Well, fact of the matter is that I intend to vote for the incumbent NDP MP in my riding, but not because I’d want the NDP to form the government. She’s been a decent MP, and the elements of the NDP platform I disagree with (like various anti-trade BS) are in no danger of being implemented. The Liberals haven’t yet nominated anyone here (last I checked, might have by now I guess) and I’d like for there to be more non-Conservative Saskatchewan voices in Parliament, because we small-l liberal Saskachewanians are woefully underrepresented in Ottawa.
Well, I wish I had a pony too.
We have to work with the hand we are dealt, not the one we wish we had.
**Gorsnak’**s comments above are well considered and VERY well stated. I find myself in agreement with the entire post.
The only recourse you have is to not vote for them. Otherwise, you are condoning his breaking the law and racism.
-
I’m not voting for Trudeau. He’s not in my riding. He is the leader, but he is not the entire party. We’re not the United States.
-
I am not aware that Trudeau has been convicted of breaking a law. This is new information for me.
-
I do not believe that Trudeau is racist. I think he made some bone-headed moves in the past, and the latest “revelations” that have come out during an election have not made me think he is a racist. A privileged twit who did stupid things without thinking of how they might be taken by others, yes. Someone who has apparently learned from his stupid behaviour, yes.
-
Please read Gorsnak’s very good post. Then read it again - it sums up very nicely my thoughts, and voting intentions.
Trudeau is lately pissing me off, and I agree that he’s a lightweight and represents style over substance, and even his “style” is riddled with gaffes.
He had my support for about five seconds recently when he announced, rather sanctimoniously but correctly, that retired people deserve to live comfortably and he was therefore going to increase the non-contributary OAS pensions --*** for those over 75***! WTF? Apparently those who are retired but nowhere near 75 can be as uncomfortable as they want, he doesn’t care. I hate announcements like this that are purely feel-good symbolism, that sound like they’re actually doing something but are crafted to minimize costs and benefit only a tiny minority of the population. The way it will probably affect me is that it’s likely to raise my taxes so Trudeau can pay for this boondoggle.
FTR, I couldn’t care less about the “brownface” revelations. I care about substantive issues and after a glitzy start following the election he hasn’t delivered much, and managed to piss off both China and Saudi Arabia, the latter through the particularly naive and stupid blunder of publicly chastising them over human rights.
-
I am not aware that Trudeau has been convicted of breaking a law. This is new information for me.
-
I do not believe that Trudeau is racist. I think he made some bone-headed moves in the past, and the latest “revelations” that have come out during an election have not made me think he is a racist. A privileged twit who did stupid things without thinking of how they might be taken by others, yes. Someone who has apparently learned from his stupid behaviour, yes.
-
Please read Gorsnak’s very good post. Then read it again - it sums up very nicely my thoughts, and voting intentions.
[/QUOTE]
Thanks for pointing out what I pointed out earlier. In any case, you would be showing the Liberal party that they should be concerned about his lack of judgement.
You must have missed this: Justin Trudeau violated law by urging that case be dropped – watchdog | Canada | The Guardian
What has he learned? A drama teacher doesn’t know the history of his profession and understands the issues with blackface? He was 29
Why do you continue to say this? If that is all there is to debate on the matter why continue the discussion?
An article that sums up my attitude on Trudope.
Sent from my SM-N910U using Tapatalk
And that one word right there sums up why I’ve abandoned the modern Conservatives parties. Take a look at this thread. We’ve got a lot of right-leaning people for whom the entire election seem to turn on Trudeau, and who are making only ad hominem attacks against both him and the people who may be voting for him. No discussion of policy, no context, nothing at all of substance.
Then compare it to everyone posting about why they won’t vote for Scheer. No one is trying to come up with a cutesy insulting nickname. Lots of people have posted exactly why they oppose Scheer’s policies, and why the support Trudeau’s policies, even if they don’t particularly like Trudeau himself as a person.
Despite all the Conservatives talking about people “drinking the Koolaid”, it’s painfully clear which side of this discussion is actually thinking about things clearly, and it isn’t the conservative side.
A few things are quite important to me during this election;
-
Who will take climate change seriously and propose concrete actions to reduce our Greenhouse gas emissions. I’m talking about an actual plan, and actual steps to be taken that make sense. Anyone with science deniers in their party is not likely to get my vote.
-
Who will take the federal debt seriously. At the very least, who will keep the debt-GDP ratio constant or diminishing? Promises of tax cuts here, and more goodies there are all well and good, but simply cutting taxes and adding to the debt is not attractive to me. Who has the right balance? As a Canadian, I’m not overly impressed with promises of “more money in your pocket”, if that comes at the expense of cutting important services for all of us in this country. Of course, nobody wants to talk about what services they will cut during an election season - but a gaping hole in the budget due to tax cuts will have to be made up somehow.
Who will be able to strike that fine balance that is so very necessary on the world stage these days? With the United States being an unreliable ally now, and countries like China becoming more powerful, it’s important that Canada is seen to be a friend (and reliable trading partner) to as many countries as possible. It will be increasingly important to diversify both our economy and our trading partners in the world. We can no longer rely on selling raw goods to only one customer.
This is a very tough task.
Precisely. I have to make a decision not just on policy but with whom I want to stand. Do I want to stand with people who use terms like “Obummer”, “Killary” and “Trudope”? No. No, I don’t actually. I’d like to keep such venomous partisan crap south of the border. So it that’s who the CPoC supporters are choosing to be then they’re going to lose moderatve conservatives, like me because I won’t stand with them.
Conservatives and the conservative media will relentlessly hammer this issue until October 21st because many Conservatives passionately hate Trudeau and see this as a way to have the Liberals lose the election. Unfortunately I think the overwhelming amount of outrage over an apologetic person having worn some costumes (believably out of ignorance and without any intent to offend) belittles more harmful acts of racism that minorities face daily. Anger from an offended minority could be understandable. But when the political party that is mostly not made up of minorities (and is generally much less concerned about minorities) suddenly politicizes and weaponizes fake racism outrage it serves to further demean real racism problems.
Exactly right. And they keep doubling down on this. I was going to vote PC in the last Ontario election, right up until they chose Doug Ford as the new party leader. They had two perfectly fine moderate candidates they could have chosen, either of whom I could have supported with a clear conscience, but they went out of their way to chose the least qualified candidate for office I’ve ever seen in my life.
But at least your beer only costs you a buck now.
God.
Okay, “Buck a Beer” was just the perfect encapsulation of what is wrong with these guys now. Anyone who bothered to do the math on it knew it wasn’t a long-term sustainable proposal, but the “party that can do math” didn’t seem to notice that.
And while they were screwing that all up, they still haven’t delivered on expanding beer sales to more retail locations, which is a thing the government actually could do relatively easily, and which I actually supported. So, 0/2 on the Beer Policies.
And while they were at it, they screwed up the Pot Legalization so much they managed to do something I would have sworn was impossible: They lost money selling drugs. This is even worse than Trump’s casinos! How is that even possible?!?!
You know what surprises me on a lot of this? It’s the silence from the Conservative party on the foreign policy failures by Trudeau and the liberals.
- Failed trip to India - leave aside the dressing up and lay out exactly how you’re going to leverage our massive Indian immigrant population to get access to the Indian market
- China - the government had to fire their own political appointee/party member for appearing so in the bag for the CCP that even the Canadian public couldn’t miss it
2a. China - the government’s response to direct attacks on Canadian exporters in agriculture has been…well a lot of grave sounding concern.
2b. China/others - the existence of CCP/other govt.) funded groups in Canada acting against ethnic communities and/or students seems to be unopposed
2c. China - hostage diplomacy that has stirred only tut tuts - Hong Kong - what’s our position here? Massive popular protests for rule of law, self determination and … nothing really.
To be fair we’ve got a tripwire force in the Baltic, but where are our ideas on strengthening NATO? What happened to maritime enforcement in the North? I don’t really expect the Greens or the NDP to have views on these but a Conservative party that’s deadly silent on foreign policy is ridiculous.
As funny as that it, I have to assume it was because this was due to it being the rolling out year and so there’s upfront costs. Plus, the scale was pretty small. As the scale increases the revenues should increase too.
But still funny. 
All of them have been bad at talking about foreign policy.
Did you catch in the debates when May seemed to suggest that Russia was landing troops in the Canadian arctic? Oh boy. My last couple of years in the military were centered around arctic sovereignty. Monitoring, disaster preparation, etc. I’m pretty sure the Russians aren’t landing soldiers on Canadian soil in the Arctic.
Singh seems generally ill-prepared in general. The poor NDP. They’ve had some decent to good leaders with awful platforms. This year their platform is ok, but they’re leader is … well … not so great.
Scheer said that the UN Relief Agency is encouraging terrorism in Palestine. Other than that, Scheer’s talk on foreign policy seems to be “I’ll do better than Trudeau by <mumble> <mumble>” Sorry I missed the part where you provide details. “Oh yes, you see I’ll <cough> <cough> <mumble>.” For example, he’s called for a total reset with China. What does that mean? He says “Trudeau’s not doing enough.” What does that mean? What is he going to do? Scheer likes to talk tough, but I think as PM, I really don’t see how or what he could or would do differently.
And Trudeau. Well, you covered Trudeau fairly weak foreign policy efforts.
I think we may have to resign ourselves to the fact that the next few years are going to be weak on the foreign stage no matter what.
Edit: I didn’t agree with May basicially calling Scheer Trump’s toady. I don’t think that would be true. I think he would be friendlier with Trump but I don’t think he would be his hand puppet. I saw that Ford was in the USA and said he would have voted for Trump and he was a “big Republican”. So maybe I’m wrong about Scheer, but I think he’s a more refined that Ford. Can we ship Ford to the USA like we did with Ted Cruz? He’d do great in Texas!
I am not sure but I strongly suspect that:
- The Conservative Party has no real definitive answers for what they would have done differently in these very difficult situations. I mean, particularly when dealing with China and the USA in this Time Of Trump. International relations have become particularly volatile, and China is hard to deal with at the best of times.
So what are the Conservatives going to say other than “we would have done it better… by doing… better stuff.” I mean, SPECIFICALLY, how would they handle a situation where one ally (The USA) is pressuring you to follow international law by arresting a Chinese national… and you KNOW that by doing so you will piss off China.
So in this case, how would a Conservative government have managed without pissing off either our largest trading partner with a volatile and frankly vindictive president OR our second largest trading partner, which has a habit of bullying other countries on trade?
I think is the biggest factor is all of the “failures” listed above. The relationship with the US is the single most important one we have, whether we like it or not, and it will continue to be so for any foreseeable future. And since Trump was elected, it’s been the worst any of us have ever seen it, largely because of Trump. Any Canadian PM would have dedicated most of their efforts to dealing with Trump, regardless of whether they were inclined to working with him or against him.
Sure, it would be nice if Canada could make China behave, or get the Saudis to ease up, but we just don’t have that level of power, even in normal times. These days, I’m just glad they didn’t let all of NAFTA blow up in our faces.
Anyone who thinks Harper or Scheer would have been spectacularly more successful than Trudeau is mostly fantasizing, I think.