Liberal Party of Canada Leadership

[Proud_Newfoundlander]

So much for a leadership race where there was robust discussion on policy. Just clamor to the guy they think will sweep them back to power

 

[a_majoor]

More on Marc Garneau dropping out. While there may be ulterior motives like wanting a shadow cabinet post, I can also imagine the sheer frustration of trying to advance policy ideas in the teeth of universal indifference. (Well, actually, I can more than imagine, since I have been in a similar boat in the past...). Condolances to both Mr Garneau and to the Liberal Party of Canada. Given Edwards long term prognosis (the CPC will become tired and complacent, and voters will become tired and vote them out, allowing the NDP to become the governing party), this is a bad day for everyone....

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/03/13/by-jonathan-kay-marc-garneau-proves-canadians-dont-want-smart-candidates-with-good-ideas/

Jonathan Kay: Marc Garneau proves Canadians don’t want smart candidates with good ideas

Republish Reprint
Jonathan Kay | 13/03/13 | Last Updated: 13/03/13 12:39 PM ET
More from Jonathan Kay | @jonkay

As the pundits always seem to be reminding us, Canadian politics are in a “sorry state.” Question Period is a hissy-fit theatre of the absurd. MPs take cheap shots at one another on Twitter. Government policies are created as populist press releases, with the details filled in later. Where, oh where, the Andrew Coynes endlessly ask, are those brave, substantive men and women who put policy first, politics second?

This earnest idea — that the nation’s voters are nauseated by the fast food of sound-bite politics; and instead hunger for nutritious, meaty ideas about, oh, say, Senate reform, trade liberalization, tax-code simplification, corporate-welfare eradication, and all the rest — is the meta-narrative that has launched a million editorials. In the last seven years, how many Liberal party manifestos, for instance, have demanded a leader with the courage to develop “fresh ideas” and “innovative policies,” as opposed to just awaiting a fresh face selling the same old Liberal Happy Meal with a new plastic children toy?

In the back of our collective minds, we pundits always knew this was just a fairy tale. But it made us feel better about our country to embrace the idea that Canada is a nation of closet policy wonks betrayed by a superficial ruling class. It's so much easier to lambaste 308 MPs than it is to call out tens of millions of Canadian voters for their failure to appreciate the fine points of equalization or dairy-industry supply management.

Garneau was, in short, a policy-wonk’s dream candidate — the pocket-protector messiah whose hoped-for coming was prophesized, in abstract form, by serious-minded Liberals since the fizzling of Paul Martin.

Just ask Marc Garneau. His now-abandoned campaign for the Liberal leadership was the institutional embodiment of the above-described myth. He took positions on genuinely important policy issues that everyone is supposed to care about, but no one actually does.

Garneau called out frontrunner Justin Trudeau, in measured tones, for running a policy-free campaign. He boasted a genuinely impressive resumé, including a doctorate in electrical engineering. (Everyone knows Garneau went into space. But did you know that he also personally designed the simulator software used to train naval officers to run on-board missile systems?) And he credibly promised to use that expertise to promote the advancement of Canadian science and technology. Even his physical appearance — the epitome of pleasant-looking, middle-aged blandness — was in keeping with his insistence on policy and platform above all else.

Related
‘The party has chosen’: Marc Garneau drops out of Liberal leadership race, supports Justin Trudeau
He was, in short, a policy-wonk’s dream candidate — the pocket-protector messiah whose hoped-for coming was prophesized, in abstract form, by serious-minded Liberals since the fizzling of Paul Martin.

And now Garneau is gone, his binders full of densely-scribbled policy prescriptions pushed off the party’s collective desk by deep-sighing Liberal groupies who prefer the sight of a blank scratch pad, the better to write and re-write Justin Trudeau’s name in little heart-shaped doodles.

I’m not one of those who dismiss Trudeau as a lightweight. As I’ve noted before, he’s run two hard-fought campaigns against separatists and socialists in a tough Montreal riding. But his leadership run has been nothing but a set of bromides and media appearances. Credit to him, I guess: He’s smart enough to know that Canadians’ much-ballyhooed appetite for fresh policy ideas is mostly self-flattering malarkey.

