babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

Get ready for Justin-mania!

425 replies [Last post]

Comments

Sean in Ottawa
Offline
Joined: Jun 3 2003

I agree there should be a strategy for dealing with the Trudeau obsession:

Lucky for us it is similar to what we should be doing if Justin were not there. In fact, all this does is create more urgency to do what we should be done.

So here it is in a nutshell:

Recognize Trudeau has weaknesses:

- he actually has little in common with most Canadians

- he does not want to address substance and likely would not do well if he tried to (not that he cannot be briefed but inconsistencies would be exposed and the myth shattered

- the Cons will go after him and he will attract critics as well as boosters

- his party is the third party

- exposure to him undoes the mystique and over exposure now will ultimately make him old news by the time of the eventual election

So the strategy would be:

1) Rather than wait for the election the NDP must contrast by showing substance. The party does not need to release a platform so that substance can be for the next year nothing more than a series of potential policies and questions, consultations and grass roots mulling. The party could launch the greatest series of public consultations on specific ideas we have ever seen. The series should have a catchy name and the party should create this open consultation /public discussion in communities across the country and get this discussion going without committing the NDP to specifics but right now. If the NDP launches this before Trudeau becomes leader then Trudeau will appear to copy the NDP if he tries to do the same thing-- so this cannot wait. The party should have this series open and ongoing. The party should be engaging and responding to what people are saying. If people attack the party they should be just as willing to let that be visible because we will win on the process-- of course the party can respond by making arguments when attacked.

2) When it comes to personal attacks and nastiness the NDP should be very clean. The personal attacks on Trudeau will come from the Conservatives. The NDP should create an ongoing list of ways the Harper government is harming you with specifics-- avoiding the personal but going after the policies. This should be branded as everything else so it is highly recognizable. the party could also promote a fact checking site-- essentially a place where the Harper government lies are gathered. But this should not be fluffed up with unimportant volume -- really just the most important things that people will recognize are serious. Everything should be vetted by people who have the discipline to see things in a less partisan way -- like the audience so we are not just crowing to ourselves.

3) The party should respond when attacked every time.

4) The party must have a strong earned media strategy where there is a constant substantive effort to be heard that avoids unimportant issues

5) The party should focus on a couple important economic policies and have those out there now -- even if they are copied that is okay. The issue is that we make it clear that we are claiming the economy as our issue. Again these can come from or be tested in the early consultation process

6) The party must engage in the creation of a comprehensive plan for democratic renewal including proportional representation. We must take the high road on this and be clear about what would improve the system. The result should be a manifesto for democratic renewal. This can come out of a round of public consultation. This has to be branded-- there should be a clear look and slogan that is repeated throughout-- we want people to get to know the process and recognize it.

7) The party must continue a strong campaign to get the leader to connect more, look natural etc. But also look like a leader so emphasize his team leadership skills rather than present him as a lone actor.

 


autoworker
Offline
Joined: Dec 21 2008
@Sean in Ottawa: I agree with most of what you just posted, with the exception of the timing of releasing policy specifics. I believe the NDP should be upfront with its platform, and be candid with it's positions on the Clarity Act, Bill 101 and it's proposed application to federal public service and regulated industries in Quebec, along with it's ME foreign policy (particularly Iran). Procurement and trade policies are also topics than need to be discussed more robustly (who gets the benefits, specifically).

josh
Offline
Joined: Aug 5 2002

The latest Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey released Friday says 36 per cent of those who took part in the poll across the country last week said they would be certain or likely to vote Liberal in the next election if Trudeau is at the party's helm.

The poll says he would get "significant support" east of Manitoba, with 40 per cent of those surveyed in Ontario, 43 per cent in Quebec and 48 per cent in Atlantic Canada indicating they would be certain or likely to vote for the Liberals if Trudeau is leading the party.

http://www.570news.com/news/national/article/408980--poll-says-trudeau-could-shake-up-federal-politics-as-he-wins-key-endorsement

 


Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

autoworker wrote:
I believe the NDP should be upfront with its platform, and be candid with it's positions on the Clarity Act, Bill 101 and it's proposed application to federal public service and regulated industries in Quebec, along with it's ME foreign policy (particularly Iran). Procurement and trade policies are also topics than need to be discussed more robustly (who gets the benefits, specifically).

The NDP has been 100% crystal clear on all of the following. They believe that the Clarity Act is irrelevant since it has been superseded by the reference to the Supreme Court which has already made a ruling accepted by everyone  on the rules around any province seceding. They believe that Quebecers who work in federally regulated workplaces should have a right to work in their own language - just like everyone working in provincially regulated workplaces. The policy on Iran is that sanctions and pressure should continue on Iran to discourage any attempt to develop nuclear weapons, but they are totally opposed to any foreign invasion of Iran. Take it or leave it!

I wish you the best of luck trying to figure out where Justin Trudeau stands on any of the issues.


Arthur Cramer
Offline
Joined: Nov 30 2010

josh wrote:

The latest Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey released Friday says 36 per cent of those who took part in the poll across the country last week said they would be certain or likely to vote Liberal in the next election if Trudeau is at the party's helm.

The poll says he would get "significant support" east of Manitoba, with 40 per cent of those surveyed in Ontario, 43 per cent in Quebec and 48 per cent in Atlantic Canada indicating they would be certain or likely to vote for the Liberals if Trudeau is leading the party.

http://www.570news.com/news/national/article/408980--poll-says-trudeau-could-shake-up-federal-politics-as-he-wins-key-endorsement

 

So what you are saying is that because the Tories are so bad, people, remembering a time that didn't exist, will allow back into the power the same guys who were doing what Harper is doing, only not as quickly. If that is so, it is sad, and leads feeling nothing but contempt for the average voting Canadain. Flash before susbstance eh? Good luck with that.


socialdemocrati...
Offline
Joined: Jan 10 2012

One of the narratives that's already taking hold is that Trudeau represents a "reboot" for the Liberal party, devoid of any of the corruption and entitlement that led to their downfall.

Trudeau’s rebels not about ‘renewal’: They mean to start from scratch

what can we surmise about Trudeau’s likely policy direction from the composition of his team? Its pivotal figures, though some might dispute such a characterization, are Butts, Telford, McNair and Sacha Trudeau. As a group they are progressive, environmentalist and internationalist, but with a pragmatic tilt. If “youthful over-achiever” were a political party, all four would be charter members.

Butts is a governor of McGill University and president and CEO of the World Wildlife Fund, Canada. He has a Master’s degree in English Literature from McGill; while there he twice won national debating championships. In addition to having served nearly a decade as principal secretary to Ontario premier Dalton McGuinty, Butts wrote the Ontario Liberal policy platforms in their first two winning elections.

Telford, a new mother with a 15-month-old son, is a consultant at Toronto-based Strategy Corp. She cut her teeth as chief of staff to Gerard Kennedy, when he was Ontario education minister. After Kennedy’s failed bid for the federal Liberal party leadership, Telford went to work for the new leader, Stephane Dion. She was a Liberal negotiator in the ultimately unsuccessful coalition talks between the Liberals and New Democrats in 2008.

McNair is a former investment banker for CIBC World Markets, with a Master’s degree in global economic history from the London School of Economics and another in international and public affairs from Columbia University. He was a policy adviser to Dion and Michael Ignatieff. He will travel with Trudeau and is the team’s key policy hand.

Most intriguing of all, perhaps, is Alexandre “Sacha” Trudeau’s role. At 38, the middle Trudeau son is a documentary filmmaker and journalist (the youngest, Michel, died in an avalanche accident in 1998). Though Sacha is less outgoing than his brother, his work has long been passionately political, in a nuanced way. He was an outspoken critic of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

In 2003, Sacha told The Gazette in Montreal, “I’m not a Liberal. I’m apolitical.”

His apolitical brother aside... his team is still a bunch of insiders who worked closely with Dion, Ignatieff, and McGuinty. That's not really enough to incriminate them, but it's not exactly a huge movement of reform either.

But if people on this site wanted to do a little more digging, it's possible we might have a narrative that shows Trudeau is really just a young face for old ideas and career politicians.

Anyone want to see what they can dig up on these folks?


kropotkin1951
Online
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Stockholm wrote:

The policy on Iran is that sanctions and pressure should continue on Iran to discourage any attempt to develop nuclear weapons, but they are totally opposed to any foreign invasion of Iran. Take it or leave it!

I wish you the best of luck trying to figure out where Justin Trudeau stands on any of the issues.

i suspect that Justin will have much the same imperial stand on Iran.  Quite the thing for a party that is supposed to be about working people and social justice to be supporting sanctions that are making real people in Iran suffer merely to discourage something that Iran says they aren't doing and don't want to build.  The kicker is that all independent sources say the Iranians are not trying to build a nuclear bomb but the thought of it is enough for progressives to call for the punishment the working people of Iran.  Apparently those people are of no concern to social democrats.

Ready Aye Ready is the cry coming from all sides of the House of Commons.

 


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

On P&P tonight: someone said a Trudeau candidacy will cause splits - and the Cons will get an even bigger majority next time.

 


clambake
Offline
Joined: Apr 21 2011

Depressing thought. Almost makes me want to tune out politics entirely.


adma
Offline
Joined: Jan 21 2006

Boom Boom wrote:

On P&P tonight: someone said a Trudeau candidacy will cause splits - and the Cons will get an even bigger majority next time.

Or else, if we're looking at a mid-high 30s percentile for the Libs, a "phony Liberal majority"--Con votes being wasted in the West, etc...


Ken Burch
Offline
Joined: Feb 26 2005

If there's a Liberal victory at all.  Remember, when John Turner took over from Trudeau, the first polls had the Liberals in the 45% range, 10 points or more up on the PC's, and the NDP were at 11% in that scenario.  Compare that to the actual results of the 1984 election.


Centrist
Offline
Joined: Apr 7 2004

Ken Burch wrote:

If there's a Liberal victory at all.  Remember, when John Turner took over from Trudeau, the first polls had the Liberals in the 45% range, 10 points or more up on the PC's, and the NDP were at 11% in that scenario.  Compare that to the actual results of the 1984 election.

Same with Kim Campbell after Mulroney. Problem is that you are referring to longer-term incumbent governments that were tired and that the public had already turned on. The subsequent leader replacements received short-lived dead cat bounces (as a momentary sigh of relief from the electorate) but were ultimately turfed.

In this instance, the Libs are not an incumbent government. They are a 3rd party.

While Justin Trudeau comes across as a nice enough guy, he also comes across as someone with a speech impediment, a flake and a light-weight. I honestly just don't understand what's going on at the moment.

 


lagatta
Offline
Joined: Apr 17 2002
Justin Trudeau might be a nice enough guy (certainly "personable", I can say as someone who has met him superficially several times at community events), however, he is the scion of wealthy families in Québec and BC, and a missile launched as what the ruling class sees as an aberration - the big increase in NDP votes and seats in the last Federal elections. One need not have any illusions in the NDP program or history to see that this would be a huge backward step. Centrist, agree about lightweight (and upper-class twit, don't know about "flake" - he doesn't say much of substance, even supposedly "nutty" things, but attacking someone for a speech impediment is ablism, non? The great trade unionist and Labour politician Aneurin Bevin overcame a dreadful stammer, without access to the paid speech therapists who helped a certain well-known King... http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/bevan_aneurin.shtml

autoworker
Offline
Joined: Dec 21 2008
It may have escaped some that Jack Layton was not born into the working class, yet Mulroney most definitely was. One might say that they both betrayed their class.

6079_Smith_W
Online
Joined: Jun 10 2010

autoworker wrote:
It may have escaped some that Jack Layton was not born into the working class, yet Mulroney most definitely was. One might say that they both betrayed their class.

In Mulroney's case, perhaps. In Layton's, only if one accepts the caricature that everyone who is well-off is obsessed with protecting their wealth and grinding everyone else into the mud. I don't think it's true, myself. Some people in all circumstances have that attitude; again.... look at Mulroney.

 


autoworker
Offline
Joined: Dec 21 2008
6079_Smith_W wrote:

autoworker wrote:
It may have escaped some that Jack Layton was not born into the working class, yet Mulroney most definitely was. One might say that they both betrayed their class.

In Mulroney's case, perhaps. In Layton's, only if one accepts the caricature that everyone who is well-off is obsessed with protecting their wealth and grinding everyone else into the mud. I don't think it's true, myself. Some people in all circumstances have that attitude; again.... look at Mulroney.

 

I wouldn't suggest that Layton fit that caricature, but I don't believe it applies to either Justin or Pierre Trudeau.

R.E.Wood
Offline
Joined: Aug 13 2002

I think this reference to Justin Trudeau having a "speech impediment" is not only incorrect, but completely inappropriate, and a derogatory implication to people who do have speech impediments. Centrist should apologize.

But now I'll just say a couple things about Justin Trudeau: He is young and represents a generational shift the other parties have not taken (very disappointingly so, I feel, in the NDP's case). He is charismatic and immediately likeable, which is an attribute the NDP ignores at its own peril - never underestimate charm (remember, most people are not as into deep policy discussions as those here at babble are!). He represents and radiates optimism and hope - you can't put a price on that when it comes to stirring up optimism and hope in voters.

What I'm going to say next is sure to incite calls of me being a "liberal", but that's not true. I have voted NDP in every election, provincial and federal, since I turned 18 in the late 80s. (And yes, that makes me almost the same age as Justin Trudeau.)

In our leadership campaign I was a firm supporter of Nathan Cullen, and the time since the leadership went to Tom Mulcair has only served to disappoint me. The more I see of him, the more I find Mulcair stiflingly dull, uninspiring, and generally just another boring old politician. I don't believe him. And I don't trust him. I may agree with some of the things he says, but it's how he says them that ultimately makes me just not care anymore. For the first time in my voting life, I just don't care what happens to the NDP. Even Alexa couldn't do that, and I never liked her as leader either! 

So, there's some honesty. Some of you will undoubtedly bash me now and call me names. But the more honest and thoughtful out there will get what I'm saying: If Justin Trudeau offers optimism, hope, energy, youth, (and yes, eventually, some policies), and promises it's a reborn party untied to the scandals of old... what do you really think people of our generation and younger (who aren't rabid conservatives) will vote for? It's not going to be blustery, boring old Mulcair (or his alternate personality: smooth, soft-spoken, boring old Mulcair). Policies and depth aren't going to do it, folks. Charisma, hope and optimism will go very far... See Obama's first election. 

Just sayin'.

 

Centrist wrote:

While Justin Trudeau comes across as a nice enough guy, he also comes across as someone with a speech impediment, a flake and a light-weight. I honestly just don't understand what's going on at the moment.


autoworker
Offline
Joined: Dec 21 2008
Stockholm wrote:

autoworker wrote:
I believe the NDP should be upfront with its platform, and be candid with it's positions on the Clarity Act, Bill 101 and it's proposed application to federal public service and regulated industries in Quebec, along with it's ME foreign policy (particularly Iran). Procurement and trade policies are also topics than need to be discussed more robustly (who gets the benefits, specifically).

The NDP has been 100% crystal clear on all of the following. They believe that the Clarity Act is irrelevant since it has been superseded by the reference to the Supreme Court which has already made a ruling accepted by everyone  on the rules around any province seceding. They believe that Quebecers who work in federally regulated workplaces should have a right to work in their own language - just like everyone working in provincially regulated workplaces. The policy on Iran is that sanctions and pressure should continue on Iran to discourage any attempt to develop nuclear weapons, but they are totally opposed to any foreign invasion of Iran. Take it or leave it!

I wish you the best of luck trying to figure out where Justin Trudeau stands on any of the issues.

It's not as simple as that, but it will be interesting to see where Justin stands on those issues.

R.E.Wood
Offline
Joined: Aug 13 2002

And I just want to add that I didn't mean to be ageist in my last post, and apologize if it came across that way. I did want a generational shift in our leadership, but my second vote (after Cullen) went to Peggy Nash. I found her honest, trustworthy, and appealing on a personal level, and thus able to connect with voters as a human being (which I don't think Mulcair is doing). Age was not a factor I held against her.


kropotkin1951
Online
Joined: Jun 6 2002

The NDP should prepare itself to fight against Obama's 2008 campaign. Justin will definitely try to brand himself as the person of Hope and Change. Hell even NDP'ers  fell for Obama's bullshit and some still think he is a progressive. Justin will be every bit as progressive as Obama has been. 

When the NDP moves to the centre, as it is and will continue to do so, and a fresh young face sings all the hymns from the Democratic playbook unsophisticated voters will not be able to tell the difference.  The Conservatives need to run against two centre left parties and better still if their opposition splits the seats in Quebec.  After Justin gets crowned the real battle will be for Quebec. from afar it seems that while the federal Liberal scandals are getting to be a bit old and forgotten the provincial brand is likely to hurt the changes of any federal Liberal revival. 

I will predict that Justin Trudeau will not change the result of a single seat in BC.  The Liberal name is toast here and the people seem to be tired of photo op leaders talking in sound bites.


Ippurigakko
Offline
Joined: May 30 2011

Aboriginal ppl wont vote Justin because of his dad disagreed on Aboriginal land claims! And He not even put the word First Nation instead of Indian.

 

 


Centrist
Offline
Joined: Apr 7 2004

R.E.Wood wrote:

I think this reference to Justin Trudeau having a "speech impediment" is not only incorrect, but completely inappropriate, and a derogatory implication to people who do have speech impediments. Centrist should apologize.

If I offended anyone, I certainly do apologize as that was not my intent. My point was that he "comes across" as having a speech impediiment when I see him on television and that seems to hamper his communication skills. C'est la vie.

kropotkin1951 wrote:
I will predict that Justin Trudeau will not change the result of a single seat in BC. 

But when you look at last week's Forum poll results for BC with Trudeau at the Lib helm, it makes one wonder:

Con - 38% (-8% from 2011 election result)

Lib - 33% (+20%)

NDP - 25% (- 8%)

Green - 2% (-6%)

Other - 2% (+2%)

 

 


kropotkin1951
Online
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Sure I believe those polls just like Danielle Smith is the Premier of Alberta. He brings nothing to the table for BC except media driven charisma and unlike his father he is actually not charismatic.

A poll that says only 25% of BC voters will support the federal party at the same time as the provincial party is at least 20 points higher makes no sense except as the result of a push poll designed to drive support for the Liberals. 


autoworker
Offline
Joined: Dec 21 2008
Ippurigakko wrote:

Aboriginal ppl wont vote Justin because of his dad disagreed on Aboriginal land claims! And He not even put the word First Nation instead of Indian.

 

 

I agree, that part of the Trudeau legacy was left wanting. One was left with the impression that he wasn't serious about negotiating anything of substance. The Liberals attempted to redress that with the Kelowna Accord, but political opportunism got in the way. Let's see what Justin has to offer First Nations, who are right to be skeptical.

Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Stockholm wrote:

The NDP has been 100% crystal clear on all of the following.

In comradely spirit, I'll try to correct your unclarity.

Quote:
They believe that the Clarity Act is irrelevant since it has been superseded by the reference to the Supreme Court which has already made a ruling accepted by everyone  on the rules around any province seceding.

Strange - the Clarity Act was tabled in 1999 and proclaimed in 2000. But the Supreme Court reference was initiated in 1996 and the decision was handed down in 1998. I guess it's conceivable for something to be "superseded" by something that preceded it, but it's an awfully unusual use of the term.

Furthermore, no one in Québec supported the Supreme Court reference - that includes the Liberal Party. The National Assembly voted unanimously against the reference. And need I add that no one in Québec supports the Clarity Act.

That includes the Federal NDP. Jack Layton unilaterally altered party policy in the December 2005 election campaign when he announced that the party would now support the Clarity Act. Bad bad move. In 2006, the national convention of the party adopted the Sherbrooke Declaration, which goes directly counter to both the Clarity Act and the Supreme Court reference, on both key issues of the size of the necessary majority (50%+1 as per Sherbrooke) and the referendum question (which is the sole preserve of the National Assembly, as per Sherbrooke).

Quote:
They believe that Quebecers who work in federally regulated workplaces should have a right to work in their own language - just like everyone working in provincially regulated workplaces.

Uh, no. They believe that Quebecers in federally regulated workplaces should be able to work in English or French. Right now, provincially regulated workplaces with 50 or more employees must by law have French as the language of work.

Quote:
The policy on Iran is that sanctions and pressure should continue on Iran to discourage any attempt to develop nuclear weapons, but they are totally opposed to any foreign invasion of Iran.

As kropotkin pointed out, it's a shame that Mulcair's NDP is part of the international blackmail and war-drum-beating against Iran, a country which has never committed aggression against any other. As for being "totally opposed to any foreign invasion of Iran", I suppose you mean, as of today? When the time comes, Mulcair will be blessing the Iran war heroes just as Turmel did with our Libyan bomber pilots.

Quote:
Take it or leave it!

That's an easy choice. But I did think that it was important to correct some of your statements about NDP policy.

Quote:
I wish you the best of luck trying to figure out where Justin Trudeau stands on any of the issues.

Anyone who spent the last decade trying to figure out just where the NDP stood on Afghanistan - or the Middle East - or crime - or the gun registry - or just about anything - should have no problem with this exercise.


Centrist
Offline
Joined: Apr 7 2004

Unionist wrote:
That includes the Federal NDP. Jack Layton unilaterally altered party policy in the December 2005 election campaign when he announced that the party would now support the Clarity Act. Bad bad move. In 2006, the national convention of the party adopted the Sherbrooke Declaration, which goes directly counter to both the Clarity Act and the Supreme Court reference, on both key issues of the size of the necessary majority (50%+1 as per Sherbrooke) and the referendum question (which is the sole preserve of the National Assembly, as per Sherbrooke).

Nevertheless, never discount public opinion, this time in Quebec itself. According to an Ipsos poll of September 4, 2012, the threshold for a “yes” vote in a referendum:

1. 70% of Quebecers believe that it should be greater than 60%;

2. 55% of Quebecers believe that it should be greater than a two-thirds majority of 66%;

http://ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=5751

 

 


janfromthebruce
Offline
Joined: Apr 24 2007

autoworker wrote:
Ippurigakko wrote:

Aboriginal ppl wont vote Justin because of his dad disagreed on Aboriginal land claims! And He not even put the word First Nation instead of Indian.

 

 

I agree, that part of the Trudeau legacy was left wanting. One was left with the impression that he wasn't serious about negotiating anything of substance. The Liberals attempted to redress that with the Kelowna Accord, but political opportunism got in the way. Let's see what Justin has to offer First Nations, who are right to be skeptical.

 

I will respond to the suggestion "political opportunism" as alluded to the NDP in this regard. Unless, you are rightly suggesting that it was Liberals creating opportunism, because in the dying days of this liberal minority govt, was when it found it's fake progressive roots. So Martin, the millionaire fakes left but no matter, he had promised an election in 6 weeks, and the pulling of the plug happen only weeks earlier, so in REALITY, the outcome would have been the same for the Kelona Accord and for the promised forever national childcare program.

Neither of those proposed programs were anywhere near coming to fruitation, but besides that Martin wasn't willing to bring anything to the table for the NDP to support and preferred running on this rather than "praying for a miracle" in passing through a minority vote, although with or without the NDP, the numbers were not there.

And this is the Liberal myth making which lives on: the total number of lib plus NDP MPs was less than the total number of Cons, Bloc, and independents. It's simple math.

So it was in the political interests of the NDP to be on the side of "pulling the plug early" (by a few weeks) rather than supporting a corrupt liberal party who wasn't willing to support other "progressive initiatives".


Ken Burch
Offline
Joined: Feb 26 2005

autoworker wrote:
Ippurigakko wrote:

Aboriginal ppl wont vote Justin because of his dad disagreed on Aboriginal land claims! And He not even put the word First Nation instead of Indian.

 

 

I agree, that part of the Trudeau legacy was left wanting. One was left with the impression that he wasn't serious about negotiating anything of substance. The Liberals attempted to redress that with the Kelowna Accord, but political opportunism got in the way. Let's see what Justin has to offer First Nations, who are right to be skeptical.

Let's go over this ONE MORE TIME, shall we?

Even if the NDP had backed Martin on the no-confidence motion, the Liberals would STILL have fallen by a margin of 153-151.  It was mathematically impossible for the Liberals to survive once the Bloc committed to backing the motion. 

It was never the NDP's fault that Harper came to power...it was the Bloc who made that happen.  So give the "political opportunism" thing a rest.  The actual parliamentary math proves the NDP wasn' t to blame.


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Centrist wrote:

 

Nevertheless, never discount public opinion, this time in Quebec itself. According to an Ipsos poll of September 4, 2012, the threshold for a “yes” vote in a referendum:

1. 70% of Quebecers believe that it should be greater than 60%;

2. 55% of Quebecers believe that it should be greater than a two-thirds majority of 66%;

Excellent! I wonder why we bother electing representatives, when we can just ask you and Ipsos-Reid what we really think, in a Toronto press release! Thank you!

Now, hurry off and tell your NDP buddies that they've got it all wrong. The Sherbrooke Declaration is history. Tell them to promote 60% as the winning number. That'll give them the support of 70% OF QUEBECERS!! Booyah!

God. How stupid we can be when we can't look past our own noses. Just down the road... there's Toronto!!

 


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments