Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I wouldn't be surprised either if Peterson's team shopped around the advertising spots to obtain the best return. Every broadcaster with such an opportunity does the same thing. Fox/NBC/CBS puts out their Super Bowl ads spots to get the most money out of every 30 second segment. The Super Bowl teams aren't sitting at the table with the network executives and approving the advertising spots though and I seriously doubt that PPs team is doing that. I would also doubt if Trudeau's team or Singh's team is doing that either.

I guess I have noticed exactly how controlled PPs image has been and changed over the past few years, and think it would be sloppy to not cover that base. You know the opposition is going to pick up on it. If it was an ad for Andrew Tates "how to drug and manipulate vulnerabile teange girls to get the sex you are entitled to"do you think that would have aired, or been kiboshed by PPs team? If it had aired without review, they'd distance themselves when confronted. I guess they still have some time on that one, but currently the logical conclusion is that he's ok being seen , well first off with JP, but also with these ads. And I think that should be telling.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

If you’re upset about the article, feel free to debate it. But remember, I didn’t write it.

Write it? You’d have a tough time trying to argue you even read it.

Every day you struggle understand conversations you’re actively in. Trust me, nobody would confuse you for a journalist.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

Why is that?

Is it because it isn’t a problem? Or, is it because the Liberals will fix it before an election?

You're cute.

You're also disingenuous and a bad-faith arguer.

See ya.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

Are you just calling me a ####ing idiot, or are you calling the large number of Canadians that the polls suggest support the CPC ####ing idiots?

Either way, that’s not very nice.

Rightwingers aren't very bright... Who had in 2025 that deplorables are the biggest snowflakes? hahaha

What has the whiny little bitch offered for solutions?

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

You're cute.

You're also disingenuous and a bad-faith arguer.

See ya.

Thanks! I get told that a lot.

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Write it? You’d have a tough time trying to argue you even read it.

Every day you struggle understand conversations you’re actively in. Trust me, nobody would confuse you for a journalist.

So, what exactly didn’t you agree with in the article?

You buying the book?

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Rightwingers aren't very bright... Who had in 2025 that deplorables are the biggest snowflakes? hahaha

What has the whiny little bitch offered for solutions?

That’s not a very nice thing to say. Be better.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

So, what exactly didn’t you agree with in the article?

You buying the book?

Why don’t you start with telling us how the article has anything to do with the federal NDP.

[puffnstuff]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I’d rather vote Bloc if they were ever an option outside of Quebec. PP really needs to do a nature walk, maybe it’ll help him recalibrate and gain a bit of clarity. He’s still a joke without any real world life experience or anything in common with any Canadians. You can save the whattaboutism, because this is about who the CPC should be offering up as a potential PM for Canadians, not some silly Trump bootlicker.

Hes been this way his entire life, Jeff isnt going to change. Well, he changed name to Pierre, but only because he thought it would help him in some way, but thats it.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

I would recommend people watch the Peterson interview ( fast forwarding the commercials which are awful). It's friendly territory for conservative politicians and the long form format allows you to get a much better feel for where they stand and even who they are. It was the same when John Rustad sat down with him.

The 3 key things to remember when watching are, first, that this is a friendly interview without any push back like you'd get from a real journalist, second, that some of the areas of greater concern to those more left leaning will go unexplored entirely and, third (again) do anything you can to skip the commercials.

I found it enlightening, although with the strong caveat that it contained large gaps with respect to policy. Still, far more informative than the sound bites regular tv news coverage provides.

Long form podcast style interviews are not really intended to be journalism in the traditional sense. The idea of hard hitting journalism is a bit of an anachronism now, since we probably get a much better idea of who someone is when they go on a long form podcast that forces the politician to exceed the confines of sound bite responses. It's up to the voters to determine if such interviews obscure the politician's true intentions or reveal them.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Ya, he's already secured them. My point is that rational Canadians should rightly see that PP does not possess the ability to lead Canada if he also believes Peterson is the type of person Government leaders should be talking to and boosting the profile of.


