GT: Federal Election

[Nufy]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

And you'd be here defending Harper to your dying breath. Talk about sanctimonious.

Fortunately there were plenty of REAL issues to criticize Harper on.

Give it a bit of time...

JT has only been in power for a few months so it will take sometime for him to royally screw things up...

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Of course. That's what makes political partisans so hilarious. The best part is the same people who are defending Trudeau today would have been roasting Harper for the same thing. Being a dyed-in-the-wool partisan does strange things to peoples' brains, distorting incidents and sympathies to serve the we're always right and they're always wrong tribal narrative.

Which is why this thread should be shut down and topic-specific threads created.

I've posted my fair share of partisan in this thread also...but I can see how it's becoming a giant pissing match now. We're all still friends right?

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Of course. That's what makes political partisans so hilarious. The best part is the same people who are defending Trudeau today would have been roasting Harper for the same thing. Being a dyed-in-the-wool partisan does strange things to peoples' brains, distorting incidents and sympathies to serve the we're always right and they're always wrong tribal narrative.

Incredible. I actually reversed my opinion of when Harper prorogued parliament based on what I read here and online. Yet, because I'm defending Trudeau here from ridiculous partisan attacks with no merit, that makes me a dyed in the wool partisan? Get real. Conservatives are foaming at the mouth to attack Trudeau on anything, and this is the best they can do. It's pathetic.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Of course. That's what makes political partisans so hilarious. The best part is the same people who are defending Trudeau today would have been roasting Harper for the same thing. Being a dyed-in-the-wool partisan does strange things to peoples' brains, distorting incidents and sympathies to serve the we're always right and they're always wrong tribal narrative.

Disagree.

A lot people were criticizing Harper, for the litany of actual policy decisions that he made, not whether he got a freaking nanny. Infact, in the first couple of years of Harper he got a big benefit of the doubt bonus from most Canadians willing to give him a chance.

We're not 4 weeks into this new government and we have people melting down over the most inane of issues.

This is a very dangerous narrative to be peddling that "both sides" are equal in their partisan blathering. It's not true. Just look at the conversation happening right now. We have an unruly horde that's already peddling fear and almost perversely wishing for failure and hardship to make their partisan point. It's completely baseless as well. Ressurecting old boogeymen like the NEP.

While the criticisms of Harper didn't emerge immediately into his mandate and weren't on the lunatic fringe like what we're seeing right now except for the most hardened left-wing anarchro anti-capitalist (who would save their vitriol for ALL parties).

So no, this is a false equivalence. One side is getting more radicalized and crazy while the other has kind of just been the same and has reacted to a government that was increasingly governing to that constituency and those animal instincts.

[CliffFletcher]

This article puts the nanny thing into context.

Two nannies? That's a little rich, prime minister.

* Not all prime ministerial families take advantage of access to nannies (Harper didn't).

* Justin Trudeau is a 1 per center. But even among 1 per centers, having two nannies is unusual.

* Trudeau paid for two nannies before he become prime minister.

Of course, all of this is perfectly legitimate and Trudeau entitled to the nannies. But this is politics, and politics are about optics. Given his comments about the wealthy paying for their own child care, he will take a public opinion hit over this. So either he was too naive to recognize that, or he's willing to pay that price so his kids can have two nannies.

And another article sums up the political price Trudeau will pay:

The PM's nannies: In politics, people remember the little things

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

This article puts the nanny thing into context.

Two nannies? That's a little rich, prime minister.

* Not all prime ministerial families take advantage of access to nannies (Harper didn't).

* Justin Trudeau is a 1 per center. But even among 1 per centers, having two nannies is unusual.

* Trudeau paid for two nannies before he become prime minister.

Of course, all of this is perfectly legitimate and Trudeau entitled to the nannies. But this is politics, and politics are about optics. However, given his comments about the wealthy paying for their own child care, he will take a public opinion hit over this. So either he was too naive to recognize that, or he's willing to pay that price so his kids can have two nannies.

And another article sums up the political price Trudeau will pay:

The PM's nannies: In politics, people remember the little things

You sound like Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity right now. You are right however, when you say it's about optics. Perception is reality and you're choosing the reality that best suits your political narrative of fear mongering and anger.

[East Coast Flame]

Congrats guys, 6 pages on the Prime Ministers Nannie.

