Ignatieff inner circle shrinks, 2 more aides depart

[madmax]

http://www.canada.com/make+poll+gains+over+Tories+Liberals/2250128/story.html

CPC 37

LPC 24

NDP 19

[Smallc]

What is there to defend? They just don't stand for anything right now.

I dunno, but I'm sure someone could find a way.

[punked]

It looks like even die hard Warren Kinsella has left the good ship Iggy to let it sink on its own.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

It looks like even die hard Warren Kinsella has left the good ship Iggy to let it sink on its own.

A tempest in a tea cup! The wife of an outed ex leader speaks her piece and the wheels fall off? Somehow that doesn't sound all that credible to me.

[jbg]

What is there to defend? They just don't stand for anything right now.

When did the LPOC stand for anything?

[punked]

When did the LPOC stand for anything?

At least at one time they pretended they stood for things. "Green shift", "Just society" you know buzz words that really don't mean anything but that people could feel good about.

[myata]

As it appears, Harper's stealthy approach to government (do little; say a lot; show nothing, unless absolutely have to), is all that we, collectively, need (and deserve) at this point of our history. We don't want anything new in our system to think about, and we don't like new projects to invest in. What choices are left out there that we could possibly have a serious debate about, like take 1% off GST and move it to income tax?

Iggy tried to imitate Harper, but he is just so much better at his own game. Between them is all the choice we need, so we're getting what we want deep inside and subconsciously, why complain?

[Moonbox]

As it appears, Harper's stealthy approach to government (do little; say a lot; show nothing, unless absolutely have to), is all that we, collectively, need (and deserve) at this point of our history. We don't want anything new in our system to think about, and we don't like new projects to invest in. What choices are left out there that we could possibly have a serious debate about, like take 1% off GST and move it to income tax?

Iggy tried to imitate Harper, but he is just so much better at his own game. Between them is all the choice we need, so we're getting what we want deep inside and subconsciously, why complain?

First of all, please work on your punctuation because it's painful to read some of your posts with all of the random commas. It's worse than listening to Shatner speak.

Second, the things you would like the government to invest and change are things that most Canadians don't want anything to do with. This is reflected in the polls. It's not a lack of desire for change but rather a lack of desire for expensive and pointless new initiatives.

IIRC correctly you were advocating earlier for the federal government to invest in a high-speed transit line between Montreal and Toronto. I live near Toronto and that's the last thing I want federal money spent on. That's not a good public investment. That's for poor people who want the government to pay for them to travel around and entertain themselves.

[madmax]

First of all, please work on your punctuation because it's painful to read some of your posts with all of the random commas. It's worse than listening to Shatner speak.

I LIKE MYATAS POSTS.... heres", a few, extra, commas ,,,,,,,,, ,,,,, ,,,,,,, ,,,,,, s,,,,, ,,,,,,

to salt and pepper the posts with.

As a brutal offender of random commas and poor grammer, I have no problem understanding Myatas posts.

My God, What, Have I done, Bones. I, Can't take it, any, longer. Spock, help me.

[b]Lucy, in the, sky, with, Diamonds[/b]

Actor WILLIAM SHATNER's bizarre version of LUCY IN THE SKY WITH DIAMONDS has been named the worst BEATLES cover ever.

The STAR TREK icon's spoken word massacre of the Beatles classic was chosen as the biggest crime against the Fab Four in a poll conducted by the digital TV channel MUSIC CHOICE in Britain.

And, he's, Canadian, to boot.

[madmax]

That's for poor people who want the government to pay for them to travel around and entertain themselves.

Actually, it would be for people without cars, and cheaper then a flight.

Regardless, it is the fact that the LPC have no structure, poor leadership and still an agonizing believe of entitlement that is holding them back. Its not necessarily the ideas. Most Canadians don't like the HST but that didn't stop the Harper Government from proposing it to 3 provinces. The problem being the LPC support the HST like their cousins the CPC. Thus no traction.

Then in Quebec, the LPC were slowly being forgiven for adscam and then petty internal partizan politics has put silly battles before the public in the midst of a horrific recession. The bleeding in Quebec continues and the CPC have proven to be a Federalist alternative.

The LPC dropping EI and attempting to force an election, proved what people thought of Ignatieff. That he was an intellectual and tone deaf.

Essentially Harper has realized that when Ignatieff is stumbling, don't get in his way. Let him fall all on his own. Its taken more years then expected to see Harper wisen up. But this fall he has proven to withhold his own foolish outbursts that would usually cost the CPC a % or 2 and kill any momentum the government had.

