• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

Bruce Monkhouse said:
So like Maple Maga??
Click to expand...
Nope, not the same at all.

First, when you say someone has "TDS", and many on here have, it's a disparaging comment. It's in the name; you're saying someone has a Derangement Syndrome just for their position. Conversely, calling someone Maple MAGA is just a simple way to identify a person's particular political position (and that they're Canadian).

Second, TDS is used to dismiss someone's position, in that you're saying their position has no merit because they are "Deranged". We aren't doing that when we call someone Maple MAGA. Again we are just identifying that they have a particular position/opinion, but not denouncing their position offhand simply because of the name we've applied to them.

That doesn't mean we don't feel the above (disparaging and dismissive) about Maple MAGA, it just means this opinions are separate and independent of the cute lable that's been created.
 
Lumber said:
Conversely, calling someone Maple MAGA is just a simple way to identify a person's particular political position (and that they're Canadian).
Click to expand...
That’s a nice rationalization, but it doesn’t change how “Maple MAGA” is actually used. It’s a put-down, same as “TDS.”

Pretending it’s just a “cute label” doesn’t make it any less dismissive. Both terms exist to write people off instead of dealing with what they’re saying. It’s used to lump people into a stereotype and reduce someone’s position to a caricature IMO.
 
Jarnhamar said:
That’s a nice rationalization, but it doesn’t change how “Maple MAGA” is actually used. It’s a put-down, same as “TDS.”

Pretending it’s just a “cute label” doesn’t make it any less dismissive. Both terms exist to write people off instead of dealing with what they’re saying. It’s used to lump people into a stereotype and reduce someone’s position to a caricature IMO.
Click to expand...
Except that no one on here has ever responded to a "pro-Trump" post on here by saying "Yea, but, you're just a Maple MAGA", while people on here HAVE responded to "anti-Trump" posts by saying "Your TDS is showing".
 
Remius said:
Maple Maga types does a good job defining themselves without anyone else having to do so.
Click to expand...
That's thoughtful of them if you think about it.


Lumber said:
Except that no one on here has ever responded to a "pro-Trump" post on here by saying "Yea, but, you're just a Maple MAGA", while people on here HAVE responded to "anti-Trump" posts by saying "Your TDS is showing".
Click to expand...
People who say your TDS is showing also accused people of having TDS not so long ago.
 
"Derangement Syndrome" reminds of something up-thread about that. Lol emoji.

armyvern said:
I'll just sit back and watch all the regulars who claim moral superiority by blaming everything on "TDS" do their thing. The fucking irony.
Click to expand...
 
Jarnhamar said:
Pretending it’s just a “cute label” doesn’t make it any less dismissive. Both terms exist to write people off instead of dealing with what they’re saying. It’s used to lump people into a stereotype and reduce someone’s position to a caricature IMO.
Click to expand...
The issue is that the descriptor/ name "Maple Maga" fits a meaningful constituency/ voting bloc within the CPC tent. Any meaningful discussion of Canadian political dynamics needs to address the existence of the Maple Maga* camp no different than the Socon's, Red Tories, Blue Grits, Labour movement, social justice movement etc. etc.

* my loose definition - those whose political and world views are aligned with MAGA and shaped by the reactionary pro-Trump infospace rather than a set of ideals within the traditional Canadian overton window

I've also seen it used to describe the populist/reactionary bent that the CPC has taken trying to mimic the MAGA methodology and style and apply it to their own messaging, but I don't think that use is as accurate
 
IKnowNothing said:
The issue is that the descriptor/ name "Maple Maga" fits a meaningful constituency/ voting bloc within the CPC tent. Any meaningful discussion of Canadian political dynamics needs to address the existence of the Maple Maga* camp no different than the Socon's, Red Tories, Blue Grits, Labour movement, social justice movement etc. etc.

* my loose definition - those whose political and world views are aligned with MAGA and shaped by the reactionary pro-Trump infospace rather than a set of ideals within the traditional Canadian overton window

I've also seen it used to describe the populist/reactionary bent that the CPC has taken trying to mimic the MAGA methodology and style and apply it to their own messaging, but I don't think that use is as accurate
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1968935303755751725

Maple MAGA.

Very clear for all to see.
 
My view of the anti-US crowd is they are operating from a position of contradiction. For example, less trade with US and more with CCP China is viewed as a good goal because the US is being abusive, while pretending the CCP would be less so. Obama pushing for higher NATO spending (ignored) Trump achieving it (horrible).

How Canadians are characterizing the current World Series showdown between the Toronto Blue Jays and LA Dodgers is also a good contradiction. The "elbows up" crowd and some media have portrayed this as Canada vs the US. Yet the Blue Jays play in the American League of US dominated MLB, and there is only 1 x Canadian who plays on the Blue Jays while most players are American.

So here we have a certain demographic of people playing politics with a sport (or economics) they would never be a part of (80$ foreign exports) if it weren't for Americans and the USA in the first place. And prior to this we had Canadians booing US NHL teams that were mostly Canadian players.

Contradictions everywhere.
 
QV said:
My view of the anti-US crowd is they are operating from a position of contradiction. For example, less trade with US and more with CCP China is viewed as a good goal because the US is being abusive, while pretending the CCP would be less so. Obama pushing for higher NATO spending (ignored) Trump achieving it (horrible).

How Canadians are characterizing the current World Series showdown between the Toronto Blue Jays and LA Dodgers is also a good contradiction. The "elbows up" crowd and some media have portrayed this as Canada vs the US. Yet the Blue Jays play in the American League of US dominated MLB, and there is only 1 x Canadian who plays on the Blue Jays while most players are American.

So here we have a certain demographic of people playing politics with a sport (or economics) they would never be a part of (80$ foreign exports) if it weren't for Americans and the USA in the first place. And prior to this we had Canadians booing US NHL teams that were mostly Canadian players.

Contradictions everywhere.
Click to expand...
The goal is more varied trading, not just with China, but a consistent trading partner that actually adheres to international agreements is definitely better than when some geriatric toddler can have a temper tantrum and try and wipe out people's lives.

Every single country will try and maximize their benefits of any trade agreement, so not sure why anyone thinks China would be different. They have enough production to flood anyone's market, but nothing wrong with limited free trade (just like what we do with every other country on the planet outside of US and Mexico)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top