Canadian Politics

352 posts / 0 new

Tue, 2022-05-24 15:14

NorthReport

I thought babble was supposed to be part of a progressive website but certainly not seeing it from some of the posters here......

Canada should rethink relationship with U.S. as democratic 'backsliding' worsens: security experts

Former national security advisers, CSIS directors say U.S. could become a 'source of threat and instability'

Catharine Tunney · CBC News · Posted: May 24, 2022 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 1 hour ago

Jacob Anthony Chansley, centre, with other insurrectionists who supported then-President Donald Trump, are confronted by U.S. Capitol Police in the hallway outside of the Senate chamber in the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington. Chansley was among the first group of insurrectionists who entered the hallway outside the Senate chamber. (Manuel Balce Ceneta/Associated Press)

Canada's intelligence community will have to grapple with the growing influence of anti-democratic forces in the United States — including the threat posed by conservative media outlets like Fox News — says a new report from a task force of intelligence experts.

"The United States is and will remain our closest ally, but it could also become a source of threat and instability," says a newly published report written by a task force of former national security advisers, former Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) directors, ex-deputy ministers, former ambassadors and academics. Members of the group have advised both Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and former prime minister Stephen Harper.

Now is the time for the federal government to rethink how it approaches national security, the report concludes.

The authors — some of whom had access to Canada's most prized secrets and briefed cabinet on emerging threats — say Canada has become complacent in its national security strategies and is not prepared to tackle threats like Russian and Chinese espionage, the "democratic backsliding" in the United States, a rise in cyberattacks and climate change.

"We believe that the threats are quite serious at the moment, that they do impact Canada," said report co-author Vincent Rigby, who until a few months ago served as the national security adviser to Trudeau.

"We don't want it to take a crisis for [the] government of Canada to wake up."

The report he helped write says that one area in need of a policy pivot is Canada's relationship with the United States.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/national-security-us-fox-news-threat-re...

Tue, 2022-05-24 20:54

#53

NorthReport

Conservatives ask for ethics probe into Liberal’s $17K ‘sweetheart’ PR contract

https://globalnews.ca/news/8863504/conservatives-ethics-probe-mary-ng-sw...

Tue, 2022-05-24 23:11

#54

NorthReport

Maybe stop spending money and other resources on war, and start building co-op houses for seniors and working-class Canadians might help!

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/finances-worsening-for-canadians-as-inflatio...

Wed, 2022-05-25 01:08

#55

NorthReport

Brilliant Liberals!

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-canada-left-out-of-laun...

Wed, 2022-05-25 01:37

#56

NorthReport

WTF!

https://vancouversun.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/trudeau-cancels-ap...

Wed, 2022-05-25 22:59

#57

NorthReport

Political media's role in basic income

https://rabble.ca/rabbletv/karl-nerenberg-political-medias-role-in-basic...

Fri, 2022-05-27 02:18

#58

NorthReport

I heard an interview on CBC this afternoon about a new female immigrant to Canada who was scamed over the phone by people who were impersonating Canada Border Services for a substantial amount of money. Fortunately she had a counselor who she contacted after the scam took place. And the counselor started an online fun-raiser for this woman and her family and many Canadians contributed Cash as well as furniture because they had an empty apartment. Even the counselor was interviewed she was very humble about it, saying that she was just doing her job. Remarkable uplifting story.

Canada needs to ensure that all residents of Canada are made aware of all the scams that are circulating, as new to Canada folks can be particularly vulnerable.

Sun, 2022-05-29 16:20

#59

NorthReport

Why are we not, via our mainstream news media, geting weekly updates on the progress of all those items in the NDP-Lib agreement? The silence is deafening!

That Liberal-NDP deal made Parliament more predictable — but not more boring

But when the Conservatives put forward a motion calling on the government to raise defence spending to two per cent of GDP — in line with NATO's target — it passed overwhelmingly, with Liberals and the Bloc voting in favour. The NDP and Greens voted against. (Such motions are non-binding.)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/parliament-liberal-ndp-deal-votes-1.646...

Sun, 2022-05-29 16:35

#60

NDPP

Read this in the Star. Seems pertinent to the escalating costs of our alarming militarization and deteriorating social conditions, not to mention the total collaboration/capitulation of parliamentary political parties to elite agendas.

