Licia Corbella of the Calgary Herald looks at why Michael Ignatieff failed to connect with Canadian voters.
To his baffled Harvard colleagues who can’t understand how a Harvard man can’t beat a University of Calgary man, ask yourselves this: Would any of Ignatieff’s books have won awards if the positions he took waffled as much as his comments to Canadians? Would he have been a popular lecturer? Of course not.
Those of us who had read his work knew he didn’t really believe that Israel was guilty of war crimes, but that he made a calculated decision to throw Israel under the bus to quell a political storm in Quebec while speaking French.
Bob Rae, who was also fighting for the Liberal leadership at the time (which went to Stephane Dion) called Ignatieff "the guy who’s changed his mind three times in a week," with regard to the Lebanese-Israeli war.
Then in 2009, when Ignatieff was Liberal leader, he put forward policies that he clearly didn’t give more than a passing thought to.
Ignatieff wanted Canadians to be eligible to take a year off drawing employment insurance benefits after working just nine weeks.
The very people that was supposed to entice -autoworkers losing their jobs -were outraged. Why should some student whose summer job comes to an end get to draw EI benefits for the same amount of time as that autoworker who has paid into the system for decades?
For years, Ignatieff waxed poetic about how valuable the oilsands were to all of Canada, and then during the campaign, instead of supporting his very valid views, he spoke of how he would place a moratorium on development of our "dirty oil" and bring in a cap-and-trade system.
Ignatieff didn’t resonate with voters because he was a sycophant. He said what he thought people wanted to hear and thought Canadian voters are too stupid to know good policy from bad.
I am not really sure if that was it. Early on the in the election, Canadians tuned into Ignatieff and seemed to like him and his platform. Even out west, people seemed to like the Liberal platform, yet didnâ€™t vote for them. Part of me wonders the impact the horrible state of the Liberal Party’s grassroots in parts of Canada played a part, the other part of me wonders if his attempt to bring down the government last year had an impact. While in Ottawa it may have played well, the rest of us in Canada were really tired to it. So Harper brings out a budget that isnâ€™t that bad and before it comes out, Ignatieff is saying his is going to bring down the government. Meanwhile the rest of us are thinking, â€œArenâ€™t governmentâ€™s supposed to fall on really big issues and mistakes, not on the Opposition Leaderâ€™s rhetoric?â€.
I donâ€™t watch a lot of Canadian television and the Conservatives donâ€™t advertise on History Channel so I donâ€™t know if I saw the â€œjust visitingâ€ ads and I donâ€™t think I was influenced by them but after Ignatieff said he be was bringing down the government in 2010, he sounded like a political opportunist, meanwhile Layton who occasionally propped up Harper (and â€œMade Parliament workâ€) seemed more and more like the government in waiting. As that happened, I found myself ignoring Ignatieff more and more.
So whatâ€™s your reason for not supporting the Liberal Party?