So far Harper has travelled the globe and his shoe isn't in his mouth.

Therefore the LPC ship is sinking and Ignatieff doesn't have the skill to bail it out. The LPC will bail on Ignatieff after the next election. I hear Justin Trudeau is holding $10,000 fund raising dinners for his leadership run.

[myata]

IIRC correctly you were advocating earlier for the federal government to invest in a high-speed transit line between Montreal and Toronto. I live near Toronto and that's the last thing I want federal money spent on. That's not a good public investment. That's for poor people who want the government to pay for them to travel around and entertain themselves.

So what projects would you consider worthy of our attention and effort? Moving %% points around? Cutting on "unnecessary" government services and investments, while growing its bureacracy? It's all there before you right now, in Harper's agenda, and identical to it Liberal one. Understand, where consumer neither wants nor needs a choice, there will be none. It's simply counter productive to these parties' runners. They'll wait for their partner-opponent to screw up majorly (and it will happen sooner or later, in the system devoid of transparency, or effective checks and balances on the actions of government - for example, in the form of proportional, multiparty representation), and take their turn at the helm as their rightful due. Ideas, policies, principles and vision aren't really necessary in this setup, and would fade into the past, painlessly and unnoticed.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Actually, it would be for people without cars, and cheaper then a flight.

Regardless, it is the fact that the LPC have no structure, poor leadership and still an agonizing believe of entitlement that is holding them back. Its not necessarily the ideas. Most Canadians don't like the HST but that didn't stop the Harper Government from proposing it to 3 provinces. The problem being the LPC support the HST like their cousins the CPC. Thus no traction.

Then in Quebec, the LPC were slowly being forgiven for adscam and then petty internal partizan politics has put silly battles before the public in the midst of a horrific recession. The bleeding in Quebec continues and the CPC have proven to be a Federalist alternative.

The LPC dropping EI and attempting to force an election, proved what people thought of Ignatieff. That he was an intellectual and tone deaf.

Essentially Harper has realized that when Ignatieff is stumbling, don't get in his way. Let him fall all on his own. Its taken more years then expected to see Harper wisen up. But this fall he has proven to withhold his own foolish outbursts that would usually cost the CPC a % or 2 and kill any momentum the government had.

So far Harper has travelled the globe and his shoe isn't in his mouth.

Therefore the LPC ship is sinking and Ignatieff doesn't have the skill to bail it out. The LPC will bail on Ignatieff after the next election. I hear Justin Trudeau is holding $10,000 fund raising dinners for his leadership run.

Maybe not Harper....but the "No good bastard's" remark from one of his MP's is not going to sit very well.

[madmax]

Maybe not Harper....but the "No good bastard's" remark from one of his MP's is not going to sit very well.

This is about the Liberal Ship Sinking.. and Harper has been in the good books for a few months. Time for him to read the riot act to his MPs.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

This is about the Liberal Ship Sinking.. and Harper has been in the good books for a few months. Time for him to read the riot act to his MPs.

He can try, but I don't think its going to work.

[jbg]

Time for him to read the riot act to his MPs.

What's the Bill Number and year for the Riot Act?

[Anacoluthe]

At some point, one should start wondering. If counting to three becomes too confusing, and letting go of a few cents - too burdensome, what kind of real "something" could there be to "rally people around"? As said, no point in throwing an array of choices before somebody who neither wants, nor need any?

Well, sorry, but listing three political projects that people didn't understood and saying that they find counting up to three is confusing isn't the same thing at all. Especially if those projects weren't well understood mostly because people didn't take the time to think about them.

Very, very few are willing to think by themselves and question the surrounding way to do the things. You usually need a charismatic leader with a vision and a project to make them love the leader first. Then, through the focus that charismatic leader bring, people start to talk about and think about a project.

As long as there's problems around, people need changes and they know it. But they need people to propose those changes in an appropriate way to adhere to those changes. So: People DO want changes, but there's no one around charismatic enough to propose them in a global project, in a vision that will rally them, that will touch them at an emotional level so they feel concerned and involved by the needed changes.

The problem with that is that income taxes are less visible. The way to shrink government is to make the impact of taxes visible and immediate.

Yeah, but guess what: I am absolutely opposed to any attempt to shrink the government: The bigger is the better for me. I firmly beleive that a government is the fairest way to redistribute wealth in a society and that it need to be quite bigger than what we have right now.

Without going up to comunism and socialism, I beleive that a government should be able egality of chances (not plain egality, it's not the same thing) for everyone. And right now, we are far from that.

