TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Future PM of Canada
Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »

I have to admit, I had a chuckle at ShadoWolf's assertion that Stephen Harper is considered one of the intellectuals in the Conservative party... It's not saying very much of the Conservatives. Funny thing about the Conservatives, is that at the grassroots level (Riding Associations) many members are looking past this election (deeming it un-winnable) to the next leadership convention when they can turf out Harper. I think we get a good idea about how unpopular Harper is in the party when Ralph Klein, one of the true visionaries of the party, would publicly state that the election was un-winnable with Harper at the helm.

A second year Poli Sci. student could have predicted that forcing an election now was a no-win situation for the Conservatives. The first Gomery report will be too much a thing of the past to be a salient issue, and the election will fall before the second report is released. Harper won't be able to take advantage of Canadian's indignation with corruption in the LBC.

Voters are not going to respond positively to a holiday election campaign - a point agreed upon by every national analyst.

Harper wants to open up the abortion debate again - to his peril. This issue alone has killed him in Ontario and Quebec amongst women. The only woman agreeing with Harper on this issue is Gwen Landolt at REAL Women of Canada. This policy plank is nothing more than pandering to the religious fringe.

Same-sex marriage presents a similar problem. It's a dead issue in Quebec and everywhere else is a 50-50 split along rural/urban lines. Any policy created by a Conservative goverment will be tossed by the Supreme Court within a year. Such an attempt at overriding C-38 is also likely to get Harper's government tossed in a confidence vote.
The fact is, same-sex marriage is not a big enough issue nationally to base an election campaign on... the last election demonstrated that point.

As for health care, Harper is going to try and sell the country on Klein's 'third way' combination of public and private services. The question that neither Klein nor Harper can answer (and I've asked both of them), is how to guarantee competent doctors will remain in the public system. Unless Harper can clear up that uncertainty he will be vulnerable everywhere.

I have to agree with Klein's opinion that we're in for another Liberal minority.

^^Liberals should gain more seats from the last election, and honestly I expect them to have a MAJORITY. As the guy above said, the conservatives cannot really capitalize on any issues anymore. The fact is most Canadians do not want to go back to the old ways and are satisfied with their life.
This is the way society is progressing, aint nothing you can do about it, move on. Outside the US, traditional conservative parties are dying out, just look at UK. Most people who still vote conservative are traditional voters (ie stick with one party their whole lives b/c of family voting history etc).

They are very successful with people who have many morals and values but the fact is our society has less and less of those and its not neccessarily a bad thing...If the PC and Alliance never united, I think PC would've had a chance with Belinda as leader. I think for the future, Liberals will shift to the right and so will the NDP, thus pushing away the conservatives for good.

quote:

Originally posted by jon jon hahah now who's the loony left

LOL

LOL

I knew the moment this thread got started that shadoWolf would stick his ugly head in and that DigiNut would be sure to follow.

ahahahah

So I promised myself I wouldn't post until they both opened mouth and inserted their foots in it
LOL that didn't take long

Thank goodness we have MarkT, Swilly, nacarter and the other positive and equitable voices of logical reasoning on TA.

As for the Shadow and Nut...you guys can stand alone. Again.



Hope you both grow up one day LOL

^^^^^ am I that forgetable?

they all fucking suck

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard ^^^^^ am I that forgetable?

LOL Moral..ur most definately not forgettable.

Your one of the more astute people I've had the pleasure of meeting...

I just happened to name the person who started the thread and the last two voices of reason that I read before I decided to post lol

But I'm sure it won't be long b4 shadow and nut come after us with more of their oratory performance.

Funny thing is, we haven't seen any of Ignatieff's stands on issues, what his politics are, etc.

I honestly think Klein may be the best Conservative candidate. Whether you hate him or not, he's got a good success record. I'd also like to see Preston Manning working as the grey eminence of Conservatives. He sounds silly, but he's got a smart mind.

quote:

Originally posted by mikester69 ^^Liberals should gain more seats from the last election, and honestly I expect them to have a MAJORITY. As the guy above said, the conservatives cannot really capitalize on any issues anymore. The fact is most Canadians do not want to go back to the old ways and are satisfied with their life. This is the way society is progressing, aint nothing you can do about it, move on. Outside the US, traditional conservative parties are dying out, just look at UK. Most people who still vote conservative are traditional voters (ie stick with one party their whole lives b/c of family voting history etc). They are very successful with people who have many morals and values but the fact is our society has less and less of those and its not neccessarily a bad thing...If the PC and Alliance never united, I think PC would've had a chance with Belinda as leader. I think for the future, Liberals will shift to the right and so will the NDP, thus pushing away the conservatives for good.

