CPC 2017: Bernier vs Alexander

[PIK]

15 hours ago, blueblood said:

Michael Chong isn't going to do anything but make noise.  The sooner he backs out of the race with his delusions of grandeur the better.  

Its the b-team debate tonight.  

He should be running for the liberals.

[Newfoundlander]

4 hours ago, PIK said:

He should be running for the liberals.

Why?

[Derek 2.0]

A good interview between Mad Max and Rod Giltaca from the CCFR:

 

 

 

[PIK]

16 hours ago, Newfoundlander said:

Why?

Becasue he sounds like one. To soft for me. And of cousre he has been sucked into the CC scandals with his carbon tax.

[Newfoundlander]

5 hours ago, PIK said:

Becasue he sounds like one. To soft for me. And of cousre he has been sucked into the CC scandals with his carbon tax.

Being "soft" makes someone a Liberal?

CC scandals?

[BillyBeaver]

It doesn't matter who is the Conservative leader, they will bow to Big Oil, and further continue down the globalist path that Harper started. Can't wait to see their justification for signing TiSA.

 http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/06/04/tisa-wikileaks-trade-in-services-agreement_n_7512124.html

Likely the same bullshit that they repeated over and over during the CETA ratification.

Liberals and Conservatives are the same two-party corruption that infests the western world from UK (Labour, tories) to US (dems, reps) We need a viable third option to step up because the NDP sure as hell won't. They could have swept the last election but all Mulcair is good for is sniping bilingual one-liners in the HoC. They have no clue how to run a winning campaign that requires a majority at a federal level and never will. They exist to show the Liberals how far to campaign left to win. It's sad.

 

My pick would be O' Leary just so he can get destroyed.

If I was a Conservative, I would choose bernier.

 

[August1991]

On 2/19/2017 at 1:22 PM, Newfoundlander said:

Candidates like Obhrai, Saxton, Lemieux, Peterson, and Trost, appear to have little to no support so when they drop off their numbers will hardly impact the overall race. Alexander and Blaney may get enough support to have a little influence. It's the other seven - O'Leary, Bernier, Leitch, Chong, O'Toole, Scheer and Raitt - who will likely have the most support in the race that their second, third, fourth, etc. choices will influence the race. There's a good chance that people's second and third choice will have similar views as their first choice. Due to O'Leary's high profile and focus on economics he probably has a better shot at being ranked high on almost anyone's ballot. However, where does Leitch's second place support come from?

Astute, and I agree (!).

Unlike the US primaries or French presidential where voters learn, the CPC choice is a one-preferential-vote decides-all.

====

Unless O'Leary wins the first round, I suspect that he will be weak on the second choice. Same with Leitch.

Like Dion in 2006, I suspect/fear that the next CPC leader will be a third or fourth first choice: Scheer (Catholic) or Alexander (Protestant).

Unless Bernier wins, I go with Alexander - his French is far better.

Edited March 12, 2017 by August1991

[Newfoundlander]

Alexander has no chance at all. The fact that he speaks French fluently may mean he becomes the second or third choice for Quebeckers, but I doubt many outside Quebec care that his French is considered by some to be flawless. While many people outside of Quebec want the leader to be bilingual I doubt many people care how good the candidate's French is. Alexander's French might be better than Scheer's, Chong's or O'Toole's but Anglophones won't really care. As well, Bernier seems likely to make it to the final round so even if Alexander is the second or third choice of Bernier and Blaney supporters he'll probably never see those votes. 

[August1991]

9 hours ago, Newfoundlander said:

Alexander has no chance at all. The fact that he speaks French fluently may mean he becomes the second or third choice for Quebeckers, but I doubt many outside Quebec care that his French is considered by some to be flawless. While many people outside of Quebec want the leader to be bilingual I doubt many people care how good the candidate's French is. Alexander's French might be better than Scheer's, Chong's or O'Toole's but Anglophones won't really care. As well, Bernier seems likely to make it to the final round so even if Alexander is the second or third choice of Bernier and Blaney supporters he'll probably never see those votes. 

Newfoundlander, I suspect that given the voting system, Alexander will be the Protestant/left-over choice.

Like Joe Clark in 1979, another Catholic/left-over - or Dion in 2006..

[Argus]

18 hours ago, Newfoundlander said:

Alexander has no chance at all. 

Alexander was the guy who started his campaign by calling for a huge increase in immigration. So no, I don't think he stands much chance.

[PIK]

Now I am looking at bernier and O'Toole, and lisa a distant 3rd. Anybody here a member and voting?

Edited March 14, 2017 by PIK

[capricorn]

I finally made my choice. I will vote for Mad Max for 2 reasons. First, I fully endorse his platform. In addition, the Couillard affair ensures that Max has name recognition and this would help him square off against Trudeau in the next election. The fact he is Québecois will not be detrimental, just as it did not hurt the Dauphin.

[capricorn]

6 minutes ago, PIK said:

Now I am looking at bernier and O'Toole, and lisa a distant 3rd. Anybody here a member and voting?

Yup PIK, Bernier first. Although given my certitude that Max will win the day, the second most attractive candidate is O`Toole simply because he makes sense when he speaks.

[scribblet]

16 minutes ago, capricorn said:

I finally made my choice. I will vote for Mad Max for 2 reasons. First, I fully endorse his platform. In addition, the Couillard affair ensures that Max has name recognition and this would help him square off against Trudeau in the next election. The fact he is Québecois will not be detrimental, just as it did not hurt the Dauphin.

My choice too...   

[betsy]

18 hours ago, PIK said:

Now I am looking at bernier and O'Toole, and lisa a distant 3rd. Anybody here a member and voting?

We're seriously looking at Bernier.  Second will be Leitch.

 

I've taken Lisa Raitt off the list.  I'll never vote for her.  She put up an attack on Leitch for her immigration policy (screening applicants for compatibility to Canadian values) - what's wrong with that??? 

Raitt's spouting off the same liberal cliche', calling Leitch, divisive!  And yet, Raitt took the trouble to single out Leitch and O'Leary in her attack ads at her website!  Marginalizing someone is being maliciously divisive!  It's hypocritical, isn't it?  That makes Raitt very much just like any hypocritical Liberal who's for indiscriminate open borders, in my book.

Edited March 15, 2017 by betsy

[?Impact]

1 hour ago, betsy said:

 Raitt took the trouble to single out Leitch and O'Leary in her attack ads at her website!

So the instant Bernier or Leitch single out anyone on their website, you will immediately remove them from consideration?

[Argus]

4 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

So the instant Bernier or Leitch single out anyone on their website, you will immediately remove them from consideration?

No. I agree with Lietch on values testing, strongly agree. So do most Canadians. When Raitt called a special news conference to announce that the party had to stop Leitch because of this policy I decided not to vote for her. Clearly she's very liberal on immigration - or is just eager to get accolades from the liberal media, and that's not what I'm looking for.

Edited March 15, 2017 by Argus

[?Impact]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

No. I agree with Lietch on values testing, strongly agree.

Yes, but do you agree with "Marginalizing someone is being maliciously divisive!"? It seems that betsy doesn't ever want to support someone that mentions others on their website. Obviously she never supported a Conservative candidate because they were maliciously divisive forever with their website that is dedicate to the Liberal opposition (Just Visiting, Nice Hair, etc.).

[capricorn]

Is the Liberal party sending signals that they believe Bernier will win the Conservative party leadership? A researcher from Justin Trudeau's office, an employee whose pay and benefits are paid by the taxpayer, has attended Bernier's events and press conferences. This is odd considering those are public events reported in the media.

Sorry, the following media report on this matter is in French. A quick google translation will provide the gist of it.

http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2017/03/14/paye-par-les-contribuables-pour-surveiller-maxime-bernier

And yes, I realize all political parties send snoops at events hosted by their opponents. But couldn't they at least pay the freight instead of dinging the taxpayers for what they pay the snoops?

[?Impact]

6 minutes ago, capricorn said:

And yes, I realize all political parties send snoops at events hosted by their opponents. But couldn't they at least pay the freight instead of dinging the taxpayers for what they pay the snoops?

Are you saying the Bernier's press briefings are partisan events? Why is he drawing a taxpayer salary as an MP if all he does is partisan events?

[capricorn]

10 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Are you saying the Bernier's press briefings are partisan events? Why is he drawing a taxpayer salary as an MP if all he does is partisan events?

What do you think Trudeau is doing in Calgary? He's canvassing for the Liberal candidate in anticipation of the by-election. Do you think all he does is participate in partisan events?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/trudeau-ambrose-calgary-rally-byelections-1.4004609

[?Impact]

2 minutes ago, capricorn said:

What do you think Trudeau is doing in Calgary? He's canvassing for the Liberal candidate in anticipation of the by-election.

Yes, but what was Bernier's press conference about? Are you telling me that no taxpayer resources assigned to Conservative MPs have ever attended a Trudeau press conference?

[capricorn]

9 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Yes, but what was Bernier's press conference about? Are you telling me that no taxpayer resources assigned to Conservative MPs have ever attended a Trudeau press conference?

Do you even think before asking such simplistic questions? Tell you what, think about it and tell me what you think the reasons could be for a leadership contender to hold a press conference.

And no, I didn't tell you that "no taxpayer resources assigned to Conservative MPs have ever attended a Trudeau press conference". If you have such info please share.

[?Impact]

3 minutes ago, capricorn said:

a leadership contender

Bernier is also an MP. If they are using taxpayer resources to attend an O'Leary press conference then that is a different story.

[dre]

On 1/18/2017 at 6:49 AM, PIK said:

It will be between O'leary and max. And please look south before you tell the world that O'leary has no chance of winning.

Sure but the conservative candidate here wont have the luxury of running against Hilary Clinton.

Only way the conservatives win is if there's a huge recession, or a sponsorship sized scandal.