Does anyone see even the remote possibility of something being different with Iggy? I mean, they look different but....
Things would have every possibility of being worse. Iggy is at least as arrogant as Harper, they have purged the mp's of any talent and you will bring back the Quebec Liberal mafia into importance.Does anyone see even the remote possibility of something being different with Iggy? I mean, they look different but....
Agreed. Until one party or another can put up a leader with real, obvious merits we'll continue to get minorities. Harper's only appeal beyond his rump group is on days when the other guys have smoking bulletholes in their shoes. Without a Stephen Lewis the federal NDP hasn't hope of ever doing what they did in Ontario, and the Liberals—like their Conservative twins—keep picking guys they like instead of guys voters will like.if the opposition has an electable leader with an actuall platform then they might have a chance.
Until that day, dream on...
I'm not sure I follow you. If you mean "arrogant" as conceited or having an inflated sense of one's abilities, Harper and Iggy are probably neck and neck. Conceit is normal for people seeking high office. But if you're using arrogant to describe a leader who purges his organization of everyone talented enough to challenge his leadership, I think I'd like to see some examples. I'm sure Iggy's victims have names. BTW, Iggy has only been back in the country for a couple of years so how many Liberal MPs have left the party since then (without being sent packing by the voters)? If there has been an exodus of talented Liberals since Iggy, I haven't noticed.Things would have every possibility of being worse. Iggy is at least as arrogant as Harper, they have purged the mp's of any talent and you will bring back the Quebec Liberal mafia into importance.
You're quite right as far as the present goes, but the task of any party is to change that, and break out of their home turf. Otherwise, as you say, they're doomed to minority status. Liberals did elect members in the West, and the PCs did in Ontario. Both by being blandly middlin' enough that the NDP used to campaign on "You can't tell them apart". Might have disappointed the diehard ideologues, but it elected majorities.The election of minorities is more due to the number of parties running than anything else. The BQ aren't likely to get wiped out in an election any time soon. The Liberals will continue to draw seats in Ontario and Eastern Canada and pick up a smattering of seats west of Ontario. The Conservatives will continue to find their strength west of Ontario, but in good years will do okay in Ontario and Quebec. And the NDP will continue to have a strangle hold on select ridings across the country. It would take a party paradigm shift or scandal to change this.
Until then, each party can grow from where they are somewhat, but majorities will be hard to acheive.
this what I meant so we agreeI'm not sure I follow you. If you mean "arrogant" as conceited or having an inflated sense of one's abilities, Harper and Iggy are probably neck and neck.
I didn't explain myself clearly I guess. what would bring the Quebec Liberal mafia back into importance would be the Liberals forming a government.When you say this purge of talent "will bring back the Quebec Liberal mafia into importance" you are suggesting that the Quebec Liberal mafia are currently of little consequence. It wouldn't be necessary to "bring them back into importance" if they were already there. I agree that the Quebec Liberal mafia are not a factor but I think it is a stretch to say that a lack of leadership talent would cause them to materialize.
Iggy has been out of Canada until a couple of years ago so it seems unlikely (to me at least) that he'd tolerate any clandestine activities by Quebec Liberals or their associates. After sponsorship, I think any Liberal leader would be extremely eager to make sure everyone is squeaky clean.I didn't explain myself clearly I guess. what would bring the Quebec Liberal mafia back into importance would be the Liberals forming a government.
Maybe but it pales in comparison to the pompousness of Icky and Sideshow Bob.My that's a pompous thing to say.
when wackos like you are entitled to vote then yes i have a problem with democracy.Sounds like you have serious problems with Democracy......
First off its Rona Ambrose, not Barrett. but I agree with you she was a failure at cabinet level. The other hottie Helena Guergis also is incompetent. But there are alot of talented ministers in this govt. Jim Prentice, John Baird, Rob Nicholson, Diane Finley, Jay Hill, Chuck Strahl, Peter Van Loan, Tony Clement, Vic Toews, Diane Ablonczy and James Moore to name a few. One of the most talented members of the party, Bob Dechert from Mississauga, isn't even a cabinet minister.......yet.Ignatieff is clearly leagues brighter than Harper. Also - however poorly one thinks of the potential Liberal cabinet, there can be no cabinet in Canadian history as devoid of talent as Harper's current line up. Mulroney had a cast of stars in comparison. Diefenbaker had giants in comparison. Harper has such slim pickings that he has to recycle failed ministers like Rona Barrett.
Just look at Harper's Finance Minister - no one in their right mind will ever claim he's been one of the great finance ministers.
The reason for the lack of talent is that Harper can't tolerate potential competition. Whereas Chretien embraced his enemies within the party (for political purposes), Harper has shunned potential stalwarts and prevented them from running. No one with talent runs under the Conservative banner. Aside from Peter Mackay who's been a standout?
As opposed to the level headed clear thinkers like you I supposed.when wackos like you are entitled to vote then yes i have a problem with democracy.
No more than the anti-CPOC people who are still in denial that Harper is PM!Sounds like you have serious problems with Democracy......