Toronto Escorts

Ipsos poll - Trudeau would lose if the election were held today

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
70,871
70,073
113
Let's not be naive. Some for public service. Some for prestige. Some for resume. Some for one passionate issue. Some because of hubris. And any number of combinations of these and more.

But it isn't always about advancing all views of one person. Human beings as noted above can have be pragmatic.

The social conservative bogeyman always rears its ugly head. Just like the commie allegations against the NDP.
Why would I trust or elect a guy who says "Personally I hate gays, but I realize I will get kicked out of my lucrative government job if I act on my beliefs. So I will just lie like a corrupt, sneaky fucker until the time is right for me to leap out and legislatively beat those deviants to a pulp. But you can like and trust me up until that time, can't you?"

Come on. Get friggin' serious here!
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,836
3,482
113
Why would I trust or elect a guy who says "Personally I hate gays, but I realize I will get kicked out of my lucrative government job if I act on my beliefs. So I will just lie like a corrupt, sneaky fucker until the time is right for me to leap out and legislatively beat those deviants to a pulp. But you can like and trust me up until that time, can't you?"

Come on. Get friggin' serious here!
Why should we trust a guy who is a proven liar about electoral reform, deficit spending, pipelines, accepting quid pro quo from lobbyists........

One you are assuming. The other is now FACT.
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38
Why should we trust a guy who is a proven liar about electoral reform, deficit spending, pipelines, accepting quid pro quo from lobbyists........

One you are assuming. The other is now FACT.
“Fact”, Butler? You have your assumptions mixed up. This is about who the electorate trusts not the pace of legislation. If you want to trust that an avowed social conservative will govern for the benefit of his entire country, not a minority of those who put him in office that’s your business. You’re mixing up individual promises and the pace of legislation with trusting that a leader will not let their personal religious beliefs govern EVERY action.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,836
3,482
113
“Fact”, Butler? You have your assumptions mixed up. This is about who the electorate trusts not the pace of legislation. If you want to trust that an avowed social conservative will govern for the benefit of his entire country, not a minority of those who put him in office that’s your business. You’re mixing up individual promises and the pace of legislation with trusting that a leader will not let their personal religious beliefs govern EVERY action.
The facts do matter. Many dippers and greens switched their vote solely on the basis of electoral reform.

Many others are pissed about tripling the deficits promised.

Environmentalists on pipelines are pissed. Add in the natives on this and numerous other issues.

So yes trust has been broken. People trusted him to keep those promises.

It will factor in. Alot.

The abortion debate is over. That's just a bogeyman. Same with gay marriage. Over.

I'm laughing because you are saying policy Doesn't matter. It does. Alot.
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38
I'm laughing because you are saying policy Doesn't matter. It does. Alot.
"Policy doesn't matter"? I'm laughing because it's always a trend when a person is grasping to create words that were never written. OF COURSE policy matters - And while you can say that environmentalists are pissed, on the other side are the pro-pipeline contingent who watched for a decade while nothing was accomplished. That gives Trudeau another 7 years to do nothing. It's also funny to hear your talk about deficits and I always get a chuckle when I listen to CPC supporters talk about them. The Liberals picked up more votes from the NDP than from the CPC. How many of those are fiscal hawks? And THAT is ignoring the FACT (see? I can throw that term around too) that most CPC supporters have NO CLUE about fiscal policies but try to pretend that they do (eg: They were perfectly silent when Harper used billions of dollars to buy his way to majority during his so called "Action Plan").
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,836
3,482
113
"Policy doesn't matter"? I'm laughing because it's always a trend when a person is grasping to create words that were never written. OF COURSE policy matters - And while you can say that environmentalists are pissed, on the other side are the pro-pipeline contingent who watched for a decade while nothing was accomplished. That gives Trudeau another 7 years to do nothing. It's also funny to hear your talk about deficits and I always get a chuckle when I listen to CPC supporters talk about them. The Liberals picked up more votes from the NDP than from the CPC. How many of those are fiscal hawks? And THAT is ignoring the FACT (see? I can throw that term around too) that most CPC supporters have NO CLUE about fiscal policies but try to pretend that they do (eg: They were perfectly silent when Harper used billions of dollars to buy his way to majority during his so called "Action Plan").
Did you read? I said dippers are pissed over electoral reform. I have friends who switched votes and are party members. They are pissed and so are many others on this one thing and have vowed never to vote for him again. Same with the greens according to them.

And some independents switched due to Harper fatigue. Again friends I've spoken to are pissed.

Add in his becoming a joke and yes he is eroding support from what was in essence a coalition of support.

He has lost them. And it will cost him seats in ridings.
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38
Did you read? I said dippers are pissed over electoral reform. I have friends who switched votes and are party members. They are pissed and so are many others on this one thing and have vowed never to vote for him again. Same with the greens according to them.

And some independents switched due to Harper fatigue. Again friends I've spoken to are pissed.

Add in his becoming a joke and yes he is eroding support from what was in essence a coalition of support.

