# Run Up to Election 2019



## Fishbone Jones (19 Feb 2019)

Does this seem like the roll out of the grit platform for the election? Is she laying the groundwork for the PM's Big Red Tent?  :dunno:



> Canada faces new world order in the face of dramatic change, says Chrystia Freeland
> In what was billed as a major speech on Canada’s foreign policy priorities, the Foreign Affairs Minister sketched out the challenges the country faces today and the role it aspires to play.
> 
> News Jun 06, 2017 by Bruce Campion-Smith Hamilton Spectator
> ...



More at link - https://www.thespec.com/news-story/7357042-canada-faces-new-world-order-in-the-face-of-dramatic-change-says-chrystia-freeland/


----------



## Jed (19 Feb 2019)

Yep. The Liberals will be hoisting the New World Order Flag.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (19 Feb 2019)

> How Harper transformed Canada’s foreign policy
> John Ibbitson
> JOHN IBBITSON
> CONTRIBUTED TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL
> ...



Same author in 2017



> Trudeau's foreign policy vs. Harper's: There is little difference
> John Ibbitson
> JOHN IBBITSON
> PUBLISHED MARCH 8, 2017
> ...



So all in all, not much of a change.  It is as if the policies of the different parties are not all that different, shaped as they are by Canadian values.

The uncomfortable truth about Canadian politics is that it often comes down to a stark and earth-shatteringly important choice between boring and competent, or competent and boring.


----------



## Jed (19 Feb 2019)

That is just John Ibbiston carrying water for the Liberals and the Global Elitists. Same old, same old.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (19 Feb 2019)

Jed said:
			
		

> That is just John Ibbiston carrying water for the Liberals and the Global Elitists. Same old, same old.



Yup. Nothing new there.


----------



## Journeyman (20 Feb 2019)

Jed said:
			
		

> That is just John Ibbiston carrying water for the Liberals and the Global Elitists. Same old, same old.


Seriously  ???  

I'm sorry, but did you actually read (and understand) both articles?  (Hint: It actually credits Conservatives).  Regardless of the pro-Conservative tone, how can saying that Canadian foreign policies are reasonably consistent under both Liberals and Conservatives be seen as "carrying water for the Liberals and the Global Elitists"?   ... regardless of how deep one is into NWO conspiracy theories.  


f**king politics threads  :brickwall:


----------



## Remius (20 Feb 2019)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Seriously  ???
> 
> I'm sorry, but did you actually read (and understand) both articles?  (Hint: It actually credits Conservatives).  Regardless of the pro-Conservative tone, how can saying that Canadian foreign policies are reasonably consistent under both Liberals and Conservatives be seen as "carrying water for the Liberals and the Global Elitists"?   ... regardless of how deep one is into NWO conspiracy theories.
> 
> ...



Not to mention that John Ibbitson is hardly a Liberal supporter, quite the opposite.  I mean the guy wrote Stephen harper's biography...

I think some people missed the point of both articles posted.   :


----------



## Lumber (20 Feb 2019)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Seriously  ???
> 
> I'm sorry, but did you actually read (and understand) both articles?  (Hint: It actually credits Conservatives).  Regardless of the pro-Conservative tone, how can saying that Canadian foreign policies are reasonably consistent under both Liberals and Conservatives be seen as "carrying water for the Liberals and the Global Elitists"?   ... regardless of how deep one is into NWO conspiracy theories.
> 
> ...



Holy crap. I just went and actually read those articles (I avoided it at first because they are long(ish) and somewhat old, but hold hell how can you come to the conclusion that they are pro-anything, Liberal or Conservative, let alone "carrying water for the Global Elitists".

 ???


----------



## Jed (20 Feb 2019)

Yes I read those articles. I guess my opinion is not in line with all you oh so knowledgeable and astute regular pundits on this page. My opinion remains the same.


----------



## Remius (20 Feb 2019)

Jed said:
			
		

> Yes I read those articles. I guess my opinion is not in line with all you oh so knowledgeable and astute regular pundits on this page. My opinion remains the same.



You are entitled to an opinion it can be in line with whatever you want.  But your statement was little odd given that the author is widely known as a conservative journalist who offers up opinions that are not clouded by ideology.  So if you mean in line with facts and what was actually written by John Ibbitson then yeah I guess it isn't in line with what most us got from it. 

His Thesis in both articles does not portray anything near what you stated. 

(cue the cries of "I don't have to explain myself" and "I have the right to say what I want without explaining or justifying anything" and so on.)

" **king politics threads  :brickwall:"  indeed.


----------



## Jed (20 Feb 2019)

Have you ever came across politicians and journalists that say one thing and do and practise something else?


----------



## Lumber (20 Feb 2019)

Jed said:
			
		

> Have you ever came across politicians and journalists that say one thing and do and practise something else?



And your point is? 

Regardless of what he does and practices in real life, when reading and analyzing these two articles in isolation, we can see no way to come to the conclusions that your and RG Fishbone Jones came to.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (20 Feb 2019)

I've just given up, plain and simple. Journalism today, whether the talking heads, journalists, newspapers and news programs, is too biased and I don't have the time to suss out anyone motivation. If I don't like what I hear or read, that's for me to worry about. It's one of those big general things that gets overblown and out of control when people want to argue why their preference is better. I've lost all trust in journalism and most are viewed with a jaundiced eye.

I was mistaken with Ibbetson. I was thinking of Coyne, the perfect example, to me, of two faced bullshit. I'm not big on Chantal, but at least she appears to tell the truth and is *mostly* non partisan.

You guys have your favourites, I don't have any.
They are all partisan, to me, until proven otherwise.

trudeau's $6 million, to the media, has gone a long way to fuel my disdain. Along with diaz and the communist UNIFOR backing trudeau, and commanding the media members to trash the Conservatives.

I get three Canadian stations out of my 50+ over the air channels. TVO, CTV and CBC. The last two local. I get the national, if I unblock CBC, but I won't because the CBC are racist liars. CTV is better, but having a real good cross selection of US stuff, I can tell when they are running their liberal interference also, especially of US politics. I do watch the Agenda on TVO, I just don't listen when they have Coyne talking.

There are no Walter Cronkite's any more. True news reporting is dead. 

Grit propaganda with a smattering of local accidents, arrests and pet stories. That's what I think of the news.


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 Feb 2019)

Initial Elections Canada results from last night's by-elections (source) ...


----------



## Haggis (26 Feb 2019)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Initial Elections Canada results from last night's by-elections (source) ...



Pretty low turnouts.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (26 Feb 2019)

Haggis said:
			
		

> Pretty low turnouts.



Yeah, I am not sure many conclusions can be drawn from the results.  The only thing that did stand out for me in the Burnaby results was the relative strength of both the Conservatives and PPC. That riding is clearly more diverse than I had been led to believe.


----------



## Remius (26 Feb 2019)

Very low. 

I would think even for by-election standards that is pretty low.


----------



## dapaterson (26 Feb 2019)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Yeah, I am not sure many conclusions can be drawn from the results.  The only thing that did stand out for me in the Burnaby results was the relative strength of both the Conservatives and PPC. That riding is clearly more diverse than I had been led to believe.



If that plays out in a number of ridings where the Conservatives are competitive, the PPC have the potential to deny seats and enable a Liberal run through the middle.

The question is how much was the party, and how much the candidate; the answers won't be known until October.


----------



## JesseWZ (26 Feb 2019)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Yeah, I am not sure many conclusions can be drawn from the results.  The only thing that did stand out for me in the Burnaby results was the relative strength of both the Conservatives and PPC. That riding is clearly more diverse than I had been led to believe.



A lot of immigration to the West Coast in the last 30+ years has come from cultures that are what we would cast as "small-c" social conservative. Some of those values are still in play amongst the _"those most likely to vote"_ populace.


----------



## Remius (26 Feb 2019)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Yeah, I am not sure many conclusions can be drawn from the results.  The only thing that did stand out for me in the Burnaby results was the relative strength of both the Conservatives and PPC. That riding is clearly more diverse than I had been led to believe.



Conservatives dropped about 5% from 2015 in that riding.

If the PPC wasn't there they likely would have finished second and had an increase in voter percentage.  If the PPC can manage 10% of the vote in other key contested areas it won't bode well for the CPC. 

But this may just be an outlier.


----------



## Rifleman62 (1 Mar 2019)

https://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/weaker-gdp-than-anyone-expected-shows-canadian-growth-stalling?video_autoplay=true

*Canada’s economy practically grinds to a halt — and nobody saw it coming* - 1 Mar 19 - Financial Post
    _Data reveals much bleaker picture than anyone anticipated with weakness extending well beyond the energy sector_

Canada’s economy practically came to a halt in the final three months of 2018, in a much deeper-than-expected slowdown that brings the underlying strength of the expansion into doubt. The country’s economy grew by just 0.1 per cent in the fourth quarter, for an annualized pace of 0.4 per cent, Statistics Canada said Friday from Ottawa. That’s the worst quarterly performance in two and a half years, down from annualized 2 per cent in the third quarter and well below economist expectations for a 1 per cent annualized increase.

While a slowdown was widely expected in the final months of the year due to falling oil prices, it’s a much bleaker picture than anyone anticipated with weakness extending well beyond the energy sector. Consumption spending grew at the slowest pace in almost four years, housing fell by the most in a decade, business investment dropped sharply for a second straight quarter, and domestic demand posted its largest decline since 2015.

The only thing that kept the nation’s economy from contracting was a build-up in inventories as companies stockpiled goods.

At the very least, the numbers suggest that heightened uncertainty — everything from the impact of higher interest rates to potential trade wars and oil-sector woes — has made a real impact on both consumer and business sentiment. The question now is what the weaker-than-expected data suggests about the economy’s ability to rebound back to more normal growth levels. Most economists had been expecting the soft patch would come to an end by this spring and growth would accelerate closer to 2 per cent for the rest of the year. No one, however, expected the economy would need to come back from such a low point. The Bank of Canada’s latest forecast, from January, is for annualized growth of 1.3 per cent in the fourth quarter and 0.8 per cent in the first quarter, before the expansion accelerates back to above 2 per cent growth by next year.

Until recently, the economy had been doing relatively well even in the face of higher rates. It grew by a Group-of-Seven-best 3 per cent in 2017, and expanded at a healthy clip in the first half of last year — prompting the Bank of Canada to press ahead with higher borrowing costs. But even that strength had been overstated, with Statistics Canada revising down its estimates for first half growth to 2 per cent from 2.3 per cent. For all of 2018, the economy grew by 1.8 per cent — below the Bank of Canada’s estimate for 2 per cent. Monthly data released Friday show the economy ended the year contracting, with December gross domestic product down 0.1 per cent. The data suggest rising interest rates may be having a bigger impact on consumers than expected. Consumption slowed to an annualized 0.7 per cent pace in the four quarter, the weakest growth since the start of 2015 as households increased their savings.

Business investment also disappointed, with non-residential capital spending down an annualized 10.9 per cent — the third straight quarterly decline and the second consecutive drop of more than 10 per cent. Residential investment also contracted for a second straight quarter, down an annualized 14.7 per cent, the biggest drop since 2009.

The economy also wasn’t able to get a contribution from exporters who have helped lift growth over the past year. Exports recorded an annualized 0.2 per cent drop in the fourth quarter. Imports also declined, down 1.1 per cent. The biggest contributor to growth came from inventories — driven by machinery, food and wood producers.


By contrast:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-economy-grew-2-6-in-the-fourth-quarter-11551360960

*U.S. Economy Grew 2.6% in the Fourth Quarter* - 28 Feb 19
   _ For the year, consumer spending was robust thanks to strong job market, tax cuts and household income gains_

WASHINGTON—The U.S. economy completed one of the best years of a nearly decade long expansion, growing at a modest pace in the fourth quarter despite slowdowns elsewhere in the world, turbulent financial markets, trade disputes with China and a partial government shutdown late in the year.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (1 Mar 2019)

Nobody saw it coming?

Millions of Canadians saw it coming and voiced, and continue, to voice their concerns. They were ignored then by the Trudeau Liberals and Bay St, as they are now. Our PM continues to shovel our rainy day dollars into the furnace of worldwide social ideals, knowing only some small portion of the funds actually get to where it's supposed to go. We have watched them close down industry and make Canada extremely business unfriendly. We have watched them bloat our welfare system with unsustainable, illegal recipients with all costs being borne by the taxpayer, but unsatisfied, they appear weekly with new ways of taxing us for more. 

Nobody saw it coming? We all saw it coming, but we couldn't get the Canadian press to cover it honestly and show the world our emperor was naked.

That is the trouble with the Canadian Press. They treat us like morons, while ignoring the fact that Canadians see them for exactly what they are. Paid propagandists.

Harper warned Canada what would happen if Trudeau got elected. We knew it then and it's all coming to pass now.

So yeah, this isn't a big surprise to anyone. Everyone saw it coming.


----------



## Remius (1 Mar 2019)

Fishbone Jones said:
			
		

> Nobody saw it coming?
> 
> Millions of Canadians saw it coming and voiced, and continue, to voice their concerns. They were ignored then by the Trudeau Liberals and Bay St, as they are now. Our PM continues to shovel our rainy day dollars into the furnace of worldwide social ideals, knowing only some small portion of the funds actually get to where it's supposed to go. We have watched them close down industry and make Canada extremely business unfriendly. We have watched them bloat our welfare system with unsustainable, illegal recipients with all costs being borne by the taxpayer, but unsatisfied, they appear weekly with new ways of taxing us for more.
> 
> ...



The slowdown was expected.  Just not one as bleak.

"_While a slowdown was widely expected in the final months of the year due to falling oil prices, it’s a much bleaker picture than anyone anticipated with weakness extending well beyond the energy sector._"


----------



## Remius (1 Mar 2019)

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/don-martin-here-s-an-inconvenient-truth-trudeau-s-brand-is-broken-1.4317297

Pretty much what most people are saying now.


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Mar 2019)

Let's see what they roll out 19 March in the budget to draw the eye.


----------



## 211RadOp (6 Mar 2019)

*Conservatives take slight lead over Liberals in latest Nanos tracking poll*

CTVNews.ca Staff 
Published Tuesday, March 5, 2019 12:57PM EST  

The Conservatives now have a slight edge over the Liberals, according to the latest Nanos Research federal ballot tracking.

The weekly tracking data, which ended March 1 and was released on Tuesday, shows the Conservatives at 34.7 per cent, followed by the Liberals at 34.2 per cent.

The NDP is at 15.5 per cent and the Green Party at 9.1 per cent.  The Bloc Quebecois got 3.6 per cent of the vote, while the People’s Party of Canada got 0.7 per cent.

(More at link)

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/conservatives-take-slight-lead-over-liberals-in-latest-nanos-tracking-poll-1.4323137


----------



## Rifleman62 (6 Mar 2019)

Extract of  email received 6 Mar 19,announcing Andrew Scheer's policy if elected.

*That’s why I announced today that, if I become Prime Minister, not only will I scrap the carbon tax, but I’ll also bring in tax-free home energy – completely removing the federal tax from your home heating and energy bill.*

Currently, the federal government doesn’t tax most essentials. Medical supplies, prescription drugs, and most groceries are all tax exempt. But, as you know, the government does charge tax on home heating. If you ask me, heating your home is a necessity, not a luxury.

*As Prime Minister, I will be dedicated to lowering the cost of living for all Canadians.*

I’ll reverse Justin Trudeau’s increased taxes on daily essentials, and put that money back in your pocket.


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Mar 2019)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Extract of  email received 6 Mar 19,announcing Andrew Scheer's policy if elected.
> 
> *That’s why I announced today that, if I become Prime Minister, not only will I scrap the carbon tax, but I’ll also bring in tax-free home energy – completely removing the federal tax from your home heating and energy bill.*
> 
> ...


More on that from a party news release here, or as attached in case link doesn't work.


----------



## Haggis (9 Mar 2019)

It seems that the PM continues to be  dogged by bad news.  At least this time he apologized to the MP in question.


----------



## a_majoor (10 Mar 2019)

One thing I always found interesting about the SNC Lavalin story was why the Attorney General and Public Prosecutor were so dead set on a trial. I suspected there was a lot more to the story than was being reported and apparently am correct. Reading this story, it is apparent that SNC Lavalin does not meet any of the requirements for offering a DP rather than a trial (i.e. self reporting of bribery, or the acts did not create any harm):

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/03/08/analysis/hidden-key-snc-lavalin-scandal

Stories like this will continue to erode the credibility of Trudeau and the Liberals, especially since we are still close enough in time to remember 1990 and 200 era Liberal scandals like Adscam. There will be a significant number of people who will link the "old" Liberals to the "New" Liberals because of these ethical failures. How much it moves the needle is harder to say.


----------



## Cloud Cover (10 Mar 2019)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/03/08/analysis/hidden-key-snc-lavalin-scandal
> 
> Stories like this will continue to erode the credibility of Trudeau and the Liberals, especially since we are still close enough in time to remember 1990 and 200 era Liberal scandals like Adscam. There will be a significant number of people who will link the "old" Liberals to the "New" Liberals because of these ethical failures. How much it moves the needle is harder to say.



If the stories like that make their way into the actual MSM that Canadians read, and believe, then maybe. The "National Observer" is not mainstream enough, not even close.  I still believe that unless something totally nuclear happens with the personalities in this event (the facts and law seem to be irrelevant) then it will not have the immense detrimental impact that many seem to think it will.  The "moral authority to govern' that Andrew Scheer harps on does not resonate with many people, considering not enough people know enough about to take his credibility seriously. And those that do know him, would know that he had his own visits with SNC.


----------



## PuckChaser (10 Mar 2019)

Liberals can't even make a law properly to help their friends out. They literally created DPAs after months of lobbying from SNC, and then $@#$ed up at making the law so it didn't even apply to SNC.


----------



## Rifleman62 (10 Mar 2019)

Although the Liberals are in the process of changing the Regulations: i.e. from 10 years to 10 months for SNC ;D

I really don't know what the time reduction will be.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (10 Mar 2019)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Although the Liberals are in the process of changing the Regulations: i.e. from 10 years to 10 months for SNC ;D
> 
> I really don't know what the time reduction will be.



I was listening to Cross Country checkup today on CBC. A significant portion of that listening audience is willing to allow that something isn't right or that mistakes were made, but, A Conservative majority is much, much worse. Therefore, they still back Trudeau. Caller after caller questioned the motives of JWR, almost to the point of making me wonder if it was an organized campaign.

Apperently, if you are a hard core Trudeau fan , he could literally get away with murder. Because his motives are pure on climate change and feminism (!) are pure (I am paraphrasing one caller from Toronto.

This affair is no means a slam dunk for any of the opposition parties. Those that believe in the PM, do so with a religious fervour. That is pretty hard to shake, regardless of the evidence.


----------



## Rifleman62 (10 Mar 2019)

Well, at my age VAC says I don't have long to go, or long to put up with this Liberal shidt, I mean this Liberal shidt at the head (refuse to say leading) of the LPC.


----------



## Cloud Cover (10 Mar 2019)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Apperently, if you are a hard core Trudeau fan , he could literally get away with murder. Because his motives are pure on climate change and feminism (!) are pure (I am paraphrasing one caller from Toronto



I don't know about "murder" , but his contempt for blue collar resource based workers has created economic, political and legal outcomes that must have caused some to feel like that. He obviously has no conscience about many of the things he's done, but then again millions of Canadians are behind him about those very same things.


----------



## Remius (11 Mar 2019)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Apparently, if you are a hard core Trudeau fan , he could literally get away with murder. Because his motives are pure on climate change and feminism (!) are pure (I am paraphrasing one caller from Toronto.



Same goes for any polarized person of any political stripe.  Something that is on the rise.

Everyone should ask a themselves a simple question.  Do you hate your political opponents?  Real hate.  If so you are likely polarized and extreme.  

A few articles on that subject.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jan/20/canadas-political-polarization-rises-kills-image-m/

https://www.macleans.ca/politics/why-were-calling-out-the-left-and-the-right-of-canadian-politics/


----------



## Lumber (11 Mar 2019)

Identity politics works both ways. I'm _not _going to _not _vote for someone solely on one scandal.

Would I rather have an incompetent PM and a corrupt party but who's policies I agree with; or
Would I rather have a competent PM, a less corrupt party (lol), but a bunch of policies that I totally disagree with.

Similarity, what's more important to you? Social policy or economic policy? If someone could prove that they could make us all rich, but we'd have to execute all people who pronounce "Gif" as "Jif" would you take that trade? 

Ok, that's a ridiculous example, but lets look how Trump got support form so may "normal" people. Look at how he survived all the allegations of sexual harassment, including that abhorrent audio recording with TMZ. People were rightly mortified at the things he said and did, but would they rather have Trump and republican policies, or a less deplorable Clinton and Democratic policies? For a lot of them who voted Trump, they recognized that Trump was a vile creature undeserving of the office of President, but they felt the damage of a Democratic president would be worse than damage caused by Trump. 

So, do people deplore the unethical behaviour of Trudeau and the LPC? Sure. Is it enough to warrant switching from the LPC to the CPC? You have to take an actual look at the difference between the two, not just their leaders, and ask which is better for Canada.

And the crux of it is, once you do that, you realize that who's at the helm and what they did don't actually matter at all.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Mar 2019)

The LPC is trudeau. Backbenchers don't talk or contribute, they are simply there to vote and every motion is whipped. Lackeys get jobs to do his bidding. Every word uttered, is vetted by the PMO. Trudeau is the party, along with the other Laurentien Elites. Chretien, Martin, Mulroney to name a few. Most everything done by the liberals, legislated or not, benefits one, some or all of them. SNC, Bombardier, Power Corp. Owned and staffed by LEs. They have never cared for Canada as a collective.They have massive foreign oil investments, so they took out the Canadian competition. They own most of the banking and financial houses. They own most of the insurance companies. And they own the media.

I have all the info I need to vote.


----------



## brihard (11 Mar 2019)

Fishbone Jones said:
			
		

> hey have never cared for Canada as a collective.They have massive foreign oil investments, so they took out the Canadian competition. They own most of the banking and financial houses. They own most of the insurance companies. And they own the media.
> 
> I have all the info I need to vote.



The 'big five' Canadian banks are all publicly traded, and their largest owners are in fact each other and their own investment banking branches, plus a couple of the major mutual funds / pensions (Vanguard, Fidelity, Quebec Pension Plan, etc). Almost all of the major shareholders are themselves publicly traded companies owned by an increasingly broad array of international financial powerhouses the more one follows ownership up. Major share holdings for these companies are all disclosed and pretty easy to follow if one cares to look.

The media industry is a bit more nebulous. Rogers is sufficiently owned by the Rogers family that it can be fairly called privately controlled. They're a Toronto family. Bell is publicly traded and has no controlling shareholders, but rather is owner by a broad array of major institutional investors. Corus - a Shaw holding - is privately controlled by the Shaw family of Alberta. Quebecor is controlled by the Peladeau family, but given PKP's history with the Parti Québecois, I'm not sure if he can be credited as among the 'Laurentian Elite' since that perjorative has a necessarily Liberal connotation... And Quebecor also owns the Sun chain, so I'm not sure if that really fits the 'Liberals own the media' line of rhetoric. Anyway, moving right past that awkward stumble, we've got Postmedia- they're publicly traded with two different share classes to navigate around foreign-control regulations, but they aren't even truly a Canaidan controlled company anymore- the biggest strings are held by US hedge funds.

Now, I'm only speaking about what I've actually spoken to - the media and banking companies. I've not gone into detail on the other ventures you mentioned, though I'm happy to concede that there is probably considerable influence within major Quebec businesses like SNC, Bombardier, and Powercorp. Further dissecting that is beyond the scope of my reply. I will say though that to try to paint our media and banks as if they are in the greedy, grasping hands of some small group of Québecois Liberals must at least arch one's eyebrows. I would respectfully suggest that whatever time you're spending reading sources that lead you to this mindset, perhaps devote a portion of that to fact checking things like corporate ownership... The info is all out there. Frankly some of what you said borders nearly on the hysterical.


----------



## Remius (11 Mar 2019)

Lumber said:
			
		

> So, do people deplore the unethical behaviour of Trudeau and the LPC? Sure. Is it enough to warrant switching from the LPC to the CPC? You have to take an actual look at the difference between the two, not just their leaders, and ask which is better for Canada.
> 
> And the crux of it is, once you do that, you realize that who's at the helm and what they did don't actually matter at all.



And that is likely why the LPC hasn't dropped in support that much but Trudeau has.  I am sure plenty of voters voted liberal despite Trudeau not because of him.


----------



## PuckChaser (11 Mar 2019)

Lumber said:
			
		

> So, do people deplore the unethical behaviour of Trudeau and the LPC? Sure. Is it enough to warrant switching from the LPC to the CPC? You have to take an actual look at the difference between the two, not just their leaders, and ask which is better for Canada.



I mean, if you're going to vote for someone again who's been the only Prime Minister paying fines for ethical breaches, so you can have legal weed, GBA+ and carbon taxes, you deserve the economy grinding to a halt due to literally no rational economic policy.

The rest of us have a higher ethical and moral standard expected of the Prime Minister of a G7 country.


----------



## FJAG (11 Mar 2019)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Identity politics works both ways. I'm _not _going to _not _vote for someone solely on one scandal.
> 
> Would I rather have an incompetent PM and a corrupt party but who's policies I agree with; or
> Would I rather have a competent PM, a less corrupt party (lol), but a bunch of policies that I totally disagree with.
> . . .



That's basically it though; there's not much difference between the CPC and LPC policies other than the CPC tends to trend more towards fiscal control and balancing budgets while the LPC trends towards more largess for social programs in defiance of fiscal restraint. Neither one of which impacts the majority of voters significantly.

Effectively people get drawn towards one or the other about perceptions of whether the party/candidates are competent and committed to furthering the lives of their constituents. Unfortunately its virtually impossible to do demonstrable performance measurement on whether one's expectations are in fact being met. Instead we get vague assurances that the given party has "created more jobs"; "been greener than the other"; made more apologies for centuries old wrongs" etc etc.

Quite frankly much of my negative opinion about the LPC has been my belief that for many decades (centuries?) they have been the protectors of corrupt/voracious corporations centered in their ridings and the darlings of the bloated civil service. SNC and the Norman affairs have certainly reinforced my perceptions.

On the other hand, the CPC has done nothing recently to earn and keep my faith in them (in fact my better half--a long time CPC supporter--has been so disgusted by them of late that she declined her ballot in the last election). I can see where many new voters will have a hard time making a choice in the next election and why our voter turnout is so low.

 :brickwall:


----------



## RangerRay (11 Mar 2019)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Identity politics works both ways. I'm _not _going to _not _vote for someone solely on one scandal.
> 
> Would I rather have an incompetent PM and a corrupt party but who's policies I agree with; or
> Would I rather have a competent PM, a less corrupt party (lol), but a bunch of policies that I totally disagree with.
> ...



Speaking for myself, I was faced with this predicament when I lived in BC.

As a right-leaning free-enterpriser, I had one party to vote for, the BC Liberals (really a Liberal-Conservative free-enterprise coalition).

After a couple of terms with Gordon Campbell, and later Christy Clark, it became apparent that it was a rotten, sleazy, crony-capitalist party beholden to corporate and wealthy Chinese interests.  They didn't care about regular folks.

However, the only viable party to vote for against them is the NDP.  The BC Conservatives are a fringe rump.

In BC, contrary to stereotypes, most people are deathly scared of the NDP, aka The Socialist Horde.  The NDP wins when the free-enterprise vote is split.

For the last two terms, the BC Liberals won despite the stench, because most voters were more scared of the alternative than of the stink and corruption of the governing Liberals.  Most people still remembered the '90's.

For me, the sleaze and crony-capitalism were too much.  After Christy Clarke became leader, I voted NDP.  Even though I disagreed with almost every policy of the NDP, I felt that the BC Liberals had to be cleansed of the cronyism and sleaze.  If that meant 4 years of NDP, so be it.  

During that election, I was in the minority of free-enterprise voters.  Most held their nose and voted BC Liberal because the NDP scared them (and me for that matter) shitless.

In the last election, it appears more BC Liberal voters felt the way I did or stayed home.  Either way, from here it does not look like the BC Liberals learned their lesson.  They chose another Howe Street elitist rather than someone who has a clue about the problems of regular people.

So yes, for me, issues like competency, corruption and character matter.


----------



## Furniture (11 Mar 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> That's basically it though; there's not much difference between the CPC and LPC policies other than the CPC tends to trend more towards fiscal control and balancing budgets while the LPC trends towards more largess for social programs in defiance of fiscal restraint. Neither one of which impacts the majority of voters significantly.



I imagine many Greek, Spanish, and Portuguese voters felt that way at one time as well. 

One party is pushing us closer to being a northern Greece, the other seems to be content halting the slide a bit. Despite my lack of children I know who I want plotting the course for our nation's future.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Mar 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> The 'big five' Canadian banks are all publicly traded, and their largest owners are in fact each other and their own investment banking branches, plus a couple of the major mutual funds / pensions (Vanguard, Fidelity, Quebec Pension Plan, etc). Almost all of the major shareholders are themselves publicly traded companies owned by an increasingly broad array of international financial powerhouses the more one follows ownership up. Major share holdings for these companies are all disclosed and pretty easy to follow if one cares to look.
> 
> The media industry is a bit more nebulous. Rogers is sufficiently owned by the Rogers family that it can be fairly called privately controlled. They're a Toronto family. Bell is publicly traded and has no controlling shareholders, but rather is owner by a broad array of major institutional investors. Corus - a Shaw holding - is privately controlled by the Shaw family of Alberta. Quebecor is controlled by the Peladeau family, but given PKP's history with the Parti Québecois, I'm not sure if he can be credited as among the 'Laurentian Elite' since that perjorative has a necessarily Liberal connotation... And Quebecor also owns the Sun chain, so I'm not sure if that really fits the 'Liberals own the media' line of rhetoric. Anyway, moving right past that awkward stumble, we've got Postmedia- they're publicly traded with two different share classes to navigate around foreign-control regulations, but they aren't even truly a Canaidan controlled company anymore- the biggest strings are held by US hedge funds.
> 
> Now, I'm only speaking about what I've actually spoken to - the media and banking companies. I've not gone into detail on the other ventures you mentioned, though I'm happy to concede that there is probably considerable influence within major Quebec businesses like SNC, Bombardier, and Powercorp. Further dissecting that is beyond the scope of my reply. I will say though that to try to paint our media and banks as if they are in the greedy, grasping hands of some small group of Québecois Liberals must at least arch one's eyebrows. I would respectfully suggest that whatever time you're spending reading sources that lead you to this mindset, perhaps devote a portion of that to fact checking things like corporate ownership... The info is all out there. Frankly some of what you said borders nearly on the hysterical.



