Moonbox
-
Posts
9,555 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
47
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Moonbox
-
-
10 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:
He got voted in for his mandate. No overestimation there at all. He is re-paving his "stupid - road. Mid terms aside, he has at least 2 years of fee reign.
He has taken the hammer to the US bureaucracy as he promised to do. Killed programs, fired people and a lot more to come.
Do you figure that torpedoing the economies of swing states like Michigan/Ohio/Pennsylvania via trade war with Canada will be popular policy among their voters, and won't affect mid-term elections?
-
30 minutes ago, Army Guy said:
I think you should concentrate on your record, which has been trolling everyone else's conversation there is literally pages upon pages of absolute nothing with your name attached to it.......your that guy that's always got to be right when in reality you your just a troll...
Any ways i hope you move on...I'm not playing your reindeer games any more...
This sort of childish whining would make more sense if wasn't you that both started the exchange, AND went immediately ad-hominem. You have the self-awareness of a rock.
We're now on page two of your useless moaning, and all on account of a benign question you refused (actually couldn't) answer.
If you just want to rant out your feelings without being challenged, go write in your diary. 😭
-
13 minutes ago, Army Guy said:
Why not Quebec what advantage does that give them....? every other province could be getting cheaper goods, increasing GDP , perhaps leave in place tariffs to quebec or increase them, provinces would be hesitant to buy Quebec goods as they would cost more, It would not make sense to not agree....
I agree, but then I only speak French. I'm not Quebecquois. They've always been very protectionist and concerned about their sovereignty. They don't even have the same legal system as the RoC. Canada doesn't have a federal securities regulator like the SEC in the states because of Quebec.
-
1 minute ago, ExFlyer said:
Ha Ha Ha ...like that will happen.
I think you underestimate presidential power and overestimate the will of the house and senate.
Perhaps, but I think folks overestimate the strength of Trump's mandate and how far down stupid-road they'll all go before they start pumping the breaks.
1 minute ago, ExFlyer said:Trump is in the catbird seat and he knows it and will use it....as has been the case in his first month in power (without house or senate assistance).
True enough, but rounding up and kicking out illegals, or taking the hammer to the bureaucracy is a bit different than starting pointless/costly trade wars with close allies, or taking over Gaza.
-
2 minutes ago, Army Guy said:
No, you were either to lazy to do your own research, or you already knew the answer and were baiting me into something....
Judging by your record on this forum, you'd be safer assuming that anyone you're talking to has already done 10x more research than you have. That would save you a lot of frustration.
Instead of all of this useless rambling, you could have just answered the question, or requote the previous answer that you keep insisting you totally provided. 🙄
-
14 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:
Except, as we see, executive orders by the president can do anything he wants without congress or senate votes.
Except that the House can invalidate executive orders through their own legislation and through denial of funding.
-
49 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:
I don't have a strong feeling that a "large portion", presumably a majority, are aggravated.
I kept it vague, because I don't clear data, but the longstanding editorial bias and support for the Liberal party predictably yields a lot of opposition. The widening trust gap amongst Conservatives for the CBC is even highlighted by your link:
49 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:Pollara does an annual poll of trusted sources and they come SECOND nationally after The Weather Network. I just don't see a lot of hard data on this.
https://www.pollara.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Trust-in-Media-July-2024-final.pdfIt's an interesting read, but the last few years have put into question how valuable and accurate this sort of polling research is.
I'm more inclined to trust hard data about the precipitous drop in revenue and ratings for the CBC, despite large increases in public funding. There's a disconnect here.
-
I suspect most of the provinces would agree...just not Quebec.
-
1 hour ago, Nationalist said:
It's not meaningless at all. Canada now knows we have a responsibility to properly manage our border and our drug crime.
Isn't that supposing that we somehow didn't know that already? Trudeau had already committed something like $1.5-2B on that in December. These "concessions" will fall in under that umbrella, and a fentanyl tsar is just a cheesy symbolic gesture.
1 hour ago, Nationalist said:I would like to see the USA work on the gun running problem as well.
Me too, but I wouldn't hold your breath on US gun enforcement under a Republican President. Whatever happens on that file will be for our border services to figure out.
-
54 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:
"the more reasonable voters"? The Americans have already voted and are stuck with Trump for the next 4 years.
Yes, but the one relic of the US system that actually still works is the midterms, and House Republicans with slimmer margins aren't going to fall in line with the Emperor if it means a guaranteed blow-out loss in states like Michigan.
-
10 minutes ago, eyeball said:
I wonder how this wave of patriotism will affect sentiments around the CBC? Arguments for keeping it will likely be bolstered and it could enjoy a renaissance.
