All eyes on Ignatieff

[Kirkhill]

I coulda swore that mob were opposed to promotion on the basis of genetics....... or did they suddenly become closet  monarchists?

 

[Brad Sallows]

So the most important characteristics of a national leader are that he be fun and popular?  Charisma is too effective a camouflage for basic incompetence, inability, and lack of focus - it should be derided and ignored, and its proponents ridiculed and shunned.

Consider young Trudeau's accomplishments and education to date.  Would you like him to handle your personal affairs on your behalf?  If not, then why the country's?

 

[brihard]

Trudeau, like Obama, hasn't *done* anything to merit serious consideration for leading the country. Obama got in as much because he wasn't Bush and wasn't Conservative as he did because of his charisma and Pr department. very little of his success related to his abilities or his accomplishments.

Trudeau needs many more years and much more experience before he's a viable contender. Our generation isn't ready to lead the country yet.

 

[a_majoor]

More on the leadership vacuum:

http://paulsrants-paulsstuff.blogspot.com/2010/01/liberal-woes-are-self-inflicted.html

Liberal Woes Are Self-Inflicted

Paul Wells has a new post up linking to Steve at Far and Wide and his blog posting criticising the Liberal war rooms slow response time and linking it to Ignatieff's poor polling numbers.

While I agree with Steve's assessment of poor responses from the Liberal war room, the fact is both Ignatieff and the Liberal Party have far deeper problems than just news scrums. Those problems started back when Jean Chretien was still PM and leader of the party. Throwing Adscam aside, which in my opinion still affects voters intentions towards the Liberals, the biggest problem the Liberals have is they are just plain old wishy-washy. And it just gets more exasperated with each new faux scandal or threat to bring down the government. Here's my take on some of the things killing the Liberals.

1. The Coalition. Canadians saw the coalition not as a democratic attempt at change in government, but as a sore loser mentality that they thought only they deserved to rule the country. Mark my words, come next election Iggy will need to take a stand either for or against a possible coalition, and if for Conservatives get their majority.

2. Drawing a line and then erasing it. The most glaring example of this was Iggy demanding EI reforms, including a country-wide standard for qualifying, and falure of the PM to do so would force an election. Iggy then accepted a blue ribbon panel. There are other examples of the party quickly backtracking on issues they claim to own.

3. Failure to learn from past mistakes. This began shortly after Dion became leader. Thumping his chest it was time for an election, than backtracking with his tail between his legs. Apparently Iggy was oblivious to all this, as his "your time is up Harper" line was probably the biggest single issue to precipitate the steep fall in polling numbers. Calling the HST the Harper Sales Tax and then voting to pass the legislation is also just plain stupid.

4. Arrogance. Many Liberals feel it is their god-given right to have power over the country. While they have done a better job hiding it lately, you still get blowhards like Hedy Fry and Ken Dryden opening their mouth from time to time to refresh voters memories.

5. This is the biggie. Lack of policy. Sorry guys, but whining you can't release any policies or platforms because mean old Stephen Harper might steal it or mislead Canadians on it is pathetically weak. Conservatives release policy and do so confident in what they stand for. Your refusal to release policy just doesn't sit well with the average Canadian. And don't be surprised next election when Iggy is featured in a Tory ad with his it's not my job to come up with ideas attitude during the onset of the recession.

6. This ties in with most of the points already mentioned. No attempt at articulating a position on a wide array of issues. An example is to this day I have no ideas if the Liberals were for or against the auto bailouts. Voters in southern Ontario might be asking during local debates next election.

7. Trying to play both sides of an argument to pander to a bigger base. Was there too much stimulus or not enough? Because depending on the day and the Liberal talking, we were told it was both.

Liberals need to accept the reality of today. They are a spent force politically. One look at leader approval ratings tells you all you need to know about both the PM and Ignatieff. We were told Liberal polling numbers would change once they got to know Dion, and they sure did. Same with Iggy. And rumors of Bob Rae becoming the next leader when Iggy leaves or gets the boot brings a smile to my face as I know that the unions who paid a hefty price during Rae's tenure as Ontario Premier haven't forgotten, and just as they got Miller and McGuinty elected, so too will they prevent Rae from ever winning an election.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s National Post is a comment by a well known, senior NDP insider:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/01/04/john-baglow-everyone-shut-up-so-ignatieff-can-start-a-conversation.aspx

John Baglow:
Everyone shut up so Ignatieff can have a debate

Posted: January 04, 2010

Faced with the Harper government's frontal assault on the principles of responsible government, the opposition is in its usual complete disarray. My Liberal friend Impolitical has a new badge up at her place: "I prorogue because...I can...you let me...". But what do we get from the leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition?

