My hunch about all this is that we've just been through something that is a lot closer to the 1958 Liberal leadership convention than the 1968 one. That's not to say Dion won't be more successful than Pearson, because I hope and think he could be. But there's a similar kind of instability in the current climate, and I don't just mean global warming.
It would be interesting to examine Pearson and Dion comparatively - both well-respected academics with international reputations, both possibly a little shaky getting off the ground (Liberals: remember the 1958 election? You don't want to), both (in my view) doomed to a lot of minority governments. Yet Pearson shaped this country into what it is, and into what most Canadians ( I think) want it to be. Dion could do the same. And as everyone noted this weekend, there's no shortage of young blood (Gerard? Is that with one R or two?) hovering in the wings to carry things on.
Memo to the NDP: do something. Now. Or else you're gonna get creamed into pumpkin pie.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addendum - one place where 1958 and 2006 have NO similarity whatsoever is in the actual convention voting pattern - Lester got it in a landslide. If only Paul Martin Jr. had avenged his father's loss by being more like Mike....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment