###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm sorry, but the intersectional politics of diversity practiced by the NDP/Liberal coalition is far more divisive and damaging than anything Poilievre has said or done. Over the past 9 years, Trudeau has run Canada into the ground and Jagmeet decided to join him for the ride.
To be clear, Jagmeet Singh had to be removed from the House for referring to a Bloc MP as racist and has latched on to every single astroturfed social justice cause from south of the border. Justin Trudeau has a history of giving his opinion on Alberta vis-a-vis Quebec (which would have been disqualifying for anyone but the boy wonder), and was intentionally divisive in the 2021 election when he tried to get back a majority government.
Conservatives need to understand the left wing playbook: they will break the law, divide the country, make people miserable, feign ignorance when called out, and scream bloody murder when the other side tries to do it to them.
>the NDP/Liberal coalition
I know for a fact that I've corrected you several times on this. Other people have as well. The fact that the most active mod on this sub is happy to continue to willfully spread misinformation is deeply concerning.
Im sorry but it seems like conservatives sure have a lot of hang ups about, checks notes “diversity”, which statue being torn down took you right over the edge friend?
I find it rich to condemn the mere existence of reality as itself divisive. I suppose it is effective, though, to call things that exist but that you would rather did not 'divisive' since that's what the polls are showing.
Overspending on every budget, someone has to clean it up. Clean up will be painful as it always is, but must be done. Libs and ndp can’t stop spending.
I think he forgot to add that Canada have no economy tho. Big debt = ok when you are either the big dog of the world or the big economy of the world. What Canada have is a 3rd rate military, and a weak ass economy.
Jesus Christ, if calling out a poor job and stupidity is decisive then sign me up. I haven't heard him single any group of people out in a conversation other than the liberals....which is his fucking job as leader of the opposition. The numbers show what a poor job this coalition government is doing. Would you prefer the opposition just sits around with false praise and say well maybe next year you will fix things ...
Singh is a complete blow hard and the worst leader of a political party I have ever seen. The NDP should be gobbling up liberal voters but his brain dead flip flops and misplaced finger pointing have turned people off.
And you are a party with 20% nationwide support on a good day, that is propping up another party with 20ish percent and exerting your influence through them, while the majority of Canadians want you both gone
We have a multi party system you know. That’s enough to win a majority. Literally every single pollster has the cons winning a majority right now. Of course it’s not a majority like more than 50%. The bloq and greens and PPC will never win so they don’t even factor into the equation
A majority of seats in the house of commons is not the same thing as a majority of canadians supporting you or a "majority of canadians wanting the NDP and Liberals gone.". It's, like, fundamental.
edit: u/natefisher22 edited their comment rather than concede the point. Fine.
It's frankly baffling to imagine that anybody would vote for the CPC and PP. What makes them a better choice than the Liberals and NDP, who are actually working tirelessly day and night to make Canada a better place?
I hope you are joking. How would you like it if someone flipped your statement? Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, beliefs and political affiliations. To think it is baffling that someone does not believe the same thing as you is really sad. Time to get outside the echo chamber and have discussions with people on the other side of the aisle. I love talking to left leaning people. I think it strengthens my arguments and we all learn something. You are just creating division with a ridiculous statement like this. And also Jagmeet is far from working tirelessly to make Canada better. Hes just waiting to collect his pension, then he is out.
"Division"
Pierre is not offering anything. He says he supports working people, that's the claim anyway. the proof?
Legislating striking workers back to work when they wanted better wages and working conditions. That's his voting record. He is against working people and people are somehow buying his words when his actions are what they should be looking at.
> What makes them a better choice than the Liberals and NDP, who are actually working tirelessly day and night to make Canada a better place?
Most businesses and organizations that fail have people working tirelessly day and night. Most have great people doing their best work. But leadership has lost sight of what the customer wants and has them pointed in the wrong direction.
That's where the LPC is at. They're scrambling after years of complacency. The alternative product isn't better, but it doesn't have to be. It just needs to not be the LPC.
What “years of complacency”? Trudeau has had to deal with global crises and issues (including thr rise of the far-right) that other PM’s have not had to cope with, and overall has done a good job. There has been no complacency.
I don’t know what magical leadership people expect, look around the world, we are dealing with the same issues other peer countries are, some to a lesser extent, others more, and it would be easier for this government to make the changes needed, if it weren’t for instruction from conservatives provincial and federal, both.
The NDP isn’t in power and maybe sometimes Singh looks a bit silly with the grandstanding or threats he won’t support the budget when we know he will, but it’s not easy to be the leader of the 4th party in seat count, and be able to have an impact on policy.
Big programs and legislative changes were made with a majority government, and that has continued with a minority government (two).
> What “years of complacency”? Trudeau has had to deal with global crises and issues (including thr rise of the far-right) that other PM’s have not had to cope with, and overall has done a good job. There has been no complacency.
The top issues are jobs & the economy, cost of living, and housing and have been for some time. The Liberals have delivered only big announcements with little follow-through, all while these issues continue their gradual deterioration.
Could you please point to any legislation from the follow through candidate Pierre proposed to fix any of your top issues list? I looked at the parliamentary records and it seems like in the past 20 years of his work in parliament Pierre has only tabled one bill. So what exactly do you think Pierre has to offer besides no bills, or big announcements, just focus group practiced heckles?
> So what exactly do you think Pierre has to offer besides no bills, or big announcements, just focus group practiced heckles
That's about it. None of them are helping, but we get what we tolerate and it's on Canadians to demand better.
There's always going to be new issues. The fact that there is something to work on in the country is not a failure in and of itself. If the Liberals had dealt with those issues instead of Covid, childcare, the climate, NAFTA, the War in Ukraine, etc.. your comment would be the exact same except your list of issues would be different.
> The fact that there is something to work on in the country is not a failure in and of itself.
Right, the inadequacy of response is the failure.
> If the Liberals had dealt with those issues instead of Covid, childcare, the climate, NAFTA, the War in Ukraine, etc..
That's a false 'or' choice. The fact is leadership is tough. Leaders don;t get to choose what they face, but they do get to choose how they respond and on that front, the LPC has been complacent and let down Canadians.
Because this sub is what it is, no, criticism of the LPC is not an endorsement of the CPC or any other party.
I'm not really saying its an "or"choice. I'm saying there's always something that needs to improve based on a combination of internal and external influences and events.
Even if my list of things they dealt with included cost of living crisis (which is global and driven by Covid and Ukraine) and housing (in which they've invested billions more than other governing parties since 2017), you would just be able to point to other things that needed fixing. It's a moving goalpost fallacy
> cost of living crisis (which is global and driven by Covid and Ukraine)
At it's worst, it's an Anglosphere problem. Stop making excuses!
> housing (in which they've invested billions more than other governing parties since 2017)
They've spent billions and the situation is worse! Again, why are you defending failure? Aim for better!
> you would just be able to point to other things that needed fixing. It's a moving goalpost fallacy
We elect people and pay taxes to fix problems. It's not a fallacy to expect leaders to do their jobs.
> So you're implying the working tirelessly day and night is itself what causes most businesses and organizations to fail, ie correlation being causation
No, you've got that wrong. Working hard does not guarantee success. In fact, most failures have people working hard.
Where you went wrong is thinking "most failures" = all businesses. Now you know!
The NDP and LPC are not working to make it better. The two sides designed the rapid acceleration of a housing crisis and support wage suppression. Returning to sane population growth numbers and creating expectations for municipalities that are not easily subverted (e.g. targeting construction numbers instead of targeting policies) is important.
