Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Muta

There is an odd sense of fear and desperation from the conservatives in this thread recently. It's refreshing.

It’s because we know it’s over. It all ended on inauguration day.

The LIBS are gonna ride Flight 905 (that’s an Ontario area code btw) right to a majority.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

They're free to ask what they want to ask, and he's free to answer how he wants to answer.

It's clear that the questions were not asked for genuine purposes, but were instead gotcha questions meant as political attacks. He can and should push back against sneaky gotcha questions.

It's funny how you never take issue with the anger/animosity/dishonesty of the administration to the south when they give their answers to questions. Yet you light your hair on fire for every little thing this government says. Almost like you're a political hack or something.

Uh, what? Delusional take there buddy. I have no lost love for the chaps down south. Maybe go read the tariff thread?

But hey, for someone who rails against the 'rich & powerful' all the time, you sure have no problem lapping up what Carney has to say. Pretty hypocritical there, don't you think? One would think Carney represents everything you hate and bitch about everyday. Ex-banker, Goldman & Brookfield elitist, no?

Oh right, its different when its 'your' side. My bad for forgetting how things work in your world.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Maybe you're new to press conferences but the media almost always ends up asking off topic questions. It should be expected by any politician.

Maybe he should only accept planted questions if he wants to control the narrative and discussion.

When is last interview Carney had with anyone from the CBC?

Maybe he doesn't know how it works.....

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Slava

I’m not sure what they hope to uncover with those assets. He’s got Brookfield shares, RSUs and other savings from his employment over the years. No one should be surprised by this.

Yeah, its also not a huge conflict of interest when he makes political decisions as PM that he knows directly benefit his assets or as an example Brookfield holdings.

The same holds true for all of them in case all the whataboutism chaps what to chime in.

I don't know what the answer is, but lets not all pretend that its not a major issue. Wealth gap anyone? You'd think Mathgod would be all over this, but I guess he has to be a team player of a sudden.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Azure

When is last interview Carney had with anyone from the CBC?



Maybe he doesn't know how it works.....

Do you feel the same when Pollievre does it?

https://youtu.be/As3AeZ_Ttl0?si=pjfKDOJZsd6RdPAR

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I dunno. If it’s a nothing burger just release the data or answer the questions honestly.

Just like how if it’s a nothing burger PP should get security clearance.

When politicians dance around stuff, all it does is raise suspicion on possible non-issues. If such suspicions are unwarranted or silly, then show people that.

He could have also said that he's aware that he needs to disclose them eventually and is working on getting it done.

Its also a completely fair question to ask, and it should be asked of every politician given the to crony corporate 'we will not let Elon make decisions if he has a conflict of interest' stupidity happening down south.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Azure

Yeah, its also not a huge conflict of interest when he makes political decisions as PM that he knows directly benefit his assets or as an example Brookfield holdings.

The same holds true for all of them in case all the whataboutism chaps what to chime in.

I don't know what the answer is, but lets not all pretend that its not a major issue. Wealth gap anyone? You'd think Mathgod would be all over this, but I guess he has to be a team player of a sudden.

Really the rule should be is all investments should be liquidated and put in broad global ETFs with some home country bias or property but with an upper limit on the value of the non-personal residence property.

This way none of this would matter.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Do you feel the same when Pollievre does it?

https://youtu.be/As3AeZ_Ttl0?si=pjfKDOJZsd6RdPAR

Yes.

Should I start writing every post with 'if PP does it, I don't like it either'?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Azure

Yes.



Should I start writing every post with 'if PP does it, I don't like it either'?

No, but I could show you clips of 100% of democratic world leaders having testy exchanges with reporters and I'm certain only one of them would be called out as if it's some sort of disqualifier.

Having testy exchanges with reporters is good, so long as it's respectful. It's exactly what we have a free press for. It's not any sort of anomaly or disqualifier for any leader to do so, again - so long as it's respectful

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Azure

Yeah, its also not a huge conflict of interest when he makes political decisions as PM that he knows directly benefit his assets or as an example Brookfield holdings.

The same holds true for all of them in case all the whataboutism chaps what to chime in.

I don't know what the answer is, but lets not all pretend that its not a major issue. Wealth gap anyone? You'd think Mathgod would be all over this, but I guess he has to be a team player of a sudden.

I wonder if Brookfield still wants that $50B of taxpayer money to set up a new investment fund in Canada.

[Winsor_Pilates]

https://vancouversun.com/news/bc-con...t-mean-for-you

BC also axing its carbon tax.

