There are 10 good reasons Harper might step down before the next election: (Article by Warren Kinsella)
1. Ten years is a long time: By the time the next election takes place, Harper will have been in power for nearly a decade. Very few last that long, and those who overstay their welcome inevitably end up regretting their decision. After that much time has gone by, voters start to get sick of your face.
2. He could lose. As pollsters have been saying for months, Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau is the real deal. By now, it is clear that his popularity is no passing fad. For the first time, Harper needs to consider the possibility that he could to lose to someone he clearly considers his inferior. He doesn’t want to do that.
3. His party is getting restless. As Alberta Wildrose supporter Rod Love once observed: “When the water dries up, the animals begin to look at each other differently.” So too in politics. Harper’s backbench is no longer afraid of him, and rebelling. His PMO is heartily detested throughout the Conservative hinterland. To many Conservatives, Harper is being quietly regarded as a liability, and not an asset.
4. Leadership shenanigans abound: Jason Kenney has been running a leadership campaign for months; Peter MacKay is warning he will quit the party if he doesn’t get his way on leadership selection rules. Harper, mindful of what Jean Chretien endured, may be persuaded to choose discretion over valour.
5. He is not a wealthy man: Harper and his wife own their Calgary home, but not much else. And, as Calgary Conservative legend Harvie Andre once queried: “Why is it more profitable to know Harvie Andre than to be Harvie Andre?” Harper, knowing this, may decide he needs to build up a retirement nest egg while he still can.
6. He’s a young man: Not even 60, Harper has many prime earning years ahead of him — as a corporate rainmaker, as a member of lucrative boards, as the giver of big-ticket speeches. Why wait until he can’t enjoy the fruits of his labours? Why not go while the getting’s good?
7. Everything starts to look the same: After 10 years in the same job, new files aren’t as exciting or as challenging as they once were. Things develop a sameness to them; boredom and sloppiness start to set in. When that happens, it’s time to go.
8. The Cons don’t stand for anything anymore: Even the party faithful are admitting the mission statement is long forgotten. They have become, in effect, what they came to Ottawa to destroy. Even Harper, a policy wonk and partisan, would be hard pressed to express his party’s raison d’etre. Canadians sure can’t.
9. The job is done: Harper wanted to do three things. One, reduce the Liberal Party to a shadow of its former self. Two, unite conservatives as a single political force. Three, make conservativism a less radical political choice. He has indisputably done all three. His legacy is achieved.
10. Him: Watch him. Listen to him. There is no joy in the job for him anymore. There is no challenge. He looks unhappy.
Will he go?
Who knows?
But no one should be surprised, now, if he does.
Well if Trudeau's money has nothing to do with it.......then why mention it? If he was poor or of average income would you have said he should not have taken the speaker fee? It was only mentioned because he does have............ money.
As far as what I say about the "rich", if you look back (and please do), I only speak my views on the rich who have been cruel to others or who have used their money and power to do unconscionable things.
Speaking of the rich............. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/property/interiors/article3807976.ece
I’m always amazed in the different media articles and blogs etc how some people can take a dislike for Trudeau. Their complaints revolve around his inherited money and his looks and even his physique (the time he took his shirt off for a charity auction). It’s rather sad that people go after such trivial things in the media, because they don’t seem to have much to say about his politics……..which is what should be really talked about. Personally I think it’s a failure in their own character, or physical condition. My grandmother use to call it….just old fashioned jealousy.
On Nov 24 2012 you said I ride a Vespa.
Big Vespa, 890 lbs worth.
having organized MANY public speaking events for charities MOSt get a token gift!
Small charities yes. Not large charities who bring in very notable people.
Also as noted he only offered ti refund IF they could prove they have lost money on the event
Only if they could prove they lost money? Got a link to that?
Harper just followed through on a LIBERAL commitment!!!
He didn’t have to.
Got an answer for the G20, the outhouse and the fake lake?
as noted he was being PAID by the people of Canada to be at work on those days!! When is he going to give back the money he was PAID to be sitting in Parliment those days??
You’ve compared the dates and matched them up to days he was suppose to be in Parliament? Got some proof of that?
I've read and re-read your reply and somehow in all good charity I just can't bring myself to once again prove your concept incorrect and also use the links you yourself provided as proof. It's just not worth my time, especially knowing it won't make an iota of difference.
mikey, mikey, mikey
a) I can prove it in spades but really what is the point? When you have been proven wrong in the past many times, by several people, you just disappear. The same will happen again. Pure waste of my time, or anyone else's.
c) You have my address and I even provided a map to help you. If you need a guide I can provide that as well. Feel free to come by and see my business operation, meet the staff and I especially look forward to discussing things with you.
memebers do not have to be there for sessions but DO have to be there for votes. Since going after the leadership of the LIBERALS Justin has shown up for about 5% of the votes!!
he has the WORST attendance record out there and he is the "LEADER" hmmmm great example to set!!!
mikey I believe Pierre already corrected you on that some time ago, just before you disappeared.
Here we go again:
10 worst MPs (as far as attendance is concerned):
1. Romeo Saganash - NDP - 94 absences
2. Maria Mourani - Bloc Quebecois - 82 absences
3. Thomas Mulcair - NDP - 74 absences
3. Paul Dewar - NDP - 74 absences
5. Nathan Cullen - NDP - 70 absences
6. Ed Fast - Conservative - 67 absences
7. Peggy Nash - NDP - 62 absences
8. Niki Ashton - NDP - 61 absences
9. Sana Hassainia - NDP - 60 absences
10. Gerry Ritz - Conservative - 54 absences
2 Conservatives
1 Bloc
7 NDP
0 Liberal
"he has the WORST attendance record out there"
Same old, same old, same old conservative playbook: lie, lie and keep lying. Something may stick and we'll win the next election.
I thought you had replied before. I'll save the stats myself this time.
