Justin Trudeau says he’d be open to coalition with NDP - if Thomas Mulcair wasn’t leader

That's lame.

Waht does he not like, Mulcair's accent? 

Wow. It's one thing for Trudeau to either set conditions for a coalition or to rule it out outright, but for him to state that it's because Mulcair is leader is just nasty and personal. I thought Trudeau was above that kind of politics?

I have heard that Trudeau in private is a nasty person - this kinda confirms what has been going around.

But Ray Heard is a loyal Liberal trooper and or promoter isn't he?

It's one thing for JT reject a coaliton pre election.

But this is just petty and childish, I was never going to vote for him and I don't think you have to like the people you work with but saying this is just petty, I would never have guessed he was spitful and crass.

Definatly conferms he's not a person I would want as leader or even as my MP. 

Here's an updated version of the story.

Trudeau actually says some complimentary things about Mulcair.

As usual the press has kind of misrepresented what was said and made it sound more sensational.

Mulcair has also made some snarky remarks about Trudeau, btw.  So both sides have done so.

---

Asked on Tuesday whether having someone other than Mulcair as leader would change the dynamic in terms of a coalition between the two parties, Trudeau replied: "I don't know....Honestly, I don't want get into hypotheses. Maybe, but maybe not.

"There are no problems in terms of personality," he told The Canadian Press in an interview from Oakville, Ont. "Mr. Mulcair is a veteran politician who has proven himself.

http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2015/04/14/trudeau-might-be-open-to-for...

Debater wrote:

Here's an updated version of the story.

Trudeau actually says some complimentary things about Mulcair.

As usual the press has kind of misrepresented what was said and made it sound more sensational.

Mulcair has also made some snarky remarks about Trudeau, btw.  So both sides have done so.

---

Asked on Tuesday whether having someone other than Mulcair as leader would change the dynamic in terms of a coalition between the two parties, Trudeau replied: "I don't know....Honestly, I don't want get into hypotheses. Maybe, but maybe not.

"There are no problems in terms of personality," he told The Canadian Press in an interview from Oakville, Ont. "Mr. Mulcair is a veteran politician who has proven himself.

 

Not a smart move on Trudeau's part but it's a one day story.

http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2015/04/14/trudeau-might-be-open-to-for...

Quote:

Maybe that's where the "angry Tom" stuff comes from.

Or maybe Tom's just sick of this shit.

But I think the "Angry Tom" meme began when some staff photographer shot 100 frames of him at some scrum, and his/her editor chose the one frame where his hand was in the air and his mouth was open.  Add the caption "Third Party Leader So Mad About Something That He Could Bite His Own Belly" and voila.

Trudeau must mean conducting politcs like having Eve Adams cross the floor and then creating huge turmoil in the riding association by trying to bypass the democratic process.

Sorry but that's just sleazy old-fashioned politics that Canadian voters are so tired of.

The only thing new that Trudeau brings to politics is his hairstyle.

Mulcair should say:

"We're open to a coalition with the Liberals - even if they have the worst possible leader in the world - oh wait..."

What's really going on is that the Trudeau Liberals are losing support for their opposition to the idea of working with the NDP to oust Harper so Trudeau thinks lashing out and attacking Mulcair will change the channel. How stupid can Trudeau be!

http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2015/04/14/justin-trudeau-fait-la-fine-...

Brachina wrote:

"NDP commits crucial error, fails to get Trudeau's approval before picking leader"

The above was twitted by Gerry Nicoles, pretty funny.

 If true its pretty shitty and childish, so right up Trudeau's ally!

 If not, well I'm getting fucking sick of headline editors taking liberities with the truth when making headlines, I honestly think headlines have become one of the most dishonest things in journalism and it needs to stop, I don't like Trudeau but if its misinformation then its not fair, because it will burn him big time, too many people read only headlines and not the meat.

Yeah, I agree with you.

The media is really going after Trudeau right now, too.  They know he is the only one who can beat Harper so they want to bring him down.

The media is not Liberal in this country any more - it is Conservative.  It supports a Conservative financial agenda and a right-wing, pro-War foreign policy.  It is angry with Trudeau for opposing Harper's War.  It wanted him to sign off on it.

If Trudeau sinks that may make North Report and some others happy, but it won't lead to an NDP victory.  It will just help the Conservatives again.

Debater wrote:

They know he is the only one who can beat Harper so they want to bring him down.

This is an absolute fantasy. A real flight into delusion.

The unbiased experts have been pretty clear that the likelihood of a clear majority win is remote for all parties. The Conservatives are well placed to win the most seats but short of a majority. Trudeau's arc is downward right now and Mulcair's is upward and the gap is small. To say at this point that Trudeau is the only one who can win is the kind of statement that might make Liberals feel good but it won't pass as serious analysis.

At best you can say that in some respects the Liberals are slightly better positioned at the moment but the gap is nothing like what Liberals here want you to believe. At this point Trudeau cannot hold a ten point gap over the NDP and struggles to keep it half that much. Any party within ten of the lead is clearly a potential contender. A ten point change during an election period is quite normal.

I don't care if you Liberals want to say you love your party and leader best -- but don't pretend that you have facts suggesting the NDP is not a contender in what is clearly a close election between the top three parties.

This election may well start with the three main parties closer than they have ever been before in Canadian history at the time of the start of an election.

I do suspect that Liberal arrogance of this flavour by their boosters is actually a problem for the Liberals as they go into an election. It turns people off.

terrytowel wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

The unbiased experts have been pretty clear that the likelihood of a clear majority win is remote for all parties.

Which is why Sid Ryan is setting up his union machine to advocate strategic voting, like he did in the Ontario election in 2014. To break it down riding by riding, and identify which is the candidate with the most electoral support. Then throw resources at that candidate, so vote splitting can be avoided.

And it is also why Nathan Cullen and Joyce Murray advocated 'joint' nomination meetings and only have one progressive candidate running against the Con candiddate. Even Elizabeth May was on board with that.

But some here on Rabble have rejected both ideas.

Absolutely. More than some. If we had merged I would be voting for a candidate who supported Bill C-51 among other things.

Sid Ryan is making a fool of himself. There are more differences in policy between the NDP adn the Liberals now than the Liberals and the Conservatives. People are waking up to that.

Justin Trudeau wrote:

I don't know....Honestly, I don't want get into hypotheses. Maybe, but maybe not.

The fact that Trudeau would even consider the idea that he'd change his mind and be open to a coalition with the NDP if there were a different leader from Mulcair is ridiculous.  It indicates to me that their campaign will largely echo the theme of "two sides of the same coin" that they did last time (when they bizarrely claimed Layton and Harper were two sides of the same coin).

JT just gave himself a big "idiot" certificate. What an airhead. Zero political acumen.

This clearly shows he doesn't even understand how a federal government is formed. And that he either has crappy advisors or good ones that he doesn't listen to, neither of which bodes well for the Libs. And also that he knows nothing about talking to the media, keeping his cards close to his chest. He could have said something ambiguous, because coalition negotiations would come after the election when the chicks have hatched. I had some hope in him helping to usurp Harper, but his lack of not only basic political skill but also basic math skill has caused my opinion of him to drop like a rock.

Could he not even see that he had, and I emphasize the past tense, a very good chance of becoming PM supported by the Mulcair-led NDP?

So the media needs to press him hard now on whether or not he would form a coalition with the Conservatives, with JT playing the role of Harper's jock strap. His answer would let the public know for sure where he stands, if that's the right verb.

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

terrytowel wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

The unbiased experts have been pretty clear that the likelihood of a clear majority win is remote for all parties.

Which is why Sid Ryan is setting up his union machine to advocate strategic voting, like he did in the Ontario election in 2014. To break it down riding by riding, and identify which is the candidate with the most electoral support. Then throw resources at that candidate, so vote splitting can be avoided.

And it is also why Nathan Cullen and Joyce Murray advocated 'joint' nomination meetings and only have one progressive candidate running against the Con candiddate. Even Elizabeth May was on board with that.

But some here on Rabble have rejected both ideas.

Absolutely. More than some. If we had merged I would be voting for a candidate who supported Bill C-51 among other things.

Sid Ryan is making a fool of himself. There are more differences in policy between the NDP adn the Liberals now than the Liberals and the Conservatives. People are waking up to that.

To that end: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/a-coalition-why-trudeau-has...

Some, more senior, Liberal should remind Justin that it was exactly this kind of arrogance and sense of entitlement that got the Liberals thrown out of office in the first place.  Either that or someone should just give the kid a lollipop and send him home.

Tweet from Warren Kinsella

@kinsellawarren: Sigh. #cdnpoIi http://t.co/hwrTCZiBA7

Trudeau's position tomorrow!  

"Well if the NDP membership was different The Liberals would reconsider a coalition."

http://warrenkinsella.com/2015/04/sigh-7/

If you quote the question and Trudeau's answer everything he said was perfectly acceptable. If you disagree, quote him directly and completely and explain what you think is bad about his answer. 

He has been very clear that the NDP and Liberal policies and approach to unity differ too greatly for a coalition. It is feasible that under a new leader policies would change therefore it would change the equation. Hence his answer, maybe, maybe not. He was in no way suggesting that the NDP should consult him on leadership choices.

He also complimented Mulcair and said there is no personality clash and that he respects Mulcair's experience. 

In return Mulcair talks trash about Trudeau and NDP supporters twist Trudeau's words. 

This is the kind of thing that continues to erode the respect I once had for the NDP. 

What do you mean bullies? Justin Trudeau is a very good boxing fighter!

The interview of Margaret Trudeau on Global News is quite a treat as well.

ETA:  I came close to breaking a resolution.