Trudeau better than Harper and Mulroney combined

[BC_chick]

Angus Reid!

Many Canadians hold positive views on the tenure of Pierre Trudeau as their head of government, according to a poll by Angus Reid Strategies. 42 per cent of respondents think Trudeau has been Canada’s best prime minister since 1968.

Brian Mulroney and Stephen Harper are tied for second with 12 per cent, followed by Jean Chrétien with six per cent, Joe Clark with three per cent, Paul Martin with two per cent, and Kim Campbell with one per cent.

Not to be outdone, Mulroney also made it to the number one spot:

Mulroney was selected as the worst prime minister for 21 per cent of respondents, followed by Chrétien with 17 per cent, Harper and Trudeau with 14 per cent each, Campbell and Martin with eight per cent each, Clark with four per cent, and John Turner with two per cent.

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/...em/itemID/16315

Interesting, out of seven choices, 42% preferred one. What are the chances of that happening? This must burn the Trudeau-haters.

[ScottSA]

*yawn* I wonder if Canadians prefer John Lennon to Paul McCartney?

[Michael Bluth]

Stephen Harper did better than Jean Chretien and Paul Martin combined.

This must burn the Harper-haters.

Can I vote for Ringo?

[tim pellett]

Under Trudeau we would have owned our OIL

But malruney GAVE IT TO THE US

[uOttawaMan]

damn generation x'ers

[M.Dancer]

*yawn* I wonder if Canadians prefer John Lennon to Paul McCartney?

Yes...but I prefer George Harrison to either

[BC_chick]

damn generation x'ers

Pardon?

[ScottSA]

damn generation x'ers

Pardon?

*zing* What was that?

[Leafless]

Interesting, out of seven choices, 42% preferred one. What are the chances of that happening? This must burn the Trudeau-haters.

Which only proves, 42% are Liberal supporters who like other communist supporters enjoy the prospect of being subsidized for everything at the expense of contents of the wallets of other Canadians.

Hey, what the hell, why not, its a free country.

Don't be a jerk, vote Liberal.

[BC_chick]

Which only proves, 42% are Liberal supporters who like other communist supporters enjoy the prospect of being subsidized for everything at the expense of contents of the wallets of other Canadians.

Like I said, it burns eh?

[Michael Bluth]

Like I said, it burns eh?

Harper doing better than Chretien and Martin combined?

Yeah, I can see that.

[Leafless]

Which only proves, 42% are Liberal supporters who like other communist supporters enjoy the prospect of being subsidized for everything at the expense of contents of the wallets of other Canadians.

Like I said, it burns eh?

It only goes to show that you many Canadians know very little about politics and care little about politics, but rather are bought off by cheap socialist ideologies, programs and policies. With all of this paid for a capitalistic freer society, while at the same time destroying the lifestyle and quality of life of the English speaking majority.

[speaker]

leafless that's just amazing. you have the power to amaze. Here's my interpretation, since the liberals and conservatives and verging on the ndp are all pretty much the same thing, populist wannabes, it only goes to show that you can fool most of the people most of the time. The capitalists who bought off the political parties are using the game to rob everyone of their lifestyle and quality of life, and getting us to pay for it to boot.

[Leafless]

leafless that's just amazing. you have the power to amaze. Here's my interpretation, since the liberals and conservatives and verging on the ndp are all pretty much the same thing, populist wannabes, it only goes to show that you can fool most of the people most of the time.

What you are saying is that the Conservatives are in agreement of successful Liberal corruptness and that is where the problem is. That is why why we have a dysfunctional government.

Political parties continue to play the old game when we know basically the Quebec created Liberals are a fraudulent national political party continually playing up to the interest of Quebec with a few socialist inspired programs to win the hearts of the ROC.

The capitalists who bought off the political parties are using the game to rob everyone of their lifestyle and quality of life, and getting us to pay for it to boot.

The capitalist are robbing Canadians thanks to the Liberalization of Canada.

But it is the Liberals who rob basically English Canadians of their lifestyles, quality of life and getting us to pay for it to boot.

For instance the 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms' that contain discriminatory sections forcing Canadians to subsidize a foreign nationalistic culture that continually brow beats the feds for power and money with the end result being, English Canada paying the shot and at the same time being discriminated upon.

Our current political system is broken.

[jbg]

Interesting, out of seven choices, 42% preferred one. What are the chances of that happening? This must burn the Trudeau-haters.

I'll tell you one thing. At least Trudeau was eloquent and creative in the way he destroyed a lot of what was good about Canada. Richard Nixon, a similarly malevolent vandal in the US, was neither eloquent nor creative.

Trudeau also was handsome. Nixon's jowels shook like quivering jello. Perhaps they're better friends in h*ll than they were when they were leaders of neighboring countries.

[Mad_Michael]

To anyone who follows academic historians in Canada - this poll is no surprise at all.

Trudeau is generally perceived by Canadian academic historians as the best PM in recent years. The historians have been quite kind to Trudeau and his policies.

