Can The Waffle Afford To Be “Potter”-Trained?
There’s something a little troubling about Andrew Potter’s Citizen column, in which he considers the upcoming Liberal “policy conference” in March.
The trouble comes when we hit this sentence:
The truth is, the Liberal party already has their big ideas guy — his name is Michael Ignatieff.
Uh-oh. Somehow I sense a set of horse-blinders being put on.
Their leader’s entire brand — indeed, the whole reason it was thought wise to woo him back to Canada in the first place — is that he was the living avatar of Canadian Liberalism’s idealized self-image: a postmodern cosmopolitan and a grounded intellectual who could bring the world to Canada, and Canada to the world.
I can count at least three self-deceptions in that last sentence. “Postmodern” just means “not the standard definition,” which can apply to pretty much anyone with less than a decade of experience in federal politics. “Cosmopolitan” is what you call a “city-dweller” who’s trying to be trendy. As for that last bit, you could argue that he’s brought an Anglo-American style of thinking to Canada — but as for the other way around, he hasn’t been here long enough to pull off that particular trick.
One can only assume that Michael Ignatieff and his team already know where they want to take the country. The task ahead is to work out the policies that will activate the vision, while crafting a serious brand identity with which to sell it. It looks like that will be the real point of the Montreal conference: to position Ignatieff in the public’s mind as a man engaged in long-term strategic thinking about what is best for the country, as against the short-term, purely tactical politics of Stephen Harper.
This is perhaps the biggest problem with Potter’s thesis: the idea that the conference should be used to re-introduce a “new Ignatieff” to Canadians. Trouble is, the Waffle has had a year — more than a year, if you count his leadership campaign — to present himself to Canadians, and if that self-image could resonate with them, it would have done so by now no matter what campaign ads the Tories run against him.
What we have seen, so far, is that the Waffle will do anything to avoid anything smacking of controversy. He wants to be popular; all politicians want that, and that’s fine. But if he doesn’t take a stand that offends at least some portion of the voter base, then people will conclude (if they haven’t done so already) that he stands for nothing at all. And a re-introduction on Potter’s model isn’t going to change that perception.
And the real problem is, even if Potter’s idea works, it only works on the leader. Ever since the sponsorship scandal, the Liberal brand has taken a hit, and it’s been eroding. You need policy, you need the grassroots, because you want a party that can be more than just “the leader.” It’s a problem that the federal Tories will need to deal with (who replaces Harper once he retires?); if the Liberals want to survive, it’s one they have to confront as well.
![](http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/1462/1818/320/262511/btweek.gif")
November 30th, 2009 at 17:54
If Ignatieff’s vision was individual rights and freedoms and private property rights he’d have something to sell. But I think what Potter is talking about is the usual Liberal “we have a vision and we’re going to impose it whether you like it or not.” For Pete’s sake, we are a twenty-first century highly educated country. What we need most is our freedom, not some self absorbed political party treating us like we’re third world bumpkins.
November 30th, 2009 at 18:07
With Iggy being placed number 64 on the great thinkers list, by some magazine, who will join him at this thinkers fest.
No other liberals made the list higher or lower than him. Not much to choose from IMHO.
Will this event be before or after the budget, and a possible election.
November 30th, 2009 at 18:50
Potter is hoping for a myth, as we Canadians never heard of this guy before he came home. Now that he is home, can he please retire? He is too old (I am his age too), a dysfunctional manager (no experience) and too out-of -touch with Canadian issues to create any kind of viable vision. Let him go and stop giving him any advice! We Canadians don’t like him!
November 30th, 2009 at 21:17
It’s all just a big phony act with these Gliberals and their media sycophants. No truth, no honesty, its all a Made for TV drama that they’d like all of us to take seriously.
These clowns are a complete disgrace and embarrassement to our country.
What a disgusting bunch.
November 30th, 2009 at 21:37
My read on Potter’s piece differs.
What I read was a cynical jab at the LPC inner circle that decided one day that Iggy should come to Canada, renew his LPC membership, and then be awarded the PM’s chair (just because he would be liberal leader by then).
Its not so much a criticism of Iggy, though there is ample in that article, its a well deserved swipe at the LPC by someone echoing the sentiment of an ever decreasing base.
December 1st, 2009 at 17:30
For Pete’s sake, we are a twenty-first century highly educated country.
Then if that is the case. why in hell are we stuck with the same dreary media that wants to live in the 70′s and 90s while liberals were in government. why is it that our media airwaves is still stuck in this type of behaviour.
For all their problems which exists in Iraq, how is it that they progress in change from SADDAM’S style media which the public endured for decades now have a 21st style media. The answer is, the iraqis changed in many ways and so did the media. . Even Afghanistan is moving on. ECEPT CANADA.
The prime minister promotes our country and the ‘stuck in liberal era 70 90 styly media refuse to acknowledge such good news. The world knows about us yet we don’t know anything about ourselves our country our troops to take pride in. This is the type of mentality, the liberal national media want to keep you in. BLAZEE, STUPID, IGNORANT, LACK OF PRIDE, you name it.
The day we do something to help the prime minister promote this country by delivering the news to other nations, we have taken a stand that no media can break.
The choice is yours not the medias nor the liberals.
December 1st, 2009 at 18:01
Why do you think that soldiers who are maimed, lost legs struggle very hard to get back on their feet and on brand new legs; execised daily in pain so they can go back to Afghanistan, is because they see there what they can’t seem to see here. The fight and death for freedom amongst the afghan people. Women who were once treated badly now walk proudly, there are more women per capita there, in government than there are in cd. politics. therre are more wheat farms growing than poppie farms.
This and more is the reason why our soldiers return to afghanistan, while we sit in our comfortable chairs and whine that the federal government is not handing out goodies.