Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Liberal Leadership (AKA Canada's Primaries)
Andrew_Jay
Registered User
Registered User
With the demise of the megathreads, so has passed our beloved Canadian politics thread. Seems that the last Canadian related discussion we had was about Afghanistan, so I bring you a thread on the Liberal Leadership race, if anyone is so inclined.
What is all of this about?
Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, since Paul Martin quit back in January with the loss of the election.
Why is it important?
Interesting fact I learned the other day – ever since Wilfred Laurier was elected, it has been more than a century since a leader of the Liberal Party did not also serve as Prime Minister for at least some period of time (Yes, even John Turner counts).
How?
Beats the hell out of me. I joined the party right after the election but haven’t been able to figure out exactly how the leader is elected. All I know is that next weekend there is a riding association meeting that’s five hours long. Apparently I’ll be voting for the leader, or voting for people who will vote for the leader (or voting for the people who will vote for the people . . .).
Who?
As of today, there are eight candidates left – my own MP Carolyn Bennett and MP Hedy Fry quit to support Bob Rae just recently.
The two front runners are Harvard professor and MP Michael Ignatieff and former NDP premier of Ontario Bob Rae.
Apparently MP Stéphane Dion is also fairly well regarded. Then there are former Conservative MP (and now Liberal MP) Scott Brison, former Ontario MPP Gerard Kennedy, former Hockey player MP Ken Dryden, lawyer Martha Hall Findlay and MP Joe Volpe (who’s campaign has been a mess from the start).
I’ll just start it off by saying I don’t like the idea of Bob Rae as the most likely winner. He comes from another party and for the most part people seem to still hate him for his stint as Premier of Ontario (the economy essentially tanked).
Then again, my opposition is a little hypocritical as I am somewhat warm to the candidacies of both Brison and Ignatieff – both also outsiders. But Rae seems to carry a degree of arrogance about the whole thing – at least Brison has served in caucus as a Liberal MP for some time now.
I’ve heard from a few people who are pegging Kennedy as the consensus winner (i.e. through endorsements by defeated candidates or through the second-choice of delegates). He seems alright to me and I agree with him in most areas – I'd be delighted to see him come out of this the leader. He just doesn’t seem to be doing all too well at this point.
Ignatieff of course has been in the country for less than a year now, elected for the first time back in January. He has his problems like his vocal support of the invasion of Iraq, but I’m willing to accept his explanation that his behaviour as a private citizen would of course be different than that if he were Prime Minister. Calls to open the constitution aren’t all too welcome since I’ve tended to side with Trudeau’s view of Quebec, but I have been impressed with his ability to look at the entire spectrum of Canadian issues and comment very intelligently on them. Like I mentioned above though, he's one of the two leaders, and has the strongest support from within the caucus (39 MPs and 8 Senators, including Roméo Dallaire).
I have to admit I don’t know a whole lot about Stéphane Dion’s campaign or where he stands. However, at this point he is literally the only party “insider†here. If the spot simply went to the individual with the experience he would have earned it.
Anyway, I’d like to hear what thoughts anyone else has. Naturally, I’d be interested to hear what the American posters think too – especially since this is the closest thing Canada has to a primary and it would be interesting to know what the reaction would be to so many candidates from outside a party.
The Toronto Star’s coverage
The Liberal Party of Canada’s own site
Naturally, I will also refer to you to what Wikipedia has to say
What is all of this about?
Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, since Paul Martin quit back in January with the loss of the election.
Why is it important?
Interesting fact I learned the other day – ever since Wilfred Laurier was elected, it has been more than a century since a leader of the Liberal Party did not also serve as Prime Minister for at least some period of time (Yes, even John Turner counts).
How?
Beats the hell out of me. I joined the party right after the election but haven’t been able to figure out exactly how the leader is elected. All I know is that next weekend there is a riding association meeting that’s five hours long. Apparently I’ll be voting for the leader, or voting for people who will vote for the leader (or voting for the people who will vote for the people . . .).
Who?
As of today, there are eight candidates left – my own MP Carolyn Bennett and MP Hedy Fry quit to support Bob Rae just recently.
The two front runners are Harvard professor and MP Michael Ignatieff and former NDP premier of Ontario Bob Rae.
Apparently MP Stéphane Dion is also fairly well regarded. Then there are former Conservative MP (and now Liberal MP) Scott Brison, former Ontario MPP Gerard Kennedy, former Hockey player MP Ken Dryden, lawyer Martha Hall Findlay and MP Joe Volpe (who’s campaign has been a mess from the start).
I’ll just start it off by saying I don’t like the idea of Bob Rae as the most likely winner. He comes from another party and for the most part people seem to still hate him for his stint as Premier of Ontario (the economy essentially tanked).
Then again, my opposition is a little hypocritical as I am somewhat warm to the candidacies of both Brison and Ignatieff – both also outsiders. But Rae seems to carry a degree of arrogance about the whole thing – at least Brison has served in caucus as a Liberal MP for some time now.
