Can Trudeau Beat the Conservatives? Canadian Election... 2015?

[Jimbo07]

In 1968, a little-known Trudeau beat the Progressive Conservative Party in an election to become Prime Minister of Canada. Will the same thing happen in 2015?

A different question might be, given the string of Liberal leadership failures, is Justin Trudeau the one who finally has what it takes to defeat the Conservatives? Or will he get crushed, too?

One way, or the other, history is going to repeat itself. Which will it be?

 

[lopeyschools]

In 1968, a little-known Trudeau beat the Progressive Conservative Party in an election to become Prime Minister of Canada. Will the same thing happen in 2015?

A different question might be, given the string of Liberal leadership failures, is Justin Trudeau the one who finally has what it takes to defeat the Conservatives? Or will he get crushed, too?

One way, or the other, history is going to repeat itself. Which will it be?

Well, considering the liberals traditionally took quebec and ontario as their stronghold I think they first have to beat the NDP back and regain ground before then can convince anyone.

 

[Jimbo07]

Well, considering the liberals traditionally took quebec and ontario as their stronghold I think they first have to beat the NDP back and regain ground before then can convince anyone.

Was the Orange Crush a harbinger of a new Canadian politics, or a one-off, unsustainable without Jack?

The latest polling has the Liberals surging with the prospect (and now win) of a Trudeau leadership. Whether a Liberal or Conservative government, it would seem that all will be right with Canadian politics when the NDP are once again an also-ran.

 

[LashL]

The problem that I see with Justin is that the entirety of his platform seems to be "vote for me because my Dad was the PM once upon a time, my Mom dumped him and had sex with Mick Jagger, how cool is that?, and I have no idea what to do with my life so I might as well try this."

Not very impressive, really.

 

[SezMe]

Gee, I dunno, Lash, sounds pretty good compared to some of the horsetails we offer up. I guess we're beneath you in more than one way.

 

[Border Reiver]

Trudeau doesn't seem to have any idea of where he's going - at least his Dad had some ideas.

 

[Caper]

I'm a right winger... but I really don't like Harper all that much... but with that said... I like Justin, much, much, less.

I still think the left divide will win Harper at least another minority.. after that I hope he steps down.

 

[Border Reiver]

Hopefully, Stevie can do a little leadership development in his party in the interim. If only so the learning curve for any new leader isn't so steep.

 

[Jimbo07]

So we could have a general election thread, where we all say, "I like him," or, "I don't like her," about anybody running.

The angle I thought I'd take, is that I'd beg a couple of questions: i) that the NDP will once again be third, and ii) that the Harper Conservatives are the real target, and you can assume your own value (or lack thereof) in seeing them beaten.

The question was, given the last couple of Liberal Leaders, can Trudeau win an election against Harper? Majority or Minority? Those sorts of things.

The problem that I see with Justin is that the entirety of his platform seems to be... I might as well try this."

Not very impressive, really.

Right. So is that a personal reason not to like him, or are you advancing that as a reason the public may find him unelectable? From my point of view, lack of experience doesn't seem to have much impact on the voter (some would say there's a current American precedent ). Similarly, family dynasties are not unheard of in Western democracies (something about some guy from Texas? ).

I still think the left divide will win Harper at least another minority.. after that I hope he steps down.

That's what I'm getting at. Your take is that with the Liberals surging in the polls, they'll take support mostly from the NDP, with a few from the centre-right, knock Harper down, but still leave him with a minority (and yes, he'd probably step down, but I'm worried that he's the one keeping the real crazies at bay )?

 

[Caper]

but I'm worried that he's the one keeping the real crazies at bay )?

I think that is about the biggest misconception or myth out there. This whole hidden agenda thing... or that there are these extreme right wingers lurking under the bushes just waiting for the control... is I think, just a big load. You can't just come in and change anything you want.... it's not a dictatorship. If the most right wing nut in the conservative party was given leadership today..... he couldn't do much of anything... even if they tried.... and like Harper... they would just change and dive into the middle anyway.

 

[lopeyschools]

Was the Orange Crush a harbinger of a new Canadian politics, or a one-off, unsustainable without Jack?

The latest polling has the Liberals surging with the prospect (and now win) of a Trudeau leadership. Whether a Liberal or Conservative government, it would seem that all will be right with Canadian politics when the NDP are once again an also-ran.

Good question. It is difficult to project at this stage whether the NDP will hold Quebec, lose Quebec or hold parts of Quebec. The latest polling is nothing more then a bit of feel good news for the liberals. Considering two years before the last election, I don't think anyone thought the liberals would go to third place and the Bloc would be destroyed. Not to mention the utter failure of polling recently in Alberta.

I think that is about the biggest misconception or myth out there. This whole hidden agenda thing... or that there are these extreme right wingers lurking under the bushes just waiting for the control... is I think, just a big load. You can't just come in and change anything you want.... it's not a dictatorship. If the most right wing nut in the conservative party was given leadership today..... he couldn't do much of anything... even if they tried.... and like Harper... they would just change and dive into the middle anyway.

