Would it occur to them to put JWR in the job, or are they not able to get past the "it has to be another white dude" mindset? And is there anybody who'd be the equivalent to John Turner as "the designated inevitable" in this scenario?
If Trudeau resigned...who'd be favored to succeed him as LPC leader and (interim) pm?
Thu, 2019-02-28 15:09
#1
If Trudeau resigned...who'd be favored to succeed him as LPC leader and (interim) pm?
Thu, 2019-02-28 15:44
#2
Tom Mulcair?
Rachel Notley??
Thu, 2019-02-28 16:12
#3
LOL, Trudeau is not going anywhere but if he did JWR is the last person they would put in charge. She doesn't play ball. I'm shocked she didn't quit caucus. She said she is still a Liberal.
As an aside I disagree with the notion that MPs should not be able to cross the floor without facing the electorate first. The fact that they can illustrates that we elect representatives not political parties.
Thu, 2019-02-28 16:37
#4
Clearly the heir apparent is Chrystia Freeland. She has all the requisite qualities. A pretend progressive neocon with a 'feminist foreign policy' that hates Russia adores America and supports Israel.
Thu, 2019-02-28 16:43
#5
I actually think Tom Mulcair would be a brilliant move by the Liberals, and he might go for it.
Thu, 2019-02-28 17:10
#6
Clearly the heir apparent is Chrystia Freeland.
This is correct.
Thu, 2019-02-28 17:20
#7
Clearly the heir apparent is Chrystia Freeland.
This is correct.
Personally, my money's on her maternal grandfather. Yes, he is technically deceased, but his Nazi credentials are otherwise impeccable.
Thu, 2019-02-28 17:27
#8
Clearly the heir apparent is Chrystia Freeland.
This is correct.
Personally, my money's on her maternal grandfather. Yes, he is technically deceased, but his Nazi credentials are otherwise impeccable.
Lol! You’re on a roll today Unionist. Yes NDPP is correct. Freeland
Thu, 2019-02-28 19:56
#9
hmmm....Freeland would play well in SK, AB and parts of BC Conservatives who don't like Scheer.
they're leaning PPC but Freeland would give them a home too.
imv it will be Mulcair. get more votes in eastern Canada than Freeland.
Thu, 2019-02-28 20:14
#10
Mulcair's political instincts have not improved. I have to reconsider on JWR. This could be a coup. She took notes. She could definitely win an election. She is coming out of this smelling like roses. Liberal MPs may be pissed at her now but if they sense Trudeau is falling and JWR could preserve their seats I think they would flip. Most of them haven't put in enough MP years in for the cushy pension. She is claiming to still be a Liberal.
Thu, 2019-02-28 20:50
#11
JWR isn't bilingual, right? So that's a non-starter, especially for the Liberal Party.
But yeah, Trudeau's not going anywhere. Not before the polls close, anyway. After the polls close, Freeland's grandfather uber alles.
Thu, 2019-02-28 21:05
#12
@JeffWells
You sound confident that Toronto centre will give freeland another go after every one has seen her in action.
You could be right, no shortage of ignorant voters, but I don’t share your confidence.
Fri, 2019-03-01 00:08
#13
@JeffWells
You sound confident that Toronto centre will give freeland another go after every one has seen her in action.
You could be right, no shortage of ignorant voters, but I don’t share your confidence.
Freeland represents University-Rosedale - Bill Morneau represents Toronto Centre
Fri, 2019-03-01 01:29
#14
@JeffWells
You sound confident that Toronto centre will give freeland another go after every one has seen her in action.
You could be right, no shortage of ignorant voters, but I don’t share your confidence.
Freeland represents University-Rosedale - Bill Morneau represents Toronto Centre
But Freeland did win the Toronto Centre by-election in 2013-beating Linda McQuaig, even though McQuaig had the last decent showing for an NDP candidate in a federal by-election before Jagmeet Singh's victory in Burnaby South and the stronger-than-expected showing of Julia Sanchez in Outremont.
Fri, 2019-03-01 07:08
#15
Ok thanks for the correction guys. I just did a quick search and Toronto centre came up. I knew in the back of my head that in 2015, Ontario did get 15 more seats in Parliament (finally better representation but that’s for another thread) and Toronto got 3 more. So some boundaries had to be shuffled around.
Anyways, I hope that her constituents wake up and send her packing, the corporate world (or whoever she really serves) will welcome her back into their fold and nurture her.
Fri, 2019-03-01 08:58
#16
And here I thought Freeland would replace Andrew Sheer, should the Conservatives fail to take advantage of Trudeau's poor leadership.
