Justin Trudeau

[mso489]

Leaving the left/right discussion out of it for one post, and hoping I don't sound agist in reverse, I'd have to say that this guy is likely too young to do his best work as a national leader. He's about ten years from really having the grasp of all of the factors that apply and the social skills to make policy work. With very young leaders, like Theodore Roosevelt, John Kennedy, and Barrack Obama, much depends on the people they can appoint and how skillfully they can pick and choose the advice they receive. JFK, as it turns out, did not have a friend in Robert Strange MacNamara and various of his other advisors. Obama made a serious error in choosing Emmanuel as his chief of staff who was not tolerated by many of the people who could have advised Obama in acting in more effective ways. Theodore Roosevelt was a force of nature who rolled over huge egos of his time and would, by comparison, make Trump look like a child, both in magnitude of personality but also in swift and terrible intellect, which Donald does not have. So, my brilliant analysis -- Trudeau is a hugely telegenic politico who might be saved to some degree by the right advisors, as would a conservative of similar age and credentials. Time and experience is hardly everything in leadership, but it is irreplaceable.

 

[deathmetal]

Well, if a person is going to label themselves a "conservative", you'd think they'd be interested in conserving the health of our society and civilization. I'm in favor of conserving natural resources and wildlands, so I'm definitely a conservative.

I couldn't agree more. Health of civilization and nature are inextricable issues in my mind. Not only for the commonsense recognition that we depend on nature for air/water, but that a civilization which fails to recognize natural beauty is an existentially miserable place that will shortly self-destruct.

Obama made a serious error in choosing Emmanuel as his chief of staff who was not tolerated by many of the people who could have advised Obama in acting in more effective ways.

This is a really good point. Some early detractors pointed to Obama's lack of administrative experience as a big problem.

 

[pruss]

The problem is that doing that alone is never enough.
What about the health of our society and civilization?
No one wants to address that.

I've been uncharacteristically quiet on this thread, and on the election in general, both here and on my Facebook account. Some of my friends and colleagues have remarked on this. The reason for my silence is because I am an American living in Canada. As a permanent resident, landed immigrant, legal alien, I do not have the right to vote in elections in Canada; but I enjoy all the other rights conferred to Canadian citizens. Hence my reticence to speak out on the election, during the election. But now it's done, and the votes have been counted.
So here goes...
I was, and remain, seriously conflicted about this election, and about elections in general in Canada. I have a serious allergy to first-past-the-post elections in general, and even more so in an election where a vote for my local representative translates to a vote for Prime Minister.
I agree with earlier comments in this thread that this election was as much about a repudiation of Stephen Harper's government and style of governance as it was an election of Justin Trudeau. Strategic voting did rule the election. I have MANY friends who admit to voting for the candidate in their riding most likely to defeat a Conservative candidate even if their vote was NOT for their party/representative of choice.
Stephen Harper's economic plan, helmed by the recently departed Jim Flaherty, did help drive dollars to the middle class and allowed Canada to weather the economic shit-storm of the last 10 years. Unfortunately, it did so on the back of cuts to research and development, infrastructure, and social programs, even in the wake of six consecutive deficits of the last seven years. The government of Stephen Harper was also notoriously closed to discussion, debate, and controlled outgoing messages to the public to the point of pain... or inanity.
Like others have mentioned, my family was financially better off under the Harper government than we are likely to be under the Trudeau government, but I am willing to spend a little bit more to live in a Canada which benefits from financial support to the programs that Mr. Harper left unfunded, cut entirely, or simply didn't finance (in 2014 federal government departments left $8.7B in funds unspent). That said, I have serious issues with Trudeau's proposed about-face on Canada's involvement in Syria and Iraq, and I worry that they will not go far enough with changes to bill C-51.
What would my ideal government have looked like? A Liberal minority government with Conservatives in opposition, and with a strong NDP as the third party. I'd have been happy if the popular vote % delivered the seat allocation.
One of the items I hope to see addressed in the first year of the Liberal government is their commitment to open the door to Mixed Member Representation and an end to first-past-the-post which would put Canada in a position to elect a government, in four years, that is not only representative of the populace but also reflects votes of conscience or conviction instead of votes of strategy.
Am I happy with Trudeau and the Liberal government? I am hopeful that this transition means a Canada which spends a little more money on itself, and works harder to build strong political relationships internationally. I know that this will come out of my wallet.
I will, also, be able to vote in the next Canadian national election.
Dual citizenship here I come.
Just don't require me to explain what a blue-line is on my citizenship exam.
-- Pat

 

[perdurabo]

Yea, conserving your health is your responsibility, not for you to elect leaders that steal from others to support your health.

 

[carpart67]

Time and experience is hardly everything in leadership, but it is irreplaceable.

The experience part is what worries me the most. Not just in the political realm but in regards to life experience as well. Mr Trudeau grew up with a trust fund, and his working experience was hardly similar to that of the average Canadian citizen. I'm suspicious of how well he fully understands the issues he has promised to fix.

 

[deathmetal]

Unfortunately, it did so on the back of cuts to research and development, infrastructure, and social programs

I used to be in favor of "social programs." Now I oppose them all: they form a basis of control.

 

[jackswilling]

"Yea, conserving your health is your responsibility, not for you to elect leaders that steal from others to support your health."
Exactly, love the "logic" of spending more on something by taking more of other people's money and from evil corporations. It is theft and the takers vote for more theft.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Winston Churchill
"Two centuries ago, a somewhat obscure Scotsman named Tytler made this profound observation: “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.”"

Daily Oklahoman, December 9, 1951

 

[perdurabo]

In The US, We are born into the world with our rights, wether you believe in God or not, that was our founders philosophy. Government did not create our rights, neither does man.

 

[drezz01]

I'm in favor of conserving natural resources and wildlands, so I'm definitely a conservative.

I think for many conservatives this is an important subject, unfortunately under the Harper government ('the Harper government' is a phrase that seems to have proliferated to distinguish the most recent iteration of the Conservative party, as Stephen Harper had a tendency to micromanage and appeared to be running something akin to an autocracy) many acts that were in place to protect out natural reserves were eroded. Namely the Fisheries Act, The Species at Risk Act, The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, and the The Navigable Waters Protection Act.
Most of the changes to these acts allow the government to decide when and where they apply to suit their needs and remove any oversight or hearings to oppose them. Some of them were included in omnibus bills, another nagging aspect of the Harper governments method of legislation. Many bills of diverse content and impact are bundled together in one bill that is voted on as a whole.
I'm being a bit reductive here to illustrate a point, but if one bill was to loosen legislation on waste dumping, and another in the same omnibus was to make penalties for moose fornicators more harsh, you would have to go on record stating you didn't think moose fornicators should be penalized more harshly just to support the continued protections against waste dumping. The other impact is that there is less discussion about each item.
To play my own devil's advocate, Harper certainly isn't the first to utilize omnibus bills, Pierre Trudeau even used them. Harper's just been utilizing them more (11 in total I believe) and to lump more disparate subjects together. One item burried in an omnibus bill even attempted to appoint a Justice to the Supreme Court even though he was ineligible.

 

[pruss]

In The US, We are born into the world with our rights,

Ditto in Canada.

wether(sic) you believe in God or not

Ditto in Canada.

Government did not create our rights, neither does man.

I guess that's where we are divergent in our philosophies. Men (generally wealthy, White, Christian, mostly English-speaking) wrote both Canada's and the U.S.A.'s Constitutions; both bodies formed government. These men, governing, determined what our respective rights and freedoms were and would be, based on their personal philosophies which were of course influenced by their beliefs.
-- Pat

 

[fmgee]

He's about ten years from really having the grasp of all of the factors that apply and the social skills to make policy work.

Age is an interesting factor. It is worth knowing that he is only 3 years younger than Stephen Harper was when he first became PM.

 

[aldecaker]

Reminds me of our perennial "line item veto" debate down here. Lumping legislation into an all-or-nothing package is nothing but obfuscation and deceit.

 

[peckinpahhombre]

Unfortunately, it did so on the back of cuts to research and development, infrastructure, and social programs, even in the wake of six consecutive deficits of the last seven years.

The only unfortunate part about this statement is that it is simply not true.
Federal program spending in 2014-15 stood at 13 per cent of GDP, a shade higher than the 12.6 per cent in 2005-06, when Harper bounced the Liberals from office.
Infrastructure spending also rose by a far larger multiple.

 

[drezz01]

I've been uncharacteristically quiet on this thread...

That was a really insightful post Pat, thanks for speaking up! It is interesting to see your views on the election as a landed immigrant. We're happy and lucky to have you!
A couple of reactions:

The government of Stephen Harper was also notoriously closed to discussion, debate, and controlled outgoing messages to the public to the point of pain... or inanity

I fully agree with this. It may be a token gesture, but it was a breathe of fresh air to see Trudeau addressing the public at the National Press Gallery Theatre. It was last used by Harper in 2008 and he only used it to address the public 3 times in his nearly decade long stint in office. Yikes.

I have a serious allergy to first-past-the-post elections in general...

