Jump to content

Conservative Leadership September 10th


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, eyeball said:

Say what?!

What exactly is it you have against being governed by Liberals again?

Governed is one thing but the Trudeau government is comprised of dicks and taters, hence we have a dicktatership.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Drama teacher is one...

I'm afraid I give Trudeau little credit in the job department. Because the hardest job, after all, is to get the job. Getting a job through family connections, including at an exclusive private school, does not qualify. Still, he did manage to show up for work for a couple of years - as far as I know. My real problem with him back in the day was his lack of political experience. The absence of which has been amply demonstrated.

The only real reason to care about a private sector job is (Imho) to see if the politico can relate to ordinary working Canadians. I don't think Trudeau can. Not because of his slim private sector experience but because he's never had to worry about money or budgeting and always had family connections to fall back on for jobs.

And at least Poilievre took the seat away from someone else, rather than being handed a safe party seat in Alberta or Saskatchewan. And apparently worked hard at it. 

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/over-seven-elections-pierre-poilievre-honed-a-winning-strategy-but-will-it-work-for-the-job-he-wants-the-most

Edited by I am Groot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, eyeball said:

Yes but what is Pierre intending to do about the Nazification of Ottawa and Canada? You had a whole half hour in which to raise the most important topic in your life.  I can't believe you would pass up the opportunity to do so.

Look you twit.  Why don’t you take a hike if all you are going to do is be an idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, sharkman said:

Look you twit.  Why don’t you take a hike if all you are going to do is be an idiot.

Look you coward. why don't you cucks answer the fricken question instead of looking like...Cuckservatives on the back-peddle?

All we've heard from your ridiculous ilk is Nazi this and Commie that when it's come to opposing Trudeau, our government and saving Canada from totalitarianism.

You are Pierre Poilievre's bedrock base of support.  What does he have to say about a core issue of such importance to his base of supports mind?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Legato said:

Governed is one thing but the Trudeau government is comprised of dicks and taters, hence we have a dicktatership.

Dicks and taters notwithstanding what about governing via elites running the Conservative show and feeding BS to the public?  I'm pretty sure that disgusts Poilievre's supporters who say Liberals are guilty of this.  This feature and aspect of our governance certainly disgusts me. 

Edited by eyeball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Look you coward. why don't you cucks answer the fricken question instead of looking like...Cuckservatives on the back-peddle?

All we've heard from your ridiculous ilk is Nazi this and Commie that when it's come to opposing Trudeau, our government and saving Canada from totalitarianism.

You are Pierre Poilievre's bedrock base of support.  What does he have to say about a core issue of such importance to his base of supports mind?

Obviously you are unable to take a hint, no one cares about your nonsense “questions” because you’re just trolling.  Quite the boring life you have there, I guess even twits need something to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

Obviously you are unable to take a hint, no one cares about your nonsense “questions” because you’re just trolling.  Quite the boring life you have there, I guess even twits need something to do.

I can take a hint, the question is a troubling one. I think Poilievre should have to account for the paranoia that fuels much of hopes his base of support are investing in him.

But I guess like Poilievre his cucks gotta be cucks too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Maybe, but our system needs positive leaders to win majorities, except for rare examples.

He will have to build political connections to groups that people disparage and insult on these pages: minority religious groups, ethnic groups, the irreligious, and voters in eastern Canada who are reluctant to try new ideas.

Journalist Justin Ling predicts a low, dirty campaign from the main two parties.  That could help the NDP but not enough to win.

I sense that people are tired of Trudeau's face and could give Poilievre a minority but to keep it he would have to go more centrist than Doug Ford did.

Trudeau will campaign on "Poilievre is Hitler everybody" and that won't work, although I hate to make predictions.  Maybe it will.

It's hard to believe that in the face of all our problems we will have to withstand a campaign that stays away from substance but maybe Ling is right.

 

 

Which Conservative leader hadn't tried to reach out to all?  Poilievre will do the same - although I don't see him buying votes, or pivoting from his policies or stance. 

 

Dirty politics has always been around us.  Remember "boots on the ground" campaign against Harper? 

The biggest threat to Poilievre will come from the leftist media - especially from the  tax-payer-funded-leftist-propaganda-media.  That's always been the case.  The media will HEAVILY come after him - character assassination - when campaign for election starts. 

 

Despite this threat - I see Poilievre winning a LANDSLIDE in the next federal election (provided there are no scandals or anything the media can use, that would erupt between now and then).

Edited by betsy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/10/2022 at 8:34 PM, Jack9000 said:

he won the conservative leadership who has been slowly moving towards  trumpism the last few years so thats no suprise lmao.. erin otoole  tried to save the party  from it but they stabbed him in the back and here we are...  doesn't mean populism is mainstream.. just means the partys base  got no brains basically .

First of all...congratulations to Pierre Poilievre and the Conservative Party. The leader of the opposition is now interested in Canada instead of playing the role of globalist stooge.

I see a number of people lamenting this new leader. Claiming he's a "dangerous populist" and comparing Poilievre to Trump.

So to real conservatives, I have this message. We've already seen the panic start. Claiming Poilievre is an evil populist. Indeed Poilievre is a populist...a nationalist. Its far from being shameful. It is now a growing movement. Wear your beliefs proudly. Know that while the liberal government media will try to tell you otherwise, Canadian nationalism is now "main stream". It's a very rational answer to the globalist chicken kaka we've been fed for years now.

So be proud...be conservative...be nationalist...be a patriotic Canadian. 

And again...congratulations to all of us. Now let the dismantling begin.

Edited by Nationalist
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, betsy said:

1. The biggest threat to Poilievre will come from the leftist media - especially from the  tax-payer-funded-leftist-propaganda-media.  That's always been the case.  

2. Despite this threat - I see Poilievre winning a LANDSLIDE in the next federal election (provided there are no scandals or anything the media can use, that would erupt between now and then).

1. There's also the point that CBC is acutely aware that they're widely believed to support the Liberals no matter what, and that some elements of their management are going to try to dispel that belief.  You probably don't watch CBC much at all, nor do I, but i do listen to the radio and they had TWO conservative strategists on the radio this morning who were absolutely gushing about Poilievre.  I just need you to hear that things are sometimes more complicated than they seem.

2. I think it's very possible that he wins decisively, yes, but your own hopes are likely seeping into your judgement if you are predicting an actual LANDSLIDE (caps yours) along the lines of Mulroney 1984.   Unlike you, I am unlikely to make predictions but that's a bold one...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. There's also the point that CBC is acutely aware that they're widely believed to support the Liberals no matter what, and that some elements of their management are going to try to dispel that belief.  You probably don't watch CBC much at all, nor do I, but i do listen to the radio and they had TWO conservative strategists on the radio this morning who were absolutely gushing about Poilievre.  I just need you to hear that things are sometimes more complicated than they seem.

2. I think it's very possible that he wins decisively, yes, but your own hopes are likely seeping into your judgement if you are predicting an actual LANDSLIDE (caps yours) along the lines of Mulroney 1984.   Unlike you, I am unlikely to make predictions but that's a bold one...

 

They have conservative strategists too on most of their panels.  But that doesn't stop the anchor from asserting her liberal views, or to make leading statements/questions when interviewing a guest.

 

Rosemary Barton was incredibly rude with her panel while covering the CPC Convention , including to her co-host Vassy Kapelos, whom she practically ignored all night.  Barton would dismiss an explanation by a panelist (in a seemingly petulant tone). 

Kapelos appeared to be non-partisan in her views, and Barton seemed to resent it.

 

Yes, I'm hopeful.  But my hopes - my predictions -  aren't without any sensible reason to be hopeful for.  As explained, I have something to base my predictions on. 

Edited by betsy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, betsy said:

Rosemary Barton was incredibly rude with her panel while covering the CPC Convention , including to her co-host Vassy Kapelos, whom she practically ignored all night.  Barton would dismiss an explanation by a panelist (in a seemingly petulant tone). 

I'd like to highlight that not as personal, or even partisan but a general and very natural effect of unchecked, non accountable and entrenched power. It's very simple: if you know that you're right and you can why wouldn't you? What / who is there to make you not do what you see as right?

Our whole model is coming to that one issue. What are the balancing factors? What is there to stop misuse, abuse and transgressions?

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, betsy said:

 

1. They have conservative strategists too on most of their panels.  But that doesn't stop the anchor from asserting her liberal views, or to make leading statements/questions when interviewing a guest.

2. Yes, I'm hopeful.  But my hopes - my predictions -  aren't without any sensible reason to be hopeful for.  As explained, I have something to base my predictions on. 

1. There's no show where the host asserts editorial prerogative, unless I am mistaken.  And yes they have conservatives on, but not without a balancing view.  It's quite unusual actually.

2. For sure you do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, eyeball said:

You are Pierre Poilievre's bedrock base of support.  What does he have to say about a core issue of such importance to his base of supports mind?

I imagine those three bills to regulate the internet would be reversed under him, as a start. There'd obviously be no vaccine mandates or passports, and no more encouraging of woke cancellation. I believe he's said he wants less government interference in people's lives and less regulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

I imagine those three bills to regulate the internet would be reversed under him, as a start. There'd obviously be no vaccine mandates or passports, and no more encouraging of woke cancellation. I believe he's said he wants less government interference in people's lives and less regulation.

Sort of, but also not really.  Creating provisions for academic freedom and such would be one thing but appointing a judge to monitor university speech is the same kind of censorship really.

I doubt he'll do much of what he promised on the way up though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Born in Alberta...adopted to nice folks in Saskatchewan...lives and works in Ontario.

Speaks both French and English.

Beautiful immigrant wife and darling kids.

People turn out in large numbers just to see him.

Now leader of the CPC.

Yup...the Liberals have a bit of a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

First of all...congratulations to Pierre Poilievre and the Conservative Party. The leader of the opposition is now interested in Canada instead of playing the role of globalist stooge.

I see a number of people lamenting this new leader. Claiming he's a "dangerous populist" and comparing Poilievre to Trump.

So to real conservatives, I have this message. We've already seen the panic start. Claiming Poilievre is an evil populist. Indeed Poilievre is a populist...a nationalist. Its far from being shameful. It is now a growing movement. Wear your beliefs proudly. Know that while the liberal government media will try to tell you otherwise, Canadian nationalism is now "main stream". It's a very rational answer to the globalist chicken kaka we've been fed for years now.

So be proud...be conservative...be nationalist...be a patriotic Canadian. 

And again...congratulations to all of us. Now let the dismantling begin.

lol do you ever spew anything but nonsense jesus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

First of all...congratulations to Pierre Poilievre and the Conservative Party. The leader of the opposition is now interested in Canada instead of playing the role of globalist stooge.

I see a number of people lamenting this new leader. Claiming he's a "dangerous populist" and comparing Poilievre to Trump.

So to real conservatives, I have this message. We've already seen the panic start. Claiming Poilievre is an evil populist. Indeed Poilievre is a populist...a nationalist. Its far from being shameful. It is now a growing movement. Wear your beliefs proudly. Know that while the liberal government media will try to tell you otherwise, Canadian nationalism is now "main stream". It's a very rational answer to the globalist chicken kaka we've been fed for years now.

So be proud...be conservative...be nationalist...be a patriotic Canadian. 

And again...congratulations to all of us. Now let the dismantling begin.

Basically everything Rex Murphy said here:

Rex Murphy: Prime Minister Pierre Poilievre is something to look forward to (msn.com)

Quote

 

A whole lot of Canadians, and not just Conservatives, have grown exceedingly irritated, beyond mere annoyance, at the perpetual, smug self-righteousness and cloying preachiness of the ultra-woke “we always know best” Liberal leadership.

Poilievre at the very least does not carry that burden. Should he become prime minister, it will be good to get back to not always being lectured to and frowned down upon by a self-assuming superior caste. Be nice to have a government again that does not see the whole country as “systemically racist” when in fact Canada has proven to be both a haven and welcoming place for people from all over the world.

Poilievre won the Conservative leadership with such a vast majority because he is sensible, has some clue about life for most Canadians, because he is not a woke preacher disguised as a Prime Minister, and because he defied the opinions of much of the media.

He also won because he is not what his critics, in their fever-dreams, wished to paint him. He is not a “populist” in the derogatory sense, but a populist in the sense that he has at least a clue of what ordinary people think, feel and live.

As for the current Liberal batch, with their incomprehensible incompetence, their deliberate choice to use a pandemic as a political lever, for calling an election in the middle of one, to describing those who challenged their undebated vaccine mandates as “racists” and “misogynists” and a “fringe minority,” it has all become so tiresome, even boring.

Poilievre is serious. He does not want vainglorious socks. And thank the cosmos he will not tell the country just how deplorable and awful its history has been. We may have a moratorium on apologies for one of the most tolerant, wishing-to-be-always-fair country this troubled globe can offer.

It would be nice to be regularly proud of Canada again. That alone might be motivation enough for a change in government. And have an election on just such a theme.

 

 

  • Like 3
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
      10,717
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Watson Winnefred
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

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