Canadian Politics Thread

[Northern_Nuck]

7 hours ago, aGENT said:

 

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.

I agree, Canada needs a party for the people. There’s no one representing the average Joe/Jane.  NDP used to champion the middle class, but they’re far from that now.
  Jack Layton was a respectable leader. I thought Jagmeet was well spoken at first but it’s all empty talk. He’s voted down almost all of everything he campaigned on early on. 
 I was really young when cretéin liberals were in, but they didn’t seem horrible, kind of middle of the road. But now they seem obsessed with getting as much unopposed power as possible and going extreme left that those dictators have come from while catering to the WEF’s agendas at the expense of the Canadian middle class. 
 
 Early on I didn’t mind Harper and he seemed to make fiscally responsible choices that got the economy going. But he grew arrogant after a while and also in the last years started selling out Canadian interest to alliance with the WEF as well.  The conservatives then started acting in corporations best interests at an alarming rate, which I think ultimately cost them and has cost them since. 
 

 But the future looks bleak no matter what team people decide to cheer for, for the average Canadian. It’s become obvious that the whole system in Canada threw Canadians, their futures and their best interests overboard about 30-40 years ago. 

[aGENT]

37 minutes ago, Northern_Nuck said:

I agree, Canada needs a party for the people. There’s no one representing the average Joe/Jane.  NDP used to champion the middle class, but they’re far from that now.
  Jack Layton was a respectable leader. I thought Jagmeet was well spoken at first but it’s all empty talk. He’s voted down almost all of everything he campaigned on early on. 
 I was really young when cretéin liberals were in, but they didn’t seem horrible, kind of middle of the road. But now they seem obsessed with getting as much unopposed power as possible and going extreme left that those dictators have come from while catering to the WEF’s agendas at the expense of the Canadian middle class. 
 
 Early on I didn’t mind Harper and he seemed to make fiscally responsible choices that got the economy going. But he grew arrogant after a while and also in the last years started selling out Canadian interest to alliance with the WEF as well.  The conservatives then started acting in corporations best interests at an alarming rate, which I think ultimately cost them and has cost them since. 
 

 But the future looks bleak no matter what team people decide to cheer for, for the average Canadian. It’s become obvious that the whole system in Canada threw Canadians, their futures and their best interests overboard about 30-40 years ago. 

 

 

Ya lost me here. More side show nonsense. The Liberals aren't remotely "extreme left" or "dictators".

[Northern_Nuck]

10 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

 

Ya lost me here. More side show nonsense. The Liberals aren't remotely "extreme left" or "dictators".

They are if you get out of the echo chamber and look at it from a position of neutrality. 
 

 How many investigations and committees have been voted to get adjourned. How much funding has the party given major media outlets? How many censorship bills have been presented and passed?  No matter what team you cheer for those actions are wrong regardless of what party is doing it. It’s straight out of the road to tyranny playbook in 19th and 20th century global politics. 

[Satchmo]

17 minutes ago, Northern_Nuck said:

They are if you get out of the echo chamber and look at it from a position of neutrality. 
 

 How many investigations and committees have been voted to get adjourned. How much funding has the party given major media outlets? How many censorship bills have been presented and passed?  No matter what team you cheer for those actions are wrong regardless of what party is doing it. It’s straight out of the road to tyranny playbook in 19th and 20th century global politics. 

I don't get it.  Can you pick a 19th or 20th century tyranny and tell me what happened there that is also going on here?

[Northern_Nuck]

1 minute ago, Satchmo said:

I don't get it.  Can you pick a 19th or 20th century tyranny and tell me what happened there that is also going on here?

Look at any one in history, any leader that ruled with total authority. The first things to go are always personal accountability and free expression/speech and/or the control of information. 
 

 Conspiracy theorists always say they come for the guns first, but it’s always controlling what can be said and reported prior to that. 

[Satchmo]

1 minute ago, Northern_Nuck said:

Look at any one in history, any leader that ruled with total authority. The first things to go are always personal accountability and free expression/speech and/or the control of information. 
 

