Justin Trudeau

[VicHockeyFan]

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/03...rudeau-boxing/

Justin Trudeau scores major upset in Fight for the Cure boxing match over Conservative Senator Patrick Brazeau

[Bob Fugger]

Good for Justin. It's not like he's got a massive ego with delusions of grandeur that he couldn't possibly live up to, or something like this just might go to his head.

[VicHockeyFan]

Originally Posted by Bob Fugger

Good for Justin. It's not like he's got a massive ego with delusions of grandeur that he couldn't possibly live up to, or something like this just might go to his head.

Ha!

Ya, I think it's alright though. They raised some money.

[spanky123]

Was hoping that they would knock each other out.

[Nparker]

Perhaps this is how the next Federal election should be decided. Harper (and his ego) could take on all 4 of the opposition leaders. I am almost certain Elizabeth May could take him all on her own though.

[VicHockeyFan]

So it looks like Trudeau has won this thing, Garneau dropped out today.

[gumgum]

He stands to lead the Liberals in a defeat against the Conservatives. Therefore he's alright in my books.

[drt]

Originally Posted by VicHockeyFan

So it looks like Trudeau has won this thing, Garneau dropped out today.

What?! I'm blown away. I figured Garneau and Trudeau would be the only ones to make it to the end.

[AllseeingEye]

Perhaps clearing the way for a 'coronation' of sorts? No matter and no thank you - one Trudeau was more than enough for one lifetime. Next.....

[Lorenzo]

Originally Posted by AllseeingEye

Perhaps clearing the way for a 'coronation' of sorts? No matter and no thank you - one Trudeau was more than enough for one lifetime. Next.....

Agreed.......

[Kikadee]

Okay, I was alive when Pierre was prime minister, but not old enough to register anything about his time in office except for the Charter, and oh, I remember him flipping the bird. What did he do that was so awful, exactly?

[AllseeingEye]

Look up the National Energy Policy, to name likely the most divisive issue during his time. Actually in some ways my main disappointment re: PET was the squandered opportunity of what could have been - intellectually and academically he was very, very smart. With regard to his peers on the international stage (*cough, cough, Richard, cough, Nixon), he could run circles around most in terms of 'smarts'.

He also stood up to the FLQ in 1970: of all parties the Liberals actually called in the Army when they implemented the War Measures Act. He was no doubt a staunch Federalist and quite willing to duke it out with the PQ.

Kind of ironic however relying on the Army though given their almost complete lack of support for the Canadian Armed Forces for 30+ years. Starting before Trudeau but certainly accelerating under his watch the Libs almost singlehandedly emasculated the Canadian Armed Forces, which continued of course under the leadership of Trudeau's good buddy, Jean Cretin. Nope can't spend money on the folks who work in harm's way to protect the rest of us when you are too focused on kissing Quebec's bum....

However in spite of that great intellect by his own admission economics "were boring" - which makes it kind of awkward to effectively govern a major world economy. Also - regardless of who is PM and which party is in power - personally I want any Canadian leader to exhibit at least some decorum and act accordingly on the world stage. Sliding down a bannister and making silly faces and pirouetting in circles behind the Queen (I am not a monarchist, but come on...) and above all flying the bird to the people of BC while the camers click away are acts hardly symbolizing a true leader IMO. Tons of potential and excitement ("Trudeaumania" anyone?) when first elected but, overall, at best uneven results when all was said and done.

[UrbanRail]

Originally Posted by AllseeingEye

Look up the National Energy Policy, to name likely the most divisive issue during his time. Actually in some ways my main disappointment re: PET was the squandered opportunity of what could have been - intellectually and academically he was very, very smart. With regard to his peers on the international stage (*cough, cough, Richard, cough, Nixon), he could run circles around most in terms of 'smarts'.

He also stood up to the FLQ in 1970: of all parties the Liberals actually called in the Army when they implemented the War Measures Act. He was no doubt a staunch Federalist and quite willing to duke it out with the PQ.

Kind of ironic however relying on the Army though given their almost complete lack of support for the Canadian Armed Forces for 30+ years. Starting before Trudeau but certainly accelerating under his watch the Libs almost singlehandedly emasculated the Canadian Armed Forces, which continued of course under the leadership of Trudeau's good buddy, Jean Cretin. Nope can't spend money on the folks who work in harm's way to protect the rest of us when you are too focused on kissing Quebec's bum....

