— Musings —10.17.2012 10:21 PM
— Musings —10.17.2012 10:21 PM
This would make the Provincial race very interesting: http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1273045–gerard-kennedy-may-be-ontario-liberals-best-hope-hepburn
Warren,
Those of us who were in favour of creating the category of supporters to enlarge the pool of those backing the Liberal Party of Canada were naive at best. Unlike Chantal Hébert, I don’t expect to see throngs of Trudeau fans swelling those ranks. What I do expect is deliberate mischief makers — absolutely intent on trying to put in place the weakest possible leader that will face his opponents in the next federal election. Count on it. It’s as good as money in the bank.
LOL, the machinations begin. This is what happens in the Liberal Party when there is a real race shaping up. Change the rules quick! If all the candidates embraced the supporter category, then the Liberal Party would be revitalised, and reinvigorated. Sure there would be shills in the supporter category, but there would also be an absolute flood of curious but formerly passive Liberal supporters actually getting involved in the party, with an actual personal investment in the outcome. Of course, some people would prefer to work their lists of rent-a-members, and will doubtless be spreading alarm about a fifth column. Count on it, it’s as good as money in the bank, lol
@Ronald,
Please do not speak for all people that voted on the motion to open up a new supporter category and subsequently vote to allow that category to cast a vote for the next leader. This was done by many as a very calculated decision and one that will still show it was the correct move.
Your “naive at best” comment just shows that you do not have a grasp as to why this was decided. The fact that the convention was astute enough to realize that the possible benefit from such a move far out-ways any negative, is in itself proof that the party is moving in the right direction.
No unorganized attempt from outside political people could effect the leadership outcome. And, if an organised attempt from another political party or some arms lengths political group did try to have a concerted effort to “steal” the leadership vote, it would be blatantly obvious to media and subsequently to all Canadians. Voters would punish greatly any political party for such tactics and the likelihood that it would even work is small. Too much risk for not enough gain. We are the third party you know?
As a future proof to the amount of thought that went into this choice; the convention also voted AGAINST allowing the new supporter category from voting for a local candidate during a party nomination meeting. Why? Because, at the local level it would be much more likely for success in swaying the outcome. This was the correct move as it will still allow for party MEMBERS to decide who they will campaign for locally and this is what engages the local machines. Take it one step further and by having the party ban appointments of candidates, you probably will have the most democratic main-stream political party in North America.
Bring on Dalton!
Well, the convention ignored the fact that the Liberal Party of Alberta used this system you speak of and it was a classic case of voter manipulation that resulted. As for the Canadian electorate punishing anyone? Well, they punished a party so bad it ended up with a current majority. And that party has vote manipulated everything since the merger of the pc and reform parties.
Martyn,
Thank you for your insight.
Look I’m not saying he wouldn’t win and I’m not saying he wouldn’t make a good leader but from his own purely personal perspective why would he want to do something like run for Liberal leader? He can become a respected former premier and future statesman. He would, until his last days, be sought out for his advice and wisdom. He can land with one of the top law firms on Bay St. and create his post-political life. Boards, charity work, commissions of inquiry and the like. He can do more international work and he can devote his life to those causes which have guided him for the past couple of decades – excellence in education and public service. And of course he can spend more time with his lovely wife and family. What am I missing here? The man has done enough and he has earned the statesman’s life. To throw all that away to re-build the Liberal Party of Canada? I don’t get it.
All that is true.
But if you want an insight into why political leaders do what they do read Steve Paikin’s The Life: The Seductive Call of Politics.
I prefer Rex Murphy’s take: “Mr. McGuinty doesn’t have the whisper of a chance.”
“Can it make any sense at all that the man of no glitter whatsoever should enter a competition with a man (JT) who overflows with the stuff?”
http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/rexmurphy/story/2012/10/18/thenational-rexmurphy-101812.html
Rex Murphy should be listened to by Liberals. That’s frigging hilarious.
Warren,
I publicly go by the golden rule. I won’t make the mistake of underestimating any of them. My private concerns are for inside baseball meetings. Let them all have at it and see how it turns out.
Sorry W, can’t resist this one: the only part where I agreed with Rex was when he said Michael should run again. Ha, ha, ha!
Warren,
My apologies. That should be could run again, not should run again.
Is there anything Rex doesn’t know? He opines on everything, EVERYTHING.