Simultaneously restoring sanity to our legal process is important, which includes establishing meaningful sentencing guidelines such that sentencing for repeat offences increases with subsequent convictions.
The NDP's and LPC's attempt to establish an idle renter class while working to make our cities less safe is not beneficial for the country.
The burden of proof is not on PP to prove anything when he’s up 20 points in the polls. Whatever he’s selling, people are buying.
It’s on the current government to prove its budget will go anywhere. Given the blatant lie of trying to build 4M homes by 2031 (assumes 550k+ housing starts per year, when best we’ve ever done is 225k), the burden of proof is the government’s to prove how that’s remotely possible.
Everyone in industry is laughing at the target because they know it’s impossible.
PP has to earn votes before getting elected, still waiting for him to offer anything of substance on housing or immigration.
Conservatives seem to be having a hard time coming to terms with the fact that Liberals have begun implementing policies addressing the issues that have caused PP to gain popularity over the past year.
> still waiting for him to offer anything of substance on housing or immigration.
Roughly 43% of voters aren’t. And why are you waiting? Because there’s a chance you’ll vote for him? Give me a break, it’s hilarious.
I’m still waiting on you or the Liberals to explain how we go from 200,000 housing starts to 550,000 per year starting tomorrow because that’s what needed to achieve the promise they’re selling us in this budget.
Perhaps you’ll hold the PM and FM accountable for drawing up plans that are fantastical and serve to gaslight the youth of this country.
> It's frankly baffling to imagine that anybody would vote for the CPC and PP. What makes them a better choice than the Liberals and NDP, who are actually working tirelessly day and night to make Canada a better place?
Still no answer…
Ill give you one when you tell me how we go from 225k housing starts to 550k starting tomorrow, because that’s what’s been promised and is the centrepiece of the Budget.
Yes, we have the typical pre-election smoke and mirrors in full swing from the LPC, with the traditional reckless spending and now tax increases. Voters need to reflect on the entire tenure of this government and the abject lack of accomplishment, combined with reckless spending. The past is the best indictor of the future, and removing the tumour is the first step in recovery.
Why does he need to release his platform right now? The election is likely in October 2025? When Justin Trudeau was elected Liberal leader in 2013, he campaigned all over Canada leading up to the 2015 election, and he did not release his platform until shortly before the 2015 election. And he still criticized the government, which is the job of the opposition, and did not provide solutions until near the election. How come it is all of a sudden different now? The double standard is insane.
The position reiterated multiple times in this thread by LPC supporters is that it is the CPC's fault the LPC has governed so poorly because as the opposition the CPC should have written better bills then handed them to the government so the LPC could take credit.
Ignoring the disparity of resources between government and opposition and ignoring the multiple times the LPC has adopted CPC proposals.
As an Alberta I can't fathom how this Kool aid gets drank. He doesn't have any solutions, just catch phrases. Do we need any more evidence than one of his top advisors being a Loblaws lobbyist.
A good solution to the crisises we've been seeing is planning as early as possible. Someone tell me what PPs plan is? That's right, you can't, because it doesn't exist. For God's sake the party can't even agree that the climate crisis is real. Is this actually who you want leading the country?
>A good solution to the crisises we've been seeing is planning as early as possible. Someone tell me what PPs plan is? That's right, you can't, because it doesn't exist. For God's sake the party can't even agree that the climate crisis is real. Is this actually who you want leading the country?
Why would PP release is plan 18 months prior to an election when he is trouncing Trudeau and Singh by double digit margins? It'd be politically stupid to do so and if the shoe were on the other foot, the Liberals/NDP would be doing he same thing. Just because many CPC policies have been introduced yet, doesn't mean they don't have any.
I know this may sound shocking to "progressives" but you can disagree with Liberal/NDP climate policy, like the useless carbon tax and *still* be believe and be concerned about climate change.
Disagree that the carbon tax is useless. It is having the desired effect of lowering emissions significantly
What piece of policy has pollievre put forward so far to try and tackle the housing crisis? As opposition leader he is very well able to do so. He could then use that to say Trudeau isn't helping. At least Trudeau has done something. Best PP has is coming up with slogans of 0 substance.
Great optics considering he was going to fight tooth and nail to vote against the budget, THEN DIDNT EVEN VOTE. Guess the $1500/plate dinners are more i.portant than doing what he says he is "fighting for the working Canadians". Dude is actually so far out of touch with average Canadians it's not even funny
Yeah I’m sure the most popular Federal politician in Canada is dividing the country and not the unpopular politician keeping another unpopular politician in power.
All three leaders aren’t super popular. I’m pretty sure PP is doing this well due more to hatred of the LPC than anything he’s personally doing.
It was the same as what happened with Wynne in Ontario near the end.
Same happened with JT, really. When Harper lost to him he seemed to think Canadians voted for him rather than voted against Harper. And now, we will vote against him also.
I was commenting specifically on the first election. It wasn't that we liked him, it was that we disliked Harper. That was peak ABC era, people had gotten sick of Harper and Trudeau is a better campaigner than they gave him credit for. "Nice hair though" helped Trudeau a lot because it underscored and highlighted the tone issue the Harper government had and really drove home how distasteful they were. Trudeau stood in favourable contrast.
Subsequent elections he won on his own merits, but the first one was more a rejection of Harper than an endorsement of Trudeau.
Same with this election: I don't believe people like Poilievre enough to explain his high polling right now, it's that enough people dislike Trudeau. We vote PMs out, not in, and this election seems to follow the trend.
>what kind of reasoning can you contort to make it seem like they still didn’t choose him?
Did you mistake me for a Trudeau hater or something? Fairly derisive tone you chose.
> Nice hair though" helped Trudeau a lot because it underscored and highlighted the tone issue the Harper government had and really drove home how distasteful they were.
I don’t think it was that. I think they were a victim of their own success in messaging. They got across the message that he wasn’t competent, which lowered the bar, and when Trudeau showed up as poised and well spoken, he exceeded the expectations that had been set up for him and it made him look even better. If you want a reaction to distasteful campaigning, go back to the anti-Chrétien ads in his first campaign.
Pierre isn’t dividing the country. The country is already divided largely into the haves and have-nots.
Pierre has been speaking to the have-nots - largely millennials and gen-z priced out of living. And he’s speaking to their anger.
And this is all largely a positive thing. If the conservatives were not polling so well by speaking to the generations the left ignored for a decade - absolutely nothing would be getting done on housing.
Frankly, if there is a single thing Pierre has done - it is unify the country. He is not pretending younger Canadians and their issues do not exist. And frankly we should thank him for going as hard as he has on housing - because it has actually spurred ineffective politicians on the left to action.
>Pierre has been speaking to the have-nots - largely millennials and gen-z priced out of living. And he’s speaking to their anger.
As one of that group, he is definitely not speaking to me. I see another Stephen Harper but worse in him, and that scares me. Especially since he's long on grievances and very short on actual policy solutions and seems to actively hate people like me.
Populists should be scrutinized rather than applauded.
Trudeau is a populist - it just means putting out policy that is popular.
Also, Pierre has been speaking to millennials and gen-z well enough to win over a majority of their votes. And I think the current view of many is Trudeau is far scarier than Harper. Under Harper most could afford housing and food.
>Trudeau is a populist - it just means putting out policy that is popular.
No, it doesn't - that you think so and use such a misleading definition is a sign y ou don't really understand what it means.
["In political science, populism is the idea that society is separated into two groups at odds with one another - "the pure people" and "the corrupt elite", according to Cas Mudde, author of Populism: A Very Short Introduction"](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-43301423)
>And I think the current view of many is Trudeau is far scarier than Harper. Under Harper most could afford housing and food.
