Federal Conservative Leader

[Argus]

15 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

So, how many votes did the Peoples Party of Canada get? Compared to the votes the CPC and Grits get?

It took the green party something like 4 elections to get as many as the PPC got a few months after they were formed. Also, the word on many conservative forums was that people didn't want to split the vote because it was so important to get rid of Trudeau.

[Rue]

On ‎2‎/‎5‎/‎2020 at 5:26 PM, Argus said:

I'm not positing a conspiracy. I'm simply pointing out that the judges of the supreme court can make any finding they want and no one can really overrule them. They're the product of a system of left-leaning ideologically driven schools run by second and third rate professors who have succeeded in inspiring in them the belief that their job is to change the country to make it more socially just. 

Lol, the first part is sort of correct except one thing you missed. If the elected assembly does not like their decision as to an existing law, they can pass a new one. They have to get around Supreme Court of Canada decisions  in the past and will continue to do so, the exception being Charter of Rights interpretations. At this point they have carte blanche on those.

In regards to the second, I am sure many of the SCC members would find your definition of them being left wing etc. laughable. Judge John Sopinka and many other Judges were not exactly leftists. I think the analogy of the SCC as the CBC is funny though. I am sure you felt that way about Rosie Abella or Laskin but come on some of these other guys  no some maybe. Given I am a third rate, I can assure you I did not influence any of them. Trust me on that.

Edited February 10, 2020 by Rue

[Argus]

2 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

Whatever you need to tell yourself, son.

You are most certainly no serious legal authority,

And YOU are? Are you going for laughter now?

2 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

For who's the dick, I'll let our fellow interlocutors review both of our posts not only in this thread but our respective catalogues of comments and decided themselves. 

You do that, son.

2 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

No need to respond, nothing productive can come from an argument with ignorance.

Yes, I had decided that as soon as I saw your name. And so I wasn't going to bother to respond. But I generally don't let dicks insult me without replying in kind.

[SkyHigh]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

But I generally don't let dicks insult me without replying in kind.

Your a silly little man, my first comment on this wasn't even directed at you,it was who chose to interject.

 

1 hour ago, Argus said:

And YOU are?

I know you are but what am I? Best you can come up with? Your willful ignorance is showing again, son.

1 hour ago, Argus said:

And YOU are?

Going for Laughter? Statement of fact son, anyway you provide enough fooder for ridicul on your own without the need for me to point it out.

 

1 hour ago, Argus said:

don't let dicks insult me without

Insult? Please, again the fact you're a partisan hack is objective, demonstrable reality, and your insinuations that im anti conservative without any basis,and that you ignore my persistent demands that you justify these claims just continues to prove my point.

1 hour ago, Argus said:

Yes, I had decided that as soon as I saw your name. And so I wasn't going to bother to respond

Oh so now my name disqualifies me from rational conversation? At least your previous adhoms required some level of thought, you're really reaching down to the bottom of the intellectual barrel, now. Go with you're first instinct, don't respond. Again it's not like you have the capacity or the want to bring added value to this or any other conversation.

[Charles Anthony]

Folks,  

Stop the personal banter.  

[SkyHigh]

2 minutes ago, Charles Anthony said:

Folks,  

Stop the personal banter.  

Pardon, folks? I asked legitimate, objective questions and was answered with insults( and this is far from the first time). Either you call out adhomenims at their onset or allow people to respond to those same personal attacks. Please explain how letting people go off then expecting those attacked to "stop the personal banter" is moderating

Please understand this is simply asking for clarification, and in no way is intended to cast dispersion on you personally, or any other moderators here

 

[PIK]

On 1/23/2020 at 5:56 PM, jacee said:

We can't be at the mercy of the changing agendas of political parties. In a democracy, the rights of people must not change on political whims.

Harper appointed three Conservative judges to the Supreme Court, hoping they'd follow his whims. It turned out that competent judges do agree on interpretation of Charter rights, regardless of politics. 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/stephen-harpers-accidental-legal-legacy/article27150950/

And again, the "sovereign" power that you propose for parliament is not what democracy is about. 

You'd prefer a constant right-wing dictatorship, but you live in the wrong country for that - ie, you live in a democracy. 

You might prefer elsewhere. Lol 

 

We really do not have a real right wing up here, as america does not have a real left wing down there. That is just fear mongering and hatred coming from you and your ilk.

[PIK]

4 hours ago, Argus said:

It took the green party something like 4 elections to get as many as the PPC got a few months after they were formed. Also, the word on many conservative forums was that people didn't want to split the vote because it was so important to get rid of Trudeau.

And the PPC self destructed, with poor vetting.

[Argus]

46 minutes ago, PIK said:

And the PPC self destructed, with poor vetting.

All the parties had candidates who turned out to have things in their closet. I cut the PPC more slack, being brand new, than the old-line parties.

[SpankyMcFarland]

I suspect most politicians have claimed a lack of ambition for the top job at some point:

Quote

 "Some people may have when growing up, always harboured leadership ambitions. I've never harboured leadership ambitions. It is the honest-to-God truth."

Mohammed Adam, "What makes John Baird tick?", Ottawa Citizen, April 25, 2011, pg. A2.

If Baird thought he might return to politics after he left office, he should have used the intervening time to create a coherent personal narrative. That’s more difficult (although not impossible) to do in the heat of a leadership campaign. He certainly has the charisma and a solid record of accomplishment in cabinet posts to win the race. 

[Argus]

33 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

I suspect most politicians have claimed a lack of ambition for the top job at some point:

If Baird thought he might return to politics after he left office, he should have used the intervening time to create a coherent personal narrative. That’s more difficult (although not impossible) to do in the heat of a leadership campaign. He certainly has the charisma and a solid record of accomplishment in cabinet posts to win the race. 

Gay guy beloved by right-wing conservatives doesn't work?

Edited February 10, 2020 by Argus

[SpankyMcFarland]

5 hours ago, Argus said:

Gay guy beloved by right-wing conservatives doesn't work?

First, let's see if he jumps in. 

Edited February 11, 2020 by SpankyMcFarland

[jacee]

8 hours ago, PIK said:

We really do not have a real right wing up here, as america does not have a real left wing down there. That is just fear mongering and hatred coming from you and your ilk.

What? 

Whose? 

[jacee]

12 hours ago, Argus said:

It took the green party something like 4 elections to get as many as the PPC got a few months after they were formed. Also, the word on many conservative forums was that people didn't want to split the vote because it was so important to get rid of Trudeau.

I'm surprised Bernier didn't hightail it back to the cpc fold and try to take another shot at the leadership. 

I'm pretty sure he now knows he's going nowhere with a bunch of nazi wannabes. 

[PIK]

I hope Baird goes for it.

[PIK]

15 hours ago, Argus said:

Gay guy beloved by right-wing conservatives doesn't work?

Every party has idiots. Baird would clean up if he runs.

[scribblet]

On 2/11/2020 at 10:03 AM, PIK said:

Every party has idiots. Baird would clean up if he runs.

He isn't running, but does he need 'cleaning up' 

[Rue]

On 2/10/2020 at 6:56 PM, Argus said:

Gay guy beloved by right-wing conservatives doesn't work?

I heard through the grapevine he refrained from running because he did not want his personal lifestyle becoming an issue. I will say this, at least he never hid being gay when he got elected unlike Trudeau and Morneau. I respect his integrity but its a political reality you outed and why beat around the bush. (not Bush Chaney)

[Rue]

21 hours ago, scribblet said:

He isn't running, but does he need 'cleaning up' 

He would need a diet, new teeth, and the dumb and dumber haircut would not work. I would suggest he grow a salt and pepper beard, colourful socks , hip hugger pants,  and  a little  more oopah in his gait to keep up with Lord Justin of Trudeau. He is the epitome of the chubby boy at school with the big head everyone shot spit balls at.  Hey is it just me or doesPeter MacKay looks like a moose?  Seriously Baird was more right wing than Harper. Might have been be a little bit too polarizing had he ran. I don't doubt the right wing of the party aint happy with Peter Moose.

 

[Rue]

On 2/11/2020 at 1:16 AM, jacee said:

I'm surprised Bernier didn't hightail it back to the cpc fold and try to take another shot at the leadership. 

I'm pretty sure he now knows he's going nowhere with a bunch of nazi wannabes. 

.He's too busy. Someone bought him a shirt without buttons on the cuffs and some cuff links and he's been trying to figure out what to do about both ever since.