As for Garneau, I challenge readers — even those self-selected nerds willing to read eight paragraphs into a column such as this — to recite the major planks of Garneau’s policy platform. (For the record, it’s gender equality, high-speed internet access, student-assistance reform, expansion of Pacific-directed trade, and telecom liberalization.)

Not that it matters much at this point.

Pity Marc Garneau. We said we wanted a serious intellectual promoting serious policy ideas. He was brilliant enough to fit the role perfectly. And naïve enough to think we actually meant it.

National Post

jkay@nationapost.com

Twitter @jonkay

Until we as Canadians pull our collective heads out of our asses and start getting engaged on questions like the economy, international relations, defense, the evolution of society etc. we will have to endure more and more "Young Dauphins" entering the political arena fishing for voters in the "Twittervere" rather than people who will be capable of forecasting future problems and issues and crafting potential solutions. When reality strikes, these policy free candidates will resemble headless chickens, and we Will be on our own. 

(Think I'm exaggerating? Who is making any attempt to put the financial house in order as the provinces are expanding their debt at a record rate? looking beyond that, what provisions are being made for the demographic "bust" in the 2020's and beyond?)

 

[a_majoor]

Commentary from the National Post on what happened and the huge risk they are taking:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/03/14/kelly-mcparland-liberals-are-betting-the-farm-on-justins-likeability/

Kelly McParland: Liberals are betting the farm on Justin’s likeability

Kelly McParland | 13/03/14 8:47 AM ET
More from Kelly McParland | @KellyMcParland

What would have become of the Liberal party if Justin Trudeau hadn’t come along to divert its attention?

Given the many determined proclamations issued in the wake of Michael Ignatieff’s departure, it might actually have pursued the quest for renewal it claimed to want. It’s possible a serious effort would have been mounted to redefine the party, rebuild its ties to parts of the country where it no longer functions, develop policies and proposals that appeal to Canadian voters searching for an alternative to the Conservatives and NDP, and put in place a leadership structure committed to carrying out the new program.

Taken together, the loss in the space of a week of much of its potential voter base and its most serious contender mean a leadership race that is fast becoming a fiasco. Both, moreover, have a common origin: in the decision to take away from party members the prerogative of choosing the party leader, and give it to people with no connection to the party and even less commitment, the so-called “supporter” class. Because make no mistake, that is who will decide this.

That the party has steadfastly refused to disclose precisely how many of those 294,000 are actual members, as opposed to supporters, tells you all you need to know. If it had grown much from what it was, they’d be shouting it from the rooptops. And while it’s safe to assume that members are more likely than supporters to vote next month, they will still make up only a small fraction of the votes cast. The rest will be made up of those who, given the chance to join, couldn’t be bothered. And the vast majority of those are for Justin.

Without Justin, numbers suggest the leadership contest would have pitted the serious-minded, if unexciting, ex-astronaut Marc Garneau against the similarly non-glamorous Martha Hall Findlay and surprisingly popular B.C. MP, Joyce Murray.

What then? Almost certainly there would have been a great deal more substance to the debate. Since none of that trio possesses much in the way of charisma, they would likely have been reduced to debating ideas. Hall Findlay could have been pushed to expand on her pledge to get rid of dairy subsidies; Garneau’s plan to open Canada to greater competition for its monopolistic cellphone companies might have stirred wider discussion. And Murray might have been required to explain further her unlikely proposal for electoral co-operation with the NDP.

Of the three, Murray has proved to be the real surprise of the race. With Garneau and Hall Findlay both staking ground on the practical-minded side of the party, she presumably became the go-to candidate for left-wingers. There are suggestions that Garneau’s decision to withdraw from the race on Wednesday reflected a fear that he might not even be sure of finishing second in the voting next month. At about 15% support, his numbers have shown little upward movement, while Murray has gained ground and is in a solid third. That being the case, a race without Justin might have focused much more on Murray’s notion that Liberal survival rests on greater co-operation with the NDP. It might not have been the healthiest of debates – what kind of party is so unsure of itself it feels it needs a lifeline from a competitor, especially one that has spent almost its entire existence as a third-place party of protest?