And Mulroney is roundly considered the worst (his empowerment of Quebec nationalism and alliance with separatists backfired on him enormously - the BQ practically was a splinter group from Mulroney's Quebec faction). Mulroney also holds the record as Canada's most fiscally irresponsible - greatest increase in deficit spending and greatest increase National Debt (real or per capita terms, Mulroney wins both) and Mulroney achieved this during the 2nd longest economic expansion cycle on record. It takes a special kind of idiot management to have Canada's fiscal situation seriously deteriorate when the economy was booming.

[Michael Bluth]

To anyone who follows academic historians in Canada - this poll is no surprise at all.

Trudeau is generally perceived by Canadian academic historians as the best PM in recent years. The historians have been quite kind to Trudeau and his policies.

And Mulroney is roundly considered the worst (his empowerment of Quebec nationalism and alliance with separatists backfired on him enormously - the BQ practically was a splinter group from Mulroney's Quebec faction). Mulroney also holds the record as Canada's most fiscally irresponsible - greatest increase in deficit spending and greatest increase National Debt (real or per capita terms, Mulroney wins both) and Mulroney achieved this during the 2nd longest economic expansion cycle on record. It takes a special kind of idiot management to have Canada's fiscal situation seriously deteriorate when the economy was booming.

That might be the view of 'academic historians' but definitely not of economists.

Mulroney inherited a huge operating deficit from Trudeau that he turned into an operating surplus by the end of his time in office.

His changes to the regulatory environment, plus trade deals, directly lead to the strength of the economy we experience today.

[GreenWhiteandPink]

When the liberals came to power in 1993 there were faced with a 42 billion dollar deficit. There was no operating surplus untill 1997.

[margrace]

When the liberals came to power in 1993 there were faced with a 42 billion dollar deficit. There was no operating surplus untill 1997.

There isn't any use arguing with these people. They will argue black as white, they are paid party people. Tight fisted conservatives who would have us all do without the aminities to suit their greed.

[Michael Bluth]

When the liberals came to power in 1993 there were faced with a 42 billion dollar deficit. There was no operating surplus untill 1997.

There isn't any use arguing with these people. They will argue black as white, they are paid party people. Tight fisted conservatives who would have us all do without the aminities to suit their greed.

GWP you are referring to the budgetary surplus. The budgetary surplus/deficit is made up of two components. The operating surplus/deficit is the difference between the money the Government brings in through taxes, fees etc. (i.e. in the course of operating the Government) and the money it spends on programs. The remaining component of the budgetary surplus/deficit is the amount spent on financing. Debt repayments primarily.

Until the Progressive Conservatives took power the debt grew because the Government was spending more money on programs then it took in. Then the debt began feeding on itself.

[scribblet]

Mulroney had the best economic record according to McGill and still is www.mcgill.ca/files/economics/mulroney2001.pdf

but then 'they' won't believe it but what the heck I'm 'paid to say this' ROTFLMAO

[Michael Bluth]

but then 'they' won't believe it but what the heck I'm 'paid to say this' ROTFLMAO

Do you know when we get our cheques for posting on MLW? Have you been cashing my cheques?

Silly us providing facts and information to argue "black as white".

wtf does black as white even mean?

[jdobbin]

Mulroney had the best economic record according to McGill and still is www.mcgill.ca/files/economics/mulroney2001.pdf

but then 'they' won't believe it but what the heck I'm 'paid to say this' ROTFLMAO

That is a lot of massaged numbers in there to be sure.

Some of the things they criticize Chretien for in 2001 changed by 2003. A low dollar and slumping stock market all changed for the better. And where was the mention of September 11 in all this when there was mention of the recession for Mulroney?

I'd love to see an update on this report instead of one that ended before Chretien left office. Is there one?

[Michael Bluth]

That is a lot of massaged numbers in there to be sure.

Some of the things they criticize Chretien for in 2001 changed by 2003. A low dollar and slumping stock market all changed for the better. And where was the mention of September 11 in all this when there was mention of the recession for Mulroney?

I'd love to see an update on this report instead of one that ended before Chretien left office. Is there one?

Which are the massaged numbers?

Misery index is still a valid concept.

No mention of the September 11th, 2001 attacks in a report published in 2001? Kinda makes sense. No way for the effects of an incident in the latter half of the year to make it into a report published in that year.

Update? Not sure. Have you looked? Wait don't answer that one....

[jdobbin]

Looks like stalker boy is back probably yelling "it's true, true!" Mulroney is the bestest prime minister! That is, until Harper!" On a percentage level, I wonder how many of stalker posts follow mine from this particular poster. I'd wager it is pretty high.

A search through McGill's records shows that there was no update. The authors themselves said that Chretien's term was not complete so the figures could only be calculated up to what they had.

The right wing might try to convince us that Mulroney was the greatest prime minister ever but he wasn't so regarded by Harper who dumped him and his party to defeat the PCs so that they never won government again.