New poll: Harper - Conservatives headed for third place next election?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

May's tabling of the ridiculous raises an interesting proposition.

I wonder if we collect enough signatures if she'd agree to table a motion to put a deep water port in Kitimat BC for industrial exports, including oilsands.

This is the same line of thought that inspired the petition to have Stockwell Day change his name to Doris.

[killer_carlson]

YES! I was thinking of the Doris Day petition as well.

I'm just shocked we have an MP table this conspiracy theory motion. She's set a precedent.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I'm convinced that Harper would have had his majority one term earlier if he had stood up during the debate that May forced herself into and pushed her chair off camera while saying "shhhhh the adults are talking now"

She literally screwed over her own parties chances to win one seat.

I don't know if I'd say that. She clearly won her seat and she's been a pretty good MP for the most part. She's incredibly active in her riding and does a really good job of remaining visible in Victoria and on the Gulf Islands. Whenever I attend events like Pride, the Saanich fair, etc., she's always present at the Green tents. The Liberal and NDP MPs usually hand that sort of thing off to their minions, and the Conservatives don't even bother showing up.

That's actually another thing that leaves a bad taste in my mouth regarding the federal Conservatives. It's not even like Pride is that much of a political statement anymore. It's pretty much been taken over by corporations for marketing and PR purposes, and yet the Conservatives seem to be the only party who won't show up for it. It's a minor quibble, I know, but it tells me they're still afraid of standing up to that section of their base.

[Resolute 14]

So May is a good local MP. Question needs to be asked: how good is she as a party leader? As I noted, the polls don't suggest she's helping the Greens become a political alternative.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

So May is a good local MP. Question needs to be asked: how good is she as a party leader? As I noted, the polls don't suggest she's helping the Greens become a political alternative.

Yeah, I meant to add that to my post. Definitely think she has value, just not necessarily as a leader.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

When was the last good liberal government?
I mean one that didn't ruin us economically?
That is a serious question. I don't recall.

A shift to the liberal party must mostly be coming from those who were too young to suffer the effects of previous liberal governments.
That's not to say I'm a Harper supporter at all, just simply understand what the alternative is.

Posts like this are pretty sad. I'd never vote for Trudeau, but its not really debatable that Cretien/Martin was an awesome combination that fixed the myriad mistakes of Mulroney.

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't know, the one that was in power from 1993-2005 was better economically than the CPC has been.

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Inconvenient.

Originally Posted by MarchHare

The Chretien/Martin Liberal governments from 1993-2006 balanced the budged, started paying down the national debt, lowered taxes, and were in power during a time in which Canada's economy grew (although I'm hesitant to give them 100% of the credit for that, but at least they didn't waste their good fortune of being in power during an extended bull market).

Liberals recovered nicely from the Bush 1 created recession of the early nineties, mostly because of Paul Martin. I would not trust this batch of Libs and certainly not the NDP for what comes next.

Each Bush has presided over the start of recessions and wars. When Jeb Bush wins the presidency, expect even bigger ecomonic challneges and scarier wars.

I'm putting my trust in Harper for that period. I prefer experience.

Mind you, all this poking Russia with a stick might have consequences. A big war would be good for Russia's economy. I'm sure PUtin would think nothing of crushing Canada in the North.

[nik-]

Except if Harper is in majority and Bush 3 comes along he'll have us as deep in the #### as they are. He wanted us in the Iraqi disaster.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Posts like this are pretty sad. I'd never vote for Trudeau, but its not really debatable that Cretien/Martin was an awesome combination that fixed the myriad mistakes of Mulroney.







Liberals recovered nicely from the Bush 1 created recession of the early nineties, mostly because of Paul Martin. I would not trust this batch of Libs and certainly not the NDP for what comes next.

Each Bush has presided over the start of recessions and wars. When Jeb Bush wins the presidency, expect even bigger ecomonic challneges and scarier wars.

I'm putting my trust in Harper for that period. I prefer experience.

Mind you, all this poking Russia with a stick might have consequences. A big war would be good for Russia's economy. I'm sure PUtin would think nothing of crushing Canada in the North.

I have a feeling that Putin won't survive 2015. Their economy is sour and getting worse by the day and the one benefit of the crashing Oil prices is that its finishing the work that economic sanctions have started.

Russia has a history of the coups against even the most popular leaders.

