Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[8 Ball]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

No, Smith isn’t right. If you listened to her on QR for years you would understand that she is a lemming. She acts tough and wants to pick fights with Ottawa when she jumps on the trucker convoy, but doesn’t have the guts to be patriot when there is a real external threat. See here is the thing. Smith is stupid enough to think that she and Alberta are special and Trump will love us if we all just bend the knee. No, Trump only dies from within. Many of you talk about how they have alternatives. No, they really don’t. Rural America is fickle, especially about their precious gas prices.

Smith isn’t stupid for one thing. She is merely pandering to her base and her base was able to vote her in. We get what we deserve. America voted Trump in and they will get what they deserve. And we’re all gonna pay for it.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by curves2000

Although I don't agree with some her of stance and how she has gone about this/missing at the table, there are Liberal politics at place here as well, especially vote rich Ontario and Quebec.

We can all agree that hitting the US with export tariffs on Canadian (primarily Alberta energy) would have a strong affect on the US considering the size of the daily oil demand. That benefit for Canada comes mostly at Alberta's expense which obviously pisses off Smith but is mostly ok with the other big players in the country.

It's not like Trudeau and the feds are telling Ontario, Quebec and BC that their primary industries are be considered for game changing tariffs or being opened up for market share.

I can assure you that if the feds tariffed auto parts and productions, allowed US train, aerospace and dairy industries to have significant more market access in Canada, than Ontario and Quebec would be beyond livid. Throw in some messing around with BC's mining, fishing and forestry industries and they are going to be up in arms as well.

I highly doubt the feds promised to make AB mostly whole on this deal and Smith objected to that. If it was Ontario who was facing the most crushing of blows than I am confident that they would be furious at the Feds.

There is next to zero chance that the auto industry escapes without tariffs, but a reasonable chance that O&G does, hence more speculation about export taxes on O&G. That, and O&G and electricity are the two biggest immediate levers we have to inflict pain on the US if they choose not to do it themselves. It’s not to F Alberta

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by peterh

I don't quite understand why Canadians are so adamant on staying poor:

https://imgur.com/a/FAdgBUf

A trade war with America will just result in further poverty for Canadians.

Plus why is everyone so against exploring a potential union with the greatest nation on the planet?

Whatever, as our currency collapses, the brain drain will continue. If it gets worse in Canada, I will gladly accept that L-1A visa transfer offer from my employer...

See, this is the type of thing that lets everyone know who is and isn't living in reality. Canada is unbelievably prosperous. Do we have problems, people living in poverty...yes. But the percentage of people living in poverty in the US is much more than in Canada. Do you actually know anything about living in the US or do you just think you do. Personally I guess I thought in a similar way when I was younger. My university degrees are from an American University and I lived there for a decade. I can tell you now, I choose Canada and all of it's faults over the mess down there. No ####ing thank you.

[Manhattanboy]

Is the imposition of tariffs not a violation of the USMCA?

I know it’s up for renewal in 2026 but I guess Trump is essentially tearing it up.

[Andy83]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

No, Smith isn’t right. If you listened to her on QR for years you would understand that she is a lemming. She acts tough and wants to pick fights with Ottawa when she jumps on the trucker convoy, but doesn’t have the guts to be patriot when there is a real external threat. See here is the thing. Smith is stupid enough to think that she and Alberta are special and Trump will love us if we all just bend the knee. No, Trump only dies from within. Many of you talk about how they have alternatives. No, they really don’t. Rural America is fickle, especially about their precious gas prices.

She picks fights with Ottawa? I'd say she opposes legislation that she views as harmful to Alberta. But if you think that's picking a fight, you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Reality is, Alberta, and more specifically the Alberta energy industry, have been the doormat of Liberal Canada for a decade, and now they are crawling back begging for unity, looking for a bargaining chip in our most valuable export.

She's smart enough to know all this rhetoric is a lose lose proposition. She's smart enough to know that having a mutually benificial relationship with the US is literally our only option. If you think that's "bending the knee", again, you do you.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Andy83

Christ, you really do need a picture painted for you.

Smith has not made any comments, that i am aware of, suggesting retaliation is not in the cards (in her eyes). What she has said is retaliation using energy as a bargaining chip should not be. What she has said is the US is our most important trading partner and cutting off our nose to spite our face, is probably the most idiotic strategy we could possibly dream up.

Agree with him or not, you really think Trump is going to respond favorably to a threat he damn well knows we don't have the capacity to execute? You don't think a guy like that just calls the bluff?

You really think Smith knows better how he’ll respond and to what than the people who have dealt with him before. Really?

You think it’s smarter to go into a negotiation by undermining your position and taking things off the table. Really?

The best you’ve got is that her plan is to “strengthen our relationship” by… doing different tariffs? Every tariff BUT energy? Oh… wow… I can feel it getting stronger already. You really think Trump is going to say, “Hey, thanks for not putting an export tax on oil and gas. I’ll ignore anything else and cancel the tariffs. We’re best friends now.”

Appreciate the offers to show me your finger painting, but based on your opinions here I doubt it’d make it on anyone’s fridge.

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Canada doesn't have a Trudeau problem, it has an electorate problem.

Trudeau is actually an accurate incarnation of the Canadian populace.

A little too ironic for you to post this.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Andy83

She picks fights with Ottawa? I'd say she opposes legislation that she views as harmful to Alberta. But if you think that's picking a fight, you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Explain how our pension and the RCMP are harming Alberta.

Explain how the federal government giving money to municipalities in Alberta is harmful to Alberta.

Paint us a beautiful watercolour.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by edslunch

There is next to zero chance that the auto industry escapes without tariffs, but a reasonable chance that O&G does, hence more speculation about export taxes on O&G. That, and O&G and electricity are the two biggest immediate levers we have to inflict pain on the US if they choose not to do it themselves. It’s not to F Alberta

Like I said, Trump only dies from within. I guess we will see what happens on Monday but the only real immanent external threat that Canada has faced in decades is coming from our closest ally. This isn't because the people within want this, it is 100% because of Donald Trump. Rural America will eat him alive if he doesn't deliver on lower prices.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by Andy83

She picks fights with Ottawa? I'd say she opposes legislation that she views as harmful to Alberta. But if you think that's picking a fight, you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Reality is, Alberta, and more specifically the Alberta energy industry, have been the doormat of Liberal Canada for a decade, and now they are crawling back begging for unity, looking for a bargaining chip in our most valuable export.

She's smart enough to know all this rhetoric is a lose lose proposition. She's smart enough to know that having a mutually benificial relationship with the US is literally our only option. If you think that's "bending the knee", again, you do you.

We already have a mutually beneficial relationship with the US. Trump is literally the only reason that is being jeopardized. You truly think that DS is going to engage in diplomacy with someone this irrational? Yes, that is bending the knee, and it is literally the starting point to giving our resources away for free. I will say it again, Smith is a lemming. We would be so much better off right now with Kenney leading Alberta, and that is saying something.

[peterh]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

See, this is the type of thing that lets everyone know who is and isn't living in reality. Canada is unbelievably prosperous. Do we have problems, people living in poverty...yes. But the percentage of people living in poverty in the US is much more than in Canada. Do you actually know anything about living in the US or do you just think you do. Personally I guess I thought in a similar way when I was younger. My university degrees are from an American University and I lived there for a decade. I can tell you now, I choose Canada and all of it's faults over the mess down there. No ####ing thank you.

And you believe that past performance equals future performance. Canada is failing to compete in the global market and our “unbelievable wealth” is not guaranteed. Argentina was once extremely wealthy compared to the rest of the world.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by peterh

And you believe that past performance equals future performance. Canada is failing to compete in the global market and our “unbelievable wealth” is not guaranteed. Argentina was once extremely wealthy compared to the rest of the world.

Use this line in your next job interview and see how that goes.

[Andy83]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You really think Smith knows better how he’ll respond and to what than the people who have dealt with him before. Really?

You think it’s smarter to go into a negotiation by undermining your position and taking things off the table. Really?

The best you’ve got is that her plan is to “strengthen our relationship” by… doing different tariffs? Every tariff BUT energy? Oh… wow… I can feel it getting stronger already. You really think Trump is going to say, “Hey, thanks for not putting an export tax on oil and gas. I’ll ignore anything else and cancel the tariffs. We’re best friends now.”

