Win a date with Justin Trudeau

The Liberal leader is ‘very, very saleable,’ says the party’s fundraiser, who is taking full advantage


Adam Scotti

Last November, Dorothy Corbeil was recruited—and very willingly, she’ll tell you—to burnish Justin Trudeau’s political brand. The retired registered nurse, who lives in Golden Lake, Ont., won a contest posted on Trudeau’s Facebook page to dine with the Liberal leader, along with four of her friends; they agreed to be filmed for a video now on the party’s website.

Corbeil, a long-time Liberal voter—the first ballot she ever cast was for Pierre Trudeau— admits to being somewhat star-struck meeting the boyish 42-year-old politician at an Ottawa restaurant. Trudeau, whom she describes as “genuine,” “well-informed” and a “great listener,” put her at ease. Conversation over good food and wine (Trudeau nursed a beer) ranged from the criminal justice system to work-life balance, though specific policies weren’t discussed: “Justin said, ‘You don’t have platforms until you’re in an election.’ ” The three-minute video, Dorothy’s Story, exudes a calculated folksy vibe. Trudeau identifies Corbeil as part of the embattled middle class that he wants to protect, the platform of the party’s 2015 campaign: “Dorothy is exactly who I’m working hard for every day. She deserves a government that is listening to her, that cares for her.” Corbeil praises Trudeau’s empathy: “It’s so nice to have a politician who connects with us on a human level,” she says.

Trudeau’s ability to connect—and Canadians’ seeming desire to reciprocate—is being fully exploited by the Liberal machine. “Justin is very, very saleable,” chief Liberal fundraiser Stephen Bronfman, a Trudeau friend and adviser, told the media last summer. “He’s got a great name and people want to find out who he is.”

The eldest son of a legendary—and polarizing—prime minister signals a Canadian first: a political leader whose marquee value eclipses any Parliamentary or legislative accomplishment. It is perilous terrain—such as when the family man was dangled as sex-symbol bait at a “ladies only” $250-a-ticket fundraiser in November where guests were invited “to (really) know the future prime minister” with a suggestive wink. The female organizers were called out for being “sexist” toward women, but if anyone was being objectified it was the candidate.

Yet presenting Trudeau as a gift to be won has increasingly proven to confer value. Dinner with Trudeau was a top prize in a December Liberal fundraising drive, along with 12 “limited-edition” Justin Trudeau scarves (also available for $27.99), that raised more than $1-million, and led to the party’s best quarterly result since 2004. Party spokesperson Andrée-Lyne Hallé reports 20,593 first-time donors contributed in the nine months ending Oct. 31: “These numbers show us that the Liberal party and its leader are attracting new support and interest all across the country,” she says. A recent Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey showed Liberal support at 34 per cent, the scandal-enmeshed Conservatives at 26 per cent and the NDP at 24 per cent.

The selling of Trudeau-as-product represents a watershed in Canada, even in an age when political currency is measured by whether voters can imagine having a beer with the candidate. Political scientist Alex Marland views the branding of Trudeau as a precursor to the marketing-driven, consumer-based political model in the U.S. “Dinner with Justin,” for instance, clearly borrows from “Dinner with Barack,” which isn’t surprising: Obama campaign director Mitch Stewart consulted with Trudeau’s strategists during his leadership bid. “All politicians engage in image management,” says Marland, pointing to Stephen Harper’s love of hockey and the fact Trudeaumania was stoked by the Liberal backroom. “But with Justin Trudeau it feels more commodified. You hear ‘brand’ used to describe him in a way you don’t with other politicians. I think it’s because a brand has so much emotional connection with people.”

The Memorial University professor examines the topic in a paper, “What is a political brand?: Justin Trudeau and the theory of political branding,” which will be a chapter in his upcoming book about branding in Canadian politics. “Trudeau’s unique selling proposition is the fact he is a humble celebrity who loves Canada and is enthusiastic to serve its citizens,” Marland writes. “This is backed up by a remarkable ability to engage people in person and online.” But Trudeau isn’t simply a brand; he’s a line extension: “[Justin] has his own strengths but he’s Liberal leader only because of his last name,” says Marland. “On the plus side, there’s a significantly reduced learning curve and energy the party has to put into its communications.” Among the minuses is the fact Trudeau is measured against his father’s legacy as an outlier and “philosopher king,” two descriptors that don’t apply to the son.

Marland writes that Trudeau’s current avoidance of policy commitments could be strategic: “If Justin sways too far from his father’s brand image or policy positions he risks alienating Trudeau loyalists, and there is no pressure of a pending general election.” Disavowing his father’s unpopular policies (the National Energy Program) while advancing the theme of a “just society” (the decriminalization of marijuana) hugs the parent brand.

Still, the focus is squarely on “Justin,” not “Trudeau,” specifically “Team Justin,” with its reference to Twilight’s “Team Jacob/Team Edward.” Trudeau’s team understands the power of the sort of imagery that contributed to Pierre Trudeau’s mythology: his pirouette behind the Queen, wearing a red rose, paddling a canoe in a buckskin jacket.

His son referenced the latter optic in a tweet annoucing that he and his wife, Sophie Grégoire-Trudeau, were expecting their third child this spring; it was accompanied by a photo of the family in a canoe. A GIF of the couple boogying backstage at the Liberal leadership convention that went viral echoed images of the American first family. And images of Trudeau hugging Canadians—and literally feeding the poor at a Vancouver soup kitchen in December—serve as stark contrast to the emotionally remote Stephen Harper, who refuses to field questions from opponents or the press. By travelling outside “the Ottawa bubble,” as Trudeau puts it, he’s rarely in Parliament to even ask questions. This is likely a conscious decision by his handlers, says Ottawa-based political consultant Robin Sears: “Justin Trudeau is not very good in the House.”

Instead, he’s become a roving “unpolitician,” an earnest reformer more tactile than tactical, brandishing EQ, not IQ. Still, the message is carefully edited, seen in Barbecue with Justin, a video made on the Vancouver deck of fisherman Doug Hamilton. As he dines on grilled salmon and hoists a pint, Trudeau defines himself as a father first (“I am not in politics in spite of my children, but because of them”) while exuding positivity: “People are cynical about politics, but we’re Canadian, so it doesn’t sit right for us to be cynical,” he says. Millennial Colin Walker enthuses that Trudeau is “a lot different than most of the politicians I’ve seen on TV.” Hamilton says he’s never met a politician so “personable and genuine,” adding, “I’d love to take him out fishing.”

Branding consultants who cleave to the premise that the party, not the candidate, should be the brand, voice skepticism. “Developing Trudeau as a personality around which a cult might form likely won’t fly in Canada,” says Bruce Philp of Toronto’s Heuristic Branding. Voters here are not as inclined to cults of personality as Americans are, he says: “We’re tough on people who try to be charismatics; I’m not sure Pierre Trudeau could get elected today.”

