Stephen Harper vs Bob Rae

[Nocrap]

I don’t always have a lot of faith in polls, but one conducted after the election, showed

that roughly 45% of Canadians voted for Harper’s Party because they felt we needed a

change, 25% felt that the Liberals needed a “time-out”, 24% liked his policy but only 6%

liked the actual man.

So with the majority opting for change and punishment, will they be so inclined next

election? Despite the abominable Liberal scandals and the horrible Martin campaign;

Harper was still only able to get a minority; so if the Liberals can produce a strong leader

without the sponsorship baggage; we could see dramatically different results.

Enter Bob Rae.

I did read the previous thread asking if Ontarians could forget his tenure as Premier, and I

think we could. There were some mitigating circumstances, including the fact that he

inherited a recession and the National Citizens’ Coalition backed ‘Ontarians For

Responsible Government’, allocated almost $600,000 to defeat his party. Colin Brown,

son of the NCC’s founder said they waged an ``all-out electoral war'' against the ``People's

Republic of Ontario...We want to wipe them off the electoral map.'' And more recently

NCC vice-president Gerry Nicholls: “We set up ORG in the dark days of former Premier

Bob Rae. Back then ORG's tough ad campaigns helped to drive the NDP from office.”

The fact that Stephen Harper was once President of NCC could be used strategically to

discredit him, so long as it was handled better than the way Martin handled it.

But what could Bob Rae bring to the table?

1. Better Credentials - In his memoirs, Preston Manning said that "Stephen had difficulty

accepting that there might be a few other people (not many, perhaps, but a few) who were

as smart as he was...." I won’t deny that Mr. Harper is an intelligent man with a masters

degree, but Bob Rae is a Rhodes Scholar, an Officer of the Order of Canada and recipient

of the Order of Ontario. He was also appointed chancellor of Wilfrid Laurier University, etc., etc.

2. Better Relationship with Students - As Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities,

he prepared a Postsecondary Review report (the Rae Report) that was met favourably

with student groups and is often asked to speak at colleges and universities. On the other

hand, Mr. Harper has often alienated students with social issues like same-sex marriage

and gay rights.

3. Religious Tolerance - Bob Rae was raised Christian, but his grandfather was Jewish,

his grandmother Scottish Protestant, he himself a practicing Anglican, and his wife and

children Jewish. Mr. Harper is Evangelical Christian, as is most of his caucus. There is

certainly nothing wrong with that, but many of us fear that his policies will be faith-based,

and not necessarily what is best for all. Religion and Politics simply don’t mix (but I guess

that’s the topic for a different discussion).

4. A Better Diplomat - His father was a diplomat and he himself has extensive experience

on the world stage; often asked to mediate in volatile situations, like the constitutional

discussions between the government of Sri Lanka and Tamil Tiger rebels.

5. A More Constructive Relationship With the US - He advocates a good relationship and

supports globalization and open markets. He was invited by the US to be a constitutional

adviser to the new Iraqi parliament, despite the fact that he has stated that the war was

wrong (but admits that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was a good thing) and calls the

Americans “invaders” and an “occupying army”; not liberators. On the other hand, many

Canadians feel that Mr. Harper is too pro-American, without objectivity.

6. A More Positive Approach to the Role of Our Military - Mr. Rae’s views on our military’s role on the world stage, are based on fact and not just rhetoric. He believes that we need to be involved with the

reconstruction of Afghanistan and Iraq, and it is to our benefit to ensure that a democratic

government is allowed to take control, but the difference is, that he has spent a great deal

of time in the Middle East and can speak from personal experience and not just a couple of

days at a military base. What Canadians need at a time when the world is such a volatile

place, is a leader who can and will explain our activities, and not just stand with his arms

crossed and say that “it is not open for discussion”.

Though I’m not saying that I would vote for him and do find him at times to be just as

arrogant and uncharismatic as Stephen Harper; I think he would have more mass appeal and could very well

become our next Prime Minister - that is if he decides to run.

[scribblet]

I

Though I’m not saying that I would vote for him and do find him at times to be just as

arrogant and uncharismatic as Stephen Harper; I think he would have more mass appeal and could very well

become our next Prime Minister - that is if he decides to run.

No time to reply to all, but IMHO Bob Rae is unelectable in Ontario, the Rae days hit people of all political stripes and are not forgotten.

As far as religious tolerance goes thats a straw man argument, Harper might be religious but he doesn't wear it on his sleeve or even talk about it, its a non issue, strictly a scare tactic. The majority of his caucus is not evangelical, and a few are not even Christian.

I think it might be time for me to donate to the NCC again...

[Nocrap]

I

Though I’m not saying that I would vote for him and do find him at times to be just as

arrogant and uncharismatic as Stephen Harper; I think he would have more mass appeal and could very well

become our next Prime Minister - that is if he decides to run.

No time to reply to all, but IMHO Bob Rae is unelectable in Ontario, the Rae days hit people of all political stripes and are not forgotten.

As far as religious tolerance goes thats a straw man argument, Harper might be religious but he doesn't wear it on his sleeve or even talk about it, its a non issue, strictly a scare tactic. The majority of his caucus is not evangelical, and a few are not even Christian.

I think it might be time for me to donate to the NCC again...

Whether he wears it on his sleeve or not, you have to admit that it is a hot topic and many of his supporters certainly do speak of it. Perhaps because of the Reform Party's stance on same-sex marriage, abortion, etc. Most of the debates centered on religous beliefs and not human rights. I'll have to verify the facts on the % of Evangelical Christians, but I know that people like Cheryl Gallant and David Sweet will be watched closely by mainstream Canadians; not to mention Stockwell Day.

[scribblet]

I

I think it might be time for me to donate to the NCC again...

Whether he wears it on his sleeve or not, you have to admit that it is a hot topic and many of his supporters certainly do speak of it. Perhaps because of the Reform Party's stance on same-sex marriage, abortion, etc. Most of the debates centered on religous beliefs and not human rights. I'll have to verify the facts on the % of Evangelical Christians, but I know that people like Cheryl Gallant and David Sweet will be watched closely by mainstream Canadians; not to mention Stockwell Day.

Yes its a hot topic, mainly because the media and left wingers make it so, and use it as a fear tactic.

I was under the impression that all people had a right to voice an opinion, regardless of their religion, even those 'evil fundamentalists' are entitled to a voice in parliament.

Maybe you could tell us exactly what the CPC's (not the defunct Reform party)policy is on abortion etc.

Harper wants a free vote in parliament on whether or not the subject should be re-visited, it likely won't pass. Regardless, I'm not particularly religious but I agree with not changing the definition of SSM, one can have beliefs and values not based on fundamentalist religious beliefs. There are a number of liberal MP's against it, and the whole party including Martin voted against it a few years ago, either way, it is not taking away anyone's rights, they can still have the same legal recognition and benefits. (another subject allready under discussion). I don't know what other social issues there are.

[Leafless]

Nocrap

You wrote- " but I know that people like Cheryl Gallant and David Sweet will be watched closely by mainstream Canadians; not to mention Stockwell Day."

This is a BS statement!

Since when are social sucking Liberals or NDP supporters mainstream Canada?

Name me the last federal election either party won with more than 50% of the popular vote?

[wellandboy]

This comparison on paper may have some validity but in the context of todays political reality no way. Too bad he hasn't worked for the CBC because he'd make a great Governor General.

[Nocrap]

This comparison on paper may have some validity but in the context of todays political reality no way. Too bad he hasn't worked for the CBC because he'd make a great Governor General.

Bob Rae has been considered for the post of Governer General in the past (unless you mean me, and I'm not a guy)

But back to the comparison between Mr. Rae and Mr. Harper. During the last election there was a vast difference between Stephen Harper and Paul Martin so both could feed off the 'right wing', 'left wing' thing. However, there is very little difference between SH and BR, when it comes to their politics.

Rae left the NDP because he felt that their economic policies were too near sighted, and supports free trade, so will please the business sector.

He supports our involvement in Afghanistan but can back it up with a wealth of experience. He opposed the invasion of Iraq but feels that the western world needs to get involved in rebuilding and forging ties with new Iraqi government.

He is much better educated, so a debate would not have to be just mud-slinging, but could have some real substance.

He has been the victim of the NCC, so would be better prepared this time around, and since Harper lost his bid to have the NCC's finances kept secret, there would be a little more transparency.

His ideology is social democrat, so will please not only the left, but the centre-left and even those just right of centre. Harper has moved, or at least appears to be trying to move toward centre, but still not enough.

Bob Rae would be everything Stephen Harper fears - just like him only better at it.

As far as the religous thing - Harper's caucus and even his supporters have made it about religion, whether he intended to do that or not. Read Hansard - almost every argument from the Reform/Alliance includes the fact that they are Christian. As I said before: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! SO AM I. But if his caucus was mostly Jewish, and they tried to legislate that every Canadian male had to be circumcized, even if it was for health reasons (hypothetical), every non-Jew would say that it was not the government's place to tell them what to do. Gay rights have nothing to do with religion and religion has no place in politics.

[geoffrey]

All those areas you mentioned already are dominated by Liberal supporters.

Do you actually think Rae will swing the vote from the students to the Liberals? Not likely since its always been extremely pro-Liberal besides my little patch of happiness ie. U of C.

Anyone that would support Rae already supports the Liberals so I wouldn't think this massive shift from centrist business oriented voters will happen. Remember, believe it or not the Liberals are mostly a very pro-business, low-tax, moderate spending party. It's only in the recent days that the shift left has occured. Any further to the left and much of the Liberal base will run to the Conservatives very quickly.

[uOttawaMan]

Nocrap

You wrote- " but I know that people like Cheryl Gallant and David Sweet will be watched closely by mainstream Canadians; not to mention Stockwell Day."

This is a BS statement!

Since when are social sucking Liberals or NDP supporters mainstream Canada?

Name me the last federal election either party won with more than 50% of the popular vote?

"Name me" the last federal election in which any party won more than 50% of the popular vote.

[scribblet]

This comparison on paper may have some validity but in the context of todays political reality no way. Too bad he hasn't worked for the CBC because he'd make a great Governor General.

Bob Rae has been considered for the post of Governer General in the past (unless you mean me, and I'm not a guy)

Bob Rae would be everything Stephen Harper fears - just like him only better at it.

As far as the religous thing - Harper's caucus and even his supporters have made it about religion, whether he intended to do that or not. Read Hansard - almost every argument from the Reform/Alliance includes the fact that they are Christian. As I said before: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! SO AM I. But if his caucus was mostly Jewish, and they tried to legislate that every Canadian male had to be circumcized, even if it was for health reasons (hypothetical), every non-Jew would say that it was not the government's place to tell them what to do. Gay rights have nothing to do with religion and religion has no place in politics.

Number one, Bob Rae might not be better at it, thats only your opinion.

Secondly, there is no Reform/Alliance party anymore, only the CPC, so please tell us where in the policies they address abortion or other 'social' issues, again using the religious theocracy bit is a crock The only CPC policy on any social issue as far as I know, is a free vote in parliament. You know, a party that encourages diversity of views and opinions and allows open debate and Free Votes. MP's would have free will to vote their concience or their riding's wishes.

Harper is more of a libetarian born and raised in Ontario, he may attend church but he cetainly doesn't make religion an issue, that is mainly coming from the press and secular liberals. Yes there are some MP's with strong views in the CPC, there are in the liberals too.

