More for our American friends then anything else so I started a new thread.
Turns out Havard is agast that Canadians wouldnt elect one of their own. Also turns out the bright bulbs at Havard have no idea what is happening in Canada - their explanation for why Iggy lost is because of his views on the war in Afghanistan which actually had no impact on the election at all.
Cellucci, the former US embassador got it right.
QuoteBoston's chattering classes are struggling with the stunning political defeat of one of Harvard's most popular academics at the hands of Canadian voters, painting Michael Ignatieff's historic loss as Liberal leader as a new low in Canadian politics.
A series of editorials and articles published this week in the Harvard Crimson, Boston Globe and elsewhere have blamed Canadians for being close-minded and anti-American when they handed Mr. Ignatieff and the Liberals the party's worst defeat in history.
"Harvard sees itself as the centre of the universe, so I'm sure it felt it very deeply," said Graham Wilson, chair of Boston University's department of political science.
In a front page article, The Boston Globe said the main reason for the Liberal collapse was that Mr. Ignatieff — the former director Harvard's Carr Center of Human Rights Policy and an expert on international military interventions — had views on the Canadian mission in Afghanistan that had pushed "war-weary voters toward the more left-leaning New Democratic Party."
The paper's editorialists noted with some disbelief that Canadian politics had become "surprisingly caustic" and described the "sadness and indignation" his former Harvard colleagues felt at seeing that Conservative attack ads painting Mr. Ignatieff as a foreign Ivy League elitist had played so well with Canadian voters.
"For a country that is stereotyped here in the U.S. as a country that is accepting of everyone and everything, this federal election depicts a Canada that is moving in a steadily more exclusive and narrow direction," wrote Shalini K. Rao, a Canadian student, in the Harvard Crimson newspaper.
It was a tough lesson in humility for one of the world's most prestigious universities that while a former student could be elected president — and the first black one at that — its star professor couldn't win his seat in a Canadian riding.
"I think they're unhappy that his time spent in the U.S. at Harvard ended up hurting him not really helping him in the election," said Paul Cellucci, former U.S. ambassador to Canada and a former governor of Massachusetts. "They're not happy about that and I don't blame them. You would think that spending time in Harvard would have a positive impact on your future career path."
The reaction to Mr. Ignatieff's defeat has focused largely on trying to explain how his reputation as one of Harvard's most respected professors, a charismatic intellectual who could pack classrooms and once graced the cover of GQ magazine, could have worked against him with voters.
Mark Leccese, a journalism professor and media blogger at Boston.com, wrote that Mr. Ignatieff's colleagues were dismayed that negative connotations about Harvard — long a code word in U.S. political rhetoric for "out-of-touch elitist" — seemed to have crossed the border into Canada.
"If Ignatieff had been a professor at the University of Southern North Dakota at Hoople, would the ad have been as powerful?" he wrote.
But U.S. commentators trying to make sense of Mr. Ignatieff's defeat seem to have little understanding of how well political ads questioning Mr. Ignatieff's time abroad played with Canadian voters, Mr. Cellucci said.
"They don't fully appreciate that as great a relationship as we have, the United States and Canada, as close as we are, it's important to Canadians to be Canadian, not American," he said. "I think that's the point that they're all missing and this effort by the Conservative party that kind of turned Michael Ignatieff into an American, that's what really hurt the most. I don't think some of the commentators are aware of how deeply Canadians want to be different than Americans."
However, those commentators who pay close attention to Canadian politics would likely be more surprised that a renowned scholar had even become head of a political party in the first place, something that would rarely happen in the U.S., Mr. Wilson said.
"Being an academic would not be a good start in this county and being an academic who had spent a long time outside of the United States is a double whammy," he said. "People would be less surprised that it happened and was done badly but that it happened at all."
National Post
[email protected]
.
Heh, Iggy got canned because he, and his party, had nothing much to offer anyone. It had little IMO to do with "Canadians wanting to be Canadians", and everything to do with the fact that the Cons successfully usurped what used to be the Lib's greatest strengths - appealing to local constituents, one riding and one group at a time - and toning down on their social conservative rhetoric to make them palateable.
In contrast, Iggy & Co. appeared to totally take local constituents for granted, seeing them a steady support for the political careers of Iggy & Co.
Take Iggy's own leadership in my riding (in theory, his riding) of Etobicoke-Lakeshore. He was "parachuted" in to replace a popular Lib incumbent in a riding that was considered "safe". Other would-be applicants were disqualified from running on flimsy grounds - leading to much fury within local Lib ranks, many of whom were Ukranian (my in-laws, for example!) who already disliked Iggy for his writings on Ukrainian nationalism. In spite of that they held their noses and voted for him - once.
Having imposed himself in this strong-arm manner (or been imposed by the Lib machine), he proceeded to do - well, nothing - for "his" riding. Is it any wonder he lost it?
All this gave teeth to the Con's attacks, about how Iggy really could not give a shit about those he claimed to represent, and only wanted to feather his own resume.
What the good folks at Harvard are forgetting is that all politics are local. Ironically, Iggy lost his own seat because he forgot that, too.
Quote from: Malthus on May 12, 2011, 11:15:16 AM
What the good folks at Harvard are forgetting is that all politics are local. Ironically, Iggy lost his own seat because he forgot that, too.
I agree with that. I also think Celluci correctly identified why the attack ads, portraying him as essentially being on leave from Harvard, worked.
I agree with CC's analysis. It wasn't an anti-intellectual message, it was an Anti-American (or at least, not Canadian) message.
Remember Dion was an academic as well, and that was never used against him.
And I'm shocked at Harvard's inflated sense of self-importance. ;)
The anti-American spin of the Conservatives probably played a role in the defeat of Ignatieff, but I think it was far from the main cause (and certainly the Afghan war had almost 0 relevance in this election). The Libs' lack of real ideas (ironic for an esteemed Harvard prof) and inability to brand themselves successfully was a much more important factor.
Wait, what are Iggy's view of Afghanistan?
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 12, 2011, 11:40:05 AM
Wait, what are Iggy's view of Afghanistan?
Well as an academic he was a hawk - supported war in Iraw and Afghanistan.
As leader he wanted Canadian troops out of Afghanistan.
It's understandable, he saw the number I would want the Canadian troops out too in his place.
I don't understand this thread, nor do I want to.
Quote from: The Brain on May 12, 2011, 12:32:15 PM
I don't understand this thread, nor do I want to.
Too much radiation kills brain cells. :cry:
Quote from: crazy canuck on May 12, 2011, 11:18:25 AM
Quote from: Malthus on May 12, 2011, 11:15:16 AM
What the good folks at Harvard are forgetting is that all politics are local. Ironically, Iggy lost his own seat because he forgot that, too.
I agree with that. I also think Celluci correctly identified why the attack ads, portraying him as essentially being on leave from Harvard, worked.
I don't agree with this:
Quote"I think that's the point that they're all missing and this effort by the Conservative party that kind of turned Michael Ignatieff into an American, that's what really hurt the most. I don't think some of the commentators are aware of how deeply Canadians want to be different than Americans."
Iggy did not lose beacuse Canadians saw him as an
American, much less that this "really hurt [Iggy] the most". Iggy lost because his party lacked purpose and failed to make connections with local constituents.
It would not have made a big difference if Iggy spent those thirty years teaching at U of T rather than Harvard - he'd
still have lost, and for much the same reason: lack of purpose and lack of connection.
Admittedly, spending many years outside of Canada did not help, but it wasn't the key to his failure.
Malthus, he is commenting on why the attack ads worked not why the Liberals lost the election all though obviously there is a connection between the two.
Quote from: crazy canuck on May 12, 2011, 12:40:53 PM
Malthus, he is commenting on why the attack ads worked not why the Liberals lost the election all though obviously there is a connection between the two.
Even so.
The reasons the ads worked is that the thrust of them - I believe the slogan was "he didn't come back for
you" - had teeth, because Iggy and his party was seen as a buncha empty suits.
It wasn't simply that he was being branded as a Yank, it was that he was being branded as an opportunist, fundamentally uncaring about constituents, just using 'em as a stepping-stone to leadership. The same sort of ads would have worked, had he been an academic at U of T all those years.
The "Yank" aspect added flavour, but it wasn't the meat of the matter.
When all the Russian Canadian immigrants of my parents generation were telling me they were voting against Ignatieff, I knew he was doomed. You have to carry your own ethnic group.
Quote from: crazy canuck on May 12, 2011, 12:33:11 PM
Quote from: The Brain on May 12, 2011, 12:32:15 PM
I don't understand this thread, nor do I want to.
Too much radiation kills brain cells. :cry:
Really.
I mean, there can be nothing, but nothing, as interesting as Canadian politics.
;)
Quote from: Malthus on May 12, 2011, 12:51:18 PM
The same sort of ads would have worked, had he been an academic at U of T all those years.
I disagree. As much as we all love to hate Toronto it would have had no impact at all. He was someone that had spent a large amount of his professional career outside the Country. We have a long history of academics within Canada turning to politics at both the Federal and Provincial levels. I dont know why someone from the U of T would have been any different.
Quote from: Barrister on May 12, 2011, 11:20:11 AM
I agree with CC's analysis. It wasn't an anti-intellectual message, it was an Anti-American (or at least, not Canadian) message.
Remember Dion was an academic as well, and that was never used against him.
Anti-American! :mad: Now I'm mad! No more visits to Canada for me!! ;)
Quote from: KRonn on May 12, 2011, 12:58:45 PM
Quote from: Barrister on May 12, 2011, 11:20:11 AM
I agree with CC's analysis. It wasn't an anti-intellectual message, it was an Anti-American (or at least, not Canadian) message.
Remember Dion was an academic as well, and that was never used against him.
Anti-American! :mad: Now I'm mad! No more visits to Canada for me!! ;)
How popular would someone be if they ran for President but spent most of their professional career as a professor at the University of Toronto?
All my relatives back east (Ontario/New Brunswick) totally bought those "blood soaked" anti Iggy ads like they were the gospel delivered from St. Peter himself. IMHO though he lost for manyof the reasons people quote in this thread. The Libs had no real policies that anyone could grab onto and say, now this is what I want from my leaders. It's almost like they threw all their seats, to my mind anyway. I never heard anything that would make me vote Liberal, anymore than I would have Conservative. Same steaming pile of dog doo, but in a less interestingly shaped pile than the conservative one.
I've not once ever thought Iggy had a shot at it. Not realistically. Of course I didn't think he'd decimate the party so thoroughly. I think it's going to take a few elections for the Libs to get any mojo again if they ever do.
Quote from: crazy canuck on May 12, 2011, 12:55:39 PM
Quote from: Malthus on May 12, 2011, 12:51:18 PM
The same sort of ads would have worked, had he been an academic at U of T all those years.
I disagree. As much as we all love to hate Toronto it would have had no impact at all. He was someone that had spent a large amount of his professional career outside the Country. We have a long history of academics within Canada turning to politics at both the Federal and Provincial levels. I dont know why someone from the U of T would have been any different.
Because, without an air of reality about the ads, they would not have bite or traction. In fact, without bite, they subject the maker to ridicule and can even boost the target. Remember those Con attack ads depicting Cretien as a moron because his face sags? He made hay with that, because the key to Cretien was that he was a old-time party infighter, not a moron. The ads lacked teeth.
If Iggy had come back from Harvard filled with a burning vision of a liberal society, and the charisma to transmit this vision to his constituents, show them how his vision could inspire and recreate their communities, and worked with them to (say) improve the Bloor Street business improvement area or whatever ... those Con ads would have flubbed, badly.
The ads worked because they had an air of reality. Iggy *did* appear to be an opportunist. It isn't the fact that he's an academic, or a long-time Yank dweller - it is the fact he does not appear committed.
Quote from: crazy canuck on May 12, 2011, 01:00:03 PM
How popular would someone be if they ran for President but spent most of their professional career as a professor at the University of Toronto?
Dunno about President, but they could get elected Senator from New York with no problem. :)
Quote from: KRonn on May 12, 2011, 12:58:45 PM
Quote from: Barrister on May 12, 2011, 11:20:11 AM
I agree with CC's analysis. It wasn't an anti-intellectual message, it was an Anti-American (or at least, not Canadian) message.
Remember Dion was an academic as well, and that was never used against him.
Anti-American! :mad: Now I'm mad! No more visits to Canada for me!! ;)
You can still visit Quebec, Canadian or American, it's all the same to us :P
Quote from: viper37 on May 12, 2011, 01:16:55 PM
Quote from: KRonn on May 12, 2011, 12:58:45 PM
Quote from: Barrister on May 12, 2011, 11:20:11 AM
I agree with CC's analysis. It wasn't an anti-intellectual message, it was an Anti-American (or at least, not Canadian) message.
Remember Dion was an academic as well, and that was never used against him.
Anti-American! :mad: Now I'm mad! No more visits to Canada for me!! ;)
You can still visit Quebec, Canadian or American, it's all the same to us :P
I'll still visit Quebec, but not Canada!! ;)
Reading the thread title, I thought it was an onion article :lol:
Quote from: Malthus on May 12, 2011, 11:15:16 AM
What the good folks at Harvard are forgetting is that all politics are local.
Which is kind of amazing as Cambridge happens to be in Tip O'Neill's old district.
Quote from: crazy canuck on May 12, 2011, 01:00:03 PM
Quote from: KRonn on May 12, 2011, 12:58:45 PM
Quote from: Barrister on May 12, 2011, 11:20:11 AM
I agree with CC's analysis. It wasn't an anti-intellectual message, it was an Anti-American (or at least, not Canadian) message.
Remember Dion was an academic as well, and that was never used against him.
Anti-American! :mad: Now I'm mad! No more visits to Canada for me!! ;)
How popular would someone be if they ran for President but spent most of their professional career as a professor at the University of Toronto?
James Buchanan was nominated for President by the Democratic party precisely because he had spent most of his adult life overseas (as a diplomat, not a professor), and thus had missed much of the deeply divisive domestic disputes of the time. Of course, "the time" was over a century and a half ago, so I don't know how that would go down now.
Quote from: dps on May 12, 2011, 04:29:56 PM
James Buchanan was nominated for President by the Democratic party precisely because he had spent most of his adult life overseas (as a diplomat, not a professor), and thus had missed much of the deeply divisive domestic disputes of the time. Of course, "the time" was over a century and a half ago, so I don't know how that would go down now.
And his example is what taught everybody else why they shouldn't do that.
Quote from: crazy canuck on May 12, 2011, 11:00:48 AM
Turns out Havard is agast that Canadians wouldnt elect one of their own.
Makes for a fun thread I guess, but don't see where you got that from in the article.
Quote from: crazy canuck on May 12, 2011, 11:00:48 AM
Turns out Havard is agast that Canadians wouldnt elect one of their own.
He still a mod over at Pdox?
Quote from: Malthus on May 12, 2011, 01:03:30 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on May 12, 2011, 12:55:39 PM
Quote from: Malthus on May 12, 2011, 12:51:18 PM
The same sort of ads would have worked, had he been an academic at U of T all those years.
I disagree. As much as we all love to hate Toronto it would have had no impact at all. He was someone that had spent a large amount of his professional career outside the Country. We have a long history of academics within Canada turning to politics at both the Federal and Provincial levels. I dont know why someone from the U of T would have been any different.
Because, without an air of reality about the ads, they would not have bite or traction. In fact, without bite, they subject the maker to ridicule and can even boost the target. Remember those Con attack ads depicting Cretien as a moron because his face sags? He made hay with that, because the key to Cretien was that he was a old-time party infighter, not a moron. The ads lacked teeth.
If Iggy had come back from Harvard filled with a burning vision of a liberal society, and the charisma to transmit this vision to his constituents, show them how his vision could inspire and recreate their communities, and worked with them to (say) improve the Bloor Street business improvement area or whatever ... those Con ads would have flubbed, badly.
The ads worked because they had an air of reality. Iggy *did* appear to be an opportunist. It isn't the fact that he's an academic, or a long-time Yank dweller - it is the fact he does not appear committed.
what you say is true enough... though I think you are overestimating the brainpower of those who did take the ads seriously. Anybody who is anything but offended by the "blood soaked" look of them needs to take their head out of their ass.
It's the look, production of the ads that did all the actual work. Not the fact that yes he was an opportunist.
Imagine how bad he'd have lost if he was from Yale.
Quote from: Razgovory on May 12, 2011, 10:46:39 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on May 12, 2011, 11:00:48 AM
Turns out Havard is agast that Canadians wouldnt elect one of their own.
He still a mod over at Pdox?
LOL. Second time in two days I've spilled my morning coffee. :lmfao:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 12, 2011, 08:29:20 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on May 12, 2011, 11:00:48 AM
Turns out Havard is agast that Canadians wouldnt elect one of their own.
Makes for a fun thread I guess, but don't see where you got that from in the article.
Quote"Harvard sees itself as the centre of the universe, so I'm sure it felt it very deeply," said Graham Wilson, chair of Boston University's department of political science.
:hmm:
OK, if you want to take Graham Wilson's word for it. Based on the thread title I expected more Harvardians to be actually agasting on the record. Instead the direct quotes were more along the lines of concern that the "Ivy League Intellectual" theme might be crossing the border.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 13, 2011, 08:59:21 AM
OK, if you want to take Graham Wilson's word for it.
So what you really meant is you disagree with the analysis in the article not that you dont know where the idea is mentioned in the article.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 13, 2011, 06:30:54 AM
Imagine how bad he'd have lost if he was from Yale.
:spit take: Do you work for MAD magazine? kutgw
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 13, 2011, 08:59:21 AM
OK, if you want to take Graham Wilson's word for it. Based on the thread title I expected more Harvardians to be actually agasting on the record. Instead the direct quotes were more along the lines of concern that the "Ivy League Intellectual" theme might be crossing the border.
I dunno, why should I take the chair of the department of political science at Boston U's word for how Harvard, in general, views a matter of political science?
That would just be crazy. :D
Quote from: Malthus on May 13, 2011, 12:52:57 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 13, 2011, 08:59:21 AM
OK, if you want to take Graham Wilson's word for it. Based on the thread title I expected more Harvardians to be actually agasting on the record. Instead the direct quotes were more along the lines of concern that the "Ivy League Intellectual" theme might be crossing the border.
I dunno, why should I take the chair of the department of political science at Boston U's word for how Harvard, in general, views a matter of political science?
That would just be crazy. :D
Well he's at BU...
It's a pity, as he did a worthwhile series about 'Death of Yugoslavia'; should have stayed a broadcaster.
Obviously Canadian elections get no attention at all in America. But I noted with humor that this time around, with massive tornadoes destroying the South, the Royal Wedding which millions of American women were super excited about, and Osama bin Laden getting his brains blown out the Canadian election may have been the most overshadowed one in the history of Canada.
Yeah, the last election got some coverage on the 24-hour news stations, but this one the day after Osama's death was a total non-event on CNN.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on May 13, 2011, 08:44:22 PM
Obviously Canadian elections get no attention at all in America. But I noted with humor that this time around, with massive tornadoes destroying the South, the Royal Wedding which millions of American women were super excited about, and Osama bin Laden getting his brains blown out the Canadian election may have been the most overshadowed one in the history of Canada.
I couldn't even find news articles about it in US papers unless I dug deep into the International section. :(
I couldn't help but notice a pall over the entire institution when I walked through the campus today. :(
EDIT: In seriousness, I'd never heard of him until the election. I don't think he is as associated with Harvard as, e.g. Edward Said was with Columbia or Harold Bloom with Yale, etc.
And the only Canadians I'm friendly with here are blood-orange lefties, so they weren't all that sad...
Quotehttp://"They don't fully appreciate that as great a relationship as we have, the United States and Canada, as close as we are, it's important to Canadians to be Canadian, not American,"
Sounds like Germany and Austria.