Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

And who had the most reasonable response to Trump's bluster?

Danielle Smith.

Yes, yes, brilliant assessment.

"We need to be prepared that tariffs are coming," Smith said. "I haven’t seen any indication in any of the president’s public commentary or even in the comments that he had with me that he’s inclined to change his approach."

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...fs-smith-trump


She really nailed that one.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

How exactly have you come to that conclusion?

An excessive amount of Kool-Aid.

[Andy83]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Yes, yes, brilliant assessment.



https://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...fs-smith-trump


She really nailed that one.

To be fair, tariffs may still be coming. You don't know the future, so her first statement may still be true. Probably prudent to act accordingly. Also, maybe she knows what he really wants, and the second part of her statement is relevant as well?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Andy83

To be fair, tariffs may still be coming. You don't know the future, so her first statement may still be true. Probably prudent to act accordingly. Also, maybe she knows what he really wants, and the second part of her statement is relevant as well?

What I don't understand is, given her history, how you can give her the benefit of the doubt here?

[Andy83]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

What I don't understand is, given her history, how you can give her the benefit of the doubt here?

You don't understand, because it seems (maybe I'm wrong here) no matter what she does, you aren't going to agree with what she's doing.

I give her the benefit of the doubt because I believe she's doing what she believes (and i agree with her) is in Alberta, and Canadas best interest.

[direwolf]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

And who had the most reasonable response to Trump's bluster?

Danielle Smith.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I don't see Musk lasting more than 6 months. That might be tumultuous, but there is no way those two egos are going to get along. And with Bannon stirring the H1-B pot with visceral determination, I suspect it all blows up soon. Now, what does Musk do after he's been severed like an unwanted gangrene appendix? That'll be interesting. I suspect he may even hard pivot to authoritarians elsewhere.

But you forget one important and saving grace for Musk over Bannon, the one thing that ensures he wins this battle, Musk is worth 205 billion dollars and Bannon is worth about 20 million

All Trump cares about is the grift and a good grifter never drops a big fat juicy mark like Musk

[FurnaceFace]

Laugh. She’s a politician, like all of them. They are going to do/say whatever they think is best for the people that will get them elected/keep them elected and whatever they think will make “the other person/party” look bad to voters.

This is all just a high school popularity contest.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/...c8378d?mod=mhp


I wouldn't want to be in a position where it actually matters about predicting what Trump will do next, and what impact that will have on economies. But this is a good news day for Canada. Time:bought.

Big win for Smith

[GGG]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

And who had the most reasonable response to Trump's bluster?

Danielle Smith.

I thought you said it was a mistake for Smith to make the public comments she did and she should have done it privately

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by GGG

I thought you said it was a mistake for Smith to make the public comments she did and she should have done it privately

That's correct.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Andy83

You don't understand, because it seems (maybe I'm wrong here) no matter what she does, you aren't going to agree with what she's doing.

I give her the benefit of the doubt because I believe she's doing what she believes (and i agree with her) is in Alberta, and Canadas best interest.

How is believing she has intent you ideologically align with relevant to competence?

[Andy83]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

How is believing she has intent you ideologically align with relevant to competence?

I think it's far too easy to say "She/He is ####ing idiot" leave it at that, and disregard everything being done because you don't agree with some or most of their decisions/policy. If you don't believe they kind of go hand in hand, what's the point of any of it?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

Big win for Smith

This is delusional. One could just as easily say that the other provinces “unifying” made Trump reconsider his position.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Andy83

Like him or hate him, Kevin O'leary has said, from the start, he doesn't believe additional tariffs are going to be implimented. Takes a Wacko to know a Wacko.

Anyone who has a stock portfolio that is tied into Canadian American trade is going to preach stability right up until #### hits the fan, and they will be the first to sell.

It's all poker to these Corporate types.

[Andy83]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Anyone who has a stock portfolio that is tied into Canadian American trade is going to preach stability right up until #### hits the fan, and they will be the first to sell.

It's all poker to these Corporate types.

Definitely a valid observation.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Andy83

I think it's far too easy to say "She/He is ####ing idiot" leave it at that, and disregard everything being done because you don't agree with some or most of their decisions/policy. If you don't believe they kind of go hand in hand, what's the point of any of it?

It's not about agreeing with in decisions/policy. She's clearly shown herself to be unwilling to listen to those smarter and more knowledgeably than her. She proudly boasts of that. Add to that her questionable statements she's made on all manner of things, from vaccines to chem trails, and I'm just at a total loss as to how someone could have faith in her ability to make the right decisions.


Just being motivated by thinking she is doing what is best for Alberta isn't nearly enough. She has to prove she can actually make choices which are good for Alberta, and I've yet to see any evidence of that. From her green energy bans, to the coal policy, to denying us free federal funding, to Turkish tylenot, to not understanding premier powers, to Ivermectin, to the APP, to...well, I just don't get it. Why, beyond "she thinks she is doing right for Alberta" do you offer her such support? What's that based on? Anything more than Blue, and that she yells at Trudeau lots?

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

This is delusional. One could just as easily say that the other provinces “unifying” made Trump reconsider his position.

Let's simplify it

Trump's Motivation: Negotiation
Smith's Motivation: Negotiation

Team "Canada" led by the most "unpopular PM in Canadian history, who despite that refuses to step down until it suits him" Motivation: Trade war.

I am pretty sure who is on the wrong side of history, they both went down there to talk to him and came back with 2 different interpretations on what was going to happen. Smith interpreted the right way and goes into that relationship a step up from the others like JT, Ford and whoever is the Premier of that welfare state Quebec

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

Let's simplify it

Trump's Motivation: Negotiation
Smith's Motivation: Negotiation

Team "Canada" led by the most "unpopular PM in Canadian history, who despite that refuses to step down until it suits him" Motivation: Trade war.

I am pretty sure who is on the wrong side of history, they both went down there to talk to him and came back with 2 different interpretations on what was going to happen. Smith interpreted the right way and goes into that relationship a step up from the others like JT, Ford and whoever is the Premier of that welfare state Quebec

Sure is easy to "negotiate" when you only have to worry about one apple and not the whole apple cart.

And that's the real kicker with your views and politics - as long as it's good for me, who gives a flying #### about anyone else. You benefit from the rest of us making informed, considerate decisions while throwing it back and saying, "see, I'm right."

[Andy83]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

It's not about agreeing with in decisions/policy. She's clearly shown herself to be unwilling to listen to those smarter and more knowledgeably than her. She proudly boasts of that. Add to that her questionable statements she's made on all manner of things, from vaccines to chem trails, and I'm just at a total loss as to how someone could have faith in her ability to make the right decisions.


Just being motivated by thinking she is doing what is best for Alberta isn't nearly enough. She has to prove she can actually make choices which are good for Alberta, and I've yet to see any evidence of that. From her green energy bans, to the coal policy, to denying us free federal funding, to Turkish tylenot, to not understanding premier powers, to Ivermectin, to the APP, to...well, I just don't get it. Why, beyond "she thinks she is doing right for Alberta" do you offer her such support? What's that based on? Anything more than Blue, and that she yells at Trudeau lots?

To me, shes no different than any other political figure. She's going to do/say things i love or hate, and everything in-between. In the end, i think a large portion of their energy goes into what serves them best, sometimes we end up getting in the way and end up benefitting, sometimes we lose. While I'm not suggesting everything else is forgotten and not taken into consideration, somewhat isolating every decision/policy is kind of important (to me anyway).

For me anyway, even the biggest "idiots" who I tend to disagree with the most are still capable of doing good, even if it's rooted in personal political benefit.