IF Harper wins another majority...

[PIK]

What happens to mulcair and trudeau. Mulcair will be replaced by Cullen, but will the liberals move on trudeau or give him another chance.

[sharkman]

Oh he'll get another chance, alright. Based on his last name and the lack of logic applied to it in Quebec, he's got at least a decade.

[cybercoma]

What happens to mulcair and trudeau. Mulcair will be replaced by Cullen, but will the liberals move on trudeau or give him another chance.

What makes you think Mulcair would be replaced by Cullen and not Peggy Nash? Or someone else entirely?

Granted, I would vote for Cullen to replace Mulcair. I'll give you that. WWWTT on the other hand was a staunch supporter of Peggy Nash.

Edited December 30, 2014 by cybercoma

[jacee]

What happens to mulcair and trudeau. Mulcair will be replaced by Cullen, but will the liberals move on trudeau or give him another chance.

Majority?!!

.

[Bob Macadoo]

Majority?!!

.

.....I was going to say celebrate the Cubbies winning the World Series....

[jacee]

What makes you think Mulcair would be replaced by Cullen and not Peggy Nash? Or someone else entirely?

Granted, I would vote for Cullen to replace Mulcair. I'll give you that. WWWTT on the other hand was a staunch supporter of Peggy Nash.

Would Mulcair be replaced at all? The NDP tends to stick with a leader, perhaps because no one really expects them to win.

I doubt that Trudeau would be replaced either. They'll give him another chance.

.

Edited December 30, 2014 by jacee

[PIK]

I just think Cullen would be the logical choice to lead the NDP. And IMO peggy nash is to left to be considered. And jacee,don't laugh,people are really getting know that Justin is in over his head. He is losing his older base,IMO.

[Keepitsimple]

I think Mulcair is safe - if he wants to stay as leader. As for Trudeau, it really depends on how well he acquits himself when he finally has to speak for himself, off the cuff - and actually say something. With his mother's genes and his propensity for saying silly things, there is a good chance he may end up having an emotional meltdown when the pressure of demonstrating substance can no longer be brushed off with empty platitudes. As he drops in the polls, the pressure to do something to turn it around will finally show Canadians what he is made of. Maybe he'll fool us all - maybe he's a genius. We shouldn't have to wait too much longer.

[ReeferMadness]

As for Trudeau, it really depends on how well he acquits himself when he finally has to speak for himself, off the cuff - and actually say something. With his mother's genes and his propensity for saying silly things, there is a good chance he may end up having an emotional meltdown when the pressure of demonstrating substance can no longer be brushed off with empty platitudes. As he drops in the polls, the pressure to do something to turn it around will finally show Canadians what he is made of. Maybe he'll fool us all - maybe he's a genius. We shouldn't have to wait too much longer.

Real leadership isn't about being a genius - it's about building a team where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. We've allowed the American cult (not to mention myth) of exceptionalism to become so ingrained in our thinking that we've forgotten this basic truism.

[On Guard for Thee]

And with Harpers ability to say "let me be very clear" and then spew the same nonsensical BS, I expect JT will kick the s**t out of him when the time comes.

[Newfoundlander]

What makes you think Mulcair would be replaced by Cullen and not Peggy Nash? Or someone else entirely?

Granted, I would vote for Cullen to replace Mulcair. I'll give you that. WWWTT on the other hand was a staunch supporter of Peggy Nash.

Because Nash won't be an MP?

[SpankyMcFarland]

..I will want to talk to some real Ontarians and ask them why, why do so many of you turkeys vote for Christmas? I meet very few Harper fans offline in Atlantic Canada, or at least very few who are willing to admit they voted for him.

[drummindiver]

Such puerile anti Harper vituperation.

JT or Mulcair as PM?

LMFAO

JT does have nice hair, and Mulcair has the beard, which I hear are coming back. Other than that, they are empty vassals to their respective parties. Not an original thought or idea betwixt the pair.

[PrimeNumber]

Such puerile anti Harper vituperation.

JT or Mulcair as PM?

LMFAO

JT does have nice hair, and Mulcair has the beard, which I hear are coming back. Other than that, they are empty vassals to their respective parties. Not an original thought or idea betwixt the pair.

Yes because Harper has any more original thoughts than either of them.. He's a regular Paulius Zabotkiene

I find it funny how right-wingers in Canada's main talking point is opposing party leaders haricuts, like it means anything. Yet fail to mention anything about old Stevie and the ridiculous amount of hairspray and products it takes to comb over that "just-for-men" cowlick of his..

Here's a fun fact, Mr. Harper is the first prime minister in this countries history to employ a personal stylist, Michelle Muntean, whose duties range from co-ordinating his clothing to preparing his hair and makeup for all speeches and television appearances. While formerly on public payroll, that's right at one point in time you the taxpayers were paying for Mr. Harpers eyeliner and mascara touch-ups in between attack ads and fund-raising spots, she is now paid for directly by the Conservative Party. Be happy your fund-raising dollars go into keeping that comb over nice and slick!

[drummindiver]

Yes because Harper has any more original thoughts than either of them.. He's a regular Paulius Zabotkiene

I find it funny how right-wingers in Canada's main talking point is opposing party leaders haricuts, like it means anything. Yet fail to mention anything about old Stevie and the ridiculous amount of hairspray and products it takes to comb over that "just-for-men" cowlick of his..

