Federal Liberal Candidates

619 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Mon, 2014-08-04 16:19

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Debater wrote:

AC, you always predict that the NDP will win.

You also predicted that Joe Cressy would beat Adam Vaughan on the By-elections thread back in April. You are not exactly objective.

Debater, I'm flagging that.

ETA: Do you ever consider how disrespectufl,, dismissive and insulting that standard comment of yours is? Basically you are saying, no, nothing you are saying is of any consequence, I can dismiss it, and you HAVE to listen to me. At the least, Debater, you show an appaling lack of good manners and gentlemanly conduct. Where are your manners?

Tue, 2014-08-05 00:06

#103

Robo

Debater wrote:

montrealer58 wrote:

The battlegrounds will be Ontario and BC.

And Québec. The Liberals are in position to take a number of NDP seats. Extra high Anglophone support increases Liberal margins in their existing seats more than winning them new seats.

We are far enough in advance of the next federal election to make me skeptical about poll results. Still, the relatively good results for federal Liberals in most Quebec polls is boosted by their extra high support among Anglophone Quebecois. Among Francophone Quebecois, the Liberals trail the NDP, and Mulcair exceeds Trudeau as best Prime Minister.

Tue, 2014-08-05 15:04

#104

Jacob Two-Two

Debater wrote:

We know there are differences between by-elections and general elections, but they can also be significant in developing momentum. Remember when people laughed at the inroads Jack Layton was trying to make a decade ago, and didn't take him seriously when he worked on expanding the NDP base into new ridings? Well Trudeau & his team are doing the same thing.

Is there any actual evidence of this? Just because their numbers came up slightly from their absolute worst result ever doesn't prove anything. That probably would have happened in any scenario (except Iggy staying as leader). What are they doing exactly?

But it's really irrelevent. The NDP's efforts paid off because they had a plan. They went after soft BQ support and precipitated the party's collapse. Are you thinking that the Conservative vote is going to collapse in the west the same way? If so you are delusional.

Tue, 2014-08-05 16:57

#105

Debater

1. Is there any evidence of what? Liberal numbers are up more than slightly, they are up substantially in all areas of the country. That doesn't predict some big Liberal sweep in 2015, and I'm not predicting that by any means, but it does indicate a reversal of momentum appears to be under way.

2. What's irrelevant? The fact that the Liberals have beaten the NDP in every by-election since Trudeau has become leader? I'd say it's pretty significant. When's the last time that an Official Opposition lost to the 3rd party in 9 consecutive by-elections? I don't have that info off the top of my head, so maybe we'll have to ask a political scientist.

3. Nowhere did I predict a collapse in the Conservative vote in the West. I don't know where you got that from. I simply said that the Liberal vote is up significantly in the West and that the NDP vote in the West has dropped significantly under Mulcair. I'll quote some commentators on this if you like. It doesn't mean the Liberals are poised to form government, but it does mean they are beating the NDP so far.

Tue, 2014-08-05 17:09

#106

Debater

Robo wrote:

Debater wrote:

montrealer58 wrote:

The battlegrounds will be Ontario and BC.

And Québec. The Liberals are in position to take a number of NDP seats. Extra high Anglophone support increases Liberal margins in their existing seats more than winning them new seats.

We are far enough in advance of the next federal election to make me skeptical about poll results. Still, the relatively good results for federal Liberals in most Quebec polls is boosted by their extra high support among Anglophone Quebecois. Among Francophone Quebecois, the Liberals trail the NDP, and Mulcair exceeds Trudeau as best Prime Minister.

Yes, that's the case this year. But a year ago at this time Trudeau was beating Mulcair in all categories in Québec. Things change very quickly from year to year in Québec. It would be unwise for anyone to predict what Québecers will decide next year until all the pieces are in place. If Trudeau does a better job of convincing Québecers that he can beat Harper than Mulcair, he may regain the edge there.

In any event, it's a very good start for the Liberals. At this time 3 years ago, the Liberals had finished 4th in popular vote in Québec under Ignatieff. To be alternating between 1st and a solid 2nd is a huge change. Iggy was so weak he not only struggled to compete with the NDP & BQ, he was as unpopular as Harper.

Btw, here's an article on Harper's new plan to win 10 seats in Québec in 2015, mostly by hoping to take back NDP seats in the Québec City area. Who knows how his plan will turn out. NDP MP Alexandre Boulerice says he expects the CPC to be the main competitor for the NDP in Quebec City but that the rest of the province will be an NDP vs. LPC contest.

http://www.hilltimes.com/news/news/2014/07/28/harper-conservatives-hope-...

Tue, 2014-08-05 20:57

#107

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Debater, the NDP will hold 50 to 60 seats in Qubec. The LPC is NOT going to get elected to governance following a path through Quebec; there is none. By the way, and seriously, I want to know, why would voting LPC and having Justin for PM be better then a NDP government under Tom Mulcair. You have never answered my question; maybe you don't have one?

Wed, 2014-08-06 00:21

#108

Aristotleded24

Debater wrote:
The Liberals leapfrogged the NDP in all 4 ridings from where they had been in the last couple of elections. The Liberals became the main alternative to the Conservatives instead of the NDP. You haven't yet explained why the NDP has been doing so poorly under Mulcair in all these ridings. Why is Mulcair getting beaten by Trudeau in ridings that Layton used to beat the Liberals in?

2 of those by-elections happened in Manitoba, and one in Calgary. Here's my take:

NDP popularity in Manitoba is cratering to levels not seen since 1988, which was the last time they finished third. The NDP is currently at risk of being overcome by the Liberals in popularity, and recent provincial by-elections saw the Liberals finish in second place, which is normally where the NDP finish. The NDP is so unpopular in Manitoba right now that a poll in the "safe" NDP seat of Brandon-East (which did hold in 1988) recently place the NDP well back in second place. In this context, it really doesn't surprise me that the Liberals will overtake the NDP, and Manitoba could very well be a bright spot for the Liberals in 2015 regardless of what else happens nationally.

As for Calgary, Calgary really has no NDP presence to speak of. The NDP finished well behind the Liberals in Calgary even in 2011. There are a few Liberal MLAs in Calgary, so the default progressive opposition is behind the Liberals. Again, it's not a surprise that the Liberals would come out strong to try to defeat the Conservatives, nor is it a surprise that Liberal MLAs would want to try and run in Calgary.

The "close" calls in rural Alberta don't mean anything, the Conservatives are still going to rack up massive wins in these ridings without breaking a sweat.

Wed, 2014-08-06 00:43

#109

Pondering

Another strong candidate for Trudeau.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jody-wilson-raybould-b-c-aboriginal-lead...

Assembly of First Nations British Columbia regional chief Jody Wilson-Raybould is about to become the latest addition to the 2015 federal Liberal campaign roster.

On Thursday night, Wilson-Raybould will be acclaimed as the party's candidate at the nomination meeting for the newly created riding of Vancouver–Granville — a pro forma event, as she's the only one on the ballot.

Wilson-Raybould has been a fixture on the Liberal pre-campaign circuit since announcing her intention to run the party earlier this year.

She co-chaired the biennial policy conference in Montreal last February.

On July 16, she appeared at a party-organized panel on indigenous women and politics in Halifax, alongside Liberal aboriginal affairs critic Carolyn Bennett and National Women's Association of Canada president Michele Audette, who met with Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau in May to discuss running for the nomination in the Northern Quebec riding of Manicouagan.

Wed, 2014-08-06 11:09

#110

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Everyone I talk to in Quebec simply says "corruption" when you say Liberal. One gent figures English Canada will prefer Trudeau over Mulcair because he will be better at suppressing Quebec.

Wed, 2014-08-06 11:30

#111

Pondering

montrealer58 wrote:
Everyone I talk to in Quebec simply says "corruption" when you say Liberal. One gent figures English Canada will prefer Trudeau over Mulcair because he will be better at suppressing Quebec.

And yet they elected a Liberal government, unless you are saying this was a recent sentiment? While the Liberals are sure to struggle in Quebec and I don't expect a sweep they will win seats.

During the orange crush people were obviously voting for Jack not the local rep. The Liberals are attracting high caliber nominations so I have no doubt they will attract big names in Quebec too. Trudeau is doing well in the polls too. He is behind Mulcair as an individual which I expect but he does have significant support. To pretend otherwise is to hide your head in the sand.

Wed, 2014-08-06 12:23

#112

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

As one friend of mine up north put it, "I have to vote for corruption over fascism." This was in the Quebec election. The NDP has neither the corruption nor the 'Quebecois de souche' taints, so they are a pretty clean alternative. The only way the Liberals are going to advance heavily in Quebec is if anglophones advance into francophone ridings, which is being seen. In places where you would have been told off for speaking English only a year ago, it is being loudly (and in many cases obnoxiously) spoken.

The Adscam thing for the federal Liberals is the basic assumption.

Wed, 2014-08-06 14:20

#113

Pondering

montrealer58 wrote:
In places where you would have been told off for speaking English only a year ago, it is being loudly (and in many cases obnoxiously) spoken.

I think it is shameful and ignorant that anyone would think to tell someone off for speaking any language. If someone is saying something obnoxious or loud that's different but that can be done in any language. Being french doesn't make it okay to be a bigot. All the politician's kids speak English. They just don't want the lower classes to know it. Makes them harder to isolate and control.

