Jump to content

Why not Michael Chong?


Recommended Posts

I see the Conservative party shooting themselves in the foot as they seem headed towards choosing a party leader that will most likely lose them the election in 2019.    I may not want to vote for JT and the Liberals in 2019, but if my other option is someone like O'Leary or even Bernier, what choice will I have?  Climate change is a real thing and each year this becomes more obvious (except for the hard-core deniers), but few of the Conservative candidates are addressing it.  Bernier says nothing about the issues climate change will bring and his website features an oil-worker.  O'Leary doesn't even seem to have a platform - just regurgitated media bites attacking JT.   Combine that with his debate no-shows and I'm left wondering if this is just a a lark to him.   

Chong, who is ranked 2nd among all Canadians for Conservative leader but 7th among Conservatives, points out that the Conservative party has lost 2/3 of it's membership since 2004; from 285,000 down to 100,000.  Clearly this is not a party who resonate with all Canadians, and that matters at election time.   Chong is the only candidate I've seen who actually considers climate change an issue - whether one agrees with his carbon pricing plan or not, at least he's not either ignoring the issue or claiming it doesn't exist.   This is an important issue for Canadians (http://www.nanosresearch.com/tickers/PDF/POLNAT-S15-T661.pdf), even if the Conservative party doesn't think so.

I really do hope the Conservative elects a leader that will be palatable to the more centrist Canadians and thus give us a viable choice in the next election.    I'm not the only Canadian who feels this way, either.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I see the Conservative party shooting themselves in the foot as they seem headed towards choosing a party leader that will most likely lose them the election in 2019.    I may not want to vote for JT and the Liberals in 2019, but if my other option is someone like O'Leary or even Bernier, what choice will I have?  Climate change is a real thing and each year this becomes more obvious (except for the hard-core deniers), but few of the Conservative candidates are addressing it.  Bernier says nothing about the issues climate change will bring and his website features an oil-worker.  O'Leary doesn't even seem to have a platform - just regurgitated media bites attacking JT.   Combine that with his debate no-shows and I'm left wondering if this is just a a lark to him.   

Chong, who is ranked 2nd among all Canadians for Conservative leader but 7th among Conservatives, points out that the Conservative party has lost 2/3 of it's membership since 2004; from 285,000 down to 100,000.  Clearly this is not a party who resonate with all Canadians, and that matters at election time.   Chong is the only candidate I've seen who actually considers climate change an issue - whether one agrees with his carbon pricing plan or not, at least he's not either ignoring the issue or claiming it doesn't exist.   This is an important issue for Canadians (http://www.nanosresearch.com/tickers/PDF/POLNAT-S15-T661.pdf), even if the Conservative party doesn't think so.

I really do hope the Conservative elects a leader that will be palatable to the more centrist Canadians and thus give us a viable choice in the next election.    I'm not the only Canadian who feels this way, either.  

Chong is my choice too.  I haven't done any research into it, but people I trust actually joined the party so they could vote for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Chong is my choice too.  I haven't done any research into it, but people I trust actually joined the party so they could vote for him.

 

Yup, me too.   Does this mean you trust me?   ;)

 

Edited by dialamah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And lets just get it out there: Chong is the Tory equivalent of Stephane Dion.  Mild, inoffensive, utterly ineffective, hopeless. 

 

That blandness just might be what the Cons compromise on of course.  But only of they choose to surrender 2019, right now.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, overthere said:

How can anybody bu a white man from Quebec win an election as PM?

This is not as snippy a question as it might first seem to be. Quebec's tribal vote has always had a big influence on our national elections.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, overthere said:

And lets just get it out there: Chong is the Tory equivalent of Stephane Dion.  Mild, inoffensive, utterly ineffective, hopeless. 

 

That blandness just might be what the Cons compromise on of course.  But only of they choose to surrender 2019, right now.

He's bland, a nonentity, and a boring speaker. And his support of carbon taxes dooms any hope he might have had. You don't have to be a climate denier to judge that the idea of our paying California some sort of offseting fee in order to run our power plants is insanity. And looking at the world and it's rising emissions, it's clear nothing we do is going to have any significant impact. I would say we'll put a carbon tax on when every major emitter (and competitor) does and not before.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snippy?  It is a recitation of fact.  Over the last half century or so, we have had a PM that is a white guy from Quebec about 75% of the time.  For 20% of the balance, we had a white guy from Toronto. .  The other 5% were the Temporary Foreign Workers:: Campbell, Clark and Turner.

 

Quebec has 20% of the population and virtual control of central government.  It makes sovereignty sentiments hard to understand.!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Argus said:

He's bland, a nonentity, and a boring speaker. And his support of carbon taxes dooms any hope he might have had. You don't have to be a climate denier to judge that the idea of our paying California some sort of offseting fee in order to run our power plants is insanity. And looking at the world and it's rising emissions, it's clear nothing we do is going to have any significant impact. I would say we'll put a carbon tax on when every major emitter (and competitor) does and not before.

 

 

 

Don't get the whole "Well, if we can't fix it right now let's not do anything at all".   And at least he's addressing the issue, rather than ignoring it.  

Not sure what 'boring speaker' has to do with it, or being 'bland' for that matter.  Lots of criticism directed toward JT because he's neither boring nor bland.     I think nonentity is a bit inaccurate for someone who's managed to be reelected five times.    Although possibly no-one has ever run against him in his riding; is that the case?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, overthere said:

How can anybody bu a white man from Quebec win an election as PM?

Chong opposed Harper's motion of "Quebecois as a nation within a unified Canada" and quit his cabinet post. I doubt Quebecers have forgotten this and Chong has no chance in La Belle Province.

Quote

"To me, recognizing Quebecers as a nation, even inside a united Canada, implies the recognition of ethnicity, and I cannot support that."

"I do not believe in an ethnic nationalism. I believe in a civic nationalism."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/tory-cabinet-minister-quits-post-over-motion-1.585951

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, overthere said:

And lets just get it out there: Chong is the Tory equivalent of Stephane Dion.  Mild, inoffensive, utterly ineffective, hopeless. 

 

That blandness just might be what the Cons compromise on of course.  But only of they choose to surrender 2019, right now.

 

If the survey taken that says Chong and O'Leary are 1 & 2 among all  Canadians, that suggests to me that any other candidate would be the loser in 2019.  If the survey I linked is accurate, it shows that more than half of Canadians think climate change is important and Chong does address that - does any other Candidate?   If not, then right there you've lost a significant portion of the voting public.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I don't think Chong will get in as leader, he's too far behind and doesn't have enough anti-immigrant, anti-tax, pro-business in his platform to appeal to the hard-core Conservatives, but I think knowing that a lot of non-Conservative Canadians seem to support him over all other Conservative candidates is something the Conservatives ought to think about.  

Of course one of the more hardline Conservative candidates could change his (her) platform significantly after he's elected leader.   But then would he (she) be considered trustworthy by the public?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, dialamah said:

If the survey taken that says Chong and O'Leary are 1 & 2 among all  Canadians, that suggests to me that any other candidate would be the loser in 2019.

The only reason O'Leary is number one is because most people don't know any of the other candidates. The only reason Chong is high is because the NDP and Liberals like him. That doesn't mean they'll ever vote Conservative, of course. But they like him better than, well, the actual conservatives, mostly because of his name and his climate change stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

7 minutes ago, dialamah said:

If the survey taken that says Chong and O'Leary are 1 & 2 among all  Canadians, that suggests to me that any other candidate would be the loser in 2019.  If the survey I linked is accurate, it shows that more than half of Canadians think climate change is important and Chong does address that - does any other Candidate?   If not, then right there you've lost a significant portion of the voting public.

If Chong wins, ti will be because he is the compromise guy, the least offensive choice within the party.  He is also Mr Bland, and has no chance whatsoever of beating Trudeau.  Like Dion before him, he is everybodys second choice and that will be reflected in a general election too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Argus said:

He's bland, a nonentity, and a boring speaker. And his support of carbon taxes dooms any hope he might have had. You don't have to be a climate denier to judge that the idea of our paying California some sort of offseting fee in order to run our power plants is insanity.

I think you might be confusing Carbon taxes with Carbon credits/offsets.

And looking at the world and it's rising emissions, it's clear nothing we do is going to have any significant impact. I would say we'll put a carbon tax on when every major emitter (and competitor) does and not before.

It is true, Canada contributes a relatively small amount to the amount of Carbon released. But, in the grand scheme of things we will also be paying a very small portion of the total cost of fixing the issue

I say this as someone who has voted conservative in the last election... This is one of the major problems within the political right wing... Global warming is happening, and humans are contributing to it. There is more than enough evidence to support that. And there are no easy solutions to dealing with the problem. Ideally, I would love for the conservatives to be involved in solving the problem... help pick out a solution that makes the most economic (as well as scientific) sense. Instead, far too many Canadian conservatives (or American republicans) keep ignoring the problem. They dismiss it as a "hoax", or suggest that because it snowed during the spring that Global warming isn't happening. Or they will nitpick, pointing out how "it used to be called global warming now its called climate change so its obviously not an issue". Or, they will say things like "we don't contribute that much to the problem".

The longer that conservatives sit on the sidelines making non-scientific claims and sniping at scientists and environmentalists, the less moral authority that we have in proposing solutions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Argus said:

The only reason O'Leary is number one is because most people don't know any of the other candidates. The only reason Chong is high is because the NDP and Liberals like him. That doesn't mean they'll ever vote Conservative, of course. But they like him better than, well, the actual conservatives, mostly because of his name and his climate change stuff.

I have and would vote Conservative if their election platform appealed to me.  Not everyone is blindly partisan you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, overthere said:

 

If Chong wins, ti will be because he is the compromise guy, the least offensive choice within the party.  He is also Mr Bland, and has no chance whatsoever of beating Trudeau.  Like Dion before him, he is everybodys second choice and that will be reflected in a general election too.

Well that's a shame for people who don't want to re-elect JT, but also want a government who will take climate change seriously.   That's not the only reason I like Chong, but it is significant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, segnosaur said:

.This is one of the major problems within the political right wing... Global warming is happening, and humans are contributing to it. There is more than enough evidence to support that.

Okay. Let's accept that as given.

Quote

And there are no easy solutions to dealing with the problem.

Therein lies the problem.

Quote

Ideally, I would love for the conservatives to be involved in solving the problem... help pick out a solution that makes the most economic (as well as scientific) sense.

Canada is not going to solve this. Carbon taxes are not going to solve this. This is only going to be solved by technological innovation. We need to develop a means of producing energy which is a LOT less carbon intensive, a means of energy which can spread around the world so that nations prefer that to coal powered generating stations. That is the only thing which has any hope of lowering carbon emissions worldwide.

The longer that conservatives sit on the sidelines making non-scientific claims and sniping at scientists and environmentalists, the less moral authority that we have in proposing solutions.

Why should we not challenge people who have turned climate science into an ideology, and in some cases almost a religion, and have already on multiple occasions shown themselves more than willing to lie and misrepresent the facts in order to persuade others to their point of view?

 

Edited by Argus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I have and would vote Conservative if their election platform appealed to me.  Not everyone is blindly partisan you know.

It has nothing to do with partisanship. I can read the numbers. I can see that there is absolutely no point in trying to lower carbon emissions. It's like you telling me that people are dying of cancer so we must immediately start forcing everyone to drink more champagne. What the hell good is that going to do?

The difference between conservatives and liberal progressives is the latter are eager to jump at ANYTHING which they think might be good. Conservatives want to see the logic and common sense and numbers demonstrated. There is no logic to the numbers behind trying to solve global warming by taxing energy use in Canada. You MIGHT be able to do something if that happened everywhere in the world, maybe, possibly, but that just is NOT going to happen. The Russians, Chinese, Indians and the US are not serious about carbon reduction. Coal plants are blossoming across the third world like dandelions will soon be on our lawns (well, maybe not MINE). I'm not going to support an idiotic plan to slow our economy just so progressives can puff out their chests and feel good about 'doing something'. I don't want to do 'something'. I want to do something that will actually help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Argus said:

It has nothing to do with partisanship

I was responding to your claim that Libs and NDP wouldn't vote for him as an alternative to Libs.

You could be right, carbon pricing isn't the answer.  But at least climate change is on his radar; is it on the radar of any other candidate?   If I'm looking for a government that is going to take climate change seriously, and 8 out of 9 leadership candidates don't even mention it, the one who does is already ahead.  

(Insert sweeping generalizations about how stupid and greedy "the right" is because they invariably choose economy over environment, while proclaiming "the  left" smarter and more moral because they look for solutions that might prevent humans becoming extinct over the next century.)

Edited by dialamah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Argus said:

Canada is not going to solve this.

Canada may not be able to solve the problem globally. We can hopefully reduce our own contribution to the problem, in proportion to the amount that we cause the problem in the first place.

Carbon taxes are not going to solve this. This is only going to be solved by technological innovation. We need to develop a means of producing energy which is a LOT less carbon intensive, a means of energy which can spread around the world so that nations prefer that to coal powered generating stations. That is the only thing which has any hope of lowering carbon emissions worldwide.

Actually, the point of Carbon taxes is to increase the price of fossil fuels to reflect their true costs (by taking in externalities). By doing so, it will hopefully put other technologies (I favor nuclear, but others may like solar or wind) on a more even footing.

So, carbon taxes may or may not work. But again, the thing is, if conservatives don't like carbon taxes, then come up with alternatives, and lets judge each possible solution appropriately. (Carbon taxes may end up being a giant tax grab... that's why I want conservatives involved... because if they are implemented I want them to be revenue neutral.)

Why should we not challenge people who have turned climate science into an ideology, and in some cases almost a religion, and have already on multiple occasions shown themselves more than willing to lie and misrepresent the facts in order to persuade others to their point of view?

Probably because those challenging climate science are often not equipped to debate the science in a reasonable rational matter. (Its sort of like a creationist trying to claim that they have "proof" that evolution is false, when really its their own ignorance being demonstrated.) And yes, there may be the occasional problem with people making mistakes, or making exagerations. But that really doesn't affect the bulk of the research that has been done. (Again, its sort of like the creationist who points to the Piltdown man, but ignores the thousands of other pieces of evidence that support evolution.)

Trying to get this back to the main thread topic... I have no idea whether Chong would be a good choice. Yes, his stance on carbon taxes might harm him in the leadership race. It might have less of an effect in a general election however, since it might allow the conservatives to pick up a few votes from moderates.

Admittedly, I haven't been paying much attention to the leadership race. But, from glancing at some of the potential leaders, at least some would actually drive me to vote the the Liberals if they were to win. Chong seems pretty reasonable at least policy wise.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dialamah said:

I see the Conservative party shooting themselves in the foot as they seem headed towards choosing a party leader that will most likely lose them the election in 2019.    I may not want to vote for JT and the Liberals in 2019, but if my other option is someone like O'Leary or even Bernier, what choice will I have?  Climate change is a real thing and each year this becomes more obvious (except for the hard-core deniers), but few of the Conservative candidates are addressing it.  Bernier says nothing about the issues climate change will bring and his website features an oil-worker.  O'Leary doesn't even seem to have a platform - just regurgitated media bites attacking JT.   Combine that with his debate no-shows and I'm left wondering if this is just a a lark to him.   

Chong, who is ranked 2nd among all Canadians for Conservative leader but 7th among Conservatives, points out that the Conservative party has lost 2/3 of it's membership since 2004; from 285,000 down to 100,000.  Clearly this is not a party who resonate with all Canadians, and that matters at election time.   Chong is the only candidate I've seen who actually considers climate change an issue - whether one agrees with his carbon pricing plan or not, at least he's not either ignoring the issue or claiming it doesn't exist.   This is an important issue for Canadians (http://www.nanosresearch.com/tickers/PDF/POLNAT-S15-T661.pdf), even if the Conservative party doesn't think so.

I really do hope the Conservative elects a leader that will be palatable to the more centrist Canadians and thus give us a viable choice in the next election.    I'm not the only Canadian who feels this way, either.  

Chong is half Liberal half Conservative.  Why would a true conservative vote for someone who wants to put carbon taxes on us.  Not everyone falls for the man-made climate change hoax.   I won't vote for O'Leary either.  Where has he been all along.  He suddenly appears and want to be leader.  We don't even know what he stands for.   I think he is a risky choice.  I support Kelly Leitch because she has not wavered on her stand.  She is against carbon taxes and supports an immigrant interviewing process for everyone.  It's a good plan.  She is very stable and trustworthy.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...