In the end it didn’t happen, of course. Instead the Liberals jettisoned any effort at serious introspection, and are about to bet the farm on Trudeau. His approach to policy is to avoid it. The character of the party can be established later, he says, once voters have been engaged. Within his camp, “engagement” appears to mean running up the number of “supporters” it can claim, even if the bulk of them not only refuse to fork over $10 for party membership, but won’t provide an email address and can’t be bothered registering to vote.

Even though Garneau’s withdrawal means Trudeau’s coronation is inevitable, his camp has demanded – and won – an extension to the registration deadline, in hopes it can avoid embarrassment by muscling more of its “supporters” to take the extra step and register.

It’s all about optics now, much as it was when the party gave itself to Michael Ignatieff. Everything will depend on Trudeau’s ability to sell himself on his charm and likeability, while his handlers try to cobble together a platform that gives the appearance of substance without grievously offending any important voter groups. It didn’t work so well with Ignatieff, who had greater accomplishments than Trudeau but never could produce the platform or the likeability. Maybe Trudeau will do better. Liberals have made their decision, all they can do now is hope.

National Post

 

[Brad Sallows]

>The character of the party can be established later, he says, once voters have been engaged.

You have to vote for the candidate to find out what's in it, eh?

Maybe the strategy is there, but we don't see it: victory in the next election is unlikely, so choose a popular nothing to draw voters away from the NDP rather than waste a useful leader's future.  Then caste away the failed leader - had his shot, didn't he - and choose a real one for the following election.

 

[Old Sweat]

>The character of the party can be established later, he says, once voters have been engaged.

You have to vote for the candidate to find out what's in it, eh?

Maybe the strategy is there, but we don't see it: victory in the next election is unlikely, so choose a popular nothing to draw voters away from the NDP rather than waste a useful leader's future.  Then caste away the failed leader - had his shot, didn't he - and choose a real one for the following election.

That would be crediting the party's brain trust with a degree of sophistication far beyond what its past performance indicates.

 

[Edward Campbell]

It is possible, of course, that the Liberal Party brain trust is on to something. This is Canada in the 21st century, after all, and we are, by and large, a shallow, celebrity obsessed, ill informed and poorly educated people. Maybe M. Trudeau - telegenic, "nice" (in the ways that Stephen Harper is not), charismatic (like his father) and simply "new" - is enough to make him prime minister after the 2015 general election. Perhaps the so called media party, which, to the degree that it exists at all, detests Prime Minister Harper, will forgive M. Trudeau any sin and ignore any failing in an effort to advance his cause against the hated Harperites.

 

[a_majoor]

This blogger expands on Edwards point, which is a bit frightening to contemplate. Is this the way we want to find the people who will be making decisions for the rest of us?

http://abearsrant.com/2013/03/marc-garneau-resigns-as-the-liberal-party-embraces-the-cult-of-celebrity.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ABearsRant+%28A+Bear%27s+Rant%29

Marc Garneau Resigns As The Liberal Party Embraces The Cult Of Celebrity
Published March 14, 2013

I’m going to put aside partisanship for a moment because something happened today which I think exemplifies more than anything else, one of the problems facing us these days.

Marc Garneau, candidate for the leadership of the Liberal Party announced that he was dropping out of the leadership race because it had become self-evident that he had no hope of even coming close to catching up to the level of support of frontrunner Justin Trudeau.

Think about that for a moment.

By all standards of measurement, Marc Garneau is not only an accomplished Canadian – he is a great Canadian, but it wasn’t enough to earn him the support of his political party or Liberal supporters across the country. Instead, they threw that support to a ‘high-profile name’ with only limited experience, unproven ability and a resume so thin it’s anorexic.

Mr. Garneau holds a doctorate in Electrical Engineering. Justin Trudeau has a Bachelor of Arts and a Bachelor of Education.

Marc Garneau first served in the Canadian Navy and then went on to join Canada’s space program where he became the first Canadian in space, making three separate voyages. He was seconded to head up Canada’s Space Agency in 2001 after being chosen from more than 4,000 candidates. He was elected to Parliament in 2008 and reelected again in 2011.

Justin Trudeau studied engineering for a bit and started to work on a Master degree in arts before giving it up to run for political office. He has been a substitute teacher, a somewhat expensive public speaker and more recently, a candidate to lead his party.