Appreciate the offers to show me your finger painting, but based on your opinions here I doubt it’d make it on anyone’s fridge.



A little too ironic for you to post this.

I'm assuming that's exactly why she met with him for a few days.... These things don't happen over night. Not doing previous deals with Trump doesn't necessarily mean she's not the exact right person to be advocating for a win-win on this one, which i believe is exactly what she's doing. In addition, Trumps comments towards the last bunch we sent to get a deal done, no matter how you view them (right/wrong, appropriate/inappropriate etc.), a change is probably in everyone's best interest.

I'd genuinely like to know how you think taking a threat off the table, that both sides know isn't a viable option, is undermining your strength in negotiation. Threats are hollow without the ability to execute. It shouldn't be a hard concept to get a grasp on, yet this one seems strangely out of reach for you.

Yes, responding with targeted tariffs you actually have the ability to impliment, would be incredibly more effective than threatening something we all should know we can't do without burning it all down. But again, as above, I know this one seems beyond your comprehension.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Andy83

I'm assuming that's exactly why she met with him for a few days.... These things don't happen over night. Not doing previous deals with Trump doesn't necessarily mean she's not the exact right person to be advocating for a win-win on this one, which i believe is exactly what she's doing. In addition, Trumps comments towards the last bunch we sent to get a deal done, no matter how you view them (right/wrong, appropriate/inappropriate etc.), a change is probably in everyone's best interest.

I'd genuinely like to know how you think taking a threat off the table, that both sides know isn't a viable option, is undermining your strength in negotiation. Threats are hollow without the ability to execute. It shouldn't be a hard concept to get a grasp on, yet this one seems strangely out of reach for you.

Yes, responding with targeted tariffs you actually have the ability to impliment, would be incredibly more effective than threatening something we all should know we can't do without burning it all down. But again, as above, I know this one seems beyond your comprehension.

Well, no, not doing previous deals with Trump doesn’t mean she isn’t the right person, she isn’t the right person because she doesn’t have any authority, of which there are many reasons why, but not least of which is the fact that she wasn’t even down there on “official business.”

Seems like it might be pretty hollow coming from who actually has no authority to make any sort of deal with Trump, right?

And if export taxes or shutting off the taps just isn’t viable and is a hollow threat… remind me why you’re sitting here arguing about why Smith is right for stomping her feet around and freaking out because it was put on the table in the first place? I mean if they’re not going to do it anyway, why debase yourself defending her incompetence and the fact that she made up reasons why it couldn’t happen instead of just calling their bluff? Wouldn’t the smart thing to do have been to just sit quiet and let what was never going to happen not happen? You know, maintain “unity”? Why so scared if it’s not going to happen?

You’re right though, I’m having trouble dumbing myself down enough to understand your position. Can you answer these to help me get there?

- How will others tariffs, but just not this one little one that Alberta cares about, “strengthen the relationship?”
- Explain how our pension and the RCMP are harming Alberta.
- Explain how the federal government giving money to municipalities in Alberta is harmful to Alberta.
- In a negotiation, how is one person who is not authorized to make any sort of terms going against the wishes of the people responsible for that negotiation and advocating for themselves not “undermining” the position?

[BoLevi]

I don't think anyone is claiming that Smith isnt making Central Canada's position weaker.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

I don't think anyone is claiming that Smith isnt making Canada's position weaker.

Fixed that for you

[Andy83]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Well, no, not doing previous deals with Trump doesn’t mean she isn’t the right person, she isn’t the right person because she doesn’t have any authority, of which there are many reasons why, but not least of which is the fact that she wasn’t even down there on “official business.”

Seems like it might be pretty hollow coming from who actually has no authority to make any sort of deal with Trump, right?

And if export taxes or shutting off the taps just isn’t viable and is a hollow threat… remind me why you’re sitting here arguing about why Smith is right for stomping her feet around and freaking out because it was put on the table in the first place? I mean if they’re not going to do it anyway, why debase yourself defending her incompetence and the fact that she made up reasons why it couldn’t happen instead of just calling their bluff? Wouldn’t the smart thing to do have been to just sit quiet and let what was never going to happen not happen? You know, maintain “unity”? Why so scared if it’s not going to happen?

