It's official - Stephen Harper Best PM. (Village Media)

[CdnFox]

Now that i've triggered half the board...  

Village Media is Ontario based and is a network of small local news outlets, relatively neutral politically (like most swings at least a little to the left but not significantly).

Some very interesting results here - but perhaps the most interesting is that Harper is the best PM for both men and women. And this is in Ontario mostly.

And Justin is considered the worst by a landslide.  Now - to a degree it's to be expected considering he's the one on people's minds the most. And it's noteworthy that Trudeau the first is second behind harper by a nose (appropriately enough).

But it does show that Conservatives can absolutely win elections and be popular

 

Who do people here think were the best and the worst?

 

 

[Moonbox]

I don't think it's very surprising.  I liked him and voted for him and live in Ontario.  He didn't do anything terrible, while Justin has been a joke. 

Those are the only two PMs that basically a generation of Canadians even knew, so for anyone under 30 who isn't extremely interested in politics,  it was a two option contest, with one of them a dud.  ?

 

[ExFlyer]

Perhaps but, Harper 29 votes for best and 28 for worst.

In another poll:

"Justin Trudeau has been voted Canada’s worst prime minister in the past 55 years by three out of 10 respondents in a new public opinion survey from Research Co"

10?

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/justin-trudeau-is-canada-s-least-liked-prime-minister-in-55-years-a-new-opinion/article_2dba14d5-052e-5662-9048-36c07e3c4414.html

I agree with Trudeau being the worst today but his dad was also considered the worst for a long time even after he quit politics.

Thing is, only 6 of the 23 PM's elected were Conservative. Seems Canada was and is primarily a Liberal country.

With any luck, Canada will have had enough of Trudeau and make a change next time

[SpankyMcFarland]

Kim Campbell seems to have rubbed some people up the wrong way. How could she be considered the worst after such a short time in the job? 
 

If you add the two opinions together, Chrétien and PT come out well. I suspect JT’s negatives will decline after he leaves office. 

Edited August 7, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Kim Campbell seems to have rubbed some people up the wrong way. How could she be considered the worst after such a short time in the job? 

Because she lasted only a short time on the job

Seriously tho, she had an attitude that was absolutely horrific.   She ran an ad making fun of chretien's face (he had bells palsey).  She dismissed the west pretty badly.  She didn't address the corruption concerns that were being raised. And she didn't show any vision at all.  And the PC were already in the hole after being in power for 8 years.

So she sank like a rock ,

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Kim Campbell seems to have rubbed some people up the wrong way. How could she be considered the worst after such a short time in the job? 
 

If you add the two opinions together, Chrétien and PT come out well. I suspect JT’s negatives will decline after he leaves office. 

She was collateral damage of Mulroney's unpopularity. She was a good justice minister and I think she would have made a very good PM. Certainly a lot more intelligent than JT. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Because she lasted only a short time on the job

Seriously tho, she had an attitude that was absolutely horrific.   She ran an ad making fun of chretien's face (he had bells palsey).  She dismissed the west pretty badly.  She didn't address the corruption concerns that were being raised. And she didn't show any vision at all.  And the PC were already in the hole after being in power for 8 years.

So she sank like a rock ,

Yes, she came across as a bit stuck-up but she was given a hospital pass by Mulroney and shouldered the accumulated hostility to a government long in power. Regarding the infamous ad, did she even see it before it was aired? John Tory deserves more of the blame there. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Chrétien_attack_ad

 

 

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[Moonbox]

3 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

I agree with Trudeau being the worst today but his dad was also considered the worst for a long time even after he quit politics.

It's a bit of a toss up, but Justin's probably worse on account that his dad was actually smart, in his own way.  Justin is a name, a face and an ego, and little else.  

[CdnFox]

19 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Yes, she came across as a bit stuck-up but she was given a hospital pass by Mulroney and shouldered the accumulated hostility to a government long in power. Regarding the infamous ad, did she even see it before it was aired? John Tory deserves more of the blame there. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Chrétien_attack_ad

the hostility explains a loss.  But it doesn't come close to explaining being reduced to, what was it, 4 seats? 2? Something stupid like that.

And she's responsible for every ad that goes out for her campaign.  IF she did see it she's disgusting. If she didn't, she's incompetent.  Either way it wasn't winning her any points.

[SpankyMcFarland]

33 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

the hostility explains a loss.  But it doesn't come close to explaining being reduced to, what was it, 4 seats? 2? Something stupid like that.

And she's responsible for every ad that goes out for her campaign.  IF she did see it she's disgusting. If she didn't, she's incompetent.  Either way it wasn't winning her any points.

Do leaders really see every ad that goes out? You’d think you could trust someone as sensible as John Tory not to screw that up. 

The vagaries of first past the post and the split in the conservative vote played a huge role. Being provincially based can be a big asset in our system. Reform got 2.7% more of the vote than the PCs but ended up with 50 more seats. 
 

