Trudeaumetre - Bravo!

618 posts / 0 new
Last post
monty1

Trudeau is up to 64% approval here but that's not the bad part. The lying liars tell  us more.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-approval-ratings-polls-1.3363911

Quote:
Problematic for the New Democrats, however, is how Mulcair stacks up against Trudeau among NDP voters. Forum and EKOS put Trudeau's approval rating among New Democrats at between 67 and 72 per cent, with just 15 per cent standing in disapproval. By comparison, Mulcair scored a 71 to 77 per cent approval rating among New Democrats, with his disapproval rating sitting at 14 to 18 per cent.

Well that has to be a lie. It puts Trudeau's popularity pretty much  the same as Mucair's AMONGST NDPe'ers

NDPP

NDP=No Difference Party

Sean in Ottawa

so now Monty is trying to equate personal approval numbers with party support -- see post 595 where he says there is 70% in a discussion of votes and support and later the link to 64% in job approval not voter support.

monty1

NDPP wrote:

NDP=No Difference Party

I would have much preferred that approach on this forum too and right from the beginning. There is no benefit for supporting the NDP over the Liberals. And now, the benefit of supporting the Libeals over the NDP is that the Liberals have a majority in parliament. And the reallly big benefit in supporting the Liberals is that they are the anti-Conservatives. 

The NDP must now try to get their act together and support the LIberals in any chance they get. That is their way out of the jackpot and their way to a future. And that's being very kind and generous toward them because the Liberals don't need them with the majority they have. 

Even if they pretend to object to the Liberals, they can't pull with the Cons to the right. And thems' the facts for the NDP people on this board. I think you, NDPP understand that in the same way I understand it.

And  fwiw, I would hate to see the end of a great legacy that Tommy Douglas and his peers built.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

monty1 wrote:

Trudeau is up to 64% approval here but that's not the bad part. The lying liars tell  us more.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-approval-ratings-polls-1.3363911

Quote:

Problematic for the New Democrats, however, is how Mulcair stacks up against Trudeau among NDP voters. Forum and EKOS put Trudeau's approval rating among New Democrats at between 67 and 72 per cent, with just 15 per cent standing in disapproval. By comparison, Mulcair scored a 71 to 77 per cent approval rating among New Democrats, with his disapproval rating sitting at 14 to 18 per cent.

Well that has to be a lie. It puts Trudeau's popularity pretty much  the same as Mucair's AMONGST NDPe'ers

This is from six or seven weeks ago. Before the TPP sellout, the NEB lies unfolding in the streets of Burnaby and the broken promise on killing Iraqi and Syrian civilians.

You can't even be honest about polling data and are trying to sell this as some sort of current reading of the Trudeau Liars. But tell me again you were really an NDP voter in the past. LMAOROF

 

Pondering

Pondering wrote:

I find it really discouraging that someone like quizzical who spends so much time here still doesn't understand the threat posed by the ISDS chapter in all the latest trade deals.

I see that as a huge failure on the part of babble.

quizzical wrote:

why???? it's my choice what threads and posts i want to read.

i grew up listening to my mom carry on about NAFTA. we're still here. the sky didn't fall. and now i just tune it out. maybe wrongly but it's my choice.

That's right. It's not up to you to pay attention to things you aren't interested it. Everyone is the same way. It is up to the people with causes to convince others to join them.

The sky didn't fall after NAFTA? Have you not noticed the degration in our health care and social services in general? The stagnant wages and hollowing out of the middle class? There have been a hundred suits against Canada none of which we won. We did win on soft-lumber but it doesn't matter because the US refused to pay all they owed anyway.

Are you unaware that it is against the law for cities to choose to buy local on contracts under NAFTA? Although Montreal won, we were sued for chosing Bombardier for our metro cars. One of the requirements was rubber wheels. I think China, may have been some other country, contested our right to demand rubber wheels because most companies don't make them. Had we just decided to buy from Bombarier because they are situated in Quebec we whould have had to pay penalties.

Trans Canada is suing the US over the Keystone refusal. Right now Canada is being sued for 250 million because Quebec banned fracking. That's under NAFTA, so no, the sky hasn't fallen, but we have payed millions

CETA and TPP have been referred to as NAFTA on steroids.

It isn't enough that you are against CETA and TPP. You should be scared to death that they will pass. they embed neoliberalism into international law.

If you pull the right thread, everything falls apart, Trade deals are the right thread, they are at the heart of neoliberalism and the undermining of democracy. They increase income inequality and interfere with our ability to pass environmental laws to deal with climate change.

I thought the point of activism is to change the world for the better in some way through gaining public support.

This is a tiny site and people are here for years. If activists here haven't been able to reach/inform quizzical how do you expect to reach the general public? It's the disinterested we have to reach.

It isn't enough that she is against the trade deals. We have to motivate as many people as possible to feel so strongly about it that we can get 100K+ people to demonstrate in every major city in Canada.

I have some ideas but nothing I could do by myself. My theory is that we have to educate people without lecturing or explaining and without trying to convince them of anything or offering any solutions.

monty1

kropotkin1951 wrote:

monty1 wrote:

Trudeau is up to 64% approval here but that's not the bad part. The lying liars tell  us more.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-approval-ratings-polls-1.3363911

Quote:

Problematic for the New Democrats, however, is how Mulcair stacks up against Trudeau among NDP voters. Forum and EKOS put Trudeau's approval rating among New Democrats at between 67 and 72 per cent, with just 15 per cent standing in disapproval. By comparison, Mulcair scored a 71 to 77 per cent approval rating among New Democrats, with his disapproval rating sitting at 14 to 18 per cent.

Well that has to be a lie. It puts Trudeau's popularity pretty much  the same as Mucair's AMONGST NDPe'ers

This is from six or seven weeks ago. Before the TPP sellout, the NEB lies unfolding in the streets of Burnaby and the broken promise on killing Iraqi and Syrian civilians.

You can't even be honest about polling data and are trying to sell this as some sort of current reading of the Trudeau Liars. But tell me again you were really an NDP voter in the past. LMAOROF

Nawww kropotkin, I'm not trying to sell it as anything. It's a link I found when I decided to get into the pissing match with sean and his ilk again. If you think Mulcair's popularity amongst NDP'ers is higher than Trudeau's then show me the stats. For now, I'm sticking with my position of Mulcair being done like dinner.

Jacob Two-Two

monty1 wrote:
The NDP must now try to get their act together and support the LIberals in any chance they get. That is their way out of the jackpot and their way to a future. And that's being very kind and generous toward them because the Liberals don't need them with the majority they have.

Hahahahahaha! You are so obviously full of shit. Don't you people ever get embarrassed? No of course not. How could you shill for the Liberals if you did?

It's not the difference between the Libs and the NDP that needs to worry you, my friend. It's the difference between the Liberals and the Liberals, or more specifically what they say and what they do, because never the twain shall meet. No, I don't think I'll be joinging you in your fantasy land and supporting a party that is selling Canadian sovereignty to foreign corporations, who presided over the biggest increase in greenhouse gases in the country's history, who signed the Kyoto accord and then a few years later said, "Yeah, we never really meant that". Who voted C-51 into law, turning our country into a police state, and now wants to "consult" about which rights to return, if any. Who steal our tax money (literally steal, as in take revenues they have no legal right to) and enable Canadian billionaires to sneak their cash out of the country so they don't have to pay their share.

You are a chump if you believe the flimsy rationalisations for these crimes, and I will not be joining you in chumpville. If the NDP folded tomorrow, I still would not be joinging you, because I get that politics isn't about choosing which punch in the face might urt the least. It's about building something positive and productive. This will nevetr happen with the party of liars and thieves, otherwise known as the Liberals.

monty1

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

monty1 wrote:
The NDP must now try to get their act together and support the LIberals in any chance they get. That is their way out of the jackpot and their way to a future. And that's being very kind and generous toward them because the Liberals don't need them with the majority they have.

Hahahahahaha! You are so obviously full of shit. Don't you people ever get embarrassed? No of course not. How could you shill for the Liberals if you did?

It's not the difference between the Libs and the NDP that needs to worry you, my friend. It's the difference between the Liberals and the Liberals, or morespecifically what they say and what they do, because never the twain shall meet. No, I don't think I'll be joinging you in your fantasy land and supporting a party that is selling Canadian sovereignty to foreign corporations, who presided over the biggest increase in greenhouse gases in the country's history, who signed the Kyoto accord and then a few years later said, "Yeah, we never really meant that". Who voted C-51 into law, turning our country into a police state, and now wants to "consult" about which rights to return, if any. Who steal our tax money (literally steal, as in take revenues they have no legal right to) and enable Canadian billionaires to sneak their cash out of the country so they don't have to pay their share.

You are a chump if you believe the flimsy rationalisations for these crimes, and I will not be joining you in chumpville. If the NDP folded tomorrow, I still would not be joinging you, because I get that politics isn't about choosing which punch in the face might urt the least. It's about building something positive and productive. This will nevetr happen with the party of liars and thieves, otherwise known as the Liberals.

Indeed Jacob! 

Jacob Two-Two

With the Liberals, it's never in deed. Only in word.

Pondering

Terrible news for you, good news for the environment.

www.cbc.ca/news/politics/environmental-regulations-pipelines-1.

Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr and Environment Minister Catherine McKenna announced Wednesday that the government is launching an interim review process that will impose more steps on projects such as Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain and TransCanada's Energy East pipelines before they can be built. 

"We believe it is important and, in fact, essential to rebuild Canadians' trust in our environmental assessment processes," McKenna told a news conference Wednesday.

"We need to take into account the views and concerns of Canadians, respect the rights and interests of indigenous peoples and support our natural resources sector."

Moving forward, the environment ministry will analyze greenhouse gas emissions that would result from approving pipeline projects. The results from that study would then be presented to cabinet, which will make the final decision on whether to approve a project.

The process will also include greater public, and indigenous consultations on projects, something that is not currently part of the National Energy Board regulatory regime.

The new process will be separate from the existing NEB, and take place after the regulator has completed its review of proposed projects.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

Terrible news for you, good news for the environment.

www.cbc.ca/news/politics/environmental-regulations-pipelines-1.

Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr and Environment Minister Catherine McKenna announced Wednesday that the government is launching an interim review process that will impose more steps on projects such as Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain and TransCanada's Energy East pipelines before they can be built. 

"We believe it is important and, in fact, essential to rebuild Canadians' trust in our environmental assessment processes," McKenna told a news conference Wednesday.

"We need to take into account the views and concerns of Canadians, respect the rights and interests of indigenous peoples and support our natural resources sector."

Moving forward, the environment ministry will analyze greenhouse gas emissions that would result from approving pipeline projects. The results from that study would then be presented to cabinet, which will make the final decision on whether to approve a project.

The process will also include greater public, and indigenous consultations on projects, something that is not currently part of the National Energy Board regulatory regime.

The new process will be separate from the existing NEB, and take place after the regulator has completed its review of proposed projects.

No Pondering; wrong again, sigh! Silly Goose!

Myself and so many others on here have said we'll be the first to cheer if Trudeau delivers. Its not about us, Pondering, its about social good. What part of that don't you get. Mind you, "Ponderiing", the devil is in the detail, so we'll see.

Seriously, were you sticking out your tongue and going "nynah nynah nynah nynah nynah", while you wrote that post?

How chilidish.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

So let me see if I have this straight, you, Pondering, a person I've never met in my life, thinks my dear, departed Darelne (Blessed be her memory) is owed my apology? And you know this, how?

Pondering, not only was I married to Darlene, I served with her. So I shared something with her that transcneds ANY of your experience.You know NOTHING about the idea of Military Service, and what motivates people do to so, and NEVER will. But this shared experience of my wife and I allowed us to share in a way that transcends YOUR experience in EVERY way, and was an important part of Darlene and I.

The thing that galls me the most about your comment is that it implies somehow, YOU KNOW DARLENE BETTER THAN !. How could that be possible Pondering? You must really believe that or you wouldn't have said it. My wife never told me in all of our years she felt anyting other than proud of me and certain that I was a good man, period! You have NO IDEA, at ALL, what you are talking about, but that has never kept you from pontificating on here regardless of subject area.

I've been away as I've been studyong Sociopathy, Pychopathy, and Narcissim, trying to get an insite into your posts. I've ruled out Sociopathy and  pychopathy, but think Narcissim might help with gaining insite. But, I'm not  a Pyschiatrist, so what do I knnow? That woudln't stop you though, would it?

This whole thing started because you couldn't stand the idea that there was validity in my invoking my wife's memory in making a poliical  point. It wasn't that I made the point, the issue for you was that I had the temerity to attack the Liberals. That is all it is about. That is ALL all of this between you and me is about; nothing else. I remind you that you had long before invoked the memory of your husband (blessed be his memory), and as I have said before, I am sorry for his loss, in attacking Quebec, its inhabitants, the NDP, Tom Mulcair and pretty much anyone else that you saw as a politcal enemy. And I use the word, POLITICAL, on purpose. That is all any of your posts are about; NOTHING ELSE!

I have never attacked your late husband, I would never have the insensitivty or frankly, the nasitiness in me to do so. But that doesn't seem to stop you. There is OBVIOUSLY NO LINE YOU WON'T CROSS! NONE!

OK, I get it now. You simply don't care what anyone writes. And you don't feel there is any limit on what you can say. I can't speak to the pyschology of why you are the way you are, but I can say I feel thankful I'm not your friend. I'd be asking myself what was wrong with my judgement.

Have a nice day, Pondering.

 

 

 

Pondering

Arthur Cramer wrote:
So let me see if I have this straight, you, Pondering, a person I've never met in my life, thinks my dear, departed Darelne (Blessed be her memory) is owed my apology? And you know this, how?

You've never met me, your late wife is a complete stranger to me (assuming she even existed), and yet you claimed I owed her an apology.

I didn't know her so maybe she would love to be remembered as someone who destroys others with her words but in my view it is desrespectful and inappropriate to brandish the dearly departed as a weapon on a message board.

It is also inappropriate to use mental illness as a means of insulting someone.

To use your own words:

Arthur Cramer wrote:
There is OBVIOUSLY NO LINE YOU WON'T CROSS! NONE!

Still biting my tongue.

 

 

 

Pondering

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Myself and so many others on here have said we'll be the first to cheer if Trudeau delivers.

Like you cheered him for having gender parity in his cabinet and reopening the coast guard station and overtuning the anti-union laws?

 

quizzical

there's not real parity yet we've got no clarification on whether they're real cabinet ministers or not....and how often do we see a women's face speaking on TV to the news. maybe 1 out of 10-15 times?

coast guard station is NOT open yet...

and the anti-union law over turning is still a work in progress

MegB

I've lost count of the number of complaints I've received about this thread. AC and Pondering, congratulate yourselves. Your inability of disagree respectfully has polluted this thread with vindictive and insulting personal attacks to the extent that I'm going to close it.

On another note, those of you who want me to ban a certain new babbler will be disappointed. Being a supporter of the LPC is not a banning offense. It does not violate babble policy.

Pages

Topic locked