What's Ignatieff up to now?

57 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
What's Ignatieff up to now?

One thing Ignatieff is doing apparently is trying to lure Wally Oppal into federal politics with the offer of the Justice portfolio. There's just one little problem with that - the Liberals chance of formimg government are next to nothing at this point, and even if the Liberals somehow formed gov't they would have to have a coalition partner, and the NDP might not agree to that. Everything is on the table with a coalition government. What riding would Oppal be running in if he takes the bait?

StarSuburb

I think objectively the Libs chances are better than "next to nothing". I think the next election is going to be a very tight toss up between the Libs and Cons, maybe a dozen seat difference. I doubt Iggy would pursue a formal coalition if he did end up winning (a Lib victory I think would be the last election for at least a bit, as the Tories would boot Harper out for losing, but a narrow Con victory would probably lead to another election soon after) but in a narrow minority, a strong NDP could prove vital. The NDP should be preparing for both outcomes, scenario A leaves a Tory victory in which another election would probably soon follow (so the NDP should just keep the campaign engine revving) while scenario B leaves a narrow Lib minority in which the NDP could get some big consessions out of Iggy.

remind remind's picture

Wow, interesting rumour, and indicates even less space between the ReformaTories and Liberals.

Oppal = Dona Cadman, Hedy Fry?

Having said that, Delta Richmond East seems feasible, as does Richmond. ;)

 

 

 

Stockholm

The only way that Harper stays PM is if he wins a majority. I predict that if he falls short it won't matter who has more seats - Liberals or Tories, because Harper cannot survive a vote on a throne speech. He will lose that vote and then the GG will invite the opposition to govern

West Coast Lefty

Interesting theory, Stockholm - that would force Iggy into accepting a coalition with the NDP or letting Harper continue in power - what a nice box to put him in Laughing I don't entirely agree with your statement about Harper - if the results are similar to 2008 with a strong 135-145 seat performance from the Cons and the Libs below 90 seats and way behind, don't know why Harper would be forced out at that point.  There is no way the Libs would try to defeat the government on a result like that, as they would be in the throes of yet another leadership race. 

I think there would be mass voter revulsion at the Libs with 90 seats trying to replace the Tories with 40 or 50 more seats than the Libs, within weeks of the election result.  The Dec 2008 coalition was a unique situation due to an ultra-partisan and fundamentally dishonest economic statement by Flaherty which drove the 3 opposition parties together in a brief coalition - these conditions are very unlikely to occur in the forseeable future. 

West Coast Lefty

NorthReport wrote:

One thing Ignatieff is doing apparently is trying to lure Wally Oppal into federal politics with the offer of the Justice portfolio. There's just one little problem with that - the Liberals chance of formimg government are next to nothing at this point, and even if the Liberals somehow formed gov't they would have to have a coalition partner, and the NDP might not agree to that. Everything is on the table with a coalition government. What riding would Oppal be running in if he takes the bait?

After just getting beat in Delta South, I'm thinking Wally will want a very safe seat like Vancouver South (albeit Dosanjh only hung on by 20 votes!) - Richmond is a possibility, I guess.  Delta Richmond-East is a non-starter, as Cummings owns that seat for the Conservatives.  I don't think Wally will go unless the Libs are looking very likely to form government, which is not a very probable scenario in my view.  Wally wasn't that effective as A-G in BC, but he would be terrible in opposition and wouldn't enjoy that at all, I suspect. 

Stockholm

I see your point WCL, but there will be another big difference after the next election and that is that Harper will never get a chance to establish any post-election confidence in the first place. On election night the message would out from all the opposition leaders that "Canada has elected a minority Parliament and we shall see what combination of parties can gain the confidence of the house". I think that as long the NDP and Libs together have more seats than the Tories (which is very, very, very likely) then we are all set for a change of government. Iggy will be quite enthused since it will be the only way to prevent a leadership revolt against him after coming in second.

ottawaobserver

The new Liberal national director seems not to remember that he's not the story (or maybe with Iggy on holidays in Europe at the moment, he is), but he's put himself on the front-page of their party's website for a canoe trip up the Rideau Canal, collecting donations of $23 to make Iggy the 23rd Prime Minister, and is tweeting things like pointing out that it's 23 degrees outside today.

