The Decline of the Conservatives

344 posts / 0 new
Last post
Misfit Misfit's picture

At least it wasn't Mackay. If he hadn't been a fool and butchered his French when he announced his intention to run in the race he may have received Quebec support. Oh well. He just didn't do that.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Erin O'Toole ....hahahahahahaha...WOOOO! unilingual anglo from the West. Say goodbye to Quebec support..haha...4 more years of the Liberals. EXCELLENT!

What really made me sick to my stomach was the favt that Lewis was 3rd with just over 30%. She's a fucking idiot.

josh

McKay was the least conservative, but after how he lied and killed off the PCs in 2003, he doesn't deserve to lead anything.

Misfit Misfit's picture

I liked Leslyn Lewis. The only things I have against her is that she is a Conservative and her evangelical views. She really came across to me as being very articulate, smart, genuine, capable, and classy. She sounded like the kind of person that you can disagree about something with but still really enjoy to work with.  I can see why she appealed to so many within their party social conservative views aside.

Debater

alan smithee wrote:

Erin O'Toole ....hahahahahahaha...WOOOO! unilingual anglo from the West. Say goodbye to Quebec support..haha...4 more years of the Liberals. EXCELLENT!

What really made me sick to my stomach was the favt that Lewis was 3rd with just over 30%. She's a fucking idiot.

It's too soon for the Liberals to be popping champagne.  It's true that in theory MacKay was a bigger threat to the Liberals because of his supposed appeal to red tories/blue liberals & swing voters, but it's possible O'Toole will turn out to be a stronger opponent in a general election than expected.

Btw, O'Toole isn't from the West -- he represents Durham in Ontario, and emphasized the fact that he was born in Montreal in his speech last night.  He's not fluent in French, but he's better at it than MacKay.  He reached out to BQ/Nationalist voters, as well.

O'Toole may turn out to be a smarter leader than Scheer or MacKay.

Misfit Misfit's picture

Leslyn Lewis is not an idiot. She is extremely intelligent. She entered the race late and gained strong support base very quickly. That makes her very impressive actually. I just happen to disagree with her political ideology. 

Pondering

From his speech last night O'Toole isn't going to appeal to enough swing voters. They are getting more Republican lite by the day not Liberal lite.  In his acceptance speech he talked about "Liberal ideology" and the "radical left". Canadians elect Liberals because they aren't ideological and don't consider either the Liberals or NDP to be the "radical left". 

He focused on the Liberal deficit before the pandemic but it is nothing compared to the deficit now and the deficit is not what is worrying Canadians. Every G7 nation is spending like a drunken sailor.

He's running on cancelling the carbon tax and leaving it up to the provinces the approach they want to take. That will not fly with Canadians. Lowering taxes for business and personal is not going to be popular with Canadians.

Saying, I want your votes, is not reaching out to Quebec. He is going on the old mandra of supporting nationalists without giving them anything. The Bloc owns Quebec for the moment because of Bill 21. He will be challenged on it.

That he was born in Montreal or raised in Ontario won't help him at all because his politics still reflects Alberta and the prairies, free markets and individual freedoms. Most Canadians don't consider their individual freedoms to be constrained except perhaps by arcane drug laws. We don't consider taxes a curtailment on our freedom nor regulations on business ornerous. These are just normal costs of living in a civilized society. We are not Americans. We want stricter gun control laws and do not relate to the archaic notion of "the right to bear arms" as if we would do physical battle with government forces as a means of revolt.

I think Conservative Party has a really solid base of anywhere from 25 to 30% of the vote but they are pooled in particular communities

The Conservative party is being strongly influenced by the Republicans. Erin O'Toole hired an American call centre because "because of a lack of availability of Canadian conservative political call centres ".  As a Canadian I don't see call centres as either Conservative or Liberal. They are just Canadian businesses. Apparently O'Toole divides businesses into Conservative and Liberal, and he would rather give his business to Americans than to Canadian a Canadian business that hires liberals.

Like in the US the Conservatives seek to polarize views, to divide Canadians into Conservatives and Liberals, to elevate ideology as a religion that should guide government decisions.

Lewis did so well that both MacKay and O'Toole declared their desire to work with her and give her a significant role in the party.

Lewis is against outlawing conversion therapy. This is what Lewis wants.

If elected party leader, she said, she would move to ban sex-selective abortions, criminalize coercive abortions, increase funding for pregnancy centres that counsel women about their alternatives to ending a pregnancy and end funding for international abortions through Canada's foreign aid.

She billed herself as a straight shooter who believes representatives should speak up and defend their views. Social Conservatives have elevated a strong ally willing to speak up. That will not fly well in Central Canada.

The Conservative party thought Peter MacKay was too far left, too liberal lite. That says a lot about the direction the Conservative party will take.

The Liberals do have to put in some effort, but they don't have too much to worry about from the Conservatives in terms of gaining enough votes to form government (because we don't have PR). I think the NDP is a greater threat. Not that they will win, but that they will continue to hold the Liberals to a minority and push them harder to the left.

Minimum income, pharmacare, national daycare, national senior care, national housing plan, are all going to be up for debate. It's possible none will happen but even debating them shows the direction of the mood of the country. Canadians want federal government intervention in what we percieve to be national challenges. Preaching small government is out of touch with the mood of the country.

They will drum up resentment against Trudeau's ethics breaches but it won't help them because are no longer the Progressive Conservatives. Like the Lincoln Republicans they have left or are leaving though much less dramatically.

I think Jack Layton would win the next election maybe even with a majority. I don't think Singh can in part because he is not as experienced as Jack was but also because the turban stands in his way. Maybe in another 8 to 12 years but maybe not even then. We would also be unlikely to elect someone wearing a big crusifix around their neck either.

Of course I would prefer for the NDP to win the next few elections but failing that I would be happy with the Liberals winning a minority government for the next few elections. A kind of a stalemate in which they are forced to bargain with the NDP or face another election in which they would likely get another minority.

The Liberals know that the Conservatives and Bloc are going to vote against them. Everyone is counting on the NDP being too poor to trigger an election. The Liberals want to make the Conservatives look bad for not supporting what is going to be a relief plan. Huge bonus if the Conservatives go off on a tirade about the deficit when countries are doing this world wide to survive. People know this is unprecedented in our lifetimes.

I see the Liberals becoming the modern PC party in all but name. I only hope that doesn't mean that the NDP will become the Liberal party. I don't think it will.

Pondering

First Ballot

MacKay: 33.5% (11,328 points)
O’Toole: 31.6% (10,681 points)
Lewis: 20.5% (6,925 points)
Sloan: 14.4% (4,864 points)

Second Ballot

O’Toole: 35.2% (11,903 points)
MacKay: 34.8% (11,756 points)
Lewis: 30% (10,140 points)

Third Ballot

O’Toole: 57% (19,271 points)
MacKay: 43% (14,528 points)

First ballot, 35% social conservative

Second ballot 30% social conservative

Third ballot social conservatives split to O'Toole.

Social conservatives have a great deal of power in the party.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Misfit wrote:

Leslyn Lewis is not an idiot. She is extremely intelligent. She entered the race late and gained strong support base very quickly. That makes her very impressive actually. I just happen to disagree with her political ideology. 

She's believes in demons. Nuff said

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Debater wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Erin O'Toole ....hahahahahahaha...WOOOO! unilingual anglo from the West. Say goodbye to Quebec support..haha...4 more years of the Liberals. EXCELLENT!

What really made me sick to my stomach was the favt that Lewis was 3rd with just over 30%. She's a fucking idiot.

It's too soon for the Liberals to be popping champagne.  It's true that in theory MacKay was a bigger threat to the Liberals because of his supposed appeal to red tories/blue liberals & swing voters, but it's possible O'Toole will turn out to be a stronger opponent in a general election than expected.

Btw, O'Toole isn't from the West -- he represents Durham in Ontario, and emphasized the fact that he was born in Montreal in his speech last night.  He's not fluent in French, but he's better at it than MacKay.  He reached out to BQ/Nationalist voters, as well.

O'Toole may turn out to be a smarter leader than Scheer or MacKay.

That's a good point. I didn't know he was from Ontario (he came across Albertan) and I didn't know he spent 15 minutes in Montreal.

I ask you. Have yoiu watched what's going on in the US? I will be voting for the Liberals and I hope they merge with the NDP (not permanantly) This person's agenda must be prevented. Like how Bernie backs Biden. Country over politics. Sorry. The Liberals and NDP should incessantly HAMMER him about his agenda. I don't believe the majority of Canadians are SoCons.

bekayne
jerrym

bekayne wrote:

Apparently Lewis had the most votes on the 2nd ballot

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Conservative_Party_of_Canada_leadership_election#Full_results

On Power and Politics, a Conservative commentator noted that 30% of Lewis voters did not pick either O'Toole or McKay after she was eliminated. The numbers in the above url confirm that as the total vote dropped from 171,000 to 153,000, a drop of 18,000 Lewis's 60,000 voters who did not pick either McKay or O'Toole, which is 30% of her voters who did not want either of them. This creates a problem for the Cons because if they shift to the centre right to win an election they could lose these voters while if they try to keep these voters, many non-Conservative voters may feel the party is too far to the right. 

Debater

alan smithee wrote:

That's a good point. I didn't know he was from Ontario (he came across Albertan) and I didn't know he spent 15 minutes in Montreal.

I ask you. Have yoiu watched what's going on in the US? I will be voting for the Liberals and I hope they merge with the NDP (not permanantly) This person's agenda must be prevented. Like how Bernie backs Biden. Country over politics. Sorry. The Liberals and NDP should incessantly HAMMER him about his agenda. I don't believe the majority of Canadians are SoCons.

I agree with you that O'Toole is Harper/Trump lite.  I was just saying he shouldn't be underestimated.

Earlier this year Trudeau had put the Liberals back in majority territory in the polls with good approval from the Covid crisis.  However, Trudeau's latest ethical controversy has taken the Liberals back down into minority territory in the polls.  If O'Toole plays his cards right, he has a shot at winning a minority.

Misfit Misfit's picture

Allan,

Leslyn Lewis's belief in demons speaks nothing to her intelligence. You are entitled to agree or disagree with her regarding the validity of demons but that doesn't give you the right to insult her for what she believes in.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Misfit wrote:

Allan,

Leslyn Lewis's belief in demons speaks nothing to her intelligence. You are entitled to agree or disagree with her regarding the validity of demons but that doesn't give you the right to insult her for what she believes in.

Then go vote for this quack. I don't care if  her intelligence is superior to Einstein. I heard her platform. She's a lunatic

josh

Misfit wrote:

Allan,

Leslyn Lewis's belief in demons speaks nothing to her intelligence. You are entitled to agree or disagree with her regarding the validity of demons but that doesn't give you the right to insult her for what she believes in.

Why not?

Misfit Misfit's picture

josh wrote:

Misfit wrote:

Allan,

Leslyn Lewis's belief in demons speaks nothing to her intelligence. You are entitled to agree or disagree with her regarding the validity of demons but that doesn't give you the right to insult her for what she believes in.

Why not?

Excuse me?

Misfit Misfit's picture

alan smithee wrote:

Misfit wrote:

Allan,

Leslyn Lewis's belief in demons speaks nothing to her intelligence. You are entitled to agree or disagree with her regarding the validity of demons but that doesn't give you the right to insult her for what she believes in.

Then go vote for this quack. I don't care if  her intelligence is superior to Einstein. I heard her platform. She's a lunatic

There seems to be a real maturity deficit here with you. You don't talk to people like that. You don't tell people to go vote for someone when they explain to you that rudely insulting that person's intelligence is offensive and unacceptable. This has nothing to do with me agreeing or disagreeing with what the candidate believes but rather about your toxic behaviour toward others.

I'll also remind you that this is a left wing board. Simply hating the Conservatives and announcing your love for another less severe neo-liberal right wing party and fantasizing for the elimination of the only viable left wing party in Canada is also extremely rude and disrespectful. 

There are Conservatives who post on this board. Most of them post in a manner which I find enhances the discussion of issues. They have the ability to disagree without being toxic and insulting to others. 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Misfit wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Misfit wrote:

Allan,

Leslyn Lewis's belief in demons speaks nothing to her intelligence. You are entitled to agree or disagree with her regarding the validity of demons but that doesn't give you the right to insult her for what she believes in.

Then go vote for this quack. I don't care if  her intelligence is superior to Einstein. I heard her platform. She's a lunatic

There seems to be a real maturity deficit here with you. You don't talk to people like that. You don't tell people to go vote for someone when they explain to you that rudely insulting that person's intelligence is offensive and unacceptable. This has nothing to do with me agreeing or disagreeing with what the candidate believes but rather about your toxic behaviour toward others.

I'll also remind you that this is a left wing board. Simply hating the Conservatives and announcing your love for another less severe neo-liberal right wing party and fantasizing for the elimination of the only viable left wing party in Canada is also extremely rude and disrespectful. 

There are Conservatives who post on this board. Most of them post in a manner which I find enhances the discussion of issues. They have the ability to disagree without being toxic and insulting to others. 

\

/quote]

You know I am sure you are the only person on this board who will play apo;ogist to this sick individual. Maturity level? I  write something you attack----CONSTANTLY....Even when I'm right and when I call her a quack,that she is  sick and lunatic I am right.

READ HER PLATFORM. NO progressive would defend this maniac. NONE. Except you. Hmmm...why is that?

Find anyone who will defend your opinion on this, I am a big enough person to admit I have said a lot of shit at babble and I have been wrong. More than once. This time the consensus would be that I am right. Go ahead. Ask ANYBODY here if Leslyn Lewis is a dangerous maniac. Go ahead.

I think you are a pest. But to defend this person? Fuck you anbout how bad my politics is. Name a Liberal that is as sick and demented  as this person.

*crickets8

Yeah thought so. Get  over your Liberal derangement syndrome and face REALITY. Shake yoursdelf from your bubble.   

Misfit Misfit's picture

Josh,

The belief in angels or demons itself is benign and is totally unrelated to one's intelligence. The problem with evangelicals or fundamentalist Christians is when they take their views and try to mold society to fit their reality. Then they become dangerous, not stupid.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

BABBLE POLL

Is  Leslym Lewis a maniac?

a)No... she's a well  respected doctor who is above critictsmp

b)Yes...she's an out right maniac

OK. Let's get to the bottom of this.

josh

Misfit wrote:

josh wrote:

Misfit wrote:

Allan,

Leslyn Lewis's belief in demons speaks nothing to her intelligence. You are entitled to agree or disagree with her regarding the validity of demons but that doesn't give you the right to insult her for what she believes in.

Why not?

Excuse me?

She's a public figure who's made an issue of her religious beliefs.  Fair game for insults.

Pondering

 Regardless of what she is or isn't I'm coming down on the side of Misfit. Insulting people isn't informative nor persuasive.  This place has calmed down a lot and it is for the better. It allows for more genuine  conversation.

At the same time it's difficult not to dismiss this woman as a crackpot but I am an atheist. I would imagine many religious people do believe in demons. Calling everyone who believes in God a crackpot won't get us very far. I don't see a major difference between believing in demons and believing in God. 

At the end of the day she is good news for us. She is very popular. Both O'Toole and MacKay approached her saying there would be "room" for her in their teams. They are not going to be able to keep her quiet during the election period.

The Conservative narrative seems to be that Harper united the party but he did no such thing. He kept the social conservatives quiet by letting them think that once he had a majority he would do more. Hence the rise of Leslyn Lewis. Her pitch is that Conservatives should be honest, and one of the things she is honest about is ending sex selection abortions. (as if there is a way to read women's minds)

O'Toole, Mackay, everyone says the party needs social conservatives and acts like they want to befriend them but they just want their votes without giving them anything on homosexuality or abortion. They are trying to satisfy social conservatives with "law and order" (shades of the US). 

They will lose support based on the noise that social conservatives and anti-immigrant factions will make, both of which the new Conservatives need to win.

