Canadian Politics Thread

[Optimist Prime]

May 31st Ontario was looking like this for federal voter intentions:

Cons: 46.38%

Libs: 31.35%

NDP: 14.75%
Grn: 5.92%

PPC: 1.37%

 

So 'battle ground Ontario' is a thing and it currently has a 7.5% swing vote deciding the outcome.. Can Pepi keep stoking the anger fire there for another 16 months? I doubt it. Greens will bleed 3% to the NDP and Libs when the election is called, probably 2% to libs and 1% to NDP. The NDP itself may actually shrink in voter intentions once an election is called: traditionally they always do. Historically the most support the CONS have ever had in Ontario since y2k was March 1st of this year with 49.93% voter intentions....we are already three months beyond 'peak con' in ontario and they have already lost 3.5% of that support, more than 1% down per month.... the Liberals on that day of peak CON support were at 25.2% now up 6.15% over three months, a TWO PERCENT PER MONTH RISE.

 

Shrug, call me an optimist. 

I think the Liberals are not yet sunk. That 46 will be 39 something in the coming 8 months, I am pretty sure of it. Now if the Liberals can make something of that who knows...but they are going to try. 

[Bob Long]

15 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

In broad strokes, the CON men have a 15% lead right now over the Liberals: that is only a SWING of 7.5%. 
Lets say, again just broadly speaking, that the election starts with a 10% lead, or just a five point swing vote. (remember six months ago they were tied, 16 months from now the voter intentions could be wildly different than they look right now today) 
if its a ten point lead.. it would look something like Liberals: 28%, Cons: 38% NDP: 18%, more or less...

 

So we already know from previous Elections the LIberals can form government with 32 to 34 % of the vote. The CONS have no dance partners at the moment and so they need 38 to 42% to form a majority, or obviously the Liberals and NDP will vote them down at the first confidence vote and form government again as they have today. (beore anyone yells about the will of the people: in this scenario the Combined Lib/NDP vote is about 48% or more, which would outwiegh the CONs 40%)

 

So basically, from todays numbers, all that needs to happen for the CONS not to form government is that the Cons fail to grow any more than they already have. Seeing as Peak Poilievre was almost a month ago and he has already lost 5% of his polling over the last thirty days..that is not really even that hard to imagine. 

So lets say the Liberals want a majority instead of relying on other progressive parties to prop them up: They are already ahead in the maritimes and Quebec: if they can make gains in BC and Ontario, the prairies aren't and never have been a growth prospect for the liberals, then we will at least have a status quo of the current minority government: BUT, and this is the tricky bit as its very fluid right now....

 

....The NDP have been losing voter support at the ballot box since Jack Layton's big breakthrough..they are trending lower in percentages and trending lower in seats...
It is entirely possible that with so many MP's not running again for the NDP, that their rump is reduced below official party status, that would be 12 seats, so lets say 11. If the percentage of their support outside the core of BC moves below 15%, which is entirely possible, that will generally go almost exclusively to the LIberals from Thunder Bay eastwards... and from the Rockies west... which could be a 3 to 5% swing from NDP to Liberals that could be enough to tip the Libs very near or over the majority threshold. 

I know that all sounds retarded considering the Libs are currently 15% behind the CONS...but what if I told you that if you take away the results from Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan and remove those results from the coast to coast to coast polls: that 15% current gap is already just an 8 points gap, or a 4% swing... it is much more likely sounding. 

 

Shrug. All I am pretty sure about is that without a pure majority, Pierre Poilievre won't hold onto power. Meanwhile, the Liberals, can survive or at least have a shot to survive with anything over 29%, provided they have a dance partner with another up to 18% support. The Prairies will almost totally go to Pepi Le Pew, that won't change, but 60 or 70 seats 'headstart' in the prairies might not be enough for the cons if they are mired at 34% everywhere else. 

 

 

Yep the CPC numbers nationally can look better for the cons due to prairie group think. I mean who cares if they win Yorkton by 65% or 95, it's still just one seat.

 

My Spidey sense says the US election will loom large. If Pp can be linked strongly to trump that may swing things back to a lib minority.

 

[Elias Pettersson]

15 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

Steven Harper called: he says sorry, but that boat sailed with prorogation. He called like four elections 18 months apart each...LMAO... your argument holds zero water. 

 
Harper was forced to call an election in 2011 because of a non confidence vote. So Harper calling 4 elections is a complete exaggeration. He was elected in 2006. The next election was scheduled for 2009 but he called it a year early as they had changed election laws in 2007. In 2011 it was forced and in 2015 it was the appropriate 4 years. So only once did he actually call an election early and it was a year earlier than it should have been. 
 

Trudeau needing an election during the middle of a pandemic In order to make sure he was doing the will of the people is also a stretch. According to this thread, every decision of the federal government during COVID was agreed to by all parties. So there was no questions as to what the federal government was doing. 

