06.16.2012 05:45 AM

In tomorrow’s Sun today: Trudeau times ten

Liberals being Liberals, we prize one thing above all: Winning.

Now that Bob Rae has figured out that he could never possibly win, Grits are again in search of someone who can.

True, our party’s problems won’t be solved by a simple leadership change.

But getting a popular new leader — a winner — isn’t ever a bad idea, either.

Is Justin Trudeau, the name on every politico’s lips, a winner?

Can he wrench the Liberal Party of Canada out of the past, and put it back on track to governing again?

As a public service, here are 10 Reasons Why Justin Trudeau Is A Winner.

56 Comments

  1. james curran says:

    One could also add that he is Roman Catholic. The Liberal Party has lost that voting constituency as well. And, it wouldn’t hurt to have a leader walk out of a church on a Sunday during a campaign. I argued that Dion or Martin might have done that during their campaigns but I guess God only comes in the form of “God help me” on the campaign trail.

    • Warren says:

      Works against a guy who pocketed a communion wafer, too.

      Gee, I wonder who has footage of that?

      • CQ says:

        Yeah, as if many Protestants, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Mormons, Buddhists, New Age spiritualists, and Sunday Morning Political Panel / Pro-Sports watching Atheists would know, or care, of any exacting church rites and customs for Catholic services. Good luck selling that message.

        • bluegreenblogger says:

          never heard of narrowcasting? You know, the way the Conservatives appeal to muslims and orthodox jews out of each corner of their mouths? People hear what they want to hear sometimes

      • Graham says:

        Nobody has video of it Mr. Kinsella, because it never happened. The paper that reported it was forced to make a front page apology to not only PM Harper, but to the Priest it attributed quotes to he never made. The editor who ran the story was fired.

        “This was a bad year for the Telegraph-Journal, a newspaper in New Brunswick, Canada. First, it came under fire when it dismissed a summer intern after he committed a few factual errors in a controversial story. It also had to apologize for an incident of plagiarism in an unrelated story. But the biggest problem was a front page story that included a fabricated accusation against the Canadian prime minister, as well as a fabricated quote from a prominent priest. In Canada, the ensuing national scandal came to be known as “Wafergate,” and it eventually cost the paper’s editor her job. The publisher was also suspended. Here’s how I described the incident in a previous column:

        In early July, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper traveled to New Brunswick to attend the funeral of former Governor General Romeo LeBlanc. At the funeral, the prime minister was given communion. Video footage shows him accepting a wafer from the priest, but cuts away before anyone can see him eat it. Nobody thought much of this until the Telegraph-Journal, a New Brunswick paper, published a front page article claiming that the prime minister put the wafer, which represents the body of Christ, in his pocket. Then everyone piled on the story. Eventually, the prime minister and his spokesman issued strong denials.

        Almost three weeks after it set off a national controversy, the paper issued a front page apology and admitted that, “There was no credible support for these statements of fact at the time this article was published, nor is the Telegraph-Journal aware of any credible support for these statements now.” So, uh, how did they end up in the paper?

        Then, on September 16, the paper issued another major apology, this time to Monsignor Brian Henneberry for fabricating a quote from him in the offending report. From the apology:

        … The Telegraph-Journal said prominently, on the front page, that Monsignor Brian Henneberry, a senior Saint John priest, had “demanded” that Prime Minister Stephen Harper explain what he had done with the communion wafer that he had been given. The newspaper has determined that Monsignor Henneberry said no such thing and believes that the false assertion was wholly the product of improper editorial manipulation …

        Though the paper has issued two prominent apologies, one major issue remains: the public doesn’t know who or what caused the paper to fabricate this controversy. Who made the decision to insert the offending accusation and quotes? Why did they do it? Do they still work for the paper? The paper apologized for its errors, but it hasn’t been transparent about what caused them. Sadly, this lack of disclosure is all too common among news organizations.”

        I seem to remember a certain Liberal strategist and blogger who was accused of having a part in the lie.

        And before you get to riled up, I realize those were simply accusations and were never proven.

        • james curran says:

          Um. Lost in the bullshit is the FACT that Harper in a non-Catholic and should not have been taking communion AT ALL. Period. But it’s all about Stephen J. Harper. Who cares about rules and religion.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            James curran, if the Prime Minister of Canada only paid respects to his own religion, you would be the first one posting that he’s intolerant of those of a different faith.

            I can’t wait to read your post on the Mullah’s in Toronto (many Liberal ridings) denouncing Jews, infidels, and the other enemies of Islam. Of course, given the pandering that many Liberals make in those ridings…..I’m assuming it’s ok for a LIberal to do it right?

          • james curran says:

            I don’t think so. So go fuck your hat.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            james curran….I do find your fixation with my headgear amusing, but not as amusing as your inability to refute what I write.

            Lastly, since I do not have any experience with the protocol required to engage carnally with inanimate objects, perhaps you could provide your expertise.

            Do I have to buy my hat dinner first?
            Do I have to hold the door….
            do I have to meet my hat’s father….?

            Please advise.

  2. Matt says:

    He’ll run. His family life notwithstanding, I think he’s itching to take on the leadership mantle.

    • Philip says:

      Nothing like an editorial board writing scripts which echo back their own pre-conceived notions. I think we will just run a good leadership campaign, see who wins and then go from there. The re-building is a multi-cycle project, if it is going to be effective and lasting. We need a leader who will be around for more than one cycle. If the Globe and Mail Editorial Board as so concerned about it, then buy a membership, raise the money and run themselves.

      • Jon Adams says:

        Oh, come on. There’s never been a precedent of the mainstream media buying into its own narrative (if you don’t count the Alberta Provincial Election of 2012, the Saskatchewan Provincial election of 2003, the Federal Elections of 1993 and 2000, and Dewey defeating Truman.)

        • Philip says:

          You are right, Jon, I really should have known better! I vow never to question our media outlets again. This time I mean it.

  3. WDM says:

    I have no inside information whatsoever, but I think he declines to run. Quite clear the family issue is something that matters a great deal to him, and he has first hand experience in the impact politics can have on his family. I’ll also add that much of the narrative surrounding him running is the notion he’s the only one who can save the Liberals. This type of Messiah complex stuff is something Justin spoke out against after the last election, noting the issues the Liberals face go well beyond leadership.

  4. There’s an authenticity about JT that can’t be denied, maybe that’s the reason the opposition went straight to attack mode and that authenticity will be a catalyst for younger voters who will make their own decisions come election day.

    • que sera sera says:

      You hit the nail on the head, Cameron. There is an authenticity and a sense of quiet pride in the best Canada & Canadians can be, each & every one of us.

      It is such a drastic change from the malevolent vindictive ar$eholes whose only concept of nationhood includes only widespread voter suppression and electoral fraud.

      I want to hear & see more of it from all leadership hopefuls.

      • Bill Sparrow says:

        Stop crying in your beer and learn from the many many mistakes made in the election campaign, not to mention the clown we had for a leader. If Trudeau flops as leader, the Liberal party will disintegrate because there will be no ‘next’ leader. Martin, Dion, Ignatieff, Trudeau, and fifth leader will not happen. Look into the future and get serious instead of slagging the winners just to make you feel better. We are in a very serious state of affairs, and bellyaching doesn’t help.

        • que sera sera says:

          Articulating a legitimate comparison between the obvious governing style of the present-day Conservatives and that typical to Liberals is “crying in your beer” and “slagging the winners”, rather than a rational explanation of why Trudeau is a breath of fresh air in the increasingly toxic political miasma overtaking the country?

          Right.

          Your hyper-sensitivity and defensiveness is very interesting.

    • ottawacon says:

      You are absolutely f$*king dreaming if you think you have seen attack mode from the real opposition. Intramural Liberal, well, maybe – I cannot really say. If anything, the Cons are letting Trudeau have a free ride now because he is a useful stalking horse. They have done absolutely nothing to start to define him yet.

  5. Jordan says:

    If Dominic LeBlanc decided to run and Trudeau threw his support behind him from the start would it be enough to boost LeBlanc’s profile throughout the country?

    Warren doesn’t seem to have much faith in LeBlanc but he’s got more experience in politics then many who are mentioned and is still on 44.

  6. Mark says:

    With respect, Warren, you also said that Ignatieff would kick Harper’s ass.

  7. Sandra says:

    Justin Trudeau is like a breath of fresh air in Canadian politics. I can’t see why anybody would attack him in ads like the Conservatives are wont to do. Con attack ads will backfire on Harper if Justin is the new Liberal leader.

    He’s a glamour-puss too. Women, who are 52% of the population will love him to bits and vote vote vote Liberal again.

    Liberals are stupid if they don’t make Justin their next new leader and I will hate them if they don’t.

    • Bill says:

      Justin will get smoked if he runs, good looks and a boxing match will not do it. Harper and Mulcair will eat him alive in debate. He has said some silly things in the past and will do so again. Truduea Jr doesn’t have what it takes and he even knows this. Why are libs so desperate to sacrifice the son of their messiah?

      • que sera sera says:

        It’s always interesting studying the contortions of Conservatives increasingly desperate that we don’t run Trudeau.

  8. Star Sailor says:

    Here we go again. Justin is a strong liberal who is a true Canadian. His party is the Liberal’s who support all values Canadaians support. He is admired from coast to coast and in the north. But, get your ears cleaned out by wire wool – he is not going to run. If you have time on your hands check the ethics of Peter Kent in how he counted his expenses from the last election.

  9. que sera sera says:

    Good column, Warren. I like the buzz.

    And the negative attention of the Conservative buzzards on this website daily.

    • Mark says:

      que sera sera, just in case you think I’m one of the Conservative buzzards you refer to…. I’m not. I’m just honest enough to point out that the Liberals need much more than a Messiah right now. A few good ideas might be a good start.

      • que sera sera says:

        Mark – as a Liberal I’m sure as hell not looking for a Messiah. No matter how often Conservatives say something it doesn’t make it true. (ie: see Bob Rae issue)

        For a good start, it was a good idea for Rae to publicly keep his mouth shut about his plans for as long as he did.

        And it is a good idea to have no “good ideas” until the Leadership Convention.

        All the nattering nabobs, contemptuous Conservatives, poisonous pundits, puerile pollsters & fraudulent CPC advertising dollars can just blow smoke and continue to invent their alternative realities on Planet Conservative. Not only is it very amusing but it lets serious people get some serious work done before ground zero.

        Let the buzzards circle – they just continue to prove daily that there is still lots of life in the Liberal carcass.

        • Mark says:

          Well I’m okay with keeping the good ideas under wraps for a while, but I wish the Libs had actually expressed some in the last election.

        • ottawacon says:

          Serious question to you, que – do you think the Liberals have used the ‘interim’ timeout well? Coyne’s column today really made me think otherwise. As an economic conservative without a scrap of social conservatism in me, I feel screwed over but without an alternative. A centrist party that offered sound economic management and never made me to talk to those troglodytes would be deeply appealing – but there is no such place right now.

          • que sera sera says:

            @ ottawacon:

            Thanks for the serious question. Bear with me while I try & give it a serious answer from my personal Liberal viewpoint.

            I think the timeout was a good cooling off period for everyone.
            I think it not only focused Liberal members and Party apparatchiks, but it also focused Canadians.
            I think it also reminded all of us what Liberals are and are *NOT*. At least it did for me.

            We Liberals are seriously good:
            1/> with finances, budgets, surpluses , the economy & banking regulations;
            2/> with the public, public debate, public access, public consultations, policy positions & papers, media access & scrums, mandates & problem solving;
            3/> at promoting consensus, peacekeeping, democracy and fair elections, upholding treaties and conventions around the world, without fear or favour;
            4/> at honouring, maintaining and upholding traditions, institutions, research, science, the environment, statistics, and data;
            5/> at supporting & preserving free speech, free thinking, and the free exchange of information and ideas;
            6/> at treating all citizens with respect and dignity, including but not limited to: men, women, children, elderly, students of all ethnicities, cultures and faiths, the working poor, immigrants, prisoners, politicians of all political parties, journalists, child soldiers, ex-pat criminals, war veterans , employees, bureaucrats, civil servants and foreign nationals under the care of our military;
            7/> at preventing the abuse of citizens, civil liberties and charter rights at the hands of government, government agents, police forces and corporations (foreign & domestic);
            8/> at promoting education, training, social programs and business opportunities;
            9/> at weaving a web of interdependent commitments between the provinces/territories and federal government that strengthens the country, promotes provincial & territorial autonomies, and fosters peace, order & good governance;
            10/> at preserving & protecting the rights, assets and sovereignty of Canada & Canadians.

            When Liberals forget who we are, where we come from, where we are going, and how & why we and Canada best fit together, we risk filling the void with arrogance and hubris instead. That cannot happen when we keep the faith with Canada and Canadians.

            So yes, I think the timeout has been good for this Liberal, anyway.

            Now, the rest of the hard work begins, not the least of which is crafting our message & taking responsibility for accurately and cheerfully moving that entire message to all Canadians.

            A leadership race, fundraising, and policies that get Canada & Canadians back on track: fiscally, socially, electorally, domestically and internationally, with the peace, order & good governance that Canada and the rest of the world have counted upon for decades.

            I’m betting we’ll do it the Canadian way that has long been admired around the world: with kindness, dignity, respect and politeness.

            The Liberal talent pool & experience runs as deep and wide as the country itself.
            Historically the world has trusted Canada to lead & inspire where other nations fall short internationally.
            And Canadians have trusted the Liberals to do the same domestically.
            We must honour that trust.

    • The Doctor says:

      It seems to me that a number of Liberal commenters are at least as numerous and negative on JT as any conservative commenters. I’m pro-JT myself, but there’s no question he’s a controversial choice. For me, it’s precisely the fact that he IS controversial that counts in his favour. The LPC needs every bit of attention it can get, because it’s in a dogfight with the NDP to claim the opposition spotlight. JT attracts the spotlight like no other leadership candidate could dream of doing.

      • Bill Sparrow says:

        Yes, the next Liberal leader must be able to recover the millions of lefty votes that fled the Liberal party and went over to the NDP, and that’s a fact. Justin may be passionate about politics, but presently I don’t see any substance that would make him the one to bring back the lost lefty vote. As for the youth vote, I wouldn’t count on that to turn things around because the youth vote may just split to reflect the general vote. We must be serious when considering who should be the next Liberal leader, because if we err there may not be a ‘next’ leader.

        • que sera sera says:

          And those “millions of lefty votes” would those be the left-lefty votes that left for the left or just lefty votes that left or perhaps lefty votes that left themselves out????

          ……since you appear to be so fluent in “lefty”.

  10. Brad Young says:

    Plus he has a tattoo. Steve cant compete with that.

  11. dave says:

    When Dominic Leblanc offered to run for the leadership in the race that did not happen, – was short circuited by immediate politcal needs in a tight minority parliament, – I figured he sounded ok. He had always done a sound job in the House of Commons when I caught it on tv. He has done so since.
    A small point that crossed my mind then, was that Leblanc is from NB, not Central Canada, and I wondered how that might affect his reception in Western Canada.

  12. Bill says:

    Nowhere in any of the 10 points is there mention of understanding the issues and concerns of Canadians. No mention of what in his experience makes him vote-worthy. He only fights when he can win, he’s not old, he appeals to the young, bilingual etc…. These are NOT qualities one seeks when electing a PM. Not one mention of any kind of intelligence or skill that makes JT special

    • Philip says:

      Look at you, with your precious canned Conservative talking points. I see you managed to squeeze in both the “inexperienced” card and the “not smart enough” card in one post. Not brave enough to throw add the “NEP” one for the talking points trifecta?

      Tell me Bill, how does one become experienced at being leader of a national political party, before they have actually been the leader of a national political party? Is there a correspondence course? Does one pull a sword from a stone? Enlighten me Bill.

      • Bill Sparrow says:

        Some, if not many within the Liberal party, hold the opinion that Trudeau is not politically seasoned enough to lead the Liberals out of third place. Remember that his father, PET, was a recognized intellectual in Quebec and he had ministerial experience before he won the leadership. Justin has none of his father’s attributes and is an obvious lightweight when compared to heavyweights Harper and Mulcair (politically and figuratively).

        I just can’t imagine the veteran Liberal caucus following a Trudeau leadership, and I say that without being partisan. Justin may just not have leadership capabilities within the Liberal party and politically. Please don’t accuse me of being a Conservative, because I’m not.

        • que sera sera says:

          I suspect the Liberals that betrayed Dion, hung Ignatieff out to dry, and/or mocked Rae might be willing to STFU long enough to give Trudeau a chance to compensate for their willful ignorance, suicidal machinations and outright political sabotage. And the “veteran Liberal caucus” you speak of has done so well themselves over the past decade, eh?

          This particular babe in the woods is worth a hell of a lot more than lone wolves howling mournfully over what remains of Canada’s carcass.

          I absolutely don’t buy your comment that “Justin has none of his father’s attributes”. Perhaps you are one of the intimates in the Trudeaus lives qualified to render that opinion – although if not I hasten to add it won’t prevent you or anyone else from articulating it.

          And political seasoning is exactly that – a fabulous dish is obvious, even before seasoning. However, when the dish is crap to begin with there is no amount of “seasoning” that will render it palatable.

          I agree that Justin is a lot fitter and slimmer than Harper and Mulcair but, in fairness, he has youthful vigour, and all that entails, on his side.

        • Philip says:

          Way to write a script. Maybe you can’t imagine the veteran Liberal caucus following Mr. Trudeau because you don’t want to imagine a veteran Liberal caucus following Mr. Trudeau. It doesn’t mean that the caucus won’t. In fact, you literally have no idea who the Liberal caucus would or would not follow.

          “Obvious lightweight”? Care to actually define that? Oh, wait you can’t. All you are doing is recycling a meme recently produced by the Conservative Party. Which is fine, if that how you want to spend your day but it’s not particularly clever or insightful.

          • Bill Sparrow says:

            q.s.s. and Philip — The next Liberal leader will have to redefine and sell the Liberal party to Canadians. If you think he is capable of such a substantive effort, then what has he done to date that convinces you he has the ability to do that?

            Harper was a policy wonk within the Reform and Mulcair had ministerial experience. What has Trudeau got to offer beyond image? Where is the substance to the man? I see none.

            Canadians recognize Harper as the prime minister and Quebecers are highly supportive of Mulcair and the NDP. How will Justin gain credibility to stand up to these two wolves? Personally, I have no confidence in Trudeau leading the Liberal party out of it’s “miasma”. The next leader must be a proven performer in the broader political arena.

            As for Conservative “memes”, who was it that said to heed the insults of your enemy because they may be more truthful than those who praise you? After being relegated to rump existence, I think some deep and quiet reflection is necessary.

          • que sera sera says:

            @ Bill Sparrow (aka the canary in the coal mine)

            “…what has he done to date” – I suspect it is more what Trudeau HASN’T done and what he CAN do that will have voters flocking to him and his party.

            “Canadians recognize Harper as the prime minister” – With election results already overturned in one riding and voter suppression and electoral fraud being investigated in another 200 ridings many Canadians don’t recognize Harper at all.

            “Heed the insults of your enemy.” – An endless flow of insults delivered 24/7/365 over the past six years is pretty meaningless and says more about the maturity and intellect of the delivery boys than it does about the target.

            “I think some deep and quiet reflection is necessary.” – By all means, take all the time you need.

          • Philip says:

            Que sera sera pretty much said everything I wanted to. I imagine whatever evidence of experience or qualities which we see in Mr Trudeau would have been immediately dismissed by Bill Sparrow as insufficient. Am I the only one starting to notice a sameness of content and structure in these types of posts, from supposedly different people?

  13. Graham says:

    Mr. Kinsella:

    Can we, or should we read anything into the fact that every person Justin Trudeau publicly campaigned with/for and publicly endorsed in various elections, from George Smitherman in Toronto’s 2010 Mayoral election to Ruby Dhalla in the May 2011 general election LOST?

    Thanks again for allowing differing points of view to be heard.

Leave a Reply

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


*