Figleaf Posted May 6, 2007 Report Posted May 6, 2007 Who stank most? I left out short-timers to keep the focus on policies and achievements. Quote
BC_chick Posted May 6, 2007 Report Posted May 6, 2007 You should have done a best PM of all time right below it. Betcha Trudeau and Mulroney would get the most votes on both polls. Funny how life's like that. Quote It's kind of the worst thing that any humans could be doing at this time in human history. Other than that, it's fine." Bill Nye on Alberta Oil Sands
Figleaf Posted May 7, 2007 Author Report Posted May 7, 2007 Yeah, I thought of that five minutes too late. I think you're right. Maybe I should have cut it off before Trudeau, too. Quote
scribblet Posted May 7, 2007 Report Posted May 7, 2007 Why, Pierre Trudeau isn't loved by everyone you know. Quote Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province
Figleaf Posted May 7, 2007 Author Report Posted May 7, 2007 Why, Pierre Trudeau isn't loved by everyone you know. To weed out both Mulroney and Trudeau, whose memorys are both too high it some minds for people to be fully objective. Quote
Canuck E Stan Posted May 7, 2007 Report Posted May 7, 2007 Why, Pierre Trudeau isn't loved by everyone you know. To weed out both Mulroney and Trudeau, whose memorys are both too high it some minds for people to be fully objective. If Chretien is listed,so should have been Paul Martin. All those years in government, and he turned out to be a dud as PM. Quote "Any man under 30 who is not a liberal has no heart, and any man over 30 who is not a conservative has no brains." — Winston Churchill
Michael Bluth Posted May 7, 2007 Report Posted May 7, 2007 If Chretien is listed,so should have been Paul Martin.All those years in government, and he turned out to be a dud as PM. Yes. Maybe anybody actually elected as PM is the cutoff. No Kim Campbell's or John Turner's. Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
sharkman Posted May 7, 2007 Report Posted May 7, 2007 Interesting results so far. I had a hard time choosing between Chretien and PET, they both did some big damage, but PET won for his meddling with our constitution. Quote
Charles Anthony Posted May 7, 2007 Report Posted May 7, 2007 I do not know who is the worst but I know for sure that I could be the worst if given the chance. I would campaign on an airy-fairy platform of "restoring public trust" and "being hard on crime" and "putting a chicken in every pot" and "reducing taxes" while "maintaining services" and "bringing people together" to "move the country forward" and "ensure prosperity for the future" for "a kinder, gentler nation" yadda yadda yadda. If I get a majority government, I will throw my platform out the window and slash and slash and slash public spending. People who complain about not getting their passports on time will be surprised when they find out that my government does not issue passports anymore! Would that make me qualify for the worst Prime Minister? To weed out both Mulroney and Trudeau, whose memorys are both too high it some minds for people to be fully objective.What kind of opinion do you want? Quote We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
southerncomfort Posted May 7, 2007 Report Posted May 7, 2007 Good think you included Trudeau, he's taking a beating Quote
Figleaf Posted May 7, 2007 Author Report Posted May 7, 2007 Good think you included Trudeau, he's taking a beating It's too bad people needed to flog the dead horse of their biases rather than analyze things with greater perspective. This poll turns out to have been a waste of time. Quote
sharkman Posted May 7, 2007 Report Posted May 7, 2007 I am somewhat surprised at the results so far myself. But I am encouraged not discouraged at the result. Quote
scribblet Posted May 7, 2007 Report Posted May 7, 2007 It's too bad people needed to flog the dead horse of their biases rather than analyze things with greater perspective. This poll turns out to have been a waste of time. You don't like the results so now its a waste of time LOL Quote Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province
Michael Bluth Posted May 7, 2007 Report Posted May 7, 2007 It's too bad people needed to flog the dead horse of their biases rather than analyze things with greater perspective. This poll turns out to have been a waste of time. Because it took an accurate gauge of the feelings of the posters her or doesn't agree with you preconceptions and biases? Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
