Stephane Dion is the new Canadian Liberal Party Leader

Canada’s Liberal Party picked Stephane Dion over frontrunners Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae to lead their party. (Story here.)

For those who don’t pay close attention to Canadian politics, the Liberal Party is one of Canada’s two big old parties; although there are smaller parties on the federal scene, the ruling party has always been either Liberal or Conservative. The Conservatives are currently in power, under Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Dion will lead the Liberals into the next federal election, which could (in theory) happen at any time.

I am far from being a Liberal but I am a political junkie; however I confess I wasn’t paying close attention to the race because I wasn’t thrilled with either Iggy or Rae. I supported Dion (as far as it went) from the beginning (after Godfrey dropped out) but I didn’t have much hope of him winning. I was always happy with his commitment to the environment, and happy too that he is francophone. So I am thrilled and inspired that the Liberals have picked him as their leader! Yippee! Thanks, Liberals!

So, Canadopers, what does this mean? For Quebec, and for Canada? Can Dion beat Harper, or at least prevent a Conservative majority?

I didn’t really invest any effort in paying attention to the leadership race or have more than a passing knowledge of the candidates.

My first thought is that Dion is not particularly well known in Western Canada. I don’t know what kind of marketability he has in Ontario or maritime provinces.

I think Ignatieff would have been the better strategic choice.

I think this allows the Conservatives the opportunity to write their own destiny as far as the next federal election is concerned. As an aside, it surprises me to hear that they are proceeding with the free vote (as they did promise they would do) regarding same sex marriage. Do they not realize how ridiculous this issue makes them look? I am curious to know what percentage of Canadians want this issue to remain on the table.

I’m baffled by the choice of Dion. Is he not the worst possible leader for the Liberals? This is an academic with a temper, known for shooting his mouth off, who is a poor speaker of English and disliked in Quebec.

Just who is his constituency? Urban Ontario?

The Conservatives must be doing a little happy dance today.

My opinion was that Dion was the safe choice at the end of the day, he should appeal to all aspects of the fiberals and those who vote for them, I shuddered at the thought of Bob Rae getting another kick at the can for governing something.

Declan

I will admit that he is far better than Rae, but then the same can be said for any name you pick at random from the phone book.

I’m unlikely to vote for him (and since I’m in Alberta, it’s really unlikely to make a difference if I did) but in terms of “who would I like to be the next Prime Minister”, I think Dion makes the best choice for me. Only one Liberal leader has ever not become PM, and that was in 1887 (I suppose there’s also John Turner, who inherited the position). So of the four that had a realistic shot, I’d prefer him. Kennedy might have been a good choice for me there as well.

As far as him not being known, isn’t that a good thing? He can define himself however he wishes. Which he already seems to be trying to do, positioning himself as the environmental choice. Should play well in BC.

I don’t believe Celine has the ability to unify the Libs. What the Libs need worst is a rebirth, which I suppose is possible under their new honcho. But as far as his electability as a PM, he sits par with a tree frog. But as mentioned, he’s got 17% in Que, squat in the west, and can’t stand toe to toe with an aglophone in any kind of debate. Quite aside from the fact that he’s running on a largely environmental platform, as the Lib’s ex env. minister, whom as a ruling party have a horrid track record with the environment.

Harper will out maneuver, turn sod, and likely get the chance he needs to use a majority to prove his government to the Canadian people.

still sore about the ‘natural ruling party BS’

That alone says to me why he ultimately carried the day. As long as the king maker provinces are Quebec and Ontario, anything else will be a fly over province. His platform really does not mean much to me , Pierre Trudeau pretty much stole Joe Clarks ideas after campaigning against the very thought.

The fibs will adapt to any enviroment as required.

Declan

Dion is a fantastic, fantastic choice. I’m actually surprised they did something this smart.

Playing it soft with separatists does not work. It has never worked, it will never work; politicians who play nice with the separatists always, always, always do more harm than good. Trudeau was disliked in Quebec, too, and they kept voting for him again and again. Dion keeps getting elected in Quebec for the same reason. Poor speaker of English? Tell me again, who was the last man to win three straight majorities? When he was replaced with a guy who spoke great English, how did that go?

Dion doesn’t “shoot his mouth off” at all (and maybe you were confusing him with Michael “The Israelis Are War Criminals” Ignatieff) - he’s made a number of phenomenally smart, convincing arguments. When everyone else was cowering before Lucien Bouchard, terrified of his alleged invincibility, Stephane Dion took him on head-to-head, made the case of Canada, and come out looking like the smarter guy every time. Dion was behind the Clarity Act, a fantastic peice of legislation that took the lobster-in-a-post option away from the separatists.

