Canadian Politics

[blue_gold_84]

1 minute ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I used to be a Liberal and I admit I am a Conservative but I was surprised by how the vapid empty suit got over with voters. 

Really? You shouldn't be. It's the same old same: get sick of a particular ruling party's policies and demand change by voting them out for the opposing party. Liberal gov't, get sick of their policies and vote them out; Conservative gov't, get sick of their policies and vote them out; Liberal gov't, get sick of their policies and vote them out; etc., etc. It never changes and regular folks wind up getting stuck with the bill.

Partisan politics are a polarized disaster these days. Our great nation is no exception, unfortunately.

[The Unknown Poster]

1 minute ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Really? You shouldn't be. It's the same old same: get sick of a particular ruling party's policies and demand change by voting them out for the opposing party. Liberal gov't, get sick of their policies and vote them out; Conservative gov't, get sick of their policies and vote them out; Liberal gov't, get sick of their policies and vote them out; etc., etc. It never changes and regular folks wind up getting stuck with the bill.

Partisan politics are a polarized disaster these days. Our great nation is no exception, unfortunately.

Yeah true.  I guess I figured people would actually look at the policies and platforms and quality of leadership.  I recall arguing with someone here about the experience of Harper vs experience of JT and they flat out refused to accept that JT was not as experienced as Harper.  I mean, you can like the guy but lets not throw all reason out the window.

I was over-estimating people I guess.  There was nothing the Cons could have done to beat JT and his nonsense promises. 

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

50 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Yeah true.  I guess I figured people would actually look at the policies and platforms and quality of leadership.  I recall arguing with someone here about the experience of Harper vs experience of JT and they flat out refused to accept that JT was not as experienced as Harper.  I mean, you can like the guy but lets not throw all reason out the window.

I was over-estimating people I guess.  There was nothing the Cons could have done to beat JT and his nonsense promises. 

Yeah, that is a head-scratcher... Harper was WAY more experienced...  I mean JT had some experience, being the son of a former PM and some small stints in politics- But Harper had loads more- you know, being a PM himself... 

 

Not sure what non-sense promises you are referring to. I am still pissed at the Libs dropping their crusade against FPtP.  I was hoping that was the last election of FPtP. 

[Mark F]

40 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

I am still pissed at the Libs dropping their crusade against FPtP.  I was hoping that was the last election of FPtP. 

I agree with you . 

We would all be represented with proportional representation.

It was a stupid move walking away from that.

 

[Mark F]

1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

2 hours ago, Mark F said:

 

I seem to recall a global recession impacting the Cons' time in office. 

One surplus in nine years? Anyway, was he elected to do what the Liberals and NDP told him to do? 

Arch conservative  D!Cheney said it

"deficits don't matter"

lol at censor again... D!ck Cheney.....

 

Edited March 19, 2018 by Mark F

[The Unknown Poster]

8 minutes ago, Mark F said:

One surplus in nine years? Anyway, was he elected to do what the Liberals and NDP told him to do? 

Arch conservative  D!Cheney said it

"deficits don't matter"

lol at censor again... D!ck Cheney.....

 

They had a surplus until the recession.  They were in minority status so yes, the opposition's desires for increased spending was important.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

23 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

They had a surplus until the recession.  They were in minority status so yes, the opposition's desires for increased spending was important.

The running joke about the Cons was that they were supposed good at balancing the budget- they never did.  They were never supposed to. They cut the GST as a "stave the beast" move- cut off income to justify future cuts. They were able to "Justify" raising the Old age pension because of the reduction in GST.  The GST cut was a brilliant maneuver by Harper (I disagree with it, but it was brilliant politically). 

[The Unknown Poster]

Just now, wanna-b-fanboy said:

The running joke about the Cons was that they were supposed good at balancing the budget- they never did.  They were never supposed to. They cut the GST as a "stave the beast" move- cut off income to justify future cuts. They were able to "Justify" raising the Old age pension because of the reduction in GST.  The GST cut was a brilliant maneuver by Harper (I disagree with it, but it was brilliant politically). 

Well again, they had a major global recession and ran deficits at a time their opposition demanded even larger deficits.  They cleaned things up and set up the Liberals for a balanced budget...which not only is not materializing but is even worse than they promised during the campaign.  It is certainly amusing that they ran such large deficits the part of fiscal restraint.

GST cut was a promise they made and lived up to.  I disagree with it also.  I have no problem with GST type taxes or sin taxes.  Lower my income tax.  Let me keep more of MY money.  Then Ill decide how much tax to pay based on how many purchases of goods I make.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

Just now, The Unknown Poster said:

Well again, they had a major global recession and ran deficits at a time their opposition demanded even larger deficits.  They cleaned things up and set up the Liberals for a balanced budget...which not only is not materializing but is even worse than they promised during the campaign.  It is certainly amusing that they ran such large deficits the part of fiscal restraint.

GST cut was a promise they made and lived up to.  I disagree with it also.  I have no problem with GST type taxes or sin taxes.  Lower my income tax.  Let me keep more of MY money.  Then Ill decide how much tax to pay based on how many purchases of goods I make.

IIRC, the Cons were in complete denial that there was a global recession and that the stim package was forced upon them by the minority parties and then the Cons took full credit for the whole thing afterwards- it was weird.  All of that would have been averted if he didn't cut the GST. Also- I think the Haper Cons are the only federal gorvenment to hit two recessions (2007 and 2015 basically book-ending his time as PM).  Harper was one of the worst PMs in Canadian history when it come to the economy. 

 

I whole heartily agree with you on cutting personal income tax and keeping (dare I say increasing the GST?)- it's more fair. 

[The Unknown Poster]

11 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

IIRC, the Cons were in complete denial that there was a global recession and that the stim package was forced upon them by the minority parties and then the Cons took full credit for the whole thing afterwards- it was weird.  All of that would have been averted if he didn't cut the GST. Also- I think the Haper Cons are the only federal gorvenment to hit two recessions (2007 and 2015 basically book-ending his time as PM).  Harper was one of the worst PMs in Canadian history when it come to the economy. 

 

I whole heartily agree with you on cutting personal income tax and keeping (dare I say increasing the GST?)- it's more fair. 

As I recall they did not want the comprehensive stimulus package the liberals wanted.  And I guess we know what happened.  Liberals said "you MUST run a deficit to combat this recession" and then "Can you believe they ran a deficit?"

Harper was a strong PM during the worst economic times.  Hard to judge him as bad given what he had to work with.  I'd say things could have been a lot worse...If we have another recession with JT in power, you'll see.  I believe aside from that initial $55 billion dollar deficit Harper ran that JT's deficits have been forecast in the same ballpark but without a recession. 

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

As I recall they did not want the comprehensive stimulus package the liberals wanted.  And I guess we know what happened.  Liberals said "you MUST run a deficit to combat this recession" and then "Can you believe they ran a deficit?"

Harper was a strong PM during the worst economic times.  Hard to judge him as bad given what he had to work with.  I'd say things could have been a lot worse...If we have another recession with JT in power, you'll see.  I believe aside from that initial $55 billion dollar deficit Harper ran that JT's deficits have been forecast in the same ballpark but without a recession. 

Yeah- when BOTH parties piled on with that "reckless spend" ****- I was pretty aghast at the duplicity of that attack... cheap political points... 

What was it about Harper's tenure, that gets you to believe that he was a strong leader? Serious question- I had Harper hate for too long. 

I judge Harper on more than his economic record- it's his egregious abuse of power while PM, it's well documented. oddly enough, that **** Harper pulled, PALES in comparison to what's going on down south today... 

True, but JT didn't run on a platform of fiscal restraint. it still boggles the mind how he was upfront with his huge spending and won. 

