This thread is about Trudeau. Trudeau's party attacked Scheer about his same sex marriage views. I suppose I could have picked the abortion one, but no matter, the mud was being flung. Trudeau then showed that on a similar file he fell short of his own standards, and admitted to covering it up. I suggested rank hypocrisy on Trudeau's part inconsistent with his high view of himself, and his party.

I am not here to debate same sex marriage with you, since it is the settled law of the land. I believe the conservative party dropped its intent to change that from its charter, or whatever it is.

As for making assumptions about people you don't know... unbecoming. I am leaving it there whether you want to or not.

1 in 4 "truly offended" ... that's surprising. On the news street interviews very few people seem to be truly offended.

Assuming Trudeau does get re elected what does this mean to the Canadian brand?

I'm not sure what "the Canadian brand" means. Is this intended to relate Trudeau and a horse's arse? If it's not some sort of pun please explain.

I could have written it differently to make it more clear. It was just that it was his double standard I was referencing so the contrast was his inconsistent treatment of two blokes who had done similar things...one on his team and one on the other.

If I meant it was your man - really yours, TD - it wouldn't have been a double standard. Hope that clarifies it.

Nae borr, as we say in NI. The problem with debating on forums I guess.

Anyways, I am outta this thread... seems to be getting a bit too shrill.

Probably not. 60-something percent of that one-in-four are Conservative voters; I suspect they are generally offended by the idea of Trudeau, and this has changed neither their offendedness nor their voting intention. I haven't done the math of multiplying the offence percentage by the voting intention percentage, but at a glance it looks as though this really hasn't changed the overall pattern of voter intention at all.

It seems professional pollsters disagree with Oakvillian:

https://news.yahoo.com/conservatives...200234461.html

Did you read the article? The Conservative polling numbers are "stagnant" (because, according to the article, "Scheer has been 'unable to persuade voters unhappy with Trudeau to look at the Conservative Party.'" The Libs have in fact lost ground (a couple of percentage points) to the Greens. While doubtless there are a few who have been moved to change their voting intention by the blackface photos, it's as likely a result of the Greta Thunberg effect and genuine concerns about lack of action on the climate.

As one of the slightly-less-rabid comments on the Yahoo piece notes, the more astonishing story here is that, after Blackface-Gate, Scheer's numbers haven't moved. This is where Scheer should be absolutely burying Trudeau. If I were a Conservative strategist, I'd be pretty worried about that about now.

Well, yes.

I'm now seeing very many facebook posts, from people I would not have thought politically active, on the theme that Trudeau's been an idiot but one should not lose sight of the big picture; Scheer is a man from the 1950s, the Brits and the Americans have chosen poorly, don't make the same mistake. I doubt that bots or political consultants subscribe to equine or aquarium threads so I think there's a real fear among Canadians that Trudeau's foibles could let in a dangerous regressive. Ford would serve as well as Johnson or Trump as an example of what the Conservatives have to offer. (Did the conservatives drop "progressive" from their name, btw? They certainly dropped it from their policies).

Trudeau announces that a re-elected government led by him would provide a 10 per cent boost to Old Age Security (OAS) at age 75 and a 25 per cent increase to the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) for widows. - https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/lib...aign-1.5287896

Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer said Tuesday in London, Ont. that after repealing the Liberals’ climate pricing plan, they would bring back “very popular” tax credits including the Children’s Sports and Fitness tax credit. - https://globalnews.ca/video/5947238/...ar-tax-credits

This strikes me as a really weird campaign promise. The Children’s Sports and Fitness tax credit is only of benefit to people who spend significant sums on having their progeny coached. They're necessarily affluent and, while they might be greedy, there are few of them. Promising to repeal an attempt at alleviating the impact of climate change, an urgent matter for all, to chuck a bung to a few well off people is, I suppose, the essence of modern conservatism but making like an ostrich isn't going to broaden his appeal.