Andrew Scheer needs to go.

[Argus]

44 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Whoever in here said Pierre Pollievre would make a good CPC leader is braindead.  The man is a snake.

Snake? Why?

Canadians can take a guy who can be a mean SOB as long as he's competent at what he does. They showed that with Harper.

[Moonlight Graham]

46 minutes ago, Argus said:

Snake? Why?

Canadians can take a guy who can be a mean SOB as long as he's competent at what he does. They showed that with Harper.

He's a lying snake-oil salesman buttkisser.  He's not popular, he's very lucky to be an MP in a strongly conservative riding.

[betsy]

A couple of pundits were saying there's talks going on behind closed door.  That even Harper was said to be telling conservatives to "calm down."

[Dougie93]

I never forgave Scheer for selling out to the socialist milk cartel from Quebec, that was the last straw for me, same as Bernier.

[Argus]

Matt Gurney basically says the same as I've been saying. Scheer's problem is his lack of directness, his sneak weaseling around answering questions. When you see a politician constantly dodging questions about themselves and their beliefs it doesn't give you much confidence in them or their honesty. When it came to abortion, gay marriage, his resume, his US citizenship, the hiring of Warren Kinsella, or a bunch of other things, he dodged questions and refused to answer anything directly. Maybe that's why his personal approval/popularity actually decreased as the campaign progressed.

That’s entirely correct. I have no problems with anything he said there. But Scheer is still missing the bigger picture. If you want Canadians to trust you on that — and that’s exactly what you’re asking for, their trust — you need to actually seek it. You need to respectfully engage with them, in a serious way. Scheer didn’t do that. He wanted Canadians to give him the benefit of the doubt over something he really obviously did not want to talk about or acknowledge. It turns out that “You can trust me with the issue that dare not speak its name” isn’t a great strategy.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/matt-gurney-scheer-asked-canadians-to-trust-him-while-avoiding-questions-not-a-good-look?video_autoplay=true

Edited October 25, 2019 by Argus

[Argus]

14 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

He's a lying snake-oil salesman buttkisser.  He's not popular, he's very lucky to be an MP in a strongly conservative riding.

You're not giving any details here, any specifics, just that you apparently don't like him. And he clearly IS popular or he wouldn't keep getting re-elected. The riding is not that strongly conservative, especially given the growing numbers of new houses being built here. Yes, it has a rural component, but not a very big one. It's a suburb.

[Argus]

It's funny how almost everyone commenting on Scheer's problems winds up talking about how he's not honest, and how he dodges questions.

This is the only one I've seen which talks about Scheer making a mistake in sidelining Doug Ford in Ontario. Certainly the federal Tories accomplished nothing in Ontario. The Liberals took only one less seat than they did last time around. The tories completely failed to break through into the suburbs around Toronto.

 

By sidelining Ford, Scheer kept the premier intact as a liability but lost the advantages he could bring. Ford is a strong campaigner who has had success in reaching immigrants and blue collar workers in the suburbs around Toronto, an area where Scheer failed to connect.

The Scheer team thought their guy was more popular than Ford, but Ontario PC internal polling shows the opposite. Ford had better hope it’s right and there is reason to believe it is. After a rough first year, Ford is well on the way to normalizing his government.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/federal-election-2019-results-ontario-doug-ford-andrew-scheer?video_autoplay=true

[Moonlight Graham]

39 minutes ago, Argus said:

You're not giving any details here, any specifics, just that you apparently don't like him. And he clearly IS popular or he wouldn't keep getting re-elected. The riding is not that strongly conservative, especially given the growing numbers of new houses being built here. Yes, it has a rural component, but not a very big one. It's a suburb.

Go look at the border of the riding and tell me it's not rural.  He's a POS.  It's a strong conservative riding, he's won every election since Harper got in.  They could put a retarded zebra as CPC rep in that riding and they'd win.

