Canadian politics thread

[supafamous]

Originally Posted by JD¹³

I know it's been done in the past, but its disingenuous regardless. Political leadership should be chosen by the people, not appointed by political parties. The major UK parties have it right.

That's not what the UK parties are doing though - you clearly didn't read what I shared.

The Conservative Party constitution says that the leader of the party "shall be drawn from those elected to Parliament". Clause VII of the Labour Rule Book also says its leader "shall be elected from among Commons members of the PLP [Parliamentary Labour Party]."

IOW, the leader is elected by the party membership from amongst the representatives that have been elected.

Originally Posted by JD¹³

While this is true in theory it's not reality and you know it. With the partisan games all parties play no MP is truly independent unless running as such. If you're voting for Party X you know you're voting for their individual Prime Minister, that's why they campaign as such. The ballot looks different but in practice it's the same as the US, you're choosing the PM with your vote even if they're not specifically listed.

It's not just theory if that's actually how the parliamentary system works. What you're saying is that people's perceptions of how they are voting are different than the reality. Not that the reality doesn't match the theory.

Originally Posted by JD¹³

Given the staggering corruption and complete loss of mandate from Canadian citizens the Liberal Party should not be swearing-in someone off the street to be PM. With tensions as high as they are with the new US leadership having some unelected stand-in for three months would be exceptionally weak. Couldn't be a worse time for these partisan games, and we the people are going to suffer as a result. As usual.

As long as the gov't stands it has a mandate. I will say that "mandates" are generally bullshit though - parties rarely win elections by majority yet they get a majority of seats. Trump won by a tiny margin yet will rule with an iron fist.

Gov'ts don't actually have "mandates". They hold power until they no longer can hold power - that is they can't act on their agenda any longer. That's it.

This tariff war won't require parliament to be in session - the power to fight this lies largely in the hands of the PM's office. It would certainly help if the PM was a powerful PM but it's not required - that Trudeau was able to bring all but 1 idiot Premier to the table shows he can still tackle this particular issue (even if he might not be able to handle other things).

[JD¹³]

Originally Posted by Manic!

In the UK they are chosen by the party.

I know reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. The point being made is that in order for those UK members to be eligible for the leadership of their party, and then be Prime Minister, they have to be part of the House of Commons.

Originally Posted by supafamous

That's not what the UK parties are doing though - you clearly didn't read what I shared.

Yes I did, the key is that the leadership candidates are at least sitting members and are elected to office to begin with.

Originally Posted by supafamous

IOW, the leader is elected by the party membership from amongst the representatives that have been elected.

I agree that that's the way it should be. That's the crux of what I'm saying.

I'm not faulting the Liberals for having a leadership race, it needs to happen. But the timing is the worst imaginable and that's the fault of Trudeau's ego and Singh's stupidity. Trudeau should have been replaced a year ago either by his party or through non-confidence. You can say what you want about the semantics of the word mandate but the reality is the vast majority of Canadians want the Liberal Party out, they want Trudeau out, and they want a general election. Partisan games by the Liberals and NDP have now put the country in a bad position in practice and even worse in optics. Their "Team Canada" call-to-arms now is incredibly hypocritical. They didn't give a shit about what Canadians wanted as recently as a few weeks ago before the HOC had their holiday break.

[Traum]

The un-elected PM who isn't even an MP is really nothing more than a strawman argument. The reality is -- the moment Parliament resumes, both the Cons and the NDP would be filing and passing a non-confidence motion to topple the gov. I haven't bothered looking up the expected dates, but I bet it would be 2 - 3 weeks tops.

IMO the bigger question is -- which riding is Carney gonna run in that will give him the best chance of getting elected? The last 2 by-elections were both supposed to be in Liberal strongholds, but the Libs still lost in both cases.

Originally Posted by JD¹³

Until Mark Carney is elected as an MP couldn't give a shit what he has to say. At this point he's just a businessman/bureaucrat spouting his opinion, no different than that other mouthpiece O'Leary. If Carney is voted leader of the Liberals to be the face of the party through the election, fine then he can speak during the campaign. But he absolutely SHOULD NOT replace Trudeau as PM before the election even if he replaces him as party leader. Having an unelected, non-MP as the Prime Minister is a complete subversion of our democracy and should not be allowed to happen.
[/url]

[Badhobz]

i dont want a Carney as PM. we got enough fucking clowns in government already.

[68style]

You’re just afraid he’ll steal your house

[Hondaracer]

I love that we’re so “woke” and against colonization and colonialism that we spend all this money and time trying to fix it yet our entire political and govt. structure is based on it.

Get rid of this gross shit.

[JDMDreams]

I wonder what the frenchy did

Amazon to close Quebec facilities, insists it's not because of new union

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7438078

[whitev70r]

Whoever wins the Liberal leadership will go down in the annals of Canadian history, and the answer to many trivial questions ... 'Who was the shortest term serving PM of Canada?'

It will be days or weeks, not even a month.

[murd0c]

Union bullshit and Amazon said fuck you if you want to get paid stupid amounts of money, no one will work for us.

[Badhobz]

Originally Posted by whitev70r

Whoever wins the Liberal leadership will go down in the annals of Canadian history, and the answer to many trivial questions ... 'Who was the shortest term serving PM of Canada?'

It will be days or weeks, not even a month.

Anals of Canadian history eh ? Hohohooh

[whitev70r]

Annal is a noun. It means a written records and media created yearly, and preserved for history. Sometimes a yearbook produced by a school is called an “annual” which is related to the word annal.

Anal is an adjective. In medicine, it means procedures or medicines that function in or around the anus, the hole between the buttocks. In popular psychology, “anal” is short for “anal-rententive,” someone who is exacting, very detailed, very neat, very particular about everything they do and what other people do for them.


Sorry to give you a bit of a hard on there for a moment Badhobz

[Badhobz]

[6793026]

crazy article, amz is not a 2 Trillion company

Laval workers said they were demanding $26 per hour, a $6 pay increase.

1,700 jobs cut - told you to never push these guys... didn't ya'll learn this when Walmart tried this in Qc few years back?

[Vancouver240sx]

Carney makes sense strategically as the cons wont be able to label him part of the outgoing group. I think the start of trumps presidency hasn't helped the cons chances, I don't doubt they'll win but now with a minority. Which I think is a good thing.

Rich

[JDMDreams]

Has he said how he will bring home yet? How we can get a job in our 20s and buy a house?

[Harvey Specter]

Can we all agree that the current roster of politicians is utter shit and that none of the political parties care about helping Canadians address issues that actually matter to them?

[sonick]

I think inherently to want to be a politician is to be utter shit.

You know the saying, "those who seek power..."

[Hondaracer]

It’s pretty annoying to hear Eby say that NOW he realizes BC/Canada needs to be resilient and build an economy that doesn’t rely on the states, yea no shit.

This sounds exactly the same as Covid and the healthcare situation, and nothing changed there.

[JDMDreams]

Yea but China bad, India bad, native bad, nao USA bad. This is what happens when you trust white people.

[sonick]

Originally Posted by whitev70r

Annal is a noun. It means a written records and media created yearly, and preserved for history. Sometimes a yearbook produced by a school is called an “annual” which is related to the word annal.

Anal is an adjective. In medicine, it means procedures or medicines that function in or around the anus, the hole between the buttocks. In popular psychology, “anal” is short for “anal-rententive,” someone who is exacting, very detailed, very neat, very particular about everything they do and what other people do for them.


Sorry to give you a bit of a hard on there for a moment Badhobz

Etymology 1​​ Back formation from annals, borrowed from from Latin annus (“year”).

[Traum]

Originally Posted by Hondaracer

It’s pretty annoying to hear Eby say that NOW he realizes BC/Canada needs to be resilient and build an economy that doesn’t rely on the states, yea no shit.

This sounds exactly the same as Covid and the healthcare situation, and nothing changed there.

In the modern world, being entirely self-sufficient is utter BS though. Our world has gotten so complex, and we've been spoiled so much by all the conveniences in life at generally reasonable prices that it is practically impossible to not rely on the States.

Like it or not, the US is our most convenient and economical partner to trade with. To build an economy that doesn't need to rely on the US means we will either need to accept prices that are significantly higher (to cover the extra costs of shipping stuff in through either the Pacific or Atlantic Ocean), or we have our economy forgo all the business and economic actities that the US market presents.

For the most part, the US has been our reliable economic partner for the past 30+ years. We have our quarrels and spats, but generally the US-Canadian relationship has been excellent. In the anals of history, the Orange Man is likely a dispecable blip that brought on a turbulent 4 + 4 years. But just bcos the next 4 years are going to be crazy doesn't mean we should rip up our long standing economic plans that has worked well for us. Once the 47th term comes to an end, hopefully things will improve for the better. To completely change gears now so that we can be non-US reliant is very much a knee-jerk reaction.

[Hondaracer]

Well history in things loft soft-wood lumber, oil, pharma, all have shown that the US can strong arm you into whatever you like with little recourse on our part

The first Trump administration should have been the warning shot to at least shore up these things, but then of course Biden gets into power and it’s easier to just rest on the relationship rather than plan for the future.

Regardless of what or if tariffs are enacted, the end result will be Canadians be paying more and more for everything. A common theme in the last while.

[JDMDreams]

Just AliExpress bro

[Traum]

Yes, the US can definitely strong arm us into having a bad deal, but it doesn't always end without recourse. The WTO sided with Canada on the soft wood lumber dispute, and IIRC, the steel / aluminum tariffs that Trump imposed before had been withdrawn after a while.

When the US tries to strong arm us into a bad deal (like they are doing now), of course we should fight back. But to build our economy so that it wouldn't need to rely on the US means we have to shift our economy to work with international partners across oceans. Even if the US unfairly hit us with a 50% tariff, it would likely still be cheaper than us trying to source stuff directly from Asia or Europe.

It's no different than having a local relationship or a long distance relationship. Sure, both types can work, but if you are in a long distance relationship, the sheer distance means it is going to be a lot more expensive.

Originally Posted by Hondaracer

Well history in things loft soft-wood lumber, oil, pharma, all have shown that the US can strong arm you into whatever you like with little recourse on our part

The first Trump administration should have been the warning shot to at least shore up these things, but then of course Biden gets into power and it’s easier to just rest on the relationship rather than plan for the future.

Regardless of what or if tariffs are enacted, the end result will be Canadians be paying more and more for everything. A common theme in the last while.

[Hondaracer]

The world as a whole is only likely to get more secular moving forward. No better time to start than now