• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Liberal Minority Government 2019 - ????

Status
Not open for further replies.

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
507
Points
910
Some solutions offered here.

Lets see

Stop fetishizing rural Canada. Yes, I understand—working the land and living in small towns somehow imbues people with the beatific glow of “real Canadian-ness.” Nonetheless, over 70 per cent of the population now lives in a metropolitan area, and that proportion is growing. Not surprisingly, they aren’t voting Tory. In the last election the CPC was shut out of all the most densely populated ridings. If they started to focus on urban Canadians and their issues and concerns, that could change.

That would be great, but how to do that and not lose the base?

Be Canadian. This may sound like a weird one, but consider how regionally focused the CPC has become. It is no longer a national political party, but a western alienation movement. The next leader should be able to quickly and easily explain why they can improve the lives of every Canadian, from Newfoundland to Nunavut.

Solid idea.


Understand demographics. Canada is changing. We are not only growing more urban, but we are becoming less white and less straight. The role of women in the workplace and household continues to evolve. The CPC needs to not just catch up, but get ahead of these changes. Be the party of the next generation, not just our grandparents’ generation.

Wow, this would be a game changer. Getting ahead of these changes would definitely change the narrative, and improve the party on a whole. A lot of what you get from the CPC is the LPC is messing up on its policies, but the LPC is being proactive, not reactive.


Have some shame. This country is suffering from too many politicians willing to twist their opponents’ words out of context, make promises they know they’ll never keep, throw accusations they know are untrue, and even lie outright when needed. Canadians will embrace a politician they trust, someone who is self-evidently honest, someone who can still blush.

This would be nice.

Respect Parliament. In a recent interview with Paul Wells, the new leader of the Bloc Québécois, Yves-François Blanchet, was asked about the heckling in the House of Commons. He replied that he was amazed at how poorly MPs behave, and he pointed out that the vast majority of the jack-assery is coming from the CPC benches—a fact that anyone who has sat through Question Period can attest. I want the next leader of the CPC to cut that crap out and drag the loudest mouths into his office with a simple warning: Voters deserve better. Grow up or get out.

Yeah, cutting out the jack assery would be nice as well.

Believe in climate change. The fact this even has to be said is perhaps the greatest indictment of how far the CPC has drifted away from mainstream Canada. If every platform speech doesn’t lead with how you are going to address this crisis, then stay home. Canadians are taking this seriously and if you’re not helping you’re not needed.

Very big one if they want to be competitive in Urban Canada. The CPC did just release their version of a carbon tax, but thats it. They aren't running on that, they released it because its expected that they have some sort of plan. But you don't have Erin O'Toole out there saying climate change is one of the biggest most important issues facing Canada, not in the same way the LPC or NDP or GP are. They just came up with it and point to it when asked about climate change, but they are not running on it. Doesn't help when the party membership rejects climate change being real though.

Believe in free markets. Another weird request, given that the Conservative Party was once seen as the champion of free markets. Now, it eschews market mechanisms like a carbon tax in favour of half-baked incentives, regulations and subsidies. Given that Bay Street is aligned with the Liberals and NDP on this issue, the CPC needs to shake its head and stop opposing any idea that isn’t its own. (Although, ironically, in this case the idea was originally proposed by the Conservative Party—but then the Liberals agreed, so…)

They painted themselves in a corner on this one. The carbon tax is the most free market policies on reducing carbon emissions, and its one that has its roots in the conservative circles from the get go. But after painting the carbon tax as a job killing intrusion for years, how do you just pivot and say its okay now? I mean, O'Toole did just come up with his own version, but its more complicated and convoluted and less free market than the LPC one, its completely bizarro world.

Believe in individual liberty. Again—conservatives were once the loudest advocates for a person’s right to do whatever they damn well choose as long as it doesn’t affect others. Why have they forgotten this? I want the next leader of the CPC to not care who I sleep with, what I smoke or what gender I choose.

Problem with the big tent movements, sometimes you get people in your tent that you almost don't want in it.

The only party to bring up abortion in any capacity is the CPC, backbenchers yes, but you don't see it in other parties.

They only voted to recognize gay marriage in 2016, 11 years after it became legal.