 Conspiracy theorists always say they come for the guns first, but it’s always controlling what can be said and reported prior to that. 

And you think those first things are in jeopardy here?  Or maybe already tampered with?  How?

[Northern_Nuck]

1 minute ago, Satchmo said:

And you think those first things are in jeopardy here?  Or maybe already tampered with?  How?

 I think when you have government interfering with what journalists can or can report, it’s a dangerous precedent. I think when newscasters try to emphasize a particular point of view it’s clear that they’ve been instructed to do so to attempt to control popular opinion.  Newscasters should present the story and leave it for viewers to formulate their own opinion. Ever since bill c-11 was amended and the government started subsidizing the 3 major networks in Canada, the ability to ask anyone in government the tough questions has been lost. 
    When you have political parties run committees to investigate their own scandals, it’s complete corruption. There should be independent impartial watchdog authorities that oversee and run these investigations. 
 These are things that I’ve only seen become predominant in Canada in the last 5 years. The CBC used to be great, but now they never question anything. 
 

 In the USA you have a far left network in CNN and a far right network in Fox. I don’t agree personally with the way either network conducts its business but I like that if you don’t go into viewership with a bias, you can see both sides of an argument, disagreement or issue and come to your own opinion on it. 
 

 I just think what’s been happening since around 2018 is a dangerous precedent being set in Canada. It could either put the controlling party into a position of unquestioned authority or possibly have all the right laws in place for a future authoritarian party to get elected and take full advantage of it. 
 

 Honest, open and free discussion are the most important things for democracy to flourish. It matters not if everyone agrees, but all views and concerns should be able to be discussed.  But I think lately in Canada everyone just throws on their team’s colours and blinders on and cheers for them ignoring any of their team’s mistakes. It’s really polarizing and divisive and it should be making more people question their bias and question all parties. 
 

 

[Spur1]

Wow. If we didn’t have free speech and press just think how many conspiracy theories we could rid ourselves of. 

[Northern_Nuck]

5 minutes ago, Spur1 said:

Wow. If we didn’t have free speech and press just think how many conspiracy theories we could rid ourselves of. 

Look how well that worked out 90 years ago for anyone who had questions for an unopposed, unquestionable group from Germany that portrayed themselves as socialists to get into power. 

[Spur1]

1 minute ago, Northern_Nuck said:

Look how well that worked out 90 years ago for anyone who had questions for an unopposed, unquestionable group from Germany that portrayed themselves as socialists to get into power. 

As the song goes please don’t let me be misunderstood. My point was that we have so many conspiracy theories we must also have free speech. 

[Northern_Nuck]

6 minutes ago, Spur1 said:

As the song goes please don’t let me be misunderstood. My point was that we have so many conspiracy theories we must also have free speech. 

Ahhh gotchya. I think some things that jeopardize the narrative of the ruling powers are portrayed as misinformation or conspiracy theory if the truth threatens status quo. You know “The end, justifies my means” , some conspiracy theories are proven true if given enough time and investigation but in saying that it’s probably a small percentage and there is some really ridiculous conspiracy theories out there. 

[aGENT]

3 hours ago, Northern_Nuck said:

They are if you get out of the echo chamber and look at it from a position of neutrality. 
 

 How many investigations and committees have been voted to get adjourned. How much funding has the party given major media outlets? How many censorship bills have been presented and passed?  No matter what team you cheer for those actions are wrong regardless of what party is doing it. It’s straight out of the road to tyranny playbook in 19th and 20th century global politics. 

 

Sorry, your going a bit too tinfoil hat for me. Free speech is not in jeopardy in Canada. Again, side show, not key issues. Don't let yourself get lulled.

Edited December 31, 2023 by aGENT

[Warhippy]

5 hours ago, Northern_Nuck said:

Look at any one in history, any leader that ruled with total authority. The first things to go are always personal accountability and free expression/speech and/or the control of information. 
 

 Conspiracy theorists always say they come for the guns first, but it’s always controlling what can be said and reported prior to that. 