However in spite of that great intellect by his own admission economics "were boring" - which makes it kind of awkward to effectively govern a major world economy. Also - regardless of who is PM and which party is in power - personally I want any Canadian leader to exhibit at least some decorum and act accordingly on the world stage. Sliding down a bannister and making silly faces and pirouetting in circles behind the Queen (I am not a monarchist, but come on...) and above all flying the bird to the people of BC while the camers click away are acts hardly symbolizing a true leader IMO. Tons of potential and excitement ("Trudeaumania" anyone?) when first elected but, overall, at best uneven results when all was said and done.

I was a bit young when he was in power, but I seem to recall in reading about and hearing about him, that he defended Canada much better than PMs after him when it came to the US.

Its not just kissing the Quebec butt, but also kissing the US butt as well that annoys me.

[VicHockeyFan]

Originally Posted by UrbanRail

I was a bit young when he was in power, but I seem to recall in reading about and hearing about him, that he defended Canada much better than PMs after him when it came to the US.

Its not just kissing the Quebec butt, but also kissing the US butt as well that annoys me.

Defending Canada against what? Why is everyone so anti-US, when we send them 90% of our exports. We are kinda lucky to have them nearby.

[LJ]

^Exactly, and remember it was Mulroney who brought in NAFTA which has benefited Canada immensely. Trudeau V1.5, no thanks, but at least he will replace Mulcair as opposition leader.

[AllseeingEye]

Originally Posted by VicHockeyFan

Defending Canada against what? Why is everyone so anti-US, when we send them 90% of our exports. We are kinda lucky to have them nearby.

I was just going to say - its pretty easy to be an armchair quarterback sitting at a keyboard in pokey little Victoria. However if you were the PM what - exactly - are you defending against re: the US? I get that you feel we are inundated with and by American popular culture (we are, no question), however....

Consider if you were the PM that if you wanted to extricate yourself out from under US influence, your economy is utterly, completely and irrefutably dependent upon US exports and imports simply to function. Your standard of living and way of life as you know and understand it are dependent on what the US does or does not do in terms of cross border trade.

Further you are bolted at the hip in a plethora of binding, bi-lateral international treaty obligations including key sectors like trade and defence.

Remember with regard to the latter because this country is either too obstinate or stupid to adequately fund either Defence or S&R, consider in the instance of the latter if you go into the drink on either coast there is an excellent chance it will be the US Coast Guard that bails you out. Our poor little CCG fleet is of little use other than to simply get out of the way in the event of any serious incident. In fact such an episode just happened recently off Nova Scotia where the USCG had to rescue some maritime fishermen - which they do time and again with no complaint whatsoever: imagine, off our own coast within hailing distance of our largest naval base at Halifax, we had to call in American S&R units because poor little Canada can't even muster basic S&R capability to provide coverage within our own borders. A few years ago not long after 9/11 an unidentified aircraft barrelled in over this coast heading directly toward Vancouver. Ottawa had to request US Air National guard fighters from Whidbey Island fly into our airspace merely to ID the aircraft. IOW our third largest city was completely dependent on the US because our closest fighters sit uselessly in Cold Lake AB.

Point being while its easy to pee in the other guy's pool, the fact is without him essentially you/we don't exist. Unless of course you think North Korea or Cuba are going to take up the slack and be our new best buddies.

[phx]

Originally Posted by AllseeingEye

Consider if you were the PM that if you wanted to extricate yourself out from under US influence, your economy is utterly, completely and irrefutably dependent upon US exports and imports simply to function. Your standard of living and way of life as you know and understand it are dependent on what the US does or does not do in terms of cross border trade.

That's the problem. We would be better off if we had done more to improve trade with other countries besides the US. Also, free trade agreements need to respect environmental and labour standards, instead of the reverse.

[AllseeingEye]

Originally Posted by phx

That's the problem. We would be better off if we had done more to improve trade with other countries besides the US. Also, free trade agreements need to respect environmental and labour standards, instead of the reverse.

Agreed especially in an ideal world, however that does not materially change the fact that US influence is pervasive. Old PET himself more than adequately covered off the nature of our bilateral relationship with his famous Elephant and Mouse analogy. He in fact recognized that Canada needed to look at markets alternative to the US, i.e. Europe, with some limited success. In the end however Canadians, no matter how ambivalent our perceptions of the US may be, remain addicted to American cars, music, TV, popular culture, you name it. As does much of the rest of the world so no surprise there. For better or worse they remain the primary game in town folks....

[phx]

Originally Posted by AllseeingEye

He in fact recognized that Canada needed to look at markets alternative to the US, i.e. Europe, with some limited success.

Yah, that's another problem right there: the fed's ignorance of things west of Ontario. We wasted decades of opportunity to develop trade with the far east.

[AllseeingEye]

Originally Posted by phx

Yah, that's another problem right there: the fed's ignorance of things west of Ontario. We wasted decades of opportunity to develop trade with the far east.

Problem there - in defence of PET for a moment - who are you going to trade with at that time? China? Nope. Remember that was Mao's China - Monolithic Communism don't ya know, so "run along you running dog capitalist oppressor of the people!" The US (let alone Canada) barely managed to make a dent in Sino relations and when they did it involved sending a ping pong team there. Vietnam? Nope. Until 1975 there was this thing called the Vietnam War going on, and then 20 years of recovery thereafter. India? Allied more closely with the Soviet Union at the time than the West. Japan? Nu-uh. One of the most protectioninst nations in the world - any product destined for there from here would be subject to huge tariffs. Not to mention how do you address that ridiculous trade imbalance? They send us cars, stereos, all manner of finished manufactured, industrial and electronics goods, and we send them...smoked salmon? Not so easy as you think especially 35-40 years ago.

[phx]

True enough, it was a bit later that opportunities arose.

I believe the Japanese have always been interested in natural resource hook-ups, though.

[AllseeingEye]

Probably true however see if you can digest this: as recently as 2006, Japan was the third ranked destination of all Canadian exports - comprising all of 2.1% of the total - and the fourth ranked source of imports accounting for a paltry 3.9% of the total. Care to guess who was Number One, overwhelmingly, in both categories?

Pretty daunting and shows yet again the degree to which this country is absolutely dependent on our friends to the south. So while it is fine to ***** and moan about their national or international policies, this country remains extremely exposed and is absolutely dependent on whatever good will it can engender from Washington.

[tedward]

OK, we get that you hated P.E.T. Can we get to back to discussing Justin Trudeau who is not, by any measure I know of, responsible for the policies or actions of this father as Prime Minister.

I signed up as a "supporter" before even Garneau entered the race and have listened to Garneau, Trudeau and Murray speak in person in the last few months. Trudeau was certainly the best speaker with the most interesting things to say and despite what has been portrayed in the media, I heard more specifics from Trudeau than either of the other two.

I am excited by the prospect of Trudeau's leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada. I was inspired by his vision of Canada and if he is the next leader (all but guaranteed at this point) I think it will create a much-needed excitement. I think people like Garneau and Murray will make fantastic members of his cabinet-in-waiting and all together they will breath new life into a party that represents Canada much better than the parties on the left or right.

[AllseeingEye]

And I "get" that your reading comprehension is somewhere between zero and none: I never said I hated PET nor did I infer it anywhere so would appreciate you not putting words in my mouth. In fact I implied not so veiled admiration for the man colored by disappointment he didn't achieve more. I certainly don't need you to speak for me. Nor did I imply the son is responsible for the policies of the father. Suggest you further your efforts and try to keep up with the rest of us....

Phx made some interesting points to which I merely responded, having already provided my .2 on Trudeau Junior. Its called intelligent discourse and as far as I am aware is permitted in a democracy as is your comment, ideally of ourse minus the snippy prologue. Pardon the rest of us if we don't happen to fawn all over the Trudeau Clan.

[Bernard]

I think it is foolhardy for the Liberals to be considering someone as leader of the party that has so little political experience, has not held any long term jobs, has no background in political campaigning or organizing.

I look at the campaign Trudeau has done so far, his campaign is the one that could not get the supporters to finish the sign up so that they could vote. He picked up a lot of back room political operatives but has not managed to run an exciting campaign. It is very clear that he has not managed to sign up many new members to the party.

As a student I know up at UVic said, Trudeau the MP was much more exciting to hear speak than Trudeau the leadership candidate.

The Liberals need a leader who understands that they are now a distant #3 as a political party federally and that they need to organize on the ground. They do not need a middle aged man with good hair pretending he is part of some youth movement and thereby hoping some miracle will happen and the party will return to power.

The Liberals need to focus on creating 338 functioning EDAs with at least 100 members each but no one in the Liberals seem to be interested in that path.