Who's going to be the next Liberal leader?

[Moonmoth]

And I debate my points despite the fact that you rarely fully read or comprehend them. Enough said.

Gerard Kennedy should hopefully get into the mix in the near future, I hope he announces his leadership bid. He is really what Canada needs at this juncture as I think he understands the stake and what is necessary.

Gerard is underestimated, he actually won a net gain for the Liberals, and is seriously of a newer generation of Liberals that need to come out and vote.

Another Gerard Kennedy-head. Don't you see that it's Gerard Kennedy's fault that the liberals elected Stephane Dion???? And plummeted in votes?

Kennedy could have backed Rae (or another candidate) during the last leadership race. But NOOOOOO he backed Dion which won Dion the leadership. Kennedy backed Dion, Dion didn't do so well, Harper is PM. Though I really like Dion as liberal leader, and I consider him a potential PM, I don't understand why Dion was treated so harshly by voters....was it still because of the sponsorship scandal??

In any case I'm not a Kennedy fan, he turfed out Peggy Nash in Parkdale-High Park, a fantastic NDP MP when there are so few effective women MP's federally, Kennedy could have run in any riding and won, but NOOOOOO he picked Parkdale-High Park.

Kennedy has eradicated the chance of me ever casting a vote for him.

 

[Hydrogen]

Another Gerard Kennedy-head. Don't you see that it's Gerard Kennedy's fault that the liberals elected Stephane Dion???? And plummeted in votes?

Kennedy could have backed Rae (or another candidate) during the last leadership race. But NOOOOOO he backed Dion which won Dion the leadership. Kennedy backed Dion, Dion didn't do so well, Harper is PM. Though I really like Dion as liberal leader, and I consider him a potential PM, I don't understand why Dion was treated so harshly by voters....was it still because of the sponsorship scandal??

So let's see, you don't like Kennedy because it's his "fault" that Dion became leader - even though you like Dion.

In any case I'm not a Kennedy fan, he turfed out Peggy Nash in Parkdale-High Park, a fantastic NDP MP when there are so few effective women MP's federally, Kennedy could have run in any riding and won, but NOOOOOO he picked Parkdale-High Park.

Actually, it was the voters that turfed Peggy Nash.

You appear to have overlooked this rather looming fact of elections.

 

[adma]

Actually, it was the voters that turfed Peggy Nash.

You appear to have overlooked this rather looming fact of elections.

But, we're also operating under the likelihood that Peggy Nash *wouldn't* have been turfed had anyone but GK run here. And indeed, the fact that GK chose to take on and take out Nash does put, well, a bit of a cloud over his wouldbe cloak of Barackian idealism--unlike Obama vs Hillary, Kennedy *doesn't* come across as the sympathetic, unifying figure here; indeed, it's all the more reason for "NDP progressives" to loathe him. Yeah, sure they can go ahead and loathe; but it's all the more reason you're not gonna see the left galvanized in Canada, Obama-style. You think Peggy Nash and Cheri DiNovo are going to lend that slick yuppie pseudo-leftie twerp and a half of a Liberal Leader Gerard Kennedy their utmost support in saving Canada from the Harperian reactionaries? Uh-uh. Ix-nay. So don't overlook this rather looming fact of Canadian electoral politics and dynamics.

Ultimately, in fact, the Nash vs Kennedy battle can be viewed in "heritage vs starchitecture" terms. Like, sure we could use a GK in parliament; but, why here? Why destroy existing progressive representation? Why couldn't some other sure-bet deal be struck; like, Allan Tonks being retired off in York South-Weston on behalf of GK? Then we'd have the best of all progressive-politics worlds: GK in Parliament, Peggy Nash in Parliament, a past-best-before-date hack like Tonks no longer in Parliament, etc. And GK wouldn't look nearly so loathesome to NDP-type progressives, either.

Come to think of it, just like misplaced "starchitecture envy", there may be a bit of misplaced "Obama envy" operating here, i.e. so glassy-eyed in thrall to examples abroad and wishing we had the same, without considering that upon closer inspection maybe we're perfectly fine already, perhaps even better off than our neighbours. Such is why the left isn't "uniting" so easily; and even the pesty presence of the NDP in Canada is better than what the States has that's comparable i.e. independent Bernie Sanders + a Kucinich or two...

 

[Brandon716]

Another Gerard Kennedy-head. Don't you see that it's Gerard Kennedy's fault that the liberals elected Stephane Dion???? And plummeted in votes?

Kennedy could have backed Rae (or another candidate) during the last leadership race. But NOOOOOO he backed Dion which won Dion the leadership. Kennedy backed Dion, Dion didn't do so well, Harper is PM. Though I really like Dion as liberal leader, and I consider him a potential PM, I don't understand why Dion was treated so harshly by voters....was it still because of the sponsorship scandal??

