Tom Mulcair Joins Sun Media Newspaper Chain As National Columnist

111 posts / 0 new
Last post
Paladin1

alan smithee wrote:

I'll tell you why I get triggered by Conservatives. Everything I said above. I don't buy into the false equivilancy between the Conservatives and the Liberals. I would rather live for the next 40 years with the Liberals in power than the Conservatives for 4 years.

This is where I'm coming from. You don't have to agree with me but that's my motivation.

My concern with this mindset is that you're esentially giving the Liberals a blank check to behave however they want and you'll still pick them because of their name. You don't owe the Liberals your loyalty, they should work for it and maintain it through their actions- not their name brand.

Your business of course, totally respect that.

It's neither here nor there but you were also super right about pot being legalized and I was wrong with my suspicious of what would happen. If the CPC wins the election, which I have a feeling is a very real possibility, I hope they have enough integrity to leave pot alone. The Liberals made a good choice legalizing it, I think, and the Conservatives should be humble enough to admit it.

Todrick of Chat...

Slightly off topic, do we have a housing crisis in Canada or a lack of will to move out of urban centres into rural areas?

Housing is more affordable in rural areas.  

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Thank you Paladin...but it's not loyalty it's my utter distrust of the Cons...they always do the wrong thing....I have been to the stores a few times and the clientele is on average my age and over.,I go downtown and you have business people and elderly people.. they all seem very happy with it...I don't want a SoCon to come along and destroy it....they may pay a political price if they do I believe... we'll see

As for the housing crisis..I don't know where you are from but the crisis is real...and cheap rent? The North and South shore are just as, if not more expensive than in the city. People on a fixed I cncome like myself cannot pack up and move to butt Fuck nowhere without a large stash of cash. It's real and it has been since the middle 90"s

voice of the damned

Paladin wrote:

If the CPC wins the election, which I have a feeling is a very real possibility, I hope they have enough integrity to leave pot alone. The Liberals made a good choice legalizing it, I think, and the Conservatives should be humble enough to admit it.

There's no way it's getting reversed. Even in the US, where pot remains illegal federally and the Republicans, at least, generally hate the stuff, state-level legalizations haven't been over-ruled. You would need a CPC that's ten times more ideological than Scheer is to get re-criminalization to take place in Canada. 

Aristotleded24

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:
Slightly off topic, do we have a housing crisis in Canada or a lack of will to move out of urban centres into rural areas?Housing is more affordable in rural areas.

We have lopsided economic development where on the one hand, rural areas have very few jobs that can sustain people, but the housing is cheap. Most of the jobs are in the cities, so that is where people will end up.

On top of that, beneath the friendly facade that small towns often present, they have the same kinds of social issues that are present in larger centres, social life is essentially structured around raising a family so good luck fitting in if you are single or without children, and there is a general distrust and suspcion of outside influences that often manifests itself in racism and homophobia. I once saw a bumper sticker that read, "fit in or fuck off," and my experience living in southwestern Manitoba is that is pretty much the mentality of small town residents. I felt that way about Brandon, and that mentality would only have been stronger in the smaller surrounding communities. If you don't fit in, at least you can take a chance in a bigger city where because of a critical mass you have a chance of finding a group you can belong to.

Now if someone running for public office can make that point about economic development so that small town residents realize that their problems are not caused by people different than they are, you might be onto something.

cco

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:
Slightly off topic, do we have a housing crisis in Canada or a lack of will to move out of urban centres into rural areas?Housing is more affordable in rural areas.

We have lopsided economic development where on the one hand, rural areas have very few jobs that can sustain people, but the housing is cheap. Most of the jobs are in the cities, so that is where people will end up.

On top of that, beneath the friendly facade that small towns often present, they have the same kinds of social issues that are present in larger centres, social life is essentially structured around raising a family so good luck fitting in if you are single or without children, and there is a general distrust and suspcion of outside influences that often manifests itself in racism and homophobia. I once saw a bumper sticker that read, "fit in or fuck off," and my experience living in southwestern Manitoba is that is pretty much the mentality of small town residents. I felt that way about Brandon, and that mentality would only have been stronger in the smaller surrounding communities. If you don't fit in, at least you can take a chance in a bigger city where because of a critical mass you have a chance of finding a group you can belong to.

Well-said, Aristotleded24. On a more philosophical level, there's something I find deeply distressing about the "It's your own fault because you're living somewhere the things you need are reserved for the rich" attitude – and I'm an immigrant. Picking up and leaving behind family, friends, and places you know is a difficult experience even when it doesn't involve applying for a visa.

People's expectations for what society and government should provide have become so weakened that, for example, parents sending their children to "good schools" has become an aspirational economic goal, because we've all just come to accept that private schools are better and that's natural. Things that should be basic human rights have become reclassified as luxuries. Can't afford a home? That's not the government's fault, or the fault of the rich, or wage theft, or any of the factors (union-busting, immigration, poor urban planning, or a dozen others) that drive prices up while driving wages down – it's your fault for being too big a snob to move to Thetford Mines.

And for those who live in rural areas but keep working in cities, there's a massive environmental cost to the "drive until you qualify [for a mortgage]" philosophy. Sprawl isn't inevitable. It's the consequence of policy decisions, and it's so destructive that we absolutely need to examine those policy decisions rather than just decide it's all the fault of individuals.

Aristotleded24

cco wrote:
And for those who live in rural areas but keep working in cities, there's a massive environmental cost to the "drive until you qualify [for a mortgage]" philosophy. Sprawl isn't inevitable. It's the consequence of policy decisions, and it's so destructive that we absolutely need to examine those policy decisions rather than just decide it's all the fault of individuals.

Agreed. If you address that issue, along with provision of services, then instead of having clusters of people living around our major metropolitan areas, you can actually revitalize rural communities that have been facing a long, steady decline but have been well established long before people started commuting into cities from just around the periphery.

Misfit Misfit's picture

alan smithee wrote:

Would you quit with the Justin bullshit.... that's not progressive it's right wing...you sound like Agolf Twitler...grow up

Again, Justin broke the law and justified it. He needed to be exposed for his despicable actions.

And no, I’m not calling him what you want me to call him because you are a Liberal and support him politically and are offended.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Misfit wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Would you quit with the Justin bullshit.... that's not progressive it's right wing...you sound like Agolf Twitler...grow up

Again, Justin broke the law and justified it. He needed to be exposed for his despicable actions.

And no, I’m not calling him what you want me to call him because you are a Liberal and support him politically and are offended.

A) I'm not a Liberal
B) I'm not a Trudeau supporter

But your sad and impotent attempt to belittle Trudeau is childish.
It's a right wing trope...I thought you were above the right wing.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Misfit wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Would you quit with the Justin bullshit.... that's not progressive it's right wing...you sound like Agolf Twitler...grow up

Again, Justin broke the law and justified it. He needed to be exposed for his despicable actions.

And no, I’m not calling him what you want me to call him because you are a Liberal and support him politically and are offended.

Actually, it was the Liberal Party itself which started the "Justin" thing, to distinguish him from his no longer corporeal father.  "Justin Time" was virtually the LPC slogan during the 2015 campaign.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Misfit wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Would you quit with the Justin bullshit.... that's not progressive it's right wing...you sound like Agolf Twitler...grow up

Again, Justin broke the law and justified it. He needed to be exposed for his despicable actions.

And no, I’m not calling him what you want me to call him because you are a Liberal and support him politically and are offended.

Actually, it was the Liberal Party itself which started the "Justin" thing, to distinguish him from his no longer corporeal father.  "Justin Time" was virtually the LPC slogan during the 2015 campaign.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

In any case, Alan, there was no good reason for the Liberals to campaign to take  ridings which had been NDP-they should have focused solely on flipping Con-Lib marginals.

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

In any case, Alan, there was no good reason for the Liberals to campaign to take  ridings which had been NDP-they should have focused solely on flipping Con-Lib marginals.

 

Misfit Misfit's picture

And...

George Herbert Walker Bush was known as George Bush or George Bush Sr. His son was commonly referred to as  simply George W.

 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Ken Burch wrote:

In any case, Alan, there was no good reason for the Liberals to campaign to take  ridings which had been NDP-they should have focused solely on flipping Con-Lib marginals.

 

Ken,you know nothing about my politics. Which is a shame considering I have been explaining myself for years.

Our Conservatives are as psychotic as yours. Are you happy with YOUR government? You voting Democrat or Green?

I don't want the bullshit that is happening in your country to seep into mine. Do you understand or are you too partisan to look passed your nose?

The NDP IS NOT GOING TO WIN THE FUCKING ELECTION. Do you get it,Ken?

So don't dare label me something I'm not. If you want to call me an anti-Conservative,a radical one at that,then that's fine.

Don't call me a Liberal soimply because I don't believe for a second that they are worse than the CPC. Far from it.

I'll gladly take another Liberal majority. Hopefully Bernier's Fascist party cuts into CPC votes.

In any case, you're wrong,mate. Sorry.

cco

alan smithee wrote:

The NDP IS NOT GOING TO WIN THE FUCKING ELECTION.

Remember 4 years ago at this point, when it was? Or 8 years ago at this point, when Ignatieff was the only hope to stop Harper?

Nobody knows what's going to happen in the election until people have actually voted. That doesn't stop people from making money off making predictions they'll never have to defend, and trying to push the election in one direction with their conventional "wisdom".

Mighty Middle

cco wrote:

Remember 4 years ago at this point, when it was? Or 8 years ago at this point, when Ignatieff was the only hope to stop Harper?

Nobody knows what's going to happen in the election until people have actually voted. That doesn't stop people from making money off making predictions they'll never have to defend, and trying to push the election in one direction with their conventional "wisdom".

Next thing we will hear from those still clinging to the NDP turning things around is that Hillary Clinton was poised to win the presidency based on all the polls, and look how that turned out. 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

cco wrote:
alan smithee wrote:

The NDP IS NOT GOING TO WIN THE FUCKING ELECTION.

Remember 4 years ago at this point, when it was? Or 8 years ago at this point, when Ignatieff was the only hope to stop Harper?

Nobody knows what's going to happen in the election until people have actually voted. That doesn't stop people from making money off making predictions they'll never have to defend, and trying to push the election in one direction with their conventional "wisdom".

Are you paying attention to Alberta and the new Kenney United Fascists Party? Have you heard of all the goodies Ford has in store for his populace? I know for sure you are aware of CAQ.

What do you suppose is going to happen to this country with a Kenney (Scheer) government?

It's like cheering as an asteroid free falls to collision with the Earth. Let's not wait for a horror show to begin. The Cons need to be stopped and I truly don't give a fuck who can do it as long as they get the job done.

NOW do you understand me? Probably not.

cco

alan smithee wrote:

Are you paying attention to Alberta and the new Kenney United Fascists Party? Have you heard of all the goodies Ford has in store for his populace? I know for sure you are aware of CAQ.

Yep. I'm not going to vote Conservative, for sure.

alan smithee wrote:

What do you suppose is going to happen to this country with a Kenney (Scheer) government?

All kinds of awful stuff. Say goodbye to any action on climate change; hell, the government will probably buy pipelines.

alan smithee wrote:

It's like cheering as an asteroid free falls to collision with the Earth. Let's not wait for a horror show to begin. The Cons need to be stopped and I truly don't give a fuck who can do it as long as they get the job done.

NOW do you understand me? Probably not.

Understanding your point doesn't mean agreeing with it. I'm not cheering for, voting for, or supporting the Conservatives in any way. I just don't exist in the Liberal parallel universe where there are only two choices, since I live in a riding that's Liberal/NDP swing and a province that's voted for the Bloc, the NDP, and the Liberals more recently than it's voted for the Conservatives. In your riding, if the Liberal vote had split in the last provincial election, it would've elected QS – so voting Liberal to "stop the CAQ" was nonsensical. In mine, QS was also second, but so distant that no conceivable split between the number of candidates on the ballot would've elected anyone but a Liberal.

