Jump to content

The Conservative Leadership Race


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Jaydee said:

Of those polled, 0.7% picked Jean Charest on their first ballot, 0.2% picked Scott Aitchison and 0.1% picked Patrick Brown.

I'm pretty sure if you look in the dictionary under "weasel" you'd find a picture of Patrick Brown - seems others have come to the same conclusion.  That's an opinion I formed from reading his own book, BTW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never got much coverage but a Rebel news reporter was following up on a lead involving Patrick Brown. During the height of covid, when all public facilities were locked down,  brown was playing regularly with his buddies at a public rink.


Brown said he was just checking out the facilities, but at the 8:00 mark, there is his equipment laid out on the floor…coincidence, I guess.

Never liked the guy either.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BROWN kicked out of Campaign. No Loss In my opinion.

 

Statement by Ian Brodie, Chair, Leadership Election Organizing Committee

"In recent weeks, our Party became aware of serious allegations of wrongdoing by the Patrick Brown campaign that appear to violate the financial provisions of the Canada Elections Act. Following our Rules and Procedures for the 2022 Leadership, the Chief Returning Officer notified the Patrick Brown campaign of the allegations and asked for a written response. He also withheld the interim membership list from the Patrick Brown campaign.

“The information provided to date by the Patrick Brown campaign did not satisfy concerns about their compliance with our Rules and Procedures and/or the Canada Elections Act.  The Chief Returning Officer has therefore recommended to LEOC that LEOC disqualify Patrick Brown and earlier tonight LEOC agreed to do so.  The Party will be sharing the information it has gathered with Elections Canada, who is responsible for ensuring compliance with, and enforcement of, the Canada Elections Act.

"Throughout the investigation into these allegations, the Chief Returning Officer and I have done our best to be fair to the Patrick Brown leadership campaign and provide them with the time they need to substantively refute these allegations.  We regret having to take these steps but we have an obligation to ensure that both our Party's Rules and federal law are respected by all candidates and campaign teams. None of these problems has any impact on the integrity of the vote itself.

"While we felt it important to provide a transparent response to Party members about this matter, because this issue is now subject to further investigation, we will not be speaking further on the subject."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brampton city councillors call for end to Patrick Brown’s “scandalous” time as mayor | True North (tnc.news)

 

Quote

Five city councillors and both deputy mayors of Brampton released a letter condemning mayor Patrick Brown, alleging he is corrupt.

The letter alleges that Brown used his office as mayor to pay off cronies with taxpayer dollars, employed nepotism and shut down city council’s investigations of the allegations.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

“ As many of you know, earlier this week, the Leadership Election Organizing Committee (LEOC) made the difficult decision to disqualify Patrick Brown as a leadership candidate.

I know there are many questions about why this happened, what information was reviewed and why more details can't be provided.

I would love to share all that we have.  But we have legal restrictions of what we are to say when we are dealing with allegations of breaking federal law.  That's why we referred this case to Elections Canada.

The reality is our party received credible, verifiable information alleging serious wrongdoing in the Patrick Brown leadership campaign that violated not only the Leadership Election Rules, but the Canada Election Act.

Together with our party’s lawyer, I personally engaged for the better part of a week to find a path for the Patrick Brown campaign to be in compliance with our rules and federal law. We met with the campaign on June 29 to relay the allegations, to convey the seriousness of them, and to inform the campaign that we would require a satisfactory response. On June 30, after another phone call with senior campaign officials, the Chief Returning Officer, Don Nightingale, and I sent a formal letter asking the campaign for a detailed and complete response. The Patrick Brown campaign delivered a response on July 1, that did not address our concerns about violations. Contact continued with the campaign between July 2 and July 5, right up until the July 5 LEOC meeting.

In the spirit of good faith and fairness, the party gave them every opportunity to clarify and resolve their concerns aside. Ultimately that effort failed.

To be clear, the Brown campaign knew full well what the allegations were.  Any suggestion to the contrary is simply incorrect. 

LEOC could not afford the risk of having a leadership candidate under the investigation of Elections Canada for breaking federal law - especially one that did not answer the questions we put forward to him to bring him into compliance.  Our leadership race is to select a person to contend for the role of prime minister of Canada. The process must be beyond reproach and in full compliance with the law.

I would like to thank the members of LEOC who asked important questions as part of a decision that nobody should be forced to make.

They did the right thing, as tough as it is, to protect the long-term interests of our party.

Ian Brodie
Chair, Leadership Election Organizing Committee “

Edited by Jaydee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is blatantly obvious that the conservative party does not want Patrick Brown at the helm.  They do everything they can to smear him.  We went down this road several years ago.

They will not let it happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, boestar said:

it is blatantly obvious that the conservative party does not want Patrick Brown at the helm.  They do everything they can to smear him.  We went down this road several years ago.

They will not let it happen. 

Or maybe he’s just a sleaze bag like Trudeau who will say and do anything to get elected.  Even Brampton no longer wants him.

 

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2022/07/06/patrick-brown-brampton-mayoral-troubles/

Edited by Jaydee
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As many of you know, earlier this week, the Leadership Election Organizing Committee (LEOC) made the difficult decision to disqualify Patrick Brown as a leadership candidate.

I know there are many questions about why this happened, what information was reviewed and why more details can't be provided.

I would love to share all that we have.  But we have legal restrictions of what we are to say when we are dealing with allegations of breaking federal law.  That's why we referred this case to Elections Canada.

The reality is our party received credible, verifiable information alleging serious wrongdoing in the Patrick Brown leadership campaign that violated not only the Leadership Election Rules, but the Canada Election Act.

Together with our party’s lawyer, I personally engaged for the better part of a week to find a path for the Patrick Brown campaign to be in compliance with our rules and federal law. We met with the campaign on June 29 to relay the allegations, to convey the seriousness of them, and to inform the campaign that we would require a satisfactory response. On June 30, after another phone call with senior campaign officials, the Chief Returning Officer, Don Nightingale, and I sent a formal letter asking the campaign for a detailed and complete response. The Patrick Brown campaign delivered a response on July 1, that did not address our concerns about violations. Contact continued with the campaign between July 2 and July 5, right up until the July 5 LEOC meeting.

In the spirit of good faith and fairness, the party gave them every opportunity to clarify and resolve their concerns aside. Ultimately that effort failed.

To be clear, the Brown campaign knew full well what the allegations were.  Any suggestion to the contrary is simply incorrect. 

LEOC could not afford the risk of having a leadership candidate under the investigation of Elections Canada for breaking federal law - especially one that did not answer the questions we put forward to him to bring him into compliance.  Our leadership race is to select a person to contend for the role of prime minister of Canada. The process must be beyond reproach and in full compliance with the law.

I would like to thank the members of LEOC who asked important questions as part of a decision that nobody should be forced to make.

They did the right thing, as tough as it is, to protect the long-term interests of our party.

Ian Brodie
Chair, Leadership Election Organizing Committee

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“‘Unlike in a general election, when voters can only make one choice, the Conservative party picks its new leader through a ranked balloting system.
What that means is members will rank their choice for leader from one to six, as there are that many candidates in the race.
A winner is chosen when a candidate receives more than 50 per cent of the points. If that doesn't happen when ballots are first counted, the candidate who receives the lowest number of points will be eliminated. Whichever candidate was listed as being the second choice under theirs will receive the eliminated candidate's votes when ballots are counted for a second time.
Voting will continue in rounds until a candidate receives more than 50 per cent of the points, which is why those running not only want to be the first choice of members, but also listed as their second and third choices.”

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.png.a41829ac48a6d1cd720114c8e3980ee8.png

 

And do you care or does it matter to the average voter?

Do any of you reading this, actually think we have any influence in the out come of this vote or indeed as individuals any influence in the outcome of any federal election or party vote unless we live east of Winnipeg?>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The message that will win Pierre Poilievre the next election

Saddled with a government that can no longer deliver basic services, Canadians will settle for competence
 

In two months’ time, Pierre Poilievre will take the reins of the Conservative Party of Canada.

 

With the party releasing its preliminary list of approximately 675,000 eligible leadership electors late last month, we have now entered "foregone conclusion" territory. The Poilievre campaign has signed up over 55 percent of all members who have joined the Conservative Party since the race began in February. Poilievre can also bank on the votes of a sizeable chunk of the 115,000 or so pre-existing party members (at the time of writing, Poilievre had received the endorsement of just over half of his co-partisans in the House of Commons, signalling a strong base of support at the electoral district level). In recent weeks, Poilievre has garnered key endorsements from long-tenured party stalwarts like Mulroney government alumnus Elmer MacKay (father of 2020 runner-up Peter MacKay); a clear indication that the Conservative Party establishment is lining up, however begrudgingly, behind the man who’s certain to become party’s next leader. 

 

As a matter of simple arithmetic, the leadership race is effectively over. The only question that remains is how many ballots it will take Poilievre to clinch the victory.

 

Poilievre finds himself in this enviable position because he has stuck doggedly to a clear and uncompromisingly populist message, hammering away at the well-connected "gatekeepers" who leverage their political influence to impede everyday Canadians from building wealth and getting ahead in life. He’s doubled down on this narrative at every turn, undeterred by blowback in the opinion pages and personal attacks from some of Canada’s most august public figures (including former Bank of Canada governor David Dodge, who has called Poilievre’s politics “incredibly stupid”). Poilievre has also been unwavering in his support for the freedom convoys that have rolled through his hometown of Ottawa throughout the year, recently joining Canadian Forces veteran James Topp on his “March to Freedom” through the streets of the nation’s capital. The freedom movement and Poilievre—who announced back in February that he was running for prime minister to make Canadians the “freest people on earth”—are a branding match made in heaven. 

 

This message has been catnip to the Conservative Party’s base, who’ve united behind Poilievre with a uniformity not seen since Stephen Harper’s departure from politics. An online survey of 5,228 self-identified Conservative Party members conducted by the right-wing True North Centre (TNC) last month found that over three-quarters of respondents favoured Poilievre to be the party’s next leader—rival Jean Charest and now-disqualified rival Patrick Brown mustered a collective 0.9 percent of the vote (disclosure: I was briefly a research fellow for TNC predecessor the True North Initiative). Communications executive Corey Hogan recently tweeted, “Pierre Poilievre might understand key messages and brand better than any politician I have ever seen.” Indeed, Poilievre’s leadership campaign has been a clinic in effective political marketing so far.  

 

However, there are a number of reasons to suspect that Poilievre’s gatekeeper-bashing, freedom-trumpeting message won’t play quite as well with the general electorate. Political rhetoric that pins society’s problems on a small, ill-defined elite—i.e., Poilievre’s gatekeepers—tends to lead true believers down a conspiracist rabbit hole that, more often than not, ends up at the doorstep of one well-heeled Jewish family or another. In a post-truth national climate where some 13 percent of Canadians believe that billionaire Bill Gates is using microchips to track our movements and a further 20 percent of us believe that the World Economic Forum is secretly running global affairs, this rhetorical tack could easily blow up in Poilievre’s face; it would just take one conspiracy-spouting Poilievre backer taking things too far. 

 

Moreover, while Poilievre has sought to educate Canadians about our very own gospel of freedom (showing a special affinity to Liberal prime minister Sir Wilfrid Laurier) many of us will still associate the word “freedom” with the erstwhile Land of the Free to our south. This is not a connotation that Poilievre will want to embrace. Indeed, it brings to mind Janis Joplin’s timeless refrain that “freedom’s just another word for ‘nothing left to lose’”. 

 

Canadian voters are a skittish bunch who, historically, have chafed at anything that strikes us as too radical—or even worse, too American. Canada’s recent electoral history is rife with examples. Back in 2004, scandal-plagued prime minister Paul Martin found a new lease on life by tying Conservative upstart Stephen Harper to the unpopular U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. Seven years later, Harper, by then prime minister himself, Yankee-bashed his way to his sole majority government by convincing voters that his principal challenger, Harvard professor Michael Ignatieff, was “just visiting” his birth country of Canada after 34 years abroad. Poilieve, who has needlessly incorporated a few Americanized touches to his campaign branding (for instance, the whole “running for prime minister” thing), will undoubtedly be painted with a red-white-and-blue brush by a Liberal war room that takes no prisoners.

 

The good news for Poilievre is that, thanks to the confidence-and-supply agreement between the Liberals and NDP, he will have at least three years to prepare for the next federal election. The even better news is that the Trudeau government, which will enter its eighth year in the fall, already looks to be on its last legs. 

 

Never known for being an especially tight ship, HMCS Trudeau now appears to be totally adrift and rudderless. In fact, the past few months have raised serious questions about the federal government’s ability to deliver even the most basic frontline services to Canadians. Travellers have endured days-long delays and lost checked luggage at the country’s major airports; people are camping overnight outside of Service Canada offices in hopes of getting their passports renewed; the backlog in Canada’s immigration system has grown by over 250,000 since the beginning of May and now stands at 2.4 million. These lapses have only been magnified by a seemingly endless string of unforced errors from members of Trudeau’s frontbench. Near the end of June, the prime minister announced the creation of a new parliamentary task force on service delivery, an uninspired and all-too-predictable gesture that was universally panned by political commentators. 

 

To his credit, Poilievre appears to be recalibrating his message to match the shifting political winds. On June 27th, he tweeted“Trudeau gov wants to do many things that are NOT their job… but not what IS their job: passports, airports, low inflation. We need back-to-basics govt that does a few things well, not a lot of things poorly [emphasis added]."

 

“[Doing] a few things well, not a lot of things poorly” is the message that will make Pierre Poilievre the next prime minister of Canada; and, if it sounds familiar, that’s because it was also the message at the heart of the breakthrough 2006 campaign of Poilievre’s mentor Stephen Harper.

 

Read the rest of this story 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The party simply does not want Brown at the Helm.  They will smear him at every turn to stop it.  not the first time

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, boestar said:

The party simply does not want Brown at the Helm.  They will smear him at every turn to stop it.  not the first time

 

Just because the party might not want  him does not mean that the party had anything to do with the charges against him. He was turned in by one of his own workers and he is getting a fair hearing but a committee outside of the party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, boestar said:

The party simply does not want Brown at the Helm.  They will smear him at every turn to stop it.  not the first time

 

Here's a good article on the subject: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-poor-patrick-brown-is-the-subject-of-a-takedown-yet-again/

After his Ontario PC leadership fiasco I bought (with my own money) his book - Take Down.  My opinion of him after reading his own words is that he's a snivelling and conniving person and one of the the greasiest politicians I know about. 

No loss, IMO, but, hey, I could be wrong maybe he's just an innocent victim.  In any case, before this latest scandal I think he was in the 1% range for Conservative party member's first choice so it seems many had come to the same conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mo32a said:

I just voted, and I notice Brown was on the ballot, so he may garner some votes.

 

The party has said that it was too late to change the ballots and any vote for Brown will be ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, GDR said:

Just because the party might not want  him does not mean that the party had anything to do with the charges against him. He was turned in by one of his own workers and he is getting a fair hearing but a committee outside of the party.

But its not the first time.  This keeps happening to him coincidentally

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...