• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

"The Liberals shall rise again," says Conrad Black

The problem is that the effect of the bill will coming home to roost around election time. Much of the laws were written in haste, which rarely works out well. The effects may be the galvanizing issue to bring the left together and swing centre votes away from the  CPC.
 
I can't see that happening.  I was only a kid in the '70s and teenager/young adult in the '80s, but I remember how violently the pendulum used to swing and how much the adults complained about the immediate post-election period whenever government changed hands (NDP vs Socreds).  Anything done in the first two years is a distant or fuzzy ("doesn't seem like it was that bad) memory by the next election.  What is going to matter is whether voters like the vector on which the country is travelling in 2015.
 
Colin P said:
The problem is that the effect of the bill will coming home to roost around election time. Much of the laws were written in haste, which rarely works out well. The effects may be the galvanizing issue to bring the left together and swing centre votes away from the  CPC.

Most Canadians now think we've been out of Afghanistan for years, and we're still in until 2014.

Three years from now is a third of a decade...that's en epoch on a political time scale.  C-38 will be just as much a faint memory in 2015 as when Jean Chretien promised to scrap NAFTA and the GST....
 
Sometimes the Good Grey Globe's Jeffrey Simpson gets it almost exactly right, especially when he stays in his lanes: politics in Canada (Canada East of Saskatchewan, anyway). He does so in this column which is reproduced, without further comment, under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/liberal-problems-run-deeper-than-who-will-be-the-next-leader/article4264962/
Liberal problems run deeper than who will be the next leader

JEFFREY SIMPSON

The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Jun. 15 2012

Was it just eight years ago, in 2004, that Liberal prime minister Paul Martin seemed poised to win 200 seats? Another Liberal extended reign, one that began with prime minister Jean Chrétien's 1993 victory, beckoned under his rival and successor.

Today, the Liberal question is not victory, but survival – a survival made more questionable now that interim leader Bob Rae has decided he does not want the job permanently.

Mr. Rae would have been, by far, his party's most effective leader.

Sure, he had a rough time as premier of Ontario, and certainly the Conservative attack machine would have hounded him with those memories.

But most Canadians do not live in Ontario, and even those who do would have retained only the fuzziest of memories of those tumultuous years two decades ago.

Mr. Rae was the most experienced, talented and verbally gifted of the entire Liberal field of potential candidates. And now he is going, once the party chooses among a very thin field of possible contenders.

There is, in the aftermath of Mr. Rae's decision, much buzz about Justin Trudeau. Buzz, however, obscures some stubborn facts.

That Mr. Trudeau has a famous name, is handsome and bilingual, and has worked hard to secure his constituency are all assets in his favour. He has also answered many constituencies' calls for a speaker, which will be remembered where he went.

But, please, Mr. Trudeau is inexperienced, associated with no policy ideas and an unproven debater. Were his name Smith or Pelletier, very few Liberals would have heard of him.

The more profound question, however, is not about the potential candidates about whom we shall all hear much in due course, but about the party. Canada is now a more ideological place than when the putative Martin dynasty collapsed.

Certainly the Harper Conservatives are far more ideological than the Progressive Conservatives whom they supplanted. In the face of this ideology, buttressed by an unshakeable, motivated and often angry core of about a third of the electorate, many of those who do not share, indeed fear, this ideology have shifted to the New Democrats as a sturdier vehicle with which to confront the Conservative bulldozer.

The Liberals were a protean party in a largely middle-class country, devoid of ideological moorings, capable of shifting according to events and circumstances, a party of internal compromise, the sturdiest bridge for many decades between French- and English-speaking communities and renowned for immigrant absorption into the party and Canada and a broad internationalist agenda in foreign policy.

From Wilfrid Laurier to Mr. Martin, the Liberals were anchored in Quebec. Now, they are a scattered remnant throughout the province, moribund in many regions, scarcely alive in others, vital in only a few. Since the demise of the Meech Lake accord, the largest number of francophone Quebeckers have withdrawn from governing Canada and preferred to be in opposition, first with the Bloc Québécois, now with the NDP. As they withdrew from governing Canada, by definition, they withdrew from the Liberals who were, after all, once the natural governing party of the country.

We live at a time of growing economic inequalities, which separate classes and groups. We live at a time of growing regional disparities, as Alberta and Saskatchewan leave the rest of the country behind. We live at a time of widespread economic uncertainty, with high debt levels, stagnant per capita incomes for the middle class, the fear of unemployment and no shelter from international economic storms.

