Canadian Election

[MigL]

And again, S Harper wasn't running in this election ( if he was he would have gotten my vote ) , so what does any of this have to do with the OP ?

2 hours ago, rangerx said:

It was the controversial "Barbaric Practices Act" and other anti-Muslim antics that showed his true colors as anti-constitutional, religiously driven racist.

Tell us how many times S harper wore black-face and then had to apologize for it.
J Trudeau seems to preach racial harmony and inclusivity, but then does things like put on black-face, wear a t-shirt with bananas on it, stuffs something large down his pants, and jumps around like a gorilla.
Real Prime ministral behavior.

 

2 hours ago, rangerx said:

trashed our standing as climate leaders, globally

And J Trudeau was so outraged, he adopted S Harper's GHG reduction targets, and then proceeded to not lower emissions, but actually raise them, compared to the previous S Harper Government. And flew around in this election campaign using 2 gas guzzling older jets, because he bought carbon credits, which makes it OK for rich people to keep polluting.

2 hours ago, rangerx said:

At the very least Trudeau has a modicum of contrition and in it for Canada

He seems so contrite because he's had to apologize for so many things in 4 short years, in which he did little else other than legalize pot.
He is a spoiled rich brat, and the very definition of white privilege, who got his job simply because of his dad's name.
And he reminds me of the Church with his "do as I say, not as I do" attitude; hell, he doesn't have to abide by the same rules as us normal people, if he doesn't like the law, and the Minister of Justice won't change it to suit him, he simply fires her ( And she gets re-elected as an independent )
Oh, did I forget to mention he claims to champion women's rights ?
Only until they disagree with him, I guess.
I'm surprised he didn't grope her before firing her, like he did with that other woman in Kokanee, 18 yrs ago.
You remember, the one who might have perceived things differently than he did.

Old news but at least they pertain to the OP.

I'm just glad to be discussing something/someone other than that moron D Trump or Brexit, for a change, INow.
I think I've now done most of  the complaining that my vote entitles me to.
I'd better quit now, or I may not be allowed any more complaining during the next 4 yrs of 'Trudeau-mania'.

Edited October 24, 2019 by MigL

[rangerx]

28 minutes ago, MigL said:

And again, S Harper wasn't running in this election ( if he was he would have gotten my vote ) , so what does any of this have to do with the OP ?

Tell us how many times S harper wore black-face and then had to apologize for it

His legacy has everything to do with this election. Beside that it's my right to say it,  and I refuse to be censored/moderated by you in this discussion.

Beside that, it's whataboutism, no less in an abstract form. Are you suggesting because he didn't wear black face, that by default makes him a better PM?

It appears to me as yet another desperate grasp for a gotcha or a false equivalence, which has been your MO, time and time again in my view.

33 minutes ago, MigL said:

And J Trudeau was so outraged, he adopted S Harper's GHG reduction targets, and then proceeded to not lower emissions, but actually raise them, compared to the previous S Harper Government. And flew around in this election campaign using 2 gas guzzling older jets, because he bought carbon credits, which makes it OK for rich people to keep polluting.

More whataboutism, except this time with the authoritarian hogwash that anyone critical of climate issues ought to live in a cave. No less framed as though I defend him or ignore those facts. I don't. My point being, it pales compared to Harper and I won't be moved from that position, just because you say so.

38 minutes ago, MigL said:

He is a spoiled rich brat, and the very definition of white privilege, who got his job simply because of his dad's name.

Last time I checked, he was duly elected by democratic processes. Twice.

Apparently you "simply" don't agree and preach it in the same breath to me. Again, authoritarianism at it's height.

Is he the only spoiled rich brat in politics? What's your point? Will I hear that same admonishment about other leaders or candidates of your ilk?... I doubt it.

45 minutes ago, MigL said:

Oh, did I forget to mention he claims to champion women's rights ?

Only until they disagree with him, I guess.
I'm surprised he didn't grope her before firing her, like he did with that other woman in Kokanee, 18 yrs ago.
You remember, the one who might have perceived things differently than he did.

So Trudeau doesn't champion women's rights? His is the most diverse cabinet in history. Name ONE issue on women's rights Sheer championed this past cycle. He was asked in a recent press conference, but couldn't answer. Not one.

Truth is you can't, hence in a typical shift of blame, lay it at Trudeau's feet.

48 minutes ago, MigL said:

Old news but at least they pertain to the OP

I see. You make rules for me and what I can bring to the discussion, yet excuse yourself for the same thing.

Thank you for that heaping helping of hypocrisy, for all to see.
 

51 minutes ago, MigL said:

I think I've now done most of  the complaining that my vote entitles me to.

I'd better quit now, or I may not be allowed any more complaining during the next 4 yrs of 'Trudeau-mania'.

How is this not gaslighting? How is this not sore losing? How is this not snide commentary on what you expect from others.

What? Are you going to be scarlet lettered? Trundled off to the Gulags?

Perhaps not, but that's the narrative you're attempting to instill here. That somehow you're rights will be trampled by a Trudeau government. If only you were so adamant when your rights were actually trampled under Harper. A glaring double standard, indeed.

[MigL]

HaHaHa.
You accuse me of 'whataboutism' when it was you who brought up S Harper and basically said "But what about what Harper did ?" in a thread about the current election. Talk about tunnel vision with blinders on.
You must not have many friends with your attitude, and you seem to have a label for everyone and everything.

Tell you what, if you don't like discussing MY OP, feel free to stay out of it; no one is forcing you to participate.
If you do want to participate, own up to it, and admit that you find my comments/discussion interesting and stimulating. 

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

Please stop with the personal jibes / general hostility.  

 

[rangerx]

May I request a ruling from the moderators, that the conduct of a previous Prime Minister is germane to this discussion?

MigL has leveled serious allegations about a PM in a previous cycle, the genesis of several of those allegations were stirred up by his predecessor, Stephen Harper.

I have articulated on several points, that Trudeau's hand was forced by his predecessor, Stephen Harper's actions and those actions had an effect on the last election.




 

 

6 hours ago, MigL said:

Tell us how many times S harper wore black-face and then had to apologize for it.

 

[iNow]

It’s a politics thread. It’s okay for you to disagree and move on. There is no “one right opinion.”

[rangerx]

1 minute ago, iNow said:

It’s a politics thread. It’s okay for you to disagree and move on. There is no “one right opinion.”

Thank you.

Not a mod, but point taken.

So MigL. Will you at least answer my question about Trudeau v Sheer on women's issues? How about the spoiled brat question?

https://pressprogress.ca/andrew-scheer-was-asked-to-name-one-policy-that-shows-he-supports-womens-rights-he-couldnt-name-any/

https://globalnews.ca/news/3981858/trudeau-davos-speech-investment-womens-rights/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-29/trudeau-says-he-ll-raise-women-s-rights-backsliding-with-pence

https://www.citynews1130.com/2019/06/04/trudeau-increased-funding-health-rights-women-world/

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-women-reproductive-rights-1.4014841

https://globalnews.ca/news/2581600/justin-trudeau-pushes-for-gender-equality-at-un-womens-conference/

[iNow]

46 minutes ago, rangerx said:

Thank you.

Not a mod, but point taken.

With young kids, I already deal with enough shit filled diapers. No need doing it with you all online here, too.

[MigL]

7 hours ago, rangerx said:

So MigL. Will you at least answer my question about Trudeau v Sheer on women's issues?

So Rangerx, you really do like discussing politics with me,
But I think I've said all I'm going to say on the matter.

Incidentally, did you catch J Trudeau's Wednesday morning Press Conference where he said he is definitely going ahead with the pipeline.
Obviously he'll get Conservative support.
What did I tell you ?

[dimreepr]

If two very intelligent Canadians can be so vehemently polarized, what chance does my country have?

[MigL]

There's hope for you guys yet.
Rangerx and I agree on quite a few things.
The problem is he doesn't really read what I post because he has preconceived notions about me.
And, I have to admit, sometimes I don't really read his posts for similar reasons.

[dimreepr]

7 minutes ago, MigL said:

There's hope for you guys yet.

I don't share your optomism.

7 minutes ago, MigL said:

The problem is he doesn't really read what I post because he has preconceived notions about me.
And, I have to admit, sometimes I don't really read his posts for similar reasons.

For this reason, and the fact that 52%/48% of us are probably c£%&$...

Edited October 25, 2019 by dimreepr

[rangerx]

2 hours ago, MigL said:

There's hope for you guys yet.
Rangerx and I agree on quite a few things.
The problem is he doesn't really read what I post because he has preconceived notions about me.
And, I have to admit, sometimes I don't really read his posts for similar reasons.

I boiled it down to a simple question about women's issues because YOU brought it up.

It's got nothing to do with what I read, wrote or even think.

That tells me all I need to know about your debating style.


 

4 hours ago, MigL said:

Incidentally, did you catch J Trudeau's Wednesday morning Press Conference where he said he is definitely going ahead with the pipeline.
Obviously he'll get Conservative support.
What did I tell you ?

Other than it being a means to an end, do you admit going ahead and getting approval are two entirely different things.

Have First Nations signed off? No

Are spill responses trained, equipment depots established and compensation funds established? No

Are the required environmental assessments been certified? No

Lip service will not build a pipeline.

[dimreepr]

13 minutes ago, rangerx said:

That tells me all I need to know about your debating style.

Yep, there it is...

[rangerx]

9 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Yep, there it is...

In my defense, I am following what the high court has ruled on TMX.

MigL brought up women's issues, accusing our Prime Minister of of being a misogynist hypocrite, who clearly he has the most diverse cabinet in history and championed women's rights here and all over the world.

Rather than answer, attacks me personally.

Edited October 25, 2019 by rangerx
ommissions

[dimreepr]

8 minutes ago, rangerx said:

In my defense, I am following what court has ruled on TMX.

MigL brought up women's issues, accusing our Prime Minister of of being a misogynist hypocrite, who clearly he has the most diverse cabinet in history and championed women's rights here and all over the world.

Rather than answer. he attacks me personally.

Take a step back and look at the picture anew; maybe!!! he has a point that is equal and oposite to yours and maybe!!! the solution is somewhere in the middle.

There is no evidence that shows the bad guy is evil...

Edited October 25, 2019 by dimreepr

[rangerx]

2 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Take a step back and look at the picture anew; maybe!!! he has a point that is equal and oposite to yours and maybe!!! the solution is somewhere in the middle.

There there is no evidence that the bad guy is evil...

Indeed. MigL has conceded the deal Harper made with China is disagreeable.

As an adult, I understand there are consequences of decisions made a high levels. Our coastline, our environment, our livelihood, my home.

The court has ruled our province has none of the economic benefit yet has all the liability.

The narrative is such that it's our fault, for every reason but the reality of the situation.

If the court says done, it's done. The court has not said it's done, so it's not done.

I fail to see how that's our fault and why we're treated as such.

MigL, of all people claims to be a champion of rights and a fighter when things get shoved down our throats. Color me skeptical. It occurs to me he's being selective, not universal.

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, rangerx said:

If the court says done, it's done. The court has not said it's done, so it's not done.

That seems to depend on what court you choose to believe...

 

Or appeal too...

[rangerx]

4 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

That seems to depend on what court you choose to believe...

 

Or appeal too...

Of course. At this point in time, the high court ruled Canada has not met it's burden.

This whole campaign of poisoning the grassroots comes across as an end play rather than a solution.

Divide and conquer, as it were.

[dimreepr]

Is that the end of the begining or the begining of the end?

[rangerx]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Is that the end of the begining or the begining of the end?

It's a huge burden. The court order Canada to come to an agreement with first nations. The term "consult" was thrown out because it was little more than lip service. It was ruled, first nations territory cannot be expropriated under eminent domain. Of all the territories, thirty something, only one has reach a tentative agreement. It's yet to be finalized. Several have indicated no.

The court ruled, Canada has not meet it's burden on the issue of clean up or compensation if or when oil spills. They also failed to conduct and certify the required environmental assessments.

As it stands, if oil spilled in BC, BC would be forced to foot the bill to do the cleanup and would have to sue Canada for the damages to the environment and the loss of opportunity.

How is that fair, when China is off the hook for all of it? In fact, if the flow stops because of a spill, China will sue us for loss of opportunity during the interruption.

Thank you, Stephen Harper for that.

[rangerx]

On 10/21/2019 at 9:34 PM, MigL said:

The fact that A Sheer couldn't win against a 'damaged' Prime Minister like J Trudeau ( whose only kept promise is the bungled legalization of pot, and a multitude of scandals ) doesn't bode well for him; we may just see P Mackay leading the Conservatives in the next election.

Looks like Yankee Andy imploded.

No less, opted not to mention in his resignation speech that he's about to be implicated in election impropriety.

Not that the Conservative Party paid for his kids to go to private school, insomuch as he neglected to mention that in his disclosure to the Federales.

 

The man who would have been Prime Minister.

 

Conservatives needed to move on from him. He did the right thing to resign. I'll give him that.

For all our sake.
 

[MigL]

If only J Trudeau, of the many faces ( black, brown, two, etc ) would have the integrity to do the same...