Wed, 2014-08-06 17:54

#114

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Does that mean the Liberal Party is the defender of the lower classes? Arf arf arf. Major flail-fail. Saying "ici on parle francais" is not being a bigot. Seems like the usual Anglo thing to shove it down throats again, while blaming those whose language and culture are being encroached on by a mindless North American mentality which cares for nothing but its own profit. The idea is a distinct society which. is. not. like. you. Sorry.

Wed, 2014-08-06 18:05

#115

kropotkin1951

How about Chinese or Punjabi? Those are BC's second and third languages.

I live in BC and have visited your province on many occasions, I am happy to report as someone who is unilingual that most people are not rude assholes. I have no ear for languages and despite having tried to learn both French and Mandarin I have not had any success. Montrealer58 should I just not go to your province since I do not speak "ma grand-mère's" tongue?

Wed, 2014-08-06 18:22

#116

Debater

montrealer58, you don't exactly seem like an objective voice.

There is no doubt that the Sponsorship Scandal damaged the federal Liberals, but they have recovered from that and have a new leader in Trudeau who wasn't even in politics when that happened and voters know that. He has no connection with anything from that era.

And Phillippe Couillard won a Majority despite the problems the provincial Liberals have. The PQ is not exactly clean when it comes to corruption either, as we have learned from the Charbonneau Commission and other subsequenet developments. And Québecers weren't too amused to see Pauline Marois driving around in a $300,000 car yesterday. Norman Spector commented on it.

The NDP has a base of popularity right now because it faces a weak BQ and a weak Conservative party. Mulcair is popular, but less so than Pierre Trudeau & Brian Mulroney were at the height of their popularity. I don't see him getting the types of numbers in Québec that they did. And Justin Trudeau is not going to concede Québec or the Francophone vote to Mulcair without a fight. Don't underestimate him. Québecers are open to change, and Justin Trudeau has been ahead of Mulcair in the Québec polls before, and can be again.

I'll be interested to see which ridings the BQ targets in 2015. They obviously don't have the ability to come back to 50 seats next time around, but presumably they will try to get back to 12 seats so they can win official party status. They will presumably go after the NDP in ridings that used to be their strongest BQ strongholds.

And as I posted somewhere above, Daniel Leblanc says the Conservatives have some residual support in Quebec City and are targetting the NDP ridings in that area with a Conservative conference to be held there this month by Harper in preparation for 2015. It will be interesting to see whether the Cons can actually mount a comeback there.

Wed, 2014-08-06 20:20

#117

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

So if I am not a Liberal supporter I am not 'objective'? How can that be? 'Objective' would be looking through everybody's eyes or nobody's eyes, which (fortunately in the first case and unfortunately in the second) could not possibly be me. Or you. Someone saying 'objective' while talking political drivel is not pulling any wool over any eyes.

The fear I have of the Liberals is this Toronto-centric mentality which will make Toronto the centre of the universe, when, in actuality it is Montreal. Or Vancouver. Or Winnipeg. Or wherever you may be. The Toronto lifestyle is a grand failure on a massive scale, and it is something that should not be encouraged for the rest of the country.

The Liberals also have a long history of being in the pockets of the mining and hydrocarbon industries which do little to benefit working Canadians and do a lot to destroy our habitats.

Considering the name Trudeau goes back before Adscam, it is not going to be hard to forget Adscam when the Liberals are being considered. Whether or not Junior was still in high school or college when this happened is irrelevant. The Liberals are permanently tainted with this kind of political corruption. Now they are trying to install a red Conservative Party using a 'progressive' cover. Few are fooled.

Wed, 2014-08-06 22:11

#118

Pondering

montrealer58 wrote:
Considering the name Trudeau goes back before Adscam, it is not going to be hard to forget Adscam when the Liberals are being considered. Whether or not Junior was still in high school or college when this happened is irrelevant. The Liberals are permanently tainted with this kind of political corruption.

The Liberals are in the lead nationally, Trudeau is in a statistical tie for best PM, apparently other voters are ready to move on. Quebecers know both Justin and Sophie, they have their own reputations. Trudeau has done better than Mulcair in the polls at times and even now he is not doing that badly.

montrealer58 wrote:
Now they are trying to install a red Conservative Party using a 'progressive' cover. Few are fooled.

What progressive "cover"? The platform isn't even out yet. Justin openly supported Keystone, in Alberta he agreed that they should be able to use temporary workers, he has taken other positions that are clearly not progressive. He isn't claiming to be progressive and as far as I know no one in the party is claiming to be "progressive".