If I ever see Brad Lavigne doing anything like this, I will pull my pac.  yuck.

But, anyone starting to get the idea that the Liberals' ENTIRE strategy revolves around spinning Iggy as the next PM?

 

West Coast Lefty

You could be right, Stockholm, but I suspect that won't happen as Harper and the media will be pushing Iggy from day 1 of the next campaign as to whether he will form a coalition government with the NDP and BQ.  You didn't mention the Bloc in your last post but their role is absolutely crucial - it's highly unlikely that the NDP and Libs alone will have 155 seats.  There is no way Iggy will be able to avoid the "alliance with the BQ" issue in particular, and again, the math is such that the NDP alone probably won't be enough to guarantee a stable coalition government.Iggy has already gone on record in saying a coalition with the BQ is not on and he's been quite negative on even a coalition with the NDP, so again, Harper wins either way. 

Either Iggy panics and rules out a coalition during the campaign, in which case your scenario would mean Iggy breaking a fundamental commitment to voters on election night, which would cause mass media and public backlash and doom any fledgling coalition government to early defeat; or Iggy says he's open to a coalition and then Harper runs against "the separatists and the socialists running the country" and likely wins at least a solid minority and possibly a majority.  Yet another example of Iggy making short-term tactical decisions or statements ("I don't favour a coalition") that are hugely damaging to his long-term strategic interests.

ottawaobserver

WCL raises a good point about how the fact of there being a coalition or not will be a campaign issue, and how this might affect subsequent negotiations afterwards.  Do you think Harper can whip up as much of a fury now that the concept is not so new to people anymore?  Enough to make them vote Conservative if they're otherwise mad at the party?  I don't know what I think about that, but it's one of the key questions I believe.

The coalition question might well define the subsidiary ballot question, assuming the economy is the primary one, and Layton will have to think about how to turn that to our advantage.  I've thrown out the concept of saying he might run to lead a "progressive coalition"; lets him continue to run for PM, stays on the right side of that issue, and handles the inevitable strategic voting argument that will come from the Liberals.  They're going to do a lot of "you need someone on the government side" stuff in our ridings in northern Ontario, which could be countered with "you need someone in a progressive coalition who will make sure northern issues don't get shunted aside like they did under the Liberals last time".  OK, something shorter but with the same general drift ;-)  You know what I mean.  Is this out to lunch at all?

Debater

NorthReport wrote:

One thing Ignatieff is doing apparently is trying to lure Wally Oppal into federal politics with the offer of the Justice portfolio. There's just one little problem with that - the Liberals chance of formimg government are next to nothing at this point, and even if the Liberals somehow formed gov't they would have to have a coalition partner, and the NDP might not agree to that. Everything is on the table with a coalition government. What riding would Oppal be running in if he takes the bait?

Talk about a lack of objectivity.

Anyway, Wally Oppal is a horrible individual who didn't even have the spine to have the RCMP officers who committed murder with a taser properly investigated.  I hope we don't see him end up in Parliament with any party.

ottawaobserver

So, sorry, the only objective view is that the Liberals are most likely to form a government next time, is that what you're saying?

Because lots of folks (including some quite experienced Liberals) think the riding-by-riding math is really hard for them on that score.  Now it's you not being objective.

KenS

ottawaobserver wrote:
WCL raises a good point about how the fact of there being a coalition or not will be a campaign issue, and how this might affect subsequent negotiations afterwards.  Do you think Harper can whip up as much of a fury now that the concept is not so new to people anymore?  Enough to make them vote Conservative if they're otherwise mad at the party?

I don't think he needs to whip people in a fury. I think its more like WCL sketches: yet another lose-lose position for Iggnatieff. And then his tendency to panic. even without a disaster on this particular front... a whole lot of boxes and cul-de-sac for Iggy and all the options for Harper.