They are the only party currently making a stink about banning conversion therapy.

Individual liberty would go a long way to helping them catch up in urban canada.


Have a plan to share. Andrew Scheer ran on a very vague platform. Doug Ford didn’t have one at all. It would be great if you could tell voters what you are actually going to do in office, how much it will cost, and how you will pay for it. I can’t believe I have to ask for this, but here we are.

A lot of CPC supporters seem to think that just hating Justin Trudeau and his government is enough to bring about change.

While hate for the PM may run deep in the party, its not widespread enough outside of the party for that to work.

Its here where having a clear plan would come in very handy, other than, LPC sucks, vote for us because we are not them.


Want to be prime minister. Too many CPC politicians want to be the most CPCish politician they can be, more than they want to be prime minister. They love to revel in the cheers of their hard core base, and to point fingers at other conservatives who aren’t as conservative as them. This will only keep you in opposition. So choose what you want more. (Note to Erin O’Toole: when you accuse Peter MacKay of being “Liberal-Lite”, voters just hear “electable”.)

Yeah, they need to get out of their bubble/echo chamber. But lets be frank, its the way to win the leadership. O'Toole did try to pivot, but I don't think its working the way he intended.


So yes, there is a article saying what they should do. Telling that its from over a year ago though.
 

LittleBlackDevil

Full Member
Reaction score
62
Points
330
well I for one haven’t hid my political background as what used to be, but no longer seems to exist, ‘small-c’ PC background, nor have I shied away from pointing out (IMO anyway) how the Reform/Canadian Alliance killed the remnants of the PCs in their effort to win it all, and set the long-term ‘shrink-right’ trend of today’s conservatives.

I and others hashed it out often, well upthread, but included elements having to positively (not begrudgingly) affirm that climate change is occurring and how best to address it locally, nationally, globally (54% vote against such a simple statement is not ‘constructive’). Also proactively affirm that issues of choice, particularly for women re: abortion, should be unquestioned as the law is clear. Another ‘own goal’ by Team Blue. Everything the CPC does seems to come a day late and/or a dollar short. O’Toole’s carbon policy isn’t bad, but imaging if it had come out as a positive, proactive policy, not a reactionary one that many coloured as a ‘kicking and screaming, getting with the times’ effort.

The things you complain of are not CPC policy but also do not indicate any move to the right, so much as a failure to move to the left at the grassroots level (as opposed to formal party policy). The fact that people who attend the convention may vote a certain way, clearly has no impact on how the Party is actually run. Looking at the actual policies, the CPC seems to be fiscally conservative (relatively) and socially progressive. I'm not aware of any actual policy that is not socially progressive. It seems that you have quit the party over bad optics (and what some people say/vote at conventions) versus actual policy, no?

I don't post as much as you do, but I also think I've been fairly open about being a "social conservative" albeit one who is frustrated with some of the self-defeating positions taken by that group. While I in principle disagree with you on the killing of babies who haven't yet exited the womb, we would agree in practice that it should not be part of the CPC platform (and it isn't nor has it been since the CPC existed).

I’d probably have better results to my efforts joining the LPC, and being ‘that privileged, cis-male white guy’ that everyone rolls their eyes at when I put my hand up in the back corner of the room to make a point of order/something about not throwing the baby out with the non-virtuous bath water…

I applaud your principled "putting your money where your mouth is". I, too, am done with the CPC (for opposite reasons you are). What you describe as your positions seem that you should actually be at home with the CPC, whereas people with my views are expected to vote "team blue" but our views will never be reflected by actual policy. That said, I have no interest in trying to convince you because I'd rather see the CPC die the death.

I think that you will find that things are much rougher for you in the LPC than the CPC and that you will be quickly left behind as the party moves ever left at a faster pace. I think you implicitly recognize this as you predict eye rolling at the "cis-white guy" offering his dinosaur opinions when UBI is on the table.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
759
Points
910
Its not so much people are overlooking that, so much as Canadian society not being in tune with that.