The logic of blind partisanship is completely understandable: "The other guys are worse, so anyone that hurts my team in any way, including exposing a scandal, is working to hurt me." At that level, ethical concerns simply cease to matter. It's why Liberals still think Jody Wilson-Raybould, Jane Philpott, and the ethics commissioner are deep-cover agents for Andrew Scheer. They're incapable of comprehending that an action being right or wrong is independent of its partisan outcome. This, not coincidentally, is the attitude behind Trumpism: "I could shoot a guy on 5th Avenue." It's the attitude that causes every political scandal in history.

I'm trying to get the NDP elected this cycle, but not unconditionally so. If I discovered the candidate in my riding had murdered someone, I wouldn't vote for them just because "the Liberals are worse". There's a political breaking point for everyone. Mine's different than yours. That doesn't make me a Scheer supporter any more than it makes Trudeau a Scheer supporter for trying to give immunity from prosecution to an illegal corporate campaign donor. The Canadian electorate is not carved out of stone except for leftists, and I'm under no obligation to vote as if it were.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

cco wrote:
alan smithee wrote:

Are you paying attention to Alberta and the new Kenney United Fascists Party? Have you heard of all the goodies Ford has in store for his populace? I know for sure you are aware of CAQ.

Yep. I'm not going to vote Conservative, for sure.

alan smithee wrote:

What do you suppose is going to happen to this country with a Kenney (Scheer) government?

All kinds of awful stuff. Say goodbye to any action on climate change; hell, the government will probably buy pipelines.

alan smithee wrote:

It's like cheering as an asteroid free falls to collision with the Earth. Let's not wait for a horror show to begin. The Cons need to be stopped and I truly don't give a fuck who can do it as long as they get the job done.

NOW do you understand me? Probably not.

Understanding your point doesn't mean agreeing with it. I'm not cheering for, voting for, or supporting the Conservatives in any way. I just don't exist in the Liberal parallel universe where there are only two choices, since I live in a riding that's Liberal/NDP swing and a province that's voted for the Bloc, the NDP, and the Liberals more recently than it's voted for the Conservatives. In your riding, if the Liberal vote had split in the last provincial election, it would've elected QS – so voting Liberal to "stop the CAQ" was nonsensical. In mine, QS was also second, but so distant that no conceivable split between the number of candidates on the ballot would've elected anyone but a Liberal.

The logic of blind partisanship is completely understandable: "The other guys are worse, so anyone that hurts my team in any way, including exposing a scandal, is working to hurt me." At that level, ethical concerns simply cease to matter. It's why Liberals still think Jody Wilson-Raybould, Jane Philpott, and the ethics commissioner are deep-cover agents for Andrew Scheer. They're incapable of comprehending that an action being right or wrong is independent of its partisan outcome. This, not coincidentally, is the attitude behind Trumpism: "I could shoot a guy on 5th Avenue." It's the attitude that causes every political scandal in history.

I'm trying to get the NDP elected this cycle, but not unconditionally so. If I discovered the candidate in my riding had murdered someone, I wouldn't vote for them just because "the Liberals are worse". There's a political breaking point for everyone. Mine's different than yours. That doesn't make me a Scheer supporter any more than it makes Trudeau a Scheer supporter for trying to give immunity from prosecution to an illegal corporate campaign donor. The Canadian electorate is not carved out of stone except for leftists, and I'm under no obligation to vote as if it were.

Those are some fair points. I don't expect you to agree with me, I just want my point understood.

And as much as it seems I am defending the Liberals, it's more about people complaining exclusively about the Liberals when something more despicable is waiting in the wings.

You're right. The climate priority will be flushed down the toilet as the Conservatives,in conjunction with Closeted Kenney, a country wide pipeline. Fracking in the Arctic and anything else because they ultimately do not believe climate change is man made.

They will drag us into American offensive and illegal wars. Suck off Israel, etc...

The pot shops will be strangled to the point where they are no longer porofitable and the product becomes so bad that no one buys it there anymore. Basically you're typical 'crime and order' hypocrites who are going to hand over the business to organized crime. Start busting us 'hippies' again.

The Liberals were governing on the deficit. The first thing the Conservatives are going to do is exclaim that the Liberals left them in the red and they will use that excuse to gut all our services.

The Liberals have cut NOTHING as far as I know since taking power. And you're still going to tell me they are as bad as the Cons? Can't spell Conservative without the word Con.

Anyway,I'm not a true supporter of the Liberals. It's just that the NDP can't break 20% and are apparently losing support in favour of the Greens. Bad news, n'est-ce pas?

The NDP need at least 9 more points to have any chance in hell. I believe they need a new leader and come out as the 'left wing' choice.

I'd spit in Raybould-Wilson's face if I met her. She wasn't qualified for her position and should have been a career back bencher. She claims to be 'strong and principled' but she's writing a book. Hmmmmmmmm.

Anyway, I'm glad you can at least understand my point. If not I'll remind you what my point is: I Hate Conservatives!

pietro_bcc

Ken Burch wrote:

Misfit wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Would you quit with the Justin bullshit.... that's not progressive it's right wing...you sound like Agolf Twitler...grow up

Again, Justin broke the law and justified it. He needed to be exposed for his despicable actions.

And no, I’m not calling him what you want me to call him because you are a Liberal and support him politically and are offended.

Actually, it was the Liberal Party itself which started the "Justin" thing, to distinguish him from his no longer corporeal father.  "Justin Time" was virtually the LPC slogan during the 2015 campaign.

True, from when Trudeau announced his Liberal leadership run until the 2015 campaign started the party branded him as "Justin", then they thought that the brand they came up with didn't project gravitas so they stopped using it and then turned around and started criticizing people who used the brand they developed. Just google "Justin Trudeau Liberal Leadership race" and all the placards say Justin, either predominently or exclusively.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

alan smithee wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

In any case, Alan, there was no good reason for the Liberals to campaign to take  ridings which had been NDP-they should have focused solely on flipping Con-Lib marginals.

 

Ken,you know nothing about my politics. Which is a shame considering I have been explaining myself for years.

Our Conservatives are as psychotic as yours. Are you happy with YOUR government? You voting Democrat or Green?

I don't want the bullshit that is happening in your country to seep into mine. Do you understand or are you too partisan to look passed your nose?

The NDP IS NOT GOING TO WIN THE FUCKING ELECTION. Do you get it,Ken?

So don't dare label me something I'm not. If you want to call me an anti-Conservative,a radical one at that,then that's fine.

Don't call me a Liberal soimply because I don't believe for a second that they are worse than the CPC. Far from it.

I'll gladly take another Liberal majority. Hopefully Bernier's Fascist party cuts into CPC votes.

In any case, you're wrong,mate. Sorry.

I made no assumptions about your politics in that post, Alan, or about you in any way, nor any comments about this election.  I'm fully aware that it is unlikely that the NDP will win this time-something for which the categoric failure of the Mulcair campaign in 2015 is at least partially responsible, when combined with the severe problems Singh has had in the job.

I was simply asking if you would agree that the last four years would have been far more progressive if the Liberals had needed NDP votes to stay in power.   That, by itself, would have guaranteed the end of the anti-democratic FPTP electoral system, which would mean we would never face another bleak, depressing "you HAVE to vote Liberal, dammit!" campaign.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Ken Burch wrote:

 about your politics in that post, Alan, or about you in any way, nor any comments about this election.  I'm fully aware that it is unlikely that the NDP will win this time-something for which the categoric failure of the Mulcair campaign in 2015 is at least partially responsible, when combined with the severe problems Singh has had in the job.

Well I agree with you there. Mulcair for lack of a better word, destroyed the NDP and all its progress they had made. They were on their way to form a government. Sadly,Layton died and his successor was more of a right wing Liberal who packed his caucus full of so-called 'moderates' and demoted progressive members.

The party ran to the right of the Liberals in 2015. That was the knock out punch.

I was simply asking if you would agree that the last four years would have been far more progressive if the Liberals had needed NDP votes to stay in power.   That, by itself, would have guaranteed the end of the anti-democratic FPTP electoral system, which would mean we would never face another bleak, depressing "you HAVE to vote Liberal, dammit!" campaign.

In a perfect world I'd like to see an NDP/Liberal merger where the NDP can quietly take things over. The Conservatives wouldn't win another election in my lifetime.

And yes FPTP is bullshit and should be eradicated. I know, I know, the Liberals didn't fulfill their promise of electoral reform. Other than that they haven't done anything I strongly strongly disagree with. No cuts, no joining the US in the Persian Gulf waiting to attack Iran,no visits to Tel Aviv and legalized cannabis.

It may not be enough for some but we got some progress from them. More than we'd ever get from the Conservatives.

It is bleak and depressing that we must vote X,Y or Z but sometimes you have to to avoid something much worse.

Here's my question. In your opinion, what is it going to take to get the NDP up to at least 28%? Personally,I haven't a clue.

Left Turn Left Turn's picture

alan smithee wrote:
If they are going to keep that promise, I have faith that they will do something about our housing situation,

I don't. Most of the money the Liberals recently announced for housing here in Vancouver is loans to private developers to build market housing. And some of the funding was for two buildings on East Hastings Street that have already been built. How is any of this going to do anything to provide housing for the over 2,000 people who are currently homeless in this city?

Debater

Misfit wrote:

That is correct. But if they got rid of snivelling Trudeau then they would have him as an option. However the Liberals would not consider Bob Rae either because of his past with the NDP.

This stuff about Mulcair & Rae is a moot point because neither one are interested in running for office again, plus they are considered too old anyway.

As Chantal Hebert wrote about last year, a generational change has taken place at the Federal level in Canada -- no more baby boomers for leaders.  Once Trudeau became PM, the Conservatives also picked a younger new leader with Scheer.  And then the NDP did so with Singh.

Unlike in the U.S. where Trump is in his 70's, as are Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, much older leaders are less likely to be successful in Canada at this point in time.

Misfit Misfit's picture

Bull Shit!!! What a bunch of crap. If any leader came forward with good qualifications that attracted their support base, they would win the leadership of their party regardless of age. It just so happens that Canada’s leaders are now all younger. Woopty-doo!

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I agree. I judge candidates by character and their values not age. I don't care if they are 23 or 93

Debater

Chantal Hebert, 2017:

With the selection of Jagmeet Singh as NDP leader, the 2019 federal leadership lineup is now complete. It will be strikingly different from that on offer only two years ago on not one but two significant scores. It will also be more representative of 21st-century Canada.

For the first time there will be someone drawn from the ranks of Canada’s visible minorities on the leaders podium.

And for the first time in the living memory of most voters, there will not be a baby boomer vying to become prime minister on behalf of one of the three main parties.

Singh is 38, the same age as Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer. At 45 Justin Trudeau is, as of now, the oldest of the three main party leaders.

The long reign of the generation that dominated Canada’s life for the past decades has drawn to an end.

https://www.ourwindsor.ca/opinion-story/7588553-jagmeet-singh-s-ndp-win-turns-the-tide-in-more-ways-than-one-h-bert/

Misfit Misfit's picture

Again, nobody really cares!!!

voice of the damned

Unlike in the U.S. where Trump is in his 70's, as are Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, much older leaders are less likely to be successful in Canada at this point in time.

Is this supposed to be some sort of defining cultural difference ie. the USA idolizes old geezers, but Canadians go for the hot young studs? Because within quite recent memory, that has not always been the case. Jean Chretien was 12 years older than Bill Clinton, for example, and Pierre Trudeau was only within a few years of any POTUS he served opposite of, and actually five years older than Carter.   

Misfit Misfit's picture

This youth crap thing is just a coincidence. Barrack Obama was young. So that has started a very deep meaningful trend here in Canada that we are now supposedly incapable of wanting anything else.

Misfit Misfit's picture

Jagmeet Singh became leader because he signed on more delegates than the other leaders. Andrew Sheer was second to Maxine Bernier and western Canadian Conservatives didn’t want a Quebec leader and back room sealed  a pact to out Sheer in. Justin had name recognition from his father’s legacy. Justin had an image that they could sell. I don’t think age was a factor.

WWWTT

Debater wrote:

Misfit wrote:

That is correct. But if they got rid of snivelling Trudeau then they would have him as an option. However the Liberals would not consider Bob Rae either because of his past with the NDP.

This stuff about Mulcair & Rae is a moot point because neither one are interested in running for office again, plus they are considered too old anyway.

As Chantal Hebert wrote about last year, a generational change has taken place at the Federal level in Canada -- no more baby boomers for leaders.  Once Trudeau became PM, the Conservatives also picked a younger new leader with Scheer.  And then the NDP did so with Singh.

Unlike in the U.S. where Trump is in his 70's, as are Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, much older leaders are less likely to be successful in Canada at this point in time.

50% (probably 99%) of everything Chantal writes is BS! I’ve actually caught the Toronto star making up lies. 

Chantal is part of the imperialist corporate media flank that ride in the Trojan horse of “being progressives”

 

nicky
kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

When the people of Canada got to know Tom better they voted for Justin. I sincerely hope Jagmeet does much better. I saw an interview with the Toronto Sun on youth issues and I was impressed with his answers to a wide range of topics. He explained the party policy well without speaking notes.

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

"Or 8 years ago at this point, when Ignatieff was the only hope to stop Harper?" Sorry, I didn't properly quote or attribute but I don't think very many Canadians thought Ignatieff was the only hope - his electoral performance was dismal. He was a carpet bagger through and through that the back room boys thought would be a star performer. The Liberals stood aside and did little to stop the unfair character assasination of Stehan Dion. It was a very disgusting period in politics, that's for sure.

Aristotleded24

A stopped clock is right twice a day. I agree with what was written.

nicky

Would you be referring to TOM or yourself, Aristotle?

swallow swallow's picture

Why does TOM appear in ALL CAPS? 

Pondering

Ken Burch wrote:

In any case, Alan, there was no good reason for the Liberals to campaign to take  ridings which had been NDP-they should have focused solely on flipping Con-Lib marginals.

 

That makes no sense. Political parties try to win all the seats they can. Doesn't matter who has them. 

Debater

Pondering wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

In any case, Alan, there was no good reason for the Liberals to campaign to take  ridings which had been NDP-they should have focused solely on flipping Con-Lib marginals.

 

That makes no sense. Political parties try to win all the seats they can. Doesn't matter who has them. 

Correct.  For the Liberals to beat the Conservatives, they need to take not only Conservative seats, but enough NDP seats to overtake the Conservative seat total.

The NDP does the same thing.  In fact, the NDP targets *predominantly* Liberal seats, and only a few Conservative seats.

Mighty Middle

Mulcair writes a PRO-Andrew Scheer OP-ED

MULCAIR: Being underestimated is familiar terrain for Andrew Scheer

https://calgarysun.com/opinion/columnists/mulcair-being-underestimated-f...

voice of the damned

^ It's not pro-Scheer in the sense of endorsing his policies or telling people to vote for him. It's saying he is a skilled politician, who could do better than many are predicting.

Mighty Middle

voice of the damned wrote:

It's saying he is a skilled politician, who could do better than many are predicting.

It would be more accurate to write an OP-ED about Scheer being a "career" politican, not a "skilled" politician.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Debater wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

In any case, Alan, there was no good reason for the Liberals to campaign to take  ridings which had been NDP-they should have focused solely on flipping Con-Lib marginals.

 

That makes no sense. Political parties try to win all the seats they can. Doesn't matter who has them. 

