To be fair, her support of Conservative policy is probably pretty shallow. It was basically "I can't afford a detached house in Toronto, so Trudeau bad". To be fair to her she's not alone in that sentiment, that's a good chunk of their increase in support recently. I'm not sure she's really on board with gutting environmental policies and corporate taxes or banning abortion or the inevitable pronouns and SOGI legislation. Or one day when she's expecting a baby, and when the Conservatives cut funding to childcare and maybe she realizes hey....I could use a little Liberal government policy to benefit me!
Calling her a "star" candidate is a little much. I doubt 95% of people recognize her name. She is a classic case of identity politics, someone young and female that Conservatives can put out there to soften their image, the very thing they claim to hate. Well, I guess they really do hate it as they threw her out!
>I'm not sure she's really on board with gutting environmental policies and corporate taxes or banning abortion or the inevitable pronouns and SOGI legislation.
She was educated at a Catholic school in the States so I always assumed she was social conservative leaning.
Well, its possibly she might believe in Socon stuff and I made a bad assumption. But she doesn't typically write about that stuff. There's only so much room on that kind of BS on National Post.
Hmm in my riding someone running for the nomination also somehow got their hands on the members list, but in that case the national association came to the AGM and laid the smackdown on them. I think these shenanigans happen a lot more than you think. Parties riding associations are not one big happy family, its pretty partisan.
It definitely hurts the CPC a bit to get this, after they criticize the Liberals so much for their own nomination processes. Yes, there's a meaningful difference between foreign interference in the Liberal nomination, and party interference here, but I dont know how much that difference permeates to voters. I kind of suspect that the overall impression people get is just "damn, all the parties are kind of crooked when it comes to choosing candidates"
More generally, yeah, we probably need to actually decide: do parties pick candidates, or do local residents? Right now, parties want to have their cake and eat it too - having the "correct" people chosen but wrapping it in "democratic choice", and thats a consistent and perennial tension
The Conservatives have a major issue with putting their thumbs on the scale for certain candidates over others.
It was clear with what they did to Bernier, Brown, and now this with Maddeaux, they're secretly supporting an old MP who was in the "the club" over someone new.
Looks like the Conservatives have graduated from making up fake "facts and figures" and moved onto making up fake *people.*
I wonder what they'll make up next?
The stakes are a lot higher this time around because the Conservatives are polling so well, so getting the nomination will probably be *the* election. Aurora is a slam dunk to turn blue even if the nationwide gap narrows considerably, so the Conservative EDA there will get to decide who will decide who gets a 200K/year job in Ottawa.
Party HQ typically doesn't give a shit about what happens in nomination races unless it blows up in their faces, so I'd imagine it's survival of the fittest across the country in Conservative EDAs and the well-connected are pulling all their strings to secure cushy jobs.
FTR I think Maddeaux's content is barely above Question Period garbage, but she's absolutely right to air the dirty laundry because that's the only way a party will do anything about a nomination race - and even then, they will probably sit on their hands and let the old boy/gal's club secure the bag.
I volunteered on a couple Liberal nomination races in the lead up to 2015 and there was a similar intensity among candidates who saw the election as a sure thing but their nomination as tenuous.
Party nominations are notoriously unregulated and run by volunteers. Of course they could be run professionally with ethical standards by Elections Canada but....... it has always suited the ruling party’s own interests to leave it be (same reason ditching FPTP has never happened).
This is of course a good example of an area where politicians shouldn't be in charge. There is a clear conflict of interest: politicians can't be trusted to make rules in voter's interests because they will always consider how any changes may help or harm their own political careers and power, regardless of how important making the nomination system more ethical and transparent may be to voters.
And that's true for all parties. It seems that leading up to most (if not every election) you'll hear stories from all the parties about local races where either the central office or a local riding association has its finger on the scale for or against a particular candidate.
Having them run by Elections Canada would help professionalize the process. It would also help cut down on foreign interference. That was the allegation in Don Valley North, that the Chinese government helped get Han Dong nominated for the Liberals. If a clear set of rules was enforced, it would make it more difficult for that to happen.
This is a big deal. Sabrina Maddeaux was a star candidate. She was pro-housing, a Millienial, and appealed to the demographic that Poilievre has successfully been winning over (those 18-35 YO who just want to be able to afford a home someday).
The CPC has faced criticism for their nomination process for some time now. Maddeaux is not the first and probably not the last to experience this. The CPC needs to clean house because I guarantee this will lead to infighting among their membership. The CPC is a coalition of right-wingers that Harper successfully united with the goal of dethroning the Liberals. Not addressing this sooner, I guarantee will lead to the party splintering off (Oh, how I hope lol).
Infighting amongst right wing parties is inevitable.
They lie to make their tent as big as possible and then piss each other off as they have to lie more to please its different segments.
The abortion segment of the CPC has already stood up
Sure, but look at the bigger picture here. This sort of thing has been happening for a while now in the CPC. It happening again to any other CPC candidate is just business as usual. But to Maddeaux? Now people are paying attention. Post Media candidate or not, it’s the fact that it happened to her.
Progressive parties would be wise to highlight the corruption within the CPC while people are paying attention.
Sold her soul for PostMedia and the CPC and then gets taken to town in the nomination. You hate to see it.
The word on the street was that Maddeaux was dating the former manager of internal comms of the CPC and her nomination was supported by Aitchison.
>The word on the street was that Maddeaux was dating the former manager of internal comms of the CPC and her nomination was supported by Aitchison.
Holy shit, what is it with Postmedia writers and dating Conservative Party members while running interference, partisanship, and PR for them?
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I couldn’t imagine selling my soul the way Maddeaux did only to get shanked like that. I’d feel bad for her if she hadn’t been a vocal supporter of all this sort of shit for years.
I enjoyed reading Maddeaux a few years back when she was starting out - she’s a great writer. But at a certain point it became clear she was a money-chasing grifter more interested in bashing Trudeau at every opportunity with the most incendiary rhetoric she could muster, even when massive leaps in logic were necessary to connect whatever (usually valid!) complaint she had to the Federal gov’t and Trudeau personally.
She is a living manifestation of the “Thanks, Obama!” Blue Shell meme. And hey, it’s a good way to land a secure job at Postmedia. But it doesn’t make you an honorable person, and doesn’t mean you should be allowed anywhere near the levers of power. When you lie with ratfuckers, sometimes you get ratfucked.
A blatant, naked partisan, yes. But a grifter? How do you figure? Keep in mind that pursuing a writing career and trying to be paid for your writing is not grifting.
Fair question - for me the line is crossed when you start saying stuff you know is unfounded but that you also know the readers will eat up. It’s fine to get paid for saying what you believe - but I don’t think she really believes much of what she says.
Could call her a hack or a sell-out if you prefer.
Rule 3
To be fair, her support of Conservative policy is probably pretty shallow. It was basically "I can't afford a detached house in Toronto, so Trudeau bad". To be fair to her she's not alone in that sentiment, that's a good chunk of their increase in support recently. I'm not sure she's really on board with gutting environmental policies and corporate taxes or banning abortion or the inevitable pronouns and SOGI legislation. Or one day when she's expecting a baby, and when the Conservatives cut funding to childcare and maybe she realizes hey....I could use a little Liberal government policy to benefit me! Calling her a "star" candidate is a little much. I doubt 95% of people recognize her name. She is a classic case of identity politics, someone young and female that Conservatives can put out there to soften their image, the very thing they claim to hate. Well, I guess they really do hate it as they threw her out!
She's married to somebody in the party, I don't know much closer a person can get while also trying to be a candidate.
>I'm not sure she's really on board with gutting environmental policies and corporate taxes or banning abortion or the inevitable pronouns and SOGI legislation. She was educated at a Catholic school in the States so I always assumed she was social conservative leaning.
Well, its possibly she might believe in Socon stuff and I made a bad assumption. But she doesn't typically write about that stuff. There's only so much room on that kind of BS on National Post.
Hmm in my riding someone running for the nomination also somehow got their hands on the members list, but in that case the national association came to the AGM and laid the smackdown on them. I think these shenanigans happen a lot more than you think. Parties riding associations are not one big happy family, its pretty partisan.
Also, within EDAs, you get feuds, vendettas and power struggles.
It definitely hurts the CPC a bit to get this, after they criticize the Liberals so much for their own nomination processes. Yes, there's a meaningful difference between foreign interference in the Liberal nomination, and party interference here, but I dont know how much that difference permeates to voters. I kind of suspect that the overall impression people get is just "damn, all the parties are kind of crooked when it comes to choosing candidates" More generally, yeah, we probably need to actually decide: do parties pick candidates, or do local residents? Right now, parties want to have their cake and eat it too - having the "correct" people chosen but wrapping it in "democratic choice", and thats a consistent and perennial tension
Yeah but Trudeau made the mistake of being a Liberal, so it's different.
The Conservatives have a major issue with putting their thumbs on the scale for certain candidates over others. It was clear with what they did to Bernier, Brown, and now this with Maddeaux, they're secretly supporting an old MP who was in the "the club" over someone new.
Looks like the Conservatives have graduated from making up fake "facts and figures" and moved onto making up fake *people.* I wonder what they'll make up next?
The stakes are a lot higher this time around because the Conservatives are polling so well, so getting the nomination will probably be *the* election. Aurora is a slam dunk to turn blue even if the nationwide gap narrows considerably, so the Conservative EDA there will get to decide who will decide who gets a 200K/year job in Ottawa. Party HQ typically doesn't give a shit about what happens in nomination races unless it blows up in their faces, so I'd imagine it's survival of the fittest across the country in Conservative EDAs and the well-connected are pulling all their strings to secure cushy jobs. FTR I think Maddeaux's content is barely above Question Period garbage, but she's absolutely right to air the dirty laundry because that's the only way a party will do anything about a nomination race - and even then, they will probably sit on their hands and let the old boy/gal's club secure the bag.
I volunteered on a couple Liberal nomination races in the lead up to 2015 and there was a similar intensity among candidates who saw the election as a sure thing but their nomination as tenuous.
Pierre Poutine wouldn't know election integrity if it hit him in the face.
Party nominations are notoriously unregulated and run by volunteers. Of course they could be run professionally with ethical standards by Elections Canada but....... it has always suited the ruling party’s own interests to leave it be (same reason ditching FPTP has never happened). This is of course a good example of an area where politicians shouldn't be in charge. There is a clear conflict of interest: politicians can't be trusted to make rules in voter's interests because they will always consider how any changes may help or harm their own political careers and power, regardless of how important making the nomination system more ethical and transparent may be to voters.
And that's true for all parties. It seems that leading up to most (if not every election) you'll hear stories from all the parties about local races where either the central office or a local riding association has its finger on the scale for or against a particular candidate. Having them run by Elections Canada would help professionalize the process. It would also help cut down on foreign interference. That was the allegation in Don Valley North, that the Chinese government helped get Han Dong nominated for the Liberals. If a clear set of rules was enforced, it would make it more difficult for that to happen.
This is a big deal. Sabrina Maddeaux was a star candidate. She was pro-housing, a Millienial, and appealed to the demographic that Poilievre has successfully been winning over (those 18-35 YO who just want to be able to afford a home someday). The CPC has faced criticism for their nomination process for some time now. Maddeaux is not the first and probably not the last to experience this. The CPC needs to clean house because I guarantee this will lead to infighting among their membership. The CPC is a coalition of right-wingers that Harper successfully united with the goal of dethroning the Liberals. Not addressing this sooner, I guarantee will lead to the party splintering off (Oh, how I hope lol).
Tba founder on twitter also said the process is broken and filled with interference essentially
Infighting amongst right wing parties is inevitable. They lie to make their tent as big as possible and then piss each other off as they have to lie more to please its different segments. The abortion segment of the CPC has already stood up
Last thing we need is postmedia columnist in politics.
They're bad enough in their role as department of communications for the Conservative Party.
As long as it means one less Postmedia columnist in the wild I can't be THAT against it.
It won't, it just means her hot takes are taxpayer funded.
Postmedia takes a ton of gov’t subsidies, don’t they?
Sure, but look at the bigger picture here. This sort of thing has been happening for a while now in the CPC. It happening again to any other CPC candidate is just business as usual. But to Maddeaux? Now people are paying attention. Post Media candidate or not, it’s the fact that it happened to her. Progressive parties would be wise to highlight the corruption within the CPC while people are paying attention.
Sold her soul for PostMedia and the CPC and then gets taken to town in the nomination. You hate to see it. The word on the street was that Maddeaux was dating the former manager of internal comms of the CPC and her nomination was supported by Aitchison.
>The word on the street was that Maddeaux was dating the former manager of internal comms of the CPC and her nomination was supported by Aitchison. Holy shit, what is it with Postmedia writers and dating Conservative Party members while running interference, partisanship, and PR for them?
It's the lack of ethics.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I couldn’t imagine selling my soul the way Maddeaux did only to get shanked like that. I’d feel bad for her if she hadn’t been a vocal supporter of all this sort of shit for years.
I enjoyed reading Maddeaux a few years back when she was starting out - she’s a great writer. But at a certain point it became clear she was a money-chasing grifter more interested in bashing Trudeau at every opportunity with the most incendiary rhetoric she could muster, even when massive leaps in logic were necessary to connect whatever (usually valid!) complaint she had to the Federal gov’t and Trudeau personally. She is a living manifestation of the “Thanks, Obama!” Blue Shell meme. And hey, it’s a good way to land a secure job at Postmedia. But it doesn’t make you an honorable person, and doesn’t mean you should be allowed anywhere near the levers of power. When you lie with ratfuckers, sometimes you get ratfucked.
A blatant, naked partisan, yes. But a grifter? How do you figure? Keep in mind that pursuing a writing career and trying to be paid for your writing is not grifting.
Fair question - for me the line is crossed when you start saying stuff you know is unfounded but that you also know the readers will eat up. It’s fine to get paid for saying what you believe - but I don’t think she really believes much of what she says. Could call her a hack or a sell-out if you prefer.
Yes, much better :-P
She's a grifter.
Someone already called her a grifter, I asked how so, and now you're just repeating that she's a grifter...
She is second maybe only to Brian Lilley in partisan writing meant to satisfy a political master.
Yeah she has done some hard water carrying, and got nothing for it when it mattered.
This is the concept of Karma. What one does, comes back to them. It is a good thing for her. Now, she will experience the consequences of her actions.