Friday, October 31, 2008

It's Official...Kinsella is Supporting Dominic Leblanc

...or so says the voters.

Voters put Leblanc over the top at 24% or 83 votes, ahead of Michael Ignatieff and John Manley at 74 votes and 73 votes respectively.

Bob Rae finished dead last, behind "other", with only 15 votes.

My gut tells me that Mr. Kinsella will be endorsing Ignatieff. Especially with the Ignatieff additions of Pollara's Don Guy and the Quebec general Marc-Andre Blanchard.

But, on the other hand, does Ignatieff meet Warren's own sniff test:

Who will win the leadership race? I dunno, and if I have a preference — and I do — I’m keeping it between me and my priest, for now. I will say, however, that the next Liberal leader needs to meet certain basic criteria. He or she needs to have a demonstrated ability to fundraise for the Liberal Party, now about $3-million in debt (which is less than the debt’s ever been after any other Liberal loss, by the by). Key to that is having no personal debt from the last Liberal race. You can’t very well position yourself as a great fundraiser if you still carry a lot of personal debt, can you?

He or she needs to have a record of knowing how to balance the books — of knowing why prudent fiscal management is crucial, particularly in times like these. He or she needs to be able to inspire and unite Canadians and Liberals. He or she needs to TAKE THE LIBERAL PARTY BACK TO THE CENTRE of the spectrum, where all the votes are. There’s a reason why the Conservatives have been (falsely) attempting to depict themselves as centrists — they know that is the only way they can ever hope to win a majority. So why should the Liberal Party of Canada stick on the far left, competing for 25 per cent of the votes with the NDP, the Greens, and the Bloc? Tried that, didn’t get a T-shirt. Back to the Liberal centre!

1. Demonstrated ability to raise money. While it's true Michael and Bob were able to pay off their past leadership debts, isn't it really the people behind the candidates that raise the money?

2. Demonstration of prudent fiscal management. I don't know how Dominic, Michael or Bob caould meet this criteria. David, however, has a degree from the London School of Economics and John Manley was Deputy PM under one of the most prudent governments in Canadian history.

3. He or she needs to be able to inspire and unite Canadians and Liberals. I don't know about all Canadians, but there is certainly a large amount of Liberals still blaming Martin/Chretien and now Ignatieff and Rae for a largely ununited party. To that end, David, John or Dominic fit the bill a little better.

Well, Michael did run a leadership with speeches that included the words, "We have to be the party of the large centre". Bob? Not so much. Manley? Centre right. David and Dom? They're listening to the voices of the party.

So there you have it. Clear as mud.

UPDATE: I've already stated I believed Warren won't be on Dominic's campaign.


Jamie Callingham said...

Jim, Warren did reveal to a bunch of real estate peope who he supported. I hear you might have some connections in that business.

James Curran said...

I haven't even been able to find out where this so-called panel tooke place and the purpose thereof.

RuralSandi said...

The balancing of books is the part that confuses me.

I don't see that any of the possible candidates have proven they have balanced any books - does anyone know who that might be?

James Curran said...

Only Manley. Perhaps McGuinty of the if-come because he is a graduate of London School of Economics.

Blazing Cat Fur said...

Anyone who accepts the Lying Jackals endoresment deserves to lose.