Is there a reason for Antonia Maioni?
Because honestly, I can't think of one. From her vapid postings on Maclean's 50 (sample quote from her comment on the Quebec election: "History was made as Quebecers elected a minority government and was made again as the third-party ADQ formed the official opposition. But the real story of the election is what happened in terms of the vote.") to her inimitable penchant for stating the boneheadedly obvious during her myriad television appearances as Quebec-based-political-scientist-at-large, rarely has a political observer/commentator taken so much opportunity to contribute to the public discourse and delivered so little.
Case in point: how the hell can a Canadian political scientist manage to produce a treatise on the legacy of Tony Blair and fail to acknowledge, even in passing, the impact of Blair's establishment of devolved assemblies in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland? Are there no lessons to be drawn from this legacy for Canada - say, regarding the perils of dicking around with the distribution of legislative and spending powers for electoral gain?