Canada General Discussion: Trudeau II

[RogueBeaver]

JdM has the names. "Ainsi, les Québécois Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, Anne Minh-Thu Quach, Christine Moore et Robert Aubin ont laissé planer le doute sur leur avenir politique." Akin spoke to Boulerice, Dube, REB who all said they're running. Interestingly, Pierre Nantel, Singh's most outspoken caucus critic, isn't on the list.

[136or142]

JdM has the names. "Ainsi, les Québécois Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, Anne Minh-Thu Quach, Christine Moore et Robert Aubin ont laissé planer le doute sur leur avenir politique." Akin spoke to Boulerice, Dube, REB who all said they're running. Interestingly, Pierre Nantel, Singh's most outspoken caucus critic, isn't on the list.

It seems Mulcair was the third. 

[RogueBeaver]

On At Issue, Chantal Hebert said she believes Singh would lose a leadership review if held today.

[DC Al Fine]

On At Issue, Chantal Hebert said she believes Singh would lose a leadership review if held today.

Does the NDP have automatic leadership reviews and if so will one happen before the election?

Also, as with Scheer, I'm not sure why everyone thinks the leadership is so disastrous. They're both facing a fairly popular  first term Liberal PM. One has to grade this on a curve and given the circumstances  I'd say they're both doing ok. They can always be turfed after an election loss.

What are your thoughts Dippers?

[Vega]

Gary Doer should replace Singh.

[MaxQue]

On At Issue, Chantal Hebert said she believes Singh would lose a leadership review if held today.

Does the NDP have automatic leadership reviews and if so will one happen before the election?

Leadership review at every convention.

[2952-0-0]

Also, as with Scheer, I'm not sure why everyone thinks the leadership is so disastrous. They're both facing a fairly popular  first term Liberal PM. One has to grade this on a curve and given the circumstances  I'd say they're both doing ok. They can always be turfed after an election loss.

He has shown a lack of leadership whenever the party was confronted with a thorny issue. Every time the media asks him a tough question, his handlers simply respond "no comment", thus allowing the media or even the Liberals to answer that question for him. No one has any idea what he stands for, other than some vague platitudes about a positive vision.

Finally, when Maxime Bernier quit, he revealed that the last time Scheer spoke to him was nine days earlier during their last caucus meeting. So Scheer made no effort to prevent an embarrassing split, and just let it happen, for a whole nine days???

And what's with the defeatist attitude about Trudeau and the next election? Even if it's an uphill battle, at the very least the Conservative Party could reduce the Liberals to a minority which would pave the way for a victory in the next vote. But as it stands, there's the real chance the Trudeau Liberals would win 200+ seats with just 37% of the national vote. Jean Chretien would be proud.

[136or142]

Also, as with Scheer, I'm not sure why everyone thinks the leadership is so disastrous. They're both facing a fairly popular  first term Liberal PM. One has to grade this on a curve and given the circumstances  I'd say they're both doing ok. They can always be turfed after an election loss.

He has shown a lack of leadership whenever the party was confronted with a thorny issue. Every time the media asks him a tough question, his handlers simply respond "no comment", thus allowing the media or even the Liberals to answer that question for him. No one has any idea what he stands for, other than some vague platitudes about a positive vision.

Finally, when Maxime Bernier quit, he revealed that the last time Scheer spoke to him was nine days earlier during their last caucus meeting. So Scheer made no effort to prevent an embarrassing split, and just let it happen, for a whole nine days???

And what's with the defeatist attitude about Trudeau and the next election? Even if it's an uphill battle, at the very least the Conservative Party could reduce the Liberals to a minority which would pave the way for a victory in the next vote. But as it stands, there's the real chance the Trudeau Liberals would win 200+ seats with just 37% of the national vote. Jean Chretien would be proud.

Andrew Scheer(stupidity) seems to make the same mistake over and over again of going for the immediate political gain while leaving himself open for longer term negatives.

[Lord Halifax]

Gary Doer should replace Singh.

