Monday, February 20, 2006

Unsure Leads Liberal Race

According to a recent SES poll of Ontario voters here are the leading contenders to take over the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada:

Unsure 28%

Ken Dryden 14%

Bob Rae 12%

Michael Ignatieff 12%

Belinda Stronach 11%

Frank McKenna 7%

Brian Tobin 7%

Anne McLellan 4%

Joe Volpe 3%

Martin Cauchon 1%

Other 2%

To me this list makes perfect sense --Unsure should be the leading candidate by a wide margin.

After all the Liberals are unsure about how to make government honest; they are unsure about how to repair relations with the United States; they are unsure about how they are going to win votes in Quebec.

So Unsure should win the leadership race in a walk.

But watch out for the dark horse candidate: Other.

6 comments:

Clinton P. Desveaux said...

Something interesting for you over at my blog. PEI could be a fun place in the not to distant future for those of us who enjoy economic and social liberty

Miles Lunn said...

They've no doubt lost all top tier candidates. But this might be a good thing since part of the problem with Martin is it was crowing of the leader rather than a genuine race. I am no fan of Pierre Trudeau but going into the 1968 leadership race there was no front runner, so this generated more public interest.

As for improving Canada-US Relations, I put the blame on the Bush administration for the deterioriating relations. Lets wait until Bush is gone before trying to improve relations with the US. We've survived okay over the last few years so we can survive another few years under strained relations. Besides lets focus on strenghthening our ties with the EU, China, Japan, and India so we can diversify our trade and be less reliant on the US.

Anonymous said...

Yes, let's blame Bush for the stupidity of the Liberals, blame Bush for the ice storm in Ontario, blame Bush for the Tsunami in Indonesia, blame Bush for the landslides in the Philippines, blame Bush for the Mohammed Cartoons, should I go on to blame Bush for everything ? Liberals you never learned a thing about the past election !!! You remain as arrogant and as self righteous as ever !!! Hurray for Unsure and Other.. They will make GREAT Liberal Party leaders of the future , most deserved for a directionless political entity!!!!

Miles Lunn said...

Anonymous - the Liberals lost over corruption, desire for change, and arrogance, not anti-Americanism. The decision not participate in the Iraq War and BMD were amongst the most popular decisions the Liberals made. If anything they would have lost even more badly had they supported the War in Iraq and BMD. Besides Bush's values and America's values are radically different than Canada's. The Canadian government must represent Canada and its values and if they are at odd with the Americans then too bad. We have our values and if they don't like them, tough!!

I am generally supportive of less government and probably would have gone Conservative if they dropped the social conservatism and pro-American attitudes.

Matt said...

Miles, Bill Graham supported BMD, and Paul Martin supported the Iraq War.

Concerning our neighbours to the south, this is something you and many other Liberals don't understand.
The Conservatives aren't Pro-American. They're Pro-Canadian. If they were Pro-American, they'd have lost the last election.

The Liberal Party is (or acted during the election) Anti-American. In contrast, your fallacious argument is that anyone who doesn't share your views MUST be Pro-American.

Miles Lunn said...

Matt - Bill Graham did support BMD, but the overwhelming majority of members in his caucus opposed it. Paul Martin did not support the War in Iraq. This is a myth that has been floating around for some time but completely false. Former defence minister David Pratt supported the War in Iraq, but not Martin. Paul Martin voted on three separate motions against Canadian support for the War in Iraq, while David Pratt was either absent or abstained on all three. Paul Martin did support BMD although I believe with great reluctance and I think he did more to appease the right wing of the Liberal Party who wanted better relations with the US. Whenever he spoke in favour of BMD in the past, he came across as feeling uncomfortable with his views

The Conservatives maybe Pro-Canadian according to you, but being pro-Canadian means standing up for the values Canada stands for. Pre-emptive war, ripping up international treaties, and bullying smaller nations runs counter to the foreign policy of every past government both Liberal and Conservative. Opposing the War in Iraq and BMD is not anti-American, it is about defending our values. If your view is that we should just blindly follow the Americans, then we might as well become a 51st state. We have our values they have their values and we as nation must be true to ourselves. We will stand for our values and if they coincide with the Americans that is fine by me, but if at odds with the Americans that is also fine by me.

BTW here in BC, anti-Americanism runs especially strong, which may explain why you guys lost seats here and the Liberals had a net gain of one seat, despite losses elsewhere and gains for the Tories elsewhere. Many of our people have lost their jobs due to the Softwood Lumber which has hit BC hard so we are in no mood to be nice to the Americans since they haven't been nice to us. If they treated us better, we would treat them better. The only reason BC's economy is doing so well is high commodity prices as well as strong fiscal discipline by the Campbell government. If it weren't for the softwood lumber dispute, we would probably be having an even bigger boom here in BC.