Apolitical Staples

“Now don’t get me started on Bob Rae because I just don’t see it happening but I do see a candidate coming from the centre-left. If the delegates break well this could easily be Stephane Dion.”

For political animals (if you’re reading this, that means you) delegated conventions are highly entertaining (not necessarily democratic, though.) If this became a one member, one vote contest at least 6 candidates would disappear immediately. Dion would be one of them. This delegate process gives Dion a chance and I think, ultimately will kill Ignatieff’s chances of becoming leader.

When Brison and Bevilacqua are the right wing of your party, obviously there is little room for growth in delegate support for Ignatieff. If Ignatieff doesn’t win by the 3rd ballot, he’s finished. UNLESS, somehow he can get a final ballot contest between himself and Rae, he’s done.

Somehow, Dion or Dryden or Kennedy have to climb into second place. Unfortunately for them they’re drinking from the same political watering hole (money). This is where the lack of memberships and money has real consequences. The watering hole has shrunk. Their campaigns are being run on a shoestring budget. Can they even make it to December? I mean somebody has to pay for the hospitality suite at the convention.

Bob Rae, at least, has the Power Corp money on his side. He will be there until the bitter end.

Last post was mine. Sorry.

Never mind that Ignatieff’s position on Afghanistan has absolutely nothing to do with his place in the fictional left-right dichotomy.

The reason people say Ignatieff is centre-right is because of his views on Afghanistan, Iraq, and foreign policy in general. Factor this out and you most certainly have a centre-left candidate.

I would argue that Ignatieff is not centre-right in the least in his foreign policy. He believes that states should intervene to protect people in other states when their government can’t or won’t. I fail to see how this is in any way rightwing. He is deemed a hawk because he wants to exercise “muscular multilateralism”. Last I checked, you need a military to provide security, save people from genocidal governments, and create a secure environment for development, the creation of democracy, and the advancement of human rights. There is nothing conservative about that. The conservative belief would be that nations should invade other nations if it is in their strategic interests. Human rights vs. military or economic interests. Which is more conservative?

Let’s just say that it is liberal - though not Liberal because it is no longer “progressive”.

How many points do I get in buzzword bingo?

The combined vote of those voters who did not vote Conservative was in the mid-60’s. As Greg asserts, it can be argued Martin was a centre-right candidate. It would reason that the vote the Liberals need to pick up is from the NDP - ergo the reason why you saw the Liberals attacking the NDP in Parliament almost as much as the Tories in the early-going.

It would thus stand to reason that a centre-left candidate is whats needed to have the best chance of beating Harper.. tho I will admit that the Sponsorship Scandal was a big variable in the last election and so it may have skewed the perception of things.