 

 

Edited March 19, 2018 by wanna-b-fanboy

[pigseye]

12 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/economy/exactly-how-canadas-economy-is-doing-right-now-in-10-charts/

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-progressing-well-despite-trade-uncertainty-bank-of-canada-says/article38251079/

 

What damage are you speaking of exactly?

The same damage that every tax and spend government does. More debt means more money for debt servicing and less for social services, which means raising taxes again to pay for the services. It's a vicious cycle left for future generation's to pay for and it's wrong.

 

[The Unknown Poster]

1 minute ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Yeah- when BOTH parties piled on with that "reckless spend" ****- I was pretty aghast at the duplicity of that attack... cheap political points... 

I judge Harper on more than his economic record- it's his egregious abuse of power while PM, it's well documented. oddly enough, that **** Harper pulled, PALES in comparison to what's going on down south today... 

True, but JT didn't run on a platform of fiscal restraint. it still boggles the mind how he was upfront with his huge spending and won. 

 

 

He would have won no matter what.  It was "time for a change".  Harper could have personally delivered a gold boat to every Canadian and lost. 

Harper was a great PM.  I'd vote for him for Canadian Galactic Emperor.  (No need to flame, just my opinion, I liked the guy, true left wing PC-loving Social Justice Warrior I am, or accused of being by the Trumpologists lol)

[kelownabomberfan]

4 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

Not sure what non-sense promises you are referring to. I am still pissed at the Libs dropping their crusade against FPtP.  I was hoping that was the last election of FPtP. 

I laughed at all the people that fell for that promise.  No way the Liberals are going to abandon their best chance of maintaining a majority.  When NDP supporters were telling me that they were voting for Trudeau I was just shaking my head at their gullibility.  That being said, when I look at some of the ****-shows going on in countries like Italy that have proportional representation I am glad that we don't have it.  There are already enough lunatics influencing our politics we don't need  to elect even more crazy people.  Here in BC we have three Green MLA's holding the entire province hostage for the crazy Green ideology, and that's not "democracy".  I get this is a rare event under FPTP and hardly ever happens, but under prop rep this would be the norm, and that just sucks.   Prop rep is not the way to go in my opinion.

Edited March 19, 2018 by kelownabomberfan

[kelownabomberfan]

http://angusreid.org/federal-issues-march2018/

March 19, 2018 –  The passage of time appears to have done nothing to soothe Canadian voters irritated with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau since his highly criticized passage to India last month.

This, combined with a simmering unease among the electorate over the federal government’s deficit spending has, for the first time, driven Trudeau’s disapproval rating north of 50 per cent.

All of this adds up to a ten-point gap between the Liberal and Conservative parties in vote intention. The latest polling analysis from the Angus Reid Institute shows that if an election were held tomorrow, the CPC – led by Andrew Scheer, would be in range to form a majority government.

The bleed away from the Trudeau Liberals includes not just vote intention, but perception of leadership. On a number of key metrics, including those that have traditionally been strengths for the Prime Minister, Scheer is seen as a better bet.

But with 18 months before an expected election, key areas of Liberal support remain solid. Millennials, many of whom turned out to the ballot box for the first time in 2015 principally because of Justin Trudeau, have not changed their minds about the leader – a majority (55%) still approve of him. And the party remains either in the lead or competitive in vote-rich urban centres, where a red surge pushed the Liberals to a 2015 majority.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

4 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

I am still pissed at the Libs dropping their crusade against FPtP.  I was hoping that was the last election of FPtP. 

 

32 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

I laughed at all the people that fell for that promise. 

Nice... stay classy.

[The Unknown Poster]

34 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

http://angusreid.org/federal-issues-march2018/

March 19, 2018 –  The passage of time appears to have done nothing to soothe Canadian voters irritated with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau since his highly criticized passage to India last month.

This, combined with a simmering unease among the electorate over the federal government’s deficit spending has, for the first time, driven Trudeau’s disapproval rating north of 50 per cent.

All of this adds up to a ten-point gap between the Liberal and Conservative parties in vote intention. The latest polling analysis from the Angus Reid Institute shows that if an election were held tomorrow, the CPC – led by Andrew Scheer, would be in range to form a majority government.

The bleed away from the Trudeau Liberals includes not just vote intention, but perception of leadership. On a number of key metrics, including those that have traditionally been strengths for the Prime Minister, Scheer is seen as a better bet.

But with 18 months before an expected election, key areas of Liberal support remain solid. Millennials, many of whom turned out to the ballot box for the first time in 2015 principally because of Justin Trudeau, have not changed their minds about the leader – a majority (55%) still approve of him. And the party remains either in the lead or competitive in vote-rich urban centres, where a red surge pushed the Liberals to a 2015 majority.

It would be hilarious (and great) if the Cons won a majority next election and JT was a one & done PM.

[kelownabomberfan]

14 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

Nice... stay classy.

no problem.  I'm just curious - why did you trust the Liberals on election reform?  It was pretty obvious they were never going to do it.  Next time you want to trust a politician, just inbox me first and I'll set you straight. 

 

[kelownabomberfan]

15 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

It would be hilarious (and great) if the Cons won a majority next election and JT was a one & done PM.

I still say that Justin is following in the steps of his dad.  The comparatives to his old man are actually quite eerie.  Win a big majority in 1968 (including taking Kelowna riding, something that didn't repeat itself until 2015), and then fast fall out of favour by the next election, but still squeak out a minority.  I think JT will get a minority next election too, but we'll see.  It depends on how much Jagmeet destroys the NDP.  I just don't see Quebec continuing to vote NDP, and if they don't they aren't going to support Dimples McCheery (Scheer made a joke about that) so that leaves Trudeau.   Quebec like Alberta tends to vote enmasse for one party, and I think that's going to be the Liberals.

Edited March 19, 2018 by kelownabomberfan

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

12 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

no problem.  I'm just curious - why did you trust the Liberals on election reform?  It was pretty obvious they were never going to do it.  Next time you want to trust a politician, just inbox me first and I'll set you straight. 

 

Wow, you don't get it at all. I'm done- you're on Ignore.

[Atomic]

There is nothing wrong with FPtP, lefties just don't like it because it splits their vote between NDP and Liberals.  Didn't see them complaining when it was killing the Conservatives during the PC/Reform/Canadian Alliance split years.

[kelownabomberfan]

20 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Wow, you don't get it at all. I'm done- you're on Ignore.

Great.  That probably will solve a lot of problems here, as it appears you and I have an inability to communicate.  Your comment about how this was going to be the last FPTP election really struck me as being horribly naïve, and then I remembered that was a comment from Prince Vapid during the election.  Oh well, we all have to trust someone.  Just don't trust the guy with the haircut and the smile, is all I'm saying.  

[kelownabomberfan]

20 minutes ago, Atomic said:

There is nothing wrong with FPtP, lefties just don't like it because it splits their vote between NDP and Liberals.  Didn't see them complaining when it was killing the Conservatives during the PC/Reform/Canadian Alliance split years.

Yup, that's it in a nutshell.  I also notice how when Harper won with only 39% of the popular vote, the lefties were screaming about how Harper wasn't their prime minister, and yet when Trudeau wins with the same percentage of the popular vote, that's totally cool.  I will never understand this innate hypocrisy.

[kelownabomberfan]

2 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

True, but JT didn't run on a platform of fiscal restraint. it still boggles the mind how he was upfront with his huge spending and won. 

and yet I don't recall the amount of $19 billion deficits being promised during the election...though you make a point, the brain-washed would have voted for him no matter what he said the deficit was going to be.

[The Unknown Poster]

15 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

and yet I don't recall the amount of $19 billion deficits being promised during the election...though you make a point, the brain-washed would have voted for him no matter what he said the deficit was going to be.

As I recall JT promised smaller deficits..."reasonable" deficits leading to a balanced budget and then immediately broke that promise.  But his promise was not realistic at all.  They chose a number they felt Canadians could live with knowing they'd never hit it but as a new government they'd blame the old government anyway.