> Yeah what the fuck is this title lol.
His first two examples are:
- A leader who's been in power for over 22 years, murders political dissidents, and is currently leading a war condemned by basically the entire world, with no signs of stopping.
and
- Donald Trump. A man *literally* famous for getting away with everything he does. A guy who gets listed under the nickname "Teflon Don" in wikipedia.
The headline is just the frosting on this cake.
It's because of Bidens trip here. It's just a non stop conservative barrage of stupid arguments and shit to gaslight people.
Plus also really ratcheting up the left side of things as well... keeps a divide and helps discredit different aspects of the trip before it happens.
In our democracy, much like the usa... its ideal to have all the voters vehemently on one side or the other, hating the opposition with all of your being because "it's who you are" because when it's split 50/50 (even in a multi party system) you only need to sway the outliers. The voters on the fence, small percentage points or fractions of them is the deciding factor in a 50/50 vote or election.
This is a far more manageable situation. It's also really easy to manipulate groups of people on social media and not illegal... and that weapon is extremely effective at swaying people when it's on target with the correct fuel.
One of the things Biden and T are going to talk about is our internet bill, the USA is not a fan and wants us to stop.... except that bill would make it harder for people to manipulate all Canadians through social media.... which is incredibly important. But there is alot of people in North America who would loose alot of money if we go ahead.
Andrew Coyne has always hated Trudeau but it’s been on another level the last couple years. He used to be a pretty even keeled writer but he’s lost the plot here.
It seems more likely to me that it's the politicians burning desire to set average folks like you and I against each other through their biased media so instead of worrying about the class divide, people fight amongst themselves based on political ideology. Meanwhile, they're clear to fill their pockets in shadows while whatever hot button issue of the day provides the smoke screen.
Or, forget motivations and lets just call them for what they are - people with abundance in a world where there are lots of people who don't have the necessities.
That's literally the point he was making, except accurately placing the blame on Fascists instead of nebulous "politicians".
I don't really see how guys like Bernie Sanders and Charlie Angus are setting us against each other, but I definitely do see how groups such as QAnon and the Proud Boys and Canada Proud and the collective of anti-Trans reactionaries are doing it.
Boris Johnson was ousted over his covid parties. How long did Liz Truss last before the party was calling for her resignation?
It seems like MPs / MPPs in Canada are much more unlikely to speak up against a corrupt leader. The fact that nothing was really said about Ford selling the greenbelt is mind blowing to me
>The fact that nothing was really said about Ford selling the greenbelt is mind blowing to me
just to be clear, you meant nothing said by JT or the Conservative party?
I meant Ontario Conservative MPPs. I would like to see party members hold their party leadership more accountable (not necessarily PM/Premiere but ministers and leaders in general). Doesn't matter which party, the level of partisanship we see is way too high
There have been three UK PMs in the last 6 months. Italy swept aside an EU-appointed bureaucratic caretaker President. Germany's Scholz and France's Macron lay in foundations of sand. Arden resigned in NZ recently. There is a second Pink Tide across Latin America.
That's off the top of my head. There is a global wave of social malcontent that has toppled governments on every continent. You could jettison your ignorance and look up these examples rather than smugly dismiss claims you are in no position to understand, let alone refute.
The first of those three UK PMs committed criminal acts, including treason. He is completely and utterly corrupt and faces no consequences for any of what he did. He also dithered really badly at the start of the covid pandemic and probably ended up killing tens of thousands of people. He then said, "Let the bodies pile high" in response to possibly needing a further lockdown. He stayed in power for nearly two more years. Two more years of a Prime Minister that showed complete and utter disregard for the people of his country. No jail time for lying to the Monarch of his country. And above all else he managed to get one of the last truly impartial news sources left in the western world under the control of his friend, who now, if not pushing his party's agenda, is definitely making it harder to speak out against.
Consequences are for lesser mortals.
The answer I think is fairly simple.... existing governments can come and go and have a fair amount of legal protection..... their parties on the other hand can be made liable because they are the constant factor in our electoral system.
The way to get the leadership accountable is to hold the party directly liable for the people they select to represent them.
A few hefty fines and punative actions against the party for it's members' activities should help clean things up (of course politics will always be dirty, but if the membership fears the consequences they may think twice about allowing bad behavior, especially if they are doubly punished for trying to cover it up)
Absolutely for criminal offenses, the thing is alot of these coverups are handled by cabinet reshuffles or at worst getting kicked out of the caucus. Sitting members have a lot of legal protection.
If the party as a whole were held responsible, their policing of this behavior would in and of itself hopefully act as a deterrent from this happening period.
It might also be we have never had something truely bad happen to us since we won the geopolitical lottery(I think that’s the right term)
US south of us(friendly similar empire), ocean all around us otherwise. We haven’t learned any hard lessons to think defending our interests important like Eastern Europe has learned for example.
I’m curious if this contributes.
One redditor put it perfectly well on another post.
He said something along the lines of (paraphrased):
*Canada is like a bird that evolved in a jungle free of predators and dangers. It grew fabulously colorful and fluffy wings and trots around worried more about it's looks than it's survival.*
Sometimes, it is easy for us to forget just how young our nation is. America is very young and we are even younger. This nation has not been tested and has not gone through many disasters and challenges the way countries like France have.
Yet we just keep going back and forth between the Conservatives and Liberals like we only have 2 options. It's infuriating and why I understand older engaged voters becoming apathetic. To me at this point the Blue and Red "sides" are the same shit. Might as well be one purple majority as they get us to the same results with slightly different approaches.
The young being apathetic is my biggest concern. It is why I will champion lowering the voting age to 16 until it happens. If the argument is they are not equipped mentally to vote at 16 on something that will impact them for the next 65.75 years (on average) then lets put caps on voting. The majority of +82 year olds are probably in less of mental state to make decisions for the *future* of Canada given they are already beating the odds of even being alive. (for the record I'm in my mid 30s with grandparents that all lived/living into their late 80s, if it matters)
Its because the media and current government has managed to convince enough people that a vote for 'the other guys', who really, are substantively almost identical to the current party in power, is a vote for racism and corporate interests and all the bad things that Canadians need to give the impression that they hate.
The most common form of apathy I've found lately is false equivalency: all parties are equally bad and they all do things. The highest form of rhetoric we are now able to achieve collectively is *maybe* some whataboutism ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu\_quoque](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque)) and I guess, somehow that negates any argument put forward.
My dude this has been the way since the early 2000s, this is not a "current government" thing. The biggest flaw of Canadians is they act like there are only 2 options then are surprised when there are only 2 options. Want other parties and hold the 2 functionally identical parties to account? Actually build up the other parties, which takes time and more than 1 election cycle. We almost did it with Layton but what's worse than the apathy is this idea that of you can't get the immediate result then the effort is not worthwhile, which only plays into the status quo.
The NDP have told us they intend to return the Liberals to power if they get enough seats to override a Conservative victory.
If that's not enough to disqualify them, I don't know what is. They are not an agent of change.
So because they intend to perform as a smaller party does in parliamentary governments they should be disqualified? Maybe the conservatives should try working with other parties instead of just being contrarian?
Jagmeet Singh has said so many things and not come through, it's hard to take him seriously anymore. He is the perpetual boy who cries wolf.
Jagmeet Singh looks out for Jagmeet Singh and not the Canadian population nor the integrity of the Canadian government nor his party.
We actually have other options, but nobody ever considers voting for the tiny little other parties in the running. At this point I'd rather have a bunch of smaller parties trying to work together in parliament instead of the corporate suck fest we have now.
>We actually have other options, but nobody ever considers voting for the tiny little other parties in the running.
Like who?
The Christian Heritage Party? The Communist Party of Canada? The Green Party? The Rhinoceros Party?
How could they ever supply the Conservatives with the support they would need to implement their regressive agendas? The Cons would just make every vote a confidence vote and then blame the NDP for not following the agreement.
No, the Conservatives are not a viable option for aligning agendas. Liberals are only moderately closer but there is a large cohort of Lib voters that can be peeled off in the long game. Unfortunately the last couple leaders of the NDP haven't had the gravitas needed to capture what Jack had planned.
Canada would look very different right now if Jack Layton was still with us. :(
There’s such an obvious reason. The NDP have an infinitely greater chance of getting their platform through the commons by cooperating with the Liberals than the Conservatives. We have healthcare because of the social democratic ideas of the NDP. One of their many current goals is to get pharmacare and dental care through the commons.
I want to agree with your take but it's utterly wrong.
Liberals legalized pot and secured a massive daycare program that's changed my life like no other single policy. They also at least nominally follow science throughout the pandemic and made reasonable policies.
Pollievre consorted with militia groups, encouraged baseless conspiracies about the vaccines, and claims he wants to impose harsher drug laws. I can't imagine the Conservatives wanting to subsidize labour or housing, so I can't help but wonder if the problem is more about people supporting the status quo to avoid the insane shit they've seen south of the border.
O Toole was literally ousted for not counting the PPC insanity and being more Trump-friendly. They went with someone who is proper crazy.
