Consevative Party leadership contest
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
There would possibly come a time when whoever gets that position may have to debate Trump, especially if he/she was P.M. Guess it depends a lot on style. But hey, I'm just surmising!
What's a toughphie?
There would possibly come a time when whoever gets that position may have to debate Trump, especially if he/she was P.M. Guess it depends a lot on style. But hey, I'm just surmising!
What's a toughphie?
I think it's a pie that's been left in the summer sun for too long and has since dried hard.
Just my guess.
O'Leary channels GW Bush.......
‘If this were a dictatorship it would be a heck of a lot easier as long as I'm the dictator”
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/8221-if-this-were-a-dictatorship-it-would-be-a-heck
O'Leary is telling wealthy friends he wants 'carte blanche' power over Canada
video
https://www.pressprogress.ca/mark_c...ends_he_wants_carte_blanche_power_over_canada
‘If this were a dictatorship it would be a heck of a lot easier as long as I'm the dictator”
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/8221-if-this-were-a-dictatorship-it-would-be-a-heck
O'Leary is telling wealthy friends he wants 'carte blanche' power over Canada
video
https://www.pressprogress.ca/mark_c...ends_he_wants_carte_blanche_power_over_canada
I hear an echo.......
Conservative debate sees agreement on more defence spending, killing carbon tax and tighter border control
The fourth official Conservative leadership debate in Edmonton saw the candidates broadly agree on defence spending, carbon taxes and illegal border crossings, while engaging in spirited exchanges on taxation and plans for growing the economy.
Steven Blaney and Pierre Lemieux both used their opening statements to make an argument for getting Alberta oil to international markets by expanding pipelines into the United States and across Canada.
Kellie Leitch used her introduction to hammer home her immigration plan — to screen all would-be newcomers for Canadian values and ensure all immigrants get a face-to-face interview before being admitted to Canada
The candidates were asked to respond to a number of policy areas, and one of the areas where the candidates broadly agreed with one another was on how to respond to U.S. President Donald Trump's demand that NATO members start living up to their commitment to spend two per cent of GDP on defence.
All candidates said they would meet the two per cent target.
The candidates were also in agreement on the issue of refugees crossing into Canada illegally, mostly through fields, forests and farmland in Manitoba and Quebec.
Leitch said refugees and migrants coming across the border should be detained, questioned and "sent back to the United States." It was a sentiment that garnered applause from a small group of enthusiastic supporters in the crowd.
Peterson, a Vancouver-based businessman, said Leitch's immigration and border policies had so far allowed the public and the media to paint the Conservatives as an anti-immigrant party.
Raitt said illegal border crossings had to be stopped, because they were putting an extra burden on the refugee system and forcing legal migrants to wait longer to be processed.
Blaney, Andrew Scheer and Chris Alexander rolled out their tough-on-crime policies by promising to put victims back at the centre of the criminal justice system. They also pledged to prevent dangerous and repeat offenders from being released from prison.
During the question about crime, the debate quickly switched to the need for a strong economy to ensure the government has the tools it needs to effectively fight crime.
Peterson, who replied to every question of the night with plug for his economic platform, did not disappoint on crime either, promising to cut corporate income tax to zero and reduce personal income tax to a 15 per cent flat rate.
Leitch said people will only feel safe in their communities when they have jobs and can provide for their families, and she pledged to make it legal for women to use pepper spray on attackers without fear of being prosecuted.
Conservative debate sees agreement on more defence spending, killing carbon tax and tighter border control - Politics - CBC News
Conservative debate sees agreement on more defence spending, killing carbon tax and tighter border control
The fourth official Conservative leadership debate in Edmonton saw the candidates broadly agree on defence spending, carbon taxes and illegal border crossings, while engaging in spirited exchanges on taxation and plans for growing the economy.
Steven Blaney and Pierre Lemieux both used their opening statements to make an argument for getting Alberta oil to international markets by expanding pipelines into the United States and across Canada.
Kellie Leitch used her introduction to hammer home her immigration plan — to screen all would-be newcomers for Canadian values and ensure all immigrants get a face-to-face interview before being admitted to Canada
The candidates were asked to respond to a number of policy areas, and one of the areas where the candidates broadly agreed with one another was on how to respond to U.S. President Donald Trump's demand that NATO members start living up to their commitment to spend two per cent of GDP on defence.
All candidates said they would meet the two per cent target.
The candidates were also in agreement on the issue of refugees crossing into Canada illegally, mostly through fields, forests and farmland in Manitoba and Quebec.
Leitch said refugees and migrants coming across the border should be detained, questioned and "sent back to the United States." It was a sentiment that garnered applause from a small group of enthusiastic supporters in the crowd.
Peterson, a Vancouver-based businessman, said Leitch's immigration and border policies had so far allowed the public and the media to paint the Conservatives as an anti-immigrant party.
Raitt said illegal border crossings had to be stopped, because they were putting an extra burden on the refugee system and forcing legal migrants to wait longer to be processed.
Blaney, Andrew Scheer and Chris Alexander rolled out their tough-on-crime policies by promising to put victims back at the centre of the criminal justice system. They also pledged to prevent dangerous and repeat offenders from being released from prison.
During the question about crime, the debate quickly switched to the need for a strong economy to ensure the government has the tools it needs to effectively fight crime.
Peterson, who replied to every question of the night with plug for his economic platform, did not disappoint on crime either, promising to cut corporate income tax to zero and reduce personal income tax to a 15 per cent flat rate.
Leitch said people will only feel safe in their communities when they have jobs and can provide for their families, and she pledged to make it legal for women to use pepper spray on attackers without fear of being prosecuted.
Conservative debate sees agreement on more defence spending, killing carbon tax and tighter border control - Politics - CBC News
I was at the "snooze" debate on Tuesday night and I'm afraid I agree with Kevin O'Leary. You cannot have a debate with 13 other people the way this was set up. I left early because I was so bored. Kelly Leitch has a voice that became really annoying after a while - for me at least. I tried picturing her at a conference somewhere in Europe or the US (or even the UN - yeah, the UN would be okay - she'd annoy the hell out of everyone there LOL). While I agree with some of her policies, again, doubt I could stomach her for very long. Michael Chuong (sp) refuses to do away with the carbon tax and assured everyone that it would be "revenue neutral", just like BC. Unfortunately, one couldn't challenge him on how any tax could possibly be "revenue neutral" which is an oxymoron if there ever was one. Got lots of boos. Rick Peterson and Deepak O. were entertaining if nothing else. I was impressed by Lisa Reit; she was very eloquent and does have experience. I could easily see her representing Canada on the world stage.
I went because I honestly don't know who would best represent my interests and those of Canada as a whole. I came away a bit disappointed because I'm still not sure who I would vote for; the way this whole thing was set up was extremely disappointing. I believe the whole spectacle allowed 4 questions. 4!!! I had, as I'm sure others did too, many more that required answering. As it was, it was mostly posturing and while most of those involved agreed with a lot of policies those of us attending weren't able to ferret exactly how, (whatever policy was being proposed), each individual proposed to do exactly that. How? (e.g. Rick Peterson stated he would get rid of corporate taxes and everyone would have a flat tax of 15%. He would increase military spending to UN standard of 2% of GDP. How does he merry those two together? Would he get rid of all exemptions? Would he get rid of the credits we now can claim?). Those are the sorts of things we need to know before deciding who we want to vote for. This venue didn't allow for that.
I now wish I had gone to see Mr. O'Leary instead. I might have gained a better understanding of where he was coming from at least. I was disappointed he would chose the same night as the debate though. Had it been on a subsequent night, more people would have had the opportunity to speak and hear what he had to say.
While he was absolutely correct in that the format sucked, optics are everything now-a-days so I suppose he should have showed up anyway.
JMHO
I went because I honestly don't know who would best represent my interests and those of Canada as a whole. I came away a bit disappointed because I'm still not sure who I would vote for; the way this whole thing was set up was extremely disappointing. I believe the whole spectacle allowed 4 questions. 4!!! I had, as I'm sure others did too, many more that required answering. As it was, it was mostly posturing and while most of those involved agreed with a lot of policies those of us attending weren't able to ferret exactly how, (whatever policy was being proposed), each individual proposed to do exactly that. How? (e.g. Rick Peterson stated he would get rid of corporate taxes and everyone would have a flat tax of 15%. He would increase military spending to UN standard of 2% of GDP. How does he merry those two together? Would he get rid of all exemptions? Would he get rid of the credits we now can claim?). Those are the sorts of things we need to know before deciding who we want to vote for. This venue didn't allow for that.
I now wish I had gone to see Mr. O'Leary instead. I might have gained a better understanding of where he was coming from at least. I was disappointed he would chose the same night as the debate though. Had it been on a subsequent night, more people would have had the opportunity to speak and hear what he had to say.
While he was absolutely correct in that the format sucked, optics are everything now-a-days so I suppose he should have showed up anyway.
JMHO
oops, did I spell Lisa's last name wrong? My bad LOL
Kevin O'Leary alleges 'vote rigging' in Conservative leadership campaign
The Conservative party is investigating allegations from leadership hopeful Kevin O’Leary that one of his rivals is engaging in fraud and vote-rigging.
The celebrity businessman issued a statement Thursday accusing an unnamed campaign of trying to buy its way to the top by using untraceable prepaid credit cards to sign up fake members, which he said runs afoul of party rules and potentially the law.
“Beyond the legalities of this, it is completely immoral, and extremely unfair to the tens of thousands of real party members that will have the impact of their votes weakened,” O’Leary said in a statement.
The alleged scheme involves people on the Ontario PC party membership list being signed up as members of the federal Conservative party, possibly without their knowledge.
Several people who are part of Bernier’s campaign team were also involved in Patrick Brown’s winning campaign for the Ontario PC leadership in 2015.
A source inside Bernier’s campaign shot back at the rumours they were involved in the alleged fraud.
“If Kevin spent more time in Canada campaigning he would be winning instead of whining,” the source said, speaking anonymously because they had not been authorized to provide an official response.
O’Leary has faced criticism for continuing to do events and interviews in the U.S. long after he launched his leadership bid officially in January.
He is currently on a cross-Canada tour, telling Conservative MPs earlier this month he planned to spend 24 days on the road in March, according to a leaked copy of a letter he circulated to the Conservative caucus and obtained by The Canadian Press.
He also told MPs he is signing up 700 new members a day.
The Conservative party reached out to the campaigns on Thursday to request their credit card logs and party spokesman Cory Hann said an investigation is underway.
Any memberships obtained contrary to party rules will be eliminated and those people will be ineligible to vote, Hann said in an email.
“Our rules are clear, any person looking to join our party must do so by paying the membership fee out of their own pocket, and we will ensure that principle is followed,” he said.
Memberships cost $15 and party rules state they can only be purchased by credit card or cheque, a provision implemented specifically to avoid campaigns being able to use their own funds to sign up thousands of members, as had been the practice in the past.
The new system drew grumbling when it was unveiled, with some saying the fee – originally set at $25 – was still too high and the credit card process too cumbersome.
A couple of hours after the allegations surfaced Thursday, Bernier made a point of telling a would-be supporter on Twitter that his mother’s credit card wasn’t good enough to pay for a membership.
“You need to pay with your own card,” Bernier told the man via Twitter.
Brad Trost, one of the 14 candidates in the race, called on O’Leary to provide proof of his allegations.
“If Mr. O’Leary has evidence to substantiate this hack he should make it public immediately,” Trost said in a statement.
“If this is nothing but a publicity stunt, and Mr. O’Leary has no evidence then he should be sanctioned to the greatest extent possible by the party.”
There are believed to currently be about 100,000 party members, with more to come as candidates have until Mar. 28 to sign up new ones for the leadership vote. That’s scheduled to take place in May.
https://twitter.com/Justin_Ling/status/842517333579124737
The Conservative party is investigating allegations from leadership hopeful Kevin O’Leary that one of his rivals is engaging in fraud and vote-rigging.
The celebrity businessman issued a statement Thursday accusing an unnamed campaign of trying to buy its way to the top by using untraceable prepaid credit cards to sign up fake members, which he said runs afoul of party rules and potentially the law.
“Beyond the legalities of this, it is completely immoral, and extremely unfair to the tens of thousands of real party members that will have the impact of their votes weakened,” O’Leary said in a statement.
The alleged scheme involves people on the Ontario PC party membership list being signed up as members of the federal Conservative party, possibly without their knowledge.
Several people who are part of Bernier’s campaign team were also involved in Patrick Brown’s winning campaign for the Ontario PC leadership in 2015.
A source inside Bernier’s campaign shot back at the rumours they were involved in the alleged fraud.
“If Kevin spent more time in Canada campaigning he would be winning instead of whining,” the source said, speaking anonymously because they had not been authorized to provide an official response.
O’Leary has faced criticism for continuing to do events and interviews in the U.S. long after he launched his leadership bid officially in January.
He is currently on a cross-Canada tour, telling Conservative MPs earlier this month he planned to spend 24 days on the road in March, according to a leaked copy of a letter he circulated to the Conservative caucus and obtained by The Canadian Press.
He also told MPs he is signing up 700 new members a day.
The Conservative party reached out to the campaigns on Thursday to request their credit card logs and party spokesman Cory Hann said an investigation is underway.
Any memberships obtained contrary to party rules will be eliminated and those people will be ineligible to vote, Hann said in an email.
“Our rules are clear, any person looking to join our party must do so by paying the membership fee out of their own pocket, and we will ensure that principle is followed,” he said.
Memberships cost $15 and party rules state they can only be purchased by credit card or cheque, a provision implemented specifically to avoid campaigns being able to use their own funds to sign up thousands of members, as had been the practice in the past.
The new system drew grumbling when it was unveiled, with some saying the fee – originally set at $25 – was still too high and the credit card process too cumbersome.
A couple of hours after the allegations surfaced Thursday, Bernier made a point of telling a would-be supporter on Twitter that his mother’s credit card wasn’t good enough to pay for a membership.
“You need to pay with your own card,” Bernier told the man via Twitter.
Brad Trost, one of the 14 candidates in the race, called on O’Leary to provide proof of his allegations.
“If Mr. O’Leary has evidence to substantiate this hack he should make it public immediately,” Trost said in a statement.
“If this is nothing but a publicity stunt, and Mr. O’Leary has no evidence then he should be sanctioned to the greatest extent possible by the party.”
There are believed to currently be about 100,000 party members, with more to come as candidates have until Mar. 28 to sign up new ones for the leadership vote. That’s scheduled to take place in May.
https://twitter.com/Justin_Ling/status/842517333579124737
Maxime Bernier calls Kevin O’Leary a ‘loser’ for vote-rigging accusations
Maxime Bernier calls Kevin O'Leary a 'loser' for vote-rigging accusations - Macleans.ca
Maxime Bernier calls Kevin O'Leary a 'loser' for vote-rigging accusations - Macleans.ca
Maxime Bernier calls Kevin O’Leary a ‘loser’ for vote-rigging accusations
Maxime Bernier calls Kevin O'Leary a 'loser' for vote-rigging accusations - Macleans.ca
He's probably right. O'Leary is coming off as a whiny complainer.
Bernier says make AR-15's more accessible, Chong calls that ‘an extreme policy’
The Armalite-15 is one of the most infamous firearms of the modern era, used in at least four mass shootings in the U.S. in recent years.
So eyebrows were raised recently when Conservative leadership candidate Maxime Bernier chose to single it out in a fundraising pitch.
"With my firearms legislation, many popular guns like the AR-15 would become nonrestricted, because gun legislation wouldn't be based on fear anymore," Bernier wrote in an email.
Yet, Bernier isn't alone on having a gun policy that would make the AR-15 more accessible.
Several of his rivals would as well, with platforms linked to the adoption of a formal Conservative party policy on simplifying the way guns are currently regulated.
The argument for the AR-15 in particular is rooted in a belief that in form and function, it's no different than many other rifles and is only restricted because of its reputation.
But in a crowded campaign field, sticking out has become priority one for the leadership contenders.
Highlighting the AR-15 helps do just that, for reasons that are bigger than the weapon itself.
Last year, contender Kevin O'Leary gave an interview with an Ottawa radio station talking about his personal experience shooting the AR-15 at FBI range, calling it an unbelievable weapon that would never be used for hunting.
"That is a weapon that is just used to kill everybody in the room you're in. Who should have that? Nobody," he said, according to a transcript of the remarks.
While O'Leary is a known gun enthusiast, the way he talked about the AR-15 hinted at his character, suggested Nicolas Johnson, editor of TheGunBlog.ca, which advocates for the rights of gun owners.
A post about O'Leary's comments has been one of his most popular.
"He's telling us, 'I've just done this thing, but nobody else should be allowed to do it', which sounds like a double-standard," Johnson said in an interview.
Where a candidate stands on guns can give insight into where they stand more broadly on personal freedoms, defence, property rights, even heritage in the context of what rights aboriginal Canadians hold, he said.
To some of Bernier's competitors, the choice to focus on the AR-15 is an example of American politics coming north.
Michael Chong, who has made a point in his campaign of noting he lives on a farm and is no stranger to the use of firearms, said nobody needs an AR-15.
"Proposing to make the AR-15 unrestricted — a variant of which was used at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut to kill 20 children aged 6 and 7 and six adults in 2012 — is an extreme policy," he said in an email.
"Canadians do not want to adopt U.S.-style firearm policies."
more
Conservative leadership: Bernier says make AR-15 more accessible, Chong calls that
The Armalite-15 is one of the most infamous firearms of the modern era, used in at least four mass shootings in the U.S. in recent years.
So eyebrows were raised recently when Conservative leadership candidate Maxime Bernier chose to single it out in a fundraising pitch.
"With my firearms legislation, many popular guns like the AR-15 would become nonrestricted, because gun legislation wouldn't be based on fear anymore," Bernier wrote in an email.
Yet, Bernier isn't alone on having a gun policy that would make the AR-15 more accessible.
Several of his rivals would as well, with platforms linked to the adoption of a formal Conservative party policy on simplifying the way guns are currently regulated.
The argument for the AR-15 in particular is rooted in a belief that in form and function, it's no different than many other rifles and is only restricted because of its reputation.
But in a crowded campaign field, sticking out has become priority one for the leadership contenders.
Highlighting the AR-15 helps do just that, for reasons that are bigger than the weapon itself.
Last year, contender Kevin O'Leary gave an interview with an Ottawa radio station talking about his personal experience shooting the AR-15 at FBI range, calling it an unbelievable weapon that would never be used for hunting.
"That is a weapon that is just used to kill everybody in the room you're in. Who should have that? Nobody," he said, according to a transcript of the remarks.
While O'Leary is a known gun enthusiast, the way he talked about the AR-15 hinted at his character, suggested Nicolas Johnson, editor of TheGunBlog.ca, which advocates for the rights of gun owners.
A post about O'Leary's comments has been one of his most popular.
"He's telling us, 'I've just done this thing, but nobody else should be allowed to do it', which sounds like a double-standard," Johnson said in an interview.
Where a candidate stands on guns can give insight into where they stand more broadly on personal freedoms, defence, property rights, even heritage in the context of what rights aboriginal Canadians hold, he said.
To some of Bernier's competitors, the choice to focus on the AR-15 is an example of American politics coming north.
Michael Chong, who has made a point in his campaign of noting he lives on a farm and is no stranger to the use of firearms, said nobody needs an AR-15.
"Proposing to make the AR-15 unrestricted — a variant of which was used at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut to kill 20 children aged 6 and 7 and six adults in 2012 — is an extreme policy," he said in an email.
"Canadians do not want to adopt U.S.-style firearm policies."
more
Conservative leadership: Bernier says make AR-15 more accessible, Chong calls that
Each candidate should publically state their choice of weapon for "unrestricting" ...
Maxime Bernier: AR-15s, Kevin O'Leary: 50 Cals, Kelley Leitch: Claymore Mines (for enhanced border security), Michael Ching:Vulcan battling guns for that "Waskally Wabbit" problem that farmers often have.
That ought to narrow down the field as there are a limited number of seats to be had in Yahoo country ... not enough to ever form governments.
Maxime Bernier: AR-15s, Kevin O'Leary: 50 Cals, Kelley Leitch: Claymore Mines (for enhanced border security), Michael Ching:Vulcan battling guns for that "Waskally Wabbit" problem that farmers often have.
That ought to narrow down the field as there are a limited number of seats to be had in Yahoo country ... not enough to ever form governments.
Kevin O’Leary campaign organizer accused of vote buying
Six Sikh-Canadians signed an affidavit on Sunday alleging that the president of the Conservative Brampton East Riding Association offered to pay for their memberships.
Party rules require membership to be purchased by an individual using either personal cheques or personal credit cards.
"I was approached by Ron Chatha from the Kevin O'Leary team to provide names and addresses for myself and friends, so they could sign up for the Conservative Party of Canada [and] not to worry about the fees as they will take care of it. But I discussed with my friends, they said they had to pay for the membership so we decided not [to] sign for membership," the six men said in the signed affidavit.
The Sikh-Canadians went to a notary's office in Brampton on Sunday to have their allegations notarized. The affidavit was provided to The Globe from the Bernier camp.
"It is very disturbing and doubly disturbing that Mr. O'Leary was so keen to throw stones at other campaigns, yet he was very clearly in a glass house," Conservative MP Tony Clement, a senior adviser to the Bernier campaign, told The Globe. "This is the height of hypocrisy and it illustrates that his campaign is up to no good."
But Mr. Chatha, who is a key organizer for Mr. O'Leary, flatly denied he engaged in voter buying and accused the Bernier campaign of seeking revenge.
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/kevin-oleary-campaign-organizer-accused-of-vote-buying/article34345188/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&service=mobile
Six Sikh-Canadians signed an affidavit on Sunday alleging that the president of the Conservative Brampton East Riding Association offered to pay for their memberships.
Party rules require membership to be purchased by an individual using either personal cheques or personal credit cards.
"I was approached by Ron Chatha from the Kevin O'Leary team to provide names and addresses for myself and friends, so they could sign up for the Conservative Party of Canada [and] not to worry about the fees as they will take care of it. But I discussed with my friends, they said they had to pay for the membership so we decided not [to] sign for membership," the six men said in the signed affidavit.
The Sikh-Canadians went to a notary's office in Brampton on Sunday to have their allegations notarized. The affidavit was provided to The Globe from the Bernier camp.
"It is very disturbing and doubly disturbing that Mr. O'Leary was so keen to throw stones at other campaigns, yet he was very clearly in a glass house," Conservative MP Tony Clement, a senior adviser to the Bernier campaign, told The Globe. "This is the height of hypocrisy and it illustrates that his campaign is up to no good."
But Mr. Chatha, who is a key organizer for Mr. O'Leary, flatly denied he engaged in voter buying and accused the Bernier campaign of seeking revenge.
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/kevin-oleary-campaign-organizer-accused-of-vote-buying/article34345188/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&service=mobile