Trudeau has been fairly vocal about wanting to reform the electoral process, specifically as it pertains to first-past-the-post. Will he follow through with his 32 point 'Restore Democracy in Canada' plan? Who can say.

That said, I have serious issues with Trudeau's proposed about-face on Canada's involvement in Syria and Iraq

This shocked me as well. I read it as a poorly veiled attempt to make a big splash on day one which I think was neither necessary nor smart. I don't support our efforts in Syria and Iraq, (content deleted: actually I'll just leave it at that as to avoid derailing the thread) but I do think it is something you have to phase out of responsibly.

Age is an interesting factor. It is worth knowing that he is only 3 years younger than Stephen Harper was when he first became PM.

That's an interesting point fmgee. Maybe we are just used to the steely-eyed silver haired Harper that he has become in the last 10 years and forget how comparatively young he was first day in office.

 

[perdurabo]

There were many men who said a bill of rights automatically restricted mans rights, I belong to that school of thought, but there were many who thought that we should secure and name certain rights, so there would be no confusion. These gentlemen won, perhaps for the better, these rights where indeed written down by men, but these rights were already assumed. The language of the American Constitution is also detrimental in understanding its content. This is by no means a living and breathing document. It always amuses me, that so many think the founders meant joy when referring to happiness.

 

[jackswilling]

"The only unfortunate part about this statement is that it is simply not true.

Federal program spending in 2014-15 stood at 13 per cent of GDP, a shade higher than the 12.6 per cent in 2005-06, when Harper bounced the Liberals from office.

Infrastructure spending also rose by a far larger multiple."
We get the same nonsense down here. A "draconian cut" is defined as not increasing spending on welfare, the arts, whatever, enough. So it is not a cut as any intelligent person would use the term, it is an increase that is called a cut. It is never enough, so again we get to the point of running out of other peoples' money.

 

[aldecaker]

I've never been so mesmerized by Canadian politics in my entire life.

 

[deathmetal]

A "draconian cut" is defined as not increasing spending on welfare, the arts, whatever enough.

I definitely do not want Government involved with the arts, and would keep them out of welfare as well. Allowing Government to write itself a blank check to expand is a very bad idea.

 

[peckinpahhombre]

Trudeau has been fairly vocal about wanting to reform the electoral process, specifically as it pertains to first-past-the-post. Will he follow through with his 32 point 'Restore Democracy in Canada' plan? Who can say.

I personally prefer the first-past-the-post system and believe in large measure it has served us well. It does encourage strategic voting, that is true, but it also tends to result in majority governments where things can actually get done in a short time frame (whether I like those thing or not!). In other countries that are plagued by minority governments, little is ever accomplished.
There is no chance in hell Trudeau would support a pure proportional representation system, since he would only have ended up with a minority government if one had been in place. In fact, he would only have gotten 18 more seats than the Conservatives in this election if we had such a system. Recall that he only achieved 39.4% of the popular vote.
No, I am sure that if Mr. Trudeau does pursue an alternative system it will be one designed to ensure a higher chance for liberal majorities and more of them. The likely candidate is a preference system like Australia.
Whatever the party we should always cast a skeptical eye at proposals for electoral reform because the only thing we can be sure of is that those reforms will be designed to benefit the party in power.

 

[drezz01]

The only unfortunate part about this statement is that it is simply not true.
Federal program spending in 2014-15 stood at 13 per cent of GDP, a shade higher than the 12.6 per cent in 2005-06, when Harper bounced the Liberals from office.

Interesting Peck, I wonder what the implications of spending vs GDP are compared to spending per capita. I ask because MacLeans posted the following chart.

Harper's spending is certainly higher than Chretien's but Martin's eclipses it (maybe not be so relevant considering...). The other component would be the spending breakdown. Their have been highly scrutinized cuts to federal sciences, arts and culture so it would be interesting to know where the increased spending has been focused.

Whatever the party we should always cast a skeptical eye at proposals for electoral reform because the only thing we can be sure of is that those reforms will be designed to benefit the party in power.

That is sage advice - especially when it comes to a re-drawing of ridings! Saskatoon West was redrawn this year and it is the only NDP riding in our province. The conservative candidate Randy Donauer has claimed the redrawing was partially to blame as it biased the riding more towards the urban population. Since we only have 13 ridings for our entire province, some riding encompass very different demographics. I was surprised my riding voted overwhelmingly conservative. If you walked around my neighbourhood last week you would have seen a lot of orange lawn signs with a couple smatterings of red. I forgot how extensive our riding is, however and the suburbanites seem to have had a different reading on things.