None of that mattered to people within either the Liberal Party or those who flocked to get on the Trudeau Rock ‘n’ Roll Train. All that mattered was that Justin Trudeau was a celebrity.

There are very few among us who, upon seeing those two resumes would hire Justin Trudeau for an executive position over Marc Garneau. The qualifications and experience just aren’t there but this is politics and in politics, reality and common sense have no place.

I don’t particularly agree with Marc Garneau’s politics and found his policy platform somewhat pedestrian but unlike Justin Trudeau,  he at least had one. But while I don’t agree with his politics, I have no difficulty whatsoever in respecting his accomplishments or his intellect.

His credentials are impeccable; his integrity well-established and his ability is more than proven. If that isn’t enough to earn you serious consideration for the right to lead your party, I don’t know what does.

It’s fairly clear that the Liberals have recognized and seized on something most of us don’t want to admit. We have become a society that is unbelievably shallow. Experience is trumped by celebrity; accomplishment is overruled by good looks and charm.

Thousands rushed to oppose vaccinating their children despite the decades of medical evidence of the benefit of vaccines simply because celebrities told them it caused autism. They turned a deaf ear to medical authorities including our own Surgeon Generals and the World Health Organization to instead  listen to and take the advice of Jenny McCarthy and Oprah Winfrey who, it turns out, got it wrong.

In our societies today, it is celebrities who have become the new authorities on almost everything. Science is ignored in favour of profiteers like Al Gore and David Suzuki who make millions selling half-truths and scare-mongering. Successful business people are condemned for being successful while the purveyors of snake-oil are celebrated simply because they have celebrity.

Any kind of election is always a bit of a popularity contest but The Liberal Party of Canada has turned this race for political leadership into a farce. You don’t even have to be a member to vote for their leader which is similar to suggesting that you don’t have to be a cardinal, or even a Christian, to vote for the next Pope.

If they thought this was going to earn them renewed respect and credibility, I believe, along with others, that  they’ve miscalculated.

“It’s a remarkable sort of party the Liberals are building: a virtual party, a party that exists more in theory than in reality. The probable winner has left perhaps the slightest footprint of any party leader in the country’s history; he has offered little in the way of a serious program of government; and his supporters, so far as their whereabouts can be traced, are for the most part not even members of the party.

“The Liberals are lighter than air.”  – Andrew Coyne, National Post

This is no way for a nation to choose its leadership. Increasingly our best and brightest are refusing to step forward to stand for public office because when they do, they are either ignored, demeaned or passed over in favour of some twit with a personality cult following on Twitter.

Even interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae was a better, more substantive choice than Canada’s Peter Pan. Mr. Rae is a former Rhodes Scholar with a significant amount of political experience. He’s up to speed on the issues, fast on his feet and even has personality. But he was also passed over in favour of The Trudeau glamour.

We revere former leaders like Abraham Lincoln, Winston Churchill, Golda Meier and Wilfred Laurier but these days we elect celebrity candidates like Justin Trudeau and Barrack Obama for their popularity, the colour of their skin or simply because they’re just so darned cool.

No politician is perfect, including our current Prime Minister but when you start from a position where the leader is vacuous, devoid of a consistent policy vision and with little to commend except his or her celebrity, you are already in deficit position.

Leadership should be about exactly that – leading - but to the Liberal Party of Canada it is only about winning. Somewhere in their desperate thirst to win back government, they’ve lost sight of why they want to win. They have forgotten that our politics and government are not about them; they’re about us and the Liberals have forgotten us in their urgency to reclaim past glory.

This leadership race has had more in common with adolescent girls fawning over Justin Beiber than a serious political party doing what it can to elect a new and qualified leader. In that regard they treat us, the electorate, with the same lack of respect they treat themselves. They think they have developed a strategy to win future elections but I don’t think they’ve learned much at all.

Winning isn’t everything, it isn’t even the only thing and placing your hopes on someone who is able to collect social media followers rather than articulate a well-defined set of policies and developed leadership skills is not only foolish, it betrays the desperation of a party short of ideas and long past its prime.

I doubt we’ve heard the last of Marc Garneau but whatever his future accomplishments might be; they will not be as leader of The Liberal Party much to their loss. I think Andrew Coyne may be right. The Liberals are lighter than air and appropriately they are on the road to choosing a piece of fluff to lead them.

