Canadian Federal Election 44 - Sep 2021

[Oldgateboatdriver]

The problem I have with Trudeau' latest announcement that he will render something criminal (blocking access to health facilities or harassing/threatening health workers) is that it shows (as usual) his complete ignorance of Canadian law: These acts already are illegal under tons of Criminal Code sections, ranging from Mischief (430(1)), Harassment (423(1)) at the low end up to Criminal Harassment (264(1) or Uttering Threat (264.1(1)) and to Unlawful Assembly (63(1)) or even Forcible Detainer (72(2)) at the upper hand.

Basically , he should have simply said that they would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law - the usual trite response from politicians who have no say over who gets prosecuted and for what in any event.

 

[Remius]

More proof, in case it was needed, that nurses are great organizers:

Trudeau lashes out at protester who made sexist slur about his wife​

Trudeau's responses to anti-vaccination protesters during the pandemic have ranged from dismissive to sympathetic. During repeated attempts to disrupt his campaign events, Trudeau has responded in his speeches by making a joke or telling them to get vaccinated.

At a campaign stop in Quebec earlier on Monday, Trudeau thanked a People's Party of Canada supporter for helping him make his point. As he was asked by a reporter if he was concerned that PPC Leader Maxime Bernier's rhetoric was inciting violence, the demonstrator started cheering.

"Thank you, sir, for making my point," Trudeau said.

The demonstrations were organized by two Ontario nurses who have promoted conspiracy theories about COVID-19. The organizers also attended rallies in the U.S. for those who think the pandemic is a "fraud."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-lashes-out-protester-derogatory-remark-wife-1.6174623

Ah yes, the nurses who were fired back in Jan. Looks like they have a new job helping the LPC win this election with those shenanigans.

 

[Remius]

The problem I have with Trudeau' latest announcement that he will render something criminal (blocking access to health facilities or harassing/threatening health workers) is that it shows (as usual) his complete ignorance of Canadian law: These acts already are illegal under tons of Criminal Code sections, ranging from Mischief (430(1)), Harassment (423(1)) at the low end up to Criminal Harassment (264(1) or Uttering Threat (264.1(1)) and to Unlawful Assembly (63(1)) or even Forcible Detainer (72(2)) at the upper hand.

Basically , he should have simply said that they would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law - the usual trite response from politicians who have no say over who gets prosecuted and for what in any event.

but it gives him the opportunity to look like he’s being tough and decisive and taking these freaks on. All they are doing is helping his image. Brilliant.

 

[Haggis]

but it gives him the opportunity to look like he’s being tough and decisive and taking these freaks on. All they are doing is helping his image. Brilliant.

Just like his dad. "Just watch me." It's been 51 years since then. The separatist flame is dimmed but not extinguished because Trudeaus keeps it alive.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Ah yes, the nurses who were fired back in Jan. Looks like they have a new job helping the LPC win this election with those shenanigans.

Here's their web page.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Within a narrow range of quibbling, it's maximal individual liberty. Lack of property rights ain't in it, no matter how people wish to redefine the concept.

Maybe in your personal definition; here's the wiki tracing about 200 years of evolution on the libertarian concept. "Liberty" is a pretty nebulous concept and means a lot of different things to different people, so if you are calling yourself a libertarian people's understanding of that will vary pretty widely. For example, the French newspaper 'The Libertarian' was an anarchist publication.

Or you could look at the Nolan chart, created by Libertarian Mark Nolan, to show the split between personal/economic liberty to show some of the differences.

Libertarianism - Wikipedia

Lack of property rights springs from the idea that everything on Earth is collectively owned, so people claiming ownership on property infringes on other people's liberty to use that land. Again, doesn't make sense for most people, but kind of an example of why I don't specifically identify as a Libertarian; it's too broad of a philosophy so far too much room for misinterpretations.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I think you are exaggerating the power of the Trudeau's.

There has been (and always shall be, to quote Spock) an independantist (separatism can only refer to the current Canada) flame in what is now Quebec from about 40 years after the Plains of Abraham. At the beginning, the first few English governors were quite astute to the needs and wants of the Canadians (which only denoted the French settlers at that time) and they accepted the change of Crown quite wilfully. But then, the British hyper-capitalist merchants started to immigrate (The McGill's, Molson's , Ogilvy's of the world, etc.) in numbers to Montreal and basically took over the power of the governors by controlling him for their own purpose as opposed to the better needs of the community at large (in both Lower Canada - the Clique du palais, and in Upper Canada - where the Family Compact pissed off the recent American arrivals by thwarting their efforts to set things like providing for basic education for all ) which caused a call - in both provinces for independence from England: the Rebellion.

