Conservative Leadership September 10th

[I am Groot]

16 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Is that any reason to fire someone? Why fire the Governor who has been performing well?

Presumably because he feels the man is not performing well.

[I am Groot]

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

The demonization of fossil fuels is a HUGE mistake. We are being told that we must stop burning fossil fuels for energy...BEFORE we have a realistic replacement.

THAT is suicide.

The cost of energy is an enormous factor in the economic health of any industrialized nation.

[myata]

Will Poilievre support proportional system ahead of dumb nonsense speculative cryptocurrency? Let's see. Conservatives would have won two previous elections by popular vote.

[I am Groot]

1 minute ago, myata said:

Will Poilievre support proportional system ahead of dumb nonsense speculative cryptocurrency? Let's see. Conservatives would have won two previous elections by popular vote.

The only hope of any party to form a government with a popular vote parliament would be to form a coalition party. Given the other four parties (I'm being charitable about the Greens) are all quite left of centre it is unlikely any would cooperate with the Tories when they could instead form a left leaning government. The BQ being a possible exception.

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

 The BQ being a possible exception.

But under PR, the Bloc Quebecois becomes another Fringe party.

[Queenmandy85]

2 hours ago, myata said:

Surely, a laughing matter. A publicly funded supposedly "independent" media group actively involved in political propaganda for the default ruling party. Where do we see this kind of stuff? And how does it end, usually? Anybody interested?

Sorry, but Mr. Poillievre doesn't lead the default ruling party, but he definitely benifited by the CBC's coverage. It will end with the results of the next election, whatever they may be. He received far more CBC coverage than the other contenders. I am not saying the CBC is biased, but rather Mr. Poillievre ran an excellent campaign that earned the publicity. He controlled the story. He is beginning to show glimmers of King as a politician. Time will tell.

[myata]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

The only hope of any party to form a government with a popular vote parliament would be to form a coalition party. Given the other four parties

That is of course based on the assumption that no new actually, meaningful parties, parties in the sense of democratic parliamentary groups representing significant interests in the society can exist here. Change is not possible; the status quo has to go on (forever, or to the hard stop one of the two). Only vague and amorphous default governing corporations are allows to exist (here). Just as deep in the depths of the times colonial. Sure. A win by default also popular in places like China and Russia.

Edited September 13, 2022 by myata

[Michael Hardner]

11 minutes ago, myata said:

That is of course based on the assumption that no new actually, meaningful parties, parties in the sense of democratic parliamentary groups representing significant interests in the society cannot exist here. Change is not possible; the status quo has to go on (forever, or to the hard stop one of the two). Only vague and amorphous default governing corporations are allows to exist (here). Just as deep in the depths of the times colonial. Sure. A win by default also popular in places like China and Russia.

Yes, the future goes on for a long time.  The Whigs disappeared and the SoCreds disappeared. 

The fact is, though, that Canada regularly has majority governments and that would be significantly harder under PR.  I think the last majority vote we had was in 1984.

Now... PR would make things more dynamic and governments would rise and fall more quickly as they do in Israel etc.  

[myata]

23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Now... PR would make things more dynamic and governments would rise and fall more quickly as they do in Israel etc.  

You are missing the point here. Democratic governments exist not only to govern. Dictators and tyrants govern too. There's another essential reason.

Edited September 13, 2022 by myata

[Nationalist]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

The cost of energy is an enormous factor in the economic health of any industrialized nation.

Yet our silly little PM is dumping on it. His policies hurt his own people and produce little to no real benefit.

[Michael Hardner]

29 minutes ago, myata said:

You are missing the point here. Democratic governments exist not only to govern. Dictators and tyrants govern too. There's another essential reason.

OK - what is that reason then and how does it relate to PR ?

[myata]

31 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

OK - what is that reason then and how does it relate to PR ?

Nothing to do with conspiracies. An easy guess too. In the meanwhile Liberals announce another package of aid for low income families. The message seems to be clear: your living standard will deteriorate, and your taxes one way or another, will grow till you hit the low income bracket at which point you would be eligible for a handout that will help you stay there. The new Canada promise. Could it be any different? Why would it, like would you ask for anything different with an obscene public salary and an automatic annual rise?

[Michael Hardner]

20 minutes ago, myata said:

Nothing to do with conspiracies. An easy guess too. In the meanwhile Liberals announce another package of aid for low income families. The message seems to be clear: your living standard will deteriorate, and your taxes one way or another, will grow till you hit the low income bracket at which point you would be eligible for a handout that will help you stay there. The new Canada promise. Could it be any different? Why would it, like would you ask for anything different with an obscene public salary and an automatic annual rise?

Isn't managing the economy 'governance' ?  Maybe I'm just getting stuck on terms here, sorry...

[PIK]

We produce 1.5% co2. We could drop that to 0% and it would not do one iota for CC. Nothing. Why are we cutting our throats for nothing.? It's all about photo ops and keep the sheep in line and in fear. You want real action, we start shipping LNG to China. Get them off coal and supplying Europe would be bad for Putin and better for the enviroment.  The boy could be a hero, but he just to fixed on Net zero which is silly. 