Prepare for massive poverty ahead. And remember when/if you paid no attention to those hit earlier and already sounding warning voices that the austerity status quo was killing people. There is a price for doing nothing. Karma may be visiting you too, and sooner than you think.

"Canada is tracking to have the lowest growth in income per capita among the 38 members of the OECD during 2020-30."

Sun, 2022-05-29 17:04

#61

kropotkin1951

The main NDP success in Parliament is to intensify the Cold War with China and help farmers get exemptions for carbon fuels.

New Democrats also have twice used their votes to advance items the Liberals opposed.

First, NDP MPs supported a Conservative proposal earlier this month to reestablish a special committee on China. Two days later, NDP MPs voted in favour of a Conservative MP's bill that would exempt propane and natural gas used for farming from the federal carbon tax (New Democrats had also voted for a previous version of the bill during the last Parliament).

Mon, 2022-05-30 16:46

#62

NorthReport

This secrecy and power-tripping in Ottawa is heading us in a very wrong direction, and Canadians are already paying a very heavy price.

All-powerful PMO, mistrust “destroying” the public service: Paul Tellier

The former top public servant and corporate CEO says the long-term trend toward centralized decision-making must be reversed to restore trust.

https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/may-2022/tellier-mistrust-destr...

Wed, 2022-06-01 01:09

#63

NorthReport

Matt Gurney: Trudeau's Goldilocks moment, but for pistols instead of porridge

We've heard a lot about crassly opportunistic politicians exploiting low-info voters. I wonder how many of Canada's urbanites would be surprised to realize that this time, that means them.

Matt Gurney

14 hr ago

In my 15 years or so of writing about firearms policy, here’s been a constant problem: gun policy is complicated, the broader public doesn't know much about it, and it's hard (impossible?) to make any coherent arguments without laying out the context, both of the specific proposals and the broader background. Working through what was announced yesterday, and how this clarifies a worrying shift in how the Liberals approach gun control, is going to be a bit of a process.

Get comfy.

As of Tuesday morning, we are short a lot of details, because the Liberals chose to make their high-publicity announcement before they provided any technical briefings. (We'll come back to that later.) At first glance, it seems that lot of what the Liberals announced is stuff they'd either already committed to do or, in fact, already exists. (The Liberals?! Re-announcing stuff? Well, I never!) There is currently confusion about the ammunition magazine capacity limit — most non-gunnies won't know the difference between an internal magazine and a detachable one, but it's a huge difference, and the proposed legislation is unhelpfully vague. So stay tuned. But the actual centrepiece of the proposal, I have to admit, made me burst out laughing. On Twitter, I called it "peak Liberal." It really is a pretty perfect example of what's wrong with how the Liberals govern, but why they're great at politics.

Share The Line

The big reveal was a "freeze" on handgun sales in Canada, and their importation. Existing owners can keep theirs. It's not clear exactly when this will go in effect, so I imagine gun stores across the land are going to set sales records in the next few days. Once in place, the sale or transfer of a handgun — from either a store to an individual or between individuals — will be eliminated. Again, "frozen," as the Liberals call it.

At the most basic level, new government policies are intended to solve a problem: you see something that's wrong with the status quo, and you try to enact a policy to improve it. Parties tend to wrap their policies in lots of rhetorical flourishes, but if you tune out what the politicians are saying and look at what they're doing, you can get a decent sense of what their actual goal is. And there's been an interesting shift in what the Liberals have been doing with gun control these last few years. Monday's announcement is perhaps the ultimate example of this yet, the purest form of the new normal we've yet seen.

The Liberals are making a series of announcements that won't actually change, at all, how safe Canadians are from gun violence. The announcements do get a lot of attention, though. Because, clearly, getting the attention is itself the goal. The public-safety talking points are just the PR frosting on top of what is an entirely political exercise. Why else make the announcement before you give the press the technical briefings? The sequence tells you all you need to know. (The Star’s terrific Stephanie Levitz said all that needed saying on that front yesterday in a short Twitter thread.)

