Support for Trudeau remains high

[Queen K]

Like Canada isn't part of the G7?

And what the HELL happened here? The Liberals won a new riding?

https://www.castanet.net/news/Canada/20 ... tion-upset

How did this happen? Someone explain it to me because this was after Wreath-Gate and Monreau-Gate and ooohh, God, so many more.

[hobbyguy]

^^ By-elections are sometimes weird, but this a pretty strong upset win.

Especially given all the negative press recently. For most voters, the choice is the lesser of evils. In this case, the voters decided that the NDP were the worst choice (Quebecois aren't dumb), PQ second worst choice (but not nearly as bad as the NDP), just slightly less bad the Conservatives, and lesser of evils the Liberals.

[Omnitheo]

https://www.nanosresearch.com/data

Nanos polling still has Liberals in the lead. There have been some recent drops in support, however those seem to be making way for NDP and green gains, not conservative ones thankfully.

[The Green Barbarian]

Nanos polling still has Liberals in the lead. There have been some recent drops in support, however those seem to be making way for NDP and green gains, not conservative ones thankfully.

yes I agree, thankfully. The Conservatives need the NDP and the psychotic Green party to suck away the farthest left and dumbest part of the leftist pie back to the NDP that deserted last election, and hopefully the NDP will do just that, though the way the new NDP guy seems to be stepping into poo already over the terrorist Air India stuff doesn't bode well for him unfortunately.

[Ka-El]

At this point it seems to me our choices for our next election will not be looking much better than the choice the Americans had in their last election. However, all have time to make some kind of significant impact before then - including the incumbent.

[The Green Barbarian]

At this point it seems to me our choices for our next election will not be looking much better than the choice the Americans had in their last election. .

That's pretty harsh. Justin is a dumb-dumb but he's not nearly as corrupt as the Clintons. Not yet anyway. The NDP guy seems to be about as dense as Bernie Sanders, and then you have Scheer, who isn't Trump at all.

[hobbyguy]

GB - I can't say as I consider JT a dumb-dumb, but he is a little too politically correct for me. But then I come from the bronze age.

In these days of social media, I notice a LOT of "firestorms" over some pretty petty issues. My tendency is to watch the big issues and see if government/parties are proposing/implementing real actions as opposed to stuff designed to appease the social media mob by giving the appearance of doing something.

Example: the Harper government was accused of not being sensitive to indigenous health issues. Yet in terms of long term solutions, the Harper government was responsible for what I feel is one of the most promising (it is still developing) directions - which is giving indigenous peoples control of their own health care. The First Nations Health Authority in BC is an example of what the Harper government actually did (and received almost no credit for), and it gives FNs a lot of control over delivery of services for FNs in their context. Not a small deal either, $4.7 billion in funding by the Harper government. The FNHA has the potential to be much more responsive to the concerns of FNs than the federal government ever could be.

That's an example of a real action/direction that to be quite honest, very few of the public are really aware of.

Example: much"to do" over Harjit Sajjan and "operations" in Africa. He went, he looked at where Canada could make a difference, but there has been only 1 new operation in Africa, and that one a short term one that has ended. The 3 ongoing operations in Africa - South Sudan, Congo, and Niger - were all carryovers from the previous government. http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/operations/current-list.page#details-panel-1424977816603-4 Yup, Canada has military people in Niger.

That's an example of something that "buzzed up" on social media, but is actually a big nothing if you watch what the government is actually doing.

Example: Housing prices. There seems to be a bit of a "buzz" around government inaction on housing prices. Yet the most recent move by the OSFI in tightening mortgage rules expected to have a significant dampening effect on the housing markets. The "action" on housing is at the municipal level anyway. The major metropolitan areas are going to have to transform, as New York and others have done, to where the vast majority are renters (69% of New Yorkers are renters). That, unfortunately, is going to be the only path to affordable urban housing (other than moving to smaller communities).

In the end, if you watch what the government is actually doing, the approaches have been relatively "small c" conservative - incremental and not revolutionary.

Yup, Sheer is touting "tough on crime". But he has not proposed anything that is both going to be constitutional and effective. That's the double bind we are in on crime. IF we are really going to tackle it, then we need some tweaks to the constitution, but so far I don't see any politicians that are willing to take that on. So what we see is what we get.

[The Green Barbarian]

GB

Example: the Harper government was accused of not being sensitive to indigenous health issues. Yet in terms of long term solutions, the Harper government was responsible for what I feel is one of the most promising (it is still developing) directions - which is giving indigenous peoples control of their own health care. The First Nations Health Authority in BC is an example of what the Harper government actually did (and received almost no credit for), and it gives FNs a lot of control over delivery of services for FNs in their context. Not a small deal either, $4.7 billion in funding by the Harper government. The FNHA has the potential to be much more responsive to the concerns of FNs than the federal government ever could be.

That's an example of a real action/direction that to be quite honest, very few of the public are really aware of.
.

HG - good post. As usual you are the level-headed one in the thread. This story you mention above is a prime example of the media deliberately not reporting on anything positive that the Conservatives did, in an effort to ensure that the narrative about Harper was always negative. People still spout some of the lies that were told about Harper in the last election, and our media sure didn't help.

A close relative of mine works in Indigenous Affairs for the federal government, and one of their jobs is distributing cash to the FN bands. She was extremely angry when Trudeau killed the Accountability Act. It was the one thing that they had to try and get some of the bands that just wouldn't report their financials to finally report their financials. Yet it was spun as some sort of "racist" law. Total hogwash. It was put in to help the FN bands that were being totally screwed over. It just goes to show how things are spun and how the message is relayed.

[Ka-El]

In these days of social media, I notice a LOT of "firestorms" over some pretty petty issues. My tendency is to watch the big issues

Great observation hobbyguy. Reminds me of the numerous threads started on this board trying to make an issue out of every superfluous non-issue even loosely associated with Trudeau. In an effort to ensure that the narrative about Trudeau remains negative, all the partisans are falling over each other to start another silly new thread. Unfortunately, while there are some serious substantive issues we could be criticizing Trudeau for; they are all getting lost in the nonsense.

[sobrohusfat]

OFF TOPIC

[The Green Barbarian]

Great observation hobbyguy. Reminds me of the numerous threads started on this board trying to make an issue out of every superfluous non-issue even loosely associated with Trudeau. In an effort to ensure that the narrative about Trudeau remains negative, all the partisans are falling over each other to start another silly new thread. Unfortunately, while there are some serious substantive issues we could be criticizing Trudeau for; they are all getting lost in the nonsense.

And it also reminds me of the numerous responses from Trudeau lovers crying that insanely stupid actions of the Liberal government are dismissed as "superfluous", when in fact they are the opposite of this. And then the babbling about "partisans" attacking Trudeau. Just total apologist BS. It's not up to the Trudeau partisans to decide what is "substantive", as very few of the insanely stupid actions of the Liberals will of course be deemed worthy by these quasi-intellectual elitists as "substantive".

One large example of this was when the Indian community was outraged by Justin's stupid gaffe in a tweet his handlers sent out about Diwali. The Trudeau partisans were horribly racist in their responses, dismissing the offended Indians as "partisan puppies". It was disgusting and wrong. Their culture was disrespected, and yet the wall of stupidity was set up to protect Trudeau at all costs. Once again, the Trudeau mistakes are getting lost in the apologist nonsense.

[Queen K]

At this point it seems to me our choices for our next election will not be looking much better than the choice the Americans had in their last election. .

That's pretty harsh. Justin is a dumb-dumb but he's not nearly as corrupt as the Clintons. Not yet anyway. The NDP guy seems to be about as dense as Bernie Sanders, and then you have Scheer, who isn't Trump at all.

Yes, GB, but in all of North America, my cat can cough up better candidates.

[maryjane48]

Jt. Will easily win next election as andy can never win it. Canada doesnt. want. harper 2.0

[The Green Barbarian]

. Canada doesnt. want. harper 2.0

why not? Trudeau 2.0 has been a giant embarrassment and a complete disaster.

[Ka-El]

*removed*