Canadian Politics Redux

1237238239241243

Comments

  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    there's plenty wrong with the trudeau government, as you pointed out. But as I've said many, many times, the other options, in my eyes, are much, much worse. I will happily vote for someone else who doesn't seem to be a bigger buffoon than JT. 
    Fair enough, but why do you seem to only defend this government, rarely if ever being critical of them? If you never (or extremely rarely) criticize them despite your claims, you support them in my opinion.

    Just because you don’t like the other guys doesn’t mean you let a criminal walk. Although that is what they did to Jesus, lol.

    And at what point does the weight of Trudeau’s “controversies” have an effect? Because this is one of, if not the most “controversial” government of my lifetime.

    And let’s remember, Canada just turned its back on someone who was far, far less of a buffoon than Justin: Erin O’Toole, who served in our armed forces, completed a law degree before working in the private sector before entering public life. But a buffoon who was adamantly politicizing vaccines was the preferred option. O’Toole (and all the other leaders except Trudeau) were all talking in terms of bringing Canadians together while Justin was dividing us into camps.
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • ParksyParksy Posts: 1,554
    Parksy said:
    What does the Laith Marouf issue have to do with the clown accosting Freeland?   I'm confused. 
    No reason we shouldn’t be talking about both is my point. I wasn’t going to introduce a second topic when I was having difficulty defending my point of view on the first subject. I’d been hoping someone else might have brought it up, since the Marouf business is far more troubling (to me) than a single goof in Alberta. Marouf’s language on public internet forums was just as offensive as anything Edmonton guy said (still confused why the women are rarely mentioned). And Marouf received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the federal government.

     I own my own part in giving a good smokescreen to distract from this government’s incompetence (a google would have found what a piece of shit Marouf is, but I suspect he ticked too many diversity boxes to warrant close inspection).

    Seriously (and this is a general question not directed only at you Parksy), what will it take for people to be critical of this Trudeau’s government? SNC was downplayed and excused, there’s a climate hypocrite in the top job, we’ve had several recent allegations about Lucki being too close to the PMO, hell, we had a terrorist attack happen during the Occupation of Ottawa that we’ve heard far less about, and here, more often than not, there’s crickets. It’s just more than a bit confusing to me, in all honesty.
    Lol. I am critical of the Trudeau government.  I think he's a goof for lack of a better word.  I think he's the worst PM we've ever had.  I think the only reason he has flown under the radar is because compared to the dumpster fire in the south, he's looked good. But make no mistake, he is a corrupt PM for the reasons you mentioned amongst other things. That's not to say that he has done and said some good things.  <-  That is something I would absolutely love for the haters to actually muster the courage to say. 

    The amount of hate he gets from what can only be described as the dumbest morons of our population is completely misplaced and done so with no respect whatsoever. (Alberta guy) 

    At present, Polievre is using similar Trump tactics to gain popularity... make zero mistake about that.  As such, if he is named Conservative Leader next week...  I'll vote any way possible to prevent him from gaining any power. Because as much as I don't like Trudeau, I despise anything remotely close to Trumpism or the Freedom Convoy morons more.  And I don't base that on a headline here or there. I've read Pierre's interviews, I've watched his interviews, his debates, panel discussions, his YouTube channel. I'm watching the man carefully and I don't like anything he has to say.  The only good point he makes here or there are also echoed by every other conservative go getter... including Charest. 

    If an election were today and I had to choose between Polievre and Trudeau, I would pick Trudeau. Even after everything I just said about him.   If I could choose between Charest and Trudeau on the other hand.. I would choose Charest in a heartbeat... in fact if he's named Leader of the Conservatives... that would actually be the only political moment in recent Canadian history that will have made me remotely happy.   That's a longshot though... what's likely.. is that Polievre is made leader and I'm left saying "Seriously, that turd burglar?"  Then we would have a couple years of arguing... good points being made... but ultimately Polievre vs. Trudeau & Singh... with Trudeau once again winning a minority. The media bias will continue. The potshots will continue.  All garbage. 