In any case I'm not a Kennedy fan, he turfed out Peggy Nash in Parkdale-High Park, a fantastic NDP MP when there are so few effective women MP's federally, Kennedy could have run in any riding and won, but NOOOOOO he picked Parkdale-High Park.

Kennedy has eradicated the chance of me ever casting a vote for him.

You seem to forget the most important thing, Kennedy isn't anything like Dion. Kennedy is not Dion. Who cares who he supported in the last Liberal leadership convention? He in actuality supported himself if you ask me, and he's a rising star.

Dion is a token Liberal meant to ride out a storm, just like Kerry rode out a conservative storm in the US in 2004. Dion led the Liberals during a period when virtually no one could win.

Times are changing, and Kennedy is the change candidate. Ignatieff and Rae don't signify change in the Liberal party, they represent the status quo.

I want to use an analogy south of the border. Teddy Kennedy, the "liberal lion" of the Senate backed Kerry so fullheartedly in the 2004 US presidential primary and supported his run for the Presidency. Teddy Kennedy then supported Barack Obama in 2008 very early in the game.

Would you say Teddy Kennedy isn't worth listening to because he backed a loser in 2004?

So where is your reasoning coming from?? In the end it all boils down to personal preference combined with our personal experiences. I think Gerard Kennedy is the future of the Liberal party. Rae and the others signify the past. Last time I checked the Liberals were looking for a new image, Dion didn't give them that image.

 

[Moonmoth]

So let's see, you don't like Kennedy because it's his "fault" that Dion became leader - even though you like Dion.

I liked Dion, yes I think he would have made a good PM. But clearly something went wrong with the liberal's campaign! Was it Dion? Was it voter apathy, was it the sponsorship scandal remnants? I don't know?! Even if Dion would have wiped the floor with Harper last election, Gerard Kennedy turfing Peggy Nash is unforgivable.

Actually, it was the voters that turfed Peggy Nash.

You appear to have overlooked this rather looming fact of elections.

Adma says it very well. Kennedy could've run, and won, in ANY riding. But instead he chooses to usurp progressive, effective MP Peggy Nash. He is no candidate for change, he's totally stagnant politician with minimal education! He doesn't even possess a university degree. Thumbs waaay down.

 

[Hydrogen]

Adma says it very well. Kennedy could've run, and won, in ANY riding. But instead he chooses to usurp progressive, effective MP Peggy Nash. He is no candidate for change, he's totally stagnant politician with minimal education! He doesn't even possess a university degree. Thumbs waaay down.

But Kennedy ran in that riding and won. Tough.

You and adma may want to place your blame with the electorate. It's not the job of Kennedy or the Liberals to keep NDP MP's in office. That ought to be clear.

 

[kEiThZ]

You seem to forget the most important thing, Kennedy isn't anything like Dion. Kennedy is not Dion. Who cares who he supported in the last Liberal leadership convention? He in actuality supported himself if you ask me, and he's a rising star.

Maybe he is a rising star, maybe he isn't...time will tell....

Dion is a token Liberal meant to ride out a storm, just like Kerry rode out a conservative storm in the US in 2004. Dion led the Liberals during a period when virtually no one could win.

The situation was no where as hopeless as Kerry faced. If Dion was more effective, he could have outmanoeuvred Harper quite easily. I think the Liberals were simply stuck in their old ways and expected Canadians to return to them as the natural governing party of Canada. There was no emphasis at all that the Liberal party had changed from the scandal ridden days. There was no sense that they had a fresh vision per se. They seemed to be peddling the same line they sell every election albeit in new green drag. And sadly Dion was not the best at making the new green dress look good.

Times are changing, and Kennedy is the change candidate. Ignatieff and Rae don't signify change in the Liberal party, they represent the status quo.

I'd actually agree that Kennedy is more of a fresh face than Dion. But here the problem lies in his views. He's a magnet for opposition from both sides. He took out Peggy Nash which pissed off the left, and is far enough left to make centrist voters weary. Now if he moves to the centre, I'll admit he'll be quite a compelling candidate. Till that happens, I'd say the Liberals are better served by a real centrist....

....Last time I checked the Liberals were looking for a new image, Dion didn't give them that image.

I seem to recall tons of arguments on your behalf about how Dion was a fresh face and that's why Canadians should vote for him.....

Back to the topic on hand. I'll admit Kennedy is probably the freshest and has the least baggage of the current bunch.....I can't believe Rae thinks he can win the leadership and premiership..... I also hope the Libs go looking for candidates outside of the current bunch. If this is really the best 'the natural governing party' of Canada can draw up, the state of democracy and governance is truly in trouble in Canada....and will probably ensure Conservative rule for years to come.....

 

[adma]

But Kennedy ran in that riding and won. Tough.

You and adma may want to place your blame with the electorate. It's not the job of Kennedy or the Liberals to keep NDP MP's in office. That ought to be clear.

Though I'm not the one making the "totally stagnant politician with minimal education" accusation. (Okay, I have called him "vacuous".) Rather, I'm emphasizing how the fact that "he ran in that riding and won" might actually hinder rather than help any so-called visionary left-galvanizing leadership bid on his part...because of the fact that the NDP already exists, and remains the more attractive option for a good deal of the firm left in this country.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I hope Rae takes the leadership, and then loses heartily in the election, meaning that once and for all Ontario can see the back of Rae.

I remember when I was in university when Rae became premier and much of Ontario was waking up that morning with a collective "what have we done?" moment. Well, I took action then, got my Canadian citizenship and did my part to kick his arse out of office. Thus, you might envision my frustration now that Rae is my MP in Cabbagetown, in a riding where Hitler himself could run as a Liberal and guarantee victory.

 

[unimaginative2]

Moonmouth has got to be espousing the most hilarious NDP strategy yet: "How dare you run against our candidates!" Yes, indeed. What a disgrace that A well-liked candidate from one party defeated a slightly-less-well-liked candidate from another party. I just don't get it. What, exactly, does Gerard Kennedy or the Liberal party owe Peggy Nash? Has Peggy Nash or the NDP ever done anything to help a high-quality Liberal candidate?

I seem to recall that the NDP continued to campaign against a universally-acclaimed Liberal candidate in Saanich-Gulf Islands, despite the fact that their candidate's past exposure of himself to preteens was, uh, exposed. Needless to say, the NDP voters were the difference between a strong, environmentalist Liberal candidate and the Tory who promotes the tar sands and gutted our nuclear regulatory system.

 

[Whoaccio]

Booyah!

Ignatieff's in, Kennedy's out

OTTAWA — Michael Ignatieff will formally declare he is in the race to replace Stéphane Dion as the leader of the Liberal party tomorrow in Ottawa.

And he we will not be challenged by Toronto MP Gerard Kennedy, the former Ontario cabinet minister, who has decided he will not take a second shot at the federal leadership.

Mr. Ignatieff will make the announcement at an 11 a.m. news conference scheduled for the National Press Theatre.

In his address to launch his campaign, the 61-year-old former journalist and Harvard professor will also speak about the possibilities for Canada in the world, according to a source, delivering a positive message and one that has attracted many young people to his campaign.

Steven MacKinnon, former director of the party and a key Ignatieff supporter, said the press conference will be an extremely low-key affair. A much bigger, more formal launch is expected in the near future.

Mr. Ignatieff is expected to make a statement but it is not expected that he will resign his post as deputy leader.

Mr. MacKinnon joked that Mr. Ignatieff's candidacy has been one of the “worst-kept secrets†and it felt right that he say something now. He has not spoken publicly about his intentions, nor has he made many public appearances since the election Oct. 14.

“It feels like the right time to make his intentions clear,†said Mr. MacKinnon.

Gerard Kennedy was the kingmaker in the 2006 contest, throwing his support to Mr. Dion after coming fourth on the first ballot.

That allowed Mr. Dion to stage a stunning, come-from-behind victory over Mr. Ignatieff and Bob Rae, both of whom are preparing to square off again now that Mr. Dion has decided to step aside.

Mr. Ignatieff placed second to Mr. Dion in the 2006 leadership in Montreal. He is considered the front runner along with Toronto MP Bob Rae, who has declared his intention to run but not made a formal announcement. Mr. Rae resigned his foreign affairs critic post when he made his intentions known.

Mr. Ignatieff had waited until the national party executive had established the venue and rules for the convention before making a formal announcement.

The new leader will be picked at a convention that is taking place in early May in Vancouver. Candidates are only allowed to spend $1.5-million on their campaigns, which is down from $3.4-million in the 2006.

There is also a non-refundable entry fee of $90,000 for candidates. Delegates will be chosen over several days next March.

It is also expected that New Brunswick MP Dominic LeBlanc will run. It is not clear yet if former Chrétien justice minister Martin Cauchon will enter the race

Looking more and more like a simple Rae-Iggy showdown. I don't quite understand why LeBlanc is even bothering.

 

[Hydrogen]

because of the fact that the NDP already exists, and remains the more attractive option for a good deal of the firm left in this country.

Then they should do a better job in attracting voters or face the fact that their candidates will lose elections.

 

[Hydrogen]

Looking more and more like a simple Rae-Iggy showdown. I don't quite understand why LeBlanc is even bothering.

Dion could have thought the same thing, but...

 

[Moonmoth]

I'd pick Rae over Ignatieff any day. Ignatieff is in the wrong party, he's much more closely aligned with the Harper's conservatives, he is not a liberal.

 

[Brandon716]

If Ignatieff is the next leader, I'll support him against the Harper Cons. Too bad Kennedy chose not to run. He's still a great guy and I look forward to him in the federal party working where he can.