True, but I think it's unfair. If God Himself was running the Liberal Party, they would still have lost seats. And the one who solidly deserves the most blame (IMHO) is his predecessor, Chretien.
Belinda could run but I think it's too soon after coming in 3rd for the Conservative leadership only a few years ago. At least she has a seat in the Commons and, if she plays her cards right, will get some camera face time as a prominent opposition critic.
Frank has a good shot, largely on name recognition, but it's hard to get TV time at home when you're stationed in DC. On the one hand, it's customary for ambassadors to submit their resignation to the new gov't which can then pick & choose who to retain; on the other, it would be wise of Harper to keep McKenna in DC because (a) he's useful there, and (b) it keeps him off the Liberal leadership campaign for just a little longer.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-01-24 04:29 pm (UTC)True, but I think it's unfair. If God Himself was running the Liberal Party, they would still have lost seats. And the one who solidly deserves the most blame (IMHO) is his predecessor, Chretien.
Belinda could run but I think it's too soon after coming in 3rd for the Conservative leadership only a few years ago. At least she has a seat in the Commons and, if she plays her cards right, will get some camera face time as a prominent opposition critic.
Frank has a good shot, largely on name recognition, but it's hard to get TV time at home when you're stationed in DC. On the one hand, it's customary for ambassadors to submit their resignation to the new gov't which can then pick & choose who to retain; on the other, it would be wise of Harper to keep McKenna in DC because (a) he's useful there, and (b) it keeps him off the Liberal leadership campaign for just a little longer.
Let the games begin! :-)