Losing may be the best thing that ever happened to the Liberals

[jackbourassa]

Assuming that the Tories win a minority, and it looks like the Conservative "surge" (and the whole media as Conservative cheerleader thing is getting tired) is beginning to show signs of retreat, I think that the Liberals losing may be the best thing that ever happened to them. Here's why:

Paul Martin plain and simply sucks as a Liberal leader. Say what you will about Jean Chretien, the dude was an excellent politician. No way someone can get elected that many times, serve as a Member of Parliament for 40 years, hold 7 cabinet portfolios, and be Prime Minister for 10 years after winning three back to back to back MAJORITY governments and not be good. After all, only three other Prime Ministers have served as long: McDonald, Laurier and Mackenzie King. Not bad company.

Paul Martin, and his loyal army of idiots, are delusional. We in Canada have been sold this "Paul Martin is invincible" meme for more than a decade. He was so popular, we were told, that he would win 200+ out of 300 seats, remember that? The truth is that Martin is a stuttering fool. He, and his supporters, hijacked the Liberal agenda for far too long with the sole purpose of getting Martin to the pinnacle of power. His supporters constantly undermined Chretien, believing the great Martin to be "invincible." They thought putting a separatist (Jean Lapierre) in charge in Quebec would win us all these Quebec seats. This is triangulation run amok.

Far from being "invincible," Martin turned out to be an insecure and arrogant little prick. He quashed any dissent from within the ranks, not because he had any grand agenda (other than more tax credits for this or that), but because he was so insecure in his own position. He came to power, by bullying other big-named Liberals out of the race. By outraising them with massive infusions of corporate cash. By hijacking all the organizers. By taking over all the riding Associations. By replacing them in Cabinet and getting rid of them all together from Parliament. Then appointing weaker backbenchers, whose loyalty was to him and not the Liberal members or Canadian people. I guess he didn't want a strong Minister there who could constantly challenge his authority, the way he had with Chretien.

So instead we are left with Martin, and Martin alone. What makes Martin so great? What gives Martin such providence? He was a good finance Minister who balanced the books, yes. But we have had two other Finance Ministers who have balanced the books (Goodale, Manley). What else? He ran for the leadership in 1990 and lost badly to Chretien (the source of the "feud"). He inherited a majority goverment (173 seats) and turned it into a minority of 135 in 2004. Now, he's going to lose us this election.

Martin's problem stems from his character. He is a grossly insecure man. That is why he stutters. That is why he tries to be all things to all people, and in the process ends up alienating everyone. He flip flops constantly. He stands for nothing other than keeping himself at the helm. He is completely inarticulate and resorts to bullying and negativity to get his way, like a petulant child. I'm sure when this is all over and Martin goes back to playing corporate boat captain, he'll blame Chretien for the loss. Meanwhile, never acknowledging his own deficiencies as a leader.

Remember when Martin promised to fix the "democratic deficit?" Personally, I thought that to mean that he was going to open up Parliament and give the people more of a say. But instead he tightened ranks and vested even more control in the PMO. And don't get me started on this group of "yes, men" Martin surrounds himself with. People so grossly out of touch with reality, that they thought abandoning rebuilding in Quebec for expanding into the west was a good idea. These people are the Canadian version of the DLC - but on crack. Now we are getting killed in Quebec and the West. Nice going guys. Why? Because they don't listen to anyone else. They think they are the smartest guys in the room, but are really the most inept. They surround themselves with people who agree with them and get rid of all those who don't. This was a recipe for disaster from the start. Now in this election, they seem genuinely shocked that people don't think they're as great as they think themselves to be.

THAT'S THE F***ING PROBLEM!!!

So what does this all mean for us Liberals? The Liberals will lose big in Quebec. Getting rid of Martin, LaPierre, Pettigrew and all his other idiots there. Most of Martin's supporters in Ontario look like they will go down to defeat, too. The West? Well, that was always a pipedream. McLellan and Goodale will probably be gone as well. Which means that Martin and his whole regime will be tossed out. The one good thing about Martin's insecure approach is that there is no successor to him once he is gone. Which leaves the upcoming Liberal race in the Spring wide open.

