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

Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

Would it be accurate to say Poilievere was honest and said public service jobs needed to be cut, which didn't land well with his constituents whom many were public service employees.

His opponent promised caps not cuts, which was manifestly popular with the constituents?
His support for the convoy likely also cost him support.
 
So because your incorrect, preconceived notions are wrong, rather than accepting the truth, you are going to take your teddy and leave rather than continue to contribute to the electoral process that selects out government?

Absolutely rational and reasonable decision.
Yeah WTF is the truth any more? Contributing will d nothing while people are being lied to by the politicians lie to the voters and do a 180% on what they promised. Elbows up, what a croc. The government will bankrupt the country.
 
His support for the convoy likely also cost him support.
It probably cost him some support yeah.

I bet taking the honest road and telling constituents (Liberal AND Conservative) that his government would need to cut their jobs cost him more support than supporting the convoy.

Lots of similarities to Poilievre vs Carney's approach how to deal with Trump, and the ultimate outcome.
 
Yeah WTF is the truth any more? Contributing will d nothing while people are being lied to by the politicians lie to the voters and do a 180% on what they promised. Elbows up, what a croc. The government will bankrupt the country.

Best we can do is stock up on food, water, ammunition, and learn to be self sufficient.

Maybe start an underground army.ca network of buried caches around the country 😄
 
Do you believe we'd see that full 25¢ at the pump? Because I certainly didn't really see that temporary 10¢ reflected there.

Yes. It's like arguing that when the retail carbon tax ended we wouldn't see lower gas prices.

Unfortunately, global oil prices can go up faster than any gas tax cut the government can give. And the feds really only have excise and HSR they can cut anyway. Anything more requires the provinces to cooperate. Not sure how down they are with that.
 
We do know why. When you add a new bunch of people who vote for the other side to the riding it skews it. He had the riding for 20 years and then they enlarge it and see what happens? Maybe if they didn't Gerrymander things would go different.

Based on the voting in the prior election, he was still strongly favored to win it.

It was not gerrymandered. He lost to an opponent who was knocking on doors for a few years to get out in front of the voters on the riding.

People have pulled poll level data and looked at past voting. The boundaries became more favourable to him. Not less. If he had his old riding, he would have had a larger loss. By the way, this is from a commentator who is anything but a fan of the LPC:


But I get that vibes rule these days and people will tell themselves what they want. Dude is an Ottawa area MP who was vocal about supporting the convoy and seemed to relish the idea of cutting public service jobs if elected. Why is anybody surprised with the result?
 
Last edited:
Well I find the whole thing suspect and that's why I will never vote again. It is all a big scam and the Liberals will destroy the country and we will do it to ourselves by letting the government get away with corruption. Im done. Welcome to the end.
This is the very dark place where politics has been heading. The whole "stolen election" narrative and the ideas being pushed that the system itself is rigged against one side or the other could lead to a situation where a significant portion of the population doesn't believe their elected government is legitimate. That's when extremists can turn a sense of disenfranchisement into violence.

It's easy to see signs of it even on here.
  • Suggestions that the First Past the Post system isn't legitimate because you can get elected with a plurality of the votes rather than an outright majority. The current flavour of this argument is that it's rigged to support the Liberals despite the fact that the same system has in recent history resulted in just under a decade each of Conservative rule under Mulroney and then Harper. The system may not be perfect (which system is?) but it is far from rigged against one party or the other.
  • Claims of partisan "gerrymandering" of riding boundaries to tip local elections in favour of a particular party like what happens in the US even when it can be demonstrated that the redistribution system in Canada is non-partisan and makes every effort to not unfairly change the balance.
  • The current spate of floor crossings while certainly controversial are not anything new in our parliamentary system and in fact happens on a fairly regular basis. See this quite long list of floor crossers in both our Federal and Provincial parliaments. In this case however, there are some people suggesting that coercion and corruption are the only possible reasons for these floor crossings and that it somehow makes the current Liberal majority illegitimate.
  • Lastly and most importantly is the increasing characterization of those on the other side of issues being the "other" and that their actions will "destroy" the country. The highlighted portion of the quote above is one example as are the commonly trotted out terms of "Lie-berals" on one side and "Maple MAGA" on the other side.
As a Conservative voter I hated JT's breathless virtue signaling and irresponsible economic policies but I also dislike PP's slogan-driven campaign style that to my mind has the effect of trivializing complex issues. That being said, I don't ascribe evil intent to either side. Neither is intentionally setting out to try and destroy Canada but there are unfortunately a growing number of Canadians that DO believe that. Just take a look at all the F-Trudeau/F-Carney flags and bumper stickers or the number of times you hear people infer Nazi imagery when describing the Conservatives.

Canada certainly is facing a number of very serious issues, both economic and social but I challenge anyone to walk outside, look around at the country we are currently living in and honestly say "Welcome to the end". I am quite confident that the Carney Liberal government will not result in the destruction of our nation. I am equally confident that the Conservatives when they eventually form the government after the Liberals have run out of steam will not destroy the country either. In fact, I doubt that on a day to day basis the average Canadian will notice a significant difference in their lives as a result of changes in the House of Parliament compared to the impacts they experience from external Global events.

The real risk to Canada is not Carney or Poilievre, it's people being led to believe that a government led by the side that is not "theirs" is not just a government with policy differences from their own views but rather an illegitimate and evil group intent on the destruction of the country and their way of life. When that is the case it can become an excuse for extreme and violent actions. That is not a road I want to see us go down.
 
The real risk to Canada is not Carney or Poilievre, it's people being led to believe that a government led by the side that is not "theirs" is not just a government with policy differences from their own views but rather an illegitimate and evil group intent on the destruction of the country and their way of life. When that is the case it can become an excuse for extreme and violent actions. That is not a road I want to see us go down.
The risk isn't people merely believing that government "by the other side" is against them. The risk is people who win government and manifestly use it to impose cultural dominance. IOW, it isn't paranoia if they're really out to get you.

The cure is to limit the power of governments to do a lot of things. We don't have a constitution that does that.
 
Back
Top