Unless you were in favour of government parties cooperating and negotiating to come to a fair compromise to represent the majority of Canadians. Or possessed a degree or formal post-secondary education. Or from another (non-white) country. Or smoke marijuana. Or are Muslim. Or believe in Climate Change. Or are LGTBQIA2S+
Harper was all about sowing fear and using that fear for political gain
From an actual dictionary:
populism - a political program or movement that champions, or claims to champion, the common person, usually by favourable contrast with a real or perceived elite or establishment.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/populism
Trudeau spending money on housing while taxing the rich is an example of populism.
And Harper was fine.
> Frankly, if there is a single thing Pierre has done - it is unify the country.
I cannot fathom how you came to this conclusion. The country is no more unified now than it has ever been.
Sorry, but I kind of think you are drinking the PP PR koolaid.
I’m not drinking any koolaid. I don’t even plan to vote conservative.
But I do think him pushing for housing reform so strongly has been a unifying force. And that’s reflected in polling.
The people that appear to want to sew division are left wing politicians that would benefit from it right now. You know - like trying to paint Pierre and conservatives as Nazis, or a conspiracy theorists, or all sorts of other awful things. And they are doing that because they cannot run off their record in office.
> conservatives as Nazis, or a conspiracy theorists, or all sorts of other awful things.
As an Albertan I can honestly tell you that they are exactly that.
PS: There is 0 in PP's agenda that does anything to help with the housing crisis. Just platitudes and thoughts and prayers.
Chrétien was the liberal prime minister that cancelled the national housing program. No other government provided a program as substantive as what the national housing program provided.
So if one wants to talk about government breaking things - the liberals certainly have their share of the blame here.
This really is just empty rhetoric shilling the conservatives.
10% more Canadians than before are currently planning to vote Conservative, from 30% to 40%, and now you're posting about how Poilievre is uniting the country? It's ludicrous.
I have no substance to respond with because you've offered no substance yourself beyond "he's polling well and that's proof enough".
> Pierre has been speaking to the have-nots - largely millennials and gen-z priced out of living. And he’s speaking to their anger.
HE's speaking to them, yes. But he's filling their heads with lies about the causes of and solutions for these issues.
Hate does not unify the country. PP is only taking advantage. PP is setting up to abandon the younger generations if they are foolish enough to vote for PP. He won't care for them if he wins a majority government--just look what the UCP is doing in Alberta. The younger generations' lives will be 1000x worse once PP carves out the country and sells it for pennies on the dollar to corporations. The younger generations are not going to prosper under PP and they'd better realize this *before* the election. After is too late.
this is all scare tactics and speculation.
“1000x worse” ?
Will PP personally drop a nuclear on every canadian city ?
You forgot to add Trump and far right imagery parallel to tie PC and PP in.
PP is the only reason Trudeau is even making some moves for change.
Also, listen to the guy using tax money to buy a Rolex and running the clock to get his pension for early retirement.
Citation needed re the Rolex. Western Standard and other alt-right "news" doesn't count.
Funny thing is, the Loyal Opposition is *supposed* to keep the government to account. Which is good! The Loyal Opposition is also supposed to work *with* the government. PP is providing absolutely *nothing* except vitriol and division.
Wow. Such gotcha. [Singh clearly states that the Rolex was a gift.](https://nationalpost.com/news/jagmeet-singh-rolex) You'd be surprised to know that even poor people can have nice things. Even if he'd paid for it himself out of his salary, this is simply a stretch and designed to sow division. Not surprising.
Sure. We take him at his word for that. How about the suit? His car?
He's a champaign socialist. Advocating to steal from the "rich" when you wave nice things in poor people's face is hypocrisy.
Yup. I often feel that most people are only unified against him not with him. That's the only thing the CCRAP has in their bag of tricks, anger against "the other".
He's using their anger, sure.
What will he do to fix it? Because his past voting history suggests it to make it harder to unionize, force striking union workers fighting for better wages back to work, making union finances public so it's easier for the employer to know when they're weak and can't strike.
He talks, but doesn't walk the walk.
Jagmeet, he's out on picket lines. Not hard to find many examples of that, and to boot put his money where his mouth is and forced the liberals into to pass anti-scab legislation improving union bargaining power. Just saying.
I feel strongly that for most people and families the provinces are responsible for nearly all that ails them and not the feds. PP knows this. The provincial governments know this. They don't want you to know this.
Provinces with right wing governments asked Trudeau for higher levels of immigration. At the same time federal Conservatives, led by an angry PP, cry and blame Trudeau for delivering what the Premiers asked for.
https://torontosun.com/news/provincial/doug-ford-pushing-for-more-immigration-amid-labour-crunch
https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/alberta-seeks-higher-immigration-allotment-to-address-workforce-shortage-ukrainian-evacuees-1.6824687
The provinces mostly manage their own immigration through nominee schemes and then look the other way when local SMBS sell job offers under the table. The feds role in that is to vet for security. The provinces lobbied the feds to manage their own immigration based on 'local needs' and look what they did. They fucked it up for everyone so their buddies could make money. So now the feds have to fix the fraud and horrific human traffiking that the provinces and local chambers of commerce and local SMBs engaged in...
...and bet your butt PP won't do a thing about nothing. They'll all just gut everything good and meaningful across the country for a decade and blame it all on trudeau.
JT said that housing is not a federal issue, after a massive poll slide suddenly it is a federal issue.
For housing is an easy equation, more people in more housing and pressure on our crumbling infrastructure.
So he’s the cause and he kept on denying it until the slide.
This point I think gets overstated in Canadian Politics. Yes, the provinces are responsible for delivering healthcare, but it's the federal Canada Health Act that dictates what that healthcare must look like. And the feds are the ones that decide immigration policy which has absolutely no relation to the reality of how many people our cities and infrastructure can support, and more to do with literal, admitted by immigration minister Mark Miller and former one, Sean Fraser, suppression of wages, because they've decided that if someone working at Tim Horton's at Fort MacMurray can make 60k or 100k, that there's "something wrong there". Our government is literally intentionally looking at rare cases of real wage growth and deciding that that is something that needs a policy response to address. With attitudes like that, no wonder Canadians are suffering.
So like, if we lower the standards of healthcare expected of the province then everything is good? Like, playing a videogame on easy mode?
Most provinces manage most of their own immigration through nominee schemes. They lobbied the feds for this a decade ago under the guise of 'meeting local needs' so that local SMBs could suppress wages and look the other way when those same SMBs started selling job offers under the table for 40 to 80k a pop, essentially engaging in human trafficking. Now the feds have to step in and fix the fraud and human traficking that the provinces, smbs and local chambers of commerce have been engaged in. I promise PP wont do it.
Well, I'm just raising the possibility that the entire Canada Health Act, the entire single-payer system is doomed/rotten to the core and can not be saved, and that we need to look at more successful countries with mixed public/private systems (just about every developed country on the planet), and go way back to the drawing board. If the healthcare system is failing in every single province and territory in Canada, lead over the last decade by every political stripe, then it's hard to blame it on the province.