Then I'll go beyond your flirtatious and cursory research. His politics and climate rhetoric aside, this guy did a better research job than I ever could to peel back the Power Corp onion. It scratches the surface  https://www.resilience.org/stories/2019-02-12/finance-fossil-fuels-and-climate-change/

Yes, the info is out there. You need to look in the right spot. Many similar graphs and explanations from more reputable sources also exist. Some deeper, some not. I gave you the first one I came across. You can look up what you want. Or not.

Twice today you have attacked me with ad hominems. You're back on ignore, no more replies.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (12 Mar 2019)

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/justin-trudeau-is-an-actor-not-a-prime-minister/

Justin Trudeau is an actor, not a prime minister
Barbara Kay by Barbara Kay
1 day ago



> Justin Trudeau’s “contrition” session with the press turned out to be a nothingburger. He did not apologize. He would only cop to an “erosion of trust” between his guy, Gerald Butts, and Jody Wilson-Raybould, implying that Canadians should be blaming Mr. Erosion, not him. He allowed as how “there is always room for improvement,” the kind of thing one sees written on one’s children’s report card. He has nothing against contrition—in fact, he was on his way up north that very day to express contrition to the Inuit … for the past deeds of other people, that is, something he excels at.
> 
> As National Post reporter John Ivison noted in his column Mar 8, Trudeau’s press conference was “the enactment of humility,” and not the real thing. Exactement! “Enactment” is in fact the story of Trudeau’s public life. He is all political theatre, shining when he has memorized a script (“Canada’s back!” “Diversity is our strength!”…”Because it’s 2015!”…”Jobs!”), but very much at sea when the other actors walk away from the parts his scriptwriters assigned to them. At which point, as in his “contrition” press conference, he hits verbal bathos: “to move forward, not backward,” or “every day as prime minister I learn new things.”
> 
> ...


----------



## Rifleman62 (12 Mar 2019)

I find it hilarious, incredible, that the MSN is now only just becoming aware how useless Trudeau is.


----------



## Jed (12 Mar 2019)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> I find it hilarious, incredible, that the MSN is now only just becoming aware how useless Trudeau is.




Bad Journalism plus monetary incentives can warp common sense.


----------



## Furniture (12 Mar 2019)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> I find it hilarious, incredible, that the MSN is now only just becoming aware how useless Trudeau is.



The media hated Harper. In their minds anybody but Harper was better, and Trudeau had an easy last name to sell in certain circles. 

What is surprising to me is that they are turning on him now.


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Mar 2019)

From another thread ...


			
				dapaterson said:
			
		

> March 19: Federal budget with some nifty new things.
> 
> March 26: "To execute this agenda to support and build the middle class, we are returning to the people for a fresh mandate"
> 
> ...


This, from an English-language Montreal weekly, shared with the usual _Copyright Act_ "fair dealings" caveat (highlights mine)...


> Is Justin Trudeau really relaxing in Florida this week to recharge his batteries and forget about the SNC Lavalin  scandal? Or is he getting ready to hit the road for a re-election campaign?
> 
> *Several good sources tell me that Trudeau will soon pull the trigger on an early May election.* It makes a lot of sense. He cannot have this story  follow him for the next six months. So after his party tables a good news budget, he will tell Canadians that he did the right thing by asking Jody Wilson-Raybould, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General at the time, to intervene in an ongoing criminal prosecution case against SNC Lavalin. He wanted to save jobs and if the opposition has a problem with that he will let the people decide.
> 
> ...


Caveat lector and all that, but if true & represented accurately, the second highlight seems far more indicative/predictive than the first ... op:


----------



## Remius (13 Mar 2019)

And the Admiral Norman trial won't be happening in may as opposed to the fall where all of this will get drudged up again.  


Also, equally important to note is that an early snap election would dissolve parliament and end all House business including committees.  Like say, oh, the justice committee...


http://www.ourcommons.ca/MarleauMontpetit/DocumentViewer.aspx?Sec=Ch08&Seq=7


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Mar 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> And the Admiral Norman trial won't be happening in may as opposed to the fall where all of this will get drudged up again.


Don't know about that***, but ...


			
				Remius said:
			
		

> Also, equally important to note is that an early snap election would dissolve parliament and end all House business including committees.  Like say, oh, the justice committee...
> 
> http://www.ourcommons.ca/MarleauMontpetit/DocumentViewer.aspx?Sec=Ch08&Seq=7


... that _is_ an intriguing reminder  ;D

*** -- ... although this is an interesting take on the whole fracas & possible impact on the trial:


> The looming trial of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman and his defence team’s allegations of political interference in the case could push swing voters away from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party, says one pollster, by shoring up a perception created by the SNC-Lavalin scandal that Mr. Trudeau’s team likes to meddle where it shouldn’t to help out big business.
> 
> Some current and former Liberal insiders and government officials are speculating that the government may wish for the prosecution of Vice-Admiral Norman on breach of trust charges to be dropped. However, one Ottawa lawyer with experience representing clients in the government and military says the government wouldn’t dare to direct the public prosecutor to drop the charges.
> 
> “At the moment, when the entire legal system is under not only a magnifying glass, a microscope, there’s no bloody way anybody who is anybody within the political regime would dare even to get anywhere close to it,” said Michel Drapeau, a lawyer and former colonel in the Canadian Armed Forces, who is not involved in the Norman case but regularly represents Canadian civil servants and military members ...


----------



## Cloud Cover (13 Mar 2019)

Nor will there be an Ethics Commissioner sticking his unwelcome snout into the affairs of Cabinet, the PMO and the PCO now that Conflict of Interest is on the table.


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Mar 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> Nor will there be an Ethics Commissioner sticking his unwelcome snout into the affairs of Cabinet, the PMO and the PCO now that Conflict of Interest is on the table.


His staff can still investigate/probe, though, according to this ...


> ...  all normal operations of the commissioner’s office will continue in Dion’s absence, including gathering information for any “ongoing investigations.” ...


----------



## Cloud Cover (13 Mar 2019)

Yes I read that too, but I doubt they will do very much without direction.


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Mar 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> Yes I read that too, but I doubt they will do very much without direction.


Maybe, but if an investigation is under way, one would think they'd have their orders, at least in general terms, like if an ombudsman is out of commission.


----------



## Rifleman62 (13 Mar 2019)

I saw one report the Ethics Commissioner is out for surgery and expects to be back shortly. You would think there was an Acting Ethics Commissioner who has all the authority/sign off ability.

Six Months to investigate.

https://twitter.com/l_stone/with_replies?lang=en

Laura StoneVerified account
@l_stone
Canadian politics, based at Queen’s Park in Toronto. I like to lunch. Find me @globeandmail; @YourMorning Tuesday am; former @ctvqp and @ctv_powerplay


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Mar 2019)

Thanks for the update R62!


----------



## Fishbone Jones (13 Mar 2019)

Something else that gets buried if he calls for a May election?


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Mar 2019)

Fishbone Jones said:
			
		

> Something else that gets buried if he calls for a May election?


If you mean the Ethics Comm'n'r probe, I stand to be corrected, but I doubt if it'll be NOT mentioned during any campaign, and I doubt the digging will stop.


----------



## Loachman (13 Mar 2019)

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/the-biggest-threat-of-election-interference-comes-from-michael-wernick-not-russia/

The biggest threat of election interference comes from Michael Wernick, not Russia

by Mika Ryu Mar 12

<snip>

That being said, Wernick will serve as the head of a panel of government employees who will monitor this year's election campaign, on the lookout for fake news and foreign interference. This is even after his disastrous Justice Committee testimony, and calls from the NDP for him to be fired.

That includes what Wernick himself called the "vomitorium" of social media, which has become an important aspect of staying informed of current events in Canada.

Earlier this month, the Ministry of Democratic Institutions defended their choice not to remove Wernick from the panel, saying that they have "great confidence in the integrity of Canada's public service."

As if those facts are not troubling enough, recent events have done nothing to improve the apparent trustworthiness of the "Critical Election Incident Public Protocol Panel".

It is already hard enough to trust the government to monitor social media during an election, but it might become even harder, considering who else will be on the panel.

<snip>

Is this a man who has the calm and nerve to make thoughtful and unbiased decisions concerning the boundaries of political public discourse during an election campaign?

Do the Liberals' still have such hubris that they would expect Canadians to let this one go?

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/truth-and-reconciliation-commissioner-calls-out-trudeau-for-reconciliation-facade/

Truth and Reconciliation commissioner calls out Trudeau for reconciliation "façade"

by Travis Gladue-Beauregard Mar 12

<snip>

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/cohen-wilson-raybould-and-philpott-are-finished-as-liberals


Cohen: Wilson-Raybould and Philpott are finished as Liberals

Andrew Cohen

Updated: March 12, 2019

What do Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott want? Where does this all go, now that they’re gone from cabinet?

Will they bring down the government of Justin Trudeau, in a very Canadian coup? Or, more likely, is this effectively the end of their short, unhappy lives as Liberals?

Justin Trudeau is responding, fitfully, and retrenching, slowly. He is not leaving. He and Gerald Butts, his former principal secretary, now offer a counter-narrative: This is a managerial problem, not a moral one. This is vanity, not virtue.

Trudeau needs a return to the status quo ante. Fast. With Parliament off this week, as it was last week, he has bought time and relief from the anger of the opposition.

<snip>

Both will run in the next election. Both will lose if their party does (learning, as every MP does, that it isn’t about them). Or, they will win and return to the back benches. Neither will be ministers again under this prime minister.

Amid the ruins, they may tell themselves that it was all worth it, that it is better to be right than in cabinet. As Liberals, though, they’re done.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-for-the-ndp-in-quebec-the-dream-is-over

Chris Selley: For the NDP in Quebec, the dream is over

The nationalism to which Layton successfully appealed doesn't exist any more. What's left is simply incompatible with a Canada-wide progressive movement

Chris Selley March 12, 2019 8:28 PM EDT

<snip>

Today the governing Coalition Avenir Québec, successor to the ADQ, vows to bring in legislation that would, among other things, make it illegal for the turban-wearing Singh to work as a public school teacher.

<snip>

The problem with that is a significant chunk of the nationalist voters Singh is after in Quebec see the entire controversy - literally - as an anglophone hate-plot perpetrated by the Rest of Canada on francophone Quebecers.

<snip>


----------



## Cloud Cover (14 Mar 2019)

"Wheel of Misfortune"  Lol. As seen on Instagram.


----------



## Loachman (14 Mar 2019)

I would have expected the Liberals to wait until October to hold the election as scheduled, in the hopes that this would all blow over, so recent rumours of a May election somewhat surprised me.

The only reason to try it early, that I can see, is that they expect things to get worse. That matches their continuing efforts to suppress a second round of testimony from Jody Wilson-Raybould, and makes me curious. What is it that they truly fear? What horror lurks in the dark recesses of Liberal minds?

Snap elections can also be risky, and don't always work out in favour of the snappers.

It could already be too late for them, anyway:

https://www.campaignresearch.ca/single-post/2019/03/13/Prime-Ministers-approval-rating-plunges-in-wake-of-SNC-Lavalin-Affair

Prime Minister's approval rating plunges in wake of SNC-Lavalin Affair

March 14, 2019

Eli Yufest

In the aftermath of Jody Wilson-Raybould's testimony to the House of Commons Justice Committee, Campaign Research conducted a national public opinion poll of 1,893 Canadians to investigate their views on the upcoming federal election. A plurality (43%) believe that the government has done a bad job and should not be re-elected. Couple that with the 10% of Canadians that say the government has done a good job but it's time to give someone else a chance, and a majority of Canadians now want to see a change of government.

The country is seemingly divided along geographic lines, with Atlantic Canada and Quebec leaning Liberal (37%, 29%, respectively) and Ontario and everything West of it supporting the Conservatives. For example, the Conservatives continue to lead in seat-rich Ontario over the Liberals (40% vs. 34%) among decided voters. The Conservatives also now hold a lead in BC (30% vs. 27%). In short, the Conservatives maintain a strong lead over the Liberals with a national result of 36% vs. 30%

Justin Trudeau's personal brand and approval has taken a significant hit since the start of 2019, with a -10% decline.  Conversely, Andrew Scheer's approval rating has surpassed Trudeau's for the first time in March, since we began tracking. For the second straight month, Trudeau's disapproval score has been over 50%. Of particular concern for Trudeau is the 60% of baby boomers that disapprove of him. Turning perceptions around of this key, more-likely-to-vote demographic is of paramount importance if Trudeau will win the election later this year. 

Given the SNC-Lavalin controversy, we also asked about approval ratings for Jody Wilson-Raybould. In short, she received higher approval scores than any of the three main party leaders. Overall, 45% of Canadians approve of the job she is doing as a member of parliament and former attorney general. This relatively strong score likely speaks to the believability or favourability Canadians feel towards to her.

When asked who would make the best prime minister, Canadians selected Andrew Scheer over Justin Trudeau for the first time in our tracking. This number is likely the most worrisome for Trudeau because if Scheer is now being seen as a viable substitute as prime minster, this could prove disastrous for the Liberals during the election. 

<snip>

Christie Blatchford: Liberal sheep may be ready to move on from LavScan, but I'm not

I am reminded of the Gomery inquiry. Quid pro quos, greasy influence over civil servants, too much power in the PMO: It all seems awfully familiar, doesn't it?

Christie Blatchford	

March 13, 2019 8:19 PM EDT

<snip>


----------



## SeaKingTacco (18 Mar 2019)

CBC is reporting that the Clerk of the Privy Counsel has resigned. He stated that there is no way that he can appear impartial to the opposition parties going into a federal election.

Guess that opening monologue to the Justice Committee was not such a great idea, after all.

The body count from SNC-Lavalin keeps piling up....


----------



## Remius (18 Mar 2019)

He announced that he is "retiring"...lol


----------



## Cloud Cover (18 Mar 2019)

Interestingly, if Trudeau calls a snap election after the budget (expected to do so); with this letter Wernick appears to be attempting to establish clean hands and no knowledge about that. He has referenced the election several times in a resignation letter?

"Recent events have led me to conclude that I cannot serve as Clerk of
the Privy Council and Secretary to Cabinet during the upcoming election
campaign. Therefore, I will be taking steps to retire from the public service well
before the writ of election is issued.

One of the key roles of the Privy Council Office is to be ready to assist
whichever government Canadians elect in October. It has been my privilege to
work with the transition teams of three prime ministers. It is now apparent that
there is no path for me to have a relationship of mutual trust and respect with
the leaders of the Opposition parties. Furthermore, it is essential that during
the writ period the Clerk be seen by all political parties as an impartial arbiter of
whether serious foreign interference has occurred.

Therefore, I wish to relinquish these roles before the election. It is
essential that Canadians continue to see their world leading public service as
non-partisan and there to provide excellent services to Canadians and the
governments they elect.

The timing of my retirement is something we should discuss, as your
Government will have a busy Cabinet agenda until the end of the Parliamentary
session, and you will want to seek advice on how best to address succession."


----------



## PPCLI Guy (18 Mar 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> Interestingly, if Trudeau calls a snap election after the budget *(expected to do so);*



Source?  Other than Maxime Bernier?  Because I couldn't find one.


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Mar 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Source?  Other than Maxime Bernier?  Because I couldn't find one.


One place I've seen:  this suburban Montreal weekly - while I can take or leave the unnamed political guesses, this bit of detail, _if true & reported correctly_, clicks for me ...


> ... Several suppliers who are called upon by candidates in   federal elections have told me they were contacted already to  be prepared to  start printing material soon for a May vote. This  would catch the  opposition  off guard ...


Caveat:  depending on the "material" in question, this could be Elections Canada being safe as well as possibly political folks.

I don't know if I'd be as definite as saying _*"expected"*_, though.  Although someone smarter than me around these parts made a similar prediction  ;D


----------



## PuckChaser (18 Mar 2019)

The snap election claim made a run through a few online-only media outlets, but articles were pulled a few hours later. Sources likely not credible.


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Mar 2019)

In case you're interested, here's the Budget 2019 page for when it's tabled this afternoon & the Finance Canada Twitter feed for the info-machine highlights./


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Mar 2019)

New defence mentions in Budget 2019?  See attached - more also in attached excerpt.


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Mar 2019)

Wow!  Good thing we’re spending $3M on cyber security to protect critical national infrastructure - that’ll keep hackers at bay... :not-again:


----------



## TimneyTime (20 Mar 2019)

I know this is going to make me unpopular, but I unequivocally support Andrew Scheer.  Mainly for his stance on Bill C-71


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Mar 2019)

Scheer isn't pro firearms, he's pro firearm-owner votes. Big difference.
He's a lame duck that says enough to keep him out of hot water with conservative voters but nothing more.


----------



## Jed (20 Mar 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Scheer isn't pro firearms, he's pro firearm-owner votes. Big difference.
> He's a lame duck that says enough to keep him out of hot water with conservative voters but nothing more.




Agreed but no other viable alternative available for Canada.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (24 Mar 2019)

Jed said:
			
		

> Agreed but no other viable alternative available for Canada.



if gun stuff is your defining issue for Canada.....and the exercise of your franchise.  Otherwise, not so much.

When other single issue Canadians vote to support their single issue, are they just as virtuous?  LGBTQ2 rights?  Animal Rights?  Feminism?  Proportional Votes?  Environmentalists?


----------



## mariomike (24 Mar 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> if gun stuff is your defining issue for Canada.....and the exercise of your franchise.  Otherwise, not so much.
> 
> When other single issue Canadians vote to support their single issue, are they just as virtuous?  LGBTQ2 rights?  Animal Rights?  Feminism?  Proportional Votes?  Environmentalists?



To add to that list, I remember when the single defining issue for some federal election voters was the restoration of the death penalty.


----------



## Jed (24 Mar 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> if gun stuff is your defining issue for Canada.....and the exercise of your franchise.  Otherwise, not so much.
> 
> When other single issue Canadians vote to support their single issue, are they just as virtuous?  LGBTQ2 rights?  Animal Rights?  Feminism?  Proportional Votes?  Environmentalists?



So being a single issue voter is wrong? Pretty biased there PPCLI Guy. All those other issues you have in your sentence don't amount to a hill of beans to the importance in preservation from unscrupulous deceitful leaders.


----------



## ballz (24 Mar 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> if gun stuff is your defining issue for Canada.....and the exercise of your franchise.  Otherwise, not so much.
> 
> When other single issue Canadians vote to support their single issue, are they just as virtuous?  LGBTQ2 rights?  Animal Rights?  Feminism?  Proportional Votes?  Environmentalists?



Yes, although I don't see it being a matter of "virtue," but if they feel those issues are so important that all other issues combined are not as important to them, that's democracy.... the argument that anyone's single issue isn't important enough is a self-defeating argument. It's simply based on disagreeing that that particular issue is important enough to be worth a "single issue" vote, despite the fact that there are undoubtedly circumstances which would, at some point, have us all become single issue voters... the whole point of having a vote is that no one else gets to decide what issues you *should* care about, and just *how much* you should care about them.

I suspect there are plenty of people who have had their life completely ruined because they are LGBTQ2 who have plenty of good reason that is above my judgement to vote solely for the party who they think will fix the single most destructive thing in their life.

If someone literally thinks the world is going to end in short order due to our failure to act on global warming, why wouldn't they be a single issue voter?

And a vote for something someone deeply and sincerely believes is critical to a properly functioning democracy? Like proportional representation or say, I dunno... the independent judiciary system  ... if they think it's going to literally end our democracy... why would it be unreasonable to think that one single issue like that *could* be worth the sum of all other issues?


----------



## TimneyTime (24 Mar 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Scheer isn't pro firearms, he's pro firearm-owner votes. Big difference.
> He's a lame duck that says enough to keep him out of hot water with conservative voters but nothing more.



I disagree with that, he himself is a firearms owner.  And all politicians are pro votes.  That's all they do, is get votes.

I also agree with the basic ideologies of the Conservative party, so whether he's a lame duck or not, he's the leader of the party which I align with.

I think he'll do the right thing by being tough on crime, and getting rid of the carbon tax.

I really was hoping that he'd totally scrap bill C-71, and that is a big issue for me, because it's just a Liberal attempt to get votes.

Also, Conservatives are heavily pro military.

Further, Andrew Scheer is not a lame duck, he's a serious threat to Trudeau and the Liberals.

Recent poll results reflect this, as an amalgamation of polls done by a variety of sources across Canada:

https://www.calculatedpolitics.com/project/2019-canada-election/


----------



## mariomike (24 Mar 2019)

ballz said:
			
		

> ... the whole point of having a vote is that no one else gets to decide what issues you *should* care about, and just *how much* you should care about them.



Until I retired on my 55th birthday, the issues I cared about ( most ) were fair compensation, benefits, pension, staffing and equipment, decent working conditions etc.

That was mostly at the municipal level. But, to a lesser degree, also at the provincial and federal levels.

Our union had a simple, non-partisan philosophy when endorsing candidates – We supported politicians who supported us. Regardless of party affiliation or one’s political leanings. 

At the same time, the union respected the right of every member to vote for the candidate(s) of their choice. No one, including the union, had the right to tell you how to vote.


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Mar 2019)

[quote author=TimneyTime]  he himself is a firearms owner.[/QUOTE] 
I own 30 round magazines pinned to 5 rounds. That doesn't mean I support magazine caps, just comes with the territory of legally shooting ar15s. 

Scheer doesn't have to own firearms to be a conservative but it sure makes connecting with conservative voters easier. See below. 



> And all politicians are pro votes.


 :nod:




> I really was hoping that he'd totally scrap bill C-71, and that is a big issue for me, because it's just a Liberal attempt to get votes.


I'd have to dig up the speeches but I remember feeling less than impressed with his response to C-71. 



> Also, Conservatives are heavily pro military



Until the war is over and public support starts to wander. Look at the Conservatives attitude towards CAF members post Afghanistan. 



> Recent poll results reflect this, as an amalgamation of polls done by a variety of sources across Canada:
> 
> https://www.calculatedpolitics.com/project/2019-canada-election/



Not a big fan of polls. Clinton had a 99.9% chance to win according to polls.

Polls I heard about a week ago suggested Trudeau's popularity was down but Scheer’s didn't move up.  I think that's more to do with the Liberals overt scandals and corruption. 
Conservatives should parachute in a replacement.


----------



## brihard (24 Mar 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I own 30 round magazines pinned to 5 rounds. That doesn't mean I support magazine caps, just comes with the territory of legally shooting ar15s.
> 
> Scheer doesn't have to own firearms to be a conservative but it sure makes connecting with conservative voters easier. See below.
> 
> ...



338canada seems to have inherited the role of collecting Canadian polling data since Eric Grenier got hired by CBC and stopped running his website. Both in popular vote and seat projections the liberals have suffered considerably in recent weeks and the Conservatives and NDP have both gained. Even the Greens have picked up modestly.

http://338canada.com/polls.htm


----------



## mariomike (24 Mar 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Not a big fan of polls.



They say, "Don't worry about polls, but if you do, don't admit it."


----------



## Remius (24 Mar 2019)

TimneyTime said:
			
		

> I disagree with that, he himself is a firearms owner.  And all politicians are pro votes.  That's all they do, is get votes.
> 
> I also agree with the basic ideologies of the Conservative party, so whether he's a lame duck or not, he's the leader of the party which I align with.
> 
> ...



Jarnhammer hit the nail on the head with his response.

Until Trudeau imploded with this scandal Scheer was and still is a lame duck.  The only real threat to Trudeau and the Liberals is Trudeau and the Liberals.


----------



## Strike (25 Mar 2019)

Here's an opinion posted on FB by a friend of mine who has worked on various campaigns across the country for each of the 3 main parties.  He tends to post a lot of poll numbers that I will share later as they come up, but I found this interesting, especially as I've always thought the two men were opposite sides of the same coin.

Again, not my words, but the words of someone I would consider a SME on the subject given that this is how he makes a living.



> Donald Trump is more likely to be re-elected President than Justin Trudeau is to be re-elected Prime Minister.
> 
> And Trump needs 48% or more of all votes cast, while Trudeau needs only 35% of all cast.
> 
> ...


----------



## TimneyTime (25 Mar 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> Jarnhammer hit the nail on the head with his response.
> 
> Until Trudeau imploded with this scandal Scheer was and still is a lame duck.  The only real threat to Trudeau and the Liberals is Trudeau and the Liberals.



Andrew Scheer has been neither unsuccessful, nor has he been in office after the election of a successor.  Therefore, he is not a lame duck.


----------



## brihard (25 Mar 2019)

TimneyTime said:
			
		

> Andrew Scheer has been neither unsuccessful, nor has he been in office after the election of a successor.  Therefore, he is not a lame duck.



No, but he's been singularly unimpresive and uninspiring.

At present the best that can be said is that he has so far managed to avoid stepping particularly hard on his own dick. Entering into this election, it appears that may be enough to carry the day. 

As a self-declared centrist and a swing voter, my vote tends to vary between CPC and LPC, usually whenever I get sick of one or the other. Scheer is not someone who has inspired my vote... I will likely be voting CPC despite him, not because of him. I do still believe he is a less bad option. I'm disappointed the CPC didn't do better in their leadership race.

The LPC will be trying to stick as much to Scheer as they can in the next while. He now faces the unenviable task of seven months' worth of keeping a firm grip on his party so that nobody says or does anything too politically stupid. I wish him luck.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (25 Mar 2019)

TimneyTime said:
			
		

> Andrew Scheer has been neither unsuccessful, nor has he been in office after the election of a successor.  Therefore, he is not a lame duck.



Let's not forget, ALL parties picked him to be Speaker of the House. He was 32 years old. Younger than our current PM. They ALL had confidence in his ability. That position requires a great understanding of politics. He proved to be an impartial arbiter of the rules and did the job well. As opposed to our current government.

I have full confidence he can do a better job, sleepwalking, than the current government at full speed. I also see an honesty there that is lacking in most politicians.


----------



## Loachman (28 Mar 2019)

Thank you for your donation | Watch Justin Trudeau's arrogance | Michelle Rempel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b73TMZ9zVfE


----------



## Loachman (28 Mar 2019)

And that certainly won't help him with this:

https://globalnews.ca/news/5103763/trudeau-approval-rating-snc-lavalin-budget/

March 28, 2019 5:00 am

Updated: March 28, 2019 9:26 am

Trudeau now has a lower approval rating than Trump, with Tories way ahead: Ipsos poll

By Rahul Kalvapalle

<snip>

That’s according to a new Ipsos poll, conducted exclusively for Global News, which found that Trudeau’s approval rating (40 per cent) has now slipped below Trump’s (43 per cent), even as the Conservative Party established a double-digit lead over the Liberals.

The Liberal government’s federal budget did little to quell the damage, the poll found, with most Canadians indifferent about it and only a small minority impressed by Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s offerings.

The Conservatives are now sitting pretty in crucial provinces Ontario and British Columbia, with Trudeau managing to fall behind among two of the key demographics that swept him to victory in 2015, women and young people.

READ MORE: Jody Wilson-Raybould joins calls for judicial appointment leak probe amid SNC-Lavalin scandal

If an election were held tomorrow, the Conservatives would receive 40 per cent of the vote among decided voters, according to the poll of 1,002 Canadians conducted between March 25 and 27.

That’s unchanged since Ipsos’ last poll on March 4.

The Liberals would receive 30 per cent of the vote - down one point - while the NDP would receive 21 per cent and the Bloc Quebecois five per cent.

“Whatever this SNC-Lavalin thing is, it seems to have settled in. We’re creating a new normal in which the Conservatives are consistently ahead of the Liberal Party,” said Darrell Bricker, CEO of Ipsos Public Affairs.

<snip>


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Mar 2019)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Thank you for your donation | Watch Justin Trudeau's arrogance | Michelle Rempel
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b73TMZ9zVfE



In Trudeau defence if you can't crack jokes about a place where kids are getting sick from mercury poisoning what CAN you joke about?

I just watched a clip of his apology. Looks like he hasn't perfected the art of keeping a straight face yet.


----------



## suffolkowner (28 Mar 2019)

The Conservatives need to do well enough to gain a majority, otherwise we risk a Liberal-NDP government.
 I was willing to give the Trudeau-Liberals a chance, even hoping as I  always do each election for a successful competent government but it seems like each government I have seen at the Federal and Provincial level has been worse than the one that preceded it.


----------



## Loachman (28 Mar 2019)

suffolkowner said:
			
		

> The Conservatives need to do well enough to gain a majority, otherwise we risk a Liberal-NDP government.



The last sentence of the poll article that I posted indicates the likelihood of a majority:

"When you take a look at where the Conservatives are leading, they're now leading everywhere you need to lead," Bricker said. "They really don't need anything else to beat the Liberals."


----------



## Cloud Cover (28 Mar 2019)

As has been pointed out many times in these threads and elsewhere, elections are lost, not won.  If there's any party that can shoot their foot off  with a tweet and snatch defeat from victory, it is the CPC.
Rempell, Raitt and the other infantry from the smash mouth platoon are exhausting everyone, and soon the public will tune it out.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (29 Mar 2019)

Is there any reason that the accompanying video that is collected, in the House, is not considered as part of Hansard? I'm speaking of the tape of the prolonged budget vote, where the NDP and Conservatives claim there were not enough liberals in the House for a certain line vote. If they were below the limit, the government has fallen to no confidence. The video of the incident apparently exists, but is not available.

I thought Hansard, belonged to the owners of the House, the Canadian people, not the occupiers, the sitting government. We should as individual citizens, be able to access any part or any time of Hansard without restriction. Would video of the recorded word not be viewed in the same light as the written word?

This is just the way I see thing as 'supposed to work like that'. I don't know if they do.

I'm sure someone will be along very shortly to correct me if wrong ;D


----------



## Remius (31 Mar 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> As has been pointed out many times in these threads and elsewhere, elections are lost, not won.  If there's any party that can shoot their foot off  with a tweet and snatch defeat from victory, it is the CPC.
> Rempell, Raitt and the other infantry from the smash mouth platoon are exhausting everyone, and soon the public will tune it out.



This is the issue.  Andrew Scheer already gave the Liberals ammunition for not denouncing or distancing himself from some white nationalists.  Expect more of that as the election ramps up.


----------



## Remius (31 Mar 2019)

Fishbone Jones said:
			
		

> Is there any reason that the accompanying video that is collected, in the House, is not considered as part of Hansard? I'm speaking of the tape of the prolonged budget vote, where the NDP and Conservatives claim there were not enough liberals in the House for a certain line vote. If they were below the limit, the government has fallen to no confidence. The video of the incident apparently exists, but is not available.
> 
> I thought Hansard, belonged to the owners of the House, the Canadian people, not the occupiers, the sitting government. We should as individual citizens, be able to access any part or any time of Hansard without restriction. Would video of the recorded word not be viewed in the same light as the written word?
> 
> ...



For info only.

The situation that took place was that the opposition noticed that there wer not enough liberals in the house during routine motions.  They quickly seized on this and played a procedural move to get a confidence motion in place. However the liberals scrambled and avoided that.  So they almost fell into no confidence but avoided it. 

Plenty of stories about it in the MSM.

https://globalnews.ca/news/5083783/house-of-commons-voting-marathon-liberals-confidence/



No cover up.  Hansard covers the transcripts and results of debates and votes.  Video is not always on when nothing is officially happening.


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Mar 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> This is the issue.  Andrew Scheer already gave the Liberals ammunition for not denouncing or distancing himself from some white nationalists.  Expect more of that as the election ramps up.



Andrew Scheer could pinky promise he hates white nationalists, open every conversation by denouncing white nationalists and get a black lives matter tattoo. The Liberals will still insnuate he's racist and criticize him for not denouncing white supremists. That's their thing.


----------



## Remius (31 Mar 2019)

Which is why he has to not give them reason so to reinforce that notion.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (31 Mar 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> Which is why he has to not give them reason so to reinforce that notion.



I think Jarnhamar's point is that, regardless, the Liberals will play the racism card on Scheer. Doesn't matter what he does.


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Mar 2019)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> I think Jarnhamar's point is that, regardless, the Liberals will play the racism card on Scheer. Doesn't matter what he does.



Exactly.

Can you imagine if Scheer was the one to crack that _ thanks for your donation_ joke?


----------



## Remius (31 Mar 2019)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> I think Jarnhamar's point is that, regardless, the Liberals will play the racism card on Scheer. Doesn't matter what he does.



Not disagreeing.  But no need to add oil to a fire.


----------



## Cloud Cover (31 Mar 2019)

And it will work, no matter what the truth or facts are. The other approach will be “Andrew Scheer is Stephen Harper”.  
Harper may have been inelastic, but he was a pragmatist and a realist, and yes, cruel to the Liberal party. This frigging Shakespeare play we have right now is much worse, but too many people want to fawn over the actors and not the plot.

 I’m tired of politics and governance as we have come to know and witness how these things are practised in Canada. They truly suck, but I also don’t see a better alternative.  

Maybe direct democracy on major issues where people vote not just on political party platforms but on critical issues themselves. Actually and truly give people a voice rather than just an opportunity to choose who to vote for, to control by constraining or enabling the activities, agendas and directions of the body politic including the judiciary. But that would be turning the tables on power.


----------



## FJAG (31 Mar 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> And it will work, no matter what the truth or facts are. The other approach will be “Andrew Scheer is Stephen Harper”.
> Harper may have been inelastic, but he was a pragmatist and a realist, and yes, cruel to the Liberal party. This frigging Shakespeare play we have right now is much worse, but too many people want to fawn over the actors and not the plot.
> 
> I’m tired of politics and governance as we have come to know and witness how these things are practised in Canada. They truly suck, but I also don’t see a better alternative.
> ...



The basic problem is that I trust the people less than the politicians. People have very little to lose by being intransigent a**holes while politicians have to keep a little bit of decency visible in order to be re-elected. Call me a cynic if you will but I blame the electorate.


----------



## Cloud Cover (31 Mar 2019)

Well, you’re right of course and that’s a common concern, and an even bigger concern is too many people would rather somebody else make decisions, while reserving to themselves the right to complain and revolt against every and anything that might make a little sense.  UNtario is a good example where government has tried to be all things to all people, that hasn’t worked out very well.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (1 Apr 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> Well, you’re right of course and that’s a common concern, and an even bigger concern is too many people would rather somebody else make decisions, while reserving to themselves the right to complain and revolt against every and anything that might make a little sense.  UNtario is a good example where government has tried to be all things to all people, that hasn’t worked out very well.



Communism never will.


----------



## Rifleman62 (8 Apr 2019)

https://www.taxpayer.com/news-releases/the-trudeau-government-has-announced--4.2-billion-in-spending-since-snc-lavalin-scandal-broke
*
THE TRUDEAU GOVERNMENT HAS ANNOUNCED $4.2 BILLION IN SPENDING SINCE SNC-LAVALIN SCANDAL BROKE *- 8 Apr 19

OTTAWA, ON: The Canadian Taxpayers Federation today released a list of all spending announcements made by the Trudeau government over the last two months which may have been missed during the ongoing SNC-Lavalin scandal.

“With so much attention understandably focused on SNC-Lavalin, many people may have missed most or all of these 267 spending announcements,” said CTF Federal Director Aaron Wudrick. “We believe spending taxpayer dollars deserves proper scrutiny, and in that spirit we’re pleased to provide this list.”

The largest spending announcement made since Feb. 7 is $1 billion in “innovation” funding for southern Ontario on Feb. 27, while the smallest was $8,000 to fund upgrades for a maple sugar camp in New Brunswick on Mar. 29. Other highlights include:

$72 million for “clean technology” in Alberta (Mar.14)
$30 million for an “intellectual property collective” (Feb. 13)
$4.2 million to help develop “innovative” fruit (Mar.11)
$595,000 on a boating safety mobile app (Mar. 14)
$376,000 for a ‘Cheese Expertise Centre’ (Apr. 3)

Wudrick noted that with the federal government currently running a deficit of $19.8 billion rather than balancing the budget as promised, all *267* announcements are effectively being funded with borrowed money that will be added to the growing federal debt.

“With an average of four spending announcements per day being missed in the wake of SNC-Lavalin, taxpayers should take note: the Trudeau government continues to borrow and spend even though you may not be hearing much about it,” said Wudrick.

To see a complete list of the Trudeau government’s spending announcements since Feb. 7, please click http://www.taxpayer.com/media/CostofSncScandal.pdf


----------



## Lumber (8 Apr 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> The basic problem is that I trust the people less than the politicians. People have very little to lose by being intransigent a**holes while politicians have to keep a little bit of decency visible in order to be re-elected. Call me a cynic if you will but I blame the electorate.



Not to mention the fact that social media and the unfettered access to unqualified information means that the mass of proles could, and would, easily be swayed by disinformation. 

I like the idea that with technology, we could all have a government sponsored and encrypted "app" on our phone that lets us vote at anytime, anywhere, on some important issue. But those same phones are going to be flooded with disinformation from both sides of the argument, and I do not trust the average person to do any real research to suss out the truth.


----------



## Kirkhill (8 Apr 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> The basic problem is that I trust the people less than the politicians. People have very little to lose by being intransigent a**holes while politicians have to keep a little bit of decency visible in order to be re-elected. Call me a cynic if you will but I blame the electorate.



Well, if you don't like the electorate, because they are not experts, what do you recommend when the electorate don't like politicians when they demonstrate incompetence?  Are the electorate right to seek out a single expert?  Not my preference.  

I'd rather the public elect socialist baristas and turf them out if they feel they are not up to the task.  And, explicitly, I would not elect anyone, to any position, who proclaims themselves an expert in anything. 



> The UK public is increasingly disenchanted with MPs and government and ever more willing to welcome the idea of authoritarian leaders who would ignore parliament, a long-running survey of attitudes to politics has shown.
> 
> Amid the Brexit chaos, overall public faith in the political system has reached a nadir not previously seen in the 16-year history of the Hansard Society’s audit of political engagement, lower even than at the depths of the crisis over MPs’ expenses.
> 
> ...



https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/08/uk-more-willing-embrace-authoritarianism-warn-hansard-audit-political-engagement

Burke has his limits.  He needs to ensure that he maintains contact with the people he asks to represent.


----------



## Lumber (8 Apr 2019)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Well, if you don't like the electorate, because they are not experts, what do you recommend when the electorate don't like politicians when they demonstrate incompetence?  Are the electorate right to seek out a single expert?  Not my preference.
> 
> I'd rather the public elect socialist baristas and turf them out if they feel they are not up to the task.  And, explicitly, I would not elect anyone, to any position, who proclaims themselves an expert in anything.
> 
> ...



Ah, that explains the glossed over backstory for the setting of "V, for Vendetta".


----------



## Loachman (15 Apr 2019)

More bafflement. Part of me cannot imagine how this government cannot forecast potential problems/embarassments in advance and avoid them, but it's not like a pattern didn't begin to form quite some time ago:

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/trudeau-visit-gurdwara-government-removes-140204148.html

Trudeau walks in Vaisakhi parade after government removes reference to Sikh extremism

The Canadian Press April 13, 2019

<snip>

His morning speech came just hours after the federal government agreed to remove a reference to Sikh extremism from a report on terrorism.

The language was changed late Friday to remove any mention of religion, instead discussing the threat posed by "extremists who support violent means to establish an independent state within India."

The 2018 Public Report on the Terrorism Threat to Canada drew the ire of the Sikh community when it was released in December.

For the first time, the report listed Sikh extremism as one of the top five extremist threats in Canada.

Although the objections were largely about the inclusion of Sikhs at all, because of the report's lack of evidence to back it up, Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale said he would at least ask for a review of the language the report used.

He said entire religions should never be equated with terrorism.

<snip>

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-trudeau-plays-politics-with-terrorism

LILLEY: Trudeau plays politics with terrorism

Brian Lilley Published: April 14, 2019 

For Justin Trudeau, the problems of terrorism and extremism in Canada appear to be nothing more than partisan political issues.

I don't make that claim lightly, nor do I make it without some kind of proof. In fact, I make this claim based on Trudeau's actions of the last week.

Trudeau spent most of last week trying to link his Conservative opponents to white supremacist extremism. It's a ploy he's been using since the heinous shooting in Christchurch, New Zealand, last month.

Meanwhile, he pushed through a removal of any reference to Sikh extremism from an intelligence report just before he visited one of the largest Sikh temples in Canada on Saturday.

What else should we make of this?

<snip>

Yet, there was Trudeau on Friday night linking Scheer to white nationalists in a speech to supporters in Mississauga. He tried to link Scheer, a man I've known for 15 years and without a racists bone in his body, to Ontario Premier Doug Ford and then link them both to racism.

Ford won seats across the Toronto area with huge support among the city's many diverse communities. Many of his top staffers, long serving staffers, are visible minorities.

But to Trudeau, linking these two men to white nationalism, white supremacy, without proof is fine because it helps him politically.

Then there is the removal of Sikh extremism from the 2018 Public Report on the Terrorism Threat to Canada, issued by Public Safety Canada, after consultation with the various intelligence agencies of the federal government.

Originally it listed in order, Shia extremism, Right-Wing extremism, Sikh extremism, Sunni extremism, and Canadian extremist travellers.

Now the reference to Sikh extremists is gone and is replaced by, "Extremists who Support Violent Means to Establish an Independent State Within India."

On the website of Public Safety Canada is a statement about the removal of Sikh extremism, which says, "The Government's communication of threats must be clear, concise, and cannot be perceived as maligning any groups."

Funny that.

Shia Muslims are a group representing as many as 200 million Muslims around the world.

Sunni Muslims are another group and they representing more than 1 billion people.

So much for that statement.

Did I mention that the change was made just before Trudeau visited a major Sikh temple?

Here's another oddity to deal with.

When Trudeau's minister for foreign affairs appeared before a Senate committee, she emphasized the importance of calling out violent groups by naming them.

"I absolutely believe we need to name that threat, we need to be aware of it, and we need to work hard to find ways to protect our societies and our people from it," Chrystia Freeland said.

So let's get this straight, we need to be scared of white supremacy and name it, yet when it comes to the group responsible for the deadliest terrorist attack in Canadian history, the Air India bombing, we should drop any reference to that group over political pressure?

Justin Trudeau came to power promising "sunny ways." Now he warns darkly that his opponents are racist and that violence lurks around every conservative corner while turning a blind eye to a history of violence committed in this country.

Turns out his sunny ways were as fake as his feminism.

https://globalnews.ca/news/5165976/sikh-extremism-report-trudeau-india/

April 14, 2019 12:39 pm

Sikh Indian minister slams Trudeau Liberals over 'knee-jerk' changes to terrorism report

By Rahul Kalvapalle Global News    

The leader of India's Sikh-majority Punjab state has slammed Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party after the federal government removed direct references to Sikh extremism in a recent terrorism threat report.

Chief Minister Capt. Amarinder Singh, whose meeting with Trudeau was one the flashpoints of the prime minister's troubled trip to India last year, called the move "a threat to Indian and global security" in a statement issued by his office on Saturday.

Singh suggested that Trudeau was kowtowing to Sikh voters ahead of October's federal election, slamming the Liberals for what he called a "knee-jerk decision that was clearly aimed at protecting its political interests in an election year."

<snip>

He said the Trudeau government's removal of references to Sikh extremism from its report amounted to "de facto promotion of extremism."

"It is obvious that Trudeau had played safe in view of the upcoming elections in Canada, giving in to pressure within his country," Singh said, adding that the move was likely to damage Canada's relations with India.

"Trudeau is playing with fire with his decision to assuage inflamed domestic passions through this ill-considered move," he said. "The world cannot afford to fan extremism in any form, which is what the Trudeau government was effectively doing with such ill-thought moves."

<snip>


----------



## Loachman (15 Apr 2019)

And a collection of other Liberal electoral problems...

Apparently, nothing has been learned from the previous Liberal government's "Soldiers in our streets. With guns" fear tactics, or Hillary's "basket of deplorables" moment.

Then there's growing economy, deficit, pipeline, foreign policy, taxation (carbon dioxide and other), military funding, illegal border crossings, and poorer prospects for the young problems, past Khadr payments and holidays (unethical and cringey-costumed), continuing Vice-Admiral Norman and Lavscam affairs, and Jane Philpott may deny them her seat.

And the latest poll shows the continuing effects of all of this:

https://torontosun.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-liberals-are-treating-racism-like-an-electoral-prop-thats-wrong

EDITORIAL: Liberals are treating racism like an electoral prop - that's wrong

Postmedia News Published: April 12, 2019 

It looks like Prime Minister Justin Trudeau may have found some inspiration in the Jussie Smollett case and has himself decided to cry racism as a PR ploy.

"White supremacy has no place in Canada," Trudeau posted to social media the other day. We'd certainly agree with that statement. But Trudeau didn't leave it at that.

"It's time for all parties, including Andrew Scheer's Conservative Party, to stand together in denouncing hatred in all its forms," Trudeau continued.

It's part of a larger drive-by smear, an attempt to imply in the lead up to the election that Scheer is somehow supportive of or in allegiance with white supremacists. It's a completely groundless accusation, which is why they're so vague in making it. But their goal is to clearly plant the seed.

<snip>

This all came after the Liberals pounced upon comments made by Conservative Senator Leo Housakos who was pressing Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland to be more specific in her suggestion that Canada was somehow a cesspool of white supremacy that places us in grave danger.

Because Housakos was reluctant to believe that our streets have been overrun with violent white supremacists and that Canadians are somehow weak-willed enough to fall prey en masse to such an awful ideology, the Liberals are trying to shamelessly twist it into something it's not. It's pretty weak sauce.

<snip>

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/mackay-of-stormy-days-come-better-ways

MACKAY: Of stormy days come better ways

Peter MacKay Published: April 13, 2019 

<snip>

Yet the corrosive forces at play go back far longer than the current scandal that has rocked this Government over its term in office. Our Canada under this Prime Minister is undeniably poorer, less prosperous, less secure, less influential. Faced with increasingly challenging, complex and volatile times, reputationally we are losing our privileged position in the world.

There is a clear need for focus and discipline regarding economy, foreign relations, national security and the environment. Consumed with the inner machinations of political mismanagement, ill-delivered 'priorities' of cannabis legalization, over-lorded carbon tax, sanctimonious scolding of our own population, this government irreparably harms our esteemed pedigree.

<snip>

Feminist, Environmentalist, Indigenous: under him "Canada is back."

Instead? Massive deficits electoral reform un-promised, trade negotiations bungled, immigration policy at sea, pipeline projects cancelled and nationalized, foreign investment drying up, sexual interference queried, humiliating foreign visits ridiculed, vacations in conflict of interest and fundraising likewise, payouts to terrorists voluntary, too many missteps and worse to count.

Now the present scandal spilling into penal arguably spurious prosecution of a respected 35-year RCN veteran, the politicization of the "objective" neutral public service through Wernick clearly confounded as to his role, interference with selection of the judiciary, neglect of military veterans, escalation of taxes on working people, shoddy roll-out of marijuana ironically increasing black market penetration, declining productivity and competitiveness; in effect a general malaise, a country adrift.

<snip>

https://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/op-ed/comment-friend-or-faux-four-years-of-failed-foreign-policy-1.23789024

Comment: Friend or faux? Four years of failed foreign policy

Times Colonist April 14, 2019 12:55 AM

David Carment, Brandon Jamieson, Fatimah Elfeitori and Emily Robertson

When it comes to foreign policy, members of the Trudeau government are very good at explaining what they think Canadians want. Less clear is if Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is the right leader to navigate a new world of uncertainty.

This is a key finding from our annual Foreign Policy Report Card evaluating the government's performance in key areas. Heading into an election, the Liberals received the lowest grade ever, scoring a C+ overall and in crucial areas, such as diplomacy, a C-.

We find that that Trudeau's foreign policy is driven largely by domestic pandering with little thought to long-term strategic objectives. A foreign policy designed in dribs and drabs, never planned too far in advance, never looking too far into the future.

While a comprehensive defence review was conducted in 2017, there was never an equivalent foreign-policy review to recalibrate Canada's national interests in an increasingly complex and changing world. For all the change and uncertainty that have roiled alliances and our allies, Trudeau and Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland have sat comfortably idling on the margins, eulogizing the end of the liberal international order and longing for its return, looking back but never forward.

We've heard rousing speeches in Parliament that evoke memories of the "Golden Age" of Canadian diplomacy. A party extolling its proud tradition of statesmanship, always with a hand in negotiations and conflict resolution. And yet, at every turn, this government has helped undermine and weaken the international order and the principles it stands upon.

Under Freeland's watch, Liberal foreign policy has become conservative, hawkish and short-sighted. A foreign policy no longer committed to multilateralism or diplomacy. A foreign policy largely improvised, ad hoc, and built for domestic consumption with a tinge of subservience to the United States.

<snip>

The Liberals' amateur approach to statecraft has crept into other areas of government policy, as well. Few Canadians would know or appreciate that the Canadian Forces are now at one of the highest operational tempos in decades. Our troops are deployed across the Middle East, West Africa and Eastern Europe on a variety of missions. But none of these interventions serve a broader security policy. When we are engaged, we do so half-heartedly. Where we are needed most, such as in Mali, we abandon our allies in the heat of the fight.

The state of our armed forces remains equally depleted. Despite the Liberals' preference for running deficits, our air force continues to fly planes that first saw action during the senior Trudeau's government. Rather than committing to the investments that are so obviously needed, the procurement issue has been punted down the road, beyond the election.

<snip>

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/for-millennials-in-canada-the-middle-class-dream-slips-a-little-further-away-oecd

For millennials in Canada, the middle class dream slips a little further away: OECD

Just 59 per cent of Canadian millennials were found to have attained middle class status by their 20s, compared to 67 per cent of their boomer parents

Tom Blackwell	

April 11, 2019 1:10 PM EDT

With a federal election coming later this year, expect politicians to be talking non-stop about the middle class and its importance to the country.

The problem is, according to a new report, the middle class is shrinking - squeezed by high housing and education costs, displaced by automation and lacking the skills most valued in the digital economy.

And faring particularly badly are millennials, who are less likely to reach middle-income levels in their 20s than their baby-boomer parents, says the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development analysis.

The picture is as bad or slightly worse in Canada as in the average OECD country, said the report, which calls for various government measures to tackle the problems.

<snip>

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/philpott-may-run-again-under-another-party-banner-denies-being-attention-seeking-1.4377894

Philpott may run again under another party banner, denies being 'attention-seeking' 

Rachel Aiello Published Sunday, April 14, 2019 7:00AM EDT

OTTAWA - Former Liberal cabinet minister-turned Independent MP Jane Philpott says she's currently seriously exploring a range of options to continue her tenure as a federally elected politician, and is pushing back on accusations made about her intentions and motivations throughout the SNC-Lavalin scandal.

<snip>

Philpott said she has had conversations with both the federal NDP and Green Party, but she could not run for the Conservatives, despite leader Andrew Scheer being one of her and Wilson-Raybould's most vocal supporters over the last two months.

"There are too many policy differences with the Conservatives," she said.

<snip>

http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/2938/federal-april-2019

Gap Between Second-Place Liberals and Leading Conservatives Widens April 14, 2019 @ 6:59 AM

Toronto, April 9th - In a random sampling of public opinion taken by The Forum Poll™ among 1634 Canadian voters, with those decided and leaning, 4 in 10 (42%) say they would support the Conservatives, with a third (29%) saying they would support the Liberals and a tenth (12%) supporting the NDP.

1 in 10 (9%) support the Green Party and few support the BQ (6%), the People’s Party of Canada (2%), or another party (1%).

Respondents most likely to support the Conservatives include males (51%), live in the Prairies (Alberta 67%, Manitoba/Saskatchewan 64%), are between the ages of 45-54 (48%), the least educated (51%) and earn between $80,000 to $100,000 (47%).

Respondents most likely to say they support the Liberals are those who live in Ontario (36%), those aged 35-44 (34%), 55-64 (33%), or 65 and over (35%), females (35%), those earning $20,000 to $40,000 (31%) or $100,000-$250,000 (31%), and those with post-graduate degrees (39%).

If an election were held today, these results suggest the Conservatives would win a majority government of 192 seats. The Liberals would serve as the official opposition with 105 seats. The BQ would secure 23 seats, the NDP 16 seats, and the Green Party with 2 seats.

1 in 3 say Scheer would make the best Prime Minister A third (30%) say Andrew Scheer would make the best Prime Minister regardless of which party they plan to vote for. A quarter (26%) say Justin Trudeau, 1 in 10 (10%) say Elizabeth May and a similar proportion say (7%) Jagmeet Singh would make the best Prime Minister.

1 in 4 (27%) of respondents say they don’t know.

<snip>

"The Conservative lead over the Liberals has widened as the challenges plaguing the government are beginning to take their toll," said Dr. Lorne Bozinoff, President of Forum Research. "With the exception of Elizabeth May, none of the Federal leaders has a positive net favourable score, which suggests people aren’t particularly impressed with most of their options, right now."


----------



## Rifleman62 (21 Apr 2019)

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/d ... n-2019.pdf  (Full Report at Link)

*What Happens to the Federal Deficit if a Recession Occurs in 2019?*
*
Summary Of the March 2019 Report*

 In its latest fiscal update, the Trudeau government revealed that it intends to continue running sizeable budget deficits for the foreseeable future. There are several risks inherent in the federal government’s current approach to fiscal policy and criticism has frequently revolved around the potential for federal finances to deteriorate rapidly if a recession were to occur.

 In the event of a recession, aside from any policy changes the federal government might make, government revenues will decline and program spending will increase, resulting in larger deficits (or reduced surpluses).

 To assess how a potential recession would affect Canada’s federal finances, this bulletin uses the latest fiscal sensitivity tables from the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) and historical economic data from the 1991/92 (mild), 2000/01 (moderate), and 2008/09 (severe) recessions or slowdowns. The analysis excludes the effect of any potential discretionary spending.

 The bulletin finds that the 2019/20 deficit could increase from its current expected level of $19.6 billion to anywhere between $28.2 billion to $34.4 billion depending on the severity of the next recession. In addition, the five-year accumulated deficit from 2019/20 to 2023/24 could increase from its current budgeted level of $76.8 billion to between $114.6 billion and
$142.3 billion (an increase of between $37.8 billion and $65.5 billion).

 This bulletin’s estimates for what the deficit might look like when a recession occurs are conservative. The deficit will likely be much higher than these estimates once the federal government enacts policy changes to stimulate the economy. Regardless of the severity of the recession, the risks posed to federal finances are considerable. The federal government needs to alter Canada’s current trajectory by emphasizing deficit reduction in future budgets.


----------



## observor 69 (21 Apr 2019)

The Fraser Institute is a Canadian public policy think tank and registered charity. It has been described as politically conservative and libertarian.

The Toronto Sun is modeled on British tabloid journalism, even borrowing the name of The Sun newspaper published in London, and sharing some similar features of that paper.

When the Post launched, its editorial stance was conservative. It advocated a "unite-the-right" movement to create a viable alternative to the Liberal government of Jean Chrétien, and supported the Canadian Alliance.

The above quotes are all from Wikipedia.

While I have my own political opinion I see value in following a variety of media opinions.


----------



## PuckChaser (21 Apr 2019)

So you're saying the study is biased and that if we hit a recession with our current and projected deficit that we won't have anything to worry about?


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Apr 2019)

>While I have my own political opinion I see value in following a variety of media opinions.

Ironic that you quoted three times a source that is notorious for its bias on political matters.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 Apr 2019)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/snc-lavalin-liberal-donors-list-canada-elections-1.5114537

Names of SNC employees, executives behind thousands of dollars in illegal Liberal Party donations revealed



> Former attorney general of Quebec denies involvement in scheme that broke Canadian election law
> Harvey Cashore, Frédéric Zalac · CBC News · Posted: Apr 30, 2019 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 3 hours ago
> 
> An Elections Canada investigation revealed that between 2004 and 2009, 18 former SNC-Lavalin employees, directors and some spouses contributed nearly $110,000 to the federal Liberals. (Christinne Muschi/Reuters)
> ...



More at link.


----------



## AshleyMarie34 (3 May 2019)

Looking at the poll for sometime I thought this year would produce a Liberal minority. However I'm beginning to suspect the Conservatives may now win a minority government. Across Canada the Liberals have been falling more and more. Up north they probably will win Yukon and Northwest Territories while Nunavuts seat goes blue. Despite a breakthrough out west by coming first in British Columbia (which hasn't happened since 1968) and Manitoba ( which only happened during a Cretiens years after 1968) the Conservatives will likely win both provinces back and easily so. Ontario the Conservatives will probably win but narrowly. Quebec is going further away from Liberals but they still narrowly lead there. In Atlantic Canada New Brunswick has been Conservative leaning for months whereas Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia seem to still be leaning Liberal but the Greens are actually beginning to eat at their base. Only Newfoundland seems solidly Liberals. Infact as per provinces won the absolute worst case senario for Trudeau would be winning only Newfoundland (if Ignatieff won there fairly well it won't be leaving the Liberals any time soon) Yukon and perhaps PEI

The four "swing " provinces to watch for will totally be British Columbia and New Brunswick (both at this point has large Conservative leads) Manitoba ( probably going blue but it depends how badly Winnipeg voters vote against them) and Ontario which could still gone either way, but the Conservatives still been leading. Perhaps Quebec if it becomes a conservative landslide


----------



## Loachman (6 May 2019)

While it is still early, I'd say that there's a good chance of a Conservative majority if current trends continue.

The Liberals have many vulnerabilities to exploit.

"The budget will balance itself", for one:

https://torontosun.com/news/national/goldstein-trudeau-hiked-canadas-per-person-debt-at-record-pace

GOLDSTEIN: Trudeau hiked Canada's per-person debt at record pace

Lorrie Goldstein Published: April 18, 2019 

Justin Trudeau will increase the federal government's per-person debt more than any prime minister in Canadian history who did not face a world war or recession, says a new report by the Fraser Institute.

The conservative think-tank says from 2015, when he assumed office, up to the end of his current Liberal government in October, Trudeau will have increased federal per-person debt by 5.6%, to $32,589.

Trudeau's legacy "will now include record high levels of debt accumulation, due to spending increases that continue to outpace revenue," said Finn Poschmann in the study Examining Federal Debt in Canada by Prime Minister Since Confederation.

<snip>

Following his victory in 2015, Trudeau abandoned his election prediction of three years of "modest" deficits under his leadership followed by a balanced budget in 2019-20, which is the current fiscal year.

Instead, Trudeau racked up deficits at more than twice the rate he predicted.

This year, in which he told Canadians his government would have a $1 billion surplus, he's now predicting a $19.6 billion deficit — $16.6 billion even if you factor in a $3 billion reserve fund.

This is what comes of electing a PM who believes budgets balance themselves.

Inevitably, we're all going to pay for it.

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/wudrick-trudeaus-broken-promises-cost-100-billion-and-counting

WUDRICK: Trudeau's broken promises cost $100 billion and counting

Aaron Wudrick Published: March 20, 2019

Most people don't expect their governments to be perfect. But they do expect governments to make some effort to honour commitments, be straight with taxpayers and make the best of circumstances as they come.

In the 2015 election, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promised he'd run "modest" deficits for a few years, then balance the budget in 2019.

The prime minister just released the 2019 budget. It wasn't what he promised. And it's worth counting the ways in which he misled Canadians in the process of breaking that promise.

<snip>

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fiscal-monitor-trudeau-surplus-1.5112639

Federal government still on pace for $15B deficit despite surplus through most of 2018-19

Last month's budget pledged billions in additional spending for previous fiscal year

Andy Blatchford · The Canadian Press · Posted: Apr 26, 2019 1:31 PM ET

The Trudeau government says it remains on track to post a budgetary shortfall of about $15 billion in 2018-19 even though a new estimate says the federal books ran a $3.1-billion surplus through the first 11 months of the fiscal year.

The number was released Friday in the Finance Department's latest fiscal monitor, a document that provides a preliminary look at the federal balance sheet.

In last month's budget, the Liberals projected the government to post a $14.9-billion shortfall in 2018-19 - so a report showing Ottawa $3.1 billion in the black with one month to go appears to have the government on pace for a better fiscal result.

The surplus, however, is poised to be more than wiped out by promised spending, the department said.

The budget contained "several significant measures" that will be booked in the 2018-19 fiscal year once the legislation is adopted, the report said.

<snip>

Program expenses rose by $12.7 billion, or 4.8 per cent, mostly because of increases in major transfers to individuals and other levels of government as well as higher direct program spending.

<snip>

The department said public debt charges increased $1.7 billion, or 8.4 per cent, in a change mostly due to the higher effective interest rate on government debt.

In February alone, the report said the government had a surplus of $4.3 billion, which was driven by a revenue boost of $3.5 billion, or 12.2 per cent, compared to the year before.

The Liberals' budget also predicted the government would run annual deficits of $19.8 billion in 2019-20, $19.7 billion in 2020-21 and $14.8 billion in 2021-22.

<snip>


----------



## Loachman (6 May 2019)

Pipelines will also be prominent. He's managed to piss off both pros and cons by waffling and dithering. We - including the antis (who still like to drive/fly/eat/be comfortable in their houses in the middle of winter/enjoy plastic products) - need oil. We can get it by ship on the east cost, but still can't sell it by ship on the left coast, or move it east by pipeline. Somebody needs to tell them, using simple words, what their lives would be like without oil (ie, short and unpleasant for most of them).

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/saudi-oil-imports-rise-canada-diplomacy-1.5096887

Canada's oil imports from Saudi Arabia on the rise since 2014, trade figures show

Total volume of Canadian imports from kingdom has increased by 66 per cent over past 5 years

Chris Arsenault CBC News Posted: Apr 28, 2019 4:00 AM ET

<snip>

A spokesperson for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) said increased imports from Saudi Arabia buttress the call for more pipelines to increase market access for Western Canadian crude. 

"Right now, our pipeline network is fairly extensive but it doesn't extend to the East Coast," said Mark Pinney, CAPP's manager of markets and transportation. "There are some refineries Canadian producers are not easily able to reach.... Additional pipeline capacity is the answer to a lot of things."

While oil imports from Saudi Arabia and the U.S. have increased, total Canadian imports have been falling since 2016, he said. 

Imports are down overall because of the reversal of Enbridge's Line 9 pipeline, allowing more crude from Alberta's oilsands to be easily moved to refineries in Ontario and Quebec, said Pinney. 

He said the industry is "frustrated" over slow progress in building new pipelines that would allow domestic producers to compete to supply Eastern Canadian markets, potentially displacing future imports.

<snip>


----------



## Loachman (6 May 2019)

Not much has been said about the Liberal Holy Grail - the coveted UN Security Council seat - of late. I'd thought that they'd given up on the idea as they've been very quiet about it for quite some time, plus did not live up to their campaign promises. Money is still being spent on a half-vast effort, it seems, but not enough to campaign on a second time:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-un-security-council-von-scheel-1.5113585

Canada is facing off against Ireland and Norway for a rotating seat at the table

Elise von Scheel Posted: Apr 29, 2019 4:00 AM ET

<snip>

Documents obtained by CBC News under Access to Information law show the government has ramped up spending as the clock ticks down. Since 2016, $1.5 million has been spent on the campaign - $1 million in the last 10 months alone. 

The papers released include inquiries to the ministry from MPs about gifts to foreign dignitaries during Canada's pursuit of the Security Council seat. The replies revealed that there is no set budget for these gifts. Precise details on who received gifts were not provided due to privacy reasons, but the presents included everything from key chains to wild Sockeye smoked salmon.

Canadian officials have made dozens of trips for this campaign, and at least $1 million in additional money was spent in the 2016-2017 fiscal year on salaries for 11 government employees in Ottawa and New York dedicated to the bid full-time. Data was not provided for other years.

<snip>

"We've not yet seen any articulated vision of why we actually want to get the seat," David Perry, a vice-president at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, said. 

He pointed out that having a clear objective the government could point to - like a better engagement strategy for Asia - would paint a more transparent picture for Canadians and UN members.

<snip>

Perry added that it's not a matter of throwing money at the campaign: The visibility of the prime minister and foreign affairs minister can be just as valuable as a dollar figure.

"It's tough simply because we haven't articulated a view of why they should vote for us."

<snip>

Some have criticized the government for failing to provide more peacekeepers or to extend Canada's commitment to UN missions like the one in Mali. 

Canada was also in the hot seat as the prime minister defended his decision to ink a $15-billion deal to supply light armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia in spite of its well-known human rights violations. 

Competitors Ireland and Norway both have records that may be hard to beat. 

Norway is the world's most generous foreign aid contributor, giving over one per cent of its gross domestic product to help developing countries. Canada gives about 0.26 per cent of GDP.

And while Canada has recently returned peacekeepers to the field, Ireland has double the number of blue helmets and an unbroken record of missions dating back to 1958.

<snip>


----------



## Loachman (6 May 2019)

"A Fridge Too Far" is not likely to gain many Liberal votes, and there is now a Change.org petition asking Loblaws to return the handout. That petition, as it draws further attention, may damage the Liberals at least a little bit more. Lavscam has yet to die out, and SNC-Lavalin are still fighting for their DPA. I don't know when Liberal MP LGen (Retired) Andrew Leslie will testify in VAdm Mark Norman's trial, or what, exactly, he will say, but, should it happen prior to the election, that won't help either.

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/05/01/news/loblaws-lobbyists-attended-trudeau-fundraiser-getting-grant-refrigerators

Loblaws lobbyists attended Trudeau fundraiser before getting grant for refrigerators

By Carl Meyer in News, Energy, Politics | May 1st 2019

Two Loblaws lobbyists, one of which helped steer the company towards a controversial $12-million federal grant to reduce the energy consumption of their refrigerators, also donated frequently to the Liberal Party and attended a partisan fundraising event with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Environment and Climate Change Minister Catherine McKenna and two of her senior officials also met with one of the lobbyists representing Loblaw Companies Ltd., soon after the grant program had opened to businesses, her office confirmed.

McKenna's office said the meeting with the lobbyist was on another topic, plastic waste, and that the grant was awarded following a fair and competitive process. Loblaw Companies also denies that the grant for their fridges was awarded because of lobbying or preferential treatment, and the lobbyists in question say they never lobbied the government over the program on behalf of the company.

But the connections and money flowing between individuals representing Loblaws and the Liberal Party "doesn't pass the smell test," argued NDP ethics critic Charlie Angus. "This is a company that has huge capacity, huge tentacles, huge lobbying," he said in an interview.

"They're very comfortable with the prime minister, they're attending fundraisers with the prime minister and senior staff from the minister of environment's office. So this is a very comfy, cozy relationship....for the Liberals to say (Loblaws) won this challenge fair and square is ridiculous."

The Liberal government has been criticized for weeks over its decision to hand public money to Loblaw Companies, one of Canada's largest corporations, to help make refrigeration systems at hundreds of its supermarkets more efficient.

Conservative environment critic Ed Fast has blasted the Trudeau Liberals for giving handouts to "the wealthy and well-connected." On Monday, the NDP demanded that the government cancel the $12-million grant.

McKenna has said Loblaws won the grant out of the government's $500-million Low Carbon Economy Challenge (LCEC) through a competitive process driven by her department, and that it will help slash the company's annual carbon pollution by roughly a quarter, while the company pays for three-quarters of the cost.

<snip>

A review of lobbying and political donation records, as well as attendance records at Liberal Party donor events, shows that while Loblaws was awaiting the results of this competition, it retained Liberal-friendly lobbyists pushing its message in close proximity to powerful people in Canadian politics.

<snip>

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/liberals-accused-of-cover-up-after-report-reveals-details-of-snc-lavalins-illegal-donations

Liberals accused of cover-up after report reveals details of SNC-Lavalin's illegal donations

A CBC investigation listed for the first time individuals accused of indirectly funnelling almost $110,000 of SNC's money to the Liberals, and $8,000 to the Tories

Marie-Danielle Smith April 30, 2019

OTTAWA - Conservatives accused Liberals of a different sort of SNC-Lavalin cover-up in question period Tuesday after a report revealed the names of employees involved in the Montreal firm's illegal attempts to influence Canadian politics between 2004 and 2011.

A CBC investigation revealed new details about the scheme and listed for the first time individuals accused of indirectly funnelling almost $110,000 of the company's money to the Liberal Party, and another $8,000 to the Conservative Party. The parties became aware of the lists during a 2016 investigation by the Commissioner of Canada Elections.

On his way into cabinet on Tuesday morning, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said his party has "moved forward on transparency and openness and that is not what happens anymore."

During question period, Conservative leader Andrew Scheer accused him of a lack of transparency for sitting on the information for three years. "It took investigative reporting to uncover it," he said. "Why did the prime minister's recent election financing changes not take action to expose this cover-up?"

Trudeau responded: "These improper donations to two political parties were made over a decade ago. Under my leadership, we have raised the bar on openness and transparency."

<snip>

Drawing that link, the Conservatives' deputy leader, Lisa Raitt, questioned whether the prime minister's office had any contact with Elections Canada in 2016, when SNC-Lavalin signed a compliance agreement with the Commissioner of Canada Elections, Yves Côté, thereby saving them from a criminal prosecution over elections violations.

"We have seen this before," Raitt said, alluding to Wilson-Raybould's testimony.

Bardish Chagger, the leader of the government in the House of Commons, didn't give a yes or no answer but said Elections Canada is independent and "decisions are taken separate from any government."

CBC's The Fifth Estate reported that it obtained the names from a leaked confidential document, which Côté had sent to the Liberal Party in 2016. It lists 18 former SNC-Lavalin employees or their spouses who donated almost $110,000 to Liberal Party riding associations and leadership campaigns. The commissioner's investigation revealed the company reimbursed the donors, which is illegal.

SNC-Lavalin also made about $8,000 worth of contributions to the Conservative Party in this way, as recently as 2011. Since 2004 it has been illegal for corporations to donate to federal parties at all.

In the compliance agreement with the commissioner in 2016, the company agreed not to break the law again. Lists of names went to the Liberals and Conservatives so they could reimburse the receiver general for the associated donations, which both did. CBC reported that Tories provided the names when asked, but Liberals repeatedly refused.

<snip>

others confirmed they received bonuses as compensation, and former senior employees confirmed being aware of, or being a part of, an effort to solicit political donations from employees.

The compliance agreement itself, which is available on the commissioner's website, states that SNC-Lavalin implemented compliance measures and mechanisms as recommended by elections officials. But it did not preclude individuals from being charged as a result of the then-ongoing investigation. One former SNC-Lavalin vice president was ultimately charged for the breaches in May 2018. Normand Morin pled guilty to two violations of the Canada Elections Act in November, for "collusion" with senior executives on behalf of political parties, and paid a $2,000 fine.

In 2014, Tory MP Dean Del Mastro faced criminal prosecution and served jail time for financial violations of the Elections Act that involved considerably less money.

"It just boggles the mind that the so-called watchdog of elections would not have taken the (SNC) matter to court and prosecuted that offence," Pierre Poilievre told reporters after question period. "It's insane. He's got a lot of explaining to do."

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-federal-prosecution-fights-back-against-snc-lavalin-bid-to-quash/

Federal prosecution fights back against SNC-Lavalin bid to quash criminal case

Sean Fine Justice Writer Published May 3, 2019

The federal prosecution service is fighting back against a bid by SNC-Lavalin to quash the criminal case against it.

The Quebec engineering giant is hoping to show that the prosecution service acted in bad faith when it declined to negotiate a settlement – known as a deferred prosecution agreement – and instead insisted on seeking a conviction. The charges against the company relate to allegations of fraud and bribery in construction contracts in Libya between 2001 and 2011.

But SNC-Lavalin is alleging bad faith before the Federal Court of Appeal, when it did not do so before a lower court, where it lost its bid for a judicial review of the prosecutor's decision in its case. The federal prosecution service says it should not be permitted to make a completely new argument in its appeal.

<snip>


----------



## Loachman (6 May 2019)

While the Conservatives set a new record for fundraising, Liberal support continues to slide (and I disagree with the assumption that "surging Tory support is soft" - "surging" and simultaneously "soft"? - in the second article below), as does Trudeau's personal approval rating. He has even been lampooned on The Simpsons, and his party described as "rudderless" in the Toronto Star. I'm not sure about Chantal Hébert's comment regarding more Liberal MPs possibly taking early retirement. Another article that I read pointed out that fewer than historically normal have done so, at least at this point in the lead-up to the election. Their morale has yet to break, it would seem, but that could change.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/conservatives-break-fundraising-record-outpace-liberals-on-candidate-recruitment-as-election-looms#comments-area

Conservatives break fundraising record, outpace Liberals on candidate recruitment as election looms

The party hauled in just over $8 million from the beginning of the year to the end of March

Marie-Danielle Smith April 29, 2019 5:06 PM EDT

OTTAWA - The Conservative Party has broken a record for the best-ever first quarter fundraising result by a federal political party, which they are taking as a sign Canadians have been paying attention as the SNC-Lavalin scandal has unfolded.

The party hauled in just over $8 million from the beginning of the year to the end of March, according to data the party released to the National Post. It was the finest first-quarter showing in "Canadian political history," said Conservative spokesman Cory Hann, though donations have only been reported this way since 2005. The next-best result had come in the first quarter of 2011, when Stephen Harper's Conservatives raised nearly $7.4 million and went on to win a majority government that May.

The number of individual contributors has also swelled - 50,026 donors put money into the Conservative pot, the largest number of quarterly donors to pitch in for any political party since before the last federal election.

<snip>

https://www.citynews1130.com/2019/04/28/liberals-trudeau-hit-new-low-but-poll-suggests-surging-tory-support-is-soft/

Liberals, Trudeau hit new low but poll suggests surging Tory support is soft

by Joan Bryden, The Canadian Press

Posted Apr 28, 2019 7:00 am PDT

OTTAWA - A new poll suggests support for Justin Trudeau, his government and his party sank to a new low this month, just six months before Canadians will decide whether to re-elect the Liberals or give them the boot after just one term.

According to the Leger poll, conducted April 18-22 for The Canadian Press, just 27 per cent of respondents said they'd vote for Trudeau's Liberals - 13 points behind Scheer's front-running Conservatives, who, at 40 per cent, were in the range needed to win a majority of seats in the House of Commons.

The Tories led in every region except Quebec, where the Liberals enjoyed an eight-point lead with 31 per cent support; the Conservatives and Bloc Quebecois were tied at 23 per cent.

<snip>

Only 30 per cent of respondents said they were very or somewhat satisfied with the Trudeau government while 65 per cent said they were very or somewhat dissatisfied - worrying numbers for the prime minister that were reflected across every region and demographic group.

Moreover, Trudeau was five points behind Scheer on the question of who would make the best prime minister, with 20 per cent to the Conservative leader's 25 per cent.

Still, when asked if Canada would be better off with a Liberal or Conservative government, 30 per cent chose the Liberals and 25 per cent picked the Tories. Fully 45 per cent said they didn't know.

<snip>

The latest poll numbers are the lowest Leger has recorded for the Liberals and Trudeau since they took power in 2015.

The poll suggests potentially more trouble for Trudeau is in store following the election of openly hostile conservative governments in provinces across the country, particularly Ontario and Alberta.

<snip>

Noting that some provincial conservative leaders, including Ontario Premier Doug Ford and incoming Alberta premier Jason Kenney, won election by campaigning against the Trudeau government, Bourque said: "One more variable that Mr. Trudeau will need to consider in the next federal election is the fact that a lot of regional barons have turned people against Ottawa."

<snip>

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-trudeaus-best-poll-numbers-still-have-him-losing-the-fall-election

LILLEY: Trudeau's best poll numbers still have him losing the fall election

Brian Lilley Published: May 4, 2019

How bad are Justin Trudeau's political fortunes these days?

The latest polling numbers from Campaign Research are the best he's seen in some time and he's still losing to Andrew Scheer and the Conservatives.

A poll of 1,471 adult Canadians conducted on April 30 and May 1 found 35% would back the Conservatives while 31% would back the Liberals.

The NDP under leader Jagmeet Singh were in a distant third place with 17% support.

Believe it or not, those are good numbers for Trudeau these days.

He's been dealing with some polls, like Leger, putting him at 27% support to Scheer's 40%, and Angus Reid putting the Conservatives at 38% to the Liberals 25%.

Most polls show a tighter race, as does the latest from Campaign Research, and even then it is not good news for Trudeau and his team.

Regionally, his party only has a commanding lead in Quebec where the Liberals best the Conservatives 36% to 21% support. The Liberals have lost their lead in Atlantic Canada to the Conservatives and in British Columbia, things are looking bad with the Conservatives holding a 15 point lead over the Liberals.

The Liberals are actually in third place in B.C. with 23% support compared to 24% for the NDP and 38% for the Conservatives.

<snip>

The SNC-Lavalin scandal that rocked his government costing him two cabinet ministers and two top advisors was back into the news this past week.

Not only was it back in the news due to The Simpsons episode that made it a punchline but also because of revelations about illegal donations to the Liberal Party and the ongoing court battle by the company to escape their bribery and corruption charges.

<snip>

https://www.thestar.com/politics/political-opinion/2019/05/02/is-trudeau-the-prime-minister-or-just-the-liberal-leader.html

Is Trudeau the prime minister or just the Liberal leader?

By Susan Delacourt Thu., May 2, 2019

Conservatives gave Justin Trudeau a demotion this week - a nominal one, at least.

On Wednesday, one Conservative critic after another stood up and addressed their questions to the "Liberal leader" - not the prime minister, as is conventional practice in the House. 

It's a small thing, perhaps, but it coincided with the unveiling of a new Conservative attack-ad campaign, featuring the same tag line in each of the five spots: "Justin Trudeau: Not as Advertised." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNnVD_tLDzg

Casting Trudeau as a mere party leader, or a faulty product, gives us some idea of where the Conservatives believe the prime minister is vulnerable as the fall election looms. The idea, presumably, is to remind voters that Conservatives had warned people in 2015 that Trudeau was neither prime ministerial nor ready for high office. Remember "nice hair?"

Trudeau, we'll also recall, took the unusual step of replying to those attack ads with his own "I'm ready" ads - an option that may be a little more difficult in 2019, what with Conservatives saying now he is "not as advertised."

Using advertising to accuse an opponent of false advertising is maybe a bit meta for some voters and even cultural critics, but it's potentially effective too, in a pre-emptive kind of way. What kind of ads can Trudeau launch in reply this time? "I am as advertised?"

<snip>

https://www.thestar.com/politics/political-opinion/2019/05/03/liberals-are-stuck-on-justin-trudeaus-rudderless-ship.html

Liberals are stuck on Justin Trudeau's rudderless ship
By Chantal Hébert Fri., May 3, 2019

As prime minister, Justin Trudeau is not one who is usually eclipsed on a Canadian stage - especially on Parliament Hill.

The occasion of Jason Kenney's return to his former haunts Thursday in his new role as Alberta's premier was a clear exception.

For better or for worse, the premier's message that Trudeau's environmental policies are putting his province's economy in peril, alienating Albertans and putting dangerous strains on the unity of the federation, resonated loud and clear. Absent a strong federal counter-message, Kenney literally had the stage to himself.

By the time the Alberta premier left town, no one doubted where he stood. The same could not so easily be said of Trudeau.

On the energy/environment front, the prime minister has managed to lose pro-pipeline advocates to the perception that he is against them, even as more and more environmental advocates seriously doubt the depth of his commitment to the climate-change cause.

The boilerplate comments he and his government offered in response to Kenney's arguments did little to advance the prime minister's case with either camp.

On this as on other files - think of Indigenous reconciliation or refugee policy, to name just two - there is by now more confusion than clarity about the government's ultimate purpose, and questions as to whether it has lost the thread of its own narrative.

Those questions predate the so-called SNC-Lavalin affair. But they have become more acute as the failure of Trudeau's team to put the crisis behind it emerged as a possible template for its overall management of the government.

On the day after Kenney's visit, yet another poll documented the decline of the Trudeau brand.

The latest Angus Reid sounding pegged dissatisfaction with the prime minister's performance at 67 per cent, the highest of any federal leader. It also placed the Liberals in distant second place behind the Conservatives.

Given the short time frame between now and the election, those numbers are more likely to prompt more Liberal MPs to exit the scene than to set a leadership revolt in motion. Those who are seeking re-election this fall have already chosen to sink or swim with Trudeau.

But by now, some have to be wondering whether that means they elected to go down with a rudderless ship.

As his fortunes have unravelled over the past months, Trudeau has more often looked like a passenger at the mercy of the elements than a captain in command of the helm.

<snip>


----------



## Haggis (6 May 2019)

Loachman said:
			
		

> While it is still early, I'd say that there's a good chance of a Conservative majority if current trends continue.



As much as I would like to believe this, I don't think that'll be the outcome.

I also think we're in for a very American style campaign of unprecedented (in Canada anyways) drive-by smears, highly personal attacks and a ferociously emotion driven interpretation of truth.  Given that the Liberals of late have become quite experienced at deflection, obfuscation and disinformation, I believe their campaign machine will carry the day and result in, at a minimum, a Liberal minority.  I believe this because their messaging will stray away from the key election issues which are their vulnerabilities, and focus on the Trudeau personality cult based, in part, on continued consistent messaging that our celebrity PM is the best choice for today's Canada and the right "person" (see what I did there?) to keep those rogue Conservative premiers in line.


----------



## FSTO (6 May 2019)

Loachman said:
			
		

> "A Fridge Too Far" is not likely to gain many Liberal votes, and there is now a Change.org petition asking Loblaws to return the handout. That petition, as it draws further attention, may damage the Liberals at least a little bit more. Lavscam has yet to die out, and SNC-Lavalin are still fighting for their DPA. I don't know when Liberal MP LGen (Retired) Andrew Leslie will testify in VAdm Mark Norman's trial, or what, exactly, he will say, but, should it happen prior to the election, that won't help either.



Just an aside, at the Battle of Atlantic ceremony yesterday at the National War Memorial, General(Ret) Leslie was present in the front row with all the other VIPs.

Hmmm.


----------



## Loachman (6 May 2019)

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/canada-consumer-confidence-slumps-in-april-amid-weak-economy-1.1254348

Canada consumer confidence slumps in April amid weak economy

Theophilos Argitis, Bloomberg News

Canadians’ confidence in the economy continues to hover at depressed levels, suggesting prospects for a strong rebound are dim.

Households are worried about the outlook for growth and their personal finances, the latest telephone polling show. Sentiment, already low, showed signs of further deterioration in the final weeks of April.

The Bloomberg Nanos Canadian Confidence Index ended April at 54.9, down from 55.4 at the end of March. The drop reverses a string of two consecutive monthly gains for the measure. The confidence index, a good barometer of overall economic health, has remained close to current levels for most of 2019, after plunging for much of 2018.

Canada’s economy is undergoing one of its most sluggish periods in the past decade with growth at a near halt amid a confluence of negative developments, including last year’s sharp decline in oil prices and growing global trade tensions that have curtailed business investment. Home owners have also been rattled by a slowdown in real estate markets, particularly Vancouver and Toronto.

Every week, Nanos Research asks 250 Canadians for their views on personal finances, job security, the outlook for the economy and where real estate prices are headed. Bloomberg publishes four-week rolling averages of the 1,000 telephone responses. The composite indicator is calculated from the rolling averages of the four questions.

The polling found that only 13.1 per cent of Canadians believe the economy will get stronger over the next six months, near record lows for this question. Households are also reporting concerns about their personal finances, with 29.5 per cent claiming their finances have worsened over the past year. On the plus side, Canadians are showing more confidence in the housing market, with readings for this question returning to more average levels for the survey.

<snip>

https://www.hilltimes.com/2019/05/06/with-the-clock-ticking-and-ticking-fast-to-the-election-liberal-support-headed-in-the-wrong-direction-at-the-wrong-time-say-veteran-political-analysts/198759

‘Clock ticking fast’ to next election, but Liberal support headed in ‘wrong direction at the wrong time,’ say veteran political analysts

By Abbas Rana  May. 6, 2019

'It’s never over until it’s over,’ but Liberal strategists should be ‘very concerned’ the general polling trends do not favour the governing Liberals, says Shachi Kurl, executive director of the Angus Reid Institute.

With the “clock ticking and ticking fast” to the next election, support for the federal Liberals is headed in the “wrong direction at the wrong time,” bleeding a significant chunk of their support across the country, say veteran pollsters, and the governing party should be “very concerned” that they control the national agenda, get the maximum media coverage, and yet they are still consistently behind the Conservatives this close to the October vote.

“Think about it: you have control of all the mechanisms of government, you should be able to push up your popularity just before you go into the election, and the Liberals have been completely knocked off stride,” said Ipsos CEO Darrel Bricker in an interview with The Hill Times. “They’re headed in the wrong direction at the wrong time.”

<snip>

Meanwhile, Mr. Bricker said the reason Canadians are looking more favourably at the Conservatives over all other parties is because Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer’s (Regina-Qu’Appelle, Sask.) party is capitalizing on the mistakes the governing party has been making, and the Conservatives’ success is a reflection of how Canadians view the Liberals’ performance.

Since coming to power in 2015, the Liberals have broken a number of key promises, and have made unforced errors on issues, including ditching electoral reform, ethical controversies involving senior Liberals, the gaffe-plagued India trip, not balancing the budget, controversial corporate tax changes, and most recently, the SNC-Lavalin scandal. Last week, the Conservatives launched a multi-million TV ad campaign in English and French against the Liberals, reminding voters about the broken promises and the other controversies that Liberals have run into in their time in power.

Mr. Bricker said Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s (Papineau, Que.) Liberals should be concerned that they are behind the Conservatives even though the Liberals control the agenda, and thereby get more media coverage. He said once the writ is dropped, all political parties and their leaders are going to get equal coverage, so Liberals don’t have a lot of time left before they lose this advantage. After the House adjourns, each passing day will diminish their incumbency advantage in terms of setting the agenda and media attention. At the same time, however, opposition parties and their leaders will start to receive more intense media scrutiny than they do now, Mr. Bricker said.

What is alarming for Liberals, he said, is that their party is in second place in almost all the recent polls, and that has become a trend. The only difference is by what percentage they trail.

“It’s settling into a pattern,” said Mr. Bricker. “There’s no poll right now that doesn’t have the Conservatives in first place, there’s no poll that doesn’t have the Liberals in second place, and there’s no poll that doesn’t have the NDP in third place.”


----------



## Cloud Cover (7 May 2019)

The fringes are bleeding off the main 3. The Greens in particular, maybe they will take a firm root with seats in most provinces.  That would likely hurt the NDP and Libs  more than CPC, although some conservatives will consider the Green platform on economic grounds.


----------



## Loachman (7 May 2019)

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/andrew-coyne-canadians-have-fallen-desperately-out-of-love-with-justin-trudeau

Andrew Coyne: Canadians have fallen desperately out of love with Justin Trudeau

The problem seems less to do with any one incident than with a slowly cementing impression: of a leader who talks a good game but does not deliver

Andrew Coyne May 6, 2019 8:39 PM EDT

There are precedents for the extraordinary swoon in popularity the governing Liberals are currently enduring, and have endured - 20 points in the polls in two and a half years, according to data collected by the CBC’s Poll Tracker site - but you have to go back some way to find one.

The Harper government stayed within a comparatively narrow band throughout its time in office, never falling below 30 per cent, never rising much above 40. The Chretien government likewise lost only a little altitude over the years, remaining well above 40 per cent in most polls until the sponsorships scandal brought them down to earth.

But a government falling this far, this fast, in its first term? To have done so, what is more, without even the aid of a recession - with unemployment and mortgage rates both in single digits, and separatism (in Quebec, at least) quiescent? The only parallel that comes to mind is with the first Mulroney government.

<snip>

Poll Tracker now has them an average of seven points behind the Conservatives. There are reputable pollsters who put them as much as 13 points behind. Worse still are the numbers in the regions, where elections in Canada are won and lost. They are now 10 points back in B.C., where they led by five in the last election, the party’s best showing there since 1968. They trail narrowly in Ontario, a province they won by 10 points last time. Likewise for Atlantic Canada - where they won by nearly 40 points.

Even in Quebec, where as late as the start of this year they looked likely to pick up a dozen seats or more - enough to make up for their projected losses elsewhere - their lead is now down to just 10 points, the same as in 2015. Not so long ago, the worst-case scenario for the party was that it would be reduced to a minority. As things stand, that’s about the best it can hope for.

<snip>

It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the party’s unpopularity is connected to that of its leader. That’s true for most parties at most times, of course: Canadian politics is unusually fixated on the leader. But today’s Liberal party has taken the cult-worship of the leader to new heights. Indeed, it is almost wholly his creation; he alone could have raised the Liberals from the near-death experience of 2011. Or so it must have seemed to the party, which was thus spared any more searching examination of its predicament.

<snip>

And the public would appear to have fallen desperately out of love with Justin Trudeau. The latest Angus Reid poll gives him an astonishing net approval rating of minus 39 (28 per cent approval, 67 per cent disapproval). It isn’t that there is any great wave of enthusiasm for his rivals: among party leaders, only the Green Party’s Elizabeth May enjoys a positive net approval rating. But none excites anywhere near such antipathy.

<snip>

The problem seems less to do with any one incident than with a slowly cementing impression: of a leader who talks a good game but does not deliver; who is more concerned with symbols than substance; who spends more time posturing on social issues than attending to the nuts and bolts of governing; whose record of broken promises and centralization of power looks more like the cynical calculations of politics as usual than the shiny idealism he once seemed to embody.

<snip>

Not specific to the upcoming election, but worth a read, I thought: https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/may-2019/pms-caucus-expulsions-reveal-rot-in-parliament/

PM’s caucus expulsions reveal rot in Parliament


The expulsion of two Liberal cabinet ministers from their caucus shows the need for ambitious democratic reforms, reforms that are not easily subverted.

Michael Chong May 6, 2019

The SNC-Lavalin affair offers a rare glimpse into the inner workings of the PMO, and raises concerns about prosecutorial independence and political interference in our judicial system. But it also revealed something equally concerning - the disempowerment of members of Parliament versus their party leaders. Justin Trudeau’s unilateral expulsion of MPs Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott from the Liberal team is a testament to the omnipotence of prime ministers over their caucuses. Clearly, more expansive parliamentary reforms are required.

<snip>

The Reform Act, 2014, assumed that the rule of law is strong in the corridors of Parliament. It assumed that members of Parliament would self-regulate and govern themselves according to that principle. What took place at the first Liberal caucus meeting makes it clear that this assumption was wrong. It revealed a deep rot in Parliament. What took place justified the whole purpose of the Reform Act, which is to rebalance the power between elected MPs and all-too powerful party leaders, who are so powerful they believe themselves to be above the law.

The amendments I have suggested above would ensure that the legal right and obligation of members of Parliament to decide who has power to expel is respected, while strengthening the rule of law.

The Reform Act, 2014, was just a small step in the right direction of rebalancing power in Ottawa. But even though it passed into law it was of little force, because it ran into a political culture that is “all about the leader.” But the SNC-Lavalin affair and the resulting expulsions of Wilson-Raybould and Philpott have shed light on the need for much more ambitious democratic reforms, reforms that are not easily subverted. Perhaps it’s time for another, much bigger Reform Act.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/andrew-scheer-foreign-policy-speech-1.5126144

In first major foreign policy speech, Scheer takes aim at 'disastrous' Trudeau

Conservative leader says he'd move embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, join U.S.-led missile defence program

John Paul Tasker · CBC News · Posted: May 07, 2019 12:52 PM ETConservative Leader Andrew Scheer delivered a hard-hitting speech Tuesday that sought to outline his foreign policy priorities while laying Canada's perceived failures on the file squarely at the prime minister's feet.

Scheer said Justin Trudeau has demonstrated "a fundamental unseriousness and misunderstanding" of global issues during his time in power. He also attacked the government's "Canada is back" sloganeering as meaningless.

"Being a good ally and contributor on the world stage requires more than just talk. Both our allies and adversaries respect strength and confidence," Scheer said during a luncheon address to the Montreal Council on Foreign Relations.

"We have seen serious mistakes like this over and over again from this government, and they are almost always attributable to Mr. Trudeau's poor judgment."

The speech repeated many of the attack lines the Conservative Party has directed against Trudeau and the governing Liberals in question period in recent months. It also offered some new details - but few specifics - about what a Tory government would do differently, such as joining a U.S.-led global missile-defense coalition and starting "the necessary work towards moving Canada's embassy to Jerusalem."


----------



## 211RadOp (8 May 2019)

*Scheer rolls out an ambitious defence agenda, but critics ask: Where's the money?*

The Conservative leader's foreign policy speech was a grab-bag of old party favourites - minus the specifics

Murray Brewster · CBC News · Posted: May 08, 2019 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: an hour ago

A little joke used to make its way around the Harper Conservative government every time National Defence presented Andrew Scheer's former boss with the bills for new equipment — about how Stephen Harper would emit an audible 'gulp' of alarm when they crossed his desk.

Scheer, in the first of a series of election-framing speeches for the Conservatives, pledged yesterday to wrap his arms around Canada's allies, take the politics out of defence procurement, buy new submarines, join the U.S. ballistic missile defence program and expand the current military mission in Ukraine in an undefined way.

What was absent from the Conservative leader's speech — a greatest-hits medley of road-tested Conservative policy favourites, blended with jabs at the Trudeau government's record — was an answer to the first question his supporters usually ask on these occasions:

How are you going to pay for it?

<snip>

"I will reinvigorate Canada's role in the alliances we share with our democratic allies. This includes existing alliances like NORAD, NATO, the Commonwealth, La Francophonie and the Five Eyes, but it will also include overtures to India and Japan," Scheer said.

He also pledged a Conservative government would do more in Eastern Europe.

"This will include expanding upon the current missions to support Ukraine and providing Ukraine's military with the equipment they need to defend their borders," said the Conservative leader.

<snip>

Politicians are to blame, Scheer said.

"Military procurement in Canada is hyper-politicized, to our detriment," he said. "By playing politics with these matters, governments have diminished the important responsibility to adequately and expediently equip the Armed Forces."

Michael Byers, a University of British Columbia defence policy expert, said removing politics from procurement decisions would be a fantastic step forward, one that could save taxpayers boatloads of money by doing away with pet projects and regional interests.

"It's an admirable goal, but he would be the first prime minister ever to take the politics out of defence procurement," he said. "So, I'm skeptical about whether he would actually do so ... I take that statement with a very large grain of salt."


More at link https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/scheer-foreign-defence-policy-procurement-trudeau-1.5127028


----------



## Cloud Cover (9 May 2019)

"Michael Byers, a University of British Columbia defence policy expert, said removing politics from procurement decisions would be a fantastic step forward, one that could save taxpayers boatloads of money by doing away with pet projects and regional interests."

This coming from a self appointed defence expert who ran for the NDP, and has a pretty well known agenda to entirely politicize the procurement system by ensuring that procurements of any military weapons utility are discarded. 
Wait ... maybe he IS in charge of procurement.


----------



## Loachman (9 May 2019)

https://www.citynews1130.com/2019/05/09/ex-tory-mp-del-mastro-accuses-elections-canada-of-a-personal-vendetta/

Ex-Tory MP Del Mastro accuses Elections Canada of a 'personal vendetta'

by The Canadian Press Posted May 9, 2019 9:51 am PDT

OTTAWA - A former Conservative MP who spent time behind bars for electoral offences is accusing Canada’s elections authority of having a personal vendetta against him - and he’s calling for a parliamentary investigation.

Dean Del Mastro was handed a one-month jail term in 2014 after being convicted of failing to report a $21,000 contribution he made to his own 2008 re-election campaign, overspending and knowingly filing a false report.

The ex-parliamentary secretary to former prime minister Stephen Harper is calling on MPs to launch a thorough investigation into the handling of his case that would include testimony from Canada’s elections commissioner.

<snip>


----------



## ajieajie02 (28 May 2019)

Thoughts?


Title: Wilson-Raybould, Philpott to seek re-election as Independent MPs


----------



## Remius (28 May 2019)

They probably have a good chance at getting elected.  But they are not run of the mill independents. 

This CBC article offers a good opinion on the subject. 


https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wilson-raybould-philpott-wherry-independents-1.5151157


----------



## Cloud Cover (28 May 2019)

Good luck with that Max, I wish you success, but watch out for milk shakes:


----------



## Remius (29 May 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> Good luck with that Max, I wish you success, but watch out for milk shakes:



Speaking of Max, looks like the saner members of his party might be jumping ship.

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/abandoning-the-people-s-party-drake-gets-dragged-postmedia-s-politics-milkshaking-high-cuisine-and-more-1.5147118/the-nastier-side-of-populism-why-founding-organizers-are-quitting-maxime-bernier-s-new-party-1.5147163


and Chantal Hebert argues that the CPC has nothing to fear from him.

https://brooksbulletin.com/scheer-has-little-to-fear-from-berniers-breakaway-party/

6 months ago I thought that Bernier and the PPC would erode 5-10% of the popular vote from the CPC (not actual seats but votes).  enough to affect certain swing ridings.  Now I'm not so sure they will even be a factor...


----------



## Loachman (29 May 2019)

Not the run-up to this election, but I did not want to start a thread for 2023 this early.

The knives may not be out just yet, but some Liberals may be at least considering some sharpening and oiling as their worry increases...

https://www.ourwindsor.ca/opinion-story/9396023-liberal-insiders-looking-at-mark-carney-as-trudeau-s-successor/

Liberal insiders looking at Mark Carney as Trudeau’s successor

May 28, 2019 by Chantal Hébert

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s leadership has not emerged unscathed from his trouble-plagued pre-election season.

With a possible Liberal defeat this fall in mind, some insiders are already strategizing a path to the party leadership for former Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney.

Carney is due to finish his current gig as governor of the Bank of England at the end of this year. There has long been speculation that he could one day land in the Canadian political arena and that if he did, he would cast his lot with the Liberals.

As the party’s fortunes have declined in the pre-election polls, that speculation has turned into active interest - if not on Carney’s part, at least on that of some of his many fans inside the party.

On a recent conference call, a group of them discussed how Trudeau’s diminished prospects could result in an early opportunity for Carney to succeed him.

According to one participant, the group is working on the assumption that Trudeau will be hard-pressed to win more than 140 seats in October.

That would be down from 184 in the 2015 election, and _*well short of the 170 seats required to command a majority in the House of Commons*_.

With fewer than 140 seats, the Liberals would - at best - be left with a very fragile minority government. _*At worst, Trudeau would have led his party back to opposition*_.

<snip>

The issue of Trudeau’s succession - a remote prospect for the overwhelming majority of Liberals only six months ago - is now clearly more current.

<snip>

The past suggests that it usually takes two ingredients for leadership fever to set in within Liberal ranks.

The first is a critical mass of malcontents, made up of past and present movers and shakers who feel ignored or shunted aside by the current leadership team.

The second is widespread fear among the grassroots and the caucus that the leader is becoming a liability.

There has long been no lack of the first. Since Trudeau became leader, he and his team have alienated many in the Liberal old guard. Generational change rarely come easily to those in long-standing positions of influence.

The second is more recent and stems from the troubles that have befallen the Prime Minister’s Office over a particularly difficult political winter, but also from the sense - even as the government has started to turn the page on the controversies of the recent past - that the prime minister is not at the top of his game.

It may take more than an election victory this fall - especially if Trudeau falls short of securing a second majority - to cleanse the Liberals waters of the blood that has some of the party’s sharks once again circling their leader’s raft.

From http://www.bourque.org/nates.html of 9 April, in a similar vein (Pierre Bourque seems to have some good political connections):

<snip>

"I'm wondering more about who is the brain trust preparing for the election at Lib HQ. Is there any adult supervision ? Anyone with a genuine win under their belt ? Someone with actual trench warfare experience ?"

Sausage ponders the thought as he maws on a slice of buttered rye toast.

"It's a no-win gig", admits Sausage, "nobody in the family wants to take credit for dropping the Party from majority to minority or defeat."

"And you think we're gonna lose our majority ?" Bacon now looks a bit worried.

"I have no doubt, we are not going to repeat", asserts Sausage. "We don't have a stellar government record of achievement to run on beyond satisfying the pot heads and I don't know how many of them remember to vote on election day .. we don't have the leader's sunny ways charisma to bank on anymore .. we don't have Harper's longevity to run against either .. and we've got that frikkin' PMO/SNC scandal continuing to drag us down".

Bacon checks his timeline on the Huawei mobile as he's forming his reply, but before he can rebut, Sausage continues with his thought.

"So, what you're trying to understand is what will it take to not go down to abject defeat .. and who has the bona fides to prevent it from happening ?"

Bacon is ready this time.

"The problem is deeper than what you've laid out, mon ami. Think about how Justin treated the Liberal Senators. He threw them out of caucus."

"True that", admits Sausage, "as stupid a move as Harper not stacking the Senate when he still had the chance. If you don't feed the beast, the beast feeds on you. Period."

Bacon nods, continues.

"And think about how he's treated party strategists with decades of experience. He froze them out. And remember for the most part it was a very small cabal of kool-aid'rs who stumbled into the 2015 win with Justin. By pure accident. At the right place at the right time."

Sausage is nodding in agreement. He knows all this, but is hoping Bacon is leading himself towards the answer he's looking for. He motions with his toast for Bacon to finish his thought.

"Ok, ok, so, the main problem is there are a lot of key Liberals, the real so-called 'Liberal election strategists', well, they're still on the outside looking in. And they're in no rush to, well, rush in to help. They've perhaps rightly strategized that it would be best to let the current team trip up and then come in after election day with whatever help is needed, especially if it is a very iffy minority situation where Trudeau will be literally begging for help. And if Trudeau actually loses, even better in the minds of some who will assume Trudeau will be gone and a leadership campaign will be on the horizon."

"So no help for the leader ?" Sausage is side-glancing at a cabinet minister's chief of staff who came and went with a load of bagels, lox, and cream cheese in the time that Bacon was laying out his theory. He couldn't tell if the government credit card was used for the purchase.

Bacon shrugs. "No upside, they'll likely focus on some of the better MPs and help them in local campaigns instead."

"Brutal", Sausage says.

"I could be wrong," hedges Bacon as he picks a piece of meat from his teeth, "but I am not uncertain at this point.".

Developing.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (2 Jun 2019)

Gee, does anyone not think for a second that China would be spending some serious cash to groups to promote re-electing Mr. Trudeau again??    You'd have to be a fool to think otherwise, they know he "admires" them and that he'll crumble if pushed.
Would that be a crime by Mr. Trudeau??  Not for a second.....


----------



## Remius (2 Jun 2019)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Gee, does anyone not think for a second that China would be spending some serious cash to groups to promote re-electing Mr. Trudeau again??    You'd have to be a fool to think otherwise, they know he "admires" them and that he'll crumble if pushed.
> Would that be a crime by Mr. Trudeau??  Not for a second.....



Not so sure given the whole Huawei debacle going on.  If Canada blocks China from 5G they won’t be keen on sending any money here for anything.  And as long as their princess is being detained I doubt they will do anything to keep the Liberals in power.

I’m more concerned with special interest groups masquerading as charities doing what they can to influence the election here than I am with China.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (2 Jun 2019)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Gee, does anyone not think for a second that China would be spending some serious cash to groups to promote re-electing Mr. Trudeau again??    You'd have to be a fool to think otherwise, they know he "admires" them and that he'll crumble if pushed.
> Would that be a crime by Mr. Trudeau??  Not for a second.....



Given our election finance laws with strict limits on donations, spending etc, I would be interested to see just how, exactly, that would manifest itself.

#wearenotamericathankfuck


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (2 Jun 2019)

Those laws are easy to circumvent. ...it's not like they'd be handing money to any party. .....but the Courageous Coalition of Canadians in support of........


----------



## FJAG (2 Jun 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Given our election finance laws with strict limits on donations, spending etc, I would be interested to see just how, exactly, that would manifest itself.
> 
> #wearenotamericathankfuck



By registering as Third Party Advertisers who can spend up to $211,200 dollars each. The terms and conditions can be found on the Elections Canada website here:

https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=pol&document=info&dir=thi&lang=e

The trick is setting up multiple fronts-end eligible Third Parties that can conduct campaigns in targeted areas. 

Think of the types of campaigns that nursing and teacher unions run that while not directly supporting a party are designed to undercut leading candidates of parties that do not support their interest.

 :cheers:


----------



## PPCLI Guy (2 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> By registering as Third Party Advertisers who can spend up to $211,200 dollars each. The terms and conditions can be found on the Elections Canada website here:
> 
> https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=pol&document=info&dir=thi&lang=e
> 
> ...



does that not expire once the writ is dropped?


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Jun 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> does that not expire once the writ is dropped?


Doesn't look like it according to the info-page ...


> ... A third party is a person or group that conducts election advertising, other than a candidate, registered party or electoral district association ... Election advertising is the transmission to the public during an election period of an advertising message that promotes or opposes a party or a candidate, or that takes a position on an issue associated with a party or candidate ...


----------



## FJAG (2 Jun 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> does that not expire once the writ is dropped?



No. The provision is specifically for the election campaign and the limits are set for a 37 day campaign and were set for the 2017-2018 period (I don't have the CPI adjusted figures for 2019). If a campaign is longer than 37 days the limit goes up by 1/37th for each additional day.

 :cheers:


----------



## YZT580 (2 Jun 2019)

That was one of the crimes that SNC Lavelin committed if memory serves.  They got caught but that won't prevent others from finding novel ways to finance their preferences, such as rubber chicken dinners BBQs etc.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (2 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> By registering as Third Party Advertisers who can spend up to $211,200 dollars each. The terms and conditions can be found on the Elections Canada website here:
> 
> https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=pol&document=info&dir=thi&lang=e
> 
> ...



Not sure that is right.  I think the limit applies to the party in tootal (211K), not third party....


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (2 Jun 2019)

But you don't have to 'support ' a party in your advertising.... support certain issues that a party just happens to support.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (2 Jun 2019)

"We're not saying who to vote for but we suggest you just vote for pro-life candidates. "

What?  Us??  Supporting a party?  Noooooooo. ....


----------



## PPCLI Guy (2 Jun 2019)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> But you don't have to 'support ' a party in your advertising.... support certain issues that a party just happens to support.



Examples from last election?


----------



## FJAG (2 Jun 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Not sure that is right.  I think the limit applies to the party in tootal (211K), not third party....



Not the way I read it.



> A third party is a person or group that conducts election advertising, other than a candidate, registered party or electoral district association.
> ... the following can register:
> - individuals who are Canadian citizens, permanent residents or reside in Canada
> - corporations that carry on business in Canada
> ...



The major issues that I see for a foreign entity getting it's message out is that: a) needs to be an eligible front-man to be the 'Third Party' and b) a permissible funding stream needs to be developed. I would think that there are sufficient Chinese businessmen, corporations etc that could be enrolled in such a project and permissible funding streams engaged. 

For me the question is: Do the Chinese really care enough one way or the other to even bother? Both the Libs and Conservatives have pro trade agendas. The only issue right now is the Huawei one and while Scheer has said they would ban them, it's starting to look like the Libs will probably (and rightfully) go that way as well.

 :dunno:.


----------



## FJAG (2 Jun 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Examples from last election?



This is the official list of registered Third Party Advertisers for the 2015 General Election:

https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=pol&document=42ge&dir=thi/tie&lang=e

Lot of unions, the Wheat Board ...

And this page links to each Third Party's report summarizing their expenses. Some are small. Some are large.

https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=fin&document=index&dir=oth/thi/advert/tp42&lang=e

I find Friends of Canadian Broadcasters interesting. Lots of contributors and cash raised and spent.

Note also Strong and Free who spent all their money on Facebook campaigns.

 :cheers:


----------



## PPCLI Guy (2 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Not the way I read it.
> 
> T



Two topics on the same screen - but nit, I believe, connected.


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Jun 2019)

[quote author=FJAG] 

I find Friends of Canadian Broadcasters interesting. Lots of contributors and cash raised and spent.
[/quote] 

Definitely



> Note also Strong and Free who spent all their money on Facebook campaigns.
> 
> :cheers:



It looks like most of _ Canadian Veterans ABC Campaign 2015_ 
$78'000 was spent  on Facebook advertisements too.


----------



## FJAG (3 Jun 2019)

I hadn't realized before this that Facebook influencer campaigns were now a thing in Canada, too.

Should be interesting to watch what comes out of the registered Third Party advertisers and non-registered foreign trolls during this campaign.

 :cheers:


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 Jun 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Two topics on the same screen - but nit, I believe, connected.


Granted, I was reading it a bit like I would legislation or a regulation, so I stand to be corrected.


----------



## Loachman (5 Jun 2019)

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2019/06/05/thanks-to-justin-trudeaus-virtue-signalling-foolishness-canada-could-face-a-genocide-investigation-run-by-foreign-countries/

Thanks To Justin Trudeau’s Virtue-Signalling Foolishness, Canada Could Face A ‘Genocide’ Investigation Run By Foreign Countries

Justin Trudeau’s decision to use the term ‘genocide’ following the release of the MMIWG report has now lead to something that would have seemed absurd to write:

The Organization of American States is asking Canada to hold an investigation into “allegations of genocide.”

On Twitter, the head of the OAS – Luis Almagro – said “it is necessary to clarify these allegations and achieve justice.”

“Given evidence of genocide perpetrated against indigenous women and girls in Canada I have offered the creation of an Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (GIEI Canada). It is necessary to clarify these allegations and achieve justice”.

As Warren Kinsella noted, Justin Trudeau will now face allegations of ‘genocide’ and have to deal with that during the election:

“I predicted this would happen within the week. I was wrong. It actually happened a lot faster. Trudeau will now be investigated by an international body, during an election, for genocide he’s admitted to: that’s a first. Well done, JT.”

<snip>

The full letter from Luis Almagro can be viewed via the link.


----------



## Brad Sallows (5 Jun 2019)

It was a really brilliant thing to do.  Now we're on the very short list of countries which have admitted to genocide, and stand alone on a list of countries admitting to genocide which are currently committing it*, and it will be thrown back in Canada's face every time Canada comments on some other nation's behaviour ("You have nothing to say to us; by your own admission, you are committing genocide").

*Unless all the recommendations necessary to void the assessment were completed yesterday.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (6 Jun 2019)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> It was a really brilliant thing to do.  Now we're on the very short list of countries which have admitted to genocide, and stand alone on a list of countries admitting to genocide which are currently committing it*, and it will be thrown back in Canada's face every time Canada comments on some other nation's behaviour ("You have nothing to say to us; by your own admission, you are committing genocide").
> 
> *Unless all the recommendations necessary to void the assessment were completed yesterday.



Even better, JT, as the PM of a self admitted state conducting "genocide" may now find himself arrested for crimes against humanity next time he travels internationally and stand trial in the Hague.

Well done....


----------



## Remius (6 Jun 2019)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Even better, JT, as the PM of a self admitted state conducting "genocide" may now find himself arrested for crimes against humanity next time he travels internationally and stand trial in the Hague.
> 
> Well done....



Not quite.  If you listened to what he said he stated that he agreed that is "was" not "is" genocide.  subtle but was likely deliberate in the wording. 

My guess is that with his credibility with indigenous communities in peril that this was something he could leverage to regain some of that with those groups.  he likely succeeded in that regard.   

The cost though may be felt in other areas. 

Now as to other countries throwing it back at us, I'm of two thoughts.

One: They were already doing that.  So situation no change.

Two: By stating what he did, I think it does however remove the hypocrisy of recognising other countries' failings and not our own. 

It's really uncharted waters right now.  So it could set a bad precedent or it could not.  Time will tell.  

Also, look at the CPC reaction to the inquiry.  Largely in agreement.  And they are pretty quiet on Trudeau's comments about genocide.  They also are trying to distance themselves from some comments  made by a former minister under Harper.

Link here

https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/valcourt-mmiwg-report-1.5159437

With the CPC trying hard to show people that they are not a party of intolerance they really have no choice but to be silently or overtly supportive.  With the whole Beyak issue and more recently with comments made by Cooper it is likely wise not to pick a fight over this.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Jun 2019)

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/70-per-cent-of-murdered-aboriginal-women-killed-by-indigenous-men-rcmp-confirms/article23868927/

RCMP - 70% of aboriginal women are killed by aboriginal men.

If the race doing the killing are the same race that are dying, is it really genocide?  :dunno:


----------



## Brad Sallows (6 Jun 2019)

>he stated that he agreed that is "was" not "is" genocide. 

Correct, but useless as a deflection.   To concede that it "was" means that unless someone can identify when it stopped it still "is".  The commission's expressed opinion is that it "is", and he passed the opportunity to dispute that by pretending to escape behind a verb tense.


----------



## Remius (6 Jun 2019)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >he stated that he agreed that is "was" not "is" genocide.
> 
> Correct, but useless as a deflection.   To concede that it "was" means that unless someone can identify when it stopped it still "is".  The commission's expressed opinion is that it "is", and he passed the opportunity to dispute that by pretending to escape behind a verb tense.



That small word though did not go unnoticed by all groups involved.


----------



## YZT580 (6 Jun 2019)

He has positioned himself as the righteous leader taking affirmative action which he can then use to ask the PCs why they did nothing on their watch.  My problem is with the word genocide itself.  If you had asked the leaders (of both parties) why the schools were set up they would have replied to bring our indigenous people into the 19th or 20th century.  It is dangerous and uncharted waters that may bring about results that are detrimental to all involved.


----------



## Brad Sallows (6 Jun 2019)

>That small word though did not go unnoticed by all groups involved.

Also correct, but they don't command the authority to re-purpose plain language and reasoning.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (8 Jun 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Given our election finance laws with strict limits on donations, spending etc, I would be interested to see just how, exactly, that would manifest itself.
> 
> #wearenotamericathankfuck



No??

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2019/06/07/federal-liberals-solicited-funds-from-us-and-uk-facebook-audiences.html?fbclid=IwAR0LpGxKviJV-5_d2d9hZas3uAq9bpWQsh_fPwSXKyuwOm1SwX2O-jDYBgY



OTTAWA—Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the Liberal party ran a series of fundraising ads targeting American and U.K. audiences on Facebook despite it being illegal to accept donations from foreign citizens.
The party used its official Facebook account, as well as Trudeau’s, to solicit donations from the U.S. and U.K. for a week in March — advertising party official Braeden Caley says was an error. Caley said no money was collected from foreign citizens through the ad campaign.

“A limited set of grassroots fundraising ads on Facebook inadvertently ran briefly both inside and outside of Canada, when that wasn’t the intention here,” said Caley, a spokesperson for the Liberal party, in a statement to the Star.
“The ads were removed by the following week. (The Liberal party) has also been reviewing with Facebook how the ads were able to extend into the other places that you’ve referenced.”

By law, Canadian political parties can only accept donations from Canadian citizens or permanent residents.
Facebook is one of the world’s most powerful advertising platforms, allowing companies and organizations to drill down on micro-targeted audiences to get their message across. It is heavily used by both the Liberal party and the Conservative party in Canada.


----------



## Cloud Cover (10 Jun 2019)

I support this NDP policy:
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/singh-making-pitch-for-more-affordable-cell-internet-services-1.4459466     

It would also be nice to see more pocket book issues addressed : bank and insurance transaction fees, service and admin charges,  surcharges,  levies, credit card interest rates, pro-consumer dispute resolution rights, ridiculous airline baggage and seating change fees, etc. All the little fees that add up in a month or a year.       
I don't think anyone can quickly fix the big issues facing this country, but they can make it more affordable in fairly short order.


----------



## kratz (10 Jun 2019)

I know this discussion is leading up to the Federal election, but some things I've casually noticed in our local provincial by-election. 

The 3 main parties are conducting normal, routine campaign style methods: signs along roads - 1 party puts up a lawn sign and other lawn signs MUST pop up nearby. Only 1 candidate came to our door, the other 3 have not even bothered to mail anything to us. Yet, we've watched the teams canvass our short street.

The Green party candidate has caught my eye, working so hard. No...he didn't come to our door.
He's hosted an AMA on Redditt, and instead of a BBQ / ice cream event, he hosted a street corner party, with supporters personally hoisting his signs for a couple of hours. 

These kinds of efforts are more direct, personal and take effort both by the candidate and those who support him. It caught my eye as refreshing  and when successfully managed can be very disruptive to traditional elections. Normally, I's never consider my vote for the Green party, but this individual is working hard.


----------



## Loachman (10 Jun 2019)

kratz said:
			
		

> Normally, I's never consider my vote for the Green party, but this individual is working hard.



Well, if your taxes are too low, go ahead and try him out.

Meanwhile:

https://www.alberta.ca//external/news/pmo-provincial-letter-to-senate-on-c-69-and-c-48.pdf

Rt. Hon. Justin Trudeau, PC, MP
Prime Minister of Canada
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington St
Ottawa, ON
K1A 0A2

Dear Prime Minister,

We are writing on behalf of the Governments of Ontario, New Brunswick, Manitoba,
Saskatchewan and Alberta and the Northwest Territories. Collectively, our five provinces and
territory represent 59 per cent of the Canadian population and 63 per cent of Canada’s GDP.
We are central to Canada’s economy and prosperity, and it is of the utmost importance that you
consider our concerns with bills C-69 and C-48.

Canadians across the country are unified in their concern about the economic impacts of the
legislation such as it was proposed by the House of Commons. In this form, the damage it
would do to the economy, jobs and investment will echo from one coast to the other. Provincial
and territorial jurisdiction must be respected. Provinces and territories have clear and sole
jurisdiction over the development of their non-renewable natural resources, forestry resources,
and the generation and production of electricity. Bill C-69 upsets the balance struck by the
constitutional division of powers by ignoring the exclusive provincial powers over projects
relating to these resources. The federal government must recognize the exclusive role
provinces and territories have over the management of our non-renewable natural resource
development or risk creating a Constitutional crisis.

Bill C-69, as originally drafted, would make it virtually impossible to develop critical
infrastructure, depriving Canada of much needed investment. According to the C.D. Howe
Institute, between 2017 and 2018, the planned investment value of major resource sector
projects in Canada plunged by $100 billion – an amount equivalent to 4.5 per cent of Canada’s
gross domestic product. To protect Canada’s economic future, we, collectively, cannot afford to
overlook the uncertainty and risk to future investment created by Bill C-69.

Our five provinces and territory stand united and strongly urge the government to accept Bill C-
69 as amended by the Senate, in order to minimize the damage to the Canadian economy. We
would encourage the Government of Canada and all members of the House of Commons to
accept the full slate of amendments to the bill. The Senate Committee on Energy, the
Environment, and Natural Resources heard 38 days of testimony from 277 witnesses including
indigenous communities, industry, Premiers, and independent experts. Based on that
comprehensive testimony, the committee recommended significant amendments to the bill,
which were accepted by the Senate as a whole. We urge you to respect that process, the
committee’s expertise, and the Senate’s vote.

If the Senate’s amendments are not respected, the bill should be rejected, as it will present
insurmountable roadblocks for major infrastructure projects across the country and will further
jeopardize jobs, growth and investor confidence.

Similarly, Bill C-48 threatens investor confidence, and the tanker moratorium discriminates
against western Canadian crude products. We were very disappointed that the Senate did not
accept the recommendation to the Senate Committee on Transport and Communications that
the bill not be reported. We would urge the government to stop pressing for the passage of this
bill which will have detrimental effects on national unity and for the Canadian economy as a
whole.

Our governments are deeply concerned with the federal government’s disregard, so far, of the
concerns raised by our provinces and territory related to these bills. As it stands, the federal
government appears indifferent to the economic hardships faced by provinces and territories.
Immediate action to refine or eliminate these bills is needed to avoid further alienating provinces
and territories and their citizens and focus on uniting the country in support of Canada’s
economic prosperity.

Yours sincerely,

[ORIGINAL SIGNED]
Hon. Doug Ford
Premier of Ontario
[ORIGINAL SIGNED]
Hon. Blaine Higgs
Premier of New Brunswick
[ORIGINAL SIGNED]
Hon. Brian Pallister
Premier of Manitoba
[ORIGINAL SIGNED]
Hon. Scott Moe
Premier of Saskatchewan
[ORIGINAL SIGNED]
Hon. Jason Kenney
Premier of Alberta
[ORIGINAL SIGNED]
Hon. Bob McLeod
Premier of the Northwest Territories


----------



## Loachman (10 Jun 2019)

http://angusreid.org/federal-issues-june2019/

Federal Politics: Liberals appear to have stopped bleeding; can the Conservatives be bloodied?

June 10, 2019 – Notwithstanding a summer sitting of the House of Commons, these will be the final days for MPs in Ottawa before returning to their constituencies to fight for their political futures in the federal election campaign this fall.

The latest analysis of new polling data from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute suggests that for Liberal candidates, a disastrous slide in support over the first half of the year appears to have ended, making this a critical – albeit shrinking – period of time to try to regroup and rebuild.

Conservatives, meanwhile, will take comfort in maintaining a wide lead over the governing party, but must be mindful of a failure to build momentum as their opponent plummeted.

Indeed, 37 per cent of decided and leaning voters say they would cast ballots for the CPC if the election were held tomorrow, a number that is statistically unchanged from where it has been since the SNC Lavalin scandal first hit the headlines back in February.

For the second straight month, the Liberals hold the support of roughly one-quarter of Canadian voters (26%), still well below the 31 per cent they recorded in February, but no longer dropping month after month.

<snip>

_*The CPC leads in vote intention across all regions of the country*_, but the race with the Liberals is much closer in Ontario, Quebec, and Atlantic Canada than it is in the four western provinces

<snip>

The CPC’s overall lead has decreased slightly (from 13 percentage points to 11) since the Angus Reid Institute’s federal vote intention poll last month, but the Tories remain well ahead, largely on the strength of their performance in Western Canada.

Andrew Scheer’s party holds commanding leads in traditional strongholds Alberta and Saskatchewan, as well as in Manitoba. The Conservatives are also well ahead in British Columbia, though this has more to do with a divided field in that province than an exceptionally high level of support for the CPC. As seen in the table that follows, Conservative support tops 50 per cent in each of the three Prairie provinces, while in B.C. it is 36 per cent, with the Liberals, Greens, and New Democrats all holding the support of roughly one-in-five.

The Liberals and Conservatives are statistically tied in Ontario, Quebec, and Atlantic Canada, though the CPC is ahead by a couple of percentage points in each of these three regions:

<snip>

Lots of graphs 'n' such at link.


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Jun 2019)

>I support this NDP policy:

So do I, provided all the necessary funding comes out of federal revenues.  Otherwise, it is just political bullying to transfer money away from the shareholders and employees of selected companies to other Canadians.

If not, I have another great idea to share the costs among all companies rather than an unlucky few: skim all the profits from every corporation and business with a profit margin greater than some threshold - say, 10% - and use that money.


----------



## Loachman (11 Jun 2019)

Justin Trudeau's answer to this simple question will leave you, umm, confused... | Michelle Rempel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oXoS2z413Q


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Jun 2019)

Like, drink box water bottles sorta thing lol

Funny but unsurprising it costs more, line with plastic and recyclable than plastic water bottles.


----------



## Furniture (11 Jun 2019)

Apparently the Left side of the political spectrum is flexing it's union supportmoney to try to torpedo the Tories prior to the election being called. Apparently they don't have to release any funding information at this time because it is outside the period covered by Elections Canada's mandate. 

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/who-s-behind-the-anti-andrew-scheer-ad-airing-during-raptors-game-1.4460332


----------



## brihard (11 Jun 2019)

Furniture said:
			
		

> Apparently the Left side of the political spectrum is flexing it's union supportmoney to try to torpedo the Tories prior to the election being called. Apparently they don't have to release any funding information at this time because it is outside the period covered by Elections Canada's mandate.
> 
> https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/who-s-behind-the-anti-andrew-scheer-ad-airing-during-raptors-game-1.4460332



No different in principle from the constant torrent of paid Facebook advertising from groups like Canada Proud who come from the other side of the spectrum.  Either we decide that that all political advertising be subject to financial disclosure (and then wrestle with deciding what counts), or we have to accept a line in the sand when or after a writ drops to determine when stricter rules apply. The current system may not always be pretty, but it seems to be reasonably unintrusive, balancing freedom of expression with protecting electoral integrity.


----------



## FJAG (11 Jun 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> No different in principle from the constant torrent of paid Facebook advertising from groups like Canada Proud who come from the other side of the spectrum.  Either we decide that that all political advertising be subject to financial disclosure (and then wrestle with deciding what counts), or we have to accept a line in the sand when or after a writ drops to determine when stricter rules apply. The current system may not always be pretty, but it seems to be reasonably unintrusive, balancing freedom of expression with protecting electoral integrity.



I agree with everything that you say but would also add that freedom of expression in political matters should not safeguard anonymity. If you are prepared to put up the money to throw mud (or even just shade) into the ring in order to influence the public in a certain direction then you should disclose who you are and how much you're throwing around. I think that the public has the right to know.

 :cheers:


----------



## Furniture (11 Jun 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> No different in principle from the constant torrent of paid Facebook advertising from groups like Canada Proud who come from the other side of the spectrum.  Either we decide that that all political advertising be subject to financial disclosure (and then wrestle with deciding what counts), or we have to accept a line in the sand when or after a writ drops to determine when stricter rules apply. The current system may not always be pretty, but it seems to be reasonably unintrusive, balancing freedom of expression with protecting electoral integrity.



I don't disagree with anything you said, but posted the story since it seemed to draw enough attention to get CTV to produce a piece about it. 



			
				FJAG said:
			
		

> I agree with everything that you say but would also add that freedom of expression in political matters should not safeguard anonymity. If you are prepared to put up the money to throw mud (or even just shade) into the ring in order to influence the public in a certain direction then you should disclose who you are and how much you're throwing around. I think that the public has the right to know.
> 
> :cheers:



I wholeheartedly agree! I don't like the use of "third party" influencers to push a social media narative at arms length from the actual interested parties, and think it is bad for our democracy.


----------



## Loachman (12 Jun 2019)

Potential Conservative blunder, indicating weakness and lack of conviction:

https://tnc.news/2019/06/10/award-winning-professor-salim-mansur-disqualified-from-seeking-conservative-nomination/

Award-winning professor Salim Mansur disqualified from seeking Conservative nomination

Mansur, a devout Muslim, has been a stalwart opponent of radical Islamism and the groups advancing it within Canada

by Andrew Lawton June 10, 2019

Professor, author and columnist Salim Mansur has been disqualified from seeking the Conservative nomination.

Mansur, a recently retired Western University professor, announced his candidacy last September in his home riding, London North Centre.

Despite being told by the Conservative Party of Canada’s regional organizer last November that he was allowed to launch his campaign and begin campaigning, Mansur received notice from the party’s executive director Monday morning that his nomination candidacy was “disallowed.”

<snip>

http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/2970/fed-horserace-may-2019/

Conservatives Lead, But the Gap Is Narrowing June 11, 2019 @ 6:00 PM

<snip>

If these results were projected into seats, we expect a Conservative minority government of 151 seats, with the Liberals securing 134.

The NDP would win 27, and the BQ would win 23.

<snip>

Trudeau sees approval from a third, disapproval from more than half

Justin Trudeau sees approval from a third (34%) and disapproval from more than half (56%), with about 1 in 10 (10%) saying they don’t know. His net favourable score is _*-22*_ (approve-disapprove).

Scheer sees disapproval from almost half

A third (33%) say they approve of Andrew Scheer, while almost half (45%) say they disapprove. One-fifth (22%) say they don’t know. Scheer’s net favourable score is -12 (approve-disapprove).

<snip>

http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/2966/carbon-tax-june-2019/

Carbon Tax Pushing Conservatives to Vote June 6, 2019 @ 4:24 PM

Nearly half oppose the Federal Carbon Tax Toronto, June 6th – In a random sampling of public opinion taken by The Forum Poll™ among 1633 Canadian voters, nearly half (45%) are opposed to the carbon tax, one-quarter (27%) are neither in favour nor opposed to it, and about one-quarter (28%) say they are in favour of the carbon tax.

<snip>

Of those that are opposed to the carbon tax, more than 8-in-10 (84%) say that they carbon tax is likely to affect their vote.

In contrast, only half (53%) of those that said they are in favour of the carbon tax said it was likely to affect their vote.

Conservative supporters (80%) are far more likely than others to say the carbon tax is likely to affect their vote.

Amongst other parties, two-thirds (68%) of Greens, and more than half (58%) of New Democrats say the carbon tax will affect their vote.

Only half of Liberals (48%) say the carbon tax will affect their vote.

“The carbon tax looks like it’s mobilizing its opponents to vote in far greater numbers than its proponents,” said Dr. Lorne Bozinoff, President of Forum Research. “Additionally, Conservative supporters are far more opposed than Liberals are in favour. If the Conservatives can consolidate the opposition around this issue, and make it the focal point of the campaign, the Liberals’ re-election prospects may be severely diminished.”


----------



## Navy_Pete (12 Jun 2019)

Wait, how do you figure exactly a devout Muslim who campaigns against radical Islam is going to be sold as Islamaphobic?  That makes no sense, and really only reinforces the narrative that the Cons are stuffy white men.

Why would the PR types no think that someone capable of making rational, coherent and intelligent arguements wouldn't make a good poli.... oh, nevermind.


----------



## Furniture (12 Jun 2019)

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> Wait, how do you figure exactly a devout Muslim who campaigns against radical Islam is going to be sold as Islamaphobic?  That makes no sense, and really only reinforces the narrative that the Cons are stuffy white men.
> 
> Why would the PR types no think that someone capable of making rational, coherent and intelligent arguements wouldn't make a good poli.... oh, nevermind.



It's pretty easy really, the CPC would be accused of putting a "token" Muslim on display to distract from their "secret agenda", or the LPC/NDP/Greens would trot out a candidate that proclaims he's not really Muslim and it would devolve into a religious debate that Canadian's tune out.

I think it was a bad move on the CPC part, but I can see why they would do it.


----------



## FJAG (12 Jun 2019)

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> Wait, how do you figure exactly a devout Muslim who campaigns against radical Islam is going to be sold as Islamaphobic?  That makes no sense, and really only reinforces the narrative that the Cons are stuffy white men.
> 
> Why would the PR types no think that someone capable of making rational, coherent and intelligent arguements wouldn't make a good poli.... oh, nevermind.



Here's a quick search on Wikipedia:



> In 2010, he wrote: "The story of modern Israel, as many have noted, is a miracle unlike any [...] It is a robust and inclusive democracy, and is at the leading edge of science and technology [...] What hypocrites demand of Israelis and the scrutiny Israel is subjected to by them, they would not dare make of any other nation."[12]
> 
> Mansur wrote that a Palestinian state was de facto created by Britain in Jordan by partitioning its Palestine Mandate in 1922, and the Palestinians would have had a state of their own, had they accepted Israel and reconciled themselves to the rights of the Jews in Jerusalem and the Holy Land.[13]



and:



> Mansur writes that, from Algeria to Indonesia, from Central Asian republics to Sudan, the entire Muslim world: "has turned its back on modernity".[14] He says the Muslim world must stop blaming the West for its own ailments.[15]
> 
> Mansur's criticisms of other parts of the world have extended so far that he has testified on 1 October 2012 to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration that Canada should stop immigration from Muslim countries. Mansur stated:
> 
> The flow of immigration into Canada from around the world, and in particular the flow from Muslim countries, means a pouring in of numbers into a liberal society of people from cultures at best non-liberal. But we know through our studies and observations that the illiberal mix of cultures poses one of the greatest dilemmas and an unprecedented challenge to liberal societies, such as ours, when there is no demand placed on immigrants any longer to assimilate into the founding liberal values of the country to which they have immigrated to and, instead, by a misguided and thoroughly wrong-headed policy of multiculturalism encourage the opposite.[16]



How long do you think it would have taken Liberals to jump all over that and ask Scheer whether he supports his candidate's position?

Sometimes there are issues that it's not worth falling on your sword for. There's no sense in giving the Liberals a dog whistle to blow over this.

 :2c:


----------



## YZT580 (12 Jun 2019)

So the left wins again.  Without even saying a word they have prevented a good man from a position from which he could do a lot of good.  What a collection of wimps.  It has become impossible for any person to have any opinion other than that accepted by the mainstream.  Mansur is no radical and he is definitely not Islamophobic.  I have followed his column for years and much of the time he has proven to be very prophetic.  
But answer this, if the PCs root out every candidate but those who have any opinion that does not conform to what the left considers acceptable what is the point of voting PC.  You are simply selecting another of the same ilk that we have in office now.  We desperately need people in office who aren't afraid to push against the status quo.


----------



## FJAG (13 Jun 2019)

It's a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack ...

(David Marks performed by Four Jacks and a Jill)

 :cheers:


----------



## Furniture (13 Jun 2019)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> So the left wins again.  Without even saying a word they have prevented a good man from a position from which he could do a lot of good.  What a collection of wimps.  It has become impossible for any person to have any opinion other than that accepted by the mainstream.  Mansur is no radical and he is definitely not Islamophobic.  I have followed his column for years and much of the time he has proven to be very prophetic.
> But answer this, if the PCs root out every candidate but those who have any opinion that does not conform to what the left considers acceptable what is the point of voting PC.  You are simply selecting another of the same ilk that we have in office now.  We desperately need people in office who aren't afraid to push against the status quo.



This is exactly what you get in the age of outrage culture. People love to be upset about things, and the media has latched onto that to make money. The old adage "if it bleeds it leads" was just the pre-internet outrage mob version of this.

The CPC can't afford to have controversial candidates because the media, and social media will have a field day whipping up outrage over anything they can. (social media shares are good for business) In Canada they don't have a mainstream media ally like the Republicans do down south so they will lose the cable news fight, and with social media companies cracking down on conservative leaning posters they have the potential to lose the social media fight as well.  

The CPC needs to play a careful balancing act between appealing to those of us that are fiscal conservatives, not lose the more socially conservative leaning people, and on top of that not crossing the media talking heads... I don't envy them the task.


----------



## YZT580 (13 Jun 2019)

I wonder if 'success' is worth the price?  When all is said and done, will we still have something worth keeping?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (13 Jun 2019)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> I wonder if 'success' is worth the price?  When all is said and done, will we still have something worth keeping?



If you mean an absence of trudeau and his grits, then yes.


----------



## Loachman (13 Jun 2019)

"Losing his marbles" strikes me as an apt description of what we are seeing more frequently in his behaviour - lashing out at anybody who disagrees with him.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/colby-cosh-trudeau-and-the-gang-of-six-a-pm-undone-by-his-own-handiwork

Colby Cosh: Trudeau and the Gang of Six: A PM undone by his own handiwork

Colby Cosh June 13, 2019 10:05 AM EDT

There’s almost no other way to put it: the prime minister seems to be losing his marbles. On Monday, the premiers of five provinces and the Northwest Territories sent him a polite, conventional open letter raising familiar concerns with the Liberal government’s resource bills C-69 (which creates a new regime for federal review of big infrastructure projects) and C-48 (the ban on oil tanker traffic along most of B.C.’s coast).

The premiers, who included the three Prairie conservatives, Ontario’s Doug Ford, and New Brunswick’s Blaine Higgs, didn’t say anything you haven’t heard before. They claimed that C-69 is a “reform” that makes things worse for megaproject investors, who are already shying away from Canada, and that as passed by the House of Commons it tramples provincial responsibility for resource development. The tanker ban, they added, is just the putrid icing on the toxic C-69 cake.

There is some firm language in the premiers’ letter. They warn that “The federal government must recognize the exclusive role provinces and territories have over the management of our non-renewable natural resource development or risk creating a Constitutional crisis.” C-48 in particular, they say, “will have detrimental effects on national unity.”

This does not seem like an especially outrageous warning to deliver. Canada is, the last time anyone checked, a federation. Because Ford’s name is on the letter, the signatories represent more than half the country’s population, and in particular the interest of that half in resource revenue and jobs. The tanker ban, almost by definition, sacrifices the general welfare of a resource-reliant national economy and federal treasury for the perceived protection of one thinly populated region. That may be a worthwhile tradeoff on utilitarian grounds, but from a national unity standpoint it is inescapably what it is: a choice between what two different groups of Canadians want.

But for some reason, as my colleagues Don Braid and Matt Gurney have described, the PM went kinda bananas, calling the signers of the letter “absolutely irresponsible” and accusing them of “threatening national unity” by pointing out the disunifying nature of the Liberal bills. Trudeau added that “Anyone who wants to be prime minister, like Andrew Scheer, needs to condemn those attacks on national unity.”

Trudeau seems to have decided that “attacks on national unity,” which consisted entirely of speaking in its defence, were a promising wedge issue. The “Will X at long last rise to his feet and denounce Y?” rhetorical trope is usually reserved for situations in which Y is some hate group or nefarious cult, and maybe that is how Trudeau regards the gang of six letter-signers.

Yet their offensive epistle actually endorses the Senate’s amended version of C-69 and begs for it to be adopted. You’ll recall that after hearing its own evidence on the impact of the bill, the Senate split up into its Conservative and “Independent” camps, returned with separate lists of legislative improvements, and found that they matched almost perfectly. They were, with relative ease, able to reach agreement on a sober second version of the bill to send back to the House.

Is the Senate also to be considered an attacker of national unity? Even in its primordial 1867 state, that chamber is intended to be a place where provincial and regional interests receive special care. (Again: Canada - it’s a federation!) Then, at a later point in Canadian history, the institution found its most radical reviser, a certain Rt. Hon. J.P.J. Trudeau. This obscure Canadian historical figure tried to increase the diminishing prestige of the Senate by making new appointments independent of the PMO and by disconnecting the Liberal Senate caucus from its brethren in the House.

The hard work done by the Senate on C-69 and its relatively aggressive advocacy for revision of C-69 is entirely a product of these changes. The detached Independent senators took Trudeau at his word, behaved independently and, lo and behold, found that they agreed with the Conservatives on a buncha stuff. Now Conservative premiers are praising the Senate’s craftsmanship. And Trudeau has no more intelligent or strategic reaction than a sloppy, goofy rant about unity?

Frankly, from an admittedly less-than-ideal Alberta perspective, passing the revised C-69 and C-48 together looks like it might be a good recipe for Trudeau. The letter, while grumbling about the tanker ban, practically invites this approach. When it comes time to campaign in a few months, the PM could take credit for the work of his Senate, pat himself on the back for responding to the concerns of the premiers, and boast to eco-sensitive voters that he was able to go ahead with core protection for the allegedly vulnerable B.C. coast.

Instead he is indulging in warlike off-the-cuff talk that can only attract continued sarcastic remarks about his sunny ways. Hey, I was never a big fan of the idea of a “sunny” Liberal prime minister either, but I cannot say I enjoy the spectacle of a paranoid and unhinged one.


----------



## Loachman (13 Jun 2019)

https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/jack-mintz-only-one-country-is-contemplating-destroying-its-own-resource-sector-canada#comments-area

Jack Mintz: Only one country is contemplating destroying its own resource sector: Canada

Development is proceeding apace everywhere but here

The long saga of the Liberal government’s Bill C-48, the West Coast oil tanker ban, and Bill C-69, the new project-approval regime, may be coming to an end this month. It will not go well.

The Senate will likely pass Bill C-48 against the recommendations of its own committee that studied the bill. And on Wednesday, the Trudeau government said it is only willing to accept a minority of the more than 180 amendments proposed by the Senate to C-69, euphemistically called the “No Pipelines” Bill by Alberta’s Premier Jason Kenney. That is, it will accept only those changes proposed by senators aligned with the Liberal party, while rejecting any suggested amendments backed by the industry and provinces who rely on oil and gas.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government has said it wants to “develop our resources responsibly.” Both these bills will almost certainly make resource development more difficult, if not impossible. Add to these Trudeau’s carbon taxes aimed at curbing fossil fuels and regulations such as the new clean fuel standard, and it raises a serious question: What is Canada’s actual resource plan for the future?

According to polls, most Canadians want mining and fossil fuel development to take place with proper environmental safeguards. But numerous politicians have expressed their desire to stop resource development altogether. Their plan is for no more oilsands projects. No more pipelines. No more natural gas fracking. And no more coal. Some politicians are even going so far as considering putting an end to mining. In other words, no more responsible resource development. No resource development at all.

<snip>

While Canada debates whether to stop using our resources, most countries are eagerly making more use of theirs. Even as the Obama administration in the U.S. tried getting coal-fired electricity replaced by natural gas and renewables, it was not afraid to let U.S. oil production double and even eliminated the ban on U.S. oil exports to enable production growth.

<snip>

If Canada decides to go it alone in stopping oil and gas developments, resource provinces will get badly hurt - and so will Canada as a whole. We need a resource policy that allows for responsible development, just like other countries have. That’s not the direction we appear headed in now.


----------



## Loachman (13 Jun 2019)

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/feds-energy-policies-risk-fuelling-western-separatism-schulich-1.1272956

Feds' energy policies risk fuelling western separatism: Schulich

Shane McNeil, BNN Bloomberg

One of Canada’s most successful entrepreneurs says Canada is “biting the hand that feeds it” with its inability to get pipelines approved for its energy industry.

“If this government doesn’t start to realize where its bread is buttered … even animals learn where their sustenance comes from and they don’t bite the hand that feeds them. This government has been biting the hand that feeds it in an inexorable fashion,” billionaire investor Seymour Schulich told BNN Bloomberg on Thursday.

<snip>

Schulich also criticized the federal approval process for the Trans Mountain expansion project and other major infrastructure initiatives, cited an Angus Reid Institute poll from February that found 50 per cent of Albertans polled considered separatism in the province “a real possibility.”

The Montreal-born Schulich said that sentiment was historically high for a Canadian province and should be a real concern for the Trudeau government.

“I’m sincerely worried if they don’t approve [the Trans Mountain expansion] and start to be more conscious of the energy industry’s place in our country, we’re going to fuel separation in Alberta and Saskatchewan,” he said.

“When you have 50 per cent of the people being polled saying they would consider such a thing … I lived in Quebec in the troubling times and I don’t remember the polls ever getting that high. They might have gotten very close at the end, but during the process, I don’t ever remember them being that high.”

Schulich also questioned the blame being placed on the energy industry amid the Trudeau government’s aims to reduce the nation’s carbon footprint.

“We are 1.5 per cent of the emissions in the world, and the oil sands, which has become the whipping boy for everything, is about one-tenth of that,” he said.

“What are we doing? We’re basically taking an industry that employs 558,000 – it did employ it – and we’ve put up a giant sign [that says] ‘we’re not open for business.’”


----------



## Loachman (17 Jun 2019)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stefanovich-un-national-inquiry-genocide-response-1.5174855

UN Human Rights Office calls for examination of MMIWG inquiry's genocide claim

Request comes as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights visits Ottawa

Olivia Stefanovich · CBC News · Posted: Jun 16, 2019 7:26 PM ET

The United Nations Human Rights Office is urging the federal government to probe the national inquiry's conclusion that violence against Indigenous women and girls amounts to genocide, CBC News has learned.

"The national inquiry found reasons to believe that Canada's past and present policies, omissions and actions amount to genocide, under international law," UN spokesperson Ravina Shamdasani wrote in an email statement on Sunday.

"Given these findings by the inquiry, we call on the government to take steps for competent national authorities to assess these serious claims."

<snip>

The focus of Bachelet's visit is supposed to be about promoting human rights and gender equality around the world, but Canada's own record on those issues is expected to be scrutinized.

"The very first thing I'm sure the commissioner's going to want to see is what is the plan on the part of Prime Minister Trudeau and his government to address the conditions of genocide that he's admitted," said Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond, a law professor at the University of British Columbia. 

"The fact that the prime minister said 'genocide' triggers an international process."

<snip>

If the federal government were to admit genocide against Indigenous Peoples is ongoing, it would open the doors to international prosecution since Canada is part of the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, according to Turpel-Lafond.

"Part of me is concerned that they're using words in a loose way that have massive implications," Turpel-Laford said. "They should be much more disciplined and focused about it."

<snip>

The UN is not the first international body to urge Canada to dig deeper into the claim of genocide against Indigenous peoples. 

The Organization of American States is also awaiting a response from the federal government to launch an investigation. 
Setback to UN Security Council seat bid?

"This will have a very detrimental impact, I would suggest, on Canada's hopes for joining the security council at the United Nations," said Peter MacKay, former Conservative justice, defence and foreign affairs minister who attempted to secure a UN Security Council seat for Canada.

"Being a country that has recently acknowledged a genocide separates us in a negative way from some of the other countries we're competing with."

<snip>

"There's an element of hypocrisy when we start to lecture and hector in a sanctimonious way, cast aspersions on the histories of other countries," MacKay said.

"I think we are now in a different place, and under a different lens when it comes how countries view our country."

Payam Akhavan, an international law professor at McGill University and former UN prosecutor at the Hague, agrees it may become more challenging for Canada to preach human rights to other countries given the inquiry's findings. 

"What I fear now is that countries like Myanmar, which are in fact committing genocide in the strict legal sense, will use this genocide finding to discredit and undermine Canada's standing in a way which is neither reasonable or fair," Akhavan said.

<snip>

https://www.hilltimes.com/2019/06/17/rookie-gta-liberal-mp-tan-quits-as-liberal-candidate-for-the-fall-election/204629

Rookie GTA Liberal MP Tan quits unexpectedly as Liberal candidate for fall election

By Abbas Rana Jun. 17, 2019

In his Facebook post, Liberal MP Geng Tan thanked Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, his wife, staff and constituents for their support during his parliamentary career.

<snip>

His abrupt decision not to seek re-election is unexpected, given that he was the party’s nominated candidate in the upcoming election. Considering the margin of victory in the last election, the riding of Don Valley North is a safe Liberal riding.

<snip>

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-canadians-view-ethics-in-government-as-paramount-issue-in-fall/

Canadians view ethics in government as paramount issue in fall election, poll shows

Robert Fife Ottawa Bureau Chief
Steven Chase

Jun 17, 2019

Ethics in government is shaping up as the biggest issue for voters in the approaching federal vote, outdistancing the economy, the environment and trade with the United States, according to a new poll conducted for The Globe and Mail.

A solid majority of 73 per cent of Canadians polled by Nanos Research say that ethics in government will influence their vote in the fall election, slated to take place on Oct. 21.

This comes after extensive coverage of the SNC-Lavalin controversy, in which the Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau put pressure on then-attorney-general Jody Wilson-Raybould to stop the criminal prosecution of the Montreal-based engineering company.

There were also months of attention on charges against Vice-Admiral Mark Norman for allegedly leaking information on a naval supply vessel program. During the trial, which was ultimately aborted, the Liberals faced accusations in the House of Commons that the Prime Minister “interfered in the judicial process” by withholding documents from the defence and by denying Vice-Adm. Norman access to his own documents.

“What this speaks to is Canadians want to hear from politicians about ethics, transparency and how our government should run as a top issue,“ pollster Nik Nanos said in an interview.

Mr. Nanos said Canadians’ faith in Mr. Trudeau’s government has been shaken.

“Many times people want politicians and elections to focus on problems that need to be solved. What happened in the SNC-Lavalin controversy, and issues related to Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, have added up to put a focus on ethics in government,” Mr. Nanos said.

“The Prime Minister put himself right in the middle of the controversy in terms of what he said and his intentions on SNC-Lavalin.”

<snip>


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Jun 2019)

One hopes the sound bite was worth it.


----------



## dapaterson (25 Jun 2019)

In the "Who knew hiring your girlfriend to work in your office wouldn't work out well when your wife found out" department, a Toronto area Liberal MP will not be running again this fall.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/liberal-mp-hired-girlfriend-to-work-in-riding-office-then-fired-her-and-refused-to-support-their-baby-lawyers-allege/wcm/bebd74bd-1d71-4465-a744-a04460f17b88


A Liberal MP hired his girlfriend as a constituency assistant, then fired her at his wife’s behest and refused to provide child support to their daughter, according to allegations contained in two lawyers’ letters obtained by the National Post.

Ying (Stella) Yu — who says she gave up a lucrative career in business to work for Don Valley North MP Geng Tan — fell into deep depression after her “ignominious” dismissal, with suicide attempts, anxiety attacks and crying fits, the two letters claim.

But the MP dismissed Ying (Stella) Yu’s mental-health problems, one of the letters alleges, urging her not to get professional help.

Tan, 55, has strongly denied the allegations, saying Yu’s job in his constituency office was supposed to be temporary, and that he had only provided her a donation of sperm without agreeing to support the resulting child. There was no “misuse” of their acquaintance.

“I will strongly fight for my dignity and honour which is improperly being maligned, alleging wrong facts and concealing the real ones,” the MP said in a statement to the Post. “I have strong support and love of my family.”


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (25 Jun 2019)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> , and that he had only provided her a donation of sperm without agreeing to support the resulting child.



That's classy.....


----------



## QV (25 Jun 2019)

I don't recall any previous government being the complete train wreck this one has been, and in such a short time too.


----------



## Cloud Cover (25 Jun 2019)

Maybe. But they are still going to carry Ontario, the east and a few metro areas in the west, so they stand a very good chance of being re-elected.


----------



## ModlrMike (25 Jun 2019)

I wouldn't count that chicken just yet.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (25 Jun 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> Maybe. But they are still going to carry Ontario, the east and a few metro areas in the west, so they stand a very good chance of being re-elected.



They might get some of Toronto. I doubt they'll carry Ontario in todays climate. Ford and the PC are popular here, contrary to what unions and msm want you to believe.


----------



## Spencer100 (12 Jul 2019)

Torys ask CSIS to look into McCallum 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/china-mccallum-csis-conservatives-1.5209439


----------



## ballz (14 Jul 2019)

This seems absolutely nuts... 338 now has the CPC and Liberals tied again...

https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/this-weeks-338canada-projection-all-bets-are-off/?fbclid=IwAR1sGiQAzhcYJBgke32pwVOQAKqxaUMkslSn4CWbwR8FtI1QJ4khxbLTnMg


----------



## daftandbarmy (14 Jul 2019)

ballz said:
			
		

> This seems absolutely nuts... 338 now has the CPC and Liberals tied again...
> 
> https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/this-weeks-338canada-projection-all-bets-are-off/?fbclid=IwAR1sGiQAzhcYJBgke32pwVOQAKqxaUMkslSn4CWbwR8FtI1QJ4khxbLTnMg



And then there's the caution about ascribing too much importance to polling results: https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-trouble-with-polling


----------



## dapaterson (14 Jul 2019)

Generally, provinces elect provincial governments at odds with their federal (or vice versa).

But it's still early in the process... and a week can be a long time in politics.


----------



## Cloud Cover (15 Jul 2019)

https://www.calculatedpolitics.com/project/2019-canada-election/

Liberals pulling way out now, a 20 + swing in seats based on riding breakdowns. It does appear that the momentum has markedly shifted.


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Jul 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> https://www.calculatedpolitics.com/project/2019-canada-election/
> 
> Liberals pulling way out now, a 20 + swing in seats based on riding breakdowns. It does appear that the momentum has markedly shifted.



Wouldn't it be interesting if they (Liberals) won an election with out the popular vote.  And even coming in behind the Cons, as your post suggests.  Oh the hand wringing that would go on...


----------



## Remius (16 Jul 2019)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Wouldn't it be interesting if they (Liberals) won an election with out the popular vote.  And even coming in behind the Cons, as your post suggests.  Oh the hand wringing that would go on...



Probably be a lot of people threatening to move to the US.  Some actually worried they might go to the grave with a liberal government with Trudeau at the head of it in power.  Same if Scheer wins.  It happens on both sides every time all the time.

But if the CPC loses ground in Ontario, a lot of people and pundits will be blaming Doug Ford and his tumultuous first year in Office.


----------



## brihard (16 Jul 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> Probably be a lot of people threatening to move to the US.  Some actually worried they might go to the grave with a liberal government with Trudeau at the head of it in power.  Same if Scheer wins.  It happens on both sides every time all the time.
> 
> But if the CPC loses ground in Ontario, a lot of people and pundits will be blaming Doug Ford and his tumultuous first year in Office.


Indeed. I fear that Ford is presently an anchor weighing on the federal Conservatives.

Political outrage has a short half life. SNC, JWR, Admiral Norman etc didn’t actually really effect voters tangibly. Much of the loudest outrage came from those who were already solid Conservatives votes.

The swing voters who will turn the election have seen little of real substance from the CPC as of yet, and the LPC haven’t stepped on any real landmines lately. There was no reason to expect that the post-controversy depths to which the Liberals plummeted would be locked in absent further problems. Compounding this, the NDP look dead in the water for this election.

We’ll see what the CPC can present as a solid platform. People still vote the issues closest to home and to their wallet, and the economy and job market are doing fairly well.

I’m still heading into this election intending to vote Conservative. It appears many others have yet to be convinced.

Either way at this point I’ll be surprised if it’s not a minority, whichever way it goes.


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Jul 2019)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Wouldn't it be interesting if they (Liberals) won an election with out the popular vote.  And even coming in behind the Cons, as your post suggests.  Oh the hand wringing that would go on...


I think most elections in Canada have parties winning with less than 50% of the popular vote, so count on that no matter which party wins.


----------



## mariomike (16 Jul 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> But if the CPC loses ground in Ontario, a lot of people and pundits will be blaming Doug Ford and his tumultuous first year in Office.





			
				Brihard said:
			
		

> I fear that Ford is presently an anchor weighing on the federal Conservatives.



How well known was Doug around the province before getting in at Queen's Park?



> Oct. 22, 2014
> 
> Financial Post
> "I've lived in Chicago for 12 years."



Other than that, he lived in Toronto.

Prior to becoming premier, his government experience was limited to one term as one of 47 Toronto city councillors. 

He had the third-worst attendance record. The two ahead of him both had life-threatening illnesses. One has since passed away.


----------



## Furniture (16 Jul 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Indeed. I fear that Ford is presently an anchor weighing on the federal Conservatives.
> 
> Political outrage has a short half life. SNC, JWR, Admiral Norman etc didn’t actually really effect voters tangibly. Much of the loudest outrage came from those who were already solid Conservatives votes.



As much as Ford my be an anchor for the CPC now, the Ontario Liberals will still weigh heavy on the federal Liberals in the swing ridings around Toronto. 

It wasn`t Doug Ford that won the election, it was people's anger over years of Liberal waste and corruption, which they have seen glimpses of in the federal party. 

It may that when people plan to vote for something "unpopular", or "not woke" they keep it to themselves until they cast their ballot. It would explain why the polls were so wrong down south in 2016.


----------



## mariomike (16 Jul 2019)

Furniture said:
			
		

> It would explain why the polls were so wrong down south in 2016.



I replied in US Politics,
https://army.ca/forums/threads/129605.500.html


----------



## Remius (16 Jul 2019)

Good article here on the accuracy of Canadians polls.

https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/how-accurate-are-canadian-polls/


----------



## Cloud Cover (16 Jul 2019)

What the Conservatives need to develop quickly is an issue that will cause more of their base to show up and vote, while at the same time raising another issue that will cause Liberal voters to be inclined to stay at home ( complacency or boredom)
- Climate change has been a bust for both parties. Each platform increases taxes, has little to no effect on the environment;
- the economy isn’t likely to tank between now and the election;
- health care it seems can not be improved with cash (we’ve tried that) and there isn’t any more money for that anyway;
- this is a great country to be a criminal but that’s not an election winning issue.
- the governments have emasculated the security services, armed forces, but that hasn’t been an deciding factor in any election since our great grand parents were electing folks.
- identity politics is divisive but not sure that wins elections but does cause Conservatives to lose them.


This leaves relatively few issues:
- trust
- corruption
- infrastructure
- taxation
- benefits
- wellness and living standards
- perhaps immigration 

Anything else?


----------



## Loachman (17 Jul 2019)

http://angusreid.org/federal-issues-july2019/

Federal Politics: CPC lead holds, but as Liberals begin to climb, will their task be simple, or Sisyphean?

July 16, 2019 - While the Conservative Party of Canada maintains a comfortable eight-point lead over the governing Liberals, all eyes are on the latter party to see if its slow increase in voter intention over the last three months will maintain momentum or run out of steam. 

<snip>

Ontario remains a key battleground, with the CPC and Liberals statistically tied. 36 per cent of residents say they would support the CPC if the election were held today, while 34 per cent choose the Liberals. The NDP is chosen by nearly one-in-five (17%)

_*Six-in-ten who intend to vote Conservative (63%) say they are absolutely certain they will support the party and not change their mind, nearly double the number of Liberal supporters who say this (33%)*_ (This could well influence voter turn-out - Loachman)

One-in-three Canadians (32%) approve of Justin Trudeau’s performance as Prime Minister, while 61 per cent disapprove. Other federal leaders continue to be viewed less than favourably as well. Conservative leader Andrew Scheer is viewed favourably by 39 per cent and unfavourably by half (51%)

<snip>

https://globalnews.ca/news/5502690/andrew-scheer-justin-trudeau-prime-minister-ipsos-poll/

July 17, 2019 5:00 am

Majority of Canadians want change in Ottawa, 37% say they’d vote Conservative: Ipsos

By Jesse Ferreras	

<snip>

Ipsos noted that the Liberals are trailing in every region except Quebec.

There, the Liberals are polling at 37 per cent, representing a lead of 13 per cent over the Conservatives, who are polling at 24 per cent.

The Conservatives lead the Liberals in Ontario with 38 per cent to 32 per cent, while the NDP hold 22 per cent, the highest margin they have in any region.

<snip>

And a link from the article to the actual Ipsos poll: https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/news-polls/Federal-Conservatives-Liberals-Locked-in-Holding-Pattern


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Jul 2019)

The Conservatives would benefit if Singh got some Layton mojo, but that's not going to happen.


----------



## GAP (17 Jul 2019)

The NDP are going to get creamed  in Quebec with most of it going to the Liberals and some green


----------



## Remius (18 Jul 2019)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> The Conservatives would benefit if Singh got some Layton mojo, but that's not going to happen.



The Conservatives would also benefit from not making boneheaded moves like this:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-conservatives-rewrite-fundraising-video-attacking-trudeaus-handling/

They are their own worst enemy at times.  This is minor but shows that they haven't completely learned from past mistakes. 

The Liberals now have a track record (or lack of one that might be substantial).  Attack that properly and avoid anything controversial.  

And provide a good platform to contrast against the LPC.  

They have a perceived weak leader, didn't capitalise on getting him out there more and hitting the Liberals when they were down.  Has anyone noted any real appearance by Scheer at anything?  I haven't.  I don't think he is getting much traction. 

In short the CPC needs to stop shooting itself in the foot and get out there more effectively.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (24 Jul 2019)

Ever since trudeau showed up, virtue signalling has become a national past time. It allows all the idiots to believe they make a difference.


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 Jul 2019)

Fishbone Jones said:
			
		

> Ever since trudeau showed up, virtue signalling has become a national past time. It allows all the idiots to believe they make a difference.



I feel a thread split coming on 


The awful rise of ‘virtue signalling’

Virtue signalling is one of many phrases invented by Spectator writers (‘the Establishment’ is another). It is now in use all over the world

Go to a branch of Whole Foods, the American-owned grocery shop, and you will see huge posters advertising Whole Foods, of course, but — more precisely — advertising how virtuous Whole Foods is: ‘We are part of a growing consciousness that is bigger than food — one that champions what’s good.’ This is a particularly blatant example of the increasingly common phenomenon of what might be called ‘virtue signalling’ — indicating that you are kind, decent and virtuous.

We British do it, too. But we are more sophisticated, or underhand. Mishal Husain was particularly aggressive to Nigel Farage on the Today programme recently, interrupting him mid-sentence, insinuating that he is racist or that, even if he isn’t, his membership is. She would doubtless like to believe that she was being tough but fair. But another force within her was stronger. Mishal was ‘virtue signalling’ indirectly — indicating that she has the right, approved, liberal media-elite opinions, one of which is despising Ukip and thus, most importantly, advertising that she is not racist.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/07/the-awful-rise-of-virtue-signalling/


----------



## Remius (25 Jul 2019)

https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/the-latest-338canada-projection-majority-or-bust-for-andrew-scheer/


Some more data pointing to a minority government one way or another.  The key question is which of the two parties can get the confidence of the house.  I cannot see the NDP supporting the CPC.  Not in this climate right now.  But I also have a hard time seeing the LPC getting support either.


----------



## brihard (25 Jul 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/the-latest-338canada-projection-majority-or-bust-for-andrew-scheer/
> 
> 
> Some more data pointing to a minority government one way or another.  The key question is which of the two parties can get the confidence of the house.  I cannot see the NDP supporting the CPC.  Not in this climate right now.  But I also have a hard time seeing the LPC getting support either.



So far it seems literally nobody has truly shown up to play. Scheer is at least so far avoiding doing anything dumb, which I hope to see continue, and then be bolstered by solid platform promises. I still believe the federal conservatives are suffering a bit from a provincial anchor in Ontario.

The Liberals also won’t decisively engage. The shine has worn off of PMJT, and they need to tread careful lest they shoot a back bearing into one of the minefields of previous months.

Jagmeet Singh never really caught a groove and it’s showing.

The Greens are arguably the only real beneficiary of this malaise. They continue to slowly, quietly trend upwards and can reasonably expect to take a couple of seats. Wouldn’t it be a trip if either LPC or CPC got close enough that the Greens could tip the scale into confidence?

PPC are faring so dismally that hopefully they don’t cost the CPC any seats; Bernier seems to be going full desperate now with his promise of slashing immigration and planting a polite little privacy hedge along the border. While the CPC would be fundamentally healthier for shedding the voters who would be swayed by that, in an election that could run this close it’s still a short term inconvenience. Hopefully Bernier continues to not shut up and sinks himself further.

However this one goes, I think the real winner is ultimately going to be Peter MacKay.


----------



## Cloud Cover (25 Jul 2019)

I know the people who won’t win will be the people of Canada, but they will be significantly hurt with a minority Liberal government propped up by the NDP.


----------



## dimsum (25 Jul 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> However this one goes, I think the real winner is ultimately going to be Peter MacKay.



Did I miss something?  Is he returning to politics?


----------



## Remius (25 Jul 2019)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Did I miss something?  Is he returning to politics?



Not yet.  But he is likely waiting in the wings for Scheer to fail.    

I suspect a few other alumni are waiting as well to see what happens.


----------



## brihard (25 Jul 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> I know the people who won’t win will be the people of Canada, but they will be significantly hurt with a minority Liberal government propped up by the NDP.



If that happens, the CPC did it to themselves, beginning with the election of Scheer as leader... with everything they’ve had to work with they should have been quite handily coming into this election from a position of strength. Instead they’re scraping far more than they should be.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (25 Jul 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> If that happens, the CPC did it to themselves, beginning with the election of Scheer as leader... with everything they’ve had to work with they should have been quite handily coming into this election from a position of strength. Instead they’re scraping far more than they should be.



Part of the problem in current Canadian politics is how party leaders are currently selected- by party membership votes. Buy enough party memberships and single issue voters get to badly sway leadership races.

If parties went back to the caucus selecting the leader, then the leader is immediately answerable to sitting MPs.

But I can see exactly why the current crop of party leaders don't much like that idea....


----------



## Halifax Tar (25 Jul 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> If that happens, the CPC did it to themselves, beginning with the election of Scheer as leader... with everything they’ve had to work with they should have been quite handily coming into this election from a position of strength. Instead they’re scraping far more than they should be.



I don't think the CPC have really done anything to hurt themselves.  They are relatively scandal free.  Their leader is a bit of a unknown, but that's not a bad thing.  Wait for platforms to be released. 

What is hurting the CPCs is IMHO: 

1)  Anything Conservative is a dirty word right now.  The media; and left sided politics is successfully painting the picture of a conservative as a racist, unsympathetic, angry white male; and 

2)  Doug Ford's bungling of Ontario politics is being successfully tied to the Federal party by the media and left sided politics.  I will note I was repeatedly told we cant do that when Wynn was in power.  But politics is politics.  

I think Scheer was the best candidate possible at this time.  But I think Rona Ambrose and Peter MacKay should have played their card differently and stuck around for the leadership race.  I am personally a big fan of Rona Ambrose and I hope she comes back. 

Personally I think the CPC are the closest Canada has to a centrist party right now.  And that is why I became a member and will vote for them. 

Thank god we didn't end up Bernier!


----------



## Remius (25 Jul 2019)

In news that should have been news but has been buried by manhunts and Mueller...

https://ipolitics.ca/2019/07/24/liberals-deny-preventing-ex-ambassador-from-commenting-on-china-policy/

The original Globe article is behind a pay wall.

This PMO really thinks everyone answers to them.  As a private citizen I'd tell them to take a hike.


----------



## Remius (25 Jul 2019)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Thank god we didn't end up Bernier!



Well he has made one campaign promise that might resonate with Trump supporters in Canada...

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/bernier-promises-to-build-border-fences-if-elected-pm-1.4522382


----------



## Nuggs (25 Jul 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> Not yet.  But he is likely waiting in the wings for Scheer to fail.
> 
> I suspect a few other alumni are waiting as well to see what happens.


Isn't he currently receiving pension now?

If so how would a return effect that?

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## kratz (25 Jul 2019)

Nuggs said:
			
		

> Isn't he currently receiving pension now?
> 
> If so how would a return effect that?
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk






			
				Election to Continue or Come Under Act said:
			
		

> Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. M-5)
> 
> 
> Application of Act to members not making election who become members again
> ...


----------



## Nuggs (25 Jul 2019)

Right but didn't they increase the time required to be pensionable? So he was pensionable under a shorter period previously than is required now.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Nuggs (25 Jul 2019)

Correction. He had 18 years previously so I guess it wouldn't matter.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## brihard (12 Aug 2019)

In a minor blow to the Liberals (by virtue of a lost opportunity to vote-split a few % on the right), the Tantrum People’s Party of Canada will not be represented in the upcoming leaders’ debates.

More at link: Maxime Bernier excluded from initial invitations to leaders' election debates

At this point it’s going to be entertaining watching Bernier struggle to retain his seat. It’s not looking good for him.


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2019)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/andrew-scheer-gay-marriage-lgbtq-goodale-1.5256095


Dirty move but effective.  No one is talking SNC and everyone is talking Scheer, but not in a good way. 

Not a fan of negative campaigning but this was a very tactical move from the LPC and now the CPC is on damage control mode.


----------



## brihard (23 Aug 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/andrew-scheer-gay-marriage-lgbtq-goodale-1.5256095
> 
> 
> Dirty move but effective.  No one is talking SNC and everyone is talking Scheer, but not in a good way.
> ...



I doubt this will sway much. Anyone who pays attention already knows Scheer’s long held personal views. Similarly, anyone paying attention already knows the CPC have accepted that this is an issue that they cannot touch, never mind walk back on. The fact that they have to dig back to 2005 on this speaks volumes.

While I do not trust the CPC on social issues generally, they at least have the wisdom to avoid self destruction by trying to reopen some of the long settled ones. It’s gonna take a lot to convince me something from 14 years ago is relevant; and I think Scheer is a bit of a wiener already anyway, so situation: no change.

It’s about time to start seeing some actual platforms from the parties in contention.


----------



## Journeyman (23 Aug 2019)

It's becoming more and more difficult to find social liberalism and fiscal conservatism.   :not-again:


----------



## ModlrMike (23 Aug 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/andrew-scheer-gay-marriage-lgbtq-goodale-1.5256095
> 
> 
> Dirty move but effective.  No one is talking SNC and everyone is talking Scheer, but not in a good way.
> ...



Meh... 32 Liberals and 1 NDP voted against the Civil Marriage Act in 2005, including Ralph Goodale I might point out. If there's no statute of limitations on one's past views on issues, then the Liberals are being somewhat hypocritical, are they not? 

Sorry, I forgot... only conservatives aren't allowed to grow.


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> I doubt this will sway much. Anyone who pays attention already knows Scheer’s long held personal views. Similarly, anyone paying attention already knows the CPC have accepted that this is an issue that they cannot touch, never mind walk back on. The fact that they have to dig back to 2005 on this speaks volumes.
> 
> While I do not trust the CPC on social issues generally, they at least have the wisdom to avoid self destruction by trying to reopen some of the long settled ones. It’s gonna take a lot to convince me something from 14 years ago is relevant; and I think Scheer is a bit of a wiener already anyway, so situation: no change.
> 
> It’s about time to start seeing some actual platforms from the parties in contention.



It's not so much to sway but it may bring apathetic or disgruntled liberals to come out and vote who might have stayed home.  It changed the channel (not sure for how long), made the NDP commit to not propping up a conservative government, (I'm sure May will be asked the same question and she'll be stuck depending on her answer).  It might actually have worried NDPers vote Liberal to avoid a CPC government.  they dug back to 2005 yes, but it has everything to do with Scheer not being at a pride parade in 2019.  It has put the CPC on the defensive.  

I'm on the same page as you as far as the CPC not wanting to re-open that can of worms but this might make some people think otherwise. 

Totally agree about actual platforms.


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2019)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Meh... 32 Liberals and 1 NDP voted against the Civil Marriage Act in 2005, including Ralph Goodale I might point out. If there's no statute of limitations on one's past views on issues, then the Liberals are being somewhat hypocritical, are they not?
> 
> Sorry, I forgot... only conservatives aren't allowed to grow.



I suspect they are expecting that response.  The key to grow is to actually grow.  Goodale voted for it in 2005 and has marched in pride parades since (not sure why this is a right of passage for politicians but whatever).  Did Scheer vote for it in 2005 and has he marched?  That is what they are trying to highlight.  They are saying essentially he isn't marching so he hasn't changed.    

It's a chink in the armour.


----------



## Haggis (23 Aug 2019)

Not that he had to but Trudeau just bought won Montréal.


----------



## Haggis (23 Aug 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> It's a chink in the armour.



Right now, it's all about sowing the seeds of doubt and showing that old stock Conservatives have never changed and will never change.


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2019)

Haggis said:
			
		

> Right now, it's all about sowing the seeds of doubt and showing that old stock Conservatives have never changed and will never change.



Exactly.  I think it does show some desperation but it might actually work.  The CPC needs an effective counter to that.  Liberal Corruption might be it but I'm not sure it will have the same impact.


----------



## Good2Golf (23 Aug 2019)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> It's becoming more and more difficult to find social liberalism and fiscal conservatism.   :not-again:



Harper put the nails in that coffin when he reneged on his agreement with Peter MacKay...happy to get the transferred PC votes, but not so big on the “I’ll pass it to you after I PM the first two rounds...’  :nod:

Regards,
G2G


----------



## Fishbone Jones (23 Aug 2019)

I don't put much stock in polls, but a recent one done by Yahoo, shows over 70% of Canadians want trudeau gone. I doubt those numbers will go down. Contrarily, I expect that to grow.

I also doubt there's many people out there waiting for an epiphany or an Ahh Ha moment. Most, I believe, have made up their minds and nothing will sway that.

People are not blind to the slander that constantly gets tossed out by the liberals. I think the grits may have peaked too early by campaigning for months, on taxpayer money, while the other parties can't campaign at all. I'll bet there's tons who are already fatigued by all of the grit promises to spend your money. People are also not impressed with the way trudeau, and party, are using divisive, untrue terms like racists, nazis, etc to describe opponents. He said it was going to be a dirty campaign, but it wouldn't be him doing it. He is the only one truly campaigning and the only one that is being really ugly about it. I don't believe Canadians want, or need, Republican vs Democrats style politics here, which is exactly the road trudeau is following.


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Aug 2019)

>Dirty move but effective.  No one is talking SNC and everyone is talking Scheer, but not in a good way. 

Lesson learned.  There are no disputes conducted civilly with gracious losers and winners anymore; there will be no golden bridges; no-one is allowed to accept defeat and move on without agreeing to apologize whenever so demanded.  Concede nothing; compromise nothing; they will use your opposition to what they want now to destroy you if they can in the future.

Next time people wonder why there is less compromise in politics, they can be pointed to this issue.


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 Aug 2019)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> … There are no disputes conducted civilly with gracious losers and winners anymore; there will be no golden bridges; no-one is allowed to accept defeat and move on without agreeing to apologize whenever so demanded.  Concede nothing; compromise nothing; they will use your opposition to what they want now to destroy you if they can in the future ...


Sad, but true ...


----------



## ModlrMike (23 Aug 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> The key to grow is to actually grow.



In his response on Tuesday, Scheer's spokesperson said that the Conservative leader "supports same-sex marriage as defined in law and as prime minister will, of course, uphold it."

Seems like growth to me.




			
				Remius said:
			
		

> Goodale voted for it in 2005 and has marched in pride parades since (not sure why this is a right of passage for politicians but whatever).  Did Scheer vote for it in 2005 and has he marched?  That is what they are trying to highlight.  They are saying essentially he isn't marching so he hasn't changed.
> 
> It's a chink in the armour.



So what! Trudeau et al didn't march in Caribanna. Does that mean he doesn't support Caribbean Canadians? Singh marched in a parade that glorified a terrorist. Does that mean he supports terrorism? 

Marching means putting one foot in front of the other. No more, no less, unless you're looking to gain SJW points.


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2019)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> In his response on Tuesday, Scheer's spokesperson said that the Conservative leader "supports same-sex marriage as defined in law and as prime minister will, of course, uphold it."
> 
> Seems like growth to me.
> 
> ...



You are missing the point.  Scheer now has to explain or not as to why he isn't marching.  They've put him on the defensive and in an uncomfortable position.  So what happens when the media asks if he still believes if LGTBQ marriage lack the  ‘inherent’ quality of marriage ?  He will likely try to dodge that.  Several still serving Liberals that were around in 199 and 2005 have already responded.  the media is going after them as well but some are pretty clear on their stances now.  Scheer is still dodging and using talking points. 

I really don't care if he marches or not or anyone else for that matter but the LPC is banking on the fact that some people will.  They have successfully put the spotlight on Scheer.  

the election is about top drop and it looks like the LPC made the first strike and are trying to shape the narrative.  Let's see how the CPC responds and reacts.


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2019)

And the media is saying the same thing I've mentioned. 

https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/what-andrew-scheer-believes-about-same-sex-marriage/


----------



## Good2Golf (23 Aug 2019)

Haggis said:
			
		

> Not that he had to but Trudeau just bought won Montréal.



Although perhaps better characterized as ‘soft infrastructure’ it is infrastructure nonetheless which is actually quite good use of public money.  Also not a bad thing to increase environmental resilience.  

A savvy, but also reasonably value-added move. 

At this rate, the rather mundane guy who has, IMO, been one of the most unremarkable people in politics astonishingly for more than a quarter of a century may be hard pressed keep the Grits from another majority... 

Regards
G2G


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Aug 2019)

>Scheer now has to explain or not as to why he isn't marching.

Pride isn't an event to exclusively commemorate SSM.  Some gay people don't want to be involved in it any more.   Must they explain themselves, or have enough people explained enough times to enough other people that there are aspects which some do not care to be involved with or to witness?


----------



## Good2Golf (23 Aug 2019)

So long as the Grits can characterize Scheer as stealthily intolerant, and he chooses not to participate in an event more for his personal reasons than a strategically savvy purpose to de-power his opponents, they’ll be winning the ‘perception is reality game’...he could have entirely deflated their efforts by participating and it wouldn’t have cost him anything...would any of the Reform/Alliance/CPC voters really swing to Mad Max if Scheer had walked in the parade with the other National leaders? ???  Dying on a hill so far away from the front seems detached from the end goal...

:2c:

Regards
G2G


----------



## Fishbone Jones (23 Aug 2019)

I just watched an interview on CBC. The host kept trying to draw the guest in with that question. What about Scheers personal belief, not the party's. Asked it 3 or 4 times. The guest dismantled him every time. The gay guest. The guest also made a number of very salient points about the reasoning and attempt the liberals made in trying to smear Scheer with this.

I don't see this lasting the weekend.

On the other hand, this is pretty fucking low. Even for the grits. I have no doubt at all that they will get even lower, but I just can't fathom anything more distasteful and despicable for electioneering, from the liberals, even though they will certainly try.

It is just a matter of time and desperation before they get so far into the sewer that even their support will be disgusted with their foulness. This is a party with no good record. They have nothing they can campaign on. Their term is bereft of anything they can crow about. All they have are more promises that will be ignored after 22 October and  smear, scandal and false narrative. This party hasn't told the truth in four years. They aren't going to start now.


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2019)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> So long as the Grits can characterize Scheer as stealthily intolerant, and he chooses not to participate in an event more for his personal reasons than a strategically savvy purpose to de-power his opponents, they’ll be winning the ‘perception is reality game’...he could have entirely deflated their efforts by participating and it wouldn’t have cost him anything...would any of the Reform/Alliance/CPC voters really swing to Mad Max if Scheer had walked in the parade with the other National leaders? ???  Dying on a hill so far away from the front seems detached from the end goal...
> 
> :2c:
> 
> ...



Exactly what is happening here.  

He probably has no votes to gain by doing it but he could deflate the whole attack.  I wonder if there was a calculation at potential lost votes if he did go?  They might not park their votes with mad max but they might not show up.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (23 Aug 2019)

Most people I talk to could care less about this latest ploy. It's a shoulder shug and "Meh, it's liberals. What do you expect". Stuff like this doesn't stick around. It's a drive by. Especially during an election. Oh wait, it hasn't been called yet has it? I'm sure there's some that don't agree, but I don't think it has the legs, or votes, they think it does.

Just my opinion among the rest here.


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2019)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >Scheer now has to explain or not as to why he isn't marching.
> 
> Pride isn't an event to exclusively commemorate SSM.  Some gay people don't want to be involved in it any more.   Must they explain themselves, or have enough people explained enough times to enough other people that there are aspects which some do not care to be involved with or to witness?



I hear you Brad.  I’m not arguing the merits of pride parades.  I’m not against them or gay rights.  People can go or not go, support or not support.  But like it or not they are political and they are used to that end. when the only federal leader who does not go and refuses to explain his position, it’s  been mostly awkward avoidance and talking points it plays right I to the “secret agenda” or “intolerance” narrative.  Doug Ford went to one.  Hard to label him as intolerant to the LGBTQ community after that.


----------



## mariomike (23 Aug 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> Doug Ford went to one.  Hard to label him as intolerant to the LGBTQ community after that.



Having been mandated to work the Pride parade in Toronto, I agree that Doug's description of "buck naked men running down the middle of Yonge St." was pretty accurate.  
https://www.google.com/search?ei=hJFgXfSKA6K-ggfw5LnACg&q=%22doug+ford%22+buck+naked+men+Yonge&oq=%22doug+ford%22+buck+naked+men+Yonge&gs_l=psy-ab.12...13054.14530..17269...0.0..0.143.610.0j5......0....1..gws-wiz.t_R6D_5BiqU&ved=0ahUKEwj03JSjrJrkAhUin-AKHXByDqgQ4dUDCAo#spf=1566609813333

I believe he did finally relent under pressure and participated in a much tamer Pride event up in Newmarket.
https://www.google.com/search?ei=x5JgXYLpE8Pp_QaZwYu4AQ&q=%22doug+ford%22+pride+newmarket&oq=%22doug+ford%22+pride+newmarket&gs_l=psy-ab.3..35i39.13510.16900..17491...0.0..0.157.303.0j2......0....1..gws-wiz.WAotZkENQUQ&ved=0ahUKEwjC6Ke9rZrkAhXDdN8KHZngAhcQ4dUDCAo&uact=5#spf=1566610136782


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2019)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Having been mandated to work the Pride parade in Toronto, I agree that Doug's description of "buck naked men running down the middle of Yonge St." was pretty accurate.
> https://www.google.com/search?ei=hJFgXfSKA6K-ggfw5LnACg&q=%22doug+ford%22+buck+naked+men+Yonge&oq=%22doug+ford%22+buck+naked+men+Yonge&gs_l=psy-ab.12...13054.14530..17269...0.0..0.143.610.0j5......0....1..gws-wiz.t_R6D_5BiqU&ved=0ahUKEwj03JSjrJrkAhUin-AKHXByDqgQ4dUDCAo#spf=1566609813333
> 
> I believe he did finally relent under pressure and participated in a much tamer Pride event up in Newmarket.
> https://www.google.com/search?ei=x5JgXYLpE8Pp_QaZwYu4AQ&q=%22doug+ford%22+pride+newmarket&oq=%22doug+ford%22+pride+newmarket&gs_l=psy-ab.3..35i39.13510.16900..17491...0.0..0.157.303.0j2......0....1..gws-wiz.WAotZkENQUQ&ved=0ahUKEwjC6Ke9rZrkAhXDdN8KHZngAhcQ4dUDCAo&uact=5#spf=1566610136782



I lived at Bay and Bloor for a year.  I saw it first hand.


----------



## mariomike (23 Aug 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> I lived at Bay and Bloor for a year.  I saw it first hand.



What has been seen, cannot be unseen.  

Not that there's anything wrong with it, of course.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Aug 2019)

>when the only federal leader who does not go and refuses to explain his position, it’s  been mostly awkward avoidance and talking points it plays right I to the “secret agenda” or “intolerance” narrative.

If this is all just people who wouldn't vote for him under any circumstances, it hardly matters.  Try to imagine the voter who is waiting to switch from not-CPC to CPC on the basis of whether or not the leader attends a Pride event.  What kind of person is that?  How many of them are there?

This is about making Scheer bend the knee.  Does kowtowing to Goodale's gambit benefit Scheer?  Suppose Scheer attends.  Possible responses from the critics:
1) Thank you, Andrew! Way to go.
2) Oh, he doesn't really mean it.  He's just doing this because Goodale called him out.

I don't think there's a scenario in which Scheer wins, but there is a scenario in which he looks weak and willing to pander.


----------



## TCM621 (24 Aug 2019)

What Pride parade could Scheer go to where he wouldn't be attacked (verbally if not physically), maybe be milkshaked or worse. That is if they let him in. Pride hasn't been inclusive in a number of years banning police and military from the events as well as supporting anti-Semitic BDS groups and BLM movements.


----------



## FSTO (24 Aug 2019)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >when the only federal leader who does not go and refuses to explain his position, it’s  been mostly awkward avoidance and talking points it plays right I to the “secret agenda” or “intolerance” narrative.
> 
> If this is all just people who wouldn't vote for him under any circumstances, it hardly matters.  Try to imagine the voter who is waiting to switch from not-CPC to CPC on the basis of whether or not the leader attends a Pride event.  What kind of person is that?  How many of them are there?
> 
> ...



An out for Scheer is for one of the Pride Event organizations to actually invite him to a parade. Morden Manitoba had a pride parade this year, that town is in the Mennonite heartland of the Red River. That would be a safe space for him. (pun intended)

Edit to add: The Ottawa Pride Committee announced that they would not invite Scheer to their event. So he can always say he'll go if invited.


----------



## Remius (24 Aug 2019)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >when the only federal leader who does not go and refuses to explain his position, it’s  been mostly awkward avoidance and talking points it plays right I to the “secret agenda” or “intolerance” narrative.
> 
> If this is all just people who wouldn't vote for him under any circumstances, it hardly matters.  Try to imagine the voter who is waiting to switch from not-CPC to CPC on the basis of whether or not the leader attends a Pride event.  What kind of person is that?  How many of them are there?
> 
> ...



Of course it’s a no win scenario.  Damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Aug 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> Of course it’s a no win scenario.  Damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t.



...but then again, politics isn’t ever a 100% win scenario either, just a ‘win enough’ scenario. :nod:


----------



## Remius (24 Aug 2019)

I can’t be 100% sure but there is a method to this.  The LPC timing for this was pretty good.  Hit the CPC during Pride week.  CPC goes on the defensive.  Trudeau goes to the G7, will look statesman like there, make announcements etc.  All good PR and will contrast with Trump.  So a week of bad press for Scheer and Trudeau gets a freebie PR event with the G7.  

Anyone want to put money that the LPC might keep up with the momentum by launching another attack after the G7.


----------



## mariomike (24 Aug 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> Damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t.



Showing up at parades in this town was usually simple enough for politicians.

eg: At the recent Raptors parade, the PM and mayor were cheered.

Doug, not so much,
https://www.blogto.com/sports_play/2019/06/doug-ford-booed-toronto-raptors/


----------



## Remius (27 Aug 2019)

Neil MacDonald sums up the coming election quite well.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/election-leaders-1.5260586


----------



## Journeyman (27 Aug 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> Neil MacDonald sums up the coming election quite well.
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/election-leaders-1.5260586


From the article:  
"In a sense, though, the sign does nicely capture the current election campaign – a contest of angry resentment, invective, ad hominem hurling and spewing."

Is MacDonald reflecting on the "Trudeau Sucks" sign in Manotick, or this site's Politics 'discussions'?   op:


----------



## Remius (27 Aug 2019)

Maybe one is a bellwether for another?  But which one...


----------



## Remius (27 Aug 2019)

If anyone is interested in comparing promises assessed between this government and the former one.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-government-s-353-pre-election-promises-assessed-in-new-book-1.4564103

I found the transactional vs transformational difference interesting. 

Also this line was telling:

_Overall, governments in Canada have good records when it comes to keeping promises, Petry said. Polls, on the other hand, have long shown that most Canadians think politicians are liars, even though voters have generally done a poor job keeping tabs on party pledges._


----------



## Remius (29 Aug 2019)

Well this is still in the news.

Why Scheer waited this long to respond and now keeping it it in the media is beyond understanding.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/andrew-scheer-social-controversy-conservative-1.5264360


Just watched Rachel Curran comment on this.  She is a staunch Harper conservative pundit and even she criticized how Scheer and his team are handling this...


----------



## FJAG (29 Aug 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> Well this is still in the news.
> 
> Why Scheer waited this long to respond and now keeping it it in the media is beyond understanding.
> 
> ...



I'm afraid Scheer is trying to run a razor's edge between a significant special interest group within the party that favors pro-life and wants the issue before parliament, and an equally significant group (mostly in Quebec) that are pro choice and want it kept off the floor.

His position is that the government will not bring it to the floor for either debate or a vote BUT he won't stand against a private member's bill and a free vote. (Which I would hope would go down to defeat)

My riding is changing it's long term Conservative member to a relatively young lady who expresses great devotion to her faith and touts her pro-life stance. I've already fired off a missive saying that displeases me, however, I think her enablers in the riding association are of the same ilk as she is. Quite frankly, if it wasn't for the fact that I think Trudeau is a mor@n and that the liberal party machinery is corrupt I'd be seriously considering changing my vote here.

There's not much room anymore for fiscal conservative/socially liberal centrists anymore.

 :brickwall:


----------



## FSTO (29 Aug 2019)

I'm planning to put three signs on my lawn here in Ottawa. A Green, NDP and Conservative just to show my displeasure at the Liberals. My riding is yellow dog Liberal so it won't really make any difference except getting the neighbours talking.


----------



## Jarnhamar (29 Aug 2019)

What do you suppose would happen if you put a _pro-life_ or _no same-sex marriage_ sign on your lawn?


----------



## ModlrMike (29 Aug 2019)

The Liberals used the "he'll rescind abortion laws" and "he'll overturn gay marriage" in several elections won by Mr Harper. Neither of those things happened. At what point is this crying wolf no more than  :deadhorse: ?


----------



## Remius (29 Aug 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> What do you suppose would happen if you put a _pro-life_ or _no same-sex marriage_ sign on your lawn?



I’ve seen pro life signs up here and there.  No fires that I know of.  No same sex marriage sign a might elicit more reaction.


----------



## Haggis (29 Aug 2019)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> The Liberals used the "he'll rescind abortion laws" and "he'll overturn gay marriage" in several elections won by Mr Harper. Neither of those things happened. At what point is this crying wolf no more than  :deadhorse: ?



Remember what Minister McKenna was seen saying; "If you say it long enough and loud enough people will believe it."  Climate change, same sex marriage, pro-choice, racism, islamophobia, gun control, immigration.  Same MO - different message.


----------



## dapaterson (29 Aug 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> There's not much room anymore for fiscal conservative/socially liberal centrists anymore.


----------



## FJAG (29 Aug 2019)

dapaterson said:
			
		

>



More like this, I think.






 ;D


----------



## ModlrMike (31 Aug 2019)

Made a complaint to EC today. I believe the federal representative in my riding is illegally campaigning during the provincial election. Specifically, the words re-elect are now affixed to her signs in advance of the federal election being officially called. I notice by comparison, no other signs carry these words, except for current sitting MPPs; as one would expect.

As a result, I believe that she is a) illegally campaigning in advance of the writ, b) illegally spending on campaign advertising, and c) sewing confusion in the provincial riding.

We'll see what EC has to say. :worms: :stirpot:


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2019)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Made a complaint to EC today. I believe the federal representative in my riding is illegally campaigning during the provincial election. Specifically, the words re-elect are now affixed to her signs in advance of the federal election being officially called. I notice by comparison, no other signs carry these words, except for current sitting MPPs; as one would expect.
> 
> As a result, I believe that she is a) illegally campaigning in advance of the writ, b) illegally spending on campaign advertising, and c) sewing confusion in the provincial riding.
> 
> We'll see what EC has to say. :worms: :stirpot:



https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=faq&document=faqelec&lang=e#a2

Are the signs on public property or private property?

Also note this

https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=pol&document=index&dir=limits/limpol_partisan&lang=e

And this

https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=pol&dir=pre&document=index&lang=e


----------



## ModlrMike (31 Aug 2019)

Although the bench itself is private property, it sits on public land. The problem is not so much that she is campaigning during the pre-writ period, it's that there's a provincial election running right now.


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2019)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Although the bench itself is private property, it sits on public land. The problem is not so much that she is campaigning during the pre-writ period, it's that there's a provincial election running right now.



Not sure that that is an actual legal issue.

Bezan has been campaigning in Manitoba...does not seem to be a problem.  Confusion yes. Problem? Likely not.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/manitoba-election-stretch-resources-1.5245776


----------



## AbdullahD (2 Sep 2019)

This could be interesting and a very interesting way to garner more interest in the party...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/ppc-people-s-party-canada-gun-range-shootout-1.5268078

I can see this working in a Trump esque style
Abdullah


----------



## Retired AF Guy (4 Sep 2019)

Interesting article from the CBC about the decision of 14 NDP members to defect to the Green party may have been affected by the fact that NDP leader is a Sikh.



> NDP defector says he warned party some N.B. voters are 'uncomfortable' with Jagmeet Singh
> 
> CBC Radio · Posted: Sep 04, 2019 6:38 PM ET | Last Updated: 2 hours ago
> 
> ...



 Article Link


----------



## brihard (4 Sep 2019)

Federal NDP have pooped the bed. They’re coming into the election with basically nothing but the hard party loyalists.

Unfortunately this benefits the Liberals most of all.


----------



## Cloud Cover (4 Sep 2019)

Who are those hard party loyalists? The NDP of the Layton era are a distant memory. They really haven’t truly represented interests other than fringe special interests for a long time.  And now they have competition with even that, especially from the current governing party.


----------



## Remius (5 Sep 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> Who are those hard party loyalists? The NDP of the Layton era are a distant memory. They really haven’t truly represented interests other than fringe special interests for a long time.  And now they have competition with even that, especially from the current governing party.



There is still a base in the NDP of hardline socialists and union types. They clash a lot with the environmental wing as well as younger members of the NDP who are trying to get the party to move to the centre.

A real mess.


----------



## Furniture (5 Sep 2019)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> Interesting article from the CBC about the decision of 14 NDP members to defect to the Green party may have been affected by the fact that NDP leader is a Sikh.
> 
> Article Link



What I find most entertaining is that some people seemed shocked that rural communities are less open to outside cultures/minorities. On PEI if you were white, of UK descent, but not from around the community you were an outsider... 

In my experience it's because of a lack of exposure to anything different, so as Mr. Richardson said maybe the NDP leader should have made an effort to go and meet the people of northern NB. Expose them to a different culture, maybe make an effort to expose himself to a different culture.


----------



## Remius (5 Sep 2019)

Furniture said:
			
		

> What I find most entertaining is that some people seemed shocked that rural communities are less open to outside cultures/minorities. On PEI if you were white, of UK descent, but not from around the community you were an outsider...
> 
> In my experience it's because of a lack of exposure to anything different, so as Mr. Richardson said maybe the NDP leader should have made an effort to go and meet the people of northern NB. Expose them to a different culture, maybe make an effort to expose himself to a different culture.



Experiences will vary.  But no doubt that this is on Singh.  He is going to wear this.

The Liberals must be dancing right now.  How much luck can one party have?


----------



## mariomike (5 Sep 2019)

Furniture said:
			
		

> On PEI if you were white, of UK descent, but not from around the community you were an outsider...



Not all that different in a big city. The City of Toronto has upwards of 240 official and unofficial neighbourhoods.  

I've been retired for over ten years and pretty much stick to my own.



			
				Remius said:
			
		

> There is still a base in the NDP of hardline socialists and union types.



Regarding unions and party politics, this was written during Canada's last federal election, 



> Following years of attacks on unions by Harper’s Conservatives, our members in Canada are backing the NDP and Liberals.
> 
> International Association of Firefighters ( IAFF )
> Sept. 2015
> http://services.prod.iaff.org/ContentFile/Get/27125


----------



## FSTO (5 Sep 2019)

Anyone see the PM on Netflix's Patriot Act. He did not cover himself with much glory.

Here is a review:
https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/why-the-liberals-and-netflix-dont-mix/

Truth be told, I don't find woke humour all that funny. Yes they certainly exposed the PM (and Canada for that matter) as the hypocrite that he truly is. But this dude Hasan Minhaj would be a puddle of goo if he listened to military humour for very long.


----------



## Haggis (7 Sep 2019)

On Thursday The Star livestreamed an hourlong panel interview with the PM.  He was not his usual self, IMO, in that he sounded well briefed and well prepared with a number of sharp barbs at the Cons and Scheer strategically inserted in his responses.  He didn't give fulsome answers to a few questions and is adamant that he did the right thing in his dealings with the SNC Lavalin debacle. Despite being repeatedly challenged, he seemed to back away from a handgun ban which I'm sure lost him a few fans in the GTA

The Star will be doing similar interviews with the other party leaders.


----------



## daftandbarmy (7 Sep 2019)

Haggis said:
			
		

> On Thursday The Star livestreamed an hourlong panel interview with the PM.  He was not his usual self, IMO, in that he sounded well briefed and well prepared with a number of sharp barbs at the Cons and Scheer strategically inserted in his responses.  He didn't give fulsome answers to a few questions and is adamant that he did the right thing in his dealings with the SNC Lavalin debacle. Despite being repeatedly challenged, he seemed to back away from a handgun ban which I'm sure lost him a few fans in the GTA
> 
> The Star will be doing similar interviews with the other party leaders.



He might have read Napoleon:

'Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake.'


----------



## Infanteer (7 Sep 2019)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Anyone see the PM on Netflix's Patriot Act. He did not cover himself with much glory.
> 
> Here is a review:
> https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/why-the-liberals-and-netflix-dont-mix/
> ...



I actually like watching Minaj's Patriot Act.  His politcal bias shows through, but he is hilariously good at exposing hypocrisy.


----------



## Remius (8 Sep 2019)

Some pre writ analysis.  Always interesting to see what they predict now and analyse and how it will actually turn out.  Campaigns do matter.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-votes-newsletter-issue22-ndp-greens-battle-election-1.5274133

A few things stand out.  How the Greens May not still be able to translate popular votes into seats.  Also how the bloc might eat into the NDP seats in Quebec in a fight for third.


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Sep 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> Some pre writ analysis.  Always interesting to see what they predict now and analyse and how it will actually turn out.  Campaigns do matter.
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-votes-newsletter-issue22-ndp-greens-battle-election-1.5274133
> ...



That's exactly why one of their platform items is to change the electoral system. Which is a forlorn hope of course...


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Sep 2019)

Ironically, advertising like this does not work, apparently....

An unprecedented spending frenzy could give a clue about where the election battles will be fought

It wouldn’t be a crazy theory to suggest the Liberals are worried about the fate of their three precarious seats in Alberta as the Oct. 21 election approaches.

The province is home to widespread ire toward the government and a provincial conservative party that just swept to power with a crushing majority. And then there’s this: Edmonton MP Randy Boissionault has been hurrying around the province this summer, doling out money like a drunken billionaire.

No less than 69 cheques have been handed out in the last month by Boissionault. His colleague in Calgary, Liberal MP Kent Hehr, is in second place with 59 spending announcements to his name.

These sweepstakes, funded by tax dollars, have been documented assiduously by Global News chief political correspondent David Akin, who has been tracking and analyzing every government spending announcement, going back three parliaments. That’s more than 26,000 spreadsheet rows, for anyone counting.

https://vancouversun.com/news/canada/an-unprecedented-spending-frenzy-could-give-a-clue-about-where-the-election-battles-will-be-fought/wcm/7c50db15-75bf-46e5-8e6c-1c2087ebb6e0


----------



## Journeyman (9 Sep 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> These sweepstakes, funded by tax dollars....


But that's not campaigning;  no election has been announced, right?


----------



## ModlrMike (9 Sep 2019)

I wonder if we'll see any spring back from the "anti Harper" votes cast in 2015. There were lots of seats that changed hands on quite slim margins, that could revert to their former party status.


----------



## YZT580 (9 Sep 2019)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> But that's not campaigning;  no election has been announced, right?


  Why would Justin call an election before he absolutely has to.  Right now he can hand out money as the government (not just make a promise).  He is also flying around at our expense and in CAF aircraft.  That's big money when you consider charter costs.


----------



## Haggis (9 Sep 2019)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Why would Justin call an election before he absolutely has to.  Right now he can hand out money as the government (not just make a promise).  He is also flying around at our expense and in CAF aircraft.  That's big money when you consider charter costs.



I believe he has to call it by no later than this coming Sunday.  Until then, the money taps will be open full blast.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Sep 2019)

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2019/09/09/andrew-scheer-fights-back-after-liberals-make-fun-of-poor-canadians/



> Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer is fighting back after the elitist Liberals made fun of poor Canadians by spreading the hashtag #ScheerWasSoPoorThat.
> 
> Among those spreading the hashtag was Liberal MP Gagan Sikand.
> 
> ...



I can only hope that the Conservatives capitalize on this one. Now that the writ is close, the liberals are showing their true, arrogant, Laurentien Elitist colours. This has the potential to turn lots of votes and take a huge chunk out of the liberals ass.

This, and trudeau's refusal to join other debates, which he can't control and stack, are going to become major points of derision for him and his party.

Lastly, Canadians aren't stupid. They can see the game the liberals are playing with taxpayer money, trying to bribe votes. They remember all the promises from four years ago that were nothing but unfulfilled lies. They also see the lopsided campaigning he's doing, again at taxpayer expense, by withholding the writ and disadvantaging the other parties.

The stink of desperation is getting thick and pungent around the liberals and even die hard grits are leaving instead of holding their noses.

While Bernier tries splitting the vote in favour of the liberals, trudeau and team are wasting it by splitting the vote for the Conservatives.


----------



## 211RadOp (10 Sep 2019)

From CTV News



> Trudeau to launch federal election on Wednesday
> 
> Rachel Aiello Ottawa News Bureau Online Producer
> @rachaiello  | Contact
> ...



More at link

https://election.ctvnews.ca/trudeau-to-launch-federal-election-on-wednesday-1.4586315


----------



## Old Sweat (10 Sep 2019)

"The 41-day campaign will be just under half the length of the marathon 78-day election in 2015."

Oh, really?


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Sep 2019)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> "The 41-day campaign will be just under half the length of the marathon 78-day election in 2015."
> 
> Oh, really?


#EyeSukAttUrithmuhtick


----------



## dapaterson (10 Sep 2019)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> "The 41-day campaign will be just under half the length of the marathon 78-day election in 2015."
> 
> Oh, really?



Apparently, a $600M media bailout doesn't buy math skills.


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Sep 2019)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Apparently, a $600M media bailout doesn't buy math skills.


To be fair, it appears CTV doesn't qualify (still no excuse for poor math skills, though) - and it's still a _proposed_ bailout given CRA's still working out the details:


> … “The Government is in the process of considering the recommendations of the panel, which will inform the process that will be put in place in the near future to administer these tax measures,” a CRA spokesperson told CTVNews.ca via email.
> 
> The panel recommended that in the case of websites that offer video content, 60 per cent of the content must be written in order to qualify. Additionally, a minimum of 50 per cent of a news outlet’s content must be original news content to qualify.
> 
> ...


And I suspect processes will slow down even more once the latest version of this kicks in.


----------



## brihard (10 Sep 2019)

Fishbone Jones said:
			
		

> https://www.spencerfernando.com/2019/09/09/andrew-scheer-fights-back-after-liberals-make-fun-of-poor-canadians/
> 
> The stink of desperation is getting thick and pungent around the liberals and even die hard grits are leaving instead of holding their noses.
> 
> While Bernier tries splitting the vote in favour of the liberals, trudeau and team are wasting it by splitting the vote for the Conservatives.



Got anything to back that assertion? I haven’t seen any indication for a few weeks now that the LPC are trending down again; certainly nothing so eyebrow-raising as a trend of ‘die-hard Grits’ pulling up (Laurentian?) stakes and ambling off to bluer pastures. On the contrary they seem to be gaining at the NDP’s expense.

I take a bit of consolation in the fact that the PPC appear very nearly dead in the water and hopefully unlikely to split the vote with any significance. Despite a pretty full slate they’re cruising solidly in ‘also-ran’ territory, and I think a lot of the voters they’re attracting will chicken out and vote CPC if it looks necessary to stave off a Liberal victory, or at least hold it to a minority. At this point that’s probably the vital ground.


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2019)

338canada’s latest.


http://338canada.com/

Looks like the LPC is starting stronger than it should be.  Campaigns matter though so we’ll see.


----------



## ModlrMike (10 Sep 2019)

But apparently this will not be a "first past the post" election.  :sarcasm:


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Sep 2019)

Haha, polls. Might as well be tossing bones or reading tea leaves. Using polls to back a point is a crap shoot at best. But hey, don't let me stop you.


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2019)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> But apparently this will not be a "first past the post" election.  :sarcasm:



Lol.  I’m pretty sure that was the first broken promise.

Looks like the writ might drop tomorrow so this thing will finally get into full gear.


----------



## brihard (10 Sep 2019)

Fishbone Jones said:
			
		

> Haha, polls. Might as well be tossing bones or reading tea leaves. Using polls to back a point is a crap shoot at best. But hey, don't let me stop you.



They are dubious at best for gauging results, but decent enough for spotting support trends and seeing what direction sentiment is moving in, inasmuch as the errors polls are prone to will generally be reasonably constant. Broad longitudinal samples of polling data should show trajectory reasonably well.

In any case you are the one who asserted that hard party loyalists are fleeing the liberals; it’s your claim. I see nothing backing it, and the only evidence at hand points to the contrary. Where’s the beef? If not polls, what do you base your claim on? It’s fundamentally a numerical assertion- it should be empirically supportable if even vaguely true.


----------



## dimsum (10 Sep 2019)

> Maxime Bernier faces new challenger in Beauce riding: Maxime Bernier
> Rachel Gilmore
> CTVNews.ca Writer
> @atRachelGilmore | Contact
> ...


https://election.ctvnews.ca/maxime-bernier-faces-new-challenger-in-beauce-riding-maxime-bernier-1.4586991?fbclid=IwAR2dM4cZX6aTsMwQBKhp3LGI1ZbmUSNCf-ukCD7q2-IBDFtU9BbfLLuYHd8


----------



## ModlrMike (10 Sep 2019)

Seriously though... What sort of discourse follows if the Liberals form the government, but the Conservatives win the popular vote? How will the left wrap its head around that one?


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Sep 2019)

>How will the left wrap its head around that one?

Probably the same way it did in BC in 1996.  Claim a mandate and carry on.


----------



## brihard (11 Sep 2019)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> https://election.ctvnews.ca/maxime-bernier-faces-new-challenger-in-beauce-riding-maxime-bernier-1.4586991?fbclid=IwAR2dM4cZX6aTsMwQBKhp3LGI1ZbmUSNCf-ukCD7q2-IBDFtU9BbfLLuYHd8



Dammit, you beat me to it. That is mastery level trolling by the Rhinos.

What would be truly hilarious would be if ‘their’ Maxime Bernier picked up enough votes that, if added to PPC Bernier’s total, PPC Bernier would have won the seat but didn’t. You want to see a tantrum on the way out the door...


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Sep 2019)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Seriously though... What sort of discourse follows if the Liberals form the government, but the Conservatives win the popular vote? How will the left wrap its head around that one?


Has that happened often under FPTP here?  Opposition getting more popular vote?

It'll make for interesting political fodder/memeing, but until the system changes, whoever gets more seats wins, like it or not for either side.  It's like the memes saying "s/he doesn't speak for me because they didn't take a majority of the popular vote" - although generally, the "against" vote isn't concentrated with just one party.

P.S. -- In case anyone's interested, there's already been a fair bit of discussion in these parts on changing systems here in Canada.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (11 Sep 2019)

Nice way to start off the election: 



> BREAKING: Liberal government block RCMP’s SNC-Lavalin investigation
> 
> Siddak Ahuja, 8 hours ago 1 min read
> 
> ...



Article Link

Apparently Daniel Leblanc and Robert Fife at the Globe and Mail have another report that goes into more details, but its behind a paid firewall.


----------



## PuckChaser (11 Sep 2019)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Has that happened often under FPTP here?  Opposition getting more popular vote?



Did some research, apparently popular vote counts before 1960 are a crap shoot but it's only ever happened in a minority government situation, last one being 1979 election with Joe Clark at 36% and Trudeau Sr at 40%, but the Tories had more seats.

The left typically use the meme that XX% of people DIDN'T vote for the right leaning candidate, so therefore the results aren't legitimate. They forget that it is exceedingly difficult to gain both a majority of seats and majority of popular vote in the FPTP system, so all those Liberal PMs must not have been legitimate either.


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Sep 2019)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Did some research, apparently popular vote counts before 1960 are a crap shoot but it's only ever happened in a minority government situation, last one being 1979 election with Joe Clark at 36% and Trudeau Sr at 40%, but the Tories had more seats.


Thanks for the digging - much appreciated!



> The left typically use the meme that XX% of people DIDN'T vote for the right leaning candidate, so therefore the results aren't legitimate. They forget that it is exceedingly difficult to gain both a majority of seats and majority of popular vote in the FPTP system, so all those Liberal PMs must not have been legitimate either.


It wasn't the left meme-ing this argument after PMJT got in  - and you're bang on re:  FPTP & popular vote #'s.

Circling back to your original question, how likely do you see a Conservative popular vote majority this time (realizing it's still early days)?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Sep 2019)

Trudeau goes full on despot and obstructs the RCMP from investigating his crimes and we're discussing FPTP. : :rofl:


----------



## PuckChaser (11 Sep 2019)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Circling back to your original question, how likely do you see a Conservative popular vote majority this time (realizing it's still early days)?



With a majority of the Liberal support firmly entrenched in the echo-chamber that is the GTA, I really can't see any scenario that the Tories end up with the lead in popular vote. They're too good at using the system as intended: targetting swing ridings with low populations to gain seats. The only way I see GTA support faltering is with a criminal indictment of Justin Trudeau for the SNC Lavalin scandal, which is seeming less likely after they blocked investigator access to documents that some experts even think a search warrant won't overturn.


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2019)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Thanks for the digging - much appreciated!
> It wasn't the left meme-ing this argument after PMJT got in  - and you're bang on re:  FPTP & popular vote #'s.
> 
> Circling back to your original question, how likely do you see a Conservative popular vote majority this time (realizing it's still early days)?



I remember when the PCs were reduced to 2 seats in the HoC.  Joe Clark tried to make a case for party status based on their popular vote which was still quite high. 

Parties care when it affects them.  Not so much when it's someone else.


----------

