Jump to content

Conservative Leadership September 10th


Recommended Posts

On 5/3/2022 at 12:52 PM, Zeitgeist said:

I think the CBC is trying to sow division in the CPC.  I hope the CPC incorporates the PPC.  

That's because they know they are finished if PP gets in. so it is in their best interest.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No idea what I replied before in this thread.

I prefer Charest. I'm an old school conservative: what works is good, get along.

But make things happen.

Mulroney did the GST, free trade. Charest did the Mtl interchange.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Faramir said:

So it sounds like the executive at CPC will get the candidate THEY want with all their machinations I am hearing about.

If by that you mean Charest or Brown, I won’t bother with the Conservatives.  Brown had a milquetoast platform as Ontario PC leader.  He supported carbon taxes.  Charest supported the way the government handled the truckers.  He’d likely also support carbon taxes.  Polievre is the only real departure from the Liberals with a proven track record and a shot at winning.  Lewis is strong but not quite there.  Polievre knows the issues and covered them more powerfully and succinctly than any of the other candidates.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jack9000 said:

Pierre is just a little attack dog once he has to come up with solutions he will fail and fail fast


Pierre may threaten your parasitic existence . . . he may have a solution to you and your ilk, to the betterment of Canada.

 

Edited by Nefarious Banana
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jack9000 said:

Pierre is just a little attack dog once he has to come up with solutions he will fail and fail fast

That is not why you don't support him, you are afraid he is going to cut programs that puts money in your pocket...

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Poilievre will need to abandon many of his positions from the leadership race if he intends to win a federal election. The defunding of the CBC is a case in point. Politics is an exersize in building support. Remember the firestorm Prime Minister Mulroney unleashed when he thought it would be a brilliant idea to pre-empt Coronation Street to hold a press conference. CBC is a national institution created by a Conservative government and it has a large base of support. It is not just politics. It is Quirks and Quarks, the Nature of Things, Under th Influence, drama, comedy etc. Why would any politician tell a significant body of voters to kiss his ass?

Political parties serve one purpose. They do not exist to promote some stupid ideology. They exist to win elections. We need leaders who are pragmatic, not ideological. Mr. Poilievre has campaigned on a format of ideology. The majority of voters disagree with him. For him to say he is smarter than the majority of people is pure arrogance. He has laid out a platform that is at odds with what voters want. Therefore, he must either flip flop and be called a liar, or stick to his platform and be called a loser. The only Conservatives who have won elections are Red Tories who can draw support from liberals.

Edited by Queenmandy85
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

1. Mr. Poilievre has campaigned on a format of ideology.

2. The majority of voters disagree with him.

3. For him to say he is smarter than the majority of people is pure arrogance.

4. He has laid out a platform that is at odds with what voters want.

1. Has he ?  I have heard slogans and smart-ass comments.  Basically the same method as Trudeau, but a wisecracking nerd personality instead of an eyelid-batting middle-aged Tiger Beat alumnus.

It's style vs style.  This should be what we all reject - the game they invite us to is not intelligent.

2. Do they ?

3. Did he really say that ?

4. Has he laid out a platform or are you piecing together statements he has made ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Has he ?  I have heard slogans and smart-ass comments.  Basically the same method as Trudeau, but a wisecracking nerd personality instead of an eyelid-batting middle-aged Tiger Beat alumnus.

It's style vs style.  This should be what we all reject - the game they invite us to is not intelligent.

2. Do they ?

3. Did he really say that ?

4. Has he laid out a platform or are you piecing together statements he has made ?

1. That is how it appears to me. Nerd is a great description. 

2. Yes.

3. When he says the CBC is bad, he is telling me I am wrong, and by inference he is smarter than me. Of course he is wrong about that.

4. I am piecing together statements he has made. His support of the illegal occupation of Ottawa is an example.

5. Mr. Poilievre has failed to provide a hint of any positive solutions to climate change. He is not alone on the political stage in that matter. I crave a leadership with real vision to face the coming crisis. I want a leader who works with political rivals to achieve great things to overcome global warming. But, as a militant Monarchist, I have learned politics is a venue of unfulfilled dreams. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

1. I am piecing together statements he has made. His support of the illegal occupation of Ottawa is an example.

2. Mr. Poilievre has failed to provide a hint of any positive solutions to climate change. He is not alone on the political stage in that matter.
3. I crave a leadership with real vision to face the coming crisis. I want a leader who works with political rivals to achieve great things to overcome global warming. But, as a militant Monarchist, I have learned politics is a venue of unfulfilled dreams. 