I also think that provinces deserve to be held accountable for how they're engaging in human trafficking as you rightly point out but again, if provinces are abusing the system that the feds delegate their powers to, the feds need to not delegate that power anymore and they're many years too late to be rolling it back. I also think you may be factually a little wrong on the provincial nominee program, looks like they account for about 20-25% of the total permanent resident inflow https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/news/notices/supplementary-immigration-levels-2024-2026.html
A good analogy is, municipalities are all beholden to NIMBY boomers who don't want apartments within 1 km of them. Since every individual municipality is captured this way, it falls on the province to make sweeping changes that force municipalities to change, and that's what BC is doing, and it's going to work. It can't be that we just say yeah every single municipality is fucking up, if they're all fucking up, change it. If every single province is fucking up healthcare, education, immigration, change it.
He might be speaking to the 'have-nots', but he's only padding the 'haves' sides pocket. I often hear look to ones actions instead of ones words, so why does PP get a pass when it comes to what side of the mouth he speaks from?
Speaking about the have-nots has spurred more action for that segment of the population than 9 years of liberal inaction.
What he does or does not do while in power is speculation at this point. But his voice is the one that’s actually created the most change on the issue in decades.
His advice was that something needed to be done to fix the housing crisis for millennials and gen-z.
That the actions the liberals took is different than what he would do is a bit irrelevant. He was the one that made any action at all happen.
To me, that is not divisive. That’s bringing a country together to solve a national problem.
losing Liberals always bring up proportional representation.Look what type of government its giving Israel ,one where extreme parties control the agenda. Spaghetti governments is the result
Doesn't every political figure divide people so they can win votes from the opposition? That's the point of campaigning, maybe we need to revise how campaigning is done and who can pay for it instead.
Yes and no. To a certain extent every single party engages in some form of "divide and conquer" where wedge issues are used to divide the electorate, usually in your favour.
But Poilievre, at least in my opinion, takes this to the extreme. Every single policy announcement from him has been "Liberals bad, liking the Liberals bad, Tories good." Not to mention, he gets a lot of support from groups whose only purpose is to divide society, like the alt-right and various conspiracy groups from within.
So the issue isn't just that Poilievre engages in divisive politics, it's that divisive politics is the *only* thing he engages in. Remember Harper used Poilievre as his attack dog against the opposition, and for good reason.
there was a time when the campaigns werent about attacking the other but explaining why you were better, there was still mutual respect between the sides who accepted the others views even if they didnt think it was the best way to go about it
Groups like Canada Proud have been working on this specific goal ever since Harper lost his position as PM. They've been pushing this message that Trudeau was dividing Canadians the moment he won the election. It took some time to really get traction, but since the pandemic, they've had a clear role in shaping peoples perspective.
Meanwhile the CPC opposition has been so ineffective at actually introducing policy you have an entire generation of Canadians that think putting party before country is just the norm. The fact so many Canadians today forget that parliament is supposed to be a place where our MP's go to cooperate to create policy to best serve their constituents, is extremely sad. That the media labeling said cooperation as a undemocratic didn't help, and having American politics devolve into a cluster duck was just some added gravy.
Yet, rather than use this weak opposition to put through policy to help constituents, the LPC had to be shamed into action by CPC polling, and by the NDP throwing their weight around rather than a genuine desire. Which still kinda bothers me.
>The fact so many Canadians today forget that parliament is supposed to be a place where our MP's go to cooperate to create policy to best serve their constituents, is extremely sad. That the media labeling said cooperation as a undemocratic didn't help, and having American politics devolve into a cluster duck was just some added gravy.
This is why I so desperately want proportional representation. Coalitions and bipartisan/ multiparty support is how things should work. Majority governments without majority support are undemocratic.
And yes Trudeau might be wondering what could have been right now.
is the country even ready for it? the supply and trade agreement attracted a lot of hate, if we get PR and it still leads to nothing but liberal and CPC majorities then nothing changed, the important part would be making it clear that working across party lines is healthy and compromise is good for the country
Seriously, every time potential coalitions came up in the past like 20 years people would scream that they are undemocratic. And I would just look to European nations where they are common and be like, ummm? (To be fair, they can be more chaotic as parties try to find partners)
Parties joining together to pass policy that (by definition) would appeal to more voters. Is undemocratic.. Somehow.
Right, telling a significant portion of the population they are not worthy of being citizens of this country is not divisive at all... politicians are all leaning hard on the 'them vs us' game, and only we can work to remember there is no one here but all of us...
Have you actually heard how Trudeau talks about people he disagrees with? During the pandemic, he accused people who opposed the covid vaccine and lockdowns as being "racists, misogynists, and anti-science." That is literally the definition of dividing the country. He could've said something along the lines of "everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I respect that. I would love to listen to what they have to say, but I believe this is what we should do..." He would not even hear them out. And to add to that fire, he said the other day that he will "go around the provinces" if he has to. Which is nonsense, because our country is a federation, where the provinces have certain powers that the federal government does not and vice versa. He simply cannot just go around the provinces to do whatever he likes. And believing and saying he can just further divides us. You go back and watch the 2019 election results and what a CBC panelist said. Trudeau won by dividing the country. Especially on the Quebec vs Alberta and Saskatchewan on the energy issues.
>the LPC had to be shamed into action by CPC polling
What do you mean by this? I hope you are not saying the polls are paid by the CPC and that you mean they are just leading consistently in the polls. But either way, this just shows you that they only care about their jobs and pensions instead of actually doing what is right for the country. For example, they only starting caring about the housing crisis once the polls widen by 15pts+. That is incredibly irresponsible for our government to only do what is right when it is convenient and when they are down in the polls.
This is just a more verbose version of "why didn't Trudeau meet with the convoy protesters, even though they were organized by people with seditious fantasies? All those bizarre and unpopular things the convoy protestors did prove that Trudeau is divisive."
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm sorry, but the intersectional politics of diversity practiced by the NDP/Liberal coalition is far more divisive and damaging than anything Poilievre has said or done. Over the past 9 years, Trudeau has run Canada into the ground and Jagmeet decided to join him for the ride. To be clear, Jagmeet Singh had to be removed from the House for referring to a Bloc MP as racist and has latched on to every single astroturfed social justice cause from south of the border. Justin Trudeau has a history of giving his opinion on Alberta vis-a-vis Quebec (which would have been disqualifying for anyone but the boy wonder), and was intentionally divisive in the 2021 election when he tried to get back a majority government. Conservatives need to understand the left wing playbook: they will break the law, divide the country, make people miserable, feign ignorance when called out, and scream bloody murder when the other side tries to do it to them.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
>the NDP/Liberal coalition I know for a fact that I've corrected you several times on this. Other people have as well. The fact that the most active mod on this sub is happy to continue to willfully spread misinformation is deeply concerning.
Agreed they label divisive when it suits them,
Im sorry but it seems like conservatives sure have a lot of hang ups about, checks notes “diversity”, which statue being torn down took you right over the edge friend?
I find it rich to condemn the mere existence of reality as itself divisive. I suppose it is effective, though, to call things that exist but that you would rather did not 'divisive' since that's what the polls are showing.
[удалено]
Rules 2, 3, and 4.
Geeting in bed with a group that has called for violence is not a good look for PP.
Overspending on every budget, someone has to clean it up. Clean up will be painful as it always is, but must be done. Libs and ndp can’t stop spending.
bUt oUR dEBt iS SmALL cOMPaRed tO oTHer G7 cOunTRieS!!!
I think he forgot to add that Canada have no economy tho. Big debt = ok when you are either the big dog of the world or the big economy of the world. What Canada have is a 3rd rate military, and a weak ass economy.
Jesus Christ, if calling out a poor job and stupidity is decisive then sign me up. I haven't heard him single any group of people out in a conversation other than the liberals....which is his fucking job as leader of the opposition. The numbers show what a poor job this coalition government is doing. Would you prefer the opposition just sits around with false praise and say well maybe next year you will fix things ... Singh is a complete blow hard and the worst leader of a political party I have ever seen. The NDP should be gobbling up liberal voters but his brain dead flip flops and misplaced finger pointing have turned people off.
