Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarley
I'm not a CPC supporter nor partisan in the least. In fact, I'll likely be voting for Kent Hehr.
|
Fair enough. My apologies.
Quote:
|
I think you'd have to be blinded by ideology to not agree that Trudeau does not have an in depth understanding of economic and political issues. He leans on talking points much more than Harper or Mulcair, he continually makes foolish statements, has trouble thinking on his feet, and his educational background suggests he does not not have the same ability as the other two party leaders.
|
Yeah, I think there are areas he's obviously weaker than the other two on, but I think he did well for himself in the debates. By the same token, Harper has made a number of ridiculous statements during his time in office and even on this campaign, I'm thinking specifically of his comments regarding marijuana being "infinitely worse than tobacco," and missing and murdered indigenous women "not being on his radar." Mulcair has had his share of missteps too, so I don't think it's exclusive to Trudeau but he does seem to get the most attention for it, for whatever reason (I think a lot of it does have to do with the perceptions around his last name and "qualifications").
Quote:
|
Having said that, it looks like there is a good chance the Liberals will form the next government and I think Trudeau can be an effective leader if he leans heavily on his team of advisers (which is fairly strong). However, I would have much preferred to put my vote towards a party led by someone like Martha Hall-Findlay or Marc Garneau rather than a man with a famous last name.
|
Well the Liberals tried to run effective leaders in the last two elections and they failed miserably, so it's hard to blame them for trying to win with youth and charisma this time.