The other choices were simply terrible. Bob Rae has been a member of another party his whole life and was an absolutely horrible premier; electing him leader would be like nominating Roseanne Barr to be the regular anthem singer at Rexall Place. Rae is probably the only human alive who could have given the Conservative Party a majority of the seats in Ontario. Michael Ignatieff is a pompous fool who knows pretty much nothing about Canada or Canadians. Either man would have led the Liberals to a crushing defeat.

Dion has been underestimated his whole career. Kind of like that other Stephen. You can all laugh now, but he’ll get the last chuckle. Dion is the next Prime Minister of Canada; if not in the next election, absolutely guaranteed in the one after that.

Examples?

I was rather surprised to click the article in the OP and learn that Stephane Dion is a guy . . . but I guess you Canucks are hip to French names.

I’ve voted NDP in every election provincially and federally since I turned 18. With the election of Dion as Liberal leader and with Kennedy as his Ontario sidekick, I’ll have some thinking to do as who will get my vote in the next election. I have not been pleased with the showing of Jack Layton in the House since the election. And I’ve been very impressed with Dion ever since the Clarity Act and right through this whole campaign. If I had to vote today, it’d be Liberal.

From today’s Toronto Star:
“At the big NDP convention in Quebec City a few months ago, Layton was poking fun at all the Liberal leadership candidates, with the notable exception of Dion. Rattling off the list of the other candidates’ flaws or foibles, the only thing Layton could say about Dion was that he was “a man of principle and conviction and therefore almost certain not to be elected leader of the Liberal party.”

Of the candidates in the running, Dion was my first choice. After McKenna declined to run and the pundits were talking only about Ignatieff and Rae (and Stronach, but she doesn’t appear to be in any rush to take the top job) I was dreading the outcome. I never did understand why Rae was suddenly a Liberal. My general impression of Dion whenever I’ve heard him interviewed has been favourable, so here’s hoping he makes a good leader.

I’m hedging my bets until I see him in action, but colour me (as a orange-flag-waving hippie) cautiously optimistic–especially with regards to the environment, considering the way Rona Ambrose’s been acting lately. Hopefully we’ll get some balance on the environmental issues now…

Well, I’m cautiously optimistic. I’m glad Ignatieff didn’t get in–he supported torture and the Iraq War.

Guess who is my MP. :frowning:

She was actually considering it quite early on but apparently has been unable to learn to speak French to any degree of comprehension.

It should tell you something about the woman that, with the help of the finest tutors money can buy, she still can’t get by.

Glad you brought that up, BrainGlutton, because if we are going to be talking about this guy a lot, perhaps my Anglo-Canadian countrymen could use a few pointers.

By the way, there are three forms of “Stephen” in French. I will give you a pronounciation guide, but note that an “n” in brackets here means that the final “n” is NOT PRONOUNCED as an “n” but just gives a nasal sound to the vowel before it.

Stéphan (Stay-fa(n))
Stéphane (Stay-fan) (which is the nam of the new Liberal Leader).

and, believe it or not: Étienne (Ay-tyen).

(BTW, females are generally named “Stéphanie” (Stay-fan-ee).)

Now about the last name, Dion. It is NOT pronounced “Dee-yawn”. There is another family name that is spelled “Dionne” as in the famous Dionne Quintuplets, and that is indeed pronounced “Dee-yawn”.

But Céline and Stéphane are named “Dion”. It is pronounced Dee-yo(n).

The rule is simple. When a French word ends in an “n”, it is not pronounced as a distinct “n” but it gives a nasal sound to the vowel before it.

So “bon, mon, ton, and Dion” are pronounced “bo(n), mo(n), to(n) and Dee-yo(n).”

Try saying the English word “tone” but avoid pronouncing the final “n” and instead cause the sound to go out through your nose. With a little practice you will get the hang of French nasal vowels.

If the “n” is not the final letter in the word but is followed by a vowel, then the “n” is pronounced as an “n”.

So “bonne, tonne, and Dionne” are pronounced “bun, ton and Dee-yawn”.

So the guy’s name is (Stay-fan Dee-yo(n).)

Well, think about it this way. Harper is not saying he wants to outlaw same-sex marriage, which would indeed look ridiculous. He’ll only say that on such an important moral issue, he wants the House to hold a truly free vote – which he’ll claim the last one wasn’t – so that MPs can poll their constituents to know which way to vote. The text of the motion will probably mention “revisiting the legal definition of marriage”, or some other not very threatening phrase. When the motion will be defeated – not “when the Conservatives will be defeated”, since Harper will claim that his party isn’t pushing for any particular result: look, after all, even some of his ministers are voting against the motion! – Harper won’t even look disappointed and he’ll say that the House has spoken and that this issue has been dealt with once and for all. Or he’ll blame the NDP, Liberals and/or Bloc for not allowing a free vote on this issue and therefore stifling democracy.

But at the same time, he’ll be able to tell social conservatives that he did try to do something to stop same-sex marriage. I think this motion is useless, and I’m sure Harper thinks it too, but it isn’t a political gaffe, and it might even win him some points.

