[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[PRC]

Here is a series of tweets from Mercedes Stephenson yesterday, she is the Ottawa Bureau Chief for Global News.

https://twitter.com/MercedesGlobal/status/1200199939659378688?s=20

I don't know how to link so the twitter feed shows up in the thread, but here is her thread of tweets:

Mercedes Stephenson
@MercedesGlobal
·
16h
Multiple Conservative sources say they don't think Scheer is getting the message about social conservatism being an issue and that socons are a powerful force in the post election structure of the OLO #cdnpoli #CPC
Mercedes Stephenson
@MercedesGlobal
·
16h
One key member of Scheers team:
@chriswarkentin
who I am told has unusual influence for an MP in the OLO and is raising hackles of some of the progressives in the party. Warkentin has been a close ally of Scheer's #cdnpoli #CPC
Mercedes Stephenson
@MercedesGlobal
·
16h
Some CoPC sources say they worry the continued influence of MPs who they identify as socially conservative with the leader will render the party unable to win again in the next election and re-enforce Scheer's inability to deal with those issues in the election weren't a big deal
Mercedes Stephenson
@MercedesGlobal
·
16h
Also hearing some MPs feel there has been a crackdown on their ability to discuss certain issues that could be regarded as social conservative issues in public #cdnpoli #CPC
Mercedes Stephenson
@MercedesGlobal
·
16h
Conservative sources say in Quebec Scheer is in major trouble and that recent meetings there with candidates from the 2019 election went very badly. Many want Scheer gone as leader, some demanding it happen before Christmas #cdnpoli #CPC
Mercedes Stephenson
@MercedesGlobal
·
16h
When it comes to Conservative Victory - mixed reactions. Some say anything to pressure Scheer out, others are worried it will be open season for a party civil war and hand the Liberals ammunition #cdnpoli #CPC
Mercedes Stephenson
@MercedesGlobal
·
16h
One thing I keep hearing over and over - a call for Stephen Harper to say something in private or public to restore order. Much nostalgia for then hated-by-many-caucus-members discipline he imposed. #cdnpoli #CPC
Mercedes Stephenson
@MercedesGlobal
·
16h
And from the pro-Scheer camp many allegations that the Conservative Victory crowd are dissatisfied Doug Ford backroom supporters and that this is all part of the Ford-Scheer discord that has been brewing since the Ontario election #cdnpoli #CPC

[viper37]

It might be unfair to single him out.  He wasn't alone in this failure to win, lots of people approved of him and his message once he got elected. Lots of candidates from Quebec joined after he was elected as leader.  They kinda knew what he stood for.

I didn't vote for the Cons this time.  Social conservatism is a big issue to me, it's a no-no-no.  I'm not sure about Scheer, it seems to me he always tried to doge most issues, never offering a clear answer until pressed into the cables.

Either he is really hiding something (I doub it, but it is a possibility), or, he is simply bad at communicating his ideas outside of expressing his Faith.

That might not make it the ideal leader, but I don't see who could take his place. Maybe Peter MacKay, but he is uncommitted so far (though things can change quikcly if Scheer announces his retirement).

Now, the rest of the campaing, social conservatism aside, was very bad.  Lots of negative campaigning, unclear answer to Liberal promises, no single defining promise from the Cons I can remember, unclear&muddy environmental policy, to the point we wonder if he isn't simply playing a game.

Add to the list his ill-fated comments on the new NAFTA, quickly rebuked by Rona Ambrose (from his own party).

Again, bad leader, but do we have any other choice?  Trudeau will be out in 24-36 months.  If it hapens, it must happen quickly.

[Barrister]

Scheer wasn't my first (or second, or third) choice to be leader.  He ran a capable but uninspiring election campaign.

But in a minority government, going into a leadership race means giving the floor to Trudeau for at least 18 months.  I don't think the Conservatives can afford to do that.

[Syt]

Scheer wasn't my first (or second, or third) choice to be leader.

[crazy canuck]

Scheer wasn't my first (or second, or third) choice to be leader.  He ran a capable but uninspiring election campaign.

But in a minority government, going into a leadership race means giving the floor to Trudeau for at least 18 months.  I don't think the Conservatives can afford to do that.

The Social Conservatives within the party seem intent on using this moment of weakness to change the party into an officially pro-life party.  Whatever happens this public spat is going to be viewed as proof the Conservatives are a risky vote for those concerned about abortion etc.   How is any future leader going to be able to shake that?

[Barrister]

Scheer wasn't my first (or second, or third) choice to be leader.  He ran a capable but uninspiring election campaign.

But in a minority government, going into a leadership race means giving the floor to Trudeau for at least 18 months.  I don't think the Conservatives can afford to do that.

The Social Conservatives within the party seem intent on using this moment of weakness to change the party into an officially pro-life party.  Whatever happens this public spat is going to be viewed as proof the Conservatives are a risky vote for those concerned about abortion etc.   How is any future leader going to be able to shake that?

That's not my take at all.  No one is trying to make it "an officially pro-life party".

Social Conservatives - no, actually lets just call them who they are - pro-lifers - have seen all the think pieces blaming them for the Conservatives losing.  They know people like yourself are urging the Party to just dump them entirely.  They've just been pushing back, reminding people they're an important part of the Party and can't be taken for granted.

[Grey Fox]

Forced Birthers.

Scheer leadership is to blame on Bernier & his steadfast dumbassness of trying to break up the Milk cartel.

[crazy canuck]

Scheer wasn't my first (or second, or third) choice to be leader.  He ran a capable but uninspiring election campaign.

But in a minority government, going into a leadership race means giving the floor to Trudeau for at least 18 months.  I don't think the Conservatives can afford to do that.

The Social Conservatives within the party seem intent on using this moment of weakness to change the party into an officially pro-life party.  Whatever happens this public spat is going to be viewed as proof the Conservatives are a risky vote for those concerned about abortion etc.   How is any future leader going to be able to shake that?

That's not my take at all.  No one is trying to make it "an officially pro-life party".

Social Conservatives - no, actually lets just call them who they are - pro-lifers - have seen all the think pieces blaming them for the Conservatives losing.  They know people like yourself are urging the Party to just dump them entirely.  They've just been pushing back, reminding people they're an important part of the Party and can't be taken for granted.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-social-conservative-groups-call-for-andrew-scheer-to-resign/

Two main points.  First Scheer won the leadership because he picked up late ballot support of social conservatives.  Second, those social conservatives are now upset with him because he did not support or defend their values during the election.  The social conservatives also seem to think that if he had, the Conservatives would have won the election.  I am not sure how they come to that conclusion but whether or not one agrees with that premise, it seems clear the social conservatives are beginning to try to flex some muscle.As an example from the news article:

The president of the Canada Christian College said he leads 1,100 pastors and the group is "mobilizing Christians across the country" for an eventual leadership race that he says is guaranteed whether Mr. Scheer resigns now or waits until Conservative Party delegates vote on his future at the April convention.

[crazy canuck]

Forced Birthers.

Scheer leadership is to blame on Bernier & his steadfast dumbassness of trying to break up the Milk cartel.

Well the alternative is Bernier as the leader of Conservatives.  One shudders at the thought.

[Grey Fox]

Forced Birthers.

Scheer leadership is to blame on Bernier & his steadfast dumbassness of trying to break up the Milk cartel.

Well the alternative is Bernier as the leader of Conservatives.  One shudders at the thought.

We would have a 2nd Trudeau majority & the Cons in bigger disarray. A better outcome than right now.


I found so weird during the campaign seeing many ads (especially tv ads) aimed at getting my, and those like me, support in Quebec to the Conservatives. Waste of time, money & bad signs for his Social Conservatives base.

[PRC]

Social Conservatives - no, actually lets just call them who they are - pro-lifers - have seen all the think pieces blaming them for the Conservatives losing.  They know people like yourself are urging the Party to just dump them entirely.  They've just been pushing back, reminding people they're an important part of the Party and can't be taken for granted.

It doesn't matter if the Conservatives have a de facto pro-choice policy when they have, as you described, an "important" part of the party unhappy with and wanting to change that policy.  Social Conservatives may view themselves as an important part of the party, but they're also an anchor to that party.  You believe a split in the Conservative Party would lead to vote splitting and handing the Liberals a majority.  I think it would certainly ensure whatever Social Conservative party came out of it would win less seats than the Green party, but the progressive Conservative side of the split would take a lot of votes from the Liberals as the Liberals also suffer from vote splitting on the left, now more than ever.

[crazy canuck]

Forced Birthers.

Scheer leadership is to blame on Bernier & his steadfast dumbassness of trying to break up the Milk cartel.

Well the alternative is Bernier as the leader of Conservatives.  One shudders at the thought.

We would have a 2nd Trudeau majority & the Cons in bigger disarray. A better outcome than right now.


I found so weird during the campaign seeing many ads (especially tv ads) aimed at getting my, and those like me, support in Quebec to the Conservatives. Waste of time, money & bad signs for his Social Conservatives base.

I think this is actually not a bad result.  At least this way, the Conservative party is finally going to have the show down they have been putting off between the evangelicals and the rest of the party.  This position of having a progressive front with a social conservative back only worked under a strong leader like Harper and even then there were some difficulties.

I agree with PRC's analysis regarding how that could play out.

[Malthus]

Social Conservatives - no, actually lets just call them who they are - pro-lifers - have seen all the think pieces blaming them for the Conservatives losing.  They know people like yourself are urging the Party to just dump them entirely.  They've just been pushing back, reminding people they're an important part of the Party and can't be taken for granted.

It doesn't matter if the Conservatives have a de facto pro-choice policy when they have, as you described, an "important" part of the party unhappy with and wanting to change that policy.  Social Conservatives may view themselves as an important part of the party, but they're also an anchor to that party.  You believe a split in the Conservative Party would lead to vote splitting and handing the Liberals a majority.  I think it would certainly ensure whatever Social Conservative party came out of it would win less seats than the Green party, but the progressive Conservative side of the split would take a lot of votes from the Liberals as the Liberals also suffer from vote splitting on the left, now more than ever.

I tend to agree with this.

But then, that may be wishful thinking on my part, because that is very much what I would like to see: a truly progressive conservative party as a genuine alternative to the Liberals.

What I do not want to see on the federal is what happened here in Ontario: a voter population pissed off about provincial Liberal incompetence, waste and corruption, throwing the bums out ... only to get by default a provincial Conservative party that was not progressive and that few outside their base actually agreed with.

[Barrister]

Social Conservatives - no, actually lets just call them who they are - pro-lifers - have seen all the think pieces blaming them for the Conservatives losing.  They know people like yourself are urging the Party to just dump them entirely.  They've just been pushing back, reminding people they're an important part of the Party and can't be taken for granted.

It doesn't matter if the Conservatives have a de facto pro-choice policy when they have, as you described, an "important" part of the party unhappy with and wanting to change that policy.  Social Conservatives may view themselves as an important part of the party, but they're also an anchor to that party.  You believe a split in the Conservative Party would lead to vote splitting and handing the Liberals a majority.  I think it would certainly ensure whatever Social Conservative party came out of it would win less seats than the Green party, but the progressive Conservative side of the split would take a lot of votes from the Liberals as the Liberals also suffer from vote splitting on the left, now more than ever.

It's funny you should say that, since we have a couple of examples of exactly what happens when social conservatives split from more urban moderates.  In the 1990s is was the more conservative Reform Party that won far more seats, with the more moderate PCs left as the 4th party in Parliament (or was it 5th).

And in 2015 in Alberta it was the more conservative Wildrose party that took more seats than the more moderate (under Prentice) PCs.

And, of course, in both situations neither party actually won government.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither PRC or CC have ever worked on an election campaign.  They call these kind of supporters "the base" for a reason - they're the foundation of the party.  They're the ones that knock on doors, put up signs, donate money. 

Now obviously the last campaign, and the next one, is largely going to be fought over suburban voters, and the Conservative Party needs to be able to appeal to those voters.  But don't ever mistake those voters as being your base.  You lose your base, and you don't really have a party anymore.

[Oexmelin]

This is all very true.

But this is also why it completely validates the fear of people who'd rather not have the PC in power. Because of the importance of that base, and the fact that it's not going away.

In a way the current Conservative party is stuck with the very same problem that plagued the Parti Quebecois since 1995. A base who was highly militant, highly motivated, and committed to a cause, fighting for voters who desire change, but fear the cause. Thus, the PQ has tried to square the circle of keeping the base motivated about independence, while never fully committing to it, so as to attract voters. It worked, somewhat poorly, for a time, but the PQ has been hemorrhaging militants, and its electoral prospects do not look good.

So, I can understand why BB is worried that expelling them would mean the Cons would lose their operating efficiency. But in turn, he must recognize that fears about socons are not as groundless as he asserts.

Anti-choice is the PC's sovereignty. This is why Harper kept sending all sorts of alternative social conservative signals - anything but abortion. It's the current CAQ strategy in Quebec: signal strong nationalism short of outright talks of independence. That works in Quebec because there is a broad nationalist consensus. What sort of broad conservative consensus could there be? There's a reason why finances were often the battleground, but I think the time when frugality was a vote-winner is past.