Jump to content

Trudeau is going to lose.


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

When Trudeau tried to vilify the Conservatives because O’Toole wants to raise the flag of Canada from half mast to full mast after three months with it lowered, that spelled the end of Trudeau as ever being worthy of holding the office of Prime Minister of Canada.

That is so tru. When he said it will be down till the natives say so, he lost all authority.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, myata said:

It's a misconception and confusion in a majoritary, first-by-the post system. If you are not voting for one twin of the duopoly, you're giving your vote to the other.

when voting for one is the same as voting for the other

this is a distinction without a difference

if not voting for CPC means I'm voting LPC and not voting LPC means I'm voting CPC

then apparently by that logic, I'm somehow voting for both, instead of neither

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, myata said:

Exactly. You are voting for continuation of the duopoly system and the twins will continue to take turns running it, with no real controls or accountability.

that has nothing to do with my vote tho

that is the result regardless of who you vote for

I'm actually voting against that

while the "strategic" voters are voting for it

I'm not rewarding the status quo with my vote for not changing and doubling down on stupidity

they are tho

I am voting for a party that is offering something different

they are voting for parties offering more of the same

all while they front as if I am supporting the status quo with my vote and they somehow aren't

even though they clearly support the status quo with their vote far more than I do

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/7/2021 at 1:16 PM, Argus said:

1. Says who?

2. Or maybe just dismissing arguments and disagreements over major policy ideas as 'culture wars' is the new attempt at distraction.

3. It seems to be your thing that if someone points out how a particular attitude is utterly prevalent you'll hunt up a single case or so and brandish it triumphantly aloft as if this trumps all. 

 

1. I would say that's pretty obvious.  I would also accept the Globe and Mail but they're not as Conservative.  Anyway that's a nitpick.
2. Maybe, but I don't see much mainstream media trying to not stoke up the culture wars.
3. It seems to me that if you backed off a smidge on your extreme statements I would have little to say about your comments.  When you say who 'dares' to comment against immigration and say "He's one of those I spoke of who don't have a sliver of daylight between their social views and that of the NDP" you really open the door for me to slam dunk on those comments.  If you said "most if not all of the Canadian media toes the line on liberal opinions and criticism of immigration of other liberal policies is the exception rather than the norm"... then I doubt I would be able to counter that.

You're welcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

The post in question was a direct response to a poster who says journalists don't criticize imigration.

the vast majority of journalists are gung ho for more immigration

and see any criticism of that as anti-immigrant

the occasional outlier does not disprove the obvious trend

acting like the media doesn't have a clear and obvious bias on the issue

is asinine

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/7/2021 at 1:24 PM, Argus said:

1. He's not a journalist. And you had to go back four years to find it.

2. And you constantly take this sanctimonious, superior attitude to question finer details even

3. ...while being unable to dispute the bulk of the allegation which is angering you.

4. You search back for years for a few contrary opinions on a single subject and then gleefully wave them aloft

5. ...as if this is anything more than you being pedantic. 

1. Google doesn't tell me how old things are.  And my response to your direct statements that journalists dare not comment, results in me responding to your sloppy and overreaching posts.  You say Ivison is NDP and so I find an article when he questions immigration.  All you have to do is back off on your hysterical posts, and act like the button-down conservative you are growing into and respect will be yours.
2. No, I think you are just hurt because I am your best mentor and editor.
3. The 'bulk of the allegation' in many cases is something I AGREE with.  it's your personal sloppy style I am trying to help you with.  And this is the thanks I get.
4. You don't specify a time frame when you Google for a term.  Have you ever used Google.
5. That's exactly what I am being.  Be a good schoolboy and take note, and you will be an excellent opinion writer thanks to me.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. the vast majority of journalists are gung ho for more immigration

2. and see any criticism of that as anti-immigrant

3. the occasional outlier does not disprove the obvious trend

4. acting like the media doesn't have a clear and obvious bias on the issue is asinine

1. I agree.
2. That would be very difficult for you to prove.  I don't know if it's true or not, but you seem like a better poster than someone who makes assumptions on unstated opinions.
3. I agree.  Also see #1
4. Agree.  The media and Canada and the banks and most institutions are pro-immigration.  Few public intellectuals dare to question immigration - Dr. David Suzuki being one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

That would be very difficult for you to prove.  I don't know if it's true or not, but you seem like a better poster than someone who makes assumptions on unstated opinions.

when they call everyone who disagrees a bigot

no matter how reasonable their critique

then it's a pretty safe assumption

they front like the PPC are white nationalists for their position on immigration, that's a prime example

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. when they call everyone who disagrees a bigot no matter how reasonable their critique, then it's a pretty safe assumption

2. they front like the PPC are white nationalists for their position on immigration, that's a prime example

1. Again, hard to prove.  But I'll indulge you with a challenge - find me a serious commentator who calls someone a bigot for simply questioning immigration levels.  I will join you in denouncing such a person.

2. The PPC is a clown car caked with shit on the windshield, so maybe you can convince people for being confused about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Again, hard to prove.  But I'll indulge you with a challenge - find me a serious commentator who calls someone a bigot for simply questioning immigration levels.  I will join you in denouncing such a person.

2. The PPC is a clown car caked with shit on the windshield, so maybe you can convince people for being confused about them.

the PPC is a notable upgrade on all the other parties

all the other clown cars have more shit on the windshield

so people pretending they are the second coming of the Nazi's is flat out ridiculous

journalists do this all the time, often because of their stance on immigration

it's not hard to find it, if you haven't noticed it, you aren't paying attention

anyone the media doesn't like is tarred as a white supremacist

it's their go to tactic to discredit any opposition at this point

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. the PPC is a notable upgrade on all the other parties, all the other clown cars have more shit on the windshield,
2. so people pretending they are the second coming of the Nazi's is flat out ridiculous
3. it's not hard to find it, if you haven't noticed it, you aren't paying attention
4. anyone the media doesn't like is tarred as a white supremacist
5. it's their go to tactic to discredit any opposition at this point

1.  Disagree.  
2. Nazis ?  Well, on a lot of criteria the PPC aren't Nazis, especially their inability to garner support.  Bernier states racists are not welcomed in the party but makes them into candidates so... yeah they are a shit show.  The CPC now dumps Candidates who are dumb enough to be vulgar online.  Really we only have the PM who remains as a somehow untouchable racist.
3. I don't deny that these things happen.  But the job of a thinking public is to make politics better, don't you agree ?  So - as someone who favours immigration, and good dialogue I am saying we should all denounce sloppy journalists who automatically equate immigration discussions with racism.
4. Hyperbole.  "Anyone" ?  No.
5. The PPC is a minor party who hasn't broken though yet.  They haven't been as embarrassing this time around, but compare to the Green Party who can't get beyond the leadership controversy they had earlier.  When shit cakes on, guess what... it sticks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Bernier states racists are not welcomed in the party but makes them into candidates so...

no he doesn't

the media says he does

they are lying

because to them

anyone they don't like

is a white supremacist

obvious witch hunt is obvious

 

at this point those they state are white supremacists

are less likely to be racist than those they don't call out

the general dynamic with the media these days is

anyone who isn't racist, is now called a racist, and vocally condemned

and anyone who is a racist, is now called an anti-racist, and openly cheered

it's Orwellian af

 

when the media cries racist, there is over a 90% chance that they are full of shit

the media doesn't have a clue what racism is

they see it under every rock

especially when it's not there

and when it occasionally is there

they often look the other way

the way journalists use the word racist these days

it has basically lost all meaning

and is just a weapon to use against those they disagree with

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. no he doesn't the media says he does; they are lying because to them anyone they don't like is a white supremacist obvious witch hunt is obvious

1. Ever heard of Alain Deng ?  They denied he was in the party I think, until he was a candidate.

Actually, this might be a good point to pause and discuss this case.  I think there may have been a few examples of people with bad attitudes, people hosting events and so on.  If that's the case then you can't quite call it a witch hunt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ever heard of Alain Deng ?  They denied he was in the party I think, until he was a candidate.

Actually, this might be a good point to pause and discuss this case.  I think there may have been a few examples of people with bad attitudes, people hosting events and so on.  If that's the case then you can't quite call it a witch hunt.

never heard of Deng

seems like they are mad at him for some tweets

they claim are proof of racism

but don't actually constitute any proof at all

seems like more classic woke cancel culture bullshit

upon first glance anyway

 

you claim there are racists in the party

where's your proof?

if there is no proof

and just grasping at straws

that's clearly a witch hunt

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ironstone said:

In a country like Canada, if anyone or any party comes out against high levels of immigration or multiculturalism it will not be well received by most in the media. This is putting it mildly too. People are afraid to even have the discussion for fear of repercussions. Woke is the new religion.

facts

especially that last sentence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. never heard of Deng; you claim there are racists in the party; where's your proof?

2. if there is no proof and just grasping at straws that's clearly a witch hunt

1. So I don't have the facts at my fingertips on this but Deng was a candidate who denigrated the Muslim religion.  There have been other stories like this - feel free to comment, I didn't follow these.

2. If there are lots of accusations, which are not true then I agree it's a Witch Hunt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. So I don't have the facts at my fingertips on this but Deng was a candidate who denigrated the Muslim religion.  There have been other stories like this - feel free to comment, I didn't follow these.

2. If there are lots of accusations, which are not true then I agree it's a Witch Hunt.

you seem to hold a guilty until proven innocent view of media claims of racism of it's political opposition

I hold an innocent until proven guilty view of media claims of racism of it's political opposition

 

the media have proven to be totally untrustworthy of being able to tell what racism actually is

and usually just use that label to slander those who they want to discredit

so one is particularly prone to being mislead about those being labelled as racists by the media

if they just take the media's word for it, without actually checking for verification of that claim being accurate

 

I have not seen any evidence that Deng hates Muslims

if he does, I haven't seen the proof

I do see evidence that he hates Muslim extremists who commit acts of terrorism

and I see the media construing that as a hatred for all Muslim's in general

if the media had an open a shut case about Deng being racist

why the need for grasping at straws in an attempt to discredit him?

why not just lead with the slam dunk proof and leave it at that?

 

there are a shit ton of accusations of racism by the media

that are not only false, but outrageously so in many cases

whether you have seen them yet or not

not sure how you missed it

given that it's like the media's favorite thing to do these days

so yeah, obvious witch hunt

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. you seem to hold a guilty until proven innocent view of media claims of racism of it's political opposition; I have not seen any evidence that Deng hates Muslims

2. if he does, I haven't seen the proof

3. so yeah, obvious witch hunt

1.  Well he did make disparaging Tweets towards the religion

2. https://ipolitics.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/savage-from_Alaindeng88-Twitter-Search.pdf

3. You call something an obvious witch hunt without looking at the evidence, makes me wonder if you are really trying here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,713
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...