Sears notes Trudeau has yet to prove himself a serious adult politician. “He hasn’t given a serious speech, he hasn’t given a serious interview, he hasn’t written anything of consequence.”

Still, focus on Trudeau’s EQ hasn’t hurt the Liberals; the party intends to continue staging events where Trudeau “reaches out to people and tries to engage as many people as possible,” says spokesperson Hallé. Sitting in the Vancouver sunshine at that prize-delivered barbecue, Trudeau presents himself as the front man resuscitating a diminished Liberal brand: “The one thing I was good at—connecting with people—was the thing the Liberal party had to do again,” he says. In this, he’s merely the catalyst: “The only thing exciting about me is the fact that Canadians are excited; and that’s what matters,” says Trudeau modestly, before turning to his fellow diners and asking: “Who wants more salmon?”


Win a date with Justin Trudeau

  1. Sears notes Trudeau has yet to prove himself a serious adult politician. “He hasn’t given a serious speech, he hasn’t given a serious interview, he hasn’t written anything of consequence.”
    Sears is bang on.
    Trudeau is inexperienced, unaccomplished and insubstantial — but a corporate media favourite e.g. note 111 of Trudeau’s Zoolander-like poses in the Huffington Post! LOL
    Even right wing commenters like Robert Fife and Andrew Coyne describe Trudeau as a lightweight.

    • First of all Trudeau and the liberals are a team, not a one man show, and with a team comes plenty of knowledge, teamwork and experience, whether to consult or institute policy. And second, the liberal party of Canada has gone through a complete transformation or a make over from top to bottom. Third, Trudeau is a money making machine and also deserves respect from all parties and the MSM whether you like him or not. Finally, people are not elected because of policy, people are elected because of trust, likability, and genuine personality, and Trudeau has that in spades. You see, Harper and Mulcair are doing everything in there power, to try, and I mean whatever it takes to get Canadians to like them(even if it cost taxpayers millions to prop up harper), and that’s all Trudeau has to do, is be himself. That’s called charisma. You have a nice day now !

      • You’ve got to be kidding! It’s all about Justin.

        • Strike 2. That’s the second pointlessly personal, and thus moronic, comment on this post…so far.

        • Tom mulcair is doing the same thing as iggy done when he was leader of the liberals, he went after harper, and what do you think happened next, jack Layton comes up the rear and kneecaps the libs. Tom, like harper, is hoping Trudeau will fall flat, I wouldn’t wait for that to happen. Harper now knows Trudeau is a serious contender, they learned from the time they attack him, it caused the libs to raise more voters and money. the libs had to learn a long lesson in humility, to get back to where they are today, and they are still learning, and will be until 2015.

      • Trudeau “is a money making machine” and hence deserves respect! Really – are you serious?LOL

        Trudeau’s appointment of his old elite school buddy,Stephen Bronfman, as his bagman speaks volumes about the elite nature of his “team” and “the complete transformation” of the Liberals..LOL

        School Presidents are elected because of likability and personality – a prime minister of Cda hopefully has some relevant experience, accomplishment and gravitas: none of which Trudeau has.

        Trudeau has shown no ability to learn how to effectively conduct himself in Question Period, his reading of scripted questions – and lack of serious capacity for follow-up questions is readily apparent.

        Trudeau is himself when he echoes the Conservative support for sale of Nexen, and the export of bitumen and 40 thousand Cdn value-added jobs via the XL pipeline. so much for his hollow rhetoric about creating good middle class jobs for Cdns: he would export them with our unprocessed natural resources!

        • here we go again. first you have Tom, mr left, who cant go too far right or he will loose his base, second you have steve, mr right,(I mean wright) who cant go too left or, he will loose his base, so now you have Justin, who can play to right, center and left, that way everyone gets something. that’s what you call governing for the country, not just cherry picking your voters. the libs are center and are playing to all parties, their offering something to everyone. I think its completely greedy for one party to take all and not share with the rest of the country. that’s called divide and conquer.

          • You are correct about Trudeau: it depends upon who he is speaking to as to whether he is right, centre , or left.

            When he speaks in Calgary he is opposed to the long-gun registry, he supports the sale of Nexen to a Chinese state oil corporation , and supports the export of raw bituman and 40 thousand good value-added job s to the US via the XL pipeline.
            His Alberta speeches echo those of the PM of Alberta – Harper.

            When he is in Quebec he says his heart tells him to support long gun control. LOL

            His speeches to the corporate elite assure them that he will not raise the unfair corporate rate – initially reduced by the Liberals when it was 28% and supported by them when they were pretending to be the Official Opposition. Trudeau supports the 15% rate in a New Year interview!

            So much for a fair tax system – and so much for him ever explaining how his rhetoric about increased spending for infrastructure, education and training etc. will ever be payed for!!!

          • Oh god a dipper lecturing on taxation…wait, let me get my ear trumpet, slippers and fiddle.

          • Q: Mr. Trudeau what’s your stance on the European Free Trade deal?
            A: What do you want it to be? I’m saleable.

          • Almost funny, but what really happened was, I am in favour of it. Harper & Trudeau agreed, nonpartisan issue… out of the news.

            So back to the Tom and Stephen talking about Duffy.

            Funny that, poor silly Trudeau. Could have held the media cycle for a week talking about CETA. Instead killed it in 48 hours.

      • Ask anyone of these star struck Trudeau fans to name three other liberals.
        Good luck with that.

        • freeland,premier wynne, bob ray, stephan dion, me…my mother and one of my nephews?hahaha!on and one of my favourites Marc Garneau

      • The guy who delivers the flyers to my front door looks a little like Justin Trudeau.
        When I speak to him he seems very likeable, with a genuine personality, and I trust him totally to place the flyers at my front door. His team consists of him and his wife who drives the van through the streets while he runs from one house to the next. I don`t know if he wants to be Prime Minister but I believe he could be as effective a leader of Canada as Justin Trudeau. As a matter of fact the only real difference between him and Trudeau is their names.

        • Well maybe your flyer deliverer should join the liberals with Justin Trudeau in the next election, Justins always looking for likable and genuine people.

          • Strange you should say that— because even though he is just out of his teens, which coincidentally is the age Trudeau comes across as being, he seems to be a hard-working entrepreneur who, I suspect, would have little time for a silver-spoon rich kid who trades on his family name to profit from charities and naive harlequin romance readers.
            Now you go have yourself a good day.

          • Is that you Ezra ?

          • oh ya Cawn (or is it Con )your above all that… seems to me the guy delivering papers for a living would love to get a lucky break but like most of us though… can’t find a job these days because of the temporary workers big corps get to hire instead of Canadian students who simply would like a fair wage without having to speak mandarin .

          • so are the voters

        • so long as he is not on same wave lenght as present prime minister who also used to work in a mail room before he got himself voted in a prime minister by hook or by crook.

      • Rootie, I heard the same old B.S. when the Libs trotted out Martin, Dion and Iggy….same old same old…unfortunately for you birds, this is Canada and we prefer to vote for capable, proven managers…not rock stars with no track record ….the Americans elected a phoney celebrity wannabe and they have found themselves in deepest doodoo. The sun may shine out of Trudeau juniors aaaassss in your eyes but us old timers vividly remember how his commie old man screwed us Albertans back in the 80’s. Harper may not be loveable but he has proven track record, so the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know.

        • Wiser to give the job to the person with no record than to the person whose record is indefensible. Harper’s had his lseason; it’s time to let someone else have a chance. We were better off with harper kept in check by minority status than we have been with his longed-for majority, which he has squandered foolishly. He does not deserve four more years.

          • Yes, Canada is floundering. Our economy is in the tank….no wait….hmmm.

          • Corruption brought down the Liberals; it will likely do the same to the CPC.

          • Wishful thinking Keith …shows how much confidence you libs have in your candidate….Hoping Harper falls on his sword…good luck with that pipedream.

          • Harper has plenty of game left and Canada has just weathered a serious recession in good economic shape. Harper has withstood every challenge the frantic opposition has thrown at him and despite all the gnashing of teeth and false allegations he is still standing. You may think we need turnsies ….well come up with a viable candidate and you might stand a chance. The clowns, has beens and neverwases the libs keep trotting out to be gushed over by the CBC are really dead meat.

        • Last i read (last night) you albertans are in trouble and your debt per person is going up… in fact you may be paying an extra tax soon.

          • The trouble is, we elected a liberal in conservative clothing who lied to the public during the election and submitted budget figures that were not adhered to. Wishful thinking, but us Albertans are far from”in trouble” when the extra tax you mention is the faint possibility of a sales tax. A decision that would relegate Redford to the scrapheap of history.

    • What Trudeau has in spades is the ability to be authentic in public. Going back to when Peter Kent misbehaved in the House, Trudeau called bs (technically pos). When Quebec’s charter came out, he said it was wrong. When the Boston Marathon was bombed, Trudeau said we needed to understand how people within our society become terrorists. When the government finally agreed to the Nexus deal, Trudeau was in favour of increased foreign investment. When CETA was announced, he said liberalizing trade was a good thing. Trudeau favours some pipelines, not others. When the NDP used a variant on the “just visiting” meme in the last Toronto byelection, Trudeau found a very effective way to send a message that a party led by a dual citizen should be cautious about adapting Conservative style campaign themes. In none of the above did Trudeau give the impression of someone calculating political pros & cons, (please note I am not saying he didn’t). Rather it looked like he made the assessment of what was best for Canada. It puts him in stark contrast to the recent performances of Stephen Harper, where even his fans laud his politics over his policy.

      Many of the above were described as gaffes made by a lightweight, but I haven’t seen Trudeau backing away (or needing to ) from any of the above. Indeed, most of Trudeau’s gaffes are associated with not mastering the soundbite (eg. the China quote) However, not mastering the soundbite is consistent with being an authentic person and doesn’t really hurt.

      Mulcair has been a stud in question period and he is without doubt the most effective opposition leader in recent Canadian history. He is clearly smart, strategic, tough, perhaps a little cold, wooden in public… just like a young Stephen Harper.

      • Trudeau’s support for the sale of Nexen, and for the export of unprocessed bitumen via the XL pipeline means the loss of thousands of good, middle-class, value-added jobs for Cdns.

        Trudeau has not backed away from saying he is for the middle class but he is backing away from policies that would help restore more middle-class jobs for Cdns.Empty rhetorixc will not create middle class jobs- other than for the corporate media – such as the Huff post that fawn upon him and provide 111 Zoolander-like poses of Himself

        • That’s just ndp rhetoric[ i’m not saying there’s no truth to it] Anyone who bothers to read any of the economists who post @ macleans alone will know the question is far from that simple or that cut and dried. As is usually the case the answer is most likely somewhere in the middle, or quite possibly both opposing policies have advantages and disadvantages for either business or labour, and it may be next to impossible to fully reconcile them.

        • I got a question for you my friend. how is nexen and the unprocessed bitumen going to effect you directly, my answer for you would be didley squat. how is that all going to change your life, because im more worried about health care and OAS. that effects me directly, and that’s why I don’t support harper, and in order to pay for all these items, you need to sell resources, and if it has to go in raw material, well I say go for it. that’s what trade is all about, give a little, take a little. you want to drive companies away.

          • These items haven’t cost us existing jobs, but have potentially cost us the value-add jobs that processing product here would give us. Such jobs would improve GDP and the tax base, thus making the things you want more affordable.

            Note I said potentially; it’s always possible that if we waited to build the infrastructure to refine the bitumen here, the market may find another source.

            It all boils down to best guess, and there are arguments to be made either way.

          • it is proving tough enough to build a pipeline to transport dilbit, a relatively benign product…wait till you try constructing a refinery and transporting millions of gallons of highly flammable finished petroleum products by rail, ship and highway….that is why dilbit is refined as close to it’s final market destination as possible.

          • Dilbit is not relatively benign, far from it. Unless you regard what happened in Kalamazoo as relatively benign.

          • The sale of Nexen allows a Chinese state oil corporation to get a foothold in the oil/gas resources of our land – to the benefit of their nation and people: for example Chinese employees who are moving to Alta: but I had thought our gov’t’s first concern would be employment opportunities for Cdns, who could have good jobs and pay taxes to share my and your tax burden! go to china and try to buy into their natural resources sector — good luck!

            The loss of 40 thousand potential Cdn jobs via export of unprocessed bituman to the US via the XL pipeline is the same case – in spades.

            The Norwegian state oil corporation has poured over $800 BILLION into their Oil fund – for the benefit of all Norwegians: would that Cdns look at how the Nordic social democracies work on behalf of their people first.

          • Norway doesn’t allow foreign ownership or investment then?

            As for the 40,000 jobs. Did you get that from the same bogus tps the Harper keystone boyos did? How many jobs did Obama say were on the line in the US when all was said and done? Admittedly pipelines aren’t particularly good and generating long lasting full time jobs.
            If the ndp seriously wants the support of liberals like myself should Trudeau fall on his face, you might want to start respecting facts and the process as SS says. Otherwise i might reasonably conclude you’re just the flip side of the Harper coin.

          • Norway chief player is the Norwegian state oil corporation – which incidentally has bought into the oil sands! – but it allows foreign firms prepared to pay 76% royalties. Thus they have accumulate over $800 BILLION in their Oil ( sovereignty ) fund.

            The 40 thousand figure is found in the Infometrica study and has been tracked back to public statemenjts by Flaherty..Perhaps Liberals should do some serious thinking about how good, value-added jobs can be created by a Cdn oil strategy – and not drink the Trudeau kool-aid?

          • So now you’re taking statements from Flaherty and the cpc without doing your own research. That’s interesting since i’m pretty sure the ndp don’t except similar figures for keystone. As i said, if all the ndp is going to do is ape the Tories why even consider putting them in.

          • Did you read my response? Doubt it . – as I referred to Flaherty’s estimates as well as Infometrica’s but only mention your dislike of Flaherty !LOL

            Trudeau is echoing Harper on the XL – not the NDP!! If he continue to do that, why consider voting for a pale imitation of the Tories?

          • One or both of us is confused. I simply pointed out that when Trans Canada produced almost exactly the same job claims for keystone[ backed enthusiastically by the govt and Flaherty] the ndp were quite happy to pile on.[ rightly as it now seems]
            But forgive me for being cynical when the ndp quotes similarly exaggerated numbers for value added jobs within AB/SK. Numbers that look even more fishy to me when Flaherty backs them.[ probably where i get confused. Why is Flaherty backing ndp # and quoting 40,000 new refinery jobs?]

        • I get (and respect) that you disagree with Trudeau’s positions. However, in short order you have gone from stating that Trudeau has no policies to saying that Trudeau’s policies are substantive and would be disastrous (i.e. loss of thousands of jobs). The development of the oil sands is an issue of current concern. Harper is arguing for every pipeline, Trudeau is arguing to grow the oil sands but avoiding threatening pristine wilderness. Mulcair has evolved from starving the oil sands through to producing higher value added product on site. There is an interesting adult discussion to be had which many would find refreshing.

          I think if you want to sell the NDP as the alternative to the Conservatives, then perhaps you should stop mimicking their strategies. (Jack wouldn’t do that.) Otherwise the populous will see you as frick and frack. Nasties on the left, Nasties on the right.

          You will note I was respectful in not putting you in the frack column… I guessed that would be distasteful to you.

          • The incoherence of Trudeau’s position is what I have been trying to illuminate: profess concern about the middle class but support the export of bitumen – and therefore many thousands of value-added jobs – via the XL US pipeline.

            Surely Lougheed and Mulcair’s view that refining in Alberta, increased taxation of oil corporations (as opposed to multi-billion dollar annual subsidies), and high environmental standards and related monitoring are the way to go – to the benefit of Cdns rather than the foreign-owned oil corporations whose profits and interests are not Cda first.

          • Ok, where is the money coming from to build those very expensive refineries?

            Harper screwed up Keystone with his lax approach to the oil sands. For Obama to push Keystone through, he didn’t need Harper as a cheerleader, he needed to point to a rigorous and tough Canadian policy on environmental issues. Well that didn’t work out.

            Harper has screwed up Northern Gateway by turning it into his cowboys versus those indians. His cowboys love the stories and when the judges side with the indians, those cowboys will be angry and donate. Good politics, bad policy.

            Now we have Mulcair, who first wants a freeze on the oil sands but now wants investment. Not a little investment, but a massive investment. So PM Mulcair would have a policy that depends crucially on massive foreign investment by large multinationals. Hmmm, how would that actually work out?

            Coherence may be in the eye of the beholder. But remember, Tom and Stephen both think they should be able to unilaterally dismantle the Senate. How exactly is that going to work out?

            On many issues, the NDP and Conservatives know the outcome they want, but have no respect for process. Harper thinks he can tell the US where to build their pipelines, Mulcair thinks he can tell the multinationals where to invest. Both think they can tell the Provinces what to do about Senate reform. Two diametrically opposed outcomes but only one approach. And that approach won’t work, it doesn’t respect others, it doesn’t respect process, it doesn’t respect the limitations of government.

            So what to do? Do we we really want to feed this struggle between these two ideologies, right and left. I think it is time to try something different, something workable, something based on making things better for Canadians rather than winning political wars.

          • Mulcair wants a massive investment in a national pipeline/refinery strategy which will have massive Cdn job and taxation benefits.His position is like that of the late premier Lougheed who – as you know -wanted a pro-Cda strategy.

            Mulcair – like others – has called for a national referendum on abolition of the Senate – you disagree with the process, I assume – but to say their is no process suggested is nonsense.

            Both the Liberals and conservatives are two-side of the same democratic capitalist coin and the New Democrats are of a social democratic persasion. Mind you the Liberals – out of power – signal left, and in power turn right e.g. sigh Kyoto then do almost nothing about reducing.ghouse gases, commence reducing corporate taxes and support the tories in the massive corporate tax cuts that even the Gov. of the Bank of CDa questioned!

          • You didn’t answer the question… so allow me to channel my inner Mulcair.

            Who is going to invest massive amounts of money?
            What are their motivations for investing that money?

          • If one follows the US model then public subsidization on the condition of job creation) is one model) while the Norwegian model of largely state ownership and huge, long-term benefits to their society via their OIL Fund, is another.

            The motivation of a social democratic gov’t would be benefit to all Cdns – as it is to all Norwegians – while the motivation of
            private sector participants would be reasonable profit in a nation that has stable, safe investment climate.

          • Fair enough, let me know when Mulcair announces that he has even spoken with a multinational interested in partnering with the leader of a party which describes multinationals as evil and nationalization as a valuable economic tool.

            More interesting is the Norwegian approach. All Mulcair has to do is convince the electorate that the Canadian public service and the NDP have the where-with-all to pull it off. I don’t argue that it technically couldn’t work. (I have visited Norway) I would content that it is a near impossible political sell to Canadians.

          • You are the quintessential Liberal – I heard the same types of arguments as we fought for medicare in the the 1950’s: and witnessed the Liberals join with the doctor’s strike! .

          • Thanks! I like you too.

          • Why the taxpayer of course Stewart!

            For sure a 12 billion dollar investment to secure a couple hundred jobs is the proper solution to the problem.

          • So there is no economic benefit to having a value-adde refinery and pan-Cdn pipeline system? LOL.
            Of course Canadians can never become masters of their own economic and social destiny – how foolish of me to think that only in the Nordic nations can social, economic and environmental justice be evolved!
            The lack of a Cdn as opposed to corporate vision of Cda by the Liberals is appalling.

      • Stewart,
        Trudeau is in favour of Keystone because he knows it most likely will NOT go through with Obama as president. He’s opposed to the Northern Gateway (ask Gerald Butts why) because he knows that pipeline would enrich the country as a whole if we can sell our oil at the best prices. Justin and the Libs don’t want the economy to improve just yet as it would make Harper look good.
        If you really want to know what Justin believes in….you’ll have to wait until his handlers tell him what he believes in.
        So far we know he likes a good spliff once in a while, but even then, we onlyh know about that because he thought someone was going to spill the beans on him….so he fessed up.

        • “Justin and the Libs don’t want the economy to improve just yet as it would make Harper look good.”

          Except that, even if approved, Northern Gateway won’t be “improving the economy” “just yet”, or anytime before the next election.
          But hey, why spoil your fact-free, mind-reading fantasy.

          • Yep…all those jobs, and taxes won’t help at all.
            And I wasn’t worried about the $$’s before the next election, so much as the ones afterwards.
            Trudeau and Mulcair both want to keep throwing wrenches into any policy that would actually help people….they want Canadians to feel like they’re suffereing, and that the only relief will be to pitch the Conservatives out in the next election.

          • Like I said, the pipeline won’t be built or relieving any “suffering” before the next election, regardless of what happens.
            But again, pardon my intrusion on your fact-free fantasies.

      • You actually could be a PR person for Mr. Trudeau. What other people describe as “gaffes”, you call failure to “master soundbites” as though what comes out of Mr. Trudeau’s mouth are not the true contents of his thoughts and his apparent lack of ability to think quickly and act prudently under pressure. When Trudeau made the comment about “root causes of terrorism’, there was a terrorist bomber on the loose and people were panicking in Boston. His job as Prime Minister will be to calm the citizens in times of crisis. Think back to Rudy Giuliani on 9/11. I don’t particularly care what “sound bite” Justin Trudeau makes but I certainly hope he has more between ears than what he has exhibited thus far.

      • It’s easy to be “authentic” when you can say nut-job things like Quebecors are better than Albertans, and the media goes after Jason Kenney for making an issue of it.

        • Well, Quebecor are Albertan’s “betters” in as much as they’re the ones telling Albertans what to think.

          • I am right on this one.

            This is Jason Kenney’s media scrum on the topic. I defy anyone to watch this and conclude that the media are not attacking him and defending Trudeau. The assault on Kenney starts at 1:20. Whoever is questioning him at 4:00 is clearly on Trudeau’s staff.

          • The nerve of the media to ask Kenney question in a scrum. Any real unbiased reporter would have just dutifully and quietly held out the microphone until such time as Kenney was finished issuing his talking points, then bowed respectfully and asked His Grace for leave.
            Or if they insist on asking questions they could ak, “why do you love Canada so much and how are we so lucky to have you?” or “why do you think Trudeau hates the country and wants to destroy it?”

          • Come on John. We both know if the press is doing their job, then they are in Trudeau’s face (see my links). If Kenney makes hay, they they are supposed to get in his face. (One unedited scrum that never made a major newscast. )

            The question at 4 (yes from a reporter with a point of view) asks a fair question… when are old comments fair game?

            We both know there are some old quotes and comments from Harper that the Conservatives do not want to talk about now.

            Kenny didn’t answer that question, so she asked again.
            If politicians are going to treat scrums like question period and provide talking points that don’t address the question I would hope reporters would call them on it.

          • If Kenney makes hay, they they are supposed to get in his face. (One unedited scrum that never made a major newscast. )

            Since when is the media’s job to interrogate the aggrieved/slandered identifiable group? Show me where it says that in the gotcha journalism handbook. Do they do that if a gay person comes forward to speak out against some anti-gay slur a Conservative may have said? Never once in all the years I’ve been watching politics have I seen the victim of a slur attacked like that.

            The question at 4 (yes from a reporter with a point of view) asks a fair question… when are old comments fair game?

            It’s not a fair question at all. To paraphrase a tweet from Wells, because I don’t feel like digging it up;”2 years ago is so obviously fair game I’m embarrassed for colleagues who suggest otherwise”.

            These same reporters that seemed to think attacking 2 year old comments were beyond the pale had no such qualms when Tom Lukiwski’s 20 year old videotape surfaced. Paula Deen’s career was destroyed for one use of the “N” word that was discovered 27 years ago. So no. It’s not a fair question. It’s a desperate attempt to draw Kenney into making the story about Kenney’s response to the story instead of the story itself, like what was done to Romney with Benghazi. Kenney was smart enough not to take the bait.

          • “the victim of a slur”


          • “Men are better than women” <– Sexist slur
            "Whites are better than blacks" <— Racist slur
            "Straight people are better than gays" <— Homophobic slur

            "Quebecers are better than Albertans" <— Perfectly acceptable to liberals.

          • Well, I’m not a liberal, but I could care less about his comments.
            Though I hope the poor victim, Jason Kenney, is receiving whatever counseling he needs to get through this.

          • I understand he was recovering well until Flaherty told him to STFU. The guy just can`t catch a break.

          • Not only that, but he’s a lazy, spendthrift Catholic.

          • The old sociologists really had it right. :-)

          • So you`re arguing that Albertans and Quebecers are equally capable of running the government.

        • That’s another lie, he said no such thing, so I guess its o k harper told the rest of the Canada that Calgary was the best city in the country, and Jason Kenny do politic around the country on the taxpayers dime, but Kenny will never see the grand prize(PM), he can only dream about it

          • Harper said that?
            OMG, I’ve the victim of a slur!

      • that may have been the way you saw his image, unfortunately for him, many others saw shoe leather sticking out of his mouth.

      • The quality of being “authentic” is difficult to define and almost impossible to identify. How do you know he’s not just a very convincing actor?
        Was the outburst against Peter Kent unharnessed passion or a calculated response, made with the knowledge that it would create a generally positive response? Only Trudeau knows for sure.

        • That makes no sense, since Trudeau wasn’t privy to the idiotic remarks in the House by Kent that provoked his outburst. Moreover he was sticking up for an ndper not a Liberal. It’s very hard to conclude it was anything other than spontaneous.

      • “When the NDP used a variant on the “just visiting” meme in the
        last Toronto byelection, Trudeau found a very effective way to send a
        message that a party led by a dual citizen should be cautious about
        adapting Conservative style campaign themes.”

        I missed that. Do you remember what the effective way to send a message amounted to?

      • Mulcair is good no excellent in his position.

    • I don’t know about that. Years ago I edited a textbook for English classes and the best piece of short fiction I could find for the book was the eulogy Justin delivered at his father’s funeral. An entire generation of young Canadians have had this heartwarming and remarkably clever speech imprinted on their memories.

      While naysayers run through their talking points they fail to realize that the battle is already lost, due to a very consequential speech some time ago.

    • Harper is heavy weight when it comes to lies and scandal. lol

  2. that’s bs, Justin has given several good interviews, Sears is a NDP pundit so has a bias view of the situation. However i will take a lightweight with a great team over a criminal and corrupt politician like Stephen Harper and the “gang of thieves” in the PMO

    • Too bad that your false alternative is not the reality for Cdns.
      Tom Mulcair offers a positive alternative of an experienced, accomplished and mature leader who believes that Cdn resources should have value-added before shipped to foreign countries. – middle class jobs for Cdns, just in case Trudeau asks! LOL

      • Mulcair is a good HoC performer and a smart man. I honestly believe the problem for the NDP is that he is sooo far from the “brand” they developed under Layton — an underdog with a sunny personality, fighting off cancer while running to lead the country — that same brand that attracted the new voters who made them official oppo is so far gone now that those votes are likely to disappear too.

        • Superficial “branding” seems to be a pre-occupation of those parties that have little or no policy i.e. the Trudeau brand of Liberals.

          Little doubt this was a reason the latest CROP poll in Quebec’s Le Devoir had Tom Mulcair at 60% support and about 20% disapproval and Trudeau at 40% approval and almost the same disapproval.

          Trudeau’s inability to seriously discuss serious economic, social and environmental issues – and offer little or no positive policy for Cdns consideration is appalling – and explains the slow but steady decline in his personal support.

          • Don’t kid yourself . . . Jack Layton was a formidable “brand” himself.

          • It’s weird how Dippers forget the cult of personality tat they promoted last time around isn’t t? That’s as opposed to the cult of no-personality the Cons ran with.
            If a leader doesn’t resonate with people then the party is dead in the water; yet another reason I truly despise the party system.

          • True, but what’s the alternative? Personalized politics has long been the norm in this country. You might even say Canadians seem to like it that way.

          • I don’t mind personalised politics per se, but I don’t think that it should be carried out on a nationwide basis. Your local MP’s personality should be key. My local MP has less personality than Harper, his leader, and while that is depressing enough he is just a “do as he is told machine” in the House.
            I would prefer it if the voters looked at their representative’s personality before voting as that tells you a lot about their character and whether they will do as they are told or whether they will represent you.

          • That would be nice but seems next to impossible in urban ridings. I grew up in NL, and in that time and place the individual running in the riding played almost as big (maybe even more) a role than the party leader in determining how people voted.

          • Maybe the problem is that we are even more “leadership”obsessed in this country? There are a lot of good competent mps from all the parties just sitting around twiddling their thumbs. Or so it seems to me.

          • He was also a formidabile social democrat who – unlike – Trudeau – was willing to speak authoritatively about his policies and programs.

          • But the main point – about branding – is that Layton was a brand, as much as any other leader. It was a preoccupation of the NDP irrespective of their policy platform.

            As to explanations for trending of personal popularities in polls, that is an area in which it would be prudent to tread carefully.

          • To be fair to Justin……he’ll talk policy once his handlers explain it to him, and tell him what he actually thinks.

          • How’s the Dutch disease thing going? Seriously, not every idea Tom has put out there is worth considering. In fact a fair number of them haven’t got off the ground – which might explain where he is in the polls right now despite his superior performance in the House.
            This all politics and strategy all around. The ndp have decided to put their meat in the window, The LPC are keeping their powder dry. And your characterization of JT’s political choice as being shallow and vacant and Tom’s as near genius is merely you pushing the party line…you’re really pretty obvious you know.

          • Liberals keeping their powder dry? LOL

            The only powder they have exposed is to echo Harper’s support for the sale of Nexen, and the export of unprocessed bitumen – and good, value-added jobs to the US via the XL pipeline – which Trudeau supports despite his rhetorical concern for the middle class!

          • Not that I am a supporter of KXL (I kind of lean against) but the arguments in favour of it from an economic perspective are there (if one discounts the environmental externalities) . . .extract a resource in sufficient quantities which will call for more jobs, and will generate more tax revenues.

            I suppose a refinery could be built here but that would be prohibitively expensive and risky for the businesses concerned, and then there would be the issue of environment and also how to transport the finished product to customers.

          • The benefit of a cross-Cda pipeline and refinery is clear: good value-added jobs for Cdns. Refineries in the US are subsidized as part of the US national security so Cda can never compete with them unless we subsidize -with the condition of creation of good Cdn jobs.

            Environmental issues are valid -whether refining is done in a state-of-the art new Cdn refinery or in the US. Much of the refined Cdn product would be used for Cdns and the rest exported at intl prices: a win-win for all Cdns.

            Tom Mulcair has clearly stated a policy position in opposition to the Harper /Trudeau pro-foreign oil corporation advocacy.

            The oil and the fair corporate taxation issues that Tom Mulcair has identified will be 2015 issues: especally if Trudeau can be smoked out regarding his pro-foreign oil corporation and unfair Cdn corporate tax stands he has taken.

          • The benefit is not clear, stop lying.

          • As we have seen repeatedly, some folks are opposed to ALL resource extraction.
            If it’s not the eco-nuts blockading roads in opposition to piplines, it’s Indian groups opposed to any development until they get their cut.

          • Fine, i know what you think. But unfortunately for you policy needs to be supported by evidence. As i said before – there’s till a debate about energy issue. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

          • Trudeau should therefore provide the evidence he uses to support his support for the XL pipeline.
            Tom Mulcair has – the Infometrica analysis – and some day Trudeau might get serious – and thus engage in an informed discussion rather than echoing Harper’s oil policies.

          • “Echoing Harper’s oil policies”

            Really, is that the best you have? Don’t tell me ndp partisans have been reduced to picking up party TPs before expressing views on blogs like this.
            Both Mulcair and Trudeau gave reasons for their positions at the time. To some degree we have to assume some of this is just political posturing. But the evidence[ or arguments] for both pov are out there for those who wish to inform themselves above and beyond the political.
            Push your pov all you want. But spare us the Tom is a genius who always does his research, while JT just pulls stuff out of his arse…it gets tiresome.

          • When did Justin explain his position on the XL – and the loss of Cdn jobs through exporting unprocessed bituman?

          • He outlined his basic position in a speech to the petroleum club in Calgary – when or where did Mulcair present a detailed policy document explaining why we need more value added in the energy field?
            As i said before both of them are staking out political territory more then anything at the moment. At some point both will feel more pressure to justify their views with well researched facts.
            As far as i can tell there is still a debate among economists as to how much value added refinery jobs make economic sense, and to what degree we should permit more foreign ownership or resource companies. In a nutshell Trudeau thinks we can risk being more open to foreign investment, Tom seems to be more wary. I wouldn’t be surprised if their final positions are closer then you might think by merely listening to party rhetoric.

          • So if Mulcair should form government he’s going to stop the XL pipeline? And if so how? Otherwise, it’s just grandstanding about something that is out of our hands.

          • Mulcair would take the same policy approach as the late, great Premier Peter Louheed. Refine the bitumen in Alberta , raise environmental standards in the oil sands project, raise royalties in order to at least double the Alberta Heritage Fund.

            It’s a matter of priorities – with Cdn interest first: unlike the Libservatives, Mulcair thinks all Cdns should benefit through good-paying jobs and fair corporate taxes as in the Norwegian social democracy.

          • You didn’t answer the question. You need to slow down you’re starting to sound like Ricky Omen. Hey – if Mulcair knocks out Harper I will be cheering him on with bells and whistles – I just don’t think if looks like he can.

          • It’s worse then that. I recall reading that Mulcair said if it were up to him projects like keystone wouldn’t even be sent to regulators for review. So we got Harper trumping the JRP and Tom not even letting it get that far – some choice eh.

          • I truly believe Rick Omen and FV are bots. No real person would have the stamina or lunacy to argue as long, hard and dumb as they do. But I have to admit — FV makes me find Rick almost normal.

          • Okay, this comment was a reply to kcm2. Something is telling me to quit until disqus is sorted out.

          • disquis would like you to sort out your own issues with lunancy and long and hard dumbness before you go looking for it in others.
            Look, the fact that you would be willing to entrust the prime decision making of the country to Vacuous Justin is way closer to dumbness and lunacy then anything another poster might say.

      • i’m on fence with mulcair, but i think he would be a much more honest man than harper, the NDP will only have one shot at the can, should Mulcair win, and not govern well, the ndp will go back to the wilderness, so i doubt they would do anything drastic, Mind you, what i thought at first when harper won.

      • I’d rather have a vacous lightweight like Trudeau over a competent socialist like Mulcair.
        At least with Trudeau, you know the more able minded will keep him in check.

    • yes….good interviews in that Trudeaus handlers want to know what he will be asked before he sits down.
      Even then, Trudeau can’t help but put his foot in his mouth and show what a lightweight he truly is.

      • James if you weren’t such a shill for the man who has taken insisting on being protected from the media and any surprises to a new level, then I’d have sympathy for your bleating.
        Unfortunately you have been nothing but an apologist for the man who runs abroad to announce policy decisions, so I really don’t care about what concerns you.

        • the difference of course Hairball, is that the media in Canada does everything in their power to make Harper look bad, or to simply fabricate something and call it “news”……whereas on the same note, they cannot say enough positive things about Trudeau.
          You’d have to be nuts, or blind not to see the bias in Canadian media.

          • History still not your strong point is it?
            When he was in opposition the media couldn’t get enough of him ragging on at Paul Martin and he couldn’t get enough of them. Go back and look at all those interviews where they lobbed him softballs to get him to attack Martin over his response to the sponsorship scandal.
            Then once he gets into power instead of building on this relationship he sidelines them and ignores them at every opportunity. This mess he finds himself in, like every other mess that affects him is all of his own making. There is no fabrication and with a few exceptions the vast majority of media outlets endorsed him last time around.
            So quit your bleating, whining and lieing you’re only fooling yourself.

          • News organizations are profit driven corporations, no? Then why are they biased towards a party that is “tax and spend?” Wouldn’t news owners be more inclined to support parties that want to decrease taxes no matter what?

        • You are absolutely right about Harper and the media. Harper has treated them with complete disdain. However, Harper has a history of performing well in debate and in the HoC. Trudeau unfortunately isn’t shining in the HoC or in other situations. God help us I hope he can get smarter fast.

      • One thing JT doesn’t do is demand to know what the questions are or attempt to veto ones he doesn’t like…I guess that makes you a bare faced liar James R Halifax.

        • No, he just has to screen them to make sure they’re not Sun News reporters before he talks to them.

          • That is not a negative now, is it, really?

          • Jeez John you proved what? That he keeps a wary eye out for scum news – who wouldn’t in his position. The fact he was confused as to who the reporter was sure does make me think he screens his questions…not!

          • Well, you’d have to have john’s talent for reading the coded messages and recognizing the secret signs to understand what he proved.
            John can probably tell you what he had for breakfast and what colour underwear he’s wearing just from watching a few moments of that video.

  3. Loved Rex Murphy the unbearable lightness of Justin Trudeau

    • Was this the same classy guy who posted images of Hitler next to JT before the CBC took it down?

  4. LOL Justin is just so bad the rightwing can’t stop talking about him……..and their numbers keep dropping….and how many articles have we seen on Harp resigning?

    • Yes, Justin Trudeau does bring fond memories of Dan Quayle to mind. Has anyone asked him to spell potato?

      • Um…Dan Quayle was rightwing.

  5. “Win a date with Justin Trudeau”

    Seriously, WTF Maclean’s???

    • It got your attention didn’t it ? II know, it has to bother you, when the other guy is better than your guy. don’t worry, them symptoms will go away after the 2015 election, when Trudeau becomes PM.

      • Disappointing but not surprising to see Anne Kingston join other Canadian pundits who are determined to keep painting Trudeau as a heart throb lightweight instead of an alternative to Harper. Grow up, Anne Kingston. The contest is not presented as a “date” and you know it. When you choose to present stuff in a way you know is not correct, you aren’t really a journalist: you’re just a writer using devices to create effect.

        And anyone who can take seriously anything the likes of Sears, Tim Powers, and all the other paid-partisan commenters should give their heads a shake, even if it does bolster your own views. If anyone can be bought, it’s Sears, the NDP hack who moonlights for Mulroney — if the cash is enough. Hard to believe in paid partisan speakers.

        Perhaps it is just possible that, after 8 years of a pm who disdains to answer questions or meet Canadians in person, Trudeau’s open and genuinely likable personality is a tonic to those sick to death of the cold and aloof harper. Whatever the reason, I hope he continues to fill the war chest for the next election. And while you’re speculating about why Canadians are responding to Trudeau with donations to LPC, why don’t you stop a moment and think about why we’re simultaneously cutting back on donations to the harper regime?

        • you got my vote.

        • Good point about the date thing – that is pretty low come to think of it. But there are a lot more partisan pundits i would pour scorn on before Sears. He’s actually a pretty balanced analyst. Just my opinion anyway…Powers OTOH you can keep, he’s pretty much a shill, but a crafty one.

      • root canal — not sure why my comment above is posted in reply to you — it wasn’t — but happy new year to you anyway.

      • ….when the other guy is better or better looking??? Honestly, did the Liberal Party have a contest to ‘win a date with Bob or Iggy or Dion?’ You don’t usually win a date with a married man with children.

        • It’s Ms. Kingston, not the Liberals using the word date.

      • Amen!!! With our dollar falling and unemployment on the rise time for a change.

    • Malceans journos get a tingle in their inner thigh when they think of Trudeau.

      • Harpers Hucksters are out in full force today. Have you been reading SNs, PMa or G@M lately ?

    • Wherry is away and they need page views. Seems to be working.

      • Agreed.
        I always make it a point to read Macleans when Wherry isn’t a contributor.
        Every story Wherry writes can be summed up thusly:
        “Stephen Harper is a lying meanie…..and Justin trudeau is pretty”
        Aaron Wherry writes like a 14 year old girl with a facebook page.

        • Now you see, that makes you sound like a sexist 14 year old with very thin skin about your leader.

          • Zing!

    • Gravol time!!!

  6. What is your favourite value?

  7. Sonic Youth – Kool Thing:

    Hey, kool thing,
    Come here,
    Sit down beside me,
    There’s something I got to ask you.
    I just wanna know, what are you gonna do for me?
    I mean, are you gonna liberate us girls
    from male white corporate oppression?


  8. “Justin is very, very saleable,” chief Liberal fundraiser Stephen Bronfman….”
    So if Just in is saleable, is Mr. Bronfman saying he can be bought?

    • Look at Quebec.
      The question is not whether Justin can be bought….the question is, “Is there a Liberal anywhere who can’t be?”

      • You do know it was Harper who settled the so called fiscal imbalance, and recognized Quebec as a nation…moron.

  9. His image as a lightweight could well be cemented or broken in a TV leadership debate. Hopefully he’s preparing now for the inevitable leadership debates in ’15 or ’16.

  10. It almost feels like prostitution!

  11. I wonder who the lucky guy will be?

    • You hoping it’s you?

      • You thinking what I’m thinking…Baird with time on his hands. :)

  12. This article is a press release complete with Liberal Party headline and supplied campaign publicity photo. Journalism is truly dead in Canada. The old hands at professional journalism have handed off the reigns to a generation of lazy transcribers unwilling to investigate anything or ask tough questions for fear of being excluded from the party with the politically powerful. This article is a pathetic example of how the current generation can’t do the job. Sick and depressing that we’ve come to this.

    • Er, actually she made the bit up about the date with Justin. Perhaps you might also like to go after AK for that; in the interests of good journalism of course.

  13. ” Trudeau’s team understands the power of the sort of imagery
    that contributed to Pierre Trudeau’s mythology: his pirouette behind the
    Queen, wearing a red rose, paddling a canoe”

    Even as a JT supporter this marketing stuff bothers and irritates me. The important distinction with Pierre was that while he rehearsed some of his stunts, they were authentically his – no handler or team ever suggested he go canoeing in the north in a buckskin jacket, or even pirouette behind the Queen, much less give protesters the finger out of a train window. In this sense all politics is so much more calculated and becoming ever more so. JT needs to be absolutely sure this is where he wants to go.But in essence his team is tackling the core of the LPC long standing malaise – not even pretending to really connect with voters or the grassroots. It’s all show for now, but it’s working. Ms Kingston’s snarky characterization of this as a “date with Justin” is simply beside the point[ it is a date with JT AND the values of LPC. That is the point] and really her perception problem; IOWs it is her doing the projecting here.

    The much more important issue for me is party financing. This is what you get when you boil everything down limited individual donor support for the parties. Harper’s no different – he’s just marketing fear of the other, fear of the elite, fear of big gummint…whatever![ can’t honestly say what Tom is selling, apart form fear the corporation and the rich guys running them.]
    Thanks a lot Coyne and fellow slaves to market ideology. Now we have all the parties shilling for voters dollars instead of shilling for their votes. Narrow as the distinction is, i think there is one to be made.
    At some point down the road i hope one of the parties comes to see some merit in allowing limited participation by individuals, business and unions.[as long as there is transparency] This current model of funding can surely only increase divisions and foster ever more partisanship in the system.

    • Well there was that creative and lucrative model of funding set up by the Liberal Party in the late 90`s, specifically in Quebec I believe where there campaign funds came funneling down from the national treasury.
      This method avoided those awkward moments where the Party actually had to shill for dollars from the electorate, but it only works if it`s done on the hush-hush.

      • What’s your point Einstein…that didn’t end too well, did it.

      • As opposed to in-and-out scamming, gazebo granting, and robocalling…

    • Please do not invoke FV; I’m hoping fervently for MacLean’s to be an FV-free zone in 2014. But hollinm and rfaris as Waldorf and Statler is brilliant, especially since one is Super Con and the other is Head In the Sand NDP. Both so incredibly ideological that they see only what they want to see. I would prefer to see them on Power and Politics than the insufferable Alise Mills and Tim Powers.

      • What about NotRick? We must have a place for him. Perhaps we could file him under a M for moron?

        • I truly believe Rick Omen and FV are bots. No real person would have the stamina or lunacy to argue as long, hard and dumb as they do. But I have to admit — FV makes me find Rick almost normal. (later: this comment posted somewhere else, so I’ll try it again and wish you a happy new year, and now I am going to stop until disqus sorts itself out.

  14. poster boy … and how did that work out for the US ?

    • Depend on what you thought about the alternative…Romney or Bush before that.

  15. Can we be abuse on a date like government is with taxpayers?

    Maybe a few jokes like “Charity pays eh? Now looking for the big pile of Ozawa money?”

  16. i hope liberals and all Canadians alike are embarrassed by this

  17. so if a man wins the date, does this official make Justin Trudeau gay??

    • If you win does that make you gay, or merely monumentally stupid?

      • neither, i would never apply for this gimmick in the first place…

  18. Why anyone would vote for an arrogant self serving pompous punk is beyond me.

  19. Anne,
    seriously, wouldn’t this kinda “buzz” story not be better served on say “The Wendy Williams Show”?, or how about Rick Mercer?, I bet Rick would love a “date” with Justin.

  20. I see a very bleak Future for all of Canada If Trudeau is to ever be elected as Prime Minister, He has a hidden aganeda that will Cripple and possibly Destroy The West and All Of Canada, His oppinion and Ideoligy on the Topic Of China s Communist System instantly told me He is Far from being trusted the slightest, and especially the leader of a great Nation such as Canada. So fellow Canadians Think Twice when you cast your next ballot.

  21. Well,I’ve got boyish good looks and a muscular build-I’m 5’9″,200 lb. with 18-inch biceps.Perhaps some buxom blonde between 25 and 40 would want to win a date with me.(Oh,I forgot:I’m a black man and today,we life-size Brad dolls-from 1968-’72,Brad was Barbie’s then-beau Ken’s handsome black best bud-are ALMOST TOTALLY ABSENT from TV,the movies and the electronic and print media!!!!!!!!)

Sign in to comment.