Why I am voting Liberal

msj · October 14, 2015

Most of the reasons given are superficial and unimportant, or simply silly.

Ah, yes, the "not real issues" crowd....

How...condescending.

socialist · October 14, 2015

Trudeau is largely being helped by a friendly main stream media, which has given him a free pass on anything he says or does. If the media flunkies like Fife et al. were to hold Wonderboy to the same standard that they try to hold the conservatives, good old Wonderboy's support numbers would be in the single digits. When you have most of the media on your side, it's pretty hard to lose.

socialist · October 14, 2015

Ah, yes, the "not real issues" crowd....

How...condescending.

I still may vote Liberal.

I like the fact that they will allow thousands of refugees from middle east countries to lay roots in Canada without the hassle of a background check. The Liberal compassion has me interested.

waldo · October 14, 2015

You always seem to think you've won every argument you hold here, regardless of facts. As I recall, the pertinent facts are these.

Harper spent some nineteen years working in politics, as aides and assistants to MPs in the Tory and Reform Party, policy chief, organizer and strategist of the latter, then an MP for the Canadian Alliance. He then headed a conservative lobby group before returning as Alliance leader and MP, whereupon he was able to negotiate the merging with the old Tories, then was elected leader. Nineteen years of strong political experience from all sides, from the back rooms to running for office, to lobbying politicians. And he did it all without nice hair and without a name anyone knew, and without family connections or money.

Trudeau, by contrast, was drafted by the Liberals party hierarchy, which virtually begged him to run and be their leader, and threw their support behind him. Scads of family contacts showered him with money and used their influence to ensure he got elected.

what a croc! You've outdone your own partisanship measuring bar... Harper started in 1985 as a gopher for a Calgary PC MP... that supposedly lasted a year! In 1987 Harper was a nobody within a group that formed the Reform Party... eventually running for and winning a Reform MP seat in 1993. Harper had a falling out with Preston Manning and left (not seeking re-election in 1997)... left and was named "NCC Vice President" the same day he resigned his MP seat in 1997... and not being able to keep a job :lol: , Harper left that in 2001 and was gifted a candidacy/seat when Ezra Levant gave it up to him... for "undisclosed considerations"! (nudge, nudge, wink, wink).

all through that, the 'milktoast' Harper rode the waves of circumstance, change and opportunity... principally the void left by western disenchantment with Mulroney's PCs... to riding Manning's coat-tails... to having a token NCC position handed to him... to having Ezra Levant gift him his Alliance candidacy... to Joe Clark's bumbling the leadership of the PCs... to the idiot Stockwell Day's position as Alliance leader...

waldo · October 14, 2015

I still may vote Liberal.

I like the fact that they will allow thousands of refugees from middle east countries to lay roots in Canada without the hassle of a background check. The Liberal compassion has me interested.

no background checks? Citation request

ReeferMadness · October 14, 2015

... to the idiot Stockwell Day's position as Alliance leader...

yes. We all have fond memories of Day.

Apparently, the earth just turned 6,019.

WestCanMan · October 14, 2015

are you saying he's not ready?

.

no, I'm saying that he's either anti-democracy or incredibly stupid. That was an alarming thing for the leader of a farcical group like the Green Party or the rhino party to say, let alone one of the major political parties in Canada.

Dropping a stooge bomb like that should be political suicide, but then again it seemed to work for GWB and Donald Trump down in the states.

WestCanMan · October 14, 2015

only a purposeful misinformer would focus on the amount... on the $90K figure... and ignore the salient abuses of power and corruption within l'affaire Duffy!

.

His own father bilked the senate for ten times as much money back in the '80's with bogus appointees and didn't even disguise the fact that he was ripping off Canadians. He also gave western Canada the finger. No Trudeau should ever complain about anything senate-related.

Harper was clearly uninvolved in the mis-spent money, and the way the money was paid back is of no concern to me. I appreciate the fact that Duffy's feet were held to the fire and even you can't deny that with the conservative govt in power there was at least some semblance of accountability in many instances. There was zero accountability in the PE Trudeau era or in the shawinigate era under those liberal govts.

Smallc · October 14, 2015

No Trudeau should ever complain about anything senate-related.

I can't complain about anything my dad does?

waldo · October 14, 2015

Harper was clearly uninvolved in the mis-spent money, and the way the money was paid back is of no concern to me. I appreciate the fact that Duffy's feet were held to the fire and even you can't deny that with the conservative govt in power there was at least some semblance of accountability in many instances.

given you brought up l'affaire Duffy, I appreciate you sanction cover-ups, interference with audits, self-serving (and improper) interpretation of the constitution criteria for residency of Senators, Harper's failed Senate appointments, purposeful misinformation and outright lying to Canadians, etc.. Accountability in many instances... Harper?... Harper Conservatives? How many is YOUR many? :lol: As for your stated accountability... where's yours in accepting any for the actions of Harper Conservatives... per usual, you revert to the standard, "but the Liberals, but the Liberals", as you reach back decades! Your favoured party has been in place for the last decade - own it!