[Argus]

2 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Go look at the border of the riding and tell me it's not rural.  He's a POS.  It's a strong conservative riding, he's won every election since Harper got in.  They could put a retarded zebra as CPC rep in that riding and they'd win.

I LIVE in his riding.

[Moonlight Graham]

6 hours ago, Argus said:

I LIVE in his riding.

Ok so you know that Richmond, Munster, Goulbourn, Kars, North Gower, Greely, Metcalfe even Manotick have a lot of old white conservative Lowell Green-listening spunkers like yourself living there, even Stittsville, though it's growing a lot with new houses, same with Manotick.  And a lot of rural types live in these places who like living outside the dense burbs of Barrhaven and Kanata.  The riding doesn't even include Barrhaven anymore as it did before 2015 under Nepean-Carleton.  Much of the rest of the riding is straight-up rural farmers.

 

The rest of Ottawa closer to the core and denser suburbs vote Liberal and sometimes NDP for a reason.

Edited October 25, 2019 by Moonlight Graham

[jacee]

Delete

Edited October 26, 2019 by jacee
Delete

[Dougie93]

Bernier called it, the CPC is "morally corrupt", it's not that they are too right wing, or too anything, they stand for nothing.

They have no principles other than cravenly seeking the perks and prerogatives in Ottawa for its own sake.

[Dougie93]

Like, serving in the military I had the chance to glimpse what it's like behind the scenes in Ottawa.

They'd truck us out once in awhile as ceremonial toy soldiers to be the quarter guard at some of their events.

It's opulent, they're getting driven around in limos and catered to, wined and dined with the wealthy and powerful.

They acquire a taste for it, being a big shot, or at least hanging with the big shots, fancy office, staffers, cronies, even sex, it's debauched, make no mistake.

That's the perks and prerogatives in Ottawa, most Canadians never get to see it, so they have no idea what a scam it really is.

Never mind that they get a platinum plated indexed pension for life just for being an MP.

 

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Ok so you know that Richmond, Munster, Goulbourn, Kars, North Gower, Greely, Metcalfe even Manotick have a lot of old white conservative Lowell Green-listening spunkers like yourself living there, even Stittsville, though it's growing a lot with new houses, same with Manotick.  And a lot of rural types live in these places who like living outside the dense burbs of Barrhaven and Kanata.  The riding doesn't even include Barrhaven anymore as it did before 2015 under Nepean-Carleton.  Much of the rest of the riding is straight-up rural farmers.

You're talking about areas with million dollar homes (Greely, Manotick) and other suburban areas  (Metcalfe, Stittsville) where most of the people work in Ottawa and live further out because it's cheaper and they have families. And while it doesn't include Barrhaven it does have Riverside South, which is growing like a weed. Yeah, there's still some farmers further south and east, but it's a wide mix of people. Sorry if not everyone is a hip, young downtown, multi-ethnic singleton since you seem to believe these are the only reasonable and intelligent people out there. And probably there IS a greater percentage downtown that are non-white. That's GOOD, right?! The less whites the better!

Quote

The rest of Ottawa closer to the core and denser suburbs vote Liberal and sometimes NDP for a reason.

Because they vote for bigger government to take care of all their problems? Because unlike other folks they can't imagine having a sense of personal responsibility and turn to 'mommy' to solve every problem? Because masses of them pay no income tax anyway, so will always prefer the party that offers the most 'free' goodies?

Edited October 26, 2019 by Argus

[Moonlight Graham]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

You're talking about areas with million dollar homes (Greely, Manotick) and other suburban areas  (Metcalfe, Stittsville) where most of the people work in Ottawa and live further out because it's cheaper and they have families. And while it doesn't include Barrhaven it does have Riverside South, which is growing like a weed. Yeah, there's still some farmers further south and east, but it's a wide mix of people. Sorry if not everyone is a hip, young downtown, multi-ethnic singleton since you seem to believe these are the only reasonable and intelligent people out there. And probably there IS a greater percentage downtown that are non-white. That's GOOD, right?! The less whites the better!

Dude i'm not judging you or more rural people.  I grew up rural, i prefer rural areas and rural people and older people, they tend to be nicer and more down-to-earth.  I'm just saying that the riding has a lot of rural people mixed with people in more isolated subdivisions on the outer edge of ottawa where people like more peace and quiet, and these people tend to vote more conservative than the city dwellers and the dense suburbia yuppies.  Which is why Pierre Poilievre has had the Carleton riding locked down for a decade and half, not because he's some genius or likeable politician, but because of the demographics.  Just like they could put poo on a stick as Liberal candidate in the centre core of Ottawa and they'd almost always win.

That's because it doesn't matter who our MP's are, the party leadership has all the power, if you don't kiss the leader's ass like Poilievre kissed Harper's ass you're thrown out of cabinet like JWR was.  BTW i'm not anti-conservative, i'm anti-Poilievre, there's way better potential CPC leaders than he, like Michael Chong.

[marcus]

The only chance the Conservatives have is someone like Michael Chong. Many Canadians would not be able to stomach someone like Poilievre. 

Edited October 26, 2019 by marcus

[betsy]

What do you guys think of McKay?

[Rue]

2 hours ago, betsy said:

What do you guys think of McKay?

I think he is strongly identified with the previous Progressive Conservative Party and so to pick him now, might alienate the former Reformist wing and cause a schism. Me personally I think he would be a good candidate. I think he could sell himself across Canada very well and has the qualities Sheer does not. Marcus mentioned Michael Chong. He is another middle of the road or progressive Tory but I am not sure he would carry nationally and I never did understand why he did not do better in Toronto. He was a pretty middle of the road inoffensive politician but voters tuned him out. I really do not know why.

[Rue]

21 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

I never forgave Scheer for selling out to the socialist milk cartel from Quebec, that was the last straw for me, same as Bernier.

Supply chain economics in Canada  has been protecting small farmers since Canada started in 1867. It is as much a part of the fabric of Canadian politics as is medicare and gun control. These 3 things plus strong regulation of banks which Americans call communist tendencies Canadians of all political parties embrace. Its a non partisan issue. We won't allow Americans to dump cheap milk in Canada, put out of business are dairy farmers, then yank up the prices once they have destroyed our milk producers and have no competition. We protect our farmers no differently than the US does its own. The US engages in the very same predatory pricing tactics as China when it comes to dumping or what I call Walmart Cancer Marketing,

[Queenmandy85]

13 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

It's opulent, they're getting driven around in limos and catered to, wined and dined with the wealthy and powerful.

They acquire a taste for it, being a big shot, or at least hanging with the big shots, fancy office, staffers, cronies, even sex, it's debauched, make no mistake.

That's the perks and prerogatives in Ottawa, most Canadians never get to see it, so they have no idea what a scam it really is.

Never mind that they get a platinum plated indexed pension for life just for being an MP.

Wow. You have talked me into it. I'm running for Parliament. Why haven't you, Doug? You make it sound great.

As for gold plated pensions, don't you get a pension after all those years in the Forces?

2 hours ago, betsy said:

What do you guys think of McKay?

McKay stabbed the Progressive Conservative Party in the back. He would continue to alienate the Red Tories. Who could trust him?

The CPC will have to come up with a realistic policy to fight climate change that is better than the other parties. The Party will have to attract people from the right wing of the Liberal Party. It will have to attract Quebec Nationalists. The Leader will have to be an eminent person of integrity, vision and courage. Once elected, the Party will have to sustain all of this. 

[Dougie93]

2 hours ago, Rue said:

Supply chain economics in Canada  has been protecting small farmers since Canada started in 1867. It is as much a part of the fabric of Canadian politics as is medicare and gun control.

Protectionist cartels, bread line healthcare and gun grabbing.  F@ck commie Canada.

Edited October 26, 2019 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Wow. You have talked me into it. I'm running for Parliament. Why haven't you, Doug? You make it sound great.

As for gold plated pensions, don't you get a pension after all those years in the Forces?

An MP makes $157,000 a year, after only six years gets a pension of $30,000 per year,  and no requirement to kill nor die for the job.

But I could never be elected because I'd have to tell Canadians the truth about themselves and they don't like hearing it.

Edited October 26, 2019 by Dougie93

[dialamah]

2 hours ago, Rue said:

I think he is strongly identified with the previous Progressive Conservative Party and so to pick him now, might alienate the former Reformist wing and cause a schism. Me personally I think he would be a good candidate. I think he could sell himself across Canada very well and has the qualities Sheer does not. Marcus mentioned Michael Chong. He is another middle of the road or progressive Tory but I am not sure he would carry nationally and I never did understand why he did not do better in Toronto. He was a pretty middle of the road inoffensive politician but voters tuned him out. I really do not know why.

Michael Chong was re-elected, so voters didn't turn him out. He lost the party leadership to Scheer. I think if the Conservatives had run somebody that had a viable plan to deal with climate change, and who was more socially progressive than Scheer and fiscally conservative, they would likely have won a majority this time. 

I think part of the problem is that carbon taxing is the most effective means of addressing the need to reduce emissions at this point in time.  Other technologies to mitigate climate change are not well enough developed, yet. Conservatives use this to differentiate themselves from the other 'side', so they say "no" to carbon taxing, but because there's nothing else as effective, they cannot provide a feasible plan.

I suspect  that in four years the voting demographic will be quite different. The students protesting now will be able to vote; they are clearly able to mobilize and inspire each other and they will be able to influence their parents voting decisions.  Those who currently dismiss or mock these young people seem to forget that this is their future they're fighting for, and they're not just going to outgrow it.  As much as most politicians are in it for themselves they will have to provide and follow through on what the younger generation is looking for, rather than focussing on people who will, soon enough, no longer be part of the voting public.  This will be a challenge for Conservatives, because most of their support is from a shrinking demographic.  Progressive politicians will be getting their support from a growing demographic.  

Edited October 26, 2019 by dialamah

[Argus]

12 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Dude i'm not judging you or more rural people. 

Yeah, you are. "... have a lot of old white conservative Lowell Green-listening spunkers like yourself."

Btw, never listened to Lowell Green.

12 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

  Which is why Pierre Poilievre has had the Carleton riding locked down for a decade and half, not because he's some genius or likeable politician,

Polievre is not a particular likeable persona on TV. That's not his role. He seems to have taken over the John Baird role of the in-your-face agitator. But in all the press he's gotten, and he's gotten a lot of it, I've never heard him referred to as dumb, or incompetent at his roles, including as finance critic or as unprepared or as lacking confidence.

12 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

That's because it doesn't matter who our MP's are, the party leadership has all the power, if you don't kiss the leader's ass like Poilievre kissed Harper's ass you're thrown out of cabinet like JWR was.  BTW i'm not anti-conservative, i'm anti-Poilievre, there's way better potential CPC leaders than he, like Michael Chong.

He's not my first choice either. But your descriptions lack detail, much like Scheer's political promises. He was an ass-kisser? In what way? Chong has no chance at the leadership as he's a traditional progressive conservative and too far to the Left on too many issues.

[Argus]

34 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Michael Chong was re-elected, so voters didn't turn him out. He lost the party leadership to Scheer. I think if the Conservatives had run somebody that had a viable plan to deal with climate change, and who was more socially progressive than Scheer and fiscally conservative, they would likely have won a majority this time. 

I think part of the problem is that carbon taxing is the most effective means of addressing the need to reduce emissions at this point in time. 

The great 'climate change crisis' is a product of the neurotic ignorance of progressives. That they are infusing helpless children with the same neurotic level of fear and anxieties simply demonstrates that when you're an extremist nothing is off the books in terms of getting your way and pushing your agenda.