The Manitoba Provincial Politics Discussion - Page 33

esquire · #**641** Posted **Mar 9, 2015, 7:53 PM**

So who will step up and run after the NDP gets obliterated in the next provincial election and Selinger steps down?

Andrew Swan, perhaps? He could carry the torch for the dissenting faction, aka Group of Five and their supporters.

Kevin Chief: Selinger's pick and a way for him to stick it to Swan, Oswald & Co.

Steve Ashton: Because why not?

Of course, I wouldn't totally rule out the possibility that Selinger could come back from the political dead like a 1980s horror movie character and manage to beat the unlikeable Pallister in the next election.

Tacheguy · #**642** Posted **Mar 9, 2015, 10:10 PM**

Of course, I wouldn't totally rule out the possibility that Selinger could come back from the political dead like a 1980s horror movie character and manage to beat the unlikeable Pallister in the next election.[/QUOTE]

I know a fair number of people who cringe at the idea of Pallister as Premier. At the same time most people, myself included, would like to see a change. Should be interesting. I think Selinger still has a pretty good shot, particularly if he buys off the seniors vote with those municipal tax rebates for education.

Riverman · #**643** Posted **Mar 9, 2015, 10:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tacheguy

I know a fair number of people who cringe at the idea of Pallister as Premier.

Why, because he is too tall, or because he lives in a big house?

Greggy will be elected again. Never underestimate the stupidity of Manitobans.

Tacheguy · #**644** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 12:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riverman

Why, because he is too tall, or because he lives in a big house?

Greggy will be elected again. Never underestimate the stupidity of Manitobans.

A lot of Manitobans are economic conservatives but social liberals. Pallister comes across as a social conservative, and people are nervous about that.

Riverman · #**645** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 12:55 AM**

What social changes do you think he would implement if he won a majority? Make Manitoba a Christian province? Ban abortion? Not allow women to work anymore?

Give your head a shake, please. We need competent leadership and government in this province. At least long enough to stop this hydro mess we are getting into.

Tacheguy · #**646** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 4:10 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riverman

What social changes do you think he would implement if he won a majority? Make Manitoba a Christian province? Ban abortion? Not allow women to work anymore?

Give your head a shake, please. We need competent leadership and government in this province. At least long enough to stop this hydro mess we are getting into.

Competent like...the Filmon government? Thanks for the laugh.

Agree about the hydro situation though.

Riverman · #**647** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 1:20 PM**

The huge rainy day fund that your Dippers pissed away was built during the Filmon era.

esquire · #**648** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 1:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tacheguy

A lot of Manitobans are economic conservatives but social liberals.

In other words, people with entitlements but who don't want to pay for it. "Give me free cardiac surgery and build more roads and raise social assistance rent allowances but don't you dare raise the PST!"

Calling oneself an economic conservative/social liberal is probably the most socially acceptable political label to wear these days in Canada, but it's probably time that we began recognizing that wanting it both ways just isn't going to work for much longer.

Tacheguy · #**649** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 1:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

In other words, people with entitlements but who don't want to pay for it. "Give me free cardiac surgery and build more roads and raise social assistance rent allowances but don't you dare raise the PST!"

Calling oneself an economic conservative/social liberal is probably the most socially acceptable political label to wear these days in Canada, but it's probably time that we began recognizing that wanting it both ways just isn't going to work for much longer.

Tax policy is not what I was referring to. A social conservative wants to limit access to abortions, keep gays in the closet, teach creationism in school (or, better yet, at home), keep the little woman in the kitchen and the churches front and center in the community etc. Most Canadians, in my view, think these opinions are personal and should not underpin public policy.

esquire · #**650** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 2:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tacheguy

Tax policy is not what I was referring to. A social conservative wants to limit access to abortions, keep gays in the closet, teach creationism in school (or, better yet, at home), keep the little woman in the kitchen and the churches front and center in the community etc. Most Canadians, in my view, think these opinions are personal and should not underpin public policy.

What exactly has Pallister said or done that leads you to believe that he intends to:

Quote:

limit access to abortions, keep gays in the closet, teach creationism in school (or, better yet, at home), keep the little woman in the kitchen and the churches front and center in the community etc.

Authentic_City · #**651** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 6:02 PM**

Whether or not he is socially conservative, Pallister sure comes off that way. While I believe Pallister was simply striving to be inclusive (with very poor choice of words) when he wished all the infidel atheists a happy holiday season, it still makes him look bad. I guarantee the NDP will go on the attack and portray him as a dangerous social conservative and an out of touch rich guy living in a mansion. And this could work too. Pallister just isn't very likeable. He's too darned tall.

esquire · #**652** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 6:07 PM**

I agree, there is something about Pallister that is inherently unlikeable. Even when he's right, he still comes across as a smarmy jerk most of the time.

But I honestly don't get the "social conservative with a hidden agenda" vibe from him... even the "infidel atheists" thing was just an ill-considered wisecrack, not a statement of party policy. And I say this as someone who doesn't consider social conservatism in general to be some sort of unspeakable horror either.

Jammon · #**653** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 8:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

I agree, there is something about Pallister that is inherently unlikeable. Even when he's right, he still comes across as a smarmy jerk most of the time.

But I honestly don't get the "social conservative with a hidden agenda" vibe from him... even the "infidel atheists" thing was just an ill-considered wisecrack, not a statement of party policy. And I say this as someone who doesn't consider social conservatism in general to be some sort of unspeakable horror either.

I agree. I don't particularly like Pallister and I don't think I would vote for him despite the fact that I wouldn't vote for the NDP either. That just leaves the Liberals and Bokhari has been MIA through all of this. She has truly missed a golden opportunity to become the alternative party to the NDP. I just don't get why she is avoiding the spotlight..too raw??

esquire · #**654** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 8:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jammon

I agree. I don't particularly like Pallister and I don't think I would vote for him despite the fact that I wouldn't vote for the NDP either. That just leaves the Liberals and Bokhari has been MIA through all of this. She has truly missed a golden opportunity to become the alternative party to the NDP. I just don't get why she is avoiding the spotlight..too raw??

I don't think it's that easy anymore for the Liberals. They have to fight pretty hard to get the media's and the public's attention these days.

For what it's worth, Bokhari could make a splash by introducing a decent lineup of candidates (unlike the Liberal roster in the past 2 or 3 elections which has included a dozen credible legit candidates, a bunch of unimpressive ones and few out and out nutjobs) and a compelling policy platform. That alone would convey more credibility than 10 press releases and press conferences on the NDP leadership drama.

Tacheguy · #**655** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 8:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jammon

I agree. I don't particularly like Pallister and I don't think I would vote for him despite the fact that I wouldn't vote for the NDP either. That just leaves the Liberals and Bokhari has been MIA through all of this. She has truly missed a golden opportunity to become the alternative party to the NDP. I just don't get why she is avoiding the spotlight..too raw??

Yeah I dunno what it is with the Libs. If they were ever going to become relevant in Manitoba this is their chance. Maybe they are keeping their powder dry for now. Trudeau seems to be doing the same thing federally. More likely just a lack of capacity within the provincial party apparatus...

esquire · #**656** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 8:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tacheguy

More likely just a lack of capacity within the provincial party apparatus...

Yeah... even after Carstairs left they managed to ride the coattails of the federal Liberals through the 1990s and into the early 2000s. A lot of federal Liberal staffers, fundraisers, etc. pitched in for the provincial party. But once the federal party lost momentum, that was it for the provincial party. They've been running on fumes for pretty much the last decade now. Of course, this has made the job of successive PC leaders much harder, without a viable Liberal party to siphon off the NDP vote.

Jammon · #**657** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 8:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tacheguy

Yeah I dunno what it is with the Libs. If they were ever going to become relevant in Manitoba this is their chance. Maybe they are keeping their powder dry for now. Trudeau seems to be doing the same thing federally. More likely just a lack of capacity within the provincial party apparatus...

Ok, so if that's the case, she could at least get herself out there as party leader and show how she is competent. Once backers see how intelligent and articulate a leader is, the donations and backing usually come in afterwards. She has the momentum of Trudeau and her side and she has been virtually silent on all provincial matters. Why not get yourself out there?

Tacheguy · #**658** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 9:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jammon

Ok, so if that's the case, she could at least get herself out there as party leader and show how she is competent. Once backers see how intelligent and articulate a leader is, the donations and backing usually come in afterwards. She has the momentum of Trudeau and her side and she has been virtually silent on all provincial matters. Why not get yourself out there?

I agree. She is invisible right now.

Danny D Oh · #**659** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 10:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

What exactly has Pallister said or done that leads you to believe that he intends to:

He made his bed as a social conservative when he ditched the PC's and joined the Canadian Alliance. That alone will always come back to haunt him in Winnipeg. He was a social conservative in 2008 but isn't now? Either way that's going to be tough to campaign on. He waffles on his beliefs or his beliefs on many fundamental issues don't align with the majority of the electorate.

Pallister really has to hope he can win on the tax issue and that the voters in Winnipeg are fed up enough with the NDP to not even care about who they are electing to replace them.

Riverman · #**660** Posted **Mar 10, 2015, 11:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Authentic_City

Pallister just isn't very likeable. He's too darned tall.

Wow, imagine if he was tall and black. Would he be twice as unlikeable then?

If you discriminate against someone because of a physical feature that someone has no control over, that makes you a sick fuck.