Monumentality. The Utter Failure of The Left.

[Nationalist]

Quote

monumentality

 

noun

1. The state or quality of being monumental; the fact or the degree of serving as a monument.
2. The quality or state of being monumental

I contend that the political left is heavily engaged in "monumentality". Granted...this is hardly a real word, but the web does have a definition for it.

The left has been slipping into a Libbie malaise for years now. We've all seen it...heard it...watched on while it took a firm hold of our politicians and media...and the education of our children. The doctrine is promoted via appeals to emotions, and uses as pillars, GUILT, FEAR and HATRED.

In the name of GUILT...we have CRT and a flood of African migrants in Europe and a flood of anyone and everyone from the US southern border.

In the name of FEAR...we have The Rona...The pandemic that never really was. A climate emergency that doesn't really exist.

In the name of HATRED...we have Donald J Trump...wild and regular accusations of "racism" and "Nazism"...Cancel culture.

And the Libbie remedy for all this supposed dread? GLOBALISM. Corporate Fascism. So as a result today...

Russia and China have the President of the United States of America...by Hunter's short and curlies. Russia also is negotiating along with Iran and the USA, on Iranian nuclear capabilities. Russia has also invaded Ukraine. China appears to be set to invade Taiwan. And they can do this because...

Biden corruption keeps the POTUS at bey.

Globalistic ideals got Europe to rely on Russian oil. They also got most Western corporations to rely on cheaper labour in China and around the world.

The "Greenies" got Biden to all but halt American fossil fuel production.

The Libbies hated "The Wall" and Trump so much, that one of the first things their Great Savior Biden did was open the southern border.

Indeed the left has lashed out and clearly displayed "monumentality". Its all so monumentally dumb and corrupt. Silly and destructive. Childish and irrational.

This madness needs to end. Thoughts?

 

Edited March 8, 2022 by Nationalist

[Nationalist]

So far...we have one "thought".

A laugh from an eyeball. Unfortunately the eyeball has nothing to say really. Just an attempt to belittle and virtue signal.

Any REAL thoughts on the subject?

[Nationalist]

Another example of monumentality. Thanks Michael.

[sharkman]

All of these items you mention have the same thread running through them.  It’s the same one that runs through Ukraine and condemns Putin(and rightfully so) but won’t condemn China if they invade Taiwan.

The globalists have the US now, btw, Biden is an outpatient.

[Moonlight Graham]

Emotions like guilt, fear, etc can have their place.  But when emotions are pervasive to the point of trumping reason, you have a problem.  You can see many people all over the political spectrum suffering from this problem, people on the right are certainly not immune.

You can have compassion without being paralyzed by weakness.  Irrationality is the enemy of rationality.  Leftists are paralyzed by compassion/guilt/fear, and conservatives are paralyzed by fear also, and both succumb to anger and hatred, which leads to a dark place.

The problem with our politics is that its become so emotional, and therefore illogical.

[Moonlight Graham]

A bit of globalism is fine, but not to the point of undermining your own country.

A typical leftist leader like Trudeau is deeply consumed by emotions like guilt, fear (of offending), and compassion (towards certain people anyways).  They want to be the white knight who saves the world, and applauded for it.  They won't stand up for the interests of their country if it might make an oppressed person somewhere "feel bad", and they're far too afraid of the potential backlash from being called a racist or sexist or whatever even if it's the right call.

Again, there's room for some guilt and compassion, but turning it into an obsession that cripples rationality is simply cowardliness and weakness.

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

The problem with our politics is that its become so emotional, and therefore illogical.

No, it's become entertainment.

The actual trade offs behind important things like trade deals aren't even discussed.  Every issue is dressed up to flatter our image of ourselves, including our endless remorse for our success.

You can look at the conversations on here as evidence.  'Globalism' is turned into a monster story, so the children can understand that it's a bad thing.  There was no long address from Harper explaining the benefits, daddy just went to the store one day and came back with a trade deal 

[Moonlight Graham]

41 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No, it's become entertainment.

The actual trade offs behind important things like trade deals aren't even discussed.  Every issue is dressed up to flatter our image of ourselves, including our endless remorse for our success.

You can look at the conversations on here as evidence.  'Globalism' is turned into a monster story, so the children can understand that it's a bad thing.  There was no long address from Harper explaining the benefits, daddy just went to the store one day and came back with a trade deal 

Sure.  And we were never really given a choice. We were told certain things would be good for the country and then our politicians went ahead and did it.  Were the people ever consulted?  Did the major parties have much difference of opinion on it to give us a choice about it?  A bunch of globalism is just crooked capitalism.