Morality in canada = honest frank discussion gets you nowhere... lies, blackmail and stealing get you re-elected.

Sad

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Morality in canada = honest frank discussion gets you nowhere... lies, blackmail and stealing get you re-elected. Sad

Actually, I think the more accurate lesson to be learned if the next election results echo the last is the following: If you are going to pander to a regional electorate rather then the national electorate you'd best be sure to reflect the will of the most populace province(s) otherwise you are doomed to opposition.

BTW...Dear Fir3start3r
You have officially surprised me. I would have never thought you were one to take cheap shots. One must always be careful when they make low blows...bc you lose face when your true flag colours show up.

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree Funny thing is, we haven't seen any of Ignatieff's stands on issues, what his politics are, etc. I honestly think Klein may be the best Conservative candidate. Whether you hate him or not, he's got a good success record. I'd also like to see Preston Manning working as the grey eminence of Conservatives. He sounds silly, but he's got a smart mind.

I don't think Klein would be a good candidate. The cold truth that the conservatives need to confront is that western conservatism is viewed with suspicion everywhere west of the Lake of Bays. The conservatives will not be a viable threat to hold the government benchs until they have a leader who is either from Ontario (born in Toronto but raised in Calgary does not count) or from an Anglo area of Quebec.

Ah, Preston.... I didn't agree with much of his politics but at least I respected him, and the Reform party. They actually stated their positions and stuck to their guns..... this is the principle weakness of the Conservatives.

The problem is that there isn't any viable Conservative candidate from Ontario. But at least with Klein, you can present a record of economic success. (Plus a good PR department needed to help)

I was surprised that the Deformed Party did well enough under him during the Cretin era. IMO I think it was Manning who held it together.

Every way we try to look, we can't present an alternative to the Libs. Not now anyways. (Catherine Clark for PM candidate anyone?)

quote:

Originally posted by b4k-oz BTW...Dear Fir3start3r You have officially surprised me. I would have never thought you were one to take cheap shots. One must always be careful when they make low blows...bc you lose face when your true flag colours show up.

No need for surprises.
I grew up in Western Canada and any Western Canadian will tell you, we had no love for the man.
Amusing and a character as he was in a dull Canadian politic environment, his track record was abysmal at best...
I'm far from being anti-patriotic; Canada is the best country in the world bar-none but I failed to see the love affair.

If you're questioning as to why, this article pretty much sums a lot of the main points.
(I'm sure Diginut and few others can concur and/or add to this list).

quote:

