The Next Conservative Leader

[Kirkhill]

I am afraid that I can't see O'Leary as competent.

He strikes me as the Shopping Channel version of Trump.

Of the current field I continue to put my money on Bernier.  My second choice would be Alexander but I fear that he is forever going to be associated with a kid on a beach. O'Toole and Raitt are my third choices.

 

[jollyjacktar]

I can't get past Bernier's past issues with girlfriends who run with bikers and leaving sensitive documents laying around.  He leaves me with trust issues and concerns he lets the little head do the thinking for the big head. 

 

[Kirkhill]

Can't argue that.  It just depends on how much weight you ascribe to those types of issues.  For me, by and large, it is a relatively minor historical matter.  His current, and his past character, and positions generally have seemed consistent and genuine.  And I suspect him to be mildly disruptive - in a manner fitting for Canada.  We don't do revolutions.

The big issue for me is that believe him to be liberal, in its original sense of being tolerant and espousing freedom, not in its modern sense of espousing the cant of "liberal values".  My position is that if you can define a liberal position on anything then you are not a liberal because to be liberal is to be accepting of different opinions.

And with that - I guess I demonstrate my illiberalism....

 

[Journeyman]

.... girlfriends who run with bikers ......

You say that like it's a bad thing. 

 

[Kirkhill]

You say that like it's a bad thing. 

Actually I kind of liked his taste

Any excuse....  [

 

[jollyjacktar]

You say that like it's a bad thing. 

When it comes to a Minister of the Crown, especially the PM, for me, yes a very bad thing.  I don't want someone who's demonstrated he lets the little head think for the big head, not at that level of responsibility.  However attractive the target.

 

[Stoker]

We need a female as leader if we have any chance of winning the next election from Trudeau and the only female that has a chance is not running unfortunately.

 

[ballz]

When it comes to a Minister of the Crown, especially the PM, for me, yes a very bad thing.  I don't want someone who's demonstrated he lets the little head think for the big head, not at that level of responsibility.  However attractive the target.

Couillard's relationships with people in biker gangs ended around 1999... Bernier started dating Couillard in 2007. I really cannot fathom how anyone thinks this part about biker gangs of the "Couillard Affair" matters at all. That piece of her life was almost a decade old by the time the incident occurred and its likely that neither Max nor the party (who was going to get her to run as an MP) knew anything about it.... and why would they? It was quite irrelevant 8-9 years later.

The act itself, leaving the documents at her apartment, is an actual matter of substance. He was doing work in her apartment (not out of the ordinary for someone in a long-term relationship) and f**ked up by leaving them there. He f**ked up again by asking her to destroy the documents instead of just going back and getting them himself because he obviously trusted her to do it. He trusted a woman who he was in a legitimate long-term relationship with and she burned him for it. This has happened to almost every person ever at some point. How this brings his "judgement" into question I don't really know.

What I do know is, he accepted responsibility for it and doesn't make excuses for it. To me, that tells me more good things about his character than the Couillard Affair speaks to him having bad judgement.


O'Leary has surprised me with some of the things he's said since joining the race. I thought he was rather laissez-faire but now realize he just thinks he can do big government better than everyone else. I'm not really sure why Conservatives would want a leader who wants to buy Bombardier. He should have ran for the NDP leadership based on some of the things he's said.

 

[Good2Golf]

We need a female as leader if we have any chance of winning the next election from Trudeau and the only female that has a chance is not running unfortunately.

Sadly, I believe you're quite right.  Her, or Peter MacKay...

Regards
G2G

 

[Stoker]

Sadly, I believe you're quite right.  Her, or Peter MacKay...

Regards
G2G

I agree Peter Mackay would have been a excellent choice.

 

[dapaterson]

Sadly, I believe you're quite right.  Her, or Peter MacKay...

She has been quite cunning - getting good experience, but then handing off to someone who will likely lose the next election, so she will be well positioned for the next leadership race.

As for Peter, my only question is which party he'd merge with this time...

 

[Kirkhill]

DAP, your red tails are trailing..  ;D

I concur with ballz entirely on Bernier. 

