Trudeau campaign 2015 part 2

615 posts / 0 new
Last post
montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

I wouldn't worry about the Star. They have clearly been bought off. TorStar have $200 million in the bank. What will they do next? I think some rich Liberals told the Star they would cover their newsroom until the election if they keep printing the Liberal horse shit.

terrytowel

Pondering I know it is hard to face facts, but you have to

For Justiin Trudeau - IT'S OVER!

It is now the NDP that is saying "If you want to defeat the Conservatives, you cannot vote for the Liberals"

IT'S OVER!

The sooner you accept that, the less painful it will be. You need to accept it and move on.

Sean in Ottawa

terrytowel wrote:

Pondering I know it is hard to face facts, but you have to

For Justiin Trudeau - IT'S OVER!

It is now the NDP that is saying "If you want to defeat the Conservatives, you cannot vote for the Liberals"

IT'S OVER!

The sooner you accept that, the less painful it will be. You need to accept it and move on.

This is not a good thing for the NDP to say.

It sure is not over for anyone with all the parties within about 10 points of each other. If the NDP thinks like this they will lose.

Are you hearing people say how annoyed they are with this repeated it's over comments? Hearing a person who dismissed the NDP until what seems like 5 minutes ago now saying it is over for the Liberals in what is looking like it will be the closest, dirtiest and longest election campaign in Canadian history is getting tiresome. The thing has not even started. Things look good for the NDP. I don't know what your agenda is but respect for your opponents is a smarter strategy than this so you won't see longtime New Democrats saying this.

 

terrytowel

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

terrytowel wrote:

Pondering I know it is hard to face facts, but you have to

For Justiin Trudeau - IT'S OVER!

It is now the NDP that is saying "If you want to defeat the Conservatives, you cannot vote for the Liberals"

IT'S OVER!

The sooner you accept that, the less painful it will be. You need to accept it and move on.

This is not a good thing for the NDP to say.

It sure is not over for anyone with all the parties within about 10 points of each other. If the NDP thinks like this they will lose.

Are you hearing people say how annoyed they are with this repeated it's over comments? Hearing a person who dismissed the NDP until what seems like 5 minutes ago now saying it is over for the Liberals in what is looking like it will be the closest, dirtiest and longest election campaign in Canadian history is getting tiresome. The thing has not even started. Things look good for the NDP. I don't know what your agenda is but respect for your opponents is a smarter strategy than this so you won't see longtime New Democrats saying this.

I don't think I ever dismissed the NDP. I'm just a big booster of tactical voting.

Liberal or NDP, I don't care which one. As long as it is not the Conservatives

I just want Liberal supporters to realize and face facts it is OVER for the Liberals.

We really need to start talking about who in the NDP will make cabinet.

That should be the conversation moving forward, who will be in the NDP cabinet since it is over for the Liberals.

Pondering

terrytowel wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

terrytowel wrote:

Pondering I know it is hard to face facts, but you have to

For Justiin Trudeau - IT'S OVER!

It is now the NDP that is saying "If you want to defeat the Conservatives, you cannot vote for the Liberals"

IT'S OVER!

The sooner you accept that, the less painful it will be. You need to accept it and move on.

This is not a good thing for the NDP to say.

It sure is not over for anyone with all the parties within about 10 points of each other. If the NDP thinks like this they will lose.

Are you hearing people say how annoyed they are with this repeated it's over comments? Hearing a person who dismissed the NDP until what seems like 5 minutes ago now saying it is over for the Liberals in what is looking like it will be the closest, dirtiest and longest election campaign in Canadian history is getting tiresome. The thing has not even started. Things look good for the NDP. I don't know what your agenda is but respect for your opponents is a smarter strategy than this so you won't see longtime New Democrats saying this.

I don't think I ever dismissed the NDP. I'm just a big booster of tactical voting.

Liberal or NDP, I don't care which one. As long as it is not the Conservatives

I just want Liberal supporters to realize and face facts it is OVER for the Liberals.

We really need to start talking about who in the NDP will make cabinet.

That should be the conversation moving forward, who will be in the NDP cabinet since it is over for the Liberals.

I think it is over for you TnT.

Liberals and NDP, 1 & 2 or 2 & 1. It's over alright, for the Conservatives.

terrytowel

Pondering wrote:

Liberals and NDP, 1 & 2 or 2 & 1. It's over alright, for the Conservatives.

I'm saying it will be NDP 1 and it is over for the Liberals.