Why the West has no love for Trudeau By LINK BYFIELD Saturday, September 30, 2000 Candour is not always wise when it concerns a man who is dead but not yet buried. Any criticism of Pierre Trudeau at this moment seems base. His family is in grief, his army of political friends and admirers shaken. Gushing adulation appears to be the only acceptable course. Or so the media seem to think. There were at least six straight hours of doting retrospective Thursday on the CBC, and 12 pages of mostly fawning veneration in this national newspaper yesterday, along with 16 in the other one. But I think it's eminently safe to say there is relatively little interest or grief when you get away from the East, and away from the competitive melodramatics of the media. Most of us in the West bore neither love nor respect for the man who has just died in Montreal. Indeed, what's being said about him ranges between irritating and nauseating. The assertion is being made that Mr. Trudeau was a "great" prime minister. People who say this can never explain very clearly what they mean. It seems to signify that Mr. Trudeau has always fascinated people of a certain age and attitude. If by "great" we mean he screwed up the country more thoroughly than anyone before or since, Westerners would probably agree. But I don't think that's what his many admirers are struggling to express. We're told, for instance, that he was a force for national unity. This despite the fact that a powerful separatist movement grew up in Quebec while he was running the country, and a second one, less mature but equally dangerous, was up and running in the West before he quit. He was a "nation builder," we're told. He had a "vision of what Canada could be." Well, perhaps. These things are hard to quantify. What isn't hard to count is how much federal debt he left behind. The net federal debt was $17-billion when he came in and $128-billion when he left. There was no federal deficit when he took control, and a $25-billion annual deficit by the time of his departure. And what have we to show for it? Did we win a war? Did we build a dynamic economy? No, we spent it all on sandwich programs of infinite variety, most of which did no good and are long gone. And our children -- those who haven't moved to the United States -- are repaying it today through fruitless taxation from which they derive zero benefit. We're told that he was a great champion of human rights and a faithful Roman Catholic. As to his faith, I can't pretend to know. But it's a fact that almost his first act was to legalize abortion, and that during his 15 years of power, about 750,000 Canadian babies were killed. Such a champion of human rights, Mr. Trudeau. And how very, very Catholic. Similarly, we are forever hearing what a frighteningly deep intellect he had. Long ago, I actually tried to read some of his earlier writing. It was a waste of effort. His jottings were disorganized, superficial, long on jargon and short on thought, and dreadfully, dreadfully dull. As far as I have ever been able to tell, Pierre Trudeau had three assets: cleverness, style and nerve. In short, he was an actor. He could act like an intellectual, or a lover, or a statesman, or a brawler, and a huge audience followed along, relishing his every word, gesture and hat. In this sense, he was "great." It was this quality that captivated such widespread attention. Behind that mask, however, he was moody, inconsistent, glib, arrogant and shallow. Parliament annoyed him, so he bulldozed his Charter of Rights and Freedoms into the Constitution and surrendered statutory supremacy to the Supreme Court. Quebec nationalism annoyed him, so he invoked the War Measures Act against a small insurgency known to and traceable through an ordinary police force. The price we paid for that stunt was the election of Ren� L�vesque. Finance annoyed him, so he spent us into a multi-generational national debt. English Canada annoyed him, so he expanded official bilingualism everywhere across the country except in Quebec, and accused those who objected of racism. He seemed to have the mind of a dictator, not a democrat. He was fascinated by the cold-blooded determination of the Chinese Communists. He was once overheard by reporters remarking to Fidel Castro how much quicker and easier it would be to run things the Cuban way. Democracy is clumsy, public and messy, and Mr. Trudeau was graceful, private, elitist and fussy.

>>Source<<

Give Ignatieff a chance...he *just* formally announced his intentions to run as an MP...he can't be expected to have a "what I will do for Canada if I'm elected PM" speech prepared and ready for the public just yet

as for the alleged "anti-Ukranian" quote from a book of his...perhaps some context is required before any of us comment. Taking ONE PARAGRAPH out of an entire novel, without context, is what lead to a bounty on the head of Salman Rushdie, no?

I would think the Liberal bashers should welcome this candidacy...they *claim* to want change, both with the Liberals being removed from office, but also presumably from within the party itself (after all, we need strong opposition parties, regardless of who's currently in power).

Not to over-hype his running (witness the lack of hoopla around Ken Dryden's position), but Ignatieff could be the beginning of some positive change. He's not a "businessman" or "politician" in the same sense as Marin, Harper and Layton would be identified. He's a *highly* respected academic and journalist, presumably approaching politics from a different light.

give the guy a chance before you knock him down.

This is the same way they muscled Belinda Stronach into the Aurora-Newmarket riding even though they already had martha hall-findley who is now jobless. No party vote or anything. How democratic!

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT give the guy a chance before you knock him down.

That arguement can be used on both ends of the spectrum...

The reality is, Canadians are too politically paralyzed to make a decision and are willing to be lulled to sleep, voting for status quo.
I hope this time round with people being more Internet savy they'll get some real information rather than what the state run media (CBC) tells them.

actually most media is quite biased in the liberal's favour.

It makes me sick how they spin stories around.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 actually most media is quite biased in the liberal's favour. It makes me sick how they spin stories around.

It's a political hypocrisy.
They feed us what they want us to hear and we pay for it too!
It's like mad cow disease, political-style!

this "biased media" bullshit is getting *really* tiring...the Liberals are not perpetually in gov't and the ENTIRE FUCKING MEDIA is not in cahoots with the Liberal party.

start throwing some blame elsewhere instead of crying "bias". Face it, Harper has to be one of the most ineffective leaders the Tory party has put forth in recent history.

