Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

I can't argue with someone that won't look at or believe data, like how do you refute my second paragraph? It's literally data. Your rebuttal is just "ya but there could be other things in there not considered", with zero actual critical thought put into your claims.

Again, look at the link I posted:

https://www.c2es.org/content/u-s-emissions/

What portion of total emissions is methane? How long does methane stay in the atmosphere? Even if you doubled methane emissions because of the leaks you proudly use as a silver bullet, methane emissions still don't hold a candle to CO2. The methane leaks are also the easiest to address via regulation, which is already being scrutinized by both Canada and the USA. These leaks will be addressed. And you are vastly overstating their impact on the final numbers. They would not change materially so as to completely invalidate the trends. If we only used data that was 100% accurate in making decisions, we would never make decisions.

As the Mark Twain saying goes: 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.' So I will sign off.

You don't appear to be a serious person and look to be topped up with rage, so I'm not going to continue this.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by calculoso

The provinces won’t put existing funding into healthcare, do you really think that they would devote more funding to healthcare or use it as general revenue for other purposes?

I am of the opinion that if healthcare wasn’t being starved today, the requirement for proof wouldn’t exist.

The provinces are being very reasonable in asking for a percentage increase on the growth of the cash side of transfers here. This is like filling a swimming pool with a garden hose when right now you should be topping it up and worrying about inefficiencies after the dust settles and care/treatment has caught up.

Just 6 years ago we were at a 6% growth rate on CHTs, but for some reason this government can't manage to go above 3% now? Something doesn't add up - especially when you're emerging from a pandemic with an extreme burden on specialists and clinical care that was left swinging in the wind for 2+ years.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Yeah, going to have to call that one out. Provinces have already resisted or declined federal money to put into healthcare (namely Alberta) so to turn around and blame it on the federal government is hilarious.

You also can’t say increasing immigration puts a further burden on the healthcare system without saying it increases the number of people actually paying for healthcare. The amount of people thinking about retiring and complaining about immigration is hilarious. Who do you think is going to look after your old, sick, out of work asses? lol

That's an odd stance - the provinces declined funding based on the way it had been offered to be handed out by Trudeau, not because they simply didn't want the money. I can certainly say that immigration is increasing the burden on health care, education and so on. You must be aware that you can get a health card, enroll in school and use other services months (sometimes years) before many will even begin to look at paying taxes or even looking at becoming regularly employed workers.

It is astonishing how removed some people are from how our immigration system actually works. You don't just arrive in the country and suddenly contribute as much as someone that has been living and working here for 10, 15 or 20 years. It takes a very long time to get through the processes and during this time each person or family is drawing far more out than it is putting in.

This is fine, but you do need to expand funding for public services at a rate far beyond what is the lowest in the last 10ish years if you are going to continue to ramp up immigration and deal with your aging and sick population at the same time.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

That's an odd stance - the provinces declined funding based on the way it had been offered to be handed out by Trudeau, not because they simply didn't want the money.

I guess beggars can be choosers?

I can certainly say that immigration is increasing the burden on health care, education and so on.

A quarter of health care sector workers in Canada are immigrants, and this share has only steadily increased since the mid-90s. This is especially high when it comes to support positions (nurse aids, orderlies, etc.). Seems like they're helping shoulder the 'burden.'

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1605249328003665920

[Fuzz]

The Greens are really on a tear, more than doubled their support.

[Roughneck]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1605253819465605140

https://twitter.com/user/status/1604715548914262016

https://twitter.com/user/status/1604717187448594432

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

https://twitter.com/user/status/1604715548914262016

https://twitter.com/user/status/1604717187448594432

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Yoho

https://twitter.com/user/status/1605249328003665920

These numbers are meaningless for the CPC and show the same story since 2019, basically they have a solid 1/3rd of the country +/- 3% and that doesn't really change over time. Votes between GPC, NDP & LPC are somewhat fluid and like we saw in 2019 & 2021 will snap back to the Liberals to keep the CPC out if the prospect of a CPC government becomes the ballot box question in an election.

