Moonbox

Maybe not, but winning lends you a certain credibility Poilievre currently lacks and at least would have given him a mandate to actually do something other than screech at your opponents. It also helps if your leader doesn't regularly poll below the rest of the Party.

I don't need to, because you're only embarrassing yourself further with statements like this. GDP per capita is generally considered a poor measurement of productivity because it includes too many things that have absolutely nothing to do with efficiency (which is what productivity is all about). Alberta's GDP per capita is 10% lower now than it was in 2014. That's not because Alberta got lazier or less efficient. It's because oil prices crashed and still haven't really recovered. This fundamentally altered the landscape of their economy and despite their oil and gas industry being far more efficient (productive) than in 2014, they just don't earn as much per barrel as they used to. As usual, you're proving you know less than nothing about the topics on which you bullshit.

We already have? Thanks for coming out bud.

There's a reasonable discussion to be had about affirmative action and how unfair it can be and how it can build resentment with voters. You just don't seem to be interested in the reasonable part.

I've already responded to this...😑 I think they crossed the floor because they can't stand Poilievre, like most of Canada.

Hilarious. Too it takes 20 seconds of Googling to prove that (once again) you're completely and utterly full of shit: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11-402-x/2012000/chap/econo/econo01-eng.htm We started falling behind the US in productivity back in the 80's or earlier. https://www.canadaaction.ca/canadian-productivity-and-investment-falling-report

🤦‍♂️ Key there: "or run as an independent". Look, this is very simple. If individual MPs can't break ranks with their party, there's basically no point in having individual's names on the ballot. You just select a party, and then that party appoints a minion to follow leaderships' orders. The system was specifically and deliberately designed not to function this way. The whole point of our federal parliamentary system is regional representation.

Gotta earn my moneys and feed the children man. It's tough out there.

I've always been a small-dose kind of guy when it came to Toronto. Alright to visit and go to events...miserable to have to work there or drive around.

Because you say so? That's not much of an argument. He lost the election, remains deeply unpopular with Canadians, has shown zero capacity for self-reflection and continues to bang the grievance bell at every opportunity.

Nobody's interested in engaging with you. It's the same reason nobody wants to talk to the homeless guys screaming on the street. If you want to rant into empty air, go start a blog or something. I'm sure you'll get at least zero followers.

I just moved to Alberta this week. The lower taxes are NICE, and the housing prices compared to back home are around 1/2 to 1/3. I love Jesus and stuff now too.

You keep saying that, but you can't actually address or refer to any of my points. I explained it pretty clearly. If you can formulate a reasonable response to that rather than just express your outrage over and over in different words, let me know. 😑

It was off a tip. When you spend that much time in your zone, eventually the other team will probably score. The shots were pretty even for most of the game but I thought that the US was running the game for most of it.

Most do probably, but that's not a good thing. There's nothing undemocratic about it. This is literally democracy at work. If an MP can't repudiate their party's policies or leadership, then most of our political system is a pointless charade. Individual MPs no longer have any power. Their constituency have no real representation, and all the election is about is the brand of government you're going to get. The MPs end up being nothing but appointed apparatchiks - bobbleheads and Yes men chosen for their loyalty to the Brand rather than to their constituents.

Fer 'nuf.

Isn't it 'murica? /hat tip to the US ladies. Their one defenseman/woman is nutso good.

No, because the Parties have no legal status in Parliament. You vote for your MP. If that person doesn't change, no by-election is required. The fact that you can't see past the colour on the sign is irrelevant to this reality. The way you would prefer it to be doesn't change the way it actually is, and the way it was intentionally designed.

Legally, and Constitutionally, they have no status in Parliament whatsoever.

He's literally a homeless guy pointing on the keyboard and blaming everyone else for his problems. I suspect drugs have been involved at one point or another. To him, he's living in tents and on benches because of his political martyrdom.

They're still casting their ballot for the individual. That's also not up for debate. Being a low-info voter that makes decisions based on lazy heuristics and/or tribalism doesn't change how the system was designed or intended to work. It's not just legal, it's vital to our political system. The Constitution doesn't even mention political parties, and the Parties don't have ownership over seats. The ability to cross the floor is what prevents party discipline and power centralization from stifling representation, which is the whole point of the Westminster system. The delegitimization of floor-crossing would convert political parties from voluntary associations to franchise arrangements.

I know it's late...but: Nate Erskine-Smith Liberal Party of Canada 39,804 67.7% This is a riding that has been Liberal or NDP every election (almost always Liberal) for longer than I've been alive. It's like worrying that Medicine Hat is going to vote Liberal next election. This doesn't change much.

He had a lot of stuff right. It's too bad it was all wrapped up in all that's wrong with the Poilievre experience. What the CPC hasn't been able to understand over the last 11 years is that the culture warrior People's Party and the MAGA retards within their membership are what Canada is consistently voting against - not the common sense Conservatives focused on actual tangible policy. That's why Carney was able to eat his lunch. He disowned a lot of the vapid stupidity of the Trudeau Liberals, embraced the more common sense policy issues of the Conservatives, and won the centre. It's crazy to me that the CPC membership can't wrap their heads around this stuff. That's objectively and categorically not true. 😑

This is just your goofy hyperpartisan interpretation. Carney stole Poilievre's platform, haven't you heard? Drastics cuts to immigration and cuts to the public service support that, right?

Your vote is for your MP - the individual. The fact that you choose to vote purely by Party affiliation is your own issue. I can't stand Pierre Poilievre, but I do like my Conservative MP Michael Chong. He's a principled politician and can and has stood up to party leadership when he's felt the need to. He would probably win an election as a Liberal or as an Independent at this point, and I would vote for him either way. It's reasonable for you to be upset with an MP you voted for crossing the floor. It's unreasonable to say it's undemocratic, because it isn't. Of the ~50% who voted for Jeneroux as a Conservative, some of that support was likely soft. For the 49% who voted Liberal and NDP, they're probably happy that he crossed the floor. Both groups are his constituents. He doesn't only represent Conservative supporters.