06.05.2012 06:42 AM

Trudeau is assembling a leadership team?

News to me.

Anyone else heard this?

71 Comments

  1. Cromwell says:

    Good for him. He can vie along with Rae for the grand prize of King of Nothing in Particular.

  2. Shane Mackenzie says:

    No. I have not heard this. I’ve heard the very opposite. Similar to other prospective candidates with personal barriers, I sincerely think the ‘young family’ thing has to be respected as a sticking point. I think a little too much wishful thinking has caused someone to murmur things that have little to no validity. Verify before you monger such things around please – you’re very influential and it does sincerely no good for this rumour to continue to circulate. The Wells article released weeks ago remains a vivid depiction of what he’ll tell you in person if you ask.

    • JamesHalifax says:

      TIMMAH!!…TiMAYTIMAHHH…Timmay!!…timtimTIMMMMM…TIMITIMAH!!!!…..

      Sorry, I know I promised to stop. I just cant’ help myself.

    • Shane Mackenzie says:

      This is all I’ve ever wanted from being on the interweb is for Warren Kinsella to call me “sonny”. I must thank you for that.

      Yea, as I saw below you were just reacting to the Ivison article (http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/06/04/john-ivison-justin-trudeau-can-dominate-attract-the-spotlight-but-can-he-lead-a-team/), but you can’t trust such a speculative tone. It holds as much weight as any guy who has been in a coma’s wish upon waking up. 2016 leadership review is Trudeau’s time. I we catch the wave then, then maybe these journos will start predicting better fortunes.

      I’ve met him. Personability-wise, you more than correct. Somehow these journos make great careers on paper and only that. It’s remarkable really.

      • Bubba says:

        The interweb???? I hear you can get that on computers nowadays!!! Now sonny leave your daddy’s computer alone and go outside and play.

  3. Ray Heard says:

    Justin is supported — whether for free or fee — by a major Toronto-based PR-lobby firm

  4. Al says:

    Not unexpected but can he really be what the party needs at this juncture. I suppose those backing him are thinking a Trudeau will rekindle the old Trudeaumania days. Bring in more young folks who seem to be losing their way, enticed by the promise of milk and honey from the NDP. If he is in fact planning to run I wish him luck but I really don’t think he is the one. Dominic LeBlanc on the other hand has stayed away from any suggestion he might want to lead the Liberals. Too bad. He is, in my opinion, the one.

  5. Nic Coivert says:

    I think a lot of people are worried he might run, and they aren’t Liberals.

    JT would make Harper look positively toxic, on top of awkward bitter & resentful.

    • Warren says:

      He’s an amazing guy. But I take him at his word when he said he isn’t running. That’s why Ivison’s revelation surprised me.

      • JamesHalifax says:

        Well…he’s got amazing hair….but that’s about it as far as I can see.

        • Joey Rapaport says:

          He’s got more than hair, he has charisma, a name, and the appearance of a Winner… There’s a lot of qualified ex-Liberals in the private sector that would flock back if they thought the Liberals could win and with Trudeau, they’d at least have a chance.

          Scares the crap out of me to look at the NDP cast of characters, all from union jobs, out of high school, and completely useless, at least the Liberals could provide a competent alternative!

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Joey, you mention:
            -hair
            -charisma
            -a name
            -appearance of a winner

            pleae note, the word “competence” or “ideas” does not make your list.

            I believe you have made my point for me.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Joey, you mention:

            1. Hair
            2. Charisma
            3. A name
            4. Appearance of a winner.

            Please note, the words “COMPETENCE” or “IDEAS” did not make your list.

            I believe you have made my point for me.

          • Jason King says:

            “I believe you have made my point for me”

            I believe your double post kinda outlines your not so solid grasp on competence.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Really, Jason…that’s all you got?

          • Kevin T. says:

            Don’t you mean: Really, Jason… that’s ALL you GOT?

          • smelter rat says:

            Don’t forget his mean left hook.

    • JamesHalifax says:

      I think a lot of the folks who wouldn’t want to see Trudeau run would be those in the NDP war room. The Conservative Party is not going to bleed support if Trudeau runs….it will be more of a shoot-out between the remaining Liberals and the NDP. Bring it on….vote splitting the left and far left helps the right.

      If the LIberals pick Trudeau-lite as their leader, it would simply show they havne’t learned a thing. They are still relying on a saviour to bring them to the promised land, as opposed to any real policies that help Canadians. Face it, who do you want leading the country? A silver spoon born, Castro admiring sometimes substitute drama teacher……or a trained economist hard-ass who can make the tough decisions? If trudeau becomes the leader of the Liberal party….they can kiss any hope of making a breakthrough west of Ontario Goodbye. In fact, if Trudeau becomes the Liberal leader…..I bet his first policy will be to bring back Katimavik.

      On second thought….” LONG LIVE TRUDEAU AS LIBERAL LEADER!!!”

      I think I’ll take out a Liberal memebership and vote for him.

      • Michael says:

        Who is the trained economist?

        Because in my years at the UWO economics dept, no one without a PhD would dare call themselves an economist. 😉

        • Pat says:

          At the very least you might need some experience, you know, as an economist…

        • JamesHalifax says:

          Harper is an economist as you fully realize. He didn’t get his PHD, because unlike your tenured co-horts..Harper was actually running an economy.

          • sharonapple88 says:

            Harper got his degree in 1993. He stepped away from politics in 1997 2001. If he wanted to get a doctorate, there was time then because he wasn’t actually running an economy at that point. (More like doing the equivalent of backseat driving when it came to the economy.)

            As for his degree, he doesn’t seem to put it to much use. Here are some of his classic calls.

            The best is probably his comments on the stock market. Invest and watch your money drop by 2,000 points or around 20%.

            Sure there have been some recovery since then, but if you bought into the index in October 2008 (10,056) and kept it there (11,449), your return’s about the same as a bond. (But you’d miss the rollercoaster ride, which is what everyone wants when they think of saving for retirement.)

            http://calgarygrit.blogspot.ca/2008/12/stephen-harper-economist.html

          • sharonapple88 says:

            He stepped away from politics in 1997 2001.

            That’s suppose to read, he stepped away from politics from 1997 to 2001. 😛

          • Pat says:

            You do realize that getting a PhD doesn’t mean a) you are going into the academic world or b) you’ll ever be tenured, right? Also, I think it’s a little crazy to suggest he didn’t get his PhD because he didn’t want to be an “elite”, or that he could have easily gotten his PhD. This is a guy who can’t finish a book on hockey, I have little confidence in his ability to finish a PhD. They don’t just hand you those things.

            Also, as noted, he wasn’t running an economy until over a decade after he got his degree. Many of his comments suggest he has a suspect grasp of economics. As sharonapple noted, he was pretty wrong about buying stocks (“great opportunities”), but he also apparently didn’t see the recession coming when ALL other parties did. He spent much of the 2008 election campaign denying that a recession was coming and refusing to prepare for the fallout, just because it is what Canadians WANTED to hear, rather then what a competent leader should tell them.

            A hairdresser has a better understanding than PMSH.

          • Tim Sullivan says:

            Because nothing says “conservative” like the government running the economy. Now, where did that invisible hand go?

        • Bill says:

          Michael,

          How about Mike Moffatt? He lectures part time at Ivey Biz School. Masters in Economics. Call himself an economist.
          http://twitter.com/#!/mikepmoffatt

      • Michael says:

        “Hard-assed” ha ha. Thanks for the chuckle.

        Really? I assume you are referring to the guy who never met a micro tax credit he couldn’t dole out to a favoured group. Yeah, some hard assed trained economist that guy. :eyeroll:

        • JamesHalifax says:

          Favoured groups?

          Oh…..you mean like working parents with kids and stuff right?

          yeah…screw those people….what have they ever done for those folks with a PHD.

          • Michael says:

            Well as an “economist” he should know that those micro tax credits (& the GST cut) are bad economic policy. He allowed politics to trump good policy.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Mikey…why is it bad economic policy to let the people who earned their money…keep it?

            Does good economic policy mean you have to pay more and more to the Feds?

            sorry…I’ll stick with Harper. I know better how to spend what I earn, better than any beaurocrat.

          • Tim Sullivan says:

            Those stupid micro credits complicate the tax code, provide a pittance in actual fact as a credit rather than a deduction, and are an expenditure that depletes the treasury for other policies that might provide a better return on investment.

            The sports tax credit prefers teams over individual sport, for one thing. There are no numbers to shoe it increases participation rate in sport, and simply makes things more expensive for those who finance it but have no kids. There is no sunset to the expenditures in case the policy objective does not work (no, wait, the policy objective was to garner votes … I take all that back).

  6. Annie says:

    There i a new kid on the bloc, Bertchi

  7. Eliz says:

    There is a new kid on the bloc, Bertchi

  8. Joel R says:

    I sure hope this is true – Trudeau becoming leader would change everything. Among those of us 35 and under we do not care about Harper, Rae or Mulcair.

    Trudeau is on twitter, facebook, young and “cool” – nobody else in Canadian federal politics is like this. I don’t think this can be overstated.

  9. JamesHalifax says:

    Joel R…..

    Trudeau is on twitter and facebook because it keeps his mind off of the boring stuff.

    Like actual policy, or ideas.

    • Jason King says:

      Someone’s a bit bitter today. But hey, keep it up. You’re making the late not lamented Tulk look like Shakespeare.

      • JamesHalifax says:

        I don’t get bitter, Jason.

        If I did, I wouldn’t respond to lightweights such as yourself.

        I’m not sure if you’re as much of a lightweight as justine, but you are close.

    • Joel R says:

      James, you’re wrong – we didn’t vote for Jack Layton because of his great ideas and policy. We voted for Jack the person.

      Leftist/centrist Canadians will vote for Justin the person, not the liberal policies in the next election. He is that kind of figure.

      • JamesHalifax says:

        Joel, if you think being popular is the same as being competent………you have a lot to learn.

        Would I have rather had a beer with Jack Layton or Harper? Layton of course.
        Would I rather trust Harper to run the country, or a socialist? Harper of course.

        As for Justine……well, I think you over-reach in the popularity contest. Being well known, or being laughted at…is not the same as being popular. Cripes…even the anti-conservative press corps folks laugh at Justin. Never a good sign.

        • Joel R says:

          Hi James – Obama was not competent, yet was elected. I don’t argue that Harper is far more competent than Trudeau, but I think that the masses are sheep. Again, look at our neighbors south – Obama won with no experience, but lots of charisma to a certain sector. Trudeau appeals to that same sector – the young and inexperienced.
          Whether the right likes him or whether he is competent yet is not really important – he can win without this.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Sadly, Joel….you are correct.

            I guess my point was that folks who actually pay attention and want competence in Government, would prefer Harper over Justin. Your point is equally valid, as explained in your reference to Obama.

            One can hope (and change?) though that more folks will opt for experience and capability…..but I’m afraid you may be on to something.

            Thank god Mulcair is such a pompous ass. An anti-Layton.

        • Tim Sullivan says:

          Yeah! Harper has been popular enough to recruit scam artists to steal elections (there is a conviction for that) but competent? Haven’t seen it yet, not in budgets, crime policy, governance …

          • JamesHalifax says:

            If you haven’t seen it….it is because you haven’t been paying attention.

            Simply because you disagree with the direction of the Government, does not mean it is not competent.

          • Tim Sullivan says:

            It is not competent, objectively, JamesHalifax. Harper said he would not run a deficit. Yet, there it is, a big one.

            He has cabinet ministers who do not know their departmental policies well enough to provide a proper, accurate accounting. He has appointed at least one disbarred, bankrupted lawyer to his inner sanctum for advice, who lives with a prostitute. He had a foreign affairs minister who left secret documents with a biker-chick. This government has a foreign aid minister who spends thousands of dollars on a limo instead of a few pounds for a cab. We have a government which established a secretariat for an appointments commissioner who was never appointed, and the secretariat spent millions of dollars over the years without anyone to secretariat to. Then we have a government which, against convention and an order of parliament to withhold documents for inspection. We have a government which is not answering questions on the order paper.

            When the Liberals reduced the deficit to a surplus but reduced the size of government, it was done with finesse and in consultation with the employees. Now you have panic and confusion, but no downsizing, only lay-offs. The employees who remain will be over-worked and stressed because they are left with the same programs but fewer resources.

            Of course, let’s not overlook the increase in the OAS without any answer as to how much that increase will save, if any. The government abolished the census but former cabinet minister saying he received “thousands of call” about it, but not one call documented.

            I don’t agree with much this government does, JamesHalifax whoever you are, but what I am particularly opposed to is the incompetence. If you prefer to call it lying, that works too, because it has to be one or the other or a mixture of both. It said it would not run a deficit and it said it would be held accountable. Anyone who asks for accountability is vilified or fired. Is that incompetence, not able to do what one fundamentally says must be done, or is that simply dishonesty? Maybe it is an incompetence to tell the truth.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Well, Tim…..I could write an equally lengthy response to your comments, however, that would start a new argument on an old thread. I’ll sum it up thusly:

            Nobody’s perfect.

  10. Chris P says:

    Need to fill space + Pure speculation + Creating a story where one may not exist =
    News Media.

    Means nothing.

    • Philip says:

      Exactly. I always take time to John Ivison’s columns. Politically, I’m worlds apart from him which is fine because I really enjoy his writing style. This article is, as noted above, pure speculation. Fine for filling column inches and driving comment boards traffic but absent any meat.

  11. Tiger says:

    At last, something to make the Liberal leadership race interesting!

    (There’s always something…)

  12. Star Sailer says:

    Beats me but hei is a true Canadian who speaks for all of Canada (except for Harber Land) He has the support of most/all young Canadians. If he runs probably he would win; at least the voter trun-out would be higher.

  13. Jordan says:

    I honestly don’t see the appeal either. Yes he’s charming, attractive and a good speaker but is that all people want in a Prime Minister? I think Trudeau needs more experience, he has not been in politics very long and has no experience in the private sector.

    Do people even know where he stands on major issues?

    • Joel R says:

      I don’t think the inexperience, and stand on major issues matter. Obama won in a landslide with these same characteristics.

      Young people won that election for Obama.

      • Jordan says:

        And Obama has done an amazing job!

        Trudeau was elected less than four years ago. Obama was first elected to Illinois Senate in 1996, 12 years before he became the Democrats presidential nominee. Obama also had an impressive career outside politics, that didn’t include teaching drama (not that there’s anything wrong with that). Obama made a name for himself for his own achievements, not his father’s.

        I think Justin Trudeau has some great characteristics and could make a good future leader for the Liberal Party but I don’t think he’s ready at this time.

      • JamesHalifax says:

        Yeah….and look what that got them.

        • smelter rat says:

          It got them 4 years of trying to get out of the muck and mire that Bush & Co. left them. Not an easy task.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            sorry, smelterrat….

            Take a look at the economic situation in the USA. It is not all George’s fault…it was Obama that spent like the wildman…..and it will take years to clean it up.

  14. fred says:

    “Pat says:

    “Canadians are suckers for athlete types” – Then why did they vote for Harper?”

    They didn’t, he roboconned the election.

    • JamesHalifax says:

      Sorry Fred…..robocalls or no robocalls…Harper was getting his majority.

      As much as it pains you…..Harper won fair and square.

      • MCBellecourt says:

        Jury’s still out, James.

        Now, if only someone would light a candle under Maynard’s ass, then that question can finally be properly dealt with.

      • smelter rat says:

        Heh, you’re funny James.

      • Tim Sullivan says:

        That has yet to be evidenced.

        Has anyone seen where Opitz is sitting, still? Yeah, in the House of Commons, even though a Superior Court Judge said he has no right to be there.

    • Warren says:

      Is he running, brother?

      • james curran says:

        Tonite is a perfect opportunity to ask him in person me thinks…..if I was a betting man.

      • JamesHalifax says:

        Warren, if he is running, I’m sure the person most fearful of that happening….is Bob Rae.

        Looks like old Bobby will have to dust off that resume and submit it to Power Corp for his brother’s approval.

        Because really….does anyone actually think Bob will stick around if he has to play second fiddle again?

  15. JamesHalifax says:

    Warren, I think you should go back and see what Justin actually said. He said he wouldn’t run “unless he had to” which, when he announces he’s throwing his hat into the ring…….will show that he is sacrificing the time with his family in order to save Canada from the evil Conservatives. Well, he may have his mother’s brains…..but he has his fathers arrogance.

    I’m sure somoeone will buy it.

Leave a Reply

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


*