[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Josephus]

Reminds me of an interesting poll I saw earlier (ah found it).  Conservative voters overwhelmingly actually want the Conservatives to win, while barely half of Liberal voters want Trudeau to get a majority, and about 20% would actually prefer another party to win.

The fact that there's only one conservative party has a lot to do with that. If there was another centre right party that can poll 10-15 per cent of the vote nationally you'll find that would change right away. If the NDP and Liberals ever were to merge (and I really think they should) the Conservatives would have a very hard time winning an election.

[Jacob]

The SNC Lavelin affair, where Trudeau attempted to get his own AG to drop corruption charges against a well-connected firm is a 'tempest in a teapot'?

What about giving WE Charity a sole-sourced $912 million contract after WE gave hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees and other compensation to Trudeau's wife and mother?  Also a 'tempest in a teapot'?

Yup.

Who exactly has imbibed the kool-aid here?

You.

We discussed this earlier where you asked for - and got - comparable and worse examples of Conservative corruption. If O'Toole comes in we'll see more of the same, only the beneficiaries will be Albertan oil firms, "heritage" think tanks, and anti-abortion "counsellors", and whatever other folks and firms are well-connected to the Conservative party.

You've determined "corruption" and "I hate Trudeau" are the best angles of attack for the election, and you're leaning it them hard because you think they work - but that's all they are, election tactics. As your disengenuous comparisons to Trump so aptly illustrate - when everyone knows that Canadians who like Trump are all voting for the Conservatives.

[Barrister]

Okay - WE Charity involved $900 million dollar program and hundreds of thousands of dollars given to Trudeau family members.  WE initially denied giving the Trudeau's any money at all before being found out.


Senate expense scandal.  4 Conservative senators improperly claimed expenses they were not entitled to.  Patrick Brazeau was ordered to repay $48k, was kicked out of caucus for unrelated misbehavior, criminally charged then charges withdrawn citing no RLOC.

Mac Harb did repay $231,000.  Charges also laid and then withdrawn.  Harb ultimately retired.

Mike Duffy repaid $90k.  This money was given to him by the Conservative Party (not using government funds).  The Party originally denied that money came from them.  Mike Duffy was charged and acquitted at trial on all 31 counts.  Duffy sat as an independent and finally retired upon hitting age 75.

Pamela Wallin repaid $150k or so.  She also retired.  She was also charged and ultimately withdrawn.


So... this involved Conservative Senators (hardly the most important members of caucus).  The money was repaid (the Trudeau's did not give back their WE money).  But most importantly... the Trudeau's corruption led to a nearly billion dollar sole-sourced contract being issued.  Nothing like that is comparable.


If you think a different scandal is more appropriate for comparison, let me know and I'll go through it.  But I didn't even get to SNC Lavelin.  And note I'm not talking about minor-league scandals like Trudeau's visit to the Aga Khan's island without claiming it - that's pretty standard fare for political scandals.


And Jacob - this has nothing to do with "angles of attack".  I have not expected to change anyone's mind on Languish about anything for years, if not a decade or more.  This is more political debate masturbation - I like to type out how I see politics in a forum that can't easily be tracked back to me.  At most I hope you can come away with "Oh, well I see how someone can think that way and it makes sense, even if I disagree with it".

[Jacob]

Bottom line: comparing Trudeau to Trump is intellectually dishonest.

[Barrister]

Bottom line: comparing Trudeau to Trump is intellectually dishonest.

Please expand.  I made my argument, now make yours.

[Jacob]

Please expand.  I made my argument, now make yours.

You're on a time-out.

Maybe we can pick this up in a few days.

[Barrister]

Please expand.  I made my argument, now make yours.

You're on a time-out.

Maybe we can pick this up in a few days.

[viper37]

Bottom line: comparing Trudeau to Trump is intellectually dishonest.

Not at all.  They are the same kind of individuals, and as always, the stalwart defenders of the LPC are willing to excuse just about anything to justify their hatred of right-wing parties.  Just like the GOPtards are willing to overlook Trump's morality issues (well, lack of), corruption, racism, ineptness and all of his character flaws because he's not a Democrat.

The LPC says it's for women's equality, their leader promotes himself as a feminist, he criticizes a hockey team for recruiting a player who made a silly mistake, but at the same time is totally fine with a sexual harrasser (and it ain't the first time such a thing happens) in its ranks.

The LPC has no plan to bring the country back to a balanced budget, but that's fine.  You'll all be the ones complaining when the situation is unsustainable and cuts have to be made.

The LPC is supposedly pro-environment but has no far never reduced GHG emissions in any mandates since 1993.  The only govt to do so was the Conservative Party.  The same party that passed a deal to solve the acid rain problem and eliminate cooling gaz that destroyed the ozone layer.

The LPC says it promoted official bilinguism, but rails against "tribalism" whenever French citizens wants to defend their rights.

The LPC says it supports indigenous rights, yet has made zero progress in 6 years on the issue.  In fact, it did not even attempt to solve the problems these communities face.  Some reservations, not too far from major cities, don't even have running water.  What's your government doing?

It claims to protect the right of minorities, but it refuses to listen to these minorities when they say something they don't want to hear.  For the LPC, immigrant communities are simply bag of votes.

[viper37]

There are many rational reasons to vote for Trudeau.

Of course there are:
- You have a profound dislike for French speaking people
- You hate Quebec and its people

I have plenty of vitriol for Trudeau.  But this?

He's is father's son.  Hot dog eaters and all that.
He's against seperate school systems for english&french in provinces with french speaking minorities because it's divisive.  What would be the net result of abolishing french schools in a province like this?

[crazy canuck]

But with no order from your PHO making vaccination mandatory in certain settings, it puts the burden entirely on private actors to decide for themselves how to use it - will all the attendant legal risks.  A clear case of conservative ideology getting in the way of good public policy.

[Jacob]

 

[crazy canuck]

?

[Barrister]

I made a mistake in posting in this thread.  I have deleted my posts.

I do not apologize for deleting them, but apologize that your responses no longer make sense.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

[crazy canuck]

I made a mistake in posting in this thread.  I have deleted my posts.

I do not apologize for deleting them, but apologize that your responses no longer make sense.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

You may not understand the legal position that puts employers and public bodies.  But par for the course.

[Jacob]

?

This was in response to something now deleted, not your post.