Read more at http://abearsrant.com/2013/03/marc-garneau-resigns-as-the-liberal-party-embraces-the-cult-of-celebrity.html#u5S8Clf5rhwY1kT5.99

 

[Edward Campbell]

The Hill Times is is reporting that "Irregularities in voter registrations for the upcoming federal Liberal Party leadership election are being challenged “big time” as scrutineers for the seven remaining candidates are poring through the qualifications of tens of thousands of potential voters."

 

[CougarKing]

Good grief. Some people can't accept that this ship has sailed.

link

How Joyce Murray could beat Justin Trudeau and win the Liberal leadership race

By Andy Radia

Politics Reporter

By Andy Radia | Canada Politics – 6 hours ago

Could British Columbia MP Joyce Murray be the next leader of the federal Liberals?

While a Justin Trudeau 'coronation' is still the likely scenario, things have gotten a lot more interesting over the past couple of weeks.

As explained by the Canadian Press, only less than half of the party's supporters signed up to vote before a Thursday midnight deadline.

Less than half the almost 300,000 people who signed up to take part in the federal Liberal leadership race have registered to vote, despite getting an extra week in which to do so.

Trudeau's team initially boasted that it had signed up 165,000 supporters, which was widely interpreted as assuring the front-runner a comfortable first-ballot victory.

However, the disappointing number who registered to vote may mean a closer contest than expected.

'A closer contest than expected' but can someone else possibly win?

How about Murray: who many feel is now second place in the contest?

For Murray to become the leader she needs four things to go her way:

1) Her camp needs to have registered a greater percentage of their supporters than the Trudeau camp

2) There needs to be a lot of registrant disqualifications

3) Her team needs a stronger 'Get Out the Vote' campaign than Trudeau's

4) There needs to be an "Anyone But Justin" movement in a second ballot.

According to a Murray campaign spokesperson, they may already have number one sewn-up.

"I don't have a firm number for our campaign to disclose. What I can say is that we surpassed over 70 per cent of our ID'd supporters being registered back on the original registration deadline of March 14th. That number has increased with the extension," Brenden Johnstone wrote in an email exchange with Yahoo! Canada News.

With regard to registrant disqualifications, Johnstone notes that numerous people had erroneously signed up two or three times as a means to get information from the candidates about their platforms.

He also thinks his campaign has a demonstrated advantage when it comes to getting out the vote.

"Registration is only the second step in a 3-step process. Getting people to vote is the key to success for any campaign. I doubt there's going to be an extension given to the voting week so registered supporters are only going to have one week to cast their ballots," he said.

"Joyce has an incredibly organized team behind her which is why we experienced such success with getting our supporters registered. It's the same team that are going to lead her GOTV efforts from April 7th-14th and I'm sure we're going to see the same results."

Number 4 — an 'Anyone But Justin' movement — is going to be Murray's biggest challenge.

There's no evidence of such a campaign taking place. In fact, one might even expect an 'Anyone but Joyce' campaign first because of Murray's controversial idea of one-time electoral cooperation with the NDP and Green Party — Murray is the only candidate who has publicly endorsed such a scheme.

Nevertheless, Johnstone remains confident.

"Our registered supporters are completely committed to Joyce and her position on electoral cooperation and democratic reform as well as her Sustainable Society platform," he said.

"Keep in mind, raw numbers do not decide a winner. Each riding is worth the exact same number of voting points. IE: If you have 5000 registered voters in one riding it counts the same as having 100 registered voters in another riding."

Political consultant Gerry Nicholls isn't predicting an upset.

"Trudeau will still win in a landslide," he told Yahoo!.

"But what [the low registration numbers do show] is that despite his name-recognition and his near-cult status in the media, Trudeau lacks the grassroots machinery needed to turn supporters and fans into donors and voters. This should worry the Liberals and it’s something they will need to work on before 2015.

"Trudeau’s cute face alone won’t cut it."

The party will host a Candidate's 'showcase' on April 6th in Toronto. Supporters who have registered will be allowed to vote by phone between April 7th to 14th. The winner will be announced on April 14th in Ottawa.

