Iggie ain't Obama. Obama's

Iggie ain't Obama.

Obama's story:
1. Raised by single mother (and her parents) after feckless father left.
2. Mixed race, with all implied in terms of personal stress in determining identity.
3. Hard personal work to find life path in maelstrom of his background. Came to decision that he would contribute to America.
4. Wrote eloquently of his search (as well as much else)
5. Started to pay his dues by community organising in poor areas. And finding a way for an outsider to get into the system and contribute.
6. Exhibited imagination, charisma, intelligence, consistency of values, hard work, leadership (harvard law review, efforts to enter political process from the "bottom.")
7. totally loyal to the important people in his life (mother, grandparents, wife)
8. Able to assimilate use of internet.

Iggie's story.
1. Privileged upbringing in best schools by elite parents (foreign service, and previously Russian aristocrats) Normal angst of intelligent people -- even in the elite.
2. Life as intellectual in writing, universities,
3. wrote well on his family, and on political topics.
4. Highly ambitious, and apparently willing to change his life and views to serve his ambition. For example, he wrote as an American "us" in the US (Would the NYT give so much space to someone identified clearly as a canadian? OR does Iggie have no sense of where his "home" is?)
5. Profoundly ambitious and loyal to his own career (even changed wife as his activities shifted from left-wing in the UK to right-wing in the US. I wonder what the young Iggie would say about the "mature" Iggie's support for preventative war and torture?)
6. With melt-down of Liberal party, sensed opportunity in Canada, obviously partly at invitation of the inbred elitist Liberal leadership which saw their party implode as Martin finally eviscerated Chretien. Even the Liberals were unwilling to annoint him leader without some electoral experience, however.
7. Managed not to fall on his political face for a couple of years. (Rather, press didn't really castigate him for supporting Quebec "nationality" or floating the carbon tax ballon -- which they later used to deflate poor Dion.)
8. Produces a good blog.

Obama, he ain't.

Iggie would be equally at home as head of the Conservatives.
His appointment as Liberal leader helps to ensure that we mice will continue to be ruled by Cats (as noted by Tommy Douglas)

Frank

I hope you are wrong, frank, even while I fear you may be right.

Don't think so

Obamasphere coming to Canada - don't think so. The last intelligent PM who had any connection with the Canadian people was Prime Minister Trudeau..if Web 2.0 tools were available then...his effect would have been amplified. In my view the critical element in the making of Obamasphere was not the Web 2 social web features...but the authentic persona of Obama - and his creative capacity to link mind with heart and communicate in an intelligent manner with the American people - which inspired his team and the American people to join him to create a movement for Change. Certainly his website, his use of Twitter and other social web 2.0 tools helped him with fundraising and the establisment of a movement with a strong base across America..but without Obama it would have been for nought.

As I see it, in Canada we don't have such quality of leadership, neither do we have a political party that has much of a base amongst the Canadian people. The Conservatives rely on their corporate base and mass media base for their support. Without public funding at $x/vote neither the NDP, Liberals, the Bloq nor the Greens could function well as a party. If they, like Obama, were required to go out and get funding for their parties in $5/$10/$20 - $100 denominations - which is how Obama made is $750 million, I doubt very much Canadians would shell out many $ for them. Succinctly many key factors came together to make the Obama campaign a success - foremost was Obama.

I don't think "a 'spherical'

I don't think "a 'spherical' organization with a tightly controlled centre" can by definition create a "real grassroots democracy." Grassroots movements form together and bring someone from their midst to lead.

Not right now, anyway.

Like Trudeau, Obama can hold his own among intellectuals. So can Iggy, but unlike the other two, he doesn't have a Social Democratic vision with which he can inspire ordinary people. Indeed, if he has a vision at all, at this point in time it seems it is only to become Prime Minister and fulfill yet another of his ambitions.

In that sense he is a perfect fit for the Liberal Party, since it has always prided itself on its pragmatism, its success in opportunistically being all things to all people. If the polls favoured Satanism, they'd go for it.