Stephanie Levitz @StephanieLevitz

The Liberals just tabled what they've been flagging as a major piece of gun legislation. In about 15 minutes, the PM and others will speak to it. But as of this minute, no one except the gov't has actually seen the bill. 1/n

May 30th 2022

35 Retweets113 Likes

This is new. Up until a few years ago, while Conservatives and Liberals disagreed on a lot of the details, but they shared a common concept of what the purpose of our system was: to regulate the licensing of gun owners, set standards for storage and transport, and generally seek to keep gun crime (especially violent gun crime) in Canada at its generally low levels. The system functions very well. It is a genuine success story for government policy. Most of the firearm homicides in Canada are committed with guns smuggled in from the United States, outside the framework of our gun control. Canada's millions of lawful owners, and their many millions of firearms, are seldom responsible for crimes. The system works about as well as it can — you can tweak it, but it's fundamentally sound.

What has changed in recent years is the shared understanding of the purpose of our gun control system. The Conservatives are, to put it mildly, in a state of transition of late, so who knows what the future will bring. But as of now, their gun policies remain within that once-shared framework: the problem isn't civilian ownership of firearms, it's crimes committed with guns. The Liberals shared that common framework at least up until at least 2018, during Justin Trudeau's first mandate (his only with a majority). The Liberals spent genuine time and energy crafting Bill C-71, their first crack at reforming our gun laws, and didn't change much from the Harper-era rules. The bill was a mixed bag, to my mind, with some good ideas mixed in with some bad ideas, but it was a serious bill — a thoughtful effort that was within the general consensus of what our gun laws are for and should do.

And then things began to change, starting around 2019 — which, no doubt entirely by coincidence, was the year the Liberals lost their parliamentary majority and became electorally dependent on a hyper-efficient vote in the country’s large urban areas.

The Liberals have always used guns as a wedge against the Conservatives, of course, but that was just sort of a happy coincidence born of their fairly modest policy differences. Now creating that wedge, pleasing as it is to those last-remaining Liberal voters in the big cities, itself seems like the point. Because in terms of actual public-safety benefits, most of what the Liberals have proposed since losing their majority is bullshit.

I don't mean bullshit as in "bad." (Though I think most of the proposals are indeed bad.) I mean it as in "nonsensical." There has been a noticeable uncoupling between what the Liberals say they're doing and why they're doing it, and what they're actually doing. Take, for example, the assault weapon ban they rushed out after the Nova Scotia shooting, committed with smuggled guns from the U.S.: The Liberals like to tout how they banned 1,500 models of assault rifle, but they've left even more models of rifle that are functionally identical to the banned models untouched. I can't buy an AR-15, but I can walk into a store today, flash my firearms licence, swipe my credit card, and walk out with something that's basically the same: same calibre of ammunition, same kind of magazines, same semi-automatic rate of fire. Likewise, the handgun freeze they announced Monday? It leaves Canadians in possession of an estimated million handguns.

If it's bad for Canadians to have handguns, if it's a threat to public safety, what good is a plan that just locks in the threat?

Tune out the rhetoric, look at the proposals. What's being accomplished here?

Journalist Stephen Maher had what was perhaps the most revelatory announcement on Monday. He asked a government spokesperson what the rationale behind the freeze was and then tweeted that he'd been told: "The reason we’re not changing the classification [which would ban handguns outright] is that it would mean that people who currently own handguns legally would be breaking the law. By doing it this way, we’re putting a cap on the market and stopping importation/sale/transfer of handguns while permitting those who currently own them legally to keep them."

Okay, but ... why? What kind of sense does that make? If the Liberals see a need to stop the importation/sale/transfer of handguns, they must think handguns are a problem. But they're also explicitly letting people who have legal handguns keep them, which tells us they don't think they're a problem.

This is bizarre policy. If handguns pose a threat to the public that must be stopped, you can't let people keep them. If there's no problem with people keeping them, there's no point in stopping them from being imported, bought or sold. The policy announcement Monday, interpreted literally, implies that the Liberals have concluded that Canadians own the exactly the right number of handguns. More would be a problem, and fewer is no benefit. It's Goldilocks, but for pistols instead of porridge.

There is no coherent rationale for this. Trudeau could start getting rid of handguns overnight. He has the power to immediately ban them and begin a buyback or confiscation process. Handguns are registered; he knows where they are, so it's not a logistical problem. He would have the support of the NDP in doing this, so it's not a political constraint, either. There's only one possible explanation for this proposal: if the Liberals aren't banning the guns, they're acknowledging the guns aren't the problem. It's the same for their "military style assault rifle" plan: they're banning some semi-automatic rifles that fire the various ammunition calibres, but not all semi-automatic rifles that fire the various ammunition calibres. Clearly, the rifles aren’t the problem. There's no way to read this without concluding that the purpose of the announcements is the announcements themselves.

"Oh Matt," you might be thinking. "Don't be silly, they'll ban them eventually. It's an incremental plan." Well, yeah, probably. That's worse. Again, the stated rationale is that these firearms are a danger to public safety. What possible justification is there for the Liberals, by their own claimed internal logic, to not ban them by now? Is there some minimum threshold of death needed before they'll act and they're just patiently waiting to reach it? Imagine if this was a product recall for contaminated food, and the government announced that they weren't going to shut the production down, just cap it, and you can keep and eat the contaminated food you already have. People would rightly think that was bonkers.

What looks like confusing policy becomes clear once understood as politics. The Liberal have moved away from the previous shared understanding of the purpose of our gun control laws was and now view gun control as political signalling to their urban base voters, voters who won't know enough to realize how bizarre and toothless the proposals are. And that's it. The more vulnerable the Liberals have become politically, the harder they've worked to make a lot of noise on guns without actually coming down with a policy that goes all the way toward the obvious natural conclusion of their proposals. Excellent politicians that they are, they know actually solving the issue isn’t in their interests — it’s better for them to keep stuff in hand to roll out, bit by bit, every time there's a tragedy. That only makes sense if one of these things are true: the Liberals are either willing to let Canadians die to give them more political cover, or they know the freezes and bans won't actually save lives, so feel no real urgency to actually do anything.

This is either a cynical ploy or an unconscionable choice. It can't be anything else. It'll work, though. It works because the public doesn't know enough about our laws to independently analyze what the Liberals are proposing. We've heard a lot in recent years about crassly opportunistic politicians exploiting low-info voters. I wonder how many of Canada's well-educated, white-collar urbanites would be surprised to realize that this time, that means them.

https://theline.substack.com/p/matt-gurney-trudeaus-goldilocks-moment?s=w

Wed, 2022-06-01 10:15

#64

Pondering

Grandfathering is normal. As long as no new guns are sold old ones will eventually be outdated.

At the most basic level, new government policies are intended to solve a problem: you see something that's wrong with the status quo, and you try to enact a policy to improve it.

That is a conservative mindset. Something doesn't have to be "wrong" with the status quo to make improvements or changes. We can be preemptive. Not be allowed to privately own handguns is not deprivation. I often hear claims that the guns used in crimes are smuggled in, that it isn't legal hand guns being used. Then I read this.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/as-ottawa-readies-new-firearms-bill-statca...

"Of particular concern, there is currently little information available to determine the source of firearms used in crime: for example, whether a gun used in a crime was stolen, illegally purchased or smuggled into the country," the report says.

Too bad gun owners didn't raise a stink about that. Gun owners have known for a very long time that the public is in favor of more stringent gun laws in general but have done nothing to address the concerns. Instead they follow in the steps of the NRA.

Gun owners should have been and still should be fighting for national registration of all firearms. They should be fighting for all toy guns including BB guns to be easily differenciated from actual firearms. They should be fighting for controls, regulations and severe penalties I can't even think of because I'm not a gun owner.

Fri, 2022-06-03 09:58

#65

NorthReport

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/02/more-from-morneau-canada-should...

Fri, 2022-06-03 23:22

#66

NorthReport

Conservatives say they are about to set another new membership record

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-leadership-memberships-1.6...

Fri, 2022-06-03 23:48

#67

NorthReport

Good riddance!

Une députée conservatrice priée de quitter la Chambre des communes

https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/politique/2022-06-03/vaccination-obli...

Sun, 2022-06-05 01:43

#68

NorthReport

The Liberals were on the ropes and took the Trudeau name out of desperation.

My hunch is that the Liberals will soon be on the ropes again.

And I question whether the Liberals will be up to the challenge when Poilievre takes over as Conservative leader.

Poilievre campaign recruits record number to Conservative party

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-poilievre-campaign-recr...

Sun, 2022-06-05 01:48

#69

NorthReport

Over 600,000

Conservatives sure do look like they are going to be having a happenin' soon

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cpc-leadership-membership-sales-1.6477819

Sun, 2022-06-05 01:57

#70

NorthReport

Just more absurd Liberal
Party talking points

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2022/06/02/
where-is-the-progressive-counter-narrative-to-pierre-poilievre/#.YpxFSGllDis

Sun, 2022-06-05 02:22

#71

NorthReport

Yea, make sure Trudeau that you go after the low-income Canadians to ensure that you keep the poor, poor, and the rich, rich, eh! Don't worry though, as your corporate masters will reward you handsomely for your efforts.

Government drive to verify CERB payments ramps up — many told to return some or all of funds received

CRA says notices ‘mark a transition in compliance and collecting activities.’ Verification will continue over next four years. Advocates say effort will hit low income Canadians hard

https://www.thestar.com/business/2022/06/01/low-income-people-are-really...

Sun, 2022-06-05 02:25

#72

NorthReport

Doug Ford just showed Pierre Poilievre how to win — and Justin Trudeau how to lose

No one will remember the just-concluded Ontario election campaign for the depth of its policy debates but the results still give Canada’s national parties much to think about, Chantal Hébert writes.

https://www.thestar.com/politics/political-opinion/2022/06/03/doug-ford-...

Sun, 2022-06-05 03:15

#73

NorthReport

We are going to continue to be so screwed.

https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/ottawa-should-reject-the-mur...

Sun, 2022-06-05 10:39

#74

NorthReport

The Paranoid Style in Canadian Politics

Appeal to Reason

The Left needs to double down on its own sustained critique of the WEF and organizations like it. The problem is that the Left’s critique is grounded in reality — the reality that capitalism’s avatars and functionaries around the world cooperate to protect and advance their material interests against the interests of workers. And this reality is boring. Further, it takes time to explain. But it is the only way forward.

The answer to this problem can be found in the name of the late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century Midwest socialist weekly, Appeal to Reason. Working people understand that the deck is stacked against them and that they are exploited. Conspiracies may be exciting, but human beings don’t need the sugar of conspiracy to allow the medicine of reasoned analysis to go down.

The pervasiveness of conspiracy and the exploitation of their prevalence by right-wing actors like Poilievre offer up an opportunity for the Left to distinguish itself. We should grab the chance to offer a more compelling and grounded alternative that explains precisely what the problem is. There is no conspiracy required. The problem is simply run-of-the-mill capitalist interests.

While we need to be wary of conspiracy theorists and politicians who cynically use them, the Left should not abandon its critiques of institutions and players who happen to attract their attention. What appears to be shared affinities are so only in the most superficial ways. The Left ought to also guard against opponents who mobilize conspiracy oppositionality, reducing all critique of the WEF to conspiracy. A policy of criticism without paranoia is a good start. If THEY are really out to get you, it isn’t paranoia. And the fact is: they are out to get us, but there’s nothing new or cloak-and-dagger about it.

DAVID MOSCROP

Conspiracy theories are way more exciting than political economy, and Canada’s Pierre Poilievre is exploiting the thrill of paranoia for political gain. The Left must counter these impulses with analyses of worker exploitation — and a program for change.

Conservative leadership candidate Pierre Poilievre speaking at the Conservative Party of Canada English leadership debate in Edmonton, Canada. (Artur Widak. / NurPhoto via Getty Images)

The new issue of Jacobin will be out on Tuesday. Subscribe today and get a yearlong print and digital subscription.

When Debts Become Unpayable, They Should Be Forgiven

MICHAEL HUDSON

Jeremy Corbyn: Climate Crisis Is a Class Issue

JEREMY CORBYN

Fassbinder and the Red Army Faction

MEAGAN DAY

R.E.M.’s Michael Stipe Talks to Jacobin

MICHAEL STIPE

Canadian Conservative Party leadership hopeful and presu

https://jacobin.com/2022/06/paranoid-conspiracy-theories-canadian-politi...

Sun, 2022-06-05 18:42

#75

NorthReport

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/judicial-independence-supreme-court-ric...

Sun, 2022-06-05 21:13

(Reply to #75) #76

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

The Paranoid Style in Canadian Politics

Appeal to Reason

The Left needs to double down on its own sustained critique of the WEF and organizations like it. The problem is that the Left’s critique is grounded in reality — the reality that capitalism’s avatars and functionaries around the world cooperate to protect and advance their material interests against the interests of workers. And this reality is boring. Further, it takes time to explain. But it is the only way forward.

