Dump Dion Movement Begins

[Michael Bluth]

From an email by Ray Heard, Director of Communications in the PMO of John Turner.

"I say this on the record. Some Liberals feel today Mr. Dion should be forced to quit as leader. His deal with Elizabeth May, a social reactionary, is the very last straw. It denigrates the tradition that the Liberals are a national party. Though he was the architect of the Clarity Act, Dion is cynically kowtowing to the decentralists in Quebec; he does not, like his predecessors, speak up for Canada any more.. He refused to support extending the terrorism provisions Bob Rae said were needed to find the Air India terrorists. He is fudging the commitment to fight terrorists in Afghanistan his own government made. He is surrounded by a bunch of control-freaks who will not accept the offers of veteran strategists, who date back to Trudeau, to help with policy. Both Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae are eminently qualified to succeed him before the next election and I cannot fault their supporters for plotting to dump him before its too late."

Here's Warren Kinsella's take on it.

In broad terms, however, it again demonstrates that the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party have switched DNA. They - who were for years divided, divisive and practiced eat-the-leader - have become what the Grits once were: disciplined, dedicated and utterly devoted to the leadership principle. And vice-versa.

Looks like the odds on Dion not making it to the next election just got a little shorter.

[gc1765]

We already have a thread on this topic...

Anyways, who do you think the Liberals should have made as leader?

[Michael Bluth]

We already have a thread on this topic...

Anyways, who do you think the Liberals should have made as leader?

Topaz hijacked that one. Thought it best to start another one.

I honestly think Gerard Kennedy was the best choice for the Liberals medium to long-term.

1. He, and his campaign team, truly were not beholden to the old Liberal Party of Canada and his winning would have represented a real move away from the Martin/Chretien feud. (No matter how people dress it up, the feud has continued with almost all of Dion's braintrust coming from the Martin wing of the party.)

2. Kennedy is in it for the long-term. Dion's pact with May reminds me of Martin's Hail Mary with the Notwitstanding clause. A ploy by a leader who sees the next election as his last if he loses, proposed by some advisors who aren't really in tune with the electorate.

3. Kennedy was the most pro-business of the candidates. He truly could have made inroads in places/demographics that Dion has no shot in. He could have appealed to westerners and the Tim Horton's crowd that pushed Harper over the top.

Sure Kennedy would have made some mistakes. But he could have spent a majority Conservative mandate as leader of the opposition.

If the Conservatives when a majority in the next election does anybody see Dion sticking around for the following election?

[gc1765]

Topaz hijacked that one. Thought it best to start another one.

Fair enough.

I honestly think Gerard Kennedy was the best choice for the Liberals medium to long-term.

I agree. He was pretty much the only good candidate. Dion isn't bad and was my second choice...I'm just glad they didn't choose Iggy or Rae, we probably would have seen a "Dump Iggy/Rae" movement a long time ago.

[kimmy]

I would not think this to be a big deal. The Conservatives had this sort of problem a couple of years ago with Carol Jamieson. Liberal-boosters and Conservative-bashers had a grand time with it; there were at least a couple of "Tories coming unravelled!" "Harper is finished!" type threads here if I recall.

But where's Jamieson now? And where's Harper now?

I don't know if Ray Heard is a big deal or not, but I don't think it matters. If Dion begins to turn the polls around, this "Dump Dion" movement will vanish just like the "dump Harper" movement vanished. If Dion can't turn things around, more and more people will be calling for Dion's head, and it won't be because Ray Heard is a big deal, it'll be because the Liberals want a leader who they think can win an election.

As hokey as it might sound, it will be Canadian voters, not Ray Heard, who decide how long Stephane Dion stays as Liberal leader.

-k

[gc1765]

I would not think this to be a big deal. The Conservatives had this sort of problem a couple of years ago with Carol Jamieson. Liberal-boosters and Conservative-bashers had a grand time with it; there were at least a couple of "Tories coming unravelled!" "Harper is finished!" type threads here if I recall.

Actually, that is a good point. There was a movement to get rid of Harper in the summer of 2005, but obviously that failed.

[Michael Bluth]

I don't know if Ray Heard is a big deal or not, but I don't think it matters. If Dion begins to turn the polls around, this "Dump Dion" movement will vanish just like the "dump Harper" movement vanished. If Dion can't turn things around, more and more people will be calling for Dion's head, and it won't be because Ray Heard is a big deal, it'll be because the Liberals want a leader who they think can win an election.

The reason I posted the Kinsella quote was that stories like this can never help a party.

They hurt the Reform and the Alliance. At that time the Liberals were united and you never heard dump Chretien stories. Obviously not everything, but a contributing factor to 13 straight years of Liberal rule.

Ray Heard maybe isn't a big deal now, but as Director of Communications in the PMO he was a big deal at one time.

I agree. He was pretty much the only good candidate. Dion isn't bad and was my second choice...I'm just glad they didn't choose Iggy or Rae, we probably would have seen a "Dump Iggy/Rae" movement a long time ago.

My guess, this is all dependent on where the poll numbers would be, is that you would have seen it with Rae but not Iggy.

The old Chretien team was behind Rae so if Rae was hurting the knives from the Martinites would have come out.

Iggy would have gotten a longer leash, but that's because he would have been as unbeholden to either of the two camps as anybody could have been.