Via Inkless Wells, La Presse columnist Michael Auger weighs in on yesterdays’ Liberal leadership debate and he says there were only three candidates on the stage that have what it takes to lead a G8 country: Stephane Dion, Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae.
Auger writes money and organization aside, these three are the only ones that have shown they have the policy heft, the ideas and leadership needed to lead the country.
The article is in French, but if you run it through the Babel Fish translator you can get the gist.
Sunday, June 18, 2006
Narrowing the field: Dion, Rae and Ignatieff
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Those 3 were the ones I viewed as "real" contenders. I say Ignatieff (1st), Rae (2nd - close to Iggy), Dion (3rd). In the end, it will probably be Ignatieff and Rae squaring off. Then Libs will need to decide on someone who has past political involvement (whether we view it as good or bad), or a fresh face...
My guess is that Dion will emerge victorious.
Yes, right you are, that should have read "LEAD a G8 country", and now does. For the record, I think all of them are capable of LEAVING a G8 country. It's not as complicated as you might think. :)
Uggh. I sure hope not.
Ignatieff - Pro-war ex-pat (YUCK!)
Rae - Seen as the most disastrous premier in the history of the country (YUCK!)
Dion - Part of the old guard--but miles ahead of the other two (YUCK!)
I agree Rae has media hype but I don't think he has grassroots support, although his people are working hard. He's trying to diferentiate himself to position himself as the anti-Ignatieff, anticipating an anyone but Iggy movement, but I don't think it will work.
I think Ignatieff, Kennedy and Dion will be the final three. Ignatieff is a polarizing figure, so it will be interesting to see how the support of the others divides amongst them, and if there is an anti-Iggy movement where those people go.
I think Dryden has the heft and policy and credentials to fit in that list. I think he has a better shot of winning in the end then Rae.
I would say that Dion is the sentimental favorite, I am not supporting him but I like the guy and I think that is a pretty general feeling. Taking a poke a Dion is probably a convention growth limiting move.
Is it just me or are the Kennedy folks a little edgy and aggresive. They kinda scare me, sort of all Paul Martin tactics and stuff, if you are not with us you are against us kinda language.
I think Rae is all air war and no ground game, He will be a lot weaker then we think.
You could be right about Dion, Rae and ignatieff as the top three on the first ballot. But - and please correct me if I'm wrong - don't the rules have the bottom feeder dropping off each ballot?
If so, you want to consider whose delegates will go where, as much as determining the top 3.
I'm supporting Brison because he has not only the best ideas, but he knows how to achieve those goals. That said, however, bloggers don't seem to be supporting him in large numbers. I would think Brison's delegates might go to Stephane Dion if he (Brison) were on the bottom - which he won't be at the beginning! I can't see them going to Iggy, but what do I know? I sure wouldn't!
We all think we know who will be in the bottom 4-5, so where will their votes go??
Next where will the delegates to the candidates in the middle of the pack go?
And when will they start going?
Penny, I believe the last place candidate is automatically dropped off (and potentially anyone not meeting a certain threshold of support maybe? i'm not sure), and of course anyone can chose to drop at any time.
I want to avoid handicapping the potential horse race at this point and start predicting whose support will go where at this point, I think it's better to focus on policy right now. But I will say that I think Dion has very good potential to build support on subsequent ballots.
I like Dion a lot!! I suppose what got me thinking about votes moving around was comments like "in the end, it will probably be Ignatieff and Rae... or "Dion will emerge victorious" "Kennedy and Iggs will be at the last ballot", "Iggy and Dion" and "Ignatieff, Kennedy and Dion will be the final three."
Unless the 6 or 7 candidates below those big three garner very few votes, don't you think things could change in mid-balloting?
I think any one of the bloggers here could be right about the first ballot.
Anything can happen. In the NDP race (two races ago) Svend had more votes than Alexa on the first ballot, but dropped out to support her because he knew he couldn't build his support and she would win in the end.
This race clearly will go multiple ballots. Certaintly quite a few will drop-off on the first ballot, and where they go will be interesting. That's why a candidate's ability to grow their support on subsequent ballots is so important. Leading on the first ballot won't mean anything if that candidate peaks there. You need a good showing on the first ballot, but second choice support is also needed to win.
Post a Comment