Predictions For The New Conservative Party ?

[Galahad]

Craig,

I agree with you that Harper is the best person for the job of leader.

Barbara Yaffe, Raif Mair and many other, I'm sure, giants of the media believe that Preston Manning would be the best choice to lead the Conservative Party.

Paul Wells at Macleans.ca suggested a short list that included Preston Manning. Said he:

"This whole thing was his idea, and I mean, like, 30 years ago. Are there simply no rewards in Canadian politics for being right?"

So why should we listen to your and Craig's promotion of "firewall" Harper?

[Galahad]

I agree with you that Harper is the best person for the job of leader.

In a speech in 1999 Harper zeroed in on Preston Manning, saying:

"Manning long ago outflanked Clark as the champion of ideology. He is now threatening to outflank him as the king of compromise."

Soooo, I wonder:

Is he now ready to outflank BOTH of these great men and become the undisputed king of compromise?

Or are his fuehrer-like tendencies going to prevail?

[Craig Read]

Morgan, great post again. Harper is a rarity in politics:

1. An ideologue who understands both the theory and practice of political science. Ask Chretien or another mind dead liberal on the major tenets of realism, socialism, liberalism, or rationale theory, and you will be met by dumb stares.

2. Acutely aware of history. As your quote ably demonstrates Harper is aware that Trudeau's socialism came very close to bankrupting the country.

In 1984, the Tories inherited a deficit of $38.5 billion, which was nearly 9% of GDP -- the largest in the history of Canada. The federal debt had increased by 1,100% under the Trudeau administration. Remember the interest rates? They had peaked at 22.75%. Program spending had skyrocketed to $1.23 for every dollar collected in taxes.

Chretien's cabinet and advisers were stocked with Trudeau liberals and Martin did not cut nary a program [except provincial transfers] and did nothing to truly reduce taxes [the US has a $1.3 Trillion tax cut, Canada - $40 billion].

3. Consistency. He has reiterated in speeches and written articles the same themes of fiscal orthodoxy and social conservatism. Unlike the PCs and Lie-berals Harper has never sought to buy votes through program expansion.

4. Honesty. People who know him, state that like Bush, he is direct honest and passionate about his beliefs.

5. Has a professional team in place that understands the massive bias directed against them by the Cdn media. Harper is now just starting to get some positive press.

He outdistances anything the Tories can put forward.

[Galahad]

Harper is a rarity in politics.

He outdistances anything the Tories can put forward.

He's not so rare. Just look at the Middle East, Africa.

But I agree that he IS one competitive boy. He'll try to lose the old PCs in the dust no mater what. The word "teamwork" is NOT in his vocabulary.

[Morgan]

Galahad,

I don't think Harper is free of warts, but still I don't think Harper's imperfections are so many or so damning that prevent him from being the best man for the job.

In fact, some of Harper's "warts" might make his party stronger platform wise and more appealing to Canadians from sea to sea.

For example,while it's true Harper's a stickler for party member discipline, the CA MP's are less likely to make position flip flops. Harper also lets his MP's vote by conscience on important issues.

And while Harper is less a standard bearer for Christian values and in fact, has tried to distance himself from Reform's core religious roots, Harper comes through in spades on non religious pro-family issues like traditional marriage which is dear to the vast majority of Canadians regardless of any religious affiliation.

So what one person can see as authoritarian rule or compromise in values, others can see in another light.

With regards to Preston Manning, I think Preston is a fine man and a dedicated public servant. However, I don't think Manning is the right person to lead this new re-unified conservative party. He's had his "time" and he will never be forgotten for his tireless work in establishing the Reform Party.

But I would agree with Paul Wells, that Manning got side tracked with being concerned about minutia and irrelevant details or that's the image he conveyed to the voting public.

Now I believe Manning would do better to influence party policy "behind the scenes" with the new leader than to actually lead the new united party.

Paul Wells' blog Dec.07-Dec.12

Manning fell into bad habits, replacing an obsession with policy for an obsession with organizational diagrams and an endless succession of conferences, meetings, membership plebiscites, and other marginalia.

[Mr. Chater]

An interesting CTV poll done today:

If you were to vote today, which party would you pick:

Liberals 

  28 %

Conservative Party of Canada 

  48 %

Only a dream..would be nice though...