WestCanMan · October 14, 2015

given you brought up l'affaire Duffy, I appreciate you sanction cover-ups, interference with audits, self-serving (and improper) interpretation of the constitution criteria for residency of Senators, Harper's failed Senate appointments, purposeful misinformation and outright lying to Canadians, etc.. Accountability in many instances... Harper?... Harper Conservatives? How many is YOUR many? As for your stated accountability... where's yours in accepting any for the actions of Harper Conservatives... per usual, you revert to the standard, "but the Liberals, but the Liberals", as you reach back decades! Your favoured party has been in place for the last decade - own it!

So you don't see the irony of a Trudeau talking about senate scandals, or bringing the dirtiest pm of the last century on his campaign. Not much I can do for ya Waldo. To people with their eyes wide open its good for a laugh.

L'Affaire Duffy is much ado about nothing, but the liberals and ndp cling to it like a drowning man clutching a piece of straw.

For a govt with a country to run plus major concerns on the international stage to contend with diffy is not even a blip on the radar. He was appointed as an actual senator and no one even questions the fact that he did what little work they actually do.

A major scandal is when the leader of a political party officially and openly bans a widely held opinion nationwide. Go ahead and vote for that guy Waldo. The same guy whose campaign promise is to take his ball and go home with it if Harper gets a minority govt. Really mature of him to try and sidetrack our democracy yet again.

Can you tell me three good things about Trudeau? Honestly?

I don't think Harper is the ideal leader for Canada. I don't think we should blindly support Israel, it's disgusting. But we have three choices.

I think it would be a huge mistake to make Trudeau or mulcair pm. --> "Village idiot for mayor".

socialist · October 14, 2015

A couple earning $140K/year, with 3 kids will get $6600 tax free from the Liberals. Under the CPC, that family would get $4500 which is taxable. Also, couples earning $200K with 3 kids would get $1800 tax free, the CPC would give $3400 taxable.

These promises by the LPC look delicious. But how will they pay for it?

waldo · October 14, 2015

copied here... a more appropriate thread than as initially posted within the 'Harper the Disgrace' thread:

The Liberal Canada Child Benefit starts at $6,400 per year, tax-free, per child under the age of 6. It starts at $5,400 per year, tax-free, per child 6 to 17 years old. The benefit level is tied to family income and slowly phases out, in order to focus help on the middle class and those working hard to join it. Families making up to $140, 000 will benefit tremendously from this promise. Tax free money unlike the cheques the CPC have given to families.

Also, trudeau will lower the middle tax bracket from 22% to 20.5 %. These are great policies for the middle class. However, when I asked my local Liberal candidate how they will pay for these unicorn type promises, he couldn't give a straight answer.

Does anyone know how Trudeau will pay for these promises?

Liberal Party platform costing has been released; the Liberal 'Canada Child Benefit' (CCB) as below:

.

SpankyMcFarland · October 14, 2015

Ten years is long enough for anybody as PM. He should have realized that. Or some brave party member should have told him.

dialamah · October 14, 2015

L'Affaire Duffy is much ado about nothing, but the liberals and ndp cling to it like a drowning man clutching a piece of straw.

Corruption is corruption; saying it was 'only a little bit' doesn't make it ok. And Conservatives cling to Trudeau Sr like a drowning man clutching a piece of straw. The man hasn't been in power longer than some voters have been alive.

A major scandal is when the leader of a political party officially and openly bans a widely held opinion nationwide

He didn't ban an opinion; he said that if that was your opinion, you couldn't run for the Liberal party. The Conservative party candidate who held the opinion that gay people were 'not normal' and could be 'cured' with therapy was dropped; what's the difference? It's not like plenty of people across the country don't agree with him. One might call it a pre-emptive strike, avoiding having some candidate go on a tear declaring that women who have abortions are mentally ill, or murderers -- and having to drop that candidate anyway.

The same guy whose campaign promise is to take his ball and go home with it if Harper gets a minority govt

I assume you mean that he's said he won't support a Tory Governmenti, which is a little different than "take his ball and go home". Since Harper's government is clearly not wanted by the majority of Canadians, I don't really see this as a problem. Has any party ever declared their intention to support an opponent who gets a minority government? Anyway, if Harper gets a minority and it looks like there's going to be a confidence vote, he can always prorogue parliament -- now that's really taking your ball and going home, if you ask me.

Can you tell me three good things about Trudeau? Honestly?

