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

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Antithesis

I really wish the Liberals had chosen Garneau as their leader instead of Trudeau.

Not speaking to you directly or about anyone in particular, but it is funny because I would bet that most of the same people that point out Trudeau's gimmicky traits, would be the first ones to charge the Liberals for using Garneau's astronaut past for attention. Garneau's popularity in his own riding took a pretty big hit the last election and Trudeau was on an opposite trajectory. It would have looked really bad to pick a leader that could very well lose their own riding at election time. Just to add, Garneau withdrew from leadership contention and put his support behind Trudeau. He wasn't even in the final 5 or 6 that the party ended up voting on. They couldn't have just chosen him.

No matter whom they picked, that person was going to be up for equal character assassination by most of the same people. Just my opinion of course.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

A pragmatist. Someone who knows he won't please everyone, so doesn't even try.

As far as voting intentions goes, I believe I have already described the Conservatives as the "least repugnant" option in this thread, so don't view my criticisms of Trudeau and his puppetmasters as unqualified support of Harper.

Except we now have 10+ years of Harper and some truly repugnant policies/stances. Omnibus, treatment of aboriginals, Senate scandal, contempt of parliament, science denial, etc., etc. How is that less repugnant than anything Trudeau or Mulcair have said/done?

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Except we now have 10+ years of Harper and some truly repugnant policies/stances. Omnibus, treatment of aboriginals, Senate scandal, contempt of parliament, science denial, etc., etc. How is that less repugnant than anything Trudeau or Mulcair have said/done?

Didn't you hear? They have pupper masters who want to install a shadow government.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Mulcair won't win, but the truth is, neither Trudeau nor his party can be taken at their word. The Liberals have run with anti-Alberta platforms multiple times and it is one would have to be delusional to think that the leopard has changed its spots without any hard evidence to prove it.

Just to be clear:

1: Liberals can't be taken at their word
2: The Liberals have run an anti-Alberta platform

Therefore, shouldn't everyone in Alberta be voting Liberal? As if you can't take them at their word and they're saying they're anti-Alberta by that logic they are a pro-Alberta party.

**********************

Harper's anti-science, anti-veterans, anti-seasonal workers, tough on crime policies that have been proven don't work, anti-constitutional, senate scandal coverup administration has been enough for me to think any change would be better than what we currently have.

Do I think Trudeau will be a great Prime Minister? No. Am I a fan of his father's? Nope. But will I take Trudeau over Harper? I honestly can't see how he'd possibly be worse.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Except we now have 10+ years of Harper and some truly repugnant policies/stances. Omnibus, treatment of aboriginals, Senate scandal, contempt of parliament, science denial, etc., etc. How is that less repugnant than anything Trudeau or Mulcair have said/done?

Man, of the last three posters to comment, you're the one I respect most. But don't pull out crap like that politically motivated Contempt of Parliament as if it means something. The only thing the Conservatives were in contempt of was opposition parties trying to take power.

And yes, Harper has done some poor things as PM. He's done some good things too, and I stand by my personal position that he remains the best option. Especially given the alternatives.

If Trudeau's scripted statements won't sway me, you know that you won't either. The only thing that Trudeau can ever do to convince me of sincerity is through action. He and his party will never be worthy of consideration before that.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

...The only thing the Conservatives were in contempt of was opposition parties trying to take power.
...

Ah yes. Staying in power by shutting down democracy. The "Jar Jar Binks" style of governing.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Man, of the last three posters to comment, you're the one I respect most. But don't pull out crap like that politically motivated Contempt of Parliament as if it means something. The only thing the Conservatives were in contempt of was opposition parties trying to take power.

Perhaps I'm misremembering, but weren't the Conservatives found in contempt because the opposition parties alleged that the government refused to share the true cost of the F-35 purchase with Parliament? And didn't the Auditor General later (after the 2011 election) show that the Liberals and NDP were right about that all along -- that is, the F-35s are going to cost more than the Harper Government was revealing, but they weren't disclosing the information publicly, thus preventing the opposition from effectively doing their job?

My memory on this is a bit hazy, but isn't that what happened? And if so, wasn't finding the government in contempt of Parliament because of that entirely justified?

[Resolute 14]

Truthfully, I don't remember what the pretext was, but the entire point of that charade was to force an election and try to embarrass the government in the process.

Canadians rejected that power play entirely in the subsequent election. Pretty sure I've mentioned it before, but if you hate what Harper has done with a majority, blame your own parties. They created the so-called monster.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Man, of the last three posters to comment, you're the one I respect most. But don't pull out crap like that politically motivated Contempt of Parliament as if it means something. The only thing the Conservatives were in contempt of was opposition parties trying to take power.

And yes, Harper has done some poor things as PM. He's done some good things too, and I stand by my personal position that he remains the best option. Especially given the alternatives.

If Trudeau's scripted statements won't sway me, you know that you won't either. The only thing that Trudeau can ever do to convince me of sincerity is through action. He and his party will never be worthy of consideration before that.

Your not suggesting that Harper's statements aren't scripted are you?
Not suggesting that Trudeau inst scripted but to assume that ANY politician doesn't follow a script is silly.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Man, of the last three posters to comment, you're the one I respect most. But don't pull out crap like that politically motivated Contempt of Parliament as if it means something. The only thing the Conservatives were in contempt of was opposition parties trying to take power.

And yes, Harper has done some poor things as PM. He's done some good things too, and I stand by my personal position that he remains the best option. Especially given the alternatives.

If Trudeau's scripted statements won't sway me, you know that you won't either. The only thing that Trudeau can ever do to convince me of sincerity is through action. He and his party will never be worthy of consideration before that.

Well except that it's pretty much impossible for opposition parties to lead by action in a majority situation. When you say things like "Trudeau's scripted statements won't sway me, and you won't either," and "I'd rather vote separation than NDP," it comes off as the jilted, petulant rantings of an ideologue, rather than someone who has actually weighed the parties on the basis their policies.

I get what you're saying in that all three of the big parties are repugnant in their own ways. I've voted Green in the last couple of elections because I haven't felt like the big three have put forward platforms I can get behind. This election I'm still unsure about who I'll vote for, but the areas that I prioritize, such as environmental protection, progressive policies towards crime prevention and punishment, aboriginal rights, open democratic discourse, more representative democracy, anti-prohibition legislation, balancing the budget, and transparency are all areas where the Harper Conservatives have failed miserably and, in many of these areas, have actually caused the country to regress substantially.

I don't think any of the above that I have pointed out are wrong or partisan-based statements. They're the things and legislation that have actually happened under Harper. So I guess I'm curious A) which of these you think the opposition would actually handle worse and why B) what areas Harper has done well that are of more importance than the areas he's failed in. I guess that's what it comes down to for me. The few things Harper has done well have often been in areas that I consider to be of much lower importance than the areas in which he's done poorly, and in the areas he's don'e poorly, it's hard to see either the NDP or Liberals faring much worse.

EDIT: And I don't mean "curious" as in I don't believe there are any and I want to openly flame you. I just mean I'm curious if there are things that Harper has done that I've unfairly overlooked.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I don't think any of the above that I have pointed out are wrong or partisan-based statements.

They aren't, which is why I didn't challenge you on them. The trumped up Contempt of Parliament fiasco is unworthy of serious discourse, but the remainder I accept as your opinion. I disagree with some of those actions myself. Others, I accept as merely politics as usual.

And you are right, of course, about the opposition being unable to take action in a majority. I have always freely admitted that it is impossible for Trudeau or the Liberals to earn my vote before forming a government. And that reason was what started this discussion: that party has spent decades operating from an anti-Alberta perspective, and Trudeau's overtures remain empty words to me.

[Caged Great]

I wish there was a way to vote none of the above and if that won they'd all get turfed as the leaders of their parties and a new election would be held once the new leaders came in.

[rubecube]

On a completely unrelated note, I think the Greens need to move on from May. She's done a lot of good for the party but she's been trending in the wrong direction, and the latest 9/11 petition nonsense kind of sealed her fate, in my opinion.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by rubecube

On a completely unrelated note, I think the Greens need to move on from May. She's done a lot of good for the party but she's been trending in the wrong direction , and the latest 9/11 petition nonsense kind of sealed her fate, in my opinion.

LMAO!

I actually missed that.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/eliza...ment-1.2133362

Best part how many comments in this story are from truthers. But yeah, even despite May's protests, taking one of those 9/11 petitions seriously is not a good way to appear as anything but crazy.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

LMAO!

I actually missed that.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/eliza...ment-1.2133362

Best part how many comments in this story are from truthers. But yeah, even despite May's protests, taking one of those 9/11 petitions seriously is not a good way to appear as anything but crazy.

I can appreciate that the Greens have always been the one party to consistently support more direct and representative democracy, but this is the type of thing that people have often suggested might happen if they were ever to gain any serious political power and it makes them look incredibly bush league.

[Resolute 14]

Agreed. Even if you want to support direct democracy like this, you still have to apply a filter at the individual level rather than waste everyone's time in Commons.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by rubecube

On a completely unrelated note, I think the Greens need to move on from May. She's done a lot of good for the party but she's been trending in the wrong direction, and the latest 9/11 petition nonsense kind of sealed her fate, in my opinion.

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.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

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

I am actually not certain where I stand on that. It is very much self-serving on the individual level, but is there enough value going forward in putting all your eggs in one basket to get one foot in the door by electing your first MP? Certainly doesn't appear so based on polling numbers. The Greens have consistently polled at barely half their pre-election figures since the election. Only in BC (naturally), do they really have anything approaching a presence.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Only in BC (naturally), do they really have anything approaching a presence.

Which is sad because it is also the one thing that keeps BC a CPC heavy province. The very people that are most against Ħarper are the people that keep ensuring he gets the seats to stay in power.

Same with the Provincial elections. Green party voters do more harm than good to their own causes.

[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.