Leaderboard

With 5 weeks to go until the October 1 election, the latest poll shows Philippe Couillard`s Parti Libéral du Québec (PLQ) trailing François Legault`s Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ). Legault is leading as best leader. The other parties, including the Parti Québecois (PQ), are not in the running. In terms of appetite for change, 83% want a change in government. http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/elections-quebec-2018/201808/23/01-5193963-sondage-ipsos-la-presse-la-caq-part-en-tete.php Sensing impending defeat, Couillard is desperate to improve the PLQ`s numbers and win votes, so he has promised a cheque of $150.00 to $300.00 per child. It`s interesting to note that the CAQ has many of the characteristics of a conservative party. A win by the CAQ and a PLQ defeat would set an interesting tone to next year`s federal election. Certainly not something that would be welcome by Trudeau and his Liberals.

Coyne's thesis depends on the effect of parties on the electorate. I don't think it's that strong. Most people pay as little attention to politics as posible between elections. Canada's political culture is different from that of the US and is in some ways more like Western Europe's. Both major parties support free trade and have done so since Mulroney (notwithstanding some predictable opposition barking at the time of the original deal) so it shouldn't be a major political issue. The current NAFTA problems originate south of the border. I guess Scheer will try to blame Trudeau if no deal emerges but it's not a convincing argument.

I believe you're correct. The biggest threat to social harmony and unity in much of the world appears to be "diversity," particularly where people believe it is foisted on them. As a (now late) friend of mine who spent a lot of time in Southeast Asia used to note, ethnic and religious differences and animosities in the region generated the fuel that ignited and sustained many fires. And we're now seeing what significant immigration is doing in Scandinavia, and particularly Sweden, long considered one of the world's most tolerant places. As a column by David Brooks in the NY Times noted a few months back ('The Strange Failure of the Educated Elite'), promoting diversity for the sake of diversity is doomed to failure. The political and economic elites, the column points out, have developed a "misplaced idolization of diversity" and have apparently failed to realize that "diversity for its own sake, without a common telos, is infinitely centrifugal, and leads to social fragmentation." In other words, the maintenance of common values is crucial to harmoniously functioning societies. Ordinary voters, including in the largely tolerant democratic West, on the other hand, seem increasingly cognizant of this reality. The elites and their MSM acolytes continue to wail about intolerance and racism (Hello Justin!) without recognizing the underlying forces they're encouraging. Healthy modern societies are not blank canvasses upon which fanciful visions can be painted. Rather, they're rich, textured and intricately interconnected murals where the impact of each new element that might be added has to be considered in relation to every other aspect on the canvas.

According to this, it is increasing and what's to say there won't be another wave from Venezuela. There re allready some in Manitoba. Mind you, they are fleeing real problems. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/venezuela-family-altona-refugee-status-manitoba-1.4258148 https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-illegal-border-crossings-from-us-increase-by-nearly-23-per-cent-from/

2) My point is that it's the Asylum/Border system that is the problem. It was not designed to account for illegal crossers and there was never an issue at legal border crossings because of the safe third country agreement. This government will not even admit that there is a serious issue on several levels.. As for the "scale", again - that is limited to the Asylum process. The scale of formal immigration is a political decision. Too much, too little or just right - The Three Bears........but it is unrelated to the Asylum process even though the Liberals would like to muddy the waters to tar their opponents.

I don't think many Western conservatives "associate their positions" with that of Islamic theocracies. Nor, for that matter, do I think that even many of their opponents would accuse of them doing so. I believe it's mostly you that's trying to do the redefining. Most people who follow politics in Western countries today even in a very cursory way know what "liberal" and "conservative" means in the current context. Yes, the meaning of words changes over time. Languages are living things and so are societies. Trying to say that the currently accepted meaning of words should be discarded and we should only use words according to the meanings they had in the oldest known usage of those words is an exercise in pointlessness.

There's nothing necessarily wrong with having ambition. It's what you're willing to do to realize that ambition which is the problem with our system. Because basically you have to be willing to be everyone's bitch, to grovel before the party bosses, hold your tongue, agree with them all the time, and never EVER speak in public or give an opinion which isn't cleared by the party. That's why I'd like to see us return to a similar system as in the UK, where backbenchers have real power and can speak their minds. It would likely draw a better class of candidate.

I agree about living without a dairy cartel as supply management is why I can buy dairy products in the USA for a lot less than what it costs in Canada. It does not just impact Quebec farmers, it is ultimately visited upon the consumer. That's quite a charge there, which I won't repeat. You do know that Scheer has promised not to open the issue of abortion and a resolution to that effect was just passed. The rest is just poppycock.

She says that she requested them to be deleted before the subpoena, but we all know that Hillary Clinton's word is not actually proof of anything because of all the lies that she told throughout this entire story. The emails were there on the server when the FBI sent an subpoena instructing her to preserve her them under penalty of law. Her employee also received an email saying that the FBI ordered them to save the emails, and Hillary was responsible for providing them at that point. When the employeee were aware of that they deleted the emails AND used BleachBit on them, which she never even asked them to do according to their own garbage story. Hillary IS responsible for those emails, and they were intentionally deleted after everyone knew about the subpoena. End of story. There are thousands of people in jail for doing far less than Hillary is known to have gotten away with. It's ridiculous for the FBI to allow a precedent to be set where their subpoenas become utterly meaningless. If I received a subpoena from the FBI right now and then my cousin destroyed all the evidence they asked for a week from now do you think that I'd get away with it? Well, I should, because that right there is the new definition of how to legally destroy subpoenaed evidence.

I have better things to do than mingle with a bunch of political hacks. As do most other reasonable people.

I would revise that to say that Democracy is only as good as the worst among the electorate.

If you look at things in the UK, backbench MPs have considerable more freedom to speak their minds, including publicly opposing government policy and speaking against ministers and the prime minister. Both the Conservatives and Labour party have ongoing issues with backbenchers publicly criticizing the party leaders, and I think that openness is good for democracy.

The campaign will provide child care and rides? Where and when? Doesn't sound like a universally available service. Moreover who would want to leave their children in the hands of fanatical political operators? It's not a matter of excuse, it's a matter of convenience. Here in WA state we switched to voting by mail and it works a heck of a lot better from what I've seen. Online is the obvious next step. The idea that voting should be some archaic procedure where you have to physically go somewhere to prove your dedication is not productive. Voting is a matter of recording citizen's preferences for government, and should be achieved just like any government service, in the most cost effective, timely, and accessible way possible. And that means online. Campaigning for a candidate is an exercise that's only for political fanatics. Most normal people want nothing to do with politics and just vote for the lesser of the evils presented to them by the system.

I think you are right about this....not only was Trudeau trying to stop Quebexit, he was also trying to cast off the remnants of British rule and influence (e.g. patriated constitution). Plus he had the American hegemon totally dominating Anglo Canadian media/culture, and "old stock" Canadians leaving for the USA to get better jobs and better weather.

It's never been about 'racism', that's the narrative the Liberals put forward to deflect from their own incompetence and ineptitude.

I'm unaware of any disunity in Japan. The disunity in Scandinavia definitely has 100% to do with immigration. Not sure which Asian country you're referring to. AFAIK all disunity is because of different ethnicities and religious groups in the same country.

Of course she, like any other citizen, is entitled to a voice. One might expect political partisans to drag her reputation through the mud for having the temerity to raise presumably unpleasant and inconvenient issues directly with the cosseted Trudeau, but I was taken aback to hear such commentary from MSM types. Are MSM outlets now an arm of the sitting government, I wondered? If they are, real democracy is well and truly a thing of the past in this country.

For a Believer- It is axiomatic with believers that God created/creates ALL life. That includes all life including humans etc., and also viruses, bacteria, prions, cancers. God designed DNA so that it often makes mistakes replication thus birth defects, cancers etc.. Reconcile 'Gods Love' with babies cancer. You cannot. So God is the biggest killer of all. A Believer might argue that the Creator has the moral right to destroy its own creations. In that case even if you accept that, you are left with a God who may well be feared, but certainly not loved. Saying that 'God is Love' is probably the most inaccurate idiotic statement ever. As an atheist I have no reason to be concerned with this nonsense. An atheist does not believe God doesn't exist. Once again I add this quote which I have never seen overturned. "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" Epicurus circa. 250 B.C.E

The media assisted Trump by giving him wall to wall coverage. He sucked all the oxygen out of everywhere he went and the media were quick to lap it up. Hillary had zero opportunity to discuss her policies. The media should feel ashamed