2022 CPC Leadership Discussion: Et tu Redeux

[Kirkhill]

On the subject of expertise being specific

Having spent a lot of time around academics and media types I learned years ago that people can be smart, talented, and complete dunces at the same time.

Orwell captured that reality with his typical genius, explaining: “Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.”

Who knew Ken Burns is an idiot?

Having spent a lot of time around academics and media types I learned years ago that people can be smart, talented, and complete dunces at the same time. Orwell captured that reality with his typical...

hotair.com

 

[dimsum]

Photo op picture of the PM and mayor at the coffee shop here in Vancouver, generally all the comments in social media in all the local paper feeds was negative and basically saying time to go.

What was the old saying?

"Don't read the comments"

 

[Kirkhill]

What was the old saying?

"Don't read the comments"

What was the old saying?

None so blind as those who will not see?

 

[mariomike]

What was the old saying?

"Don't read the comments"

Someone once said, "Never take comments as more than the loudest minority."

 

[Eaglelord17]

Pierre Poilievre’s know-nothing populism is a dangerous delusion

Pierre Poilievre's disdain for experts may delight his supporters, but it should worry just about everyone else, writes columnist Max Fawcett.

www.nationalobserver.com

That article highlights why ‘experts’ aren’t being listened to. First of, it was very talk down to you writing style, basically saying your too ignorant to understand anything other than what is told to you in simple terms.

Second, it shows it really doesn’t understand many Canadians, especially rural Canadians and poorer Canadians. Its point about Electrical and Plumbing is a joke. Maybe in a larger city where if you can afford a home you have the money to have a tradesman come in to fix every little problem. Or if your in a apartment, the landlord sends someone. But for the poor and rural folks you do learn to fix things yourselves. If I have a plumbing issue I try to fix it myself long before I call a expert. If I have a electrical issue same thing.

The point is rural and poorer folk tend to be more independent and capable of handling a variety of issues simply because circumstances require them to be.

Many of these experts tend to be very one sided on a issue, ignoring the fact everything has multiple effects, some of which are obvious some which are more hidden.

Take Brexit being mentioned. They only mention the economic side of it, ignoring the sovereignty side of it completely. The fact that the UK can now choose its destiny and not have its own democratically elected governments laws overturned by a fairly aristocratic EU government. Thats huge. If it had just been the common market there would have been no Brexit. It was the slow transformation from a economic union into a dissolution of states which created Brexit.

The best line in there was deriding ‘Liberty and Freedom’ in favour of ‘common purpose, and shared Ideals’. Whose common purpose? Whose shared ideals? Ideals that plebs cannot hope to understand with their small uneducated brains?

For the record I am not a PP fan, but that article highlights the divide in Canada at the moment. Basically urban populations who are more collectivist because they can’t survive as individuals vs rural populations who are independent and rely on themselves to survive.

 

[Lumber]

The level and "type" of "expert" being discussed here actually encourages me. The type of experts and nature of expertise and the common people by comparison that we are talking about is far from what I was envisioning when I created my post deriding PP's twitter post about the common people vs experts that spawned the last few pages. What I was envisioning at the time was certain American politicians who are (and I mean this sincerely), actual idiots, but who were elected because they motivated their base by convincing them that they were the preferred option to someone smarter, more competent, more experienced, and more educated (and therefore less "common"). But, based on the responses so far, our appeal to the common people is of a much different sort, though I'm worried PP is shepherding us in that direction.

 

[Lumber]

At this point if a person can still put their mark beside the LPC I have to assume they are simply a loyal Liberal foot soldier. That doesn't mean they have to vote Cons but continuing to vote Liberal is just blind allegiance IMHO.

Well, I didn't vote Liberal in the last election, so I guess I wouldn't be "continuing to vote liberal", but if PP, when asked (and he will be asked) doesn't promise to keep the $10 child care program in effect, I will likely* be voting liberal (this whole Chinese election influence thing is really giving me pause). If he promises to keep it, liberals are off the the table (and CPC is on the table).

PP constantly talks about "putting money back in the pockets of Canadians", but I can't think of another government program ever that has put more money directly into the pockets of Canadians. The only reason it's not a more widely celebrated program is because it only benefits parents of infants for 3-5 years. Seriously, just look at the ANNUAL savings per child:


I'll vote with my conscience the election after next; for now, I'm voting with my wallet.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Hard to try to persuade a voter who has been bought with others' money.

 

[Lumber]

Hard to try to persuade a voter who has been bought with others' money.

I do believe I left an asterisk and an footnote on the word "likely". I'm not heartless.

 

[brihard]

Hard to try to persuade a voter who has been bought with others' money.

The universal daycare policy also makes very good economic sense- the prohibitive cost of childcare keeps a lot of people out of the workforce, particularly women who bear a grossly unfair burden of unpaid hike-rearing labour. That’s an opinion I’ve held for quite some time, well before I was expecting/planning to start a family, or there was anything in it for me.

 

[RangerRay]

While we're at it .... the impact of one angry person - Georgia.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1633240231766904835

Grandma Wong, Hong Kong.

I love her.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Lots of different groups can get behind the childcare for lots of different reasons. The left is behind it because they love the cradle to grave state care. Some right groups get behind it due to anti-immigration (i.e. higher birthrate = less requirement for immigration). Feminists get behind it due to giving primarily women the option of staying at home or working.

 

[Good2Golf]

That article highlights why ‘experts’ aren’t being listened to. First of, it was very talk down to you writing style, basically saying your too ignorant to understand anything other than what is told to you in simple terms.

Second, it shows it really doesn’t understand many Canadians, especially rural Canadians and poorer Canadians. Its point about Electrical and Plumbing is a joke. Maybe in a larger city where if you can afford a home you have the money to have a tradesman come in to fix every little problem. Or if your in a apartment, the landlord sends someone. But for the poor and rural folks you do learn to fix things yourselves. If I have a plumbing issue I try to fix it myself long before I call a expert. If I have a electrical issue same thing.

The point is rural and poorer folk tend to be more independent and capable of handling a variety of issues simply because circumstances require them to be.

Many of these experts tend to be very one sided on a issue, ignoring the fact everything has multiple effects, some of which are obvious some which are more hidden.

Take Brexit being mentioned. They only mention the economic side of it, ignoring the sovereignty side of it completely. The fact that the UK can now choose its destiny and not have its own democratically elected governments laws overturned by a fairly aristocratic EU government. Thats huge. If it had just been the common market there would have been no Brexit. It was the slow transformation from a economic union into a dissolution of states which created Brexit.

The best line in there was deriding ‘Liberty and Freedom’ in favour of ‘common purpose, and shared Ideals’. Whose common purpose? Whose shared ideals? Ideals that plebs cannot hope to understand with their small uneducated brains?

For the record I am not a PP fan, but that article highlights the divide in Canada at the moment. Basically urban populations who are more collectivist because they can’t survive as individuals vs rural populations who are independent and rely on themselves to survive.

Some people are going as far as to demonize people who don’t want to, or aren’t able to live in the future Shanghai La of “15-Minute” Cities…

 

[FSTO]

I'll vote with my conscience the election after next; for now, I'm voting with my wallet.

I don’t know if I asked you this before, but is it any easier to get child care now that it’s heavily subsidized? I’ve heard for years that just getting enough child care workers was a major issue causing the high prices.

 

[TacticalTea]

The universal daycare policy also makes very good economic sense- the prohibitive cost of childcare keeps a lot of people out of the workforce, particularly women who bear a grossly unfair burden of unpaid hike-rearing labour. That’s an opinion I’ve held for quite some time, well before I was expecting/planning to start a family, or there was anything in it for me.

Sure.

But what does the FEDERAL government have to do with it? Take it up with your province, I say.

---

@Halifax Tar We usually agree on a lot of things, so I'm curious as to how you don't see the equivalence in Trump/Russia and Trudeau/China. Even if Dems did play up the collusion aspect, it remains that Trump and his campaign knew, under-rugged it (it's a word now, deal with it) and criminally obstructed investigations. I won't blame the Democrats for stirring and spicying up that pot: if team Trump wanted fairness, they should've offered transparency.

Same goes for team Trudeau. I had not entirely ruled out voting Liberal until this week, but that seals the deal. I consider both have acted treasonously and are wholly unfit for public service, and so is any Liberal who runs under the same banner if Trudeau is still their leader come next election.

---

PS: Not to beat a dead horse, but I must echo @QV's sentiment. No tangible evidence has been put forth to prove that Christine Anderson is a seriously toxic person. PP's declaration is that of a politician managing a PR crisis. It does not directly relate to Mrs CA. I did follow the advice provided in this thread and conduct a google search, all it returned were articles about the current ''scandal''. I even attempted an advanced search by eliminating recent results and found no such evidence. She says a lot of stuff I disagree with. As far as I can tell, nothing that should make her persona non grata in Canada.

I accept the notion that Canadians will buy into the media's messaging and think ''Wow, Tory MPs are unelectable because they meet with the German far-right!'', and thus that PP feels the need to do something. But I do not accept that that stance is valid. In fact, I think @Lumber himself explained very well several pages back why it is important to engage with people of all stripes, even those you may vehemently disagree with.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The universal daycare policy also makes very good economic sense- the prohibitive cost of childcare keeps a lot of people out of the workforce, particularly women who bear a grossly unfair burden of unpaid hike-rearing labour. That’s an opinion I’ve held for quite some time, well before I was expecting/planning to start a family, or there was anything in it for me.

Optimizing economic situations for a few persons isn't really something we need government to do, particularly at the federal level. But if we're going to subsidize childcare, make it a per-child grant given directly to the parents to dispose of as they please. Stop discriminating against non-working parents and in favour of working parents and pretending it's either some sort of moral high ground or some sort of economic advantage - it's neither; it's just favouring another constituency.

 

[Brad Sallows]

At least we don't have what the Americans had: a campaign that launched an information operation, approved by the candidate, to tie the other candidate to foreign interference, which a reasonable person would have known would (and did) necessarily entail at some point working/colluding/conspiring with one or more foreign nationals, thus becoming in fact the myth it was trying to create.

 

[IKnowNothing]

You realize this is Canadian political thread right ?

Yes. Well sort of. It's the Canadian CPC leadership thread, which got derailed from discussing the Canadian Conservative leader to foreign interference in elections. Combine the two, and the prevailing attitudes of Canadian Conservatives regarding election interference becomes quite germane to the conversation.

I have no idea what you're on about, I can barely read that.

My bad, i get lazy with formatting on desktop, forgetting that mobile ignores list spacing if its not properly bulleted. Its a list of the common elements between Trudeau/China and Trump/Russia.

You've lost me.

I was asking you to invert the partisanship in the lines I bolded in your post (the first and last) - to consider China-gate somewhat vapid, and that anyone that can(in 2020) vote Republican is a party before country person. I'm asking for some critical thinking surrounding partisan biases, because regardless if written from the right or left lens it's a fundamentally contradictory couplet.

Personally, I think that neither Trump nor Trudeau should be/have been able to remain in office, should be/have been rendered completely unelectable in the eyes of both the political establishment and the citizenry, and a big ole broom should make an appearance to sweep out the remaining lower level Russian/Chinese assets in North American elected representation.

Now, there are those that might consider foreign interference a vapid issue, or resign themselves to the opinion that "Foreign governments interfere or try to all the time. That is a known" and as such be willing to overlook prospective leaders being both friendly to and pushed on us by Russia/China. I disagree with that view, but I can understand the perspective where the "why" doesn't matter, only the "what" when it comes to policy objectives ie "I don't care that they're the next thing to a Russian/Chinese asset, I want to go where they're leading." But people with that approach should be consistent in it.

Now the real opportunity to build bridges is to acknowledge that people on both sides of the line believe in their respective versions of that contradictory couplet. That it's okay when their guy does it but the other is a threat to democracy. How does that happen?

Media silo's polluted by both foreign and domestic partisan disinformation convincing us that our guy is more innocent than he is and the other is more guilty?

Stark divisions fanning the flames and convincing us that its ok for our guy, because the other guy is going to be so bad for the country that winning is more important than anything?

The important thing is that for anyone on either side of that inconsistent fence is to understand that it's inconsistent, how they got there, and understand that the guy they disagree with got there the exact same way.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The universal daycare policy also makes very good economic sense- the prohibitive cost of childcare keeps a lot of people out of the workforce, particularly women who bear a grossly unfair burden of unpaid hike-rearing labour. That’s an opinion I’ve held for quite some time, well before I was expecting/planning to start a family, or there was anything in it for me.

Universal daycare is dependent on having a workforce that will do it for peanuts. My daughter was looking at Early Childhood education and has surmised that it's not worth it and it's a deadend job. So she is going towards being a elementary school teacher or something else.

 

[Lumber]

Universal daycare is dependent on having a workforce that will do it for peanuts. My daughter was looking at Early Childhood education and has surmised that it's not worth it and it's a deadend job. So she is going towards being a elementary school teacher or something else.

I had this exact same thought. The daily rate per child that the public daycares can charged is capped at $40 something dollars per child per day (with the Feds/Provinces covering up to 75% of that). Each ECE is legally limited in the number of children that they can simultaneously look after; I think it's 7 toddlers, or 9 school age children, or 3 infants. So, you can do the math; the most a single ECE can bring in is ~$300, or ~$78k/year. Remove from that the portion that goes to all the overhead in running the day care (rent, utilities, food, toys, salaries of non-child caring staff), and I cannot imagine how little money is left for people who volunteer to look after a half dozen toddlers all day. Shoot me.