Next, we have to take back the Liberal Executive Committee. Get rid of all the Martin ass kissers there. The riding association Presidents et al. have to go as well. We all have to become active to retake these Associations.

We can rebuild from the ground up. Which is why I believe that if we lose to a Conservative minority it will be a good thing for us. We can get a new leader in there. Personally, i'm in favour of Brian Tobin taking over. He was one of the original RAT PACK (who vigerously opposed Mulroney in the 1980s - so we know he's fiesty in opposition), he was a popular minister of Fishing and later Industry, who had a famous showdown with Spanish boats overfishing in our seas, and he organized that huge rally in Montreal when things looked darkest during the 1995 Quebec separation referendum (this earned him the nickname Captain Canada), he went on to become a two-term Premier of Newfoundland, then came back to become Chretien's last deputy Prime Minister. He's still young (in his 40s), has some gravitas to him and can still kick some ass. But someone else may emerge.

WE MUST REBUILD IN QUEBEC. Without Quebec we're nothing. Here's the opportunity for us. If Harper wins a minority government, he'll need the Bloc Quebecois to govern. Like Napoleon at Austerlitz, our next leaders job will be to divide and conquer. The Bloc and the Conservatives may currently share a strong desire to get rid of the Liberals. But once in office, and without Liberals to kick around anymore, they will have very little else in common. The Bloc are NDP-like ideologues. The Conservative's most certainly are not. We have to tie them together. This is how we will destroy the Bloc in Quebec. And the Conservatives everywhere else. Every time some Conservative backbencher says something crazy: we tie it to the Bloc in Quebec. Every time the Conservatives want to cut some program and cut taxes for the rich, we tie it to the Bloc in Quebec. Every time the Conservatives do some favour for one of their corporate buddies on Bay Street, we tie it to the Bloc. Every time Harper and the Conservatives have a love fest with Bush and the Republicans, we tie it to the Bloc. When Harper sells us out on Softwood Lumber, we tie it to the Bloc. And so on...

Our next leaders second job will be to come up with new, fresh, progressive ideas. New fresh faces. A whole new fresh agenda.

NEW LIBERALS FOR A NEW CANADA that should be our slogan. Then we turn the House against the minority conservatives and we elect ourselves back in. This isn't the end of the world guys. Unless Harper wins a majority, I think we might be okay. We'll be out of office for a year or so, but after that we'll be back stronger than ever.

I'm sorry I went on like that, but I just had to rant.

[CHIMO]

1. Thanks for The Rant

Much of what you say seems to be true. And truer, still seems to be the sole purpose is to retain power.

The threat, as I see it, is a return to Smiling Eyes type of decisions. Many things can be accomplished by cabinet that would affect our way of life.

So I guess in short, until Quebec wishes to to part of Canada they will be part of North America. And until corporations don't decide our future we will follow the easiest path.

[Pierre Trudeau]

2. good summary

I would have to concur with much of what you say.

It's true, many (myself included) have never forgiven Martin for stabbing Chretien in the back (or I guess the front?).

The return of Brian Tobin & other stalwarts snubbed by team Martin would be good, but the party also needs an infusion of fresh blood.

AND this is not going to be like 1979 (anyone remember PM Clark?). There will be no Trudeau-like comeback in the offing for Martin. Plus, we can only hope that a Harper minority stumbles out of the starting gate as badly as Joe Clark's did. But I doubt it, they've been very canny throughout the campaign.

NOR do I expect this will be like 1984 (Harper pulls a Mulroney sweep)... although the parallels are striking: an anglophone Liberal leader succeeds the popular francophone one and is promptly tossed out of office by a surging conservative leader who has Quebec's support.

