Jump to content

Kim Campbell says Harper will lose


Recommended Posts

Kim Campbell stated today in an interview at the London school of Economics that she believes that Stephen Harper's social conservatism will result in him losing the election. Must say I never thought that I'd find myself agreeing with both Kim Campbell and Ralph Klein. The Liberals have not been this unpopular in a long time and with the right leader, CPC would be forming government in 2006. But they blew it in picking Harper as their leader. I suspect their next leader won't be a social conservative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy, Kim Campbell is a real authority on what it takes to win an election campaign.

Try not ignore every rule of the board. Post links to information like this.

Kim Campbell stated today in an interview at the London school of Economics that she believes that Stephen Harper's social conservatism will result in him losing the election. Must say I never thought that I'd find myself agreeing with both Kim Campbell and Ralph Klein.  The Liberals have not been this unpopular in a long time and with the right leader, CPC would be forming government in 2006.  But they blew it in picking Harper as their leader.  I suspect their next leader won't be a social conservative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try not ignore every rule of the board. Post links to information like this.
Kim Campbell stated today in an interview at the London school of Economics that she believes that Stephen Harper's social conservatism will result in him losing the election. Must say I never thought that I'd find myself agreeing with both Kim Campbell and Ralph Klein.  The Liberals have not been this unpopular in a long time and with the right leader, CPC would be forming government in 2006.  But they blew it in picking Harper as their leader.  I suspect their next leader won't be a social conservative.

Happy to oblige:

http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try not ignore every rule of the board. Post links to information like this.

Kim Campbell stated today in an interview at the London school of Economics that she believes that Stephen Harper's social conservatism will result in him losing the election. Must say I never thought that I'd find myself agreeing with both Kim Campbell and Ralph Klein.  The Liberals have not been this unpopular in a long time and with the right leader, CPC would be forming government in 2006.  But they blew it in picking Harper as their leader.  I suspect their next leader won't be a social conservative.

Happy to oblige:

http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/

I didn't check the link because it doesn't surprise me. A lot of disaffected old PC MPs are taking their merger anger out on the Reform wing whose guy just happens to be party leader. Joe Clark will probably be next.

I wonder what they'd be saying with MacKay or Lord at the helm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks normie! That's the way to have a fair debate.

I don't hold much faith in what Kim Campbell says - hell I even voted Liberal the one election she was at the helm of the Conservatives....

Funny how The Toronto Star, CTV, The Globe and Mail or CanWest didn't find this story worthy of publishing on any of their sites. Bias in the CBC? Nah, never...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Toronto Star also carried the CP story.

This is the full quote of what she said:

"Their (the Conservative party's) positions are too socially conservative, I think, to form a government in Canada. People may like their fiscal policies but they're frightened by their social conservatism...It's a pity because it denies people a choice on policy issues."

The article ends with:

She now divides her time between Madrid and Chicago, where her husband, Hershey Felder, is based.

I have often wondered what happens to people like Campbell, Dukakis, Gore. They had their fifteen minutes of intense scrutiny and then utter silence. Pierre-Marc Johnson and David Peterson had somewhat similar experiences. Chretien named Campbell as Consul-General in LA in part because she had no other job, and it was considered unseemly to have an ex-PM drawing UIC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks normie! That's the way to have a fair debate.

I don't hold much faith in what Kim Campbell says - hell I even voted Liberal the one election she was at the helm of the Conservatives....

Funny how The Toronto Star, CTV, The Globe and Mail or CanWest didn't find this story worthy of publishing on any of their sites. Bias in the CBC? Nah, never...

You have voted Liberal??? :P

But no I don't think Campbell has that much influence over Canadian politics...I did like it when she ripped Mulrooney though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twice, 93 and 97.

There was a documentary on the Conservatives getting crushed in 1993, that I used to have a copy of somewhere. It was just an ugly example of finger pointing and placing blame. John Charest or Jim Edwards would have done much, much better as leader. Not saying much I though, anything would have been better than two seats. :lol:

You have voted Liberal???   :P

But no I don't think Campbell has that much influence over Canadian politics...I did like it when she ripped Mulrooney though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twice, 93 and 97.