Maybe, but I doubt it. The problem with the CBC over the last 20-25 years has been twofold:
1) It is very partisan and very agenda-based.
2) Its programming generally sucks.
As a result, it not only provides near-zero value to the majority of Canadians, it also aggravates and antagonizes a large portion f the population.
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Nationalist said:
Trump did what he did and Canada reacted. It may have not been done via normal diplomatic channels but...it did work to a degree.
Actions cause reactions. That's how this sort of thing works. I'm not sure what you figure "worked" though. $200M may as well be nothing at this scale, and a couple of meaningless platitudes don't count for much, do they? A fentanyl czar? Really?
-
59 minutes ago, Deluge said:
I get the feeling that Putin's been pulling his punches on this conflict.
That's why there are so many cities in Ukraine with no buildings left standing, and why Putin lost almost the entirety of his professional army. That's why he had to enact conscription and why thousands of his peasant donkey-soldiers die weekly...because Putin's pulling his punches.
🤣👌
-
I think it's funny how the donkeys are framing this as a big win. $200M (nothing) for border security and then some hollow, symbolic gestures.
AMERICA IS GREAT AGAIN!
-
1 minute ago, ExFlyer said:
Don't kid yourself.
It may hurt for a moment but it will be. short moment and as soon as Trump tells them it is for the MAGA program , they will get over it. LOL
The diehard MAGA cultists will, but the more reasonable voters in the middle might care.
-
1 hour ago, Aristides said:
I’m saying that it will make a big difference to many Americans who depend on Canadians visiting and shopping in their country. You can see it in many of their border towns that go from busy to near ghost towns when Canadians stop coming. Canadians have a big impact on sun state economies in the winter months. Real estate in Florida is taking a hit from all the Canadians trying to sell and get out.
Yes they can adjust but so can we if we are prepared to do what it takes.
There's an obvious disparity in scale and Americans can absorb Canadian disinvestment far easier than the other way around, but it's still harmful to them. Folks are also fooling themselves if they think it's just going to be Canada. If the USA's closest and most economically integrated ally is diversifying away from the US (or boycotting it), we can safely assume the rest of the world will be too.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:
I agree, Carney will win.
I like Carney. I think he is a smart guy.
I am astonished he decided to become a Liberal.... maybe I am wrong and is not such a smart guy. LOL
I feel almost the exact same way. Carney would have been a great PM, but signing up now doesn't show great political instincts, unless he figures he can play the long game and last until 2029.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Nationalist said:
The tariff threat to Canada...IMO...was to shove just one more knife in the backs of the Canadian Liberals and Pixie-Dust in particular.
You may very well be right, but it's flogging a dead horse and accomplished basically nothing beyond setting Canada/US relations back 30 years.
-
28 minutes ago, eyeball said:
The average cost to inspect one container is $3500.
That seems like a problem in itself.
-
Can you write this in Haiku form, please? If you're going to write nonsense, you may as well be poetic about it.
-
1
-
-
I just don't understand what the point is in this sort of topic. Trudeau's been running a zombie government for months. He's certain to lose. The desperate scrambling and polling he was doing in his final months seems pretty irrelevant now.
-
2 hours ago, Army Guy said:
I gave you the answer to your question...And your not interested in debating just fighting....
No. I asked you to lay it out specifically, and all you could do was mumble vaguely about fentanyl and immigration, which is precisely all that Trump has done so far anyway.
As I said before, if you don't like being challenged, then go write in your diary. Whining about the "fight" you keep running straight into is childish, especially when it was you who started this exchange.
2 hours ago, Army Guy said:The only one that can answer that is trump,
That's the point. Only Trump knows what Trump wants, because he's not really saying what he wants. He's just doing his usual grievance rambling, blustering and threatening.
These performances might impress the apes who treat his words as gospel, but it's a pretty crappy way of handling international diplomacy. An ultimatum isn't worth much if it's not attached to a specific demand. This was about as good an example as you get of bad-faith "negotiating", and all it's really done is annoyed and angered everyone involved.
-
2 hours ago, Army Guy said:
Maybe you did not read the whole article....the last poll was done in 2025....
Okay. A poll of some sort was conducted by a government on its way out...
What are you even going to have to talk about once Trudeau's gone?
-
There's no question that I'm correct on that. The scale of the pushback and the changes are up for debate, but there's going to be a substantial percentage of Canadians who stop buying American, stop traveling to the US, and diversify away from the US on account of how immature and unstable the administration is, and the electorate that enabled him.
Chickens Coming Home To Roost?
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
I don't disagree with any of that.