Most people have some religious background whether or not they go to a church or whatever, their values and beliefs generally are based on that very upbringing and background. Pretty hard for anyone to think in comletely secular terms, and divorce themselves from everything they've believed in, and take an -anything goes - attitue, or to even embrace the new religion of secular humanism. I agree with separation of church and state, but you cannot deny a group of people their democratic voice because they go to church more often than we do. Neither can you deny a group of people whomever they are, the right to lobby government, to deny a group that right based on the fact they are Christian (or other) would be discrimination.

Maybe you could provide a Hansard quoe for us where the CPC and or Harper have made religious comments.

Those we need to fear most, are the radical liberal secularists who have been forcing their agenda down our throats for decades.

[Nocrap]

This comparison on paper may have some validity but in the context of todays political reality no way. Too bad he hasn't worked for the CBC because he'd make a great Governor General.

Bob Rae has been considered for the post of Governer General in the past (unless you mean me, and I'm not a guy)

Bob Rae would be everything Stephen Harper fears - just like him only better at it.

As far as the religous thing - Harper's caucus and even his supporters have made it about religion, whether he intended to do that or not. Read Hansard - almost every argument from the Reform/Alliance includes the fact that they are Christian. As I said before: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! SO AM I. But if his caucus was mostly Jewish, and they tried to legislate that every Canadian male had to be circumcized, even if it was for health reasons (hypothetical), every non-Jew would say that it was not the government's place to tell them what to do. Gay rights have nothing to do with religion and religion has no place in politics.

Number one, Bob Rae might not be better at it, thats only your opinion.

Secondly, there is no Reform/Alliance party anymore, only the CPC, so please tell us where in the policies they address abortion or other 'social' issues, again using the religious theocracy bit is a crock The only CPC policy on any social issue as far as I know, is a free vote in parliament. You know, a party that encourages diversity of views and opinions and allows open debate and Free Votes. MP's would have free will to vote their concience or their riding's wishes.

Harper is more of a libetarian born and raised in Ontario, he may attend church but he cetainly doesn't make religion an issue, that is mainly coming from the press and secular liberals. Yes there are some MP's with strong views in the CPC, there are in the liberals too.

Most people have some religious background whether or not they go to a church or whatever, their values and beliefs generally are based on that very upbringing and background. Pretty hard for anyone to think in comletely secular terms, and divorce themselves from everything they've believed in, and take an -anything goes - attitue, or to even embrace the new religion of secular humanism. I agree with separation of church and state, but you cannot deny a group of people their democratic voice because they go to church more often than we do. Neither can you deny a group of people whomever they are, the right to lobby government, to deny a group that right based on the fact they are Christian (or other) would be discrimination.

Maybe you could provide a Hansard quoe for us where the CPC and or Harper have made religious comments.

Those we need to fear most, are the radical liberal secularists who have been forcing their agenda down our throats for decades.

I hadn't really intended this to be about religion but the fact that I read his bio and was comforted by his diverse religous background, may also mean that others will be. (BTW: There is still a Reform Party very much alive and well in Canada - they are just now calling themselves CPC. Mr. Harper has been involved in more parties than Belinda Stronach - and all without crossing the floor.)

However, my post was only meant to compare Bob Rae to Stephen Harper and present MY OPINION as to why I thought BR may have an edge over SH.

Many feel that Ontarians will never forgive Bob Rae for his history with Ontario politics, but I disagree. Their distate for Mike Harris will far outweigh Rae's ancient history and the fact that three relics from the 'Common Sense Revolution" are now key Harper cabinet ministers, will continue to remind us. 'Two-Tier' Tony Clement and Jim Flaherty, whose brilliant solution to the homeless problem was to simply throw them all in jail; like being poor was a crime. And then of course, there's Baird, whose name is synonymous with the 500 million dollar computer boondoggle, when he was minister of Community and Social Services.

For those who don't know, the 'boondoggle' centered around government outsourcing to Anderson Consulting, to reform our welfare system. To save taxpayers 89.5 million dollars, they were paid 193 million dollars, and the shoddy equipment they saddled us with created extra expense and nightmares beyond belief.

