I recommend not comparing things if you don't intend to make a point with that comparison.
This is just another distraction, nothing more.
Oh yeah that's been a recurring theme for a while now. Not just with Tudd, mind
And since the search actually works now I can go dig up an old post I made ages ago and put it to work again
Y'know, I'm seeing these words used an awful lot lately
"It would just be interesting to see if..."
"I think it's interesting that..."
"It would be interesting to know..."
And they're increasingly starting to strike me as null words because they're almost always followed up by things that are not actually things that would be or are interesting, they're followed up by thinly veiled tribalistic agenda pushing like
"It would just be interesting to see some more information about [YOUR TRIBE HERE]" While talking about statistics that don't look good for a certain tribe
"I just think it's interesting how [YOUR TRIBE HERE] does an awful lot of [YOUR OBJECTIONABLE THING HERE]" Most often seen in relation to things like race and religion. Mostly two or three specific ones
"It would just be interesting to know more about [YOUR TRIBE HERE]"
"It's just interesting how people believe [YOUR TRIBE HERE] but not [THE OTHER TRIBE HERE]"
And y'know what
I just think that's real interesting
In general, individual polls are never worth reporting on their own. They are but a single data point that should be compared against others, weighted by pollster methodology, and adjusted for the pollster's house effect (general bias compared to other pollsters). Yes, everything here is factually correct, but you cannot take this single poll at its face value or glean any meaning from it without more data to compare it to.
That being said, I think the main issue here is that it's pretty transparent why this thread was posted in the first place and other posters are recognizing that.
Approval ratings aren't the final indicator of success, but Trump's being so low so soon into his tenure combined with warnings that it would be tbis way tells an awful lot in his case.
Then why the fuck did you bring it up? These threads have turned into nothing but traps to drag these people in to fuel your narcissism.
but he danced with the indians
Of course, because you could never get off your so called "God Emperor"'s Micro cock.
I'm not all that crazy about Trudeau, I would much rather had Mulcair as PM. But Trudeau is still better than Harper
That arrow is the wrong way round
Over what communication medium was the poll conducted with?
Have a car review by RCR
https://youtu.be/dn_HAvA33q8?t=199
I know, it sounds like a weird thing to bring up, but I've transcribed the part that ties into your point here
"The ZZW30 (and that takes a long time to say) is modern, but not in a millenial sort of way. It refutes the obnoxiousness of the "just saying!" culture. You know, those people. Who punctuate their shitty opinions with "just saying", because they want to have an opinion, but avoid criticism for having it. So they drop it in there as if it's something they don't wanna have to say, but somehow feel compelled to. But what they don't realize is that overusing the word "just" undermines their own authority. It's like they're apologizing in advance for an opinion no reasonable person could hold."
That's not irony.
Math is hard.
Yeah man, America's really going to shit with all the new taxes, wars, and socialist programs he's implementing.
Guess what? I'm Canadian too, and this shit has been reported by Notoriously left-wing Huffington Post and is the result of an opinion poll by the Angus Reid Institute. This isn't just some "evil right-wing attack" on Trudeau but the 2 right-wing news outlets in Canada, this is reflective of Canadian society being thoroughly disappointed in his social justice agenda and the way he's conducting himself both at home and abroad. Between his national embarrassment of a state trip to India, him snubbing the Belgian royal family during their state visit by not meeting them, and him yelling at backbencher MPs who question why they weren't consulted about legislation that affects their ability to get re-elected, he's shown that he's absolutely unfit to be a leader. The Liberals should have elected Marc Garneau.
Trudeau really needs to work on his PR and leverage media to his advantage. Right-wing populism is on the rise even up here in Canada because of the bullshit happening south of our border. Canada's conservatives aren't comletely taken over by demagoguery just yet, but there's enough of a trend towards it that I know for a fact I don't want another conservative federal government in power for a while. Not after Harper and all the anti-democratic shit he pulled. In the end he tried to win points by hopping on the Islamophobia bandwagon and was blown away in the election because of it.
Trudeau hasn't been doing a bad job, but he hasn't been spectacular either, and he's lost points by reneging on several key election promises, ending the first-past-the-post voting system being the foremost among them. Meanwhile, conservatives being conservatives, hit pieces by news media, tabloid rags and social media personalities abound - not to mention conservative campaign organizations. There's a shitload of disinformation out there to make him look bad. The Liberals need to stay on top of making as big a noise about all their achievements as the conservatives have about every little shortcoming.
If SJW complaints and minor grievances about his public etiquette are all you can muster then I can't imagine Trudeau is doing all that badly in reality.
Personally what i see in this country is the looming cloud of a bunch of fuckwit alt-right populist assholes gaining a voice, and despite not voting for the liberals I'm quite happy to have Trudeau in office doing his goofy weekend warrior shtick rather than having a bunch of conservative reactionaries actively regressing the state of our civil liberties.
His trip to india was a little embarassing but I'd rather have that than the barbaric practices hotline that harper wanted to implement if he had won
pffffft
Trudeau sold billions of dollars worth of weapons to fucking Saudi Arabia, he's honestly not that much better than Trump. He's just more efficient, handsome, and "nice".
He isn't being sued by a porn star. He also hasn't employed his family in key positions of his government. He also hasn't praised white nationalists and neo nazis by calling them very nice people. he hasn't blown up a footballers for simply kneeling and expressing their right to peacefully protest.
I pfft your pffft
Making a multi-billion dollar arms deal with a country that has a piss poor human rights record and is responsible for financing terrorist cells that are destabilizing the middle east and threatening the West is kind of worse than Trump's bumbling incompetence and racism.
Trump is doing both. x + y = trump is worse
So how about we just combine that bumbling incompetence and racism with the billion dollar arms deal Tinyhands made with Saudi Arabia not even a full fucking year ago because that is an actual thing that happened. He actively bragged about making a deal for selling over a hundred billion worth in arms to Saudi Arabia and even though that was a grossly inflated figure he most definitely signed a fucking arms deal with Saudi Arabia
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/world/middleeast/trump-weapons-saudi-arabia.html
Hell, Obama offered Saudi Arabia over a hundred billion dollars in arms and technical assistance. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-saudi-security/obama-administration-arms-sales-offers-to-saudi-top-115-billion-report-idUSKCN11D2JQ
What Trudeau did is considered a Tuesday in America.
Okay, I'm a fucking idiot.
I forgot about that, I apologize.
i think you'll find with every first world country at the moment that the people are in disapproval of their leader (minus totalitarian pseudo-democracies). i think last i checked trump was doing better in the polls than australia, the uk and germany.
Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't that be due to the fact that these countries have more than two big political parties, meaning that it's less likely a leader would have a high approval rating?
dunno about the other countries i listed but australia is for the most part a two party system.
Also to top it off that arms deal was made under Harper (as I understand it). Doesn't absolve Trudeau of keeping the deal but I'm not going to bring the conservatives back because of it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