[Ryan Coke]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

No, but I could show you clips of 100% of democratic world leaders having testy exchanges with reporters and I'm certain only one of them would be called out as if it's some sort of disqualifier.

Having testy exchanges with reporters is good, so long as it's respectful. It's exactly what we have a free press for. It's not any sort of anomaly or disqualifier for any leader to do so, again - so long as it's respectful

Agreed in general, and for my part the issue is seeing the hypocrisy of many on this board (and elsewhere) who would complain endlessly against the politicians that aren’t on “their team”, and then make incessant excuses when it is someone on their side. Of course there are those blind partisans on all sides of the political spectrum, but on this board it tends to be dominated by those on the left. But they are the same in their lack of balance and critical thought as the MAGAs are down south, constantly justifying and rationalizing the failings of their team, while convincing themselves that everything the other team does is terrible.

I love different political views, but I despise blindly partisan hypocrits for where they are bringing our political and societal landscape. Trump supporters are exhibit A, but we see many with similar qualities on this board as well.

[MrButtons]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

Agreed in general, and for my part the issue is seeing the hypocrisy of many on this board (and elsewhere) who would complain endlessly against the politicians that aren’t on “their team”, and then make incessant excuses when it is someone on their side. Of course there are those blind partisans on all sides of the political spectrum, but on this board it tends to be dominated by those on the left. But they are the same in their lack of balance and critical thought as the MAGAs are down south, constantly justifying and rationalizing the failings of their team, while convincing themselves that everything the other team does is terrible.

I love different political views, but I despise blindly partisan hypocrits for where they are bringing our political and societal landscape. Trump supporters are exhibit A, but we see many with similar qualities on this board as well.

How in the world did you get here from the original comment about PP?

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by BigThief

Like you said renewing your lisence is a simple process. The Canadian Firearms Program also sent out notices months leading up the date of renewal as well. His idea of distinguishing between owning and operating a gun is just insanity as well. Should an owner pinky promise they won't use it thus avoiding registration?

flamesfever, this made my brain bleed. Do you think you struggling with your firearm licences in 2025 in Calgary would have prevented an incident five years ago in Nova Scoia?

While the process was relatively simple when I have renewed (twice now) the program is far from well run. I have never received a renewal notice, it's been 100% up to me to track when my old one is expiring. Most recent renewal was last year and they were running about 6-8 months behind to process them. I'm not sure how that is even possible but at least they acknowledged this and would not penalize anyone with an expired PAL that had applied for renewal and had not received it yet. Mine expires in October, I applied for renewal in August and received it in December. The upside it POL's have been eliminated (which is what I had) and everyone with one was grandfathered to a PAL.

[MrButtons]

Originally Posted by Azure

Yeah, its also not a huge conflict of interest when he makes political decisions as PM that he knows directly benefit his assets or as an example Brookfield holdings.

The same holds true for all of them in case all the whataboutism chaps what to chime in.

I don't know what the answer is, but lets not all pretend that its not a major issue. Wealth gap anyone? You'd think Mathgod would be all over this, but I guess he has to be a team player of a sudden.

I mean, Carney's parents we're educators, he went to Harvard on scholarships and financial aid and is probably as self-made as they come. Isn't this the exact thing that Conservatives try to champion? That type of financial movement?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by MrButtons

How in the world did you get here from the original comment about PP?

Victim complex and a complete lack of self awareness.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

No, but I could show you clips of 100% of democratic world leaders having testy exchanges with reporters and I'm certain only one of them would be called out as if it's some sort of disqualifier.

Having testy exchanges with reporters is good, so long as it's respectful. It's exactly what we have a free press for. It's not any sort of anomaly or disqualifier for any leader to do so, again - so long as it's respectful

I don't care about how he responds, I care about the fact that he thinks a reporter is not allowed to ask him about disclosing his financial info. Its crony bull#### and should be called out.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by MrButtons

I mean, Carney's parents we're educators, he went to Harvard on scholarships and financial aid and is probably as self-made as they come. Isn't this the exact thing that Conservatives try to champion? That type of financial movement?

So basically you have literally no point to make, so you resort to useless ramblings about what the Conservatives are all about.

Your team can do no wrong, and the other team has no business even asking questions.

[WideReceiver]

What’s the best guess as to when there will be an election? Spring? Summer? Fall?

[MrButtons]

Originally Posted by Azure

So basically you have literally no point to make, so you resort to useless ramblings about what the Conservatives are all about.

Your team can do no wrong, and the other team has no business even asking questions.

Nah I don't got no team. I do like Carney but also voted conservative last election

I was more making a comment on the wealth gap you mentioned, not on asking the question.