Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Did some Googling just for you Pepsi. One of us fits this statement, and it sure as hell is not me.

gaslight
2 of 2
verb
gaslighted or gaslit ˈgas-ˌlit ; gaslighting; gaslights
transitive verb
2
: to grossly mislead or deceive (someone) especially for one's own advantage

Try a dictionary once in a while. Especially if you’re going to talk about “inflection” like that lol.

EDIT: and reframing this red herring take as an opinion isn’t much better, since there’s zero evidence to support it, so you’re really just making yourself look like a ridiculous conspiracy theorist

But I love that you have so little self awareness you went from accusing me of being a gaslighter to mocking me for using the term after you had to google it because you apparently didn’t know what it meant.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Just addendum to the gaslighting post, it isn't gaslighting if people are informing you you are wrong, and showing why.

'Gaslighting' is the hot new buzzword that everyone loves to throw around but very few understand.

Nobody will be able to warp my understanding of reality in any way that would make me believe otherwise!

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

It's absolutely terrifying that some of you believe you have more democratic rights then others.

Why shouldn’t we allow anyone under 18 to vote then?

[woob]

Singh: We'll help prop up the Liberals to get this tariff assistance passed.
Also Singh: We're totally going to take down the Liberals when Parliament reconvenes.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Why shouldn’t we allow anyone under 18 to vote then?

If they have a job and pay taxes then they should! No taxation without representation!

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

gaslight
2 of 2
verb
gaslighted or gaslit ˈgas-ˌlit ; gaslighting; gaslights
transitive verb
2
: to grossly mislead or deceive (someone) especially for one's own advantage

Try a dictionary once in a while. Especially if you’re going to talk about “inflection” like that lol.

EDIT: and reframing this red herring take as an opinion isn’t much better, since there’s zero evidence to support it, so you’re really just making yourself look like a ridiculous conspiracy theorist

But I love that you have so little self awareness you went from accusing me of being a gaslighter to mocking me for using the term after you had to google it because you apparently didn’t know what it meant.

1- to grossly mislead or deceive (someone) especially for one's own advantage
And my advantage is?
2- having a discussion around the report is not gaslighting anyone. I was having a sincere conversation about the report that you took as a personal insult
3-I purposefully “gaslighted” you in my mocking response(got me)
4-I googled it to not have to type it out. I might not be self aware but you sure dont spend a whole lot of time looking ar yourself either.
5- what evidence is there to say that PP cant get the security clearance to begin with?

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by belsarius

How I see it, is that NSICOP is made up of parliamentarians who are reading these intelligence reports on their peers and seeing the worst. I haven't gone through the whole list to see their respective careers, but I doubt they were all lawyers and judges. They are looking at the information from a jaded lenses, looking at peers and jumping at partial intelligence. Much like the public was crying for when it wanted to "name the members!"

Hogue and her team however provides a more nuanced and balanced approach. She is looking at the evidence from a judiciary slant, and not jumping to conclusions without full evidential support. She needs to be beyond a doubt to make the same accusations. Something I seriously doubt a group of MPs and Senators did to the same extent.

I also tend to have trouble with leakers, especially in intelligence because they won't have a full picture. Especially if we don't know who they are or what their motives are. Based on the Hogue report, they were leaking sensational info that didn't provide full clarity or enough evidence to be as damning as they seemed.

Even looking at the differences in May's and Singh's impression of the report. She was very forgiving and saying it isn't as bad as it is being represented (much like Hogue), where Singh was "more convinced than ever" that some MPs were willing participants.

This is why it is important to have auditors and independent reviews. Everyone reading the intelligence, from a low level CSIS agent, to their boss, to the MP to the Hogue Commission sees it a little differently. In the end I trust the final report released the most, but that doesn't discredit the other viewpoints - it puts them into their proper perspectives.

Well said.

[fotze2]

Fata, now I have to go back and decipher who’s mad at who and why and what side I need to pick and this one looks like it’s gonna need some work from by high level skimming.

Why can’t AI just have a Cole’s notes of the feud if you don’t want to go back 30 posts?

Edit: went back one page and that is too much work for no upside. Pepsi is probably right but being the most infuriating person on earth to argue with. He’s Sydney Crosby of message board arguing.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

1- to grossly mislead or deceive (someone) especially for one's own advantage
And my advantage is?
2- having a discussion around the report is not gaslighting anyone. I was having a sincere conversation about the report that you took as a personal insult
3-I purposefully “gaslighted” you in my mocking response(got me)
4-I googled it to not have to type it out. I might not be self aware but you sure dont spend a whole lot of time looking ar yourself either.
5- what evidence is there to say that PP cant get the security clearance to begin with?

1. I don’t know, you tell me why you lied.

2. Correct, that’s not what was being referred to as gaslighting, and no, I didn’t take it as a personal insult, I was just having a sincere conversation about it.

3. OK?

4. You either didn’t know what it meant and you were throwing it around anyway or you did and you were purposely using it incorrectly. Not sure which you want to hang your hat on but go nuts.

5. There’s no evidence he can’t, but he hasn’t, and there’s bountiful evidence that he’s lying about the reasons for not doing it, evidence that includes other people doing what he claims it would stop him from doing and the very people who know what he can/can’t do saying he has no actual reason not to.

If every leader is encouraged to get security clearance, and every leader BUT PP has it, and every leader BUT PP can still speak on things PP is pretending he can’t speak on if it gets it, then he’s wittingly or unwittingly opening the door for people to speculate on why he doesn’t have it.

Given the actual facts of the matter, why do you think he’s refusing to get it? And why are you voting for someone who isn’t being transparent on why he’s refusing it?

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by woob

Singh: We'll help prop up the Liberals to get this tariff assistance passed.
Also Singh: We're totally going to take down the Liberals when Parliament reconvenes.

Singh is the penultimate hypocrite

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by fotze2

Edit: went back one page and that is too much work for no upside. Pepsi is probably right but being the most infuriating person on earth to argue with. He’s Sydney Crosby of message board arguing.

He's more like Phil Kessel. Always around and never taking a break, should be good but is mostly #### although shows flashes of brilliance.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

He's more like Phil Kessel. Always around and never taking a break, should be good but is mostly #### although shows flashes of brilliance.

Cool it Chris Butler

[Fuzz]

https://www.ekospolitics.com/index.p...er-past-month/


LOL.

[Mr.Coffee]

That should be a wake up call for the Conservatives.

Also, how hated was Trudeau? Just crazy.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

https://www.ekospolitics.com/index.p...er-past-month/


LOL.

What I told the CPC pollster who asked if PP has my vote - no, turf PP and I could consider it.

[Mr.Coffee]

Yeah, I wonder how much of that is also the Trump factor. People seeing his first couple weeks of craziness giving them pause.

[Fuzz]

Definitely a few factors. PP hasn't been able to pivot, and probably says Trudeau's name more in a day than any other Canadian.

[Mr.Coffee]

That should spell out a clear strategy for PP in my opinion. Time to move center big time.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Singh is the penultimate hypocrite

Just an FYI that you don't know what "penultimate" means...

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

That should spell out a clear strategy for PP in my opinion. Time to move center big time.

Instructions unclear, banning trans from sports instead.