wyly Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 And Canada is doing far better than most other countries already.not because anything harper has done...our bank rules were in place long before harper arrived and paul martin left the country in good shape financially... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 So what? You want to hand over the keys to government and let them start? As of right now all the LPC can do is oppose and introduce private members legislation that gets turfed in the senate anyhow. The least he can do is go out and listen to people. I also have to laugh. Ignatieff is so incredibly out of touch, yet we're sitting with a PM with a 26% approval rating who would rather dump money into corporate welfare, warplanes and prisons? And Ignatieff is out of touch? I'm not sold on his ideas but at least he's TALKING about things that actually matter to Canadians. Senior care is going to be a huge issue as the baby boomers have already started to retire. There's a lot more to say about him at least trying to have a discussion regarding these issues at pressers where the questions aren't scripted. As opposed to this government that gets one single complaint that suits their ideological goals and goes on a tear as if there's a great grass roots movement behind them. Census? Canadian National Anthem? Really...please, if we're going to have a discussion on who is really out of touch, let's at least be honest about it. That really does say it all,does'nt it? If the Liberal Party could ever get a leader that did'nt act like a bumbling fool,or at least did'nt seem to be bumbling,they would probably beat Stephen Harper like a rented mule in a federal election! The fcat of the matter is,as I see it longterm,the split on the right seems to have hurt the Liberal party worse than the political Right in this country.The reason is that the split that occurred sorted itself out and the Conservative party has consolidated itself over time. The Liberal Party,because it received alot of "faux majorities" due to the split,never really had to work at coming up with new and fresh ideas.It almost seems like it's a party that has no idea what to stand ofr anymore...It probably has'nt since the Trudeau era.It seemes to exist solely for powers sake,and now that it has to compete in the arena of public ideas,it's bereft of any ideas that differentiate itself from the Conservative party... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 I could be wrong, but I think Ignatieff would do a better job as PM. He has ten years on Harper, he's well travelled, more life experiences, makes a lot of sense when he talks and he has a better personality, more down to earth, rather than uptight and cold , like Harper. Harper has had five years of chances to prove himself and there more negatives things comes to mind than positive things, Time to go! Good for you! Somebody has to vote for the guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 Good for you! Somebody has to vote for the guy. Enough will to keep your boy in the proper minority check... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 (edited) The Liberal Party,because it received alot of "faux majorities" due to the split,never really had to work at coming up with new and fresh ideas.It almost seems like it's a party that has no idea what to stand ofr anymore...It probably has'nt since the Trudeau era.It seemes to exist solely for powers sake,and now that it has to compete in the arena of public ideas,it's bereft of any ideas that differentiate itself from the Conservative party... Bang on. It's called the Culture of Entitlement. The backroom boys were more interested in keeping power than binding the nation together - East and West, Urban and Rural. This current bunch of Conservatives, led by Harper, is pragmatic. They have been slowly but steadily moving from their Western Center-Right roots towards the true center. Picking up some more urban seats - especially Toronto - will continue that movement. Incremental change. For the health of our political system, the Conservatives need to win a majority - so that the Liberals can finally exorcise their leadership demons and backroom dinosaurs and rebuild the party....because much like happened to the Liberals, the Conservatives will eventually fall on their own landmines and Canada will need a strong, united Liberal party as a viable option. As an aside, here is an article for us to refresh our minds about Mr. Ignatieff - written by a friend for the Globe and Mail - back in 2006: Being Michael Ignatieff: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/article841745.ece Edited January 17, 2011 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicky10013 Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 (edited) That really does say it all,does'nt it? If the Liberal Party could ever get a leader that did'nt act like a bumbling fool,or at least did'nt seem to be bumbling,they would probably beat Stephen Harper like a rented mule in a federal election! The fcat of the matter is,as I see it longterm,the split on the right seems to have hurt the Liberal party worse than the political Right in this country.The reason is that the split that occurred sorted itself out and the Conservative party has consolidated itself over time. The Liberal Party,because it received alot of "faux majorities" due to the split,never really had to work at coming up with new and fresh ideas.It almost seems like it's a party that has no idea what to stand ofr anymore...It probably has'nt since the Trudeau era.It seemes to exist solely for powers sake,and now that it has to compete in the arena of public ideas,it's bereft of any ideas that differentiate itself from the Conservative party... I think that's crap. Was the right divided? Sure, but the left is even more divided than the right ever was and has been since the implosion of the old PC party. Lets not forget that the LPC actually won an election against the CPC under Harper. As for the Liberals "not having a leader." I again have to challenge that. It's becoming the prevailing wisdom, but I'll yet again post an article written by Jeffrey Simpson.