Just desperate Reformers grasping at straws, and they seem to jump on sound bites out of context. All politicians have fundraisers - even women's nights.
I can smell the fear from the pmo.

Ladies' Night with a Ladies' Man, eh?

I have nothing against it. I wish everyone there a good time.

Not just desperate Reformers - there was NDP criticism of the event as well. The criticism I heard was three-fold.

1) some feel that there are no longer "women's issues" - that whatever used to be considered "women's issues" should now be considered mainstream.

2) some didn't like the advertising package for the event, finding it demeaning to women.

3) some thought it was portraying Trudeau's style rather than substance.

On the concept of an event for women, I have no real problem with it - although some  of my Conservative acquaintances have pointed out that there'd probably be a lot of howling from the left if Stephen Harper decided to host a men's only event. Probably true.

All I smell is Trudeau's after shave. And not Justin's. This continual insistence on playing on his sex appeal doesn't smack so much of sexism as of playing on his father's reputation. If he wants to be his own man, he has to stop playing his father's game. He has yet to make an impression on me beyond a handsome wannabe. And I am not a Harper supporter (quite the opposite, in fact).

Mendalla

I knew Pierre. And Justin is no Pierre.

The only possible reason to have a women's night is to provide a venue to concentrate on women's issue. This was just a gathering of giggling airheads, and mostly the ones with enough money so that they have no women's issues. They used to go to hear Pierre, too. but he never encouraged it.

Precisely.

Mendalla

I'm not sure JT is the one that's going to take the next election, but I would vote for a Teddy bear if it meant the end of this cold and secretive regime. I think I'm not alone in that. Wish it were otherwise. I actually believe Marc Garneau would be a better fit to get the Red Tories on board. It would be great if the Reform frankenparty at least reverted back to PC's and Reformers.
At least JT has good mentors and takes questions & talks freely - to his own detriment. I'd prefer that to the situation we have now with all the secrecy, propaganda and criminal activity we currently deal with.
In my perfect world, Elizabeth May would be PM & the NDP the opposition - Mulcair is doing that well. Justin is Liberal - not Green or NDP - people forget that.
I disagree that Justin is a vacuous Daddy wannabe with nothing substantial to impress his critics. The "ladies night" was the idea of two women. I'm sure Old Sourpuss has raised money at "men's prayer breakfasts".
I suggest looking at JT's web page. If he revealed any good ideas two years ahead of an election, Harper would steal the ideas & dangle them as empty promises for the next election. Why would he not first confer with Canadians first to really hear what's needed? Consult with people? what a concept!
JT is smart enough to know he needs to listen to experts, can't be effective without collaboration with them.

Idealistic view of Trudeau to say the least. Liberal backroomers are Canadians, to be sure, but are no more the mainstream of Canada than Conservative backroomers.

Maybe you're right, ninjafaery, and he is going to be more responsive to ordinary Canadians. However, I've lived through enough Liberal governments to know that while they and Conservatives may fall a few points apart on the political spectrum (and not always that, the old PCs were sometimes close enough to the centre to overlap with the Libs), on political behaviour they generally aren't so different.

I guess what I am saying in the end is "Show me the money". Show me that you're different. It is not my job to bend my will to embrace Trudeau; it is his job to make me want to embrace him and he hasn't done that yet.

Mendalla

It's the second and third points that stood out too me.

I have no issue with an event for women.  Just the act of marketing it as a 'Ladies Night' took away from the substenance.  I do think women's issues are everyone's issues, but women can still get together to discuss them.

Mendalla - I too am cynical about the Libs & don't expect much to change. I remember also. What was especially egregious to me was that they didn't restore EI back to 80% of employment income that the Conservatives clawed back, for example. But Harper kept his cards close to his chest until a week before the election, I think.
I'm not that naive. I'm sure if JT were PM, there will be would be lots of hypocrisy. Those Omnibus bills won't get a second look. I'd bet money on that.
Also, he supports the Keystone pipeline & Nexxen.
That cost him many Left votes, but that aligns him with the Centre.

Sure, another benevolent dictator like Cretien, but at least JT could repair our global reputation, but Libs embrace corruption as well, as do
all politicians. Voters are on guard now because of all the taxpayer money blown on corrupt senators and ill-advised spending.
As I mentioned, I'm Green, but they aren't on the radar yet. I need to see the last of Harper.,,

Is it possible to have a conversation in politics that doesn't end up having Harper mentioned?

Is there some kind of weird law specific to Canadians similar to Godwin's law?

Apologies - I addressed your topic up thread. End of rant.
Despite my opinions, I would not compare Harper with Hitler (yet).

Sorry, I reread my post and it sounds more annoyed than I meant it too.

I do find it a bit annoying that almost all politics conversations here lead to Harper, but it's a bit amusing too.

I think it is a mistake for him to try to capitalize on his looks as it feeds into the narrative that he has nothing else. So far there is nothing else apparent

And then on the news last night he is filmed at that event extolling the vitues of Chinese dictatorships.

While china has lots to admire, their dictatorship isn't one of them

A mistake on several fronts He needs to start putting out a more professional and serious image. He skated o the pot smoking thing, but it also feeds into his airhead image

Ninja: I like Elizabeth May and Mulcair too. But I would have it in reverse order, ideally. With him PM and her opposition.The only reason is- if May is appalled by what Harper's doing she'd be apoplectic over what some other world leaders are up to. If she thinks Harper's hard to reason with in an open and democratic way...he seems to indeed be hard to reason with, but there are worse, and what goes on in Canada is still- believe it or not- relatively civil. It's just that we used to be extraordinarily civil (comparatively speaking- not without issues). I think Mulcair's a tough nut and I wouldn't be afraid of him buckling under the weight of the ugly truths out there. I like Elizabeth- she's is a principled person, and very smart and if there were anything untoward Mulcair ever tried, she'd keep him in line. But on the world stage I think she'd be personally crushed to find out what a mean world it is.
She's a really nice person.

Yeah, Trudeau's ladies' night thing just struck me as a cheesy gimmick. Not much else to say about it.

"What Trudeau actually said was that he had "a level of admiration ... for China because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime and say 'we need to go greenest, fastest — we need to invest in solar.' I mean, there is a flexibility that I know Stephen Harper must dream about of having a dictatorship that he can do everything he wanted, and I find that quite interesting."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-applauds-china-but-then-s...

That doesn't make sense.

Is he saying that one dictatorship is based on better values than another one, so it's okay?

We all say that some dictatorships are better than others. We just love Saudi Arabia - and we wouldn't even think of listening to ao politicians who criticized it. Ditto for Haiti which is effectively a dictatorship under American control. Twenty years ago, we admired Saddam Hussein, and supplied him with weapons to kill Iranis.

China was smaashed, impoverished, brutalized  in over a century of western rule that destroyed every attempt the Chinese made to form a goverment and, if possible, a democratic one.

Mao was as cold  a murderer and dictator as they come. But it was Mao who saved China, who defeated the "Christian" Chiang Kai Shek that we were trying to impose, And it was Mao, not us Christian democrats, who made it possible to create the modern China. The dictatorship, for all its faults, has done more good for China than a century of interference by western democracies.

The quality of life in China has improved enormously under dictatorship. the quality of life in the US is near collapse under a (corrupt) democracy. All over the western, "democratic" world, societies are in deep trouble, with record levels of poverty. in the US, we are watching the destruction caused by uncontrolled greed - and an  utter indifference to the suffering of the American people.

China is prospering. The Chinese people are prospering with it. Education is soaring. Hospital care in immensely improved. There is an end to the famines that used to ravage China under the rule of democratic countries.

I don't like dictatorship. i think it's unstable in the long run. But it has done well in China. Why is it a sin to say so?

And we, with our police states (including Canada) and our political parties paid for by big business, and a thoroughly corrupt news media, and our rapacious big business - who are we to criticize anybody?

His words may have been poorly chosen, but he's basically expressing frustration about the slowness of the democratic process when dealing with more urgent environmental issues.
It's embarrassing that Canada is displaying little interest in developing green technologies at a pace to ensure alternatives to fossil fuel.
He also knows the press will eat him alive.

It's a skewered concept of democracy when "by the people for the people", includes corporations as people. That's what's wrong. That's a huge factor in the destabilization of the democratic process around the world. Even when not all countries recognize it- because the US does, and that's that. When one little person is up against a giant mammoth 'person' worth a zillion dollars with corporate lawyers built into his genetic code, and who lives on a diet of disadvantaged people. It's the little people vs. Godzilla ;)

Well put Kimmio.

As for the Ladie's Night, I do not know a lot about it, but suspect the organizers were boomers who used language familiar to them rather than language suited to today's times.  And "Lasies' Night" rolls off the tongue more easily than "Night for Women" or "Women's Night" or "Women's Evening".  It does feel a bit cheesy, but more honest than some of the events put on by other politcians.  And I am sorry that many people beleive women's issues are a thing of the past.  There is too much day to day evidence to the contrary.

Jim, I might agree about the Ladies' Night wording if it was marketed differently.  I think they were aware of the connotation that went with it.

As for women's issues, that wasn't part of my criticism, but I do think that "women's issues" are things that affect everyone.  I don't think the event was going to focus on women's issues, if it was though, getting a man up on stage as the only speaker in front of women does seem like a set up for some mansplaining.

It's also, I don't know... But it feels strange to have a young good looking male politician host an event about women's issues, calling it "Ladies Night". Just does.