Canadian Politics Redux

DarthMaeglin

Parksy said:

I watched 15 minutes of Pierre's 'Town Hall - Axe the Tax' meeting in Nova Scotia. Only word that I can accurately use to describe it is "Cringe." 

There's a lot to unpack as to why it was awful.. but the thing I can't wrap my head around is why on earth is he doing this stuff?  He's basically 100% in campaign mode... still pandering to the 'Never Trudeau' crowd..... with no election in sight. 

He had a packed hall... some with signs that read "COMMON SENSE."  Sorry folks... but packing yourself in a hall to hear Pierre grasp at straws and try to gain support when an election is miles and miles away is the furthest thing from 'common sense.' 

I've said it once and I will say it again... if Charest was elected leader of the opposition, I think I'd be behind the Conservatives all the way.  But I simply don't see Pierre as PM.  He can use his populist tactics alllllll day long, but when crunch time comes around, Trudeau will mop the floor with him. 

Our future... two polished turd candidates duking it out once again. 

I’ll suggest that he does these town halls for the same reasons Trudeau does his: exposure.

As far as this being campaigning, in a minority government an election is a snap of the fingers away, confidence-and-supply agreements notwithstanding. I suspect Jagmeet has no interest in an election right now, but is that just for his own reasons or truly for the benefit of the country (personally I lean towards the first)?

Parksy

DarthMaeglin said:

Parksy said:

I watched 15 minutes of Pierre's 'Town Hall - Axe the Tax' meeting in Nova Scotia. Only word that I can accurately use to describe it is "Cringe." 

There's a lot to unpack as to why it was awful.. but the thing I can't wrap my head around is why on earth is he doing this stuff?  He's basically 100% in campaign mode... still pandering to the 'Never Trudeau' crowd..... with no election in sight. 

He had a packed hall... some with signs that read "COMMON SENSE."  Sorry folks... but packing yourself in a hall to hear Pierre grasp at straws and try to gain support when an election is miles and miles away is the furthest thing from 'common sense.' 

I've said it once and I will say it again... if Charest was elected leader of the opposition, I think I'd be behind the Conservatives all the way.  But I simply don't see Pierre as PM.  He can use his populist tactics alllllll day long, but when crunch time comes around, Trudeau will mop the floor with him. 

Our future... two polished turd candidates duking it out once again. 

I’ll suggest that he does these town halls for the same reasons Trudeau does his: exposure.

As far as this being campaigning, in a minority government an election is a snap of the fingers away, confidence-and-supply agreements notwithstanding. I suspect Jagmeet has no interest in an election right now, but is that just for his own reasons or truly for the benefit of the country (personally I lean towards the first)?

I agree 100%.  Jagmeet holds the cards right now... and I don't see him letting that go anytime soon... especially considering the momentum Pierre is (somehow) gaining.  He and the NDP stand to gain absolutely nothing by forcing an election anytime soon.  In two years, I don't see that changing either... but for now he at least has Trudeau by the sack...  which is why I don't understand what Pierre has to gain by the constant campaigning.  I don't see him moving the dial anywhere near an election win. 

BF89905

Zod said:

I once had a University professor that argued the skills needed to win an election are not the same skills needed to do the job.  I don't disagree with the argument.

Very true

HughFreakingDillon

https://twitter.com/d0j0h/status/1679506839237545984?s=46

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

https://twitter.com/d0j0h/status/1679506839237545984?s=46

So what is your point? Do you fully endorse what is said? I watched the whole load of adorable bullshit and he seems to get away with a lot of misinformation of his own, as usual. But anything’s acceptable if it further vilifies the evil right wing, correct?

His entire monologue (punctuated by one brief comment, very similar to the other video you liked with the young man a couple months ago) falls apart when we look at his record. He doesn’t stand up for everyone’s rights (look to the convoy protests), and how many here does he consider far-right because you object to a school keeping fundamental information about children secret from their parents?

And please point me to one single policy of the CPC that takes away rights from the LGBT groups (I guess he’s accepted that he can’t force the 2S to the front of the acronym, lol?) or any other group. No, he doesn’t name the party or its current leader (this is a very recent video given the reference to the Edmonton teacher (fuck her, btw)), but does he really need to, the way he delivers his speech?

I’ll still give you this, and I don’t believe I’ve ever denied this, he’s an incredibly slick politician.

Edited to remove an extra “he” from a sentence, ooops, lol.

HughFreakingDillon

I didn't memorize the entire thing, but I believe he vilified the American far right for the anti-LGBTQ misinformation here. 

All I'll say is this: it's obvious your extreme hatred towards JT so overwhelms your bias that even a normal conversation with the guy, where he seems, at least to me, genuinely real, he's a "slick politician". Wait, I thought he was a buffoon who repeatedly embarrasses Canada?

There is no way he can win here with Conservatives who hate him. Either he's an idiot or a genius politician, depending on what he says or does. It's really kind of funny. Reminds me of the Biden hate. Some days he's unfit because of "dementia", other days he's a corrupt genius who is fooling everyone. 

And yet we have a guy named Pierre who thinks he can win the female vote by taking off his glasses. What a joke. 

HughFreakingDillon

And about the convoy... ...he said he supports the rights of all, but those rights end at the rights of others. the convoy did that. and seriously. fuck the convoy. no one cares. I'm not even going to get back into that discussion. aren't those losers still bitching about their freedoms?

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

I didn't memorize the entire thing, but I believe he vilified the American far right for the anti-LGBTQ misinformation here. 

All I'll say is this: it's obvious your extreme hatred towards JT so overwhelms your bias that even a normal conversation with the guy, where he seems, at least to me, genuinely real, he's a "slick politician". Wait, I thought he was a buffoon who repeatedly embarrasses Canada?

There is no way he can win here with Conservatives who hate him. Either he's an idiot or a genius politician, depending on what he says or does. It's really kind of funny. Reminds me of the Biden hate. Some days he's unfit because of "dementia", other days he's a corrupt genius who is fooling everyone. 

And yet we have a guy named Pierre who thinks he can win the female vote by taking off his glasses. What a joke. 

Does he clarify that he sees the Canadian right as separate from the Americans or does he just let the insinuation stand?

And if I can’t have a valid opinion on an encounter because of my hatred of Trudeau, well, your repeated assertion to me that you’re not a Trudeau cheerleader is falling apart.

By the way, is Trudeau standing up for the rights of our citizens of Chinese descent with his continued delaying of a public inquiry into election interference by the PRC? This space has been notably quiet on this major issue, I must say.

Lastly, if I can’t make a valid comment about Trudeau due to my hatred, I also think you need to check yourself when it comes to the convoy just as much.

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

And about the convoy... ...he said he supports the rights of all, but those rights end at the rights of others. the convoy did that. and seriously. fuck the convoy. no one cares. I'm not even going to get back into that discussion. aren't those losers still bitching about their freedoms?

This is an honest question (maybe not just for you but the wider group as well).

When does your (the) greater good make room for my (the) individuals’ rights? I don’t mean this as a covid-specific question though it may prove to be the easiest example to use given it’s one we’ve all lived through.

Clearly I have a fairly high threshold for individual rights to be overridden but in all honesty I’m not entirely sure what my specific standards are beyond lives being on the line, which leads to different scenarios probably presenting different standards. I’ll certainly be mulling this over some more.

As an aside I have to say I’m starting to regret owning my bias against Trudeau given how it’s since been used to dismiss me. Something that I should stress is that, for me, being aware of that bias has actually allowed me to watch him more objectively. It’s my analysis that becomes heated more often than not.

DarthMaeglin

I’m sure he’s still thankful for their donation.

Is ignoring the boos the correct response? I honestly don’t know anymore.

https://torontosun.com/news/national/justin-trudeau-booed-at-north-american-indigenous-games

Edit: The CBC version, paragraph 7 is where the Sun’s headline is mentioned, lol.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/north-american-indigenous-games-officially-open-in-halifax-1.6908669

DarthMaeglin

Uh-oh, I thought he was the Greatest Canadian Ever?