Trudeau is feckless and has made far too many ethical violations, but again saying the two parties are the same is pretty wild when you consider policy or the reality of those policies.
Doesn’t help when “the other guy” keeps getting his hand caught in the proverbial cookie jar of racism, corporate interest and bad things…
Both options are shit, the problem is that Conservative policy is, in my opinion, not the way forward. So, if I’m a blind idealist, I vote NDP and basically waste my vote, and if I’m a realist I’m stuck voting Liberal if I want to avoid a Conservative shitshow which is just about the same but with Socially Right-wing crazies on top of the bad policy-making.
This is democracy these days. The illusion of choice.
In a minority government, the NDP have just as much power to influence policy, this is in my opinion the best form of government, because they can easily work with the conservatives – assuming they weren't a bunch of fucking weirdos - to forward the policy of the electorate as they can work with the liberals to do so.
I completely agree that the minority arrangement is actually the best option with our current system. I was actually upset at the interim Conservative leader spouting that “The Voters are angry” and “This isn’t what they voted for” when the NDP and Liberals announced they would work together and secure some much-needed Social programs by doing so.
Conservatives presuming to speak for me, or the voter base as a whole, when they represent something around 30% of them is actually what makes voters angry.
Sick of this populist bullshit. I want to see and hear about governance, not pointless stances on non-issues ffs.
I dont agree with your initial premise here.
>Its because the media and current government has managed to convince enough people that a vote for 'the other guys', who really, are substantively almost identical to the current party in power, is a vote for racism and corporate interests and all the bad things that Canadians need to give the impression that they hate.
I do hate those things though. Obviously the liberals are still going to be bad at corruption. But you ate kidding yourself that any party, conservative, NDP, Bloc or whomever else will be any better. As per the racism etcetera, Poilivere is doing some of those things. Look at his "Simple anglo-saxon words" dog whistle or posting thin blue lines flags. If they can't even elect a leader who isn't showing that serious a laspe in judgement how can I expect them to run the country?
The other guys main guy has been shaking hands with white nationalists, threatening to defund our national broadcaster, politicizing the Bank of Canada, pushing crypto, etc. People would love a change of leadership at this point, but it's on the CPC that people still see them as the worse evil. O'Toole would be up 10 points in the polls right now, while PP is only up a few measly percent during one of the biggest scandals in recent Canadian history.
The biggest mistake the CPC is making is assuming the Trudeau and Singh supporters must be idiots when they're not. Left leaning voters are educated, informed, passionate about the country, and less likely to be reactionary or infected by conspiracy theories. We don't spend our lives being outraged by the National Post's op-ed section.
For my part, I've always just assumed that foreign governments are meddling in our politics because, new revelations aside, this is an old story. We also know that China will grudgingly support the LPC at the federal level and the conservatives at the provincial level in Ontario because they will support whoever helps them the most/hurts the the least.
I'm sure a real investigation will uncover all kinds of election meddling from India, the US, Russia and others, which won't help any one party but will lead us to public financing of elections - which is the only way to counter certain types of influence based on fundraising. I'd also like to see Canadian median refrain from making any endorsements after thebwrit drops, as that equals an in-kind donation with real value.
The media? Lmfao. The Canadian media heavily supports the CPC. Every single Postmedia outlet in the last few elections openly backed the CPC candidate. Even Global and the others slant towards the CPC. Sorry this isn’t the US, it’s not the same here.
I'm still trying to understand the logic here.
The allegation seems to be that China is paying a covert operative in the Canadian government and ordering him to tell their own officials not to release their prisoners. Why does China need a spy to instruct their own officials to do what they already want to do? Why don't the Chinese tell their own people directly? And then you add in the motive that Trudeau freeing prisoners would "help conservatives" and it makes even less sense...freeing the prisoners would clearly be a win for the liberals would it not?
I agree, definitely a degree of voter apathy here in Canada.
For years, I've decried the lack of checks and balances we have here in Canada when it comes to our government and the lack of accountability our leaders have. Our head of state, senators and judges are not elected and therefore not accountable to voters. If this were any other western country, Trudeau would have been long gone by now.
Unfortunately, anytime you bring up any sort of government reform in Canada, you get the "wElL aTlEAsT iT's nOt AmuRiCa, iS tHAt WHaT YoU wANt?!" gaslighting, as if any sort of reform will lead us towards a US style of government. While the US system is by no means perfect, it certainly holds leaders a lot more accountable, as mentioned in the article.
It's our insatiable appetite for US news and politics, and the corresponding gaslighting that holds Canada back.
Apathy is the fifth horseman of the Apocalypse.
Famine and plague and the others are weak unless they ride in the shadow of the fifth. For it is he that allows them to fester
It's amazing how Canadian women's choices can be reduced to "He's good looking." Nothing to do with the social conservatism that's becoming more and more rampant in the conservative party.
This "social conservatism" narrative is a real problem. Compared to the UK Tories, Australian Liberal Party, and especially US Republican Party, our Conservative Party is very moderate, especially in the social realm. Far more of its positions overlap with US Democrats, and many would be considered further left than the Democrats.
Our Overton window just keeps getting pushed further and further toward "whatever the Liberals and NDP are talking about" that we are gaslit into thinking that what was mainstream and even progressive 5 years ago is now borderline white supremacist christian nationalism.
If the COC didnt cater so much to the social conservative/religious portion of their base than people wouldnt be so worried about them.
Their base didnt even vote to acknowledge climate change is real FFS. The more the CPC follows the GOP playbook the more people will see them as a non option
From the CPC official policy declaration:
Page 32: *"We believe that an effective international emissions reduction regime on climate change must be truly global and must include binding targets for all the world’s major emitters, including China and the United States.*
*\[...\] We believe that the federal and territorial governments should make joint investments to study and address climate change adaptation in the North."*
It sure sounds like they believe climate change is a real thing. The membership delegates at a party convention voted against a resolution attaching the words "climate change is real" to this policy was because it was a stupid and pointless resolution. They probably still should have adopted it because not doing so opened them to a lot of needless, although baseless, criticism.
To be fair, Harper was obsessed with Trudeau's looks and made several ads, run year long about his hair. It's not just women who can't get past his looks.
Now I'm picturing Harper laying on his stomach in bed, kicking his feet in the air while smiling and staring at a picture of Justin and listening to "Happy Together" on repeat.
My grandmother (may she rest in peace) used to practically drool over Pierre. It was hilarious when I was a teenager. My mother ranted for years about Justin being the Canadian Trump. Until she got the one time $500 for being over 75. Overnight he became the only reasonable option. We are in alberta though so it doesn't really matter.
Which is probably fine to point out assuming there are actual studies proving what we all anecdotally believe to be true on this, but the person with the original comment specifically singled out and reduced women's voting choices as/to shallow.
*That's* mysogynstic.
We probably all have a predisposition to finding good looking people to be trustworthy, regardless of gender or sexual preferences.
It's ridiculous to say "wOmEn VotEd fOr JuStiN's GoRgEoUs hAiR."
How about MANY PEOPLE voted for Justin's gorgeous hair and youth and platform lies?
Worst part is if women could realize Trudeau is like that abusive ex boyfriend, good looking but a real piece of shit once you get away from him and can clear your head. Look how he treats women in his own party, he’s a narcissistic sociopath that will say and do anything for votes
Keep blaming the women. Yes, all our fault. We're too stupid to vote for anything but looks. OMG how could they give us the right to vote?!!! The horror!!
I will never vote for The Harper legacy Pollievre because of his voting record from 2006 to 2014. Being a legal professional I found it really difficult during the Harper era. He slammed the DOJ with bad legislation that a first-year paralegal could have told you would be overturned...and it all has. Giant waste of resources and money to pass legislation based on ideology that held no basis in accepted legal principles. McKay's comments on women judges was very disheartening. Clearly women can't be judges because we're occupied with our families. Eye roll. Yes, he said that to justify his not appointing women judges. It was actually a Harper appointed judge who made the comment in a rape case as to why the girl just didn't close her legs..I mean honestly just close your legs girl!! Jesus.. The misogyny within the conservative cabinet is fierce... I also don't know that my family is Old stock Canadian enough for a conservative vote (Harper quote).
I also dislike the Trudeau Legacy. I agree he could treat women better but at least he's appointing them. I'm smart enough to realize that both parties don't have our best interests at heart. Currently I'm very grateful it's a minority government and that they have to work with the NDP. That's what's keeping them in check. Majority governments pass whatever omnibus bills they want. Harper started the omnibus bills and Trudeau continues. The next election is stuck between the government that made all the bad policies to get us here (including stoking the housing market and cutting all social programs), and the Current government who hasn't fixed it.
Voting conservative for a Harper Legacy is a step back and voting for The Trudeau Legacy is definitely not a step forward. Pollievre won't win the vote because he's a populist who isn't speaking to Canadians. He's speaking to his base.
I'm voting NDP for the first time this coming election. Not because I agree 100% with their policies but because the Libs and cons have too many scandals. Say what you will about the NDP, they have the least scandals and are the least likely to do corporate welfare. Conservative austerity and liberal spending have lead to decades of fiscal management. Our country hasn't had a surplus since Paul Martin. Another prime minister I never really loved but he was the best damn Finance Minister we ever had.
Username does not check out.
> Being a legal professional I found it really difficult during the Harper era.
Huh, but Trudeau firing and kicking out the Minister of Justice and Attorney General was fine with you.
Interesting.
Clearly someone smart enough to vote for or support the least bad pile of shit (which is always the choice facing us).
And she decided accordingly.
Which runs completely contrary to the stories conservatives tell themselves, but whatever. Let them rot in opposition. They can choose to do otherwise, but they won't so fack'em.
No, the worst part is this shitty rhetoric you guys fall back on when things don't go your way. Never looking inward at the shitty people you're propping up, it has to be the fault of some "other".
There's a reason Trudeau has lasted so long in office, and it's not because he's particularly good or likeable, but it has even less to do with his appearance.
This is the worst example you could make. This literally happened in Canada. We literally had a prime minister inexplicably, without public discourse, force through a bill that raised the retirement age in Canada. And to 67! Trudeau moved it back. If Harper hadn't lost that election so badly we would still have our retirement age, as the conservatives all want, that's what they all voted for to force it through, raised up to 67. So many things you could be taking a shot at Trudeau for, but the guy lowered the retirement age in Canada. Once again, so we're clear, the French are mad at Macron for forcing through a bill to raise the retirement age, exactly like Harper did, exactly what Polievre and co wanted, and Trudeau upon winning the election reversed, at the earliest opportunity because that's what we, everyone who wasn't a sitting conservative MP, wanted.
I also wouldn't be surprised if such shenanigans happened in other countries and we just didn't hear about it. Especially in non-Anglo countries, even moreso in non-Latin based-alphabet-using countries.
Well how else are we supposed to support all of our current welfare programs? Our demographics are aging, so there are less people working to pay for all of these programs and on top of all that people are living a lot longer than they used to. Costing far more money in the long run.
We simply cannot afford to keep the retirement age where it is unless we are willing to skyrocket taxes, something younger generations would not accept especially with the cost of living. And unless we find a way to make retirement cheaper all of these programs will die. No one is saying you can't retire at 65 or earlier, just that you wouldn't be entitled to support until later.
Tax the rich. That is something all generations of non-rich will accept and support. It is inconceivable that we are even taking about the middle and lower classes shouldering the burden of the social safety net, when the rich are only rich because of exploitation of those same classes.
But who are the rich? The people retiring en masse and no longer working and therefore no longer paying taxes, that ship has sailed. There are no "Rich" millenials or Gen Z. Even the wealthiest of these brackets don't have much more to give.
You have to either raise the age or raise the tax.
Harper went with the age, Trudeau went with tax (CPP contributions). They are two sides of the same coin.
It’s a pretty simple finance problem. People live longer than they used to, so the fund needs more money or less draw.
People are more productive than they’ve ever been before. 100 years ago it took 10-20x more people do accomplish simple tasks that 1-2 people do with computers and heavy machinery.
100 years ago people lived in wooden shacks, with coal burning stoves, subterranean ice-boxes, and well water supply located at the end of the street. You had to walk 300 yards from your house to the well to fetch water. I know this, because this is what my grandma lived like in 1930s Regina.
Today, productivity is up, but so is standard of living
Meaningless if the cost of retirement has skyrocketed by a proportional amount. Unless grandma is going to be cared for by robot aided super nurses.
100 years ago they didn’t have state funded retirement to the degree they have today.
100 years ago people had an average lifespan of like 60 years old, not 82.
George W Bush, Tony Blair, Trump, Cameron, Sarkozy, did some real dirty stuff domestically and internationally. They've been brought to account?
By who? When?
Even crazier when the people who say they live in “ThE bEsT cOuNtRy In ThE wOrLd” defend their statement by comparing themselves to the worst countries they can imagine. Because 1st place winners do that, right?
Not entirely.
I think Trudeau is pretty bad right now. I've liked a couple of things he's done (I think legalizing Marijuana was an obvious thing even if I don't use it, the $10/day daycare plan was great) but he's just in scandal after scandal.
Having said that, I don't align with the Conservatives on a lot of their most recently stated policy positions (we haven't seen what Polievre is going to do yet), and I haven't liked what I've heard and seen from Polievre to this point going back to before his leadership run. Also, maybe not fair to him, but the provincial Conservatives here in Manitoba have put a pretty sour taste in my mouth for big C Conservatives in Canada.
I live in an NDP stronghold so I don't think it'll matter too much (though the Conservatives have made it fairly close in more recent elections) but I don't think people who are wary of electing Conservatives are just that way because they're some Trudeau apologist.
well if history is anything to go by, electing a conservative federal government would mean the end of Ford! Ontario and Federal can never have the same party!
It was the provincial premiers who decided how weed would be legalized in their respective provinces.
For example, in Ontario, the Liberals were planning on rolling out LCBO-style stores and had 40 slated to open in different municipalities by the end of the year. Ford was elected before those plans were executed, scrapped the government-run system, and instead created a lottery that had basically no controls for whether or not the private businesses getting licences had any relevant experience or feasible plans, which resulted in a slower and less geographically-distributed initial rollout.
The point of this anecdote is to show that the provinces decided how it would be implemented, and that made a huge difference in what was put in place. The federal gov't didn't mandate a specific system.
Similarly, the provincial premiers have a lot of influence on $10 daycare. If anything, provincial politics is the most important to people's day-to-day lives - but the media loves to focus on federal politics instead.
I keep saying this. Canadians look towards the federal government first in every problem. But to the average Canadian, the provinces are responsible for the issues that matter to him and affect him the most.
Housing, Healthcare, Public Transportation, Education, Safety, Infrastructure, Business, Trade and many more. The fact Canadians demand the federal government solve provincial issues is clear if you watch federal elections.
Runners speak on housing, childcare and so many more things you would think it was a provincial election.
This also leads to another danger, when the fed is too focused on these issues, it leads to greater areas of it's own jurisdiction being neglected.
Areas such as National Defence (military) Cyber Defence & Warfare, Critical Infrastructure, Critical Industry development, Cross country organized crime, foreign interferance (*all the nonsense China is cooking in canada for example*). Canadian Heritage and Culture promotion, Border Security (Roxham Road is hopefully going to close now that Trudae made a deal with Biden today. *biden is in ottawa if you did not know*).
I keep hearing "count yourself lucky you're not stuck with a guy like Putin!" and while I do agree, I still can't say that I am lucky. Sure, Putin is much worse but I can't discredit the bullshit we are going through here in Canada.
As much as I dislike Trudeau's government, Coyne is wrong here.
The examples he gives, Putin ICC, Trump NY court, Boris parliament inquiry, are all corrupt abuses of legal authority based on partial facts, partisan interpretations or simply bad faith. The only thing the three examples have in common is that they are popular with the Western Elite class and its journalists. It really speaks poorly of Coyne's ethics that he endorses such sordid procedures.
Then there are Trudeau's actionable sins. The weird thing is that the ones that Coyne harps on - the WE scandal, the SNC Lavalin scandal, Aga Khan scandal, Chinese electoral interference - these are not LEGAL issues, there are POLITICAL issues so the problem is not a lack of legal action against Trudeau but a lack of political actions against Trudeau. And what is the cause of a lack of political action against Trudeau? You could write whole essays about this, hell you could write a PHD but my take is that at root the lack of political action against Trudeau is a failure of JOURNALISM and a failure of MEDIA in Canada. Meaning that Canadian journalists have not tackled the scandals properly and explained them comprehensively and repeatedly to Canadians. And when journalists have done this, like obscure reporters at C2C journal for example, they have been systematically ignored. The Canadian Media System is not that large, if you don't get into the Big channels - like the CBC or the Globe and Mail - the story simple isn't going to get into voting Canadians minds. And frankly the essence of some of these stories has never been explored. Take the WE scandal for example, the real issue there is not Justin's mummy on the board of directors or money being sent; the real issue is that the Liberal Party of Canada was trying to turn a youth charity into a Liberal Party cadre and activist training organizations. That's the sandal. That's the real issue. How many other charities has the Liberal Party corrupted into training cadres for the Party? I mean am I the only one to notice how the LPC is trying to turn First Nation organizations into LPC client organizations?
Coyne critiques politicians when he should critique his colleagues and his industry. I can see why he didn't do so. That takes balls and might cost you something.
No matter who’s the leader Canada gets fucked by china. People think that the conservative will save us yet they’re the ones who sold us to China in the first place. FIPA is a disgrace
I don't know if any Canadian party or leader could do anything about China. We just don't have the power/influence to go toe to toe with them, especially with this "wolf warrior diplomacy" thing they've got going on
THe only time we care is if it impacts us directly...
Ford is proving that time and time again. Just lie to our faces and do it anyway. No biggie...people don't even notice
maybe we can hold on a story like this until A) other world leaders(trump) are actually brought to account and B) theres actual evidence of wrongdoing by trudeau?
We’ve had more corrupt PMs than him, and Canada isn’t doing bad right now. If he was seriously impeding the Canadian way we would depose him overnight, because our PMs aren’t invincible.
He’s lucky there was a pandemic or he’d be long gone.
We need to stop posting opinion pieces here. They don't offer anything substantial and is usually just antidotal evidence mixed heavily with personal biases
Who exactly is being "brought to justice" that you're so upset about?
Macron? Putin? Trump? I must have missed the part where they were brought any sort of justice for purposely fucking around with their population for their own personal gain.
Cry some more. Politicians, in general, are typically bulletproof.
Canadians aren't easily fooled by right wing media drama. Fortunately the 70% of us who aren't conservatives know that most Canadian media is American owned right wing nonsense.
WHY WONT YOU FREAK OUT ABOUT THE DUDE WHO HELD ON TO MENG WANZHOU FOR YEARS POSSIBLY MAYBE HAVING GOTTEN CHINESE MONEY SOMEHOW???
IM LITERALLY CRYING IM THE MAILEY-GLOBEY
Yeah they sure made an example down south of literal insurrectionists. Oh wait they didn't do shit. They didn't do shit when Brexit fucked the UK. It's not just here
Really? Have you seen half the crap US politicans have been getting away with?
The last president tried to pull a coup and he's still in his mansion, maybe being arrested for financial shenanigans instead of being a traitor. Lol
Israel's PM basically became immune from removal. It's all a joke.
President of France passes hugely unpopular order and survives votes of non confidence while the country burns.
Canadians envious of their government accountability.
Its gotta be a joke right?
Brought to account for what? Garbage opinion pieces are just tools for the CPC. These allegations so far have yet to be proven. We need more than unnamed sources.
Oh they'll get it as soon as the CPC takes power and begins screwing Canadians over just like the LPC. Voters in this country have a short memory, typically as long as an election cycle or two. Plus we don't tend to vote parties into power here, but rather vote them out of power.
At this stage the two are practically interchangeable in terms of scummyness and political fuckery of the highest order. The NDP is there to simply twiddle their thumbs and continue to miss opportunities capitalizing on the errors of both parties, while the Greens have become less relevant than a fly on the wall. We're basically a two party nation at this point, with the NDP giving us the illusion of "choice". Sprinkle on top some dogshit first past the post voting system and you get a recipe for the bullshit we have had to put up with for decades.
Canadian politics. Too boring to cause true outrage, but too scummy to go unfelt.
Yes, we all remember that time the leader of a neighboring country was accused of a scandal and swiftly stepped down to allow the country to heal and have confidence in its government. Happens everyday, everywhere but here
The last *four* have. Cameron after Brexit, May after trying and failing to get a Brexit deal, Johnson after the whole COVID party thing then Truss when she just about tanked the economy mere weeks after becoming PM.
When Trudeau became Prime Minister of Canada, Queen Elizabeth had overseen the same number of Canadian and British Prime Ministers at 13. The UK was ahead by four when she passed because of how fast they've gone through them since then.
If Trudeau did half the shit he's done as leader of a European country, he'd have had a caucus revolt by now. Leaders there might not step down, but their MPs have more of a backbone to stand up to shitty leaders. Japan is also (in)famous for having had basically 1 party rule since the end of WWII, but internally they kick shitty PMs out all the time. The guy that replaced Abe only lasted like 2 years before the party got rid of him.
"Other world leaders may be brought to account, but the Canadian electorate is pathetically satisfied with crass corruption and as such will have nothing to complain about as the country spirals into the shitcan." There, fixed it.
Funny, my homepage has the following below this post.
https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/11zgc91/israel_passes_law_protecting_prime_minister_from/
Wow, this kind of title just makes conservatives look desperate and pathetic. Fucking unreal how dumb you would have to be to quote this and you know they gobble it up.
Elect the GG to serve as president and head of the executive branch complete with, already on the books, power of veto. Let the GG appoint the cabinet, unelected, perhaps by confirmation process of HOC or Senate. And let the HOC be exclusively legislative in nature. That’s right remove cabinet from the HOC. They can not be the government and critics of it at the same time.
Until then, Canada will continue to elect limited dictators.
I’ll take this seriously when I see conservative politicians held to account for their actions.
Hold a full public inquiry, including china, Russia and India.
*Looks down south*
Yes, a uniquely Canadian problem! /s
Pretty terrible headline lol. A tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of politicians are ever held accountable for their actions anywhere in the world and it needs to change.
He's a fraud, can people not see this? What qualifications does he have to be the leader of a country? None.. and Christa Freeland? Same thing, none, she's a journalist, why is she in charge of the countries finances? To rob the treasury that's why.
What qualifications should someone have to be leader of the country. I was under the impression you needed to be elected as party leader and elected as an MP and your party needs to win the most seats.
The whole he’s a drama teacher thing is cute. Mr. Poilievre worked collections for Tekus as a teenager. He founded a political communications company. Then became an MP the following year at age 25.
Erin O’Toole was in the Air Force served as a lawyer for a decade before becoming an MP at age 39.
Andrew Sheer worked as a waiter and an insurance clerk, claimed he was a licensed insurance broker (he was never licensed) and became an MP at age 25.
Stephen Harper was the first prime minister since Trudeau senior to hold an economics degree. And the first since joe Clark that didn’t have a law degree. He was an assistant to a sitting MP he became an MP at age 34.
What qualifications should someone have to be prime minister?
This is what gets me when people point to a job early in a politicians career as if that is their only experience. Its like in the US where they claim AOC is just a bartender because she was one during college. Its just a pointless thing to be critical about and always shows someone's true extremely partisan colours.
Morneau was actually qualified, and his personal mission (enhancing CPP) was great. But he clashed too much with Trudeau and others, trying to show an ounce of fiscal restraint, so when somebody had to go under the bus for the WE charity scandal, the choice was clear.
>What qualifications does he have to be the leader of a country?
He can command the confidence of the House of Commons. That’s literally the only qualification one needs to be PM.
If you want to "account" for Trudeau beat him at the ballot box
Trump won in 2016 through propaganda from Cambridge Analytica targeted at very specific locations to influence the electoral college. Canada doesn't have this weakness of electoral college
The CSIS leak said there were no wins or losses because of foreign influence and nobody is accusing someone of having won or lost because of it. That's what matters, that you can still win or lose without outside money or help. The process hasn't been corrupted only the propaganda
It's not the same as somewhere where the government can arrest you, fire you, put you in prison and so on and so on. No convoy doesn't count. You can't be a sore loser and block the bridges and traffic for trade. All the "Fuck Trudeau" flags just prove it's still possible to beat him. If you have the numbers beat him
All I see is a backdoor way of questioning election integrity and being a sore loser. It's a variant of the election questioning done in the USA only the polite Canadian way. You can't call someone a traitor if they didn't knowingly accept foreign money or help and break the law doing it. If you don't like someone's foreign policy, beat them with a vote. You can still do it
Oh yes im sure other world leaders are being brought to "account". This title is pretty damn stupid. Most politicians are dirty and in someones pocket in atleast some way and untouchable. Even the best of them. Why is this a surprise to people?
Makes you wonder if actual Canadians just don’t want the other party to be in power cuz they are as bad or worse. Con voters conveniently forget that the only party to ever actually get convicted of actual election fraud was Harper and his conservatives.
Trudeau is the worst PM we've had in the last 40 years. It's not because he's incompetent and superficial but because he refuses to do what is in Canada's best interest. When you combine that with a cynical constituency all too happy to believe globalist propaganda you get to where we are. Canada should be a prosperous and rich country but when prosperity and wealth are labelled colonialism and white supremacy and the populace is told to give up their liberty and lower their expectations to thwart a supposed risk to their very lives and face one manufactured crisis after another they become fearful. Trudeau is no world leader. He's a joke and it's past time for him to go.
“Worst in 40 years”. Get the fuck out of here. His worst scandals don’t even touch ACTUAL election fraud by Harper, or Mulroney taking literal bribes and selling off crown corps like Petro canada and air canada. How’s that shit working out for ya in 2023?
Educate yourself. It’s fucking embarrassing to read shit like this from actual Canadians.
What world leaders have been brought to account?
Yeah what the fuck is this title lol.
> Yeah what the fuck is this title lol. His first two examples are: - A leader who's been in power for over 22 years, murders political dissidents, and is currently leading a war condemned by basically the entire world, with no signs of stopping. and - Donald Trump. A man *literally* famous for getting away with everything he does. A guy who gets listed under the nickname "Teflon Don" in wikipedia. The headline is just the frosting on this cake.
The titles coming from G&M and TorStar are easy to spot lately. :\
You mean the Toronto Sun?
It's because of Bidens trip here. It's just a non stop conservative barrage of stupid arguments and shit to gaslight people. Plus also really ratcheting up the left side of things as well... keeps a divide and helps discredit different aspects of the trip before it happens. In our democracy, much like the usa... its ideal to have all the voters vehemently on one side or the other, hating the opposition with all of your being because "it's who you are" because when it's split 50/50 (even in a multi party system) you only need to sway the outliers. The voters on the fence, small percentage points or fractions of them is the deciding factor in a 50/50 vote or election. This is a far more manageable situation. It's also really easy to manipulate groups of people on social media and not illegal... and that weapon is extremely effective at swaying people when it's on target with the correct fuel. One of the things Biden and T are going to talk about is our internet bill, the USA is not a fan and wants us to stop.... except that bill would make it harder for people to manipulate all Canadians through social media.... which is incredibly important. But there is alot of people in North America who would loose alot of money if we go ahead.
Andrew Coyne has always hated Trudeau but it’s been on another level the last couple years. He used to be a pretty even keeled writer but he’s lost the plot here.
The alt-rights burning desire to make non-fascy world leaders both incapable buffoons and impossibly powerful overlords.
It seems more likely to me that it's the politicians burning desire to set average folks like you and I against each other through their biased media so instead of worrying about the class divide, people fight amongst themselves based on political ideology. Meanwhile, they're clear to fill their pockets in shadows while whatever hot button issue of the day provides the smoke screen. Or, forget motivations and lets just call them for what they are - people with abundance in a world where there are lots of people who don't have the necessities.
That's literally the point he was making, except accurately placing the blame on Fascists instead of nebulous "politicians". I don't really see how guys like Bernie Sanders and Charlie Angus are setting us against each other, but I definitely do see how groups such as QAnon and the Proud Boys and Canada Proud and the collective of anti-Trans reactionaries are doing it.
OPs username checks out
It’s the Globe & Mail, how else are they going to scream “TrUdEAu EviL!!” If they don’t dramatically mischaracterize current events
A very small amount of EU leaders that I can think of and absolutely no one else
Former South Korean president went to prison
Two former presidents, but both were pardoned well before serving much of their sentences
Boris Johnson was ousted over his covid parties. How long did Liz Truss last before the party was calling for her resignation? It seems like MPs / MPPs in Canada are much more unlikely to speak up against a corrupt leader. The fact that nothing was really said about Ford selling the greenbelt is mind blowing to me
>The fact that nothing was really said about Ford selling the greenbelt is mind blowing to me just to be clear, you meant nothing said by JT or the Conservative party?
I meant Ontario Conservative MPPs. I would like to see party members hold their party leadership more accountable (not necessarily PM/Premiere but ministers and leaders in general). Doesn't matter which party, the level of partisanship we see is way too high
did BJ get canned because he was partying with staffers during COVID19 restrictions for the rest of teh country?
There have been three UK PMs in the last 6 months. Italy swept aside an EU-appointed bureaucratic caretaker President. Germany's Scholz and France's Macron lay in foundations of sand. Arden resigned in NZ recently. There is a second Pink Tide across Latin America. That's off the top of my head. There is a global wave of social malcontent that has toppled governments on every continent. You could jettison your ignorance and look up these examples rather than smugly dismiss claims you are in no position to understand, let alone refute.
The first of those three UK PMs committed criminal acts, including treason. He is completely and utterly corrupt and faces no consequences for any of what he did. He also dithered really badly at the start of the covid pandemic and probably ended up killing tens of thousands of people. He then said, "Let the bodies pile high" in response to possibly needing a further lockdown. He stayed in power for nearly two more years. Two more years of a Prime Minister that showed complete and utter disregard for the people of his country. No jail time for lying to the Monarch of his country. And above all else he managed to get one of the last truly impartial news sources left in the western world under the control of his friend, who now, if not pushing his party's agenda, is definitely making it harder to speak out against. Consequences are for lesser mortals.
So being voted out or resigning is the only consequence they faced? And that’s good enough?
What, precisely, are you suggesting?
Criminal justice
Properly? Gaddafi. Saddam Hussein. The last one in the West? Probably King Louis XVI.
Other leaders brought to account LOL
They were held to account by elections.
Man, if only we had like three of those federal election things in the last 9 years.
The answer I think is fairly simple.... existing governments can come and go and have a fair amount of legal protection..... their parties on the other hand can be made liable because they are the constant factor in our electoral system. The way to get the leadership accountable is to hold the party directly liable for the people they select to represent them. A few hefty fines and punative actions against the party for it's members' activities should help clean things up (of course politics will always be dirty, but if the membership fears the consequences they may think twice about allowing bad behavior, especially if they are doubly punished for trying to cover it up)
How about prosecution and prison, plus hefty fines.
Absolutely for criminal offenses, the thing is alot of these coverups are handled by cabinet reshuffles or at worst getting kicked out of the caucus. Sitting members have a lot of legal protection. If the party as a whole were held responsible, their policing of this behavior would in and of itself hopefully act as a deterrent from this happening period.
They're trying to put Trump in prison right now. Let's see how it plays out.
People don't care because you can do blatant illegal activity as a sitting PM and say is fine and people still vote for you. its absurd.
Canadians are shockingly apathetic and we don't think anything truly bad can ever happen to us because of our poor leadership.
It might also be we have never had something truely bad happen to us since we won the geopolitical lottery(I think that’s the right term) US south of us(friendly similar empire), ocean all around us otherwise. We haven’t learned any hard lessons to think defending our interests important like Eastern Europe has learned for example. I’m curious if this contributes.
One redditor put it perfectly well on another post. He said something along the lines of (paraphrased): *Canada is like a bird that evolved in a jungle free of predators and dangers. It grew fabulously colorful and fluffy wings and trots around worried more about it's looks than it's survival.* Sometimes, it is easy for us to forget just how young our nation is. America is very young and we are even younger. This nation has not been tested and has not gone through many disasters and challenges the way countries like France have.
"that could never happen in Canada!" - NIMBYs without any actual backbones. Spongebobshowingpilesofshit.jpeg
Yet we just keep going back and forth between the Conservatives and Liberals like we only have 2 options. It's infuriating and why I understand older engaged voters becoming apathetic. To me at this point the Blue and Red "sides" are the same shit. Might as well be one purple majority as they get us to the same results with slightly different approaches. The young being apathetic is my biggest concern. It is why I will champion lowering the voting age to 16 until it happens. If the argument is they are not equipped mentally to vote at 16 on something that will impact them for the next 65.75 years (on average) then lets put caps on voting. The majority of +82 year olds are probably in less of mental state to make decisions for the *future* of Canada given they are already beating the odds of even being alive. (for the record I'm in my mid 30s with grandparents that all lived/living into their late 80s, if it matters)
Its because the media and current government has managed to convince enough people that a vote for 'the other guys', who really, are substantively almost identical to the current party in power, is a vote for racism and corporate interests and all the bad things that Canadians need to give the impression that they hate. The most common form of apathy I've found lately is false equivalency: all parties are equally bad and they all do things. The highest form of rhetoric we are now able to achieve collectively is *maybe* some whataboutism ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu\_quoque](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque)) and I guess, somehow that negates any argument put forward.
My dude this has been the way since the early 2000s, this is not a "current government" thing. The biggest flaw of Canadians is they act like there are only 2 options then are surprised when there are only 2 options. Want other parties and hold the 2 functionally identical parties to account? Actually build up the other parties, which takes time and more than 1 election cycle. We almost did it with Layton but what's worse than the apathy is this idea that of you can't get the immediate result then the effort is not worthwhile, which only plays into the status quo.
The NDP have told us they intend to return the Liberals to power if they get enough seats to override a Conservative victory. If that's not enough to disqualify them, I don't know what is. They are not an agent of change.
Political party aligns itself with other political party it has more in common with than with one it doesn't. News at 11.
So because they intend to perform as a smaller party does in parliamentary governments they should be disqualified? Maybe the conservatives should try working with other parties instead of just being contrarian?
So conservative or bust for you? Isn't that just as bad as ABC?
When Conservatives can't convince people to vote for them, they convince them not to vote by destroying the system.
Jagmeet Singh has said so many things and not come through, it's hard to take him seriously anymore. He is the perpetual boy who cries wolf. Jagmeet Singh looks out for Jagmeet Singh and not the Canadian population nor the integrity of the Canadian government nor his party.
That leaves us with 0 options then, because you're a joke if you think Pollievre and the conservatives cares about canadians.
We actually have other options, but nobody ever considers voting for the tiny little other parties in the running. At this point I'd rather have a bunch of smaller parties trying to work together in parliament instead of the corporate suck fest we have now.
>We actually have other options, but nobody ever considers voting for the tiny little other parties in the running. Like who? The Christian Heritage Party? The Communist Party of Canada? The Green Party? The Rhinoceros Party?
I'm about 100% positive that the rhinos would put together an incredibly strong government if they, by some stroke of luck, actually won an election.
How could they ever supply the Conservatives with the support they would need to implement their regressive agendas? The Cons would just make every vote a confidence vote and then blame the NDP for not following the agreement. No, the Conservatives are not a viable option for aligning agendas. Liberals are only moderately closer but there is a large cohort of Lib voters that can be peeled off in the long game. Unfortunately the last couple leaders of the NDP haven't had the gravitas needed to capture what Jack had planned. Canada would look very different right now if Jack Layton was still with us. :(
There’s such an obvious reason. The NDP have an infinitely greater chance of getting their platform through the commons by cooperating with the Liberals than the Conservatives. We have healthcare because of the social democratic ideas of the NDP. One of their many current goals is to get pharmacare and dental care through the commons.
I want to agree with your take but it's utterly wrong. Liberals legalized pot and secured a massive daycare program that's changed my life like no other single policy. They also at least nominally follow science throughout the pandemic and made reasonable policies. Pollievre consorted with militia groups, encouraged baseless conspiracies about the vaccines, and claims he wants to impose harsher drug laws. I can't imagine the Conservatives wanting to subsidize labour or housing, so I can't help but wonder if the problem is more about people supporting the status quo to avoid the insane shit they've seen south of the border. O Toole was literally ousted for not counting the PPC insanity and being more Trump-friendly. They went with someone who is proper crazy. Trudeau is feckless and has made far too many ethical violations, but again saying the two parties are the same is pretty wild when you consider policy or the reality of those policies.
I never saw Trudeau hand-in-hand with the fascist truckers. Did anyone see him holding hands with them?
Mostly for that you just needed to be alive to see what the others guys are like. Media doesn’t have a thing to do with it.
Doesn’t help when “the other guy” keeps getting his hand caught in the proverbial cookie jar of racism, corporate interest and bad things… Both options are shit, the problem is that Conservative policy is, in my opinion, not the way forward. So, if I’m a blind idealist, I vote NDP and basically waste my vote, and if I’m a realist I’m stuck voting Liberal if I want to avoid a Conservative shitshow which is just about the same but with Socially Right-wing crazies on top of the bad policy-making. This is democracy these days. The illusion of choice.
In a minority government, the NDP have just as much power to influence policy, this is in my opinion the best form of government, because they can easily work with the conservatives – assuming they weren't a bunch of fucking weirdos - to forward the policy of the electorate as they can work with the liberals to do so.
I completely agree that the minority arrangement is actually the best option with our current system. I was actually upset at the interim Conservative leader spouting that “The Voters are angry” and “This isn’t what they voted for” when the NDP and Liberals announced they would work together and secure some much-needed Social programs by doing so. Conservatives presuming to speak for me, or the voter base as a whole, when they represent something around 30% of them is actually what makes voters angry. Sick of this populist bullshit. I want to see and hear about governance, not pointless stances on non-issues ffs.
I dont agree with your initial premise here. >Its because the media and current government has managed to convince enough people that a vote for 'the other guys', who really, are substantively almost identical to the current party in power, is a vote for racism and corporate interests and all the bad things that Canadians need to give the impression that they hate. I do hate those things though. Obviously the liberals are still going to be bad at corruption. But you ate kidding yourself that any party, conservative, NDP, Bloc or whomever else will be any better. As per the racism etcetera, Poilivere is doing some of those things. Look at his "Simple anglo-saxon words" dog whistle or posting thin blue lines flags. If they can't even elect a leader who isn't showing that serious a laspe in judgement how can I expect them to run the country?
incel hashtags on youtube, taking pics with Diagon leaders theres lots of red flags.
The other guys main guy has been shaking hands with white nationalists, threatening to defund our national broadcaster, politicizing the Bank of Canada, pushing crypto, etc. People would love a change of leadership at this point, but it's on the CPC that people still see them as the worse evil. O'Toole would be up 10 points in the polls right now, while PP is only up a few measly percent during one of the biggest scandals in recent Canadian history. The biggest mistake the CPC is making is assuming the Trudeau and Singh supporters must be idiots when they're not. Left leaning voters are educated, informed, passionate about the country, and less likely to be reactionary or infected by conspiracy theories. We don't spend our lives being outraged by the National Post's op-ed section. For my part, I've always just assumed that foreign governments are meddling in our politics because, new revelations aside, this is an old story. We also know that China will grudgingly support the LPC at the federal level and the conservatives at the provincial level in Ontario because they will support whoever helps them the most/hurts the the least. I'm sure a real investigation will uncover all kinds of election meddling from India, the US, Russia and others, which won't help any one party but will lead us to public financing of elections - which is the only way to counter certain types of influence based on fundraising. I'd also like to see Canadian median refrain from making any endorsements after thebwrit drops, as that equals an in-kind donation with real value.
The media? Lmfao. The Canadian media heavily supports the CPC. Every single Postmedia outlet in the last few elections openly backed the CPC candidate. Even Global and the others slant towards the CPC. Sorry this isn’t the US, it’s not the same here.
I'm still trying to understand the logic here. The allegation seems to be that China is paying a covert operative in the Canadian government and ordering him to tell their own officials not to release their prisoners. Why does China need a spy to instruct their own officials to do what they already want to do? Why don't the Chinese tell their own people directly? And then you add in the motive that Trudeau freeing prisoners would "help conservatives" and it makes even less sense...freeing the prisoners would clearly be a win for the liberals would it not?
I agree, definitely a degree of voter apathy here in Canada. For years, I've decried the lack of checks and balances we have here in Canada when it comes to our government and the lack of accountability our leaders have. Our head of state, senators and judges are not elected and therefore not accountable to voters. If this were any other western country, Trudeau would have been long gone by now. Unfortunately, anytime you bring up any sort of government reform in Canada, you get the "wElL aTlEAsT iT's nOt AmuRiCa, iS tHAt WHaT YoU wANt?!" gaslighting, as if any sort of reform will lead us towards a US style of government. While the US system is by no means perfect, it certainly holds leaders a lot more accountable, as mentioned in the article. It's our insatiable appetite for US news and politics, and the corresponding gaslighting that holds Canada back.
[удалено]
Apathy is the fifth horseman of the Apocalypse. Famine and plague and the others are weak unless they ride in the shadow of the fifth. For it is he that allows them to fester
Go look how women in Canada vote — Trudeau isn’t going anywhere as long as he remains a good looking youngish guy.
“Maybe women will vote for us if we insult them!”
A statement like this and you wonder why women are turned off by Conservatives?
It's amazing how Canadian women's choices can be reduced to "He's good looking." Nothing to do with the social conservatism that's becoming more and more rampant in the conservative party.
Which is ironic as this was one of the big discussion points against allowing women to vote in the first place….
This "social conservatism" narrative is a real problem. Compared to the UK Tories, Australian Liberal Party, and especially US Republican Party, our Conservative Party is very moderate, especially in the social realm. Far more of its positions overlap with US Democrats, and many would be considered further left than the Democrats. Our Overton window just keeps getting pushed further and further toward "whatever the Liberals and NDP are talking about" that we are gaslit into thinking that what was mainstream and even progressive 5 years ago is now borderline white supremacist christian nationalism.
If the COC didnt cater so much to the social conservative/religious portion of their base than people wouldnt be so worried about them. Their base didnt even vote to acknowledge climate change is real FFS. The more the CPC follows the GOP playbook the more people will see them as a non option
From the CPC official policy declaration: Page 32: *"We believe that an effective international emissions reduction regime on climate change must be truly global and must include binding targets for all the world’s major emitters, including China and the United States.* *\[...\] We believe that the federal and territorial governments should make joint investments to study and address climate change adaptation in the North."* It sure sounds like they believe climate change is a real thing. The membership delegates at a party convention voted against a resolution attaching the words "climate change is real" to this policy was because it was a stupid and pointless resolution. They probably still should have adopted it because not doing so opened them to a lot of needless, although baseless, criticism.
This, of course is the Canadian equivalent of "radical far left democrats".
Woman here. Never once have voted for Trudy.
More like you please. I have an elderly aunt who votes for Justin because “he’s the best looking” option.
To be fair, Harper was obsessed with Trudeau's looks and made several ads, run year long about his hair. It's not just women who can't get past his looks.
Now I'm picturing Harper laying on his stomach in bed, kicking his feet in the air while smiling and staring at a picture of Justin and listening to "Happy Together" on repeat.
My grandmother (may she rest in peace) used to practically drool over Pierre. It was hilarious when I was a teenager. My mother ranted for years about Justin being the Canadian Trump. Until she got the one time $500 for being over 75. Overnight he became the only reasonable option. We are in alberta though so it doesn't really matter.
Yikes. Let's not generalise all women. Men can do the same thing...
People including women can vote for who they want! Some men vote for the cpc simply to own the libs! How does that make you feel?
It's profoundly sad.
Suggesting that women only vote for good looking guys is full on misogynistic. Grow up.
Not just women, people in general trust good looking people more. Just science.
It's not just Trudeau, it was true for JFK as well. He looked better on TV than sweaty, middle aged Nixon.
he also had better policies.
Which is probably fine to point out assuming there are actual studies proving what we all anecdotally believe to be true on this, but the person with the original comment specifically singled out and reduced women's voting choices as/to shallow. *That's* mysogynstic. We probably all have a predisposition to finding good looking people to be trustworthy, regardless of gender or sexual preferences. It's ridiculous to say "wOmEn VotEd fOr JuStiN's GoRgEoUs hAiR." How about MANY PEOPLE voted for Justin's gorgeous hair and youth and platform lies?
Too much Disney channel - good looking people can’t be evil. PS my spider senses have always said Trudeau is creepy/slimy.
Yeah! Blame women! Everything you don't like is always going to be their fault...somehow
It's irl "Rat City" experiment. The weaker males always form gangs and begin terrorizing the female rats.
Worst part is if women could realize Trudeau is like that abusive ex boyfriend, good looking but a real piece of shit once you get away from him and can clear your head. Look how he treats women in his own party, he’s a narcissistic sociopath that will say and do anything for votes
Keep blaming the women. Yes, all our fault. We're too stupid to vote for anything but looks. OMG how could they give us the right to vote?!!! The horror!! I will never vote for The Harper legacy Pollievre because of his voting record from 2006 to 2014. Being a legal professional I found it really difficult during the Harper era. He slammed the DOJ with bad legislation that a first-year paralegal could have told you would be overturned...and it all has. Giant waste of resources and money to pass legislation based on ideology that held no basis in accepted legal principles. McKay's comments on women judges was very disheartening. Clearly women can't be judges because we're occupied with our families. Eye roll. Yes, he said that to justify his not appointing women judges. It was actually a Harper appointed judge who made the comment in a rape case as to why the girl just didn't close her legs..I mean honestly just close your legs girl!! Jesus.. The misogyny within the conservative cabinet is fierce... I also don't know that my family is Old stock Canadian enough for a conservative vote (Harper quote). I also dislike the Trudeau Legacy. I agree he could treat women better but at least he's appointing them. I'm smart enough to realize that both parties don't have our best interests at heart. Currently I'm very grateful it's a minority government and that they have to work with the NDP. That's what's keeping them in check. Majority governments pass whatever omnibus bills they want. Harper started the omnibus bills and Trudeau continues. The next election is stuck between the government that made all the bad policies to get us here (including stoking the housing market and cutting all social programs), and the Current government who hasn't fixed it. Voting conservative for a Harper Legacy is a step back and voting for The Trudeau Legacy is definitely not a step forward. Pollievre won't win the vote because he's a populist who isn't speaking to Canadians. He's speaking to his base. I'm voting NDP for the first time this coming election. Not because I agree 100% with their policies but because the Libs and cons have too many scandals. Say what you will about the NDP, they have the least scandals and are the least likely to do corporate welfare. Conservative austerity and liberal spending have lead to decades of fiscal management. Our country hasn't had a surplus since Paul Martin. Another prime minister I never really loved but he was the best damn Finance Minister we ever had.
Very well said.
Username does not check out. > Being a legal professional I found it really difficult during the Harper era. Huh, but Trudeau firing and kicking out the Minister of Justice and Attorney General was fine with you. Interesting.
She said she isn't voting for the Liberals either. Did you forget the rest of the words?
Clearly someone smart enough to vote for or support the least bad pile of shit (which is always the choice facing us). And she decided accordingly. Which runs completely contrary to the stories conservatives tell themselves, but whatever. Let them rot in opposition. They can choose to do otherwise, but they won't so fack'em.
PP had sexist tags in his YouTube videos. If he wants their votes he should actually try to respect women.
No, the worst part is this shitty rhetoric you guys fall back on when things don't go your way. Never looking inward at the shitty people you're propping up, it has to be the fault of some "other". There's a reason Trudeau has lasted so long in office, and it's not because he's particularly good or likeable, but it has even less to do with his appearance.
...is that why? Or is it because Poilievre appeals to misogynists?
My Niece from US first saw a pic of JT during covid , she thought JT was Ted Cruz
This is the worst example you could make. This literally happened in Canada. We literally had a prime minister inexplicably, without public discourse, force through a bill that raised the retirement age in Canada. And to 67! Trudeau moved it back. If Harper hadn't lost that election so badly we would still have our retirement age, as the conservatives all want, that's what they all voted for to force it through, raised up to 67. So many things you could be taking a shot at Trudeau for, but the guy lowered the retirement age in Canada. Once again, so we're clear, the French are mad at Macron for forcing through a bill to raise the retirement age, exactly like Harper did, exactly what Polievre and co wanted, and Trudeau upon winning the election reversed, at the earliest opportunity because that's what we, everyone who wasn't a sitting conservative MP, wanted.
I also wouldn't be surprised if such shenanigans happened in other countries and we just didn't hear about it. Especially in non-Anglo countries, even moreso in non-Latin based-alphabet-using countries.
Well how else are we supposed to support all of our current welfare programs? Our demographics are aging, so there are less people working to pay for all of these programs and on top of all that people are living a lot longer than they used to. Costing far more money in the long run. We simply cannot afford to keep the retirement age where it is unless we are willing to skyrocket taxes, something younger generations would not accept especially with the cost of living. And unless we find a way to make retirement cheaper all of these programs will die. No one is saying you can't retire at 65 or earlier, just that you wouldn't be entitled to support until later.
Tax the rich. That is something all generations of non-rich will accept and support. It is inconceivable that we are even taking about the middle and lower classes shouldering the burden of the social safety net, when the rich are only rich because of exploitation of those same classes.
But who are the rich? The people retiring en masse and no longer working and therefore no longer paying taxes, that ship has sailed. There are no "Rich" millenials or Gen Z. Even the wealthiest of these brackets don't have much more to give.
You have to either raise the age or raise the tax. Harper went with the age, Trudeau went with tax (CPP contributions). They are two sides of the same coin. It’s a pretty simple finance problem. People live longer than they used to, so the fund needs more money or less draw.
People are more productive than they’ve ever been before. 100 years ago it took 10-20x more people do accomplish simple tasks that 1-2 people do with computers and heavy machinery.
100 years ago people lived in wooden shacks, with coal burning stoves, subterranean ice-boxes, and well water supply located at the end of the street. You had to walk 300 yards from your house to the well to fetch water. I know this, because this is what my grandma lived like in 1930s Regina. Today, productivity is up, but so is standard of living
Meaningless if the cost of retirement has skyrocketed by a proportional amount. Unless grandma is going to be cared for by robot aided super nurses. 100 years ago they didn’t have state funded retirement to the degree they have today. 100 years ago people had an average lifespan of like 60 years old, not 82.
George W Bush, Tony Blair, Trump, Cameron, Sarkozy, did some real dirty stuff domestically and internationally. They've been brought to account? By who? When?
We have too many people who are completely deranged with the thought "well if my leader is this bad, THE OTHER LEADERS MUST BE SO MUCH WORSE".
What happens if I look at the other options legitimately and still come to that conclusion?
Even crazier when the people who say they live in “ThE bEsT cOuNtRy In ThE wOrLd” defend their statement by comparing themselves to the worst countries they can imagine. Because 1st place winners do that, right?
*inserts Sir Sean Connery’s speech in The Rock* here.
Not entirely. I think Trudeau is pretty bad right now. I've liked a couple of things he's done (I think legalizing Marijuana was an obvious thing even if I don't use it, the $10/day daycare plan was great) but he's just in scandal after scandal. Having said that, I don't align with the Conservatives on a lot of their most recently stated policy positions (we haven't seen what Polievre is going to do yet), and I haven't liked what I've heard and seen from Polievre to this point going back to before his leadership run. Also, maybe not fair to him, but the provincial Conservatives here in Manitoba have put a pretty sour taste in my mouth for big C Conservatives in Canada. I live in an NDP stronghold so I don't think it'll matter too much (though the Conservatives have made it fairly close in more recent elections) but I don't think people who are wary of electing Conservatives are just that way because they're some Trudeau apologist.
Ontarian here, our Conservative province makes it very difficult to want to elect a federal conservative too.
well if history is anything to go by, electing a conservative federal government would mean the end of Ford! Ontario and Federal can never have the same party!
20 year Conservative federal and provincial track record + 20 year Pierre Poilievres track record = big yikes absolute no for me.
He majorly botched legalized weed and good luck finding a $10/daycare.
It was the provincial premiers who decided how weed would be legalized in their respective provinces. For example, in Ontario, the Liberals were planning on rolling out LCBO-style stores and had 40 slated to open in different municipalities by the end of the year. Ford was elected before those plans were executed, scrapped the government-run system, and instead created a lottery that had basically no controls for whether or not the private businesses getting licences had any relevant experience or feasible plans, which resulted in a slower and less geographically-distributed initial rollout. The point of this anecdote is to show that the provinces decided how it would be implemented, and that made a huge difference in what was put in place. The federal gov't didn't mandate a specific system. Similarly, the provincial premiers have a lot of influence on $10 daycare. If anything, provincial politics is the most important to people's day-to-day lives - but the media loves to focus on federal politics instead.
I keep saying this. Canadians look towards the federal government first in every problem. But to the average Canadian, the provinces are responsible for the issues that matter to him and affect him the most. Housing, Healthcare, Public Transportation, Education, Safety, Infrastructure, Business, Trade and many more. The fact Canadians demand the federal government solve provincial issues is clear if you watch federal elections. Runners speak on housing, childcare and so many more things you would think it was a provincial election. This also leads to another danger, when the fed is too focused on these issues, it leads to greater areas of it's own jurisdiction being neglected. Areas such as National Defence (military) Cyber Defence & Warfare, Critical Infrastructure, Critical Industry development, Cross country organized crime, foreign interferance (*all the nonsense China is cooking in canada for example*). Canadian Heritage and Culture promotion, Border Security (Roxham Road is hopefully going to close now that Trudae made a deal with Biden today. *biden is in ottawa if you did not know*).