    Alas... not one excellent choice amongst the lot of them all. 
    Toronto 2000
    Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
    Boston I&II 2004
    Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
    Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
    Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
    Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
    Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
    Toronto I&II 2011
    Buffalo 2013
    Toronto I&II 2016
    10C: 220xxx
  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    Parksy said:
    Parksy said:
    What does the Laith Marouf issue have to do with the clown accosting Freeland?   I'm confused. 
    No reason we shouldn’t be talking about both is my point. I wasn’t going to introduce a second topic when I was having difficulty defending my point of view on the first subject. I’d been hoping someone else might have brought it up, since the Marouf business is far more troubling (to me) than a single goof in Alberta. Marouf’s language on public internet forums was just as offensive as anything Edmonton guy said (still confused why the women are rarely mentioned). And Marouf received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the federal government.

     I own my own part in giving a good smokescreen to distract from this government’s incompetence (a google would have found what a piece of shit Marouf is, but I suspect he ticked too many diversity boxes to warrant close inspection).

    Seriously (and this is a general question not directed only at you Parksy), what will it take for people to be critical of this Trudeau’s government? SNC was downplayed and excused, there’s a climate hypocrite in the top job, we’ve had several recent allegations about Lucki being too close to the PMO, hell, we had a terrorist attack happen during the Occupation of Ottawa that we’ve heard far less about, and here, more often than not, there’s crickets. It’s just more than a bit confusing to me, in all honesty.
    Lol. I am critical of the Trudeau government.  I think he's a goof for lack of a better word.  I think he's the worst PM we've ever had.  I think the only reason he has flown under the radar is because compared to the dumpster fire in the south, he's looked good. But make no mistake, he is a corrupt PM for the reasons you mentioned amongst other things. That's not to say that he has done and said some good things.  <-  That is something I would absolutely love for the haters to actually muster the courage to say. 

    The amount of hate he gets from what can only be described as the dumbest morons of our population is completely misplaced and done so with no respect whatsoever. (Alberta guy) 

    At present, Polievre is using similar Trump tactics to gain popularity... make zero mistake about that.  As such, if he is named Conservative Leader next week...  I'll vote any way possible to prevent him from gaining any power. Because as much as I don't like Trudeau, I despise anything remotely close to Trumpism or the Freedom Convoy morons more.  And I don't base that on a headline here or there. I've read Pierre's interviews, I've watched his interviews, his debates, panel discussions, his YouTube channel. I'm watching the man carefully and I don't like anything he has to say.  The only good point he makes here or there are also echoed by every other conservative go getter... including Charest. 

    If an election were today and I had to choose between Polievre and Trudeau, I would pick Trudeau. Even after everything I just said about him.   If I could choose between Charest and Trudeau on the other hand.. I would choose Charest in a heartbeat... in fact if he's named Leader of the Conservatives... that would actually be the only political moment in recent Canadian history that will have made me remotely happy.   That's a longshot though... what's likely.. is that Polievre is made leader and I'm left saying "Seriously, that turd burglar?"  Then we would have a couple years of arguing... good points being made... but ultimately Polievre vs. Trudeau & Singh... with Trudeau once again winning a minority. The media bias will continue. The potshots will continue.  All garbage. 

    Alas... not one excellent choice amongst the lot of them all. 
    Thanks, and I do have to acknowledge that you have been critical of some of what this government’s done.

    To your point about Trudeau’s detractors giving him credit where it’s due I think I’ve done so a couple times but do need to improve on that front. Unfortunately I don’t get many opportunities since I disagree with so many of his policies. I was glad they changed their single use plastics ban to include production of the items.

    Comparing Poilievre to Trump isn’t out of line and I agree I would much prefer Charest (I was disappointed when he lost out to Kim Campbell, but c’est la vie). I wish more credence would be given to Trump-Trudeau comparisons (not policy-wise obviously).
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    Glad they caught him, I turned on the local news at 5 when they reported a sighting and an hour later an arrest.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/suspect-in-saskatchewan-stabbing-rampage-arrested-1.6575208
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    I hope there’s nothing controversial in wishing well to a 96 year old lady. Thought about starting a thread to acknowledge her at tonight’s show, but probably not the appropriate venue given the diversity of views regarding the monarchy.

     I truly feel she has held herself up as a fine example over the decades and will miss her calm, compassionate demeanour when she passes.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/queen-elizabeth-under-medical-supervision-1.6575695
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,223
    Glad they caught him, I turned on the local news at 5 when they reported a sighting and an hour later an arrest.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/suspect-in-saskatchewan-stabbing-rampage-arrested-1.6575208
    I'm interested in how he died. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,223
    I don't think there's anything controversial about wishing her well. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    Glad they caught him, I turned on the local news at 5 when they reported a sighting and an hour later an arrest.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/suspect-in-saskatchewan-stabbing-rampage-arrested-1.6575208
    I'm interested in how he died. 
    Yeah, I really hope it had nothing to do with any actions by the police. Sad that the perpetrators are getting off easy by dying, there’s a bit of a feeling of justice denied to me.
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    I don't think there's anything controversial about wishing her well. 
    I agree, however some people feel so strongly about the monarchy that they’ll give them no quarter, even in cases like this unfortunately.
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    edited September 8
    Sadly, our Queen has died.


    Post edited by DarthMaeglin on
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    Does anyone here pay for the Toronto Star? Today they're running a headline that is incredibly troubling on it's surface,  apparently Trudeau is saying he won't leave the country in Poilievre's hands.  I can only read the first two paragraphs which don't elaborate on what he means. 

    Seriously,  what the fuck does he mean by that?  Does he even have a basic understanding of our democracy? 
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,223
    Does anyone here pay for the Toronto Star? Today they're running a headline that is incredibly troubling on it's surface,  apparently Trudeau is saying he won't leave the country in Poilievre's hands.  I can only read the first two paragraphs which don't elaborate on what he means. 

    Seriously,  what the fuck does he mean by that?  Does he even have a basic understanding of our democracy? 
    headlines are meant to grab. especially when you hit a paywall. I'm guessing he is just saying it's too dangerous to vote for the PC's. I can't imagine it's anything more than that. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    Does anyone here pay for the Toronto Star? Today they're running a headline that is incredibly troubling on it's surface,  apparently Trudeau is saying he won't leave the country in Poilievre's hands.  I can only read the first two paragraphs which don't elaborate on what he means. 

    Seriously,  what the fuck does he mean by that?  Does he even have a basic understanding of our democracy? 
    headlines are meant to grab. especially when you hit a paywall. I'm guessing he is just saying it's too dangerous to vote for the PC's. I can't imagine it's anything more than that. 
    You're right,  headlines are meant to grab but also need to be accurate. The sub-headline seems to lean towards what you’re suggesting but I need to know his full words and intent before I give him a pass on this. Here’s the link,  for what it's worth. 

    https://www.thestar.com/opinion/2022/09/11/trudeau-will-not-leave-canada-in-poilievres-hands.html
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,223
    edited September 12
    yeah, I googled it earlier to see if maybe the paywall wouldn't hit me, but it did. The headline is the editor's job, and I don't know anything about the Star (I imagine if that columnist is on the payroll, it most likely leans left-I see her often on election night on CBC), but as soon as you posted the headline my mind immediately went to what I wrote, not the place I imagine your mind went to (trudeau wanting to become a dictator, etc), which I just think probably shows both of our biases at play. 

    I used to react the same with Trump. For a really long time actually. Then I started figuring out that, even though the headlines didn't need much embellishment, they ALWAYS were. Ironically, because of Trump, I really started to notice the liberal bubble I was in and how headlines are so often skewed to the dramatic knowing 85% of the time people make their conclusion on the headline move on. 
    Post edited by HughFreakingDillon on
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    yeah, I googled it earlier to see if maybe the paywall wouldn't hit me, but it did. The headline is the editor's job, and I don't know anything about the Star (I imagine if that columnist is on the payroll, it most likely leans left-I see her often on election night on CBC), but as soon as you posted the headline my mind immediately went to what I wrote, not the place I imagine your mind went to (trudeau wanting to become a dictator, etc). 
    Agreed,  the headline isn't Herbert's job. If the Star was accurate in representing Trudeau’s words, then I really do need a clarification before I can change my point of view on this.  Personally I'm surprised The Star (referred to locally as The Red Star) would saddle Trudeau with a headline that makes him sound (yet again in my opinion) so much like Trump,  because that's how it reads, that Trudeau might try and circumvent our democracy if he doesn't like the result. 

    Let's collectively try a thought experiment.  How would our reactions fall out if this quote came from Harper prior to the 2015 election?  Personally I'd still be troubled by such a statement,  no matter who makes it. 

    Stupid paywalls, leaving us discussing this entirely via supposition,  lol. 
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,223
    yeah, I googled it earlier to see if maybe the paywall wouldn't hit me, but it did. The headline is the editor's job, and I don't know anything about the Star (I imagine if that columnist is on the payroll, it most likely leans left-I see her often on election night on CBC), but as soon as you posted the headline my mind immediately went to what I wrote, not the place I imagine your mind went to (trudeau wanting to become a dictator, etc). 
    Agreed,  the headline isn't Herbert's job. If the Star was accurate in representing Trudeau’s words, then I really do need a clarification before I can change my point of view on this.  Personally I'm surprised The Star (referred to locally as The Red Star) would saddle Trudeau with a headline that makes him sound (yet again in my opinion) so much like Trump,  because that's how it reads, that Trudeau might try and circumvent our democracy if he doesn't like the result. 

    Let's collectively try a thought experiment.  How would our reactions fall out if this quote came from Harper prior to the 2015 election?  Personally I'd still be troubled by such a statement,  no matter who makes it. 

    Stupid paywalls, leaving us discussing this entirely via supposition,  lol. 
    honestly, prior to Trump, I wouldn't think anything of it with Harper either. Now, if Polliviere said it, yeah, I might take it that way. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    yeah, I googled it earlier to see if maybe the paywall wouldn't hit me, but it did. The headline is the editor's job, and I don't know anything about the Star (I imagine if that columnist is on the payroll, it most likely leans left-I see her often on election night on CBC), but as soon as you posted the headline my mind immediately went to what I wrote, not the place I imagine your mind went to (trudeau wanting to become a dictator, etc). 
    Agreed,  the headline isn't Herbert's job. If the Star was accurate in representing Trudeau’s words, then I really do need a clarification before I can change my point of view on this.  Personally I'm surprised The Star (referred to locally as The Red Star) would saddle Trudeau with a headline that makes him sound (yet again in my opinion) so much like Trump,  because that's how it reads, that Trudeau might try and circumvent our democracy if he doesn't like the result. 

    Let's collectively try a thought experiment.  How would our reactions fall out if this quote came from Harper prior to the 2015 election?  Personally I'd still be troubled by such a statement,  no matter who makes it. 

    Stupid paywalls, leaving us discussing this entirely via supposition,  lol. 
    honestly, prior to Trump, I wouldn't think anything of it with Harper either. Now, if Polliviere said it, yeah, I might take it that way. 
    This is where it breaks down for me,  sorry.  I know there's all kinds of hysteria being drummed up against PP, but Trudeau gets the benefit of the doubt (with his stellar record for honesty and transparency/s) but PP doesn't? I can't square that circle,  sorry. 

    If I hadn't tested positive for covid today I might have swallowed my pride and bought a copy of The Star today,  but that's not an option right now. Might see if someone can help me out there.
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    I do have to acknowledge that I'm not giving Trudeau the benefit of the doubt here, but with a headline like that,  no one gets the benefit of the doubt. Even pre-Trump I'd have found this troubling.

    There was actually an interesting column in The Sun a couple weeks ago that laid out all the instances since 2000 where Democrats questioned the legitimacy of elections,  so it's far from uniquely a Trump/conservative thing. 
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,223
    he uses the same stupid rhetoric that trump did. "the liberal elite". "thought police" on university campuses. potentially firing heads of institutions. 

    hope you feel better soon Darth. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    he uses the same stupid rhetoric that trump did. "the liberal elite". "thought police" on university campuses. potentially firing heads of institutions. 

    hope you feel better soon Darth. 
    Did you watch his speech Saturday evening?  It was fairly reasonable with the central theme of uniting Canadians.  That's a message I can get  behind,  no matter who's saying it.  In fact in the last election,  every party was talking bringing people together while the governing party ran a campaign based on division.  But they were reelected,  so that seems to be what (a minority of) Canadians want. 

    And Trudeau is quite familiar with inflammatory rhetoric himself. 
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    edited September 12
    he uses the same stupid rhetoric that trump did. "the liberal elite". "thought police" on university campuses. potentially firing heads of institutions. 

    hope you feel better soon Darth. 
    Separately,  and seriously,  thanks for the well wishes,  it's appreciated.  Yesterday I felt like crap but tested negative,  today I feel better but tested positive (probably messed up yesterday's test). Strangely enough I'm hoping I caught it at Thursday's show (so that I hopefully wasn't spreading it), but there is the chance I picked it up at a funeral the day before.
    Post edited by DarthMaeglin on
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,223
    he uses the same stupid rhetoric that trump did. "the liberal elite". "thought police" on university campuses. potentially firing heads of institutions. 

    hope you feel better soon Darth. 
    Did you watch his speech Saturday evening?  It was fairly reasonable with the central theme of uniting Canadians.  That's a message I can get  behind,  no matter who's saying it.  In fact in the last election,  every party was talking bringing people together while the governing party ran a campaign based on division.  But they were reelected,  so that seems to be what (a minority of) Canadians want. 

    And Trudeau is quite familiar with inflammatory rhetoric himself. 
    I didn't but I will. 

    Again, I still don't agree at ALL about trudeau's platform being based on division. I know there are certain things he's done and said since then that you consider divisive (and I disagree with), but I don't recall anything he ran on in that vein. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,223
    I know this article is dated by today's standards (April 2022), but I think it speaks to what we are talking about. 

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bergen-trudeau-convoy-canada-divided-1.6413520

    The opposition to anyone in power can stand to lose nothing and gain everything by painting their opponent as "divisive" and "elite" and "not for the people". Conservative politicians seem to like to throw this around a lot. But it doesn't make it true. 

    The convoy was a fringe element. You'll probably never convince me otherwise. Trudeau probably shouldn't have said that. He also shouldn't have said anti-vaxxers were racists and misogynists (I honestly don't know where he came up with that assertion). He's made some missteps in order to shed light on his detractors, and yes, it has back fired. For the most part, I've found his messaging to be comforting and helpful. Especially in the first year of the pandemic. He was calming. He was reassuring. He was a good leader. Sometimes he messes up when he opens his mouth; no doubt. 

    If he's guilty of anything, it's that sometimes he says what's really on his mind rather than what he should say: noncommittal double speak political nonsense. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    he uses the same stupid rhetoric that trump did. "the liberal elite". "thought police" on university campuses. potentially firing heads of institutions. 

    hope you feel better soon Darth. 
    Did you watch his speech Saturday evening?  It was fairly reasonable with the central theme of uniting Canadians.  That's a message I can get  behind,  no matter who's saying it.  In fact in the last election,  every party was talking bringing people together while the governing party ran a campaign based on division.  But they were reelected,  so that seems to be what (a minority of) Canadians want. 

    And Trudeau is quite familiar with inflammatory rhetoric himself. 
    I didn't but I will. 

    Again, I still don't agree at ALL about trudeau's platform being based on division. I know there are certain things he's done and said since then that you consider divisive (and I disagree with), but I don't recall anything he ran on in that vein. 
    I hear you and get that in the end we’ll largely have to agree to disagree.

    However flash back to the last election. ALL politicians were asked by virtually every medical professional in the country to NOT politicize the vaccines, but it was Trudeau that was the first to do so, and pushed his agenda hard (I’m still amazed that Trudeau can apparently tell at a glance who’s vaccinated and who’s not!). Hell, that was probably a major factor that lead up to the dreaded “insurrection” we saw in February. That’s one helluva divisive policy/tactic in my books. Just weeks before he called the unnecessary election he was still endorsing individual choice. And if the Liberals had deigned to show us the work (“science”) that justified the policy they might have shut me up on this long ago. But I have yet to see a strong justification for said policy beyond it giving a political advantage which ultimately backfired given the results (we know this group of Liberals have no hesitations about exploiting tragedies for ideological purposes, they’ve openly admitted it).

    Part of why I caught covid may go back to his ridiculous vaccine procurement and rollout. I took my 2 doses of mnra vaccines in the initial days, setting aside my reservations for the “greater good”. Moving forward I wanted one of the more traditional vaccines (which incorporate the virus itself). Those vaccines are available, but require jumping through extra hoops to gain access. To be fair, part of this falls on the city, who haven’t done a good job of informing doctors about who is eligible (why do I need a referral from my doctor for the vaccine I want but can get the other vaccines by walking into most drug stores?). I should/could have pushed back against my doctor sooner (have a phone call scheduled for Thursday), but it’s something I’m generally not comfortable doing, and as I said I don’t think it’s a situation I should have found myself in regardless. If I had fair access, I would have been boosted months ago (although any protection would have worn off by now in any case). Instead my last covid shot was over a year ago now. And just to reiterate, it’s not exclusively the federal government’s problem, much of it does fall on the city of Toronto.
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    I know this article is dated by today's standards (April 2022), but I think it speaks to what we are talking about. 

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bergen-trudeau-convoy-canada-divided-1.6413520

    The opposition to anyone in power can stand to lose nothing and gain everything by painting their opponent as "divisive" and "elite" and "not for the people". Conservative politicians seem to like to throw this around a lot. But it doesn't make it true. 

    The convoy was a fringe element. You'll probably never convince me otherwise. Trudeau probably shouldn't have said that. He also shouldn't have said anti-vaxxers were racists and misogynists (I honestly don't know where he came up with that assertion). He's made some missteps in order to shed light on his detractors, and yes, it has back fired. For the most part, I've found his messaging to be comforting and helpful. Especially in the first year of the pandemic. He was calming. He was reassuring. He was a good leader. Sometimes he messes up when he opens his mouth; no doubt. 

    If he's guilty of anything, it's that sometimes he says what's really on his mind rather than what he should say: noncommittal double speak political nonsense. 
    Once I powered through his opening paragraph it was an interesting read, though Wherry seems to imply the Conservatives are more responsible for the divisions than the Liberals (personally I blame all parties except maybe the BQ who are eternally divisive). If you read Wherry regularly he’s firmly in the Liberal camp. One paragraph where he points out Trudeau’s words made the convoy worse (but no clear admission by Trudeau himself)? But look at the pictures accompanying the article, all “Conservative” groups (except one picture of how kids and others were hand-held and comforted getting their vaccines), even some supposed Nazi imagery (which is such a misrepresentation of that sign it should be laughable. Before you say it wasn’t, I saw that specific sign referenced several times as being supportive of the Nazis. Yes, there were other flags on the first day but we don’t hear about how it was other protesters that ran them out.).

    Is it just me or do others remember in 2015 part of Trudeau’s campaign was railing against the out-of-touch Conservative Harper elites?

    If Trudeau can’t be mindful of what he’s saying (despite all his ummms and ahhhs), then he shows (to me) how just not ready he was and is. Personally I find it sad, given how formidable his father’s intellect was (whether or not one agreed with his policies). All I can really see Justin as is a raving ideologue. His speech today sounds like he’ll work with the other parties…as long as they agree with him, and his characterization of PP is worlds apart from his congratulatory tweet on Saturday. Instead of talking about Liberal policies and ideas it sounded like he was already on the campaign trail (but don’t we have a deal in place that ensures stability of government for a couple more years?).
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,223
    Not all have the gift of the gab. Some are able to think quickly on their feet to appease the media and those who care about sound bites. I don't. I care about policy and action. If he says a few stupid things here and there that's really not a big problem for me (unless it gets to the level of awfulness of Trump et al). 

    Harper was out of touch. If he called them elites, so be it. Touche, I suppose. But I do still believe that is a tactic used far more by the right. 

    I'm not even going to touch "it's Trudeau's fault I got covid". 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    Not all have the gift of the gab. Some are able to think quickly on their feet to appease the media and those who care about sound bites. I don't. I care about policy and action. If he says a few stupid things here and there that's really not a big problem for me (unless it gets to the level of awfulness of Trump et al). 

    Harper was out of touch. If he called them elites, so be it. Touche, I suppose. But I do still believe that is a tactic used far more by the right. 

    I'm not even going to touch "it's Trudeau's fault I got covid". 
    “Fringe minority with unacceptable views” is certainly Trumpian rhetoric, or at least Clintonian.

    It might be an interesting experiment to take our political debates back to the radio (thinking back to the perceived outcomes of the Kennedy-Nixon debate). I strongly suspect PP would win the radio debates based on his performance in the HOC and at committee. If Trudeau doesn’t break out sweating or has a meltdown then there’s a good chance he wins the televised version. However the last few debates I’ve watched for our elections, well, I feel calling them debates is being incredibly generous, with candidates talking over each other and moderators unable to control the proceedings.

    Apologies for my covid rant there, and I’m sorry you drew the conclusion that I blame Trudeau (though I can see why). I did a poor job of highlighting that it was a number of factors that played into it, not least of which is one I didn’t even mention: personal choices I made. I dragged my heels getting back to my doctor regarding my preferred vaccine, then chose to attend a crowded arena with virtually no protection. I still don’t understand my city’s vaccine policies and admittedly that had a bigger impact on my current situation than the federal government’s policies in this regard. But I do try to own my choices and didn’t in my rant there.
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,223
    you're right, the debates are basically a complete waste of time shout-fest. 

    I don't think that was Trumpian at all. Clintonian? sure. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 2,075
    you're right, the debates are basically a complete waste of time shout-fest. 

    I don't think that was Trumpian at all. Clintonian? sure. 
    Lol, I wrote out a whole reply then realized we’re more or less agreeing on this point. Glad I didn’t hit post comment prematurely (as I sometimes do).

     I would like to circle back to my covid comments yesterday though. I do see why you read it the way you did, but I’m not sure you really read my post given your simplistic summary.

    Do I ultimately blame anyone but myself for my present situation? No. Do I think there were external factors (mostly municipal not federal or provincial) that played into it? Yes, but in the end I made my own choices. Did I (yet again) do a poor job expressing myself? Definitely.

     Part of why I circled back on this is because, while I understand your not wanting to address my first rant, you seemingly chose to ignore my subsequent mea culpa and clarification. Hopefully now I’ve better explained myself and that angle can be put to bed.

    Circling even further back to my first post yesterday regarding the Star’s headline, since I wasn’t able to gain access to the article, I’m willing to give Trudeau (and Hebert) the benefit of the doubt that the Star published an inflammatory headline that wasn’t factual (which, when I studied journalism, I was taught they should be). It speaks to shoddy practices by the publication (back in the day they did send a reporter to snoop around Rob Ford’s house from the adjacent public lands).

     I do still, however, maintain that such a headline should be concerning to everyone, regardless who supposedly makes that statement (and if it’s been grossly misrepresented then the publication should see some consequence perhaps). Being familiar with The Star’s practices, this is one of the rare times I’ll give Trudeau the benefit of the doubt.
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,223
    sorry, I didn't ignore it, I accepted it but just didn't express that. 

    as cynical as this might sound, I've grown accustomed to inflammatory headlines, from all sides. Should we be comfortable with it? No, but I don't know how it changes. it just is what it is. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


Sign In or Register to comment.