The Next Conservative Leader

[GAP]

Well....we won't need Russian hackers with Bernier at the helm.  He'll just leave those Secret documents laying around his condo for anyone to view.  >

Well.........after seeing the reason he was distracted, I understood.....she was rather distracting......... ;D

 

[Altair]

O'Leary was smart to avoid embarrassing himself in the French debate.

When only half of the people running can actually talk French I am beginning to think that Trudeau won have any serious competition in 2019.

Maxime Bernier, Chris Alexander, Steven Blaney, Rick Peterson, Andrew Sheer, Micheal Chong, Pierre Lemieux. That's it.

Lisa Raitt is terrible

Kellie Leitch is has major issues with French.

Deepak Obhrai can't even read French off his own notes, never mind speak it.

Brat Tost is lost in French, gets easily annoyed and switches to English.

Erin O'Toole was decent enough...I guess? Speaks it like a 5th grader, but at least he can speak it. Would get massacred by Trudeau however.

Andrew Saxton is in the same category as O'Toole, can speak it but not at a high level.

So 7 People who can actually go toe to toe with a fully bilingual Prime Minister out of 15.

Of those, Peterson wont win, Chong is a longshot, Lemieux isn't winning it, Blaney doesn't have any name recognition outside of Quebec. That leaves the conservatives with Sheer, Alexander, and Bernier as the only ones who have a shot of winning who can be considered fully bilingual.

I don't know if the Conservatives strategy involves completely ignoring Quebec, but looking at this leadership contest, I can't help but think it might be.

 

[gryphonv]

I don't know if the Conservatives strategy involves completely ignoring Quebec, but looking at this leadership contest, I can't help but think it might be.

It's worked before, and Trudeau is making it a little easier for someone to swoop in and steal the English vote in Quebec. While it is a small demographic, it still can swing the tides in a few electorates.

 

[Altair]

It's worked before, and Trudeau is making it a little easier for someone to swoop in and steal the English vote in Quebec. While it is a small demographic, it still can swing the tides in a few electorates.

The English vote in Quebec is centered around Montreal. Montreal, a big urban multicultural center is not exactly fertile ground for the conservative party. Even during the big liberal collapse of 2011 they didn't lose the anglo vote in Quebec around Montreal.

And yes, the Harper conservative years were great at splintering the Quebec vote up until 2015. 2006 it went mostly bloc, and away from the Liberals. 2008, same story. 2011, it went NDP, who had the best chance of forming government outside of the CPC that year, but NDP weakness in the rest of Canada wasted that vote. 2015 it went Liberal once again and coupled with strength in the rest of Canada the Liberals were able to win.

So it's possible to win without Quebec, but that means the Quebec vote needs to be split, or wasted on parties that cannot win, (bloc, NDP). With the bloc a spent force, and the NDP not likely having a leader with as much Quebec Bona Fides as Mulcair and Layton, unless the CPC can compete with the Liberals in Quebec, there is only one way for that vote to go.

 

[jollyjacktar]

I believe that anyone wanting to be the next PM and is unable to converse in both official languages has about as much chance as the Leafs winning back to back Stanley Cups.  If you can't play in both playgrounds with the kids, you're done.

 

[Kirkhill]

The interesting candidate for me, with respect to Quebec, is Maxime Bernier.

He comes from a part of the country that has found common cause with Anglos in the past on small c-conservatism (economic and cultural).  The problem for the western Conservatives has been the difference on Co-operatives.  Co-operatives, introduced in Canada in the west were slow to be adopted in Quebec.  But while they have faded elsewhere they remain very strong in Quebec.  Especially the dairy co-ops.

Bernier is challenging those co-ops on their home turf.

It will be interesting to see how he makes out.  If he can carry his seat in the face of the dairy lobby in his home riding, I think, it will put him in a very interesting position - a socially liberal, economically conservative (ie economically classical liberal) from Quebec.

Will Quebecers, and more particularly, Beaucerons, vote blood or ideology?

By they way, for the record, I'm supporting Bernier.

 

[Remius]

The interesting candidate for me, with respect to Quebec, is Maxime Bernier.

He comes from a part of the country that has found common cause with Anglos in the past on small c-conservatism (economic and cultural).  The problem for the western Conservatives has been the difference on Co-operatives.  Co-operatives, introduced in Canada in the west were slow to be adopted in Quebec.  But while they have faded elsewhere they remain very strong in Quebec.  Especially the dairy co-ops.

Bernier is challenging those co-ops on their home turf.

It will be interesting to see how he makes out.  If he can carry his seat in the face of the dairy lobby in his home riding, I think, it will put him in a very interesting position - a socially liberal, economically conservative (ie economically classical liberal) from Quebec.