So is it *really* this awful, biased media? Or is Harper just not up to snuff?

look within before pointing fingers. Mulroney somehow overcame this "biased media" to form a majority gov't...so WTF state would that party be in if there was NO scandal??? Liberal 3/4 majority?

Harper is your problem...not the "Liberal media"

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT this "biased media" bullshit is getting *really* tiring...the Liberals are not perpetually in gov't and the ENTIRE FUCKING MEDIA is not in cahoots with the Liberal party. start throwing some blame elsewhere instead of crying "bias". Face it, Harper has to be one of the most ineffective leaders the Tory party has put forth in recent history. So is it *really* this awful, biased media? Or is Harper just not up to snuff? look within before pointing fingers. Mulroney somehow overcame this "biased media" to form a majority gov't...so WTF state would that party be in if there was NO scandal??? Liberal 3/4 majority? Harper is your problem...not the "Liberal media"

It is tiring... especially when i see it daily on the tv and in the newspapers.

if you dont see the bias its probably because u are a part of it.

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree Funny thing is, we haven't seen any of Ignatieff's stands on issues, what his politics are, etc.

EXACTLY!

The reason why we haven't seen them is because they're not relevant. Ignatieff's candidacy isn't about ideas, it's about raw power. The elites want a successor to Paul Martin in their pocket in case the election goes sour for the Lieberals. That's why they and their friends in the media started a whisper campaign for him months ago to lay the groundwork for his coronation (see the original posting in this thread). It's also why they worked behind the scenes to have him undemocratically installed in the Etobicoke riding, grassroots liberals be damned.

Those principled grassroots liberals deserve a clean party they can be proud of, which is why the Lieberal Party must be purged. An election defeat is the first step in that process.

^^^ at least the Liberals know how to produce a competent, effective leader who can lead their party to success.

The Conservatives may want to try the same...instead of putting forth a leader who initially wouldn't commit to anything...and still can't bring success to his party despite a huge scandal for the outgoing gov't.

you call it a "whisper campaign"...others would call it an effective leadership search.

Jay...if the media is so biased and so damaging to every party but the Liberals...then explain the past success of the Conservatives? How did Mulroney manage to lead a majority gov't? Has the media really changed THAT much in the last dozen years that it's impossible to overcome their awful bias?

there are far too many excuses for the lack of success for other parties...baised media...Canadians being dumb, apathetic, *insert whatever term you wish here*, etc.

when will other parties accept that they simply are not appealing to enough voters and that the "biased media" can't remain the excuse? The CBC is not going to disappear, so now what?

When will the Conservatives just admit that Harper simply cannot lead the party to power...that Canadians will not vote for him? Poll released today said that 47% of those polled favour the Liberals being turfed from office...yet the same percentage believe we're better off under the Liberals than the Conservatives...that's indicative of a failure on the part of the Conservative party to appeal to voters.

but ok...keep pointing at the media...while everyone does that, we'll have another Liberal win in the next election...another minority gov't forced to scramble to hold onto power...and we'll all suffer while the leaders continue to bicker and posture instead of enacting any meaningful change in Parliamnet.

I suspect you'll be addressing him as PM Paul Martin for the forseeable future, judging by the incompetence of the Conservative leadership

but hey, that's probably just my "Liberal arrogance" talking there...lol

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r No need for surprises. I grew up in Western Canada and any Western Canadian will tell you, we had no love for the man. Amusing and a character as he was in a dull Canadian politic environment, his track record was abysmal at best... I'm far from being anti-patriotic; Canada is the best country in the world bar-none but I failed to see the love affair. If you're questioning as to why, this article pretty much sums a lot of the main points. (I'm sure Diginut and few others can concur and/or add to this list).

LOL \O/ ... that you would actually suggest Nut and others can concur. That has to be the worst selection of credible people in this entire site LOL

As for your claim of being far from anti-patriotic...take a good look in the mirror my friend. If your happy with what you see, then good for you...but frankly I find your opinion to be extremely disrespectful.
However, I can totally understand your need to express yourself this way..cuz your still pretty young and I am even more certain, with your opinion, that you were never a history or poli-sci major ...so IMO you have a lot to learn and a lot to be greatful for.

Oh and re your rebuttal...whatever

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.