Federal Politics 2015 Thread

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by evman150

Harper is proven awful, Trudeau is lost and hopeless. What has Mulcair done to prove he's not ready to lead this country?

What has Mulcair done to prove he is ready to lead this country? Your argument is pretty much "Mulcair is great because Harper and Trudeau suck". Well, okay, but that only goes back to my original point that the NDP are largely viable not because of the NDP, but because the Conservatives and Liberals (and Bloc) are pushing people away through their own failures.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Resolute's ideological coding is impervious to any actual discussion or logic. Don't even bother. He's so maligned that he thinks that any disagreement is proof of your own ideological polarization not his.

I don't think that's necessarily a fair. We all have our biases. I think the difference is that for some of us those biases run along ideological lines and for others they run along party lines.

[Resolute 14]

Not to mention that Tinordi is wrong. I've never feigned a lack of bias in this regard. But the nature of Tinorid's attack is as unsurprising as it is empty.

[Slava]

What exactly has Mulcair shown in terms of being capable to govern that Trudeau hasn't shown? Being the lesser of three evils (in your opinion) isn't enough really. All three of these parties have their warts and that's what makes the decision for a voter so difficult.

[burn_this_city]

Mulcair can't balance a chequebook, would rather see Trudeau at this point if the country is moving on from the Cons.

[Tinordi]

You like to think I'm the same as you just on the opposite end.

That's not true. I've voted for all four national political parties. I at one time supported Harper with policies like income trust and more fiscal discipline (even though that second policy never came to pass).

You seem to think that my arguments are subject to the simple point of rebuttal that I'm just some (L)iberal and should be taken with no more merit than his own. My criticisms of Harper are just that I love Trudeau not that I have legitimate grievances with the direction of government in this country.

Your reasoning for attacking the parties that you deem worthy of it are based on vague boogeymen, appeals to 35 year old policies (NEP) long dead, and unmeasurable metrics of how air headed some leaders appear.

In the meantime there's a mountain of evidence that our current government is a total disaster even for your own interests. I take it you want to see oil pipelines built. But the weight of evidence suggests that the Harper government policies and strategy has actually made the prospects of building them WORSE.

Among all this you cling to these vagaries that Mulcair isn't ready to lead. When meanwhile we've had a government that clearly is NOT leading in the best interest of Canada at all. This ideological discrepancies just render your arguments baseless. But carry on, I predict the response will be something like "Pot meet kettle".

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by Slava

What exactly has Mulcair shown in terms of being capable to govern that Trudeau hasn't shown? Being the lesser of three evils (in your opinion) isn't enough really. All three of these parties have their warts and that's what makes the decision for a voter so difficult.

This seems to be the way it always is now, both federally and provincially. I can't remember the last time I voted for a party because I thought they were going to do a great job instead of because I wasn't totally opposed to everything they stand for. Maybe I'm just getting cynical and cranky as I get older though.

[Resolute 14]

"Why should I vote for Mulcair?"
"Because Harper sucks."
"What is so great about Mulcair though?"
"Harper sucks."
"What's Mulcair's best quality?"
"He's not Harper."
"..."

[Tinordi]

Well? What are you supposed to say?

You have a government where there is considerable evidence it is doing a bad job.

You have another party that has no evidence it would do a good or a bad job.

Do you stick with the bad, or put faith in the new government to be at least equally bad or better?

But there are further dynamics. If you don't punish the incumbent bad government what does that signal? Does the accountability gap matter? Is it worth sacrificing for a maximum of four years with an unknown government?

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Ashartus

This seems to be the way it always is now, both federally and provincially. I can't remember the last time I voted for a party because I thought they were going to do a great job instead of because I wasn't totally opposed to everything they stand for. Maybe I'm just getting cynical and cranky as I get older though.

I think as long as the result is a minority, regardless of who wins, that result is fine. CPC is useless and impotent without a majority, they won't be able to accomplish anything they want, and giving one to Trudeau or Mulcair at this point would be risky, especially since they can clearly work together on a lot of things, so why not let them work together rather than giving one total power?

[Resolute 14]

What are you even arguing about here, Tinordi?

I make a comment about how the NDP are gaining in viability because the Conservatives and Liberals are screwing themselves over. In short, that they are leading now because they are viewed as the least bad option.

All you and Evman have done in reply is to argue that the NDP are... the least bad option.

Okay? Good for you? Thumbs up, gold star and all that?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

"Why should I vote for Mulcair?"
"Because Harper sucks."
"What is so great about Mulcair though?"
"Harper sucks."
"What's Mulcair's best quality?"
"He's not Harper."
"..."

I can sort of answer this from my own perspective:

- I think he's done a great job as Opposition Leader in hounding the Conservatives and trying to hold them accountable for their various boondoggles.
- He's shown much more an interest in working alongside First Nations groups than either Trudeau or Harper
- He's much more likely to put environmental interests ahead of big business interests than Harper
- The NDP are the only party that have even show a modicum of interest in catering to students
- He's the only leader that voted against C-51

Those are just off the top of my head.

[FlamesAddiction]

I just hope that if Trudeau loses, that they don't cast him aside right away like the Liberals tend to do with their leaders in recent history when they fail to win an election. Honestly, I don't think it should be expected that a new leader in their first federal election wins.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I just hope that if Trudeau loses, that they don't cast him aside right away like the Liberals tend to do with their leaders in recent history when they fail to win an election. Honestly, I don't think it should be expected that a new leader in their first federal election wins.

I just don't see anything that is special about Trudeau other than the way he makes opposition voters tight in the pants.

Fence straddling on the right isn't working for them anymore. Their big tent is empty.

[nik-]

They should cast him aside. They need to put someone up who's earned it, not just a popular name.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I can sort of answer this from my own perspective:

- I think he's done a great job as Opposition Leader in hounding the Conservatives and trying to hold them accountable for their various boondoggles.
- He's shown much more an interest in working alongside First Nations groups than either Trudeau or Harper
- He's much more likely to put environmental interests ahead of big business interests than Harper
- The NDP are the only party that have even show a modicum of interest in catering to students
- He's the only leader that voted against C-51

Those are just off the top of my head.

All fair points, but I think that the point still stands that the NDP are still likely ahead because of the anti-PC, anti-Lib sentiment. I say this, because your reasons aren't exactly new, when it comes to supporting the NDP. They have always had those attributes and have almost always (until recently) finished well back in third. Perhaps there is a real wind change in what Canadians want from their government, but I can't shake the feeling that the NDP surge is mostly, the best of the worst options.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

All fair points, but I think that the point still stands that the NDP are still likely ahead because of the anti-PC, anti-Lib sentiment. I say this, because your reasons aren't exactly new, when it comes to supporting the NDP. They have always had those attributes and have almost always (until recently) finished well back in third. Perhaps there is a real wind change in what Canadians want from their government, but I can't shake the feeling that the NDP surge is mostly, the best of the worst options.

I think it's a combination of both. The environment has clearly become a top issue for most Canadians and the NDP at least have the appearance of being leaps and bounds ahead of the other parties. I think there are some other issues you could point to that are becoming more of a priority for the younger electorate that just isn't showing up on the radars of the other two major parties, especially the Conservatives who clearly pander to specific demographics in a way that's become unpalatable to a large section of Canadians.

[Weitz]

Who wants PM that will cater to students? I surely do not.

[nik-]

Also, I think we need to be honest here, C-51 is never going away, regardless of who's elected.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Who wants PM that will cater to students? I surely do not.

Well I would guess students, for one.