Newfoundlander

http://www.canada.com/news/Tandt%2BWhat%2Bwould%2Btruly%2Bliberal%2BLiberal%2Bparty%2Blook%2Blike/6437181/story.html

Yet when the Liberals bring up Trudeau and Laurier or say how they balanced the budget in the 90s people bitch and complain, I've heard this from Dippers which is ironic.

They were also statistically tied with the Liberals just weeks ago, things change fast in politics.

They're up in new polling and statistically tied with the Wildrose.

They're milking that man's death for all it's worth.

He's a bit to robotic.

Got that source?

You can have libertarian views without being a libertarian on every issue. Danielle Smith is pro-choice but from what I understand she's willing to allow the public to decide policy on abortion. I don't see how libertarians and social conservatives couldn't agree on that.

Do they?

Justin Trudeau is a left-wing Liberal. He has mused about cooperation with the NDP and a merger with them in order to get rid of the Conservatives. He made idiotic comments about Quebec separation, showing that he's not a staunch federalist. While the NDP may try and deny it they're a bit more nationalistic when it comes to Quebec, even if they are a federalist party. Trudeau has never really discussed policy much so I'm unaware of where he stands on many issues, he seems to love the environment. As well while he's a celebrity within the Liberal Party he has not been given much responsibility when it comes to his critic position, which is probably smart seeing he doesn't seem to be the sharpest tool in the shed.

He often sounds like a New Democrat.

This is why the party is allowing the people to decide moral issues. The PCs lasted 40 years and they had red Tories, blue Tories, social conservatives, and libertarians all under the one tent, it wasn't till they moved closer to the centre that they lost their more conservative members. People don't have to agree on every issue be in the same party.

Well everyone makes mistakes.

Can I see the estimates you were going by then? I find it odd how depending on the source the numbers change and was having difficulty finding Stats Canada's 2009 figures.

Depending on the source. RBC shows that PEI's GDP grew, Nova Scotia's didn't change and that Manitoba's GDP shrunk. I've also seen different numbers then these, some show Manitoba's didn't change and that Nova Scotia's shrunk. http://www.rbc.com/economics/market/pdf/provfcst.pdf

Last October was the first time the NL NDP put out a "realistic" platform, the biggest problem with it was the law suit it promised with the worlds biggest oil companies.

That "integrity" hasn't helped them move up in the polls though.

If history is history you also can't deny that it's thanks to our province's resources that Quebec is not collecting more money from equalization. Or that Canada has formed stronger relationships with countries at the expense of our cod stocks, which helped lead to them being destroyed.

But without oil Alberta would be booming, right?

I asked you a question, no need to be mean.

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have the second highest income of any province, behind only Alberta. The Quebec government is also making $1 billion a year off the Churchill Falls hydro development in Labrador. If that money had been coming in to Newfoundland and Labrador we would have no debt whatsoever and would have been off equalization much sooner then 3 years ago. If Quebec would leave Canada the contract signed with them would have to be re-written and it's quite possible northern Quebec, and other parts, would remain in Canada which could make it easier for us to develop hydro power and send it to Ontario.

I asked a question to someone else, if you're not smart enough to answer then mind your own business.

So why does a leadership candidate come out and say he'd raise corporate taxes by 50% if it means absolutely nothing?

So did Jack Layton not say he'd balance the budget the same year as Harper did during the 2011 election?

It was titled to Quebeckers and was in ENGLISH.