Name the next CPC and NDP leaders

ToadBrother · October 20, 2015

Considering the way things normally work in this country im not sure it matters, all Trudeau has to do is spew empty platitudes for the next 4 years and he is almost certain to be reelected. The natural governing party is back in.

Perhaps Tories should ask why they became so hated. But no, that would require self-reflection and a confession that the party had become the Nasty Party. Better to just attack the electorate, you know, the people that actually make or break governments.

Get over the bitterness. The Tories had nearly ten years in power. That they spent a fairly large proportion of that time ticking people off isn't the fault of people, it's the fault of the party. Even most of their policies weren't bad, it was that even good policies were framed in an obnoxiously partisan way.

Here's a tip for future Conservative governments. Don't give jerks like Pierre Poilievre bully pulpits to show how incredibly and apologetically vile and mean your party can be, and when such ministers do demonstrate they're nothing more than hyperpartisan mouths attached to a body, send them to the backbenches. Don't actually give them more screen time to show how vicious and ludicrous they are.

ToadBrother · October 20, 2015

Wait, aren't we going to figure out how much of a percentage of the total eligible voters they got and then disparage them for that low number for the next 4 years? Isn't that how it's done now?

Sure, go to town. Hopefully we'll have a different electoral system by the next election, so it will be rendered moot.

Peter F · October 20, 2015

Here's a tip for future Conservative governments. Don't give jerks like Pierre Poilievre bully pulpits to show how incredibly and apologetically vile and mean your party can be, and when such ministers do demonstrate they're nothing more than hyperpartisan mouths attached to a body, send them to the backbenches. Don't actually give them more screen time to show how vicious and ludicrous they are.

Absolutely. I think that if they had managed to somehow control the vitriol and outright nastiness of their attitudes (even while continuing to dump their nasty policies on the country!) they would have won this election.

Edited October 20, 2015 by Peter F

ToadBrother · October 20, 2015

Absolutely. I think that if they had managed to somehow control the vitriol and outright nastiness of their attitudes (even while continuing to dump their nasty policies on the country!) they would have won this election.

It didn't help that Harper's instincts seem to be best described as "red in tooth and claw". He seemed to view the entire apparatus of government as little more than a tool for winning elections and for brutalizing his opponents. He surrounded himself with a core of hyper-partisan advisers, some of which, like Nigel Wright, seemed almost to view Conservative government as some sort of righteous and holy cause.

To some extent I do understand it. To weld Reform and the remnants of the Progressive Conservatives together, he had to rule with an iron fist. Imagine if the Tory caucus had behaved like the Tory conventions of the last ten years. But surely at some point Harper could have loosened the chains a little bit, built the "circle of trust" a little wider than his personal offices. The number of cabinet ministers in that inner circle was exceedingly small; Jim Flaherty to some extent, though he seemed in the end to be shifting Red-ward. Jason Kenney, certainly, but there is an almost Brutus-like quality to Kenney, and he certainly was sharpening his knife when the Duffy-Wright affair was surfacing. And then there was Pierre Poilevre which was the Cabinet's honorary "kid in short pants", who was so awful that by all accounts his over-the-top original drafts of the Fair Election Act left even the Tory caucus appalled.

A bad government isn't necessarily a government with bad policies. Sometimes it's a government with good, or at least defensible policies, run by bad people. The Conservatives under Stephen Harper was just such a government, and in the end, it had become so toxic that even many Conservatives simply could no longer stomach it.

-1=e^ipi · October 20, 2015

No, it's not. It's a statement of fact.

What you wrote started with 'because' so I was interpreting what you wrote after 'because' to be a justification for the status quo based on the context of the conversation. So either you are performing circular reasoning, or you don't understand what justification is. Saying that the way things are are the way things are does not justify the way things are.

So other than complain about it, I don't expect you're going to change that which has not been changeable since the 18th century.

Many things that last for centuries eventually die out.

-1=e^ipi · October 20, 2015

By that logic, the conservatives are the most amazing party ever, because after getting kicked down to 2 seats...they increased their seats by how many x?

