Justin Trudeau takes the high road

[Neeper]

Originally Posted by Matty81

It's crazy how Harper is green lighting these ad campaigns at the exact same time he's trying to wrap himself in the flag of righteousness charging full speed ahead on the anti-bullying laws in response to the poor kid in NS.

Not that there's any parallel between lispy and a mentally vulnerable teen but you think they'd at least pause for a week or two before starting up a large scale series of personal attacks.

You make such a great point. The attack ad and the flyer is nothing but pure bullying. If some kid made attack videos or handouts about a student at a school, that would for sure get squashed fast by the teachers, you would think. It would not be acceptable. And these guys are adults and using taxpayer money to bully? Unbelievable!!

I know who I am NOT voting for, that's for sure.

[starseed]

Maybe the conservatives realize that politics are cyclical and the conservative reign is temporarily ending. Perhaps they are just making sure that it is not the NDP in power come the next cycle.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Heh. A co-worker once told me that he never votes for the party in power. His claim was that every party in power does despicable things with that power and that should never be rewarded.

I like your co-workers thinking and would take it one step further by trying to only elect a minority government.

[Matty81]

I'm getting us way off track but if we had proportional representation every interest group would have at least some voice federally and you'd never see the kinds of unilateral governments we tend to have where unless the caucus revolts they can ram through whatever they want for 4 years. Even better than perpetual minority governments in my opinion. Whole different can of worms though I know.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Matty81

I'm getting us way off track but if we had proportional representation every interest group would have at least some voice federally and you'd never see the kinds of unilateral governments we tend to have where unless the caucus revolts they can ram through whatever they want for 4 years. Even better than perpetual minority governments in my opinion. Whole different can of worms though I know.

We'd probably end up with more parties, including more regional parties as well - similar to some European countries. There would likely be coalition governments quite regularly. Our current constitutional monarchy system is completely outdated for a modern, self-sufficient country like Canada.

[Smartcar]

How about preferential voting?
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/omar-al...b_2239113.html

The PB [Preferential Ballot] would require a candidate to win 50 per cent of the vote in their riding before they are declared a winner. Voters would be asked to rank their candidates of choice. If no candidate achieved 50 per cent of the vote then the candidate with the least number of votes would be dropped and their voters' second choice would gain those votes. If that still didn't produce a winner, the same process is applied again until a candidate garnered the coveted 50 per cent.
The PB system would ensure that no voter would be compelled to vote strategically because they would have the ability to rank their preferred candidates. This process would ensure that the winner was the choice of at least 50 per cent of voters. Also, it would preserve our representative parliamentary democracy where each MP would remain accountable to voters in a specific riding.

Political parties already use this method to elect their leaders.

I would support this.

[V]

Originally Posted by Smartcar

Political parties already use this method to elect their leaders.

And it has worked out so well for them.

No thanks. I'd prefer politicians that actually stand for something win. It's better than the middle of the road, don't offend anyone candidate.

[killer_carlson]

I'm more interested in preferential balloting if the party I vote for isn't the government.

I don't think I'm the only one.

THe other thing about preferential balloting that people tend to ignore in this debate, is the fact that it creates a preferential list within political parties, which causes all sorts of additional politicking and patronage within the parties as they horse trade certain candidates to the top of some list. This in turn creates larger numbers of people within the parties who are now politicians. Not to mention I'm tired of the perpetual election campaigns, which again would only be made worse by the jockeying within parties to formulate that list.



I'm not really interested in getting larger government (in one form or another)

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

I'd rather have someone with a lack of experience but makes up for it with drive. What I can't stand is the lying, scheming divisive experience we're being subjected to right now.

Well you know Trudeau is lying if he says he likes Alberta.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/11...quebec-either/

Is this the anti-divisive experience you are looking for?

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Well you know Trudeau is lying if he says he likes Alberta.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/11...quebec-either/

Is this the anti-divisive experience you are looking for?

The guy made a mistake, owned it and apologized. Imagine that, accountability!

[Bootsy]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

The guy made a mistake, owned it and apologized. Imagine that, accountability!

No he got caught expressing his true feelings towards Alberta and now that he is the National Liberal leader (running for it at the time) he's backpedaling.
Those comments just re-enforce any suspicions westerners had of him due to his dad's past with the west.

[Matty81]

It may be relevant since older voters turn out with so much more frequency but I grew up in Alberta in the late 80s/90s and Pierre Trudeau wasn't really somebody I was super familiar with until I got more interested in politics towards adulthood. I think the idea that the Trudeau name is already poisoned across the west is dated.

My first couple years worth of observation - I think Justin Trudeau seems a little gaffe prone and not the quickest on his feet... may go away with years leading the party but he's already been in the house for a few years. The Conservatives would have been better off just fencing with him and letting him define himself rather than rolling out the cheezy mean spirited ads they're cranking out.

Making themselves look lame to anybody with half a brain and in some ways crystalizing the notion that he's the main so called progressive challenger and helping the Libs erode the NDP support.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I wouldn't call myself a hard leftist. On most social issues I am, but there are a number of issues where I would definitely say I lean more to the right. I'm really not sure who these ads are intended for. I don't see them working well in places like Quebec or Ontario, and I've seen more negative reactions to them from people in the centre of the spectrum than I have from people on the far left, who largely view it as "Here we go again."

I'd also point again to the 2008 election in the U.S. as an example of negative campaigning ultimately losing a battle to positivity. People generally like positivity.

I was thinking of three posters specifically, of which you are not one. The overall reaction (of which I would include you, and myself) is that these ads are likely missing their mark.

[GP_Matt]

I am not defending these ads, but most campaign coordinators will tell you that people hate attack ads and then turn out to vote for the party that runs them.
The same goes for the excessive phone calls. People all hate them but somehow they still donate money that way.

[FanIn80]

The guy just seems like a face stuck on someone else's message. That's not a leader. That's not the guy you look towards to make a decision when it matters. That's the guy that's going to turn to a bunch of other guys and find out what he's supposed to say next.

I don't want to be lead by a follower.

[Tinordi]

We need something better than First Past the Post.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

The guy made a mistake, owned it and apologized. Imagine that, accountability!

This is absolutely hilarious. A mistake is when you forget your cell phone at the counter after paying for something. Or driving through a puddle near a sidewalk when someone is walking by. He didn't make a mistake, he's showing his true colors. He deep down believes that Canada is tiered and either Alberta or the west in general is of a lower tier.

If someone from outside this country was to visit, and see the link I posted prior, and then was asked "Do you think he made a mistake? Or do you think he prefers one part of the country over the other?" 1000 out of 1000 I'm sure would say the latter. And guess where he got it from?

Thinking Trudeau's look down their nose at the west, or at least Alberta is a tried, true and repeated, demonstrated fact. It's not a mistake.

I don't lean too hard left or right, probably left on social issues and right on economic ones, but one thing I don't like is I find time and time again, that people on the left tend (not all, but tend) to be less burdened with facts, they like what is nice, charismatic and makes them feel good. They pick a favorite and stop thinking. So when inconvenient things like a party leader s&!&'s on another part of the country, people on the left want to look the other way, and call it a mistake.

Where in the developed world has a country leader put in a plan that by its very design shifts significant wealth from one region to another, and then his kid with no real experience in anything useful, with very obvious regional bias's to match his Dad's get elected a party leader?

[Rathji]

Even if they are not his true colors, and he was just pandering to some type of eastern group, the lack of judgement that is shown by making such a statement is pretty bad.

It's not the end of the world though, everyone says stupid things and people have the right to change their minds and opinions.

I really don't think it matters though, the Liberal vote in Alberta will drop with Trudeau, but it will go up everywhere that matters for the Liberals. They certainly won't be worse off than they were last election. If they don't mess it up, they might even form the government sometime in the next 4 or so years.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

...I don't lean too hard left or right, probably left on social issues and right on economic ones, but one thing I don't like is I find time and time again, that people on the left tend (not all, but tend) to be less burdened with facts, they like what is nice, charismatic and makes them feel good. They pick a favorite and stop thinking. So when inconvenient things like a party leader s&!&'s on another part of the country, people on the left want to look the other way, and call it a mistake...

What do you think about the guy who said the following?

"Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it"

"I was asked to speak about Canadian politics. It may not be true, but it's legendary that if you're like all Americans, you know almost nothing except for your own country. Which makes you probably knowledgeable about one more country than most Canadians."

"You have to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada; people who live in ghettos and are not integrated into Western Canadian society."

http://unseatharper.ca/harper-quotes.php

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

The guy just seems like a face stuck on someone else's message. That's not a leader. That's not the guy you look towards to make a decision when it matters. That's the guy that's going to turn to a bunch of other guys and find out what he's supposed to say next.

I don't want to be lead by a follower.

Is this impression based on anything more than intuition?