[Bodah]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

The CPC will be ahead of the game with television and print ads to attempt to define JT even before the campaign gets underway.

"Do you think it's easy to make priorities?".

I think, or more like if I we're them I would be carefull with the ads against Trudeau once he's leader for the next election. This isn't any old Liberal Leader, for some this is their messiah. If they come out like they have been coming out during past elections, I suspect it may back fire on them, and may very well churn out sympathy for him. Like when they made fun of Chretiens mug, e.g. If any of the ads point out he is were he is because of his last name, no matter how true it may or may not be. They're done.

[Caelon]

raydan raydan:

So it's another, "they do/did it too, so it's OK if I do it".

Guess it's a lot easier to find something bad to say about the other guy than something good about ourselves.

I believe it is more the norm for all sides to participate in smear campaigns. It has been going on for so long I am not sure who started it in Canada anymore.
It would be nice to go back to the times where parties defined a platform and defended their positions. Now it is inuendo and personal attacks.

The media has jumped on the the negativity of smear campaigns as it makes good press. It would be a novel approach if they focused reporting on substance instead of mud slinging. Infortunately it is a vicious circle. The political parties are looking for media coverage to gain presence in the public's mind. The mud slinging gets headlines and substance gets buried. Ergo if you want public attention then negative smear campaigns generates headlines. Headlines are what the public seams to remember in the voting booth. It worked last time so repeat process at higher level for more headlines.

[raydan]

Oh I know it's both sides, still doesn't make it right... probably why I don't like politics, politicians and by extension, political hacks.

[CanadianJeff]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

That's fair. Not all conservatives and not all Liberals are happy about Trudeau but I think enough express it that my point isn't without merit.

Now this Conservative is conflicted. On the one hand I like the idea of Trudeau leading the Libs, because I think once you start to shine the light on who he actually is he should be easy to take down.

On the other other hand, I worry, because I wonder...taken down by whom?

Enough of the media swing far enough left that they'll only give Trudeau so much cover once the real campaign for Prime Minister begins. I would expect Trudeau to get it hard from both sides - right and left. At this point I worry the Trudeau votes go left to the NDP. Plus I don't see a strong Conservative replacement for Harper. I worry with two lame duck leaders the NDP looks to be where the smart money will bet on who the next Prime Minister is.

You mean the same media that was present was Harper was elected the last two times? I get so very tired of this "Liberal media" claim. I think the record speaks for itself.

It shouldn't be too far from common sense to know that if your heavily conservative almost everything is going to look Liberal for you.

[EyeBrock]

There's no doubt that JT will be more appealing to the vast majority of our left-leaning media. Steve has made no bones that he sees the media as an opponent; it’s been like that from day one. He has nobody to blame but himself.

This side taking is no secret to any of us with an ounce of objectivity. It’s glaringly apparent in the GTA with Ford vs the Toronto Star and the Toronto CBC.

It’s not a conservative political stance I’m taking, it’s just accepted by most on here in the real world as the way it is.

The fact that the media are left of centre really isn't an issue for most of us. Teachers and journos are usually left of centre, cops and soldiers are usually right of centre. It's life and these professions attract people of a particular educational level and interest. It would be boring if we were all the same.

News will always have an editorial slant or particular agenda, people in the media are mere mortals with opinions and points-of-view like all of us. Pretending our news is bias free is disingenuous and naive.

[Zipperfish]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

There's no doubt that JT will be more appealing to the vast majority of our left-leaning media. Steve has made no bones that he sees the media as an opponent; it’s been like that from day one. He has nobody to blame but himself.

This side taking is no secret to any of us with an ounce of objectivity. It’s glaringly apparent in the GTA with Ford vs the Toronto Star and the Toronto CBC.

It’s not a conservative political stance I’m taking, it’s just accepted by most on here in the real world as the way it is.

The fact that the media are left of centre really isn't an issue for most of us. Teachers and journos are usually left of centre, cops and soldiers are usually right of centre. It's life and these professions attract people of a particular educational level and interest. It would be boring if we were all the same.

News will always have an editorial slant or particular agenda, people in the media are mere mortals with opinions and points-of-view like all of us. Pretending our news is bias free is disingenuous and naive.

It's just as obvious to me, here in Vancouver, where all four major dailies (National Post, Globe and Mail, Vancouver Sun, Vancouver Province) supported Bush in his invasion of Iraq. And the Eocnomist--another paper I used to like. All four papers also endorsed Harper in the last election. As did the Economist.

Yes, assuming the media are bias free is indeed naive.

[Lemmy]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

It's just as obvious to me, here in Vancouver, where all four major dailies (National Post, Globe and Mail, Vancouver Sun, Vancouver Province) supported Bush in his invasion of Iraq. And the Eocnomist--another paper I used to like. All four papers also endorsed Harper in the last election. As did the Economist.

Yes, assuming the media are bias free is indeed naive.

[Gunnair]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

There's no doubt that JT will be more appealing to the vast majority of our left-leaning media. Steve has made no bones that he sees the media as an opponent; it’s been like that from day one. He has nobody to blame but himself.

This side taking is no secret to any of us with an ounce of objectivity. It’s glaringly apparent in the GTA with Ford vs the Toronto Star and the Toronto CBC.

It’s not a conservative political stance I’m taking, it’s just accepted by most on here in the real world as the way it is.

The fact that the media are left of centre really isn't an issue for most of us. Teachers and journos are usually left of centre, cops and soldiers are usually right of centre. It's life and these professions attract people of a particular educational level and interest. It would be boring if we were all the same.

News will always have an editorial slant or particular agenda, people in the media are mere mortals with opinions and points-of-view like all of us. Pretending our news is bias free is disingenuous and naive.

It's just as obvious to me, here in Vancouver, where all four major dailies (National Post, Globe and Mail, Vancouver Sun, Vancouver Province) supported Bush in his invasion of Iraq. And the Eocnomist--another paper I used to like. All four papers also endorsed Harper in the last election. As did the Economist.

Yes, assuming the media are bias free is indeed naive.

oops... reality just kicked in.

[CanadianJeff]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

There's no doubt that JT will be more appealing to the vast majority of our left-leaning media. Steve has made no bones that he sees the media as an opponent; it’s been like that from day one. He has nobody to blame but himself.

This side taking is no secret to any of us with an ounce of objectivity. It’s glaringly apparent in the GTA with Ford vs the Toronto Star and the Toronto CBC.

It’s not a conservative political stance I’m taking, it’s just accepted by most on here in the real world as the way it is.

The fact that the media are left of centre really isn't an issue for most of us. Teachers and journos are usually left of centre, cops and soldiers are usually right of centre. It's life and these professions attract people of a particular educational level and interest. It would be boring if we were all the same.

News will always have an editorial slant or particular agenda, people in the media are mere mortals with opinions and points-of-view like all of us. Pretending our news is bias free is disingenuous and naive.

If that's in response to myself your straw manning a bit. I never stated the media was without bias simply that to simply declare a Liberal bias and leave it at that is very close minded.

[EyeBrock]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

There's no doubt that JT will be more appealing to the vast majority of our left-leaning media. Steve has made no bones that he sees the media as an opponent; it’s been like that from day one. He has nobody to blame but himself.

This side taking is no secret to any of us with an ounce of objectivity. It’s glaringly apparent in the GTA with Ford vs the Toronto Star and the Toronto CBC.

It’s not a conservative political stance I’m taking, it’s just accepted by most on here in the real world as the way it is.

The fact that the media are left of centre really isn't an issue for most of us. Teachers and journos are usually left of centre, cops and soldiers are usually right of centre. It's life and these professions attract people of a particular educational level and interest. It would be boring if we were all the same.

News will always have an editorial slant or particular agenda, people in the media are mere mortals with opinions and points-of-view like all of us. Pretending our news is bias free is disingenuous and naive.

It's just as obvious to me, here in Vancouver, where all four major dailies (National Post, Globe and Mail, Vancouver Sun, Vancouver Province) supported Bush in his invasion of Iraq. And the Eocnomist--another paper I used to like. All four papers also endorsed Harper in the last election. As did the Economist.

Yes, assuming the media are bias free is indeed naive.

I agree Zip, there are agendas in all media outlets. We need to vigilant about what we believe.

[EyeBrock]

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

There's no doubt that JT will be more appealing to the vast majority of our left-leaning media. Steve has made no bones that he sees the media as an opponent; it’s been like that from day one. He has nobody to blame but himself.

This side taking is no secret to any of us with an ounce of objectivity. It’s glaringly apparent in the GTA with Ford vs the Toronto Star and the Toronto CBC.

It’s not a conservative political stance I’m taking, it’s just accepted by most on here in the real world as the way it is.

The fact that the media are left of centre really isn't an issue for most of us. Teachers and journos are usually left of centre, cops and soldiers are usually right of centre. It's life and these professions attract people of a particular educational level and interest. It would be boring if we were all the same.

News will always have an editorial slant or particular agenda, people in the media are mere mortals with opinions and points-of-view like all of us. Pretending our news is bias free is disingenuous and naive.

If that's in response to myself your straw manning a bit. I never stated the media was without bias simply that to simply declare a Liberal bias and leave it at that is very close minded.

You are reading between lines that ‘aint there.

[Jonny_C]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

...there are agendas in all media outlets. We need to vigilant about what we believe.

Particularly when the agenda creeps into things that are written as "straight news".

Editorializing is expected (and usually quite obvious) in columnists' pieces, and in things like newspaper editorials.

It's trickier to find clues to agenda in "straight news" items, where one has to examine particular words, turns of phrase, emphasis and so on. But it's usually present; subtle but present.

Vigilant, yes... and skeptical. It's usually best to try to cobble your own opinion together from a variety of sources that write from a variety of viewpoints.

[QBall]

Any chance these guys could actually start debating policy (i.e. the real issues)? I know it's just a small thing, however the CPC, NDP and the rest won't be pussyfooting about with bullshit when the real debates start.

[Curtman]

QBall QBall:

Any chance these guys could actually start debating policy (i.e. the real issues)? I know it's just a small thing, however the CPC, NDP and the rest won't be pussyfooting about with bullshit when the real debates start.

I hope not. The leadership convention isn't about deciding policy, we do that at policy conventions. It's an opportunity to see which of the candidates will implement Liberal policy, and which will refuse to do that, and how they will do that.

Justin Trudeau Justin Trudeau:

“This leadership is the beginning of a platform-development process, not the end of it.”

It's more about how they handle themselves under pressure I think.

[bootlegga]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

andyt andyt:

Yes, he earned $44k a year. Many middle class kids do this well or much better, many get a job as a teacher right out of school. He left teaching to return to McGill to study engineering. He married after he left McGill.

Many teachers don't come out of school and land full-time teaching jobs. It's a privileged to just drop your full-time job to return to school. Find me other middle-class people that just drop their full time job to go back to school full-time. You'll have a hard time.

I did.

And it's not a privilege - it's a sacrifice. At least it was when I did it in 2008 to get my Master's degree. We scrimped and saved and sacrificed all sorts of things (new vehicles, staying in our condo instead of buying a house, fancy vacations, eating out, etc).

Why - because it allowed me to boost my future earning power and provide a better life down the road. Granted I didn't have the $20k annual stipend Trudeau got, but I did work PT on weekends and evenings to earn something.

I have no doubt that Trudeau went back for his engineering degree for the very same reason - future earning power. I know half a dozen engineers and they all make solid incomes (125k - 175k).

It sounds to me like he wasn't really planning on going into politics this early in his life - after all, why invest years in school and thousands of dollars on an engineering degree if you're going to go into politics a couple years after you graduate?

No, it's sounds to me like he was planning on living a typical middle class life and got swept up by a party desperate for someone, anyone who could get them some votes.

I do agree that everyone doesn't come out of school and find a FT job right away, at least not if they're not willing to relocate. Students graduating here in Alberta can get a job in rural Alberta rather easily, while getting one in Edmonton or Calgary is a matter of timing and more often, luck.