Too old.

[DC Al Fine]

Also, as with Scheer, I'm not sure why everyone thinks the leadership is so disastrous. They're both facing a fairly popular  first term Liberal PM. One has to grade this on a curve and given the circumstances  I'd say they're both doing ok. They can always be turfed after an election loss.

He has shown a lack of leadership whenever the party was confronted with a thorny issue. Every time the media asks him a tough question, his handlers simply respond "no comment", thus allowing the media or even the Liberals to answer that question for him. No one has any idea what he stands for, other than some vague platitudes about a positive vision.

Finally, when Maxime Bernier quit, he revealed that the last time Scheer spoke to him was nine days earlier during their last caucus meeting. So Scheer made no effort to prevent an embarrassing split, and just let it happen, for a whole nine days???

Also, as with Scheer, I'm not sure why everyone thinks the leadership is so disastrous. They're both facing a fairly popular  first term Liberal PM. One has to grade this on a curve and given the circumstances  I'd say they're both doing ok. They can always be turfed after an election loss.

He has shown a lack of leadership whenever the party was confronted with a thorny issue. Every time the media asks him a tough question, his handlers simply respond "no comment", thus allowing the media or even the Liberals to answer that question for him. No one has any idea what he stands for, other than some vague platitudes about a positive vision.

Finally, when Maxime Bernier quit, he revealed that the last time Scheer spoke to him was nine days earlier during their last caucus meeting. So Scheer made no effort to prevent an embarrassing split, and just let it happen, for a whole nine days???

Andrew Scheer(stupidity) seems to make the same mistake over and over again of going for the immediate political gain while leaving himself open for longer term negatives

Yes, but what about Singh guys? I'm aware of the centre left consensus on Scheer here, but what do you guys think about Singh's leadership? That was more the point of my post.

And what's with the defeatist attitude about Trudeau and the next election? Even if it's an uphill battle, at the very least the Conservative Party could reduce the Liberals to a minority which would pave the way for a victory in the next vote. But as it stands, there's the real chance the Trudeau Liberals would win 200+ seats with just 37% of the national vote. Jean Chretien would be proud.

I wouldn't call it defeatist. The Liberal lead has declined to about 4% from 8% in the 2015 election and 15-20% earlier in Trudeau's mandate. That's not A+ material, but it isn't disastrous, especially against a popular first term PM. In fact I'd say we'd be in the minority territory you mentioned if it weren't for the NDP and Bloc pooping the bed in Quebec... but then that's not Scheer's fault is it.

[MaxQue]

https://twitter.com/MaximeBernier/status/1038541677030518785?s=19

I thought Trudeau was much more careful with his language

Well, everything goes towards more entropy, it's a basic physical law.

Not surprised the anti-science alt-right is not aware of that or fights against physics, through.

[cp]

And what's with the defeatist attitude about Trudeau and the next election? Even if it's an uphill battle, at the very least the Conservative Party could reduce the Liberals to a minority which would pave the way for a victory in the next vote. But as it stands, there's the real chance the Trudeau Liberals would win 200+ seats with just 37% of the national vote. Jean Chretien would be proud.

I wouldn't call it defeatist. The Liberal lead has declined to about 4% from 8% in the 2015 election and 15-20% earlier in Trudeau's mandate. That's not A+ material, but it isn't disastrous, especially against a popular first term PM. In fact I'd say we'd be in the minority territory you mentioned if it weren't for the NDP and Bloc pooping the bed in Quebec... but then that's not Scheer's fault is it.
[/quote]

Eh, it kind of is. At least insofar as he has been utterly incapable of taking advantage of the NDP/Bloc implosions. A more charismatic or intellectually forceful leader might have been able to make some intervention to shift people's perceptions, or at least capture their attention and help him redefine his image.