And we should start talking about who will be in the NDP cabinet

Sean in Ottawa

terrytowel wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Liberals and NDP, 1 & 2 or 2 & 1. It's over alright, for the Conservatives.

I'm saying it will be NDP 1 and it is over for the Liberals.

And we should start talking about who will be in the NDP cabinet

You can't predict this.

What if the CPC went into freefall? Can you predict with certainty that Trudeau can't pick up some of that?

The Liberal plan has clearly been to try to get votes from the Conservatives. The election is not over and the Conservatives are in trouble. Votes could move dramatically. I am not willing to count Trudeau out for anything but my own vote. The NDP will get that.

Brachina

 Anything can happen in this election, Tom needs to say on his toes, no more fuck ups like corporate tax rates.

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

If people are going to get in pissing contests that involve really long postings, could you please avoid reproducing the entire entry - especially if your response is going to be a single word or sentence. If there is a particular section that you want to address, identify it... my fingers are getting sore from having to scroll the screen down to get past the completely unnecessary repeating of entries that could be referred to by number. Seriously, some of you should be charged by the character for the posts you dump in here, dump as in "take a"...

I realize we all find some of the other posters tedious beyond words - but if you are just going to comment with the equivalent of :rolleyes:, couldn't you just go: Re post #666 :rolleyes:

Pondering

The House interview. I think he did well.

http://www.cbc.ca/player/Radio/The+House/ID/2669952876/

 

nicky

Did you really find his justinfications about C-51 intelligible, convincing or principled, Pondering?

NorthReport

What did Trudeau say when was it Chris Hall asked him why he was promoting PR as the Liberals voted against the NDP motion for it?

I suppose he was asked this on the radio because he could never answer that question with a straight face and people would observe that on television, eh!

What kind of a clown is Trudeau anyway?

You're doing one hell of a job Justin!  Yikes!

socialdemocrati...

Trudeau's plan for "electoral reform" is to have a committee consider all the options. So if you're in favor of any option, you should vote Liberal, because the panel is really going to consider your option. Seriously, any option, including the options that the Liberals have voted down over and over. Don't sweat that, because we're going to have a committee. 

Similar to Trudeau's plan for senate reform: have a committee put together a list of appointments that the Prime Minister gets to pick from.

Similar to Trudeau's plan for Bill C-51: have the widely powerful RCMP and CSIS answer regularly to another committee.

That's what Ottawa needs. MOAR COMMITTEES.

Sean in Ottawa

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

Trudeau's plan for "electoral reform" is to have a committee consider all the options. So if you're in favor of any option, you should vote Liberal, because the panel is really going to consider your option. Seriously, any option, including the options that the Liberals have voted down over and over. Don't sweat that, because we're going to have a committee. 

Similar to Trudeau's plan for senate reform: have a committee put together a list of appointments that the Prime Minister gets to pick from.

Similar to Trudeau's plan for Bill C-51: have the widely powerful RCMP and CSIS answer regularly to another committee.

That's what Ottawa needs. MOAR COMMITTEES.

It is how you talk about something, sound like you are promising something, but actually promise only talk. Tried and true.

Pondering

nicky wrote:
Did you really find his justinfications about C-51 intelligible, convincing or principled, Pondering?

There is nothing he could say that would convince me because so far I have yet to hear an explanation as to why we need it. Having said that, I thought he managed the question well enough. He said more details to come in the next few weeks but to begin with mandatory review every three years, require warrants, all party oversight...it's a good start.

I think the Liberals are studying all the objections to the bill by experts and will make sure that it complies with the Charter.

MMP is only one of many options to be considered. He wants consultations before deciding which system we should move to.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering, come on. Le Dauphin is going to study the bill and consult with experts. It seems to me the experts have already said the bill had to go; there's no need to study anything. What Ke Dauphin wants is to here from his experts and get the answer he wants. Seriously, I can't believe you wrote that. Just admit you'll accept anything he decreed and that your support of him is unconditional, that there is NOTHING Le dauphin could do EVER that would shake your support, and that it doesn't matter what LE Dauphin could do that would EVER keep you from voting Liberal, please. It'd be a lot easier talking to you if you would just admit this. You ARE NOT FOOLING ANYONE! And honestly I don't believe there could EVER be a situation should price pretty hair be coronated as King, I mean, "elected" Prime Minister where you would ceae voting Liberal. Everyone here knows that. Just admit it.

Pondering

Arthur Cramer wrote:
Pondering, come on. Le Dauphin is going to study the bill and consult with experts. It seems to me the experts have already said the bill had to go; there's no need to study anything. What Ke Dauphin wants is to here from his experts and get the answer he wants. Seriously, I can't believe you wrote that. Just admit you'll accept anything he decreed and that your support of him is unconditional, that there is NOTHING Le dauphin could do EVER that would shake your support, and that it doesn't matter what LE Dauphin could do that would EVER keep you from voting Liberal, please. It'd be a lot easier talking to you if you would just admit this. You ARE NOT FOOLING ANYONE! And honestly I don't believe there could EVER be a situation should price pretty hair be coronated as King, I mean, "elected" Prime Minister where you would ceae voting Liberal. Everyone here knows that. Just admit it.

The experts have already spoken in condemnation of it. Haven't you heard? Do you think Liberals don't check news media?

Trudeau specifically stated that he will release more details in the coming weeks. His team isn't just twiddling their thumbs. They are obviously planning some damage control. They will be examining what experts have already said and will design amendments that take those factors into account. It's just common sense. Furthermore, Trudeau wouldn't be doing that personally. Mulcair has people to do that sort of stuff too. That's where the error came from when Mulcair said 13% instead of 15%. His speech writer or checker was sloppy.

Are you seriously trying to argue that Trudeau and his team are going to ignore the C 51 fallout when Trudeau just explicitly said that he will be sharing more details in the coming weeks? You hate the Liberals, that's fine, but it doesn't mean they are unprofessional. Those are two separate issues. You can be against a party yet still recognize their political skill.

socialdemocrati...

“As the party of the Charter, as the party that has always understood how important people’s rights and freedoms are, as someone who has demonstrated it on a wide range of issues throughout my leadership, we will move on it very quickly,” he said.

Yet those rights and freedoms were not quite important enough to justify taking a stand against the bill when the opportunity presented itself. By Trudeau’s reckoning the New Democrats — who did take that stand — are just playing politics. As are the Conservatives for taking the position they did. Only the Liberals, it would appear, are being honest — by backing a bill they don’t support.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/national-post-view-in-trying-t...

Trudeau's flailing on Bill C-51 shouldn't fill anyone with confidence. What's going to happen to his promises when the poll numbers shift again?

Pondering

 

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

“As the party of the Charter, as the party that has always understood how important people’s rights and freedoms are, as someone who has demonstrated it on a wide range of issues throughout my leadership, we will move on it very quickly,” he said.

Yet those rights and freedoms were not quite important enough to justify taking a stand against the bill when the opportunity presented itself. By Trudeau’s reckoning the New Democrats — who did take that stand — are just playing politics. As are the Conservatives for taking the position they did. Only the Liberals, it would appear, are being honest — by backing a bill they don’t support.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/national-post-view-in-trying-t...

Trudeau's flailing on Bill C-51 shouldn't fill anyone with confidence. What's going to happen to his promises when the poll numbers shift again?

While I don't agree with the decision to support it, or the bill itself, I do believe it is possible to approve of some aspects of a bill while disapproving of other aspects of it. Don't you?

Trudeau's position hasn't changed at all so I don't know what poll numbers have to do with it. He has always said that he supports aspects of the bill but not all of it.

The article also stated:

Trudeau says he is “unequivocally opposed” to a coalition with the NDP, but called Tuesday for electoral reforms that would make coalition governments more likely.

Ranked ballots wouldn't make coalitions more likely and he stated his reasons for opposing a coalition with the NDP which are based on policy so if policy changes a coalition becomes possible but it isn't necessary. There are other means of working together that don't require a coalition. Seems like the NP is pretty dumbed down if they don't know that.

He promises more open, honest government but refuses to say whether he would appoint new senators.

That's not true. He will definitely appoint new senators. He wants to alter the selection process not stop appointing senators. Maybe the NP needs to read a newspaper?

He promises more free votes, yet won’t let anyone with the mildest pro-life views even run for office, let alone vote their conscience in Parliament.

All parties have core stances that MPs must support otherwise party platforms become meaningless. By seeking to represent a party the candidate is saying that they agree with the party on major issues, otherwise they should run as independents. Also, Trudeau did not say pro-life candidates couldn't run; only that they would have to support the party line on this.

It's a dishonest editorial that seeks to mislead rather than inform.

