GT: Federal Election

[Drak]

I'm sure we'll hear a lot of these types of comments from folks on the right over the next few years, regardless of what Trudeau does.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Drak

I'm sure we'll hear a lot of these types of comments from folks on the right over the next few years, regardless of what Trudeau does.

I didn't think the right was pro-misogyny.

[Street Pharmacist]

I'm genuinely confused what was at all strange with what he said

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by zamler

FFS we've elected a complete idiot

Exactly. I much preferred Harper's approach of not commenting on anything ever, and then suddenly and quietly making horrendous, embarrassing changes to our country.

Ah, the good old days. This new guy's so annoying, wasting precious seconds commenting on things so we know where he stands and what we can expect him to work on, whether it's small or large issues.

Just shut up and run our country in secrecy, Justin. Have you learned nothing from how Canadians like to be governed.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I'm genuinely confused what was at all strange with what he said

Ditto. My guess is that the people ragging on Trudeau have no idea what Gamergate was all about.

[Drak]

Lots of sour grapes still fermenting in places.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Ditto. My guess is that the people ragging on Trudeau have no idea what Gamergate was all about.

Phew. Thought maybe Zamler was pro gamergate

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by zamler

FFS we've elected a complete idiot

I agree with him actually but they're kind of empty words. What's he really going to be able to do about it?

[Drak]

Wrong thread.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Why?

Gamergate has pretty much been a study in misogyny, homophobia and generally the worst aspects of humanity

No. I mean that entire thing is pants on head ######ed. Both sides. They're both getting trolled into oblivion by people playing both sides and saying things just to keep the #### storm going.

That adam Goldberg guy is a perfect example. Trudeau is right misogyny is bad, but target real issues, not internet trolls

[adc]

Originally Posted by Kavvy

Either your side of our party, aka the far right, needs to embrace a leftist tory, or were stuck with Liberal rule for the next decade or longer.

PC/Cons can't hope for the left to simply split the vote, we need to be a party that is center right, not right, or we will simply have a party that forms an opposition to majority governments...

We need the right side of our party to compromise... which is what politics should actually be about, not taking hardlines.

Take a hard line/split the party, you're just going to get less of what you want by empowering a leftist government. All the reform party did was ensure Liberal majorities.

I guess for me I am not sure I see a big difference in a Liberal party as it is currently made up and a centre right party that the PC's could potentially turn into.

I guess I would have to wait and see what the party looked like and perhaps it would fit my preferences closer than the Liberals but at some point I think I prefer supporting someone who actually supports what I want rather than just someone who isn't as bad as the other guys.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

No. I mean that entire thing is pants on head ######ed. Both sides. They're both getting trolled into oblivion by people playing both sides and saying things just to keep the #### storm going.

That adam Goldberg guy is a perfect example. Trudeau is right misogyny is bad, but target real issues, not internet trolls

That is the correct answer. There is no good side in gamergate. They're all a bunch of zealots and trolls of the kind who are doing their best to make the internet a toxic battleground hostile to reason and nuance.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

No. I mean that entire thing is pants on head ######ed. Both sides. They're both getting trolled into oblivion by people playing both sides and saying things just to keep the #### storm going.

That adam Goldberg guy is a perfect example. Trudeau is right misogyny is bad, but target real issues, not internet trolls

Yeah except one side is tweeting over-the-top third-wave feminist demagoguery, and the other is making rape threats. One of those things seems worse.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yeah except one side is tweeting over-the-top third-wave feminist demagoguery, and the other is making rape threats. One of those things seems worse.

Go to where people that claim to be "gamergate" gather, like Kotakuinaction on reddit. All they post about is asinine things they disagree with that they think is censorship or hiding #### in gaming media. It's hilarious. No death threats, no rape threats, nothing.

Go to Gamerghazi, where the anti-group is. Read it. No insane feminism. No one saying games can't have violence, or boobs. It's just them railing on #### posted by people in gamergate.

These groups are so naive and innocuous. Then some troll will go on twitter and send a rape threat to Anita Sarkeesian, and then everyone will freak out. Or someone will clickbait something about how video games need to be friendly and nice and no violence. And then they all freak out again.

The trolls have these two groups by the god damn balls and it is funny to watch. Both sides come from points of reason. Misogyny is bad. Corruption in journalism is bad. But they just get led around like dogs at a super dogs competition, jumping through the hoops for people's amusement.

[Scrambler]

If anyone's interested, you can track Trudeau and the Liberal government on how they are doing with their election campaign platform/promises here: https://www.trudeaumetre.ca/

"The TrudeauMetre is a non-partisan collaborative citizen initiative that tracks his performance with regards to his electoral platform."

https://www.trudeaumetre.ca/

[Chingas]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

http://business.financialpost.com/fp...ont-be-so-sure

Theories about how climate change will be a vehicle for decimating O&G and the people behind Trudeau.

Sorry if it has been re-hashed hundreds of times already in this and the previous thread.

Can someone explain to me the benefits to Canada as a nation of agreeing any climate treaties that also include carbon credits/taxes etc?

Is this completely revolved around a holistic endeavour designed to make us look good in the light of global opinion? I think that I am missing the point here. I don't believe in total negligence and intentional or avoidable excess polution. I also don't believe in the intentional sinking of the economy and overall health of the Canadian economy and any infrastructure and run on benifits to its citizens that might be forfeighted as a result.

Is there a tangible upside here? Can anyone give me an eighth grade dissertation of the general talking points from both sides of this debate?

Is there a thread already dedicated to this? Should there be one?

Thank you

Edit: Is the increased funding for green energy and low tax for green energy producers as simple as it appears at first sight? Is this a lens directly into some of the largest campaign supporters? Am I jaded by the past business influencial realities of almost every major politician throughout the history of mankind?

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by zamler

FFS we've elected a complete idiot

NM, it's been covered already.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Chingas

Sorry if it has been re-hashed hundreds of times already in this and the previous thread.

Can someone explain to me the benefits to Canada as a nation of agreeing any climate treaties that also include carbon credits/taxes etc?

Is this completely revolved around a holistic endeavour designed to make us look good in the light of global opinion? I think that I am missing the point here. I don't believe in total negligence and intentional or avoidable excess polution. I also don't believe in the intentional sinking of the economy and overall health of the Canadian economy and any infrastructure and run on benifits to its citizens that might be forfeighted as a result.

Is there a tangible upside here? Can anyone give me an eighth grade dissertation of the general talking points from both sides of this debate?

Is there a thread already dedicated to this? Should there be one?

Thank you

Edit: Is the increased funding for green energy and low tax for green energy producers as simple as it appears at first sight? Is this a lens directly into some of the largest campaign supporters? Am I jaded by the past business influencial realities of almost every major politician throughout the history of mankind?

A very complex issue, many things to be commented on. I'll admit, I don't know a ton about carbon trading etc., but for the larger issue of green energy I think there are significant benefits to putting Canada on a path to develop and use green technologies. For one, it's going in that direction anyway, like it or not. One of the problems the Alberta economy has is the constant boom bust cycle of the fossil fuel industry. Becoming a leader in green technologies could help economically, other countries like Germany and China already have industries involving this. Of course, that probably won't happen, it seems we want to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century. But conversely, being late to the party could be economically costly too.

Of course, it all revolves around the very real and indisputable science that we are warming the world. And it's getting worse faster than we originally predicted. Yes, Canada uses a lot less energy than major countries like the US, and China, and popular opinion on the right is that since we use so little comparatively, we shouldn't really care until the big users do, but I don't really see that as making any sense. We use proportionally more than most other countries, including first world nations, and every little bit counts. As well, it appears the US is more willing to change than we are, so the big users ARE changing their ways.

There is a massive thread about it, probably not on the first page anymore. Bill Nye and DeGrasse Tyson warn about climate change or something. You'll find a lot more there on both sides. And a lot of the science and articles.

[Thor]

Here's the global warming thread:

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=137092

[EldrickOnIce]

I see the political 'debate' as a separate issue though. There has been bits and pieces of good discussion/ideas posted here about what initiatives we might take to start to address carbon concerns, in the context of our country.
I would love to see more of that kind of discussion specifically in a politics thread.

And then this: What I am most interested in (in Trudeau's 'gamergate' 'stand') were his 'I am a feminist' comments. Maybe this needs it's own discussion thread too lol. The dictionary definition of feminism is "the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men." If that is the definition, aren't like 99% of us feminists? If I where to be asked if I was a feminist, I would respond by saying I absolutely strongly advocate political, economic and social equality. I don't think that's exactly what Trudeau (or a large portion of those who use the term feminist) mean.
What is it supposed to mean, now, to be a feminist?

So i rambled...