There was a documentary on the Conservatives getting crushed in 1993, that I used to have a copy of somewhere. It was just an ugly example of finger pointing and placing blame. John Charest or Jim Edwards would have done much, much better as leader. Not saying much I though, anything would have been better than two seats.  :lol:

You have voted Liberal???   :P

But no I don't think Campbell has that much influence over Canadian politics...I did like it when she ripped Mulrooney though...

Finger pointing? Doesn't sound like anything I have ever heard happening in an election campaign??? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twice, 93 and 97.

There was a documentary on the Conservatives getting crushed in 1993, that I used to have a copy of somewhere. It was just an ugly example of finger pointing and placing blame. John Charest or Jim Edwards would have done much, much better as leader. Not saying much I though, anything would have been better than two seats.  :lol:

A lot of people seem to have forgotten that Campbell went into that election with a lead over the Liberals. All she had to do was run a reasonable campaign, make everyone realize she was going to be different from Mulroney, and she'd have been in. At worst, they'd have been reduced to Official Opposition. Their annihilation can certainly be blamed on people's dislike of Mulroney coming out, but only in part. It was also a reaction to perhaps the most ridiculously inept political campaigns in modern Canadian history.

I agree with those who say Campbell is hardly one to be giving lessons on what it takes to win an election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't check the link because it doesn't surprise me.  A lot of disaffected old PC MPs are taking their merger anger out on the Reform wing whose guy just happens to be party leader.  Joe Clark will probably be next.

Actually, Joe Clark went much further than Kim Campbell. He didn't just say that Harper would lose because of his social conservatism. He stated that he reluctantly supported Paul Martin over Stephen Harper to lead the country because "I do think it would be dangerous to have a leader with the kind of mentality Mr. Harper has." Clark said this just before the 2004 election:

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/04/26/canada/clark040426

So while Kim Campbell and Ralph Klein claim to support Stephen Harper but fear he'll lose because of his social conservatism, Joe Clark actually preferred Paul Martin, in part because of Harper's social conservatism.

It's true that Campbell and Clark are disaffected former PC MPs...not to mention Prime Ministers. But they do represent a wing of conservatism that CPC will need to capture if they are ever hope to form government. In last year's election, Harper captured only 29.6% of the vote, far less than Reform and the PCs captured together in the past. In yesterday's Ipsos Reid poll, December 1, 2005, Harper was down to 28%.

CPC supporters need to face reality rather than attack Campbell, Clark and Klein. If Harper can't even capture the vote of former PC supporters, how can he expect to capture the Liberal, NDP or BQ vote? I'm not saying this to slam either CPC or CPC supporters but only their choice of leader. It was a mistake in my opinion, and it's time to move on and cleanse CPC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy crap normie. We get your point. You think Harper was a mistake. Great. They ain't gonna change leaders now.

Funny how you get stuck on this while the good news of the GST is starting to dominate another news cycle.

:lol:

CPC supporters need to face reality rather than attack Campbell, Clark and Klein.  If Harper can't even capture the vote of former PC supporters, how can he expect to capture the Liberal, NDP or BQ vote? I'm not saying this to slam either CPC or CPC supporters but only their choice of leader.  It was a mistake in my opinion, and it's time to move on and cleanse CPC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We get your point. You think Harper was a mistake.

It's not just me who thinks Harper was a mistake. So did Klein, Campbell and Clark. Now let me ask you some questions. Do you think Harper was a mistake? After Harper lost the 2004 election, should CPC have had a leadership convention in early 2005 and picked a fresh leader for the next election?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kim Campbell stated today in an interview at the London school of Economics that she believes that Stephen Harper's social conservatism will result in him losing the election. Must say I never thought that I'd find myself agreeing with both Kim Campbell and Ralph Klein.  The Liberals have not been this unpopular in a long time and with the right leader, CPC would be forming government in 2006.  But they blew it in picking Harper as their leader.  I suspect their next leader won't be a social conservative.

This is a major blow to Harper in these past few weeks. All former and current MP's and PM's are saying he's nto going to get in, thats a bite in the a**

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's no surprise that small c conservatives and others who don't like the direction the party has taken will come out and snipe at Harper. Happens in politcs all the time. Closer to the election date when their comments will have more effect, others will come out in favour of Harper.

After over a decade of a liberal agenda, we need social conservatism in Canada and Harper is just the guy to bring it on. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's no surprise that small c conservatives and others who don't like the direction the party has taken will come out and snipe at Harper.  Happens in politcs all the time.  Closer to the election date when their comments will have more effect, others will come out in favour of Harper. 