Putin is a pretty powerful guy with the state security apparatus baking him, but that might not survive a depression in Russia.

[Badgers Nose]

The quicker Putin is gone the better. I can see him starting a war to remain in power, beyond what he has done in Crimea and Ukraine.

I could also see him getting his pals in Iran to do something to OPEC oil price stability - maybe a territorial expansion before the hawks retake the US presidency.

Obama is a lame duck President. Doubtful there would be much more than sanctions if Russia/Iran pulled something.

In fact some pretty powerful US interests would welcome destabilizing the region and the likely subsequent increase oil prices.

In that kind of world we don't need star eyed Trudeau taking charge.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by nik-

Except if Harper is in majority and Bush 3 comes along he'll have us as deep in the #### as they are. He wanted us in the Iraqi disaster.

Our forces are already stretched thin with anti ISIS in air and ground. He has an out. But yeah, that is a valid point.

[Badgers Nose]

http://nypost.com/2014/12/07/an-iran-russia-axis/

The next few years are going to be too complicated for a kid to guide Canada through.

[Bunk]

43 is a "kid"?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

http://nypost.com/2014/12/07/an-iran-russia-axis/

The next few years are going to be too complicated for a kid to guide Canada through.

The "kid" is 43 years-old (almost 44 by the time the election happens).

His father was 48 when he became PM. Harper was 46. Mulroney was 45.

[Badgers Nose]

He seems a lot less mature than his dad, Mulroney or Harper. He has no epxerience leading a country, and right now the country needs experience.

[evman150]

Looks young = incompetent

/neocon logic

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by Bunk

43 is a "kid"?

It is when you're trying to put someone down, evidently.

[killer_carlson]

Lol

And are any of you suggesting that the muppet has anywhere near the business or academic accomplishments of his dad, Harper or Mulroney?

The quips that you will hear about Trudeau's age are related with the fact that he comes across as a guy spending the trust money while he is "finding himself". As Bob Rae said, leader of the liberal party (and by extension prime minister) isn't an entry level position.

But he does look great for 43 though, doesn't he?

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

He seems a lot less mature than his dad, Mulroney or Harper. He has no epxerience leading a country, and right now the country needs experience.

We need someone with good experience. But that's always the case. Unfortunately, we don't have that option.

All we have is:

1. A Prime Minister who has done a very poor job running the country
2. A leader of the opposition who fails to connect to the Canadian people, and hasn't been able to capitalize on the Prime Minister's blunders, I'd give more here but frankly no one cares enough about him to point to his successes or failures
3. A third party leader who, while as more real world experience than the current PM had prior to taking office, but still lacks experience and has made missteps costing major political points.

The real question is: do you want the bad PM we have or take a chance on the new guy?

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

We need someone with good experience. But that's always the case. Unfortunately, we don't have that option.

All we have is:

1. A Prime Minister who has done a very poor job running the country
2. A leader of the opposition who fails to connect to the Canadian people, and hasn't been able to capitalize on the Prime Minister's blunders, I'd give more here but frankly no one cares enough about him to point to his successes or failures
3. A third party leader who, while as more real world experience than the current PM had prior to taking office, but still lacks experience and has made missteps costing major political points.

The real question is: do you want the bad PM we have or take a chance on the new guy?

you can criticize Harper for a lot of things, but when it comes to the economy he Flaherty, And Oliver have handled the economy better than any other g20 country over the last 5 years

[Slava]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

Lol

And are any of you suggesting that the muppet has anywhere near the business or academic accomplishments of his dad, Harper or Mulroney?

The quips that you will hear about Trudeau's age are related with the fact that he comes across as a guy spending the trust money while he is "finding himself". As Bob Rae said, leader of the liberal party (and by extension prime minister) isn't an entry level position.

But he does look great for 43 though, doesn't he?

Harper hasn't done anything though. He worked for a special interest group and worked in politics. Thats it. There is no amazing business acumen, nothing outstanding in terms of the academic background... just a career politician. I get that this is a partisan debate, but I can't believe people are impressed with Harper. He literally has nothing in terms of a background that's impressive. His time in office has been underwhelming to say the least. Sure, I like a couple of the things they have done, but I wonder how much it was Flaherty. Harper just strikes me as so out of touch it's incredible he managed to win the leadership, never mind the PMO.