Next Liberal leader

[Shwa]

He won`t though, largely because "he has(n`t got) the chops to be a real mean s.o.b. for any length of time." He has neither a thick enough skin nor a sufficient disrespect for the people and institutions of Canada to be the kind of prime minister this nation now seems to demand.

Quite the opposite! The mean S.O.B is in defence of the people and institutions of Canada. Somebody has to do it...

[Molly]

We are not disagreeing.

_{(I guess I should have made that two separate paragraphs. )}

[Ravenwood]

Surely the question of leadership is a bit premature? Rushing into a leadership race now is essentially putting a fresh coat of paint on the creaking Liberal house. The Liberals need to step back, take a deep breath, and decide what it is they actually stand for.

What vision of Canada will they offer Canadians in the next election, that's distinct from both the Conservatives and the NDP? (To continue with the creaking house analogy, they need to re-pour the foundation.) If they can't answer that question with conviction, they're not going to find any traction with the electorate. They won't find any traction because the assumed answer will be "The Liberals stand for getting re-elected, and will say or do just about anything to do it."

Personally, I think the Liberals should stand for something more than that.

[Posc Student]

Surely the question of leadership is a bit premature? Rushing into a leadership race now is essentially putting a fresh coat of paint on the creaking Liberal house. The Liberals need to step back, take a deep breath, and decide what it is they actually stand for.

What vision of Canada will they offer Canadians in the next election, that's distinct from both the Conservatives and the NDP? (To continue with the creaking house analogy, they need to re-pour the foundation.) If they can't answer that question with conviction, they're not going to find any traction with the electorate. They won't find any traction because the assumed answer will be "The Liberals stand for getting re-elected, and will say or do just about anything to do it."

Personally, I think the Liberals should stand for something more than that.

I don't think they should pick their new permanent leader for another 2 years, they should have a year long leadership election campaign, but it's still interesting to discuss and see who others think would or could make a good leader.

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't think they should pick their new permanent leader for another 2 years, they should have a year long leadership election campaign, but it's still interesting to discuss and see who others think would or could make a good leader.

I agree...the Grits should be made to wander in the political desert for worshiping false idols.

[fellowtraveller]

I don't think they should pick their new permanent leader for another 2 years, they should have a year long leadership election campaign, but it's still interesting to discuss and see who others think would or could make a good leader.

I wouldn't mind if they did this, that approach has led to two weak leaders (Martin and Dion) and contributed to the collapse of the party. Another one with another failure could elad to the demise of the party entirely. . Ignatieff was coronated, the better of two poor choices when it became apparent that Dion had to go and go quickly.

LOng, expensive leadership campaigns decimate numerous wallets and exhaust both the candidates and the Party. Why not find your man/woman, appoint them in a shocking celebration of unity, and hand the party to them. Fund them heavily. Let them build a following outside the party. And so on.

What the LPC has been doing is not working and will not work.

In the meantime, I'm solidly on the Hedy Fry and/or Justin Trudeau bus.

[cybercoma]

One thing is absolutely certain. The Liberals need to appoint a leader that is far removed from the party's "politics" over the last 20 years and leads the party with that "just watch me" attitude. They need a strong, experienced and untainted leader. I'm not sure who that could be. In fact, I don't even know if this fantasy leader actually exists. They also need to go back to the idea of having a Quebec lieutenant rather than just flipping back and forth between anglos and francos.

[Ravenwood]

I wouldn't mind if they did this, that approach has led to two weak leaders (Martin and Dion) and contributed to the collapse of the party.

I think we're still not seeing the forest for the trees...

The Liberal Party has - arguably - been slowly collapsing since 1984. It has nothing to do with the leader.

Under Trudeau, the Liberal Party had a clear agenda. (The Just Society.) Since that time, the party has lost its purpose, and the first order of business is to find it again. Say what you will about Harper and the Conservatives, but they've been very successful in articulating what they stand for. (That being, the establishment of 'conservatism' as the mainstream political philosophy in Canada.) You might not agree with what they stand for, but nobody has any doubt about what it is.

Job # 1 = getting the party organized again. Once again, I'll point to the Conservatives as an example of how to do this. When they were wallowing in the opposition wilderness, they spent a lot of time re-building their grass roots support. Over several years, policy positions were hashed out during countless meetings and town halls. This process accomplished 3 main things:

1. It gave the party a policy agenda with which to rally the troops. A "moral compass", if you will.

2. It offered an opportunity to organize its followers and supporters - which is the single most important reason the Conservatives are so much better funded today - they're organized!

3. By listening to its constituents, it made the Conservative faithful feel they had a real stake in the party and its agenda.

Job # 2 = Only once the party has rebuilt its organization and established its political philosophy - the positive message it will offer to voters as an alternative to conservatism - only then should it begin to contemplate who will lead it.

It's a giant task, but the one luxury the Liberals have is time.

[WWWTT]

I agree...the Grits should be made to wander in the political desert for worshiping false idols.

Thats freakin funny man!

Very creative

Good for you!

WWWTT

[fellowtraveller]

I think we're still not seeing the forest for the trees...

The Liberal Party has - arguably - been slowly collapsing since 1984. It has nothing to do with the leader.

Under Trudeau, the Liberal Party had a clear agenda. (The Just Society.) Since that time, the party has lost its purpose, and the first order of business is to find it again. Say what you will about Harper and the Conservatives, but they've been very successful in articulating what they stand for. (That being, the establishment of 'conservatism' as the mainstream political philosophy in Canada.) You might not agree with what they stand for, but nobody has any doubt about what it is.

Job # 1 = getting the party organized again. Once again, I'll point to the Conservatives as an example of how to do this. When they were wallowing in the opposition wilderness, they spent a lot of time re-building their grass roots support. Over several years, policy positions were hashed out during countless meetings and town halls. This process accomplished 3 main things:

1. It gave the party a policy agenda with which to rally the troops. A "moral compass", if you will.

2. It offered an opportunity to organize its followers and supporters - which is the single most important reason the Conservatives are so much better funded today - they're organized!

3. By listening to its constituents, it made the Conservative faithful feel they had a real stake in the party and its agenda.

Job # 2 = Only once the party has rebuilt its organization and established its political philosophy - the positive message it will offer to voters as an alternative to conservatism - only then should it begin to contemplate who will lead it.

It's a giant task, but the one luxury the Liberals have is time.

You left out the msot important reason the CPC have rebuilt and succeeded n the last couple of decades- they have moved top the center. Of course, the center is the Liberals happy place. Aside from their leadership issues, they have to figuire out how to budge the Cons from that vote rich middle ground. It won't be easy.

And I peg the serious demise with Chretien, who I believe to be possibly the worst PM in our history. He left magically unscathed by Adscam, or at least did not go to jail, but he crippled his own party and turned many Liberals to the Tories, where they remain.

[Posc Student]

Alfred Apps has just said on Power & Politics that thanks to fundraising during the campaign and subsidies and what not that the Liberals will have more money now then they had going into the election. Which is good news for having a leadership election.

[Posc Student]

Newfoundland and Labrador's Senator George Baker has said he wants Dominic LeBlanc as leader.

[Dave_ON]

I think we're still not seeing the forest for the trees...

The Liberal Party has - arguably - been slowly collapsing since 1984. It has nothing to do with the leader.

Job # 1 = getting the party organized again. Once again, I'll point to the Conservatives as an example of how to do this. When they were wallowing in the opposition wilderness, they spent a lot of time re-building their grass roots support. Over several years, policy positions were hashed out during countless meetings and town halls. This process accomplished 3 main things:

Job # 2 = Only once the party has rebuilt its organization and established its political philosophy - the positive message it will offer to voters as an alternative to conservatism - only then should it begin to contemplate who will lead it.

It's a giant task, but the one luxury the Liberals have is time.

I agree the Liberals have some soul searching to do, and I find your assessment to be interesting. I guess I hadn't pegged the beginning of the end for the Liberals as far back as 84, but what you say does make sense, I think what was truly the catalyst for this though was the collapse of the PC in 93. Once their arch nemesis was out of the picture they no longer had to try, who was even remotely close to being in a position to replace them? This I believe let further corruption set in which exacerbated their lack of direction and purpose.

Consequently as the CPC's march to the centre it is indeed my fear they will suffer the same fate and we'll end up in an endless, one party cycle. It's my belief that our system thrives on having two strong main parties, always ready to step in and replace the current party in power. It keeps both on their toes and as honest as politicians can be. I'm not convinced that the NDP will serve this purpose but perhaps they will. However this is all thread drift.

I agree the LPC needs a new vision but I think they need a leader that will stick it out throughout the entire rebuild process, they shouldn't be looking for a leader that will win an election but one that will help them get their feet back on the ground. Sadly I don't know of anyone waiting in the wings capable of this that wants the job. If I had my pick I'd go for Frank McKenna, but he wouldn't touch it with a ten foot poll. Trudeau is an absolute no and I haven't the foggiest why people think he's even remotely a shell of his father. Dominic LeBlanc is their best choice I guess, but I have serious doubts about him also.

