Canadian election this fall?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in

Well, what do you think of the thread's opening question?

  • We will and we should

    Votes: 1 11.1%

  • We will and we should not

    Votes: 2 22.2%

  • We won't but we should

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • We won't and we should not

    Votes: 3 33.3%

  • Not sure

    Votes: 2 22.2%

  • Something else (explain in a post)

    Votes: 1 11.1%
  • Total voters
    9
  • Poll closed .
I'm thinking that whatever his views, he will be able to articulate them far better than Scheer. Of course, most could. I'd rather hear well articulated views that I disagree with than wishy washy crap. That way we know what we're dealing with. I have noticed the varied policies @KayTheCurler mentioned. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
 
I just saw a recent poll...past few hours that put the Libs popularity up and the Cons down today! Not by alot, but definitely remarkable.
 
He was the first of 18 Conservatives to vote in support of LGBTQ rights. Social cons may have voted for him but he has clearly stated his willingness to always support rights including women's rghts to choose and LGBTQ rights. He will force the discussion to focus on economic policies. This is where he loses people like me.
 
jimkenney12 said:
He will force the discussion to focus on economic policies. This is where he loses people like me.
Click to expand...

I assume you mean because you disagree with said policies, because economic policies are exactly what we need to be talking about in the next election. That and pandemic recovery (and how they plan to be ready for the next one).
 
I will appreciate his forcing the focus on economic policies, but in the leadership campaign, he seemed to be pushing traditional slash and cut policies. While he lives in a middle class neighbourhood and believes he is in tune with the needs of ordinary Canadians, I do not believe he had a commitment to equality of economic opportunity.
 
jimkenney12 said:
I will appreciate his forcing the focus on economic policies, but in the leadership campaign, he seemed to be pushing traditional slash and cut policies. While he lives in a middle class neighbourhood and believes he is in tune with the needs of ordinary Canadians, I do not believe he had a commitment to equality of economic opportunity.
Click to expand...

He is one of those Conservatives who is delusional about fiscal policy. Wants to offer programs and still cut taxes. If you don't want a deficit, you either have to reduce spending or raise revenues. Conservatives, of course, always want to do the former but if you are promising new programs, then something else has to go. And they have their own sacred cows like defense that they generally won't touch (or that are part of their new spending plans). Personally, I'd cut back defense, especially overseas commitments, do an overhaul of the tax system to both raise revenue and make it fairer, and put the money raised towards health, a UBI, etc.
 
O'Toole is going to allot tax dollars to "Pregnancy Centres".
They are evangelical, private counselling services whose mission is to talk women out of having an abortion.
He will ban transpeople from being in the military. Otherwise he tolerates LGBTQ rights.
 
I thought they'd go with MacKay. He's better looking. Shallow reason but it often works. It worked for Justin. But maybe his Iranian Canadian wife would be a problem for a certain set of conservatives.
 
McKay's insurmountable problem was the fact that he sold out a bunch of Conservatives a few years ago. They've got long memories.

Justin didn't just have nice looks to start with; he also had a recognizable Canadian political pedigree. You would laugh now, but "Trudeaumania" was a real thing in the late 60s/early 70s; he was smart, he was elegant, he was funny, he could be hugely human. He was totally The Beatles of politics when I was growing up.
 
ninjafaery said:
O'Toole is going to allot tax dollars to "Pregnancy Centres".
They are evangelical, private counselling services whose mission is to talk women out of having an abortion.
Click to expand...

How? To my mind that would fall under health and the provinces administer health care using transfers from Ottawa. Ottawa almost always loses when it tries to dictate how those dollars are spent.
 
BetteTheRed said:
McKay's insurmountable problem was the fact that he sold out a bunch of Conservatives a few years ago. They've got long memories.

Justin didn't just have nice looks to start with; he also had a recognizable Canadian political pedigree. You would laugh now, but "Trudeaumania" was a real thing in the late 60s/early 70s; he was smart, he was elegant, he was funny, he could be hugely human. He was totally The Beatles of politics when I was growing up.
Click to expand...

Except he lacked most of what made Pierre tick save the charisma. Anyone who voted based on his relationship to his father got the wool pulled over their eyes big time.
 
I think Bette was saying the Pierre was all those things

no one would think Justin is smart. Savvy. Yes. Charismatic. Yes. Pretty. Yes. Smart? Not so much
 
I think we need to see how O tools settles into his job. He has a voting record of supporting women’s rights, LGBT rights. Let’s see

health care is provincial and is very disjointed. And that is an issue it would be nice if the federal government tried to address. Abortions available in Ontario. Not so much in PEI......

I hope he finds his footing quickly. We need someone to hold Trudeau to account. and Sadly I don’t think Singh is that person
 
BetteTheRed said:
McKay's insurmountable problem was the fact that he sold out a bunch of Conservatives a few years ago. They've got long memories.

Justin didn't just have nice looks to start with; he also had a recognizable Canadian political pedigree. You would laugh now, but "Trudeaumania" was a real thing in the late 60s/early 70s; he was smart, he was elegant, he was funny, he could be hugely human. He was totally The Beatles of politics when I was growing up.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but in the looks department - and that does attract attention - if it were possible for a conservative male to have a slightly sexy swagger, he has one. He doesn't look like a conservative. To me. In my particular intuitive assessment. He looks like a bit of a bad boy. He probably drops F bombs occassionally and drinks scotch, and good beer, and does adventure sports. Scheer on the other hand, looks and sounds like a boyish gosh-darn bible salesman who never worked a hard day in his life. Can't trust people like that. They are never really like that. MacKay looks like he is who he is.

Peter MacKay has got the same kind of "thing" Pierre Trudeau had. A certain magnetism. They kind of look alike actually. MacKay is like a cross between a younger Pierre Trudeau and a younger Joe Biden. O'Toole ain't got that thing. Not that it matters because I hate conservatives' politics regardless. I think MacKay was probably a political opportunist more than an apocalyptic evangelical when he sold the party that way. Maybe he lacked foresight to see where it would go. Still, it was a big sin, imo.

And Justin did come from a political pedigree - but his looks wooed a lot of younger, especially female voters who might've been voting for the first time. He has the advantage of being a sex symbol around the world now - even if his leadership is faulty.
 
Last edited:
Kimmio Laughterlove said:
Yeah, but in the looks department - and that does attract attention - if it were possible for a conservative male to have a slightly sexy swagger, he has one. He doesn't look like a conservative. To me. In my particular intuitive assessment. He looks like a bit of a bad boy. He probably drops F bombs occassionally and drinks scotch, and good beer, and does adventure sports. Scheer on the other hand, looks and sounds like a boyish gosh-darn bible salesman who never worked a hard day in his life. Can't trust people like that. They are never really like that. MacKay looks like he is who he is.

Peter MacKay has got the same kind of "thing" Pierre Trudeau had. A certain magnetism. They kind of look alike actually. MacKay is like a cross between a younger Pierre Trudeau and a younger Joe Biden. O'Toole ain't got that thing. Not that it matters because I hate conservatives' politics regardless. I think MacKay was probably a political opportunist more than an apocalyptic evangelical when he sold the party that way. Maybe he lacked foresight to see where it would go. Still, it was a big sin, imo.

And Justin did come from a political pedigree - but his looks wooed a lot of younger, especially female voters who might've been voting for the first time. He has the advantage of being a sex symbol around the world now - even if his leadership is faulty.
Click to expand...
O'Toole looks like an older Scheer. Bible salesmanish. Can't trust him to do what he says and say what he does. MacKay seemed more authentic, even if some of that is authentic opportunist a**hole. There's something more real, more interesting, with more depth, about MacKay, maybe he is not so rigid - based, again, on only my own intuitive assessment. He seems comfortable in his own skin. Since we don't really know any of these people, I use my intuition.

The fact that MacKay's wife is an Iranian activist probably counted against him. Conservative voters of a particular bent wouldn't know what to make of that and probably wouldn't want any cultural complexity like that to bother them.
 
Last edited:
BetteTheRed said:
And I loved Jack Layton. We need ya now, bud.
Click to expand...
Inclusive of the poor and the helpless, the cold, the hungry and the oppressed, the sick in body and in mind and them that mourn, the lonely and the unloved, the aged and the little children - that Jack Layton?
 
OK, I'll play ...

Some Conservative MPs reportedly pushed for Sloan's ouster in May, after he publicly questioned whether Canada's chief public health officer, Dr. Theresa Tam — who was born in Hong Kong — was working for China. Ultimately, a backbencher put forward a motion calling on him to retract his comments. Sloan insisted that his question had been "rhetorical."

The only Conservative MP to join Sloan in opposing that motion was O'Toole.

And today ...

the Liberals tossed out their first challenge: the new Conservative leader, they said, should move forthwith to remove inflammatory backbencher Derek Sloan from the Conservative caucus.

But wait there's more ...

His comments about Tam may have crossed a line for a significant number of Conservative MPs but Sloan has made multiple statements that O'Toole might not want to be associated with now.

In January, Sloan said that the "the cause of sexual orientation" was "scientifically unclear." He later said that Liberal legislation to ban conversion therapy — the discredited practice of trying to change someone's sexual orientation with counselling — was tantamount to legalized "child abuse."

Sloan has said he believes Canada should pull out of the UN's Paris agreement on climate change and withdraw all funding from the World Health Organization. He opposes both mandatory vaccination for COVID-19 and any rule requiring Canadians to wear face masks to curb the spread of the virus. Echoing Donald Trump, Sloan has said that "antifa" should be officially listed as a terrorist organization.

O'Toole is apparently of the view that Sloan has not yet said enough to justify expulsion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top