Libs       177, 41.2%

BQ         54, 13.5%

Reform  52, 18.7%

NDP         9, 7%

PC            2, 16%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Canadian_federal_election

The PCs were in for a hammering no matter who led them there. 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 8, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

8 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Do leaders really see every ad that goes out?

The good ones do.  They might not see all the riding's individual ads but sure the federal ones they do. Or they should. If they don't they're a pretty serious fail as a leader.

Quote

You’d think you could trust someone as sensible as John Tory not to screw that up. 

I just don't get how they could have though that would be well received.

Not to mention chretien turned it around brilliantly on them saying "Yes, it's true that due to an illness i talk out of one side of my face. But that's because i'm a liberal, whereas tories talk out of both sides of their face".

All i can say is they were desperate, plunging in the polls already and i guess it's all they could come up with. but damn.

 

Quote

The PCs were in for a hammering no matter who led them there. 

There's getting hammered, there's getting REALLY hammered.... then there's whatever that was.

Not just hammered but utterly crushed underfoot.  And that was just the end of it - she failed to impress all the way along leading up to it  as well.  Statements like "an election is no time to be talking about important issues". I mean - i kind of get where she was coming from but how do you say that with a straight face and expect to get elected.  Her buffoonery was consistent, it wasn't any one event. She sucked.

[Moonbox]

She may have made the party worse off, but the PC's were toast federally with the Reform coming to split the vote and a decade of built-up resentment.  Brian Mulroney may not have been our best PM, but he was nowhere as bad as people make him out to be.  He was dealt probably the worst hand a Canadian PM has had in 75 years with something like 40% of every budget dollar going to pay interest on Pierre Trudeau's debt and bloated service spending.  

[SpankyMcFarland]

2 hours ago, Moonbox said:

She may have made the party worse off, but the PC's were toast federally with the Reform coming to split the vote and a decade of built-up resentment.  Brian Mulroney may not have been our best PM, but he was nowhere as bad as people make him out to be.  He was dealt probably the worst hand a Canadian PM has had in 75 years with something like 40% of every budget dollar going to pay interest on Pierre Trudeau's debt and bloated service spending.  

Mulroney is often considered glib because he spoke so well. Even when he didn’t know he was being recorded by Peter Newman, he produced the same well-formed sentences and paragraphs in that mellifluous baritone we remember from his days in power. The GST and free trade speak for themselves, policies that have stood the test of time. On the downside of the ledger, of course, are the favours for friends, certainly a weakness. However, the grubby brown envelopes received are much harder to forgive. The downside of charisma for a politician is that voters can turn against you as strongly as they liked you once. 

Edited August 8, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Moonbox said:

She may have made the party worse off, but the PC's were toast federally with the Reform coming to split the vote and a decade of built-up resentment.  Brian Mulroney may not have been our best PM, but he was nowhere as bad as people make him out to be.  He was dealt probably the worst hand a Canadian PM has had in 75 years with something like 40% of every budget dollar going to pay interest on Pierre Trudeau's debt and bloated service spending.  

Sure.  Mulrioney was actually pretty decent, he ran structural surpluses for most of his years but those debt payments... no way to get back to teh black with that over your head without major changes.

And sadly for him all the things he did to fight the deficit and debt - gst, free trade etc - all paid off just as he was leaving and chretien got to take the credit

But - the PC's ALSO shot themselves in the foot by constantly keeping western canada out of the 'boys network' and building that resentment.  If they hadn't - there wouldn't have been a reform party.  Even Kimmy who was from the west treated the west like it was a joke and their concerns were petty.

But yeah - you can't pin it ALL on kim, that's certainly true.

[SpankyMcFarland]

I was disappointed when Campbell beat Charest. He sounded the better candidate in English, let alone French, tuned in to the obvious pitfalls for an intellectual to avoid. Sure enough, she came across as an elitist twit against Chrétien, talking about her love of Russian literature and the issues that are too complex to discuss with the commoners at voting time. Yes, really! The contrast was painful, much worse than Kerry-Bush; she was facing a genuinely everyday guy with a rumpled face from a humble background. I don’t know what the breakdown by gender was but I suspect Campbell turned women off at least as much as men. 

Edited August 8, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[Moonbox]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

And sadly for him all the things he did to fight the deficit and debt - gst, free trade etc - all paid off just as he was leaving and chretien got to take the credit

Nobody was happy with the GST, and people were pissed with Chretien for keeping it.  That said, Chretien/Martin undertook the biggest program spending cuts in Canadian history.  You have to give them credit for that, no?  

[ExFlyer]

12 hours ago, Moonbox said:

It's a bit of a toss up, but Justin's probably worse on account that his dad was actually smart, in his own way.  Justin is a name, a face and an ego, and little else.  

