sinking. The Conservatives may break their promise to balance the budget after seven years of deficit. All this has handed a cudgel to the opposition: the NDP and the centrist Liberals.

The politician best placed to wield it is Thomas Mulcair, who leads the NDP. Formed in 1961 from a merger of socialist and union groups, the party has governed five provinces but was thought to lean too far left to win a federal election. That changed in May, when it won power in Alberta, Mr Harper’s political home, ending four decades of rule by the Progressive Conservatives, a provincial party much like the prime minister’s. The Conservatives’ fortress in western Canada no longer looks impregnable. Polls suggest that the Conservatives and the NDP are running neck and neck, with the Liberals trailing.

The NDP would bring change, though just how much is unclear. It would raise taxes on big companies and makes vaguer promises to support the manufacturing sector. It would finance 1m child-care places rather than support families directly, as the Conservatives have done. Mr Mulcair, a veteran of Quebec provincial politics, has proved himself a political scrapper. As leader of the opposition in the House of Commons, he has exploited ethical lapses under the Conservatives. The campaign may offer more opportunities: the trial of a senator in an expenses scandal is likely to embarrass the ruling party, even though he resigned from the Conservative caucus in 2013. But the hot-tempered Mr Mulcair has yet to show that he is prime-ministerial material. He fluffed his answer to an easy question about corporate taxes, and has sent confused messages about whether he supports an east-west pipeline to transport Alberta crude.

Similar doubts surround the other opposition contender, Justin Trudeau. A year ago he seemed likely to win. That would have been a return to normality: the Liberals governed Canada for most of the 20th century, most memorably under Mr Trudeau’s, father, Pierre. But Conservative adverts attacking the son as inexperienced proved effective (even though, at 43, he is just three years younger than Mr Harper was when he became prime minister). Mr Trudeau hurt his standing with civil libertarians by backing tough security legislation proposed by the government while promising to soften it after winning the election. In an attempt to win back support from left-of-centre voters, he is advocating the legalisation of marijuana and the imposition of a price on carbon (also backed by the NDP). His relative youth may appeal to ballot-shy younger voters.

Two-thirds of Canadians say they want a change of government. Mr Mulcair has offered to govern in coalition with the Liberals, if necessary, to bring that about; Mr Trudeau has so far been cool to the idea.

Despite the anti-incumbency mood and the weak economy, Mr Harper brings formidable weaponry to the contest. He has been building the country’s most effective political machine since 2003, when he united Canada’s various right-leaning parties under the Conservative banner. He imposed iron discipline on three successive governments, the first two of which lacked a majority in the House of Commons. Backbenchers were kept in line, rivals disposed of. Luck played a part in Mr Harper’s longevity. The Liberals put up ineffectual leaders in earlier elections and the commodity boom spared Canada the worst effects of the financial crisis. But Mr Harper’s skill mattered as much.

Now, with characteristic belligerence, he has seized the initiative. By calling the election early, he has silenced unions and other anti-government groups, which had launched a barrage of hostile adverts in preparation for the poll. Now that the campaign is officially on, they will be subject to much stricter spending limits than parties. The Conservatives, meanwhile, can ramp up spending; they have more cash than the NDP and the Liberals.

Mr Harper will use it to appeal to the groups he has assiduously courted throughout his time in office, such as Ukrainian immigrants and Jews. On a campaign stop in Mount Royal, a largely Jewish area of Montreal, he flaunted his support for Israel and criticised Muslim women who veil their faces at citizenship ceremonies (though the Conservatives are generally pro-immigration). The economy may be wobbling, but Conservatives will ask: can Canadians really trust the excitable Mr Mulcair, or the callow Mr Trudeau, to steady it? The race may be long; it is unlikely to be boring.