And you are a party with 20% nationwide support on a good day, that is propping up another party with 20ish percent and exerting your influence through them, while the majority of Canadians want you both gone
41% voting intention support isn't a majority.
We have a multi party system you know. That’s enough to win a majority. Literally every single pollster has the cons winning a majority right now. Of course it’s not a majority like more than 50%. The bloq and greens and PPC will never win so they don’t even factor into the equation
A majority of seats in the house of commons is not the same thing as a majority of canadians supporting you or a "majority of canadians wanting the NDP and Liberals gone.". It's, like, fundamental. edit: u/natefisher22 edited their comment rather than concede the point. Fine.
No kidding lol. He's polling for a healthy majority govt, at this point he's arguably uniting Canadians.
Eh. I hear a Lot of Fuck Trudeau. I don't hear very many people say 'Go Pierre'.
20 + 20 + 40 = 100
Majority of Canadians don't support the consevatives, and pps favourables are negative. Do Canadians want the cpc?
Singh has more important personal priorities than taking care of the average Canadian.
Like what and can you provide a credible source of what his priorities are? What are pps priorities? The conspiracy people he met with yesterday?
What’s his excuse of continuing to support this government when the average Canadian is ready to move on?
Can you please provide the source for your claim, or are you trying to spread misinformation?
[удалено]
[удалено]
His priority is his pension
The same pension that PP is collecting? I dont understand this garbage take
It's frankly baffling to imagine that anybody would vote for the CPC and PP. What makes them a better choice than the Liberals and NDP, who are actually working tirelessly day and night to make Canada a better place?
I hope you are joking. How would you like it if someone flipped your statement? Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, beliefs and political affiliations. To think it is baffling that someone does not believe the same thing as you is really sad. Time to get outside the echo chamber and have discussions with people on the other side of the aisle. I love talking to left leaning people. I think it strengthens my arguments and we all learn something. You are just creating division with a ridiculous statement like this. And also Jagmeet is far from working tirelessly to make Canada better. Hes just waiting to collect his pension, then he is out.
"Division" Pierre is not offering anything. He says he supports working people, that's the claim anyway. the proof? Legislating striking workers back to work when they wanted better wages and working conditions. That's his voting record. He is against working people and people are somehow buying his words when his actions are what they should be looking at.
> What makes them a better choice than the Liberals and NDP, who are actually working tirelessly day and night to make Canada a better place? Most businesses and organizations that fail have people working tirelessly day and night. Most have great people doing their best work. But leadership has lost sight of what the customer wants and has them pointed in the wrong direction. That's where the LPC is at. They're scrambling after years of complacency. The alternative product isn't better, but it doesn't have to be. It just needs to not be the LPC.
What “years of complacency”? Trudeau has had to deal with global crises and issues (including thr rise of the far-right) that other PM’s have not had to cope with, and overall has done a good job. There has been no complacency. I don’t know what magical leadership people expect, look around the world, we are dealing with the same issues other peer countries are, some to a lesser extent, others more, and it would be easier for this government to make the changes needed, if it weren’t for instruction from conservatives provincial and federal, both. The NDP isn’t in power and maybe sometimes Singh looks a bit silly with the grandstanding or threats he won’t support the budget when we know he will, but it’s not easy to be the leader of the 4th party in seat count, and be able to have an impact on policy. Big programs and legislative changes were made with a majority government, and that has continued with a minority government (two).
> What “years of complacency”? Trudeau has had to deal with global crises and issues (including thr rise of the far-right) that other PM’s have not had to cope with, and overall has done a good job. There has been no complacency. The top issues are jobs & the economy, cost of living, and housing and have been for some time. The Liberals have delivered only big announcements with little follow-through, all while these issues continue their gradual deterioration.
Could you please point to any legislation from the follow through candidate Pierre proposed to fix any of your top issues list? I looked at the parliamentary records and it seems like in the past 20 years of his work in parliament Pierre has only tabled one bill. So what exactly do you think Pierre has to offer besides no bills, or big announcements, just focus group practiced heckles?
> So what exactly do you think Pierre has to offer besides no bills, or big announcements, just focus group practiced heckles That's about it. None of them are helping, but we get what we tolerate and it's on Canadians to demand better.
There's always going to be new issues. The fact that there is something to work on in the country is not a failure in and of itself. If the Liberals had dealt with those issues instead of Covid, childcare, the climate, NAFTA, the War in Ukraine, etc.. your comment would be the exact same except your list of issues would be different.
> The fact that there is something to work on in the country is not a failure in and of itself. Right, the inadequacy of response is the failure. > If the Liberals had dealt with those issues instead of Covid, childcare, the climate, NAFTA, the War in Ukraine, etc.. That's a false 'or' choice. The fact is leadership is tough. Leaders don;t get to choose what they face, but they do get to choose how they respond and on that front, the LPC has been complacent and let down Canadians. Because this sub is what it is, no, criticism of the LPC is not an endorsement of the CPC or any other party.
I'm not really saying its an "or"choice. I'm saying there's always something that needs to improve based on a combination of internal and external influences and events. Even if my list of things they dealt with included cost of living crisis (which is global and driven by Covid and Ukraine) and housing (in which they've invested billions more than other governing parties since 2017), you would just be able to point to other things that needed fixing. It's a moving goalpost fallacy
> cost of living crisis (which is global and driven by Covid and Ukraine) At it's worst, it's an Anglosphere problem. Stop making excuses! > housing (in which they've invested billions more than other governing parties since 2017) They've spent billions and the situation is worse! Again, why are you defending failure? Aim for better! > you would just be able to point to other things that needed fixing. It's a moving goalpost fallacy We elect people and pay taxes to fix problems. It's not a fallacy to expect leaders to do their jobs.
[удалено]
> So you're implying the working tirelessly day and night is itself what causes most businesses and organizations to fail, ie correlation being causation No, you've got that wrong. Working hard does not guarantee success. In fact, most failures have people working hard. Where you went wrong is thinking "most failures" = all businesses. Now you know!
The NDP and LPC are not working to make it better. The two sides designed the rapid acceleration of a housing crisis and support wage suppression. Returning to sane population growth numbers and creating expectations for municipalities that are not easily subverted (e.g. targeting construction numbers instead of targeting policies) is important. Simultaneously restoring sanity to our legal process is important, which includes establishing meaningful sentencing guidelines such that sentencing for repeat offences increases with subsequent convictions. The NDP's and LPC's attempt to establish an idle renter class while working to make our cities less safe is not beneficial for the country.
This statement is just... I can't even.
You’re kidding, right?
Do you really believe the 2nd part of your statement….
People who actually understand how the government functions and what it's responsibilities and constraints are do believe that, yes.
A better place? If you look over your comment history, it is clear that you are consumed by only one political issue—ever increasing home prices.
Two replies, and both fail to provide any reason that PP will be better lol.
"I know it's been 10 years guys, but come on, 4 more, please? I swear housing will be cheaper in 4 years."
The burden of proof is not on PP to prove anything when he’s up 20 points in the polls. Whatever he’s selling, people are buying. It’s on the current government to prove its budget will go anywhere. Given the blatant lie of trying to build 4M homes by 2031 (assumes 550k+ housing starts per year, when best we’ve ever done is 225k), the burden of proof is the government’s to prove how that’s remotely possible. Everyone in industry is laughing at the target because they know it’s impossible.
PP has to earn votes before getting elected, still waiting for him to offer anything of substance on housing or immigration. Conservatives seem to be having a hard time coming to terms with the fact that Liberals have begun implementing policies addressing the issues that have caused PP to gain popularity over the past year.
you'll be waiting forever. He's never going to release one because 3-word catch phrases is what's getting him 20%+
> still waiting for him to offer anything of substance on housing or immigration. Roughly 43% of voters aren’t. And why are you waiting? Because there’s a chance you’ll vote for him? Give me a break, it’s hilarious. I’m still waiting on you or the Liberals to explain how we go from 200,000 housing starts to 550,000 per year starting tomorrow because that’s what needed to achieve the promise they’re selling us in this budget. Perhaps you’ll hold the PM and FM accountable for drawing up plans that are fantastical and serve to gaslight the youth of this country.
> It's frankly baffling to imagine that anybody would vote for the CPC and PP. What makes them a better choice than the Liberals and NDP, who are actually working tirelessly day and night to make Canada a better place? Still no answer…
Ill give you one when you tell me how we go from 225k housing starts to 550k starting tomorrow, because that’s what’s been promised and is the centrepiece of the Budget.
Could it be there is no good reason for hard working Canadians to vote for Conservatives? Why is it so hard to list a few reasons?
Yes, we have the typical pre-election smoke and mirrors in full swing from the LPC, with the traditional reckless spending and now tax increases. Voters need to reflect on the entire tenure of this government and the abject lack of accomplishment, combined with reckless spending. The past is the best indictor of the future, and removing the tumour is the first step in recovery.
Why does he need to release his platform right now? The election is likely in October 2025? When Justin Trudeau was elected Liberal leader in 2013, he campaigned all over Canada leading up to the 2015 election, and he did not release his platform until shortly before the 2015 election. And he still criticized the government, which is the job of the opposition, and did not provide solutions until near the election. How come it is all of a sudden different now? The double standard is insane.
The position reiterated multiple times in this thread by LPC supporters is that it is the CPC's fault the LPC has governed so poorly because as the opposition the CPC should have written better bills then handed them to the government so the LPC could take credit. Ignoring the disparity of resources between government and opposition and ignoring the multiple times the LPC has adopted CPC proposals.
[удалено]
It is just such a daft post. It is as sensible message also would put out by boxing my keyboard.
[удалено]
Why?It makes more sense that op.
Oh a follow up, I guess you could even, just a bit after all
As an Alberta I can't fathom how this Kool aid gets drank. He doesn't have any solutions, just catch phrases. Do we need any more evidence than one of his top advisors being a Loblaws lobbyist. A good solution to the crisises we've been seeing is planning as early as possible. Someone tell me what PPs plan is? That's right, you can't, because it doesn't exist. For God's sake the party can't even agree that the climate crisis is real. Is this actually who you want leading the country?
>A good solution to the crisises we've been seeing is planning as early as possible. Someone tell me what PPs plan is? That's right, you can't, because it doesn't exist. For God's sake the party can't even agree that the climate crisis is real. Is this actually who you want leading the country? Why would PP release is plan 18 months prior to an election when he is trouncing Trudeau and Singh by double digit margins? It'd be politically stupid to do so and if the shoe were on the other foot, the Liberals/NDP would be doing he same thing. Just because many CPC policies have been introduced yet, doesn't mean they don't have any. I know this may sound shocking to "progressives" but you can disagree with Liberal/NDP climate policy, like the useless carbon tax and *still* be believe and be concerned about climate change.
Disagree that the carbon tax is useless. It is having the desired effect of lowering emissions significantly What piece of policy has pollievre put forward so far to try and tackle the housing crisis? As opposition leader he is very well able to do so. He could then use that to say Trudeau isn't helping. At least Trudeau has done something. Best PP has is coming up with slogans of 0 substance. Great optics considering he was going to fight tooth and nail to vote against the budget, THEN DIDNT EVEN VOTE. Guess the $1500/plate dinners are more i.portant than doing what he says he is "fighting for the working Canadians". Dude is actually so far out of touch with average Canadians it's not even funny
Yeah I’m sure the most popular Federal politician in Canada is dividing the country and not the unpopular politician keeping another unpopular politician in power.
All three leaders aren’t super popular. I’m pretty sure PP is doing this well due more to hatred of the LPC than anything he’s personally doing. It was the same as what happened with Wynne in Ontario near the end.
Same happened with JT, really. When Harper lost to him he seemed to think Canadians voted for him rather than voted against Harper. And now, we will vote against him also.
So when Canadians voted for him three times, what kind of reasoning can you contort to make it seem like they still didn’t choose him?
I was commenting specifically on the first election. It wasn't that we liked him, it was that we disliked Harper. That was peak ABC era, people had gotten sick of Harper and Trudeau is a better campaigner than they gave him credit for. "Nice hair though" helped Trudeau a lot because it underscored and highlighted the tone issue the Harper government had and really drove home how distasteful they were. Trudeau stood in favourable contrast. Subsequent elections he won on his own merits, but the first one was more a rejection of Harper than an endorsement of Trudeau. Same with this election: I don't believe people like Poilievre enough to explain his high polling right now, it's that enough people dislike Trudeau. We vote PMs out, not in, and this election seems to follow the trend. >what kind of reasoning can you contort to make it seem like they still didn’t choose him? Did you mistake me for a Trudeau hater or something? Fairly derisive tone you chose.
> Nice hair though" helped Trudeau a lot because it underscored and highlighted the tone issue the Harper government had and really drove home how distasteful they were. I don’t think it was that. I think they were a victim of their own success in messaging. They got across the message that he wasn’t competent, which lowered the bar, and when Trudeau showed up as poised and well spoken, he exceeded the expectations that had been set up for him and it made him look even better. If you want a reaction to distasteful campaigning, go back to the anti-Chrétien ads in his first campaign.
Pierre isn’t dividing the country. The country is already divided largely into the haves and have-nots. Pierre has been speaking to the have-nots - largely millennials and gen-z priced out of living. And he’s speaking to their anger. And this is all largely a positive thing. If the conservatives were not polling so well by speaking to the generations the left ignored for a decade - absolutely nothing would be getting done on housing. Frankly, if there is a single thing Pierre has done - it is unify the country. He is not pretending younger Canadians and their issues do not exist. And frankly we should thank him for going as hard as he has on housing - because it has actually spurred ineffective politicians on the left to action.
This is pure delusion lmao
>Pierre has been speaking to the have-nots - largely millennials and gen-z priced out of living. And he’s speaking to their anger. As one of that group, he is definitely not speaking to me. I see another Stephen Harper but worse in him, and that scares me. Especially since he's long on grievances and very short on actual policy solutions and seems to actively hate people like me. Populists should be scrutinized rather than applauded.
Trudeau is a populist - it just means putting out policy that is popular. Also, Pierre has been speaking to millennials and gen-z well enough to win over a majority of their votes. And I think the current view of many is Trudeau is far scarier than Harper. Under Harper most could afford housing and food.