[Galahad]

Galahad,

I don't think Harper is free of warts, but still I don't think Harper's imperfections are so many or so damning that prevent him from being the best man for the job.

In fact, some of Harper's "warts" might make his party stronger platform wise and more appealing to Canadians from sea to sea.

For example,while it's true Harper's a stickler for party member discipline, the CA MP's are less likely to make position flip flops. Harper also lets his MP's vote by conscience on important issues.

And while Harper is less a standard bearer for Christian values and in fact, has tried to distance himself from Reform's core religious roots, Harper comes through in spades on non religious pro-family issues like traditional marriage which is dear to the vast majority of Canadians regardless of any religious affiliation.

So what one person can see as authoritarian rule or compromise in values, others can see in another light.

With regards to Preston Manning, I think Preston is a fine man and a dedicated public servant. However, I don't think Manning is the right person to lead this new re-unified conservative party. He's had his "time" and he will never be forgotten for his tireless work in establishing the Reform Party.

But I would agree with Paul Wells, that Manning got side tracked with being concerned about minutia and irrelevant details or that's the image he conveyed to the voting public.

Now I believe Manning would do better to influence party policy "behind the scenes" with the new leader than to actually lead the new united party.

Paul Wells' blog Dec.07-Dec.12

Manning fell into bad habits, replacing an obsession with policy for an obsession with organizational diagrams and an endless succession of conferences, meetings, membership plebiscites, and other marginalia.

Morgan,

I don't think anyone is looking for "the perfect man" as we all know that he doesn't exist.

However a few of Harper's personality traits are fatal.

As exhibited in the past...he quits when he doesn't get his way ( read Preston Manning's book).

You state that he is a stickler for party discipline. I read that as "my way or the highway". And as we mentioned before, he has hissy fits & quits when it's NOT his way. Had he eviler intentions ( I'm sure he doesn't), it could get ugly. Hitler was a "stickler for party discipline" too. Mugabe is too...this isn't a POSITIVE trait. I think too many years of listening to Chretien has clouded your judgement. This was a NEGATIVE on Chretien's part & will also be on Harper's.

The entire "Christian values" scares the hell out of most thinking people. Manning laid his values on the table, but you were aware that there was an underlying sharp intelligence there , so you knew that he could see all sides.

Harper? Not the brightest bulb...combine this with inbred religious philosophy...you've got Iran. Not a pretty picture.

The bottom line is that in Manning we have a man with an obsidian sharp mind that hasn't been seen in a Canadian leader since Trudeau. We pushed him aside for pedantic boors like Harper.

Mark my words, unless the new Conservative party gets in someone with something better to offer than this clown...it's toast for the next few elections.

FYI , I voted Alliance last election.

[theWatcher]

You probably shouldn't be comparing people to Hitler until they have gassed a few million people and invaded half a dozen countries. Picking a random trait that hitler had in common is not the best way to present a point.

Harper left because he had issues with the leader (Manning). What you call a "hissy fit" others would call doing the honourable thing and resigning, because he had too many conflicts with Manning. One could also say it was sour grapes on Mannings part.

The bottom line is that in Manning we have a man with an obsidian sharp mind that hasn't been seen in a Canadian leader since Trudeau.

This is the same Manning who waffled on moving into Stornoway?

Who alienated the entire province of Quebec right?

The same Manning who destroyed the Reform party to create a new party named C.C.R.A.P.?

And created this new party for what purpose? He knew the PC's weren't going to join. All it did was get him bounced from the job because everyone was angry that he folded the party for nothing and sacrificed many of the parties principles in order to try to become the ruling party.

[Neal.F.]

You speak about Christian values that "scare the hell out most Canadians". I submit that if people properly understood Christian values, they'd realize, whether they choose to accept Jesus Christ as personal saviour or not, the actual values expresses are the cornerstone of what made the west the place in the world where one's rights and dignity have the best chance of survival.

It is the leftist media that seeks to undo those values, and have set about doing it by taking statements from uneducated wackos who pose as pastors who have a fundamentalist view of things. Fundamentalists of any religion or world view are what is frightening, and militant secularists are even more fundamentalist about their view than most religious ones, which play right into the hands of the militant secularists.

Anyone who would trouble themselves to read and understand the encyclicals of Pope John Paul II or some of the works of Ravi Zacharias, CS Lewis, Malcolm Muggeridge or GK Chesterton would get a fair and balanced view of what Christianity really is all about, and will gain a great respect for its intellectual roots, a view which is distorted by the rantings of uneducated fundies.

[Alliance Fanatic]

I'm afraid that the social liberals will try taking over the party. If this party bends over backwards for social liberals, and supports gay marriage, bill C-215, abortion on demand, and government funded multiculturalism, then I'm out.

[Galahad]

You probably shouldn't be comparing people to Hitler until they have gassed a few million people and invaded half a dozen countries. Picking a random trait that hitler had in common is not the best way to present a point.

Harper left because he had issues with the leader (Manning). What you call a "hissy fit" others would call doing the honourable thing and resigning, because he had too many conflicts with Manning. One could also say it was sour grapes on Mannings part.

The bottom line is that in Manning we have a man with an obsidian sharp mind that hasn't been seen in a Canadian leader since Trudeau.

This is the same Manning who waffled on moving into Stornoway?

Who alienated the entire province of Quebec right?

The same Manning who destroyed the Reform party to create a new party named C.C.R.A.P.?

And created this new party for what purpose? He knew the PC's weren't going to join. All it did was get him bounced from the job because everyone was angry that he folded the party for nothing and sacrificed many of the parties principles in order to try to become the ruling party.

The trait of "firm control" is not unrelated to Hitler's other acts. Megalomania usually leads to rather unsavory policies. Hence the comparison. And don't you think it is better to note this IN ADVANCE of the insanity?

Of course Harper had reason to leave...it wasn't "his way", it the party's way. The best predictor of someone's future actions are his past actions. If his "firm control" slips & his MPs decide ( hopefully based on their constituencies wishes) on a different course of action than HE had planned...will he take his ball & go home again? I think so.

Preston wasn't perfect ( see last post...no one is). But the thing he had going for him was that he was the architect of the Reform Party & his ideas resonated so deeply with many Canadians, that the governing parties of Canada & several provinces had to adopt HIS policies in order to get into or remain in office.

Can you name ONE original thought that Harper has had? One thing that people could rally behind?

Thought not. He's an ordinary hack like most of the rest of our politicians in Canada.

If you think that Manning "sacrificed his principles in order to try & be the ruling party", though, Harper COULD be your man.

The rest of us feel that Manning was trying to be "more inclusive" in order to get to be the ruling party. That IS the aim you know! Can't do much reform from the sidelines...although Manning certainly did manage even that.

[Galahad]

the western worldYou speak about Christian values that "scare the hell out most Canadians". I submit that if people properly understood Christian values, they'd realize, whether they choose to accept Jesus Christ as personal saviour or not, the actual values expresses are the cornerstone of what made the west the place in the world where one's rights and dignity have the best chance of survival.

It is the leftist media that seeks to undo those values, and have set about doing it by taking statements from uneducated wackos who pose as pastors who have a fundamentalist view of things. Fundamentalists of any religion or world view are what is frightening, and militant secularists are even more fundamentalist about their view than most religious ones, which play right into the hands of the militant secularists.

Anyone who would trouble themselves to read and understand the encyclicals of Pope John Paul II or some of the works of Ravi Zacharias, CS Lewis, Malcolm Muggeridge or GK Chesterton would get a fair and balanced view of what Christianity really is all about, and will gain a great respect for its intellectual roots, a view which is distorted by the rantings of uneducated fundies.

Excuse me if I phrased that in way that implied that Canadians were scared of Christian values.

That was not what I intended. At present the majority of Canadians were raised with these values & certainly don't fear them.

What I meant was that politicians that appear to be going to try to entrench these values in law scares the hell out of most people.

I would say that the majority of Canadians do NOT want to live in a theocracy...they prefer a separation of church & state.

I would further add, that it was not the Christian religion that made the west so successful, but the separation of state & church that did it.

[Galahad]

I'm afraid that the social liberals will try taking over the party. If this party bends over backwards for social liberals, and supports gay marriage, bill C-215, abortion on demand, and government funded multiculturalism, then I'm out.

I'm out already. But not for the reasons you state.

The social issues were never a major part of the original Reform party & how they handled them was never an issue to me. I couldn't give a damn if Bob & Joe get marraige rights & we're all given a day off for Divali.

Preston's platform was fiscal responsibility & accountability & that's what we're missing here in Canada.

Our health care crisis, our low dollar, our lack of military strength, our lowered esteem in the eyes of the world & our increasing poverty are all a result of fiscal irresponsibility.

[Goldie]

AF

That is correct you are afraid and don't speak for the Alliance or the Conservative party.

Protecting the definition of marriage is not the same as opposing gay marriage. Jurisdiction exists to permit gay unions and does not need to be infringed upon by a federal government.

Women are having abortions. This may be sad and you may believe it is wrong along with alot of other Canadians. You can't legislate them to stop.

What is Canadian culture? Whitebread, beer, hockey. I like the global culture that is emerging within Canada. Consensus but variety, diversity with unity. A conservative should respect the traditions of our country and those from others with the same regard, otherwise it would be hippocritical.

AF seems to want the government to intervene in peoples lives; marriage, abortion, protectionist of culture like the mullahs of Iran and Sheila Copps. None of this is Conservative so AF should leave the party. Bye!

[Neal.F.]

Ther eis not a single party on the Canadian political scene that disagrees with the separation of church and state.... The disagreement is over what separation of church and state MEANS.

Conservatives, including the Christian Heritage Party do not seek to establish a state reloigion, let alone a theocracy.

This is a liberal scare tactic, and it is used by those who wish to establish their religion" Miliutant secularism.

Separation of Church and state means simply, that the state shall establish no official church. That's it, that's all.

The CHP, and other conservatives who are tarred and feathered as zealots by the left-wing press, for the record, believe in behaving ,in government, as those who observe Christian principles should be expected to behave.

I will also take this time to echo the concerns of Alliance fanatic over the new CPC. There is a real possibility that the social liberals will try to duplicate the Liberals on social policy. Should this indeed come to pass, then i ask, What was the point of the whole exercise of uniting the two parties? If a voter wants a liberal , they'll vote for a real liberal, not liberal-lite.

[Galahad]

Ther eis not a single party on the Canadian political scene that disagrees with the separation of church and state.... The disagreement is over what separation of church and state MEANS.

Conservatives, including the Christian Heritage Party do not seek to establish a state reloigion, let alone a theocracy.

This is a liberal scare tactic, and it is used by those who wish to establish their religion" Miliutant secularism.

Separation of Church and state means simply, that the state shall establish no official church. That's it, that's all.

The CHP, and other conservatives who are tarred and feathered as zealots by the left-wing press, for the record, believe in behaving ,in government, as those who observe Christian principles should be expected to behave.

I will also take this time to echo the concerns of Alliance fanatic over the new CPC. There is a real possibility that the social liberals will try to duplicate the Liberals on social policy. Should this indeed come to pass, then i ask, What was the point of the whole exercise of uniting the two parties? If a voter wants a liberal , they'll vote for a real liberal, not liberal-lite.

People aren't that worried that there will be mullah-like takeover of the political scene. But I will venture that they don't want even a hint of religious influence in their state.

Ireland wasn't a theocracy, but the church had a great influence on the state in enacting laws, etc. And until that chokehold was off the state, Ireland was mired in poverty & backwardness. It was only once the church's influence waned did they become properous.

You can't be anymore slightly secular than you can be slightly pregnant. It's an either/or sort of situation.

I think that most people in Canada at this point just want to see those who represent Christians act as Christians are expected to behave...why don't people who are so excited about Christianity get THAT act together first before they try & foist it on the poor electing public?

[Neal.F.]

Name me ONE contemporary Canadian politician who has tried to foist their religion on Canadian society.....

Actually I CAN think of two, off the top my head: Jean Chretien and Svend Robinson, who have tried to make miltitant secularism the official state religion.

Seriously, abortion is not a religious issue. It is one of basic respect for the right to life. By allowing abortion, right to life is now non-existent. You are allowed to live by privelege now, and soon they will be making decisions on behalf of the weak, disabled and infirm... what's next?

Homosexuality is not an issue of religion, but of public health. The state, very simply should not be placing its stamp of approval on such unions. Tolerate them, that's one thing. promoting them is quite another, and it's as wrong as promoting smoking.

[theWatcher]

Can you name ONE original thought that Harper has had? One thing that people could rally behind?

Thought not. He's an ordinary hack like most of the rest of our politicians in Canada

Lets see now....

Other than writing most of the original policies and procedures for the reform party.

And being acknowledged as the original author of the Clarity act which Chretien "borrowed" and is credited as one of the main reasons that the threat of separation is gone.

And initiating the fight to repeal the Liberals election gag laws and getting sued and having the law repealed 4 times? Thereby allowing Canadians to speak their minds during elections.

And re-uniting a fragmented party that was going down for the final count and about to tear itself apart.

And co-authoring a reunification of two political parties that have split the vote for the last 10 years allowing the Liberals to come up the middle and take everything. Something that none of the previous leaders have ever been able to accomplish.

Not bad for an "ordinary hack".

[Galahad]

Can you name ONE original thought that Harper has had? One thing that people could rally behind?

Thought not. He's an ordinary hack like most of the rest of our politicians in Canada

Lets see now....

Other than writing most of the original policies and procedures for the reform party.

And being acknowledged as the original author of the Clarity act which Chretien "borrowed" and is credited as one of the main reasons that the threat of separation is gone.

And initiating the fight to repeal the Liberals election gag laws and getting sued and having the law repealed 4 times? Thereby allowing Canadians to speak their minds during elections.

And re-uniting a fragmented party that was going down for the final count and about to tear itself apart.

And co-authoring a reunification of two political parties that have split the vote for the last 10 years allowing the Liberals to come up the middle and take everything. Something that none of the previous leaders have ever been able to accomplish.

Not bad for an "ordinary hack".

WELLL!!!!

You had better run all of Harper's accomplishments through the man who is perhaps Canada's most popular conservative, Ralph Klein, who QUESTIONED Harper's ability to win an election just the other day.

Mr. Klein said in an interview on the weekend that though he thinks that Harper is a "good Canadian," he did not know if this man has "the timber or what is needed to be a national leader."

''I would hope that if he becomes the leader he will demonstrate that he has what it takes to get the profile necessary to form a government'' said Mr. Klein.

http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpos...31-4a086056c842

Personally I CAN'T WAIT for the rest of Canada's great & popular right-wingers to weigh in with their opinions on this rigid & scheming man.

Will he survive that?

I don't THINK SO!

[Galahad]

http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpos...31-4a086056c842

From the same article:

"Meetings were already under way to deal with such questions as a new party logo. There are currently five possibilities: It appears the design will be Tory blue with elements of Alliance green."

It appears to me that that the blue and green design is Harper's idea. He knows just as well as we do that "blue and green should never be seen except in the washing machine".

I think he's doing it on purpose. Don't you?

[theWatcher]

Mr. Klein said in an interview on the weekend that though he thinks that Harper is a "good Canadian," he did not know if this man has "the timber or what is needed to be a national leader."

Mr. Klein has been miffed ever since his buddy Harris decided not to run. He is certainly entitled to his opinion.

But one person's opinion does not a leader make.

This is the same man who staggers into homeless shelters dead drunk and yells at the folks to go get a job while throwing coins at them.

So I would not be too troubled by a lack of endorsement from him.

[dnsfurlan]

If Harper wants a continuation of the charge that this is simply an Alliance takeover then, by all means, go with the blue and green again.

However, if he wants to send the message that this is a re-establishment of the traditional conservative coalition in this country, he should go with the traditional blue, red, and white of the Conservative Party.

If anyone has seen the new Canadian Alliance email newsletter, I don't think that's a bad place to start for a new logo. Go with dark blue, red, and white. And have the word "conservative" displayed prominently with a retro-classical font, and a big red leaf somewhere in there. And no CPC PCPC CPOC or CPCanada stuff either. Lets just go with "Conservative" just like Libs go with "Liberal".

--------------------

Also, what's with the Harper and Hitler stuff? Borders on hate speech, if you ask me.

[Goldie]

I agree I love the look of Conservative voice. The colours are great. I think there has to be red in the logo.