You think Trudeau rules with total authority?

[Warhippy]

4 hours ago, Northern_Nuck said:

Ahhh gotchya. I think some things that jeopardize the narrative of the ruling powers are portrayed as misinformation or conspiracy theory if the truth threatens status quo. You know “The end, justifies my means” , some conspiracy theories are proven true if given enough time and investigation but in saying that it’s probably a small percentage and there is some really ridiculous conspiracy theories out there. 

 

[Satchmo]

11 hours ago, Northern_Nuck said:

 I think when you have government interfering with what journalists can or can report, it’s a dangerous precedent. I think when newscasters try to emphasize a particular point of view it’s clear that they’ve been instructed to do so to attempt to control popular opinion.  Newscasters should present the story and leave it for viewers to formulate their own opinion. Ever since bill c-11 was amended and the government started subsidizing the 3 major networks in Canada, the ability to ask anyone in government the tough questions has been lost. 
    When you have political parties run committees to investigate their own scandals, it’s complete corruption. There should be independent impartial watchdog authorities that oversee and run these investigations. 
 These are things that I’ve only seen become predominant in Canada in the last 5 years. The CBC used to be great, but now they never question anything. 
 

 In the USA you have a far left network in CNN and a far right network in Fox. I don’t agree personally with the way either network conducts its business but I like that if you don’t go into viewership with a bias, you can see both sides of an argument, disagreement or issue and come to your own opinion on it. 
 

 I just think what’s been happening since around 2018 is a dangerous precedent being set in Canada. It could either put the controlling party into a position of unquestioned authority or possibly have all the right laws in place for a future authoritarian party to get elected and take full advantage of it. 
 

 Honest, open and free discussion are the most important things for democracy to flourish. It matters not if everyone agrees, but all views and concerns should be able to be discussed.  But I think lately in Canada everyone just throws on their team’s colours and blinders on and cheers for them ignoring any of their team’s mistakes. It’s really polarizing and divisive and it should be making more people question their bias and question all parties. 
 

 

So much to comment on.  I've taken an unusual method to reply.  I am Mr. Italic below: 

 

I think when you have government interfering with what journalists can or can report, it’s a dangerous precedent.  I do too.

 

I think when newscasters try to emphasize a particular point of view it’s clear that they’ve been instructed to do so to attempt to control popular opinion.  I see no clarity there.  Maybe these newscasters are just liberals who think liberal thoughts and say liberal things, or conservatives who think conservative thoughts and say conservative things.  No need to call any of them puppets or anyone a puppet master.

 

Newscasters should present the story and leave it for viewers to formulate their own opinion.  I agree.

 

Ever since bill c-11 was amended and the government started subsidizing the 3 major networks in Canada, the ability to ask anyone in government the tough questions has been lost.   I can't agree here.  I'm still hearing just as many tough questions being asked as ever.  Tougher ones really because everyone is getting so worked up about things.

When you have political parties run committees to investigate their own scandals, it’s complete corruption. There should be independent impartial watchdog authorities that oversee and run these investigations. Sounds like something I could agree with but I'd need to know what scandals you are referring to before  I could even agree to call them scandals.

 These are things that I’ve only seen become predominant in Canada in the last 5 years. The CBC used to be great, but now they never question anything. Well, as you can see, I'm not in agreement that anyone is being muzzled so I can't comment on when the muzzling I don't believe in started.
 

 In the USA you have a far left network in CNN and a far right network in Fox. I don’t agree personally with the way either network conducts its business but I like that if you don’t go into viewership with a bias, you can see both sides of an argument, disagreement or issue and come to your own opinion on it.   Maybe.   You might be able to do that if you followed both networks simultaneously and in equal amounts.  I think most people just follow one or the other.
 

 I just think what’s been happening since around 2018 is a dangerous precedent being set in Canada. It could either put the controlling party into a position of unquestioned authority or possibly have all the right laws in place for a future authoritarian party to get elected and take full advantage of it.  All I can say here is that I think you are exaggerating.
 