You’re right though, I’m having trouble dumbing myself down enough to understand your position. Can you answer these to help me get there?

- How will others tariffs, but just not this one little one that Alberta cares about, “strengthen the relationship?”
- Explain how our pension and the RCMP are harming Alberta.
- Explain how the federal government giving money to municipalities in Alberta is harmful to Alberta.
- In a negotiation, how is one person who is not authorized to make any sort of terms going against the wishes of the people responsible for that negotiation and advocating for themselves not “undermining” the position?

I don't think you should be wasting your energy "dumbing down", that doesn't seem to be a problem for you at all. Pulling your head out of the sand, or your ass will likely result in a better understanding. Though, I don't believe this is something you have any genuine interest in anyway.

I could turn it right back around, and say if she has no say in any of this as you suggest, why is everyone so up in arms about her supposed anti-team Canada treachery? If she has no authority, no impact on negotiations, what she says or does shouldn't matter, right? But we both know that's a load of horses##t. Or maybe you don't. That's a you problem.

Agree or disagree with Trumps statements regarding tariffs, it's what he's said. He's the trading partner we have to deal with. It's the path he's said he's chosen. Nothing we can do about that. You can either realize he's a narcissist that just says a bunch of things (often ridiculous) hoping it gets him a better deal, and fight for a deal that works for Canadians, or you can follow him, play his game, and say a bunch of stupid #### too. Issuing ridiculous empty threats, again, unless you are willing to burn it all to the ground, is definitely not productive, or in Canadas best interest. If you can't comprehend how even an empty threat can still be damaging, that's a you problem.

If you can't comprehend how advocating for a win-win deal, is fundamentally different from getting a deal done, well, again, that's a you problem.

Your first question, more so "this one little one", referring to Canadas largest export, paints a pretty clear picture how disingenuous you truly are.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Andy83

She picks fights with Ottawa? I'd say she opposes legislation that she views as harmful to Alberta. But if you think that's picking a fight, you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Reality is, Alberta, and more specifically the Alberta energy industry, have been the doormat of Liberal Canada for a decade, and now they are crawling back begging for unity, looking for a bargaining chip in our most valuable export.

She's smart enough to know all this rhetoric is a lose lose proposition. She's smart enough to know that having a mutually benificial relationship with the US is literally our only option. If you think that's "bending the knee", again, you do you.

Other long term option is building access to other markets to remove US leverage. That’s coming soon when the adults are in charge again.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by 8 Ball

Smith isn’t stupid for one thing. She is merely pandering to her base and her base was able to vote her in. We get what we deserve. America voted Trump in and they will get what they deserve. And we’re all gonna pay for it.

She absolutely is. This is provable with fact after fact, starting with Ivermectin, not realizing premiers aren't governors, compared vaccinated Canadians to supporters of Hitler, ####ery with wind and solar(great economic success!), claimed the Federal government isn't a national government, giving legitimacy to goddamned chemtrail theories, I mean, we can continue, but if that's necessary that's more an issue for the person thinking DS isn't stupid. She absolutely is.

Oh look, someone put it all in one place. Put your stupid hat on, it's going to be quite the journey.

https://www.tiktok.com/discover/dani...tupid-comments

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Other long term option is building access to other markets to remove US leverage. That’s coming soon when the adults are in charge again.

What evidence is there of that? The CPC got exactly zero new pipelines built in their time in office. The Liberals have had both TMX and Coastal Gas Link completed (at great expense both politically and economically). The idea that they’re shutting in the resources and leaving trapped assets is just not supported by the information.

And sure, we need more access to a more diversified market. Can we do that by Monday or Tuesday? No? Oh so this is just a red herring so we don’t have to address the pending issue.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Other long term option is building access to other markets to remove US leverage. That’s coming soon when the adults are in charge again.

I'm not so sure. Even well intentioned politicians have an electorate issue.

The problem with Canada is that it's full of Canadians.