Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Locke]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Makes one wonder how effective of a leader PP would be if the thing you consider to be his bread and butter appears to have had little to no impact on anything.

People can wonder if they want, I think at the very least that by now we should know what Poilievre is.

At this juncture in Country's course Fiscal Conservatism is dead, and I am uninterested in Social Conservatism, I think I know exactly what I need to know about Poilievre, if others dont then thats their business.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Locke

I guess we'll never know because if anyone even dares question Fearless Leader they are worthy only of derision and mockery.

This kind of stuff I don't get at all.

Here on CP, social media or just in everyday life, I've never seen a PM that gets as much hatred and mockery that JT gets. I see it everywhere, friends, family, those stupid 'F Trudeau' bumper stickers and flags. Deserved or underserved, the guy gets bashed daily, and often. Kind of a strange comment to say you can't question him.......it's happening everywhere.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

This kind of stuff I don't get at all.

Here on CP, social media or just in everyday life, I've never seen a PM that gets as much hatred and mockery that JT gets. I see it everywhere, friends, family, those stupid 'F Trudeau' bumper stickers and flags. Deserved or underserved, the guy gets bashed daily, and often. Kind of a strange comment to say you can't question him.......it's happening everywhere.

I'm the biggest Lib on here and I HATE JT. he is terrible and deserves some of the ridicule! It's just astounding that the Cons can trot out 3 straight leaders that are even worse than him. and not even just a bit worse.. WAY worse where you have no option but to choose blackface Mr. Dressup! LOL

It just blows the mind!!

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Locke

People can wonder if they want, I think at the very least that by now we should know what Poilievre is.

At this juncture in Country's course Fiscal Conservatism is dead, and I am uninterested in Social Conservatism, I think I know exactly what I need to know about Poilievre, if others dont then thats their business.

What are you even saying here? It’s like you’re speaking in riddles.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

This kind of stuff I don't get at all.

Here on CP, social media or just in everyday life, I've never seen a PM that gets as much hatred and mockery that JT gets. I see it everywhere, friends, family, those stupid 'F Trudeau' bumper stickers and flags. Deserved or underserved, the guy gets bashed daily, and often. Kind of a strange comment to say you can't question him.......it's happening everywhere.

The leader of the Official Opposition questioned the Government (a large part of their job) where the funds for the ArriveCan app actually went and where the Government spent the money.

This was the response:

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

LOL Milhouse is such a petulant turd.

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Plan the parade?

Originally Posted by Looch City

Originally Posted by Fuzz

What is his big issue with it? That it cost $54 million(that's gotta be one off the smallest bills the feds have ever paid) for a system that millions of travelers used? What was the cost per use? What is the goal, here? Dig for months to unearth a moldy nothing burger? This is a waste of resources. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if this farce ends up costing more than $54 million.

Instead of thinking: "Hey, thats a good question. That guy is doing what he's supposed to be doing."

They just attacked the leader of official opposition for doing his job because they dont like him.

And hey, I get it, Poilievre is inherently unlikable, I can understand that. The guy has all of the charisma of a brick to the face.

But there is still a job to be done. The Opposition asks a perfectly relevant question and are subsequently attacked for it.

Trudeau's name and party affiliation were never even uttered.

And as you just said, people everywhere are 'bashing' Trudeau.

Well...so what?

Questioning requires thought. 'Bashing' just requires feelings.

[Johnny Makarov]

Who would have thought that when the snowflakes term was used in politics that it would eventually describe the right more than the left.

Leave PP alone!

[Locke]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

What are you even saying here? It’s like you’re speaking in riddles.

Its very simple.

If no party is interested in balancing a budget or paying off debt and voters similarly dont care then Fiscal Conservatism is irrelevant.

If thats the case, as I believe it is, then I'm no longer using that as a criteria to determine my vote.

Furthermore, I'm not interested in re-illegalizing abortion, removing rights from homosexuals or any other already under-privileged group, or any group for that matter. Thats not my jam.

Even more, I dont believe that religious fundamentalism or religion period should have any place in our Governmental system.

These are things that would be considered 'Social Conservatism.'

As such, the modern iteration of Conservative Politics is clearly not for me.

Poilievre is someone with whom I appear to share zero values and therefore that is not a party that is going to garner my vote, so I'll have to look elsewhere.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Locke

The leader of the Official Opposition questioned the Government (a large part of their job) where the funds for the ArriveCan app actually went and where the Government spent the money.

This was the response:

Instead of thinking: "Hey, thats a good question. That guy is doing what he's supposed to be doing."