With all the support the Liberals are bleeding to the NDP, maybe Ignatieff will be dethroned by Rae to stop the hemorrhage. Rae seems to straddle both parties. What have they got to lose with what would amount to a shot in the dark? The party often looks like a bunch of blind people anyway.

I don't think Bob Rae will ever become the leader of the LPC. It would be the same mistake as Dion was: Dion was much hated, both by sovereignists and federalists, in Quebec for the Clarity Act. From what I've heard of, Bob Rae was as much hated in Ontario.

May be Ignatieff will manage to do Ok in a general election, then he will stay, if not, I guess we will see either Martin Cauchon or Denis Coderre (yes, I know, it seem unbelievable right now) move on for the leader place. My guess is for a leader from Quebec... It's usually the historical way to go if you want to achieve a majority (Dion is the exception, but he was so much unpopular in Quebec...).

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Well, sorry, but listing three political projects that people didn't understood and saying that they find counting up to three is confusing isn't the same thing at all. Especially if those projects weren't well understood mostly because people didn't take the time to think about them.

Very, very few are willing to think by themselves and question the surrounding way to do the things. You usually need a charismatic leader with a vision and a project to make them love the leader first. Then, through the focus that charismatic leader bring, people start to talk about and think about a project.

As long as there's problems around, people need changes and they know it. But they need people to propose those changes in an appropriate way to adhere to those changes. So: People DO want changes, but there's no one around charismatic enough to propose them in a global project, in a vision that will rally them, that will touch them at an emotional level so they feel concerned and involved by the needed changes.

Yeah, but guess what: I am absolutely opposed to any attempt to shrink the government: The bigger is the better for me. I firmly beleive that a government is the fairest way to redistribute wealth in a society and that it need to be quite bigger than what we have right now.

Without going up to comunism and socialism, I beleive that a government should be able egality of chances (not plain egality, it's not the same thing) for everyone. And right now, we are far from that.

I don't think Bob Rae will ever become the leader of the LPC. It would be the same mistake as Dion was: Dion was much hated, both by sovereignists and federalists, in Quebec for the Clarity Act. From what I've heard of, Bob Rae was as much hated in Ontario.

May be Ignatieff will manage to do Ok in a general election, then he will stay, if not, I guess we will see either Martin Cauchon or Denis Coderre (yes, I know, it seem unbelievable right now) move on for the leader place. My guess is for a leader from Quebec... It's usually the historical way to go if you want to achieve a majority (Dion is the exception, but he was so much unpopular in Quebec...).

There is an up and comer by the name of Trudeau....

[myata]

And how would we know that he wouldn't turn up a flip flopper like somebody else before him? Same old, same old people: start thinking for a change of what new and different and better you have to offer, apart from a new face.

[punked]

And how would we know that he wouldn't turn up a flip flopper like somebody else before him? Same old, same old people: start thinking for a change of what new and different and better you have to offer, apart from a new face.

He already is a flip flopper on the Afghan war. He was against it until he ran for office and has voted for many times over.

[myata]

Well, sorry, but listing three political projects that people didn't understood and saying that they find counting up to three is confusing isn't the same thing at all. Especially if those projects weren't well understood mostly because people didn't take the time to think about them.

That would be my diagnosis too. And it's a pretty damning one, for all I could think of. Because if people are too busy entertaining and gratifying themselves, to stop and think about things that matter to their and their posterity well being and survival, it's going to end only one way, in decay and apathy, as it happened so many times before us.

Very, very few are willing to think by themselves and question the surrounding way to do the things. You usually need a charismatic leader with a vision and a project to make them love the leader first. Then, through the focus that charismatic leader bring, people start to talk about and think about a project.

If may be the sad reality of things. Shows us how far we really evolved from e.g. those bizons that roamed these plains millions years back.

As long as there's problems around, people need changes and they know it. But they need people to propose those changes in an appropriate way to adhere to those changes. So: People DO want changes, but there's no one around charismatic enough to propose them in a global project, in a vision that will rally them, that will touch them at an emotional level so they feel concerned and involved by the needed changes.

Nah, don't believe you here. As soon as those same people see a possibility (real or imaginary) of a few extra cents dropping from their pocket, they'll vote for somebody who'll promise them no change. And they'll keep doing it (pushing the pleasure button) all the way till the fate strikes, and there's absolutely no way avoiding it.

Edited December 2, 2009 by myata

[Keepitsimple]

I don't think Bob Rae will ever become the leader of the LPC. It would be the same mistake as Dion was: Dion was much hated, both by sovereignists and federalists, in Quebec for the Clarity Act. From what I've heard of, Bob Rae was as much hated in Ontario.

Paul Martin, Stephane Dion, Michael Ignatieff....why NOT Bob Rae...

From Thomas Walkom's Star column today (forgive my BOLD but it relates to the original title thread of the Liberal Ship Sinking):

As Ignatieff sinks further in the polls, many Toronto Liberals are already looking past the next election (which they expect their party to lose) to a future leader.

Ask who that might be and one name keeps cropping up: Bob Rae.

As one Ignatieff supporter put it sadly: Who else is there?

Who else indeed? While many neophytes are angling for the top Liberal job, 61-year-old Rae is the only contender with experience as an effective opposition leader.

Increasingly, opposition is where many Liberals expect to be after an election that could come as early as next spring and that, in the afterglow of the Vancouver Olympics, they now believe could return a majority Harper government.

Certainly, Rae has never been coy about his ambition to lead the Liberals. He was in a blue funk after Stéphane Dion won that post in 2006. But as Dion floundered, Rae's spirits visibly improved.

When Dion was purged after the Liberals' disastrous performance in the 2008 election, Rae threw his hat in the ring again – only to be outmanoeuvred by Ignatieff who, in effect, staged a caucus coup.

Since then, Rae's been very much the loyal soldier. The FOBs (Friends of Bob) keep a low profile. Within the party, there is not the overt fratricidal scheming that characterized the long-running feud between Chrétien and Paul Martin.

Instead, Ignatieff appears to be gradually destroying himself. Politics is clearly a much more difficult game than the former Harvard professor had ever envisaged.

But when he goes – as he almost certainly will – Rae will still be in there punching. Ready, available, anxious to take the job he firmly believes should be his.

Link: http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/733240

Edited December 2, 2009 by Keepitsimple

[punked]

The knives are out the backroom meeting to plot Iggy's down fall are happening in public now.

Glen Pearson, an MP from London and one of those present for the nightcap with Rae, said that in his opinion Ignatieff was losing the loyalty of the party and Rae was "the only one the party trusts." Carolyn Bennet, also present at the meeting, said that David McGuinty, Justin Trudeau and others are already planning their leadership runs and it was time for Rae to do something.

Then the conversation shifted to some concrete proposals. In particular, they told Rae that many MPs believe he should become "the deputy leader with authority to manage all the files in the House of Commons," basically a kind of CEO. They also said that Ignatieff shouldn't be asking questions in the House but travelling throughout Canada "attending functions."

http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/734749

[madmax]

The knives are out the backroom meeting to plot Iggy's down fall are happening in public now.

http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/734749

Iggy will run and lose the next election. The LPC will rebuild with a new person and the LPC will not be stupid enough to choose a turkey like Bob Rae.

The question isn't if the LPC will lose, but how badly. Last years election numbers are no fluke.

Harper is stronger more competent and less petty, but unfortuneately no one can trust the Prime Minister off his leash.

I see the HST as a defining issue in two of the largest Provinces. That shuts out the LPC and leaves the CPC and NDP to figure out what people deserve and whether government knows bests, trumps the 80% of Public Opinion.

THe LPC ship isn't sinking. Its oarless and without an engine.

[punked]

CBC is in on the story now.

http://www.cbc.ca/politics/insidepolitics/2009/12/oh-liberals-if-youre-going-to-plot-against-your-leader.html

Every week it is bad news for those guys.

[capricorn]

It all started after a gathering to mark the retirement of Liberal Senator Jerry Grafstein from the Hill. Among those present were Ignatieff and Rae.

After they had all feted the popular senator with great words of love and affection, some MPs – invited by Rae for a drink – moved "100 yards away from the Hill" into the Château Laurier. Here the façade of unity vanished, the true face of today's Liberal party materialized and the real work of politics, which no longer takes place on the Hill, was in full swing.

(my emphasis)

http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/734749

The question of who is the real leader of the LPC, Ignatieff or Rae, has been foremost in the minds of observers for some time. This leadership uncertainty inevitably stokes the aspirations of other contenders which only serves to further undermine Ignatieff's control of the caucus.

Carolyn Bennet, also present at the meeting, said that David McGuinty, Justin Trudeau and others are already planning their leadership runs and it was time for Rae to do something.

To state the Liberals are in disarray is putting it mildly. And with this as a backdrop, Harper's popularity continues to climb.