Peterson has the ability to spread his vile trash precisely because people have not done that. But I guess this is what the CPC has become.

Nobody believes this kind of rhetoric or message any more.
Yelling "racist" or similar kind of personal attacks have lost their power. People like Peterson not because they haven't listened to him... But because they have. Once they do they generally reach a vastly different conclusion than you do based on their own eyes and ears. If you think Peterson is truly deplorable, you're going to be in for a rough time over the next 10-20 years.

Progressivism has had a pretty epic run over the last ten to fifteen years, and has failed spectacularly. The pendulum is swinging sharply the other way and progressives should take the L like a ...uh... "person".

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Long form podcast style interviews are not really intended to be journalism in the traditional sense. The idea of hard hitting journalism is a bit of an anachronism now, since we probably get a much better idea of who someone is when they go on a long form podcast that forces the politician to exceed the confines of sound bite responses. It's up to the voters to determine if such interviews obscure the politician's true intentions or reveal them.

. Just curious if you got this from a podcast or tweet or something, because my brother said almost the exact same thing, down to the wording, a few months ago. When I hear it twice, I start suspecting it's a seed planted by someone.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Nobody believes this kind of rhetoric or message any more.
Yelling "racist" or similar kind of personal attacks have lost their power. People like Peterson not because they haven't listened to him... But because they have. Once they do they generally reach a vastly different conclusion than you do based on their own eyes and ears. If you think Peterson is truly deplorable, you're going to be in for a rough time over the next 10-20 years.

Progressivism has had a pretty epic run over the last ten to fifteen years, and has failed spectacularly. The pendulum is swinging sharply the other way and progressives should take the L like a ...uh... "person".

People liking or disliking someone isn’t an indictment on whether what that person says is right or wrong.

For the record I don’t agree with people complaining about PP doing an interview with him but at the same time I think if Peterson wants to do these types of interviews he should invite every party leader to do one. And every candidate should accept that invitation.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

Hes been this way his entire life, Jeff isnt going to change. Well, he changed name to Pierre, but only because he thought it would help him in some way, but thats it.

Changed his name? Come on now, that is nonsensical misinformation.

[Ironhorse]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

To be clear, the phrase “death to Canadians” was tongue in cheek.

That does not excuse you calling me a ####ing idiot, or calling CPC supporters ####ing idiots.

I suggest an apology, rather than trying to justify it.

Fuzz has been gaslighting CP for months. If you don't share his views on things, he tends to call you an idiot.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Ironhorse

Fuzz has been gaslighting CP for months. If you don't share his views on things, he tends to call you an idiot.

That’s not what gaslighting means.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Progressivism has had a pretty epic run over the last ten to fifteen years, and has failed spectacularly. The pendulum is swinging sharply the other way and progressives should take the L like a ...uh... "person".

You and your children are welcome for all the progress that has been made. You’re welcome to try to ruin it now, but instead of “taking the L,” progressives will just continue working to make your life better regardless of how much you hate everyone else.

[kn]

I don't know much about Jordan Peterson other than his refusal to use gender pronouns at UT and that he taught at Harvard before Toronto. What makes him so vile? He clearly has a following.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You and your children are welcome for all the progress that has been made. You’re welcome to try to ruin it now, but instead of “taking the L,” progressives will just continue working to make your life better regardless of how much you hate everyone else.

The voters in most Western democracies are enthusiastically refuting the idea that their lives have been made better by progressivism. This isn't despite what progressives have accomplished by because of what progressives have accomplished. Progressives have accomplished a lot. In the accomplishing, they have also proved their ideas to be bankrupt, both literally and figuratively.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by kn

I don't know much about Jordan Peterson other than his refusal to use gender pronouns at UT and that he taught at Harvard before Toronto. What makes him so vile? He clearly has a following.

Jordan is an iconoclast, especially as it comes to religious texts.

However, his overall views aren't particularly outlandish. As with most ideas that progressives find threatening, he is the target of character n assassination. It's a strategy that is backfiring in spectacular fashion.