[myata]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Isn't managing the economy 'governance' ? 

In essence it's moving toward famous 18-th century style of 'governance': what they cannot rent a place with the inflation and stagnating income? Why wouldn't they move to the guest bedroom?! At $200K annually (with automatic annual rise) no connection to reality needed, an easy decision.

[DogOnPorch]

1 minute ago, PIK said:

We produce 1.5% co2. We could drop that to 0% and it would not do one iota for CC. Nothing. Why are we cutting our throats for nothing.? It's all about photo ops and keep the sheep in line and in fear. You want real action, we start shipping LNG to China. Get them off coal and supplying Europe would be bad for Putin and better for the enviroment.  The boy could be a hero, but he just to fixed on Net zero which is silly. 

 

We are literally better off each grabbing a spade and a tree if we as Canadians wish to help globally.

[I am Groot]

On 9/13/2022 at 3:07 PM, Nationalist said:

Yet our silly little PM is dumping on it. His policies hurt his own people and produce little to no real benefit.

What is your point here? His policies are not designed to do anything more than let him preen and pose in front of the progressive media. He certainly doesn't care if they hurt ordinary people. The urban liberals who are his election targets don't seem to get the connection between Canada's economic health and the health of our natural resource industries. 

Edited September 14, 2022 by I am Groot

[Michael Hardner]

21 hours ago, PIK said:

We produce 1.5% co2. We could drop that to 0% and it would not do one iota for CC.  

How so ?  

[I am Groot]

On 9/13/2022 at 2:29 PM, myata said:

That is of course based on the assumption that no new actually, meaningful parties, parties in the sense of democratic parliamentary groups representing significant interests in the society can exist here. Change is not possible; the status quo has to go on (forever, or to the hard stop one of the two). Only vague and amorphous default governing corporations are allows to exist (here). Just as deep in the depths of the times colonial. Sure. A win by default also popular in places like China and Russia.

Most European countries have a popular elected parliament. I have not noticed any sign of superior government coming out of Europe lately, nor are its people any less angry at government. Else we wouldn't see the rise of extremist right wing parties from Italy to Sweden.

[I am Groot]

On 9/13/2022 at 12:58 PM, Michael Hardner said:

But under PR, the Bloc Quebecois becomes another Fringe party.

That would depend on how PR is allocated. If on a national basis you're correct, which is why they'd never allow it to happen without making it a national crisis, which would drag us through another round of how to appease outraged Quebecers.

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

That would depend on how PR is allocated. If on a national basis you're correct, which is why they'd never allow it to happen without making it a national crisis, which would drag us through another round of how to appease outraged Quebecers.

The alternative being telling Alberta that your votes don't count for as much...

[I am Groot]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

The alternative being telling Alberta that your votes don't count for as much...

Any national question which pits Quebec against Alberta will be won by Quebec. That should go without saying. History has demonstrated this repeatedly.

The problem with fringe parties is that if you have a lot of them it's kind of hard to form a majority without including some. This has been responsible for a large degree of the mess which is Israel, as Likud has to continually appeal to the religious right and their little parties to gather up a few votes here or there. It leaves them open to blackmail and the fringe parties use it ruthlessly to get laws passed the majority of Israelis don't like or want.

 

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

1. Any national question which pits Quebec against Alberta will be won by Quebec. That should go without saying. History has demonstrated this repeatedly.

2. The problem with fringe parties is that if you have a lot of them it's kind of hard to form a majority without including some. This has been responsible for a large degree of the mess which is Israel, as Likud has to continually appeal to the religious right and their little parties to gather up a few votes here or there. It leaves them open to blackmail and the fringe parties use it ruthlessly to get laws passed the majority of Israelis don't like or want.

 

1. And any government can avoid the ugly politics by NOT brining up PR, which will happen.
2. Agree

[myata]

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Else we wouldn't see the rise of extremist right wing parties from Italy to Sweden.

So our governments should be "better" than the people they represent? Democracy for the people, but not by? Such an old dilemma. But the thing is, it's not even a conscious choice no matter how many talking heads would profess it. Only an apathy, laziness, inability to understand and act for meaningful change.

[I am Groot]

14 minutes ago, myata said:

So our governments should be "better" than the people they represent?\\\

The people they represent include all manner of small-minded, uneducated, pig-ignorant people. To say nothing of criminals. So yes, the government ought to be 'better" than at least the worst of those they represent, if not the best.

 

14 minutes ago, myata said:

Democracy for the people, but not by? Such an old dilemma. But the thing is, it's not even a conscious choice no matter how many talking heads would profess it. Only an apathy, laziness, inability to understand and act for meaningful change.

What do you believe would change under such a system? Seriously.  What would government do more/less of? Other than spend more money out of the need to buy off various minority parties.

Edited September 14, 2022 by I am Groot