2022 CPC Leadership Discussion: Et tu Redeux

[Good2Golf]

To be fair to PP I suppose (Uugh, can’t believe I said that), if he wins the leadership and does a solid campaign right and lead from centre…a mirror version of classic Chretien/Martinism, and grip the edges like Harper did (not weakly fawning like both Scheer and more so O’Toole did, it might retain the Red Tories and possibly even attract some Blue Grits (especially of the LPC keeps trying to out-Left Team Orange to steal their numbers.

 

[IKnowNothing]

To be fair to PP I suppose (Uugh, can’t believe I said that), if he wins the leadership and does a solid campaign right and lead from centre…a mirror version of classic Chretien/Martinism, and grip the edges like Harper did (not weakly fawning like both Scheer and more so O’Toole did, it might retain the Red Tories and possibly even attract some Blue Grits (especially of the LPC keeps trying to out-Left Team Orange to steal their numbers.

I actually agree with you. I think PP will be fodder for the Liberal machine. He will give an easy minority to the Libs, but I don't see a majority coming their way.

The thing I can't get over with CPC caucus/ establishment being seemingly all in on PP is that it's such a narrow path to victory. Unless he changes every single thing about his persona and style there's only one scenario where he can effectively govern, or even influence the governance of Canada, and that's a Conservative majority. As a person he hasn't shown the ability to play nice with others, and the place he wants to lead the party and base to is too far off centre to work constructively across the aisle.

Conservative Minority likely = a formal Liberal NDP coalition and one epic tantrum, a lot of crying about government being stolen
Liberal Minority = several more years of attack dog Pierre yapping in the wind while governance happens around him

There's more to the leadership than just "who can beat the libs", I want a leader that has the CPC in a position to positively impact the governance of the nation regardless of electoral outcome. That can put one foot in front of the other and pull a Liberal minority right rather than pushing them left.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

The problem with the CPC is that they have spent the majority of their existance being "not like the Liberals" without realizing that Canadians want them to be basically the Liberals with some fiscal restraint.

As much as the PPC and other Far Right folks will try to argue it, the majority of Canadians have socialist leanings. We aren't ardent capitalists, social conservatives, or libertarians; so why develop a platform with those ideals that isn't palatable to your target audience?

Keep the narrative of fiscal restraint, economic policies that benefit Canadians, and foreign policy that will keep us in good standing with our friends and neighbours. That's it. That's the platform.

Anything else is static noise that plays into the hands of the Liberals and NDP.

 

[RangerRay]

The problem with the CPC is that they have spent the majority of their existance being "not like the Liberals" without realizing that Canadians want them to be basically the Liberals with some fiscal restraint. competent management skills

FTFY

 

[QV]

Every time someone says a person is "punchable" it completely degenerates their argument from there.

Though it is good to see some of you grudgingly admitting PP would prob do alright, especially debating JT.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Canada has two crises right now. Fiscal management, and public health care. Everything else people worry about is just noise.

 

[QV]

The problem with the CPC is that they have spent the majority of their existance being "not like the Liberals" without realizing that Canadians want them to be basically the Liberals with some fiscal restraint. The number of conservative provincial governments elected would be evidence this theory is not accurate. The LPC of today is not really liberal, in fact have acted quite illiberal.

As much as the PPC and other Far Right folks will try to argue it, the majority of Canadians have socialist leanings. We aren't ardent capitalists, social conservatives, or libertarians; so why develop a platform with those ideals that isn't palatable to your target audience? PP is not far right. But you may be right about many Canadians having socialist leanings, which continues to grow for every industry destroyed and supplemented by new government handouts - this needs to be reversed, not accepted. Do we want to be more like a socialist country or more like the USA at the height of the American Dream?

Keep the narrative of fiscal restraint, economic policies that benefit Canadians, and foreign policy that will keep us in good standing with our friends and neighbours. That's it. That's the platform. The CPC under PP would do that far better than the LPC under JT. But Canadians want free stuff.

Anything else is static noise that plays into the hands of the Liberals and NDP. Yes, particularly when you're easily swayed by MSM.

 

[Lumber]

Every time someone says a person is "punchable" it completely degenerates their argument from there.

Though it is good to see some of you grudgingly admitting PP would prob do alright, especially debating JT.

Sure, if I tried to use that to strengthen or support any other argument, but none of us did. It’s a separate qualification. I could present to you someone who I think would be the best prime minister ever and still also present to you the idea that they had an extremely punchable face.