Edited June 8 by Elias Pettersson

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 
Harper was forced to call an election in 2011 because of a non confidence vote. So Harper calling 4 elections is a complete exaggeration. He was elected in 2006. The next election was scheduled for 2009 but he called it a year early as they had changed election laws in 2007. In 2011 is was forced and in 2015 it was the appropriate 4 years. So only once did he actually call an election and it was a year earlier than it should have been. 
 

Trudeau needing an election during the middle of a pandemic In order to make sure he was doing the will of the people is also a stretch. According to this thread, every decision of the federal government during COVID was agreed to by all parties. So there was no questions as to what the federal government was doing. 

 

Poor Stevie, I never realized how he was so manhandled by the opposition. He had no choice but to prorogue, change laws, and not play nice with others. No wonder he looked so grumpy.

[Optimist Prime]

2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 
Harper was forced to call an election in 2011 because of a non confidence vote. So Harper calling 4 elections is a complete exaggeration. He was elected in 2006. The next election was scheduled for 2009 but he called it a year early as they had changed election laws in 2007. In 2011 it was forced and in 2015 it was the appropriate 4 years. So only once did he actually call an election early and it was a year earlier than it should have been. 
 

Trudeau needing an election during the middle of a pandemic In order to make sure he was doing the will of the people is also a stretch. According to this thread, every decision of the federal government during COVID was agreed to by all parties. So there was no questions as to what the federal government was doing. 

I think we can agree that both Prime Ministers were within their rights to call the elections. Disagreeing on when your opponent called one isn't a bone to fight over, really? Right?

"Well your guy didn't cover his mouth when he coughed.."
"well your guy didn't say bless you when I sneazed"

 

Just petty bullshit really, I would say to both of our arguments about when elections were called. 

[Optimist Prime]

Just now, Bob Long said:

 

Poor Stevie, I never realized how he was so manhandled by the opposition. He had no choice but to prorogue, change laws, and not play nice with others. No wonder he looked so grumpy.

..and no wonder he went pouting to the Trump Whitehouse so many times during Trudeau's governing up here. 

[Bob Long]

Just now, Optimist Prime said:

..and no wonder he went pouting to the Trump Whitehouse so many times during Trudeau's governing up here. 

 

That pissed me off, disloyal creep.

[Sapper]

2 hours ago, Optimist Prime said:

^ not to mention that the unprecedented situation with COVID and the extensive means to combat its effects on Canada, an election was necessary as a sort of plebescite that the government was doing the will of the people. 

Had he not called the election the conservatives would have exploded in rage over a minority government about to spend billions and billions without a mandate 

 

They still got a minority but voters where clear that the majority supported anyone but the conservatives guided us through the pandemic 

[The Lock]

4 hours ago, Sapper said:

Fat fingers no spell.check on phone lol

All my posts should be taken as EO and O accepted 

 

I hear you. I have a bad habit of thinking one word and typing another and I only notice my mistakes after I post. Between that and thinking of more to say after posting, think of it as a miracle if you don't see an "Edit" note on a post of mine. lol

[Sapper]

2 hours ago, Optimist Prime said:

May 31st Ontario was looking like this for federal voter intentions:

Cons: 46.38%

Libs: 31.35%

NDP: 14.75%
Grn: 5.92%

PPC: 1.37%

 

So 'battle ground Ontario' is a thing and it currently has a 7.5% swing vote deciding the outcome.. Can Pepi keep stoking the anger fire there for another 16 months? I doubt it. Greens will bleed 3% to the NDP and Libs when the election is called, probably 2% to libs and 1% to NDP. The NDP itself may actually shrink in voter intentions once an election is called: traditionally they always do. Historically the most support the CONS have ever had in Ontario since y2k was March 1st of this year with 49.93% voter intentions....we are already three months beyond 'peak con' in ontario and they have already lost 3.5% of that support, more than 1% down per month.... the Liberals on that day of peak CON support were at 25.2% now up 6.15% over three months, a TWO PERCENT PER MONTH RISE.

 

Shrug, call me an optimist. 

I think the Liberals are not yet sunk. That 46 will be 39 something in the coming 8 months, I am pretty sure of it. Now if the Liberals can make something of that who knows...but they are going to try. 

Also with the lunatics running the show it's starting to wake some people up...

 

I have some very deeply conservative neighbors that are starting to acknowledge that PP scares the hell out of them with the hate he is stoking

 

A Trump win in November coupled with his expected bat shit crazy actions he has planned ..... Could scare reasonable people into plugging their nose and voted for the devil ya know vs the brand of hate PP is selling 

 

I think it's a case of Truduea giving PP enough rope to hang himself ......

 

Take the PP social.media support group - axe the tax. That group has gone completely off the rails with adding more and more to their demands ( calling for jail time for anyone voting liberal or NDP .... Or loss of citizenship..... Cloud seeding to create the climate issues and so on ... )

 

People I think are starting to understand just how dangerous they are

 

I follow their Facebook just for the laughs ..... Starting to see some of their extremests getting concerned that they are becoming the tin foil hat brigade and loosing credibility

 

Spoiler alert .... That ship has long since sailed lmao

[Optimist Prime]

58 minutes ago, Sapper said:

Also with the lunatics running the show it's starting to wake some people up...

 

I have some very deeply conservative neighbors that are starting to acknowledge that PP scares the hell out of them with the hate he is stoking

 

A Trump win in November coupled with his expected bat shit crazy actions he has planned ..... Could scare reasonable people into plugging their nose and voted for the devil ya know vs the brand of hate PP is selling 

 

I think it's a case of Truduea giving PP enough rope to hang himself ......

 

Take the PP social.media support group - axe the tax. That group has gone completely off the rails with adding more and more to their demands ( calling for jail time for anyone voting liberal or NDP .... Or loss of citizenship..... Cloud seeding to create the climate issues and so on ... )

 

People I think are starting to understand just how dangerous they are

 

I follow their Facebook just for the laughs ..... Starting to see some of their extremests getting concerned that they are becoming the tin foil hat brigade and loosing credibility

 

Spoiler alert .... That ship has long since sailed lmao

I don't think I could follow along without going nuts! Nutsier?

[Sapper]

21 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

I don't think I could follow along without going nuts! Nutsier?

A buddy of mine is writing a paper on it - documenting how mass hysteria can cause people to blindly dive in. Not so much a cult effect but mass hysteria on a topic ( think temperance movement and how they quickly conned every one to the point of having public disposal parties .... Followed by a wth have we done pause ).

 

The crazier the conspiracy the harder.the following with them it seems.

 

 

[The Arrogant Worms]

Capital gains proposal to be presented to Parliament on Monday, Freeland says

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/capital-gains-proposal-to-be-presented-to-parliament-on-monday-freeland-says-1.6919755

[UnkNuk]

59 minutes ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

Capital gains proposal to be presented to Parliament on Monday, Freeland says

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/capital-gains-proposal-to-be-presented-to-parliament-on-monday-freeland-says-1.6919755

 

The Canadian Centre on Policy Alternatives opines on the tax:

 

"A fair and decent society should have neither extreme of obscenely rich nor desperately poor. Taxation of the wealthiest is a central means to reduce inequality, provide robust public infrastructure and services that benefit all, and create opportunities for all to live a decent life."

 

https://www.policynote.ca/taxing-the-rich/

[Sharpshooter]

21 hours ago, Sapper said:

A buddy of mine is writing a paper on it - documenting how mass hysteria can cause people to blindly dive in. Not so much a cult effect but mass hysteria on a topic ( think temperance movement and how they quickly conned every one to the point of having public disposal parties .... Followed by a wth have we done pause ).

 

The crazier the conspiracy the harder.the following with them it seems.

 

 

Haven’t there already been ‘papers’ produced on this effect historically?

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

1 hour ago, Sharpshooter said:

Haven’t there already been ‘papers’ produced on this effect historically?

I believe they wound up in Panama, and then we didn't hear much about it after that. 

[Sharpshooter]

6 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

I believe they wound up in Panama, and then we didn't hear much about it after that. 

Well played. 

[Smashian Kassian]

On 6/6/2024 at 5:03 AM, bishopshodan said:

 

Why does Lorrie think they wont be prosecuted?

 

Who is Lorrie?

 

Where is Kanada?

 

Why would 'they' be prosecuted when 'they' (those in power) ultimately control the details available?

 

Canada -> Kanata is derived from the indigenous origin of the name fwiw.

 

I'd assume Lorrie is either dumb enough to misspell or else putting his own spin on it, but either way its irrelevant to the wider issue raised.

 

On 6/6/2024 at 7:09 AM, RupertKBD said:

 

My guess is that Kanada is some sort of reference to the USSR.....as if we're a Communist country, or some such nonsense. As if due process is some sort of repressive ideology....

 

As to who Lorrie is, he could be just about anyone. If you go by the content in the tweet, he could even be lurking here, under the guise of a former (or current) Canuck player....or a manlike figure made of snow....or a cartoon dog.....

 

As I said above, Kanada is likely a reference to 'Kanata', which is apparently an indigenous name, tho I guess its not surprising this is something new to progressives.

 

I'm Lorrie? Your too kind, I definitely don't have the followers he does.

 

And these people in charge of this situation don't deserve your generosity, imo. 

 

On 6/6/2024 at 7:03 AM, Bob Long said:

 

If we had to reveal key details about how we gather information, the yea there might not be a public trial. 