The Conservatives used to win by default when Canadians got disgusted enough with the Liberal corruption. They are still counting on that, but that was the Progessive Conservatives not Republican lite.

Were it not for covid they still might have had a chance but not now. Talk of deficits, cutting taxes, and free markets will not resonate during Covid and the near total collapse of the hospitality industry.

What "cards" does the Conservative Party have to play?

 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Of course you are because it is me who is calling this whack job for what she iyou a and misfit can keep being apologist for this Canadian Taliban candidate.
If anyone else were to say what I said about this fanatical regressive you would be jumping on this band wagon
Pias off

Misfit Misfit's picture

Allan wrote:

"This time the consensus would be that I am right. Go ahead. Ask ANYBODY here if Leslyn Lewis is a dangerous maniac. Go ahead.

I think you are a pest. But to defend this person? Fuck you anbout how bad my politics is. Name a Liberal that is as sick and demented  as this person.

*crickets8

Yeah thought so. Get  over your Liberal derangement syndrome and face REALITY. Shake yoursdelf from your bubble.   "
 

1. There is no concensus about anything here, only a discussion between you and I about your insulting and toxic behaviour towards others.

2. Now you have changed her label to a dangerous maniac. Now, if you take out the word maniac and stick with the word dangerous which I even mentioned myself as a valid issue when pertaining to social conservstism, of course, you will find wide consensus on this board including myself.  But you didn't say that. You called her an idiot which she is not.

3. You have wildly accused me of defending her. I have done no such thing. 
 

4.  You challenged me to name a Liberal eho is as sick and demented as Leslyn Lewis. I will reframe that to mean who is a social conservative like Leslyn Lewis.  I can name Liberals who are social conservatives. I have met NDP people who are social conservatives who support restrictions on abortion but happen to be pro union and support the NDP on broader social issues. We have personal friends who are devout Catholic, devout Liberals, and devout pro life. There is nothing about social conservatism that is unique to one party.

Justin Trudeau had to enact a policy that in order to run as a Liberal candidate while he is leader of the Liberal party that no one will be allowed to vote or champion against pro-choice legislation. He did this because social conservatism is everywhere including in his and your own political party. 

Pondering

 I am 100% against any merger between the Liberals and the NDP. We do not need to emulate the US becoming a highly polarized two party system. The Liberal party is far too right wing for progressives to be comfortable being a part of.

There is no need for it. Times change. If Conservatives were to win the Liberals and NDP could make a deal just as the NDP and Greens did in BC and as Layton and Dion tried to do years go.  If the Liberals again refuse to deal and support the Conservatives instead that will strengthen the hand of the NDP in the next election.

In my book the Liberals are no longer better than the Conservatives, at least not by enough to count. On the WE controversy I am less interested in the corruption angle than I am in the stealth privatization of government services. The Liberals bought a pipeline. They have done nothing about pharmacare. They are resisting basic income when now is the obvious time to introduce it. They are as bad as the Conservatives in their constant references to hard working Canadians as if that is the only kind that counts. The underlying message is that Canadians who are not hard-working are undeserving of government services. It's never just Canadians or citizens.

The Liberals did legalize cannabis but they did a crappy job of it, they have done better on the clean water issue for indigenous communities.

In any case the Conservatives are not going to have a platform that appeals to Canadians. Conservative ideology has nothing to offer in times of turmoil.

Misfit Misfit's picture

Oh, and about demons and angels and personal beliefs. I grew up in a household where you had to go to church every Sunday. Angels were these little trinkets that you put up and hung on Christmas trees every year but I never personally believed in angels myself even though they are mentioned in the Bible and they are in the Christmas story you hear every year.

Then as an adult, I challenged a woman who said that angels exist and that she can see angels. I told her that I have never seen angels. She said that I do have one who follows me around. She described him to me and his energy shape. She gave me his age and a story about him. 
 

Over the years I have met other people who claim to see angels. I have asked them if I have one. They have all described to me the exact same story. They have mentioned his shape, his age, and why he latched on to me.

This could all be just a coincidence or they could be telling the truth that there actually are angels. Whether you believe in the existence of angels or not is really not an issue. It is just a belief and one of many.  What has changed for me from these encounters with people who claim to be able to see angels is that I am not as definite about my own skepticism because really I'll never know. That is why it is a belief.

Dark angels are demons. Some people have referred to alcohol as a demon. Anger, jealousy, pride, envy, greed, etc., have all been used in context with the word demons. Demons can be dark spirit beings or they could more commonly be referee to as negative forces within ourselves. So believing in demons could simply mean to believe in negative energies within ourselves.

A big problem with us is that we have focused too much on what we believe to be true is the only way, and then forcing our belief systems onto others. We did that to First Nations people here, and we have done that all around the world, believing that our God and our religion is the one true religion or belief to have. Christian missionaries have spanned the entire globe preaching for a conversion to Christianity as the one true way.

So, when we attack someone like Leslyn Lewis and call her an idiot for believing in the existence of something we may not believe in, we are doing exactly what we criticize the social conservatives for being, and that is for attacking and judging others for beliefs which we deem to be different and inferior to our own. 

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

While I don't want to get into the debate about Ms. Lewis, I do think there is a significant difference between an atheist refusing to believe in angels, for which no objective evidence is available, and an evangelical Xtian refusing to believe in evolution or the geological age of the earth, even though there is a shit-ton of evidence for those things.

Misfit Misfit's picture

Michael Moriarity wrote:

While I don't want to get into the debate about Ms. Lewis, I do think there is a significant difference between an atheist refusing to believe in angels, for which no objective evidence is available, and an evangelical Xtian refusing to believe in evolution or the geological age of the earth, even though there is a shit-ton of evidence for those things.

I agree. The only problem is when the atheist acts like an asshole and mocks and insults the people who do believe in angels.

Oh, like Sarah Palin using her authority to shut down the museum of paleontology and destroy the fossils, and to destroy books in the library which contradicted her belief that the earth was created 6,000 years ago. I think you are referring to that kind of destructive denialism.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/deadlineusa/2008/sep/02/palinversusthemuseum

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Misfit wrote:

Michael Moriarity wrote:

While I don't want to get into the debate about Ms. Lewis, I do think there is a significant difference between an atheist refusing to believe in angels, for which no objective evidence is available, and an evangelical Xtian refusing to believe in evolution or the geological age of the earth, even though there is a shit-ton of evidence for those things.

I agree. The only problem is when the atheist acts like an asshole and mocks and insults the people who do believe in angels.

Oh, like Sarah Palin using her authority to shut down the museum of paleontology and destroy the fossils, and to destroy books in the library which contradicted her belief that the earth was created 6,000 years ago. I think you are referring to that kind of destructive denialism.

Yes, that was my intent. I fully support the right of everyone to believe whatever they want to believe. It is only when they use their obviously false (to me) beliefs to guide public policy that I become concerned.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Misfit wrote:

Oh, and about demons and angels and personal beliefs. I grew up in a household where you had to go to church every Sunday. Angels were these little trinkets that you put up and hung on Christmas trees every year but I never personally believed in angels myself even though they are mentioned in the Bible and they are in the Christmas story you hear every year.

Then as an adult, I challenged a woman who said that angels exist and that she can see angels. I told her that I have never seen angels. She said that I do have one who follows me around. She described him to me and his energy shape. She gave me his age and a story about him. 
 

Over the years I have met other people who claim to see angels. I have asked them if I have one. They have all described to me the exact same story. They have mentioned his shape, his age, and why he latched on to me.

This could all be just a coincidence or they could be telling the truth that there actually are angels. Whether you believe in the existence of angels or not is really not an issue. It is just a belief and one of many.  What has changed for me from these encounters with people who claim to be able to see angels is that I am not as definite about my own skepticism because really I'll never know. That is why it is a belief.

Dark angels are demons. Some people have referred to alcohol as a demon. Anger, jealousy, pride, envy, greed, etc., have all been used in context with the word demons. Demons can be dark spirit beings or they could more commonly be referee to as negative forces within ourselves. So believing in demons could simply mean to believe in negative energies within ourselves.

A big problem with us is that we have focused too much on what we believe to be true is the only way, and then forcing our belief systems onto others. We did that to First Nations people here, and we have done that all around the world, believing that our God and our religion is the one true religion or belief to have. Christian missionaries have spanned the entire globe preaching for a conversion to Christianity as the one true way.

So, when we attack someone like Leslyn Lewis and call her an idiot for believing in the existence of something we may not believe in, we are doing exactly what we criticize the social conservatives for being, and that is for attacking and judging others for beliefs which we deem to be different and inferior to our own. 

 

READ goddammit! Check her PLATFORM. When someone wants to impose their religious bullshit into public policy, I call peoploe like that MANIACS. Just like Ms Lewis. She can go fuck herself....With a crucifix.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Pondering wrote:

 I am 100% against any merger between the Liberals and the NDP. We do not need to emulate the US becoming a highly polarized two party system. The Liberal party is far too right wing for progressives to be comfortable being a part of.

There is no need for it. Times change. If Conservatives were to win the Liberals and NDP could make a deal just as the NDP and Greens did in BC and as Layton and Dion tried to do years go.  If the Liberals again refuse to deal and support the Conservatives instead that will strengthen the hand of the NDP in the next election.

In my book the Liberals are no longer better than the Conservatives, at least not by enough to count. On the WE controversy I am less interested in the corruption angle than I am in the stealth privatization of government services. The Liberals bought a pipeline. They have done nothing about pharmacare. They are resisting basic income when now is the obvious time to introduce it. They are as bad as the Conservatives in their constant references to hard working Canadians as if that is the only kind that counts. The underlying message is that Canadians who are not hard-working are undeserving of government services. It's never just Canadians or citizens.

The Liberals did legalize cannabis but they did a crappy job of it, they have done better on the clean water issue for indigenous communities.

In any case the Conservatives are not going to have a platform that appeals to Canadians. Conservative ideology has nothing to offer in times of turmoil.

The Liberals are ' too right wing'

Let's check some  Liberal policy. Legal cannabis.  They kept their promise. During the pandemic, the Liberals CHOSE to go into DEBT to make sure you had food and your bills were paid, Bought a pipeline to bail out Alberta. .You're just looking for fights. Go on facebook and knock yourself out.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Let's check some  Liberal policy. Legal cannabis.  They kept their promise. During the pandemic, the Liberals CHOSE to go into DEBT to make sure you had food and your bills were paid, Bought a pipeline to bail out Alberta. .You're just looking for fights. Go on facebook and knock yourself out.

Trudeau’s crisis-driven ‘reset’

quote:

In Canada, however, the capitalist class is fortunate to have the political centre dominated by a totally loyal and safe alternative to the Conservatives.

As Canadian capitalism has come into its own as a global exploiter and doubled down on implementing neoliberal austerity domestically, Liberal-Tory power sharing has served this agenda very effectively. In some regards, the Liberals have even outdone the Tories. The Chrétien-Martin austerity budgets of the mid-1990s were the turning point in terms of dismantling the post-war Canadian welfare state. Yet the Liberals have managed to preserve their ill-deserved progressive credentials which they contrast to their more crudely reactionary rivals.

This astounding Liberal ability to run with the hare and hunt with hounds is expressed very well in the person of Trudeau’s replacement for Finance Minister, Chrystia Freeland. In 2013, the year she was elected to the House of Commons, she gave a TED talk on “the rise of the new global super-rich” in which she thundered against increasing inequality, the global plutocracy and the crony capitalism out of which this layer had emerged. Yet, this very same plutocracy has very little to fear from Freeland.

A whole book could be devoted to exploring Chrystia Freeland’s services in the cause of global exploitation. Speaking as Foreign Affairs Minister in 2017, she suggested that massive increases in military spending were necessary because “Canadian diplomacy and development sometimes require the backing of hard power.” She played the leading role in the development, out of the most compliant and submissive regimes in Latin America and the Caribbean, of the so-called Lima Group, as a force devoted to overthrowing the government of Venezuela and reopening it for exploitation by the very global plutocracy she previously condemned. Nor can Freeland‘s imperialist antics be viewed as having been improvised on the go. Her vision of a Canadian role in dominating Latin America conjures images of Manifest Destiny. Last year, as she prepared to broker a meeting of the Lima Group, she declared: “This is our neighbourhood. For Canadians, we have a very direct interest in what happens in our hemisphere. That is why we have been so active and will continue to be so active.”

Now that she has taken up the role of Finance Minister, at a time of considerable crisis, gun boat diplomacy and regional domination have been put aside in favour of a commitment (in words, at least) to a progressive turn on the domestic front in the face of the pandemic. One Liberal who has worked closely with Freeland dutifully announced to the media that “She is a social interventionist activist, so she believes in the power of government and also believes in the redirection of funds to those who need it most.”

The reset

Freeland’s tenuous record as a force for good in the world offers a clue as to what we may expect from the Liberals after they regroup and bring forward a blueprint for a response to the economic fallout from the pandemic. Apart from their own self-inflicted credibility issues, they are improvising in the face of a massive and complex series of crises. The neoliberal decades have been marked by the corrosion of the pillars of social provision, particularly income support programs, so as to reduce workers’ bargaining power and step up exploitation. The pandemic lockdown and the threat of mass destitution that came with it, forced governments to take extraordinary measures of support that ran counter to everything they had been doing over recent decades.

For the most greedy and reckless elements of the capitalist class, the best way forward appears to be a rapid economic reopening, along with the removal of temporary income supports so as to drive people back into still unsafe workplaces. However, the situation is not without its complications. It seems very unlikely that we can avoid further waves of the pandemic, and consequently more lockdowns. Hopes for a quick “V-shaped” economic recovery have been dashed. Moreover, the enormous protests that erupted after the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis and the beginnings of other resistance, such as that of tenants facing eviction, raise the prospect of serious social unrest in the harsh times ahead.

In this situation, the drive to reopen and return to neoliberal coercion is being tempered by fear and uncertainty about what lies ahead. This is playing out in different countries in different ways. In the United States, partisan discord has thrown everything into disarray and it is unclear what will become of the presently suspended extended unemployment insurance benefits. But whatever deal is finally struck, the measures taken are clearly going to fall far short of meeting existing needs. In the UK, the furlough scheme that has kept many afloat during recent months is coming to an end in October with predictably disastrous effect. Germany, on the other hand, is expected to extend its equivalent system of emergency provision.

In this situation, the Trudeau Liberals seek a way through that serves the interests of Canadian capitalism, while preserving a manageable level of stability and social peace. In response to some pressure, they have announced a $37 billion package that grants a one-month reprieve for the doomed Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB), establishes modest new “recovery” benefit programs and timidly enhances the system of austerity-damaged Employment Insurance (EI). However, Trudeau would have us believe that this is the trickle that precedes a huge wave of social reform. He told the media that “This is our chance to build a more resilient Canada, a Canada that is healthier and safer, greener and more competitive, a Canada that is more welcoming and more fair.”

We would be foolish to take the Liberals at their word when it comes to the prospects of substantially strengthening the social infrastructure since they are unwilling to impose the cost burden on the banks and corporations or to renounce the international neoliberal agenda they have prosecuted until now. It was not that long ago that Trudeau promised a bold national housing initiative and this proved to be a major disappointment and a stalking horse for neoliberal redevelopment. Since Trudeau’s minority government will have to find support if it is to win a confidence vote in September, the only real issue is whether it can secure the backing of the NDP. That remains an open question. But there is reason to worry that the NDP will demand relatively little and settle for even less allowing the Liberals to emerge with a response to the crisis that appeases Big Business while largely failing to secure the needs of workers and communities.

Pondering

alan smithee wrote:

Pondering wrote:

The Liberals are ' too right wing'

Let's check some  Liberal policy. Legal cannabis.  They kept their promise. During the pandemic, the Liberals CHOSE to go into DEBT to make sure you had food and your bills were paid, Bought a pipeline to bail out Alberta. .You're just looking for fights. Go on facebook and knock yourself out.

The Liberals went with legalizing cannabis as a means of burnishing their left wing credentials without actually doing anything to offend big business. Trudeau was against it at first even though his own brother escaped a criminal record because of a fancy lawyer. Even so he still didn't clear the records of people who do have them due to drugs. He said point blank he will never decriminalize other drugs even though we know that treating drug addiction as a health issue is much more effective and less expensive. He must know that.

This pandemic was and remains the perfect situation to address homelessness. Neither provincial nor federal governments are doing it because they don't want all the homeless to be housed. Homelessness is the motivation for people accepting horrible underpaid work.

The Liberals didn't go into debt, Canada did, and even Trump had to send out cheques and extend unemployment etc. Yeah, the Liberals are left of Trump, that isn't saying much.

Buying the pipeline certainly wasn't a left-wing move. It was the wrong thing to do and continuing to push it is saddling the country with a white elephant or worse.

I supported Trudeau against Mulcair. The NDP was run by fools who refused to support marijuana legalization and focused on the deficit, both right wing positions I couldn't support. I don't regret supporting Trudeau for his first election. I got what I wanted more or less and there wasn't any better on offer.

The Liberal platform in September is going to be farther left but without weakening the status quo that keeps big business in power. They are trying hard to make sure the homeless or those who weren't working before won't get CERB or the new UIC benefit. Business is getting antsy because they can't coerce employees as easily. That CERB is a disincentive to work proves that employers just aren't paying enough. Importing cheap workers undercuts the working of the "free market" because it disrupts the balance of power between worker and employer.

Anyone good enough to work in Canada is good enough to become a citizen. Employers need to pay Canadian wages to workers within Canada. If that means food prices go up so be it. Subsidize them another way not on the backs of the most lowly paid workers.

The NDP are also too far right in my book. They mistake supporting unions for supporting workers. They have refused to stay left on climate change which has allowed the Greens to take much of their support.

The Liberals are just about guaranteed the next election unless Trudeau turns out to be an ax murderer. Be happy with that. The NDP having the balance of power can only be a good thing.  Even in seats that they don't win, votes indicate support.

Debater

Pondering wrote:

The Liberals are just about guaranteed the next election unless Trudeau turns out to be an ax murderer.

The Liberals may win another minority, but it may be difficult for them to win a majority unless they can win back some of the BQ seats in Quebec.  Right now the BQ seems to be holding onto the gains it made in the 2019 election.  If the numbers stay like that the Liberals are probably likely to see a repeat of 2019.  (Although a Conservative minority can't be entirely ruled out).

Pondering

Thank you epaulo. That was a terrific read. I do think at times it has been important to vote Liberal to stop the Conservatives but I think that time has past. Looking at the demographics the Conservative's time is past.

kropotkin1951

You can be a Canadian Prime Minister as long as you have the votes in the House of Commons and it is absolute dictatorial power if you have a majority.

Stephen Harper - 9 years, 271 days

Jean Chrétien - 10 years, 38 days

Sir Wilfrid Laurier - 15 years, 86 days

Pierre Trudeau - 15 years, 164 days

Sir John A. Macdonald - 18 years, 359 days
William Lyon Mackenzie King - 21 years, 154 days

NDPP

Erin 'The Tool' O'Toole Promises to be the best Canadian Prime Minister Amerikkka Ever Had

https://financialpost.com/diane-francis/diane-francis-erin-otoole-is-the...

"...The most important job of the Canadian prime minister is to make sure we have strong relations with the US...'O'Toole told the Financial Post back in May.  The international order has been broken, he continued and the only counterbalance to the corruption and incompetence of the United Nations, is to strengthen the Five Eyes Alliance, an intelligence partnership between the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

'A prime minister of Canada should unite with the Five Eyes to correct the international order, rid the bad actors and stop the gaming of the United Nations agencies. The US and Canada must lead these efforts,' he said. 'There is a remarkable opportunity for this alliance to reassert and reorder the global trading system too, but right now Trudeau is considered a joke.'

O'Toole thinks Canada should join America's missile defence system and increase our support for NATO, in order to show our solidarity and improve our relationship with our neighbour and allies to the south. Doing so will underscore the fact that Canada is America's 'only domestic homeland security partner,' O'Toole said. As for China..."

So a true blue in your face Canucklehead mouse-that-roars fascist. Nor are Trudeau/Freeland the lesser evil. Simply the more effective. They less obviously, more cunningly and covertly share most of the same overall aims and aspirations. Mercifully, O'Toole is also clearly a clown without any real prospects of ever taking power even here, even despite the fond and wishful thinking of FP's uber-Zio Francis.

 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Pondering wrote:

Thank you epaulo. That was a terrific read. I do think at times it has been important to vote Liberal to stop the Conservatives but I think that time has past. Looking at the demographics the Conservative's time is past.

If the Liberals fail, we have a Conservative government. You are foolish. What? The NDP will be the new natural alternative? A party who can hardly best 25% support? Keep lying to yourself.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..i post this here because at the 3.30 min mark, sandy talks about a cbc interview with andrew scheer that asks him why all the excitement over kamala harris, a black woman, in the us and none about leslyn lewis. scheer responded i would like to ask you that question. why do you cover harris so much and haven't covered lewis.  

Episode 115 – Liberals having a proroguing good time

In this episode, Sandy and Nora talk about Bill Morneau’s resignation, Chrystia Freeland being a woman and how Justin Trudeau really hopes that Canadians will not pay close enough attention. 

Pondering

alan smithee wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Thank you epaulo. That was a terrific read. I do think at times it has been important to vote Liberal to stop the Conservatives but I think that time has past. Looking at the demographics the Conservative's time is past.

If the Liberals fail, we have a Conservative government. You are foolish. What? The NDP will be the new natural alternative? A party who can hardly best 25% support? Keep lying to yourself.

The Liberals are in power for the foreseeable future. At the very best the Conservatives could get a minority which would allow the Liberals and NDP to overthrow them without a merger. If the Liberals decide to support the Conservatives that is on them.

But, the Liberals will never have to face that decision because O'Toole and the reform party are completely out of touch with the rest of Canada who does not see western alienation as a big deal, especially now. He is still trying to sell low taxes and small government! He is talking about the "radical left" and a "culture war". This is not going to fly in central Canada.

They are delusional:

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/corbella-wexit-suffered-a-b...

It’s pretty safe to say, however, that the election of O’Toole has taken some of the wind out of the sails of the Wexit movement.

Peter MacKay, a longtime politician, was viewed as Trudeau-lite by many in the West. And while O’Toole, an Ontario Conservative MP since 2012, is viewed as a red Tory, he has spent a considerable amount of time and effort courting westerners and telling them he understands their frustrations.

Even on Monday, O’Toole’s office issued a news release following his morning conversation with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, saying that he “made a point to raise Western alienation and called on Mr. Trudeau to outline a plan to address real and serious national unity concerns in the Speech from the Throne.

The mood in the RoC is if you want to go, go, to both Quebec and Alberta. There is no unity crisis just because Alberta claims there is. Separatists don't have majority support. The RoC is focused on Covid, climate change and the economy under which health care and jobs are covered.

They are trying to emulate the Republicans by portraying the Liberals as radical left and un-Canadian and the battle as a culture war. The RoC is not up for a culture war.

The old scare tactics aren't going to work anymore. The Liberals will have to earn votes and earn the support of the NDP.  Traditionally Canadians have benefited greatly from that power balance.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Pondering wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Thank you epaulo. That was a terrific read. I do think at times it has been important to vote Liberal to stop the Conservatives but I think that time has past. Looking at the demographics the Conservative's time is past.

If the Liberals fail, we have a Conservative government. You are foolish. What? The NDP will be the new natural alternative? A party who can hardly best 25% support? Keep lying to yourself.

The Liberals are in power for the foreseeable future. At the very best the Conservatives could get a minority which would allow the Liberals and NDP to overthrow them without a merger. If the Liberals decide to support the Conservatives that is on them.

But, the Liberals will never have to face that decision because O'Toole and the reform party are completely out of touch with the rest of Canada who does not see western alienation as a big deal, especially now. He is still trying to sell low taxes and small government! He is talking about the "radical left" and a "culture war". This is not going to fly in central Canada.

They are delusional:

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/corbella-wexit-suffered-a-b...

It’s pretty safe to say, however, that the election of O’Toole has taken some of the wind out of the sails of the Wexit movement.

Peter MacKay, a longtime politician, was viewed as Trudeau-lite by many in the West. And while O’Toole, an Ontario Conservative MP since 2012, is viewed as a red Tory, he has spent a considerable amount of time and effort courting westerners and telling them he understands their frustrations.

Even on Monday, O’Toole’s office issued a news release following his morning conversation with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, saying that he “made a point to raise Western alienation and called on Mr. Trudeau to outline a plan to address real and serious national unity concerns in the Speech from the Throne.

The mood in the RoC is if you want to go, go, to both Quebec and Alberta. There is no unity crisis just because Alberta claims there is. Separatists don't have majority support. The RoC is focused on Covid, climate change and the economy under which health care and jobs are covered.

They are trying to emulate the Republicans by portraying the Liberals as radical left and un-Canadian and the battle as a culture war. The RoC is not up for a culture war.

The old scare tactics aren't going to work anymore. The Liberals will have to earn votes and earn the support of the NDP.  Traditionally Canadians have benefited greatly from that power balance.

This is almost word for word what I commented in another thread.

I don't believe the majority of Canadians are SoCons.

And most definitely agree that no one gives a flying crap if Quebec or Alberta split. Less and less Quebecers are separtists. So there is no appetite for it any way. Alberta can drip crude oil like molasses to Texas and becoming the 51st State. Good riddance.

Pondering

The Toronto Sun just did a poll.

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-closing-parliament-and-we-scandal-boosts-liberal-poll-numbers/wcm/d9c72416-b8bb-4db7-9f50-98bff9f41e0b/

Among decided voters, 40% say they would back the Trudeau Liberals compared to 30% who would vote for Erin O’Toole’s Conservatives. The NDP under Jagmeet Singh has the support of 15% of decided voters while the Greens have 7% and the Bloc Quebecois 6%.

The Liberals are currently well into majority territory. Even I didn't think they were doing that well. Don't new leaders usually get a honeymoon bump?

Meanwhile: https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/peter-mackay-on-why-he-lost-conservative...

Social conservatives are on their way to making up a majority of the party's base, MacKay said, and whether and how the party can evade or redirect the line of attack that ultimately sank former leader Andrew Scheer rests on O'Toole.

So what do you think? What do the numbers tell you? If you were leader of the Conservatives what would you do?

Pages