Yeah, but she wasn't without her own issues.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Canadian PoliGAF - 42nd Parliament: Sunny Ways in Trudeaupia
- Thread starter matthewwhatever
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, but she wasn't without her own issues.
Stephen Harper always looked like he just wanted to get the hell away from every other person in the room and go sit in his blessedly silent Pierre Trudeau hate shrine.
matthewwhatever
Member
I like that there's an entire subgenre of journalism built around pointing out just how bad Kevin O'Leary really is at business. He's less a smart businessman and more a buffoon who's good at playing a caricature of one on TV.
Though I'm told by people who know Tory insiders -- so second-hand gossip, basically -- that there's a general dissatisfaction with pretty much the entire CPC caucus, and they're desperate for someone to come out of the business community who can lead the party, so even if O'Leary would probably be a spectacular disaster as leader, him leading the party isn't totally out of the realm of possibility.
I like Scott Reid's take on the candidacy:
The Victorian
Neo Member
Whenever I saw pictures of him, even when he was younger, he always had this cold, dead-eyed look typically associated with dangerous drifters or serial murderers. Watching him performing Beatles' songs was like watching a robot attempting to display human emotions.
The biggest problem is that the CPC doesn't really stand up for business interests -- just the most politically expedient solution. We've seen plenty of examples during the CPC's reign, with the most memorable being Wind Mobile's entry requiring direct intervention by a cabinet minister.
That's why the CPC didn't really like passing legislation, because removed a level of control away from the PMO.
In/during their previous Harper controlled incarnation, they didn't really stand for much of anything.
Which is ironic, because that's exactly what they accused the Liberals of being.
PumpkinSpice
Banned
They stood for standing in the way of progress.
That and staying in power as long as possible. Harper wasn't even all that popular with his own base, they didn't consider him extreme enough but he was good at winning elections and keeping the leftist hippie pothead tax-and-spend liberals out. That's all that seemed to matter.
It's easy to lambaste an opponent who is in shambles of not having a firm foot to stand on, and it takes peoples eyes off the fact you yourself go with the winds to a degree.
But that's what I mean, 'staying in power'/standing in the way of progress is not really a policy platform or a party stance on a given issue. It's just a technicality
I mean, I remember it being this bad as a kid, but I didn't have to pay for things as a kid, so I'm less happy about it now. I can't do much but cut back on discretionary spending (gaming, etc) and wait for the inevitable upturn in 10 years
A lower dollar is going to suck for a consumer perspective. No way around that. However, while the western provinces are surely going to take a hit, there are opportunities that will open because our other exports are going to become much more attractive and competitive on a global market. Sadly, the benefits always lag behind the costs, so who knows when things will pick.
The outlook isn't great, but it's not doom-and-gloom either.
Only certain exports. The dollar also works against exporters because capital equipment is now more expensive.
Life is cyclical you know? This certainly feels like a year of hunkering down and cutting down on spending though for everyone.
So this is more a Canadian media story than a Canadian politics one, but I think it's still of interest.
So background info: A UK journalist for Buzzfeed has a similar name to Ottawa's mayor (Jim Waterson vs Jim Waston). This has lead him to be mistaken on Twitter by Ottawa residents who thought they were @ tweeting the mayor. Thinking this was amusing, he set up a fluff interview with the mayor which can be read here: http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/ottawa-ottawa-so-much-to-answer-for#.rlE8Br5YBe.
As a result of this interview (emails were exchanged, naturally), some City of Ottawa staffers mixed up Jim Watson's email with Jim Waterson and as a result, he has a scoop that Paul Godfrey, CEO of Postmedia, is requesting an urgent meeting with the mayor, possibly to consolidate Ottawa's two major newspapers, the Ottawa Citizen and the Ottawa Sun.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/postmedia-ceo-paul-godfrey-wants-a-private-briefing-with-may#.jkrYYPJQrB
So background info: A UK journalist for Buzzfeed has a similar name to Ottawa's mayor (Jim Waterson vs Jim Waston). This has lead him to be mistaken on Twitter by Ottawa residents who thought they were @ tweeting the mayor. Thinking this was amusing, he set up a fluff interview with the mayor which can be read here: http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/ottawa-ottawa-so-much-to-answer-for#.rlE8Br5YBe.
As a result of this interview (emails were exchanged, naturally), some City of Ottawa staffers mixed up Jim Watson's email with Jim Waterson and as a result, he has a scoop that Paul Godfrey, CEO of Postmedia, is requesting an urgent meeting with the mayor, possibly to consolidate Ottawa's two major newspapers, the Ottawa Citizen and the Ottawa Sun.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/postmedia-ceo-paul-godfrey-wants-a-private-briefing-with-may#.jkrYYPJQrB
Kabuki Quantum Lover
Member
Now that's funny. Sad, but funny.
The reality is that newspapers are gonna keep consolidating and there's really nothing anyone can do about it. Either that or they go out of business altogether, which is probably the eventual outcome of consolidation as well anyways.
It's an industry that's been in decline for almost a century now (radio -> TV -> Internet), nothing is going to stop it.
It's an industry that's been in decline for almost a century now (radio -> TV -> Internet), nothing is going to stop it.
I think it's stranger that Canada hasn't responded to the decline of print news like the US has. There's a considerable lack of news blogs, independent news aggregators, and so forth up here.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
we just piggyback off those US sources, because what happens in Canada doesn't matter (even to Canadians)
Toronto anyway is decently served by a lot of free newspapers and alt weeklies. I imagine the other big cities have a bunch of those as well.
I can't speak to the really big cities, but here in ~1million-land a lot of the content in those free newspapers are produced nationally with only a token amount of local content. Edmonton's two local free weeklies merged into one (Vue) a few years ago, largely because of the introduction of Metro and another one I forget the name of, most of which is national content and was pushed onto the market with a huge amount of advertising.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Vue go under eventually and Metro not even bother with as much local content as they have now.
There's a perspective element here too: Content produced and pushed out to local free weeklies from a national distributor will tend to focus on Ontario and/or Quebec just due to sheer market size, so even if this is happening in places like Toronto you probably don't/won't notice.
PumpkinSpice
Banned
Not sure about newspapers but CBC's local stuff online has been pretty good everywhere I've lived. I don't really care if the citizen/sun just disappear.
The problem with local CBC coverage is that it slows down considerably during the evening and holidays
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-not-invited-isis-paris-meeting-1.3409420
But remember, everyone, our allies are totally cool with us pulling our contribution from Syria. They totally respect our decision. No, really.
But remember, everyone, our allies are totally cool with us pulling our contribution from Syria. They totally respect our decision. No, really.
Blue Submarine No. 6
Member
Why would they invite us if we're pulling our planes? And why would we care? The Americans have the aircraft carrier Harry S Truman in the region, the French have the Charles De Gaaulle; those two carriers are engaged against ISIS and carry something in the neighbourhood of 120 military aircraft between them. Nobody outside of Canada thinks Canada's contribution was anything but symbolic in the first place...
We are changing Canada's roll in this kind of fight because in the end dropping bombs never solves anything, in fact it makes things worse... the Middle East is a train wreck because of a long series of Western meddling since WWI, and we're not really helping in the long run by blowing more people up now... Let the Americans deal militarily with a military problem they created, and we'll take a step back, take a breath, and try to figure out a path to peace in the region that might actually work. Because just killing more people is not working (in case someone hasn't noticed yet)...
A perfectly valid perspective to have.
Somehow, I don't think that response will work for the government.
LordOfChaos
Member
To be fair, the story seems rather reactionary and doesn't give much in the way of details other than: "It's a meeting, we didn't get an invite. Thanks
Not being involved in a single ISIS related meeting in Paris is not the end of the world, nor our seeming fall from international grace.
Simon Belmont
Banned
It's very valid. Why would you bring somebody who isn't going to be involved into the planning meeting?
Right, but the point that is being made here is that the Canadian government can't really take that stance since the optics just don't look good for them.
Simon Belmont
Banned
Not being invited to a planning session to continue a war we're not part of? That looks fine to me.
Are you giving the Conservatives soundbytes to work from, because that's all I hear in my head when I read this. A knee-jerk, finger pointing reaction to nothing.
Simon Belmont
Banned
It is typical to invite non-combatants into military planning sessions? My gut says no.
You guys do realize that the Liberals made a point to stress that they were not pulling out of the fight against ISIS, right? What the Liberals had said from the get-go was that they were pulling out the jets to 'refocus their strategy' and send in 'advisers' to train the ground forces. They were very insistent that they were going to stay part of the coalition.
Then, when Trudeau publicly states that he contacted Obama to inform him that Canada was pulling its jets he goes all 'Yeah, Obama was totally cool with that. We're bros.' The Canadian government was (and is) continually repeating that they are still very much part of the coalition and their allies are completely understanding that they're pulling out the jets. And yet, we're now seeing that Canada is being left to the sidelines in coalition meetings.