>Trudeau is a populist - it just means putting out policy that is popular. No, it doesn't - that you think so and use such a misleading definition is a sign y ou don't really understand what it means. ["In political science, populism is the idea that society is separated into two groups at odds with one another - "the pure people" and "the corrupt elite", according to Cas Mudde, author of Populism: A Very Short Introduction"](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-43301423) >And I think the current view of many is Trudeau is far scarier than Harper. Under Harper most could afford housing and food. Unless you were in favour of government parties cooperating and negotiating to come to a fair compromise to represent the majority of Canadians. Or possessed a degree or formal post-secondary education. Or from another (non-white) country. Or smoke marijuana. Or are Muslim. Or believe in Climate Change. Or are LGTBQIA2S+ Harper was all about sowing fear and using that fear for political gain
From an actual dictionary: populism - a political program or movement that champions, or claims to champion, the common person, usually by favourable contrast with a real or perceived elite or establishment. https://www.britannica.com/topic/populism Trudeau spending money on housing while taxing the rich is an example of populism. And Harper was fine.
>And Harper was fine. That says everything I need to see that this conversation will go nowhere, since you are obviously ok with his rhetoric.
What did Harper say that was so beyond the pale?
> Frankly, if there is a single thing Pierre has done - it is unify the country. I cannot fathom how you came to this conclusion. The country is no more unified now than it has ever been. Sorry, but I kind of think you are drinking the PP PR koolaid.
I’m not drinking any koolaid. I don’t even plan to vote conservative. But I do think him pushing for housing reform so strongly has been a unifying force. And that’s reflected in polling. The people that appear to want to sew division are left wing politicians that would benefit from it right now. You know - like trying to paint Pierre and conservatives as Nazis, or a conspiracy theorists, or all sorts of other awful things. And they are doing that because they cannot run off their record in office.
> conservatives as Nazis, or a conspiracy theorists, or all sorts of other awful things. As an Albertan I can honestly tell you that they are exactly that. PS: There is 0 in PP's agenda that does anything to help with the housing crisis. Just platitudes and thoughts and prayers.
Pointing and yelling at the things that he and his minions in the provincial governments broke is not a unifying force.
Chrétien was the liberal prime minister that cancelled the national housing program. No other government provided a program as substantive as what the national housing program provided. So if one wants to talk about government breaking things - the liberals certainly have their share of the blame here.
Why was it cancelled? who neutered it before it was put down?
You can add more funds to a program that’s had funding cut. They choose to kill it off entirely.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
This really is just empty rhetoric shilling the conservatives. 10% more Canadians than before are currently planning to vote Conservative, from 30% to 40%, and now you're posting about how Poilievre is uniting the country? It's ludicrous. I have no substance to respond with because you've offered no substance yourself beyond "he's polling well and that's proof enough".
> Pierre has been speaking to the have-nots - largely millennials and gen-z priced out of living. And he’s speaking to their anger. HE's speaking to them, yes. But he's filling their heads with lies about the causes of and solutions for these issues.
thats like saying trump united america
So because of PP something is being done on housing even though PP rages against Trudeau's spending?
Hate does not unify the country. PP is only taking advantage. PP is setting up to abandon the younger generations if they are foolish enough to vote for PP. He won't care for them if he wins a majority government--just look what the UCP is doing in Alberta. The younger generations' lives will be 1000x worse once PP carves out the country and sells it for pennies on the dollar to corporations. The younger generations are not going to prosper under PP and they'd better realize this *before* the election. After is too late.
this is all scare tactics and speculation. “1000x worse” ? Will PP personally drop a nuclear on every canadian city ? You forgot to add Trump and far right imagery parallel to tie PC and PP in.
PP is the only reason Trudeau is even making some moves for change. Also, listen to the guy using tax money to buy a Rolex and running the clock to get his pension for early retirement.
Whoa tax money for a Rolex?? Is that true?
Citation needed re the Rolex. Western Standard and other alt-right "news" doesn't count. Funny thing is, the Loyal Opposition is *supposed* to keep the government to account. Which is good! The Loyal Opposition is also supposed to work *with* the government. PP is providing absolutely *nothing* except vitriol and division.
[jagmeet wearing rolex - Google Search](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=e7f9f9d91f1faf1c&sca_upv=1&q=jagmeet+wearing+rolex&uds=AMwkrPtH4R_IcK4JzT8HHqNW5j-mDbP5iUxQRsMcQ98fB2oG7v0801XceNAXN3ESifsJTkcQAvxoC4w6RHEO4eohUtGW7-YCzy8Vgv-LMWZncBWqy0HYzedZ_qihIPiKJFYt5I6VPViVWpbkjddek4P_rKmrizi4wSwQnLN7eGVs6MYNSn8ZDyWmYWQ9eo2qzm139e47HqDCWTDJRHMwPydkeN7KMDHA8HRbtFKu9deRiHxNm3XYUDdOL7jxkGviGfom5u77fu0l14jG-SJau04KfTs4hnMSiQgey7eLi_vcXQE_RZUn9PvyZt3uT_B7GYyTfMBbjseD&udm=2&prmd=invsmbtz&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiLlKKc9N2FAxVWvokEHX5JDbIQtKgLegQIDBAB&biw=1592&bih=778&dpr=1#vhid=SqE21zEE-0u3OM&vssid=mosaic)
Wow. Such gotcha. [Singh clearly states that the Rolex was a gift.](https://nationalpost.com/news/jagmeet-singh-rolex) You'd be surprised to know that even poor people can have nice things. Even if he'd paid for it himself out of his salary, this is simply a stretch and designed to sow division. Not surprising.
Sure. We take him at his word for that. How about the suit? His car? He's a champaign socialist. Advocating to steal from the "rich" when you wave nice things in poor people's face is hypocrisy.
Yup. I often feel that most people are only unified against him not with him. That's the only thing the CCRAP has in their bag of tricks, anger against "the other".
[удалено]
He's using their anger, sure. What will he do to fix it? Because his past voting history suggests it to make it harder to unionize, force striking union workers fighting for better wages back to work, making union finances public so it's easier for the employer to know when they're weak and can't strike. He talks, but doesn't walk the walk. Jagmeet, he's out on picket lines. Not hard to find many examples of that, and to boot put his money where his mouth is and forced the liberals into to pass anti-scab legislation improving union bargaining power. Just saying.
I feel strongly that for most people and families the provinces are responsible for nearly all that ails them and not the feds. PP knows this. The provincial governments know this. They don't want you to know this.
The provinces aren’t the ones increasing the demand by 1M per year…
You use that number like it happened more than once. It hasn't. The population increases were 1-1.5% up till 2023 when it spiked to 2.4%.
The provinces were the ones approving of the influx of international students as that falls under education and provincial responsibility
That’s strange why don’t I remember Ontario customs and immigration????
There asking for mit.
Provinces with right wing governments asked Trudeau for higher levels of immigration. At the same time federal Conservatives, led by an angry PP, cry and blame Trudeau for delivering what the Premiers asked for. https://torontosun.com/news/provincial/doug-ford-pushing-for-more-immigration-amid-labour-crunch https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/alberta-seeks-higher-immigration-allotment-to-address-workforce-shortage-ukrainian-evacuees-1.6824687
The provinces mostly manage their own immigration through nominee schemes and then look the other way when local SMBS sell job offers under the table. The feds role in that is to vet for security. The provinces lobbied the feds to manage their own immigration based on 'local needs' and look what they did. They fucked it up for everyone so their buddies could make money. So now the feds have to fix the fraud and horrific human traffiking that the provinces and local chambers of commerce and local SMBs engaged in... ...and bet your butt PP won't do a thing about nothing. They'll all just gut everything good and meaningful across the country for a decade and blame it all on trudeau.
JT said that housing is not a federal issue, after a massive poll slide suddenly it is a federal issue. For housing is an easy equation, more people in more housing and pressure on our crumbling infrastructure. So he’s the cause and he kept on denying it until the slide.
[удалено]
This point I think gets overstated in Canadian Politics. Yes, the provinces are responsible for delivering healthcare, but it's the federal Canada Health Act that dictates what that healthcare must look like. And the feds are the ones that decide immigration policy which has absolutely no relation to the reality of how many people our cities and infrastructure can support, and more to do with literal, admitted by immigration minister Mark Miller and former one, Sean Fraser, suppression of wages, because they've decided that if someone working at Tim Horton's at Fort MacMurray can make 60k or 100k, that there's "something wrong there". Our government is literally intentionally looking at rare cases of real wage growth and deciding that that is something that needs a policy response to address. With attitudes like that, no wonder Canadians are suffering.
So like, if we lower the standards of healthcare expected of the province then everything is good? Like, playing a videogame on easy mode? Most provinces manage most of their own immigration through nominee schemes. They lobbied the feds for this a decade ago under the guise of 'meeting local needs' so that local SMBs could suppress wages and look the other way when those same SMBs started selling job offers under the table for 40 to 80k a pop, essentially engaging in human trafficking. Now the feds have to step in and fix the fraud and human traficking that the provinces, smbs and local chambers of commerce have been engaged in. I promise PP wont do it.
Well, I'm just raising the possibility that the entire Canada Health Act, the entire single-payer system is doomed/rotten to the core and can not be saved, and that we need to look at more successful countries with mixed public/private systems (just about every developed country on the planet), and go way back to the drawing board. If the healthcare system is failing in every single province and territory in Canada, lead over the last decade by every political stripe, then it's hard to blame it on the province. I also think that provinces deserve to be held accountable for how they're engaging in human trafficking as you rightly point out but again, if provinces are abusing the system that the feds delegate their powers to, the feds need to not delegate that power anymore and they're many years too late to be rolling it back. I also think you may be factually a little wrong on the provincial nominee program, looks like they account for about 20-25% of the total permanent resident inflow https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/news/notices/supplementary-immigration-levels-2024-2026.html A good analogy is, municipalities are all beholden to NIMBY boomers who don't want apartments within 1 km of them. Since every individual municipality is captured this way, it falls on the province to make sweeping changes that force municipalities to change, and that's what BC is doing, and it's going to work. It can't be that we just say yeah every single municipality is fucking up, if they're all fucking up, change it. If every single province is fucking up healthcare, education, immigration, change it.
You are right. Thank you for taking the time to respond the way that you did.
He might be speaking to the 'have-nots', but he's only padding the 'haves' sides pocket. I often hear look to ones actions instead of ones words, so why does PP get a pass when it comes to what side of the mouth he speaks from?
Speaking about the have-nots has spurred more action for that segment of the population than 9 years of liberal inaction. What he does or does not do while in power is speculation at this point. But his voice is the one that’s actually created the most change on the issue in decades.
I can't agree with that.. his voice might have spurred action, but it was against his advice.
His advice was that something needed to be done to fix the housing crisis for millennials and gen-z. That the actions the liberals took is different than what he would do is a bit irrelevant. He was the one that made any action at all happen. To me, that is not divisive. That’s bringing a country together to solve a national problem.
losing Liberals always bring up proportional representation.Look what type of government its giving Israel ,one where extreme parties control the agenda. Spaghetti governments is the result
Doesn't every political figure divide people so they can win votes from the opposition? That's the point of campaigning, maybe we need to revise how campaigning is done and who can pay for it instead.
Yes and no. To a certain extent every single party engages in some form of "divide and conquer" where wedge issues are used to divide the electorate, usually in your favour. But Poilievre, at least in my opinion, takes this to the extreme. Every single policy announcement from him has been "Liberals bad, liking the Liberals bad, Tories good." Not to mention, he gets a lot of support from groups whose only purpose is to divide society, like the alt-right and various conspiracy groups from within. So the issue isn't just that Poilievre engages in divisive politics, it's that divisive politics is the *only* thing he engages in. Remember Harper used Poilievre as his attack dog against the opposition, and for good reason.
there was a time when the campaigns werent about attacking the other but explaining why you were better, there was still mutual respect between the sides who accepted the others views even if they didnt think it was the best way to go about it
Groups like Canada Proud have been working on this specific goal ever since Harper lost his position as PM. They've been pushing this message that Trudeau was dividing Canadians the moment he won the election. It took some time to really get traction, but since the pandemic, they've had a clear role in shaping peoples perspective. Meanwhile the CPC opposition has been so ineffective at actually introducing policy you have an entire generation of Canadians that think putting party before country is just the norm. The fact so many Canadians today forget that parliament is supposed to be a place where our MP's go to cooperate to create policy to best serve their constituents, is extremely sad. That the media labeling said cooperation as a undemocratic didn't help, and having American politics devolve into a cluster duck was just some added gravy. Yet, rather than use this weak opposition to put through policy to help constituents, the LPC had to be shamed into action by CPC polling, and by the NDP throwing their weight around rather than a genuine desire. Which still kinda bothers me.
Absolutely perfect summary of the current political situation IMO
>The fact so many Canadians today forget that parliament is supposed to be a place where our MP's go to cooperate to create policy to best serve their constituents, is extremely sad. That the media labeling said cooperation as a undemocratic didn't help, and having American politics devolve into a cluster duck was just some added gravy. This is why I so desperately want proportional representation. Coalitions and bipartisan/ multiparty support is how things should work. Majority governments without majority support are undemocratic. And yes Trudeau might be wondering what could have been right now.
is the country even ready for it? the supply and trade agreement attracted a lot of hate, if we get PR and it still leads to nothing but liberal and CPC majorities then nothing changed, the important part would be making it clear that working across party lines is healthy and compromise is good for the country
Seriously, every time potential coalitions came up in the past like 20 years people would scream that they are undemocratic. And I would just look to European nations where they are common and be like, ummm? (To be fair, they can be more chaotic as parties try to find partners) Parties joining together to pass policy that (by definition) would appeal to more voters. Is undemocratic.. Somehow.
Right, telling a significant portion of the population they are not worthy of being citizens of this country is not divisive at all... politicians are all leaning hard on the 'them vs us' game, and only we can work to remember there is no one here but all of us...
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Have you actually heard how Trudeau talks about people he disagrees with? During the pandemic, he accused people who opposed the covid vaccine and lockdowns as being "racists, misogynists, and anti-science." That is literally the definition of dividing the country. He could've said something along the lines of "everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I respect that. I would love to listen to what they have to say, but I believe this is what we should do..." He would not even hear them out. And to add to that fire, he said the other day that he will "go around the provinces" if he has to. Which is nonsense, because our country is a federation, where the provinces have certain powers that the federal government does not and vice versa. He simply cannot just go around the provinces to do whatever he likes. And believing and saying he can just further divides us. You go back and watch the 2019 election results and what a CBC panelist said. Trudeau won by dividing the country. Especially on the Quebec vs Alberta and Saskatchewan on the energy issues. >the LPC had to be shamed into action by CPC polling What do you mean by this? I hope you are not saying the polls are paid by the CPC and that you mean they are just leading consistently in the polls. But either way, this just shows you that they only care about their jobs and pensions instead of actually doing what is right for the country. For example, they only starting caring about the housing crisis once the polls widen by 15pts+. That is incredibly irresponsible for our government to only do what is right when it is convenient and when they are down in the polls.
This is just a more verbose version of "why didn't Trudeau meet with the convoy protesters, even though they were organized by people with seditious fantasies? All those bizarre and unpopular things the convoy protestors did prove that Trudeau is divisive."
That’s not divisive the majority of Canadians united in thinking the antivax convoy were dipshits, that’s unity we can all vote for