Canadian Federal Election - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15043082
Anyone who wishes can look at your post history and see how angry and dismissive you get when non-US posters say anything you disagree with.

Now, in Canada, the government is formed by whichever party gets the most seats in the House of Commons. In this election, this could easily be the party that gets the second highest amount of votes. Is this democratic?
#15043092
Pants-of-dog wrote:Anyone who wishes can look at your post history and see how angry and dismissive you get when non-US posters say anything you disagree with.


I'll accept that as your unqualified admission that I never said people don't have the right to say something and that your assertion that I had was a complete fabrication.

See, you can say whatever the fuck you want. You have that right and I support you having that right. You don't, however, have the right to be taken seriously...
#15043104
Pants-of-dog wrote:

If you think it is perfectly fine for US citizens to comment, then you have no reason to bring up Obama.



Yes, but it is not he most racist thing he has done. I discussed this in the other thread we had devoted to this topic.

It is not really that relevant or damning. Trudeau could literally admit that the Canadian government is committing genocide and it would not matter. In the Canadian voter mind, Trudeau stands for progressivism, despite the fact that his government routinely perpetuates racism and other problems.

And from a position of Canadian relativism, it is not wrong. Scheer makes Trudeau look like a saint. But that is just optics.



No. Some are and some are not. They all support a system that is inherently racist, though.



I have no idea what you are talking about.



I think this and the rest of your defenses (posts) are self explanatory and their is no need for me to double down and beat a dead horse about your hypocrisy.
#15043120
BigSteve wrote:I'll accept that as your unqualified admission that I never said people don't have the right to say something and that your assertion that I had was a complete fabrication.

See, you can say whatever the fuck you want. You have that right and I support you having that right. You don't, however, have the right to be taken seriously...


Oh, I see.

You are nitpicking at the semantic and irrelevant difference between angrily telling someone they should not comment, and actually arguing intelligently that they should not have a right to do so.

I concede that you have never done the latter.

——————-

Finfinder wrote:I think this and the rest of your defenses (posts) are self explanatory and their is no need for me to double down and beat a dead horse about your hypocrisy.


I still have no idea what you are talking about when you refer to my supposed hypocrisy.

——————

There are conservative pundits who think Obama is meddling:
https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/ ... -concerned
#15043126
Pants-of-dog wrote:Oh, I see.

You are nitpicking at the semantic and irrelevant difference between angrily telling someone they should not comment, and actually arguing intelligently that they should not have a right to do so.

I concede that you have never done the latter.

——————-



I still have no idea what you are talking about when you refer to my supposed hypocrisy.

——————

There are conservative pundits who think Obama is meddling:
https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/ ... -concerned


lastly two things

Your hypocrisy is completely apparent and secondly you always getting the last word in is not an argument.
#15043142
Pants-of-dog wrote:Oh, I see.

You are nitpicking at the semantic and irrelevant difference between angrily telling someone they should not comment, and actually arguing intelligently that they should not have a right to do so.

I concede that you have never done the latter.


It's not semantics at all.

Again, I've never told anyone they didn't have the right to comment, nor have I told anyone they shouldn't comment.

I've told people that their opinion means dick, but not that they shouldn't express it...
#15043150
So, one of you is accusing me of hypocrisy because they incorrectly assume I am a Trudeau supporter, and the other one is claiming to be misunderstood.

Since neither are on topic, I will move on:

Most of my indigenous friends and family will not be voting. This is mostly due to the fact that they do not think of themselves as Canadian citizens.
#15043152
Pants-of-dog wrote: Most of my indigenous friends and family will not be voting. This is mostly due to the fact that they do not think of themselves as Canadian citizens.


Then they forfeit the right to bitch when they don't like what their government is doing...
#15043157
No. But thanks for confirming that you think they do not have a right to comment on Canadian elections.

Any person who is subject to a democratic government has a right to hold said government accountable. This is true regardless of whether or not the person voted. If this were not the case, only voters would be able to attend protests.
#15043159
Pants-of-dog wrote:No. But thanks for confirming that you think they do not have a right to comment on Canadian elections.


To be more clear:

Of course they always have that right.

They forfeit any expectation that their opinions won't be completely dismissed...

Any person who is subject to a democratic government has a right to hold said government accountable. This is true regardless of whether or not the person voted. If this were not the case, only voters would be able to attend protests.


I vote in every election I can here in the States; local, State and Federal.

If someone says they don't vote, and then bitches and whines because they don't like what the elected officials are doing, what that person has to say goes in one ear and out the other. Their opinions are given no consideration at all.

So, yeah, they can say whatever the fuck they want. But they have no right to expect to be taken seriously...
#15043162
Pants-of-dog wrote:So, one of you is accusing me of hypocrisy because they incorrectly assume I am a Trudeau supporter, and the other one is claiming to be misunderstood.

Since neither are on topic, I will move on:

Most of my indigenous friends and family will not be voting. This is mostly due to the fact that they do not think of themselves as Canadian citizens.


When the shoe is on the other foot they cry. Thanks for making my point crystal.
#15043163
BigSteve wrote:To be more clear:

Of course they always have that right.

They forfeit any expectation that their opinions won't be completely dismissed...


....by you.

But since indigenous people in Canada are not looking for you to validate their concerns, this is not relevant.

I vote in every election I can here in the States; local, State and Federal.

If someone says they don't vote, and then bitches and whines because they don't like what the elected officials are doing, what that person has to say goes in one ear and out the other. Their opinions are given no consideration at all.

So, yeah, they can say whatever the fuck they want. But they have no right to expect to be taken seriously...


....by you.

But since indigenous people in Canada are not looking for you to validate their concerns, this is not relevant.

Back to the topic:

An interesting idea has been floated by the NDP and Liberals, and that would be the prospect of forming a coalition government if the Conservatives end up winning the most seats.

While this has happened in provincial elections, I think this would be a first on the federal level.
#15043181
Pants-of-dog wrote:....by you.

But since indigenous people in Canada are not looking for you to validate their concerns, this is not relevant.

....by you.

But since indigenous people in Canada are not looking for you to validate their concerns, this is not relevant.


Why would anyone in Canada want to be so stupid as to consider the opinions of people who don't even give enough of a shit about the country to even vote?
#15043191
I already explained that. It involves democracy and holding government accountable.

You do not seem to have anything intelligent to say about the Canadian election.
#15043422
Pants-of-dog wrote:An interesting idea has been floated by the NDP and Liberals, and that would be the prospect of forming a coalition government if the Conservatives end up winning the most seats.

While this has happened in provincial elections, I think this would be a first on the federal level.


If the coalitions isn't formed before hand (which it hasnt), and no majority government is formed, then the plurality party forms government. Do you think the Liberals would
1) intentionally torpedo a Conservative minority government rather than bend the Cons to support Liberal policies? (they didn't against Harper)
2) and persuade the Governor general to let the Liberals-NDP form a coalition in lue of another election? (an argument could be made that another election would be preferable)
#15043430
1. I think Trudeau would rather wait the four years or so before becoming PM again rather than rock the boat by doing something unprecedented like forming a coalition. This is why he is being so cagey about it, in my opinion. The Liberals lose nothing in the medium to long term by maintaining the status quo.

2. Yes, they could probably persuade the Governor General to form a coalition. It is a token position, after all. Chretien had the GG prorogue Parliament during the sponsorship scandal, and Harper got the GG to do the same thing to prevent a coalition that would have unseated him.
User avatar
By SSDR
#15043470
Pants-of-dog wrote:I already explained that.

Continuously repeating yourself is not effective.
You do not seem to have anything intelligent to say about the Canadian election.

You do not seem to have anything intelligent to say about politics in Canada.
#15043479
Our website data suggests Australians don't care to read a lot about Canada.

In fact, you probably only clicked on this piece because you are interested in what's going to happen to Justin Trudeau, the country's famous yet scandal-afflicted Prime Minister, when he goes to the polls for a general election on Tuesday morning, Australian time. (There's more on that from Canada's version of Antony Green at the bottom of this piece.)

But Australian voters should probably give this tight race more than a cursory glance.

Leading political strategists on the left and right say Canada and Australia have the most similar electoral markets in the world.

They've long swapped notes about their successes and failures.

It means some of the policy proposals being aired right now could soon be headed to a campaign near you.

"Canada appears to have taken several lessons from the 2019 Australian election and Scott Morrison's victory," Canadian political scientist Clifton van der Linden said.

"You can see this in how the centre-left Government of Justin Trudeau and the [centre-right] Conservative party of Opposition Leader Andrew Scheer are positioning themselves.

"There are some quite obvious similarities."

That's largely because Australian and Canadian voters seem to have similar priorities.

...



https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-20/justin-trudeau-looks-to-australia-fight-for-political-survival/11611962


The author is right. Australians give about as much of a rat’s arse about Canadian elections as Canadians give about Australian elections. But it is interesting that political tacticians see similarities and use experiences in the two nations to shape a strategy for the next campaign.
#15043772
Pants-of-dog wrote:The two countries have similar histories, and thus have similar modern contexts, and thus have similar issues.



Just out of curiosity, do Chileans care about Argentine elections?
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

He definitely wouldn't be looming behind her as he[…]

Unfortunately, Time has a record of picking PotYs[…]

The Irishman...

I see. As usual when Finfinder is back on his he[…]

The one that erased the 1910-1940 warming and the[…]