To these anxieties the Conservatives offer their alternatives; to these divisions and inequalities, they largely turn their backs. In reply, more and more Canadians are turning to the NDP with its alternatives, which at least have the virtue of being known: more state activity paid for by higher corporate taxes, the foil for the Conservatives who prefer a smaller state and lower taxes.

The battle lines, ideologically and regionally, are drawn, and the Liberals are a bit on both sides of the line and definitely off to the side of the real action. It will take sharper analyses of the forces at work in the country and the world, and compelling ideas that flow from those analyses, to make the Liberals relevant.
 
Mr Rae would still require Ontario and wouldn't get the votes required there. I believe he done the right thing for his party by stepping down.

The liberals should not even considering looking at Trudeau (as some last ditch savior to the party it seems)and collectively deciding who has a personality and a good record.

Jack Laton didn't bring the NDP to the forefront with policy and attack ad's; he did so with personality and a great ability to debate.

 
Rae getting out of the way is a good thing, but I agree with the Grope's assessment of Trudeau... though, quite honestly, the name and that legend might actually be enough to gain him some traction, particularly if the Liberals are well positioned to attack Conservatives on their emergent scandals - this last bill, the F-35, robocalls, Del Mastro's overspending (I'm so glad to see that guy get thrashed, I've never met someone quite so... I can't even come up with the word... distasteful?), and so on. The Liberals will have to court NDP supporters to reduce their impact and also draw over a lot of those Red Tories who are finding the CPC increasing more embarrassing (and they exist) in order to cobble together enough support to make things work. I don't think it'll be easy and there's lots of ways they can screw it up, but there is indeed a way forward for them.
 
I think Trudeau being placed as leader is the best thing that could happen to the liberals ;)
 
Watching how the Liberal leadership plays out will also show which faction is in charge:

The faction that advocates for the Young Dauphin believes all they need is a charismatic leader to regain power (and the unspoken assumption is the party does not need to stand for anything besides the assumption of power). If they win the party remains irrelevant and doomed to extinction.

The obviously smaller faction that believes the LPC needs to define what they stand for and renew the party apparatus to operate in a 21rst century fashion. Sadly, there is no obvious leader to gather around (although based on the thin bios offered in the Toronto Star's Thursday edition, Marc Garneau is probably the best choice in terms of accomplishments). If this faction wins, look for a long hard grind as they renew on the one hand, and bayonet the old guard out of the party executive and riding associations on the other. The next time they will be competative will be 2019, probably the best they can hope for is to make some gains at the NDP's expense in 2015.
 
Thucydides said:
The obviously smaller faction that believes the LPC needs to define what they stand for and renew the party apparatus to operate in a 21rst century fashion. Sadly, there is no obvious leader to gather around (although based on the thin bios offered in the Toronto Star's Thursday edition, Marc Garneau is probably the best choice in terms of accomplishments). If this faction wins, look for a long hard grind as they renew on the one hand, and bayonet the old guard out of the party executive and riding associations on the other. The next time they will be competative will be 2019, probably the best they can hope for is to make some gains at the NDP's expense in 2015.

They tried that with Iggy and Stephan, but hey, third times a charm, right?
 
Here is an opinion piece from the National Post's site that more or less trashes the idea of the Young Dauphin as the immediate saviour of the Liberal Party. It is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provision of the Copyright Act.

Den Tandt: Justin Trudeau is smart, talented and nowhere near ready to redeem the Liberals
Michael Den Tandt, Postmedia News  Jun 14, 2012 – 2:30 PM ET | Last Updated: Jun 14, 2012 2:34 PM ET

Justin Trudeau should, after a suitable period of introspection, politely thank those who would have him press-ganged into taking on the Liberal leadership. Then he should tell them to heave off. And enjoy the summer.

He’s not ready. Neither is the Liberal Party of Canada.

This latest effort to resurrect Trudeau-mania, prompted by Bob Rae’s decision to bow out of the leadership rather than fight like a junkyard dog over the scraps of power, is manic. Trudeau says he’s under intense pressure to run. That can only grow now that he’s opened the door. But this is a mug’s game. The effort to drive the 40-year-old to jump before his time is a sign, not of his suitability, but of the party’s desperation. Through three election cycles, now, the Liberals have clung to their Biblical myth of return, whereby a hero emerges from the mists, takes up his sword and leads them back to the Promised Land. At what point does it get old?

It began with Paul Martin, who’d slain the deficit but peaked too soon. Then came Stephane Dion, by mistake; then Michael Ignatieff. The internationally renowned author was in many respects a perfect Liberal candidate, with a political lineage drawn directly back to Lester B. Pearson. Marvellous! He fizzled.