Edited May 6, 2011 by Dave_ON

[munsinger]

What the Grits really need to do is take a very hard look at Apps, Herle, Smith, Reid, etc - the great stratigic brain trust, for the last number of elections - and ask some pretty hard questions.....

[capricorn]

Newfoundland and Labrador's Senator George Baker has said he wants Dominic LeBlanc as leader.

Chretien wants Bob Rae as interim leader and is actively promoting him.

Former prime minister Jean Chrétien is calling Liberal MPs to urge them to support Bob Rae as interim party leader.

The former Liberal leader, who served as prime minister for 11 years, has called at least six MPs to ask them to support Rae for the job of party leader while they start rebuilding.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/05/06/pol-liberal-leadership.html

Baker and Chretien, now which of those two old coots pulls the most weight inside the Liberal party? I would guess Chretien.

Now here's something I didn't know.

Under the party's constitution, the leader's resignation triggers a leadership race with a final vote within six months. The party also has to select an interim leader within 27 days of the leader publicly resigning.

I guess there must be some mechanism in place to override the Constitution.

Here's another reason why some old fogies within the Liberal party need to take their retirement.

John McCallum, speaking on CBC's Power & Politics Friday night, wouldn't say whether Chrétien had phoned him to talk about Rae.

"That's an internal matter for us Liberals until we emerge from our caucus," he told host Evan Solomon.

"I've been called, I've made calls, but I don't think I want to report those calls on national television."

"This is a conversation among Liberals," McCallum added.

I mean, does McCallum really think that between this information age and blabbing anonymous Liberals a "conversation among Liberals" would remain private for very long? Has this guy been living under a rock or has he been imbibing something on the rocks?

Edited May 7, 2011 by capricorn

[Blue Grit]

Anyone know much about Ted Hsu? He has an impressive resume which would make him leadership material in a minute but I don't know much about him personally, if he is at all charasmatic, a good speaker or where he stands on issues.

[Newfoundlander]

Does anyone think Sandra Pupatello may be considering or planning on running for the leadership of the Liberal Party?

[cybercoma]

Does anyone think Sandra Pupatello may be considering or planning on running for the leadership of the Liberal Party?

I think she should, but others think that she won't get the support because Canada's "not ready for a woman" Prime Minister. Well, the United States wasn't ready for a black president either, so who knows.

[Evening Star]

We've had a woman Prime Minister already!

Pupatello is my MPP. She's popular locally but I didn't know she was considered a real heavyweight. This is interesting. I'm scanning her Wikipedia. She's more accomplished than I realized!

If we're thinking of Ontario Liberals, what about Kathleen Wynne?

Edited June 19, 2011 by Evening Star

[Newfoundlander]

We've had a woman Prime Minister already!

Pupatello is my MPP. She's popular locally but I didn't know she was considered a real heavyweight. This is interesting. I'm scanning her Wikipedia. She's more accomplished than I realized!

If we're thinking of Ontario Liberals, what about Kathleen Wynne?

Sandra Pupatello's husband made a brief appearance in Newfoundland and Labrador politics. I read in one of the article's on her announcement not to run about how it had been thought she would have been appointed to a more senior cabinet post and that she was considered a contender to succeed Dalton McGuinty.

[Newfoundlander]

She may have too much baggage now but I thought I'd bring up Belinda Stronach.

[Newfoundlander]

Another female candidate could be Amanda Lang.

[Newfoundlander]

Rogue Liberal Readies Leadership Bid

Borys Wrzesnewskyj is ready to take on the elites who run the Liberal Party, looking to return the Grits to the ideals that made them one of the most successful parties in democratic history.

From now until 2013, the former Liberal MP is hoping to “unwedge the backroom boys” and open the party up through a grassroots effort to sign up new members. If all goes according to plan, it could lead to a run for the Liberal leadership.

But first, he said, the party must be opened up.

“It’s not a private club, it belongs to the Canadian people and it’s part of the democratic process. And we have an incredible opportunity after the devastation of this last party and the slap-down that this establishment received for having parachuted Michael Ignatieff into the riding and then into the leadership of the party.”

...

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/canada/rogue-liberal-readies-leadership-bid-62194.html

[Bonam]

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/canada/rogue-liberal-readies-leadership-bid-62194.html

Borys Wrzesnewskyj

The liberal party is nowhere close to ready for someone with that name becoming its leader. Anyway, next liberal will be, by precedent, a Frenchie.

[Newfoundlander]

The liberal party is nowhere close to ready for someone with that name becoming its leader. Anyway, next liberal will be, by precedent, a Frenchie.

That's a bit racist. As well if the party wants to remain in existence they'll likely move past the idea of only allowing a "frenchie" to be their next leader, especially seeing they don't have many to pick from.