Justin Trudeau, another Kardashian

[Army Guy]

Justins brand is of course himself first, or should I say sunny ways, then anything to do with feminism, he is Canada's chief apologist,  being finally being a Liar, i'll stop there as the list could go on for days... 

[Centerpiece]

4 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

I don't think Butts is dangerous because he is an ideologue, I think the danger is that he is not. 

He has no ideology other than telling the rubes anything they want to hear to get an kleptocratic political class into a position to do kleptocracy,

No Dougie - he is an eco-nut. He's the guy whose plan is to starve the Oil & Gas industry and keep it all in the ground. That's his background. That's his ideology.....and that by default, aligns him with all the UN global one-world dogma.

[Argus]

5 hours ago, DocStrangelove said:

Political parties and leaders engage in branding just like corporations and products.

 

 

 

How would you define the Justin Trudeau brand?

 

He has attempted to brand himself as the caring, progressive, inclusive champion of gender equality and environmentalism. I think that's fraying around the edges now because his government has all too obviously spent too much effort on style vs substance, and Trudeau himself has shown far too much love of selfies and polishing his own image.

[Zeitgeist]

14 minutes ago, Argus said:

He has attempted to brand himself as the caring, progressive, inclusive champion of gender equality and environmentalism. I think that's fraying around the edges now because his government has all too obviously spent too much effort on style vs substance, and Trudeau himself has shown far too much love of selfies and polishing his own image.

I agree but I have to respect his attempt to balance such seemingly contradictory interests.  You should see his town halls.  It’s hours of unscripted potshots and Trudeau remains respectful and clear headed.  Some of the attendees are so rude and ignorant, yelling through his responses to their questions or leaving before he has a chance to answer them.  He can’t win, trying to manage environmental, business, Indigenous, provincial and international concerns. The superpowers are all causing shit in their own ways and Canada is always managing its distinct interests from those to the south. Not easy.  In that context he’s done okay.  Again, he wasn’t my choice. 

[Dougie93]

29 minutes ago, Centerpiece said:

No Dougie - he is an eco-nut. He's the guy whose plan is to starve the Oil & Gas industry and keep it all in the ground. That's his background. That's his ideology.....and that by default, aligns him with all the UN global one-world dogma.

No, he's just a political adviser, his job is to get people elected, he has no ideology to govern, other than he steals the NDP platform.

The NDP platform being the quasi Marxist sermon of virtue signaled purity spiraling nonsense in play right now.

But behind the scenes it's still the Liberals, so the real purpose is simply divide and rule influence peddling kleptocracy, as it always is with Government by Elites.

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

I agree but I have to respect his attempt to balance such seemingly contradictory interests.  You should see his town halls.  It’s hours of unscripted potshots and Trudeau remains respectful and clear headed.  Some of the attendees are so rude and ignorant, yelling through his responses to their questions or leaving before he has a chance to answer them.  He can’t win, trying to manage environmental, business, Indigenous, provincial and international concerns. The superpowers are all causing shit in their own ways and Canada is always managing its distinct interests from those to the south. Not easy.  In that context he’s done okay.  Again, he wasn’t my choice. 

The problem is that the economy is, by all accounts, heading downward. We could have tens of thousands more jobs if we'd probably develop and export our resources, but we can't do that because Mr. Sensitive and his idiotic environmental laws and policies are keeping the resource industry swaddled in red tape. Not to mention his bragging "Canada's back!" foreign affairs efforts have resulted in a big fat ZILCH for Canada, as his uber progressive lecturing have done nothing but piss off everyone from the Russians and Chinese to the Saudis and Japanese. Not to mention the Americans.

[turningrite]

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I agree but I have to respect his attempt to balance such seemingly contradictory interests.  You should see his town halls.  It’s hours of unscripted potshots and Trudeau remains respectful and clear headed.  Some of the attendees are so rude and ignorant, yelling through his responses to their questions or leaving before he has a chance to answer them.  He can’t win, trying to manage environmental, business, Indigenous, provincial and international concerns. The superpowers are all causing shit in their own ways and Canada is always managing its distinct interests from those to the south. Not easy.  In that context he’s done okay.  Again, he wasn’t my choice. 

Respectful and clear headed? He recites progressive bromides to such an extent that MSM commentators, like Chantal Hebert, have noted that he and his party should ditch their annoying habit of pontificating. He's a terrible speaker when asked to respond to difficult questions. And when members of the public raise difficult topics he can be quite reactive. Look at the way he made a fool of himself with his "Peoplekind" comment, which made him a global laughingstock, and the incident in Quebec last summer where he angrily attacked a woman for raising the thorny border security issue.

I see Trudeau as a lightweight. Hopefully voters are more clearheaded this year than was in the case in 2015, when he was given the benefit of the doubt and centrist voters had tired of Harper. Sunny ways has lost his shine so maybe somebody else can more credibly use the halo he seems to love to don when campaigning.

[turningrite]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

The problem is that the economy is, by all accounts, heading downward. We could have tens of thousands more jobs if we'd probably develop and export our resources, but we can't do that because Mr. Sensitive and his idiotic environmental laws and policies are keeping the resource industry swaddled in red tape. Not to mention his bragging "Canada's back!" foreign affairs efforts have resulted in a big fat ZILCH for Canada, as his uber progressive lecturing have done nothing but piss off everyone from the Russians and Chinese to the Saudis and Japanese. Not to mention the Americans.

It's clear that many countries and/or global leaders don't respect him. Look at the India debacle. Look at the way he's been treated by China despite his obsequious overtures to that country and the "basic dictatorship" he so admires. And Trump obviously holds him in contempt. It's difficult to think of a major regime that really respects him.

Edited January 21, 2019 by turningrite

[bush_cheney2004]

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

....The superpowers are all causing shit in their own ways and Canada is always managing its distinct interests from those to the south. Not easy.  In that context he’s done okay.  Again, he wasn’t my choice. 

 

Clearly he has not done OK, as "superpowers" were very active for previous Canadian PMs as well.    And to make matters worse, Trudeau has caused even more of the usual internecine fighting between provinces and special interest groups...except for potheads.

[Dougie93]

11 minutes ago, turningrite said:

Respectful and clear headed? He recites progressive bromides to such an extent that MSM commentators, like Chantal Hebert, have noted that he and his party should ditch their annoying habit of pontificating. He's a terrible speaker when asked to respond to difficult questions. And when members of the public raise difficult topics he can be quite reactive. Look at the way he made a fool of himself with his "Peoplekind" comment, which made him a global laughingstock, and the incident in Quebec last summer where he angrily attacked a woman for raising the thorny border security issue.

I see Trudeau as a lightweight. Hopefully voters are more clearheaded this year than was in the case in 2015, when he was given the benefit of the doubt and centrist voters had tired of Harper. Sunny ways has lost his shine so maybe somebody else can more credibly use the halo he seems to love to don when campaigning.

That's why Zoolander is such a perfect meme. 

It literally is the Justin Trudeau Center For Kids Who Can't Read Good ( And Who Wanna Learnt To Do Other Stuff Good Too )

[turningrite]

Just now, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Clearly he has not done OK, as "superpowers" were very active for previous Canadian PMs as well.    And to make matters worse, Trudeau has caused even more of the usual internecine fighting between provinces and special interest groups...except for potheads.

And many of the potheads aren't impressed either as pot legalization hasn't been very, well, efficient. Okay, part of the problem rests with the provinces. Many believe Ontario's rollout has been a boon for the traditional illegal distribution industry. And Trudeau has done nothing so far to resolve the issues faced by those with minor pot possession records. Further, legalization has been accompanied by the implementation of a new and rather draconian impairment testing regime that many believe won't stand up to a Charter challenge. 

[Dougie93]

And Climate Barbie so nails that vacuous Dingbat McKenna as well, she is Bimbo Queen to Trudeau's Himbo King.

[Dougie93]

But this is what Government by the Elites looks like.  This is what it has always looked like, see; House of Bourbon

[Argus]

12 hours ago, turningrite said:

It's clear that many countries and/or global leaders don't respect him. Look at the India debacle. Look at the way he's been treated by China despite his obsequious overtures to that country and the "basic dictatorship" he so admires. And Trump obviously holds him in contempt. It's difficult to think of a major regime that really respects him.

I had briefly (mercifully) forgotten India. This is a country growing very fast, democratic, western focused, almost as big as China, and instead of focusing on trying to grow trade with them his government deliberately insults them by suggesting their secret service somehow was responsible for their own MP inviting a terrorist to come and meet everyone.

[Hates politicians]

On 1/20/2019 at 3:08 PM, DocStrangelove said:

Political parties and leaders engage in branding just like corporations and products.

 

 

 

How would you define the Justin Trudeau brand?

 

 

On 2/25/2018 at 8:35 AM, scribblet said:

I didn't expect him to be this bad; he is far worse than expected.

He could'nt run a popsicle stand on a miami beach, and you actually expected anything of him?

[Hates politicians]

On 2/25/2018 at 2:26 PM, Argus said:

I'm all for having to earn the right to vote. That way people might take their vote seriously. And be more careful who they gave it to.

How do I earn the right to vote none of the above?

[Hates politicians]

On 2/26/2018 at 11:45 AM, Argus said:

In various ways. 

I think everyone should have to register to vote, and in doing so take a small test, something that could be done in thirty minutes or so, and which demonstrates basic knowledge of what has been happening politically and economically, and what the major party platforms are. I think that merely having to go somewhere and take a brief test would result in nearly half of the electorate not bothering to get 'registered' to vote. Not because they'd find it hard to pass but because they just wouldn't bother. That would be a good thing. The fewer lazy people who don't really care a lot who vote the better.

In  a broader way (which will never happen) I think you should have to be a taxpayer in order to decide how taxes should be spent. And if not, then you should have to do something, volunteer work, say, or joining the military or... something. With rights should come responsibilities. If you have no responsibilities to this country then why should you have the right to vote?

That would exclude the indians, good idea

[Hates politicians]

On 3/5/2018 at 8:00 PM, dialamah said:

So what you are saying is that you both contributed what you were able, and you supported each other.   Why shouldn't a tribe, village, town, city, province and country operate in the same way?   Not to mention, I think they have essentially throughout human history.  Beggars have been around forever, and been supported by the more generous among the citizenry; people unwilling to share their wealth with anyone have also been around forever.

Yes, of course businesses make huge errors and go out of business.  Countries also go out of "business" so to speak, or we'd all be Egyptians or Babylonians. 

But one of the major differences between a country and a corporation is that a country exists to look after it's citizens.  It's not to make a profit, get the best return on investment or to pay shareholders.  It is simply to take care of it's citizens.   I think that's a pretty important difference starting off.  

But specifically for budgeting - a country's budget is called an 'economy', not a budget and I think that alone should be a pretty good clue that a household budget is very different animal than a country's economic policy.   I'm not an economist, so I'm not about to explain why a government running a deficit or adding to debt can be 'good for it's citizens'.   However, in case you are interested in why that might be so, here are a few cites.  

http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/2016/09/20/what-if-the-national-economy-is-like-a-household-budget/

https://www.theguardian.com/money/us-money-blog/2013/mar/26/federal-budget-household-finances-fed

https://theconversation.com/why-the-federal-budget-is-not-like-a-household-budget-35498

 

I also wish there was a better way to make politicians accountable.  Perhaps like you, I find huge government pensions on minimal served time outrageous; it's not that I'm against pensions, but that everyone else has to put in a full work life to get a full pension, and so should politicians.  I would also like to change the Senate: they show up to get paid, they have limited terms (maybe; there may be unintended consequences to that).  I wish there was a way to ensure politicians would work together - this "if I do it it's good/if you do it I'll criticize" form of politics is stupid and annoying.   I hoped the election reform promised by JT might address that, but he decided against.  

I have read that garden-variety sociopaths make successful politicians, and that seems to ring true a lot of the time.

Without everybody voting none of the above and hen be willing to take to te streets to ensure these criminals don't shove somebody down their throats and forcing politicians to change their ways. Partys need to be abolished all candidates need to be independant and represent their constituants. Amongst them they can vote for a prime minister. Nothing is goin tochange until the citizens force change.

[Machjo]

On 1/20/2019 at 4:16 PM, QuebecOverCanada said:

-I don't know what he says, but as long as he looks good.

 

Heard from a female student in Montréal, 2015, the year she voted for him.

Was that feminist member of the matriarchy lusting after Trudeau, objectifying him, thinking of him just as a sex object? Oh the toxic feminism!

[August1991]

On 2/13/2018 at 7:45 PM, capricorn said:

And to add, he'll hug or embrace anyone at the drop of a hat. The latest occasion is when he met with Colten Boushie's mother.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/coulten-boushies-mother-meets-with-trudeau-it-feels-like-theres-going-to-be-a-change/article37966035/

Can Trudeau not exercise his duties as Prime Minister without wrapping his arms around some (female) Canadians?

Is this our current federal Liberal Party?

Is this "Canada"?

[cannuck]

Mr. Dressup and his clown show of a cabinet are just the distraction needed to allow the back room to continue to use their privilege as government to scam the rest of the country for the benefit of Quebec and their cronies.

To the question of the thread title:  the Kardashians have more substance and intellect.

Edited March 4, 2019 by cannuck