I think there are a couple of crazies in the CPC (like in every party), but you're right. Canadian political parties don't have the ability to just overthrow the whole system overnight. The GG, the SCC, and the provinces all curb federal power. Not to mention one thing the canadian electorate agrees on is that things should never change very quickly.

 

[Praktik]

I've actually always felt a bit of an antipathy to the Liberals - i say this merely to put the "no Liberal/Trudeau" fanboy disclaimer out front.

But I will say that I think the accusation that he "doesn't have ideas" is a bit silly given the current Canadian landscape and the last few decades of federal politics, which seem to me to be a bit of wasteland for ideas and visionary politicians.

There is no example I can think of that shows us a contrasting party leader "with ideas" - even Harper's government can be best described as a "steady as she goes" leadership with "strong ideas" not really making it to the forefront with the exception of the execrable "tough on crime" legislation, one of the few times where Conservative "ideas" made headlines. We are in the middle of a political desert for charisma and bold thinking.

Trudeau has the first one, and that very well may be enough. Once he's leader he needs time to develop and put forward a platform, at which point I think pointing out a "lack of ideas" would be more appropriate.

Maybe we just like to transplant American political arguments north too much? The "no ideas" line sounds to me like a lot of the vapid commentary on candidate Obama in the dem primaries...

 

[Horatius]

Right. So is that a personal reason not to like him, or are you advancing that as a reason the public may find him unelectable? From my point of view, lack of experience doesn't seem to have much impact on the voter (some would say there's a current American precedent ). Similarly, family dynasties are not unheard of in Western democracies (something about some guy from Texas? ).

Yes, and other than as punchlines to bad jokes, how well are those family dynasties doing?

This guy has been in Parliament less than 5 years, and people were calling on him to lead the party almost immediately after he was first elected. There's no way that was based on any reasonable assessment of his ability to lead; it's purely a matter of name recognition. Nothing he's done in the less than five years since then does much to change that conclusion.

But alas, I expect you're right, and a lot of voters won't really care about this.

 

[squealpiggy]

I think Justin Trudeau will lead the Liberals to victory, and I think it would be a terribly blow for the country.

The issue with the Liberals is that they don't actually have a platform. Their platform always seems to be "We don't share a platform with the Conservatives or NDP". At all levels of government.

I think another term for Harper and then see where we are is the most favourable course of action, Harper hasn't managed to do anything too offensive yet.

I will add that I find Trudeau's comments on Boston to be a little cloying.

 

[Praktik]

You see I am a bit more optimistic cause Trudeau is not coming in as a changing of the guard in a time of plenty for the Liberals, he's coming at a time when they are at the low ebb of power.

Being completely indifferent to party and galvanized more on ideas - I do find it a bit rich to hear these calls about "no platform". Its a bit of a generalized statement you hear people repeating a lot, but is it true really? To me it's a kind of lower-order political criticism that signifies more a deeply rooted cynicism, rather than actual descriptive value of the target of that statement. But hey, I freely admit we Canadians have earned that cynicism honestly!!

But even the Liberals in the worst days of their muddled-middle power apex they were putting out red books with some kind of consensus Canadians identified enough with to keep voting those suckers back in time after time... Even wet behind the ears Obama had a whole lot of things to say. The out of power party always gets accused of having "no ideas" - its just a common thing incumbents say.

What I think we might end up seeing is a party willing to take risks to make a splash and overcome their time in the political wilderness.

A party like that might actually get out in front of some difficult issues, like legalizing weed. Could be an exciting time to see some bold policy - and if they DO make it back on the back of that kind of thinking they may feel rewarded enough to entrench it...

I'm not at all convinced this will play out according to the typical circular paths we've all become accustomed to.

 

[Madalch]

I doubt he'll be as successful as his father was. I'd like to see him do well (just because I'd like to see Harper turfed), but I would rather have seen Marc Garneau take the lead.

 

[Horatius]

A party like that might actually get out in front of some difficult issues, like legalizing weed. Could be an exciting time to see some bold policy - and if they DO make it back on the back of that kind of thinking they may feel rewarded enough to entrench it...

Well, something like that would be nice to see. After many years of being a regular (progressive) conservative voter, the last few elections, I've been a swing voter, hoping that the current crop of conservatives would come back to the middle ground on social issues. But that hope has mostly evaporated now.

So, the Liberals have a chance to show me the money, but Trudeau will really have to step up, and show that he's more than just a guy with his father's last name, and a douche-tastic hairdo.




Seriously. He looks like the sort of douche you'd want to take a poke at if he showed up at your local pub.

 

[Jimbo07]

Okay, so my angle was, "Can Trudeau beat the Conservatives," not what I would like to happen. My personal tastes, I'll hide in spoiler tags, so as not to derail things.

Politics (like everything else, in its own way) is a game. It's not about who is more qualified, or more experienced. It's about who can play the game better. Harper was better than both Dion and Iggy. He kept the Liberals on the ropes for years. My suspicion is that Trudeau is the first who can give as good as he gets, and I think Harper knows it.

Case in point, the last couple of days of attack ads. Trudeau's already turned the striptease business into a win! Harper's swinging wild and hoping to land something. Conversely, Trudeau tried to land something with the tariffs, and I think he's barking up the wrong tree. The Conservatives skewered him on taxes.

Who will play the game better over the next couple years?

I think that is about the biggest misconception or myth out there. This whole hidden agenda thing... or that there are these extreme right wingers lurking under the bushes just waiting for the control... is I think, just a big load. You can't just come in and change anything you want.... it's not a dictatorship. If the most right wing nut in the conservative party was given leadership today..... he couldn't do much of anything... even if they tried.... and like Harper... they would just change and dive into the middle anyway.

Now for my own rants.

My worry about the Harper Conservatives is not some hidden agenda. It's their very public agenda! There's nothing hidden about it. They're anti-science, anti-civil-service, anti-Charter, etc. That's the evil (or ill, as it were). Worse, it's mixed with the incompetence. Witness them having to backpedal on their own expansion of the temporary foreign workers program! They were going into deficit territory, before the recession ever hit.

Can a party do much? No, but that's an aspect of undoing the civil service, undoing the fisheries act, undoing the work of the veterans' ombudsman, (again, and so forth, interfering with the Nuclear Safety Commission, etc.). They are trying to remove some of the system's stability and resiliency. They're doing an effective job, too, and because a lot of it's procedural, people can't be bothered to care. Not one of these things is a flashpoint issue, but they're fundamentally remaking the systems of this country. It's going to take a generation to recover.

As for the extreme right, for the game right now, Harper's trying to hold the appearance of the middle. That's why he's squashing dissent amongst the socially conservative back-benchers. The best thing for the centre-left would be to give these folks more of a voice!

Good question. It is difficult to project at this stage whether the NDP will hold Quebec, lose Quebec or hold parts of Quebec. The latest polling is nothing more then a bit of feel good news for the liberals. Considering two years before the last election, I don't think anyone thought the liberals would go to third place and the Bloc would be destroyed. Not to mention the utter failure of polling recently in Alberta.

Alberta will be tough for Trudeau to win, with concerns of the NEP redux, fair or not.

I think there are a couple of crazies in the CPC (like in every party), but you're right. Canadian political parties don't have the ability to just overthrow the whole system overnight. The GG, the SCC, and the provinces all curb federal power. Not to mention one thing the canadian electorate agrees on is that things should never change very quickly.

So far, Harper's remained within what the GG has been comfortable. He should have lost everything when he prorogued Parliament, but he's a better player than what the Liberals were offering at the time.

I doubt he'll be as successful as his father was. I'd like to see him do well (just because I'd like to see Harper turfed), but I would rather have seen Marc Garneau take the lead.

I would have loved to vote for Marc Garneau in an ideal world, but I don't think he could have beaten Harper.

Rightly or wrongly, I think image and Charisma are important in politics. I think Trudeau is one of the best chances the Liberals have.

 

[rustypouch]

<snip>
I think another term for Harper and then see where we are is the most favourable course of action, Harper hasn't managed to do anything too offensive yet.

Really?

Only if you don't care about science, our environment, international relations, the office of religious freedom (which I'm still not sure what it's about, or why we need it), cutting arts and culture funding, running up massive deficits, stopping things when he doesn't get his way...

About the only thing I fully agree with is getting rid of the penny.

As for Trudeau, I'm not sure if he's the best choice. The name still brings out all sorts of animosity out here in the west.

Also, another who'd prefer Garneau. You don't get much more awesome than an astronaut.

 

[Praktik]

Ya garneau would have been more of a head-turning selection for me too...

And as for the Cons, I think they are made to be a bit more of a bogeyman than they really are - there's a certain consensus in Canadian politics that leaves me less scared about changes of the reigns of power....

THat said, the issues the Cons DO diverge from me are pretty important - most important would be the horrible steps backwards taken by the Tough on Crime approach, a kneejerk hostility to environmentalism and a kneejerk patriotism round out the reasons why I would never vote for them in the current incarnation, even if I feel like the world won't end if they win another election.

To be honest? The weed issue is also a big one for me. The Conservatives are the only federal party holding out on a prohibitionist stance and they are the ONLY reason we don't have our de-facto decriminalization enshrined in law yet (we would have had another go w/ Obama in town if we had non-Cons in power, just like Mexico waited til after Bush to decriminalize and did so with no impact to their US relations).

I know it will never happen - but I think they should think about getting in front of that issue too. There is a conservative case to be made for decriminalization and even legalization. By so doing they could neutralize some of the appeal of libs/ndp among younger demographics and show themselves to be modernizing.