Wed, 2014-08-06 22:16

#119

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

montrealer58 wrote:
Considering the name Trudeau goes back before Adscam, it is not going to be hard to forget Adscam when the Liberals are being considered. Whether or not Junior was still in high school or college when this happened is irrelevant. The Liberals are permanently tainted with this kind of political corruption.

The Liberals are in the lead nationally, Trudeau is in a statistical tie for best PM, apparently other voters are ready to move on. Quebecers know both Justin and Sophie, they have their own reputations. Trudeau has done better than Mulcair in the polls at times and even now he is not doing that badly.

montrealer58 wrote:
Now they are trying to install a red Conservative Party using a 'progressive' cover. Few are fooled.

What progressive "cover"? The platform isn't even out yet. Justin openly supported Keystone, in Alberta he agreed that they should be able to use temporary workers, he has taken other positions that are clearly not progressive. He isn't claiming to be progressive and as far as I know no one in the party is claiming to be "progressive".

Based on your post, why would anyone calling themselves progressive want to vote Liberal? Sorry, I don't get it. What am I missing here. Are you saying it doesn't matter if he's progressive or not. After all these weeks of your posts, is it finally boiling done to looking at your posts and understanding them entirely as "because...Harper"?

Wed, 2014-08-06 23:17

#120

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Trudeau gives no reason for a right-winger not to vote Conservative, and gives no reason for a progressive voter to vote for him. Mile wide and an inch thick.

Thu, 2014-08-07 00:01

#121

jjuares

Pondering wrote:

[/quote]

Nice try. Your point is not accurate.
“There were some people who raised an eyebrow, absolutely,” Trudeau told reporters on Friday. “I'm seen as a strong, young progressive with an environmental background. The fact that I'd be talking positively about the project I think got people thinking about the fact that perhaps it's not as bad as it's been caricatured.”

This is from the CBC website where he talks about Keystone.

Thu, 2014-08-07 10:59

#122

Debater

montrealer58 wrote:

Trudeau gives no reason for a right-winger not to vote Conservative, and gives no reason for a progressive voter to vote for him. Mile wide and an inch thick.

He seems to be be doing pretty well so far.

The Liberals are the only party to have increased their vote share in the last 9 by-elections and to pick up 2 seats within the last year.

Thu, 2014-08-07 11:06

#123

Debater

montrealer58 wrote:

Considering the name Trudeau goes back before Adscam, it is not going to be hard to forget Adscam when the Liberals are being considered. Whether or not Junior was still in high school or college when this happened is irrelevant. The Liberals are permanently tainted with this kind of political corruption. Now they are trying to install a red Conservative Party using a 'progressive' cover. Few are fooled.

You appear to have come to this discussion with pre-formed ideas about the Liberals & Trudeau without actually considering the strengths & weaknesses of each of the parties and their leaders.

You also seem to have the same way of arguing as some of the other partisans here - attack the Liberals as being very bad and claim to be against the Conservatives and yet not demonstrate why voters should choose the NDP instead of the Liberals. The NDP is closer now to the ideology of the Liberals & Conservatives than ever before.

And when you say 'few are fooled', I guess that would apply to the NDP. It seems voters are not fooled by the NDP's makeover under Mulcair since it is polling in 3rd place.

Thu, 2014-08-07 12:04

#124

Pondering

montrealer58 wrote:

Does that mean the Liberal Party is the defender of the lower classes? Arf arf arf. Major flail-fail. Saying "ici on parle francais" is not being a bigot. Seems like the usual Anglo thing to shove it down throats again, while blaming those whose language and culture are being encroached on by a mindless North American mentality which cares for nothing but its own profit. The idea is a distinct society which. is. not. like. you. Sorry.

Oh please, no one said anything of the sort and the mindless North American mentality that you are a part of isn't forcing anything at all on the French.

You don't want to hear a syllable that isn't French, stop begging for immigrants. Don't allow French children to see English movies, or TV or let them use the internet as they may be tainted by a language other than French. In Europe some children even learn 3 languages! The horror!

Aside from Montreal Quebec is almost 100% French. Montreal is Quebec's communication hub with the rest of the world. Bill 101 worked. You know how to "save" French in Quebec, continue talking French! Quebecers can live and work entirely in French without knowing a word of English.

English has become the lingua franca of the world. If French still can't survive it's the fault of French people for not having enough babies to dispense with immigrants. Apparently, some immigrants use Quebec's selection process to get into Canada and as soon as they have been here long enough they move on to other provinces where they are welcome.

If it is so deeply offensive to you to hear words in English then Quebec should go ahead and separate and shut down the borders and the internet then expel anyone who isn't pure laine.

Thu, 2014-08-07 13:34

#125

Pondering

jjuares wrote:
Pondering wrote:

What progressive "cover"? The platform isn't even out yet. Justin openly supported Keystone, in Alberta he agreed that they should be able to use temporary workers, he has taken other positions that are clearly not progressive. He isn't claiming to be progressive and as far as I know no one in the party is claiming to be "progressive".

Nice try. Your point is not accurate. “There were some people who raised an eyebrow, absolutely,” Trudeau told reporters on Friday. “I'm seen as a strong, young progressive with an environmental background. The fact that I'd be talking positively about the project I think got people thinking about the fact that perhaps it's not as bad as it's been caricatured.” This is from the CBC website where he talks about Keystone.[/quote]

Nice try? I hadn't heard that quote and I don't defend the Liberal party or Trudeau as "progressive" even though some of their policies are. I still say there is nothing hidden about the Liberal approach to the economy.

Thu, 2014-08-07 14:55

#126

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

"I'm seen as a strong young progressive". Very cynical. Chip off the old block.

Thu, 2014-08-07 15:04

#127

jjuares

Pondering wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Pondering wrote:

What progressive "cover"? The platform isn't even out yet. Justin openly supported Keystone, in Alberta he agreed that they should be able to use temporary workers, he has taken other positions that are clearly not progressive. He isn't claiming to be progressive and as far as I know no one in the party is claiming to be "progressive".

Nice try. Your point is not accurate. “There were some people who raised an eyebrow, absolutely,” Trudeau told reporters on Friday. “I'm seen as a strong, young progressive with an environmental background. The fact that I'd be talking positively about the project I think got people thinking about the fact that perhaps it's not as bad as it's been caricatured.” This is from the CBC website where he talks about Keystone.

[/quote]

The point is really simple.You said something contradicted by Trudeau' own words.

Fri, 2014-08-08 14:33

#128

MegB

Debater, no one is an objective voice. Objectivity is the fallback position for people who are anything but. Objectivity doesn't exist. Try a reality-based criticism, okay?

Fri, 2014-08-08 14:48

#129

Debater

What I mean is that some of the NDP partisans here act as if they are providing a dispassionate, cold, analytical stating of the facts or as if they are non-partisan members of the press who have no particular stake in what party wins. They often deny basic facts or basic math that most non-partisans agree on or even some of the people in their own party have conceded. Even some of the NDP spin doctors on the political panels are more wlling to concede when their opponents are doing well than some of the partisans who post here.

I guess what I'm saying is, some posters act as if they look at the political situation as 'objectively' as Chantal Hébert, Tim Harper, Robert Fife or Glen McGregor would, without acknowledging that their own partisan & emotional loyalty to the NDP prevents them from doing so. Even when I've quoted from sources that have nothing to do with the Liberals, some people here refuse to be open to looking at things from a different point of view.

Fri, 2014-08-08 18:34

#130

Robo

Debater wrote:

Even when I've quoted from sources that have nothing to do with the Liberals, some people here refuse to be open to looking at things from a different point of view.

Because, as we all know, Debater is open to agreeing with those who comment that the Liberal Party is not an actually progressive party when it comes to enacting policies, despite on occasion campaigning as if they are progressive. Yes, isn't it terrible when people post things here from a unidimensional viewpoint? Why can't we all be as objective as Debater's list of Toronto Star columnists (and Glen McGregor)?

Fri, 2014-08-08 18:36

#131

Robo

Debater wrote:

What I mean is that some of the NDP partisans here act as if they are providing a dispassionate, cold, analytical stating of the facts or as if they are non-partisan members of the press who have no particular stake in what party wins. They often deny basic facts or basic math...

I know -- it's annoying. Debater could never be accused of such things! [Pot, I'd like to introduce you to Kettle.]

Fri, 2014-08-08 23:49

#132

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

MegB wrote:

Debater, no one is an objective voice. Objectivity is the fallback position for people who are anything but. Objectivity doesn't exist. Try a reality-based criticism, okay?

Did you even read what she posted and then try to digest what it meant? All you did was go after NDP posters and say nothing about yourself. Don't you get the point that no one, not even you, is "objective". That was the point of what MegB wrote. You ignored it and went off on another one of your self-defendig replies, implying, as usual, that the rest of us aren't "objective", based on OPINION writers, YOUR selected.

Sun, 2014-08-10 20:00

#133

Jacob Two-Two

I would never say this about most people, no matter how much I disagreed with him or her, but I feel I can say with certainty that Debater is the least objective person on this board. Not because he's incessantly incorrect (which he is), but because he is deliberately incessantly incorrect. He doesn't believe the things he's saying anymore than we do. Hard to be less objective than that.

Sun, 2014-08-10 20:55

#134

Pondering

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

I would never say this about most people, no matter how much I disagreed with him or her, but I feel I can say with certainty that Debater is the least objective person on this board. Not because he's incessantly incorrect (which he is), but because he is deliberately incessantly incorrect. He doesn't believe the things he's saying anymore than we do. Hard to be less objective than that.

It is true that no one is completely objective, there are some that tend to reject reality more than others. For example, while I wouldn't count the NDP out, it's very clear that the Liberals currently have the momentum and Trudeau is more of a threat than some are willing to admit. Suggesting that people are voting for his hair isn't a put down of Trudeau, it's a put down of voters and not at all objective.

I only recently realized that Debater actually belongs to the Liberal party so of course he is not objective in an absolute sense. I haven't noticed him basing his arguments on incorrect information. Information you disagree with isn't the same thing as incorrect.

Sun, 2014-08-10 21:09

#135

nicky

Pondering, just go back through my posts in the polling threads. I have pointed out myriad examples of Debater misstating facts, as have others.

Jacob is absolutely right in calling him the least objective contributer here.

Mon, 2014-08-11 13:39

#136

Debater

Stop the personal attacks, nicky. You and Jacob have a history of attacking me, and it is the two of you who are among the least objective people here. You both worship the ground Mulcair walks on and display a personal animosity towards Justin Trudeau that prevents you from looking at anything objectively.

I am actually very frequently correct about the things that I say here, and regularly back them up with references to actual polls, results & political commentators and journalists.

The new column by Chantal Hebert, in fact, makes many of the exact points I have been making about the Liberals & NDP all summer! I've been saying for the past several months that the NDP & Mulcair are struggling to gain traction and have underperformed in by-elections and are not doing well in Ontario, and Hebert says the same thing.

Mon, 2014-08-11 13:48

#137

Debater

Seamus O'Regan To Run For Liberal Nomination In Newfoundland

Seamus O-Regan will be running in the riding of St. John's South-Mount Pearl:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/08/11/seamus-oregan-liberal-trudeau-ne...

Mon, 2014-08-11 13:58

#138

Pondering

Quote:
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/08/11/justin-trudeau-wants-to-scrap-ne...

A Liberal government would scrap the new federal legislation that led to the recent revelation that the chief of a small Lower Mainland band had received income last year totalling close to $1 million, according to leader Justin Trudeau.

He made the pledge in a Vancouver Sun interview even though he later told a media scrum that he’s glad the public learned about Kwikwetlem First Nation Chief Ron Giesbrecht’s lavish remuneration.

“You can have good outcomes out of bad things,” he told reporters last week in explaining why he welcomed the disclosure of Giesbrecht’s windfall last year.....

Trudeau’s high-profile recruit in the new riding of Vancouver Granville recently has criticized the federal law, saying bands shouldn’t be forced by Ottawa to disclose salaries to those outside their communities.

“The ultimate accountability must be to our people and this certainly goes beyond that,” said Jody Wilson-Raybould, speaking in her capacity as B.C. regional chief for the Assembly of First Nations

I appreciate Trudeau's nuanced views and respect for Canadians and First Nations. The easier political route would be to feed the outrage and support the law. Instead he showing respect for FN people.

Mon, 2014-08-11 14:58

#139

Jacob Two-Two

Debater wrote:

Stop the personal attacks, nicky. You and Jacob have a history of attacking me, and it is the two of you who are among the least objective people here.

That's about how well you understand the term objective, all right. The people who attack you can't be objective. It couldn't have anything to do with your constant parroting of groundless Liberal talking points, could it Mister objective? Cuz you're so objective and all.

Though I can't help but recall just yesterday that I had to set you straight on the fact that you were misrepresenting Mulcair's positions on pre-election vs. post-election cooperation with the Liberal party as a "flip-flop". Something I have had to do repeatedly. I bet it won't be the last time either. You'll run away from this just like you ran away from the other conversations and then just repeat the same dishonest smear at a later date. I attack you because your behaviour is weasely and dishonest. If you want to stop the attacks, stop being that way.

Quote:

You both worship the ground Mulcair walks on and display a personal animosity towards Justin Trudeau that prevents you from looking at anything objectively.

I have plenty of criticisms of Mulcair. Sometimes I write about them here but mostly I don't because I can't find the time to compose the kind of long essays that would entail. Poking holes in your Liberal nonsense, on the other hand, is fun and quick and practically writes itself (since your comments are so lacking in reason or merit), so I do a lot more of that.

So you have no idea what I think about him, because I know for a fact that I've never told you. More importantly, you have no interest in other people's opinions. Even calling me a worshipper is just something you say to people you perceive as opponents. You don't really think that about me, or more precisely, you don't care one way or the other. It's just a tactic you employ, a dodge, a thrust. Everything is contrived and calculated. Honestly, I don't know how you don't get tired of this schtick.

But you're right that I feel a bit of animosity towards JT. I think any objective person would take some measure of offense at such a man of little merit or accomplishment attempting to lead the country on nothing but his fame and charm. He's a narcissistic dickhead.

Mon, 2014-08-11 15:01

#140

Pondering

Jacob Two-Two wrote:
But you're right that I feel a bit of animosity towards JT. I think any objective person would take some measure of offense at such a man of little merit or accomplishment attempting to lead the country on nothing but his fame and charm. He's a narcissistic dickhead.

Not just a little bit. Justin Trudeau was elected to lead the party so your inability to see why only illustrates your inability to recognize his strengths. Same goes for his lead over the NDP. You just cannot comprehend it so you make excuses and insult people.

Mon, 2014-08-11 15:29

#141

Debater

You're right, Pondering. The NDP partisans don't understand how insulting and morally superior they sound when they try to donwplay Justin Trudeau's strengths & accomplishments. No one is saying that he is a constitutional law professor like his father or an academic scholar. He's not claiming to be.

And Mulcair doesn't have that many accomplishments to his name, btw. He spent most of his years in the National Assembly in opposition, and was only briefly in the cabinet for about 2 years before falling out with Jean Charest. And he wasn't a major minister like finance or justice - he was environment minister. Meanwhile, he only has one year more than Justin Trudeau in the Federal Parliament. Mulcair came to the House in 2007, Trudeau in 2008.

Anyway, you started this thread to be about Liberal Candidates, so let's try to get it back to posting the latest updates about who is running for the nominations and hopefully that will reduce the arguing.

I posted today's latest Candidate news above about Seamus O'Regan. He's trying to recapture St. John's South-Mount Pearl. It went Liberal in 2008, but Siobahn Coady lost in 2011 to Ryan Cleary. With Trudeau being #1 in the Maritimes, O'Regan has a shot to win it back.

Mon, 2014-08-11 18:55

#142

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

I appreciate Trudeau's nuanced views and respect for Canadians and First Nations. The easier political route would be to feed the outrage and support the law. Instead he showing respect for FN people.

I have to agree -- credit where credit is due.

Mon, 2014-08-11 18:57

#143

Sean in Ottawa

Debator I am not going to bother posting Mulcair's bio here. He does have a lot more experience and achievements. I won't say that is absolutely everything but you might want to argue from a position of strength.

Mon, 2014-08-11 19:00

#144

Sean in Ottawa

btw environment minister in Quebec is not a meaningless portfolio.

Mon, 2014-08-11 20:17

#145

Jacob Two-Two

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Debator I am not going to bother posting Mulcair's bio here. He does have a lot more experience and achievements. I won't say that is absolutely everything but you might want to argue from a position of strength.

Ha! Then he'd never have anything to say.

Mon, 2014-08-11 20:38

#146

Jacob Two-Two

Pondering wrote:

Jacob Two-Two wrote:
But you're right that I feel a bit of animosity towards JT. I think any objective person would take some measure of offense at such a man of little merit or accomplishment attempting to lead the country on nothing but his fame and charm. He's a narcissistic dickhead.

Not just a little bit. Justin Trudeau was elected to lead the party so your inability to see why only illustrates your inability to recognize his strengths. Same goes for his lead over the NDP. You just cannot comprehend it so you make excuses and insult people.

I understand perfectly why these things happen. I say it constantly. It's the same reason that public sentiment always drifts back to the Liberals between elections then changes when people start paying attention. Canadians like to vote Liberal. It feels like nice safe default option. Even after a decade of laughably bad performance from the party this effect still holds up. If the Libs had a real leader, like another Chretien, they would already be polling strong majorities and leaving the Cons and the NDP in the dust. The fact that they're not is very telling about the strength of the current leader.

The NDP is totally different. Many people in Canada have never considered voting NDP before. Before the last election, no more than 20% of voters had ever taken them seriously as an option. To get people to take a course they've never taken before always takes much more effort, and the NDP doesn't get votes dropped into its lap by virtue of their name like the Libs do. They have to fight hard for each one.

When considering the difference between the NDP and the LIberals, I'm often reminded of that saying about women in the workplace: You have to do twice the work of a man to get half the credit. Fortunately that's not hard. Same could be said of the NDP and the Liberals.

Mon, 2014-08-11 21:06

#147

Jacob Two-Two

Debater wrote:

You're right, Pondering. The NDP partisans don't understand how insulting and morally superior they sound when they try to donwplay Justin Trudeau's strengths & accomplishments. No one is saying that he is a constitutional law professor like his father or an academic scholar. He's not claiming to be.

But he is claiming to be someone who's capable of leading the country, which is something else he definitely isn't.

As usual, your posts only betray the shocking sense of entitlement that is all too common among Liberals. It's not insulting or morally superior to expect people in important jobs to have a wealth of skills and experience that pertain to their jobs.

If a hospital just appointed a new director, and you learned that it was a relative newbie who had only been working there a short while but was the son of a previous director and had not distinguished himself in any way during his time of employment, you would question that. Any rational person would question this, no insult or moral superiority involved. Just natural skepticism about a person who claims they can run the whole show but has none of the experience or training to do that.

You cheerleaders who want to ignore his lack of qualifications are the ones being less than rational.

Wed, 2014-08-13 18:48

#148

Pondering

I will first agree with Sean, that Mulcair has more political experience but more experience isn't helpful when you disagree with someone's views. Harper has more experience than both Mulcair and Trudeau.

Jacob Two-Two wrote:
I understand perfectly why these things happen. I say it constantly. It's the same reason that public sentiment always drifts back to the Liberals between elections then changes when people start paying attention. Canadians like to vote Liberal. It feels like nice safe default option. Even after a decade of laughably bad performance from the party this effect still holds up.

The crux of the matter is that the right has won the economic argument. So much so that the NDP barely murmurs its criticism of neoliberalism.

Jacob Two-Two wrote:
If the Libs had a real leader, like another Chretien, they would already be polling strong majorities and leaving the Cons and the NDP in the dust. The fact that they're not is very telling about the strength of the current leader.

Trudeau is a real leader, just with a different style, which will become even more apparent in election season. I agree that with a more seasoned leader the Liberals would be wiping the floor with the Cons and the NDP, so what does that say about the NDP? The vitriol directed at Trudeau is misplaced. That the Liberals can take the lead with a leader you believe is so clearly inferior bodes poorly for the NDP.

In my personal opinion the NDP will not be able to win the next few elections unless something changes very dramatically because selling themselves as liberal lite isn't working. It's conceding the argument. It's saying that the Conservatives and the Liberals are basically correct on economic theory but we should still be a bit kinder to the poor and workers.

You suggest the Liberals should be doing much better than just leading and would be with a stronger leader but what about the NDP? Perhaps with another Layton the NDP would have maintained support and momemtum and had a chance against Trudeau.

For the most part I have found Trudeau to be thoughtful in his opinions.

Wed, 2014-08-13 20:02

#149

nicky

What that guy said it's all bullshit

"My Cousin Vinnie"

Wed, 2014-08-13 20:12

#150

Jacob Two-Two

Pondering wrote:

I will first agree with Sean, that Mulcair has more political experience but more experience isn't helpful when you disagree with someone's views.

That's certainly true. So tell us about which of Mulcair's views you disagree with.

Quote:

Jacob Two-Two wrote:
I understand perfectly why these things happen. I say it constantly. It's the same reason that public sentiment always drifts back to the Liberals between elections then changes when people start paying attention. Canadians like to vote Liberal. It feels like nice safe default option. Even after a decade of laughably bad performance from the party this effect still holds up.

The crux of the matter is that the right has won the economic argument. So much so that the NDP barely murmurs its criticism of neoliberalism.

What? This has literally nothing to do with what we were talking about. Even for you, that was out of nowhere. Did you mean to put that in a different conversation? Did you pull out the wrong cue card?

Quote:

You suggest the Liberals should be doing much better than just leading and would be with a stronger leader but what about the NDP? Perhaps with another Layton the NDP would have maintained support and momemtum and had a chance against Trudeau.

Well sure, you can always dream of a better leader, but the NDP is at an all-time high, while the Liberals under Justin are not at their traditional strength. I think that's worth pointing out and reflects on the effectiveness of their leadership.

Wed, 2014-08-13 20:59

#151

PrairieDemocrat15

Pondering wrote:

The crux of the matter is that the right has won the economic argument. So much so that the NDP barely murmurs its criticism of neoliberalism.

So because the NDP accept neoliberalism we should vote for the Liberal Party which actively promotes it? Interesting logic.

For the record, Mulcair has criticised the culture of privatization, deregulation, austerity, layoffs, and off-shoring that has developed "over the last 30 years." He has said it in the House. Other NDP MPs have openly attacked the "neoliberism" of Liberal and Conservative governments.

I admit the NDP, for the most part, tolerates neoliberalism. However, out of all the major parties, it is by far the most resistant to it and critical of it.

Pages

Topic locked