Canadian Politics Thread

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, MidKnight Ego said:

this right here... is the saddest thing i have ever read in my life... i see why you have no shame, you must be incapable of it

Just because you're angry doesn't mean you're bright or understand what you're talking about 

 

Being offended isn't a green card or free pass.

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, MidKnight Ego said:

stop lying through your teeth... its you that doesnt know what you are talking about... making uplies and putting words to mouth... get bent you saucy Curmudgeon

What am I lying about? Do tell me

[Optimist Prime]

45 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

So, according to your logic Stephen Harper should have won the 2015 election because he had 9 years of experience running a G7 country up to that point while Trudeau’s experience in 2015 was teaching kids French and Math in a high school. 

Not at all, no. Someone asked what qualifies Trudeau to be the PM or something like that: I replied that at this point he has done the job for 8 years and has a whole lot of on the job experience, more or less. Sorry I wasn't clear. 

[Elias Pettersson]

1 minute ago, Optimist Prime said:

Not at all, no. Someone asked what qualifies Trudeau to be the PM or something like that: I replied that at this point he has done the job for 8 years and has a whole lot of on the job experience, more or less. Sorry I wasn't clear. 

No problem my friend. At some point somebody has to get the experience. Every Prime Minister and every US President never had the experience of running the country until after they were elected. 

[4petesake]

3 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

No problem my friend. At some point somebody has to get the experience. Every Prime Minister and every US President never had the experience of running the country until after they were elected. 

 

I agree with your premise…in a way.

I didn’t like the Libs selection of JT precisely because he had no qualifications aside from being the offspring of a former PM. Which makes PP equally unqualified, or less if you count genetics.

[Bob Long]

13 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

No problem my friend. At some point somebody has to get the experience. Every Prime Minister and every US President never had the experience of running the country until after they were elected. 

 

But we've seen Skippy in action for 20 years and we know he's a moron.

[Elias Pettersson]

2 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

But we've seen Skippy in action for 20 years and we know he's a moron.

Unfortunately our options are a couple of morons and a guy that needed to change his name as a cover for his previous life. 
 

And people still laugh at me when I say our country is completely fooked. 

[Bob Long]

Just now, Elias Pettersson said:

Unfortunately our options are a couple of morons and a guy that needed to change his name as a cover for his previous life. 
 

And people still laugh at me when I say our country is completely fooked. 

 

Nah, it's not. We have systems.

 

Skippy is a real tool tho, too quick to stoke anger.

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Unfortunately our options are a couple of morons and a guy that needed to change his name as a cover for his previous life. 
 

And people still laugh at me when I say our country is completely fooked. 

IMO you're putting far too much emphasis on party leadership. The electorate doesn't get much say in which Muppet is the face of any party, nor do those leaders have as much unilateral power as people seem to think (if internet vitriol is any indication).

 

Like @Bob Longsaid, we have systems.

 

Vote based on party platform/policies and your local candidate. Voting based purely on a given party's leader is about the most ignorant, short sighted thing you can do. Vote in thoughtful, quality local representation to insulate us from what I agree are generally, bad, worse and awful party leaders.

 

@Heretic, this one's for you too.

 

 

Edited December 30, 2023 by aGENT

[PeteyBOI]

8 hours ago, Warhippy said:

What am I lying about? Do tell me

sorry i learn really quick who is a waste of time arguing with. your not worth my keystrokes.

[PeteyBOI]

8 hours ago, aGENT said:

 

Who's defending Trudeau's leadership ability? Most of the "defending" I see on here is people rightly pointing out he isn't actually responsible for whatever thing they're ignorantly screaming about that day. Today it seems to be MAID.

 

I doubt most people on this forum have ever voted for Trudeau FWIW, as I doubt there's many people from Papineau on a Canuck forum.

 

And no, Pollievre doesn't seem overly qualified either. But PMs don't really "run" a country either. Certainly not as some one person show.

wrong he voted it in, i was lied to

[PeteyBOI]

8 hours ago, Curmudgeon said:

 

Dude. Chill. You are on the internet surrounded by strangers who don't agree with anything you say. Maybe find something else to do?

people should stop lying to me and themselves. making lies

 

responding with troll questions and falsehoods

[Optimist Prime]

8 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

But we've seen Skippy in action for 20 years and we know he's a moron.

A great attack dog, not the captain of the watch however.

[Heretic]

15 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 
Trudeau’s father used to be Prime Minister. Isn’t that good enough of a qualification?

 

And if you really want to go there, his father could have also been leader of another country too.  

Here's what Pierre Trudeau thought of us:

 

Edit:  So what you're saying is, if a doctor had a son, his son wouldn't have to go to Med school because his father's "qualifications" are good enough and you would be okay with him operating on you?

 

Edited December 30, 2023 by Heretic

[Bob Long]

3 hours ago, Optimist Prime said:

A great attack dog, not the captain of the watch however.

 

Baird was better at it. 

[Heretic]

11 hours ago, aGENT said:

IMO you're putting far too much emphasis on party leadership. The electorate doesn't get much say in which Muppet is the face of any party, nor do those leaders have as much unilateral power as people seem to think (if internet vitriol is any indication).

 

Like @Bob Longsaid, we have systems.

 

Vote based on party platform/policies and your local candidate. Voting based purely on a given party's leader is about the most ignorant, short sighted thing you can do. Vote in thoughtful, quality local representation to insulate us from what I agree are generally, bad, worse and awful party leaders.

 

@Heretic, this one's for you too.

 

 

Exactly!

Politics has become just a popularity contest.  


 

[Alflives]

15 hours ago, MidKnight Ego said:

im so fucking angry right now

These threads are fantastic fun! Keep up the good work. Post lots!!!

[Johngould21]

13 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

No problem my friend. At some point somebody has to get the experience. Every Prime Minister and every US President never had the experience of running the country until after they were elected. 

Including Ronald Reagan. He blundered through his final years as President with dementia. Who then was pulling the strings in that Country?

[PeteyBOI]

45 minutes ago, Heretic said:

Exactly!

Politics has become just a popularity contest.  


 

in that case lets just replace JT with...

 

[PeteyBOI]

whenever i come on here, its almost as upsetting when you fuck up your youtube algorithm, getting these vids you really dont want,but your too lazy to fix the issue.

[Alflives]

39 minutes ago, Johngould21 said:

Including Ronald Reagan. He blundered through his final years as President with dementia. Who then was pulling the strings in that Country?

Bonzo? 

[Bob Long]

35 minutes ago, MidKnight Ego said:

whenever i come on here, its almost as upsetting when you fuck up your youtube algorithm, getting these vids you really dont want,but your too lazy to fix the issue.

 

It shouldn't be that upsetting. If the politicians own that much of you it's time to take a break.

[aGENT]

3 hours ago, Heretic said:

Exactly!

Politics has become just a popularity contest.  

 

Be the change you wish to see. Don't fall victim to the same "Trudeau vs Pollievre" side show narrative as the pleebs. And try to inform as many of them as will listen. Chances are, the leader of any of the parties will have little to no direct effect on your life unless you're in one of their ridings.

 

 

Edited December 30, 2023 by aGENT

[Northern_Nuck]

48 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

Be the change you wish to see. Don't fall victim to the same "Trudeau vs Pollievre" side show narrative as the pleebs. And try to inform as many of them as will listen. Chances are, the leader of any of the parties will have little to no direct effect on your life unless you're in one of their ridings.

 

 

It’s kind of like a wash, change, cycle repeat thing.  People have to start asking if they’re happy with the way things are and with the direction they’re going. 
 

 I think people have the misconception that a government is supposed to help them when they can’t afford housing, food etc… but I think that’s wrong. I think government needs to create the economic environment where affordability on everything becomes better, identifying the cause of people not being able to buy housing/food/etc and create solutions. 
 

 I’ve noticed it’s been bad for 10 years or so and it gets progressively worse each year, but the last 2 years have gotten astronomically worse and many economists say that rate changes take about 18-24 months to cycle through an economy and show their full effects. So if that adage is true we’re only seeing the effects of 2.5-3% and we’re in for some pretty tight times in 2024-early 25, when we see what 6.5-7% does.

 

 I’m not sure a change federally will make things any better. But I think keeping the same party in power, things will get significantly worse. 

 

[aGENT]

6 minutes ago, Northern_Nuck said:

It’s kind of like a wash, change, cycle repeat thing.  People have to start asking if they’re happy with the way things are and with the direction they’re going. 
 

 I think people have the misconception that a government is supposed to help them when they can’t afford housing, food etc… but I think that’s wrong. I think government needs to create the economic environment where affordability on everything becomes better, identifying the cause of people not being able to buy housing/food/etc and create solutions. 
 

 I’ve noticed it’s been bad for 10 years or so and it gets progressively worse each year, but the last 2 years have gotten astronomically worse and many economists say that rate changes take about 18-24 months to cycle through an economy and show their full effects. So if that adage is true we’re only seeing the effects of 2.5-3% and we’re in for some pretty tight times in 2024-early 25, when we see what 6.5-7% does.

 

 I’m not sure a change federally will make things any better. But I think keeping the same party in power, things will get significantly worse. 

 

 

Oh I get it, I don't like the direction we're going either. I just think people are WILDLY misguided in thinking that following that "wash, change, cycle, repeat" is going to fix that. It will simply continue that cycle, and continue to make things worse for your average Canadian. The Trudeau-Pollievre side show fervor is designed specifically to keep us distracted from that, and make sure you vote for one party or the other so the "bad guy"/"wrong team" doesn't win. Rinse, repeat...

 

I'm not suggesting re-elecing the Liberals is the answer. But electing the Cons to "fix" things isn't the answer either. Sure it would be a "change" that people are seeking, but historically, it's change for the worse. Tax cuts for the rich/corporations (among growing wage/wealth disparity), slashed funding for needed social programs (that end up costing more in the long run), selling off Canadian resources to foreign investors, just as much (or more) debt than the Liberals. 

 

That's not change for the betterment of average Canadians. That's change for the worse. And that's before you even get in to the archaic social policies and lack of environmental (which leads to economics, health etc) plan.

 

I get it, people have this sentiment of "are we better off than we were 10 years ago?" No, we're not... But there's also been a pandemic, invasion in Ukraine, supply chain interruptions, increasing climate change issues with food supply, fires etc, and an aging population/demographic issue. All global things that are causing major shifts in economics and our quality of life and affordability, and have zip to do with whichever party happened to be sitting in power in Canada at the time.

 

One thing both parties have utterly failed at is replacing the CMHC public housing funding that was cancelled ~30 years ago. The housing/affordability crisis didn't start in the last ~5 years. This has been building for decades. It's just gotten naturally, progressively worse over that time and then was exacerbated by the pandemic.

Multiple governments of BOTH parties have done squat about it (though the Liberals look like they're going to do at least "something" soon).

 

What we need is a party that ACTUALLY addresses these issues. And for that we need an electorate that's actually informed and focused on demanding solutions to things like housing, the economy, climate change, health care etc and not focused on "Fuck Trudeau" and "Pierre Poutine" side shows.