CalgaryGrit: Vote Early, Vote Often

Friday, September 09, 2005

Vote Early, Vote Often

I'm just bringing the poll back to the top - you can vote once a day until Tuesday at noon. For background, you can read my "Case for King" or my "Trudeau vs Macdonald profile".

20 Comments:

I think there's a lot of sentimentalism attached to Macdonald, and it blurs the lines between his mythic status and reality. Macdonald was a corrupt, big government interventionist who openly and proudly diverted money to his friends who then payed that money directly into Conservative party coffers. Doesn't that sound familiar? I wonder how today's Conservatives feel about that?

By Ryan Ringer, at 8:11 p.m.
What baffles me is Laurier's lead.

By bgilliard, at 8:20 p.m.
Macdonald was a corrupt, big government interventionist who openly and proudly diverted money to his friends who then payed that money directly into Conservative party coffers. Doesn't that sound familiar? I wonder how today's Conservatives feel about that?

I would agree then with James Stewart's assessment that he would have been a Liberal.

Total burn. :)

By Jim (Progressive Right), at 9:35 p.m.
It's Mackenzie King all the way. We predict a King/Trudeau showdown in the final round. Just wait and see...

By daveberta, at 12:27 a.m.
Why would Laurier's lead baffle anyone?

By Greg Staples, at 10:16 a.m.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Liam O'Brien, at 10:45 a.m.
Trudeau should be exhumed and hanged in a public place.

I think Kenneth McDonald Summed it up best:

"In his sixteen years of office Pierre Elliot Trudeau made himself a nuisance by inserting the tentacles of government where they had no place to be: in the private lives of the citizens. The man who declared that there was no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation set about making its presence felt in every room of the house."

Trudeau polarized this ocuntry in the worst kind of way, ignored or worsened fair concerns expressed by Quebec on culture/language, pilfered Alberta on energy, pilfered coastal provinces on offshore energy and fisheries, eroded our common law freedoms, bastardized and maimed the drafts in the Charter process, started the trend of skyrocketing deficits, punished foriegn investment, did nothing for inflation, skyrocketed our tax bills, and centralized power away from many democratic institutions...

I'm sorry I didn't see this contest sooner. I think most Canadian Prime Ministers weren't all that great. I guess I'd have voted for Dief or Mulroney. Laurrier was ok too. I tend to agree that I don't understand why Macdonald does as well as he does (except for nostalgic reasons).

I think the best prime ministers were the ones we never had -- Peter Lougheed, John Crosbie, Robert Stanfield, George Drew, John Bracken...

anyway... thanks for the chance to blow off some historic PM steam!

By Liam O'Brien, at 10:48 a.m.
Liam, you might not be so enamored with Ol' Irish Eyes if you read the Globe today which excerpted parts of Peter C. Newman's new book.

TB

By Ted Betts, at 10:52 a.m.
What baffles me is Laurier's lead.

It was Kings Liberals and the "none is too many" policy that sent many Jewish refugees back to Europe and to Hitlers gas chambers. for that alone he shouldn't be given a second thought.

By Nastyboy, at 12:40 p.m.
With just over 24 hours to go, PET and John A are separated by only 3 votes...wow.

By calgarygrit, at 1:40 p.m.
I don't read the Globe anymore. I won't read it until they no longer publish bigots like Margarent Wente.

But just so we're clear, I am by no means "enamoured" with any of Canada's PM's...

I supported Mulroney govts FTA and NAFTA, privatization, replaceing Manufacturer's tax with GST, the mild (Too too too mild as the deficit would show us) spending restraints, Meech/Ch'town, etc...

I did not support c-17 or the regional development agencies that have been an embarassment in every region of Canada. I did not support the ridiculous decision on CF-18 or the refusal to adequately deal with NL's & BC's concerns re fisheries or the unwillingness to adequately reign-in the deficit.

If I hadn't been playing GI Joes back during the '83 Convention and had been old enough to vote, I'd have voted for John Crosbie, not Mulroney. And If I hadn't been a glimmer in Dad's eye in '76 I'd have voted for Horner or Wagner at that stage.

It's all very relative. I think most Canadian PM's are far too much in what Thatcher called "The mushy middle." And there is no doubt Old Irish eyes was as arrogant as the rest of 'em. . . though still probably not as arrogant as Chuck McTeer was in person...(at least from what I saw when I met him several times between 1998 and 2003).

By Liam O'Brien, at 2:34 p.m.
No matter how awful any other Prime Minister has ever been, no one can beat Trudeau for the lasting damage he did to this country. Digging him up and hanging him would be far to good for him. I just picture him in hell with the devil's pitchfork jammed up his ass, permanently.

By Anonymous, at 11:17 p.m.
Wow, over a few hours Sir John has gone from tied to several hundred in the lead.

Those righties must have quite a last minute campaign organized to say the least...

By Anonymous, at 11:38 p.m.
MacDonald almost single-handedly pushed through the CPR so that the country was linked together.

Laurier was a good war time Prime Minister during WW1. He was the chap who saw Canada's real worth stating, "This is Canada's Century." At the time, we were probably the 4th most powerful nation and the 3rd most powerful by the end of the 2nd War. The Canadian dollar was worth more than the American. All this was squandered by Trudeaudileriousness and Mr. Martin's father who invented "deficit financing."

By Anonymous, at 2:08 a.m.
If it ends up as Sir John A. vs. Sir Wilfrid, that'll be exactly as I'd have hoped right at the start.

And in that final vote, I'd say that Macdonald had the more significant accomplishments (i.e. creating the country and getting the railway done) but that Laurier was the better man (personally and philosophically), and he gets my vote on that basis.

Laurier's tenure -- 1896-1911 -- and what he went down over (Free Trade) show what kind of leader he was.

By The Tiger, at 7:31 a.m.
Actually, I really like Laurier. I think he efforts towards free trade, relatively better record of respect for provinces, creation of two western provinces, immigration, etc..and other items would likely make me vote for him (out of the options left).

Few who know me would accuse me of being a Liberal. I look forward to the day when Harper is Prime Minister.

Anyway, my vote is for Laurier.

By Liam O'Brien, at 9:06 a.m.
Also, to the last anon. commentor, Laurier was NOT PM during WWI. Borden was PM at that time, and led quite an interesting coalition.

I guess Laurier might be considered a wartime PM if we include Boer War...

By Liam O'Brien, at 9:07 a.m.
I think we are far too close to Trudeau's time to be able to judge his legacy reasonably. One can have no doubt about the impact of the original BNA Act (part of John A's legacy) while the impact of the Charter (part of PET's legacy) is still not exactly settled. Cam Carter's point is a good one...shouldn't have been John A vs. Trudeau at this round.

By Unknown, at 12:01 p.m.
I am another Big-C Conservative who will be voting for Wilf Laurier in the final round.

"Macdonald was a corrupt, big gov't interventionist..." and so was Trudeau. 'nuff said.

By Anonymous, at 2:04 p.m.
I see that my syntax was inexact. My vote's for Laurier. I think he was the best PM, hands down.

By The Tiger, at 8:01 p.m.

Friday, September 09, 2005

Vote Early, Vote Often

20 Comments:

About

Previous

About Me

Friday, September 09, 2005

Vote Early, Vote Often

20 Comments:

About

Previous

About Me