But in the 2011 election, the green party increased their seat count from 0 to 1. That's infinity times more!

Forget the PCs. Clearly, this makes Elisabeth May the most amazing Canadian party leader ever! *sarcasm*

hitops · October 20, 2015

There's nothing typical about increasing your seat count over five times what it was.

But hey, you weren't impressed. That must somehow mean 40% of voters are wrong.

Ok let's go with that. 5x seats is great. But the progressive conservatives in 1997 with Jean Charest must therefore be considered twice as great, since they increased their seat total by 10x.

The plain objective reality is that the victory is on par with the last CPC victory at 54% of the seats.

But in the 2011 election, the green party increased their seat count from 0 to 1. That's infinity times more!

Forget the PCs. Clearly, this makes Elisabeth May the most amazing Canadian party leader ever! *sarcasm*

See......obviously we should consider her the greatest ever!

Edited October 20, 2015 by hitops

The_Squid · October 20, 2015

NDP - Mulcair

CPC - Stockwell Day

hitops · October 20, 2015

CPC - Stockwell Day

I like that guy.

angrypenguin · October 20, 2015

CPC Kenney.

When I mentioned this name, you guys flipped out on me and disagreed. I ask a friend who's a bit older than me why you guys might not like him, and he wrote:

I don't know why they'd say that. I don't particularly think he'd be a good choice because he's hyper-partisan and a lot of the worst things that being a career politician embodies. I remember watching him as a smarmy deputy for Preston Manning when Manning couldn't be bothered to show up to a local candidates' debate, have never liked him since then.

But he has built a lot of contacts and was viewed as a reasonably effective minister. He also had a lot to do with the ethnic outreach strategy that helped win seats in the GTA and places like YVR over the past few elections. And there's no doubting he's an intelligent man.

But he's also very right wing and very much out of the old Reform side of the party. To the extent your friends believe the party needs to move back towards the middle and get away from a lot of the Harper tendencies, Kenney is probably the wrong pick.

The_Squid · October 20, 2015

I like that guy.

lol

figures!

ToadBrother · October 20, 2015

Ok let's go with that. 5x seats is great. But the progressive conservatives in 1997 with Jean Charest must therefore be considered twice as great, since they increased their seat total by 10x.

The plain objective reality is that the victory is on par with the last CPC victory at 54% of the seats.

It's not simply a matter of a relative increase in seats, it's an increase from third party status, with even many Liberals suggesting the game was up and the Liberals might never be an electoral force again, to the Liberals achieving a majority.

The PCs basically died in 1993 and ceased to be an electoral force permanently, and it was only by reuniting the right, with the much larger Reform/Alliance that the PCs became relevant, but even then, the Conservative Party constitution had to be constructed in such a way as to prevent the Reform wing from completely dominating policy and leadership.

Edited October 20, 2015 by ToadBrother

poochy · October 20, 2015

Perhaps Tories should ask why they became so hated.

Ah revisionist history, they never became hated, they were hated by most of the same people who hate them now since even before they were elected. They were hated for the evil agenda narrative, though none of it was true, and even though it wasn't, people like yourself tried to ascribe almost anything they did to that narrative. What exactly did they do, not the things you imagined, not the things you feel, (though we know that's what is most important, how you poor dears feel) but what exactly did they do to this country to change it into something so terrible?

It's all bs, but there are enough simpletons out there that really believe it, and that's all that matters to the liberal brain trust. No different than the idiot in line yesterday that was ranting about the dictatorship, or the idiot i saw on line today crying about federal health care cuts, these lies have been told over and over by unscrupulous people, so long that people who might have been thinking about change decided that things were so bad we absolutely needed change.

What we got is a sophomoric PM that copied Obama's path to victory, promising everything, promising to make it all better, kiss the booboos away, what we will get is liberal graft and care taking of a country that hasn't much changed at all. O but I know, the conservatives were mean, and you're pretty sensitive, so something had to be done. They for example, expected people in Atlantic Canada to work a little more instead of just working at scamming the Ei system, o but those liberals, they will make those expectations of self reliance go away, kiss it all better.

Frankly I don't much care if the liberals are in charge, aside from the increase in taxes i will pay over the conservatives, i don't think much will change, but that's mostly because I think the country is stronger than any moderate change they may make, just as in reality, it was with the conservatives, and im not an idiot, unlike those who have been claiming we have lived in some sort of dictatorship for the past 10 years, those people, are idiots. I am however embarrassed that our PM is a man child, who speaks less intelligently than my 16yr old son, and who has convinced the country, with nothing but touchy feely platitudes and promises of someone elses money, to vote for him. If he impresses you, you are the problem, and you like him, probably still have some growing up to do.

It's a good thing he plans to rarely attend question period, and we all should know why that is.

Edited October 20, 2015 by poochy

ToadBrother · October 20, 2015

It's all bs, but there are enough simpletons out there that really believe it, and that's all that matters to the liberal brain trust. No different than the idiot in line yesterday that was ranting about the dictatorship, or the idiot i saw on line today crying about federal health care cuts, these lies have been told over and over by unscrupulous people, so long that people who might have been thinking about change decided that things were so bad we absolutely needed change

And here's the nub. The Tory partisans, absolutely and completely incapable of self-reflection, just end up blaming the voters.

TimG · October 20, 2015

And here's the nub. The Tory partisans, absolutely and completely incapable of self-reflection, just end up blaming the voters.

Why is that any different than how Lib/NDP partisans reacted when the CPC won in 2011? People wanted change and they did not want the instability of a minority so they swung heavily to the Libs. Justin will have his honeymoon but will quickly run into the intractable nature of the problems and will be forced to break some of his promises which will piss people off. How fast he falls from grace will be the measure of his abilities of a leader.

SpankyMcFarland · October 20, 2015

There's nothing epic about it. It's the usual swing back to the Liberals.Increasing your seat count 5x means nothing when you are coming from being totally destroyed. By that logic, the conservatives are the most amazing party ever, because after getting kicked down to 2 seats...they increased their seats by how many x?.

From 2 to 20 to 12 before disappearing entirely. Their vote share was actually lower with twelve seats than with two. The joys of FPTP. The combined right wing vote was something like 34% in 1993.

Trudeau had name recognition but his achievement remains impressive by any standard. The importance of temperament seems to be underestimated here.

Edited October 20, 2015 by SpankyMcFarland

ToadBrother · October 20, 2015

From 2 to 20 to 12 before disappearing entirely. Their vote share was actually lower with twelve seats than with two. The combined right wing vote was something like 34% in 1993.

Trudeau had name recognition but his achievement remains impressive by any standard. The importance of temperament seems to be underestimated here.

I just can't sort out how anyone can say it isn't an achievement. In 2011, after going through two leaders perceived as weak and ineffective, even some Liberals of note were questioning the party's survival. The NDP were apparently the Progressive heirs apparent, and the Liberals were faced with permanent third party status.

In the space of less than two years, Justin Trudeau has taken the party from 34 seats to 184 seats. He's passed through the electoral crucible not just successfully, but triumphantly, exceeding, I suspect, most of his party's expectations. His achievement in Quebec alone, the complete resuscitation of the Grit's fortunes in that province to levels not seen in 35 years would be an achievement on its own. But add to that the complete seizure of Atlantic Canada, shutting out the Tories and NDP completely. And then look at what the Liberals managed to do in southern Ontario, which broke the Tories' backs in that region as much as it broke the NDP's back in Quebec. Heck, they even elected a couple of MPs in Calgary.

This was a party everyone, even party members, were writing obituaries about. It seemed the joint mission of the Tories and NDP to destroy the Liberal Party has not only failed, it has failed utterly.

And sure the family name plays its part, but as Chantal Hebert pointed out, Justin Trudeau, unlike his father, worked his way from the bottom up, rather than being anointed with a nice safe Liberal seat, Justin Trudeau fought a fiercely contested race in his riding, and sat in opposition. So it's not like he didn't make his bones.

Edited October 20, 2015 by ToadBrother

Smallc · October 20, 2015

It's like all the arguments that ignore his time spent as MP.

ToadBrother · October 20, 2015

It's like all the arguments that ignore his time spent as MP.

Not to risk the wrath of Bush_Cheney, but I do recall similar sentiments laid against Barack Obama, that he was merely some "community organizer", a Senator of little note and of little importance. To my mind, it's almost more just another way to belittle voters, to blame them for an incumbent party's failings. Rather than hold up the mirror and ask "Why didn't they pick me?", they take the emotionally easier, and more immature route, of blaming some vast group of stupid voters.

cybercoma · October 20, 2015

There's nothing epic about it. It's the usual swing back to the Liberals.

Increasing your seat count 5x means nothing when you are coming from being totally destroyed. By that logic, the conservatives are the most amazing party ever, because after getting kicked down to 2 seats...they increased their seats by how many x?

The campaign was nothing special, Trudeau is neither canny nor smart. It was an anti-Harper election, full stop. Trudeau managed to speak in full sentences, not vomit on himself on tv and successfully walk on 2 legs, and dress well. That's all they needed. If you hate Harper but are not a lefty, that's your only option. Trudeau is a performer, nothing more. He is nauseatingly inauthentic.

He is not charismatic at all, IMO. He virtually never says anything of substance, his speeches have more common with miss America winners than statesmen. If he manages to sit in the same room as Putin and not wet his pants, I'll be surprised.

Fortunately the Liberals have a deep bench, and the grown ups who will actually run things are reasonably competent even if somewhat corrupt. Trudeau's vision extends to becoming PM. Fortunately Goodale and some of the others should have some reasonable guidance to give him.

Sour grapes, plain and simple.

Trudeau took every single seat in all four Atlantic provinces. I don't think that has ever happened in history.

Trudeau went from a decimated third place party to forming government. That's happened only once before and it was in 1925.

The Liberals took ridings like Fundy Royal which have been Conservative for literally 100 years.

Only a staunch partisan with an axe to grind would call last nights performance "unremarkable."

ReeferMadness · October 20, 2015

Back to the topic. I haven't heard anyone with influence suggest that Mulcair is going anywhere so he might stick around. If he did leave, Nathan Cullen seems like the guy.

As far as the Conservatives, the candidates that I've heard kicked around (Brad Wall, Jason Kenny, John Baird) all sound to me like Harper 2.0. If they're smart they'll look at someone who is pragmatic enough to look across the spectrum and bring people together. Someone like Dianne Watts. She's smart, female, has no association with Harper, and isn't going to be perceived (as Harper was) as a prairie oil guy mad at Central Canada.

cybercoma · October 20, 2015

Wait, aren't we going to figure out how much of a percentage of the total eligible voters they got and then disparage them for that low number for the next 4 years? Isn't that how it's done now?

68% of 40% of the electorate so 27% of all eligible voters or 10% more than Harper's share.

cybercoma · October 20, 2015

And here's the nub. The Tory partisans, absolutely and completely incapable of self-reflection, just end up blaming the voters.

which is going to make the leadership race very interesting

ToadBrother · October 20, 2015

The Toronto Star is reporting that the Tories are actually in debt at the end of this election:

http://www.thestar.com/news/federal-election/2015/10/20/harpers-final-days-and-what-happens-next.html

Not only does this show how Harper's long election gambit didn't work, it has actually left the party in the hole. What's more, there are now suggestions that the Tory strategists never actually felt the party had a chance, so it seems this unnecessarily long and expensive election not only did not help the Tories, but has left them in a position where a new leader has going to spend a good deal more time fundraising.

The Tories, it strikes me, should be happy there is a majority government in power. They'll probably need four years to rebuild the party and its finances.

Bryan · October 20, 2015

The Tories, it strikes me, should be happy there is a majority government in power. They'll probably need four years to rebuild the party and its finances.

I highly doubt their finances are an issue at all. They may not be used to having a debt, but they won't sit on it.