2011 Canadian Election Thread - Page 237 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

calculoso · 05-05-2011, 05:14 PM

Ignatieff has new job already...

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics.../18108686.html

Quote:

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff has landed a new job teaching at the University of Toronto after leading his party to an historic electoral disaster.

The university announced Thursday that Ignatieff has accepted a position as senior resident of Massey College, where he will teach law, global affairs, policy and governance and political science.

Slava · 05-05-2011, 05:22 PM

Guess he wasn't just visiting after all.

zamler · 05-05-2011, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slava

Guess he wasn't just visiting after all.

So then what was he doing? Took a part time job as a politician, and when that didn't pan out, promptly quit and went back to his regular gig.

Slava · 05-05-2011, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

So then what was he doing? Took a part time job as a politician, and when that didn't pan out, promptly quit and went back to his regular gig.

The knock was that he was in the US? Did you expect him never to work again just because he used to be elected? Quite a few posts in this thread say that he would go back to Boston...

Ark2 · 05-05-2011, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

So then what was he doing? Took a part time job as a politician, and when that didn't pan out, promptly quit and went back to his regular gig.

So? A man's got to make a living. No sense in dwelling on defeat.

zamler · 05-05-2011, 05:50 PM

I have no problem with him taking that job, in fact I applaud it. That is what he is good at, I respect that. I was trying to make the point that he should have never entered politics in the first place, he's just not good at it, let alone qualified to become PM.

It makes me question his dedication as a politician, for example Harper said he fully expects to become Prime Minister of Canada, and he did just that. And it was not by giving up so easily.

Slava · 05-05-2011, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

I have no problem with him taking that job, in fact I applaud it. That is what he is good at, I respect that. I was trying to make the point that he should have never entered politics in the first place, he's just not good at it, let alone qualified to become PM.

It makes me question his dedication as a politician, for example Harper said he fully expects to become Prime Minister of Canada, and he did just that. And it was not by giving up so easily.

Well the guy didn't get elected, so I suppose he could either collect EI or welfare (I know that would delight you!), or get a job. He gets a job and apparently you figure he should lead the party sitting in the press gallery or watching CPAC?

OldDutch · 05-05-2011, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

I have no problem with him taking that job, in fact I applaud it. That is what he is good at, I respect that. I was trying to make the point that he should have never entered politics in the first place, he's just not good at it, let alone qualified to become PM.

It makes me question his dedication as a politician, for example Harper said he fully expects to become Prime Minister of Canada, and he did just that. And it was not by giving up so easily.

How was he to know unless he tried? Is there some magic ball or computer program he could have checked before he ran?

That is why people run for elected office, to try and make a difference. He failed and moved on. However, to suggest he never try at all is absurd.

The man has pedigree, he is educated, has good connections, and brings his own ideas to the table. You may not think he would make a good PM, but I do for the reasons I stated.

I am really sick of the Con stance that the only people that should run are Harper neo-cons. The rest are aloof communists.

getbak · 05-05-2011, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

It was quite the turnip truck Preston Manning drove to Ottawa back then.

Indeed. At least Layton has the advantage of most of his previous caucus being re-elected (I think they only lost two previously-held ridings and had one incumbent not run), so the really green newcomers can be kept out of the spotlight.

When Reform went to Ottawa, they were pretty much all new MPs.

zamler · 05-05-2011, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldDutch

How was he to know unless he tried? Is there some magic ball or computer program he could have checked before he ran?

That is why people run for elected office, to try and make a difference. He failed and moved on. However, to suggest he never try at all is absurd.

The man has pedigree, he is educated, has good connections, and brings his own ideas to the table. You may not think he would make a good PM, but I do for the reasons I stated.

I am really sick of the Con stance that the only people that should run are Harper neo-cons. The rest are aloof communists.

I really twisted way of thinking. The fact that he gave it a go, failed, then promptly quite politics makes me question his resolve. What was he in it for? Why did he not continue on in some capacity with the Liberal party? The fact is he failed, and promptly bailed out, a man of convenience.

FiftyBelow · 05-05-2011, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiger

That is the problem I have with the Canadian system. The local representation doesn't really have much say at all. With the party whip you are only voting for the leader.

But that being said, if I was a MP I wouldn't complain about the system at all.

Not just a Canadian weakness but an inherent drawback of the Westminster model. In reality, party discipline is necessary for parliamentary government to function. Without it, there would be so much inefficiency during debates, committees, and voting, that significant policy would not be developed. People complain now about how much they hate frequent elections, but we'd have a way higher frequency of them if MPs ignored party discipline.

Ark2 · 05-05-2011, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

I really twisted way of thinking. The fact that he gave it a go, failed, then promptly quite politics makes me question his resolve. What was he in it for? Why did he not continue on in some capacity with the Liberal party? The fact is he failed, and promptly bailed out, a man of convenience.

I'm pretty sure he was pushed out. Had he won his riding, I have no doubt that he would have stuck it out as an MP for at least a couple of years.

getbak · 05-05-2011, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

I really twisted way of thinking. The fact that he gave it a go, failed, then promptly quite politics makes me question his resolve. What was he in it for? Why did he not continue on in some capacity with the Liberal party? The fact is he failed, and promptly bailed out, a man of convenience.

He lost his seat, what else was he supposed to do?

I'd agree with what you're saying if he had won his own seat and still left office to take a teaching job. As it stands, he doesn't have a job in politics to continue in. A leader without a seat in the House is pretty useless and it was pretty obvious he wasn't going to be the man to lead the Liberals into the next election in 4 and a half years.

zamler · 05-05-2011, 06:36 PM

I see your point.

Resolute 14 · 05-05-2011, 06:37 PM

In marginally related news, a British referendum today on whether to abandon FPTP in favour of a form of STV is heading to defeat: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/...876/story.html

OldDutch · 05-05-2011, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

I really twisted way of thinking. The fact that he gave it a go, failed, then promptly quite politics makes me question his resolve. What was he in it for? Why did he not continue on in some capacity with the Liberal party? The fact is he failed, and promptly bailed out, a man of convenience.

There are a few factors at play here. First off the man led the Liberals to their worst defeat in at least 50 years. He also lost his seat. That alone is the kiss of death to his political career. No one would elect him after this election.

As for an advisory role in the Liberal party, what is he going to do? The man said it himself he is an educator first. So instead of wasting his time in a useless advisory role, he is going to help educate Canada's future. Not US kids but Canadian.

He was brought in to be the messiah to the Liberal party. However it back fired for many reasons, some his fault, others not. Bottom line is that the Liberal party cannot move on and regroup with him there. He was a victim in part to bad timing, but regardless he has the image of everything wrong with the party. So he is moving on and indirectly helping the party refocus.

Kybosh · 05-05-2011, 07:11 PM

I don't have a problem with Ignatieff snapping up an academic gig right after the election. U of T is a good school and Ignatieff (contrary to what some people seem to believe) really is an academic genius in political science and global relations. He's a smart cookie but a pretty terrible leader.

MelBridgeman · 05-05-2011, 07:43 PM

Good the Bloc are gone..I think..I mean the NDP can it really be that good? Any ways maybe it's time for those separist to move Saint-Pierre,they will still be close to Quebec but living in France and maybe they can covince France to give them the island

Calgaryborn · 05-05-2011, 08:06 PM

Those who can do! The rest teach.

Ark2 · 05-05-2011, 08:33 PM

Ah, gotta love CBC's left wing bias. Merely three days after the election and CBC is already predicting that this will be the Harper's last majority government.

Quote:

The majority government won by Prime Minister Stephen Harper on Monday could be his one and only, according to a focus group of Canadian voters.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stor...ers-views.html