CPC Leadership Discussion 2020-21

[Altair]

I disagree.  Once example: Scheer addressed the abortion topic, that he personally disagrees but would not open it for debate just as the former CPC majority did not when it was in government.  The media kept it alive to smear him.  It doesn't matter how Scheer addressed this or how many times he answered, or that this hasn't been an issue even during Harper... The media kept bringing it up as though Scheer was going to immediately outlaw abortion once in power.  So long as the LPC continues to pump hundreds of millions into the media, and the CPC states they won't, there will be tainted reporting.
 
     

Scheer did a lot of work keeping it alive.

It was in the first week of the campaign that the LPC started to draw attention to CPC candidates who talked about reopening the abortion debate.

It wasn't until after the first french debate that Scheer mentioned that he was personally anti abortion but wouldn't open it for debate.

For the 3 weeks that he was asked about it,  repeatedly, he simply said that parliament has settled it,  and the CPC wasn't going to bring it up.

Which is dodging the question. So the media kept asking about it. Eventually,  the media got an answer,  but the damage had been done.

And it wasn't just that. He dodged the question on whether he supports gay marriage,  and still does to this day. Also refused to apologize for his comments in the house in 2005 with the how many legs would a dog have if you counted the tail as a leg when talking about legalizing gay marriage.

He wasn't forthcoming with his history as a insurance broker,  or lack there of.

He offered a weak defense on his dual citizenship.

He could have gotten a lot of stuff out of the news cycle by simply answering the questions asked as opposed to hiding behind the party policy.

 

[Remius]

What Altair just did.  The CPC and Scheer did a lot of damage to themselves by avoiding or seeming to avoid answering. 

Take yesterday and his response to the question about homosexuality being a sin.

https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/the-question-that-haunts-andrew-scheer/

This article in Macleans hits the nail on the head. 

What I find interesting is that some in the CPC base think it was the media that made them lose.  It was a weak platform, a weak leader and policy plans that did not jive with voters.  It isn't a communications issue, it's an ideas issue.  But until they see that they will lose again.

 

[Good2Golf]

I disagree.  Once example: Scheer addressed the abortion topic, that he personally disagrees but would not open it for debate just as the former CPC majority did not when it was in government.  The media kept it alive to smear him.  It doesn't matter how Scheer addressed this or how many times he answered, or that this hasn't been an issue even during Harper... The media kept bringing it up as though Scheer was going to immediately outlaw abortion once in power.  So long as the LPC continues to pump hundreds of millions into the media, and the CPC states they won't, there will be tainted reporting.

I’ll disagree with your disagreement of my disagreement.

As others have posited, and I will support with a single point, Scheer could have shut it down in a heartbeat by: addressing the criticism ASAP and noted that his view personal/professional literally was no different than of Canada’s Roman Catholic pro-life personal but pro-choice by party policy/Federal legislation Prime Minister.  Done. Full stop. Next....

But he didn’t. Altair and Remius make numerous solid points about Scheer’s shortcomings.  The media, biases and all, kept circling Scheer while he flailed and bled in the water.

Regards
G2G

 

[garb811]

The media bias derail has been split and can now be found here:  Media Bias [Merged]

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[Remius]

Interesting to see "pro life" being called "anti choice" by groups now.

Jarn, I disagree with this (not with your point, but the stance by some groups).  I consider myself pro choice in the sense that I have no place telling anyone what to do with their body and that people can choose one way or the other.  But that does not mean that someone cannot hold the pro life view and still have some validity to their position.  It's when one group or another feels that we should legislate or criminalise one's choice that I have an issue with or that we should just let God or gods decide.

In the end, one can have a humanist approach on both sides of the argument and not be wrong. 

On the other end, we see "cancel culture" enter the fray and if you are not pro life then you are clearly anti-woman, anti-progressive anti-fill in name here. 

I'm sure you have seen it.  Where on the left, there is a tendency to shut down reasonable discourse and reasoned arguments.

I don't consider myself very right or very left.  I've argued with some right wing and left wing types.  Most are my friends so we are respectful but I found that those that are more on the left tend to want to shut down the conversation rather than counter the facts they get.  Those on the right that I know tend to want to counter facts with facts but more often than not they are from sources that are less than reliable but it fed their narrative.  Most of the people I know though are willing to accept the facts but it might not change their opinion. 

Scheer's main problem, I will propose (although I am not the first to claim this), is that he has not been able to show that he can separate his religious views from his political views and convince Canadians that he has.  He looks awkward, he avoids directly answering or he answers with something unrelated. 

The pro life stance is an easy one to deal with.  The gay marriage one is not so easy and he hasn't been able to get around that with his answers. 

He still hasn't been able to walk back his dog tail comment.  It's not that he feels gay marriage is akin to a dog, it's that his analogy is that gay marriage is unnatural, unequal despite what the law says because his religion says otherwise.

While it's ok to say that he won't stop his MPs from bringing forth private members bills on the issue but that he will vote against any attempt to repeal something, would he allow any MP to bring forward any legislation that would repeal equal rights for women or legislation that would repeal civil rights for minorities and still say he would allow them but would vote against it?  I doubt it.

 

[ModlrMike]

Rex Murphy's take on the question:

Rex Murphy: So when will Trudeau and Singh be asked tasteless questions about their religion?

While one may or may not agree with Mr Murphy in general, his question has merit. When will the other leaders be asked the same sorts of questions?

 

[brihard]

Rex Murphy's take on the question:

Rex Murphy: So when will Trudeau and Singh be asked tasteless questions about their religion?

While one may or may not agree with Mr Murphy in general, his question has merit. When will the other leaders be asked the same sorts of questions?

Probably when either of them leads a party that historically has been on the wrong side of history on social issues, and which has voted accordingly?

I don' think may people care much about Andrew Scheer's beliefs because of Andrew Sheer. They care about his beliefs because of his leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada, one of two viable contenders for leadership of our legislature, and for his ability to whip the votes of the party as well as to give sanction to private members' bills.

It's not simply so black and white a matter of 'will they try to roll back abortion / same sex marriage / trans rights / etc?', but also that the government in power has considerable ability to influence things more softly through various executive powers, departmental funding, and so on and so forth. A lot of people fear that an evangelical social conservative, elected chosen by his party to be their leader, could use his power in a way contrary to their interests or the interests of their friends or family.

So that's what the question about Scheer's religion is about. The LPC and the NDP don't carry the same social conservative baggage, so that fear isn't present.

 

[Remius]

Rex Murphy's take on the question:

Rex Murphy: So when will Trudeau and Singh be asked tasteless questions about their religion?

While one may or may not agree with Mr Murphy in general, his question has merit. When will the other leaders be asked the same sorts of questions?

I would argue that neither has demonstrated that their personal religious views interfere with their jobs.  They've both demonstrated that with their actions and their comments.

He pretty much put that to bed in 2014.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/q-and-a-justin-trudeau-in-his-own-words

Since that moment, I still consider myself and have re-found myself of a deep faith and belief in God. But obviously very aware of the separation of church and state in my political thinking,” said Mr. Trudeau in his October 2014 interview with the Ottawa Citizen.

This was Singh's response to Scheer's position on gay Marriage.  Taken from the NDP site.

https://www.ndp.ca/news/ndp-leader-jagmeet-singh-responds-andrew-scheers-comments-same-sex-marriage

“The resurfacing of Andrew Scheer’s disgusting prejudice against LGBTQI2S+ people and families is very painful for many Canadians. This is exactly why, if Canadians deliver a minority government in October, I will not prop up Andrew Scheer and the Conservatives. We can't trust Mr. Scheer or his caucus to champion the fundamental rights of Canadians."

Here is the LPC and some of Justin trudeau's actions taken.

https://www.liberal.ca/lgbtq2/


So compare that with how Scheer has handled himself and one can see why more questions keep coming.

 

[Blackadder1916]

Sometimes the obvious isn't official until you bring a consultant to tell you it is.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-party-andrew-scheer-john-baird-2019-1.5353596

Conservatives planning a sweeping three-part review of party's 2019 campaign

MP says party wants expedited review 'because we don't know how long this Parliament will last'

Hannah Thibedeau · CBC News · Posted: Nov 08, 2019 4:29 PM ET | Last Updated: 25 minutes ago

Former cabinet minister John Baird's external review of the Conservative Party of Canada's election performance is just one part of what Conservatives are calling a sweeping effort to get at the reasons behind the party's recent defeat.

Within hours of being named chair of the external review, Baird — who served as minister of foreign affairs in Stephen Harper's cabinet — began conducting interviews, starting with senior campaign staff.

Conservative sources say Baird's tone in these interviews has been forward-looking but serious, and his questions appear intended to get an honest assessment of what went wrong and help the party mount a more successful campaign next time.

And Baird's mandate isn't limited to the party itself. Sources say he'll be asking outside professionals to offer their own critiques of the 2019 campaign plan.

"I think Mr. Baird's a great choice," B.C. MP Mark Strahl told CBC News. "I think he is someone who's passionate about conservative politics. He has a record of service to the country and to our movement and wasn't a part of the campaign so he can provide a unique perspective."

Strahl also said that Baird, being from Ontario, is in a good position to learn the reasons behind the party's poor performance in Canada's most populous province.

"He has a good perspective on what's happening in this part of the country and that's where we need to improve in the next election," he said.

As part of the same lessons-learned effort, Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer's planned ten-province "listening tour" will start in Mississauga and Brampton — two cities in the so-called 905 belt around Toronto where the party failed to win the ridings it needed to form government.

The party narrowly retained the Aurora-Oak Ridges-Richmond Hill seat held by Conservative MP Leona Alleslev; the former Liberal MP crossed the floor in September 2018 to sit with the Conservatives.

But in the traditionally blue riding of Milton, Ont., the Conservatives lost their deputy leader. Incumbent Lisa Raitt was defeated by Liberal candidate and four-time Olympic medal winner Adam van Koeverden.

Meeting with the membership

In an email to Conservative MPs, party Executive Director Dustin van Vugt said Scheer will visit all ten provinces before the end of the year.

"This will be a useful tool to help him gauge what the on-the-ground feedback is from the grassroots up, something he felt necessary for us to have the most fulsome picture of the campaign," van Vugt wrote in the email, obtained by CBC News.

This tour across Canada also will give Scheer some much-needed time to press the flesh with the party members who will decide whether he stays on as leader at the biannual convention in April in Toronto.

The third part of the Conservative Party's post-mortem of the 2019 campaign will be an internal review chaired by van Vugt, CBC News has learned.

"I'll be talking with members like you, campaign volunteers, workers, campaign managers, and taking back their advice, and what they felt worked, and what didn't. That will be compiled to present to our leader, Andrew Scheer," van Vugt wrote in the email.

A need for speed

The full internal/external review could take about two months to complete. Strahl said the party can't afford to slow-walk the process.

"Andrew Scheer was quite clear that we don't want this to drag on and on. We could be facing an election ... at any time in a minority Parliament," he said.

"So we're looking to have that done thoroughly, but as quickly as it can be done thoroughly. We don't want to just have a surface review. It needs to be a deep dive. But that needs to be done with some urgency because we don't know how long this Parliament will last."

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is expected to decide when Parliament will resume after speaking with opposition leaders next week. He's set to meet with Scheer on Tuesday.

 

[garb811]

OK folks, I've cleaned up the thread, again. I'm not sure what the problem is with this one, but we are three pages in and it's had to be cleaned up twice.  It's getting tiresome.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[Jarnhamar]

Sorry for bringing it off thread. I'll chalk it up to something else I dont like my taxes paying for.

As long as the CPC has the religious component to it they're going to have abortion and same sex marriage thrown in their face along with a whipped up threat that a Conservative government will all of a sudden ban both of them.


I don't have the source but I read in passing somewhere that in around 20 ridi g's the Conservatives lost to the Liberals by as low as 5% and "stratigic voting" by other party members is being suggested why the Liberals won those.

I think the Liberals had a lot less suport than they're even now being credited with but many, like some on the forum here, blocked their nose and went that way.

I never heard of Scheer before. Wasn't impressed by him. I did think that Canada would benefit from a more boring leader than our current socks and drama obsessed PM, but Scheer is just TOO underwealming. 

I really like Ambrose and Rempel (even though the former is retired and uninterested) but conservatives saying "we need a woman leader" is just stupid identity politics.

 

[Remius]

Not this biggest fan of Remple but Ambrose I like. 

Agreed about having a woman leader.  I’m not convinced it makes you more electable.  Women voters are smarter that that. 

They need a more electable leader, boring or not, man or woman.  But, they also need a bit of a challenge culture change in the whole of the party as well.

I really hope they can get it together for the next one.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I find Remple really smart and articulate. I especially like her blogs and videos where she just talks and she doesn't sound like she's reading off a script. Compare that to Trudeau trying to talk about water bottles  :

Ambrose's name keeps getting floated about but by the sounds of it she has zero interest in coming back.

Im considering renewing my party membership just to get a say in any vote.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Rona would certainly get my vote. And I think she would be a great PM.

While I don't believe either that the CPC "need a woman leader" any more or less than any other main party, and I believe that to do so for identity politics sake would be wrong, I also believe that this is a key strategic moment for such leader.

Why? Quite simply because Trudeau's Libs would be incapable of attacking her as  person or on personal belief without completely destroying JT's image as a feminist leader. He would be in a serious bind for any kind of attack on such leader. So having a women as leader would be a stroke of genius at this juncture (and because it's 2019!  ;D).

 

[mariomike]

So having a women as leader would be a stroke of genius at this juncture (and because it's 2019!  ;D).

Or 1993. 

 

[The Bread Guy]

This just out from Abacus Data ...

There’s been a lot of talk about whether the Conservative Party of Canada should stick with Andrew Scheer as its leader into the next election, whenever that will be.  The Conservative Party will have a vote to decide whether to hold a leadership race this spring.

Here’s what our latest polling finds on the question:

Of nine possible alternative leaders of the Conservative Party, Canadians prefer 7 of the 9 to Andrew Scheer.  Five are 8 points or more ahead of Andrew Scheer, including two of Brian Mulroney’s children, Stephen Harper, Brian Pallister, Brad Wall and Peter MacKay.  Across the country, 60% would prefer Peter MacKay to Mr. Scheer.

In Ontario, the province where Conservatives most fell short of their goals in the last election, 8 of the nine names have more support than Mr. Scheer.  MacKay, Harper and Caroline Mulroney have the largest advantage over Mr. Scheer.

However, the choice of leader will ultimately reflect the preferences of Conservative Party members.  Among Conservative voters, Mr. Scheer is preferred to eight of the nine names, the only exception being Stephen Harper.  However, his lead over MacKay, Wall, Caroline Mulroney, and Brian Pallister may not be as large as incumbents might hope for or expect.

UPSHOT

According to Bruce Anderson: “Public comments from leading Conservatives reveal that there’s obviously some restiveness in the Conservative Party today. To some extent, this reflects a belief that the party could have formed a government and fell short of that goal.  But there are different factions within the conservative movement in Canada, some reflecting conservative social values, some western alienation, some a pro-oil perspective, while others want a party that embraces climate action and a broad inclusive value system.  Leadership tensions can be a surrogate for these schisms, beyond whether Andrew Scheer campaigned as well as people hoped for.  The Conservative leader may find it necessary to make clear choices and stake out some ground – hoping for incumbency to protect him may prove riskier.”

According to David Coletto: “Our test of potential alternatives to Mr. Scheer finds none, except for Mr. Harper, are preferred over Mr. Scheer among those who voted Conservative in the last election. This should give him some comfort, especially since Conservative members will ultimately decide whether to initiate a leadership election.

But beyond the Conservative universe, Scheer’s performance against Mr. MacKay, Ms. Mulroney, or Mr. Wall should give Conservatives some pause to reflect on why Mr. Scheer failed to break-through and whether it is a question of leadership, tone, or party positioning.”

METHODOLOGY

Our survey was conducted online with 3,000 Canadians aged 18 and over from November 12 to 17, 2019. A random sample of panellists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.

The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 1.79%, 19 times out of 20.  The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding ...

More @ link & attached graphics.

 

[Remius]

More division on Scheer coming out of the woodwork.

I think things are going to get worse for him before they get better.

Hard to take on Trudeau when you are being assailed from within.

Liberals must be smiling right now.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/andrew-scheer-jenni-byrne-conservative-party-1.5377166

 

[Remius]

And more this time from within the caucus.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/senior-conservative-ed-fast-declines-critic-role-over-scheer-s-leadership-1.4708681

 

[brihard]

And more this time from within the caucus.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/senior-conservative-ed-fast-declines-critic-role-over-scheer-s-leadership-1.4708681

Wow. That’s a stinging indictment- and a rather confident assertion of the belief that Scheer won’t last as leader.

The sooner Scheer steps down, the better for the party.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Just in - keep in mind initial reports caveats ...

Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer is set to resign.

Global News has learned Scheer will announce imminently that he will be stepping down from the party leadership after losing the last election.

His resignation comes as a direct result of new revelations that he was using Conservative Party money to pay for his children’s private schooling.

Senior Conservatives say the expenditures were made without the knowledge or approval of the Conservative fund board, including the chair of the board.

There are also calls for the party president to resign over the schooling expenses.

op: