In her first weeks as interim Conservative leader, Rona Ambrose got positive reviews. She showed a willingness to backtrack on the uglier side of the past Conservative campaign.

But after those few opening moves, the rookie leader has become engaged in losing strategies.

On Canada’s military mission, Ambrose leads a one-note choir, obsessively portraying the Liberals’ withdrawal of CF-18s as evidence of abandoning a combat mission.

But has she not heard from the military generals that this new mission increases risk to our troops? Does she not understand the Liberals have tripled on-the-ground military assistance? Somehow providing CF-18s is the sole measure of Canada’s military capability?

Ambrose no doubt believes her CF-18 questions protect the Conservative’s hawkish image. But she gives questions for which the Liberals have an answer – they to point to their expanded war engagement. And in each reply to Ambrose they strengthen their own military brand to compete with the Conservatives.

In fact, the Liberals’ answers grow bolder daily in describing their expanded engagement. They know Ambrose’s questions give them the chance to push the Conservatives around the board. The Conservatives don’t get it. Rookie mistake.

In contrast, on Iraq, Tom Mulcair’s strategy is to push the Liberals on questions for which the Liberals have no answers. Mulcair asks about mission definition and timeline. NDP MPs ask about the Liberals’ much-promised deradicalization strategy. They ask about plans to shut down the flow of foreign fighters. About steps being taken to block terrorist funding. Trudeau provides no answers because he has none.

On the upcoming budget, Ambrose asks about deficit numbers, maintaining the unhelpful impression that Conservatives want deep cuts and balanced budgets at all costs. Tom Mulcair asks about Canadians’ incomes. He calls the Liberals “incompetent” over the loss of 2,800 positions at Bombardier. He wonders “when is the Prime Minister going to act” on manufacturing jobs. He calls the Liberals’ broken promise on the Canada Wheat Board “shocking.” He keeps a spotlight on the TPP. Trudeau has no answers.

Post-election, even with every campaign error getting stuffed into his backpack, Tom Mulcair and his caucus continue as an effective fighting force. Mulcair has worn the weight of defeat with humility and not a word of complaint, even though others from the campaign should be shouldering their share of the load.

And were it not for the weight pulling down Tom Mulcair since the NDP’s poor campaign, the contrast with Ambrose would be even clearer. Daily in Question Period, Mulcair holds the Liberals to account. Conservatives demand the Liberals break more promises.

Without a strong NDP, Morneau, Freeland and the other neo-liberals would move their party further right – back to the two-party, elite politics that sets in when the NDP is weak. Politics that stacks the deck against lower-income and middle class Canadians.

Look south to see how arrogant the billionaire class becomes when there’s no effective social democratic force. See how debased their democracy grows. And how progressive Americans desperately crave the reforms the NDP has been able to achieve for Canadians – when it is strong.

Tom Mulcair is a substantial person leading the NDP with dignity and strength. From a humbling defeat, he’s making changes to his office and personal style. If there’s a new person who’d be more effective, no one can say the name. Many New Democrats may remain unsettled about their leadership decision, but none can be indifferent to its importance.