 Honest, open and free discussion are the most important things for democracy to flourish. It matters not if everyone agrees, but all views and concerns should be able to be discussed.  Damn right.

 

But I think lately in Canada everyone just throws on their team’s colours and blinders on and cheers for them ignoring any of their team’s mistakes.  +1 for spelling colours as you did and for patriotically ignoring the screen annoyingly telling you that you'd made a mistake.   I don't know if what you said is all true though.   I have seen  'my teams' mistakes and have called them out.  Lot's of other folks around here do too.  So have all the news sites I follow.

 

It’s really polarizing and divisive and it should be making more people question their bias and question all parties. Things are certainly polarized and divided.   I think it's because modern politics is just louder than it used to be, and modern politicians are bringing everything down to Us Vs. Them. 

 

The main thing I have to disagree with is that we are 'on the road to tyranny'.  That's just sensationalist spin in my opinion.   You don't like our government and that's fine.   But you won't be able to convince me the CBC has declined because Josef Goebbels is now at the helm. 

[aGENT]

6 hours ago, Warhippy said:

You think Trudeau rules with total authority?

I love how to the loudest right, Trudeau is both an incompetent, "beta"  dope... and an evil authoritarian mastermind at the same time 

 

Personally, I think he's probably closer to the former, but I agree with a good chunk (not all) of his party's platform and policies. And as I posted earlier, all three parties leaders suck and frankly don't really matter as much as people seem to think they do. 

[Northern_Nuck]

7 hours ago, Warhippy said:

You think Trudeau rules with total authority?

Ask Jody Wilson-Raybould, CSIS or Michael Duheme. 
 

    Not once did I say Trudeau rules with total authority, I said rulers that do usually always start by doing the same things. I might have alluded that’s what his eventual ambition is. 
 

 But I see where this is going, it needs to be a far left liberal echo chamber, Neutral centralized opinions are not allowed from what I’ve seen as a constant theme of this topic. I can’t discuss things with close minded people that have a far right or left bias. And I’ve seen your history in this thread, so this is where you and I respectfully part ways. Cheers. 
 

[Satchmo]

15 minutes ago, Northern_Nuck said:

Ask Jody Wilson-Raybould, CSIS or Michael Duheme. 
 

    Not once did I say Trudeau rules with total authority, I said rulers that do usually always start by doing the same things. I might have alluded that’s what his eventual ambition is. 
 

 But I see where this is going, it needs to be a far left liberal echo chamber, Neutral centralized opinions are not allowed from what I’ve seen as a constant theme of this topic. I can’t discuss things with close minded people that have a far right or left bias. And I’ve seen your history in this thread, so this is where you and I respectfully part ways. Cheers. 
 

Sorry to butt in because I know you responded to Warhippy and not to me but I just have to ask:  Do you really feel you have been espousing a neutral centralized opinion?

[aGENT]

27 minutes ago, Northern_Nuck said:

Ask Jody Wilson-Raybould, CSIS or Michael Duheme. 
 

    Not once did I say Trudeau rules with total authority, I said rulers that do usually always start by doing the same things. I might have alluded that’s what his eventual ambition is. 
 

 But I see where this is going, it needs to be a far left liberal echo chamber, Neutral centralized opinions are not allowed from what I’ve seen as a constant theme of this topic. I can’t discuss things with close minded people that have a far right or left bias. And I’ve seen your history in this thread, so this is where you and I respectfully part ways. Cheers. 
 

 

@Warhippy is the epitome of "centrist" FWIW. 

 

I think there's a vast amount of confusion about what is "far left" and "centrist" these days.

 

And FWIW, "I can’t discuss things with close minded people that have a far right or left bias."... Sounds pretty fucking close minded.

[Wiggums]

1 hour ago, Northern_Nuck said:

Ask Jody Wilson-Raybould, CSIS or Michael Duheme. 
 

    Not once did I say Trudeau rules with total authority, I said rulers that do usually always start by doing the same things. I might have alluded that’s what his eventual ambition is. 
 

