Posts Tagged ‘Michael Ignatieff’
Closed Door Caucus Decision? – An Affront to Democracy and the Grassroots
UPDATE – This was originally posted at 12:03am on Monday December 8th 2008. I received another email with similar points and have included it’s text at the bottom. An original of that is available too.
Caucus is a pretty unrepresentative body. Take a look at it. Geographically it does not represent Canada, demographically it’s even worse. While I respect our 77 member team, they are not constitutionally empowered to make this decision and would be completely out of their minds to think the grassroots will not go nuts if their rights are taken away because the party wants a quick fix. Caucus support did not decide who won the last leadership race, and it will not this time. They cannot and must not try to force their decision on the rest of us.
Below is an email I just received that was sent to a number of other Riding Presidents, Stephane Dion and some other senior party officials. It is an open email based on it’s distribution and therefore, I think sharing it is appropriate. An original is available.
It reads:
“Subject: Liberals should not act like Conservatives and Mr. Iggnatieff should not act like Harper
Mr. Dion,
“Liberal MPs should very carefully before they proceed with Iggnatieff’s CORONATION. By having a vote in Caucus only and affirming him later will be seen as Hi-Jacking Democracy. Taking away the right to elect by the grassgroots the leader is morally and ethically wrong. It sends the wrong message to the Liberal Party faithfuls and Canadians. It will signal that the Liberal Party under Michael Iggnatieff are willing to abandon Democratic Principals and seize power at any cost as Stephen Harper did. This must not be allowed to happen!!!
If this action is taken Canadians will not be able to differentiate the Liberals from the Conservatives.
This action will also deny members of the Liberal Party participation in a very important exercise of choosing their Leader.
Mr. Iggnatieff’s CORONATION MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN. Bob Rae and Michael Iggnatieff must fight a fair and open election.
one third of ridings in Ontario will have even a Caucus member vote.
This means:
No votes for the aboriginal community.
No votes for students.
No votes for Womens’ Clubs.
1 vote for francophones.
1 vote in the Guelph-Windsor corridor.
1 vote for Northern Ontario.
This is anti-democratic, and does not represent the many voices and values of our party!”
On Misleading Polls and Liberal Leadership
I like to think I have some understanding of how polling works and what some of the challenges a pollster needs to address to tell a story as someone who has been a National Field Manager and worked on survey design and sample selection. Whenever I see a poll that doesn’t make sense, I look for ‘why’.
In the case of the Angus Reid polls, it is easy. Online samples are not representative of the population because they are self selecting and not random. It is unclear exactly what the profile of an internet vs. non interest user is. Therefore an online poll with a sample of 1200 people – is really just the opinion of those people and is not in any way representative of the Canadian population as a whole.
Now this poll that came out comparing Liberal support in a general election with Dion, Ignatieff, Rae and LeBlanc as leaders – it might as well have asked name recognition. It is far far too early to tell the impact any of these guys would have as leader because none of them have a national profile to even rival Dion’s yet.
Anyone who honestly believe Canadian’s want another go with Dion over any of the other guys should really think back to October 14th when Canadians sided with the bully.
I have no idea what impact any of the candidates would have as leader of our party, except that two may need an extra bus for their baggage – and one needs to become better known before we can win. That being said, if name recognition is your only problem, with the kind of issues LeBlanc is focusing on I suspect we could find ourselves looking at a majority government once that is solved.
I resent bad polling – and especially when it relates to voting intention because these decisions are too important to be toyed with by a bad poll.
3 Comments »Reflections on the Liberal Leadership Media Coverage
The idea behind having a professional media cover elections and other important events is to leave readers better informed about the events happening around them. But what if the media was just wrong? What if they were factually wrong regularly? Two things: These guys have no idea what is actually going on within the party and appear to not even have adequate fact checking. I’m going to point out a couple of obvious ones in two Globe and Mail articles that have been published over the last two weeks about the Leadership election. I’ll ignore Jeffery Simpson’s analysis that seems to me to be highly questionable.
The polarization is gone – Ignatieff is the favourite – Jeffrey Simpson – November 14th 2008 – Globe and Mail
Simpson’s Text:
“He became the most polarizing figure in the 2005 contest, and that polarization did him in. You could see it unfold as the ballots progressed. You could see it in the hall when he delivered his final pitch, because half the room either applauded tepidly or not at all to his punch lines.”
My Response:
Michael Ignatieff was the most polarizing figure – I agree with this statement, but there was no 2005 contest. Michael Ignatieff was in year twenty seven of his life abroad from Canada during the first 10 months of 2005. The convention was in fact in December 2006.
Simpson Text:
“By May, he will have been in politics for about five years.”
My Response:
By May 2009 Michael Ignatieff will not even have been back in Canada for five years after his twenty seven year jaunt abroad. If by politics he means his involvement in providing punditry regarding the 2004 US Presidential election where he regularly used the phrase “we” to describe Americans as then maybe you could make this claim.
The Lesser Evil – Essay in the New York Times – May 2 2004 By Michael Ignatieff
“That is what defeat in a war on terror looks like. We would survive, but we would no longer recognize ourselves. We would endure, but we would lose our identity as free peoples.” – Michael Ignatieff on the American Identity
Cauchon to announce he will not seek Liberal leadership – Campbell Clark – Globe and Mail
Clark’s Text:
“Mr. LeBlanc, a 47-year-old New Brunswick MP, is positioning himself as a youthful alternative to the two older men, both of whom are over 60.”
My Response:
Dominic LeBlanc is was born December 14 1967 and is therefore 40. – Both www.parl.gc.ca and www.wikipedia.org agree.
The Michael Ignatieff/Bob Rae Side Show
The Ignatieff/Rae sideshow has attracted four days of news. It is nothing short of ridiculous. The picture of them on the front of the National Post was about as unflattering as one could imagine a picture of them could be. I am sick of the party division, I’ve said so publicly and resent that these guys have done this to the Liberal Party of Canada – a party neither of them has been a member of until they decided they should lead it.
I’ve said before it bothers me that the media is putting a bizarre level of punditry with next to nothing but gut feelings to go on. How many public endorsements are out? Who has raised what? and How many delegates have been elected? – I am concerned at the level of irresponsibility being showed in trying to call it over for Liberals.
Here is my prediction- Michael Ignatieff will not go in with the support to win on the first ballot regardless (or because?) of all the media attention.
1 Comment »