But a name and face that Canada has voted into power for the past 3 elections so, I think it was a little more, at least more than his opposition.

[Moonbox]

45 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

But a name and face that Canada has voted into power for the past 3 elections so, I think it was a little more, at least more than his opposition.

Sadly, yes.  

[CdnFox]

8 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Nobody was happy with the GST, and people were pissed with Chretien for keeping it.  That said, Chretien/Martin undertook the biggest program spending cuts in Canadian history.  You have to give them credit for that, no?  

Everyone hated the GST - but it played a massive role in wiping out the deficit.  Which is why chretien kept it (after promising to scrap it), but by then people were used to it and they kind of gave him a walk on it and blamed mulroney for it while chretien got the benefits.

As to spending cuts - yes and no.  In some cases that's absolutely true, but in many cases he didn't really "cut" spending, he just passed more of it on to the provinces. So while he got to look like he 'cut' something in reality he just stuck someone else with the bill. And remember that every surplus dollar he had was basically paid for by robbing the EI fund of all it's savings.

Still - there can be no doubt that he did much to get things back under control, and kudos for that.

To be honest tho i think his biggest contribution to Canadian society and politics goes largely unnoticed and unremarked.  He ended corporate donations to political parties and capped personal donations.  That RADICALLY reduced the power of big business and big union to interfere with and influence politics and made the political parties far more reliant on the people for money.  Not entirely of course - but it did a lot.

That was massive. If the man deserves a statue - its' for that.  It should be the law for provinces too as far as i'm concerned. That's what helps keep our democracy from being a complete shite-show like the states. So far.

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

To be honest tho i think his biggest contribution to Canadian society and politics goes largely unnoticed and unremarked.  He ended corporate donations to political parties and capped personal donations.  That RADICALLY reduced the power of big business and big union to interfere with and influence politics and made the political parties far more reliant on the people for money.  Not entirely of course - but it did a lot.

It must have been Harper's kick at the accountability can that maintained the opening for corruption that even an empty-headed dilettante could drive a truck thru.  Good job.  I wonder what PP will do with the opening, use it or lose it?  If I was Poilievre and I wanted to make a real impression on the political corruption file I'd put Michael Chong in charge of accountability and transparency.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

It must have been Harper's kick at the accountability can that maintained the opening for corruption that even an empty-headed dilettante could drive a truck thru. 

I have to admit - i often think "Man, Eyeball can't say anything dumber than THAT.... "  and yet, time and again you prove me wrong

Quote

Good job.  I wonder what PP will do with the opening, use it or lose it? 

Calm down.  You're so triggered you're sounding like myata and making less sense.

Quote

If I was Poilievre and I wanted to make a real impression on the political corruption file I'd put Michael Chong in charge of accountability and transparency.

Why? Lets say he put in place a system that showed every time a gov't official was corrupt.  So what? The libs woudln't care, if he's a conservative they weren't going to vote for him anyway and if he's a liberal they won't care he's corrupt.  So why bother putting energy into it.

[eyeball]

14 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Why? Lets say he put in place a system that showed every time a gov't official was corrupt.  So what? The libs woudln't care, if he's a conservative they weren't going to vote for him anyway and if he's a liberal they won't care he's corrupt.  So why bother putting energy into it.

Why do you perpetually second guess the outcome of the effort?

Because you presumably support coorruption and don't want to deprive right wingers of the opportunity to exploit it.

You haven't given a 2nd thought to any sort of process that might lead to better transparency. You shouldn't criticize what others are doing on a daily basis. If you've ignored the process I've described that's on you not me.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Why do you perpetually second guess the outcome of the effort?

They second guess because they've got first hand experience

This isn't theoretical - this is happening right now. 

You personally are here every day defending the liberals like mad, you're doing so right now in some threads, and this is after justin has been caught committing crimes and very obvisouly was involved in other corruption cases as well.

It's not 'second guessing' to say the sun will rise in the east tomorrow, that objects fall towards the earth when dropped, or that liberal supporters will excuse any form of corruption that their party does, and will invent excuses not to vote conservative regardless (they'll ban abortion! They'll unmarry the gays!  Soldiers in our streets, we're not making this up!!!)

 

Sorry kiddo - that's the observable history of people like you.  So why would the conservatives bother? 

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You personally are here every day defending the liberals like mad, you're doing so right now in some threads

Predicating everything you think and say on this silly obsession you have over people's support for Trudeau makes you stupider than the contents of a doggie bag. You can't seem to help yourself.

 

[CdnFox]

46 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Predicating everything you think and say on this silly obsession you have over people's support for Trudeau makes you stupider than the contents of a doggie bag. You can't seem to help yourself.

Oh dear.  You've reached that emotional level of distress where you start to blather and stop making any coherent sense.

Sorry kiddo, I didn't mean to break your brain again.