Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Nah, that's too simple. It would never work.

Rick Mercer on Libs choosing their leader :

"Members of the Liberal party don't actually get to vote for the leader. Oh no, no, no. That would be madness. Instead, they choose a delegate. And when they choose their delegate, they hoist them up on their shoulders and they march them down to the train station and then send them off to Montreal somewhere. And then three days later some guy named Gerard Kennedy makes a back room deal and then suddenly, the guy in third place who can't communicate becomes the leader. Then there's an election. Then they lose.

Here's an idea. From now on in, how about members of the party actually get to vote for the leader? And instead of one of these old fashioned multi-million dollar conventions, do it on the Internet. Hell you can do your banking on the there, you can buy a kidney on there, surely to god you can figure out a way to vote for the leader of a political party on there."

Actually, Rick, at their last convention the Lib delegates held a forum on whether or not to open up the vote to, you know, the members of the Liberal party. Then they voted against it.


Paul said...

Change the delegate model? But, the 'openness' and 'team building' aspects of delegate model worked o-so-well for the Liberals last time.

Alison said...

Hey if thought you enjoyed the openness and team building of the delegate model, you're just gonna love the new IggyRae auto-consecration model!

Blog Archive