Ontario Liberal leadership race

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

NES, Naqvi and Hsu are the current candidates. Only remote comparison for Schreiner I can think of is PCs trying to draft Harper 25 years ago, and Schreiner won't be merging the parties.

I like Nethanial Erskine Smith, but as I read about a candidate in some other leadership race just a few days ago (I think it was James Laxer) "a guy who isn't a team player shouldn't lead the team."

Erskine-Smith would be interesting in that it would be a shakeup to the old OLP formula of picking bland establishment politicians who are very good at organizing (that's what Del Duca was supposed to be, but we all saw how that turned out, so it makes sense to want to shake things up).

But tbh, I agree with that James Laxer quote as far as NES goes. Political observers and journalists love a maverick, but they don't usually make for great leaders of large, existing organizations. There's also the question of whether he's fishing out of the same pond as Marit Stiles - both downtown Toronto progressives, only Stiles has a stronger political resume and leads a party that is currently much bigger than the OLP by every metric.

I'd make the same move if I were Nate though. His career isn't going anywhere federally, and he's still young, so why not take the chance

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Begging Schreiner to lead the party reeks of desperation.

I hope for the OLP's sake that this is just routine silly season nonsense that happens in leadership elections. I remember in the last OLP leadership, people were suggesting John Tory. You know, the guy who spent most of his life affiliated with the Liberals' biggest rivals. There was also a short-lived "draft Chris Hadfield" trend around that time. I'm sure there's a joke there, something along the lines of how the OLP had so little talent they had to search for leaders in outer space.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Begging Schreiner to lead the party reeks of desperation.

No kidding. Where is the logic in "we have only 8 seats and our only solution is to ask the leader of a party with 1 seat and that got just 6% of the vote election to lead us". Schreiner's main claim to fame is being a "nice guy" who everyone likes as long as he is a gadfly leading party of one. There is no reason to believe that he would have any political talent leading a serious party with competing players and interests and in any case if the OLP wants to become competitive in 905 suburbs - not sure how having a leader who is a single issue environmental fanatic who wants massive increases in carbon taxes and road tolls etc... is the solution.

I call this the Elizabeth May effect. In 2019, she was the most favourably-viewed federal party leader. I assure you, if Elizabeth May was anywhere near wielding any sort of political power, she would not be popular. If you actually look at what the Green Party pushes, it's a mishmash of very drastic environmental policies that most Canadians wouldn't actually support in practice, a random assortment of big social spending promises, while also bizarrely promising to balance the budget.

But nobody took Elizabeth May seriously, which means she's non-threatening. She was just seen as Canada's kooky aunt. Nobody actually cared whether her policies or promises made any sense, or that her party's stances on anything other than climate (arguably even on climate) were an incoherent mess. But she had the luxury of going on the debate stage and dunking on Trudeau and Scheer, neither of whom were particularly popular, so people liked her for just that. But if she had somehow taken over the LPC post-Ignatieff, i.e. been in a position where she could conceivably lead the country, I guarantee you, 2015 would have given us Prime Minister Mulcair.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

So far only Canadians have posted in this thread, so I'll jump in. I'm surprised at the negative reaction among the Canadians here to the idea of poaching Schreiner. Even though the NDP forms the official opposition, plenty of Ontarians think of the OLP as the alternative government. There were several times during the last Parliament when the Liberals polled comparably to or higher than the Tories; there was never any meaningful span of time when the NDP did so. What hurt the OLP in 2022 was a poor campaign headed by a no-name leader.

Schreiner fixes a lot of these problems immediately. The media has covered him positively and there's every reason to think that it will continue to do so, thereby framing him as the premier-in-waiting. adma has posted repeatedly about the tendency of Canadian media to dismiss the NDP and treat elections as a Liberal-Tory two-horse race regardless of the actual facts at hand. With Schreinter they'd have their man to do that effectively. Getting him would also probably kneecap the Green Party, which received six percent of the vote in 2022; if the leader of the party those people voted for is now saying that to get green policies they should vote Liberal, that's a difficult argument to pass up.

Maybe Schreiner is a no-talent hack who would be eaten alive in Queen's Park if anyone focused their attention on him, and maybe his transportation policies would destroy the OLP in the 905. But in the short run, poaching him would do more than anything else could to project the credibility of the Liberal Party as the next government of Ontario.

I think the last paragraph is where most of us are coming from. Green Party leaders like May and Schreiner who are relevant enough to be well-known, but nowhere near holding power. What that means is that they basically only get positive coverage, because nobody really has much to gain from dunking on them, but political journalists sure love a "scrappy upstart" story

Like Benjamin Frank said, his widely-praised debate performance in 2022 could easily have been considered out-and-out demagoguery instead of passionate idealism. But on the debate stage where Ford, Del Duca and Horwath were all gunning for the top job, Schreiner got to play what is essentially a "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" role where he gets to criticize the powerful without being considered one of the powerful. As Liberal leader, he wouldn't have that luxury.

I don't think bringing Schreiner would meaningfully kneecap the Green Party, although losing their one seat in Guelph won't help. The reason is, there's a certain small group of Canadians who vote for the "Green" brand above all else. Maybe the Liberals could pick 1-2% off of the Greens, which won't amount to much. Because ultimately, Schreiner is too fiscally conservative to quash the NDP, and the Green stuff doesn't fly in the "Trudeau-Ford" parts of Ontario (the Greens almost always do worst in the 905 belt, they even do better in rural farmland).

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

I see people sometimes describe Green leaders in Canada as "more fiscally conservative" than the NDP. I'm not sure where people get that idea since in almost every case the Green Party has a pie in the sky platform that promises to spend way more and tax way more than the NDP would ever dare to propose.

"Fiscally conservative" isn't the right word because you're right, Green promises tend to be the opposite. I can't think of a word to properly describe it, but it's more stylistic than policy-based.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

The last thing I'll say about Schreiner (unless he actually runs, which I doubt) is that he's a complete outsider to the Liberal Party. Political parties, especially legacy parties like the Liberals, are ecosystems of their own with thousands of insiders that you need to manage effectively.

Anyway, one advantage for the Libs is that they know who is going to lead the NDP. The next leader should be someone who can offer something that Marit Stiles can't, to excite ABC voters. Their federal counterparts struck gold in 2015 with Trudeau, someone whose platform was virtually interchangeable with Mulcair's, except he was younger, more handsome, more famous, and 100x more energetic. There's not going to be someone of Trudeau's caliber, I honestly can't think of anyone who can do this. But if they can find someone who can at least be on the same level as Stiles, be that rhetorically, name-recognition, experience, whatever, the longevity of the Liberal brand just might be enough. Del Duca was supposed to do that, except he somehow turned out to be even more underwhelming than Horwath.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Some are just anti-establishment types who could just as easily vote for a far right populist party

Oh yeah. The mother of a very close buddy of mine is...let's just say, she falls on the 'kooky' end of the spectrum and preoccupies herself with things like GMOs supposedly causing birth defects and things of that nature. She used to be a big supporter of the Green Party then turned into a PPC supporter in 2021. Just one example, but clearly she's not even a 'green' voter in the environmentalist sense, or else she wouldn't vote for a climate denier.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Anyway, one advantage for the Libs is that they know who is going to lead the NDP. The next leader should be someone who can offer something that Marit Stiles can't, to excite ABC voters. Their federal counterparts struck gold in 2015 with Trudeau, someone whose platform was virtually interchangeable with Mulcair's, except he was younger, more handsome, more famous, and 100x more energetic. There's not going to be someone of Trudeau's caliber, I honestly can't think of anyone who can do this. But if they can find someone who can at least be on the same level as Stiles, be that rhetorically, name-recognition, experience, whatever, the longevity of the Liberal brand just might be enough. Del Duca was supposed to do that, except he somehow turned out to be even more underwhelming than Horwath.

This is a notion that I haven't yet seen voiced: Marit Stiles as an Andrea II rather than a Rachel Notley-style premier-in-waiting charismatic figurehead.  Or, most of the voiced skepticism and concern trolling I've witnessed has less to do with who she is than with the fact that she was acclaimed for the leadership.

That's not at all what I was suggesting lol. I think Marit Stiles is a huge step up from Horwath. What I mean is that because the Liberals know who the NDP leader in the next election will be, they know who they have to beat to get the ABC vote around them. So in that sense, the OLP should focus more on who is most likely to beat Stiles for the ABC vote, because it wouldn't take much of a drop for the PCs for a strong ABC Coalition to win.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Anyway, one advantage for the Libs is that they know who is going to lead the NDP. The next leader should be someone who can offer something that Marit Stiles can't, to excite ABC voters. Their federal counterparts struck gold in 2015 with Trudeau, someone whose platform was virtually interchangeable with Mulcair's, except he was younger, more handsome, more famous, and 100x more energetic. There's not going to be someone of Trudeau's caliber, I honestly can't think of anyone who can do this. But if they can find someone who can at least be on the same level as Stiles, be that rhetorically, name-recognition, experience, whatever, the longevity of the Liberal brand just might be enough. Del Duca was supposed to do that, except he somehow turned out to be even more underwhelming than Horwath.

This is a notion that I haven't yet seen voiced: Marit Stiles as an Andrea II rather than a Rachel Notley-style premier-in-waiting charismatic figurehead.  Or, most of the voiced skepticism and concern trolling I've witnessed has less to do with who she is than with the fact that she was acclaimed for the leadership.

That's not at all what I was suggesting lol. I think Marit Stiles is a huge step up from Horwath. What I mean is that because the Liberals know who the NDP leader in the next election will be, they know who they have to beat to get the ABC vote around them. So in that sense, the OLP should focus more on who is most likely to beat Stiles for the ABC vote, because it wouldn't take much of a drop for the PCs for a strong ABC Coalition to win.

Still, I'm referring to the inability-to-excite-ABC-voters part.  So if, implicitly, Marit Stiles is a "huge step up" and she's *still* unable to engender that kind of excitement, well...

I wouldn't say she's unable to excite ABC voters, although that obviously remains to be seen. If anything, the Liberals probably have a bigger task on their hands. Right now, literally the only thing the OLP has over the NDP is brand loyalty and generally being taken more seriously as a party. Like you said that's a major advantage, but the disadvantages are also clear. Much less funding, no party status, and such a scarcity of talent that people are considering a guy who doesn't even affiliate with said party. If Ontarians want Ford out in 2026 and the Liberals don't have a solid leader, I think the NDP will close the deal by default (at least enough to deny Ford a majority).

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Schreiner rules himself out. I've seen Erskine-Smith in the news quite a lot, I'm skeptical of how effective a leader he would be, but he would certainly be the interesting choice.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Schreiner rules himself out. I've seen Erskine-Smith in the news quite a lot, I'm skeptical of how effective a leader he would be, but he would certainly be the interesting choice.

Erskine-Smith's main claim to fame is being a maverick "non-team player" in Ottawa - and that is not usually a set of attributes that makes someone cut out to lead a party.

My understanding is that Yasir Naqvi is probably the heavy favourite. As a former party president, he has the contacts etc...

That's why I doubt Erskine-Smith's chops, but I find that he's generally popular with base-level Liberals, because his mavericky votes are usually on things most Liberals align with him on, but the leadership doesn't act on out of political considerations. His initial resistance to the Emergencies Act is an exception where he wasn't siding with your average Liberal, but on other things like drug decriminalization etc, he has the pulse of the party's activist base.

Naqvi definitely has the superior resume as far as leadership though.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Wonder if Naqvi would run in Ottawa Centre, or would be parachuted to a safer seat such as Ottawa South (if he wins).

Its a good question. If he won, it could be years before the next election and there would likely be a lot of pressure to get in the leg - the question then would be whether Fraser would be willing to resign his seat in Ottawa South to make way for Naqvi. Once elected in Ottawa South it would make sense for him to stay put there as opposed to trying to overturn a massive NDP majority in Ottawa Centre

But if Fraser resigns, who will serve as the OLP interim leader in 2026-27?

Jokes aside, it will depend on whether Fraser wants to stay in the caucus. He's in his mid-60s and Canadian politicians rarely stick around past retirement age, so he just might decide that he's done with politics and let Naqvi take his seat in this case. Of course, any Liberal would be a shoe-in in Ottawa South, it would definitely help the leader to not have to worry too much about winning his own seat.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Toronto MP Nate Erskine-Smith launches leadership bid for Ontario Liberal Party


It's been obvious for months, but official now. NES becomes the first to declare his candidacy for the OLP leadership. Pretty well-liked and respected guy among the broad centre-left in Ontario (except some NDP activist types who see him as a faux-progressive, but NDP activists aren't voting Liberal anyway), and even some conservatives like him as a person despite disagreeing with his politics.

Now, whether he actually has the chops to lead a party, we'll have to see. Some politicians are good at getting the talking heads talking, but aren't that great at politicking, and Nate might be that kind of politician. After all, he's never been a minister or even a parl sec, so we haven't seen him in positions of making executive decisions. At the same time, if the LPC wants someone who can rally an anti-Ford coalition under the Liberal banner, he's a damn good choice.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

‘We govern from right of centre’: Bonnie Crombie on how she’d lead the Ontario Liberals


Uhhh Bonnie, I think you're describing the Progressive Conservatives

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

I can't stand "vote for me and I'll be the same as the current guy" politicians. Crombie's critique of Wynne gov't is literally the same as what Ford used to say in 2018 - it speaks to a lack of a backbone to criticize your own party more than your opponent as you're hinting at wanting to lead said party - and the theory of "Liberals need to be centre-right to win the 905" line is a little outdated, because I'm sure Crombie knows that Justin Trudeau had a clean sweep three clean sweeps of Mississauga while running as the most left-wing Liberal leader since his father. If Crombie wants to give voters two centre-right options, they will go for the authentic centre-right option.

Well to be fair she's not entirely the same as Ford. Ford's not a NIMBY.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

‘We govern from right of centre’: Bonnie Crombie on how she’d lead the Ontario Liberals


Uhhh Bonnie, I think you're describing the Progressive Conservatives

Yeah, as opposed to what the Chretien/Martin Liberals referred to as the "Reform Alliance" or later as the "Alliance Conservatives".   Basically, she's bidding to be the Alison Redford to Doug Ford's Danielle Smith.

That analogy doesn't really work for two reasons. For one, Danielle Smith was an opposition leader, Ford is the premier. And I'm really not sure there's that much space on the centre-right, because the PCs have been pretty effective at knowing when to veer to the centre, and when to tack right. If I were a Liberal, I'd much rather my party focus on crushing the NDP and consolidating the centre-left

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

I can't stand "vote for me and I'll be the same as the current guy" politicians. Crombie's critique of Wynne gov't is literally the same as what Ford used to say in 2018 - it speaks to a lack of a backbone to criticize your own party more than your opponent as you're hinting at wanting to lead said party - and the theory of "Liberals need to be centre-right to win the 905" line is a little outdated, because I'm sure Crombie knows that Justin Trudeau had a clean sweep three clean sweeps of Mississauga while running as the most left-wing Liberal leader since his father. If Crombie wants to give voters two centre-right options, they will go for the authentic centre-right option.

Well to be fair she's not entirely the same as Ford. Ford's not a NIMBY.

Of all of the Ontario provincial elections in the last two or three decades, I can't remember a single time when Ontario Liberals won an election on a left-of-centre platform, with 2014 being an exception, but that was due to Tim Hudak being a little too frank about his plan to dismiss large numbers of public sector workers.


In general, I would say OLP does better when they run on a centre to centre-right platform, as in, promising not to raise taxes (McGuinty 2003), or even promising tax cuts (McGuinty 2011).

That's fair, but I think times have changed. Politics is more polarized than it used to be, and while this is somewhat anecdotal, the Trudeau era seems to have dramatically changed what the Liberal Party looks like. Many of the insiders today are progressive millennials who were inspired by Trudeau (and their hatred of Harper) to get into politics, which basically describes Erskine-Smith. Much of the Liberal base is also the same. When you look at LPC and OLP conventions for example that reliably vote for left-wing policy proposals, it's not clear to me that today's Liberals would actually accept a "centre-right" platform.

The other thing is that in McGuinty's runs, being more centrist worked in part because Liberals could still win rural areas. Ridings like Perth-Wellington, Lambton-Middlesex, Prince Edward-Hastings etc voted Liberal in his two majorities. Today, it's almost inconceivable that Liberals would win such ridings, short of a landslide. When those ridings left the Liberals in 2011, McGuinty lost his majority - Wynne won it back, not by winning back those ridings, but by maxing out the GTA (and yes, Hudak helped in that regard).

Point is, the path to a Liberal win in Ontario today looks a little different than it may have in the past, because it's a much more urban and cosmopolitan party than it used to be 20 years ago. I'm not sure a Ford-lite platform would really work for them.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

‘We govern from right of centre’: Bonnie Crombie on how she’d lead the Ontario Liberals


Uhhh Bonnie, I think you're describing the Progressive Conservatives

Yeah, as opposed to what the Chretien/Martin Liberals referred to as the "Reform Alliance" or later as the "Alliance Conservatives".   Basically, she's bidding to be the Alison Redford to Doug Ford's Danielle Smith.

That analogy doesn't really work for two reasons. For one, Danielle Smith was an opposition leader, Ford is the premier. And I'm really not sure there's that much space on the centre-right, because the PCs have been pretty effective at knowing when to veer to the centre, and when to tack right. If I were a Liberal, I'd much rather my party focus on crushing the NDP and consolidating the centre-left

In that case, you can shift the metaphor to the '14 Toronto mayoral race, and say that she's bidding to be the John Tory to Doug Ford's, well, Doug Ford--and Ford was kind of "incumbent" as his brother's proxy.  (And Stiles would be Chow, '14-style.)

And of course, the right-wing-troll twittersphere loves to refer to "John Liberal".

Sure that's possible, but contingent on the NDP going the way of Olivia Chow in 2014, which we can't guarantee. There's certainly loads of historical precedent for Ontarians voting Liberal to kick out the Tories because "the NDP can't win", but the NDP is in a much stronger position today than it was in 2003 or 1985 - and for that matter, Grits are much weaker. If 2026 is a change election, the NDP is in at least as good a position as the Liberals to be the beneficiaries.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Well to be fair she's not entirely the same as Ford. Ford's not a NIMBY.

But keep in mind that that might be, indeed, his tripping point--that is, being perceived as a NIMBY is one thing, being perceived as a "Greenbelt is a scam" insensitive goon bulling ahead with pet notions for Ontario Place and Ontario Science Centre is another.  And remember: Doug Ford has *always* had that "insensitive goon" thing going--it's what galvanized Toronto voters to opt for John Tory instead in '14...

The NIMBY thing is just my spin on it, I don't think it matters much in a provincial election (it should but I doubt it)

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

The Liberals aren't winning back those ancestral Liberal ridings back any time soon due to realignment. The path to victory is indeed the Wynne path - sweeping the GTA.

Crombie's strategy is a bold one, considering there are more swing voters on the centre-left than the centre-right. But maybe if she focuses on the 905 suburbs, and the NDP focuses on keeping their seats, the two parties can force a Tory minority government? That's the ideal situation, but would involve Ontarians voting tactically.

Thank you, that's what I was trying to say but wasn't elaborating very well. The McGuinty path doesn't really exist anymore, because those right-wing ancestral Liberals in small town Ontario no longer vote Liberal. The good thing for the Liberals is, even though they've lost those places, the massive growth of the GTA means they can win with a completely different coalition. A centre-left strategy can absolutely win votes in the GTA, as Trudeau has proven three times in a row - in large part because a centre-left strategy actually energizes Liberals.

I said this about O'Toole, I said it about Charest, and now I'm saying it about Crombie - in today's political atmosphere, if you can't excite your party's core voters, your supposed appeal to swing voters means nothing.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Well to be fair she's not entirely the same as Ford. Ford's not a NIMBY.

But keep in mind that that might be, indeed, his tripping point--that is, being perceived as a NIMBY is one thing, being perceived as a "Greenbelt is a scam" insensitive goon bulling ahead with pet notions for Ontario Place and Ontario Science Centre is another.  And remember: Doug Ford has *always* had that "insensitive goon" thing going--it's what galvanized Toronto voters to opt for John Tory instead in '14...

On the greenbelt thing:

https://twitter.com/connordpeters/status/1661168239630532608
I just hope people realize what this means. Ontario has an annual population growth nearing 450,000. The Ford government has passed some of the most pro-intensification laws in Canada - for example, by the end of 2023, all Ontario municipalities will be required to permit secondary suites in single detached zones. The pie-in-the-sky urbanist fantasies may be fulfilled at some point in the future, but we need quick-and-dirty solutions right now, and things like basement apartments and "shiny towers" are part of that mix.

The other thing with intensification is that it creates a strain on existing municipal infrastructure, and require major upgrades. So yes, in some cases, it's more economical to create new infrastructure to service new lots built in the greenbelt than to intensify within an urban area. Doesn't mean we shouldn't be vigilant about encroachment into the greenbelt, but this I guarantee you: whether there is a PC, Liberal, or NDP government, there will be development on the Greenbelt. The rate of population growth and the lack of developable land within settlement areas makes it somewhat inevitable.

Of course, one could argue that maybe the rate of population growth is too high, but I know better than to touch the third rail of Canadian politics. Besides, that's a federal issue. I do find it a little ridiculous that the federal government has doubled immigration rates with no national strategy for how to accommodate such growth. But again, third rail, we can't question that.

Anyway, what Bonnie Crombie is signaling represents the WORST possible outcome for the Greenbelt. The Ford government has been perhaps too lax with the greenbelt, but has also been pro-intensification. If we get a Liberal government that opposes intensification, make no mistake - the Greenbelt will be opened up MUCH, MUCH more than the PCs have done.