Vote conservative, not Tory!

[Connie Fournier]

<center>Vote conservative, not Tory!</center>

Today John Tory announced that he wants to fund all religious schools, but that he wants to "unite them" with the public schools, and require that they teach the same secular cirriculum.

Well, that did it for me.

I think we should definitely vote for Ontario PC candidates who are true conservatives, but I believe we have a moral obligation not to vote for pseudo-conservatives who are running under the PC banner, because all we will be doing is putting someone in a position of power who is, from all appearances, more dangerous to feedom and liberty than Dalton McGuinty.

So, this thread is for people to discuss the candidates and let FDers know who is running for the PC Party who <i>really</i> represents our values.

If the person in your riding is not a principled conservative, I hope you will consider voting the FCP, the Freedom Party, or another alternative. We have to send these guys a message!

[Mark Fournier]

We need more candidates like Randy Hillier. He fits the bill.

[Dacre]

So far I have no candidate for either the FCP or FPO in my riding. I hope one will step up.

[bulldog905]

Newmarket has a wishy-washy PC candidate, and current MPP, who goes with the flow.

I'm voting Family Coalition Party, but I don't know if a Freedom Party or Libertarian is running.

If a genuine conservative cannot vote FCP, and there is no Freedom Party or Libertarian running, they should either stay home or vote Liberal strategically.

[Angleland]

A decent PC candidate Angela Kennedy is running in Don Valley East. Phil Bannon in Oakridges-Markham might be OK even if I was critical of the nomination. His Grit opponent Helena Jaczek wants to be Health Minister in McFly's cabinet so bad, she can taste it.

[nickjbor]

idea:

in the state of New York they have both a Liberal and a Conservative Party. neither ever runs candidates - rather they endorse candidates who are already running. Sometimes independents who plan on, then get the endorsement from one of those parties will be defined as a Liberal or Conservative candidate, but officially the parties never "run" candidates. What they do is they endorse people who fit thier views. The Conservative party endorses about half of the Republicans, but has been known to endorse some Libertarians, and independent Christians.

so...

why cant FD officially endorse a slate of candidates? each riding would have one officially endorsed FD candidate, unless there are no "conservatives" running in that riding

[Jason Kauppinen]

That's one option. Another option is to just provide information on each of the Ontario Progressive candidates themselves. A particular piece of information I'd look for would be who they declared for in the leadership race.

[theservant]

bbq the other afternoon

hold on their big fella

[Jason Kauppinen]

bbq the other afternoon

hold on their big fella

Eh?

[ccurrie]

bbq the other afternoon

hold on their big fella

There's a list of ridings and candidates here: http://www.nodice.ca/elections/ontario/ridings.php

[nickjbor]

That's one option. Another option is to just provide information on each of the Ontario Progressive candidates themselves. A particular piece of information I'd look for would be who they declared for in the leadership race.

why focus on the PC Party though? this is why I think it'd be better to endorse a candidate per riding. maybe half of them will be PC, and maybe there will be 20 from the FCP and 20 from the Freedom Party, but you could end up with ridings without a conservative, or ridings where it's the Liberal who is pro-life and anti-SSM

[littleharbour]

idea:

in the state of New York they have both a Liberal and a Conservative Party. neither ever runs candidates - rather they endorse candidates who are already running. Sometimes independents who plan on, then get the endorsement from one of those parties will be defined as a Liberal or Conservative candidate, but officially the parties never "run" candidates. What they do is they endorse people who fit thier views. The Conservative party endorses about half of the Republicans, but has been known to endorse some Libertarians, and independent Christians.

so...

why cant FD officially endorse a slate of candidates? each riding would have one officially endorsed FD candidate, unless there are no "conservatives" running in that riding

It won't work here. In NY State and a few others, you can actually be on the ballot for more than one party. It is not uncommon for a Republican candidate in NY to show up on the ballot under the Republican, Conservative and Right to Life party banners. They get to add up all of the votes they receive, so there is no risk of a vote being "wasted". If you want to cast your vote as Right to Life and the Republican deserves your vote, you can accomplish both tasks. It would be wonderful if we had that kind of system in Canada, which is exactly why you will never see it happen. Permitting 2nd and 3rd party endorsements of a single candidate would lessen the control that the major party leaders would have over their own MP's. It would be hard for Harper to justify his extremist pro-abortion position if over half of his caucus sought and received the endorsement of a Right to Life party.

[Edward Kennedy]

We need more candidates like Randy Hillier. He fits the bill.

---------------------

Randy is the best candidate the PC's ever had.

[littleharbour]

We need more candidates like Randy Hillier. He fits the bill.

---------------------

Randy is the best candidate the PC's ever had.

Perhaps he is. But unless he's going to keep his mouth shut, he'll have a short tenure in the Tory caucus. It would be interesting to question Mr. Hillier during a campaign debate on whether he supports John Tory's position on homosexual privileges, extra funding for Toronto, the takeover of private schools, etc.. The claim of conservatives like Hillier and Ted Morton that they are doing more good on the inside than if they were on the sidelines, starts to ring hollow when you hear nary a word of dissent from these people after they become part of the Tory caucus. They accomplish nothing in the cause of conservatism and effectively cut the legs from under conservatives by giving cover to all the lib-left nonsense introduced by their party. After all, if a strong conservative, Christian, pro-life MP like Stockwell Day can work happily beside Stephen Harper, then Harper's positions on abortion, marriage, Quebec, Kyoto, etc., can't be all that bad can they? And those whining conservatives who went to bat for Day and others when they were being attacked by the left, start to look like sorry malcontents.

[Edward Kennedy]

We need more candidates like Randy Hillier. He fits the bill.

---------------------

Randy is the best candidate the PC's ever had.

Perhaps he is. But unless he's going to keep his mouth shut, he'll have a short tenure in the Tory caucus. It would be interesting to question Mr. Hillier during a campaign debate on whether he supports John Tory's position on homosexual privileges, extra funding for Toronto, the takeover of private schools, etc.. The claim of conservatives like Hillier and Ted Morton that they are doing more good on the inside than if they were on the sidelines, starts to ring hollow when you hear nary a word of dissent from these people after they become part of the Tory caucus. They accomplish nothing in the cause of conservatism and effectively cut the legs from under conservatives by giving cover to all the lib-left nonsense introduced by their party. After all, if a strong conservative, Christian, pro-life MP like Stockwell Day can work happily beside Stephen Harper, then Harper's positions on abortion, marriage, Quebec, Kyoto, etc., can't be all that bad can they? And those whining conservatives who went to bat for Day and others when they were being attacked by the left, start to look like sorry malcontents.

----------------------------------

Randy is there for the rural resident and stands for property rights and opposes control by bureaucratic bullshiters.

That is why he won the nomination and that is why he will sweep this riding. All things start small and we are starting with this one riding. The issues you mention, he will not highlight BUT he will not be shy in taking a position. Further, his supporters are voting for the man and in this case, Randy will, like Scott Reid, his federal counterpart, represent his constituents. That is what MOST politicos do NOT do but Randy is different and will run things for the best interests of the small guy.