News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.2K     0 

Who's going to be the next Liberal leader?

  • Michael Ignatieff

    Votes: 16 33.3%
  • Gerard Kennedy

    Votes: 8 16.7%
  • John Manley

    Votes: 2 4.2%
  • Frank McKenna

    Votes: 9 18.8%
  • Bob Rae

    Votes: 9 18.8%
  • Justin Trudeau

    Votes: 3 6.3%
  • Other

    Votes: 1 2.1%

  • Total voters
    48
Why is the only choice all of a sudden between Rae and Iggy? Seems like a narrow field to consider, especially considering their lack of success in the past.

Because nobody wants the thankless job of being a leader of a party that's broke during a minority when the threat of an election looms constantly. It's really too bad McKenna is out, he could have really resurrected the party and the brand.
 
The "broke" party thing is a bit exaggerated. The Liberals have less debt than they did after any other election campaign, including Chretien's majorities.
 
Keith, your messages have less and less meaning over time. The United States has more party disloyalty than Canada, so your lectures of "how it is up here in Canada" are rather annoying at best. Unless you forget, I already know how it is in Canada. You are aware that many members of the two major US parties hardly follow their party leadership, whereas in Canada its tantamount to being kicked out of the party when you question the top.

I prefer the responsible party system in Canada, for what its worth.

Beyond this, you apparently think its un-Canadian to have an ideals based system where you believe in certain planks or platforms. I think its good to have a cohesion behind a specific group or cause. Its not called blind ideology, but its called cooperation and working with others to get something done. I don't agree with everything the Liberals have done, but its worth standing for against the Conservatives. I also fail to see how they are as bad as you claim...

You keep saying you'd "like to vote Liberal" but your reasons tend to be that you want the Liberals to stop being Liberal. I don't think you really paid attention to the Green Shift plan based on how you talk of it. It was revenue neutral, it was not a radical plan.

If that's the only reason you dislike the Liberals under Dion, okay, but I have heard you say one thing and do another before.

My opinion is simple: I thought Dion led a misinterpreted, miscalculated campaign where he focused on a Green Shift plan that most people didn't care about. I agreed with his policy, but he had poor communication and did not connect with voters. Its not about ideology, I simply agreed with the Green Shift. It makes sense. Don't lecture me about how I can't think for myself, its really unbecoming of you Keithz. Where I disagreed with Dion was the fact he made it his entire campaign. He should have made the policy a footnote behind a larger message, not the only message. Dion simply doesn't know how to be a politician.

I wouldn't rely on your opinion if I were a Liberal leader looking to reshape the party so it could win a majority. Your opinions don't seem to be that pro-Liberal.

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but in order to want a party to win you have to believe in it somewhat. You don't.
 
Last edited:
Keith, your messages have less and less meaning over time. The United States has more party disloyalty than Canada, so your lectures of "how it is up here in Canada" are rather annoying at best.
Unless you forget, I already know how it is in Canada.

Until you take up residency here, I doubt you have more invested in or know more about the country than I do, so I suggest you quit while you're ahead on this line of attack. I would not be so arrogant as to suggest to a yank that I know more about the states than him....

You are aware that many members of the two major US parties hardly follow their party leadership, whereas in Canada its tantamount to being kicked out of the party when you question the top.

And I for one, despise the rigidity of our parties here because it leads to such hard, doctrinaire positions.....

I prefer the responsible party system in Canada, for what its worth.

Ever observed the English parliamentary system? That's what Canada should have had. Instead we have American politicians living under a British model.

Beyond this, you apparently think its un-Canadian to have an ideals based system where you believe in certain planks or platforms.

I think its un-Canadian to be close-minded and rigid....

I think its good to have a cohesion behind a specific group or cause. Its not called blind ideology, but its called cooperation and working with others to get something done.

Fair enough...but what happens when the group fails, is it worthwhile to stick to them as they fail to learn the lessons they need?

I don't agree with everything the Liberals have done, but its worth standing for against the Conservatives. I also fail to see how they are as bad as you claim...

The wound is smaller for you because you weren't voting for them and donating money to them....

You keep saying you'd "like to vote Liberal" but your reasons tend to be that you want the Liberals to stop being Liberal.

Nein, I just want them to be the Libs of the 90s, not some blue version of the NDP.

I don't think you really paid attention to the Green Shift plan based on how you talk of it. It was revenue neutral, it was not a radical plan.

Nope, it was a radical plan. It stopped being revenue neutral when it took in more than it paid out on the tax balance...to fund social programs. What's more it left middle income earners (a real clue to why this didn't sell) and the business sector with the short end of the stick. It was less a carbon tax then a plan to use the green schtick to fund various social causes. WTF does child care have to do with the environment? Had it been a strict carbon tax and real revenue neutrality I would have voted for it.

If that's the only reason you dislike the Liberals under Dion, okay, but I have heard you say one thing and do another before.

I didn't accuse Dion of waffling. I accused him of being a weak leader for a turbulent time. Proof: sticking to the green shift as the economy tanked. Kinda like McCain selling a national security agenda during a recession.

My opinion is simple: I thought Dion led a misinterpreted, miscalculated campaign where he focused on a Green Shift plan that most people didn't care about. I agreed with his policy, but he had poor communication and did not connect with voters.

On this perhaps, we can agree....he did a poor job of selling what he had on the table.

Don't lecture me about how I can't think for myself, its really unbecoming of you Keithz.

If you are going to insinuate that I am less than the sincere in my views, I will be equally forthcoming on my prognostications on yours.....

I wouldn't rely on your opinion if I were a Liberal leader looking to reshape the party so it could win a majority. Your opinions don't seem to be that pro-Liberal.

I call it how I see it. The way I see it, their leftward turn cost them rural and suburban ridings, making them actually lose ground. Your suggestion is to turn even more leftward. I say it's better to take the Conservatives on in the centre than to fight with the NDP, Green Party and Bloc on the left. I guess we can agree to disagree on what's the better game plan.

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but in order to want a party to win you have to believe in it somewhat. You don't.

Just because I didn't vote for them this election does not mean I don't believe in them or would not want to see them be a strong alternative to the Conservatives. It is statements like this, why I have suggested that you don't get Canadians. In your view, if I don't support the Liberals once, that makes me a pariah who has no right to contribute thoughts or views on the Liberal party. That's not how I or most Canadians think.
 
The "broke" party thing is a bit exaggerated. The Liberals have less debt than they did after any other election campaign, including Chretien's majorities.

Fair enough. But that begs the question then, why the dearth of Leadership candidates?
 
I never claimed to know more about Canada than you, I asked for you to stop the condescending tone because I already know a great deal about Canada and its political system.

I think its time you stop claiming to speak on behalf of Canadians. Neither of us do, Canada is a nation with millions of people and millions of voices, each voice different. So I'm asking you to stop claiming you speak for everyone, nothing more.
 
Last edited:
Fair enough. But that begs the question then, why the dearth of Leadership candidates?

I think the race has yet to 'officially' begin. They're deciding the parameters of the race this weekend.
 
I never claimed to know more about Canada than you, I asked for you to stop the condescending tone because I already know a great deal about Canada and its political system.

I have never taken a condescending tone. We have been through this before. I have argued my points passionately. Yet, you resort to accusing me of having a condescending tone. Is that your response to reasoned debate? If I had said something condescending point it out.

I think its time you stop claiming to speak on behalf of Canadians. Neither of us do, Canada is a nation with millions of people and millions of voices, each voice different. So I'm asking you to stop claiming you speak for everyone, nothing more.

I have never claimed to speak for Canadians. But I have pointed out, what I believe to be your lack of perspective on our system since you haven't grown up in, or traveled through most of Canada (I've been to 8 of 10 provinces and lived in 4). And I would do the same to any of my friends who grew up entirely in TO and somehow feel that a Torontonian perspective is how you make decisions for all of Canada. Your perspective was a lot like mine before I had the opportunity to experience the breadth of this country. Since then, I appreciate the beliefs and interests of many Canadians from coast to coast and I will defend them against anyone who wishes to ram policies down their throat.

You want to talk policy. Let's do that. Let's debate the Green Shift. Otherwise, grow up and quit resorting to epithets (OH no he's a Conservative) and accusation of me having a tone (Mommy, he's being condescending). Debate your point, sir. And I will do likewise.
 
And I debate my points despite the fact that you rarely fully read or comprehend them. Enough said.

Gerard Kennedy should hopefully get into the mix in the near future, I hope he announces his leadership bid. He is really what Canada needs at this juncture as I think he understands the stake and what is necessary.

Gerard is underestimated, he actually won a net gain for the Liberals, and is seriously of a newer generation of Liberals that need to come out and vote.
 
I am wondering if it was policy or leadership that cost the Liberals the last election. Was it the Green Shift or the guy flogging it?

I don't think it was Dion in so much as it was the Green Shift. I still think had he made a straight forward revenue neutral carbon tax it would have been much easier to sell, instead of trying to have a plan that would be all things to all people. Also, they should have more of a platform than the Green Shift from the beginning. Waiting till the end to release the whole platform gave them that 'deer in the headlights' look.
 
Wasn't the Liberal platform the first one released (aside from the Greens)?

The CPC are the ones who released a 'platform' in the last 7 days that consisted in large part of Harper portraits.
 
Wasn't the Liberal platform the first one released (aside from the Greens)?

The CPC are the ones who released a 'platform' in the last 7 days that consisted in large part of Harper portraits.

That's true. But when you are out to beat the incumbent you have to get out ahead. By the time the rest of the platform was out, the Green Shift was the only item in the platform that voters associated with the Liberals. And let's be honest, it did seem like they hastily drafted and released a platform when the Green Shift wasn't selling. I firmly believe if they had a better platform, and one more focused on the economy, the CPC attacks would have failed. And the campaign would have been less about Liberal unpreparedness to lead and more about the Conservative lack of vision.
 
A little disappointed they increased the cost to enter the race ($90,000 this time - 50,000 last time).
 
A little disappointed they increased the cost to enter the race ($90,000 this time - 50,000 last time).
It's to keep out the losers. If you can't raise $90K for your bid, how will you lead the fundraising effort to finance the next campaign? For example, Gerard Kennedy still hasn't paid off the bill for his last leadership bid, while all Gerard Kennedy accomplished was to ensure Dion's victory, and kill the party's chances in the campaign.
 
Last edited:
That's true. But when you are out to beat the incumbent you have to get out ahead. By the time the rest of the platform was out, the Green Shift was the only item in the platform that voters associated with the Liberals. And let's be honest, it did seem like they hastily drafted and released a platform when the Green Shift wasn't selling. I firmly believe if they had a better platform, and one more focused on the economy, the CPC attacks would have failed. And the campaign would have been less about Liberal unpreparedness to lead and more about the Conservative lack of vision.

No, I don't agree that their platform was hastily assembled. It was pretty detailed, and mostly well-considered. The only party that has an obviously last-minute platform is the CPC. Many of the photos in their platform were taken as late as three days prior to its release.
 

Back
Top