Just when a decisive voice is called for, there's Michael Ignatieff bleating almost en passant about the Harper cut-and-run exercise, and then proffering loads of hype about a Liberal "thinkers' conference" in March (which may conflict with a spring election call, leaving all those thoughts unthought). Another tiresome grand tour of the Canadian hinterland is planned, including a homecoming visit to the universities. In other words, he'll be flying below the radar again at a crucial time.

Once defensive about Ignatieff's glaring lack of political instincts, Liberals are now starting to sound embarrassed. I don't blame them. Here's what the Leader says, fiddling while Rome burns:

It seems unbelievable that the Conservative government has prorogued Parliament for the second time in a year. Canadians are rightly starting to wonder if Conservatives intend to shut down government whenever things don't go their way.

While Conservatives will be in hiding, Liberals will be hard at work over the next few months.

On March 26 to 28, 2010, some of Canada's leading progressive thinkers and doers will gather in Montreal for a conference entitled Canada at 150: Rising to the Challenge. They will be part of a national conversation about the Canada we want to be in 2017, when we celebrate our 150th birthday, and the steps we can take today and tomorrow to get there.

That conversation starts with you.

That's why I'll be spending the first few months of the year reaching out, travelling from coast to coast, holding town-hall meetings, web forums and small gatherings to hear from Canadians first-hand. Your ideas, hopes, concerns and priorities will feed the discussion in Montreal. We're starting off by visiting university and college campuses across the country - because a conversation about Canada's future starts with the generation of Canadians that will shape it more than any other.

This goes beyond flabbiness, all the way to intellectual catatonia. A plaintive whine about those mean Conservatives, and then a proposal for a "national conversation," forsooth, where the common folk can all talk about Canada seven years hence.

Leaders are supposed to lead, dammit. This empty suit has been asking for input almost since his coronation. Doesn't he have any ideas of his own by now? Any gut reactions? Any strategy? Any vision? Any passion, for crying out loud?

I'm not even a Liberal, and I'm yearning to hear something real, just for once, come from this man's mouth.

If he still needs a clue, let him proceed by way of focus groups and polls. Canadian views are diverse: you won't pick up themes and directions by holding townhalls. At present Ignatieff is offering little more than the mainstream media with their online comment threads, pretending to give Canadians a voice -- suggesting, even, that they are being listened to -- but, in reality, building sandboxes for trolls to whom no one pays any real attention.

It's a faux-democratic exercise, at best. If Ignatieff hasn't figured out what presses Canadians' buttons by now, he won't achieve enlightenment with more trans-Canada meetings. Once more, he's coming across as a floundering, rootless character in search of an author.

At one point in the fall of 2008, it looked as though the three opposition parties, representing the majority of Canadians, might achieve something by concerted action. Ignatieff pulled the plug on that, and shortly afterwards began to circle the drain himself, to the mounting despair of the Liberal rank and file. By the end of last October, he had finally pulled his party below Stéphane Dion's numbers.

Advisors have been cramming words and policies into him, inevitably making him look silly and out of touch--flipflopping on asbestos, selecting EI reform as a defining electoral issue, putting the Conservatives on "probation," tough-talking about an election when he's ten percent behind in the polls. Now we're getting a thinkers' conference and what might fairly be called outreach theatre.

We needed courage and conviction. We got Charlie McCarthy.

How is it that Harper can get away with defying and padlocking Parliament whenever he likes? Because he can. Because we're letting him. Because the two smaller opposition parties can't do very much on their own. Because the largest "opposition" party in the House of Commons is lumbered with a hapless caricature of a leader and a "war room" apparently populated by stoned adolescents.

I don't want any part of your "national conversation," Iggy. In case you hadn't noticed, we've already been having one. Perhaps some day you might deign to join it -- or have the decency to step aside and make way for someone who will.

National Post

John Baglow, a former Executive Vice-President of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, is a writer, researcher and consultant living in Ottawa. A member of the New Democratic Party, Baglow writes occasionally for the online magazines Straight Goods and The Mark. He has been blogging as "Dr.Dawg" since 2005, and has lived to regret it more than once.

“Bleating, en passant,” “intellectual catatonia” and “empty suit” al work for me as fair descriptors of Iggy Iffy Icarus as he flies closer and closer to the sun.

 

[Edward Campbell]

And here is another comment, this time from a Liberal activist (whatever in hell an ‘activist’ might be), also reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s National Post:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/01/04/jeff-jedras-and-the-lady-byng-award-for-polite-politics-goes-too.aspx

Jeff Jedras:
Still waiting for that Liberal leadership moment

Posted: January 04, 2010,


I share the displeasure of my Liberal and progressive brethren with Stephen Harper’s decision to prorogue parliament. And going back to the first leadership race, Michael Ignatieff does have a definite history of taking vacations and going on media blackouts at the most inopportune times. I think there was a week in 2006 his staff couldn’t even find him. And it happened again last summer until he launched the Hiding in Plain Sight Tour. Opposition leaders don’t get vacations, Michael.

So it’s been left to the likes of Ralph Goodale and Bob Rae to go in front of the cameras and provide the obligatory clips of outrage about how upset we are about the decision to prorogue, how it’s an affront to democracy, how he’s hiding from his incompetent and duplicitous handing of the Afghan detainee, thwarting the democratic will of parliament and its order to produce documents, and so on. And they've done that well. But it was certainty a missed opportunity for Ignatieff to have been front and centre in the media spotlight.

My question though is still what it was a few days ago: to what end? Whether it’s Rae and Goodale or Ignatieff up front providing the outrage quotes (probably more so if it’s the leader and not a surrogate) I’m still left to wonder “OK, you’re pissed off. Me too. Now what are you going to do about it?”

Putting Ignatieff up on this issue would have made that question even more pointed, and I’ve yet to hear any credible suggestions on that front. Short of forcing an election which we’d most likely lose (although the Conservatives may want to precipitate a spring vote anyway, is the latest speculation) our options are decidedly limited. Apparently some folks are planning protest rallies for Jan. 23. And Coyne wants opposition MPs to hold their own unofficial parliament in a bowling alley or something; interesting, and theatrical, if a bit (or a lot) of a stunt.

I’m all for raising the issues that need to be raised, and for calling attention to grievous injustices and perversions of democracy. And I'm open to creative suggestions on that front. My bigger concern though is that we’re in no position to actually do anything about it. Even if people were ready to turn on the Harper Conservatives, even if this could be the proverbial straw that breaks the camel’s back, four-plus years of farting around as a party means it’s very unlikely we’d be able to capitalize. We haven’t done the work needed for Canadians to turn to us when they’re displeased with Harper.

That’s because for far too long now long (going back multiple leaders) we’ve been focused on the tactical. We’ve hungrily leapt at every scandal and Harper miscue and bitten-in hard, wanting to believe it was our ticket back to our rightful place in the seat of power.

Yet, at every turn, we’ve been unable to capitalize on each of a litany of Conservative scandals, faux-pas, screw-ups, miscues and arrogant decisions. No bump in the polls. No lasting increase in support. Why is that? It’s not because Harper is so dammed loveable. It’s because, compared to the alternatives, he still has more appeal to most Canadians because a) he’s the devil they know, and b) we haven’t given them a reason to vote for us.

Until we do, until we finally, at long last, stop looking for the easy home-run, but instead re-build our brand and develop our leader and start giving Canadians a reason not just to vote AGAINST the Conservatives, but to vote FOR us, them we’re just spinning our wheels. And all the Conservative scandals in the world won’t help us. He gets away with it time and time again not because we won’t fight, but because we’re too weak to stop him.

I want Harper gone as badly as anyone. That’s why, while we can get rightfully worked-up over this prorogument, I’d much rather we ALSO finally move past the tactical and do the strategic heavy-lifting around policy, vision and leadership (like finding some) so that when Harper pulls crap like this, we can call him on it and be in a position to actually do something more about it then provide soundbites of outrage for the political magazine shows.

It’s all well to fight and die for the noble cause. I’d rather fight and win.

National Post

A Liberal blogger and activist from the left coast who now reluctantly calls Toronto home, Jeff Jedras blogs as A BCer in Toronto.

It looks like the Liberal rats are preparing to abandon the (sinking?) ship. What is Donolo doing? Will Prince Michael take advice from anyone?