Now you can't support exiting the EU to regain sovereignty without being called a racist, or feeling terrible guilt that you yourself might be a xenophobe.  All of a sudden the left are a bunch of neoliberals lol.  Any sense of acting in the national interest if it hurts the interests of people outside the country is "xenophobic".  You can't even close our borders at the beginning of a pandemic without being accused of racism.  What a country of cowards and losers.

Canada doesn't owe any foreign national or foreign company a damn thing besides following the law. Apparently this is a racist statement. The guilt ridden leftists in the US can't even stop illegal migrants pouring into the country or send the ones they catch home without flogging themselves in shame.  There's no reason to hate these migrants, again this is illogical negative emotions. But rule of law and national interest matters.

[Nationalist]

I find the idea that Mulroney and Harper talked up Globalist practices, a very weak argument. Hell I thought it was a good idea at first. Then I lost a good position to outsourcing to India. There were no complaints with my work or personality. They even threw me a going away party of sorts and apologized for having to let me go. But...the India labour was much cheaper. I then moved on to a large IT company who had lots of "off-shore" staff. I find the people pleasant enough...likeable enough...but not very effective at their tasks and bloody impossible to understand when speaking English. Granted, this is not 100% across the board, but its a large enough percentage that some clients are now demanding that high-level positions of import, be staffed right here in North America.

Originally I had thought that labour globalization would provide us with cheaper goods. Instead, those who "off-shored" labour did not reduce their sales prices, and our markets have been flooded with sub-standard knockoffs and cheap junk. My wife has noticed this too. If it says "Made in China", it breaks rather quickly. So we do not shop at Wallymart anymore and she looks at all the made in labels before buying anything.

Globalized business has been bleeding The West dry of manufacturing and labour in general. All this at the expense of the western labour markets. Gee...they didn't tell us that one...did they.

In the meantime, Joe has managed to put much of The West in a real pickle. With the economy reeling from a pandemic...of sorts...and unemployment at dizzying heights, Joe thought it would be a good idea to begin shutting down oil and gas production. A fucking genius that Joe Biden. Now Russia has all sorts of geopolitical and economic strength in the world. Same goes for China. As for Joe? He's now reduced to begging the Saudis and Venezuela for more fuel.

Here in Canada our frail little leader is so afraid of upsetting a bunch of old natives that he's essentially stunted our oil and gas industry. I suppose he's also afraid an old has-been like Neil Young might not come to his parties anymore.

The first politician who comes out and says what so many want to hear...close the borders and reinstate strict merit-based immigration, open back up the oil and gas industries, finish the damn pipelines and refineries, and any Canadian company who practices the "off-shoring" of labour, will find very hefty tariffs waiting for them at our borders...gets my vote.

I Am Canadian and I will not sacrifice the world my forefathers built, so Pixie-Dust and his merry band of Globalist Tweenkies can feel good about themselves.!

Edited March 8, 2022 by Nationalist

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Moonlight Graham said:

1.  And we were never really given a choice. We were told certain things would be good for the country and then our politicians went ahead and did it. 

2. Were the people ever consulted?  Did the major parties have much difference of opinion on it to give us a choice about it?  A bunch of globalism is just crooked capitalism.

3. Now you can't support exiting the EU to regain sovereignty without being called a racist, or feeling terrible guilt that you yourself might be a xenophobe. 

4. All of a sudden the left are a bunch of neoliberals lol.  Any sense of acting in the national interest if it hurts the interests of people outside the country is "xenophobic".  You can't even close our borders at the beginning of a pandemic without being accused of racism.  What a country of cowards and losers.

5. Canada doesn't owe any foreign national or foreign company a damn thing besides following the law. Apparently this is a racist statement.

6. The guilt ridden leftists in the US can't even stop illegal migrants pouring into the country or send the ones they catch home without flogging themselves in shame.  There's no reason to hate these migrants, again this is illogical negative emotions. But rule of law and national interest matters.

1. We got a choice for the FTA, but the other choices were embedded with our voting choice.  So if you voted for Harper, Chretien, or whomever then you were effectively voting for their economic policies.

2. Well, no they weren't.  But how exactly would you organize a 'consultation' ?  How about town halls where dairy farmers (actually actors hired by the dairy industry were pleading for their 'families') while the CBC cameras crept closer ?  How about First Nations peoples lamenting their plight and tying it to colonists and economic policy ?  How about green-haired punks getting tear gassed as they protest ?  

The fact is that people generally can't be expected to understand what is going on.  Economic orthodoxy says that capitalism, self-organized economies, and free markets are good.  This also means that factory workers are out of luck, but do you expect politicians to stand in front of their constituents and admit that ?

And why is it 'crooked' ?  Do Canadian Dairy Companies have a god-given right to charge $6 for milk now ?  

I have said it before: we treat economics like 'alchemy'.  Without a layer of trusted public intellectuals to debate it and explain it we are like country bumpkins wandering up to the weighted crown-and-anchor wheel at the fair.

3. 4. 5. Let's move past this.  If you're afraid of being called names by unreasonable people then you shouldn't be speaking publicly

6. As long as you're moralizing, maybe mention the landowners and business owners and even individuals who hire them.   But even this is not an issue of consequence compared to macroeconomic forces and disparity.  That's the big fish.
 

[Nationalist]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

The fact is that people generally can't be expected to understand what is going on.  Economic orthodoxy says that capitalism, self-organized economies, and free markets are good.  This also means that factory workers are out of luck, but do you expect politicians to stand in front of their constituents and admit that ?

I have said it before: we treat economics like 'alchemy'.  Without a layer of trusted public intellectuals to debate it and explain it we are like country bumpkins wandering up to the weighted crown-and-anchor wheel at the fair.

 

You grossly underestimate the average person. This reads like an advert for Academia.

Gee...what a shocker.

Any system...unregulated and directed for the benefit of THE SYSTEM instead of THE POPULATION easily gets out of hand and soon becomes self-destructive. Have you never read a history book? Or were you hoping to just...slip this nonsense in without question?

Indeed! We definitely need more "trusted public intellectuals" to tell us everything we need to know. Like for instance...that kids should be shut out of schools...that masks are necessary...that taking your job away from you so someone in India can do it for 10X less money, is good for you...how gender is a fluid concept that has little to nothing to do with the presence or absence of a dick and balls...

Yes Mikie...the "country bumpkins" should be happy that our "trusted public intellectuals" can explain these incredibly complicated concepts to them properly...so they can walk right off that cliff with a smile on their faces.

Edited March 8, 2022 by Nationalist

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Sure.  And we were never really given a choice. We were told certain things would be good for the country and then our politicians went ahead and did it.  Were the people ever consulted?  Did the major parties have much difference of opinion on it to give us a choice about it?  A bunch of globalism is just crooked capitalism.

Why shouldn't I point to the ideology that prides itself on being capitalism's biggest defender and ask wtf it's thinking?

Consultation from your side seems to consist entirely of forcing us to accept your view of the world. 

[Michael Hardner]

12 minutes ago, eyeball said:

1. Why shouldn't I point to the ideology that prides itself on being capitalism's biggest defender and ask wtf it's thinking?

2. Consultation from your side seems to consist entirely of forcing us to accept your view of the world. 

1. Because they changed their mind
2. Regardless - nobody can explain how 'consultation' would be undertaken for a public review of the TPP.  It's kind of impossible really.

[sharkman]

Speaking of globalism, watch what the American left does if Biden announces Russian oil is banned in the US.

Edit:  At least 2 globalist goals get advanced With this move on Russian oil.  Russia/Putin gets further isolated and hurt financially.  Then, the American juggernaut must be brought to heel.  Of course the regimes that sell the oil to the US benefit tremendously.

I’m assuming that it’s pretty clear how banning Russian oil will harm the American economy.  First Biden reduced American oil production, a 180 from what it had been under Trump.  Now this.  Why would Biden pull these moves?  To further globalism. 

Both Trump and Putin are anti-globalists and had to be dealt with.  Freedom?  Conservatives?  Not on the globalist agenda, I’m afraid.  
 

Edited March 8, 2022 by sharkman

[Moonlight Graham]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Why shouldn't I point to the ideology that prides itself on being capitalism's biggest defender and ask wtf it's thinking?

Consultation from your side seems to consist entirely of forcing us to accept your view of the world. 

What is "my side"?  I'm not an economic conservative, i've never been a neoliberal a day in my life.

I, like I assume you, don't represent big corporate interests but instead the average working Canadian.

I'm also not an authoritarian type who wants to enforce my view on others using the state as the club to ensure compliance, or cancel famous people whose opinions I disagree with.  Canceling people who commit rape and sexual assault and start wars is another matter entirely.

I'm not a defender of Harper or Trudeau or their vile parties.  They're both neoliberal China butt-kissers as far as I can tell and the reason we've gotten into this mess.

[Moonlight Graham]

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. We got a choice for the FTA, but the other choices were embedded with our voting choice.  So if you voted for Harper, Chretien, or whomever then you were effectively voting for their economic policies.

2. Well, no they weren't.  But how exactly would you organize a 'consultation' ?  How about town halls where dairy farmers (actually actors hired by the dairy industry were pleading for their 'families') while the CBC cameras crept closer ?  How about First Nations peoples lamenting their plight and tying it to colonists and economic policy ?  How about green-haired punks getting tear gassed as they protest ?  

The fact is that people generally can't be expected to understand what is going on.  Economic orthodoxy says that capitalism, self-organized economies, and free markets are good.  This also means that factory workers are out of luck, but do you expect politicians to stand in front of their constituents and admit that ?

And why is it 'crooked' ?  Do Canadian Dairy Companies have a god-given right to charge $6 for milk now ?  

I have said it before: we treat economics like 'alchemy'.  Without a layer of trusted public intellectuals to debate it and explain it we are like country bumpkins wandering up to the weighted crown-and-anchor wheel at the fair.

3. 4. 5. Let's move past this.  If you're afraid of being called names by unreasonable people then you shouldn't be speaking publicly

6. As long as you're moralizing, maybe mention the landowners and business owners and even individuals who hire them.   But even this is not an issue of consequence compared to macroeconomic forces and disparity.  That's the big fish.
 

1.  Sure.  But were there any anti-NAFTA parties?  I probably voted for them.

2. Well maybe explain to the public what we want to join, how it would benefit and not benefit us, and then wait for the responses.  I don't remember this being done for TPP.  We just sign up, and our gov's contribution is to have it renamed the "Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership" to signal the virtue of our dear leader.  Or something.  This is supposed to "sell it" to us?  Does our gov think we give a rip about titles?

It's crooked because our govs do what they can to help out their rich corporate friends.  We sold out the country to China and elsewhere for decades. Caring about national security doesn't get you votes or backroom donations through the Trudeau Foundation and Clinton Foundation i guess, or whatever greasy schemes the CPC and GOP use.

3/4/5.  How do we "move past this" when our governments are paralyzed with fear by it?  Our gov leaders are afraid of being called names.  It's shaming our public policy.  You're asking us to put our heads in the sand.  Are you paralyzed by fear with these conversations?  Is it the guilt or the shame?  I'm not afraid of uncomfortable but necessary conversations, but our government is, and so are most people.

If the gov wants to increase immigration numbers from 275k to 400k+ maybe they should explain how it benefits the country and sell us on it.  "Diversity is our strength" is an emotional appeal, it's not a logical argument explaining the national interest.  If it's an economic argument, then show us the numbers, we might even agree.  People are too emotional to have these convos.  They are filled with anger, fear, and shame.

6.  Yes these are the corporate interests the crooked politicians bow to.  Corporations will always seek profit, we can't change their nature, we can only control gov policy so it benefits us instead of just profit.

"But even this is not an issue of consequence...", again you're burying your head.  What are you so afraid of?  Sure there are other issues, even bigger issues, but that doesn't make other issues illegitimate to talk about, it's a red herring.

[Michael Hardner]

29 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

  They're both neoliberal China butt-kissers as far as I can tell and the reason we've gotten into this mess.

Ok, but since you're not crazy I can ask you about this without fear of you saying crazy things: What is your problem with China ?  I ask not because I think they're great, but the thing is we trade with problematic countries all the time so...

If you problem is that we lose out economically... well ok but reflect on the US trade war with China.  China just traded through other countries.  I agree with Harper on this that we haven't seen the change in China that (he, Harper) expected.

[Moonlight Graham]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

Ok, but since you're not crazy I can ask you about this without fear of you saying crazy things: What is your problem with China ?  I ask not because I think they're great, but the thing is we trade with problematic countries all the time so...

Mostly national security issues.  Vietnam doesn't have the means to buy off our politicians at their level, nor the means to flex global economic and military power over us.  Many Chinese actors (gov, private companies etc) don't have good intentions.  They steal our IP, infiltrate our govs etc.  Why should we allow ourselves to be taken advantage of?

It doesn't mean we can't trade with them, just be careful and strategic about it, and maybe not put all our eggs in that one basket.

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, Moonlight Graham said:

1.  Sure.  But were there any anti-NAFTA parties?  I probably voted for them.

2. Well maybe explain to the public what we want to join, how it would benefit and not benefit us, and then wait for the responses.  I don't remember this being done for TPP.  

3. It's crooked because our govs do what they can to help out their rich corporate friends. 

4. How do we "move past this" when our governments are paralyzed with fear by it?   

5. If the gov wants to increase immigration numbers from 275k to 400k+ ...

6. maybe they should explain how it benefits the country and sell us on it.  "Diversity is our strength" is an emotional appeal,  

7.  Yes these are the corporate interests the crooked politicians bow to.  Corporations will always seek profit, we can't change their nature, we can only control gov policy so it benefits us instead of just profit.

8. "But even this is not an issue of consequence...", again you're burying your head.  What are you so afraid of?  Sure there are other issues, even bigger issues, but that doesn't make other issues illegitimate to talk about, it's a red herring.

1. NAFTA ?  I think only the NDP if memory serves.
2. Yeah, that's what I said - it wasn't explained.   Would you expect a true accounting of potential gains/losses though ?
3. That's NDP talk.  'Good for business' means good for corporations and indirectly means good for Canada, all things equal.  Right ?
4. I think you're overstating the impact of this social phenomenon.  My opinion only.
5. I doubt you can tie immigration policy to governments feeling shame about racism.  
6. More customers, more workers working for less $.  You expect politicians to admit that ?  Or - rather - have them say 'diversity is our strength' and everybody smiles ?
7. Agreed.  This is more NDP stuff - tax the corporations more, raise the minimum wages etc.  They could maybe switch to reduce immigration some day too, why not...
8. Why do you think I'm "afraid" ?  Just because people are focusing on something that's low priority and I don't want to devote cycles to that thing. 

It's actually a problem in line with our refusal to look at details intelligently, you know ?  Tabloid media covers tiny issues as matters of principles and gets all huffed up about it.  I yawn.  I think that the blogs and forums will one day cover in-depth issues intelligently and people will look to them for guidance.  It's actually happening already and it totally predictable.
 

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

1. Mostly national security issues.  Vietnam doesn't have the means to buy off our politicians at their level, nor the means to flex global economic and military power over us.  Many Chinese actors (gov, private companies etc) don't have good intentions.  They steal our IP, infiltrate our govs etc.  Why should we allow ourselves to be taken advantage of?

2. It doesn't mean we can't trade with them, just be careful and strategic about it, and maybe not put all our eggs in that one basket.

1. Sure but also we can mitigate that.  I think most of what we export to them is commodities and that's what they invest in too.  They may have stolen IP from us in the past, who knows.  I suppose we could refuse to do business with them on principle... not sure
2. Ah... here's the answer.  Yes, we can trade with them and more importantly get their money.  When they show up with billions to spend here, nobody is going to say no.

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, sharkman said:

1.  Why would Biden pull these moves?  To further globalism. 

2. Both Trump and Putin are anti-globalists and had to be dealt with.  Freedom?  Conservatives?  Not on the globalist agenda, I’m afraid.  
 

1. 2. Poor Putin.  Bombing apartment buildings, minding his own business then Biden pulls THIS.

 

[sharkman]

Why did Putin attack Ukraine?  What are the facts?  Hopefully you have more than he’s crazy…

Edited March 8, 2022 by sharkman

[Nationalist]

So I understand the Saudis let Joey leave a voice message. The monumetality continues...

I bet Charlie Chaplin would have loved this tale of stupidity. 

I have to wonder...is it merely circumstances that's produced this Shakespearean tragicomedy? Or a new form of blind-assed hive mentality?

[Moonlight Graham]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. NAFTA ?  I think only the NDP if memory serves.
2. Yeah, that's what I said - it wasn't explained.   Would you expect a true accounting of potential gains/losses though ?
3. That's NDP talk.  'Good for business' means good for corporations and indirectly means good for Canada, all things equal.  Right ?
4. I think you're overstating the impact of this social phenomenon.  My opinion only.
5. I doubt you can tie immigration policy to governments feeling shame about racism.  
6. More customers, more workers working for less $.  You expect politicians to admit that ?  Or - rather - have them say 'diversity is our strength' and everybody smiles ?
7. Agreed.  This is more NDP stuff - tax the corporations more, raise the minimum wages etc.  They could maybe switch to reduce immigration some day too, why not...
8. Why do you think I'm "afraid" ?  Just because people are focusing on something that's low priority and I don't want to devote cycles to that thing. 

9. It's actually a problem in line with our refusal to look at details intelligently, you know ?  Tabloid media covers tiny issues as matters of principles and gets all huffed up about it.  I yawn.  I think that the blogs and forums will one day cover in-depth issues intelligently and people will look to them for guidance.  It's actually happening already and it totally predictable.
 

1.  Maybe so.

2. Well how would the gov know themselves whether or not to join TPP unless they had reasons it was a net benefit?  Our politicians work for us, they're literally our employees and we pay their wages and make most of the hiring/firing decisions.  We should be able to demand anything we want from them in terms of justifications for the work they're doing for us.  If they want to lie to their bosses (us) or refuse to answer we can show them the door.

3.  That's CPC "trickle down" talk, so not necessarily.  The devil is in the details.

4. Agree to disagree.

5.  It's done all the time, including in the US re: illegal immigration.

6. I expect our employees to tell us the truth.  I will vote for liars and swindlers to be fired come next election.

7. Government corruption shouldn't be a left or right issue.

8. Agree to disagree.

9. Maybe.  Forums and blogs allow people to discuss things anonymously, which is valuable because there's less fear of being shamed, so there can be more open exchange of ideas.  Maybe if you were anonymous you'd be more willing to discuss them.  Journalists and politicians have their jobs and reps to worry about.  People don't like being accused of being a racist. #CancelCulture.

[Michael Hardner]

10 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

 1. Well how would the gov know themselves whether or not to join TPP unless they had reasons it was a net benefit? 

2. Our politicians work for us, they're literally our employees and we pay their wages and make most of the hiring/firing decisions. 

3a. We should be able to demand anything we want from them in terms of justifications for the work they're doing for us.  If they want to lie to their bosses (us) or refuse to answer we can show them the door.

3b.  That's CPC "trickle down" talk, so not necessarily.  The devil is in the details.

4. Agree to disagree.

5.  It's done all the time, including in the US re: illegal immigration.

6. I expect our employees to tell us the truth.  I will vote for liars and swindlers to be fired come next election.

7. Government corruption shouldn't be a left or right issue.

8. Agree to disagree.

9. Maybe.  Forums and blogs allow people to discuss things anonymously, which is valuable because there's less fear of being shamed, so there can be more open exchange of ideas.  Maybe if you were anonymous you'd be more willing to discuss them.  Journalists and politicians have their jobs and reps to worry about.  People don't like being accused of being a racist. #CancelCulture.

1. Yes, of course they know.  But as I asked - do you expect a true account ?  Would you have expected Chretien to tell Canadian factory workers in the early 90s that they were going to see their jobs eliminated in favour of more resource jobs or somesuch ?  
2. Has your boss ever asked you what you thought of his tie ?  "pretty shitty boss, cat puke colour too... thumbs down".  Seriously though, we are their customers as we are using a consumer model these days in politics and customers are flattered, as are voters.
3a. Who, exactly, is asking for the whole truth ?  More to the point: who is asking for the boring details ?
4. Disagree
5. Ok, point taken.  But illegal immigration even is used more as a political pawn than it has impact on anything... I'm guessing.
6. Ok, but you (and I) are not robots.  We are susceptible to the 'hot button' issue just like anyone.  What makes you really MAD ?  Is that thing actually an important issue ?  Illegal immigration, for example.  Trump successfully used a SINGLE MURDER in the US as a cornerstone for his immigration policy.  What do you think of that tactic ?  Should that have worked 7.  and 3b. Corporate success helps Canada, don't doubt that.  To call that 'corruption' is a hard left opinion. 

And 'Trickle Down' means ... actually what does it mean ?  ?  It's been years since the right has used that term so I had to look it up again.  Ok it's "Reaganomics" or supply-side economics with large tax cuts given to highest earning individuals and corporations. 

Trade deals don't easily equate to trickle-down because they impact the whole economy top-to-bottom.  Some corporations lose out and some win, but the idea is overall that the deal creates win-win.  Manufacturing might lose, but those losses are offset by cheaper imports, which provide consumers money to spend elsewhere.  And a whole set of new industries replace the old ones.  This follows economic orthodoxy but difficult to prove out academically or otherwise.  Suffice it to say, though, that is the way of the world today.

8. You can't "disagree" that I'm afraid   I'm not and I'd like to think I actually know this more than you  

9. I am anonymous, dummy.  DM me.