( http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/life-cycle-of-an-opposition-leader/article1848365/ ) Every single opposition leader has faced those questions. Every single opposition leader has always been less popular than the government whether they deserve it or not. Every opposition leader is written off. Why? Because things don't significantly change until election time. Large movements in the electorate don't happen until people are forced to care. The prevailing wisdom was that summer tours and BBQ circuits don't matter because no one pays attention but the real wisdom was that outside hardcore political junkies and the operatives up on the Hill, no one cares despite what season it is, of course outside a major scandal. Ignatieff isn't popular because no one knows who he is. It seems like a stretch since he's been leader almost two years, but is it really? Outside a scrum or two picked up on a slow news day, he's never really heard from, he's never really seen except on cable news and I'd love to see their ratings. I've never seen him on my local news as we don't watch the national edition. The fact of the matter is, he'll never be known until he runs a campaign. It's just the way it goes. There really isn't anything that will make it better until a campaign. Case in point, the LPC has slowly been releasing a lot of policy over the past 6 months, but no one knows about it because no one cares. It's inconsequential until there's a fight over it and there won't be until the writ is dropped. For as horrible a leader as Ignatieff is, for being in such a split parliament, the Liberals in terms of where they are heading into an election are much better off than they were in 1993 and they're better off than the Conservatives were in 2006. We have a government that can't crack 34%. The undecided percentage of the vote is huge after most of them peeled off from the CPC after the prorogue last year and have stayed on the sidelines and whose second choice tends to be Liberal. They have a PM in power who is approval is at 26%. To foil the PM we have a still completely unknown opposition leader who contrary to popular belief is an incredibly eloquent and passionate speaker. The party is coming out with more and more policy and while I don't agree with all of it, it's good politically in that it contrasts very well with the true out of touch nature of what the CPC has done, or hasn't done over the past year and a bit. All this is to say his expectations are already so low that if he can show he knows how to tie his shoe laces he'll be blowing people away which in the political world is an incredibly valuable commodity. All people seem to care about though is the fact that the Liberals are currently under 30% without even taking the time to consider the implications of the way our party system is actually set up. It's still bad (but could be easily overcome, as I said, big moves don't happen until the writ is dropped) but it would've been much worse 20 years ago, which, invariably people look back to as a comparison which isn't fair. Is this to say that he's going to win an election? Not at all, it's going to be a really tough fight and Harper is already out there throwing mud. However, I think writing the man off before a campaign is ludicrous and the epic height of hubris. A lot of political predictions had Ignatieff backstabbed and run back to the states by the end of 2010. Not only is he still leader, he's still out there doing tours and talking to people. John Ivison made the same prediction for this year. He wasn't right last year and he won't be this year. He will without doubt, be leader going into the next campaign. This goes to the second thing, a lot of the press Ignatieff gets isn't good and it's primarily focused on bad poll numbers. Again, that won't change until there's a campaign and a comprehensive policy platform is released. Despite what you hear out there, the Liberal Party as of December 2009 had enough money to run a national campaign to the spending limit without going into debt. As I said, there's policy coming out combined with a leader who can really speak. He's not known, but come good or bad, if there's a writ on the budget, he will be. I think there's a good chance at winning. Edited January 17, 2011 by nicky10013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 I'm somewhat content with the current Conservative minority. Afghanistan is the biggest thing i disagree with on their part. The CPC/Harper have done/proposed some stupid things, but thankfully the other parties have provided a good check on many of them. The Liberals or CPC ruling in a majority scares the living heck out of me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted January 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 I think that's crap. Was the right divided? Sure, but the left is even more divided YES, so why do you say "it's crap"? Lets not forget that the LPC actually won an election against the CPC under Harper. CPC was never in power yet at that time. Mostly a Reform party which - according to CBC predictions -"will never make it out of Alberta". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinko Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 He was an accountant. Emplyed by a large firm because of his degree in economy. Saipan I would like you to identify the large firm you allege Stephen Harper was employed at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted January 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 Try your favorite. The google. It was an oil firm in Alberta. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NtgXlrcvXZA/SaA4icQAg2I/AAAAAAAAbaw/ZVNzxo66ClY/s400/CHUCKMAN+-+IGNATIEFF+-+RESIDENT+AMERICAN+EAGLE.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 Try your favorite. The google. It was an oil firm in Alberta. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NtgXlrcvXZA/SaA4icQAg2I/AAAAAAAAbaw/ZVNzxo66ClY/s400/CHUCKMAN+-+IGNATIEFF+-+RESIDENT+AMERICAN+EAGLE.jpg True Harper worked at a large oul firm in ALberta. He never worked there as an accountant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted January 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 There you go pinko. Back to Iggy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 There you go pinko. Back to Iggy. You're not off the hook yet. You clioam he worked there because... He was an accountant. Emplyed by a large firm because of his degree in economy. He worked in the mail room...before he had a degree.... try again... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted January 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 It's so nice you said it twice And no one argues. His father was the Harper accountant there. Back to Iggy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicky10013 Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 CPC was never in power yet at that time. Mostly a Reform party which - according to CBC predictions -"will never make it out of Alberta". Harper and the United Conservative Party of Canada ran in and lost against Paul Martin in 2004. So....no...you're completely wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted January 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 Harper and the United Conservative Party of Canada ran in and lost against Paul Martin in 2004. So....no...you're completely wrong. I said: CPC was never in power yet at that time. Mostly a Reform party which - according to CBC predictions -"will never make it out of Alberta". Which part you didn't understand? When Paul Martin lost, CPC was in power and then Stephan Dion lost too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicky10013 Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 I said: CPC was never in power yet at that time. Mostly a Reform party which - according to CBC predictions -"will never make it out of Alberta". Which part you didn't understand? When Paul Martin lost, CPC was in power and then Stephan Dion lost too. So you're changing the meaning of your words when made to look like a complete idiot? I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Also, Shit like this can only help Ignatieff. Polls have already shown that the coalition boogeyman effect has worn off, so please Mr. Haprer, keep going with this. People will only get tired of this cynical, mud slinging government. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/tories-fire-up-their-attack-ad-machine/article1872646/ 1. Just visiting redux. Stephen Harper’s Conservatives began airing a new series of attack ads Monday aimed at thwarting “opportunistic” Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff, his “coalition partners” and their lust for a federal election.“Actions don’t lie; more tellingly, Ignatieff has just begun a national campaign-style tour, targeting seats he believes can be won by the Liberals. He’s even revealed his election ‘ballot question’,” the Tories say on their website in explaining why they need to mount this ad campaign now. “Canadians should be in no doubt: the opportunist Ignatieff has decided that an election this Spring is his best hope of becoming Prime Minister.” Ahahaha reading it more and more it just gets more stupid. God forbid the leader of the opposition actually want to become Prime Minister...THE HORROR! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrGreenthumb Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 Harper is trying to introduce mandatory prison sentences for pot offences when more than half of the country would like it legalized according to opinion polls and you think Iggy is out of touch? Harper is the one who doesn't understand Canadians. The only problem I have with Iggy is that the Liberals are always trying to run on an NDP platform but then govern like Conservatives when in power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted January 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 Harper is trying to introduce mandatory prison sentences for pot offences Iggy is trying to make criminals out of duck hunters and Olympic competitors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinko Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 Saipan I would like you to identify the large firm you allege Stephen Harper was employed at. Thanks for the picture. Provide the name of the firm, Harper's job there and how long he spent with this particular firm. Or are you just blowing smoke again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted January 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 You're in the wrong thread again, Brian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted January 18, 2011 Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 Iggy is trying to make criminals out of duck hunters and Olympic competitors. Well those criminals should obey the law and register their firearms no? Then, of course, we'd have no problems... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted January 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 Well those criminals should obey the law and register their firearms no? Then, of course, we'd have no problems... What problems? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted January 18, 2011 Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 Liberal or Conservative, you have to admit that this guy is a loser as a politician. Big time! Would we really want to see this guy leading the country? The thing is, he wouldn't be leading. He doesn't have a clue and marches to the beat of the masters behind the curtain and guys like Goodale. It's been said time and again there is little light between the two parties and it's manifest as time goes on. The Liberals are making noises about bringing in a $1B a year home care program. I don't believe one bit this program would materialize if they came to power. It would be shelved just like the daycare program announced in 1993 in the Red Book. We've had Harper for 5 years and guess what....the country still looks like the Canada I know (not the US) and there are no soldiers in the streets. Ignatieff should go back to Harvard and the Liberals should shoot all the backroom boys and take the steps necessary to be a true national alternative to the Tories. Amen to that. IMO Canadians are awake to the fact that there is nothing to be gained at this time from changing governments. With a new leader, the Liberals might be able to turn things around. Ignatieff just doesn't cut it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted January 18, 2011 Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 What problems? The problem of being "criminalized" by Ignatieff. As far as I am concerned, and I'm sure Ignatieff as well, if you are breaking the law by not registering your firearms, you are a criminal. It's a pretty easy concept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.