 

[Underway]

The number of conservative provincial governments elected would be evidence this theory is not accurate. The LPC of today is not really liberal, in fact have acted quite illiberal.

Don't confuse classic liberalism with Liberals. The 1960's moved them to a completely different place in political philosophy with their focus on civil liberties changing. And they aren't acting any more illiberal than any other government since Confederation.

PP is not far right. But you may be right about many Canadians having socialist leanings, which continues to grow for every industry destroyed and supplemented by new government handouts - this needs to be reversed, not accepted. Do we want to be more like a socialist country or more like the USA at the height of the American Dream?

Depends on where the center is, and it's certainly not anywhere near PP. He'll likely win an election due to electoral fatigue from JT and then do so much damage to the CPC brand that it will guarantee Liberals winning another three terms in the following elections. Take a page from Ford and lean into the middle ground or guarantee no votes in Quebec and the Maritimes.

Of course, Canadians are socialist. Welfare, employment insurance, healthcare, gov't assistance of all types. There is a strong argument that Alberta is the most socialist of the bunch based on pay and program funding.

Sure, if I tried to use that to strengthen or support any other argument, but none of us did. It’s a separate qualification. I could present to you someone who I think would be the best prime minister ever and still also present to you the idea that they had an extremely punchable face.

John A would punch you right back! And Cretien would choke you out (his wife would brain you with a soapstone sculpture)!

 

[Good2Golf]

Don't confuse classic liberalism with Liberals. The 1960's moved them to a completely different place in political philosophy with their focus on civil liberties changing. And they aren't acting any more illiberal than any other government since Confederation.

…from ‘68 onwards. Prior to that, Liberals, not Conservatives, were the hawkish ones working deals with the US to deploy nukes on Canadian soil, long before the entrenchment of the Blue Beret’d Boy Scout image.

 

[Eaglelord17]

The problem with the CPC is that they have spent the majority of their existance being "not like the Liberals" without realizing that Canadians want them to be basically the Liberals with some fiscal restraint.

As much as the PPC and other Far Right folks will try to argue it, the majority of Canadians have socialist leanings. We aren't ardent capitalists, social conservatives, or libertarians; so why develop a platform with those ideals that isn't palatable to your target audience?

Keep the narrative of fiscal restraint, economic policies that benefit Canadians, and foreign policy that will keep us in good standing with our friends and neighbours. That's it. That's the platform.

Anything else is static noise that plays into the hands of the Liberals and NDP.

Sometimes it isn’t about winning but what you represent. If you have to throw the baby out with the bathwater what was the point?

I believe a true Classical Liberal party would actually be well received in Canada. Basically it wouldn’t care if your gay, trans, black, native, wanting a abortion, etc. i.e. all the social stuff a lot of the mostly left get up in arms about, and it also wouldn’t care if you own guns or use your freedom of speech, i.e. a lot of the stuff the mostly right care about. Add in some fiscal restraint and you would have a very solid party for Canadians likely pulling in about 50% of the vote (i.e. a centre leaning party). And more importantly than pulling in 50% of the vote it would likely be a good mix of rural and urban voters, which is how you win elections.

Right now the Liberals have gone so far to the left to take from the NDP the centre is open for the taking.

The way I see it is most the people voting Liberal at the moment are doing so not because they truly believe in what the Liberals are doing (and the farther left they go the less they believe in it), rather it is they are afraid of what the Conservatives MIGHT do. The Liberals are very good at making them out to be the boogie man aiming to take away universal health care, make abortions illegal well giving children machine guns. The Conservatives are good at giving them ammo for that argument with a few quick soundbites which look bad out of context (or sometimes in context).

That and when you refuse to put a platform forward which you get your party on board for, its hard to dissuade people that what they are saying is untrue.

 

[QV]

He'll likely win an election due to electoral fatigue from JT and then do so much damage to the CPC brand that it will guarantee Liberals winning another three terms in the following elections. Take a page from Ford and lean into the middle ground or guarantee no votes in Quebec and the Maritimes.

That's quite the prediction. I suppose we could turn up our noses and vote in a way that allows JT or the JT/JS alliance to continue doing a bang up job.

Harper was allegedly a right wing spawn of demon too before he became PM.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Every time someone says a person is "punchable" it completely degenerates their argument from there.

Though it is good to see some of you grudgingly admitting PP would prob do alright, especially debating JT.

It's definitely not a mature or logical response, but when someone provokes some kind of visceral reaction like that, it's a really huge first impression to overcome. Some people just have a really greasy or sleezy vibe about them, and the guy's voice and personality sets my teeth on edge.

Not meaning it literally, but it's a definite personality deficit that will impact his chances. Boring but competent is fine; aggravating as hell takes a lot of convincing to listen to. Maybe he's a great guy who knows what he's doing, but his actions and words really just reinforce that impression, so don't see that changing. Even just reading his points he comes across as a smarmy arshehole, and his points are frequently implausibly stupid or impractical.

An given how well JT did in beating Brazeau in boxing, I think he'd win both an actual fight and the personality appeal in a debate.

I just don't see a path to governance with PP at the helm, and don't see anyone being coordinated enough to have that as an intentional strategy. I think it's really more of a strong appeal to his echo chamber, which is increasing alienating long term Conservatives, and pushing swing voters away from the CPC. It's a straight up loser play, like dumping you high value players at the trade deadline.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I suppose politics is the one place it's still OK to express prejudices about appearances.

 

[Remius]

I suppose politics is the one place it's still OK to express prejudices about appearances.

God knows they kept going after Trudeau’s hair and that add about Chrethien’s face way back when. Heck the media ran weird stories about Mulcair’s beard lol.

Trudeau’s sox, and harper’s sweaters are fair game though

 

[Furniture]

It's definitely not a mature or logical response, but when someone provokes some kind of visceral reaction like that, it's a really huge first impression to overcome. Some people just have a really greasy or sleezy vibe about them, and the guy's voice and personality sets my teeth on edge.

Not meaning it literally, but it's a definite personality deficit that will impact his chances. Boring but competent is fine; aggravating as hell takes a lot of convincing to listen to. Maybe he's a great guy who knows what he's doing, but his actions and words really just reinforce that impression, so don't see that changing. Even just reading his points he comes across as a smarmy arshehole, and his points are frequently implausibly stupid or impractical.

An given how well JT did in beating Brazeau in boxing, I think he'd win both an actual fight and the personality appeal in a debate.

I just don't see a path to governance with PP at the helm, and don't see anyone being coordinated enough to have that as an intentional strategy. I think it's really more of a strong appeal to his echo chamber, which is increasing alienating long term Conservatives, and pushing swing voters away from the CPC. It's a straight up loser play, like dumping you high value players at the trade deadline.

Boring but competent left Harper out in the cold when young and fiery came along. Boring and competent left nothing to fall back on for O'Tool when the wolves came for him.

As for punchable, and unlikeable... JT's "sincere" voice puts me into an instant rage. Yet, enough people accept his rage inducing fake sincerity to get him elected, so there is hope for PPs "greasy" voice and appearance.

EDIT: For clarity, my point is that it's easy for us to get trapped in our own perceptions, and forget that others viewpoints may be different. I find nothing particularly "sleazy", or "greasy" about PP, but I accept that others view him differently. I suspect that with the power of the CPC behind him, he can be made to be more "mainstream" for the average person left feeling abandoned by the ideologues running the LPC. The finance minister recently said high gas prices are a reminder about climate change... How out of touch with the average person do you have to be to try to spin it that way?

 

[Good2Golf]

As for punchable, and unlikeable... JT's "sincere" voice puts me into an instant rage. Yet, enough people accept his rage inducing fake sincerity to get him elected, so there is hope for PPs "greasy" voice and appearance.

 

[Eaglelord17]

One thing got Trudeau elected the first time and that was the legalization of marijuana. If it wasn’t for that I doubt he would have won, and if he had it wouldn’t have been a majority.

As the last two elections have shown, without those apathetic single issue voters who only come out if their issue is on the line, he can’t get a majority.

 

[Remius]

One thing got Trudeau elected the first time and that was the legalization of marijuana. If it wasn’t for that I doubt he would have won, and if he had it wouldn’t have been a majority.

As the last two elections have shown, without those apathetic single issue voters who only come out if their issue is on the line, he can’t get a majority.

I think it was more than that or rather less than that.

The CPC was a spent force by then after ten years. The LPC offered something else. People likely voted for change as opposed to voting for the LPC. But…

The LPC wasn’t a protest party. Agree or disagree with its policies they were offering something that some people were ok with.

The CPC right now seems to be more about protest and opposition than having anything on offer to get people to to vote their way. That can still get them elected but it’s a harder climb than if they had a better platform other than what they have now.

 

[RangerRay]

Listening to Pollievre supporters talk about the huge pool of non-voters itching to vote for him remind me of the Bernie Bros to the south thinking that all those non-voters are itching for a truly socialist candidate…