As for Singh, I think he's done reasonably well. He hasn't stepped in it on any major issues and he's still a good spokesman for the NDP and his brand of politics. As far as I can gather, the prevailing attitude about him is a general sense of frustration about the political landscape rather than his deficiencies as a leader: it sucks that his not an MP, that the Liberals are still popular, and that the two NDP provincial governments aren't aligned on oil exploitation.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

He hasn’t stepped in it over major issues? What? He got into a civil war with his caucus over abortion, feuds daily with a successful premier from a provincial arm of his party over pipelines, and was seen by some as being too earnest when it came to his strategy for dealing with allegations of abuse/harassment against members of his party.

I won’t rip him to shreds, but there’s no way he could be called a success. Not only has he been an ineffective and hollow spokesperson, but his decision to not immediately seek a seat has since proven to be a huge blunder. He has very little credibility among his own caucus, has not built important intra-party relationships, and has now accumulated such a stink of failure that there’s very little he can do to get out from under it even if he manages to do everything perfectly up to the election. It’s not fair, but it’s the reality. He had lots of chances.

So I maintain that the party made a huge mistake turfing and disrespecting Mulcair. He did not meet expectations in 2015, I’ll grant that. But people saw him and knew he was tough and capable. A bit of course correction for 2019 and he could have been the perfect counterpoint to Trudeau.

[136or142]

He hasn’t stepped in it over major issues? What? He got into a civil war with his caucus over abortion, feuds daily with a successful premier from a provincial arm of his party over pipelines, and was seen by some as being too earnest when it came to his strategy for dealing with allegations of abuse/harassment against members of his party.

I won’t rip him to shreds, but there’s no way he could be called a success. Not only has he been an ineffective and hollow spokesperson, but his decision to not immediately seek a seat has since proven to be a huge blunder. He has very little credibility among his own caucus, has not built important intra-party relationships, and has now accumulated such a stink of failure that there’s very little he can do to get out from under it even if he manages to do everything perfectly up to the election. It’s not fair, but it’s the reality. He had lots of chances.

So I maintain that the party made a huge mistake turfing and disrespecting Mulcair. He did not meet expectations in 2015, I’ll grant that. But people saw him and knew he was tough and capable. A bit of course correction for 2019 and he could have been the perfect counterpoint to Trudeau.

This seems quite a bit over the top.  I doubt most Canadians could even name Jagmeet Singh as head of the NDP yet alone know anything about any of these things.

[RogueBeaver]

https://twitter.com/jessiecatherine/status/1039213770529296384

[Hatman 🍁]

Jagmeet's leadership hasn't been that good so far, I'm afraid, but this is Canadian politics; he has plenty of time to redeem himself.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

He hasn’t stepped in it over major issues? What? He got into a civil war with his caucus over abortion, feuds daily with a successful premier from a provincial arm of his party over pipelines, and was seen by some as being too earnest when it came to his strategy for dealing with allegations of abuse/harassment against members of his party.

I won’t rip him to shreds, but there’s no way he could be called a success. Not only has he been an ineffective and hollow spokesperson, but his decision to not immediately seek a seat has since proven to be a huge blunder. He has very little credibility among his own caucus, has not built important intra-party relationships, and has now accumulated such a stink of failure that there’s very little he can do to get out from under it even if he manages to do everything perfectly up to the election. It’s not fair, but it’s the reality. He had lots of chances.

So I maintain that the party made a huge mistake turfing and disrespecting Mulcair. He did not meet expectations in 2015, I’ll grant that. But people saw him and knew he was tough and capable. A bit of course correction for 2019 and he could have been the perfect counterpoint to Trudeau.

This seems quite a bit over the top.  I doubt most Canadians could even name Jagmeet Singh as head of the NDP yet alone know anything about any of these things.

And that’s pretty bad too.

[Njall]

Noticed this on Twitter: Manitoba MLA and former MP has taken over the fledgling Manitoba Party, apparently without the knowledge of the party’s Board

[mileslunn]

I don't think Trudeau's numbers are great but they are not bad either.  There are not the type of numbers that make re-election a complete certainly, but high enough that the odds are heavily in his favour.  He doesn't have the approval rating Brad Wall had in 2016, but its not rock bottom like Selinger in 2016 or Wynne this past June.  If anything his approval rating is similar to Harper going into 2008 and 2011 as opposed to 2015 and in both cases Harper's lead in the polls going in was pretty small yet still won.  Christy Clark who came one seat shy of a majority and Stephen McNeil who was re-elected both had worse approval ratings than Trudeau.

Trudeau's main danger is a crisis emerges and he handles it poorly or he makes some completely idiotic decision (a good example of this is Shawn Graham who had a much bigger lead a year out form the election but then tried to sell NB Power to Hydro-Quebec which cost him the election).  Where he needs to step up his game is more for 2023 as I think if he continues to govern like he does, 2023 could be a challenge.  Also having Trump, Ford, and probably soon Kenney gives him a good whipping boy and he can claim voting for Scheer means you will get the same from those three.

In terms of parties, the Tories can win in 2019, but it is a steep hill to climb and the odds are definitely not in their favour, but its not impossible, just not likely.  For the NDP winning is pretty close to impossible but they can hold the balance of power if there is a minority thus allowing them to push through some policies they want.  Also another is just patience as Liberal support is mile wide, inch deep so much like Ontario it is not totally inconceivable if the Liberals are in power for a really long time (I am thinking 2027 and beyond), they could fall to third and with no obvious savior, if NDP forms official opposition, they might have a chance sometime in the 2030s at forming government.

[DC Al Fine]

Noticed this on Twitter: Manitoba MLA and former MP has taken over the fledgling Manitoba Party, apparently without the knowledge of the party’s Board

LOL!

[OSR stands with Israel]

Doug Ford so far has been awesome

[136or142]

Doug Ford so far has been awesome

If you like people who believe that a democracy is a four year dictatorship.

[Hatman 🍁]

Please don't quote reply that troll. I have him on ignore, and I don't wish to see his trolling.

[136or142]

Please don't quote reply that troll. I have him on ignore, and I don't wish to see his trolling.

Sorry.

[136or142]

Blue skying ideas here. With the Liberals meeting in Saskatchewan and the NDP presently in some disarray in Saskatchewan, I wonder if the Liberals will look at 'finessing' the carbon tax. 

1.Saskatchewan is presently the only province where the federal Liberals are the 3rd party: the NDP has managed to remain as the major opposition to the Conservatives in Saskatchewan.  If Ralph Goodale's riding is excluded, the Liberals received something like 17% of the vote in Saskatchewan in the 2015 election.

3.Saskatchewan has 6 (mostly) urban ridings (and the 1 Northern riding though that's a bit different) where the Liberals should be competitive based on the 2015 election results in other provinces and there are the 4 ridings in Alberta they won in the last election and some other ridings where they were competitive but did not win in Alberta, so this does not add up to an insignificant number of ridings.

4.Everybody with any sense knows that regulations to reduce carbon emissions are (much) more expensive than the imposition of a carbon tax, but since no Premier wants to be seen as being a climate denier, they do seem to be willing to apply regulations that would achieve roughly the amount of carbon reductions demanded by the federal government.

The problem here of course is that the Premiers are cowards who simply don't want to impose a direct tax on consumers.  However, since the Federal Liberals are politicians as well, they certainly shouldn't be above accomodating the Premiers in a way that achieves the maximum political gain for them as well.  Backing off the carbon tax might even provide a lifeline to Rachel Notley.

5.While I don't think it would be in the best interests of the Liberals to destroy the NDP, weakening them to the point where the major remaining supporters are Niki Ashton types I think would be the sweet spot for the Liberals. 

The Liberals could certainly use a foil on the left that (not to make too much of a strawman), for instance, argued based on the Chartalist economics view that 'government debt is the long run driver of economic growth', that Israel is the most evil nation in the world today and that even listening to African music is 'cultural appropriation' would certainly make the Liberals look dead centrist in comparison.