-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Canada PoliERA |OT| Two Years of Sunny Days? That’s Scheer Madness!
- Thread starter Caz
- Start date
- Status
Um.... wow, things are looking *dire*.
And I'm not saying these because of the Polls, but as a university student pretty much no one seems to like Trudeau. People at my age group fall in three categories:
a) Leftist that believes Trudeau is shallow and lied his way to victory, not doing enough etc.
b) Reactionary right-wingers who believe Trudeau is an SJW cuck
c) People not politically inclined one way or the other (most of these are centrists) but are falling hook, line and sinker for the Liberal smear campaign
And the thing is I can't even blame those who voted for him but are severely disappointed with him, I can relate- yet at the same time I don't want him to lose the election either because I fear the alternative.
I think we can all agree that Trudeau should not fly overseas anymore for the remainder of his term, LOL
On the subject of foreign entities, i'm curious to see how the G7 summit will play out in terms of affecting the next election given what happened last time in Canada and that this will be 45's first time on Canadian soil as POTUS.
That and to find out where the closest local (organized) protest for the bigoted orange will be.
That and to find out where the closest local (organized) protest for the bigoted orange will be.
Trudeau doomed us to conservatives winning again when he decided not to change the election system. It was his biggest fuck up, and still pisses me off as this was the golden opportunity to make our system better.
I will likely now be forced to vote liberal to try and fend off the conservative party, but I am expecting enough to be pissed off and not bother, or split to NDP for the next government to be back to Conservatives.
I will likely now be forced to vote liberal to try and fend off the conservative party, but I am expecting enough to be pissed off and not bother, or split to NDP for the next government to be back to Conservatives.
I still find strategic voting a terrible compromise, but I also know that voting your conscience is basically useless in our system so you're kind of screwed either way.
Quebec Chapter of Antifa will be there, the Black-block will be there.
I find that rioting, vandalizing and looting to be counter-productive.
I side with the police any time anarchists show up to cause trouble.
Yep, I voted Liberal based on the promise of electoral reform and then he pissed all over everyone like me. This could have been a game-changer for Canada and the Liberals and then he fucked it up.
I honestly don't want to vote for anyone on the next go-round of this roller coaster, but like you, I'll probably end up voting Liberal again in a vain attempt to prevent the conservatives from winning. Who knows, maybe in the future I'll end up voting Conservative if it isn't a dumbass like Scheer.
Two good pieces of analysis came out yesterday about Singh's leadership of the NDP in the wake of...whatever it was that happened with Christopherson. First, from the Star:
The fundraising numbers for the NDP in the last quarter of 2017 weren't great (only a few thousand more than Mulcair had managed the year before, which, considering the circumstances, is pretty dire), so the first quarter numbers for 2018, which come out in a few weeks, suddenly have much more meaning to them.
The even more interesting analysis is from Paul Wells in Macleans:
I don't think the NDP would be insane enough to turf Singh after six months. But if Wells is writing about it, that means he's hearing rumblings around Ottawa, which means that it's a lot more realistic a scenario than I would've thought possible.
The fundraising numbers for the NDP in the last quarter of 2017 weren't great (only a few thousand more than Mulcair had managed the year before, which, considering the circumstances, is pretty dire), so the first quarter numbers for 2018, which come out in a few weeks, suddenly have much more meaning to them.
The even more interesting analysis is from Paul Wells in Macleans:
I don't think the NDP would be insane enough to turf Singh after six months. But if Wells is writing about it, that means he's hearing rumblings around Ottawa, which means that it's a lot more realistic a scenario than I would've thought possible.
That's fine. So long as they leave metal concerts alone, for once.
There was a Vice documentary or news segment about people who make campaign ads and I had to laugh when I watched this because it's immediately clear that either that American company made this ad or whoever did it ripped off the formula. Even the drive through the neighbourhood while talking into a camera thing.
It's like the way to make someone seem authentic is to go full verite, and I guess it works or people wouldn't keep doing it. lol
Hubris is the natural state of the federal Liberals. Natural Governing Party and all that.
But I didn't expect them to have this much until after they won a re-election campaign so I shouldn't be one to talk. I'm naive.
