Support NeoGAF

[CitizenVectron]

looks at income tax rates........ doesn't see a change.. what tax cut you talking about?


the GST? a consummer tax? pfffffffff that is small potatoes for teh average Canadian.

singletons have not seen any tax cuts

Shrink government? what you talking about? Harper has increased the size of government and government spending

He has cut taxes in a number of ways, primarily through tax exemptions and refunds, along with the GST (which was a huge tax cut, even though it's only felt a tiny bit at a time).

My point is that he is accomplishing some of what he wants (another example would be his anti-crime agenda, and pro-police powers), but he can't get all of what he wants, so he sacrifices those things. All leaders do this in order to maintain power.

 

[CitizenVectron]

I'm calling it now, save this bad boy for posterity:

Tom Mulcair's lack of charisma will be the deciding factor that costs the NDP the election.

Two more months of the Canadian public trying to stay awake while Mulcair drones on in the background of rockstar Trudeau and evil villain Harper? He has no chance. I had engineering professors more engaging than this guy.

The average Canadian doesn't watch CSpan. This is the country's first extended, widespread exposure to Mulcair. And he is incredibly boring. Leaders aren't supposed to be boring, and the more we see of him, the more this will be reflected in the polls.

Harper has even less than Mulcair, and he's been in power for almost 10 years. You are confusing the charm element of charisma with other important alternatives: gravitas, heir of competency, etc.

 

[Walpurgis]

I'm calling it now, save this bad boy for posterity:

Tom Mulcair's lack of charisma will be the deciding factor that costs the NDP the election.

Two more months of the Canadian public trying to stay awake while Mulcair drones on in the background of rockstar Trudeau and evil villain Harper? He has no chance. I had engineering professors more engaging than this guy.

The average Canadian doesn't watch CSpan. This is the country's first extended, widespread exposure to Mulcair. And he is incredibly boring. Leaders aren't supposed to be boring, and the more we see of him, the more this will be reflected in the polls.

Angry Tom is pretty good at ripping Harper apart but the current Mulcair is boring. He's doing well in the polls so he'll probably remain boring. He doesn't have to be though. Harper, on the other hand, can't help but be boring.

 

[Boogie]

From what I have read, there should definitely be charges against the Wright fellow like yesterday. I know Anon doesn't have the best track record but I found this interesting.

After reading this, I wouldn't be shocked at all.

Oh, pardon me, but, "The RCMP will lose as much as anyone if CPC thrown out on asses"?

But I guess that's about the level of political analysis that one should expect from Anonymous.

 

[firehawk12]

To be fair, has anything come out of the RCMP sexual harassment/glass ceiling allegations from a few years ago?

 

[jstripes]

Oh, pardon me, but, "The RCMP will lose as much as anyone if CPC thrown out on asses"?

Eh, I wouldn't be surprised if the PMO and RCMP were scratching each other's backs.

 

[Boogie]

To be fair, has anything come out of the RCMP sexual harassment/glass ceiling allegations from a few years ago?

The class action lawsuit was officially filed a few months ago, I believe.

Eh, I wouldn't be surprised if the PMO and RCMP were scratching each other's backs.

Yes, because everything that has come from the RCMP laying charges against Duffy has made the Conservatives come out smelling like roses.

Not like it has resulted in pointed questions being thrown the PM's way in the middle of an election, or anything.

 

[Tiktaalik]

I'm not sure how this "Mulcair is secret Thatcher loving Conservative" news is supposed to be that big of a scandal. NDP supporters were well aware that ex-Quebec Liberal Mulcair was one of the most centrist candidates for leadership, but he was voted leader regardless because he was considered to be the candidate that had the best chance of winning an election. Similarly policy wise the NDP have significantly moved toward the centre, but again I think NDP supporters are on board because this will yield the best chance of winning the election and ejecting Harper.

Are we expecting NDP supporters to jump ship to the Liberal Party? The Liberals are also a centrist party with a greater right tilt. With policies such as $15 day care, 1 cent gas tax toward cities and Proportional Representation, the NDP are clearly the most left wing party running.

 

[jstripes]

I'm not sure how this "Mulcair is secret Thatcher loving Conservative" news is supposed to be that big of a scandal. NDP supporters were well aware that ex-Quebec Liberal Mulcair was one of the most centrist candidates for leadership, but he was voted leader regardless because he was considered to be the candidate that had the best chance of winning an election. Similarly policy wise the NDP have significantly moved toward the centre, but again I think NDP supporters are on board because this will yield the best chance of winning the election and ejecting Harper.

Are we expecting NDP supporters to jump ship to the Liberal Party? The Liberals are also a centrist party with a greater right tilt. With policies such as $15 day care, 1 cent gas tax toward cities and Proportional Representation, the NDP are clearly the most left wing party running.

With every party within 5 or 6 points of each other, it's going to get even uglier. No nit will be too small to be picked.

 

[lamaroo]

They all look like this.

Looks like he's trying Buster's dance.

 

[Silexx]

Oh, pardon me, but, "The RCMP will lose as much as anyone if CPC thrown out on asses"?

But I guess that's about the level of political analysis that one should expect from Anonymous.

Anonymous just can't seem to keep their conspiracy theories in check long enough for people to take them seriously.

 

[Azih]

Eh, I wouldn't be surprised if the PMO and RCMP were scratching each other's backs.

Harper has been slashing and burning EVERYTHING with no one spared in his quest for a balanced budget to campaign on.

 

[GSG Flash]

On another note, the Conservative government is still up to their usual antics:

Federal government employees warned not to talk bad about government on social media

The email was sent by Bruno Thériault, a director general at the department's workplace branch in Ottawa, advising employees that social media does not "absolve them" from their duty of loyalty to refrain from criticizing the government.

The memo went on to list recommendations about personal social media use, saying "you are a public servant 24/7," and reminders to "assist" public servants in "upholding your obligations under the Code."

 

[Boogie]

Harper has been slashing and burning EVERYTHING with no one spared in his quest for a balanced budget to campaign on.

Ding!


Look, is there an element of political control over the RCMP? Of course there is. The Commissioner is considered a Deputy Minister, after all!

So, after the wild card that was Zaccardelli, no one is going to even get the job unless you are willing to play ball with how the government views the Force. (In relation to things such as playing along with the above-mentioned cutbacks, not pushing the recommendations from the Brown Report too hard, such as financial independence from Treasury Board, or setting up an independent, civilian board of directors that would oversee the RCMP, or fighting against RCMP members' efforts at forming an Association.)

THOSE are the areas in which RCMP upper management are, at some level, beholden to the political masters.

But,

A) This has not really been dependent on which party is in power, historically, imo.

and

B) It does not, again imo, extend to interference in specific investigations, collusion, corruption, etc. If the PMO and RCMP were "scratching each other's backs" in relation to Duffy, we never would have seen charges at all.

What has happened here, I would say, is a factor of the RCMP's culture of risk aversion. The investigators and management involved in this investigation probably wanted to do a thorough and fair investigation, but they were likely inherently cautious. They were never going to lay a shotgun blast of charges, splattering everyone. And it's not just the RCMP's call. If you think the investigative team didn't consult with Crown prosecutors beforehand on the strength of their potential charges before they were laid, you're crazy.

Similarly, I don't see any way in hell they take action along the lines of Charlie Angus' letter in the middle of a campaign. I can't see the brass wanting any sort of repeat of 2006.

 

[Boogie]

On another note, the Conservative government is still up to their usual antics:

Federal government employees warned not to talk bad about government on social media

Oh, shi--

Ummm, forget everything I just said everyone...

 

[BigJonsson]

I just realized some of us posting in this thread have been on Neogaf from day 1, lots of low member numbers


^^^^^Hahaha Boogie, be careful

 

[Silexx]

On another note, the Conservative government is still up to their usual antics:

Federal government employees warned not to talk bad about government on social media

Well looks like I'm going dark.

 

[ryan-ts]

I'll be working for the government in September, better watch what I say!

Spoiler

Harper government is awful

 

[Walpurgis]

On another note, the Conservative government is still up to their usual antics:

Federal government employees warned not to talk bad about government on social media

Pathetic. That doesn't even sound legal. I would just ignore it.

 

[gutter_trash]

I'm not sure how this "Mulcair is secret Thatcher loving Conservative" news is supposed to be that big of a scandal. NDP supporters were well aware that ex-Quebec Liberal Mulcair was one of the most centrist candidates for leadership, but he was voted leader regardless because he was considered to be the candidate that had the best chance of winning an election. Similarly policy wise the NDP have significantly moved toward the centre, but again I think NDP supporters are on board because this will yield the best chance of winning the election and ejecting Harper.

Are we expecting NDP supporters to jump ship to the Liberal Party? The Liberals are also a centrist party with a greater right tilt. With policies such as $15 day care, 1 cent gas tax toward cities and Proportional Representation, the NDP are clearly the most left wing party running.

Thatcher is an icon of Conservatism during the age of Reagan-omics. Kind of odd that Mulcair now leads to Pro-Union party of the NDP

English translation:

the issue is not about Left, Center or Right.It's being genuine an dnot come of as an opportunistic turn coat career politician who changes colors of ties with the times just further up the political ladder.

Justin Trudeau doesn't have that problem because Trudeau has been true to his party and ideological stance since day 1. Tom? hmm a fake smile here and there, so one thing in French then say something completely else in English.

 

[CitizenVectron]

Mulcair has always been centrist...when has he pretended otherwise? That's why he was chosen to lead the party and bring it to the centre. It still has many progressive social and economic policies, but they are trying to be in the economic centre.

 

[gutter_trash]

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/08/18/thomas-mulcair-margaret-thatcher-2001_n_8006990.html

video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZzSSp7ag-A

 

[Ondore]

I hope this is the thing that sticks.

OTTAWA—Ray Novak, Stephen Harper’s top aide, was in the room when Nigel Wright first told the prime minister’s lawyer Ben Perrin he was going to give Mike Duffy $90,000 to repay disputed Senate expenses, a court heard Tuesday.

It was a stunning statement at Duffy’s criminal fraud trial that directly contradicts both Novak’s statement to the RCMP and the official Conservative Party version of events, which has been repeated throughout the election campaign: that Novak was not in the loop on Wright’s decision to personally pay Duffy’s expenses.

Who said the good stuff would come during cross-examination?

 

[Tiktaalik]

gutter_trash maybe you should stop to read my posts when you quote them?

Mulcair was probably the most right wing candidate in the NDP leadership race and he won by a significant margin. NDP followers knew what they were getting. These comments are not controversial at all.

 

[eBay Huckster]

gutter_trash maybe you should stop to read my posts when you quote them?

But then how will he justify the constant bizarre tangents he chooses to go off on?

That weird alt-universe PR discussion (where he posited that a switch to PR would've propped up regional parties, like that hasn't actually repeatedly happened under FPTP), every time he ever posts anything about the Separatist Satan (as if the NDP hasn't done more to neuter it than anyone else in 20 years), anything about Mulcair (as if the majority of the NDP are True Communists just waiting for a revolution and were hoodwinked into voting him into leadership in 2012, and not pragmatists by and large)...

 

[Buba Big Guns]

On another note, the Conservative government is still up to their usual antics:

Federal government employees warned not to talk bad about government on social media

lol good luck with that. I have yet to meet a government employee that likes the CPC.

 

[CitizenVectron]

But then how will he justify the constant bizarre tangents he chooses to go off on?

That weird alt-universe PR discussion (where he posited that a switch to PR would've propped up regional parties, like that hasn't actually repeatedly happened under FPTP), every time he ever posts anything about the Separatist Satan (as if the NDP hasn't done more to neuter it than anyone else in 20 years), anything about Mulcair (as if the majority of the NDP are True Communists just waiting for a revolution and were hoodwinked into voting him into leadership in 2012, and not pragmatists by and large)...

His blind partisanship is amusing.

 

[bishoptl]

Oh, shi--

Ummm, forget everything I just said everyone...

So busted.

 

[Walpurgis]

I hope this is the thing that sticks.



Who said the good stuff would come during cross-examination?

Has there ever been a federal government with more corruption than the Harper administration?

 

[CitizenVectron]

Has there ever been a federal government with more corruption than the Harper administration?

Depends on how you define it, but yes there undoubtedly has been. Think of all the rules we have in place now that prevent outright gifting of political contracts to friends, etc. All that didn't exist 100 years ago. Favours and contracts were granted to "friends" all the time.

Not saying the current government isn't corrupt in many ways, but the rules are generally tighter now. Also I don't think corrupt is the right word you are looking for, it's probably "controlling." In that sense, it may be the most.

 

[Walpurgis]

Depends on how you define it, but yes there undoubtedly has been. Think of all the rules we have in place now that prevent outright gifting of political contracts to friends, etc. All that didn't exist 100 years ago. Favours and contracts were granted to "friends" all the time.

Not saying the current government isn't corrupt in many ways, but the rules are generally tighter now. Also I don't think corrupt is the right word you are looking for, it's probably "controlling." In that sense, it may be the most.

I was talking about how it feels like, at all times, there has been at least one ongoing scandal for the Conservatives. I remember one about some lady buying $30 orange juice and there was one about Conservatives going on vacation using jets. There's just so much stealing money, ulterior motives and lying. I only started watching politics a few months ago so I was wondering if there was any federal government (in recent history) that was worse.

 

[lacinius]

What has happened here, I would say, is a factor of the RCMP's culture of risk aversion. The investigators and management involved in this investigation probably wanted to do a thorough and fair investigation, but they were likely inherently cautious. They were never going to lay a shotgun blast of charges, splattering everyone. And it's not just the RCMP's call. If you think the investigative team didn't consult with Crown prosecutors beforehand on the strength of their potential charges before they were laid, you're crazy.

I'm hoping you can help speculate about something... according to this article the RCMP did consult with Crown prosecutors, however they apparently chose not to consult with the Public Prosecution Service of Canada to pursue any charges that might be laid under the Parliament of Canada Act, and instead only stuck with charges based on the Criminal Code. As that article points out, and this article from the Globe and Mail as well, it is very well defined under Section 16 and would have meant charges specifically against Wright... and that never really made sense to me, just leaving something so obvious like that on the table?

 

[mo60]

I hope this is the thing that sticks.



Who said the good stuff would come during cross-examination?

People are already speculating today that ray novak has already left the conservatives campaign most likely because of this. This is based on some of the stuff said on politicial shows yesterday.

 

[Boogie]

I'm hoping you can help speculate about something... according to this article the RCMP did consult with Crown prosecutors, however they apparently chose not to consult with the Public Prosecution Service of Canada to pursue any charges that might be laid under the Parliament of Canada Act, and instead only stuck with charges based on the Criminal Code. As that article points out, and this article from the Globe and Mail as well, it is very well defined under Section 16 and would have meant charges specifically against Wright... and that never really made sense to me, just leaving something so obvious like that on the table?

Hmm, forgot about that aspect of the controversy.

I would suggest the answer lies in looking at section 16 as a whole:

(1) No member of the Senate shall receive or agree to receive any compensation, directly or indirectly, for services rendered or to be rendered to any person, either by the member or another person,

(a) in relation to any bill, proceeding, contract, claim, controversy, charge, accusation, arrest or other matter before the Senate or the House of Commons or a committee of either House; or

(b) for the purpose of influencing or attempting to influence any member of either Hous
e

(2) Every member of the Senate who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine of not less than one thousand dollars and not more than four thousand dollars.

(3) Every person who gives, offers or promises to any member of the Senate any compensation for services described in subsection (1), rendered or to be rendered, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year and to a fine of not less than five hundred dollars and not more than two thousand dollars.

The articles you link to both selectively quote S.16, and I think both gloss over the bolded part. I would suggest the bolded may be where S.16 doesn't apply to the situation. Wright didn't give the 90k to Duffy for Duffy to do anything as a Senator (ie. to "render any service"). He gave the money to solve a political perception problem, so that it could be said the questionable expense money was paid back.

Semantics, but probably a natural defence.

Related, but it appears that no charges have ever been laid under Section 16. of the PoC Act. From the National Post article, according to the law clerk: "there is no record of anyone ever before being prosecuted under sect. 16."

If they considered S.16 at all, they probably didn't feel comfortable that such a case was strong enough to act as a guinea pig case for a completely untested offence. No precedents, no existing case law to look to for a guideline or standard of proof, and an obvious (if challeange-able) defence to the charge? Probably just easier to stick to the offences that you know how to prove. As before, caution rules the day when it comes to such sensitive investigation.


(To emphasize, the above is all speculation, I don't know anything about the investigation that is not in the public domain, etc. etc.)

