Who should the Ontario PCs pick as their next leadership candidate

[Argus]

2 hours ago, ?Impact said:

You also need to be the person you say you are, and not some candidate getting a big long list of names as seems to be often done. What would you consider a party event, hopefully not the convention as that is very difficult for most to attend. Perhaps a local riding association meeting, or some meet & greet rally?

Yes, that would be fine. 

2 hours ago, ?Impact said:

What about someone donating to a party, without getting a vote?

Donating money does demonstrate a commitment but that it has to be more than the $10 you slap down to join. Lots of people, like this guy, have no problem slapping down their $10 to vote once. Far fewer will pay $100. In fact, maybe it should cost $100 to join a political party. Does that exclude poor people? Yes, but how many poor people join political parties anyway? And you could make an alternative path for those who can't afford $100 They could do some basic volunteer work instead. I would like to see some sort of commitment that you actually are interested in and care about the success of this party. 

Maybe you could be forced to go somewhere and sit through an introductory speech by party leaders before joining.

[Rue]

On 2/1/2018 at 4:33 PM, capricorn said:

Hooray! Christine Elliott is in. I like that she knows her way around Queens Park. All the better to take the fight to Wynne and bring her down.

She lost too many times. She also showed  when she lost she had no grave and continued to stab Brown in the back every opportunity she got. She didn't stick around to support him and run again-she proved what a political whore she was taking a Liberal patronage appointment as Patient's Ombudsman.. You don't take a cushy Liberal patronage appointment after repeatedly stabbing the person you lost to in public, then run again .That is bull crap. She can kiss my ass. Mulroney is the only one right now who has no smell on her from all that inbred infighting and the only one capable of running with a clean record.

[capricorn]

2 minutes ago, Rue said:

She lost too many times. She also showed  when she lost she had no grave and continued to stab Brown in the back every opportunity she got. She didn't stick around to support him and run again-she proved what a political whore she was taking a Liberal patronage appointment as Patient's Ombudsman.. You don't take a cushy Liberal patronage appointment after repeatedly stabbing the person you lost to in public, then run again .That is bull crap. She can kiss my ass. Mulroney is the only one right now who has no smell on her from all that inbred infighting and the only one capable of running with a clean record.

That's all well and good Rue. But, if you look at recent polls, Elliott is polling first and tied with...guess who....Patrick Brown. Mulroney is running 4th after Elliott, Brown and Ford. Mulroney has publicly called for Brown to step aside in the leadership race whereas Elliott has stayed mum on the matter. It seems to me she is approaching the situation in a mature and thoughtful way to mend fences and look to the future rather than fighting old battles. And as for the Liberal appointment, which politician do you know who would pass up a plum appointment from a rival entity?

[?Impact]

2 hours ago, Rue said:

Mulroney is the only one right now who has no smell on her from all that inbred infighting and the only one capable of running with a clean record.

Her record may be her strength, but it is also her weakness. She needs to get a general election behind her belt, and a few years in the legislature before tackling the leadership.

[Argus]

Buh bye, Patrick. Dunno what you were thinking when you decided to enter the race, but glad I wasn't one of the suckers who paid your way in...

[Michael Hardner]

So - Brown was crooked too ?  How does that happen ?  Aren't the PC's supposed to be the clean ones ?

[Argus]

29 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

So - Brown was crooked too ?  How does that happen ?  Aren't the PC's supposed to be the clean ones ?

The only clean one I've seen was Harper. But he wasn't pretty or charismatic. Wait, I forgot Preston Manning was decent and honest too.

Edited February 27, 2018 by Argus

[betsy]

The PC should pick the one who represent the conservative values the most, a true reflection of his/her own values.  It shouldn't be Liberal-light.

 

I've yet to know where they stand.  Caroline Mulroney isn't for me - she was for the carbon-tax until she flipped- flopped.

Edited February 27, 2018 by betsy

[Rue]

20 hours ago, capricorn said:

That's all well and good Rue. But, if you look at recent polls, Elliott is polling first and tied with...guess who....Patrick Brown. Mulroney is running 4th after Elliott, Brown and Ford. Mulroney has publicly called for Brown to step aside in the leadership race whereas Elliott has stayed mum on the matter. It seems to me she is approaching the situation in a mature and thoughtful way to mend fences and look to the future rather than fighting old battles. And as for the Liberal appointment, which politician do you know who would pass up a plum appointment from a rival entity?

True. Yes. Of course. Godo point...butElliott has made more enemies in her party than anyone. When all is said and done her enemies will gather around Mulroney. Brown's people will not go to Elliot. Elliot openly ridiculed Brown. People do not forget disloyalty. Vic Fideli hates her. He has enough clout with the Brown rump to put Mulroney in. That would be my guess.

Its just that.

[Rue]

6 hours ago, betsy said:

The PC should pick the one who represent the conservative values the most, a true reflection of his/her own values.  It shouldn't be Liberal-light.

 

I've yet to know where they stand.  Caroline Mulroney isn't for me - she was for the carbon-tax until she flipped- flopped.

It appears  she first stated the carbon tax proposal was a  necessary evil, assuming Trudeau was forcing a carbon pricing scheme on all provinces including Ontario if Ontario did not come up with its own. Her impression was if Ontario did not create one, Trudeau would impose one so on that assumption went along with it feeling Ontario's hand was forced but she qualified her comments saying to use the tax collected to offset the harm of the tax to business.

Of course now she is running, she and the other candidates are being handed scripts from the Party as to what positions they should now say and they will differ.   

To take ANY politician literally is probably stupid don't you think Besty? They all  flip and flop. Some of course flop their flip so boldly we call them Kathleen Wynne or Dalton Dumbo or Justin the Bollywood choreographer.

[betsy]

3 hours ago, Rue said:

 

To take ANY politician literally is probably stupid don't you think Besty? They all  flip and flop. Some of course flop their flip so boldly we call them Kathleen Wynne or Dalton Dumbo or Justin the Bollywood choreographer.

 

Why shouldn't we take them literally with their platform?  Isn't that what it's all about?  Selling their platforms?

How do we know they all flip flop?  Not all candidates win! 

 

Are we saying.....it's okay for a candidate to flip flop just because we think they all do?   Politics is neck deep in corruption - shall we now say, "it's stupid to expect an honest candidate - so don't make a big deal of dishonesty?" 

That's how standards are lowered and before you know it, we think nothing of it.  

 

Edited February 27, 2018 by betsy

[?Impact]

On 2/27/2018 at 3:26 PM, betsy said:

Why shouldn't we take them literally with their platform?  Isn't that what it's all about?  Selling their platforms?

Then remove the politicians from the equation, and only publish the platforms. The become binding. It is called direct democracy.

Otherwise if you want representative democracy then you need to judge the politicians as well, based on their past performance.

[Topaz]

On 2/26/2018 at 10:02 PM, Argus said:

The only clean one I've seen was Harper. But he wasn't pretty or charismatic. Wait, I forgot Preston Manning was decent and honest too.

Harper got dirty after he became PM

[Argus]

6 hours ago, Topaz said:

Harper got dirty after he became PM

In what way? Haven't heard of him taking money from anyone.

[?Impact]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

In what way? Haven't heard of him taking money from anyone.

I would assume things like lying to the Canadian people about his deficit when he broke his own election rules and called an early election in 2008 pretending that things were rosy.

[Michael Hardner]

Impact, you know that I hated Harper as much as any well-bred Torontonian did.  I even went to the "two-minutes hate" against him at city hall when I had time.

 

But you can't deny that he was relatively clean, when compared to the scandals of Chretien, Wynne and Trudeau (huge scandal pending).  Even now, Trudeau's sweet schoolboy hallowe'en mask is slipping off and we're glimpsing the desire for raw power behind it.

 

Now, back to Ontario.  

 

Looks to me like Biff-from-Back-to-the-Future has so far not said anything overly racist, and has been travelling around the province dutifully.  It will come down to how much Ontarians want to risk a leader who could go batshit-hashish-flashback crazy vs a leader who would be great however is afflicted with womanhood.

 

 

[Argus]

18 hours ago, ?Impact said:

I would assume things like lying to the Canadian people about his deficit 

He played way less with accounting books than those before and after him. And if lying to Canadians made you dirty then we've never had a clean politician. Well, maybe Preston Manning, but that's about it.

[Argus]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Looks to me like Biff-from-Back-to-the-Future has so far not said anything overly racist, and has been travelling around the province dutifully.  It will come down to how much Ontarians want to risk a leader who could go batshit-hashish-flashback crazy vs a leader who would be great however is afflicted with womanhood.

You guys keep thinking the Fords are/were racist but they have huge support among the Black community. In fact, Rob mostly got into trouble with his drugs among his black friends and was deeply emotionally committed to coaching and helping the members of a black football team. Just because they're rough around the edges and not politically correct don't presume that translates into racist.

That being said, I'm hoping someone else wins, of course.

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, Argus said:

You guys keep thinking the Fords are/were racist but they have huge support among the Black community. 

Right.  His wife even practices "Judism".  He doesn't drink booze but he does get boos.

 

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Right.  His wife even practices "Judism".  He doesn't drink booze but he does get boos.

You think a video by John Oliver counters what I said?

[Michael Hardner]

12 hours ago, Argus said:

You think a video by John Oliver counters what I said?

Did you watch it?  It's a video of Doug Ford and his clan talking Judism.

[OftenWrong]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Did you watch it?  It's a video of Doug Ford and his clan talking Judism.

That video is complete nonsense. I'm all for giving criticism where it's due, but silliness like that only annoys and actually detracts from valid critical argument.

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

That video is complete nonsense. I'm all for giving criticism where it's due, but silliness like that only annoys and actually detracts from valid critical argument.

The focus of the nonsense is Doug Ford's ridiculous extemporaneous speech, and that of his wife.  This is what he's like without a lot of handlers telling him what to say.  Clearly.

[OftenWrong]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

The focus of the nonsense is Doug Ford's ridiculous extemporaneous speech, and that of his wife.  This is what he's like without a lot of handlers telling him what to say.  Clearly.

I'm ok with any of that, because it's not important. Political policy objectives of the new party leader is important, however. Please post criticisms again, when you have something more substantial.

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, OftenWrong said:

I'm ok with any of that, because it's not important. Political policy objectives of the new party leader is important, however. Please post criticisms again, when you have something more substantial.

It's noted that brutal comments related to peoples' religion aren't important to you.  To many Ontarians,  it is. 

And - the #1 issue we are facing in the west today is unity, the lack of it, and the root cause of broken political systems.  You have some able candidates in the PC party who can make economic adjustments to the province (a keystone and important Conservative value) without stoking the fires of culture war.  Many people love to see the culture wars in the public forum, but it is destructive from both sides and takes energy and focus from the important tasks of today.

 

That's all I have to say on it, as the PCs aren't my party.  Good luck with it.