Sunday, November 02, 2008

Neither Rae nor Ignatieff.

Neither Bob Rae nor Michael Ignatieff will win this leadership race without one throwing their support behind the other at some point between now and the final ballot.

We all saw this story play out in December of 2006. The two candidates ended up dividing the delegates and forced the "anyone but" movements that played out on the convention floor. When Ray was forced off after the 3rd ballot, and released his delegates instead of walking over to MI, he left it wide open for Dion to be crowned.

MI received 1412 delegate votes after the 1st ballot. over the next 3 ballots, he only managed to increase his tally by 662 of the possible 3403 delegates that split their vote between Hall Findlay, Volpe, Brison, Dryden, Kennedy, Dion and Rae. ONLY 662 of a possible 3403. Similarly, Rae only managed to increase his count by only 398 from ballot 1 to ballot 3. What makes anyone think it will be any different this time? Assuming that MI goes into the convention with a lead after the 1st ballot, there would likely be those who would want to support Rae on a 2nd ballot to thwart MI and we would be right back where we started.

What we need here is a clear front runner. A front runner who can engage a broader spectrum of delegates so as to ward off a polarized delegation. We need a candidate other than Rae and Ignatieff, who would otherwise be a first choice if the two were not in this race to begin with.

Rae and Ignatieff offer a tremendous amount to this debate. They would both elevate the Liberal party and offer a tangible opportunity to beat Harper in four years. That they elevate the party for different reasons is good for the debate. That they do so in relatively equal measure is divisive.


MississaugaPeter said...

You are right.

We do need a strong third alternative.

Someone who has a track record of being the underdog, and through hard work, innovation, and listening, has taken seats away from the NDP twice and the Conservatives once.

Anonymous said...

I predict Manley will run and Kennedy won't.

Anonymous said...

One pulls from left of centre , the other right. Neither can draw from both sides.

Anonymous said...


We can all choose between Rae and Iggy.

MississaugaPeter said...

Anon 10:46

Gerard can draw from both.

"In May 1996 the activist ran in the provincial by-election in Toronto's York-South Weston riding after former Premier Bob Rae resigned as leader of the New Democratic Party (NDP). He defeated the NDP's Dennis Miller and claimed the riding for the Liberals for the first time since it was established in 1925."

That's right - Harvard educated, present Toronto mayor Dennis Miller, lost to Gerard in a riding that was NDP for over 60 years!

Underestimated in his second election, he took from the right in 1999...

...when he took one from the Conservatives.

Underestimated in his fourth election, he took from the left in 2008...

...when he took one from the NDP.

Name any other young gun who in 4 elections as a LIBERAL, has overcome such challenges from both the left and right. How did he do it? Because he is in the centre and draws from both the left and right.

Anonymous said...

Kennedy is the one. He is a natural leader to all of us who take the time to look at what the liberal party needs now. He has been saying it loud and clear RENEWAL . His time has come.

Anonymous said...

Kennedy kool-aid drinkers are nuts. He is responsible for the Dion Debacle.
There is a reason the Rae and Iggy are the top two contenders for the job. Read up on them either one would save the party.
Kennedy responsible for election, about that Gerard you did absolutely nothing! Very overrated and underqualified poser!