Munk debate 2015/09/28

[On Guard for Thee]

All your cites are the whining of 'progressives' who hate Harper without regard to his foreign policy. Naturally, they hate his foreign policy, too, and would no matter what it is.

As for niqabs, that's Quebec driven, and it will be the Quebec Liberal government which bans them. Harper has made no move to do so, except that thing about showing your face when you want to swear an oath of citizenship. As for your 'ex pat' living in England, that's a country of race riots, where Jewish temples and schools need to have cops with machineguns outside. Spare me.

I've said before that 95% of the whining about our foreign policy comes from ex-foreign service types who resent that the palatial party life they used to love has been so deeply curtailed by Harper, and 'academics' who snivel about the fact we no longer abstain from all those "We hate Jews" resolutions the UN's Islamic bloc passes dozens of times a year. And I fully agree with Harper about about.

And you got this 95% from....maybe the Argus book of wild assumptions perhaps? We have all seen a number of them but hey, you're on a run with that one.

[On Guard for Thee]

Bluster and drivel. What influence has Canada ever had except when it was eagerly volunteering its military to the UN for crossing guards, something which no longer makes sense in today's world, and for which we don't really have a military for thanks to both Chretien and Harper. Canada's so-called 'international influence' always was nothing but a figment of the imagination of the progressives, who assumed that since they knew how incredibly noble and wonderful they were, all the world must admire them desperately. Guess what, it didn't.

Boy you really do need a history lesson as others have pointed out. Maybe start with a study of our honored role as peacekeepers.

[GostHacked]

Everything he has done has been slow and subtle. As to not create disturbance or panic.. To the untrained eye, it is , like if, he has done nothing. Very skilled leadership. The man dose have qualities.

Like putting through legislation that was struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada. To the untrained eye, Harper looks like a god.

[GostHacked]

I think Harper was wise to stay out of the fray and bickering and constant back and forth between Mulcair and Trudeau.

With the clips I watched, all three were trying to talk over each other. Quite childish in my view.

[GostHacked]

I find the Harper Haters to be much more angry.

Only following Obama haters.

[GostHacked]

You just can't stand that Canada is well respected and well admired.

Propaganda works. This is why North Korea thinks they are the king of the world.

[GostHacked]

I don't see the loss of reputation with other governments.

Take the shades off. It helps to see things a bit clearer.

[GostHacked]

From my perspective it seems to be the tinfoil hat set who are hiding under their beds trembling with fear that Harper is going to come and get them.

C-51 is prudent. Even your beloved Justin voted for it!

All of them were for it before they were against it. All of them are lying to us. It's a clown show made to look like we have a functioning democracy, which to me is a total fallacy that people have not yet managed to understand.

I guess I am voting Green. Can't be any worse that what we already have right? But are we too chicken as a populace to actually vote for change instead of voting those that are 'proposing' change?

I get a flyer in the mail from the local Liberal candidate, the catchphrase 'Real (Maple leaf icon) Change' I said to a friend, 'Hey looks like I am gonna vote Liberal as they are promising real change!! We both had a good laugh.

Canadians are ready for change, and I would argue have been ready for change for a very long time. It's just our government that is promising change is not so willing nor ready to change themselves.

[angrypenguin]

I think Trudeau was the one who lost. Harper took a few zingers, and gave a few zingers. "The war is not against CSIS but ISIS" was a good line and the line at the end about how 99% of trade agreements were done in a Conservative government was good too.

Trudeau pulling the daddy card was moronic. We know who you are, that's why you're even standing on the stage.

Wahh, I don't want to talk about C51 so now I'm going to bring up my dad.

Lame.

[Freddy]

Like putting through legislation that was struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada. To the untrained eye, Harper looks like a god.

When your a bleeding hart. You always find something to bleed about.

[dialamah]

Because he's conservative, you mean?

Since I voted for him once, that would be a fail for you. He managed to turn me from a supporter to a non-supporter strictly on his own merits.

But hey, I'm glad he's got you on his side.

[On Guard for Thee]

Indeed, the Reputation Institute can say what it wants about the way people perceive Canada around the world. The problem is our political and social clout around the world has been completely trashed by the Harper Government. He can't get a damn thing done with the US. He hasn't been able to ram through the TPP like he said. He lost the seat on the UN Security Council, when the UN Peacekeeping was practically built by a Canadian prime minister.

It's great that people view Canada as a great place to live, but it's more than a little bit ironic that radical rightwingers who are vehemently opposed to immigration would give two shits what a bunch of foreigners think of our country. None of that means much to Canadians, when our political influence in the world means we can't get a damn thing done for people here at home.

We want you to come here and love the place, spend your money, but we don't want you to stay.The contradiction is blatant but not new.

[Hydraboss]

We want you to come here and love the place, spend your money, but we don't want you to stay.

That sounds like a pretty reasonable stance to take. There are lots of your "socialist haven" type countries and non-socialist ones that don't allow much immigration. Try to buy a one way ticket to New Zealand and see what happens.

[On Guard for Thee]

That sounds like a pretty reasonable stance to take. There are lots of your "socialist haven" type countries and non-socialist ones that don't allow much immigration. Try to buy a one way ticket to New Zealand and see what happens.

My grandparents bought a one way ticket across the Atlantic on a ship. They bought some dirt, turned it into a farm, and raised 6 successful kids. That's a small part of the way this country was built. Take your "socialist haven" bullshit and shove it where the sun don't shine, ad study a little history while you are at it.

[Hydraboss]

OGFT, are you aware that they don't run those "Don't flick your Bic" commercials before movies anymore? Ever wonder why? Simple - things change. One side of my family came here from a Russian territory when they were still arguing how to spell Canada. So what? Things changed since then.

You now have to wear seatbelts in cars. You can't smoke in hospitals anymore either. Why? Because things changed.

I have news for you...this country HAS BEEN built. Past tense. How's that for shoving it where the sun don't shine?

[Kageshima]

I think Trudeau was the one who lost. Harper took a few zingers, and gave a few zingers. "The war is not against CSIS but ISIS" was a good line and the line at the end about how 99% of trade agreements were done in a Conservative government was good too.

Trudeau pulling the daddy card was moronic. We know who you are, that's why you're even standing on the stage.

Wahh, I don't want to talk about C51 so now I'm going to bring up my dad.

Lame.

I really don't think so.

For most people, especially those that aren't politically savy, it's not about what you're voting for, it's about who you're voting for. People want to make that personal connection, they want to think "He/She's the one." While it's arguable who won if you're analyzing the policies and the arguments that were raised and zingers that were delivered, I think Trudeau gave off a much better 'vibe' in this debate than he ever did before.

Compared to Mulcair, who looked at times nervous and awkward, Trudeau probably reeled in the support of more progressive swing voters, which is way more important for the Liberals than somehow convincing more Conservatives to vote for them. The PET comment probably appealed to more people than it repelled.

So at least on a personal level for the Liberals, the debate was a success. Whether JT, or anyone else "won" or "lost" the debate is up for question, until we see this next week's polls (which aren't necessarily a reflection of who voters think won/lost the debate either).

[angrypenguin]

I really don't think so.

For most people, especially those that aren't politically savy, it's not about what you're voting for, it's about who you're voting for. People want to make that personal connection, they want to think "He/She's the one." While it's arguable who won if you're analyzing the policies and the arguments that were raised and zingers that were delivered, I think Trudeau gave off a much better 'vibe' in this debate than he ever did before.

Compared to Mulcair, who looked at times nervous and awkward, Trudeau probably reeled in the support of more progressive swing voters, which is way more important for the Liberals than somehow convincing more Conservatives to vote for them. The PET comment probably appealed to more people than it repelled.

So at least on a personal level for the Liberals, the debate was a success. Whether JT, or anyone else "won" or "lost" the debate is up for question, until we see this next week's polls (which aren't necessarily a reflection of who voters think won/lost the debate either).

I agree, the polls will tell. My wife found Trudeau cocky, and his posture was not ok. (I'm a presenter by trade). He seemed arrogant, and the way he deflected was not professional. But I agree with you, we'll have to wait and see!

[marcus]

I find the Harper Haters to be much more angry.

As opposed to Harper Lovers?

For the love of god. Please push people to vote, or guys like the above will choose the next government again, with 36% of the votes.

[poochy]

As opposed to Harper Lovers?

For the love of god. Please push people to vote, or guys like the above will choose the next government again, with 36% of the votes.

So whats your acceptable popular vote cut off? How about the 41, 38 and 40% the liberals got in 93, 97 and 2000? No? Or how about some of you stop bringing up this stupid red herring, find a legitimate argument, PLEASE, in your words, for the love of god PLEASE, fyi the Conservatives got 39% in 2011.

Edited September 30, 2015 by Michael Hardner
corrected misspelling

[marcus]

So whats your acceptable popular vote cut off? How about the 41, 38 and 40% the liberals got in 93, 97 and 2000? No? Or how about some of you stop bringing up this stupid red herring, find a legitimate argument, PLEASE, in your words, for the love of god PLEASE, fyi the Conservatives got 39% in 2011.

We need to change the system. Our electoral system has shown to be a failure.

[cybercoma]

how about some of you stop bringing up this stupid red herring, find a legitimate argument, PLEASE,

How is an example of an angry Harper supporter a red herring in a conversation where Shady brought up angry supporters?

[Spiderfish]

How is an example of an angry Harper supporter a red herring in a conversation where Shady brought up angry supporters?

I believe the red herring referred to is that suddenly in the last election cycle, winning a majority mandate with less than 50% of the vote seems to be unfair. We certainly didn't hear this crying when the Liberals won with less than 50%, but this is Harper... this is the Conservatives...it's different now. Right?

As far as pidgeonholing Conservatives as angry old white dudes, this is also a red herring and is about as insightful as saying that all Green supporters are tree-hugging hippies, or NDP supporters are all social assistance recipients and civil servants.

[Evening Star]

We certainly didn't hear this crying when the Liberals won with less than 50%, but this is Harper... this is the Conservatives...it's different now. Right?

Is this really true? People, including Reform and Harper himself, did complain about the electoral system at that time, from what I recall. Even as a teenager, I was aware of it.

[angrypenguin]

I believe the red herring referred to is that suddenly in the last election cycle, winning a majority mandate with less than 50% of the vote seems to be unfair. We certainly didn't hear this crying when the Liberals won with less than 50%, but this is Harper... this is the Conservatives...it's different now. Right?

As far as pidgeonholing Conservatives as angry old white dudes, this is also a red herring and is about as insightful as saying that all Green supporters are tree-hugging hippies, or NDP supporters are all social assistance recipients and civil servants.

Please read up on how our election process works.

[Keepitsimple]

Is this really true? People, including Reform and Harper himself, did complain about the electoral system at that time, from what I recall. Even as a teenager, I was aware of it.

I guess when you think about it, there will always be a vocal minority that complains when "their guy" is not PM. It was Chretien the Dictator back then and now amusingly, it's Harper the Dictator.....and I can guarantee that if Mulcair ever became PM, the cries of Mulcair the Dictator would ring out. What has changed over the years is the ease and multitude of formal and social media. The squeaky wheels have gotten progressively more grease over the years. But hey, it's all part of a healthy democracy.