# 2022 CPC Leadership Discussion: Et tu Redeux



## Remius (31 Jan 2022)

Well then…



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/erin-otoole-leadership-review-caucus-1.6334491
		


Will be an interesting day tomorrow.

Mod edit to align thread title with newly-merged thread contents all in one place


----------



## Czech_pivo (31 Jan 2022)

I’m an old supporter of the Federal PC party. Unless something drastic changes, I’ll still be without a party.


----------



## RangerRay (31 Jan 2022)

I have been ver disappointed with Mr. O’Toole lately. At first I thought it would be stupid to replace the leader again in so many years but he never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. 

I am not confident that the Tories will find anyone better though. A lot of people are talking about Pierre Pollievre, but I think he’s a good attack dog, not a leader. He will just turn the party into a base-only party, turning off the suburban voters they need to win elections. 

Unfortunately, I see the Tories trying to ape the”popular front” politics down south of “no enemies to the right” (or “no enemies to the left” if you’re a Dem). Great for getting 25% of the vote who are p!$$ed off but not great if you want to govern with a majority.


----------



## Remius (31 Jan 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I have been ver disappointed with Mr. O’Toole lately. At first I thought it would be stupid to replace the leader again in so many years but he never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
> 
> I am not confident that the Tories will find anyone better though. A lot of people are talking about Pierre Pollievre, but I think he’s a good attack dog, not a leader. He will just turn the party into a base-only party, turning off the suburban voters they need to win elections.
> 
> Unfortunately, I see the Tories trying to ape the”popular front” politics down south of “no enemies to the right” (or “no enemies to the left” if you’re a Dem). Great for getting 25% of the vote who are p!$$ed off but not great if you want to govern with a majority.


We’ll see if he survives but it’s not looking good.


----------



## Altair (31 Jan 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I have been ver disappointed with Mr. O’Toole lately. At first I thought it would be stupid to replace the leader again in so many years but he never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
> 
> I am not confident that the Tories will find anyone better though. A lot of people are talking about Pierre Pollievre, but I think he’s a good attack dog, not a leader. He will just turn the party into a base-only party, turning off the suburban voters they need to win elections.
> 
> Unfortunately, I see the Tories trying to ape the”popular front” politics down south of “no enemies to the right” (or “no enemies to the left” if you’re a Dem). Great for getting 25% of the vote who are p!$$ed off but not great if you want to govern with a majority.


Nah, it only works in the USA because there are two parties trying to desperately widen the gap between them. 

CPC (or a faction of it) just wants to be a protest party.


----------



## dapaterson (31 Jan 2022)

RangerRay said:


> A lot of people are talking about Pierre Pollievre, but I think he’s a good attack dog, not a leader. He will just turn the party into a base-only party, turning off the suburban voters they need to win elections.



He reminds me of Copps, Tobin and Boudria during the Mulroney years - a good attack dog when you're in opposition, but not leadership material.


----------



## Remius (31 Jan 2022)

dapaterson said:


> He reminds me of Copps, Tobin and Boudria during the Mulroney years - a good attack dog when you're in opposition, but not leadership material.


I’ve met him twice.  In person he’s actually not bad.  And he’s a great MP.  But yes, I agree, he’s not leadership material.


----------



## RangerRay (31 Jan 2022)

Altair said:


> CPC (or a faction of it) just wants to be a protest party.


As a centre-right voter, I fear that faction is in the ascendancy in the party which will guarantee Liberal governments for the foreseeable future.


----------



## daftandbarmy (31 Jan 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I have been ver disappointed with Mr. O’Toole lately. At first I thought it would be stupid to replace the leader again in so many years but *he never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.*



So it seems:

Erin O’Toole never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity​









						Globe editorial: Erin O’Toole never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity
					

Erin O’Toole’s tone-deaf positions of late have probably been helpful to the Liberals




					www.theglobeandmail.com


----------



## Remius (31 Jan 2022)

Altair said:


> Nah, it only works in the USA because there are two parties trying to desperately widen the gap between them.
> 
> CPC (or a faction of it) just wants to be a protest party.


At this point you may be right.


----------



## Altair (31 Jan 2022)

RangerRay said:


> As a centre-right voter, I fear that faction is in the ascendancy in the party which will guarantee Liberal governments for the foreseeable future.


Yup. 

I said it after the election, and I will say it now. 

All talk of this being Justin Trudeaus last election is premature. If the CPC self destructs and he can at the very least sleepwalk to a minority government, and be within 30k well placed votes from a majority, he's not going anywhere.


----------



## McG (31 Jan 2022)

Altair said:


> CPC (or a faction of it) just wants to be a protest party


There is a fraction that wants to be PPC and there is a fraction that wants to be the old PC. The CPC would have no problem snow-ploughing the PPC into oblivion if the party decides to launch that way, but they will loose substantially more from right of centre voters who walk away.


----------



## dapaterson (31 Jan 2022)

Canadians vote out parties after a certain amount of time in power.

In 2015, Canadians voted out the CPC.

In both 2019 and 2021, despite being incumbents (and in 2021 despite papering Canada with money) the LPC failed to win a majority.

If there was a reasonable opposition party with a credible leader the LPC would not be in power today.

The current PM is only the PM because the CPC has failed to provide an alternative.


----------



## Altair (1 Feb 2022)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1488324064930406402

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1488324270988140545
not substantiated, but interesting if true.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

The previous article mentioned the issue over C-4/C-6…this indicates that about half (or more) of the CPC is Reform/Alliance/PPC-like and a thin half or less is old PC.

Trudeau’s going to roll 2023 even if he spends the entire campaign surfing in Tofino…


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1488324064930406402
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1488324270988140545
> not substantiated, but interesting if true.



Every storm needs a lightening rod, and that might just be it.


----------



## MilEME09 (1 Feb 2022)

Tell me your out of touch with Canadians without telling me you are out of touch. If that is really what triggered it, then the far right of the party has a string grip on the CPC, which in the end destroy them and ensure another decade of liberal rule.


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

It may be time for moderate conservatives to just move to team red and effect change from there.  Let the CPC become a protest party and be perpetually stuck in opposition .   They’ve shown that they don’t want to govern seriously.  

Unless they can get a leader that can keep the party in line (and I can’t see anyone that can) then time for a different approach.


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Well then…
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm so tired of this.  If my party can't understand how shitty we are and fix it then we have no business beating Trudeau or being Canada's governing power.

#spoilingmyvote



Remius said:


> It may be time for moderate conservatives to just move to team red and effect change from there.  Let the CPC become a protest party and be perpetually stuck in opposition .   They’ve shown that they don’t want to govern seriously.
> 
> Unless they can get a leader that can keep the party in line (and I can’t see anyone that can) then time for a different approach.



I will stop going to polling stations what so ever before I ever vote for the Liberal party again.


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I'm so tired of this.  If my party can't understand how shitty we are and fix it then we have no business beating Trudeau or being Canada's governing power.
> 
> #spoilingmyvote
> 
> ...


I understand the feeling.  I really can’t see myself voting LPC as long as JT is there.

But my counter is to have enough Right of Center/red tories that can help balance the party and effect change and have influence from within.  It’s a long term thing.  Not sure that can happen but it isn’t happening in the CPC and I’m not sure it can ever happen.


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I understand the feeling.  I really can’t see myself voting LPC as long as JT is there.
> 
> But my counter is to have enough Right of Center/red tories that can help balance the party and effect change and have influence from within.  It’s a long term thing.  Not sure that can happen but it isn’t happening in the CPC and I’m not sure it can ever happen.



I am not sure there is any chance of the red ship being righted at this point.  It seems destined role as far left as it can.

I curse you Peter MacKay.


----------



## RangerRay (1 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> It may be time for moderate conservatives to just move to team red and effect change from there.  Let the CPC become a protest party and be perpetually stuck in opposition .   They’ve shown that they don’t want to govern seriously.
> 
> Unless they can get a leader that can keep the party in line (and I can’t see anyone that can) then time for a different approach.


As long as they remain a corrupt, unserious party in the thrall of the United Front Work Department of the Chinese Communist Party, and with Justin Trudeau as leader, I cannot in good conscience vote Liberal. I would sooner stay home on Election Day.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I am not sure there is any chance of the red ship being righted at this point.  It seems destined role as far left as it can.
> 
> I curse you Peter MacKay.


Don’t you mean you curse all the CPC members who voted for O’Toole INSTEAD of Peter MacKay?

I think only Rona Ambrose could salvage the CPC crap-show at this point.  Possibly Remple-Garner…


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Don’t you mean you curse all the CPC members who voted for O’Toole INSTEAD of Peter MacKay?
> 
> I think only Rona Ambrose could salvage the COC crap-show at this point.  Possibly Remple-Garner…



No I curse MacKay for giving up the PC Party.  They should have stuck it out. 

I agree on Rona Amborse, but I think she is too intelligent to put her hat in with these fools currently in the CPC.


----------



## Czech_pivo (1 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I have been ver disappointed with Mr. O’Toole lately. At first I thought it would be stupid to replace the leader again in so many years but he never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
> 
> I am not confident that the Tories will find anyone better though. A lot of people are talking about Pierre Pollievre, but I think he’s a good attack dog, not a leader. He will just turn the party into a base-only party, turning off the suburban voters they need to win elections.
> 
> Unfortunately, I see the Tories trying to ape the”popular front” politics down south of “no enemies to the right” (or “no enemies to the left” if you’re a Dem). Great for getting 25% of the vote who are p!$$ed off but not great if you want to govern with a majority.


The fellow who I like, have meet, years ago when he first ran and represented my old riding, is Mike Chong.  Principled, old school PC tory and not a religious zealot that seems to run just below the surface of the last 2-3 Conservative leaders.

EDIT: And he's a Windsor, Ontario boy just like me, so I'm partial to this....being a Tory in Windsor makes you quick on your feet and sometimes with your fists, lol.


----------



## Czech_pivo (1 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> No I curse MacKay for giving up the PC Party.  They should have stuck it out.
> 
> I agree on Rona Amborse, but I think she is too intelligent to put her hat in with these fools currently in the CPC.


Yes, I feel strongly that Peter sold us out.  I still think that he's capable and could make a difference/contribution but as for a leader, I think that the ship has sailed.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> No I curse MacKay for giving up the PC Party.  They should have stuck it out.


Ah, seen…we’ll, it was in good faith with Harper and “the deal” would have seen a transfer of leadership after the first full majority, so I think that at the time, it was an appropriate decision…but Harper and the further/far right reneged (therein dissing the larger PC crowd as well) and the Red(dest) Tories plugged their noses as they saw the rising SOCON tide.



Halifax Tar said:


> I agree on Rona Amborse, but I think she is too intelligent to put her hat in with these fools currently in the CPC.


Sadly, I think you’re right.  The SOCON hijack needs to burn itself out…if ever.  If it doesn’t, then it will be a bad time for Canada as we spend ourselves blissfully into oblivion (and de facto takeover by the CCP).  Definitely very little strategic thought going on in the CPC these days.

Just out of interest, MacKay should re-register the PCs and see how that flies.  It may actually recover many of the Red Tories and even some Blue Liberals, and then do a coalition with the CPC and punt Trudeau Jr… 🤔


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

I agree that Ambrose was the way to go.  But yes.  She’s too smart and likely saw the writing on the wall and wanted nothing to do with that mess.


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Ah, seen…we’ll, it was in good faith with Harper and “the deal” would have seen a transfer of leadership after the first full majority, so I think that at the time, it was an appropriate decision…but Harper and the further/far right reneged (therein dissing the larger PC crowd as well) and the Red(dest) Tories plugged their noses as they saw the rising SOCON tide.
> 
> I never took Harper as a SOCON.  But I could be wrong.  Ya as a red torrie I have been consistently pushed away from the party.
> 
> ...


----------



## Czech_pivo (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Just out of interest, MacKay should re-register the PCs and see how that flies.  It may actually recover many of the Red Tories and even some Blue Liberals, and then do a coalition with the CPC and punt Trudeau Jr… 🤔


I'm fairly certain that the conditions of the 'merger' included the name 'Progressive Conservative',  'PC' and 'Progressive Conservative Party of Canada' terms/logos to be no longer used/available.


----------



## Czech_pivo (1 Feb 2022)

I've felt the same way, pushed away as an old Tory supporter.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

Czech_pivo said:


> I'm fairly certain that the conditions of the 'merger' included the name 'Progressive Conservative',  'PC' and 'Progressive Conservative Party of Canada' terms/logos to be no longer used/available.


So? 😉 

Harper broke the agreement. So it would arguably be null and void.  MacKay is a good enough lawyer that he’d be able to easily justify moving on as the PCs.


----------



## RangerRay (1 Feb 2022)

I didn’t see Harper as the religious bogey man here. I have heard they intensely dislike him because he put them in a box labelled “DO NOT OPEN”. Now that he’s gone, they are letting their freak flag fly. 

I saw the merger as an opportunity for both parties, that agreed on 90% of things, to jettison their extremists and work together on a common liberal-conservative cause. Unfortunately, the departure of Mr. Harper coincided with the rise of far-right populism and all the media incentive structures that fueled it. Now a sizeable chunk of the party thinks they can catch lightning in a bottle like their Republican counterparts, not realizing the electoral system here will not allow that to work. It also appears that like many Republican politicians down south, many Tory politicians here are more afraid of their supporters than the general electorate.


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

I know this is premature.

So I had mentioned this a while ago about Doug Ford making a run for the leadership.  Now Gerald Butts (I know I know) tweeted something similar that Ford would be a very tough candidate to beat. 

Thoughts?


----------



## Eaglelord17 (1 Feb 2022)

There is a big difference between Canada and the USA though. In the US you only have two parties. In Canada you have 6 parties splitting votes, which is why you can win majorities with only 35ish % of the vote.

Remember the CPC won the popular vote for two consecutive elections, they were more popular than the Liberals which everyone seems to think they need to be more like. If the PPC didn't exist they likely could have won both of them. There issue isn't so much who they have running for them it is where the votes are being cast (i.e. Liberals tend to have more spread out voting, as opposed to the CPC which tends to win by landslides in some areas and not get much in others), and the fact so many Canadians are ignorant as to what they CPC is standing for.

The reason this last point is a issue is because they haven't been releasing their policies for the last couple elections and it has allowed so many attack ads to have much more of a effect because without anything countering that the Liberals can make any claim they want. Stop with the gotcha style of attacks, they are childish and only appeal to their hardcore supporters. Simply ignore the competition and state how you are going to make Canada better and why your policies will work. To do this you need to set ground rules as to what your policies are actually going to be and make everyone fall in line on them.

No banning abortion talk. No banning gays talk. None of the common things Canadians hate but somehow always gets brought up by some member of the CPC as a good idea talk. Show yourselves as a viable option, and do it long enough in advance to allow Canadians to see that before the election.

If I was the Liberal Party I would be more concerned than the Conservatives. They are the one losing voting space to the left and right and now seemingly unable to get enough votes to put them over the top.


----------



## RangerRay (1 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I know this is premature.
> 
> So I had mentioned this a while ago about Doug Ford making a run for the leadership.  Now Gerald Butts (I know I know) tweeted something similar that Ford would be a very tough candidate to beat.
> 
> Thoughts?


I won’t count him out. He comes with a lot of baggage and other negatives, but for all his bluster, I think he’s a more moderate Tory compared to some of these other guys. Not my first choice, but watch and shoot!


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I know this is premature.
> 
> So I had mentioned this a while ago about Doug Ford making a run for the leadership.  Now Gerald Butts (I know I know) tweeted something similar that Ford would be a very tough candidate to beat.
> 
> Thoughts?




Has he maintained his popularity in Ont ?


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> ... Just out of interest, MacKay should re-register the PCs and see how that flies.  It may actually recover many of the Red Tories and even some Blue Liberals, and then do a coalition with the CPC and punt Trudeau Jr… 🤔


Up to the bit in yellow, intriguing idea.  What would the chances be, though, of Peter M being able to bridge the gap that would be in place between a slightly-redder Team Blue 2.0 and the existing Team Blue 1.0?


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I won’t count him out. He comes with a lot of baggage and other negatives, but for all his bluster, I think he’s a more moderate Tory compared to some of these other guys. Not my first choice, but watch and shoot!


I’m curious how this could play out.  A provincial election is coming.  So let’s say he wins (I think he will).  Then he makes a run for the CPC.  Nothing says he has to have a seat in the HoC until it’s time for an election which could be two years from now.

Could he actuallly be premier of Ontario and leader of the federal Opposition?  Seems like an unprecedented thing that brings up all sorts of interesting scenarios.  For a while (and maybe still) he was the face of conservatives in Canada so it wouldn’t be that far off the realm of possibility. 

Anyways just playing fantasy football here.


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Has he maintained his popularity in Ont ?


Not sure I would say he’s popular.  But the opposition is a mess.  Teachers hate him, health care workers hate him.  His pandemic response approval rating is mixed. 

But…



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-election-2022-poll-abacus-doug-ford-1.6319116


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

Also the GTA gave him his win.  Can that translate nationally?


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Not sure I would say he’s popular.  But the opposition is a mess.  Teachers hate him, health care workers hate him.  His pandemic response approval rating is mixed.
> 
> But…
> 
> ...



With our broken seat distribution being unpopular in Ont is a huge detriment.


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> With our broken seat distribution being unpopular in Ont is a huge detriment.


He’s still leading in the polls and broke through the GTA last time.  So we’d have to see how that could translate nationally. But his messy thing with Franco Ontariens didn’t endear to Quebec.  Mind you he backtracked but it did damage him a bit.


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> He’s still leading in the polls and broke through the GTA last time.  So we’d have to see how that could translate nationally. But his messy thing with Franco Ontariens didn’t endear to Quebec.  Mind you he backtracked but it did damage him a bit.



Does he Parler Vous ?


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Does he Parler Vous ?


Not that I can tell.  He was taking lessons but stopped during the pandemic.   Winning without QC is hard but it is possible and has happened before.


----------



## Haggis (1 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I’m curious how this could play out.  A provincial election is coming.  So let’s say he wins (I think he will).


My prediction is that Ford will go down in flames, aided by the federal Liberals.  Trudeau would love a provincially red Ontario.


Remius said:


> Then he makes a run for the CPC.  Nothing says he has to have a seat in the HoC until it’s time for an election which could be two years from now.


After he's burned at the stake, as articulated above, his reputation in ON will be tarnished and his electability nullified.  The federal Cons won't touch him.


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

Haggis said:


> My prediction is that Ford will go down in flames, aided by the federal Liberals.  Trudeau would love a provincially red Ontario.
> 
> After he's burned at the stake, as articulated above, his reputation in ON will be tarnished and his electability nullified.  The federal Cons won't touch him.


Possible yes.  I saw a few Doug Fraud signs at the protest.


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Feb 2022)

Del Duca is a bigger lame duck than Ignatieff was. He's only getting support from the blind faithful, he's been invisible and his legacy with Wynne will come out in the campaign.


----------



## lenaitch (1 Feb 2022)

There are all sorts of publications by political scientists and pundits which describe how having the same party in power in both Ottawa and Ontario often creates difficulties for both.  One interesting one from last week I think posited that one of the reasons is that neither party has a large enough 'backroom A-team' to manage both at the same time.

I'm not naive enough to try and predict how Ontario's next election will turn out, but I don't think Ford has enough traction federally.


----------



## Journeyman (1 Feb 2022)

Copyright Bruce MacKinnon


----------



## RangerRay (1 Feb 2022)

Tasha Kheiriddin: Erin O'Toole's leadership is over
					

Conservatives need to take a long hard look at themselves, what they stand for, who’s leading their parade, and whose company they keep




					nationalpost.com
				






> Everyone in that crowd, including Poilievre, Lewis, and O’Toole had the chance — nay, the obligation — to call out the intolerance. Not after the images hit Twitter, but immediately. On the spot.





> If you stand shoulder to shoulder with people who display racist symbols, and don’t tell them right then and there to leave your protest or take them down, you are not standing up for freedom. You are standing with hate. If you stand with people who verbally abuse hotel clerks and inflict 24-7 mayhem on an entire city, you are not standing up for freedom. You will be tarred with their hatred and become complicit in their agenda.


----------



## mariomike (1 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> Tasha Kheiriddin: Erin O'Toole's leadership is over
> 
> 
> Conservatives need to take a long hard look at themselves, what they stand for, who’s leading their parade, and whose company they keep
> ...





> Conservative MPs Pierre Poilievre and Leslyn Lewis were working the crowd all weekend, giving coffee and sympathy to protesters and yammering about “freedom” until their vocal cords gave out.





> Organizers of the protest said O’Toole should quit and be replaced by Poilievre or Lewis.





> Shots of people hoisting confederate flags, “Trump 2024” signs, and Canadian flags adorned with swastikas.



Interesting.


----------



## dapaterson (1 Feb 2022)

The way things are going my main question is where they will find the eight people to lead all the dissident parties that will split off.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> Up to the bit in yellow, intriguing idea.  What would the chances be, though, of Peter M being able to bridge the gap that would be in place between a slightly-redder Team Blue 2.0 and the existing Team Blue 1.0?


If reasonably intelligent people, let’s call them Blue Liberals, who most-likely had moved to the LPC because the CPC was policy-wise measurably further right than the PCs were, see that they can unplug their nose enough and rejoin the PC party, knowing that the farther-right CPC wouldn’t get their vote, even if a PC-CPC coalition would form Government, then the yellow-bit above may still be something acceptable to at least some of the original PC->LPC transferees.


----------



## Scott (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> If reasonably intelligent people, let’s call them Blue Liberals, who most-likely had moved to the LPC because the CPC was policy-wise measurably further right than the PCs were, see that they can unplug their nose enough and rejoin the PC party, knowing that the farther-right CPC wouldn’t get their vote, even if a PC-CPC coalition would form Government, then the yellow-bit above may still be something acceptable to at least some of the original PC->LPC transferees.



The CPC can't go all messiah seeking like the LPC of the 00s did, either. I think that would turn some of the people you describe (okay, me) off of them even more. Because this isn't something fixed by a leadership review/race/anointing. 

If they decide to fend off Max first then we'll get something entirely different.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

Yup.  I don’t know where they think they’ll get to, but an ‘anointment’ of anyone other than Ambrose at this point (so we know it won’t ne successful in the end) is going to be a mess and will likely hand Trudeau a fourth term (and probably a majority too).  

I was a PC lifer until the Reform/Alliance hard-core faction brought out whatever blackmail material it had on Harper and their appreciation of the boost the PCs gave them post-merger was conveniently forgotten and MacKay never became the shared PM after Harper.  We’re going to have to accept that at least for the next half decade or so, socks, hair and virtue signaling will be something we live with. 😔


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Yup.  I don’t know where they think they’ll get to, but an ‘anointment’ of anyone other than Ambrose at this point (so we know it won’t ne successful in the end) is going to be a mess and will likely hand Trudeau a fourth term (and probably a majority too).
> 
> I was a PC lifer until the Reform/Alliance hard-core faction brought out whatever blackmail material it had on Harper and their appreciation of the boost the PCs gave them post-merger was conveniently forgotten and MacKay never became the shared PM after Harper.  We’re going to have to accept that at least for the next half decade or so, socks, hair and virtue signaling will be something we live with. 😔









Putting on my tin foil hat now... 

And I have postulated this before...

What if the CPC is purposefully throwing elections now ?  Leave JT and team in place, eventually their bed will be so full of shit they wont be able to lay in it anymore and completely destroy the Liberal Party.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

HT, possibly, but I honestly don’t think there’s as much strategic thought in the current caucus to actually coordinate/implement that.


----------



## dapaterson (1 Feb 2022)

I don't think any federal party plays a long game like that.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

dapaterson said:


> I don't think any federal party plays a long game like that.


Xi Jinping has entered the chat:


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Xi Jinping has entered the chat:


China is not a federal system though so…


----------



## Scott (1 Feb 2022)

The CPC couldn't keep that COA secret. Someone would out the idea to propel their own self interests.

Or this:



dapaterson said:


> I don't think any federal party plays a long game like that.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> China is not a federal system though so…


Mainland + Taiwan = Federation.


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Mainland + Taiwan = Federation.


Unwilling as it may be in one direction, anyway.


----------



## blacktriangle (1 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Putting on my tin foil hat now...
> 
> And I have postulated this before...
> 
> What if the CPC is purposefully throwing elections now ?  Leave JT and team in place, eventually their bed will be so full of shit they wont be able to lay in it anymore and completely destroy the Liberal Party.


It's possible that some are actively engaged counter to the national interest. There's probably others that are just indifferent. I think any vast conspiracy is a stretch though. They just aren't what Canadians want to elect currently.


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

It’s pretty much a Unitary system by all accounts.

Main Land Taiwan and island of Taiwan maybe lol.


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Not sure I would say he’s popular.  But the opposition is a mess.  Teachers hate him, health care workers hate him.  His pandemic response approval rating is mixed.
> 
> But…
> 
> ...


On that ...


> Ontario Premier Doug Ford says he has no intention to run for leadership of the federal Conservative party if Erin O’Toole loses a caucus vote that’s expected to happen Wednesday.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Unless we apply the Kemlin Rule, of course ...


----------



## RangerRay (1 Feb 2022)

One thing the Tories have to contend with is that many low-information voters (not a pejorative, but most people don’t pay attention to this stuff) assume the Liberals are a “centrist” party as opposed to a brokerage party. They think by voting Liberal, they split the difference between the far left and the kooky right. 

It doesn’t help the situation when the Tories actually go into kooky right territory because that is what their membership demands. 

Which leads me to think of how a long time ago, it was common for regular folk to be members of any political party. But now with the decline in political party membership, those that remain are passionate ideological activists, which turn off most people.  Reminds me of a quote “…something something, the worst are full of passion…” or something like that.


----------



## Brad Sallows (1 Feb 2022)

Don't entertain oddball ideas about "conspiracy" where "self-organizating behaviour" (people following their own paths) will do.

CPC defectors are starting to sound like "NeverTrump Lite" - purists who claim to be conservative but will not tolerate anything except their own brand of conservativism with them in control, so they end up supporting some other party (de facto tolerating everything in that party, oddly enough) or withdrawing entirely.

Again: there are not enough ridings in Canada that would elect so-con candidates for so-con candidates to form a so-con parliamentary majority within a CPC parliamentary majority.  Talk of SSM rollback and abortion legislation is overwrought hand-wringing about something that can not happen.

The CPC does have to police its ranks; the rules of politics/media are that wingnut progressives get a pass and wingnut conservatives are closely scrutinized.  The same applies to trivial "gotcha" bullsh!t scandals.  The leader of the CPC has to ignore the petty pitfalls of other parties' MPs, police his own, and stick to policy.


----------



## Kat Stevens (1 Feb 2022)

As long as "Orange Man Bad" sentiments that inundated our country, strangely enough, for a few years lingers, a conservative won't get elected dog catcher within 100 miles of most urban centres in Canada. Conservative=Trump thought is prevalent with the younguns and the groovy urbanites.


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

Kat Stevens said:


> As long as "Orange Man Bad" sentiments that inundated our country, strangely enough, for a few years lingers, a conservative won't get elected dog catcher within 100 miles of most urban centres in Canada. Conservative=Trump thought is prevalent with the younguns and the groovy urbanites.


Certainly a valid point.  It does not help when some CPC members try to link themselves to the trump train though.


----------



## Altair (1 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Don't entertain oddball ideas about "conspiracy" where "self-organizating behaviour" (people following their own paths) will do.
> 
> CPC defectors are starting to sound like "NeverTrump Lite" - purists who claim to be conservative but will not tolerate anything except their own brand of conservativism with them in control, so they end up supporting some other party (de facto tolerating everything in that party, oddly enough) or withdrawing entirely.
> 
> ...


The don't worry, the other parties +moderate Conservatives will prevent the worst impulses of the CPC is not the selling point you think it is.


----------



## Haggis (1 Feb 2022)

I will preface this "theory" by saying that I have a relative and an acquaintance who own shares in Alcan and a hat factory. 

They claim that prior to the last CPC leadership contest that Ambrose was quietly encouraged by "The Laurentien Elite" to keep her from running - and likely winning - the CPC leadership and then contesting the next election against Trudeau.  She was to have received as much as $10M to step away from the CPC permanently.

I've also been told that recycled tinfoil which still has some mustard on it is best for blocking certain brainwave sensor frequencies.  Apparently it's the No. 6 yellow food colouring that's the key.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

I think she honestly wanted to spend more time with her family and she did great service keeping the wheels on the wagon, so no one should be dissing her for ‘abandoning’ the CoC.  

That said, if the Alcan cap crowd was right, isn’t that a federal offense to tamper with an election?


----------



## Altair (1 Feb 2022)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/otoole-supporters-caucus-vote-1.6335530
		





> *MPs opposed to O'Toole's leadership have collected enough signatures — 35 so far — to hold a secret ballot on his future Wednesday, sources have told CBC News.
> 
> 
> 
> A vote by 50 per cent plus one of the 119 sitting Conservative MPs calling on O'Toole to step down would force him to make way for an interim leader immediately. Sources tell CBC News that O'Toole's caucus opponents believe they have the necessary votes, with at least 60 MPs agreeing that he has to go*


I wonder if O'Toole could convince the 50-59 MPs that support him to go make their own Party.


----------



## Kat Stevens (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> I think she honestly wanted to spend more time with her family and she did great service keeping the wheels on the wagon, so no one should be dissing her for ‘abandoning’ the CoC.
> 
> That said, if the Alcan cap crowd was right, isn’t that a federal offense to tamper with an election?


Yes, I can only imagine the thorough and exhaustive investigation the govt would initiate.  🤣


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

Kat Stevens said:


> Yes, I can only imagine the thorough and exhaustive investigation the govt would initiate.  🤣


Could also have gone with “😢“ but wanted to look on the bright side of life…


----------



## Remius (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> I think she honestly wanted to spend more time with her family and she did great service keeping the wheels on the wagon, so no one should be dissing her for ‘abandoning’ the CoC.
> 
> That said, if the Alcan cap crowd was right, isn’t that a federal offense to tamper with an election?


If you want to spend time with your family you don’t become a special consultant and help the minister of foreign affairs with the NAFTA deal or join an e cigarette company’s board of directors lol.  She’s probably enjoy more control I r her life though not having to campaign or travel anymore.  Good for her.  I always liked her.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> If you want to spend time with your family you don’t become a special consultant and help the minister of foreign affairs with the NAFTA deal or join an e cigarette company’s board of directors lol.  She’s probably enjoy more control I r her life though not having to campaign or travel anymore.  Good for her.  I always liked her.


You sure as heck do!

Higher pay rate and less time on the clock.


----------



## Haggis (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> I think she honestly wanted to spend more time with her family and she did great service keeping the wheels on the wagon, so no one should be dissing her for ‘abandoning’ the CoC.
> 
> That said, if the Alcan cap crowd was right, isn’t that a federal offense to tamper with an election?


I highly doubt the Alcan Crew are even remotely right in this instance.  That being said, S. 497.5 and 497.6 of the Canada Elections Act govern leadership races and, specifically, leadership candidates.  Dissuading someone from running before they declare their candidacy is not an offence under the Act.


----------



## dimsum (1 Feb 2022)

Haggis said:


> I've also been told that recycled tinfoil which still has some mustard on it is best for blocking certain brainwave sensor frequencies.  Apparently it's the No. 6 yellow food colouring that's the key.


Dammit I only have dijon.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2022)

dimsum said:


> Dammit I only have dijon.


Poncey fixed-wing aircrew with on-board galley…


----------



## Fishbone Jones (1 Feb 2022)

Erin O’Toole may not have a job come tomorrow.
I did not vote for O’Toole. Nor do I like the way he said all the right true blue things in the leadership convention, then flipped to a gooey pink centrist the next day. His interview,a out supporting the truckers last week was the last straw. He gave an answer that would make trudeau proud. Word salad. When the journalist said he didn't answer the question, he lied and then tried to talk over the reporter and drown him out. I don't  know who will replace him if he loses tomorrow, I just know they can't be worse than O’Toole. 









						Erin O'Toole Is The First Politician To Fall To The Truckers — The National Telegraph
					

After 35 MPs publicly signed a letter to oust him from leadership, Erin O’Toole grabbed his phone and took to social media at midnight to attack the Conservative base one last time.  The best metaphor for what is below would be the violent twitching of a freshly decapitated chicken.




					thenationaltelegraph.com
				




Erin O'Toole Is The First Politician To Fall To The Truckers​Opinion
Written By Daniel Bordman
Erin O’Toole’s political career is dead, he just hasn’t admitted it yet. 
After 35 MPs publicly signed a letter to oust him from leadership, Erin O’Toole grabbed his phone and took to social media at midnight to attack the Conservative base one last time.  The best metaphor for what is below would be the violent twitching of a freshly decapitated chicken.

More at link.


----------



## Altair (1 Feb 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Erin O’Toole may not have a job come tomorrow.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Truckers?

Yeah, I suppose his election results or the forced vote on conversion therapy were not the catalyst, 60+ MPs organized this from 5 days ago when the protest started to now to oust him.


----------



## dimsum (1 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Poncey fixed-wing aircrew with on-board galley…
> View attachment 68422


....and more importantly, a toilet.


----------



## QV (2 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Don’t you mean you curse all the CPC members who voted for O’Toole INSTEAD of Peter MacKay?
> 
> I think only Rona Ambrose could salvage the CPC crap-show at this point.  Possibly Remple-Garner…


Remple-Garner likely pissed her chances away at leading a unified CPC the moment she publicly apologized for her “cis/straight/white privilege“ and her relative silence since C19 began.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> Remple-Garner likely pissed her chances away at leading a unified CPC the moment she publicly apologized for her “cis/straight/white privilege“ and her relative silence since C19 began.


I must say, Season 6 of the CPC in opposition, rise of the SOCONs has been most entertaining TV to watch.

Cannot wait until tomorrows episode.


----------



## QV (2 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> I must say, Season 6 of the CPC in opposition, rise of the SOCONs has been most entertaining TV to watch.
> 
> Cannot wait until tomorrows episode.


I wouldn’t be surprised if the CPC fracture.


----------



## MilEME09 (2 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> I wouldn’t be surprised if the CPC fracture.


A blue divorce is looking likely, I suspect though that would benefit any new non-Socon party, rural, more religious riding's would likely vote for a socon, so that party would stay a protest party forever.


----------



## tomydoom (2 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> A blue divorce is looking likely, I suspect though that would benefit any new non-Socon party, rural, more religious riding's would likely vote for a socon, so that party would stay a protest party forever.


And curse the country to another decade of Liberal government, or worse alternating Liberal and NDP governments.  The "true blue" faction needs to learn that ideological purity is  a path to the wilderness and social conservatism is a complete non-starter in suburbia.  I would have thought that the lessons of the PC/Reform split, would have lasted longer.  Unfortunately, that appears to not be the case.


----------



## Halifax Tar (2 Feb 2022)

Tim Houston the Premier of NS is the perfect old school PC.  He's doing an amazing balanced job so far. And very well spoken. 

Would love to see him leading a new centerist PC party.


----------



## Remius (2 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Tim Houston the Premier of NS is the perfect old school PC.  He's doing an amazing balanced job so far. And very well spoken.
> 
> Would love to see him leading a new centerist PC party.


Hadn’t even thought of him.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (2 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Tim Houston the *Premier of NS* is the perfect old school PC.  He's doing an amazing balanced job so far. And very well spoken.
> 
> Would love to see him leading a new centerist PC party.



But can he pass the ultimate test of a federal PC leader from NS  - catch a football without fumbling while being photographed?


----------



## Scott (2 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> I wouldn’t be surprised if the CPC fracture.



I was thinking the same thing seeing Remple-Garner on P&P last night. I've never seen her look resigned like that.


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Feb 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> ... I don't  know who will replace him if he loses tomorrow, I just know they can't be worse than O’Toole ...


You're far from the only person feeling this way.  Does that mean anyone'll be better in general, or at best, they'll be "no better than"?


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Feb 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> You're far from the only person feeling this way.  Does that mean anyone'll be better in general, or at best, they'll be "no better than"?


Depends on whom you ask in the party…


----------



## Scott (2 Feb 2022)

Tim Houston has been surprising me - quite pleasantly so far.


----------



## dimsum (2 Feb 2022)

Scott said:


> Tim Houston has been surprising me - quite pleasantly so far.


I read that as "Tim Hortons". 

"Tim Hortons" and "pleasant"...lol


----------



## Halifax Tar (2 Feb 2022)

Scott said:


> Tim Houston has been surprising me - quite pleasantly so far.



Me too.  His comments and willingness to take action on th latest NSP boondoggle is pretty reassuring


----------



## Scott (2 Feb 2022)

dimsum said:


> I read that as "Tim Hortons".
> 
> "Tim Hortons" and "pleasant"...lol



Nope!



Halifax Tar said:


> Me too.  His comments and willingness to take action on th latest NSP boondoggle is pretty reassuring



Anyone who tells NSP to fuck themselves is fine with me.


----------



## Czech_pivo (2 Feb 2022)

For me, as of now, if he throws his hat into a leadership race, if one occurs, its Mike Chong.  It's a feather in his cap that the ChiCom's have made him persona non grata.


----------



## Scott (2 Feb 2022)

Back when I joined the CPC to have a voice in Scheer's eventual win, I voted for Chong. I would again.

Not sure he can win over the loonies though.


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Feb 2022)

Scott said:


> Back when I joined the CPC to have a voice in Scheer's eventual win, I voted for Chong. I would again.
> 
> Not sure he can win over the loonies though.


The SOCONs would probably get donations from  an anonymous source (NOT LPC agents 😉) to campaign against Chong.


----------



## RangerRay (2 Feb 2022)

I don’t think O’Toole’s problem is he’s a “moderate”. It’s that he’s all over the place. One day he’s moderate, the next day he’s “True-Blue” and making juvenile videos.  Nobody can tell where he’ll stand on a given issue. If you don’t like what he says on Monday, wait till Tuesday and you will. He’s talking out of both sides of his mouth, which only works if you’re a Liberal.


----------



## Halifax Tar (2 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I don’t think O’Toole’s problem is he’s a “moderate”. It’s that he’s all over the place. One day he’s moderate, the next day he’s “True-Blue” and making juvenile videos.  Nobody can tell where he’ll stand on a given issue. If you don’t like what he says on Monday, wait till Tuesday and you will. He’s talking out of both sides of his mouth, which only works if you’re a Liberal.



He's making the classic leadership mistake of trying to make everyone happy.


----------



## Haggis (2 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I don’t think O’Toole’s problem is he’s a “moderate”. It’s that he’s all over the place. One day he’s moderate, the next day he’s “True-Blue” and making juvenile videos.  Nobody can tell where he’ll stand on a given issue. If you don’t like what he says on Monday, wait till Tuesday and you will. He’s talking out of both sides of his mouth, which only works if you’re a Liberal.


The CPC is not a one person show.  O'Toole must be getting advice from sources within the CPC whose role is to advise the leader. Whether he takes that advice is another matter.


----------



## Scott (2 Feb 2022)

His language sure indicated that he's willing to blow things up over this. Maybe that's why MGR looked sooooo uncomfortable last night.

I have also heard a soundbyte from someone referencing "Scheerites" being behind this move.

Lisa Raitt appeared convinced that Erin is done and dusted.

It's Michelle Rempel Garner's involvement/stance that has me flummoxed about where this could lead.


----------



## Scott (2 Feb 2022)

Hearing more and more stuff like this about the CPC under O'Toole: John Ivison: How Erin O'Toole allegedly sidelined Peter MacKay's plan to run in next election and it's coming back to bite him now. It's a year old, but pretty damned relevant now.



> John Ivison
> Publishing date:
> Mar 17, 2021
> 
> ...



I have only ever heard of Fred Delorey from my time living in Antigonish. I never understood why Fred was not on Peter's team and instead on Erin's. It didn't make sense to me. Then again, the few times I have heard Fred's name come up in conversation, it wasn't positive and barely tepid.


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Feb 2022)

Scott said:


> Hearing more and more stuff like this about the CPC under O'Toole: John Ivison: How Erin O'Toole allegedly sidelined Peter MacKay's plan to run in next election and it's coming back to bite him now. It's a year old, but pretty damned relevant now.
> 
> 
> 
> I have only ever heard of Fred Delorey from my time living in Antigonish. I never understood why Fred was not on Peter's team and instead on Erin's. It didn't make sense to me. Then again, the few times I have heard Fred's name come up in conversation, it wasn't positive and barely tepid.


Kind of paints O’Toole as either an unwitting (thus naive, and weak) or deliberate (and thus disingenuous to the small-C elements) conspirators to the SOCONs.  That a party would rather lose a seat to the Liberals in an election when every seat counted, than see MacKay be part of the party’s caucus is prof of the myopia of the growing extremism of the CPC.  O’Toole no doubt either knew it, or is an unworthy leader for letting this happen on his watch.


----------



## Remius (2 Feb 2022)

I don’t want to sound negative but is suspect many of us will be going to our graves under a liberal sun.  The LPC will be holding on to power for quite some time after this is all said and done.


----------



## Remius (2 Feb 2022)

Looks like he is done 73 votes against him.


----------



## Scott (2 Feb 2022)

73 and quite a few abstentions, from what Hannah Thibedeau said on CBCNN.



Good2Golf said:


> Kind of paints O’Toole as either an unwitting (thus naive, and weak) or deliberate (and thus disingenuous to the small-C elements) conspirators to the SOCONs.  That a party would rather lose a seat to the Liberals in an election when every seat counted, than see MacKay be part of the party’s caucus is prof of the myopia of the growing extremism of the CPC.  O’Toole no doubt either knew it, or is an unworthy leader for letting this happen on his watch.



Yeah this totally caught me off guard. I'd think that reactiveness like this would have been well known before he was groomed to be leader.


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Looks like he is done 73 votes against him.


First report from The Canadian Press ....


> Conservative Party MPs voted to remove Leader Erin O'Toole from his role in a meeting on Wednesday afternoon.
> 
> Sources confirm to CTV News the Durham MP lost the vote by 119 caucus members by a count of 73-45.


From ipolitics


> Erin O’Toole is out as the Conservative leader.
> 
> The majority of the Tory caucus voted to remove him by secret ballot during a virtual caucus meeting on Wednesday.
> 
> ...


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Feb 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> First report from The Canadian Press ....
> 
> From ipolitics



Hopefully he had correctly donned his parachute this morning...


----------



## Drallib (2 Feb 2022)

O'Toole voted out!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/otoole-leadership-vote-1.6336336


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Feb 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> First report from The Canadian Press ....
> 
> From ipolitics





..if only government acted that quickly on a regular basis… 😉


----------



## FJAG (2 Feb 2022)

Drallib said:


> O'Toole voted out!
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/otoole-leadership-vote-1.6336336


----------



## Halifax Tar (2 Feb 2022)

FJAG said:


>



Can we have a schism already ?


----------



## dapaterson (2 Feb 2022)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1488941474251218946


----------



## Kat Stevens (2 Feb 2022)

Ten more years! Ten more years! Welcome to Northern Venezuela, try to enjoy your stay.


----------



## Scott (2 Feb 2022)




----------



## Good2Golf (2 Feb 2022)

Kat Stevens said:


> Ten more years! Ten more years! Welcome to Northern Venezuela, try to enjoy your stay.


Jinping: “Congratulations!”
Trudeau: “谢谢!”


----------



## RangerRay (2 Feb 2022)




----------



## OldSolduer (2 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Jinping: “Congratulations!”
> Trudeau: “谢谢!”


JT looks especially stern, but his friend looks bored.....


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Feb 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> First report from The Canadian Press ....
> 
> From ipolitics


So I take it he's done. The CPC will never be happy with what ever leader they choose.


----------



## Kat Stevens (2 Feb 2022)

You could dig up Ralph Klein's moldering corpse and he'd beat Trudledum.


----------



## brihard (2 Feb 2022)

Well that was stupid. Anything that drags the CPC back to SoCon will only help the Liberals. Although this will be a bit of a rug-pull out from under the PPC, and that’s inherently amusing.

Now, pay close attention to which names are _not_ floated for interim leader. Under the CPC constitution, an interim cannot be selected as the substantive. It’s a codified caretaker role.

Pierre Poilievre’s name has not been mention that I’ve seen. I’d say he’s an obvious high profile candidate for leader. Who else?


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Feb 2022)

Kat Stevens said:


> You could dig up Ralph Klein's moldering corpse and he'd beat Trudledum.


That might be an idea. I liked Ralph.


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> Well that was stupid. Anything that drags the CPC back to SoCon will only help the Liberals. Although this will be a bit of a rug-pull out from under the PPC, and that’s inherently amusing.
> 
> Now, pay close attention to which names are _not_ floated for interim leader. Under the CPC constitution, an interim cannot be selected as the substantive. It’s a codified caretaker role.
> 
> Pierre Poilievre’s name has not been mention that I’ve seen. I’d say he’s an obvious high profile candidate for leader. Who else?


Someone could approach Rona Ambrose unless she's busy. Or Peter McKay.


----------



## KevinB (2 Feb 2022)

JFC - so just because the Republicans down here can't get along, the CPC decided to immolate itself?


----------



## mariomike (2 Feb 2022)

Scott said:


>


----------



## mariomike (2 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> JFC - so just because the Republicans down here can't get along, the CPC decided to immolate itself?



Seems like a strange sense of timing with Trudeau on the ropes during the Freedom convoy. 

Maybe on the canvass or TKO with Covid.


----------



## Navy_Pete (2 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> Well that was stupid. Anything that drags the CPC back to SoCon will only help the Liberals. Although this will be a bit of a rug-pull out from under the PPC, and that’s inherently amusing.
> 
> Now, pay close attention to which names are _not_ floated for interim leader. Under the CPC constitution, an interim cannot be selected as the substantive. It’s a codified caretaker role.
> 
> Pierre Poilievre’s name has not been mention that I’ve seen. I’d say he’s an obvious high profile candidate for leader. Who else?


Poilievre has a pretty punchable kind of face, and has made a reputation as an attack dog who pumps up the rhetoric and 'us vs them' type politics. May be popular with a portion of the base but would be an awful leader if the intention is to actually win.

A Paul Martin type would probably be the best thing they could do, but someone fiscally responsible with a steady hand to guide the economy doesn't seem to be in the cards at all.


----------



## FJAG (2 Feb 2022)

I'd like to see who voted which way.

Dollars to donuts that the moron who holds my riding was one of them.


----------



## Remius (2 Feb 2022)

I love how they say they are all united…lol


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Feb 2022)

I misread the title and thought it said Circus Revolt.....


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Feb 2022)

The Manitoba wing of the Conservatives are just as fragmented. The leader is a multi millionaire and she just disciplined one of her MLAs for meeting with the convoy.


----------



## RangerRay (2 Feb 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Poilievre has a pretty punchable kind of face, and has made a reputation as an attack dog who pumps up the rhetoric and 'us vs them' type politics. May be popular with a portion of the base but would be an awful leader if the intention is to actually win.



That’s my impression too. If you’re not a Tory, you probably find him annoying. Personally, I like his pointedness in the HoC, but his rhetoric outside is over the top.  Cuddling up to the Tantrum on the Hill won’t endear him to the persuadables in Suburbia.


----------



## Kat Stevens (2 Feb 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> I misread the title and thought it said Circus Revolt.....


Funny, I misread it first time too, but I thought it was strange things are afoot in Caucasus.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

45. Would still be the 3rd largest party in parliament.


----------



## RangerRay (2 Feb 2022)

Would be nice to know who voted and why. I am sure some had different reasons for tossing him (too left, too right, too flip-floppy, lost the election, bad hair…🤷‍♂️).


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> Would be nice to know who voted and why. I am sure some had different reasons for tossing him (too left, too right, too flip-floppy, lost the election, bad hair…🤷‍♂️).


Probably go check the Conversion therapy vote before it was a whipped vote and you will have your answer.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 Feb 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Poilievre has a pretty punchable kind of face, and has made a reputation as an attack dog who pumps up the rhetoric and 'us vs them' type politics. May be popular with a portion of the base but would be an awful leader if the intention is to actually win.
> 
> A Paul Martin type would probably be the best thing they could do, but someone fiscally responsible with a steady hand to guide the economy doesn't seem to be in the cards at all.


I agree a Paul Martin Senior type would be great. I place him as one of the last great honest politicians the grits ever had.

As for Poilievre, I think he scares the beejeezus out of trudeau. If trudeau ever spoke the truth or answered a question, he wouldn't be able to steer clear of Pierre's challenges. It would be worth watching an election debate between them when trudeau is required to answer a real question honestly, outside the protection of Parliament.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

You know who is smiling today?

Tom Mulcair. 

Tom Mulcair, him of the holder of the most recent most humiliating exit as a party leader for a very long time just had Erin O'Toole hold his beer.


----------



## ringo (2 Feb 2022)

Michelle Rempel Garner


----------



## Remius (2 Feb 2022)

ringo said:


> Michelle Rempel Garner


She was looking pretty dejected before the vote.


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Feb 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> As for Poilievre, I think he scares the beejeezus out of trudeau. If trudeau ever spoke the truth or answered a question, he wouldn't be able to steer clear of Pierre's challenges. It would be worth watching an election debate between them when trudeau is required to answer a real question honestly, outside the protection of Parliament.


Spécialement de répondre aux questions de Poilièvre en sa langue maternelle (ou en anglais, pas de quoi), car il sait que Poilièvre craquerait ses couilles en QP…


----------



## Brad Sallows (2 Feb 2022)

Unity isn't created and maintained by extremists; the centrists have to do it.

Political splits happen when the centre/establishment keeps finding reasons to exclude everything that isn't exactly what they want.  Best example right now is in the US: the Never-Trump (ex-)neo-cons are pretty much centrist relative to both Democrats and Republicans, but their attempt to take back the Republican party can be described as "nothing for you; we'd rather burn the party to the ground if we can't own it".

The people who want a PC-type conservative party are the ones who have to figure out where to make accommodations, and make them.  The answer cannot be "No" to everything.


----------



## dimsum (2 Feb 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> I misread the title and thought it said Circus Revolt.....


Did you really though...?


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> The people who want a PC-type conservative party are the ones who have to figure out where to make accommodations, and make them.  The answer cannot be "No" to everything.


Doesn’t that assume then the issue was with the small-Cs?   If that’s truly the case, then is there truly a solution other than they all accept a significantly strengthened socially-conservative position of the party? (And by implication, that the CPC is potentially no longer the party for them)


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Probably go check the Conversion therapy vote before it was a whipped vote and you will have your answer.


... as well as those who were out of country for the vote ...


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Spécialement de répondre aux questions de Poilièvre en sa langue maternelle (ou en anglais, pas de quoi), car il sait que Poilièvre craquerait ses couilles en QP…


Yeah, that really doesn't  make sense to me. I never took FSL other than a few years in public school.🙂

"Especially to answer Poilièvre's questions in his mother tongue (or in English, not what), because he knows that Poilièvre would crack his balls in QP... "
👍

Thank you DuckDuckGo


----------



## FJAG (2 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Unity isn't created and maintained by extremists; the centrists have to do it.
> 
> Political splits happen when the centre/establishment keeps finding reasons to exclude everything that isn't exactly what they want.  Best example right now is in the US: the Never-Trump (ex-)neo-cons are pretty much centrist relative to both Democrats and Republicans, but their attempt to take back the Republican party can be described as "nothing for you; we'd rather burn the party to the ground if we can't own it".
> 
> The people who want a PC-type conservative party are the ones who have to figure out where to make accommodations, and make them.  The answer cannot be "No" to everything.


The problem is that the concessions the Socons want are ones that the centrists aren't prepared to concede on. The common ground that they have is becoming less and less important than the differences are.

Were heading back to the wasteland of two separate conservative minority parties. And I doubt if the right wing of the LPC wants to unite with the left wing of the CPC.

🍻


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Feb 2022)

Just brought together both CPC threads into one - please carry on ...

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## Brad Sallows (2 Feb 2022)

The last two effective leaders of federal conservatives in Canada were Harper and Mulroney.  Which was more "reform" and which was more "PC"?  And how did each rate for character?

If PC-style conservatives want a unified party, they have to make the sale.  Which means they have to try to make the sale.  Which means more than a token gesture.  If all they want to do is cite excuses to walk away, they are worthless.


----------



## Brad Sallows (2 Feb 2022)

> The problem is that the concessions the Socons want are ones that the centrists aren't prepared to concede on.



The concession is "free votes on private members' bills", in exchange for "no legislation overturning X, Y, and Z".  Should be two fairly obvious candidates for X and Y.  Neither side gets exactly what it wants.

Something is feasible.  I doubt Harper was the last man with the last opportunity to build a party of federal conservatives in Canada.


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Feb 2022)

Looking forward to voting for the Bloc as the only viable opposition to the Liberal Party in the next election... oh, wait, I can't 

Opinion: Are Conservatives becoming Canada's Trump Republicans?​
Are we seeing the end of the federal Conservative party as a legitimate opposition? Is it becoming a sad echo of the American Republican party, a.k.a., the Donald Trump party?

The post-mortem report on the Conservative party’s performance in the 2021 election criticized it — and leader Erin O’Toole in particular — for too many flip-flops during the election. The party, it is advised, must make clear what it stands for.

Aye, but there’s the rub! What too many of its party’s supporters stand for is not palatable to the vast majority of Canadians. Sure, balanced budgets get a salute, as does support for the military. But climate change denialism, social conservatism, and creeping privatization of health care do not attract young, urban, and more socially liberal voters, and scare off many others. Even less appealing is pandering to those for whom freedom means ignoring one’s responsibilities or the rights of others.










						Opinion: Are Conservatives becoming Canada's Trump Republicans?
					

Are we seeing the end of the federal Conservative party as a legitimate opposition? Is it becoming a sad echo of the American Republican party, a.k.a., the…




					edmontonjournal.com


----------



## Brad Sallows (2 Feb 2022)

Canadian conservatives can only wish they were as successful as Republicans.  The first Canadian conservative leader to succeed is going to be the one who figures out that the things progressives want conservatives to stand for are not the only things that conservatives can stand for.


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> The concession is "free votes on private members' bills", in exchange for "no legislation overturning X, Y, and Z".  Should be two fairly obvious candidates for X and Y.  Neither side gets exactly what it wants.


Like the abortion restrictions members’ bills, etc. that well-intentioned or not, are like handing ammunition to the LPC to scare Canadians away from the CPC? 🤔


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Canadian conservatives can only wish they were as successful as Republicans.  The first Canadian conservative leader to succeed is going to be the one who figures out that the things progressives want conservatives to stand for are not the only things that conservatives can stand for.


If success is limited to winning the leadership, sure. 

But if winning the election is the end goal and losing gets a leader turfed then no, this isn't the way forward. 

The first conservative leader to succeed is going to be the one who figures out how to win the leadership while somehow being electable. 

O'Toole tried and we just saw what happened.


----------



## Remius (2 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> If success is limited to winning the leadership, sure.
> 
> But if winning the election is the end goal and losing gets a leader turfed then no, this isn't the way forward.
> 
> ...


Why would anyone run for the leadership if it’s just a one chance thing.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Why would anyone run for the leadership if it’s just a one chance thing.


Serious people will not.

Ambrose, Mackay, those people are done.

You're going to get those who love the prestige of being party leader like Poilievre, Scheer and Lewis


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 Feb 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> Looking forward to voting for the Bloc as the only viable opposition to the Liberal Party in the next election... oh, wait, I can't
> 
> Opinion: Are Conservatives becoming Canada's Trump Republicans?​
> Are we seeing the end of the federal Conservative party as a legitimate opposition? Is it becoming a sad echo of the American Republican party, a.k.a., the Donald Trump party?
> ...


He's been trying to draw parallels between the Conservatives and Trump Republicans for more than a couple of years now. It just appears a biased hit piece to me.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Like the abortion restrictions members’ bills, etc. that well-intentioned or not, are like handing ammunition to the LPC to scare Canadians away from the CPC? 🤔


It's  going to have to be clarified once and for all. The upcoming SCOTUS review of Roe v. Wade will most definitely spill over into Canada and bring the issue front and centre.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> It's  going to have to be clarified once and for all. The upcoming SCOTUS review of Roe v. Wade will most definitely spill over into Canada and bring the issue front and centre.


lol,no.


----------



## Remius (2 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Serious people will not.
> 
> Ambrose, Mackay, those people are done.
> 
> You're going to get those who love the prestige of being party leader like Poilievre, Scheer and Lewis


It’s just the cost as well.  Mackay is still in debt by like a lot…


----------



## Remius (2 Feb 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> It's  going to have to be clarified once and for all. The upcoming SCOTUS review of Roe v. Wade will most definitely spill over into Canada and bring the issue front and centre.


That’s not how that works lol.  If anything it will only add more fuel to the accusations that the CPC have a secret agenda and that won’t help.


----------



## Spencer100 (2 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> lol,no.


You don't think that would have a spillover effect?  Totally have a spillover especially if it goes against Roe.  The first thing Canadian reporters will do is ask every Conservative their position.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

Spencer100 said:


> You don't think that would have a spillover effect?  Totally have a spillover especially if it goes against Roe.  The first thing Canadian reporters will do is ask every Conservative their position.


Canadians are largely supportive of the way things are in Canada. 

Which is why every time it is brought up in Canada, its boosts the LPC and hobbles the CPC. 

If there is any spillover its simply to reinforce the above, not change the status quo. 

But by all means, the SOCONs can for sure try to rally around the abortion issue, it seems like they are in the drivers seat of the CPC right now.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> It’s just the cost as well.  Mackay is still in debt by like a lot…


There are going to be those looking at what the truckers convoy just raised in a short time, and think that they can harness it.

The PPC too most likely.


----------



## Remius (2 Feb 2022)

Spencer100 said:


> You don't think that would have a spillover effect?  Totally have a spillover especially if it goes against Roe.  The first thing Canadian reporters will do is ask every Conservative their position.


I fully expect Cheryl Gallant or some other to open their gateway to hell and say something stupid that only serves to help tank the CPC by providing sound bites.  And then all the laments about being treated unfairly after putting bullets in their feet. 

So yes.


----------



## brihard (2 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Serious people will not.
> 
> Ambrose, Mackay, those people are done.
> 
> You're going to get those who love the prestige of being party leader like Poilievre, Scheer and Lewis


Poilievre makes good angry Tory noises. He appeals heavily to their base. Not sure he’d be an attractive candidate to swing voters, however he’s not really a SoCon, so he has that going for him. If the CPC picked him and ran a hard campaign on the country’s finances, employment, and supporting the provinces to un-frig healthcare, and if while doing this he can keep a grip on the SoCons so they STFU about anything even tangentially related to abortion or LGBTQ rights, they may have a chance.

Scheer is a wiener and has already lost to Trudeau. He wouldn’t even commit to renouncing his US citizenship for the purpose of running for PM of Canada, so screw that guy.

Lewis is a hard SoCon and utterly unelectable for that purpose.

I think internal CPC politics drove out some of the good potential candidates. They may be really suffering with this decision.


----------



## dimsum (2 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I fully expect Cheryl Gallant or some other to open their gateway to hell and say something stupid that only serves to help tank the CPC by providing sound bites.  And then all the laments about being treated unfairly after putting bullets in their feet.
> 
> So yes.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> Poilievre makes good angry Tory noises. He appeals heavily to their base. Not sure he’d be an attractive candidate to swing voters, however he’s not really a SoCon, so he has that going for him. If the CPC picked him and ran a hard campaign on the country’s finances, employment, and supporting the provinces to un-frig healthcare, and if while doing this he can keep a grip on the SoCons so they STFU about anything even tangentially related to abortion or LGBTQ rights, they may have a chance.
> 
> Scheer is a wiener and has already lost to Trudeau. He wouldn’t even commit to renouncing his US citizenship for the purpose of running for PM of Canada, so screw that guy.
> 
> ...


I think Poilievre is not in the enviable position he thinks he is. 
I don't think the CPC membership is going to go for a eastern based MP without the strong SOCON roots. 

They got hoodwinked by O'Toole and they likely don't make that mistake again. 

The only chance I think Poilievre has is making this a coronation, if he fails to do that the SOCON vote will consolidate around a actual true blue conservative.


----------



## Remius (2 Feb 2022)

There is irony that this happened on ground hog day…


----------



## suffolkowner (2 Feb 2022)

Not sure there's a short term gain here for the Conservatives. O'toole might have flip-flopped to much but walking the tight-rope of policy between what is electable and what some Conservative members want is going to be difficult for whoever succeeds him. I don't see it happening


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Feb 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> It's  going to have to be clarified once and for all. The upcoming SCOTUS review of Roe v. Wade will most definitely spill over into Canada and bring the issue front and centre.


Clarified?  This is Canada, right…it’s been kept deliberately vague…enough…so that it doesn’t have to be clarified.  The only people who like ‘freedom of manoeuvre’ more than military armoured forces are politicians…they’re keep as much uncertainty in the process so that they don’t have to be held tomato’s on the issue…except when their adversary takes a position and they want to demonize them… 😉


----------



## brihard (2 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Clarified?  This is Canada, right…it’s been kept deliberately vague…enough…so that it doesn’t have to be clarified.  The only people who like ‘freedom of manoeuvre’ more than military armoured forces are politicians…they’re keep as much uncertainty in the process so that they don’t have to be held tomato’s on the issue…except when their adversary takes a position and they want to demonize them… 😉


Not sure what needs to be clarified.

Abortion is a medical procedure. The practice of medicine is regulated by the provinces.

Once upon a time, providing abortion in Canada was criminal. _Morgentaler_ struck this down on Charter grounds, albeit with the court divided on precisely why. Nonetheless, the Criminal Code section outlawing it was struck down. It is therefore not an offence to get an abortion. Theoretically a government could pass a new law on the matter since the _Morgentaler_ decision resulted in no binding precedent due to the judge split. I think, however, that in the past couple decades we have likely moved as a society well away from where this would be politically survivable.

There’s no lingering, unresolved legal question on this. A party would have to be dumb enough to try to re-criminalize it for there to be such a question. It would be a race to see if the courts or the legislature would reverse it first.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> Not sure what needs to be clarified.
> 
> Abortion is a medical procedure. The practice of medicine is regulated by the provinces.
> 
> ...


The cynical part of this is, the Left could explicitly legalize it as well. 

But they leave it undefined as bait so the second someone (CPC) suggest doing anything the LPC can pounce on them.


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> ... If the CPC picked him and ran a hard campaign on the country’s finances, employment, and supporting the provinces to un-frig healthcare, and if while doing this he can keep a grip on the SoCons so they STFU about anything even tangentially related to abortion or LGBTQ rights, they may have a chance ...


Can't see that bit in yellow happening in his case because I suspect he's not in it FOR anything, but (like others have said) AGAINST the current Team Blue approach.  He also doesn't strike me as someone who wants to deal with caucus stuff & party discipline.


----------



## AmmoTech90 (2 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> I don't think the CPC membership is going to go for a eastern based MP without the strong SOCON roots.


He's from Calgary and I'm sure he would be quite willing to leverage that fact in a leadership race.


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> Not sure what needs to be clarified.
> 
> Abortion is a medical procedure. The practice of medicine is regulated by the provinces.
> 
> ...


Sorry, should have been clearer.  I was commenting specifically on the internal politics of the CPC and the combatting factions, such that the party has not to my knowledge ever explicitly said that it’s position mirrors that of Canadian law.  I think the LPC last had a member’s bill proposing for a re-criminalization of at least a portion of the abortion spectrum in the mid-2000s, but not since.


----------



## brihard (2 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> The cynical part of this is, the Left could explicitly legalize it as well.
> 
> But they leave it undefined as bait so the second someone (CPC) suggest doing anything the LPC can pounce on them.


It is explicitly legal. Anything is in the absence of a law making it illegal. While the Criminal Code does carry some “it is not an offense to…” provisions, the absence of same does not in and of itself out the legality of an act in doubt.


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Feb 2022)

AmmoTech90 said:


> He's from Calgary and I'm sure he would be quite willing to leverage that fact in a leadership race.


And has consistently won his riding by healthy margins in the Nation’s Capital Region amongst a sea of red…


----------



## KevinB (2 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> It is explicitly legal. Anything is in the absence of a law making it illegal. While the Criminal Code does carry some “it is not an offense to…” provisions, the absence of same does not in and of itself out the legality of an act in doubt.


Because Canadian Law makes so much sense...

When child becomes human being


*223* (1) A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother, whether or not

(a) it has breathed;
(b) it has an independent circulation; or
(c) the navel string is severed.

Marginal note:Killing child
(2) A person commits homicide when he causes injury to a child before or during its birth as a result of which the child dies after becoming a human being.



So you can pummel a pregnant woman - and as long as the the child dies inside the woman who is pregnant - you can't be charged with a homicide related to the death of the child -- just the assault on the woman who was carrying the baby...

Oh Canada, you really make me want to puke these days.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> It is explicitly legal. Anything is in the absence of a law making it illegal. While the Criminal Code does carry some “it is not an offense to…” provisions, the absence of same does not in and of itself out the legality of an act in doubt.


Yes, its not illegal. 

But they could just take that next step, akin to the  the Civil Marriage Act in 2005, the abortion act or something of the like. 

They haven't. The courts knocked down the previous bans and nothing has been done since.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> Because Canadian Law makes so much sense...
> 
> When child becomes human being
> 
> ...


No worries, maybe the next CPC leader makes this their headline issue.


----------



## brihard (2 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> Because Canadian Law makes so much sense...
> 
> When child becomes human being
> 
> ...


Yes, that’s right, but it would be a hell of an aggravated assault sentencing. The law is quite clear.


----------



## KevinB (2 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> No worries, maybe the next CPC leader makes this their headline issue.


I don't vote in Canada anymore - so until the invasion no one needs to listen to my opinion.


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> I don't vote in Canada anymore - so until the invasion no one needs to listen to my opinion.


You know we all care very much about your opinion Kevin.


----------



## brihard (2 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> You know we all care very much about your opinion Kevin.


Some of us do. He has a solid head on his shoulders coupled with a breadth of experiences and perspectives, some borne of living outside of Canada while still caring a lot about what happens here. I don’t always agree with the guy, but I do always listen to what he had to say.


----------



## KevinB (2 Feb 2022)

FWIW, I totally understand that abortion issues are a colossal minefield politically in Canada (and down here too, and it's going to be an interesting year this year down here for that).
   I have my own beliefs on what is ethical and moral, but I don't usually try to force them down peoples throats.
I do find it extremely interesting that the "rights of everyone" crowd don't seem to include the unborn, but I guess that's the original cancel culture.

Bringing up Abortion as an issue for a Canadian Politician is a lose-lose proposition, kind of like white soldiers PeaceKeeping in Africa.
   Not matter what you do, others will damn you to hell.


----------



## MilEME09 (2 Feb 2022)

Conservatives name Candice Bergen as interim leader after O'Toole voted out
					

The Conservative Party of Canada has named Candice Bergen as interim leader following a private vote late Wednesday evening.




					www.ctvnews.ca
				




and here we go, Candice Bergen is the interim leader


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> I don't vote in Canada anymore - so until the invasion no one needs to listen to my opinion.


----------



## KevinB (2 Feb 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> View attachment 68457


I don't believe in open carry -- I like to have surprise on my side...


----------



## Remius (2 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> And has consistently won his riding by healthy margins in the Nation’s Capital Region amongst a sea of red…


Most yes.  There was the one in 2015 that was quite close considering his significant margins prior to.  Was only won by 2000 votes.  Compare that to 20k previously.


----------



## brihard (2 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> Conservatives name Candice Bergen as interim leader after O'Toole voted out
> 
> 
> The Conservative Party of Canada has named Candice Bergen as interim leader following a private vote late Wednesday evening.
> ...


Oh good. They picked someone most recently known for a photograph of her literally wearing a MAGA hat. No own-goal there at all.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> Oh good. They picked someone most recently known for a photograph of her literally wearing a MAGA hat. No own-goal there at all.


Its pretty clever actually.

Its signaling which path the party wants to take without officially saying which path the party wants to take.

Which only makes me think Poilievre should be feeling about as confident as Peter Mackay or Maxime Bernier did at this point in their leadership races.


----------



## Kat Stevens (3 Feb 2022)

Pretty smart, makes her interim leader during a minority govt. Takes  her out of the running for leader before the next election.


----------



## QV (3 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> Oh good. They picked someone most recently known for a photograph of her literally wearing a MAGA hat. No own-goal there at all.


It wouldn’t matter who they picked. There will always be people and media picking it apart.


----------



## lenaitch (3 Feb 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> It's  going to have to be clarified once and for all. The upcoming SCOTUS review of Roe v. Wade will most definitely spill over into Canada and bring the issue front and centre.


Roe v Wade was more about Constitutional authority vs States' rights than it was about the substantive law.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

Kat Stevens said:


> Pretty smart, makes her interim leader during a minority govt. Takes  her out of the running for leader before the next election.


Pretty smart, if she does a good job like Rona did and she gains goodwill within the party like Rona did, she can probably actually win the next leadership struggle after the party turfs the leader for failing to take down Trudeau and maybe Canadians are actually ready for change by then.


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Pretty smart, if she does a good job like Rona did and she gains goodwill within the party like Rona did, she can probably actually win the next leadership struggle after the party turfs the leader for failing to take down Trudeau and maybe Canadians are actually ready for change by then.


So 12 years or so? Don’t forget the in between infighting the CPC will be doing.


----------



## FJAG (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> Because Canadian Law makes so much sense...


It actually makes sense. Some people might not like it, however. Once you create criminal liability for harming a fetus, you create a wedge into the current position on abortion that the vast majority of Canadians support. Canada's abortion stance is one of the most successful non-laws on record. No politician wants to touch it and that means no one will criminalize harming a fetus. That said, almost always that a fetus is harmed the mother is also harmed and the courts can take it out on the offender for that.



KevinB said:


> I don't vote in Canada anymore - so until the invasion no one needs to listen to my opinion.


Tell me, after the invasion, how many electoral college seats will the provinces get? Do you really want another 38 million Democrats in the country?


----------



## dapaterson (3 Feb 2022)

Way things are going right now, the invasion is more likely to be the east and west coasts joining Canada...


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Feb 2022)

> That’s not how that works lol.



Culture bleeds across borders.  Larger countries exert more pressure than smaller ones.  You'll notice that American trends are affecting Canada more than vice versa.  Watch which way culture shifts in the US if you want some idea of "how it works" in the future.


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Culture bleeds across borders.  Larger countries exert more pressure than smaller ones.  You'll notice that American trends are affecting Canada more than vice versa.  Watch which way culture shifts in the US if you want some idea of "how it works" in the future.


Disagree.  Canadian culture has roots in American counter culture (ie loyalist Americans who fled to Canada, war of 1812 etc etc) not to mention the whole French Canada thing which takes its culture cues from Europe rather than south.  

Death penalty
Guns
Abortion

Just a few things that Canadians differ on and for the most part  are smug about that fact.

Now, TV, movies music, litterature, art, theatre etc etc.  That’s a whole different thing but that world tends to be more progressive so easily adopted or embraced by Canadians.


----------



## ballz (3 Feb 2022)

I dunno... Trump's presidency sure seemed to have an effect on our culture. It's like we're exactly 10 years behind the US in polarization and what used to be fringe is gaining enough momentum to elect a Trump of their own.


----------



## FJAG (3 Feb 2022)

ballz said:


> I dunno... Trump's presidency sure seemed to have an effect on our culture. It's like we're exactly 10 years behind the US in polarization and what used to be fringe is gaining enough momentum to elect a Trump of their own.


I first got that feeling in the sixties / seventies when National Defence turned into a business model some ten years after McNamara introduced systems analysis as a decision making process in the US. 

We seem to lag about a half to a full decade in many trends. Education is another big example where we seem to introduce learning concepts that have run for a while in the States.

🍻


----------



## KevinB (3 Feb 2022)

FJAG said:


> I first got that feeling in the sixties / seventies when National Defence turned into a business model some ten years after McNamara introduced systems analysis as a decision making process in the US.
> 
> We seem to lag about a half to a full decade in many trends. Education is another big example where we seem to introduce learning concepts that have run for a while in the States.
> 
> 🍻


Not always good to be on the cutting edge...


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

ballz said:


> I dunno... Trump's presidency sure seemed to have an effect on our culture. It's like we're exactly 10 years behind the US in polarization and what used to be fringe is gaining enough momentum to elect a Trump of their own.


To an extent.  Trump had an effect on the world regardless of what people might think. Populists aren’t new.  We actually have our own running the country. 

But that “culture” already existed here.


----------



## Czech_pivo (3 Feb 2022)

Peter Mackay's twitter feed has gone pretty active over the last hour or so.  Three sets of comments/opinions on 3 separate items. I get the feeling that someone is testing the waters.


----------



## Scott (3 Feb 2022)

Peter: the political career that won't die.

Pierre: he's got less on his resume outside of politics than Scheer did!


----------



## KevinB (3 Feb 2022)

FJAG said:


> Tell me, after the invasion, how many electoral college seats will the provinces get? Do you really want another 38 million Democrats in the country?


When I am Galactic Space Emperor - service guarantees citizenship 
   I may need to loose some Democrat Penal Battalions in a a few human wave attacks though...


----------



## Halifax Tar (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> When I am Galactic Space Emperor - service guarantees citizenship
> I may need to loose some Democrat Penal Battalions in a a few human wave attacks though...



The older I get the more I agree with that book.


----------



## Navy_Pete (3 Feb 2022)

Abortion has been legal in Canada for an entire generation; it's really a regressive vice a conservative position to roll back on that. Similarly pretty widely accepted you are born gay where conversion therapy is based on it being a wrong choice and driven by religion (and massively harmful).

Both items are religion based opinions where they are trying to enforce their morality on others, which is why there is such a massive pushback from people on them being put forward as laws, and why the so-cons in the party will continue to cripple the CPC as long as they are such a vocal part of the agenda (just like some of the more strident communist postions from NDP members turn off a large portion of voters).

Harper was successful by fairly ruthlessly clamping down on that wing of the reform party and focusing on economics and large scale strategic type issues. Scheer tried to soft play them which didn't work, and O'Toole tried to tell them all something to make them happy which didn't work either (and looks like it just pissed everyone off).

If the CPC wants success it has to take pretty firm stances as a party against some of these SOCON issues, but will take a few cycles for a lot of people to actually believe it's not just lip service.


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> The older I get the more I agree with that book.


Lol.  I know.  I found myself arguing some things in that book with some friends.


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

Scott said:


> Peter: the political career that won't die.
> 
> Pierre: he's got less on his resume outside of politics than Scheer did!


He’s a career politician and quite litterally has done nothing outside of politics.


----------



## Halifax Tar (3 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> He’s a career politician and quite litterally has done nothing outside of politics.



I do believe hes been a lawyer 









						Peter MacKay - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				





> In 1993, MacKay accepted an appointment as Crown Attorney for the Central Region of Nova Scotia. He prosecuted cases at all levels, including youth and provincial courts as well as the Supreme Court of Canada. MacKay has publicly stated that the major impetus for his entry into federal politics was his frustrations with the shortcomings in the justice system, particularly his perception that the courts do not care about the impact crime has on victims.


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I do believe hes been a lawyer
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I was talking about Polievre sorry, I thought that was who we were talking about.


----------



## Halifax Tar (3 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I was talking about Polievre sorry, I thought that was who we were talking about.



Oh!  Maybe we were!  Desolee!


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Feb 2022)

It's time for the Conservatives to wander in the political wilderness for awhile, methinks:

“Every prophet has to come from civilization, but every prophet has to go into the wilderness. He must have a strong impression of a complex society and all that it has to give, and then he must serve periods of isolation and meditation. This is the process by which psychic dynamite is made.”  Winston Churchill


----------



## Scott (3 Feb 2022)

I referenced two Peters, or Pierres, depending how you look at it.

The one with zero work experience outside politics is Pierre Polievre.


----------



## Czech_pivo (3 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I do believe hes been a lawyer
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I used to see Peter in the underground in Toronto pre-pandemic.  Would stop and say hello and ask how things were going.  Very friendly, approachable guy, always came across as a nice guy, not some schmuck full of himself.


----------



## Halifax Tar (3 Feb 2022)

Czech_pivo said:


> I used to see Peter in the underground in Toronto pre-pandemic.  Would stop and say hello and ask how things were going.  Very friendly, approachable guy, always came across as a nice guy, not some schmuck full of himself.


He is a very down to earth guy... and a very Pictou typical rugby player lol


----------



## Scott (3 Feb 2022)

Agreed. I know Peter still does stuff for vets when he can as well, on a personal and family level. It's always refreshing to see.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Feb 2022)

Scott said:


> I referenced two Peters, or Pierres, depending how you look at it.
> 
> *The one with zero work experience outside politics is Pierre Polievre*.


Wait…as a teenager he was in door-to-door sales for the local…..errr…never mind… 😉


Pierre Poilièvre’s early years…


> It is a political coming of age. At 16, he was using his radio announcer's voice to sell Reform Party memberships for Jason Kenney. Mr. Poilievre's only real private-sector job was a post-university stint as partner in a company that did robocalls for politicians. He was a young staffer for Stockwell Day, and, after 18 months in Ottawa, ran for Parliament. Now he's a senior figure.


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Feb 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> It's time for the Conservatives to wander in the political wilderness for awhile, methinks:
> 
> “Every prophet has to come from civilization, but every prophet has to go into the wilderness. He must have a strong impression of a complex society and all that it has to give, and then he must serve periods of isolation and meditation. This is the process by which psychic dynamite is made.”  Winston Churchill


They should until they come to their senses. The CPC or whoever they are this week has a considerable number of "bible belters" - anti abortion and some are downright misogynists - those are the cancers that need to be culled.


----------



## dimsum (3 Feb 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> They should until they come to their senses. The CPC or whoever they are this week has a considerable number of "bible belters" - anti abortion and some are downright misogynists - those are the cancers that need to be culled.


I like to call them "the PPC demographic".


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Feb 2022)

If the PCP stood-up tomorrow, I wonder what the end-state share of current (and potential Blue Libs jumping back, at least to the PCP) conservatives would be across the PCP-CPC-PPC spectrum? 🤔


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Feb 2022)

> Disagree.



So it's Canadian politics that's bleeding across into US politics and not the other way around?  Interesting hypothesis.  Evidence?


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (3 Feb 2022)

I actually don't think it's a bad thing they got rid of Erin O'Toole and don't even think this had anything to do with Erin O'Toole being too WOKE.

I think this letter in the Calgary Sun does a great job of highlighting the real issue with O'Toole:









						Letters, Feb. 2: 'O'Toole had his chance to beat Trudeau and blew it'
					

O’TOOLE IS NOT THE GUY




					calgarysun.com
				






> *O’TOOLE IS NOT THE GUY*
> 
> First of all, Erin O’Toole is not the man to run the Conservative party any longer. He couldn’t beat Justin Trudeau, who at the time had amassed all sorts of social faux-pas, illegal politics and sexist misgivings where even a turtle could have beat him in the last election. *We need a young, charismatic leader with hutzpah who can clobber Trudeau the next time around*. O’Toole meeting with a group of ill-informed truckers protesting in Ottawa is also pure folly. These truckers do not have the backing of the majority of other truckers and people in this country and given the fact that almost 90% of the population are vaccinated, their protest cries fall on deaf ears.
> 
> *MOLLY KENS*




Hit the nail squarely on the head with that comment IMO.  Ironically, the revolt was led by some of the younger members of the Caucus.

Also, when they said Hutzpah, they obviously meant to type Chutzpah.  For this who haven't heard that word before:

Chutzpah:  extreme self-confidence or audacity


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I actually don't think it's a bad thing they got rid of Erin O'Toole and don't even think this had anything to do with Erin O'Toole being too WOKE.
> 
> I think this letter in the Calgary Sun does a great job of highlighting the real issue with O'Toole:
> 
> ...


Not many leaders win on the first try. 

but if the CPC want to recycle their leaders every time they do not win, thats fine by me. 

Secondly, I don't think the reason O'Toole was turfed was because he wasn't young or charismatic enough, and I don't think that will be the criteria on who replaces him.

I'm firmly of the belief that the SOCON wing of the CPC thought O'Toole was one of them, voted for him to win the leadership over the red tory Mackay, and then when O'Toole did his swerve to the middle he was on borrowed time unless he could win the election. 

I don't think the SOCON wing of the CPC will go for anyone who isn't a bonified SOCON next time around. Polievre isn't that guy IMHO, so I don't see him winning unless he can convince everyone its a fair accompli and its a simple coronation. Otherwise someone from that SOCON win that just turfed O'Toole will be the new CPC leader.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Feb 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I actually don't think it's a bad thing they got rid of Erin O'Toole and don't even think this had anything to do with Erin O'Toole being too WOKE.
> 
> I think this letter in the Calgary Sun does a great job of highlighting the real issue with O'Toole:
> 
> ...


Since it’s a Yiddish word, the H or Ch is an anglicization.  Hunukah or Chanukah ? Same thing.


----------



## KevinB (3 Feb 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> They should until they come to their senses. The CPC or whoever they are this week has a considerable number of "bible belters" - anti abortion and some are downright misogynists - those are the cancers that need to be culled.


This is why we can't have nice things.

Being Anti-Abortion doesn't mean one is misogynistic, it also doesn't mean one is Anti-Anything else.   One can have beliefs, and the beauty of Western Civilization can be free to express them.  In both Canada and America people have Freedom of Religion, and many religions hold certain views about things.   My personal view that in 2022, there are enough way to avoid pregnancy, that abortion simply as a means of birth control is pretty barbaric.  But I'm not out bombing abortion clinics, or screaming at people going in to Hospitals for that.  I don't think abortion is generally healthy mentally for the woman either - and there is a lot of peer reviewed data that supports that.   However society as a whole hasn't done a very effective job in coming up with better alternatives for a lot of pregnant women, and that to me is a major fail.   Before you could even begin to fathom changes to the Canadian lack of law, you would need to address alternatives, and have those up and working well in advance.

In Politics one needs to be pragmatic, and realize that no one persons view will line up 100% with the views of others.  The key to being a successful Political Party is to find a common ground where one can attract a majority.    It also means that you need to weigh the different opinions of your supporters, and potential supporters, and be prepared to make choices that will not make some of your party happy.
  Fringe segments of the population while loud and active, don't win elections on their own - the boring middle of the road folks do -- so you need to find out what of their needs/wants are also important to your party - and court the to your side.

The various Right leaning Political parties in Canada haven't done that effectively in ages, and they won't be a real party until they muzzle or kick out the fringe.   They also need to come across as honest, as based not he last few they seem to be blowing with the wind, and letting the LPC rattle them, and the voters.    

What Canada should not do, is look down here for guidance - down here, both Parties pick the biggest idiot running, and see if the American public is still dumb enough to vote for them.


----------



## QV (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> This is why we can't have nice things.
> 
> Being Anti-Abortion doesn't mean one is misogynistic, it also doesn't mean one is Anti-Anything else.   One can have beliefs, and the beauty of Western Civilization can be free to express them.  In both Canada and America people have Freedom of Religion, and many religions hold certain views about things.   My personal view that in 2022, there are enough way to avoid pregnancy, that abortion simply as a means of birth control is pretty barbaric.  But I'm not out bombing abortion clinics, or screaming at people going in to Hospitals for that.  I don't think abortion is generally healthy mentally for the woman either - and there is a lot of peer reviewed data that supports that.   However society as a whole hasn't done a very effective job in coming up with better alternatives for a lot of pregnant women, and that to me is a major fail.   Before you could even begin to fathom changes to the Canadian lack of law, you would need to address alternatives, and have those up and working well in advance.
> 
> ...


According to our PM there are a great many people in this country with unacceptable views. It sounds like you would also be in the category of possessing unacceptable views, if you lived here.


----------



## KevinB (3 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> According to our PM there are a great many people in this country with unacceptable views. It sounds like you would also be in the category of possessing unacceptable views, if you lived here.


Warms my heart to know PMJT (the alleged groping perv and alleged crooked weasel), thinks I hold unacceptable views.   He is an absolutely repugnant creature, and another reason I love to look up at my Naturalization Certificate to the United States of America.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> Warms my heart to know JT the crooked weasel, thinks I hold unacceptable views.   He is an absolutely repugnant creature, and another reason I love to look up at my Naturalization Certificate to the United States of America.


Always nice to see how the CPC turfing their leader leads to Justin Trudeau hate. 

At some point the CPC is going to be a party that has one coherent policy other than JT sucks, right?


----------



## KevinB (3 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Always nice to see how the CPC turfing their leader leads to Justin Trudeau hate.
> 
> At some point the CPC is going to be a party that has one coherent policy other than JT sucks, right?


Trump won based on Hillary hate then Biden won on Trump hate, at a certain point it is effective.

You actually could make a pretty compelling party based on JT Sucks, you just need to air it all out, and have a solution, because clearly Canada isn't done with this Castro Trudeau yet, so hate and hate alone won't get the job done.

Ethics doesn't seem to be a major issue for Canadian Voters though -- unless it's the CAF.


----------



## FJAG (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> Being Anti-Abortion doesn't mean one is misogynistic, it also doesn't mean one is Anti-Anything else. One can have beliefs, and the beauty of Western Civilization can be free to express them.


We agree on so many things but not this one. The problem is in the terminology. It's not anti or pro abortion - its anti or pro choice. Being against terminating a pregnancy is not a problem. Don't want one -  don't have one. The problem isn't expressing that opinion either, although some do get very strident and in your face about it.

The problem comes when the anti-choice faction is bent on denying choice to everyone regardless of their beliefs which is what is happening in Republican controlled State governments. Once you impose your beliefs on others who do not share them, especially since this universally effects women, then it is misogynistic.

And while true that being anti-choice doesn't automatically make one anti-anything else, its not unusual that the trait is shared by many who are also against gay marriage or gays in general. I've always found it ironic that many who espouse freedom as their God-given right, would deny it to so many others.

This is why I am so questioning my allegiance to the CPC. I was on my local riding executive until right into the election when I was gob smacked by the extent it, including O'Toole, was kowtowing to its SOCON wing. My own MP is part of that group although she tries to adopt a veneer of tolerance. I quit the executive, I'm seriously thinking of quitting the party although I expect I'll be lost in the wilderness because I'm not an LPC fan. I can live with most of their social policies but I despise the "born to rule" mentality of the mob that controls the party.



Altair said:


> Always nice to see how the CPC turfing their leader leads to Justin Trudeau hate.



Turfing O'Toole doesn't lead to Justin Trudeau hate. Justin was hated universally well before O'Toole was ever elected as leader. I come by my dislike of Justin quite naturally. I disliked his father back in the day and with him at least you could say that he was intelligent and not just a pretty face in pretty socks. The problem isn't so much Justin and his hypocrisy as the machine that runs him.

🍻


----------



## KevinB (3 Feb 2022)

FJAG said:


> We agree on so many things but not this one.


You are absolutely correct here


FJAG said:


> The problem is in the terminology. It's not anti or pro abortion - its anti or pro choice. Being against terminating a pregnancy is not a problem. Don't want one -  don't have one. The problem isn't expressing that opinion either, although some do get very strident and in your face about it.
> 
> The problem comes when the anti-choice faction is bent on denying choice to everyone regardless of their beliefs which is what is happening in Republican controlled State governments. Once you impose your beliefs on others who do not share them, especially since this universally effects women, then it is misogynistic.


I disagree on your terminology, the same way you disagree mine, because mine working is descriptive and points to the death of the unborn baby as the result - than than Pro-Choice making it to be a simply Woman's issue, that men shook stay clear of, less they be misogynistic.
 But if I accept your language, and the argument above, based on that, people who are pro choice, are thus *paedophobic?  
*


FJAG said:


> And while true that being anti-choice doesn't automatically make one anti-anything else, its not unusual that the trait is shared by many who are also against gay marriage or gays in general. I've always found it ironic that many who espouse freedom as their God-given right, would deny it to so many others.


The flip side of the coin, are those who are generally against the Death Penalty are often Pro Abortion.



FJAG said:


> This is why I am so questioning my allegiance to the CPC. I was on my local riding executive until right into the election when I was gob smacked by the extent it, including O'Toole, was kowtowing to its SOCON wing. My own MP is part of that group although she tries to adopt a veneer of tolerance. I quit the executive, I'm seriously thinking of quitting the party although I expect I'll be lost in the wilderness because I'm not an LPC fan. I can live with most of their social policies but I despise the "born to rule" mentality of the mob that controls the party.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> Trump won based on Hillary hate then Biden won on Trump hate, at a certain point it is effective.


The US is a two party system, you can say JT sucks all you want here, people will nod and vote NDP or Greens. 

Its not that effective, because it wont drive votes to the CPC and without that the CPC wont win. 


KevinB said:


> You actually could make a pretty compelling party based on JT Sucks,


Again, NDP and greens are there if Trudeau sucks, unless you broaden that message to say every leader on the left sucks it doesn't do much.


KevinB said:


> you just need to air it all out, and have a solution,


Yes, real solutions other than JT sucks would be nice. 


KevinB said:


> because clearly Canada isn't done with this Castro Trudeau yet, so hate and hate alone won't get the job done.


Being the party of angry people screaming at clouds is the best way to relegate ones self to being a regional protest party.


KevinB said:


> Ethics doesn't seem to be a major issue for Canadian Voters though -- unless it's the CAF.


Ethics probably take a back seat to the economy, social benefits, housing, childcare, abortion,the environment, gun control, rights for minority groups.

Like, sure, you can say Justin Trudeau has issues with ethics, but is that enough to vote for the party that has a good chunk of its causus wanting to vote to keep conversion therapy legal? Or legalize more guns? To not bring in affordable childcare? To the average urban Canadian voter, they will put up with whatever ethical scandals the LPC finds itself in because the alternative is still worse.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

FJAG said:


> Turfing O'Toole doesn't lead to Justin Trudeau hate. Justin was hated universally well before O'Toole was ever elected as leader. I come by my dislike of Justin quite naturally. I disliked his father back in the day and with him at least you could say that he was intelligent and not just a pretty face in pretty socks. The problem isn't so much Justin and his hypocrisy as the machine that runs him.
> 
> 🍻


I mean in this thread. Justin Trudeau didn't lead to O'Toole getting turfed, he has nothing to do with who replaces O'Toole, and generally has nothing to do with this at all, but for some reason his name is dragged into this as a natural reflex.


----------



## KevinB (3 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Ethics probably take a back seat to the economy, social benefits, housing, childcare, abortion,the environment, gun control, rights for minority groups.
> 
> Like, sure, you can say Justin Trudeau has issues with ethics, but is that enough to vote for the party that has a good chunk of its causus wanting to vote to keep conversion therapy legal? Or legalize more guns? To not bring in affordable childcare? To the average urban Canadian voter, they will put up with whatever ethical scandals the LPC finds itself in because the alternative is still worse.


I had never heard of conversion therapy before today, I actually appalled.


----------



## QV (3 Feb 2022)

FJAG said:


> I quit the executive, I'm seriously thinking of quitting the party although I expect I'll be lost in the wilderness because I'm not an LPC fan.


No need to be lost in the wilderness. You could join the PPC. That is, if you can get past the media and CPC smears and societal ostracization by association. They're platform actually sounded reasonable.


----------



## FJAG (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> You are absolutely correct here


I expect we'll never ever change each other's mind here so let's just agree to never discuss it again.

🍻


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> Trump won based on Hillary hate then Biden won on Trump hate, at a certain point it is effective.
> 
> You actually could make a pretty compelling party based on JT Sucks, you just need to air it all out, and have a solution, because clearly Canada isn't done with this Castro Trudeau yet, so hate and hate alone won't get the job done.
> 
> Ethics doesn't seem to be a major issue for Canadian Voters though -- unless it's the CAF.


I agree.  Harper was ousted based on that same thought premise. 

But alternatives are required.  Trudeau offered an alternative to Harper.

The CPC needs to find an alternative to Trudeau. 

Hatred alone won’t do it.


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> I had never heard of conversion therapy before today, I actually appalled.


As are many moderates.  It’s medieval thinking.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Feb 2022)

So few will discuss abortion honestly.

Most people against abortion are against it because their frame is that it kills a person.  Most people against restrictions do not concede the threshold for "person" has been crossed until some later time.  The entire debate hinges on the threshold for person-hood.

I suppose the situation in Canada is much the same as elsewhere, including the US: a majority of people are against complete restrictions, and a majority of people would like to see some restrictions.  The majority of people can see that the "moment of birth" threshold is pretty damn artificial.


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> You are absolutely correct here
> 
> I disagree on your terminology, the same way you disagree mine, because mine working is descriptive and points to the death of the unborn baby as the result - than than Pro-Choice making it to be a simply Woman's issue, that men shook stay clear of, less they be misogynistic.
> But if I accept your language, and the argument above, based on that, people who are pro choice, are thus *paedophobic?
> ...


A real pro life stance (I’m not talking about your particular stance btw) would be having actual pro life policies.  Tax breaks, financial incentives to keep the child, facilitate adoption and heck I’d even legalise a woman being paid to carry her baby to term, facilitate employment and education while pregnant etc etc.  It just seems that the pro life political wing are all fine and dandy with being pro life up until the baby is born and then it’s crickets when it comes to yes SOCIAL policies to enable that. 

I’d be curious to see how many pro lifers we have here that railed against universal child care.  Seems like a weird conflicting stance to make.


----------



## FJAG (3 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> No need to be lost in the wilderness. You could join the PPC. That is, if you can get past the media and CPC smears and societal ostracization by association. They're platform actually sounded reasonable.


My jury is still out. Much of it depends on who gravitates toward it. I've seen lots of good platforms - the CPC proposes to work towards spending at least 2% of GDP on defence. How'd that work out for us?

🍻


----------



## mariomike (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> The flip side of the coin, are those who are generally against the Death Penalty are often Pro Abortion.



I wouldn't mind if they brought the Death Penalty back.

But,  last time that happened in Canada was when they hanged two murderers ( one a cop killer )  back-to-back at the Don sixty years ago.

I doubt they will be bringing it back anytime soon.

As for Abortion, for those old enough to remember the late Chief Coroner of Ontario Morton Shulman, I posted this a while back,

In the Sixties, abortion could be legally performed only to save the life of the woman, so there were practically no legal abortions. He stated that the pregnant daughters of the rich were sent to reliable physicians who did abortions for cash. He estimated that these physicians did twenty to thirty abortions per week. Women who were not rich were left to perform an abortion on themselves or go to what he called a "nurse" abortionist. Their method was commonly pumping Lysol into the woman's womb. The mortality rate was high and the infection rate over 50%. He added, "By the time I became Chief Coroner, I had had the unpleasant experience of seeing the bodies of some dozens of young women who had died as a result of these amateur abortions."
Chief Coroner Morton Shulman decided to publicize deaths from illegal abortions. He instructed his coroners to call a public inquest into each abortion death. He describes one case that he believes was the turning point, that of 34-year-old Lottie Leanne Clarke, a mother of three children, who died of a massive infection in 1964 after an illegal abortion in spite of medical treatment and antibiotics. At the inquest into her death, the jury recommended that the laws about therapeutic abortion be revised. Dr. Shulman added that a federal government committee should review the question of abortion and the law. Newspapers published editorials recommending the reform of the abortion law. In 1965, the Minister of Justice, Guy Favreau, wrote to Dr. Shulman that the recommendation would be considered in the program to amend the Criminal Code. The eventual amendment closely followed the recommendations of the coroners' juries.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> A real pro life stance (I’m not talking about your particular stance btw) would be having actual pro life policies.  Tax breaks, financial incentives to keep the child, facilitate adoption and heck I’d even legalise a woman being paid to carry her baby to term, facilitate employment and education while pregnant etc etc.  It just seems that the pro life political wing are all fine and dandy with being pro life up until the baby is born and then it’s crickets when it comes to yes SOCIAL policies to enable that.
> 
> I’d be curious to see how many pro lifers we have here that railed against universal child care.  Seems like a weird conflicting stance to make.


Universal child care, CCB, a lot of programs people seem to disagree with the LPC implementing despite being so called pro life.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Feb 2022)

> A real pro life stance



You can't redefine "pro-life" to mean whatever you want.  People in all corners of the abortion debate should be in the habit of steel-manning their opponents' arguments.  To a person against murder (as a moral idea) who believes abortion is murder, the "pro-life" aim is met by preventing the murder.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

So social programs?


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> You can't redefine "pro-life" to mean whatever you want.  People in all corners of the abortion debate should be in the habit of steel-manning their opponents' arguments.  To a person against murder (as a moral idea) who believes abortion is murder, the "pro-life" aim is met by preventing the murder.


Yes, yes, I’m offering my opinion on it.  

But the hypocrisy of the traditional pro life camp is sometimes astounding.  Both sides cherry pick.


----------



## QV (3 Feb 2022)

FJAG said:


> My jury is still out. Much of it depends on who gravitates toward it. I've seen lots of good platforms - the CPC proposes to work towards spending at least 2% of GDP on defence. How'd that work out for us?
> 
> 🍻


Just you even looking at the PPC, I consider that a huge win (against media spin), regardless of the choice you ultimately make.


----------



## Czech_pivo (3 Feb 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I actually don't think it's a bad thing they got rid of Erin O'Toole and don't even think this had anything to do with Erin O'Toole being too WOKE.
> 
> I think this letter in the Calgary Sun does a great job of highlighting the real issue with O'Toole:
> 
> ...


What is needed is a Mensch, not another Meshuggeneh. There has been too much mishegas as of late. Trudeau's current schtick is getting long in the tooth and has definitely past a good schmooze.  If he manages to pull off another election win he can kiss my tuches. 
As for our much need Mensch, I'm verklempt at this point and have bupkis to say as to who it could be.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> Just you even looking at the PPC, I consider that a huge win (against media spin), regardless of the choice you ultimately make.


I really hope more people switch from CPC to PPC.


----------



## KevinB (3 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Yes, yes, I’m offering my opinion on it.
> 
> But the hypocrisy of the traditional pro life camp is sometimes astounding.  Both sides cherry pick.


Hypocrisy exists in leagues on either side.  But as @Brad Sallows pointed out, some aspects are just personal beliefs (I chose beliefs over other words intentionally so as not to provoke a larger fight).

  As I mentioned above, before one was to even consider bringing the Legal aspect to the forefront a lot of work would need to be done to find alternative solutions that are beneficial.  Those support structures don't necessarily need to include Universal Child Care - but there does need to be a way to assist both the pregnant women and young mothers financially - you could structure it however you want depends on what side the aisle you are on.


If I was running for the CPC, I'd include a heavy part of Political Reform - to change ethics laws, and aim for massive criminal penalties for Public Servants who abuse their roles for financial and other gains.


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> Hypocrisy exists in leagues on either side.  But as @Brad Sallows pointed out, some aspects are just personal beliefs (I chose beliefs over other words intentionally so as not to provoke a larger fight).
> 
> As I mentioned above, before one was to even consider bringing the Legal aspect to the forefront a lot of work would need to be done to find alternative solutions that are beneficial.  Those support structures don't necessarily need to include Universal Child Care - but there does need to be a way to assist both the pregnant women and young mothers financially - you could structure it however you want depends on what side the aisle you are on.
> 
> ...


Right.

But that is where if government wants to regulate things like birth, birth control and such they should be prepared to financially enable it.

Criminalizing it is not the way to go in my mind. 

If the goal is to save lives and again that definition changes based on beliefs, the understanding what the main causes and reasons people get abortions needs addressing.

The top reasons in the US (sorry but that was my quick google search) for example are:

Financial
Timing
Partner related issues 
Other (incest, rape etc)

Sometimes more than one factor can come into play. 

Financial is the biggest one.  Addressing that alone would likely decrease abortions. 
Timing.  That’s a bit harder but is linked to the first one mostly.  And pressures from family etc
Partner issues is also harder to deal with as many men push their partners to get abortions for some of the same reason above.
The other stuff is touchy though.  Rape and incest is essentially forced pregnancy.  But their are creative ways of trying to get a baby to term.

But government would have to invest.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Right.
> 
> But that is where if government wants to regulate things like birth, birth control and such they should be prepared to financially enable it.
> 
> ...


The problem is squaring the circle of moral issues versus financial ones. 

The SOCON wing of the CPC is morally conservative, they want to address abortion and conversion therapy, but they are also fiscally conservative, meaning they don't want to provide costly social programs that would encourage women to have children and not seek abortions as a solution.

The best way to squard that circle? Address the first part and ignore the second part. How does on do that? By criminalizing certain abortions. Or if you're in the USA, criminalize almost all abortions. 

And then when the child is born, success, it can start to take care of itself. Freeloader doesn't deserve access to social programs that cost tax dollars. There, moral and fiscal conservatism achieved. 

And so long as that part of the CPC is around, a good 60 percent of the electorate will not vote for the CPC. But how to rid the party of that part of it? It cannot, because that part of the party decides who wins leadership contests. So the leader of the CPC has to cater to them despite them making it so he cannot be elected. And then that leader gets turfed if he loses (Scheer) or turfed if he tries to pivot away from them (O'Toole) 

Harper was a genius because he was able to keep the SOCONs quiet for near a decade. They are not quiet anymore.


----------



## KevinB (3 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> The problem is squaring the circle of moral issues versus financial ones.
> 
> The SOCON wing of the CPC is morally conservative, they want to address abortion and conversion therapy, but they are also fiscally conservative, meaning they don't want to provide costly social programs that would encourage women to have children and not seek abortions as a solution.
> 
> ...


You are 100% right.
   There need to be tactical goals and incentives, to accomplish the longer strategic plan.

 You can be fiscally conservative, and realize that in many cases that those are not good areas to be financially conservative on, because it hampers other parts of your platform.


----------



## suffolkowner (3 Feb 2022)

The problem is where does the CPC go from here? I can't see McKay being the answer if O'Toole was too moderate and if that is the way it's going why not just join the PPC? And yes policy is going to trump the personal ethics of Trudeau and it's not going to work in the reverse until the CPC can establish some kind of history on these issues. Once again it will be dragged into the Global Warming/Abortion/etc.. debate because it keeps putting itself there by turfing moderates what else can the public think?

Birth is as good a line as one can draw when it comes to life/children. At times in the past its been 7 days or longer after. Women naturally and constantly abort fetuses all the time though their reproductive lives


----------



## suffolkowner (3 Feb 2022)

A like and a trolling! How to know you are in a politics thread


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Feb 2022)

> But the hypocrisy of the traditional pro life camp is sometimes astounding.



What do you think of as hypocritical?

A person doesn't have to be in favour of any social programs whatsoever to simply be against killing.

Positions for the death penalty and against abortion are not inconsistent; one person has been found guilty and one is assuredly innocent. 

If "pro-life" is just a euphemism for "against abortion", deal with it head-on instead of pretending it has to conform to some pedantic list of conditions.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> What do you think of as hypocritical?
> 
> A person doesn't have to be in favour of any social programs whatsoever to simply be against killing.


Ah yes, so one wants a woman to keep the child and not abort it, but wont support the woman or child afterwards. 

Nevermind the fact that support for women and child via social programs and things like universal childcare will lead to less women choosing to have abortions. 

But as you said without quite saying it, its not so much about wanting women to have keep/have children so much as it is you believe that abortion is murder and you want to stop murder. Best way to do that is via legislation.

But screw supporting them, woman and child. They made their choice, woman to have sex, child to dare survive childbirth.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Feb 2022)

> Ah yes, so one wants a woman to keep the child and not abort it, but wont support the woman or child afterwards.



Yes, basically.  Whether you like them or not, there are people who expect others to deal with their own problems without making someone else pay.

I fully realize that some welfare policies might reduce abortions.  You seem to be trying really hard to miss the point that a person can be against abortion without needing to be in favour of anything else.

Don't try to pick a side for me in this debate.  Stick to your own.


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Feb 2022)

Right wing voters are really in a pickle.

Any group that tries to break away from the CPC to form a party will be immediately attacked by both the LPC and CPC. 

LPC will fear a more centered group of Canadians who embody left and ring wing ideas.

CPC will fear losing power and influence and find ways to attack them, believe they did that with the PPC.

Unfortunately shitty types in the CPC will flock to a new party to try and try to bend it to their own views. 

Moderate Conservatives or whatever you want to call them are basically prisoners to the party.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Feb 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> Right wing voters are really in a pickle.
> 
> Any group that tries to break away from the CPC to form a party will be immediately attacked by both the LPC and CPC.
> 
> ...


Give it 18-24 months to see how a PC-CPC-PPC reformation shapes up..


----------



## Rd651 (3 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Kind of paints O’Toole as either an unwitting (thus naive, and weak) or deliberate (and thus disingenuous to the small-C elements) conspirators to the SOCONs.  That a party would rather lose a seat to the Liberals in an election when every seat counted, than see MacKay be part of the party’s caucus is prof of the myopia of the growing extremism of the CPC.  O’Toole no doubt either knew it, or is an unworthy leader for letting this happen on his watch.





Scott said:


> Agreed. I know Peter still does stuff for vets when he can as well, on a personal and family level. It's always refreshing to see.


Great comment! Peter is definately for the troops!!


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Yes, basically.  Whether you like them or not, there are people who expect others to deal with their own problems without making someone else pay.
> 
> I fully realize that some welfare policies might reduce abortions.  You seem to be trying really hard to miss the point that a person can be against abortion without needing to be in favour of anything else.
> 
> Don't try to pick a side for me in this debate.  Stick to your own.


But that is where the hypocrisy of some on the pro life side.  Expect others do deal with their own problems but if abortion is their choice and to terminate a pregnancy then no they can’t.

The social programs they don’t want would and do reduce abortion rates.  But they are against that.

It doesn’t make sense.  Because even if you banned abortions they would still happen and worse more women would likely die as a result. 

If the goal is the sanctity of life, then being against social programs that encourage life and the carrying to term is hypocritical. 

  I agree that someone can be pro life and be against social programs to encourage said life.  But it is hypocritical.  

If you address the reasons WHY women choose abortions you will significantly reduce said abortions. 

The issue is that religious dogma weighs heavily in the debate.   It’s the same as end of life rights.  Religious norms are a big drive against it despite people reaching a point where they just want to end their lives in peace and in their own terms.


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Give it 18-24 months to see how a PC-CPC-PPC reformation shapes up..


I suspect in 24 months we’ll be seing another LPC win.  CP, CPC will not be merging with PPC.  

I see an even bigger split again.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (3 Feb 2022)

So.  

Anyone here willing to be swayed or have their mind's changed about abortion from this discussion?

Anyone?

Bueller?

So what is the point of this derailment?


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Yes, basically.  Whether you like them or not, there are people who expect others to deal with their own problems without making someone else pay.


I know.

I also know your viewpoint is widely unpopular and i hope the new leader of the CPC fully endorses your viewpoint on the matter.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> But that is where the hypocrisy of some on the pro life side.  Expect others do deal with their own problems but if abortion is their choice and to terminate a pregnancy then no they can’t.
> 
> The social programs they don’t want would and do reduce abortion rates.  But they are against that.
> 
> ...


The fact that the cpc needs a new leader and we are talking about abortion is indicative of why the CPC wont be winning anytime soon.

This would never happen in a LPC leadership talk, the issue is settled. In the CPC its still an open question. And you just know its going to be brought up in the leadership race.

Its why i love chatting to people like brad about it. The fact its being discussed at all is nothing but a huge L for the CPC but since its the only party outside of the PPC that will allow anti abortion voices and votes, thats where the sizeable minority of canadians gather and as such they hold considerable sway in the CPC.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Feb 2022)

Back on the rails… 😉 


Remius said:


> I suspect in 24 months we’ll be seing another LPC win.  CP, CPC will not be merging with PPC.
> 
> I see an even bigger split again.


No, I was noting how a 3-way split/race would go, ie. PC-reborn, and CPC & PPC continue as standing parties and see where those three parties lead.  If the PCs break off, I can see the PPC support deflating and some likely to move back to a ‘more-right’ CPC as the soft, left-wingers head to the PCs.  I’m sure there also be some bleed off from the Blue Libs into the PCs (same reason some PPC will come back to the CPC).  In the overall spectrum, I think a PC break-off will actual see a reduction of overall LPC levels, so I think we’ll see a battle on the left as well as the right.  Then the 2024 race is to build the biggest coalition.  Trudeau’s actually doing some damage to the middle-class with his approach to the Freedom Conviy, so anyone who thinks that O’Toole was the only victim should pay attention to 2024.   Trudeau may have to break out some tears and an apology when he sees the full impact of his broad brush of racism, bigotry, homophobia, transphobia, etc. to the Ottawa protesters.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (3 Feb 2022)

PPCLI Guy said:


> So.
> 
> Anyone here willing to be swayed or have their mind's changed about abortion from this discussion?
> 
> ...


Actually, I have changed my mind!


----------



## Remius (3 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Back on the rails… 😉
> 
> No, I was noting how a 3-way split/race would go, ie. PC-reborn, and CPC & PPC continue as standing parties and see where those three parties lead.  If the PCs break off, I can see the PPC support deflating and some likely to move back to a ‘more-right’ CPC as the soft, left-wingers head to the PCs.  I’m sure there also be some bleed off from the Blue Libs into the PCs (same reason some PPC will come back to the CPC).  In the overall spectrum, I think a PC break-off will actual see a reduction of overall LPC levels, so I think we’ll see a battle on the left as well as the right.  Then the 2024 race is to build the biggest coalition.  Trudeau’s actually doing some damage to the middle-class with his approach to the Freedom Conviy, so anyone who thinks that O’Toole was the only victim should pay attention to 2024.   Trudeau may have to break out some tears and an apology when he sees the full impact of his broad brush of racism, bigotry, homophobia, transphobia, etc. to the Ottawa protesters.


Ah i see what you mean.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Feb 2022)

> I also know your viewpoint is widely unpopular



My efforts to understand how some people view an issue do not mean their views are my own.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Feb 2022)

Old-style PC isn't going very far if it just picks up where it left off while it was in Mulroney's hands.  There will have to compromises based on trades of equal value.


----------



## Drallib (4 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> But that is where the hypocrisy of some on the pro life side.  Expect others do deal with their own problems but if abortion is their choice and to terminate a pregnancy then no they can’t.
> 
> The social programs they don’t want would and do reduce abortion rates.  But they are against that.
> 
> ...



I appreciate your concern for mothers to have financial means to support their babies. I think they should have support. I don’t think that lack of support though is a justifiable reason to terminate an unborn innocent helpless developing baby.

Of course abortions would still take place, and more women would likely die, but (not to sound insensitive) that’s the price you pay for trying to murder the vulnerable. I’m really not trying to sound mean… I don’t wish the women attempting an abortion death. I wish them grace and mercy.

I’m not against social programs at all. I’m appreciative of the child benefit my family receives. While I’m aware I can’t fully depend on it.

I think the reason women get abortions is it comes down to selfishness, as harsh as that sounds. It’s an inconvenience. It’s going to be 9 months of carrying this child they may not have wanted. Maybe it’ll bring shame on them from the family. Maybe it’ll be a financial burden. Their life will never be the same. And if the thought of adoption comes up, they may opt not to because they’ll feel bad for “abandoning” their child.

[edit: the quotations to emphasize I would rather they choose adoption rather than abortion]

All I’m trying to say is that the child should be left to develop.

(now to bring this back to politics….)

This is probably one of, if not the, biggest factors in my personal vote and why I’m leaning more towards PPC… if the CPC get a leader who is Pro-Life then I’ll very much consider my vote to them.

I just don’t like how parties, in particular the CPC, try and broaden their views on a lot of issues, in order to gain as many votes they can. Just stay true to what you believe. Easier said than done I know…


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Feb 2022)

I don't understand why the abortion file is the hill some want to die on. 

If you don't want an abortion don't have one.  There its solved for you.

If you want an abortion go have one.  There its solved for you.

Now how about both those sides stay out of each others business and way.


----------



## Drallib (4 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I don't understand why the abortion file is the hill some want to die on.
> 
> If you don't want an abortion don't have one.  There its solved for you.
> 
> ...


To answer the question: Because my vote might have a play in whether or not innocent lives are saved.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Feb 2022)

Drallib said:


> To answer the question: Because my vote might have a play in whether or not innocent lives are saved.



You don't get to make that decision.  Nor will your vote sway it.  The country has decided and its considered distasteful to keep bringing it up.  

You can think what ever you like about innocence lost but its not about you.  Its about the people have to go through it and they will live with what ever comes after, good or bad.  

I do not support your insistence that you think you have some involvement in this, my one caveat is unless its your partner or you that is at that decision point. 

Now as conservatives we can continue to bash against this wall and have us fade further into obscurity and regionalism or we can realize there are other issues we can work on and gain leverage in and leave this behind.


----------



## Drallib (4 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> You don't get to make that decision.  Nor will your vote sway it.  The country has decided and its considered distasteful to keep bringing it up.
> 
> You can think what ever you like about innocence lost but its not about you.  Its about the people have to go through it and they will live with what ever comes after, good or bad.
> 
> ...


I appreciate your desire to work together and get ahead on issues as conservative.

I don’t care if it’s considered distasteful or if it’s the unpopular view. My conscience is that it’s an evil act that has become socially acceptable. And a view that I was personally okay with before coming to faith in Jesus at 21. 

And I agree it’s about the people who have to go through it, specifically the ones who can’t speak for themselves.

I don’t think this is going anywhere so I’ll leave it at that. But I think talking about opposing views is good and should be had so that we can test our own convictions.


----------



## Scott (4 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Give it 18-24 months to see how a PC-CPC-PPC reformation shapes up..



The folks with serious TDS might not survive that long without stroking out. I mean, you saw the straw poll!


----------



## dapaterson (4 Feb 2022)

If you don't know the difference between medical and surgical abortion, the prevalence of each, what constitutes viability, what other instant where a D&C may be medically indicated, you don't have a valid opinion.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Feb 2022)

dapaterson said:


> If you don't know the difference between medical and surgical abortion, the prevalence of each, what constitutes viability, what other instant where a D&C may be medically indicated, you don't have a valid opinion.



I don't really care what the difference is.  The country has decided.  Move on.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Drallib said:


> I appreciate your desire to work together and get ahead on issues as conservative.
> 
> I don’t care if it’s considered distasteful or if it’s the unpopular view. My conscience is that it’s an evil act that has become socially acceptable. And a view that I was personally okay with before coming to faith in Jesus at 21.
> 
> ...


And its a good thing that conservatives do have open discussion on the topic, and often.

The more the CPC bring it up, the less likely they will be considered for government, especially in urban Canada.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I don't really care what the difference is.  The country has decided.  Move on.


The country has moved on, the SOCONs have not.

And as you see, its religious conviction driving a large part of it, meaning its very hard to move on from that.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

CityNews
					






					www.google.com
				






> Seventy-one per cent believe that a woman should be able to get an abortion if she decides she wants one no matter what the reason
> 
> 
> Two thirds (62 per cent) of Canadians identify as pro-choice, one in ten (13 per cent) of Canadians identify as pro-life and one quarter (25%) of Canadians indicate that they do not fit neatly into either category
> ...


I hope that the CPC tries to court that 13 percent of canadians who are actively pro life while alienating the 62 percent who are pro choice.

I mean, just narrow down that base and commit to becoming a protest party as opposed to being a viable alternative to the LPC.


----------



## Czech_pivo (4 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Back on the rails… 😉
> 
> No, I was noting how a 3-way split/race would go, ie. PC-reborn, and CPC & PPC continue as standing parties and see where those three parties lead.  If the PCs break off, I can see the PPC support deflating and some likely to move back to a ‘more-right’ CPC as the soft, left-wingers head to the PCs.  I’m sure there also be some bleed off from the Blue Libs into the PCs (same reason some PPC will come back to the CPC).  In the overall spectrum, I think a PC break-off will actual see a reduction of overall LPC levels, so I think we’ll see a battle on the left as well as the right.  Then the 2024 race is to build the biggest coalition.  Trudeau’s actually doing some damage to the middle-class with his approach to the Freedom Conviy, so anyone who thinks that O’Toole was the only victim should pay attention to 2024.   Trudeau may have to break out some tears and an apology when he sees the full impact of his broad brush of racism, bigotry, homophobia, transphobia, etc. to the Ottawa protesters.


I have very similar thoughts.  Some of the PPC will shift to the CPC as they will be 'happy' that the centre/left CPC will most likely move over to the newly reconstituted PC party and for certain the Lib's will bleed support over to the PC's.  My biggest concern is Canada moving more and more towards an Italian version of Parliament, 5-7 parties (some regional,  some ideological, some 'flavour of the day'). God help us all if we scrap first past the post as we'll achieve nothing going forward, we'll be worse than Italy, we'll become a new Belgium - God help us if we do.


----------



## dimsum (4 Feb 2022)

Czech_pivo said:


> My biggest concern is Canada moving more and more towards an Italian version of Parliament, 5-7 parties (some regional, some ideological, some 'flavour of the day'). God help us all if we scrap first past the post as we'll achieve nothing going forward, we'll be worse than Italy, we'll become a new Belgium - God help us if we do.


I have a feeling we'd be more like the Australian govt - a couple of major parties and bunch of minor ones. 

Even the current govt in power, the Liberal National Party (their version of the Conservatives), is called "the Coalition" because it's actually a coalition of a bunch of little ones.


----------



## Quirky (4 Feb 2022)

Drallib said:


> My conscience is that it’s an evil act that has become socially acceptable. And a view that I was personally okay with before coming to faith in Jesus at 21.



You let an invisible skygod influence your thinking and how you live your life?


----------



## Czech_pivo (4 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Old-style PC isn't going very far if it just picks up where it left off while it was in Mulroney's hands.  There will have to compromises based on trades of equal value.


I'm not so certain I would classify it as 'compromise based on trades of equal value'. They need to remind people that it was under Mulroney that the PC's championed the Environment - Mulroney's track record and impressive list of 'wins' proves this - the PC's need to retell this story, let people know that it was they who made these things important to Canadians in the first place and that these issues are still important to them today.
They need to be fiscally prudent, like a Paul Martin but not so much like a Jim Flaherty. Selectively re-capitalise the CAF, pound on the environmental drum, strengthen ties with the US (via spending money on re-building/repurposing/expanding NORAD, joining the Ballistic defence initiative), move forward on the Ingenious issues and revamp the immigration policy to focus more on skilled tradespeople, medical and high-tech professionals and alot less on these 'paper entrepreneurs', fly by night investors, 2nd passports seekers and family reunifications.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Czech_pivo said:


> I have very similar thoughts.  Some of the PPC will shift to the CPC as they will be 'happy' that the centre/left CPC will most likely move over to the newly reconstituted PC party and for certain the Lib's will bleed support over to the PC's.  My biggest concern is Canada moving more and more towards an Italian version of Parliament, 5-7 parties (some regional,  some ideological, some 'flavour of the day'). God help us all if we scrap first past the post as we'll achieve nothing going forward, we'll be worse than Italy, we'll become a new Belgium - God help us if we do.


We are already there?

Since 2004 there have been two majority governments, 2011 and 2015.

There have been 4 minority governments in that time.

We have 4 parties consistently winning double diget seats in parliament, with 1 winning single digets, and another one likely on the way in the PPC.

But at the end of the day, the system works because there is common ground between most parties.

The LPC works with the BQ and the NDP, the CPC works with the BQ.

I hope the CPC doesnt veer too far right in an attempt to chase down those PPC votes, because that would break the system. The less moderate the CPC is the less likely the 5-6 out of 10 left leaning canadians will be confortable with them winning leading to ABC votes denying the CPC a chance of forming government.


----------



## Czech_pivo (4 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> We are already there?
> 
> Since 2004 there have been two majority governments, 2011 and 2015.
> 
> ...


The LPC works with the BQ simply because since God was a young man the leader of the LPC has always been from Quebec. The LPC has managed to keep those outside of Quebec as 'mushrooms' in terms of not realising this. Except for the brief moment in time when JT the 1st, not to be confused with the current JT the 2nd, held power ever so briefly from Vancouver Quadra and when MI was elected leader for 18 months, the LPC has been run from Quebec since 1968.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Czech_pivo said:


> The LPC works with the BQ simply because since God was a young man the leader of the LPC has always been from Quebec. The LPC has managed to keep those outside of Quebec as 'mushrooms' in terms of not realising this. Except for the brief moment in time when JT the 1st, not to be confused with the current JT the 2nd, held power ever so briefly from Vancouver Quadra and when MI was elected leader for 18 months, the LPC has been run from Quebec since 1968.


The LPC and BQ are not representing the same Quebec.

BQ is the rural reactionary Quebec, LPC is the urban and suburban Quebec.

Nationalists and globalist.

The two do not always mix well, especially with the LPC still having its base in urban ontario and BC as well as montreal and the suburbs.

The LPC get along far better with the NDP.

The interesting part is the CPC getting along with the BQ. I mean, it makes sense since the BQ is an offshoot of the CPC but they both have that rural reactionary base, seperated only by the enviorment and language.

(I would have included seperation from canada but that seems to more or less dead these days)


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Feb 2022)

Czech_pivo said:


> ... My biggest concern is Canada moving more and more towards an Italian version of Parliament, 5-7 parties (some regional,  some ideological, some 'flavour of the day'). God help us all if we scrap first past the post as we'll achieve nothing going forward, we'll be worse than Italy, we'll become a new Belgium ...


Or a new Israel, who's had a number of government combos over time, with (loud, boisterous debate/discussion happening there all the time) not unreasonable results.  Depends on the players and the voters in question, maybe ...


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> Or a new Israel, who's had a number of government combos over time, with (loud, boisterous debate/discussion happening there all the time) not unreasonable results.  Depends on the players and the voters in question, maybe ...


Israel is weird in the sense that they are a two party state, seperated into many different smaller parties.

The fact that you NEED a governing coalition instead of just working in a parliamentary minority vote per vote makes it an oddball.

PM Trudeau has more flexibility in parliament than PM Bennett despite the former being FPTP and the latter being PR


----------



## Drallib (4 Feb 2022)

Quirky said:


> You let an invisible skygod influence your thinking and how you live your life?


An “invisible skygod” that met Paul in the flesh (who at the time was killing the Christians) and then became an Apostle and preached about the same Jesus that met him, and he eventually was beheaded for his testimony. Not to mention the 10 of Jesus’ disciples who were martyred brutally. Yes. 

(A little off topic, just answering the question)


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Drallib said:


> An “invisible skygod” that met Paul in the flesh (who at the time was killing the Christians) and then became an Apostle and preached about the same Jesus that met him, and he eventually was beheaded for his testimony. Not to mention the 10 of Jesus’ disciples who were martyred brutally. Yes.
> 
> (A little off topic, just answering the question)


Honest question.

Would you prefer a CPC that champions pro life rights and never wins an election

Or

A CPC that shuts down the pro life faction and can potentially win an election?


----------



## MilEME09 (4 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Honest question.
> 
> Would you prefer a CPC that champions pro life rights and never wins an election
> 
> ...


I'd prefer a CPC that listens to the electorate instead of finge elements of the party


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> I'd prefer a CPC that listens to the electorate instead of finge elements of the party


I'm no card carrying member of the CPC, but can you really call the SOCONs a fringe group?

They won Scheer the leadership  and they won true blue conservative O'Toole the leadership over red tory Mackay. And enough people were reportedly mad enough over the conversion therapy vote to oust O'Toole.

Doesnt seem very fringe to me.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> I'd prefer a CPC that listens to the electorate instead of finge elements of the party


Thar she goes….


----------



## Remius (4 Feb 2022)

Drallib said:


> An “invisible skygod” that met Paul in the flesh (who at the time was killing the Christians) and then became an Apostle and preached about the same Jesus that met him, and he eventually was beheaded for his testimony. Not to mention the 10 of Jesus’ disciples who were martyred brutally. Yes.
> 
> (A little off topic, just answering the question)


Do you follow everything in that book?  Because it tells people to do a lot evil things.  I think it’s the Picking and choosing that non religious people find odd.

Which is why the SOCONS who base their ideology heavily on religious dogma have a hard time making in roads writ large with the voting public.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Feb 2022)

> The country has decided and its considered distasteful to keep bringing it up.



Obviously "the country" has not decided.  There is no "the debate is over" on this issue (or many others).  "I have what I want and we stop talking about it now" is a non-starter.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Obviously "the country" has not decided.


The country has decided, the CPC has not. 

60 percent of Canadians are pro choice, 13 percent identify as pro life, thats pretty darn lopsided. 

Its as decided as gay marriage, which is also pretty darn decided. The more the CPC talks about it and have votes on the issue, the more out of touch they appear.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Do you follow everything in that book?  Because it tells people to do a lot evil things.  I think it’s the Picking and choosing that non religious people find odd.
> 
> Which is why the SOCONS who base their ideology heavily on religious dogma have a hard time making in roads writ large with the voting public.


I do find it funny that the same people pushing Christian religious dogma would be appalled if Islamic religious dogma was being pushed. 

Its better for all if religion is left out of politics, but on this case it's unusually front and center.


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Feb 2022)

Back to the leadership, here's what Cheryl Gallant - someone known to be less-than-fully disciplined in messaging - has to say


> Yesterday, after a vote in caucus, Erin O’Toole stepped down as leader of the Conservative Party of Canada.
> 
> I want to thank Erin for his service to our country in both his capacity as a former Canadian Armed Forces member, and as Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, and for his graceful exit.
> 
> ...


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Feb 2022)

Politics is just an ongoing negotiation over how people live together, and how people live is for many inflected by religion. Obviously religion can't be left out of politics; all we can do is withhold official preferential treatment. Setting aside divine inspiration, religious codes are expressions of underlying beliefs and preferences and rules. Moral issues stand on their own without any religious mandate because moral questions are human and timeless.

Conservatives aren't bound by some law to choose between forbidding all discussion of any particular issue, or making it a central platform plank.  There is a middle ground in which a party will take no official action to change status quo, but will allow discussion for those who wish to continue trying to persuade others.  Obviously to allow discussion on any issue is the first wedge into a door that some want to keep closed.  ("The debate is over!")  It's a curious world in which conservatives have become the more tolerant faction.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Conservatives aren't bound by some law to choose between forbidding all discussion of any particular issue, or making it a central platform plank. There is a middle ground in which a party will take no official action to change status quo, but will allow discussion for those who wish to continue trying to persuade others.  Obviously to allow discussion on any issue is the first wedge into a door that some want to keep closed.  ("The debate is over!")  It's a curious world in which conservatives have become the more tolerant faction.


Yet when painted as the party of anti abortion, Conservatives bristle or run from the topic. 

Yet every time they are painted as the party of anti abortion, and their support in the public drops, it's the LPC fault for smearing them. 

This status quo the CPC tries to manage is untenable. One cannot say they are not the party of anti abortion when they are the only party in parliament that brings it up. They cannot say they are not the party of anti abortion when they are the only party that welcomes anti abortion voices. 

And so long as they do, 6 out of 10 Canadians wont vote for them. The LPC and NDP both have more Canadians would would consider voting for them than the CPC does. 

If that is the price the CPC want to pay for their tolerant stance on the abortion issue, well, I hope Conservatives don't complain when they continue to lose elections.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Feb 2022)

4 out of 10 is enough to form a majority in Parliament.  So that'll do.


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> 4 out of 10 elected in the right places is enough to form a majority in Parliament.  So that'll do.


With our FPTP system, FTFY


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> 4 out of 10 is enough to form a majority in Parliament.  So that'll do.


4 out of 10 is enough, 6 out of ten is a lot easier to work with. 

Especially if that 6 out of ten is spread out more evenly than the 4 out of 10. 

Again, the CPC sets itself up for failure in this regard, and people then blame the electorate for reelecting what some call a ethically bankrupt and corrupt LPC. 

Maybe the CPC should listen to the electorate.  Majority of people are pro choice.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Feb 2022)

> Again, the CPC sets itself up for failure in this regard, and people then blame the electorate for reelecting what some call a ethically bankrupt and corrupt LPC.



It's not the CPC's fault that people vote LPC.  The people are entirely responsible.  They have the option to not vote at all if they do not in fact want in any way to stand behind "ethically bankrupt and corrupt" or "allows people to talk about abortion and SSM".

Trudeau's government has a little over 6 years in hand, for one majority and two minorities.  Just the past 50 years of Canadian federal governments suggests that result is neither anything to be proud of or despondent about.  If the LPC is still going strong in year 12, then maybe conservatives should start to worry.



> Majority of people are pro choice.



That assertion is worthless, regardless who repeats it.  How people report on abortion depends on the question.  An unadorned claim that most people are for or against is worthless, because what surveys almost always reveal is that "the majority" occupies a middle ground between "none" and "all".  My guess: "majority of people are pro-limit starting some time between start and end of second trimester".


----------



## Navy_Pete (4 Feb 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> Back to the leadership, here's what Cheryl Gallant - someone known to be less-than-fully disciplined in messaging - has to say


I find it appaling that she's an MP (for any party); what a thoroughly useless human being.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> It's not the CPC's fault that people vote LPC.


Yes it is. 

If they cannot present themselves as a viable alternative, that's on them. 


Brad Sallows said:


> The people are entirely responsible.


The people pick the best choice for them out of the options provided. 

The CPC is failing to be a lot of peoples best choice, again, that's on them. Same goes for any other party.


Brad Sallows said:


> They have the option to not vote at all if they do not in fact want in any way to stand behind "ethically bankrupt and corrupt" or "allows people to talk about abortion and SSM".


If they don't vote and other do then you get results like 2011. People will vote to prevent a party from winning, that's what the left learned from 2011.


Brad Sallows said:


> Trudeau's government has a little over 6 years in hand, for one majority and two minorities.  Just the past 50 years of Canadian federal governments suggests that result is neither anything to be proud of or despondent about.  If the LPC is still going strong in year 12, then maybe conservatives should start to worry.


With the way the CPC seems intent on going, I am of the opinion that we will be seeing exactly that result.


Brad Sallows said:


> That assertion is worthless, regardless who repeats it.  How people report on abortion depends on the question.  An unadorned claim that most people are for or against is worthless, because what surveys almost always reveal is that "the majority" occupies a middle ground between "none" and "all".  My guess: "majority of people are pro-limit starting some time between start and end of second trimester".








						CityNews
					






					toronto.citynews.ca
				






> 75 per cent of Canadians were "satisfied" with Canada's abortion policies
> 62 per cent of Canadians identify as pro-choice, 13 per cent of Canadians identify as pro-life
> Seventy-one per cent believe that a woman should be able to get an abortion if she decides she wants one no matter what the reason



The results are pretty darn clear, it's due to your beliefs that you choose to ignore said results and stick your head in the sand.

But the fact remains that the majority of Canadians are pro choice, and you ignoring it isn't going to change that fact.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Feb 2022)

> If they cannot present themselves as a viable alternative, that's on them.



Blaming one group for another group's faults.  You just shat yourself big time.



> The results are pretty darn clear



...of one survey.  Well done.


----------



## MilEME09 (4 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> I'm no card carrying member of the CPC, but can you really call the SOCONs a fringe group?
> 
> They won Scheer the leadership  and they won true blue conservative O'Toole the leadership over red tory Mackay. And enough people were reportedly mad enough over the conversion therapy vote to oust O'Toole.
> 
> Doesnt seem very fringe to me.


I use fringe in the context of main stream Canadian opinion. The majority of urban voters, who by extention make up the majority of eligible voters are pro choice, pro LGBTQ2+, and are more socially liberal. The socon elements are primarily rural, and religious, primarily Christian.  Canadians don't want republican style Christian politics forced on then.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Blaming one group for another group's faults.  You just shat yourself big time.


I'm blaming the CPC for not presenting themselves as a viable alternative to the LPC.

That means everything from their leader to their platform, to their stances, to their campaign, to the MPs they decide to run. Top to bottom, if the CPC cannot convince Canadians that they are a viable alternative to the LPC, who's fault it that? Not the voters. The CPC doesn't get to claim their votes anymore than the NDP, Bloc or PPC. 

No, its the fault of the party as a whole. Unless their stated goal is to be a protest party, a la Bloc Quebecois or the NDP to some extent, in which case not getting the most seats and forming government is fine. But if its a national party with asperations of governing, then its a failure, one they would do well to correct. 

Or they can double down on unpopular stances around guns, abortion, childcare and the like and then complain when they lose.


Brad Sallows said:


> ...of one survey.  Well done.





			https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/news-polls/majority-continue-support-abortion-canada
		


another one for good measure.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> I use fringe in the context of main stream Canadian opinion. The majority of urban voters, who by extention make up the majority of eligible voters are pro choice, pro LGBTQ2+, and are more socially liberal. The socon elements are primarily rural, and religious, primarily Christian.  Canadians don't want republican style Christian politics forced on then.


Ah, seen. 

Yes, in that context it is fringe, but that fringe seems more than happy to drag down the CPC so long as they get to express their views. Sad really.


----------



## Dana381 (4 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Yet when painted as the party of anti abortion, Conservatives bristle or run from the topic.
> 
> Yet every time they are painted as the party of anti abortion, and their support in the public drops, it's the LPC fault for smearing them.
> 
> ...


The CPC gained more votes than the LPC in both the last two elections. Gerrymandering has caused the CPC vote to be misrepresented in seats won.

I am personally pro-life and agree with supporting people who don't want an abortion. Steven Harper's government pledged to make the abortion vote a matter of choice in parliament whereas the previous liberal government dictated what its members could vote. (Not very pro-choice there)
When the free vote was defeated Harper moved on. I think that was a very wise decision, Canada spoke and he accepted that decision. Harper's government also created the UCCB in part to help support those who did choose not to abort.

The current narrative coming from the government is if you disagree with us you are misogynist, racist, bigoted etc. (again not very pro-choice)


MilEME09 said:


> I use fringe in the context of main stream Canadian opinion. The majority of urban voters, who by extention make up the majority of eligible voters are pro choice, pro LGBTQ2+, and are more socially liberal. The socon elements are primarily rural, and religious, primarily Christian.  Canadians don't want republican style Christian politics forced on then.



I disagree, the Liberal push from the urban ridings is likely more because of the LPC immigration policies. The urban ridings have many more Muslim followers than LGBTQ2+. I don't have to remind anyone on the Muslim stance on LGBTQ2+. Yet the Muslims continue to vote LPC, this is either because the LPC is viewed as anti-Christian or because of the LPC immigration agenda. I believe the latter is correct.

The Harper government didn't force Christian politics on the people. The current LPC government *IS* forcing liberal ideology on people. For the CPC to succeed they need to leave the abortion issue aside and focus on their other policies (Like Harper did). They have already shown that the majority of Canadians who bother to vote agree with their policies, now they need to work a little harder to gain the seats needed to win an election. This will not be won by returning the abortion debate. The LPC hopes the CPC does return the abortion debate because that would ensure the CPC failure.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Dana381 said:


> The CPC gained more votes than the LPC in both the last two elections. Gerrymandering has caused the CPC vote to be misrepresented in seats won.


Gerrymandering? By who? Elections Canada? Did they make it so the ridings disproportionately favored the LPC?

Or is it simply the CPC gets massive wins in western Canada and not enough in eastern Canada?


Dana381 said:


> I am personally pro-life and agree with supporting people who don't want an abortion. Steven Harper's government pledged to make the abortion vote a matter of choice in parliament whereas the previous liberal government dictated what its members could vote. (Not very pro-choice there)
> When the free vote was defeated Harper moved on. I think that was a very wise decision, Canada spoke and he accepted that decision. Harper's government also created the UCCB in part to help support those who did choose not to abort.


Harper was smart in that regard, as he squashed any further votes on the matter. O'Toole and Sheer have both allowed votes to happen which again, only CPC members of parliament voted yes on, again allowing the CPC to be painted as the party of anti abortion.


Dana381 said:


> The current narrative coming from the government is if you disagree with us you are misogynist, racist, bigoted etc. (again not very pro-choice)


Pro choice in terms of allowing a woman to decide whether or not to have a child or abort. The choice to view that a fundamental right is not the lack of choice as much as a it is standing up for a womans freedom to decide what best to do with her body.


Dana381 said:


> I disagree, the Liberal push from the urban ridings is likely more because of the LPC immigration policies. The urban ridings have many more Muslim followers than LGBTQ2+. I don't have to remind anyone on the Muslim stance on LGBTQ2+. Yet the Muslims continue to vote LPC, this is either because the LPC is viewed as anti-Christian or because of the LPC immigration agenda. I believe the latter is correct.
> 
> The Harper government didn't force Christian politics on the people. The current LPC government *IS* forcing liberal ideology on people. For the CPC to succeed they need to leave the abortion issue aside and focus on their other policies (Like Harper did). They have already shown that the majority of Canadians who bother to vote agree with their policies, now they need to work a little harder to gain the seats needed to win an election. This will not be won by returning the abortion debate. The LPC hopes the CPC does return the abortion debate because that would ensure the CPC failure.


This is exactly right, but I get the sense that O'Toole was turfed as leader not so they can leave issues like abortion behind.


----------



## MilEME09 (4 Feb 2022)

Bergen pushed O'Toole to back convoy saying there are 'good people on both sides': sources
					

Interim Conservative Leader Candice Bergen pushed predecessor Erin O'Toole to show support for the Freedom Convoy protest, arguing last week there are 'good people on both sides,' an echo of the phrase made infamous by former U.S. president Donald Trump after a Unite the Right rally in...




					www.ctvnews.ca
				




Let the knives come out


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> Bergen pushed O'Toole to back convoy saying there are 'good people on both sides': sources
> 
> 
> Interim Conservative Leader Candice Bergen pushed predecessor Erin O'Toole to show support for the Freedom Convoy protest, arguing last week there are 'good people on both sides,' an echo of the phrase made infamous by former U.S. president Donald Trump after a Unite the Right rally in...
> ...


Anyone really surprised?


----------



## dapaterson (4 Feb 2022)

Gerrymandering?


----------



## Remius (4 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> Bergen pushed O'Toole to back convoy saying there are 'good people on both sides': sources
> 
> 
> Interim Conservative Leader Candice Bergen pushed predecessor Erin O'Toole to show support for the Freedom Convoy protest, arguing last week there are 'good people on both sides,' an echo of the phrase made infamous by former U.S. president Donald Trump after a Unite the Right rally in...
> ...


Saw that.  Looks almost like a set up lol.


----------



## OldSolduer (4 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Anyone really surprised?
> 
> View attachment 68497


Trolling again. One picture says it all, right? Never mind that persons service to the country.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> Trolling again. One picture says it all, right? Never mind that persons service to the country.


Very good people on both sides is something former President Trump said about the protestors in Charlottesville, which included white nationalist elements. 

So is it surprising someone who wears a MAGA hat, most of those being Trump supporters, would say the same?


----------



## mariomike (4 Feb 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> Trolling again. One picture says it all, right?



Have to remember that, next time, for the umpteenth time, someone posts those old PMJT pics.


----------



## OldSolduer (4 Feb 2022)

mariomike said:


> Have to remember that, next time, for the umpteenth time, someone posts those old PMJT pics.


We've all seen those and they should stop too.


----------



## lenaitch (4 Feb 2022)

Dana381 said:


> The Harper government didn't force Christian politics on the people. *The current LPC government IS forcing liberal ideology on people. *For the CPC to succeed they need to leave the abortion issue aside and focus on their other policies (Like Harper did). They have already shown that the majority of Canadians who bother to vote agree with their policies, now they need to work a little harder to gain the seats needed to win an election. This will not be won by returning the abortion debate. The LPC hopes the CPC does return the abortion debate because that would ensure the CPC failure.


What political party in the history of political parties hasn't when they are in power?


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

lenaitch said:


> What political party in the history of political parties hasn't when they are in power?


Yeah, it's like we don't have elections or something.


----------



## MilEME09 (4 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Yeah, it's like we don't have elections or something.


Elections these days seem to be about the illusion of choice, our system seems to be crumbling


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> Elections these days seem to be about the illusion of choice, our system seems to be crumbling


LPC
CPC
BQ
NDP
GRN
PPC

Seems like a lot of choices.


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Feb 2022)

Nom nom nom....












						Kurl: Conservatives' embrace of the truck protest in Ottawa isn't helping them
					

The CPC must decide if it wants to be a party that meets only the needs of a stringent base, or whether it wants to be the party in power.




					ottawacitizen.com


----------



## mariomike (4 Feb 2022)

mariomike said:


> Have to remember that, next time, for the umpteenth time, someone posts those old PMJT pics.





OldSolduer said:


> We've all seen those and they should stop too.



Sounds like a good idea. 

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1488521020004777987


----------



## suffolkowner (4 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Old-style PC isn't going very far if it just picks up where it left off while it was in Mulroney's hands.  There will have to compromises based on trades of equal value.



What would be the problem with a Brian Mulroney like PC party? I mean I didn't like the corruption, patronage and fiscal mismanagement, but I hope the CPC returns to an electable position to provide an alternative to the LPC. This last election was the first time I voted Conservative  since Mulroney


----------



## MilEME09 (4 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> LPC
> CPC
> BQ
> NDP
> ...


I'd agree with you if we didn't have a FPTP system, unfortunately it's devolved into the eternal flip between LPC and CPC.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> I'd agree with you if we didn't have a FPTP system, unfortunately it's devolved into the eternal flip between LPC and CPC.


Yeah, it is what it is at the end of the day. 

I would prefer some form of PR to be implemented, but the two main parties have vested interests in avoiding diluting their power.


----------



## dimsum (4 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> I'd agree with you if we didn't have a FPTP system, unfortunately it's devolved into the eternal flip between LPC and CPC.


Look at Australia.  They don't have FPTP yet it's really only Liberal vs Labour.


----------



## dapaterson (4 Feb 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> What would be the problem with a Brian Mulroney like PC party? I mean I didn't like the corruption, patronage and fiscal mismanagement, but I hope the CPC returns to an electable position to provide an alternative to the LPC. This last election was the first time I voted Conservative  since Mulroney


To be fair, corruption, patronage and fiscal mismanagement were SOP under Chretien as well.  Mulroney, for all his faults, brought in the GST and free trade which helped balance the y.


----------



## suffolkowner (4 Feb 2022)

dapaterson said:


> To be fair, corruption, patronage and fiscal mismanagement were SOP under Chretien as well.  Mulroney, for all his faults, brought in the GST and free trade which helped balance the y.


Reading this thread has been kinda depressing to me as someone who wants to have the two main parties be an option for 20% of the electorate to switch between. It seems to me that many people want the CPC to be a version of the Christian Heritage Party or the PPC when they already exist


----------



## Remius (4 Feb 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> What would be the problem with a Brian Mulroney like PC party? I mean I didn't like the corruption, patronage and fiscal mismanagement, but I hope the CPC returns to an electable position to provide an alternative to the LPC. This last election was the first time I voted Conservative  since Mulroney


I think it is sad that the party was able to bring people like you (and me) back to voting for them only to push them out again.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I think it is sad that the party was able to bring people like you (and me) back to voting for them only to push them out again




I don’t see myself returning any time soon to a “C” party unless: 

A) the PCs are reformed, or 

B) the CPC sorts itself out to become a party for Canadians who disagree with an overreaching ultra-progressive agenda of the LPC, vice a party for an increasingly extreme retrenchment party more interested in having a robust echo-chamber to serve the party members.


----------



## Remius (4 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> I don’t see myself returning any time soon to a “C” party unless:
> 
> A) the PCs are reformed, or
> 
> B) the CPC sorts itself out to become a party for Canadians who disagree with an overreaching ultra-progressive agenda of the LPC, vice a party for an increasingly extreme retrenchment party more interested in having a robust echo-chamber to serve the party members.


I always adopt a wait and see approach and for me campaigns matter.

But I am of the same mind with your point A.  And your point B is also well taken.


----------



## Dana381 (4 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Gerrymandering? By who? Elections Canada? Did they make it so the ridings disproportionately favored the LPC?


Not just western Canada, pretty much any rural area. I live in southwestern Ontario and almost all the ridings around me went CPC. Its more of a Rural vs Urban differential. Ridings around cities are set up to have the city population cancel out rural votes.


Altair said:


> Pro choice in terms of allowing a woman to decide whether or not to have a child or abort. The choice to view that a fundamental right is not the lack of choice as much as a it is standing up for a womans freedom to decide what best to do with her body.



No I mean Pro-choice in the definition of choice. According to Liberals women can choose to have an abortion but Liberal MP's can't choose how to vote on the issue.


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2022)

Dana381 said:


> Not just western Canada, pretty much any rural area. I live in southwestern Ontario and almost all the ridings around me went CPC. Its more of a Rural vs Urban differential. Ridings around cities are set up to have the city population cancel out rural votes.


Ridings would need to be prohibitively large to reach the average population and urban ridings would need to be broken down even more into more ridings to get down to the average riding population. 

So elections Canada would be weirdly making more urban ridings at the detriment of rural ones. Which only favours on party, I will let you guess which one.


Dana381 said:


> No I mean Pro-choice in the definition of choice. According to Liberals women can choose to have an abortion but Liberal MP's can't choose how to vote on the issue.


Lets not trivialize the extremely difficult choice a woman may need to make with how a MP votes, ya?


----------



## Brad Sallows (5 Feb 2022)

> What would be the problem with a Brian Mulroney like PC party? I mean I didn't like the corruption, patronage and fiscal mismanagement



Question asked and answered right there.



> This last election was the first time I voted Conservative   since Mulroney



Not enough corruption, patronage, and fiscal mismanagement from Harper?


----------



## suffolkowner (5 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Question asked and answered right there.
> 
> 
> 
> Not enough corruption, patronage, and fiscal mismanagement from Harper?


Harper maybe didn't come close to meeting the standard of Trudeau 1,Mulroney, Chretien and Trudeau 2 but lets not make him out to be a saint. In many ways I've felt that our PM's have progressively been worse than the ones proceeding them ever since the first Trudeau.

I voted Conservative last election because I was increasingly worried that a rising PPC would split the vote and allow the Liberals to win my riding. In the end I needn't have been that worried. 

The last time I voted Liberal was 1993. Since then I have managed to find other candidates and parties to support


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Feb 2022)

The issue comes down to a wider view of where the votes are, and how to effect that. 

Squabbling on the right to redistribute the share of votes internally is a mug’s game.

Things won’t change substantively unless something is done to attract the current Blue Liberals away from Team Trudeau.  The CPC is not positioning itself to do that.  It seems more interested in swinging further right. 

While the option space remains just CPC and PPC, the LPC can slow its pace and keep its efforts to a (very discrete and nuanced) one-front war with the NDP.

Conservatives pretty much couldn’t hand Trudeau more favourable conditions to extend his rule…


----------



## MilEME09 (5 Feb 2022)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/pierre-poilievre-running-for-conservative-leadership-1.6341335
		


Well this just got interesting


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Feb 2022)

Pierre Poilivere is running for Leader of the CPC and ultimately PM


This is going to be good. I can't really hypothesize until everyone announces, but I'll bet he gets the nod. I'm going to enjoy watching him use the grits as chew toys.


----------



## dapaterson (5 Feb 2022)

The equivalent of Tobin, Copps or Boudria running for the leadership of the LPC... aka "Do you want the opposition to remain in power forever?"


----------



## KevinB (5 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/pierre-poilievre-running-for-conservative-leadership-1.6341335
> 
> 
> 
> Well this just got interesting


Important to see who doesn't endorse him, as that will point to who will run against.


----------



## daftandbarmy (5 Feb 2022)

I'm just wondering why all these guys look the same - you know - like the kids that me and the wrestling team used to bully in High School....

.... Chocolate Swirly suitable


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Feb 2022)

The idea of Prime Minister Trudeau having to constantly deal with this guy fills me with joy.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Feb 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> The idea of Prime Minister Trudeau having to constantly deal with this guy fills me with joy.



If trudeau has been hiding up till now, he's going to have to step up his game. He doesn’t  have the balls or intelligence to go toe to toe with Pierre.


----------



## MilEME09 (5 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> Important to see who doesn't endorse him, as that will point to who will run against.


What perked my interest is when he was still in university he penned an editorial arguing for a two term limit for all politicians...wonder of he still thinks that


----------



## Navy_Pete (5 Feb 2022)

So the standard insult against Trudeau was he is just a drama teacher and they want to run a professional politician with zero life experience against him, and his primary role was attack dog?

Punchable face aside, this is an awful idea. Really need someone who is actually competent at has experience outside Parliament at doing stuff.

Wish Singh was with another party, he's currently the one party leader that seems like a useful human being, and I don't see anyone on the CPC right now that is interested in running that has basic competences.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Feb 2022)

Drama teacher's assistant is not life experience.Surfing on the tax payer dime, is not life experience. Carrying water for the WEF and China is life experience, but not the kind Canada needs.


----------



## MilEME09 (5 Feb 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> So the standard insult against Trudeau was he is just a drama teacher and they want to run a professional politician with zero life experience against him, and his primary role was attack dog?
> 
> Punchable face aside, this is an awful idea. Really need someone who is actually competent at has experience outside Parliament at doing stuff.
> 
> Wish Singh was with another party, he's currently the one party leader that seems like a useful human being, and I don't see anyone on the CPC right now that is interested in running that has basic competences.


His record isn't terrible, federal accountability act, election reform to end vouching and expand ID requirements, helped with the $4 billion compensation package for residential schools. I'm willing to give him a shot, he may surprise us.


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Feb 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Really need someone who is actually competent at has experience outside Parliament at doing stuff.



 Payette and Sajjan had quite the resume of life experience and did a lot of stuff.


----------



## FJAG (5 Feb 2022)

Poilievre's Reform Party and Canadian Alliance pedigree doesn't make me fell warm and fuzzy about him. 

I'm a little heartened by the fact that the Campaign Life Coalition voteprolife.ca website considers him unsupportable although a detailed reading shows he is only opposed to some of their more strident criteria.

Let's see what else crawls out of the woodwork.


----------



## Remius (5 Feb 2022)

FJAG said:


> Poilievre's Reform Party and Canadian Alliance pedigree doesn't make me fell warm and fuzzy about him.
> 
> I'm a little heartened by the fact that the Campaign Life Coalition voteprolife.ca website considers him unsupportable although a detailed reading shows he is only opposed to some of their more strident criteria.
> 
> Let's see what else crawls out of the woodwork.


The fact that he appeals to a certain “segment” is enough info for me.

I think he is a hard working and very good MP.  He’s not a leader. 

He’ll be a strong contender for the next ex leader of the opposition I think.  I think Leslyn Lewis might give him a run for his money though.


----------



## MilEME09 (5 Feb 2022)

FJAG said:


> Poilievre's Reform Party and Canadian Alliance pedigree doesn't make me fell warm and fuzzy about him.
> 
> I'm a little heartened by the fact that the Campaign Life Coalition voteprolife.ca website considers him unsupportable although a detailed reading shows he is only opposed to some of their more strident criteria.
> 
> Let's see what else crawls out of the woodwork.


It's entirely possible internal politics of the party are trying to make this a narrow field in order to speed up this process. If the want to be ready for the next election,  this will need to be a pretty snap leadership race and vote.


----------



## RangerRay (5 Feb 2022)

While an effective attack dog, I do not see him being a leader able to unite a fractured party or able to appeal to those who aren't already Tory partisans.  I like his attacks, but as Navy_Pete says, he does have a very punchable face.


----------



## brihard (5 Feb 2022)

He’s going to need to show considerably more depth in order to sell himself as something more than an attack dog. We all know the CPC can attack. He now needs to somehow mollify the social conservative right within the party in order to become their leader, while preserving his ability to credibly appeal to the persuadable centre in the electorate. This is the challenge that was ultimately fatal to O’Toole as leader. Will Poilievre be able to somehow do it better?


----------



## Brad Sallows (5 Feb 2022)

I just get warm feelings all over when people dwell on the superficialities.  I especially enjoyed the attacks on Harper, which basically summed up to "we don't like confident introverts".


----------



## Czech_pivo (6 Feb 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Drama teacher's assistant is not life experience.Surfing on the tax payer dime, is not life experience. Carrying water for the WEF and China is life experience, but not the kind Canada needs.


So what life experiences does PP?
As someone else previously pointed out, he’s never worked a day outside of politics. A bit hard to say that he’s had a greater depth of life experiences and know what working in the business world is like.
Just saying.


----------



## FJAG (6 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> He now needs to somehow mollify the social conservative right within the party in order to become their leader, while preserving his ability to credibly appeal to the persuadable centre in the electorate. This is the challenge that was ultimately fatal to O’Toole as leader. Will Poilievre be able to somehow do it better?


I'm not very confident that anyone can do that.

I participated in the policy submission process and watched the discussion of them during the last convention. Talk about watching sausages being made. The good thing was they were organized and got through the agenda while the NDP weren't able to do that during theirs. 

That said, these are the people who voted down a weak, motherhood proposal on climate change. Do not for one minute underestimate the sheer single-minded stubbornness of the delegates in the CPC.

🍻


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> While an effective attack dog, I do not see him being a leader able to unite a fractured party or able to appeal to those who aren't already Tory partisans.  I like his attacks, but as Navy_Pete says, he does have a very punchable face.


The most punchable face in North America is on the skull of our PM. Brandon is right there also, but he'd disappear as a cloud of dust.


----------



## brihard (6 Feb 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> The most punchable face in North America is on the skull of our PM. Brandon is right there also, but he'd disappear as a cloud of dust.


I seem to recall Trudeau handling himself alright in his boxing match with Patrick Brazeau. Although, admittedly, perhaps Trudeau was a tougher opponent than Brazeau was used to…


----------



## QV (6 Feb 2022)

brihard said:


> I seem to recall Trudeau handling himself alright in his boxing match with Patrick Brazeau. Although, admittedly, perhaps Trudeau was a tougher opponent than Brazeau was used to…


Boom!


----------



## AmmoTech90 (6 Feb 2022)

I had one encounter with Polievre.  He came to NDHQ Sgt & WOs Mess on Remembrance Day one year.  Stood around, made no attempt to greet anyone, had one word answers and left after around 15 minutes.  Was not impressive, left a very weasel-like impression.


----------



## MilEME09 (6 Feb 2022)

AmmoTech90 said:


> I had one encounter with Polievre.  He came to NDHQ Sgt & WOs Mess on Remembrance Day one year.  Stood around, made no attempt to greet anyone, had one word answers and left after around 15 minutes.  Was not impressive, left a very weasel-like impression.


Out of curiosity how long ago was that?


----------



## ArmyRick (6 Feb 2022)

So to some of you, facial appearances matter that much? Wow.

I am behind PP.


----------



## Lumber (6 Feb 2022)

AmmoTech90 said:


> I had one encounter with Polievre.  He came to NDHQ Sgt & WOs Mess on Remembrance Day one year.  Stood around, made no attempt to greet anyone, had one word answers and left after around 15 minutes.  Was not impressive, left a very weasel-like impression.


"Weasle" is exactly how I've described PP for years. I admire her fiscal conservatism, but he's the worst kind of politician in two ways: 1. Not a word comes out of his mouth that isn't carefully curated in advance, and 2. If you (the opposition) says anything that could be twisted, he will twist it apart and rip to shreds with your own words, even if you had clarified your words, and regardless if PP (bring, assumably, a smart guy) understands fully what you meant. That kind of politician. A Weasle. There's lot sof them, but he's a big one.


----------



## Edward Campbell (6 Feb 2022)

I'm not anti-Poilievre and I'm not sure a better choice is on offer, but ...

What the Conservative Party* needs* is a leader with a plan to win seats ~ lots of seats ~ in the suburbs around Vancouver and in the Toronto/Golden Horseshoe regions while not losing (much of) the party's Western base.

I think there is a huge disconnect, in the Conservative ranks between those who think as I do ~ who want back-to-back-to-back socially moderate, moderately progressive and fiscally hawkish Conservative governments of the next dozen years ~ and those who want the Conservative Party to be an ideologically pure home for the social-conservatives who make up about 10% to 15% of the electorate.

My suspicion is that the latter group is in the ascendant right now ... the next few weeks/months will be interesting.


----------



## Remius (6 Feb 2022)

Lumber said:


> "Weasle" is exactly how I've described PP for years. I admire her fiscal conservatism, but he's the worst kind of politician in two ways: 1. Not a word comes out of his mouth that isn't carefully curated in advance, and 2. If you (the opposition) says anything that could be twisted, he will twist it apart and rip to shreds with your own words, even if you had clarified your words, and regardless if PP (bring, assumably, a smart guy) understands fully what you meant. That kind of politician. A Weasle. There's lot sof them, but he's a big one.


He’s a career politician.  So it’s expected.  He’s an opportunist and will exploit anything for political gain.  I’m sure he knew exactly what was going on behind O’toole’s back.  The moment O’toole said he would not meet the protesters he jumped right in there with coffee, timbits and a photographer.  Don’t kid yourself.  Everything is scripted when it comes to his antics.

That being said, I still think he’s a good MP.  But leader and more importantly PM?  I’m going to wait for the other cast to step forward and see.


----------



## Haggis (6 Feb 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> If trudeau has been hiding up till now, he's going to have to step up his game. He doesn’t  have the balls or intelligence to go toe to toe with Pierre.





Jarnhamar said:


> The idea of Prime Minister Trudeau having to constantly deal with this guy fills me with joy.


Do you guys even watch Question Period? Trudeau has been blowing off PP forever.  He, or his ministers, never give PP - or anyone else for that matter - an answer to anything.  Do you think this will change with PP as Opposition Leader?  It won't.  They regurgitate the same talking point ad nauseum.   As Catherine McKenna was quoted as saying "If you repeat the same things often enough and loud enough, people will believe you".

As Altair said somewhere else "it's called 'Question Period', not 'Answer Period'."


----------



## Czech_pivo (6 Feb 2022)

For, as of now, I’ll be backing Mike Chong if he decides to run.
I’m looking for someone with character, not an attack dog, someone who has worked in the real world and in politics. A person who is not a loud mouth but who’s no shrinking violet. I’m not willing to back or vote for someone who’s there just because they are winnable - I want someone who I can get behind, someone with some shared interests.


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Feb 2022)

There are weasles, and then there are sanctimonious pretend non-weasels…


I wonder what a Poilièvre CPC and MacKay PC dual-lane conservative run would look like? 🤔


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Feb 2022)

Haggis said:


> Do you guys even watch Question Period? Trudeau has been blowing off PP forever.  He, or his ministers, never give PP - or anyone else for that matter - an answer to anything.  Do you think this will change with PP as Opposition Leader?



I know, small things amuse small minds, I just like watching him fumble under pressure.
One of my favs: 




I think we're blessed (in an evidence based scientific way) with enjoying a Liberal government for a very long time.


----------



## Remius (6 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> There are weasles, and then there are sanctimonious pretend non-weasels…
> 
> 
> I wonder what a Poilièvre CPC and MacKay PC dual-lane conservative run would look like? 🤔


I honestly don’t think McKay would run.  And I honestly don’t think McKay would be chosen as leader by the party. 

Oh wait, you mean if McKay splits off?  If so I see nothing but red in power the next election.  The last thing the conservatives is split vote that would be wider than what the PPC a is already giving them.


----------



## brihard (6 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I honestly don’t think McKay would run.  And I honestly don’t think McKay would be chosen as leader by the party.
> 
> Oh wait, you mean if McKay splits off?  If so I see nothing but red in power the next election.  The last thing the conservatives is split vote that would be wider than what the PPC a is already giving them.


Indeed. I made no secret of my preference for McKay when they were selecting a leader. I think he would have navigated the party’s internal politics much more deftly, and may have won the election outright. However I’m no longer confident that he could win leadership- the party has changed. I’m not sure he’s masochistic enough to try. 

The real winner here is probably Trudeau.


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Feb 2022)

Just moved the PP material into the existing Team Blue leadership thread - bash on.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Oh wait, you mean if McKay splits off?  If so I see nothing but red in power the next election.  The last thing the conservatives is split vote that would be wider than what the PPC a is already giving them.



Correct. 

If enough Blue Libs would be pulled away by a reborn PC party, then a PC-CPC coalition could conceivably make the case to the GG that it could form a Govermnent.  

As is (CPC only), I agree with others that we’ll be red for a while.


----------



## Remius (6 Feb 2022)

Would a CPC-CP be big enough to hold more seats than an LPC NDP coalition?  I doubt it. 

All that split would do is just move one amount of votes to another but it still remain the same amount.

I just don’t see moderate CP types aligning themselves to a more SOCON CPC.  You’d sooner see a McKay led CP propping up an LPC minority and them trying to push on the fiscal side of things.  PC social stuff and thing like the environment are likely closer to the LPC than the SOCON position on those things.

And McKay will never trust that side again after what happened with Harper.


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Would a CPC-CP be big enough to hold more seats than an LPC NDP coalition?  I doubt it.
> 
> All that split would do is just move one amount of votes to another but it still remain the same amount.
> 
> ...


Reasonable question to ask.

Mathematically, LPC would need to bleed enough Blues to offset the entire NDP…not sure if that’s possible, but then PC’s could conceivably hold more power than NDPs and be a threat, as you not, to align with the LPC of the CPC is really intent on burning the center-bridge.


----------



## Remius (6 Feb 2022)

I guess it would also depend on if or when centrist Liberals would tire of the the left swing that the LPC is taking.  As in how far is too far before they have enough.


----------



## AmmoTech90 (6 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> Out of curiosity how long ago was that?


It would have been between 2012 and 2014.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 Feb 2022)

> As in how far is too far before they have enough.



When middle class LPC voters can figure out that the money the government is giving them doesn't add up to the money being taken away (taxes, erosion of buying power).


----------



## QV (7 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> When middle class LPC voters can figure out that the money the government is giving them doesn't add up to the money being taken away (taxes, erosion of buying power).


You might be on to something… so far only Pierre P has been effective at communicating that.


----------



## MilEME09 (7 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> You might be on to something… so far only Pierre P has been effective at communicating that.


And its a communication strategy that could work in an election if hammered into the public


----------



## Navy_Pete (7 Feb 2022)

Haggis said:


> Do you guys even watch Question Period? Trudeau has been blowing off PP forever.  He, or his ministers, never give PP - or anyone else for that matter - an answer to anything.  Do you think this will change with PP as Opposition Leader?  It won't.  They regurgitate the same talking point ad nauseum.   As Catherine McKenna was quoted as saying "If you repeat the same things often enough and loud enough, people will believe you".
> 
> As Altair said somewhere else "it's called 'Question Period', not 'Answer Period'."


I have a few friends that regularly post PP's questions as if he's scoring big points; there is almost never any with anyone from the government actually responding.  He's good at firing up the base and making political soundbites for the news I guess, but that does nothing other than retain existing seats.

Guy has been an MP for how long and he's running on how bad the other guy is still, vice what can he do to make things better. I think Singh made that point a few years ago at a leaders debate where Trudeau and Scheer just kept talking about how crap the other guy was. The faces changed on the CPC side but so far the playbook is the same.


----------



## MilEME09 (7 Feb 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> I have a few friends that regularly post PP's questions as if he's scoring big points; there is almost never any with anyone from the government actually responding.  He's good at firing up the base and making political soundbites for the news I guess, but that does nothing other than retain existing seats.
> 
> Guy has been an MP for how long and he's running on how bad the other guy is still, vice what can he do to make things better. I think Singh made that point a few years ago at a leaders debate where Trudeau and Scheer just kept talking about how crap the other guy was. The faces changed on the CPC side but so far the playbook is the same.


Politics pretty much has devolved into that everywhere, it stopped being "elect me because " and became "don't elect them because " which really turns off voters


----------



## QV (7 Feb 2022)

If you’ve watched PP in committee hearings you’d see he actually holds people accountable, including senior bureaucrats.


----------



## Altair (7 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> If you’ve watched PP in committee hearings you’d see he actually holds people accountable, including senior bureaucrats.


Tom Mulcair was great at that as well as opposition leader. 

He turned into a really good Prime Minis....wait.


----------



## Remius (7 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> If you’ve watched PP in committee hearings you’d see he actually holds people accountable, including senior bureaucrats.


He’s an opportunist.  Looking for sound bites and any air time he can get. 

Like I said .  Good MP.  But that’s as far as I will go.


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> He’s an opportunist.  Looking for sound bites and any air time he can get.
> 
> Like I said .  Good MP.  But that’s as far as I will go.


He's also smart and very, very well briefed by a good staff.

He sticks pretty close to his assigned knitting ~ finance, the economy, industry ~ which makes the leader happy. And he learned at the feet of some good political leaders.

Is he likely to be a good leader? Did the best soldier, the CO's and the RSM"s favourite, work his/her way up to RSM? Did the best subaltern become a good colonel and a general? Or did the best sergeants and the best officers work their way  to the top of heap by being ~ rather then just acting ~ better?

Please, I am NOT anti-Polievre; but I am not persuaded ... not yet.


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> He’s an opportunist.  Looking for sound bites and any air time he can get.
> 
> Like I said .  Good MP.  But that’s as far as I will go.


He isn’t my style, for sure, but your two points above…point 1…which politician isn’t?…point 2…well at least he’s that…many others are not.


----------



## Remius (7 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> He isn’t my style, for sure, but your two points above…point 1…which politician isn’t?…point 2…well at least he’s that…many others are not.


He seems to do it more than most. But he has ambition I guess.


----------



## MilEME09 (8 Feb 2022)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/conservatives-eye-charest-as-potential-leader-again-1.6342373
		

Well now...that would get the Quebec vote


----------



## Altair (8 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/conservatives-eye-charest-as-potential-leader-again-1.6342373
> 
> 
> Well now...that would get the Quebec vote


I would vote for him.


----------



## Halifax Tar (8 Feb 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/conservatives-eye-charest-as-potential-leader-again-1.6342373
> 
> 
> Well now...that would get the Quebec vote



I can't see the party electing him if Erin O'Tool was considered too far left.


----------



## Drallib (8 Feb 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> I'm not anti-Poilievre and I'm not sure a better choice is on offer, but ...
> 
> What the Conservative Party* needs* is a leader with a plan to win seats ~ lots of seats ~ in the suburbs around Vancouver and in the Toronto/Golden Horseshoe regions while not losing (much of) the party's Western base.
> 
> ...


----------



## Czech_pivo (8 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> I would vote for him.


I have voted for him and many years ago when I was heavily involved in the PC party I helped work on his leadership campaign back in the Windsor area. 
I’m just not certain if that ship has sailed or not. I still like Mike Chong.


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Feb 2022)

Czech_pivo said:


> I have voted for him and many years ago when I was heavily involved in the PC party I helped work on his leadership campaign back in the Windsor area.
> I’m just not certain if that ship has sailed or not. I still like Mike Chong.


One would have to do the math, re: Vancouver vs Quebec realignment to blue, to offset the LPC’s vote efficiency.  I like both Charest and Chong.  I have met Charest in person; he’s very personable, mindful and dedicated.  He was and would make again an excellent leader, very much in the type that Mr. Campbell notes earlier - he knows how to rebuild and move forward.  Mike Chong I think would also be an excellent leader, both for his personal dedication, but also his strong principled stand against manipulation of Canadian citizens and national institutions by China.  My concern lies in the introspective, retrenching view of the CPC party ship, vice visionary forward movement…I’m not sure the CPC has it in them.


----------



## The Bread Guy (8 Feb 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> ... My concern lies in the introspective, retrenching view of the CPC party ship, vice visionary forward movement…I’m not sure the CPC has it in them.


I'd have to agree with you & Halifax Tar on this one -- if the incumbent was turfed (in whole or in part) because he wasn't extreme enough, as much as I like Charest, too, I wouldn't bet my loonie on him right this second.


----------



## Halifax Tar (8 Feb 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> I'd have to agree with you & Halifax Tar on this one -- if the incumbent was turfed (in whole or in part) because he wasn't extreme enough, as much as I like Charest, too, I wouldn't bet my loonie on him right this second.



Bring back Joe Clark lol 

Tim Houston is doing pretty well out here and our NS PC party is not connected to the CPCs.  Perhaps the bluenosers can create a way forward for those of us who are red torries and blue liberals.


----------



## Remius (8 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Bring back Joe Clark lol
> 
> Tim Houston is doing pretty well out here and our NS PC party is not connected to the CPCs.  Perhaps the bluenosers can create a way forward for those of us who are red torries and blue liberals.


I voted for Joe.  The man had a good grasp of the country as a whole.


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I voted for Joe.  The man had a good grasp of the country as a whole.



Joe who?


----------



## Happy Guy (12 Feb 2022)

Possibly someone from the PC will join the fray, Mr. Jean Charest.

I hope that Mr. Michael Chong will throw his hat into the ring too.

Despite being a long time PC Supporter I hesitated in buying a membership in the CPC after I retired.  With the ongoing Trucker's Convoy Protest and the CPC's early stance I decided not too.  If any of these two individuals join the race I will join the CPC for a chance to vote for one of them.

Bring back the PC.


----------



## Altair (12 Feb 2022)

Happy Guy said:


> Possibly someone from the PC will join the fray, Mr. Jean Charest.
> 
> I hope that Mr. Michael Chong will throw his hat into the ring too.
> 
> ...


I've voted for Mr Charest before and I would do it again.


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Feb 2022)

Happy Guy said:


> Possibly someone from the PC will join the fray, Mr. Jean Charest.
> 
> I hope that Mr. Michael Chong will throw his hat into the ring too.
> 
> ...


John Iveson sees a case for something out there for the moderate progressives. 








						John Ivison: Do we need a new party for the politically 'homeless'?
					

As it stands, centrist voters are going to have a challenge knowing where to place their 'X' in the next election




					nationalpost.com


----------



## Happy Guy (13 Feb 2022)

A good article by John Ivison. He writes on topical issues of interest and I generally agree with what he says.

He hits the head with the hypocrisy of Mr. Pierre Poilievre with his stance to the Trucker's protest vice his attitude towards 2020 Indigenous rail blockades.  IMO the CPC is more of a pouplist party now swaying to whatever is the changing moods of the most vocal, not the majority, of the population.

Whatever happened to the PC / CPC Party that took a well reasoned principled stance that was based on the best interests of the country as a whole and not for political grandstanding?  Today they look very much like the Liberal Party in this regard.

I detest the current Liberal Party which is now even more left than the NDP - to be clear their policies not the people.

I honestly don't know who to vote for if a federal election was held today.  I would probably spoil my vote and write in where are the Progressive Conservatives?.


----------



## Remius (13 Feb 2022)

Happy Guy said:


> A good article by John Ivison. He writes on topical issues of interest and I generally agree with what he says.
> 
> He hits the head with the hypocrisy of Mr. Pierre Poilievre with his stance to the Trucker's protest vice his attitude towards 2020 Indigenous rail blockades.  IMO the CPC is more of a pouplist party now swaying to whatever is the changing moods of the most vocal, not the majority, of the population.
> 
> ...


Pierre Polievre is trying to capture the populist vote.  The F*ck Trudeau crowd love him.  That is the level of discourse and politics that he represents and is courting.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Feb 2022)

That article speaks to me.  

If we had a federal election today I would probably spoil my ballot.  I'd create my own "None of the above" ballot.


----------



## Remius (13 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> That article speaks to me.
> 
> If we had a federal election today I would probably spoil my ballot.  I'd create my own "None of the above" ballot.


I think that is the feeling that is being underestimated by some in the CPC.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I think that is the feeling that is being underestimated by some in the CPC.



I think most of the country is made up of Blue Liberals and Red Torys.  

I see space for a Charest and/or MacKay to restart the fires in the old dreadnought that was the PC party.  Maybe rename it the Canadian Tory party or something as I don't think the PC name can be used federally.

Also keep an eye on Houston down here in NS hes up to something.


----------



## Remius (13 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I think most of the country is made up of Blue Liberals and Red Torys.
> 
> I see space for a Charest and/or MacKay to restart the fires in the old dreadnought that was the PC party.  Maybe rename it the Canadian Tory party or something as I don't think the PC name can be used federally.
> 
> Also keep an eye on Houston down here in NS hes up to something.


The issue with Houston is that he campaigned on a “I’m not the same as them” sort of thing.  I’m not sure he could secure the CPC leadership.

Could he start a new PC party federally?  Now that might be interesting…


----------



## RangerRay (13 Feb 2022)

With people bringing up names like Jean Charest and Joe Clark, I want to say “The ‘90s called. They want their Tory politicians back!”  They failed to grow their party in the West and I don’t see them being able to do it now with a newer generation. Joe Who was also the main obstruction to the merger of the two parties, which agreed on 90% of issues. 

I don’t really see anyone who would be a suitable leader right now except for Rona Ambrose or Brad Wall. Unfortunately, neither are interested.


----------



## Altair (13 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> With people bringing up names like Jean Charest and Joe Clark, I want to say “The ‘90s called. They want their Tory politicians back!”  They failed to grow their party in the West and I don’t see them being able to do it now with a newer generation. Joe Who was also the main obstruction to the merger of the two parties, which agreed on 90% of issues.
> 
> I don’t really see anyone who would be a suitable leader right now except for Rona Ambrose or Brad Wall. Unfortunately, neither are interested.


Does....the CPC....need to grow more in the west?
Is the CPC under threat in the west from another party?

I'm confused.


----------



## RangerRay (13 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Does....the CPC....need to grow more in the west?
> Is the CPC under threat in the west from another party?
> 
> I'm confused.


To be sure, they have problems growing in the East, particularly in the suburban/urban areas they need to form government. But they can’t form government without Western conservatives. It’s a conundrum that the next leader has to fix. Charest and Clark were unable to do it then and I see no evidence they can do it now.


----------



## Remius (13 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> To be sure, they have problems growing in the East, particularly in the suburban/urban areas they need to form government. But they can’t form government without Western conservatives. It’s a conundrum that the next leader has to fix. Charest and Clark were unable to do it then and I see no evidence they can do it now.


No one is calling for Joe Clark to come back.


----------



## Remius (13 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> To be sure, they have problems growing in the East, particularly in the suburban/urban areas they need to form government. But they can’t form government without Western conservatives. It’s a conundrum that the next leader has to fix. Charest and Clark were unable to do it then and I see no evidence they can do it now.


But I do get your point.  Western voters may not be warm to someone from upper and lower Canada


----------



## MilEME09 (13 Feb 2022)

Altair said:


> Does....the CPC....need to grow more in the west?
> Is the CPC under threat in the west from another party?
> 
> I'm confused.


CPC's greatest threat in the west is it self, and maybe the Alberta UCP, last election saw a lot of ridings barely go blue that could of gone orange or even red, urban western voters are shifting in demographic.


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> To be sure, they have problems growing in the East, particularly in the suburban/urban areas they need to form government. But they can’t form government without Western conservatives. It’s a conundrum that the next leader has to fix. Charest and Clark were unable to do it then and I see no evidence they can do it now.


If they try (Charest or MacKay) and make a solid effort to recover moderate conservatism, especially down East and in Quebec and the West (AB and mini me SK) insists on cutting its nose off to spite its face and stay hard SOCON/Reform/Alliance/CPC, they might as well start the Wexit paperwork now, as it would be all about them and not a wider modestly progressive Canada.  Then I’ll count how long it takes before AB finally adopts a PST/VAT…


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> The issue with Houston is that he campaigned on a “I’m not the same as them” sort of thing.  I’m not sure he could secure the CPC leadership.
> 
> Could he start a new PC party federally?  Now that might be interesting…



Ya I never alluded to Houston running for the CPC.  He's been very careful and clear to distance himself from the CPC.  I'm talking about a return of the PC.



RangerRay said:


> With people bringing up names like Jean Charest and Joe Clark, I want to say “The ‘90s called. They want their Tory politicians back!”  They failed to grow their party in the West and I don’t see them being able to do it now with a newer generation. Joe Who was also the main obstruction to the merger of the two parties, which agreed on 90% of issues.
> 
> I don’t really see anyone who would be a suitable leader right now except for Rona Ambrose or Brad Wall. Unfortunately, neither are interested.



In case you haven't noticed the west isn't required to win federal elections.  I don't like it either but it's the truth. 

Having said that the demographic is changing out there as it becomes more urban and progressive.  

Alberta has the same rights as Quebec or anywhere else to succeed from the confederation if they feel so moved.


----------



## RangerRay (13 Feb 2022)

Despite the socon faction painting McKay as a “red Tory” (to me, moderate =\= red) I think he would be a great leader for most factions other than the PPC curious types still with the CPC. But I think that ship has sailed. I would be surprised if he would want to get within 100 miles of the party now as it takes a turn down Trumpy Lane.


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Feb 2022)

Agree, I think a reborn PC by whatever name (I’ve heard but not seen that PC can’t be used again?) will be where moderately progressive conservatives provide a valid option to the LPcs ad Canadians can expect.


----------



## Dana381 (13 Feb 2022)

The problem that I see with the conservatives in the east is that the majority of the population relies at least partially on social programs. Typically in the past conservatives are in favour of fiscal restraint. This usually means that EI gets lowered and federal jobs leave the area.

When I lived in P.E.I. I had a friend who emigrated from Ireland. He once called P.E.I. and rural Maritimes a reservation, that they don't really have an economy without federal money. At first I was offended but I realized he was right. When Ottawa reduces funding to P.E.I. one of the first places P.E.I. cuts is the EI program. And nearly everybody living there relies on EI or knows someone who does.

I have a large family and I had to move to Ontario as in my career I would never be able to support them on what I was making in P.E.I.

When the conservatives pander to the west it makes Maritimers nervous that they will loose income and it's harder for them to gain votes.

McKay being from Nova Scotia understands this more than western politicians so he may be able to make ground in the east but that will likely alienate the western voters.

The last two elections were very close, if the new CPC leader can find a way to assure Maritimers that transfer payments will remain steady and still appeal to western voters that will help their case greatly.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Feb 2022)

The old PC had the same problem as the LPC.  They had strength in Quebec, and it seems that Quebec in that era had a lot of political corruption.  That won't do any more.

Westerners won't object to paying bills if they have enough political clout.  That means things the west wants aren't automatically traded off if the east objects.


----------



## daftandbarmy (14 Feb 2022)

Dana381 said:


> The problem that I see with the conservatives in the east is that the majority of the population relies at least partially on social programs. Typically in the past conservatives are in favour of fiscal restraint. This usually means that EI gets lowered and federal jobs leave the area.
> 
> *When I lived in P.E.I. I had a friend who emigrated from Ireland. He once called P.E.I. and rural Maritimes a reservation, that they don't really have an economy without federal money.* At first I was offended but I realized he was right. When Ottawa reduces funding to P.E.I. one of the first places P.E.I. cuts is the EI program. And nearly everybody living there relies on EI or knows someone who does.




Pot, this is Kettle, over...

Ireland is perennially on the verge of bankruptcy, along with Portugal, Greece and Spain, and relies heavily on EU cash to survive e.g.,:


Ireland to get €361m EU Brexit payment within weeks​The Government will get a total of €920m by December 2023


Ireland will receive a €361m payout from the EU’s €5.4bn Brexit fund by the end of the month, the first payment to any country since the envelope was agreed this summer.

The European Commission approved the transfer on Monday given that Ireland is the country worst affected by the UK’s decision to leave the EU.

Ireland’s total allocation from the fund is worth around a billion euros.

“Brexit has had a negative impact on many people's lives. Within the EU, it is the people in Ireland who feel it the most,” said EU regional commissioner Elisa Ferreira.

“In moving forward, we don't want to leave anyone behind. The funding that Ireland will receive will contribute to improve living standards, support economic growth in the country and mitigate the negative impacts in local communities.”

*Ireland is by far the biggest recipient of aid from the fund, which was agreed this summer after changes were made to accommodate France’s demands for more cash.*

The Government will get a total of €920m in current prices (just over €1bn in 2018 prices) for supports granted between January 2020 and end-December 2023, which cover Brexit-related costs incurred before January 2021.

EU countries don’t need to obtain advance approval from the European Commission on how to spend the money, unlike the €1bn allocated to Ireland from the bloc’s €750bn pandemic recovery fund.









						Ireland to get €361m EU Brexit payment within weeks
					

Ireland will receive a €361m payout from the EU’s €5.4bn Brexit fund by the end of the month, the first payment to any country since the envelope was agreed this summer.




					www.independent.ie


----------



## Dana381 (14 Feb 2022)

My friends nationality nor Ireland's finances have nothing to do with whether or not he is right. I only mentioned his nationality because the fact he isn't Canadian gives him an outside viewpoint. Maybe that's why he said it, he recognized it from home.

Either way it dosent change the fact that unless the conservatives assure Maritimers the payments won't change it will be extremely difficult to win any east coast seats.


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Feb 2022)

Dana381 said:


> My friends nationality nor Ireland's finances have nothing to do with whether or not he is right. I only mentioned his nationality because the fact he isn't Canadian gives him an outside viewpoint. Maybe that's why he said it, he recognized it from home.
> 
> Either way it dosent change the fact that unless the conservatives assure Maritimers the payments won't change it will be extremely difficult to win any east coast seats.



Most social programs are municipal and provincial with the exception of EI which you have to contribute to to utilize. 

There is definitely an expectation out here that one should be able to exist where there is no economy or viable options.  Maritimers are very reluctant to move.

Having said that NS, NB and PEI all have Conservative governments right now.  With NBs probably being the weakest.


----------



## Dana381 (14 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Most social programs are municipal and provincial with the exception of EI which you have to contribute to to utilize.
> 
> There is definitely an expectation out here that one should be able to exist where there is no economy or viable options.  Maritimers are very reluctant to move.
> 
> Having said that NS, NB and PEI all have Conservative governments right now.  With NBs probably being the weakest.



Yes the provincial governments are conservative but thr cpc maritime lost seats in the last federal election.

Yes the social programs are provincialy managed but with the money coming from the federal government. 

Maritimers are reluctant to move and industry takes advantage of that. Many businesses claim they can't afford to pay more even when they are profitable, Even when they struggle to find workers. There seems to be a mentality among employers that they don't need to pay well because life is cheaper there than in Ontario. My experience is this is wrong. With the exception of housing everything is substantially cheaper here in Ontario. Groceries are 20-50% more in P.E.I. than in the KW area where I live now. I watched many good workers leave jobs and the province when $0.50-$1.00 would have kept them, these guys were making $13-$15/hr where the same job elsewhere paid $20+/hr. I myself went up $8/hr by moving and my expenses went down a little.


----------



## The Bread Guy (14 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> ... If we had a federal election today I would probably spoil my ballot.  I'd create my own "None of the above" ballot.


Sounds like you're not alone, but afraid there's no such option at this point federally


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Feb 2022)

Dana381 said:


> Yes the provincial governments are conservative but thr cpc maritime lost seats in the last federal election.
> 
> That has everything to do with their SOCON leanings and little to nothing to do with anything fiscal.
> 
> ...


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Feb 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> Sounds like you're not alone, but afraid there's no such option at this point federally


Oh I know I'm not alone.  I think most of the country is Red Tory or Blue Liberal ... We have more in common than people want to admit.


----------



## The Bread Guy (14 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Oh I know I'm not alone.  I think most of the country is Red Tory or Blue Liberal ... We have more in common than people want to admit.


And with political debate looking more like this, harder to get together closer to the middle anymore ....


----------



## OldSolduer (14 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> my own "None of the above" ballot.


I did this once. I wrote in a candidate whose ideals were somewhat less than liberal.


----------



## Scott (14 Feb 2022)

NBs whatever colour government always has something else to consider: Irving.

The "new" NS PCs have done a lot to distance themselves from the federal bunch.

PEI politics are hyper local, always.


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Feb 2022)

Scott said:


> NBs whatever colour government always has something else to consider: Irving.
> 
> You aren't wrong, in fact they also have a grip on NS and in PEI its the McCains.
> 
> ...


----------



## Scott (14 Feb 2022)

I've stated why PEI would never join a union of the provinces - it wouldn't be local enough for them, and I get that.

That "new" bit of the PCs in NS I mentioned is that zero affiliation, and making it public  I hope they keep up with that.


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Feb 2022)

Scott said:


> I've stated why PEI would never join a union of the provinces - it wouldn't be local enough for them, and I get that.
> 
> That "new" bit of the PCs in NS I mentioned is that zero affiliation, and making it public  I hope they keep up with that.



Ya the Maritimes are not great at looking forward beyond local influence. 

Me too!  I really think Houston could be something.


----------



## Navy_Pete (14 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Ya the Maritimes are not great at looking forward beyond local influence.
> 
> Me too!  I really think Houston could be something.



I like that the provincial parties are separate from the federal ones; gives a chance for the stupidity to be filtered out when going up or down, if one is going hard over. Also the provinces deal with some pretty specific things that the feds don't so they need to tailor it more to what works locally.

I think the NS PC party is a pretty good example of what a lot of people are looking for as a fiscally responsible, centrist kind of party. They could be liberal, conservative, or even under the NDP banner (in the old style blue collar type NDP party) and find pretty decent success.

I think the big three all have pretty entrenched positions and factions, so a breakaway party might be the only way to go at this point. If the NDP could get it's more loony area of the party to STFU and come up with a realistic plan that they can actually pay for without bankrupting our grandkids I'd vote for them over either the CPC or Liberals.

There were a few protest type candidates in my riding last time (along the lines of the Rhino party), so I'd probably look at one of them to spoil a vote if we're still in the status quo. At this point, some of them may even get elected by accident! Apparently that happened in Montreal in the 70s and the Rhino party guy didn't really know what to do, so had to resign after winning.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Feb 2022)

> industry takes advantage of that.



As long as EI can be gamed as a wage subsidy - it can be, and it is - industry is going to factor it into their compensation calculations.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (14 Feb 2022)

Just got polled by a polling agencies, clearly hired by the CPC. When they called looking for donations a few days ago I said; "get your shit together you stabbed your leader in the back during all of this and now you want my money?"


----------



## Rifleman62 (15 Feb 2022)

> Brad Sallows​As long as EI can be gamed as a wage subsidy - it can be, and it is - industry is going to factor it into their compensation calculations.



As well as assembling Canada's CF-18 replacement. We are not going to get the F-35.


----------



## OldTanker (15 Feb 2022)

Regarding spoiling ballots, I live in Elizabeth May's riding. Voting for her is essentially the same thing as spoiling a ballot, but at least I can say I did vote.


----------



## FJAG (15 Feb 2022)

OldTanker said:


> Regarding spoiling ballots, I live in Elizabeth May's riding. Voting for her is essentially the same thing as spoiling a ballot, but at least I can say I did vote.


I actually prefer declining my ballot but the last time my spouse did that it took forever to get through the process due to befuddled polling officer. Spoiling is much faster. I refuse to not vote. I think that's abrogating your responsibility as a citizen but I do not have to pick the least offensive candidate either. I may be a small voice but it's a voice.

 .


----------



## Happy Guy (15 Feb 2022)

Here is a list of all the registered Federal parties in Canada according to Elections Canada for your perusal. As of the 2021 election there were 22 x parties.

Interesting enough there is a Centralist Party, A Libertarian Party, Veteran's Coalition Party of Canada, the Christian Heritage Party and many others.

For me, I would never vote for: any Communist / Socialist party (IMO this includes the current Liberal and NDP parties); any party that promotes the break up of Canada; any party is anti-climate change; any party that espouses far right wing polices.

For now, I'm drawn towards the Libertarian Party, but I need to conduct more research - Yes, I need to read Ayn Rand's book: Atlas Shrugged.

To me the Green Party is a no go because it mirrors the Liberal and NDP platforms with respect its socialist values and assumes that all businesses are not paying their fair share of taxes and must pay much more.  There are no incentives for businesses to grow and innovate.  In brief: people - good, business - bad.  While it promotes green sustainable energy it discounts the use of nuclear power (fission) for immediate future.  Québec has hydro but what about the Prairies?  Wind and solar electric power will not be enough.   Fusion nuclear power is still decades away and yet that there are dangers too with the need to heat up to the Sun's temperature for fusion to happen.  Current renewal green sources of power will not meet the energy demands of Canada.  IMO not a realistic platform.  Plus they seem to have adopted the habit, like the CPC, of killing their leaders every two-three years.  That reminds me, I wonder how long Jagmeet Singh will last if he fails win 25 or more seats in the next election.  Will he go the way of Thomas Mulcair?

I'm still in a quandary.


----------



## QV (15 Feb 2022)

Happy Guy said:


> Here is a list of all the registered Federal parties in Canada according to Elections Canada for your perusal. As of the 2021 election there were 22 x parties.
> 
> Interesting enough there is a Centralist Party, A Libertarian Party, Veteran's Coalition Party of Canada, the Christian Heritage Party and many others.
> 
> ...


Sounds like we have another potential PPC voter in the making.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Feb 2022)

> Yes, I need to read Ayn Rand's book: Atlas Shrugged.



It's not the best source of libertarian ideas.  Start by perusing reason.com on a regular basis.


----------



## Happy Guy (15 Feb 2022)

The PCC, like the Christian Heritage Party, dismisses the science behind Climate Change.

I talked with the local PPC candidate in my riding for the 2021 election. She rejected the idea of the COVID vaccine for herself and her family.  I'm fine with that as long as they subject themselves to rapid testing as required, but she rejected the wearing of masks to prevent the spread of COVID like Mr. Bernier claiming it was a freedom of choice.  What surprised me was her rejection of the proven scientific facts by reputable scientific organizations, regarding climate change and, at the time, COVID infection.  Needless to say I voted for my local CPC candidate.  Since 2015, my riding has been Liberal, before that NDP, and before that Liberal.

Having said that I do like many of the PPC's party platforms.

I believe that there is a need to reinvent / reinvigorate capitalism.  I hate the idea of corporate welfare for large corporations.  I understand the logic behind it, but ....

Brad - thanks for link to reason.com. I will check it out.


----------



## QV (15 Feb 2022)

Happy Guy said:


> The PCC, like the Christian Heritage Party, dismisses the science behind Climate Change.
> 
> I talked with the local PPC candidate in my riding for the 2021 election. She rejected the idea of the COVID vaccine for herself and her family.  I'm fine with that as long as they subject themselves to rapid testing as required, but she rejected the wearing of masks to prevent the spread of COVID like Mr. Bernier claiming it was a freedom of choice.  What surprised me was her rejection of the proven scientific facts by reputable scientific organizations, regarding climate change and, at the time, COVID infection.  Needless to say I voted for my local CPC candidate.  Since 2015, my riding has been Liberal, before that NDP, and before that Liberal.
> 
> Having said that I do like many of the PPC's party platforms.


So, you’re saying she was correct before her time.  I jest (but not totally).

Whether a candidate has a personal preference or belief about one or two aspects should be less considered then the overall party platform, for the common good. If you like many of the PPC’s part platforms, then it’s worth considering. The LPC and CPC are not going to change.


----------



## lenaitch (15 Feb 2022)

FJAG said:


> I actually prefer declining my ballot but the last time my spouse did that it took forever to get through the process due to befuddled polling officer. Spoiling is much faster. I refuse to not vote. I think that's abrogating your responsibility as a citizen but I do not have to pick the least offensive candidate either. I may be a small voice but it's a voice.
> 
> .


As did I, with the same response.  I can't remember if it was a federal or provincial election.  According to elections Canada, a refused ballot is just lumped in with spoiled ballots.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Feb 2022)

> What surprised me was her rejection of the proven scientific facts by reputable scientific organization



A thing to remember is that models and their outputs are not facts.  So when you consider what the facts mean, be sure your estimate is starting with actual facts.


----------



## Happy Guy (15 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> A thing to remember is that models and their outputs are not facts.  So when you consider what the facts mean, be sure your estimate is starting with actual facts.


ACK.  I understand. I have a science and engineering background.


----------



## Altair (16 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> Sounds like we have another potential PPC voter in the making.


One of us, one of us!


----------



## Remius (16 Feb 2022)

Trend shows 'material increase' in PPC accessible voters: Nanos
					

Nanos Research numbers show a continuing rise in accessible voters for the People's Party of Canada -- a trend that began in the summer before the 2021 federal election.




					www.ctvnews.ca
				




Small blip but to be watched.


----------



## Altair (16 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Trend shows 'material increase' in PPC accessible voters: Nanos
> 
> 
> Nanos Research numbers show a continuing rise in accessible voters for the People's Party of Canada -- a trend that began in the summer before the 2021 federal election.
> ...


While the CPC has been wishy washy on the convoy the PPC has been nothing but fully supportive. 

I wouldn't be surprised to see those who are more supportive of the convoy signal their support for the PPC, and for the PPC to try to harness some of that fundraising power that the convoy has.


----------



## Happy Guy (17 Feb 2022)

More on the probable next leader of the CPC, Mr. Pierre Poilievre.
Geoff Russ: The Conservatives don't need a progressive as party leader

In brief, he presents himself as a Fiscal conservative and not a social conservative.


----------



## Scott (17 Feb 2022)

In brief, Pierre comes off as not a nice guy.

We sure don't need a nice guy running the place, and according to a bunch of you PMJT is the biggest blade since Judas. So why are so many people okay with him ANDTHESCANDALSBLACKFACEGROPEWEELBOWGRRRRAAAAHHHGGGGGG

Because he _sounds like a nice guy to a few more voters._ If a vote is at all influenced by the leader then this matters to people.

Don't give me that they're all just stupid, come on. The left forums are calling all of us troglodyte dummies as well, and they're at least half wrong  And best not vote for the guy the base always wants - because the base ain't your lost votes.


----------



## Halifax Tar (17 Feb 2022)

Scott said:


> In brief, Pierre comes off as not a nice guy.
> 
> We sure don't need a nice guy running the place, and according to a bunch of you PMJT is the biggest blade since Judas. So why are so many people okay with him ANDTHESCANDALSBLACKFACEGROPEWEELBOWGRRRRAAAAHHHGGGGGG
> 
> ...



Feel better now ?

The truth is were in a situation like the USA was with Trump V Clinton and Trump V Biden ...

I will ask the same question I asked then, in a country of our population, wealth and education how is it that these are the people who find the way to be our political leaders ?  We know better people are out there... Why is the cream not rising ?


----------



## Remius (17 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Feel better now ?
> 
> The truth is were in a situation like the USA was with Trump V Clinton and Trump V Biden ...
> 
> I will ask the same question I asked then, in a country of our population, wealth and education how is it that these are the people who find the way to be our political leaders ?  We know better people are out there... Why is the cream not rising ?


Why would they? They are likely doing bigger and better things.

Why put themselves in that mess?  We could have the best person step up an they’ll just get labelled by one side or another.  Why uproot your family and put yourself through that?  Your life isn’t your own and you take nothing but flak for your efforts.


----------



## Halifax Tar (17 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Why would they? They are likely doing bigger and better things.
> 
> Why put themselves in that mess?  We could have the best person step up an they’ll just get labelled by one side or another.  Why uproot your family and put yourself through that?  Your life isn’t your own and you take nothing but flak for your efforts.



Sounds like being in the CAF...


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Feb 2022)

Be reasonable.  I have repeatedly been assured over the years that there are many good, fine, competent people in politics trying to make their communities, provinces, and the country a better place.

How it is that the governments so often end up with the worst of them holding the levers of control, is never explained.


----------



## Altair (17 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Feel better now ?
> 
> The truth is were in a situation like the USA was with Trump V Clinton and Trump V Biden ...
> 
> I will ask the same question I asked then, in a country of our population, wealth and education how is it that these are the people who find the way to be our political leaders ?  We know better people are out there... Why is the cream not rising ?


Because politics is nothing but a blood sport right now.

The prime minister got pelted with rocks on campaign. He had to cancel rallies due to his security detail not being able to assure his safety.

O'Toole and Scheer got shanked by their own party.

Question period is a toxic screaming mess of immature adults.

Toss into all of this that unless your past is sqeaky clean, someone will find something off putting you did or said in your past.

All of this for less money than you would make in the private sector.

It's telling that the last 2 PMs have little life experience outside of politics, Andrew Scheer didnt have much, PP doesn't have any. The lawyers of the NDP havent faired well, Mulcair and Singh.

Then you have their families, dragged along for the ride. Spouses of the PM have no role in Canada, just expected to sit at and keep their mouths shut. Both Sophie Trudeau and Laureen Harper have been subject of vicious rumours and accused of affairs with the security details. The kids get to deal with having their family name dragged through the mud. Zero privacy.

In short, long hours, high stress, average pay, no privacy, not ideal family situation, personal attacks, past picked apart by opposition and the media, and you leave the job more hated than when you started. Only people who really want that are career politicians who know nothing but that.


----------



## Navy_Pete (17 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Be reasonable.  I have repeatedly been assured over the years that there are many good, fine, competent people in politics trying to make their communities, provinces, and the country a better place.
> 
> How it is that the governments so often end up with the worst of them holding the levers of control, is never explained.


I believe they are commonly referred to as 'backbenchers'.

The ones that follow their conscious when it doesn't follow the party line get sidelined or leave politics. Jane Philpott was by all accounts excellent and got stuff done. Rona Ambrose was also apparently quite effective as a minister. I'm sure there are lots of other examples.

On the flipside, there are also backbenchers who are oxygen theiving ballast, (cough Cheryl Gallant cough) who shouldn't be in charge of making coffee, let alone Govt policy decisions, so it's hard to gauge who is who.


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Feb 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> On the flipside, there are also backbenchers who are oxygen theiving ballast, (cough Cheryl Gallant cough) who shouldn't be in charge of making coffee, let alone Govt policy decisions, so it's hard to gauge who is who.


Uugh… 🤦🏻

Hector ‘Give ‘em Heck!’ Cloutier was a cataract er in Renfrew-Nipissing federal politics, but far an above what Ms. Gallant is… 😞


----------



## RangerRay (17 Feb 2022)

Probably for most smart successful people of good character, rewards < costs to get involved in politics. Most insanely normal people will not subject themselves and their families to putting targets on their backs so they can try make the country better.  They would rather keep their head down and make their small part better without seeking the limelight. 

Which gets me thinking:  most successful PM’s have been assholes to one degree or another (name me one “nice guy” that was PM for more than a blink of an eye). But what those successful assholes had in common was they had enough appeal outside their base for enough time to last a few terms. 

I am still not convinced that Mr. Pollievre has much appeal outside the Tory base to be successful. I would be happy to be proven wrong, but his embrace of lawless activity and his attack-dog style make me believe that won’t happen. 🤷‍♂️


----------



## QV (17 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I am still not convinced that Mr. Pollievre has much appeal outside the Tory base to be successful. I would be happy to be proven wrong, *but his embrace of lawless activity *and his attack-dog style make me believe that won’t happen. 🤷‍♂️


You must be a subscriber of fake news. Whatever gave you that idea?


----------



## Remius (17 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> Probably for most smart successful people of good character, rewards < costs to get involved in politics. Most insanely normal people will not subject themselves and their families to putting targets on their backs so they can try make the country better.  They would rather keep their head down and make their small part better without seeking the limelight.
> 
> Which gets me thinking:  most successful PM’s have been assholes to one degree or another (name me one “nice guy” that was PM for more than a blink of an eye). But what those successful assholes had in common was they had enough appeal outside their base for enough time to last a few terms.
> 
> I am still not convinced that Mr. Pollievre has much appeal outside the Tory base to be successful. I would be happy to be proven wrong, but his embrace of lawless activity and his attack-dog style make me believe that won’t happen. 🤷‍♂️


i wouldn’t put it past PP to start the whole “if I don’t win it’s rigged line”.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Feb 2022)

> name me one “nice guy” that was PM for more than a blink of an eye



Harper.


----------



## RangerRay (17 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Harper.


I like him but face it, he got to the top of the greasy pole and stayed there for as long as he did because he was absolutely ruthless. He was no Joe Clark or Robert Stanfield. Harper just happened to be a quietly competent asshole I liked.


----------



## KevinB (17 Feb 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I like him but face it, he got to the top of the greasy pole and stayed there for as long as he did because he was absolutely ruthless. He was no Joe Clark or Robert Stanfield. Harper just happened to be a quietly competent asshole I liked.


One can be a nice guy and still ruthlessly effective when needed.  
  It’s when one’s just a ruthless asshole that people really go after you.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Feb 2022)

"Asshole" is such a broad term.  But curious what it is about Harper that made him an "asshole"?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (18 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> "Asshole" is such a broad term.  But curious what it is about Harper that made him an "asshole"?


He broke quite a few rice bowels along the way. The changes to the Fisheries Act, killed a thriving cottage industry of biologists writing environmental screening reports, often making very good money doing it, while living in small towns/cities.


----------



## Halifax Tar (18 Feb 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> "Asshole" is such a broad term.  But curious what it is about Harper that made him an "asshole"?



Most people can't tell you why they didn't like Harper... But they sure know they don't like him. 

Just like the EA... People love it!  But have no idea what it means or does.


----------



## Remius (18 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Most people can't tell you why they didn't like Harper... But they sure know they don't like him.
> 
> Just like the EA... People love it!  But have no idea what it means or does.


I didn’t particularly like Harper and I know why I didn’t.  

But what you say is true in a lot of cases.  Lots of of people hate Trudeau but don’t know why either.  But they sure hate him. 

Aside from a few other things I don’t like Trudeau for pretty much the same reasons I didn’t like Harper.


----------



## KevinB (18 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I didn’t particularly like Harper and I know why I didn’t.
> 
> But what you say is true in a lot of cases.  Lots of of people hate Trudeau but don’t know why either.  But they sure hate him.
> 
> Aside from a few other things I don’t like Trudeau for pretty much the same reasons I didn’t like Harper.


I can give you a long list of why I despise JT if you want.


----------



## Dana381 (18 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> I didn’t particularly like Harper and I know why I didn’t.
> 
> But what you say is true in a lot of cases.  Lots of of people hate Trudeau but don’t know why either.  But they sure hate him.
> 
> Aside from a few other things I don’t like Trudeau for pretty much the same reasons I didn’t like Harper.





KevinB said:


> I can give you a long list of why I despise JT if you want.


So can I and I bet our lists look very similar!


----------



## Remius (18 Feb 2022)

Dana381 said:


> So can I and I bet our lists look very similar!


For Trudeau or Harper?


----------



## Remius (18 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> I can give you a long list of why I despise JT if you want.


I don’t really include you in the lots of people that don’t know why they don’t like Trudeau category


----------



## KevinB (18 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> For Trudeau or Harper?


Harper always came off to me as a bit of a Robot, admittedly I generally don't like Politicians period.
    I can't recall when a National Candidate that I liked was running in Canada either though.


----------



## Rifleman62 (18 Feb 2022)

I am currently in Arizona. Many, many Americans do not like Trudeau at all.

They don't like Biden either.


----------



## Remius (18 Feb 2022)

Rifleman62 said:


> I am currently in Arizona. Many, many Americans do not like Trudeau at all.
> 
> They don't like Biden either.


Lol.  No surprise there.  When I was in New Zealand and mused about possibly buying a property there for winter a lady  from Arizona jumped in about all the efling Canadians in Arizona and said to me no thanks.  The kiwi I was talking to told her that it was a good thing we weren’t talking about Arizona and I told her I had no intention of ever moving to Arizona so she could relax.


----------



## QV (18 Feb 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Most people can't tell you why they didn't like Harper... But they sure know they don't like him.
> 
> Just like the EA... People love it!  But have no idea what it means or does.


These are direct results of successful media campaigns. 

"Look at the polls, EA good!" 
"Introvert Harper has an evil hidden agenda!"


----------



## QV (18 Feb 2022)

Rifleman62 said:


> I am currently in Arizona. Many, many Americans do not like Trudeau at all.
> 
> They don't like Biden either.


I am envious. One day, that will be my second home.


----------



## Remius (18 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> These are direct results of successful media campaigns.
> 
> "Look at the polls, EA good!"
> "Introvert Harper has an evil hidden agenda!"


Or, there were legit reasons to dislike him.  It can actually be more than just socks and sweaters vests.


----------



## QV (18 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Or, there were legit reasons to dislike him.  It can actually be more than just socks and sweaters vests.


Anyone can find a reason to dislike someone. In the case of Harper, this was greatly facilitated by the media whom Harper defunded (IIRC). Note the vast difference when Trudeau promised to restore the hundreds of millions in media funding. You can't tell me there was no impact here.


----------



## Remius (18 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> Anyone can find a reason to dislike someone. In the case of Harper, this was greatly facilitated by the media whom Harper defunded (IIRC). Note the vast difference when Trudeau promised to restore the hundreds of millions in media funding. You can't tell me there was no impact here.


Relationship with the media was definitely an issue.  But that works both ways.  The CPC and Harper at the time didn’t exactly endear themselves to the media.


----------



## QV (18 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Relationship with the media was definitely an issue.  But that works both ways.  The CPC and Harper at the time didn’t exactly endear themselves to the media.


Endearment should never be a requirement for reporting the truth.


----------



## Remius (18 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> Endearment should never be a requirement for reporting the truth.


Access and transparency is.  Harper talked a big game but his team wasn’t the most transparent of accessible.  Lots of self inflicted wounds.   Don’t get me wrong, he was accused of a lot of things unjustly.  But that wasn’t navigated very well.


----------



## Brad Sallows (18 Feb 2022)

> Most people can't tell you why they didn't like Harper



I keep asking, because I keep hearing people express that kind of sentiment.  But "asshole" to me has to be personal, not policy.  And it can't be because extroverts don't understand introverts ("cold fish" is a statement of ignorance, not an assessment), or because bunches of people who thought they were so important as to need to be included in every discussion were left out.  I might call PET an asshole for his Salmon Arm Salute, but not because he invoked the WMA or once did an inappropriate pirouette.


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> ... In the case of Harper, this was greatly facilitated by the media whom Harper defunded (IIRC) ...


Team Blue started funding media in 2010 (cable, at that point), but Team Red certainly cranked THAT dial up on its watch.


----------



## QV (18 Feb 2022)

Remius said:


> Access and transparency is.  Harper talked a big game but his team wasn’t the most transparent of accessible.  Lots of self inflicted wounds.   Don’t get me wrong, he was accused of a lot of things unjustly.  But that wasn’t navigated very well.


Is Trudeau more or less transparent than Harper was and has that affected whether he has endeared himself or not?


----------



## Remius (18 Feb 2022)

QV said:


> Is Trudeau more or less transparent than Harper was and has that affected whether he has endeared himself or not?


Of course he isn’t.  His team is more accessible and I don’t see them attacking the media as much.  But transparency is not something I would ascribe to Trudeau or the LPC.


----------



## Kat Stevens (18 Feb 2022)

KevinB said:


> Harper always came off to me as a bit of a Robot, admittedly I generally don't like Politicians period.
> I can't recall when a National Candidate that I liked was running in Canada either though.


Ed Broadbent. The only reason he was not PM for ten years was his chosen party.


----------



## Remius (18 Feb 2022)

Kat Stevens said:


> Ed Broadbent. The only reason he was not PM for ten years was his chosen party.


And he would probably not fit in to the current version of his party.


----------



## Happy Guy (19 Feb 2022)

A friend of mine, who is a CPC member, told me that he has been receiving quite a number of urgent communications from CPC HQ asking for a financial contribution. Apparently the Party can't hold a leadership convention and be prepared to fight a possible election due to a minority government.  He told them no.

At this time, I think that most Parties' financial resources are low and no one would be willing to being about the fall of the government any time soon.


----------



## GK .Dundas (19 Feb 2022)

Someone mentioned Ed Broadbent,not fitting in with his party as it currently stands.I doubt he's fit in with any of them these day.
Ed Broadbent is a gentleman , politicians these days are a collection of well dressed thugs.
By comparison Question Period makes feeding time at the Zoo's monkey house, look dignified.
And I may be insulting the monkeys with the comparison.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (19 Feb 2022)

Happy Guy said:


> A friend of mine, who is a CPC member, told me that he has been receiving quite a number of urgent communications from CPC HQ asking for a financial contribution. Apparently the Party can't hold a leadership convention and be prepared to fight a possible election due to a minority government.  He told them no.
> 
> At this time, I think that most Parties' financial resources are low and no one would be willing to being about the fall of the government any time soon.


it's always an "emergency/crisis" with the CPC fundraising crew. They are likley better off than any other party.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (19 Feb 2022)

GK .Dundas said:


> Someone mentioned Ed Broadbent,not fitting in with his party as it currently stands.I doubt he's fit in with any of them these day.
> Ed Broadbent is a gentleman , politicians these days are a collection of well dressed thugs.
> By comparison Question Period makes feeding time at the Zoo's monkey house, look dignified.
> And I may be insulting the monkeys with the comparison.


My dad was an NDP MLA back in 67, I remember WAC Bennett patting me on the head in the hall of the Legislature and apparently WAS Bennett would have tea with my Grandparents in the Cafeteria. The theatrics were reserved for the chamber.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (19 Feb 2022)

Yup, they never stop asking for money. And I think you right Colin, they always have a substantial war chest ready to be dragged out when needed.


----------



## Navy_Pete (1 Mar 2022)

Man, easy to be a hard ass when you are sitting on the sidelines hoping to take over the opposition, all sounds really easy until you have to do it yourself. Posted both the CBC article plus the original so you can read both. He's not wrong, but don't remember the Harper govt he was part of having any better luck engaging the numerous and overlapping First Nations on the west coast pipeline, so it's a lot more than just 'red tape'.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/pierre-poilievre-eu-ukraine-response-1.6368621

POILIEVRE: Canadian natural gas is the solution to Europe's Russian energy crisis

His face is still inherently punchable though, even when I agree in principle with him. That's a tough hurdle.


----------



## Altair (3 Mar 2022)

Can Jean Charest save the Conservative Party of Canada from itself? - NOW Magazine
					

The CPC would rather avoid a bloodbath that would end up splintering the party further if Charest decides to run for the leadership




					nowtoronto.com
				






> To be sure, Rayes’s resignation and recent moves by interim CPC leader Candice Bergen to bounce the CPC’s only openly gay member, Eric Duncan, as caucus secretary and Alberta MP Michelle Rempel-Garner from her shadow cabinet role after backing O’Toole, clearly points a cementing of the party’s tack further right.
> 
> The current CPC is not the one Charest came _this_ close to leading before falling to Kim Campbell all those years ago. It’s arguably further right of the party Harper’s Reform took over. The odds are further stacked against Charest as Poilievre’s backers push for an early leadership vote in June, which would give potential contenders little time to muster a campaign. It seems like a lost cause.
> 
> But Charest advisor Micheal Coates has been quoted in recent media accounts saying that Charest won’t be intimidated by “spin” among those in the party hierarchy who don’t want Charest to run. Indeed, the CPC would rather avoid a bloodbath that would end up scaring moderates in the fold to the Liberals and splinter the party further. But it seems unavoidable if Charest decides to run.


----------



## RangerRay (3 Mar 2022)

FFS can’t the “moderates” find someone relevant to this century?  This guy is literally yesterday’s man.  If he runs I predict he will either go down in flames or alienate everyone west of Manitoba 🤦‍♂️


----------



## Altair (3 Mar 2022)

RangerRay said:


> FFS can’t the “moderates” find someone relevant to this century?  This guy is literally yesterday’s man.  If he runs I predict he will either go down in flames or alienate everyone west of Manitoba 🤦‍♂️


Name another moderate who had the funds and the patience to run?

Chong ran before, didnt do well.

Ambrose wants nothing to do with it.

Mackay is done.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Mar 2022)

> or alienate everyone west of Manitoba.



I think you misspelled ‘East’.


----------



## RangerRay (3 Mar 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> I think you misspelled ‘East’.


Do you think Charest would alienate everyone east of Manitoba?   The only ones I see pushing for him to go are from the Laurentiens.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Mar 2022)

RangerRay said:


> Do you think Charest would alienate everyone east of Manitoba?   The only ones I see pushing for him to go are from the Laurentiens.


Ah, I thought you meant Poilièvre.  Didn’t realize Charest was over the hill, but if Poilièvre is as old as they want, I think CPC better work some expectation management…perma-opposition probably as good as it’ll get…


----------



## RangerRay (3 Mar 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Ah, I thought you meant Poilièvre.  Didn’t realize Charest was over the hill, but if Poilièvre is as old as they want, I think CPC better work some expectation management…perma-opposition probably as good as it’ll get…


I won’t disagree with you about Pollievre. I don’t see him winning over the suburban voters that the party needs to attract. All the people I want to see run are long shots or won’t go near the party with a 10 foot meat hook. 😕


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Mar 2022)

Maybe Tim Houston is young enough.


----------



## Scott (4 Mar 2022)

Right now Charest is the only one I'd consider voting for. He's in his sixties, far from over the hill. 

Leave Houston where he is a few years!


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Mar 2022)

Scott said:


> Right now Charest is the only one I'd consider voting for. He's in his sixties, far from over the hill.
> 
> Leave Houston where he is a few years!


That would be my plan too, if I were a conservative who want to see socially progressive, fiscally responsible government in Canada at some point during this century.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Mar 2022)

If things go well here, NS, Houston is the future in my mind.  For red tory like myself.


----------



## Happy Guy (4 Mar 2022)

I'm not a political scientist and to be honest I don't earnestly follow the minutiae details of Cdn politics.  From what little that I know or think that I understand, I do have the following questions:
How/when to did the CPC moved further to the right of the political spectrum? Are they out of sync with the views of the Cdn mainstream or is this simply a regional difference or perhaps rural vs urban split?  
What happened to the socially progressive, fiscally conservative/responsible members of the CPC?  
How did the socially conservative members gain control of the party? Or they simply more vocal?

I believe that the majority of Cdns (perhaps concentrated in the urban centres) do support : LGBT rights; responsible spending - balanced budget and pay down debt; free trade (incl between Provinces); less government bureaucracy; tax reform; individual freedoms; free speech; support for small businesses; and so forth.   I guess this means me a Red Tory or bluish reddish Tory.

Cheers


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Mar 2022)

Yes, and yes.


----------



## QV (4 Mar 2022)

Happy Guy said:


> I'm not a political scientist and to be honest I don't earnestly follow the minutiae details of Cdn politics.  From what little that I know or think that I understand, I do have the following questions:
> How/when to did the CPC moved further to the right of the political spectrum? Are they out of sync with the views of the Cdn mainstream or is this simply a regional difference or perhaps rural vs urban split?
> What happened to the socially progressive, fiscally conservative/responsible members of the CPC?
> How did the socially conservative members gain control of the party? Or they simply more vocal?
> ...



They didn't move further right, they stayed about the same. The LPC moved further left.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> They didn't move further right, they stayed about the same. The LPC moved further left.



You're half right.  The PCs have gone further right as the Liberals pushed further left. 

The votes are in the centre.


----------



## QV (4 Mar 2022)

What policy or platform is further right than before?


----------



## GK .Dundas (4 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> They didn't move further right, they stayed about the same. The LPC moved further left.


I quite frankly think that both happened.
One gets the impression from more then a few CPC members they 'd much rather be ideologically pure then in Government .
However  once, God ordains their ascension to power all of us lesser types will pay for our transgressions.  I have actually met one or two like this.
Where did all the centrists go ? _sigh_


----------



## Altair (4 Mar 2022)

GK .Dundas said:


> I quite frankly think that both happened.
> One gets the impression from more then a few CPC members they 'd much rather be ideologically pure then in Government .
> However  once, God ordains their ascension to power all of us lesser types will pay for our transgressions.  I have actually met one or two like this.
> Where did all the centrists go ? _sigh_


The center is smaller than one thinks.

There are a lot of centrists voters, but they are camped in the LPC or CPC and not as many swing from one or the other as people think.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> What policy or platform is further right than before?



Not everything has to do with policy.  Especially when campaign platforms and policy announcements are just empty platitudes like they are today. 

Perception = Truth now.  When the CPC finally understand that it will decide whether it wants to win nomination races or elections. 

The CPC needs to shed the perception that abortion rights and LGBTQ+ rights will be under threat if they are elected.  It needs a coherent and practical environmental policy.  It needs to show its not anti-immigration.  One thing we should do is take up the torch for electoral reform. 

Lastly it needs to take the initiative from the opposition.  And that comes by putting forth good policy that relates and resonates to the whole country and not just one area,  but mostly it comes from not continually holding party votes on things like the issues held above and putting forth a coherent and positive alternative that includes all geo areas of the country.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> The center is smaller than one thinks.
> 
> There are a lot of centrists voters, but they are camped in the LPC or CPC and not as many swing from one or the other as people think.



I disagree.  I think the center is vast.  I think the issue is the CPC has lost narrative and instead of providing positive and reasonable alternative it wails about JT in Black Face or groping allegations.  The let the Liberals get them worked up and them they become incoherent babbling fringe right wingers.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Mar 2022)

Everyone else slid "left".  Recall that SSM was not in contemplation, until suddenly it was.  Essentially similar to what happened in the US (progressive views shifting much more than conservative views).  Between two political frames of reference looking at each other, neither can tell which is moving without an external reference point.  So pick some issues and see who has moved on them.


----------



## Happy Guy (4 Mar 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I disagree.  I think the center is vast.  I think the issue is the CPC has lost narrative and instead of providing positive and reasonable alternative it wails about JT in Black Face or groping allegations.  The let the Liberals get them worked up and them they become incoherent babbling fringe right wingers.


In the last election, O'Toole published a platform that I thought was reasonable, well presented and sustainable. Unfortunately he shot himself in the foot by changing positions during the campaign and the message became muddled and confusing.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Mar 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> You're half right.  The *PCs CPC* have gone further right as the Liberals pushed further left *and took a significant chunk of the ‘less-right’ Ex-PCs with them*.
> 
> The votes are in the centre.


IMO, of course.


----------



## Remius (7 Mar 2022)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1501015054581481481
Well here we go.


----------



## OldSolduer (7 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1501015054581481481
> Well here we go.


Really? Wow I did not expect that.


----------



## Scott (8 Mar 2022)

Charest. Wow. 

I may just get a party membership again to vote for him.


----------



## Remius (8 Mar 2022)

Scott said:


> Charest. Wow.
> 
> I may just get a party membership again to vote for him.


I think he’s electable nationally.  I’m just not sure the party will pick him.


----------



## Scott (8 Mar 2022)

He governed while a member of a party with the name liberal in it. Some won't be able to get past that.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (8 Mar 2022)

Scott said:


> He governed while a member of a party with the name liberal in it. Some won't be able to get past that.


I’d vote for him.


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Mar 2022)

Scott said:


> He governed while a member of a party with the name liberal in it. Some won't be able to get past that.


You mean some will be so myopic as to not appreciate the insight he would have dealing with Justin and his Liberal GenZ’ers… 😉 

A loss for responsible progressive conservatism, if that happens. 

Time to flood Team Blue with reasonable members…


----------



## Scott (8 Mar 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I’d vote for him.


Me too.


----------



## Halifax Tar (8 Mar 2022)

I'd vote for him.  But I have big doubts he will win a leadership race.


----------



## Remius (8 Mar 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I'd vote for him.  Buy I have big doubts he will win a leadership race.


Same.  But we’ll see.


----------



## RangerRay (8 Mar 2022)

I am hoping Peter McKay gets in. I don’t think Charest can win the leadership and I don’t think Pollievre can appeal to enough non- party members to win a federal election.  Despite the smears, McKay is no “red Tory”. He’s just not a bible-thumping angry white guy. 

Tasha Kheiriddin looks interesting. Always enjoyed her writing and media hits, but I don’t think she has any experience in elected office.  Michelle Remple-Garner should run. Not sure why she’s sitting out. I would love to see Rona Ambrose run, but I also want a unicorn too.


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Mar 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I'd vote for him.  But I have big doubts he will win a leadership race.


It will be a pivotal moment to see whether the Party membership is interested in truly governing, or just providing a steady stream of opposition leaders…


----------



## RangerRay (8 Mar 2022)

Something for the next Tory leader to be aware of. 









						Melanie Paradis: Thought scams are eating our brains, and dividing our country
					

Conservatives need to be part of the solution. Thus far, we're part of the problem.




					theline.substack.com
				




“Conspiracies have found more fertile ground on the right. We Conservatives have a moral responsibility to call this out, not dog whistle to it. Yet as noted here recently by Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner, that’s exactly what too many Conservatives have done, with little or no consequences. This isn’t good for the party, and worse, it’s hurting our country.”


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Mar 2022)

Self-critical thought is not high on the list of activities of many…instead choosing to take a wave top view if things presented and not validate with varied sources to either support or refute.


----------



## QV (8 Mar 2022)

Would someone mind explaining why Charest would be the CPC leader of choice?


----------



## Remius (8 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> Would someone mind explaining why Charest would be the CPC leader of choice?


A few things come to mind.

1. He’s moderate fiscal Conservative
2. He can get the Quebec vote or some of it.  He can probably increase the seat count there 
3. He is claiming he can get a pipeline through Quebec.  Not sure he can but he’s probably better placed to get that done. 
4. He has experience in various ministerial portfolios including having been Deputy PM. 
5. He’s not Pierre Poilievre 
6. He can likely unite the party
7. He has experience at the provincial level and with inter provincial issues including being Premier.
8. He’s an effective communicator that can get a CPC message out better than what we have seen in recent years.


That’s doesn’t mean he doesn’t have his past issues though.  

I think he’s electable.  I’m just not sure the CPC has the current level of maturity to pick him.


----------



## QV (8 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> A few things come to mind.
> 
> 1. He’s moderate fiscal Conservative
> 2. He can get the Quebec vote or some of it.  He can probably increase the seat count there
> ...


I'd be concerned he would shed votes from the West, the question is would his gains in the East make up for that?


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> I'd be concerned he would shed votes from the West, the question is would his gains in the East make up for that?


‘Conservative’ math says quite reasonably yes.  There is likely going to be CPC bleed to the PPC anyway in the West.


----------



## FJAG (8 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> I'd be concerned he would shed votes from the West, the question is would his gains in the East make up for that?


I wouldn't be.

Long time conservative here who is fed up with the membership from the West. The problem with the party has little to do with who is the actual leader but more to do with the contortions the incumbent leader has to go through to keep the western wing placated. That hinders the party nationally.

The trouble right now is that the social conservatives have too large a voice within the party. Tell them to shut up and suck it up. What are they gonna do? Vote NDP? Let the PPC have them; then they'll be their problem.

🍻


----------



## FSTO (8 Mar 2022)

FJAG said:


> I wouldn't be.
> 
> Long time conservative here who is fed up with the membership from the West. The problem with the party has little to do with who is the actual leader but more to do with the contortions the incumbent leader has to go through to keep the western wing placated. That hinders the party nationally.
> 
> ...


I think PP is too effective as an attack dog and would have a hard time pivoting to the role of leader. That's where Charest would be the moderate face while PP continues to get under the skin of the Liberals. Shelia Copps could never shed the image of the screaming banshee and I think PP is in the same mold.

The CPC can loose a large percentage of the vote out west. Its the Social Conservatives of Ontario and Quebec who moved to the PPC that cost the CPC a few seats out east.


----------



## QV (8 Mar 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> ‘Conservative’ math says quite reasonably yes.  There is likely going to be CPC bleed to the PPC anyway in the West.


I'd be ok with a Charest CPC in government, with a PPC to the CPC like the NDP is to the LPC.


----------



## RangerRay (8 Mar 2022)

FJAG said:


> The trouble right now is that the social conservatives have too large a voice within the party. Tell them to shut up and suck it up. What are they gonna do? Vote NDP? Let the PPC have them; then they'll be their problem.
> 
> 🍻


IMHO, I would change that to any conservative who has abandoned liberalism in the broad sense. I am sure there are social conservatives that haven’t abandoned liberal values and they shouldn’t be hounded out.   Generally, these social conservatives know that a political party that wishes to govern must reflect the values of the broader society, and influencing society to share their values must be done outside politics. 

The opposite of liberalism isn’t conservatism, but illiberalism.  IMO illiberalism doesn’t belong in the CPC.


----------



## Remius (8 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> I'd be ok with a Charest CPC in government, with a PPC to the CPC like the NDP is to the LPC.


I think that is a realistic scenario.  Assuming he is picked as leader.  I’m sure he has enough contacts and networks to make him competitive.  What could hurt Poilievre is someone like Lewis who would steal some votes from him.  I mean realistically she could come up the center like O’toole and Scheer did.


----------



## GR66 (8 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> A few things come to mind.
> 
> 1. He’s moderate fiscal Conservative
> 2. He can get the Quebec vote or some of it.  He can probably increase the seat count there
> ...


Past corruption investigations against his provincial political party as well as his role as an advisor for Huawei on the Meng case may work against him.

As far as I recall he wasn't the most popular politician while Premier of Quebec...some of his electoral success was likely as much as poor opposition choices as support for him.  To be honest hi might end up being more popular in Ontario/the Atlantic than in Quebec in a federal election.


----------



## Navy_Pete (8 Mar 2022)

FSTO said:


> I think PP is too effective as an attack dog and would have a hard time pivoting to the role of leader. That's where Charest would be the moderate face while PP continues to get under the skin of the Liberals. Shelia Copps could never shed the image of the screaming banshee and I think PP is in the same mold.
> 
> The CPC can loose a large percentage of the vote out west. Its the Social Conservatives of Ontario and Quebec who moved to the PPC that cost the CPC a few seats out east.


PP is a pretty love him/hate him kind of guy and that Sheila Copps comparison is a great one for the same reasons. May be an effective MP, and a good role as opposition, but ultimately a lot of people would vote against them (instead of voting for the other person).

Even when I agree with the basics of what PP is saying, I still want to punch him in the face, and don't trust him on a visceral level. It will be a frosty day in hell with the Leafs hoisting the cup before I vote for a PC party with him at the helm. Lots of non-punchable and competent options though but don't see this being anything other than yet another CPC opposition party with him in charge. So unless they happen to put a really good candidate in my riding I would keep looking for the 'least worst' option in the remaining pool come election time


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Mar 2022)

I won’t say punchable, but not honest.  

During the last elections (the complete waste of 2/3 BILLION CANADIAN DOLLARS driven by someone showing extremely narcissistic behaviour), one of PP’s canvassers came
Up to our front door, tucked a pamphlet in the handle without ringing the doorbell, and rushed down the drive to the next house…pamphlet says, “Sorry you were out!  I dropped by to let you know how I could keep representing you after this election….blah, blah, blah…”

He wasn’t there, and his minion didn’t even check to see that we were home to chat, at least as a representative of PP.

Maybe some don’t think this anything beyond campaigning SOPs, but the fact that the pamphlet was written as though PP himself had come to the door, but with no answer, in my books shows a LM underlaying dishonesty in making one’s case.


----------



## brihard (8 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> I'd be concerned he would shed votes from the West, the question is would his gains in the East make up for that?



CPC could safely shed many votes out west without impacting their seat count, especially if those votes are shed from the right edge where there is no viable contender to pick them up.



QV said:


> I'd be ok with a Charest CPC in government, with a PPC to the CPC like the NDP is to the LPC.



Difference being the NDP don’t need to go to IKEA in order to pick up seats.


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> CPC could safely shed many votes out west without impacting their seat count, especially if those votes are shed from the right edge where there is no viable contender to pick them up.
> 
> 
> 
> Difference being the NDP don’t need to go to IKEA in order to pick up seats.



Don't underestimate the power of a cool, Franco smooth talker to convince urban Westerners to support the cause.

Like, you know, Trudeau


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Mar 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> Don't underestimate the power of a cool, Franco smooth talker to convince urban Westerners to support the cause.
> 
> Like, you know, Trudeau


----------



## Altair (10 Mar 2022)

PP would kill the PPC. 

Wouldn't win an election, but would kill the PPC.


----------



## Navy_Pete (10 Mar 2022)

% of popular vote doesn't matter though, it's the # of seats. Charest might have slightly less %, but if it's in the right ridings, may make a minority Government.

PP likely has higher support in existing CPC ridings, but really doesn't mean anything if they are just the opposition again.


----------



## Altair (10 Mar 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> % of popular vote doesn't matter though, it's the # of seats. Charest might have slightly less %, but if it's in the right ridings, may make a minority Government.
> 
> PP likely has higher support in existing CPC ridings, but really doesn't mean anything if they are just the opposition again.


I don't think the CPC is going to pick PP based on electability. 

It would be based on his ability to bash Trudeau.


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Mar 2022)

38% nationally is roughly the floor for a majority for conservatives.  Need a leader who can at least hit that.


----------



## Altair (10 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> 38% nationally is roughly the floor for a majority for conservatives.  Need a leader who can at least hit that.


Where do the CPC find that leader?


----------



## Halifax Tar (10 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> Where do the CPC find that leader?



Probably not where there currently looking.


----------



## Remius (10 Mar 2022)

Keep in mind that this is all with the expectation that JT is running.  I don’t think he is.  For a variety of reasons. 

So it would also depend on who would be leading the LPC.


----------



## Dana381 (10 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> Keep in mind that this is all with the expectation that JT is running.  I don’t think he is.  For a variety of reasons.
> 
> So it would also depend on who would be leading the LPC.



Interesting, I guess I just assumed he would run again. What make you think he won't?


----------



## Altair (10 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> Keep in mind that this is all with the expectation that JT is running.  I don’t think he is.  For a variety of reasons.
> 
> So it would also depend on who would be leading the LPC.


The man says he will, there is no sign of a palace coup, and the CPC have not shown they can win.

If Trudeau wins the next election he ties for most election wins for a prime minister. There also isnt a great time for a leadership contest in a minority government.

He is going to run again.


----------



## Remius (10 Mar 2022)

Dana381 said:


> Interesting, I guess I just assumed he would run again. What make you think he won't?


I think the last election made him a bit dejected.  Two minorities in a row.  He’s taken a lot of flak on a plenty of files and there are a few small cracks in the party that suggests his standing is weakened.  

His little surfing trip was no accident.  It was an FU to the country that didn’t give him a majority. And he seems to hide or disappear a lot with uncomfortable situations.

I suspect that he plans on leaving on a high note and not a loss.  It wouldn’t shock me to see him make an announcement at some point between now and Xmas.  Set up a leadership campaign and have someone ready to go for the next election.

He may also be waiting to see who he might face before making that decision though.

I think the LPC is and has been grooming Chrystia Freeland to take over.


----------



## Remius (10 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> The man says he will, there is no sign of a palace coup, and the CPC have not shownnthey can win.
> 
> If Trudeau wins the next election he ties for most election wins for a prime minister. There also isnt a great time for a leadership contest in a minority government.
> 
> He is going to run again.


I don’t think it’s a coup.  I think its him not want to be a loser.  Go out a winner.  It’s pure self interest.


----------



## Altair (10 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> I don’t think it’s a coup.  I think its him not want to be a loser.  Go out a winner.  It’s pure self interest.


Just so you know, and you can block me now if you want, but I have a habit of reminding people of their awful hot takes months if not years later.


----------



## Remius (10 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> Just so you know, and you can block me now if you want, but I have a habit of reminding people of their awful hot takes months if not years later.


I could care less about your I told you so crap.  You get it wrong a lot and never admit when you are wrong or change your original line of thought to make you feel like you were right when you weren’t.  So “shrug”. 

I’m giving you my opinion on whether I think he’ll run or not.  I don’t think he will.  If he does, no big deal.  You can have a party for being right.  I won’t care and move on to whether he can win or not depending on who the CPC leader is. 

Oh, I have a no block policy.  It’s childish.


----------



## Halifax Tar (10 Mar 2022)

I think JT will run, and he will win another minority and that will be his last election. 

I think he's just about the worst person to be and most divisive PM we've ever had.  But I'm sure hes tired and would rather not put up with the BS anymore.  

To sum up, 1 more and hes done.


----------



## QV (10 Mar 2022)

Probably the worst PM in Canadian history.


----------



## Altair (10 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> Probably the worst PM in Canadian history.


Must suck for the CPC to keep losing to the "worst PM in Canadian History".


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Mar 2022)

Sometimes a dog has a day.  I suppose it sucked when the great intellects of the LPC of the day (Dion, Ignatieff) fell to Harper.


----------



## suffolkowner (10 Mar 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I think JT will run, and he will win another minority and that will be his last election.
> 
> I think he's just about the worst person to be and most divisive PM we've ever had.  But I'm sure hes tired and would rather not put up with the BS anymore.
> 
> To sum up, 1 more and hes done.



I agree that he will run and probably win another minority. I also think the man is highly questionable from an ethical and moral standpoint but I'm not sold on the divisive part


Brad Sallows said:


> Sometimes a dog has a day.  I suppose it sucked when the great intellects of the LPC of the day (Dion, Ignatieff) fell to Harper.


The liberals had to lick their wounds until they hit on the winning show pony. The conservatives just need to find the right person from an electability standpoint. I don't know how Charest wins a leadership contest unless he manages to sign up a ton of new members. Is that allowed still? Pierre would seem to have an easier time winning the party leadership but I'm not sure how electable he is nationally. 

The dark horse here has to be Patrick Brown a phenominal organiser and fundraiser that is very popular among the Punjabi population so much so that he was able to become Mayor of Brampton while under the cloud of sexual misconduct allegations when he wasn't even from Brampton. He could maybe provide that breakthrough the CPC is looking for. He might not be the best from an ethical standpoint or even from sheer intelligence but I think he's pretty good at finding good ideas from those around him

As an aside I've met Stephane Dion a few times and always found him to be pretty sharp and was very impressed with the conversations we had


----------



## Altair (10 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Sometimes a dog has a day.  I suppose it sucked when the great intellects of the LPC of the day (Dion, Ignatieff) fell to Harper.


It did.

Although I think everyone was aware that Dion and Ignatieff were wet noodles as leaders.

The assumption was it didnt matter who was leader of the LPC so long as everyone hated Harper as much as progressives did. The same mistake the CPC is making now.


----------



## lenaitch (10 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> Probably the worst PM in Canadian history.


Such a subjective statement, often couched in ideological terms rather than some kind of performance parameters.  Even efforts to somehow employ objective measures end up with results all over the map depending on what guideposts are used.  I mean, we've had 23; is he being compared with, say Diefenbaker or Bowell?


----------



## brihard (10 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> Just so you know, and you can block me now if you want, but I have a habit of reminding people of their awful hot takes months if not years later.


Everyone knows of your habit and nobody gives a shit.


----------



## Dana381 (10 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> Must suck for the CPC to keep losing to the "worst PM in Canadian History".



But they didn't actually lose, CPC won the popular vote both times but thank to FPTP system LPC won. If I was Trudeau I would be worried that the next try would not go so nice.


----------



## Altair (10 Mar 2022)

Dana381 said:


> But they didn't actually lose, CPC won the popular vote both times but thank to FPTP system LPC won. If I was Trudeau I would be worried that the next try would not go so nice.


Two things.

*1st thing*

What system could be used that the CPC would have won?

*2nd thing*

Running up the vote in places like Alberta where they are going to win every seat anyways isn't a great strategy under FPTP, but winning the popular vote is a nice participation trophy I suppose.


----------



## Dana381 (10 Mar 2022)

My point was that more Canadians placed their x beside the CPC than the LPC candidate. That says that the election was closer than the seat count would suggest. If i was in Trudeau's shoes that would make me nervous about trying again.


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> What system could be used that the CPC would have won?


The one that your glorious leader promised in 2015, then fuddle-duddled everyone who took him at his word.   

Comme père, comme fils…


----------



## brihard (10 Mar 2022)

Dana381 said:


> But they didn't actually lose, CPC won the popular vote both times but thank to FPTP system LPC won. If I was Trudeau I would be worried that the next try would not go so nice.


They did not elect a plurality or majority of members of parliament. They did not form government. Therefore they lost. The ‘popular vote’ argument is as stupid when the Conservatives up here use it now as it was when the Democrats in the US used it after 2016. What a victory is depends on the system in question. The Liberals elected the most members of Parliament and have been able to run a stable minority government by retaining the confidence of the House. The Conservatives’ goal was to form government, and they didn’t. That’s a loss. Forming official opposition could be argued a win for the NDP or Bloc based on where they otherwise land, but it’s simply not a claim the other viable contender for government can make.


----------



## Altair (10 Mar 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> The one that your glorious leader promised in 2015, then fuddle-duddled everyone who took him at his word.
> 
> Comme père, comme fils…


Ranked ballot? Do the CPC come ahead of the LPC or NDP in terms of second votes?

PR? Does the PM not have enough dance partners in the NDP and BLOC to govern/get a coalition? 

MMP? Same as PR?

FPTP is the best shot the CPC has at winning an election.


----------



## Dana381 (10 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> They did not elect a plurality or majority of members of parliament. They did not form government. Therefore they lost. The ‘popular vote’ argument is as stupid when the Conservatives up here use it now as it was when the Democrats in the US used it after 2016. What a victory is depends on the system in question. The Liberals elected the most members of Parliament and have been able to run a stable minority government by retaining the confidence of the House. The Conservatives’ goal was to form government, and they didn’t. That’s a loss. Forming official opposition could be argued a win for the NDP or Bloc based on where they otherwise land, but it’s simply not a claim the other viable contender for government can make.



I'm not arguing any of what you said. The CPC lost fair and square. The popular vote does however show that the election was closer than it appeared.


----------



## brihard (10 Mar 2022)

Dana381 said:


> I'm not arguing any of what you said. The CPC lost fair and square. The popular vote does however show that the election was closer than it appeared.


Ok. You went from “didn’t actually lose” to “lost fair and square”, so we aren’t disagreed on that point anymore.

The CPC face the perennial challenge of vote efficiency. The LPC are better at getting just enough in more places. The CPC court the prairies way too heavily, and lose out to the rapidly diminishing rate of return that comes from pandering to the social conservative element. They need to wrap their heads around if they want to govern again. I friggin’ wish they’d get a move on doing so.


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Mar 2022)

Dana381 said:


> I'm not arguing any of what you said. The CPC lost fair and square. The popular vote does however show that the election was closer than it appeared.


There is no denying that the LPC has figured out just how much ‘tactical win’ it needs in each riding to get the seat.  Most seats generally gets to makes the pitch to the GH to form the government. 

That said, it’s also quite true to say that the greatest amount of Canadians voted for the conservatives.   That and $1.91 will get yours Timmies large double-double…


----------



## Navy_Pete (10 Mar 2022)

If only the CPC had a chance to reform the electoral system....

They continue to lose because they are stuck in the same failing strategy of courting the outliers. I think the pandering to the freedumb convoy will come back to bite them in the ass next time they go to the polls as well in the form of shots of their MPs with someone with a confederate or similar flag behind them.

I really don't get it, committing harder to a failing strategy won't make it work better. I figured an opportunistic career politician would have figured that out before jumping on the bonfire, but I've resigned myself to the CPC being the Leafs of federal politics who excel at seizing defeat from the jaws of victory. Maybe this year will be the year!


----------



## Dana381 (10 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> Ok. You went from “didn’t actually lose” to “lost fair and square”, so we aren’t disagreed on that point anymore.
> 
> The CPC face the perennial challenge of vote efficiency. The LPC are better at getting just enough in more places. The CPC court the prairies way too heavily, and lose out to the rapidly diminishing rate of return that comes from pandering to the social conservative element. They need to wrap their heads around if they want to govern again. I friggin’ wish they’d get a move on doing so.



You are right, what I meant when I said that they didn't actually lose is that they won more votes. I realize that our system is flawed, but all systems are flawed in one way or another. I didn't mean to re-open the debate of the fairness of the election and I should have been more clear.

 My point was and still is the vote results show that the election was closer than the seat count indicates and he has to be considering that when his is considering re-offering.


----------



## Altair (10 Mar 2022)

Dana381 said:


> You are right, what I meant when I said that they didn't actually lose is that they won more votes. I realize that our system is flawed, but all systems are flawed in one way or another. I didn't mean to re-open the debate of the fairness of the election and I should have been more clear.
> 
> My point was and still is the vote results show that the election was closer than the seat count indicates and he has to be considering that when his is considering re-offering.


The election was closer than the vote result shows, but not in the way youre thinking.

Liberals needed 10 more seats to hit 170.

1
Charleswood-St. James-Assiniboia-Headingley

CPC 17,336-LPC 17,312=34

2
NL
Coast of Bays-Central-Notre Dame

CPC 14,925-LPC 14,661= 264

3
Châteauguay-Lacolle

BQ 18,368-LPC 17,762=602

4
King-Vaughan

CPC 22,529-LPC 21,457=1022

5
Longueuil-Saint-Hubert

BQ 23,579-LPC 21,930=1,649

6
South Surrey-White Rock

CPC 24,176-LPC 22,164=2,012

7
Edmonton Mill Woods

CPC 18,248- LPC 16,499=1,749

8
South Shore-St. Margarets

CPC 20,444- LPC 18,527=1,917

9
Peterborough-Kawartha

CPC 27,301-LPC 24,564=2,737

10
Niagara Falls

CPC 23,650-LPC 23,650=3,160

34+264+602+1,022+1,649 +2,012+1,749+1,917 +2,737+3,160= 15,146 to tie the winner of these riding. 1 more each to win it.

15156 votes away from 170 seats. All the LPC technically needed was their percentage of the popular vote to go from 32.6 to 32.7 and they are in government for 4 years. And don't think for a second the LPC doesn't know this. They will be targeting these ridings with everything they have next election.

Now if Justin Trudeau knows he is 20k votes away from a majority government, why would he not run again?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Mar 2022)

Charest, if he runs, will not lead the CPC.
Poliviere can beat trudeau handily.
Freeland has already been chosen by WEF to be trudeau's replacement.
Poliviere can beat freeland easier than beating trudeau.
Singh hitched his wagon to the wrong horse and his party is going to suffer for it.
Once things settle down a bit, lots of info on how the world was scammed will follow. It has already started. Politicians that fumbled, stumbled and showed no backbone during the pandemic are all finished. They have been judged and found wanting. trudeau's venture into the world of an authoritarian fascist has not endeared him to the populace or that of the world. Democratic world leaders want nothing to do with him. Neither do Canadians. Any political capitol he carried has been spent and his IOU's are worthless. He screwed up WEF's social credit card rollout when he made banks the bad guys in the protest for seizing assets and made Canadians lose trust in our banking system, which is needed to move us to a cashless society. Klaus Schwab is not happy with Skippy right now. He's pushed gas to $10/gallon. He has bankrupted the  country, our economy, our welfare, our way of life and our morals. His passport is the only thing that makes this globalist Paris Hilton a Canadian.


----------



## Altair (11 Mar 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Charest, if he runs, will not lead the CPC.
> Poliviere can beat trudeau handily.
> Freeland has already been chosen by WEF to be trudeau's replacement.
> Poliviere can beat freeland easier than beating trudeau.
> ...


Nice to know Doug Ford and Jason Kenney are done then


----------



## Remius (11 Mar 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Charest, if he runs, will not lead the CPC.
> Poliviere can beat trudeau handily.
> Poliviere can beat freeland easier than beating trudeau.
> Singh hitched his wagon to the wrong horse and his party is going to suffer for it.


I’ll stick to the following you stated…

For Charest, i think you are right.  He won’t win the leadership.  But I suspect if does run, it will highlight how badly split the CPC is and the campaign will do a lot of dirty work for the LPC to exploit.  I think it will be a dirty campaign that Poilievre will seek to exploit at the lowest levels of political discourse.  It’s already started.

If a moderate CPC leader couldn’t beat Trudeau, I doubt that Poillievre can.

I doubt he can beat Freeland either.

Singh can lose seats and still manage to frame it as a win.  His party isn’t going anywhere and will still prop up the liberals like they always do.  A liberal minority might as well be a majority with the NDP holding the balance. 

Oh, “Skippy” is legit the nickname Poilivre had for a while on the hill.









						‘Skippy’ aka MP Pierre Poilievre has sunk to new low
					

Over the course of his short, less than stellar political career, Nepean-Carleton MP Pierre Poilievre has said a number of silly and really foolish things.




					ottawasun.com


----------



## mariomike (11 Mar 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> I think the pandering to the freedumb convoy will come back to bite them in the ass next time they go to the polls as well in the form of shots of their MPs with someone with a confederate or similar flag behind them.



I think you may be right.



Navy_Pete said:


> I've resigned myself to the CPC being the Leafs of federal politics who excel at seizing defeat from the jaws of victory. Maybe this year will be the year!



That's an interesting comparison! 



Remius said:


> If a moderate CPC leader couldn’t beat Trudeau, I doubt that Poillievre can.





Remius said:


> I doubt he can beat Freeland either.



Have to wait and see.



Altair said:


> 15156 votes away from 170 seats. All the LPC technically needed was their percentage of the popular vote to go from 32.6 to 32.7 and they are in government for 4 years. And don't think for a second the LPC doesn't know this. They will be targeting these ridings with everything they have next election.
> 
> Now if Justin Trudeau knows he is 20k votes away from a majority government, why would he not run again?



Interesting question.


----------



## Haggis (11 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> The election was closer than the vote result shows, but not in the way you're thinking.
> 
> Liberals needed 10 more seats to hit 170.
> ...
> ...


He can attempt to call an election at any time if he feels the conditions are right for him to get a majority.


----------



## Remius (11 Mar 2022)

Haggis said:


> He can attempt to call an election at any time if he feels the conditions are right for him to get a majority.


He tried last time.  And wasted everyone’s time.  I don’t think he will make a good calculation next time either. 

He’s won two back to back minority governments.  If he runs I have no doubt he can win.  It just depends on who he is facing.  

I’m willing to concede that a PP led CPC would be the best scenario for him to get a majority. 

But as always and as we have seen, campaigns matter.


----------



## Haggis (11 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> He tried last time.  And wasted everyone’s time.  I don’t think he will make a good calculation next time either.
> 
> He’s won two back to back minority governments.  If he runs I have no doubt he can win.  It just depends on who he is facing.


So, against Bergin he would probably win a crushing majority.


----------



## Navy_Pete (11 Mar 2022)

The only reason I can see Trudeau not running is how hard this has been on his family and marriage, as there is really no credible threat to another LPC minority.

Anyone who thinks PP is the solution doesn't pay attention to how polarising his attack dog style is or how thin his resume really is. The guy has been an MP for a long time, but outside of some soundbites in the house and on committees, but the only thing he ever seems to have accomplished was introduce the 'Fair Elections Act' which really just added in a bunch of voter restrictions and restrict what the chief electoral officers could do, so was a pretty US republican style voter suppression bill designed to combat the non-existant electoral fraud.

Given that he was minister for electoral reform for a year, really don't want to hear anyone complain about how the system doesn't favour the CPCs.

Guy came out of uni, became an MP at 25 but rates himself as a populist, man of the people, despite never having had a real job. Classic 'kid in short pants' that is trying to position himself as a credible leader when his only life experience is within the rose coloured halls of Parliament and disassociated from reality. Probably fit in perfectly with the inflated egos at TBS though.

So if JT 'just wasn't ready' or 'wasn't experienced' what is this guy? Skippy just seems like Scheer 2.0, but possibly more annoying. Sounds like a real recipe for electoral success....


----------



## Halifax Tar (11 Mar 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> The only reason I can see Trudeau not running is how hard this has been on his family and marriage, as there is really no credible threat to another LPC minority.
> 
> Anyone who thinks PP is the solution doesn't pay attention to how polarising his attack dog style is or how thin his resume really is. The guy has been an MP for a long time, but outside of some soundbites in the house and on committees, but the only thing he ever seems to have accomplished was introduce the 'Fair Elections Act' which really just added in a bunch of voter restrictions and restrict what the chief electoral officers could do, so was a pretty US republican style voter suppression bill designed to combat the non-existant electoral fraud.
> 
> ...



You've hit the nail on the head.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (11 Mar 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> The only reason I can see Trudeau not running is how hard this has been on his family and marriage,


Marriage??    I think living with another woman pretty much did that one in.....


----------



## Altair (11 Mar 2022)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Marriage??    I think living with another woman pretty much did that one in.....


Proof of this?


----------



## Altair (11 Mar 2022)

Haggis said:


> He can attempt to call an election at any time if he feels the conditions are right for him to get a majority.


He could, except Canadians are not fans of being dragged off to the polls for purely partisan reasons.

Woe to any party that forces an election it seems. Justin Trudeau will bide his time, and probably do his full mandate before making that mistake again, if the opposition lets him of course.

But the math remains, can he hold on to what he has while finding another 15156 votes spread evenly though those 10 ridings?  Another 100k votes overall in ontario, the maritimes and quebec should be enough to grab what he missed.

So if the political winds are in his sails, hes 10 seats and a stone throw away in votes away from a majority, i think hes a shoe in to run again.


----------



## Brad Sallows (11 Mar 2022)

So what's the standard for a thick resume?  Trudeau?


----------



## Remius (11 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> So what's the standard for a thick resume?  Trudeau?


Not sure.  But the CPC sure made a lot of noise about Trudeau’s.  And his was thicker than Poilievre’s.


----------



## Altair (11 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> So what's the standard for a thick resume?  Trudeau?


Probably a Chretien, a Martin, or a Mulcair.

It would be just a tad hypocritical for the CPC to have made such a big deal about Trudeaus lack of experience (everyone remembers the nice hair attack ads, yes?) and then run with PP.

Just like it would be hypocritical for the LPC to attack PP on his lack of experience, but the LPC seems to know this. With Andrew Scheer, they never attacked his lack of experience directly, they leaked it to the news (most likely) and let the media do it for them.


----------



## Brad Sallows (11 Mar 2022)

Those examples are just a roundabout way of saying a thick resume is worthless.  Chretien, the weathervane, who helped blow up his party out of spite.  Martin, the ditherer who helped blow up his party over his leadership ambition.  Mulcair, who threw away whatever Jack Layton had achieved by deciding that "anybody but Conservative" was the way to vote (in effect, "in most cases, vote Liberal").


----------



## Altair (11 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Those examples are just a roundabout way of saying a thick resume is worthless.  Chretien, the weathervane, who helped blow up his party out of spite.


Chretien is the 5th longest serving Canadian PM, with 3 majority wins. 


Brad Sallows said:


> Martin, the ditherer who helped blow up his party over his leadership ambition.


Martin sucked. 


Brad Sallows said:


> Mulcair, who threw away whatever Jack Layton had achieved by deciding that "anybody but Conservative" was the way to vote (in effect, "in most cases, vote Liberal").


Mulcair sucked. 

So in recent history, those with the most experience in politics have been the most successful, Harper and Trudeau. Maybe Freeland changes this, maybe not. But it remains, the CPC made a big stink about Trudeaus lack of experience, it would be hypocritical for them to run with a guy with even less. (Two guys if you include Scheer)


----------



## suffolkowner (11 Mar 2022)

I think you would be hard pressed to fill out a requirements card for MP/MPP/Cabinet/Minister/Premier/PM its a fools errand. Its a popularity contest all the way through competence in any measure is not required or demonstrated the only thing that matters is electability. 

PP might be electable or not time will tell eventually it may get to the point where it doesn't matter who the CPC has as a leader when the electorate gets tired of the Federal liberals much like in Ontario but I dont think we're there yet


----------



## QV (11 Mar 2022)

That mean hidden agenda sinister Harper looks better and better every day. 

To those levying criticism at PP, are you saying another Trudeau term is preferable over PP? 

A number of you voted for Trudeau, will you do that again after all that’s been said and done if PP is the CPC candidate?


----------



## Remius (11 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> That mean hidden agenda sinister Harper looks better and better every day.
> 
> To those levying criticism at PP, are you saying another Trudeau term is preferable over PP?
> 
> A number of you voted for Trudeau, will you do that again after all that’s been said and done if PP is the CPC candidate?



I voted CPC last election.  I might not (actually will not) if PP is the leader.   I’d rather PP lose to whoever even if Trudeau, if it means the CPC comes to its senses and either splits or course corrects.  I’d be willing to risk another LOC minority gvt. 

Does it mean voting for Trudeau?  Campaign will decide that but my vote has a direct impact in PPs riding and can impact if PP gets re-elected in his own riding.  Lots of people in the riding are not too happy with him right now but it’s hard to gauge if that will be enough to see him defeated.  And time can change that as well.


----------



## Altair (11 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> That mean hidden agenda sinister Harper looks better and better every day.
> 
> To those levying criticism at PP, are you saying another Trudeau term is preferable over PP?
> 
> A number of you voted for Trudeau, will you do that again after all that’s been said and done if PP is the CPC candidate?


They may not vote for Trudeau, but they wont be voting CPC either.


----------



## Navy_Pete (11 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> That mean hidden agenda sinister Harper looks better and better every day.
> 
> To those levying criticism at PP, are you saying another Trudeau term is preferable over PP?
> 
> A number of you voted for Trudeau, will you do that again after all that’s been said and done if PP is the CPC candidate?


Yes, Trudeau is preferrable over PP.

PP cozied up to the Freedumb convoy far too quickly and JT's condemnation was pretty over the top, but I think a Trudeau lead LPC will do a less bad job then a PP lead CPC. I wouldn't choose either though, and being 'less shit' than the other guy is hardly an aspirational goal.

I think the current government did a pretty good job overall navigating through the pandemic, especially when you compare them to other countries. A lot of things could have been done better in retrospect but for a first time in a modern pandemic things weren't too bad, but really was mostly just letting the actual public servants do the work after providing some high level guidance.

CPCs currently does too much pandering to the so-cons, and was really stupid to pretend climate change isn't a thing and the convention. Until they get a leader who is strong enough to get the wingnuts under control and quit bringing up abortion and other long settled issues they will continue to lose ground.

A lot of people didn't like Harper, but no one was worried about a backslide of some basic social reforms based on religious beliefs. Honestly wish Leslyn Lewis wasn't a so-con, she seems great otherwise. But that's an instant hard no.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> Nice to know Doug Ford and Jason Kenney are done then


Ford probably did better than any other premier. He also had almost 16 million people to tend to. Doug Ford is going nowhere. He'll still be Premier in July.


----------



## suffolkowner (11 Mar 2022)

I don't know I might prefer PP to Trudeau. Ill wait and see how it all shakes out theres probably a few years before it matters


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Mar 2022)

It's telling that after all the mismanagement of the pandemic, the mismanagement of taxpayer funds, lies, deceit, theft, authoritarianism, divisiveness, destroying our natural resource sectors, selling our sovereignty, theft of Canadians' personal property, kowtowing to China and protecting her agents. Being a fascist, calling patriotic citizens racists, misogynists, terrorists, people that don't deserve a spot in our society, people that are just taking up room, trying to destroy lives, families and employment,  Then pays actual terrorists $10 million each and allow them to walk free in Canada. After all of the anti Western, anti democratic, globalist WEF embracing bullshit from this spoiled little brat, that anyone here would still support a cancer such as this, is beyond me.


----------



## Remius (11 Mar 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> It's telling that after all the mismanagement of the pandemic, the mismanagement of taxpayer funds, lies, deceit, theft, authoritarianism, divisiveness, destroying our natural resource sectors, selling our sovereignty, theft of Canadians' personal property, kowtowing to China and protecting her agents. Being a fascist, calling patriotic citizens racists, misogynists, terrorists, people that don't deserve a spot in our society, people that are just taking up room, trying to destroy lives, families and employment,  Then pays actual terrorists $10 million each and allow them to walk free in Canada. After all of the anti Western, anti democratic, globalist WEF embracing bullshit from this spoiled little brat, that anyone here would still support a cancer such as this, is beyond me.


It’s more telling that an opposition that clearly want to stay in opposition offers not much else than the line of hyper partisan attacks and hyperbolic statements that you just listed and keeps losing.

 I don’t support Trudeau.  But I want better than that line of attack.   That’s why PP is not going to get my vote.  He’s only offering more of the tired old eff Trudeau garbage,


----------



## brihard (11 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> I voted CPC last election.  I might not (actually will not) if PP is the leader.   I’d rather PP lose to whoever even if Trudeau, if it means the CPC comes to its senses and either splits or course corrects.  I’d be willing to risk another LOC minority gvt.
> 
> Does it mean voting for Trudeau?  Campaign will decide that but my vote has a direct impact in PPs riding and can impact if PP gets re-elected in his own riding.  Lots of people in the riding are not too happy with him right now but it’s hard to gauge if that will be enough to see him defeated.  And time can change that as well.


I strongly agree with this. I’m also in Pierre Poilievre’s riding. I voted for him last election because O’Toole was at the helm. If PP wins the leadership of the party, I absolutely will not vote for him.  I don’t like the thought of supporting Trudeau in government. But zero chance I’ll support offering Poilievre a shot at Prime Minister.

Best case, Trudeau hangs up his gloves and Freeland steps up and gets chosen as party leader. I find her impressive. She’s very well educated (a Rhodes Scholar, no less), has worked a twenty year career in the private sector and been in a senior managerial role in a major media company. She has researched and published a master’s thesis and a couple of books, so she can work and see things through/ and the fact that she’s looked hard and critical at the relationship between governments, business, and the ultra-rich appeals to me. In Cabinet she’s overseen negotiation of a couple major trade agreements, she’s at least dipped her toe into intergovernmental affairs (and federal/provincial stuff will be important in our economic future), and has run finance. That’s a pretty compelling background so long as you find her politics tolerable, which I do. Though she only has 11 more years on this earth than PP, she’s done vastly more with her time. She could potentially be an excellent PM if she also has the savvy to assemble a skilled cabinet.


----------



## Brad Sallows (11 Mar 2022)

We don't need successful politicians.  We need successful statesmen.  In an elected government, every competent statesman must first be a competent campaigner.  But not every competent campaigner is a competent statesman, unfortunately.


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> I strongly agree with this. I’m also in Pierre Poilievre’s riding. I voted for him last election because O’Toole was at the helm. If PP wins the leadership of the party, I absolutely will not vote for him.  I don’t like the thought of supporting Trudeau in government. But zero chance I’ll support offering Poilievre a shot at Prime Minister.
> 
> Best case, Trudeau hangs up his gloves and Freeland steps up and gets chosen as party leader. I find her impressive. She’s very well educated (a Rhodes Scholar, no less), has worked a twenty year career in the private sector and been in a senior managerial role in a major media company. She has researched and published a master’s thesis and a couple of books, so she can work and see things through/ and the fact that she’s looked hard and critical at the relationship between governments, business, and the ultra-rich appeals to me. In Cabinet she’s overseen negotiation of a couple major trade agreements, she’s at least dipped her toe into intergovernmental affairs (and federal/provincial stuff will be important in our economic future), and has run finance. That’s a pretty compelling background so long as you find her politics tolerable, which I do. Though she only has 11 more years on this earth than PP, she’s done vastly more with her time. She could potentially be an excellent PM if she also has the savvy to assemble a skilled cabinet.



So, pretty much the same criteria they used to put Sajjan into the MND's seat then?


----------



## mariomike (12 Mar 2022)

Dana381 said:


> The CPC lost fair and square.



Good to know the last election was "fair and square". Hopefully, the next one will be as well.



Navy_Pete said:


> Given that he* was minister for electoral reform for a year, really don't want to hear anyone complain about how the system doesn't favour the CPCs.



* Pierre Poilievre


----------



## Fishbone Jones (12 Mar 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> The only reason I can see Trudeau not running is how hard this has been on his family and marriage, as there is really no credible threat to another LPC minority.
> 
> Anyone who thinks PP is the solution doesn't pay attention to how polarising his attack dog style is or how thin his resume really is. The guy has been an MP for a long time, but outside of some soundbites in the house and on committees, but the only thing he ever seems to have accomplished was introduce the 'Fair Elections Act' which really just added in a bunch of voter restrictions and restrict what the chief electoral officers could do, so was a pretty US republican style voter suppression bill designed to combat the non-existant electoral fraud.
> 
> ...


His resume is as thicker trudeau's. He worked for Telus as a teen, and he started his own polling and consulting business, with Jonathan Denis, now Alberta’s justice minister and solicitor general, that operated for ten years. Trudeau? A drama teacher's assistant who was fired from his only job under a cloud of suspicion. He is solely responsible for his marriage woes. When he, allegedly, had to sign the NDA for diddling a minor, Sophie moved him to the caretaker's quarters.

"which really just added in a bunch of voter restrictions and restrict what the chief electoral officers could do, so was a pretty US republican style voter suppression bill designed to combat the non-existant electoral fraud." That's some tight tinfoil shit right there. Who knew that clean, up to date voter lists, government issued ID to vote and better control of mail in ballots was so seditious and undemocratic. 

State investigations in Arizona and Wisconsin have proven voter/ election fraud in the last election with margins large enough to swing the vote. You won't find anything in the Legacy media, but the info is out there if you're interested enough to look.

The top Wisconsin Election Fraud Investigator, Special Counsel Michael Gableman, while testifying at the Assembly Committee on Campaigns and Elections last week said, “I believe the legislature ought to take a very hard look at the option of decertification of the 2020 Wisconsin general election.”


----------



## Fishbone Jones (12 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> He could, except Canadians are not fans of being dragged off to the polls for purely partisan reasons.
> 
> Woe to any party that forces an election it seems. Justin Trudeau will bide his time, and probably do his full mandate before making that mistake again, if the opposition lets him of course.
> 
> ...


Hard to say. His ego demands he walk away a winner. He can do that by passing the torch while in power. Then it's his choice and not leaving the decision to Canadians to fire his incompetent ass, lets him retain face.


----------



## Remius (12 Mar 2022)

Wisconsin?  Arizona?  Wrong country.  

Proof about trudeau”s wife?  His diddling of a minor?  

Getting close to slander here. 

Polievre has a thinner resume than Trudeau.  He can’t unite the party.  He won’t get my vote.  If he’s the leader.  I’m lucky that I can actually a vote that matters in having polievre keep his seat.  I plan to use it accordingly.


----------



## Navy_Pete (12 Mar 2022)

Using the US election system as a comparison is waste of time, the term 'gerrymandering' was coined to describe the insane manipulations they make and is a crazy mix of local and state policies, where we have a standardized, country wide approach. Tin hat shit is thinking what is happening in the US happens here with no proof, despite the systems being radically different.

Yes, requiring ID people can't afford to get does restrict voting rights, and telling the local electoral officers they can't warn people to ignore robocalls giving out false info on voting locations is direct interference with the abilities of the public service to provide fair elections.

If you want to dig into things, why does the CPC require a leadership candidate to but up $300k?


----------



## brihard (12 Mar 2022)

It’s nice to see Army.ca returning to it roots and going back to accepting our _old_ standards of political discourse in this subforum.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (12 Mar 2022)

Brihard is right here folks....lets keep it civil as I have no hesitance to bin this whole thread.

If all you have is insulting the person you don't want, then maybe you should look deeper as to why you have nothing to play the person you do want up.


----------



## RangerRay (12 Mar 2022)

I would be pleasantly surprised if Pollievre managed to unite the party and attract the votes needed to win a general election, his positioning on the “Freedom Convoy” notwithstanding.  I just don’t see it, however. 

I also feel the same about Jean Charest. In 1997, the PC’s under Charest came a distant fourth in every province west of Ontario, except for Alberta where they were a distant third, and won one seat west of Ontario.  Their performance in Ontario wasn’t that much better either. 

I don’t see either front runner uniting the party and appealing to the broader public. I don’t know enough about Patrick Brown to judge how he may do, other than he has some “Me-Too” baggage that won’t help.


----------



## suffolkowner (12 Mar 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I would be pleasantly surprised if Pollievre managed to unite the party and attract the votes needed to win a general election, his positioning on the “Freedom Convoy” notwithstanding.  I just don’t see it, however.
> 
> I also feel the same about Jean Charest. In 1997, the PC’s under Charest came a distant fourth in every province west of Ontario, except for Alberta where they were a distant third, and won one seat west of Ontario.  Their performance in Ontario wasn’t that much better either.
> 
> I don’t see either front runner uniting the party and appealing to the broader public. I don’t know enough about Patrick Brown to judge how he may do, other than he has some “Me-Too” baggage that won’t help.



I think Jean Charest is dead in the water. I cant see how he would be acceptable to the conservative base unless he is able to sign up enough supporters


----------



## Blackadder1916 (12 Mar 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I also feel the same about Jean Charest. In 1997, *the PC’s under Charest came a distant fourth* in every province west of Ontario, except for Alberta where they were a distant third, and won one seat west of Ontario.  Their performance in Ontario wasn’t that much better either.



For context.  While the "PCs under Charest came a distant fourth", the party increased their seats from two (2) to twenty (20) and regained official party status in the house.  Admittedly, their main success was down east, but they sat third in the nation-wide popular vote (closely behind Reform).


----------



## PuckChaser (12 Mar 2022)

338Canada: Jean Charest's (near) impossible task

Seems like Charest is a lame duck, and might not be the saviour of CPC seats in Quebec either:



> It is worth noting that Charest’s negative impressions are heavily concentrated in Quebec. His years in power at the National Assembly and his decade-long fight against the province’s sovereigntist parties has definitely left a mark on wide segments of the Quebec electorate. Therefore, while the CPC has tried on several occasions to appeal to Bloc Québécois voters in recent cycles (and mostly failed), the chances that it succeeds in doing so with Charest as leader are slim. Nonetheless, Poilievre’s Quebec numbers are nothing to gloat about: only 8 per cent of positive impressions against 27 per cent negative.


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Mar 2022)

Tory leadership hopeful Jean Charest says he wouldn't change Canada's firearms laws​


> Conservative leadership candidate Jean Charest said Thursday he wouldn't touch Canada's existing gun laws — including when it comes to a ban on "assault-style" firearms.



Good luck with that.


----------



## Dana381 (17 Mar 2022)

But that ban isn't a law is it?


----------



## Remius (17 Mar 2022)

PuckChaser said:


> 338Canada: Jean Charest's (near) impossible task
> 
> Seems like Charest is a lame duck, and might not be the saviour of CPC seats in Quebec either:


He isn’t going to win the leadership.  So it’s a moot point.


----------



## brihard (17 Mar 2022)

Dana381 said:


> But that ban isn't a law is it?


Yes it is. “Law” refers both to statutes and to regulation enabled by a statute. Regulations at the federal level are generally put into effect by an Order in Council. It’s far from the only example in our system where a statute enables legally enforceable regulations. Another example of this that you may be very familiar with is the QR&Os.

I’ve seen plenty of people get up in arms - or not, I guess? - because the latest changes to our firearms law were regulatory, but law it most certainly is.


----------



## Remius (19 Mar 2022)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1505199406269620227
The game just got interesting.


----------



## suffolkowner (19 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1505199406269620227
> The game just got interesting.


Indeed a sign that some are looking for someone that appeals to more than a rabid base but not a whishy washy has been never was. Perhaps Brown can come up the middle. To me that is a hell of an endorsement


----------



## TacticalTea (22 Mar 2022)

Charest has the edge in Ontario over Conservative leadership rival Poilievre, poll suggests


----------



## OceanBonfire (22 Mar 2022)

Three in 10 Canadians say they would never vote Conservative: Nanos survey
					

Recent polling from Nanos Research shows Canadians believe a more socially progressive and economically centrist Conservative Party would make it more appealing.




					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## brihard (22 Mar 2022)

OceanBonfire said:


> Three in 10 Canadians say they would never vote Conservative: Nanos survey
> 
> 
> Recent polling from Nanos Research shows Canadians believe a more socially progressive and economically centrist Conservative Party would make it more appealing.
> ...


So, like the guy they just discarded, and the eminently experienced and qualified, and ideologically similar contender he edged out in the leadership race? Ah.

Meanwhile, Poilievre is at the “angry cell phone video rant while visibly driving a truck” stage of his campaign. Canada is super well served by the CPC’s ability to make smart choices.


----------



## GK .Dundas (22 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> So, like the guy they just discarded, and the eminently experienced and qualified, and ideologically similar contender he edged out in the leadership race? Ah.
> 
> Meanwhile, Poilievre is at the “angry cell phone video rant while visibly driving a truck” stage of his campaign. Canada is super well served by the CPC’s ability to make smart choices.


As I said in another thread ,the CPC is too busy right now insulting and even in some cases threatening a large number of potential voters to really care about forming a Federal government. 
Strange doesn't even begin to cover some aspects of Canadian politics


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Mar 2022)

Curious what "right-wing" and "centrist" mean to people with respect to economic issues.


----------



## ModlrMike (23 Mar 2022)

We're going to have three more years for them to figure it out.


----------



## Haggis (23 Mar 2022)

ModlrMike said:


> We're going to have three more years for them to figure it out.


I doubt the CPC will survive that long.


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Mar 2022)

I read somewhere that the US Fed is thinking about at least half a dozen more rate increases.  Those could all be the smallest possible value, but given where the start point is, would result in a large relative increase in base rates.  Obviously not all underlying factors are the same in Canada; equally obviously, many are.  That will affect pretty much every kind of debt, including government-held.  Having existed before, surtaxes (on payable income tax) could resurface.  That combined with higher mortgage rates and a couple of years of 5%+ inflation knocking peoples' net worth down would refocus a lot of peoples' minds in ways that no-one today can claim to be able to predict.


----------



## TacticalTea (23 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> I read somewhere that the US Fed is thinking about at least half a dozen more rate increases.  Those could all be the smallest possible value, but given where the start point is, would result in a large relative increase in base rates.  Obviously not all underlying factors are the same in Canada; equally obviously, many are.  That will affect pretty much every kind of debt, including government-held.  Having existed before, surtaxes (on payable income tax) could resurface.  That combined with higher mortgage rates and a couple of years of 5%+ inflation knocking peoples' net worth down would refocus a lot of peoples' minds in ways that no-one today can claim to be able to predict.


Pretty much what I've been expecting since the start of the pandemic-economic crisis. Housing boomed on the basis of temporary affordability...

Let's see how that turns out.


----------



## Navy_Pete (23 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Curious what "right-wing" and "centrist" mean to people with respect to economic issues.


I have no idea either; not sure how being conservative/responsible about spending only what you can afford became political.

I can see the ideological split being in what things are prioritized, but not spending money you don't have shouldn't be in any one spot on the political spectrum. Lots of Conservative governements blow money on their own pork barreling, and some Liberal and NDP governments had balanced budgets.

I don't think people disagree taking on debt and running deficits in certain circumstances, but shouldn't be your only COA, and the pretending it won't catch up to you is silly.


----------



## IKnowNothing (23 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Curious what "right-wing" and "centrist" mean to people with respect to economic issues.



My take
right-wing - balanced budgets, lean /efficient government, US level social programs, minimal tax
Centrist - balanced budgets, lean /efficient government, Scandic level of social programs, progressive but not onerous tax to the level required to deliver
left wing - what's a budget? , we're not in this to make a profit- leave me alone, Scandic level social programs, punitive tax


----------



## Altair (23 Mar 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> My take
> right-wing - balanced budgets, lean /efficient government, US level social programs, minimal tax
> Centrist - balanced budgets, lean /efficient government, Scandic level of social programs, progressive but not onerous tax to the level required to deliver
> left wing - what's a budget? , we're not in this to make a profit- leave me alone, Scandic level social programs, punitive tax


So Justin Trudeau is between centrist and left wing then?


----------



## OldSolduer (23 Mar 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> I have no idea either; not sure how being conservative/responsible about spending only what you can afford became political.
> 
> I can see the ideological split being in what things are prioritized, but not spending money you don't have shouldn't be in any one spot on the political spectrum. Lots of Conservative governements blow money on their own pork barreling, and some Liberal and NDP governments had balanced budgets.
> 
> I don't think people disagree taking on debt and running deficits in certain circumstances, but shouldn't be your only COA, and the pretending it won't catch up to you is silly.


FWIW the issue is Canadians want social programs with minimal tax. That's all well and good but when the 200K per year household screams about affordable child care it makes me wonder.....


----------



## TacticalTea (23 Mar 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> FWIW the issue is Canadians want social programs with minimal tax. That's all well and good but when the 200K per year household screams about affordable child care it makes me wonder.....


I've always been perplexed by that program. If people couldn't afford kids in the first place... don't have 'em.

Plus, there are significant negative externalities to this program, notably in poorer communities, where pumping out babies becomes preferable to getting a job.


----------



## IKnowNothing (23 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> So Justin Trudeau is between centrist and left wing then?


Simplified, but 3/4 says yeah and leaning left.


----------



## Altair (24 Mar 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Simplified, but 3/4 says yeah and leaning left.


I think thats fair.


----------



## Remius (24 Mar 2022)

Ken Boessenkool: Pick a Conservative leader who can win
					

Facing a quasi-formal coalition between the Liberals and the NDP, the Conservatives are at a serious disadvantage. Deal with it.




					theline.substack.com
				




A pretty good opinion piece on what Conservatives would need to do to win.  I doubt they do it.


----------



## TacticalTea (24 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> Ken Boessenkool: Pick a Conservative leader who can win
> 
> 
> Facing a quasi-formal coalition between the Liberals and the NDP, the Conservatives are at a serious disadvantage. Deal with it.
> ...


There's a very large number of youngsters out there who aren't voting conservative strictly because of their failures on climate change and environmental protection, but otherwise would.


----------



## IKnowNothing (24 Mar 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> There's a very large number of youngsters out there who aren't voting conservative strictly because of their failures on climate change and environmental protection, but otherwise would.


I don't know if 30 qualifies me as a youngster,  but barring a surprise in the leadership race and impressive 3 years I won't vote for them because the proportion of the base and caucus that think that either/ both of Derek Sloan being a good choice for PM and the current status of the GOP is something to aspire to have way too loud of voice.


----------



## QV (24 Mar 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> There's a very large number of youngsters out there who aren't voting conservative strictly because of their failures on climate change and environmental protection, but otherwise would.


Much of the information the youngsters base their decision on is disinformation and their voting is misplaced. For example, they have climate concerns yet applaud the shutdown of ethically sourced Canadian O&G processed to the highest environmental standards anywhere, while Canada blocks pipes across the country and seeks supplies from the ME where there are virtually no environmental standards that compare to those in Canada.


----------



## Scott (24 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> Much of the information the youngsters base their decision on is disinformation and their voting is misplaced. For example, they have climate concerns yet applaud the shutdown of ethically sourced Canadian O&G processed to the highest environmental standards anywhere, while Canada blocks pipes across the country and seeks supplies from the ME where there are virtually no environmental standards that compare to those in Canada.


1) what age is someone considered past this risk in your books?

2) have you seen the fuckin garbage some of this cohort of yours relies on for news?


----------



## QV (24 Mar 2022)

Scott said:


> 1) what age is someone considered past this risk in your books?
> 
> 2) have you seen the fuckin garbage some of this cohort of yours relies on for news?


Well in that case, let's just go for it:

Cancel all Canadian O&G for feel good reasons. Rely on O&G from countries with substandard environmental stewardship until you can get enough wind/solar infrastructure and batteries sourced from China to meet our energy needs.


----------



## Scott (24 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> Well in that case, let's just go for it:
> 
> Cancel all Canadian O&G for feel good reasons. Rely on O&G from countries with substandard environmental stewardship until you can get enough wind/solar infrastructure and batteries sourced from China to meet our energy needs.


You're going to have to do better to explain to me how this relates to where anyone gets their news.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Mar 2022)

I've never noticed any generation of young people being particularly interested in news, but I've only observed 4 including my own.  What young people are influenced by is peers, led by whomever has influence among peers.  Facebook and Twitter are junk, but young people are more inclined to use TikTok.  Which is also junk.

But there are plenty of older people getting their "information" from CBC, CTV, Fox, CNN, MSNBC, etc.  Their ignorance doesn't set them much apart.


----------



## QV (24 Mar 2022)

Scott said:


> You're going to have to do better to explain to me how this relates to where anyone gets their news.


Where did I say "news"?

I'm saying the assertion that conservatives are failing on the environment is bullshit.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Mar 2022)

Scott said:


> 1) what age is someone considered past this risk in your books?
> 
> 2) have you seen the fuckin garbage some of this cohort of yours relies on for news?


Have you seen the garbage shoved down the throats of kids at school lately? Not mention everything is apparent due to climate change, etc, etc. There are good reasons that CBC news, CNN audiences are drying up, because people are tired of being told half-truths and having politically correct opinion rammed down their throats.


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> Well in that case, let's just go for it:
> 
> Cancel all Canadian O&G for feel good reasons. Rely on O&G from countries with substandard environmental stewardship until you can get enough wind/solar infrastructure and batteries sourced from China to meet our energy needs.



Or Windsor, Ontario...

Electric vehicle battery plant set for Windsor, Ont., signals Canada is a 'player' in auto industry's future​
'Largest automotive investment' for country's 1st EV battery plant expected to start operating in 2024​Canada’s 1st EV battery plant to be built in Windsor, Ont. by 2025​
Windsor, Ont., will soon be home to Canada’s first electric vehicle battery plant – a joint venture between automaker Stellantis and South Korean battery-maker LG Energy Solution. The $4.9-billion plant is expected to create 2,500 jobs in a region hard hit by layoffs in the automotive industry. 

A planned $4.9-billion electric vehicle battery plant in Windsor, Ont., that is anticipated will help the city reclaim its position as Canada's automotive capital promises to be a significant economic generator and create thousands of new jobs.

"This is massive news, not just for the Canadian auto industry. This is huge for Windsor, the Canadian economy and Canadian jobs," said Brian Kingston, chief executive officer of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association. 

"We know the auto industry is going through a significant transformation to electrification right now and for Canada to secure an investment of this size and scale into battery manufacturing ... indicates that we are a player in this transition." 

On Wednesday, South Korean battery manufacturer LG Energy Solution and European automaker Stellantis, alongside all three levels of government, announced the "largest automotive investment" in the province and country, which will bring the first lithium-ion electric vehicle (EV) battery plant to Canada. It's set to be operational in 2024.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford called the plant "game changing" and said it puts the province at the "forefront of the EV revolution."  

Ford would not divulge the amount of taxpayer money that will be spent on the factory, adding "it would compromise some negotiations moving forward with other companies as well, but it's a massive investment and it's hundreds of millions of dollars."

According to Stellantis and LG, the plant is anticipated to create 2,500 new jobs and supply batteries to Stellantis plants across North America, and is one of two that the companies are building. 



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/electric-vehicle-battery-plant-windsor-1.6394444


----------



## Scott (25 Mar 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Have you seen the garbage shoved down the throats of kids at school lately? Not mention everything is apparent due to climate change, etc, etc. There are good reasons that CBC news, CNN audiences are drying up, because people are tired of being told half-truths and having politically correct opinion rammed down their throats.


Yes.

I don't care if the likes of CBC and CNN dry up, I know you don't. 

I fuckin a well do care if either are being replaced by the likes of the Rebel, and so should everyone. 

Garbage comes from all sides, not just the convenient CBC/CNN side.


----------



## Scott (25 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> Where did I say "news"?
> 
> I'm saying the assertion that conservatives are failing on the environment is bullshit.


So "news" doesn't mean the same as "information"?

I think you're splitting some hairs there.

I'll agree with you - the assertion that the CPC is failing on the environment IS bullshit. There's no way they could pass or fail, it's the LPC in power.


----------



## QV (25 Mar 2022)

Scott said:


> So "news" doesn't mean the same as "information"?
> 
> I think you're splitting some hairs there.
> 
> I'll agree with you - the assertion that the CPC is failing on the environment IS bullshit. There's no way they could pass or fail, it's the LPC in power.


Equating "news" with "information" is a big problem.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (25 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> Equating "news" with "information" is a big problem.







__





						news noun - Definition, pictures, pronunciation and usage notes | Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary at OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com
					

Definition of news noun in Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary. Meaning, pronunciation, picture, example sentences, grammar, usage notes, synonyms and more.




					www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com
				




news noun
  new information about something that has happened recently

Yes, I can see the difficulty.


----------



## Scott (25 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> It is my personal opinion that Equating "news" with "information" is a big problem.


FTFY.

I get information _from_ news articles. Not sure your method.

When I read informa news stuff I most often find another source for it. When I can't I don't make a habit of citing it. Pretty simple.


----------



## mariomike (25 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> But there are plenty of older people getting their "information" from CBC, CTV, Fox, CNN, MSNBC, etc.



Some of us "older people" have the rather old-fashioned habit of turning off the TV, put on some music, and read the newspaper. 

aka "Fake News!"


----------



## Quirky (25 Mar 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> If people couldn't afford kids in the first place... don't have 'em.



The poorer you are, the more you get in CBB. It pays to be poor in Canada where someone like my wife and I, who earn too much to qualify for anything meaningful, pay poor people to have children through our income tax. What a wonderful system....


----------



## RangerRay (25 Mar 2022)

Scott said:


> FTFY.
> 
> I get information _from_ news articles. Not sure your method.
> 
> When I read informa news stuff I most often find another source for it. When I can't I don't make a habit of citing it. Pretty simple.


Also, if the source has a history of putting out BS, I discount the article especially if it’s not published anywhere else. 

If it puts out BS I agree with, it’s still BS.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Mar 2022)

Publication elsewhere hardly matters.  Surely it doesn't escape notice how often a chorus of journalists sing the same song?


----------



## Remius (25 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Publication elsewhere hardly matters.  Surely it doesn't escape notice how often a chorus of journalists sing the same song?


Opinion pieces, possibly and likely but there is a enough of a variety to find those. 

I find opinion pieces in the Sun quite different than what I might find in the Toronto Star.

Take the gun lobby protest that took place on parliament hill as few years ago. 

Organisers said 5000 people showed up.  The media said about 800.  Cries of fake news and bought media were claimed because the CBC reported 800.  But looking at CTV and Global they said the same thing 800.  But bought media right? 

But they all used the same source.  The Parliamentary Police Service gave them those numbers.  

Sometimes journalists sing the same tune because they get their info from the same places.

But again, OP Eds are a different beast but people confuse them sometimes.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Mar 2022)

When I see the same phrases repeated, I suspect collusion or simple mimickry.  And I doubt that just because the Journ-o-list was exposed, that writers stopped sharing ideas about messaging.

Trivially, easily verified facts are not generally at issue.  Nor are beat reports about mundane things unfolding.  The contentious issues arise exactly where people interested in shaping opinions are doing their work.  These are the sources of the myths, the "priors", the "things everyone knows that just aren't so".  Many people who think they are widely informed are just prisoners of someone else's mind.


----------



## Altair (25 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> When I see the same phrases repeated, I suspect collusion or simple mimickry.  And I doubt that just because the Journ-o-list was exposed, that writers stopped sharing ideas about messaging.
> 
> Trivially, easily verified facts are not generally at issue.  Nor are beat reports about mundane things unfolding.  The contentious issues arise exactly where people interested in shaping opinions are doing their work.  These are the sources of the myths, the "priors", the "things everyone knows that just aren't so".  Many people who think they are widely informed are just prisoners of someone else's mind.


Does this apply to true north, the postmillennial and Rebel News?


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Mar 2022)

Sure.  Why would they be excepted?  But the agencies with strong biases are the easiest damage to route around, except for those who really want to believe the message.  The agencies trading on past reputations as "trustworthy" are the ones misleading people who have convinced themselves they're not being led by the nose because they want to agree with what they read.


----------



## Halifax Tar (25 Mar 2022)

Thats kind of stuff that makes me look side ways at the modern legacy media.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Mar 2022)

Most stuff is "brought to you by" advertisers, although the attribution wasn't always so strong.


----------



## Altair (25 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Sure.  Why would they be excepted?  But the agencies with strong biases are the easiest damage to route around, except for those who really want to believe the message.  The agencies trading on past reputations as "trustworthy" are the ones misleading people who have convinced themselves they're not being led by the nose because they want to agree with what they read.


Simply due to those 3 (there are others) seem to have very similar messaging as well a lot of the time. 

Doesn't stop people from posting those opinions.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Mar 2022)

Similar conclusions and messaging are one thing.  Using exactly identical phrases is quite another.


----------



## Altair (25 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Similar conclusions and messaging are one thing.  Using exactly identical phrases is quite another.


I find a lot of that is due to the one breaking the story is usually the Canadian Press or Reuters. 

Others almost lazily copy paste it.

They usually cite it though.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Mar 2022)

Thus we come to an important point: endless repeats of one source are not confirmation of anything.

"I read the same thing in the NYT, the Atlantic, and the New Yorker.  It must be true!"


----------



## Altair (25 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Thus we come to an important point: endless repeats of one source are not confirmation of anything.
> 
> "I read the same thing in the NYT, the Atlantic, and the New Yorker.  It must be true!"


----------



## brihard (25 Mar 2022)

Mm hm. There are a few ‘simply news’ wire services that occupy a central point in the news industry. Reuters, Associated Press, and in Canada, the Canadian Press… They share stories that often don’t yet have much flavor or seasoning added, but will have a lot of the core facts of the story before individual outlets have sought quotes and reacts. So it’s not surprising that some elements of a CP, or AP, or Reuters report will appear verbatim in numerous outlets.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Mar 2022)

Heh.  They have plenty of seasoning, of the "notorious mass-murderer Sirius Black" variety (tendentious language).


----------



## Altair (25 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> Mm hm. There are a few ‘simply news’ wire services that occupy a central point in the news industry. Reuters, Associated Press, and in Canada, the Canadian Press… They share stories that often don’t yet have much flavor or seasoning added, but will have a lot of the core facts of the story before individual outlets have sought quotes and reacts. So it’s not surprising that some elements of a CP, or AP, or Reuters report will appear verbatim in numerous outlets.


This is why people need to dig a little deeper in to new stories. 

I tend to avoid posting multiple links to stories coming from the same source. But there are news agencies that do tend to use different sources or their own. 

FR24 is one, BBC is another, CNN and Fox others still. If multiple agencies not using the same wire service for their rout source are coming to the same conclusion then I give it a lot more weight. The key is to see if there are verbatim phrases being used, that's a solid hint that you're getting a wire story and thus only needs to be shared the one time.


----------



## QV (27 Mar 2022)

Scott said:


> FTFY.
> 
> I get information _from_ news articles. Not sure your method.
> 
> When I read informa news stuff I most often find another source for it. When I can't I don't make a habit of citing it. Pretty simple.


Bravo big guy.


----------



## Scott (29 Mar 2022)

QV said:


> Bravo big guy.


Do better. 

Some of the stuff you have posted is a shining exhibit of the problem with sharing "news" or "information" these days.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (29 Mar 2022)

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6399986
		


Well this makes me not want Poilievre to win. I see cryptocurrency as a environmentally destructive scam (amount of energy needed to the nation state of Argentina is needed to power Bitcoin currently) and would rather go the China route of banning it then trying to support it.


----------



## Good2Golf (29 Mar 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6399986
> 
> 
> 
> Well this makes me not want Poilievre to win. I see cryptocurrency as a environmentally destructive scam (amount of energy needed to the nation state of Argentina is needed to power Bitcoin currently) and would rather go the China route of banning it then trying to support it.


I’m not a PP fam by any stretch, but blockchain technology, like it or not, will figure prominently in many aspects of future life, not just currency but logistics/supply-chain, etc.

As well, only ‘Proof of Work’ crypto has a high power demand due to the mining aspects.  ‘Proof of Stake’ cryptocurrency is not ‘mined’, and has significantly lower power demands for management, similar to standard IT-based financial systems. 

China is not investing in (Western-based) crypto, because it doesn’t like the non-centralized, distributed control of the blockchain.  It wants complete centralized control of any cryptocurrency it uses, hence why it against Bitcoin, and for the digital Yuan.


----------



## Navy_Pete (29 Mar 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> I’m not a PP fam by any stretch, but blockchain technology, like it or not, will figure prominently in many aspects of future life, not just currency but logistics/supply-chain, etc.
> 
> As well, only ‘Proof of Work’ crypto has a high power demand due to the mining aspects.  ‘Proof of Stake’ cryptocurrency is not ‘mined’, and has significantly lower power demands for management, similar to standard IT-based financial systems.
> 
> China is not investing in (Western-based) crypto, because it doesn’t like the non-centralized, distributed control of the blockchain.  It wants complete centralized control of any cryptocurrency it uses, hence why it against Bitcoin, and for the digital Yuan.


So far blockchain technology is a solution looking for a problem, and outside of cryptocurrency (which is still a highly speculative asset that is mostly unusuable until converted back to fiat currencies), have yet to see any suggested implementation for blockchain that doesn't have multiple existing solutions. Slapping a blockchain on something only really makes it more complicated, so it's a bit of a technological Rube Goldberg machine.

We'll see quantum computing within our lifetimes, which will effectively destroy most of the existing encryption including blockchains, so really don't see this as sustainable.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (29 Mar 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> I’m not a PP fam by any stretch, but blockchain technology, like it or not, will figure prominently in many aspects of future life, not just currency but logistics/supply-chain, etc.
> 
> As well, only ‘Proof of Work’ crypto has a high power demand due to the mining aspects.  ‘Proof of Stake’ cryptocurrency is not ‘mined’, and has significantly lower power demands for management, similar to standard IT-based financial systems.
> 
> China is not investing in (Western-based) crypto, because it doesn’t like the non-centralized, distributed control of the blockchain.  It wants complete centralized control of any cryptocurrency it uses, hence why it against Bitcoin, and for the digital Yuan.


100% but it always raises the question of what value does it have. If it a ‘proof of stake’ system that means someone is creating it out of thin air. I could create my own dollar and as long as I convince enough people to use it the value is the same as any other cryptocurrency. 

If the value is in digital, we basically have digital dollars today. If the value is in decentralization we have precious metals. 

We are better off as a society banning it as tons of people are getting hurt by it in the name of a get rich quick scheme.


----------



## Good2Golf (29 Mar 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> We are better off as a society banning it as tons of people are getting hurt by it in the name of a get rich quick scheme.


WEF agrees with you! 😉


----------



## IKnowNothing (29 Mar 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> 100% but it always raises the question of what value does it have. If it a ‘proof of stake’ system that means someone is creating it out of thin air. I could create my own dollar and as long as *I convince enough people to use it the value is the same as any other currency or store of value without functional/intrinsic worth.*


Fixed. You just described money.

Edit to actually contribute
I'm by no means an expert, nor a hardcore bitcoin bull, but I have a non-frivolous portfolio allocation towards it.  Simple thesis of widespread adoption turns it into a better version of modern gold.  Inflation and debasement resistant store of value, while being more liquid, easily divisible, and spendable (especially as 2nd and 3rd layers are added)


----------



## Eaglelord17 (29 Mar 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Fixed. You just described money.


Except it is at least backed by the government and they have rules around it. A currency backed by nothing, is literally nothing at the behest of some random who in many cases isn't even known. Very logical thought process, replacing a fiat currency backed by a nation state for a fiat currency backed by no one in the hopes of being able to exchange it back to a fiat currency backed by a nation state at a higher amount later. Go buy bullion or other physical items if your that concerned about the state of the dollar.


----------



## IKnowNothing (29 Mar 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Except it is at least backed by the government and they have rules around it. A currency backed by nothing, is literally nothing at the behest of some random who in many cases isn't even known. Very logical thought process, replacing a fiat currency backed by a nation state for a fiat currency backed by no one in the hopes of being able to exchange it back to a fiat currency backed by a nation state at a higher amount later. Go buy bullion or other physical items if your that concerned about the state of the dollar.


I added to my previous reply, but too late. To reply to this-

What value does bullion have outside of the collective belief that it's worth something? 
3% of it is used for industrial purposes, 78% in jewelry, 19% in Bullion/reserve.  What's the environmental impact of the continued pursuit of shiny rocks?


----------



## Navy_Pete (29 Mar 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> I added to my previous reply, but too late. To reply to this-
> 
> What value does bullion have outside of the collective belief that it's worth something?
> 3% of it is used for industrial purposes, 78% in jewelry, 19% in Bullion/reserve.  What's the environmental impact of the continued pursuit of shiny rocks?


Nothing has any real inherent value, other than what people are willing to exchange for it.

Gold is shiny and pretty, but at least it does have some useful purpose (even if that's just looking pretty, but there is gold in a lot of electronics, and it's also used in a variety of other useful things, like prepping samples for of scanning electron microscopes.) A bitcoin is a collection of digital data, and on it's own does nothing. For the most part, you still need to exchange it for a real currency somewhere to actually spend it, so it's a bit like a stock tied to absolutely nothing but faith.

I'm a lot more confident in the backing of a fiat currency from a country, which at least has physical assets, resources etc. Bitcoins have literrally nothing but belief behind them, and come with a massive environmental cost.


----------



## Brad Sallows (29 Mar 2022)

> A currency backed by nothing, is literally nothing at the behest of some random who in many cases isn't even known.



There's always bills of credit.  All that's needed is a network of bankers whose credit is good with each other.


----------



## dimsum (4 Apr 2022)

I guess this fits best here:



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/charest-military-spending-1.6407683
		


I see a bunch of his promises and ask myself "how the hell are they planning to get enough people to do this?"  And how is his govt going to turn the corner on the sexual misconduct file and make the CAF a more welcoming work environment?  

Also, I'm sure being posted to one of the two new Arctic bases is #1 on everyone's geo location sheet 🥶


----------



## GK .Dundas (4 Apr 2022)

I'm sure you'll have the time of your life!


----------



## Navy_Pete (4 Apr 2022)

@dimsum sounds like it will be crowded, that where I suspect I'll be next!

Some of the items on the list are things that could potentially help with both retention and recruitment, without really requiring additional resources to buy/operate things.

If we could get a whack of people interested in a short stint knowing they can get access to retraining/cheap loans etc really couldn't hurt our existing recruitment numbers, but I guess I'm also not really confident our training system can surge much, so being more open to taking civilian qualifications off the street and doing some compressed OJT might help as well. Crazy to me that we'll take in red seal machinists, mechanics etc and not give them equivalents to some basic specialist courses so they can put those skills to use in postings.


----------



## TacticalTea (5 Apr 2022)

dimsum said:


> I guess this fits best here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Honestly, clean up NDHQ (deflate the number of GOFOs), reduce Op Tempo, and put more money in HR.

That'll get you better retention, more recruitment, and send the message that the high command isn't self-aggrandizing anymore. Job done.


----------



## Halifax Tar (5 Apr 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Honestly, clean up NDHQ (deflate the number of GOFOs), reduce Op Tempo, and put more money in HR.
> 
> That'll get you better retention, more recruitment, and send the message that the high command isn't self-aggrandizing anymore. Job done.



Can we get rid of the CWO corps as well and send things back the way we're before West and his grand scheme tore it all apart ?


----------



## dimsum (5 Apr 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Can we get rid of the CWO corps as well and send things back the way we're before West and his grand scheme tore it all apart ?


What was the way before?  What did West do?


----------



## OldSolduer (5 Apr 2022)

dimsum said:


> What was the way before?  What did West do?


I'd like to know as well.


----------



## Halifax Tar (6 Apr 2022)

dimsum said:


> What was the way before?  What did West do?





OldSolduer said:


> I'd like to know as well.



I actually had this typed in the reply box... Must have missed the post button.

So this is it now:









						Chief Petty Officer 1st Class / Chief Warrant Officer Corps The Heartbeat of the CAF
					

All Reg F/Res F CPO1/CWOs are now under one strategic occupation called the “CPO1/CWO CORPS (Military Occupation Structure Identification 00381).”




					www.canada.ca
				




So basically revert back pre SEMs.


----------



## Haggis (6 Apr 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> So this is it now:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Interesting...

Back in 2010 I did a study of all Reg F and P Res CPO1/CWO positions as part of a rationalization initiative.  I no longer have those stats at hand but I recall a number of 591. SEM has been good for growth of the occupation.  Whether that growth was needed is another issue.


----------



## Halifax Tar (6 Apr 2022)

Haggis said:


> Interesting...
> 
> Back in 2010 I did a study of all Reg F and P Res CPO1/CWO positions as part of a rationalization initiative.  I no longer have those stats at hand but I recall a number of 591. SEM has been good for growth of the occupation.  Whether that growth was needed is another issue.



The numbers I've seen to would disagree with you.  The numbers of the "occupation" are in the 400 neighborhood.  

It's effect has not been evenly spread across the institution no have the opportunities.


----------



## Haggis (6 Apr 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> The numbers I've seen to would disagree with you.  The numbers of the "occupation" are in the 400 neighborhood.
> 
> It's effect has not been evenly spread across the institution no have the opportunities.


Remember, I did this study in 2010.  I CFR'd in 2015 and retired in 2018 so my contact with the CWO world is fading in the rearview mirror.

There were, as I recall, 591 CPO1/CWOs.  Not all were in CPO1/CWO positions.  There were, I believe, almost three dozen Chiefs in over/under ranked positions, which was part of the problem.  This was at the time when the P Res was attempting to create more SA/KP, mostly in the Army, but the CFCWO (Cleroux, I think) wanted to get a better grip on the population as a whole before these positions went forward for approval. Overlay PRECS on top of this and there was an appetite for culling the herd.


----------



## Halifax Tar (6 Apr 2022)

Haggis said:


> Remember, I did this study in 2010.  I CFR'd in 2015 and retired in 2018 so my contact with the CWO world is fading in the rearview mirror.
> 
> There were, as I recall, 591 CPO1/CWOs.  Not all were in CPO1/CWO positions.  There were, I believe, almost three dozen Chiefs in over/under ranked positions, which was part of the problem.  This was at the time when the P Res was attempting to create more SA/KP, mostly in the Army, but the CFCWO (Cleroux, I think) wanted to get a better grip on the population as a whole before these positions went forward for approval. Overlay PRECS on top of this and there was an appetite for culling the herd.



No arguments from me, just conversing.

Not disagreeing that some adjustments needed to be made.   But the methodology and application used was a one size fits a few kind of thing.  

I think restructuring needed to be to done to the role and added emphasis of the MWO and WO as well to accompany the move to make the CWO rank an occupation.


----------



## TacticalTea (7 Apr 2022)

Law is 'not a buffet': Charest promises to make it an offence to blockade critical infrastructure
		


Charest, on ease of business, national security.


----------



## brihard (7 Apr 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Law is 'not a buffet': Charest promises to make it an offence to blockade critical infrastructure
> 
> 
> 
> Charest, on ease of business, national security.


Theatre. Such blockades already constitute criminal offences; Mischief being the most easily applied one. Police don’t need court orders to clear out such protests. The choice to wait for one in recent cases was a political decision, not a legal necessity. The only bit of this law that would address an actual thing that existing law doesn’t already cover would be the stripping of charitable status for tax purposes.


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Apr 2022)

brihard said:


> Theatre. Such blockades already constitute criminal offences; Mischief being the most easily applied one. Police don’t need court orders to clear out such protests. The choice to wait for one in recent cases was a political decision, not a legal necessity. The only bit of this law that would address an actual thing that existing law doesn’t already cover would be the stripping of charitable status for tax purposes.


Even if pretty much everyone knows that existing laws…properly used/enforced…would address such situations, if there’s a consolidating/focused legislation package that splits the difference between “not using existing law” and “going full EA-tard,” I suspect many will see that as a decent mid-point solution to addressing the extremes of inaction/ultimate action.


----------



## TacticalTea (7 Apr 2022)

.


----------



## brihard (7 Apr 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Even if pretty much everyone knows that existing laws…properly used/enforced…would address such situations, if there’s a consolidating/focused legislation package that splits the difference between “not using existing law” and “going full EA-tard,” I suspect many will see that as a decent mid-point solution to addressing the extremes of inaction/ultimate action.


No, because it takes a Provincial purview (the administration of law and justice) and awkwardly jams an unnecessary federal wrench in works that are gummed up purely at the municipal and/or provincial level. Even with such an infrastructure bill in place, it still only _empowers_ police (though in ways we’re already sufficiently empowered). It doesn’t _mandate_ us. Unless Parliament were to explicitly carve out new responsibilities to assign to the Mounties under the RCMP act, there’s no functional change to enforcement mandates or responsibilities.

It’s electoral theatre.


----------



## TacticalTea (7 Apr 2022)

brihard said:


> Theatre. Such blockades already constitute criminal offences; Mischief being the most easily applied one. Police don’t need court orders to clear out such protests.* The choice to wait for one in recent cases was a political decision, not a legal necessity*. The only bit of this law that would address an actual thing that existing law doesn’t already cover would be the stripping of charitable status for tax purposes.


Out of curiosity; whose political decision was that?


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Apr 2022)

brihard said:


> It’s electoral theatre.


…continuation of…

Yes.


----------



## brihard (7 Apr 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Out of curiosity; whose political decision was that?


Dunno, I can’t speak to that. It would depend on which particular protest one might be talking about, and the respective governance structures and power dynamics between the police of jurisdiction and the applicable municipal or provincial governments. I’m simply saying that, generally, the necessary law already existed to make the things being done offenses under provincial law, criminal law, or both, and that either way, police officers had the necessary legal enforcement authorities had they been allowed to use them. This applies whether you’re talking to Ottawa convoy, the Ambassador bridge, the logging protests in BC, or what have you.


----------



## TacticalTea (7 Apr 2022)

brihard said:


> Dunno, I can’t speak to that. It would depend on which particular protest one might be talking about, and the respective governance structures and power dynamics between the police of jurisdiction and the applicable municipal or provincial governments. I’m simply saying that, generally, the necessary law already existed to make the things being done offenses under provincial law, criminal law, or both, and that either way, police officers had the necessary legal enforcement authorities had they been allowed to use them. This applies whether you’re talking to Ottawa convoy, the Ambassador bridge, the logging protests in BC, or what have you.


Okay. 

And just to make sure I'm reading your comments from the right perspective, were you saying you're a LEO?


----------



## brihard (7 Apr 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Okay.
> 
> And just to make sure I'm reading your comments from the right perspective, were you saying you're a LEO?


Yep. Sorry, it’s pretty broadly known among those who’ve been here for a while, I missed that you wouldn’t necessarily have been aware.

Long and the short of it is, as soon as a group of people start blocking roads, premises, or the lawful activities of others or their use or enjoyment of property, there will be offences there that we would have legal authority to enforce; at that point it’s a matter of will. So my comment about a new federal statute to criminalize blocking infrastructure in protests being ‘theatre’ is coming from that standpoint. It may provide a more explicitly tailored offence to more specific fact sets, but it doesn’t really give us powers we didn’t already have.

Take, for instance, the Ottawa convoy. Police could already direct traffic and tow vehicles at owners’ expense if they blocked public roads, under the Ontario Highway Traffic Act. Anyone interfering with police doing that could be charged criminally with obstruction. Those blocking roads or other property such that other people can’t use it could be criminally charged with mischief. Likewise those slamming truck horns and keeping people awake. There are legal authorities to deem an assembly unlawful or even a riot, and to arrest and charge as needed. Anyway, that’s where I’m coming from on that.


----------



## TacticalTea (7 Apr 2022)

brihard said:


> Yep. Sorry, it’s pretty broadly known among those who’ve been here for a while, I missed that you wouldn’t necessarily have been aware.
> 
> Long and the short of it is, as soon as a group of people start blocking roads, premises, or the lawful activities of others or their use or enjoyment of property, there will be offences there that we would have legal authority to enforce; at that point it’s a matter of will. So my comment about a new federal statute to criminalize blocking infrastructure in protests being ‘theatre’ is coming from that standpoint. It may provide a more explicitly tailored offence to more specific fact sets, but it doesn’t really give us powers we didn’t already have.
> 
> Take, for instance, the Ottawa convoy. Police could already direct traffic and tow vehicles at owners’ expense if they blocked public roads, under the Ontario Highway Traffic Act. Anyone interfering with police doing that could be charged criminally with obstruction. Those blocking roads or other property such that other people can’t use it could be criminally charged with mischief. Likewise those slamming truck horns and keeping people awake. There are legal authorities to deem an assembly unlawful or even a riot, and to arrest and charge as needed. Anyway, that’s where I’m coming from on that.


You good, I just wanted to be sure ;P

I think that, especially in electoral contexts, almost everything politicians say is simplistic and would not actually solve problems. They package orientations that are digestible for the public, though utterly idiotic to any expert. And I think this applies to every field. 

Have a politician talking about medicine, the doctors will tell you their ''solution'' is missing the mark; have them talk about nuclear energy, the physicists will say that the politician doesn't understand anything, etc. 

So while I agree that this is probably not all that clever, it also seems to me that it is the direction given by Charest. He provides the political leadership... teams of actual subject matter experts and advisors will eventually develop a policy that is more appropriate. I think it is distinguishable from populism in that the latter serves strictly to please the electorate, and not actually to find workable solutions.

That's generally how it works in the military, and is what I've observed from political leaders as well, I'm not singling out Charest here. Plus, that is how people vote. They don't really examine platform points one by one, by rather, get a general idea of the candidate and make their decision based on their overall preferences.

Now regarding the issue at hand itself; I'm of the opinion that there should be greater separation of police and politics. Would you agree that political and administrative powers have often exerted undue influence on police forces in recent years? So it seems to me like we do need some sort of policy that would compel law enforcement agencies to act more swiftly and decisively against threats to the national interest and the economy. Maybe his solution isn't actually good, but at least he's bringing it up and making it an issue on the mediatic-political scene.


----------



## lenaitch (7 Apr 2022)

brihard said:


> Theatre. Such blockades already constitute criminal offences; Mischief being the most easily applied one. Police don’t need court orders to clear out such protests. The choice to wait for one in recent cases was a political decision, not a legal necessity. The only bit of this law that would address an actual thing that existing law doesn’t already cover would be the stripping of charitable status for tax purposes.



The only value I would see in such legislation would be where the critical infrastructure is private property; such as a railway, where there needs to be a determination that the lawful enjoyment or operation of their property is interfered with (a victim, as it were).  Companies usually do that via the courts and law enforcement waits for that to happen.

Similarly, where blockades, etc. are related to FN land or treaty claims, a court injunction at least considers the issue of colour of right, on both sides (land/treaty rights vs. exploration/development licence).

Pretty thin soup, I agree, since one side most often simply ignores them and the other is often reluctant to enforce them in a timely manner.

I wasn't there, you were, but I still maintain that Ottawa PS had some serious leadership and governance issues going on that allowed the situation to spiral.


----------



## lenaitch (7 Apr 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Now regarding the issue at hand itself; I'm of the opinion that there should be greater separation of police and politics. Would you agree that political and administrative powers have often exerted undue influence on police forces in recent years? So it seems to me like we do need some sort of policy that would compel law enforcement agencies to act more swiftly and decisively against threats to the national interest and the economy. Maybe his solution isn't actually good, but at least he's bringing it up and making it an issue on the mediatic-political scene.


I'll jump in here as well (former LEO).  You statement seems to contradict itself; on one hand claiming that there is undue civilian influence on police operations, then wanting a policy that does just that.

Law enforcement operates at the behest of civilian authority and is subject to civilian oversight.  Some commentators, often professional ones, take various interpretations of the extent or manner of civilian direction of the police; usually to decry that they did/did not do enough/too much to protect or control their particular hobby horse.  Generally, I think it works reasonably well in Ontario most of the time.

It is a perfect world?  Absolutely not.  In the 'Ottawa convoy' context, I haven't heard of any allegations of overt political interference.; although there was clearly an issue with the relationship between the chief, PSB and council,  as well between the chief and his command staff. In Windsor, things went pretty damned well.  Did Mike Harris say he "wanted the damned Indians out of the park" in 1995? Yup. Was that direction given to the OPP Commissioner? Nope.  Did his views get conveyed to the police commanders at Ipperwash?  Yup, but not as direction.  The wheels fell off that operation all on its own.

Injunctions, emergency orders, legislation aside, law enforcement always has to consider public and member safety.  Operations and plans can never have acceptable losses, and individual members are individually accountable for their actions.  Things get done, just not always at the speed that makes everybody happy.


----------



## TacticalTea (7 Apr 2022)

lenaitch said:


> I'll jump in here as well (former LEO).  You statement seems to contradict itself; on one hand claiming that there is undue civilian influence on police operations, then wanting a policy that does just that.


Pretty disingenuous to boil it down to a contradiction that it isn't. There's a world of difference between stated policy / legislation, and direction at the whim of a politician, whose strategy varies based on their electoral prospects.

Perhaps I should've worded it differently. ''Ensure political and electoral concerns do not affect LE operations'' instead of ''compel LE agencies to act''.


----------



## lenaitch (8 Apr 2022)

So  the revised statement would be: _"So it seems to me like we do need some sort of policy that would ensure political and electoral concerns do not affect LE operations." c__ompel law enforcement agencies to act more swiftly and decisively against threats to the national interest and the economy. _

Maybe it's the hour or my age, or both, but I'm not getting what you are proposing.  An example might help.  All the policy or legislation in the world can't prevent somebody from colouring outside of their lines if they are hell-bent on doing so.

In Ontario, the Police Services Act is fairly clear on the relationship between a municipal chief and their Police Service Board (council has no codified role).  For the OPP, locally they have a similar relationship to their client municipal governments, and the Solicitor General only has the authority of 'general direction'. 

Note:  I have to go out of town for a day or so and will likely be off-scope unless I can't sleep.


----------



## TacticalTea (8 Apr 2022)

lenaitch said:


> Maybe it's the hour or my age, or both, but I'm not getting what you are proposing.


Definitely the hour for me ;P

I'll get back to you tomorrow.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (8 Apr 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Law is 'not a buffet': Charest promises to make it an offence to blockade critical infrastructure
> 
> 
> 
> Charest, on ease of business, national security.



Intimidation


*423* (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction who, wrongfully and without lawful authority, for the purpose of compelling another person to abstain from doing anything that he or she has a lawful right to do, or to do anything that he or she has a lawful right to abstain from doing,
(a) uses violence or threats of violence to that person or their intimate partner or children, or injures the person’s property;
(b) intimidates or attempts to intimidate that person or a relative of that person by threats that, in Canada or elsewhere, violence or other injury will be done to or punishment inflicted on him or her or a relative of his or hers, or that the property of any of them will be damaged;
(c) persistently follows that person;
(d) hides any tools, clothes or other property owned or used by that person, or deprives him or her of them or hinders him or her in the use of them;
(e) with one or more other persons, follows that person, in a disorderly manner, on a highway;
(f) besets or watches the place where that person resides, works, carries on business or happens to be; or
(g) blocks or obstructs a highway.

Marginal note: Exception
(2) A person who attends at or near or approaches a dwelling-house or place, for the purpose only of obtaining or communicating information, does not watch or beset within the meaning of this section.

We have the laws at hand to deal with most of this stuff, the fact we choose not to utilize them is a whole other issue.


----------



## TacticalTea (11 Apr 2022)

lenaitch said:


> So  the revised statement would be: _"So it seems to me like we do need some sort of policy that would ensure political and electoral concerns do not affect LE operations." c__ompel law enforcement agencies to act more swiftly and decisively against threats to the national interest and the economy. _
> 
> Maybe it's the hour or my age, or both, but *I'm not getting what you are proposing.*  An example might help.  All the policy or legislation in the world can't prevent somebody from colouring outside of their lines if they are hell-bent on doing so.
> 
> ...


So the answer to that is that I don't actually have an answer. On the specific legal and political questions and machinations surrounding law enforcement operations across jurisdictions and agencies, I am not an expert. I'm just another member of the public. So I can't tell you what needs to happen for this issue to be resolved.

What's plainly apparent though, is that - as I've seen in the media or in the course of my own professional work - there have been multiple cases in recent years of politically-motivated actors disrupting our country's development and economic stability as well as individuals engaging in criminal activities to the detriment of their communities, only for them to encounter a lackluster response from the government as a whole. The consequences are far-reaching and actually degrade investors' and partners' confidence that we can actually take projects to completion and run them smoothly. From a more local perspective, LEOs have told me they can't enforce the law in a manner that would serve justice because political interests have dictated that certain groups are protected one way or another.

I would like to see actions to tackle this issue. And the only one talking about it right now... is Charest.


----------



## QV (13 Apr 2022)

Pierre Poilievre has some serious momentum. He'll get my vote if he takes the leadership of the CPC.


----------



## Navy_Pete (13 Apr 2022)

So far it seems consistent that the various candidates are popular amongst Conservatives, but actively alienate other voters to go Liberal.

Really doesn't matter if PP has serious momentum amongst Conservative voters if it just means they'll be in opposition (against a possible majority Lib govt).


----------



## QV (13 Apr 2022)

This country will get the government it deserves. If it votes in Trudeau or a Trudeau/Singh coalition again, it deserves everything it gets.


----------



## Haggis (13 Apr 2022)

brihard said:


> Yep. Sorry, it’s pretty broadly known among those who’ve been here for a while, I missed that you wouldn’t necessarily have been aware.
> 
> Long and the short of it is, as soon as a group of people start blocking roads, premises, or the lawful activities of others or their use or enjoyment of property, there will be offences there that we would have legal authority to enforce; at that point it’s a matter of will. So my comment about a new federal statute to criminalize blocking infrastructure in protests being ‘theatre’ is coming from that standpoint. It may provide a more explicitly tailored offence to more specific fact sets, but it doesn’t really give us powers we didn’t already have.
> 
> Take, for instance, the Ottawa convoy. Police could already direct traffic and tow vehicles at owners’ expense if they blocked public roads, under the Ontario Highway Traffic Act. Anyone interfering with police doing that could be charged criminally with obstruction. Those blocking roads or other property such that other people can’t use it could be criminally charged with mischief. Likewise those slamming truck horns and keeping people awake. There are legal authorities to deem an assembly unlawful or even a riot, and to arrest and charge as needed. Anyway, that’s where I’m coming from on that.





Eaglelord17 said:


> We have the laws at hand to deal with most of this stuff, the fact we choose not to utilize them is a whole other issue.



Remember, though, it's a Canadian tradition to create new laws where no need exists.


----------



## Navy_Pete (13 Apr 2022)

So ignore the reality of the Canadian voting demographics when selecting a leader, then blame that for staying opposition? Winning strategy.

Right now the Liberals are much more effective about staying in power, and the NDP are more effective at getting some platform items implemented, so looks like a safe bet that CPC will not be able to implement any party platform items on the current trajectory. They'll be visibly annoyed I guess, so shares and likes friendly among the party faithful.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Apr 2022)

The most likely candidate to succeed a Liberal PM is a Conservative.  Eventually this will happen.  The candidate will be chosen by Conservatives.  The majority of Canadians who swing the election will not be deeply politically involved or aware; the worse the party in power is at dealing with the events of the day, the more extreme the alternative can be and still be electable.  Those who care deeply about narrow issues will mostly have no influence at the point in time when the mob swings.  At each election opportunity, the choice is "this one, or wait for the next one"?  Sometimes, the choice is "the bad fit now while I have some influence" versus "the worse fit later when the mob decides".


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Apr 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> So ignore the reality of the Canadian voting demographics when selecting a leader, then blame that for staying opposition? Winning strategy.
> 
> Right now the Liberals are much more effective about staying in power, and the NDP are more effective at getting some platform items implemented, so looks like a safe bet that CPC will not be able to implement any party platform items on the current trajectory. They'll be visibly annoyed I guess, so shares and likes friendly among the party faithful.


----------



## brihard (13 Apr 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> The most likely candidate to succeed a Liberal PM is a Conservative.  Eventually this will happen.  The candidate will be chosen by Conservatives.  The majority of Canadians who swing the election will not be deeply politically involved or aware; the worse the party in power is at dealing with the events of the day, the more extreme the alternative can be and still be electable.  Those who care deeply about narrow issues will mostly have no influence at the point in time when the mob swings.  At each election opportunity, the choice is "this one, or wait for the next one"?  Sometimes, the choice is "the bad fit now while I have some influence" versus "the worse fit later when the mob decides".


Sure. Also true is that we seem to tend to vote governments _out_, with the voting in of the other guys being a byproduct of that. The Liberals may forestall their exit from government if they’re wise enough to change the guard, contingent of course on their being a distinction between dissatisfaction with _Trudeau_ versus dissatisfaction with the _party_. I believe there’s at least some of that; maybe enough to matter.


----------



## RangerRay (13 Apr 2022)

I think the only thing keeping the last two elections bringing Liberal majorities was Justin Trudeau. A more traditional Liberal leader would have easily gotten majorities. 

The Tories need to up their game. A bitcoin bro convoy booster, a Laurentian retread from the ‘90s and a sock full of no-names isn’t going to do it.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Apr 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I think the only thing keeping the last two elections bringing Liberal majorities was Justin Trudeau. A more traditional Liberal leader would have easily gotten majorities.
> 
> The Tories need to up their game. A bitcoin bro convoy booster, a Laurentian retread from the ‘90s and a sock full of no-names isn’t going to do it.



Well said.


----------



## QV (13 Apr 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I think the only thing keeping the last two elections bringing Liberal majorities was Justin Trudeau. A more traditional Liberal leader would have easily gotten majorities.
> 
> The Tories need to up their game. *A bitcoin bro convoy booster*, a Laurentian retread from the ‘90s and a sock full of no-names isn’t going to do it.


PP's record turnouts disagree with you. And if you are a big believer in the media, so does this article:

_"Pierre Poilievre is generating more excitement than anything we’ve seen in Canadian politics since Justin Trudeau’s leadership campaign in 2013. And just like Mr. Trudeau, Mr. Poilievre is winning over younger voters."_









						Data backs up younger voters’ excitement over Pierre Poilievre
					

There is growing evidence that Pierre Poilievre has successfully tapped into the anger and frustration of younger suburban voters




					www.theglobeandmail.com


----------



## RangerRay (13 Apr 2022)

QV said:


> PP's record turnouts disagree with you. And if you are a big believer in the media, so does this article:
> 
> _"Pierre Poilievre is generating more excitement than anything we’ve seen in Canadian politics since Justin Trudeau’s leadership campaign in 2013. And just like Mr. Trudeau, Mr. Poilievre is winning over younger voters."_
> 
> ...



No doubt he is getting unprecedented turnouts at his events.  That is big news.  Some people are really jazzed by what he's saying.

I am less convinced that he will appeal to more than a juiced fringe though.  Wacky banking theories (Hello, Social Credit?) and being an attack dog might be enough to win ideological activists in a party leadership race, but they aren't something that builds large coalitions needed to form majority governments.


----------



## ArmyRick (13 Apr 2022)

RangerRay said:


> No doubt he is getting unprecedented turnouts at his events.  That is big news.  Some people are really jazzed by what he's saying.
> 
> I am less convinced that he will appeal to more than a juiced fringe though.  Wacky banking theories (Hello, Social Credit?) and being an attack dog might be enough to win ideological activists in a party leadership race, but they aren't something that builds large coalitions needed to form majority governments.


Fringe. Theres that word again. Remember when Trudeau referred to a few truckers as a fringe minority?


----------



## brihard (13 Apr 2022)

QV said:


> PP's record turnouts disagree with you. And if you are a big believer in the media, so does this article:
> 
> _"Pierre Poilievre is generating more excitement than anything we’ve seen in Canadian politics since Justin Trudeau’s leadership campaign in 2013. And just like Mr. Trudeau, Mr. Poilievre is winning over younger voters."_
> 
> ...


Trump got bigger turnouts at rallies than Biden. Doesn’t mean it turns into sufficient votes to get elected. Not all voters give a shit about political rallies and crowding into a gymnasium or conference hall. The part of the electorate who will actually attend in person campaign events is quite small in absolute terms. 


ArmyRick said:


> Fringe. Theres that word again. Remember when Trudeau referred to a few truckers as a fringe minority?


And he was correct. Canada’s population is 38,000,000. The convoy protesters - _very_ few of them actual ‘truckers’ - were certainly a ‘fringe minority’. They just caused more drama and bullshit than was expected.


----------



## GK .Dundas (13 Apr 2022)

brihard said:


> Trump got bigger turnouts at rallies than Biden. Doesn’t mean it turns into sufficient votes to get elected. Not all voters give a shit about political rallies and crowding into a gymnasium or conference hall. The part of the electorate who will actually attend in person campaign events is quite small in absolute terms.
> 
> And he was correct. Canada’s population is 38,000,000. The convoy protesters - _very_ few of them actual ‘truckers’ - were certainly a ‘fringe minority’. They just caused more drama and bullshit than was expected.


There's the other factor, the elephant in the room. Just how united will this party be after what has to be one of nastiest most personal campaigns in years if not since the 19th early 20th centuries.


----------



## QV (14 Apr 2022)

ArmyRick said:


> Fringe. Theres that word again. Remember when Trudeau referred to a few truckers as a fringe minority?


The next step is calling PP and/or his supporters racist. Wait for it.


----------



## Navy_Pete (14 Apr 2022)

The article is behind a paywall, so interested to see the data, but it's really key to understand who is excited. It's a leadership race, so the crowd is already the CPC faithful. Good news internally if he is exciting the party faithful, but the other polls still show overall that PP, Charest and the rest have a net loss to the current CPC polling in more voters going to vote Liberal.

Might just be impossible to do with the CPC as long as there is a (overly vocal) Socon and tin foil hat wing that keeps bringing up red lines for a lot of voters. People can dislike abortion, but it's still legal, and the spectre of CPC trying to ban it again will continually erode votes.

Harper fairly ruthlessly suppressed those folks and had success. The others (Including O'Toole) tried to please all of them, and was in turn not trusted by swing voters to not start throwing them bones and chipping away at hard won freedoms.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (14 Apr 2022)

Haggis said:


> Remember, though, it's a Canadian tradition to create new laws where no need exists.


Easier to create new laws to pretend to do something than to actually go after those supposed to be enforcing them and educating them/holding them accountable for not.


----------



## Haggis (14 Apr 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Easier to create new laws to pretend to do something than to actually go after those supposed to be enforcing them and educating them/holding them accountable for not.


Welcome to the world of legal firearms owners.   Place your rights and freedoms on the table over there and have a seat behind that row of miscreants with FPOs that they ignore daily and the Government doesn't track as well as they track you.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (14 Apr 2022)

Haggis said:


> Welcome to the world of legal firearms owners.   Place your rights and freedoms on the table over there and have a seat behind that row of miscreants with FPOs that they ignore daily and the Government doesn't track as well as they track you.


Oh I am well aware. Criminals get a pass, but citizens who simply are trying to go to work pay their taxes and mind their own business are put on the chopping block.

The fact I can drive down some main streets in my city and in broad daylight see people walking down the street with catalytic converters over their shoulders speaks for itself. It isn’t even the cops fault, the government is the one letting them out instantly and as such have made it so there is no consequences for their actions.


----------



## QV (14 Apr 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> ... but the other *polls* still show overall that PP, Charest and the rest have a net loss to the current CPC polling in more voters going to vote Liberal...


Such as Ekos? Where the president Frank Graves has been incessantly tweeting his distaste for PP and stating how he'll "_make sure you are never going to lead my country_"...?


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1514376713941270532


----------



## IKnowNothing (14 Apr 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> So ignore the reality of the Canadian voting demographics when selecting a leader, then blame that for staying opposition? Winning strategy.


Worse than that.  Have an opportunist caucus revolt to overthrow the member elected leader (and likely next PM), and reverse course on a Red Tory shift that had been gaining ground, all because a very loud vocal minority (even in the CPC) thought Justin was being mean and leapt right into the trap of wedge issue he built up post election. Then blame everyone else.

One of the things I dislike most about Trudeau was his willingness to inflame that situation for political gain and send the country down this path rather than be a proper leader.

One of the things I dislike most about the CPC was that they swallowed the bait whole and it worked.


----------



## QV (14 Apr 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Worse than that. * Have an opportunist caucus revolt to overthrow the member elected leader (and likely next PM),* and reverse course on a Red Tory shift that had been gaining ground, all because a very loud vocal minority (even in the CPC) thought Justin was being mean and leapt right into the trap of wedge issue he built up post election. Then blame everyone else.
> 
> One of the things I dislike most about Trudeau was his willingness to inflame that situation for political gain and send the country down this path rather than be a proper leader.
> 
> One of the things I dislike most about the CPC was that they swallowed the bait whole and it worked.



Pretty sure O'Toole lost an election already and landed with fewer seats than Scheer had. So, more of that? 

Or maybe a winning strategy would be to shift in the direction Harper went, he did win consecutively and obtained a majority after all. 

I find it amusing to read all the excuses. What about PP's proposed policy statements so far are bad ideas? Alternatively, what about the PPC election platform were bad ideas? The only thing being swallowed whole is the bullshit coming from the LPC/media spewing nonsense about those who will upend their vision for Canada.


----------



## IKnowNothing (14 Apr 2022)

QV said:


> Pretty sure O'Toole lost an election already and landed with fewer seats than Scheer had. So, more of that?
> 
> *Or maybe a winning strategy would be to shift in the direction Harper went, he did win consecutively and obtained a majority after all.*
> 
> I find it amusing to read all the excuses. What about PP's proposed policy statements so far are bad ideas? Alternatively, what about the PPC election platform were bad ideas? The only thing being swallowed whole is the bullshit coming from the LPC/media spewing nonsense about those who will upend their vision for Canada.


An iron fist keeping a lid on the unelectable element of the party?  

Regarding PP, not bad idea's per se, just simple solutions to complex programs, communicated to capitalize on emotion rather than reason.  That an the unfettered irony of a career politician positioning himself as the champion for outsiders. And being the literal embodiment of a soundbite politician and everything that's wrong with politics in the social media age.  

Maybe it's all a front and he'll magically turn into a leader if/once he's won,  but the PM has to do more than criticize.


----------



## QV (14 Apr 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> An iron fist keeping a lid on the unelectable element of the party?
> 
> Regarding PP, not bad idea's per se, just simple solutions to complex programs, communicated to capitalize on emotion rather than reason.  That an the unfettered irony of a career politician positioning himself as the champion for outsiders. And being the literal embodiment of a soundbite politician and everything that's wrong with politics in the social media age.
> 
> *Maybe it's all a front and he'll magically turn into a leader if/once he's won,  but the PM has to do more than criticize.*


Lots of criticism of PP around here. So if you had to chose today, Trudeau or PP as PM, which would it be?


----------



## IKnowNothing (14 Apr 2022)

QV said:


> Lots of criticism of PP around here. So if you had to chose today, Trudeau or PP as PM, which would it be?


Pre August 2021 - Trudeau (though I've never voted for him).  Like I said, I hate the decision to prioritize attacking the CPC with the Covid wedge rather than lead the country.  It stoked flames that O'Toole and the premiers helped keep largely dormant, and he stabbed them in the back for it.  (For which Ford returned the favour by abandoning Ottawa to force Trudeau to be the villain)

Now- neither.


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Apr 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Pre August 2021 - Trudeau (though I've never voted for him).  Like I said, I hate the decision to prioritize attacking the CPC with the Covid wedge rather than lead the country.  It stoked flames that O'Toole and the premiers helped keep largely dormant, and he stabbed them in the back for it.  (For which Ford returned the favour by abandoning Ottawa to force Trudeau to be the villain)
> 
> Now- neither.



Singh.


----------



## Remius (14 Apr 2022)

Trudeau isn’t running again.  So I’ll wait and see who PP is facing.  To see whether I vote for NOTA or whoever PP is facing.


----------



## IKnowNothing (14 Apr 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Singh.


Eh. Doesn't do it for me.  Give me a version of the NDP that has the grounding and grip on reality of scandic social democrats (social programs with balanced budgets, acceptance of people as people while still holding onto national heritage, support for the military) vs whatever it is we have and they'd have my vote everyday and twice on Sunday.   

Until that day I'm a (seemingly soon to be) orphaned Red Tory voting for the candidate that I think best represents the riding.


----------



## Good2Golf (14 Apr 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Maybe it's all a front and he'll magically turn into a leader if/once he's won, but the PM has to do more than criticize.


…or go on about the latest themed socks…


----------



## ArmyRick (15 Apr 2022)

Remius said:


> Trudeau isn’t running again.  So I’ll wait and see who PP is facing.  To see whether I vote for NOTA or whoever PP is facing.


If Trudeau bows out, the Liberals are finished. Their is a stupid and irrational cult behind Trudeau. It won't carry to the others in the LPC.


----------



## ArmyRick (15 Apr 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Eh. Doesn't do it for me.  Give me a version of the NDP that has the grounding and grip on reality of scandic social democrats (social programs with balanced budgets, acceptance of people as people while still holding onto national heritage, support for the military) vs whatever it is we have and they'd have my vote everyday and twice on Sunday.
> 
> Until that day I'm a (seemingly soon to be) orphaned Red Tory voting for the candidate that I think best represents the riding.


The only hope the NDP has is to completely dump its incompetent leader and put in a new face, they need to stop trying to "out liberal the liberals" so to speak. 

The NDP needs a reality check and needs to focus on their core membership of years ago, union workers, labourers, single parents, people struggling, etc.


----------



## ArmyRick (15 Apr 2022)

Personally I have voted Conservatives, Reform, NDP, Green Party and independent MPs. I am not tied or married to any one party.

I personally treat election time like a major job interview. You as a MP or MPP candidate are trying to earn my vote with a sound argument or re-earn my vote again. 

We should all treat our politicians in this way. Scrutinize everything they propose, hold them accountable, etc. 

For Pierre, he has the status quo upset and nervous, he damn well should. He is winning over the youth (under 30) support big time. I have seen this in several newspaper articles (sorry didn't save the links). 

The typical attacks against PP is that he is authoritarian, racist and never going to actually lead the nation. Folks please. 

The stupid ad hominem attack against anything conservative from the left (liberal or NDP) is way getting old and is BS. The majority of Canadians know this. I am very disappointed to see army.ca members that get in on this.

Trudeau earned his 2015 election, totally. He had a clean slate. His re-election in 2019 and 2021 shows me how freaking stupid some Canadians can be.


----------



## IKnowNothing (15 Apr 2022)

ArmyRick said:


> *For Pierre, he has the status quo upset and nervous,* he damn well should. He is winning over the youth (under 30) support big time. I have seen this in several newspaper articles (sorry didn't save the links).
> 
> The typical attacks against PP is that he is authoritarian, racist and never going to actually lead the nation. Folks please.
> 
> The stupid ad hominem attack against anything conservative from the left (liberal or NDP) is way getting old and is BS. The majority of Canadians know this. I am very disappointed to see army.ca members that get in on this.


I haven't seen said attacks being put forward by his detractors in this thread.  Can't attack him for what he's *for, *because no one really knows. 
But he can be rightly criticized for being a populist that's openly courting and tacitly enabling Q style BS. Now you could argue that the ends justify the means if- when the dust settles- it's just a tactic he's using to gain power and then has plans for the good of the country. 

The very fact that he's using the tactic has people nervous on multiple fronts
-what if's not a tactic and his vision for Canada is to weaponize emotion to install GOP style theocratic oligarchy
-regardless of his intentions, what if he can't control it and his "movement" invites the loons (Sloan/Hillier types) back into mainstream discourse

I remember when the most embarrassed I was for my riding and as a somewhat conservative in a LW academic program was when Miller compared the gun registry to Hitler. Now there's worse happening weekly.
 In the last two-three months we've had MP's:

unironically calling a democratically elected PM a dictator _while speaking in parliament_
Buying into WEF conspiracy BS
Openly supporting the likes of Pat King
Being sore losers about losing influence so eroding confidence in democracy and tossing out the big scary buzzwords when they got outmaneuvered with the confidence deal
Canada deserves and needs a CPC (and leader of) that can advocate for and represent the best of Canadian conservative ideals in a constructive manner, not one that embraces the Murdochization of Canadian politics to  contribute to and exploit the fear and ignorance of the disenfranchised.


----------



## Remius (15 Apr 2022)

ArmyRick said:


> If Trudeau bows out, the Liberals are finished. Their is a stupid and irrational cult behind Trudeau. It won't carry to the others in the LPC.


That “cult” thing ended after his first majority.  The problem is no real viable alternatives that are appealing.  And the CPC populists wont have their bogey man anymore. 

I don’t see PP changing that.  

Trudeau bows out.  Freyland takes over and maybe we’ll finally have an adult in charge.   Or in a stroke of luck maybe the CPC have an adult by the time the election rolls around but I doubt it.


----------



## TacticalTea (15 Apr 2022)

Good points from both perspectives here.

I will say though, I don't think the LPC is finished if Trudeau leaves. Quite the contrary.

There isn't much of a personality cult left around him, as Canadians' exasperation with his personal brand is reflected in the party, both amongst members and MPs.

Plus, there are excellent options available to replace him, like the oft-touted DPM.


----------



## IKnowNothing (15 Apr 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Good points from both perspectives here.
> 
> *I will say though, I don't think the LPC is finished if Trudeau leaves. Quite the contrary.*
> 
> ...


Agreed, I'd go so as to say that as of this moment he's an active detriment, especially in the centre (both right and left).


----------



## suffolkowner (15 Apr 2022)

Is there somewhere that one can see the major policies and proposals of the candidates?


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Apr 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> Is there somewhere that one can see the major policies and proposals of the candidates?











						2022 Conservative Party of Canada leadership election - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Has links to their websites.


----------



## RangerRay (15 Apr 2022)

‎Hub Dialogues: Episode #39: Dialogue with James Moore on Apple Podcasts

A great interview with James Moore by Sean Speer at The Hub. Talks about how Harper built a coalition that included all the factions, and how dangerous dogma is to the Tories. Too bad Moore’s not running. 🙁


----------



## OldSolduer (15 Apr 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Good points from both perspectives here.
> 
> I will say though, I don't think the LPC is finished if Trudeau leaves. Quite the contrary.
> 
> ...


All that is necessary for a Liberal win is some wing nut Conservative candidate spouting off about abortion and reversing the conversion therapy legislation and there - a Liberal win neatly wrapped and tied by the CPC.

FWIW the mainstream media has a huge effect on voters as you all know. Look at the recent weather in Manitoba. The MSM found every talking head it could saying was the "Storm of the Century".  It sent Winnipegers on a panic buy of milk and eggs. Seriously. 

I called it Wednesday.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Apr 2022)

> GOP style theocratic oligarchy



What the hell is that?  Is that some kind of QAnon theory for non-QAnon people?


----------



## suffolkowner (15 Apr 2022)

I didn't realize that Pierre was polling that strongly looks like its his to lose.

Talking to a few kids working with my son and they were all into things like fetal personhood and such which I had not actually heard of before. There is much American political cross pollination going on there which I worry will sink any chance of a Conservative government


----------



## brihard (15 Apr 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> What the hell is that?  Is that some kind of QAnon theory for non-QAnon people?


Government of and by the evangelical and the politically connected rich. Not exactly an out-to-lunch concept when you look at the Republicans at both federal and state level.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Apr 2022)

Theocracy.

Oligarchy.

Populism.

So the US is assuredly not a theocracy, while it is thought to be an oligarchy, and the same factors are in evidence regardless whether Republicans or Democrats control most of the power.  Yet it is also thought to be in the grip of populism now whenever the (Trump-influenced/aligned/beholden/obeisant) Republicans are in charge, and populism doesn't square well with oligarchy.  Certainly the Republican "establishment" is not in control of the party, and the sub-faction that held sway during 2000-2008 has been emphatically side-lined (evidenced by the past few years of their continuing lamentations).

If there is oligarchy in Canada, the best fit for the jacket is the LPC.  As for Poilievre, is he a populist, an oligarch, or something else?

[Add: and if the NDP is increasingly the party of the chattering educated well-off white collar elite classes, where does it fit on the "oligarchy" scale?]


----------



## IKnowNothing (6 May 2022)

I'm liking Aitchison.  Shame he's not more nationally known.


----------



## GK .Dundas (6 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> I'm liking Aitchison.  Shame he's not more nationally known.


Why the hell haven't I heard of this guy?
He has a resume that would look good on any possible Prime Minister candidate for any political party.


----------



## IKnowNothing (6 May 2022)

GK .Dundas said:


> Why the hell haven't I heard of this guy?
> He has a resume that would look good on any possible Prime Minister candidate for any political party.


From what I can tell he has the temperament, principles, and views as well.  Hell of a long shot but I've spent 15 bucks to less effect.


----------



## Remius (6 May 2022)

He won’t stand a chance,  he’s good but the CPC base don’t want good.


----------



## Quirky (6 May 2022)

It's refreshing watching, someone like PeePee, get through a sentence without Umms, uhhh, ahhhhs and understand the message.


----------



## IKnowNothing (6 May 2022)

Remius said:


> *He won’t stand a chance*,  he’s good but the CPC base don’t want good.


Huge underdog is a huge understatement.  But the CPC base and the CPC membership (and the CPC caucus) are three different animals.

I have three thoughts on why he would go for it as such a huge longshot
-genuine leader that thinks he can do good for the country, and is willing to sacrifice to try to make it happen
-riding might be remote, but a lot of ties to GTA/SW ON money, could be surprising amount of membership and donor support
-visibility for future run (either CPC or new Red Tory/PC wing if the party tears itself apart)

But agreed, between being pro-choice and anti-pseudo legal/ pseudo scientific rage mongering he's fighting uphill with a lot of points lost right up front.


----------



## brihard (6 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Huge underdog is a huge understatement.  But the CPC base and the CPC membership (and the CPC caucus) are three different animals.
> 
> I have three thoughts on why he would go for it as such a huge longshot
> -genuine leader that thinks he can do good for the country, and is willing to sacrifice to try to make it happen
> ...



Might be he’s posturing himself for a few leadership replacement cycles in the future once the CPC sobers up, removes its head from its ass, shakes off the political hangover and begins taking itself seriously again.


----------



## OldSolduer (6 May 2022)

brihard said:


> Might be he’s posturing himself for a few leadership replacement cycles in the future once the CPC sobers up, removes its head from its ass, shakes off the political hangover and begins taking itself seriously again.


BINGO!!!!


----------



## Remius (6 May 2022)

All I know is from what I saw, the CPC isn’t looking very united nor do I think they will be after this.


----------



## TacticalTea (7 May 2022)

Remius said:


> All I know is from what I saw, the CPC isn’t looking very united nor do I think they will be after this.


Yeah that was a shitshow of a debate.

Worst than I anticipated. Maybe I'm the fool, tho.


----------



## Remius (7 May 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Yeah that was a shitshow of a debate.
> 
> Worst than I anticipated. Maybe I'm the fool, tho.


No, it was bad.


----------



## Haggis (7 May 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Yeah that was a shitshow of a debate.


Not if you're JT.  He now knows that no matter who wins the leadership, he will be PM until at least 2029.


----------



## IKnowNothing (7 May 2022)

I think the open callout of Brown's strategy is very interesting. Establishment doesn't like the idea of him upsetting the apple cart.
 His new members could very well dilute the pool enough to prevent a 1st ballot PP win, and between the arrangement with Charest and PP's abortion stance / pro-life hardliner attrition it could get interesting down the line.


----------



## GK .Dundas (8 May 2022)

Remius said:


> No, it was bad.


It was like watching the movie Lord of the Flies , only with adults playing the roles of the children.


----------



## QV (18 May 2022)

Jordan Peterson hosted Pierre Poilievre a few days ago on his YouTube channel. It was a great conversation. It was intelligent, measured, and calm. This guy will be a great PM.


----------



## Remius (18 May 2022)

QV said:


> Jordan Peterson hosted Pierre Poilievre a few days ago on his YouTube channel. It was a great conversation. It was intelligent, measured, and calm. This guy will be a great PM.



No thanks.  But that video is on my watch list.


----------



## FSTO (18 May 2022)

I bought a 1 year membership to vote. Don't think PP is the guy.


----------



## Remius (18 May 2022)

FSTO said:


> I bought a 1 year membership to vote. Don't think PP is the guy.


My parents did the same thing.  I’m considering it as well.


----------



## Halifax Tar (18 May 2022)

If PP is elected as leader I won't be renewing my membership.


----------



## RangerRay (18 May 2022)

None of these wastes of rations are worth me going to the polls next time. Every single one of them do not inspire confidence in their ability to lead a party or govern a G7 nation.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (18 May 2022)

RangerRay said:


> None of these wastes of rations are worth me going to the polls next time. Every single one of them do not inspire confidence in their ability to lead a party or govern a G7 nation.


Well that didn't stop the Liberal party


----------



## brihard (19 May 2022)

QV said:


> Jordan Peterson hosted Pierre Poilievre a few days ago on his YouTube channel. It was a great conversation. It was intelligent, measured, and calm. This guy will be a great PM.


Doubtful he will take the Conservatives to an electoral win. The party membership seems to remain oblivious to the fact that the overlap between what the CPC wants in a leader and what Canada wants in a leader has diverged considerably.

Personally I can’t take someone who’s going crypto-bro seriously when it comes to fiscal or economic policy. That plus his inane pledge to fire the governor of the BoC (which actually requires legislation) shows that he’s more concerned about partisan pandering than advancing serious concerns for how he would govern. He’s caught himself in a trap where his aspirations cause him to feel obliged to make certain noises, but to too many Canadians, those noises are either outright concerning or, at best, dumb.

We will not see Pierre Poilievre as PM. Picking him will simply hand the Liberals another term, and further erode the CPC’s credibility as a party that wants to be taken seriously as something other than just being angry and reactionary.


----------



## Remius (19 May 2022)

And he’s doing a great job uniting the party when stuff like this happens…



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ed-fast-finance-critic-steps-down-1.6458679
		


If PP can’t even unite his party I doubt he can unite Canadians,


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (19 May 2022)

Remius said:


> And he’s doing a great job uniting the party when stuff like this happens…
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Politics isn't about uniting people these days, it's about divide and conquer.

Trudeau did the same thing with the Red Tories.


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 May 2022)

brihard said:


> Doubtful he will take the Conservatives to an electoral win. The party membership seems to remain oblivious to the fact that the overlap between what the CPC wants in a leader and what Canada wants in a leader has diverged considerably.
> 
> Personally I can’t take someone who’s going crypto-bro seriously when it comes to fiscal or economic policy. That plus his inane pledge to fire the governor of the BoC (which actually requires legislation) shows that he’s more concerned about partisan pandering than advancing serious concerns for how he would govern. He’s caught himself in a trap where his aspirations cause him to feel obliged to make certain noises, but to too many Canadians, those noises are either outright concerning or, at best, dumb.
> 
> We will not see Pierre Poilievre as PM. Picking him will simply hand the Liberals another term, and further erode the CPC’s credibility as a party that wants to be taken seriously as something other than just being angry and reactionary.



Bingo.  Well said.


----------



## QV (19 May 2022)

Did any of you watch the interview?


----------



## suffolkowner (19 May 2022)

brihard said:


> That plus his inane pledge to fire the governor of the BoC (which actually requires legislation) shows that he’s more concerned about partisan pandering than advancing serious concerns for how he would govern.



Strange that he would not understand the workings of the BoC but the PM/Minister would not have to fire the governor they can just direct the governor to follow their directives at which point the govenor is free to resign if they wish


----------



## IKnowNothing (19 May 2022)

brihard said:


> That plus his inane pledge to fire the governor of the BoC (which actually requires legislation) shows that he’s more concerned about partisan pandering than advancing serious concerns for how he would govern.


Between that and the inane "Free-est Country on Earth" slogan he strikes me as someone trying to run for President of school council.  Simple, misguided solutions to complex problems, and a promise to make us the coolest school in the county.


----------



## IKnowNothing (19 May 2022)

I don't agree with the rosy assessment of Kenney, but the overall commentary is right on the nose.
Sean Speer: A lament for conservatism - The Hub


----------



## Remius (19 May 2022)

QV said:


> Did any of you watch the interview?


Yes


----------



## Colin Parkinson (19 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Between that and the inane "Free-est Country on Earth" slogan he strikes me as someone trying to run for President of school council.  Simple, misguided solutions to complex problems, and a promise to make us the coolest school in the county.


Likely he is dumbing down his comments for the audience which for the most part think that government is all about the house of Commons and nothing else.


----------



## Remius (19 May 2022)

Lots of catch phrases and populist language.  Nothing of substance yet as far as policy goes.  And his language is tailored to his audience.  So yeah, he’s taking some flak now because of it.  Cracks in caucus seem to be forming,

I guess we’ll see where this goes.


----------



## Brad Sallows (19 May 2022)

All new governments enter office carrying baggage that is dumped shortly after the first briefings they receive from the civil service.  Best not to panic in advance.


----------



## RangerRay (19 May 2022)

That’s assuming any of these duds, rejects and retreads manage to defeat the Liberals. I think that will be a tall order.


----------



## dimsum (19 May 2022)

RangerRay said:


> That’s assuming any of these duds, rejects and retreads manage to defeat the Liberals. I think that will be a tall order.


I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## OceanBonfire (23 May 2022)

Conservative party ends its investigation into complaint about a racist email
					

The Conservative Party of Canada says its ended its investigation into a racist email sent to leadership contender Patrick Brown's campaign team after the party member purportedly behind it resigned their membership.




					www.ctvnews.ca
				












						Conservatives end investigation into racist email as party member quits - National | Globalnews.ca
					

The resignation terminates the investigation, but information on the resigned member will be retained in case the person tries to rejoin the party at a later date.




					globalnews.ca


----------



## Remius (23 May 2022)

LILLEY: Poilievre shills conspiracy theories to sell memberships
					

In a crazy pitch aimed at people believing conspiracy theories, Poilievre announced a policy that would exclude Harper from his government.




					torontosun.com
				




Brian Liley pretty much hits the nail on the head.


----------



## brihard (23 May 2022)

Remius said:


> LILLEY: Poilievre shills conspiracy theories to sell memberships
> 
> 
> In a crazy pitch aimed at people believing conspiracy theories, Poilievre announced a policy that would exclude Harper from his government.
> ...



Yup. When political candidates actively show you who they are, believe them. If he’s decent enough to show us openly that he thinks you’re that stupid, then believe and remember that he thinks you’re that stupid. Be wary of a candidate who peddles such abject nonsense, and be wary of those who want and welcome that nonsense peddled to them.


----------



## RangerRay (24 May 2022)

Remius said:


> LILLEY: Poilievre shills conspiracy theories to sell memberships
> 
> 
> In a crazy pitch aimed at people believing conspiracy theories, Poilievre announced a policy that would exclude Harper from his government.
> ...


Oh.  My. God. This shitshow is just going to get worse…🤦‍♂️


----------



## IKnowNothing (24 May 2022)

Outside of the populist pandering, the most frustrating thing (to me) about PP's campaign is the incredibly narrowminded partisan take on inflation.  The supply side is a huge part of the current equation globally.


----------



## GK .Dundas (24 May 2022)

He is an atypical Canadian politician. The world outside our borders doesn't matter. It does not effect him.
The average hack politician in this Country has an odd combination of fear/contempt and ignorance of world.
And PP is a near perfect example of the above.


----------



## QV (24 May 2022)

There are some interesting opinions here, which is not at all surprising. 

For the detractors, if PP wins the CPC leadership will you then keep voting Trudeau in or maybe move to Singh?


----------



## Halifax Tar (24 May 2022)

QV said:


> There are some interesting opinions here, which is not at all surprising.
> 
> For the detractors, if PP wins the CPC leadership will you then keep voting Trudeau in or maybe move to Singh?



That's a good question that I can't answer right now.


----------



## IKnowNothing (24 May 2022)

QV said:


> There are some interesting opinions here, which is not at all surprising.
> 
> For the detractors, if PP wins the CPC leadership will you then *keep voting Trudeau* in or maybe move to Singh?


Bolded. Heh. I've never voted for Trudeau.  You don't have to be a Liberal to heavily dislike what PP/Lewis/Baber stand for and the direction they're threatening to take the party.

To answer, depends.
A- who voting Red is voting for (EDIT: I don't think it will be JT), what do they have to say.  Freeland/Anand would have a good chance. Carney would be a slam dunk. If we're talking Finance guy vs Finance Guy I'm taking the battle tested pro over the youtube educated career MP.
B- is opposition/Leadership campaign PP the same as PM race PP? Does he actually believe this crap or is he just hitching his cart to it in the short term for political gain?
C- Can Singh hire an accountant and show the faintest ability to lead the country to a scandic model social democracy, or is he just big ideas and identity politics?


----------



## RangerRay (24 May 2022)

QV said:


> There are some interesting opinions here, which is not at all surprising.
> 
> For the detractors, if PP wins the CPC leadership will you then keep voting Trudeau in or maybe move to Singh?


Never voted Liberal (except provincially in BC) and don’t intend to start anytime soon.   If any of these misfit toys (including Jean “Huawei” Charest) is voted in, I will probably sit out the next election.


----------



## Remius (24 May 2022)

Trudeau won’t run again.  So that option will be off the table.


----------



## QV (24 May 2022)

Remius said:


> Trudeau won’t run again.  So that option will be off the table.


Regardless, unless there is a wholesale change at the LPC it will remain the same agenda/program/direction if Freeland is the leader. And I think it's a safe bet because it sure looks like they've been positioning her for that.

So if PP is the CPC leader, then you all are good with more of the same from the Freeland LPC?


----------



## Remius (24 May 2022)

QV said:


> Regardless, unless there is a wholesale change at the LPC it will remain the same agenda/program/direction if Freeland is the leader. And I think it's a safe bet because it sure looks like they've been positioning her for that.
> 
> So if PP is the CPC leader, then you all are good with more of the same from the Freeland LPC?


  As far as I'm concerned pp is offering far worse. Not interested.  I'd rather he lose so conservatives can get their collective heads out of their asses.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 May 2022)

QV said:


> Regardless, unless there is a wholesale change at the LPC it will remain the same agenda/program/direction if Freeland is the leader. And I think it's a safe bet because it sure looks like they've been positioning her for that.
> 
> So if PP is the CPC leader, then you all are good with more of the same from the Freeland LPC?


You seem intent on setting up an “either you’re with us (assuming PP wins the leadership), or against us (All Cons)” argument to smash all those of any shade of blue here into a compliant mass.  As though, if I don’t like PP, then I’m not a ‘real conservative.’  Maybe how things are turning, it’s true.  If today’s CPC is turning harder and harder towards a Reform/Alliance model and not respect the elements of the PCs, then maybe you’ll get your wish, QV, just an angry SOCON far right echo chamber…

Let’s play a critical thought game…if Jean Charest wins the leadership, would you vote for him or Maxime Bernier?


----------



## brihard (24 May 2022)

QV said:


> There are some interesting opinions here, which is not at all surprising.
> 
> For the detractors, if PP wins the CPC leadership will you then keep voting Trudeau in or maybe move to Singh?


If PP wins the leadership, I will vote for whoever is most likely to defeat him in his (my) riding. It would be my super insignificant way of expressing my disappointment to the CPC as a party for the dumb options it sticks us with. Yes, I would rather another Trudeau government than an opposition that thinks it’s presenting us with acceptable options for who should govern Canada. I at least have a measure of Trudeau. I’m not convinced as to where PP’s limits are, and the garbage he’s spouting so far and his blatant pandering to the conspiracy-addled concerns me greatly. I’d hold my nose and pick the lesser evil.

If someone other than PP wins the leadership, I’ll reassess.


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 May 2022)

brihard said:


> If PP wins the leadership, I will vote for whoever is most likely to defeat him in his (my) riding. It would be my super insignificant way of expressing my disappointment to the CPC as a party for the dumb options it sticks us with. Yes, I would rather another Trudeau government than an opposition that thinks it’s presenting us with acceptable options for who should govern Canada. I at least have a measure of Trudeau. I’m not convinced as to where PP’s limits are, and the garbage he’s spouting so far and his blatant pandering to the conspiracy-addled concerns me greatly. I’d hold my nose and pick the lesser evil.
> 
> If someone other than PP wins the leadership, I’ll reassess.



Poll results from last month:

Canadians Believe Poilievre Has Edge over Rest of Conservative Field, but are Less Certain that they Want Him to Win​All Candidates Leave a Net Negative Impression with Canadians; Liberal Voters More Favourable to Charest than Conservative Voters



			https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/news-polls/canadians-believe-poilievre-has-edge-over-rest-of-conservative-field


----------



## Navy_Pete (24 May 2022)

That's a pretty ringing un-endorsement by Canadians; PP is the most like to come out of the lobster barrel, but they should all get dumped back in the ocean.

CPC doing a good job of circling the drain via self-sabotage. Erin O'Toole was a more palatable option then any of these candidates, but if they want an echo chamber they seem to be on their way to a permanent 3rd place party led by a crypto-bro wannabe populist who is a career politician with no real life experience. Before they had someone a bit bland who a lot of people wouldn't vote for, but would have been a palatable option, and now pretty much all of their candidates are people that a lot of non-CPC votes would actively vote strategically against.

I think Singh as an LPC would wipe the floor; he's a pretty likable guy if you talk to him, lived across the entire country, and had a life before jumping into politics. I know there are people on both sides of the political spectrum pissed off that he jumped in bed with the LPC but if it works out he will have done more to actually implement NDP policies federally than anyone beforehand. In the last few debates before elections he's probably the only leader that I'd consider voting for personnally, but just can't get behind the sum of the parts of the NDP platform (the bad massively overshadows some of the good).


----------



## QV (24 May 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> You seem intent on setting up an “either you’re with us (assuming PP wins the leadership), or against us (All Cons)” argument to smash all those of any shade of blue here into a compliant mass.  As though, if I don’t like PP, then I’m not a ‘real conservative.’  Maybe how things are turning, it’s true.  If today’s CPC is turning harder and harder towards a Reform/Alliance model and not respect the elements of the PCs, then maybe you’ll get your wish, QV, just an angry SOCON far right echo chamber…
> 
> Let’s play a critical thought game…if Jean Charest wins the leadership, would you vote for him or Maxime Bernier?


I’m not. I’m genuinely curious how people will vote considering the significant negative criticism of PP here. 

The CPC isn’t moving harder right, they’re just moving closer to the centre far slower than the LPC is moving left.

I’d likely vote for Bernier if Charest wins leadership, otherwise PP has my vote so far.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 May 2022)

QV said:


> I’m not. I’m genuinely curious how people will vote considering the significant negative criticism of PP here.
> 
> The CPC isn’t moving harder right, they’re just moving closer to the centre far slower than the LPC is moving left.



Sure, let’s go with that.  The CPC is actually moving one time zone left.

Canada just moved left an entire planet to Mars.



QV said:


> I’d likely vote for Bernier if Charest wins leadership, otherwise PP has my vote so far.



I’d vote independent, a Libertarian if there is one…and no, not the PPC.

Since he’s my MP, I can guarantee 1(+1) vote(s) that won’t be going his way…


----------



## brihard (24 May 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Sure, let’s go with that.  The CPC is actually moving one time zone left.
> 
> Canada just moved left an entire planet to Mars.
> 
> ...





Good2Golf said:


> Sure, let’s go with that.  The CPC is actually moving one time zone left.
> 
> Canada just moved left an entire planet to Mars.
> 
> ...


Not that you, Remius and I are much of a sample size, but it’s interesting how aligned we are on this. I’d be willing to bet we’ve all voted conservative before and would at least consider them as an option under the right circumstances.


----------



## IKnowNothing (24 May 2022)

QV said:


> The CPC isn’t moving harder right, they’re just moving closer to the centre far slower than the LPC is moving left.


Honestly, at first I was going to scoff but really the last ~4 months hasn't actually represented a policy shift right on either the social or economic axis.

A shift away from constructive leadership and towards soundbite driven rage mongering opposition.
A shift away from presenting and advocating for conservative solutions to real problems and towards enabling and proliferating conspiratorial tripe.

We can infer policy intent based on track record etc, but there has been a dearth of actual policy vision - which is precisely the problem.

 What's the endgame? Burning books, charging doctors with a crime for terminating an ectopic pregnancy, taking a scythe to building and planning departments to clear the way for slumlords?  Some unique beneficial future that hasn't been articulated yet?  Or is it all just one big distraction noodle to try and keep the tent together and buy time. Who knows.  Not a good look for a prospective governing party.


----------



## quadrapiper (24 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> What's the endgame? Burning books, charging doctors with a crime for terminating an ectopic pregnancy, taking a scythe to building and planning departments to clear the way for slumlords?  Some unique beneficial future that hasn't been articulated yet?  Or is it all just one big distraction noodle to try and keep the tent together and buy time.


From the outside, it feels like all of the above.


----------



## QV (24 May 2022)

The gas lighting is next level. To suggest PP and the CPC are some sort of extremist nuts.


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 May 2022)

FWIW, I found this interesting, especially the part about people not choosing partisan news sources...


Ideological and Partisan Bias in the Canadian Public​
Results suggest that Canadians (1) select politically congenial information, though not sources of such information, (2) follow elite cues when partisan motivation is primed and (3) evaluate evidence in ways that are biased by their ideological beliefs.

I find no evidence, however, that individuals choose news sources that are aligned with their political beliefs over mainstream outlets, or even over those that oppose their views (contra H2A/H2B). Ideologically right-wing and left-wing respondents both prefered mainstream and local news sources over aligned partisan media. This pattern could be the result of the partisan sources having lower levels of source credibility or less familiarity. Digital Democracy Project data provide evidence for both contentions.Footnote5 This null finding is also consistent with recent work on the media diets of Canadians: the reach of partisan media is very limited (Owen et al., Reference Owen, Bridgman, Gorwa, Loewen, MacLellan, Merkley, Ruths and Zhilin2020). Although I find null effects at the moment for selective engagement with these partisan-congenial sources, this does not mean this observation will carry into the future if these outlets or others gain more prominence and credibility.






						Ideological and Partisan Bias in the Canadian Public | Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique | Cambridge Core
					

Ideological and Partisan Bias in the Canadian Public - Volume 54 Issue 2




					www.cambridge.org


----------



## TacticalTea (25 May 2022)

QV said:


> The gas lighting is next level. To suggest PP and the CPC are some sort of extremist nuts.


It's not so much that PP is an extremist, but he's actively lending credence to conspiracy theories, which is problematic in that it legitimizes the same sort of divisive populist rhetoric the likes of Sarah Palin and Donald Trump brought to the forefront of American politics.

Besides, the way he treats his fellow contenders shows he doesn't have the character I look for in an aspiring head of state.


----------



## RangerRay (25 May 2022)

I just don’t know when oppositional defiant disorder and conspiracy theories became pillars of conservative thought in this country.


----------



## Remius (25 May 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> It's not so much that PP is an extremist, but he's actively lending credence to conspiracy theories, which is problematic in that it legitimizes the same sort of divisive populist rhetoric the likes of Sarah Palin and Donald Trump brought to the forefront of American politics.
> 
> Besides, the way he treats his fellow contenders shows he doesn't have the character I look for in an aspiring head of state.


Exactly this.  His current rhetoric is unlikely to unite the CPC and may actually split it.  

I don’t think he’s extremist per se,  I think he wants that fringe bloc to vote for him though so he’s saying a lot of what they want to hear.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 May 2022)

QV said:


> The gas lighting is next level. To suggest PP and the CPC are some sort of extremist nuts.


No….like you said, they’re gently moving left…


----------



## IKnowNothing (25 May 2022)

Remius said:


> Exactly this.  His current rhetoric is unlikely to unite the CPC and may actually split it.
> 
> I don’t think he’s extremist per se,  I think he wants that fringe bloc to vote for him though so he’s saying a lot of what they want to hear.


Agreed.  I think the only thing about him that is "extreme" is his ambition.  I don't believe he's got a GOP style malignantly regressive agenda, I just think he's a career politician who has been thirsting to be PM since he was a teenager, and is willing to completely undermine the fabric of Canadian political discourse to get there. I think he's arrogant enough to think that he can control this movement that he's fueling, and desperate enough to follow where it takes him if he can't.


----------



## brihard (25 May 2022)

QV said:


> The gas lighting is next level. To suggest PP and the CPC are some sort of extremist nuts.


Not liking what you’re being told isn’t ‘gaslighting’, nor is PP being described herein as an extremist. He is, however, pandering _heavily_ to those who are, from the crypto-bro nonsense, to being buddy-buddy with the Ottawa convoy idiots who wanted the government forcibly removed, to pledging to meddle with the BoC governorship, to peddling and amplifying the WEF conspiracy theories. It’s a low-rent, low-sophistication campaign aimed squarely at a cohort that no responsible government or party should be actively inviting to the dance. It appears he’s more interested in outflanking Maxime Bernier than he is in presenting a serious and credible alternative to our current government. And the party is going along with it.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (25 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Agreed.  I think the only thing about him that is "extreme" is his ambition.  I don't believe he's got a GOP style malignantly regressive agenda, I just think he's a career politician who has been thirsting to be PM since he was a teenager, and is willing to completely undermine the fabric of Canadian political discourse to get there. I think he's arrogant enough to think that he can control this movement that he's fueling, and desperate enough to follow where it takes him if he can't.


Wait- are we still talking about the CPC or have we switched to the Liberals?


----------



## IKnowNothing (25 May 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Wait- are we still talking about the CPC or have we switched to the Liberals?


There's a lot of shared qualities.
The political ambition, lack of real world work experience, substitution of charisma for leadership, and willingness to prioritize self over country in both of JT and PP should be glaringly obvious to everyone on either side of the aisle.

Canada needs better.


----------



## QV (25 May 2022)

brihard said:


> Not liking what you’re being told isn’t ‘gaslighting’, nor is PP being described herein as an extremist. He is, however, pandering _heavily_ to those who are, from the crypto-bro nonsense, to being buddy-buddy with the Ottawa convoy idiots who wanted the government forcibly removed, to pledging to meddle with the BoC governorship, to peddling and amplifying the WEF conspiracy theories. It’s a low-rent, low-sophistication campaign aimed squarely at a cohort that no responsible government or party should be actively inviting to the dance. It appears he’s more interested in outflanking Maxime Bernier than he is in presenting a serious and credible alternative to our current government. And the party is going along with it.



I suppose you’d think this way, Brihard, if you believed the convoy were a racist bunch of insurrectionists, Trudeau‘s use of the EA was spot on, freezing bank accounts of convoy supporters is just and right, the WEF is putting Canada‘s best interests first, Trudeau’s economic policies have been stellar for all Canadians, the BoC leadership should get a pass for their oopsies, and the fiat currency situation in the west is just about right.

No thanks.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 May 2022)

QV said:


> I suppose you’d think this way, Brihard, if you believed the convoy were a racist bunch of insurrectionists, Trudeau‘s use of the EA was spot on, freezing bank accounts of convoy supporters is just and right, the WEF is putting Canada‘s best interests first, Trudeau’s economic policies have been stellar for all Canadians, the BoC leadership should get a pass for their oopsies, and the fiat currency situation in the west is just about right.
> 
> No thanks.


What would be PP’s most important improvement then, would you think, to be less progressive and stop pandering to the left?


----------



## Remius (25 May 2022)

QV said:


> I suppose you’d think this way, Brihard, if you believed the convoy were a racist bunch of insurrectionists, Trudeau‘s use of the EA was spot on, freezing bank accounts of convoy supporters is just and right, the WEF is putting Canada‘s best interests first, Trudeau’s economic policies have been stellar for all Canadians, the BoC leadership should get a pass for their oopsies, and the fiat currency situation in the west is just about right.
> 
> No thanks.


I don’t think that Bitcoin shilling, attacking the BoC’s indépendance and excluding Canada from an economic networking group is a good economic policy platform either.   He hasn’t shown he’s serious about serious stuff.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> ... I don't believe he's got a GOP style malignantly regressive agenda, I just think he's a career politician who has been thirsting to be PM since he was a teenager, and is willing to completely undermine disrupt the fabric of Canadian political discourse to get there ...


My view more like in yellow here.  I don't know if he's got a grand vision other than to "do things differently" - which may or may not work.  My sense is that PP feels more like a rabble rouser who may enjoy being in opposition (especially against Team Red) more than having to keep party members in line & all the other "political bureaucracy" of caucus management.


IKnowNothing said:


> ... I think he's arrogant enough to think that he can control this movement that he's fueling, and desperate enough to follow where it takes him if he can't.


And we've all known folks who've tried to tame that beast in the past, unsuccessfully.


----------



## IKnowNothing (25 May 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> My view more like in yellow here.  I don't know if he's got a grand vision other than to "do things differently" - which may or may not work. * My sense is that PP feels more like a rabble rouser who may enjoy being in opposition (especially against Team Red) more than having to keep party members in line & all the other "political bureaucracy" of caucus management.*
> 
> And we've all known folks who've tried to tame that beast in the past, unsuccessfully.


To the bold-  I've seen the cynical suspicion in a couple places that he fully knows that he's taking the CPC somewhere unelectable, but it's as the champion to an extremely vocal and committed portion of the membership and will be able to survive a couple leadership reviews. Result being a decade at Stornoway with Leader of the opposition pay and perks to do nothing but rail away from his soapbox and contribute nothing to the governance of the country - pretty cushy gig.  But that's a little....... conspiratorial


----------



## brihard (25 May 2022)

QV said:


> I suppose you’d think this way, Brihard, if you believed the convoy were a racist bunch of insurrectionists, Trudeau‘s use of the EA was spot on, freezing bank accounts of convoy supporters is just and right, the WEF is putting Canada‘s best interests first, Trudeau’s economic policies have been stellar for all Canadians, the BoC leadership should get a pass for their oopsies, and the fiat currency situation in the west is just about right.
> 
> No thanks.


Literally everything you just said is dishonest. I challenge you to find me saying a single one of those things. Several are subjects I haven’t even spoken to. Step up and quote me, or retract your nonsense.


----------



## QV (25 May 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> What would be PP’s most important improvement then, would you think, to be less progressive and stop pandering to the left?


I have to hope that he is not corrupt and that he will act with a moral and ethical compass. I hope he would act differently in situations such SNC Lavalin/AG, WE, etc. 

It seems to me Trudeau is a corrupt unethical politician who’s actions are hurting our future.


----------



## QV (25 May 2022)

brihard said:


> Literally everything you just said is dishonest. I challenge you to find me saying a single one of those things. Several are subjects I haven’t even spoken to. Step up and quote me, or retract your nonsense.


I suggest people who say the things you say about PP typically have those views. Which are bullshit propagated by false or twisted media reporting. And you just said in the post I quoted “the Ottawa convoy idiots who wanted the government forcibly removed”. You and I both know that was not the vast majority of protest participants and neither does PP support the forced removal of government. But you further that false narrative in your post above saying that’s who PP hitched his ride to.


----------



## IKnowNothing (25 May 2022)

Little game to take down the temperature of the thread- Build your ideal CPC Leader

Background -upbringing, education, career (non-political), career (political)
Approach/style
Policies - 3 or 4 key ones, could be broad could be specific

Mine
Background

blue collar or rural roots
business or stem educated (or life experience thereof)
track record of success, merit driven advancement in a field that isn't legal, consulting, politics etc.
no politics before 35
Approach

consensus/bridge builder
someone that can influence policy while not in power by working with others
even keeled
willing to stand up to and lead the membership and base

Policies

Balance budgets
Lean government.  Trim fat, cut waste, deliver service in accountable manner. 
Reform defense procurement and meet NATO targets
Grounded in reality, rises above conspiracy bs and partisan narratives
Sensible climate policy to enable a smooth and profitable long term transition to a post oil economy, take advantage of our resources and support Canadians throughout that time
Socially centre.  Put abortion, LGBTQ rights etc to bed, acknowledge that people are people and stop being scared of differences, but also stop the viscous spiral of identity politics and moral grandstanding


----------



## OldSolduer (25 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Little game to take down the temperature of the thread- Build your ideal CPC Leader
> 
> Background -upbringing, education, career (non-political), career (political)
> Approach/style
> ...


You have just described a political unicorn.....


----------



## brihard (25 May 2022)

QV said:


> I suggest people who say the things you say about PP typically have those views. Which are bullshit propagated by false or twisted media reporting. And you just said in the post I quoted “the Ottawa convoy idiots who wanted the government forcibly removed”. You and I both know that was not the vast majority of protest participants and neither does PP support the forced removal of government. But you further that false narrative in your post above saying that’s who PP hitched his ride to.


I witnessed that and had that yelled at me in person by multiple people. As did others working the event. It was also a published desire of some of the ideological leaders. While it was certainly not everyone there, it was a known enough faction that that’s what politicians allowed themselves to align with. The words you tried to put in my mouth were “insurrectionist” and “racist”. I did not say these things.

You tried to attribute a bunch of other things to me too. I’m waiting to see if you have the integrity to back each one of them up or to retract them.


----------



## Remius (25 May 2022)

Pierre Poilievre allowed himself to be linked to the convoy.  It’s an association of convenience and a means to an end. 

He wants to be PM.  He needs to win the leadership of the party.  He knows a large block of CPC supporters supported the convoy.   He needs their vote and will pander to them by saying the same empty platitudes about freedom, trudeau, the WEF or whatever else.  

It’s all calculated.   Party unity be damned.  But it’s short term gains that won’t necessarily translate well in the long term. 

Regardless,  nothing he is saying or proposing is of any real substance and all I see him eroding and dividing the party. 

He isn’t the leader the CPC needs.   But they will likely get him.


----------



## Halifax Tar (25 May 2022)

Remius said:


> Pierre Poilievre allowed himself to be linked to the convoy.  It’s an association of convenience and a means to an end.
> 
> He wants to be PM.  He needs to win the leadership of the party.  He knows a large block of CPC supporters supported the convoy.   He needs their vote and will pander to them by saying the same empty platitudes about freedom, trudeau, the WEF or whatever else.
> 
> ...



Slight correction he's not the Conservative leader the country needs.  But we will likely get  him.  

My party needs to start thinking beyond winning party elections and start searching for what/who will win national elections.

We're basically handing the Libs 4 more years.  But on the plus side they are Fing things up so bad when they do finally lose its will probably be catastrophic.


----------



## IKnowNothing (25 May 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> You have just described a political unicorn.....


Haha yup. Should we not aim high when discussing the potential leaders of the country?

From this pool Aitchison's not far off, though completely unproven. From the broader caucus, I'd like to think I voted for one among the backbenchers. Some of you likely know him.


----------



## Remius (25 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Haha yup. Should we not aim high when discussing the potential leaders of the country?
> 
> From this pool Aitchison's not far off, though completely unproven. From the broader caucus, I'd like to think I voted for one among the backbenchers. Some of you likely know him.


Aitchison at least has a more fleshed out policy platform.  He’ll be one of the names on my ranked ballot.  I’ve been impressed with him, but sadly he likely won’t stand a chance but could help play kingmaker.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 May 2022)

Remius said:


> It’s all *poorly* calculated. Party unity be damned. But it’s short term gains that won’t necessarily translate well in the long term.


Failed to recover Blue Grits and to likely loose some more Red Tories, will cost him.  It’ll be another example of inefficient vote power. Overkill on the safe numbers and harder right party members, and a notable weakening of the ‘make a difference’ numbers elsewhere.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (25 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Little game to take down the temperature of the thread- Build your ideal CPC Leader
> 
> Background -upbringing, education, career (non-political), career (political)
> Approach/style
> ...



So, bring back Joe Clark or resurrect Bob Stanfield and don't let him near a football.

_Am I showing my age and political leaning?_


----------



## OldSolduer (25 May 2022)

Blackadder1916 said:


> So, bring back Joe Clark or resurrect Bob Stanfield and don't let him near a football.
> 
> _Am I showing my age and political leaning?_


Yes you and I both. I remember that picture and that had an influence on the election.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> To the bold-  I've seen the cynical suspicion in a couple places that he fully knows that he's taking the CPC somewhere unelectable, but it's as the champion to an extremely vocal and committed portion of the membership and will be able to survive a couple leadership reviews. Result being a decade at Stornoway with Leader of the opposition pay and perks to do nothing but rail away from his soapbox and contribute nothing to the governance of the country - pretty cushy gig.  But that's a little....... conspiratorial


Hey, even paranoids have real enemies, right?   I suspect he'd be happy in just the position you describe, but you may be attributing more premeditation toward that specific end game than me. We may just disagree on how much higher than zero the premeditation dial is, though.


----------



## IKnowNothing (25 May 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> Hey, even paranoids have real enemies, right?   *I suspect he'd be happy in just the position you describe,* but you may be attributing more premeditation toward that specific end game than me. We may just disagree on how much higher than zero the premeditation dial is, though.


To be clear, I've read it in a couple places - not my theory or something that I believe.  Agreed completely.  A fallback position at most.


----------



## Remius (25 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> To be clear, I've read it in a couple places - not my theory or something that I believe.  Agreed completely.  A fallback position at most.


Honestly I think he’s always had eyes on being PM.  He’ll never have a better opportunity to try and go for it.


----------



## QV (25 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Little game to take down the temperature of the thread- Build your ideal CPC Leader
> 
> Background -upbringing, education, career (non-political), career (political)
> Approach/style
> ...


So you’re 80%-85% of the way to Bernier.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 May 2022)

QV said:


> So you’re 80%-85% of the way to Bernier*’s PowerPoint*.



Seems some take the simple route pointing to Bernier as the only option out there to represent the true libertarian…


----------



## suffolkowner (25 May 2022)

can we give Harper another kick at the can? He might not be conservative enough for some now. Joe Clark would have as much chance in todays party as Charest


----------



## QV (25 May 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Seems some take the simple route pointing to Bernier as the only option out there to represent the true libertarian…


Happy to look at other options. And I won’t disparage you from pointing it out either.


----------



## Remius (25 May 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> can we give Harper another kick at the can? He might not be conservative enough for some now. Joe Clark would have as much chance in todays party as Charest


His own party as it stands would likely reject him.


----------



## Lance Wiebe (25 May 2022)

I'm having a particularly hard time trying to figure out why PP is considered the front runner.
The only thing I can figure is name recognition, he's had his name is the news a lot more than his opponents over the last few years. It might work, it worked for our current PM.
Aitchison has the most thought out platform, and one I can get behind. It's unfortunate that virtually everyone says he hasn't got any hope of becoming leader. Still, he's going to be at or near the top of my ranked ballot.


----------



## TacticalTea (25 May 2022)

QV said:


> SNC Lavalin/AG


I don't want to divert the thread too much but it is strange to me that some conservatives tried to run so much mileage on this. There was no better option. If you're gonna go the criminal route, you go after the individuals, which they already had. With a corporation, it's much more effective to take administrative measures and assert a better control than what the criminal justice system allows. It's also much more efficient.




IKnowNothing said:


> Haha yup. Should we not aim high when discussing the potential leaders of the country?
> 
> From this pool Aitchison's not far off, though completely unproven. From the broader caucus, I'd like to think I voted for one among the backbenchers. Some of you likely know him.


I liked him during the debate. Two fundamental issues that make him unacceptable however: 1. "our team will have a real plan to fight climate change. But we will never support a carbon tax." That's 1980s talk. 40 years late. If your plan is to have a plan, you've failed already, and voters will see right through it. 2. ''Bill 21 is wrong, and Scott will stand against it.'' I don't give a cr*p. Focus on keeping the country together. You want to fight on provincial issues? Run in a provincial riding.

So, despite his Huawei affair, I think Charest remains the best candidate. Working for Huawei, he acted in his personal capacity, there's nothing there, in my view, that is relevant to politics unless some evidence of actual malfeasance is uncovered.

He has the best understanding of the federation. The guy single-handedly saved the country in '95, and has lead one of its provinces for a long time, I don't think anyone is better qualified to lead it. And I say that, mind you, as someone who strongly disliked him as provincial premier, as well as, admittedly, someone who falls squarely in the PC part of CPC.


----------



## Remius (25 May 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> I don't want to divert the thread too much but it is strange to me that some conservatives tried to run so much mileage on this. There was no better option. If you're gonna go the criminal route, you go after the individuals, which they already had. With a corporation, it's much more effective to take administrative measures and assert a better control than what the criminal justice system allows. It's also much more efficient.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Charest pretty much won the French debate tonight from my observation.  Not sure it makes a difference though but he was on his A game.


----------



## brihard (25 May 2022)

Lance Wiebe said:


> I'm having a particularly hard time trying to figure out why PP is considered the front runner.
> The only thing I can figure is name recognition, he's had his name is the news a lot more than his opponents over the last few years. It might work, it worked for our current PM.
> Aitchison has the most thought out platform, and one I can get behind. It's unfortunate that virtually everyone says he hasn't got any hope of becoming leader. Still, he's going to be at or near the top of my ranked ballot.


PP has been prominently employed as an attack dog. He sinks his teeth in well during question period. But attacking your opposition and highlighting perceived failings to a standard of sound bytes or tweets is not the same think as presenting your own sound and viable alternatives. That needs to be proven independently, regardless of one’s demonstrated ability to take shots at the other guy.


----------



## IKnowNothing (26 May 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> I liked him during the debate. Two fundamental issues that make him unacceptable however: 1. "our team will have a real plan to fight climate change. But we will never support a carbon tax." That's 1980s talk. 40 years late. If your plan is to have a plan, you've failed already, and voters will see right through it. 2. ''Bill 21 is wrong, and Scott will stand against it.'' I don't give a cr*p. Focus on keeping the country together. You want to fight on provincial issues? Run in a provincial riding.
> 
> So, despite his Huawei affair, I think Charest remains the best candidate. Working for Huawei, he acted in his personal capacity, there's nothing there, in my view, that is relevant to politics unless some evidence of actual malfeasance is uncovered.
> 
> He has the best understanding of the federation. The guy single-handedly saved the country in '95, and has lead one of its provinces for a long time, I don't think anyone is better qualified to lead it. And I say that, mind you, as someone who strongly disliked him as provincial premier, as well as, admittedly, someone who falls squarely in the PC part of CPC.



Re: Aitchison, honestly his platform is nothing special.  It's the pragmatism, temperament, and party direction that I like.  Brains to not get sucked into the bs, balls to tell the base its bs, and desire to bring discourse back to one of debate to find solutions rather than shouting to score points.  I want a leader that can work with other parties, that can see the MP's across the floor as fellow Canadians that just have a different idea of what is right for the country rather than blood enemies and an existential threat.  I think Charest has that, and with his experience is the better candidate.  It's just unfortunate that he comes with a lot of baggage.

Frankly, it doesn't matter what PP's platform is.  Barring an extremely unlikely majority, he's going to have to work with others to get things done. Unfortunately building a brand as a smarmy combative dick has its cost down the line.  How long does a PP lead minority hold confidence? Does a PP lead minority even get a chance to form government, or does shit really hit the fan when the rest of the parties sit down and collectively reject him to form a coalition?


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 May 2022)

brihard said:


> ... attacking your opposition and highlighting perceived failings to a standard of sound bytes or tweets is not the same think as presenting your own sound and viable alternatives ...


... or governing.  That's why I feel the "professional attack dog" fits PP's (known) strengths than the whole governing and party management stuff.  We'll see, though.


----------



## GK .Dundas (26 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Re: Aitchison, honestly his platform is nothing special.  It's the pragmatism, temperament, and party direction that I like.  Brains to not get sucked into the bs, balls to tell the base its bs, and desire to bring discourse back to one of debate to find solutions rather than shouting to score points.  I want a leader that can work with other parties, that can see the MP's across the floor as fellow Canadians that just have a different idea of what is right for the country rather than blood enemies and an existential threat.  I think Charest has that, and with his experience is the better candidate.  It's just unfortunate that he comes with a lot of baggage.
> 
> Frankly, it doesn't matter what PP's platform is.  Barring an extremely unlikely majority, he's going to have to work with others to get things done. Unfortunately building a brand as a smarmy combative dick has its cost down the line.  How long does a PP lead minority hold confidence? Does a PP lead minority even get a chance to form government, or does shit really hit the fan when the rest of the parties sit down and collectively reject him to form a coalition?


Well you're obviously some sort commie pinko.
Seriously, you're unfortunately a part of the minority/majority. 
I call it that because at one time people like you actually did have more control  of the party before the loons either shouted you down or forced you out.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 May 2022)

Centrists need to ask themselves what part they played in driving the "loons" to take over, and follow up asking what they can do themselves to change.  Populism is just appeal to the masses.  Why don't the centrists appeal to the masses?  Did they lose their appeal; if so, why?  Could they gain/regain appeal; how?

Populists usually gain traction when established centrist factions go on ignoring too many people for too long.


----------



## FSTO (26 May 2022)

Folks should remember that Tommy Douglas and his fellow travelers were populists as well. Just a reminder that populism is not sourced solely by the far right.


----------



## GK .Dundas (26 May 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Centrists need to ask themselves what part they played in driving the "loons" to take over, and follow up asking what they can do themselves to change.  Populism is just appeal to the masses.  Why don't the centrists appeal to the masses?  Did they lose their appeal; if so, why?  Could they gain/regain appeal; how?
> 
> Populists usually gain traction when established centrist factions go on ignoring too many people for too long.


Silly me, I just assumed that sanity would have been a fairly good attraction.
Which  currently is the sad part as scorched earth politics seems to be better entertainment. 
Which begs the question when did we as a people become so simple minded and shallow.


----------



## IKnowNothing (26 May 2022)

GK .Dundas said:


> Silly me, I just assumed that sanity would have been a fairly good attraction.


Not to mention that despite running on a populist platform, pivoting to govern as a true PC/moderate saved Ford's premiership and will likely give him a second majority.   I mean, who wants to duplicate electoral success when you can yell about nonsense?


----------



## Good2Golf (26 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Not to mention that despite running on a populist platform, pivoting to govern as a true PC/moderate saved Ford's premiership and will likely give him a second majority.   I mean, who wants to duplicate electoral success when you can yell about nonsense?


The fact that Ford (and/or his advisors) realized that a pivot to center (ie. leftwards, away from the fringe right, more progressive, etc.) was/is the key to (likely) continued success, while Poilièvre veers further right, speaks volumes.  Maybe some will point out that Poilièvre is just solidifying the right before he comes back and picks up the more centrist conservatives. Maybe his is, but I think he’s running a net loss overall to convertible votes.


----------



## Remius (26 May 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> The fact that Ford (and/or his advisors) realized that a pivot to center (ie. leftwards, away from the fringe right, more progressive, etc.) was/is the key to (likely) continued success, while Poilièvre veers further right, speaks volumes.  Maybe some will point out that Poilièvre is just solidifying the right before he comes back and picks up the more centrist conservatives. Maybe his is, but I think he’s running a net loss overall to convertible votes.


He might be but that’s what may have undone O’toole.  He went for the SOCON wing and they made him pay for it when he moved more to the center. 

I’m starting to think the party needs a split.  Would take time but those two halves could shore up their support independently.  The Center right trying to become a viable alternative with the more right wing side being the protest party they want to be.


----------



## IKnowNothing (26 May 2022)

Remius said:


> I’m starting to think the party needs a split.



Purple signs everywhere say that it already did.


----------



## TacticalTea (26 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Purple signs everywhere say that it already did.


Makes one wonder why PP doesn't just join Bernier. Expect he might if he doesn't win. He has no future in the CPC if Charest or Brown win.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 May 2022)

> Silly me, I just assumed that sanity would have been a fairly good attraction.



Sure.  But that's not enough for the people who are net losers or otherwise feeling pressured.  The establishment does well, and talks among itself as if the only people in the world who matter have post-secondary educations and work in public service.  "Well, we're the polite faction" doesn't cut it anymore.


----------



## Navy_Pete (26 May 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> The fact that Ford (and/or his advisors) realized that a pivot to center (ie. leftwards, away from the fringe right, more progressive, etc.) was/is the key to (likely) continued success, while Poilièvre veers further right, speaks volumes.  Maybe some will point out that Poilièvre is just solidifying the right before he comes back and picks up the more centrist conservatives. Maybe his is, but I think he’s running a net loss overall to convertible votes.


And honestly the Ford government has done pretty well throughout the pandemic, so I think they'll get back in fairly handily, especially with how bad the Wynne liberals messed things up last time and the lingering stench there provincially. 

The ON PC seem happy to have separation between provincial and federal conservative parties. There is a lot of PC MPP in ridings with Liberal MPs, and I think endorsement from PP would actually hurt MPPs.


----------



## QV (26 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Not to mention that despite running on a populist platform, pivoting to govern as a true PC/moderate saved Ford's premiership and will likely give him a second majority.   I mean, who wants to duplicate electoral success when you can yell about nonsense?


How do you know PP isn't executing that exact plan? Folks around here are criticizing PP for not following O'Toole's failed attempt.


----------



## IKnowNothing (26 May 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> And honestly the Ford government has done pretty well throughout the pandemic, so I think they'll get back in fairly handily, especially with how bad the Wynne liberals messed things up last time and the lingering stench there provincially.


Personally I pointed out the Ford direction as something the CPC itself, and it's base should take note of when staking out a place in the spectrum and seeking long term relevancy.   There's something to be learned about electability that the Federal conservatives are refusing to take note of.  It's categorically insane that people can bemoan the electoral weight of Ontario and the inability to win those  seats while choosing to ignore a sitting blue premier, and how they handled the last two years and came out potentially stronger.

Edit- Ford had to deal with the far-right pandemic BS under his own damn roof. He didn't cowtow. He tossed MPP's. He did what his conscience and experts told him needed to be done, even if he didn't like it. He didn't lose the base at large.
If he had he would have lost the centre and not stood to win next week.


----------



## Good2Golf (26 May 2022)

QV said:


> How do you know PP isn't executing that exact plan? Folks around here are criticizing PP for not following O'Toole's failed attempt.


Nope, at least not me.  O’Toole was too nice of a guy, who either chose not to attempt to try to keep a grip on the far right SOCONs as Harper did, or he just wasn’t capable and/or respected by the same far right SOCON nexus with which he danced at the last leadership race.

My critique of Poilièvre is his clear opportunistic pandering to the relatively small right-side fringes of what I would think his overall target SHOULD be.  It isn’t the formula to actually be a PM, but rather stay Leader of Her Majesty’s Official Opposition, forever. 

We’ll see how this leadership race goes.  At stake is whether the party has what it takes to be an actual contender to govern Canada, as opposed to being the party that represents cranky older people screaming at clouds…


----------



## RangerRay (26 May 2022)

> Makes one wonder why PP doesn't just join Bernier. Expect he might if he doesn't win. He has no future in the CPC if Charest or Brown win.



You think Bernier would let someone of Polivierre’s stature into his pity-party vanity project?


----------



## TacticalTea (26 May 2022)

RangerRay said:


> You think Bernier would let someone of Polivierre’s stature into his pity-party vanity project?


I don't view it in those terms.

Cruz joined Trump after the latter went after his wife. Graham did the same despite Trump calling him a disgrace and a nutjob.

Bernier knows he needs big names to widen his audience. PP knows nothing but politics. What would he do in Charest's CPC after this muddy campaign? The two now have many things in common. I even think it would be good for Canada if the PPC became synonymous with more than just Mad Max. I generally view favourably the multiplication of viable parties.


----------



## RangerRay (26 May 2022)

Ken Boessenkool: Alberta isn't conservative
					

Figure this out now, or risk losing Alberta to the NDP for a generation




					theline.substack.com
				




Although the article focuses on Alberta’s woes, this jumped out at me:



> And to my lights, we won’t get it right until we value a conservative disposition far above conservative ideology. We need good boring government, not an exciting ideological one.



Harper understood this. 

And there is a world of difference between addressing the valid concerns of the non-elites and giving voice to cranks and conspiracy theories.


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 May 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> ... Maybe some will point out that Poilièvre is just solidifying the right before he comes back and picks up the more centrist conservatives ...


Mind you, there's a not insignificant # of Team Blue folks out there further from the centre that bemoan the Ford's and the Kenney's of the world having caved too far to the middle/left/whatever.  PP's must also be keeping that in mind, too.   Also, if he likes being a rabble-rouser more than a caucus manager/wrangler, he's in for a (what could become) messy struggle keeping both the outliers and the centrists happy.


----------



## Good2Golf (26 May 2022)

I think his calculus is wrong that there are more to swoon in the far right, than to recover from the center and leakers to the left.


----------



## Remius (26 May 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> I think his calculus is wrong that there are more to swoon in the far right, than to recover from the center and leakers to the left.


Quite possible.  I see signs that he may be changing his tactics a bit.  He didn’t mention the WEF, Bitcoin or the Bank of Canada at the French debate.  And he seems to have flip flopped on a few things he previously said.


----------



## IKnowNothing (26 May 2022)

Remius said:


> Quite possible.  I see signs that he may be changing his tactics a bit.  He didn’t mention the WEF, Bitcoin or the Bank of Canada at the French debate.  And he seems to have flip flopped on a few things he previously said.


Abacus Data |   Pierre Poilievre may have the advantage, but his popularity is softening: New Abacus polling on Canadian politics.


----------



## Remius (26 May 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Personally I pointed out the Ford direction as something the CPC itself, and it's base should take note of when staking out a place in the spectrum and seeking long term relevancy.   There's something to be learned about electability that the Federal conservatives are refusing to take note of.  It's categorically insane that people can bemoan the electoral weight of Ontario and the inability to win those  seats while choosing to ignore a sitting blue premier, and how they handled the last two years and came out potentially stronger.
> 
> Edit- Ford had to deal with the far-right pandemic BS under his own damn roof. He didn't cowtow. He tossed MPP's. He did what his conscience and experts told him needed to be done, even if he didn't like it. He didn't lose the base at large.
> If he had he would have lost the centre and not stood to win next week.


Also of note was Tim Houston in Nova Scotia who ran on a “we’re not the same conservatives as them” platform.

The federal party might have some learning to do from their successful provincial cousins.


----------



## TacticalTea (26 May 2022)

Signal of whom the winner may have to face off with:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1529826138473766912
Bernier and Quebec premier Legault both kickstarted their political rebirths with "a national conversation".


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 May 2022)

A good ad by Andrew in support of PP





__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=733065927728451


----------



## Remius (27 May 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> A good ad by Andrew in support of PP
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It’s a slick ad to be sure. 

It’s being dishonest about the reasons for inflation.  And I’m not surprised that a career politician with no experience outside politics is supporting another career politician with no experience outside politics. 

That being said, it’s a good ad that looks well produced. that will certainly resonate with the base they are targeting.

Edit: the one other good thing I’ll say is that at least it isn’t attacking the other candidates.


----------



## TacticalTea (27 May 2022)

Following up on my previous points about what makes Aitchison unacceptable as CPC leader:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1530138037853757441
During the French debate, Charest styled himself "The retirement plan of Bloc MPs". On the other hand, those candidates who obsess over Quebec's bills 21 and 96 are effectively making themselves the opposite: the recruitment plan of the Bloc et al. 

You surely can go down that road. But be prepared for a constitutional crisis.


----------



## IKnowNothing (27 May 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Following up on my previous points about what makes Aitchison unacceptable as CPC leader:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1530138037853757441
> ...


I'm of two minds. On one side- gotta pick your battles, on the other- progression over time of things like Bill 96 will further contribute to Quebec being a de facto separate country anyway.  It's already an increasingly inhospitable business environment, under a completely different legal framework.


----------



## Remius (30 May 2022)

Pierre Poilievre 'could be vulnerable,' pollster says, as support softens for frontrunner
					

Abacus Data: Supporters with a negative view are up seven points; supporters with a positive view are down eight points




					nationalpost.com
				




A coronation may be more complicated than previously thought.


----------



## Halifax Tar (30 May 2022)

With today's new gun rules the Cons could really work this in their favor.


----------



## Remius (30 May 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> With today's new gun rules the Cons could really work this in their favor.


Or mess it up. This can be used as a trap.  O’toole went down hill last election after his stance on guns.


----------



## FSTO (31 May 2022)

Remius said:


> Or mess it up. This can be used as a trap.  O’toole went down hill last election after his stance on guns.


O'Toole walked into that trap like Elmer Fudd in Bugs Bunny Cartoon. That the CPC didn't game this out during their run up to the election was mind boggling stupid. Like the sun rising in the morning, the LPC will bring up guns, abortion and privatizing health care in every and all elections.


----------



## GK .Dundas (31 May 2022)

Remius said:


> Also of note was Tim Houston in Nova Scotia who ran on a “we’re not the same conservatives as them” platform.
> 
> The federal party might have some learning to do from their successful provincial cousins.





FSTO said:


> O'Toole walked into that trap like Elmer Fudd in Bugs Bunny Cartoon. That the CPC didn't game this out during their run up to the election was mind boggling stupid. Like the sun rising in the morning, the LPC will bring up guns, abortion and privatizing health care in every and all elections.


I vote they mess it up, judging from previous experiences.


----------



## Navy_Pete (31 May 2022)

GK .Dundas said:


> I vote they mess it up, judging from previous experiences.


Yes, but they will probably innovate a new way to drop the ball this time.


----------



## brihard (31 May 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> With today's new gun rules the Cons could really work this in their favor.


God no. Anyone who cares enough about guns for it to sway their vote has already been swayed. There’s nobody to be newly surprised and shocked by LPC gun control. The anger is all from people who were already angry. The LPC won’t lose meaningful votes over this.

The trap for the CPC here is in being forced to loudly defend the ownership of handguns. That’s unlikely to gain new votes, but potentially may cost them votes in the centre by people who are fairly indifferent to guns until the issue becomes loud and they lean towards gun control. Meanwhile the LPC jockey for left-of-centre votes and pull some from the urban NDP.

Electorally, this is an astute move for the LPC,  whatever the merits of their policy are or aren’t. I have opined previously on the modern CPC’s struggle to overlap ‘electable as leader of CPC’ with ‘electable as leader of Canada’. This is a perfect wedge issue for the LPC to leverage to force the CPC to eat their own and select a leader more likely to have a CPC-base-friendly position on firearms that harms them at the voting booth.


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Jun 2022)

brihard said:


> God no. Anyone who cares enough about guns for it to sway their vote has already been swayed. There’s nobody to be newly surprised and shocked by LPC gun control. The anger is all from people who were already angry. The LPC won’t lose meaningful votes over this.
> 
> The trap for the CPC here is in being forced to loudly defend the ownership of handguns. That’s unlikely to gain new votes, but potentially may cost them votes in the centre by people who are fairly indifferent to guns until the issue becomes loud and they lean towards gun control. Meanwhile the LPC jockey for left-of-centre votes and pull some from the urban NDP.
> 
> Electorally, this is an astute move for the LPC,  whatever the merits of their policy are or aren’t. I have opined previously on the modern CPC’s struggle to overlap ‘electable as leader of CPC’ with ‘electable as leader of Canada’. This is a perfect wedge issue for the LPC to leverage to force the CPC to eat their own and select a leader more likely to have a CPC-base-friendly position on firearms that harms them at the voting booth.



I wouldn't touch the handguns thing.  But there is may more to the legislation and everyone seems to be stuck on the handguns thing.

The new magazine restrictions will effect LEs, Levers, Tube fed .22s, Shotguns ect ect...  All your Fudd guns.

Some of these like the levers and tube fed will be nearly impossible to make compliant.  

This will strike the Fudds.  This is who am referring to being swayed.


----------



## dimsum (1 Jun 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> This will strike the Fudds. This is who am referring to being swayed.


I'm not sure those folks were going to vote LPC in the first place.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Jun 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I wouldn't touch the handguns thing.  But there is may more to the legislation and everyone seems to be stuck on the handguns thing.
> 
> The new magazine restrictions will effect LEs, Levers, Tube fed .22s, Shotguns ect ect...  All your Fudd guns.
> 
> ...





dimsum said:


> I'm not sure those folks were going to vote LPC in the first place.



Are there any Red Tory Fudds?  I wouldn’t think such a person is a meaningfully/statistically significant/impactful voter.


----------



## IKnowNothing (1 Jun 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Are there any Red Tory Fudds?  I wouldn’t think such a person is a meaningfully/statistically significant/impactful voter.


I resemble that remark.  And you're right-  we also tend to live in ridings where we don't really matter, and in my case are of the view that without door to door enforcement fueled by a non-existent registry the impact of that restriction on deer/bush/varmint guns will be nil.

Edit: Agree with @brihard that this is a very well crafted, long term political trap.  A couple (potentiallu pre-planned) tweaks to the magazine restriction (carve out currently owned non-semi-automatic and internally fed, and .22) and you've got legislation that has a practical impact on an extremely small number of gun owners, a number that will inherently fall year over year. And once that legislation is passed it becomes an electoral grenade to replace abortion, because the platform shifts from protecting the status quo for legal gun owners to actively agitating that Canada needs more handguns- the attack ads write themselves


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Jun 2022)

dimsum said:


> I'm not sure those folks were going to vote LPC in the first place.





Good2Golf said:


> Are there any Red Tory Fudds?  I wouldn’t think such a person is a meaningfully/statistically significant/impactful voter.



Yup they do.  I know or have interacted quite a few. 

Will they be meaningful in numbers, or will this th straw that brakes the camels back ?  Who knows, one can hope.


----------



## Brad Sallows (1 Jun 2022)

In politics the strength of an issue as a vote-killer often exceeds its strength as a vote-attractor.

Most people who would be put off by legislation this strict, or (conversely) by a CPC assertion that the "closed marked" would be re-opened are already "dead" to whichever party has the objectionable stance.

The conservative response should be:
1.  This isn't a useful policy; the measures infringe on the freedom of reasonable people and will have very little beneficial effect curbing gun crime.
2.  Offer an alternative: measures to interdict criminal trafficking and use of firearms in crimes.

If questioned on whether they would repeal the legislation, the answer is "These parts: a, b, c...".


----------



## Remius (1 Jun 2022)

MP says so-cons should rank Pierre Poilievre as second choice. Pro-life groups disagree
					

Social conservatives are much more cautious about who they support, after having done so for Erin O’Toole who then pushed them to the sidelines




					nationalpost.com
				




It will be interesting to see if these pro life groups have as much influence in the race.


----------



## RangerRay (3 Jun 2022)

These two articles on the Ontario election by Warren Kensella are very relevant to the federal Tories. 









						My latest: Doug vs. Pierre
					

Musings




					warrenkinsella.com
				












						My latest: the morning after Doug Ford’s big night
					

Musings




					warrenkinsella.com
				




If the Tories think they can win with any of the duds running for leader, they are dreaming in technicolor.


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Jun 2022)

Remius said:


> MP says so-cons should rank Pierre Poilievre as second choice. Pro-life groups disagree
> 
> 
> Social conservatives are much more cautious about who they support, after having done so for Erin O’Toole who then pushed them to the sidelines
> ...


And now the CPC has been sunk. By their own. Again.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Jun 2022)

Maybe Trudeau should try again for a majority?  
He might actually get it this time.


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Jun 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Maybe Trudeau should try again for a majority?
> He might actually get it this time.


If the right-of-centre is split _enough_, not impossible


----------



## IKnowNothing (4 Jun 2022)

Remius said:


> MP says so-cons should rank Pierre Poilievre as second choice. Pro-life groups disagree
> 
> 
> Social conservatives are much more cautious about who they support, after having done so for Erin O’Toole who then pushed them to the sidelines
> ...


Of the 70k that voted Sloan/Lewis last go around, ~20k dropped off by 3rd ballot.  Non an insignificant proportion.  But honestly with the membership drives and early indications of memberships "last go around" proportions are pretty meaningless at this point.


----------



## Navy_Pete (22 Jun 2022)

Huh, this seems like an exceptionally stupid idea.  I'm for limiting deficit spending, but arbitrarily locking spending now doesn't make any sense or give governments flexibility to adapt to changing conditions.

It hasn't worked at all in the US for decades, and just leads to stupid shut downs and random political soapboxing.

Not sure if this is a populist pitch or what, but this guy is really cruising for 3rd place in Parliament.

Poilievre pitches a 'pay-as-you-go' law to rein in federal spending​Conservative leadership contender says every dollar of new spending should be met with a cut to something else​
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-pay-as-you-go-budgeting-1.6497652


----------



## brihard (22 Jun 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Huh, this seems like an exceptionally stupid idea.  I'm for limiting deficit spending, but arbitrarily locking spending now doesn't make any sense or give governments flexibility to adapt to changing conditions.
> 
> It hasn't worked at all in the US for decades, and just leads to stupid shut downs and random political soapboxing.
> 
> ...



If elected by the party, he'll populist his way into another stint as opposition that will be neutered by an NDP balance of power. Basically status quo.


----------



## Halifax Tar (22 Jun 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Huh, this seems like an exceptionally stupid idea.  I'm for limiting deficit spending, but arbitrarily locking spending now doesn't make any sense or give governments flexibility to adapt to changing conditions.
> 
> It hasn't worked at all in the US for decades, and just leads to stupid shut downs and random political soapboxing.
> 
> ...



We share this space.  It's a great sound bite but wickedly impractical.


----------



## brihard (22 Jun 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> It's a great sound bite but wickedly impractical.


That’s increasingly his campaign in a nutshell. Like much of our politics, what you can sell is far more important than what you can implement. He understands this very well.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (22 Jun 2022)

While only tangentially related to the CPC leadership race, an interesting wrinkle.



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/patrick-brown-rempel-garner-ucp-leadership-1.6498054
		



> Patrick Brown's campaign manager joins Michelle Rempel Garner for possible UCP leadership bid​Conservative leadership campaign says Sean Schnell has stepped away
> The Canadian Press · Posted: Jun 22, 2022 3:50 PM MT | Last Updated: 3 hours ago
> 
> Patrick Brown's campaign manager has left to help Michelle Rempel Garner with her possible bid to lead the United Conservative Party in Alberta.
> ...



The loss of Brown's campaign manager (and Michele Rempel Garner as co-chair of his campaign) will likely have no affect on that candidate's outcome in the federal party's leadership race, but what I find interesting is the possible move of Rempel Garner to Alberta provincial politics.  The simple conclusion is that the writing is on the wall who will be the next CPC leader (not Brown) and she has determined that she would not have a place at the adult's table under that leadership.  Sitting in opposition (without even a shadow portfolio) for several more years is probably not high on her list of favourite things.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (22 Jun 2022)

Blackadder1916 said:


> While only tangentially related to the CPC leadership race, an interesting wrinkle.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But she has a pretty good shot at being Premier…


----------



## RangerRay (23 Jun 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> But she has a pretty good shot at being Premier…


I dunno. Looks like a case of jumping from the frying pan into the fire. It’s really too bad because she is someone I would have loved to see run as Tory leader.


----------



## Remius (23 Jun 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I dunno. Looks like a case of jumping from the frying pan into the fire. It’s really too bad because she is someone I would have loved to see run as Tory leader.


There won’t be a place for someone like her in a PP led party.  I suspect a few will jump ship by the next election.


----------



## IKnowNothing (23 Jun 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Huh, this seems like an exceptionally stupid idea.  I'm for limiting deficit spending, but arbitrarily locking spending now doesn't make any sense or give governments flexibility to adapt to changing conditions.


If find it most frustrating that the "what" - leaning out government bloat, taking a critical look at every program- is a fundamentally good idea, but the "how"- heavy handed legislation- is par for the course for a career MP that has zero experience at running an organization, leading people, or accomplishing well, anything.

Well that and his abject refusal to acknowledge the reality of the supply side drivers of current inflation. Those ones are harder to come with soundbite solutions and pin on the sitting government.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (23 Jun 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> If find it most frustrating that the "what" - leaning out government bloat, taking a critical look at every program- is a fundamentally good idea, but the "how"- heavy handed legislation- is par for the course for a career MP that has zero experience at running an organization, leading people, or accomplishing well, anything.
> 
> Well that and his abject refusal to acknowledge the reality of the supply side drivers of current inflation. Those ones are harder to come with soundbite solutions and pin on the sitting government.


I don’t know. A half decent politician could paint a pretty credible picture about how the current Liberal Government actively choked Petroleum development in Canada (and therefore supply). How the price of petroleum is baked into literally every food, good and service in Canada. How the Liberals have been aiming for $2/L gas for years, because climate change. Well- mission accomplished. The planet is saved. They should be made to wear it like a banner…


----------



## IKnowNothing (23 Jun 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I don’t know. A half decent politician could paint a pretty credible picture about how the current Liberal Government actively choked Petroleum development in Canada (and therefore supply). How the price of petroleum is baked into literally every food, good and service in Canada. How the Liberals have been aiming for $2/L gas for years, because climate change. Well- mission accomplished. The planet is saved. They should be made to wear it like a banner…


They could paint paint that picture, but it would be full of holes, such as the global nature of the current shortage, that it's refined product rather than crude based, etc.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (23 Jun 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> They could paint paint that picture, but it would be full of holes, such as the global nature of the current shortage, that it's refined product rather than crude based, etc.


I know how crude is priced.

You are saying that if Canada were producing anywhere from 2-4 million more barrels of crude/day; able to refine at least part of that and able to transport all of it to tidewater (all things the Liberals have actively spiked since 2015) that the supply price situation would not be better?


----------



## QV (23 Jun 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I know how crude is priced.
> 
> You are saying that if Canada were producing anywhere from 2-4 million more barrels of crude/day; able to refine at least part of that and able to transport all of it to tidewater (all things the Liberals have actively spiked since 2015) that the supply price situation would not be better?


Trudeau did say he wanted to price Canadians out of bad habits. I'm not sure why people didn't believe him at the time... his policies sure seemed to support that end, and here we are.

The effects are going to be crippling. One of the foundations for a sound economy is cheap and plentiful energy.


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Jun 2022)

When did campaign statements approach the realm of "will happen for sure"?

Stop being scared by things that will never happen.


----------



## Good2Golf (23 Jun 2022)

QV said:


> Trudeau did say he wanted to price Canadians out of bad habits. I'm not sure why people didn't believe him at the time... his policies sure seemed to support that end, and here we are.
> 
> The effects are going to be crippling. One of the foundations for a sound economy is cheap and plentiful energy.


You know when a Green Party-led coalition in Germany is burning more brown coal and pulling nuke power plants out of reserve, that there's a time and a place...

Canada (Feds) continues to fiddle while Rome burns, believing that unyielding adherence to the 2050 NetZero aspirational goal is the only way we'll go to Heaven... 🙄


----------



## Journeyman (23 Jun 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Canada (Feds) continues to fiddle while Rome burns, believing that unyielding adherence to the 2050 NetZero aspirational goal is the only way we'll go to Heaven... 🙄


I think Trudeau is hoping that Greta Thunberg will hire him, once he's finally out of Parliament.


----------



## IKnowNothing (23 Jun 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I know how crude is priced.
> 
> You are saying that if Canada were producing anywhere from 2-4 million more barrels of crude/day; able to refine at least part of that and able to transport all of it to tidewater (all things the Liberals have actively spiked since 2015) that the supply price situation would not be better?


It might. But then again OPEC might have just cut production by an equal amount, or the additional refining capacity might have joined the million barrels a day that the Americans lost when demand got crushed. (Or more likely, survived but lead to a proportional amount of failures in older American plants).

The problem right now is global refining capacity shortage contributing to massive refining margins, not crude shortage.


----------



## QV (23 Jun 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> When did campaign statements approach the realm of "will happen for sure"?
> 
> Stop being scared by things that will never happen.


What are the things that will never happen?


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Jun 2022)

Pay-as-you-go legislation, for example.  Things politicians will talk about when out of power are often enough things they suddenly find to be inconvenient when they win power.


----------



## Remius (23 Jun 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I dunno. Looks like a case of jumping from the frying pan into the fire. It’s really too bad because she is someone I would have loved to see run as Tory leader.











						Calgary MP Michelle Rempel Garner not running for UCP leadership
					

Despite recent polls calling her a frontrunner, Calgary Nose Hill MP Michelle Rempel Garner will not run to be the next leader of the United Conservative Party.




					calgary.ctvnews.ca
				




Could still happen.


----------



## Remius (25 Jun 2022)

Remius said:


> There won’t be a place for someone like her in a PP led party.  I suspect a few will jump ship by the next election.


And to support what I said here…









						Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner doubles down after Star reveals push to eject her for criticizing colleagues
					

A law that allows MPs to eject fellow members from their caucus encourages abusive behaviour inside political parties and that’s unacceptable, Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner said Friday.




					www.thestar.com


----------



## Dana381 (25 Jun 2022)

After listening to this podcast and other conversations between these two men I thnk Rex Murphy should run for PM. He has a really good handle on Canada and what this country needs going forward. His career as a journalist has given him great insight on Canadians wants and needs and on what works and what dosen't politically.


----------



## suffolkowner (25 Jun 2022)

Remius said:


> And to support what I said here…
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If there's no room for Michelle Remple-Garner in the Conservative party thats a scary idea IMO


----------



## rmc_wannabe (25 Jun 2022)

The problem I have seen in the CPC since Harper's departure is that there isn't a seat at the table for anyone close to the centre; O'Toole, Rempel-Garner, I'm sure Charest and Brown will soon be added to this list.

PP is the frontrunner because he is the fringe candidate; the CPC party sages are putting their bets that the fringe of Canadian voters are far more right leaning than they would ever let on in public. 

They're wrong, and our past 8 years of Liberal government have demonstrated as such. 

The majority of Canadians have Centrist or Left of Centre ideals at heart on most social issues. Canadian society is far more accepting of alternative lifestyles, non secular ideals, and is far less "Old Stock" than it was 20 years ago. 

I had a colleague say to me that it doesn't matter how "fiscally conservative" a person can be; it will always be the cost of accepting social conservatism by voting CPC. For people in the LGBTQ2IA+ community, it's a non-starter. For victim's of religious trauma and conversion therapy, it's a non-starter. For most women and young voters, it's a non-starter. For most indigenous groups, it's a non-starter. Same with BIPOC Canadians (except the South East/West Asian populations in urban centres... that one is kind of a wildcard.) They would rather hold their nose and vote Liberal again before heading down that road. 

The CPC needs Red Tories more than it needs to pull in more PPC or "Northern Republican" voters. The sooner they realize this, the sooner they get a chance to govern. Sticking to the issues of fiscal mismanagement, government corruption, and developing our industries and communities will get them there. 

Keeping the lunatics in the asylum should be the primary campaign plan moving forward. Punting people like Rempel-Garner is not a good start.


----------



## Remius (25 Jun 2022)

It’s two parties in one.  The more right will morph into the status quo for the CPC.  The more centrist and “red Tory” types will need to either go their own way or accept and try to influence policy by joining the LPC once Trudeau is gone.


----------



## GK .Dundas (25 Jun 2022)

The problem is that Lunatics are running the asylum.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Jun 2022)

Remius said:


> It’s *been* two parties in one *since 2003*.



 Yup. 😉



Remius said:


> The more right will morph into the status quo for the CPC.



And if rumours are true, then it has legally blocked/prohibited the PC party from ever rebirthing with its original name.



Remius said:


> The more centrist and “red Tory” types will need to either go their own way or accept and try to influence policy by joining the LPC once Trudeau is gone.


Either way…PC2 or as Blue Grits, thus the CPC is likely to be Her Majesty’s Official Opposition of Canada’s Parliament for a long…long…very long time.


----------



## Remius (25 Jun 2022)

So I know a few of us here that live in PP’s riding have mused about the support he might see in the next election should he become leader.  This poll seems to agree with us as his support in the riding has slid to the margin of error.  Mostly based on his support for the convoy. 



			https://old.ipolitics.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Mainstreet_Riding_Poll_Carleton_June_14_15_2022-1.pdf
		


Still lots of time for things to change but he will need to pay attention and watch his next steps.  My guess is he might not go near the next upcoming convoy protests due to arrive.  I guess we’ll see.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Jun 2022)

Remius said:


> So I know a few of us here that live in PP’s riding have mused about the support he might see in the next election should he become leader.  This poll seems to agree with us as his support in the riding has slid to the margin of error.  Mostly based on his support for the convoy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If he doesn’t take that to heart, he shouldn’t be surprised at the forever Opposition status if he becomes Leader of the CPC.

Incidentally, Jagmeet’s Rolex, BMW and fancy suits clearly comes through in the NDP’s candidate Kevin Hua’s greatest support of from the >$100K Sunshine Listers… 🤔


----------



## brihard (26 Jun 2022)

rmc_wannabe said:


> The problem I have seen in the CPC since Harper's departure is that there isn't a seat at the table for anyone close to the centre; O'Toole, Rempel-Garner, I'm sure Charest and Brown will soon be added to this list.
> 
> PP is the frontrunner because he is the fringe candidate; the CPC party sages are putting their bets that the fringe of Canadian voters are far more right leaning than they would ever let on in public.
> 
> ...


The CPC seem to be more afraid of losing likes and retweets to the PPC, than of losing votes to the LPC. The freely trade the one for the other.



Remius said:


> So I know a few of us here that live in PP’s riding have mused about the support he might see in the next election should he become leader.  This poll seems to agree with us as his support in the riding has slid to the margin of error.  Mostly based on his support for the convoy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And that’s a pretty significant “undecided” cohort, too. This riding may actually be in contention. Last election I described it as a solid lock for CPC.

Of course, there are still three years to go. And if Poilievre wins leadership that may give him a boost just as much as it galvanizes opposition.

Haven’t heard him say much about crypto in the last couple months. I wonder why?


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Jun 2022)

Its likely that the hope is that Pierre Polievre can attract large numbers of people that don't traditionally vote or aren't voting. The holy grail of political parties for some time. If we can just get a small number of the 40% of people who dont vote to swing our way the election will be ours


----------



## Navy_Pete (26 Jun 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> Its likely that the hope is that Pierre Polievre can attract large numbers of people that don't traditionally vote or aren't voting. The holy grail of political parties for some time. If we can just get a small number of the 40% of people who dont vote to swing our way the election will be ours


I think the success of the fundamentalists in getting Roe vs Wade will have the opposite effect in terms of who comes out voting and people that pander to the so-con sector will ignore this at their peril. Honestly wouldn't be surprised if the CPC slipped from being official opposition with either the PQ or NDP taking over.


----------



## Remius (26 Jun 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> I think the success of the fundamentalists in getting Roe vs Wade will have the opposite effect in terms of who comes out voting and people that pander to the so-con sector will ignore this at their peril. Honestly wouldn't be surprised if the CPC slipped from being official opposition with either the PQ or NDP taking over.


If that split is big enough, possible.


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 Jun 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> If he doesn’t take that to heart, he shouldn’t be surprised at the forever Opposition status if he becomes Leader of the CPC.


That would suck for the whatever form of a conservative party ends up evolving, but I'm still convinced that 1)  he may be more than OK being the noisy & laser-focused thorn-in-the-side of a Liberal government (especially a minority one), and 2)  he may be better suited as that than carrying out the relatively boring stuff of caucus management, governing, etc.  (you know, the same stuff current Team Red management seems to be bored with).


----------



## Remius (26 Jun 2022)

brihard said:


> The CPC seem to be more afraid of losing likes and retweets to the PPC, than of losing votes to the LPC. The freely trade the one for the other.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And in another sign…









						Former Government Leader Of The Senate Resigns From Pierre Poilievre's Riding Association Board Over Worrisome Future For The Party - Manotick Messenger
					

Marjory LeBreton, former Government Leader of the Senate, has resigned from Carleton's Conservative board over fears for the parties future.




					manotickmessenger.ca


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Jun 2022)

Where are all these red Tories going to go if its too bad in the CPC? Try to grab a bunch of blue Liberals and form another party?


----------



## brihard (26 Jun 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> Where are all these red Tories going to go if its too bad in the CPC? Try to grab a bunch of blue Liberals and form another party?


Probably just vote Liberal in hopes it convinces the CPC to smarten up. It's the 'diaper' approach to voting that many of us in the centre adhere to; when your current party of choice gets too full of shit, change it. Repeat a few elections later.


----------



## Remius (26 Jun 2022)

More from Global









						‘I’m very worried’: Former Tory Senate leader on Poilievre, convoys and the party’s future - National | Globalnews.ca
					

Conservatives risk "fracturing beyond repair" over its convoy support and fractious leadership contest, says a former Stephen Harper advisor and Conservative Senate leader.




					globalnews.ca
				




Her comment here sums it up: _ “You could easily tell this was not going to end well,” said LeBreton, who said she felt like she no longer had a home in the Conservative party she had a hand in building._


----------



## RangerRay (27 Jun 2022)

Remius said:


> More from Global
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That’s something. 

Everyone used to talk about how “extreme“ Stephen Harper was, yet red Tories like her and Hugh Segal were very comfortable with him as leader.  

Harper would have sorted this shit out long ago and punted some of these wankers from caucus.  I miss him.


----------



## Brad Sallows (27 Jun 2022)

The LPC and NDP worked hard to get rid of Harper.  I can see why people would reward them by voting for them.


----------



## IKnowNothing (27 Jun 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> Where are all these red Tories going to go if its too bad in the CPC? Try to grab a bunch of blue Liberals and form another party?


Likely still vote blue locally (providing that MP stays out of the nonsense) while rooting for a nation wide smackdown that either smartens the CPC up or splits it.


----------



## Good2Golf (27 Jun 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Likely still vote blue locally (providing that MP stays out of the nonsense) while rooting for a nation wide smackdown that either smartens the CPC up or splits it.


I aspire to owning a Rolex and a BMW one day, so I may vote NDP…


----------



## IKnowNothing (4 Jul 2022)

Preliminary lists are out, direct contact has begun.

PP, Lewis, Baber all have their main message built around the pandemic restrictions and grievance politics.   Someone in PP's team is bold, keeping member emails short, punchy, and almost childish like tweets.  Not sure if that style transfers well between mediums but we'll see.

I'd love to see the polling that's telling them that this is the play, to me it seems likely that's PP's membership surge is 2020 PPC voters that want to pull the CPC to have a chance to have a meaningful vote, not voters that are new to being right of the LPC.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (4 Jul 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Preliminary lists are out, direct contact has begun.
> 
> PP, Lewis, Baber all have their main message built around the pandemic restrictions and grievance politics.   Someone in PP's team is bold, keeping member emails short, punchy, and almost childish like tweets.  Not sure if that style transfers well between mediums but we'll see.
> 
> I'd love to see the polling that's telling them that this is the play, to me it seems likely that's PP's membership surge is 2020 PPC voters that want to pull the CPC to have a chance to have a meaningful vote, not voters that are new to being right of the LPC.


The problem is that its not the Fringe morons you have to pull to get on to your side in large numbers; very few Canadians are as right-wing as PP et all would suspect they are. 

Team Red has made a huge play to paint anyone a toe over the centre line as an extremist looking to cave to social conservatism, the Christian Alt-Right and pull the rug out from anyone in vulnerable sectors of society. Many people I know that voted Liberal in the last election did so strictly because there is no room for moderates in the CPC it seems, A lot of people the CPC could easily court are Liberals who are fed up with the current situation in the LPC. That will give you more votes/seats than trying to win over PPC voters.

If the CPC wants a chance to govern, they need to move closer towards the centre and court those estranged from the current establishment. They do that by not letting the lunatics get hold of the asylum.


----------



## Remius (4 Jul 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Preliminary lists are out, direct contact has begun.
> 
> PP, Lewis, Baber all have their main message built around the pandemic restrictions and grievance politics.   Someone in PP's team is bold, keeping member emails short, punchy, and almost childish like tweets.  Not sure if that style transfers well between mediums but we'll see.
> 
> I'd love to see the polling that's telling them that this is the play, to me it seems likely that's PP's membership surge is 2020 PPC voters that want to pull the CPC to have a chance to have a meaningful vote, not voters that are new to being right of the LPC.


Ive been getting my daily spam mail lol


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Jul 2022)

People tend to campaign more to their "side" during primaries/leadership selections/conventions, and more to the centre during general elections.


----------



## Remius (4 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> People tend to campaign more to their "side" during primaries/leadership selections/conventions, and more to the centre during general elections.


That’s what got O’toole turfed.


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> People tend to campaign more to their "side" during primaries/leadership selections/conventions, and more to the centre during general elections.


It'll be interesting to see if PP does that if (when?) he takes over the Team Blue wheelhouse.


----------



## Navy_Pete (4 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> That’s what got O’toole turfed.


It really did backfire on him (and others). With everything being recorded, harder than ever to pander to bases without it coming to light.

And it's not like it was opinions from things from decades ago that bit him in the ass, it was things he said to the so-cons during the leadership race on a Zoom call that bit him in the ass right away. I guess it was at least in French, so points for bilingualism. Probably also an anti-Franco crowd somewhere that doesn't like that as well.

Based on the crop of CPC candidates, guess we're looking at yet another term of the LPC.

PP jumping onboard the cryptobro train was the last straw and he's since said stupider things. Maybe the old adage about not saying anything and letting people think you are dumb would have been wise.


----------



## Remius (4 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> It really did backfire on him (and others). With everything being recorded, harder than ever to pander to bases without it coming to light.
> 
> And it's not like it was opinions from things from decades ago that bit him in the ass, it was things he said to the so-cons during the leadership race on a Zoom call that bit him in the ass right away. I guess it was at least in French, so points for bilingualism. Probably also an anti-Franco crowd somewhere that doesn't like that as well.
> 
> ...


There is enough social media posts and sound bites to come back and haunt him if he does try to woo the Center.  I expect another LPC term as well. 

The one spoiler I could see is if Brown leaves the race.  Most of his supporters would likely go Charest.  Lewis already telegraphed her support for Charest so maybe it will still be a race.  But we’ll see.


----------



## Remius (6 Jul 2022)

And here we go…



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/patrick-brown-disqualified-conservative-leadership-1.6511407
		


I assume the bulk of his support goes to Charest.


----------



## IKnowNothing (6 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> And here we go…
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Presuming of course that his signups aren't challenged 

Until presented compelling proof to the contrary, I'm going to assume that this is exactly like 2018
A. there is some element of "truth" to the allegations. Brown will have done something distasteful and morally ambiguous, but it will fall short of criminal wrongdoing, rule breaking, or really being any worse than you'd expect from a politician
B. The CPC thinks that Trudeau is a dead man walking, that the next election is theirs to lose, and want to ensure that the leader they want is in place to take advantage of the victory
C. There's a smelly underside to the party that wants nothing to do with Patrick Brown, social moderates, or a multi-cultural Conservative party, and they had the benefit of learning from the Ontario PC's not to underestimate Brown and decided to bring out the knives and hatchets early to minimize the controversy.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (6 Jul 2022)

I'm going with "c"


----------



## Lumber (6 Jul 2022)

All of the above.


----------



## IKnowNothing (6 Jul 2022)

Lumber said:


> All of the above.





Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I'm going with "c"


Yeah that was a list rather than a multiple choice.  I don't think B is anywhere near as strong as in 2018 with Wynne, but overall the situation has the exact same stench.  They sense opportunity and don't want to "squander" it with a leader that will take them somewhere they don't want to go.


----------



## Lumber (6 Jul 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Presuming of course that his signups aren't challenged
> 
> B. The CPC thinks that Trudeau is a dead man walking, that the next election is theirs to lose, and want to ensure that the leader they want is in place to take advantage of the victory


I agree, but I don't really get this. I even a short clip from a video of a pod cast where the host was saying to his guest "They say 30% of people will still vote liberal. Can you believe that?! Like how is that possible?!" And I would counter with "how do you NOT believe that? Are you that naive?"


----------



## Navy_Pete (6 Jul 2022)

I would say yes; they keep putting up leaders with dubious competence or very punchable and then wonder why they lose. I actually thought O'Toole was pretty good but was trying to please all the wings of the party while still being electable. That's an impossible task, as some of the fringe elements have stances that make the leader political kryptonite.

I think some house cleaning is needed to ever get electable; they may lose members to the PPC or whatever, but right now they are alienating the majority of the centre who have no interest in going back to the 1950s, and just want to be able to pay their bills without the country falling apart.

I don't want to vote for either at this point, but there isn't any non-lunatic middle ground smaller parties in my area, and the NDP and Green party candidates seem to be whoever has a pulse that wants their name on a placard instead of someone who would actually be a competent MP if elected.


----------



## IKnowNothing (6 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> I would say yes; they keep putting up leaders with dubious competence or very punchable and then wonder why they lose. I actually thought O'Toole was pretty good but was trying to please all the wings of the party while still being electable. That's an impossible task, as some of the fringe elements have stances that make the leader political kryptonite.
> 
> I think some house cleaning is needed to ever get electable; they may lose members to the PPC or whatever, but right now they are alienating the majority of the centre who have no interest in going back to the 1950s, and just want to be able to pay their bills without the country falling apart.
> 
> I don't want to vote for either at this point, but there isn't any non-lunatic middle ground smaller parties in my area, and the NDP and Green party candidates seem to be whoever has a pulse that wants their name on a placard instead of someone who would actually be a competent MP if elected.


With the same thoughts running through my head, presuming I'm not completely off base, and assuming PP wins..   I wonder if the braintrust behind this course of action has considered that they've  alienated a membership pool effectively large enough for a first ballot win of any other leadership contest in the history of the party, tied to a candidate with strong allegiance to one with the backing of the PC establishment and endorsement of a non-trivial number of MP's,  all this with potentially years before an election.   The recipe is there for a split/defection that dwarfs Mr. Bernier's.


----------



## RangerRay (6 Jul 2022)

I always found something sleazy about Brown. I couldn’t put my finger on it but the previous allegations, his promise to legalize the Tamil Tigers without any discussions with the national security apparatus, and his reluctance to challenge China on their influence and intimidation operations really didn’t help dispel that. 

I also don’t find Pollievre or Charest to be very compelling either.  I suspect I will be politically homeless for the next several years.


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Jul 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I always found something sleazy about Brown. I couldn’t put my finger on it but the previous allegations, his promise to legalize the Tamil Tigers without any discussions with the national security apparatus, and his reluctance to challenge China on their influence and intimidation operations really didn’t help dispel that.
> 
> I also don’t find Pollievre or Charest to be very compelling either.  I suspect I will be politically homeless for the next several years.


I’m prepping already for the walk in the snow…
😆


----------



## RangerRay (6 Jul 2022)

I think Trudeau Jr. will stick around for another kick at the can. He can’t help himself.   He loves a fight and I think would relish the chance to put another Tory leader into the political grave.   Despite his innumerable failings, I think he has a good chance of doing that.


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Jul 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I think Trudeau Jr. will stick around for another kick at the can. He can’t help himself.   He loves a fight and I think would relish the chance to put another Tory leader into the political grave.   Despite his innumerable failings, I think he has a good chance of doing that.


Most likely.  In change management, there’s often talk of the ‘burning platform’ to get folks to jump off…Fils et Cie. are geared up in the latest fire retardant apparel.

JT and friends could pretty much walk unburnt through a massive party hosted trilaterally by the Aga Khan, SNC Lavelin and the Kielburger brothers…


----------



## Remius (6 Jul 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I think Trudeau Jr. will stick around for another kick at the can. He can’t help himself.   He loves a fight and I think would relish the chance to put another Tory leader into the political grave.   Despite his innumerable failings, I think he has a good chance of doing that.


I think he’s done.  He was done when he didn’t get his majority. He’s on his legacy world tour right now.  I predict he’ll step down, they’ll have a very polite leadership contest to contrast the current CPC leadership goat rodeo and maybe call a snap election when it suits them and catch the CPC off guard. 

Could maybe win but I doubt he can win a majority.

He’d rather leave undefeated and pass the torch off.  I expect an announcement around Xmas or early new year that he’s stepping down when a new leader is chosen.


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> Could maybe win but I doubt he can win a majority.



Honestly....does he have to?


----------



## Remius (6 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Honestly....does he have to?


I think he does. And I think he or rather someone has done the math if he stays in power.


----------



## Furniture (6 Jul 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I always found something sleazy about Brown. I couldn’t put my finger on it but the previous allegations, his promise to legalize the Tamil Tigers without any discussions with the national security apparatus, and his reluctance to challenge China on their influence and intimidation operations really didn’t help dispel that.
> 
> I also don’t find Pollievre or Charest to be very compelling either.  I suspect I will be politically homeless for the next several years.


I can't understand why Brown was considered a "better" alternative to PP by anyone who wants to see a CPC win in the next election. He was fired from the Ontario PCs because of sexual misconduct... Regardless of the fact the woman in question wasn't underage, and nothing criminal was discovered, it would still be a damaging weapon for the LPC/NDP to use against him, and the CPC in general, for electing a leader known to have committed sexual misconduct.


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Jul 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I think Trudeau Jr. will stick around for another kick at the can. He can’t help himself.   He loves a fight and I think would relish the chance to put another Tory leader into the political grave.   Despite his innumerable failings, I think he has a good chance of doing that.


The main reason I don't think this'll be the case is because I don't see Team Red rousing up the unwashed in a mass "PP is evil!" narrative - or they may be waiting to see if/when he's officially the leader, too.  

And as much as I'm not wild about PP, Team Red's captain'll have a hard time standing up to him rhetorically speaking (pun intended).  I also don't see a lot of next-in-lines on Team Red to be able to stand up to & push PP hard, either.


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Jul 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> And as much as I'm not wild about PP, Team Red's captain'll have a hard time standing up to him rhetorically speaking (pun intended). I also don't see a lot of next-in-lines on Team Red to be able to stand up to & push PP hard, either.


I’d definitely pay top dollar for front row seats to the debates (French AND English) though, if JT stayed on for another round and PP was CPC leader!!!


----------



## Navy_Pete (6 Jul 2022)

Why would anyone have to push PP hard? He's inherently unlikeable to a lot of people, and has curated a 15 second news reel setup as an attack dog.

I think they could sit back and let him sink himself, along with the crypto stock and freedum convoy he hitched himself to in a bunch of self goals. Dude is a walking series of unforced error who has never held a real job. To top it all off he's got a Howdy Doody haircut in a throwback to the 'good old days' and has that compensating small man energy.

I think JT would beat him by default if he just kept his mouth shut, and anyone else would be looking at a majority with the LPC.

Even if his policy and plans were sound (which they aren't) he has to overcome a personality deficit of being a smug face you kind of want to punch.

All incredibly harsh and shallow judgements, but that seems to matter more than sound policy and being competent (and so far he's demonstrated neither). He may get the 'own the libs' votes, plus some family but after that, I really can't see him making inroads if he has to be coherent past a soundbite and sell what he can do, vice how bad the other guy is.

I think he would just be yet another mistake at electing as a leader.... so landslide win to lead the CPCs into maybe scraping out the official opposition! (but only because the BQ takes seats from the NDP).


----------



## TacticalTea (6 Jul 2022)

I just want Jean Charest so that the Crown stays in Quebec, no matter who wins.


----------



## Furniture (6 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Why would anyone have to push PP hard? He's inherently unlikeable to a lot of people, and has curated a 15 second news reel setup as an attack dog.
> 
> I think they could sit back and let him sink himself, along with the crypto stock and freedum convoy he hitched himself to in a bunch of self goals. Dude is a walking series of unforced error who has never held a real job. To top it all off he's got a Howdy Doody haircut in a throwback to the 'good old days' and has that compensating small man energy.
> 
> ...


I suspect that much like the people who underestimate the appeal of JT, you are underestimating the appeal of PP. Remember back in 2014 when people were pretty sure that JT wasn't going to be "serious" enough to attract voters? 

The LPC have ben losing more of the popular vote each time they go to the polls, if PP can bring a bit more "sunny ways" to his messaging after the CPC leadership race he may be able to swing voters his way.


----------



## Navy_Pete (7 Jul 2022)

JT was pro-choice though; even a whiff of pro life, anti-vaxx etc is enough that people just won't trust that he'll pander to the lunatics in the asylum if he gets in. That killed O'Toole and he was pretty centrist outside that single zoom call with the QC so-cons, and he was foxed.

I think the CPC is also underestimating how punchable his face is; some people are naturally quite dividing and he seems to be one of them. When a number of people have a visceral, illogical reaction to someone it's probably a bad sign to their electability. I don't even think he may get re-elected in his own riding after siding with the convoy who were pissing off his constituents.


----------



## Lumber (7 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> I think the CPC is also underestimating how punchable his face is; some people are naturally quite dividing and he seems to be one of them.


Yes! This! Everyone I know agrees with this. Such a punchable face.


----------



## Furniture (7 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> JT was pro-choice though; even a whiff of pro life, anti-vaxx etc is enough that people just won't trust that he'll pander to the lunatics in the asylum if he gets in. That killed O'Toole and he was pretty centrist outside that single zoom call with the QC so-cons, and he was foxed.
> 
> I think the CPC is also underestimating how punchable his face is; some people are naturally quite dividing and he seems to be one of them. When a number of people have a visceral, illogical reaction to someone it's probably a bad sign to their electability. I don't even think he may get re-elected in his own riding after siding with the convoy who were pissing off his constituents.


His riding is well outside the downtown, and even just across the Rideau River(but still well inside the general "downtown" according to many) in Vanier the convoy was only annoying because of the media coverage. I spent weeks not being bothered by anything happening within a couple of blocks of Parliament, and I suspect the good people who live south of Nepean had the same experience. 

O'Tool was brought low by waffling, not by having a position. He tried to play both sides, appearing unreliable to both. PP for all his faults doesn't seem to be one to try to play both sides. 

I'm not saying PP would be the best PM ever, but I suspect he would do a lot better than the guy in the office right now. Until the LPC puts someone serious in the leader role, I think a punchable PP is better than a punchable JT...


----------



## Remius (7 Jul 2022)

Furniture said:


> His riding is well outside the downtown, and even just across the Rideau River(but still well inside the general "downtown" according to many) in Vanier the convoy was only annoying because of the media coverage. I spent weeks not being bothered by anything happening within a couple of blocks of Parliament, and I suspect the good people who live south of Nepean had the same experience.
> 
> O'Tool was brought low by waffling, not by having a position. He tried to play both sides, appearing unreliable to both. PP for all his faults doesn't seem to be one to try to play both sides.
> 
> I'm not saying PP would be the best PM ever, but I suspect he would do a lot better than the guy in the office right now. Until the LPC puts someone serious in the leader role, I think a punchable PP is better than a punchable JT...


I’m one of his constituents.  I voted for him last time.  This time not likely if he becomes leader. 



			https://old.ipolitics.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Mainstreet_Riding_Poll_Carleton_June_14_15_2022-1.pdf
		


I posted this recent poll of the riding a few days ago and support for PP is now within the margin of error.  A big drop for someone who overwhelmingly wins most elections with large margins.  And if you look at the data, his performance in regards to the convoy has had a negative impact. 

That being said.  We are still a long way from an election.  And maybe he gets a leader’s bump if he becomes the leader.  So things can change.

But I am aware of several people in the riding (some on this site) that are not impressed with him right now and that poll seems to support that. 

Time will tell if changes though. 

I would be happy though with any leader that isn’t punchable though at this point lol.


----------



## Halifax Tar (7 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> JT was pro-choice though; even a whiff of pro life, anti-vaxx etc is enough that people just won't trust that he'll pander to the lunatics in the asylum if he gets in. That killed O'Toole and he was pretty centrist outside that single zoom call with the QC so-cons, and he was foxed.
> 
> I think the CPC is also underestimating how punchable his face is; some people are naturally quite dividing and he seems to be one of them. When a number of people have a visceral, illogical reaction to someone it's probably a bad sign to their electability. I don't even think he may get re-elected in his own riding after siding with the convoy who were pissing off his constituents.



I actually agree with you.  I think PP will be fodder for the Liberal machine.  He will give an easy minority to the Libs, but I don't see a majority coming their way.

I've said this a few times now.  This may be a long game strategy by the Cons.  By giving the Libs successive chances to act like buffoons', which they take glee in embracing, Liberal stock continues to fall.

One more round and maybe the Libs will put themselves in a position similar or worse than '11 where the Libs have spent all their capital and completely collapse.  Could we be seeing a repeat of the Chretien V Martin situation ?   I remember the Libs going through a few lame ducks before the sun prince emerged.

Rona Ambrose, are you waiting in the bushes to pounce ?


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Jul 2022)

To be fair to PP I suppose (Uugh, can’t believe I said that), if he wins the leadership and does a solid campaign right and lead from centre…a mirror version of classic Chretien/Martinism, and grip the edges like Harper did (not weakly fawning like both Scheer and more so O’Toole did, it might retain the Red Tories and possibly even attract some Blue Grits (especially of the LPC keeps trying to out-Left Team Orange to steal their numbers.


----------



## IKnowNothing (7 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> To be fair to PP I suppose (Uugh, can’t believe I said that), if he wins the leadership and does a solid campaign right and lead from centre…a mirror version of classic Chretien/Martinism, and grip the edges like Harper did (not weakly fawning like both Scheer and more so O’Toole did, it might retain the Red Tories and possibly even attract some Blue Grits (especially of the LPC keeps trying to out-Left Team Orange to steal their numbers.





Halifax Tar said:


> I actually agree with you.  I think PP will be fodder for the Liberal machine.  He will give an easy minority to the Libs, but I don't see a majority coming their way.


The thing I can't get over with CPC caucus/ establishment being seemingly all in on PP is that it's such a narrow path to victory. Unless he changes every single thing about his persona and style there's only one scenario where he can effectively govern, or even influence the governance of Canada, and that's a Conservative majority.  As a person he hasn't shown the ability to play nice with others, and the place he wants to lead the party and base to is too far off centre to work constructively across the aisle.

Conservative Minority likely = a formal Liberal NDP coalition and one epic tantrum, a lot of crying about government being stolen
Liberal Minority = several more years of attack dog Pierre yapping in the wind while governance happens around him

There's more to the leadership than just "who can beat the libs",  I want a leader that has the CPC in a position to positively impact the governance of the nation regardless of electoral outcome.  That can put one foot in front of the other and pull a Liberal minority right rather than pushing them left.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (7 Jul 2022)

The problem with the CPC is that they have spent the majority of their existance being "not like the Liberals" without realizing that Canadians want them to be basically the Liberals with some fiscal restraint. 

As much as the PPC and other Far Right folks will try to argue it, the majority of Canadians have socialist leanings. We aren't ardent capitalists, social conservatives, or libertarians; so why develop a platform with those ideals that isn't palatable to your target audience? 

Keep the narrative of fiscal restraint, economic policies that benefit Canadians, and foreign policy that will keep us in good standing with our friends and neighbours. That's it. That's the platform. 

Anything else is static noise that plays into the hands of the Liberals and NDP.


----------



## RangerRay (7 Jul 2022)

rmc_wannabe said:


> The problem with the CPC is that they have spent the majority of their existance being "not like the Liberals" without realizing that Canadians want them to be basically the Liberals with some fiscal restraint. competent management skills


FTFY


----------



## QV (7 Jul 2022)

Every time someone says a person is "punchable" it completely degenerates their argument from there.

Though it is good to see some of you grudgingly admitting PP would prob do alright, especially debating JT.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 Jul 2022)

Canada has two crises right now.  Fiscal management, and public health care.  Everything else people worry about is just noise.


----------



## QV (7 Jul 2022)

rmc_wannabe said:


> The problem with the CPC is that they have spent the majority of their existance being "not like the Liberals" without realizing that Canadians want them to be basically the Liberals with some fiscal restraint.  The number of conservative provincial governments elected would be evidence this theory is not accurate. The LPC of today is not really liberal, in fact have acted quite illiberal.
> 
> As much as the PPC and other Far Right folks will try to argue it, the majority of Canadians have socialist leanings. We aren't ardent capitalists, social conservatives, or libertarians; so why develop a platform with those ideals that isn't palatable to your target audience? PP is not far right. But you may be right about many Canadians having socialist leanings, which continues to grow for every industry destroyed and supplemented by new government handouts - this needs to be reversed, not accepted. Do we want to be more like a socialist country or more like the USA at the height of the American Dream?
> 
> ...


----------



## Lumber (7 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Every time someone says a person is "punchable" it completely degenerates their argument from there.
> 
> Though it is good to see some of you grudgingly admitting PP would prob do alright, especially debating JT.


Sure, if I tried to use that to strengthen or support any other argument, but none of us did. It’s a separate qualification. I could present to you someone who I think would be the best prime minister ever and still also present to you the idea that they had an extremely punchable face.


----------



## Underway (7 Jul 2022)

> The number of conservative provincial governments elected would be evidence this theory is not accurate. The LPC of today is not really liberal, in fact have acted quite illiberal.


Don't confuse classic liberalism with Liberals.  The 1960's moved them to a completely different place in political philosophy with their focus on civil liberties changing.  And they aren't acting any more illiberal than any other government since Confederation.



> PP is not far right. But you may be right about many Canadians having socialist leanings, which continues to grow for every industry destroyed and supplemented by new government handouts - this needs to be reversed, not accepted. Do we want to be more like a socialist country or more like the USA at the height of the American Dream?


Depends on where the center is, and it's certainly not anywhere near PP. He'll likely win an election due to electoral fatigue from JT and then do so much damage to the CPC brand that it will guarantee Liberals winning another three terms in the following elections.  Take a page from Ford and lean into the middle ground or guarantee no votes in Quebec and the Maritimes.

Of course, Canadians are socialist.  Welfare, employment insurance, healthcare, gov't assistance of all types.  There is a strong argument that Alberta is the most socialist of the bunch based on pay and program funding. 



Lumber said:


> Sure, if I tried to use that to strengthen or support any other argument, but none of us did. It’s a separate qualification. I could present to you someone who I think would be the best prime minister ever and still also present to you the idea that they had an extremely punchable face.


John A would punch you right back!  And Cretien would choke you out (his wife would brain you with a soapstone sculpture)!


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Jul 2022)

Underway said:


> Don't confuse classic liberalism with Liberals. The 1960's moved them to a completely different place in political philosophy with their focus on civil liberties changing. And they aren't acting any more illiberal than any other government since Confederation.


…from ‘68 onwards.  Prior to that, Liberals, not Conservatives, were the hawkish ones working deals with the US to deploy nukes on Canadian soil, long before the entrenchment of the Blue Beret’d Boy Scout image.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (7 Jul 2022)

rmc_wannabe said:


> The problem with the CPC is that they have spent the majority of their existance being "not like the Liberals" without realizing that Canadians want them to be basically the Liberals with some fiscal restraint.
> 
> As much as the PPC and other Far Right folks will try to argue it, the majority of Canadians have socialist leanings. We aren't ardent capitalists, social conservatives, or libertarians; so why develop a platform with those ideals that isn't palatable to your target audience?
> 
> ...


Sometimes it isn’t about winning but what you represent. If you have to throw the baby out with the bathwater what was the point?

I believe a true Classical Liberal party would actually be well received in Canada. Basically it wouldn’t care if your gay, trans, black, native, wanting a abortion, etc. i.e. all the social stuff a lot of the mostly left get up in arms about, and it also wouldn’t care if you own guns or use your freedom of speech, i.e. a lot of the stuff the mostly right care about. Add in some fiscal restraint and you would have a very solid party for Canadians likely pulling in about 50% of the vote (i.e. a centre leaning party). And more importantly than pulling in 50% of the vote it would likely be a good mix of rural and urban voters, which is how you win elections.

Right now the Liberals have gone so far to the left to take from the NDP the centre is open for the taking. 

The way I see it is most the people voting Liberal at the moment are doing so not because they truly believe in what the Liberals are doing (and the farther left they go the less they believe in it), rather it is they are afraid of what the Conservatives MIGHT do. The Liberals are very good at making them out to be the boogie man aiming to take away universal health care, make abortions illegal well giving children machine guns. The Conservatives are good at giving them ammo for that argument with a few quick soundbites which look bad out of context (or sometimes in context).

That and when you refuse to put a platform forward which you get your party on board for, its hard to dissuade people that what they are saying is untrue.


----------



## QV (7 Jul 2022)

Underway said:


> He'll likely win an election due to electoral fatigue from JT and then do so much damage to the CPC brand that it will guarantee Liberals winning another three terms in the following elections.  Take a page from Ford and lean into the middle ground or guarantee no votes in Quebec and the Maritimes.


That's quite the prediction. I suppose we could turn up our noses and vote in a way that allows JT or the JT/JS alliance to continue doing a bang up job. 

Harper was allegedly a right wing spawn of demon too before he became PM.


----------



## Navy_Pete (7 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Every time someone says a person is "punchable" it completely degenerates their argument from there.
> 
> Though it is good to see some of you grudgingly admitting PP would prob do alright, especially debating JT.


It's definitely not a mature or logical response, but when someone provokes some kind of visceral reaction like that, it's a really huge first impression to overcome. Some people just have a really greasy or sleezy vibe about them, and the guy's voice and personality sets my teeth on edge.

Not meaning it literally, but it's a definite personality deficit that will impact his chances. Boring but competent is fine; aggravating as hell takes a lot of convincing to listen to. Maybe he's a great guy who knows what he's doing, but his actions and words really just reinforce that impression, so don't see that changing. Even just reading his points he comes across as a smarmy arshehole, and his points are frequently implausibly stupid or impractical.

An given how well JT did in beating Brazeau in boxing, I think he'd win both an actual fight and the personality appeal in a debate.

I just don't see a path to governance with PP at the helm, and don't see anyone being coordinated enough to have that as an intentional strategy. I think it's really more of a strong appeal to his echo chamber, which is increasing alienating long term Conservatives, and pushing swing voters away from the CPC. It's a straight up loser play, like dumping you high value players at the trade deadline.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 Jul 2022)

I suppose politics is the one place it's still OK to express prejudices about appearances.


----------



## Remius (7 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> I suppose politics is the one place it's still OK to express prejudices about appearances.


God knows they kept going after Trudeau’s hair and that add about Chrethien’s face way back when.  Heck the media ran weird stories about Mulcair’s beard lol. 

Trudeau’s sox, and harper’s sweaters are fair game though


----------



## Furniture (7 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> It's definitely not a mature or logical response, but when someone provokes some kind of visceral reaction like that, it's a really huge first impression to overcome. Some people just have a really greasy or sleezy vibe about them, and the guy's voice and personality sets my teeth on edge.
> 
> Not meaning it literally, but it's a definite personality deficit that will impact his chances. *Boring but competent is fine*; aggravating as hell takes a lot of convincing to listen to. Maybe he's a great guy who knows what he's doing, but his actions and words really just reinforce that impression, so don't see that changing. Even just reading his points he comes across as a smarmy arshehole, and his points are frequently implausibly stupid or impractical.
> 
> ...


Boring but competent left Harper out in the cold when young and fiery came along. Boring and competent left nothing to fall back on for O'Tool when the wolves came for him.

As for punchable, and unlikeable... JT's "sincere" voice puts me into an instant rage. Yet, enough people accept his rage inducing fake sincerity to get him elected, so there is hope for PPs "greasy" voice and appearance.

EDIT: For clarity, my point is that it's easy for us to get trapped in our own perceptions, and forget that others viewpoints may be different. I find nothing particularly "sleazy", or "greasy" about PP, but I accept that others view him differently.  I suspect that with the power of the CPC behind him, he can be made to be more "mainstream" for the average person left feeling abandoned by the ideologues running the LPC. The finance minister recently said high gas prices are a reminder about climate change... How out of touch with the average person do you have to be to try to spin it that way?


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Jul 2022)

Furniture said:


> As for punchable, and unlikeable... JT's "sincere" voice puts me into an instant rage. Yet, enough people accept his rage inducing fake sincerity to get him elected, so there is hope for PPs "greasy" voice and appearance.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (7 Jul 2022)

One thing got Trudeau elected the first time and that was the legalization of marijuana. If it wasn’t for that I doubt he would have won, and if he had it wouldn’t have been a majority. 

As the last two elections have shown, without those apathetic single issue voters who only come out if their issue is on the line, he can’t get a majority.


----------



## Remius (7 Jul 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> One thing got Trudeau elected the first time and that was the legalization of marijuana. If it wasn’t for that I doubt he would have won, and if he had it wouldn’t have been a majority.
> 
> As the last two elections have shown, without those apathetic single issue voters who only come out if their issue is on the line, he can’t get a majority.


I think it was more than that or rather less than that.

The CPC was a spent force by then after ten years.  The LPC offered something else.  People likely voted for change as opposed to voting for the LPC.  But…

The LPC wasn’t a protest party.  Agree or disagree with its policies they were offering something that some people were ok with.  

The CPC right now seems to be more about protest and opposition than having anything on offer to get people to to vote their way.   That can still get them elected but it’s a harder climb than if they had a better platform other than what they have now.


----------



## RangerRay (7 Jul 2022)

Listening to Pollievre supporters talk about the huge pool of non-voters itching to vote for him remind me of the Bernie Bros to the south thinking that all those non-voters are itching for a truly socialist candidate…


----------



## QV (7 Jul 2022)

I can't find any recent official platform for the CPC, I assume that will be ironed out after the leadership race.

But these guys have a very clear and easily understood platform which I think almost anyone could agree with: Our Platform - People's Party of Canada


----------



## brihard (7 Jul 2022)

RangerRay said:


> Listening to Pollievre supporters talk about the huge pool of non-voters itching to vote for him remind me of the Bernie Bros to the south thinking that all those non-voters are itching for a truly socialist candidate…


Part of what Pollievre would achieve as leader would be to increase the polarization of undecided voters in the centre. A lot of voters reluctantly hold their nose and vote for whoever sucks less between LPC and CPC come election time. The more dramatic the party leader on one side or the other, the easier it is to decide which option will suck more and vote accordingly. I’m not sure that, in the balance, his style (if it stays more or less the same) will work in his favour in this regard. He will pull some “this is what I’ve been waiting for!” Votes from the PPC, and will lose some “I’d vote CPC if not for…” votes in the centre. I don’t think many undecided centrists are looking for what PP offers…


----------



## Remius (7 Jul 2022)

Tory leadership committee was advised not to approve Patrick Brown's nomination
					

Reasons behind the advice to refuse Brown’s application to run is not known, but were overruled




					nationalpost.com
				




This getting messier than it was or needed to be.


----------



## MJP (7 Jul 2022)

RangerRay said:


> Listening to Pollievre supporters talk about the huge pool of non-voters itching to vote for him remind me of the Bernie Bros to the south thinking that all those non-voters are itching for a truly socialist candidate…


The irony being Canadian is Bernie is just a normie here.

But that is not your point and agree that it is likely the case


----------



## brihard (7 Jul 2022)

Details are now emerging: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/whistleblow-brown-disqualification-payment-1.6514122


----------



## Navy_Pete (7 Jul 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> One thing got Trudeau elected the first time and that was the legalization of marijuana. If it wasn’t for that I doubt he would have won, and if he had it wouldn’t have been a majority.
> 
> As the last two elections have shown, without those apathetic single issue voters who only come out if their issue is on the line, he can’t get a majority.


Woah woah easy there; legalization of marijuana is a genuine retention tool that is letting a lot of people stay sane while the CAF continues to do want to do even more with even less. Should be a legitimate work related expense at this point.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (7 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> Part of what Pollievre would achieve as leader would be to increase the polarization of undecided voters in the centre. A lot of voters reluctantly hold their nose and vote for whoever sucks less between LPC and CPC come election time. The more dramatic the party leader on one side or the other, the easier it is to decide which option will suck more and vote accordingly. I’m not sure that, in the balance, his style (if it stays more or less the same) will work in his favour in this regard. He will pull some “this is what I’ve been waiting for!” Votes from the PPC, and will lose some “I’d vote CPC if not for…” votes in the centre. I don’t think many undecided centrists are looking for what PP offers…


There's an Italian saying my grandfather used to tell me as a boy:

_se uomo vende cazzate, ma odora di lavanda;  non è lui che lo spala"_

It roughly translates to "the man who sells bullshit, but smells of lavender; isn't the one shoveling it."

I feel that way about Trudeau and PP about the same. These folks are puppets that spout the message of the party "faithful" and lobbyists that have agendas. If there is a platform most people can get behind, they can overlook personalities. When the platform is the personality...well... see my quote above.


----------



## dapaterson (7 Jul 2022)

Robert Fyfe reports that it's a long-time Conservative activist, Debra Jodoin, who blew the whistle on Brown.

The allegation is that she was being paid by a private corporation while working on the campaign.

Her CV on LinkedIn shows the last company she was working for is MaxSys, a staffing company in Ottawa, run by Bryan Brulotte, who in 2020 announced a run for the CPC leadership, then withdrew, and then announced a potential run to be Ottawa's mayor, then withdrew.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1545194936840196096


			https://ca.linkedin.com/in/debbie-jodoin-7432b22b?original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F


----------



## OldSolduer (7 Jul 2022)

The LPC can run a retarded monkey as their leader and still win a majority.


----------



## Navy_Pete (7 Jul 2022)

Furniture said:


> Boring but competent left Harper out in the cold when young and fiery came along. Boring and competent left nothing to fall back on for O'Tool when the wolves came for him.
> 
> As for punchable, and unlikeable... JT's "sincere" voice puts me into an instant rage. Yet, enough people accept his rage inducing fake sincerity to get him elected, so there is hope for PPs "greasy" voice and appearance.
> 
> EDIT: For clarity, my point is that it's easy for us to get trapped in our own perceptions, and forget that others viewpoints may be different. I find nothing particularly "sleazy", or "greasy" about PP, but I accept that others view him differently.  I suspect that with the power of the CPC behind him, he can be made to be more "mainstream" for the average person left feeling abandoned by the ideologues running the LPC. The finance minister recently said high gas prices are a reminder about climate change... How out of touch with the average person do you have to be to try to spin it that way?


I agree they are both pretty 'punchable', but I trust the Liberal Party more (or distrust them less?) to not try and roll back the clock on things like abortion. They are both likely to do stupid things I dislike, but the stupid things the LPC will do are more palatable than the stupid things the CPC and PP in particular are talking about doing. The CPCs aren't even really talking about cuts, just spending the same amount on different things and their own special interests.

I had no problem with O'Toole, but the local candidate was useless, and a potato with a Franco name would win my riding under the LPC banner regardless. I think a general lack of party unity and internal strife took him out as least as much as any external attacks, and I still think whoever put together the platform glossy with the photos of him and his family hated him. That campaign loss was more of a systematic failure of the party to put together a coherent clear message on what they bring to the table and keep the unhinged lunatics muzzled. 

Meanwhile provincially the Conservatives are doing much better by specifically distancing themselves from the federal party.  🤷‍♂️

With the current block of candidates I don't see any likely outcome other than another LPC government barring some kind of massive upheaval. 

If JT just calls it and Freeland or anyone else takes over, just forget it.


----------



## Remius (7 Jul 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> The LPC can run a retarded monkey as their leader and still win a majority.


I was just saying something similar to a friend.  Leave it to the CPC to self destruct while trying to pick a leader.

Political parties need to form actual succession and leadership development plans instead of the game of thrones crap we see right now.


----------



## brihard (7 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> I was just saying something similar to a friend.  Leave it to the CPC to self destruct while trying to pick a leader.
> 
> Political parties need to form actual succession and leadership development plans instead of the game of thrones crap we see right now.


Issue with that is they at least purport to have democratic processes to select leaders. Obviously there’s some slime inherent… I think we end up getting the worst of where those two ideas collide in the middle.


----------



## RangerRay (7 Jul 2022)

I prefer the old method of choosing leaders that most other Westminster systems use: caucus chooses the leader because they are the ones that have to work with him.


----------



## Furniture (8 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> Tory leadership committee was advised not to approve Patrick Brown's nomination
> 
> 
> Reasons behind the advice to refuse Brown’s application to run is not known, but were overruled
> ...


The leadership committee or Brown himself should have avoided creating this mess... 

Brown was always going to be bad news for the CPC, and an adult should have told him that in plain language, then tossed his name from the leadership race.

If one was conspiratorially minded, one could imagine Brown being pushed as an "alternative" to PP, to ensure the guy running against the LPC next time was wide open to character attacks.  Harper, Scheer, O'Tool, and PP _might_ have had a "hidden agenda", Brown has actually been fired for sexual misconduct...


----------



## OldSolduer (8 Jul 2022)

Maybe the front running two should have a duel with flintlocks. 

Brought to you by Labatt’s Blue and Molson Canadian


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Jul 2022)

> I prefer the old method of choosing leaders



At this point, maybe we could try Thunderdome.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (8 Jul 2022)

Furniture said:


> Brown has actually been fired for sexual misconduct...


As a certain PM has shown us, that doesn’t have to be the end of a political career..


----------



## Navy_Pete (8 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> Issue with that is they at least purport to have democratic processes to select leaders. Obviously there’s some slime inherent… I think we end up getting the worst of where those two ideas collide in the middle.


Except that the leadership bid costs something like $500k total to register. Kind of crazy that they are raising something like $3M for the leadership campaign when the entire election costs are capped at about $30M.

With the rules around raising money that threshold to run seems like a massive gatekeeper, and may not actually reflect support of potential leaders. Suspect it keeps some competent people out of the running.


----------



## OldSolduer (8 Jul 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> Maybe the front running two should have a duel with flintlocks.
> 
> Brought to you by Labatt’s Blue and Molson Canadian


I have changed my mind. Sabres - big cavalry sabers - at dawn. 

Brought to you by CRKT and Gerber Knives.


----------



## Remius (12 Jul 2022)

Conservatives bring in outside lawyers to review possibility of Patrick Brown appeal
					

Brown’s campaign has hired lawyer Marie Henein who sent a letter to the campaign Monday, calling for a swift meeting of the dispute resolution appeal committee




					nationalpost.com
				




Looks like Brown has hired Marie Henein.


----------



## Navy_Pete (12 Jul 2022)

Oh man, she is scary in an awesomely impressive way. The CPC is foxed on this one.

What a mess, LPC has got to be loving this continuous streams of self goals.


----------



## Lumber (12 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> Conservatives bring in outside lawyers to review possibility of Patrick Brown appeal
> 
> 
> Brown’s campaign has hired lawyer Marie Henein who sent a letter to the campaign Monday, calling for a swift meeting of the dispute resolution appeal committee
> ...


Oh SNAP!


----------



## Remius (12 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Oh man, she is scary in an awesomely impressive way. The CPC is foxed on this one.
> 
> What a mess, LPC has got to be loving this continuous streams of self goals.


Add to that Thomas Mulcair’s latest piece.  Something smells funny.









						Tom Mulcair: Stephen Harper clearly has a preferred candidate in the Conservative race
					

Now that Patrick Brown is no longer a Conservative Party leadership candidate, it's a pretty safe bet that many if not most of his supporters will simply not vote and Jean Charest's hopes for second-place votes go down the tubes along with his 'path to victory,' former NDP leader Thomas Mulcair...




					www.ctvnews.ca
				





So the CPC is really going to need to have Elections Canada come back and say « yes you were right ».  Otherwise this won’t wear well at all.


----------



## Lumber (12 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> Add to that Thomas Mulcair’s latest piece.  Something smells funny.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ah. So that's what he's up to these days.


----------



## Halifax Tar (12 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> Add to that Thomas Mulcair’s latest piece.  Something smells funny.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It must be something miserable to live in such a deep seated fear of Harper, like Mulcair and Trudeau.  They seem to see him around every corner.


----------



## Remius (12 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> It must be something miserable to live in such a deep seated fear of Harper, like Mulcair and Trudeau.  They seem to see him around every corner.


Former leaders that were popular in their own parties do exert some influence.


----------



## Halifax Tar (12 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> Former leaders that were popular in their own parties do exert some influence.



No doubt at all.


----------



## Remius (12 Jul 2022)

A lot of he said she said though.  I’m going to wait and see what Elections Canada says.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Jul 2022)

Ah, Mulcair - the NDP's gift to the LPC.


----------



## Remius (12 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Ah, Mulcair - the NDP's gift to the LPC.


He’s done his fair share of Trudeau bashing in his new line of work.


----------



## Halifax Tar (12 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> He’s done his fair share of Trudeau bashing in his new line of work.



He's just angry cuz he had to follow happy Jack.  And well he's just and angry person.


----------



## brihard (12 Jul 2022)

Ok, Brown hired a scary lawyer. Fair enough. What will matter is does he have a solid legal argument? I’m not sure that even Henein can bully the CPC apparatchiks. It’s plausible that Brown _did_ do wrong, and if so, he may be up a creek.

I have no real knowledge of how the law would apply to what are essentially internal corporate mechanisms of a political party. I don’t know if Brown has a recourse mechanism outside of civil tort.


----------



## suffolkowner (12 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> Ok, Brown hired a scary lawyer. Fair enough. What will matter is does he have a solid legal argument? I’m not sure that even Henein can bully the CPC apparatchiks. It’s plausible that Brown _did_ do wrong, and if so, he may be up a creek.
> 
> I have no real knowledge of how the law would apply to what are essentially internal corporate mechanisms of a political party. I don’t know if Brown has a recourse mechanism outside of civil tort.


Yeah its a hard climb I think even if the party is clearly in the wrong by the time it is resolved it will be too late. The real kick in the nuts is the disqualification of 25% of the party membership


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Jul 2022)

> He’s done his fair share of Trudeau bashing in his new line of work.



Doesn't really help the NDP after he threw over so much of Jack's work to Trudeau by going along with "anybody but conservative".  I doubt he'll ever come within an order of magnitude of making up for that.


----------



## brihard (12 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Doesn't really help the NDP after he threw over so much of Jack's work to Trudeau by going along with "anybody but conservative".  I doubt he'll ever come within an order of magnitude of making up for that.


Yes and no. Realistic best case for NDP is kingmaker, and getting major concessions out of an LPC government. They’ve done that. NDP won’t form government in any conceivable reasonable future, so their goals are best achieved by conditionally supporting the LPC. An LPC minority against a CPC that shows real potential to win an election is an ideal set of circumstances for the NDP.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Jul 2022)

But that's not how "ABC" (strategic voting) worked out.  Handing more votes to the LPC - which is what "ABC" effectively did, and realistically always will do -  helped give the LPC a majority (NDP irrelevant).  Elections since haven't featured "ABC" (certainly not with the same intensity), and minorities resulted.  On the evidence, fighting for votes and not conceding votes to the LPC is a more effective tactic for the NDP.


----------



## Edward Campbell (13 Jul 2022)

The electoral calculus for the Conservative party is simple. They need 170+ seats to forms a majority government. This graphic illustrates the "key terrain."

The next CPC leader MUST:

1. Hold on to almost al of the nearly 120 seats that Erin O;'Toole won in 2021 - which means NOT alienating the base; and

2. Turn nearly half (50+) of the red (LPC), orange (NDP) and green (BQ) seats in the graphic to Tory blue.

Anything less is a failure ... a failure to understand that about half of Canadians live in a few big cities and in the suburbs around them and they get about half the seats in the HoC. Elections in Canada are, broadly, fair - PEI and the Territories are grossly overrepresented, so are most rural areas, and most big cities are underrepresented, but it's pretty fair and, slowly, its' getting more fair - and honestly won. Justin Trudeau is PM because his party understands that.


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Jul 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> Elections in Canada are, broadly, fair - PEI and the Territories are grossly overrepresented, so are most rural areas, and most big cities are underrepresented, but it's pretty fair and, slowly, its' getting more fair - and honestly won. Justin Trudeau is PM because his party understands that.


And why the 2015 promise for electoral reform died a very quiet death…


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Jul 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> Anything less is a failure ... a failure to understand that about half of Canadians live in a few big cities and in the suburbs around them and they get about half the seats in the HoC. Elections in Canada are, broadly, fair - PEI and the Territories are grossly overrepresented, so are most rural areas, and most big cities are underrepresented, but it's pretty fair and, slowly, its' getting more fair - and honestly won. Justin Trudeau is PM because his party understands that.



From where I sit, population density shouldn't dictate the direction of the country.   And our current division of seats only helps to keep the status quo in place we while leave huge swaths of the country undervalued and represented; and only creates more division.


----------



## mariomike (13 Jul 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> Anything less is a failure ... a failure to understand that about half of Canadians live in a few big cities and in the suburbs around them and they get about half the seats in the HoC. Elections in Canada are, broadly, fair - PEI and the Territories are grossly overrepresented, so are most rural areas, and most big cities are underrepresented, but it's pretty fair and, slowly, its' getting more fair - and honestly won. Justin Trudeau is PM because his party understands that.



See also,









						One person, one vote? In Canada, it's not even close
					

Some ridings have fewer than 40,000 people. Others are closer to 160,000. Can anything be done to make them more equal?




					www.wellandtribune.ca


----------



## Navy_Pete (13 Jul 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> Yeah its a hard climb I think even if the party is clearly in the wrong by the time it is resolved it will be too late. The real kick in the nuts is the disqualification of 25% of the party membership


She stated that she thinks she has a strong case, and I think her firm is high profile enough they don't need to take on long shots, and a BS filing might actually be worse for their reputation (and books).

I think her firm is also capable of making a strong case out of a weaker one.

Will see how it falls out I guess.


----------



## IKnowNothing (13 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> She stated that she thinks she has a strong case, and I think her firm is high profile enough they don't need to take on long shots, and a BS filing might actually be worse for their reputation (and books).
> 
> I think her firm is also capable of making a strong case out of a weaker one.
> 
> Will see how it falls out I guess.


Regardless of how it shakes out for this race, I wonder if the bigger takeaway is that Brown, and possibly by extension Charest and their PC backing aren't going to go away quietly and accept Reform rule.  If theres any truth to those riding stats there's ammo for a split


----------



## Quirky (13 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> From where I sit, population density shouldn't dictate the direction of the country.   And our current division of seats only helps to keep the status quo in place we while leave huge swaths of the country undervalued and represented; and only creates more division.



Different sections of major cities like Vancouver, Calgary and Toronto have different issues, don't you know.....


----------



## Kirkhill (13 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> It must be something miserable to live in such a deep seated fear of Harper, like Mulcair and Trudeau.  They seem to see him around every corner.




Speaking of Stephen Harper - his current gig - Chairman









						International Democrat Union - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Jul 2022)

Quirky said:


> Different sections of major cities like Vancouver, Calgary and Toronto have different issues, don't you know.....



My point is more that we equate population density with a priority of concerns, issues at at hand and electoral results.   

For example, provincially, just because half the province of NS lives in the HRM does not mean that the concerns of those in Yarmouth or Sydney are any less valid.  And they should have equal representation. 

If we want find a way to come back together as a tight country we need figure out a proper method of representation that does not have certain areas dominating others, and making sure the small areas have equal importance electorally. 

If we want to progress we need to move beyond population density as the measure of electoral power.  Only through getting everyone on board to an equal playing field will we overcome our divisiveness.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Jul 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Speaking of Stephen Harper - his current gig - Chairman
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm not sure what you're striking at here.  Or just providing info ?


----------



## Kirkhill (13 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> My point is more that we equate population density with a priority of concerns, issues at at hand and electoral results.
> 
> For example, provincially, just because half the province of NS lives in the HRM does not mean that the concerns of those in Yarmouth or Sydney are any less valid.  And they should have equal representation.
> 
> ...



That thinking would apply equally to the first nations communities.  They are small areas as well.


----------



## Kirkhill (13 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I'm not sure what you're striking at here.  Or just providing info ?


Just providing info.


----------



## Quirky (13 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> If we want find a way to come back together as a tight country we need figure out a proper method of representation that does not have certain areas dominating others, and making sure the small areas have equal importance electorally.
> 
> If we want to progress we need to move beyond population density as the measure of electoral power.  Only through getting everyone on board to an equal playing field will we overcome our divisiveness.



Until the electorate is changed where everyone below the 49th Parallel is responsible for voting in the government, then nothing will change. By the time votes are starting to get counted in Manitoba the election is over.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Jul 2022)

> If we want find a way to come back together as a tight country we need figure out a proper method of representation that does not have certain areas dominating others, and making sure the small areas have equal importance electorally.



The solution lies less in how representation is decided, and more in what authority the representatives have.

Again: Subsidiarity.


----------



## GR66 (13 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> My point is more that we equate population density with a priority of concerns, issues at at hand and electoral results.
> 
> For example, provincially, just because half the province of NS lives in the HRM does not mean that the concerns of those in Yarmouth or Sydney are any less valid.  And they should have equal representation.
> 
> ...


Kind of like the Senate (if it were actually effective)?  A Triple-E Senate (Equal, Elected & Effective) could do that nationally and similarly a Triple-E Upper House in the Provinces could represent the various regions within each Province.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Jul 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> That thinking would apply equally to the first nations communities.  They are small areas as well.



Absolutely. 


Kirkhill said:


> Just providing info.



Thank you. 


Quirky said:


> Until the electorate is changed where everyone below the 49th Parallel is responsible for voting in the government, then nothing will change. By the time votes are starting to get counted in Manitoba the election is over.



Same feeling in the Maritimes.  We are the pregame show, and everything after Ont is the post game show. 


Brad Sallows said:


> The solution lies less in how representation is decided, and more in what authority the representatives have.
> 
> Again: Subsidiarity.



Interesting.  I have some reading to do.  Thank you. 



GR66 said:


> Kind of like the Senate (if it were actually effective)?  A Triple-E Senate (Equal, Elected & Effective) could do that nationally and similarly a Triple-E Upper House in the Provinces could represent the various regions within each Province.



I find it funny that we have a House of Commons yet I would argue much of the those in the HoC are not the common person.  

Your point about the senate is excellent.


----------



## Navy_Pete (13 Jul 2022)

From what I can tell there are a lot of plus sides to having an appointed Senate; because they aren't worried about getting elected, they can push back with something, even if it's unpopular, and aren't fighting to make some kind of soundbite for the news clips. On the flip side they aren't elected so can't be held accountable via an election, and really hard to get rid of deadweight.

Pros and cons to each system, but looking at the US I'm okay with the status quo. We generally seem to do a reasonably good job of not selecting total incompetents to the Senate, and most of them are actually really good and are there in a form of genuine public service. They are deadlocked and highly partisan, and I could see us going down the same path if we went to an elected Senate as well. ALready enough delays getting things done in Parliament.

Sen. Sinclair, Sen Dallaire and some others immediately come to mind, and I don't know that either of them would have been elected.

Guess at the end of the day good people can make a bad system effective, while bad people can trainwreck a good system.


----------



## GR66 (13 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> From what I can tell there are a lot of plus sides to having an appointed Senate; because they aren't worried about getting elected, they can push back with something, even if it's unpopular, and aren't fighting to make some kind of soundbite for the news clips. On the flip side they aren't elected so can't be held accountable via an election, and really hard to get rid of deadweight.
> 
> Pros and cons to each system, but looking at the US I'm okay with the status quo. We generally seem to do a reasonably good job of not selecting total incompetents to the Senate, and most of them are actually really good and are there in a form of genuine public service. They are deadlocked and highly partisan, and I could see us going down the same path if we went to an elected Senate as well. ALready enough delays getting things done in Parliament.
> 
> ...


Bit of a derail but Senate appointments could be where proportional representation could actually be useful.  The number of Senate seats assigned to each party could be based on the proportional popular vote received by the parties in their Provincial elections.  

Senators then would not technically be directly elected individually, but elections would determine the party composition of the Senate.  Assuming a party maintains their seat count in the Senate those Senators deemed by their nominating parties to be doing a good job would keep their seats while still providing an opportunity for poorly performing Senators to be dropped.


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Jul 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Speaking of Stephen Harper - his current gig - Chairman
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The OTHER #NewWorldOrder


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Jul 2022)

Not much point in having two bodies which are in practical terms chosen by voters along party lines.  Not all parties in provincial elections will have federal equivalents.  What is the point of a bicameral legislature if not to have a second body of legislators whose main purpose is to review the work of the first?  Given such purpose, what is the point of choosing any mechanism for selection which tends to make the second mirror the first, thus becoming a rubber stamp?


----------



## GR66 (13 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Not much point in having two bodies which are in practical terms chosen by voters along party lines.  Not all parties in provincial elections will have federal equivalents.  What is the point of a bicameral legislature if not to have a second body of legislators whose main purpose is to review the work of the first?  Given such purpose, what is the point of choosing any mechanism for selection which tends to make the second mirror the first, thus becoming a rubber stamp?


The Senate would be drawn from members representing the Provincial parties not the Federal parties since their role is to represent the interests of the Provinces.  

Electors often select Provincial parties that are different than they select Federally.  In Ontario for example the 2021 Federal Election saw the Liberal Party of Canada receive 78 of the 121 seats (64% of the seats with 39% of the popular vote) vs 37 seats for the Conservative Party (31% of the seats with 35% of the popular vote).  Meanwhile in the 2022 Ontario Provincial election the Ontario Liberal Party received 24% of the popular vote compared to 41% for the Conservative party.  Under a PR system then Ontario would have 64% Liberal/35% Conservative representation in the HOC but 24% Liberal/41% Conservative representation in the Senate.  Hardly the Senate mirroring the HOC.

Currently the Senate can in effect be stacked by the party that remains in power the longest as they will have the most opportunity to fill seats as they become vacant.  And despite the supposed "independence" of the Liberal-appointed Senators they are all still selected by the Federal party leader in power at the time.  Much more likelihood of "rubber stamping" in that situation than by members of a potentially different (Provincial) party with no direct ties to the Federal party leadership.


----------



## brihard (13 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> But that's not how "ABC" (strategic voting) worked out.  Handing more votes to the LPC - which is what "ABC" effectively did, and realistically always will do -  helped give the LPC a majority (NDP irrelevant).  Elections since haven't featured "ABC" (certainly not with the same intensity), and minorities resulted.  On the evidence, fighting for votes and not conceding votes to the LPC is a more effective tactic for the NDP.


Who was talking about ABC? I was talking about NDP working to maximize their seats in parliament, but in the knowledge that what that means is that they can either make or break an attempt a minority government’s attempt to pass a bill. Their best case is a Liberal minority where the NDP can, alone, push a vote over 50%, but the Bloc and Greens cannot.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Jul 2022)

> Who was talking about ABC?



I was, when I criticized Mulcair.  I suppose I missed whatever else it was you were responding to.


----------



## FSTO (14 Jul 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> Elections in Canada are, broadly, fair - PEI and the Territories are grossly overrepresented, so are most rural areas, and most big cities are underrepresented


I hear this a lot. But when power is concentrated in the PMO and the backbench is full of trained seals does it really matter that rural areas are over represented in the HoC? Also, the most powerful cabinet ministers are all from major urban centres, even though it seems they are nothing more than well fed trained seals these days.


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Jul 2022)

Remember 1832? The Great Reform Act, the birth of modern liberalism (the small "L" really, really matters)? All that? 

Small L_ liberal democracy_ is neither old new especially robust. Some forms of _illiberal democracy_ have been around for a long time, since, arguably, the Athenian _agora_, but the whole idea of _liberalism_ - where the individual is sovereign and all rights belong, equally, to each sovereign individual, regardless of race, creed, sex, etc, is quite new - starting, maybe, in Iceland about 1,000 years ago and not really flourishing until Britain in the 19th century.

Anyway, 1832, the Reform Act, brought us the idea of "one man-one vote," which, quickly spread to America and even to Canada, where it was opposed by the rich and powerful in Toronto, Charlottetown and Halifax and especially in Montreal and Québec City.

But the 1860s, when the British contemplated casting Canada adrift, was the time of Palmerston, Smith-Stanley and Russel and saw the rise of Disraeli and Gladstone. In 1867, besides granting Canada a form of sovereignty, Smith-Stanley, the Earl of Derby, also passed another Reform Act and cemented _liberalism_ into Anglo-American political culture where it resides, not always securely, today.

Anyway, the notion that each person should have a roughly equal say in deciding who gets to govern us all is a major _liberal_ _democratic_ value. Those of us who call ourselves *liberals* believe that we should all have a nearly equal say - yes, there is a need for regional representation and that explains why Nunavut gets one MP but there is no valid democratic excuse for PEI's four seats; it is a _Constitutional_ anomaly and highlights the nonsense that we find in all written constitutions.

The people of rural Saskatchewan have no inherent _right_ to extra representation just because they live in a rural area. Their fundamental _right_ is to live where and (broadly) how they wish, they do not get rewarded, politically, for that choice. Equally the people in, e.g. Calgary and Toronto do not deserve to be underrepresented, just because they live in cities, do they?

This map matters - more than half of all Canadians live South of the red line. They deserve more than half of the seats in the House of Commons,  don't they? (The Senate is a whole different matter, related more to federalism and to democracy.)


----------



## FSTO (14 Jul 2022)

^^
I see your point, but in these times of concentrated power in the PMO does it really matter? And yes PEI and 4 seats are outrageous. If we were draconian, Canada would just amalgamate the 3 maritime provinces into one and give it the 14 seats like Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

Could you imagine the howls if that was to happen?


----------



## GR66 (14 Jul 2022)

FSTO said:


> ^^
> I see your point, but in these times of concentrated power in the PMO does it really matter? And yes PEI and 4 seats are outrageous. If we were draconian, Canada would just amalgamate the 3 maritime provinces into one and give it the 14 seats like Manitoba and Saskatchewan.
> 
> Could you imagine the howls if that was to happen?


Sadly, the concentration of power in the PMO is in effect a self-inflicted wound.  The members of Parliament select the Prime Minister.  Should the members of the governing party's caucus _choose _to exercise their power they could replace the sitting PM with one more to their liking (as is happening in the UK and has happened a number of times in Australia).  The system itself isn't the problem, it's the people we elect that allow for the concentration of power in the PMO.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (14 Jul 2022)

GR66 said:


> Sadly, the concentration of power in the PMO is in effect a self-inflicted wound.  The members of Parliament select the Prime Minister.  Should the members of the governing party's caucus _choose _to exercise their power they could replace the sitting PM with one more to their liking (as is happening in the UK and has happened a number of times in Australia).  The system itself isn't the problem, it's the people we elect that allow for the concentration of power in the PMO.


IIRC it was Chretien that consolidated a lot of the power in the PMO. It just has become the status quo ever since, despite the recommendations found in the Gomery Comission.


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Jul 2022)

rmc_wannabe said:


> IIRC it was Chretien that consolidated a lot of the power in the PMO. It just has become the status quo ever since, despite the recommendations found in the Gomery Comission.


It was actually Pierre Trudeau when he made Michael Pitfield his Clerk of the Privy Council and "_integrated_" the PMO and PCO - see Don Savoie's 'Governing from the Centre' (1999).


----------



## mariomike (14 Jul 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> This map matters - more than half of all Canadians live South of the red line. They deserve more than half of the seats in the House of Commons,  don't they?



Good question.


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Jul 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> Remember 1832? The Great Reform Act, the birth of modern liberalism (the small "L" really, really matters)? All that?
> 
> Small L_ liberal democracy_ is neither old new especially robust. Some forms of _illiberal democracy_ have been around for a long time, since, arguably, the Athenian _agora_, but the whole idea of _liberalism_ - where the individual is sovereign and all rights belong, equally, to each sovereign individual, regardless of race, creed, sex, etc, is quite new - starting, maybe, in Iceland about 1,000 years ago and not really flourishing until Britain in the 19th century.
> 
> ...



Indeed the map matters - but unless we hew to Brad's position on subsidiarity AND an effective regional senate then everything north of that line is nothing more than a colony of the Laurentian Imperium.

Edit:  The central organizing principal should be the local municipality.


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Jul 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Indeed the map matters - but unless we hew to Brad's position on subsidiarity AND an effective regional senate then everything north of that line is nothing more than a colony of the Laurentian Imperium.
> 
> Edit:  The central organizing principal should be the local municipality.


I know I use this cartoon too often, but it's from 1915 - nothing is new:


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Jul 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> This map matters - more than half of all Canadians live South of the red line. They deserve more than half of the seats in the House of Commons,  don't they? (The Senate is a whole different matter, related more to federalism and to democracy.)



Yes and no.  

We're getting a concentration of power, in a very small space, and it can generally disregard the rest of the country.  Im not looking for domination from outside, I am looking for equal representation and a spreading of power equally. 

I say again, The problems from Twillingate -> Yarmouth -> Toronto -> Gimli -> Victoria all deserve equal representation in our government.  The concentration of population in the in the Windsor -> Montreal corridor should not be let to dictate to the rest country simply because of population density.  

Otherwise we will remain a regionally fractured country.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (14 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Yes and no.
> 
> We're getting a concentration of power, in a very small space, and it can generally disregard the rest of the country.  Im not looking for domination from outside, I am looking for equal representation and a spreading of power equally.
> 
> ...


Canada in all rights has always been too big to have a competent, functioning federation since we took on MB and BC in the 1870s.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Jul 2022)

The size of the federation doesn't matter that much if federal government authority is appropriately limited.  But almost everyone contributes to scope creep.  We would even find people who think that the provinces should have power to meddle in international affairs and defence, and certainly find people who consistently argue that their pet idea is something that has to be imposed upon everyone.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (14 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> The size of the federation doesn't matter that much if federal government authority is appropriately limited.  But almost everyone contributes to scope creep.  We would even find people who think that the provinces should have power to meddle in international affairs and defence, and certainly find people who consistently argue that their pet idea is something that has to be imposed upon everyone.


OH believe me, I'm not an advocate for devolving powers to provinces, nor do I believe that regional influence should trump national priorities.

My point was that, much like the U.S, the system we built and designed in 1867 wasn't done so with the belief we'd become the second largest and dispersed country on earth. With that in mind, does the system need tweaking? Probably. Do those changes need to happen in the Senate? Maybe. Should we move toward proportional representation in the House? 100 percent. Will it happen in my life time? I highly doubt it.


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Jul 2022)

rmc_wannabe said:


> Should we move toward proportional representation in the House? 100 percent. Will it happen in my life time? I highly doubt it.



Never going to happen.  It would mean the two major parties would have to give up their reigns on things.  And then there is the whole instability factor of PR. 

Id divide the country into electoral geographic regions incorporating multiple provinces and evenly dist the seats.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Jul 2022)

The flaw wasn't the 1867 design; the flaw was relying on the British approach to a "constitution".  Anything not written down can be subjected to argument, litigation, and pressure to change.  What the forefathers didn't foresee was just how hard modern activists would push on black letter law, let alone mere customary practices.  The US did an admirable job, and look how hard it is to prevent people from reading ideas in that aren't explicitly mentioned anywhere.

We need constitutional law that divides political authority and sets aside individual rights in plain language with no room for subjective interpretation ("reasonable") or exceptions ("notwithstanding"), and we haven't got it.


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Jul 2022)

_It seems to me_ that those arguing for _regionalism_ want something akin to wan the American revolutionaries wanted in the late 18th century: strong, almost independent provinces and a weak federal government which has only limited powers. 

In many respects that's what we got in 1867 - look at §§91 and 92 of the BNA. §91.29 is a hole big enough to allow almost anything but by then the authors - in London - had seen, in the USA, that "states' rights" led to some insurmountable problems.

_It seems to me_ that Canadians (and Americans, Australians, Brits, Germans and Indians and so on) want a *strong* national government. It's probably natural given modern transportation and communications - in 1867 a trip from Halifax to Victoria was a once-in-a-lifetime adventure, now it is a matter of a few hours and one change of planes (in YYZ 😱). People feel that they are at least as much Canadian as British Columbian or Nova Scotian and they expect similar standards of public services everywhere in Canada.

Many of the intrusions that the federal government has made into areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction (§92) were made at the request of t.he provinces, during both world wars. Canadians didn't;t object and there was no pressure, from locals, to shove the feeds out - back where they, Constitutionally, belonged when the emergencies were ended.

In most federal states there are two chambers - one in which the people, on a roughly equal (one person-one vote) get to elect the people who will make §91 work and another in which the political partners in Confederation, the provinces, have their voices. 

In my mind equal, elected and effective makes sense in the second chamber but only if we have, say, just five provinces (BC+ Yukon, the Prairies + NU and NWT, Ontario, Québec and Atlantic Canada).


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> The flaw wasn't the 1867 design; the flaw was relying on the British approach to a "constitution".  Anything not written down can be subjected to argument, litigation, and pressure to change.  What the forefathers didn't foresee was just how hard modern activists would push on black letter law, let alone mere customary practices.  The US did an admirable job, and look how hard it is to prevent people from reading ideas in that aren't explicitly mentioned anywhere.
> 
> We need constitutional law that divides political authority and sets aside individual rights in plain language with no room for subjective interpretation ("reasonable") or exceptions ("notwithstanding"), and we haven't got it.


I disagree, quite vehemently. I think unwritten constitutions are always and in every way better. Tell me, please, what rights and freedoms or "peace order and good government" we, Canadians, have that are denied to Brits, Israelis and Kiwis.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Jul 2022)

I don't think the Brits, Israelis, and Kiwis have enough rights.  In fact, I'm dismayed by the NZ and AUS policies on firearms, and by the creeping surveillance state the Brits are submitting to, along with bizarre ideas like "anti-social behaviour orders" and its successors.


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> I don't think the Brits, Israelis, and Kiwis have enough rights.  In fact, I'm dismayed by the NZ and AUS policies on firearms, and by the creeping surveillance state the Brits are submitting to, along with bizarre ideas like "anti-social behaviour orders" and its successors.


And Bill C-11? And the goings on in the USA and India and Germany don't suggest that written constitutions are hazardous to democracy and individual liberty? We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, Brad - I suspect we are too far apart to find much common ground.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Jul 2022)

I am likely to lean much more strongly toward individual freedoms than nearly anyone else on this board, as a consequence of which I have a much higher tolerance for the messiness of freedom and a much higher interest in hard-to-overcome limits on governments (all aspects - executive, legislative, judicial, administrative).  So there's that.

C-11 is mixed.  On balance, I'd discard it.

Written constitutions are not error-free, but they are amendable.  Rule of law requires that the rules be written down where everyone can see them, that the rules be enforced, and that the rules be enforced impartially.  First step is to write them down.


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Jul 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> _It seems to me_ that Canadians (and Americans, Australians, Brits, Germans and Indians and so on) want a *strong* national government.



But only if it is their national government and it does the things they want done.

We don't do a very good job of teaching our kids how to lose gracefully and prepare for the next match.   Because there will always be a next match.


----------



## RangerRay (14 Jul 2022)

I would like to see more equitable distribution of seats in the House, but without being balanced by an equally distributed Senate amongst the provinces, I fear it would lead to an even bigger tyranny of the majority than the one we currently live in now.  Unfortunately, there is no way to make the required changes since there are those whose approval is needed to make the required amendments, who have no interest in making said amendments.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (14 Jul 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> But only if it is their national government and it does the things they want done.
> 
> We don't do a very good job of teaching our kids how to lose gracefully and prepare for the next match.   Because there will always be a next match.


The other problem is how ill informed most folks are on how the game is played. That's on both sides of the political spectrum. 

Maybe once folks know that their First Amendment RIghts ( the right of Manitoba to exist within Confederation) or Roe v. Wade decisions ( I would brush up on R v. Morgentaler instead) don't actually mean anything within Canada or Canadian politics; then we can talk about how the system works up here.


----------



## lenaitch (14 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> The flaw wasn't the 1867 design; the flaw was relying on the British approach to a "constitution".  Anything not written down can be subjected to argument, litigation, and pressure to change.  What the forefathers didn't foresee was just how hard modern activists would push on black letter law, let alone mere customary practices.  The US did an admirable job, and look how hard it is to prevent people from reading ideas in that aren't explicitly mentioned anywhere.
> 
> We need constitutional law that divides political authority and sets aside *individual rights in plain language with no room for subjective interpretation ("reasonable") or exceptions ("notwithstanding"), and we haven't got it.*


I can't imagine how unworkable that would be.  Under the assumption that no right is absolute, pick a fundamental; expression, search and seizure, you name it, and craft it so it covers every conceivable circumstance, now and forever.  If not 'and forever', does the Constitution, the foundational law, change every time some new twist, or technology emerges?  Sounds like substantive law to me.


----------



## Dana381 (14 Jul 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I would like to see more equitable distribution of seats in the House, but without being balanced by an equally distributed Senate amongst the provinces, I fear it would lead to an even bigger tyranny of the majority than the one we currently live in now.  Unfortunately, there is no way to make the required changes since there are those whose approval is needed to make the required amendments, who have no interest in making said amendments.








						Canadian Election Results: 1867-2021
					

Information on Canadian federal election results from 1867-2021, with party seats, percent of vote, number of candidates, and voter turnout for each election.



					www.sfu.ca
				



According to this website 7 times out of 44 or 16% of our past elections the popular vote lost the election. I think that is unnacceptable. I am not smart enough to come up with a better way but I think we should be trying to find a better system.

I also cannot fathom how someone can still be the PM (and get re-elected) after so many scandles. Just one of those scandles would have ousted the leader of most other democratic countries. If not immediatly he never would have been re-elected.


----------



## Kirkhill (15 Jul 2022)

Presidential scandals throughout history
					

Presidents behaving badly - the biggest scandals to engulf the Oval Office




					www.history.co.uk
				












						8 Very English Political Scandals
					

The United Kingdom’s Brexit chaos is so intense that it’s easy to forget about the country’s political scandals of yore. Rest assured that both royals and




					www.history.com
				












						List of political scandals in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				









						List of political scandals in Canada - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




And MacDonald was re-elected four times after he was forced to resign over the Canadian Pacific scandal.

And that's only the civilized part of the world....doesn't bear thinking about the French.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Jul 2022)

> I can't imagine how unworkable that would be.



For example: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Not really that hard.  

Certainly the "notwithstanding" clause could be ditched.


----------



## FSTO (15 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Certainly the "notwithstanding" clause could be ditched.


It could be, but it won’t be.


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Jul 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> _It seems to me_ that those arguing for _regionalism_ want something akin to wan the American revolutionaries wanted in the late 18th century: strong, almost independent provinces and a weak federal government which has only limited powers.
> 
> In many respects that's what we got in 1867 - look at §§91 and 92 of the BNA. §91.29 is a hole big enough to allow almost anything but by then the authors - in London - had seen, in the USA, that "states' rights" led to some insurmountable problems.
> 
> ...



I always look forward to your replies. 

We need a way to bring the whole of the country back into the fold.  Right now regionalism is tearing us apart socially and institutionally.  To me the first step is taking the total power away from the Windsor - Montreal corridor and equalizing it across the country regardless of where there population density lays.

I would argue the issues and troubles across this country are skewed and underrepresented because of that massively concentrated base of voting power. 

Like others have said, I am not smart enough to know what the course is, but I can recognize change is needed. 

To add perspective, I am a very proud rural Ontarian who lives in NS.  Not just an Angry Bluenoser.


----------



## brihard (15 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> For example: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
> 
> Not really that hard.
> 
> Certainly the "notwithstanding" clause could be ditched.


And yet as soon as you take any close look at American jurisprudence, it’s been necessary to ‘abridge’ those freedoms in many instances for extremely valid reasons. Some degree of reasonableness has had to be read in to American law many times over, else laws criminalizing things like threats, or creating sanctions for libel or slander would not exist. A pharmacy company could claim whatever it wants about some fantastical new product. False advertising could be rampant. I could purchase a billboard plastered with an allegation that the mayor is a child molester. Etc, etc ad nauseum. So, in practice, any meaningfully functional system _must_ have reasonable limitations. Ours just approaches it more directly, and has a very well established legal test to adjudicate it when it happens in real life.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (15 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> We need a way to bring the whole of the country back into the fold.  Right now regionalism is tearing us apart socially and institutionally.  To me the first step is taking the total power away from the Windsor - Montreal corridor and equalizing it across the country regardless of where there population density lays.
> 
> I would argue the issues and troubles across this country are skewed and underrepresented because of that massively concentrated base of voting power.
> 
> ...


I agree wholeheartedly with your position. I grew up in Toronto and I still think its ludicrous how much power one city has in driving a country as large and regional as we are. Even Ontario as a province recognizes how easily it is to lose influence the further out you are from the GTA. Policies that would benefit your riding are dwarfed by initiatives made to bolster support from the 416/905.

When I was out west, it was even more shocking watching how "National" issues were always that of the Ontario/Quebec variety and had no bearing on day to day life on the Prairies. And in the same timeframe, something that would cripple Alberta, and thus our resource based economy, didn't see an eye batted in government. 

I often have said that in 50 years, possibly more, we'll see a fracture in the federation. I could easily see the Prairies breaking off before Quebec.


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Jul 2022)

rmc_wannabe said:


> I agree wholeheartedly with your position. I grew up in Toronto and I still think its ludicrous how much power one city has in driving a country as large and regional as we are. Even Ontario as a province recognizes how easily it is to lose influence the further out you are from the GTA. Policies that would benefit your riding are dwarfed by initiatives made to bolster support from the 416/905.
> 
> When I was out west, it was even more shocking watching how "National" issues were always that of the Ontario/Quebec variety and had no bearing on day to day life on the Prairies. And in the same timeframe, something that would cripple Alberta, and thus our resource based economy, didn't see an eye batted in government.
> 
> I often have said that in 50 years, possibly more, we'll see a fracture in the federation. I could easily see the Prairies breaking off before Quebec.



I sadly believe that if we don't find an equitable way to govern our nation my child will probably not leave this world as a Canadian. 

Unfortunately, like asking politicians to mandate their own pay cut, having Ont and Que relinquish their almost total power is probably out of the realm of reality.


----------



## mariomike (15 Jul 2022)

Maybe the territory within Ontario shown below the red line on the map, will one day become America's 51st. state.  🤷‍♂️

Either statehood, or a separate province within Canada.


----------



## Kirkhill (15 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> And yet as soon as you take any close look at American jurisprudence, it’s been necessary to ‘abridge’ those freedoms in many instances for extremely valid reasons. Some degree of reasonableness has had to be read in to American law many times over, else laws criminalizing things like threats, or creating sanctions for libel or slander would not exist. A pharmacy company could claim whatever it wants about some fantastical new product. False advertising could be rampant. I could purchase a billboard plastered with an allegation that the mayor is a child molester. Etc, etc ad nauseum. So, in practice, any meaningfully functional system _must_ have reasonable limitations. Ours just approaches it more directly, and has a very well established legal test to adjudicate it when it happens in real life.


Isn't that the reason we hire judges  (and juries and legislators)?

We can't write a program or a law that meets all requirements.  We rely on subjective assessments.  And we rely on parliaments of legislators being able to change their collective minds.


----------



## brihard (15 Jul 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Isn't that the reason we hire judges  (and juries and legislators)?
> 
> We can't write a program or a law that meets all requirements.  We rely on subjective assessments.  And we rely on parliaments of legislators being able to change their collective minds.


Well, I mean… We did. We elected legislators who drafted and passed the Charter, and we appointed judges who interpret it. So the constituent parts of the system are working as intended.


----------



## QV (15 Jul 2022)

mariomike said:


> Maybe the territory within Ontario shown below the red line on the map, will one day become America's 51st. state.  🤷‍♂️
> 
> Either statehood, or a separate province within Canada.


Problem is, that space is a net draw on resources and not a net contributor. Doubt anyone would want it, it's just high maintenance with little output. But I like where you're going MM...


----------



## Kirkhill (15 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> Well, I mean… We did. We elected legislators who drafted and passed the Charter, and we appointed judges who interpret it. So the constituent parts of the system are working as intended.


That is true.

Maybe the relevant question is about the continuing role of parliament in adjusting the Constitution.

1982 was 40 years ago and is disappearing in the rearview mirror.  It fades to join VE Day, Vimy Ridge and the Riel Rebellions.

My ongoing concern with the Constitution is that it replaces Parliament with Judges.


----------



## brihard (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Problem is, that space is a net draw on resources and not a net contributor. Doubt anyone would want it, it's just high maintenance with little output. But I like where you're going MM...


You just wrote off a third of Canada’s GDP.


----------



## mariomike (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> But I like where you're going MM...



We can dream, QV...  

I remember in the 1970's Metro Chairman Godfrey arguing before a Royal Commission that the region should have the range and flexibility of a province in its decision making.

If they can't even get that after all these years, pretty hard to imagine that part of Ontario  south of the red line on the map of Canada ever getting statehood.


Edward Campbell said:


> - more than half of all Canadians live South of the red line.





brihard said:


> You just wrote off a third of Canada’s GDP.


----------



## QV (15 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> You just wrote off a third of Canada’s GDP.


Yep. Finance, services and tech can be done anywhere. But you can't drill for oil or grow crops and beef in significant quantities in the GTR.


----------



## Navy_Pete (15 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> You just wrote off a third of Canada’s GDP.


As well as a huge chunk of power generation, and a key transportation hub, a huge amount of food production, fuel processing etc. R&D hubs, specialist companies etc as well. Also GM, Ford, Toyota etc are all in that region.

Not sure why people think it's a net draw; there aren't 5M people sitting idle with their thumbs up their ass. Not the manufacturing powerhouse of the 70s, but doesn't mean there isn't still a lot of stuff being made and processed. Not cranking out a million widgets but the ones left are high quality and high tech.


----------



## brihard (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Yep. Finance, services and tech can be done anywhere. But you can't drill for oil or grow crops and beef in significant quantities in the GTR.


They could be, but they’re not. Capital, people, and innovation go to where there are already economic incubators for same. Kitchener-Waterloo won’t suddenly see its tech sector uproot and move out west just ‘cause.

Oil and crops are both important sectors of our economy, but extraction and processing of basic materials do not suffice to drive a modern economy alone. A prosperous. integrated modern economy needs a lot of different sectors to make it resilient. Canada, fortunately, has that. Albertan oil fuels Oshawa trucks to move Saskatchewan grain to feed Kanata AI technology researchers that bring 21st century communications to test geomagnetic surveys and test wells in Athabaska.


----------



## lenaitch (15 Jul 2022)

mariomike said:


> Maybe the territory within Ontario shown below the red line on the map, will one day become America's 51st. state.  🤷‍♂️
> 
> Either statehood, or a separate province within Canada.


That's it - I'm moving.


----------



## QV (15 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> They could be, but they’re not. Capital, people, and innovation go to where there are already economic incubators for same. Kitchener-Waterloo won’t suddenly see its tech sector uproot and move out west just ‘cause.
> 
> Oil and crops are both important sectors of our economy, but extraction and processing of basic materials do not suffice to drive a modern economy alone. A prosperous. integrated modern economy needs a lot of different sectors to make it resilient. Canada, fortunately, has that. Albertan oil fuels Oshawa trucks to move Saskatchewan grain to feed Kanata AI technology researchers that bring 21st century communications to test geomagnetic surveys and test wells in Athabaska.


The difference is that one could, while the other could not.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Jul 2022)

Extraction and processing ARE the driver.  Everything else is larger, but without the bottom layer ("extraction"), the second layer ("finishing") and third layer ("services") don't exist.  It's just that in our modern economy the bottom layer is much smaller than historically, and the upper layers correspondingly larger and much larger.  Picture a pyramid which has inverted.

The constitution looks so reasonable to so many people right now, but I'm not impressed with the direction some leaders are going on freedom of information in the countries which are supposed to be on the side of freedom.  "We just need to manage and curate information a little more, for the greater good."


----------



## IKnowNothing (15 Jul 2022)

So while we're artificially minimizing Ontario's voice to prevent GTA/Laurentian dominance, are we also artificially inflating south/midwestern Ontario's voice proportional to the GTA, or do we just disappear as we paint Ontario with one big brush?

Also @QV there's more to agriculture than ranch beef and vast expanses of low yield fields.


----------



## brihard (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> The difference is that one could, while the other could not.



It’s not clear what point you think you’re making here. Nobody in this discussion is suggesting discarding the prairies or their resource based industries.



Brad Sallows said:


> Extraction and processing ARE the driver.  Everything else is larger, but without the bottom layer ("extraction"), the second layer ("finishing") and third layer ("services") don't exist.  It's just that in our modern economy the bottom layer is much smaller than historically, and the upper layers correspondingly larger and much larger.  Picture a pyramid which has inverted.



What we have had indeed grown that way, but industry, tech, and service based economies can exist on proportionately much  smaller natural resource bases than ours. Several economies larger than ours are much more based on industry and services and much less on primary resources. Japan and the UK come easily to mind.

The reality is that a hypothetically divided Alberta and rest of Canada would each do fine economically based on their own strengths, and continued economic interdependence and trade. It would simply be less efficient due to new barriers resultant from different financial systems and regulatory regimes having to interact.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Jul 2022)

> What we have had indeed grown that way, but industry, tech, and service based economies can exist on proportionately much  smaller natural resource bases than ours. Several economies larger than ours are much more based on industry and services and much less on primary resources. Japan and the UK come easily to mind.



Agreed.  Now consider the potential fragility.


----------



## GR66 (15 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Extraction and processing ARE the driver.  Everything else is larger, but without the bottom layer ("extraction"), the second layer ("finishing") and third layer ("services") don't exist.  It's just that in our modern economy the bottom layer is much smaller than historically, and the upper layers correspondingly larger and much larger.  Picture a pyramid which has inverted.
> 
> The constitution looks so reasonable to so many people right now, but I'm not impressed with the direction some leaders are going on freedom of information in the countries which are supposed to be on the side of freedom.  "We just need to manage and curate information a little more, for the greater good."


Looking at those nations with the highest per capita GDP I'm seeing quite a mix of economies.  The oil states of course are there, but there are also a number of countries in the top grouping (7 of the top 12) that are not primarily extractionist economies


#2 Macao
#3 Luxembourg
#4 Singapore
#6 Ireland
#9 Switzerland
#10 San Marino
#12 Hong Kong
While it's true that Canada has traditionally been seen as "hewers of wood and drawers of water" it doesn't mean that we aren't able to diversify away from resource extraction as our primary sources of export income.  

In fact, of our top 10 exports, five of the categories are natural resources (accounting for 38.1% of total exports) while the other five categories are manufactured goods (accounting for 23.6% of total exports).  

I'd argue that we would be best served by getting even greater diversity in our economy so that having 23.8% of our total exports coming from a single sector (Mineral fuels including oil) doesn't leave us at such major risk of downturn when those commodity prices take a hit.


----------



## brihard (15 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Agreed.  Now consider the potential fragility.


In the context of this discussion, what specific fragility are you alluding to?


----------



## Navy_Pete (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Yep. Finance, services and tech can be done anywhere. But you can't drill for oil or grow crops and beef in significant quantities in the GTR.


That's just massively ignorant. Ontario exported $20B in agriculture in 2021, and processes huge amounts of raw materials or sub assemblies into higher value goods. If you think they can just pick up and move multi-billion dollar factories with highly integrated supply chains, I don't know what to tell you.

And from the oil sands own info machine, they spent $6.5B and had support from 1300 Ontario companies between 2017-2019.









						Canada Oil Production | The Industry Across Canada
					

Canada's oil and natural gas industry is active in 12 of 13 provinces and territories in Canada; a truly national industry! Learn about Canada's Oil Production.




					www.capp.ca
				




If you think Alberta would be better off outside of Canada (with additional trade barriers etc) take a look at Brexit; the UK export market is tanking and it's a lot more effort to export something to what used to be open market access to the EU, and it's similarly harder to import things. And work visas etc etc are all things that require time and effort.

Things are integrated, and we're better off together were we are overall fairly self-sufficient.


----------



## QV (15 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> That's just massively ignorant. Ontario exported $20B in agriculture in 2021, and processes huge amounts of raw materials or sub assemblies into higher value goods. If you think they can just pick up and move multi-billion dollar factories with highly integrated supply chains, I don't know what to tell you.
> 
> And from the oil sands own info machine, they spent $6.5B and had support from 1300 Ontario companies between 2017-2019.
> 
> ...



I didn't say anything about Ontario. I don't know what you're all pissy about.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Jul 2022)

> what specific fragility are you alluding to?



Trade hiccups, whether from natural causes or political interference.


----------



## Navy_Pete (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> I didn't say anything about Ontario. I don't know what you're all pissy about.


That's the area you said was a net drain on the country and should become the 51st state? 

The flipside of that is raw materials can be imported from anywhere, you need the specialized equipment to do the processing, and the HR expertise for services and tech.

I think we're lucky to have both in the same country, so these regional fights are stupid.


----------



## brihard (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> I didn't say anything about Ontario. I don't know what you're all pissy about.


That’s not accurate. You did, in response to Mariomike:



QV said:


> Problem is, that space is a net draw on resources and not a net contributor. Doubt anyone would want it, it's just high maintenance with little output. But I like where you're going MM...


----------



## QV (15 Jul 2022)

MM posted a picture of a map... with a red line on it which was mostly the GTA and southern bits... better go back and look.


----------



## brihard (15 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Trade hiccups, whether from natural causes or political interference.


Right. Which any economy is vulnerable to, hence the benefit of economic diversification. You would find a similar but probably more more serious fragility in an economy that is over reliant on one relatively narrow sector.I would contend that the Quebec City - Windsor corridor is, through sectoral diversity, well hedged against the supposed fragility you’re concerned about.


----------



## IKnowNothing (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> MM posted a picture of a map... with a red line on it which was mostly the GTA and southern bits... better go back and look.


~90-99% of the population of Ontario was below that line.
With it a significant % of Canada's Poultry, Dairy, Beef, Vegatable, and Hog production
With it 37 conservative seats
With it between 1/3 and 1/2 of all conservative voters


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Jul 2022)

> I'd argue that we would be best served by getting even greater diversity in our economy



Yes.  Any ideas how we do that?  My solution - and it's general - would be to remove most things which discourage people from doing things they want to do or encourage people to do things that otherwise would not be economically viable.

I suppose I must stress that I'm not claiming we need to increase the size of the bottom tier.  For example, we have a tiny fraction of population directly engaged in agriculture compared to the past.  This is good (ie. creative destruction).  I do claim the bottom tier is critical.  No company - no company town.  A mid-sized city with 3 or 4 major employers loses one - substantial recession.  Broad contraction in bottom tier - cascading effects through upper tiers.


----------



## brihard (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> MM posted a picture of a map... with a red line on it which was mostly the GTA and southern bits... better go back and look.


Yes, so nearly the entire population and economy of Ontario, which you even then acknowledged after I related how much of the _national_ economy that chunk of Ontario comprises. It was very clear what you were talking about, and it wasn’t Timmins or Thunder Bay.


----------



## QV (15 Jul 2022)

Resources are more important. From there we can make everything else. 

In the absence of resources, you have to hope they are available from somewhere else. Hope is not a valid COA.


----------



## QV (15 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> Yes, so nearly the entire population and economy of Ontario, which you even then acknowledged after I related how much of the _national_ economy that chunk of Ontario comprises. It was very clear what you were talking about, and it wasn’t Timmins or Thunder Bay.


And I maintain if the GTA became the 51st state, the loss can be replicated. Where if we lost the bulk of a specific resource, it cannot be replicated - it must be sourced from elsewhere.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Jul 2022)

If we lost a financial centre like Toronto to the US, I doubt we'd be able to re-establish it.  We'd be entering a competitive market long after the sector leaders have been established, without any disruptive innovation, which is often a good predictor of failure.


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Resources are more important. From there we can make everything else.
> 
> In the absence of resources, you have to hope they are available from somewhere else. Hope is not a valid COA.


Luxembourg agrees with you completely…umm…well…it doesn’t.  Taiwan agrees completely…oops…they don’t either.  Anyway…importation of raw materials is not impossible, as many productive countries have aptly demonstrated.


----------



## Navy_Pete (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> And I maintain if the GTA became the 51st state, the loss can be replicated. Where if we lost the bulk of a specific resource, it cannot be replicated - it must be sourced from elsewhere.


That's just a stupid argument. Raw materials on their own are useless without processing/fabricating and vice versa. No one is going to invest trillions in redeveloping the massive infrastructure that is there to support that in the GTA area, as well as the expertise. If it was to be lost with the GTA it would be gone from Canada forever.

Hint; location and geography is a key part of that infrastructure; being located on ports connected to a lot of major US cities via the great lakes, as well as the rail and highway infrastructure is why it works. There is a lot of heavy industry that very specifically is built up along the high power lines from Darlington and Niagara falls, and still a lot of marine traffic on the lakes.

Logistics is a key part of the whole production scheme, and you really don't have any idea of what you are talking about if you think that infrastructure, geographic location and things like customs, import/export requirements etc don't all play a key part in figuring out the supply chain to make something useful out of raw materials.

I'm not sure if you are just deliberately trolling at this point though.


----------



## torg003 (15 Jul 2022)

If Toronto ever tries to leave Canada and join the US (not that it would be an easy thing to do, constitutionally), we should trade TO for Alaska (and maybe a bag of magic beans).


----------



## lenaitch (15 Jul 2022)

Curious thought experiment.  There's no provision in the Constitution to kick somebody out and I'm not aware of any groundswell from southern Ontario to jump ship.  If anything, some feel that it should be it's own province but what the 'it' includes becomes a matter of debate.  The scale in the picture kinda sucks but The Red Line looks to be around the 46th parallel (ish), so does enclose all of the agricultural economy of southwestern and eastern Ontario which is significant but I don't know what percentage it is of our total ag output.  The fact that the line also captures southern New Brunswick and Nova Scotia I'll just chalk up to lazy cartography. 

People toss around 'GTA', but that is just Toronto, Durham, Halton Peel and York.  While there is manufacturing, there is little of what I would call 'heavy industry'.  Only one auto plant; very little that can't go out in a seacan.  When you start to broaden out to the rest of the alphabet you get into the GTHA (Greater Toronto Hamilton Area), which adds Hamilton to the mix and which has a fair bit of heavy industry.  Farther still the GGH (Greater Golden Hoseshoe) which adds Niagara, Haldimand and Waterloo (a lot of tech) regions as well as the counties of Brant, Wellington, Dufferin, Simcoe (another auto plant), Kawartha Lakes, Peterborough and Northumberland (i.e. the whole centre cut).

Toronto in particular is an economic hub, but a lot of wealth reported is either 'paper' (banking) or actually generated elsewhere (mining) because their head offices are there.  Even for manufacturing and retail, much of it is because of head office location.  Canadian Tire's head office is in Toronto.  What little they actually manufacture under their own flag is from offshore.  If they moved their head office to Tobermory tomorrow, their economic reporting would go with it.

I had to laugh when I saw the argument that one of Toronto's strengths is its location on the Seaway.  The only things that flow through the Port of Toronto is sugar, road salt and some cement - all inbound.  I don't think anything has been exported by water in a couple of decades.

One of the concerns I have with our economy is the amount of manufacturing that are branch plants that are parented outside of our borders.  Every time there is an economic hiccup, our branch plants are under a bigger microscope than either home-based sites or ones that are in low labour cost countries.  If nothing else, the GTA/GTHA/GGH is a vast wealth of income tax revenue and votes.


----------



## QV (15 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Luxembourg agrees with you completely…umm…well…it doesn’t.  Taiwan agrees completely…oops…they don’t either.  Anyway…importation of raw materials is not impossible, as many productive countries have aptly demonstrated.


Ideally, it would be nice to avoid the situation Germany is in with energy at the moment.


----------



## QV (15 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> That's just a stupid argument. Raw materials on their own are useless without processing/fabricating and vice versa. No one is going to invest trillions in redeveloping the massive infrastructure that is there to support that in the GTA area, as well as the expertise. If it was to be lost with the GTA it would be gone from Canada forever.
> 
> Hint; location and geography is a key part of that infrastructure; being located on ports connected to a lot of major US cities via the great lakes, as well as the rail and highway infrastructure is why it works. There is a lot of heavy industry that very specifically is built up along the high power lines from Darlington and Niagara falls, and still a lot of marine traffic on the lakes.
> 
> ...


See lenaitch’s response? That’s how you play nice. You should try it sometime instead of insults.


----------



## torg003 (15 Jul 2022)

The idea that southern Ontario/Golden Horseshoe would leave Canada is silly in that they believe they ARE Canada (aside from Quebec) and all other provinces (aside from Quebec, again) joined them.  So they wouldn't be leaving, they'd be kicking everyone else out of Canada.  Toronto would be named the official capital of "Canada" and all the other provinces would have to decide if they want to form a new country, or separate into individual nation states.


----------



## mariomike (15 Jul 2022)

torg003 said:


> The idea that southern Ontario/Golden Horseshoe would leave Canada is silly < snip >



Even secession - Metro/GTA/GTHA/GGH - from Ontario ( let alone Canada ) would be "one of the hardest political maneuvers in Canadian history".








						How hard would it actually be for Toronto to become its own province?
					

It’s not impossible, but it would be one of the hardest political maneuvers in Canadian history




					nationalpost.com


----------



## Happy Guy (15 Jul 2022)

What it takes to make Conservative Party a contender again ​Interesting podcast on the National Post today with an interview with Ms. Tasha Kheiriddin, who once considered running for the leadership of the CPC.  The topic was "What it takes to make the Conservative Party a contender again."

I agree with her many of her opinions but I know that some people will in this forum will not especially with her proposal of Canada once again becoming the "hewers of wood and drawers of water” for world again.

She also eloquently stated, in a significantly more polite way, why the many people (like myself) intensely dislike the current Prime Minister.


----------



## Kirkhill (15 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> You just wrote off a third of Canada’s GDP.





Navy_Pete said:


> As well as a huge chunk of power generation, and a key transportation hub, a huge amount of food production, fuel processing etc. R&D hubs, specialist companies etc as well. Also GM, Ford, Toyota etc are all in that region.
> 
> Not sure why people think it's a net draw; there aren't 5M people sitting idle with their thumbs up their ass. Not the manufacturing powerhouse of the 70s, but doesn't mean there isn't still a lot of stuff being made and processed. Not cranking out a million widgets but the ones left are high quality and high tech.





> Gross domestic product (GDP) is the monetary value of all finished goods and services made within a country during a specific period.
> GDP provides an economic snapshot of a country, used to estimate the size of an economy and growth rate.











						Gross Domestic Product (GDP): Formula and How to Use It
					

Gross domestic product is the monetary value of all finished goods and services made within a country during a specific period.




					www.investopedia.com
				





Part of the problem with this discussion is the use of the GDP. 

GDP is influenced by the amount of people buying and selling, the number of transactions and the goods and services they exchange.  That can all happen in a closed economy.



> As well as a huge chunk of power generation,



Power is generated in southern ontario by southern ontarians for southern ontarians.  Some goes to industry, a lot in fact, but some goes to keep lights on and people warm.



> and a key transportation hub,



Which like power generation is staffed by southern ontarians for southern ontarians.



> a huge amount of food production,



I'll come back to this



> fuel processing etc.



Imported fuel which is locally processed for the local market and which produces by products which are used locally and re-exported to the points of origin of the imported fuels.



> R&D hubs, specialist companies etc as well.



Very true.  A matter of concern to other places in Canada that would like to compete.



> Also GM, Ford, Toyota etc are all in that region.



Vehicle production that largely feeds the local market, that was based on international trade agreements and placed where the population was densest, supplying both a labour force and a local market.

Coming back to the food processing - most of the raw material is imported to the GTA - either from within Canada, from the US or overseas.  It is then turned into products that suit the local southern ontario market by southern ontarians.  Those plants then export those foods back, like the petroleum by products, to those parts of Canada that don't have the production capabilities.  In other words back to the point of origin.

Every year, no, every month, I come across another Western entrepreneur who wants to convert local raw materials - grains, pulses, meat, potatoes, beets, berries, milk, eggs into value added goods that can be "exported" within Canada.  And they all die.  Internal trade barriers.  Lack of Capital.  Lack of Labour.  Lack of Interest from head offices located in the St Lawrence Lowlands.

Although, to be fair, most of those Laurentian head offices are being eaten up by Brazilian, Swiss, German, French, Italian, British and US companies making it harder yet for people outside of the area to get their ideas considered.

The internationals aren't overly concerned about the GDP in the area.  Except insofar as it influences how much they can skim from that circulating pool of funds and export back to their banks where they control their home governments and can influence the tax regime.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (15 Jul 2022)

I would just be happy if Ontario realized that there is a whole chunk of province above the 50 degree Longitude that they forgot about.


----------



## FJAG (15 Jul 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> I would just be happy if Ontario realized that there is a whole chunk of province above the 50 degree Longitude that they forgot about.


Ha! That's a good one. When I grew up in Toronto we firmly believed that there was nothing north of the 401.

😁


----------



## mariomike (15 Jul 2022)

We've been riding this merry-go-round for years. A divorce is impossible.



> For any part of Toronto and the surrounding region to secede from Ontario to create a new province would require an amendment to the Constitution of Canada. The constitutional amendment would require resolutions from the House of Commons of Canada and the Senate of Canada, and resolutions from the legislative bodies of 7 of the provinces representing at least 50% of the population.


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Ideally, it would be nice to avoid the situation Germany is in with energy at the moment.


I don’t disagree.  But having a whole bunch of oil/NG and little else isn’t a recipe for a productive nation.


----------



## Kirkhill (15 Jul 2022)

mariomike said:


> We've been riding this merry-go-round for years. A divorce is impossible.



Not a problem - if Vancouver and Montreal split from BC and QC as well.  I'm sure you would get your 7/50 support no problem at all.


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Jul 2022)

FJAG said:


> Ha! That's a good one. When I grew up in Toronto we firmly believed that there was nothing north of the 401 Hwy 7.
> 
> 😁


😉


----------



## Kirkhill (16 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> I don’t disagree.  But having a whole bunch of oil/NG and little else isn’t a recipe for a productive nation.



What's that bit about money not being able to buy you happiness ... but it beats the alternative.


----------



## Kirkhill (16 Jul 2022)

FJAG said:


> Ha! That's a good one. When I grew up in Toronto we firmly believed that there was nothing north of the 401.
> 
> 😁



First trip out of Toronto in 1966 was on the Dayliner to Peterboro.  Toronto ended at Scarborough and the wilderness began at AAAAAA-gin-COOOOOurt.


----------



## mariomike (16 Jul 2022)

I love Northern Ontario for hunting and summer recreation and cottaging. Succession,  if it were possible, would be business, nothing personal.


Kirkhill said:


> First trip out of Toronto in 1966 was on the Dayliner to Peterboro.



It was a Budd car. Used to ride it with my father.


----------



## FJAG (16 Jul 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> First trip out of Toronto in 1966 was on the Dayliner to Peterboro.  Toronto ended at Scarborough and the wilderness began at AAAAAA-gin-COOOOOurt.


True that. In 1960 we moved to the Birch Cliff Heights area of Scarborough, just a little west of where Kingston Rd and Danforth Ave merged. If you went east on Kingston Rd another three kilometres, just beyond RH King Collegiate, you would start to hit farmlands all the way to Oshawa. Going west, Mississauga was a tiny place. After Etobicoke there was nothing really until Hamilton.

🍻


----------



## mariomike (16 Jul 2022)

Our part of town was a village, until it was annexed in 1967. The "final frontier before Etobicoke".


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Jul 2022)

No fear about being overly-dependent on resources.

Components of GDP.


----------



## GR66 (16 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> No fear about being overly-dependent on resources.
> 
> Components of GDP.


As @Kirkhill noted above GDP can be a tricky measure to use as in includes all spending, including non-productive internal and government spending.  That is why I focused on exports which is where a nation earns income from outside its own, closed system.  

A single resource commodity group (Mineral fuels including oil) accounts for 23.8% of our total export income.  Not as bad as the Gulf States, but that's still a significant number of eggs to have in one basket.  The top five resource categories account for 38.1% of our total exports.  

One need only look at the boom and bust cycle in Alberta to see how an economy largely dependent on exporting commodities is affected by fluctuations in global demand and global prices.


----------



## TacticalTea (16 Jul 2022)

GR66 said:


> As @Kirkhill noted above GDP can be a tricky measure to use as in includes all spending, including non-productive internal and government spending.


That's not accurate.

GDP includes government spending because it is derived from taxes, which themselves are cut out of profits made from production. 

Gross Domestic *Product* aims to represent Production, as its name indicates.

''*the monetary value of all finished goods and services made within a country during a specific period*''. Each word in there is important. It has its flaws, but counting taxes is not one of them.

But anyway, I don't disagree with most things you've said on this thread, this was just my economics rant of the day.


----------



## TacticalTea (16 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> My point is more that we equate population density with a priority of concerns, issues at at hand and electoral results.
> 
> For example, provincially, just because half the province of NS lives in the HRM does not mean that the concerns of those in Yarmouth or Sydney are any less valid.  And they should have equal representation.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I don't know why people in this thread are arguing for proportional vote and more power to the cities. That's only going to divide the country even further. Our democratic process is fine and doesn't need major reform. What we need is to devolve more power from the federal government, as it was first designed in the 1800s.

Extraordinary powers were levied for the purpose of fighting world wars... these need not be held in the federal's hands anymore. Power to and by the people means power close to the people.


GR66 said:


> The Senate would be drawn from members representing the Provincial parties not the Federal parties since their role is to represent the interests of the Provinces.
> 
> Electors often select Provincial parties that are different than they select Federally.  In Ontario for example the 2021 Federal Election saw the Liberal Party of Canada receive 78 of the 121 seats (64% of the seats with 39% of the popular vote) vs 37 seats for the Conservative Party (31% of the seats with 35% of the popular vote).  Meanwhile in the 2022 Ontario Provincial election the Ontario Liberal Party received 24% of the popular vote compared to 41% for the Conservative party.  Under a PR system then Ontario would have 64% Liberal/35% Conservative representation in the HOC but 24% Liberal/41% Conservative representation in the Senate.  Hardly the Senate mirroring the HOC.
> 
> Currently the Senate can in effect be stacked by the party that remains in power the longest as they will have the most opportunity to fill seats as they become vacant.  And despite the supposed "independence" of the Liberal-appointed Senators they are all still selected by the Federal party leader in power at the time.  Much more likelihood of "rubber stamping" in that situation than by members of a potentially different (Provincial) party with no direct ties to the Federal party leadership.


I've been advocating for this for a while, and can personally confirm that a good amount of senators are also in favour of this.


----------



## Dana381 (16 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Yeah, I don't know why people in this thread are arguing for proportional vote and more power to the cities. That's only going to divide the country even further. Our democratic process is fine and doesn't need major reform. What we need is to devolve more power from the federal government, as it was first designed in the 1800s.
> 
> Extraordinary powers were levied for the purpose of fighting world wars... these need not be held in the federal's hands anymore. Power to and by the people means power close to the people.
> 
> I've been advocating for this for a while, and can personally confirm that a good amount of senators are also in favour of this.



The federal government should also lower the transfer payments to allow provinces to raise the provincial tax level proportionally. This would allow the provinces more autonomy (real or percieved) in how they spend their money.  I don't think we can eliminate the transfer payment system all together but there should be steps to minimize its necessity.

I would also like to see more federal incentives to help the "have not" provinces attract industry. Currently those provinces have to provide industry with deep tax breaks to attract them and then the provincial budgets suffer. If there was some sort of federal program where industry gets the biggest tax breaks by establishing in the poorest provinces then the province can hold on to their tax revenue and won't need so much federal transfer money.


----------



## mariomike (16 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> I don't know why people in this thread are arguing for proportional vote and more power to the cities. That's only going to divide the country even further.



8 pages of City-state provinces, and another 53 pages of electoral reform, with no end in sight.









						One person, one vote? In Canada, it's not even close
					

Some ridings have fewer than 40,000 people. Others are closer to 160,000. Can anything be done to make them more equal?




					www.wellandtribune.ca
				



If after reading the above people are STILL whining, maybe best if the part of Ontario south of the red line goes its own way as a separate province.

Maybe Uncle Sam will adopt "South Ontario".


----------



## FSTO (16 Jul 2022)

Well, Toronto doesn’t really think of itself as Canadian anyway.


----------



## mariomike (16 Jul 2022)

FSTO said:


> Well, Toronto doesn’t really think of itself as Canadian anyway.



Reading that, I'm not surprised to read the CAF is not attracting many recruits  from the GTA.

I don't think many are as obsessed with other Canadians as some seem to be about them.

Nothing personal FSTO. I've been to your town and thought the people were very nice.

But, most in the GTA would be more likely to visit New York State than Manitoba.

Maybe some Canadians wouldn't mind US statehood for their province. 🤷‍♂️


----------



## GR66 (16 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> That's not accurate.
> 
> GDP includes government spending because it is derived from taxes, which themselves are cut out of profits made from production.
> 
> ...


The only fly in that ointment is that not all government spending is derived from taxes.  The over $1 Trillion in debt racked up by the Federal Government is proof of that.  All that borrowed money that the government spends counts as "production" as well.  And don't forget the Provincial and Municipal deficits on top of that.

Money circulated internally within the country...earned/taxed/spent/earned/repeat...is not NEW money (i.e. net national income).  Exports, foreign investment (and borrowing from foreign sources) is where new money comes from (excluding of course new money that the government just creates from whole cloth).


----------



## TacticalTea (16 Jul 2022)

GR66 said:


> The only fly in that ointment is that not all government spending is derived from taxes.  The over $1 Trillion in debt racked up by the Federal Government is proof of that.  All that borrowed money that the government spends counts as "production" as well.  And don't forget the Provincial and Municipal deficits on top of that.
> 
> Money circulated internally within the country...earned/taxed/spent/earned/repeat...is not NEW money (i.e. net national income).  Exports, foreign investment (and borrowing from foreign sources) is where new money comes from (excluding of course new money that the government just creates from whole cloth).


That debt mostly consists of direct transfer payments, which are not included in the ''goods and services'' calculation, even if they would otherwise be included under the umbrella of government spending.

In other words, the government can't even increase real GDP by sending everyone a thousand dollar cheque (though it would probably increase nominal GDP indirectly by causing inflation, but nominal GDP is rather meaningless).

Now, is trade balance a better indicator of an economy's strength? Not so sure. In the G20, Russia and China dominate that leaderboard whereas Canada and the US figure poorly, the latter having the greatest trade deficit of any economy. Yet, would you say the Reds have stronger, more robust, or more diversified economies?

Doubtful.


----------



## FSTO (17 Jul 2022)

mariomike said:


> Maybe some Canadians wouldn't mind US statehood for their province. 🤷‍♂️


I don’t think it would be the panacea they’d hope it would be.


----------



## mariomike (17 Jul 2022)

FSTO said:


> I don’t think it would be the panacea they’d hope it would be.


They say the grass is always greener on the other side. 
You've got to love your country, even if it doesn't love you back.


----------



## lenaitch (17 Jul 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> I would just be happy if Ontario realized that there is a whole chunk of province above the 50 degree Longitude that they forgot about.


50?  How about 44 or 45 lat?  It's not just a weekend playground.


TacticalTea said:


> Yeah, I don't know why people in this thread are arguing for proportional vote and more power to the cities. That's only going to divide the country even further. Our democratic process is fine and doesn't need major reform. What we need is to devolve more power from the federal government, as it was first designed in the 1800s.


[/QUOTE]

Your statement seems to contradict itself.  More power to the cities and devolving more power from the federal level seem very similar.  In terms of devolved powers, which includes the power to tax, borrow and spend, I don't see a huge difference which sub-national level they devolved to (not under our current system, obviously, because municipalities don't constitutionally exist).

Besides, who would the sub-national governments whine to for more money?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (17 Jul 2022)

lenaitch said:


> 50?  How about 44 or 45 lat?  It's not just a weekend playground.



Your statement seems to contradict itself.  More power to the cities and devolving more power from the federal level seem very similar.  In terms of devolved powers, which includes the power to tax, borrow and spend, I don't see a huge difference which sub-national level they devolved to (not under our current system, obviously, because municipalities don't constitutionally exist).

Besides, who would the sub-national governments whine to for more money?
[/QUOTE]
Every level of government loves to have at least one other level to blame for its shortcomings…


----------



## TacticalTea (17 Jul 2022)

lenaitch said:


> 50?  How about 44 or 45 lat?  It's not just a weekend playground.



Your statement seems to contradict itself.  More power to the cities and devolving more power from the federal level seem very similar.  In terms of devolved powers, which includes the power to tax, borrow and spend, I don't see a huge difference which sub-national level they devolved to (not under our current system, obviously, because municipalities don't constitutionally exist).

Besides, who would the sub-national governments whine to for more money?
[/QUOTE]
Yes, sorry, I realized that.

In the first case, I'm talking about federal power as a result of the city's influence. In the second case, I'm talking about autonomy of the provinces.

In other words, I want them to have less power over others, but more power over themselves.

I don't get your point about how cities don't exist constitutionally. They're a creation of provinces sure... So what? The provinces are free to grant them more autonomy as they see fit.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Jul 2022)

> That debt mostly consists of direct transfer payments



Can't figure out what you mean.  There is no pretending "this part of spending is from revenues, and this part is from borrowing".  People can say that, but it's meaningless.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Your statement seems to contradict itself.  More power to the cities and devolving more power from the federal level seem very similar.  In terms of devolved powers, which includes the power to tax, borrow and spend, I don't see a huge difference which sub-national level they devolved to (not under our current system, obviously, because municipalities don't constitutionally exist).
> 
> Besides, who would the sub-national governments whine to for more money?




I don't get your point about how cities don't exist constitutionally. They're a creation of provinces sure... So what? The provinces are free to grant them more autonomy as they see fit.
[/QUOTE]

Within the authorities of the Provinces power only though. City governments also play the game of "It's the Provinces fault" and "Give me more money", just as the Provinces do to the Feds. The Cities will never go for full autonomy as the responsibility will then rest on the shoulders of the Mayor and Council.In reality, both the Feds and Provinces should focus their efforts away from the major cities and work to make smaller communities and cities more liveable and able to support primary businesses there. But they won't as major cities are vote rich.


----------



## TacticalTea (17 Jul 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> both the Feds and Provinces should focus their efforts away from the major cities and work to make smaller communities and cities more liveable and able to support primary businesses there. But they won't as major cities are vote rich.


Totally agree, that's why I prefer a voting system that slightly favours those communities and a political system that grants more autonomy to smaller polities (provinces, regions, cities). 

I'm not advocating for ''full autonomy'', my interpretation being that it means the province has no role in a city's business, is that what you meant? Just enhanced autonomy.


----------



## TacticalTea (17 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Can't figure out what you mean.  There is no pretending "this part of spending is from revenues, and this part is from borrowing".  People can say that, but it's meaningless.


True. But;

Most of the federal government's spending is from transfers to individuals or provinces (who in turn spend a lot on direct transfers to individuals). That money is not counted as part of the GDP.

Much of the massive hike in federal spending - and thus, in the national debt - under Trudeau has been via direct transfers. Child care benefit, provincial health transfer hike, COVID CERB et al, etc..


----------



## brihard (17 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Totally agree, that's why I prefer a voting system that slightly favours those communities



Good news for you then: we have one. Rural and remote ridings are overrepresented in the House of Commons; there are more constituents per seat in the big cities, fewer in the prairies. And then of course there’s also the Senate, which, for all its faults, _does_ heavily overrepresented the less populous provinces.


----------



## FSTO (17 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> Good news for you then: we have one. Rural and remote ridings are overrepresented in the House of Commons; there are more constituents per seat in the big cities, fewer in the prairies. And then of course there’s also the Senate, which, for all its faults, _does_ heavily overrepresented the less populous provinces.


I’ll direct you to my post about where actual power resides at the federal level, trained seals and well fed trained seals.


----------



## mariomike (17 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> Rural and remote ridings are overrepresented in the House of Commons; there are more constituents per seat in the big cities, fewer in the prairies. And then of course there’s also the Senate, which, for all its faults, _does_ heavily overrepresented the less populous provinces.



Maybe not overrepresented enough to satisfy some people.  🤷‍♂️


----------



## TacticalTea (17 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> Good news for you then: we have one. Rural and remote ridings are overrepresented in the House of Commons; there are more constituents per seat in the big cities, fewer in the prairies. And then of course there’s also the Senate, which, for all its faults, _does_ heavily overrepresented the less populous provinces.


Yep, that's why I said it doesn't need radical changing. 😉

Just some tweaking.


----------



## GR66 (17 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> True. But;
> 
> Most of the federal government's spending is from transfers to individuals or provinces (who in turn spend a lot on direct transfers to individuals). That money is not counted as part of the GDP.
> 
> Much of the massive hike in federal spending - and thus, in the national debt - under Trudeau has been via direct transfers. Child care benefit, provincial health transfer hike, COVID CERB et al, etc..


But when the individuals that receive those direct transfers spend the money THAT spending becomes part of the GDP.  The economy doesn't separate the money that an individual received from their employment income and is spent on home renovations from the home renovation money they spend that came from government transfers.


----------



## GR66 (17 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> That debt mostly consists of direct transfer payments, which are not included in the ''goods and services'' calculation, even if they would otherwise be included under the umbrella of government spending.
> 
> In other words, the government can't even increase real GDP by sending everyone a thousand dollar cheque (though it would probably increase nominal GDP indirectly by causing inflation, but nominal GDP is rather meaningless).
> 
> ...


Canada maintains a trade surplus which is good and what keeps a relatively small country in terms of population like us in the top 10 GDP earning nations in the world.  

Russia, despite its shrinking population and generally moribund economy has financed it's continued status as a "major" power almost completely on the back of its oil and gas exports.  

The massive growth of China's GDP both in overall terms and in per capita terms comes down to their massive trade surplus with the rest of the world.

The United States is a special case and not an apples-to-apples comparison.  The status of the US Dollar as the defacto global currency compensates for their trade deficit with the rest of the World.  For example (from the article) "As of the fourth quarter of 2019, it [US Dollar] makes up over 60% of all known central bank foreign exchange reserves."  If the US Dollar wasn't the global reserve currency then absolutely the US would be in dire economic straits due to their massive debt and trade deficit.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Jul 2022)

Trade deficit/surplus isn't that big a deal.  The only thing people can do with Canadian dollars is use them to buy things priced in Canadian dollars.  A path that doesn't show up in trade balance is investment of Canadian dollars in Canada.

The rural/urban House imbalance we have is enough to be visible, but not enough to effectively matter.


----------



## TacticalTea (17 Jul 2022)

GR66 said:


> Canada maintains a trade surplus which is good and what keeps a relatively small country in terms of population like us in the top 10 GDP earning nations in the world.
> 
> Russia, despite its shrinking population and generally moribund economy has financed it's continued status as a "major" power almost completely on the back of its oil and gas exports.
> 
> ...


Hm? Canada does not have a trade surplus. Happy to have my facts corrected but I haven't seen any source stating it did.


----------



## Remius (17 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Hm? Canada does not have a trade surplus. Happy to have my facts corrected but I haven't seen any source stating it did.








						Monthly Trade Report September 2022
					

Information, statistics and analysis related to the Canadian economy and international trade and investment.




					www.international.gc.ca
				









						Canada Trade Balance [Up-to-date Chart & Data] | 1988 - 2022 | CEIC Data
					

Canada Trade Balance recorded a surplus of  886.9 USD mn in  Oct 2022, compared with a surplus of 454.8 USD mn in the previous month. Canada Trade Balance data is updated monthly, available from Jan 1988 to Oct 2022, with an averaged value of 904.0 USD mn. The data reached an all-time high of...




					www.ceicdata.com


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (17 Jul 2022)

Canada has a Trade deficit but a Current Account surplus due to the monetary flux (foreign investment in Canada, purchase of financial assets, etc.).


----------



## TacticalTea (17 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> Monthly Trade Report September 2022
> 
> 
> Information, statistics and analysis related to the Canadian economy and international trade and investment.
> ...



From your link.

I guess my info is pre-COVID!

Thanks tho.

I think this proves my point that the trade balance isn't particularly relevant in terms of proving an economy's strength, given that we've only been having this surplus in the middle of an economic downturn. Might be a sign that we are holding out better than others, maybe not. Would have to look into it.


----------



## TacticalTea (17 Jul 2022)

@GR66  what you said about direct transfers then being used for goods and services makes sense (although a good portion would also be saved up). I'd have to look into it, it's been a while since I've really delved into my Econ books...


----------



## lenaitch (17 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> I don't get your point about how cities don't exist constitutionally. They're a creation of provinces sure... So what? The provinces are free to grant them more autonomy as they see fit.



Simply that they are not mentioned in the Constitution at all, let alone in the division of powers sections.  All municipalities are a form of corporation and 'children of their province', who can deal with them how they please (as we have seen in Ontario).  Having your power dependent on the mood of another level of government is not constitutionally protected.

To be clear, I'm not advocating one way or the other.  Maybe big cities should be on their own, but what about the 'slightly not so big cities'?  For those who advocate, I'm never clear on what powers they wish devolved. or how they imagine they would be governed.  I'm not exactly sure how the Constitution could be amended to accommodate their inclusion.  Some kind of population standard or could Upper Rubber Boot apply?


----------



## Remius (17 Jul 2022)

They’d end up with non voting seats is what might likely happen. Lessening their representation I would think.


----------



## Kirkhill (17 Jul 2022)

lenaitch said:


> Simply that they are not mentioned in the Constitution at all, let alone in the division of powers sections.  All municipalities are a form of corporation and 'children of their province', who can deal with them how they please (as we have seen in Ontario).  Having your power dependent on the mood of another level of government is not constitutionally protected.
> 
> To be clear, I'm not advocating one way or the other.  Maybe big cities should be on their own, but what about the 'slightly not so big cities'?  For those who advocate, I'm never clear on what powers they wish devolved. or how they imagine they would be governed.  I'm not exactly sure how the Constitution could be amended to accommodate their inclusion.  Some kind of population standard or could Upper Rubber Boot apply?



That is the ultimate rationale for why we will continue to retain the monarch, and China will retain the CCP.  It is hard to impossible to define what comes next.


----------



## suffolkowner (17 Jul 2022)

At this point in time there doesnt appear to be any reasonable chance at ammending the constitution, either in Canada or the US, in any way so we are likely stuck with the system we have. Written or unwritten. The difficulty in resolving how 80% of the population in 20% of the country making the rules for 20% of the population in 80% of the country remains but is exacerbated by how much the lives have diverged and how quickly


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Jul 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> At this point in time there doesnt appear to be any reasonable chance at ammending the constitution, either in Canada or the US, in any way so we are likely stuck with the system we have. Written or unwritten. The difficulty in resolving how 80% of the population in 20% of the country making the rules for 20% of the population in 80% of the country remains but is exacerbated by how much the lives have diverged and how quickly


So what’s the metric for fair representation, if not population?  Area?  Provincial equality?  Share of GDP?  Other?


----------



## suffolkowner (17 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> So what’s the metric for fair representation, if not population?  Area?  Provincial equality?  Share of GDP?  Other?



The representation may be fair but I'm not sure the results are. I dont know if I have a solution. Im just pointing out I  dont see a solution constitutionally right now.


----------



## Kirkhill (17 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> So what’s the metric for fair representation, if not population?  Area?  Provincial equality?  Share of GDP?  Other?



Aren't you bumping up against the equity/equality debate?  Opportunity vs outcome?

In my view the issue is how disputes are resolved.  People, individuals, corporations (municipal, provincial or private) are constantly in tension with each other.  Competition is.  People will always try to make the best of their circumstances and sometimes that is going to mean two people reaching for the same reward. 

Who is Solomon and how do you select her?

My inclination is to leave as many decisions to the local government as possible.  And basically that means that Provinces, Cities, Towns, First Nations, landowners, unions etc will constantly challenge the status quo and the status quo will constantly change.

And I'm back to the McGarrigles and the need to learn to step lively.   Solid ground is hard to find.


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Jul 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> The representation may be fair but I'm not sure the results are. I dont know if I have a solution. Im just pointing out I  dont see a solution constitutionally right now.


Oh, I’m not sure the representation is fair, currently, but I think that a more fair system would be something closer to a Party-List Proportional Representation  (PLPR) system, than the current FPTP/Westminster system.  The main challenge being the loss of direct regional ‘representation’ as exists today.


----------



## torg003 (17 Jul 2022)

There is actually a hybrid system that uses a combo of the current plurality system (FPTP), for individual ridings, and proportional rep. (party list) where you just vote for a national party (doesn't have to be the same as who you voted for in your riding).  Pretty simple.  The main thing that is stopping this from being used is that NO national party that has a chance of forming a gov't (Lib, Cons) would vote for the change.  That's because  it would be impossible to get a majority gov't for 35% of the popular vote.  The results of the PR vote are used to give extra seats to balance things out according to percentage of vote.  Usually means smaller parties would likely be the ones getting more seats.  Also would mean that there would be more coalition governments (which, as far as I'm concerned, wouldn't be a bad thing).
The Libs had promised to change the electoral system in their first term, but they shut down the committee (when they realized that it would be harder for them to win a majority government in the future).
I'm sure the Cons would've done the same thing if they had been in power, as this system would benefit the smaller parties  more than the major ones.


----------



## Edward Campbell (17 Jul 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> At this point in time there doesnt appear to be any reasonable chance at ammending the constitution, either in Canada or the US, in any way so we are likely stuck with the system we have. Written or unwritten. The difficulty in resolving how 80% of the population in 20% of the country making the rules for 20% of the population in 80% of the country remains but is exacerbated by _how much the lives have diverged and how quickly_


That - the divergence - is,_ I think_, the key to it ... whatever it is.

There is, here, and in America, quite clearly, and in Australia too, I'm told by a reliable source, and in Britain, also, I think, a massive and fairly recent divergence between _big-city-urban_ and small-town/rural with the suburbs drifting between the two.

The suburbs are variable and morale - as the British Tories showed in the last UK general election.


----------



## Edward Campbell (17 Jul 2022)

Back, a few centuries go, when Simon de Montfort was wandering about, we - our political ancestors - decided that we should be represented in the fledgling parliament by people that came from our communities. The French name for our House of Commons, _la Chambre des communes_, is a more accurate representation of what was intended than is the "commons" which too many people mistakenly think refers to the Lords and the commoners. Anyway, while de Montfort didn't think about equality of representation or even fairness, he did put in place, in 1265 - a long, long time ago - a system which, in my opinion, has served us well and which we would not want to throw out without a lot of thought. 

_La Chambre des communes_ brings together representatives of each "community," each remote and rural district, each village and town, each suburb and each district in big towns and cities. 

One factor which de Montfort did not consider was federalism wherein each community is represented at two levels: provincially and nationally. Now, the electors of New Brunswick get to send ten representatives to Ottawa to do the nation's business but they send nearly 50 to Fredricton to look after more local affairs.

Maybe, if we look at §§91 and 92 of the Constitution we should ask ourselves if we don't, perhaps, have too many people worrying about a lot of less than really critical issues in Ottawa. I mean everything to do with money - Gresham and all that - and foreign and defence policies are important but do w really need 338 legislators to look after that plus the postal service, beacons, buoys, lighthouses, and Sable Island and weights and measures? Are those things really as important as managing hospitals and public education and licences for shops, saloons and taverns?

I have always maintained that a federal state requires a bicameral legislature: one chamber to represent the people, in their communities, on a roughly equal basis, and the other to represent the provinces as the constituent partners in confederation. But what if I'm wrong? What if we need only one federal legislative body? Maybe an elected and effective Senate that is regionally, and very roughly, equal. That (roughly) equal, effective and elected Senate _might_ need only, say, 201 senators - say 155 elected during provincial general elections and 46 elected, by proportional representation, during federal general elections. BC, ON and QC would each get 31 "provincial" senators, the prairies would get 31 and Atlantic Canada would get 31, also. How the 201 senators - whose political balance would shit with every single provincial and national election - caucused, and, therefore, how they determined who "governed" Canada would be something that would hark back to the 16t and17th centuries when we understood that what really, really mattered in governing was the treasury - almost everything, including defence and foreign and most social policies depends on that.

My 2𝇍 ... for argument's sake.


----------



## Kirkhill (17 Jul 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> Back, a few centuries go, when Simon de Montfort was wandering about, we - our political ancestors - decided that we should be represented in the fledgling parliament by people that came from our communities. The French name for our House of Commons, _la Chambre des communes_, is a more accurate representation of what was intended than is the "commons" which too many people mistakenly think refers to the Lords and the commoners. Anyway, while de Montfort didn't think about equality of representation or even fairness, he did put in place, in 1265 - a long, long time ago - a system which, in my opinion, has served us well and which we would not want to throw out without a lot of thought.
> 
> _La Chambre des communes_ brings together representatives of each "community," each remote and rural district, each village and town, each suburb and each district in big towns and cities.
> 
> ...



Work expands to fit the time available.  Maybe the issue isn't too many representatives but too much time...too many man hours.

If so the solution is to make the position of MP a part time job.


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Jul 2022)

Mr. Campbell, I agree. I think there is value to the bicameral system.  The Senate is a bit discordant at the moment, but set-up properly, ie. Elected, but with a flavour of equality across the provinces and territories, would go a longer way to a balanced systems with both the representation of the people with first-order accountability to respective MPs, and the federate voice of regional input and accountability.


----------



## PuckChaser (17 Jul 2022)

I'm almost entirely certain there's a topic here about electoral reform and I haven't seen any CPC leadership candidates even mention it, so maybe we can get back on topic?


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Jul 2022)

All proposals to modify the federal structure without reducing the federal authority are, upon examination, likely to be mere tinkering around the edges of the problem.


----------



## McG (17 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Oh, I’m not sure the representation is fair, currently, but I think that a more fair system would be something closer to a Party-List Proportional Representation  (PLPR) system, than the current FPTP/Westminster system.  The main challenge being the loss of direct regional ‘representation’ as exists today.


No party lists. The parties are autocracies with power concentrated in the leader, and a party list system just gives more power to the leader who controls the list.  

But, there are ways to give better representation and keep representatives local: Multimember ridings and single transferable vote.


----------



## TacticalTea (18 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Oh, I’m not sure the representation is fair, currently, but I think that a more fair system would be something closer to a Party-List Proportional Representation  (PLPR) system, than the current FPTP/Westminster system.  The main challenge being the loss of direct regional ‘representation’ as exists today.


Yeah I'm really not a fan of that. As @McG said, party lists would just concentrate power EVEN FURTHER into the PMO and unelected party officials' hands.



Good2Golf said:


> Mr. Campbell, I agree. I think there is value to the bicameral system.  The Senate is a bit discordant at the moment, but set-up properly, ie. Elected, but with a flavour of equality across the provinces and territories, would go a longer way to a balanced systems with both the representation of the people with first-order accountability to respective MPs, and the federate voice of regional input and accountability.


How would you implement that exactly? The House already corresponds to that description of ''Elected, but with a flavour of equality across provinces and territories''. If both chambers are functionally the same, then there's no point having a bicameral. 

I strongly believe that the best possible improvement would be provincial nomination of Senators, as Alberta has been attempting to push for. 

However, I remain undecided on whether it would be better for provincial governments to name Senators for life (or until voluntary or mandatory retirement), for a term (5, 15, 25 years, w/e it may be), or at pleasure (blank slate when a new provincial government is elected). And one thing I am wary of is the risk that this new construct may incite federal and provincial parties to merge vertically, akin to the Democrats and Republicans down south, in an attempt to better coordinate their agendas. 

Lastly, I'm not oblivious to the fact that this plan would increase the power of Provincial Premiers, which might seem contradictory to my first paragraph above. That said, that is not nearly as worrying a prospect to me, as the idea of giving more power to the federal PMO.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (18 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Yeah I'm really not a fan of that. As @McG said, party lists would just concentrate power EVEN FURTHER into the PMO and unelected party officials' hands.
> 
> 
> How would you implement that exactly? The House already corresponds to that description of ''Elected, but with a flavour of equality across provinces and territories''. If both chambers are functionally the same, then there's no point having a bicameral.
> ...


More power to provincial premier might act as a check to the PMO.


----------



## TacticalTea (18 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> More power to provincial premier might act as a check to the PMO.


Exactly, which is why it doesn't concern me as much.


----------



## Good2Golf (18 Jul 2022)

McG said:


> No party lists. The parties are autocracies with power concentrated in the leader, and a party list system just gives more power to the leader who controls the list.
> 
> But, there are ways to give better representation and keep representatives local: Multimember ridings and single transferable vote.


Certainly considerations for a discussion, and something that I believe the CPC should be engaging on during its own leadership campaign.


----------



## FSTO (18 Jul 2022)

I listen to David Herle podcast quite a bit. For a liberal he's an okay guy (must of been a lonely life as a Liberal Strategist in Saskatchewan) and his latest guest was Mike McDonald.  They had an interesting exchange about local riding organizations. Back in the day the Riding President used to be a very important person, even if your riding was podunk Yukon. You had access to the senior folks in the party who had access to the PMO and your concerns from the riding were at least given a nod of acknowledgement. Now you're lucky to get a call before the email from the PMO on who they selected as the candidate for that riding.  

From the website
We’ve got a helluva pod today. We’re going to take a deep dive into B.C. politics with my good friend, and now 2-time Herle Burly guest, *Mike McDonald*! Mike is a brilliant human being. He’s the former campaign manager and Chief of Staff to Premier Christy Clark. Currently, he’s Partner and Chief Strategy Officer at Kirk & Co., one of the leading communications and public engagement firms in Canada, and a senior research associate at Pollara Strategic Insights. And he has a goddamn blog! You can read about what’s on Mike’s political mind, at Rosedeer.blog

Today, we’re going to talk about the NDP in B.C., post Horgan. BC Liberals post the Liberal brand-name. And what the province thinks of Trudeau, Poilievre and Singh.









						Mike McDonald
					

SUBSCRIBE :  Apple Podcasts  |  Spotify  |  Stitcher  |  Google Podcasts  |  YouTube  |  RSS     Twitter          Instagram          Facebook




					www.airquotesmedia.com


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Jul 2022)

FSTO said:


> I listen to David Herle podcast quite a bit ....


LOVED the daily updates on the Ontario election!  This is worth subscribing to, even if one isn't a fan of Team Red (they bring in feisty Team Blue and occasionally Team Orange folks to chat as well, including a senior advisor on PP's campaign, who gives as good as she gets).


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Jul 2022)

Interesting recent video from the PP campaign




Talking straight to/directly at people in their circumstances about what concerns/worries them/pisses them off?  Some very subtle dog whistles (maybe)?  Something else?  All in the eye/ear of the beholder?


----------



## Kirkhill (20 Jul 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> Interesting recent video from the PP campaign
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Must be my tinninitus.  I'm not hearing any dog whistles.


----------



## suffolkowner (20 Jul 2022)

I am expecting PP to win and the federal election is a few years off still, hopefully. So I will await the platform before making any real decisions. By that time it could be AnyoneButTrudeau


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Jul 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Must be my tinninitus.  I'm not hearing any dog whistles.


That's why I said "maybe" (OK mispelled, but nonetheless) - a very few commentariat seem spooked, but that's only a very few.


----------



## Brad Sallows (20 Jul 2022)

> a very few commentariat seem spooked



Not that they are extremely sensitive and constantly looking for that sort of stuff.


----------



## The Bread Guy (21 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Not that they are extremely sensitive and constantly looking for that sort of stuff.


*MORE *than fair take there.  

What with the flag "alternative take" discussion elsewhere, we'll see if anyone picks up and runs with any alternate takes on the "I know where you're coming from because I come from that place, too" line.


----------



## Remius (21 Jul 2022)

As 'moderate' Conservatives meet, suspicions of anti-Poilievre plotting grow
					

Centre Ice Conservatives says it wants to bring Conservatives on the centre or centre-right of the political spectrum together.




					nationalpost.com
				




Moderates creating their own internal wing of the party?


----------



## Navy_Pete (21 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> As 'moderate' Conservatives meet, suspicions of anti-Poilievre plotting grow
> 
> 
> Centre Ice Conservatives says it wants to bring Conservatives on the centre or centre-right of the political spectrum together.
> ...


Bit of an odd headline, it's not really plotting if they are doing it openly, and no different than the existing so-con and other groups that are already operating within the CPC.


----------



## Remius (21 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Bit of an odd headline, it's not really plotting if they are doing it openly, and no different than the existing so-con and other groups that are already operating within the CPC.


It’s reporting how some CPC members view it.  

I see it the way you do.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (21 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> As 'moderate' Conservatives meet, suspicions of anti-Poilievre plotting grow
> 
> 
> Centre Ice Conservatives says it wants to bring Conservatives on the centre or centre-right of the political spectrum together.
> ...


How is this plotting, in the middle of a leadership race?

This literally what it is all about- putting together a faction/coalition large enough to defeat the other candidate.


----------



## Remius (25 Jul 2022)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1551538864552136704
Some polling data from 338 about how an election could shape up if the CPC were under PP vs Charest.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> How is this plotting, in the middle of a leadership race?
> 
> This literally what it is all about- putting together a faction/coalition large enough to defeat the other candidate.


"Faction building" took up more room in the headline than "plotting"?


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1551538864552136704
> Some polling data from 338 about how an election could shape up if the CPC were under PP vs Charest.


Which speaks to vote efficiency, which was the CPC’s issue in 2021…vote efficiency eats popular vote for breakfast. 

That poll should be concerning to PMO/The Laurentians…


----------



## Navy_Pete (25 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Which speaks to vote efficiency, which was the CPC’s issue in 2021…vote efficiency eats popular vote for breakfast.
> 
> That poll should be concerning to PMO/The Laurentians…


I think it's actually the opposite, given that the CPC seems to be en route to crowning PP as the leader. He's destined to be the bridesmaid, so the LPC can just focus on the status quo, instead of worrying about being replaced as the Government.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> I think it's actually the opposite, given that the CPC seems to be en route to crowning PP as the leader. He's destined to be the bridesmaid, so the LPC can just focus on the status quo, instead of worrying about being replaced as the Government.


‘Concerning’ in that it’s the black swan event the LPC wouldn’t want to see happen. 

Also don’t underestimate the CPC’s leadership vote methodology…still lots of folks who thought MacKay would trounce O’Toole.  There are some funky-isms that are not the same as a FPTP vote basis.


----------



## brihard (25 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1551538864552136704
> Some polling data from 338 about how an election could shape up if the CPC were under PP vs Charest.


Interesting. Note that nearly all the lost prairie votes under Charest leadership go to PPC, which makes them utterly inconsequential. CPC would still very nearly clean sweep the prairies.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; CPC unnecessarily reinforce success in the prairies at the expense of forming government, and they are continuing to fail to recognize the imperative to elect a leader who can win an election on any scale larger than within their own party. Charter can beat the Liberals in Ontario and Quebec. Poilievre cannot.

I was not part of the sample on this poll, but I would have been another data point for exactly that.


----------



## Remius (25 Jul 2022)

I see this as a lose lose right now. 

Charest, would seem to be a better alternative to Canadians rather than PP.   But…

If Charest wins, I bet that PP’s base would go to the PPC or stay home.  If PP wins, red tories and moderates stay home or vote Liberal.  Both options favour the LPC.

If I was to prognosticate, I think PP wins the leadership.  But won’t win the election.  Regardless of who wins the leadership though, I think a split is coming…


----------



## brihard (25 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> I see this as a lose lose right now.
> 
> Charest, would seem to be a better alternative to Canadians rather than PP.   But…
> 
> ...


Yeah, but as the poll breakdown shows. CPC mostly only loses prairie votes to PPC. PPC still remain irrelevant from a seat count standpoint. Which also communicates a lot about the impact PP is having on the CPC’s base. Prairie votes are votes the CPC can afford to lose without impacting their seat count. Meanwhile they pick up seats in ON and QC, which, to hear a lot of Conservatives from the Prairies whine, is apparently where the election is decided.

So, in the interest of being government versus opposition, maybe CPC should do that.

But they won’t.


----------



## IKnowNothing (25 Jul 2022)

Interesting tidbit from inside the campaign...

_"The source added that they don’t believe anyone has a real handle on who the new 675,000-plus member Conservative Party of Canada are, and won’t until September 11 when the ballots are counted and the granular analysis is done.

But “the vast, vast majority” of Poilievre’s membership sales were to people who are new to partisan politics, the source said.

“If they voted, I bet the only other time they voted was for Trudeau in 2015 because they wanted to legalize pot,” the source said.

“It’s a libertarian bent to people that you see at the events.”"_

_https://globalnews.ca/news/9009446/this-will-be-pierre-poiliveres-party-conservatives-reckon-with-a-new-direction/_

How do you keep a group like this mobilized until the next election when the primary catalyst is getting further and further in the rearview mirror? Is this group indicative of a broader base of support, or representative of a near perfect capture/conversion rate of those of certain bent?


----------



## QV (25 Jul 2022)

Jean Charest, former paid consultant for Huawei and former Liberal, becoming the leader of the CPC or even the PM would be a huge win for.... China.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> Interesting. Note that nearly all the lost prairie votes under Charest leadership go to PPC, which makes them utterly inconsequential. CPC would still very nearly clean sweep the prairies.
> 
> I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; CPC unnecessarily reinforce success in the prairies at the expense of forming government, and they are continuing to fail to recognize the imperative to elect a leader who can win an election on any scale larger than within their own party. Charter can beat the Liberals in Ontario and Quebec. Poilievre cannot.
> 
> I was not part of the sample on this poll, but I would have been another data point for exactly that.



Power at the expense of continuing the continuance?  

Better to try and fail.


----------



## Remius (25 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Jean Charest, former paid consultant for Huawei and former Liberal, becoming the leader of the CPC or even the PM would be a huge win for.... China.


But people that support PP conveniently ignore the senior Huawei exec that has come out in support of PP.  

And Quebec liberals are not federal liberals.  That fact escapes some.  The fact that they label him that way shows that the CPC is not the big tent party it pretends to be.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Jean Charest, former paid consultant for Huawei and former Liberal, becoming the leader of the CPC or even the PM would be a huge win for.... China.


Meh.

Canada is already in China’s back pocket, so it’s effectively a nothing burger to Beijing if Charest were the next PM. 

Heck, Xi Jinping may even prefer Charest’s thinning blonde/grey afro to Trudeau’s ’Dumb&Dumber’ coiffe…


----------



## GK .Dundas (25 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> But people that support PP conveniently ignore the senior Huawei exec that has come out in support of PP.
> 
> And Quebec liberals are not federal liberals.  That fact escapes some.  The fact that they label him that way shows that the CPC is not the big tent party it pretends to be.


Now let's not start bringing facts into this, it will only confuse things even further.😉


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Jul 2022)

GK .Dundas said:


> Now let's not start bringing facts into this, it will only confuse things even further.😉


Zactly!

Fun fact: if you take ‘Charest’ and take away the ‘e’ and add two ‘i’ two ‘t’ an ‘n’ and move the ‘a’ you get…

‘Anti-Christ!’


----------



## QV (25 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> But people that support PP conveniently ignore the senior Huawei exec that has come out in support of PP.


Link?


----------



## Remius (25 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Link?


Will it matter?  Being honest.  Every time I provide a link to you, you go off about the paid media.


----------



## Remius (25 Jul 2022)

The point I was making though, is that we have a very leadership race that regardless of who wins, the party will likely stay fractured.  I am not confident any of them can unite the party and win.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> Will it matter?  Being honest.  Every time I provide a link to you, you go off about the paid media.


I'd enjoy a link - and only apply the same sized grain of salt I reserve for any MSM


----------



## QV (25 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> Will it matter?  Being honest.  Every time I provide a link to you, you go off about the paid media.


Assuming your supposition is accurate; you're speaking of two very different levels as if they are equal. 

PP (someone from Huawei supports him who PP may or may not acknowledge)
vs.
Charest (actually was employed by Huawei)


----------



## Remius (25 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Assuming your supposition is accurate; you're speaking of two very different levels as if they are equal.
> 
> PP (someone from Huawei supports him who PP may or may not acknowledge)
> vs.
> Charest (actually was employed by Huawei)


Not disagreeing.  I can understand the trepidation of voting for Charest with that link.  Neither bothers me to be honest as I don’t see China and Canada working well together right now and Huawei has effectively been banned. 

Given I cannot find the link to what or when I thought I had seen the story I will recant that statement for now.


----------



## brihard (25 Jul 2022)

Remius said:


> Not disagreeing.  I can understand the trepidation of voting for Charest with that link.  Neither bothers me to be honest as I don’t see China and Canada working well together right now and Huawei has effectively been banned.
> 
> Given I cannot find the link to what or when I thought I had seen the story I will recant that statement for now.


It was a Toronto Sun article a couple months back. The Huawei exec in question is Alykhan Velshi, a pretty well known name federally and provincially in Canadian political conservative circles. At present he’s a Huawei VP.

I put little stock in the Sun and am not opining on how credible this is, but this is likely what Remius was referring to. He does have a commendable habit of having his facts straight.









						LILLEY: Conservative leaders debate a battle between Poilievre and the 'little coalition'
					






					torontosun.com


----------



## Remius (25 Jul 2022)

brihard said:


> It was a Toronto Sun article a couple months back. The Huawei exec in question is Alykhan Velshi, a pretty well known name federally and provincially in Canadian political conservative circles. At present he’s a Huawei VP.
> 
> I put little stock in the Sun and am not opining on how credible this is, but this is likely what Remius was referring to. He does have a commendable habit of having his facts straight.
> 
> ...


Thanks.  That’s correct,  but I apologize for not having the info on hand when making the statement.  I couldn’t remember where I had seen or heard it.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Jul 2022)

Of course if the Chinese didn't want PP, one way to sour his appeal would be to pretend to like him...


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Jul 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Of course if the Chinese didn't want PP, one way to sour his appeal would be to pretend to like him...


They’re intelligent enough to reasonable assess that if PP wins, he’ll be the leader of the Still Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition…


----------



## TacticalTea (25 Jul 2022)

QV said:


> Jean Charest, former paid consultant for Huawei and former Liberal, becoming the leader of the CPC or even the PM would be a huge win for.... China.


Myopic, sorry to say.

Charest was federal PC leader in the 90s and leader of the campaign that kept Canada united.

Anyways:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1551723480785121281


----------



## McG (25 Jul 2022)

Another source showing Charest is the more likely to secure a CPC win.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1551598156617396224


----------



## SeaKingTacco (25 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Myopic, sorry to say.
> 
> Charest was federal PC leader in the 90s and leader of the campaign that kept Canada united.
> 
> ...


Charest gets a giant, get out of jail for life card from me for his actions in saving Canada in 1995, right after J Chretien crapped the bed.

Don’t love that he worked for Huawei, but perhaps he learned something about the Chinese during the experience…


----------



## Halifax Tar (26 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Charest gets a giant, get out of jail for life card from me for his actions in saving Canada in 1995, right after J Chretien crapped the bed.
> 
> Don’t love that he worked for Huawei, but perhaps he learned something about the Chinese during the experience…



Well put.


----------



## Navy_Pete (26 Jul 2022)

McG said:


> Another source showing Charest is the more likely to secure a CPC win.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1551598156617396224


That's % of overall vote though, not distribution. Crushing it out west won't matter unless they take seats in ON/QC.

I think Charest has a better chance of forming a government (even a minority one), while PP will continue to rail on as a reformer in second place.

I can also see JT retiring, as they are setting up Chrystia Freeland pretty well, so polls like that would probably help make the decision. Politics aside, being in charge throughout the pandemic must have been insane, and he's probably at the career or family decision point that a lot of us in the military hit.


----------



## Edward Campbell (26 Jul 2022)

I suspect some of us ae looking past the real issue. Canadians only rarely vote FOR someone or something; most elections, since circa 1900, have been about throwing the rascals out. We have, it seems to me, "decided,"_ en masse_, that 8 to 10 years is about the max that any regime should stay in power. I suspect that the state of the economy is in second place - many, many people do "vote with their pocketbooks" and a stagnant economy is bad news for the party in power. 

2023 marks eight years since Justin Trudeau's Liberal Party was elected; by 2025 when his confidence and supply agreement with the NDP expires it will be 10 years. My suspicion is that he's toast.

I think the party leaders do matter - I think Trudeau mattered and his party will find it hard to replace him because that _*may*_ mean a major shift in direction. I think that IF the CPC selects Pierre Poilievre it will not mean a major shift for most party members because I also suspect that PP campaigned _right_ for the Party leadership and will shift, fairly quickly, as did Erin O'Toole, to the _middle_ when he is campaigning to win the National prize. As others have correctly pointed out the Conservative vote is inefficient: stronger than needed in the prairies and weaker than it would be in the big urban centres and, most importantly, in the suburbs around Vancouver and throughout South Western Ontario.

My 2¢: time is Justin Trudeau' implacable, most formidable and, very likely, unbeatable foe; it is, very simply and in the minds of most Canadian voters, time for him to go.

The Conservative leadership campaign is somewhat predictable: the _progressives_ vs the _reformers_. The campaign that really matters, the national general election is FOR the broadly socially moderate, fiscally cautious, _progressive_ voters - and they live in the suburbs and small cities all across Canada. Both the CPC and the LPC have rock solid core votes of about 20%, the NDP has, maybe 10% and the BQ has 5%. That means that 45% of Canadian voters can be persuaded to vote for any of the main parties. It means that the 50% vote share that both Diefenbaker (1958) and Mulroney (1984) earned is still achievable. The Conservatives won those tub-thumping majorities despite the fact that both Diefenbaker and Mulroney were divisive party leaders: Canadians were, in both cases, ready - beyond just ready - eager for change.

I worry less about who leads the CPC than I do about who writes the platform. The platform (manifesto) has to speak to what matters to the _moderate middle_ of the political spectrum because they will decide the outcome.


----------



## Remius (26 Jul 2022)

I suspect that Trudeau won’t be running in the next round.  He’s secured time to cement his legacy and he’ll hand over to Freyland.  She’s being shielded for a reason.


----------



## QV (26 Jul 2022)

Right now, there is not a single CPC leadership candidate or leader of another federal party that is on the same level as PP's social media short clip videos. He is carrying the right messages far and wide.


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Jul 2022)

A little something from one of the candidates' Twitter feed ...

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1552312948722282496Letter also attached in case Tweet disappears.


----------



## Remius (27 Jul 2022)

What a gong show.


----------



## Remius (27 Jul 2022)

That reminds me, I have to mail in my ballot lol.


----------



## The Bread Guy (28 Jul 2022)

Some of the latest








						Conservative leadership: A third candidates’ debate will take place…without Poilievre
					





					oicanadian.com
				











						Ask my questions or I won’t attend leadership debate, Leslyn Lewis tells Conservative party
					

Lewis is the second of five leadership candidates to criticize the party for staging a third debate in the race that ends Sept. 10.




					www.thestar.com
				











						Conservative party moving ahead with third debate Aug. 3, still deciding format
					

The Conservative Party of Canada has set a date for the third – and almost certainly final – debate in its leadership contest.




					torontosun.com


----------



## RangerRay (28 Jul 2022)

Gad, what a shitshow… 🤦‍♂️


----------



## QV (2 Aug 2022)

Poilievre smashes rivals in fundraising
					

Pierre Poilievre raises more in one quarter than Erin O'Toole did throughout the 2020 contest




					www.thewrit.ca
				






> _If you didn’t think Pierre Poilievre was on track for a first ballot victory on September 10, the latest fundraising figures might just change your mind.
> Because he raised a lot of money.
> 
> It isn’t much of a contest. But Poilievre is also outpacing past leadership contestants. In 2020, Peter MacKay raised a little less than $4.1 million in the entire race — Poilievre nearly matched that in a single quarter and is already half a million dollars ahead overall. Erin O’Toole, who ended up winning, raised $3.5 million.
> ...


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Aug 2022)

Oops, QV, looks like you device’s clipboard didn’t past all of the article…



> …While the national numbers are very impressive for Poilievre, this race will be decided at the local level. Every riding is worth an equal amount of points regardless of how many voting members are in it. So, the fundraising figures could be clouding Poilievre’s actual ability to win this race.


----------



## QV (2 Aug 2022)

The fact is PP's fundraising is unprecedented. I'm sure there are a variety of opinions on what that means.


----------



## Remius (2 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> The fact is PP's fundraising is unprecedented. I'm sure there are a variety of opinions on what that means.


Can mean a whole lot of things.  I think he’s been able to galvanise his base.  Social media, Twitter etc. 

He’s been able to reach out in a modern way and is doing a good job of it.

Now does that mean more Canadians are turning to him or just that his base is feeling the need to donate more to the party?  Unknown for now. 

I think he’s going to win the leadership.  He’s not in my ballot choices though but I suspect he will win.  I guess we’ll see what the breakdown in points per riding gives him.


----------



## FSTO (2 Aug 2022)

Going to see him tomorrow night in Regina. I’ve already voted so I’ll be crowd watching to see what sort of people are there.


----------



## Remius (2 Aug 2022)

FSTO said:


> Going to see him tomorrow night in Regina. I’ve already voted so I’ll be crowd watching to see what sort of people are there.


Enjoy and report back.  I’m sure you’ll see a whole variety of people.


----------



## suffolkowner (2 Aug 2022)

By the time the federal election happen the CPC might be able to run my neighbours dead dog and win. If the economy holds together than it still might be the conservatives to lose, something they're rather good at. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'll wait to see the platform before casting my judgement or vote. But the difficulty will remain on gun issues and climate etc...somehow the conservative base has to come to terms with an electable policy or be satisfied with being a protest party that gets its chance every blue moon when the Liberals screw up too much


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> The fact is PP's fundraising is unprecedented. I'm sure there are a variety of opinions on what that means.


Cue the LPC PR machine which will accuse PP's funding is coming from Russia, overseas bad-actors, and Nazi's.


----------



## QV (3 Aug 2022)

suffolkowner said:


> By the time the federal election happen the CPC might be able to run my neighbours dead dog and win. If the economy holds together than it still might be the conservatives to lose, something they're rather good at. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'll wait to see the platform before casting my judgement or vote. But the difficulty will remain on gun issues and climate etc...somehow the conservative base has to come to terms with an electable policy or be satisfied with being a protest party that gets its chance every blue moon when the Liberals screw up too much


It's amusing when people keep saying the only way conservatives will win if they keep trying to be like the Liberals. The last two elections have shown that doesn't work. And coupled with PP's apparent ability to generate significant new interest in the CPC seems to demonstrate that a lot of people prophesizing on this board how the CPC ought to be, might be wrong.


----------



## QV (3 Aug 2022)

Sabrina Maddeaux: Pierre Poilievre is eating Jagmeet Singh's lunch
		


_Abacus Data’s latest survey of how Canadians would vote if a federal election were held tomorrow finds 37 per cent of 18-29 year olds in favour of the Conservative Party of Canada. This represents a massive *17-point surge since January *when just 20 per cent of this age bracket preferred the CPC.

A series of polls over the last year showed the 18-29 demo creeping rightward, but the last few months’ rapid change is unprecedented when it comes to young Canadians turning Conservative.

Its timing suggests credit almost certainly lies with Pierre Poilievre.

Mere months ago, many political insiders and pundits considered such a shift impossible. Now, many of those same people are eager to paint it as evidence of increasing right-wing radicalism, conspiracy culture and intolerance. They’re committed to the narrative that Poilievre’s new base comes from the far right, and specifically former People’s Party of Canada (PPC) supporters.

At least when it comes to millennials and Gen Z, the numbers tell a different story. In the same January to July stretch that saw a surge of support for the CPC, Abacus polls show 18-29 year olds’ intent to vote PPC only dropped by three points.

Meanwhile, Abacus also reports the largest shift downward, by a weighty 10 points, belongs to the NDP. In January, 31 per cent of 18-29 year olds preferred the NDP. Now only 21 per cent do. Crucially, their votes didn’t go to the Liberals, whose support in this period declined by 1 point.

It appears Poilievre’s younger support hasn’t principally come from the right, or even the centre. Counterintuitively, it may be coming from the farther left, with an additional boost from first-time voters who would historically gravitate leftward._


----------



## TacticalTea (3 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> Sabrina Maddeaux: Pierre Poilievre is eating Jagmeet Singh's lunch
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Same reason Bernie polled better with the right than his closer-to-center opponents.

Anyway, this is interesting but 18-29s generally don't vote, so the impact of this might remain marginal.


----------



## QV (3 Aug 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Same reason Bernie polled better with the right than his closer-to-center opponents.
> 
> Anyway, this is interesting but 18-29s generally don't vote, so the impact of this might remain marginal.


Traditionally, sure. But the sheer number of donations compared to other leadership candidates past and present indicates there are significant new motivations to: get involved, donate, and eventually vote.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Aug 2022)

Possibly some have figured out that deficit spending is future taxation.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (3 Aug 2022)

CPC is reporting a membership of around 678,000 members, that's about 2-3 times the size of the Liberal membership.


----------



## IKnowNothing (3 Aug 2022)

Re: the people he's bringing into the party
“There’s people that signed up for us that are anti-COVID mandates? Yeah, I think that’s safe to say,” said another Poilievre campaign source, who agreed to discuss strategy on the condition they not be named.

“It’s not the only issue, but it definitely is an issue that (has) galvanized across party lines, moreso than any issue I’ve ever seen. There’s a reason why, you know, NDP supporters in Timmins (Ontario) are coming to a Pierre Poilievre rally and signing up to be Conservative Party of Canada members.”








						‘This will be Pierre Poilievre’s party’: Conservatives reckon with a new direction - National | Globalnews.ca
					

Multiple sources tell Global News the Poilievre campaign has drawn in a significant number of new members that haven’t participated in party politics before.




					globalnews.ca
				




We know that Bernier added ~500k votes between 2019 and 2021, primarily  campaigning on pushback against vaccination and mandates
We know that ten's or even hundreds of thousands Canadians supported the Convoy, many of them financially
We know the PP's social media game and outreach to that same cohort is incredibly strong.

Put those three together, and I think it's very premature to assume the (quite significant) support he's garnered is a representative sampling of an actual grassroots shift in Canadian thinking rather than an excellent capture rate of a motivated, relatively small, previously identified voting bloc.


----------



## Remius (3 Aug 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> CPC is reporting a membership of around 678,000 members, that's about 2-3 times the size of the Liberal membership.


And apparently 80k or so have already voted.


----------



## QV (3 Aug 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Re: the people he's bringing into the party
> “There’s people that signed up for us that are anti-COVID mandates? Yeah, I think that’s safe to say,” said another Poilievre campaign source, who agreed to discuss strategy on the condition they not be named.
> 
> “It’s not the only issue, but it definitely is an issue that (has) galvanized across party lines, moreso than any issue I’ve ever seen. There’s a reason why, you know, NDP supporters in Timmins (Ontario) are coming to a Pierre Poilievre rally and signing up to be Conservative Party of Canada members.”
> ...


Gross government overreach of individual freedoms tends to galvanize people who would otherwise be politically opposed. For example, the average "anti-vaxxer", the derogatory term for those opposed to mandates, was left leaning and female.


----------



## IKnowNothing (3 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> Gross government overreach of individual freedoms tends to galvanize people who would otherwise be politically opposed. For example, the average "anti-vaxxer", the derogatory term for those opposed to mandates, was left leaning and female.


Quite- when it comes to the issue of "freedom" the political spectrum is very much a circle.  

That being said, the point stands. Skillful use of twitter to recruit a previously identified single issue voters on said single issue isn't indicative of a population wide movement, a grassroots shift, or a sustainable political strategy.


----------



## QV (3 Aug 2022)

Very much doubt these are "single issue voters"... .

Only the folks that are vehemently against PP will keep ignoring that PP's fundraising has surpassed in the first quarter what even Peter McKay achieved in his entire leadership race... this is quite significant. 

If this were Trudeau's numbers, you wouldn't stop hearing all about Trudeaumania 2.0.


----------



## Navy_Pete (3 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> Very much doubt these are "single issue voters"... .
> 
> Only the folks that are vehemently against PP will keep ignoring that PP's fundraising has surpassed in the first quarter what even Peter McKay achieved in his entire leadership race... this is quite significant.
> 
> If this were Trudeau's numbers, you wouldn't stop hearing all about Trudeaumania 2.0.


His fundraising work is impressive by Canadian standards, but it's still only 37k people donating to his campaign, which is a statistically insignificant portion of Canadian voters.

At the end of the day, voter turnout and distribution is what wins seats and forms governments. Unless the CPC makes significant in roads in ON/QC, they'll remain primarily a regional party making up the official opposition.

There are some pretty clear red line issues for voters like abortion; Steven Harper very effectively stomped that down within the CPC so was able to pick up seats in ON etc while maintaining support out west. Scheer waffled on it and was soundly rejected; O'Toole tried to pander to some so-cons which damaged his credibility when the video was leaked and similarly got rejected.

PP has been pretty clear that he's personnally pro-choice, but the party position is still pretty unclear. Unless they draw a line in the sand (ie it's a medical procedure and not any of the GoC's business) officially as a party they will keep having people vote against them out of fear for erosion of existing rights.

I think particularly with Roe vs Wade being overturned in the US, this will continue to be a genuine wedge issue that will drive votes away from parties.

Still don't get the mental gymnastics of people who are against vaccine mandates but also want to restrict abortions; bodily autonomy, and freedom of personal choice shouldn't have qualifiers, and if you are against government over reach that should also extend to things like abortion, restricting gay marriage etc.


----------



## QV (3 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> His fundraising work is impressive by Canadian standards, but it's still only 37k people donating to his campaign, which is a statistically insignificant portion of Canadian voters. I suppose those donating to Charest make for even less statistical significance by several orders of magnitude then.
> 
> At the end of the day, voter turnout and distribution is what wins seats and forms governments. Unless the CPC makes significant in roads in ON/QC, they'll remain primarily a regional party making up the official opposition.
> 
> ...


----------



## Eaglelord17 (4 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Still don't get the mental gymnastics of people who are against vaccine mandates but also want to restrict abortions; bodily autonomy, and freedom of personal choice shouldn't have qualifiers, and if you are against government over reach that should also extend to things like abortion, restricting gay marriage etc.


Just as I don't understand the mental gymnastics of people who are for vaccine mandates but are all of a sudden my body my choice when it comes to abortion (and there is a substantial amount of people in Canada with that mindset).

Or the mindset of say Quebecs government where its ok to ban religious symbols on government workers but also ok to have a giant cross up in Quebec Parliament. 

The reality is many people are hypocrites. If you were able to have a rational conversation with most you would find most issues are ruled by emotion rather than logic no matter how much evidence you can show to the contrary.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Aug 2022)

A vaccine involves one person; to some people, an abortion involves two people.


----------



## Dana381 (4 Aug 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> A vaccine involves one person; to some people, an abortion involves two people.


Abortions involve three people, it takes two to make a baby.


----------



## IKnowNothing (4 Aug 2022)

@QV   " I suppose those donating to Charest make for even less statistical significance by several orders of magnitude then."

Exactly, that's the point.
Neither are of much significance when trying to extrapolate some sort of grand notion of shifting voter intention. 
900k+ people voted PPC or Maverick, these are people with whom PP's message would resonate
300k+ plus people purchased memberships
110k+ plus people financially supported the convoy in Feb

That 37k (a small subset of the subsets above) were willing to tick the box and toss his campaign some money is not significant new information, or reason to believe that his message is resonating throughout the electorate in a more meaningful way than polls are suggesting.

We know PP has an awesome social media game. We know he has the ability to mobilize his base. We know that there is a portion of the population with which his message resonates strongly.  He's the first of his kind in the modern age of Canadian politics.  Further evidence of all of the above is not reason to infer what you're putting forward in posts 1273/ 1276.  

There are reasons- the NDP polling shift, drawing in the types who last voted in 2015 to legalize dope (words of someone in the campaign), but do those reasons have staying power to a general election? If they are seemingly "left-wing libertarians"  what does their inclusion do to internal party dynamics?


----------



## Navy_Pete (4 Aug 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Just as I don't understand the mental gymnastics of people who are for vaccine mandates but are all of a sudden my body my choice when it comes to abortion (and there is a substantial amount of people in Canada with that mindset).
> 
> Or the mindset of say Quebecs government where its ok to ban religious symbols on government workers but also ok to have a giant cross up in Quebec Parliament.
> 
> The reality is many people are hypocrites. If you were able to have a rational conversation with most you would find most issues are ruled by emotion rather than logic no matter how much evidence you can show to the contrary.


Vaccine mandates are restrictions on people who aren't vaccinated, vice forced vaccinations, so not at all the same as forcing a woman (or a child) to go give birth (or alternately forced sterilizations).  

Functional societies require limits on individual rights for the greater good; people will argue about COVID, but generally slowing/stopping the spread of a severe illness has been common practice for millennia. But now we have modern things like effective vaccines so we don't have to burn plague cities to the ground anymore.

In that line of thought it's still logical to be okay with vaccine mandates (which were in place prior to COVID anyway, just more low key) and be pro choice. No one is forcing anyone to get vaccinated, but there are consequences/restrictions if someone chooses to not get vaccinated for COVID. Similarly, being pro-choice means it's up to the mother to decide if she wants to give birth or have an abortion, and consequences either way for the decision.

As an aside, QC finally removed the cross in the legislative assembly in 2019. It was a weird debate to see people that considered themselves non-religious argue it was part of the heritage. I can get appreciating places of worship for their architecture/artisanry/craftsmanship without being a believer, but an obvious symbol like a crucifix was fairly obviously secular with no inherent artistry.


----------



## FSTO (4 Aug 2022)

Pierre Poilievre Meet and Greet – Regina SK 03 Aug 2022

The meeting was held in a hotel conference room and there was a standing room only crowd of about 450 to 500. The crowd was overwhelmingly uniform in skin tone but there were a smattering of south Asian and middle eastern representatives as well. This would be typical for a conservative party get together in Regina. I arrived fairly early to get a seat and the crowd then was a vast majority of over 60 but as the people rolled in the average age reduced to about 45-50. Again, typical for Regina.

Local Conservative MP’s and Sask Party MLA’s were there but no press was allowed (as far as I could see). Andrew Scheer (AS) introduced Pierre Poilievre (PP) to the crowd. The cheering wasn’t over the top by any means which didn’t surprise me (Sask people are not emotional unless it’s about the Roughriders). PP gave a pretty typical boiler plate speech and there was nothing in it that I hadn’t heard before. He is polished, jovial, and quick with the jabs.

Highlights:

Only mentioned running for PM twice, most of the time he’s say he was vying for the leadership of the conservative party.
Took a couple of swipes at Charest (didn’t mention any of the other candidates at all), each time calling him the “Liberal Premier of Quebec”
A few themes of “Freedom” that focused on freedom to choose the life to lead, freedom for the west to grow without Ottawa roadblocks (my words). Mentioned soldiers died for our freedoms (I wish politicians would stop using the military as an election prop.)
Swipe at PM JT for going to Costa Rica on a gas guzzling jet (I wish I could have asked him if he’d authorize the purchase of new, energy efficient jets)
Repeal Bill C-69 and build more pipelines to get our energy to Asia and Europe (I support this but it’ll be too late, I hope (War in Ukraine over) to get a line to our eastern tidewater)
Strong support for more Nuclear produced Energy
Liberals attack our farmers (fertilizer reduction use, which is wrong, its emissions but it’s not like farmers are using more fertilizer than required) and our resource industries
Mentioned the “Pay as you go Government”. I still have no idea how that will work
Gun control – Liberals focus on people who follow the rules and ignore people who don’t (gangs and smugglers)
Freedom of Speech Restored (big cheer)
Gatekeepers at CBC/CRTC. He said CBC focuses too much on the United States and not enough on Canada (I really agree with that statement)
Repeal C-11
Mentioned his adoption and that you shouldn’t get ahead by “Who you know, but by what you can do” (cheer)
Used a Freedom vs Control Analogy – Liberals espouse their Freedom by controlling people, PP wants people to be free to do what they want – within the limits of personal responsibility
Ended his speech with a quote from John Diefenbaker (always plays well in Saskatchewan) and his bill of rights.
Question and Answer Period:

A farce, Scheer had questions “sent’ to him via SM and were obviously vetted, if not outright drafted by PP’s team
Questions were about:
Bank of Canada – Printing Money
Arrive Can App – scrap
Convoy – PP still supports the idea of the convoy and not the folks who broke the law (personal responsibility)
Jean Charest time as Québec Premier – full of scandal
Reforming the tax system
Improving the lives of FN
Cutting the bureaucracy from Ottawa
Allow freedom from the Indian Act
Support pro development FN
Scrap the CBC – Huge Cheer from the crowd. (I observed that both Scheer and PP had big smirks on their faces, which to me means that that promise has the same intention of being kept as the JT’s promise of the “last first past the post election in 2015)
Overall impression:

PP is defiantly the front runner and he is starting to massage his message to broaden his appeal. He said he’s won consecutive elections in a Liberal heavy region, he directly mentioned helping FN, and he mentioned non-Christian Canadians having freedom to live as they wish.

I was hoping that my daughter the socialist would have joined me because she would likely have pointed out the dog whistles that I would be blind to but PP is still too toxic in her mind to be listened to.

I’m still very skeptical that he’ll be able to implement many of his initiatives if he becomes PM. But he is committed to what he believes and if he gets to become Prime Minister expect a raucous time in the HoC and A LOT of fights with the Public Service.


----------



## QV (4 Aug 2022)

Very nice summary FSTO.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Aug 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Just as I don't understand the mental gymnastics of people who are for vaccine mandates but are all of a sudden my body my choice when it comes to abortion (and there is a substantial amount of people in Canada with that mindset).
> 
> Or the mindset of say Quebecs government where its ok to ban religious symbols on government workers but also ok to have a giant cross up in Quebec Parliament.
> 
> The reality is many people are hypocrites. If you were able to have a rational conversation with most you would find most issues are ruled by emotion rather than logic no matter how much evidence you can show to the contrary.


Deep down I suspect the majority of Canadians are opposed to late abortions and most people would believe the fetus is a human being in the later stages, so it's really not that hard to understand. The only hard part is figuring out when that shift from fetus to baby takes place, both developmentally and where it would legally. The Progressive know that's the unspoken opinion and fear to much discussion will uncork the bottle. The end result would not please the hardliners on either side of the debate.


----------



## mariomike (4 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Vaccine mandates are restrictions on people who aren't vaccinated, vice forced vaccinations, so not at all the same as forcing a woman (or a child) to go give birth (or alternately forced sterilizations).
> 
> Functional societies require limits on individual rights for the greater good; people will argue about COVID, but generally slowing/stopping the spread of a severe illness has been common practice for millennia. But now we have modern things like effective vaccines so we don't have to burn plague cities to the ground anymore.
> 
> In that line of thought it's still logical to be okay with vaccine mandates (which were in place prior to COVID anyway, just more low key) and be pro choice. No one is forcing anyone to get vaccinated, but there are consequences/restrictions if someone chooses to not get vaccinated for COVID. Similarly, being pro-choice means it's up to the mother to decide if she wants to give birth or have an abortion, and consequences either way for the decision.





> there are consequences/restrictions if someone chooses to not get vaccinated for COVID



From what I understand, anyone who wants to work on a film set must be at least triple-vaxxed, and double-masked ( even the crew ) when not in front of a camera.

As far as the science goes, some do their online research, and some are influenced by their favorite media and political personalities.

Others simply follow their employer mandates, and local Health Dept. guidelines.

As far as abortion goes, I believe if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.

If Canadian political parties want to go there,



> In the Sixties, abortion could be legally performed only to save the life of the woman, so there were practically no legal abortions. He stated that the pregnant daughters of the rich were sent to reliable physicians who did abortions for cash. He estimated that these physicians did twenty to thirty abortions per week. Women who were not rich were left to perform an abortion on themselves or go to what he called a "nurse" abortionist. Their method was commonly pumping Lysol into the woman's womb. The mortality rate was high and the infection rate over 50%. He added, "By the time I became Chief Coroner, I had had the unpleasant experience of seeing the bodies of some dozens of young women who had died as a result of these amateur abortions."





> Chief Coroner Morton Shulman decided to publicize deaths from illegal abortions. He instructed his coroners to call a public inquest into each abortion death. He describes one case that he believes was the turning point, that of 34-year-old Lottie Leanne Clarke, a mother of three children, who died of a massive infection in 1964 after an illegal abortion in spite of medical treatment and antibiotics. At the inquest into her death, the jury recommended that the laws about therapeutic abortion be revised. Dr. Shulman added that a federal government committee should review the question of abortion and the law. Newspapers published editorials recommending the reform of the abortion law. In 1965, the Minister of Justice, Guy Favreau, wrote to Dr. Shulman that the recommendation would be considered in the program to amend the Criminal Code. The eventual amendment closely followed the recommendations of the coroners' juries.


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Aug 2022)

FSTO said:


> ... I was hoping that my daughter the socialist would have joined me because she would likely have pointed out the dog whistles that I would be blind to but PP is still too toxic in her mind to be listened to ...


That's too bad - gotta know (and understand) what the other side is saying to deal with it.  Thanks TONS for the granular summary - much appreciated!


----------



## IKnowNothing (4 Aug 2022)

If we're going to dive into abortion
A- late term abortions are almost always health related decisions, and are almost always traumatic. We're talking about babies for which showers have been held, nurseries decorated, names given.  The casual late term abortion is a myth.

B- the Catholic Church won't baptize a stillborn baby, nor will they baptize a fetus.  No consistency, no moral authority.

C- The Southern Baptist Convention largely viewed abortion as distasteful but ultimately something between a woman, a doctor, and God- not something the state should be involved in at all.  That is, until a bunch of Southern racists at risk of having to choose between desegregating their private cash cows schools or losing their tax exemption came up with a brilliant idea to mobilize their base. 

Edit, history of the position of the Southern Baptist convention on abortion. Note those dates relative to R vs W. Note that Jerry Falwell didn't preach an anti-abortion Sermon until 1978


			Southern Baptist Convention Resolutions on Abortion
		


Solid piece of reading








						The Religious Right and the Abortion Myth
					

White evangelicals in the 1970s didn’t initially care about abortion. They organized to defend racial segregation in evangelical institutions — and only seized on banning abortion because it was more palatable than their real goal.




					www.politico.com
				




Multiple generations of well meaning people have been had.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Aug 2022)

> Abortions involve three people, it takes two to make a baby.



Men have been read out of the matter.  Maybe that should change, but until it does, "two".


----------



## QV (4 Aug 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> @QV   " I suppose those donating to Charest make for even less statistical significance by several orders of magnitude then."
> 
> Exactly, that's the point.
> Neither are of much significance when trying to extrapolate some sort of grand notion of shifting voter intention.
> ...


The bottom line is PP is doing far better than any other candidate, even far better than past candidates who were very popular (McKay). That is significant and it does mean something. And that is my point. 

Recall, it wasn't too long ago the prevailing opinion on PP was that he is just a right wing mouth piece who doesn't stand a chance. Wrong, at the moment he stands the best chance.


----------



## Remius (4 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> The bottom line is PP is doing far better than any other candidate, even far better than past candidates who were very popular (McKay). That is significant and it does mean something. And that is my point.
> 
> Recall, it wasn't too long ago the prevailing opinion on PP was that he is just a right wing mouth piece who doesn't stand a chance. Wrong, at the moment he stands the best chance.


Who said that?  So far everyone here has said he is likely the guy to win the leadership. That has been the consistant prevailing opinion here.   As to liking him or if he’s the best thing for the party is another issue.  Winning the general election is another thing but I agree he should not be underestimated.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> Who said that?  So far everyone here has said he is likely the guy to win the leadership. That has been the consistant prevailing opinion here.   As to liking him or if he’s the best thing for the party is another issue.  Winning the general election is another thing but I agree he should not be underestimated.


🧠 

And the issue remains about improving CPC vote efficiency.  Maybe PP can improve on the CPC results of the past, time will tell.  As pragmatic conservative-minded folks here have pointed out numerous times, a full sweep of heavy-% home runs in AB/SK does not an election win…


----------



## Quirky (4 Aug 2022)

FSTO said:


> if he gets to become Prime Minister expect a raucous time in the HoC and A LOT of fights with the Public Service.


I can't wait for the general election debates. If Trudeau is still in running it's going to be a massacre.


----------



## RangerRay (4 Aug 2022)

I am still not convinced that gaining the PPC votes will help the Tories. Every Dipper in the country will freak out and abandon the NDP for the Liberals; Red Tories, swing voters and Blue Liberals will either stay home or vote Liberal; and Tru-Anon will crawl over broken glass to vote for their cult leader. 

But I also thought Harper and Mulcair would wipe the floor with Trudeau, so what do I know?  🤷‍♂️


----------



## rmc_wannabe (4 Aug 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I am still not convinced that gaining the PPC votes will help the Tories. Every Dipper in the country will freak out and abandon the NDP for the Liberals; Red Tories, swing voters and Blue Liberals will either stay home or vote Liberal; and Tru-Anon will crawl over broken glass to vote for their cult leader.
> 
> But I also thought Harper and Mulcair would wipe the floor with Trudeau, so what do I know?  🤷‍♂️


People who follow politics are well versed in the draws and flaws of each leader, party, and candidate because they have an interest in it. 

The majority of Canadians do not follow politics, however, are entitled to cast their vote regardless.

My wife worked as a Poll Site Supervisor in both Federal elections and recently in the Ontario Provincial one. She said it was "interesting" how many voters she had ask for assistance because they didn't have a colour marker on the ballot, and that they "wanted to vote for the Republican candidate." There were also numerous people that had no idea that they were only selecting the MP/MPP for their riding and not the Premier or Prime Minister. 

It was a baffling ordeal and exposed a lot of the ignorance parties play on now during the election cycle.


----------



## QV (4 Aug 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I am still not convinced that gaining the PPC votes will help the Tories. Every Dipper in the country will freak out and abandon the NDP for the Liberals; Red Tories, swing voters and Blue Liberals will either stay home or vote Liberal; and Tru-Anon will crawl over broken glass to vote for their cult leader.
> 
> But I also thought Harper and Mulcair would wipe the floor with Trudeau, so what do I know?  🤷‍♂️


Well the good news is you need not worry about that. The biggest gain seems to be from bleeding NDP supporters. The PPC bleed is relatively small comparatively. It is also important to note that a large number of past PPC supporters had come from the left.  

Trudeau's first campaign was masterful if two ways: 
1. He promised to restore/increase media funding by a lot, which bought him very good press and Harper very bad press; and
2. Legalizing weed, which brought out swathes of new single issue voters.

The world was a different place in 2015, many people didn't have much to worry about (in many ways thanks to Harper). Things are now much different.


----------



## QV (4 Aug 2022)

Quirky said:


> I can't wait for the general election debates. If Trudeau is still in running it's going to be a massacre.


Agree. It will be quite the show. Safe to say Freeland would get massacred too...


----------



## Quirky (4 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> Agree. It will be quite the show. Safe to say Freeland would get massacred too...


That screeching, condescending voice. “Mister Speeka”…..


----------



## QV (4 Aug 2022)

The third debate...









						Third Conservative leadership debate suffers from poor attendance and lack of viewers
					

The three candidates focused on areas that had not been thoroughly covered in previous debates, such as Indigenous issues, transportation and climate change




					nationalpost.com
				




_Jean Charest, Roman Baber and Scott Aitchison *made their final pleas to the few dozen members who were watching the live feed *online on Facebook. At its peak, approximately 300 people tuned in to watch it *but near the end of the debate, less than 100 people were still listening.*

The party’s feed on YouTube indicated more than 18,000 views on Thursday morning, but it is unclear who tuned in to listen during the debate as it was happening._

Most of the FB viewers were probably staff and the 18k YT views is somewhat less than the average funny cat video so...


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> The third debate...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You’re right, QV, PP’s got it in the bag.  He should break out the champagne now! 🍾

And might as well open a second bottle since he’d wipe the floor with either Trudeau or Freeland, because whether breathy/moist or screeching, Canadians are well-known for voting by the sound of the candidates’ voices…they don’t have a hope against Poilièvre.


----------



## QV (4 Aug 2022)

Shouldn't folks in the political centre be happy there is a viable CPC candidate gaining significant momentum to defeat the Trudeau/Singh alliance? 

This is a much better situation than the Scheer or O'Toole attempts.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> Shouldn't folks in the political centre be happy there is a viable CPC candidate gaining significant momentum to defeat the Trudeau/Singh alliance?
> 
> This is a much better situation than the Scheer or O'Toole attempts.


Maybe some old-PC are still feeling the Alliance/Reform burn and can’t help but feel that Alliance/Reform 2.0 isn’t going to be as successful as 1.0 was with the PC’s (unrewarded) help back in the day.

QV, we get it…you think Poilièvre is the best thing since sliced bread.  Are you seriously looking for the ‘less socially-conservative’ (aka progressive conservatives) to suddenly agree with you that PP’s a slam dunk?  And you seem to berate with ease, many of the moderately conservative for their views.  Again, we get that you’re bedazzled by PP.  I’m glad you find someone apparently aligned with your core values.  That doesn’t mean it’s an anointment and guaranteed win by PP against the Grits in 24/25.


----------



## IKnowNothing (4 Aug 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Maybe some old-PC are still feeling the Alliance/Reform burn and can’t help but feel that Alliance/Reform 2.0 isn’t going to be as successful as 1.0 was with the PC’s (unrewarded) help back in the day.
> 
> QV, we get it…you think Poilièvre is the best thing since sliced bread.  Are you seriously looking for the ‘less socially-conservative’ (aka progressive conservatives) to suddenly agree with you that PP’s a slam dunk?  And you seem to berate with ease, many of the moderately conservative for their views.  Again, we get that you’re bedazzled by PP.  I’m glad you find someone apparently aligned with your core values.  That doesn’t mean it’s an anointment and guaranteed win by PP against the Grits in 24/25.


To be fair, he's in a better situation than O'Toole. Not because he's a better leader or PM candidate, but because he has the freedom (heh) to fuel/ride the "Freedom"/anti-mandate movement without the burden/cost of acting irresponsibly during an active pandemic and contributing to the death toll and over taxing of the healthcare system.   If O'Toole didn't have that pesky ethical reality to contend with he likely wouldn't have lost a half million odd votes to Purple.  He (PP) chose his time to jump on that wagon very well.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Aug 2022)

I suspect the majority of CPC members have already made up their mind one way or another as to who they will support.


----------



## Remius (4 Aug 2022)

Quirky said:


> I can't wait for the general election debates. If Trudeau is still in running it's going to be a massacre.


I watched PP at the CPC debate.  He wasn’t all that and a slice of bread. And if history repeats itself maybe he won’t even show up….

People thought Harper was going to wipe the floor with Trudeau at the debate as well.  That didn’t end well.  I don’t underestimate PP but I also don’t underestimate Trudeau.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Aug 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I am still not convinced that gaining the PPC votes will help the Tories. Every Dipper in the country will freak out and abandon the NDP for the Liberals; Red Tories, swing voters and Blue Liberals will either stay home or vote Liberal; and Tru-Anon will crawl over broken glass to vote for their cult leader.
> 
> But I also thought Harper and Mulcair would wipe the floor with Trudeau, so what do I know?  🤷‍♂️


Both were successful leaders in their own way, with more depth than any of the current candidates.


----------



## QV (4 Aug 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Maybe some old-PC are still feeling the Alliance/Reform burn and can’t help but feel that Alliance/Reform 2.0 isn’t going to be as successful as 1.0 was with the PC’s (unrewarded) help back in the day.
> 
> QV, we get it…you think Poilièvre is the best thing since sliced bread.  Are you seriously looking for the ‘less socially-conservative’ (aka progressive conservatives) to suddenly agree with you that PP’s a slam dunk?  And you seem to berate with ease, many of the moderately conservative for their views.  Again, we get that you’re bedazzled by PP.  I’m glad you find someone apparently aligned with your core values.  That doesn’t mean it’s an anointment and guaranteed win by PP against the Grits in 24/25.


Mind reading I see.   

I'm at the point of anyone but JT/JS. If Charest was generating PP level interest and followers I'd be behind him too right now, but he's not and he's got no momentum. 

Don't worry, there is plenty of time for the LPC/media war machine to do plenty of damage to PP.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> Mind reading I see.


Actually I think of it more as “paying attention to everything you’ve messaged in this thread…”

Maybe I got it wrong.  Maybe you’re a MacKay-style guy, moderate/progressive like me, and I totally misread you. 🤷🏻‍♂️


----------



## Navy_Pete (4 Aug 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> To be fair, he's in a better situation than O'Toole. Not because he's a better leader or PM candidate, but because he has the freedom (heh) to fuel/ride the "Freedom"/anti-mandate movement without the burden/cost of acting irresponsibly during an active pandemic and contributing to the death toll and over taxing of the healthcare system.   If O'Toole didn't have that pesky ethical reality to contend with he likely wouldn't have lost a half million odd votes to Purple.  He (PP) chose his time to jump on that wagon very well.


Will be interesting to actually see how jumping on the Convoy bandwagon impacts him in his actual riding; it was pretty polarizing in the NCR and immediate communities who were impacted by it. The local MPP is a complete lunatic who also attached himself strongly to the convoy/anti-mandate side and pissed a lot of people off, so might rub off on PP. The balcony guy was pretty representative of a lot of people.

Would be pretty funny if he got all this momentum going within the part and lost his seat. For me he's a lot of hot air and his original ideas like jumping on the cryptobro bandwagon and politically interfering with the BoC are both good reasons to vote against him and reject the style of US populism that he's trying to harness.

The amount of general ignorance of Canadian civics on all sides of the political spectrum is pretty sad though, but when one of the Convoy leaders tried to assert their first Amendment rights during a bail hearing, had to laugh when the judge agreed that Manitoba was in fact part of Canada.


----------



## Remius (4 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Will be interesting to actually see how jumping on the Convoy bandwagon impacts him in his actual riding; it was pretty polarizing in the NCR and immediate communities who were impacted by it. The local MPP is a complete lunatic who also attached himself strongly to the convoy/anti-mandate side and pissed a lot of people off, so might rub off on PP. The balcony guy was pretty representative of a lot of people.
> 
> Would be pretty funny if he got all this momentum going within the part and lost his seat. For me he's a lot of hot air and his original ideas like jumping on the cryptobro bandwagon and politically interfering with the BoC are both good reasons to vote against him and reject the style of US populism that he's trying to harness.
> 
> The amount of general ignorance of Canadian civics on all sides of the political spectrum is pretty sad though, but when one of the Convoy leaders tried to assert their first Amendment rights during a bail hearing, had to laugh when the judge agreed that Manitoba was in fact part of Canada.


The last mainstreet poll had him lowered to the margin of error and it was a direct result of his support for the convoy.  I’m in the riding.  Most of my stuff is anecdotal ie my neighbours and friends in the riding but actually supported by that poll.

I voted for him last election.  Probably won’t in the next if he’s leader.  Things can change but I doubt he will broaden his appeal.


----------



## Spencer100 (4 Aug 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I am still not convinced that gaining the PPC votes will help the Tories. Every Dipper in the country will freak out and abandon the NDP for the Liberals; Red Tories, swing voters and Blue Liberals will either stay home or vote Liberal; and Tru-Anon will crawl over broken glass to vote for their cult leader.
> 
> But I also thought Harper and Mulcair would wipe the floor with Trudeau, so what do I know?  🤷‍♂️


Funny under reported is that there is a NDP bleed to PPC and/or CPC.   Many union members do not see themselves in the NDP.  With the NDP move to urban/young/progressive base.  Many have been switching. You see some of it in places like Windsor.  The average Unifor worker does not relate to the NDP anymore.  Even if they still do the tension on the relationship is greater.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> The balcony guy was pretty representative of a lot of people.


I think a lot of people identified with ‘Balcony Ricky’ even if they weren’t* right downtown.  Gotta admit, I was cheering for him, even though I was dead set against the craptacular shit show that was political ‘leadership’ that was a healthy contributing factor to how things were let loose to run pretty much amok.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Aug 2022)

Spencer100 said:


> Funny under reported is that there is a NDP bleed to PPC and/or CPC.   Many union members do not see themselves in the NDP.  With the NDP move to urban/young/progressive base.  Many have been switching. You see some of it in places like Windsor.  The average Unifor worker does not relate to the NDP anymore.  Even if they still do the tension on the relationship is greater.


If the CPC had their wits about them, they do a divide and conquer between union workers and union management. Most union workers in the Transportation and construction side want jobs and contracts, The union workers most likley opposed to the CPC will be the clerical and inside workers. Much of the union management I have encountered are socialists of one flavour or another. If the NDP loses most of the union vote, then they are in big trouble as they are the people who will volunteer, donate and vote.


----------



## brihard (4 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Will be interesting to actually see how jumping on the Convoy bandwagon impacts him in his actual riding; it was pretty polarizing in the NCR and immediate communities who were impacted by it. The local MPP is a complete lunatic who also attached himself strongly to the convoy/anti-mandate side and pissed a lot of people off, so might rub off on PP. The balcony guy was pretty representative of a lot of people.
> 
> Would be pretty funny if he got all this momentum going within the part and lost his seat. For me he's a lot of hot air and his original ideas like jumping on the cryptobro bandwagon and politically interfering with the BoC are both good reasons to vote against him and reject the style of US populism that he's trying to harness.
> 
> The amount of general ignorance of Canadian civics on all sides of the political spectrum is pretty sad though, but when one of the Convoy leaders tried to assert their first Amendment rights during a bail hearing, had to laugh when the judge agreed that Manitoba was in fact part of Canada.


Which MPP are you referring to? PP’s riding isn’t a perfect overlap with provincial. He also partly overlaps a provincial PC riding represented by a wholly unremarkable lawyer currently suspended for misconduct.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Aug 2022)

brihard said:


> Which MPP are you referring to? PP’s riding isn’t a perfect overlap with provincial. He also partly overlaps a provincial PC riding represented by a wholly unremarkable lawyer currently suspended for misconduct.


That’s the one, not the ‘lunatic.’


----------



## Navy_Pete (4 Aug 2022)

brihard said:


> Which MPP are you referring to? PP’s riding isn’t a perfect overlap with provincial. He also partly overlaps a provincial PC riding represented by a wholly unremarkable lawyer currently suspended for misconduct.


Sorry for not being more specific, I was thinking of Randy Hillier (who is no longer the MPP as of June) who was from the Lanark county area vice Carleton Place (vice Goldie Ghamari, the actual MPP for Carleton who is the one with the suspended law license who just got re-elected). 

If he hadn't already been kicked out of the PC party in 2019 for making fun of parents of autistic kids, he would have been punted in 2020 for going full conspiracy theory lunatic, or then later in 2021 for encouraging people to flood 911 in Ottawa with nuisance calls during the convoy, or any of the 25 odd criminal charges currently pending against him.

Some really greasy Ottawa area politicians tried to hitch a ride on the convoy;  hopefully Counc. Chiarelli finally gets punted next election. Still can't believe the only reason the greasy bastard didn't get fired is that there isn't any legal way to do so under current law, so he only got suspended for 450 days.


----------



## Dana381 (4 Aug 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Men have been read out of the matter.  Maybe that should change, but until it does, "two".



If "we" continue to say two people are affected it will never change.

I can speak from experience that 26 years later it still hits hard. 

The fact is three people ARE involved. Whatever opinion someone one may or may not have about the man's place in it, the pregnancy can't happen without him.

I'm not advocating men get legal say. What I am saying is that men are affected and it can have long lasting mental effects. I am in no way downplaying the effects women experience and I believe they need as much support as we can give them.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (5 Aug 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> If the CPC had their wits about them, they do a divide and conquer between union workers and union management. Most union workers in the Transportation and construction side want jobs and contracts, The union workers most likley opposed to the CPC will be the clerical and inside workers. Much of the union management I have encountered are socialists of one flavour or another. If the NDP loses most of the union vote, then they are in big trouble as they are the people who will volunteer, donate and vote.


My union did exactly this. Every election year they vote on which party to donate funds to (I don't agree with donating any union money to political parties but that is besides the point). Last election the members voted to give it to the CPC in spite of the union management wanting it to go to the NDP (it is a Steelworkers Union).

There is a huge opportunity for the Conservatives to seize the blue collar worker vote, on top of the environmental job opportunities they could tap into. Simple option being promoting producing products in Canada as we have and follow environmental controls, don't have to ship it as far thereby reducing the environmental footprint to bring it to market, and it would provide tons of well paying jobs in country which you don't need to have PHD's to get.

That is what a vote winning environmental/economic policy looks like, not just following the Liberals lead with a stupid carbon tax which does nothing to help the workers of this country and is essentially subsidizing the workers of foreign countries.


Navy_Pete said:


> Vaccine mandates are restrictions on people who aren't vaccinated, vice forced vaccinations, so not at all the same as forcing a woman (or a child) to go give birth (or alternately forced sterilizations).
> 
> Functional societies require limits on individual rights for the greater good; people will argue about COVID, but generally slowing/stopping the spread of a severe illness has been common practice for millennia. But now we have modern things like effective vaccines so we don't have to burn plague cities to the ground anymore.
> 
> ...


So basically what you said is we will restrict and punish you if you fail to comply with us, i.e. punishing people for having their body autonomy, which is what the abortion argument centers on, body autonomy. Using the same arguments about saving lives, abortion should be banned as many more potential children are killed, approximately 73 million a year (according to the WHO). Which is substantially more than any amount killed by covid, yet the world is willing to shut down over covid.

It is violating their most sacred right, security of the person. Which if you do not possess that, you have nothing. Taking away their means to work and support themselves because you disagree with their right to decide is inherently evil, especially when alternative options can be adopted with no consequences (i.e. periodic testing, simply not coming into work if they have the symptoms, etc.). I personally am pro-abortion and pro-people making their own decisions about vaccines. At the end of the day they pay the consequences if they get covid and die.


----------



## TacticalTea (5 Aug 2022)

Obesity kills millions every year, yet governments, journalists and academics tell you not to say a thing about it otherwise you're a fat-shaming bigot.

Obesity alone, as a comorbidity factor, triples your likelihood to die from COVID.

Yet there isn't a massive national - let alone global - campaign to eradicate obesity. We aren't forcing kids to eat healthy. Aren't pushing them to be more active - instead shoving computer screens in their faces so they stop bothering us, both in and outside of classes -, we aren't mandating an hour of PT for all government workers, we aren't paying for people's access to gyms; we'd closed down the damn things during COVID! Despite being one of the best tools against COVID hospitalization.

But who am I, anyway...


----------



## Remius (5 Aug 2022)

It’s funny how some here who are or we’re vehemently against vaccine mandates blame the LPC for everything when the provinces had more say in how it was applied but still voted for Doug Ford and or cheered his victory lol when Ontario had some of the strictest COVID a rules in the world.  Simultaneously they cheered when Kenney was deposed despite him having the loosest rules.  

For the record I voted for Ford.


----------



## lenaitch (5 Aug 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> My union did exactly this. Every election year they vote on which party to donate funds to (I don't agree with donating any union money to political parties but that is besides the point). Last election the members voted to give it to the CPC in spite of the union management wanting it to go to the NDP (it is a Steelworkers Union).
> 
> There is a huge opportunity for the Conservatives to seize the blue collar worker vote, on top of the environmental job opportunities they could tap into. Simple option being promoting producing products in Canada as we have and follow environmental controls, don't have to ship it as far thereby reducing the environmental footprint to bring it to market, and it would provide tons of well paying jobs in country which you don't need to have PHD's to get.
> 
> ...


Except for those who feel it is 'no worse than a cold' and/or a World Government Conspiracy and will come to work anyway, possibly infect me, and I die.


----------



## Remius (5 Aug 2022)

lenaitch said:


> Except for those who feel it is 'no worse than a cold' and/or a World Government Conspiracy and will come to work anyway, possibly infect me, and I die.


They don’t care.


----------



## QV (5 Aug 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Obesity kills millions every year, yet governments, journalists and academics tell you not to say a thing about it otherwise you're a fat-shaming bigot.
> 
> Obesity alone, as a comorbidity factor, triples your likelihood to die from COVID.
> 
> ...



Just stop. I can't take this dose of common sense any longer.


----------



## Furniture (5 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> It’s funny how some here who are or we’re vehemently against vaccine mandates blame the LPC for everything when the provinces had more say in how it was applied but still voted for Doug Ford and or cheered his victory lol when Ontario had some of the strictest COVID a rules in the world.  Simultaneously they cheered when Kenney was deposed despite him having the loosest rules.
> 
> For the record I voted for Ford.


That's an odd argument... The other parties all said they would have done even more, so Ford was the lesser of the evils presented. 

Not voting/cheering for Ford would have been essentially saying you wanted even more restrictions.


----------



## Spencer100 (5 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> It’s funny how some here who are or we’re vehemently against vaccine mandates blame the LPC for everything when the provinces had more say in how it was applied but still voted for Doug Ford and or cheered his victory lol when Ontario had some of the strictest COVID a rules in the world.  Simultaneously they cheered when Kenney was deposed despite him having the loosest rules.
> 
> For the record I voted for Ford.


Yes the provinces did have the power but Trudeau and feds still have  the whip hand.  I have no inside knowledge but you could see it on a day to day with Ford.  You know he knew he didn't want to do something at first then a prov/fed call later change of plan.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (5 Aug 2022)

lenaitch said:


> Except for those who feel it is 'no worse than a cold' and/or a World Government Conspiracy and will come to work anyway, possibly infect me, and I die.


You can still get covid from someone who is fully vaccinated. I got it from someone who was triple vaccinated, and I am also triple vaccinated. There is even a higher possibility of someone vaccinated showing up to work with covid because they didn’t realize they had it/had extremely mild symptoms that were dismissed. 

You could get the flu from a coworker and possibly die. You could get into a car accident on the way to work and possibly die. You could get a infected cut and possibly die. The world is full of ways to die. Being part of society means accepting risk. If you are so afraid of it, it means you should stay home, not forcing anyone else who may or may not have it to stay home.


----------



## Brad Sallows (5 Aug 2022)

I am always amused when someone drags out "but this one particular thing might kill me".


----------



## OldSolduer (5 Aug 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> You can still get covid from someone who is fully vaccinated. I got it from someone who was triple vaccinated, and I am also triple vaccinated. There is even a higher possibility of someone vaccinated showing up to work with covid because they didn’t realize they had it/had extremely mild symptoms that were dismissed.
> 
> You could get the flu from a coworker and possibly die. You could get into a car accident on the way to work and possibly die. You could get a infected cut and possibly die. The world is full of ways to die. Being part of society means accepting risk. If you are so afraid of it, it means you should stay home, not forcing anyone else who may or may not have it to stay home.


Agreed - there are numerous ways to die every day, but we don't.


----------



## Remius (5 Aug 2022)

Spencer100 said:


> Yes the provinces did have the power but Trudeau and feds still have  the whip hand.  I have no inside knowledge but you could see it on a day to day with Ford.  You know he knew he didn't want to do something at first then a prov/fed call later change of plan.


Ford has had more photo ops with Trudeau than any conservative leader during that time.  They got along quite nicely.  Ford has shifted to the Center and he won a majority,  lessons learned.


----------



## Remius (5 Aug 2022)

Spencer100 said:


> Yes the provinces did have the power but Trudeau and feds still have  the whip hand.  I have no inside knowledge but you could see it on a day to day with Ford.  You know he knew he didn't want to do something at first then a prov/fed call later change of plan.


Also what whip did he have over Ford that he didn’t have over Kenney?


----------



## The Bread Guy (5 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> Ford has had more photo ops with Trudeau than any conservative leader during that time.  They got along quite nicely.  Ford has shifted to the Center and he won a majority,  lessons learned.


He's also taken heat from the further right/"darker blue", too, because of same.


----------



## Kirkhill (5 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> Also what whip did he have over Ford that he didn’t have over Kenney?


Money.  And the willingness to spend it in Ontario.


----------



## Remius (5 Aug 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Money.  And the willingness to spend it in Ontario.


So,Ford let himself be bought by the Fed LPC?  And people still voted for him? Hmm…


----------



## Kirkhill (5 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> So,Ford let himself be bought by the Fed LPC?  And people still voted for him? Hmm…



What's to hmm about?  People vote to bring benefits.  More benefits.  More votes.

Haven't seen many benefits from Ottawa in Alberta recently.


----------



## Remius (5 Aug 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> What's to hmm about?  People vote to bring benefits.  More benefits.  More votes.
> 
> Haven't seen many benefits from Ottawa in Alberta recently.


Fair enough.  So mandates were not an issue then when it comes to Ford.


----------



## brihard (5 Aug 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> He's also taken heat from the further right/"darker blue", too, because of same.


Indeed he has. I’m sure the strong Parliamentary majority he holds is some consolation. I don’t see Ford losing sleep over what the fringe to the outside right thinks.


----------



## The Bread Guy (5 Aug 2022)

brihard said:


> ...  I don’t see Ford losing sleep over what the fringe to the outside right thinks.


That's true at his end, too.


----------



## Remius (5 Aug 2022)

brihard said:


> Indeed he has. I’m sure the strong Parliamentary majority he holds is some consolation. I don’t see Ford losing sleep over what the fringe to the outside right thinks.


He’s done a decent job of purging a few from the party.


----------



## brihard (5 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> He’s done a decent job of purging a few from the party.


He has. He’s done a pretty decent job of being seen to take his party and his job sufficiently seriously that he’s willing to do the  housekeeping when needed. He won’t tolerate the wingnuts debasing the party. I didn’t vote for him, but I do respect that our differences on some key policies (bill 124 in particular for me) don’t mean he’s some kind of clown. He won the election fair and square by delivering an electable platform and not abjectly sucking at his job.


----------



## Kirkhill (5 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> Fair enough.  So mandates were not an issue then when it comes to Ford.


No idea.  Neither my monkeys nor my circus.


----------



## lenaitch (5 Aug 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> You can still get covid from someone who is fully vaccinated. I got it from someone who was triple vaccinated, and I am also triple vaccinated. There is even a higher possibility of someone vaccinated showing up to work with covid because they didn’t realize they had it/had extremely mild symptoms that were dismissed.
> 
> You could get the flu from a coworker and possibly die. You could get into a car accident on the way to work and possibly die. You could get a infected cut and possibly die. The world is full of ways to die. Being part of society means accepting risk. If you are so afraid of it, it means you should stay home, not forcing anyone else who may or may not have it to stay home.


And part of being an employer and a member of a civil society is to minimize risk to the extent that we reasonably can.  It seem the 'reasonably can' part is what people diverge on.


----------



## Kirkhill (10 Aug 2022)

FIRST READING: Young people seem to be leaning Tory (possibly for the first time ever)
					

Polls keep showing a plurality of under-30 voters backing the Conservatives




					nationalpost.com
				




What happens when you lock a generation of keen youngsters in their parents' basements and deny them hope for an independent future.




> FIRST READING: Young people seem to be leaning Tory (possibly for the first time ever)​Polls keep showing a plurality of under-30 voters backing the Conservatives
> 
> Author of the article:
> Tristin Hopper
> ...


----------



## Kirkhill (10 Aug 2022)

lenaitch said:


> And part of being an employer and a member of a civil society is to minimize risk to the extent that we reasonably can.  It seem the 'reasonably can' part is what people diverge on.



REASONABLE

The most divisive word in the English language.  I loathe and detest its rise in legal documents.  It is an open invitation to adjudication meaning that every decision has the potential to go before a tribunal, a court, a jury.

I date the rise of the "reasonable" cop-out to the introduction of the ISO standards.  standards that were developed when the Europeans tried to amalgamate a bunch of national standards and couldn't come to definitive conclusions.  As a result they punted and opted for the reasonable solution.

The lack of clarity that resulted has had a chilling effect on innovation.  Nobody is willing to risk being wrong anymore.  And even if they are, their insurers, banks and investors aren't.


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Aug 2022)

What is "reasonable"?  Is it just the average of whatever the majority believes?

I don't trust majorities.  They occasionally do really sh!tty things.


----------



## Kirkhill (10 Aug 2022)

I don't trust minorities or majorities.  I occasionally do really shitty things.

Why would I expect anything different from a group of people just like me?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (10 Aug 2022)

People forget it was reasonable people who supported Residential Schools, exclusion of Chinese and Indian immigrants, forced relocation of the Inuit. These were all "Politically correct" in their day.


----------



## Kirkhill (10 Aug 2022)

Reasonable people, from reasonable families, go to reasonable schools where they learn the catechism of reason.


----------



## Navy_Pete (10 Aug 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> REASONABLE
> 
> The most divisive word in the English language.  I loathe and detest its rise in legal documents.  It is an open invitation to adjudication meaning that every decision has the potential to go before a tribunal, a court, a jury.
> 
> ...


I think it's use in technical standards is generally caveated by the assumption that the people involved in that assessment have the necessary expertise, and not random people on the street. You can always call up standards with additional restrictions on acceptable criteria, but that's where the expertise comes in.

For contracts the flip side is trying to be hyper specific, and then you get unenforceable clauses or things that come up not in the hyper-specific wording. Similarly in laws there will always be interpretation and changes over time, as you just can't keep up with technological advances etc.

If it's down to arguing over the definition of a word in a contract, things have already gone sideways. Some of the relational contracting models are interesting in that they focus on avoiding that scenario with some dispute resolutions and include some outs to end a contract if the relationship breaks down.


----------



## Navy_Pete (10 Aug 2022)

What restrictive policies are they talking about that is preventing people from getting into houses that is specific to the LPC?

Our requirements for qualifying for a mortgage and the stress test are stricter than in the US, but if you look at how devastating that was when there was even a slight uptick in mortgage rates it's not an unreasonable check to protect people from getting into mortgages outside what they can actually afford.

So far no government of any political affiliation has any good solution to improve housing affordability, and municipalities are already in trouble for approving building on flood plains and other spots you shouldn't settle down in. If the CPC were currently in power, does anyone seriously think that housing would suddenly be affordable? It's the same story in other western democracies, and far worse the UK where they have a long running Tory government.

It's also the smallest voter group by demographic, with the lowest turnout, so weirdly optimistic article. People liking a PP video of housing affordability doesn't translate into support either; lots of videos of Bernie Sanders appearing on Fox News in front of a panel, and having hard core Republican voters agree with him for things like being able to get health care without going bankrupt, but they still wouldn't have voted for them. Similarly, I can broadly agree in a survey that the underlying *stated* goals of the convoy made sense while still thinking the execution was ridiculous and it got overrun by idiots without a plan and didn't actually represent the stated goals in practice.


----------



## Remius (10 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> What restrictive policies are they talking about that is preventing people from getting into houses that is specific to the LPC?
> 
> Our requirements for qualifying for a mortgage and the stress test are stricter than in the US, but if you look at how devastating that was when there was even a slight uptick in mortgage rates it's not an unreasonable check to protect people from getting into mortgages outside what they can actually afford.
> 
> ...


Pierre Poilievre is a landlord.  So is his wife.  They are part owners in a home rental company.  I can see why he would want to fire the gatekeepers.  MPs also get housing subsidies and many use them for things like this…

It’s a good sound bite but people buying income properties are likely also keeping others out of the market.  Nothing wrong with what he does.  Just a little rich that he talks about it when he’s had subsidized housing for his entire life.  

There isn’t much the can do to fix the problem.  Municipalities need to fix this not the feds.


----------



## Navy_Pete (10 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> Pierre Poilievre is a landlord.  So is his wife.  They are part owners in a home rental company.  I can see why he would want to fire the gatekeepers.  MPs also get housing subsidies and many use them for things like this…
> 
> It’s a good sound bite but people buying income properties are likely also keeping others out of the market.  Nothing wrong with what he does.  Just a little rich that he talks about it when he’s had subsidized housing for his entire life.
> 
> There isn’t much the can do to fix the problem.  Municipalities need to fix this not the feds.


Yikes, that's an awkward reality.

I think a lot of things get blamed on the feds where it's really just global events. Inflation is up around the world, housing and cost of living is a problem everywhere, and things are tough all over.

The solution for some of these would actually be closer to communism (ie government housing for all, fixed prices on most goods etc), and normal conservative doctrine of smaller government and less regulation would actually make the problems worse than they are right now.

I don't like Trudeau, but I think Canada weathered the storm relatively well for COVID, our safe and conservative mortgage rules means there aren't tens of thousands of people financially ruined for decades by small mortgage rate increases, and we don't have a shortage of staples. Russia invading Ukraine drove up food costs, the follow on sanctions drove up fuel costs, and the fuel cost increases drive everything up, so is a bit of a perfect storm.

One thing that I found actually refreshing in COVID was the federal and provincial governments putting party politics aside and collaborating fairly well, so compared to that the hyper-partisanship in federal politics is particularly odious. I'd probably prefer a bit of a Thanos approach in the next election, where the MP spots are cut in half and there is a new crop of party leaders, but barring that still don't see much appealing in the CPC party to vote for.

Which is frustrating, because I would like a real alternative, not someone who will ride the populist wave whichever way the wind is blowing. Not sure any of the 5 look appealing, but Scott Atchinson seems to be reasonably good from what little I've seen.


----------



## PuckChaser (10 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> our safe and conservative mortgage rules means there aren't tens of thousands of people financially ruined for decades by small mortgage rate increases


Mortgage rates have just doubled in a year, with another 0.75 increase coming in October. There is an absolute timebomb brewing when folks come up for renewal, and the variable rates are already screwed. Anyone who overpaid by 6 figures in the last few years, and picked a low fixed rate is about to lose their home at renewal.

Trudeau has created a ton of this inflation by printing all that debt to pay for the national COVID welfare state. His Bank of Canada has no answer to inflation other that to raise rates which will completely wreck the middle and lower class that is already reeling from inflation caused by external factors.

Must be nice to have the "Sunny Ways" sunglasses on about his fiscal policy, or lack their of.


----------



## Navy_Pete (10 Aug 2022)

Doubled from an exceptionally low rate, and mortgage rates have been kept suppressed internationally for a long time to keep artificial growth in housing bubbles flowing and feed the stock market. 5-6% is painful compared to 2-3%, but still within the envelope of the conservative stress test limits on mortgages.

Our banking rules are generally really conservative, but means companies can't get massively over-leveraged with like has happened with the massive property developers in China which are basically collapsed and propped up by the government.

The BoC tool to control inflation is to adjust interest rates to encourage/limit spending. That doesn't work when inflation is driven by factors completely external to Canada. What exactly would you like them to do differently?

If we hadn't locked down and people were being stacked like cordwood in trailers there would be angry people. If we had done a lockdown without providing relief for people that lost income there would be pissed off people. Doing what we did to try and minimize avoidable deaths and ruin a lot of people still has people pissed off. There weren't really any good options, and we seem to have come through better off than others overall. Sure, some things probably could have been done better in retrospect, but I think governments at the federal, provincial and municipal levels did the best they could with what they knew at the time by listening to the experts instead of playing bullshit politics.

If they don't learn from this and prepare things better for the next pandemic, I'll be pissed off then, but it's a waste of effort to 'what if' this to death as I don't honestly think anyone competent would have done anything much differently.

The stats aren't apple to apple, but a little over a million people have died from COVID in the US to date, compared to about 43k in Canada, so if you want a comparison, they had about twice as many people die per capita as we did.  Hardly sunny days, but still better than around 100k dead Canadians. Yeah, it's absolutely sucked, but has sucked less than it could have sucked to the tune of around 57k Canadians still on the sunny side of the grass.


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Aug 2022)

PuckChaser said:


> Trudeau has created a ton of this inflation by printing all that debt to pay for the national COVID welfare state. His Bank of Canada has no answer to inflation other that to raise rates which will completely wreck the middle and lower class that is already reeling from inflation caused by external factors.


This - This - This

Some may say, “well others printed money too!” but not to the degree that Canada did.  The Deficit LoveTM is not healthy, and Canadians, particularly those trying to survive, will pay the price for Trudeau’s bravado to spend others’ money.


----------



## PuckChaser (10 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Doubled from an exceptionally low rate, and mortgage rates have been kept suppressed internationally for a long time to keep artificial growth in housing bubbles flowing and feed the stock market. 5-6% is painful compared to 2-3%, but still within the envelope of the conservative stress test limits on mortgages.
> 
> Our banking rules are generally really conservative, but means companies can't get massively over-leveraged with like has happened with the massive property developers in China which are basically collapsed and propped up by the government.
> 
> The BoC tool to control inflation is to adjust interest rates to encourage/limit spending. That doesn't work when inflation is driven by factors completely external to Canada. What exactly would you like them to do differently?


Interest rates weren't fully fueling the housing market just as inflation isn't solely at the hands of the Ukr/Rus war. Chronic supply issues coupled with poor confidence in the Trudeau Government's ability to grow our economy with their anti-business policies caused the upper class to invest in property and housing as a means to make money. You cannot blame inflation on external factors on one hand, and think the BoC can control it with rate increases on the other. BoC created part of our inflation issues by devaluing our dollar to support the willy-nilly spending policy.

BoC needed to raise rates. SLOWLY. They were untenably low and they probably should have started the increases during COVID. Do you know the predictions now? Recession in late 2023. The BoC, under the guidance of the Trudeau Government, has created a housing bubble, popped it, aided to generationally high inflation and caused a recession due to their mismanagement. But I'm sure all those people who got COVID stimulus will be happy when they lose their jobs or homes.


----------



## Quirky (11 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> with what they knew at the time by listening to the experts instead of playing bullshit politics.



Except we don't elect politicians to completely listen to experts when it's convenient. Before covid it was always about saving the children at the expense of the elderly and sick, for the greater good of society. During Covid that was flipped, we locked up the young, healthy, future generations that keep the economy going to save a few old folk, who were past their life expectancy anyway. Lets hope politicians learn from this and don't make the same mistake during the next "pandemic".



Navy_Pete said:


> If we hadn't locked down and people were being stacked like cordwood in trailers there would be angry people.



Speculation.


----------



## QV (11 Aug 2022)

PuckChaser said:


> Interest rates weren't fully fueling the housing market just as inflation isn't solely at the hands of the Ukr/Rus war. Chronic supply issues coupled with poor confidence in the Trudeau Government's ability to grow our economy with their anti-business policies caused the upper class to invest in property and housing as a means to make money. You cannot blame inflation on external factors on one hand, and think the BoC can control it with rate increases on the other. BoC created part of our inflation issues by devaluing our dollar to support the willy-nilly spending policy.
> 
> BoC needed to raise rates. SLOWLY. They were untenably low and they probably should have started the increases during COVID. Do you know the predictions now? Recession in late 2023. The BoC, under the guidance of the Trudeau Government, has created a housing bubble, popped it, aided to generationally high inflation and caused a recession due to their mismanagement. But I'm sure all those people who got COVID stimulus will be happy when they lose their jobs or homes.


But PP is mean because he criticized the BoC....


----------



## brihard (11 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> But PP is mean because he criticized the BoC....


No; he’s silly because he promised to fire the BoC governor, which is not in the power of a Prime Minister to do. He would have to pass legislation through booth chambers of Parliament. It’s populism on the dumb end, though it’s an interesting barometer in terms of who likes and is unconcerned by his promise to go outside his powers and meddle in an independent institution.

Poilievre has always been a good attack dog; he’s yet to demonstrate any political maturation beyond that though.


----------



## QV (11 Aug 2022)

You read far too much into things. PP was right when he pointed out the government of the day and the BoC were making mistakes. I have no reason to believe PP intends to go outside the law or his authorities to do anything regarding the BoC, you make quite the overzealous assumption there.


----------



## brihard (11 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> You read far too much into things. PP was right when he pointed out the government of the day and the BoC were making mistakes. I have no reason to believe PP intends to go outside the law or his authorities to do anything regarding the BoC, you make quite the overzealous assumption there.


Wrong. PP said, with regards to the Givernornof the Bank of Canada, that he would “replace him”. He said this at a leadership debate. His exact words were “I would replace him with a new governor”. I’m not “reading into”; I’m just reading.









						Pierre Poilievre says he would fire the Bank of Canada governor if elected prime minister
					






					financialpost.com
				




So either PP does not grasp the limits on the power of the PM and doesn’t understand how the Governor was appointed, or he _does_ know these things and was deliberately dishonest. Given his words in contradiction of what a PM can actually do, which of the two do you think it was? Ignorance or dishonesty?


----------



## QV (11 Aug 2022)

Wrong again. You seem like the attack dog here. You're assuming he is going to go about that in a manner that is outside his powers. Do you think the BoC governor is irreplaceable and is an appointment for life?

So how did Trudeau get away with this then: Trudeau opts to replace Bank of Canada Governor Poloz despite COVID-19 economic crisis

Bottom line: the BoC and the elected GoC screwed up and we're paying for it. They both need to be replaced. You just can't stand that this is true. 

This isn't a new notion: The case for firing the governor of the Bank of Canada


----------



## Brad Sallows (11 Aug 2022)

> That doesn't work when inflation is driven by factors completely external to Canada.



Not completely external.  Inflating the money supply is inflation, by definition.


----------



## brihard (11 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> Wrong again. You seem like the attack dog here. You're assuming he is going to go about that in a manner that is outside his powers. Do you think the BoC governor is irreplaceable and is an appointment for life?
> 
> So how did Trudeau get away with this then: Trudeau opts to replace Bank of Canada Governor Poloz despite COVID-19 economic crisis
> 
> ...


Not offering an extended mandate is not the same as firing. Try again. Or maybe just read again.

All I’ve done is directly quoted his stated intent. I don’t know why you’re trying to dance around what he has directly said he’s do but lacks the power to.


----------



## QV (11 Aug 2022)

brihard said:


> Not offering an extended mandate is not the same as firing. Try again. Or maybe just read again.
> 
> All I’ve done is directly quoted his stated intent. I don’t know why you’re trying to dance around what he has directly said he’s do but lacks the power to.


You really don't give up. You get completely focused and lost on one word and miss the whole picture.


----------



## PuckChaser (11 Aug 2022)

PP won't have to fire him. If he's elected, BoC board is smart enough to read the writing on the wall and ask him to resign. I have a funny feeling being in a GIC appointment without the confidence of the PM and PMO would be kinda rough.


----------



## Navy_Pete (11 Aug 2022)

PuckChaser said:


> Interest rates weren't fully fueling the housing market just as inflation isn't solely at the hands of the Ukr/Rus war. Chronic supply issues coupled with poor confidence in the Trudeau Government's ability to grow our economy with their anti-business policies caused the upper class to invest in property and housing as a means to make money. You cannot blame inflation on external factors on one hand, and think the BoC can control it with rate increases on the other. BoC created part of our inflation issues by devaluing our dollar to support the willy-nilly spending policy.
> 
> BoC needed to raise rates. SLOWLY. They were untenably low and they probably should have started the increases during COVID. Do you know the predictions now? Recession in late 2023. The BoC, under the guidance of the Trudeau Government, has created a housing bubble, popped it, aided to generationally high inflation and caused a recession due to their mismanagement. But I'm sure all those people who got COVID stimulus will be happy when they lose their jobs or homes.


The rich have always invested in property, and have been doing it long before the current LPC and will keep doing it under any future CPC party.

Don't dispute that the GoC and BoC made (and are making) mistakes but it's also not reasonable to blame them entirely given that inflation is kicking in around the globe.

I think the stock market commodification of housing is a major contributor to this as well; the unrealistic push for eternal and infinite growth is making all kinds of basics unaffordable, and putting inordinate pressure on regulators that want to put brakes on things to prevent massive collapses.

The value of anything in the stock market is massively disconnected from actual value anyway; if you look at a blue chip stock like Apple, the returns on holding the stock will take something like 50 years to payback the purchase price, so really only makes sense if you look at the stock as a commodity to resell to someone else at a higher price, which is effectively a pyramid scheme.


----------



## Good2Golf (11 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> Wrong again. You seem like the attack dog here. You're assuming he is going to go about that in a manner that is outside his powers. Do you think the BoC governor is irreplaceable and is an appointment for life?
> 
> So how did Trudeau get away with this then: Trudeau opts to replace Bank of Canada Governor Poloz despite COVID-19 economic crisis
> 
> ...


So you’re not going to answer brihard’s clear link to PP’s statement in public record that is factually incorrect/wrong? 🤔 

At least you didn’t follow-up with ‘irrelevant’ as it clearly is.


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> ... You get completely focused and lost on one word and miss the whole picture.


Ah, but when politicians you don't like say one thing and do another, that's OK, then?  Or is this "this is what he says, but this is what he REALLY thinks"?


----------



## QV (11 Aug 2022)

You guys can continue to pick fly shit out of pepper if you like. It's quite hilarious. Yes, when Trudeau complains about pollution and then travels by air across the country to ski and surf multiple times every year... yes that is hypocrisy and needs to be called out. 

When PP states he is going to fire/replace/remove/excommunicate the BoC governor, most people will understand that if elected PP will do something at sometime where the end result is a different BoC governor... and you folks will be like; "See!? He lied! He didn't fire him, he just somehow enabled a situation where he was replaced!". The inability to see through the weeds is why DND can't have nice things, even simple ones like a modern pistol.


----------



## Navy_Pete (11 Aug 2022)

They are all politicians; they are hypocritical about different things (ie PP calling out landlords when profittng off a landlord company).

But c'mon, saying he's going to fire the BoC governor as PM when he won't have that authority is either due to ignorance or outright lying. You're bending yourself into a pretzel trying to justify it as somehow different.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (11 Aug 2022)

Likely the term replace/fired is simplified for the general public who really don't give a sh*t about the mechanisms used. The CPC will want to clean house of anyone tainted by the JT brand. As QV mentioned, likley the Governor and many others will suddenly find the grass is greener on the other side of the fence and make the move themselves.


----------



## Navy_Pete (11 Aug 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Likely the term replace/fired is simplified for the general public who really don't give a sh*t about the mechanisms used. The CPC will want to clean house of anyone tainted by the JT brand. As QV mentioned, likley the Governor and many others will suddenly find the grass is greener on the other side of the fence and make the move themselves.


They have speechwriters and all kinds of PR people so the choice of words was very deliberate, and implies a certain amount of authority. He's been an MP for 18 years, including a stint as the shadow Finance guy so it's either a lie or he is ignorant on that basic relationship, which implies incompetence. I don't think he's incompetent, so this was a deliberate lie.

Why would the BoC govenor resign because of a change in government? They get given broad GoC direction and figure out how to get it done, but are independent to prevent political interference. If there is a change of government, the new GoC can provide new guidance, but they can't fire them. We really don't want to get like the US where there is a broad change of senior public servants every elections to new cronies who may or may not have any relevant expertise.


----------



## Good2Golf (11 Aug 2022)

PP isn’t stupid, and equally, it is not unreasonable for us to expect at least a bit of principled conduct from someone who could be the next party leader.   I and my wife have had personal interactions and lack of interactions from him personally during the last campaign that really put us off. Outright dishonest portrayal of his interaction with us and other constituents in our riding.  He needs to build better if he expects to get our vote.


----------



## suffolkowner (11 Aug 2022)

With respect to the Bank of Canada and its governor, I think I posted this before

Government Directive​Marginal note:Consultations


*14* (1) The Minister and the Governor shall consult regularly on monetary policy and on its relation to general economic policy.
Marginal note:Minister’s directive
(2) If, notwithstanding the consultations provided for in subsection (1), there should emerge a difference of opinion between the Minister and the Bank concerning the monetary policy to be followed, the Minister may, after consultation with the Governor and with the approval of the Governor in Council, give to the Governor a written directive concerning monetary policy, in specific terms and applicable for a specified period, and the Bank shall comply with that directive.
Marginal noteublication and report
(3) A directive given under this section shall be published forthwith in the Canada Gazette and shall be laid before Parliament within fifteen days after the giving thereof, or, if Parliament is not then sitting, on any of the first fifteen days next thereafter that either House of Parliament is sitting.


----------



## brihard (11 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> When PP states he is going to fire/replace/remove/excommunicate the BoC governor, most people will understand that if elected PP will do something at sometime where the end result is a different BoC governor... and you folks will be like; "See!? He lied! He didn't fire him, he just somehow enabled a situation where he was replaced!". The inability to see through the weeds is why DND can't have nice things, even simple ones like a modern pistol.



You’re out to lunch. He has used both the words “replace” and “fire”. He has said “fire” over and over. His meaning is very clear. The BoC governor’s term runs for a year and a half beyond the next election, so he isn’t talking about simply not offering him another term.

Literally search “fire” on his Twitter and you get a ton of immediate relevant results, as seen below.

You cannot continue to pretend this isn’t what he means, and keep your integrity intact. He has repeatedly made a promise to do something a Prime Minister does not have the authority to do. Obviously you didn’t know better (though now you do), but he sure as hell does. So I ask you again: is he incompetent or lying?


----------



## QV (11 Aug 2022)

Oh boy... you're seeing red. I can't believe you put this much effort to argue semantics.  And using your junior interview skills to solicit the result you are after: "is he incompetent or lying?". This is comedy. Thank you for the laugh. 

PP wants the existing BoC governor replaced, I believe that will happen under a PP government. How it happens...nobody cares.


----------



## Good2Golf (11 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> PP wants the existing BoC governor replaced, I believe that will happen under a PP government. How it happens...nobody cares.


Exactly.  Nobody cared how Trudeau replaced the Attorney General…so why worry about how PP as PM would replace the BoC Governor.


----------



## brihard (11 Aug 2022)

QV said:


> Oh boy... you're seeing red. I can't believe you put this much effort to argue semantics.  And using your junior interview skills to solicit the result you are after: "is he incompetent or lying?". This is comedy. Thank you for the laugh.
> 
> PP wants the existing BoC governor replaced, I believe that will happen under a PP government. How it happens...nobody cares.



Not at all, I find this amusing. What effort? Screenshot ring the first six tweets for ‘fire’ from his Instagram took about 30 seconds, and posting them maybe another ten.

He either doesn’t know what he’s doing, or heMs wilfully dishonest. You have been given all the information needed to see that. If you refuse to commit to one or the other, that’s fine, and utterly predictable.

The facts aren’t on your side so you’re trying to go after me instead. Just take the L, my man.


----------



## Good2Golf (11 Aug 2022)

…or move to Carleton riding to vote for him personally in the next election.


----------



## brihard (11 Aug 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> …or move to Carleton riding to vote for him personally in the next election.
> 
> View attachment 72459


That’s the fun part of this; I actually get to vote against the guy. I have no illusions, he’ll likely take the riding easily, but I can walk the talk.


----------



## Good2Golf (11 Aug 2022)

brihard said:


> That’s the fun part of this; I actually get to vote against the guy. I have no illusions, he’ll likely take the riding easily, but I can walk the talk.


As can I; heck he jogs by my house often and I walk past his.

Others…some chatter from afar.  

Deeds speak.


----------



## Remius (11 Aug 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> As can I; heck he jogs by my house often and I walk past his.
> 
> Others…some chatter from afar.
> 
> Deeds speak.


Same here.  While he doesn’t jog by my house I’ve seen how he campaigns door to door.  It’s kind of funny how he sends in his minions first.  If the response is positive he jumps out of the bushes to talk, if negative he skips.  I’ve spoken to him twice in person.  He presents well enough one on one. I’ll give him that.  But like some have mentioned, it will take some doing to get me to vote for him.


----------



## Good2Golf (11 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> Same here.  While he doesn’t jog by my house I’ve seen how he campaigns door to door.  It’s kind of funny how he sends in his minions first.  If the response is positive he jumps out of the bushes to talk, if negative he skips.  I’ve spoken to him twice in person.  He presents well enough one on one. I’ll give him that.  But like some have mentioned, it will take some doing to get me to vote for him.


Funny you mention that Remius, that’s part of his rubbing us the wrong way.  During one round of campaigning, we were at our next door neighbours’, and he came up the driveway huffing and puffing (for show) the actually says, “Whew!  You caught me running like an immigrant!” 😳

Our neighbours and we were stunned!  None of us said anything, we were still trying to process just how he thought saying that was a good idea.  I think he at least figured that was a bit of a gaff, because he just handed us a couple of pamphlets, and excused himself and puffed away down the street to the next house.

He has some work to do being more genuine and honest.

That’s why I take issue with his near casual looseness with the truth.


----------



## Halifax Tar (12 Aug 2022)

The crazy part about all this is the Cons are polling ahead for.... the first time since JT took the reigns ? 











						338Canada Canada | Poll Analysis & Electoral Projections
					






					338canada.com


----------



## SeaKingTacco (12 Aug 2022)

I think it has more to do with Trudeau fatigue, than any real love of the CPC.


----------



## The Bread Guy (12 Aug 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Funny you mention that Remius, that’s part of his rubbing us the wrong way.  During one round of campaigning, we were at our next door neighbours’, and he came up the driveway huffing and puffing (for show) the actually says, “Whew!  You caught me running like an immigrant!” 😳 ....


It's things like that that leave an impression on voters one-on-one - for better or worse - for sure.

His latest on YT




Brings up loads of legit zingers, but my one beef:  while he rags on the PM for long line-ups for passports, he's saying it wasn't the PM standing in line for them.  Yeah, I know it's "rhetoric", but would PP stand in line for his own passport if/when he becomes PM?  Other than that, more well-executed message craft.


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Aug 2022)

While he has many legit points, I don't like being treated as if I'm not able to identify BS points as well - get rid of the bumpf* and ensure solid delivery of the legit points, so he doesn't ever have to regret or explain away a BS rhetorical point.  And he definitely needs to filter his 'jazzing with the common person' lexicon.  Our other neighbours (Kosovar refugees who arrived in Canada in 1999 with just the clothes on their backs, now an MD and s/w Engineer) were probably the most horrified at his words, and rightly so.

*Edit: for spelling


----------



## RangerRay (12 Aug 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> While he has many legit points, I don't like being treated as if I'm not able to identify BS points as well - get rid of the bumps and ensure solid delivery of the legit points, so he doesn't ever have to regret or explain away a BS rhetorical point.  And he definitely needs to filter his 'jazzing with the common person' lexicon.  Our other neighbours (Kosovar refugees who arrived in Canada in 1999 with just the clothes on their backs, now an MD and s/w Engineer) were probably the most horrified at his words, and rightly so.


I thought he sounded like the nerd in high school trying too hard to use the “hip” lingo and be funny. 

I weep for the party and this country.


----------



## Remius (12 Aug 2022)

Opinion: Where would Poilievre take the Conservatives? Not to the far right, but the far out
					

His campaign – a grab bag of grievances and resentments, plus a few shiny objects – is aimed squarely at attracting support from extremists




					www.theglobeandmail.com
				




Sums up some of my concerns with PP.


----------



## RangerRay (12 Aug 2022)

I was attracted to conservatism because they were supposed to be the steely-eyed, cold rationalists who would make decisions based on reason an reality.  Now, the right is just as emotional and extreme as the left. They are exploiting peoples’ feelings rather than appealing to intellect, and saying to hell with character.  It makes me physically ill thinking about it.


----------



## TacticalTea (13 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> Opinion: Where would Poilievre take the Conservatives? Not to the far right, but the far out
> 
> 
> His campaign – a grab bag of grievances and resentments, plus a few shiny objects – is aimed squarely at attracting support from extremists
> ...


Pisses me off that the people of this country seem to keep missing every opportunity to take the right direction, at every god damn turn. There are some far better, more credible options than PP in this race.

It seems France has some good ideas wrt to how elections should be run. AFAIK, all candidates run in the same election, no party-specific primaries. That seems to allow parties to put forward individuals that better represent the country as a whole, and not just the particular party's base. (that's not to say their system is perfect)


----------



## IKnowNothing (15 Aug 2022)

RangerRay said:


> I was attracted to conservatism because they were supposed to be the steely-eyed, cold rationalists who would make decisions based on reason an reality.  Now, the right is just as emotional and extreme as the left. They are exploiting peoples’ feelings rather than appealing to intellect, and saying to hell with character.  It makes me physically ill thinking about it.


Key example: inflation

Misdirection re: the real problems to stoke and direct anger at political enemies, often with messaging that is straight up contradictory.

No mention of US refinery shortages caused by closures brought about by COVID cratering demand in early 2020 spiking refining margins. 
No mention of the plastic resin shortages that lead to a 50+% spike in raw input prices through the summer of 2021.
No shame self contradiction regarding fuel being an inelastic good and requirement to life but fuel driven inflation is somehow caused by income supports.

It's all "their" fault.  There are no problems in need of complicated solutions. There are no problems that in the short run a simply out of our control.  Just hop on the anger train and it will all be better.


----------



## Kirkhill (15 Aug 2022)

Love this article - 



> NP Comment
> Chris Sankey: Why, as an Indigenous-Canadian, I will be voting Conservative in the next election​Author of the article:
> Chris Sankey,  Special to National Post
> Publishing date:
> ...


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Aug 2022)

> Under Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, the Liberals opened new residential schools, while pushing a white paper that threatened to eliminate Indian status. Why aren’t Canadians tearing down and cancelling his statues and removing his name from streets and buildings?



There’s an awkward question asked by someone whom Trudeau Fils has no right to silence…not that he won’t try to passive-aggressively gaslight Sankey somehow.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (15 Aug 2022)

Giving a name to moderate (?) Conservatives.  Centre Ice . . .



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/centre-ice-conservatives-poilievre-analysis-wherry-1.6549953
		



> Moderate conservatives are worried, but what are they going to do about it?​Speaking to a gathering of self-described "Centre Ice Conservatives" in Edmonton on Thursday, former British Columbia premier Christy Clark offered a tidy explanation for why the people in the room had come together.
> 
> "When you look across the country, what we see are political leaders rushing to the fringes. Political leaders of all political stripes – they're all trying to get right to the edge," she said. "And you are trying to do the exact opposite. You are trying to preserve that middle political path that has saved Canada so many times and that has preserved our country."
> 
> ...



And what's a movement these days without its own web presence.









						The Power of the Centre
					

Welcome to Centre Ice Conservatives. We are a platform that intends to be a strong, bold and proud voice for the centre-right of Canada’s political spectrum. Why are we doing this? Because we don’t want the centre to be marginalized and ignored any longer. And because our voice – your voice –...




					www.centreiceconservatives.ca


----------



## Kirkhill (15 Aug 2022)

I also found this passage informative



> Historically, there have been many government policies, instituted by both parties, that have harmed Indigenous people. But as with all things, time heals all wounds and people change. So does policy. People always want to associate the CPC with* Sir John A. MacDonald, because his governments launched the residential schools. The boarding schools were not mandatory at the time, but became compulsory years after his death.*
> 
> Both parties have bad track records in dealing with First Nations. Indian agents had dictatorial powers over our people and our reserves. Oftentimes, those powers were abused. But surely *John A. Macdonald* could not be in all places at all times, holding all government officials to account. In fact, he *was oddly more progressive on Indigenous policy than many of his contemporaries*.
> 
> On the eve of the North-West Rebellion of 1885,* Macdonald proposed to extend voting rights to Indigenous people — a measure that Canada wouldn’t adopt until 1960. “I hope to see some day the Indian race represented by one of themselves on the floor of the House of Commons,” he wrote to Peter Jones, a Mississauga Ojibwa chief and a personal friend of the prime minister’s.* Liberal MP David Mills ridiculed the policy, arguing that it would allow Indians to “go from a scalping party to the polls.” Ultimately, *Macdonald was able to enfranchise some Indigenous-Canadians, a right that was later taken away by the Liberal government of Prime Minister Wilfrid Laurier.*


----------



## Remius (16 Aug 2022)

If Poilievre wins leadership, but fails to pivot to the centre, Quebec Tory MP Godin says he will ‘reflect' on his own 'future political life’
					

After the Conservative leadership election concludes on Sept. 10, party unity will depend on the direction the new leader decides to go, whether that's leaning into populism or pivoting to the centre, says Tasha Kheiriddin, author and co-chair of the Jean Charest campaign.




					www.hilltimes.com
				




I suspect that Godin is not alone in those thoughts of floor crossing or leaving caucus.

Not to mention party members with influence who might be working in the background that may be musing on a split or something else. 

I myself wouldn’t mind seing red tories or blue liberals take the LPC back to the Center.  Because I suspect the CPC won’t be the ones to do that under PP.


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Aug 2022)

The last time politicians tried something different than what the voters selected, it ended badly for those politicians.


----------



## Kirkhill (16 Aug 2022)

The whole point of a representative democracy is that the demos is represented.  The intent is to resolve disputes without resorting to swords or the mace.

Contrary opinions need to have their voice in parliament.  And the contrarians can be expected to win, sometimes, occasionally or often.  Otherwise parliament loses legitimacy and the demos resorts to swords and maces.


----------



## IKnowNothing (16 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> If Poilievre wins leadership, but fails to pivot to the centre, Quebec Tory MP Godin says he will ‘reflect' on his own 'future political life’
> 
> 
> After the Conservative leadership election concludes on Sept. 10, party unity will depend on the direction the new leader decides to go, whether that's leaning into populism or pivoting to the centre, says Tasha Kheiriddin, author and co-chair of the Jean Charest campaign.
> ...



It's definitely a tricky one.  Sticking to my homeground, in rural midwestern Ontario we've got Nater (Perth-Wellington), Ruff (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound), and Lobb (Huron-Bruce).

Nater has endorsed Charest, Lobb and Ruff are each part of the minority of MP's that are largely sitting on the sidelines.  Lobb endorsed McKay in 20, Ruff O'Toole.  It's fair to say that among the group of representatives there is a fairly strong PC/ centre-right lean,  and not much appetite for PP's populism, Trumpism, etc.

But that being said,  those are conservative stronghold ridings, B-G-OS Blue since 04, H-B since 08.  All three ridings flirted with ~60% CPC + PPC vote in 2021, all had higher than baseline convoy support, all have a fairly strong anti-Trudeau sentiment.

I think each would stand a good chance of winning as a theoretical PC. 50/50 at best as an independent.  As an incumbent Liberal after crossing the floor- I have my doubts.


----------



## Remius (16 Aug 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> It's definitely a tricky one.  Sticking to my homeground, in rural midwestern Ontario we've got Nater (Perth-Wellington), Ruff (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound), and Lobb (Huron-Bruce).
> 
> Nater has endorsed Charest, Lobb and Ruff are each part of the minority of MP's that are largely sitting on the sidings.  Lobb endorsed McKay in 20, Ruff O'Toole.  It's fair to say that among the group of representatives there is a fairly strong PC/ centre-right lean,  and not much appetite for PP's populism, Trumpism, etc.
> 
> ...


Godin could I think.  He only won his seat with 51 percent.  So in theory him crossing the floor would likely give him the win.  He’d get the LPC, disaffected CPC vote.  That may be part of his calculus.


----------



## Remius (17 Aug 2022)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1559717446432575488
There is a link in that to the article about what happened.   But PP decided to spin this for political points.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Aug 2022)

Veterans aren't special.  MAID is for all Canadians, and is getting a bit of a push as an answer for people suffering mental anguish.  I think that's really f*cked up, but I'm a curmudgeon.


----------



## ArmyRick (17 Aug 2022)

PP being compared to Trump? Seriously guys? Current and ex-military people, please shake your heads.

You know what really damages Canada? Its people who keep focusing on guys like PP as some sort of "frothing angry Hitler-like" populist and in my views, some are implying he is all the "bad" things (he is white therefore racist, he is pro-Canadian therefore anti-indigenous, he is pro-economy therefore his a sellout for large corporations, etc). 
And then IGNORE the worst Prime Minister of all Canadian history, Justin Trudeau. Focus. Please.
-SNC Lavalin
-Firing JWR for doing her job
-Lost several female MPs because of his ideology
-Went from Majority party to minority party
-Called an election when he said he wouldn't
-Agra Khan gift receiving
-Two ethics violations convictions
 -Elbowing collegues
-WE scandal
-The list keeps going and going

FOCUS. At this point a brain dead baboon could do a better job of running this nation then the current clown. Will PP do a better job if elected to lead the party and eventually the nation? Hell yes. He could come in sh*t faced drunk everyday and still do better.


----------



## Remius (17 Aug 2022)

ArmyRick said:


> PP being compared to Trump? Seriously guys? Current and ex-military people, please shake your heads.
> 
> You know what really damages Canada? Its people who keep focusing on guys like PP as some sort of "frothing angry Hitler-like" populist and in my views, some are implying he is all the "bad" things (he is white therefore racist, he is pro-Canadian therefore anti-indigenous, he is pro-economy therefore his a sellout for large corporations, etc).
> And then IGNORE the worst Prime Minister of all Canadian history, Justin Trudeau. Focus. Please.
> ...


I just went through the last few pages and didn’t see PP being compared to Trump.  He pretty much has his own brand of populism.  One based on anger and protest.  His campaign is big on slogans and not big on actual policy. 

Now that may change once he becomes leader but he really does not have much policy wise right now.   Some of us would like to see an effective leader with a chance to win. 

Harper lost to Trudeau.
Scheer lost to Trudeau.
O’Toole lost to Trudeau. 

Yes. “ Anyone should be able to beat Trudeau “.  We’ve heard that every time and yet like a poor marksman, they keep missing the target.  

I’d like someone that can beat Trudeau.  I don’t think PP is the guy that will do that.  He’s divided party beyond repair I think.  Not sure why you would tell current and ex military people to shake their heads.  Many are indeed sharing their heads but not for the reasons you might think.  

And none of this is an endorsement of Trudeau.  But it might be an indictment of a party we’d like to see aspire to power instead of perfecting second place all the time.


----------



## Halifax Tar (17 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> I’d like someone that can beat Trudeau.



Would you really ?


----------



## Remius (17 Aug 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Would you really ?


I do yes.  I thought the last guy could. But was wrong.   If the party had given him a chance rather than turf him and put themselves in a divisive leadership race, I think he had the potential to get there. 

I like Scott Atchison more than I like Charest but I think both would be better choices than PP.   Both are my only ballot choices.  

Rona Ambrose was and is my preferred leader for the CPC but that ship has sailed for now.


----------



## IKnowNothing (17 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> I like Scott Atchison more than I like Charest but I think both would be better choices than PP.


The issue is that neither is great. 
 I love Aitchison's tone and philosophy, but he's so rough around the edges and while he gets points for a fairly robust platform, some of the actual ideas are... questionable.

Meanwhile Charest is pretty much perfect, but just too stigmatized.  Both the Laurentian aspect and the "Liberal",  PP's very skillful spin machine has made it almost impossible for a Charest led CPC to stay together.  

The only way I see this working out well for the CPC and Canada is if PP is smarter than he has shown to date and both 
A- has a solid platform of real ideas and a beneficial agenda that he's keeping close to his chest
B- can use his skill to keep the mob on board while he pivots and enacts it


----------



## rmc_wannabe (17 Aug 2022)

I think PP's main problem is that he is trying to win the Party, without a plan to win the country.  All of his rhetoric, sloganing, speeches, etc. drum up support within the farther corners of the party; but are met with indifference or skepticism from the electorate. 

Its all well and good to have the best CONOP with your fellow staff, but in the end, you're not convincing them, you're convincing the boss. The boss in this case are the 40ish Million people you're trying to convince to vote for your party. 

The same thing happened in the NDP. Singh was touted as the new face to lead the NDP into a second Orange Crush, with massive party support for his Leadership bid. He instead has fallen flat with Canadians and the NDP is suffering for it.

The question becomes how much more Canadians are willing to hold their nose with our current elected government. Unless the CPC and NDP provide a viable option, we're where were are for the foreseeable future. 

I think Atchison and Charest would have far more appeal to Canadians than PP, however, I said the same about O'Toole. Whoever is selected as CPC Leader will have little time to relish their success once Parliament resumes in the autumn.


----------



## Remius (17 Aug 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> The issue is that neither is great.
> I love Aitchison's tone and philosophy, but he's so rough around the edges and while he gets points for a fairly robust platform, some of the actual ideas are... questionable.
> 
> Meanwhile Charest is pretty much perfect, but just too stigmatized.  Both the Laurentian aspect and the "Liberal",  PP's very skillful spin machine has made it almost impossible for a Charest led CPC to stay together.
> ...


There is a school of thought that PP’s current populist leaning is a means to undercut and destroy the PPC.  I think he might be politically savvy enough to concoct that sort of thing. 

The issue is can he or will he try to unite the party under a broad banner or will he double down on his current path. 

And has there been enough damage done that he can’t actually unite the party. 

It’s going to take a lot for me to vote his way.  As an MP and as PM.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (17 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> There is a school of thought that PP’s current populist leaning is a means to undercut and destroy the PPC.  I think he might be politically savvy enough to concoct that sort of thing.
> 
> The issue is can he or will he try to unite the party under a broad banner or will he double down on his current path.
> 
> ...


O'Toole tried a similar play and it blew up pretty hard in his face. 

When you're as fractured as the CPC/PPC; going from slightly right of centre to "what in the Jesus Christ was that?" right, you're not going to win everyone in the party. The key to a majority lies in the centre. There are enough Blue grits unhappy with the LPC that are willing to flip; only if they can be sure that the lunatics won't get hold of the asylum.


----------



## IKnowNothing (17 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> There is a school of thought that PP’s current populist leaning is a means to undercut and destroy the PPC.  I think he might be politically savvy enough to concoct that sort of thing.


That may well be the case.  And I do appreciate that he's read the room and (unlike Lewis) has been increasingly leaning away from the WEF/ COVID grievance angle and finding newer and (somewhat) more legitimate issues to stoke anger at.

Personally I hate the constant misrepresentation and oversimplification of issues to form attacks, but if it's actually a form of "weaning" people back to reality to keep them under the tent... it makes it more palatable. 

But I'd much prefer a principled, grounded in reality, solution based, "This is why I'm better" leader to a "Trudeau sucks" soundbite machine


----------



## Remius (17 Aug 2022)

rmc_wannabe said:


> O'Toole tried a similar play and it blew up pretty hard in his face.
> 
> When you're as fractured as the CPC/PPC; going from slightly right of centre to "what in the Jesus Christ was that?" right, you're not going to win everyone in the party. The key to a majority lies in the centre. There are enough Blue grits unhappy with the LPC that are willing to flip; only if they can be sure that the lunatics won't get hold of the asylum.


O’toole’s mistake was that it was blatant.

Poilievre’s tactic might be to be light on any policy or even be void of any policy.  It would let him shift significantly without being seen as a bait and switch.  As long as the sound bites come, his base won’t care much about policy. 

I’m curious to see if that is indeed his play. 

Your last point is the challenge.


----------



## IKnowNothing (17 Aug 2022)

Email from a candidate says that 450k votes are outstanding.  Pure conjecture on my part, but perhaps too much onus was put on PP avoiding the debate due to risk and he really does need to focus on getting out the vote.  Driving to a rally is exciting.  Clicking a link, ticking a box, and using your auto-fill credit card information is easy.  Scanning/photocopying your drivers license, filling out declarations by hand, getting them to the mail on time? Inconvenient and annoying.


----------



## RangerRay (17 Aug 2022)

ArmyRick said:


> PP being compared to Trump? Seriously guys? Current and ex-military people, please shake your heads.
> 
> You know what really damages Canada? Its people who keep focusing on guys like PP as some sort of "frothing angry Hitler-like" populist and in my views, some are implying he is all the "bad" things (he is white therefore racist, he is pro-Canadian therefore anti-indigenous, he is pro-economy therefore his a sellout for large corporations, etc).
> And then IGNORE the worst Prime Minister of all Canadian history, Justin Trudeau. Focus. Please.
> ...


I think it’s possible to both believe that Justin Trudeau is the worst PM in Canadian history AND that Pierre Pollievre is the worst choice to defeat said worst PM in history.  It’s also possible to believe that all the other candidates are not up to the task either.


----------



## Edward Campbell (17 Aug 2022)

Caution ... Geezer eruption!

I share the opinion of the _*Good Grey Globe*_'s Editorial Board.

Too many of our American friends have lost their political minds. I guess I understand that many people are fed up to here with the antics of the Laurentian Elites and their US (and British and Australian) cousins. But Donald J Trump is a reprehensible human being and a disgrace to the party that nominated him for high office. I have friends (good friends, I hope) on both sides of our shared border who supported Trump in 2016. I thought he was the least bad of the two main candidates six years ago. Now I think, maybe just hope, that they now see that he is, as he was in 2016, a monster. 

Many Canadian Conservatives support _Trumpian_ tactics. I believe that is a disservice to our political process. We need to look at ourselves, at our own political heritage and values - at Macdonald, Laurier, Borden and St Laurent - great Conservatives and great Liberals, too, but, above all, great and honest and able Canadians - and declare them to be the examples we want our leaders to follow.

I am not part of what was described by one astute political analyst as the Harper/Poilievre "fusion." I think I stand aloof, at least at some distance from that (3rd image). But so, I think, does a solid majority of Canadians (4th image).

_I believe_ that the Conservative party needs to *and can* move a substantial minority (40+% of voters) away from the illiberal left and up towards the small L liberal realm of socio-economic-politcal belief (5th image).

I'm not sure that Pierre Poilievre is the best leader to do that, but then I don't believe that the best leaders entered the race to replace Erin O'Toole. But that's a personal view. The Conservative party appears to be Mr Poilievre's, for better or for worse.

If I was "havin' my druthers" I'd rather see something like this (6th image) for Canada's responsible, conservative (by which I mean small L liberal) future.

Geezer eruption ends.


----------



## Halifax Tar (17 Aug 2022)

Trump, Trudeau, PP and populism are symptoms.  Symptoms of a broken system.  Symptoms of a populace who is either disinterested or distrustful of the political class.  Symptoms of a completely disconnected political establishment.  Symptoms of a populace who don't believe the Gov is working in their best interest. 

We will continue to get this, in Canada as well,  until:

(1)  A political leader emerges that inspires and effects actual positive change. 

or 

(2)  The populace rise up and reset the system. 

I'm hoping for #1.


----------



## Furniture (17 Aug 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> That may well be the case.  And I do appreciate that he's read the room and (unlike Lewis) has been increasingly leaning away from the WEF/ COVID grievance angle and finding newer and (somewhat) more legitimate issues to stoke anger at.
> 
> Personally I hate the constant misrepresentation and oversimplification of issues to form attacks, but if it's actually a form of "weaning" people back to reality to keep them under the tent... it makes it more palatable.
> 
> But I'd much prefer a principled, grounded in reality, solution based, "This is why I'm better" leader to a "Trudeau sucks" soundbite machine


The problem with that is, Canadian's aren't interested in a dull but capable PM. Canadians want the emotional arguments, which is why the LPC have gone that route, they aren't interested in long complicated answers that don't make a good soundbite.


----------



## IKnowNothing (17 Aug 2022)

@Edward Campbell ,  thank-you for the links, led me down an excellent Speer/Kheiriddin morning diversion.


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Aug 2022)

rmc_wannabe said:


> I think PP's main problem is that he is trying to win the Party, without a plan to win the country.


I have been trying to be positive and look for some patterns that would indicate some kind of well-played pivot from party campaigning to a win-capable leader and still having trouble seeing it.  Maybe it’s just me, but maybe not just me. 




rmc_wannabe said:


> The same thing happened in the NDP. Singh was touted as the new face to lead the NDP into a second Orange Crush, with massive party support for his Leadership bid. He instead has fallen flat with Canadians and the NDP is suffering for it.


The tailored suits, Rolexes and flashy BMW Z4 convertible certainly didn’t help…

I believe that Trudeau’s days are numbered and that aside from a lame attempt over the next 38 months to generate some kind of self-aggrandizing virtuous legacy followed by some modern day equivalent of his dad’s “walk out in the snowfall” such as a mindful surf along the Tofino beachfront after which he will tearfully wish Canadians well as he ‘takes time now with my family…’, leaving the CPC to deal with a fresh(ish) face (Vegas bookmakers probably supporting Chrystia Freeland) that will likely pose a greater challenge to the CPC than a decade-in-office JT…


----------



## IKnowNothing (17 Aug 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> leaving the CPC to deal with a fresh(ish) face (Vegas bookmakers probably supporting Chrystia Freeland) that will likely pose a greater challenge to the CPC than a decade-in-office JT…


Smarter play would be Carney in my opinion


----------



## Halifax Tar (17 Aug 2022)

I have never met PP in person.  But I have been over his website, and his WIKI... 

I'm not sure what others find so distasteful.  He's defiantly a "gotcha" tactic guy using social media, but so are all the others; that's politics these days.  He wasn't my first choice in party elections, but his positions on different topics are either aligned with mine or close enough.


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Aug 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Smarter play would be Carney in my opinion


Agree, personally, but the Cult of Personality wants to take “Because it’s 2015!” and raise it up a notch to “Because it’s 2025!” (To have the first _elected_ woman PM).


----------



## Remius (17 Aug 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Smarter play would be Carney in my opinion


Could be but that would be a possible Ignatieff situation.  I like Anand.  But the LPC is short on adults in the room as well.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Aug 2022)

> Symptoms of a populace who is either disinterested or distrustful of the political class.



People trusting the ruling class has never been common.  So much time is wasted discussing ways to making voting more "fair" (usually, majoritarian) by people who resent the choices the majority of the people make.


----------



## Kirkhill (17 Aug 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> Caution ... Geezer eruption!
> 
> I share the opinion of the _*Good Grey Globe*_'s Editorial Board.
> 
> ...



Sorry to say that I am one of those that still think that Trump was the least worst.  And a necessary hand grenade.

Trump's great crime in the eyes of many, was to meet illiberalism with illiberalism, to apply Alinsky's rules of the Left against the Left. This was not gentlemanly or sporting and had nothing to do with the Marquess of Queensberry (just down the road from Ayr in Galloway).  It had everything to do with a Brooklyn Donnybrook.  And he was up for it.

That made him attractive to many of the general population who the gentle set found too odoriferous.

The peculiarity in all of this is that those same people would have voted for Bernie if he had  been on the ballot.  

The Donald and Bernie are two sides of the same coin.  A coin that the Beltway couldn't accept.

Do I like the Donald? 

A better question is Do I like the Establishment?


----------



## blacktriangle (17 Aug 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I have never met PP in person.  But I have been over his website, and his WIKI...
> 
> I'm not sure what others find so distasteful.  He's defiantly a "gotcha" tactic guy using social media, but so are all the others; that's politics these days.  He wasn't my first choice in party elections, but his positions on different topics are either aligned with mine or close enough.


I live on the western edge of Ottawa. Pierre is my MP. 

Do I agree with him on everything? No. Has he taken the time to speak with me in person? Yes. Do I feel like he represents my interests (and more importantly, *the national interest*) better than the alternatives? Yes.

As I grow older, I realize that I believe in *Liberalism*. Why then, do I not feel, that I should vote for the Liberal Party of Canada?

My family came here generations ago as poor immigrants. At least three generations have answered the call to serve this country. And we would do so again, if need be. Canada has given us a chance to prosper, and for that, we are grateful. And we want nothing less for other families - be they long established Canadians, or newcomers. 

So, if there is a better alternative to a PM Pierre Poilievre, perhaps someone could clue me in?


----------



## RangerRay (17 Aug 2022)

blacktriangle said:


> As I grow older, I realize that I believe in *Liberalism*. Why then, do I not feel, that I should vote for the Liberal Party of Canada?


The way I see it, all the main parties are moving away from liberalism to illiberalism.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (17 Aug 2022)

RangerRay said:


> The way I see it, all the main parties are moving away from liberalism to illiberalism.


A few posts up I made a comment about Canadians as a whole live in the Centre and want to have 2 parties that essentially are the same; that way, when they're sick of one, they can swap to the other. 

This is why the PPC and NDP are such paper tigers. It's Red or Blue in some variance and will be until the end of days. The problem  becomes when either party strays too far from that centre in either direction. The LPC is drifting left much to the national detriment and the CPC is drifting right much to their own detriment. 

Unless PP et al can convince voters that they are basically a more fiscally responsible LPC, they won't get the popular support needed to govern.


----------



## IKnowNothing (18 Aug 2022)

Remius said:


> O’toole’s mistake was that it was blatant.


I don't even know if his "mistake" had anything to do with the shift. He won the popular vote despite losing a lot of pandemic voters to the PPC. 

I'd say his mistake was underestimating how ready the party base was to break "free" once the perceived threat was past.  He had to thread a very narrow needle respecting the need for pandemic measures throughout the threat time but aggressively calling Trudeau out for politicizing the end stages to divide and alienate people. 

And given that he was ousted by caucus, not the base, it's likely that biggest mistake wasn't even public facing policy ,it was underestimating PP's ambition and opportunism re: the above


----------



## Good2Golf (18 Aug 2022)

Interesting take by Michelle Rempel-Garner on PP and whether Trudeau may call a fall election to avoid his own ousting from the LPC.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1559977202275467264


----------



## mariomike (18 Aug 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> But Donald J Trump is a reprehensible human being and a disgrace to the party that nominated him for high office.





Edward Campbell said:


> Many Canadian Conservatives support _Trumpian_ tactics.



Nice.  

Sarcasm emoji


----------



## RangerRay (18 Aug 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Interesting take by Michelle Rempel-Garner on PP and whether Trudeau may call a fall election to avoid his own ousting from the LPC.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1559977202275467264


Between the lines, I am seeing Rempel-Garner has made peace with a Pollievre victory.


----------



## Remius (18 Aug 2022)

RangerRay said:


> Between the lines, I am seeing Rempel-Garner has made peace with a Pollievre victory.


Was my take as well.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (18 Aug 2022)

RangerRay said:


> Between the lines, I am seeing Rempel-Garner has made peace with a Pollievre victory.


Unfortunate, really. I would have loved to see her as CPC Leader


----------



## Edward Campbell (18 Aug 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Sorry to say that* I am one of those that still think that Trump was the least worst.*  And a necessary hand grenade.
> ...


Me, too, as I said, above. But I also said, 2016, that I thought he was a dumbarsed buffoon. I recall a meme on social media ... it showed a country roadside, there were three signs: *Vote for Hillary* on the left, *Vote for Trump* on the right and, in the middle, a sign advertising Firewood. The caption said "_America is saved! We have a choice! Vote for Firewood on November 8th_*!*" Firewood would have gotten my vote, for sure, if I'd had one.


----------



## Halifax Tar (18 Aug 2022)

rmc_wannabe said:


> Unfortunate, really. I would have loved to see her as CPC Leader



Canada needs, is crying out for Rona Ambrose.  Unfortunately for us I think she sees politics as a juice not worth the squeeze anymore.


----------



## Good2Golf (18 Aug 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Canada needs, is crying out for Rona Ambrose.  Unfortunately for us I think she sees politics as a juice not worth the squeeze anymore.


Agree.  I’ve spoken with her on a number of occasions and she is incredibly intelligent and approachable/relatable.  Last time I spoke with her, I got the vibe that she was definitely ready for (and deserving of) a break, but no doubt she would have made an incredible PM!


----------



## Quirky (18 Aug 2022)

blacktriangle said:


> So, if there is a better alternative to a PM Pierre Poilievre, perhaps someone could clue me in?



There isn't.


----------



## brihard (20 Aug 2022)

Oof. Aaaand Poilievre met with and was photographed shaking hands with Jeremy MacKenzie… That’s not a good look. Even Charest is going after him already, and the Liberals haven’t even started yet.


----------



## IKnowNothing (20 Aug 2022)

brihard said:


> Oof. Aaaand Poilievre met with and was photographed shaking hands with Jeremy MacKenzie… That’s not a good look. Even Charest is going after him already, and the Liberals haven’t even started yet.


He does not look happy that that moment happened/ was photographed. Makes for a tight rope to walk to not have to choose between undecided moderates and the ppc votes he was trying to court back


----------



## brihard (20 Aug 2022)

Indeed. This will be where a lot of normal Canadians learn who MacKenzie is and the things he’s done and said.

I buy Poilievre’s statement that he didn’t know who he was, and the ‘shaken tens of thousands of hands’ thing. But this is the sort of individual where if you get photographed shaking his hand, a subsequent clear and specific denunciation is probably called for. This is gonna be one of those super awkward things that dogs Poilievre for a while.


----------



## IKnowNothing (21 Aug 2022)

brihard said:


> Indeed. This will be where a lot of normal Canadians learn who MacKenzie is and the things he’s done and said.
> 
> I buy Poilievre’s statement that he didn’t know who he was, and the ‘shaken tens of thousands of hands’ thing. But this is the sort of individual where if you get photographed shaking his hand, a subsequent clear and specific denunciation is probably called for. This is gonna be one of those super awkward things that dogs Poilievre for a while.


Yup.  Whether truthful or not, thats a reasonable statement, and that reasonableness makes the handshake pretty small potatos. But petulantly refusing to put on his big boy pants and make a clear statement  is far more damning


----------



## Edward Campbell (21 Aug 2022)

Then there's this: 



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561108521650774016
The guy says he "trolled" Poilievre on purpose to help the PPC.


----------



## TacticalTea (28 Aug 2022)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1562550141546278913

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1563990649200050176
These are the sort of statements that I wanted to hear from PP.

Happy he's moving in that direction. As late and as little as it may be, it does make me more comfortable voting (a certain shade of) blue in the next election.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (29 Aug 2022)

My wife wanted to meet PP this morning when he was in North Van. So she met him and told him that she voted for him in the party election, but as a immigrant who can't have dual nationality she can't vote in the election. She told him she can't lose her Malay citizenship because the healthcare system here is so unreliable and slow compared to her home country. She utterly despises JT and what he is doing to this country. It reminds her to much of what corrupt politicians have done to her country.


----------



## Halifax Tar (30 Aug 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> My wife wanted to meet PP this morning when he was in North Van. So she met him and told him that she voted for him in the party election, but as a immigrant who can't have dual nationality she can't vote in the election. She told him she can't lose her Malay citizenship because the healthcare system here is so unreliable and slow compared to her home country. She utterly despises JT and what he is doing to this country. It reminds her to much of what corrupt politicians have done to her country.



I have to admit, I would much prefer a Rona Ambrose, but PP is growing on me.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Aug 2022)

I was going with Jean Charest, but some of the stuff released by his team in my email soured me. Disagreeing with your opponent in your own party is one thing. But gutter level attacks are another. I would go with Rona in a heartbeat and I was tempted with Leslyn Lewis, but fear that she is not ready to beat JT, but she was my second pick.


----------



## Remius (30 Aug 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> I was going with Jean Charest, but some of the stuff released by his team in my email soured me. Disagreeing with your opponent in your own party is one thing. But gutter level attacks are another. I would go with Rona in a heartbeat and I was tempted with Leslyn Lewis, but fear that she is not ready to beat JT, but she was my second pick.


Charest was my first choice followed by atchison.  

Agreed with the gutter level stuff though which is why PP was never going to be on my ballot. 

Rona would be a good choice but she’s smart enough to stay the eff away from the train wreck this party seems to be becoming.  I’d vote for her.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> What the AF is up with people spreading a conspiracy theory about GoC wanting to push cricket protein? And being encouraged by Cheryl Gallant (MP and lifelong oxygen thief) and Leslyn Lewis?
> 
> I just can't even deal with that level of stupidity. It's at best a novelty snack (and honestly is a bit like popcorn) but just because someone built a large plant to supply crickets for pet food, doesn't mean it's suddenly going to be turned into t-bones. The vegetable based meat substitutes and lab grown meat have been trying for years with no real impact, so I don't see how that's going to be feasible.
> 
> ...


Problem is that it is hard to tell if one is an oddball story or a shaping operation. Lets be honest, there is a whole host of people on the left that are anti-meat and anti-domestic animals/ranching. So switching protein from animals to insects, is well within the gambit for portions of the left. How would you do that? By "normalising the concept", it's a bit like 1984, "We have always eaten insects". the best part is there is truth behind it, but not the truth that some would like to grow it to.


----------



## Halifax Tar (31 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> What the AF is up with people spreading a conspiracy theory about GoC wanting to push cricket protein? And being encouraged by Cheryl Gallant (MP and lifelong oxygen thief) and Leslyn Lewis?
> 
> I just can't even deal with that level of stupidity. It's at best a novelty snack (and honestly is a bit like popcorn) but just because someone built a large plant to supply crickets for pet food, doesn't mean it's suddenly going to be turned into t-bones. The vegetable based meat substitutes and lab grown meat have been trying for years with no real impact, so I don't see how that's going to be feasible.
> 
> ...



Probably has to do with these: 









						Canadian government invests $8.5 million in insect production
					

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada will help support the construction of Aspire’s insect production facility to spur the development of sustainable human and pet foods.




					www.petfoodprocessing.net
				






			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/london-ontario-cricket-factory-1.6562083


----------



## FSTO (31 Aug 2022)

I'm not an advocate for the factory pig industry at all, but our grasslands (which is in more danger than the Amazon of disappearing) requires grazing animals (a lot of them) to thrive. Since the Bison are not going to be reintroduced on a large scale, cattle will have to do. This was proved when Grasslands National Park was established. Initially Parks Canada tossed out the cattle because of policy, but they realized after a couple of years that the ecosystem was suffering. When they looked at the neighbouring ranches and discovered a thriving ecosystem they reversed their policy.

Long winded to say that if we want to save the largest and most diverse ecosystem we need to eat meat!


----------



## QV (31 Aug 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Probably has to do with these:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So is it still a conspiracy? I'm going to wait for Navy_Pete to opine on the "level of stupidity" he feels about some people who are not in favor of the government investment to grow insects for consumption.

I think the biggest issue with "the divide" in our political discourse is that both sides are only getting half the story.


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2022)

As Centre Ice group drops 'Conservative' from name, where are moderate Tories to go?
					

An advocacy group started by centrist Conservatives to provide more of a voice to the political middle has dropped the party's name to expand its base.




					www.ctvnews.ca
				




This is a group I can get behind and hope gains more traction.


----------



## Navy_Pete (31 Aug 2022)

@QV pretty easily using math; annual meat consumption in Canada is somewhere around 3 million metric tonnes. This plant's max output is 9000 metric tonnes. At 0.03% of the overall annual consumption it would be, *at best,* a novelty food for a very small minority of people.

In reality, the focus is for pet food, either as live crickets or as a protein additive, so if they did sell some for human consumption, it would be an even smaller fraction of a fraction of a percent.

I'm sure if they can sell some for people to eat for a premium, they'll be happy to, but that's not a sound business model. It's a good line to sell to the GoC to get funding though to get points for being 'innovative and green', but if they ever had any intention of going through that they already abandoned it as not worth the hassle. Creating some new agri-manufacturing jobs and cutting down on supply chain distance is never a bad thing though, and there are already oxygen thieves sitting as MPs that have cost far more than $8.5M.

People have been eating bugs for millennia, and things like toasted crickets are widely available as a novelty snack all over the place, with various bug cooking festivals (aka *Entomophagy*) have been in around since at least the 80s. And outside North America, not uncommon, but Canadians are soft AF so it's not exactly a growth market, especially when you can just eat beans etc if you want to cut down on protein from meat. I've tried bugs before, and actually were pretty tasty if you can get past the ick factor, but still would rather just have some chick peas or something.

With the horribly overprocessed things people do eat (like hotdogs) crickets are probably a lot healthier anyway though, but thinking that a single small plant is going to replace the entire beef industry which is valued at around $22 billion per year is pretty clown shoes. Especially when the meat replacements like the lab grown meat have a much higher price point and potential to make cash if they can scale it up.

So yes, the GoC providing money for someone to start a plant is true, but believing that means they want all Canadians to switch to crickets does require a certain suspension of disbelief normally reserved for cartoons if you look at it in context of the output vs actual annual consumption. 

But the best stories start with a grain of truth I guess, if you want to sell someone a bunch of BS. But sure, this is all a Machivellian plot to do blah blah blah, from the same crew you are also saying has no idea what is going on and is massively incompetent. I mean, they are either evil geniuses with a cunning plan or useless oxygen thieves; you can't claim they are both concurrently.


----------



## Brad Sallows (31 Aug 2022)

The thing about moving the Overton Window for a subject is that you have to start somewhere.


----------



## Kirkhill (31 Aug 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> @QV pretty easily using math; annual meat consumption in Canada is somewhere around 3 million metric tonnes. This plant's max output is 9000 metric tonnes. At 0.03% of the overall annual consumption it would be, *at best,* a novelty food for a very small minority of people.
> 
> In reality, the focus is for pet food, either as live crickets or as a protein additive, so if they did sell some for human consumption, it would be an even smaller fraction of a fraction of a percent.
> 
> ...



One fishmeal plant in Dutch Harbor swallows 1000 metric tonnes of fish per day.  There were 4 plants of that size in the vicinity.

Alberta slaughters 50,000 head of beef a week at about half a tonne each. Call it 25,000 tonnes of beef per week or about 5,000 tonnes a day.

9000 tonnes of crickets = a couple of days run of fish in Dutch or cattle in Alberta (2 main plants).

There has been some talk of alternate proteins to feed fish and cattle and raising insects to that end might not be a bad thing.  A bit grubby mind.

As to the overprocessed foods I can categorically state that the most overprocessed foods on the market are the meat and dairy substitutes made from pea proteins etc.  They are triumphs of the Food Scientists art.  I am personally acquaint with people who, like me, are retiring, and who wrote graduate theses on the imminence of the pea protein revolution and the replacement of the meat industry.  The Foodie version of the Fusion reactor.

The problem is that for every westerner that discovers the wonders of tofu there seems to be ten Chinese willing to chow down on a nice red steak or well grilled pork chop.


----------



## Brad Sallows (1 Sep 2022)

Yeah, don't underestimate foreign markets.  Apparently they're at least partly responsible for why my favourite brands are sometimes hard to find at liquor stores.


----------



## Navy_Pete (1 Sep 2022)

@Kirkhill agree, it's really a pretty insignificant in the overall picture, particularly when the meat industry is subsidized with billions each year, but I'd be surprised if their actual output from this plant had more than a few hundred pounds going towards people wanting to try it, with the rest going for feeding fish, reptiles and other pet foods. If the government really wanted to get rid of beef, they would simply stop subsidizing it and consumption would fall off when most people can't afford it.

The Canadian diet is completely unsustainable for the global population and we're actually the outliers, so who knows where things are going. In living memory lobster went from a nuisance catch that only the dirt poor would eat to an expensive luxury food, so maybe they just need to add garlic butter. I still won't eat a bottom dwelling sea bug that flourishes down current from sewage outflow pipes, but lots of people do.

There have been people trying to get eating insects to catch on in Canada for decades, and still a really niche thing that people will try to say they tried it (which is all I did). They were pretty tasty to be honest, and it's totally normal in some countries, but it's not like anyone is being forced.

Maybe one day things like cricket flour will be mainstream (instead of a niche product), but it's pretty easy to grab a bag of beans or chick peas and whip up some tasty and balanced vegetarian meals if cost is an issue, and is a lot better for you than a bowl of instant ramen. People have all kinds of fad diets, and if someone decides they want to add in a whack of bug protein, then great for them. Vegetarianism has been around for millennia and that still hasn't made a dent in Canadian eating habits either.

All that to say, this going from a random PA announcement to plug 'investing in a community' and 'creating jobs' turning into some kind of insidious plan is pretty crazy. Those announcements are pretty empty and meaningless, and the only difference between governments on doing them is the colour theme of the letterhead. You are pretty lucky if the actual content of it is half right, and someone doesn't inject some random words so it sounds better (and becomes factually incorrect).


----------



## SeaKingTacco (1 Sep 2022)

Pete, I come from a long line of cattle farmers/beef producers. Could you explain how the meat industry is ”subsidized with billions each year”, because we certainly never saw any of that money….


----------



## Remius (1 Sep 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Pete, I come from a long line of cattle farmers/beef producers. Could you explain how the meat industry is ”subsidized with billions each year”, because we certainly never saw any of that money….


Some sources peg it at 2 Billion a year.  That would include dairy, poultry, cattle etc etc. 

Apparently it’s all on the agriculture Canada website.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (1 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Some sources peg it at 2 Billion a year.  That would include dairy, poultry, cattle etc etc.
> 
> Apparently it’s all on the agriculture Canada website.


So, by that standard, virtually every industry in Canada is subsidized…


----------



## FSTO (1 Sep 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Pete, I come from a long line of cattle farmers/beef producers. Could you explain how the meat industry is ”subsidized with billions each year”, because we certainly never saw any of that money….


My family as well. 
I'm trying to think about the big cheques from the government that my brother cashes every year from his herd of cattle? 
Nope, not one.

Does the various levels of government donate to livestock associations? More than likely.
Do municipalities give tax breaks to processors to set up their plants? Sure, but so does Amazon, MEC, Auto industry, wind farms and every other bloody thing.

Also that price of meat at the store? Well the rancher or feedlot operator ain't getting that sort of markup, not by a damn site. Cargill and the Weston Families are the ones you go after.

My brother will sell you a side of beef, cut and wrapped for $5.00 per lb. (he's likely just breaking even after he pays the butcher).

Now if you want to talk subsidies, go after dairy.


----------



## Remius (1 Sep 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> So, by that standard, virtually every industry in Canada is subsidized


Agriculture Canada has the numbers.   Just pointing where you can find the numbers. It also has the various programs one can apply for and how to qualify for them.  

I’m not making any arguments about whatever the argument is.


----------



## FSTO (1 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Apparently it’s all on the agriculture Canada website.


Link?


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Sep 2022)

FSTO said:


> Now if you want to talk subsidies, go after dairy.


Hey, let’s keep the subsidies discussion to just billions, not trillions… 😉


----------



## SeaKingTacco (1 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Hey, let’s keep the discussion to just billions, not trillions… 😉


Good point about the Dairy industry being subsidized, which also indirectly subsidizes the beef industry. Each milk cow has to have a calf per year. Statistically, 50% of them will be males, which are of no use in a dairy, so they get sold to eventually be butchered…


----------



## IKnowNothing (1 Sep 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Good point about the Dairy industry being subsidized, which also indirectly subsidizes the beef industry. Each milk cow has to have a calf per year. Statistically, 50% of them will be males, which are of no use in a dairy, so they get sold to eventually be butchered…


There's also upstream subsidies that keep the cost of inputs down, tax breaks on fuel, parts etc- varies by region.

It's definitely a touchy subject, but coming from a (crown deeded) 6th gen family farm, there's definitely a discussion to be had on the present and future of agriculture, Canadian food consumption habits, and the economic accuracy and viability of both.  I'm only 30, and in my active memory there has been a massive shift. The family farm is largely dead, the industry is rife with externalized cost and almost entirely under corporate influence. 

 I'm no bleeding heart environmentalist, but there's something to be said for us eating less meat at a higher price, raised in a better way with more money going direct to smaller farms.


----------



## Remius (1 Sep 2022)

FSTO said:


> Link?


To agriculture Canada? 






						Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada - agriculture.canada.ca
					






					agriculture.canada.ca
				



Also:  Grants, Subsidies and Contributions - Agriculture

But even easier is to just google it.  Plenty of sources pointing to about the same number.  2 Billion or so.

My guess is that the bulk of it goes to large farming corporations but I don’t really know enough about it.


----------



## Brad Sallows (1 Sep 2022)

> more money going direct to smaller farms.



Why?  Are they more efficient?

Everyone gets a little "richer" when we get more for less, not when we get less for more.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (1 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> I'm no bleeding heart environmentalist, but there's something to be said for us eating less meat at a higher price, raised in a better way with more money going direct to smaller farms.


I was buying a 1/4 of a bison from my cousin until recently. The herd broke through a fence and ate water hemlock, so he lost a chunk of his herd.


----------



## IKnowNothing (1 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Why?  Are they more efficient?
> 
> Everyone gets a little "richer" when we get more for less, not when we get less for more.


Cut out corporate middle men.

Gotta ask, why do you consistently fail to quote people properly?


----------



## IKnowNothing (1 Sep 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> I was buying a 1/4 of a bison from my cousin until recently. The herd broke through a fence and ate water hemlock, so he lost a chunk of his herd.


That sucks.
I generally do two beef quarters a year direct, sprinkle the rest between 3 locally owned, operated, and sourced, butcher shops/ abattoirs.   Might cut out the quarters, source is close to retirement and freezer is close to EOL


----------



## Colin Parkinson (1 Sep 2022)

There is a shortage of abattoirs in BC from what I have heard. We do need to encourage the small scale niche businesses to have a robust system, both in the food and lumber market. Government trend to support large corporation as they are easier to police than a whole group of small independents. The large corporations lobby politicians to encourage this.


----------



## IKnowNothing (1 Sep 2022)

Same in Ontario.  Lots of places still set up to cut, fewer and fewer licensed kill floors.


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Sep 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Pete, I come from a long line of cattle farmers/beef producers. Could you explain how the meat industry is ”subsidized with billions each year”, because we certainly never saw any of that money….


Average of just under $3B/year from government programs for the past 10 years if one believes deep-state statisticians @ Stats Can - spreadsheet here for those inclined.  

Zackly where the $ goes?  Good question ...


----------



## FSTO (1 Sep 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> Average of just under $3B/year from government programs for the past 10 years if one believes deep-state statisticians @ Stats Can - spreadsheet here for those inclined.
> 
> Zackly where the $ goes?  Good question ...


Now are these direct subsidies that go into someone's hands or are they a laundry list of insurance (crop insurance for instance) low interest loans, and check offs. Also is that 3billion just for beef cattle or is that all livestock put together?


----------



## Brad Sallows (1 Sep 2022)

> Gotta ask, why do you consistently fail to quote people properly?



Quoted what you wrote, which didn't mention "corporate middle men".


----------



## Navy_Pete (1 Sep 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Pete, I come from a long line of cattle farmers/beef producers. Could you explain how the meat industry is ”subsidized with billions each year”, because we certainly never saw any of that money….



It's definitely a touchy one, and don't think the bulk of it goes to family farms. Some economists also include things like tax breaks etc as subsidies. I don't have an issue with any of that, and generally prefer to buy from the farmers if I can. It's a tough life and can get wiped out by one or two bad years.

I think food stability is potentially a genuine national security issue, so have no problem at all in Canada doing all kinds of things to make sure Canada is self sufficient and can feed ourselves, and if we can produce an excess and export, then great. We are fortunate to have a lot of land that is a lot more productive for raising livestock than growing crops.

I do think we should really put a hard stop on converting farm land into housing; going around Niagara there is a massive amount of prime farmland that has been lost forever to McMansions, but given how hard scrabble farming can be for so little return, don't blame the farmers at all for selling it off.

In general, I think it would make sense if we can do more to help make the actual farmers make more money, with reasonable profits along the chain, but really don't know enough about any of that to have a suggestion to do it. So makes sense for the governent (at whatever level) to do things like give grants/loans to farmers, as well as to the processing/distribution side of the house so we stay self sufficient. With changing climate and population densities though, doesn't hurt to diversify things either, so investing in things like the vertical aquaculture etc that isn't weather dependent builds in a lot of resiliency into the supply chain.


----------



## FSTO (1 Sep 2022)

^^
Canola Oil, Canada usually ships every kernel of access canola seed to China for processing. But after the latest skullduggery from China, there has been a big push to do more processing in Canada. There are currently two large processing plants in the Regina area being built. Once completed their addition will ensure that pretty much all canola production will be processed in Canada. 

Agree with your assessment that urban sprawl needs to stop and like right now.

There is no way a kid can get into large scale grain farming unless they have a Saudi Prince as a backer.

Cattle ranching is almost as tough. Land, equipment and cattle are massive costs.


----------



## Brad Sallows (1 Sep 2022)

Corporations allow people to specialize, and allow people to concentrate investment capital without unlimited risk.

Weigh those two things against the factors cited as difficulties forming a "family farm".


----------



## FSTO (1 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Corporations allow people to specialize, and allow people to concentrate investment capital without unlimited risk.
> 
> Weigh those two things against the factors cited as difficulties forming a "family farm".


Honestly most corporate farms are family operations that incorporated to allow succession planning. Basically (and being a bit sexist here) Dad is the CEO of Maple Valley Land and Cattle Company Inc., Mom is the CAO. Child #1 wants to become CEO but wants to make sure Mom and Dad have a comfortable retirement. The process is a lifelong journey.


----------



## Navy_Pete (1 Sep 2022)

Interesting series of op-eds over on the left leaning Guardian, but this one seems topical. There is a running thread on holistic farming practices I think which is similar to this. I guess like anything, healthy mix of things in moderation, and raises lots of good points about what could potentially happen if we start relying on patented lab grown food products.

Unfortunately this kind of detail is usually absent in policy debates on the politics side, but I think there are lots of benefits to balanced agriculture, so government investment and support to all the streams can help encourage things from getting stuck on just a single way of doing things or focus on a single crop. I think it was bananas that almost got wiped out because a single variety is used and a disease popped up, and coffee is another one.

Eating meat isn’t a crime against the planet – if it’s done right | Thomasina Miers



> Eating meat isn’t a crime against the planet – if it’s done right​Thomasina Miers
> 
> 
> George Monbiot criticised ‘chefs and foodies’ like me for focusing on regenerative grazing. But alternative, lab-grown foods, could have terrible consequences
> ...


----------



## lenaitch (1 Sep 2022)

This is a US site but an interesting comparison of what the farmer getd for products we see everyday:









						Farmer’s Share
					

The Farmer’s Share Did you know that farmers and ranchers receive only 14.3* cents of every dollar that consumers spend on food at home and away from home? According to USDA, off-farm costs, …




					nfu.org


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Sep 2022)

lenaitch said:


> This is a US site but an interesting comparison of what the farmer getd for products we see everyday:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The short form of that table is that the more shelf stable a product is the more the farmer makes - see carrots vs lettuce.  Carrots store easily.  Lettuce wilts within hours.  The cost of transporting lettuce, and the wastage in transport is high.

The other point is the amount of processing.  Chickens generate more saleable product than beef.  You can buy a whole roaster.  Few people buy a whole steer.  The slicing and dicing costs money and generates waste. 

The final point is the amount of water.  I am not sure just how much a farmer contributes to a bottle of club soda.  In my experience that would be virtually nil.   For something that is 100% water I cant see why the farmer would get anything.   On the other hand if you are talking about something that is 10% sugar and 90% water  ... the sugar farmer seems to be getting a fair return.

Making food available costs money.  A lot of it.

Retail margins in the food industry are typically in the sub 5% range.


----------



## Remius (1 Sep 2022)

So back to the leadership race. 









						Pierre Poilievre promises new law against government jargon
					

Pierre Poilievre is promising to enact what he calls the 'Plain Language Law,' which he says would bring an end to government jargon, including in legislative documents.




					www.ctvnews.ca
				




Will be interesting to see how that works…


----------



## Navy_Pete (1 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> So back to the leadership race.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


TBS has actually had that policy in place for a long time. They are actually one of the worst for jargon and bureaucratese.

I'm a huge fan of keeping things free from unnecessary jargon, but that can be a real problem when you get into writing laws and regulation on very specific topics, where the terms have a very specific meaning.

This would be great but I think it has to be done carefully so you get rid of BS but don't simplify things to the point where people can drive a truck through it.

On the flip side trying to do plain language contracting is an exercise in futility if you can't get lawyers on board, but that costs the taxpayer a lot of money as the terms and conditions can be totally unenforceable because no one understands what it means.


----------



## Remius (1 Sep 2022)

Sure, but will be interesting to see if he can write a law without legalese…


----------



## IKnowNothing (1 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Sure, but will be interesting to see if he can write a law without legalese…


----------



## rmc_wannabe (1 Sep 2022)

I'm sure the Attorney General, the SCC, and many other legal bodies that would need to oversee/enforce that law might feel....well...differently about it.


----------



## Remius (1 Sep 2022)

rmc_wannabe said:


> I'm sure the Attorney General, the SCC, and many other legal bodies that would need to oversee/enforce that law might feel....well...differently about it.


As an accountant friend of mine said to me:  good luck with the income tax act.


----------



## Navy_Pete (2 Sep 2022)

I think a much cleaner way would be to have plain language guides to complement things, and generally the websites do a pretty good job of that.

A lot of his ideas seem similar; they seem like great ideas if you aren't familiar with the subject or don't think about it too much, but won't work in practical terms.

So sure, get rid of BS like 'maximizing efficiencies with stakeholders', but you will need to keep the accurate technical language for precision and clarity for the majority of laws, acts and regulations. They aren't necessarily supposed to be clear for everyone, just the intended users. Sometimes those intended users are SMEs.

If he wants laws drafted to the same level of simple language used to brief politicians, it will be down to 4th grade level, and frequently wrong.


----------



## QV (2 Sep 2022)

The attacks on PP are getting weaker. 









						Conservative leadership race descends into argument over Nanaimo bars
					

It all started Monday when leadership frontrunner Pierre Poilievre posted a video with Katrina, a Nanaimo woman who presented him with a box of Nanaimo bars




					nationalpost.com


----------



## brihard (2 Sep 2022)

QV said:


> The attacks on PP are getting weaker.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, that’s kind of up there with “Chretien’s helmet on backwards”. A slightly embarrassing gaffe, but I doubt anyone is seriously concerned about whether PP knows what goes into baking Nanaimo Bars. I suspect it’s more reflective of it having been a restively quieter few weeks in Canadian politics.

Parliament resumes in two weeks and I’m sure the theatrics and silliness will resume, while we wait to see what the autumn’s big controversy will be.


----------



## Remius (2 Sep 2022)

QV said:


> The attacks on PP are getting weaker.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Demonstrates the state of the CPC right now.  Good luck to PP in trying to unite it.


----------



## Remius (4 Sep 2022)

Current aggregate polling as the CPC closes in on selecting a leader.









						338Canada Canada | Poll Analysis & Electoral Projections
					






					www.338canada.com


----------



## TacticalTea (5 Sep 2022)

brihard said:


> Yeah, that’s kind of up there with “Chretien’s helmet on backwards”. A slightly embarrassing gaffe, but I doubt anyone is seriously concerned about whether PP knows what goes into baking Nanaimo Bars. I suspect it’s more reflective of it having been a restively quieter few weeks in Canadian politics.
> 
> Parliament resumes in two weeks and I’m sure the theatrics and silliness will resume, while we wait to see what the autumn’s big controversy will be.


I watched the video. It didn't seem to me that he was saying Nanaimo bars are made with flour.

Just that flour, an important ingredient - amongst others - for the baker standing next to him who also happens to bake nanaimo bars, has gotten substantially more expensive.


----------



## IKnowNothing (8 Sep 2022)

ArmyRick said:


> PP on the other hand (why do people think he is a poor choice? Totally think people who say that are closet liberal apologist or NDP IMO) speaks very clearly on financial management, basic economics,



In general terms, he has no platform- I don't trust that.   I don't see a vision for the country. I don't see a cogent plan with concrete, sensible, and implementable solutions to get us from here to an (as yet undefined) there

 I see a collection of marketing slogans that resonate, with an unending barrage of pithy soundbites and fire and forget "ideas", with no structure or substance binding the two together or him to plan he has to defend.  

I see a finance critic with no education or experience in finance, business, or economics.

I see a career MP campaigning as an outsider.

He may speak clearly on financial management and basic economics, but he does so in a way that often contradictory, misapplied, or superficial to the point of uselessness. 

For example:  Interest Rate Jacked While JustinFlation Forces Canadians To Take On More Debt Just To Get By
"I have a “common cents” plan to fight JustinFlation. As Prime Minister, I will

Axe the carbon tax;    (*I thought government spending got us into this? Tax reduction and spending have the same net impact. Reducing cost on an inelastic good frees more money to bid up elastic goods)*
End the money-printing deficits;  (*Good plan long term,  but what does this do for the supply side drivers of current inflation that those involved in manufacturing/ supply chain have been experiencing since Q2 2021?)*
Restore the Bank of Canada’s independence with a Governor who will fight inflation;"  (_*You meann by further rising interest rates, the action that catalyzed this hollow grievance piece?)*_


Harper may have endorsed him, but he's no Harper.


----------



## Lumber (8 Sep 2022)

ArmyRick said:


> PP on the other hand (why do people think he is a poor choice? Totally think people who say that are closet liberal apologist or NDP IMO)


Call me an elitist, but I do think that those with the right formal education combined with experience in the real world make better leaders. Skippy's has decent education for the job (international relations), but has no real world experience. 

That being said, most of his positions would actually seem to be desirable to centrists (blue liberals and red Tories). He policies espouse fiscal responsibility, and he has no interest in opening any doors wrt social conservatism. Great!

The thing I think turns a lot of people off is that he is kind of like Joe Rogan. He might not share unsavory opinions, but he has no qualms about giving a platform (or outright support) for those with unsavory opinions. There is a lot of anger toward Trudeau, and a lot of it is justified, but a lot of the hooting and hollering is not based on actual facts (i.e. people complaining and blaming Trudeau for things Trudeau has nothing to do with). He should just stay away from those discussions/those people and keep his focus and energy on attacking Trudeau/LPC for the things they are actually responsible for. 

Oh, and stupid slogans like "JustinFlation", like grow the f*** up and be serious for a minute.


----------



## QV (8 Sep 2022)

Comparing PP to one of the most popular podcasters in the world is not going to turn out to be a negative...  

I'd suggest coining the name Justinflation is rather witty. A damn site better than just calling people who oppose you racists.


----------



## Navy_Pete (8 Sep 2022)

QV said:


> Comparing PP to one of the most popular podcasters in the world is not going to turn out to be a negative...
> 
> I'd suggest coining the name Justinflation is rather witty. A damn site better than just calling people who oppose you racists.


Justinflation doesn't even really make sense, given that Canada has lower inflation than the US and most of Europe. The countries that are doing better tend to have much more tightly controlled economies where inflation is being artificially repressed. So if the current government is doing better than average, without being communist, what exactly is the plan to have lower inflation?

Inflation Rate  - G20 - By Country

We aren't an outlier here, but if you look at the UK, where the neo-Thatcher market force types are planning a $130B GBP utility relief cap, I don't see anyone with ideas to lower inflation by being more hands off.

Witty names with no real plan to do things differently is still the same hot air BS he is accusing JT of. If we are going to change the GoC, I would prefer it to be more than a swap of billboard colours and hairstyles.


----------



## Remius (8 Sep 2022)

I’ll wait until he’s officially the leader and what his policies beyond his current sloganism looks like. 

But my hopes are far from high…


----------



## IKnowNothing (8 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Witty names with no real plan to do things differently is still the same hot air BS he is accusing JT of. If we are going to change the GoC, I would prefer it to be more than a swap of billboard colours and hairstyles.


The two are more alike than any of PP's backers want to admit.  I want better for Canada


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Sep 2022)

> I see a finance critic with no education or experience in finance, business, or economics.



Right, because  education and experience are guarantors of high performance.  It's why we've had such awesome ex-service people at the Defence table.  Now, what do we do about PMs with thin resumes?


----------



## IKnowNothing (8 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Right, because  education and experience are guarantors of high performance.


There you go again, failing to quote properly.  Leave user tags in. It's super simple stuff.  It's the default after hitting the quote button.  If everyone posted like you forums would be an incomprehensible mess.

They're not.  But they'd certainly add credibility to his thoughts on those matters, both by their existence and by cutting down on the amount of BS he utters.


----------



## Navy_Pete (8 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> The two are more alike than any of PP's backers want to admit.  I want better for Canada


This is sadly true, they seem to be different sides of the same empty, populist coin. It's unfortunate, because there are a number of genuinely competently people in the various parties, but I guess telling people the reality doesn't sell as much as a punchy slogan that rhymes or alliteration.

I'm not sure what the CPC equivalent to doing a yoga pose on a bench is, but if I see PP curling a haybale or something I think that might mark the moment of Canadian politics jumping the shark. Maybe PP will surprise me and have actual 'hows' behind his catchy slogans, but he's had more than enough time now to outline actual plans that I'm not hopeful.


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Sep 2022)

> Leave user tags in.



I don't care about the user's identity; I care about the idea expressed.


----------



## suffolkowner (8 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> In general terms, he has no platform- I don't trust that.   I don't see a vision for the country. I don't see a cogent plan with concrete, sensible, and implementable solutions to get us from here to an (as yet undefined) there
> 
> I see a collection of marketing slogans that resonate, with an unending barrage of pithy soundbites and fire and forget "ideas", with no structure or substance binding the two together or him to plan he has to defend.
> 
> ...


What evidence is there that the BOC has not been initiating its own policies?
How does he square this with saying he would fire the Governor?


----------



## Lumber (8 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Witty names with no real plan to do things differently is still the same hot air BS he is accusing JT of. If we are going to change the GoC, I would prefer it to be more than a swap of billboard colours and hairstyles.


I can't like this twice, so I'm quoting it then I'm going to like my own post.
.
.
#like


----------



## Navy_Pete (8 Sep 2022)

I'm actively looking for an alternative to the LPC, so this has been disappointing. I was onboard with O'Toole, but so far still looking. Will probably just wait until the actual election and go based on the local candidates, but at the moment PP is a mark against whoever they run in my area (which is likely to go LPC again regardless, even if they run an inanimate carbon rod or register a candidate by the name of Dees Nutz).


----------



## ArmyRick (8 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> I'm actively looking for an alternative to the LPC, so this has been disappointing. I was onboard with O'Toole, but so far still looking. Will probably just wait until the actual election and go based on the local candidates, but at the moment PP is a mark against whoever they run in my area (which is likely to go LPC again regardless, even if they run an inanimate carbon rod or register a candidate by the name of Dees Nutz).


Alternative to the LPC? Easy the Conservative Party of Canada. STOP looking for perfection in a political party and accept better than the status quo. 

Or you could support the NDP, which lets face it under Singh is "Liberal Lite" or "The Other Liberals"

Or you could support The Green Party which would bring their voter base to like 8 people in total across the country.


----------



## Navy_Pete (8 Sep 2022)

ArmyRick said:


> Alternative to the LPC? Easy the Conservative Party of Canada. STOP looking for perfection in a political party and accept better than the status quo.
> 
> Or you could support the NDP, which lets face it under Singh is "Liberal Lite" or "The Other Liberals"
> 
> Or you could support The Green Party which would bring their voter base to like 8 people in total across the country.


The CPC under PP isn't a real alternative though. I'm not looking for perfection, just less bad.

Cryptobro of Freedom isn't really doing it for me, as the 'proposed' policies; aren't actually implementable.

'Justinflation' = Canada better than most of the G20 (and G7).
COVID mandates were similar across the globe, with a lower death/infection rate per capita against comparable countries.

Looking at what the world has gone through, Canada is coming up better than most, so it's a really unconvincing pitch.

Some of the slogans sounds good, but without a plan to achieve them, is just a slogan. I don't want perfection, just an actual idea of what he'll do differently in real terms. Right now he's offering himself as an alternative to JT (vice the LPC) without saying what he'll actually _do_ differently. The guy has been nothing but an MP his professional life, so if he doesn't know what he can actually accomplish after 14 years as an MP, and what the PMO can't do, it's not really building confidence. If he's lying about things he knows he can't do, it's also not confidence building. His campaign claims aren't referenced, and fall apart when you poke at them.

Guy keeps going on about 'ruling elites', 'gatekeepers' and some other buzzwords, but he is one. He's proposing tax cuts to help Canadians; cool, lets see some high level details and see if they are for taxpayers or large businesses (who are already at one of the lowest effective tax rates in the G7).

Neither option is great, but his platform is basically meanigless promises that I don't see how he can keep without a really detailed plan, as some are pretty wide reaching. Aspirational is great, but it will take years to figure out these kind of details, and there is FA there now.


----------



## Dana381 (9 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> I don't care about the user's identity; I care about the idea expressed.


Sometimes I like to look at the context of the idea quoted, or the idea intrigued me and I want to see the whole post. No user tags make that difficult. I have got to the point that if the user tag is removed I assume the quoter knows they are taking the quote out of context and that they are just trying to shitpost. I ignore the post completely then.


----------



## Lumber (9 Sep 2022)

This from the code of conduct guidelines:

"You will *properly attribute any quotes* to the appropriate author or speaker."

However, I'm not sure if this is referring to ALL quotes, which would include us quotes quoting each other, or quoting more formal sources, like from a book or website.


----------



## QV (9 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> The CPC under PP isn't a real alternative though. I'm not looking for perfection, just less bad.
> 
> Cryptobro of Freedom isn't really doing it for me, as the 'proposed' policies; aren't actually implementable.
> 
> ...



It sounds like you've made up your mind and status quo it is. 

Thankfully more and more people don't think like this.


----------



## Quirky (9 Sep 2022)

The ironing when people say PP doesn't have any real-world experience when our current PM is a failed drama teacher and his side-kick is a bumbling incoherent ex-reporter running (into the ground) this country's finances. We have two incompetent people running this country with even more incompetent ministers. If this is our benchmark for leading this country, god help us.


----------



## Lumber (9 Sep 2022)

Quirky said:


> The ironing when people say PP doesn't have any real-world experience when our current PM is a failed drama teacher and his side-kick is a bumbling incoherent ex-reporter running (into the ground) this country's finances. We have two incompetent people running this country with even more incompetent ministers. If this is our benchmark for leading this country, god help us.


How is it irony? It's not like I said Trudeau was doing a good job and is meeting my "standard". It _would _be irony if I said PP didn't have hte right experience, but through Trudeau did, but that's not the case.


----------



## Remius (9 Sep 2022)

Quirky said:


> The ironing when people say PP doesn't have any real-world experience when our current PM is a failed drama teacher and his side-kick is a bumbling incoherent ex-reporter running (into the ground) this country's finances. We have two incompetent people running this country with even more incompetent ministers. If this is our benchmark for leading this country, god help us.


The real irony is those that lamented Trudeau’s lack of real life experience are embracing one with even less. 

It just shows how partisan some people are. 

I didn’t really care about Trudeau’s or PPs lack of real life experience.  I like to point out that irony though. 

We’ll know tomorrow who the leader is and we’ll see where this takes the CPC.


----------



## IKnowNothing (9 Sep 2022)

It's likely moot at this point, but how many Pro PP / Anti-Charest commenters have read Charest's platform, and what do you not like about it?
@ArmyRick 








						Policy | Jean Charest
					

Jean Charest is the conservative voice that can bring our movement together around common cause issues that champion our values.




					www.jeancharest.ca


----------



## Mick (9 Sep 2022)

Dana381 said:


> Sometimes I like to look at the context of the idea quoted, or the idea intrigued me and I want to see the whole post. No user tags make that difficult. I have got to the point that if the user tag is removed I assume the quoter knows they are taking the quote out of context and that they are just trying to shitpost. I ignore the post completely then.


Attributing the quote also sends a notification to the person being quoted, allowing timelier responses in order to clarify, provide context, rebut etc.


----------



## Quirky (9 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> The real irony is those that lamented Trudeau’s lack of real life experience are embracing one with even less.



People would rather vote for the Libs because they are already in power and using that as a benchmark (a horrible one at that), instead of looking at both parties separately. Anyone who votes for the LPC after everything that's happened over the past 7 years needs some serious......education. I'm not a CPC supporter by any means, but putting Trudeau back in power, wow. Just shows how stupid Canadians are.


----------



## Remius (9 Sep 2022)

Quirky said:


> People would rather vote for the Libs because they are already in power and using that as a benchmark (a horrible one at that), instead of looking at both parties separately. Anyone who votes for the LPC after everything that's happened over the past 7 years needs some serious......education. I'm not a CPC supporter by any means, but putting Trudeau back in power, wow. Just shows how stupid Canadians are.


Or it shows how inept the opposition is.


----------



## Navy_Pete (9 Sep 2022)

QV said:


> It sounds like you've made up your mind and status quo it is.
> 
> Thankfully more and more people don't think like this.


By questioning rhetoric and checking against actual facts?

If someone can point to what country has done better on the inflation side and what Canada could have done differently, I'd be interested to hear. That's not on PPs platform though.

The facts I could find (and posted in a link) show we're sitting at 7.8%, with the US and UK at 10%. 8% definitely sucks, but better than 10%. Similarly we are sitting overall at 1.1 COVID deaths per 100k versus 3.0 and 2.6 for the US and UK respectively. All objectively better.

My mind will be made up on election day, based on whatever information is available, but at the moment PP's campaign is pretty weak rhetoric, which only makes sense if you totally ignore global context.


----------



## Lumber (9 Sep 2022)

Quirky said:


> People would rather vote for the Libs because they are already in power and using that as a benchmark (a horrible one at that), instead of looking at both parties separately. Anyone who votes for the LPC after everything that's happened over the past 7 years needs some serious......education. I'm not a CPC supporter by any means, but putting Trudeau back in power, wow. Just shows how stupid Canadians are.


Alright, instead of listing off all the good things (IMO) that the LPC has accomplished in the last 7 years, I'm curious to know what exactly it is they've done so badly to make you think anyone who would vote liberal is stupid? I would genuinely like to know (if you are so inclined) some example of things that the LPC has done that are THAT bad that you'd have to be stupid to continue to vote for them.


----------



## QV (9 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> It's likely moot at this point, but how many Pro PP / Anti-Charest commenters have read Charest's platform, and what do you not like about it?
> @ArmyRick
> 
> 
> ...


There is a lot to like in his policy suite. He might make a good minister in a PP government.


----------



## Remius (9 Sep 2022)

QV said:


> There is a lot to like in his policy suite. He might make a good minister in a PP government.


PP has already called Charest a Liberal.  No way he makes him a cabinet minister.  People like Charest will not be welcome in a PP led party.  More is the pity.


----------



## IKnowNothing (9 Sep 2022)

QV said:


> There is a lot to like in his policy suite. He might make a good minister in a PP government.


Why not Prime Minister?  

Strongest platform among candidates
Most leadership experience
Polls best among Canadians at large


----------



## Navy_Pete (9 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Why not Prime Minister?
> 
> Strongest platform among candidates
> Most leadership experience
> Polls best among Canadians at large


Lack of witty slogans and pithy hashtags; this may be a good example of style over substance (which is specifically the complaint against JT).

If he takes over as leader of the CPC, and his platform translates to the party platform, I'd vote for the CPC.


----------



## IKnowNothing (9 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Alright, instead of listing off all the good things (IMO) that the LPC has accomplished in the last 7 years, I'm curious to know what exactly it is they've done so badly to make you think anyone who would vote liberal is stupid? I would genuinely like to know (if you are so inclined) some example of things that the LPC has done that are THAT bad that you'd have to be stupid to continue to vote for them.


I've never voted for the man, but also prior to last fall always looked at the "F*&k Trudeau" movement with a kind of bemused curiosity.  For the most of his tenure he was an adequate if vanilla PM.  A little heavy on the social justice and identity politics but that wasn't really impactful.  I had a great deal of respect for the way he handled the pandemic, worked with the Premiers, and appreciated how Canada got through things on all levels. There was a great fiscal price tag, but in terms of health, economic health, and the state of public discourse, we were in pretty damn good shape.  

Then came Q3/Q4, and everything that's come since.  I can't forgive him throwing that away to sacrifice on the alter of personal ambition with the election, driving the wedge, the EA.  I can't overlook his lack of response to the situation in Ukraine, his complete lack of pragmatism on the energy front.  

I just want something better to vote for


----------



## Blackadder1916 (9 Sep 2022)

QV said:


> There is a lot to like in his policy suite. He might make a good minister in a PP government.



But Charest would have to run in an election (national or by-election) and get elected to Parliament without a guarantee of there even being a Poilievre government in the hope that he would be tapped to join the cabinet by someone who made it quite clear, during a sometimes acrimonious leadership race, that they didn't think much of his "conservative credentials" and who Charest considered to espouse a particularly troubling brand of conservatism.  What do you think would be the odds of that happening?  And if it did, what do you think would be the odds of being credited for formulating any portion of the party platform?

The musing might therefore be, not that he might make a good minister, but will he even remain (officially or unofficially) in the "CPC" between the leadership election and the next federal election.


----------



## Halifax Tar (10 Sep 2022)

At this point I don't want anymore JT lead government.  

As for PP I don't see many people poking holes in him just throwing proverbial stones because they don't like him for personal reasons it seems.  And that's fair enough as well I suppose. 

Maybe the Liberals need to be sent away for a while to sort themselves out. 

I will be voting for the candidate in my riding that has best chance of beating Metlege.  But Halifax being Halifax I'm pretty much pissing into the wind.


----------



## Lumber (10 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> At this point I don't want anymore JT lead government.
> 
> As for PP I don't see many people poking holes in him just throwing proverbial stones because they don't like him for personal reasons it seems.  And that's fair enough as well I suppose.


It's not his policies, and it's not even that I think he's a weasel. It's that I feel he is creating an environment where extremists feel emboldened to talk/act, just like Trump did in the states. I would rather live in a country where my disposable income is less but people treat each other with dignity and respect  than a country where my taxes are lower but people feel safe verbally attacking those they disagree with. 

Oh, but as far policies go, I hate his desire to see the CBC done away with. You seriously want to have our only source of news be self-interested private industry?


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Sep 2022)

I would rather live in a country where my disposable income is more.  Nothing says "respect and dignity" like providing income to others.  A vocal very small minority of assholes is well worth the cost.

My only sources of food are pretty much all self-interested private industry.  Biggest difficulty is choosing from the wide array of stuff on offer.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (10 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> It's not his policies, and it's not even that I think he's a weasel. It's that I feel he is creating an environment where extremists feel emboldened to talk/act, just like Trump did in the states. I would rather live in a country where my disposable income is less but people treat each other with dignity and respect  than a country where my taxes are lower but people feel safe verbally attacking those they disagree with.
> 
> Oh, but as far policies go, I hate his desire to see the CBC done away with. You seriously want to have our only source of news be self-interested private industry?


Do you seriously want to have your only source of news be a self-interested Crown Corporation, who is only too happy taking talking points from this Government?

Works both ways…


----------



## Lumber (10 Sep 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Do you seriously want to have your only source of news be a self-interested Crown Corporation, who is only too happy taking talking points from this Government?
> 
> Works both ways…


You've activated my trap card! #yugioh

I never said I wanted my only source of news be a self-interested Crown Corporation. That would be F***ing stupid. While in the Canadian context I don't think it would be as bad as the Chinese public news, it would certainly be something toward Russian media style where "independent" media, well, isn't.

You need to have both.

Also, while I agree that CBC is definitely left leaning and overly supportive/kind to the government in general and LPC more specifically, anyone who thinks that the CBC is actually signing and dancing to the literal tune of the PMO or LPC can come get the tin hats my daughter made today.


----------



## Lumber (10 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> I would rather live in a country where my disposable income is more.  Nothing says "respect and dignity" like providing income to others.  A vocal very small minority of assholes is well worth the cost.
> 
> My only sources of food are pretty much all self-interested private industry.  Biggest difficulty is choosing from the wide array of stuff on offer.


Where would you draw the line? Seriously, if you can't give an answer just think about it yourself for a minute. 

If you could snap your fingers and transport your whole life to somewhere where you make more money and your money goes farther, but the culture of the people in how they treat each other is more violent and asshole'ish, how much more violent and asshole'ish would it have to be before you changed your mind and said "nah, this is too hostile an environment to live in, I'd rather go back to making less money and having people get along? Would today's level of partisanship and animosity in US politics cross the line? Would Russian "democracy" be the line? Would fascist Germany be the line?

Obviously, everyone's answer to that would be different. My line is somewhere worse than it is today, but before we get to the current level of US discourse. So, someone like Skippy, to me, is moving us in the wrong direction.


----------



## Lumber (10 Sep 2022)

Pierre Poilievre!

#first


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2022)

Looks like a decisive win for PP at 68% or so on the first ballot.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (10 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Looks like a decisive win for PP at 68% or so on the first ballot.


whatever you think of PP, this is certainly better than limping in on the second or third ballot with 51%.


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> whatever you think of PP, this is certainly better than limping in on the second or third ballot with 51%.


it certainly gives him legitimacy as far as where he wants to take the party.


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Sep 2022)

I doubt that prosperity and violence have to go hand-in-hand.  Most people become less violent when basic needs like employment are met, which allow them to aspire to more.  I'm in no doubt that if we go far enough the other way, we end up where people have been in the past: family, clan, tribe, village, etc, with us-against-them playing out with increasing scope at each level.


----------



## FJAG (11 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> it certainly gives him legitimacy as far as where he wants to take the party.


So now we wait and see where he really wants to take the party.


----------



## Furniture (11 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> I would rather live in a country where my disposable income is less but people treat each other with dignity and respect  than a country where my taxes are lower but people feel safe verbally attacking those they disagree with.


That country is long gone(if it ever actually existed), social media has seen to that, and politicians of all stripes have leaned into it... The PM implied a Jewish CPC MP was on the side of Nazis in the HoC...

I'd rather a fresh government than the stale, scandal riddled one we have now.


----------



## ArmyRick (11 Sep 2022)

I have seen a few comparisons of PP to Trump. Please, get real. That little tactic alone is a Liberal playbook tool and I am pretty sure its getting tiresome.

You can only cry wolf so many times. 

How come so many people can give a free pass to Trudeau on just about every scandal and unethical action?


----------



## Eaglelord17 (11 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Where would you draw the line? Seriously, if you can't give an answer just think about it yourself for a minute.
> 
> If you could snap your fingers and transport your whole life to somewhere where you make more money and your money goes farther, but the culture of the people in how they treat each other is more violent and asshole'ish, how much more violent and asshole'ish would it have to be before you changed your mind and said "nah, this is too hostile an environment to live in, I'd rather go back to making less money and having people get along? Would today's level of partisanship and animosity in US politics cross the line? Would Russian "democracy" be the line? Would fascist Germany be the line?
> 
> Obviously, everyone's answer to that would be different. My line is somewhere worse than it is today, but before we get to the current level of US discourse. So, someone like Skippy, to me, is moving us in the wrong direction.


We like to pretend we are nicer than Americans but my answer is it just depends on where you are. I have had some of the nicest most welcoming greetings of my life in parts of the US and also some of the most hostile unwelcome interactions in parts of Canada.

My biggest concern at the moment is Trudeau is A) creating/inciting the rhetoric/extremists with his policies and actions, and B) is actually creating a unsafe crime ridden environment which poses a danger to my family by failing to keep criminals off the streets well not caring about the victims they harm. I am less concerned about the rhetoric people are using, than the legitimate threats that are actually increasing. How many innocent Canadians need to die because this government is refusing to repeal a clearly failed law (Bill C75) and replace it with something which will actually work to protect us?


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2022)

FJAG said:


> So now we wait and see where he really wants to take the party.


Correct.  

Justin Ling had a good analysis of where he thinks PP will go. 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1568765916065955842


----------



## ArmyRick (11 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Correct.
> 
> Justin Ling had a good analysis of where he thinks PP will go.
> 
> ...


All he has are his opinions. So does everyone else. 

More nonsense speculation about PP.


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2022)

ArmyRick said:


> All he has are his opinions. So does everyone else.
> 
> More nonsense speculation about PP.


Of course and I said as much that it was his opinion.

But it makes sense.  PP won’t court then Center and may have found another way to get the CPC into power.

What parts of what he opines on is nonsense to you? 

That he won’t pivot?  I don’t think he will. 

That he isn’t a racist?  I don’t think he is either.

That Trudeau will go scorched earth and not actually campaign on governance?  I suspect that is where we are heading.


----------



## FJAG (11 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Correct.
> 
> Justin Ling had a good analysis of where he thinks PP will go.
> 
> ...


I'm still on the fence but leaning away. Trouble is, there's nowhere to lean to.

His support for the Freedom convoy pushed me away. It felt opportunistic. I'm a big fan of less government and more freedom but that issue was just plain stupid. 

If he's not courting the centre then he's not courting me.

😟


----------



## Kirkhill (11 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Where would you draw the line? Seriously, if you can't give an answer just think about it yourself for a minute.
> 
> If you could snap your fingers and transport your whole life to somewhere where you make more money and your money goes farther, but the culture of the people in how they treat each other is more violent and asshole'ish, how much more violent and asshole'ish would it have to be before you changed your mind and said "nah, this is too hostile an environment to live in, I'd rather go back to making less money and having people get along? Would today's level of partisanship and animosity in US politics cross the line? Would Russian "democracy" be the line? Would fascist Germany be the line?
> 
> Obviously, everyone's answer to that would be different. My line is somewhere worse than it is today, but before we get to the current level of US discourse. So, someone like Skippy, to me, is moving us in the wrong direction.



The country I grew up in was populated by micks and jocks, geordies, scowsers and brummies, sassenachs and tcheuchters, cockneys and the posh....  and those were just my friends.

My real friends I called by names my parents wouldn't let me utter in the house.

Debate was vigorous.

But my first fight, which I lost badly, occurred in the cemetery adjacent to my first school in Canada.


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2022)

FJAG said:


> I'm still on the fence but leaning away. Trouble is, there's nowhere to lean to.
> 
> His support for the Freedom convoy pushed me away. It felt opportunistic. I'm a big fan of less government and more freedom but that issue was just plain stupid.
> 
> ...


Full disclosure, I am with you on all of that. He isn’t courting you or me.  There is nowhere for people like us to lean for now so I will likely vote based on my preference as an MP.   Given that mine supported the convoy and was nowhere to be seen after our riding was hit hard by weird weather i suspect I won’t be supporting him.   But things can change in a few years. 

But I do find the political manoeuvring fascinating and I think that Justin Ling hit the nail on the head. 

PP got 68% of the vote.  He’s got a very strong mandate to take the party where he wants to.


----------



## ArmyRick (11 Sep 2022)

A couple of thoughts on the upcoming PMFC (Prime Minister Fighting Championships) Defending champion JT vs top challenger PP.
-I think JT will watch the polls and try to exploit any opportunity to call a snap election if PP or ANY of his MPs slip up (if a Tory back bencher gets caught drinking and saying just the slightest dumbest thing for example)
-I think JT may try to sweeten the pot with the NDP and the Bloc to have them label PP as "the next Trump"
-In the next election, Singh, Bloc Guy and whoever is in the greens will not run to get as many votes as possible instead they will campaign to take away as many votes as possible from PP
-In an open debate, PP will destroy Trudeau for sure. 
-JT will try to bring up any link of PP and his tory party to the trucker convoy, anti-vaxxers, "hate" (I bet he will blame the red neck who harassed Freeland on PP) and stopping or against any planned benefits for Canadians.
-I also think JT will try to label PP as bending to the corporate elite in Canada 
-If PP stays on course, stays quick witted with well rehearsed (and researched) answers, he is going to make JT look like a fool
-PP should also use every opportunity to ask his difficult questions in Parliament Q & A

Canadians on the other hand can have a good election or piss poor one
-Please stop voting for a party because you always have, they are not a sports team
-Each region will probably stick to their guns.
-Ontario could be swung either way IMO. Hey Doug Ford got back in with a majority!

So lets see what happens.


----------



## mariomike (11 Sep 2022)

Furniture said:


> The PM implied a Jewish CPC MP was on the side of Nazis in the HoC...



Maybe, because of that, we will see more Jewish CPC MPs after next election...

Of Canada's current federal Jewish politicians, there are 6 LPC MPs and 2 CPC MPs.


----------



## ArmyRick (11 Sep 2022)

mariomike said:


> Maybe, because of that, we will see more Jewish CPC MPs after next election...
> 
> Of Canada's current federal Jewish politicians, there are 6 LPC MPs and 2 CPC MPs.


I seriously think JT miscalculated with that blunder. He seems to want to leave it alone and not bring it up.


----------



## Halifax Tar (11 Sep 2022)

Congrats to PP.  Now get to work solidifying the platform and prepping for the fight of the century. 

This next electoral campaign is gonna be dirty.


----------



## Navy_Pete (11 Sep 2022)

Doug Ford is an interesting one; his government did a generally pretty competent job in the pandemic, which required with other provincial and the federal government. He had zero tolerance for the conspiracy nuts, and then did get rid of thing like get rid of the license plate renewal fee (licensing is still required, but you can just set a reminder on the website and it will ping you 3 months out, and takes less than 5 minutes to do it for free).

He then very specifically distanced himself from the CPC.

I think the Ford majority is more indicative of both the fact that ON PC =/= federal CPC, and people are still pissed off at the Wynne Liberals.

Not holding my breath for PP and the 118 other CPC MPs to actually start to do things now though, but guess we'll wait and see. They seem to entrenched is being the oppostion party that will sweep to power at some point than having a functional HoC now though.


----------



## OldSolduer (11 Sep 2022)

I


Halifax Tar said:


> Congrats to PP.  Now get to work solidifying the platform and prepping for the fight of the century.
> 
> This next electoral campaign is gonna be dirty.


I am not sold on him. I am not sold on any of his former rivals either. In a country of almost 40 million we certainly could do better.

There is an old saying "there is room for everyone in the tent". It might be Arabic - I don't know for sure.

He needs to get the tent in order.


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2022)

ArmyRick said:


> A couple of thoughts on the upcoming PMFC (Prime Minister Fighting Championships) Defending champion JT vs top challenger PP.
> -I think JT will watch the polls and try to exploit any opportunity to call a snap election if PP or ANY of his MPs slip up (if a Tory back bencher gets caught drinking and saying just the slightest dumbest thing for example)


Agreed.  I think JT will engineer an election when the time suits him.


ArmyRick said:


> -I think JT may try to sweeten the pot with the NDP and the Bloc to have them label PP as "the next Trump"


Yes.  It certainly will be ABC this time as well.  Part of the scorched earth “nonsense” thing Justin Ling mused about


ArmyRick said:


> -In the next election, Singh, Bloc Guy and whoever is in the greens will not run to get as many votes as possible instead they will campaign to take away as many votes as possible from PP


I doubt it.  But I see them encourage strategic voting. Bloc will do what’s best for the Bloc and QC.  I don’t think they care who is in power.  Singh will muse on ABC and might actually consider a merge if the CPC wins a weak minority.


ArmyRick said:


> -In an open debate, PP will destroy Trudeau for sure.


Meh.  Not so sure.  They said that about Harper vs Trudeau.  And his performance against Charest wasn’t earth shattering.  I’m sure it will be testy but they’ve sparred before so I’m not sure why this is a novel thing.  In any federal election debate I see PP getting dog piled on by everyone else. 


ArmyRick said:


> -JT will try to bring up any link of PP and his tory party to the trucker convoy, anti-vaxxers, "hate" (I bet he will blame the red neck who harassed Freeland on PP) and stopping or against any planned benefits for Canadians.


Yes, see the scorched earth thing vs actually campaigning on governance.


ArmyRick said:


> -I also think JT will try to label PP as bending to the corporate elite in Canada


Possibly yes.  There may be other low hanging fruit to attack him on though.


ArmyRick said:


> -If PP stays on course, stays quick witted with well rehearsed (and researched) answers, he is going to make JT look like a fool


He is anything if not consistant.  He is quick witted but can be knocked off his position when confronted.  (His flustered response about his real estate business as an example).  He needs to avoid weird things like crypto and firing the BOC governor to not look like a fool himself.


ArmyRick said:


> -PP should also use every opportunity to ask his difficult questions in Parliament Q & A


Yes.  He will be and has been good at that. 


ArmyRick said:


> Canadians on the other hand can have a good election or piss poor one


Depends on who you cheer for


ArmyRick said:


> -Please stop voting for a party because you always have, they are not a sports team


True.  Campaigns matter, issues matter.  I voted CPC last time.  Not sure I will in the next one. We’ll see. 


ArmyRick said:


> -Each region will probably stick to their guns.


Some will.


ArmyRick said:


> -Ontario could be swung either way IMO. Hey Doug Ford got back in with a majority!


He did but he ran on a centrist platform.  Not sure PP will do that.  If Ford makes unpopular decisions (and he’s started a few)it could favour the LPC. 


ArmyRick said:


> So lets see what happens.


Lots of time to see that.


----------



## Furniture (11 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Of course and I said as much that it was his opinion.
> 
> But it makes sense.  PP won’t court then Center and may have found another way to get the CPC into power.
> 
> ...


Who is the centre?

I feel I'm pretty centre/centre-right, and I find PP far more appealing than JT. As mentioned earlier, Ford won Ontario as a centre/centre-right politician...

If PP campaigns on affordability, and keeps the SOCONS quiet, he will likely do very well with the non-diehard Liberal and NDP voters. JT got elected a few times on poorly thought through platforms, why can't it work for the CPC?


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Doug Ford is an interesting one; his government did a generally pretty competent job in the pandemic, which required with other provincial and the federal government. He had zero tolerance for the conspiracy nuts, and then did get rid of thing like get rid of the license plate renewal fee (licensing is still required, but you can just set a reminder on the website and it will ping you 3 months out, and takes less than 5 minutes to do it for free).
> 
> He then very specifically distanced himself from the CPC.
> 
> ...


Ford and Tim Houston in NS campaigned the same way.  “We are not them”


----------



## Brad Sallows (11 Sep 2022)

First thing people ought do is figure out where they actually sit, as opposed to where they think they sit or want to believe they sit.  Are you part of the "1%" (probably not) or the "25%"?  Then unless you rub shoulders with a lot of people in the next couple of quartiles, you might not have a very good idea of where the centre is.  The people with jobs and lives organized around employment and families don't often speak up, let alone protest.  Their voices aren't often represented by the chattering mob in the media (part of the "25%").  When they do protest, even if it's an incoherent scream, it's more important to pay attention to them than to fringe activists mad at the world about everything and who live for acting out.


----------



## brihard (11 Sep 2022)

I guess it’ll come down to what is he going to do different? How will he overcome the CPC’s conventional over-courting of already secure seats in the Prairies, and attract enough votes in ridings in eastern Canada that can actually deliver a win? Harper mostly swept Ontario and the Atlantic and even much of BC, including many urban ridings. But that was 2011. Can Poilievre do that?

The prairies are safely CPC as long as they run a reasonably conservative platform, and the choice of Poilievre will take much of the modest wind out of the PPC sails and will minimize PPC nipping at them from the right. They need to shift focus from there. I don’t know if the party can.


----------



## ArmyRick (11 Sep 2022)

brihard said:


> I guess it’ll come down to what is he going to do different? How will he overcome the CPC’s conventional over-courting of already secure seats in the Prairies, and attract enough votes in ridings in eastern Canada that can actually deliver a win? Harper mostly swept Ontario and the Atlantic and even much of BC, including many urban ridings. But that was 2011. Can Poilievre do that?
> 
> The prairies are safely CPC as long as they run a reasonably conservative platform, and the choice of Poilievre will take much of the modest wind out of the PPC sails and will minimize PPC nipping at them from the right. They need to shift focus from there. I don’t know if the party can.


If the CPC can get Peter Mackay to get out and help campaign, it might build up strength in the maritimes.


----------



## IKnowNothing (12 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Correct.
> 
> Justin Ling had a good analysis of where he thinks PP will go.
> 
> ...


What's the end game here? A Conservative minority is likely a Lib/NDP or Lib/Bloc coalition, or another election in short order when he fails a confidence vote.


----------



## Lumber (12 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> What's the end game here? A Conservative minority is likely a Lib/NDP or Lib/Bloc coalition, or another election in short order when he fails a confidence vote.


Can you just imagine the turmoil if the CPC gets the plurality, but the LPC and NDP offer to the GG to form a formal coalition government (their combined numbers totaling a majority in parliament), and the GG accepts? Can you just IMAGINE.


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Can you just imagine the turmoil if the CPC gets the plurality, but the LPC and NDP offer to the GG to form a formal coalition government (their combined numbers totaling a majority in parliament), and the GG accepts? Can you just IMAGINE.


I think that’s a CONPLAN in the Liberal red book, filed under “Emergencies Act - Round 2”


----------



## ModlrMike (12 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Can you just imagine the turmoil if the CPC gets the plurality, but the LPC and NDP offer to the GG to form a formal coalition government (their combined numbers totaling a majority in parliament), and the GG accepts? Can you just IMAGINE.


They tried this once already and failed. The argument being that the public did not vote for a coalition, as both leaders emphatically stated that was off the table during the election. The 180 afterwards was what the GG (Michelle Jean) supposedly based her decision on. Had folks known that a coalition was an option when the writ was dropped, the outcome might have been different.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (12 Sep 2022)

ModlrMike said:


> They tried this once already and failed.


How would it fail?

The Liberals get first crack at forming a Government. If they can assemble a coalition, the GG has no choice but to accept it.


----------



## Remius (12 Sep 2022)

Given how some people have no concept how our government works I suspect lots of people would rage and write poorly worded manifestos to overthrow the government coalition should one ever be formed.  And then plenty of people say that isn’t at all what they meant after the fact. 

Or maybe not.  

Maybe a minority CPC gvt will be allowed to govern until it does something the opposition won’t stand for and we’ll have another election.  Like most times.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Sep 2022)

Given the amount of whinging in the past by some people on the left when right-wing parties do well, a little more whinging from the right if the LPC form a coalition is tolerable.


----------



## Navy_Pete (12 Sep 2022)

Coalitions are pretty common in a lot of Parliaments, and would be a lot more common if we moved away from FPTP to more proportional representation. It's a feature of representative democracy, not a bug.

In theory if a coaltion of independents with completely different views put together a plan and had enough numbers they could form a government, and if you tried to figure out the coalitions in the Knesset you'd realise the parties involved are all over the spectrum, but come together over common interests.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (12 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Coalitions are pretty common in a lot of Parliaments, and would be a lot more common if we moved away from FPTP to more proportional representation. It's a feature of representative democracy, not a bug.
> 
> In theory if a coaltion of independents with completely different views put together a plan and had enough numbers they could form a government, and if you tried to figure out the coalitions in the Knesset you'd realise the parties involved are all over the spectrum, but come together over common interests.


It also can give disproportionate power to people who shouldn’t have any as they can sometimes become kingmaker. 

You wish to form that government? Well my small far right/left party has a couple demands we want in exchange, if not no government…

People think the PPC is extreme, we haven’t even scratched the surface and that is 1000% the result of the FPTP system. We could literally have Nazi parties or Communist parties elected depending on the system and some government at some point may have to deal with them.


----------



## PuckChaser (12 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Coalitions are pretty common in a lot of Parliaments, and would be a lot more common if we moved away from FPTP to more proportional representation. It's a feature of representative democracy, not a bug.
> 
> In theory if a coaltion of independents with completely different views put together a plan and had enough numbers they could form a government, and if you tried to figure out the coalitions in the Knesset you'd realise the parties involved are all over the spectrum, but come together over common interests.


With our system of going into caretaker mode 3 months before and at least 3 months post election cycle, we might as well close down the CAF. Nothing will ever get purchased.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Sep 2022)

Kind of hard to reconcile "we need to marginalize those people and shut them up" with "we need to change the system so they can have MPs".


----------



## Eaglelord17 (12 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Kind of hard to reconcile "we need to marginalize those people and shut them up" with "we need to change the system so they can have MPs".


Personally I think the solution is to have more direct democracy like the Swiss. FPTP for the parliamentarians (so it tends to keep the extremes out of the law writers), with direct voting on issues. It works exceptionally well for them, no reason it couldn't effectively work for us. It wouldn't matter as much who is in charge, as the people would always have the final say.


----------



## Navy_Pete (12 Sep 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> It also can give disproportionate power to people who shouldn’t have any as they can sometimes become kingmaker.
> 
> You wish to form that government? Well my small far right/left party has a couple demands we want in exchange, if not no government…
> 
> People think the PPC is extreme, we haven’t even scratched the surface and that is 1000% the result of the FPTP system. We could literally have Nazi parties or Communist parties elected depending on the system and some government at some point may have to deal with them.


Democracy is ugly; if Nazis get elected in proportional representation it's because a portion of people voted for Nazis. It would at least be more honest than dog whistles at the same group to get them onside; polite racism is still racism. (Just speaking in generalities, not saying anything about PP or the CPCs).

You don't need a permanent coalition to get things done though; I'm sure there are probably enough MPs that would be onside from something like delaying carbon tax increases they could get that accepted by either a majority of all parties, or by partnering with the BQ and others to get a private members bill through.

That requires more finesse then pounding on a podium though and saying 'You suck!'. Politics should be more than sniping at each other for future votes.

Anyway, PP has a mandate from his party, and should be able to take advantage of the minority goverment to push things through anyway if he wants to try. If he has some kind of simple, concrete thing they can do now, now's the time to suggest it and try working with others outside his party.


----------



## Navy_Pete (12 Sep 2022)

Somewhat topical; Swedish election results are waiting on final tally, but the 8 parties seem to be split into 2 bloqs, with the right wing including the Swedish Democrats who descended who started out as a nationalist, white supremacist party in the mid 80s, and still has some pretty directly anti-immigrant/refugee positions.

Swedish rightwing on verge of narrow election win but waits on final tally


----------



## RangerRay (12 Sep 2022)

ModlrMike said:


> They tried this once already and failed. The argument being that the public did not vote for a coalition, as both leaders emphatically stated that was off the table during the election. The 180 afterwards was what the GG (Michelle Jean) supposedly based her decision on. Had folks known that a coalition was an option when the writ was dropped, the outcome might have been different.


I remember that. People who I thought were apolitical or centre-left were absolutely furious at Dionne and Layton.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Can you just imagine the turmoil if the CPC gets the plurality, but the LPC and NDP offer to the GG to form a formal coalition government (their combined numbers totaling a majority in parliament), and the GG accepts? Can you just IMAGINE.



Turmoil is putting it lightly.  

Would make for interesting times on these forums.



Remius said:


> Given how some people have no concept how our government works I suspect lots of people would rage and write poorly worded manifestos to overthrow the government coalition should one ever be formed.  And then plenty of people say that isn’t at all what they meant after the fact.
> 
> Or maybe not.
> 
> Maybe a minority CPC gvt will be allowed to govern until it does something the opposition won’t stand for and we’ll have another election.  Like most times.



Knowledge of how our government works or not; to have won the popular and seat count only to have that pulled out after the fact and not expecting people not be wildly upset about that is simply not understanding the human experience or the temperature outside of Ottawa. 

I can't see this having a net positive effect on the whole of the country.


----------



## suffolkowner (13 Sep 2022)

All the above may be true and make sense but what is also true is the PM must have the confidence of the HoC and MPs can and should vote down legislation they disagree with.

It would make for interesting times


----------



## Edward Campbell (13 Sep 2022)

Constitutionally - in the important parts of the Constitution, not the largely irrelevant bits of bureaucratic drivel and housekeeping that were published in 1867 and 1982 - the King *MUST ALWAYS* have counsel. That counsel is provided, *by custom* - which has greater strength in law than anything written down, anywhere - by the King's Privy Council in each of his realms. The Committee of the Privy Council - the body which actually speaks to the King (or the GG) - is chaired by the prime minister. The prime minister holds that office at the King's pleasure and the "King's pleasure" is, in most matters, decided by his Parliament.

Short form: there* MUST ALWAYS* be a government and that government *MUST ALWAYS* have the confidence of the House of Commons.

When an election is held the government does, indeed, go into "caretaker" mode. It is the duty of the "caretaker" prime minister to advise (tell) the King (or GG), shortly after the election, who should be the next prime minister - who, in other words, the King/GG should call upon to form a government. The person who should form the next government need not be the person whose party can secure the confidence of the House of Commons by winning votes. A party needs 170 seats to guarantee it can win a vote in the House.

Consider, for example, that there is a Canadian general election in 2022 - we vote in late November. The results are:

BQ:                  33
Cons:             121
Greens:              4
Liberals:         114
NDP:                57
Independents:   9 

Now, I'm the serving Liberal prime minister who, by any fair reasoning, just lost the election to Pierre Poilievre's Conservatives. I have a _*Constitutional duty*_ (not a right, a *DUTY*) to advise the GG. I know that neither Poilievre nor myself will ever form a government that depends on BQ support. The BQ wants to break Canada apart. The Conservatives could govern IF they had the support of the NDP - but the NDP grew in power, mainly at the expense of my Liberals, on a decidedly _progressive_/anti-Conservative platform so I think that's unlikely. I, on the other hand, can govern, comfortably, IF I have the support of the NDP - they'll demand seats in my cabinet, but that's OK with me - and the Greens. The GG has two obvious choices:

1. ask M Poilievre too form her government because he has there most seats and won the largest share of the popular vote - that will result in a fairly rapid failure to secure the confidence of the House and we'll be back to the polls in the early sporing of 2023; or​2. ask me to form a government which will, quite possibly, results in political stability for four years.​ 
As a responsible prime minister _I think_ I should go with option 2. The GG should, usually, accept my advice on this matter but she does have "_reserved powers_" and these include deciding, for herself, when there are debatable Constitutional choices.

What would you do?


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Sep 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> Constitutionally - in the important parts of the Constitution, not the largely irrelevant bits of bureaucratic drivel and housekeeping that were published in 1867 and 1982 - the King *MUST ALWAYS* have counsel. That counsel is provided, *by custom* - which has greater strength in law than anything written down, anywhere - by the King's Privy Council in each of his realms. The Committee of the Privy Council - the body which actually speaks to the King (or the GG) - is chaired by the prime minister. The prime minister holds that office at the King's pleasure and the "King's pleasure" is, in most matters, decided by his Parliament.
> 
> Short form: there* MUST ALWAYS* be a government and that government *MUST ALWAYS* have the confidence of the House of Commons.
> 
> ...



The problem with your post is that your not taking into account the human factor. 

If JT and JS did do this the possible net result for country scares me.  I'm amounts to the Laurentians and the east telling the rest the country we decide what's best no matter the electoral result. 

I think we would be better off going with option 1. My biases admitted. 

I also think an election wouldn't come that fast. The population hates elections and campaigns. The Liberals would probably have a leadership crisis to deal with as well. 

If minority Con government is toppled too fast I see that not going well for those in opposition.

If the Libs and NDP want for a coalition they have to campaign on that from the outset of the electoral campaign.  Otherwise the divisiveness it will create will be palpable and I fear what else.


----------



## Lumber (13 Sep 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> Constitutionally - in the important parts of the Constitution, not the largely irrelevant bits of bureaucratic drivel and housekeeping that were published in 1867 and 1982 - the King *MUST ALWAYS* have counsel. That counsel is provided, *by custom* - which has greater strength in law than anything written down, anywhere - by the King's Privy Council in each of his realms. The Committee of the Privy Council - the body which actually speaks to the King (or the GG) - is chaired by the prime minister. The prime minister holds that office at the King's pleasure and the "King's pleasure" is, in most matters, decided by his Parliament.
> 
> Short form: there* MUST ALWAYS* be a government and that government *MUST ALWAYS* have the confidence of the House of Commons.
> 
> ...


I see your logic, however, the CPC was able to maintain a minority government for 5 years from 2006-2011, so, they can make it work.


----------



## IKnowNothing (13 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> I see your logic, however, the CPC was able to maintain a minority government for 5 years from 2006-2011, so, they can make it work.


A lot, both the palatability/electoral rightness of a coalition and the viability of the reciprocal/usurped minority would come down to the specifics.

Under EC's scenario an LPC/NDP coalition would outseat the CPC 171 to 121, with voter share ~55 to 35.  That coalition arguably better represents the electoral will of Canadians, and certainly represents a more effective ability to govern

In 2006 it was 132 to 124, 47% to 36%.  The same arguments do not hold true.

Edit- but I do agree with @Halifax Tar that regardless of what I think of the rational rightness, it would be incredibly destabilizing for the country. With that on one side, and the prospect of a vicious campaign and a CPC PM with burned bridges and no ideological desire to work across the aisle on the other, I don't see a good outcome for the country from a non-majority CPC win, and I don't see the majority happening.  I hate where Canadian politics stand relative to this time last year.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Sep 2022)

If the people don't like the outcome and the GG's choice, they can give a spanking at the next election.  That's basically what happened after 2008.


----------



## TacticalTea (13 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> I see your logic, however, the CPC was able to maintain a minority government for 5 years from 2006-2011, so, they can make it work.


Don't miss the stability factor. As EC stated, the incumbent PM advises. Incumbent PM would maintain power, just as incumbent PM did in 2008.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (13 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> I see your logic, however, the CPC was able to maintain a minority government for 5 years from 2006-2011, so, they can make it work.



Yes, they can make it work, however let's not forget the December 2008 prorogation of Parliament (6 weeks after the election) that avoided the next day non-confidence vote already agreed to by the "coalition" of opposition parties.  Following on from the same constitutional custom that EC references in his scenario, Harper "advised" the Governor General who accepted his advice.  Those nearly two months gave him the breathing room during which the Liberal party questioned its leadership and with the budget (changed enough from the "economic update" previously presented) providing concessions to the opposition parties, they were able to remain in government.


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2022)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1569734308037906434

 I wonder if he will be the first of a few making this sort of move.


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2022)

.


----------



## suffolkowner (13 Sep 2022)

The Liberals and NDP under the Harper government lacked the courage, commitment and cash to stand on principle. The same could follow a PP minority government or they could vote it down. Lots of possibilities


----------



## Kirkhill (13 Sep 2022)

On politics and politicians...  UK ones at least.

During national mourning, we realise that rival politicians were friends all along​MPs don’t alter their feelings towards their opponents, they simply don’t make the effort to hide their genuine friendships any more
TOM HARRIS13 September 2022 • 2:54pm
	

	
	
		
		

		
			









As the nation mourns and prepares to say a final farewell to Queen Elizabeth II next Monday, it’s striking that our politicians are, for once, providing a positive example of behaviour. Once fierce opponents are filmed and photographed together, sharing memories and jokes, seemingly enjoying each other’s company. And we, the public, nod approvingly. This, after all, is what Her Majesty would have wanted: for politicians to bury their differences, if only for a short time, and to consider more high-minded issues than political advantage and electoral prospects.
We all know that normal service will be resumed at some stage. Some might say that it’s like a giant confidence trick which everyone is privy to. The truth, however, may be even more shocking. Consider this: what if the Queen’s death and preparations for her funeral were not forcing natural enemies to behave in public, but were allowing our political leaders the rare opportunity genuinely to enjoy each other’s company?
MPs, after all, work together in a big room that’s not quite big enough to allow all 650 of them to get a seat on busy days. That makes for an intimate working space. These are people who eat, sleep and breathe politics: in other words, they’re pretty weird individuals. And the thing about weirdos is that they want to spend time with other people who share their own obsessions. And if those people don’t happen to share the same political affiliation, well, perhaps that matters less than the fact that they can name every single prime minister, chronologically, in the last 120 years.


Cross-party friendships are always surprising to outside observers, though within Westminster’s walls they are so common that they are rarely commented upon. True, the tea room, where most of the House of Commons gossip is shared, is strictly split up into party areas. But those demarcations are informal and there is much interchange and banter, including the sharing of tables by MPs of different parties.
The fact is that many MPs will feel more comfortable sitting in the smoking room after a late night vote, having a drink and sharing a joke with colleagues from the opposite party, than they will having a beer after a meeting of their local party. After all, outside those fraught occasions when constituency mergers and boundary changes are in prospect, an MP will see no rival when he gazes around the chamber of the Commons. Everyone there, by definition, already has a seat and is too concerned with holding onto theirs to cast envious eyes on their own.
It’s a shame that friendships between MPs of opposition parties is the love that dare not speak its name. Only when tragedy rears its head do we catch a glimpse of those relationships. In a touching tribute to John Smith just a day after the Labour leader’s unexpected death in 1994, John Major told of late night drinks in his study with his political rival, meetings which started off with drink singular and then progressed to the plural pretty quickly.
As an MP I would frequently join colleagues from different parties to sample Soho’s various karaoke bars. We enjoyed John Whittingdale’s extraordinary rendition of _Bat Out of Hell_ and Therese Coffey’s energetic power ballads, alongside performances from Labour’s Kevin Brennan and Rachel Reeves. These events were not unusual in themselves; what was unusual was how quickly, the day after, everyone once again sworn political enemies.
Ironic, then, that it is the speeches and barbs of the Commons and TV studio debates, not the joyful, slightly inebriated singing, that are the more performative. Constituents expect it. The first rule of Karaoke Club is that no one talks about Karaoke Club, not just because MPs can’t be seen to be enjoying themselves during the week instead of keeping their heads down in the Commons library, but also because it just wouldn’t do to be seen to be friends with the other side.
So in these times of national bereavement, politicians don’t alter their feelings towards their opponents, they simply don’t make the effort to hide them any more. But soon the masks will come back on, the rehearsed and well-practised vehemence will be on show again, and everything will be back to normal. Every political disagreement will be mutated into an offence against everything that is good and decent in the world, and the motives of fellow MPs will be impugned. 
Personally, I prefer it when we settle our differences with a sing-off. But maybe that’s just me.









						During national mourning, we realise that rival politicians were friends all along
					

MPs don’t alter their feelings towards their opponents, they simply don’t make the effort to hide their genuine friendships any more




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Sep 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> 1. ask M Poilievre too form her government because he has there most seats and won the largest share of the popular vote - that will result in a fairly rapid failure to secure the confidence of the House and we'll be back to the polls in the early sporing of 2023;


Poilièvre gets one gimme, because Trudeau completely and arrogantly wasted 2/3 BILLION DOLLARS of the good citizens’ money on an aspirational blunder of largesse and self-grandeur.  If there is a vote of non-confidence in 2023 and PM Poilièvre must return to Her Excellency to recommend the dissolution of Government, then it’s a fair dinkem do-over and Her Excellency can then feel comfortable in entertaining a grouping that in total, represent the de facto plurality of Canadian wishes.


----------



## Lumber (14 Sep 2022)

This was what I was talking about when I said (something to the effect ) that I did not like the idea of PP as PM because he will sow an environment of mistrust and anger, and destroy civility. Attacking the ENTIRETY news media and saying the only way to get truth is to have it delivered to your door _by the Conservative Party of Canada _is inflammatory and dangerous.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1569857712569073665


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> This was what I was talking about when I said (something to the effect ) that I did not like the idea of PP as PM because he will sow an environment of mistrust and anger, and destroy civility. Attacking the ENTIRETY news media and saying the only way to get truth is to have it delivered to your door _by the Conservative Party of Canada _is inflammatory and dangerous.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1569857712569073665



Is it a lie that a member of the media, David Akin, was shouting obscenities at PP ?  

You talk of civility but I don't think you know what that means.


----------



## Lumber (14 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Is it a lie that a member of the media, David Akin, was shouting obscenities at PP ?



No, I saw the video, he definitely did. Why would you even ask that? I never insinuated it didn't happen.

The proper response to a single "liberal heckler" is to call out that heckler, or call out his boss, or call out his news station, and remind people that an independent (and ideally, civil) media and proper discourse is fundamental to a well functioning democracy.

You don't send an email blast out to the entire country (specially to his supporters) saying, "see, because of this one guy, we should get rid of all independent and publicly funded news, and you should all just let us, the wise and benevolent leaders of the CPC, tell you what's true."


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> No, I saw the video, he definitely did. Why would you even ask that? I never insinuated it didn't happen.
> 
> The proper response to a single "liberal heckler" is to call out that heckler, or call out his boss, or call out his news station, and remind people that an independent (and ideally, civil) media and proper discourse is fundamental to a well functioning democracy.
> 
> You don't send an email blast out to the entire country (specially to his supporters) saying, "see, because of this one guy, we should get rid of all independent and publicly funded news, and you should all just let us, the wise and benevolent leaders of the CPC, tell you what's true."



1 Because David Akin isn't a Liberal heckler he's a media personality. 

2 Because PP has been and will be under attack from the media for the duration of his time as leader of the CPC.  They have placed him firmly on a defensive footing.


----------



## Lumber (14 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> 1 Because David Akin isn't a Liberal heckler he's a media personality.
> 
> 2 Because PP has been and will be under attack from the media for the duration of his time as leader of the CPC.  They have placed him firmly on a defensive footing.


 1. This was the term PP himself used in the video, though not in the letter.

2. I'm not sure your point here? Are you saying that because PP will be under attack from the media the whole time, he has to try and go around the media? What about the media that is supportive of him? National Post, True North, Western Standard, _Rebel News... _Calgary Herald?


----------



## Lumber (14 Sep 2022)

Also, the Globe and Mail, apparently.


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> 1. This was the term PP himself used in the video, though not in the letter.
> 
> 2. I'm not sure your point here? _*Are you saying that because PP will be under attack from the media the whole time, he has to try and go around the media?*_ What about the media that is supportive of him? National Post, True North, Western Standard, _Rebel News... _Calgary Herald?


That was the Harper strategy and I suspect it will be Pierre Poilievre's, too. And I suspect that _Post Media_ and _Sun Media_ will both watch, happily, even cheer him on. gleefully, from the sidelines because Mr. Poilievre is attacking their competitors.

Will the strategy work?

It didn't for Prime Minister harper - the "old," mainstream media - _CBC_, the _Toronto Star_, _CTV_, even the normal pro-Conservative _Globe and Mail_, etc - remained hostile and the Conservatives wee unable to reach past them and speak, directly, to local audiences. Even independent outlets like CHCH/Channel Zero would not give the Conservatives a direct, local "voice" because they didn't want to be seen as openly partisan.

Can it work now?

Maybe. As others have pointed out, we, Canadians, are becoming more and More and MORE divided on socio-political as opposed to economic grounds. There are, now, more ways to "speak" directly to Canadians than there were even a decade ago.


----------



## IKnowNothing (14 Sep 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> And I suspect that _Post Media_ and _Sun Media_ will both watch, happily, even cheer him on. gleefully, from the sidelines because Mr. Poilievre is attacking their competitors.



Ah yes. Sun and Post media, where noted Liberal heckler/ mouthpiece  David Akin spent most of a decade in progressively senior political roles.    Adds up.


The outburst was definitely uncharacteristically unprofessional, but when David Akin is being called out as not to be trusted the message isn't "Watch out for media bias" it's "Thou shall not contradict Pierre"


----------



## Good2Golf (14 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> You don't send an email blast out to the entire country (specially to his supporters) saying, "see, because of this one guy, we should get rid of all independent and publicly funded news, and you should all just let us, the wise and benevolent leaders of the CPC, tell you what's true."


Perhaps he should skip the letters and go straight to publicly pontificating with a wide brush as PM about how the media on the whole is behaving deplorably and against Canadian values… 😉


----------



## Remius (14 Sep 2022)

David Akin was out of line.  He even looked a little nuts. 

But…

He isn’t exactly a “liberal heckler” if you look at his background.   Also, I got the letter about the media being the enemy and to send money.  

Not actually shocked to be honest.   PP will use social media and will stoke that sort of thing so I have no idea why anyone would be surprised.   

Will be an interesting time.


----------



## Navy_Pete (14 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> David Akin was out of line.  He even looked a little nuts.
> 
> But…
> 
> ...


Interesting how Chrystia Freeland being verbally attacked should suck it up and not be a snowflake, when it's PP he needs protected and funded to fight back against it.

So much for a move towards the centre post campaign win; here's hoping for a LPC party back to the centre (under a new leader).


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Sep 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> That was the Harper strategy and I suspect it will be Pierre Poilievre's, too. And I suspect that _Post Media_ and _Sun Media_ will both watch, happily, even cheer him on. gleefully, from the sidelines because Mr. Poilievre is attacking their competitors.
> 
> Will the strategy work?
> 
> ...



Can I take advantage of your age?  I would enjoy hearing your remembrances of how Diefenbaker was perceived.


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Sep 2022)

As to bypassing media...

"The Church in Peril"  - Pamphlets being published in the Netherlands.

Samizdat predates the Internet.  And Samizdat predates Samizdat.


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Sep 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Can I take advantage of your age?  I would enjoy hearing your remembrances of how Diefenbaker was perceived.


The key thing to remember is that Dief was a populist before that word became popular.  But, _in my opinion_, you must see Diefenbakjer in tandem with TC Douglas.

He, and Tommy Douglas, too, were old style "preachers" - Dief was a noted trial lawyer and Douglas was, in fact, an evangelical (Baptist) minister. They were both outstanding stump speakers - spellbinding is not too strong a word.

Both espoused anti-establishment, "populist" ideals, ideas and policiers. Both championed the "little guys" against Bay Street and, more generally, against what we now call the _Laurentian Consensus_ or the _Laurentian Elites_. Both, quite unintentionally, laid the paving stones for Pierre Trudeau's own form of illiberal (_my opinion_, again) populism.


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Sep 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> The key thing to remember is that Dief was a populist before that word became popular.  But, _in my opinion_, you must see Diefenbakjer in tandem with TC Douglas.
> 
> He, and Tommy Douglas, too, were old style "preachers" - Dief was a noted trial lawyer and Douglas was, in fact, an evangelical (Baptist) minister. They were both outstanding stump speakers - spellbinding is not too strong a word.
> 
> Both espoused anti-establishment, "populist" ideals, ideas and policiers. Both championed the "little guys" against Bay Street and, more generally, against what we now call the _Laurentian Consensus_ or the _Laurentian Elites_. Both, quite unintentionally, laid the paving stones for Pierre Trudeau's own form of illiberal (_my opinion_, again) populism.



Is it fair to say that neither Tommy nor the Dief were well received in Montreal's Square Mile, Ottawa or Bay Street?  Was there a difference between the way the Globe, the Star and the Telegram covered them?

PS - I take a degree of exception to the "evangelical" label.  Baptists were baptists long before some of their number became evangelicals.  In my opinion Tommy was well anchored in the conventional protestant community.  As was Dief for that matter, he too was a Baptist. (Scots-German).


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Sep 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Is it fair to say that neither Tommy nor the Dief were well received in Montreal's Square Mile, Ottawa or Bay Street?  Was there a difference between the way the Globe, the Star and the Telegram covered them?


They were covered much, much differently, because:

1. Dief was the PM - he won what was, then, the biggest majority government in Canadians history - and he had some downright crazy ideas. This is, still, 50 years on, an excellent analysis; but​2. the Toronto based media was much kinder to Tommy Douglas because -​a. they supported his medical insurance scheme, and​b. the CCF enjoyed general media support as the "conscience off parliament" and they were never a threat to the _Laurentian Consensus_.​


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Sep 2022)

Actually, @Edward Campbell 

You might be suggesting that Diefenbaker and Douglas, as populists, presage Trump and Sanders.  Two sides of the same anti-establishment coin.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2022)

Status of media has changed since Harper was in office.

Accepting money from government may have been necessary, but it wasn't "free".  It's cost them credibility among some people.

The question is whether they respond to the goad.  If they do, they emphasize the point.


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Sep 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> They were covered much, much differently, because:
> 
> 1. Dief was the PM - he won what was, then, the biggest majority government in Canadians history - and he had some downright crazy ideas. This is, still, 50 years on, an excellent analysis; but​2. the Toronto based media was much kinder to Tommy Douglas because -​a. they supported his medical insurance scheme, and​b. the CCF enjoyed general media support as the "conscience off parliament" and they were never a threat to the _Laurentian Consensus_.​



Thanks for the reference on Diefenbaker.  At first glance it appears something other than a hagiography.


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Sep 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Actually, @Edward Campbell
> 
> You might be suggesting that Diefenbaker and Douglas, as populists, presage Trump and Sanders.  Two sides of the same anti-establishment coin.


Yes, I am ... they made Trump (and Justin Trudeau who I see as the flip side of the same coin) look like amateurs. I watched several of the Trump (and Trudeau) speeches (none from start to finish, I think) and neither could hold a candle to either Dief the Chief or Tommy Douglas. Both Diefenbaker and Douglas had big ideas - some were crazy, to be sure - but they were big, and they could stir a crowd with them - with positive ideas, not recycled hate. Trump (and Trudeau) just tried/try to stoke already simmering anger. 

Trump (and Trudeau) were/are amateur populists; Diefenbaker and Douglas were the real deal.


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Sep 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Thanks for the reference on Diefenbaker.  At first glance it appears something other than a hagiography.


Many people, especially Conservatives, called it a hatchet job. Newman didn't like Dief nor did he like his politics but I think he captured the essential man: the renegade.


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Sep 2022)

Having had the chance to read Newman's 1989 introduction I am struck by the cultural continuity of the Prairies - or flyover country as the Americans might refer to it.

But there is also the Quebec - Socred - Real Caouette faction of note in there.  The fact that Diefenbaker managed to appeal to Quebecers - but that faction is now owned by the BQ and the CAQ.


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Sep 2022)

Three of Diefenbaker's ideas that continue to resonate with me are:

The Bill of Rights
The Right to Property
Northern Development.


----------



## TacticalTea (14 Sep 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Actually, @Edward Campbell
> 
> You might be suggesting that Diefenbaker and Douglas, as populists, presage Trump and Sanders.  Two sides of the same anti-establishment coin.


I see Trudeau as much more of a populist than Sanders.

The latter's long form interview with Joe Rogan gives one great insight into his psyche and beliefs. I don't think Trudeau could keep an hour long interview interesting.

Or, perhaps as EC reframed it, Sanders is a ''real deal'' populist, unlike Junior.


----------



## Furniture (14 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> No, I saw the video, he definitely did. Why would you even ask that? I never insinuated it didn't happen.
> 
> The proper response to a single "liberal heckler" is to call out that heckler, or call out his boss, or call out his news station, and remind people that an independent (and ideally, civil) media and proper discourse is fundamental to a well functioning democracy.
> 
> You don't send an email blast out to the entire country (specially to his supporters) saying, "see, because of this one guy, we should get rid of all independent and publicly funded news, and you should all just let us, the wise and benevolent leaders of the CPC, tell you what's true."


Thats not what the message said though, he said they won't get "_our messages_" out to Canadians. Essentially, we don't trust the media to not spin our messaging to suit their personal biases. 

David Aiken let the mask slip, which will damage media credibility... They are in damage control mode now because the ugly truth was out for all to see. The media pretends to be unbiased, and uses that pretense to influence people. 

I don't think PP would be the greatest PM in history, but he also isn't the devil. The current government, aided by a sympathetic media, has done much to lay the foundations of distrust people are building on.


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Sep 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> I see Trudeau as much more of a populist than Sanders.
> 
> The latter's long form interview with Joe Rogan gives one great insight into his psyche and beliefs. I don't think Trudeau could keep an hour long interview interesting.
> 
> Or, perhaps as EC reframed it, Sanders is a ''real deal'' populist, unlike Junior.



You don't have to be a populist to be a demagogue.  Demagogues, fundamentally, are actors - rhetoricians.   They don't need to be bright.


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> 1. This was the term PP himself used in the video, though not in the letter.
> 
> 2. I'm not sure your point here? Are you saying that because PP will be under attack from the media the whole time, he has to try and go around the media? What about the media that is supportive of him? National Post, True North, Western Standard, _Rebel News... _Calgary Herald?



1. No, he asked a rhetorical question.  At least in the tweet.

2.  No PP is always going to be on defensive with media, if it wasn't it's now obvious.  And he can use this situation to show reinforce the thought that the media is biased.  Well done Akin.



Navy_Pete said:


> Interesting how Chrystia Freeland being verbally attacked should suck it up and not be a snowflake, when it's PP he needs protected and funded to fight back against it.
> 
> So much for a move towards the centre post campaign win; here's hoping for a LPC party back to the centre (under a new leader).



Freeland was heckled by a private citizen, not the same.

That private citizen as little ability to influence the country.  Akin and the media, thats a completely different story.

Does he need to be protected ?  No more than any other party leader.

Why is it an attack with Freeland but heckled with PP ?


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2022)

Poilievre was smart to get out in front, and had nothing to lose (he's going to get slimed regardless).  By laying down this marker, he forces his critics who have an ethical spine to be constructive if they don't want to end up in the bin with the other critics, who will get the "Aha! Told you so!" treatment.


----------



## Lumber (14 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Poilievre was smart to get out in front, and had nothing to lose (he's going to get slimed regardless).  By laying down this marker, he forces his critics who have an ethical spine to be constructive if they don't want to end up in the bin with the other critics, who will get the "Aha! Told you so!" treatment.


Call me cynical, but by sowing distrust at the media in general, then even if the "corrupt liberal media" levels honest and verifiable criticisms at PP, his supporters won't believe it, and cry foul at the bias.


----------



## Lumber (14 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Perhaps he should skip the letters and go straight to publicly pontificating with a wide brush as PM about how the media on the whole is behaving deplorably and against Canadian values… 😉


Got any specific example, or can you even elaborate generally, on how the media is behaving against Canadian values? Not trying to s**t post here; I'm genuinely curious what they've done to receive such derision.


----------



## IKnowNothing (14 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Call me cynical, but by sowing distrust at the media in general, then even if the "corrupt liberal media" levels honest and verifiable criticisms at PP, his supporters won't believe it, and cry foul at the bias.


Distrust in the media in general, in this case specifically in a well respected, fair handed yet undoubtedly Conservative media personality.  He (Akin) acted terribly in this case, but I have no doubt that the point he was trying to raise would be valid.

What he (PP) did was throw a warning broadside at Sun Media, Post Media, and all mainstream conservative outlets and personalities, that Conservative credentials or lack of left wing bias be damned, if you're not with me you're out.


----------



## QV (14 Sep 2022)

Plenty of examples of media acting deliberately dishonest over the past 7 years. Many people can see it. PP is popular because he takes them head on. The media fears a PP government will cut funding so they will be relentless.


----------



## Furniture (14 Sep 2022)

Here is a clip of the interaction posted by CTV.






Who appears to be the problem here? Who is undermining media credibility?

The best part is when Mr. Aikin defends his behaviour by saying he did the same thing to Minister Baird... Essentially admitting on camera he treats CPC members differently than others. 

Finally, when seen in context the " Liberal Heckler" comment was an attempt at humour to defuse the situation.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2022)

It's likely that supporters will overreach with claims of bias.

There's a fix for that: form a national professional media association, adopt a code of ethics, grant a credential, and revoke it from everyone who breaks the code.  The credential is a marker of trustworthiness, and out of the hands of partisan media critics.


----------



## QV (14 Sep 2022)

Furniture said:


> Here is a clip of the interaction posted by CTV.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Akin is clearly triggered by a PP leadership win.


----------



## ModlrMike (14 Sep 2022)

That was highly unprofessional of Mr Aikin. When, as a reporter, you become the story, you have failed.


----------



## Good2Golf (14 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Got any specific example, or can you even elaborate generally, on how the media is behaving against Canadian values? Not trying to s**t post here; I'm genuinely curious what they've done to receive such derision.


It was a hybrid post and the smilie included a nuance that went beyond just PP and media specifically, so lets look at two elements: 
1) PP gets muckraked/trolled by Aiken, with pretty good clarity as noted in @QV’s post above, and can only explain that he did the same to a previous Govt’s Minister, but uses no example of doing same to a current/Liberal Minister, so PP jousts back with a Liberal Heckler joke…best response? Perhaps not in that it could be taken out of the context of the immediate exchange, but not a wonton hatred of all media as some have conflated; and
2) other ‘PM-grade’ individuals appeared not to have any issues broadbrushing, and while we’re all mindful that two wrongs do make a right (except in arithmetic), some folks seem to be selective in how huffy they get against some (PP), but make apologies and communicate understanding when others are much more divisive and dole out underserved and inciteful words…


----------



## Blackadder1916 (14 Sep 2022)

David Akin's twitter


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1569875919250096129
What I took as the essence of his apology cum explanation; "We all want politicians to answer questions — but there are better ways of making that point."

I guess the rub being this was the second presser in a row that Mr. Poilievre did not take questions.  Undoubtedly frustrating for a reporter but what is the line?  Do you ask questions regardless?  Do you wait until the subject finishes his canned presentation (like the previous day when he finished and left without comment before questions could be asked)?  Or do you immediately press the question - a valid one considering the subject using the topic as part of his leadership platform - and in the ensuing exchange get the subject to say he will take questions after his presentation? I haven't seen the end of the presser (PP's presentation became irrelevant as soon as he engaged with Akin), so I don't know if he kept his word and took questions.  My opinion is that if a politician is going to stand in front of reporters, he has to expect questions.  If he's not going to answer questions, then he should just ignore them (the reporters, as well as the questions).


----------



## Kat Stevens (14 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Call me cynical, but by sowing distrust at the media in general, then even if the "corrupt liberal media" levels honest and verifiable criticisms at PP, his supporters won't believe it, and cry foul at the bias.


Gee, I wonder how JT would feel if that were ever to happen to him?


----------



## Remius (14 Sep 2022)

More on some of the fallout for Alain Rayes after leaving the CPC.









						Text message campaign targets Quebec MP Alain Rayes, who left Conservative party
					

A member of Parliament who quit the Conservative caucus says Pierre Poilievre's office sent a text message to party members in his Quebec riding asking them to encourage him to resign.




					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## Furniture (14 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> More on some of the fallout for Alain Rayes after leaving the CPC.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If the party did send a message asking people to badger the MP, that is a step too far.

If the message was "seen by the Canadian Press", why wasn't it shown? Makes me think that perhaps people might not interpret it the way the article wants people to.


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Sep 2022)

Blackadder1916 said:


> David Akin's twitter
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1569875919250096129
> ...



That was pretty classy of Akin.


----------



## Remius (14 Sep 2022)

Furniture said:


> If the party did send a message asking people to badger the MP, that is a step too far.
> 
> If the message was "seen by the Canadian Press", why wasn't it shown? Makes me think that perhaps people might not interpret it the way the article wants people to.


Probably wasn’t shown until they can confirm it was sent.

Edit: the CBC has shown it with the caveat that it was provided by Mr. Rayes.  Pretty much reads as reported.


----------



## Furniture (14 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Probably wasn’t shown until they can confirm it was sent.
> 
> Edit: the CBC has shown it with the caveat that it was provided by Mr. Rayes.  Pretty much reads as reported.


I just checked it out, looks like the CPC took what was a day of potential victory and threw it away... Must have Putin's team helping them out. 🤣


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Sep 2022)

Furniture said:


> I just checked it out, looks like the CPC took what was a day of potential victory and threw it away... Must have Putin's team helping them out. 🤣



Never put it past the Cons to miss an opportunity to step on their own who-ha's. 

Sometimes the incompetency they show is astounding.


----------



## brihard (14 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> That was pretty classy of Akin.


I wouldn’t go so far as to say “classy”. I’d say it’s the necessary and appropriate display of accountability that should be requisite of anyone who intends to be taken seriously in the public discourse. It’s not ‘class’ when you screw up and do something stupid and you own it. It’s merely restoring yourself to the minimum acceptable standard.


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Sep 2022)

brihard said:


> I wouldn’t go so far as to say “classy”. I’d say it’s the necessary and appropriate display of accountability that should be requisite of anyone who intends to be taken seriously in the public discourse. It’s not ‘class’ when you screw up and do something stupid and you own it. It’s merely restoring yourself to the minimum acceptable standard.



In this day an age anyone in a public position showing accountability is pretty classy. 

He could have said he remembered differently


----------



## RangerRay (14 Sep 2022)

Harassment is wrong, no matter who does it. 








						Kristin Raworth: Call out harassment by your own political tribe
					

It is, quite literally, the least you could do




					theline.substack.com


----------



## daftandbarmy (14 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> That was pretty classy of Akin.



If I was PP I would have paid him to do that.

How else would he get any air time with the Royal Funeral hogging the airwaves? #macchiavellianhellyeah


----------



## OldSolduer (14 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Never put it past the Cons to miss an opportunity to step on their own who-ha's.
> 
> Sometimes the incompetency they show is astounding.


The abortion question enters the chat…


----------



## Spencer100 (14 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> It's likely that supporters will overreach with claims of bias.
> 
> There's a fix for that: form a national professional media association, adopt a code of ethics, grant a credential, and revoke it from everyone who breaks the code.  The credential is a marker of trustworthiness, and out of the hands of partisan media critics.


Perfect an organization that can even more reinforce and give cover to the bias in the system.  That's what is needed!


----------



## Kirkhill (15 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> It's likely that supporters will overreach with claims of bias.
> 
> There's a fix for that: form a national professional media association, adopt a code of ethics, grant a credential, and revoke it from everyone who breaks the code.  The credential is a marker of trustworthiness, and out of the hands of partisan media critics.


I do not like that.

I'd sooner have honest hecklers.  The audience can decide who is the boor.


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Sep 2022)

I’ll call those false equivalencies.  

A biased media (heavily influenced by undenied direct compensation north of one billion dollars), is not the same as a personalized branding program of facile discrediting of all but few select media  elements as fake news.

This also supports a side of the narrative that seems blind to its own bombast and that of politicians who profit from that bombast (filled with nazis, horrible people not worthy of being considered consistent with Canadian values, etc.)

At the very least, shouldn’t a Canadian ask, I care more about what’s happening in Canada now than trying to rehash what happened south of the border and equate the two…?


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> At the very least, shouldn’t a Canadian ask, I care more about what’s happening in Canada now than trying to rehash what happened south of the border and equate the two…?



There is a History in Canada to look south and say “yeah, no thanks, we don’t want that here.”   

Been happening since the revolutionary war.


----------



## Lumber (15 Sep 2022)

I'm having a little trouble following you, so I apologize, but my responses might miss the mark based on an incorrect foundation:


Good2Golf said:


> A biased media (heavily influenced by undenied direct compensation north of one billion dollars), is not the same as a personalized branding program of facile discrediting of all but few select media  elements as fake news.


It's only the CBC that received direct compensation. Everyone else is independent, so why are they considered biased as well?


Good2Golf said:


> This also supports a side of the narrative that seems blind to its own bombast and that of politicians who profit from that bombast (filled with nazis, horrible people not worthy of being considered consistent with Canadian values, etc.)


This is the part I'm most uncertain about what you're saying. Are you saying that our politicians are a bunch of nazis, horrible people, all not worth of being considered consistent with Canadian values, or are you saying that the "bombast" that our politicians espouse is that PP and his ilk are nazis, horrible people, etc (I think you mean the latter).


Good2Golf said:


> At the very least, shouldn’t a Canadian ask, I care more about what’s happening in Canada now than trying to rehash what happened south of the border and equate the two…?


Yes. But you can do both. I have lots of free time.


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> There is a History in Canada to look south and say “yeah, no thanks, we don’t want that here.”
> 
> Been happening since the revolutionary war.


Introspection, mindful comparisons and consideration, sure.  I’m okay with that.  

Carefully-veiled gaslighting and vilification, whilst pretending that’s not happening…we should be above that…but I acknowledge that the average Canadian is okay with the duality of being preachy and judging of others, yet pretending their own fences is fragrant…


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Just going to leave this here...
> 
> View attachment 73553



I would assert a person with, what I suspect, are your biases will see that connection.  No offence meant, just my opinion and observation.  You're free to disagree. 

I will simply point again to Akin, the proof is in the pudding.  And I think its a fair statement to not trust the Canadian media to report on PP or his message with the same velvet glove handling and spin that they will report on other politicians.


----------



## IKnowNothing (15 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Carefully-veiled gaslighting and vilification, whilst pretending that’s not happening…we should be above that…


Honestly, that's the difference between the two pictures. PP's not Trump.  Rather than shouting from the mountaintop that all news is fake news, PP quietly (via non-public email) gaslit his followers by spinning a well respected conservative reporter losing his cool over his (PP's) repeated refusal to take questions at press conferences into proof of that reporter (and the rest of the media) being biased against him.  Now many want that reporter cancelled, and a fair and balanced voice won't be taken seriously.  We're on what, Day 5?


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Honestly, that's the difference between the two pictures. PP's not Trump.  Rather than shouting from the mountaintop that all news is fake news, PP quietly (via non-public email) gaslit his followers by spinning a well respected conservative reporter losing his cool over his (PP's) repeated refusal to take questions at press conferences into proof of that reporter (and the rest of the media) being biased against him.  Now many want that reporter cancelled, and a fair and balanced voice won't be taken seriously.  We're on what, Day 5?



That's the world we are in now.  Like it or not.  PP didn't make it this way, he is just playing the game as its being played now.  And the game plays both ways.


----------



## Lumber (15 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> We're on what, Day 5?


Day 3, actually.


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Day 3, actually.
> 
> View attachment 73555



I say again: 



> Never put it past the Cons to miss an opportunity to step on their own who-ha's.
> 
> Sometimes the incompetency they show is astounding.


----------



## Lumber (15 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I would assert a person with, what I suspect, are your biases will see that connection.  No offence meant, just my opinion and observation.  You're free to disagree.


Just to be clear, my bias is not toward the LPC or away from the CPC. If I have a bias, I have a bias away from anything that is not based on logic and facts, and away from those (i.e. PP) who would take advantage and espouse these things (whether they believe them or are just taking advantage of them). I.e. a bunch of people who go around screaming that Trudeau is a tyrant and that we have no freedom in Canada. I'm sorry, I've spend too much time travelling the world and studying world politics to know how far from the truth that is. So when someone like PP latches onto the fervor surrounding that message, I'm out.


----------



## IKnowNothing (15 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> PP didn't make it this way, he is just playing the game as its being played now.  And the game plays both ways.


The game is played by taking the unique position of being completely sheltered from "live" scrutiny, questioning, and contrary thought? The leader of the official opposition doesn't get to hide on twitter and communicate solely through prepared statements.

As unprofessional as Akin's outburst was, PP is whining about bias because he didn't want to have his series of canned messages diluted by having to face questions. It's just as unprofessional and leagues more petulant.


----------



## Lumber (15 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> The game is played by taking the unique position of being completely sheltered from "live" scrutiny, questioning, and contrary thought? The leader of the official opposition doesn't get to hide on twitter and communicate solely through prepared statements.
> 
> As unprofessional as Akin's outburst was, PP is whining about bias because he didn't want to have his series of canned messages diluted by having to face questions. It's just as unprofessional and leagues more petulant.


I'm actually going to defend PP here. I saw the video (but correct me if I'm remembering incorrectly), he said he would answer questions at the end, and Akin started heckling him at the very beginning of PP's initial statement.


----------



## IKnowNothing (15 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> I'm actually going to defend PP here. I saw the video (but correct me if I'm remembering incorrectly), he said he would answer questions at the end, and Akin started heckling him at the very beginning of PP's initial statement.


As far as I know the "terms" of the press conference are announced upfront, and this one (like the one before it) allowed for no questions.  The heckling lead to an at the podium audible from PP to allow 2.


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> I'm having a little trouble following you, so I apologize, but my responses might miss the mark based on an incorrect foundation:





Lumber said:


> It's only the CBC that received direct compensation. Everyone else is independent, so why are they considered biased as well?


CBC gets the lion share of direct compensation, but there is also a significant amount of direct partial funding through the Canadian Media Find, the Canadian Periodical Fund and indirects through highly incentivized tax-rebates.  



Lumber said:


> This is the part I'm most uncertain about what you're saying. Are you saying that our politicians are a bunch of nazis, horrible people, all not worth of being considered consistent with Canadian values, or are you saying that the "bombast" that our politicians espouse is that PP and his ilk are nazis, horrible people, etc (I think you mean the latter).



No, but that Trudeau and Co. directly impugn a wider group of Canadian’s based on the single Nazi/white supremist flag and dig deep into his theatrical background and broad brushed a far wider swath of Canada than was at all warranted.  



Lumber said:


> Yes. But you can do both. I have lots of free time.


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Just to be clear, my bias is not toward the LPC or away from the CPC. If I have a bias, I have a bias away from anything that is not based on logic and facts, and away from those (i.e. PP) who would take advantage and espouse these things (whether they believe them or are just taking advantage of them). I.e. a bunch of people who go around screaming that Trudeau is a tyrant and that we have no freedom in Canada. I'm sorry, I've spend too much time travelling the world and studying world politics to know how far from the truth that is. So when someone like PP latches onto the fervor surrounding that message, I'm out.



Its not my intention to chase you out of a conversation.  My apologies if that was your perception.

Having said that, if you're going to post in a public forum you can expect people to disagree with you and find fault with your positions.  Its not personal.  Your ideas are not you.



IKnowNothing said:


> The game is played by taking the unique position of being completely sheltered from "live" scrutiny, questioning, and contrary thought? The leader of the official opposition doesn't get to hide on twitter and communicate solely through prepared statements.
> 
> As unprofessional as Akin's outburst was, PP is whining about bias because he didn't want to have his series of canned messages diluted by having to face questions. It's just as unprofessional and leagues more petulant.



I think we diametrically disagree about the existence of media bias in this country.  I firmly believe that it is real and slanted away from the Conservative party, and its going to get worse.


----------



## Lumber (15 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Its not my intention to chase you out of a conversation.  My apologies if that was your perception.


No apology is necessary. That wasn't my perception.

Rather, what I've seen a lot lately is the propensity of people on this forum to assume that attacking one position/person/idea means support for the opposite (i.e. I attack PP therefore I must be a Trudeau loving liberal lacky). 

Just trying to make my position, or lack thereof, more clear.


----------



## IKnowNothing (15 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I think we diametrically disagree about the existence of media bias in this country.  I firmly believe that it is real and slanted away from the Conservative party, and its going to get worse.


I'm of many minds on this.  Gonna work broad to specific

All people and media carry some sort of inherent bias, it's simply human. (AP/ Reuters etc do a hell of a job cutting through it though, but being so sterile-y fact based limits utility)

Canadian MSM, as an entity, is fairly objective.  There are leanings to both sides of the spectrum, but by and large the major outlets are very anchored in facts/ reality, with their bias primarily shown in word choice, headlines, story selection, then ramping up when you get to editorializing.  No fake news and make believe, just the same things being seen and presented differently from differing perspectives.   If you've done your due diligence on the outlets and can read things critically, you should be able to read/visit the news of any of the Star/CBC/Global/Globe/Post/Sun and come out more informed.   None of them are CNN, none of them are Fox.

David Akin specifically, is a respected, long tenured, balanced but right leaning personality. 

Overall I'd agree that more outlets lean away from the CPC than towards, but not to a degree worthy of shutting them out as a reader/listener,  and certainly not to the point where it's acceptable for the leader of a mainstream federal party to refuse to engage with them for months, then throw a tantrum and take his ball home when they won't dance to his tune and give him airtime without questions.


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> No apology is necessary. That wasn't my perception.
> 
> Rather, what I've seen a lot lately is the propensity of people on this forum to assume that attacking one position/person/idea means support for the opposite (i.e. I attack PP therefore I must be a Trudeau loving liberal lacky).
> 
> Just trying to make my position, or lack thereof, more clear.



That's very fair.  And I can admit I am probably part of that group.  Having said that there is also a propensity for people on this forum to attack only one side and claim they are unbiased.

Personally, I have made it clear on these forums I am a conservative party member.  With fairly fiscally conservative and socially liberal leanings. But I have no problem giving other parties kudos for good work and face palming myself when the Cons FUBAR something.



IKnowNothing said:


> I'm of many minds on this.  Gonna work broad to specific
> 
> All people and media carry some sort of inherent bias, it's simply human. (AP/ Reuters etc do a hell of a job cutting through it though, but being so sterile-y fact based limits utility)



Having a bias is one thing, and its human.  But reporting on events and happenings unequally is not.  I cannot imagine a Conservative government would get the same treatment that the current government does if they had been in power as long and committed the same massive errors.  I may be wrong, we will never know.



IKnowNothing said:


> Canadian MSM, as an entity, is fairly objective.  There are leanings to both sides of the spectrum, but by and large the major outlets are very anchored in facts/ reality, with their bias primarily shown in word choice, headlines, story selection, then ramping up when you get to editorializing.  No fake news and make believe, just the same things being seen and presented differently from differing perspectives.   If you've done your due diligence on the outlets and can read things critically, you should be able to read/visit the news of any of the Star/CBC/Global/Globe/Post/Sun and come out more informed.   None of them are CNN, none of them are Fox.



No doubt that in Canada you can find right leaning media.  But the big ones with the most opportunity to influence are left leaning.  In Canada is not so much an overtly adversarial stance as its a lack of emphasis or rush to move on.



IKnowNothing said:


> David Akin specifically, is a respected, long tenured, balanced but right leaning personality.



Maybe, I searched on this and nothing came up.



IKnowNothing said:


> Overall I'd agree that more outlets lean away from the CPC than towards, but not to a degree worthy of shutting them out as a reader/listener,  and certainly not to the point where it's acceptable for the leader of a mainstream federal party to refuse to engage with them for months, then throw a tantrum and take his ball home when they won't dance to his tune and give him airtime without questions.



The Canadian Conservative community is very suspicious of the MSM. Our media will try to pit PP as some evil being and equate him to Trump. The worst thing the MSM can do is give PP points to say _"see, I told you so".  _And if they continue to then they have no one to blame but themselves.


----------



## Navy_Pete (15 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> As far as I know the "terms" of the press conference are announced upfront, and this one (like the one before it) allowed for no questions.  The heckling lead to an at the podium audible from PP to allow 2.


Doesn't a press conference imply Q&A? Otherwise its just an announcement. If he wants press to play his bit on the news, there is a give/take relationship that includes asking questions as part of having a free press (otherwise it's just propaganda). This is a weird stance from a career politician and not sure why he thought he'd keep getting away with it.


----------



## RangerRay (15 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> I'm of many minds on this.  Gonna work broad to specific
> 
> All people and media carry some sort of inherent bias, it's simply human. (AP/ Reuters etc do a hell of a job cutting through it though, but being so sterile-y fact based limits utility)
> 
> ...


I would agree with this and add that we don’t have the diversity in thought in journalism as we did decades ago. This is more a case of a fish not knowing it’s wet because journalists now have more or less the same backgrounds. Instead of coming from the working classes like they did decades ago, now they come from the upper middle class, go to the same centre-left J-Schools and are raised and hang out in those same segments of society. After all, who can afford to intern for free in places like Toronto, Vancouver, or New York where our premier media outlets are located?  But I don’t think this is a deliberate bias on the part of today’s journalists. More a case of people from narrow backgrounds not understanding parts of society they have had superficial exposure to.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Sep 2022)

Once upon a time, there was a special federal health-care funding measure which undertook to increase funding by 6% per year, for 10 years - Paul Martin's health care accord, colloquially known as a "fix for a generation".  It had a start and an end.  Martin's government did not outlast its commitment, but the subsequent (Harper) government kept it and extended it two years.

When the program terminated, activists branded Harper as "cutting health care".  And the media dutifully reported that, in almost no cases bothering to explain - it would have taken only one or two sentences - that the cut was programmed in by Paul Martin's Liberals, or to credit Conservatives with extending it.

Media. Bias.


----------



## Edward Campbell (15 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Doesn't a press conference imply Q&A? Otherwise its just an announcement. If he wants press to play his bit on the news, there is a give/take relationship that includes asking questions as part of having a free press (otherwise it's just propaganda). This is a weird stance from a career politician and not sure why he thought he'd keep getting away with it.


*Bingo! *The very word "confer" implies some verbal to_ing_ and fro_ing, _doesn't it?

But he's not the real master of this art - that's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the announcer-in-chief. Ask a rude question - say about clean drinking water for First Nations - and you'll be given the bum's rush by the PM's security service (‘Unacceptable and offensive’: Trudeau gets called out over sarcastic response to Grassy Narrows advocate - APTN News).


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Sep 2022)

Edward Campbell said:


> *Bingo! *The very word "confer" implies some verbal to_ing_ and fro_ing, _doesn't it?
> 
> But he's not the real master of this art - that's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the announcer-in-chief. Ask a rude question - say about clean drinking water for First Nations - and you'll be given the bum's rush by the PM's security service (‘Unacceptable and offensive’: Trudeau gets called out over sarcastic response to Grassy Narrows advocate - APTN News).



From what I saw, posted here, PP never had a chance to state his point(s) and he was instantly let into by Akin.  With Akin trying to talk over PP from the get go. 

If that's the reception I received, I wouldn't stick around for questions either.


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> That's very fair.  And I can admit I am probably part of that group.  Having said that there is also a propensity for people on this forum to attack only one side and claim they are unbiased.
> 
> Personally, I have made it clear on these forums I am a conservative party member.  With fairly fiscally conservative and socially liberal leanings. But I have no problem giving other parties kudos for good work and face palming myself when the Cons FUBAR something.
> 
> ...



David Akin:  David Akin - Wikipedia

Covers where he’s worked,  NP, G&M and CTV among a few notables.  But was also working for the short lived sun media cable news channel.  Hardly left leaning. 

That being said. He was out of line and didn’t do him or his profession any favours.


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> From what I saw, posted here, PP never had a chance to state his point(s) and he was instantly let into by Akin.  With Akin trying to talk over PP from the get go.
> 
> If that's the reception I received, I wouldn't stick around for questions either.


I think the stage was set before with them saying there would be no questions.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Sep 2022)

Another bleed-over from US politics.  Biden-style press exposure.


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Another bleed-over from US politics.  Biden-style press exposure.


Not so sure about that.  Harper had a contentious relationship with the media during his tenure. 






						Harper refuses to explain limits on media queries
					

By Mark Kennedy




					nationalpost.com


----------



## Blackadder1916 (15 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> IKnowNothing said:
> 
> 
> > David Akin specifically, is a respected, long tenured, balanced but right leaning personality.
> ...



@IKnowNothing's description of David Akin as "right leaning" may be a bit of a stretch but "balanced" is not. (i.e., balanced is not a stretch in describing him)  Maybe I'm having an aluminum mess tin moment, but I seem to recall Mr. Akin commenting (or seeking information) on these forums a few times in the past (maybe distant past, since I'm unable to find him in the membership, he likely hasn't visited since we migrated to this platform).

In a post from 2015 Mr. Akin was characterized by one of the most respected members of this community as:


> _Caveat lector_: David Akin, of _Sun News_ is a member, here and is known by some members. He is, very generally, pro-Conservative, or, at least, not part of the _anti-Harper movement_.



One of the best commentaries about David Akin's "conservative credentials" that I have read was in Maclean's from 2015 by David Akin.





__





						David Akin: In defence of Sun News
					

Sun Media's national bureau chief weighs in on what was missing from coverage of the Sun News Network's demise




					www.macleans.ca
				




While he's not perfect, if most of the journalists in this country (and a few others) had his standards we would be better for it.


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Sep 2022)

To be honest, Akin surprised me with the lead-in jousting. He’s normally pretty balanced.  While I wouldn’t go as far as to count him in Christie Blatchford’s (RIP) cadre, I would count him amongst the Murray Brewsters and Ashley Burkes of Canadian journalism.  He did catch himself the day after and give him credit where credits it due.  PP was playing hurt feelings a bit too, but I don’t think he was showing a brash/wonton disregard for Canadian press overall, and I took his semi-light tongue-in-cheek plaintive response to Akin as a reasonable part of the to’ing and fro’ing.


----------



## IKnowNothing (15 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> To be honest, Akin surprised me with the lead-in jousting. He’s normally pretty balanced.  While I wouldn’t go as far as to count him in Christie Blatchford’s (RIP) cadre, I would count him amongst the Murray Brewsters and Ashley Burkes of Canadian journalism.  He did catch himself the day after and give him credit where credits it due.  PP was playing hurt feelings a bit too, but I don’t think he was showing a brash/wonton disregard for Canadian press overall, and I took his semi-light tongue-in-cheek plaintive response to Akin as a reasonable part of the to’ing and fro’ing.


My reaction would be far more subdued if it weren't for the contents of the email. Given his (Akin's) background, smirking and calling Akin a Liberal heckler is honestly kind of funny.  But the email was outright manipulative lies.

And to be honest, based on just PP/Koch's portrayal, I was quite surprised as well.  But given the near past backstory (not taking questions), PP's wide brush attacks on all media and refusal to engage generally, and his attack on Rachel Gilmore/ Global specifically, I could see a guy of Akin's principles and standing getting to the point of a profound personal and professional  (not political) dislike and boiling over.


----------



## Navy_Pete (15 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> From what I saw, posted here, PP never had a chance to state his point(s) and he was instantly let into by Akin.  With Akin trying to talk over PP from the get go.
> 
> If that's the reception I received, I wouldn't stick around for questions either.


I believe this was the second press 'conference' in 3 days with these rules, so probably better to call it out now rather than let it become a trend. There may be some more background context, as he was pretty pissed off at this, but he wasn't wrong.

Also, doesn't seem PP actually answered his question about walking back on being able to fire the BoC President, which is a straight up lie that has sat for a few months now.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (15 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> I believe this was the second press 'conference' in 3 days with these rules, so probably better to call it out now rather than let it become a trend. There may be some more background context, as he was pretty pissed off at this, but he wasn't wrong.
> 
> Also, doesn't seem PP actually answered his question about walking back on being able to fire the BoC President, which is a straight up lie that has sat for a few months now.



Most of the discussion re this presser was based on most seeing or listening only to the interaction between Poilievre and Akin.  I mentioned before that I wasn't aware if, after stating that he would take two questions (? due to Akin's prodding, perhaps), whether or not PP did actually take questions.  Thanks to CPAC, I have been enlightened.





__





						CPAC - For the Record
					

CPAC - For the Record




					www.cpac.ca
				








2:11    agrees to take two questions, continues with his presentation
9:22    takes the first of two questions
10:51  second question
11:40  finishes answer, immediately turns and leaves followed by his press secretary
_(note:  times edited to correspond to the YouTube timings, there's a couple of seconds difference in versions)_

And you are correct, he didn't answer Akin's question.


----------



## Navy_Pete (15 Sep 2022)

Sigh... if Justin Trudeau is responsible for 10% inflation across the globe he's a lot more effective than they make out, nice of him to twist the narrative on why Rayes left when he was pretty clear that he didn't want to be in the CPC under PP. 

I absolutely hate the meaningless 'talking points' like that they work into every conversation.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Sep 2022)

A difference between Harper and Poilievre is that Harper's policy was reactive and Poilievre's is pre-emptive.


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2022)

Former MP Tony Clement appointed to board of Conservative Fund: CP sources
					

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has appointed former member of Parliament Tony Clement to serve on the board of the Conservative Fund, the federal party's main fundraising arm, sources say.




					www.ctvnews.ca
				




I guess if you raise enough money you can climb out of the dog house but I’m not sure how wise this appointment is…


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Former MP Tony Clement appointed to board of Conservative Fund: CP sources
> 
> 
> Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has appointed former member of Parliament Tony Clement to serve on the board of the Conservative Fund, the federal party's main fundraising arm, sources say.
> ...


Probably wiser than someone appointing a toxic, egotistical alleged aggravated assaulter and inadvertent killer of pedestrians to an influential position representing a hierarchical  monarchical influential position in a procedural and governmentally representative role…


----------



## TacticalTea (15 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Probably wiser than someone appointing a toxic, egotistical alleged aggravated assaulter and inadvertent killer of pedestrians to an influential position representing a hierarchical  monarchical influential position in a procedural and governmentally representative role…


Who?


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Sep 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Who?


Google:

toxic assault pedestrian monarch representative 

‘They’ are on the first page of results…


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Sep 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Who?



Luckily I speak G2G, so can translate 









						Julie Payette - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Sep 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> Luckily I speak G2G, so can translate
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Spoilsport… 😛


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Probably wiser than someone appointing a toxic, egotistical alleged aggravated assaulter and inadvertent killer of pedestrians to an influential position representing a hierarchical  monarchical influential position in a procedural and governmentally representative role…


I attribute that to poor vetting to push an agenda. 

The whole country saw a boudoir pic of Clement…crime.


----------



## QV (15 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Google:
> 
> toxic assault pedestrian monarch representative
> 
> ‘They’ are on the first page of results…


Funny that this is true. Embarrassing also.


----------



## TacticalTea (15 Sep 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> Luckily I speak G2G, so can translate
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh! I actually did think of her, reading his comment, but my thought was ''well she's totally irrelevant now, surely she's not the one he's talking about!''


----------



## TacticalTea (15 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Google:
> 
> toxic assault pedestrian monarch representative
> 
> ‘They’ are on the first page of results…


Yeah I tried ''Mary simon kill''. Wasn't too far off, but not quite it!

(Also I might be on an three-letter agency's list now)


----------



## PPCLI Guy (15 Sep 2022)

or this Google Search...


----------



## PPCLI Guy (15 Sep 2022)

or this one


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Sep 2022)

Yup… 😔


----------



## mariomike (15 Sep 2022)

Your link is from 2018.

This is from 2020.



> If only men voted, the Liberal and Conservatives would be in a statistical tie. Only women: the Liberals win a crushing 226 seats.











						The biggest divide in Canadian politics? Men vs. Women. - Macleans.ca
					

Philippe J. Fournier: If only men voted, the Liberal and Conservatives would be in a statistical tie. Only women: the Liberals win a crushing 226 seats.




					www.macleans.ca


----------



## Halifax Tar (16 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Sigh... if Justin Trudeau is responsible for 10% inflation across the globe he's a lot more effective than they make out, nice of him to twist the narrative on why Rayes left when he was pretty clear that he didn't want to be in the CPC under PP.
> 
> I absolutely hate the meaningless 'talking points' like that they work into every conversation.



He's the leader of the country or he's not.  Which is it ?  

This is some week 1 PLQ shit.  You're boss in the good times and the shit times and you have be accountable for both.


----------



## Lumber (16 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> He's the leader of the country or he's not.  Which is it ?
> 
> This is some week 1 PLQ shit.  You're boss in the good times and the shit times and you have be accountable for both.


His point is that world events are causing increased inflation throughout the world, yet there are those who blame all of the inflation in Canada solely on the decisions of Trudeau.


----------



## Lumber (16 Sep 2022)

So, apparently sharing a tweet from twitter, but first adding a picture from the office to it in order to emphasize a certain assessment of the tweet (and to add humour), makes that tweet a "political meme", and according to the directing staff , political memes "don't add anything intelligent to the conversation" (actual quote). I find that somewhat hypocritical, because an internet meme is no more than a home made political cartoon found in many a news papers/news sites, and we're fine to share those on here. So, I will re share the tweet itself, and add written commentary instead of using Pam from the office to illustrate my point (since I am NOT the best at articulating my thoughts/feelings).
----

I'm sharing a comparison between a letter sent by Trump to his supporters against a letter sent by Poilievre sent to his supporters. On the one hand you could argue that sharing the same tactics as Trump doesn't necessarily make you "as bad" as Trump (and first you'd have to posit that Trump is, in fact, bad); after all, there must have been _some _things that Trump did well, and how does a method of soliciting donations make you a bad person? I would posit that it has more to do with the underlying message they are sharing, and the method which they are trying to encourage donations. They both are trying to convince their supporters that the main stream media is against them (DJT/PP), and if they are against them, then they are also against them (the people), and the only way to overcome this attack on their person is to donate to DJT/PP. Since I don't actually think the MSM is against people (biases notwithstanding), then I consider this grifting. People like DJT and PP are smart, and they are using people emotions to get money. So, I share this tweet (which itself is sharing from two letters sent out by prominent politicians), because not only do I dislike these types of tactics in general, but I also abhor the damage it does to the credibility of and trust in news media, which as I've said before, I believe is paramount to a well functioning demoncarcy.


--
Was that _intelligent _enough?


----------



## Halifax Tar (16 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> His point is that world events are causing increased inflation throughout the world, yet there are those who blame all of the inflation in Canada solely on the decisions of Trudeau.



Outside factors does not remove one in a leadership position from responsibility.  

I don't blame inflation on JT. 

_*He does have to held accountable*_ for his actions (or lack there of) on and methods (or lack there of) to recover.


----------



## Lumber (16 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Outside factors does not remove one in a leadership position from responsibility.
> 
> I don't blame inflation on JT.
> 
> _*He does have to held accountable*_ for his actions (or lack there of) on and methods (or lack there of) to recover.


Agreed, and his most recent announcement doesn't illicit much confidence in me.

I think he's right that it's low enough spending not to contribute to inflation, but it's not high enough to really help. A one time $500 bonus to help with housing costs? Thanks, but you just covered half of this month's rent, that's it.


----------



## Good2Golf (16 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Outside factors does not remove one in a leadership position from responsibility.
> 
> I don't blame inflation on JT.
> 
> _*He does have to held accountable*_ for his actions (or lack there of) on and methods (or lack there of) to recover.


And he is responsible by policy* for the extent of Canada’s deliberate increase of M2, which directly and proportionally affects money devaluation and inflation.  Canada demonstrably increased its M2 proportionately more than several other G7/G20 nations, so any claim that Trudeau was essentially along for the ride re: inflation is fundamentally wrong.

*edit to add - GoC fiscal policy which has direct influence with BoC policies.


----------



## PuckChaser (16 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Was that _intelligent _enough?


Since you want to take a tantrum on open forums, I'll clarify: if you cant see how posting memes devalues intelligent debate then maybe you're best served arguing on r/politics. Our threads were a dumpster fire of memes, name calling and "cartoons" that had no value other than partisan sniper fire. The rules aren't changing because you didn't read them and your feelings got hurt.

So yes, it's intelligent enough. Mature enough of response to a simple course correction? I'll leave that alone.

- Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## Lumber (16 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> And he is responsible by policy for the extent of Canada’s deliberate increase of M2, which directly and proportionally affects money devaluation and inflation.  Canada demonstrably increased its M2 proportionately more than several other G7/G20 nations, so any claim that Trudeau was essentially along for the ride re: inflation is fundamentally wrong.


M2 (and monetary policy in general), is controlled by the BOC, which is independent from the PMO. If you're insinuating that the PMO is pulling the BOC's strings, well that's a whole other discussion, but I think you can predict my opinion on that. However, if you're simply saying that PMO's/JT's policies _forced _the BOC to increase money supply to try and counteract the PMO's policies' effects on inflation, then I could buy that argument. However, here's a list of G20 countries who's money supply has increased MORE than Canada's in the past 12 months:
1. Germany
2. United Kingdom
3.  Russia
4. Saudi Arabia
5. Australia
6. Argentina
7. Brazil
8. Mexico
9. China
10. South Africa
11. France
12. India
13. Indonesia
14. South Korea
15. Turkey


----------



## Good2Golf (16 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> M2 (and monetary policy in general), is controlled by the BOC, which is independent from the PMO. If you're insinuating that the PMO is pulling the BOC's strings, well that's a whole other discussion, but I think you can predict my opinion on that. However, if you're simply saying that PMO's/JT's policies _forced _the BOC to increase money supply to try and counteract the PMO's policies' effects on inflation, then I could buy that argument. However, here's a list of G20 countries who's money supply has increased MORE than Canada's in the past 12 months:
> 1. Germany
> 2. United Kingdom
> 3.  Russia
> ...


Got it. Clearly the BoC’s fault.  Trudeau gets a pass, not his fault and in no way at all could have had any influence on the BoC because, demand signals like huge deficits are in no way linked to monetary policy.  Got it.
Since you didn’t actually post a link for your claim above, I can’t question the source, but

In the less M2 increase than Canada (and decreases for all of them, in fact) category of G20s are:

Indonesia
Saudi Arabia
Singapore
South Korea
Spain

I’ll even add a reputable reference.






						Money Supply M2 - Countries - List | G20
					

This page displays a table with actual values, consensus figures, forecasts, statistics and historical data charts for - Money Supply M2. This page provides values for Money Supply M2 reported in several countries part of G20. The table has current values for Money Supply M2, previous releases...




					tradingeconomics.com


----------



## Lumber (16 Sep 2022)

PuckChaser said:


> Since you want to take a tantrum on open forums, I'll clarify: if you cant see how posting memes devalues intelligent debate then maybe you're best served arguing on r/politics. Our threads were a dumpster fire of memes, name calling and "cartoons" that had no value other than partisan sniper fire. The rules aren't changing because you didn't read them and your feelings got hurt.
> 
> So yes, it's intelligent enough. Mature enough of response to a simple course correction? I'll leave that alone.
> 
> - Milnet.ca Staff


I just read through the "Army.ca Conduct Guidelines: MUST READ", the "change to political board" thread, and the "How to engage in political discourse on Army.ca" thread, and even the Staff Guidelines.

I couldn't find where it says you can't post political memes or cartoons in the politics forum? (A political cartoon is technically a meme, which is simply any piece of culture that can be copied or replicated.)

Could you please point me toward where that rule is, so that I can see any other rules I should probably be made aware of.


----------



## Lumber (16 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Got it. Clearly the BoC’s fault.  Trudeau gets a pass, not his fault and in no way at all could have had any influence on the BoC because, demand signals like huge deficits are in no way linked to monetary policy.  Got it.
> Since you didn’t actually post a link for your claim above, I can’t question the source, but
> 
> In the less M2 increase than Canada (and decreases for all of them, in fact) category of G20s are:
> ...


Sorry, I meant to include the source. I actually don't think I meant to hit send yet, I had more to say about both our monetary and fiscal policy being actually well managed in the face of world events. But, anyways, here's the link. This is for the last 12 months, so not necessarily the height of the pandemic: Money supply (broad money) around the world | TheGlobalEconomy.com

And in line with most other countries, the rate of increase of Canada's monetary supply has decreased drastically since the peak of the pandemic:
Canada’s Money Supply Is Decelerating At A Rate That Typically Precedes A Recession - Better Dwelling

Look, lets temper this one down a little. I'm not denying that fiscal policy has an effect on monetary policy. I'm just not sure of who you're attacking anymore. You attacked JT for his effect on M2 and how that effects inflation. I said he's not responsible for M2. You said, you're right, but his policies affect M2. Ok, then why bring up M2 at all, why not just attack his policies and their overall effect on the economy? As far as I see it, the increase in M2 was a smart decision by the BOC needed to counteract the effects of over spending. Canada is fairing fairly well compared to others (Research from 44 countries shows levels of rising inflation across the world), so I'm curious what PP think he can do that's better than what we've done.


----------



## Lumber (16 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> As far as I see it, the increase in M2 was a smart decision by the BOC needed to counteract the effects of over spending. Canada is fairing fairly well compared to others (Research from 44 countries shows levels of rising inflation across the world), so I'm curious what PP think he can do that's better than what we've done.


Just to be clear, I'm not saying increasing M2 _doesn't _lead to inflation, I'm saying that it was a necessary evil.


----------



## Kirkhill (16 Sep 2022)

Tugging at heart strings is what sells.  It sells movies, books, music.  It sells cars, weapons, factories and soap. And it sells politicians.  Especially politicians.  Of all parties.

And thus it is impossible to have an emotionless debate.


----------



## Good2Golf (16 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> You said, you're right, but his policies affect M2.


I should have been clearer with my sarcasm about ‘it not being JTs fault’…I still directly hold him responsible for M2 impact because HIS government’s fiscal policy directly influenced the need for the BoC to issue bonds/etc. to finance the enormous deficit.   It is my personal belief that the Canadian response to COVID was one of the more ‘Cadillac’ like responses to the pandemic, which added to the Trudeau government’s basic propensity to spend, spend, spend, exacerbated an already near perfect storm. 

Clearly the two of us won’t and need not see things the same, which is entirely okay IMO.  I personally believe that Trudeau tends to take a very selective view of accountability, and while I’m not the biggest PP fan by a long stretch, can’t help but believe that there is an underlying asymmetry to who gets handled with kid gloves and who gets the evildoer end of the country as we know it approach.  YMMV.


----------



## Halifax Tar (16 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Sorry, I meant to include the source. I actually don't think I meant to hit send yet, I had more to say about both our monetary and fiscal policy being actually well managed in the face of world events. But, anyways, here's the link. This is for the last 12 months, so not necessarily the height of the pandemic: Money supply (broad money) around the world | TheGlobalEconomy.com
> 
> And in line with most other countries, the rate of increase of Canada's monetary supply has decreased drastically since the peak of the pandemic:
> Canada’s Money Supply Is Decelerating At A Rate That Typically Precedes A Recession - Better Dwelling
> ...



Staying on a sinking ship until it capsizes might keep you dry for a bit, maybe longer than others, but its not a measure of success. I can appreciate your positive out look on things though 

I recently has a conversation with a well-connected Liberal party friend of mine. We were talking about carbon tax, which I am obviously not in support of. 

Their position was that it was a minimal increase and as a middle (upper +/-)  class family we should be able absorb that. 

My response was simply, who was he or the Gov to decide what I felt was a cost increase my family should or shouldn’t be able to absorb. And I am getting sick and tired of the Gov (all levels) reaching into my pay cheque and taking.


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Sep 2022)

Understanding quantitative easing (BoC).

"QE is not the same as printing cash. Under QE, we buy bonds in the open market from financial institutions. And the funds that we use to pay for these purchases end up being deposited in accounts that financial institutions have at the Bank in the form of settlement balances.

Settlement balances (or reserves) are a unique type of money that the central bank creates. They are a normal part of central banking operations. Financial institutions use them to settle payments among themselves. We pay interest on these balances, like deposits at a regular bank.

Being able to issue settlement balances is a privilege that only central banks have. We use this ability carefully to fulfill our mandate of promoting Canada’s economic and financial welfare.

It’s important for central banks to be independent from the government. Simply put, the power to create money should be kept separate from the power to spend money."

Left unstated is what happens if the banks would do without that special money in settlement balances.  I am skeptical that one kind of money can be walled off from another kind of money without the inherent fungibility of money bleeding through.  And since I can't imagine the BoC standing by and allowing the government to default, the final quoted sentence is just an aspiration - the latter forces the former.


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Sep 2022)

Most people can absorb the carbon tax, just like they absorb any other cost - they pay it at the expense of something else they might have bought (unless they are receiving some kind of carbon tax rebate).  Their overall consumption goes down (they are paying more for the same amount of something); whoever might have provided the foregone goods/services is out a little bit of revenue.


----------



## suffolkowner (16 Sep 2022)

The Bank Of Canada Is Printing Money Like Crazy
					

Chart shows massive surge in money printing, far outpacing comparable nations on a relative basis. Amid the current crisis, many countries have seen increased central bank activity. With business activity pulling back, government spending has surged, and countries around the world are going...




					spencerfernando.com
				




This link  suggests that maybe Canada was doing something a little bit more

also this paper in press attempts to tease out the various causes of inflation in Canada









						The Rise (And Fall?) of Inflation in Canada: A Detailed Analysis of Its Post-Pandemic Experience
					

Canada's inflation rate rose from 3.1 percent in June 2021 to 8.1 percent one year later. What is behind this rapid surge? And will higher interest rates ease t



					papers.ssrn.com
				





__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1569784354838315010


----------



## Remius (17 Sep 2022)

Quebec senator already out of Tory caucus now quits party after Poilievre victory  | Globalnews.ca
					

Sen. Jean-Guy Dagenais had endorsed former Quebec premier Jean Charest in the recent leadership race, and hasn't sat in the Conservative senators caucus since 2019.




					globalnews.ca
				




This one isn’t much of a surprise. He had already left caucus.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> So, apparently sharing a tweet from twitter, but first adding a picture from the office to it in order to emphasize a certain assessment of the tweet (and to add humour), makes that tweet a "political meme", and according to the directing staff , political memes "don't add anything intelligent to the conversation" (actual quote). I find that somewhat hypocritical, because an internet meme is no more than a home made political cartoon found in many a news papers/news sites, and we're fine to share those on here. So, I will re share the tweet itself, and add written commentary instead of using Pam from the office to illustrate my point (since I am NOT the best at articulating my thoughts/feelings).
> ----
> 
> I'm sharing a comparison between a letter sent by Trump to his supporters against a letter sent by Poilievre sent to his supporters. On the one hand you could argue that sharing the same tactics as Trump doesn't necessarily make you "as bad" as Trump (and first you'd have to posit that Trump is, in fact, bad); after all, there must have been _some _things that Trump did well, and how does a method of soliciting donations make you a bad person? I would posit that it has more to do with the underlying message they are sharing, and the method which they are trying to encourage donations. They both are trying to convince their supporters that the main stream media is against them (DJT/PP), and if they are against them, then they are also against them (the people), and the only way to overcome this attack on their person is to donate to DJT/PP. Since I don't actually think the MSM is against people (biases notwithstanding), then I consider this grifting. People like DJT and PP are smart, and they are using people emotions to get money. So, I share this tweet (which itself is sharing from two letters sent out by prominent politicians), because not only do I dislike these types of tactics in general, but I also abhor the damage it does to the credibility of and trust in news media, which as I've said before, I believe is paramount to a well functioning demoncarcy.
> ...


I will argue that the MSM has mostly their selves to blame for the lack of trust. God awful reporting and very evident bias while proclaiming they are not. At least the Guardian and the National Observer are pretty clear on their bias, which I am ok with, even if I disagree with it. The politicans are exploiting a problem the MSM created.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Most people can absorb the carbon tax, just like they absorb any other cost - they pay it at the expense of something else they might have bought (unless they are receiving some kind of carbon tax rebate).  Their overall consumption goes down (they are paying more for the same amount of something); whoever might have provided the foregone goods/services is out a little bit of revenue.


Up to a point. These taxes are cumulative. As one restaurant owner pointed out to me as he noticed we had cut our weekly dinner out to 3 instead of 4 a month. He said if 500 hundred of his customers cut back one meal a month, that's a drop of 500 sales for him. We are now at one outing a month due to costs. so that would be 1500 sales a month drop expanded to the rest of his customers. 
Toss in the increase in renting, mortgage, car insurance, cost of gas, heating, electricity. The bottom of most peoples pots is being reached and the politicians/planners/senior bureaucrats don't get that the pots are not bottomless.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Sep 2022)

Yes, but recent cost increases involve a lot more than just carbon taxes.  But again, evidence accumulates that much of the recent cost increases are at root due to energy cost and availability.

Almost no-one in a position of responsibility behaves as if catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is existentially threatening.  But the political and economic damage of pretending to mitigate warming is real, and costly.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (17 Sep 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Up to a point. These taxes are cumulative. As one restaurant owner pointed out to me as he noticed we had cut our weekly dinner out to 3 instead of 4 a month. He said if 500 hundred of his customers cut back one meal a month, that's a drop of 500 sales for him. We are now at one outing a month due to costs. so that would be 1500 sales a month drop expanded to the rest of his customers.
> Toss in the increase in renting, mortgage, car insurance, cost of gas, heating, electricity. The bottom of most peoples pots is being reached and the politicians/planners/senior bureaucrats don't get that the pots are not bottomless.


I have a similar thought any time Municipal or Provincial politician “demands” the next level of government “pay” for something.

There is only one level of taxpayer. Period.


----------



## Navy_Pete (18 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> He's the leader of the country or he's not.  Which is it ?
> 
> This is some week 1 PLQ shit.  You're boss in the good times and the shit times and you have be accountable for both.


Like Lumber said, I mean inflation is a global problem, not specifically a Canada issue. You shouldn't be held accountable for being hit by an earthquake or something, but your response to it should be.

Objectively Canada is doing better than most on inflation, but that only looks at how much things cost. If people have less money in their pockets on top of it, and some of these things are items the government can address, they should. Ie pause/roll back carbon taxes, reduce GST, etc.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (18 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Like Lumber said, I mean inflation is a global problem, not specifically a Canada issue. You shouldn't be held accountable for being hit by an earthquake or something, but your response to it should be.
> 
> Objectively Canada is doing better than most on inflation, but that only looks at how much things cost. If people have less money in their pockets on top of it, and some of these things are items the government can address, they should. Ie pause/roll back carbon taxes, reduce GST, etc.


Arguably, keeping or increasing the GST/Carbon taxes in times of high inflation can help reduce the M2 (and reduce inflation), as long as the Government does not just shovel the money out the door again as fast as it comes in.


----------



## QV (18 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Like Lumber said, I mean inflation is a global problem, not specifically a Canada issue. You shouldn't be held accountable for being hit by an earthquake or something, but your response to it should be.
> 
> Objectively Canada is doing better than most on inflation, but that only looks at how much things cost. If people have less money in their pockets on top of it, and some of these things are items the government can address, they should. Ie pause/roll back carbon taxes, reduce GST, etc.


If you believe the rate of inflation you’re told.

Basic commodities and everything else has increased way more than 8%. Probably closer to 25% on average.


----------



## Lumber (18 Sep 2022)

QV said:


> If you believe the rate of inflation you’re told.
> 
> Basic commodities and everything else has increased way more than 8%. Probably closer to 25% on average.


Why wouldn't we believe it?


----------



## Halifax Tar (18 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Outside factors does not remove one in a leadership position from responsibility.
> 
> I don't blame inflation on JT.
> 
> _*He does have to held accountable*_ for his actions (or lack there of) on and methods (or lack there of) to recover.



My reply to Lumber  ^

You may have missed that.



Navy_Pete said:


> Like Lumber said, I mean inflation is a global problem, not specifically a Canada issue. You shouldn't be held accountable for being hit by an earthquake or something, but your response to it should be.
> 
> Objectively Canada is doing better than most on inflation, but that only looks at how much things cost. If people have less money in their pockets on top of it, and some of these things are items the government can address, they should. Ie pause/roll back carbon taxes, reduce GST, etc.



Arguing we are doing better than others is simply a deflection tactic.


----------



## Halifax Tar (18 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Why wouldn't we believe it?



I think he answers why in his post.


----------



## TacticalTea (18 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Why wouldn't we believe it?


BLUF: (Americans) Canadians aren't buying the "average basket of goods", they're buying more of essentials, which are considerably more expensive, and less of discretionary expenses, whose costs have been rising slower.









						Inflation Is Higher Than the Numbers Say (Published 2020)
					

While government statistics say inflation is low, the reality is that the cost of living has risen during the pandemic, especially for poorer Americans.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## QV (18 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Why wouldn't we believe it?


Because on this topic reality isn't aligning with the statement. 

I think the coming years are going to be very difficult for many people.


----------



## Brad Sallows (18 Sep 2022)

The "rate of inflation we're told" is true because it's defined a certain way; it's arbitrary.  Whether or not a particular good or service tracks it is a matter of reality.  Voters are all going to have their own "lived experience" on the matter of inflation and no amount of "akshully, folks" explainers on what the rate is and how it is defined and how it is not really bad after all is going to have any impact on those who experience it deeply because their margin for trading "nice-to-haves" for "must-haves" is thinner.


----------



## Good2Golf (18 Sep 2022)

Yup, my groceries and gas and heating are certainly more than 8% more expensive than last year.

Amongst other factors, I would cynically believe that the Feds are trying to minimize the ‘real number’ for inflation so they don’t have to use a realistic number to have to adjust indexed pensions… 🤔


----------



## Navy_Pete (18 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Yup, my groceries and gas and heating are certainly more than 8% more expensive than last year.
> 
> Amongst other factors, I would cynically believe that the Feds are trying to minimize the ‘real number’ for inflation so they don’t have to use a realistic number to have to adjust indexed pensions… 🤔


The normal measurement of inflation is the 'Consumer Price Index' and is put out by StatsCan. Those folks hold numbers as gospel and don't do anything to change them other than report what the CPI is calculated as, and all their info is posted for anyone to verify.

They report it monthly as well, which usually is a few months behind actual (because it takes time to collect the data). It's also for the country, so there are regional variances in costs that are averaged out.

They also have a 'personal inflation tool' where you can look at what you actually spend money on to figure out how it's affecting you. That's a lot more relevant than the generic CPI, which includes a lot of things (like alcohol and tobacco) that are luxuries, as well as clothing etc, but still doesn't necessarily show the impact on you personnally as it pulls country wide prices, which may not be the same as what you see in your grocery store. It's like when you drive an hour outside a big city and gas is $0.20 more a litre; YMMV based on geographics. Still, it's a useful data point to track at a very high level to have something as a reference point.

Personal Inflation Calculator

I guess a genuine question for everyone on the 'Justinflation' bandwagon, how would it have been different if the CPC was in power? The pandemic and the invasion of Ukraine still would have happened, and the BoC mandate under Harper was basically the same. 

If PP was in power right now, what would he do differently to fight inflation? Sure, the carbon tax keeps going up, but that's not why gas was $2/litre back a few months ago. O&G companies are also reporting record profits, is he going to reign that in, or is that too communist? I just don't see any actual proposals for the how/what will change, only a desire for someone else.


----------



## Kirkhill (18 Sep 2022)

> in the past 10 years, major oil and gas companies suffered tremendous losses in 2014, 2015, and 2020. In fact, in 2020 the five integrated supermajors (i.e., “Big Oil”) – ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, Chevron, and Total – lost $76 billion. Oil prices plunged into negative territory in 2020.



If Oil Companies Control Prices, Why Do They Ever Lose Money?


----------



## Lumber (18 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Amongst other factors, I would cynically believe that the Feds are trying to minimize the ‘real number’ for inflation so they don’t have to use a realistic number to have to adjust indexed pensions… 🤔


Aaaaaaaand there it is.


----------



## Good2Golf (18 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Aaaaaaaand there it is.


What?  That the government adjusts/fudges/re-weighs the composition of the CPI?  This is a fact, not a conspiracy. It will be interesting to see how the 2022/2023 basket weightings are adjusted and what effect that demonstrably has on the CPI in the future.






						An Analysis of the 2022 Consumer Price Index Basket Update, Based on 2021 Expenditures
					

This article presents the data sources and methodology for the Machinery and Equipment Price Index (MEPI). The MEPI is an input price index that measures the quarterly change in the price of machinery and equipment purchased by industries in Canada. The MEPI is an important indicator of economic...




					www150.statcan.gc.ca


----------



## QV (19 Sep 2022)

I find it amusing some people just can’t/won’t believe government data is occasionally arbitrary or even at times misleading on purpose. I wonder what colour the sky is in that world?


----------



## Navy_Pete (19 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> What?  That the government adjusts/fudges/re-weighs the composition of the CPI?  This is a fact, not a conspiracy. It will be interesting to see how the 2022/2023 basket weightings are adjusted and what effect that demonstrably has on the CPI in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's not the 'government' in a political sense, that's StatsCan. Otherwise they get complaints that the CPI doesn't reflect what people are actually seeing as spending trends change, and they are pretty transparent about what they do and why.

I'm guessing lower weighting next year on luxuries, higher on necessities, but you can always look at the individual item data too if you don't think the CPI is accurate.

There are a bunch of other inflationary indexes as well; some are more specific to manufacturing etc, so it's a lot of thought put into it, but at the end of the day it's just a number; what you pay at the grocery store is what's actually coming out of your pocket. One thing I've noticed is some items have a similar regular price, but are on sale an awful lot less (like loves of bread). I think I used to frequently pick up the same kind for $2.79 on sale, but most of the time it's at the full price of $3.99, so not sure for a situation like that if they use full ticket price or whatever it actually sells for.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (19 Sep 2022)

Interesting and from the CBC



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/pierre-poilievre-bipoc-youth-support-1.6586065


----------



## Eaglelord17 (19 Sep 2022)

Just remember gas and housing aren't included in the inflation index since the early 80s. Inflation is substantially higher than the numbers they are saying, anyone who has bought a house in the last 2 years, had to rent a new place, or not been locked in at lower rates can verify this. Many people are struggling to get by, and the people who will be hit hardest are those who make the least as they have no shield from inflation and their wages aren't going up anywhere near what they need to survive.


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Sep 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Interesting and from the CBC
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/pierre-poilievre-bipoc-youth-support-1.6586065



While I am happy to have all the youth we can get.  I wonder if this has more to do with a stale Liberal brand. 

The once energetic juggernaut of sunny ways seems to be more of a dying two stroke these days.


----------



## dimsum (19 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> While I am happy to have all the youth we can get.  I wonder if this has more to do with a stale Liberal brand.
> 
> The once energetic juggernaut of sunny ways seems to be more of a dying two stroke these days.


I'd also be interested to know how many youth and BIPOC are going towards NDP, etc as well.  I suspect it's not like the formerly LPC group is all shifting to CPC.


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Sep 2022)

dimsum said:


> I'd also be interested to know how many youth and BIPOC are going towards NDP, etc as well.  I suspect it's not like the formerly LPC group is all shifting to CPC.



That's not much of a story though as it's generally believed that that demographic always tended towards the left end of the spectrum.


----------



## dimsum (19 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> That's not much of a story though as it's generally believed that that demographic always tended towards the left end of the spectrum.


Agreed.  It's a bit of a "no shit Sherlock" - but I would personally like the stats on that from something like StatsCan or similar.


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Sep 2022)

dimsum said:


> Agreed.  It's a bit of a "no shit Sherlock" - but I would personally like the stats on that from something like StatsCan or similar.



I would be more interested in seeing the trend over time and then by age for that demographic.


----------



## Navy_Pete (19 Sep 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Just remember gas and housing aren't included in the inflation index since the early 80s. Inflation is substantially higher than the numbers they are saying, anyone who has bought a house in the last 2 years, had to rent a new place, or not been locked in at lower rates can verify this. Many people are struggling to get by, and the people who will be hit hardest are those who make the least as they have no shield from inflation and their wages aren't going up anywhere near what they need to survive.


That's not true in Canada and CPI actually includes both, but frequently gas prices are reported separately because they are so volatile. StatsCan is generally very clear when they do that and actually label it with 'excluding gasoline'. If that drops off during reporting that's not really their fault, but sometimes without gas you see it referred to as 'core CPI'.

I think people fundamentally misunderstand what CPI is meant to do, but if you read the latest daily for July it has the following;

gas up 35.6% over a year (with a 54.6% increase in June)
groceries up by 9.9% over a year, with bakery products up 13.6%
accommodation up 9.7%, with rent up 4.9% (and expected to grow with increased mortgage rates)
nat gas prices up 42.6% (mostly driven by ON energy board rate increase approval)
(Source: The Daily — Consumer Price Index, July 2022)

Lot of other info there, but when you look at the data a lot of things are flat (clothing, entertainment, etc) while core necessities are spiking pretty hard. If you really want to you can look at the data yourself; it's searchable back to 1914 with a full visualisation tool to break it down by province, line item etc, or you can look at the numbers on your own.

Searchable CPI data (not seasonally adjusted) 
Consumer Price Index, monthly, not seasonally adjusted

Visualization tool
Consumer Price Index Data Visualization Tool

(As an aside, StatsCan has over a hundred different visualisation tools; Statistics Canada - Data Visualization Products so everything from labour market, mortality, population etc is there.)

Put a bit of info below, but StatsCan tries to explain why a broad economic indicator doesn't translate to the day to day expenses of Canadians, and also why some perceptions enter into it.

From the FAQ

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/220816/cg220816a001-eng.png



> How is it calculated, exactly? The CPI is based on a broad basket of goods and services (see The Representative Products of the Consumer Price Index) which is divided into eight categories:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Why doesn't it match my personal spending experience?​
> It is important to note the CPI may not seem to match the exact experience of individuals, households, or even regions in Canada. This is because consumers, understandably, are more likely to notice – and attach greater importance to – price changes for the things they buy frequently, rather than more occasional purchases. Changes in common items like milk or gasoline are included in the CPI, but the index also includes items that are purchased less frequently, such as furniture, home electronics and clothing, as well as items that have been decreasing in price compared to last year, such as cellular services and car insurance premiums. This can explain how the perceptions and experiences of individual consumers may differ from the monthly CPI.


----------



## Good2Golf (19 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> I think people fundamentally misunderstand what CPI is meant to do, but if you read the latest daily for July it has the following;
> 
> gas up 35.6% over a year (with a 54.6% increase in June)
> groceries up by 9.9% over a year, with bakery products up 13.6%
> ...


So do you seriously wonder why people question a 7% figure, when they’re making their wardrobe last a bit longer and not going out as often for a night on the town, and all the rest of those things…that people need for shelter and to get to/from work are well, well above the CPI?


----------



## Brad Sallows (19 Sep 2022)

For the what-iffers, the main difference between what the LPC has done and what the CPC might have done is that the CPC would likely have gone into events with a modest surplus net budget and lower accumulated deficit, meaning more fiscal freedom of manoeuvre.  A secondary difference might have been energy policy (the CPC being more liberal in this regard).

All the external factors would still be there.  Everyone will have to guess for himself whether those things would have mitigated effects on Canada, and by how much.


----------



## YZT580 (19 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> For the what-iffers, the main difference between what the LPC has done and what the CPC might have done is that the CPC would likely have gone into events with a modest surplus net budget and lower accumulated deficit, meaning more fiscal freedom of manoeuvre.  A secondary difference might have been energy policy (the CPC being more liberal in this regard).
> 
> All the external factors would still be there.  Everyone will have to guess for himself whether those things would have mitigated effects on Canada, and by how much.


and possibly our natural resource infrastructure would be expanding to provide our allies with the resources they need to compensate for the loss of Russian resources instead of promising a hydrogen plant sometime in the future


----------



## Navy_Pete (19 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> So do you seriously wonder why people question a 7% figure, when they’re making their wardrobe last a bit longer and not going out as often for a night on the town, and all the rest of those things…that people need for shelter and to get to/from work are well, well above the CPI?


No, because people don't understand what CPI actually means, or how compound interest/inflation works (which is how credit cards make money). 

Inflation over the last 2 years is 12% overall (and $100 from 1914 is about $2600 today), so even a 2% over a long enough time can be cumulatively huge.  It also depends on when you use it as a snapshot in time; over the last 3 months gas prices dropped from $2/ litre to about $1.40 right now, but is basically double what it was if you use April 2020 as a ref point, or up about $0.20/litre from Feb/Mar 2020.

But again, if bread goes up 14%, that's what, $0.40 a loaf, so a few extra bucks a month? For someone that drives a lot a very small change in gas will be a massive difference in their monthlies. 

There's other stuff on CPI that are very infrequent buys, so the fact that the prices of something like furniture is pretty flat doesn't mean your grocery bills haven't skyrocketed. If you want to know what your own is, just plug it into Stats Can's personal inflation calculator;

Personal Inflation Calculator


----------



## Good2Golf (19 Sep 2022)

So you’re going to try and portray inflation as just a few bucks a month, based on bread alone?  I’m solidly in double digits using the personal calculator (and that jives very closely with my monthly budgeting numbers), and that’s before I refinance my mortgage next year at what I’m guessing will be more than 1.89%.  I would certainly love to be experiencing just a 7% or 8% rise in expenses. My mortgage payments alone next year will conservatively (at todays rate) increase by 51.5%.  About the only positive thing is that my property taxes will hopefully be less next year than the 3% increase for 2022.


----------



## Kirkhill (19 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> So you’re going to try and portray inflation as just a few bucks a month, based on bread alone?  I’m solidly in double digits using the personal calculator (and that jives very closely with my monthly budgeting numbers), and that’s before I refinance my mortgage next year at what I’m guessing will be more than 1.89%.  I would certainly love to be experiencing just a 7% or 8% rise in expenses. My mortgage payments alone next year will conservatively (at todays rate) increase by 51.5%.  About the only positive thing is that my property taxes will hopefully be less next year than the 3% increase for 2022.


Just went through a budgeting exercise personally due to remortgaging.

Mortgage from 2 to 5%
Groceries over 4 years up 60%.


----------



## Good2Golf (19 Sep 2022)

Kirkhill said:


> Just went through a budgeting exercise personally done to remortgaging.
> 
> Mortgage from 2 to 5%
> Groceries over 4 years up 60%.







Shhhh…you’re ruining StatsCan’s groove.


----------



## Remius (19 Sep 2022)

I would argue that mortgage rates were unusually low the last few years and were due for a course correction at some points.  Plenty of warnings about that.


----------



## Good2Golf (19 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> I would argue that mortgage rates were unusually low the last few years and were due for a course correction at some points.  Plenty of warnings about that.


True.  That make me feel much better about things, and bad about complaining about inflation……..


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> I would argue that mortgage rates were unusually low the last few years and were due for a course correction at some points.  Plenty of warnings about that.



You're right.  Of course that means absolutely nothing to the reality people will find themselves in.


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> No, because people don't understand what CPI actually means, or how compound interest/inflation works (which is how credit cards make money).
> 
> Inflation over the last 2 years is 12% overall (and $100 from 1914 is about $2600 today), so even a 2% over a long enough time can be cumulatively huge.  It also depends on when you use it as a snapshot in time; over the last 3 months gas prices dropped from $2/ litre to about $1.40 right now, but is basically double what it was if you use April 2020 as a ref point, or up about $0.20/litre from Feb/Mar 2020.
> 
> ...



This was my point in a previous post.  You don't get to decide what 40 cents means to someone else.  You also don't get to decide that they can suffer that additional cost with no issues.  

Peoples personal financial situation will dictate that.  Not you, and not Stats Can and not the Gov. 

Now, JT need to be held accountable for the time leading up to this and how he and his gov chooses to navigate.


----------



## Remius (19 Sep 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> True.  That make me feel much better about things, and bad about complaining about inflation……..


I can’t dictate if you feel good or bad about it. Just an observation on how we were in a real estate bubble.  Rates were were going go up at some point.  Inflation or not.  

I’m sure inflation as a whole doesn’t help though.


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> I can’t dictate if you feel good or bad about it. Just an observation on how we were in a real estate bubble.  Rates were were going go up at some point.  Inflation or not.
> 
> I’m sure inflation as a whole doesn’t help though.



The catch 22 is people have to find a place to live.  And they are at the whim of an artificial market. 

To anyone out there: 

If you bought after Mar 2020 you have my sympathies.


----------



## Good2Golf (19 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> I can’t dictate if you feel good or bad about it. Just an observation on how we were in a real estate bubble.  Rates were were going go up at some point.  Inflation or not.
> 
> I’m sure inflation as a whole doesn’t help though.


I get it.  I was just being all cranky pants, because I was COVID-downsized/pink-slipped and inflation kicks a fixed-income square between the uprights when one still has a not insignificant mortgage.  A loaf of bread being $0.40 more than ‘back in the good ole days’ is the least of my and I’m sure many others’ issues where “CPI inflation” is just a number and real inflation is a lot more of ‘an impactful number.’


----------



## IKnowNothing (19 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> You don't get to decide what 40 cents means to someone else.  You also don't get to decide that they can suffer that additional cost with no issues.
> 
> Peoples personal financial situation will dictate that.


It's funny.  My emotional/intellectual response to that brings out both the "right" and "left" of my upbringing, and it very much depends on my subjective assessment of people's personal financial situation.  

On one side, extremely sympathetic to people that legitimately can't make ends meet and have no where to turn. In favour of government intervention to help those people, including paying higher income tax to do it.

On the other,  I was raised by parents that made personal sacrifices to support us kids and our dreams.  We didn't do without, but second hand skates were the norm, never owned a remotely new car, McDonalds was a treat. We stretched a dollar for all it was worth, and long-term financial responsibility and contingency planning were paramount.  I don't know how to put it undickishly, so here it is-  there's a lot of middle and upper middle class people that were living at the absolute pinnacle of a means only allowed by freakishly cheap money that I can't feel sympathy for. Tighten the belt. Make adjustments.


----------



## Good2Golf (19 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> On the other, I was raised by parents that made personal sacrifices to support us kids and our dreams. We didn't do without, but second hand skates were the norm, never owned a remotely new car, McDonalds was a treat. We stretched a dollar for all it was worth, and long-term financial responsibility and contingency planning were paramount. I don't know how to put it undickishly, so here it is- there's a lot of middle and upper middle class people that were living at the absolute pinnacle of a means only allowed by freakishly cheap money that I can't feel sympathy for. Tighten the belt. Make adjustments.


Thankfully I’m not quite at reliving my childhood by drinking powdered milk again…mmmm, warm with pockets of dusty calcium goodness…


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> It's funny.  My emotional/intellectual response to that brings out both the "right" and "left" of my upbringing, and it very much depends on my subjective assessment of people's personal financial situation.
> 
> On one side, extremely sympathetic to people that legitimately can't make ends meet and have no where to turn. In favour of government intervention to help those people, including paying higher income tax to do it.
> 
> On the other,  I was raised by parents that made personal sacrifices to support us kids and our dreams.  We didn't do without, but second hand skates were the norm, never owned a remotely new car, McDonalds was a treat. We stretched a dollar for all it was worth, and long-term financial responsibility and contingency planning were paramount.  I don't know how to put it undickishly, so here it is-  there's a lot of middle and upper middle class people that were living at the absolute pinnacle of a means only allowed by freakishly cheap money that I can't feel sympathy for. Tighten the belt. Make adjustments.



I don't think there is anything left or right about it. A good portion of the country is having a hard go and it's probably going to get worse for lots. 

And these people will look to the political class for answers and help. 

Telling them to harden and suffer more, it's probably your fault anyways, won't win anyone any affection.


----------



## IKnowNothing (19 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> *A good portion of the country is having a hard go and it's probably going to get worse for lots.*



It's going to get objectively worse for almost everyone.  For some it is and will be a hard go, for some (many) it will be choosing between relative luxuries.


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> It's going to get objectively worse for almost everyone.  For some it is and will be a hard go, for some (many) it will be choosing between relative luxuries.



I can't blame people for playing the game in the rules that exist.

I will blame business and banks for knowingly letting people over extend themselves for profits sakes.


----------



## Brad Sallows (19 Sep 2022)

Business and banks worth within rules set by politicians, and governments don't very often cut business and banks the kind of breaks that governments cut for themselves when a supreme f*ck-up is laid at their doorsteps.

The people facing the biggest hits to their buying power, including savings erosion, are sort of at the mercy of the people who have the power to effect legislative and regulatory change.  Too bad the incentives and interests of people with indexed pensions and approximately indexed pay raises don't exactly align with the incentives and interests of people without those things.


----------



## mariomike (19 Sep 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Too bad the incentives and interests of people with indexed pensions and approximately indexed pay raises don't exactly align with the incentives and interests of people without those things.



_Too bad instead of, _ "We don't have it, so they shouldn't either."
People could not look at it this way, "They have it – why don't I?" It's not a _race_ _to_ _the_ _bottom_.


----------



## Navy_Pete (19 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> This was my point in a previous post.  You don't get to decide what 40 cents means to someone else.  You also don't get to decide that they can suffer that additional cost with no issues.
> 
> Peoples personal financial situation will dictate that.  Not you, and not Stats Can and not the Gov.
> 
> Now, JT need to be held accountable for the time leading up to this and how he and his gov chooses to navigate.


I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not saying anything other than that's where the numbers comes from, and it's a lot more complex than one simple number if you poke at it at all. The fact that overall it's at 7%, with things like furniture being below 1%, doesn't change the fact that food is over 10% with specific items being more. Similarly housing overall increase was in the 5% range, but because it's such a large portion that is a massive increase, even if it's below the overall CPI.

If anyone wants to use CPI, fill their boots, but it doesn't represent the impacts on individuals, because that's not what it's for at all. No one is fiddling with the numbers; the numbers simply aren't being used for its intended purpose by people who understand what it means.

But realistically if a rise in anything costs me an extra hundred bucks a month, I'll care a lot more about that than an increase of a few bucks a month, regardless of what that works out for a percentage. That's why mortgage rate hikes can be devastating, a small change can result in real large increases in real terms (vice huge percentage changes to low dollar value items that have low real term impacts). Similarly the cost of gas nearly doubling in the spring could add hundreds to commuting cost every month, and lots of people don't have the option of public transport for work.

For some folks the cost of bread might be the critical one, for others it will be something else; all I'm saying is CPI is a 50,000' general indicator, the general impact on individuals is much more complicated. When I plugged in my personal inflation to the tool I was around CPI overall, but if I was to start commuting back to work daily it would go up to around 12%, so really depends considerably on your personal specifics, and can change very quickly.

I do maintain though that calling it 'Justinflation' is fundamentally ignorant though, and completely ignoring the real causes of global inflation that we really can't do anything about.


----------



## brihard (20 Sep 2022)

Chiming in as an ‘elder millennial’, we have a whole generation of us who have reluctantly been no-shit adults for over a decade now, with houses, spouses, jobs and kids. We started having adult financial responsibilities around the time of the Great Recession and started fighting our way into the housing market after that. We’ve never experienced interest rates (read: mortgage rates) that weren’t historically low.

I’m aware of that and plan accordingly, but I’ve also been super lucky on real estate timing and am about to renew at 2022 interest on early 2017 purchase price. I’m also, objectively, in an enviable financial position. As a household we can swallow that easily enough.

Many in my generation were a year or three behind me getting into home ownership and are gonna get smoked on renewal at way higher payments. Their first cars will crap out around the same time, and that’s when kids’ sports and stuff will also start. We have a generational reckoning starting to hit. Money has been super cheap, and now the yellow stickers are getting pulled from the shelf.


----------



## Brad Sallows (20 Sep 2022)

If everyone had roughly the same income, everyone would have roughly the same purchasing power.  Those in the upper three or four deciles who understand what that would mean probably would not look forward to the prospect.


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Sep 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not saying anything other than that's where the numbers comes from, and it's a lot more complex than one simple number if you poke at it at all. The fact that overall it's at 7%, with things like furniture being below 1%, doesn't change the fact that food is over 10% with specific items being more. Similarly housing overall increase was in the 5% range, but because it's such a large portion that is a massive increase, even if it's below the overall CPI.
> 
> If anyone wants to use CPI, fill their boots, but it doesn't represent the impacts on individuals, because that's not what it's for at all. No one is fiddling with the numbers; the numbers simply aren't being used for its intended purpose by people who understand what it means.
> 
> ...



This: 



Navy_Pete said:


> But again, if bread goes up 14%, that's what, $0.40 a loaf, so a few extra bucks a month?



I never used the the term Justinflation.  Nor do I think he's in charge of global inflation.  I'm not sure how many times I have to say this, but can you remember this this time ?


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Sep 2022)

brihard said:


> Chiming in as an ‘elder millennial’, we have a whole generation of us who have reluctantly been no-shit adults for over a decade now, with houses, spouses, jobs and kids. We started having adult financial responsibilities around the time of the Great Recession and started fighting our way into the housing market after that. We’ve never experienced interest rates (read: mortgage rates) that weren’t historically low.
> 
> I’m aware of that and plan accordingly, but I’ve also been super lucky on real estate timing and am about to renew at 2022 interest on early 2017 purchase price. I’m also, objectively, in an enviable financial position. As a household we can swallow that easily enough.
> 
> Many in my generation were a year or three behind me getting into home ownership and are gonna get smoked on renewal at way higher payments. Their first cars will crap out around the same time, and that’s when kids’ sports and stuff will also start. We have a generational reckoning starting to hit. Money has been super cheap, and now the yellow stickers are getting pulled from the shelf.



The oncoming generations have definitely been boned hard by the preceding generations.  No doubt about that.


----------



## Lumber (20 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I never used the the term Justinflation.  Nor do I think he's in charge of global inflation.  I'm not sure how many times I have to say this, but can you remember this this time ?


He's not directing that at you, he's just bringing the conversation back tot he beginning. If you look at this conversation as whole (at least over the last couple of days), it all comes back to a few central questions/premises:
1. Whether JT and the LPC (i.e. the Government) have anything to do with the current state of inflation in Canada;
2. Whether the term "JustInflation" is clever and innocent, or inaccurate, manipulative, and juvenile;
3. Whether the reported inflation is accurate from a person-to-person impact perspective; and
4. Whether the government is actively manipulating thereported inflation rate for political purposes.


----------



## IKnowNothing (20 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I can't blame people for playing the game in the rules that exist.
> 
> I will blame business and banks for knowingly letting people over extend themselves for profits sakes.


How far does that extend? All vice, or just reckless financial decision making?


----------



## Lumber (20 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I can't blame people for playing the game in the rules that exist.
> 
> I will blame business and banks for knowingly letting people over extend themselves for profits sakes.


This is an interesting stance. You've stated that you yourself are more conservative, and while I can't reference any specific policy statement of the CPC, generally speaking conservatives want less government regulation in business. But, you're second sentence would imply that you might appreciate greater control over business so that they don't profit from the fact that people are so easily manipulated.


----------



## IKnowNothing (20 Sep 2022)

Germaine to the last page of conversation but not necessarily the thread,  I apologize that this comes late for several of you with impending renewals, but I highly recommend to anyone with or that will have a mortgage investigates the Blend & Extend options their chosen or prospective institution offers.  They do a pisspoor job advertising them but they can be an absolutely incredible tool for managing cost and interest rate risk.  I bought in 18 on a five year fixed.  Instead of coming due next summer I averaged down once and then extended once at par, not up for renewal until 2027


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> He's not directing that at you, he's just bringing the conversation back tot he beginning. If you look at this conversation as whole (at least over the last couple of days), it all comes back to a few central questions/premises:
> 1. Whether JT and the LPC (i.e. the Government) have anything to do with the current state of inflation in Canada;
> 2. Whether the term "JustInflation" is clever and innocent, or inaccurate, manipulative, and juvenile;
> 3. Whether the reported inflation is accurate from a person-to-person impact perspective; and
> 4. Whether the government is actively manipulating thereported inflation rate for political purposes.



Fair.  I can walk that back.  When someone replies to me using the quote function I tend to think I'm the one being spoken too. 



IKnowNothing said:


> How far does that extend? All vice, or just reckless financial decision making?



Like all things in life it's not that black and white. There is nuances for everything. 

I'm sure lots of folks said screw it and happily accepted th banks and over extended themselves. I also know a good portion are just to house cloth and feed a family.  Those are the ones who I feel sympathy for.



Lumber said:


> This is an interesting stance. You've stated that you yourself are more conservative, and while I can't reference any specific policy statement of the CPC, generally speaking conservatives want less government regulation in business. But, you're second sentence would imply that you might appreciate greater control over business so that they don't profit from the fact that people are so easily manipulated.



What I would appreciate is some regulations that protect people in financial trouble from getting further in trouble by using high interest/risk loaners. 

Think places like money mart.  That's just loan sharking and it preys on the vulnerable. 

Being conservative doesn't mean I don't have a heart.


----------



## Lumber (20 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> What I would appreciate is some regulations that protect people in financial trouble from getting further in trouble by using high interest/risk loaners.
> 
> Think places like money mart.  That's just loan sharking and it preys on the vulnerable.
> 
> Being conservative doesn't mean I don't have a heart.


I agree. I used to lean more on the libertarian side; if people want to smoke, drink, and eat processed food till they die at 38, let them.

While I still believe that, I would only believe it if the person killing themselves is making that decision without a massive amount of outside influence.

What I've learned over the years is how easily people's behaviors and beliefs can be influenced, and how ready business are to take advantage of that fact.

So, on the micro scale, people have 100% free-will. On the macro scale, people are lemmings.


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> So, on the micro scale, people have 100% free-will. On the macro scale, *people are lemmings.*


…or cult (of personality) members… 😉


----------



## IKnowNothing (20 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Like all things in life it's not that black and white. There is nuances for everything.
> 
> *I'm sure lots of folks said screw it and happily accepted th banks and over extended themselves.* I also know a good portion are just to house cloth and feed a family.  Those are the ones who I feel sympathy for.


I explicitly categorized two very similarly described groups.  Given that the only harsh (ish) sentiment was directed at my comparable to the bold, I assumed that who your response was defending as "playing the game in the rules that exist."  If that's not the case we seem to be on the same page.


----------



## Brad Sallows (20 Sep 2022)

Even payday lenders/cheque-cashers serve a role in the economy.  Almost anything can be abused or misused.


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> I explicitly categorized two very similarly described groups.  Given that the only harsh (ish) sentiment was directed at my comparable to the bold, I assumed that who your response was defending as "playing the game in the rules that exist."  If that's not the case we seem to be on the same page.



I think we're on the same page.


----------



## Remius (26 Sep 2022)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-threats-mackenzie-1.6595730
		


Ah yes.  Such a nice guy.  Probably just misunderstood.  Right…

He IS a dirtbag.


----------



## Halifax Tar (26 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-threats-mackenzie-1.6595730
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The press gives that Mackenzie guy more air time than he's worth. 

Sad thing is he's a Veteran.


----------



## Remius (26 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> The press gives that Mackenzie guy more air time than he's worth.
> 
> Sad thing is he's a Veteran.


In all fairness, PP tweeted it out before it became a story.


----------



## Halifax Tar (26 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> In all fairness, PP tweeted it out before it became a story.



Mackenzie has much longer history than this.


----------



## IKnowNothing (26 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> The press gives that Mackenzie guy more air time than he's worth.


And PP and his like in the CPC gave him more legitimacy than should ever  have happened.


----------



## Remius (26 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Mackenzie has much longer history than this.


Understood but the guy threatened to rape his wife.  He called it out on Twitter. 

Thus news.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Understood but the guy threatened to rape his wife.  He called it out on Twitter.
> 
> Thus news.





IKnowNothing said:


> And PP and his like in the CPC gave him more legitimacy than should ever  have happened.


----------



## OldSolduer (27 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> And PP and his like in the CPC gave him more legitimacy than should ever  have happened.


How many lineups have you been in shaking hands with people you may not know? And do you remember them later?

I agree that this guy is a POS but our Dear Leader has been associated with ones as well.


----------



## IKnowNothing (27 Sep 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> How many lineups have you been in shaking hands with people you may not know? And do you remember them later?


 Between February and the Topp march / Gilmore controversy for a person so supposedly as prepared and researched as PP to not know who's voice he was lending credibility to is either 
A- a lie
B- willful ignorance
C-recklessly negligent


----------



## QV (27 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Between February and the Topp march / Gilmore controversy for a person so supposedly as prepared and researched as PP to not know who's voice he was lending credibility to is either
> A- a lie
> B- willful ignorance
> C-recklessly negligent


Nice set of very narrow and shitty options.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Between February and the Topp march / Gilmore controversy for a person so supposedly as prepared and researched as PP to not know who's voice he was lending credibility to is either
> A- a lie
> B- willful ignorance
> C-recklessly negligent



I would argue you're simply blinded by disdain.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2022)

QV said:


> Nice set of very narrow and shitty options.



Its called controlling the narrative.


----------



## IKnowNothing (27 Sep 2022)

QV said:


> Nice set of very narrow and shitty options.


C- is actually an incredibly broad catchall

@Halifax Tar , confusing cause and effect.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> C- is actually an incredibly broad catchall
> 
> @Halifax Tar , confusing cause and effect.



If you say so skipper.


----------



## Remius (27 Sep 2022)

Anyone who doesn’t think PP hasn’t been courting that kind of person hasn’t been paying attention. 

The problem is that you end up with problems like this and being associated even if you aren’t. 

This situation should transcend political lines.  But it’s amazing to see some hypocrisy on both sides of this. 

When McKenna had her office vandalized and threats made she was told to suck it up by some because she was now a public figure 

When Freeland was confronted she was accused of overreacting. 

People taking smug pleasure in PP and in particular his wife having to experience it now themselves aren’t helping either. 

People should be consistant with their outrage at crap like this.  Sadly their politics blind them. 

Not pointing any fingers here per se but maybe just maybe some people need a bit of self introspection about what they actually believe in.


----------



## Lumber (27 Sep 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> Between February and the Topp march / Gilmore controversy for a person so supposedly as prepared and researched as PP to not know who's voice he was lending credibility to is either
> A- a lie
> B- willful ignorance
> C-recklessly negligent


Yea, I don't like Skippy, but I would offer you're missing:
D. Innocently negligent
Because, as others have pointed out, he very well could have not known who it was at the time of the "hand shake" photo.

That being said, I do find it hypocritical that PP chose to speak out against Mckenzie when he attacked his wife, but not when Mckenzie attacked other people, like CBC journalist Rachel Gilmore.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Anyone who doesn’t think PP hasn’t been courting that kind of person hasn’t been paying attention.
> 
> The problem is that you end up with problems like this and being associated even if you aren’t.
> 
> ...



I'm very confused by your position on this and how it interacts with my original post about the press giving Mackenzie too much attention. 

MacKenzie is a wing nut, and any politician who ties their horse to his cart will do so at their peril.  



Remius said:


> Anyone who doesn’t think PP hasn’t been courting that kind of person hasn’t been paying attention.



Are you some how insinuating that the threat, mention or making light of sexually assaulting PPs wife is some how lesser because at one time he knowingly or not shook hands with MacKenzie ? 

Also you will have to pardon me, but there is a distinct difference between some vandalism and being yelled at and a public threat of sexual assault. I am really confused about the position you and @IKnowNothing are coming from.  

Can we at least agree that MacKenzie is in the wrong and we should let the RCMP do their thing ?


----------



## Quirky (27 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Sad thing is he's a Veteran.



He joined the infantry/Army in the middle of the Afghanistan war, wanting to head over. I don't think his intentions were noble and to fight "freedom". There are plenty of people like him joining the Army in the early 2000s, they just wanted a legal means of killing people.


----------



## IKnowNothing (27 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Yea, I don't like Skipper, but I would offer you're missing:
> D. Innocently negligent
> Because, as others have pointed out, he very well could have not known who it was at the time of the "hand shake" photo.
> 
> That being said, I do find it hypocritical that PP chose to speak out against Mckenzie when he attacked his wife, but not when Mckenzie attacked other people, like CBC journalist Rachel Gilmore.


Honestly,  the handshake photo is nothing in and of itself.  He does see a lot of people.  He's not a protective detail guy, nor a protocol guy, and by the looks of things had neither whispering in his ear.  It's a meet and greet, hundreds and thousands of faces, none of them expected to high profile. It's completely excusable that he wouldn't recognize the face. 

To not have heard the name or organization?  Complete BS.  They came up in the HoC debates in Feb.  Bernier had a photo with the guy in Ottawa.  They were publicly connected to Coutts. Many a word was written about who was at the heart of the convoy etc.  He decided to publicly lend his support.  Either he did his due diligence or he didn't. 

He's had months to learn about these types, and no less than three high profile reasons/opportunities (Convoy and aftermath, Topp march, photo) to have a staffer dive in, brief him, and issue that statement of express and explicit condemnation.  He chose not to.  He chose to attack the media, to fence, to tip toe around connection and issue vague platitudes.  To not force people at the edge of his base to choose.




@Halifax Tar .  Yes. Mackenzie is the wrong, RCMP should do it's thing, and regardless of how I feel about PP no one should be subjected to this.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2022)

Quirky said:


> He joined the infantry/Army in the middle of the Afghanistan war, wanting to head over. I don't think his intentions were noble and to fight "freedom". There are plenty of people like him joining the Army in the early 2000s, they just wanted a legal means of killing people.



I have it in my head that he deployed with 2 RCR to Afghanistan, but I could be wrong.

According to the article he did deploy, and has PTSD.  But I cant vouch for its accuracy.









						N.S. veteran at Ottawa occupation allegedly pointed gun at another man in drunken Cape Breton video | SaltWire
					

A Nova Scotian involved in the Ottawa occupation allegedly pointed a pistol at another man’s head in Cape Breton last month while he was drunk on whisky, ...




					www.saltwire.com
				




So according to this he served from 2003-2017



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-threats-mackenzie-1.6595730


----------



## Remius (27 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I'm very confused by your position on this and how it interacts with my original post about the press giving Mackenzie too much attention.


Sorry you are confused.  You said the press was giving him too much attention.  News is news unfortunately and the attention was brought to the media by PP himself.  Not that the press when digging for this.  Not sure how that clashes with my position which should be clear. 


Halifax Tar said:


> MacKenzie is a wing nut, and any politician who ties their horse to his cart will do so at their peril.


That is what I said. 


Halifax Tar said:


> Are you some how insinuating that the threat, mention or making light of sexually assaulting PPs wife is some how lesser because at one time he knowingly or not shook hands with MacKenzie ?


That is a lot of creative writing.  I said nothing of the sort.  Please point out where I said that.


Halifax Tar said:


> Also you will have to pardon me, but there is a distinct difference between some vandalism and being yelled at and a public threat of sexual assault. I am really confused about the position you and @IKnowNothing are coming from.


You just minimized what happened to those people with that statement.  Think about that.  


Halifax Tar said:


> Can we at least agree that MacKenzie is in the wrong and we should let the RCMP do their thing ?


I said as much in my first post about him being a dirt bag. 

You missed my point about the hypocrisy on some on both sides regarding this.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Sorry you are confused.  You said the press was giving him too much attention.  News is news unfortunately and the attention was brought to the media by PP himself.  Not that the press when digging for this.  Not sure how that clashes with my position which should be clear.



My point is simply that by providing him with air time they are fueling his, Mackenzie's, fire.  Ignore him.  And sure, PP should probably do the same, and just leave it with the RCMP.



Remius said:


> That is a lot of creative writing.  I said nothing of the sort.  Please point out where I said that.



I didn't say you did, that's why I was asking the clarifying question.  It comes from:


Remius said:


> Anyone who doesn’t think PP hasn’t been courting that kind of person hasn’t been paying attention.





Remius said:


> You just minimized what happened to those people with that statement.  Think about that.



There is a scale of offences in this country.  Some are minor some are not.  Something are worse than others. 



Remius said:


> You missed my point about the hypocrisy on some on both sides regarding this.



Oh no I caught that quite well.

I get that you and others aren't fans of PP, and that's a-ok, but even it what should be a unifying position you and other have decided to get partisan about him.


----------



## Remius (27 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> My point is simply that by providing him with air time they are fueling his, Mackenzie's, fire.  Ignore him.  And sure, PP should probably do the same, and just leave it with the RCMP.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There is a scale of offences.  Shouldn’t be minimized regardless.  mckenna had her office vandalized, was confronted in a public place on more than one occasion, received plenty of threats, death, sexualized violence etc etc  But somehow that isn’t enough to merit calling out?  In her case things went from virtual online to in person and physical.  That’s the hypocrisy I am calling out.  Where some saw this as no big deal but now it’s an issue because their guy is the victim now.  


How did I get partisan?  I pointed out the hypocrisy of both sides in this.  Those that were ok with or silent this sort of garbage happened to others and those that take smug satisfaction that it is happening to PP and as I said in particular his wife.   And no I’m not a fan of PP, that’s irrelevant to the fact that this and other extreme actions are not acceptable regardless of the political leanings. 

That should clear things up.  If not feel free to PM me.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> There is a scale of offences.  Shouldn’t be minimized regardless.  mckenna had her office vandalized, was confronted in a public place on more than one occasion, received plenty of threats, death, sexualized violence etc etc  But somehow that isn’t enough to merit calling out?  In her case things went from virtual online to in person and physical.  That’s the hypocrisy I am calling out.  Where some saw this as no big deal but now it’s an issue because their guy is the victim now.



I've only heard of McKenna having her office vandalized.  Any threats she has received deplorable and should be dealt with no different than with PP. 



Remius said:


> How did I get partisan?  I pointed out the hypocrisy of both sides in this.  Those that were ok with or silent this sort of garbage happened to others and those that take smug satisfaction that it is happening to PP and as I said in particular his wife.   And no I’m not a fan of PP, that’s irrelevant to the fact that this and other extreme actions are not acceptable regardless of the political leanings.



See below. 


Remius said:


> Anyone who doesn’t think PP hasn’t been courting that kind of person hasn’t been paying attention.



What does that have to do with threats against his, PP's, wife ?


----------



## Lumber (27 Sep 2022)

The term 'partisan' keeps coming up. There's a lot of talk about how those of us who are speaking out against Skippy as being "Partisan". We're not speaking out against the CPC, or are we speaking in favour of the LPC, we are only speaking out against Skippy. How does that make us partisan?


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> The term 'partisan' keeps coming up. There's a lot of talk about how those of us who are speaking out against Skippy as being "Partisan". We're not speaking out against the CPC, or are we speaking in favour of the LPC, we are only speaking out against Skippy. How does that make us partisan?



Partisan isn't a term only for political party allegiance. 

Someone can be construed as being partisan for their like or dislike about anything including an individual.


----------



## Remius (27 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I've only heard of McKenna having her office vandalized.  Any threats she has received deplorable and should be dealt with no different than with PP.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Plenty of media stories about the abuse she went through.  Easily googled. 

My post (which admittedly was to be broad in relation to the discussion up thread) that included that was addressing the whole “he shakes hands and meets all sorts of people” part of the thread.  And that he doesn’t always know who he meets.  

Which is true.  My point though is that he has and is courting a segment of the right that he knows has people like that. 

He isn’t stupid or uninformed.


----------



## Lumber (27 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> What does that have to do with threats against his, PP's, wife ?





Halifax Tar said:


> Partisan isn't a term only for political party allegiance.
> 
> Someone can be construed as being partisan for their like or dislike about anything including an individual.


Yes, except it's not "like or dislike", it's almost exclusively "like". Partisan normally refers to being strongly _in favour_ of a particular person/group/party/etc., not against one (unless the party you're supporting literally has that in their sloga, like if an Anti-Harper party... but lets not go down that road).

In context of political discussion, when you are being partisan, it 'generally' means that you are forgoing/ignoring objective facts in favour of supporting your preferred person/group/party etc. In context of _this discussion, _being called partisan implies you are arguing against PP not because we have an objective belief that he is a bad choice, but instead because we are are so staunchly supportive of other parties we are attacking PP regardless of objective truths.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> Yes, except it's not "like or dislike", it's almost exclusively "like". Partisan normally refers to being strongly _in favour_ of a particular person/group/party/etc., not against one (unless the party you're supporting literally has that in their sloga, like if an Anti-Harper party... but lets not go down that road).
> 
> In context of political discussion, when you are being partisan, it 'generally' means that you are forgoing/ignoring objective facts in favour of supporting your preferred person/group/party etc. In context of _this discussion, _being called partisan implies you are arguing against PP not because we have an objective belief that he is a bad choice, but instead because we are are so staunchly supportive of other parties we are attacking PP regardless of objective truths.



I believe you're now being partisan about the usage of the word partisan


----------



## Lumber (28 Sep 2022)

I don't know if the "CPC Leadership" thread is the best place for this, but we don't have another recent conservative centric thread, so I'll just leave this here:

On carbon pricing: 

"What is it doing to prevent disasters?" 

*"How come it didn't prevent Hurricane Fiona? *Where are those tax dollars going?"


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1574849785294688259

🙄


----------



## brihard (28 Sep 2022)

Remius said:


> Sorry you are confused.  You said the press was giving him too much attention.  News is news unfortunately and the attention was brought to the media by PP himself.  Not that the press when digging for this.  Not sure how that clashes with my position which should be clear.
> 
> That is what I said.
> 
> ...


Looks like Jeremy MacKenzie was arrested today. Apparently Saskatchewan RCMP extended the warrant that was out for him in SK. That’s what I guessed would happen; it’s an expedient way to get him in custody on existing charges.

EDIT TO ADD: One count of assault, one of mischief, one of pointing a firearm, one of careless use of a restricted firearm. These charges stem from events that allegedly took place last November and were reported this summer.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1575249121690193934


----------



## Halifax Tar (29 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> I don't know if the "CPC Leadership" thread is the best place for this, but we don't have another recent conservative centric thread, so I'll just leave this here:
> 
> On carbon pricing:
> 
> ...



He lost me at Convoy Party.


----------



## Lumber (29 Sep 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> He lost me at Convoy Party.


#JustInflation?

But seriously, you should watch the video. She actually says that.


----------



## Halifax Tar (29 Sep 2022)

Lumber said:


> #JustInflation?
> 
> But seriously, you should watch the video. She actually says that.



I have said repeatedly my position on #Justinflation.  

I would but my computer doesn't have speakers.  Thanks DND  

You mean we cant just tax away climate change ?  Who knew...


----------



## Remius (6 Oct 2022)

Conservatives call off probe into misogynistic tags on Poilievre’s YouTube channel - National | Globalnews.ca
					

The Conservative leader said Thursday he rejects 'all misogyny and all acts of extremism' after Global News revealed a hidden misogynistic tag on his YouTube videos.




					globalnews.ca
				





These are dumb mistakes to be making at this point.  Some will argue the media is attacking him but at some point these things start adding up to patterns.


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Oct 2022)

MRG pulling no punches…too bad she wasn’t a contender - definitely like the cut of her jib.









						Unparliamentary language alert! Rempel tells Liberals to cut the “woke s—t”
					

The Calgary Conservative MP’s interjection in Parliament was paraphrased from a disgruntled Liberal MP




					nationalpost.com


----------



## Quirky (6 Oct 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> MRG pulling no punches…too bad she wasn’t a contender - definitely like the cut of her jib.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



About time someone called them out on it. She has my vote.


----------



## Lumber (6 Oct 2022)

Remius said:


> Conservatives call off probe into misogynistic tags on Poilievre’s YouTube channel - National | Globalnews.ca
> 
> 
> The Conservative leader said Thursday he rejects 'all misogyny and all acts of extremism' after Global News revealed a hidden misogynistic tag on his YouTube videos.
> ...


So apparently they verified that these "ghost tags" have been attached to their videos for years going back to 2018. They jsut used the same ones over and over again. So it's not PP and his possy that decided to do it, but it makes you wonder who DID decide in the first place to include it.


----------



## Brad Sallows (6 Oct 2022)

The tag is #mgtow?  Bullsh!t; the entirety of "men going their own way" isn't misogynistic just because it's often lumped together with everything else constituting "men's issues" or because some of the people claiming to be going their own way are also affiliated with more extreme beliefs.  Association fallacy, promoted mostly by women with their own axes to grind.  Not everything men do that doesn't suit women is misogynistic.  Many men going their own way are just men living without a woman.

[PS. Don't bother producing cites to Wikipedia or any other online resource that is polluted when it comes to sociopolitical issues.]


----------



## Lumber (6 Oct 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> The tag is #mgtow?  Bullsh!t; the entirety of "men going their own way" isn't misogynistic just because it's often lumped together with everything else constituting "men's issues" or because some of the people claiming to be going their own way are also affiliated with more extreme beliefs.  Association fallacy, promoted mostly by women with their own axes to grind.  Not everything men do that doesn't suit women is misogynistic.  Many men going their own way are just men living without a woman.
> 
> [PS. Don't bother producing cites to Wikipedia or any other online resource that is polluted when it comes to sociopolitical issues.]


Ok fine, here's a link to a post on a men's group website that explains and supports the claim that #mgtow is "Just like other communities under the manosphere, the MGTOW forum is connected to white supremacist and alt-right movements. It has been implicated in online cases of harassment against women". 

MGTOW: The Ultimate Guide to Men Going Their Own Way Movement


----------



## Brad Sallows (6 Oct 2022)

Same mistake - people who don't like something, presuming to dictate exactly what it is.  Might as well go to Vox for exposition of and advice to conservatives.  The old rule - you can prove anything if you dictate the evidence and definitions - applies.  For some people, MGTOW is just ... doing their own thing.  I suppose the best way of going your own way is to ignore other people telling you which way to go.  Every popular movement has sewage.

Women fill the airwaves and internet with constant chatter of all the ways in which women don't need men and can be their own people and do their own thing; let men start doing it, and they all get tarred with the sins of the worst among them.  I suppose MGTOW joins the list of movements which have diverged in so many directions that their names are no longer useful.  But at least don't make the same mistake some people make with the TEA Party - lumping the early adopters, or anyone else, in with the later splinters that were hijacked by assholes.


----------



## Quirky (6 Oct 2022)

LPC, CPC or NDP supporter I don’t care, the real problem with this country is the media and how they influence politics. This country is a disaster in so many ways, the world is closer to Armageddon than we have ever been and a video that got 1000 views is what they report on. Journalists really are pieces of sh*t.


----------



## QV (7 Oct 2022)

Quirky said:


> LPC, CPC or NDP supporter I don’t care, the real problem with this country is the media and how they influence politics. This country is a disaster in so many ways, the world is closer to Armageddon than we have ever been and a video that got 1000 views is what they report on. Journalists really are pieces of sh*t.


Hell yes


----------



## Lumber (7 Oct 2022)

Quirky said:


> LPC, CPC or NDP supporter I don’t care, the real problem with this country is the media and how they influence politics. This country is a disaster in so many ways, the world is closer to Armageddon than we have ever been and a video that got 1000 views is what they report on. Journalists really are pieces of sh*t.


This is why you need the CBC. Privately owned media will report whatever makes them the most money, not what morally or philosophically "should" be reported. A publicly funded but independent media (i.e. CBC) will be far more likely report on things that "should" be reported on, even if it's not the sexiest content.

The country is a disaster in very very few ways, especially if you compare it against some real shit-hole countries in this world. We are not "closer than ever", but we are "closer than we've been in a long time".

About journalists being pieces of shit and not reporting on waht's important? Yea, let's take a look at that. The top stories right now on various news sites:

CBC: Russia-Ukraine
CTV News: Russia-Ukraine
CNN: Russia-Ukraine
BBC: Russia-Ukraine
NBC: Russia-Ukraine
Al-Jazeera: Russia-Ukraine
Sky News: Russia-Ukraine
Reuters: Russia-Ukraine
AP: Russia-Ukraine
EuroNews: Russia-Ukraine
WaPo: Russia-Ukraine
Newsweek: Russia-Ukraine
WSJ (World): European Energy Crisis
Al Arabiya News: Iraq
The Hill: Russia-Ukraine
Globe and Mail: Russia-Ukraine (Putin)
Ottawa Citizen "world" news section: Irish dancing sexual favours/cheating scandal
National Post "world" news section: Irish dancing sexual favours/cheating scandal
The Post Mellenial: Trudeau and the WEF
NEWSMAX: Russia-Ukraine (kind of surprised here, actually)
OANN: Biden's Florida/Hurricane Ian Response
Washington Examiner: US Political crap (MAGA vs DACA)
The Washington Times: Some GOP threats of impeaching DHS heads
Breitart (because why not?): Kanye West and "White Lives Matter"
*Fox: Hunter fucking Biden*


----------



## Quirky (7 Oct 2022)

Lumber said:


> This is why you need the CBC.



You mean the arm of the Liberal Party. Ok, that's a good one.   CBC needs to the first on PPs chopping block.


----------



## FSTO (7 Oct 2022)

Lumber said:


> This is why you need the CBC. Privately owned media will report whatever makes them the most money, not what morally or philosophically "should" be reported. A publicly funded but independent media (i.e. CBC) will be far more likely report on things that "should" be reported on, even if it's not the sexiest content.
> 
> The country is a disaster in very very few ways, especially if you compare it against some real shit-hole countries in this world. We are not "closer than ever", but we are "closer than we've been in a long time".
> 
> ...


CBC needs to get out of the entertainment business and get back to local, provincial, national and international news.


----------



## Navy_Pete (7 Oct 2022)

Quirky said:


> You mean the arm of the Liberal Party. Ok, that's a good one.   CBC needs to the first on PPs chopping block.


Interesting how the big push from that is from the privately owned media, who has largely consolidated under a single entity and is pushing to get rid of their publically funded competition.

Lots of CBC stories against the LPC in general, and because they still have local outstations one of the few national news reporters that will bring up local issues (like the various scandals in some of the LPC MP offices), and also lead the charge on things like the Adm Norman farce, Trudeau's various grabby handing and ethical lapses, CAF sexual assault, MMWIG committee shit show, and all sorts of other big issues that is pretty bad for the LPC. 

If you think the LPC base is reading CBC a lot, wouldn't stories against the LPC on CBC be to the CPC benefit?

There is the occasional unfavourable article about CPC/PP in the politics section, but the NP and other large outlets generally go the other way, so seems to be a balance if you look at both. It's also not unreasonable to ask why PP is going hard at high housing/rental costs when he gets a steady income as part of his rental property interests, which I'm sure are at the same high levels as the rest of the market, or ask why he's attracting a high number of wing nuts on the right wing end of things and is an attractive candidate for some white supremecists. If I found actual neo-nazis agreeing with what I was saying, I'd probably stop and take a long hard look at what I was doing/saying. I don't think he's personnally a supremacist, but at the very least he has people on his team that are deliberately courting those groups, so he probably needs to do some team purges and set some really clear, unequivacol lines in the sand.


----------



## Remius (7 Oct 2022)

From the National Post and why the story matters.









						Chris Selley: Misogynist hashtag should be a wake-up call to Pierre Poilievre
					

He has a compelling and important message, and a very tired opponent in Justin Trudeau. There is no need to wink at weirdos and extremists




					nationalpost.com


----------



## Halifax Tar (7 Oct 2022)

Pardon me if I discard "news" about _gasp_ hashtags.  #GMAB (Give me a break)

I'll wait to see him on the next campaign trail and see how he conducts himself until then in the HOC.


----------



## Lumber (7 Oct 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Pardon me if I discard "news" about _gasp_ hashtags.  #GMAB (Give me a break)
> 
> I'll wait to see him on the next campaign trail and see how he conducts himself until then in the HOC.



Are you saying (by your use "gasp" and sarcastic "#GMAB") that you feel that because it's a discussion about a technological tool (tagging/hash-tagging/key-wording) that is used by social media platforms that is suddenly something _trivial _to discuss? As if somehow the use of more "modern" methods of communication suddenly makes them invalid? Just because #hastagging appeared on a really funny SNL skit, doesn't mean you can ignore it.

This is about the conservatives actively trying to reach out and connect with, as I pointed out earlier, groups that are _"connected to white supremacist and alt-right movements."_ that have been _"implicated in online cases of harassment against women."_


----------



## Navy_Pete (7 Oct 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Pardon me if I discard "news" about _gasp_ hashtags.  #GMAB (Give me a break)
> 
> I'll wait to see him on the next campaign trail and see how he conducts himself until then in the HOC.


These are things that are running in the background that are absolutely critical for when the automatic algorithms are suggesting 'play next' items.

You may not care, but doesn't change the fact that that specifically pushes his carefully managed content to people on the crazy end of the political spectrum in a very targeted way. Incels, misanthropes and misogynists have very active online communities and you don't have to look hard to see the occasional suicidal attack on random people that comes out of it. Someone did that very deliberately to push it to that specific group.

Again, I don't think PP knew about it, but if you are going to go big on social media, then that's the risk you take. I do like that he owned it, and came out strongly against the concept, but things like this are the reason that he gets pictures taken with random people that turn out to be extremists, as someone is trying to manipulate search algorithms to deliberately attract them.


----------



## Halifax Tar (7 Oct 2022)

Lumber said:


> Are you saying (by your use "gasp" and sarcastic "#GMAB") that you feel that because it's a discussion about a technological tool (tagging/hash-tagging/key-wording) that is used by social media platforms that is suddenly something _trivial _to discuss? As if somehow the use of more "modern" methods of communication suddenly makes them invalid? Just because #hastagging appeared on a really funny SNL skit, doesn't mean you can ignore it.
> 
> This is about the conservatives actively trying to reach out and connect with, as I pointed out earlier, groups that are _"connected to white supremacist and alt-right movements."_ that have been _"implicated in online cases of harassment against women."_



I am saying its fluff reporting, a distraction; and made up "outrage".  Its  fast food for the opposition with little substance or sustenance, much like a dollar store chocolate bar.  Its a big fat double patty nothing burger.

But I don't expect much more from our media and its readers/watchers/listeners these days. 



Navy_Pete said:


> These are things that are running in the background that are absolutely critical for when the automatic algorithms are suggesting 'play next' items.
> 
> You may not care, but doesn't change the fact that that specifically pushes his carefully managed content to people on the crazy end of the political spectrum in a very targeted way. Incels, misanthropes and misogynists have very active online communities and you don't have to look hard to see the occasional suicidal attack on random people that comes out of it. Someone did that very deliberately to push it to that specific group.
> 
> Again, I don't think PP knew about it, but if you are going to go big on social media, then that's the risk you take. I do like that he owned it, and came out strongly against the concept, but things like this are the reason that he gets pictures taken with random people that turn out to be extremists, as someone is trying to manipulate search algorithms to deliberately attract them.


----------



## Lumber (7 Oct 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I am saying its fluff reporting, a distraction; and made up "outrage".  Its  fast food for the opposition with little substance or sustenance, much like a dollar store chocolate bar.  Its a big fat double patty nothing burger.


How in the actual hell can you say that evidence that the party at some point was ACTIVELY trying to court extremists is "of little substance"????


----------



## Halifax Tar (7 Oct 2022)

Lumber said:


> How in the actual hell can you say that evidence that the party at some point was ACTIVELY trying to court extremists is "of little substance"????



I told you I don't care and am tuning it out, I wont be drawn into another stupid forum debate about this crap. 

We can debate when their electoral platform is out for consumption.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 Oct 2022)

A public broadcaster like the CBC is no help.  There they were beaking off about how the last storm was evidence of climate change, at the same time the NOAA was (yet again) pointing out that the quantity and intensity of hurricanes has not been increasing recently for any reason, let alone climate change.

Someone stuck the tag in the video; without knowing who it was, blaming "the party" for outreach is premature.

What is unfolding now is a fight Poilievre should simply decline, since it is not one he can win.  Just remove the unnecessary tags.  Opponents and activists have already called for apologies, denunciations, and/or explanations.  If he offers none, he loses.  If he offers less than they demand, he loses.  If he bends a knee exactly as they decree, he loses and they know exactly how to manipulate him.  This dance has played out innumerable times the past few years.  The only way to win is not to play.


----------



## Remius (7 Oct 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> A public broadcaster like the CBC is no help.  There they were beaking off about how the last storm was evidence of climate change, at the same time the NOAA was (yet again) pointing out that the quantity and intensity of hurricanes has not been increasing recently for any reason, let alone climate change.
> 
> Someone stuck the tag in the video; without knowing who it was, blaming "the party" for outreach is premature.
> 
> What is unfolding now is a fight Poilievre should simply decline, since it is not one he can win.  Just remove the unnecessary tags.  Opponents and activists have already called for apologies, denunciations, and/or explanations.  If he offers none, he loses.  If he offers less than they demand, he loses.  If he bends a knee exactly as they decree, he loses and they know exactly how to manipulate him.  This dance has played out innumerable times the past few years.  The only way to win is not to play.


Just a note, Global News broke the story not the CBC, most have carried it after though.


----------



## QV (7 Oct 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> A public broadcaster like the CBC is no help.  There they were beaking off about how the last storm was evidence of climate change, at the same time the NOAA was (yet again) pointing out that the quantity and intensity of hurricanes has not been increasing recently for any reason, let alone climate change.
> 
> Someone stuck the tag in the video; without knowing who it was, blaming "the party" for outreach is premature.
> 
> What is unfolding now is a fight Poilievre should simply decline, since it is not one he can win.  Just remove the unnecessary tags.  Opponents and activists have already called for apologies, denunciations, and/or explanations.  If he offers none, he loses.  If he offers less than they demand, he loses.  If he bends a knee exactly as they decree, he loses and they know exactly how to manipulate him.  This dance has played out innumerable times the past few years.  The only way to win is not to play.



Do people really want a government and media that play by these kinds of rules? There ought to be a long hard look in the mirror before the next election.


----------



## Remius (7 Oct 2022)

PP is a master at using social media.  He’s effectively leveraged it more than any other leader since social media became a thing.  He’s getting his message out. 

But that comes with the many advantages pitfalls of using social media.  Use it irresponsibly to your peril. 

Certain demographics won’t care because the internet might as well be sorcery to them.

Others and likely younger understand the concept of hashtags and how they can be used for good or for bad. If you are over 35 you probably are oblivious to it.  So it’s understandable why some people don’t care.  

It’s no different why JTs followers don’t care about the various political manoeuvring like supply arrangements and prorogations or committee procedures to limit debate.  The don’t really understand it so they don’t really care about it.


----------



## Remius (12 Oct 2022)

New shadow cabinet 



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-unveils-shadow-cabinet-1.6613702


----------



## RangerRay (12 Oct 2022)

Remius said:


> New shadow cabinet
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-unveils-shadow-cabinet-1.6613702


I haven’t heard of the vast majority of those people. And I consider myself up to date on current events!


----------



## Navy_Pete (12 Oct 2022)

That's a lot of critics. Are any of them actually qualified in any way for the items they are supposed to be critiquing, and do they intend to try and work with the incumbents to actually fix things?

Actual ministers just have to be smart enough to listen critically to their SME advice from the departments and figure out what to do, I'm not sure how they will do anything comparable with their random office staff.

Sounds like they are setting up for soundbites and the next election vice any meaninful changes now.


----------



## brihard (12 Oct 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Sounds like they are setting up for soundbites and the next election vice any meaninful changes now.


I think that’s generally the role of opposition critics.


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Oct 2022)

James Bezan is a good call shadowing Anand.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Sounds like they are setting up for soundbites and the next election vice any meaninful changes now.



Exactly what changes are you expecting the opposition to make in our sitting parliament ?


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2022)

Remius said:


> New shadow cabinet
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-unveils-shadow-cabinet-1.6613702



I'm not sure of the order of that list in the article, but look how far down DND is.


----------



## Remius (13 Oct 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I'm not sure of the order of that list in the article, but look how far down DND is.




I doubt defence is any more important to the CPC than it currently is to the LPC but the list looks more random than anything else in terms of the order.


----------



## OldSolduer (13 Oct 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> James Bezan is a good call shadowing Anand.


I think he has had that job forever.


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Oct 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> I think he has had that job forever.


When the Cons aren’t in power, yes.


----------



## IKnowNothing (13 Oct 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Exactly what changes are you expecting the opposition to make in our sitting parliament ?


By taking a less adversarial stance and leveraging his seats Jagmeet forced a decent shift in the agenda of the sitting government.  
There's appetite in the Liberal caucus (and the electorate) to pull the Liberals back to the centre.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> By taking a less adversarial stance and leveraging his seats Jagmeet forced a decent shift in the agenda of the sitting government.
> There's appetite in the Liberal caucus (and the electorate) to pull the Liberals back to the centre.



The whole of government needs to take a less adversarial stance.  And you want the opposition to lead that change ?  

The Cons/Opposition cant pull the Liberals back to center.  That's the job of the electorate.


----------



## IKnowNothing (13 Oct 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> The whole of government needs to take a less adversarial stance.  And you want the opposition to lead that change ?
> 
> The Cons/Opposition cant pull the Liberals back to center.  That's the job of the electorate.


I want the Conservative Party of Canada working to influence policy for the betterment of Canadians.  It might be years before we see another election.  Minority governments can be influenced.  The CPC has been outmanoeuvred and that influence is being better wielded by the NDP. That's not trolling, it's fact.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> I want the Conservative Party of Canada working to influence policy for the betterment of Canadians.  It might be years before we see another election.  Minority governments can be influenced.  The CPC has been outmanoeuvred and that influence is being better wielded by the NDP. That's not trolling, it's fact.



There is no oppositional influence in the GoC or HoC right now.  The Lib/NDP alliance is exactly set up to keep Conservative influence impossible.

What exactly do you want them to do ? Right now the Lib/NDP have essentially made 5,747,410 Canadians mute.

Its laughable that you expect the CPC to some how pull power away from the NDP in our current real scenario. And if that's not trolling then you don't seem to grasp the temperature of current situation and partisanship in the HoC.


----------



## IKnowNothing (13 Oct 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> There is no oppositional influence in the GoC or HoC right now.  The Lib/NDP alliance is exactly set up to keep Conservative influence impossible.
> 
> What exactly do you want them to do ? Right now the Lib/NDP have essentially made 5,747,410 Canadians mute.
> 
> Its laughable that you expect the CPC to some how pull power away from the NDP in our current real scenario. And if that's not trolling then you don't seem to grasp the temperature of current situation and partisanship in the HoC.


There was under O'Toole. The "current temperature" was not the case last year.  Hence "outmanoeuvred" being in the past tense.   The CPC is far from blameless in their sidelining. They invited it.

Not saying it will be easy, or instant, but it's literally their job.  4 years is a long time.  A long time to be working across the aisle, influencing backbenchers, actively contributing to committee in a beneficial way, undermining the supply in confidence by providing a more palatable alternative.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> There was under O'Toole. The "current temperature" was not the case last year.  Hence "outmanoeuvred" being in the past tense.   The CPC is far from blameless in their sidelining. They invited it.
> 
> Not saying it will be easy, or instant, but it's literally their job.  4 years is a long time.  A long time to be working across the aisle, influencing backbenchers, actively contributing to committee in a beneficial way, undermining the supply in confidence by providing a more palatable alternative.



Lol so wait I need to clear this up, with the CPC opposition under O'Toole the HoC was in some way a less partisan more productive place place ?  

And now you're blaming the hyper partisanship on one party.  

You sir, are a troll.


----------



## IKnowNothing (13 Oct 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Lol so wait I need to clear this up, with the CPC opposition under O'Toole the HoC was in some way a less partisan more productive place place ?
> 
> And now you're blaming the hyper partisanship on one party.
> 
> You sir, are a troll.


It most certainly was.  It was still adversarial, and there was still sniping, but as I said- it was not at the current temperature.  O'Toole lost the party because he was too moderate. 

And no, I'm not blaming the hyper-partisanship on one party, I'm saying that the CPC infighting and decision to embrace it created a Liberal need and an NDP opportunity that previously didn't exist.  

Was Scott Aitchison a troll?


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2022)

IKnowNothing said:


> It most certainly was.  It was still adversarial, and there was still sniping, but as I said- it was not at the current temperature.  O'Toole lost the party because he was too moderate.
> 
> And no, I'm not blaming the hyper-partisanship on one party, I'm saying that the CPC infighting and decision to embrace it created a Liberal need and an NDP opportunity that previously didn't exist.
> 
> Was Scott Aitchison a troll?



Ahh this about your distaste for PP.  Gotcha.  Now I that I understand your context it all makes sense.  I think you're wrong, but I can see your position now. 

No, the Liberal/NDP alliance was created for the simple reasons that they are close in policy and need each other to push through their, generally shared, desired vision for the country.  It has nothing to do with sniping from the CPC benches.  The CPC is powerless.  And it has been since it first lost to the Liberals, the last election I voted Liberal as well.

Scott Aitchison was my first choice on party ballots.


----------



## Navy_Pete (13 Oct 2022)

I think Canadian political parties need to quit being so pure if they want to actually have influence and form government in various alliances. If you look at many other parliaments the actual ruling coalition can have some pretty weird bedmates, but they can actually get some of the things they want kind of done.

Looks like some kind of improved health/dental coverage is pending, so in very real terms the NDP has been more effective in getting things in their platform implemented with 25 MPs than the CPC with 118.

I think there is enough popular support that they could probably get both the BQ and (some) NDP/Liberal MPs onside with some kind of short term GST/carbon tax pause to offset the current inflation impacts, but that requires them to maybe do something other than whinge like losers and actually work with other parties across the aisles.

Real life requires compromising and working with others all the time, and they could maybe actually do something if they paused the attack mode. The LPCs know they currently don't need to, and won't need to unless the CPC changes tact. The people in the lead don't have to do anything other than stay the course.

Or you know, we could just collectively just sit around blaming the other side for doing nothing but keep the morale superiority and hope for the best. That will keep the lights on and food in the fridge.


----------