Fri, 2019-03-01 09:51
#17
And here I thought Freeland would replace Andrew Sheer, should the Conservatives fail to take advantage of Trudeau's poor leadership.
Good call, though I fear she's a bit too right-wing and pro-U.S. for that party. She might consider an approach to Maxime Bernier, but I'd advise them not to meet at her apartment. National security, you know.
Fri, 2019-03-01 10:08
#18
Chrystia Freeland is from Peace River, Alberta despite representing a downtown Toronto ridingh
Fri, 2019-03-01 10:10
#19
Gosh U, for a moment I thought perhaps you meant the apartment Macleans reported she owns in downtown Kyiv with her sister but for which one can't find any indication she has declared as statutorily required. My mistake. But rest assured she has no mean or tawdry ambition to replace the politically ailing Dauphin whatsoever. And just to prove it, in case evil tongues may be wagging to the contrary, she put it on the record:
Top Ally Supports Embattled Canada PM Easing Pressure For Now
https://www.reuters.com/article/canada-politics-snc-lavalin/top-ally-sup...
"...In an unusual move, Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland appeared on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation to say she fully backed Trudeau. 'I have 100 percent faith in the prime minister she said..."
Of course, if the party was in a tight spot and they needed her...?
Fri, 2019-03-01 10:27
#20
At least she's not 1000% behind Trudeau.
Fri, 2019-03-01 10:51
#21
As RCMP Lies in Wait, Legal Minds Ponder Whether SNC-Lavalin Scandal Warrants Criminal Probe
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcmp-investigation-obstruction-quetions...
"Criminal defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger said an obstruction of justice charge wouldn't be hard to prove in court. He pointed to a meeting Gerry Butts, the prime minister's former principal secretary had with Wilson-Raybould's trusted chief of staff Jessica Prince where he allegedly said, 'There is no solution here that doesn't involve some interference.'
If that is not a smoking gun when it comes to actual interference and obstruction, I don't know what is,' said Neuberger. 'This has stepped over the bounds of inappropriate; it has certainly crossed into the realm of criminal conduct..."
Fri, 2019-03-01 11:09
#22
Justin is only a criminal if he’s convicted after being charged.
I remember when Xi Jin Ping and the CPC was cracking down on corruption within the CPC, the icm was demonizing China and claiming that Xi was a ruthless dictator, using the courts in eliminating any political opposition.
While at the same time, the RCMP refused to charge Harper for bribery in the Duffy scandal, instead, charged Duffy????
Justin isn’t getting charged with shit! Political corruption within the rcmp dictates that criminal acts committed by senior politicians be swept under the rug toot sweet!
Let’s pretend, and say for example the rcmp did act on Scheer’s requests and did charge Justin. And Justin is convicted. Would the Canadian icm claim that Scheer is a ruthless dictator using the courts to destroy his opposition to power? That’s not how white racism works!
Fri, 2019-03-01 11:25
#23
At least she's not 1000% behind Trudeau.
Sgt. Shriver's Bleeding Hearts Club Band...
We don’t really want to stop the war,
But that’s what you’ll all be voting for.
You’ll forget amidst this stupid sham,
We’re the ones who got you into ‘Nam.
So let us introduce to you
The once and future Tommy–who?
And Sgt. Shriver’s Bleeding Hearts Club Band.
(Link contains tasteless jokes about mental illness and other matters.)
Fri, 2019-03-01 15:06
#24
I doubt that Trudeau is finished yet, but I think Freeland would be the most likely next Liberal PM.
I think she would happily stick with the Liberal brand-name, with which the Liberals would also likely be content--after all she is considerably smarter than the mental runt of the Pierre's litter, and is likely behind much of the decision making, and the smartest of any Party-elite -acceptable contenders for that position.
As a Liberal she could continue to play up her fake concern for human rights, feminism, democracy, and "the rule of law" and win the approval of many MSM-led Canadians.
That would also provide continued cover for her unstinting support of US imperialism, (military and economic)--which means Washington and its international media stenographers would happily accept her as yet another useful colonial administrator of Canada.
With her higher profile as PM, her promotion of, and backstory deception about, her Nazi grandfather would likely get more internatiional attention, but that hasn't hurt her so far in the Canadian media, and would be generally ignored or dismissed in MSM at large.
She could proclaim, yet again, with greater confidence: "We are all Ukrainains now"
Fri, 2019-03-01 15:24
#25
I concur.
Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland Responds to Jody Wilson Raybould 'Political Interference' Testimony (podcast)
https://www.cbc.ca/listen/shows/ottawa-morning/segment/15673566
"Having said that..."