He has lost them. And it will cost him seats in ridings.
Electoral reform will guarantee that the NDP never govern. I wonder if the typical supporter realizes that? It will also make it harder for a hard right party to govern too. Everything will have to move towards the center because proportional representation does that. Finally - you do realize that the Liberal's promise on electoral reform was to seek consensus - either via referendum, or consultation. So their "broken promise" 2.5 years into their 4 year mandate is in not moving forward with this seeking of consensus. If you actually thought that they'd flip a switch and introduce electoral reform then the actual problem is that you didn't pay attention.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,836
3,482
113
Electoral reform will guarantee that the NDP never govern. I wonder if the typical supporter realizes that? It will also make it harder for a hard right party to govern too. Everything will have to move towards the center because proportional representation does that. Finally - you do realize that the Liberal's promise on electoral reform was to seek consensus - either via referendum, or consultation. So their "broken promise" 2.5 years into their 4 year mandate is in not moving forward with this seeking of consensus. If you actually thought that they'd flip a switch and introduce electoral reform then the actual problem is that you didn't pay attention.
No it was moving toward a concencus of proportional rep. What the Liberals wanted was ranked ballot. So they would govern in perpetuity. And then they cancelled it.

Proportional leads to coalition govts with no majorities. The Liberals didn't want that. NOR THE conservatives.

But many NDP voters do as well as Greens. It can give them the balance of power in a coalition.

Trudeau broke his promise. He clearly stated this last election would be the last one with first past the post. No ambiguity.

And they will remember.
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38
No it was moving toward a concencus of proportional rep. What the Liberals wanted was ranked ballot. So they would govern in perpetuity. And then they cancelled it.

Proportional leads to coalition govts with no majorities. The Liberals didn't want that. NOR THE conservatives.

But many NDP voters do as well as Greens. It can give them the balance of power in a coalition.

Trudeau broke his promise. He clearly stated this last election would be the last one with first past the post. No ambiguity.

And they will remember.


So let me make sure that I'm understanding your objections and those of all your friends: The Liberals did not implement a ranked ballot that would pretty much guarantee that they (Liberals) govern in perpetuity AND they did NOT implement proportional representation that neither the Liberals (majority) or CPC (official opposition) wanted (but the NDP and Greens did).

What they also have not done is seek a consensus so that Canada can move forward with an electoral system acceptable to the majority. In other words - they haven't jumped the gun (as they well could) to implement a system that would give them a distinct advantage and they have not jumped the gun in implementing a system that the majority do NOT want. And you see this as a problem.... WHY?

The criticism on this issue is that they have not sought consensus, YET. Period. They are 2.5 years into a 4 year mandate. It could well be a referendum question on the next general election.

Sometimes I just have to shake my head...
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,836
3,482
113
So let me make sure that I'm understanding your objections and those of all your friends: The Liberals did not implement a ranked ballot that would pretty much guarantee that they (Liberals) govern in perpetuity AND they did NOT implement proportional representation that neither the Liberals (majority) or CPC (official opposition) wanted (but the NDP and Greens did).

What they also have not done is seek a consensus so that Canada can move forward with an electoral system acceptable to the majority. In other words - they haven't jumped the gun (as they well could) to implement a system that would give them a distinct advantage and they have not jumped the gun in implementing a system that the majority do NOT want. And you see this as a problem.... WHY?

The criticism on this issue is that they have not sought consensus, YET. Period. They are 2.5 years into a 4 year mandate. It could well be a referendum question on the next general election.

Sometimes I just have to shake my head...
No. He has now clearly stated that electoral reform is off the table. There will be no more looking into it.

And what the parties want does not represent what the voters want. But the Liberals once Ranked balloting proved unpopular shelved the whole thing because that was their ONLY choice. They NEVER INTENDED IT TO BE AN OPEN QUESTION.

And what I'm pointing out is that Trudeau promised to end FPTP. Period. And that NDP and Green voters voted for him solely on that basis and issue.

And as a result of that backtrack he is going to lose those votes in two years. Placing ridings in jeopardy that were close.

I prefer FPTP. But my friends mentioned earlier don't. And won't vote for him again.

Please stop trying to mitigate this. Whatever you think it's a clear cut betrayal to people who took a chance on him on this issue.
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38
No. He has now clearly stated that electoral reform is off the table. There will be no more looking into it.

And what the parties want does not represent what the voters want. But the Liberals once Ranked balloting proved unpopular shelved the whole thing because that was their ONLY choice. They NEVER INTENDED IT TO BE AN OPEN QUESTION.

And what I'm pointing out is that Trudeau promised to end FPTP. Period. And that NDP and Green voters voted for him solely on that basis and issue.

And as a result of that backtrack he is going to lose those votes in two years. Placing ridings in jeopardy that were close.

I prefer FPTP. But my friends mentioned earlier don't. And won't vote for him again.

Please stop trying to mitigate this. Whatever you think it's a clear cut betrayal to people who took a chance on him on this issue.

So NDP voters got duped on this issue (more accurately - had misguided hopes on what would be implemented). Not the first time and certainly won't be the last - I mean they still voted for Jack and opportunist Jack gave us Harper. And note: with a majority, the Liberals could have pushed through ranked ballots. What would you be complaining about if that happened?

Fortunately for ALL parties - elections are never single issue affairs.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,836
3,482
113
So NDP voters got duped on this issue (more accurately - had misguided hopes on what would be implemented). Not the first time and certainly won't be the last - I mean they still voted for Jack and opportunist Jack gave us Harper. And note: with a majority, the Liberals could have pushed through ranked ballots. What would you be complaining about if that happened?

Fortunately for ALL parties - elections are never single issue affairs.
Well at least you admit Trudeau was a con man on this.

This could cost him maybe 20 seats. And then the other issues come into play.
 

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
170
63
Read Ibbitson’s column and count the number of times he mentions Scheer’s name. The poll is about how Ipsos has the Conservatives ahead and if an “election were held today”. Yet even with this theme, ibbitson only mentions Scheer (our PM in waiting) once. Even Ibbitson realizes that the more times you mention Scheer the more ridiculous the narrative sounds. The only problem with maintaining the lead this poll suggests is that Scheer will have to appear in public more. That will not be good for the CPC.
I'm not sure why you think "if an election were held today" is an issue. As I previously stated, that's how all political polls work.

Meanwhile, John Ivison at the National Post reports that Abacus has also recorded a significant drop in the Liberals' support: http://nationalpost.com/news/politi...filled-india-trip-sinks-liberals-in-the-polls

It's interesting that Bruce Anderson at Abacus thinks pocketbook issues like the rising cost of living, and that it could have implications for policy measures such as the carbon tax.

Meanwhile, Eric Grenier at the CBC says the poll tracker aggregate of various polls shows Liberal support has dropped.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-polltracker-india-1.4564733
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38
I'm not sure why you think "if an election were held today" is an issue. As I previously stated, that's how all political polls work.

Meanwhile, John Ivison at the National Post reports that Abacus has also recorded a significant drop in the Liberals' support: http://nationalpost.com/news/politi...filled-india-trip-sinks-liberals-in-the-polls

It's interesting that Bruce Anderson at Abacus thinks pocketbook issues like the rising cost of living, and that it could have implications for policy measures such as the carbon tax.

Meanwhile, Eric Grenier at the CBC says the poll tracker aggregate of various polls shows Liberal support has dropped.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-polltracker-india-1.4564733

The only issue I have is the fact that an election is NOT "held today". That's a big issue. This is why mid-term polls - while definitely showing a troubling trend should not be taken as anything more than than that. In fact, given how badly botched the India trip was, and how recent to the poll, it's surprising that it didn't show a worse trend. Anyway - the person with the best polling analysis for the past two elections is Eric Grenier quoted in the CBC article in your link (he founded and ran ThreeHundredEight.com until last year - now tracks polls for the CBC). The trend of the Liberals has definitely dropped. Of course in aggregate - he says it's a tossup.

Anyway, I still stand by my belief that when Scheer gets out in public more, he will suffer from Hudak-itis, or Dion-itis. I've watched him too long to expect anything better - unless he's hidden his political chops completely for the 12 plus years he's been in politics. And the CPC will likely commit the same errors they always do - attack Trudeau non-stop for too long on image and intellect - which only serves to lower the bar so much that anything Trudeau does is not as bad. And like Harper, Scheer will not be able to deliver a choice that is convincingly better. That's the problem with attack style politics which is the only thing the CPC know. Trudeau is not doing himself any favours but with a year and a half to go, I think it's way too early for the CPC to pop the champagne.
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38

Look at this quote from Iveson’s article:

“In the Westminster system, party loyalties are traditionally more important than leaders when it comes to winning elections but the Liberals have taken presidential-style politics to new levels, making the leader synonymous with the party brand. ”

It makes you wonder where Iveson was from 2006 through 2015. If anything, it’s the reverse. People think (thanks to the CPC’s constant use of this attack) that Butts is actually in charge.
 

thirdcup

Well-known member
Jan 4, 2005
1,331
109
63
Directly above the center of the earth
I think it's over, Trudeau had better realize the 2015 election was a vote against Harper.
Voters never vote new governments in. They always vote existing governments out.
 

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
170
63

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
The latest poll from Angus Reid shows Trudeau is less popular than Stephen Harper was at the same time in his mandate.

http://nationalpost.com/news/politi...at-this-point-in-his-tenure-as-prime-minister

http://torontosun.com/opinion/colum...tion-were-tomorrow-justin-trudeaus-gone-as-pm

It sure looks like something interesting is going on in terms of Canadians' thinking.

For one thing, the Angus Reid poll says government deficits have become a top concern. I hope that's true.
Trudeau violated the basic rule of politics: you can survive being an idiot or a lightweight, but as soon as the electorate discovers that you're a lightweight idiot, you're a walking dead.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts