On high-risk strategies

There's been far too little mention in the press of the obvious dangers to Michael Ignatieff and his party if they decide that Stephane Dion's strategy of giving Harper everything he wants is somehow worth repeating. But Hassan Arif nicely sums up the options now facing Ignatieff:

If the Liberals vote to support Harper's budget (or at the very least abstain) while the NDP votes against it, then Ignatieff's standing as leader could be severely damaged. For progressive-leaning Canadians, he will be seen as "collaborating with Harper" and "abdicating his role as Official opposition leader," both of which would gravely damage the Liberal Party among a crucial group of voters.

This would open the door for Jack Layton and the NDP to be the dominant voice of progressive Canadians.

The Coalition may not have caught on with the public at large, but it does enjoy a significant degree of popularity among progressive and left-leaning Canadians...

If Ignatieff can articulate a vision that inspires Canadians, and if he can rise to deal with the economic challenges of the current downturn, showing that he understands the problems of Canadians worried about their jobs and livelihoods, then he could be a successful leader.

This could be derailed in the eyes of many Canadians if he is seen as collaborating with Stephen Harper and selling out on progressive values. This is a prospect which Michael Ignatieff must be keenly aware of if he is to succeed.

Indeed, for those looking for the quickest possible path to Liberal destruction (which of course tends to be the Cons' fondest hope), it likely involves Ignatieff taking on for himself exactly the same mantle of weakness and ineffectiveness that sunk Dion. And that negative impression would almost certainly spill over onto the party's image as well: while the Libs could relatively easily paint Dion's mistakes as his own based on his seemingly accidental ascension to the leadership and limited ties to the party structure, they would have a much harder time shaking off Ignatieff's failures when the party has effectively chosen him by acclamation.

Moreover, there's ample reason to think the Libs' current base will be less than happy with any move to keep propping up Harper. After all, Liberal voters have not only shown themselves to be strong supporters of the coalition, but have also expressed their willingness to switch their vote if it leads to a better chance to stop the Harper Cons. And if two Lib leaders in a row demonstrate that they're not up to the task, then the result can only be to strengthen the NDP's hand as the best available alternative.

(Edit: fixed wording.)