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

[killer_carlson]

Harper has a Masters Degree in Economics

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

Harper has a Masters Degree in Economics

And yet he continues to make terrible mistakes and ignores the advice of virtually every economist in the country on matters of fiscal policy (e.g. GST cut, income splitting, etc.).

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

Harper has a Masters Degree in Economics

And dubbya went to Yale and Harvard.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

Harper has a Masters Degree in Economics

By itself, thos is actually the opposite of an "impressive achievement." It's a resume-padded for a 20-something trying to break out of working in retail. You have to pull back the curtain and look at his actual accomplishments as an academic--and as Slava alluded to, for Harper it is a short and mediocre list.

I do find it funny that people who were willing to vote for a 46 year old whose only relevant experience was a writing policy copy on contract for a right-wing think tank, feel that a 43-year old teacher is "too inexperienced." Frankly, neither guy is "experienced," but at least Trudeau has had a real job. Harper has done absolutely nothing with his life other than politics. I say this as a person who is far from Trudeau's biggest fan (though like many I cannot imagine he will be worse than Harper).

[edslunch]

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.

When did Harper become some sort of foreign policy genius? He is arguably the least diplomatic PM in many decades and apart from Israel appears to have no standing in the world community. In times of global tension I'd rather not have a leader who talks tough

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by edslunch

When did Harper become some sort of foreign policy genius? He is arguably the least diplomatic PM in many decades and apart from Israel appears to have no standing in the world community. In times of global tension I'd rather not have a leader who talks tough

I haven't liked his dealings with Israel much either. There's a strong Israel lobby in the U.S., and I rather not duplicate the situation here.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

By itself, thos is actually the opposite of an "impressive achievement." It's a resume-padded for a 20-something trying to break out of working in retail. You have to pull back the curtain and look at his actual accomplishments as an academic--and as Slava alluded to, for Harper it is a short and mediocre list.

I do find it funny that people who were willing to vote for a 46 year old whose only relevant experience was a writing policy copy on contract for a right-wing think tank, feel that a 43-year old teacher is "too inexperienced." Frankly, neither guy is "experienced," but at least Trudeau has had a real job. Harper has done absolutely nothing with his life other than politics. I say this as a person who is far from Trudeau's biggest fan (though like many I cannot imagine he will be worse than Harper).

Not to mention that Trudeau was pretty much born into a politics environment. If Trudeau were to become PM at an age 2 years younger than Harper was when he became PM, I don't think that additional 2 years of life experience would necessarily amount to more "political" experience.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by 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.

For the sake of argument:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/01...ionist-hardly/

Let’s start with the obvious, the conflict in Ukraine. The Liberal position has been in total lock step with the position of the government from the very beginning. To suggest otherwise, as Mr. Fisher did, is simply wrong. How a journalist could be unaware of this is frankly difficult to even imagine.

Since a review is apparently necessary, here are some facts Mr. Fisher may have missed: During an emergency debate in the House of Commons more than a year ago, it was the Liberal party that first raised the issue of tough, direct sanctions against Putin’s cronies, while the other two parties were still non-committal. In fact, the Liberal party continues to advocate stiffer sanctions than the government on certain individuals close to Putin as well as providing armoured vehicle assistance to the Organization of Security and Co-operation in Europe, charged with monitoring the ceasefire conditions in eastern Ukraine. We have supported the government’s commitment to the NATO reassurance mission every step of the way. These deployments include CF-18s in the Baltic States, troops in Eastern Europe and a Canadian warship.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I haven't liked his dealings with Israel much either. There's a strong Israel lobby in the U.S., and I rather not duplicate the situation here.

So if there wasn't a strong Israeli lobby in the USA, you'd be ok with Harper's stance?... seeing as how there wouldn't be any duplication and all.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by edslunch

When did Harper become some sort of foreign policy genius? He is arguably the least diplomatic PM in many decades and apart from Israel appears to have no standing in the world community. In times of global tension I'd rather not have a leader who talks tough

Just curious... just how do you want Harper to talk to a former Lieutenant Colonel of the KGB?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Rerun

So if there wasn't a strong Israeli lobby in the USA, you'd be ok with Harper's stance?... seeing as how there wouldn't be any duplication and all.

Is that really what you read from my post, or are you being deliberately obtuse? Duplication isn't the issue, what is being duplicated is.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Is that really what you read from my post, or are you being deliberately obtuse? Duplication isn't the issue, what is being duplicated is.

I just wanted you to clarify your anti-Israel stance.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Rerun

I just wanted you to clarify your anti-Israel stance.

Fair enough, but it's not really about being anti-Israel.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Not to mention that Trudeau was pretty much born into a politics environment. If Trudeau were to become PM at an age 2 years younger than Harper was when he became PM, I don't think that additional 2 years of life experience would necessarily amount to more "political" experience.

This is basically the same argument that was made to justify making someone who was essentially a rookie backbench MP the Liberal party leader: His dad was Pierre Trudeau. Being born into Pierre's household might have given him a political inclination, but that hardly counts as "experience". Particularly since the most notable thing Justin did before entering politics was star in a CBC movie. He has spent most of his life being a pretty face with a famous last name. Albeit also a very good public speaker when he sticks to his script.

People can criticize Harper all they want, that doesn't automatically make Trudeau a great candidate to lead this country from a foreign relations perspective.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

People can criticize Harper all they want, that doesn't automatically make Trudeau a great candidate to lead this country from a foreign relations perspective.

That is not the point. I believe all anyone wants you and the other hardline conservatives to recognize is your own hypocrisy in denouncing Trudeau for his lack of experience while voting for a man in the first place with far less.

[Resolute 14]

Given Justin Trudeau had *zero* experience, there is no possible way you can say Harper had "far less" experience and not be viewed as disingenuous. Also, given your participation in this thread has amounted to little more than hardline liberal rhetoric, right back atcha with the hypocrisy.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

People can criticize Harper all they want, that doesn't automatically make Trudeau a great candidate to lead this country from a foreign relations perspective.

Who says it makes Trudeau automatically great at anything? I don't know how good/bad he'd be at foreign relations. I do know how Harper has fared, and I'm not exactly thrilled.

In other news, the constant references to Trudeau's looks and hair is just fascinating. Why is that so important?

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I haven't liked his dealings with Israel much either. There's a strong Israel lobby in the U.S., and I rather not duplicate the situation here.

I totally disagree. I have never been more proud of a Canadian prime minister on matters of Middle East foreign policy.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Given Justin Trudeau had *zero* experience, there is no possible way you can say Harper had "far less" experience and not be viewed as disingenuous. Also, given your participation in this thread has amounted to little more than hardline liberal rhetoric, right back atcha with the hypocrisy.

I've voted for three different parties in the last three elections. Can you say the same? Have you ever voted for a different party (PC=R=CA=CPC) in your life?

I'm not the one who is hardline here. You and others trot out the same decades old canards about the NEP and how everybody but the Tories hates Alberta. It's really tiresome. There are two provinces where the population puts their interests far before the nation's - Quebec and Alberta. At least Quebec has an excuse - what's yours?

[Resolute 14]

Cry moar.

You're deluded if you think the population of the other eight provinces doesn't place local interest ahead of national. Actually, if your stated location is accurate, you're just ignorant.