I'd prefer Rae to Iggy without hesitation. The "nation for Quebec" thing, the Isreal flip-flop, the dislike-like Quebec language laws blither, and the general sense that this guy is very much out of touch with the country as a whole makes me wish he'd kept his comfy Harvard job where he expounded the supposed virtues of invading Iraq and mouthed on about America's role in Vietnam.
Iggy, go home.
As for Rae, at least he has had involvement in Canadian affairs at many levels for the last thirty years.
Ignateiff seems to be a pure politician, he has re-opened the Quebec nationality issue to ramp up support for him in Quebec. He doesn't care that he's opening up a can of worms, he just wants a few votes of support.
Ignateiff says he supported the Iraq war conflict, but the vast majority of Canadians - and as of 2005 a majority of Americans as well - agree that the operation was a mistake.
His comments on Israel and Palestine offer no better sign for his stances on foreign policy.
In my opinion, it is surprising that Ignatieff is the frontrunner at all. The Liberal leadership is looking for solid change, right?
Kennedy and Dion seem to embody what the Liberals need. In Dion you have a genuine Quebecer that understands the divisional problem, and won't just say something stupid to grab for votes on the nationality issue. In Kennedy you have a genuine Liberal who has a proven track record that he's interested in improving social programs (from what I've read his track record on education in Ontario is decent). And both Dion and Kennedy are at least true Canadians, Ignatieff seems to blow wherever the wind blows.
So the question stands, why is Ignatieff still running ahead?
Bob Rae sounds like a decent person, but his past is a record that can't be changed. One of the Liberal bases of Canada is the urban region around Toronto, other areas in Southern Ontario, and Bob Rae is highly unpopular in Ontario. He also has loyalty issues switching between NDP and Liberal. That may appeal to people who don't like to affiliate with parties, but it isn't enough to get him elected.
Is solid change going to come from installing a person who was with the NDP, had low popularity, and was practically thrown out of office barely 10 years in the past?
I don't think by weakening support in a Liberal base area is a good sign for solid change.
In my opinion Dion and Kennedy are the two best options in the race at this point, and out of the two I am inclined to support Kennedy.
Dion appears to be a Chretien era memory that is too close to the history surrounding his cabinet. Its too easy to tie him to the past, and Liberals need to distance themselves from anything closely related to sponsorship.
Based on all the factors, I think Kennedy is a clear choice for Liberal leadership. He's a fresh face, having come from provincial politics and not federal, and he offers a clear Liberal platform that is pro-social programs such as universal health care and not so obnoxious on the foreign policy as Ignatieff has so clearly demonstrated.
