Support NeoGAF

[maharg]

Nobody but conservatives are winning those Alberta ridings. Kenney's and Harper's and suburban Calgary to boot.

BTW the two letter abbreviation for Alberta is AB, not AL.

Hmm makes sense... Are there any options other than privatization? Why can't the CMHC place a threshold on the insurance (insured up to a certain amount)?

That would probably have a lot of unintended consequences. I expect it would heavily distort prices around the cut-off, and it would be difficult to find a cut-off that would work well everywhere (and making it regional would cause calls of unfairness). I don't think that's a path they'd want to go down.

They do have restrictions on how long your loan can be for and how much you have to put down. For a while these were extremely loose (40-year zero down mortgages were a thing), but they did get tightened up at some point I believe.

 

[gutter_trash]

Nobody but conservatives are winning those Alberta ridings. Kenney's and Harper's and suburban Calgary to boot.

BTW the two letter abbreviation for Alberta is AB, not AL.

sorry
I will try to be correct next time.
http://www.comeexplorecanada.com/abbreviations.php

I find it important to be accurate with abbreviation, I didn't mean it

 

[Mr.Mike]

Hi topazsparrow,
I'm in favour of net neutrality. Here's why: I see the Internet just like POTS (plain old telephone service). And like a utility, it is vital to the functioning of our economy. Otherwise, it won't be a level playing field, and some will be left behind in the modern, technology-based economy.
I think that foreign money is a secondary factor in the unsustainable housing prices in Canada's large cities. The bigger factor is the government's interference in housing market finance through CMHC's mortgage insurance and securitization program. That's why I'm proposing to privatize this business. You can read about my plan here:
It's a long-term plan to make housing affordable for Canada's middle class.
https://www.chong.ca/economic_opportunity
Thanks for the questions.
Michael

RussTheMann16,
Thanks for the question and thank you for your decision to serve in our navy. My plan for the Canadian Forces is simple. Our military spending is well below the commitment we made to our allies, and as PM I would work towards increasing our spending to meet the 2% threshold agreed on in Wales.
When we look at Russia's actions vis-à-vis Ukraine and especially in the Arctic, it's clear that we need to improve our power-projection capability. To me (and I hope this helps answer Wonka_Raskolnikov's question below), that means rolling back defence cuts and increasing our Arctic naval and air presence. Specifically, ensuring that we have timely delivery of the CH-148 Cyclone; ensuring a timely, transparent and accountable procurement process for our CF-18 replacements; procuring adequate naval supply and replenishment vessels; and increasing the funding and scope of the Arctic Patrol Ship Project are all good first steps towards hitting that 2% threshold.
It also means encouraging the US to ratify CLOS - the UN Convention of the Law of the Seas. That will help solidify our territorial claims in the Artic archipelago, as well as stabilize the situation in the South China Seas, by giving the US more "moral ground" to stand on in light of the recent CLOS decision in respect of China et al.
It means reforming our procurement process and taking a look at going from ”best bid" to ”preferred supplier". It also means reviewing whether industrial and regional benefits policy stil makes sense and looking at buying ”off the shelf" for future procurement to ensure the best value for money.
My father-in-law flew Trackers off the Bonaventure in the Royal Canadian Navy. He joined at Esquimalt. Good luck for your career in the navy.
Take care,
Michael

Hi gunju11,
Thanks for the question.
Yes, I think it was a mistake to campaign on those issues. In particular, the Barbaric Cultural Practices Tipline is not what conservatism is. As a conservative we must guard against using the coercive powers of the state to intrude into the private lives of its citizens. The tipline is far too intrusive ... besides, as I said to my wife at the time, we already have a tipline: It's called 911. If you see criminal activity, you call 911. Anything beyond that is none of the business of the state.
The future of conservatism is about creating opportunity for all citizens, regardless of race, religion or creed, centred around our common Canadian values, shared history and shared institutions.
It's going to be up to the voters to decide which direction we're going to take. If you want to have a say, sign up at
https://www.chong.ca/1_year_membership by March 28th for your right to vote.
Thanks,
Michael