1. He gave a surgical answer when asked: He supported the legal participants but not the illegal participants.  Which is... uh... Anyway, at least it's something.  I'm sure the Convoy lovers will see him as going after Trudeau and love him.
2. Ok
3. I just want leaders who "debate" "ideas".   

I utterly hate Trudeau's opportunistic capture of 'progressive values' as his own idea, and wish he lived up to the image that was crafted as a new kind of PM.  He just waved at the crowd, then went behind the curtain and got all his ideas from the old Liberal machine.

Replacing him with a nobody who has only been in parliament his whole life, acts like a Nerdy insult comic isn't an improvement.

At this point in our history, we have a LOT of people under 50 years old who have a lot of experience in transforming organizations and understand the new world.  Finding someone with a brain and heart and recruiting them shouldn't be so tough.  We're Canada, we should be doing this more.  

Rather than finding another lawyer who looks at the whole system and comes up with one-offs like legal WEED or ?!? POPPERS... 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I have learned politics is a venue of unfulfilled dreams. 

I've learned that being governed is an exercise in expectation management and I expect dishonesty. I don't know if I'd make a good politician but I definitely know I'd make a lousy partisan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I crave a leadership with real vision to face the coming crisis. I want a leader who works with political rivals to achieve great things to overcome global warming.

I think I just described Scott Aitchison. I think I will consider him as my first choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Political parties serve one purpose. They do not exist to promote some stupid ideology. They exist to win elections. We need leaders who are pragmatic, not ideological. Mr. Poilievre has campaigned on a format of ideology. The majority of voters disagree with him.

How did you come to your conclusion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I've learned that being governed is an exercise in expectation management and I expect dishonesty. 

Even if you expect lies, that leaves an entire horizon of possible behaviours from your representative to the Queen or whatever....

All of them lie, but would you rather have been led by Stalin, Hitler or Churchill ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Mr. Poilievre will need to abandon many of his positions from the leadership race if he intends to win a federal election. The defunding of the CBC is a case in point. Politics is an exersize in building support. Remember the firestorm Prime Minister Mulroney unleashed when he thought it would be a brilliant idea to pre-empt Coronation Street to hold a press conference. CBC is a national institution created by a Conservative government and it has a large base of support. It is not just politics. It is Quirks and Quarks, the Nature of Things, Under th Influence, drama, comedy etc. Why would any politician tell a significant body of voters to kiss his ass?

Political parties serve one purpose. They do not exist to promote some stupid ideology. They exist to win elections. We need leaders who are pragmatic, not ideological. Mr. Poilievre has campaigned on a format of ideology. The majority of voters disagree with him. For him to say he is smarter than the majority of people is pure arrogance. He has laid out a platform that is at odds with what voters want. Therefore, he must either flip flop and be called a liar, or stick to his platform and be called a loser. The only Conservatives who have won elections are Red Tories who can draw support from liberals.

Also remember that it is often the only way for voices to be heard in Canada’s North.  

Clearly, it is not profitable for radio and TV to broadcast to places in the arctic.  The CBC is often a lynchpin bringing people closer together.  Art, community, news…. All of it is tied together up there because of the CBC.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Mr. Poilievre will need to abandon many of his positions from the leadership race if he intends to win a federal election. The defunding of the CBC is a case in point. Politics is an exersize in building support. Remember the firestorm Prime Minister Mulroney unleashed when he thought it would be a brilliant idea to pre-empt Coronation Street to hold a press conference. CBC is a national institution created by a Conservative government and it has a large base of support. It is not just politics. It is Quirks and Quarks, the Nature of Things, Under th Influence, drama, comedy etc. Why would any politician tell a significant body of voters to kiss his ass?

Political parties serve one purpose. They do not exist to promote some stupid ideology. They exist to win elections. We need leaders who are pragmatic, not ideological. Mr. Poilievre has campaigned on a format of ideology. The majority of voters disagree with him. For him to say he is smarter than the majority of people is pure arrogance. He has laid out a platform that is at odds with what voters want. Therefore, he must either flip flop and be called a liar, or stick to his platform and be called a loser. The only Conservatives who have won elections are Red Tories who can draw support from liberals.

If the CBC can’t produce content worthy of drawing enough viewers to win advertising dollars, it shouldn’t exist.  If the issue is ensuring that East Coast Christmas kitchen parties and Inuit belly singing gets aired because Canada, there are ways of ensuring that all broadcasters provide some unpopular Canadian cultural content.  We can even subsidize it.  We already do.  The clear problem with the CBC and much of our MSM in Canada is that it’s heavily dependent on government funding, making it beholden to government.  Also, there’s no real public demand necessary for much of the content.  Basically, programming that isn’t especially interesting can be propped up for ideological reasons.  20-30 years ago I think CBC played a critical role in affirming Canadian cultural content, but Canadians produce a lot of popular and interesting content that advertisers are willing to fund because people like it.  I’m not saying the CBC should be scrapped, but it does need to survive on its own merits to a greater degree.  I hope PP kicks their woke asses.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

1. That is how it appears to me. Nerd is a great description. 

2. Yes.

3. When he says the CBC is bad, he is telling me I am wrong, and by inference he is smarter than me. Of course he is wrong about that.

4. I am piecing together statements he has made. His support of the illegal occupation of Ottawa is an example.

5. Mr. Poilievre has failed to provide a hint of any positive solutions to climate change. He is not alone on the political stage in that matter. I crave a leadership with real vision to face the coming crisis. I want a leader who works with political rivals to achieve great things to overcome global warming. But, as a militant Monarchist, I have learned politics is a venue of unfulfilled dreams. 

There’s no way to prove human made climate change, and there’s certainly no sensible way to reverse climate change except in a gradual manner over many decades and centuries.  Even then, humanity’s role in it may be small.  At some point our energy production technology will make it much easier to reduce our human impact, so clobbering humanity with carbon taxes and heavily subsidized, insufficient green energy today is dumb.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to cause thread drift, so I will point out that the image I described of Mr. Poilievre is the image many centre - centre right voters have of him. To win enough seats currently held by the grits in Ontario and Quebec, the Consevative party needs a Red Tory like Brown, Charest and Aitchison.

 

Edited by Queenmandy85
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Mr. Poilievre will need to abandon many of his positions from the leadership race if he intends to win a federal election. The defunding of the CBC is a case in point. Politics is an exersize in building support. Remember the firestorm Prime Minister Mulroney unleashed when he thought it would be a brilliant idea to pre-empt Coronation Street to hold a press conference. CBC is a national institution created by a Conservative government and it has a large base of support. It is not just politics. It is Quirks and Quarks, the Nature of Things, Under th Influence, drama, comedy etc. Why would any politician tell a significant body of voters to kiss his ass?

Political parties serve one purpose. They do not exist to promote some stupid ideology. They exist to win elections. We need leaders who are pragmatic, not ideological. Mr. Poilievre has campaigned on a format of ideology. The majority of voters disagree with him. For him to say he is smarter than the majority of people is pure arrogance. He has laid out a platform that is at odds with what voters want. Therefore, he must either flip flop and be called a liar, or stick to his platform and be called a loser. The only Conservatives who have won elections are Red Tories who can draw support from liberals.

 We really going to spend close to 1 billion dollars to fund the above shows, I wonder just how many viewers these shows get...other than you 4...  You guys have heard about cable right...or streaming, you know it is bad when a boomer has to tell the younger generations, and Queen about life after CBC... you are addicted, there is a 12-step program, that will take you off slowly it is called cable.

Besides, I don't think there are many of the others that are going to keep CBC, with exception of Charest and he is going to reprogram it...

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I don't want to cause thread drift, so I will point out that the image I described of Mr. Poilievre is the image many centre - centre right voters have of him. To win enough seats currently held by the grits in Ontario and Quebec, the Consevative party needs a Red Tory like Brown, Charest and Aitchison.

 

I liked Aitchison he made sense and did not want to get involved in the catfights, or name-calling  I also liked Baber who had all the right answers as well. but I don't think these 2 have the support and that's what it is going to come down to...

Charest got played by PP, he spent most of his time yelling and countering PP, if he wants a chance he has got to up his game...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

There’s no way to prove human made climate change, and there’s certainly no sensible way to reverse climate change except in a gradual manner over many decades and centuries.  Even then, humanity’s role in it may be small.  At some point our energy production technology will make it much easier to reduce our human impact, so clobbering humanity with carbon taxes and heavily subsidized, insufficient green energy today is dumb.  

There may not be a way to prove it, but we certainly did not do mother earth any favors... lots of ways to slow climate change, but these projects take decades to complete and our nation does nothing fast. If the government was serious there would be an action plan already, and action being taken, I mean Justin did declare it an emergency right...with all the lights and sirens, and we have not even left the station yet..., and to get the whole world on board is going to be next to imposable, that is if we don't nuke each other first...

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.

Guest
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.

×
×
  • Create New...