 

[Silexx]

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/stephen-gordon-canada-is-not-in-a-recession-and-thats-a-bad-thing

Making the case that we’re in a recession is basically optimistic: the problems we’re currently experiencing in the economy will be over soon (if it’s not already) and all that is needed it for policymakers to employ the usual array of countercyclical policies. The “no recession” camp is the home of the pessimists: saying that we’re not in recession is the same thing as saying that what we’re seeing now is about as good as we’re likely to see for many years. According to this view, low growth rates are not a passing phase; they’re the new normal.

There’s little point in blaming the Conservative government — or the Liberal government that preceded it — for “betting the farm” on high oil prices. In volume terms, energy and resource exports have remained steady over the past 15 years. The only effect of higher oil prices was to increase the income generated by Canadian exports. No government would have — or should have — tried to deprive Canadians of that windfall.

The end of that windfall is not even the worst of our problems. Let’s put things in terms of a single worker. There are two ways workers can increase their incomes: work more hours or obtain a higher hourly wage. Lower oil prices are the equivalent of a pay cut: less income for the same amount of production.

This is bad enough, but our aging population is compounding this wage cut with a reduction in the number of hours worked. Fewer and fewer youths are entering working age (defined by the Labour Force Survey as those 15 and over) and the “prime” 25 to 54 working-age population is shrinking in all of the provinces east of Ontario. The only age groups showing strong growth are those 55 and over; those 65 or over accounted for more than two-thirds of the growth in the working-age population over the past year. Episodes of weak or negative growth are likely to become more frequent as more workers continue to retire.

 

[Tiktaalik]

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/stephen-gordon-canada-is-not-in-a-recession-and-thats-a-bad-thing

There’s little point in blaming the Conservative government — or the Liberal government that preceded it — for “betting the farm” on high oil prices. In volume terms, energy and resource exports have remained steady over the past 15 years. The only effect of higher oil prices was to increase the income generated by Canadian exports. No government would have — or should have — tried to deprive Canadians of that windfall.

This is kind of bullshit. The government has a limited amount of items it can prioritize and work on. The Conservatives wasted their time and effort (and our money) by going all in on a single, narrow economic policy ("moar pipelines") and writing "tough on crime" bills that were obviously going to be voided by the courts.

Certainly no Canadian government would have been able to do anything about the drop in prices, but a balanced approach to the economy could have yielded outcomes where there were other thriving industries people could move to.

 

[Cake Boss]

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/stephen-gordon-canada-is-not-in-a-recession-and-thats-a-bad-thing

Bullshit ass article.

It read like some 12 year olds opinion on politics and the world. "All politicians are the same, it don't matter who you vote for" narrow minded crap.

 

[KrellRell]

Bullshit ass article.

It read like some 12 year olds opinion on politics and the world. "All politicians are the same, it don't matter who you vote for" narrow minded crap.

Why isn't it like that?

 

[gutter_trash]

gutter_trash maybe you should stop to read my posts when you quote them?

Mulcair was probably the most right wing candidate in the NDP leadership race and he won by a significant margin. NDP followers knew what they were getting. These comments are not controversial at all.

a progressive cannot praise Thatcher for anything; look up her history regarding her position on South Africa's apartheid........ eessh.

 

[CitizenVectron]

a progressive cannot praise Thatcher for anything; look up her history regarding her position on South Africa's apartheid........ eessh.

And as we've said, Mulcair is economically moderate, not progressive. He is socially and environmentally progressive. The NDP chose him for these exact reasons as he is basically a Liberal.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Man, I don't get into talk about polls. Have I told you about PR though?

Sorry, it's maharg who hates Nanos. My mistake! For some reason I always confuse the two of you. I think it's the fact you both have H in your names.

I'm not sure how this "Mulcair is secret Thatcher loving Conservative" news is supposed to be that big of a scandal. NDP supporters were well aware that ex-Quebec Liberal Mulcair was one of the most centrist candidates for leadership, but he was voted leader regardless because he was considered to be the candidate that had the best chance of winning an election. Similarly policy wise the NDP have significantly moved toward the centre, but again I think NDP supporters are on board because this will yield the best chance of winning the election and ejecting Harper.

Are we expecting NDP supporters to jump ship to the Liberal Party? The Liberals are also a centrist party with a greater right tilt. With policies such as $15 day care, 1 cent gas tax toward cities and Proportional Representation, the NDP are clearly the most left wing party running.

Mulcair has always been centrist...when has he pretended otherwise? That's why he was chosen to lead the party and bring it to the centre. It still has many progressive social and economic policies, but they are trying to be in the economic centre.

Ah yes, all those centrists who praise Thatcherism, negotiate with Harper to join the Conservatives, vow to be Israel's staunchest allies, and promise to keep tax cuts and social programs designed mainly for the rich. There's definitely an ideology at work in there, but I don't think "progressive" is the word you're looking for.

I'm calling it now, save this bad boy for posterity:

Tom Mulcair's lack of charisma will be the deciding factor that costs the NDP the election.

Two more months of the Canadian public trying to stay awake while Mulcair drones on in the background of rockstar Trudeau and evil villain Harper? He has no chance. I had engineering professors more engaging than this guy.

The average Canadian doesn't watch CSpan. This is the country's first extended, widespread exposure to Mulcair. And he is incredibly boring. Leaders aren't supposed to be boring, and the more we see of him, the more this will be reflected in the polls.

I think that's why they're trying to limit his exposure. Have you seen him trying to interact with people? It's cringe-worthy. His speeches have generally been pretty lousy, too, and based on that first debate it's not hard to see why the NDP are trying to limit the number of debates, either.

I don't know if it will matter, though. I'd like to think it will, but Canadian history is full of examples of "boring" working.

Has there ever been a federal government with more corruption than the Harper administration?

Pretty much every government in Canadian history has faced some allegations of corruption, going all the way back to the Pacific Scandal that briefly brought down Sir John A. Chretien had Adscam, Mulroney had Airbus, Diefenbaker had the Munsinger Affair and the Avro Arrow...this stuff happens with every government.

That said, Harper and his people certainly do seem to attract more than their fair share of allegations. Conservative supporters would probably claim it's evidence of media bias, but I don't know...the big difference here is that people have gone to jail and been found guilty of various offenses in courts of law. I don't know how many previous governments have had that happen to them to this degree.

Hilariously, when you Google "Most corrupt Canadian Prime Minister", Stephen Harper's name pops up.

 

[Tiktaalik]

News Flash:

All leaders of the main political parties are free marketers!

If you want to vote for a party that will nationalize industries you will have the tough choice of either the Communist Party of Canada or Communist Party of Canada (Marxist–Leninist).

For the average progressive voter who is the better option? Is it Trudeau who also leads a free market party? His most recent rally was shared with close ally Ontario Liberal Party Premier Wynne, who's main policy plank right now is to privatize the province's energy utility. Privatization of course was pretty much the main Margaret Thatcher policy.

 

[Pedrito]

Stop to trying to make that Thatcher quote happen. It's not going to happen.

I imagine a Bloc supporter spending days and days reading transcripts of old debates, looking for that one quote that would sink the NDP. He finally finds that Thatcher quote. A devilish smile appears on his face : "Checkmate, Mulcair", he says.

Well guess what? No one cares. Leftists will change their votes to Green or Bloc, ensuring Harper four more years? Yeah that'd make sense. Or vote for the even more centrist liberals? I don't think so.

It's a disapointing quote, but I doubt it gets much traction at all.

 

[CitizenVectron]

Ah yes, all those centrists who praise Thatcherism, negotiate with Harper to join the Conservatives, vow to be Israel's staunchest allies, and promise to keep tax cuts and social programs designed mainly for the rich. There's definitely an ideology at work in there, but I don't think "progressive" is the word you're looking for.

1) At the time Thatcher and her ilk were popular because they were seen as capable of cutting through the malaise that gripped western nations. They were popular with moderates as well.

2) Mulcair negotiated to join the round table on the environment, a non-partisan council that is not held accountable by the PMO. He did not negotiate to join their party or run as a candidate, and the reason he pulled out of the negotiations is because the CPC didn't want him to be able to voice his opinion on the environment.

3) Support for Israel is not a partisan issue in terms of the left-right spectrum. I disagree with him on it, but it's not an ideological issue.

4) As many have said, he's an economic moderate. He doesn't support raising personal taxes on any class, but supports raising corporate taxes instead. This puts him in the middle of the economic spectrum. He also supports some progressive economic ideas, such as subsidized daycare spaces.