Then, for a while, Rae was the One — Rhodes scholar, gifted orator, passionate political warrior. But upon reflection, that wasn’t going to work either. Rae was too old, his record as Ontario premier too polarizing. Faced with his coronation, the party was already preparing to rip itself apart. Rae saw the lay of the land and did the intelligent thing. As he stepped back he may as well have said to Trudeau: You’re up. Have fun, kid — if you think you can hack it.

In what way is a centre-left-leaning Liberal Party different from a centre-left-leaning New Democratic Party?Here’s a question, for fun. Is there a single plank in the Liberal platforms of 2006, 2008 or 2011 that the party would now repudiate? Here’s another: In what way is a centre-left-leaning Liberal Party different from a centre-left-leaning New Democratic Party? Let’s acknowledge that the 35 Liberals in the current parliament, many of them former cabinet ministers, are an able lot. But how is their current political posture, vis-a-vis the Harper government, different from the NDP’s?

Next question: What has Justin Trudeau ever said or written that is substantive, original or politically powerful, in the sense that it compels people to rally to his side? Of course he has spoken about inclusion and the end of apathy, of the need for reasonable compromise and political engagement. Good. But these are bromides. What has he said that’s new?

The charity boxing match in late March has been cited by Trudeau’s admirers as evidence of steel, behind the Hollywood looks. I was ringside. I saw him beat up Senator Patrick Brazeau, as the crowd roared its approval. It was a political masterstroke. But what happens when you marry ambition and determination to inexperience and mercurial judgment?

Trudeau has talent to burn. He has the capacity to acquire an intellectual spine and then articulate a coherent political philosophy. He hasn’t yet done so. Until he subjects himself to that kind of discipline, he is no match for Stephen Harper, or Thomas Mulcair. In head-to-head debate, either of them will eat his lunch.

There is one scenario — if Trudeau is secretly very crafty, and plotting to pull a Prince Hal, whereby he uncloaks his ruthless gravitas at just the right time — under which his candidacy would make some sense. That is, if he intends to to lead the Liberals into a merger with the NDP, before the 2015 election.

If the Liberal Party is to have any hope at all as an independent entity, it must develop ideas that set it apart from the other two national partiesThis would be Shakespearean in its irony — the eldest son of P.E. Trudeau presiding over the dissolution of his party, in the service of a progressive vision for Canada. Justin could contest with Tom Mulcair and others for the leadership of the New Democratic Liberals; he would lose; he would become a minister, possibly, in a Mulcair government. Eventually he might become prime minister. Merging with the New Democrats removes the need for a new intellectual spine, because the Dippers have one.

But even here, the logic for moving now is flimsy. If he wishes, Trudeau can work toward a merger as an MP — he needn’t be leader to do so. Moreover, a union — say it happens in 2014 — would require a leadership race. He could jump then. In the interim he could stick to his knitting, burnish his chops and acquire some grey hair.

If the Liberal Party is to have any hope at all as an independent entity, it must develop ideas that set it apart from the other two national parties. Paul Martin did this, with help from some very clever strategists, in advance of the publication of the famous Red Book, which won the 1993 election. That’s what Liberals should be working through now. Who will write that book? And never mind their latest Moses.
 
My sympathy for the LPC is aprox 0%, but there are still issues that need to be dealt with, such as keeping the NDP out of power (and as an Ontarian yourself, you hardly need to be reminded why).

The problem with Dion and Ignatieff was they were also sold to us as "Philosopher Kings" in the Trudeupian mold. Dian and Ignatieff were undoubtedly smart, but Dion's smarts were applied to something that few Canadians were interested in or supportive of (the Green Shift and radical tax increases for all Canadians), and Ignatieff was simply unable to articulate what exactly he was all about. Canadians were apparently supposed to simply be satisfied with the Philosopher King cred...

Marc Garneau has a record of accomplishment as an astronaut and director of the CSA, which is head and shoulders above the other presumptive leadership candidates mooted so far (I am exempting Mark Carney, who's name has been raised but who isn't even known to be a member of the LPC), so while I doubt he has an alternative vision of Canada to Stephen Harper or Thomas Mulcair, he is at least capable of doing the work to manage the transformation should a coherent platform be created and adopted.

So if (big IF) the LPC is able and willing to make the real changes to become a party organized along and representing 21rst century values, then someone like him is needed to manage the change. The real danger to the Liberals (and long term danger to us) is that they decide the Philosopher King/Star Candidate approach is the correct COA; which means the LPC declines further into irrelevance and eventually dissapears.
 
