CdnFox

Yes, in fairness you did say that in the past that you would like to see a minority government of any stripe rather than a majority of any stripe Cookie hasn't crumbled at all. As the election goes on more and more people are turning towards Poilievre and his approval numbers are going up and up. Worst case scenario the liberals get a small minority and when carney proves out to be exactly the same as Trudeau was, and he will, and there's no NDP to keep him propped up anymore then in 18 months or so we bring the government down and then he'll get his majority. If he gets a minority then he'll pull the same route that harper did. It's likely to be a very strong minority keeps the block happy he should stay in power. People will actually see change and then at a moment of weakness with the other parties he can simply pull the plug when they are the most vulnerable and walk into a majority. I have a pretty good feeling that if carney doesn't win the election he's going to bail despite having promised over and over that he wouldn't. Which means the liberals go into another leadership race. That sounds like about a perfect time to pull the plug and call another election It's exactly what the liberals would do

I've literally posted four. If you need more than that go look it up yourself. And you only have the balls when you got called out on it. I guess your shame over rode your cowardice in this case Oh you can be both. You're too afraid to ask me a legitimate question but you're happy to Yap like a over caffeinated Chihuahua Whenever you engage me in actual debate it usually starts off halfway decent and then you lose your shit when you realize something you've said is not accurate. Which is what's happening right now in another thread. And that seems to lead you for a while to be absolutely petrified of actually engaging because you know that you're going to say something stupid and when I correct you even nicely it sends you into a tizzy So instead you just follow me around making childish and pedantic attacks until someone changes your diaper

No, the judge LITERALY disagreed that rebel news qualified as a news organization as envisioned by the tax law. he said nothing about whether or not they were journalists and in fact agreed they do produce original news content. Just not enough to be considered for the tax break Can you point to the line where he says nobody working for rebel news is a journalist? No ? LOL your usual game of trying to twist the meaning of things out of shape to make a point that you can't with logic or facts Sorry their what? you're admitting they produce original news content? And what do we call people who produce original news content? Journalists. So let's go back to the fact that we have already posted. Rebel news as an organization was denied the tax credit given to journalists because they did not produce enough original journalism to be considered under the grant. But the judge and you both agree they do produce journals and original news The journalists who work for rebel news have three times applied to appear at the scrums for the debates. Twice they were denied with the people arguing they weren't really a news or journalist organization and they do advocacy and advertising. Both cases the judge said that was not the case and they had to be allowed as journalists. They were invited this time as journalists because the commission knew it would lose if it tried a third time to deny their journalistic chops as you put it So a tax judge says that overall rebel news is not sufficiently a news organization to qualify for a tax credit but two other judges have both ruled that they are legitimate journalists who have to be included in the debates which is what we are specifically discussing You're dead in the water with this kid. Two judges have already said their chops are legitimate enough to be attending the very thing that we're talking about them attending. The court case you references they do journalism but rebel news as a group doesn't do enough journalism to qualify for a tax break. I get that you don't like them but the fact that you don't like them is not a good enough reason to repress the freedom of the press. Like I said I don't like Tyee but I would never say they shouldn't be allowed to go

Yes it does. They argued that they should be denied because they were activists and paying for advertising. Judge said nope you have to let them participate It literally doesn't get much more clear than that. Would it help if I wrote it out in crayon for you something you'd be more familiar with perhaps?

But they did. That is exactly what happened. They changed the law to affect the statute of limitations so that trump could be charged with sexual harassment long after the statute of limitations ran out Did you forget that? This already happened. This isn't a conspiracy theory, everybody knows this to be fact LOL poor robosmith, Work up the courage to talk to me again and in three milliseconds you wind up looking like a Retarded lunatic with short-term memory issues

Sure kiddo You didn't have the balls to ask me directly about something and I'm the one that's looking stupid HAHAHAA!!! Well that's about as strong an admission of failure on your part as i can imagine Oh maybe you reply to this without reading things carefully but I have already provided the evidence long before you wrote this. So that still leaves you as being not only a coward, but also an !diot and someone who is so desperately neurotic that they will write someone else to ask a question Instead of just asking me and they're only defense is that the question wasn't really worth asking even though you asked it What a damaged little person you are LOL

Awww look at that guys, the 'cdnfox made me cry" club showed up You guys must be getting a little worried it would seem. It's not looking good for a liberal majority which i'm sure you thought was in the bag last week Nice to see you guys hugging each other for emotional support like that i know it's tough having to cope with having your stupidity highlighted so often

LOL what, you were too afraid to ask me directly? ROFLMAO! I guess it makes sense seeing as you always wind up looking stupid Nanos: LPC 42.6, CPC 37.1 - basically withn their margin, last week had libs at 45 Mainstreet LPC 39, CPC 40 Ekos lpc 43 cpc 40 again, pretty close to margin, they had the libs with a 12.5 lead only a couple of days ago. Angus libs 44 cpc 39, still showing an actual liberal lead but considering they were 10 points apart 2 days ago it magically tightened overnight, And so on. The various pollsters had widely different results last week with a huge range of results, a number in the double digits for the spread. As i mentioned at the time, the polls were not appearing to be accurate and there were serious issues. I predicted that the polls would suddenly all show something very close to a tie going into the last week and explained why. Don't hate me because i'm right and you're wrong again

It's worth noting that harper won his majority without needing a single seat in Quebec. If he hadn't gotten a single Quebec seat he still would have had a majority. At the end of the day no system is perfect But in this day and age you still need decent support in the west unless you're going to have a weak minority Wouldn't they be even more likely to be invited to participate in debates in one of the other models? I'm not sure how fptp results in them being invited to the debates where others wouldn't?

If the ndp keeps status it's questionable if the libs will get a minority, or if they do it will be so small that the cpc and any other party will knock them out. THe ndp won't have the balance of power based on the polls right now

If the polling is accurate there will be no NDP. They won't even have official party status. They won't be in a position to prop up anybody. And if there are enough NDP to make a difference that would come at the expense of liberal seats and then they probably wouldn't have a minority, the conservatives would. Right now based on polling specifically I would say that it would be a liberal minority with a CPC opposition and the block holding the balance of power. The NDP wouldn't even be on the radar

even posters like ecos with the absolutely detestable Frank Greaves who swore he would use his powers to defeat poilievre now show the liberals and conservatives at basically a tie after weeks of insisting that there was double digit spreads between them I don't know why but a lot of posters this election put their thumbs on the scales I think. You look at their methodologies and you look at what they said and there were a few that were fairly honest but most were less so. As I predicted a few days ago now that we're getting close to the end they're all going to pretend that they're pulling is saying it's magically a tie. Last night, everybody changed their minds and that hugely leads vanished and wow it's actually a tie now who'da thunk it This will allow them to pretend that they were at least close no matter who wins. It's pretty obvious from some of the commentary that they believe that the conservatives are trending right now and have momentum. The poles are currently showing a liberal minority. I have a funny feeling we're going to see a conservative minority in reality but you never know. If that happens I expect that mark carney will drop out of politics and go do something else despite having promised that he was in it for the long haul win or lose. Hopefully at that point the conservatives will call a snap election and say seeing as they got A free ride in the last leadership race there's no point in waiting for them to finish this one

Guess that's your way of admitting that you haven't got an argument I'm sure shortly you will say it was all a joke I have never mentioned any of those things. And in fact it is not me who has their ginch in anything. That would be you. You're the one foaming at the mouth over this. All I said was quite correctly they did nothing wrong and they are journalists Oh you mean like Mark Twain? Who said if you don't read the paper you're uninformed and if you do read the paper you're misinformed? Really weak minded people like that? If you're hearing barking it's probably one of the voices in your head. You've been saying it for decades. Oh yeah we saw the respectability and integrity of that hill times reporter didn't we What were you saying about barking angry !diots again? I'm afraid that's your side not theirs Their bark was worse than their sound-byte it would seem

That's not possible, we already have a plastic straw ban. So they can't be that pile of garbage out there because the straw ban would have solved it Just like we fixed global warming because I paid my carbon tax for 10 years There is absolutely zero indication that things will be better with a straw man. As I have already provided evidence the chemicals that come out of the paper straws are in the environment forever as well and maybe worse than plastic. At least if somebody gets serious about the problem they can clean the plastic up which is more than you can say for the chemicals

Says the guy who is desperately trying to argue for the suppression of media freedom. So anyone who questions the CBC is basically a 359-year-old roman catholic. That makes a lot of sense The only people to blame here are the media freaks and the established media who lost their crap because rebel media did something perfectly legal that any of them could have done but didn't. That is the only blame to be had here. "Hey guys, everyone has to follow these rules." "We followed the rules" "WHAT!!! HOW DAAAAARRE YOU FOLLOW THE RULES!?!?!?!!? " Pathetic

It does. And the section I specifically mentioned to you from the case I quoted it specifically addressed advertising as well as advocacy work said it clear as a bell. Mind you that was more than 45 seconds ago so you've probably forgotten

Why are you wrecking the planet like that? Here’s how many times you need to reuse your reusable grocery bags | CNN

Not really very funny i guess. Kinda sad.

Preferably one where their daughter will make a mint if she's found guilty

So not none. So you admit that you Were wrong and that they do do journalism even if they do do other things as well. The judge literally agreed they're journalists producing their own content, but not enough. Frankly the number really isn't that much of a concern. They don't consider it journalism or original content if your commenting on somebody else's content even if you do add your own content and facts and figures and frankly that is a large part of what they do and I don't know that I wouldn't call it journalism per se. I suppose if someone was trying to split a hair that would be commentary but that still seems like journalism to me, whatever. But at the end of the day they still produce original content, and they are still journalists. So now that we've demonstrated by your own admission you were wrong, their presence at the event was obviously as journalists. I mean they can't be there to comment on articles, those havent' been written yet. They were there to conduct interviews and ask questions and do their job as journalists. And that was a whole lot of twisting and turning to yet again get us back to the beginning. Whether you like it or not they are journalists, their outlet does produce original content, they were there as journalists and the courts have twice ordered that they must be allowed to attend. So despite how you may feel about it they did nothing wrong and they should have been accommodated. But that's the point! I didn't need to tell you. It's obvious that you felt I was winning when you started running all over the forum crying like a baby The whole point is I obviously don't need to tell you But I love that you took the time to be wrong again after having been wrong the first time because apparently being stupid once isn't enough for you, and also that you have just demonstrated to the entire forum that you are so obsessed with me that you keep a folder of quotes going back god knows how far just so you can try and pull them out when you're losing an argument I mean I think the whole chasing me around the forum thing was enough but that certainly does punctuate the point LOLOL ! I don't know why you're like this But I do enjoy it. You keep going little guy!

No felons are people who have committed felonies. We don't have felonies in Canada. Felonious crimes are in the states which is where some people get the term from mistakenly. Like I said, inconsequential but I do like to improve your education here and there where I can, obviously I can't fix all of it but if you clean up a mess where you see it then that's at least one small part of the earth that's not messy Probably not, I would imagine they would be able to get a discharge within about 2 years. Traditionally that has been more than enough to be able to get into the states and is definitely good enough for everywhere else. Of course with the way things are going god knows of any of us will be able to get into the states in 2 years. I mean seriously, this is Canada. If you were hoping to see long-term severe penalties for criminal behavior I'm afraid you are living in the wrong country Meanwhile he will be hailed as a hero by the various groups that believe in that sort of thing and that will enable him to raise large amounts of money or his own living standard, it wouldn't surprise me to see a book, and speaking engagements should be in high demand. That'll probably fetch him 15 grand per event. You won't be suffering as a result of his punishment. That's one of the problems with virtually all of the protesters out there, it's actually money for them to get arrested

Nope The judge said they did some. They said that they didn't do enough as a organization to qualify for the grant but they did say they did so. Go take a look at the reading We both know you're wrong. The moment you chase me around like a puppy trying to attack me on every other thread because your buthurt that you're losing again you're basically skywriting that you're wrong and your fewwings are huwt The journalist, judges have ruled that they are journalists specifically for this event. It's really end of story. And if I was wrong you wouldn't be crying all over the forum like you just soiled your diapers

Given the source I would say "go for lobotomy". He did and he's never looked back. Or up.

Literally the only kind of person qualified to in your case.

LOLOLOL oh my god, you're losing on our other forum so you're stalking me around and trying to blame my post count for your stupidity AGAIN!!! LOL And yes that was the first time someone said something like that But i'm so happy to see you've got a new friend for your "cdnfox made me cry" Support group LOL