News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

This upcoming election is almost a guaranteed liberal majority. As someone who grew up leaning conservative, the conservative party is an unelectable disaster but I honestly dont think the liberals are any better. The greens are in self destruct mode. As an Ontario can I vote BQ? Cuz at this point I'm not convinced that's the worst option.

Personally I think the only hope is that the NDP makes large gains, either to keep it a minority government, or win a minority government in of themselves.
 
Richard White said:
It's because he is not hardcore conservative enough. The federal conservatives are more akin to the US GOP than they are anything else.
Click to expand...
I think you exaggerate. It is true that any Canadians 'on the right" will most likely identify with the CPC as they really have nowhere else to go but there are (still) a fair number of red (well, maybe pink) Tories around. Based on recent events in the US the number of sane members of GOP is approaching zero.
 
Richard White said:
It's because he is not hardcore conservative enough. The federal conservatives are more akin to the US GOP than they are anything else.
Click to expand...
If this was the case other more right wing options would be picking up the slack and polling higher. That's not the case, otoole is losing ground to the Liberals and NDP, so the voters they're losing are not simply the super right. I am the perfect example of a conservative vote that has drifted to the NDP at this point.

The reality is the CPC is swimming in no mans land. Not socially conservative enough for some of their base and not socially liberal enough for other segments of their base. Harper somehow managed to make it work, scheer was hopeless and otoole has somehow managed to be worse. The cons are hopelessly lost right now. They dont know what their policy agenda is or even what they stand for
 
I'll be replicating existing posts, probably. Bear with me.
Videodrome said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1416065924667527174

Only 14% for Erin...
Click to expand...
Quite shocking, when I saw these numbers on SSP.
Richard White said:
It's because he is not hardcore conservative enough. The federal conservatives are more akin to the US GOP than they are anything else.
Click to expand...
I think that the problem is, hardcores identify him with the Eastern Liberals. Their support is less enthusiastic. Red Tories identify him as too conservative. Their support is also low.
DSC said:
I think you exaggerate. It is true that any Canadians 'on the right" will most likely identify with the CPC as they really have nowhere else to go but there are (still) a fair number of red (well, maybe pink) Tories around. Based on recent events in the US the number of sane members of GOP is approaching zero.
Click to expand...
[T]he number of sane members of GOP is approaching zero. Fixed it for you.

The CPC feels like the party of hating Trudeau. Honestly, if they were less focused on that and brought in more solid policy (their website is all political talk), then there's a reasonable chance I would support them.
Bjays92 said:
If this was the case other more right wing options would be picking up the slack and polling higher. That's not the case, otoole is losing ground to the Liberals and NDP, so the voters they're losing are not simply the super right. I am the perfect example of a conservative vote that has drifted to the NDP at this point.

The reality is the CPC is swimming in no mans land. Not socially conservative enough for some of their base and not socially liberal enough for other segments of their base. Harper somehow managed to make it work, Scheer was hopeless and O'Toole has somehow managed to be worse. The cons are hopelessly lost right now. They dont know what their policy agenda is or even what they stand for
Click to expand...
Yep. You nailed it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSC
The Conservatives, as a Federal party (the provincial situation is different and varies across the country) have this singular problem in my mind.

They are perceived by centre and right-centre as Liberal light, with less competence and bench depth.

That is, a party of big business, more attuned its own narrow self-interests than that of the majority of Canadians (just like the Liberals); but without the ability to even fake caring; nor the ability
to offer anything tangible to anyone by way of an achievable gain. (what does voting for you get me?) .

The Liberals answered that question once with 'legalized pot'; and a 'national child benefit'; this time the biggest pitch will clearly be 'childcare'.

They may half-ass it; they may under-perform, they may get it done too slowly and there may too much grift of one form or another along the path to delivery.............but they are offering 'something'.

This begs the question for someone in the centre, or centre-right space, what do the Conservatives have to offer.

I, for one, haven't heard any compelling proposals of any political slant. So people may ask, if the Conservatives are potentially 'Liberal-light' but w/o any meaningful policy and a profound penchant for foot-in-mouth disease
why would I consider voting for them?

****

Meanwhile, never mind the hyper-right base; genuine economic conservatives, small-c, can't seem to find much compelling there either. Part of that is the very loud hyper-right base; but its also just a lack of any good policy ideas.

****

What Harper had going for him, other than obtaining power in the wake of the Gommery Inquiry scandal was that:

a) He was technocratic. Essentially competent (ish) even when in a way one might not like, or that was partisan or aloof. He also chose his words carefully, but was clear, in a believable way on shutting down his base on certain issues.

b) When Harper came in things like Gay Marriage may have seemed to be more 'living' issues, with those who were motivated to roll back such things, feeling like Harper could be their guy, or at least was there only choice.
To contrast that, I don't think most people feel gay marriage or any number of other policy issues (assisted suicide, or legalized Pot) are really in play. So even if you believed 'Erin' was your guy on those files, it simply doesn't matter.

c) Harper put forward conservative-ish ideas, simply and straight-forwardly (ie cutting the HST by 2 points) that while simple and I would argue dubious economic policy were nonetheless appealing to many, had no social issue taint and were easy to grasp as well.

*****

I don't see any equivalent to that right now for the Federal Party.

To succeed, they need a more diverse and competent slate of candidates, particularly front-benchers, they need to poach the BQ/CAQ soft nationalist, right-leaning voters in rural Quebec; they need some compelling ideas from the centre and at least one right-leaning idea that doesn't deeply offend many.

I don't see them getting there between now and the next election.
 
Last edited:
Bjays92 said:
If this was the case other more right wing options would be picking up the slack and polling higher. That's not the case, otoole is losing ground to the Liberals and NDP, so the voters they're losing are not simply the super right. I am the perfect example of a conservative vote that has drifted to the NDP at this point.

The reality is the CPC is swimming in no mans land. Not socially conservative enough for some of their base and not socially liberal enough for other segments of their base. Harper somehow managed to make it work, scheer was hopeless and otoole has somehow managed to be worse. The cons are hopelessly lost right now. They dont know what their policy agenda is or even what they stand for
Click to expand...
Accurate but I would say it goes one step worse than even that.

Ontarians, Quebecers, and Atlantic Canadians who are politically conservative and nominally within the Conservative base, still probably feel isolated by the current Western Canada CPC caucus. The party of Alberta doesn't really represent the interests of the Ontarian PC voter nor that of the CAQ voter in Quebec. At the worst of times, they are openly antagonistic towards Ontario and Quebec - and this is still a country with a fair degree of regionalism (not to mention a political dynamic where you NEED to perform in the 905 and Montreal equivalents). If social conservativism isn't the ideological driver to vote, then it should be no surprise that OPC and CAQ voters would be considering other options federally.
 
So, my dad was telling me an interesting story. He got a call from the CPC candidate in his riding (which is titanium Liberal) and they freely admitted that they live in Whitby! So we both agreed that no matter what party, parachuting is horrible . Also, I told him about the Tool handing out favours to his friends in the party and he just shook his head and seems pretty disgusted with the CPC in general.
 
Videodrome said:
we both agreed that no matter what party, parachuting is horrible
Click to expand...

In 2007 and 2008 when I was on the Scarborough Southwest NDP Riding Executive we had parachute candidates. I strongly opposed it.

We had Jay Sarkar (provincial) in 2007 and Alamgir Hussein (federal) in 2008.

None of them lived in the riding and the only reason they were put there was to appeal to the ethnic minority in the riding. The Riding President and other long-standing exec members saw it as a way to bring in money and win a crucial demographic.

The candidates weren't from Scarborough Southwest and had no connection to the area. I opposed it because I knew the average voter wouldn't relate and that the minority they were targeting primarily consisted of PRs who wouldn't be able to vote.

My thinking was to bring in a more relatable candidate who would appeal to voters. Once we lost miserably they did just that and brought in Dan Harris for 2011 and won.

I ended up getting ostracized within the Executive for not following the party line so to speak but in the end I was vindicated.

Jay Sarkar was a manufacturer of defence related products in Vaughan while at the time Alamgir ran a newspaper called the Weekly Shomoy.

Something interesting to note about Alamgir was the cover-up by the Scarborough Southwest Riding Exec and Federal NDP HQ.

Apparently Alamgir was taking cash donations of various sizes, depositing it into his account and writing personal cheques in the amounts he received. Those cheques were then sent off to the bank and put in the party/riding coffers.

It wasn't until an audit was done after the election that it was found he violated a few laws. It was quickly swept under the rug to avoid a PR disaster.

In 2014 you had Alex Wilson running provincially in Scarborough Agincourt while he ran in Scarborough Centre federally in 2015 both for the NDP. Alex was another candidate who was parachuted in when the NDP needed someone.

He didn't care what riding he ran in, he was part of the NDP cult.

My point is that parachute candidates don't work which is why I'm strongly against them.

To win an election you need name recognition which is why Dan Harris won in Scarborough Southwest (Orange wave notwithstanding).

Parachute Candidates don't know squat about the riding or its problems and the locals can see that.
 
The only time I think it’s appropriate to run in a riding that you don’t live in is if you live fairly close by in a neighbouring riding, or if you have connections to the riding via your work, school or volunteering.

I also suspect there are cases with small parties like the Greens where they have to poach someone from another riding because they legitimately can’t find a candidate from the area.
 
Charlie Angus has never lived in his riding, although he does live in the next riding. He is elected with a large majority each election.
 
Keeping in mind that I support MMP (mixed member proportional representation)
I have always felt that in respect of a local riding component the candidate should have be a resident of the riding (and I would like this to be the law).
The principle in the local riding be it under FPTP or MMP is that the elected member represents the interests of his/her community to the legislature.
We all know what doesn't happen nearly often enough, but its surely aggravated when the elected member is not from said riding.

Likewise, I don't want to see 'star candidates' who have no history with a party nominated, nor instant members deciding nominees or leaders.
I have long felt that one should have to be a member of a party for 3 years prior to a nomination or leadership contest in order to have the right to vote in same.

No carpet bagging, no by-passing or usurping the democratic process of a constituency or a party.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top