It is my opinion that the lure of the philospher king/star candidate may prove too much for the party apparatchiks, even those who realize a rebuilding is in order. I guess it could be called the Animal House approach - the Dean was going to shut down the frat, so the members had a toga party - instead of getting serious about fixing their problems. The appeal of such an approach is that it worked, at least in the movie. After all, the platform is not important. What matters is finding somebody who can pull a Jack Layton and return the LPC to power.
 
recceguy said:
I think Trudeau being placed as leader is the best thing that could happen to the liberals ;)

Completely agree, the sooner Braid gets to grind up that Trudeau whelp and sprinkle 'em on his morning eggs, the sooner the LPC can be merged in the NDP and the soon will we enjoy good Conservative government for a few decades.
 
recceguy said:
They tried that with Iggy and Stephan, but hey, third times a charm, right?

Agree. I find Harper is a very weak speaker unprepared. Last leaders debate Iggy and Harper got ate alive.

Liberals need to find someone with charm and who can argue in a respectful way; and actually answer questions. I found Laton didn't sound like a "platform" when he debated. He answered questions unlike most politicians who stick to the "party line" form of talking (which I believe annoys the **** out of most people.)

Or depending on your political stance as recceguy said...Trudeau would be a true "saviour" to the party. ;D
 
fraserdw said:
Completely agree, the sooner Braid gets to grind up that Trudeau whelp and sprinkle 'em on his morning eggs, the sooner the LPC can be merged in the NDP and the soon will we enjoy good Conservative government for a few decades.

Actually, I think merging those two parties would put an end to the CPC's time in office - it's the split of those votes that keep the CPC in office - the Liberals enjoyed the same sort of scenario in the 1990s and onward. I'm still wondering where this "good conservative government" is. Haven't seen much to write home about.
 
Said like a dyed in the wool liberal......phyyt... ;D
 
Old Sweat said:
It is my opinion that the lure of the philospher king/star candidate may prove too much for the party apparatchiks, even those who realize a rebuilding is in order. I guess it could be called the Animal House approach - the Dean was going to shut down the frat, so the members had a toga party - instead of getting serious about fixing their problems. The appeal of such an approach is that it worked, at least in the movie. After all, the platform is not important. What matters is finding somebody who can pull a Jack Layton John Belushi and return the LPC to power.

There, fixed that for you ;D
 
Redeye said:
Actually, I think merging those two parties would put an end to the CPC's time in office - it's the split of those votes that keep the CPC in office - the Liberals enjoyed the same sort of scenario in the 1990s and onward. I'm still wondering where this "good conservative government" is. Haven't seen much to write home about.

My scenario would be the LPC splitting into the Conservatives and the NDP, bringing the Cons to the centre right and the NDP further left.  Combine that with new BQ riding on the student insurrection in Quebec and you have an even stronger Con Government in 2015.  The current budget hurts the NDP and left leaning LPC supporter more than it hurts the soft conservative support so it really is a non-issue in 2015.  Good conservative government is the economy and nothing but the economy, in the end that is the only thing that mean anything to the great unwashed...food in their bellies and 2 cars in their garage.  Environment, welfare, EI, Veterans are all meaningless to the middle class if they are not able to collect "things".  Conservatives are governing for the Right-Centerist with lip service to Rightest and it works.  Jean Creeptan did the same style of government in the 90s (excepting he choose the Centerist and Left-Centerist) with budget cuts to the military, social programs for the have nots and gun control, all issues the middle class believed were affecting their safety and ability to collect things.

Appeal to the personal greed of the largest voting block and you will always win.
 
Redeye said:
Actually, I think merging those two parties would put an end to the CPC's time in office - it's the split of those votes that keep the CPC in office - the Liberals enjoyed the same sort of scenario in the 1990s and onward. I'm still wondering where this "good conservative government" is. Haven't seen much to write home about.


The resulting New Liberal Party would be considerably smaller than the total of the two merging partners: the hard left would abandon it as would the so called Manley Liberals. The later would, sooner rather than later, migrate to the Conservatives. A Liberal NDP merger would produce at least one new party - a socialist party - and would reinvigorate one or more Quebec nationalist parties. The end result: another Conservative majority.

"Good Conservative (not conservative) government" is here in exactly the same ratio as we was "good Liberal government" and, in provinces, "good NDP governments." Stephen Harper is no worse a PM than was Jean Chrétien or Brian Mulroney ~ he's probably accomplished more than the former and less than the latter. He's infinitely superior to Pierre Trudeau (but Sir John Thompson and Sir Mackenzie Bowell were better prime ministers than was Pierre Trudeau) and he's no where near as good as Louis St Laurent; he's probably on a par with Lester Pearson.
 
fraserdw said:
Appeal to the personal greed of the largest voting block and you will always win.

Very well said.  I believe you hit the nail on the head.
 
Back
Top