And now with my tinfoil hat firmly in place, Anderson Consulting quickly changed it's name to Accenture after it's founder Arthur Anderson got into legal trouble for his involvement with the Enron scandal. And what does this have to do with Stephen Harper?

One of Accenture's directors is Patrick Daniel who also sits on the boards of Encana and Enerflex. Encana's CEO is Michael Chernoff. Michael Chernoff and his wife Dorine each gave Harper's party $ 5,000.00 on December 11, 2004 and then less than six months later, on May 20, 2005; each an additional $ 5,100.00. So for those who believe that corporations are limited to $1,000.00 per year. Guess again. There's $20,200.00 in less than six months from one corporation. Enerflex were not left out either. It's CEO John Peter Alfred and his wife Cheryl, each contributed $ 5,100.00 on July 7, 2005. I could continue with the list, but believe me, it goes on and on.

I'm not really suggesting corruption, but will be watching closely to see how much outsourcing is thrown Accenture's way.

The point is, that casting doubt on anyone's integrity is very easy, so it wouldn't take much to put Rae and Harper on the same level, where we could then simply look at their abilities to lead our country during turbulent times. Both strong economists; both apt policy makers, but Mr. Rae has a much better record on the International scene and a more realistic view of our involvement in the Middle East.

[JerrySeinfeld]

I don’t always have a lot of faith in polls, but one conducted after the election, showed

that roughly 45% of Canadians voted for Harper’s Party because they felt we needed a

change, 25% felt that the Liberals needed a “time-out”, 24% liked his policy but only 6%

liked the actual man.

So with the majority opting for change and punishment, will they be so inclined next

election? Despite the abominable Liberal scandals and the horrible Martin campaign;

Harper was still only able to get a minority; so if the Liberals can produce a strong leader

without the sponsorship baggage; we could see dramatically different results.

Enter Bob Rae.

I did read the previous thread asking if Ontarians could forget his tenure as Premier, and I

think we could. There were some mitigating circumstances, including the fact that he

inherited a recession and the National Citizens’ Coalition backed ‘Ontarians For

Responsible Government’, allocated almost $600,000 to defeat his party. Colin Brown,

son of the NCC’s founder said they waged an ``all-out electoral war'' against the ``People's

Republic of Ontario...We want to wipe them off the electoral map.'' And more recently

NCC vice-president Gerry Nicholls: “We set up ORG in the dark days of former Premier

Bob Rae. Back then ORG's tough ad campaigns helped to drive the NDP from office.”

The fact that Stephen Harper was once President of NCC could be used strategically to

discredit him, so long as it was handled better than the way Martin handled it.

But what could Bob Rae bring to the table?

1. Better Credentials - In his memoirs, Preston Manning said that "Stephen had difficulty

accepting that there might be a few other people (not many, perhaps, but a few) who were

as smart as he was...." I won’t deny that Mr. Harper is an intelligent man with a masters

degree, but Bob Rae is a Rhodes Scholar, an Officer of the Order of Canada and recipient

of the Order of Ontario. He was also appointed chancellor of Wilfrid Laurier University, etc., etc.

2. Better Relationship with Students - As Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities,

he prepared a Postsecondary Review report (the Rae Report) that was met favourably

with student groups and is often asked to speak at colleges and universities. On the other

hand, Mr. Harper has often alienated students with social issues like same-sex marriage

and gay rights.

3. Religious Tolerance - Bob Rae was raised Christian, but his grandfather was Jewish,

his grandmother Scottish Protestant, he himself a practicing Anglican, and his wife and

children Jewish. Mr. Harper is Evangelical Christian, as is most of his caucus. There is

certainly nothing wrong with that, but many of us fear that his policies will be faith-based,

and not necessarily what is best for all. Religion and Politics simply don’t mix (but I guess

that’s the topic for a different discussion).

4. A Better Diplomat - His father was a diplomat and he himself has extensive experience

on the world stage; often asked to mediate in volatile situations, like the constitutional

discussions between the government of Sri Lanka and Tamil Tiger rebels.

5. A More Constructive Relationship With the US - He advocates a good relationship and

supports globalization and open markets. He was invited by the US to be a constitutional

adviser to the new Iraqi parliament, despite the fact that he has stated that the war was

wrong (but admits that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was a good thing) and calls the

Americans “invaders” and an “occupying army”; not liberators. On the other hand, many

Canadians feel that Mr. Harper is too pro-American, without objectivity.

6. A More Positive Approach to the Role of Our Military - Mr. Rae’s views on our military’s role on the world stage, are based on fact and not just rhetoric. He believes that we need to be involved with the

reconstruction of Afghanistan and Iraq, and it is to our benefit to ensure that a democratic

government is allowed to take control, but the difference is, that he has spent a great deal

of time in the Middle East and can speak from personal experience and not just a couple of

days at a military base. What Canadians need at a time when the world is such a volatile

place, is a leader who can and will explain our activities, and not just stand with his arms

crossed and say that “it is not open for discussion”.

Though I’m not saying that I would vote for him and do find him at times to be just as

arrogant and uncharismatic as Stephen Harper; I think he would have more mass appeal and could very well

become our next Prime Minister - that is if he decides to run.

Why Rae would win:

The bulk of Ontarians just might be dumb enough to vote for another centrist directionless leftwinger in an attempt to cling to a shrivelling nanny state way of life.

[Hicksey]

Everyone knows a good showing in Ontario ostensibly wins the election. That's precisely where Bob Rae will not show well. We remember his monumental mismanagement of Ontario, and I highly doubt Ontarians will trust him to run a whole country after that.

[geoffrey]

Nocrap

You wrote- " but I know that people like Cheryl Gallant and David Sweet will be watched closely by mainstream Canadians; not to mention Stockwell Day."

This is a BS statement!

Since when are social sucking Liberals or NDP supporters mainstream Canada?

Name me the last federal election either party won with more than 50% of the popular vote?

"Name me" the last federal election in which any party won more than 50% of the popular vote.

The 1984 Mulroney PC's. Actually it was exactly 50%.

Before that, it was the Diefenbaker in '58.

Source: http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/1867-2004.html

[JerrySeinfeld]

Everyone knows a good showing in Ontario ostensibly wins the election. That's precisely where Bob Rae will not show well. We remember his monumental mismanagement of Ontario, and I highly doubt Ontarians will trust him to run a whole country after that.

Good. We're on the right track. God help us if we go back now.

[scribblet]

This comparison on paper may have some validity but in the context of todays political reality no way. Too bad he hasn't worked for the CBC because he'd make a great Governor General.

Bob Rae has been considered for the post of Governer General in the past (unless you mean me, and I'm not a guy)

Bob Rae would be everything Stephen Harper fears - just like him only better at it.

As far as the religous thing - Harper's caucus and even his supporters have made it about religion, whether he intended to do that or not. Read Hansard - almost every argument from the Reform/Alliance includes the fact that they are Christian. As I said before: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! SO AM I. But if his caucus was mostly Jewish, and they tried to legislate that every Canadian male had to be circumcized, even if it was for health reasons (hypothetical), every non-Jew would say that it was not the government's place to tell them what to do. Gay rights have nothing to do with religion and religion has no place in politics.

Number one, Bob Rae might not be better at it, thats only your opinion.

Secondly, there is no Reform/Alliance party anymore, only the CPC, so please tell us where in the policies they address abortion or other 'social' issues, again using the religious theocracy bit is a crock The only CPC policy on any social issue as far as I know, is a free vote in parliament. You know, a party that encourages diversity of views and opinions and allows open debate and Free Votes. MP's would have free will to vote their concience or their riding's wishes.

Harper is more of a libetarian born and raised in Ontario, he may attend church but he cetainly doesn't make religion an issue, that is mainly coming from the press and secular liberals. Yes there are some MP's with strong views in the CPC, there are in the liberals too.

