Lol, so they’ve destroyed their country’s democracy, and now they want to take us with them? Go f*** yourself, America. We’re not interested.
Thing is though, Trump could just make up some pie-in-the-sky-cut-from-whole-cloth-BS reason to justify anything he feels like doing to Canada, and we would have to believe his supporters would eat it up and go along.
Would it go as far as trying to annex Canada? Probably not. But could it go as far as some outlandish reason to justify America's forcing its way into acquiring Canada's resources? Probably.
He's probably already convinced a small number of Americans that Canada could just lefty-loosey a tap in the Rockies and solve the Southwest's water issues. Small step from there to justifying all manner of things to make that happen.
I met him in my work elevator once. I did find him to be fairly stiff, but was genuinely warm and friendly. He's a policy wonk, not a drama teacher. Something politics aside we are sorely needing in this country when it comes to things like housing and immigration.
Do you get to wear the "policy wonk" label when the policies you enact or try to enact are near-universally panned by policy experts (e.g. GST cut, austerity during recession)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame
You're about to get one of the biggest, over-zealous, iron-clad pensioned career policy wonks next year, so don't hold your breath too long.
Just like lacking offense doesn't automatically make you a good defensive defenseman (but people will often label you that way), Harper and Poilievre aren't automatically policy wonks just because they're uncool. They're just dorky populists.
Just like lacking offense doesn't automatically make you a good defensive defenseman (but people will often label you that way), Harper and Poilievre aren't automatically policy wonks just because they're uncool. They're just dorky populists.[/QUOTE]
Nope. Poilievre has been highly political active since he was 14, and knee deep in Reform Party crap right out of the gates, and was highly active at the U of C as President of the Young Tories club. Ironically he clashed with Patrick Brown during these years.
Policy and politics are different beasts. It's not clear to me what sort of policy chops Poilievre has since he didn't really do all that much as a cabinet minister in the Harper Era and its while in government that politicians are able to demonstrate if they have a policy mindset. As an opposition leader he mostly seems interested in trying to embed catchy slogans in Canadians minds, but its also not super advisable politically to talk specific policies 1+ years out from an election.
Harper was definitely a policy wonk, he took an actual interest in the tools the government has available and how to use them. Just because you don't like what he was trying to achieve doesn't mean he wasn't a wonk.
I mean, I agree he is more populist than policy wonk, but he has done some policymaking in the past, including pension reform in 2008 and election law changes in 2014. He also consistently focuses on economic policies, particularly on issues like inflation, housing affordability, and taxation. He often discusses concepts like “inflationary deficits” and the impact of monetary policy on cost of living, showing familiarity with economic mechanisms. He also does longer-from sound bytes (I know, I'm surprised too) where he dives deeper into policy rationale, particularly around fiscal responsibility and government spending.
So is he a policy wonk as much as other profilic politicians? No. One could argue that his baseline of speaking in populist tones to complex issues is a strategic choice rather than a lack of understanding. But he's a policy wonk in my books. Personally I think when you surround yourself with politics obsessively (in the same vein as Kenney, Smith, Nenshi, Levant, and that cadre of political hardcores that come from the U of C), policy wonk is generally your label.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ozy_Flame For This Useful Post:
I think the only reason they wanted Hunter was to get to Joe...since they have nothing on Joe. With Joe now gone and Trump et al in power there is no reason to pile on Hunter.
The guy hunted down Rosie O'Donnell for months/years, because she made a joke about his hair.
There's a massive difference between what Trump was capable of in his first term and what he is prepared to do in his second.
He didn't even know he had to hire his own House staff in round 1. He's already nominating every bootlicking sycophant to his cabinet with a mandate to incorporate Project 2025.
You simply can't rely on his bluster and incompetence to save the day any longer.
__________________ "It's a great day for hockey."
-'Badger' Bob Johnson (1931-1991)
"I see as much misery out of them moving to justify theirselves as them that set out to do harm." -Dr. Amos "Doc" Cochran
Rosie fires the majority of the bullets in that feud. She was still firing last week.
She fired back after he over reacted to a joke and dragged her through the mud for weeks/months. Love or hate Rosie O'Donnel, his entire reaction to what was basically a comedian telling a joke perfectly highlighted what a narcissistic misogynist Trump is.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to RogerWilco For This Useful Post:
