04.22.2015 07:31 AM

Just visiting the middle class©

A few folks, mostly Liberals, referred me to Justin Trudeau’s response to yesterday’s federal budget. We at Daisy were all too busy actually reading the thing, so we missed his scrum, which did not impress many of my correspondents, among them formerly elected Liberals.

I honestly don’t think how the Liberal leader spoke all that problematic. And – while the talking points he used weren’t in any way new – what he said is what concerns me the most.

To make my point, I refer you to one Michael Ignatieff. As everyone knows, the Conservatives spent around $5 million to broadcast ads that promoted the notion that Ignatieff was “just visiting.” The ads worked, and dramatically so.

The anti-Iggy ads worked, in part, because of the word that was missing from the “just visiting” tag line, not the words that were actually present. The word that was missing was “Canada.” How could Michael Ignatieff profess to care for Canada – and want to lead it, and have a vision for it – when he hadn’t lived in Canada for more than thirty years?

The Conservatives, in effect, cleverly took the one word that appeared in every single sentence that Michael Ignatieff uttered – “Canada” – and rewrote its meaning. They made viewers, and voters, feel that Michael Ignatieff was completely, utterly, fundamentally unfamiliar with the very thing that Ignatieff talked about the most: Canada.

So, too, Justin Trudeau’s much-repeated “middle class” nostrum. He says “middle class” all the time, just as he did in the clip above. When in a tough spot in a scrum about the economy, for instance, he will always reach for a reassuring line or two about the “middle class.”

The problem, of course, is that many Canadians suspect that Justin Trudeau isn’t middle class. He may know how to say those words, but he’s never lived those words. And that’s clearly why, inter alia, Stephen Harper has taken to reminding Trudeau that he is a trust fund kid, and why he resents the fact that Trudeau is a charter member of the lucky sperm club. To wit: Stephen Harper’s the Tim Horton’s-loving Hockey Dad Everyman, and Justin Trudeau has never had to worry about paying the rent or putting food on the table. Ever.

Rosedale and Westmount have taken over the Liberal Party of Canada – again. And you can reasonably expect Mr. Harper to remind us about that, over and over – and Mr. Mulcair will be doing likewise.

Think I’m wrong about my “Just Visiting the Middle Class” theory? I refer you to another case of a rich guy who talked a lot about the middle class – Mitt Romney. He certainly knew how to pronounce “middle class,” but he had never experienced “middle class.” And voters voted accordingly.

I strongly suspect the Conservatives are readying to do an Ignatieff on Trudeau – they getting ready to turn Trudeau’s own words/life against him, and at precisely the wrong time, too. Just as Michael Ignatieff could not change the fact that he had lived outside Canada for three decades, Justin Trudeau can’t change the fact that he grew up at 24 Sussex, the son of a millionaire. And the Conservatives are planning to draw attention to that fact, over and over.

Will that sort of attack work? Who knows. But it sure did against Messrs. Ignatieff and Romney, didn’t it?


  1. JH says:

    Interesting that some Liberal leaning columnists are referring to this as a middle of the road Flaherty type budget, along the lines of Chretien-Martin’s efforts. Kinda dulls the criticisms what?

    • Warren says:

      It is. It’s practically left wing.

      • Mike Adamson says:

        Perhaps I misunderstand but did you describe the budget as practically left wing? A budget that cuts revenue as a percentage of GNP to the lowest in 50 years is left wing? Maybe I’m getting old but that seems weird.

  2. VH says:


    Pierre Trudeau himself was the son of a millionaire, born into prosperity and his family was super wealthy by the time he hit high school.

    I don’t think one can accurately metaphor Justin Trudeau to either Iggy or Mitt “47%” Richie Rich Romney.
    The Cons may blast all kinds of silly ads in that general directly but, quite frankly the image that comes to mind for me here is Ali-Foreman rope-a-dope.

    There may be lots of other reasons Justin Trudeau might lose the election upcoming but this is not that.

  3. mississaugapeter says:

    “Just Visiting the Middle Class.” YIKES WK. You just wrote the slogan that both the PC and NDP could use against Trudeau. Are you sure you are not on retainer for either? If not, you should be. Did you trademark it?