Correct.  For the Liberals to beat the Conservatives, they need to take not only Conservative seats, but enough NDP seats to overtake the Conservative seat total.

The NDP does the same thing.  In fact, the NDP targets *predominantly* Liberal seats, and only a few Conservative seats.

Great Central Canadian analysis. The NDP battles the Conservatives where I live and many ridings on VI and other BC ridings have changed hands between those two parties. Your answer highlights the basic problem with our federal state. At the federal level there is no regional representation formally and so people in Upper and Lower Canada dominant because of population numbers and parties try to run "national" campaigns when in fact they are Central Canadian campaigns.

quizzical

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Debater wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

In any case, Alan, there was no good reason for the Liberals to campaign to take  ridings which had been NDP-they should have focused solely on flipping Con-Lib marginals.

 

That makes no sense. Political parties try to win all the seats they can. Doesn't matter who has them. 

Correct.  For the Liberals to beat the Conservatives, they need to take not only Conservative seats, but enough NDP seats to overtake the Conservative seat total.

The NDP does the same thing.  In fact, the NDP targets *predominantly* Liberal seats, and only a few Conservative seats.

Great Central Canadian analysis. The NDP battles the Conservatives where I live and many ridings on VI and other BC ridings have changed hands between those two parties. Your answer highlights the basic problem with our federal state. At the federal level there is no regional representation formally and so people in Upper and Lower Canada dominant because of population numbers and parties try to run "national" campaigns when in fact they are Central Canadian campaigns.

right!!!! even the new polling aggregator listing what seats were in play ignored BC outside of GVA.

they excluded Gord, Taylor Bachrach and Richard Canning as significant factors at play. imv both Gord and Richard will retain their seats and Taylor will replace Nathan.

i want BC to separate at this point so sick of the east setting the dialogue 

 

Misfit Misfit's picture

In Saskatchewan it is a battle between NDP and Conservatives except for Ralph Goodale. The Liberals do better federally here but provincially the Liberals are virtually non-existent.

Misfit Misfit's picture

While standing in front of a barn And Quiz,

Jack Layton was about as bad as them all in that regard. While campaigning he would come to Saskatchewan and get a photo op of him dressed in a cowboy shirt, cowboy boots,  jeans, and a Stetson and then would make his pitch about metro transit government funding and nothing else.

then he would fly out to Newfoundland and get a photo op of himself in a fishing trawler on the Grand Bsnks wearing a yellow rain coat and then would talk  about urban smog.

That was Jack Layton. I didn’t want him to die but I hated him as our national leader for this. He was the very worst at focusing only on metro Toronto and southern Ontario and Quebec only.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Misfit wrote:

While standing in front of a barn And Quiz,

Jack Layton was about as bad as them all in that regard. While campaigning he would come to Saskatchewan and get a photo op of him dressed in a cowboy shirt, cowboy boots,  jeans, and a Stetson and then would make his pitch about metro transit government funding and nothing else.

then he would fly out to Newfoundland and get a photo op of himself in a fishing trawler on the Grand Bsnks wearing a yellow rain coat and then would talk  about urban smog.

That was Jack Layton. I didn’t want him to die but I hated him as our national leader for this. He was the very worst at focusing only on metro Toronto and southern Ontario and Quebec only.

Thanks for the memories. I needed a good laugh and indeed that was my view of Jack as well. He muzzled the excellent MP's that the voters in BC sent to Ottawa. Using some bizarre logic he thought it would further his agenda of trying to get a breakthrough in Central Canada. Bill Siskay's whipping helped keep the other MP's in control.

Debater

Misfit wrote:

In Saskatchewan it is a battle between NDP and Conservatives except for Ralph Goodale. The Liberals do better federally here but provincially the Liberals are virtually non-existent.

That's certainly true in Saskatchewan.  Ralph Goodale has been the only Liberal in SK for many years now.  And when he retires there's no guarantee the Regina-Wascana seat will stay Liberal since a portion of that vote is for him personally rather than for the Liberals.

Pages