Quote:
Originally posted by Snakeeye+May 15 2005, 09:06 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snakeeye @ May 15 2005, 09:06 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Maritime Q-Scout@May 14 2005, 12:11 PM
Just a question.# All else being equal, let's say Martin is replaced by a young charasmatic leader, who deals with the concerns, problems, and needs of the Western provinces with great care and pride.# A "Blue Liberal" if you will.
Would you vote for the evil Liberal party then?
To answer the same question, if there was a CPC leader than was charasmatic, and dealt with the concerns, problems, and needs of Eastern provinces with care and pride, a "Red Tory" if you will, I'd be more than willing to vote for them.
Just curious if this is a Martin/Harper thing, or a CPC/Liberal thing.
|
Chances are it will be a very, very long time before I consider voting Liberal. Part of the reason is that I tend to be a social conservative as well as a fiscal conservative, and while a leader of the Liberal party can get away with using Conservative financial policy, I doubt the Libs will ever move far enough to the right to accept a social conservative, so from my perspective, your scenario likely would not occur in the future.
As for a Liberal Prime Minister dealing with western alienation, that simply will not happen until confederation is fixed and/or our electoral system is overhauled. Removing most or all linequities isnt all that likely under a Conservative government either for the same reason.
If Martin should buy his way back into the big chair, Harper will be gone regardless, and chances are McKay will take over. We would then see how realistic your second question is.
I'd also mention that when it comes to a Joe Clark type, the word "conservative" definitely needs brackets. I thought he was to the left of Chretien and the Liberals by the time his last tenure as PC leader ended. [/b][/quote]
Snake,
Joe Clark was the PM of the country as a fiscal conservative. The point is that "social" politics have never played well at all in Canada, and the Reform/CPC party has a wing that wants to start that kind of thing up. I think social liberal is the norm in Canada - there are few that hold ultra conservative moral stances in the big population centres that decide the elections, ultimately.
Victimizing certain segments of society (homosexuals), pouring millions of dollars into something where you won't get it back in the name of something of a moral crusade (criminalization of marijuana and abortion) and things like this have never played well to the majority in BC, Ontario and Quebec (one would even argue downtown Calgary and a good chunk of Edmonton, too). As this is where the population base sits, if the CPC decides to tote this 1950's vision of the world out during the election, they may find it hard to gather the momentum where they need it.
If they stick to running on fiscal conservatism and an end to graft, they have a better chance than by tacking these moral issues to their platform.