nicky10013

People don't connect with him because they can't connect with him. He's almost never on TV, he's almost never in the paper. When was the last time you saw him on your local news? I haven't seen him in probably over a year. Could his handlers do a better job? Sure, but that's the life of the opposition leader. You're not the PM and don't get the attention. A good sign is that when he did his bus tour which even the National Post called a success, people overall found him very down to earth and very likeable. Imagine how that translates into a national campaign where he WILL be on TV every day? It's going to be a tough campaign but that's certainly a positive. So, he's still unknown. Compare that to a poll that came out saying only 15% of Canadians pay attention to politics. People are bored with the system, they know the players. Jack, Stephen and Gilles have all been around for mulitple elections so who is the attention going to be on? The new guy.

HE actually is. He's published over 20 books if I recall correctly. Sure he is. He's just not lunchbox joe Canadian. Why should we be afraid of intelligent people? Oh, that's right, because the CPC bench doesn't have any so we might as well try and stir up anti-intellectualism. What is this even supposed to mean? Neither is Ignatieff.

English has absolutely nothing to do with it. They're saying he isn't Canadian at all.

It was pretty negative hahaha. It was also stupid, I'll agree with that.

So what exactly did Ignatieff say about Harper? The ads I'm attacking are from Harper about Ignatieff.

Huh??

Wow. So angry.

Who said the Liberals never used them? Also, for someone to turn around from denouncing ugly personal attacks and in the next sentence trying to find out about his previous marriage is kind of ironic, no? Also, this was quick. 2 more ads out. Seems to me the CPC is getting scared that Canadians are buying into the Liberal message about corporate taxes. The reviews of that speech in the press were fairly positive. Not surprisingly, they take the speech out of context and made an attack ad out of it. Isn't it nice to have a government that doesn't attempt to turn a debate about tax policy into a driveby smear attempt? Oh wait... http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/would-tories-use-an-ignatieff-clip-out-of-context-yes-yes-yes/article1885230/

Since when is the NDP experts on Liberal finances? Nothing substantive.

Nope, they had enough money to run a debt free campaign as of last December. Trust me, I was at the AGM. Something tells me you weren't. So, here is where you contradict yourself. You claim that the Liberal Party doesn't have enough cash to run a campaign which is the only reason we're not at the polls becuase as we all know the Liberals have absolutely no principle. Fine. Now, why is it that Jack had to step up and "get something" for Canadians to begin with? OH wait, that's right, because the Liberals were going to force an election. An election that was going to be over far more for EI benefits than what Jack spread his legs for. So, by your own admission that must mean the Liberals had money (they didn't, they were going to force it over principle, ironically) However, the NDP wasn't ready for the writ so you guys cut a deal and now pretend to be the saviour of EI when Harper still got pretty much exactly what he wanted. For someone who claims to stand on principles, you gave up a lot to get nothing in the long run.

They still are going to cut corporate tax cuts. Corporate tax cuts are still on the Liberal Agenda. Just not until the deficit is brought under control. So is that Ignatieff flip flopping or adapting to a developing situation? What would you rather have? A guy who will change course due to circumstance or an ideologue who in his own circumstance can say no on "principle" all he wants for his own political expediency with absolutely no reprocussions. Now that there will be reprocussions for the NDP, Jack and the rest of his lackies will fold like a house of cards. So please, don't talk about principles. Are the NDP really ready? If they were, would they be floating possibilities of a deal? Shall I post the article where Jack whored himself in 2009 to avert an election? Shall I repost the one from above that says he's willing to do it again? Step down from your soapbox, the hypocrisy must be dizzying from up there.

The Liberals have had the money for over a year so that can't be it. Oh, so Jack in 2009 doing a deal with the Conservatives just isn't the same. Nor will it be the same when he does it in late Feb. early March.

I think there's a difference. The Liberals have never shied away from the responsibility of keeping parliament going. When you have a government that makes every piece of legislation a confidence issue and 9 times out of 10 refuses to negotiate with the opposition on legislation, there's either an election after every vote or one party has to be reasonable to make sure it doesn't happen. Would you honestly like to spend 300 million every 8 weeks on elections that would change nothing? Because when you accuse the Liberals of flip flopping because they don't want an election, that's exactly what you're saying. It's people like Punked and Conservatives that take glee in seeing the Liberals support the government and lambaste them for not taking a stand, but when they do take a stand on something mock them for being reckless and without principle. So when parties like the NDP and the CPC who claim to stand on principle and mock others for their complete lack of principle whore themselves out, it's fitting. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ndp-takes-wait-and-see-approach-on-conservative-budget/article1884899/

In the way that right wingers pine for them, "fiscal conservatives" have never existed period.

Hahahaha. Right. Anyhow I'll keep this thread in mind a month and a half from now when Jack Layton has his "lay back and think of England" moment when he'll do anything to cut a deal with Harper to avoid an election.

Pretty much exactly what I was getting at.

No of course not. Most do. You seem to like putting words in people's mouths rather than actually making an argument of your own.

Yeah and they do that by pleading innocence, not by saying gee golly I did it so don't kill me. They do it to get out of prison.

Yeah, he made a point that people don't volunteer for the death sentence. While that's all fine and good, how many people going through the criminal justice system want to be either imprisoned or executed, period? To say that they're not asking for life sentences is stupid because they're in no way asking for life sentences either. So please, tell me how I don't get it?

Explain it to me, then.

No, we're not debating prison terms. We're debating sentences.

No I don't believe I have.

And how many are volunteering to be locked up? That's just not a valid question to ask.

The easiest way out is by not going to prison, no? Considering you don't take into account every variable, your arguement is useless.

I think age has a little bit to do with it. I think education is a bigger factor. In poll after poll if you actually look at the breakdowns based on gender and education, people with a college degree or higher go towards the centre left and the people with high school or under cut centre right.