Some hot takes on BC government out of Calgary
Braid: For B.C. government, being awful isn't even the worst of it
Spicy. Maybe Alberta can make up for their losses by exporting salt instead of oil?
Braid: For B.C. government, being awful isn't even the worst of it
Spicy. Maybe Alberta can make up for their losses by exporting salt instead of oil?
What did the NDP do during that stupid shit show anyway? lol
This is a bit off topic as it has nothing to do with politics but has anyone seen this piece on the National?
All I have to say is...
And the funny thing is I know many people who fit those buckets the researcher talks about. Argh!
People bitch about taxes for no reason but they won't do anything to mitigate other costs of living...
All I have to say is...
And the funny thing is I know many people who fit those buckets the researcher talks about. Argh!
People bitch about taxes for no reason but they won't do anything to mitigate other costs of living...
I kept watching this video just WAITING for them to mention throttling or that the smaller competitors are reliant on the big companies' lines and.. not even once.
The NDP getting rid of Mulcair was an emotional response first and foremost in my humble opinion. His crime being that "he blew it". After the NDP gains in the 2008 elections, NDP support was fairly high and polls showed at some point a NDP government was more and more likely. Then came the campaign with Mulcair stumbling in QC and the rising appeal of charismatic Justin Trudeau. What was supposed to the first NDP victory turned into a pretty severe vindication against their leader.
Mathematically it's very difficult to imagine Singh doing any better if we read the current and past political climate and polls. If we still suppose the NDP's best chance is to score big in QC again, it doesn't seem very likely. Layton's biggest wins in the 2008 elections were against the Bloc (+45) seats and the Liberals (+17) seats. In Quebec Layton got 59 seats and Ignatieff 7. In the 2015 election Mulcair lost 51 seats to the Libs and 7 to the Bloc. In QC the NDP now had 16 (-43) and the Libs 40 (+33).
Currently the Liberals enjoy a huge >40% support according to polls in QC which is only second to the Atlantic Provinces. If we consider the province ever known dislike for religion and cultural accommodation it paints a not so encouraging picture for the NDP. On Rad Can's Les Coulisses Du Pouvoir the pundits invited openly said that many of the current QC MP are absolutely terrified to go into the next campaign with Singh as their leader. The recent Sikh demonstration and Christopherson controversies seem to imply that knives are already starting being sharpened behind the scenes which is not really reassuring.
Booting Singh is probably not the best solution both before or after the election. A turnover in such a short amount of time implies the party is not really serious or good at picking someone that they want to be PM. Moreover, the pool of potential candidate is becoming really shallow, especially during periods the party isn't doing so well. The previous race where Singh was crowned wasn't enthralling to say the least. The better question is probably to start thinking as a whole what the party wants to do and achieve. If they surely want a shot a forming the government then they probably need to start picking better candidate as their leader with a lot of political experience at a federal level, a good command of both official language and someone not carrying a closet filled with skeletons. If they want to act as a counter power and force the government's hand on certain topics and shove them in a corner when they make a poor decision then they will need a good opposition leader with a passion for parliamentary work and a good speaker to make headlines and sound bites.
Mathematically it's very difficult to imagine Singh doing any better if we read the current and past political climate and polls. If we still suppose the NDP's best chance is to score big in QC again, it doesn't seem very likely. Layton's biggest wins in the 2008 elections were against the Bloc (+45) seats and the Liberals (+17) seats. In Quebec Layton got 59 seats and Ignatieff 7. In the 2015 election Mulcair lost 51 seats to the Libs and 7 to the Bloc. In QC the NDP now had 16 (-43) and the Libs 40 (+33).
Currently the Liberals enjoy a huge >40% support according to polls in QC which is only second to the Atlantic Provinces. If we consider the province ever known dislike for religion and cultural accommodation it paints a not so encouraging picture for the NDP. On Rad Can's Les Coulisses Du Pouvoir the pundits invited openly said that many of the current QC MP are absolutely terrified to go into the next campaign with Singh as their leader. The recent Sikh demonstration and Christopherson controversies seem to imply that knives are already starting being sharpened behind the scenes which is not really reassuring.
Booting Singh is probably not the best solution both before or after the election. A turnover in such a short amount of time implies the party is not really serious or good at picking someone that they want to be PM. Moreover, the pool of potential candidate is becoming really shallow, especially during periods the party isn't doing so well. The previous race where Singh was crowned wasn't enthralling to say the least. The better question is probably to start thinking as a whole what the party wants to do and achieve. If they surely want a shot a forming the government then they probably need to start picking better candidate as their leader with a lot of political experience at a federal level, a good command of both official language and someone not carrying a closet filled with skeletons. If they want to act as a counter power and force the government's hand on certain topics and shove them in a corner when they make a poor decision then they will need a good opposition leader with a passion for parliamentary work and a good speaker to make headlines and sound bites.
https://www.mnsi.net/bigmap
Anyway, the Ontario budget it out.
Liberals' $11B pledge for high speed rail highlights long list of major infrastructure promises
There's also a bunch of money for building and renovating schools and hospitals and transit for Toronto or whatever.
Anyway, the Ontario budget it out.
Liberals' $11B pledge for high speed rail highlights long list of major infrastructure promises
There's also a bunch of money for building and renovating schools and hospitals and transit for Toronto or whatever.
Good analysis.
Just a heads up though, the Orange Wave was 2011, not 2008.
Mulcair was a fake Social-Democrat. The NDP is better off without him.
hahaha the Governor's sign is larger than the Premier's
Mulcair got booted because the only reason he was given the leadership job in the first place was:
1) Hold gains in Quebec
2) Win
As good of a parliamentarian as he is, he accomplished neither.
It may have been a rash decision to boot him out of the leadership job, but I understand why NDP delegates did it. People were extremely mad at their once in a generation chance of winning government being mishandled.
Everything about how NDP members have behaved since Mulcair got booted suggests that they no longer see QC as the path to victory. Sorry QC NDP MPs, but at this point QC is a write off. It may not be a path to victory, but the path to growth in the party is through major urban centres such as Vancouver and Toronto. Don't forget that in the last election the NDP were not only wiped out in Atlantic Canada, but in the GTA as well. Jack Layton pivoted the NDP into being an urban progressive party and for that party to be kept out of the GTA is untenable. That NDP members chose Singh over Angus shows how important it is to them to get back those urban seats.
On the topic of Singh and the recent coup speculation, Singh has backed off punishing Christopherson, and Angus has poured cold water over the idea that knives are being sharpened.
But that's the problem. The NDP don't really have a path to victory if they don't get at least a good chunk of either Ontario or Quebec. They can't even aim for official opposition with their best chances in the GTA and BC.
If they've written off Quebec, what else do they have to offer for growth?
The Liberals bit into their seats in Vancouver, and they have zero in the GTA, Ottawa and Atlantic Canada, so there are many places and urban centres to make gains.
Obviously the party would still want to win seats in Quebec. What I mean is that the path to victory that hinges on the NDP improving on Layton's Orange Wave no longer seems viable. Ideally they keep at least some seats in Quebec, but make significant gains in other urban centres in Canada where they should have won, but they under performed under Mulcair.
Nothing. One of them complained about a Liberal MP's tie being loosened, and that was it. At one point a reporter noted that they'd voted with the Government on every vote, and one of their staffers said on Twitter that wouldn't always be the case, but I don't know if they actually followed through on that. Like Wells said, it was a really powerful bonding experience for the Liberals, and the Conservatives seem to be happy about it, but it seems to have given at least a portion of NDP MPs reason to reflect on their current leadership and find it wanting.
I don't think they could've kept Mulcair after the last election, but at the same time, it's not like a new leader improves their standing by all that much. They were probably going to lose all or most of their Quebec seats no matter who won, and -- outside of Ipsos' polling -- they've basically remained flat, with drops in their numbers in every by-election. Singh might yet be a good campaigner, but he's definitely not about to single-handedly save the party from the hole they're in.
the NDP could save a few seats due to the Bloc implosion
The Atlantic Red Out was pretty telling on the NDPs limits
NDP are gonna return being a Western party again with a few seats in Ontario.
The Atlantic Red Out was pretty telling on the NDPs limits
Andrew Scheer white knighting for Lisa Raitt is hilarious. Trudeau's retort was perfect.
That said; if I was one of the cavemen Bill Morneau referred to I'm sure I'd be mighty impressed by strong party leader Andy S.
On the other hand, the conservatives readily accepting that they identify with the idea of being Neanderthals opposed to the Liberals is enjoyable. "We will drag along the Neanderthals who don't agree with that and that will be our continuing approach." "Conservative" isn't mentioned but Scheer immediately claims it was a direct attack on Raitt worthy of an apology.
That said; if I was one of the cavemen Bill Morneau referred to I'm sure I'd be mighty impressed by strong party leader Andy S.
On the other hand, the conservatives readily accepting that they identify with the idea of being Neanderthals opposed to the Liberals is enjoyable. "We will drag along the Neanderthals who don't agree with that and that will be our continuing approach." "Conservative" isn't mentioned but Scheer immediately claims it was a direct attack on Raitt worthy of an apology.
Last edited:
The Justice Minister is terrible. Liberals promised to end victim fine surcharges and reform mandatory minimum sentences, and yet another round of justice system reforms announced with no movement there.
Increasing the maximum sentence for a lot of summary convictions seems to me like the sort of thing you'd find in a "tough on crime" CPC bill.
I guess at least the victim surcharge and zombie law bills that are stalled in Parliament is being incorporated into this one.
After the collapse in Quebec despite trying to pander to Quebec identity politics and nationalism there is no path for the NDP. Even the unions have given up on the party.
I would rather they spend billions on Indigenous languages, because those are the languages that actually need help.
Yeah pretty much. There are indigenous languages that are on the verge of extinction, and this fact is directly the fault of the federal government, but no lets give money to Anglos in Montreal for reasons.
Seriously? You're opposed to people being allowed to access government services in both official languages? Personally, if I were a francophone living in BC or an anglophone in Quebec (or just living in New Brunswick, period), I'd be happy to know the government was serving me, but if you want to call funding official bilingualism "pork"...knock yourself out, I guess.
Anglos in Quebec (and Allophones) are part of the Liberal base that kept that party alive in that Province during the dark ages of 2011.
(Federal) Liberals owe the Anglos in Quebec
unless you want Conservatives taking over ridings in the Western half of Montreal
Last edited:
I had to ask someone a question and then realized they were in lockup so I didn't get a reply for hours lol
This is kind of surreal.
Boasting about being hard on the rich, at a fundraiser costing 1500 per ticket if your are above 35 and half price otherwise where one of the speaker is Stephen Bronfman one of the rich folks mentioned in the Paradise Paper Leaks. Boasting about their media friends which they pushed in an adjacent room and prevented to ask any questions to the PM.
Boasting about being hard on the rich, at a fundraiser costing 1500 per ticket if your are above 35 and half price otherwise where one of the speaker is Stephen Bronfman one of the rich folks mentioned in the Paradise Paper Leaks. Boasting about their media friends which they pushed in an adjacent room and prevented to ask any questions to the PM.
Lmao where did I say I was against bilingualism? It's pork because it's non-essential cash specifically for special interests focused in areas of interest to the Liberal Party. Eg. $5-million development fund for arts and heritage, $14.5 million in relief for community media etc.
Hey I love the arts too, but as firehawk12 said, in an environment when we have indigenous languages that are going extinct, it is extremely misplaced priorities to be directing valuable funds toward language programs for Anglos in Quebec.
I mean, stuff like this is why I am so cynical about politics and have no faith in modern democracy. It's also why I think protest parties can't survive, because either they end up being a part of the machine soliciting money from these same people, or they are doomed to be irrelevant.
Yeah, if this was about Canadian identity, I think we should put each and every single Indigenous Canadian language into the charter as an official language and demand that all public servants be able to serve Indigenous Canadians in their local tongue.
But I mean, this isn't really about language or helping people who have been traditionally marginalized by old language laws and destructive policies that encouraged cultural genocide. :p
It's not a good look when the that's the reason for the fundraiser. Though i'm cynical of all political fundraisers.
Sign that Parliament's break came at the right time/that the Conservatives are desperate to be outraged for the sake of being outraged: yesterday in Question Period, a Conservative MP (Gerard Deltell) worked himself into a lather over Radio-Canada no longer playing O Canada every morning at 5 am, because of the switch some years ago to a 24-hour broadcast day. When that's the kind of thing you can get livid about, you may need to take a step back for a moment to just settle down and take a deep breath.
Enh, I give $1,500 a year to the Liberals, and I'm decidedly not rich. I just realize that if we want a functioning democracy, parties need money -- which is pretty difficult when the limit is $1,500. I don't think the limit should be higher or anything, but the way party donors get demonized over such a relatively small amount of money is nonsensical.
As for Bronfman...I know that "Paradise Papers" has taken on some totemic significance, but that doesn't actually mean anything other than that he was a client of a legal company. Having someone like Bronfman associated with a fundraiser isn't mutually exclusive from the fact the Liberals have invested $1 billion in CRA for crsckicr down on tax avoidance.
You posted a story about a $500 million investment in official languages and called it "pork". Yes, 1% of that investment is going towards English-language groups in Quebec. There's also $20 million for child care for linguistic minorities across the country. Is that "pork" too? Why not broaden it out a little? The last budget had $19 million for mental health supports for Black Canadians. Is that pork? How about the $90 million in last year's budget for indigenous languages? Aside from it being exactly what you were just asking about, that seems like it should be under your definition of pork too, since it's money going towards one specific group?
Or maybe, Canada is a big country with lots of different minority populations spread out everywhere, and the government has to spend money to help them out. If you're going to classify all of that as "pork", again, you go right ahead, but I'm going to give you the side-eye and suspect that you're being more than a little disingenuous.
Enh, I give $1,500 a year to the Liberals, and I'm decidedly not rich. I just realize that if we want a functioning democracy, parties need money -- which is pretty difficult when the limit is $1,500. I don't think the limit should be higher or anything, but the way party donors get demonized over such a relatively small amount of money is nonsensical.
As for Bronfman...I know that "Paradise Papers" has taken on some totemic significance, but that doesn't actually mean anything other than that he was a client of a legal company. Having someone like Bronfman associated with a fundraiser isn't mutually exclusive from the fact the Liberals have invested $1 billion in CRA for crsckicr down on tax avoidance.
You posted a story about a $500 million investment in official languages and called it "pork". Yes, 1% of that investment is going towards English-language groups in Quebec. There's also $20 million for child care for linguistic minorities across the country. Is that "pork" too? Why not broaden it out a little? The last budget had $19 million for mental health supports for Black Canadians. Is that pork? How about the $90 million in last year's budget for indigenous languages? Aside from it being exactly what you were just asking about, that seems like it should be under your definition of pork too, since it's money going towards one specific group?
Or maybe, Canada is a big country with lots of different minority populations spread out everywhere, and the government has to spend money to help them out. If you're going to classify all of that as "pork", again, you go right ahead, but I'm going to give you the side-eye and suspect that you're being more than a little disingenuous.
Stockwell Day paying lip service to Trump's political savvy on PnP after his visit to Mar-a-lago...not even sure how to describe how I feel after listening to that lol. On another note, Vassy has really hit the ground running as the new host. She has been impressive so far for sure.
That's exactly my problem with it. It's perfectly legal to move your assets through a shadow company in a country with low taxes to save money. For instance Couche-Tard the gas station/convenience store in QC (owning stores in the US and Canada too) has a CEO that is extremely opposed to workers' right even closing stores trying to unionize. He's whining all the time about minimum wages hike and already he's boasted about closing stores in ON. He keeps talking about trying to destroy the economy while the paradise paper leaks actively showed he was busy trying to buy in in a fiscal haven. When confronted and asked about if he succeeded he then refused to answer (so the answer is yes obviously). So the problem is twofold for me. Even if you had billions dollars in investment in the CRA it will not solve the issue as it's completely legal and since everyone is doing it companies "has to do it" to remain competitive. The second one is that virtue signaling everyone your are doing the best for the economy and adopting a tough attitude against tax evasion when one of your bagman is actively doing tax evasion is basically hypocrisy and a smokescreen.
You are probably confusing me with somebody else. I don't remember posting that and if I did it was probably not what I referenced in an article because I don't believe this at all.
- Status