I’ve heard from a few people who are pegging Kennedy as the consensus winner (i.e. through endorsements by defeated candidates or through the second-choice of delegates). He seems alright to me and I agree with him in most areas – I'd be delighted to see him come out of this the leader. He just doesn’t seem to be doing all too well at this point.
Ignatieff of course has been in the country for less than a year now, elected for the first time back in January. He has his problems like his vocal support of the invasion of Iraq, but I’m willing to accept his explanation that his behaviour as a private citizen would of course be different than that if he were Prime Minister. Calls to open the constitution aren’t all too welcome since I’ve tended to side with Trudeau’s view of Quebec, but I have been impressed with his ability to look at the entire spectrum of Canadian issues and comment very intelligently on them. Like I mentioned above though, he's one of the two leaders, and has the strongest support from within the caucus (39 MPs and 8 Senators, including Roméo Dallaire).
I have to admit I don’t know a whole lot about Stéphane Dion’s campaign or where he stands. However, at this point he is literally the only party “insider†here. If the spot simply went to the individual with the experience he would have earned it.
Anyway, I’d like to hear what thoughts anyone else has. Naturally, I’d be interested to hear what the American posters think too – especially since this is the closest thing Canada has to a primary and it would be interesting to know what the reaction would be to so many candidates from outside a party.
The Toronto Star’s coverage
The Liberal Party of Canada’s own site
Naturally, I will also refer to you to what Wikipedia has to say
Andrew_Jay on
Posts
I welcome a thread to keep me informed of and debate politics.
Anyone know what happened?
Man, if it's true, the Liberal party is doing the Conservative's work for them.
Why? I mean, she's a nutjob who had no chance of winning.
I think you just answered your own question there.
You should get yourself elected as a delegate and give the PA boards first-hand coverage of the convention.
The deadline to be a delegate was two weeks ago. I realise now that this thread might have been of use to someone had I made it earlier - say prior to the July 4 membership cut-off, but c'est la vie.
That's exactly why the Conservatives are worried about him. He'll take away a chunk of Conservative voters and bring them back to the Liberal party.
The NDP has no chance of taking power, with or without the left-wing Liberal voters. It's between the Conservatives and Liberals, and those right-wing Liberals could make the difference between a Conservative government and a Liberal government.
Unfortunately, he'd end up pushing a large segment of right-of-centre liberals to vote for the Cons instead. Can't have that again.
Seriously. Why?
Well, basically, he's already on record in the Globe and Mail 7-page spread they did on him as saying that if he doesn't win, he's going to give up politics. He's in it for pure ego-stroking, and I think it will be easy to show that. Quebec doesn't care what the IQ of the PM is, so long as they represent Quebec's interests. There is nothing to suggest that IGnatieff, who would be the first non-Quebecois Liberal Leader in who knows how long, would stand up for Quebec. Newsflash: Conservatives aren't necessarily getting themselves turfed out of Quebec like the Liberals did in the election. You need someone to convince those who now believe that Federalism is best represented by a Conservative vote that the Liberals are back in the business of pandering to Quebec - electing Ignatieff sends all the wrong signals on that front.
It's funny, about Bob Rae. People forget that he lost to a very conservative Mike Harris HANDILY. The 905-Liberal-Belt won't vote for Rae again - it wasn't just economic factors taht got him tossed out, his was a scandal-plagued government. Most importantly, though, if it's been done once, the Conservative movement in Canada can easily beat Rae again. Mike Harris is still kicking around somewhere (Fraser Institute I think) as is his campaign team, just a phonecall away.
It's funny, you know. Nationally, the Liberals are becoming more and more reliant on the cities and Quebec to keep them in power. But those cities are gradually turning into conservative breeding grounds, since as those cities and burbs get bigger do you think they're building up or out? I'll tell you: out. Burbs don't promote environmentally-friendly living in any sense of the phrase.
In the end, the Liberal party is actually the Conservative Canadian party, because it represents the status quo like nothing else in this country does. The only issue that separates them and the Tories is same-sex stuff, and government really has no place in that business and that means smaller government - naturally a Tory cause.
I vote green, and will again at the next election. Because in all honesty, I'd rather vote for my hopes than my fears, and that's all the Liberals seem to do.
The Toronto Star, I've never felt it was left-wing in its reporting. I often double-check with other sources, such as CBC or BBC, and I normally find that the Star got all the facts right. They also provide background information in their pieces, such as legal precedent or the resolution of past similar situation, which I like a lot.
Their editorial section, though? oh boy. Some of their editorial cartoons are borderline libel.
Which is why Dion will take it.
Conservative breeding grounds? Are you insane? The Tories didn't win a single seat in the three largest urban areas of the country. The only cities they won were in Alberta, and those, like Montreal for the Liberals, are the safest Tory seats around.
The Liberal Party is the 'status quo' because they've governed for most of the last century. Same-sex marriage is merely on tiny aspect of social policy that the Tories and the Grits disagree on. They are also incredibly far apart on the enviroment, and foreign policy. There are real fundamental differences between the parties. But that really doesn't matter to me, because there is no way in hell I'll vote for either of them.
