Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Geraldsh]

I look at the transmountain pipeline as an example of government building what investors couldn’t and eventually realizing a profit. The same mo will be necessary until we have renewed confidence in investing in this country.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Azure

I guess it depends on why you think more refining isn't being built.

Right now we're refining about 2 million barrels per day. Shipping oil south, even at a discount, and then buying it back in the form of fuel against the US dollar should be more expensive than building more refining capacity in Alberta (closest to the source), and moving the fuel east / west as needed, no? Something we already do daily.

Why can't the refineries in Alberta that are already processing Alberta oil be upgraded to produce more diesel as an example?

I'm honestly tired of hearing its not cheap or not quick. And I think the rest of Canadians are as well.

Economics aren't the only issue preventing this. A mountain of red tape also doesn't help.

Go look at northwest redwaters history.

Did citizens get a good deal?

Refining isn’t like pipeline capacity where it benefits every barrel by accessing new markets. The barrels still need to be moved out of province, you just have a diesel shipping problem instead of an oil shipping one.

[indes]

Originally Posted by GGG

Go look at northwest redwaters history.

Did citizens get a good deal?

Refining isn’t like pipeline capacity where it benefits every barrel by accessing new markets. The barrels still need to be moved out of province, you just have a diesel shipping problem instead of an oil shipping one.

The second we start building refineries is the second US refineries start making the adjustments to refine light oil. Without the US as a customer we would end up with more landlocked refined products than we have landlocked oil right now. Our biggest issue is export - not product to sell.

I do agree Canada should have enough refining capacity to support ourselves though. The only way that works is if we can get refined or unrefined products to the east. Maybe its an easier sell on a pipeline if the government is going to build new refineries or expand existing ones in Quebec & Ontario. It really does highlight that Energy East should have been built in national interest. Maybe we get it done now?

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

More like worlds largest economy separating from the pack FTW. Sounds like we better stop subsidizing them.

How are we subsidizing the US?

If we are subsidizing the US, why would we be doing that?

[Doctorfever]

Carney supports Hamas? Boy, he is really going after the NDP voters.

/g

[shotinthebacklund]

Mark Carney had a horrible 2 debates. Frank Baylis easily won the debates.
Mark Carney clearly showed anger and frustration when questioned, and refused to answer questions and just re-framed the question when he needed.

Freeland is insane. Gould was terrible.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by GGG

I think there is still risk that Carney Igantiaffs himself. His Carbon tax plan is to expand the Carbon tax onto imports and hide it. It’s correct economically but if people catch on it could sink him.

His comments around the price of steel were bad

He is not a politician So still lots of opportunities for him to sink himself.

To me (and probably many many others) that's one of his biggest upsides. Carney's resume is overflowing with real world accomplishments, he is the polar opposite of PP. And if we're picking leaders with the best chance to guide Canada through one of the most economically challenged times of this century thanks to the orange idiot down south, I'll take the guy who steered the ship through the last great economic collapse and kept the country stable. I don't give a #### about some fumbling of words

[Fuzz]

Electing smooth talking bull####ters is how we got Smith.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Electing smooth talking bull####ters is how we got Smith.

lol. she is nothing of the sort. Smooth talking? maybe for some phonesex rightwing deplorables on QR77.

She got voted in because Albertans are dumb.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

lol. she is nothing of the sort. Smooth talking? maybe for some phonesex rightwing deplorables on QR77.

She got voted in because Albertans are dumb.

Yes, well, being a smooth communicator makes it easier to gloss over the stupidity of what she is saying. Dumb Albertans and BS sales are why we got Smith.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

To me (and probably many many others) that's one of his biggest upsides. Carney's resume is overflowing with real world accomplishments, he is the polar opposite of PP. And if we're picking leaders with the best chance to guide Canada through one of the most economically challenged times of this century thanks to the orange idiot down south, I'll take the guy who steered the ship through the last great economic collapse and kept the country stable. I don't give a #### about some fumbling of words

Absolutely, but people who partake in political threads with some sense of reason and nuance are a very small part of the electorate.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

I'm telling you, come out and support a massive expansion on the oil & gas industry and nobody will care about the carbon tax.

Given the whole situation in the US, there is also no reason we can't have gas & diesel refining capabilities in Canada that produce fuel for the entire country. That would lower costs quicker than the carbon tax increases them.

Canada's oil & gas companies have found ways to produce their product with the lowest emissions in the world. We can continue doing so while lowering emissions year after year.

Not true. We are good, but certainly not the best:


https://www.statista.com/statistics/...on-by-country/

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

To me (and probably many many others) that's one of his biggest upsides. Carney's resume is overflowing with real world accomplishments, he is the polar opposite of PP. And if we're picking leaders with the best chance to guide Canada through one of the most economically challenged times of this century thanks to the orange idiot down south, I'll take the guy who steered the ship through the last great economic collapse and kept the country stable. I don't give a #### about some fumbling of words

I think a lot will depend on how well he performs when debating PP.

I noticed in the latest debates, he mentions "clean" energy al lot. In considering his background re Climate Change, I feel that he will be a bad choice for resource development, especially in the west.

Also, a significant part of his economic policy relates to building houses, which obviously is directed at the young voters. However, with the tariffs, the cost of materials may skyrocket, making it difficult for the building industry to be much of an economic stimulator.

However, with his background, I think he would be a good person as head of the opposition.

[CliffFletcher]

Debates typically don’t move the needle much. They’re so rehearsed that there’s rarely any drama. The bigger concern with someone like Carney is he isn’t used to campaigning. Experienced politicians have proven they’re not prone to spouting headline-making gaffes at Rotary Club lunches in Hamilton.

We say we want normal people who aren’t smooth-tongued politicians as our leaders. But the history of political campaigns shows the electorate punishes candidates who put their foot in their mouth. It takes discipline and a lot of training to make dozens and dozens of speeches without giving your opponent any ammunition that can be used against you.

[Monahammer]

Pierre's team seems to disagree about bad quality debate- they are focusing today on pushing out old documents from when Carney was on the board of Brookfield rather than criticizing his performance.

Losers lol.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I think a lot will depend on how well he performs when debating PP.

I think debates rarely ever matter.

Not to say they never do but I can only think of three in my lifetime that I think actually made a significant difference. Turner-Mulroney, Notley-Prentice, and Harper-Trudeau-Muclair. Maybe other provinces have had them, I don't know I don't watch debates from other provinces. But those are the only three I've seen that I think made a difference and I've watched most of them for Alberta and Canada

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Parallex

I think debates rarely ever matter.

Not to say they never do but I can only think of three in my lifetime that I think actually made a significant difference. Turner-Mulroney, Notley-Prentice, and Harper-Trudeau-Muclair. Maybe other provinces have had them, I don't know I don't watch debates from other provinces. But those are the only three I've seen that I think made a difference and I've watched most of them for Alberta and Canada

I don't remember the 2011 debates, but the Orange wave started right after them. They were polling in the mid-teens before the election, and days afterward they were in the low 20s, and a week later hit that 30% mark. I can't say if it was the debate specifically, but it must have been a factor with that timing.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Pierre's team seems to disagree about bad quality debate- they are focusing today on pushing out old documents from when Carney was on the board of Brookfield rather than criticizing his performance.

Losers lol.

December 1, 2024, just weeks before Carney was being pushed as the country's next finance minister and while actively hired as special advisor and the chair of the Liberal task force on economic growth, less than 3 months ago, is old according to you?

Poilievre / CPC issues and reluctance to criticize Trump aside which may cost him the election, the leaked document is very damning and why Carney's main chance to get elected while everyone is focused on anger against the US before the skeletons have a chance to come out. He's fumbled the 2 Liberal leadership debates, and is going to be forced to be on the defensive as it now appears on mainstream media.

The document is absolutely pertinent.

[Ped]

Honestly I don't think it matters. I think disaffected voters have been looking for any reason whatsoever to not vote PP in, and unless Carney does something terrible before the election, he's in.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by belsarius

I don't remember the 2011 debates, but the Orange wave started right after them. They were polling in the mid-teens before the election, and days afterward they were in the low 20s, and a week later hit that 30% mark. I can't say if it was the debate specifically, but it must have been a factor with that timing.

I don't think that really "made a difference" The party that I thought was going to win the election and was generally expected to win the election going into that debate came out of the debate and... still won the election. Not sure determining who gets to ask the 1st question in QP really counts as making a difference.

My recollection of the three I mentioned was that the race broke one way as a result of the debate performance producing a result that was either unexpected or previously up in the air. Granted I was very very young at the time of Turner-Mulroney so a great deal of my determination of that is based on post-hoc reports and subsequent lore (but I did watch that debate and distinctly remember Mulroney coming out of it looking stronger).