If Liberal supporters want to move away from the top-down control of the party, one important place to look is to abandon the US-style presidential Leadership convention concept and restore these Westminster parliaments to having caucus members determine their own leadership (and hold leaders to account at all times).
I don't see the problems as related to a person (In this case you are writing about a specific leaders), but systemic and related to the corporate culture of Canadian political parties.
I agree these are serious problems, but disagree that they are about individuals or that a different individual could solve any real problems.
I agree. I never was thrilled that Bonnie was chosen as our leader (I would have preferred Nate or Ted). She fell back on her “When I was mayor of Mississauga” line too often, and despite her time as mayor, has not performed all that well in front of the camera. Like you, I have done my best to promote her and the party. How can we criticize Poilievre for clinging on despite losing his seat yet turn around and suggest it’s okay for Bonnie? A proper chance for members to make that choice is warranted. Our province cannot sustain another Doug Ford term after this one.
My rural ridings of which I was part of the association at the time and heavily engaged in developing the Rural and Northern Commission to address exactly what you mention. Theoretically Bonnie supports it, but for her to say what she did, means she didn’t get the vital importance of focus on rural and northern ridings. We don’t need urban tactics, we need rural and northern related policies. One area agriculture, but so many more. Nate got this. McGuinty one by securing these ridings. We won’t win until we change the focus in these areas and make people heard. That said our local Lib candidate had our best ever vote, doubling the past one, in this heavily conservative riding - think Hillier our former MPP.
I appreciate the passion and thoughtfulness in your post, and I wanted to offer a different perspective on Bonnie Crombie’s leadership.
You rightly credited Crombie’s housing policy as transformational—arguably one of the boldest platforms our party has seen in years. That’s a testament to a leader who isn’t afraid to tackle tough issues with ambition.
Of course, the campaign wasn’t perfect. But it’s important to recognize the context: Crombie stepped into a fractured party, one that had just regained official status and had limited infrastructure. Much of the campaign planning relied not just on her individual decisions, but on coordination with the executive branch, local associations, and a team still finding its footing. Leadership in this moment is a team sport—and Crombie has never claimed to be a solo act.
I’d also ask: what kind of leader should we be rallying behind? One who speaks perfectly to every riding’s sensitivities? Or one willing to help rebuild the infrastructure needed for long-term success—even if that means having difficult conversations and using language that, while imperfect, reflects her intent to support under-resourced areas?
Rather than tearing down in a moment of rebuilding, now is the time to stand together, collaborate, and strengthen the weakest links. Our party is strongest not when one person leads flawlessly, but when every part of the team works in harmony—where the whole truly becomes greater than the sum of its parts.
Crombie may not be everyone’s ideal. But she’s shown vision, humility, and a willingness to listen. That’s not failure—it’s leadership evolving in real time. And I believe that deserves our support.
With this in mind, what are your thoughts on Jeff Lehman possibly running for OLP leadership? Because if we go by optics, he's a guy just outside 905 and has a strong record as Mayor of Barrie, very close less in 2022 etc
If Liberal supporters want to move away from the top-down control of the party, one important place to look is to abandon the US-style presidential Leadership convention concept and restore these Westminster parliaments to having caucus members determine their own leadership (and hold leaders to account at all times).
https://www.davidgraham.ca/p/leadership-by-caucus
I don't see the problems as related to a person (In this case you are writing about a specific leaders), but systemic and related to the corporate culture of Canadian political parties.
I agree these are serious problems, but disagree that they are about individuals or that a different individual could solve any real problems.
I agree. I never was thrilled that Bonnie was chosen as our leader (I would have preferred Nate or Ted). She fell back on her “When I was mayor of Mississauga” line too often, and despite her time as mayor, has not performed all that well in front of the camera. Like you, I have done my best to promote her and the party. How can we criticize Poilievre for clinging on despite losing his seat yet turn around and suggest it’s okay for Bonnie? A proper chance for members to make that choice is warranted. Our province cannot sustain another Doug Ford term after this one.
My rural ridings of which I was part of the association at the time and heavily engaged in developing the Rural and Northern Commission to address exactly what you mention. Theoretically Bonnie supports it, but for her to say what she did, means she didn’t get the vital importance of focus on rural and northern ridings. We don’t need urban tactics, we need rural and northern related policies. One area agriculture, but so many more. Nate got this. McGuinty one by securing these ridings. We won’t win until we change the focus in these areas and make people heard. That said our local Lib candidate had our best ever vote, doubling the past one, in this heavily conservative riding - think Hillier our former MPP.
I appreciate the passion and thoughtfulness in your post, and I wanted to offer a different perspective on Bonnie Crombie’s leadership.
You rightly credited Crombie’s housing policy as transformational—arguably one of the boldest platforms our party has seen in years. That’s a testament to a leader who isn’t afraid to tackle tough issues with ambition.
Of course, the campaign wasn’t perfect. But it’s important to recognize the context: Crombie stepped into a fractured party, one that had just regained official status and had limited infrastructure. Much of the campaign planning relied not just on her individual decisions, but on coordination with the executive branch, local associations, and a team still finding its footing. Leadership in this moment is a team sport—and Crombie has never claimed to be a solo act.
I’d also ask: what kind of leader should we be rallying behind? One who speaks perfectly to every riding’s sensitivities? Or one willing to help rebuild the infrastructure needed for long-term success—even if that means having difficult conversations and using language that, while imperfect, reflects her intent to support under-resourced areas?
Rather than tearing down in a moment of rebuilding, now is the time to stand together, collaborate, and strengthen the weakest links. Our party is strongest not when one person leads flawlessly, but when every part of the team works in harmony—where the whole truly becomes greater than the sum of its parts.
Crombie may not be everyone’s ideal. But she’s shown vision, humility, and a willingness to listen. That’s not failure—it’s leadership evolving in real time. And I believe that deserves our support.
I agree on the need to focus past the GTA.
With this in mind, what are your thoughts on Jeff Lehman possibly running for OLP leadership? Because if we go by optics, he's a guy just outside 905 and has a strong record as Mayor of Barrie, very close less in 2022 etc