This historical relativism is really going too far (and has been for a while in my opinion), but when will we address PET’s First Nations legacy (along with the beloved Chretien)?

https://torontosun.com/news/national/ndp-founder-tommy-douglas-under-review-as-national-historic-figure

(I realize this would fit just as well in the cancelled thread.)

Parksy

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

And about the convoy... ...he said he supports the rights of all, but those rights end at the rights of others. the convoy did that. and seriously. fuck the convoy. no one cares. I'm not even going to get back into that discussion. aren't those losers still bitching about their freedoms?

This is an honest question (maybe not just for you but the wider group as well).

When does your (the) greater good make room for my (the) individuals’ rights? I don’t mean this as a covid-specific question though it may prove to be the easiest example to use given it’s one we’ve all lived through.

Clearly I have a fairly high threshold for individual rights to be overridden but in all honesty I’m not entirely sure what my specific standards are beyond lives being on the line, which leads to different scenarios probably presenting different standards. I’ll certainly be mulling this over some more.

As an aside I have to say I’m starting to regret owning my bias against Trudeau given how it’s since been used to dismiss me. Something that I should stress is that, for me, being aware of that bias has actually allowed me to watch him more objectively. It’s my analysis that becomes heated more often than not.

The question can't entirely be answered.. certainly by me lol.    I refer to Section 1 of the Charter. And I personally believe it was put in as Number Uno for a very important reason. I'll get to that:

Section 1: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

Now... scholars and legal analysts have for years and will continue to do so... argue about what in the sweet fuck constitutes "reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." 

For me.. the key focus is "free and democratic society."  As a society we are constantly evolving and changing. As both a citizenship and government... we have lived and will continue to live through 'trial and error.'  

I believe for the most part that our laws and customs constantly lean towards two 'slogans' if you will... but in that order:

1. Life
2. Liberty
3. Pursuit of Happiness

The other slogan in my line of work as well as crisis management / life safety goes as follows: (The 3 Ps)

1. People
2. Property
3. Profits

It's vague, but in general I think our laws and the extent of our freedoms begins with life. If it risks Life, it's not worth Liberty and Happiness. If it risks Liberty, it's not worth Happiness. 

Personally I think our fore-fathers dropped the ball big time with the notion of freedom at all. I can't speak to a LOT of other countries... but in Canada, no one is free.  Our individual freedoms are almost not existent... and for the most part, it's due to the notion of 'greater good for all.' 

The COVID thing was a fantastic example... and barring motives etc. I think our government set a pretty decent example of how to move forward and somewhat answer this question of individual freedoms. (this is already getting long winded but let me elaborate) 

COVID happens and it risks health and life. 

The general field of medical professionals set out how governments should proceed with regards to protecting health and life. Restricting movement and gathering being the big ones... which is also the harshest removal of freedoms I've experienced in my lifetime. 

The government debates how to process and proceed with that advice. They begin enacting laws. 

The craziness ensues amongst society. 

The government calls for an election so that the people (democratically) can choose how to move forward. 

Election happens... Freedom Convoy happens. 

That stretch of about 5-6 months is to me quite important when it comes to this stuff. And it relates back to the Trudeau / Muslim video above.  Protecting the rights and freedoms for 'ALL' is in many ways completely impossible. How we answer these questions and move forward is through elections.  The big issue nowadays is coming to terms and dealing with essentially the losing side (Freedom Convoy). 

It's a fascinating thing to look at it perhaps from the other point of view. Like a 'bizzarro' world if you will. I had a cousin who essentially came out and said "who cares about the old people, it's a sacrifice that should be made for the greater good"  (every time it reminds me of Lord Farquad from Shrek..."Some of you.... may die. But it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make." lol)  But let's say majority of people in Canada felt the same way......    if free and democratic society is truly the driver of our laws and freedoms.... then the people and the electorate from my perspective presently do have the ability to change the order to:

1. Liberty
2. Pursuit of Happiness
3. Life 

What makes that 'reasonable limit' thing so important to me is that it reflects how society is and will change. And I truly believe that it is our democracy that drive's that change. And things will and have gone back and forth. Helmet rules are a good example.  Safety vs. Religious freedoms. That example alone proves that nothing regarding our laws and freedoms are 'forever.'  The ebbs and flows come and go... and with them comes the debate and approval/disapproval by both citizens and politicians. 

DarthMaeglin

Will the concept of ministerial responsibility finally take hold with this group? Not holding my breath since the days of the unacceptable $16 OJ (Trudeau called for her resignation over that, he even started a petition) have made way for $6,000/night hotel suites (I wonder how much Trudeau’s OJ cost? Who’s kidding who, at that price it better damn well be included!).

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-cabinet-shuffle-meetings-1.6915672

HughFreakingDillon

Trudeau is back on the market, ladies. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

Trudeau is back on the market, ladies. 

Top story across the country (until DT’s arraignment of course, maybe that’s why this story dropped today), but if you enter public life then your life is ipso facto public. But they want their space, how adorable. (Btw, is announcing that Justin is once again an eligible bachelor (ignoring the more salacious implications) a proper way to give them the space they’ve asked for?)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-gregoire-separation-1.6925254

This is just asinine how Toronto’s CP24 has dropped all other news for this cud.

HughFreakingDillon

I just found it interesting. it's a pretty big deal when a world leader has a marriage fall apart while still in office, whether you consider him a "cud" or not. Most try to wait until they leave office (unless there's something he's trying to overshadow, which is I'm sure what his haters will theorize). 

I would hate to be a public figure because of attitudes such as that. "how adorable"? They don't owe me anything. they don't owe anyone anything. it's absurd (and kind of disturbing to me) when people think they are somehow entitled to the details of someone's private life. 

mentioning it in this fashion on a band's message board is hardly going against their wishes of space. I didn't reveal or demand any info. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

I just found it interesting. it's a pretty big deal when a world leader has a marriage fall apart while still in office, whether you consider him a "cud" or not. Most try to wait until they leave office (unless there's something he's trying to overshadow, which is I'm sure what his haters will theorize). 

I would hate to be a public figure because of attitudes such as that. "how adorable"? They don't owe me anything. they don't owe anyone anything. it's absurd (and kind of disturbing to me) when people think they are somehow entitled to the details of someone's private life. 

mentioning it in this fashion on a band's message board is hardly going against their wishes of space. I didn't reveal or demand any info. 

I wasn’t referring to him as cud, I was calling the news coverage of this cud, which as far as I recall refers to the upchuck cows are constantly chewing. But assume what you will, lol.

Edit:  

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

I just found it interesting. it's a pretty big deal when a world leader has a marriage fall apart while still in office, whether you consider him a "cud" or not. Most try to wait until they leave office (unless there's something he's trying to overshadow, which is I'm sure what his haters will theorize). 

I would hate to be a public figure because of attitudes such as that. "how adorable"? They don't owe me anything. they don't owe anyone anything. it's absurd (and kind of disturbing to me) when people think they are somehow entitled to the details of someone's private life. 

mentioning it in this fashion on a band's message board is hardly going against their wishes of space. I didn't reveal or demand any info. 

Just to be crystal fucking clear about it, if I am shitting on anyone it’s the media for giving this story so much focus and us the media consumers for gobbling up the bullshit. The fact it involves the man I hate (and can therefore have zero real perspective on him) is entirely secondary.

And you and I will clearly never agree that once someone chooses (there is a huge distinction for me when that word comes into play) the arena (because it’s not a fucking playground) of public life one is accepting that much, if not most or all of one’s life is now public fodder, especially in today’s celebrity- and scandal-obsessed environment. I wasn’t saying anyone owes anyone else anything, just remarking on the world we have all created. No offence but your own initial comment pretty well illustrates that, in fact part of why I replied at all was to post a link so that people could maybe understand what you meant.

PJ_Soul

It's always a bit sad to see a marriage break up, especially when there are kids.

DarthMaeglin

PJ_Soul said:

It's always a bit sad to see a marriage break up, especially when there are kids.

Completely agree. I might even add in the words “more than” after “It’s always”.