I'm actually thinking about joining the federal Green Party. Elizabeth May rocks my world, and the NDP have no hope of ever governing (that, and I fucking hate Carole James, the provincial leader of the NDP in BC), so I'm finding myself drawn more and more toward the green cause. We'll see, though, I'm not going to make a decision just yet.
So this new Green party leader... is she a far leftie, or similar to the outgoing Harris?
In any case: I am from Toronto originally. The core of it is and will remain liberal. But the burbs of cities are where all the growth is happening population wise (other than places like Fort McMurray and Barrie). Those burbs are not where socially liberal attitudes - towards anything, but especially environment - are bred.
The Liberals are closer to the Conservatives than you think. The Liberals like to harp on this because now we'll never know, but there was no way for us to meet Kyoto targets. We are doing worse than the Americans in that respect. Chretien was quick to sign the agreement, but he didn't *do* anything. Martin didn't either, and Harper isn't.
Foreign Policy wise they are identical AFAIConcerned. It's classic Liberal publicity: run from the left, govern from the right. Of the two main issues - Afghanistan and the Softwood deal - the Liberals started one of them, and couldn't solve the other. I think the Liberals could have easily gotten the deal Harper got, but they didn't want to get it - posturing, in the end.
In the end, I don't think the PC and Liberals are all that different as most knee-jerk Liberals or Tories think. You're right in why the Liberals are the status quo, but that doens't excuse them for being a conservative force in society. That's what I mean when I say conservative (as opposed to Conservative, referring to the party). An unwillingness to change. I can see where it's going, and I don't want to be here in 20 years, in the prime of my life, paying for the previous generation's short-sighted mistakes.
How does that make them liberal exactly?
took out her barrettes and her hair spilled out like rootbeer
Haven't made up my mind between Ignatieff and Dion - will probably see if I can't get some delegates sent who will be supporting one and turning their vote to the other in the second round. Unfortunately, I haven't seen much overlap between Ignatieff and Dion candidates so far, but I probably have a long afternoon ahead of me to figure it out.
hehehehe
For those who don't know, it's a reference to the Volpe campaign recruitment drive, which was so successful it actually managed to recruit a number of dead people.
Ignatieff - 30.1% (1,219 delegates)
Rae - 19.7% (796)
Dion - 16.8% (681)
Kennedy - 16.7% (675)
Dryden - 4.7% (191)
Volpe - 4.2% (172)
Brison - 3.9% (159)
Hall Findlay - 1% (41)
Now it all depends on who the delegates for the losers turn to after the first round of voting at the convention two months from now.
Goddammit. Stupid Ignatieff. What's his appeal, anyway? He's been out of the country for 30+ years.
This weekend is the weekend. I thought Howard Dean gave a really good speech last night - in English and French.
First round of voting is Friday night.
Howard Dean Opens Liberal Party Convention
I don't get why so much hate gets directed Ignatief's way. He was out of the country for 30 years. Yeah, getting a worldly education, starting civil society movements, producing highly regarded research and teaching at prestigious institutions. He sure must hate Canada. :roll:
Considering how globalization is pushing the world closer and closer together in every respect possible, it might not be such a bad idea to have someone who has been around the block running things. Besides, he probably wouldn't win a majority government next election anyhow. There'd most likely be another minority, and he'd be forced to build alliances across party lines to get things done. Personally, I'm hoping that either him or Dion wins it. I'd really like to see an academic in charge for a bit.
Dion is sounding more and more like the candidate who's going to pull it off though.
2) Support for torture, infinite detention, assasination, pre-emptive wars, et al. No. Just, No.
3) Incredibly condescending in interviews. Did you see that shit with Solomon, or at the very least the clips on the Mercer Report? This isn't a man who can sell himself well to the public.
You're not a delegate, are you, Andrew_Jay? Because I just saw on the CBC some youth delegate from Ontario named Andrew talking about how he might vote on the second ballot.
The candidate speeches are on now - going from lowest to highest in standing. Dion is speaking right now.
EDIT: Oh, Dion, you're so clever:
In the same segment it said Joe Clark was a relative unknown when he took control of the Conservatives.
I guess it's just a little retrospective which suggests that we shouldn't assume Ignatief or Rae will definetly take control of the party. Not that there has been any widespread belief in these forums that either of them will definitly take the leadership, but I think there has been more of that in the media.
Yup. Iggy's in first with 29.3%, Rae's in second with 20.3%, and Dion and Kennedy are virtually tied for third with 17.8% and 17.7%, respectivly. The Globe has an article on it here, and a live blog on the happenings here.
HERESY! The man is this country's Lord and Saviour, AND YOU WILL KNEEL TO HIM!!!
Well, it's not a good sign. As the Globe article mentioned, that's about the same number of votes he got a month or so back. Stagnation is never a good sign. Though it could be the case that some of his supporters abstained from voting. On the first ballot that's the only option delegates have, apart from voting for who they're supposed to, and I heard that someone was circulating fliers saying that if you weren't sure about your candidate that you should abstain. Supposedly this was directed at Iggy.
We're used to it. We do it all the time with american elections.