Queenmandy85

I gased up my car yesterday. The carbon tax raised the price from $1.549 to $1.589 per litre. To think, a few months ago, it was only $1.769. Oh, the humanity. How will we ever survive?

There it is. Abraham Lincoln, an enemy of Canada's ally and a republican. We do have some republicans in Canada. John Manly, a Liberal, and Lorne Nystrom of the NDP come to mind. But republicanism is the antithesis of Conservatism. Fortunately,as I said previously, Pierre shows signs of actual conservatism and loyalty. He is no Preston Manning and that is a credit to him. Manning was a loser and Poilievre is a winner. I am not sure why you feel so threatened that you have to resort to lies and slander. Mr. Poilievre is going to be appointed Prime Minister very soon, so don't get your knickers in a knot.

This should jog your memory. When asked by Simpson who his hero was, Preston Manning said President Lincoln. Faultlines: Struggling for a Canadian Vision Hardcover – Jan. 1 1993 by Jeffrey Simpson (Author), Harpercollins.

I have heard a number of different versions but I can't refute what you say. I do believe the establishment of Israel in the middle of Palestine was a mistake. But would you agree with the idea that Israel should be moved? I suggested Oregon because the climate is vaguely similar. I wonder if moving Palestine to Oregon might be better because the climate in the eastern Mediterranean is deteriorating. Which ever country were to move, they would thrive. The Americans might be ticked off, but it could be viewed as Karma. They never seemed to have a problem with doing it to the Palestinians. We have to let this one go to a different thread, though. It is off the thread topic. Cheers.

You lied are incorrect. I did not say Manning did not like MacDonald. I said his political idol is Abraham Lincoln. (Faultlines: Struggling for a Canadian Vision Hardcover – Jan. 1 1993 by Jeffrey Simpson (Author), Harpercollins.) Okay. There you are lying in your teeth. 😁

The United Nations gave that land to the Israelis. Blame the UN. They should have placed Israel in Oregon, not Palestine. The alternative could be for the UN to move Palistine to Oregon.

It is refreshing to see such niave innocence. Reform was the creation of Preston Manning, a sacred. Who was his political hero? Was it Sir John A., the father of the Conservative Party? No, his hero was the American President Lincoln, a republican and an enemy of Canada. But that is all history. My hope is that when Mr. Poilievre is appointed, he will curtail immigration and repeal the restriction on the sale and transfer of hand guns. As it stands now, I will likely be voting for my CPC MP. He is an excellent Member. Mr. Poilevre gives out a lot of mixed messages. He has been in cabinet and so must understand the pressures he is going to have to deal with. He is giving the impression that he will reduce the deficit and taxes at the same time. That is a contradiction. Reducing red tape is a great sound bite, but those rules were put in to prevent wasting money. They are talking about reducing red tape to get more housing built. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't buy a new house built in a rush with reduced regulations. I remember the leaky condos in the lower mainland. The war is not going to go away and the aftermath of the pandemic will be with us for a while longer. Healthcare and education are both under funded. I won't even mention the funding of DND. The problem regarding "affordability" is a mystery to me. During the lockdown, a lot of people found their savings growing. They had nothing to spend their surplus money on with everything shut down. A lot of people suffered as well, but what happened to those savings? When the lockdown ended, passport offices and airports were swamped. The airlines couldn't keep up. So rather than buying GIC's to have a cushion against the predictable economic turmoil that comes after every plague event since the Emporer Justinian, and the preparations for war by the Moscow taxi driver, people with savings took all that money and blew it. They just threw it all away to foreigners. That is a recipe for inflation. It was the most irrational thing they could do with their money. For the last ten years, the Bank of Canada and the governments have been warning that interest rates were going to recover to a normal rate and we should prepare. Rather than taking their money to help out poor destitute billionaire Americans and Mexican casino owners, Canadians could be getting 5% interest on that money they should have invested. Pierre is facing quite a dilemma. His error in saying the carbon tax is costly to average Canadians and the incorrect message that it is not effective, means he will have to replace it regardless of the negative impact. As Scott Moe said last week, while he is against the carbon tax, all the alteratives are much more expensive. Either PP will have to raise taxes or cut services. He will likely have to do both if he wants to reduce the deficit. No matter what does, he is going to lose support. The more he does, the faster his support will melt away. My advise to Pierre is, to relish his position as Opposition Leader because it is all down hill the moment he is appointed.

Not always. He outright lied about the promised equalization deal with Saskatchewan. But, as I say, the Prime Minister who tried to keep his promises was betrayed, not by Liberals, but by Social Credit/Reform. You know, the Real Caouette lot. Voters reward liars, not politicians with integrity. Do you think Mr. Poilevre will introduce Major Douglas idea of dividend cheques to address affordability?

You just keep thinking that.

Voters don't base their vote on the honesty of a politician. Mr. Poilievre will win a super majority and will then back track on everything he promised. EDIT: I should not have said that. What I mean to say is Mr. Poilievre will win a super majority and keep all of his promises and be Prime Minister for 30 years.

I am happy for you. I am sure you have a better idea of how solid the CPC vote is than Fred Delorey. However, just as I defer to the expertise of Doug and Army Guy in military matters, I should defer to your political expertise. I wonder if Mr. Poilievre would do even better without your help. But that's just me. I am disappointed you didn't feel confident enough to explain CPC's policies. Pehaps I missed it in all the silly hyperbole. Happy Easter.

When I bring up the question of Mr. Poilievre's honesty, I don't mean to infer making false promises is a detriment to electoral success. In 1980, Pierre Trudeau promised to twin the railroad from sea to sea. Stephen Harper lied about the income trust issue and stood up in Regina and bald-faced lied about equalization agreements with Saskatchewan. Joe Clark went on the campaign trail in 1979 promising to privatize PetroCanada, move the Canadian embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, and pay off the deficit left by Trudeau and Turner. As soon as he was appointed to lead a minority government, he set about keeping his promises, so the electorate defeated him. Joe Clark is the only guy who ever defeated a Trudeau, and he was brought down by Social Credit. He was defeated because he was an honest politician. So, Pierre Polilevre doesn't need to concern himself with the accuracy of his debunked claims about the carbon tax. He will win his super majority in just a few short months and nobody will care if he lied or not.

Have I ever said Pierre Polilieve is not going to be appointed Prime Minister after the next election? I stand by my prediction that he will have a super majority on a Diefenbaker scale. In reading more about Mr. Poilievre, and a lengthy conversation with my MP, I have come to see more signs of his conservatism and loyalty, and that is encouraging. I live in hope that he will give short shrift to the republicans in the CPC. As to the questions around his veracity, we will know in about 3 years.

The exersise I set was for you to explain why an undecided voter should consider voting for the CPC. The voter (not me) has a household with four voters. They are asking what the CPC's policies are in order to decide if they should vote CPC, or Grit. The campaign manager has told you these votes are crucial to the local CPC candidate's election chances. What are you going to tell them about the CPC platform?

Back in the mid 1970's I was on the riding executive in Victoria and we had a meeting with Vic Stevens, the Progressive Conservative candidate in a by-election up Island. I had just driven through the riding and all the lawn signs were for Stevens. The election was still several weeks away. One of the members of the executive asked Vic how it was going. "It's in the bag." Remember that phrase because it is a warning of disaster. A few days before the election, NDP and Socred signs were vastly out numbering Stevens signs. Now I'm not the brightest bulb in the chandelier but if there is one thing I have learned in the last 50 years is every vote counts. How do you think your local CPC candidate is going to feel if you are prepared to write her off because Mr. Polievre is going to win anyway. Keep in mind, she has already sunk $25 -$30 grand in personal expenses and lost income to get the nomination and then fight the campaign. Telling anyone on the voters list that you don't need the four votes in their household is telling your candidate her effort and investment doesn't matter. Mr. Polievre's challenge is to overcome the tendency supporters are going to have to think it's in the bag and not bother to vote. His support may be 1.6 Km wide, but it is only a cm deep. There are a lot of Red Tories out there who may be tired of the grits, and are part of the 42% right now, but, speaking for my self, the support for the CPC is pretty tepid. It is a mistake to take Red Tories for granted. No conservative leader has become Prime Minister without Red Tory support. I predict that Pierre Poilievre will be appointed Prime Minister in the next election, but he doesn't need supporters who insult Progressive Conservatives to make his task harder. You have said you have worked on campaigns but it doesn't sound like you have experience knocking on doors. For that, I am sure Mr. Poilievre is very grateful. Every vote is precious.

My socks are still on.😉 Is that what you are going to say to someone who answers the door when you are out canvassing? Let's try again. Let's say I am a voter who is not familiar with Mr. Poilievre. We are in a riding which could go either way between the three candidates and your internal polling indicates the result is going to come down to just a few votes. I am sure you would not be willing to write off my family because there are four uncommitted voters in this house. We want to know how your party is going to solve the major issues. We are not concerned with the popularity of your leader or the failings of other leaders. We want to know what Mr. Poilievre's policies are. Have at me. 😁

I propose an exersise for fun. The scenario is: I am an undecided voter in a riding where it is a close race between the CPC, the Liberals and the NDP. Convince me to vote CPC. What will the CPC do? The floor is yours, CdnFox. Knock my socks off.

No, I am telling people to start campaigning. No matter how much people whine about the Grits, the election is still 18 months away. There is no point complaining. I'm not telling you anything you personally don't already know. You have said you get out and campaign. I am surprised you have the time to spare to come onto this forum. I live in a CPC safe seat and my MP is pretty good. He at least returns my calls. Has your CPC candidate been nominated? Have you volunteered yet? Now is the time. My kind have not been in charge since Brian Mulroney was Prime Minister. I am a proud Progressive Conservative.

No, what I expect is that those who believe the Liberals are harming the nation need to get thee to the campaign office and start working to elect a Member of Parliament who will oppose those policies they see as harmful. From everything you have said, I presume you are already out there, but for those who aren't, that is a better strategy than complaining on the internet.

All the whining about the price on carbon etc., is futile. You just need a little patience. The Canada 338 polling analysis puts Mr. Poilievre at about 210 seats. That is Diefenbaker / Mulroney territory. In 18 months, he will be appointed Prime Minister and his first act will be to eliminate the price on carbon. He will have to replace it with something else, but the point is, he will have a super majority and he will do what he deems appropriate. The talk of him blowing his lead does not take into account that to screw up that much takes a particular kind of talent.

When you listen to news broadcasts about the vote of non-confidendence , they say the Government "survived" the vote. 61% of Members of Parliament voted to express confidence in the government. Not only is that a solid vote of confidence, but it is also a solid vote in support of the policy of increasing the price on carbon. (a nickel) In Saskatoon last week, the price of gas jumped 5 cents to reach 25 cents cheaper than it was a year ago. If Premier Moe is so concerned about affordability, how about axing the provincial gas taxes.

The results of the non-confidence vote should give Mr. Poilievre some pause. The 206 Members who opposed the motion represent the anticipated number of MP's who will be in the governing caucus when Mr. Poilievre is appointed in a year and a half. those 206 MPs were elected by a majority of Canadian voters. The vote says that having a price on carbon has more support than the CPC caucus realizes. My previous post regarding the Byrne scandal was not my finest moment. I feel sorry for Mr. Poilievre. As Leader of his Majesty's Loyal Opposition, he has the best job in Canada. He is the most popular politician in Canada, not only currently, but in recent history. In a few months that will all come to an end. His first order of business is to come to grips with the climate crisis. He has poisoned one policy, the carbon tax, that had the advantage of discouraging the use of fossil fuels but on a quasi-volunteer basis. It is not a major hardship for most Canadians. His problem is, how is he going to get our emissions down to a level that will stop the catastrophe future Canadians will be facing. The obvious choices are rationing or putting a cap on production and importation of fossil fuels. Every alternative to carbon pricing will be more expensive and the cost will keep going up at an accelerating rate, the longer we put it off. This is going to be Mr. Poilievre's main problem. "Future generations will not judge us on what we say, they will judge us on what we do."

Mr. Poilievre isn't even in power and he already has a scandal brewing with the revelations regarding his lobbyist closest advisor. He is learning Karma is a bad thing. The Byrne scandal is just a forshadowing of what is going to plague Pierre when he takes office. Pierre is going to have his own SNC Lab. experience before he even takes office.

20% of people will never steal, regardless of the circumstances. 20% of people will steal no matter what. 60% of people will steal if they think they can get away with it. That means 80% of the customers in a store are potential thieves. The receipt check is there to deter that 60%. The store has every right to take such actiona as is reasonable to protect their interests. I find the clowns who whine the loudest about "being accused of stealing" are the most irritating and I presume they are probably prone to stealing if they think they could get away with it. If my support for a business that takes these measures to protect themselves helps them to reduce their loses, I am all for it.

1. It was an estimate in answer to a question posed on Quirk and Quarks. 2. True. 3. The choice of the manner of one's devotion to a deity is a personal one. It is a matter of freedom of choice. If our freedom of choice is taken away, if that is not socialism, I am not sure what to call it. 4. I am at a loss to know what conspiracy you are referring to. Are you referring to the Blackbird's OP or Zietgiest's response? With the rapid depletion of resourses critical to survival, we will not be able to support billions of people in the future. If we are to reduce the population, it will have to be done slowly by improving people's standard of living. As we can see in the wealthiest societies, the birthrate declines naturally. We need to ensure our decendents have the resourses they require to survive and thrive.