CdnFox Posted January 13 Report Posted January 13 PowerPoint Presentation Wow. All the major pollsters have come out about the same in the first polling since the announcement. The liberals are on track for the worst defeat in Canadian history other than the old PC gov't. Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
NAME REMOVED Posted January 13 Report Posted January 13 That could change, depending on who the Liberal Party chooses as their next leader. in 1993, the PC Party was in the exact same position early in 1993. Once Kim Campbell was elected, she eventually pulled even with 6 weeks to go in the campaign, as the British press compared her to Margaret Thatcher, and she was also the first female leader in North American history. Unfortunately for Campbell, Canadians grew to dislike her, once she started speaking to the media, and during the debates. Looking back in retrospect, if the PC Party chose Jean Charest, they would have probably survived, and had a strong representation in Parliament, albeit in opposition. 1 Quote
Politics1990 Posted January 13 Report Posted January 13 once a new leader is in it will probably change some i mean the conservatives will still win but i figure an actually election will be 38-40% for them not 45-47 like it is atm Quote
CdnFox Posted January 14 Author Report Posted January 14 54 minutes ago, Politics1990 said: once a new leader is in it will probably change some i mean the conservatives will still win but i figure an actually election will be 38-40% for them not 45-47 like it is atm The polling suggests otherwise, but that is obviously what the libs are hoping. There's no chance of a win but they're trying to save the furniture. It's hard to win back a seat, it can be hard to even get someone to run for a seat if it's held by the other party. It's even worse if you're not opposition because you get a lot less screen time. so if they drop to third or forth place instead of opposition, it could be a very very long road to build back. The fact is MOST of the time when there's a new leader in the last moments it goes badly. The PC party tried that by putting in Kim Campbell at the last minute and the PC were reduced to 2 seats. The dems in the states put Kammy in last minute and she got clobbered. There are other examples but that's how it usually goes. IT's not like they had a choice but the polling suggests that people hate the libs right now in general and not just Justin, and now they're going to have a no name guy running the show that nobody's heard of who isn't a political junkie and who has some baggage as well and just isn't charismatic. It might not go the way they hope. Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Army Guy Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 2 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: That could change, depending on who the Liberal Party chooses as their next leader. in 1993, the PC Party was in the exact same position early in 1993. Once Kim Campbell was elected, she eventually pulled even with 6 weeks to go in the campaign, as the British press compared her to Margaret Thatcher, and she was also the first female leader in North American history. Unfortunately for Campbell, Canadians grew to dislike her, once she started speaking to the media, and during the debates. Looking back in retrospect, if the PC Party chose Jean Charest, they would have probably survived, and had a strong representation in Parliament, albeit in opposition. There is not enough time for canadians to get to know these candidates that are still running, not enough time to change Justins narrative....it would take a miracle to change that right now a liberal is a liberal, is a justin 1 hour ago, Politics1990 said: once a new leader is in it will probably change some i mean the conservatives will still win but i figure an actually election will be 38-40% for them not 45-47 like it is atm Your man justin planned it this way, waiting this long to retire, he knew what he was doing.......if he can't be leader, then no liberal will be either... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Legato Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 I find it odd that given the current political climate anyone would wish to become the Liberal party leader, it's political suicide. Those that stay in the background will at least have a future chance. Quote
CdnFox Posted January 14 Author Report Posted January 14 9 minutes ago, Legato said: I find it odd that given the current political climate anyone would wish to become the Liberal party leader, it's political suicide. Those that stay in the background will at least have a future chance. This has boggled my mind as well. And that's doubly true when you consider that whoever gets elected will have all of 8 minutes to prepare before there are headlong into an election. Generally speaking a year is barely enough time to actually put together a decent campaign and that's if you're an expert. To walk from a leadership race straight into the debates is pretty brutal. and while some parties have to vote or decide whether to have a leadership review or not after an election loss with the libs it's automatic. So whomever loses will have a leadership vote and THEN everyone who didn't run who actually wants to be leader will dog pile on like a pack of hyenas and the winner there will have 4 years to get their crap together. Like - there's almost NO chance of that happening, especially with most of the big guns deliberately sitting this one out and keeping the cash in their pockets. I think some of these people are so removed from the public that they are able to convince themselves that the public really does love the liberals and it was just a minor annoyance with trudeau that was the problem and now everyone will love them again. Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Legato Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 22 minutes ago, CdnFox said: This has boggled my mind as well. And that's doubly true when you consider that whoever gets elected will have all of 8 minutes to prepare before there are headlong into an election. Generally speaking a year is barely enough time to actually put together a decent campaign and that's if you're an expert. To walk from a leadership race straight into the debates is pretty brutal. and while some parties have to vote or decide whether to have a leadership review or not after an election loss with the libs it's automatic. So whomever loses will have a leadership vote and THEN everyone who didn't run who actually wants to be leader will dog pile on like a pack of hyenas and the winner there will have 4 years to get their crap together. Like - there's almost NO chance of that happening, especially with most of the big guns deliberately sitting this one out and keeping the cash in their pockets. I think some of these people are so removed from the public that they are able to convince themselves that the public really does love the liberals and it was just a minor annoyance with trudeau that was the problem and now everyone will love them again. I think your last paragraph is one of the major reasons, "removed from public". 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
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.