Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

If accurate - this poll shows the Conservatives issues in a nutshell:

Spoiler!

Selecting Poilievre as a leader - they win Alberta/Saskatechwan and Manitoba by wild margins, but lose Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes.

Selecting Charest as a leader - they drop a bunch of points in the Alberta/prairie provinces (to PPC/Other) but still win comfortable but also win Ontario and the Maritimes and pass the Liberals in Quebec

The national numbers for Charest don’t add up to 100%. Seems like he might actually be a bigger winner than PP overall.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Trudeau is a dolt but he's not sticking around for another term after this one. The Liberals will force him out. His sticking around would be incredibly risky for the party, and the Liberals aren't that myopic. Chrystia Freeland or someone else will head that party and go well on the offensive before the next election (Skippy, Charest, or otherwise).

If the Liberals were smart they would hold on to Trudeau until near the election then do a quick switch to someone else. All of the Conservative anger, messaging, and energy is about Trudeau, very personally. Take that away and the tent deflates a bit.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by redforever

Do you have a link to the poll and when it was done?

https://angusreid.org/cpc-crossroads-poilievre-charest/

Just released today.. looks like polling is from July 18-20

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by edslunch

If the Liberals were smart they would hold on to Trudeau until near the election then do a quick switch to someone else. All of the Conservative anger, messaging, and energy is about Trudeau, very personally. Take that away and the tent deflates a bit.

Possibly, and likely. If Trudeau is ok with being bounced. The Liberals might have a leadership problem as well, Freeland is linked too closely to Justin, and hasn't exactly done a great job in front of the press.

If they're looking at doing a quick switch, they would probably want to look at a Mark Carney, I don't see a lot of good leadership candidates inside of the Liberal Party except for our current Minister of Defense, but somehow after a pretty high profile start, she's vanished.

I still think Justin wants another shot at a majority, and sooner rather then later.

[Azure]

Please not Freeland. She is more tone-deaf than JT.

[Locke]

Lets just haul a random individual out of the latest Freedom Convoy protest, install them as the Liberal Candidate and then let the chips fall where they may!

Some people just want to watch the world burn...

[gasman]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Trudeau is a dolt but he's not sticking around for another term after this one. The Liberals will force him out. His sticking around would be incredibly risky for the party, and the Liberals aren't that myopic. Chrystia Freeland or someone else will head that party and go well on the offensive before the next election (Skippy, Charest, or otherwise).

Imo 4 years of Freeland is probably scarier than 4 years of Trudeau.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by gasman

Imo 4 years of Freeland is probably scarier than 4 years of Trudeau.

I recommend sending this to the CPC and asking them to reconsider their policy platforms. No, I’m not being sarcastic.

[Yamer]

Stephen Harper endorses PP for leadership, because of course he does.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1551723480785121281

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by Yamer

Stephen Harper endorses PP for leadership, because of course he does.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1551723480785121281

Your dad's CPC is dead.

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by Yamer

Stephen Harper endorses PP for leadership, because of course he does.

"He is proposing answers rooted in sound conservative ideas, but ones adapted to today's realities."


Excuse me, what?

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

"He is proposing answers rooted in sound conservative ideas, but ones adapted to today's realities."


Excuse me, what?

Translation: "He makes our horse#### palatable."

Which is insane considering any conservative with taste isn't ordering anything he has on the menu.

Xenu, I hope Canadians have better sense.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

That sounds like the worst possible idea for someone who actually thinks he can win an election against Trudeau. "Hey, this guy won't stop trying to tie literally everyone who has anything to do with the CPC to Stephen Harper even a half decade on - I know, let's do a video tying me to Stephen Harper".

They really go out of their way to try to lose, don't they?

[Chingas]

Originally Posted by Azure

So to give more detail on what I assume you are talking about.

The Liberals want to cut nitrogen emissions 4% per year going forward. Not necessarily nitrogen 'usage' but emissions.

If you dig into the details, and understand how farming works, you quickly realize that fertilizer practices absolutely need to be updated. Up to 40% of nitrogen is generally not absorbed, and just runs off into the ditches and eventually into our water system.

I think JT is a moron, and the Liberals need to be kicked to the curb, but farming is going to change a lot the next 30 years. Of course the tone-deaf Liberals are going about this in the worst way possible, but Canada as a country needs to find a way to do more to protect our wetlands, water sources, etc....all of which are suffering because of the way we live, including farming methods. We also need to a find a way to support the Canadian farmer so that he can adapt to some of these problems. Basically we need smart farming where fertilizer & chemical use is extremely targeted and results in more absorption and less application.

At the same time the Feds need to invest in rehabilitating our wetlands as they help remove a lot of the phosphorous from the water before it hits our fresh water sources. Lake Winnipeg & Netley Marsh are a great example of this. The City of Winnipeg can't properly treat its sewage, plus Lake Winnipeg deals with tons of run off and accumulated water from a variety of rivers, and as a result it is in terrible shape. The Netley Marsh Rehabilitation Project has proven a way to fight back against this, but they can't get enough funding to do it on a large scale. One would think the Liberals would be all over this.

Thanks for the well thought out response. I agree with the majority of what you said. However with regards to the nitrogen in Fertilizer by saying up to 40% runs off is not accurate. It's possible in extreme cases that that may be the truth but it would not be the majority. It's true that Not 100% of what is applied each year is bio available that year, but it does not necessarily disappear or translocate through the soil. Additionally Fertilizer is expensive and it is not prudent to apply more than is necessary at any point. Most farmers in today's age are soil sampling every year to establish the appropriate amount of each portion of a Fertilizer blend that is necessary for the planned crop for that year. The soil sample gives levels of n,p,k etc at each depth and determines what portion will be available for the crop year and what portion will likely be available in the following year.

I don't like it when politicians take a blanket approach with little understanding of what it is that they are altering. With the world in a strange flux and the cost of Fertilizer more than doubling in less than a year farmers are more careful than ever about how much Fertilizer they are purchasing. I know of tens of thousands of acres that had less than necessary Fertilizer applied this year resulting in lower than the real potential yield on said acres being the likely final result. This is not Benificial to the farmer who is shouldering ridiculous cost increases nor will it be beneficial to the end consumer who will pay more for food.

[Stranger]

Farmers are already taking measures to decrease the amount of inputs on our crops. In the past 5 years we’ve started using sectional controls which decreased our inputs 5-8% on each field. This year we stated using variable rate controls on a few fields to test it out. We’ll see this harvest how it worked out.

Trust me. We are trying everything to decrease what we put in. My fertilizer bill alone this year was over $450,000. If I can redistribute how and where it’s used and cut back on that bill I will, but I definitely don’t need a politician who’s never been to a farm to come in and say cut it all by 30%. Profit margins are slim already. This could really hurt farmers at a time when the world need our grain.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

If they're looking at doing a quick switch, they would probably want to look at a Mark Carney, I don't see a lot of good leadership candidates inside of the Liberal Party except for our current Minister of Defense, but somehow after a pretty high profile start, she's vanished.

Disagree. Everyone who bought a house using a lot of leverage in the past 5 year is going to have it in for central bankers after the BoC is through with rate hikes to fight inflation as their home equity vanishes. His candidacy would be falling right into PP's 'gatekeepers' theme. There could be enough annoyed people by the time an election rolls around to shift people into PP's camp.

[PeteMoss]

I don't have an opinion on Freeland but I also highly doubt the vast majority of the voters have a strong opinion of her one way or the other.

The people who dislike her already, very likely already hate Trudeau and won't vote for the Liberals no matter who they pick.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

The people who dislike her already, very likely already hate Trudeau and won't vote for the Liberals no matter who they pick.

I don't fall into this category. I have voted for the Liberals in almost every federal election since I was 18, including in 2015, so at least once for a Trudeau-led government. I won't vote for them again while he's in office due to SNC Lavalin, but I'd be prepared to vote for the party again if it nominated the right person. Freeland is precisely the wrong person and I have a very hard time believing that I'll be willing to vote LPC with her at the head of it, broadly directing policy.

Now, she's been rumoured to be JT's successor for a long damn time so it seems likely that she has it in the bag, but you never know with these things. Not like anyone predicted Erin O'Toole before that race started.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I don't fall into this category. I have voted for the Liberals in almost every federal election since I was 18, including in 2015, so at least once for a Trudeau-led government. I won't vote for them again while he's in office due to SNC Lavalin, but I'd be prepared to vote for the party again if it nominated the right person. Freeland is precisely the wrong person.

Now, she's been rumoured to be JT's successor for a long damn time so it seems likely that she has it in the bag, but you never know with these things. Not like anyone predicted Erin O'Toole before that race started.

Why?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Why?

Literally every appearance I have seen from her in public since the Trudeau government was first elected has she been completely the opposite of what I want in a Prime Minister. Fake in all the ways Trudeau is, dishonest, ideologically motivated champagne liberal who just cannot get enough of identity politics. She's completely full of crap, and I have no reason to think she'd be any more ethical than Trudeau is given that she's perfectly capable of spewing the same type of BS with a straight face.

The fact that she would probably be more effective and competent than Trudeau, given all of that, actually accrues to her detriment, for the same reason that I don't want a more competent version of Trump in the White House.

Now, if she becomes the LPC candidate for PM, I'll see more of her in six months than I have in the ~7 years since JT took office. It's possible that given all that airtime, she'll convince me that I was wrong about all of that and should vote for the LPC candidate in my riding. I'm not completely dismissing the possibility. But she has a tougher hill to climb in that regard than a candidate coming in with a blank slate, or better yet, someone completely outside of the Trudeau circle.