It was about Michael Ignatieff

I’m a bit late to finding this, but here is Michael Valpy on the last election and Michael Ignatieff.

And at the end of this election campaign, Erin MacLeod, a post-doctoral researcher from Montreal, drew this intriguing distinction between Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Harper: “Ignatieff demands that you listen to him and think he’s right, while Harper just wanted people to put faith in the Conservative party that they would sort out what to do when it needed doing. It was as if Ignatieff had his book about Canada all ready, presumptuously written–and that’s what makes him paternalistic.”

Thus to summarize. For younger Canadians wanting vision, they looked at Mr. Ignatieff and saw no vision. For older Canadians wanting that mystical thing called “leadership,” they looked at Mr. Ignatieff and did not see leadership. For women wanting someone whom they could trust and not feel threatened by, they looked at Mr. Ignatieff and saw distrust and paternalism.