 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:
Pondering, come on. Le Dauphin is going to study the bill and consult with experts. It seems to me the experts have already said the bill had to go; there's no need to study anything. What Ke Dauphin wants is to here from his experts and get the answer he wants. Seriously, I can't believe you wrote that. Just admit you'll accept anything he decreed and that your support of him is unconditional, that there is NOTHING Le dauphin could do EVER that would shake your support, and that it doesn't matter what LE Dauphin could do that would EVER keep you from voting Liberal, please. It'd be a lot easier talking to you if you would just admit this. You ARE NOT FOOLING ANYONE! And honestly I don't believe there could EVER be a situation should price pretty hair be coronated as King, I mean, "elected" Prime Minister where you would ceae voting Liberal. Everyone here knows that. Just admit it.

The experts have already spoken in condemnation of it. Haven't you heard? Do you think Liberals don't check news media?

Trudeau specifically stated that he will release more details in the coming weeks. His team isn't just twiddling their thumbs. They are obviously planning some damage control. They will be examining what experts have already said and will design amendments that take those factors into account. It's just common sense. Furthermore, Trudeau wouldn't be doing that personally. Mulcair has people to do that sort of stuff too. That's where the error came from when Mulcair said 13% instead of 15%. His speech writer or checker was sloppy.

Are you seriously trying to argue that Trudeau and his team are going to ignore the C 51 fallout when Trudeau just explicitly said that he will be sharing more details in the coming weeks? You hate the Liberals, that's fine, but it doesn't mean they are unprofessional. Those are two separate issues. You can be against a party yet still recognize their political skill.

You KNOW that you completely ignored the context of my post, right? Or do you just have trouble with reading comprehension. My post was about YOU, not about Trudeau. Who cares what he does? Its too damn late; he had his chance and he blew. I wouldn't want him leading my Platoon on the battle field, or conning my ship at Sea, he'd get me killed with his cowardice. And that is what he is, he's a coward. And you, by continuong to support him, enable him. You are OBVIOUSLY comfortable with it. Like that post, this post and all your other ones tell us all what we need to know about you. Keep deflecting "Pondering", that's all you have. I say it again, you may think you're fooling us, but you aren't. Period!

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

terrytowel wrote:

Pondering I know it is hard to face facts, but you have to

For Justiin Trudeau - IT'S OVER!

It is now the NDP that is saying "If you want to defeat the Conservatives, you cannot vote for the Liberals"

IT'S OVER!

The sooner you accept that, the less painful it will be. You need to accept it and move on.

Terrytowel, stop saying this. It won't be over until the election. Liberals are ALWAYS dangerous; and CHRISMA (yech, I hate saying that about Le Dauphin), is a powerful force. Its what got his dad elected. Don't under estimate it. History is full of examples of this. The NDP can ony win by making it about issues; Trudeau can't keep up. If it turns onto choosing the next Canadian Idol, he's in. And remember, if that is what happens, then remember you heard it here first.

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

...His team isn't just twiddling their thumbs. They are obviously planning some damage control...

The problem is this damage control is political not with regard to the legislation.

***

What is required is an admission that this country (and many others) has a completely failed mental health strategy. We have plenty of evidence that it is failed mental healthcare that is leading to the appeal to extreme packages for their desperation. We also have failed mental health strategies for seniors with many getting absolutely no mental health care and living in appalling mental health circumstances. The Conservatives want a "security" agenda so they deny the relationship between mental health and the examples of violence we are seeing. This denial puts us all at risk and serves to extend the problem rather than offer solutions.

Trudeau's attempts to find a way to be seen to support the security agenda for his political purpose while showing daylight between his positions and the Conservatives have made him the greatest apologist for the Conservative Party agenda outside of Harper's immediate camp. I don't care if Trudeau is too naive, too stupid to realize the role he is playing in enabling the conservative agenda culturally and politically or if he simply does not care so long as that agenda is brought to you cloaked in red. In the end the result is the same. Trudeau cannot be trusted.

We are now seeing Trudeau adopt positions the NDP has long championed and he has opposed. This is not simply flexible ideology. This is a demonstration that Trudeau will present absolutely anything he thinks you might vote for -- even if it is contradictory, incoherent, or damaging. What he would actually do if elected is a mystery since he has pretty much taken every position available on almost every topic at one time or other.

Liberals, if elected, will later choose to highlight when Trudeau previously adopted whatever position he ends up taking to say he is keeping a promise. They will ignore everything he has said to the contrary. The bottom line is Trudeau has taken most positions so there is lots to support -- for everyone. Problem is there is little that can be believed and no way of knowing which of the many positions he has taken on each topic will be the one he goes with. Of what can be believed there is nothing unique to him no matter how much the Liberal communications team want you to think otherwise.

Pondering

While running for the leadership of the party Trudeau discussed electoral reform and the need to study the various forms PR takes including ranked balloting which is counted as a form of PR and is his personal preference.

Trudeau always supported aspects of C 51 and criticized other aspects. I reject the notion that politicians must take simplistic positions.

Mental health care is of particular significance to Trudeau as it has touched his life personally. He has also spoken of the alienation that makes people vulnerable to extremism.

I want our leaders to take public opinion into account as they are elected to serve our will not rule us.

I think it is terrible that politicians are now attacked as being flip-floppers or unprincipled if they change their mind on an issue or if they go along with what people want.

Trudeau was against marijuana legalization but was convinced to support it after hearing the arguments of supporters. I want a leader that will listen to reason and be guided by it.

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

 I want a leader that will listen to reason and be guided by it.

And yet you support Trudeau.

Fascinating.

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

Mental health care is of particular significance to Trudeau as it has touched his life personally. He has also spoken of the alienation that makes people vulnerable to extremism.

Truly remarkable then that he would think C-51 would be worthy of support. So, what he should well be aware of comes second to political calculation. And not even very good political calculation at that.

Sean in Ottawa

Trudeau: Voters, not Trudeau are at fault for his low poll numbers.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2066681/justin-trudeau-blames-low-polling-on-timing-cynicism/

So stunned it is stunning.

Pondering

Arthur Cramer wrote:
My post was about YOU, not about Trudeau. Who cares what he does?

I try to ignore comments about me because they are off topic smarty-pants.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Pondering wrote:

 I want a leader that will listen to reason and be guided by it.

And yet you support Trudeau.

Fascinating.

I found myself hearing this in the voice of the late Leonard Nimoy. Laughing

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:
My post was about YOU, not about Trudeau. Who cares what he does?

I try to ignore comments about me because they are off topic smarty-pants.

Let me see if I have this straight, the Marquise of deflection is Accusing others of making comments that are off topic? Really? What did you just do, complete Debater's how to post objective comment to internet commentary boards and influence people in 10 easy steps? When you were a kid and someone asked you about something you did, what did you, point elsewhere and say, "look, Squirrel"! I'll give you one thing, if I looked up the word pompous, I'm guessing I'd find your picture.

Sean in Ottawa

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Pondering wrote:

 I want a leader that will listen to reason and be guided by it.

And yet you support Trudeau.

Fascinating.

I found myself hearing this in the voice of the late Leonard Nimoy. Laughing

Fascinating is a word I use for the unexpected, in this case I would think interesting would suffice.

Pondering

Arthur Cramer wrote:
Pondering wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:
My post was about YOU, not about Trudeau. Who cares what he does?

I try to ignore comments about me because they are off topic smarty-pants.

Let me see if I have this straight, the Marquise of deflection is Accusing others of making comments that are off topic? Really? What did you just do, complete Debater's how to post objective comment to internet commentary boards and influence people in 10 easy steps? When you were a kid and someone asked you about something you did, what did you, point elsewhere and say, "look, Squirrel"! I'll give you one thing, if I looked up the word pompous, I'm guessing I'd find your picture.

Are you for real!  This thread is about Trudeau's campaign not about me.

It is not "deflecting" to try to keep the discussion on Trudeau rather than on myself.

Look at the title of the thread Trudeau campaign 2015 part 2

You don't care what Trudeau does so what the hell are you doing in a thread about Trudeau; rhetorical question.

You and Sean are both in this thread to talk about me and neither of you get how inappropriate that is.

Brachina

 Maybe AC thinks your Justin Trudeau's secrect identity!

socialdemocrati...

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Trudeau: Voters, not Trudeau are at fault for his low poll numbers.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2066681/justin-trudeau-blames-low-polling-on-timing-cynicism/

So stunned it is stunning.

Everyone knows Trudeau is in damage control mode. The Press knows it. The voters know it. Even Liberal partisans know it. The problem is that his trust is eroding quickly. If everyone knows Trudeau's team is hatching new proposals to dig himself out of a political hole, that only widens the feeling that Trudeau will try to have it every way on every issue to get elected.

At this point, even his damage control needs damage control.

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Trudeau: Voters, not Trudeau are at fault for his low poll numbers.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2066681/justin-trudeau-blames-low-polling-on-timing-cynicism/

So stunned it is stunning.

The article misrepresents what Trudeau said. The interview is here:

http://globalnews.ca/national/program/the-west-block/

The portion references starts at 4:30

When asked what he thought about his slide in the polls versus Mulcair's rise he said he doesn't put much stock in the polls.

Later when he is pressed again he basically says that people will get more familiar with the platforms after Labour day and he is confident that the Liberal platform will gain support.

He didn't give a reason for his low numbers. Go for quotes or to the source for the real information. Columnists distort what politicians say for effect.

Brachina

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Trudeau: Voters, not Trudeau are at fault for his low poll numbers.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2066681/justin-trudeau-blames-low-polling-on-timing-cynicism/

So stunned it is stunning.

Everyone knows Trudeau is in damage control mode. The Press knows it. The voters know it. Even Liberal partisans know it. The problem is that his trust is eroding quickly. If everyone knows Trudeau's team is hatching new proposals to dig himself out of a political hole, that only widens the feeling that Trudeau will try to have it every way on every issue to get elected.

At this point, even his damage control needs damage control.

Yeah, Trudeau does seem to be failing to pieces in general now, it has the feel of panicking, he's only digging himself deeper, he should stay calm develop a logical plan and consistent message like Mulcair did when polls were down, but he's not.

 That might be partly because Parliament is over and he no longer has a chance to prove he can be good at his job the way Mulcair did, so now he's deseperate.

Brachina

Pondering wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Trudeau: Voters, not Trudeau are at fault for his low poll numbers.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2066681/justin-trudeau-blames-low-polling-on-timing-cynicism/

So stunned it is stunning.

The article misrepresents what Trudeau said. The interview is here:

http://globalnews.ca/national/program/the-west-block/

The portion references starts at 4:30

When asked what he thought about his slide in the polls versus Mulcair's rise he said he doesn't put much stock in the polls.

Later when he is pressed again he basically says that people will get more familiar with the platforms after Labour day and he is confident that the Liberal platform will gain support.

He didn't give a reason for his low numbers. Go for quotes or to the source for the real information. Columnists distort what politicians say for effect.

 I have no intention of listening to it, but if its as you say its another example of unethical headlines, the sort of so called Journalism from so called pros that make me sick.

Pondering

Brachina wrote:

 I have no intention of listening to it, but if its as you say its another example of unethical headlines, the sort of so called Journalism from so called pros that make me sick.

It is, the mainstream news is no better than tabloids now. Whenever someone is paraphrased I am suspicious. Why not just quote the person?

mark_alfred

Brachina wrote:

 I have no intention of listening to it, but if its as you say its another example of unethical headlines, the sort of so called Journalism from so called pros that make me sick.

I listened to it, and the headline ("Justin Trudeau blames low polling on timing, cynicism") is accurate.

Trudeau at 4:30 is asked about his slump in the polls, and he avoids answering and instead says he doesn't put much faith in polls, and then he segues into how great he feels he, his team, and his plans are.  So at 5:30 in the interview, the interviewer once again refers to his slumping popularity:

Interviewer wrote:
But it just doesn't seem to be resonating.

Trudeau wrote:
You know what?  We're at a point where Canadians as I said are cynical about politics and not paying an awful lot of attention to what is going on in the federal scene right now.  People are getting ready for the end of school, for beginning summer vacations, for going off with the family.  It's only around Labour Day that people are actually going to start saying 'okay, we've got a decision to make in a couple of months on what our future is actually going to look like -- let's pay a lot of attention to what the actual proposals are, who the different leaders are, and what they're going to be bringing to Canada'.

So, Trudeau says his slump in the polls is due to Canadians' cynicism and due to the timing (it being the beginning of summer vacations and all), as the headline says.

mark_alfred

Pondering wrote:

Brachina wrote:

 I have no intention of listening to it, but if its as you say its another example of unethical headlines, the sort of so called Journalism from so called pros that make me sick.

It is, the mainstream news is no better than tabloids now. Whenever someone is paraphrased I am suspicious. Why not just quote the person?

Trudeau wrote:
You know what?  We're at a point where Canadians as I said are cynical about politics and not paying an awful lot of attention to what is going on in the federal scene right now.

In other words, "Justin Trudeau blames low polling on timing, cynicism".

Pondering

mark_alfred wrote:

Brachina wrote:

 I have no intention of listening to it, but if its as you say its another example of unethical headlines, the sort of so called Journalism from so called pros that make me sick.

I listened to it, and the headline ("Justin Trudeau blames low polling on timing, cynicism") is accurate.

Trudeau at 4:30 is asked about his slump in the polls, and he avoids answering and instead says he doesn't put much faith in polls, and then he segues into how great he feels he, his team, and his plans are.  So at 5:30 in the interview, the interviewer once again refers to his slumping popularity:

Interviewer wrote:
But it just doesn't seem to be resonating.

Trudeau wrote:
You know what?  We're at a point where Canadians as I said are cynical about politics and not paying an awful lot of attention to what is going on in the federal scene right now.  People are getting ready for the end of school, for beginning summer vacations, for going off with the family.  It's only around Labour Day that people are actually going to start saying 'okay, we've got a decision to make in a couple of months on what our future is actually going to look like -- let's pay a lot of attention to what the actual proposals are, who the different leaders are, and what they're going to be bringing to Canada'.

So, Trudeau says his slump in the polls is due to Canadians' cynicism and due to the timing (it being the beginning of summer vacations and all), as the headline says.

Thanks for taking the trouble to quote him. His first answer still stands. He wasn't giving a reason for why he is low in the polls. He is saying the same thing everyone else says. It doesn't matter what the polls are showing now because people only really start paying attention once the writ is dropped. At that time people will start seriously looking at the platforms. That is why current polls don't matter (in his opinion).

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/06/20/free-trade-canada-cibc_n_7627940...

Tal’s report comes after a new poll found three-quarters of Canadians have never heard of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a proposed 12-country trading bloc that would include Canada, as well as Japan, Australia, Chile and Vietnam, along with existing NAFTA partners the U.S. and Mexico.

I read elsewhere that 75% of people decide who they are going to vote for during the election period.

In a statement, Trade Justice Network spokesman Martin O'Hanlon called it "deeply disturbing" that so few Canadians are aware of the partnership talks.

The network maintains the secret negotiations are being conducted with the guidance of multinational corporations and with no input from labour leaders, environmentalists or even MPs.

"It's frightening that this can happen in a democracy," O'Hanlon said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/06/17/75-per-cent-of-respondent_n_7600...

Trudeau was not giving a reason for why he is low in the polls. He is saying the polls don't matter.

socialdemocrati...

Fair nor not, the media keeps dogging him about his low poll numbers, and all his proposals are being viewed through that lens. He should have committed to policy sooner. Instead he's dropping his policy now, which is curious for someone who wanted to wait until the campaign officially started. The timing casts a ton of doubt on his sincerity.

And the positions themselves don't help. The Liberals partisans are spinning like crazy to reconcile the numerous angles he's taken on Bill C-51, and now democratic reform. Months ago his tune was very different, as was his voting record. It's taken him a lot of different statements to say what he wanted to do "all along". 

He's said so many different things, many of them contradictory, and the biggest contradictions seemed to happen just as his poll numbers hit bottom. It's the change in message and the timing of the message that make it powerfully evident that he's in damage control mode. That's a recipe for a complete loss of trust.

The only thing he can hope is that the media stops asking questions and starts repeating his answers.

NorthReport

You must work at Burger King as that's quite the whopper!

Pondering wrote:

I read elsewhere that 75% of people decide who they are going to vote for during the election period.

mark_alfred

Trudeau is all over the map.  Initially he came across as thoughtful and even daring (like the position on marijuana).  But then nothing for the longest time (except for the oft-repeated story of him avoiding the House of Commons).  The NDP's strong stances on the Senate, Bill C-51, along with their various policy announcements, all served to overshadow the Liberals.  Now that the Liberals are slipping in the polls, they suddenly release 32 policy planks on democratic reform.  It got some good reviews from people, but it feels like an echo of many previous NDP announcements, and it seems a tad desperate.  I don't see it helping them. 

The Liberals have already announced their major planks (that being the fairness stuff about tax cuts for the middle class and more childcare money for lower income parents).  I don't see any possibility for anything new that can help them regain the momemtum they had a while ago.  The last plank left to announce is on the environment, which won't be anything major, I suspect (IE, it won't be a repeat of Dion's green shift).  The only hope for the Liberals is if Duceppe's Bloc takes over the lead from the NDP, and elsewhere in Canada people decide to return to the Liberals.  Otherwise, I think it's hopeless for the Liberals.

Sean in Ottawa

NorthReport wrote:

You must work at Burger King as that's quite the whopper!

Pondering wrote:

I read elsewhere that 75% of people decide who they are going to vote for during the election period.

Wow. That is truly amazing that anyone would write that. This is saying that the percentage of voters who are loyal to parties over a longer term PLUS the percentage that make up their minds in the period not long before the election starts comes to no more than 25%. And the undecided rate is three times the decided rate. Like I said, WOW.

I would guess that well over half of voters vote for the same party each election. The idea that there could be a 75% undecided rate could only come from a source that is completely unaware of how politics works. I would also suggest that more than 25% of voters have never voted for more than one party federally in their lifetime.

 

 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering, it is not inappropriate to challenge the commentary of another poster when it is worthy of challenge. You made comments about the LPC position on Bill C51 and I challneged them. And, the converation went for there. You know full welll that if a meme isn't challenged, it can become th truth. So, I just don't see how you can post commentary that warrants challenge, get challenged on it, and then on your defense of it, and then expect the challenger to go away. Its pretty obvious that Le Dauphin has hurt himself on this very badly, and there is no easy way for him out of this, despite all the  spin tried by LPC spin masters, here and every where else. As long as the LPC and its supporters are going to continue to insist the public buy the spin, expect the public, including me, to challenge it. The only thing that is inapprorpriate is posting things that are challengable and then proclaiming confusion when called on it. That, is inappropriate. As Sean said above, get over yourself.

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:
Pondering wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:
My post was about YOU, not about Trudeau. Who cares what he does?

I try to ignore comments about me because they are off topic smarty-pants.

Let me see if I have this straight, the Marquise of deflection is Accusing others of making comments that are off topic? Really? What did you just do, complete Debater's how to post objective comment to internet commentary boards and influence people in 10 easy steps? When you were a kid and someone asked you about something you did, what did you, point elsewhere and say, "look, Squirrel"! I'll give you one thing, if I looked up the word pompous, I'm guessing I'd find your picture.

Are you for real!  This thread is about Trudeau's campaign not about me.

It is not "deflecting" to try to keep the discussion on Trudeau rather than on myself.

Look at the title of the thread Trudeau campaign 2015 part 2

You don't care what Trudeau does so what the hell are you doing in a thread about Trudeau; rhetorical question.

You and Sean are both in this thread to talk about me and neither of you get how inappropriate that is.

Bullshit.

I go to the forum and see if there is something new (they show up in red). I click on the red number and read what is new from there. If I feel like it, I reply.

I don't give a @#$% about you. I reply to what is written no matter who writes it.

Get over yourself.

Pondering

Even if people voted the same way for a decade or more that doesn't mean they decided in advance how they were going to vote. I do think 75% is a high number, it surprised me at first. This is the first time my decision has been made so far in advance. It would take a lot to change my mind but it is possible. I never thought Trudeau would fall this far in the polls.

When asked, I wouldn't be at all surprised if people answer "I only make my final decision after the campaigns."

If you look at the quote I did supply only 25% of people were aware of TTP which is at least equally surprising to me.  I really can't remember where I was reading, I believe he also said that is the percentage of people paying attention to politics between elections.

Even a lot time ago I prefaced my decision with "unless something changes dramatically". For Debater that was C 51. I don't like the position Trudeau took on it but I am going on the assumption that he will be releasing details of what he will change in the near future.

When a person's mind is made up especially far in advance there is always the chance that something will happen that will change their opinion. There could be a big market crash, we could have a 9/11 in Canada, something could happen to one of the leaders, etc.

Pondering

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Pondering, it is not inappropriate to challenge the commentary of another poster when it is worthy of challenge. You made comments about the LPC position on Bill C51 and I challneged them.

There is a difference between challenging the points a poster is making versus expressing an opinion about the poster.

 

nicky

Trudeau is right that a cynical electorate is turning away from him. A major reason for the electorate's cynicism is the cynicism of the Liberal Party in thinking the public would vote for such an unqualified lightweight simply because he is a pretty boy with a famous name.

terrytowel

Again Pondering I know it is hard for you to face facts, but you have to face them.

It's OVER for Trudeau

On the Sunday Talk on CBC last night all three pundits Jonathan Kay, John Moore and Tasha Kerridan all agreed that for Trudeau IT IS OVER

That it is between Harper & Mulcair.

Even the At Issue Panel last week (which is the best political panel on Canadian Television) is saying the same thing.

The NDP are top of the polls, have more seats than the Libs, more incumbants running, twice as many stars, and a media narrative on their side

It is pretty inevidible that Trudeau is no longer a factor.

Again I know it is diffiuclt for your Pondering to accept, but It's OVER.

Sooner you accept it, the better you can move on.

Pages