The sentiment that at some point it will have to occur so we (Quebecers now) will have full control of our destiny -whatever that may be - hasn't died yet and is unlikely to die no matter that the Trudeau's of this world exist or not.

 

[Good2Golf]

but it gives him the opportunity to look like he’s being tough and decisive and taking these freaks on. All they are doing is helping his image. Brilliant.

Gotta wonder if they’re actually on the LPC payroll….maybe via a few numbered accounts in the Aga Khan’s Caribbean home Bahamas?

#FalseFlag

 

[Remius]

Gotta wonder if they’re actually on the LPC payroll….maybe via a few numbered accounts in the Aga Khan’s Caribbean home Bahamas?

#FalseFlag

I doubt it. Crazies like those nurses or that PPC white nationalist or the CPC campaign staffers are all well known enough to discount that.

 

[QV]

I hear a federal political party trying to tell me that I should be afraid of people who don’t look or sound like me. And I think it’s gross.

That’s an overzealous take and just not true or fair. A simple check of all the PPC candidates make it obvious this is a diverse group of people and nothing in their platform tells you to be afraid of people who don’t look like you, you draw that inference all on your own. It seems to me these are people not happy with the “establishment” party choices. It says something when they can go from zero to potentially double digit support (passing the Greens and maybe the Bloc) in this short of a span. Are there a few questionable candidates? Our PM has a history of mocking black people so show me which party doesn’t have some questionable characters.

The political discourse today is such that if you don’t agree with very high immigration targets or controlling your border (or any other ideology of the left) than you must be a racist, and for the progressive radical left that’s the kind of division they want.

 

[brihard]

That’s an overzealous take and just not true or fair. A simple check of all the PPC candidates make it obvious this is a diverse group of people and nothing in their platform tells you to be afraid of people who don’t look like you, you draw that inference all on your own. It seems to me these are people not happy with the “establishment” party choices. It says something when they can go from zero to potentially double digit support (passing the Greens and maybe the Bloc) in this short of a span. Are there a few questionable candidates? Our PM has a history of mocking black people so show me which party doesn’t have some questionable characters.

The political discourse today is such that if you don’t agree with very high immigration targets or controlling your border (or any other ideology of the left) than you must be a racist, and for the progressive radical left that’s the kind of division they want.

GTFO with that nonsense. Their anti-immigrant screed runs throughout their platform. Somehow they even make it part of their housing plan. They blatantly try to drum up the fear of ‘our’ culture being supplanted. It must have killed them having to exercise enough restraint to not use the term “great replacement”. The fact that some visible minorities are running as candidates doesn’t change the overall tone. A lot can also be gleaned from who flocks to the party, and who the party is fine welcoming.

They can be forgiven for being painfully dumb on demographics, as another poster alluded to above with regards to birth rates. That’s just ignorance and is hardly unique to the PPC, though they do revel in it. Their blatant opposition to multiculturalism and the clear racist dogwhistles, however, are as I said, “gross”.

You’ve consciously chosen to be wilfully blind to this, or perhaps even to embrace it. Fine, that’s your right if their adherents are the company you want to be seen keeping .

 

[QV]

There it is. “If you don’t agree with me you’re a racist.“. Well done champ.

 

[Brad Sallows]

So, where do liberties end?

Not at whatever the most frightened among us deem necessary for security/safety.

not be allowed to have any effect on someone’s life

If I don't drop a coin into the beggar's hat, I've had an adverse effect on his life. The first place to draw a line is between active and passive.

We have behind and among us the long toll of people immiserated and killed by the ham-fisted actions of those adhering to the "centrist" political philosophies, but as soon as the spectre of libertarianism and increased individual liberty is raised, I find myself in discussions of a "what-if-people-sell-human-flesh-for-consumption" nature.

 

[Remius]

Not at whatever the most frightened among us deem necessary for security/safety.

If I don't drop a coin into the beggar's hat, I've had an adverse effect on his life. The first place to draw a line is between active and passive.

We have behind and among us the long toll of people immiserated and killed by the ham-fisted actions of those adhering to the "centrist" political philosophies, but as soon as the spectre of libertarianism and increased individual liberty is raised, I find myself in discussions of a "what-if-people-sell-human-flesh-for-consumption" nature.

the closest thing I can think of that comes to anything resembling a libertarian society is the early American west.

 

[Brad Sallows]

the Nolan chart

The Nolan chart's axes are not very orthogonal, so it's next to useless - the axes have to be truly independent. Economic freedom is part of personal freedom. Rights in property basically mean the power to decide what to do with property.

Jerry Pournelle did a better job with his axes (rationalism, statism).

I understand where the left-libertarian idea originated and I've read some of the recent stuff pushed by people who want it to have legs. But it's a dead-end hypothetical. People can't do collectivism without pinching freedom, a lot. The first thing two out of three people are going to agree on is things they don't like about the third, and how to impose limits on him.

I suppose when I refer to "libertarianism" I have to clarify that I mean practical, feasible libertarianism.

 

[brihard]

There it is. “If you don’t agree with me you’re a racist.“. Well done champ.

Your reading comprehension sucks. If I wanted to call you racist, I would do so and would show receipts. Nor does my opinion depend on whether I’m agreed with or not.

I’ve said you have chosen either to embrace or to be wilfully blind to racist platform points from a party that’s reeking of it. I’m not in a position to say which of those two options actually applies to you, so I won’t try to. Truth be told I don’t really care which it is. If you’re cool with supporting a party that wouldn’t fire an openly white supremacist riding president (Shane Marshall) until he literally got caught throwing gravel at the PM, that’s your call- but it reflects on your values and judgment. I’m not in a position to speak to your personal beliefs other than what you’ve chosen to disclose yourself.

 

[Weinie]

Your reading comprehension sucks. If I wanted to call you racist, I would do so and would show receipts. Nor does my opinion depend on whether I’m agreed with or not.

I’ve said you have chosen either to embrace or to be wilfully blind to racist platform points from a party that’s reeking of it. I’m not in a position to say which of those two options actually applies to you, so I won’t try to. Truth be told I don’t really care which it is. If you’re cool with supporting a party that wouldn’t fire an openly white supremacist riding president (Shane Marshall) until he literally got caught throwing gravel at the PM, that’s your call- but it reflects on your values and judgment. I’m not in a position to speak to your personal beliefs other than what you’ve chosen to disclose yourself.

So by that logic stated above, Trudeau supporters embrace “blackface”

 

[The Bread Guy]

Gotta wonder if they’re actually on the LPC payroll….maybe via a few numbered accounts in the Aga Khan’s Caribbean home Bahamas?

#FalseFlag

You mean like the PPC riding association president being on the LPC payroll?

Edited to add: if there's even a scintilla of evidence that this is the case, or any even tenuous link to the Liberals, we'd hear it from folks like Spencer Fernando or Ezra Levant. Mind you, let's see what counsel for the defence pulls out during any trial - if it goes to trial.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I suppose when I refer to "libertarianism" I have to clarify that I mean practical, feasible libertarianism.

Agree, I guess that's why I just stick to 'socially liberal' as it avoids the whole discussion on libertarian-ism, plus there is a lot I don't buy into in terms of the economic/free market portions, and some of the ideas on personal liberties to an extent.

Most political theories are pretty dead end hypotheticals when you get down to it and run it to extremes, and if you don't account for people being jerks, is pretty much doomed to fail. It's like the US theory of their democratic setup sounds okay on paper, but doesn't work in practice because of the people factor, with a lot of gerrymandering and voter suppression running unchecked to a large extent because of a lack of federal oversight and unified standard.

 

[Blackadder1916]

A good turn-out for the advance polls despite some of the obstacles of the new normal.

Around 5.8M Canadians voted in advanced polls — nearly 1M more than 2019 - National | Globalnews.ca

The polls were open from Friday to Monday.

globalnews.ca

Elections Canada estimates roughly 5.8 million Canadians cast their ballot at advanced polls for the federal election.

The polls were open from Friday to Monday.

According to preliminary figures provided by Elections Canada, there was an 18.5 per cent rise in advanced voters compared to the 4.9 million who voted in advance of the 2019 election.

The number of early voters does not include mail-in ballots received by Elections Canada so far.

Tuesday is the last day for people who wish to register their vote before election day to apply for a mail-in ballot.

Election day is Sept. 20.

I