Mad Max is Right About Conservatives Being Liberal Light

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
*gulp*


Bernier's exit will split the vote — and help Liberals, says veteran Conservative

Two conservative options will allow Trudeau to solidify lead, says Stockwell Day

A veteran politician argues that Maxime Bernier's dramatic break from the Conservatives will help one party in particular — the Liberals.

"There's an impact because another choice is offered at election time," said Stockwell Day, a former leader of the Canadian Alliance who has held senior cabinet posts under Stephen Harper.

After several clashes with party leader Andrew Scheer, Bernier announced Thursday that he would leave the Conservatives to form his own party. He said that Scheer was too consumed with focus groups, and the party was "too intellectually and morally corrupt to be reformed."

But Conservative MPs are unlikely to follow Bernier in large numbers, Day told The Current's guest host Ioanna Roumeliotis.

"The problem is you don't need half [to leave with him] to see the continuation of the Liberal regime," he added. "In many ridings you only need a few percentages."

"Justin Trudeau won the election in 2015 with about 39 per cent of the vote," Day said. "You get now to a place where your opposition ... is running at about the same. Polling numbers are good, their fundraising is extremely high, and I believe this convention was the highest number of turnout in the history of the party."

"But if you split that, then Mr. Trudeau's position will be solidified."

Steven Fletcher, who served in Harper's cabinet and is now an Independent MLA in Manitoba, says that Bernier could still attract significant support.

"Half the membership will support Maxime on principle, and the other half will go with Andrew, and then that's going to be a problem."

Scheer has to take responsibility and listen to the membership of the party, he added.

Fletcher hoped to win back his federal seat in 2019, but his candidacy was rejected by the party in June.

"Andrew has blocked me from running for the Conservative Party nomination in the riding, and that undermines the membership.

"There are cases across the country where the membership is completely ignored," he said. "Candidates are not allowed to run in seats — they're barred. They're closed nominations, candidates are being parachuted in."

"What's the point of joining a party if you're not going to respect the members of that party?"

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4797506
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
76
Eagle Creek
Well said!!! Couldn't agree more!

The only thing I am waiting for...and hoping for, is more of a presence and voice from Scheer. Someone needs to ask some tough questions of Trudeau, his immigration policies, his economic policies, his international relations and trade policies...he seems to be getting a free pass from the opposition right now and many Canadians, myself included, feel there isn't a strong voice of opposition representing them. Scheer needs to correct this, not just for the support of conservatives, but for the support of the average Canadian.


To shamelessly copy another's comments - "Well said!!! Couldn't agree more!"


I couldn't help but groan when I heard that the old bugaboo 'abortion' may be discussed at the convention. This is where the party and I split ways. It has been debated to death. It is law in Canada - leave well enough alone. There are much much bigger problems facing us and spending any amount of time on this issue is wasted. It is also a guaranteed vote killer.

Andrew needs to establish a presence in Canadian news broadcasts. There are many issues he could be responding to. The Great Enabler dominates the news .........when it isn't about Trump. I don't know anyone who would vote for someone when they barely know their name let alone any policy issues.
 

CaptainTrips

Nominee Member
Jul 29, 2018
87
0
6
Predictions are hard to make, especially about the future, but here's my attempt.

We are in for another term of Trudeau, and quite possibly another after that. Trudeau is vulnerable and beatable, but Sheer is a pussy-cat who will never be PM barring some absolute catastrophe for the Libs. Bernier would never have made PM either, but his departure is a message the CPC had better understand and respond to.

After the Libs win the next election the CPC MUST come up with a strong leader, somebody like Harper. Hmm, I wonder if he is interested in a comeback. After a couple terms of the Feminist in Chief and his girls Harper is going to look really good.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
Anyway, we've veered off the point but generally speaking, you have a greater variety of parties with proportional representation.

It would be like the Israeli system or even worse, the Italian system in which the only way that you can form a government is to build a coalition of multiple parties. Small ones that hold the balance of seats can blackmail the others, like the extreme religious right does in Israel.. Those coalitions are inherently unstable and in the case of Italy, it is unusual for a government to last the year. If you like short-lived, unstable governments run by agressive minorities, go for it. That would split this country up into little pieces in no time flat.


Since Canadians are not Italians or Israelis I suspect the system would work much more like it does in Sweden, Norway, Denmark etc. In those countries a majority government is almost unheard of and yet the various parities work quite well together. If you want an actual majority every time then preferential balloting is the way to go. It is still more democratic that the plurality system. The only virtue the plurality system has is that it is simple; but it never was truly democratic.
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,198
113
Uh uh. The stoner vote was a one time deal for Trudeau. He has nothing going his way to lure the youth back.

They have been using the weed carrot since daddie's day, I think they still have one more election to get it done right and get the infrastructure solidified...or maybe NAWT - The NO abortion... life in the joint for a joint...and absolutely NO damn swearing party may rear its ugly head for one last swing at the soap box.

MuaHahahahahahahah!
Stoners are too lazy to vote.
 
Last edited:

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
Since Canadians are not Italians or Israelis I suspect the system would work much more like it does in Sweden, Norway, Denmark etc. In those countries a majority government is almost unheard of and yet the various parities work quite well together. If you want an actual majority every time then preferential balloting is the way to go. It is still more democratic that the plurality system. The only virtue the plurality system has is that it is simple; but it never was truly democratic.

Those are tiny, little, monocultural places. Canada is vast, varied and what is good for one end of the country is often quite bad for the other end. The big political parties here are already coalitions of regional interests.
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
12,395
1,367
113
60
Alberta
Geez, I thought we already had one post Maxime Apocalyptic Conservative downfall thread.
Flossy, the Conservatives are calling Maxime a sore loser and a baby.

Hey, I got an idea! Maybe Trudeau can get him to cross the floor.
He'd fit right in.
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
Geez, I thought we already had one post Maxime Apocalyptic Conservative downfall thread.
Flossy, the Conservatives are calling Maxime a sore loser and a baby.

Hey, I got an idea! Maybe Trudeau can get him to cross the floor.
He'd fit right in.

Maybe Singh 'll have him!
 

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
22,041
6,160
113
Twin Moose Creek
Really good speech by Scheer

What Andrew Scheer told Conservatives after Maxime Bernier’s exit

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/parl...’s-exit/ar-BBMoVcz?li=AAggNb9&ocid=spartanntp
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
Really good speech by Scheer

What Andrew Scheer told Conservatives after Maxime Bernier’s exit

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/parl...’s-exit/ar-BBMoVcz?li=AAggNb9&ocid=spartanntp

Schher proved to me that he's no idiot by clearly stating that they are not going to re-open the abortion debate despite all sorts of internal pressures within the party from various holier-than-thou types.

It seems that Scheer wants to get elected and form a government whereas factions of his party are stuck on shoving their fringe and marginal ideologies down the World's throat.
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
76
Eagle Creek
Conservatives can win if they take aim at Liberal incompetence—not the culture wars

Andrew MacDougall is a London-based columnist, commentator and consultant. He was formerly director of communications to Stephen Harper.

If the past week’s fracases over immigration and diversity impart one lesson upon Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives, let it be this: they need to question Justin Trudeau on competence, not question Liberals on Canada’s culture.

Exhibit A: Maxime Bernier.

Furious that Trudeau Trudeaued in the most Trudeauian way for the millionth time in office, Bernier lit up Twitter a few Sundays ago with his jeremiad against the notion of “ever more” and “extreme” diversity, before adding one about the “cult of diversity,” and another about “identity politics”. He hasn’t stopped culture warrioring ever since, really. It’s all a bit out of character for a politician whose usual eruptions have to do with Canada’s overpriced milk.

Bernier’s culture crusade, of course, got noticed. The media ran riot, Conservative colleagues—including party leader Andrew Scheer—tut-tutted furiously, and the Liberals cranked out record fundraising appeals. Now, in a fit of pique gussied up as principle, Bernier has announced that he will be striking out on his own.

