I only wish that was true, but it's not. Ekos shows Iggy's approval rating at 19% while his disapproval rating is over two and a half times that at 51%.
When you're only getting one in five to approve of the job you're doing, you're not doing the job people need you to do. Fortunately, I suppose, the party's approval rating continues to hover above that of its Leader. Out of that one in five, how many do you think really approve of Michael Ignatieff? How many of them are just holding their noses? How many are whistling past the graveyard?
Maybe it's time for the Liberal Party to become liberal again. Even if there was merit to Mikey's right of centre posturing (and there's really none), he's not been able to sell his vision to the Canadian public. If these numbers mean anything he's not been able to sell it to a lot of Liberals either.
Maybe we should hope for an early election to put this mess out of its misery.
5 comments:
I don't understand those Liberals that thought Ignatieff was a good leader that could be sold. What about him is appealing? Is pro-Iraq war stand? His smug attitude? His position on torture? His support to constitutional recognize Quebec as a nation? I could keep going, but the bottom line is the guy is a total dud and the Iggiots who put him there should apologize!
He was something of a brand name in the academic ranks, the sort that the elitist factions of the party are frequently drawn to. He does have impressive credentials but he also has a lot of baggage, particularly from his days in the States.
It's sort of like taking a top academic and figuring out he'll be able to sail. All he has to do is learn the ropes, no? But, in reality, not everyone can sail and political leadership requires a certain skillset that an academic background is not suited to imbue.
There's an interesting thought. Canada's Liberal party has had its leadership held by two academics, Dion and Ignatieff. Both disappointed. Both were unsuccessful. Both may have set the party back for years to come.
Looking through the Western world, what great leaders have emerged from academia? Some successful politicians have been successful academics afterward but is it a one-way street?
There are plenty of academics who expand their work through charities or non-profits or who use their research to push for beneficial reform and policies. As far as I know, Michael Ignatieff is not one of them or if he has, his work hasn't affected Canada in any remarkable way.
Although if we're going to look at it that way, how many MPs work for the betterment of their ridings and how many of them just want to impose their ideology on everyone else without paying attention to what the voters want or the impact of their ideology.
We've got 308 MPs with no plan, a population that doesn't question them and a media that doesn't hold them accountable.
As bad a leader as he is, we're stuck with him. Once the next election is over I hope he does the honourable thing and resigns. If he doesn't it isn't so bad, though, because he won't survive a leadership review. I've only known a few Liberals who like this guy. Granted, they're over the top in love with him but they are in the minority. The feelings of most Liberals I know range from borderline hate to slight dislike.
I guess I'm one of those who has a slight dislike of the guy. I really have trouble with several of his policy positions. His take on Gaza was terrible. His adulation of the Tar Sands reveals a disconnect, bordering on indifference, to that disaster. He kept drawing lines in the sand and, as Harper crossed each of them, Iggy retreated to draw another. He kept letting Harper take him to the woodshed for a spanking. And he's supposedly acting on top political advice? Please, spare me. If he's following the path charted out by Kinsellas and Daveys the outcome speaks for itself.
Post a Comment