    It seems Nanos is revealing the effects of the Duffy scandal. Why are the Liberals and NDP not aggressively demanding that the Senate be abolished? Do they think they will lose more votes than gain in Quebec and the Atlantic provinces (who have a disproportionate number of senators compared to the overall population of Canada)?

    I don’t see anyone getting/losing any votes with this budget. May solidify support somewhat, but it will be forgotten quickly except in Government Action Ads.

  4. Matt from Ottawa says:

    The thing that I find interesting is that he can say middle class til her turns blue (no pun intended) but he lacks conviction on it. He doesnt sound believable. Its like watching someone in a job interview caught off guard try to answer a question they dont know and are using vague generalities to fake it (the irony that a campaign is a job interview). My thoughts are even though he doesnt understand it, he’s just saying “middle class” ad nauseam trying to hope that those are the words voters will associate with him. However, because he lacks the conviction behind those words it wont resonate. If this how he plans to execute a campaign, it will be a rude awakening. To the fault of many candidates, leading up to a campaign, you’re primarily surrounded by those who cheer you on and dont question your tact. But once it starts and you have to convince the unconverted it can quickly become an uphill battle when they ask for substance and you dont have an answer because youve never been challenged for substance

    Just my 2 cents

    • Michael Bluth says:

      The answer to the question at the :58 second mark proves your point exactly. Justin could have hammered the Conservatives specifically on reducing the contingency fund and the GM sale. Instead he returned to the comfort of his defender of the middle class talking point. That shows a lack of depth which will make it very difficult to attract persuadable voters in the glare of an election.

      • Matt from Ottawa says:

        I think the reason why he wont go near the GM sale is his Ontario counterpart did the same thing with their GM shares and he knows if he went there he risks being called out on that

      • Peter says:

        Even Mulcair and the Dippers present themselves as defenders of the middle class more than the workers these days, so I wouldn’t fault JT for that. Assistant Directors of the World Unite!! But he looked nervous and tongue-tied, like he was afraid he’d get his shibboleths confused. Perhaps he should stick with the time-honoured “small businesses and ordinary Canadians”, taking care not to mix-up the adjectives..

        • davie says:

          I agree, Peter, all parties are focusing on the middle class…maybe a code word for the 50 or 60 percent of us who vote.
          Perhaps the Liberals should consider what the Republican Party in USA did 15 years ago when they bought Bush 43 a ranch where their ‘just plain folks’ Yale guy could clear slash on the weekends. Maybe get him an ATV or a skidoo for the weekends!

    • GFMD says:

      Sounds plausible, but it got him elected in 2004, 2008 and 2011, albiet against weaker opponents than the one he has now.

  5. Matt says:

    Love Scott Brison’s criticism of the budget. The Conservatives are just using this budget as a tool to get re-elected.

    Like, is he new here? EVERY government EVERYWHERE in the history of politics uses their final budget heading into an election as a tool to help them get re-elected.

    • eric weiss says:

      Politicians are doing politics? Someone, get me my fainting couch and clutching pearls!

    • Scotian says:

      Yes, that is true, but it is not usually the ONLY purpose for that budget. We used to have budgets, including election year budgets, where the primary purpose was actually trying to manage the Canadian economy as its primary goal, and within that THEN find the best ways to make political hay from their budgetary choices. This budget is nothing but about the next election, there is no real vision, no real direction beyond that one goal, and the frontloading of so much makes that very clear. This is not a document for shaping the Canadian economic health, it is solely about the CPC political health, which I will add is part of the long term problem of CPC budgets more generally. I am also having trouble with security and our need to fight in wars as being so important that we can afford to not do any increased funding for a couple of years to support same despite increasing these responsibilities on the requisite agencies/bodies. Either security is urgent and therefore needs immediate increased funding, or it isn’t, and all the hysterics coming from the Harper government since last October is empty rhetoric. Judging by their choices in the budget it clearly seems to be the latter.

      So to claim this is politics as usual for an election year budget is only half true, it is politics as usual for the Harper Government, it is NOT business as usual for every prior federal government of both Lib and PCPC persuasion for the reasons I just pointed out.

  6. Priyesh says:

    There was more than a kernel of truth to the Ignatieff attacks. “Just visiting” might just be xenophobic. But Ignatieff’s foreign policy views were completely foreign to the Liberal Party I grew up with and was taught about in history. The end result wasn’t so much that people wanted to vote Conserative, but that LIBERALS STAYED HOME. I hated the Conservatives that election, but Ignatieff and his team made me regret anything I’d ever done for the party.

    I don’t think there’s as much truth to “Justin is in over his head”. Sure he’s not that experienced, but I think that’s an asset considering how broken the political system is. People also know that you don’t elect Prime Ministers. You elect parties. And people know there’s a lot of talent in the Liberal bench.

    By the same token, everyone knows Justin was born into privilege. We don’t mind. Up against the Conservatives and their strong ties to corporate lobbyists, a little noblesse oblige is a good thing.

    If I have one worry… it’s that I don’t really even know what I’m getting when I vote Liberal.

    Sure, I’m getting rid of Harper. But the Conservatives haven’t been the boogieman on abortion or gays. It looks like they even balanced the budget. So I’m telling people to vote Liberal… because of the long-form census? We’re all nerds here who understand why that’s important, but I can’t sell that door-to-door.

    Why is Trudeau running? I can invent a bunch of reasons that I hope will be true. But I keep seeing these bone-headed talking points straight out of the Ignatieff campaign, and I see a huge vulnerability. Maybe he doesn’t stand for the things you stand for. Maybe he has a hidden agenda. Maybe it’s the same old Liberal Party with a new mouthpiece, and they haven’t learned anything in the past 10 years.

    • Matt from Ottawa says:

      I agree with much that you said, spot on! For me, one thing that concerns me is on the foreign policy standpoint. He seems to make alot of flippant comments, or “gaffes” if you will that seem to be redacted or explained again shortly after. If he happens to be at a G7 meeting, or meeting with another world leader and has one of these moments, its not so easy or forgiving to explain after what he meant

      • Priyesh says:

        I feel like the Liberals are flailing on foreign policy. I don’t know how much of that is hurting Trudeau, but it’s a factor.

        I admit my bias. I think the war on terror is and has always been bullshit. I think mass surveillance is a bigger threat to our liberty than some idiot with a holy book and a gun. I think that Canadians soldiers are meant for peacekeeping, which means we have to mindful of just shoving our troops where the civilians don’t want us.

        But there’s still the bigger problem that Trudeau seems almost *incoherent*. One day he’s criticizing Bill C-51, and the next day he’s voting for it. In the lead up to the ISIS mission he spoke supportively of participating, and ultimately stood strongly against it. One day he makes a (probably in bad taste) joke about Conservatives always trying to act tough, and the next day he’s getting caught in the rhetoric about Putin.

        The Liberal party is chasing this mythical “centrist voter”, who apparently is schizophrenic and agrees with both Harper and Mulcair.

      • edward nuff says:

        I have a feeling before this election is over someone will bush doctrine justin into oblivion the way the way charlie gibson did palin. all those gaffes add up until the tipping point is reached.

    • Elisabeth Lindsay says:

      Why is Trudeau running? “I was born to do this” is what he said to Sophie when she asked him to “be humble”. That was on the video tape of them at the boxing match. Maybe he mean`t that to just be commenting on the match.

  7. Joe says:

    I haven’t had time to read the budget nor did I listen to Jr. That aside as a long time resident of the middle class I would like to say to the saviours of the middle class – GO AWAY!!!!!! I don’t need your saving. I need you to leave me the h3ll alone! Leave my money in my pocket instead of blowing it on some brain f@rt dreamed up by some nameless faceless bureaucrat intended to make my life better. From past experience every attempt to make my life better simply makes someone else’s life worse. My dear old Mom and Dad voted themselves a wonderful pension plan that their grandchildren will never enjoy because they will have spent their lives paying for Gramma and Grampa’s pension benefits.