Barameters of a serious change is if you see the CPC break out of that range to the high side by actually taking votes away from the LPC or LPC vote share slippage to where the NDP look competitive where voters might not know where to park their vote to keep the CPC out.

It's pretty dismal prospects for the conservatives, they moved left with O'Toole and lost votes to the PPC, so they moved back right and lost votes on the left flank. They can't break out of that base. End result is the 'natural governing party' governs until Ontario voters deem them to be long in the tooth and in need of replacing.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

These numbers are meaningless for the CPC and show the same story since 2019, basically they have a solid 1/3rd of the country +/- 3% and that doesn't really change over time. Votes between GPC, NDP & LPC are somewhat fluid and like we saw in 2019 & 2021 will snap back to the Liberals to keep the CPC out if the prospect of a CPC government becomes the ballot box question in an election.

Barameters of a serious change is if you see the CPC break out of that range to the high side by actually taking votes away from the LPC or LPC vote share slippage to where the NDP look competitive where voters might not know where to park their vote to keep the CPC out.

It's pretty dismal prospects for the conservatives, they moved left with O'Toole and lost votes to the PPC, so they moved back right and lost votes on the left flank. They can't break out of that base. End result is the 'natural governing party' governs until Ontario voters deem them to be long in the tooth and in need of replacing.

I agree the Liberal Party is ready to be replaced from power, that said, Canada is a center left country. the left wing parties have not been a big tent party for a while. If they were a big tent party they would crush every election. The legitimate fear is that the CPC will let minority members of their party take the reigns to push legislations that do not line up with national values. I would vote for a conservatives party that 1. Pushed for a stably economy with moderate policy 2. made legitimate plans for environmental sustainability 3. named and ostracized every bigot in their party publicly and repeatedly.

The first two I think are achievable, but the third may never happen in my life time. Progressive conservatism is only an ideal in the current CPC.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

These numbers are meaningless for the CPC and show the same story since 2019, basically they have a solid 1/3rd of the country +/- 3% and that doesn't really change over time. Votes between GPC, NDP & LPC are somewhat fluid and like we saw in 2019 & 2021 will snap back to the Liberals to keep the CPC out if the prospect of a CPC government becomes the ballot box question in an election.

Barameters of a serious change is if you see the CPC break out of that range to the high side by actually taking votes away from the LPC or LPC vote share slippage to where the NDP look competitive where voters might not know where to park their vote to keep the CPC out.

It's pretty dismal prospects for the conservatives, they moved left with O'Toole and lost votes to the PPC, so they moved back right and lost votes on the left flank. They can't break out of that base. End result is the 'natural governing party' governs until Ontario voters deem them to be long in the tooth and in need of replacing.

I don’t remember seeing numbers this low for the Liberals before.

[dsavillian]

Originally Posted by Yoho

I don’t remember seeing numbers this low for the Liberals before.

Nanos had the Liberals at 28% in September

https://338canada.com/polls.htm

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1602695447298162689

Another Federal ethics breach don’t resign just move on.

[curves2000]

Originally Posted by Yoho

https://twitter.com/user/status/1602695447298162689

Another Federal ethics breach don’t resign just move on.

It's always amazing to me how open and honest something like this particular level of corruption is. The fact that the minister thought this was ok and that it wasn't going to be an issue is just very very bold.

I will say, that the firm that did the work does appear to at least be capable of providing the paid for services in media training. Amanda Alvaro is fairly well known on the CBC panels and mouthpiece for the Liberal party on policies etc.


As you have said, classic, don't resign, just move on. Imagine the level of fraud that occurs that we don't know of. I've always said that countries like Canada have huge level of corruption, just as they do in poor, corrupt countries. We just have the economic growth to hide it.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Angry man this morning, aren't you? Putting aside the straw man effigy you made of me(because I don't believe anything in your second paragraph), I can provide you with another article, if you like.




https://www.science.org/content/arti...oal-short-term

The problem with emissions graphs like you posted is they are based on estimates, not reality. And we are just discovering a lot of leaks go unaccounted for.