Sat, 2019-03-02 00:04
#26
That was actually a fairly nasty lyric on the part of the National Lampoon, considering that Sargent Shriver had just agreed to join the Democratic presidential ticket on a CLEARLY antiwar program-the party was supporting an immediate withdrawal from Vietnam in '72, massive cuts in the war budget, and a rejection of "world's policeman" role for US foreign policy, and also considering that Sarge's brother-in-law, Bobby, had been assassinated four years earlier while running for president as a peace candidate.At least she's not 1000% behind Trudeau.
Sgt. Shriver's Bleeding Hearts Club Band...
We don’t really want to stop the war,
But that’s what you’ll all be voting for.
You’ll forget amidst this stupid sham,
We’re the ones who got you into ‘Nam.
So let us introduce to you
The once and future Tommy–who?
And Sgt. Shriver’s Bleeding Hearts Club Band.(Link contains tasteless jokes about mental illness and other matters.)
1972 was a year when no antiwar people at all in the US had any excuse for not getting behind the Democratic presidential ticket, which was running a campaign which was not only antiwar, but outright anti-imperialist. Fuck the Lampoon for dumping on all that.
Sat, 2019-03-02 00:46
#27
I don't get why Trudeau didn't shift her much sooner when he saw that JWR wouldn't play ball.
Sat, 2019-03-02 02:02
#28
I don't get why Trudeau didn't shift her much sooner when he saw that JWR wouldn't play ball.
what's not to get?
they believed she would now.
they were using her as a prop and did not want to let it go afterall election coming
Sat, 2019-03-02 02:38
#29
That was actually a fairly nasty lyric on the part of the National Lampoon, considering that Sargent Shriver had just agreed to join the Democratic presidential ticket on a CLEARLY antiwar program-the party was supporting an immediate withdrawal from Vietnam in '72, massive cuts in the war budget, and a rejection of "world's policeman" role for US foreign policy, and also considering that Sarge's brother-in-law, Bobby, had been assassinated four years earlier while running for president as a peace candidate.At least she's not 1000% behind Trudeau.
Sgt. Shriver's Bleeding Hearts Club Band...
We don’t really want to stop the war,
But that’s what you’ll all be voting for.
You’ll forget amidst this stupid sham,
We’re the ones who got you into ‘Nam.
So let us introduce to you
The once and future Tommy–who?
And Sgt. Shriver’s Bleeding Hearts Club Band.(Link contains tasteless jokes about mental illness and other matters.)
1972 was a year when no antiwar people at all in the US had any excuse for not getting behind the Democratic presidential ticket, which was running a campaign which was not only antiwar, but outright anti-imperialist. Fuck the Lampoon for dumping on all that.
Well, in fairness, magazine satirists write for a deadline, and base their viewpoint on a combination of subjective impressions of what's going on, plus a general posture of cynicism. And the overall theme of that piece is "Umm, why should we be so convinced of this ticket's commitment to antiwar policies, when they're so closely associated with the administration that got us into the war in the first place?" Speaking as someone who would have supported every Democratiic candidate since FDR, I don't think that's an entirely illegitmate question to raise.
As for all antiwar people in America having to support the Democrats in '72, well, Dr. Benjamin Spock might have taken some exception to that. He almost certainly did more to pull votes away from the Democrats than three guys writing for a raunchy humour mag.
ALL THAT BEING SAID...
Yes, in retrospect, it's a bit of a stretch to imagine McGovern being a warmonger, given that Nixon, the "pro-war candidate", signed the peace treaties in January 1973.
Sat, 2019-03-02 03:01
#30
I also relate that to the beginning of the horrible rightward swing the Lampoon would take in the Seventies, when P.J. O'Rourke would be hired as editor and would fill its pages with viciously anti-black, anti-Latino, anti-Asian, Islamophobic and anti-semitic material, as well as with levels of misogyny that were staggering even for the Larry Flynt era.
Sat, 2019-03-02 04:56
#31
I also relate that to the beginning of the horrible rightward swing the Lampoon would take in the Seventies, when P.J. O'Rourke would be hired as editor and would fill its pages with viciously anti-black, anti-Latino, anti-Asian, Islamophobic and anti-semitic material, as well as with levels of misogyny that were staggering even for the Larry Flynt era.
Yeah, but that parody was written well before O'Rourke became editor, or even worked for the magazine(1973, according to wiki). So O'Rourke isn't relevant to discussing the piece, which, on the whole, reflects a left-of-the-Democrats viewpoint, ie. seeing the party as insincere in its commitment to the antiwar position.
Incidentally, Tony Hendra, one of the co-writers on that piece, trashes O'Rourke in his autobiography/inspirational book Father Joe, much for the same reasons that you outline in your post. I believe he continued working under O'Rourke for a few years, before leaving in 1978.