If Brian Mulroney had stayed on for the 1993 election?

[windyman]

If Brian Mulroney had stayed on for the 1993 election, would the old federal PC Party still be around today as a powerful national party? Let's say he fights the election in October 1993 and campaigns better than Kim Campbell did, which probably would've happened and emerged as official opposition or even with a minority government like he said he would in the Newman book (not inconceivable seeing how he was polling 25% in early 93 and could have closed the gap in an election campaign), and then resigned in 94 with Jean Charest probably taking his place as leader of the Opposition or as Prime Minister.

Do you think that would've saved the old PC Party and prevented the Reform people from sweeping Western Canada as strongly as they did and thus preventing the rise of modern Reformatories like Harper?

Campbell was a pretty weak campaigner and her gaffes like the Chretien ad and "no jobs" cost the PC party in a lot of support.

[Keepitsimple]

Need another poll option - "I don't care".

[Mighty AC]

I think the PC party will return sooner or later. The current incarnation doesn't adequately represent either the right wing reformers or the centrist PC crowd.

[Smallc]

The current party isn't that far from the PC party. To say it doesn't represent their views is to reach pretty far from reality.

[waldo]

The current party isn't that far from the PC party. To say it doesn't represent their views is to reach pretty far from reality.

where's the progressive side of "the current party"? "Not that far from"??? Really?

[Shady]

As a former PC voter, and a current conservative voter, I have noticed very little difference. But please, by all means, you far lefties can tell us how we're not represented. I'm sure you have the best intentions and seek a long running conservative elected government.

[waldo]

As a former PC voter, and a current conservative voter, I have noticed very little difference. But please, by all means, you far lefties can tell us how we're not represented. I'm sure you have the best intentions and seek a long running conservative elected government.

you're now the second guy to claim "no difference"... the request was made in that regard! Are you once again asking others to support your statements/claims for you?

[Shady]

you're now the second guy to claim "no difference"... the request was made in that regard! Are you once again asking others to support your statements/claims for you?

I said that I have noticed very little difference. How would you like me to support that?

[waldo]

I said that I have noticed very little difference. How would you like me to support that?

where's the progressive side of "the current party"?

[Shady]

Where was it before? What do you consider progressive?

[waldo]

Where was it before? What do you consider progressive?

if you're going to state you've not noticed any difference between the (former) Progressive Conservative (PC) party and the (current) Conservative Party of Canada (CPC), the context of "progressive" is defined as that within the (former) PC party.

if you're not prepared to stand behind your statements than simply quit making them! Simple, hey?

[cybercoma]

if you're going to state you've not noticed any difference between the (former) Progressive Conservative (PC) party and the (current) Conservative Party of Canada (CPC), the context of "progressive" is defined as that within the (former) PC party.

if you're not prepared to stand behind your statements than simply quit making them! Simple, hey?

To be fair, you should be the one demonstrating the difference. They're the ones with the null position in this case. (No change)

Edited October 16, 2014 by cybercoma

[waldo]

To be fair, you should be the one demonstrating the difference. They're the ones with the null position in this case. (No change)

no - I've not said anything other than to simply ask, "where's the progressive side of the current party". I've not said anything about a difference. Both members state they notice "no difference" between the 2 parties... yet they both appear unable/unwilling to simply speak to a basic question asking them to qualify "Progressive policy/position" within the CPC.

[cybercoma]

no - I've not said anything other than to simply ask, "where's the progressive side of the current party". I've not said anything about a difference. Both members state they notice "no difference" between the 2 parties... yet they both appear unable/unwilling to simply speak to a basic question asking them to qualify "Progressive policy/position" within the CPC.

Gordon O'Connor's speech when there was a motion to discuss abortion was pretty progressive and he was (possibly still is?) the party whip.

[waldo]

Gordon O'Connor's speech when there was a motion to discuss abortion was pretty progressive and he was (possibly still is?) the party whip.

talk is cheap! Policy and position wins the day...

[Shady]

if you're going to state you've not noticed any difference between the (former) Progressive Conservative (PC) party and the (current) Conservative Party of Canada (CPC), the context of "progressive" is defined as that within the (former) PC party.

if you're not prepared to stand behind your statements than simply quit making them! Simple, hey?

Like I've already said. In my opinion, I haven't noticed much of any policy differences between the two. If you have, please state what they are, because I'm unaware of them. Unless you want me to state things I'm unaware of. If you are. Please tell me how I'd do that.

[Smallc]

This party may - and that's very much a may - be slightly more socially conservative. They don't share my views on marijuana and the right to die in certain circumstances, but other than those two issues, there isn't much that I can fault them for...except for the areas where they do share my view and they haven't delivered.

[cybercoma]

talk is cheap! Policy and position wins the day...

Why move the goalposts? If I mention a progressive policy they legislated, you'll just say "well the majority of their legislation isn't progressive." Meanwhile, your original question was "show me where the progressive side is." I just gave you an example of a progressive side to the party. They also haven't blocked gay marriage, nor banned abortion while in power. If they were staunch social conservatives, they have the numbers to make that happen. They're also still increasing healthcare transfers to the province by 3% per year, as opposed to eliminating the federal contributions and suggesting that healthcare should be private and out of their hands. How many examples do you need of a progressive side?

Now, you say the party is different and I agree with you. So why not give your examples of how it has changed since Mulroney's time?

[cybercoma]

This party may - and that's very much a may - be slightly more socially conservative. They don't share my views on marijuana and the right to die in certain circumstances, but other than those two issues, there isn't much that I can fault them for...except for the areas where they do share my view and they haven't delivered.

You can't fault them because they haven't governed. They've been campaigning, despite having a majority. That is their fault. Harper is a do-nothing Prime Minister, interested only in appearances.

Edited October 16, 2014 by cybercoma

[Smallc]

You can't fault them because they haven't governed. They've been campaigning, despite having a majority. That is their fault. Harper is a do-nothing Prime Minister, interested only in appearances.

Chretien 2, in so many ways.

[Smallc]

This party may - and that's very much a may - be slightly more socially conservative. They don't share my views on marijuana and the right to die in certain circumstances, but other than those two issues, there isn't much that I can fault them for...except for the areas where they do share my view and they haven't delivered.

Oh, and Prostitution.

[cybercoma]

Chretien 2, in so many ways.

Not true at all. Chretien's legacy is entirely revamping health and social transfers, as well as turning multiple surpluses to pay down the debt. Harper's legacy, if anything, is creating tax-free savings accounts and cutting the GST. Both moves which adversely affected the federal bank account.

[Smallc]

Chretien Did very little. if you want to put it that way though, Harper eliminated most of the ability to form income trusts protecting the federal treasury, and revamped federal pension plans to make personal transfers sustainable. He also steered the government through the worst economic recession in almost 100 years, bringing the government back to surplus. Spending and taxes are much lower as a percentage of GDP, and I like that, as do many. There's always multiple angles.

Edited October 16, 2014 by Smallc

[waldo]

Why move the goalposts? If I mention a progressive policy they legislated, you'll just say "well the majority of their legislation isn't progressive."

Now, you say the party is different and I agree with you. So why not give your examples of how it has changed since Mulroney's time?

but you didn't... mention policy. You mentioned a speech. Again, policy and position... and of course related legislation if governing, are the progressive measures. I didn't move, as you say, "the goalposts".

I didn't say the current CPC is different from the PC. Since Progressive was a formal tenet of the PC party ideology, I asked a question in that regard. If Harper Conservative supporters on this board are so quick to state they notice no difference between the former PC and the current CPC parties, I will certainly ask them to qualify their statements.

I suggest you post your own opioned differences rather than chastize me improperly.

[cybercoma]

Look, waldo. You're a smart guy. You know how logic works. The null position doesn't prove itself. You're the one taking a stance by saying there was a change. It's on you to demonstrate that change not on others to demonstrate nothing (has changed). They demonstrate nothing by saying nothing. You support their position by failing to highlight change.