Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm cautiously optimistic. Now about the deficit thingy........
Well if he succeeds in legalizing pot (which will be harder than he things because Canada is involved in a bunch of treaties), the deficit might not be as big or not at all. Colorado had such high a surplus they gave money to every resident.
But I don't get what the big deal is, Stephen Harper racked up the biggest deficits in Canadian history. Trudeau is running deficits to build infrastructure and programs that help Canadians. Harper did it to build up the military and... drop bombs on brown people in the desert... while Canadians became less well off.
I don't care for Justin Trudeau. But what I really loathe about him, Clinton, Bush, etc. etc. is the increasing trend of giving entire families power. Just because your daddy, spouse, brother, etc. was in power doesn't mean you should have it too.
But that's what it boils down to today. I find that gross and disgusting.
Well if he succeeds in legalizing pot (which will be harder than he things because Canada is involved in a bunch of treaties), the deficit might not be as big or not at all. Colorado had such high a surplus they gave money to every resident.
But I don't get what the big deal is, Stephen Harper racked up the biggest deficits in Canadian history. Trudeau is running deficits to build infrastructure and programs that help Canadians. Harper did it to build up the military and... drop bombs on brown people in the desert... while Canadians became less well off.
He didn't actually increase military spending, he talked a big game but spending didn't really increase in any substantial way. Harper also spent much of his deficit on infrastructure (which I supported) but also wasted lots of taxpayer money on action plan ads, new prisons, and a civil service that cut front-line people but actually grew with bloated managerial types.
I don't care for Justin Trudeau. But what I really loathe about him, Clinton, Bush, etc. etc. is the increasing trend of giving entire families power. Just because your daddy, spouse, brother, etc. was in power doesn't mean you should have it too.
But that's what it boils down to today. I find that gross and disgusting.
So if your parent or grandparents were in politics you should be banned from it? If Muclair ran a better campaign and not stated he would balance the budget no matter what Trudeau would have finished third and that would be better for democracy only because a former PM son didn't win? He is the only one in Canada to do so at it really doesn't matter what you do in the States to ban a Canadian from running and winning here. I did not support the father but did the son. Anyone else running either the liberals or the Ndp with the same ability to enthused the crowds, similar platform and promise of openness would have gotten my support, even easier than Trudeau did. He earned it himself.
Well if he succeeds in legalizing pot (which will be harder than he things because Canada is involved in a bunch of treaties), the deficit might not be as big or not at all. Colorado had such high a surplus they gave money to every resident.
But I don't get what the big deal is, Stephen Harper racked up the biggest deficits in Canadian history. Trudeau is running deficits to build infrastructure and programs that help Canadians. Harper did it to build up the military and... drop bombs on brown people in the desert... while Canadians became less well off.
So if your parent or grandparents were in politics you should be banned from it? If Muclair ran a better campaign and not stated he would balance the budget no matter what Trudeau would have finished third and that would be better for democracy only because a former PM son didn't win? He is the only one in Canada to do so at it really doesn't matter what you do in the States to ban a Canadian from running and winning here. I did not support the father but did the son. Anyone else running either the liberals or the Ndp with the same ability to enthused the crowds, similar platform and promise of openness would have gotten my support, even easier than Trudeau did. He earned it himself.
If you don't think that political dynasticism is an increasing dynamic then we really don't have anything to talk about.
A Reform to Trudeau. WOW!!! I take back what I said earlier about Reform supporters. They ain't all nuts.
And this is a testament to how bad Harper was. The Conservative Party is currently fracturing as we speak. I'm reading it like OMG DRAMS!
It is a testament to how bad Harper was although I had not known they had voted Reform before. But I can't remember now if they had PC as an option back then in my riding. So if it was a choice between the NDP, which they had voted for provincially, or the Liberals, they might have seen that they didn't have a choice back then.
But you know, I saw how divisive the US elections were during the first Bush, and then once again during Obama's run, and I don't want us to ever stoop that low here. Political differences aren't worth losing friends or family over, imo.
Well; I'll take it further as one who voted for his father the first time but could not after that. I was frankly averse to voting for Justin due in large part to his last name carrying a genetic marker.
I was loathe to put a deficit budgeter into the big chair. Still am.
I was impressed with his campaign turn-around showing some acumen and shocked by Harper's missteps showing a complete ignorance of what Canadians admire in their leaders. Unmitigated arrogance and small mindedness not being among those traits.
Now today comes the news Trudeau has "invited" all party leaders to the upcoming summit on Global Warming in Paris as the delegation from Canada.
Two thoughts come to mind on that; a brilliant move that will serve to hasten Harper's exit stage left so as to have someone in place who can go as an invitee from the Conservatives, and...... I have no choice but to look at this early indicator with the thought: a lesser man would have simply said to himself "we are the governing party elected to do so and that's that".........as Harper would have done.
I'm cautiously optimistic. Now about the deficit thingy........
All political parties last just long enough to disappoint the majority, don't they? I was more in the anybody-but-Harper camp. As far as the economy goes, I'm no economist. But the way I look at it is that I'm sure that all parties running have had economists go over their plans, so even the economists can't be agreeing. And I also feel that until you are in office, you probably aren't in possession of all the facts, so within reason, I don't hold it against candidates if, upon looking over the books, they change their ideas somewhat.
If you don't think that political dynasticism is an increasing dynamic then we really don't have anything to talk about.
Yep, can't see one occurrence being an increase to worry about. Maybe you are still upset about Adams and his son both being presidents?
I just don't see why because the States had two Bushes as President Canada should pass a law prohibiting the son of any of our Prime Ministers from running for office. We had a Manning for Premier and his son could have become PM but didn't, I think a father and son Premier, several Premiers have had sons becoming cabinet ministers and some opposition leaders children becoming Premiers but overall in Canada, where Trudeau was elected, this has not been a problem. Every other person trying to become Prime Minister or who has become Prime Minister has not had a father as one. You are projecting your own political worries in your own country as a problem in this one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Now about the deficit thingy........