(Photo courtesy of the Canadian Press)

 

[a_majoor]

The ship has left Southampton on its way to New York....

IT is interesting that Joyce Murray has a theoretical chance to be the winner of the contest, especially in light of her platform of seeking an unofficial merger with the other "Progressive" parties, and act that would probably result in the extinction of the Liberal Party as a separate entity. 

It is also interesting that the two other candidates who released detailed platforms have attracted so little support from the party membership, which does not bode well considering Canada is entering a period of profound demographic and economic changes. It would be nice to know that the people running for high political office are actually thinking about these things and have some plan to meet these challenges.

Finally it is interesting that so few "supporters" could be persuaded to actually register for voting, much less be induced to become members of the party.

Good thing there are 19 registered political parties in Canada. We might need to widen our search horizons.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The ship has left Southampton on its way to New York....

IT is interesting that Joyce Murray has a theoretical chance to be the winner of the contest, especially in light of her platform of seeking an unofficial merger with the other "Progressive" parties, and act that would probably result in the extinction of the Liberal Party as a separate entity. 

It is also interesting that the two other candidates who released detailed platforms have attracted so little support from the party membership, which does not bode well considering Canada is entering a period of profound demographic and economic changes. It would be nice to know that the people running for high political office are actually thinking about these things and have some plan to meet these challenges.

Finally it is interesting that so few "supporters" could be persuaded to actually register for voting, much less be induced to become members of the party.

Good thing there are 19 registered political parties in Canada. We might need to widen our search horizons.

I know a bunch of 'non liberals' that registered to vote. They did so thinking they could throw a wrench into the silly system that this party has chosen to elect a leader. I doubt that they are an isolated bunch from a small pocket in Canada.

That's your true 'wildcard'.

 

[a_majoor]

I know a few as well. I had considered doing so myself when it was rumored that Dalton McGuinty was considering a run as party leader, but luckily for my blood pressure, this never happened...

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I know a few as well. I had considered doing so myself when it was rumored that Dalton McGuinty was considering a run as party leader, but luckily for my blood pressure, this never happened...

I would have signed up and voted for him ;D


Just to watch him get eaten alive in the big leagues.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Do not underestimate M. Trudeau. He has, as this Globe and Mail column points out "charm, good hair and a chance." Further, as another Globe and Mail article says, he's very adept at raising money - far, far better than Dion, Ignatieff and Rae.

The questions remain:

    1. Can he raise enough money - and further is money, alone, enough - to counter the attacks that Prime Minister Harper and Opposition Leader Mulcair will unleash in parliament and in the media?

    2. Is charisma, even charisma supported by good hair, enough?

I fear that in 21st century Canada the answer to the second question is: Yes.

 

[jollyjacktar]

I said it before, and I'll say it again.  The Dauphin will be the next PM.  (not that I'd like to see it happen...)

 

[Edward Campbell]

We have discussed many times the notion that the "road back" or "road to power" for the Liberal Party of Canada starts in Quebec and that it is, essentially a three way contest: BQ (or a new Quebec Party) vs. Liberals vs. NDP. Michael de Tandt explores that notion in this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the National Post:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/03/24/michael-den-tandt-justin-trudeaus-is-less-vacuous-than-you-might-think/

Justin Trudeau may be more than just a pretty face

Michael Den Tandt

13/03/24

The Liberal leadership race is over. So let’s move beyond, if such a thing is possible, the now predictable back-and-forth about Justin Trudeau’s hair, celebrity, charisma, vacuity, experience or lack of it. Separate the ideas from the man, and what do you have? What is it worth?

Let’s begin with Quebec, where the Liberals now hold eight seats – compared with five for the Bloc, five for Stephen Harper’s Conservatives, zero for the Greens and 57 for Tom Mulcair’s New Democrats. Trudeau, it is often noted, speaks perfect French, has a power base in Quebec, and intends to try to use that as a launch pad to national power – his first target being Mulcair and his 57 Quebec MPs. Fine. But of what does the power base consist? What will Trudeau say, in the election campaign of 2015, to draw fellow Quebecers into his tent?

In fact, he has been speaking about this for some time – since before he announced for the leadership – and the position is interesting. At the final Grit debate in Montreal, in his closing remarks in French, Trudeau articulated it more forcefully and bluntly than he has in the past. Much is lost in translation. The crux though, is that Canada has been “buying” Quebecers off for the past 30 years; that this pattern is outdated and insulting; and that Quebecers are secure enough now in their culture and language to embrace Canada without calculation or equivocation.

The late Robert Bourassa, who dominated Quebec politics for a generation and coined the term “le federalisme rentable” (federalism that pays) will have been rolling in his grave.

Compare this to what Stephen Harper’s Conservatives say about Quebec: Nothing. Having tried and failed to ingratiate themselves with the “Quebec-as-nation” gambit in 2006, then been laughed out of the province in 2008 by folksinger Michel Rivard’s acerbic video sendup of their cuts to arts funding, the Conservatives have given up on Quebec. Tom Mulcair, however, has much to say: He wants the federal Clarity Act re-written to allow for separation following a referendum vote of 50%, plus one. And he has said, as recently as last year, speaking of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, that “New Democrats will continue to work to ensure that one day it becomes part of a Constitution that includes us all.”

Coincidentally, Quebec’s new Liberal leader, Philippe Couillard, has a similar view. He wants Quebec’s signature on the Constitution by 2017. Now, It does not take a savant to read those tea leaves: Either Parti Quebecois Premier Pauline Marois, with a majority, or Couillard, will be soon be burning up the highway between Quebec City and Ottawa with their lists of urgent demands and grievances in hand. Trudeau, for now, is the only federal politician to have forcefully articulated a position on how Ottawa could respond in the national interest. Harper is too weak in Quebec to break any new ground. Mulcair is too beholden to soft-nationalists in his ranks, and threatened by the Bloc Quebecois, to do much but pander.

Now examine the other major fork in the road facing Canadians, to the west: Resources. The Harper government’s stance amounts to forcefully articulated extractivism: Pull the bitumen and other goodies from the ground as quickly as possible and get them to market. Mulcair is at the opposite end of that discussion. Trudeau has placed himself squarely between the two: “Pipeline, sure, but not there,” he said some time back, in response to Gateway. He’s in favour of Keystone Xl. Saturday in Montreal, Trudeau restated what will be one of his mantras in 2015: Rather than choose between the environment and the economy, embrace both. Coincidentally, that is also the position of the Premier of Alberta and the vast majority of senior executives in the oil patch.

There’s more: Trudeau is the only non-Conservative Canadian politician, except perhaps for NDP rogue Bruce Hyer, now an independent, ever to have said on the record that the federal long-gun-registry was “a failure.” (Though he later, regretfully, backpedalled). That’s not controversial in rural, western and northern Canada: It’s just the truth. Trudeau’s proposed reform of riding nominations – every candidate must win the nomination fair and square, no appointments, no gender-based quotas, no “star’” candidates parachuted in from above – subverts his own party’s long-standing practice. Would it be a good idea for that to become standard practice? By the same token, would it be healthy for Canada if the other two major national party leaders spoke blunt truths to Quebec soft nationalists, or took a balanced, pragmatic approach to resource extraction?

The answer, I think many fair-minded people would agree, is yes. One does not have to personally like or dislike Trudeau to accept this: He has taken some important and clear positions for which there is a constituency in the country. In addition to so-called charisma, it explains why he’s raising so much money.

National Post

Maybe there's more to M. Trudeau than many, me included, have seen.

 

[Infanteer]

Ditto.  If he starts to articulate some good, sound policies, he may become the logical choice for most Canadians for a Conservative brand that, like all parties in power, is getting more stale as the years go by....

 

[Brad Sallows]

>In addition to so-called charisma, it explains why he’s raising so much money.

The "in addition" to charisma is his surname.  There is nothing under the sun that should make anyone believe the people attracted to Trudeau are attracted to "ideas".  Pundits are going to go apesh!t for the next couple of years trying to find more in the candidate than Barbie, but at the end of the day, it's just going to be Barbie.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The Globe and Mail's editorial cartoonist pretty much sums it up:

Reproduced under the fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail

Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/remember-you-are-mortal/article9178812/

 

[Brad Sallows]

"I read Playboy for the articles."

"I follow Trudeau for the ideas."