That may be true, but has nothing to do with my point: variations of the myth/idea that conservatives are the ones changing, are wrong.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
507
Points
910
The things you complain of are not CPC policy but also do not indicate any move to the right, so much as a failure to move to the left at the grassroots level (as opposed to formal party policy). The fact that people who attend the convention may vote a certain way, clearly has no impact on how the Party is actually run. Looking at the actual policies, the CPC seems to be fiscally conservative (relatively) and socially progressive. I'm not aware of any actual policy that is not socially progressive. It seems that you have quit the party over bad optics (and what some people say/vote at conventions) versus actual policy, no?
Ah, this is where the CPC gets to have its cake and eat it too.

They allow free votes. So while its CPC "policy" to to not oppose abortions, its members get to vote their conscience. So where does the opposition to the current abortion laws come from? The CPC MPs. 82 (82!) out of 120 (Plus Sloan) voted in favour of Bill C-233, which sought to ban doctors from performing an abortion based on the sex of a fetus.

Conversion therapy ban? CPC allows members to vote their conscience, no official CPC policy on it. Half (HALF!) the CPC caucus voted against it.

So sure, there are no "policies" that are not socially progressive, just a lot of members who push their agendas that are not socially progressive, whos backers have a say in who the CPC chooses as a leader, and could full well bring forward a social progressive.

That may sound like hidden agenda, but its not. Its very open.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
507
Points
910
That may be true, but has nothing to do with my point: variations of the myth/idea that conservatives are the ones changing, are wrong.
Are people saying this?

I don't know of many people thinking the CPC has changed. I think their main criticism is they are stuck in the past and not keeping up with the present and definitely not the future.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
759
Points
910
You and I probably read different inputs. Every few months, some left-leaning opinion writer returns to the idea of how conservatives (Canada and US) are becoming more extreme, and attributes that to changes in conservative attitudes. From the progressive frame-of-reference, it is true that conservatives are becoming more extreme - but it is mostly because the progressive frame-of-reference is moving. We could choose any arbitrary aggregate measure of attitudes regarding a number of prominent social/political ideas, measure it now, and measure it repeatedly in future, and with reference to that arbitrary point, it is progressives who would have the greater velocity moving away from it.

Conservatives by definition don't keep up with progressives. If they do, they are just progressives.

A couple of days ago, Kevin Drum produced an article recognizing that the gap is due to changes in progressive attitudes. Here, I've linked to some Pew survey results several times in the past few years which indicate the same thing.

From time to time, some writer notes that progressives gradually achieve changes, and conservatives rarely roll anything back. Then follows the observation "what's the point of conservativism", then the point of the screed emerges, which (crudely) is "please roll over and die so we can change more quickly". But there are always a few things which are not changing much, if at all.

The valuable role of conservativism is to uphold Chesterton's Fence. There is no shortage of people who are simultaneously willing to break things they don't like, while having no idea of how to deal with any problems that result.

Phrased another way, conservativism is the philosophy of "know the standard, follow the standard, teach the standard, enforce the standard". Progressivism would be harder if more people were held directly accountable for the ill effects of changes they create.
 

LittleBlackDevil

Full Member
Reaction score
62
Points
330
Ah, this is where the CPC gets to have its cake and eat it too.

They allow free votes.

So what I am hearing is that you are opposed to free votes, and opposed to a "big tent" party.

In that case you are definitely in the right place with the LPC (where party membership requires certain social positions).

It is highly ironic to me that social progressivism has morphed from "let people do what they want" and "government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" into "agree with us or else"/"only approved opinions/thoughts are allowed". In that regard, the CPC is probably closer to the Liberal party positions of a few years ago.

That said, I think that the free vote things you complain of are empty gestures that serve only to somatize socially conservative voters into continuing to give their votes to the CPC while all along the CPC is actually wholly socially progressive. I find it very interesting that an empty gesture that will never amount to anything causes people such as yourself so much angst.
 

LittleBlackDevil

Full Member
Reaction score
62
Points
330
I don't know of many people thinking the CPC has changed. I think their main criticism is they are stuck in the past and not keeping up with the present and definitely not the future.

I think Brad Sallows summed it up well ... the CPC has actually changed (leftward) but at an insufficient pace for the media and others, thus it appears that they are shifting right whereas they are just slow.

That said re: "stuck in the past" it's very true that politics are downstream of culture, and the more leftist our culture becomes the less likely anything remotely right-of-centre can ever win. I wouldn't be surprised if the Harper government was the last CPC government we'll ever see absent drastic change of course at some point. The left completely controls the media and education (the two main drivers of culture nowadays) so things will only go further and further left until people with your current views, Altair, are derided as dinosaurs holding politically unacceptable positions.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
759
Points
910
There's always a spread of attitudes, and most people experience changes in attitude. Over time, the spread between the extremes should be expected to become larger. Social media have accelerated the rate of growth of the gap and given people the power to punish others at one or more removes (eg. pressure on an employer). Bridging the gap (getting along) is harder, and is complicated by hyper-animosity. Several recent examples (emerging mostly from the US) involving people who were part of the tribe one day and voted off the island on the next are instructive, and not encouraging.

It won't continue forever; there will be an inflection point (probably will look more like a discontinuity). The ants may do OK; the grasshoppers will be fucked.
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
218
Points
680
I think Brad Sallows summed it up well ... the CPC has actually changed (leftward) but at an insufficient pace for the media and others, thus it appears that they are shifting right whereas they are just slow.

That said re: "stuck in the past" it's very true that politics are downstream of culture, and the more leftist our culture becomes the less likely anything remotely right-of-centre can ever win. I wouldn't be surprised if the Harper government was the last CPC government we'll ever see absent drastic change of course at some point. The left completely controls the media and education (the two main drivers of culture nowadays) so things will only go further and further left until people with your current views, Altair, are derided as dinosaurs holding politically unacceptable positions.
Quite the concept that an elected representative is allowed to vote their conscience for their constituents, indeed.

We are in times where 'free votes' are considered illiberal by the progressive left and more. And the progressive left has the plurality of support.

The four phases of ideological subversion as described by KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov in his warning to America seems to be playing out.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
507
Points
910
I think Brad Sallows summed it up well ... the CPC has actually changed (leftward) but at an insufficient pace for the media and others, thus it appears that they are shifting right whereas they are just slow.

That said re: "stuck in the past" it's very true that politics are downstream of culture, and the more leftist our culture becomes the less likely anything remotely right-of-centre can ever win. I wouldn't be surprised if the Harper government was the last CPC government we'll ever see absent drastic change of course at some point. The left completely controls the media and education (the two main drivers of culture nowadays) so things will only go further and further left until people with your current views, Altair, are derided as dinosaurs holding politically unacceptable positions.
My views have changed as I have gotten older and as I educated myself on certain things.

Trans rights for example, I had a much less accepting stance on things until I actively went out and had conversations with trans people and trans activists and saw and understood their point of view, and where what they want/wanted does not infringe on what I want/believe.

I used to be a big defender of historical figures/statues in public, and not judging them for things that were before their times. Now, I am more understanding of how that can be harmful to people who view those as symbols that people who caused harm to them, their family members, their ancestors being celebrated for those acts. While I do not fully like the movement to remove these people from the public sphere, I also understand where it is coming from and as such do not have much of a problem with it when it happens.

The environment is another, where I held certain points of view in the past, but presented with the science and understanding of today, have changed my outlook from where it once was.

I don't think I am one to plant my feet in the ground and say that what I believed 10 years ago is exactly what I believe today. I am forever learning, forever reevaluating my beliefs and I hope I don't one day stop and say, I will believe this for the rest of my days no matter what.
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,384
Points
910
Quite the concept that an elected representative is allowed to vote their conscience for their constituents, indeed.

We are in times where 'free votes' are considered illiberal by the progressive left and more. And the progressive left has the plurality of support.

The four phases of ideological subversion as described by KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov in his warning to America seems to be playing out.
You mean like free and fair elections in Russia?

There was a myth or maybe it was true that in the USSR Stalin was given a standing ovation, but no one would stop clapping. Finally one did and he was arrested as a "Counter revolutionary".
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
507
Points
910
So what I am hearing is that you are opposed to free votes, and opposed to a "big tent" party.
Free votes are like free speech, I support it, but don't expect me to support what someone says with that free speech or free vote.
In that case you are definitely in the right place with the LPC (where party membership requires certain social positions).

It is highly ironic to me that social progressivism has morphed from "let people do what they want" and "government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" into "agree with us or else"/"only approved opinions/thoughts are allowed".
But thats the thing. When people are using that free vote to vote for state intervention in the bedroom, or in gender, or in abortion, that is the opposite of social progressivism.
In that regard, the CPC is probably closer to the Liberal party positions of a few years ago.
Not when they (MPs, not the party) are voting for socially conservative motions.
That said, I think that the free vote things you complain of are empty gestures that serve only to somatize socially conservative voters into continuing to give their votes to the CPC while all along the CPC is actually wholly socially progressive.
And here lies the trap I think the LPC has set for the CPC.

The LPC said it didn't want anti abortion members or supporters. CPC accepts everyone. Most Canadians are hesitant to support measures on abortion, and are content with the current laws (or lack thereof) around it. LPC gets to point at the CPC and say they are the party of anti abortion, and the CPC can deny it up and down, but their voting record on a whole says otherwise.
I find it very interesting that an empty gesture that will never amount to anything causes people such as yourself so much angst.
One is tainted by the company they keep.

The CPC are associated with the social conservatives, they have MPs that are open social conservatives, their voting record shows that they have a active social conservative wing, and social conservatives have a lot of sway in leadership contests.

At that point it rings hollow to say that their platform isn't socially conservative.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
507
Points
910
Quite the concept that an elected representative is allowed to vote their conscience for their constituents, indeed.
On can vote for whatever they please if they want free votes. But can you really be surprised if people don't support what that person voted for with their conscience?
We are in times where 'free votes' are considered illiberal by the progressive left and more. And the progressive left has the plurality of support.
I think its more nuanced than that. If you are a party that has core beliefs and someone is voting against said core beliefs, they might be in the wrong party.

For example, a Green party member being opposed to a carbon tax would likely not be a good fit.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
327
Points
1,130
I used to be a big defender of historical figures/statues in public, and not judging them for things that were before their times. Now, I am more understanding of how that can be harmful to people who view those as symbols that people who caused harm to them, their family members, their ancestors being celebrated for those acts. While I do not fully like the movement to remove these people from the public sphere, I also understand where it is coming from and as such do not have much of a problem with it when it happens.
The estimated cost to Toronto taxpayers to re-name Dundas Street and 60 other streets is $21.2 million.

The cost will keep going higher as additional streets are added to the list. Such as streets named "Indian".

 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
507
Points
910
The estimated cost to Toronto taxpayers to re-name Dundas Street and 60 other streets is $21.2 million.

The cost will keep going higher as additional streets are added to the list. Such as streets named "Indian".
And there was a time where I felt that this was not worth it, or necessary.

But learning of how much it brings harm to some people, makes them feel like the places they live does not understand the harm it brings, 21.2 million doesn't bother me as much.

Just do the right thing.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
327
Points
1,130
And there was a time where I felt that this was not worth it, or necessary.

But learning of how much it brings harm to some people, makes them feel like the places they live does not understand the harm it brings, 21.2 million doesn't bother me as much.

Just do the right thing.
Not that there's anything wrong with it, of course.

But, it will be interesting to see the price tag for the entire country.

Not just streets. But properties with problematic names as well.

Hopefully, the removal of statues and re-naming will be peaceful .
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
507
Points
910
Not that there's anything wrong with it, of course.

But, it will be interesting to see the cost for the entire country.

Not just streets. But properties with problematic names as well.

Hopefully, the removal of statues and re-naming will be peaceful .
I like that its happening at a local level.

Nobody is forcing Toronto to do this. Toronto is deciding to do this.

If at a local level people and politicians decide that its for the best, then that's up to them. So long as the provinces and feds keep their nose out of it.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
327
Points
1,130
I like that its happening at a local level.

Nobody is forcing Toronto to do this. Toronto is deciding to do this.

If at a local level people and politicians decide that its for the best, then that's up to them. So long as the provinces and feds keep their nose out of it.
A new name has already been nominated. The comments are interesting. :)


 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top