IntenseDebate - Mike514

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - Ch-ch-changes · 1 reply · +2 points

Question: If I sign in with Facebook, will my comments on Macleans be advertised to all my friends on Facebook?

It's not that I mind, but if I comment many times on Macleans, I don't want my friends to get several notifications saying "Michael has commented on such-and-such article at Macleans."

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - Back to school (II) · 0 replies · +5 points

You mean if he was more of a leader and took charge?

I think he played the role of leader fairly well, certainly better than Dion or Martin. There was a certain unity in the party (Denis Coderre's outburst aside), they cobbled together a coherent platform, and he even went as far as to fire just about all of his top staff and replace them with Donolo and others. All these things have certain strong gutsy leadership qualities to them.

I know what you mean. He listened to his handlers too much. There was a while where he was droppin' his Gs and talkin' like this. He released those awful Narnia ads. He looked foolish with "your time is up.". But in the very end, I think he did it his way: The town halls, the loose style, no notes, the infomercial explaining who he was and where he wanted to take the country.

It's tempting to point fingers, but I don't think he totally succumbed to his handlers. This was Ignatieff's campaign, not his handlers' campaign.

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - So long, Michael Ignat... · 1 reply · +3 points

Agreed! When Ignatieff first ran for the Liberal leadership (in '06, was it?), I listened closely to what he said, and seriously would have considered voting for him. I felt his int'l experience was an asset, and the only thing I didn't appreciate was the opportunism (coming back to Canada and immediately making a power grab, but aside from that...).

But then '06 Ignatieff became '10/'11 Ignatieff. He reversed himself on many controversial positions, he leaned left, he came across as insincere on certain occasions, etc etc. And I stopped seeing him as a viable alternative to Harper.

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The untold story of th... · 0 replies · +4 points

It was no secret that Ignatieff was holding these town-hall events. They didn't disappear completely from the news, and the Liberals even put together an infomercial a week before the vote.

Harper's refusal to take more than 5 questions, screen people at rallies, etc., showed up regularly in the media, and was always contrasted with Ignatieff's open, town-hall events with unlimited questions, no screening, no script, etc. Neither situation was a big secret, certainly not the whole Facebook picture "scandal" erupting in the news.

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - A personal reflection ... · 0 replies · +1 points

FYI: Jeffrey Simpson on Steve Paikin's show yesterday (podcast is available), basically reiterates what I mention above: Rushing to find a new leader is a mistake. He gives John Turner as an example.

Step one is to figure out what you stand for, define your program (that means stop trying to be everything to everyone), adjust to the new realities (for example, they're the party of national unity, but that issue is not front-and-centre anymore. Time to be the party of something more current), and only then should they choose a leader.

My fear is that they're just going to sit around and wait for the NDP or Tories to do something colossally stupid, and then get vaulted back into official opposition/gov't. But that's a dangerous game. They've been waiting 5+ years for Harper to do something really dumb, and now he has a majority.

(I should add that I voted for Harper, in case anyone misjudges me as a disgruntled Liberal. I'm not, but I want choice. I want to at least be able to consider another party for which to cast my vote, but today none is available. Until one comes along, I'll likely stick to the Tories.)

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The untold story of th... · 0 replies · +18 points

Excellent. I'll definitely be buying a copy of Macleans on Friday.

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - A personal reflection ... · 2 replies · +1 points

I think Ralph was appointed (I also hoped it wouldn't be him).

I'm concerned that the Liberals will get too distracted by a leadership convention and everything that it implies (television coverage, showmanship, putting on a false front that the Liberals are one big happy family, parties with balloons and streamers and other flashy things to easily distract people) rather than locking themselves up for hours at a time away from the cameras and media, and doing some somber, meaningful, productive soul searching and dirty work.

When I think back on recent Liberal history, including the previous leader conventions and grand "thinker's conference," while I have no doubt that important work was done, what really stands out in my mind is the showmanship, posturing, superficial divisiveness, squabbling (remember the Chretien vs Martin camps? Yeesh...), and shutting down of controversial topics/questions. In other words, everything that the Liberals don't need right now.

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - A personal reflection ... · 5 replies · +3 points

Because I don't think choosing a new leader should be on the agenda on day 1. Like I said below to Rick, it's putting the cart before the horse. Take time to reflect, figure out where to go from here, put your heads together and flesh out some ideas, and THEN choose a leader.

Although granted, a new leader will often bring new ideas, revitalize, etc., but I don't see it as working out that way. Given this party's history of unceremoniously dumping old leaders who didn't perform to expectations in search of the next great messiah, it seems like the party (at least on the surface) has once again embarked on that dangerous path.

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - A personal reflection ... · 0 replies · +3 points

All three were leaders without being MPs. That was the similarity I was pointing out. It's not unheard of.

But obviously the circumstances are way different.

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - A personal reflection ... · 1 reply · +3 points

I don't think leader conventions are a waste of time, but I think it's putting the cart before the horse.

Take some time to reflect, figure out what you stand for, etc... and THEN choose a leader. Although granted, when a new leader is chosen, you're also partly choosing his vision, but it's much too rush-rush in my opinion. Let MI stay a while, spend a year or so fleshing things out, then choose a leader.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with Mike514

People I'm following

Mike514