Four days is hardly a long time, and this is a forum, not an IRC chat. Trust me when I say I wasn't worried, and wouldn't be offended if you had decided not to respond.
In my view, any man who chooses to sacrifice the well being of a portion of the nation in the truly irreverent manner he did does not deserve the praise he gets. This is coming from a man who grew up in South Western Ontario. No offense, but BC, especially Vancouver, was one of the few spots in the West which gets support when the Liberals are in power because Vancouver is part of the three cities who vote for Liberals time and again. The rest of the nation got sincerely screwed. It polarized the nation, and when someone ardently works towards polarization rather than unity and cohesion I find it very hard to like the man. Personally, I think Pearson (another Liberal leader, for those who don't know) was the best Canadian Prime Minister.
If Trudeau did the same things these days as he did then, he'd have a much rougher time out of those who live in BC because BC is so dependent on Alberta now, even with it's supposedly more "green" (which is laughable when you look at energy use and where the energy comes from for BC) slant. The equivalent of 130 billion dollars being torn out of a province but not recovered? 77% increase in inflation? 150% increase in bankruptcies? I'm sorry, but the man had a secular cult following and it gave him extraordinary arrogance, and for those of us who lived in the shadow of Toronto, we're all kind of use to that arrogance he inspired in his followers there.
Ironically, there was great joy in every other place in Ontario when Trudeau left, since the rest of the province was basically sucked dry to keep Toronto happy and voting Liberal. When you get defeated by
Joe Clark, it's a sign. His exacerbation of the various Quebec issues still reverberate today.
I know we're likely going to have to disagree here, as you said, but I just wanted to make it clear why I didn't support him -- even as an Ontarian. It wasn't because he was Liberal, or because of my party leanings, it's because I think he got more limelight than he deserved, it went to his head, and he did a lot of things which caused negative impacts in the long run, even if they sounded good in the first place. Hell, the media is still talking about him, even going so far to annoying family members of his who have tried to have the media go away for years.
I certainly don't think he was the worst Prime Minister, but I also certainly don't think he was the best for Canada.
Yeah, Layton just... feels greasy. Which is unfortunate -- he'd have quite a following in Edmonton if he didn't have some of the nasty habits we've both brought up. Personally, I am hoping for the NDP to grow just so the Liberals are knocked down to third party status. I seriously feel the Liberals need that -- not to teach them a lesson or anything, but because they need to rebuild, and reorganize. Right now they are trying to run a race with the Conservatives and they are riddled with holes where experienced or well known members have left. It's not healthy for the party. Third party status would give that, and we'd also see how the NDP would do as the loyal opposition (hopefully in a minority, since I don't want a majority).
I think Bob Rae might be interesting. My worry is that if he is leader, he doesn't get put up as one for a while. We're going to be through a economic downturn for a while longer and... well... Rae's not good with those, and his platforms aren't going to inspire people with images of financial management skill and dedication to austerity.
I squirm to say much more than that because while I do know his general slant, stuff changes when you get into the leadership position -- Ignatieff certainly did. There's too much sliding about in the Liberal caucus when it comes to just about anything these days.
Pfft, fine. I'm going to begin calling Iggy "Bush," for being American and a tool for the people actually running the party.
