Every pundit and their sibling will write about the Liberal leadership race over the next few weeks, but few will say what truly needs to be said: it is the wrong way to choose a national party leader.
Unfortunately, so many will claim that shutting down parliament is needed to allow the Liberal Party (the corporate brand fan club) to have a leadership contest, when no such contest should happen. As you say, caucus party leadership should be decided by the caucus, and that doesn't ever require shutting down parliament or having a general election.
I wrote something back in 2020, but it wasn't as well written as what you did:
Well done, David! This type of analysis flows from the same perspective on true democracy which first sparked and then consolidated my support for you, irrespective of party labels, and continues to do so. Keep it up!
Great observations! I remember the days in which the person who could get the most paid memberships won the nomination....it had nothing to do with the quality of the candidate! You are quite right; time to change things!
I wish Democracy Watch had this level of analysis.
They have a campaign to sue to clarify some restrictions on when a PM can prorogue:
https://democracywatch.ca/funds/stop-progrations-and-other-power-abuses-fund/
Unfortunately, so many will claim that shutting down parliament is needed to allow the Liberal Party (the corporate brand fan club) to have a leadership contest, when no such contest should happen. As you say, caucus party leadership should be decided by the caucus, and that doesn't ever require shutting down parliament or having a general election.
I wrote something back in 2020, but it wasn't as well written as what you did:
https://mcormond.blogspot.com/2020/01/should-it-be-easy-to-find-candidates.html
Well done, David! This type of analysis flows from the same perspective on true democracy which first sparked and then consolidated my support for you, irrespective of party labels, and continues to do so. Keep it up!
Never thought about this view. Thank you. Sounds so right.
Great observations! I remember the days in which the person who could get the most paid memberships won the nomination....it had nothing to do with the quality of the candidate! You are quite right; time to change things!
You nailed it David.