Better, I think, to lead the Liberal faithful in a brave but foolhardy charge “into the valley of death” (a general election) than to let Harper govern as though he had a majority while the Dippers gnaw away at the “soft underbelly” of Canadian Liberalism. At least Icarus can, metaphorically, die fighting, die like a man, and let someone else - Coderre? Cauchon? The Young Dauphin? - take over.

 

[GAP]

and Bob Rae is drooling all over the placemats at each pronouncement by Iggy.....Each time I see him on some comment or other you can just feel the anxiety.     

 

[ModlrMike]

I think there are more Liberals now who hear the sharpening of knives rather than the rattling of sabres.

 

[Edward Campbell]

And here, from yet another Liberal insider, is a counterpoint to all the doom and gloom, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail’s web site:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/silver-powers/exactly-where-michael-ignatieff-wants-to-be/article1417679/

Exactly where Michael Ignatieff wants to be?

Robert Silver

Sunday, January 3, 2010 10:32 PM

Reading the year-end punditry from the Silver-Powers foreign office here in beautiful Malta, it is hard to miss the pile-on against Michael Ignatieff.

Loser. Screw-up. Step aside. Merge with the NDP to save the Liberal furniture. Plan your succession. See if Starbucks still offers stock options to baristas. All of this, and worse, forms the analysis of what faces the Liberal Leader heading into 2010.

And yet.

I make my living in the energy business. One of my theories on energy is if you had spent the last 40 years betting against the "conventional wisdom" of where natural gas prices were heading - "cheap gas is done" or "there is a mass oversupply of gas and prices are staying low for the next decade" - if you always bet against that conventional wisdom and the experts, you probably would have done pretty well over the last four decades.

Conventional wisdom is wrong more than it’s right when it comes to gas pricing, or at least that's my theory and historical data does a decent job backing me up.


I believe Paul Wells said something similar once about Canadian politics. Without the direct citation, I believe his maxim went "if everyone in Ottawa believes something to be true, bet the opposite."

So as we enter 2010, Michael Ignatieff is a dead man walking. He has no chance. He should step aside. Actually, he may be stepping aside any minute now.

Right.

I haven't read a single non-partisan pundit who has predicted anything for Ignatieff that differs from the "he's done" prediction for 2010 (and if there have been any, I apologize and blame the poor clip-service here in Malta).

It’s all harsh stuff.

So if everyone believes it to be true, isn't that, if I'm being consistent, in and of itself a reason to explore the alternative?

Let me start the ball rolling; being underestimated in politics is the greatest gift your opponent can give you.

The fact that Michael Ignatieff enters 2010 as a political fait accompli according to his opponents and pundits, isn't that a gift? Proof one: Jean Chrétien. Proof two: Stephen Harper.

Falling into even deeper partisan reasoning, Michael Ignatieff has no ideas? What happens when he starts rolling out some smart thoughts that speak to a broad coalition of Canadians? I guess the game could change.

He's just visiting? What about when he shows up in Thunder Bay in mid-February? And then the 'Peg at minus 40. And then the Gaspé. And then. No visitor would ever do this. Ever.


In other words, what happens if six months from now all the pundits are writing that the same Michael Ignatieff is connecting with a broad coalition of Canadians based on a specific set of well-thought-through ideas while working harder than any other politician in Canada? Might that put an end to Ignatieff's future making cappuccinos?

My point is not to minimize the Liberal Party's challenges entering 2010. They're big and real.

I just think the certainty with which certain pundits are painting the way the new year will unfold for Ignatieff may bite some of our national experts in their collective butts.

The alternative is 2010 will unfold exactly as we all think it will sitting here at the start of January.

Want to bet on that?

Silver is very correct: low expectations are a politician’s best friend. And no one is lower in the expectation polls than Prince Michael.

Can he stop digging and then pull himself out of the hole? Donolo is a smart guy and a skilled political operative; he will build a good team. But Team Harper is good, already, and Team Layton is already pretty good, too.

 

[leroi]

I agree with Silver that it's not good underestimate an opponent:

In other words, what happens if six months from now all the pundits are writing that the same Michael Ignatieff is connecting with a broad coalition of Canadians based on a specific set of well-thought-through ideas while working harder than any other politician in Canada? Might that put an end to Ignatieff's future making cappuccinos?

But,
Ignatieff's on a cross country university talking tour right now and according to this student-editor quoted in the Jan. 14/10 article below, Iggy's speaking notes are not based on well-thought-through ideas. If he wants to impress Canadian students he will need to work a lot harder.  Ignatieff, Jettison Those Speaking Notes!

I assume he's using the university crowd as a testing ground.

Michael Ignatieff’s cross-Canada visit to 11 post-secondary institutions might as well be called Prorogation Tour 2010.

That is, it seems like the Liberal leader has spent much of his time on campus attacking Prime Minister Stephen for dismissing parliament until March. (Nova Scotia Community College, Dalhousie University, Concordia University and l’Université de Montreal have been visited so far. As I write, Ignatieff has finished speaking at McMaster and Toronto and is headed west to Manitoba and Calgary).

From what I gather, the refrain is almost always the same; the Conservatives closed up shop to avoid accountability on controversial issues like detainee torture, Ignatieff claims – and he’s quick to add that Liberal MPs and senators will report to work on Jan. 23, whether or not parliament is in session.

It’s not that prorogation isn’t an important issue. However, if the purpose of the tour is to help students get to know the “real” Ignatieff, he’s going to have to jettison those speaking notes for something a bit more substantial. I suggest the following strategies to help make these chats a bit more interesting:

Encourage participation in politics: This was one of the original reasons Ignatieff claimed he wanted to visit Canada’s universities and colleges. So far, he’s said nary a word to students about declining election turnout and increasing voter apathy. In fact, he has defended the use of attack ads against the Conservatives on prorogation, claiming the Liberals are simply responding to public sentiment.

“I don’t need to take any lessons in positive politics from Stephen Harper,” Ignatieff told reporters. “He’s the master of the negative stuff.”

Be that as it may, such negative sentiment tends to sow disillusionment about politics, especially among younger voters. Ignatieff should remember to say some nice things about the parliamentary system he eventually hopes to oversee.

 

[Rifleman62]

Small Dead Animals

http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/013166.html

January 19, 2010

How Did Michael Vote?

"I for one, think some enterprising wag should ask Prof. Ignatieff his opinion of the special election outcome in his home state".

Posted by Kate at 10:21 PM| Comments (16)

 

[Edward Campbell]

The Globe and Mail's editorial cartoonist, Anthony Jenkins, offers this pretty accurate summary of the Liberal's decision to vote against the budget but not with enough members to force an election - reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:

http://v1.theglobeandmail.com/cartoon/

 

[GAP]

This not showing up stuff works two ways you know......

The three opposition parties show up, sans a few choice cut of Liberal moral strength, all raring to vote NO!! to this despicable budget.........then at the crucial time to stand up for what's right.......a few Conservatives dodge out to pick up milk for the kids, a pack to help relive the stress, etc.....oops, darn missed that vote......and Steve said it was important too!!

 

[Rifleman62]

The Liberals hide in the curtains, and the Liberal Whip and Assistant Whip count the heads. If it looks close, boom, a Liberal appears out of the closet!

It could happen though GAP. Good editorial cartoon.

But, I don't think anyone wants an election.

 

[GAP]

Well, with the delivery of the budget, which hurts no one.....the Liberals have acknowledged they will not vote it down, the public doesn't care, it's the PSC the governments going after and they make more money than them, the HST hasn't hit Ontario & BC......

If the government can engineer an election, they just might squeek out a small majority, especially with the poor showing of Iggy...

 

[Edward Campbell]

...
But, I don't think anyone wants an election.

I think you're right but I also agree with Ibbitson that this budget is an election manifesto preaching Chrétien/Martin style spending restraint and fiscal prudence to a country that is still, properly, enamoured with balanced budgets. The question is: will this budget, and one or two other things including a steadily improving economic picture, give the Conservatives enough support to survive the hit that forcing an election will bring and then to win a majority in that election?

 

[GAP]

To tack onto ER's cartoon....

 

[observor 69]

Just because I don't like Mr.Harper does that make me a Liberal/liberal ? 

 

[GAP]

Just because I don't like Mr.Harper does that make me a Liberal/liberal ? 

Not if you wash your mouth out with soap..... ;D

 

[Rifleman62]

"the Liberal's decision to vote against the budget but not with enough members" Does that mean the Liberals have prorogated some of their MPs? Does it mean they will not work, but still collect their pay?