That's not a coincidence. MacKay was next in line according to the party elder's succession plan. They've been grooming him since the early 2000's.
Deputy CPC leader, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minister of National Defence, Minster of Justice/Attorney General - that's the resumé of someone who's being groomed for the big chair. O'Toole is a nobody by comparison. He wasn't even on the establishment's radar.
The party elders probably asked PP to step aside for MacKay, and probably told him he'd get his turn next. In exchange he'd get the backing of the party establishment when he runs for leader, in the same way the establishment backed MacKay in 2020.
But then the unthinkable happened. O'Toole won, because of the convoluted "ranked ballot" system which the CPC should have scrapped in 2017 after Sheer won because of it.
I don’t know about what was done in the Leader race, but this is what he is saying now. From an e-mail I received.
“People have died. Businesses have collapsed. Many have lost their mental health, isolated from work, friends and families.
Most call that a tragedy.
Liberals call it a "political opportunity", to quote Chrystia Freeland. Liberals have tried to censor what you see and say online and empower themselves to raise any tax to any level without a vote in Parliament.
To make their dream (and your nightmare) a reality, Liberals need a snap election and a majority government.
They also need to silence my strong voice. In fact, Liberals are pouring funds and campaign workers into defeating me in my Carleton riding. They want to silence me and leave you without a voice.
If you want me to keep fighting for your freedom and our values, I need your help.
...”
Too strong a voice?
Shockadee may be right, though...”not enough blackmail material”? It didn’t take long for O’Fool to get rid of Derek Sloan, too, so there “must have been games afoot”.
I always assumed they were seeing this as MacKay would win without PP present and not O'Toole. That said I didn't see the CPC winning the last election I assumed it would be better to have a caretaker leader for one election and replace him prior to the next one. This lets you run a new platform and correct directions come next election while not pushing to many people away.
They don’t act like they want power—they would stand up to the carbon tax,
Most Canadians support the carbon tax. That's why O'Toole embraced it. He thought it curry some favour with the climate crazies, who make up the vast majority of the electorate.
You need to learn how to differentiate between your position on issues and what the prevailing opinion is. Just because you don't like the carbon tax and lockdowns doesn't mean they aren't popular with most other voters. And if they are, then election campaigning by opposing those things is a losing strategy. So it's in fact the person who campaigns against carbon taxes and lockdowns who's trying to lose. How can you expect to get elected by campaigning against what most people want?
Well he didn't "let" O'Toole take anything over, PP just withdrew from the leadership race. If he was trying to "let" anyone win, it was MacKay.
The timing more or less proves that Poilievre stepped aside to let MacKay win, not O'Toole.
That's not a coincidence. MacKay was next in line according to the party elder's succession plan. They've been grooming him since the early 2000's.
Deputy CPC leader, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minister of National Defence, Minster of Justice/Attorney General - that's the resumé of someone who's being groomed for the big chair. O'Toole is a nobody by comparison. He wasn't even on the establishment's radar.
The party elders probably asked PP to step aside for MacKay, and probably told him he'd get his turn next. In exchange he'd get the backing of the party establishment when he runs for leader, in the same way the establishment backed MacKay in 2020.
But then the unthinkable happened. O'Toole won, because of the convoluted "ranked ballot" system which the CPC should have scrapped in 2017 after Sheer won because of it.
I don’t know about what was done in the Leader race, but this is what he is saying now. From an e-mail I received.
“People have died. Businesses have collapsed. Many have lost their mental health, isolated from work, friends and families.
Most call that a tragedy.
Liberals call it a "political opportunity", to quote Chrystia Freeland. Liberals have tried to censor what you see and say online and empower themselves to raise any tax to any level without a vote in Parliament.
To make their dream (and your nightmare) a reality, Liberals need a snap election and a majority government.
They also need to silence my strong voice. In fact, Liberals are pouring funds and campaign workers into defeating me in my Carleton riding. They want to silence me and leave you without a voice.
If you want me to keep fighting for your freedom and our values, I need your help. ...”
Too strong a voice?
Shockadee may be right, though...”not enough blackmail material”? It didn’t take long for O’Fool to get rid of Derek Sloan, too, so there “must have been games afoot”.
Good question.
I always assumed they were seeing this as MacKay would win without PP present and not O'Toole. That said I didn't see the CPC winning the last election I assumed it would be better to have a caretaker leader for one election and replace him prior to the next one. This lets you run a new platform and correct directions come next election while not pushing to many people away.
PP has young kids, he wants to be around for the most formative years.
Good man. Why miss your kids' childhood to save a country that wants to destroy itself? Makes sense to me.
Not enough blackmail material?
Yeah. you got it. They don't want power. Great answer. /s
Most Canadians support the carbon tax. That's why O'Toole embraced it. He thought it curry some favour with the climate crazies, who make up the vast majority of the electorate.
Most Canadians support the lockdowns too, which is why the CPC have been quiet about them.
You need to learn how to differentiate between your position on issues and what the prevailing opinion is. Just because you don't like the carbon tax and lockdowns doesn't mean they aren't popular with most other voters. And if they are, then election campaigning by opposing those things is a losing strategy. So it's in fact the person who campaigns against carbon taxes and lockdowns who's trying to lose. How can you expect to get elected by campaigning against what most people want?
You got better data showing the contrary? Or just more "I don't like the carbon tax therefore it's unpopular with Canadians"?
So, no? You can't show me any figures on how many Canadians support the carbon tax?