Conservative Party of Canada Leadership Race Megathread-May 27th 2017

[adma]

I gather you don't live in British Columbia.  

<<<YAK YAK YAK BLA BLA BLA YAK YAK YAK>>>

Anyway, she's not running for Conservative Party leader, so she's not really relevant to this thread and hopefully she won't be relevant to British Columbia in about 16 months.

Listen--You.  Don't.  Have.  To.  Explain.  Anything.  To.  Me.  Whether I live in BC or not is totally immaterial.  And I'm not even *denying* any of what you're offering--mainly because it's tedious and redundant under the circumstance.

However, let me explain the seed through which this thread got derailed: it's when the discussion got into the potential jockeying-into position of the current-and-pending "conservative premiers".  And maybe out of the accident of *my own* respecting the thread's subject matter, I misconstrued that particular tangent by thinking in terms of Brian Pallister or Christy Clark themselves as hypothetical "federal Con leadership material" relative to Brad Wall.  And as I said, Pallister's too old, and Christy Clark's too historically Liberal.  But then *you* get into this whole "what Christy Clark is all about" jag, and you've *continued* to do so.  Look: I'm not necessarily in disagreement; that she leads a "right-wing" government is kinda "duh" given the nature of BC politics--indeed, I'm likely more in your camp than Lotuslander's (and my acknowledgment of the "slipperiness" of the Liberal brand, even now federally under Justin, can stand as its own implicit critique of "what Christy's all about")--***but that belongs in a different kind of political discussion forum, to say nothing of a different kind of thread.***.  And all it's showing me is that you're gallingly *incapable* of viewing *any* of these matters from a disinterested-third-party perspective.

Though it's funny, because you and Lotuslander have something in common: you both go by that "you don't live in British Columbia, do you" stance re opinionating outsiders..  Yet what I'm witnessing from the two of you re BC politics is, metaphorically speaking, a whole tedious lot of "he said, she said" blabber--next to which, I'm like the proverbial kid rolling his eyes at his bickering parents.  Which also leaves me wondering if, esp. relative to a message board like this which *ought* to be a godsend to the disinterested-third-party psephologist sort, this bickering-parent state of BC political being is a logical outcome of how the provincial electoral scene has almost always defaulted t/w dumb, dull, nuance-free US-style binarydom, i.e. you're overcompensating for the fact that your elections suck, so to speak.  (And that's nothing to do with *who* gets elected.)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

[136or142]

I gather you don't live in British Columbia.  

<<<YAK YAK YAK BLA BLA BLA YAK YAK YAK>>>

Anyway, she's not running for Conservative Party leader, so she's not really relevant to this thread and hopefully she won't be relevant to British Columbia in about 16 months.

Listen--You.  Don't.  Have.  To.  Explain.  Anything.  To.  Me.  Whether I live in BC or not is totally immaterial.  And I'm not even *denying* any of what you're offering--mainly because it's tedious and redundant under the circumstance.

However, let me explain the seed through which this thread got derailed: it's when the discussion got into the potential jockeying-into position of the current-and-pending "conservative premiers".  And maybe out of the accident of *my own* respecting the thread's subject matter, I misconstrued that particular tangent by thinking in terms of Brian Pallister or Christy Clark themselves as hypothetical "federal Con leadership material" relative to Brad Wall.  And as I said, Pallister's too old, and Christy Clark's too historically Liberal.  But then *you* get into this whole "what Christy Clark is all about" jag, and you've *continued* to do so.  Look: I'm not necessarily in disagreement; that she leads a "right-wing" government is kinda "duh" given the nature of BC politics--indeed, I'm likely more in your camp than Lotuslander's (and my acknowledgment of the "slipperiness" of the Liberal brand, even now federally under Justin, can stand as its own implicit critique of "what Christy's all about")--***but that belongs in a different kind of political discussion forum, to say nothing of a different kind of thread.***.  And all it's showing me is that you're gallingly *incapable* of viewing *any* of these matters from a disinterested-third-party perspective.

Though it's funny, because you and Lotuslander have something in common: you both go by that "you don't live in British Columbia, do you" stance re opinionating outsiders..  Yet what I'm witnessing from the two of you re BC politics is, metaphorically speaking, a whole tedious lot of "he said, she said" blabber--next to which, I'm like the proverbial kid rolling his eyes at his bickering parents.  Which also leaves me wondering if, esp. relative to a message board like this which *ought* to be a godsend to the disinterested-third-party psephologist sort, this bickering-parent state of BC political being is a logical outcome of how the provincial electoral scene has almost always defaulted t/w dumb, dull, nuance-free US-style binarydom, i.e. you're overcompensating for the fact that your elections suck, so to speak.  (And that's nothing to do with *who* gets elected.)

1.There were other people besides you,  though maybe not here, who brought up Christy Clark's name for Federal Conservative Leader.

2.So, you made a flip and juvenile post about me and whether Christy Clark could be a serious candidate for leader and I replied with what I thought was a completely sober and factual reply of why I and about 75% of British Columbians (meaning nearly half of people who voted for the B.C Liberals in the last election) strongly dislike her and think that she is a flip, juvenile and rather unserious  leader herself, and then you responded to that with another rather flip and juvenile response, and yet,  according to you, I'm in the wrong?

I already said that there was no further need to mention Christy Clark in this thread in my last post, so, if that's was the reason for your last post, there was no need for you to reply at all.

If you want to delete your last post, I'll delete this post and we'll just forget this ever happened.

[Hash]

Since people obviously can't behave, this thread is locked for a few days to let this settle.

[DC Al Fine]

So Kevin O'Leary is mulling a run...

[Hatman 🍁]

Worse than TRUMP imo

[RogueBeaver]

One PKP is bad enough. And needless to say, the leadership should always be in professional hands.

[DC Al Fine]

One PKP is bad enough. And needless to say, the leadership should always be in professional hands.

Do you remember back in 2008 when Harper said something like "Yeah the market is crashing, but it's a good time to buy"? Remember the reaction that got?

O'Leary has a penchant for saying stuff like that all the time. If you want a free marketeer, Bernier would be a better bet.

[RogueBeaver]

Bernier is on my list, along with Clement and Raitt. As for "buying opportunities"... between that, culture cuts and a generally meh early campaign, cost us a majority that year IMO.

[Hatman 🍁]

Why are people comparing him to TRUMP? The Fords are a better comparison. They represent anti-establishment populism. O'Leary may not be establishment, but he is the embodiment of Bay Street fat cats. No way he gets the same kind of support as TRUMP.

[King of Kensington]

There really aren't any "protectionist" capitalists in Canada, they all became continentalists and free traders in the 80s, basically.

[adma]

O'Leary's more like a Peter Pocklington for our time.

[DL]

Canada has had just a few experiences with business tycoons in politics. Ironically, right now its most prevalent in Quebec where both PKP and Legault are big business tycoons - and both doing quite badly politically.

The only real political success story of a multimillionaire coming out of no where in Canada would be Danny Williams (aka "Danny Millions") in Newfoundland.

[136or142]

Canada has had just a few experiences with business tycoons in politics. Ironically, right now its most prevalent in Quebec where both PKP and Legault are big business tycoons - and both doing quite badly politically.

The only real political success story of a multimillionaire coming out of no where in Canada would be Danny Williams (aka "Danny Millions") in Newfoundland.

Not quite out of nowhere, and he wasn't a business tycoon, but Brian Mulroney was a successful corporate executive.  He ended up as extremely unpopular, of course, but his government actually had a rather large number of accomplishments.

[136or142]

Why are people comparing him to TRUMP? The Fords are a better comparison. They represent anti-establishment populism. O'Leary may not be establishment, but he is the embodiment of Bay Street fat cats. No way he gets the same kind of support as TRUMP.

The Fords though were both long time city councillors before seeking higher office (and does even mayor of Toronto really compare to Prime Minister of Canada?) whereas Kevin O'Leary, like Trump, has no prior experience in electoral politics, and didn't even seem to be much involved politically, beyond attempting to buy politicians (or lobbying politicians if you prefer.)

[Hatman 🍁]

Ah yes, Danny Williams is probably the most TRUMP like politician in Canadian history. Very high energy.

[136or142]

Ah yes, Danny Williams is probably the most TRUMP like politician in Canadian history. Very high energy.

Bill VanderZalm!

[136or142]

One PKP is bad enough. And needless to say, the leadership should always be in professional hands.

Michael Den Tandt's article is comedy gold.  One economic illiterate praising another economic illiterate.  If what Den Tandt said about O'Leary's analysis of company balance sheets is true, that would make O'Leary a competent micro economist, but government fiscal (and monetary) policy is macro economics.  Related obviously, but quite different.

Michael Den Tandt is by far the stupidest 'non partisan' columnist I've seen cover national politics in a long time. How did this guy get and keep his job?

[Poirot]

Maxime Bernier is open to the legalization of marijuana consumption.

http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2016/01/17/maxime-bernier-poursuit-sa-reflexion

[RogueBeaver]

Convention is 16 months away.

[trebor204]

Without following the link:
Saturday May 27th, 2017

[Pragmatic Conservative]

New Poll Conservative Party Members only

Mainstreet Research Jan 15th 
Peter MacKay 25%
Kevin O'Leary 23%
Jason Kenney 8%
Maxime Bernier 4%
Lisa Raitt 4%
Kellie Leitch 3%
None of the above 3%
Undecided 29%

http://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/make-canada-great-again-oleary-mckay-tied/

I would be surprised if Kevin O Leary won, as outsiders rarely do well in Canadian leadership races, but I guess will see.

[DC Al Fine]

New Poll Conservative Party Members only

Mainstreet Research Jan 15th 
Peter MacKay 25%
Kevin O'Leary 23%
Jason Kenney 8%
Maxime Bernier 4%
Lisa Raitt 4%
Kellie Leitch 3%
None of the above 3%
Undecided 29%

http://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/make-canada-great-again-oleary-mckay-tied/

I would be surprised if Kevin O Leary won, as outsiders rarely do well in Canadian leadership races, but I guess will see.

This is essentially a name recognition poll.

[RogueBeaver]

Kenney probably running.

[Poirot]

In an interview with Le Soleil, Maxime Bernier will probably run.
http://www.lapresse.ca/le-soleil/actualites/politique/201603/10/01-4959605-direction-du-parti-conservateur-maxime-bernier-pret-a-se-lancer.php

He could make an announcement in 2-3 weeks. Gérard Deltell would probably be a leader with more appeal to win in an election in Quebec (but I was disppointed to hear him speak like an oil industry lobbyist).

The Conservative party will use the points system by riding to select their leader so votes in small ridings are important.

The spending limit per candidate is $5 million.