|
|
Post by Cranky on Nov 27, 2012 19:12:45 GMT -5
he's got 6 more years to learn the ropes . . . and if he doesn't the Liberals will use it on him. He wont last past he next election if the Liberals are still in 3rd place. By that time, Harper and Mulcair have torched his house down. The hilarious part of all this is the quandary the lefty media is in. If they hype the rockstar, they skewer the NDP and Saint Layton. But what they hell, they still can invent headlines on Harper's baby eating habits and secret agenda. Still can't get over this Liberal ad. It took months to get over my fear of the Canadian army invading my local brothel...... |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Nov 27, 2012 19:34:55 GMT -5
We have no idea what kind of a leader Trudeau will make. I think it's very shallow thinking to presume he'll be crap just because he's a Liberal. Nobody presumed he was shallow because he is a Liberal. He's accomplishing that all by himself. Igniatiff, Rae, etc, were very serious man that even though I disliked their political stands, I would have no problem with representing Canada. Trudeau has shown nothing of substance other then comic book politics....and rockstar appeal. As for his age. Are we kidding here? The man is 40 years old. His balls dropped a long time ago..... There is an argument out there that he is too young....I was just addressing that, by comparing him to Harper's age at the same milestones. Writing off politicians for mistakes made early in their careers would certainly lead to many being written off. Yet, most party supporters seem to find a way to defend their team. Funny how that scrutiny just applies to other parties. You see that hypocrisy demonstrated all the time by the pundits. Watching Republicans defend the litany of Sarah Palin's inane comments and dearth of political savvy completely pulled back the curtain on that tactic. I guarantee you that if Trudeau had decided to run Conservative, he'd have been welcomed with open arms. Like Chara joining the Habs. We'd find a way to look through the hate.  Could you itemize what Trudeau's done to suggest that he's a Palin-esque comic book politician or to suggest he thinks he's a rock star? In that regard, all politicians are celebrities, and it's key to bring charisma to the table. Even Harper had (maybe still has) an image consultant. IMO, it's too early to make an objective call on Trudeau. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Nov 28, 2012 0:18:39 GMT -5
Making speeches at high schools and elementary schools while taking political pot shots is the mark of deep political thinking......right up there with Mark Carney addressing the Canadian club or Harper getting awards for global statesmanship.
Let's face it, take away his name and nobody would care about a second rate drama queen.
As for the Palin comparison, good call. I'm looking at the records as we speak to see if he said that he can see the oil sands from Quebec if he stands on his father shoulders.
Don't get me wrong, I want to see him get gored by Harper and Mulcair. At best, he will marginalize the NDP and give the Conservatives an even larger majority.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 28, 2012 9:45:16 GMT -5
2015 should be interesting... Liberals, with Trudeau, easily take the Quebec votes, so that's potentially about 60 seats going to them. Harper just easily keeps AB, SK, MN, that's roughly 50 seats... Maritimes probably split the vote among them or so... So we're down to the battle of BC and Ontario... Quebec 60 seats at best....that's assuming NDP has dropped dead and PQ still gazing at their toes. More like 40 seats. Prairies have 58 of 62 seats locked up and at worst, will split BC and Maritimes. All they need is an Ontario split and they have a majority. Those extra seats are going to make the difference. Quebec still has influence but is no longer the power broker. IF Quebec goes Liberal, IF the Conservatives lose their 73 to 33 seat majority in Ontario, IF they lose their 21 to 14 seat majority in BC, IF they lose the majority of those extra seats.....if.....if....if....if...... the get the voter turnout ... I actually agree with you in that, if his last name wasn't Trudeau ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Nov 28, 2012 9:45:17 GMT -5
Harper has 12 years on him...and a lot more experience. I remember a very tense Harper during his first debates. Next time we saw him, he'd look at the camera and smile at odd times. Painfully obvious he was coached to smile. Somehow I don't think Trudeau will need to be coached to come across as "likeable". But that's sizzle...and sadly, it's been somewhat important to voters since the days of Nixon vs. JFK. Like I posted earlier...most of them work on "image"...even Harper.
Policy...that's the main thing. And if Trudeau can't articulate the Liberal stance....(they're all pie-in-the-sky during debates, anyway), and poke credible holes in the platforms of the other parties, then Harper will mop the floor with him, no doubt.
Good Palin joke!
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Nov 28, 2012 12:49:09 GMT -5
Quebec 60 seats at best....that's assuming NDP has dropped dead and PQ still gazing at their toes. More like 40 seats. Quebec didn't vote NDP, they voted Leyton and he's gone. The Bloc has sunk into oblivion. Right now it's wide open. IF the get the voter turnout ... I actually agree with you in that, if his last name wasn't Trudeau ... Cheers. Just as well I bet it isn't an easy name to carry. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Nov 28, 2012 14:21:11 GMT -5
I wonder if his half-sister's mother [what does that make her to him?] will support him when her name is dropped from the ballot?
CH: the Liberals don't have a stance right now . . . the NDP has moved into their territory from the left and the Conservatives from the right; it is going to be a difficult policy convention.
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Nov 28, 2012 15:39:22 GMT -5
It's not a stance that's missing, IMO, franko. It's public confidence and respectability. The PCs didn't have it for 10 years after Mulroney left them decimated. In fact, it took Harper's Alliance meld to bring them back to the level they used to enjoy as a major party.
It hasn't been nearly that long for the Liberals. Trudeau, if he proves to be a solid politician and not just a poser, will be able to rekindle the public confidence quickly.