The answer to this problem can be found in the name of the late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century Midwest socialist weekly, Appeal to Reason. Working people understand that the deck is stacked against them and that they are exploited. Conspiracies may be exciting, but human beings don’t need the sugar of conspiracy to allow the medicine of reasoned analysis to go down.

The pervasiveness of conspiracy and the exploitation of their prevalence by right-wing actors like Poilievre offer up an opportunity for the Left to distinguish itself. We should grab the chance to offer a more compelling and grounded alternative that explains precisely what the problem is. There is no conspiracy required. The problem is simply run-of-the-mill capitalist interests.

While we need to be wary of conspiracy theorists and politicians who cynically use them, the Left should not abandon its critiques of institutions and players who happen to attract their attention. What appears to be shared affinities are so only in the most superficial ways. The Left ought to also guard against opponents who mobilize conspiracy oppositionality, reducing all critique of the WEF to conspiracy. A policy of criticism without paranoia is a good start. If THEY are really out to get you, it isn’t paranoia. And the fact is: they are out to get us, but there’s nothing new or cloak-and-dagger about it.

BY

DAVID MOSCROP

Conspiracy theories are way more exciting than political economy, and Canada’s Pierre Poilievre is exploiting the thrill of paranoia for political gain. The Left must counter these impulses with analyses of worker exploitation — and a program for change.

Conservative leadership candidate Pierre Poilievre speaking at the Conservative Party of Canada English leadership debate in Edmonton, Canada. (Artur Widak. / NurPhoto via Getty Images)

The new issue of Jacobin will be out on Tuesday. Subscribe today and get a yearlong print and digital subscription.

When Debts Become Unpayable, They Should Be Forgiven

MICHAEL HUDSON

Jeremy Corbyn: Climate Crisis Is a Class Issue

JEREMY CORBYN

Fassbinder and the Red Army Faction

MEAGAN DAY

R.E.M.’s Michael Stipe Talks to Jacobin

MICHAEL STIPE

Canadian Conservative Party leadership hopeful and presu

https://jacobin.com/2022/06/paranoid-conspiracy-theories-canadian-politi...

Don't explain just provide facts. It's the explaining that leads the left to lose.

Sun, 2022-06-05 21:18

#77

Pondering

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/people-are-grumpy-they-opted-for-a-pragm...

There are takeaways, he says, for the party’s federal leadership contenders.

“Most voters are not ideological, they want pragmatic decisions and decision-making from their elected officials. That's what I think Ontarians believe that they're getting with Doug Ford,” he said.

That's right and Pierre Poilievre is far from pragmatic. The Liberals win because they are seen as pragmatic.

Tue, 2022-06-07 17:43

#78

NorthReport

My hunch is that the Conservative leadership race is all over but the shouting.

These 2 MPs, who represent the rich, want to make sure they get in on the gravy train, so probably looking ahead for possible Cabinet positions?

2 Conservative MPs switch allegiance from Patrick Brown to Pierre Poilievre

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/two-mps-defect-poilievre-1.6480338

Wed, 2022-06-08 09:16

#79

NorthReport

Doesn't anyone tell the truth any more?

'Mendicino was misunderstood' saying cops asked for Emergencies Act:
deputy minister

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2022/06/07/mendicino-was-misunderstood...

Wed, 2022-06-08 18:14

#80

NorthReport

Ok, the Conservative leadership race is a wrap, now what happens?

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-paths-to-conservative-l...

Wed, 2022-06-08 20:56

#81

JKR

This leadership race reminds me of the NDP's leadership election that Singh won. It's hard to beat the candidate that signs up a ton of new members who have never been members before. I’m not sure if that ended up working out well for the NDP.

Thu, 2022-06-09 17:08

(Reply to #81) #82

kropotkin1951

JKR wrote:

This leadership race reminds me of the NDP's leadership election that Singh won. It's hard to beat the candidate that signs up a ton of new members who have never been members before. I’m not sure if that ended up working out well for the NDP.