Dear paaigeemaariee,
While I believe in the deterrent and punishment aspect of our criminal justice system, I equally believe in rehabilitation and reintegration back into society, once people have discharged their debts to society.
Rehabilitation is so important. From my recollection, some three million Canadians have, at one point in their lives or another, been convicted of a criminal offense. We only have about 15,000 prisoners in the federal prison system. Clearly, the vast majority of people who commit a criminal offense re-enter society. Making sure we have good rehab programs is critical.
For minor offenses, especially for first time offenders, this is essential. For a young man caught committing petty theft, our first reaction shouldn't be incarceration. Not only does this place a huge financial burden on our police, courts, and ultimately the taxpayer, but it's also a terrible long term investment. Our first priority needs to be making sure that they don't reoffend, which means having appropriate and sufficient rehabilitation programs in place.
For individuals in jail, we need to provide education and skills training to ensure they have an opportunity to reintegrate as contributing citizens after they've paid their debt to society. If we push them out on the streets in the same condition they entered, chances are they'll reoffend. I think the most challenging issue we face is the number of incarcerated individuals who suffer from mental illness and substance addiction, both of whom are grossly overrepresented in our penal system. Our prisons our designed to prevent criminals from escaping, not as facilities to treat mental health patients. The first step needs to be mental health strategy that treats individuals with mental health issues before offend in the first place.
Regarding mandatory minimums, I think they are appropriate for violent crimes, provided that the legislation codifying these mandatory minimums are consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Section 12 (cruel and unusual treatment or punishment). My government would never introduce legislation that was clearly going to violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Sincerely,
Michael

Hi d-boom, thanks for the question.
1) I think that it has been hard to get some conservatives onside, because initially there were a lot of conservative skeptical about the science behind climate change. I think that is changing, as the evidence continues to mount. Bloomberg had an excellent article on this several weeks ago. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/hottest-year-on-record/
As more conservatives see the need to reduce emissions more have come forward to adopt the centre-right solution to climate change. For example, just about a week ago, former secretaries of state James Baker and George Shultz - both senior Reagan Republicans - wrote on op-ed in the Wall Street Journal calling for a revenue-neutral carbon tax. https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-conservative-answer-to-climate-change-1486512334
2) The one part of my platform that hasn't gotten a lot of coverage is my plan to privatize the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. CMHC is the 800 lb gorilla in Ottawa. It has about$510 billion in mortgage guarantees in force - nearly the same order of magnitude of the federal debt! Here is my [plan]
Essentially, by privatizing CMHC's mortgage insurance business we can accomplish two goals: a) Put housing on a long term track to affordability by moderating the future growth in residential mortgage debt (which I believe is a huge factor in driving price appreciation). b) Make more capital available to small- to medium-sized businesses (this according to the IMF)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...dian-growth-conference-board/article15625943/
3) I think the Liberals do a fantastic job of connecting with young people. My party has a lot to learn from that. We often hear Justin Trudeau being derided as the ”Selfie PM," and I think that's a mistake. We need to be connecting with voters through the mediums they communicate through. Did he run a campaign built on shallow promises (for example, electoral reform)? Absolutely, and I think voters are starting to see that.
The way I'm going to win in 2019 is to build a credible, engaging platform and deliver it to Canadians in a way that resonates with them. Complaining that kids these days spend too much time on their cellphones doesn't do that.
The NDP, despite being smaller with less funds at its disposal, does a great job of training and making use of their volunteers. Partly, this is because a lot of their support comes from the ”activist" community and they know how to organize themselves. The Conservative party needs to take a page from their book. And that means working with our grassroots to make sure our volunteers are engaged at a young age, not just when we need them for elections.
4) I'm going to say 100 duck sized horses. Just because it's 2017. : )

https://www.chong.ca/michael_chong_landing?splash=1

 

[Sean C]

I don't know much about 4 of them but you can scratch off Saint-Laurent since it is a super safe Liberal riding, I just hope Yolande James wins the nomination

It'll be status quo in all five (3 Liberals, 2 Tories; I know the Liberals were talking about making a push in Calgary, but particularly given the recent oil sands flap, that's not getting anywhere).

I'm not sure if I agree on this... A party simply does not last almost 20 years in a riding -- and two MPs! -- without incurring a lot of good will and grassroots support.

Nova Scotia is a bit different from the rest of the region in having a provincial NDP with some real traction, but overall, the Atlantic has very strong traditional party affiliation, and people aren't ancestrally NDP in the way they're ancestrally Liberal or Tory.

 

[djkimothy]

5 byelections to be held April 3rd in 1st major electoral test for Trudeau government


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/five-federal-by-elections-april-3-1.3993891

Saint-Laurent (QC).
Markham–Thornhill (ON)
Ottawa–Vanier (ON)
Calgary Heritage (AL
Calgary Midnapore (AL)

I don't know much about 4 of them but you can scratch off Saint-Laurent since it is a super safe Liberal riding, I just hope Yolande James wins the nomination

Ottawa vanier is also considered a safe liberal riding. I think all those ridings are safe. i don't know anything about markham though.

 

[Mr.Mike]

Hmm makes sense... Are there any options other than privatization? Why can't the CMHC place a threshold on the insurance (insured up to a certain amount)?

Well, Chong's backgrounder on this has this to say.

While short-term measures (adjusting amortizations, down payments, risk sharing, etc.) can be taken to temper Canada’s housing market, in the long-term, privatizing CMHC’s mortgage insurance and securitization business is the most important measure that can be taken to increase housing affordability for Canadian families. Privatization of CMHC’s mortgage insurance business was something proposed by former finance minister Jim Flaherty, when he suggested in October 2012 that CMHC be privatized in the following five to ten years.

Research indicates that government-backed mortgage insurance is not necessary in order for the residential mortgage industry to operate successfully. In many advanced economies the mortgage insurance market operates well without government-backed mortgage insurance. In fact, privatesector insurers, like Genworth Canada and Canada Guaranty, currently operate in the Canadian mortgage insurance market.

Getting the government out of the business of providing mortgage insurance and securitization, and strengthening OSFI’s oversight of the banking system, will ensure more sustainable mortgage credit growth rates, reducing the risk of housing asset bubbles and the associated steep declines. This is most important thing government can do to ensure that housing returns to more affordable levels for Canadian families. CMHC currently plays a role in providing direct assistance to Canadians in housing need, such as low-income families, seniors, people with disabilities and aboriginal people. This direct assistance should be continued by the federal government, and these functions could be transferred to an existing federal department.

...

CMHC’s guarantees-in-force carry the full faith and credit of Canada, and they constitute direct, unconditional obligations of and by Canada. A paper released by the C.D. Howe Institute in February 2011 concluded that CMHC's mortgage insurance business "… subjects Canadian taxpayers to large, ill-defined risks."

Privatization of the mortgage and securitization business, in a way that removes the full faith and credit of Canada, would limit the present and future liability of the federal government. This will ensure the federal government gets out of the business of “privatizing profit” and “socializing risk.” It will reduce the risk to Canadian taxpayers – especially the third of households who do not own a home and are predominantly lower income – who are ultimately liable for CMHC’s guarantees-in-force.

In parallel to the privatization of CMHC’s mortgage insurance and securitization business, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Canada (OFSI) should be strengthened to ensure sufficient oversight and supervision of Canada’s housing finance sector. Mandated to contribute to public confidence in the Canadian financial system, OFSI has effectively demonstrated the ability to supervise, advance, advise and administer issues pertaining to Canada’s financial system. Currently, oversight and supervision of housing sector finance is split among OSFI, the Department of Finance and CMHC. OFSI’s mandate should be extended to include more comprehensive oversight of housing sector finance. This would also ensure that banks, especially systemically important ones, do not require a public bailout due to excessive risk taken in housing finance.

 

[maharg]

It'll be status quo in all five (3 Liberals, 2 Tories; I know the Liberals were talking about making a push in Calgary, but particularly given the recent oil sands flap, that's not getting anywhere).

Even if they were going to, these wouldn't be the ridings to do it in. Edmonton, Lethbridge and maybe more central Calgary would be targets. Other than the two Calgary ridings they have, Federation would be a good target and maybe Forest Lawn just from the numbers.

 

[Pancake Mix]

5 byelections to be held April 3rd in 1st major electoral test for Trudeau government


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/five-federal-by-elections-april-3-1.3993891

Saint-Laurent (QC).
Markham–Thornhill (ON)
Ottawa–Vanier (ON)
Calgary Heritage (AL
Calgary Midnapore (AL)

I don't know much about 4 of them but you can scratch off Saint-Laurent since it is a super safe Liberal riding, I just hope Yolande James wins the nomination

You can scratch off both of the Alberta constituencies too, those two aren't switching to Liberal.

