« Hey Donald! How about returning the 35 ill-gotten delegates you won in Maryland, Connecticut, and Delaware? | Main | Donald Trump and the decline of Fox News »

May 02, 2016


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Sandy Crux

Excellent piece!


I think the polls are more a reflection of name recognition rather than actual support. Those with lower numbers are names that asides from political junkies aren't well known. In terms of placing them on the spectrum, I would disagree somewhat. Rona Ambrose did come from the Reform wing although she is generally more moderate than most from that wing. Kevin O'Leary is a libertarian so very right wing on economic issues but more left on social issues and considering how big an issue income inequality (I don't think it is a major issue but the public has made it one) has become, I think libertarianism might sell well after a decade of big government, but I am not sure we've reached that point yet.

Tony Clement was a Mike Harris PC and from the right wing of the Ontario PCs so also on the right while Kellie Leitch although fairly moderate her barbaric snitch line will unfortunately being used against her.

As for Harper being a factor, there is no question the Liberals will try to play the ghost of Stephen Harper but whether it will work or not is a whole different question. In some cases like in Ontario as well as BC, comparisons to the NDP of the 90s or Mike Harris do seem to work, but in Manitoba recently comparison to Harper and Gary Filmon fell flat on their face and Pallister won a landslide so I think a lot will depend more on how well Trudeau performs. If he is still popular in 2019 he will win no matter what, if extremely unpopular he will lose, but if just somewhat unpopular or public split on him then the next leader will make the difference between winning and losing.


All I have to say is that ANYBODY touting a "progressive" line for the Conservative party is a moron with no knowledge of Canadian political history. Kim Campbell anyone?
Touting "progressivism" is exactly what that article was about.

Sandy Crux

Autoguy -- Sorry but people touting a progressive line are NOT morons and DO know something about history.

Mike Harris's gov't was just such a PC gov't. Fiscally conservative & socially progressive. I know because I was an EA and Chief of Staff to one of his MPPs from 95-99.

To condemn anyone with those views as not conservative is simply your problem and shows your narrow mindedness unfortunately.

As I recall, the PC Party of Canada integrated with the Alliance, formerly Reform Party.

In other words, your generalized put down touches on an awful lot of people.

Re Kim Campbell, I was a PC volunteer during that election and went door to door with our PC candidate. Campbell lost primarily because Canadians were fed up with Mulroney's forgotten promises about paying down the deficit, not because of any progressive views.

Bil Elder

There isn't a candidate there I can support - either they are reds or oldline party trash or greedheads - possibly Kenny, but he is unmarketable.


Autoguy - I don't think there is anything wrong with the word progressive which simply means forward looking, not necessarily left wing. Kim Campbell lost because people were tired of the Mulroney government not because she was too centrist. Besides a lot has changed since the 90s and of the new voters who weren't eligible to vote then, they are more left leaning so parties that run on an ideological right wing platform would do worse.

I think the party should favour balanced budgets except during recession, keeping government spending in check, but stay away from social issues and also realize most Canadians do believe in some government intervention its more the degree.

The real problem of running on a ideological right wing platform, is where are you going to get the votes from? You are pretty much writing off every seat east of the Ottawa River which is 1/3 of the seats, you are writing off most urban ridings where most Canadians live. Downtown core always leans left but suburbs and smaller cities tend to be close to the middle and you drift too far in either way you lose there. Likewise the under 40 crowd, recent immigrants are an increasingly important demographic which the Tories need to do better amongst. I want to see Trudeau turfed in 2019 and if the party isn't realistic I fear that won't be possible.


I think Kevin O'Leary is the favourite. He is fiscally very conservative, but soft on social conservatism. I think he could care less about social issues, but in this climate, that will help him. confidence is his strong suit, and I find it appealing.
I also like Rona Ambrose. She has shown enormous confidence in the position of interim leader, but as such, she would find it near impossible to run, which she appears disinterested in. Look for her as the next leader after O'Leary.


Rona is useless. It's good she can't be leader.


wiseguy - I personally like Kevin O'Leary, but I think choosing him would be political suicide. I just don't think his brash style works well in Canada as well as we seem to like more your nicer politician. In addition with income inequality and gap between the rich and poor being big issues he could easily be defeated by running a class warfare type campaign which unfortunately generally work here. I think he would be a good PM and help bring about the tough medicine we need, but I don't think Canadians are ready for that.


The Mulroney/Campbell PC rout was a colder version of what is happening in the USA where Trump is the face of the "plague on both your houses" response from voters. When voting for the lesser evil becomes the political philosophy of un-Liberals, expect nothing less than the entire Liberal agenda over time.The Reform Party of the 90's was as successful as it was because it challenged the elitist views of progressives. When (if) Trump turns the laden supertanker that is today's PC America, look for Canadians to remain docile and under thrall to "our betters" for lack of a party and a leader to take us elsewhere.

Bill Elder

The CPC is well on its way to being politically irrelevant. Instead of returning to their big tent party with Libertarian-western populists-fiscal conservative alliance they are shifting left and will pander to the tyranny of cultural Marxism (AKA politically correct dogmatism).

They abandoned government reform, property rights and civil liberty, justice reform and senate reform for a JT liberal clone party.

Pathetic - I'll be voting either Libertarian or independent - or maybe not at all.

Sandy Crux

Why is it that conservatives shoot themselves in the foot time and time again.

No party is perfect. No party leader is perfect. Compromises have to be made.

Not voting, or voting for a party that can't possibly win, only guarantees more JT or the same.

So, how does that help our future generations?

You only need to look to Ontario to see this phenomenon and look where that has got Ontario -- nearly bankrupt and with a corrupt gov't.

John Tory was too progressive and proposed faith-based school funding -- so he lost. Tim Hudak wasn't enough like Mike Harris and was "scary" so he lost.

So, did ONPC supporters learning anything? Nope. We threw away Christine Elliott because she was too progressive. So, who did we get instead? Patrick Brown, a virtual unknown in provincial circles, who we now know believes in AGW!


The comments to this entry are closed.

e-mail address

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 02/2008

Blogging Tories

  • Blogging Tories