, 04.28.2021 02:17 PM

My latest: Joe versus Justin

One hundred days.

As of this week, that’s how long Joe Biden has been President of the United States.

Justin Trudeau, meanwhile, has been Prime Minister of Canada for 2,000 days.

One hundred days versus two thousand days: who is doing better?  Who is the better leader?

Now, this writer worked on the Biden campaign for many months.  And you might say I haven’t exactly been the head of the Trudeau fan club.  But by any reasonable standard – by any objective measure – Joe Biden is doing much, much better than Justin Trudeau.

Take the pandemic, for example (please).  People have been bombarded by lots of statistics over the past year and a bit.  Lots of partisans have played games with pandemic and vaccine-related statistics, contributing to no shortage of cynicism and disbelief.

So, let’s just look at the pandemic facts.  No spin, no adjectives.

Biden came into the office of the president promising to vaccinate 100 million Americans in his first 100 days.  But he didn’t do that, at all.  Not even close.

No, he more than doubled that.  Biden’s administration blasted past the 200 million figure a couple weeks ago, and it did so well before the 100-day mark.  So, the Democratic leader’s vaccinated more than 60 per cent of Americans.

Over a longer period of time, Justin Trudeau has procured enough vaccines to give at least one shot to more than twelve million Canadians.  Just over 30 per cent.

So, Biden is doubling what Trudeau has done in vaccinations, in a much shorter time frame.  But only one vaccine dose gives you only partial protection.  What about the figure that really counts, those who have been fully vaccinated?  It’s here that Biden crushes Trudeau.

In Biden’s America, nearly 100 million Americans have been fully vaccinated.  That’s 30 per cent of the population of the United States.

In Trudeau’s Canada, only slightly more than a million people have been fully vaccinated.  That’s about three per cent of our population.

That’s the pandemic.  What about the other key indicator in our lives, the economy?  Here, too, Biden’s 100 days easily eclipses Trudeau’s 2,000 days.

In his first 100 days, Biden has approved legislation that cuts child poverty by more than half.  He has expanded Obamacare – and he has injected the U.S. economy with $1.9 trillion in stimulus spending.  That’s more than twice the size of what Barack Obama’s Congress passed a decade ago.

Economic growth in Biden’s America is expected to exceed seven per cent in 2021 – which is the best that nation has experienced since 1984, when Ronald Reagan was in office.  Under Biden, more than a million jobs were created last month alone.

In Canada, Trudeau oversaw mixed economic performance.  While 2020 ended with double-digit growth in Canada, corporate and personal bankruptcies grew here, too. Bankruptcies were up nine per cent from the previous year, with retailers being hit the hardest.

Trudeau’s latest budget, meanwhile, took two years to see the light of day – and then mostly disappeared.  While Trudeau has amassed the biggest budgetary deficit in Canadian history, his 2021 budget mostly unimpressed.  As the National Post’s Kelly McParland memorably (and accurately) put it: Trudeau’s budget “held the public’s attention for maybe 12 hours.”

Joe Biden, meanwhile, continues to hold everyone’s attention.  Far from being “Sleepy Joe,” as his political adversaries called him, Biden has been an animated and activist president.  In just 100 days, he has already achieved much.

Justin Trudeau, over 2,000 days?

Not so much.

[Kinsella was Special Assistant to Jean Chretien.]

 

35 Comments

  1. joe long says:

    Justin Trudeau takes the Sir Humphrey Appleby approach; We don’t measure our success by results but by activity.

    • Full Retired Rambo says:

      Best comment I ever heard from was from a USMC commander at an meeting filled with officers overwhelmed with their lack of practical application. He firmly said, “y’all need to confusing activity with accomplishment”. I miss leadership with that kind of gravitas

  2. Phil Brunet says:

    How they’re doing is irrelevant, how they compare even more so. How we all end up is what matters, and with these two corrupt, idiot redistributionists, champagne socialists, mediocre power-grabbing patrons of institutionalized inefficiency, we know the answer.

    The foundation of a nation’s prosperity can only be secured with a replacement level of deferred consumption, i.e. savings, investment and capital formation. The immediate consumption that is the essence of the cycle of government revenues and expenditures is chimeric affluence. Big Government taxes away and consumes potential investment on a massive scale. It is the primogenitor of a generational course of capital consumption.

    First comes the long, slow decline. And then.

    • ANDY JURGEN KAUT says:

      Why, I do declare it interests me to note that Warren talks about how regular people are doing in canada, but how many greenbacks are being printed stateside.

      The hill is irrelevant in the long run if you’ve formed it by digging a hole. 😉

  3. irreversible road map to freedom says:

    Never forget one of Warren’s best political rules: Under promise… Over perform. Biden is turning this into an art form. Justin naturally does just the opposite.

    This stuff about the Pfizer time between doses… I’m no expert but I strongly suspect this may well be a catastrophe in the making….because of all the time and effort going into making that first does happen.

    Simply put, Biden’s team has a goal to vaccinate people. Justin’s team wants to make voters believe they are vaccinated. These are two very different goals.

    • The recent questioning of the effectiveness of one dose is based on an out of date statement spread by a Conservative press release.

      https://twitter.com/Justin_Ling/status/1387396920050597890?s=19

      The vaccine is quite effective after one dose.

      https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/03/29/cdc-study-shows-single-dose-of-pfizer-or-moderna-covid-vaccines-was-80percent-effective.html?__twitter_impression=true

      • Martin says:

        What the are you talking about. Quicker better. Period full stop.

        “Trusted Source recommends that you receive your second dose as close to the required interval as possible.

        You may be wondering what happens if you can’t get your second dose within the specified timeframes. The CDC has guidanceTrusted Source for this as well. In these situations, the second dose can be given up to 6 weeks (42 days) after the first dose.

        We currently don’t know if delaying the second dose longer than this time has an impact on immunity.

        If possible, try to schedule your appointment for your second dose on the day you get your first dose. If you didn’t schedule your second dose at this time, contact the location where you received your first dose to make an appointment.

        What level of immunity do you have after the first vaccine?
        Even though the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines require two doses, you do get some immunity after you receive the first dose. Let’s examine this in a little more detail below.”

        I got Moderna so thanks for coming out. I see our dunce PM STILL has not extended the tax deadline despite 10 million still to file. I have yet to see any of his apologists defend that decision despite raising it several time.

        https://youtu.be/K8E_zMLCRNg

        • Martin,

          Even his slavish sycophants aren’t quite that dumb. Yet.

          • Martin says:

            They just don’ think it is important enough to defend. I keep predicting he will but it will be too little too late but there will be high fives all around in the PMO.

          • Martin says:

            And the CRA rep a client is now down. Less than 30 hours to go. Maybe intentional to give them an excuse for an extension. I can’t believe I have put my health in the hands of these geniuses.

      • irreversable road map to freedom says:

        “Pfizer and BioNTech’s Phase 3 study for the COVID-19 vaccine was designed to evaluate the vaccine’s safety and efficacy following a 2-dose schedule, separated by 21 days….
        … There are no data from this study to demonstrate that protection after the first dose is sustained after 21 days.”

        Who said that? Not Breitbart…. Not Q Anon. … Pfizer.

      • Quo Vadis says:

        There you go again with foot in mouth disease…

        https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7018e1.htm?s_cid=mm7018e1_w

        In summary: “In a multistate network of U.S. hospitals during January–March 2021, receipt of Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines was 94% effective against COVID-19 hospitalization among fully vaccinated adults and 64% effective among partially vaccinated adults aged ≥65 years.”

        • irreversable road map to freedom says:

          Quo Vadis…. did you actually bother to read the details of the study you just posted?! They didn’t even consider patients with more than 21 days separation between vaccinations…. Probably because no one considered that to be vaccinated AT ALL.

          Better luck next time.

          • Quo Vadis says:

            Excuse me but that is my point. At best, assuming the one shot effectiveness does not degrade (staying at 64%) then our population remains highly at risk until the second shot is received.

            Interestingly enough what has not been indicated is does the less effective one shot approach open the door to being more susceptible to stronger variants?

          • irreversible road map to freedom says:

            Quo Vadis below…

            The study you posted obviously suggests that you are not at 64% immunity if you play around with the timing…. The scientists didn’t even waste time with that possibility. The Justin / Crazytown 4-month time frame is out of the scope of the study because the authors most likely dismiss that as nonsense. The inference drawn from the study you provided is that a patient is at 0% immunity if they follow the Justin / Crazytown plan.

            The Tru-Anon position that playing games with this product – against the deliberate, explicit, public, widely distributed instructions of the company – is really dangerous shit. Calling that out is NOT a right wing conspiracy as you have portrayed it. Justin’s awesome hair-doo doesn’t make it safe.

    • Martin says:

      “Simply put, Biden’s team has a goal to vaccinate people. Justin’s team wants to make voters believe they are vaccinated. These are two very different goals.”

      This. Puts into words what has been bothering me about them patting themselves on the back for upcoming deliveries. Irrelevant metric but one the cultists continue to buy.

  4. irreversible road map to freedom says:

    Remember all those times Winston Churchill appeared with rock stars to tell the world how well everything was going during the Blitz? No. You don’t.

  5. David Baker says:

    Mr. Kinsella:

    I follow your commentary faithfully.

    It voices some of the ablest criticism of what future historians will assess as a very poor period of the stewardship of our fair country.

    The Trudeau record has been replete with corruption, hypocrisy, incompetence, and the worst sort of corrosive, divisive political manoeuvres I expect seen in our country’s history. There is, moreover, a “cult” taking hold. It is irrational. If a Tory did a hundredth of what Trudeau has done, they’d be out in a heartbeat.

    I despair. David Baker, lawyer, Nova Scotia

    • Warren says:

      We will outlive this man child, you and I. Don’t despair.

    • Ronald O'Dowd says:

      David,

      The only legitimate repudiation of this government can come only at the ballot box. Canadians know that. Some cultists will vote, others not. But everyday Canadians will. Their collective will, to the extent that it becomes a mind meld, will speaks volumes clearly and likely almost unequivocally. I eagerly await the end result.

  6. Peter Williams says:

    Justin Trudeau: Katie, great news. Warren Kinsella gave us an A for our vaccine efforts.

    Telford: Kinsella gave us an A?

    Trudeau: Yeah, he said we scored 83, and that’s an A!

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kinsellawarren/status/1387373973269319682

  7. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Let me tell you, that if Biden could wave a magic wand and do it alone, you’d see majorities in the Senate and House for at least eight years. That speech was pure authenticity, something rare for a politician. So, end results will call the tune in 2022 — so win where you can, compromise where you can and do it as fast as you can. The midterms are no lead pipe cinch but right now Biden and the Dems have got the Big Mo. No question about that.

    • Mark D says:

      Biden has the Big Mo.

      And Republicans aren’t exactly appearing at their best since the election.

      However, let’s not forget that Democrats did not win the last election. Biden and the Republicans did.

      That is the last election was the American electorate delivering the Canadian equivalent to a minority government. Biden won a convincing victory in the presidential election. Democrats kept the House, but with a reduced majority. And the Senate more-or-less remained a tie–although because of Trump’s political interference in Georgia it now leans slightly Democrat whereas in the past it leaned slightly Republican.

      Downballot–at the state level–Republicans made substantial gains and pretty much routed the Democrats. This will bear substantial effects in 2022 since it is at the state level that congressional re-districting is determined.

      I know Biden had stated initially that he was a one-term president only. But it may prove in the best interest of the Democrat Party if he sticks around for a second term.

      • Mark,

        This is pure gold:

        https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2021/03/29/joe-biden-zero-chance-run-for-reelection-2024-column/7036849002/

        Meanwhile, I’m very much a Truman Buck Stops Here Democrat. Translation: Nanc should have taken the hit for losing seats. IMHO, there’s no way that she should be speaker now.

        • Mark D says:

          The loss of seats–and more importantly, state-level races downticket–was not the fault of Biden or Pelosi. If anything, they prevented the damage from being worse.

          Rather it was the fault of the “younger leaders” to whom last year Biden stated he would hand over the party in 2024.

          Biden understood loud and clear that Dems did not win the 2020 election. Rather he beat Trump as centrist Democrat for whom many Republicans and Independents voted for president, while continuing to vote Republican downticket.

          Pelosi understood too.

          This is why the election’s aftermath both Biden and Pelosi called for unity and reconciliation while firmly shutting down AOC’s calls for political retaliation against anyone who had voted GOP. In fact, Biden stated quite bluntly: I got the message loud and clear. Americans have had enough of partisan infighting and are demanding we work together.

          • Ronald O'Dowd says:

            Mark,

            Logical argument. But in my view, the party needs a new group of centrist leaders to serve as a continuing bridge between old-style moderates and socialistically inclined progressives such as AOC. In other words, going in Manchin’s direction is not the route to maintaining power nor is going full AOC. That’s why the Dems need new House leadership going forward, not that trio now either in their eighties or close to it. It’s time for new blood. On Pelosi’s watch, only half of the compartments of the Democratic Titanic are taking on water. Without leadership change, even more will, come the election results in 2022. But for Trump and Trumpites in power in D.C., there’s no way that any kind of Democrat would be president or control the majority in 2020. Down-ballot voting truly represents that unfortunate mindset of voters. Only a new generation of moderate Democrats coming into the leadership can change that. Otherwise, it’s a likely Democratic rout two years from now.

  8. Mark D says:

    To be fair, President Biden did spend just shy of 3000 days as a very competent President Obama’s just as competent vice-president. In fact, the relatively-inexperienced (at the time) Senator Obama chose Senator Biden as running mate precisely for his experience and competency.

  9. Peter Williams says:

    “… that cuts child poverty by more than half”. Really? By when?

    Given all the past US government pronouncements about cutting child poverty in half, why is it we still have child poverty?

    Why is this legislation going to work? What’s different from what’s been done before?

    Will anyone look back on this Biden ‘accomplishment’ and see if it actually cut child poverty by more than half?

    I suspect a lot of the money will go to new government bureaucrats, and not to the people who need it.

    Remember Biden’s promise of a $2000 check for every American? Turned out to be $1400. The rest of the money? It was spent on Pelosi pork.

    • ANDY JURGEN KAUT says:

      Government cannot create capital; they can only borrow against future generations.

      • Peter Williams says:

        Borrowing from future generations. Both Trudeau and Biden are going to excel at this.

        Neither Trudeau or Biden have any plan to balance budgets. Both will keep borrowing. Both believe big government is better.

        Both also believe that government sponsored science is primarily responsible for the technological advances we now enjoy. This will kill innovation as countless bureaucrats try to design products.

        • You see Peter, nobody wants to get real: debt and deficits are now a political afterthought, nothing more. Democrats don’t really cost programs and neither do Republicans. On their best day, it’s all smoke, mirrors and bald-faced lies.

          But the true overloads in each nation are destroying their respective countries by hollowing them out with massive QE injections. Only 8 Trillion in the States and counting. Think back to 2008 when The Fed said they spent X, only to find out that they actually spent 3-4 times more than they officially released as figures. Same pattern this time. Two sets of books with the prez not even allowed to see the real one. They had a choice: tank the markets early and permit us to feel 100% pain and loss for 1-3 years. Instead, they preferred counterfeiting, which means at least 3 to 5 hundred percent pain, when markets tank for 5-10 years instead…investment bankers, crooks and quite deliberate destroyers of economies and humanity 7 days a week. Course no one goes to jail either in 2008 or now cause the politicians are long bought and paid for. Guess whose gal and guy are now running the show?

  10. Martin says:

    Taking nothing away from Biden but doing better than JT is an extremely low bar.

  11. Joseph says:

    Difference?

    Age maybe.

    That’s about it.

Leave a Reply to jsa Cancel reply

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


*