West of Winnipeg isn't exactly prime Liberal territory, particularly in Alberta.

 

[gutter_trash]

It'll be status quo in all five (3 Liberals, 2 Tories; I know the Liberals were talking about making a push in Calgary, but particularly given the recent oil sands flap, that's not getting anywhere).

LOL Alberta still hates Trudeau even if gave the okay for Keystone XL

Oil is a ''no win'' issue for him no matter what he does because of both the Left and the Right.

He approves two, Conservatives want him to say YES to all of them

He rejects one, the NDP want him to reject all of them.

 

[Pancake Mix]

LOL Alberta still hates Trudeau even if gave the okay for Keystone XL

Oil is a ''no win'' issue for him no matter what he does because of both the Left and the Right.

He approves two, Conservatives want him to say YES to all of them

He rejects one, the NDP want him to reject all of them.

The provincial NDP want them approved too, and each provincial NDP is not wholly separate from the federal party.

The reality is that the NDP are frequently the substitute for the Liberals west of Ontario, and nowhere moreso than in Alberta.

 

[gutter_trash]

The provincial NDP want them approved too, and each provincial NDP is not wholly separate from the federal party.

The reality is that the NDP are frequently the substitute for the Liberals west of Manitoba, and nowhere moreso than in Alberta.

the Provincial ones have to actually govern, reality hits them in the face forcing them to adapt.

the Federal wing however, still are in dreamer mode. They are only goign to break that mindset when they ever get their hands on governing... then they will go ''oh, now we understand why the Liberals do things their way''

 

[mo60]

Mainstreet Research recently conducted a poll focused on Alberta politics mostly that also showed that the federal conservatives would win like 67% of the vote in Alberta if a federal election was held today.
http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/polls-show-albertans-want-conservative-merger

 

[Pancake Mix]

the Provincial ones have to actually govern, reality hits them in the face forcing them to adapt.

the Federal wing however, still are in dreamer mode. They are only goign to break that mindset when they ever get their hands on governing... then they will go ''oh, now we understand why the Liberals do things their way''

Pretty sure they'd still govern pretty differently (starting by getting rid of FPTP), but yes, they are an eternal opposition party at the federal level, and their opposition to pipelines at the federal level would probably have to go if they ever governed.

 

[Mr.Mike]

Mainstreet Research recently conducted a poll focused on Alberta politics mostly that also showed that the federal conservatives would win like 67% of the vote in Alberta if a federal election was held today.
http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/polls-show-albertans-want-conservative-merger

The CPC got 66.8% of the votes in Alberta in the 2011 election and 59.5% in the 2015 election.

 

[lupinko]

I got a letter this morning from the Japanese Ambassador, that was very pleasant.

 

[matthewwhatever]

New CPC leadership poll! It's of 1,900 CPC members. No geographic breakdowns, but otherwise it's the most accurate snapshot we have of the race.

Scheer being in fourth makes a lot more sense than Alexander ever did. And if he holds on to fourth and consolidates the Raitt/O'Toole vote behind him as second/third choice, then I think he stands a good chance of coming from behind -- which kind of sucks, since he's a pretty staunch social conservative, even if he claims he'd follow Harper's lead and not bring up things like gay rights and abortion.

And even though he's in first for first-choice ballots, Kevin O'Leary's still in a pretty bad spot for last choice:

This comes a few days after Abacus found that in the general population, O'Leary is hugely unpopular (and even among Conservative voters, his popularity is limited).

Obviously, a) it's still months away (and the membership deadline is five weeks away), so it's early to make predictions, and b) the ranked ballot complicates things, but a trend of people disliking you the more they see you is never a good thing for a politician.

And on the NDP side, Charlie Angus has registered with Elections Canada as a candidate. That brings their total number of candidates to 2, which means they officially have something that can be described as a race!

 

[Mr.Mike]

New CPC leadership poll! It's of 1,900 CPC members. No geographic breakdowns, but otherwise it's the most accurate snapshot we have of the race.

They do actually have the regional breakdowns and 2nd and 3rd ballot choices. But they charge $110/month for personal access and $1100/month to be able to share some of it as a media organization.

 

[Mr.Mike]

Lol'eary

 

[Kifimbo]

Lol'eary

With a 33% 'Least likely to support' percentage, it's almost impossible for O'Leary to win in a ranked ballot system. Of the remaining 66% of the members, he would need about 75% of them to reach 50%.

 

[Pancake Mix]

With a 33% 'Least likely to support' percentage, it's almost impossible for O'Leary to win in a ranked ballot system. Of the remaining 66% of the members, he would need about 75% of them to reach 50%.

Good!

Bernier is no better though and looking at that, he'd be more likely.

 

[imBask]

did we learn nothing about polls and their validity 4 months ago?

 

[Pancake Mix]

did we learn nothing about polls and their validity 4 months ago?

No, with the way the Electoral College works there, that was an entirely possible result.

In terms of popular vote, the polls weren't off by much.

 

[Mr.Mike]

did we learn nothing about polls and their validity 4 months ago?

The polls for the US national election were actually quite close. They predicted that Hillary would win the majority of votes and she did. The 2 factors that make it seem like they were wildly off was an insufficient look into specific states and how the electoral college system might affect things. The percentages people were spreading was likelihood of winning, not vote share or anything like that, and also if the probability of something is 70 out of a 100 that doesn't mean that thing is guaranteed to happen, that would be a probability of 100 out of 100.

 

[Pedrito]

Why is Obhrai the third least popular (well third "most unpopular")? That seems random. Foreign sounding name?

 

[Mr.Mike]

Why is Obhrai the third least popular? That seems random. Foreign name?

Yeah his proportion of dislike is out of step with his general profile. The intuitive implications are disheartening. I don't think the majority or even a large minority of CPC members are racist, but the people who are racist would probably be members of the CPC if they are going to be members of a major political party.

 

[Kifimbo]

Good!

Bernier is no better though and looking at that, he'd be more likely.

Bernier needs 55% of 90% of the remaining members, while O'Leary needs 66% of the remaining 75%.

did we learn nothing about polls and their validity 4 months ago?

You mean the polls that were within the margin of error ?

 

[imBask]

No, with the way the Electoral College works there, that was an entirely possible result.

In terms of popular vote, the polls weren't off by much.

The polls for the US national election were actually quite close. They predicted that Hillary would win the majority of votes and she did. The 2 factors that make it seem like they were wildly off was an insufficient look into specific states and how the electoral college system might affect things. The percentages people were spreading was likelihood of winning, not vote share or anything like that, and also if the probability of something is 70 out of a 100 that doesn't mean that thing is guaranteed to happen, that would be a probability of 100 out of 100.

You mean the polls that were within the margin of error ?

You guys are talking like every poll were pointing to a Trump victory, which I don't remember being the case at all. Again this "yeah but this is different don't worry about it" attitude feels very dangerous to me

anyhow I hope you guys are right but i'll keep my shield up until O'Leary actually loses.

 

[Silexx]

You guys are talking like every poll were pointing to a Trump victory, which I don't remember being the case at all. Again this "yeah but this is different don't worry about it" attitude feels very dangerous to me

anyhow I hope you guys are right but i'll keep my shield up until O'Leary actually loses.

Percentages, how do they work?

 

[imBask]

Percentages, how do they work?

idk i've been tainted by hockey advanced stats, nothing means nothing to me anymore

send help

 

[Pedrito]

Even if O'Leary loses, look who's right behind him. The three candidates most likely to do the most damages are the three front runners.

It's a whoever wins, we lose situation.

 

[gutter_trash]

Even if O'Leary loses, look who's right behind him. The three candidates most likely to do the most damages are the three front runners.

It's a whoever wins, we lose situation.

but Bernier is the funniest

 

[Kifimbo]

You guys are talking like every poll were pointing to a Trump victory, which I don't remember being the case at all. Again this "yeah but this is different don't worry about it" attitude feels very dangerous to me

Polls had Clinton winning the popular vote by 3% to 4%. She won the popular vote by 2.1%. What happened with the electoral college is that her turnout was lower where it was a close race, and her turnout was strong where she was already winning by a large margin.

Now, the above CPC leadership poll is just one poll, several weeks before the vote. Because there are more than 10 candidates (instead of 2 main ones like the in US race), it's very hard to predict where this will go when some candidates leave the race. So O'Leary still has time, especially if he can get the support of other serious candidates. But a 33% unfavorable percentage is a huge number to overcome.

 

[Sean C]

Even if O'Leary loses, look who's right behind him. The three candidates most likely to do the most damages are the three front runners.

It's a whoever wins, we lose situation.

Bernier is a crackpot on economics, but I wouldn't put him in the same category as O'Leary or Leitch.

 

[Pedrito]

Bernier is a crackpot on economics, but I wouldn't put him in the same category as O'Leary or Leitch.

Being a crackpot on economics is exactly why he's one of the most dangerous. I'd ranked him in front of O'Leary who is just your classic run of the mill low taxes conservative with a pinch of narcisism and populism.

Leitch is the most dangerous socially (I don't count Trost as he's so far back) and Bernier is the most dangerous economically.

 

[Mr.Mike]

I don't want to go through a national debate on the gold standard...

It would be nice to see Supply Management challenged though.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Why is Obhrai the third least popular (well third "most unpopular")? That seems random. Foreign sounding name?

Part of it is probably racism, but anecdotally, more than a few CPCers I know were annoyed with him for not seeming to take his leadership run seriously. When the first fundraising numbers came out he'd only raised $1,100 from two people (neither of which were him), he's made no attempt to hide the fact that he'd much prefer if Peter Mackay were running, and his performance at the debates has been...idiosyncratic (albeit incredibly charming, as far as I'm concerned). I don't doubt that some of it can be chalked up to racism, but I don't think that's the sole reason.

Spoiler

I seriously want to join just to vote Deepak, especially after reading his HuffPo profile.

I don't want to go through a national debate on the gold standard...

It would be nice to see Supply Management challenged though.

The gold standard, civil rights, health care/social services in general...if Bernier wins, all that stuff will be on the table in the next election. It'd be interesting to see such a stark choice between the Liberals and Conservatives, if nothing else, and I'm not sure that Bernier would have the full support of his party -- though, as has been said by others, his path to victory is a lot cleaner than O'Leary or Leitch.

 

[AuthenticM]

Far right economists are more dangerous to Canadian society than those who are far right socially, for the simple reason that the Charter is a Tesla Coil that pulverizes any threat to social rights, but notsomuch for economic rights. Even Harper's nominated judges voted against his shitty anti-terrorist laws.

O'Leary is more dangerous than Leitch. He can indirectly do what she cannot directly do.

 

[gutter_trash]

Far right economists are more dangerous to Canadian society than those who are far right socially, for the simple reason that the Charter is a Tesla Coil that pulverizes any threat to social rights, but notsomuch for economic rights. Even Harper's nominated judges voted against his shitty anti-terrorist laws.

O'Leary is more dangerous than Leitch. He can indirectly do what she cannot directly do.

I disagree,
a Canadian Prime Minister (majority) with the party in lock-step is a near dictator unless his or her MPs decide to overthrow the PM

 

[CazTGG]

Not surprised by Scheer's slight surge in popularity. He is, after all, Harper-lite with a younger face behind him.

Why is Obhrai the third least popular (well third "most unpopular")? That seems random. Foreign sounding name?

Racism no doubt plays a role (this was the party that formed from merging the Reform Party with the PCs, after all), but the main reason seems to be a very underwhelming campaign and lack of name recognition that other candidates boast. There was a poll that came out a while ago which found most people don't know who Kellie Leitch is, and she's one of the frontrunners whose campaign has, for all the ill it's wrought, garnered attention. Knowing that, one has to imagine how few know Obhrai or where he stands. Even trying to find his stances on various issues in detail in order to determine who will or won't go on my ballot and where is difficult since most articles I came across only give the briefest description of all the candidates stance's on abortion, gay marriage, etc.

Speaking of, i've finally come up with the order of my ranked ballot. Not sure i'll share them here but needless to say O'Leary and Leitch aren't on it for obvious reasons.

Far right economists are more dangerous to Canadian society than those who are far right socially, for the simple reason that the Charter is a Tesla Coil that pulverizes any threat to social rights, but notsomuch for economic rights. Even Harper's nominated judges voted against his shitty anti-terrorist laws.

O'Leary is more dangerous than Leitch. He can indirectly do what she cannot directly do.

I disagree,
a Canadian Prime Minister (majority) with the party in lock-step is a near dictator unless his or her MPs decide to overthrow the PM

Both of them are dangerous for the amount of support and 1st vote support they have. To be sure, they're polarizing for different reasons, but the amount of support they've received should not be underestimated.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Some interesting Quebec numbers for the Conservative leadership race:

According to officials from various federal leadership campaigns, 65 of the 78 ridings in the province have fewer than 100 members, including 38 ridings that don’t even have 30 members.

Which is interesting because:

Before a rally Tuesday evening in Laval, just north of Montreal, Mr. Bernier said he would be happy to come out of Quebec with about 65 per cent of the support, or 5,000 points, on voting day.

If he's low-balling his support (which would be wise, but this is Bernier, and Bernier is none too bright -- but on the other hand, he's said he's been receiving 90% of donations from Quebec)...I don't want to say that means the race is close to being over, since there's no telling how the rest of Canada will go for him, but starting off one-third of the way to victory on the first ballot certainly puts him in a very strong position.

 

[gutter_trash]

Some interesting Quebec numbers for the Conservative leadership race:



Which is interesting because:



If he's low-balling his support (which would be wise, but this is Bernier, and Bernier is none too bright -- but on the other hand, he's said he's been receiving 90% of donations from Quebec)...I don't want to say that means the race is close to being over, since there's no telling how the rest of Canada will go for him, but starting off one-third of the way to victory on the first ballot certainly puts him in a very strong position.

my Left-Wing friends are more informed about the CPC leadership race and rules than my Authoritarian-Right friends

My Lefty friends know who are the most controversial candidates and who is the most ''normal''..

My Right-nutter friends don't know any of the candidates, think that Ambrose is already leader and don't know that there is a leadership race.

so a percentage of Lefty leaning voters could buy up CPC membership card in Quebec and turn shit up LOL

 

[Fuzzy]

so a percentage of Lefty leaning voters could buy up CPC membership card in Quebec and turn shit up LOL

When are you doing so?

 

[gutter_trash]

When are you doing so?

I'm not because I respect my postal office workers

home delivery was one of my top 5 issues in 2015... seriously

so I'm not going to piss off my mailmen with CPC literature in my mailbox

 

[Mr.Mike]

I'm not because I respect my postal office workers

home delivery was one of my top 5 issues in 2015... seriously

so I'm not going to piss off my mailmen with CPC literature in my mailbox

I haven't been receiving physical literature from the CPC, just a shit load of emails and a few calls. When I donated to Chong's campaign I got a letter from Parliament without a CPC logo on it or anything. The membership card did come in a letter with a CPC logo on it, but that's it so far. And if there's like no CPC members in your riding the number of calls you might get is probably a lot less too.

 

[CazTGG]

Apparently a couple of people at the Manning Center Conference were wearing "Make America Great Again" hats (right near the end of the article) while others used words that The Rationals™ love to pull from their dictionary like "regressive left".

This is why it's important to vote in this leadership.

 

[gutter_trash]

Trump supporters are traitors to the Western Alliance and are Putin Puppets/ useful idiots

 

[maharg]

The banner appears to be unironic. The dude in the fedora is apparently a Trump speechwriter.

 

[gutter_trash]

so the CPC are turning their backs on Ukrainian-Canadians, an important constituency of Conservatism out West

any embrace for Trump is automatically an embrace for Putin

 

[CazTGG]

The banner appears to be unironic. The dude in the fedora is apparently a Drumpf speechwriter.

"M'lady, eh?"

I can already imagine him writing for Leitch:

"The crime in Montreal is out of control! This is why we need to screen for anti-Canadian values!"

"We're going to Make Manning Great Again!"

"Crooked Hair Elitist Justin & Radical Islamist Aga Khan are ruining Canada!"

so the CPC are turning their backs on Ukrainian-Canadians, an important constituency of Conservatism out West

any embrace for Drumpf is automatically an embrace for Putin

Bloody disgusting of them.

 

[Barrage]

Anyone watching this Conservative debate in Ottawa

Kellie is getting clowned

She comes across as so cold when talking about anything but racism

EDIT: She just said every VISITOR to Canada should have a face-to-face interview. I'm sure Americans would love that.