Article content continued

Trudeau’s recounting of his motivation (making us united, keeping us safe, giving everyone a real and fair chance to succeed) seemed genuine. After a decade of relatively dour leadership, the Liberal leader’s forthright optimism has a certain cyclical appeal.

But the flip side, also revealed in close-up, is that Trudeau continues to want for gravitas. Some of what he says is contradictory, for example his claim that it is “extremely important” that Canada continues in the fight against ISIS, while simultaneously cutting back the military’s role to training — which, as Mansbridge said, hasn’t worked for a decade. Caught out, Trudeau veered into vagueness. “You make sure that the Kurds, for example, are able to fight, to take back their territories. You work with them in a much greater way than we’re doing right now.” Greater how? He didn’t say.

The Liberal party’s bolt to the left two weeks ago, when it morphed from the party of balanced budgets into the party of deficits in the space of an afternoon, may yet turn out to have been clever electorally. There is Rachel Notley in Alberta to consider, and free-spending Kathleen Wynne’s surprise victory in Ontario last year.

What is not in doubt is the awkwardness of Trudeau’s new line of attack on the New Democrats, whom Liberals formerly derided as reckless spendthrifts. He told Mansbridge Mulcair proposes “austerity.” Even given the elasticity of truth in campaign season, this is a great stretch. Mulcair has promised to balance his budget in 2016 — which, though it would seem to require delaying some new program spending or raising taxes, is nothing like a promise of austerity.