CouchPotato

You keep saying this. It's pretty weak, Michael Hardner. First off, that is not an example of being ideological, it is an example of someone accusing the Liberals of radical ideology. You may disagree with that accusation, but it doesn't reflect any ideology of Pierre's. It may not be the best tactic, but it's not something unique to Poilievre and it's not Trumpian. Mainstream politicians on the left on both sides of the border have been doing the same for years. You just choose to ignore it. Pierre has kept his ideas and platforms very simple and practical, and has done so for years. Get rid of the carbon tax completely. Reduce immigration to sustainable levels. Stop being weak on crime. Tackle the opioid crisis and addiction with treatment rather than handing out free drugs. You haven't provided any examples of ideology. Now, if we are going to talk about accusing others of being radicals, Pierre is no match for the Liberals in this regard. Several Liberal MPs called Harper a dictator. Trudeau called people who were vaccine-hesitant racists and misogynists. They tried to paint the Freedom Convoy to Nazis. One Liberal MP went so far as to say that Honk Honk meant Heil Hitler. That's far worse than accusing a politician of being radical. The Liberals do it to regular citizens. You've provided one example of Pierre doing this sort of thing and labelled him Trumpian. And recently you made the argument that because someone on this forum called the Liberals Marxist this is further evidence that Pierre Poilievre is Trumpian. Pretty lame, Mike.

I know, myata. Mark Carney's lying sickens all of us. We need an honest leader like Pierre with common sense solutions. Completely axe the carbon tax. Get tough on crime. Reduce immigration to sustainable levels. Let's bring it home, myata!!!!!

How is Pierre an ideologue? Most of the things he is proposing are pretty popular, which is why the Liberals keep stealing the platform. Cut taxes. Get tough on crime. Reduce immigration to sustainable levels. Practical solutions. It is Mark Carney who has written a 500 page volume on his vision for building a better world. It is the Liberal party that has been focused on ideological things and spending exorbitant amounts of other people's money to do so. REVEALED: Trudeau spent $11,000,000,000 on overseas gender programs during tenure https://winnipegsun.com/news/national/revealed-trudeau-spent-11000000000-on-overseas-gender-programs-during-tenure

This guy is certainly not fit to lead us on a global stage.

I posted that that group photo of Carney with all the JCCC folks earlier in the thread, and myata said those are just some Asian-looking people. With an answer like that, he would make a great Liberal politician.

Brookfield registered entities to Grand Cayman address Obama called ‘largest tax scam in the world’ https://www.ctvnews.ca/federal-election-2025/article/brookfield-registered-entities-to-grand-cayman-address-obama-called-largest-tax-scam-in-the-world/

The Globe and Mail is a pretty reputable newspaper, myata. Easy, myata. That is you!

The photos were from The Globe and Mail. But originally they were posted on the JCCC's website. So, by their own admission, those Asian-looking people are their own members.

Except the pictures do not look like random pictures taken among a crowd. Furthermore, on their website on the very same day Carney was sworn in as PM the JCCC posted that they had in-depth meeting with Carney.

No they didn't. They have been doing it for years now. They are there to talk to students. And talking to people is not illegal and it doesn't justify what happened there. It's absolutely disgusting that you are here defending this. So therefore, by your own standard, if a leftist group is on campus promoting their own ideas and some conservative students don't like it, they are equally justified in lashing out and destroying whatever tents and signage they have up. They are just asking for it, right?

It's freedom of speech and freedom of association. The only trouble makers were the ones who lost their shizzle because they can't stand people promoting ideas they do not like.

To be fair, I don't think the Liberals would just give a contract to Brookfield. They would likely first pay millions to a two-person hiring firm run in a someone's basement to sub-contract the work out to Brookfield.

How are they causing trouble? They just talk to people. And people are free to choose not to talk to them. They literally caused no trouble. The people in the video who knocked down their whole setup were causing trouble. That's a really disturbing statement you just made, robosmith. Sure. But I said there are no 'laws'. So, if you determine that TPUSA does not follow the 'rules of debate' to your liking, it is irrelevant. They are not breaking any laws by not living up to your standard of quality debating. Yes, I know, Robes. But you posted a list of general rules. It's not like anything here is legally binding. And it's not like this is even a formal setting. I mean if you are holding a formal debate, of course you have general guidelines for what constitutes good debate, but even then violating them is not a legal offense. People do it all the time in formal debates. The police don't come in and raid a debate because someone broke some 'general rules'. What happens is someone points out why an argument is not valid. And you certainly don't lash out at people and tear stuff down because you don't like the way they debate issues. "Hey, you just used an ad hominem and ad ignorantium in the same sentence. I am going to get some thugs with masks together and knock down your kiosk and push you off campus." If you think that is fair because you don't like the way TPUSA debates and you consider it propaganda, then it is fair to do the same to leftist activists on campus as well.

Northern Perspective just posted a good video about this.

Once again, your opinion as to whether or not Turning Point USA's 'Prove Me Wrong' qualifies as valid debate is irrelevant to the topic at hand. There are no laws about debate. You just posted an image of general rules for debate. Way to go, Robes. There were masked people tearing down their setup and engaging with them physically. The fact that the cops did nothing does not mean no laws were broken. If you really believe that then next time a left-wing group sets up some sort of activist tent or whatever on a campus, then it will be perfectly fine for conservative college students to tear it all down.

Pierre was asked about Indian interference. He condemned it. Skid Mark, however, did not condemn Chinese interference when asked.

So in your opinion "prove me wrong" does not debate properly. How does this relate to the topic at hand? Do you support them tearing down their setup and members of TPUSA?

Well, the left certainly deems it newsworthy whenever they get even a small chance to claim that conservatives are violent. When it's pointed out that the left has a greater appetite for political violence all of a sudden these things are not newsworthy. According to that study about half of self-identifying leftists think its somewhat justifiable to kill either Trump or Elon Musk. That is newsworthy, and the group doing the study is not some conservative organization. Jan 6. lasted a few hours. The summer of love was a lot longer than that. Far more damage done. Chaz/Chop alone was a far worse than Jan. 6. Now we have Arson at Tesla dealerships and vandalism of Teslas. Luigi Mangione was practically praised by many on the left. But that's not newsworthy I guess. Someone with a swastika on a Trudeau flag at the freedom convoy... now that's news.

Oh robes, why do you always insist on posting stuff that is so easy to shred? Firstly, the group is not called Anti-Fascist. The wikipedia articles says they are an 'anti-fascist' group called Three Way Fight. They are very clearly leftist. Here are some quotes from their about page. https://threewayfight.org/about/ Look at that, Robes. Not only are they self-confessed leftists. They are also self-confessed 'anti-system radicals'. I want you to think about that, Robes. In Wikipedia's article about the NCRI they have an entire section devoted to 'concerns' about this organization, because one professor and some dude from a radical, leftist, anti-system group had criticized them. My sources simply referenced a study by a group which is affiliated with Rutgers and the ADL. The NCRI is not some far-right institution. My sources are more reliable than yours.

This video was just posted on Poilievre's Youtube channel this morning. Cut taxes and fees. Get government out of the way.

All that PJ Media and Daily Caller did was to reference the study in an article. Are you asserting that the study doesn't exist because they wrote an article about it? Furthermore, the reason I quoted the Daily Caller was to point out the origin of the study and that it was done in conjunction with Rutgers. Do you think they are lying about that? So, they were criticized by two leftists. Woop dee. Here you are complaining about sources and you cite a wikipedia article. Don't you find it odd that they have an entire section in that article about the NCRI entitled 'Concerns'? I mean why would you even have something like that over criticism from one professor and some guy from a leftist group called Three Way Fight. Here is their website, by the way. https://threewayfight.org/about/ One look at their resources page shows they are linked to Antifa and anarchist groups. Also from the wikipedia article you quoted.... They have also been referenced in Time Magazine. https://time.com/6071615/iran-disinformation-united-states/

PJ Media did not conduct the survey. They merely reported on it. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/assassination-culture-poll-shows-about-half-of-liberals-believe-killing-trump-musk-justified/ar-AA1CwZDM And here is a link to their report. https://networkcontagion.us/reports/4-7-25-ncri-assassination-culture-brief/

Bombshell Study Reveals How Many Leftists Support Killing Trump and Musk https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2025/04/07/bombshell-study-reveals-how-many-leftists-support-killing-trump-and-musk-n4938661

Today, when asked about it he claimed that he did not hear the heckler clearly. I wonder what it was Carney assumed the heckler said that he claimed to be 'aware' of though. The way he 'uhs' constantly when asked a challenging question makes him sound very dishonest.

What Carney said to a heckler who shouted: 'There's a genocide happening in Palestine!' https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/federal_election/mark-carney-heckler-genocide