These are the wasted years of the Liberal Party of Canada.
They began with the slow-motion collapse of then-prime minister Paul Martin's power -- the election of a minority government in 2004 followed by defeat by Stephen Harper's Conservatives in 2006.
The party since then has been in a futile search for the silver bullet to slay the Tory pretenders and restore the Liberals as the "natural government party".
Stéphane Dion wasn't it; nor was Michael Igantieff.
Bob Rae wants to be, however national opinion as measured by every poll since he took the temporary helm isn't encouraging.
There have been wasted assets in these years, like the eminently-electable Kimberly Love who ran in Grey-Bruce-Owen Sound in 2011 and was dragged into third place by the disintegration of her party.
Multiply Love's defeat by 150 ridings across the country and one begins to understand the reality on the ground for Liberals.
There is no quick fix.
It took the Conservative movement two decades from the rise of the Reform Party in to the election of Harper's first government in 2006, to complete the painful process of its return to the power of the Mulroney years.
Now it is the Liberals turn to decide their future.
At stake is, on one hand, a sharply polarized political milieu in which competing partisans play blocs of voters off against each other.
The polarity depends upon ideological Conservatives vying with social democrats -- their foe of choice -- for the political hearts and minds of a plurality of Canadian voters.
On the other hand there is a more temperate, more democratic political environment , governed by Aristotelean virtues, in which politicians and voters together address the future through the electoral and parliamentary processes, getting ahead of issues to resolve them for the common good.
The choice between polarization and moderation depends on whether the Canadian Conservatives face the social democrats of the NDP and the Occupy movement who think that economic and social opportunity is measured by equal results.
Or a democratic culture in which Conservatives face Liberals who believe that equal opportunity means equality at the starting line, with the results at the finish line depending upon individual effort and merit.
In their pithy book on marketing, Affinity: Beyond Branding,published in 2010, Martin Goldfarb and Howard Aster say in the chapter The Just Society,"Politics is both process and vision. Success in politics is a combination of the two."
"Vision alone will not lead to continued success. Vision becomes the guide for public policy.
"In order to achieve results in politics, one must become a master of process. Good public policy means conjoining public policy with a mastery of process," the authors write.
"The search for vision in politics discontinuous, but achieved infrequently. The apogee of this vision in politics was the definition of the "Just Society" by Pierre Trudeau in 1968."
In the day, Goldfarb was the Liberal advertising guru, masterminded the successful marketing of Trudeau's vision, so he knows the story as an insider.
"Trudeau introduced this concept (of the Just Society) in 1968 in order to define himself and to define the country. By this concept alone, he found a way to define Canadian values and to both define and invigorate the Canadian psyche."
Goldfarb and Aster say that the Just Society brand combined promise and performance and lasted for Trudeau's 16 years in office -- a remarkably enduring political brand.
The Liberal Party of Canada's demise is, in part, the result of the dark side of the Trudeau years, the step by step abandonment of the west and certain Atlantic constituencies, and a loss of rapport with Quebec.
Nevertheless voters knew where Trudeau stood and why, and could vote for or against his party with clarity.
They don't know where the Liberal party stands today.
Goldfarb and Aster say that mastery of process is needed, too.
In recent months, the Liberal caucus, executive leadership and constituency members have been inclined to focus on process at the neglect of vision, and the wasted years drag on.
Some critics argue that the deterioration will never be reversed; the Liberal Party of Canada will be relegated to a living death on the sidelines.
As time goes by the party will become irrelevant to new generations of Canadians -- quaint and remote, fielding candidates of decreasing quality and impact and forgotten by everyone except themselves between elections.
Others argue that, there is a future of reinvention and the discovery of a new vision.
A new Liberal brand based on virtues and values as powerful as the Just Society but contemporary -- able to speak in the political idioms of the digital age.
It would be matched by a mastery of processes fit for the times.
To get there requires fortitude and commitment; reinvention will be a long, arduous task.
A first step is to stop talking in terms of the polarizing concept of left and right.
Instead find common ground with the Canadian people beyond left and right.
There is a new Liberal vision already in the society, the economy and the culture waiting to be found through patience and discernment.
Another first step is to elect a leader who is the legitimate choice of a party electoral process.
It has been five years and counting since the party membership last elected a leader -- Stéphane Maurice Dion -- by a legitimate process.
The acclamation of Michael Igantieff as leader in 2010 was gerrymandered and the party paid a dear price.
Political parties are not adept at succession planning.
The ambition and ego of the players discourages it and preoccupations with cash flow and the always-looming next election defeat it.
The Liberals have no choice but to reach beyond the easy alternative of the aging failed premier who currently leads, and chose more wisely with a better eye to the future
The party needs a leader who has vision, longevity and the gift of charisma.
Another early step needed is to get out of the Ottawa bubble -- as much a state of mind as a place -- a capital city cut off from and indifferent to the lives of Canadians.
The future of the party is not in Ottawa. Not in the House of Commons. Not in the 24/7 media scrum on the Rideau canal.
During the past 30 years, the party has progressively written off the country region by region.
Now the elected caucus is backed into the castle keep of Toronto.
To reverse that the party must get its caucus and party executive leadership into the country, beyond Parliament Hill where Conservative control is centred.
It must empower the grassroots and take on the Conservatives in their constituencies.
The legendary Jack Pickersgill made a good case, in his 1986 book The Road Back, about the Liberal Party in the Prime Minister John Diefenbaker years, that the Tory Chief was brought down in Parliament, where his weaknesses could be magnified and exploited.
The Liberals used Pickersgill's insights to good advantage to defeat the Conservatives in 1992.
Who can forget the Rat Pack of Liberal opposition MPs who tormented the Mulroney government in Parliament?
Such is not the case with Harper, who controls Parliament effectively and commands the legislative process.
The Liberals are the third party in the House of Commons which leaves them at a disadvantage.
The Liberals have embarked on recruiting a broader membership, the key to its financial and electoral future.
So far, the effort has been tentative.
The decision to allow non-dues-paying "supporters" to vote for the next leader when the party has never trusted its membership with a one member one vote leadership selection is indicative that the party doesn't yet get it.
Plus, it threw away a million dollars in membership revenues when it decided to let tire-kickers participate in selecting the next leader without paying dues.
The successful model of open voting for a leader is the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta. It has selected three leaders by one member one vote with open membership sales up to the day of voting.
The process was nicknamed "five dollar democracy", the price of a membership, but it gleaned significant revenues and broadened the membership base without ceding control to instant members.
It will take at least two election cycles for the Liberal Party of Canada to return to power.
In the first election, it must pass the NDP to become the official opposition in the House of Commons.
In the second, it can focus on defeating the Conservatives which, as time goes by, will be the party of old faces and old ideas.
It may take two election cycles as the official opposition to achieve the ultimate victory over either an aging Stephen Harper or a less politically talented successor.
If the Liberal Party of Canada isn't strong enough and patient enough to stay the course through two or three election cycles, it isn't strong enough to again form government.
+ 16 + 3 
