Jarnhamar said:
Are we talking about paying for Canadian citizens to get a ortions while abroad or are we talking about Canada paying for other countries citizens to get abortions?
Her specific policy is;
End funding for international abortions and focusing our foreign aid to promote overall healthcare - a policy that was broadly supported under Stephen Harper’s leadership.
https://www.leslynlewis.ca/policies
That's pretty generic, so not sure specifically what it means. For example, if you have an organization (like Planned Parenthood) that includes abortion in a suite of overall healthcare policies, do you cut funding to it under the policy, or just have some kind of clause saying it can't be used for abortion? Typically, it's justified as 'not imposing our values', which is a convenient false flag argument to impose your own specific value set on our foreign aid policy.
I think a lot of people specifically voted against the Cons last time round because they didn't trust Scheer not to impose his own values (which I think he probably has) if he was given his values. So if leader with privately held social conservative values gets a kicking when people are genuinely searching for options, can't see how an openly social conservative stands a real chance. It's a minority opinion, and it's polarizing enough that you will mobilize people to actively vote against you.
O'Toole seems to be acting the bit of a fool, and becoming less impressed by his campaign as it rolls on. Actively courting the social conservative vote in his French campaign undermines my trust that he won't try and throw them some policy bones and roll things back, and the public accusations of something that no one outside political rallies cares about seems silly and desperate. Add in the personal attacks and it's not a good look for someone that wants to unite a party and be effective.
I've met MacKay, and my guy was he was a guy I wouldn't mind having a pint with, and was pragmatic enough he could get stuff done. My :2c: is that anyone not running on a centralist kind of platform has no real pathway to forming the govt, and him being considered 'red' would be an asset. When you look at some of the previous PC leaders, they were fairly socially progressive, but tying the social and fiscal conservatives together doesn't seem to be like a successful long term strategy.
I'd really like to have an option of voting for a party that could get things done without bankrupting the country and would just stay out of people's bedrooms/marriages. At this point I'd almost be willing to consider some benevolent dictatorship for a bit to reset the system to zero and (figuratively) burn down some of the bureaucratic institutions, but honestly think MacKay is probably their best chance to actually win, as he'd likely capture a lot of votes from outside the party base. They can feel free to elect Scheer 2.0 or a regressive social reformer and fight it out with the NDP and BQ for who will form the opposition I guess, but not sure I see the point.