With respect to Rona, while I am not convinced the CPC needs a woman to beat the PM, I think he is doing an admirable job himself (Natives, Environmentalists, Civil Servants, NDP voters and Millenials are all looking pretty weak as support just now) I agree that if she were running I'd be looking at her.  But keep in mind that currently she has three advantages - nobody is running against her, everybody in the party wants her to cover over their cracks, the party is paying for her to be out and about carrying the message.  An additional advantage is the press - much derided by me and others but, none the less - the press wants somebody to beat the government with and so they are inclined to give her a bit of a pass.  After all she isn't going to actually be PM.....

On Peter MacKay - he would be a good candidate, if he was in the game.  But he isn't.

 

[Good2Golf]

I agree Peter Mackay would have been a excellent choice.

I'd like to see him come in as a last-minute "re-join."  Smart, good-looking diverse background couple, and he plays a real sport, not just doing some photo-op fisticuffs.

Regards
G2G

 

[jollyjacktar]

I would too, but I think he's still to closely connected to the last government at the moment.  Give it some time for the association to wear off.  Had he run this past election, I fear he would have gone down to defeat regardless of his past performance.

 

[larry Strong]

Can't argue that.  It just depends on how much weight you ascribe to those types of issues.  For me, by and large, it is a relatively minor historical matter.  His current, and his past character, and positions generally have seemed consistent and genuine.  And I suspect him to be mildly disruptive - in a manner fitting for Canada.  We don't do revolutions.

The big issue for me is that believe him to be liberal, in its original sense of being tolerant and espousing freedom, not in its modern sense of espousing the cant of "liberal values".  My position is that if you can define a liberal position on anything then you are not a liberal because to be liberal is to be accepting of different opinions.

And with that - I guess I demonstrate my illiberalism....

Actually we have on more than one occasion and I see no reason why we would not again........if pushed far enough........

".......Both rebellions were motivated by frustrations with political reform. A key shared goal was responsible government, which was eventually achieved in the incidents' aftermath......"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebellions_of_1837

https://janetajzenstat.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/canadas-revolution/


Sadly Canadian history is a vanishing subject........




Cheers
Larry

 

[Remius]

Actually we have on more than one occasion and I see no reason why we would not again........if pushed far enough........

".......Both rebellions were motivated by frustrations with political reform. A key shared goal was responsible government, which was eventually achieved in the incidents' aftermath......"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebellions_of_1837

https://janetajzenstat.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/canadas-revolution/


Sadly Canadian history is a vanishing subject........




Cheers
Larry

The rebellions of 1837-38 are covered quite a bit in French schools.  For obvious reasons. 

 

[Kirkhill]

Actually we have on more than one occasion and I see no reason why we would not again........if pushed far enough........

".......Both rebellions were motivated by frustrations with political reform. A key shared goal was responsible government, which was eventually achieved in the incidents' aftermath......"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebellions_of_1837

https://janetajzenstat.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/canadas-revolution/


Sadly Canadian history is a vanishing subject........




Cheers
Larry

Fair comment....  Arguably those rebellions married the Catholics and the Presbyterians (and other dissenting non-conformists) against the Anglican establishment exemplified by the Scots Episcopalian Bishop Strachan.  George Brown - of the Globe - was an evangelical Presbyterian and William Lyon MacKenzie also came from a strict Presbyterian background.

 

[Remius]

Sooooo....


Anybody else see Kellie Leitch's video...

???

 

[Lightguns]

Actually we have on more than one occasion and I see no reason why we would not again........if pushed far enough........

".......Both rebellions were motivated by frustrations with political reform. A key shared goal was responsible government, which was eventually achieved in the incidents' aftermath......"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebellions_of_1837

https://janetajzenstat.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/canadas-revolution/


Sadly Canadian history is a vanishing subject........




Cheers
Larry

As an aside, Fort Cumberland where Stephen Harper's ancestor helped save New Brunswick for Canada by defeating the New Brunswick and Nova Scotia patriots (or traitors, depending on your view).  Not sure that was a good thing but........

 

[Lightguns]

She has been quite cunning - getting good experience, but then handing off to someone who will likely lose the next election, so she will be well positioned for the next leadership race.

As for Peter, my only question is which party he'd merge with this time...

Pete is a political dynasty, he will not chance a loss, he will be back when winning is a sure thing.