-=+=-

ottawaobserver wrote:

The new Liberal national director seems not to remember that he's not the story (or maybe with Iggy on holidays in Europe at the moment, he is), but he's put himself on the front-page of their party's website for a canoe trip up the Rideau Canal, collecting donations of $23 to make Iggy the 23rd Prime Minister, and is tweeting things like pointing out that it's 23 degrees outside today.

If I ever see Brad Lavigne doing anything like this, I will pull my pac.  yuck.

But, anyone starting to get the idea that the Liberals' ENTIRE strategy revolves around spinning Iggy as the next PM?

 

 

Man, this is incredibly gimmicky.  But I guess this is what happens in a top-heavy party (and one full of insider, lawyer-types).

 

The "Iggy-as-PM" strategy was what they first tried to use at the leadership convention in 2006.  Eventually they were forced to "take it off the table" (in Ignatieff's words), because it brought up terrible comparisons between Iggy's aspirations and his years out of the country.  (They were forced to back off the "Iggy is the new Trudeau" stuff too, again because the comparisons were not to Iggy's favour.).

 

If they are trying this again, then they really are out of ideas, or maybe hope.

Fidel
NorthReport

Perfect Fidel. Laughing

Sean in Ottawa

I think if Harper tries to make a ballot question about the coalition next time it will seriously backfire. I suspect Ignatief will say that this is an indication that once more Harper has no interest in leading a multi-party house and should be thrown out of office. As well the coalition died because a small number did not want coalition with the NDP and a much bigger number did not want coalition woth the BQ. If the NDP and Liberals can govern without the BQ, the idea may be quite popular.

Secondly, the coalition was unpopular because it was disrupting a government that took office with an increased mandate from what it had before the election right after a vote. If the Cons lose seats and it is clear on election night that the opposition says-- it is not certain wh will govern then the coalition idea could have a lot of support. If a majority think that Harper has done a bad job-- the coalition idea might actually gain support. With another election in such a short time people may well warm to the idea of stability that cannot happen with a party that does not negotiate with the opposition. Ignatief could simply say- we will help make sure Canada has a stable government capable of lasting at least a couple years, one that reflects the will of the majority of the house.

The NDP then will need to look willing to negotiate rather than make excessive demands disproportionate to its level of support. The party will have to learn how to say: this is what we would want if we were the government but this is our minimum given that we are not. If the party does a good job on that, the support will go up-- otherwise things could get dangerous. And it is a tightrope as if you do not assert what you would do people will not see the difference but if you hold the government hostage at every vote then it is worse. In that sense an accord stating that the NDP will not bring down the government no matter what for a time is safer for the NDP to be in-- otherwise it will have to sort every policy between "would like" and "worth going to the polls for" and the population may not always agree with the party on that priority order.

NorthReport

Fidel,

 

I like the copy around the ad as well.

 

The Liberals continued their support for the Conservatives today, as they endorsed the Harper agenda for the 79th consecutive time.

Traditional gifts for the 79th confidence vote include a joint Liberal-Conservative attack against the 2 million unemployed Canadians who need immediate assistance to make ends meet - all wrapped in a pretty blue ribbon.

Far from being placed 'on probation,' with the help of the Liberals, first under Mr. Dion and now under Mr. Ignatieff, the Conservatives have been governing with a de facto majority for over 3 years.

Despite Mr. Ignatieff's claims to have succeeded in making Parliament work, he has merely propped up Mr. Harper, and all he's gotten in return is the chance to study how the Conservatives are going to implement a 2008 campaign promise that was subsequently adopted within an NDP motion last month.

Making parliament work means securing gains for Canadians that the government was unwilling to do in the first place. New Democrats have helped previous minority Parliaments work and succeeded in getting billions of dollars in funding for a national housing program, education and public transit.

What we've seen in this Parliament is an official opposition willing to keep propping up this bad government. That's not 'making parliament work.'

Debater

ottawaobserver wrote:

So, sorry, the only objective view is that the Liberals are most likely to form a government next time, is that what you're saying?

Because lots of folks (including some quite experienced Liberals) think the riding-by-riding math is really hard for them on that score.  Now it's you not being objective.

I didn't say the Liberals are going to form a government next time - I said it was not objective of NR to say they have virtually no chance of doing so.

-=+=-

ottawaobserver wrote:

The new Liberal national director seems not to remember that he's not the story (or maybe with Iggy on holidays in Europe at the moment, he is), but he's put himself on the front-page of their party's website for a canoe trip up the Rideau Canal, collecting donations of $23 to make Iggy the 23rd Prime Minister, and is tweeting things like pointing out that it's 23 degrees outside today.

If I ever see Brad Lavigne doing anything like this, I will pull my pac.  yuck.

But, anyone starting to get the idea that the Liberals' ENTIRE strategy revolves around spinning Iggy as the next PM?

 

 

Do the Liberals know 23 is actually an unlucky number?

 

At least according to [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/23_Enigma]William S. Burroughs[/url] (author of Naked Lunch):

Quote:

I first heard of the 23 enigma from William S Burroughs, author of Naked Lunch, Nova Express, etc. According to Burroughs, he had known a certain Captain Clark, around 1960 in Tangier, who once bragged that he had been sailing 23 years without an accident.  That very day, Clark’s ship had an accident that killed him and everybody else aboard. Furthermore, while Burroughs was thinking about this crude example of the irony of the gods that evening, a bulletin on the radio announced the crash of an airliner in Florida, USA. The pilot was another captain Clark and the flight was Flight 23.

Superstitious people might want to stay away from Michael Ignatieff for the duration of the next election campaign.

ottawaobserver

-=+=-, :-)

KenS

Maybe Harper is going to take his cue, and make sure that when E-day comes it will be on the 23rd.

KenS

What a cheap attack ad possibility for the Cons.

2 second TV ads that flash 23 liberaly scattered through the schedule.

Every possible verbal reference to 23 in all earned broadcast medid.

Little billboards.  23

Subway and transit shelter posters. Square, white background, solid black numbers. 23

Twenty-three skidoo.

Stockholm

"Wally Oppal is a horrible individual"

Then he should feel right at home in the Liberal Part of Canada. Birds of a feather flock together!

NorthReport

debater,

This is a political discussion thread

Since when is anything, anyone says, ever objective? Laughing

Debater

NorthReport wrote:

debater,

This is a political discussion thread

Since when is anything, anyone says, ever objective? Laughing

So are you admitting that your prediction that the NDP will win more seats than the Liberals in the next election is largely a fantasy?

Fidel

Debater wrote:

So are you admitting that your prediction that the NDP will win more seats than the Liberals in the next election is largely a fantasy?

No way. And besides, we're having great fun making the Liberal Party look like the hypocritical lying liars that they are in phony opposition to the ReformaTories.

Debater

Back to the seat count, one of the significant trends that was revealed in the last election is that it is almost impossible for the NDP to win more seats than the Liberals.  That was one of the things that was pointed out by a number of people such as Professor Andrew Cohen of Carleton University.

NorthReport

--

NorthReport

Debater wrote:

Back to the seat count, one of the significant trends that was revealed in the last election is that it is almost impossible for the NDP to win more seats than the Liberals.  That was one of the things that was pointed out by a number of people such as Professor Andrew Cohen of Carleton University.

 

Quite the selective comments you have chosen.

 

 I remember that Mulcair wasn't going to get re-elected, and Dion was never going to win the leadership.

 

And the NDP were going to lose seats, yada, yada, yada.

 

Do I need to bother going on?

 

The NDP chances of overtaking the Liberals are probably better than the Liberals chances of overtaking the Cons.

 

Fidel

Debater wrote:
  That was one of the things that was pointed out by a number of people such as Professor Andrew Cohen of Carleton University.

 

I think he also pointed out that in the last election the Liberals won the lowest percentage of the popular vote in the history of the party. If we ever fight for and win advanced democracy in this Northern Puerto Rico, that party will be toast unless they swing left 180 degrees.

Debater

The main point about the last election was that not only did it reveal how hard it will be for the Conservatives to win a majority, it revealed that it is unlikely the NDP will be able to replace the Liberals at any point in the near future.

Just as the point of the last election was to win a majority for the Conservatives, the point of the last election for the NDP was not just to pick up 7 seats - it was to become the official opposition.  Don Newman (who appears to be fairly well-liked here) pointed this out on CBC election night.

And yes, the fact that the Liberals won their lowest popular vote since the late 1800's and yet were able to win twice as many seats as the NDP proves the point I was trying to make - even when the Liberals have a very low popular vote they are still able to beat the NDP on seat count.  Thank-you for bringing up the popular vote and helping prove my point. Wink

remind remind's picture

Debater wrote:
Back to the seat count, one of the significant trends that was revealed in the last election is that it is almost impossible for the NDP to win more seats than the Liberals.  That was one of the things that was pointed out by a number of people such as Professor Andrew Cohen of Carleton University.

He is a Canwest columnist, who is such a diehard Liberal that he thought Canadians liked Paul Martin, enough said. Though admittedly the first portion of the sentence was enough.

Fidel

Debater wrote:
The main point about the last election was that not only did it reveal how hard it will be for the Conservatives to win a majority, it revealed that it is unlikely the NDP will be able to replace the Liberals at any point in the near future.

NDPers might as well give up now since your crystal ball reveals all. And your little dog Toto, too.

Buddy youre a young man hard man
Shoutin in the street gonna take on the world some day
You got blood on yo face
You big disgrace
Wavin your banner all over the place

We will we will rock you!
We will we will ROCK YOU!

 

Slumberjack

Probably just a little insight into reality, as opposed to the supernatural or the make believe realm, where one would have to reside for an inordinate amount of time to arrive at a different conclusion.

Fidel

[stomp-stomp CLAP!]

 

Buddy youre a boy make a big noise
Playin in the street gonna be a big man some day
You got mud on yo face
You big disgrace
Kickin your can all over the place

 

sing it!

WE WILL WE WILL ROCK YOU!

WE WILL WE WILL ROCK YOU!

 

Sean in Ottawa

I argued fiercly recently that there is a chance the Liberals could overtake the Cons and become government-- but this is one of the possibilities. Another is that the NDP could overtake the Liberals. I would argue that this is also a possibility.

Unfortunately right now I think the first is more immediately likely than the second-- but they are both possible.

Debater

remind wrote:

Debater wrote:
Back to the seat count, one of the significant trends that was revealed in the last election is that it is almost impossible for the NDP to win more seats than the Liberals.  That was one of the things that was pointed out by a number of people such as Professor Andrew Cohen of Carleton University.

He is a Canwest columnist, who is such a diehard Liberal that he thought Canadians liked Paul Martin, enough said. Though admittedly the first portion of the sentence was enough.

May I please ask you this question?  Do you objectively believe that the NDP will win more seats than the Liberals in the next election?

NorthReport

Oops, wrong thread, sorry about that. 

Fidel

Debater wrote:

remind wrote:

Debater wrote:
Back to the seat count, one of the significant trends that was revealed in the last election is that it is almost impossible for the NDP to win more seats than the Liberals.  That was one of the things that was pointed out by a number of people such as Professor Andrew Cohen of Carleton University.

He is a Canwest columnist, who is such a diehard Liberal that he thought Canadians liked Paul Martin, enough said. Though admittedly the first portion of the sentence was enough.

May I please ask you this question?  Do you objectively believe that the NDP will win more seats than the Liberals in the next election?

 

Yes, we do. We're going to fight like wildcats for every vote in every riding. No prisoners!

 

Take me to the magic of the moment
On a glory night
Where the children of tomorrow dream away
In the wind of change

remind remind's picture

You did not say next election debator,  in the post I responded to.

I was merely indicating you used a Liberal hack, who is also a Canwest columnist, to bolster your position, as such, it is a particularily weak position, if you could not come up with a more credible support source.

 

 

Debater

We are talking about the next election all the time, and therefore that is what all the posts discussing the future refer to.

What's wrong with being a Canwest columnist btw?  Does that automatically mean someone has no credibility?  It would seem so according to you, but that's not an opinion most Canadians would share.

