SpankyMcFarland

The PMs after PT were under no obligation to follow his lead, so why did they? I would argue that Canadians did not want to spend on the military. No matter how necessary it is, ramping it up is still going to be a tough sell that will probably cost seats. However, as the only NATO country to border the US, we can offer special contributions beyond tanks and guns, eg more infrastructure in the Arctic, making it easier to defend, and more effective wildfire control which will help the inhabitants of American cities breathe more easily.

The US has provided zero leadership on Gaza and that looks set to continue. Netanyahu can do what he likes.

What is inaccurate in what I put there? Trump is a sociopath. There’s a lifetime of evidence to that effect and we’re about to get a whole lot more.

Real bunch of legal eagle hair splitters here when Trump’s rights are at stake. The jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll. Any decent man would have retired from public life right there.

Why do some people attract such allegations throughout their lives and others barely ever get accused? Is it just malice on the part of the media that Bill Clinton, for example, suffered more accusations of various types of impropriety and actual crimes than Mitt Romney? I don’t think so.

How dare you, Sir! He should sue you too because the jury determined he committed ‘sexual abuse’ rather than ‘sexual assault’. Once more a good man is being defamed.

The jury certainly did not conclude this ‘sexual encounter’ was consensual.

This is largely a semantic debate that I’m surprised ABC didn’t pursue given the numerous completely false QAnon-style allegations made against public figures in the US every day. Strictly speaking, Trump wasn’t convicted of anything in a civil lawsuit but the jury agreed he did commit ‘sexual abuse’ rather than ‘rape’ in the peculiar legal definitions used by New York State. In common parlance, most people would agree that the jury considered him to have committed at least what one would call sexual assault here, very serious misconduct that one would not expect from a presidential candidate. It’s not like they thought he was completely innocent - in their opinion, he committed a serious act of misconduct.

I think it’s the difference between NL surviving as a province or not. The cynic in me thought Quebec would let NL run into insolvency and get a fire sale deal for the next century after that. Before this deal is formally ratified I fear there will be some voices in Quebec who will suggest just that very move. Given that the federal givernment has remained studiously neutral for the last fifty years, I can’t see NL getting a better deal than this.

From the article quoted above: Hardly a ringing endorsement of any citizen, yet alone a person standing for the highest office in the land.

Hangovers are a lot less painful in NL, at least per unit of alcohol consumed. Low humidity and high altitude are a toxic combination as I found to my cost in Calgary.

NL just got a lot more sustainable if this deal with Quebec gets ratified. ‘People are saying’ it’s the best day for the province since Confederation. Finally, the wealth of the Churchill River will be shared by the two provinces in an equitable manner and Newfoundlanders won’t risk apoplexy discussing it. The next megaproject on the river will probably be in the hands of Quebec companies rather than outsiders whose ignorance of local conditions was cruelly exposed in the Muskrat boondoggle. https://globalnews.ca/news/10917828/quebec-newfoundland-labrador-churchill-falls-deal-politics/ https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/churchill-falls-new-deal-economics-1.7410094

It’s a regular problem in parliamentary democracies at the end of a mandate. I suspect dumping Trudeau would be better for the party in some ridings - he can’t campaign his way out of this - but it’s a tough way for a new leader to start. They should look on the bright side - they will do better than Kim Campbell and it will be up from there unless PP can change his tone considerably.

Neither side will listen to us if we try to get involved so why bother? The Chrétien method seems sensible: say something incomprehensible and leave it at that.

Is there a BC election thread here that actually tries to report what’s going on, including details that wouldn’t necessarily be more widely known beyond the province?

Most developed countries experienced peak inflation during Covid and are recovering but prices are still up, of course. Go to Europe and you’ll hear people complaining about the price of everything there as well. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/g20-inflation-rates-feb-2024-vs-covid-peak/

Who has ever listened in Russia to what a Canadian PM has to say? We can reassure ourselves on that score.

I think it might be reasonable to limit the golf as much as possible until after the election. Apparently, it was a late addition to his schedule. It adds a security problem that is in no way essential or election-related.

For some reason the obvious answer to inflation - it’s a global problem after Covid in peer countries and the US is managing better than most - is considered unacceptable. So when asked about the economy, Harris went off on a tangent that included crowd size and wouldn’t you know poor old Donnie jumps right into that trap. I don’t listen to conservatives much but the ones I would pay attention to, eg at National Review, were furious at Trump and felt he missed many opportunities to put his case. I don’t think any reasonable person can say he didn’t lose that debate. Given that he spent so long telling us how talentless Harris was she had a low bar to clear which she easily did on the night.

What many FPTP systems are seeing is wildly unrepresentative elections like we had in 1993 where a regional party gets far more seats than a national party with a larger vote share. But that’s a manageable problem. Unstable government is a much bigger issue and PR would only make that worse, I’m afraid, unless we get used to idea of (trigger warning, big breaths) coalitions in this country. There, I said it. That is, formal coalitions with every coalition partner at the table in Cabinet fully committed to a program of government, not this namby-pamby supply and confidence malarkey. Otherwise we are going to face many more minority governments clinging to power for a few years.

I doubt that the Liberals will entirely disappear. If they do, something centre-left will naturally rise up to replace them.

A lot of people don’t believe this, though. If politicians are constantly maligned as a class then their skills will naturally be undervalued and people will tend to think ‘I could do that’.

The fortunes of parties rise and fall. Most will disappear. This is a good thing.

I once thought I’d open a restaurant because I liked eating in them. Thankfully, that pipe dream never materialized. Politics looks way easier than it is - like somebody improvising in a jazz number - but do not try this at home. Politicians take years to learn how to restrain their thoughts, edit their speeches and keep their smiles going. Governing is another nightmare as one’s real enemies are in the same party. Former CEOs who think they can change things pronto are woefully ill-prepared to deal with the snail’s pace of progress that can be made. Everybody says no, or maybe, or let’s do a study. Danny Williams was a classic example of a brilliant lawyer and businessman who was not ready for political prime time when he became premier. In addition to possessing the creativity and energy of the entrepreneur and the eloquence of the salesman, the successful politician is incredibly resilient, able to take dog’s abuse from every quarter, and patient, ready to spend years shepherding legislation through so many hazards to reality. On the administration side of things, politicians must think like civil servants to some extent. They have to be cautious and careful - it’s not their money they are dealing with, after all. Procedures have to be meticulously followed and the natural temptation to do favours for friends resisted ruthlessly. So we’re talking about a veritable decathlon, or polyathlon, of skills here. Some of this is innate, of course, but it also has to be learned. This is why I think letting civilians waltz into Cabinet is a serious risk. I would prefer to see at least five years of MP experience before that. In summary, I am very much in favour of career politicians.

PP will probably get a majority of seats in the House next time but that looks like being the exception going forward. If we want to avoid the instability of minority government and the increased frequency of elections it brings, we should start getting over our collective phobia of formal coalitions in this country. Nothing stabilizes a multi-party government as much as Cabinet posts - give an MP a seat at the top table and they will be loath to leave it. Coalitions are a fact of life in European politics and the roof hasn’t fallen in over there.