He's an economic moderate and a social progressive. And supporting a politician in one area doesn't mean you support them in another. He could have supported Thatcher's economic policies at the time (as many did) but still have opposed her foreign policy as it related to South Africa. Look at Brian Mulroney, who was a staunch fiscal conservative but vehemently opposed Apartheid.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Let's see...the NDP wants to keep Harper's UCCB, a taxable benefit that doesn't take into account how much money people make.

The NDP wants to bring in a heavily subsidized daycare plan, that again has been shown to help wealthy parents a lot more than anyone else. (By contrast, the Library of Parliament reviewed the Liberal plan and found their proposal would lift over 300,000 children out of poverty.)

The NDP are running on a deceptive proposal to raise the minimum wage, making it sound like it would be a huge benefit to everyone...when the reality is it would only apply to federal workers, and the most generous assumptions show that it would benefit -- at the absolute most -- 50,000 people. A realistic projection has this benefiting fewer than 30,000 people, and by some estimates finds that fewer than 1,000 people would actually see their incomes raised.

Go ahead and be a "free marketer" all you want. Just don't try and pretend that the NDP are some bastion of progressivism any more. And simply proclaiming that "nobody cares!" sounds a lot like yesterday's CPC supporter: just because something offends your world view/sounds like it could potentially hurt support for your party doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

 

[Pedrito]

If anything, it could encourage liberals to jump ship to the NDP, knowing that Mulcair isn't a commie after all.

 

[Azih]

I don't like Muclair's Middle East policy but it's still better than the bullshit Justin Trudeau did during the Gaza invasion.

And honestly like I've said: I'm pretty much a single issue voter until we get PR. And Trudeau is wrong on that as well.

The fact that the NDP is simultaneously being attacked on being the scary socialists AND on Mulcair being the second coming of Ronald Reagan is allowing him to hold the center.

Edit: After all it's impossible to attack the NDP from the left flank as they've been branded so thoroughly in the past. The Notley win and Mulcair being attacked as too right wing has helped with the right flank.

Trudeau's support for C51 has really hurt the Liberals this cycle as it's plonked them as being like Harper on domestic security.

 

[Walpurgis]

Hilariously, when you Google "Most corrupt Canadian Prime Minister", Stephen Harper's name pops up.

Lol it even does that thing it does when you google definitions.

I don't like Muclair's Middle East policy but it's still better than the bullshit Justin Trudeau did during the Gaza invasion.

What did he do?

 

[Tiktaalik]

Let's see...the NDP wants to keep Harper's UCCB, a taxable benefit that doesn't take into account how much money people make.

The NDP wants to bring in a heavily subsidized daycare plan, that again has been shown to help wealthy parents a lot more than anyone else. (By contrast, the Library of Parliament reviewed the Liberal plan and found their proposal would lift over 300,000 children out of poverty.)

The Liberal plan is inarguably superior to the current scheme the Conservative Party has created. However, the big problem with it is that it doesn’t create affordable childcare. The Liberal plan will give parents of children $5400 a year for each child with an additional $1000 for children under 6. This amounts to roughly $534 a month. The problem however is that this great tax benefit does nothing about the state of childcare, and childcare remains absurdly expensive. In Vancouver the median monthly fee is $1215 for a toddler. Toronto it’s $1324. Calgary $936, Saskatoon $700 etc.

In contrast the NDP plan would create $15 a day daycare, which going by a 5 day week would create daycare costing $300 per month. Using the example of a single low income Vancouverite with a single toddler, under the NDP plan they'd pay $300 a month for daycare, whereas under the Liberal plan, supposing the person put 100% of their monthly benefit toward daycare, they’d be paying $681.

There is no doubt in my mind that low income Canadians would be better served by affordable daycare than the Liberal tax credit.

 

[Azih]

What did he do?

Completely agreed with Harper on everything:

https://www.liberal.ca/statement-liberal-party-canada-leader-justin-trudeau-situation-israel-gaza/

At the very least Mulcair asked to set up a ceasefire, it's not much but it's something:

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comm...alls_in_line_with_harpers_stance_on_gaza.html

Here's the thing. Trudeau and Mulcair are both incredibly 'centrist'. At least the rest of Mulcair's freaking party pulls him to the left whereas Trudeau's party has a proven history of campaigning on the left and then governing from the right.