 But I see where this is going, it needs to be a far left liberal echo chamber, Neutral centralized opinions are not allowed from what I’ve seen as a constant theme of this topic. I can’t discuss things with close minded people that have a far right or left bias. And I’ve seen your history in this thread, so this is where you and I respectfully part ways. Cheers. 
 

 

I appreciate your efforts.  You're right, this place is an echo chamber and you're already being mocked by the usual suspects.  Best to just carry on your day doing something else 

 

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, Northern_Nuck said:

Ask Jody Wilson-Raybould, CSIS or Michael Duheme. 
 

    Not once did I say Trudeau rules with total authority, I said rulers that do usually always start by doing the same things. I might have alluded that’s what his eventual ambition is. 
 

 But I see where this is going, it needs to be a far left liberal echo chamber, Neutral centralized opinions are not allowed from what I’ve seen as a constant theme of this topic. I can’t discuss things with close minded people that have a far right or left bias. And I’ve seen your history in this thread, so this is where you and I respectfully part ways. Cheers. 
 

It's a yes or no question.  You understand this it's clear.  But won't answer it and instead make victim noises and bail.

 

The reason I ask this, and before you espouse having neutral views again after making the comments you have.

 

You've made numerous comments that indicate you don't understand how our system of governance works.  People who have made the same or similar statements as you have frequently fail to understand how it works 

 

So I'll just simply remind you that we've had a minority government for years.  Many of the issues you're whinging about are not federal matters or federal jurisdiction.  Trudeau as the head of a party, is merely the ass on a seat and a figurehead that is there due to a majority consent via a minority government beholden to not only the majority seating but also the Senate.

 

Every time someone suggests or insinuates that Trudeau is the reason for X Y or Z I understand more how our education system is failing or alternatively how people fall for those CRA scams so easily 

Edited December 31, 2023 by Warhippy

[Satchmo]

Just now, Wiggums said:

 

I appreciate your efforts.  You're right, this place is an echo chamber and you're already being mocked by the usual suspects.  Best to just carry on your day doing something else 

 

I think 'you guys'  (please forgive me for phrasing it that way) are just out numbered here.

 

BTW - I don't have any idea how the term echo chamber fits into things.

[Wiggums]

Just now, Satchmo said:

I think 'you guys'  (please forgive me for phrasing it that way) are just out numbered here.

 

BTW - I don't have any idea how the term echo chamber fits into things.

 

Yes, a minority. The minority opinion is chastised, ridiculed, teamed up on and then eventually ran out of the thread.  The ones who try to stay only cause more issues and tension because the majority doesn't want the other opinion around.  Eventually fighting escalates and the threads are shut down permanently just like at the old site.  The same group of "grown ups" here were involved in that.

[Satchmo]

1 minute ago, Wiggums said:

 

Yes, a minority. The minority opinion is chastised, ridiculed, teamed up on and then eventually ran out of the thread.  The ones who try to stay only cause more issues and tension because the majority doesn't want the other opinion around.  Eventually fighting escalates and the threads are shut down permanently just like at the old site.  The same group of "grown ups" here were involved in that.

I can see your point.   I too have been chastised and ridiculed (and sometimes just felt that I had due to my immense ego) and it's only human to be bugged by it.

 

Still, I think in this thread it all comes down to numbers.   Plus the fact that we are all mostly macho dudes on a hockey site and there are going to be some scrums and the occasional fight.

[4petesake]

21 minutes ago, Wiggums said:

 

Yes, a minority. The minority opinion is chastised, ridiculed, teamed up on and then eventually ran out of the thread.  The ones who try to stay only cause more issues and tension because the majority doesn't want the other opinion around.  Eventually fighting escalates and the threads are shut down permanently just like at the old site.  The same group of "grown ups" here were involved in that.

 

I could be wrong but I can’t think of any thread that’s been shut down since Ribs started this site, moderated for inappropriate content, sure. Threads get awfully quiet without a variety of opinions so everyone is encouraged to post. That said you (general you) can’t bitch and call it an echo chamber just because you happen to be in a minority on any given topic.