Bernier’s pre-doing-it-my-way comments may not have been so divisive if his target was actually the Prime Minister, as it surely ought to have been while his party is forced to take a time-out on the opposition benches. But as should by now be obvious, it’s Scheer that Bernier’s tweets were really after, for reasons of ideological impurity. According to Bernier’s maxims, thou shall strike down any leader who lies down with milk-producing animals—and thou shall strike him down with vague but explosive musings on Satan’s social media platform about how many immigrants should be admitted and integrated into the Canadian kingdom.

It’s the kind of talk that excites a subset of the faithful, but it’s not a viable plan on which to win back Canada, especially if it divides Conservatives. Which is surelywhy Andrew Scheer hoped Bernier would implode on his own ashe clearlycruised for martyr status—something Scheer COULDN’T be the one to grant, lestthe act of martyrdom win Bernier more converts.

Really, this war of egos was all so pointless and unnecessary—not to mention self-defeating for the Tories, as it won’t HELP TO produce a new tenant in Rideau Cottage come next fall. But it does highlight something intrinsic about what a potential path to victory does or doesn’t look like for the Conservatives.


Bernier’s talk of ending supply management at least had retail appeal to a broad swathe, of non-conservatives. Less so the words on culture. New arrivals are certainly the kind of thing that would put a bee in the bonnet of Exhibit B in our story, one Diane Blain, a.k.a. Justin Trudeau’s infamous hay-field interlocutor who, in her own inimitable way, showed Conservatives how not to take on this Prime Minister.

Although Blain led with a legitimate question on reimbursing Quebec for the costs incurred by illegal border crossers—albeit one not asked in good faith, as is now clear—she followed up with a flurry of questions about whether Trudeau was intolerant of the “Québécois de souche” which, roughly translated for English Canada, means the Québécois whose ancestors invented the snowmobile and now avoid Montréal like the plague.

Trudeau’s eyes lit up in response to Blain’s heckling. Sometimes, it pays to shoot the messenger.

And if you want to see what a diploma in drama gets you, study Trudeau’s response. He might have been quick off the mark to brand Blain intolerant to immigrants—even as lots of Canadians wonder what the plan on the border is—but he brought it home in the second act, when he waded into the crowd and met her souche talk with cries of “racist.” Trudeau was in his Captain Canada element; you could practically hear the Liberal strategists climaxing, especially when Conservatives stood up for Blain’s right to question the Prime Minister on the border.

The ensuing melee over the appropriateness of Trudeau’s response produced several takeaways, one of them being that it never hurts to hold your fire until the target comes into full view—and the weapon, too, in this case. In the days when anyone can be a hit on social media, a little quality control goes a long way when assessing the suitability of stalking horses. There’s a point to be made about this government’s high-handedness with critics, but using Blain to make it is the very definition of a diminishing return—especially when you’ve already got a shadow cabinet full of better options.

Which brings us to Exhibit C: Michelle Rempel.

Having pounded Bernier on social media several times for his unhelpful comments, Rempel and her colleague Gérard Deltell yesterday laid out their principles for a revamped immigration policy.

While not yet forensic in its detail, it was miles better than Bernier’s Rebel-rousing. The Rempel-Deltell effort was at least focused on the right target: Trudeau and the Liberal government’s many failings on immigration. It was clearly the work of Conservative caucus members anxious to show Trudeau—not Scheer—the door.

“In order to prevent erosion of social license for immigration among Canadians,” Rempel noted, “it is imperative that Canada’s government be able to clearly articulate a vision for Canadian immigration, and be able to articulate a fully-costed and well-thought-out process to achieve the same.”

Here, Rempel hits on the essential truth: Immigration enjoys broad support in Canada as long as the system is working and is seen to be working. And there is lots of evidence, as Rempel notes, that the current government is failing on these fronts.

Lots of people remember the Trudeau push to welcome Syrian refugees. Few know that 90 per cent of those who arrived under government-sponsorship are now unemployed, according to Rempel, citing numbers provided to her by the immigration minister. This isn’t to say they shouldn’t have come, or that it was wrong to have taken them in, only that the government appears to have stopped working after the cameras switched off. And no one—Syrian arrival nor longstanding Canadian—benefits from that outcome.

Nor, for that matter, do most know that Liberal decisions to lift visa requirements on Mexico and Romania—which the previous government had put in place precisely because of Canada’s failings—are straining our asylum system. The immigration system, it turns out, was simply incapable of adjudicating their claims quickly enough, which was in turn inviting more to try their luck. This is the same system, by the way, that is now handling the illegal border crossers from the United States, large percentages of whom, the government’s own figures estimate, have no legal claim to enter Canada. The government should be pressed morning, noon and night about their actions to fix this integrity-sapping problem.

These are no less emotive points to make than Bernier’s, but they have the benefit of being backed up by data. In other words, they are the basis for a good-faith debate, one the Conservatives can expect to carry with a significant portion of the (non-racist) crowd in Canada.

That’s why Conservatives need to be Rempel and Deltell, not Bernier. They need to be fact-based warriors—not cultural Vandals.


https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/con...at-liberal-incompetence-not-the-culture-wars/

Also a good read: www.macleans.ca/opinion/i-was-a-reform-mp-and-i-supported-maxime-bernier-for-leader-heres-why-hell-fail/
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
Just waiting for next photo op at Pearson Airport of Justin throwing paper towel rolls into a crowd of just-arrived newcomers.
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
76
Eagle Creek
Just waiting for next photo op at Pearson Airport of Justin throwing paper towel rolls into a crowd of just-arrived newcomers.

The one thing we can be assured of when it comes to The Great Enabler is his inability to control the arrogant side of his nature and the belief that no matter how outlandish, inappropriate or downright stupid his actions, his entitlement guarantees they are beyond reproach.
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
The one thing we can be assured of when it comes to The Great Enabler is his inability to control the arrogant side of his nature and the belief that no matter how outlandish, inappropriate or downright stupid his actions, his entitlement guarantees they are beyond reproach.

He inherited that trait from his cher Papa.
 
Last edited:

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,187
14,244
113
Low Earth Orbit
Conservatives can win if they take aim at Liberal incompetence—not the culture wars

Andrew MacDougall is a London-based columnist, commentator and consultant. He was formerly director of communications to Stephen Harper.

If the past week’s fracases over immigration and diversity impart one lesson upon Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives, let it be this: they need to question Justin Trudeau on competence, not question Liberals on Canada’s culture.

Exhibit A: Maxime Bernier.

Furious that Trudeau Trudeaued in the most Trudeauian way for the millionth time in office, Bernier lit up Twitter a few Sundays ago with his jeremiad against the notion of “ever more” and “extreme” diversity, before adding one about the “cult of diversity,” and another about “identity politics”. He hasn’t stopped culture warrioring ever since, really. It’s all a bit out of character for a politician whose usual eruptions have to do with Canada’s overpriced milk.

Bernier’s culture crusade, of course, got noticed. The media ran riot, Conservative colleagues—including party leader Andrew Scheer—tut-tutted furiously, and the Liberals cranked out record fundraising appeals. Now, in a fit of pique gussied up as principle, Bernier has announced that he will be striking out on his own.

Bernier’s pre-doing-it-my-way comments may not have been so divisive if his target was actually the Prime Minister, as it surely ought to have been while his party is forced to take a time-out on the opposition benches. But as should by now be obvious, it’s Scheer that Bernier’s tweets were really after, for reasons of ideological impurity. According to Bernier’s maxims, thou shall strike down any leader who lies down with milk-producing animals—and thou shall strike him down with vague but explosive musings on Satan’s social media platform about how many immigrants should be admitted and integrated into the Canadian kingdom.

It’s the kind of talk that excites a subset of the faithful, but it’s not a viable plan on which to win back Canada, especially if it divides Conservatives. Which is surelywhy Andrew Scheer hoped Bernier would implode on his own ashe clearlycruised for martyr status—something Scheer COULDN’T be the one to grant, lestthe act of martyrdom win Bernier more converts.

Really, this war of egos was all so pointless and unnecessary—not to mention self-defeating for the Tories, as it won’t HELP TO produce a new tenant in Rideau Cottage come next fall. But it does highlight something intrinsic about what a potential path to victory does or doesn’t look like for the Conservatives.


Bernier’s talk of ending supply management at least had retail appeal to a broad swathe, of non-conservatives. Less so the words on culture. New arrivals are certainly the kind of thing that would put a bee in the bonnet of Exhibit B in our story, one Diane Blain, a.k.a. Justin Trudeau’s infamous hay-field interlocutor who, in her own inimitable way, showed Conservatives how not to take on this Prime Minister.

Although Blain led with a legitimate question on reimbursing Quebec for the costs incurred by illegal border crossers—albeit one not asked in good faith, as is now clear—she followed up with a flurry of questions about whether Trudeau was intolerant of the “Québécois de souche” which, roughly translated for English Canada, means the Québécois whose ancestors invented the snowmobile and now avoid Montréal like the plague.

Trudeau’s eyes lit up in response to Blain’s heckling. Sometimes, it pays to shoot the messenger.

And if you want to see what a diploma in drama gets you, study Trudeau’s response. He might have been quick off the mark to brand Blain intolerant to immigrants—even as lots of Canadians wonder what the plan on the border is—but he brought it home in the second act, when he waded into the crowd and met her souche talk with cries of “racist.” Trudeau was in his Captain Canada element; you could practically hear the Liberal strategists climaxing, especially when Conservatives stood up for Blain’s right to question the Prime Minister on the border.

The ensuing melee over the appropriateness of Trudeau’s response produced several takeaways, one of them being that it never hurts to hold your fire until the target comes into full view—and the weapon, too, in this case. In the days when anyone can be a hit on social media, a little quality control goes a long way when assessing the suitability of stalking horses. There’s a point to be made about this government’s high-handedness with critics, but using Blain to make it is the very definition of a diminishing return—especially when you’ve already got a shadow cabinet full of better options.

Which brings us to Exhibit C: Michelle Rempel.

Having pounded Bernier on social media several times for his unhelpful comments, Rempel and her colleague Gérard Deltell yesterday laid out their principles for a revamped immigration policy.

While not yet forensic in its detail, it was miles better than Bernier’s Rebel-rousing. The Rempel-Deltell effort was at least focused on the right target: Trudeau and the Liberal government’s many failings on immigration. It was clearly the work of Conservative caucus members anxious to show Trudeau—not Scheer—the door.

“In order to prevent erosion of social license for immigration among Canadians,” Rempel noted, “it is imperative that Canada’s government be able to clearly articulate a vision for Canadian immigration, and be able to articulate a fully-costed and well-thought-out process to achieve the same.”

Here, Rempel hits on the essential truth: Immigration enjoys broad support in Canada as long as the system is working and is seen to be working. And there is lots of evidence, as Rempel notes, that the current government is failing on these fronts.

Lots of people remember the Trudeau push to welcome Syrian refugees. Few know that 90 per cent of those who arrived under government-sponsorship are now unemployed, according to Rempel, citing numbers provided to her by the immigration minister. This isn’t to say they shouldn’t have come, or that it was wrong to have taken them in, only that the government appears to have stopped working after the cameras switched off. And no one—Syrian arrival nor longstanding Canadian—benefits from that outcome.

Nor, for that matter, do most know that Liberal decisions to lift visa requirements on Mexico and Romania—which the previous government had put in place precisely because of Canada’s failings—are straining our asylum system. The immigration system, it turns out, was simply incapable of adjudicating their claims quickly enough, which was in turn inviting more to try their luck. This is the same system, by the way, that is now handling the illegal border crossers from the United States, large percentages of whom, the government’s own figures estimate, have no legal claim to enter Canada. The government should be pressed morning, noon and night about their actions to fix this integrity-sapping problem.

These are no less emotive points to make than Bernier’s, but they have the benefit of being backed up by data. In other words, they are the basis for a good-faith debate, one the Conservatives can expect to carry with a significant portion of the (non-racist) crowd in Canada.

That’s why Conservatives need to be Rempel and Deltell, not Bernier. They need to be fact-based warriors—not cultural Vandals.


https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/con...at-liberal-incompetence-not-the-culture-wars/

Also a good read: www.macleans.ca/opinion/i-was-a-reform-mp-and-i-supported-maxime-bernier-for-leader-heres-why-hell-fail/

This one is good too: https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ot...l-be-because-of-andrew-scheers-secret-weapon/