Conservative Party shafts Joseph Bourgault

[West]

So apparently the Conservative Party of Canada has shafted Joseph Bourgault, the only true pro freedom candidate in the race. The guy raised enough money (roughly $400k) and gained the correct number of delegate signatures required to register as a party candidate. Yet he's not allowed? 

The CPC is no different than the Liberals

[Zeitgeist]

On 5/2/2022 at 6:15 PM, West said:

So apparently the Conservative Party of Canada has shafted Joseph Bourgault, the only true pro freedom candidate in the race. The guy raised enough money (roughly $400k) and gained the correct number of delegate signatures required to register as a party candidate. Yet he's not allowed? 

The CPC is no different than the Liberals

If the candidate met the criteria to run but was kicked out for his conservative views, then yeah, we need to know why’s and wherefores.  I think some in the party would try to boot Polievre out for similar reasons, but he’s too popular.

[ExFlyer]

On 5/3/2022 at 10:30 PM, Zeitgeist said:

If the candidate met the criteria to run but was kicked out for his conservative views, then yeah, we need to know why’s and wherefores.  I think some in the party would try to boot Polievre out for similar reasons, but he’s too popular.

I was led to believe there were financial improprieties with his bid to enter the race.

To claim or accuse the party you are running in as corrupt does not endear you to the party let alone voters.

[West]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

I was led to believe there were financial improprieties with his bid to enter the race.

To claim or accuse the party you are running in as corrupt does not endear you to the party let alone voters.

No there wasn't. 

The CPC and Elections Canada allows for loans. There was one line in his loan document which talked about if the loan could not be repaid within three years it became a donation. They reviewed that line with donors acting and agreeing out of their own free will to sign the document with the understanding there was a chance they may not be repaid. 

If anyone should've had concerns it was those giving the loan.

What it came down to was protecting Pierre Polievre who they want you to believe is some beacon of light for bodily autonomy even as he sat on his hands and even blamed the PM for not doing enough to get people vaccinated. 

Edited May 9, 2022 by West

[ExFlyer]

9 minutes ago, West said:

No there wasn't. 

The CPC and Elections Canada allows for loans. There was one line in his loan document which talked about if the loan could not be repaid within three years it became a donation. They reviewed that line with donors acting and agreeing out of their own free will to sign the document with the understanding there was a chance they may not be repaid. 

If anyone should've had concerns it was those giving the loan.

"In a statement, Bourgault said he still believes he should have qualified but accepts the party’s decision as final

“There were documents that were submitted by our team to the Conservative party in the last days of the campaign that they deemed incorrect and in violation of Elections Canada requirements,” Bourgault said, though he did not specify the violations.

“These details were very minor and could have easily been corrected but there was no flexibility in their decision.”

https://www.therecord.com/ts/politics/federal/2022/05/06/disqualified-conservative-leadership-candidates-say-they-wont-appeal.html?li_source=LI&li_medium=therecord_politics

 

[West]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

"In a statement, Bourgault said he still believes he should have qualified but accepts the party’s decision as final

“There were documents that were submitted by our team to the Conservative party in the last days of the campaign that they deemed incorrect and in violation of Elections Canada requirements,” Bourgault said, though he did not specify the violations.

“These details were very minor and could have easily been corrected but there was no flexibility in their decision.”

https://www.therecord.com/ts/politics/federal/2022/05/06/disqualified-conservative-leadership-candidates-say-they-wont-appeal.html?li_source=LI&li_medium=therecord_politics

 

Yes he has given subsequent interviews explaining which document they had issue with (the loan document). 

Seems the CPC went through with a fine toothed comb and found a bunk excuse to eliminate him

Edited May 9, 2022 by West

[ExFlyer]

49 minutes ago, West said:

Yes he has given subsequent interviews explaining which document they had issue with (the loan document). 

Seems the CPC went through with a fine toothed comb and found a bunk excuse to eliminate him

I think the internal trouble with the CPC is putting doubt in many peoples minds.

Is the CPC doing the leader selection behind closed doors? Is the direction of the CPC already a done deal behind those same closed doors?

6 announced nominees with 6 different agendas. 

[Queenmandy85]

Bourgault, Lewis and Baber have no hope of beating Prime Minister Trudeau and Bourgault and Baber are embarrassments to the Party. Why give the grits ammunition in the next election. We should have learned our lesson about giving these people the platform to damage the party's chances when we had Tom Cossett and Peter Pocklington.

[West]

5 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Bourgault, Lewis and Baber have no hope of beating Prime Minister Trudeau and Bourgault and Baber are embarrassments to the Party. Why give the grits ammunition in the next election. We should have learned our lesson about giving these people the platform to damage the party's chances when we had Tom Cossett and Peter Pocklington.

All Liberals

[Queenmandy85]

To beat Prime Minister Trudeau, you need to take liberal seats. Who in the leadership race is best positioned to convince disaffected liberals and independents who used to vote for Trudeau,  to vote conservative. Or would you like to see the Conservative party that is ideologically pure being the third or fourth party.

[Zeitgeist]

34 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

To beat Prime Minister Trudeau, you need to take liberal seats. Who in the leadership race is best positioned to convince disaffected liberals and independents who used to vote for Trudeau,  to vote conservative. Or would you like to see the Conservative party that is ideologically pure being the third or fourth party.

You basically mean for Conservatives to beat Liberals they must become Liberals.  I’d rather have a conservative opposition than a Liberal government and Liberal opposition, which may be what we have now.  The Conservatives have to absorb the PPC, take disaffected Liberals, and divide the left by boosting the NDP.  Not sure there will ever be a conservative government.   Canada pretty much has a one-party socialist system. Pluralism is dead in Canada.  Woke internationalist ideologues have infiltrated big business, education, and government.

Talk to your Equity Officer. In less than 5 minutes you’ll see how free speech, merit, and authentic dialogue are dead.  Your role is to assume your pre-determined position as either victim or oppressor based on your race, gender, and sexual orientation.  If you have a privileged identity, follow the ally script that you’re given.  If you’re a member of the underprivileged identity, demand the freebies that the state thinks you deserve.  Add taxation and regulation because “climate change”.  Add public health fear and mandates because Covid.  That’s politics now.  No discussion.  All policy and beliefs are downloadable from the WEF and the UN.

Edited May 10, 2022 by Zeitgeist

[Queenmandy85]

5 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

You basically mean for Conservatives to beat Liberals they must become Liberals.

Now you have the picture. No matter which party forms a government, they have only a narrow range of policy directions to choose from.  With a problem like inflation, Climate change, the pandemic etc., there is only a couple of solutions and they are similar to one another.  The solutions to all problems lie in the centre. 

You do not win voters over by telling them they are wrong and you are right. The voter is a lot smarter than most of the people on this forum...including me, of course. I've been working on campaigns for the Progressive Conservative party since the 1960's, but I still have a lot to learn.

 

12 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I’d rather have a conservative opposition

Well, you may be in luck. If we end up with Mr. Poilievre as leader, we could end up with Mr. Trudeau running the show until 2029.

Pop Quiz: Who is the only Conservative to ever beat a Trudeau? Which two Conservative leaders won the largest majorities in Canadian history?

[Zeitgeist]

37 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Now you have the picture. No matter which party forms a government, they have only a narrow range of policy directions to choose from.  With a problem like inflation, Climate change, the pandemic etc., there is only a couple of solutions and they are similar to one another.  The solutions to all problems lie in the centre. 

You do not win voters over by telling them they are wrong and you are right. The voter is a lot smarter than most of the people on this forum...including me, of course. I've been working on campaigns for the Progressive Conservative party since the 1960's, but I still have a lot to learn.

 

Well, you may be in luck. If we end up with Mr. Poilievre as leader, we could end up with Mr. Trudeau running the show until 2029.

Pop Quiz: Who is the only Conservative to ever beat a Trudeau? Which two Conservative leaders won the largest majorities in Canadian history?

Joe Clark

Mulroney and Harper?

I’m wondering if Canada has no chance fighting international narratives about climate change and Covid. We simply don’t have enough history, population, and national pride to believe in Canadian interests.  The Americans have that over Canada.  They play by their own rules and serve American interests.  Well the Republicans still do.  Canada’s government will crush its own people with health mandates and carbon taxes to look good on the international scene, even though we know the international standards are largely being set by China at the WHO, UN, WEF, etc.  The Liberals are internationalists, “post-nationalists” to be precise, and Trudeau is an admirer of the Chinese dictatorship.

Edited May 10, 2022 by Zeitgeist

[Queenmandy85]

7 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I’m wondering if Canada has no chance fighting international narratives about climate change

What do you mean by "narrative? Carbon dioxide and methane, along with several othe greenhouse gases regulate the re-radiation of energy from the earth. This has nothing to do with politics. It is a scientific fact. We have known for decades that the level of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere control the re-radiation of energy from the earth's surface. You can test it in any undergraduate lab in the country. The results will always be predictable, measurable and repeatable. Hal Schwartzberg of the RCA Space Research Labratories in Princeton, N.J. said, "The measure of the rigour of a science is the index of its ability to predict."

Have you discovered a flaw in the physics and chemistry regarding the re-radiation properties of carbon dioxide and methane ? I would like to know what the flaw is and the source of your research.

I have the same question about Covid 19. Have you discovered that all the virologists and immunologists are wrong and you are right? Your comments seem to indicate all the world's scientific issues are political, some sort of slick grit trick.

Politics is supposed to be fun but if you take ideology too seriously and let it over ride actual science, we are in for trouble.

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

 Pop Quiz: Who is the only Conservative to ever beat a Trudeau? Which two Conservative leaders won the largest majorities in Canadian history?

1. Joe Clark
2. Mulroney and ... uh .... MacDonald ?

[Michael Hardner]

49 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Politics is supposed to be fun but if you take ideology too seriously and let it over ride actual science, we are in for trouble.

But you missed the point of the question:  Can Canada fight international *narratives* - NOT science.

The point being "What is the story ?".  We are at the point where demagogues have successfully destroyed that pesky phantom called objectivity.  

If people believe YOU over science it's so much easier to achieve your goals.  "It's NOT raining you silly voter, this is New Fake Conservative sunshine !!!"

[Nationalist]

Interesting.

So...Mike and Mandy are saying that the only way to beat the Liberals, is to become...Liberals. To forsake conservative values and positions, and slip to the left in order to win an election. That would leave a rather shitty taste in my mouth.

I am done with holding my nose and casting votes for limp little wannabes. Canada requires strong, independent leadership. If the CPC can't manage to be conservative, then fuck 'em. I'll vote my conscience...thank you very much.

Who knows? Maybe a trouncing will show the CPC that leaving their base and values...is a bad idea.

[Zeitgeist]

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

What do you mean by "narrative? Carbon dioxide and methane, along with several othe greenhouse gases regulate the re-radiation of energy from the earth. This has nothing to do with politics. It is a scientific fact. We have known for decades that the level of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere control the re-radiation of energy from the earth's surface. You can test it in any undergraduate lab in the country. The results will always be predictable, measurable and repeatable. Hal Schwartzberg of the RCA Space Research Labratories in Princeton, N.J. said, "The measure of the rigour of a science is the index of its ability to predict."

Have you discovered a flaw in the physics and chemistry regarding the re-radiation properties of carbon dioxide and methane ? I would like to know what the flaw is and the source of your research.

I have the same question about Covid 19. Have you discovered that all the virologists and immunologists are wrong and you are right? Your comments seem to indicate all the world's scientific issues are political, some sort of slick grit trick.

Politics is supposed to be fun but if you take ideology too seriously and let it over ride actual science, we are in for trouble.

I too read about these theories, including Lovelock’s Gaia. The problem is that even the most current climate modelling can’t accurately predict climate changes nor the extent to which human activity influences them, which isn’t to say that there isn’t climate change and human-caused climate change.  I know CO2 levels are relatively high in the history of human existence and that change has accelerated since the start of the Industrial Revolution.

Since our concern over climate change is the impact to human survival, what is the likely outcome for humanity if we do nothing to reduce emissions?

The most likely scenario is a rise of 1.5 to 3 degrees in average annual temperature.  At the worst end of temperature change we could see some areas turn to desert and loss of coastal settlements over the next century.  It would mean resettling millions of people.  This has happened before.  Even under the worst case scenario, the world population will start to decline after around 2050 due to the falling birth rates among our increasingly urban and educated population. Demographics and technology will reduce emissions over the next 30 years.  The best move is to take affordable measures to reduce greenhouse emissions.

The alternatives are to push humanity into poverty and death through carbon taxes, forced abortions (China did this to thousands of fetuses using partial birth abortion), mass sterilization, murder by lottery, promoting homosexuality (already official policy), discouraging human contact (already official policy), altering fertility hormones through diet (already underway through increased estrogen levels in soy and leaching plastics).

I find it interesting that just as Covid restrictions lift, the economic reality of high inflation is working wonders at keeping people grounded.

Climate and health purity are the new orthodoxy that is driving oppression today.  Only those jurisdictions with strong economies, militaries, and independence from international pressure will manage to retain some semblance of economic prosperity and freedom.  Right now it’s places like Florida and Texas, which is why people are moving there from high-tax, high-regulation states in droves.

Canadian governments and Canadians are toeing the international line.  We’re very trusting and compliant.  Your grandchildren will hopefully be able to rent a small apartment and take the bus.  Home ownership is too expensive.  Fuel and electric vehicles are also too pricey. Perhaps they can move to China which doesn’t abide by the same climate policies, as long as they don’t mind living in semi-permanent lockdown.  

Edited May 10, 2022 by Zeitgeist

[Queenmandy85]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Joe Clark
2. Mulroney and ... uh .... MacDonald ?

2. Mulroney and John Diefenbaker

2 outta 3 ain’t bad. ?

[sharkman]

On 5/2/2022 at 3:15 PM, West said:

So apparently the Conservative Party of Canada has shafted Joseph Bourgault, the only true pro freedom candidate in the race. The guy raised enough money (roughly $400k) and gained the correct number of delegate signatures required to register as a party candidate. Yet he's not allowed? 

The CPC is no different than the Liberals

Hey, they disqualified another pro freedom guy in Grant Abraham. Looks like they are protecting Pierre Polievre and his potential voter base.

That means a back room deal has been struck.  These people make me sick.

[Michael Hardner]

49 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

2. Mulroney and John Diefenbaker

2 outta 3 ain’t bad. ?

Damn !  I was going to say Dief but I thought he won a minority.... he started it all...

[Queenmandy85]

Minority in 1957. About 209 seats IIRC in 1958. Then a minority in 1962.

 

[Queenmandy85]

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Since our concern over climate change is the impact to human survival, what is the likely outcome for humanity if we do nothing to reduce emissions?

Potentially the greatest mass extinction since the permian. I don't want to cause thread drift. So I'll just say that science  should never be political. Science is serious while politics is sport. Politics should be fun and not a spectator sport.

If Poilievre becomes Prime Minister, he will do pretty much what Prime Minister Trudeau would do. If he doesn't, he won't be PM for very long. His cabinet will have a number of people who have been around the block a few times and won't take kindly to being told what to do by Poilievre. 

The secret to being a good PM is don't fall for the myth that you have any power. You have to listen to people who know what they are talking about. 

Edited May 10, 2022 by Queenmandy85

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Potentially the greatest mass extinction since the permian. I don't want to cause thread drift. So I'll just say that science  should never be political. Science is serious while politics is sport. Politics should be fun and not a spectator sport.

If Poilievre becomes Prime Minister, he will do pretty much what Prime Minister Trudeau would do. If he doesn't, he won't be PM for very long. His cabinet will have a number of people who have been around the block a few times and won't take kindly to being told what to do by Poilievre. 

The secret to being a good PM is don't fall for the myth that you have any power. You have to listen to people who know what they are talking about. 

See that’s where I think there might be a problem getting a consensus.  I think many people would like to see a purge of the Liberals from the Conservatives.  I realize that would probably transfer half the Conservative seats to the Liberals.  See the problem?  The country seems permanently Liberal.  

[Faramir]

23 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Bourgault, Lewis and Baber have no hope of beating Prime Minister Trudeau and Bourgault and Baber are embarrassments to the Party. Why give the grits ammunition in the next election. We should have learned our lesson about giving these people the platform to damage the party's chances when we had Tom Cossett and Peter Pocklington.

Who I gather our milquetoasts who would govern to the left of Trudeau?