Tuesday, December 09, 2008

One Final Thought Before Moving On

Does anyone out there think that having zero debates and no real substantive discussion on the issues or the future of the party will wind up being a good thing for the long term health of the Liberal Party?


  • Well, on the bright side, there won't be any "Stephane, we didn't get it done!" moments.

    I do think the Liberals have blown it again by not having an actual race though. Almost makes you think Iggy wants to take Harper on in an election before May...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:35 a.m.  

  • No.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:42 a.m.  

  • Remember that Ignatieff pledged to have a full-blown policy convention if he became leader, so I can't see why the May convention couldn't be used for what you're talking about.

    Say what you will about Ignatieff, but the man loves ideas (indeed, one might say that his fatal flaw in 2006 was that he had too many of them).

    So, I think we'll get a chance to have a debate, and frankly, I'd rather have a pure policy debate, rather than a leadership debate where short-term political advantage usually trumps the long-term value of an idea.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:44 a.m.  

  • Speaking of zero debates... does anyone else have an issue with the Conservative party putting together an auto bailout package worth up to $6 BILLION dollars without a single vote in the house?

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 1:11 a.m.  

  • Hey... Don't talk this divisive speak. Now is the time to go write on every blog that now is the time to unite the party around our leader.

    Stronger together. Weaker not together.

    Tous ensemble. A thousand points of light.


    By Blogger thescottross.blogspot.com, at 1:20 a.m.  

  • Actually, I'm not. For one in his campaign launch Ignatieff said he would set-up some sort of thinkers conference (ala Lester Pearson) should he win which would likely produce more policy substance then any debates and for another 2006 wasn't so long ago... I'm sure you can find them on YouTube if you're really hankering for a Liberal Party Leadership debate.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:20 a.m.  

  • ScottRoss: Nice. :)

    CG: Does anyone actually think that a leadership race between Rae and Bob would have paid anything more than lip service to the idea of party reform?

    Does anyone else think that having a convention without a leadership convention will improve the quality of the policy and party reform debate held at that convention?

    By Blogger Gauntlet, at 2:52 a.m.  

  • Now is the time to unite behind Michael Ignatieff.

    We are no longer "the Rae camp", "the LeBlanc camp" or "the Ignatieff camp". We are the Liberal party of Canada and we are strongest when act together, united by our common values and driven by our dream for better days.

    "Tonight's the night we all begin again."

    Tous Ensemble.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:36 a.m.  

  • It's funny how ironic the phrase tous ensemble is becoming.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:50 a.m.  

  • Okay, we have a crisis, lack of time, and face it, we already know both guys.

    If LeBlanc had stayed in - perhaps one debate.

    I've had enough of races, debates, etc.

    Let's move on.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:07 a.m.  

  • This isn't a knock on Michael. He can't very well debate if there's no one for him to debate. [Although it might be a good idea for him to hold a series of Q & A sessions with Liberals over the coming months]

    I just think it would have made him a stronger leader to go through a more rigorous campaign than this. Obviously, given the weird events of the past few weeks, there's not much else that could have happened.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 9:13 a.m.  

  • Does anyone out there think that having zero debates and no real substantive discussion on the issues or the future of the party will wind up being a good thing for the long term health of the Liberal Party?

    At this particular point in time I don't think it matters much as there was an burning issue to take care of.

    I believe MI will find a way to comprimise with the Cons, support the throne speech and budget ... and let the Cons response to the economic situation do the dirty work.

    In the meantime the whole party better start engaging in discussions in where they are going and is that a place Canadians will want to go there themselves.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:59 a.m.  

  • No way! I think that having zero public consultation and crowning someone leader is going to do wonders for the Party.

    Tous ensemble! Who needs democracy anyway when you can just get crowned King?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:11 a.m.  

  • I think every Liberal who voted for Michael or voted for another candidate needs to unite behind him.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:44 a.m.  

  • I think the real problem is that we look at Leadership politics as the only way to have real debate in the Liberal Party.

    Maybe it's time the Liberal Party have more policy sessions, and use that technology Bob was talking about to consult a wider swath of Liberals

    By Blogger Anthony, at 12:45 p.m.  

  • Debates expose divisions to be exploited by the Conservatives. We're not living in normal times, we're living in Harper times and he's shown again and again that his trick is to define his opponents. No need to do his job for him.

    By Blogger Reality Bites, at 12:53 p.m.  


    Oh...the Liberal Party. Then no.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:03 p.m.  

  • Forgive me, but who cares about the Liberal Party having a good think about itself?
    The North American auto industry is about to implode, throwing millions of jobs and billions of dollars in commerce into uncertainty. In a perfect world Canada and the US would be trying to come to a continental plan for reinventing an entire industry. Instead we have two governments treading water until late January and nobody really grasping the enormity of the situation.
    If the Liberal Party of Canada doesn't know what the hell it stands for and can't muster the brain power to decide what it should be proposing in this situation, then it doesn't deserve to exist.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 2:45 p.m.  

  • The machinery of the Party is certainly one question the Liberal Party will have to deal with. (... with which the LPC will have to deal. ... whatever)

    The process just exercised must raise even larger questions for Elections Canada and the law surrounding Party Leadership contests: while I don't have any suggestion of any wrongdoing, this does raise questions about a Party being able to run around the law in the future.

    The law allows certain financial transactions to be excluded from scrutiny if they are concluded before a Party Leadership campaign begins. The question raised here is whether a Party could have a leadership campaign decided before the campaign officially begins, thereby avoiding the law entirely.

    Canadians should be troubled by this question, although I do emphasize that this appears to be a byproduct, not a motivating factor, of the current situation. But - how would we ever know for certain who funded MI's ascendancy to the Laurel?

    By Blogger Paul, at 5:19 p.m.  

  • libloggers "We're a Progressive Party!!!!"

    M.I. "err, not so much, centre ho!"

    libbloggers "Neeeeever Miiiind!"

    This shit is almost as hilarious as the next election is going to be.

    The best thing is that I'm guaranteed to have a PM win who believes in the Iraq war and torturing terrorists whomever wins. Also a PM who "won't lose any sleep" over Israel doing what they need to do against Hezbollah et al.


    By Blogger Hey, at 6:42 p.m.  

  • don't count out Bob Rae's immutable talent for ruining things... He's a snake that won't go down without a fight if it comes to him supporting the colition with Iggy against it..after all, Iggy isn't picked by the party anyways... The Liberals really screwed up on this one.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:59 p.m.  

  • tous ensemble?

    Seems more like "l'etat, c'est igg."

    By Blogger Demosthenes, at 1:13 p.m.  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger Jacques Beau Vert, at 5:48 p.m.  

  • Guess my sarcasm was completely missed. I thought the syntactical errors and the Reagan reference would have given that away.

    Wow. Sorta stunning.


    By Blogger thescottross.blogspot.com, at 7:07 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home