He worked as a youth advocate before becoming involved in politics.

He drove a second-hand car with holes in the floor, and worked part-time to put himself through university because his 'inheritance' isn't as huge as people think

Because his inheritance isn't as huge as people think and he had to work, he chose a career that although apparently isn't as important as 'lawyer' or 'economist', it is one that actually contributes to the betterment of society in general. (And it's not 'drama teacher' either, despite Harper's desperate attempts to make him look unimportant).

After he started his speaking career, he made a great deal of money and bought a very nice house in some tony part of Quebec. When he stopped doing that due to perceived conflict of interest with his political career, he downsized into a nice duplex in a poor part of Quebec, rather than use his inheritance to maintain his standard of living.

That's four things that impressed me about him.

Edited October 14, 2015 by dialamah

WestCanMan · October 14, 2015

Corruption is corruption; saying it was 'only a little bit' doesn't make it ok. And Conservatives cling to Trudeau Sr like a drowning man clutching a piece of straw. The man hasn't been in power longer than some voters have been alive.

its on point, when you consider the close relationship between Trudeau and Trudeau. Don change think?

He didn't ban an opinion; he said that if that was your opinion, you couldn't run for the Liberal party. The Conservative party candidate who held the opinion that gay people were 'not normal' and could be 'cured' with therapy was dropped; what's the difference?

Good grief. Are you serious? Go vote for the liberals, there's no curing what you've got.

I assume you mean that he's said he won't support a Tory Governmenti, which is a little different than "take his ball and go home". Since Harper's government is clearly not wanted by the majority of Canadians, I don't really see this as a problem.

trudeaus govt isn't wanted by the majority of Canadians, neither is mulcair's. It's a three dog race. Do you really need me to explain to you how that works?

Has any party ever declared their intention to support an opponent who gets a minority government?

if a man is elected to parliament he has a responsibility to Canadians to do his best for this country. That's it. Not to try and thwart the entire system and get another vote so that they can have a redo. This ship can't go rudderless indefinitely.

If those idiots carry out their plan to bring this country back to another election then they need to man up and give up the leadership of their parties.

He worked as a youth advocate before becoming involved in politics.

am I supposed to say "yay, one point for Trudeau"? Lmao, you are still at zero.

He drove a second-hand car with holes in the floor, and worked part-time to put himself through university because his 'inheritance' isn't as huge as people think

"he drove a second hand car, therefor he can run a country."

I'm pretty sure there's a logical fallacy there somewhere.

Because his inheritance isn't as huge as people think and he had to work, he chose a career that although apparently isn't as important as 'lawyer' or 'economist', it is one that actually contributes to the betterment of society in general. (And it's not 'drama teacher' either, despite Harper's desperate attempts to make him look unimportant).

he chose a career in politics, so we should make him pm. You're still at zero points.

More like he took the path of least resistance. With his name he was basically slingshotted into the leadership of the liberals. He was born on third base and you act like he hit a triple.

After he started his speaking career, he made a great deal of money and bought a very nice house in some tony part of Quebec. When he stopped doing that due to perceived conflict of interest with his political career, he downsized into a nice duplex in a poor part of Quebec, rather than use his inheritance to maintain his standard of living.

why did he make so much money in his speaker career when he says so many utterly stupid things? Is it because people think he has something valuable to say, or because of his famous daddy? His whole career is an inheritance from his daddy, I don't know how you don't see that.

In case you forgot, he was also taking a lot of money from charitable organizations as a speaker when he was employed by the federal liberals.

He's like a modern day Robin Hood, taking money from the poor and giving it to himself. Am I right? Can I be a liberal?

That's four things that impressed me about him.

you are a true liberal.

WestCanMan · October 14, 2015

Don change think --> doncha think

iPad spellchecker got me. Pressed for time.

dialamah · October 14, 2015

its on point, when you consider the close relationship between Trudeau and Trudeau. Don change think?

There are plenty of examples where the son does not follow in the father's footsteps, and we've yet to determine how closely Justin will follow Pierre. Anyway, plenty of people loved Trudeau Sr, so whichever way Justin goes, he can't lose.

Good grief. Are you serious? Go vote for the liberals, there's no curing what you've got.

So Conservative, when you no substance, employ insult.

trudeaus govt isn't wanted by the majority of Canadians, neither is mulcair's. It's a three dog race.

It's a two-dog race: "Harper" and "not Harper". The "Not Harper" dog is winning.

if a man is elected to parliament he has a responsibility to Canadians to do his best for this country. That's it.

You mean like Harper just shuts down the government when it looks like things might not go his way? Or how he changes laws, retroactively, to avoid being held responsible? Or uses race-baiting as part of his campaign? That's not working for the benefit of Canadians.

Not to try and thwart the entire system

I repeat.. Prorogued Parliament, retroactively changing laws, and add trying to change the constitutional rights of a tiny segment of Canadians.

and get another vote so that they can have a redo.

Because election fraud is the "right" way to win elections?

This ship can't go rudderless indefinitely.

It has when it comes to ethics for ten years.

He's like a modern day Robin Hood, taking money from the poor and giving it to himself. Am I right?

More like taking tax breaks and taxes from the rich and giving them to the people lower on rhe socioeconomic ladder. I expect that is really what bothers Conservatives about him.

In your own words:

You're still at zero points.

Edited October 14, 2015 by dialamah

WestCanMan · October 14, 2015

There are plenty of examples where the son does not follow in the father's footsteps, and we've yet to determine how closely Justin will follow Pierre. Anyway, plenty of people loved Trudeau Sr, so whichever way Justin goes, he can't lose.
So Conservative, when you no substance, employ insult.

It's a two-dog race: "Harper" and "not Harper". The "Not Harper" dog is winning.

You mean like Harper just shuts down the government when it looks like things might not go his way? Or how he changes laws, retroactively, to avoid being held responsible? Or uses race-baiting as part of his campaign? That's not working for the benefit of Canadians.

I repeat.. Prorogued Parliament, retroactively changing laws, and add trying to change the constitutional rights of a tiny segment of Canadians.

Because election fraud is the "right" way to win elections?

It has when it comes to ethics for ten years.

He's like a modern day Robin Hood, taking money from the poor and giving it to himself. Am I right?

More like taking tax breaks and taxes from the rich and giving them to the people lower on rhe socioeconomic ladder. I expect that is really what bothers Conservatives about him.

In your own words:

Dialama, you get one point. I didn't explain exactly what was different between Harper outing someone for saying something utterly retarded, and Justin Trudeau saying that no one is allowed to run for election as a federal liberal unless they share his views on abortion. I honestly thought it was blatantly obvious but now you "should" know the difference between the two.

Outside of that you dodge, evade, and throw out straw men on every point. Eg, the vote is split three ways, just like it has been in every election for as long as I have been alive. And yes Trudeau did exactly take money from the poor and give it to himself, if he gives tax money back to Canadians that doesn't take away from that fact because it's not his own money that he would be giving away. But whatever, there's no reasoning with you.

Edited October 14, 2015 by WestCanMan

Argus · October 14, 2015

what a croc! You've outdone your own partisanship measuring bar..

I don't think there is anyone on this web site more partisan than you - on every single issue. Hell, I don't even like Harper, and never have, and have always been consistent on that.

But 'my' partisanship doesn't cause me to lie about facts the way yours does. By any reasonable assessment Harper was far and away more experienced than Trudeau.

Argus · October 14, 2015

I can't complain about anything my dad does?

Well, not while extolling his virtue and praising him.

Trudeau, as far as I know, has never even suggested that a single, solitary thing his father did was in error.

dialamah · October 14, 2015

He's like a modern day Robin Hood, taking money from the poor and giving it to himself. Am I right?

Actually, I did misunderstand this when you first posted it -- you are talking about him taking money for speaking from a non-profit group, right? So yeah, he did that. And he gave it back later, after media fuss. I bet'cha if you looked at any number of celebrity speakers, you'd find the same thing. It's not that what he did was unusual, it's that it was used against him. (And note, I'm not saying it's right - but I do have to ask, if the amount of money was a problem for the charity, why did they book him anyway? Was it within their expectations to pay that much?).

And it JT's case, it seems it was as much that it was considered bad form for MPs to be taking money for speaking at all, regardless of the amount. In any case, he quit doing it thereafter.

But whatever, there's no reasoning with you.

Right back at'cha.

Edited October 14, 2015 by dialamah

ToadBrother · October 14, 2015

And it JT's case, it seems it was as much that it was considered bad form for MPs to be taking money for speaking at all, regardless of the amount. In any case, he quit doing it thereafter.

I can't see why it was even considered in bad form. Churchill did all sorts of paid speaking engagements in 1930s when he was in his Wilderness Years, and indeed did a speaking tour of the United States. He was an MP the whole time.

BC_chick · October 14, 2015

Well, not while extolling his virtue and praising him.

Trudeau, as far as I know, has never even suggested that a single, solitary thing his father did was in error.

Not true.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-justin-trudeau-interview-1.3219479

socialist · October 15, 2015

copied here... a more appropriate thread than as initially posted within the 'Harper the Disgrace' thread:

Liberal Party platform costing has been released; the Liberal 'Canada Child Benefit' (CCB) as below:

.

LOL. Your little line plot explains nothing. I guess you are tryin :rolleyes: g to appeal to your typical low info voter.