On 6/6/2024 at 7:16 AM, bishopshodan said:

No need.

Lorrie says treason has been committed by some politicians.

She/he doesn't know who they are, but they did it.

 

I'm sure we will all know who they are if we just wait long enough, right!

 

Why wouldn't they respect us enough to tell on themselves. 

 

On 6/6/2024 at 7:18 AM, Gurn said:

damn- sure glad this guy isn't a judge.

Seems to have already decided the case.

And without hearing any  evidence, or seeing any actual charges either.

 

Good point, trusting politicians is a much better route when it comes to foreign interference/maintaining their power.

 

I'm sure they have no invested interest whatsoever! How wrong I was to even question this! 

 

On 6/6/2024 at 7:26 AM, Bob Long said:

 

don't f*ck with Lorrie. 

 

It's a crappy situation, no doubt. It bothers me that there are likely MPs who may not face harsh consequences because revealing how we know they are crooked could hurt Canada even more. 

 

It's also disappointing, but not surprising, that PP will use this to to his advantage and not the country. 

 

It admittedly bothers you that this situation will never be properly resolved, yet the idea these people will never face proper consequences is the same thing blasphemous, & I'm the bad guy for even suggesting it. (I truly love ya BL, your an awesome poster, but even you have to see the contradiction here)

 

PP 'using this to his advantage' should be the least of the problems, and if its the most of our problems, then our democracy is ****ed. And I wouldn't necessarily doubt the Cons are apart of this fwiw. 

 

 

Edited June 10 by Smashian Kassian

[Bob Long]

5 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

Why would 'they' be prosecuted when 'they' (those in power) ultimately control the details available?

 

Canada -> Kanata is derived from the indigenous origin of the name fwiw.

 

I'd assume Lorrie is either dumb enough to misspell or else putting his own spin on it, but either way its irrelevant to the wider issue raised.

 

 

As I said above, Kanada is likely a reference to 'Kanata', which is apparently an indigenous name, tho I guess its not surprising this is something new to progressives.

 

I'm Lorrie? Your too kind, I definitely don't have the followers he does.

 

And these people in charge of this situation don't deserve your generosity, imo. 

 

 

I'm sure we will all know who they are if we just wait long enough, right!

 

Why wouldn't they respect us enough to tell on themselves. 

 

 

Good point, trusting politicians is a much better route when it comes to foreign interference/maintaining their power.

 

I'm sure they have no invested interest whatsoever! How wrong I was to even question this! 

 

 

It admittedly bothers you that this situation will never be properly resolved, yet the idea these people will never face proper consequences is the same thing blasphemous, & I'm the bad guy for even suggesting it. (I truly love ya BL, your an awesome poster, but even you have to see the contradiction here)

 

PP 'using this to his advantage' should be the least of the problems, and if its the most of our problems, then our democracy is ****ed. And I wouldn't necessarily doubt the Cons are apart of this fwiw. 

 

 

 

There's a whole bunch of issues going on here. Part of the problem is apparently our current laws are inadequate when it comes to being able to use intelligence info in court. How do you make things public or fair to an accused person, and protect your intelligence system and sources?

 

I don't believe that the people named will be allowed to run again at the very least, and I do trust the RCMP to do their job.

 

There is an interference problem and a new law is being developed right now.

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bill-c70-foreign-registry-speed-next-election-1.7229595

 

 

Edited June 10 by Bob Long

[Gurn]

5 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Good point, trusting politicians is a much better route when it comes to foreign interference/maintaining their power.

 

I'm sure they have no invested interest whatsoever! How wrong I was to even question this! 

[Bob Long]

Many here won't be old enough to remember it, but way back in 1987 Preston Manning whipped up the anger and suspicion, much like PP is doing now. PP's brand is more toxic but I guess thats the age we're in. 

 

But just like back then, this empty anger stuff won't lead us anywhere better. 

 

If PP and the CPC really cared about the interference issue, PP would get his clearance and see for himself whats really going on. For a so-called "PM in waiting" choosing ignorance seems like a bad idea. 

[bolt]

So are we just supposed to presume every single MP is compromised if they don't release the 11 names?  

[NewbieCanuckFan]

17 hours ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

Capital gains proposal to be presented to Parliament on Monday, Freeland says

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/capital-gains-proposal-to-be-presented-to-parliament-on-monday-freeland-says-1.6919755

 

[Bob Long]

11 minutes ago, bolt said:

So are we just supposed to presume every single MP is compromised if they don't release the 11 names?  

 

'we' don't get to know for a while. PP otoh could know today. Why isn't he trying to learn all he can about this? 

[RupertKBD]

6 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

I'm Lorrie? Your too kind, I definitely don't have the followers he does.

 

Wasn't referring to you mate....cheers.