Like I said, all platforms promise the world during campaigns.
Marc Garneau just announced he's throwing his hat into the Lib. leadership ring. He might make "out of this world" promises.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Nov 28, 2012 17:31:54 GMT -5
a coherent policy would help . . . right now it's a bunch of individuals spouting off. sure it really doesn't mean anything because the election is so far away, but those talking points will be brought up time and again in 2015.
Trudeau is going to ride charisma and good looks [and that'll give him a couple of votes] -- he's still the media darling so that'll help too. he's a likable guy -- will that be enough? Harper -- as much as he gets it for clamping down on the backbench -- has managed to muzzle the ones out of step and so gained power. will JT be able to do so to his caucus [small as it is]?
posturing until January 2015 -- what happens until then doesn't mater too much -- other than the fact that everything that happens until then will be brought up again and will need to be defended/explained!
as to Quebec, if the NDP can keep the soft vote they'll keep the Libs and the Bloc out by slithering up the middle [and I don't mean slithering in a negative context].
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Nov 28, 2012 18:14:57 GMT -5
Hard to get a coherent policy when you've been fragmented. Ask the PCs of the 90s.
Get a leader...and if he's the right stuff...it's off to the races.
Always good to have a proper dialectic in politics.....as with any discussion. The pursuit of truth over mud-slinging any day as far as I'm concerned. No party loyalty with me...
I think HA called it LibCons. Libertarian Conservative. I like the sound of that. Whoever is closest gets my vote. Then again, once they're in power....does it really matter? There will always be the same self-interest groups and corporate lobbyists tugging at their sleeves.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 28, 2012 18:15:12 GMT -5
...most of them work on "image"...even Harper. I dare say they all do, CH. Before it went under in a flood, I had a coffee table book on WW II. I remember seeing shots of one of Adolf Hitler's photo sessions. Here's one I was able to find online from a different session:  All that excessive body language Hitler used in his speeches was researched and rehearsed. As was Dalton McGuinty's posture when he participated in his first TV debate. Like Harper smiling, McGuinty was the only party leader to actually look at the camera when he was talking. It worked and he became Premier for quite an extended time. It may not even come to that. If Trudeau is ready to go just as John Q Canadian is ready to vote for a change, then he may very well end up as PM. We don't vote new guys in, though. We tend to kick the old ones out. That's the way we vote in this country and Harper will eventually have his day. Very few, from this select few, are exempt from this process. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Nov 28, 2012 20:51:53 GMT -5
Right on, Dis! Image is key....the "power of persuasion".
Our species, for the most part, has proven to be hard-wired as susceptible to it. Easily persuaded, easily led...sometimes for good, sometimes for bad. And content to be so.
Intelligence, proper education, critical thinking, questioning authority, dialectic....all key to seeing through the fog.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Nov 28, 2012 20:59:02 GMT -5
I think HA called it LibCons. Libertarian Conservative. I like the sound of that. Whoever is closest gets my vote. Then again, once they're in power....does it really matter? There will always be the same self-interest groups and corporate lobbyists tugging at their sleeves. Looking back, I thought the liberals were libertarian until it sank into my head that like much of the left, they wanted to tell you what to do and think. It started to fall apart with.....und you are going to like multiculturalism und you are going to like bilingualism und you are going to pay 50% to taxes und you are going to like that". UJmmmm...no. FU. As long as Harper muzzles the whackos, I'm Conservative. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Nov 28, 2012 21:15:07 GMT -5
what's interesting, HA, is that a lot of people don't like Harper because they don't like his far right policies and his opposition to anything gay and he is anti-abortion and is going to bring in laws about the two. yet he says over and over again that he is not going to bring in a bill on abortion [he hasn't] and he isn't going to fight gay marriage [it's a provincial matter].
for the most part he has successfully muzzled the whackos but the whackos get the press, but if you asked most people they couldn't tell you what his policies are. they point to Bev Oda who was excessive at times but from what I hear was a great minister that wasn't liked because when she listened to the bureaucrats and had to decide yea or nay she had the audacity to say "nay".
my sister-in-law doesn't like Harper because he says "listen" when he speaks. great reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Nov 28, 2012 21:47:41 GMT -5
what's interesting, HA, is that a lot of people don't like Harper because they don't like his far right policies and his opposition to anything gay and he is anti-abortion and is going to bring in laws about the two. yet he says over and over again that he is not going to bring in a bill on abortion [he hasn't] and he isn't going to fight gay marriage [it's a provincial matter]. for the most part he has successfully muzzled the whackos but the whackos get the press, but if you asked most people they couldn't tell you what his policies are. they point to Bev Oda who was excessive at times but from what I hear was a great minister that wasn't liked because when she listened to the bureaucrats and had to decide yea or nay she had the audacity to say "nay". my sister-in-law doesn't like Harper because he says "listen" when he speaks. great reason. Give credit to the lefty press for pushing bull droppings on the masses. Turn on the CBC when there is a matter involving federal politics and count how many times they mention "Prime Minister Harper" with ANYTHING negative they can attach to it. Even when he refused to attend a conference sponsored by by the garbage Iranian regime, it was "Harper shunning the UN". Two years ago, during a sky falling conference, Toronto Pravda was creating headlines for articles with the source being...their own reporters. BillyBob quoted BillyJean.......and then BillyJean quoted BillyBob in another article. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Dec 6, 2012 2:24:47 GMT -5
As a Conservative, I love Trudeau Extra Lite.
|
|