Most people have some religious background whether or not they go to a church or whatever, their values and beliefs generally are based on that very upbringing and background. Pretty hard for anyone to think in comletely secular terms, and divorce themselves from everything they've believed in, and take an -anything goes - attitue, or to even embrace the new religion of secular humanism. I agree with separation of church and state, but you cannot deny a group of people their democratic voice because they go to church more often than we do. Neither can you deny a group of people whomever they are, the right to lobby government, to deny a group that right based on the fact they are Christian (or other) would be discrimination.

Maybe you could provide a Hansard quoe for us where the CPC and or Harper have made religious comments.

Those we need to fear most, are the radical liberal secularists who have been forcing their agenda down our throats for decades.

I hadn't really intended this to be about religion but the fact that I read his bio and was comforted by his diverse religous background, may also mean that others will be. (BTW: There is still a Reform Party very much alive and well in Canada - they are just now calling themselves CPC. Mr. Harper has been involved in more parties than Belinda Stronach - and all without crossing the floor.)

The point is, that casting doubt on anyone's integrity is very easy, so it wouldn't take much to put Rae and Harper on the same level, where we could then simply look at their abilities to lead our country during turbulent times. Both strong economists; both apt policy makers, but Mr. Rae has a much better record on the International scene and a more realistic view of our involvement in the Middle East.

Yes its easy to dredge up information of the internet and try to 'tie' it into someone thus casting aspersions on that person's integrity, it is too easily done, and too many people like to use character assassination and malicious rumour to do it.

As for the Reform party, I beg to differ, the Reform party is dead, if you read up on the CPC and its policies it has morphed into liberal lite with a few old reformers still involved, that old left wing bogey man is a crock.

Personally I would take Harper over Bob Rae any day, he has the same intellectual ability and economic strength ( I would question rae's on his record).

As Preston Manning said recently:

"There is a hostility toward Protestant evangelicals or conservative Catholics trying to say anything into the political arena. Opponents would be reluctant to attack someone of Jewish faith or a Hindu, but they don't seem to have same reservation about going after others.'"

In the House of Commons, faith is almost taboo. "It's ridiculous and undemocratic as well."

BTW Liberal MP John McKay is a Baptist who referres t9o himself as his party's "token evangelical"; not to mention Tom Wappel and some others.

[August1991]

Bob Rae:

I think that the main thrust of what Blair has managed to do is to recognize that the old collectivist ideology began to lose its clear appeal, starting in the 1950s when people began to see that there were tremendous opportunities in the economic structure, that the real issue wasn’t capitalism versus socialism, but what kind of capitalism you want to have. That in turn means what kind of public policies we can have. Can we have a public sector that’s more responsive to the individual, that caters more to individual needs, that looks at the fact that people are different? In all the debates we’re having on compulsory retirement or public housing, you name the game. you look at all the issues. There is a lot to be said for looking at this question of how you effectively empower the individual. But I think what differentiates that from a hard-right politics is that it is not based on an illusion as to what you have to do to create it. It still leaves a lot of room open for strong public policies that will make those kinds of choices more available for people.

Link

Well, one thing is for sure, if the Liberals pick Rae as leader, we'll be in for a policy-wonk frenzy during the next election.

What I find significant about Rae is that he is a Leftist who learns. He understands that markets and free trade are good.

Is Rae electable? While many will refer to Rae's controversial past as NDP Premier in Ontario, I'll suggest something else. The last time an Ontario premier lead a federal part was George Drew in 1948. Drew never became PM.

I don't think the rest of the country will elect a "silver spoon socialist" from Toronto as PM.

OTOH, there are about 2 million NDP votes out there. Many of them are leftish Liberals who happily voted for Chretien in the past, but deserted Martin.

BTW, Rae speaks good French.

-----

The thread's title pits Rae against Harper. At first glance, I would say that any credible, honest Liberal leader has a good chance against Harper - at least, Harper now. Harper in one year will be a different candidate. Canadians are just now getting to know Harper and forming an opinion about him.