Ujjal Dosanjh beat Corky Evans for the BC leadership using that very strategy and the party went into the wilderness for two decades. His buddy Moe Sihota learned how to stack riding nominations for conventions delegates when he helped run Glen Clark's union steamroller. Same tactics just a different base. Corky Evans would have been a great Premier if he had been given a chance to run in a couple of elections.

Fri, 2022-06-10 00:07

#83

NorthReport

Privatization is a climate killer

https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/privatization-is-a-climate-k...

Sun, 2022-06-12 23:06

#84

NorthReport

Did Elites Really Take Over Identity Politics?

JOHN-BAPTISTE ODUOR

In his new book, Elite Capture, Olúfémi Táíwò argues that elites have hijacked identity politics — but what if it belonged to them all along?

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, June 27, 2008. (Marc Nozell / Flickr)

https://jacobin.com/2022/05/elite-capture-identity-politics-philosophy-o...

Wed, 2022-06-15 05:14

#85

NorthReport

Actually they are terrified that he might win

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2022/06/15/new-poll-suggests-liberal-n...

Wed, 2022-06-15 23:10

#86

NorthReport

You are doing one hell of a job Justin!

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-federal-...

Thu, 2022-06-16 00:03

#87

NorthReport

https://www.cp24.com/mobile/news/senior-military-officer-who-retired-wen...

Thu, 2022-06-16 00:08

#88

NorthReport

The rich are entitled to their entitlements as the Liberals say. Let the taxpayers foot their bar bill while some Canadians are homeless or don't have enough to eat. Nothing to see here. Just the usual pigs at the trough.

https://nationalpost.com/news/bar-tab-on-pms-airplane-show-booze-flowing...

Thu, 2022-06-16 02:50

#89

NorthReport

In other words, Liberals and NDPers are feeling very threatened by Poilievre

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2022/06/15/new-poll-suggests-liberal-n...

Thu, 2022-06-16 02:51

#90

NorthReport

. ..

Thu, 2022-06-16 05:05

#91

NorthReport

Canadians have collectively failed the COVID test.

https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2022/06/14/How-COVID-Broke-Canadian-Society/

Fri, 2022-06-17 11:41

#92

NorthReport

webgear's approach is if you are warmongers then your behaviour can be excused.

Joly needs to step down and pretty much everyone knows it,

Mélanie Joly’s office missed e-mail alerting them to Russian embassy party

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-melanie-joly-russian-em...

Fri, 2022-06-17 15:00

(Reply to #92) #93

JKR

NorthReport wrote:

webgear's approach is if you are warmongers then your behaviour can be excused.

NR, your nonsensical name calling is unhelpful.

Fri, 2022-06-17 15:47

(Reply to #93) #94

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:
In other words, Liberals and NDPers are feeling very threatened by Poilievre

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2022/06/15/new-poll-suggests-liberal-n...

I think it means Poilievre won't win over any swing voters when the time comes to win a federal election as opposed to a Conservative election.

I've been reading the Freedom Convoy is planning actions in Ottawa all summer long to remind Canadians how repulsive they are.

Fri, 2022-06-17 19:17

(Reply to #94) #95

Webgear

NorthReport wrote:

webgear's approach is if you are warmongers then your behaviour can be excused.

Joly needs to step down and pretty much everyone knows it,

Mélanie Joly’s office missed e-mail alerting them to Russian embassy party

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-melanie-joly-russian-em...

I am taking a common sense approach to the subject. If you want to fire the minister fired, then you need to fire a good number of civil servants that should have known better too. In the end what will that resolve.

With you approach, we will be firing a whole lot of politicians and government workers.

Sat, 2022-06-18 14:50

#96

kropotkin1951

In the days before the new reality countries tried to keep diplomatic channels open, especially when the heat was rising in relations. This is a media driven story and is insignificant on all levels.

Sat, 2022-06-18 21:45

#97

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

It's like trying to stick shift through social engagements with divorced couples. Someone is alway inevidently pissed off because you haven't declared which team you are on.

Sat, 2022-06-18 22:00

(Reply to #97) #98

Michael Moriarity

laine lowe wrote:

It's like trying to stick shift through social engagements with divorced couples. Someone is alway inevidently pissed off because you haven't declared which team you are on.

Actually, I think that's a lot harder. When you are a government bureaucrat, that's the team you are on, and you can talk to members of the other teams with that fact known by both sides. Not so with divorced friends.