Prognostications on climate change based on models are also estimates. Scientific climate models have been off and wrong for years too, so it kinda cuts both ways.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Yoho

I don’t remember seeing numbers this low for the Liberals before.

They were that low plenty of times during that last election campaign. Polls many months/years away from an election aren't really representative because people can choose their preferred party in an inconsequential poll and then when the election rolls around and it actually matters it will flop back to a 'palatable' party that has the better chance of winning or stopping their most hated party (This is what happened in 2019 & 2021). What's obvious is ~30% of voters hate Trudeau with seething hatred and line up for the CPC, a very small amount of voters love Trudeau the same degree the CPC voters hate him, and ~30% of voters are lukewarm or even modestly dislike him but will vote for him if it means the conservatives don't win power. If strength of like or dislike mattered, Trudeau would have lost the last two elections, but the people who want to launch him into the sun's vote counts the same as the voter who's indifferent but still votes for him.

If you see the CPC poll near 40% you might have something and it might actually represent movement or you need to see Liberal numbers low enough that the remaining rump needs to practically pick NDP or CPC in an election scenario (which happened in the 2008 & 2011 Elections).

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Prognostications on climate change based on models are also estimates. Scientific climate models have been off and wrong for years too, so it kinda cuts both ways.

I agree on your models comment, but I didn't mention models at all. We are just starting to have methods to monitor actual emissions, not reported emissions. The latter being whatever a company decides they are going to say their emissions are(perhaps based on monitoring, guesstimates). What we are seeing is those reported numbers tend to be way under reality.

A new study finds that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has severely underestimated methane emissions from U.S. oil and gas development, adding to a growing body of work showing that pollution from drilling is greater than EPA figures would suggest.

https://e360.yale.edu/digest/methane...es-study-finds

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

These numbers are meaningless for the CPC and show the same story since 2019, basically they have a solid 1/3rd of the country +/- 3% and that doesn't really change over time. Votes between GPC, NDP & LPC are somewhat fluid and like we saw in 2019 & 2021 will snap back to the Liberals to keep the CPC out if the prospect of a CPC government becomes the ballot box question in an election.

Barameters of a serious change is if you see the CPC break out of that range to the high side by actually taking votes away from the LPC or LPC vote share slippage to where the NDP look competitive where voters might not know where to park their vote to keep the CPC out.

It's pretty dismal prospects for the conservatives, they moved left with O'Toole and lost votes to the PPC, so they moved back right and lost votes on the left flank. They can't break out of that base. End result is the 'natural governing party' governs until Ontario voters deem them to be long in the tooth and in need of replacing.

See, I think that's where the CPC gets it wrong. Forget the far right and PPC, taking votes from them is the equivalent of one vote. Take it for them the Liberals and it's a net 2 votes. That, and if you only gain votes in places like Alberta, you've wasted your efforts. So putting PP in was a poor move strategically. The CPC don't need to become Liberals, but they do need to distance themselves from the PPC crowd, not try to chase them.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

See, I think that's where the CPC gets it wrong. Forget the far right and PPC, taking votes from them is the equivalent of one vote. Take it for them the Liberals and it's a net 2 votes. That, and if you only gain votes in places like Alberta, you've wasted your efforts. So putting PP in was a poor move strategically. The CPC don't need to become Liberals, but they do need to distance themselves from the PPC crowd, not try to chase them.

Exactly this.

I've said this time and time again. The CPC should have put Charest in as leader not Pollievre.

The knock on Charest was that he was "too Liberal" but that's who you're trying to take votes from! If you want to form government you need to increase your vote total in places where the Liberals have won.

Who gives a flipping flying frack if you lose votes in Alberta? So you win Calgary Centre with 75% of the vote rather than 80%, it's still just one seat. Meanwhile you'll pick up seats in Ontario and Quebec.

I heard a rumour of a REALLY strong CPC candidate running here, but it'll be tough with PP as leader, whereas Charest I think they'd win. Although they're changing the ridings and they may get screwed by the new boundaries regardless.

[btimbit]

I'll never understand that with the conservatives. "I know, we'll drift even FURTHER from what the average Canadian wants. That'll make them vote for us, right guys?"