In any event, the main point about the last election is that it established that the NDP is not going to become the Official Opposition at any time in the near future.  If you want to believe otherwise, that is obviously your choice.

remind remind's picture

No it did not establish that, the NDP picking up 4% from the Liberal Party is very doable. In fact,  I believe you know this to be true, see the numbers at this  thread which more than prove this. And as I showed there it is posssible for more than the needed 4% increase at the expense of the Liberals.

Canwest is not credible, especially when it comes to political reporting and punditry, as such neither are their columnists who do it. And more and more Canadians are realizing this, given the reality that Canwest is dire financial shape.

remind remind's picture

Well apparently Iggy is up to disparaging his employees on the Hill, and playing Count Chocula of the manor born.

Quote:
reports from Michael Ignatieff's meeting with staffers the other day. The Liberal leader didn't earn any goodwill, it's said, by chiding staffers for a 10 a.m to 3  p.m. work ethic. Many of the staffers who work longer hours than that took umbrage at the insult.

http://thestar.blogs.com/politics/2009/07/-staff-problems.html

Am going to look for insider commentary on this

NorthReport

Where is Ignatieff? Laughing

 

 

Coming to a milk carton near you

 

 

Back from some time away and, okay, very funny and everything guys but, um, what have you done with Michael Ignatieff?

I swear - he was right here when I left. Tall guy. Smart. Fairly eyebrowy. Come on, you remember him! He was threatening this and wagging his finger at that - then he flipped a pancake or two out in Calgary and... poof! Gonzo.

Has anybody checked the salons of 18th century Europe?

Don't get me wrong: I understand the rigors of a relaxing leadership mosey grueling leadership marathon could leave even the most resilient of politicians aching for some R&R.

And I totally get that it takes a lot out of a man to exercise the will required to extract from our Prime Minister a concession as formidable as a panel to look into the possibility of examining certain potential changes that could theoretically be made to Employment Insurance eventually.

Plus, he wrote that book that totally captured the public imagination just like Cutthroat Island and 3D Doritos.

But enough clowning around, guys. Where'd you stash him?

 

 

http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/22/coming-to-a-milk-carton-near-you/print/

 

 

remind remind's picture

It seems he is yapping without saying anything and wasting tax payer's money too, just like the CPC

Quote:
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff turned hawkish yesterday and gave every indication that he wants to bring down the Harper government in the fall.

"I have always tried to work with the government, trying to put the country first, but it's getting tougher and tougher, and that's all I'll tell you right now," Mr. Ignatieff told CTV News Channel.

The Liberal Leader did not say whether he would move a non-confidence motion when Parliament reconvenes in September, but he said it was "not an unreasonable extrapolation."

"The only good thing I can say about bad weather and lots of rain is it allows me to sit at home and think thoughts here," he said.

Hey Iggy... the weather is not  bad everywhere in Canada, idiot!

 

Quote:
They couldn't beat them, so now they're joining them.

In a report out of Ottawa, the Winnipeg Free Press says the federal Liberals have started sending out highly partisan, taxpayer-funded flyers to constituents in Conservative-held ridings.

The move comes after the Liberals didn't get anywhere with complaints about the Tories doing the same thing in Liberal ridings.

"We've started doing them," said Winnipeg South Centre Liberal MP Anita Neville. "We couldn't let them continue to do it without a response."

Ms. Neville has been complaining bitterly for years that constituents in her riding are regularly bombarded with mailings from Conservative MPs attacking her party leader and Ms. Neville herself.

The mailings are paid for by the taxpayer through the expense privileges of individual MPs.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I don't know about the rest of the country but in BC the NDP will pick up seats in the next election.  The collapse of the Liberals led to defeats in places like Van Isl North because the right wingers in the party could not abide Dion so they voted Tory.  In our riding e tracked poll by poll on election night and the Tories picked up two thirds of the Liberal vote and the NDP about a third.  With Iggy to vote for some of those right wing Liberals may just go back to voting for them.  It we would be nice to see a surge in Ontario because like it or not if the NDP does not win new seats there they  are never going to become even Official opposition.

NorthReport

 I hope Harper's days are numbered, but I'm just not sure I like the Liberal alternative.

 

"Where is Waldo" Ignatieff?

Ignatieff, the thinker, weighs every decision, going one way and then the other. Great for academics, but a problem for politicians. It passes for indecision. Harper only announces decisions once he's sure of where he stands. He looks decisive.

Remember Ignatieff last June. He threatened to vote out Harper over employment insurance. In the end he caved in. Harper survived to live another self-righteous day.

The real reason? Ignatieff wasn't ready for an election. No money, no organization, no candidates, or no platform. Harper would say all of the above. We still don't know. But we saw Ignatieff think it through. It was painful.

Ignatieff tried to bluff Harper. It didn't work. He was holding a pair of deuces. Bad decision.

Harper may not have half the brains of Ignatieff, but he knows his politics. Ask the rivals he destroyed along the way.

Ignatieff told us he held off on the election because he didn't want to spoil our summer. Some summer. Some of us would have paddled in canoes to the polling booths to get rid of Harper.

The polls tell the national story. The Liberals are at 34% and the Conservatives at 33% in the last Angus Reid poll, give or take a margin of 2%.

Last week it was the other way. Next week, who knows?

It all comes down to the campaign. Who's scared? Who isn't?

Now Harper is playing games. He says the economy is too fragile for an election. Is that it, or is it because he's afraid of losing. This is the guy who broke his own election law when he saw a chance of winning.

Wait for the recession to end before making a political choice, Harper says. Kim Campbell once said that an election was no time to talk about complex health issues. Is this no time to talk about complex economic issues?

Waiting for the recession to end could take years. Are we stuck with Harper's minority government until then?

So how is that recession going? Ask the 1,548,400 unemployed, at 9.2% the worst in 12 years.

Only 778,700 of them qualify for employment insurance. There's always welfare for the rest. Politicians have some nerve calling it "insurance." Some policy! You pay but you can never collect.

On Sept. 28 the Commons will be back in session and Ignatieff gets another chance to dump Harper. This time Ignatieff can't use summer as an excuse. He could find another season. It will be fall. It's cold in the fall. Too cold for an election?

Meanwhile Harper is ready for the polls. The bank account is bulging, the slime ads are ready, the organizers are primed up, the candidates are picked and trained as of a trip to Ottawa last week.

Harper is waiting for Ignatieff to make up his mind.

Harper could set a Canadian record -- the PM never able to win a majority. If there was anyone else in his party, Harper might already be gone.

If Ignatieff wins, he'll become the most erudite intellectual we've had behind the big desk since Pierre Trudeau. But can he make a decision?

 

http://www.westmountexaminer.com/article-362966-Where-is-Waldo-Ignatieff...

remind remind's picture

Ya, I read this earlier today, but do not think Iggy is erudite intellectual.

remind remind's picture

Quote:
Since Ignatieff took command in December, it has been hard to figure out what the Liberals stand for, how they would govern the country or whether they have workable alternatives.

Ignatieff may believe – or his strategists may have convinced him – that it is tactically smart to withhold his platform until an election is imminent.

But the former Harvard professor is paying a price. His party is stalled in the polls. Voters have doubts about his ability to manage the economy. He is acquiring a reputation as a leader who is more comfortable deliberating than providing a sense of direction.

Liberal MPs are also paying a price. Most have avoided the limelight since Parliament closed, not knowing what they're supposed to say. This makes it look as if they have few ideas or concerns.

It would be interesting to hear what Ignatieff has come up with after spending half the summer wrestling with the nation's challenges.

What, for example, are his guiding principles?

The Liberal leader has issued a steady stream of press releases, accusing the government of neglecting the unemployed, failing to protect Canadian-developed technology, pulling the plug on Canadian isotope production, ignoring the concerns of rural Canadians and dragging its feet on global warming.

But this running commentary is headline-driven. It indicates nothing about Ignatieff's priorities or values.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

You left out the next paragraph, which is the best of the piece:

Quote:
Is there any Conservative policy he finds so wrong he would be compelled to oppose it, whatever the risk?

Pages