horwath's biggest advantage, right now, is of course that she's not wynne.

i don't mean that horwath needs to come up with a precise answer that is going to appeal to everybody. that would be impossible.

what i mean is that wynne has already helped horwath tremendously by going out of her way to blur the differences between them. a sitting premier should have an incumbency advantage; wynne has wiped that away, by adopting virtually every position horwath has presented and by going out of her way to have them appear essentially the same.

again: in a situation where a premier is popular, this is a good idea as it makes the change option seem pointless. why vote for a change when they're both the same? but, in a situation where a premier is unpopular, it abolishes the incumbency advantage. why vote for wynne when horwath is basically the same, and represents the change that everybody wants?

this is the thing that wynne will probably never acknowledge.

horwath still must differentiate herself. not on a specific thing like a dental plan, or a marijuana policy. but, overall. she has to convert "basically the same, but a change" into "a change for the better".

where wynne is, right now, she should be campaigning on how much of a dramatic change the scary ndp would be - she wants voters to exaggerate the difference, and be fearful of it.