Dion isn’t especially known for having a temper. And his English is at least as good as Harper’s French, which means quite good enough for any politician with countrywide ambitions.

I have no idea what you mean here. If Quebec and Ontario are the kingmaker provinces, how did Dion’s low popularity in Quebec ensure his selection? Shouldn’t it have done the opposite?

From what I know about Dion, he seems to be a pretty good politician. And for the most part, his positions are in line with mine. He seems to stand somewhere on the centre-left of the political line, which indicates that the Liberals’ platform under his leadership should be a strong alternative to Harper’s for a large number of Canadians. His (current) pet issue is the environment, the Conservatives’ weakest point, which potentially might win him votes in some parts of the country. Raygun99 says BC, I’ll say maybe Quebec, since the Conservatives’ environmental position is also very unpopular here.

But of course, this maybe is a very, very big maybe. As said earlier, his approval rating in Quebec is likely to be very low, and not without reason. Dion’s intransigeant attitude towards Bouchard’s government when he was Chrétien’s Intergovernmental Affairs minister might have been popular with RickJay and other Ontarians, indeed in many parts of the country, but here it was basically telling us that we have no right to choose our destiny. Right now I wouldn’t vote for Dion; I don’t even trust him to negotiate with federalist Quebec governments in good faith. He’s your typical centralizing Liberal. As I’ve said in another thread, I don’t think this man can become prime minister.

This said, I’m still willing to see what happens in the next months. Dion could surprise me. I doubt it, but he could. He still has a few things to learn about politics, and the first one of these is how to compromise. If he’s able to tone down his hard-line image, and maybe concentrate on his strengths, such as the environment, he might be able to do it. But I’m not holding my breath.

Well, the Bloc didn’t exist back then. Trudeau was actually quite liked in Quebec originally. I wasn’t there at the time, but here’s how I would explain it (and I may be somewhat off).

Until the sixties, francophones were still a disadvantaged group in Quebec, despite being the majority. The Liberals were elected in 1960 and Lesage’s government started to reverse this situation. This work was continued by the rather nationalistic Union Nationale government of Daniel Johnson. At around the same, Pierre Trudeau erupted on the federal political scene. He wasn’t a Quebec nationalist – far from it – but he was still a francophone Quebecer who had succeeded in federal politics, becoming leader of the federal Liberals just a few years after becoming active in the party. He also had the dream of making the French language equal to English in Canada. This was music to the ears of francophones inside (and outside of) Quebec: after decades of being subordinate to anglophones, of having to speak English with bosses even in Quebec, they were being told that they weren’t second class citizens anymore, they were an important culture of what was to become a multicultural Canada, their language was to be made an official language equal to English, and even the anglophones were supportive of this.

It’s not surprising that francophone Quebecers voted en masse for Trudeau at the time. Francophones outside of Quebec probably still hold Trudeau in high esteem today, but during the following years, the political winds changed in Quebec. A number of Quebecers came to believe that the Trudeau ideology was a unrealistic dream, and some of them decided that independence was the only way for the province to fulfill its potential. The Parti Québécois was elected in 1976. But at the same time, who was there to vote for at the federal level? Some voted for the Rhino Party, founded by separatist doctor and writer Jacques Ferron. (Anecdote time: one of my French teachers in cégep was a scholar on Ferron and a Rhino candidate from that time. If I remember correctly what he told me, the Rhinos were mostly intended as a parody of the Liberals: politicians who lie and make empty promises, but who admit it!) The others mostly voted for the Liberals, since the Conservatives were at the time traditionally unpopular in Quebec, and because Trudeau, for all his faults, still clearly supported francophones.

This ended in 1984, about the same time Trudeau stepped down from power. The Conservatives had selected a new leader, Brian Mulroney, who promised constitutional reforms to allow Quebec to find a place in Canada and sign the Constitution, which was repatriated by Trudeau with the approval of all provinces except Quebec. I believe Mulroney came close to causing a schism in the Parti Québécois. Some former separatists, like Lucien Bouchard, became federalists and joined his team. René Lévesque spoke of the beau risque of giving Mulroney and renewed federalism a chance and was forced out of the leadership of his party by the hard-liners. (Still, the PQ selected another soft nationalist, Pierre Marc Johnson, who I’m not sure is even a separatist today, as their new leader.)

Of course, what happened is that Lévesque’s beau risque failed. He wasn’t there to see it anymore, but Bouchard was, and we know the rest. My point is that Trudeau couldn’t have been elected in Quebec after 1984, and he certainly wouldn’t be today, with the Bloc as a proven alternative.

Well, he probably doesn’t think the NDP has much of a chance on the federal level. Plus, I remember reading that he’s come to believe the NDP to be somewhat anti-Israel. He’s probably wrong on that last point, but maybe they don’t support Israel as much as he’d like them to. To me, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing.