Posts
 |
| Richard Decarie |
Decarie has been criticized in the media for public comments that being gay is a choice, and that government health care should not fund abortions. He would surely have had no chance to win, but these are ideas with which the Conservative Party establishment does not want their brand identified.
This is further evidence that the process is being tightly controlled for a pre-ordained result. The elites within the party, whoever they are, do not want things messed up by the voters. It began with the stiff entry criteria, supposedly to avoid as many candidates as they had the last time.
But why was this a problem? Why was it a problem that they had many candidates? What is bad about offering their members a choice?
Someone seems to have gotten to Jean Charest, Pierre Poilievre, Rona Ambrose, and John Baird, in turn, making them some secret offer they could not refuse to clear the aisle for Peter MacKay. For that matter, Andrew Scheer might have been given the same message. His resignation was sudden and unexpected, and came after MacKay signs started showing up at his events. Perhaps someone left a horse’s head in his bed, too.
I did not detect at the time any popular groundswell for the great Peter MacKay. It is not as though he has charisma. It looks more as if he must have powerful friends. Or owners. MacKay does not have a record of honest dealing.
True, the grey eminences also let Erin O’Toole run. But you have to let someone—you need the appearance of a contest. Even the Communists run their dummy alternative candidates. Moreover, in case MacKay stumbles badly, you need a spare.
To me it all makes it highly dubious to vote Conservative federally. They are controlled by special interests, and we do not know who the special interests are. If their motives were admirable, we probably would.
This also makes the Conservatives the very opposite of a populist party, in a time when populism is sweeping the right.
It begins to make them look irrelevant.
No comments:
Post a Comment