Inkless Wells

 Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

Momentum and its discontents: The Harper/Ignatieff show

by Paul Wells on Saturday, June 27, 2009 6:20pm - 5 Comments

From the magazine, my story about how the leaders of the two largest parties Made Parliament Work For Canadians.

Tags: ,

Bookmark and Share
  • catherine

    I'd like to see the hefty tax credits for political donations and the public funding of ten percenters eliminated. Or, at least, the tax credits should be brought in line with charitable donations and there is no reason public funds should be used for the ridiculous 'just visiting' junk mail.

  • jarrid

    The Liberals are still playing the game with their old playbook which, given the new political paradigm, is obsolete. Here's why the Liberas are up tough:

    1. The Conservative Party has become a well-funded and organized political machine led by a first rate political strategist in Stephen Harper;

    2. The Conservative policies are resonating with the times while the Liberals strayed too far to the left under Dion, a trend that started in the waning days of the Martin regime;

    3. Ironically, Michael Ignatieff is too far to the right of the Liberal Party in terms of attracting soft NDP support which the Liberals cynically appeal to during the pre-writ period and writ period and then later invariably ignore.

    4. Many Liberals are getting the sinking feeling in the pit of their stomachs that Michael Ignatieff, while an improvement from the dismal Dion, is not the man of the hour. I say "many Liberals" because a goodly number knew that already.

  • jarrid

    Why do I say that Michael Ignatieff is not the man of the hour?

    Michael Ignatieff would have been a good leader for a Liberal Party at the top of its game, a confident party that already had well thought out policy directions for which Ignatieff would have then become the articulate spokesman. But they don't have that and so Iggy not only has to be the articulate spokesman but as leader, he'll be the one deciding on the policy directions of the Party. I don't know if Iggy has the political smarts to do this, or at the very least it doesn't appear to be his forte. I had put my money on Rae in my office pool in 2006 for that reason.

    (Cross-posted from main article.)

  • Calgary Junkie

    We've already seen the disconnect between Iggy's rhetoric and actions, from the way he backtracked out of his showdown with Harper over EI-360. Fast forward to the next election campaign, and there will be many opportunities for Iggy to display that disconnect once again.

    For example, assume he goes into the campaign with this kind of narrative: "It's time to throw the bums out, they are incompetent, can't manage the affairs of the country, especially the economy, blah blah"

    So how will voters determine whether Iggy and the Libs are ready to take over gov't, and can do a better job ? The obvious thing voters will look at is how Iggy runs the campaign. If I was a Liberal supporter, I wouldn't have much confidence in Iggy the rookie running a tight campaign. But time will tell.

  • Paul Wells

    I'm gonna close comments here, just so we can consolidate commenting on the main thread (linked in the post above.)

Previous

Next

From Macleans