| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 4:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| SFrank85 wrote: | | I highly doubt that Mulroney is behind the scenes planning the demise of Stephen Harper. That is very un-Mulroney like for him to do that. Mulroney’s problem is he trusts too many people in the political world. |
That and the fact that he has the ethics of a Liberal. |
|
|
|
 |
John Larocque
Joined: 02 Dec 2008
Posts: 193
  
Location: North York, Ontario
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Mulroney/Charest conspiracy theories have been echoed in the Quebec media for a while. His mouthpiece, L. Ian McDonald, did an interview where he made reference to the culture cuts and the fact that Brian had no way of giving Harper any helpful feedback in the last campaign, because they had cut off contacts with him. I think that he's not being entirely truthful. He could have told Charest to pass on a message to Harper, but instead the former was more interested in burying the ADQ (and Harper's ADQ advisers) then getting federalist MPs elected to Ottawa. |
|
|
|
|
ezbeatz
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 1134
votes: 10
Location: Vaughan, ON
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John Larocque wrote: | | The Mulroney/Charest conspiracy theories have been echoed in the Quebec media for a while. His mouthpiece, L. Ian McDonald, did an interview where he made reference to the culture cuts and the fact that Brian had no way of giving Harper any helpful feedback in the last campaign, because they had cut off contacts with him. I think that he's not being entirely truthful. He could have told Charest to pass on a message to Harper, but instead the former was more interested in burying the ADQ (and Harper's ADQ advisers) then getting federalist MPs elected to Ottawa. |
I thought they broke off ties with Mulroney because of Schieber. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| More rumblings, this time from sources with names. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cbasu, I read that and I wanted to stick my fist through my computer screen. Thankfully the column was balanced by the remarks of Rahim Jaffer and a couple others.
Then again, I'm surprised the Red Star, or the Globe haven't run the same column minus the opinions contrary to those of Gerry Nicholls and Adam Dafaillah. |
|
|
|
|
ezbeatz
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 1134
votes: 10
Location: Vaughan, ON
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What do you guys think about Gerry Nichols? I think he's somewhat of a doomsday predictor and opportunist. |
|
|
|
|
Troy Heibein
Joined: 21 Mar 2009
Posts: 27
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gerry Nichols is great. He has a job that makes it quite easy for him to both appear as a demon and be demonized; but all and all I think he is a true conservative who doesn't have politics in his way to stop him from saying things clearly and frankly.
TEH
--
The Adaugeo Index
http://adaugeoindex.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't mind Gerry Nicholls, it was just the comment about the Conservative movement breaking up again that upset me. Everything else he has to say is often tired, and redundant. |
|
|
|
|
FF_Canuck
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3302
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, it'd be foolish to pretend that some divisions aren't still there, but I don't think that it's anywhere near as bad as they say in that article. That the next leadership contest will be mostly ideological rather than regional is a vast improvement for party unity, IMO. |
|
|
|
|
Mac
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5485
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ezbeatz wrote: | | What do you guys think about Gerry Nichols? I think he's somewhat of a doomsday predictor and opportunist. |
I don't mind Gerry but he's got a real hate-on for Harper and has had since Harper stepped aside from Reform and became the head of the National Citizen's Coalition. It's been suggested Gerry felt the job should have been his, not Harper's, but that's only rumour... take what you will from it.
-Mac |
|
|
|
|
kwlafayette
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 5698
votes: 27
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Isn't getting the majority more important than Harper? I thought any principle or person could be thrown under the bus for the sake of getting the precious majority? Am I wrong here? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kwlafayette wrote: | | Isn't getting the majority more important than Harper? I thought any principle or person could be thrown under the bus for the sake of getting the precious majority? Am I wrong here? |
I don't think anybody will throw Harper under the bus, mainly because there is really no formal mechanism in the party outside of a leadership review vote to do that.
Harper just has to win a minority next time, which means that he can probably afford to lose a dozen seats in Ontario, a few in Quebec and Atlantic Canada and still hang in there.
Of course, if the Liberals form government either by winning a minority and/or in combination with the NDP, things are going to become very difficult for the PM. If the Liberals win a majority, then Harper will obviously have to step down immediately. |
|
|
|
|
Mac
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5485
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cbasu wrote: | | If the Liberals win a majority, then Harper will obviously have to step down immediately. |
If the Conservatives win a majority, will the Harper-haters within the party finally give it a rest?
-Mac |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mac wrote: | | cbasu wrote: | | If the Liberals win a majority, then Harper will obviously have to step down immediately. |
If the Conservatives win a majority, will the Harper-haters within the party finally give it a rest?
-Mac |
You mean like this guy, writing in the Ottawa Sun today?
Seriously though, if Harper wins a majority (or if the Blue Jays win the World Series, whichever comes first), he -- Harper -- will put all the Harper-haters to rest. Personally, by using a baseball bat :-) |
|
|
|
|
Steve
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 27
votes: 1
Location: ON
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think this is a lot of idle speculation by journalists with far too much time on their hands. The less said about Gerry Nicholls, the better.
I think a lot of people are too fixated on past affiliations and are not paying attention to the rather large body of CPC members and supporters who only came to the party after the merger. I was never a CA or PC member, and Harper is the only federal Conservative leader I've known since I became politically active. I think a lot of people are in the same boat as I am. Now, there are always going to regional effects and a relative left/right sort of division in any leadership race, which will play out in any future federal Conservative leadership election. But to just assume that it will turn into some Alliance vs. PC do-over shows a pretty weak understanding of the modern Conservative Party by these journalists and commentators. |
|
|
|
|
|