Fantastic job all around.

[FlamesAddiction]

The minute Trudeau won, there were those that were at the keyboard just itching to harp on whatever they could. Sad, but very predictable.

[The Ditch]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

You sound like Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity right now. You are right however, when you say it's about optics. Perception is reality and you're choosing the reality that best suits your political narrative of fear mongering and anger.

I think it's fairly stupid, you'd think between him and his handlers, and what he said on the UCCB he would know it would be super hypocritical.

Oh, and the lowly amount that they're paying them too, lol, come on man you're not even paying for it, you're making everyone else pay for it could give them a living wage at least.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

I think it's fairly stupid, you'd think between him and his handlers, and what he said on the UCCB he would know it would be super hypocritical.

Oh, and the lowly amount that they're paying them too, lol, come on man you're not even paying for it, you're making everyone else pay for it could give them a living wage at least.

I really think this thread has jumped the shark with this post now. We've reached the bottom of the barrel. Can we all just stop?

[KootenayFlamesFan]

I think the optics don't look great at all. But I think this is getting out of hand, if this is such a massive issue then he must be doing ok.

[crazy_eoj]

Both national newspapers have front page stories regarding Trudeau's hypocritical stance by hiring nannies on the public dime after his election comments.

I guess the conservatives have finally taken over full control of the media.

Liberal Fanboys Beware!

[Coach]

I've kind of been waiting to comment on this, but I think agree that he should be paying for it himself. It'd be different if he was just a teacher or something that end up becoming PM somehow, but with all the rhetoric spouted during the campaign (much I agree with) he should pay them out of his own pocket.

If he comes out now and says he will not use his benefits for the child care, it could actually make him look good, so maybe that's what they're doing. I wouldn't have even given any of the PMs work-related benefits a thought if not for this.

But I do agree with those that say it's part of his work benefits, he's entitled to him. The only difference between this and a CEO doing the same thing, is we don't all pay the CEO.

[Zarley]

Many of you are missing the point on this. The fact that the PM is entitled to childcare benefits, as were many past prime ministers, is not the issue. Had Trudeau not spouted off about how the wealthy can afford to cover their own childcare costs during the election campaign, there would be no issue here.

I voted Liberal but I'm not a political partisan, and I can see that there is an inconsistency in his actions. It's obviously not a major issue, but it's the type of thing that your average person will take note of - A classic case of saying one thing and doing another.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

We have an unruly horde that's already peddling fear and almost perversely wishing for failure and hardship to make their partisan point.

Some people seem convinced it is the end times. A Heaven's Gate political cult wanting to get on the comet.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Dion

You millennials don't know how bad it was under Trudeau Senior but you will soon find out.

I don't think there is much to worry about with Trudeau 2.0. His father was very much an ideological wonk determined to implement his grand vision for Canada onto the country. Justin is more of a figurehead PM in the sense that major policy decisions will be made by a fairly strong group of advisors, many of whom area from the Chretien/Martin era. We have early indications that the current government will continue with the Conservative program when it comes to the areas of government that are most important (fiscal/economic).

[Patek23]

nm

[PepsiFree]

I feel like there is good potential for conservatives to continue to be angry and confused, liberals to angrily react, and moderates to calmly and accurately explain why it's a non-issue (even if it's 'an issue') while nobody pays attention to them for... 100 more posts (or so).

Let's keep this rollin'

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Many of you are missing the point on this. The fact that the PM is entitled to childcare benefits, as were many past prime ministers, is not the issue. Had Trudeau not spouted off about how the wealthy can afford to cover their own childcare costs during the election campaign, there would be no issue here.

I voted Liberal but I'm not a political partisan, and I can see that there is an inconsistency in his actions. It's obviously not a major issue, but it's the type of thing that your average person will take note of - A classic case of saying one thing and doing another.

This is exactly it.

It's not a matter of paying 15$/hr or whatever to a babysitter. its the "do as I say not as I do" attitude he is portraying.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

I'm not a big fan of Trudeau, at all.

I find it very hard to believe your vitriol came from a position of political neutrality.

Originally Posted by longsuffering

And you'd be here defending Harper to your dying breath. Talk about sanctimonious.

I would do no such thing I openly criticized Harper on many issues I hated his crime bill and his refusal to address most any environmental concerns. Harper went full idiot with his marijuana comments....