Jump to content

Moonbox

Senior Member
  • Posts

    9,177
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    40

Posts posted by Moonbox

  1. On 2/8/2025 at 8:31 PM, Army Guy said:

    Russia has made steady movement on the Ukrainian front....

    At horrific cost and of near-meaningless strategic value.  

    On 2/8/2025 at 8:31 PM, Army Guy said:

    I'm starting to guess you did not serve, or don't know what a combine arms operation is....

    It'd be hard to believe that you did, if I didn't already know better.  "Advancing is advancing", as you keep saying,  is absolute nonsense and displays a shocking ignorance of even the most basic parts of sound military doctrine.  As far as combined arms go, Russia has written a treatise on exactly what not to do.  

    On 2/8/2025 at 8:31 PM, Army Guy said:

    Ukraine can not keep up with Russia if NATO slows it's support, thats a fact...Trump has already stated that US support Ukraine will have to pay for it, no more freebies...

    Russia cannot keep up if NATO (or even just Europe) resolves to continue supporting Ukraine.  It's economically outclassed 10:1 by the EU alone.  It's already dealing with 10% inflation and 21% interest rates, and their "economy" is more and more based on deficit-financed arms production.  Last time they tried this was in 1989.  Do you remember what happened?   

    The fact that Russia has resorted to bringing North Korean troops (and workers for their factories) and is relying on Iranian and North Korean arms to support their war effort should tell you a lot.  

  2. 7 hours ago, eyeball said:

    Like his angry MAGA donkeys Trump is also rapidly becoming a joke. 

    Trump has always been a joke.  I suspect a large portion of his supporters also consider him one, but don't really care because he's pointing against what they've been annoyed with for the last 15-20 years - a government and public service concerned more with supporting minorities and their interests, than them.  

    7 hours ago, eyeball said:

    I doubt Carney would have any more trouble defusing woke as an issue than he did the carbon tax - simply not allowing men to compete in women's sports should do the trick.

    Maybe, but he doesn't help his case with comments like the one from this presser.  Those not inclined to give a Liberal the benefit of the doubt after 10 years of Trudeau will hear it how it sounds.  

    7 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

    By the end of February, I am predicting Carney and the Liberal will be leading in the polls.

    I think you're going to be very disappointed.  

  3. On 2/8/2025 at 7:16 PM, eyeball said:

    His mistake was to use the term woke

    It was a mistake, but even if he hadn't, he's contrasting himself against the (well overdue) blowback vs DEI, and that's not an election-winning strategy.  

    On 2/8/2025 at 7:16 PM, eyeball said:

    We can laugh at these things but the fact politicians can't should be concerning to everyone.  I'm quite sure future historians will only be able to shake their heads as they try to make sense of what happened in the 21st century.

    The obsession with "woke" (whatever it really means) isn't any stupider than the sanctimonious, finger-wagging, outrage farmer from the opposing tribe.  For every MAGA donkey there is shouting about the trannies, there's a 3-year general arts grad raging about privilege and climate change while while eating avocado toast.  That person and that attitude, I suspect, is what the MAGA crowd is really angry about.  

     

  4. 2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

    IIt seemed to me he suggested Carney meant he wanted to end the culture wars. But that's not what it sounded like to me at all. It sounded like a stolid insistence on maintaining the Left side's fight in the culture wars.

    I think that's the problem.  What it "sounds like" to people is going to be based on their perspective.  In context, with everything else he said, I think it's perfectly reasonable for you to view it that way, and I think most people will "hear" it the same way.  I doubt that was his intention, but he's reading the room poorly I think these sorts of statements are losing arguments for him.  

  5. 6 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said:

    If we look back at history, many PM have done this. Mulroney, Harper and Trudeau did the exact same thing. I also disagree in regards to prolonging Parliament.  I think that it would be unwise to deal with Trump tariffs during an active election campaign, since we would be dealing with him in a position of weakness.

    It's still better than not being able to deal with him at all, and it doesn't actually change anything.  Trudeau has been a lame-duck for the better part of a year and nothing is stopping Trump from doing it again once the election is called.  This is nothing but a stalling tactic to help the Liberal Party re-organize.  If Trudeau cared about Canada, rather than himself, we'd have had an election last year back when it was already clear he'd lost his mandate and the confidence of Canadians.  

  6. 6 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

     Sure he made mistakes, but no one can question that his heart was in the right place, he is very loyal to his country, and tried his hardest.

    I don’t think you can even say that though.  Proroguing parliament heading into a trade war was not the best thing for his country, and it was far from the only cynical, self-serving decision he made as PM. 

