I am Groot

Tell me how they're further to the right. I dare you.

So... you're saying you like the way Canada has been going the last ten years and want even more of that? If you knew anything about Economics you'd know that for every economist who takes a position there's another economist who'll say the opposition. Being an economist is not a particularly useful tool for a political leader unless it comes with uncommon good sense attached. And that is clearly not the case with Carney.

Oh yes, the 'conservative' who wants to spend, spend spend and borrow, borrow, borrow. The 'conservative' who mocks the US war on woke and says Canada will always be a haven for DEI and racial hiring and promotion. The 'conservative' who says, with clenched jaw and angry eyes, that companies that don't get on board with climate change will be driven out of business. The 'conservative' who wants to spend two trillion dollars on a forlorn effort at reducing our CO2 emissions while opening the floodgates to even more immigrants to increase our population even more. To be more accurate, he pretended to cancel the carbon tax, but didn't. And says he will replace it with more carbon taxes that will almost certainly be higher - though he doesn't mention that second part out loud. He has, however, on many previous occasions.

The Canadian Conservative Party today is further to the Left than the Progressive Conservatives were, both fiscally and socially. This absurd posturing of the Left that they're suddenly the next thing to Hitler is laughable and dumb.

He's done none of that. His lower number of ministers was meaningless given none will ever be even sitting in the house. He's said nothing about reducing government spending, and while he 'canceled' the consumer carbon tax he has announced he will replace it with one on business that will then trickle down to consumers in the form of higher prices. They just won't get a rebate for it. Oh, and he has long spoken of and written of the way carbon taxes ought to be applied. As a 'shadow tax', one that companies would apply internally and then include with the price they charge for their goods. That way, people wouldn't be annoyed by seeing how much they're spending on it. So expect legislation on that too. He will maintain hard caps on the expansion of oil and gas development and has suggested they could be lowered. Carney has long spoken of the need to strangle oil and gas development to aid the reduction of CO2. Yes, much like you are.

What was the legislation he voted against? While in office, it would be opposition private members bills. Hardly a surprise. While in opposition, he would be voting against government legislation, again with his party. And again, hardly a surprise. The vacuous nature of the accusations the Left is bringing against him is truly remarkable.

I'm running into this statement' elsewhere on the net. Obviously, the Democrats have worked with the Liberals and suggested this as a great talking point and the Liberals are parroting it without a second thought. It shows a nearly complete ignorance of the difference between American and Canadian legislation. In short, Canadian MPs do not propose legislation. The most they can do is put forth some private members bill doomed to failure, usually to get their name in their local paper. Even cabinet ministers do not propose legislation, except in cabinet. Proposed legislation is discussed in cabinet, sometimes initiatives by a minister, sometimes by the PMO or prime minister. It is then drawn up by officials, looked at by cabinet again, and then submitted to the house by the appropriate minister. Btw, you have to love CUPE accusing Poiilevre of being in it for banks and billionaires when his opponent is a multimillionaire CEO and Goldman Sachs banker. LOL

In what way in what universe are the free-spending, big deficit, heavy regulation, high taxation Liberals 'right-wing'?

Donald Trump.

The thing that has always puzzled me is the ability of intelligent, extremely well-educated people to do fantastically stupid things on the basis of ideology or religion. Calling Carney an economist is a misnomer. Carney is a climate change extremist. He's been doing nothing but sounding the alarm about the end of civilization and the complete destruction of the planet for more than twenty years. Nothing else seems to matter to him. Certainly not the economy and how it impacts little people. If companies need to be driven into bankruptcy and the economy derailed to get Co2 down that, he thinks, is a very small price to pay. He doesn't even show any sense of concern or empathy for that. Can't make an omelette without breaking eggs, of course. Mind you, he won't be the one paying. So is Carney. He's been talking about the need for a 'green revolution' for over twenty years now.

And what would Canada be like then? Nothing like it is now. Overcrowded cities full of third-world people still with their own customs and values and nothing at all left of Canada's historical institutions, cultures or values. By the way, small penis syndrome is not a basis for a massive influx of people. The most happy populations in the world live in countries with small populations. Wiseman is one of his policy advisors. You know who else is among his policy advisors? Our old friend Domnic Barton. So yeah, you can expect big immigration increases. Calling it a 'return to' is a mistake given we still have mass immigration of often unvetted people with low skills. That was only 'temporarily' pulled back until the election after all, just like the foreign students and foreign workers.

The Liberals have already spent $200 billion on climate change initiatives. Imagine what that money could have gotten for us in the way of better healthcare, a capable military, more police and lower crime? And the result? Canada is nowhere near the goal they set for us. Which means many, many hundreds of billions more will have to be spent - and soon. https://torontosun.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-the-liberals-200-billion-climate-boondoggle

My opposition to it has always been the same. It won't work. It won't help. It won't do a goddam thing to slow global warming. All it is is virtue signaling so guys like you, or Carney or Trudeau, can lift your chin and puff out your chest and talk bravely about how you're sacrificing for the future like the true, noble, wonderful, virtuous people you are. And I don't feel like spending two trillion dollars on that. Find a cheaper way to feed your ego. Machine guns and mines at the US southern border will solve most of that.

Ah yes. The western world agreed to heavily penalize their industry in order to drive it offshore to the developing world - and agreed to pay them hundred of billions of dollars. And the developing world agreed to do nothing. Not hard to figure out why most of the world signed onto that. Harder to explain is why the West did, except for the US. I'm damned sure Canada wouldn't have if it had been a Conservative in charge.

Oh, there it is. When the climate catastrophizers finally accept they have no argument that our two trillion dollar efforts will make any difference they resort to 'Well be setting a good example!" Which can be more accurately translated as virtue signalling. That's all it is. Others have 'set a good example' far earlier than we have. Nobody cares. The UK has been 'setting a good example' for years. The cost of electricity for business there is five times greater than in the US. Elderly people are shivering in their homes for fear that turning on the power will mean they can't afford to eat. The're strangling their oil and gas industry and pouring money into rainbows and unicorns - er, windmills and solar panels. Of course, their economy is stagnant, their infrastructure is falling apart, and NOBODY in the world gives a crap about their good example. Certainly not the Chinese or the Indians. The third world doesn't have to do this 'net zero' thing for another 45 years. Why should they spend any time or money on it today? They're busy building coal plants.

People like you see the world in black and white. Someone is on your side, or they're worse than Hitler. Someone agrees with your solution to global warming or they're a 'climate denier', whatever hell that is. One can agree that the climate is warming, and even that human activity is at least to some degree responsible without agreeing the proposed solution will accomplish anything but impoverishing us. Scientists don't say 'the end'. That's only for the scaremongers and those who have been scared. In fact, Canada's environment will actually likely be more benign and easier to survive in as the temperature rises. Same for much of the northern hemisphere.

Decoupling from the US will not leave us less exposed to trade wars but more exposed.

That was predicted to happen by 2004, wasn't it?

As I recall, the UN predicted that climate change could cost Canada around 1% of GDP in 2100. Fighting climate change will cost more than that NOW. And will only grow worse as they increase the cost of energy.

It also leads the world in coal plants and carbon emissions. It pumps out more carbon than the entire developed world combined.

What has that got to do with the topic here? To a degree, you're right. And the kind of policies Carney advocates - the same ones as exist in the UK - will continue to offshore our manufacturing. Despite our electricity grid being fairly clean and theirs very dirty, we will tax the hell out of heavy industries so they move from Canada to China - or Mexico - or India. And then men like Carney will puff out their chest and street and talk about how they've done such a good job in lowering carbon eissions.

Stole this from Reddit. A guy gathered government financial stats and a few others and fed it into an AI asking it for an analysis of Liberal rule. Real GDP per person in 2023 was about the same as in 2014, indicating almost a decade of stagnant living standards. A persistent challenge has been Canada’s lagging productivity and innovation performance. Despite a generally educated workforce and stable institutions, the country struggles to turn that into strong productivity growth. Business investment in productive assets remains weak – economists note that non-residential investment and machinery spending have been low relative to GDP, particularly since the mid-2010s. As a result, Canada’s productivity growth rate was anemic over the last decade. In fact, the standard of living measured by output per person did not improve from 2014 to 2023.an almost unprecedented period of stagnation for a developed nation. This has implications for wages and public finances in the long run. Investors have sometimes been deterred by regulatory hurdles and uncertainty. For example, energy and resource projects (pipelines, mines) faced delays or cancellations amid environmental reviews and policy changes, prompting complaints that Canada is a difficult place to invest. Tech sector investors see promise in Canada’s talent, but startups often scale up or exit slowly; many Canadian innovations (from AI research to biotech) get developed domestically but commercialized abroad due to better financing or market conditions elsewhere. Canada still invests far less in R&D (about 1.9% of GDP) than the OECD country average of 2.7% Federal budget deficits surged under the Liberal government, especially after 2015, leading to a doubling of the national debt (from about $616 billion in 2015 to roughly $1.3 trillion by 2024) Over the past decade, housing affordability reached crisis levels. Home prices soared dramatically, far outpacing incomes. The average Canadian house price roughly doubled from 2015 to 2022, putting home ownership out of reach for many young families. Even after interest rate hikes cooled the market, prices in 2023 remained about 30% higher than pre-pandemic (April 2020) Governments introduced measures (a National Housing Strategy, first-time buyer incentives, and in B.C., taxes on foreign buyers and empty homes) but housing supply has not kept up with population growth. A surge in immigration and limited new construction have intensified competition for homes. Gasoline prices spiked, notably in 2022 when the average price reached $2.07/L (a 55% jump year-over-year) by June 2022. While global oil market swings were the main driver, carbon taxes (now adding about 17¢ per liter)also raised fuel costs. Overall, Canadians faced higher costs for essentials, and critics say government efforts have been insufficient to alleviate the cost-of-living crunch. After decades of decline, crime rates in Canada have been edging up in recent years. The overall Crime Severity Index began rising from its 2014 low point, with 2023 marking the third consecutive annual increase Violent crimes, including homicides, have increased (Canada’s homicide rate grew roughly 40–50% between 2014 and 2022) amid public concern about gang violence and random attacks. Critics have blamed certain policies for being “soft on crime.” For example, the Liberal government’s 2019 justice reforms (Bill C-75) overhauled bail rules to reduce pre-trial detention, but police and opposition figures link these changes to more repeat offenders on the streets The Liberals also repealed some mandatory minimum sentences for drug and firearm offenses in 2022, aiming to address systemic bias, but drawing fire from those who believe it undermines deterrence. Canada has grappled with a severe opioid drug crisis over the last decade. Tragically, over 50,000 Canadians have died from opioid overdoses since 2016 Healthcare services more broadly have struggled to meet demand. Canadians experience long ER wait times and difficulty accessing primary care. About one in five Canadians (roughly 6.5 million people) lack a regular family doctor or nurse practitioner a gap that widened as retiring doctors outpaced new replacements. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government has been ensnared in a few high-profile controversies. In the SNC-Lavalin affair (2019), the federal Ethics Commissioner found that Mr. Trudeau improperly influenced a justice minister in an attempt to halt the criminal prosecution of a corporation, violating conflict-of-interest rules. This incident – which led to resignations of top officials – raised concerns about political interference in the justice system. Another setback was the WE Charity scandal (2020), where the government awarded a major student grant contract to a charity with close personal ties to Trudeau’s family. It emerged that the organization had paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees to his mother and relatives. Though the contract was cancelled and the prime minister apologized, the episode reinforced perceptions of favoritism and poor judgment in awarding government deals. These and other conflicts (such as ministers found in breach of ethics for accepting inappropriate gifts or lobbying) have dented public trust. Canada’s immigration levels reached historic highs. The Liberal government steadily increased annual permanent resident admissions, aiming for about 500,000 newcomers per year by 2025 – one of the highest per-capita immigration rates in the world. Critics argue the pace of immigration has outstripped infrastructure. Rapid population growth has added pressure on housing, healthcare, and transit systems. Canada’s commitment to alliances has also been scrutinized – NATO partners have long urged Canada to boost defense spending (Canadian defense outlays hover around 1.3% of GDP, below the 2% NATO benchmark). The Liberal government did increase military budgets modestly and deployed forces for NATO missions, but not to the level allies hoped.

I know I"m shocked. Who could have foreseen this!? If the Liberals have their way this will be a one topic election focused solely on Trump. That was a different Trump. This one, you may have noticed, is a lot meaner and doesn't have to care about votes.