Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Case in point:

0236ew6dcxqa1.jpg

Imagine thinking this dipshit has the upper hand on anyone in Ottawa.

I've never been a big JT fan, pompous ass, a lot of times he's more concerned with how he looks on the global front than to us Canadians, but he's light years ahead in ability to lead a country than this disgruntled shitbag dweeb.

We all know inside Orwell's book he's holding, he has Trump's angertainment handbook he is following to a tee.

All his crew members pictured in the background nodding their head in unison like trained knuckledraggers, thinking PP is owning the libs.  

 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, HardCoreBlue said:

All his crew members pictured in the background nodding their head in unison like trained knuckledraggers, thinking PP is owning the libs.  

At some point, some of them have got to start realizing this. His behaviour in the house is terrible. He does not act like a statesman at all - he is not going to be the answer for their party. 

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Mark H. said:

I find the opinion credible, with a bit of hyperbole blended in, certainly.  It is what most of the interviewees have said.

It is what most of the Liberal interviewees have said. The House of Commons majority does not agree. Even the Liberals best friends, the NDP, want an inquiry. It is extremely undemocratic of the Liberals to continually ignore the wishes of a House majority. Huberus.

4 hours ago, Mark H. said:

At some point, some of them have got to start realizing this. His behaviour in the house is terrible. He does not act like a statesman at all - he is not going to be the answer for their party. 

We shall see. Liberals continue to slide in the polls. Right now the CPC holds a significant lead in the polls, power index, and preferred leader for Prime Minister according to Nik Nanos today. You guys can mock Poilievre but he is preferred by more Canadians than Trudeau and that is terrible news for the Liberals and very importantly the power index now favors the CPC and the Liberals PI has plummeted.

Edited by GCn20
Posted
15 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Present the evidence. Until you do, it's conjecture. Same as with that jackass CSIS employee who went to the media while presenting not an iota of proof.

Transparency is obviously important. But so is evidence of a pretty serious claim.

How can any evidence be presented when Trudeau keeps blocking a federal inquiry?

Posted
6 hours ago, GCn20 said:

It is what most of the Liberal interviewees have said. The House of Commons majority does not agree. Even the Liberals best friends, the NDP, want an inquiry. It is extremely undemocratic of the Liberals to continually ignore the wishes of a House majority. Huberus.

When the story broke, I was driving and listening to CJOB. It was the consensus of people that Cloutier interviewed on his show. That's mostly what I'm basing my thoughts on.

Posted
7 hours ago, GCn20 said:

We shall see. Liberals continue to slide in the polls. Right now the CPC holds a significant lead in the polls, power index, and preferred leader for Prime Minister according to Nik Nanos today. You guys can mock Poilievre but he is preferred by more Canadians than Trudeau and that is terrible news for the Liberals and very importantly the power index now favors the CPC and the Liberals PI has plummeted.

Pollievere engages in more mockery than anyone - he should expect the same - even from an obscure football forum. 😁

We will see how the polls go.  Andrew Scheer had the numbers to win a majority, at one point in time.  

The politician I don't understand at all is Singh.  His party is effectively part of the government.  But he still speaks like he opposes them, even though he though in reality, he doesn't.

Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

Pollievere engages in more mockery than anyone - he should expect the same - even from an obscure football forum. 😁

We will see how the polls go.  Andrew Scheer had the numbers to win a majority, at one point in time.  

The politician I don't understand at all is Singh.  His party is effectively part of the government.  But he still speaks like he opposes them, even though he though in reality, he doesn't.

You may be right and I am certainly not suggesting that Poilievre is perfect by any means. Meant to point out just how disappointed people are with the Liberals by contrasting it with the latest polls. When Poilievre is the people's choice right now that speaks volumes about how Canadians feel Trudeau is doing.  

Singh...I don't understand that at all either. Not sure what to make of it.

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

When the story broke, I was driving and listening to CJOB. It was the consensus of people that Cloutier interviewed on his show. That's mostly what I'm basing my thoughts on.

Pretty small sample size then. The House of Commons voted in favor of a public inquiry by a pretty large margin. The Liberals are members of that same house, and while it wasn't a confidence motion, the will of the house should be respected. I think that any party that thinks they can operate without the support of the house should be removed.

Edited by GCn20
Posted
7 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

How can any evidence be presented when Trudeau keeps blocking a federal inquiry?

I didn't know the PM holds all the power and could veto whatever he wants.

Oh, wait... That's not a thing in Canada.

Another swing and a miss.

Posted
7 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

How can any evidence be presented when Trudeau keeps blocking a federal inquiry?

He literally appointed a rapporteur to investigate and report back. 

There is also National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. 

Nothing is blocked. 

Posted

This is the worst collection of party leaders I think I have ever seen. People are tired if Trudeau but that doesn't mean pollievre is a good choice. A guy who is only good at yelling about how awful things are and pointing fingers at the other guy makes for a terrible leader.

Posted
Just now, 17to85 said:

This is the worst collection of party leaders I think I have ever seen. People are tired if Trudeau but that doesn't mean pollievre is a good choice. A guy who is only good at yelling about how awful things are and pointing fingers at the other guy makes for a terrible leader.

And the other is running for Premier of each province. 

Posted
18 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

This is the worst collection of party leaders I think I have ever seen. People are tired if Trudeau but that doesn't mean pollievre is a good choice. A guy who is only good at yelling about how awful things are and pointing fingers at the other guy makes for a terrible leader.

At this point, I would rather see Trudeau stay in power

And I say that as someone who has voted Conservative more often than not

Pollievre needs to bring some real ideas forward - he needs to realize that Conservatives would not be able to govern with a minority - the way the Liberals can

 

27 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

Conservatives are leading in the most recent polls but Liberals are leading in Quebec, Toronto, the GTA and Vancouver in the same polls.

That's where the swing ridings are - it's all about who is polling higher in the swing ridings

That's the Canadian reality

Posted
44 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

At this point, I would rather see Trudeau stay in power

And I say that as someone who has voted Conservative more often than not

Pollievre needs to bring some real ideas forward - he needs to realize that Conservatives would not be able to govern with a minority - the way the Liberals can

Yeah. Trudeau is a complete dope, but christ I saw how awful a similar leader in Jason kenney was for Alberta, I cringe at the thought of that happening federally. Jagmeet Singh is as useless as the day is long but I might vote NDP purely as a protest vote whenever they get around to calling an election. Not that it really matters here. Useless little dipshit con wins this riding no contest every time.

Posted
9 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

I don't particularly like Trudeau but he's better than Pollievre.

I can't stand Trudeau's word salad - but I prefer it over Pollievre's hot air

Bottom line though: in spite of all the criticisms of Trudeau, Harper, Martin, et. al. - Canada is still in a much better position than most of the G7

But I am not convinced that Pollievre is a leader who would keep things intact or improve them

First off, I don't believe one word of what they're saying about the carbon tax. It's already a provincial tax in some jurisdictions - why would anyone remove it at the federal level?

To balance the budget, I think he'd just do what was done in the past - reduce social transfers - which would then leave most provinces with deficits

Just my 0.02 - no one has to agree with me

6 minutes ago, JCon said:

He should have stepped down ages ago, but he's like his dad and he needs the attention/affirmation. 

You've got good knowledge of these things - who do you think would be his successor?

Freeland?

Posted
1 minute ago, Mark H. said:

You've got good knowledge of these things - who do you think would be his successor?

Freeland?

I used to think Freeland but the last 2 years has me rethinking. She's really failed to communicate effectively during a time where we need our Finance Minister to be an effective communicator. I don't see how that changes if she's the leader of the party/Prime Minister. 

I still think she's good but I'm struggling to see her as Prime Minister now. A leadership campaign may change that. 

I think Carney would be a good Prime Minister but they should never elect him as the leader. It's Michael Ignatieff all over again. He the epitome of Laurentian Elite and not what we need now. 

Anand would be good but could she garner enough support? Also, I worry how an East coaster would do in Ontario. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, JCon said:

I used to think Freeland but the last 2 years has me rethinking. She's really failed to communicate effectively during a time where we need our Finance Minister to be an effective communicator. I don't see how that changes if she's the leader of the party/Prime Minister. 

I still think she's good but I'm struggling to see her as Prime Minister now. A leadership campaign may change that. 

I think Carney would be a good Prime Minister but they should never elect him as the leader. It's Michael Ignatieff all over again. He the epitome of Laurentian Elite and not what we need now. 

Anand would be good but could she garner enough support? Also, I worry how an East coaster would do in Ontario. 

I realize she's a politician, but she really needed to do a better job of explaining the budget - scrap the political jargon and lay down some precise bullet points

She has the smarts, but she could use some coaching with communication

The other two...I agree.  But I think it probably is one of those 3 - maybe Mendicino - after that it'll be a parachute

Posted

the short answer in all of this is that the Trudeau Grits are far less dangerous than any other party right now. Things are still rocky, economically, around the world, and we need stability right now...not drastic measures. As has been mentioned, coming out of the pandemic, Canada is faring better than most/all of the G7 nations, and we need to just keep riding this out for awhile....IMO. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, Noeller said:

the short answer in all of this is that the Trudeau Grits are far less dangerous than any other party right now. Things are still rocky, economically, around the world, and we need stability right now...not drastic measures. As has been mentioned, coming out of the pandemic, Canada is faring better than most/all of the G7 nations, and we need to just keep riding this out for awhile....IMO. 

But, they need to communicate that to everyone. They're just too smug and do not speak to the entire country. It hurts them. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Noeller said:

the short answer in all of this is that the Trudeau Grits are far less dangerous than any other party right now. Things are still rocky, economically, around the world, and we need stability right now...not drastic measures. As has been mentioned, coming out of the pandemic, Canada is faring better than most/all of the G7 nations, and we need to just keep riding this out for awhile....IMO. 

I don't know, I feel like that's loser talk. I think we need a government that can actually try and do something positive but not too crazy. 

This last budget really didn't do anything. We may be in an OK spot at the moment but at least do something.

Posted
1 minute ago, JCon said:

But, they need to communicate that to everyone. They're just too smug and do not speak to the entire country. It hurts them. 

I respect your opinion as much as anyone's, but for me, personally, I have never seen that...or never felt that vibe. I don't know what it says about ME, personally, but I have never felt the smugness/snobbiness that people talk about. I get that from every politician....

Posted
1 minute ago, Noeller said:

the short answer in all of this is that the Trudeau Grits are far less dangerous than any other party right now. Things are still rocky, economically, around the world, and we need stability right now...not drastic measures. As has been mentioned, coming out of the pandemic, Canada is faring better than most/all of the G7 nations, and we need to just keep riding this out for awhile....IMO. 

Disgruntled **** bags response to this? 

Yea but dictatorship, F Trudeau, my rights, government overreach, no one tells me how to be a good citizen to others outside of my inner circle, freedom of speech, sheep! 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...