O’Toole is out

[JeanGary Diablo]

LOL, all this talk about "Go Pierre Pollievre!", yet the last two times he declined to run for party leadership. Can't blame him, who'd want that shitty job of having to bring together a party that's tearing apart at the seams?

The Conservatives' problem is threefold: they have an inability to pick likeable leaders, there are too many social conservatives in that party and there are too many competing factions of conservatives, including Red Tories, Blue Tories, Big Oil Conservatives, small business conservatives, farmers-first conservatives and Libertarians.

 

[jcpro]

Such as?
What were those conservative issues?

I do agree that O'Toole - trying to juggle multiple factions in his party - never really established his own identity.

The question we are debating is whether or not that move to a Bernier or an O'Leary or a Pollivere is the next move, or someone with better media/leadership skills but the same Red Tory instincts as O'Toole?

I feel we aren't going to get a "more effective O'Toole" but are going to go off in a direction more guided by the GOP approach.
I could be wrong, I am not a member of the Party and I don't have an ear to the ground there.

If you have to ask that question, you don't belong in this conversation. And, besides, this is a Canadians political discussion- for a change.

 

[Valcazar]

Canadian conservatism (which is virtually extinct) = British Toryism, not US Republicanism

It did once upon a time.
Does it now?
That's the question.

 

[Valcazar]

Fair enough...then have him read a book on Thatcher.

Interesting.
You want Thatcherism instead?

 

[Frankfooter]

This right here tells me all I need to the know. That the Conservative MP's made the correct choice.

Great, you keep pushing the cons as far right as you can.

 

[Valcazar]

LOL, all this talk about "Go Pierre Pollievre!", yet the last two times he declined to run for party leadership. Can't blame him, who'd want that shitty job of having to bring together a party that's tearing apart at the seams?

The Conservatives' problem is threefold: they have an inability to pick likeable leaders, there are too many social conservatives in that party and there are too many competing factions of conservatives, including Red Tories, Blue Tories, Big Oil Conservatives, small business conservatives, farmers-first conservatives and Libertarians.

That's a real question.
How big tent can a party be in the Canadian system?
The Democrats do a decent job of being very diverse and having a wide ideological spread. It helps that the other side has gotten more ideologically narrow and the simple fact that the US system pressures things into 2 parties far more than the Canadian one does.

In Canada, if you can get a regional base, you can break off pretty easily. So the Conservatives have a dilemma because some of those elements can break off pretty easily.

One solution is just to go for ideological purity and hope that you can win more people over who are currently drifting as bad fits in other parties.

That might be the way they go (it sounds like it is what some of their supporters here want).

 

[Valcazar]

If you have to ask that question, you don't belong in this conversation. And, besides, this is a Canadians political discussion- for a change.

And as a Canadian, I am interested in the discussion.

I am asking the question because I don't believe that you know what those "Conservative issues" were.
After all, they were ones told by Trump, not a Canadian politician.

So you have set yourself a number of problems.

1) What are the Conservative issues Trump expressed that the voters wanted.
2) Which of these are the ones you want a Canadian Conservative Leader to ape?

BBW at least seems to have come down on "I want Thatcherism".
He might even know what that is.

You have a possible new leader for the Conservatives and you have said he needs to have a clear Conservative ideology/platform.

This is your chance to lay out exactly what you mean by that.
Why are you afraid of your own platform?

 

[Dutch Oven]

Interesting.
So in your view, his job was to lie and disguise the Conservative agenda because if it was presented honestly moderates wouldn't vote for it?

Nope, you managed to get the point exactly wrong (a remarkable achievement). The people he lied to were the party members he sold being a conservative to. He was never that. He was supposed to really be a conservative, but have a softer demeanor so that people wouldn't start immediately screaming the usual "but you want to jail the poor, and cut taxes to the rich by 100%" nonsense that the media organizes.

Conservatives believe that if they could only get the honest attention of more voters, their policies are not only good for Canada, but are winners with the public.

 

[james t kirk]

They were always NON priorities for everyone except Justin himself.

Justin wins because he's an idiot who runs against Tories. And Ontario despises Tories more than it despises idiots. Understand that and you understand Canadian national politics.

Funnily enough, I have never been able to vote federally for the Tories because Diefenbaker cancelled the AVRO Arrow.

Seriously. I've never forgiven them. They didn't bury Diefenbaker deep enough or soon enough for me. The guy was an old fogey when he was 25 years old.

I wasn't even born when the conservatives spiked the Arrow, but once I learned about the Arrow and what a national tragedy it was and how it affects us even today, I've never put an X beside a federal conservative. But I despise Justin Trudeau so much for being so utterly stupid and incompetent that I voted strategically for the NDP in the last election because I did want the Cons to win. Too bad it didn't work out for me or for O'Toole.

 

[Valcazar]

Nope, you managed to get the point exactly wrong (a remarkable achievement). The people he lied to were the party members he sold being a conservative to. He was never that. He was supposed to really be a conservative, but have a softer demeanor so that people wouldn't start immediately screaming the usual "but you want to jail the poor, and cut taxes to the rich by 100%" nonsense that the media organizes.

Conservatives believe that if they could only get the honest attention of more voters, their policies are not only good for Canada, but are winners with the public.

You think the only reason Conservative policies don't get honest attention is because the media isn't giving their ideas a fair shake.
OK.

 

[Insidious Von]

Canadian conservatism (which is virtually extinct) = British Toryism, not US Republicanism

In terms of dumbfuckery the British Tories make the GOP look like Rhodes Scholars, Brexit is eroding Britain's economic clout little by little. Thatcher knew that you couldn't please everyone, she liberalized London's financial services making the city very rich. Boris Johnson, won a majority by promising Northumberland that the country would level up. Harold Wilson tried it and London nearly went bankrupt.

Canada's Progressive Conservatives were not killed off by Harper, Mulroney killed them off in the 1988 Election. Harper won a majority when Jack Layton took Liberal seats in Quebec. Now was not the time for Erin O'Toole to fall on his sword, this is a replay of the Liberals in 2010. And Pierre Poilievre is a weasel, not someone I would vote for. Are the Conservatives about to Ignatieff themselves.

 

[danmand]

Conservatives believe that if they could only get the honest attention of more voters, their policies are not only good for Canada, but are winners with the public.

Fortunately I think you are wrong. Very wrong.

I hardly know any conservatives except the ones I see here on Terb. If they are representatives of real Conservatives, there is no way they would get into Government.

There is no appetite in Ontario/Quebec for removing the Universal health care. On the contrary, most people see the need for more social programs.

 

[james t kirk]

I'm speaking more about the extremists within the caucus, but in the end controlling the caucus is essential to controlling the Party. Yes, every leader enforces party discipline - some do it better than others. Harper had the very difficult challenge of trying to enforce discipline on a very diverse caucus. Most people expected the extremists (especially the social conservatives) to be in the ascendance within the Harper government. Remember the scare tactics of "the secret agenda." There was no secret agenda. Harper had a very clear agenda. It wasn't to outlaw abortion; it wasn't to end same sex marriage; it wasn't to be fiscally prudent. His agenda was to weaken the federal government by limiting its scope and returning power to the provinces. You could call him a "constitutionalist." To do that he needed the social conservative/extreme right with him and he handled them brilliantly. Every now and then he'd let them off their leash so to speak, and they'd get to make some outrageous statement in Parliament and everybody on the other side would latch on to it and start to cry about the "secret agenda" but then nothing would happen, so it became more and more obvious that Harper had no secret agenda and people in the centre became less and less afraid of him. End result? Majority government in 2011 after 2 minorities. Harper was a master at holding the diverse interests in the Conservative (or PC) Party together. Diefenbaker couldn't do it. Stanfield couldn't win. Clark got ousted. Mulroney won two big majorities but his time in office also gave us the Reform Party as the PC Party split apart. I was not a big fan of the man but the Conservative Party needs another Stephen Harper at the helm - someone with conservative credentials, who's politically pragmatic, who has a very clear understanding of what his agenda is and who knows how to manage a potentially contentious caucus by giving every enough room but not too much room.

Yep.

I could not stand Harper by the time he was forced out the door, but I have to admit, you are correct. He knew how to control a party of crack pots.

 

[james t kirk]

There is no appetite in Ontario/Quebec for removing the Universal health care. On the contrary, most people see the need for more social programs.

Where in God's green earth did you come up with the notion that the Tories want to end universal health care.

They would be reduced to 0 seats if they ran on that.

 

[Dutch Oven]

You think the only reason Conservative policies don't get honest attention is because the media isn't giving their ideas a fair shake.
OK.

When a salesman arrives at your door offering very affordable sides of meat from a reputable local butcher, you tend not to hear him out fairly if there's a faux-pious mob standing right behind him screaming "Don't trust him - he's a Vampire in disguise!".

In this case, the irony is that the faux-pious bunch happen to be the real vampires, sucking at the jugular of the taxpayer, and understanding who keeps bringing their victims to the slaughter.

 

[danmand]

Where in God's green earth did you come up with the notion that the Tories want to end universal health care.

They would be reduced to 0 seats if they ran on that.

I completely agree with your prediction. I was referring to opinions of the conservatives that post here on Terb.

Fortunately I think you are wrong. Very wrong.

I hardly know any conservatives except the ones I see here on Terb. If they are representatives of real Conservatives, there is no way they would get into Government.

There is no appetite in Ontario/Quebec for removing the Universal health care. On the contrary, most people see the need for more social programs.

 

[JeanGary Diablo]

In terms of dumbfuckery the British Tories make the GOP look like Rhodes Scholars, Brexit is eroding Britain's economic clout little by little. Thatcher knew that you couldn't please everyone, she liberalized London's financial services making the city very rich. Boris Johnson, won a majority by promising Northumberland that the country would level up. Harold Wilson tried it and London nearly went bankrupt.

Canada's Progressive Conservatives were not killed off by Harper, Mulroney killed them off in the 1988 Election. Harper won a majority when Jack Layton took Liberal seats in Quebec. Now was not the time for Erin O'Toole to fall on his sword, this is a replay of the Liberals in 2010. And Pierre Poilievre is a weasel, not someone I would vote for. Are the Conservatives about to Ignatieff themselves.

I wanted to disagree with you, but as I kept reading ... well, I think my upvote speaks for itself.

 

[Dutch Oven]

Fortunately I think you are wrong. Very wrong.

I hardly know any conservatives except the ones I see here on Terb. If they are representatives of real Conservatives, there is no way they would get into Government.

There is no appetite in Ontario/Quebec for removing the Universal health care. On the contrary, most people see the need for more social programs.

Don't confuse your particular bubble for a cross section of Canadian society. A lot of low income Canadians know all too well how important it is to spend money wisely, but have been frightened away from voting Conservative because of lies told to them about the "secret agenda" of the party.

TERB is not a great cross section of society either. If you have much money to spend on escorts, chances are that you aren't in the bottom quartile of household incomes.

It's interesting that you immediately do what I suggest is the campaign of lies the media engage in. What network do you work at? LOL! There isn't a Conservative in Canada talking about "removing" Universal health care. There are, however, better ways to spend all the money that is poured into it.

 

[JeanGary Diablo]

Yep.

I could not stand Harper by the time he was forced out the door, but I have to admit, you are correct. He knew how to control a party of crack pots.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[JeanGary Diablo]

How many more leaders will the Conservatives elect and then fire before they realize that the problem is the party? I still remember when the Tories used to be the party of personal accountability.