Shakeyhands Posted May 7, 2007 Report Posted May 7, 2007 you guys are hilarious. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Figleaf Posted May 8, 2007 Author Report Posted May 8, 2007 It's too bad people needed to flog the dead horse of their biases rather than analyze things with greater perspective. This poll turns out to have been a waste of time. You don't like the results so now its a waste of time LOL Yes. I don't like the results because all we got was a collection of hackneyed prejudices about recent PMs rather than any sort of reflective consideration of policy choices and outcomes. Accordingly, it was a waste of time. Quote
Canuck E Stan Posted May 9, 2007 Report Posted May 9, 2007 This poll turns out to have been a waste of time. Only because the pollster was selective in his choices,which makes for a bad poll. If ALL the PM's were on the list it might have played different. Too bad you didn't get the results you were hoping for.....maybe the next slanted poll you post will work like you wanted. Quote "Any man under 30 who is not a liberal has no heart, and any man over 30 who is not a conservative has no brains." — Winston Churchill
Figleaf Posted May 9, 2007 Author Report Posted May 9, 2007 This poll turns out to have been a waste of time. Only because the pollster was selective in his choices,which makes for a bad poll. If ALL the PM's were on the list it might have played different. Too bad you didn't get the results you were hoping for.....maybe the next slanted poll you post will work like you wanted. Ah, go troll yourself. Quote
sharkman Posted May 9, 2007 Report Posted May 9, 2007 This poll turns out to have been a waste of time. Only because the pollster was selective in his choices,which makes for a bad poll. If ALL the PM's were on the list it might have played different. Too bad you didn't get the results you were hoping for.....maybe the next slanted poll you post will work like you wanted. Interesting angle, I hadn't thought of that. I was distressed at all the Liberals on the list, realizing it's because Canada has voted so many in. Quote
jbg Posted May 19, 2007 Report Posted May 19, 2007 OK, I'm taking my first stab at this thread based on my vote, the only one for King, before reading other comments. King was one who had seances with his mother. Definitely not a sign of stability. More to the point, he is one of the few PM's with serious blood on his hands (we'll leave out Louis Riel, since that was one person). For him, "one Jew was too many" for Canada. Canada had previously been a country that had been quite welcoming to the Jews, and quite to Canada's advantage. After the morally and financially bankrupt Warren Gamaliel Harding slammed the US doors to immigration, and the Brits slammed their own doors and Palestine's under the notorious "White Paper" Canada slammed its doors. Canada was a country that always believed it needed more people, not less. The Jews are far from perfect. However, in terms of immigrants, I can't think of any group, except maybe Icelanders and other Nordics, that contributed less crime, and better civic values. The results of the door slamming are tragic. Both King and Roosvelt bear a lot of blame for the scope and scale of the Holocaust. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jdobbin Posted May 19, 2007 Report Posted May 19, 2007 OK, I'm taking my first stab at this thread based on my vote, the only one for King, before reading other comments. King was one who had seances with his mother. Definitely not a sign of stability. Seances were par for the course back for many of the elite back then. I wonder if they are making a comeback with the new prime minister. Get a haircut and palm reading? King's stand on fleeing Jews may not have have been admirable but in a ranking of all Canadian prime ministers, he probably wouldn't be the choice as worst prime minister of anyone aside from yourself. Quote
madmax Posted May 19, 2007 Report Posted May 19, 2007 R.B. Bennett. The worst Prime Minister of Canada. This should be enough to draw out Geoffrey. Quote
madmax Posted May 19, 2007 Report Posted May 19, 2007 Sir John A MacDonald. The worst Prime Minister? Scandal Plagued, Drunk? All sorts of things. But not the worst Prime Minister IMHO. Quote
jdobbin Posted May 19, 2007 Report Posted May 19, 2007 R.B. Bennett. The worst Prime Minister of Canada. This should be enough to draw out Geoffrey. That's who I voted for. Quote
jbg Posted May 19, 2007 Report Posted May 19, 2007 King's stand on fleeing Jews may not have have been admirable but in a ranking of all Canadian prime ministers, he probably wouldn't be the choice as worst prime minister of anyone aside from yourself.I'd put him and Roosvelt on a league with Hitler, Tojo, Mussolini, Bernardo and Pickton. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.