This was only a matter of time. Conservatives saw Trudeau as especially vulnerable and Scheer is the scapegoat for losing the election. The Conservatives gained twenty seats but precious little influence.
Strategists believe the key to Conservative victory involves continuing support in the West (and the oil patch in particular), Quebec nationalists and Main Street Ontario. The oil patch is unlikely to change its allegiance. Scheer was not very popular in Quebec, which is blamed on his mediocre French, but has other causes. The pugnacious approach favoured by Doug Ford did not help Scheer in Ontario, and especially in the GTA.
Scheer is not a natural at looking at the camera and making tough statements. Likeable enough, but unable to reconcile personal views with political realities.
The Conservatives should probably pick someone from Quebec with moderate environmental views and with Harper’s pragmatism. This can easily be done in a way consistent with Conservative values. Of course, instead they will possibly pick some Trumpian blowhard unwilling to compromise on climate concerns or social issues. Or Peter McKay, who has some positives but faces some difficult decisions.
That was Mulroney’s coalition, but it evaporated in the early 1990s and Harper didn’t really manage to recreate it. Is there a way it could happen again?
I’ve heard Alain Rayes being suggested, which from what I know of him would probably satisfy these criteria. Would he be accepted by other parts of the Conservative coalition, Western Canada in particular?
Global News is saying that the real reason why Scheer has resigned is that it came out that party funds were being used to cover tuition at private schools for his children.
Jeez. Scheer’s the official opposition in a minority government and he can’t hold the jackals at bay? He must be an extremely weak leader; there’s more to the story; or the Tories could be more fragmented and cutthroat then I ever imagined the Liberals were.
Didn’t know about the use of private funds. But it is very hard to believe no one else knew about this. It’s certainly a good reason to move on, since he would struggle to win a national election.
Don’t know much about alternatives, and it will be interesting to see who is interested. The party seems very fragmented, but will eventually regain power when the pendulum sees fit.
Harper was very wise to deem Quebec “a nation within Canada” and was quite popular, initially, in Ontario. I don’t believe the Laurentians are the only path to power but it is hard to see broad enthusiasm in BC or the Maritimes for conservatism in its current form. They should put away the cudgels and evolve.
CBC is reporting that the party was paying the cost differential between private school tuition in Regina and Ottawa. Basically paying for the increased living costs of moving to Ottawa. This is a lot more reasonable than outright paying for private school tuition, but still a really bad look.
I’m a bit curious if the schools in question are hoity toity private schools or evolution is bunkem religious private schools. Guessing the latter. In either case if public schools aren’t good enough for your kids you shouldn’t expect anyone except maybe the grandparents to chip in.
Well, do you live in or visit Regina much? I’m not a parent so I would be damned hard pressed to actually name a particular religious grade school in my town off the top of my head, though I know they exist.
I mean Regina has about 250,000 people in it. There can’t be too many schools overall let alone private religious ones.
Private Schools in Regina, Saskatchewan lists 4:
Luther College High School
Morning Star Christian Academy
Queen City Collegiate
Western Christian College and High School
Now the Leader of the Opposition makes ~250,000 and in Ottawa you would think that would be plenty to send your kids to a private school.
How did you not come to this conclusion after the last leadership race? They eventually split almost exactly 50-50 between Scheer and Bernier, who are completely different, and support almost completely different policies, and it took them 13 rounds of voting to get there.
It’s absolutely an excuse. Does anyone really think he’d be out as leader right now if they’d won the election? Kids&Money be damned, if he was PM, they’d find an excuse to ignore all this.
If the CPC plans to run another election on the main platform of “We hate Trudeau and so should you.”, then they needed to dump Scheer.
How could the next election go?
“Trudeau is not a good Canadian, unlike Scheer, who is an American citizen.”
“Trudeau is an elite, out of touch with regular people, unlike Scheer, who sends his kids to private school”
“Trudeau has no real business experience, and was only a teacher. Unlike Scheer, who spent a year in an insurance store, and nearly became a broker”
“Trudeau has no ethics, unlike Scheer, who used party money in a secret arrangement to send his kids to private school.”
They’ll need to find someone else if they want to run another election bashing Trudeau.
Alternatively, they could run an election by having a platform that shows that they have better policies and plans for the country.
I’ll be interested in what happens now. The last Conservative leadership contest was a parade of horrors, aside from Lisa Raitt & Michael Chong (who will never win). I mean just having candidates like Chris Alexander, Kevin O’Leary and Kellie Leitch was bad enough.
But it raises an interesting point. The Conservatives put up a leader apathetic to dealing with carbon that was a social conservative vowing to never take action on those beliefs. So…what will they focus on the message or the messenger as the reason they lost. I mean in conservative circles is the loss being attributed to a leader just not “conservative” enough or the conservative message?
I am not joking when I say that in many places, I am reading that Conservatives feel that they did not hate Trudeau passionately enough, and that is why they lost.