  8. Matt says:

    Maybe he should come up with a coherent definition of the middle class first.

  9. Lance says:

    Will that sort of attack work?

    Another related operative question is, “is that kind of attack working now?”

    Take a look at the general tone right now. If this blog is a litmus, I have to wonder.

    Oh, I know what diehard Liberal supporters are going to say – “this is just inside baseball”. And they’re right, it is. But is that ALL that it is? Or are the politically disengaged seeing it, too?

  10. Bill says:

    Let’s just polish the keys and return them to Harper.

    Trudeau was faux middle class when he was elected head of the party but that some didn’t seem to bother anyone then.

    And after 10 years in power, yeah Stephen Harper epitomizes the middle class.

  11. eric weiss says:

    So will JT or Mulcair refuse the tax break given to him with Harper’s income split? Will the rest of the limousine liberals who are decrying it?

  12. DonW says:

    How does the Rosedale/Westmount cabal gain perennial control over the LPC? And how can other, non-limousine Liberals, –the Honda Civic Liberals–get more control over the party? Government for the elites and by the elites ain’t gonna sell anymore, meanwhile the Cons manage to get lots of populist support doing exactly that. The attack ads, as our host points out, will be brutal and will be killers, just as with Ignatieff

  13. Mark says:

    Yes, the attack ads all worked against Dion and Iggy. They may also work against Trudeau. Frankly, I don’t care whatsoever because, while I certainly cared with Dion, and partially cared with Iggy, I don’t care if Trudeau loses the election. All that said, Conservative attack ads will not have the same effect on voters this time. Why? More and more people are sick of Harper. People are looking for a reason not to vote Conservative; they just haven’t quite found it yet.

  14. Jamie E says:

    Eric, I always find it interesting how angry Conservatives get that there are wealthy people in other parties who actually care about the poor, the working poor and the middle class. I know “empathy” and “caring about anyone outside my immediate family” are strange and foreign concepts to the conservative mind. I think I can hear your thought process now:

    “Why are all these successful people pretending to care about all these losers? I mean what’s in it for them? There has to be something in it for them. I just haven’t figured out what it is yet. I must be missing out on some opportunity to exploit and profit from human misery. Trudeau and Mulcair must have figured it out though. God that makes me angry.”

    • eric weiss says:

      Lol…Neither angry nor Conservative, just sarcastic and mindful of hypocrisy.

      • MC says:

        I know the feeling, Eric. Until recently, I was often accused of being a Conservative troll whenever I questioned Trudeau. The accusations come less now, because more people are seeing through him.

        As for wealthy people caring about the poor, there are many of them. But if Trudeau and Mulcair were amongst them, they wouldn’t have sought to score political points by citing out-dated studies to oppose the income splitting measures which, in principle, along with other benefits, anyone should be able to see is more helpful than not (including, very much so, for the middle class). The income splitting plan could be made better, yes; and additional measures could be undertaken to help those who need it most. But the specific arguments made by Mulcair and Trudeau were not fully informed, which, in and of itself, is demonstrative of narcissistic, political intent, and not compassion for the poor.

        • eric weiss says:

          One of my many jobs during university was for a valet service that sent us out to work galas and fundraisers. Watching the glitterati show up for environmental/poverty/human rights fundraisers in Escalades, Navigators, and Humvees, wearing blood diamonds and fur coats makes me weary of wealthy people who say they care about us ordinary folk. And yes, the pols were always there to be seen supporting the right causes. They were usually the worse tippers.

        • Priyesh says:

          Income splitting only makes sense for households where only one spouse works, and the other one makes enough money to trigger those taxes.

          It’s basically the “gold digger tax credit”. No wonder Conservatives love it.

          • MC says:

            You are saying that stay-at-home spouses/parents are “gold diggers”? Really? How about people laid-off? How about spouses taking a shot at starting a new business? How about spouses returning to school? All “gold diggers”? Nice.

          • eric weiss says:

            My Wife works part time while she finishes school and I support the family. Is she a Gold digger? Was I when the roles were reversed for the first few years we were married?

          • Lance says:

            Not to mention a family choosing to have a spouse stay at home to raise children.

          • UFP Ambassador says:

            It’s not about “fair” to progressive morons, it’s about “take from others”

          • Elisabeth Lindsay says:

            Priyesh…..that is perhaps the most offensive thing I have heard a so called Liberal ever say. I also am totally bothered with all this “upper, middle, lower class” stuff. This Country was built by people getting away from the old Class System nonsense.

  15. Kaiser Helmets 'n Motorbikes says:

    That is the first time I have actually sat and watched Jesus Trudeau in a real scrum.

    Is that what he is really like? No offence to my Liberal friends, I really don’t mean this to be partisan, I know it is, I get that, but WTF… Jesus looked like a deer caught in the headlights.

    After watching that, I am not convinced he even knows TFSA from a Tesla. I doubt he ever had to scrimp and save in his entire life. Those of us unfortunate sons who crawled (literally) out of Sunnyvale Trailer Park, built lives for ourselves and our families, are not going to vote for this “Senator’s Son”. ever.

  16. Lyndon Dunkley says:

    I think the JT brain trust studied the US election in 2008 and came away with the oversimplified conclusion that it was Trudeaumania 2.0. Who better to lead 3.0 than the phenomenon’s namesake? Be handsome, be cool, speak the language of empty platitudes, win social media and most importantly, don’t be the old white guy and you can start picking out the new curtains. They failed to realize their campaign is lacking a historic component (unless they somehow believed youngest is comparable) and that the Canadian electorate is more sophisticated and discerning.

  17. Kelly says:

    Trudeau needs to quickly acknowledge that he is not part of the middle class by saying Harper’s income splitting plan will put thousands of dollars of free money in his pocket while giving nothing to single moms on the west side of Saskatoon. Worse yet, the income splitting plan is paid for by poor seniors, who will have to wait 2 more years to retire while wealthy politicians like him get to sock away an extra $10 grand a year tax free thanks to the TFSA limit increases. If trudeau admits he’s not middle class and says he hates that Harper is helping guys like him by hurting people need help, he’ll turn the tables on the potential con attack and give con base fits of cognitive dissonance.

    • Kelly says:

      Plus Oliver is now saying the projected revenue shortfalls created by the increase in TFSA limits are Harper’s granddaughter’s problem. If you want to define the Conservatives as the selfish old asshole party, you couldn’t have done a better job than Oliver just did on the CBC.

    • Matt says:

      For Christ sakes, will you learn the difference between CPP and OAS already.

      Seniors don’t have to wait to retire. They can retire whenever they want. CPP – Canada Pension Plan still starts at 65. OAS – Old Age Security will EVENTUALLY be bumped from 65 to 67.

      • Kelly says:

        Semantics. The point is, the people who count on public support are getting the shaft so high income earners — like trudeau, Harper and Oliver — end up paying less tax.

        • Matt says:

          No it’s not semantics. Neither one has anything to do with seniors “having to wait two more years to retire.

          My mom was offered a package by her employer at 60. She has been collecting CPP since then. She gets less per month than had she waited till 65 because she took it 5 years earlier.

          She sure as hell wasn’t a “high income earner” during her working life.

    • Scotian says:

      You know, I seem to remember hearing and seeing Trudeau many times making this very point in past QPs in the House, that people like Harper and he were well enough off to not need these sorts of breaks unlike the middle class. So he isn’t trying to claim he is middle class, contrary to what you are claiming. He isn’t pretending to be what he is not this way, and I find this particular meme a little baffling in how it came to be seen as accepted truth/fact. You can fairly be critical of him for a lot of things, but this is not one of them.

  18. Gayle says:

    Maybe I’m missing something. Is the fact that Trudeau was born into wealth new? Are you suggesting that no one knew this when he was soaring in the poll?

  19. Christian says:

    Yesterday after work I was sitting in the Imperial Pub in Toronto (a classy joint that) with a couple colleagues. One was a lifeling NDP supporter and the other had voted Conservative in the last election, mainly because he liked Harper’s Artic policies (deep water port), and promises to properly equip the military as well as the perception that Cons are better with the nation’s finances and economy. Then there was me, who had voted Liberal last time and every time since 2004. During our talk about yesterday’s budget we came to the question of “who ya going to vote for in October?”. The first guy not surprisingly said “NDP of course”. I will also be voting NDP for the first time ever in my life. For me the reasons are directly attributable to Mr. Trudeau’s poor performance, over reliance on image over substance and his bizarre and frankly ridiculous reasons for supporting Bill C-51 among other reasons (the Liberals have also become Conservative Lite in my opinion, so why would I vote for them?). Anyway, when it came time for the Conservative supporter to answer he said: “I’m voting NDP too.” Wow, was all I could say to that. But after finally processing this I asked why. He cited serious disappoinment with Harper and his handling of the military procurement process, the expensive planes, the lack of implementation in any of his Artic promises, in other words big talk, little action (he also though selling assets to balance a budget was BS). Why not the Liberals? Because he just could not stand Justin Trudeau. Not just because of his lack of substance, but because of the presumption of “dynastic” inevitability that seems to have enveloped him and his team. Liberal supporters, you know you have a big, big problem when Conservative supporters would rather support the NDP over the Liberals. We are seeing this happen in Alberta to an extent and if you ignore this trend, like you did with Ignatieff you do so at your peril.

    • Priyesh says:

      The left/right thing is bullshit anyway. The only people who believe that are political science majors and blind partisans.

      The Liberal party is chasing a mythical centrist voter. Who is this person?

    • SF Thomas says:

      There are a couple of reasons this isn’t as big an issue as you are making it to be. Conservative leaning voters choosing the NDP as a second choice isn’t exactly new in many regions of the country, especially in western Canada. The NDP and Conservatives have drifted towards more towards the political center in some ways in the last decade so the field is a bit more crowded. These days voters are also increasingly less loyal to a single party and a bit more independent minded than they used to be.

      It is pretty unlikely at this stage barring a major change that the NDP will hold on to official opposition after the next election. They are likely going to lose a small chunk of their Quebec seats since that was partly a protest vote and partly Jack Layton’s appeal. Barring huge gains in Ontario and/or western Canada there isn’t an easy way to make up for those losses while the Liberals are likely going to gain a fair bit of seats back in Ontario and Atlantic Canada (plus possible a few in Montreal, Vancouver and maybe Winnipeg).

  20. MC says:

    I suspect that kind of attack would work. Most of us who grew up meaningfully experiencing middle class and below (that’s where I started…below) have an innate and necessary distrust of the uber-rich, or even of the over-comfortable. (Heck, I grew up suspicious of the middle class!)

    I met Trudeau in Ottawa early yesterday morning (for about 20 seconds), and I was willing to discover some sign that I was wrong about him. I didn’t.

    And then this song (superbly covered by Captain Kirk) comes immediately to mind. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ainyK6fXku0

  21. Flip T. Bird says:


    I’m confused. So you guys and gals DON’T believe in Mick Jagger’s Son then!??
    Oh, the horror!

    Looks like Mr. Harper is going to enter the history books as Canada’s longest serving CONSECUTIVE Prime Minister then. You might as well all admit now, and start planning for 2021.

  22. SF Thomas says:

    Brison might actually have a better point here than you think. Are you familiar with the theory of ‘political marketing’? In a nutshell you use marketing intelligence to segment the population into specific blocks you think you can win like ‘soccer and hockey moms’ and design policies which appeal to those specific groups. The goal is to get just enough of these groups to vote for you to win government in addition to your own party base. This is where policies like the the ‘children fitness tax credit’ and other boutique tax benefits come from. It is a big part of how the Conservatives have won the last few elections, and it lets them effectively ignore the rest of the population while focusing on a pretty narrow group of voters since it isn’t required to focus on a broad group for them to win.

    Obviously making everyone happy isn’t possible but trying to govern in the best interests of everyone or at least the majority of people used to at least be seen as an ideal by most parties

    • Kelly says:

      If you ask me, the con cabinet is basically vandalizing the country for the benefit of the rich guys who they hope will appoint them to lucrative board seats after enough people wake up and fire them out of office. It’s pretty obvious, I think. These guys aren’t traditional Tories with a sense of noblesse oblige, they’re petit bourgeoisie who want the respect and money of the truly wealthy. Cynical, shallow and pathetic.

      Trudeau needs to come out an say he was born into wealth and ask why Harper’s policies are helping guys like him instead of the poorest Canadians, and the lower income workers who work much harder for every dollar they earn than the yahoo’s in suspenders on the 48th floor.

      • MM says:

        When income splitting was announced in February, Trudeau said: “Income splitting is an idea that will give a $2,000 tax cut to families like mine or Mr. Harper’s — that’s not good enough.” I’m pretty sure he didn’t mean he wanted more.

  23. dave says:

    He says in the clip, Liberals balance budgets………..guess he forgot, Dad had 15 budgets, ONLY one was balanced……..OOPS

  24. ajay kunar says:

    Romney was WAY richer than trudeau ,he lost because of the weirdos in the tea party movement. Personal attacks against Trudeau will never work.

  25. ajay kunar says:

    Romney was WAY richer than trudeau ,he lost because of the weirdos in the tea party movement. Personal attacks against Trudeau will never work. To be fair, poor folks cant be politicians ,and like the conservative base never inherited anything like a farm or a family business.

  26. westerndefector says:

    “The liberals balance budgets” . OK , I’ll cut him some slack because he truly has a certain “lack” of honesty when its comes to history. His father ( that which he wants to avoid but yet realize that without he would be looked at for the joke he is) ran 13 deficits in 14 years. Damn. Really? Dad? Warren, I am a Davis PC, but even I can see why you are staying away. Train wreck

  27. Africon says:

    Warren is right on this one – that JT appears to be just a visiting middle class dude.

    But in reality, how many people, especially real, hard working middle class people raising a family really want one of their co-workers or neighbours running this or any other country?
    Many world leaders get elected by simply being able to “connect” to most voters who can make the voter believe that they really care, have the experience, skills and solutions for the country and are not just another corrupt politician out for themselves.

    None of the current 3 leaders are particularly believable or good actors.
    But for all that Harper at least does believe in himself and his abilities as a leader – not sure about that re the other two.
    I think there’s something to be said for having the “royal jelly” and sadly there is very little to be found anywhere in our HOC or Senate..

    The media used to protect their own country’s leaders and their foolishness, foibles and peculiarities – now they do the exact opposite and we wonder why the voter is so disgusted, disengaged and disillusioned with both politicos and the media.

    • JH says:

      The media, if what you see on P & P, QP, and Power Play, are the standard, then politicians have little to worry about. Jennifer Ditchburn with that goof Solomon last night was a perfect example, though I’ll admit Capstick jerked her chain. What a waster of time talking about the PM’s granddaughter. Same for that idiot Mainsbridge and the time he wasted on it. This is our ‘National Broadcaster’ – really? As for Trudeau or Oliver’s gaffes, the budget, etc. etc. – dropped like a stone. Not one mention in local papers, or news broadcasts today. As usual it’s only the Parliamentary Press Gallery types and the junkies interested.
      The only thing about Duffy locally is the Blatchford column and even I an acknowledged junkie have tired of reading that every day. Going to have to do better than this folks, to keep the local yokels interested.

    • Joe says:

      You have a point Africon. I have often observed that if I had a thousand dollars and wanted it to grow I would be better off lending it to Jimmy Pattison than a drunk living on the street. I may despise Jimmy and I may really like the drunk but….. On the other hand would I turn the country over to a part time substitute drama teacher because he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth?

  28. paulsstuff says:

    Warren nails it here but I think the most damaging blow was when immediately after the budget Trudeau said he would cancel the small business tax cut. He then hit himself with the knockout blow, calling small business owners wealthy and saying they don’t need a tax break. Then less than 24 hours later Trudeau did a complete 180 no doubt to backlash over his idiotic comments. That will be used in one very effective attack ad.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *