It's not a question of whether we should fight this (or any issue), it's a question of where and when.
Let's use Max and supply management as a case study, because it's a great example of someone losing on an issue because they chose poorly where and when to have that battle.
Max campaigned against supply management in the 2017 CPC leadership race. His stance on supply management is largely believed to be the the factor that just barely cost him the election, because the dairy lobby all voted as a bloc and as a result, Scheer won by a hair.
Now, if Bernier had just understood the electorate, shut the fuck about supply management in 2017, get elected leader and then hypothetically won the next federal election, he could have just ended supply management with the stroke of a pen. No problem.
But because he chose the leadership election campaign as the time and place to fight this supply management debate, he lost and will never get his way on that issue.
Same goes any issue. If publicly arguing your stance on gender ideology, or climate change or whatever and making a campaign issue out it is guaranteed to result in you losing, then you don't do it. You STFU and pick your battles, then if/when you win the election and take office, that's when you can turn your beliefs into policy.
And that's why you have zero seats and are polling at 2%. Because you don't understand how the game is played. Hell, you can't even understand why it's a bad idea to wave tiki torches at a lockdown protest FFS.
This is why the cpc always has to fight against rumors of a "hidden agenda" every fucking election. When you are dishonest to achieve a goal, it is obvious.
This is a function of being a conservative party in an overwhelmingly liberal country. It will always be this way. The liberal majority will always be suspicious of conservative governments because yes, the conservative party will have to cede more in their negotiations with voters than the Liberals will, meaning liberals know conservative governments deep down want something other than what's been agreed upon (muh "secret agenda"). It's just basic math.
The alternative is just digging in, being uncompromising, shrinking to minor/fringe party status as a result and living with endless Liberal/NDP rule. I'm sure you wouldn't prefer that.
It's not a question of whether we should fight this (or any issue), it's a question of where and when.
Let's use Max and supply management as a case study, because it's a great example of someone losing on an issue because they chose poorly where and when to have that battle.
Max campaigned against supply management in the 2017 CPC leadership race. His stance on supply management is largely believed to be the the factor that just barely cost him the election, because the dairy lobby all voted as a bloc and as a result, Scheer won by a hair.
Now, if Bernier had just understood the electorate, shut the fuck about supply management in 2017, get elected leader and then hypothetically won the next federal election, he could have just ended supply management with the stroke of a pen. No problem.
But because he chose the leadership election campaign as the time and place to fight this supply management debate, he lost and will never get his way on that issue.
Same goes any issue. If publicly arguing your stance on gender ideology, or climate change or whatever and making a campaign issue out it is guaranteed to result in you losing, then you don't do it. You STFU and pick your battles, then if/when you win the election and take office, that's when you can turn your beliefs into policy.
And that's why you have zero seats and are polling at 2%. Because you don't understand how the game is played. Hell, you can't even understand why it's a bad idea to wave tiki torches at a lockdown protest FFS.
Vichy...very apt analogy.
Yeah you wouldn't wanna be an open and honest leader, just hide everything then when elected BOOM.
Well we know that's not true...I doubt Erin can even get hard. His policies are soft so his dick probably is as well.
This is a function of being a conservative party in an overwhelmingly liberal country. It will always be this way. The liberal majority will always be suspicious of conservative governments because yes, the conservative party will have to cede more in their negotiations with voters than the Liberals will, meaning liberals know conservative governments deep down want something other than what's been agreed upon (muh "secret agenda"). It's just basic math.
The alternative is just digging in, being uncompromising, shrinking to minor/fringe party status as a result and living with endless Liberal/NDP rule. I'm sure you wouldn't prefer that.
Yeah, that's largely what electoral politics is.
None. He has zero game. That's why we're losing.
It actually can be if you sell it properly. How do you think Trudeau got elected? By saying "I'm not Harper" basically.