Will Quebecers, and more particularly, Beaucerons, vote blood or ideology?

By they way, for the record, I'm supporting Bernier.

Right now he's the front runner for me.  If I had to vote it would be for him  Not sure he can take on Trudeau unfortunately but he stands a better chance than the rest. 

 

[Altair]

The interesting candidate for me, with respect to Quebec, is Maxime Bernier.

He comes from a part of the country that has found common cause with Anglos in the past on small c-conservatism (economic and cultural).  The problem for the western Conservatives has been the difference on Co-operatives.  Co-operatives, introduced in Canada in the west were slow to be adopted in Quebec.  But while they have faded elsewhere they remain very strong in Quebec.  Especially the dairy co-ops.

Bernier is challenging those co-ops on their home turf.

It will be interesting to see how he makes out.  If he can carry his seat in the face of the dairy lobby in his home riding, I think, it will put him in a very interesting position - a socially liberal, economically conservative (ie economically classical liberal) from Quebec.

Will Quebecers, and more particularly, Beaucerons, vote blood or ideology?

By they way, for the record, I'm supporting Bernier.

Bernier is one of the only candidates that can produce a vote split in Quebec. Some will vote blood, some will vote ideology.

His true advantage is his distancing from the legacy of Harper. Harper, while respected in Quebec, was never loved, and by the end was actively disliked by Quebecers. A lot of those running now will continue to pay for that attachment to the former Prime Ministers dislike in Quebec. Bernier was removed from all that after being punted from cabinet in a way that Blaney, Sheer, Alexander Leitch, Raitt are not. He can claim to be a outsider with fresh ideas while everyone else was a lieutenant of Harper in one way or another.

It will be interesting to see how he does in the leadership contest, because I think he is the perceived frontrunner now and will draw most of the fire of the rest, especially Leitch and O'Leary.

 

[Remius]

I wonder though if the western caucus and their supporters would be able to stomach a leader from Quebec or if we may see a split along regional lines again.

 

[PuckChaser]

I wonder though if the western caucus and their supporters would be able to stomach a leader from Quebec or if we may see a split along regional lines again.

They changed the way the voting works for the leader, you need broad party support across all regional lines to win. No longer will the big ridings in Alberta hold who the balance of power. If Bernier has Quebec, he'll need Alberta and Nova Scotia support as well to win.

 

[dapaterson]

The English vote in Quebec is centered around Montreal. Montreal, a big urban multicultural center is not exactly fertile ground for the conservative party. Even during the big liberal collapse of 2011 they didn't lose the anglo vote in Quebec around Montreal.

You may wish to look at the 2011 electoral map.  While Westmount remained reliably Liberal, Notre Dame de Grace, a yellow-dog Liberal riding switched to the NDP.

 

[Altair]

You may wish to look at the 2011 electoral map.  While Westmount remained reliably Liberal, Notre Dame de Grace, a yellow-dog Liberal riding switched to the NDP.

was that a result of losing the English vote or the NDP running up the French vote do you think?

 

[dapaterson]

Despite the French name, NDG remains a largely English enclave.  I haven't seen poll by poll numbers, but I would have thought that its loss would have triggered a little more introspection on the part of the Natural Governing Party.

 

[cavalryman]

introspection on the part of the Natural Governing Party.

:rofl:

Oh - wait - you were serious... never mind.

 

[Kirkhill]

I wonder though if the western caucus and their supporters would be able to stomach a leader from Quebec or if we may see a split along regional lines again.

Pretty sure he is doing all right here in Alberta. And BC.

 

[ballz]

So it's possible to win without Quebec, but that means the Quebec vote needs to be split, or wasted on parties that cannot win, (bloc, NDP). With the bloc a spent force, and the NDP not likely having a leader with as much Quebec Bona Fides as Mulcair and Layton, unless the CPC can compete with the Liberals in Quebec, there is only one way for that vote to go.

This is exactly it. Harper won without Quebec because of the Orange Wave. The Orange Wave died with Jack Layton, and the BQ is in shambles. A uni-lingual CPC leader guarantees the Liberals take all of Quebec and the election.

They changed the way the voting works for the leader, you need broad party support across all regional lines to win. No longer will the big ridings in Alberta hold who the balance of power. If Bernier has Quebec, he'll need Alberta and Nova Scotia support as well to win.

The last time the numbers were published, Max had the most donors in every province except for Ontario where it was a virtual tie (42% Leitch / 40% Bernier). He had 71% of donors in Alberta and 68% of donors in BC.

Max was the front runner, for sure, until O'Leary joined. But, all the previous polls are kind of irrelevant now. O'Leary will cause a giant shake-up because its impossible to tell how many Bernier / Leitch / Riatt voters will change their voting contention now. So, who is the front runner now is anybody's guess.

I am surprised he joined, I thought he was doing a publicity stunt and would eventually endorse Max. I still think, in the end, he ends up endorsing Max.

 

[Altair]

This is exactly it. Harper won without Quebec because of the Orange Wave. The Orange Wave died with Jack Layton, and the BQ is in shambles. A uni-lingual CPC leader guarantees the Liberals take all of Quebec and the election.

The last time the numbers were published, Max had the most donors in every province except for Ontario where it was a virtual tie (42% Leitch / 40% Bernier). He had 71% of donors in Alberta and 68% of donors in BC.

Max was the front runner, for sure, until O'Leary joined. But, all the previous polls are kind of irrelevant now. O'Leary will cause a giant shake-up because its impossible to tell how many Bernier / Leitch / Riatt voters will change their voting contention now. So, who is the front runner now is anybody's guess.

I am surprised he joined, I thought he was doing a publicity stunt and would eventually endorse Max. I still think, in the end, he ends up endorsing Max.

I think Trump started as a publicity stunt as well until he realized one day that he could win.

Might be the same with O'Leary.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Just for some shits & giggles, the World Socialist Web Site's take on the Guy Still In Boston:

Oligarch investor seeks leadership of Canada’s Conservatives

Just days after proposing that the federal government become more of a “profit-center” by selling Senate seats, multi-millionaire investor, reality television star, and inveterate blow-hard Kevin O’Leary announced he is a candidate to lead Canada’s Conservative Party.

O’Leary joins thirteen other candidates vying to lead Canada’s Official Opposition. But much of the media has already anointed him the “front runner” in the Conservative leadership race, which will climax at a party convention in May.

The post of Conservative leader has been vacant since Stephen Harper resigned within hours of his decade-old Conservative government losing the October 2015 federal election to the Justin Trudeau-led Liberals.

O’Leary, who has no political experience, is claiming strong support for his candidacy, based largely on name recognition from his numerous television appearances as a business commentator and his leading role in two “reality” based shows that extol the virtues of entrepreneurship—the Canadian version of “Dragon’s Den” and its American spin-off, “Shark Tank.” His candidacy is supported by long-time right-wing party stalwarts, such as former Ontario Premier Mike Harris, Senator Marjorie LeBreton, and former Harper confidante Mike Coates.

O’Leary has long been associated with the unbridled cultivation of wealth and the celebration of social inequality as keystones of a well-functioning capitalist economy. In 2014, in his capacity as business expert on a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) financial news program, he infamously hailed a then-recent Oxfam report that showed the richest 85 people in the world owned as much as the poorest 3.5 billion ...

Etc., etc., etc. ...

 

[The Bread Guy]

Some National Post commentary on O'Leary's appeal to Conservatives ...

...    Partly this is just human nature: we fixate on what is nearby and recent. Partly, I think, it’s a convenient way for Canadians to feel superior and comfortable — “at least [INSERT PROBLEM] isn’t as bad as in the States.” And I’m convinced the same phenomenon is at play in much of the coverage of Kevin O’Leary’s candidacy for the Conservative leadership. He is constantly compared with Donald Trump and found much more dissimilar than similar … and yet the comparisons keep coming. He’s been on TV, he’s never been a politician, he’s notably braggadocious; someone like that just became president, ergo it’s more plausible O’Leary can succeed.

    Succeed he might. But there are many reasons to think he won’t. The votes are ranked ballots and every riding is weighted equally, which does not benefit a divisive candidate. His pitch that “surfer dude” Justin Trudeau is literally ruining the country will play well among a segment of the party base. But that same segment will be turned off by his stances on CBC (“a premier news gathering organization”), the military (“there’s nothing proud about being a warrior”), peacekeeping (“I don’t want to bomb or get involved in any campaigns … other than keeping the peace”), ISIS (“the last nationality ISIS wants to put a bullet through is a Canadian”), the Senate (why not sell seats for profit?), legalizing marijuana (“a remarkable opportunity”) … well, I’ll stop. Not only is he not particularly conservative, he’s well designed to drive Conservatives batty.

    Trump promised jobs to people who had lost them under both Democratic and Republican administrations; to the extent he violated Republican orthodoxy it was that of the elites, not of the blue-collar voters. O’Leary is promising little of substance while violating various orthodoxies of the Conservative elites and base alike. Loving the military, rolling eyes at peacekeeping, loathing ISIS and CBC — these are the things that kept Conservatives warm at night when Harper was governing not very conservatively. Why would they vote against them? ...

 

[Kirkhill]

Can't say as how O'Leary appeals to this Conservative.