So yea, this is not good optics for the government and they can't brush this aside like no was no big deal.
Simon Belmont
Banned
So what you're saying is that we're taking a non-combatant role in the fight against ISIL.
gutter_trash
Banned
I like Trudeau but he seriously needs to mature up and speak about the humanitarian aid workers killed in Burkina Faso.
For a peace n love guy spouting the importance of humanitarian aid instead of bombs, he sure looks like an idiot when actual aid workers get killed by terrorists.
Premier Couillard stepped with a more statesman like speech about the Canadians who lost their lives.
Trudeau needs to wake up
For a peace n love guy spouting the importance of humanitarian aid instead of bombs, he sure looks like an idiot when actual aid workers get killed by terrorists.
Premier Couillard stepped with a more statesman like speech about the Canadians who lost their lives.
Trudeau needs to wake up
Well yeah, but that's not how the Liberals have been selling it.
From the article:
Doesn't sound like Canada is pulling out of the mission entirely.
Addendum: While the government has pledged to pull out its jets, it has yet to do so and in fact hasn't really scaled back either. So you basically have the coalitions allies having meetings about the combat mission against ISIS that Canada is still very much part of and yet we are being left out. It's not a good look.
But retraining the Iraqi and Kurdish forces is better than the air strikes on Canada's part. With the gains the Iraqi forces have made recently, it's been far more effective than what our six planes can do. The RCAF involvement was purely only symbolic really.
Now what's really hurting the security forces is the low cost of oil but give it to the security forces they're fighting hard even tho times are getting even tougher on them for other reasons.
Now what's really hurting the security forces is the low cost of oil but give it to the security forces they're fighting hard even tho times are getting even tougher on them for other reasons.
Simon Belmont
Banned
Would you define any part of what he said as being part of a combat mission?
What's not a good look is how far you have to reach to make this a thing.
Speaking of Canadian news, I forgot to post this yesterday, but Canadian Oil Sands finally agreed to a deal with Suncor worth $6.6 Billion. http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/suncor-cos-what-s-next-1.3408952
And to continue on from the newspaper merger story, Postmedia and Sun Media newsrooms are now definitely merging across the country. For a local (Edmonton) take: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...ton-journal-sun-dismiss-top-editors-1.3410452 and http://edmontonjournal.com/business...cluding-in-edmonton-following-sun-acquisition
And to continue on from the newspaper merger story, Postmedia and Sun Media newsrooms are now definitely merging across the country. For a local (Edmonton) take: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...ton-journal-sun-dismiss-top-editors-1.3410452 and http://edmontonjournal.com/business...cluding-in-edmonton-following-sun-acquisition
Our allies certainly don't think it's symbolic.
If it was, then why is it taking so long to pull them out? They're (the jets) not really contributing any to the combat mission, so what are they waiting for? Why has the government refused to give a timetable for when they finally pull our jet out? Certainly, it can't be because the Liberals' campaign rhetoric didn't match up with the reality of the situation and now that they are in power they've realized they can't simply pull out without compromising the combat mission and their allies.
Look, if you don't care if our allies snub us, that's fine.
But the government, and many people, do.
And it's a pretty silly look for our allies to be repeatedly snubbing us, while the Liberals pretend that they aren't. It's starting to give off a slight "Iraqi Information Minister" look.
Hah. And note, all sports news consolidated nationally. Yep, this is where things are going.
Also ffs, the Journal run out of Calgary is going to be awful.
Simon Belmont
Banned
First of all, it's at best unclear as to how the government feels about this.
Secondly, nobody here knows what is going on at that meeting and if it's even appropriate for Canada to be there in any context. From the article:
There's no indication that Canada would be at those meetings, regardless.
And thirdly, how do you rate not being invited to one meeting against getting the first state dinner in 20 years?
Our allies are snubbing us, but they're not being petty about it.
Just to give some perspective on Canada's six fighter aircraft... since 30-Oct-2014 and as of 17-Jan-2016 they have flown 1302 missions, (sorties), whatever... which works out to about three flights per day. To my thinking that makes sense given that three fighters are probably always down for routine maintenance. I would say that is a symbolic contribution. Source.
As for the "snubbing"... there are 58 other countries in the coalition that were not invited to the meeting... are they being snubbed as well?
As for the "snubbing"... there are 58 other countries in the coalition that were not invited to the meeting... are they being snubbed as well?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked