Sign in to follow this  
Ryan Strome

Liberals win minority government

Recommended Posts

 

 

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

This is what exactly?  Trudeau standing next to women or the like?

 

Ya ok so totally the same as this awesome voting record or this affiliation which of course scream "get ahead" 

 

Totally...

 

 

scheer.jpg

scheer right now.jpg

I hate memes like this. (unless its against a politician I don't like I suppose, so touche).

 

Some of these things sound like like scare tactics, isn't this something Trudeau criticized the Cons of doing in 2015? Like "possible sale of assualt rifles". I think most people would read that & think of guns that fall in the 'prohibited' class & aren't available for people to buy. Even with a handgun you can only take it 3 places (gun show, gun smith, shooting range) & you have to get some kind of clearance to transport it. 

 

I'm not a gun nut, I'm not passionate about guns, I'm not against reviewing & potentially changing things in some areas, but I do have my firearms (both restricted & non-restricted) & own a hunting rifle. So tweets like this (about a really serious issue) tick me off honestly.

 

 

"Right now that's not a requirement"... I don't know where that's not a requirement in this country. When I bought my gun I had to show it & they held onto it while filling out my 'paperwork', the odd times I've gone to gun-shows friends have had to show it. When you go to buy ammo you have to show it. This to me is blatantly incorrect, unless there some nut job outlier hick gun show somewhere. 

 

 

 

Like this comment on handguns. Its gotta be locked in a box, you gotta get a permit/authorization to transport it. And you can only take it a few places, its not like the laws allow you to go anywhere you want with a handgun at anytime. "Unusual places". Unless your passionate about guns & shooting them at a range there's really no point in buying a handgun. You can't do anything with them (which I agree with), I'll probably never entertain buying one. 

 

And have fun trying to take a gun across the border! 

 

--------------

 

One other non-gun point regarding the meme. Some of these issues aren't black & white to me personally, but one question I'd have regarding it is; if he's religious, does that really matter if the Conservatives aren't going to implement a heavy religious or religious based policy?

 

(I'm just asking this as a stand alone general question, without knowing the specifics on how religious he is or isn't & how much that is or isn't involved in the CPC platform)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Violator said:

I should.

 

Just dont like singh

I don't think thats going to be a problem for much longer. 

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Squamfan said:

 

 

man the current CPC really doesn't know how to do this very well :picard: 

 

Is this what conservative Facebook is like? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

 

I hate memes like this. (unless its against a politician I don't like I suppose, so touche).

 

Some of these things sound like like scare tactics, isn't this something Trudeau criticized the Cons of doing in 2015? Like "possible sale of assualt rifles". I think most people would read that & think of guns that fall in the 'prohibited' class & aren't available for people to buy. Even with a handgun you can only take it 3 places (gun show, gun smith, shooting range) & you have to get some kind of clearance to transport it. 

 

I'm not a gun nut, I'm not passionate about guns, I'm not against reviewing & potentially changing things in some areas, but I do have my firearms (both restricted & non-restricted) & own a hunting rifle. So tweets like this (about a really serious issue) tick me off honestly.

 

 

"Right now that's not a requirement"... I don't know where that's not a requirement in this country. When I bought my gun I had to show it & they held onto it while filling out my 'paperwork', the odd times I've gone to gun-shows friends have had to show it. When you go to buy ammo you have to show it. This to me is blatantly incorrect, unless there some nut job outlier hick gun show somewhere. 

 

 

 

Like this comment on handguns. Its gotta be locked in a box, you gotta get a permit/authorization to transport it. And you can only take it a few places, its not like the laws allow you to go anywhere you want with a handgun at anytime. "Unusual places". Unless your passionate about guns & shooting them at a range there's really no point in buying a handgun. You can't do anything with them (which I agree with), I'll probably never entertain buying one. 

 

And have fun trying to take a gun across the border! 

 

--------------

 

One other non-gun point regarding the meme. Some of these issues aren't black & white to me personally, but one question I'd have regarding it is; if he's religious, does that really matter if the Conservatives aren't going to implement a heavy religious or religious based policy?

 

(I'm just asking this as a stand alone general question, without knowing the specifics on how religious he is or isn't & how much that is or isn't involved in the CPC platform)

Either JT and Liberals knows absolutely nothing about firearms and firearms regulations... which would mean they shouldn't make any decision about it whatsoever.... or they are blatantly trying to scare the public to make it easier to enact extreme firearms regulations or ban... which mean they shouldn't make any decision about it whatsoever.  

 

I get the feeling that they are trying to whip up support with factual incorrect statements, ask for a ban and then "settle" for making all non-restricted into the restricted category and then make all restricted into prohibited.  

 

They have always started using the "Scheer in the pocket of the powerful gun lobbyists" theme already.  I'm just thinking... what "powerful" gun lobby?  The NFA that has imploded?  The CSSA who are primarily the sports shooters?  The CCFR who has a grand total of 1 lobbyist?  

Yet there are tons of articles written by "journalists" who are tying the pro-gun groups with the alt-right, Islamophobic/bigot groups, the NRA, etc.  I swear, they publish such diatribe they should be forced out onto the streets and publicly shamed....

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The budget will balance itself.... not seeing much balancing or any end to the deficits that was promised back in 2015

 

Although I know a lot is being invested in infrastructure and social programs... every country is swimming in debt so we're no alone but its another example of Trudope just telling people what they want to hear come election time. I was thinking he is going to win a majority again but literally every person I ask in person says they aren't planning to vote for him.. some quite liberal people too. surprising.

 

I'm not confident the Cons have a good plan either so no clue what the answer shall be besides continuous spending to win votes

 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/politics/federal-government-posts-dollar14b-shortfall-in-2018-19/ar-AAHqWkz?ocid=spartanntp 

 

When voters get their next chance to pass their verdict on the Liberals’ fiscal stewardship, the Trudeau government will have added $75 billion to the national debt compared to their promise at the last election that they would add no more than $20 billion to the national debt.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Chicken. said:

The budget will balance itself.... not seeing much balancing or any end to the deficits that was promised back in 2015

 

Although I know a lot is being invested in infrastructure and social programs... every country is swimming in debt so we're no alone but its another example of Trudope just telling people what they want to hear come election time. I was thinking he is going to win a majority again but literally every person I ask in person says they aren't planning to vote for him.. some quite liberal people too. surprising.

 

I'm not confident the Cons have a good plan either so no clue what the answer shall be besides continuous spending to win votes

 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/politics/federal-government-posts-dollar14b-shortfall-in-2018-19/ar-AAHqWkz?ocid=spartanntp 

 

When voters get their next chance to pass their verdict on the Liberals’ fiscal stewardship, the Trudeau government will have added $75 billion to the national debt compared to their promise at the last election that they would add no more than $20 billion to the national debt.

 

 

 

The Cons plan is to cut taxes, which will lead to more debt and cuts to services.  This is exactly what Harper did, on top of the '08 crash.  In the C.R.A.P. world, Harper gets a pass for all the spending and debt he piled on, but JT is a bad man for his debt.  I don't like either, but I'll take the Liberal approach over the C.R.A.P. plan of voodoo economics any day of the week.

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still shocked at the amount being spent.  But when I look in to the numbers it makes a LOT more sense

 

Trudeau is continuing infrastructure and purchases started by the previous government which total just over $20 billion.

Trudeau is also still committing to and expanding the shipbuilding program which is an additional $10 to $17 billion

Trudeau reinvested in and expanded on numerous social programs that were cut by the former government totalling an additional $6+ billion

Trudeau doubled funding for Alberta to an almost $6 billion level

Trudeau bought a pipeline $5 billion

 

When you factor in spending/purchases earmarked to occur prior to his taking office you suddenly realize that the truth is, his debt is only half of what it was.  if he cancelled those projects all together, shipbuilding, arms procurement and infrastructure investment and didn't buy the pipeline his debt would be less than $30 billion all told.  if he didn't buy the pipeline even better.

 

But...what would people be saying about him if he just cancelled everything, didn't buy the pipeline and cancelled the procurement and shipbuilding?  Sure he'd look fiscally smarter, but he'd be lambasted for not doing anything to help people

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

The Cons plan is to cut taxes, which will lead to more debt and cuts to services.  This is exactly what Harper did, on top of the '08 crash.  In the C.R.A.P. world, Harper gets a pass for all the spending and debt he piled on, but JT is a bad man for his debt.  I don't like either, but I'll take the Liberal approach over the C.R.A.P. plan of voodoo economics any day of the week.

I think Harper did fine, getting us through the 2008 crisis, and the majority of people I talk to in person agree, hence why they are probably giving the Cons a chance again. he was pretty much "scandal" free of the top of my head as well. 

 

JT is a bad man for his debt because there is no recession right now requiring such stimulus. the economy is strong, let's work on lowering deficits and debt imo..  although as WarHippy notes above... the money does appear to be going to good use... IDK lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, goalie13 said:

This is going on in Burnaby right now.

 

 

WOW

 

Mercer called her the hell out.  Just a straight up fake.  Someone posted his actual quote below it as well.  They also posted who the candidate of that riding is door knocking with and....well...damned if the optics of that aren't bad.

 

For those wondering.  Lindsay Shepherd is a now free speech advocate that recorded some disciplinary calls and tried to blackmail  two professors under the guise of "protecting herself" after making numerous transphobic and homophobic statements and playing Jordan Peterson clips to students.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chicken. said:

I think Harper did fine, getting us through the 2008 crisis, and the majority of people I talk to in person agree, hence why they are probably giving the Cons a chance again. he was pretty much "scandal" free of the top of my head as well. 

 

JT is a bad man for his debt because there is no recession right now requiring such stimulus. the economy is strong, let's work on lowering deficits and debt imo..  although as WarHippy notes above... the money does appear to be going to good use... IDK lol

I dunno.  I think the money could be better spent but he's in a damned if you do damned if you don't situation at this point.

 

If he stopped spending he'd be yelled at.  He keeps spending he's getting yelled at.  Economy is good he's getting yelled at.  Jobs are good...still yelling.

 

Even candidates on the trail are saying "the economy is good but" as a talking point.

 

It's kind of shocking really that to be a politician in this nation you're basically just going to. be wrong no matter what you do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chicken. said:

I think Harper did fine, getting us through the 2008 crisis, and the majority of people I talk to in person agree, hence why they are probably giving the Cons a chance again. he was pretty much "scandal" free of the top of my head as well. 

 

JT is a bad man for his debt because there is no recession right now requiring such stimulus. the economy is strong, let's work on lowering deficits and debt imo..  although as WarHippy notes above... the money does appear to be going to good use... IDK lol

$55 billion deficit in one year and cuts to services gets a pass because Canada weathered the storm of the '08 crash but JT is raked through the coals for his debt.  again, both are not good.  

 

Understand, the deficits under JT have a lot to do with restoring the service cuts under Harper combined with the fact that JT would be committing political suicide if he restored Harper's tax cut.  The GST wasn't restored to pre-Harper levels and so were other Harper tax cuts.  Those tax cuts put a multi-billion hole in tax revenue.  Combine that with the crash in oil prices, and a good chunk of JT's deficits can be explained.  He is reaping the results of unpaid tax cuts that C.R.A.P. sycophants fall for.  Voodoo economics do not work, and Scheer is promising more.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Chicken. said:

I think Harper did fine, getting us through the 2008 crisis...

giphy.gif?cid=790b7611aa0eebc26782cb725f

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Chicken. said:

 

comedy central GIF by Workaholics

 

Harper wanted to deregulate markets prior to the 2008 crash. That would have put us in a far more similar predicament to what the USA went through. Canada came through that era financially largely due to the former Liberal government and Paul Martin specifically. 

 

As for the rest, as has been pointed out to you, Harper managed to add similar debt while scrapping needed taxes and slashing needed programs. That's not sound fiscal management.

 

By all means I'm not thrilled with JT adding debt either but at least it's going towards infrastructure and the populace paying those taxes.

 

I likely won't be voting for either party FWIW.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, aGENT said:

It's a shame SHD.com got shut down from pressure from the CRA (see below), they had a nice summary of all the crap Harper pulled in office @Chicken. :lol:

 

https://www.straight.com/news/766071/shdcom-also-known-$&!#-harper-did-disbands-after-being-harassed-canada-revenue-agency

For me the biggest most egregious aspect of that was the fact that Harper addressed and used CRA as his wn personal attack dog.  CRA attacked numerous charities on the left and slightly centre left as well as innocent charities based around the environment citing "political interference" costing them money and time but in some cases caused them to cease to exist.

 

But, charities on the right and centre right completely escaped unnoticed or untouched.  Numerous high profile individuals pointed this out when it was happening.  Manning and Fraser institutes completely untouched.  But a whale protection advocacy group was shut down.  

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Harper wanted to deregulate markets prior to the 2008 crash. That would have put us in a far more similar predicament to what the USA went through. Canada came through that era financially largely due to the former Liberal government and Paul Martin specifically. 

 

As for the rest, as has been pointed out to you, Harper managed to add similar debt while scrapping needed taxes and slashing needed programs. That's not sound fiscal management.

 

By all means I'm not thrilled with JT adding debt either but at least it's going towards infrastructure and the populace paying those taxes.

 

I likely won't be voting for either party FWIW.

Was going to come in here to post exactly this but you've already done so. 

 

If Harper was prime minister with a majority earlier, he would've deregulated the banks much like what they did in the states and Canada would've been hammered by the recession. 

 

Any party that comes out with a stringent anti-corruption plan with outlined laws they will add will have my vote. 

 

Don't want the situation down south to ever have a chance of coming up north. 

Edited by Duodenum
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately this is just another day of con artists making stuff up in hopes to make Trudeau look bad. They failed miserably once again. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, goalie13 said:

This is going on in Burnaby right now.

 

 

Yeah this candidate is dodging all media. She's been contacted by numerous outlets, and they just keep getting the runaround from her representatives:

 

https://www.burnabynow.com/news/burnaby-conservative-unreachable-after-months-of-interview-requests-1.23947965

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.