They just attacked the leader of official opposition for doing his job because they dont like him.

And hey, I get it, Poilievre is inherently unlikable, I can understand that. The guy has all of the charisma of a brick to the face.

But there is still a job to be done. The Opposition asks a perfectly relevant question and are subsequently attacked for it.

Trudeau's name and party affiliation were never even uttered.

And as you just said, people everywhere are 'bashing' Trudeau.

Well...so what?

Questioning requires thought. 'Bashing' just requires feelings.

Isn't the CBSA doing the job, though? I'm not sure if that was instigated by Pierre bringing it up a few weeks ago or if was always going to be looked into, but it seems like they are looking into it. So why does parliament need to run another inquiry before the CBSA has a chance to say "here is what happened"?

It would also help Pierre not look like an idiot if he'd stop referring the "guy who could build it over a weekend for a fiver" because these things are always end up being more expensive and complicated when you are a government dealing with private information. That's just the reality.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Locke

The leader of the Official Opposition questioned the Government (a large part of their job) where the funds for the ArriveCan app actually went and where the Government spent the money.

This was the response:

Instead of thinking: "Hey, thats a good question. That guy is doing what he's supposed to be doing."

They just attacked the leader of official opposition for doing his job because they dont like him.

And hey, I get it, Poilievre is inherently unlikable, I can understand that. The guy has all of the charisma of a brick to the face.

But there is still a job to be done. The Opposition asks a perfectly relevant question and are subsequently attacked for it.

Trudeau's name and party affiliation were never even uttered.

And as you just said, people everywhere are 'bashing' Trudeau.

Well...so what?

Questioning requires thought. 'Bashing' just requires feelings.

Just to confirm, you considered me posting “Plan the parade?” to be an attack?

Holy smokes I better not tell you how I really feel about him, it might devastate you.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Locke

The leader of the Official Opposition questioned the Government (a large part of their job) where the funds for the ArriveCan app actually went and where the Government spent the money.

This was the response:









Instead of thinking: "Hey, thats a good question. That guy is doing what he's supposed to be doing."

They just attacked the leader of official opposition for doing his job because they dont like him.

And hey, I get it, Poilievre is inherently unlikable, I can understand that. The guy has all of the charisma of a brick to the face.

But there is still a job to be done. The Opposition asks a perfectly relevant question and are subsequently attacked for it.

Trudeau's name and party affiliation were never even uttered.

And as you just said, people everywhere are 'bashing' Trudeau.

Well...so what?

Questioning requires thought. 'Bashing' just requires feelings.

Looked to me like people were “bashing” him for the way he went about doing his job, not the doing of the job itself.

I don’t see how any one of those posts was any less thoughtful than “I guess we'll never know because if anyone even dares question Fearless Leader they are worthy only of derision and mockery.” At least they got closer to representing an actual position instead of making up a straw man. Fuzz even asked questions, you know, questioning, that thoughtful thing you love, but you’re pretending he was just “bashing”? Lying isn’t interesting, we can all read.

I think you’re fully aware of the difference between people criticizing the opposition for doing their job and people criticizing the opposition for garbage pandering stuff like “ArriveScam.” The question is (look at that, thought… again!) why you’re pretending you don’t, even after initially dismissing the latter as “something all politicians do, news at 11!” or whatever.

It’s honestly like some of you don’t think anyone will notice this consistent level of silliness. Fearless leader can’t be criticized? Please, who are you pandering to with that? That’s all that happens in this thread. It’d be as asinine as strolling into the AB politics thread and pretending nobody can dare criticize Kenney or Smith. Come on.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Locke

The leader of the Official Opposition questioned the Government (a large part of their job) where the funds for the ArriveCan app actually went and where the Government spent the money.

This was the response:









Instead of thinking: "Hey, thats a good question. That guy is doing what he's supposed to be doing."

They just attacked the leader of official opposition for doing his job because they dont like him.

And hey, I get it, Poilievre is inherently unlikable, I can understand that. The guy has all of the charisma of a brick to the face.

But there is still a job to be done. The Opposition asks a perfectly relevant question and are subsequently attacked for it.

Trudeau's name and party affiliation were never even uttered.

And as you just said, people everywhere are 'bashing' Trudeau.

Well...so what?

Questioning requires thought. 'Bashing' just requires feelings.

Okay, I'm pretty confused by your response to my post.

You said you can't question Fearless Leader. My response was basically 'yes you can, and it happens all the time, everywhere.'

I'm not sure what the post above has to do with what I've said.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

What is his big issue with it? That it cost $54 million(that's gotta be one off the smallest bills the feds have ever paid) for a system that millions of travelers used? What was the cost per use? What is the goal, here? Dig for months to unearth a moldy nothing burger? This is a waste of resources. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if this farce ends up costing more than $54 million.

Plus the intention is/was to tie it in with customs which would facilitate travelling. I did a trip to the Arctic late August early Sept and others came from England and Australia. They had no trouble with the ArriveCan app and said they basically could walk through customs.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Locke

The leader of the Official Opposition questioned the Government (a large part of their job) where the funds for the ArriveCan app actually went and where the Government spent the money.

It's the student council president election energy of using terms like "ArriveScam" and "Justinflation" in all seriousness. It's embarrassing for the leader of the Official Opposition who wants to be Prime Minister. It's hard to take anything he says seriously.

[Inglewood Jack]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

It would also help Pierre not look like an idiot if he'd stop referring the "guy who could build it over a weekend for a fiver" because these things are always end up being more expensive and complicated when you are a government dealing with private information. That's just the reality.

Probably wants to hire the guy that did PORTPass

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

What are you even saying here? It’s like you’re speaking in riddles.

Are we having another rehash of last week’s “Locke’s Lost His Marbles” episode?

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by opendoor

If you think the current systems are starved, imagine what they'd be like if nearly half the adult population was retirement age. Based on current trends, Japan is expecting to have 80 65+ year olds for every 100 working-age residents within about 30 years. How do you even have a functional health care system with that kind of imbalance?

Logan’s Run?

There was some discussion recently that MAID could be abused. Maybe we need to make it mandatory. Save on health care costs, get that wealth transfer going, free up real estate, instantly make CPP and OAS sustainable for another 100 years.

Frankly, I don’t see any downside.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Isn't the CBSA doing the job, though? I'm not sure if that was instigated by Pierre bringing it up a few weeks ago or if was always going to be looked into, but it seems like they are looking into it. So why does parliament need to run another inquiry before the CBSA has a chance to say "here is what happened"?

It would also help Pierre not look like an idiot if he'd stop referring the "guy who could build it over a weekend for a fiver" because these things are always end up being more expensive and complicated when you are a government dealing with private information. That's just the reality.

If you want to list the ways Poilievre could look like less of an idiot all the time we could be here all night and never reach the end of the list.

At the end of the day, the Opposition is questioning the Government on an expenditure that the Government's statement doesnt adequately explain.

Just because he's a tool doesnt necessarily mean that this was the wrong thing to do and should be dismissed out of hand just because people dont like him.

And yes, he looks especially stupid because he practically paraded around while doing it...I get that, but given this Government's track history with mysterious expenditures that doesnt mean it isnt a good question to ask.

And yes, I also further understand that it is really hard to know when to take Poilievre seriously because he has irrationally leaned really hard into political pageantry.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

OK, well that sounds weird, I hadn't heard that. But wouldn't that be a responsibility of bureaucrats administering it? It can't be that hard to trace how a payment was made from what fund to who.

Which is why the government should have been able to answer the question in question period. When they don’t and lie about it an investigation is required.

Is PP terrible? Yes, but this type of stuff is actually where he is doing his job.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by GGG

Which is why the government should have been able to answer the question in question period. When they don’t and lie about it an investigation is required.

Is PP terrible? Yes, but this type of stuff is actually where he is doing his job.

Coming up with terms like adscam to communicate with voters, that’s his job?

I think you and locke are really missing the point of what people were criticizing in the post.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Locke

Its very simple.

If no party is interested in balancing a budget or paying off debt and voters similarly dont care then Fiscal Conservatism is irrelevant.

If thats the case, as I believe it is, then I'm no longer using that as a criteria to determine my vote.

Furthermore, I'm not interested in re-illegalizing abortion, removing rights from homosexuals or any other already under-privileged group, or any group for that matter. Thats not my jam.

Even more, I dont believe that religious fundamentalism or religion period should have any place in our Governmental system.

These are things that would be considered 'Social Conservatism.'

As such, the modern iteration of Conservative Politics is clearly not for me.

Poilievre is someone with whom I appear to share zero values and therefore that is not a party that is going to garner my vote, so I'll have to look elsewhere.

Is the next part of this post the standard you’re on a political island and have no party to vote for? Or is it announcing that you’re going to vote for one of the existing parties you love to endlessly rag on despite the fact that they appear to check off most of if not all of the criteria you just described?

Asking for a friend.