After over a decade of a liberal agenda, we need social conservatism in Canada and Harper is just the guy to bring it on.  :)

Agree with you 100% but A lot of rumers have been spread about him, so that people are afraid of him. That is the reason he has lost seats in Ontario and therfore can't even hope for a minority. I really want this guy to win this election but in order to do this he has to stop consentrating on the Canadian West and win seats in Onatario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a major blow to Harper in these past few weeks.  All former and current MP's and PM's are saying he's nto going to get in, thats a bite in the a**

I think Ralph Klein's comments were probably the biggest blow. Some CPC supporters will at least rationalize Campbell and Clark's comments as disaffection because of Harper's and MacKay's pointless destruction of the PCs and inability to captre the votes of former PC supporters. But Klein is Premier of perhaps the only province where most people opposed C-38 and don't view Harper as controlled by the religious right.

And Klein, for all his Ottawa bashing, never suggested putting a firewall around Alberta as Harper did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if these comments have done any damage, it's been very little, or so the polls say. Klein's comments have been kicking around for a while now. I think the worst is over, and as long as Harper stays on the offensive he can dicatate the headlines in the media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if these comments have done any damage, it's been very little, or so the polls say.  Klein's comments have been kicking around for a while now.  I think the worst is over, and as long as Harper stays on the offensive he can dicatate the headlines in the media.

The similarities in the postings of Sharkman and Shoop are astonishing. No doubt it's mere coincidence that neither post at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if these comments have done any damage, it's been very little, or so the polls say.  Klein's comments have been kicking around for a while now.  I think the worst is over, and as long as Harper stays on the offensive he can dicatate the headlines in the media.

The similarities in the postings of Sharkman and Shoop are astonishing. No doubt it's mere coincidence that neither post at the same time.

If what you posted was anything more than drivel, you might make an impact here norm.

Your constant drone is getting old, we have heard it all about the bad things that Stephen Harper represents and it is the same useless, Liberal scare campaign. It's no longer going to work, Canadians are opening their eyes to see the shit being spewed by scare-mongers like you Norm!

I think all of this social conservative crap you like to moan about, is going to help Harper in the long run!

The CPC is going to form the next government and it pisses off all you whiney Liberals....It's awesome!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leader,

Best not to respond to him.

Quite sad for the lifelong Liberals. So far the media hasn't been playing along with them and it is driving them crazy!

I think all of this social conservative crap you like to moan about, is going to help Harper in the long run!

The CPC is going to form the next government and it pisses off all you whiney Liberals....It's awesome!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leader,

Best not to respond to him.

Quite sad for the lifelong Liberals. So far the media hasn't been playing along with them and it is driving them crazy!

I think all of this social conservative crap you like to moan about, is going to help Harper in the long run!

The CPC is going to form the next government and it pisses off all you whiney Liberals....It's awesome!!!

Actually I was going to say the same thing, ignore him, don't feed him. As long as you reply to this type of thing, you feed him and give him for room to repeat the same verbage over and over again. If you get angry at it, then he wins, this type of poster is only interested in stirring the pot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I was going to say the same thing, ignore him, don't feed him.  As long as you reply to this type of thing, you feed him and give him for room to repeat the same verbage over and over again.  If you get angry at it, then he wins, this type of poster is only interested in stirring the pot.

Let me see if I understand where this is headed. Calling Martin guilty of crimes is OK. Calling Liberals corrupt is OK. Implying that the Liberal Party condones corruption is OK.

But challenging these notions is stirring the pot. Perhaps I've not been on this site long enough but it's my impression so far that Martin and the Liberals are bashed regularly

and that this is viewed as perfectly acceptable by most posters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liberal Corruption: Gomery Findings are not bashing, they are findings.

The Liberals have been in government for 12 years and have a record to run on.

The opposition only has positions.

Critisizing acutual events is not bashing, it is articulating what they actually did and not a might do fear campaign.

The Liberals based on experience have fuled many of our current challenges.

Unity, Health Care, Trust in Government

They have been in power and are responsible for the current state of affairs. If 12 years is not enough, I don't have time for their fix.

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
      10,744
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Mark Partiwaka
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • exPS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • gatomontes99 went up a rank
      Proficient
    • phoenyx75 earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • phoenyx75 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Recently Browsing

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