Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Short term gain for what is quickly becoming long term irrelevancy.

Let's not fabricate a narrative that doesn't exist.

CPC was likely a US election outcome away from a supermajority, and still got 41.3% of the vote, the highest any government including the Chretien governments has had, since Mulroney. In all instances this would have lead to a majority, except this year where Carney / Liberals got 43% of the vote in an unprecedented election.

I still maintain that had Poilievre immediately reacted properly the way that Doug Ford did and read the room correctly, CPC would have likely won, even with Carney's surge in popularity. He didn't, and with the combination of Liberals pivoted quickly, they reaped the dividends with what is now going to turn into a majority government shortly.


Now Poilievre is doing his best effort to make them irrelevant as fast as he could, but that's because they like punching themselves for no good reason.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/arti...conservatives/

And now he's lost his marbles and claiming Liberals are counterfeit conservatives.

We are effectively being run by a PC like party at the moment.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

What's destroying the CPC now is there is seemingly no appetite in the current CPC base for a 'Red Tory' approach, either in terms of a leader or policy... which is basically Carney's approach (although I guess 'blue Grit' is technically the term). But pretty broadly across the electorate, Canadians seem to have to have one.

No, Fuzz, I don't care whether you respect him, read what I wrote again. My critique was of your claim that 'he is not aware on this subject, or perhaps anything else.' Since the Scheer era, MacKay has been one of the only senior Conservatives willing to say out loud what was dragging the party down. Your personal dislike is your business, I'm saying don't let it kneecap your objectivity when the guy actually shows some clarity about how broken the party has become, because it makes you look like you're blinded by it.

Fair enough, and I'm not really aware of his previous commentary on the CPC issues. I was dismissing him because I find him dismissable for his character, not that the point he may have made was accurate or not. Fortunately his opinion on these sorts of things is kind of irrelevant, but we will get to see if he was right or not soon enough.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Silliness. First off, I don't just excuse lying because it led to an outcome, good or bad. He's a lying liar who deserves no respect. If his conviction was that it was required, campaign on that and be judged. Don't vow to protect something and then toss it in the trash wen you win. That's the move of a feckless ####.

So I take it based on this commenting you have forever vilified Trudeau and never voted Liberal since 2015 because he's a lying liar who betrayed his platform promise on electoral reform?

You don't have the same vigor in much more egregious cases with much bigger repercussions as you do here with MacKay.

Have you ever voted for the PC party before and felt personally betrayed by him?

If you have a personal angle in your sheer hatred, sure I could understand, but that's not the feeling I am seeing here.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

So Conservative Canadians had their political home hijacked. Is this what success looks like?

Well we have Carney's Liberals now. He's out PC'ing the CPC and Poilievre is mad, and PCers are finding a new home now that Liberals woke up so to speak.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Firebot

So I take it based on this commenting you have forever vilified Trudeau and never voted Liberal since 2015 because he's a lying liar who betrayed his platform promise on electoral reform?

You don't have the same vigor in much more egregious cases with much bigger repercussions as you do here with MacKay.

Have you ever voted for the PC party before and felt personally betrayed by him?

If you have a personal angle in your sheer hatred, sure I could understand, but that's not the feeling I am seeing here.

I did, I voted for the Federal PC's more than once. I voted for them in 1997 and 2000. I've voted for the Alberta Conservatives as well. Now the only option I have are on the left of the spectrum(or central, depending...) because of these mergers. I know I am not alone in this.


I didn't vote for Trudeau because of the electoral reform(it may have been a factor, but the reality is there were many reasons I voted Liberal in that election and ER was down the list), but the reality is he didn't turn his back on it immediately after the election. There was a commission and recommendations, or something along those lines. You can argue whether what he did or did not do was in good faith and that his pre-election promises were also good faith, but you can't argue he did exactly the opposite.


I'm sorry that I just have to defer to nuance and differences in the situation, but I feel that what Peter did was unforgivable(shaking a persons hand with a promise for the purpose of securing leadership votes). I don't feel the same about election promises not being followed through on. It's a pretty common thing political parties do. Electoral reform was always going to be a long shot, so I never really believed they were going to do it anyway, and I didn't think he should have promised something he couldn't deliver.

[Firebot]

That's fair and thanks for your candidness.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I did, I voted for the Federal PC's more than once. I voted for them in 1997 and 2000. I've voted for the Alberta Conservatives as well. Now the only option I have are on the left of the spectrum(or central, depending...) because of these mergers. I know I am not alone in this.


I didn't vote for Trudeau because of the electoral reform(it may have been a factor, but the reality is there were many reasons I voted Liberal in that election and ER was down the list), but the reality is he didn't turn his back on it immediately after the election. There was a commission and recommendations, or something along those lines. You can argue whether what he did or did not do was in good faith and that his pre-election promises were also good faith, but you can't argue he did exactly the opposite.


I'm sorry that I just have to defer to nuance and differences in the situation, but I feel that what Peter did was unforgivable(shaking a persons hand with a promise for the purpose of securing leadership votes). I don't feel the same about election promises not being followed through on. It's a pretty common thing political parties do. Electoral reform was always going to be a long shot, so I never really believed they were going to do it anyway, and I didn't think he should have promised something he couldn't deliver.

Specific to electoral reform, both parties have been breaking that promise for 100+ years. This link also shows how the committee that Trudeau kicked off pretty much said we should move to some form of proportional representation and the take away that the Liberals had was to look at ranked ballots. (yuck)

https://www.fairvote.ca/100-years-of-broken-promises/

The Liberals and Conservatives both want to keep FPTP as it is the best way to keep our multi-party government as close to a 2 party system as possible.

[Johnny Makarov]

Just watched Power and Politics from yesterday.

Cochrane has said he has heard from some conservatives there are at least 2 more floor crossers but they won't do it until after Polyester's leadership review! hahahahaa

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I did, I voted for the Federal PC's more than once. I voted for them in 1997 and 2000. I've voted for the Alberta Conservatives as well. Now the only option I have are on the left of the spectrum(or central, depending...) because of these mergers. I know I am not alone in this.


I didn't vote for Trudeau because of the electoral reform(it may have been a factor, but the reality is there were many reasons I voted Liberal in that election and ER was down the list), but the reality is he didn't turn his back on it immediately after the election. There was a commission and recommendations, or something along those lines. You can argue whether what he did or did not do was in good faith and that his pre-election promises were also good faith, but you can't argue he did exactly the opposite.


I'm sorry that I just have to defer to nuance and differences in the situation, but I feel that what Peter did was unforgivable(shaking a persons hand with a promise for the purpose of securing leadership votes). I don't feel the same about election promises not being followed through on. It's a pretty common thing political parties do. Electoral reform was always going to be a long shot, so I never really believed they were going to do it anyway, and I didn't think he should have promised something he couldn't deliver.

Fascist!

[Firebot]

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/video/9.7017906

Um.... why are 6 MPs in Israel trying to enter the West Bank in what is a largely tense situation with potential security issues?

Unless they are caucus members speaking on official business on behalf of the government or diplomats, this is very ill advised.

[Fuzz]

Probably to be official voices and witness what Israel is doing there? You know, the illegal and continuous theft of land, attacks on civilians, removing people from their homes and land. The basics. Of course Israel is doing everything in their power to prevent it.

Why not flip thew question, why is Israel controlling the entry of politicians into a territory that is not theirs? What right by law do they have to do that? What are they trying to hide?

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Firebot

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/video/9.7017906

Um.... why are 6 MPs in Israel trying to enter the West Bank in what is a largely tense situation with potential security issues?

Unless they are caucus members speaking on official business on behalf of the government or diplomats, this is very ill advised.

Why? 5 MPs visited the West Bank in early 2024 without issue. And it sounds this delegation had already had all of Electronic Travel Authorizations approved ahead of time and the government of Canada informed Israel that government officials would be travelling there.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Why? 5 MPs visited the West Bank in early 2024 without issue. And it sounds this delegation had already had all of Electronic Travel Authorizations approved ahead of time and the government of Canada informed Israel that government officials would be travelling there.

Was questioning the need of MPs traveling to the West Bank, but wasn't aware of the 2024 travel. I'm now questioning both.

It's worth mentioning that even with those digital authorizations, visitors are not guaranteed entry into Israel. As Raffy notes, when you apply for those visas, there is a line that says you will still be subject to control at the border.

https://israel-entry.piba.gov.il/learn-about

In the end and in any case, the denial provides more scrutiny on Israel so if there were legitimately no reasons to deny them, it only causes an international incident as it is right now.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Probably to be official voices and witness what Israel is doing there? You know, the illegal and continuous theft of land, attacks on civilians, removing people from their homes and land. The basics. Of course Israel is doing everything in their power to prevent it.

Why not flip thew question, why is Israel controlling the entry of politicians into a territory that is not theirs? What right by law do they have to do that? What are they trying to hide?

Go a step further... why are we sending them money (investment dollars or charity dollars) or selling them weapons? Why do we maintain trade with them while they murder civilians (women, children, seniors)? When nations or international organizations send in aid workers or news reporters they get killed too.

Our elected politicians should probably go take a look at what they are / are not supporting to be better informed in either case.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Vassy with the knockout punch at the end. He’s just so unlikable.

https://twitter.com/user/status/2000706264863592923

[direwolf]

Lol, dude just keeps doubling down on the same nonsense that lost him the election. God, he’s such a pathetic loser.

Vassy is a great interviewer. Love the way she holds his feet to the fire there. That’s good stuff.

[Johnny Makarov]

I wonder why during the campaign trail Pierre Deplorable Polyester limited questions to Right wing media outlets and wouldn't let CBC or CTV travel with him? why??? i wonder why?

Pretty sure if he won he would have never taken another question from CTV or CBC again.Piece of kyit.

[Looch City]

Hahaha that ####ing face during the interview. God he's such a punchable piece of #### prick.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

I wonder why during the campaign trail Pierre Deplorable Polyester limited questions to Right wing media outlets and wouldn't let CBC or CTV travel with him? why??? i wonder why?

Pretty sure if he won he would have never taken another question from CTV or CBC again.Piece of kyit.

If he won there wouldn't be a CBC anymore.