  7. On 2/4/2025 at 10:02 AM, Boges said:

    This does show that the US may not be a reliable trading partner for the forceable future. If I was an exporting business in Canada, I would be looking to expand the markets I can sell into. 

    That's the bigger consequence of all this, and I suspect that was the point all a long.  All of this grandstanding and carrying on is about causing uncertainty and getting risk-averse businesses to diversify or relocate TO the USA.  What Orange Man fails to realize is that this isn't a given, it's a two-edged sword, and it doesn't happen overnight.  

     

    • Like 1
  8. 8 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

    The problem is that politics is more than winning elections. 

    Big problems need deep thinking, and collaboration with the public as well as experts. 

    Slogans don't solve big problems.

    I think the bigger problem sometimes is that there is so much thinking, so much naval-gazing, so much squabbling and moralizing, that problems are ignored and left to fester.  

    What was a smaller issue that could have been nipped at the bud with deliberate, surgical action ends up becoming monolithic, at which point a sledgehammer becomes the better tool. 

    Say whatever you want about Orange Man, that sort of *decisive action has value.  

  9. 55 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

    He would have to really pi$$ off a lot of folks to lose too many seats.

    As I said, and is proven so far, he still has executive authority and power and will do as he pleases.

    The congressional majorities are slim, as is the popular vote difference in most of the battleground districts.  He has a lot of runway this early on (especially with Democrats in disarray), but voters also have short memories and I have trouble believing Republican Reps/Senators will support policies that doom them upon re-election.  

  10. 2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

    The thing is, the US chose Trump this time , by a lot, and will continue to support him because the democrats just screwed up too badly. Americans love his lies and wlll keep supporting him.

    He won by a lot in the college, but not in the popular vote, and his margins in many of the swing states was slim.  

    image.thumb.png.b8049dd36b6e156a504b971a7be4596e.png

    2 years can change a lot of minds, though I agree with most of the rest of what you're saying.  

     

  11. 2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

    Just using your tactics moonbox...again you research it....you've done it many times....i know you can do it....get your mom to help....

    Yeah that's how this works.  You make a claim you can't support, and then I'm supposed to research it!  

    For someone complaining about getting in fights and trolling, it's funny how you keep running back to this.  Like the dumb goldfish, you just can't help biting, I guess?  

  12. Just now, Army Guy said:

    Hang in there big fella, you'll get soon enough, And i have spelled it out many times, maybe it is not a comprehension problem maybe it's your ability to read...

    In your imagination?  Drop a link to one of these instances, rather than limply insisting on it over and over!  🤡🤡

     

  13. 23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

    If you can isolate the variables that are causal, with respect to decline in all network television then that's a valid approach.

    You don't really have to isolate anything.  CBC's cable network viewership is declining both in absolute terms and in terms of relative viewership (ie. their share of the pie is shrinking rapidly).   

    23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

    But, again, we have: cable, podcasting, radio, and Radio Canada to consider.  

    And - no - I have no idea how they're faring.

    I think we can assume "not well" considering the CBC just laid off 25% of its workforce.  Legacy media is struggling in general, but this is particularly notable considering the heavy subsidies they receive.  

  14. 2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

    And it's worth mentioning that the midterms are going to be a lot more important for him than even normally would be for presidents. If the democrats win sufficient support in the house and the senate they are absolutely 100% going to find a reason to impeach him and throw him out of office. Guaranteed.

    I don't think they'll try to impeach him again unless he does something egregious or traitorous, but they don't even need to.  A second-term President who loses the House is a lame-duck who'll get stymied and filibustered for 2 years until he's done.  

    I think he has 12-18 months to really swing his clout, after which House Republicans will really start focusing on their own re-elections.  If Trump's popularity wanes in the meantime, that will only embolden opposition amongst them.  

    Outside of his tariff ranting, so far I think he's having an okay time.  Rounding up and deporting the illegals and crashing the monolithic public service will enjoy support at least until it starts affecting the daily lives and wallets of the average voter.  

    A multi-front trade war yields almost immediate negative results and whatever (small) positive outcomes arise from it will lag years behind.  

  15. 19 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

    RFK Jr could destroy the Kennedy legacy, and be indirectly responsible for millions of deaths, if he is confirmed.

    I think the Kennedy family's legacy is heavily influenced by the fact that JFK was assassinated, and even then I don't think it carries the same weight it used to. 

    RFK has been considered a joke for a long, long time, and that's the only publicity the family gets now.  

×
×
  • Create New...