If Obama's programs turn out to be truly radical, he is in a truly unique position to get away with it within his Democratic Party, for he can effectively counter the money boys with his strong voter base which can trump their now weakened control of the MSM. Crawford has certainly read that one right.

This should be a wakeup call for the NDP which has let its local clubs wither away as it slithered into the Center in search of the votes Party strategists thought could be found there. That club base could be enlivened again, and contrary to what Peter says, there's plenty of money here to be found from people who have a clear "vision" to believe in and pursue.

But I agree with Peter re this election. If Iggy opts for one, it's going to be more of he same old, same old. Arrrrgh.

Is there something wrong for

Is there something wrong for a political party in getting rid of a leader in 2 days versus 2 years? They have been doing that in Great Britian for years and do it more frquently than we do. The Conservatives there got rid of Maggie Thatcher in a weekend when the Party MP's got fed-up with her and her bully tactics. I think there's something wrong when a person has to spend millions of dollars just to run as leader of a political party, ie as Paul Martin did. The idea of Parlament is the power is in the Members and not the leader, in which our MP's seem to forget.

Running a Campaign Is Like Building a Megachurch

A similar article was posted on Slate.com about a month and a half ago.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/bigsort/archive/2008/10/30/how-running-a-campaign-is-no-different-than-building-a-megachurch.aspx

But most of us here in Canada have no idea what a "Megachurch" is, Rick Warren, Joel Osteen, those are the models for the modern political campaign.

It's not technology per se which is the driving force, it's grassroots faith. There are tons of online graveyards out there, it's all about making your friends and neighbors believe, spread the faith, whether it's faith in Christianity, faith in Obama, or faith in Iggy. Technology is just the enabler...

What's with the Obama Love-fest?

So far, Obama has talked a good game. As do they all, to one extent or another.

I am going to wait a few years to see if what Obama does resembles what he promised.

Then I might say "Gee, wouldn't it great if we had a politician like that here"

However, I suspect I might not.

The Iggisphere

Obama will prove to be much more conservative and far less liberal than many might wish him to be:

http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/19291

Ignatieff will prove to be much more liberal and far less conservative than many might expect him to be: he is a centrist with a leftward rather than a rightward slant.

Unlike Obama, who talks left but leans right.

me too!

I signed up on the Obama site. I put through my Vision for change and I will be hopping over the border for some group focus meetings. This is what they thought democracy was about.

You could feel the energy

I could anyway especially that faithful Friday when the Coalition took form the forums were just hoping with energy. But here is a little secret for you who are trying to influence the web and it wasn't just Obama's site it was a great deal of people talking on forums about the various issues. I know as I would go chat up with America and Iran and the UK and whoever because I could and it made a world of difference to my overall understanding and filled me with amazement. I would find when chatting away it was not uncommon to go back say a week later or even sooner and see it materialize as people were now repeating everything I said. So its a new world out their and its one of info sharing but just ranting a raving well its an easy way to lose your readers I'm certain.

Obama

I am dismayed by the cynicism displayed by so many Tyee posters re Obama fulfilling his promises for positive "change".

Given our past experience with politicians, that expectation seems warranted, but it is NOT warranted, I think, in view of his recent announcements re his plans once he has assumed office.

He has said he will spend massive amounts of Federal money on things such as highways and building hospitals, and improving the lifesyle of citizens through more assistance to the unemployed and better access to healthcare.

He has stated that for the economy to rebound, the consumer must have money to spend, and so we also see his giving money to industry for preserving jobs.

This is pure Keynesian economics, which until now the neocons have held is "Communism". He's gotten around that one with his giving them "Social Assistance" too :-)

I think the naysayers (most of whom, no doubt, think "Capitalism" is doomed) should lay off and wait a few weeks, for that crow might prove hard to digest.

morechatter May Be Exactly Right

It is difficult to be objective here, but I have found the same to be true.