Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Just the other day the Cons denied the nomination of a prolife possible candidate. So that's a step.

They've got to shout it from the mountain tops.

For better or worse, the politics in the states have a huge influence in how Canadians vote. The work the GOP is doing at a state level creates a lot of concern. Politics are as much about emotion and feeling as anything else.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Oh I have full confidence the pretzel logic of Canadians will figure out a way to forgive blatant corruption and the continued erosion of our government and democratic system due to boogeyman straw men whataboutisms and the continued fearmongering of “WHAT ABOUT THE CRYTPO THOUGH?!?!?”

This government is total garbage. Criminal negligence at minimum. This is how third world cesspool corruption becomes common place and brings down a country, when governments aren’t actually accountable for anything.

Not to excuse what the government is doing here in any way, but how is it criminal?

Also people don’t care about the crypto, people care about the other policies the CPC will implement and I think those people choose to look the other way when it comes to the liberal shenanigans because if both parties do questionable things it becomes a wash, in which case the default for the average Canadian is to vote for people who are actually committing to pass legislation that will provide them with a direct benefit or at the very least not take away what they currently have. If the CPC would just put forward a platform that takes away people’s doubts they would win, but they won’t so here we are.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Your takes are cartoonish at best and downright disturbing at worst in how detached from sensible they are.

Do you actually have an opinion on blatant corruption and why you think it’s acceptable?

Has any government in history been as scandal riddled as the Liberals? Certainly no government has been given this much latitude in history by the general electorate, that’s for sure. But yeah, for sure, I’m sure if the Cons get in we’ll all become frothy racists and abortion will be legalized and social programs entirely eliminated. For sure!

You think I want Blackface Mr. Dressup to be our PM still? lol Hell no!

But the idiot Cons can't nominate a reasonable leader and keep giving us no options with these deplorable pieces of crap!

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Not to excuse what the government is doing here in any way, but how is it criminal?

Also people don’t care about the crypto, people care about the other policies the CPC will implement and I think those people choose to look the other way when it comes to the liberal shenanigans because if both parties do questionable things it becomes a wash, in which case the default for the average Canadian is to vote for people who are actually committing to pass legislation that will provide them with a direct benefit or at the very least not take away what they currently have. If the CPC would just put forward a platform that takes away people’s doubts they would win, but they won’t so here we are.

Which policies? Have they put anything forward?

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

The CPC only has themselves to blame for people being fearful of their social politics. It would be as simple as denouncing members and excluding MPs who hold the problematic* social views.

PP just needs to make an example of an MP who is anti Abortion. Make a show of kicking them out of the room.

*in the eyes of your average centrist voter

I agree, but I do worry about corruption being normalized within our governments (I do mean this plural).

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

You think I want Blackface Mr. Dressup to be our PM still? lol Hell no!

But the idiot Cons can't nominate a reasonable leader and keep giving us no options with these deplorable pieces of crap!

Overall I think I'm making peace with it.

If I had to choose between Justin or Pierre? Thats a 'Sophie's Choice' scenario.

Hell...it might be fun to give Jagmeet a shot just for the novelty. Lets get some LEAP Manifesto in there just for the lulz.

Its been so long since an established political party issued a Manifesto. Lets ride the wave!

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Locke

Overall I think I'm making peace with it.

If I had to choose between Justin or Pierre? Thats a 'Sophie's Choice' scenario.

Hell...it might be fun to give Jagmeet a shot just for the novelty. Lets get some LEAP Manifesto in there just for the lulz.

Its been so long since an established political party issued a Manifesto. Lets ride the wave!

Are you effing kidding me???? I would choose Pierre over Singh!

just say NOOOOOO to the federal NDP!!

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Are you effing kidding me???? I would choose Pierre over Singh!

just say NOOOOOO to the federal NDP!!

Yes, but you also seem certifiably insane so there is that to take into consideration as well.

In fairness, give the choice between Justin, Pierre and Jagmeet?

[Mr.Coffee]

Have you read the LEAP manifesto?

Is it even still in the federal NDP platform?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Have you read the LEAP manifesto?

Is it even still in the federal NDP platform?

Yes I have.

I think its among the greatest pieces of comedic writing since 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.'

Seriously...there are a lot of good laughs in that document.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Locke

Yes I have.

I think its among the greatest pieces of comedic writing since 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.'

Seriously...there are a lot of good laughs in that document.

It’s… insane. I hope as hell it isn’t a part of what they’re pumping these days.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Which policies? Have they put anything forward?

https://cpcassets.conservative.ca/wp...04744e7480.pdf

Ok if you wanna do it the fun way I’m game. No they haven’t released a new policy platform under Pierre, meaning they haven’t stated their intent to change anything. With that being the case I suppose all we’re left with is speculation so I guess we can begin there.

Let’s start with the low hanging fruit, do you believe it is Pierre’s intention to remove their support for right to work laws from their existing party policy document. Do you think that they are more likely to gain or lose votes from taking that out? If your answer is the former, can you explain to me why it is so important for them to keep that in there?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

It’s… insane. I hope as hell it isn’t a part of what they’re pumping these days.

Look, I'd love to discuss it with you but I just got home from a very busy day of work and now I have to crochet my own footwear for tomorrow.

[Azure]

One thing is for sure, there is actually only a small group of people who would consider switching their vote from Liberal to CPC, and they are almost certainly not many of the people who are constantly claiming 'if only they would kick out the social conservatives.'

I remember this stupidity during the Harper years. All the boogyman stuff never materialized, and many of the issues around abortion are still lurking to this day despite Harper being long gone.

Canada had a quality candidate in O'Toole. Yes he perhaps wasn't the preferred guy, but he was good enough as a candidate to remove what was at that time already a corrupt Liberal government.

It is amusing how the Liberal supporters here who are making excuses keep saying 'i will only vote CPC if they do this, only vote if they do that', when in reality we all know they are never going to vote CPC.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

They've got to shout it from the mountain tops.

For better or worse, the politics in the states have a huge influence in how Canadians vote. The work the GOP is doing at a state level creates a lot of concern. Politics are as much about emotion and feeling as anything else.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/poli...-conservative/

For reference

Two national anti-abortion groups are raising concerns about Pierre Poilievre’s leadership after the federal Conservative party upheld the disqualification of a candidate for a party nomination in Ontario although he was backed by five MPs.
Gerrit Van Dorland’s supporters in the southwestern Ontario riding of Oxford included Leslyn Lewis, a two-time candidate for the leadership of the Conservatives.
His recent disqualification from the race was allowed to stand after it was reviewed at a weekend Conservative national council meeting. Over the weekend, the council voted 11-3 to uphold an earlier decision by the party’s national candidate selection committee, party communications director Sarah Fischer said in a statement on Monday.
Ms. Fischer said Mr. Van Dorland, who has worked as an executive assistant in the House of Commons, was disqualified because of a failure to disclose required information during the candidate application process and that the recommendation for disqualification was first made by a local candidate nomination committee. Ms. Fischer did not elaborate in her statement and did not respond to questions about whether Mr. Poilievre played a role in the decision.

Jeff Gunnarson, the national president of the Campaign Life Coalition, said Monday that the decision was a “slap in the face” to the party’s social-conservative base, and criticized Mr. Poilievre for not defending party members from that wing of the conservative movement.

Mr. Gunnarson said his organization will monitor how other anti-abortion candidates are treated in future nominations, and campaign for Mr. Poilievre’s removal as leader if they are poorly treated, he said.
Meanwhile, the RightNow organization, a political anti-abortion organization, said Monday the situation involving Mr. Van Dorland has prompted an effort to begin widely canvassing current and former anti-abortion MPs, and members of the national council and others in the Conservative party to figure out how to approach the next federal election.


Earlier, spokesperson Scott Hayward had said RightNow would rally Conservative Party members to oust national council members seeking re-election to their positions, who did not support Mr. Van Dorland’s reinstatement.
Mr. Hayward said Monday that any lack of support for anti-abortion members for the Conservatives in specific ridings would likely not end well for the party.

[btimbit]

I happily voted Conservative when O'Toole was in charge, but covid absolutely pushed me away from the CPC

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

One thing is for sure, there is actually only a small group of people who would consider switching their vote from Liberal to CPC, and they are almost certainly not many of the people who are constantly claiming 'if only they would kick out the social conservatives.'

I remember this stupidity during the Harper years. All the boogyman stuff never materialized, and many of the issues around abortion are still lurking to this day despite Harper being long gone.

Canada had a quality candidate in O'Toole. Yes he perhaps wasn't the preferred guy, but he was good enough as a candidate to remove what was at that time already a corrupt Liberal government.

It is amusing how the Liberal supporters here who are making excuses keep saying 'i will only vote CPC if they do this, only vote if they do that', when in reality we all know they are never going to vote CPC.

The reality is it really doesn't matter who most of us on this board vote for, being from Alberta. It's already Conservative, it can't get more Conservative with our votes. Which leaves us voting for messaging.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The reality is it really doesn't matter who most of us on this board vote for, being from Alberta. It's already Conservative, it can't get more Conservative with our votes. Which leaves us voting for messaging.

Well it does make a difference. Remember this guy from the We committee meetings?
https://randyboissonnault.libparl.ca/
Do you really think he's got Alberta's interests in mind?

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Azure

One thing is for sure, there is actually only a small group of people who would consider switching their vote from Liberal to CPC, and they are almost certainly not many of the people who are constantly claiming 'if only they would kick out the social conservatives.'

I remember this stupidity during the Harper years. All the boogyman stuff never materialized, and many of the issues around abortion are still lurking to this day despite Harper being long gone.

Canada had a quality candidate in O'Toole. Yes he perhaps wasn't the preferred guy, but he was good enough as a candidate to remove what was at that time already a corrupt Liberal government.

It is amusing how the Liberal supporters here who are making excuses keep saying 'i will only vote CPC if they do this, only vote if they do that', when in reality we all know they are never going to vote CPC.

I know a few people who were intent on voting for O'Toole until he started catering to the anti-vax nuts in his base. If he had simply said "Listen to the experts, get vaccinated" and ignored the mouth breathers in his party I bet he'd be PM right now

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Well it does make a difference. Remember this guy from the We committee meetings?
https://randyboissonnault.libparl.ca/
Do you really think he's got Alberta's interests in mind?

OK, well 4 seats to 29. For my riding, it would take a lot to move the needle. Like, PP shooting a baby nit he street while smoking a crack pipe, and even then, I'm not sure.