Who will replace Harper?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

What are the examples that Scheer is insensitive to urban issues? Just that he represents a riding that could be considered a small town? Is that about it? Pretty thin IMHO but if you have some examples please enlighten me.
Thanks!

Gee, funny thing is most urban riding aren't big on anti-abortionists or homophobes.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by SaskScraper

If any of the other candidates besides Trost had been voted for leader of the party, we wouldn't even be having this in depth conversation of where Scheer has spend the last 15 years of his life.

So you can't see that the only road maps to the CPC winning the next election has them either getting "swing" suburban Ontario or orphan Quebec on board? (They probably would actually need both, unless the NDP/LPC vote splits are optimal.)

It's not anti-Prairie bias to merely point out the fact that these area are where the bulk of the available votes are, and that a local has a better chance of managing to get those votes.

It really just goes to show how confounded Canadians get when they can't figure out why leaders of a party don't follow liberals all-central-Canada-born-leader selection..

Well, okay, if the new Reform Party wishes to stick to Prairie leaders and let another party have all the Central Canadian Leaders and the Central Canadian Votes, sure, their choice, but I doubt it's a good electoral strategy.

[Docere]

Scheer represents Regina's remaining "rurban" riding.

[kiwi]

What are Andrew Scheer's Policies?

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by lio45

So you can't see that the only road maps to the CPC winning the next election has them either getting "swing" suburban Ontario or orphan Quebec on board? (They probably would actually need both, unless the NDP/LPC vote splits are optimal.)

It's not anti-Prairie bias to merely point out the fact that these area are where the bulk of the available votes are, and that a local has a better chance of managing to get those votes.




Well, okay, if the new Reform Party wishes to stick to Prairie leaders and let another party have all the Central Canadian Leaders and the Central Canadian Votes, sure, their choice, but I doubt it's a good electoral strategy.

I've said it before, but I really don't think that's a factor for the vast majority of Ontarians. If it is, I've never noticed it featuring in the public discussion in any significant way. As long as Bay St is OK with the choice (as they will be with Scheer, I assume), it is simply assumed that Ontario's interests will be protected. I suppose one could make an argument that that assumption was put to the test during Mr. Harper's tenure, but it seems a bit of a stretch and, in any event, I think most Ontarians accepted at least a degree of "West wants in" thinking.

[kwoldtimer]

By the way, is it time to change the title of this thread to "The Scheer Conservatives"?

[Docere]

Ontarians don't really have a distinctive "Ontario" identity. And I don't see why an Ontario-born leader from Saskatchewan is more problematic than an Ontario-born leader from Alberta.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by kiwi

What are Andrew Scheer's Policies?

I don't know all the details, but one element of his campaign was to balance the federal budget in two years. Were he to win in 2019, that could prove problematic (to put it in the mildest terms).

He also wants to give tax credits for home schooled and privately schooled children, which would be opposed by significant parts of the population.

Apart from that, he opposes carbon taxes, supports supply management (I think), and would not recriminalize marihuana (again, I think).

I'm sure there's much more. Others will know better than I.

[The Macallan]

Scheer may not attract Ontario voters en masse but, if so, I doubt it will be because he represents a Regina area riding. I want to hear more about his policies. Preliminary indications are that he will present them effectively

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Docere

Ontarians don't really have a distinctive "Ontario" identity. And I don't see why an Ontario-born leader from Saskatchewan is more problematic than an Ontario-born leader from Alberta.

They most certainly do - it's just that they call it "Canadian"!

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I don't know all the details, but one element of his campaign was to balance the federal budget in two years. Were he to win in 2019, that could prove problematic (to put it in the mildest terms).

He also wants to give tax credits for home schooled and privately schooled children, which would be opposed by significant parts of the population.

Apart from that, he opposes carbon taxes, supports supply management (I think), and would not recriminalize marihuana (again, I think).

I'm sure there's much more. Others will know better than I.

Based on just AB I would say the only people against tax credits for private schools would be unions. They and their supporters try to paint the picture that private schools are only used by the rich which is not true at all. A lot of people make great sacrifices to send their kids to these schools because the public system sucks. AB doesn't give tax credits but something like 70% of the funding needed to educate a kid in a private school is provided by the province. Choice and competition are good. It's why charter schools in AB so are popular. The argument that the public system would be better if every kid was forced to go to public schools is dead wrong. And it definitely wouldn't be cheaper--do the math.

If Scheer supports supply management that is not good. Supply management is a tax on the poor and I find it crazy we're being held hostage by such a small number of producers. If they can't compete that's their problem not ours.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by The Macallan

Scheer may not attract Ontario voters en masse but, if so, I doubt it will be because he represents a Regina area riding. I want to hear more about his policies. Preliminary indications are that he will present them effectively

My hope is that party members elected him knowing full well that he's not a radical like the media and Liberal party is trying to make him out to be. Why would they vote for someone who would reopen divisive issues when the vast majority of Conservative supporters are either fine or don't care about them? Scheer needs to come out ASAP and make it very clear that same sex marriage, abortion rights, etc. are settled and that it's time to move on to issues that actually impact all of us.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

My hope is that party members elected him knowing full well that he's not a radical like the media and Liberal party is trying to make him out to be. Why would they vote for someone who would reopen divisive issues when the vast majority of Conservative supporters are either fine or don't care about them? Scheer needs to come out ASAP and make it very clear that same sex marriage, abortion rights, etc. are settled and that it's time to move on to issues that actually impact all of us.

I think he already has indicated that same sex marriage is a settled matter. His first comment on abortion was less clear (it could become a difficult issue within caucus). I expect the Liberals and NDP to go all out to try and force Scheer to distance himself from the social conservatives, in an effort to drive a wedge between party factions. Whether they can succeed at that, I don't know.

[whatnext]

Fascinating piece in the NP about O'Leary's campaign. Sounds like he made the right decision, one that Trump should have as the issues are so similar:

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/ca...tive-candidacy

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Fascinating piece in the NP about O'Leary's campaign. Sounds like he made the right decision, one that Trump should have as the issues are so similar:

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/ca...tive-candidacy

The difference might be that Trump didn't know -- and didn't/doesn't care.

[kiwi]

[QUOTE=Corndogger;7818892]My hope is that party members elected him knowing full well that he's not a radical like the media and Liberal party is trying to make him out to be. Why would they vote for someone who would reopen divisive issues when the vast majority of Conservative supporters are either fine or don't care about them? Scheer needs to come out ASAP and make it very clear that same sex marriage, abortion rights, etc. are settled and that it's time to move on to issues that actually impact all of us.[/QUOTE]

That's the problem social conservative voters voted for Scheer to tackle social conservative issues.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

The difference might be that Trump didn't know -- and didn't/doesn't care.

I don't doubt that. O'Leary is probably 100x more intelligent than Trump, all the same I can't help but think Trump also wanted to be a close second place, rather than actually win.

[SaskScraper]

Originally posted by lio45
..Well, okay, if the new Reform Party wishes to stick to Prairie leaders and let another party have all the Central Canadian Leaders and the Central Canadian Votes, sure, their choice, but I doubt it's a good electoral strategy.

The strategy worked for Harper..

Originally posted by Corndogger
My hope is that party members elected him knowing full well that he's not a radical like the media and Liberal party is trying to make him out to be. Why would they vote for someone who would reopen divisive issues when the vast majority of Conservative supporters are either fine or don't care about them? Scheer needs to come out ASAP and make it very clear that same sex marriage, abortion rights, etc. are settled and that it's time to move on to issues that actually impact all of us.

Scheer stresses he has no plans to revisit either abortion or same-sex marriage..

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reu...#ixzz4iWZOhWP6
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

foreign press always seems to have a better un-biased news coverage than central Canada.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I don't doubt that. O'Leary is probably 100x more intelligent than Trump, all the same I can't help but think Trump also wanted to be a close second place, rather than actually win.

Trump absolutely wanted to win, he just didn't realize it would be way harder than being a figurehead CEO/reality TV host. He thought he'd wave his hand and things would change and is frustrated by checks and balances. His admiration of Erdogan, Duterte and Xi makes that clear.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Based on just AB I would say the only people against tax credits for private schools would be unions. They and their supporters try to paint the picture that private schools are only used by the rich which is not true at all. A lot of people make great sacrifices to send their kids to these schools because the public system sucks. AB doesn't give tax credits but something like 70% of the funding needed to educate a kid in a private school is provided by the province. Choice and competition are good. It's why charter schools in AB so are popular. The argument that the public system would be better if every kid was forced to go to public schools is dead wrong. And it definitely wouldn't be cheaper--do the math..

Charter schools are actually very problematic.. they lead to the public school system being drained of wealthy kids leaving behind only disadvantaged kids who suffer from only having other disadvantaged kids to be around. Isolating poverty is the best way to make the problem worse, we see it with the big public housing projects, the reason why they are such cesspools of crime and drugs is because they're 100% poor people.. hence why cities have achieved great success by developing mixed-income housing projects.

Different income levels and social classes need to be integrated, not segregated.

There's also the issue of equality of opportunity. Why should someone have access to a better education just because their parents have more money? Equality of opportunity, supposedly the cornerstone of a capitalist society, states that we should all be equal at the starting line and our success in life based on how hard we work. Different qualities of schools for different social classes fundamentally violates this principle by putting some people way ahead of others right from day one, and that's neither fair nor desirable.