Here's a fun fact, Mr. Harper is the first prime minister in this countries history to employ a personal stylist, Michelle Muntean, whose duties range from co-ordinating his clothing to preparing his hair and makeup for all speeches and television appearances. While formerly on public payroll, that's right at one point in time you the taxpayers were paying for Mr. Harpers eyeliner and mascara touch-ups in between attack ads and fund-raising spots, she is now paid for directly by the Conservative Party. Be happy your fund-raising dollars go into keeping that comb over nice and slick!

lol. I had to google young Paulius, though I had read about him awhile ago. K, sorry, the hair comment was grade school. It is holidays, and I'm politicking with a cocktail or two.

All I need to know about Justin=

JT-“If I believed that Canada was the Canada of Stephen Harper. . . I would think of wanting to make Quebec a country.”

And this is all I need to know about Thomas Mulcair. (whom I had actually liked until then, though oppose almost every policy he and his party support)

OTTAWA – The shooter in last week’s deadly attack in Ottawa was a criminal, but not a terrorist — according to NDP Leader Tom Mulcair.

“I don’t think we have enough evidence to use that word,” Mulcair said at the end of an emotional party caucus meeting Wednesday, one week after Michael Zehaf-Bibeau opened fire on a soldier and then on security guards just outside the government and Opposition caucus meeting rooms.

[PrimeNumber]

lol. I had to google young Paulius, though I had read about him awhile ago. K, sorry, the hair comment was grade school. It is holidays, and I'm politicking with a cocktail or two.

All I need to know about Justin=

JT-“If I believed that Canada was the Canada of Stephen Harper. . . I would think of wanting to make Quebec a country.”

And this is all I need to know about Thomas Mulcair. (whom I had actually liked until then, though oppose almost every policy he and his party support)

OTTAWA – The shooter in last week’s deadly attack in Ottawa was a criminal, but not a terrorist — according to NDP Leader Tom Mulcair.

“I don’t think we have enough evidence to use that word,” Mulcair said at the end of an emotional party caucus meeting Wednesday, one week after Michael Zehaf-Bibeau opened fire on a soldier and then on security guards just outside the government and Opposition caucus meeting rooms.

Well to be fair the definition of Terrorism extends to anyone who

1. uses violence and threats to intimidate or coerce others.

2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others.

So technically one could argue that anyone who frightens them in any way can be a Terrorist. The word is entirely subjective and in my opinion is used far to often. Let's just call them all criminals and be done with that stupid word.

Edited December 31, 2014 by PrimeNumber

[drummindiver]

Well to be fair the definition of Terrorism extends to anyone who

1. uses violence and threats to intimidate or coerce others.

2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others.

So technically one could argue that anyone who frightens them in any way can be a Terrorist. The word is entirely subjective and in my opinion is used far to often. Let's just call them all criminals and be done with that stupid word.

I disagree with this on so many levels. A robber with a gun is a criminal. A terrorist with a gun is well, a terrorist.

[PrimeNumber]

I disagree with this on so many levels. A robber with a gun is a criminal. A terrorist with a gun is well, a terrorist.

So a robber with a gun is a criminal, but a different man with a gun who is killing people is a terrorist? So then anyone who using a gun to do anything other than to rob people is a terrorist? What happens when the robber kills someone, but fails to rob anything? Is he then a terrorist?

[sharkman]

Why don't you start by looking up a few definitions of terrorism instead of embarrassing yourself.

[PIK]

terrorism -to cause terror.

[PrimeNumber]

Why don't you start by looking up a few definitions of terrorism instead of embarrassing yourself.

hahaha you're the one who should be embarrassed those are definitions of Terroism. Try picking up a dictionary sometime, you might learn something.

[drummindiver]

hahaha you're the one who should be embarrassed those are definitions of Terroism. Try picking up a dictionary sometime, you might learn something.

terrorism

[ter-uh-riz-uh m]

• Examples
• Word Origin

noun

1.

the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

2.

the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.

3.

a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

@PrimeNumber...for hijacking a seemingly intelligent user name, you are incredibly obtuse. Unless of course you are trying to obfuscate us with your sciolism. I doubt it though. Your nescience is a little too panoptical.

[poochy]

@PrimeNumber...for hijacking a seemingly intelligent user name, you are incredibly obtuse. Unless of course you are trying to obfuscate us with your sciolism. I doubt it though. Your nescience is a little too panoptical.

I like a good 10 dollar word as much as the next guy, but you sir are running up quite a tab.

[PrimeNumber]

@PrimeNumber...for hijacking a seemingly intelligent user name, you are incredibly obtuse. Unless of course you are trying to obfuscate us with your sciolism. I doubt it though. Your nescience is a little too panoptical.

Well it's about time someone is finally paying attention! You have commanded my respect. You will notice though that my 1st shortened definition, which would still apply, has a key word within that definition separated by the comma, "especially" which in its most simplistic terms means

2. to a great extent; very much.

Is not an absolute term, therefore the usage of the term "Terrorism" as

1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce

Would to a lesser extent, still apply to any definition of the word.

You will also notice my 2nd definition comes from the definition of the word "Terrorist" rather than "Terrorism"

2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others.

The key word in that definition being "Terrorizes", which you will notice as it's 2nd definition means;

2, to dominate or coerce by intimidation.

Which, in fact directly applies to my 1st definition.

/Prime

Edited January 1, 2015 by PrimeNumber

[Scotty]

From everything I have heard Mulcair is a nasty sort of guy, an overbearing bully who can't let an opportunity to take shots at people go by, including the reporters who interview him. As for Trudeau Junior, he seems to make spur of the moment decisions based on how that will make him look in the press. Having an election with him against Harper will be a fight beween Style with no Substance and Substance with no Style.