Moonbox

Not concerned because it's just bogeyman bullshit that the conspiracy clowns have held up as the next incarnation of the NWO or the Illuminati.

Why is it relevant? What exactly do you find so noteworthy that Canada is influenced by global thinking in a global economy? ?

Calling sensitivity training woke nonsense is why nobody's listening to you. Spiking energy prices are a worldwide (and shorter-term) issue and nothing the Liberals or anyone else do will solve it for us in the near-term. The debacle and short-sightedness of Alberta oil being bottlenecked is a clear and obvious policy blunder for both Liberals and the Democrats in the USA, but I imagine you have very little understanding of how much Keystone or Northern Pacific Pipelines would have solved the inflation we're seeing today. and so is Pierre, performing for his Alberta base. Good thing that inflation is more a Bank of Canada and private-industry problem to solve.

You'll have to make it clear what you are actually arguing then, because you and others keep bringing it up Klaus Schwab and the WEF up in every thread as if it's a critical point in all of these varied discussions. ?

Repeating yourself like a broken record doesn't make anything you're saying true/obvious. Your silly rhetoric and vague, meandering criticism is a waste of everyone's time.

His economic policies are going to be irrelevant. The Conservatives lose federal elections over social issues, time and time again. It's why O'Toole lost despite Trudeau's poor performance and Poilievre's record on this front is abysmal. No amount of economic policy is going to overcome the dredging up of this dude's anti-abortion or anti-LGBT stances, and that's just the tip of the iceberg with him. If Pierre wins the Conservative leadership, all Justin will have to do is keep his head down. Whatever Poilievre's supporters want to fool themselves into thinking, the trucker protestors and anti-vaxx conspiracy wieners were on the wrong side of science and were deeply unpopular across most of Canada. While those bozos might be thrilled that he's hitched his wagon to that cause, it's a lost one and will bury him. We'll need an actual adult to hold Justin to account for his divisive role in all of this, not an inflammatory demagogue who will scare Canadians more than Justin ever did.

No duh. So what? The degree to which you'd have us believe the WEF influences/controls/whatever you figure is what's questionable here, and the way you keep referring to Klaus Schwab as some sort of nefarious behind-the-scenes puppetmaster.

What's "magic" about governments around the world agreeing to stuff and coming to consensus? This is a PERFECT example of your failure in critical thinking and reasoning. Instead of entertaining the preposterous idea that human beings can actually find common cause over universally human issues, you see:

The spectrum is ever-evolving. Canada is certainly more left than it was 30 years ago. This is a cultural shift that will continue with demographic changes. Harper was a pragmatic leader and understood the environment he found himself in. He muzzled the inflammatory ideologues in the CPC and that's why he had longevity. Poilievre doesn't have those instincts. A lot of Canadians can get behind pipelines and not self-flagellating over our oil and gas reserves. Canada is uniquely stupid in that regard and I suspect there would be quite a few conservative candidates (and even some Liberals outside of Trudeau-style politicking) that could get behind supporting Alberta oil (myself included). That's not all that Pierre is about, however, and his caustic, wormy history will be too much for the rest of Canada. Whatever good arguments you might have about the Liberal tendency for bleeding-heart over-correctness is lost once you start parroting these slogans as scary concepts. There's nothing wrong with sensitivity training, anti-racism or gender diversity in principle. Sometimes they push it to absurdity but the all-or nothing rhetoric makes most people just tune you out.

Always drawing links where you want to see them. ?

The mainstream media was all over him on the Emergencies Act. You just didn't like that they were supporting the protestors, which was the overwhelming majority of Canada. Aside from the crypto bros, or maybe Chinese or Russian investors, confidence in the Canadian banking system is unchanged. The freezing of assets or services due criminal activity has a long history in the west and will continue to be standard procedure. The exceptional part of the story was the Emergencies Act, which was bullshit and skirted the rules. The WEF is a bogeyman that coping losers hold up to scare each other. Your conclusions on the matter are silly hyperbole, blown way out of proportion, and the everyone just sort of rolls their eyes at you when you start nattering off this nonsense. If it's not the Illuminati or the Freemasons or the NWO, it's going to be someone like Klaus Schwab and the WEF. After him it will be someone else. There's nothing like a world-spanning mysterious conspiracy for people to cope with the world and what they don't like about it.

Almost the whole world signed that so I guess if you figure that was all the WEF's doing, and that Klaus Schwab controls the world, this doesn't really mean much. NEFARIOUS Klaus Schwab...yup. All him. If you say so, whatever that means to you. Oh gosh! No those! Sounds evil to me. YIKES!

They were part of the WEF's young global leaders program. It's a given that they're "influenced" by the WEF. The idea that Klaus Schwab controls them, however, is ridiculously dumb. Or the degree to which you think the WEF is controlling much of anything.

What do you figure that means? A non-native english speaker using the word "penetrate" is the smoking gun that he's the puppet master of Canadian politics? That's so, so dumb.

I'll take my warm milk over your sour any day, dear, as will the rest of Canada. If your comfy place is angrily yelling and coping from the fringes of the political spectrum, keep up the good work. ?

That's the thing. I don't. I don't like Trudeau. I never liked Trudeau. I dreaded Trudeau becoming Prime Minister back when he first became an MP (can probably find some posts here about that). Here's an example lol: The Liberal Party's path to being re-elected is for the most inflammatory parts of the Conservative base to dictate the direction of the party. They may as well just all join with Maxime Bernier if that's what they're looking for. Pierre Poilievre as leader would be the insane repetition of the same mistakes the Party has been making forever.

Angry brainlets can't win on ideas or arguments and therefore have to rant and rave about absurd conspiracy theories and Klaus Schwab, the mustache-twirling Emperor of Globalism...or whatever it is you figure.

I literally couldn't care less what you think I sound like. If Pierre Poilievre wins the Conservative Party Leadership, the Conservative Party is dead. What YOU have decided is a "conservative" is what the overwhelming majority of Canadians consider toxic Trumpism, and it will faceplant in an election. Like I said, don't take my word for it. As far as whether I'm a Liberal, I'd have said no for pretty much my entire life. I've literally never voted anything but Conservative in Ontario elections and only voted Liberal twice Federally (once for Paul Martin). I was a huge Harper supporter up until near the end and I can't stand Trudeau and think he's probably the worst Prime Minister of my life time. If support for Pierre Poil and the freeeedom convoy is the pre-requisite for being a "Conservative" now, then I guess I'm not. Good luck with that in an election as demographics continue to ship away from Bible-thumping and social conservatism. Tell us more about how you feel and what you imagine about other posters.

That you don't see the glaring hypocrisy and the total lack of perspective in your comments is worrying to me.

Far right is relative. Pierre Poilievre and Maxime Bernier are far right of the overwhelming majority of Canadians. That's all that really matters. Nobody cares if there's an even further right, loonier fringe than that.

O'Toole lost because he couldn't pick a lane and nobody understood what he stood for. He wouldn't disavow the fundamentalist base of the CPC and their social agenda (which is a non-starter for the overwhelming majority of Canadians), but then he also sort of teased support for them but wouldn't actually commit. Both groups therefore didn't trust him. The average Canadian feared his nebulously defined social agenda, and then his far-right supporters didn't trust him because he played coy with them.

Pierre Poilievre is a performance artist telling the angry conservative base exactly what they want to hear. His flip-flops on social issues are legendary and his principles are only as strong as he thinks they're popular. Whatever intelligent policy ideas he might have is drowned out in mountains of silly hyperbole like you just posted here. He's hitched his wagon to that sort of nonsense and to the Freedom Convoy and their bullshit, and the rest of Canada is watching in distaste whilst getting vibes of Trumpism. We're probably looking at one of the worst prime ministers in Canadian history and you could put someone as boring as Patrick Brown up there and probably beat him. Poilievre, however, would lose. I hope that this is obvious to the more reasonable among CPC members and they can see he's the path to another Liberal government. Don't take my word for it though. Watch it happen and remember this conversation.

Pierre is unelectable. He's a populist ass-licker and will have absolutely no appeal outside of the conservative base. If folks want Trudeau in for another term, he's the path for that. He'd perform no better than the Reform Party and would get no support outside of the West and more isolated/rural parts of the country. I would vote for a guy like Chong in a second. He's always been level-headed and principled (lost a cabinet position for not towing the party line under Harper) and can appeal to the middle ground in a way that someone like Pierre the dweeb can't. Charest I think can win an election and can appeal to the middle-right as well, but I'm not sure he can win a leadership campaign as a former Quebec Liberal where too much of the Leadership contest depends on the West. If we want to actually get rid of Trudeau, we need pragmatism instead of dogmatism. Pierre will be a non-starter for huge swathes of the country.

but did you say they want to kill old people, or what you're saying above here? Pretty big difference in the two lol.

Where?