What can Conservatives do?

[blackbird]

8 hours ago, Moonbox said:

I mock you and people like you, and the term is meant to describe exactly what you're doing here.  

Yes, I believe in freedom over fundamentalism and ancient religious dogma.  🤷‍♂️

Your beliefs are your own, and I'd have nothing really to say about them until you start trying to shove them down everyone's throat.  

I'm proud of telling people what I believe and encouraging people to be saved and go to heaven and warning about hell.  If one person in a hundred or even a thousand gets something from it and is helped by God's grace to go to heaven instead of hell, I will praise God for it as it's entirely God's doing and grace.  I will try my best to not let the Devil discourage me by comments on here.   It only proves I am on the right track.

[Moonbox]

Okay.  You're not very good at it.  Keep trying I guess.  🥱

[I am Groot]

With the new changes to the upcoming firearms legislation to greatly expand the definition of 'assault like weapons' to include all semi-automatic rifles and shotguns which carry more than five bullets It becomes obvious the Liberals are intent on doing whatever is necessary to distract people from their incompetence. We know, and let's face it, they know such a broad measure will do nothing useful to combat firearms crime. All police chiefs have basically said as much, including York region just yesterday.

York police say all seizures of guns used in violent crime whose origins were traced came from the US.

They know just how much anger it will create among hunters and rural people - more divisiveness - but don't care.  Those people don't matter in their calculation since most of them won't vote Liberal anyway. This will look good to urban liberals, though, most of whom know nothing about firearms other than they don't like them. So the Liberals will be able to show how they're 'doing something', or at least, pretend to be doing something. If they have to buy this many guns back the cost will be in the hundreds of millions, if not billions. But hey, it's just monopoly taxpayers money. They can always borrow more.

They can't afford to run the next election on their record, that's for sure. So they'll run another scaremongering campaign on guns, abortion, gays, vaccines and 'nazis'. Probably with some cryptocurrency jeering and climate change hysteria thrown in. They'll do anything they can to keep the message away from the economy, the debt, or uncomfortable subjects like national security.

The problem for the Conservatives is unless they have a BIG MESSAGE that catches attention the Liberal plan will work. Especially since Poilievre is now so tightly identified with the truckers. The media is pretty progressive on social policy issues and hot-button issues which get people riled up are excellent clickbait. So they'll cooperate fully. If the Conservatives are to have any chance they need to have a platform that promises big things. I don't know what - a complete revamping of healthcare, a flat tax, an easily understandable new program for economic expansion. Something. Or they'll lose again.

[Nefarious Banana]

Gerald Michael Butts . . . . . puppetmaster supreme.

[Zeitgeist]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

With the new changes to the upcoming firearms legislation to greatly expand the definition of 'assault like weapons' to include all semi-automatic rifles and shotguns which carry more than five bullets It becomes obvious the Liberals are intent on doing whatever is necessary to distract people from their incompetence. We know, and let's face it, they know such a broad measure will do nothing useful to combat firearms crime. All police chiefs have basically said as much, including York region just yesterday.

York police say all seizures of guns used in violent crime whose origins were traced came from the US.

They know just how much anger it will create among hunters and rural people - more divisiveness - but don't care.  Those people don't matter in their calculation since most of them won't vote Liberal anyway. This will look good to urban liberals, though, most of whom know nothing about firearms other than they don't like them. So the Liberals will be able to show how they're 'doing something', or at least, pretend to be doing something. If they have to buy this many guns back the cost will be in the hundreds of millions, if not billions. But hey, it's just monopoly taxpayers money. They can always borrow more.

They can't afford to run the next election on their record, that's for sure. So they'll run another scaremongering campaign on guns, abortion, gays, vaccines and 'nazis'. Probably with some cryptocurrency jeering and climate change hysteria thrown in. They'll do anything they can to keep the message away from the economy, the debt, or uncomfortable subjects like national security.

The problem for the Conservatives is unless they have a BIG MESSAGE that catches attention the Liberal plan will work. Especially since Poilievre is now so tightly identified with the truckers. The media is pretty progressive on social policy issues and hot-button issues which get people riled up are excellent clickbait. So they'll cooperate fully. If the Conservatives are to have any chance they need to have a platform that promises big things. I don't know what - a complete revamping of healthcare, a flat tax, an easily understandable new program for economic expansion. Something. Or they'll lose again.

Unfortunately the electorate in Canada are perhaps the most indoctrinated people in the developed West.  It’s a de facto one-party system at the federal level.  The only way out is to emigrate or secede, which is why Alberta is seriously threatening to ignore federal policy and go it alone.

Enslavement is most powerful at the ideological level.  Our government has bought enough media and mastered the art of vilifying the opposition.  Come election time we’ll hear again how the. Conservatives are “scary.”   I don’t expect Canada to change course.

The judge at the inquiry is ignoring evidence, silencing the convoy lawyer, and using exactly the same dismissive language as the Liberal government.

What can Conservatives do?  I suggest that they be who they are and say what they think, even after the media witch-hunt ensues.  Show backbone.  I’m sure some Canadians who regain the confidence to think for themselves will appreciate the authenticity.  If the public doesn’t like it, they can have even more radical left coalition government mess.  At least then Conservatives will have the honour of being true to themselves, which is a greater honour than pretending Canada isn’t sliding into Chinese-style totalitarian capitalism.  

Edited November 24, 2022 by Zeitgeist

[Army Guy]

On 11/21/2022 at 4:12 PM, Moonbox said:

That's not really true though. Higher gas prices have demonstrable impact on consumer behavior.  Though it's true that there's a floor for a lot of people who still have to commute to work or job sites, an expensive tank of gas or flight fuel costs have obvious impact on discretionary choices.  

It's not that simple at all though.  QE can be problematic, or it can be very helpful as a policy tool when properly managed.  This is a topic that's poorly understood, with even 4th year bus/econ grads having limited grasps. The average person understands it only on a conceptual level, making it an easy target for scapegoating and strawman.  Every opposition government in the world right now is blaming the sitting government for inflation they didn't cause, and that's because this is an easy narrative to push that requires too much technical knowledge to debunk.  

Higher gas prices are not due to just Carbon taxes, in fact global events have risen the cost of of fossil fuels light years farther than any scheduled carbon tax will ever put the. So suggesting Carbon prices are doing its job is false. had we been global events free people would still be driving like it was 1999.

With Fossil fuels at todays prices it is causing some to pause and think about where to drive and where, but i think for the majority of people to be really thoughtful of driving we have a ways to go yet. I have started to hear from people taking jobs closer to home as they could not afford the commute, but they are basically minimum wage workers, part time moms.

[Army Guy]

On 11/22/2022 at 11:20 AM, Moonbox said:

Nope, sorry.  Bible-thumpers are a very different breed than everyday Christians.  You'd be considered one - the tasteless type prone to preaching and proselytizing to people uninterested in your religious messages.  

So that's a license to call him whatever you want, becasue you don't like his message or delivery. The man told you he does not like your reference, no different than calling someone that is gay a fag, or other disparaging remarks. 

[PIK]

What they can do ,is start filling cabinet position on merit, not gender or skin colour. Best person gets the job.

[Moonbox]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

Higher gas prices are not due to just Carbon taxes, in fact global events have risen the cost of of fossil fuels light years farther than any scheduled carbon tax will ever put the. So suggesting Carbon prices are doing its job is false. had we been global events free people would still be driving like it was 1999.

and yet our gas consumption continues to decline on a per capita basis. 

Nobody said high prices are due only to carbon taxes.  Carbon taxes are meant to make gas more expensive and redistribute that income.  It does influence behavior, just like price increases on any other thing does.  Whether it's having a sufficient effect to be worth doing is something you could question or analyze, but I suspect you've not run any of these numbers, have you?  

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

So that's a license to call him whatever you want, becasue you don't like his message or delivery. The man told you he does not like your reference, no different than calling someone that is gay a fag, or other disparaging remarks. 

I guess I could just call him an ignorant preacher then?  A close-minded fundamentalist?  Is that better?  

[cougar]

15 hours ago, blackbird said:

Not voting is giving more power to the liberal and left which is not a good option.

Not voting is simply that - not voting.

When we have a situation when 70% of all citizens stop to vote, this might send a louder message than continuing to play their game.

Because this is what you do - just play in their hands.

[Moonlight Graham]

I suggest moving to the prairies or to the USA.

[Moonlight Graham]

12 minutes ago, cougar said:

Not voting is simply that - not voting.

When we have a situation when 70% of all citizens stop to vote, this might send a louder message than continuing to play their game.

Because this is what you do - just play in their hands.

They don't care.  The "message" isn't going to actually make anyone do anything.  50% of people vote now, they don't care.

Elect someone you like or run for office and start your own party.  These are the choices.  Not voting is giving your power to other people.

[cougar]

30 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Not voting is giving your power to other people.

Not necessarily.  When you have a box of rotten apples do you still pick one up?

[Moonbox]

9 hours ago, cougar said:

Not necessarily.  When you have a box of rotten apples do you still pick one up?

No, but then that's a horrible analogy.  Nobody's asking you to consume your voting ballot. 

Depressed/suppressed voter turnout doesn't send as much of a message as you'd think.  Just Trudeau, I'm sure, is thrilled by how many conspiracy theorists that hate him decide not voting is the best option, or that far-right protest-votes go to Maxime Bernier.  

[Army Guy]

11 hours ago, Moonbox said:

and yet our gas consumption continues to decline on a per capita basis. 

Nobody said high prices are due only to carbon taxes.  Carbon taxes are meant to make gas more expensive and redistribute that income.  It does influence behavior, just like price increases on any other thing does.  Whether it's having a sufficient effect to be worth doing is something you could question or analyze, but I suspect you've not run any of these numbers, have you?  

I guess I could just call him an ignorant preacher then?  A close-minded fundamentalist?  Is that better?  

Well, sir maybe that is because of the global events around the world that is driving that behavior. As the left has been defending Carbon pricing as only 11 cents, not really enough to really influence any serious numbers of Canadians or to make any difference in our fight with climate change.  Which is the main goal here not to redistribute the income. The whole project is a total failure

IOr maybe you should read the rules laid out for the forum, 

[Moonbox]

21 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Well, sir maybe that is because of the global events around the world that is driving that behavior. As the left has been defending Carbon pricing as only 11 cents, not really enough to really influence any serious numbers of Canadians or to make any difference in our fight with climate change. 

You're arguing it both ways.  On one hand, the carbon tax is hurting our prosperity, or as your "esteemed" general Maisonneuve would say "sacrificing ourselves on the altar of climate change", but on the other hand you're arguing it's not enough to make a difference.  Choose your lane.  

[Army Guy]

32 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

You're arguing it both ways.  On one hand, the carbon tax is hurting our prosperity, or as your "esteemed" general Maisonneuve would say "sacrificing ourselves on the altar of climate change", but on the other hand you're arguing it's not enough to make a difference.  Choose your lane.  

Thats not what i am saying at all, Carbon pricing is having little to NO real effect on climate change, or our behavior. Global events have already proven that for us, where fossil fuels are 10 to 20 times higher than any Carbon price could be, and we are just seeing the consequences on the few of the population...

The majority of us although not happy are still going about our daily business. It is a total failure, lets define failure, it fails to get us to our agreed levels, which we signed an international agreement to reach, FAILURE for the third time( i know we break international agreement all the time) ... Canada has already had it's end year report card on climate change, we are near the bottom of the list, with get this, Russia beat us being just above us, and China just below us. So i hope you're not trying to tell us Carbon price is working, that's just something liberals are telling Canadians another lie after lie, announcing it is a climate emergency, another lie, as actions speak louder than words another failure nothing more.  Not doing anything positive with those taxes collected, like maybe investing in green tech, or alternative to fossil fuels...another failure...

For such a smart guy when it comes to economics why is it you cannot fill in the blanks when he says we are sacrificing ourselves upon the climate change alter, things like severely restricting our oil and gas industry, like restricing exploration, no more pipelines, no more subsidies, no more refiners or LP plants the list just goes on and on. and yet our government puts out a lame plan and Canadians join the parade singing and screaming dancing in pink tutus like it is going to save the planet.

When we as a nation have been presented 3 times this liberal plan is failing, it is worse than the one Russia put out...and just barely better than China's, link is already posted on here sone where.  

It is not me that needs to pick a lane it is the left and the center that needs to pick a lane... why back a plan that has failed 3 times in a row or produces results as low as Russia i mean come on, what do you need to come back to your senses, get hit in the face with a bat. What we are doing is not making any difference at all, would it sound better if you heard it from someone in the center, or left... 

 

[Army Guy]

On 11/21/2022 at 11:24 PM, Moonbox said:

 

 This by itself should prove Justinflation and Liberal spending aren't to blame, but that's the narrative that opposition leaders around the world are peddling and voters aren't generally inclined to listen to detailed technical explanations when they can opt for a one-liner instead.  

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this statement, doubling the national debt in under 3 years is having no effect on todays inflation numbers. Zero effect. and if so, why are the streets not paved in gold across Canada, why are we putting up with huge deficits in funding and personal in every federal/ provincial department, am i missing something.

 

[Moonbox]

14 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this statement, doubling the national debt in under 3 years is having no effect on todays inflation numbers. Zero effect.

Nobody said it has no effect.  Money doesn't come from thin air, and today's higher interest rates can partially be blamed on Trudeau's spending.  Whether he spent blew a hole in the budget or not, inflation is a global phenomenon.  Is this sinking in?  Are you aware that global inflation doubled this year?  I've pointed it out to you now something like...a half dozen times?  

[Army Guy]

43 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Nobody said it has no effect.  Money doesn't come from thin air, and today's higher interest rates can partially be blamed on Trudeau's spending.  Whether he spent blew a hole in the budget or not, inflation is a global phenomenon.  Is this sinking in?  Are you aware that global inflation doubled this year?  I've pointed it out to you now something like...a half dozen times?  

Sorry but you just said this. so ya you are saying liberal policies and practices have NO effect...

Quote

This by itself should prove Justinflation and Liberal spending aren't to blame, 

When they do play a role, be it little or large, Justins actions are responsible for some of this issue. he has a hand in all of this, and so has the BOC.

I've pointed this out to you dozens of times, you sure you understand this whole inflation thing. you continue to bark at all those guys that have constantly said this is a Justin problem, when in fact he has a hand in it all. 

Edited November 24, 2022 by Army Guy

[Moonlight Graham]

15 hours ago, cougar said:

Not necessarily.  When you have a box of rotten apples do you still pick one up?

One will be the least rotten.  If you let someone else choose your apple for you it could be the most rotten.

[TreeBeard]

15 hours ago, cougar said:

Not necessarily.  When you have a box of rotten apples do you still pick one up?

If you were hungry, would you eat the least rotten in the box?  Or just choose to starve?

Edited November 24, 2022 by TreeBeard

[WestCanMan]

On 11/21/2022 at 12:12 PM, Moonbox said:

Higher gas prices have demonstrable impact on consumer behavior. 

Leftists promise a higher minimum wage, then they make inflation so high that the new minimum wage is a step backwards.

Higher gas prices don't slow down the jet set at all. They just hurt people on the lower socioeconomic rungs disproportionately. Trudeau will still fly sycophant media all around the country in their own jumbo jet and then "buy carbon offsets" lol. 

Kerry, Gore, DiCaprio, Prince Harry et all will keep flying around in private jets to go to "global warming conferences" to find ways to stop you from driving. 

Suzuki, Sanders, the BLM founder et al will still buy way more houses than they need, surely that's just fine for the environment.

And then they'll all pontificate to you, and you'll stand there slack-jawed, taking it all in, 'cause you've got it all figured out.

 

Conservatives aren't competing for the stooge vote, nor should they, because it means that they'd have to emulate the left's atrocious policies. There needs to be a reasonable option, and when things get bad enough, hopefully people will figure it out.

Truthfully, some stooges will always stay in the fold, like in NYC where the Dems gained votes by saying "Let's defund police!", then when crime soared because of their own short-sightedness, they came back with the great idea "We're gonna fund more police" and the stooges lapped it up again. 

it reminds me of the time that a leftist politician won an election with the slogan "Let's all poop on the street", and then after it got smelly he won the next election by saying "Let's clean up the poop". True story. It's on the internet. 

[Moonbox]

4 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Thats not what i am saying at all, Carbon pricing is having little to NO real effect on climate change, or our behavior. 

Do you agree that price affects how much gasoline people use?  

If so (and you should, because it does), the carbon and gas taxes are having an effect on our behavior.  That they're not having enough of an effect is a fair argument, but that's the dumb nature of this problem.  We all want to  do our part for the environment, but only as long as it doesn't really cost us much.  If you remember Stephane Dion, perhaps you can recall how things go when someone tries to show "leadership" on climate change.  

4 hours ago, Army Guy said:

For such a smart guy when it comes to economics why is it you cannot fill in the blanks when he says we are sacrificing ourselves upon the climate change alter, things like severely restricting our oil and gas industry, like restricing exploration, no more pipelines, no more subsidies, no more refiners or LP plants the list just goes on and on. and yet our government puts out a lame plan and Canadians join the parade singing and screaming dancing in pink tutus like it is going to save the planet.

So again, you're complaining that we're not doing enough to fight climate change, but then criticizing the few things we are doing.  You can't choose your lane.  

For the record, I do support pipeline expansion and infrastructure etc, and that might be one of the few things from Maisonneuve's speech that wasn't complete BS, aside from the fact that it didn't really have much to do with the military.  

[Army Guy]

2 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Do you agree that price affects how much gasoline people use?  

If so (and you should, because it does), the carbon and gas taxes are having an effect on our behavior.  That they're not having enough of an effect is a fair argument, but that's the dumb nature of this problem.  We all want to  do our part for the environment, but only as long as it doesn't really cost us much.  If you remember Stephane Dion, perhaps you can recall how things go when someone tries to show "leadership" on climate change.  

So again, you're complaining that we're not doing enough to fight climate change, but then criticizing the few things we are doing.  You can't choose your lane.  

For the record, I do support pipeline expansion and infrastructure etc, and that might be one of the few things from Maisonneuve's speech that wasn't complete BS, aside from the fact that it didn't really have much to do with the military.  

At current carbon pricing no i does not, now raise it to global events levels like we have now and yes you will begin to see behavior change in the minority. not sure why you can't see that, it has been staring us in the face for the last 6 to 8 months. The government is racking in record level profits not from carbon taxes, but for tax on tax the more it costs the more they make...

This is like Justin economics having an effect on inflation, yes, they have a minimum effect, at today levels they are more of a pain in the ass, than a pain in the pocketbook, it is when you combine it with global effects that they start to get have a small effect. 

So your saying over a few beers we all agree we love climate change, after all we don't want to be one of "those" guys but when at home we really don't want to pay for anything... so lets be honest, the majority of Canadians are not behind climate change, at least not enough to invest in it... it is not even an emergency. those that are or have been climbing on soap boxes or screaming on roof tops are nothing more than fake.

So with all that out in the open, why is it bad to stop pretending i care, when majority really don't care either. I spent large amounts of my person savings converting my house to solar, putting in an expensive heat pump, pellet stoves, LP backup generator. only to later find out most Canadians are all talk no walk. and if we are content doing what we are doing and missing all our climate goals, and point fingers that don't talk the talk.... Screw them.  it is all an act,nothing more. they have no rights to complain about the nay Sayers, or scream from the roof tops when they really belong in that group, the nay sayers.  

Who is they? and what have they done to date, if you're talking about the government then your one of those guys that believe at least trying something is doing something... even if it has no effect on the issue... show me how todays carbon pricing is going to help us achieve our climate change goals? we have already proven it is barely achieves anything let alone any of our national goals, let alone international ones.  And by point it out I'm complaining. when the those that think our climate change program is effective on any level are just kidding themselves i prefer lying to themselves so they can sleep at night. 

And i can't pick a lane, here is my lane, when Canadians jump into action and believe Climate change is real instead of just giving it lip service then maybe i'll get my pom poms out again, until then it is whispers in the wind, we should nstop pretending we care and continue on with business as usual. with pipelines, new refineries, more fossil fuel exploration, more export terminals, using some of these profits to diversify our power grid with green tech, like SMR's tidal power, hydrogen...and in 30 to 40 years, if we as a planet are still around, maybe we will take it more seriously. right now, we are just pissing into the wind and getting wet.  

I did not know a man cannot have an opinion on topics outside of his specialty, or experience, none of us here are politicians and yet here we are talking about politics.