It was about Michael Ignatieff

I’m a bit late to finding this, but here is Michael Valpy on the last election and Michael Ignatieff.

And at the end of this election campaign, Erin MacLeod, a post-doctoral researcher from Montreal, drew this intriguing distinction between Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Harper: “Ignatieff demands that you listen to him and think he’s right, while Harper just wanted people to put faith in the Conservative party that they would sort out what to do when it needed doing. It was as if Ignatieff had his book about Canada all ready, presumptuously written–and that’s what makes him paternalistic.”

Thus to summarize. For younger Canadians wanting vision, they looked at Mr. Ignatieff and saw no vision. For older Canadians wanting that mystical thing called “leadership,” they looked at Mr. Ignatieff and did not see leadership. For women wanting someone whom they could trust and not feel threatened by, they looked at Mr. Ignatieff and saw distrust and paternalism. 




Browse

It was about Michael Ignatieff

  1. Michael who????

  2. And everyone thought Harper was Mr Goodbar?  LOL

    Pundits are overthinking this

    When millions of people go out to vote it’s a crapshoot who gets in.

    As we just saw.

    • Valpy is overthinking this?  I think it’s far more likely that you are underthinking this.

      • I think it’s more likely that none of you have ever been in politics.

        • I still chuckle when I remember your fearless prediction, two days before the election: “Nothing will change”.  Out of all the hundreds of predictions I saw, I think you were the furthest out to lunch.

          Of course, in the months leading up to the election, you repeated ad nauseam that the Liberals were basically tied with the Conservatives, and all the polls that said otherwise were totally wrong and unreliable, and the Conservatives were “falling apart”.

          In short, you couldn’t have been more wrong with your analysis, which is not surprising since you use a non-evidence-based approach (i.e. you just say whatever pops into your head at any given moment).  

          If politics is beyond the limits of your comprehension, it’s perfectly understandable that you’d view elections as a random “crapshoot”.

          • Nothing HAS changed

            We’ve had Con majorities before, and the Libs have been down before….this to you is radical change??

            I’ve spent many years in politics, so am more qualified than observers to comment on it.  Sorry.

          • ……I reckon CR is still contemplating your apology.

          • Moving the goalposts; good job.

            In any event, experience is not qualification. One can have great experience in a field (as you do) and still be completely unqualified to make any sort of coherent analysis of it (as you are). Was this the quality of work you produced in your long political career? “I’m still right even though things turned out 100% opposite to what I predicted?”

          • @yahoo-VDUD2P6VL35TZYYHQBNHYXA6SQ:disqus 

            LOL I doubt CR can even contemplate his navel

          • @TheAVR:disqus 

            You must be the poorest paid lawyer in Canada with logic like that

          • I know you’re thoroughly unfamiliar with logic, dear, so I’ll let that one pass. Go lay down and take a nap before you say something even more infantile.

          • @TheAVR:disqus 

            Yup…Confirmed…. yer the poorest paid lawyer in Canada

          • Still a sore loser.

          • @TheAVR:disqus 

            LOL gawd that you would spend your whole evening on here trying to patronize some other poster says a lot about you AVR

            It screams ‘loser’. 

          • Still a sore loser.

          • @TheAVR:disqus 

            LOL go to bed, your needle’s stuck

    • “A Canadian citizen is a global citizen. That’s the Canada I have lived.” …. and that Iggy attitude and comment is why he and his party lost.
      FYI

      According to the
      Urban dictionary

      1.

      Mr. Goodbaranother name for a mans penis or a piece of candyi love to eat Mr. Goodbars, they are so tastey.

      • Noop, not buyin’ it.

        Most Canadians think of themselves as global citizens.

  3. I disagree. When I Mr Ignatieff, I saw a man with a vision for a better Canada. When I looked at Mr Harper, I saw a man that would do anything to win the election.

    • And many of us saw it the other way around. What’s your point?

  4. I’m glad that Colby linked to this, because Valpy’s musings on Ignatieff are a truly interesting read.  I wish we’d hear from Valpy more often.

    Ignatieff was hampered by his lack of political experience, but it was his lack of Canadian experience that did him in.  This was what made the presumptuousness that Erin Macleod refers to all the more egregious.  At the end of the day, Iggy could never articulate a compelling narrative to explain why he came home after so many decades abroad, expecting voters to hand him the keys to the country.

    • Please stop repeating election drivel.

      • Still a sore loser.

        • Neither I’m afraid….just sick of liars and gullible people

  5. Author’s note: Michael Ignatieff and I were classmates at Harvard University. We were in the same “track” together, Modern European History. Each week for a year (1969-1970) we gathered for the colloquium which enabled H. Stuart Hughes, chairman of the History Department, to scrutinize us and decide who would advance to the Ph.D. program and who would be given the terminal Master’s Degree. Our class consisted of just a dozen students, or less. We came to know each other very well… He smoked gold tipped Sobranie, the Russian word for “‘sovereign” (current price $55 for 200)… his cigarette always a prop in his presentation.

  6. Ms. MacLeod’s hindsight is blazingly prescient.

Sign in to comment.