PERHAPS it will be a bit like 1957: Diefenbaker wins his first minority after a long period of Liberal rule (King & St. Laurent for 22 years). Of course, the NDP didn't exist at the time, but its predecessor, the CCF, did. The cautionary tale, of course, is that Diefenbaker was returned with a record majority the following year. So we want to be on guard for that. On the plus side, Dief didn't have the Bloc to contend with, only his own unpredictability.

Harper is no Chief. He resembles former Ontario premier Mike Harris more than anyone else I can think of in the Canadian political landscape.

[IntravenousDemilo]

3. Hubris has its "reward"

and Paul Martin is finding that out the hard way. Convinced that he naturally deserved to be Prime Minister, he sought out the chalice of power with a single-minded obsession, only to find it poisoned.

[Hoping4Change]

4. Great rant. You are right on the mark.

I would add that Martin and his coterie are delusional in the way CEOs of large corporations are delusional believing as they do in the empty platitudes of corporate speak, believing that consultants like Ernscliffe possess something akin to a third eye.

[Darth_Kitten]

5. Yes, let's just hand Harper the keys to power....

:eyes:

[jackbourassa]

6. I'm not handing Harper anything...

I'll vote Liberal or NDP (haven't decided). But it's time some Martinites stopped blaming the messenger. I was just explaining the reality of the situation. And the reality is that Martin has screwed up royally.

Martin was the one who started this war within the party. He started it because he thought himself to be unbeatable. All he accomplished however, was to alienate many Liberals.

Now he's going to lose. Lesson here? Keep the base happy or suffer the consequences.

I'm going to tell you all a true story.

I was always a hard-core Liberal. I've voted Liberal ever since I was allowed to vote. I've worked on 5 different Liberal campaigns. I was a member of my local riding association (on the board of directors). I've attended two party policy conventions and was very active in the workshops. I was Vice President of the Young Liberal group at my University (Planning and Communications) and my senior year was President. I have always voted for the Liberal Party ---- NO EXCEPTIONS. Until now.

Why? Because over time I began to realize what shits some of these people actually are. One day, I made the mistake of asking a senior regional organizer, whether the central party actually cared about what its members thought? Since they were always willing to accept people open arms when they needed scrutineers or volunteers for door-to-door or telephone canvassing, But whenever I presented my own opinions - they were either ignored or I was attacked by the Riding Presidents, Regional Organizers. Once, when I suggested that the party would lose support if it continued like this - the latter even said to me (a direct quote): "Well, who are you going to vote for? So it doesn't matter if the Liberals listen to you. Since you'll vote for them anyway."

That's how they get you. "Do as we say and shut up." My riding association President was such an ass too. He was also very involved in the local Chamber of Commerce - so he was interested in raising money. He was never very good at it. But that was his focus. I once suggested that we take the names from the voters lists (who we had contacted during the last election - we had about 10,000 people who we identified as Liberal supporters), and have a membership drive. The logic being that if we signed up 1,500 to 2,500 people then we would raise $15,000 to $25,000 (assuming they paid their $10.00 membership fee). But this was shot down, why? Because the "inner circle" of the riding association would then "lose control" of the association, since someone new might challenge them or something. That's the way they think. They are not interested in raising our profile or expanding our base - their primary interest is keeping themselves in control. When I and a group of local Liberals staged a media event with local unions, teachers, nurses, etc. Our local association President cancelled it at the last moment: why? See above. When I suggested recruiting my unversity bretheren to help out, again I was shot down. I was told, "they are too independant."

Then when I was President of the UW Young Liberals in 2001-2002, we had an influx of new members come in and take over the association. Their first move was to get rid of everyone in leadership positions (I was graduating so it didn't really affect me too much). But a lot of my friends lost their positions. It later became known that these "new" members were Martin supporters, since the Leadership race was about to start. Part of his heavy handed strategy I described in my original post. But here's the funny thing: we were all Martin supporters at the time.

These are just some of the ways the Liberal Party alienated its own, from my own experience. Now I'm not involved at all.

So the idea that i'm just going to support these people - to keep Harper from winning - is an insult to me given everything I know. Especially given the fact that I think Harper will only win a minority, and we will have the chance to get rid of Martin and his regime and replace them with better people.

[Minstrel Boy]

8. Thanks for that.

The arrogance of the Martin team has been astounding. They've flopped in part because they cleaned house of the Chretien loyalists who knew how to campaign. The general election has been a continuation of the party's internal warfare. It's a bizarre spectacle.

Someone wrote that Martin and the Prime Ministership is like a dog that chased a car and caught it, then didn't know what to do with it. When he was running for the leadership, and considered the Golden Boy, I thought he had the smell of John Turner's failure about him. (Though I much prefer Turner to Martin.) Soon after taking office he said in an interview that he "planned" on serving 10 years before retiring. Sentiments like that were just begging for a humbling.

[jackbourassa]

10. Like I wrote...Martin and his supporters are delusional

They always have been.

[Darth_Kitten]

12. Uh, no, not everyone...

:(

I'll support him but he's not my favourite kind of leader. I'll take him over Harper though.

[Darth_Kitten]

11. Good, give em hell!

:D

[Mother Jones]

14. Thanks

I, too, appreciate that you shared this.


I found it fascinating (and surprising) that people in my local Liberal candidate's office were openly talking about how we needed this candidate in office to keep an eye on Martin. No one seemed to like him at all, which I get, but very surprising that it was so out in the open. Almost matter-of-factly.

[Hoping4Change]

7. Hardly. I am going to vote strategically in my riding. I going to vote

for whomever has a chance to beat the neocon. In Trinity-Spadina at the moment it looks like Chow has a better chance than Ianno.

[Telly Savalas]

18. The Conservative candidate will place a distant third in Trinity-Spadina?

T'aint it so?

[jackbourassa]

20. Why do you all think that most Libs fell for Martin?

It seems stupid now to look back and think that Martin was invincible given how bad he has actually been.

[V. Kid]

9. Ideas are great, but what you need is someone to follow through...

...like a Trudeau, more fiscally responsible of course, but the situation is diffrent. Or a Pearson, another person who actually did something.

I'll admit I was never a Liberal supporter, partially because I'm a westerner, and they've mostly ignored the West, or were somewhat hostile, and then with their strategy last election actually helped elect more Conservatives out here. And because of Gordon Campbell, who has plenty of federal Liberals supporting him. But, I could easily respect other Liberals like Lloyd Axeworthy for instance, who actually seemed to care, and know what they were doing. The main problem with Martin was like you say, he wanted to be all things to all people, but in the process ended up being nothing. I remember seeing an interview, where he kept saying how this and that were "absolute priorities", well PMPM which one is it? You can't say everything is an absolute priority, you have to pick a few, or else your attention gets devided, you look weak, and you end up doing nothing in the end.

[TrogL]

13. If Annie gets her usual landslide

and there's a leadership review, she's a shoe-in for Prime Minister.

She's touched all the bases and kept her nose clean.

[jackbourassa]

15. Anne McLellan??? NO WAY!!!!!

There is no way she becomes the next leader. Does she even speak French? I doubt she even wins her riding.

I keep hearing that the Martinites are now looking to Frank McKenna as their new saviour. That the Martinites support him is enough for me not to.

[Pierre Trudeau]

16. a correction, by the way...

jackbourassa, you wrote:

After all, only three other Prime Ministers have served as long : McDonald, Laurier and Mackenzie King.

Ummm, I think you are forgetting someone, n'est-ce pas??? ;)

[Monkeybumper]

17. Aurora / Newmarket

My dilemma is worst then most , how I do I bring my self to vote for Stronach ?

[jackbourassa]

19. Trudeau, Pierre never won three back to back to back majorities

Trudeau won a majority (1968) a minority (1972), a second majority (1974), lost a minority (1979) then came back and won a majority (1980).

But he did serve as long as Prime Minister. My apologies.