In of itself of course not, but it can help cause one. Only the Liberals can stop that from happening. But if they keep mishandling things and panicking it will become one.
Ipsos poll - Trudeau would lose if the election were held today
- Thread starter Moviefan-2
- Start date
The opposition leaders are finally growing into their leadership positions, finding their feet, while their minor mistakes are forgotten in the face of Trudeau's stupidity and global embarrassment. The India Trip wasn't the first stupid thing he and his team has done and it won't be the last.
Jagmeet Singh just had a great experience on Tout Le Monde, which is huge, while Trudeau was humiliating us all in India, and bonus, the BQ leader was on the same episode and it was a disaster for her, providing a great contrast to how well it went for Singh.
People count Singh out too quickly in Quebec. The Liberals created an opening on issues like culture and netflix with their peanuts deal, which Singh has taken advantage of.
BTW that's a Trudeau majority government after a month or so of electioneering. The Tories will erode completely in urban Southern Ontario when they start talking about gay marriage and abortion.... Ooops! There goes every seat in the GTA - just like always - and throw away all the other urban centres between Hamilton and London as well. And there goes Vancouver as well! And the Liberals already have Quebec?..... That's every massive liberal party crushing majority win in history about to happen all over again.
Wake up, Tory-boys. Trudeau will still beat the shit out of your heroes. In fact, he will probably dress in a turban on election night just to shove it up your collective ass a little more...
The moral of the story is that Canadians will vote in an idiot rather than a bigoted idiot every day of the year and twice on Sundays.
The current version of Conservatives (the “CPC” version) can only get elected if there is a scandal or some other problem for the Govt (or the opposition if they are in power). They are TOTALLY incapable of campaigning upon their own virtues or platform and never did, even after 4 years of majority and 10 years in Govt. So under Scheer, they need to hope for a major scandal. A fucked up trip to India by Trudeau isn’t it. Now you could say that this applies to most parties and be partially right, but the CPC have NEVER, in their entire history, won an election without an attack themed (aka personal attacks and accusations) campaign. The NDP did great in Québec in 2011, and may do well again. They should rely upon some of their more popular Québec MP’s like Ruth Ellen Brosseau (the unlikely “Vegas Girl” who has ended up being a very popular and hard working MP). She and Singh could do some real damage to the Liberals in Québec. Singh named her NDP House Leader - a good choice. (Edit to add: since this is Terb, do have to point out that she is a hottie - LOL).
When you admit your champion and leader is an idiot that is a very bad starting point.
Your letting your biases cloud your Judgement. Scheer isn't an idiot, he's a mild social conservative who has already promised not to make gays and abortion an election issue during his leadership campaign.
You see him as stupid because you assume all social conservatives are stupid, this is your blind spot and your weakness.
And I'm not a CPC supporter, I'm an NDP member.
Jagmeet Singh isn't stupid either, a successful defence Lawyer, MPP, Deputy Leader, highly respected community leader, and now NDP leader. His weakness is he shuts his highly intelligent brain off when he's having an SJW fit and that is a bigger danger to him then his turban ultimately will be. If he can keep his focus and his SJW shit to a minimum he could end up a real threat to Trudeau.
You base your perceptions on an emotion based dislike for Schreer and more particularly social conservatives. This is the sort of mistake the CPC are praying the LPC makes.
Attack ads we're an important part of the CPC tactics, but don't kid yourself they skillfully used well design and sellable platforms, easily digestable, during campaigns.
You must now follow Scheer very closely. He is not a "mild social conservative" - he's a full blown social conservative forced to make promises because he knows that his party would be unelectable if he ran on his principles But EVERY vote he has made as an MP (and please feel free to check his record) reflected his social conservative beliefs. As for his being an idiot - again, look at his record. He was speaker of the House for 4 years. Did he find Harper in contempt of Parliament for lying when he stated that "Nobody" in his staff knew about the payment to Duffy? No. Did he ever speak up that the attack ads on Trudeau's experience were hypocritical (given his own lack of experience as well as his leader - "Mailroom boy" Harper)? No. In fact as Speaker he was clearly controlled by the CPC. IF you're an NDP member you would know this - Mulcair and the rest of the combined opposition did not get any action from Scheer re: CPC MP's answering questions on the robo-calls, on Harper's knowledge of Wright's cheque to Duffy, etc. In fact Scheer's entire record over a decade in Parliament is a big fat nothing. Clapped on command is pretty much his record.
Finally - the question of is Scheer an idiot? Well, the CPC ran on a campaign which painted Trudeau as "Just not ready" based upon his inexperience. An "idiot". Look up Scheer's experience prior to entering politics. 6 months at an Insurance company - likely a trainee who wasn't hired permanently. That's it. Trudeau sat as an MP for two years, then took a third place party to a majority in less than 4. That trumps being an obedient clapping seal backbencher for 6 then a puppet Speaker for 4. So by the CPC's own standards, Scheer is "Just not ready" and yes, an idiot.
Face it - Scheer was a mistake and an anomaly of the ranked ballot voting system at the Leadership convention. He also benefitted from the lack of good candidates because it was pretty widely felt that this will be a time for the CPC to walk in the wilderness for a while to rid themselves of Harper's stench. I mean, Mad Max, Kelly Lietch, Brad Tost, Scheer, Tony Gazebos...?? This is the best of the CPC? Only Chong and Raitt (and maybe O'Toole) could reasonably be called credible, wider tent candidates. I know MANY CPC members who are basically resigned to the fact that the real race starts in 2019.
Such polls are misleading. People often say they will vote for a party not currently in power as a form of expressing displeasure with the current administration, but when the time comes to vote they'll still vote for the same party they always vote for.
Reading what essguy_ just wrote, you just made a fool of yourself.... and I din't even have to do anything.
So why don't you tell us again about how great those attack ads are? We're all listening.
Being a partisan speaker isn't the height of integrity, but it's not being an idiot.
And I stand by moderate social conservative. He's never called for the deaths or imprisonment of gays, or anything like that. He merely doesn't support gay marriage or abortion, pretty basic stuff social conservatively. And most of his more zealous social conservative moments occurred during the easly part of his career.
Under Harper's example Schreer had learned to temper his social conservatism zeal, he would never have won the speakership if he hadn't, he was competing with far more experienced Tories and had to gain the support of opposition members to win.
Andrew also had to bring together the factions of the CPC amd defeat Bernier, not an easy task.
He couldn't just ride his father's coat tails and good looks to win unlike another leader.
And it was alot more then just inexperience that the Tories used to paint Trudeau as an idiot, it was video and quotes from Trudeau, and that Trudeau had been useless as an MP before he became leader. If all they had was he was inexperienced, that would have been nothing by itself.
And Andrew has been speaker, that is a position of stature, major stature in Canadian politics. So good luck on trying to turn the inexperienced attack on Andrew, you won't be able to sell it, and it will make the Liberals look like hypocrits. It'd be like the Liberals suggesting the NDP can't win from third, no one with sense could take that seriously given the Liberals just tried that.
I'm not a Tory. The attack ads had varying degrees of success, with the last ones being no match for Harper fatigue and Trudeau bullshit robinhood act.
I don't take issue with your assessment that Scheer is an ineffective leader of the CPC, but this statement caught my attention. Does it reflect your opinion that people with social conservative views should never be permitted to hold office, even if they don't advance those views to a legislative agenda?
The attack ads had NO success. In fact, they helped turn a tide against the CPC because thinking voters began to question why a majority Govt, in power for 10 years, would not run on their record.
Trivia question: If being Speaker is such a position of stature in Canadian politics, name Speakers who have gone on to become Prime Ministers? This is a trick question. Name any that have gone on to sit in Cabinet after being Speaker? Another trick question. Name any that have gone on to become Leader of a party. Another trick question. I'm guessing that you are an enthusiastic newcomer to following politics and I salute you. But either your memory or your interpretation of recent political history or BOTH is very suspect. BTW: the Liberals would be foolish to use attack ads against Scheer. Why? No need.
(Edit to add Answers):
1. NO House Speaker in Canadian history has ever gone on to become Prime Minister
2. NO House Speaker in Canadian history has ever gone on to be elected an MP for a governing party then be appointed to Cabinet.
3. ONE House Speaker in Canadian history has been elected leader of a political party: Andrew Scheer
The notion that House Speaker is a great position of stature is ridiculous. It is a position to be respected but is typically given to a popular MP who has no ambitions for the top job (why? - same reason most parties appoint interim leaders with no ambitions for the top job - it would affect how they operated). Scheer was a 10 year MP with nothing of significance in his background that would indicate he is "leadership" material or had leadership ambitions.
Last edited:
Huh? I was taking issue with the notion that Scheer was a "mild social conservative". My opinion is that voters should assess whether the party and leaders we elect can be trusted to separate their personal views from their political actions. Eg: Martin and Chretien were both Catholic. But both were trusted to separate their personal religious beliefs from policy. Same with Mulroney. None became leaders on one set of promises only to break these to get elected. Harper was an Evangelical and actively sought Evangelical support to win the leadership as well as become PM. But then he had to tone it down if he ever wanted a majority. So why would he be trusted when he got elected leader on one set of promises but had to break those promises to become PM? Patrick Brown suffered from that same credibility gap. Scheer's voting record shows a consistent pattern of voting along socially conservative beliefs. This is public record. You could even check Hansard if you were so inclined - although Scheer hardly ever spoke when he was a backbencher (just clapped on command) - so it's easier just to look up his voting record.
Why are you running for office if not to advance your views - overtly or covertly? Just for the money?
In the Globe and Mail, columnist John Ibbitson argues politicians and political watchers should pay heed to the poll:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/poll-shows-trudeau-is-not-unbeatable/article38219947/
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/poll-shows-trudeau-is-not-unbeatable/article38219947/
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.
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.
