2025 Federal Election - 28 Apr 25

[MilEME09]

That's easy. You just have to be confident, and have a plan like Blair outlined.

Also gotta give DND the ability to actually spend it, i know plenty of rush lists are being dusted off in ottawa. Infrastructure is top of the list

 

[YZT580]

I suspect that the Court would view turning 'may' into 'shall' as cruel and unusual, just by different means. Generally speaking, the Court has taken the view that arbitrary and mandatory sentencing provisions, in and of themselves, removes or limits the a sentencing court from making a subjective analysis of the individual facts of the case.

It would be interesting to see if somehow creating a brand new stand alone offence of 'multiple homicide' or 'aggravated homicide' or something might have more success that trying to approach the matter from the sentencing or procedure angle. Dunno. The one advantage of the DO provision is that it more broadly based towards crimes against the person, and not a specific offence.


I would argue that Constitution is more that just legislation, it is foundational legislation. It wasn't created by Parliament or a legislature, it was created by all of them, and it would take (almost) all of them to change it. Constitutions and foundational documents are hard to change - on purpose. A Constitution that is at the whim of any given Parliament or legislature is too vulnerable to politics of the day. It might seem clearer when it is for what we see as a good thing, like longer sentences for a heinous crime, but what if they do it for a not-so-good thing? A majority government has a lot of legislative power; maybe one would like a 10-year mandate.


I would surely like to hear an alternative solution. No system of humans passing judgement on other humans is going to be perfect, and every pyramid needs a top. Would you advocate elected SC judges? Not even the election-happy US does that.

I suppose we could craft a system where Parliament is supreme, and end up with populist 'three strikes' laws where people languish in prison for the damnedest things like they have in some parts of the US, but voters were satisfied. The courts, theoretically, are to protect society from the tyranny of power.

The goal posts get moved because society evolves. We don't have debtors prison, criminal offences for homosexuality or lengthy jail time for stealing a loaf of bread anymore.

no but we do have homeless camps, people dying in the streets from cold, entire neighbourhoods where small businesses are going bust due to petty theft, vandalism, and break ins such as parts of Victoria, Edmonton, Toronto of course, Winnipeg. Are you sure that society has really evolved for the better? We should maybe examine are improvements in the light of recent history and change back the bad choices we made and that requires a method of making the courts answerable to the law and not crafting it to suit themselves

 

[Jarnhamar]

Also gotta give DND the ability to actually spend it, i know plenty of rush lists are being dusted off in ottawa. Infrastructure is top of the list

Another easy fix. Dump a few hundred million into consulting groups who will best decide which organization should get a few hundred million to conduct research on a new $1B organization that streamlines military spending.

 

[MilEME09]

Another easy fix. Dump a few hundred million into consulting groups who will best decide which organization should get a few hundred million to conduct research on a new $1B organization that streamlines military spending.

But you gotta convene a committee to decide which groups get what

 

[brihard]

Debate was pretty well run. And yes it was a dull affair.

PP had a relatively good night but was completely overshadowed by rebel news shenanigans.

I found Blanchette rambled on things

Singh was trying his best to get attention by interrupting

Carmey was quite good when he broke down how his plans would work and was although he was the main target he was able to defend himself for the most part.

So yes, likely won’t move any needles significantly.

I noticed Carney has a habit of saying “two” or “three quick points”, and then bam, bam, bam, quickly jammed out a few single sentence or very short facts or statements in quick succession. He seemed to communicate relatively efficiently.

I also can’t remember seeing Carney jumping in and interrupting anyone at any point, and it didn’t seem like they got under his skin much. Some of that is probably coaching, some of that is probably born of business meetings and discussions where there’s no benefit to acting like a donkey. He came across as professional, competent but boring, and generally mature. He basically just needed to not get really hurt in the debate, and he accomplished that. He needs to essentially keep things on an even keel for eleven more days. Carney himself won’t struggle with that, he just needs to hope for no nasty surprises from within his party.

Poilievre needs a major scandal and he needs it now. A lot of people will vote this long weekend.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Lotta words for “more than we can give right now” - no matter which party says it about either defence or VAC

You're seriously trying to tie Poliviere's estimate to 2% with the callous, uncaring disregard for Canada's warriors VAC claims by trudeau?

Would you rather Poliviere lie to appease the audience, making decisions without due regard for true nature of our finances?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Poilievre needs a major scandal and he needs it now. A lot of people will vote this long weekend.

Carney's do no wrong force powers are at least equal to Trudeau, probably greater.

Given what Canadians supported Trudeau through can you imagine how depraved of a scandal Carney would have to be involved in to actually lose support?

 

[Remius]

I noticed Carney has a habit of saying “two” or “three quick points”, and then bam, bam, bam, quickly jammed out a few single sentence or very short facts or statements in quick succession. He seemed to communicate relatively efficiently.

It was very effective. It also shut down any quick responses or counters as the others needed to process what he was saying.

I also can’t remember seeing Carney jumping in and interrupting anyone at any point, and it didn’t seem like they got under his skin much. Some of that is probably coaching, some of that is probably born of business meetings and discussions where there’s no benefit to acting like a donkey. He came across as professional, competent but boring, and generally mature. He basically just needed to not get really hurt in the debate, and he accomplished that. He needs to essentially keep things on an even keel for eleven more days. Carney himself won’t struggle with that, he just needs to hope for no nasty surprises from within his party.

That was Singh. And he kept going back to healthcare on every topic.

Poilievre needs a major scandal and he needs it now. A lot of people will vote this long weekend.

He does. I’ll give him credit for trying to pivot and appear a bit more like a PM but he should have done that last summer.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Strongly agree

https://twitter.com/x/status/1913077319947665738

 

[daftandbarmy]

Well explained...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1913034690497249348

 

[Remius]

Carney's do no wrong force powers are at least equal to Trudeau, probably greater.

I think that Trudeau’s are a bit overblown. I think it’s also when facing unpopular choices. Carney gets a few passes on his clubs because he’s fairly new to the scene. But nothing he’s done yet rises to scandalous.

Given what Canadians supported Trudeau through can you imagine how depraved of a scandal Carney would have to be involved in to actually lose support?

Except a majority did not in fact support Trudeau

At the end of the day one party decided to ditch their unpopular leader and it seems to have paid off.

 

[Remius]

Well explained...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1913034690497249348

Agreed.

It was his best moment. The LPC should have predicted he’d be ready for that.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Except a majority did not in fact support Trudeau

How do you figure? Canadians supported Trudeau year after year scandal after scandal for 10 years. Survived 2 elections, including a very expensive grab for power in the middle of a pandemic.

Trudeaus support finally ran out but it's largely the same people supporting Carney now. Still the same party.

 

[Remius]

Welcome to 338Canada

338canada.com

Latest 338. Debate dates not yet reflected so we might see that this weekend. But essentially stabilized with slight movements narrowing.

Still shows a likely LPC majority but I’m still not convinced their core support is firmed up.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Well explained...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1913034690497249348

Oh snap. Poilievre should buy Carney a beer for that assist.

 

[brihard]

How do you figure? Canadians supported Trudeau year after year scandal after scandal for 10 years. Survived 2 elections, including a very expensive grab for power in the middle of a pandemic.

Trudeaus support finally ran out but it's largely the same people supporting Carney now. Still the same party.

He had enough support to get a majority of seats with just under 40% of the popular vote, and get reelected with a plurality twice after that, neither time making it past 34%. I think Remius is saying he never had the support of a majority of Canadians.

 

[Remius]

How do you figure? Canadians supported Trudeau year after year scandal after scandal for 10 years. Survived 2 elections, including a very expensive grab for power in the middle of a pandemic.

What did they win the last two elections with? What was the percentage? I can assure you it wasn’t a majority of Canadians. Those stats are published and easy to find.

Trudeaus support finally ran out but it's largely the same people supporting Carney now. Still the same party.

Disagree. The LPC has attracted NDP, Bloc and disaffected conservatives and brought back liberals that weren’t likely staying home. Whether it’s the same party remains to be seen. The LPC has quite quite adept at recreating itself

PP and the CPC could have attracted a good chunk of that but chose not to.

One can hope that maybe Blanchette and Singh while maybe steal some back or that some will get cold feet come voting day which is quite possible.

Many factors at play here.

 

[Remius]

He had enough support to get a majority of seats with just under 40% of the popular vote, and get reelected with a plurality twice after that, neither time making it past 34%. I think Remius is saying he never had the support of a majority of Canadians.

Correct.

 

[ArmyRick]

I have no faith in either party when it comes to defense spending. Once they look at the books defence will be shoved to the side.
BTW Does anyone really know what the deficit is?

Tell your unborn great great grandchildren they owe a lot of moolah for being born in Canada. Does that give a hint?

 

[ArmyRick]

Agreed.

It was his best moment. The LPC should have predicted he’d be ready for that.

That did way more damage than you realize.