Tony Clement For Conservative Leader

The Baron of Banality · February 9, 2004

- As the new Conservative Party of Canada prepares to fight a federal election in April or May of this year, it is critical to select a party leader on March 20th who has a realistic chance to unite and to grow the fledgling party this year and in years to come.

- Under Stephen Harper, the party will be seen as nothing more than Reform Mach III and will lose much of its red tory support which is absolutely vital to any hope of winning seats east of Manitoba. 40% of the PC MPs have already left, with more to leave if Harper wins, and the polls show that roughly 40% of the red tory voters have also left (i.e. the combined party is at 19% in the national polls which consists of the 10% who supported the CA in the last poll plus only 9% rather than the 14% who supported the PC party in that pre-merger poll).

- While some say that if Harper doesn't win the new party will lose even more support from the old Reform bunch out west, this is simply the spoiled, self-indulgent mewlings of the small s western separatists. There is simply nowhere else for the hard core Reform vote to go than to the new party since few would ever vote Liberal let alone NDP. Bottom line, selecting Harper as leader will lose the party almost all of its seats east of Alberta without gaining any more seats in the west and the result will be far less than the 80 combined seats the two parties won in the 2000 election.

- Selecting Belinda Stronach is a non-starter and would be even more embarrassing than the CA debacle of 2000 when they selected Laughing Stock Day and are still trying to live that down. Certainly, political neophyte Belinda would be slaughtered in the general election campaign, humiliated in the leaders' debate, and would lose seats everywhere as voters figured out that, as with Chancey Depew in 'Being There', there was no there, there. This offends on so many levels that I don't see the point in discussing it further. Anyone dumb enough to vote for the Magna Tarta, daddy's little girl, as being qualified to assume the prime ministership of Canada must be impervious to reason. Chooding Belinda as leader changes the question from "will the new party exceed the 80 seats of the two old parties?" to "will the new party even retain enough seats to form the Official Opposition?".

- All of which brings us to the one reasonable choice for Conservative leader - Tony Clement. Ontarians will remember that when the SARS hit the fan last March, Tony was sweating his ass off (literally - he lost 25 pounds during the SARS crisis) to manage and control and change the situation while Chretien partied in the Dominican with Zipper Billy Clinton and federal health minister Anne McLellan was out west campagning for Paul Martin in the leadership race. Clement was front and center at all times and even did what the federal authorities SHOULD have done which was to fly to Geneva and persuade the WHO to lift its costly travel warning about Toronto. Indeed, Tony Clement as Health Minister of Ontario controlled the largest ministerial budget in the entire country ($27 billion).

- Mr. Clement is 43, has a political science and a law degree from U ot T, is married to a lawyer and has three children, and served eight years as a PC MP in Ontario (1995-2003). As a member of the Harris team, he very capably ran four of the government's largest and most controversial departments - Health, Municiapal Affairs and Housing, Environment and, Transportation.

- In January of 2000, Tony was chosen the Founding President of the Canadian Alliance. This fluently bilingual professional is currently a counsel with the prestigious firm of Bennett Jones and he is honorary Chair of the Brampton Salvation Army Red Sheild Appeal Campaign and honorary co-sponsor of the Brampton Safe City Fundraising Campaign.

- Tony Clement is, without question, the only candidate of the three without embarassing political baggage, who has roots and credibility in both PC and CA parties, who has shown the modern, moderate, mainstream policy instincts of economic and fiscal conservatism combined with social compassion and progressivity that make him electable in all regions of the country, and who thereby has a good chance to unite the two main factions of the new party and grow it beyond the sum of its parts. Only Clement has a chance to win more than 80 seats in the Spring election, thereby positioning the party strongly for the real fight when the rubber hits the road in 2008/9.

- Those of you who are already Conservatives, and those of you who believe in democracy and the strong, viable oppostion that is a precursor of effective democracy, are urged to call 1-866-257-4499 toll free or 416-848-8180 to take out a party membership card ($10) on Tony's behalf and to also volunteer your time or donate your money to his campaign if you can.

Michael Hardner · February 9, 2004

There is simply nowhere else for the hard core Reform vote to go than to the new party since few would ever vote Liberal let alone NDP.

Amazingly, you are incorrect here. The other conservative boards are full of postings from ...er... let's say stubborn westerners who declare that they will flee to the freedom party, the west-first party etc. etc. if Harper doesn't win.

While I agree that such hard-line views probably don't represent the mainstream (?) of the CA, I do believe that these ...er... let's say outspoken supporters represent the bedrock of the party and they must be ...er... let's say kowtowed to.

Hugo · February 9, 2004

I personally feel that there isn't much to differentiate Harper and Clement in terms of ideals and policies. Both support tax cuts, senate reform, military rebuilding, repair of relations with the US, traditional definition of marriage and so forth. I feel that either would be a good choice as leader.

I'll cast my vote for Harper, because I do not want Stronach to win (there's no need for another Liberal Party, thank you very much) and I feel that of the two, Harper is more likely to be victorious. It would be a tragedy if Stronach was able to split the votes of her opponents and so clinch a victory. However, if Clement wins, I won't be shopping for a new party and I will have no reservations about voting for a Conservative Party led by him.

I think that both Harper and Clement supporters that vow to withdraw their support from a party led by the other man are just being bloody-minded. Both men have things to recommend them - Harper has experience at the federal level, while Clement can speak for both PC and CA members - but I don't think that either is so much better or different from the other that they could be written off as a leader.

Kiraly · February 9, 2004

I think that both Harper and Clement supporters that vow to withdraw their support from a party led by the other man are just being bloody-minded.

I don't believe I've heard any Harper suporters say they would not support the party if Clement wins.

I have heard many say that they will not support the party if Belinda wins...

...myself included.

maplesyrup · February 9, 2004

The one problem with this scenario of Tony for leader is that every poll I have seen shows him running third. So even if no one get 50% + 1 on the first vote tally, Tony will have been eliminated.

Communist_boy · February 9, 2004

The problem that clements has, is publicity, If it wasnt for this board all i would know about is Stronarch and Harper. And even then stronarch is way more publicied because of her money.

If hey had more money he could actually stand a chance. But until people know that he is running, and know what he will do, then the race will primarilly be between Belinda and Stephen.

theWatcher · February 10, 2004

My only concern about Clement is how will a guy who couldn't even get elected as leader of a province or even keep his seat for that matter be perceived as a leader of the country?

The Baron of Banality · February 10, 2004

[Amazingly, you are incorrect here. The other conservative boards are full of postings from ...er... let's say stubborn westerners who declare that they will flee to the freedom party, the west-first party etc. etc. if Harper doesn't win.
While I agree that such hard-line views probably don't represent the mainstream (?) of the CA, I do believe that these ...er... let's say outspoken supporters represent the bedrock of the party and they must be ...er... let's say kowtowed to.

- MH - I don't bother much with these boards but will not quibble your accounting of what you read on them ... however, I suggest thre things to you: 1/ the hard liners who are so passionate about politics that they spend a lot of time posting dire warnings, grim predictions and such on these boards in no way represent the typical CA supporter or the typical supporters of any party and therefore are unreliable as harbingers of what the rank and file membership may do; 2/ the new party may indeed lose a few thousand votes out west from ultra Reform types but distributed over the 78 seats in the west will

amount to fewer than 500 votes per riding because, to repeat, there is nowhere else for them to go except for a few lunatic fringe parties and this loss of a few hundred votes (tops) per riding will not have much impact on the new party's fortunes while the defection of tens of thousands of red tories in the east who do have a place to go (to Blue Liberal Paul Martin) will have a critical impact on the new party's fortunes and, 3/ as an NDPer, MH, you will recal how the Waffle rump of the NDP in the early 70s made similar dire warnings about deserting their party if they didn't get their way and you will know that it didn;t happen because they really had nowhere else to go - same thing here.

- FUCK EM, MH, they've been kowtowed to enough since 1988 having destroyed the PC party, given the Liberals a long term lease on 24 Sucks Us Dry, and distorted the federal electoral system all for naught ... the new party has a "one member, one vote" system for determining party policy and since the CA will initially have over 70% of the members not to mention 80% of the caucus, that is quite enough kowtowing to the folks who fucked with our formerly workable system ...

PS. Speaking of these CA geniuses and paragons of purity and virtue who couldn't organize a free crack and hookers party for the LA Kings or the Dallas Cowboys, I am reminded of a Mulroney witticism. Brian said he wanted to be buried in the Gaspe when he died so thta he could continue to be active in politics. Thanks Manning, Day, Tom Long, et al.

The Baron of Banality · February 10, 2004

I personally feel that there isn't much to differentiate Harper and Clement in terms of ideals and policies.
I think that both Harper and Clement supporters that vow to withdraw their support from a party led by the other man are just being bloody-minded. Both men have things to recommend them - Harper has experience at the federal level, while Clement can speak for both PC and CA members - but I don't think that either is so much better or different from the other that they could be written off as a leader.

- Hugo ... Tony is a bit more progressive and compassionate on social policy and issues, in part because he doesn't owe the huge debt that Harper owes to the social conservatives' element of the CA ... also, there is a perception (if not necessarily a reality) in the land that Tony Clement is more of a national, modern, moderate leader who has never been associated with firewalls around provinces, or lines drawn through the pictures of prime ministers who came from Quebec, or descriptions of atlantic canadians as losers and malcontents ... because Tony doesn't carry this baggage with him, he has more potential for growth in eastern Canada than does Harper.

- For me, it is not a matter of being bloody minded. It is a matter of asking myself what is best for my country at this point in time and also who has potential for uniting the new party and growing it east of Manitoba. Harper just doesn't have it - polls reveal that despite being the leader of the opposition for some 20 months, only 55% of canadians have even a faint clue who the hell he is.

The Baron of Banality · February 10, 2004

The one problem with this scenario of Tony for leader is that every poll I have seen shows him running third. So even if no one get 50% + 1 on the first vote tally, Tony will have been eliminated.

- MS - As you know, the vote isn't until March 20th so there is plenty of time remaining for Tony to raise his profile and establish his credibility with the membership in the debates and in other appearances.

- I believe that the more the members see and hear Tony, the more his stock will rise while the more they see and hear Belinda, the more her stock will fall as members realize she is more of a novelty than a serious, qualified candidate.

- If it does play out this way, Tony could very well be the first and second choices of more members than Stronach and if Harper gets less than 50% of the first place votes, it could be very interesting if Tony is able to slide down the middle in the manner of a elative unknown much as Joe Clark did in 1976.

- Besides, MS, don't vote based on who you think will win, vote based on who deserves to win because he or she will best unite and grow the party nationally.

The Baron of Banality · February 10, 2004

My only concern about Clement is how will a guy who couldn't even get elected as leader of a province or even keep his seat for that matter be perceived as a leader of the country?

- WATCHER ... John Diefenbaker lost his first seven (7) attempts at election, being defeated in federal and provincial elections and even in a run for mayor of Prince Albert. He also lost in his first two runs for the PC leadership. (But he did win his last 13 elections.)

- Tony Clement won two of the only three elections in which he ran and lost his one leadership race. The election he lost was due not to him or his campaign but to a Liberal tide in Ontario that knocked the PCs out of every major urban center in the the province. Tony represented one of the fastest growing and most immigrant intensive and visible minority ridings in all of Ontario. The miracle is less that he lost one out of three than that he won two out of three in his riding in Brampton so close to Pearson Airport. He lost his one leadership race as predicted to the insiders' choice, Ernie Eves.

- In summary, I would not make so much of his understandable defeats as you seem to do. They all lose an election or two, even Trudeau (1979). Of course, where Harper ran, in Manning's old riding in Calgary, the CA could have run a stuffed pet and still won. Only the NDP even put up a candidate against Harper. If Clement becomes leader, Martin as a courtesy will not run a Liberal against him. And Clement will win his Ontario seat and a bunch of other Ontario seats which, quite frankly, will not happen with Harper as leader.

Pellaken · February 10, 2004

Harper will lose support for this new party east of ontario

Stronach will lose support for this new party west of ontario

Clement may lose his seat.

your choice. 20 seats here, 20 seats there, or a seatless leader

maplesyrup · February 10, 2004

BB....I agree with you, the CPC is not going to grow with the perception that the vast majority of Canadians have of Harper, if he is chosen leader.

Initially I thought Belinda was going to win, and right now I still think she is going to win.

But as you say things can change. Tony I believe has a golden opportunity to substantially raise his profile on Wednesday, when he debates alone with Harper on Don Newman's CBC show Politics, Is the debate at 5 PM (ET) ?

I'm not sure about this, but I wonder if scientific polls are released showing Harper in the lead, perhaps that would help to stampede a lot of Stronach supporters to Tony. If the polls show Stronach in the lead then it might be a harder sell for Tony's chances.

The problem at the moment is that Tony is everyone's second choice, but he won't be around for a second count, if he finishes last in the first count.

Pell....I'm not sure Tony immediately winning his seat is all that important. Also voters in the ridings where leaders run usually make allowances out of consideration. John Turner is a good example of that when he ran in Vancouver Quadra.

Jack Layton has brought the NDP from 8% to 17% support, depending on which poll you view, in the past year, all from outside the House of Commons.

Which would you prefer for the NDP, 20 more seats or Jack Layton MP if you had to make a choice?

I read an interesting story today about Ed Broadbent's first election. They had to have a judicial recount and he won because the votes of people who voted with ball point pens were disallowed. At that time management used ball point pens but the employees they supervised didn't.

Michael Hardner · February 10, 2004

- FUCK EM, MH, they've been kowtowed to enough since 1988 having destroyed the PC party, given the Liberals a long term lease on 24 Sucks Us Dry, and distorted the federal electoral system all for naught ... the new party has a "one member, one vote" system for determining party policy and since the CA will initially have over 70% of the members not to mention 80% of the caucus, that is quite enough kowtowing to the folks who fucked with our formerly workable system

Well, I know that YOU feel that way... I guess I'm wondering about the PCers who are still hanging on to the CPC with faint hope - how do most of them feel about the former CAers ?

Shortly after the merger I heard Brison on Newsworld talking about the importance of having a strong opposition party, and the role the CPC would play. He made a strong case, and as always demonstrated clarity of thought and even vision. We all know what happened next.

I never liked the way the Harris government did politics, but I'm willing to give Tony Clement a listen when the speeches start. It's kind of the same way I feel about Martin and his participation in the Chretien government....