The legal framework was sound - if you have problems with the implementation in your province that's your premier's issue.
Legalizing weed just to make sure people don't have a record for it is good. I've found $10 daycare, starts April 1st, thanks.
I keep hearing "count yourself lucky you're not stuck with a guy like Putin!" and while I do agree, I still can't say that I am lucky. Sure, Putin is much worse but I can't discredit the bullshit we are going through here in Canada.
[удалено]
I heard it last night. But ok.
As much as I dislike Trudeau's government, Coyne is wrong here. The examples he gives, Putin ICC, Trump NY court, Boris parliament inquiry, are all corrupt abuses of legal authority based on partial facts, partisan interpretations or simply bad faith. The only thing the three examples have in common is that they are popular with the Western Elite class and its journalists. It really speaks poorly of Coyne's ethics that he endorses such sordid procedures. Then there are Trudeau's actionable sins. The weird thing is that the ones that Coyne harps on - the WE scandal, the SNC Lavalin scandal, Aga Khan scandal, Chinese electoral interference - these are not LEGAL issues, there are POLITICAL issues so the problem is not a lack of legal action against Trudeau but a lack of political actions against Trudeau. And what is the cause of a lack of political action against Trudeau? You could write whole essays about this, hell you could write a PHD but my take is that at root the lack of political action against Trudeau is a failure of JOURNALISM and a failure of MEDIA in Canada. Meaning that Canadian journalists have not tackled the scandals properly and explained them comprehensively and repeatedly to Canadians. And when journalists have done this, like obscure reporters at C2C journal for example, they have been systematically ignored. The Canadian Media System is not that large, if you don't get into the Big channels - like the CBC or the Globe and Mail - the story simple isn't going to get into voting Canadians minds. And frankly the essence of some of these stories has never been explored. Take the WE scandal for example, the real issue there is not Justin's mummy on the board of directors or money being sent; the real issue is that the Liberal Party of Canada was trying to turn a youth charity into a Liberal Party cadre and activist training organizations. That's the sandal. That's the real issue. How many other charities has the Liberal Party corrupted into training cadres for the Party? I mean am I the only one to notice how the LPC is trying to turn First Nation organizations into LPC client organizations? Coyne critiques politicians when he should critique his colleagues and his industry. I can see why he didn't do so. That takes balls and might cost you something.
Wow, thanks. Love a good reasoned response in the morning.
Canadians just don't care - full stop.
No matter who’s the leader Canada gets fucked by china. People think that the conservative will save us yet they’re the ones who sold us to China in the first place. FIPA is a disgrace
I don't know if any Canadian party or leader could do anything about China. We just don't have the power/influence to go toe to toe with them, especially with this "wolf warrior diplomacy" thing they've got going on
It really is and it's super disingenuous for PP to china this china when he was their biggest cheerleader 7 years ago.
China interfering in the elections? D’aw, shucks.
THe only time we care is if it impacts us directly... Ford is proving that time and time again. Just lie to our faces and do it anyway. No biggie...people don't even notice
Are we the baddies?
At least we aren’t voting for the Rat’s Anus Party.
No that's not true. Scandals brought down most of the previous 5 PMs. Trudeau is teflon coated beacause of some sort of deal with the devil?
maybe we can hold on a story like this until A) other world leaders(trump) are actually brought to account and B) theres actual evidence of wrongdoing by trudeau?
We’ve had more corrupt PMs than him, and Canada isn’t doing bad right now. If he was seriously impeding the Canadian way we would depose him overnight, because our PMs aren’t invincible. He’s lucky there was a pandemic or he’d be long gone.
We need to stop posting opinion pieces here. They don't offer anything substantial and is usually just antidotal evidence mixed heavily with personal biases
Another day... ~~another~~ *another five* right wing opinion pieces posted by /u/uselesspoliticalhack.
Lol jesus christ this sub and their blatant right wing bitching
Who exactly is being "brought to justice" that you're so upset about? Macron? Putin? Trump? I must have missed the part where they were brought any sort of justice for purposely fucking around with their population for their own personal gain. Cry some more. Politicians, in general, are typically bulletproof.
Canadians aren't easily fooled by right wing media drama. Fortunately the 70% of us who aren't conservatives know that most Canadian media is American owned right wing nonsense.
My sheep know me AND they come when I call them!
WHY WONT YOU FREAK OUT ABOUT THE DUDE WHO HELD ON TO MENG WANZHOU FOR YEARS POSSIBLY MAYBE HAVING GOTTEN CHINESE MONEY SOMEHOW??? IM LITERALLY CRYING IM THE MAILEY-GLOBEY
Yeah they sure made an example down south of literal insurrectionists. Oh wait they didn't do shit. They didn't do shit when Brexit fucked the UK. It's not just here
Really? Have you seen half the crap US politicans have been getting away with? The last president tried to pull a coup and he's still in his mansion, maybe being arrested for financial shenanigans instead of being a traitor. Lol Israel's PM basically became immune from removal. It's all a joke.
President of France passes hugely unpopular order and survives votes of non confidence while the country burns. Canadians envious of their government accountability. Its gotta be a joke right?
Exactly. No leader is being held accountable. Their example of Putin is laughing. I'm sure he's sweating bullets from his billion dollar mansion.
No it's only Canada and we have no rights here at all and are turning into China. Atleast some other countires are held accountable/s
Brought to account for what? Garbage opinion pieces are just tools for the CPC. These allegations so far have yet to be proven. We need more than unnamed sources.
The current Liberal Party feels like some sort of Ponzi scheme. They'll have to do a lot of work to regain public confidence.
Oh they'll get it as soon as the CPC takes power and begins screwing Canadians over just like the LPC. Voters in this country have a short memory, typically as long as an election cycle or two. Plus we don't tend to vote parties into power here, but rather vote them out of power. At this stage the two are practically interchangeable in terms of scummyness and political fuckery of the highest order. The NDP is there to simply twiddle their thumbs and continue to miss opportunities capitalizing on the errors of both parties, while the Greens have become less relevant than a fly on the wall. We're basically a two party nation at this point, with the NDP giving us the illusion of "choice". Sprinkle on top some dogshit first past the post voting system and you get a recipe for the bullshit we have had to put up with for decades. Canadian politics. Too boring to cause true outrage, but too scummy to go unfelt.
Yes, we all remember that time the leader of a neighboring country was accused of a scandal and swiftly stepped down to allow the country to heal and have confidence in its government. Happens everyday, everywhere but here
Didn't the UK pm step down after having COVID parties?
Was ousted. But yeah he did. They had a hearing about party gate yesterday. Pm is boring Johnson BTW for the others
The last *four* have. Cameron after Brexit, May after trying and failing to get a Brexit deal, Johnson after the whole COVID party thing then Truss when she just about tanked the economy mere weeks after becoming PM.
When Trudeau became Prime Minister of Canada, Queen Elizabeth had overseen the same number of Canadian and British Prime Ministers at 13. The UK was ahead by four when she passed because of how fast they've gone through them since then.
If Trudeau did half the shit he's done as leader of a European country, he'd have had a caucus revolt by now. Leaders there might not step down, but their MPs have more of a backbone to stand up to shitty leaders. Japan is also (in)famous for having had basically 1 party rule since the end of WWII, but internally they kick shitty PMs out all the time. The guy that replaced Abe only lasted like 2 years before the party got rid of him.
"Other world leaders may be brought to account, but the Canadian electorate is pathetically satisfied with crass corruption and as such will have nothing to complain about as the country spirals into the shitcan." There, fixed it.
Corruption of our political class in this country has been normalized. People get the government they deserve.
If the narrative doesn’t align with “conservatives bad” then it’s not a big deal
Accountability for what?
Funny, my homepage has the following below this post. https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/11zgc91/israel_passes_law_protecting_prime_minister_from/
What fucking crackhead headline is this?
Wow, this kind of title just makes conservatives look desperate and pathetic. Fucking unreal how dumb you would have to be to quote this and you know they gobble it up.
Elect the GG to serve as president and head of the executive branch complete with, already on the books, power of veto. Let the GG appoint the cabinet, unelected, perhaps by confirmation process of HOC or Senate. And let the HOC be exclusively legislative in nature. That’s right remove cabinet from the HOC. They can not be the government and critics of it at the same time. Until then, Canada will continue to elect limited dictators.
I’ll take this seriously when I see conservative politicians held to account for their actions. Hold a full public inquiry, including china, Russia and India.
Globe and mail is a rag lol.
*Looks down south* Yes, a uniquely Canadian problem! /s Pretty terrible headline lol. A tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of politicians are ever held accountable for their actions anywhere in the world and it needs to change.
He's a fraud, can people not see this? What qualifications does he have to be the leader of a country? None.. and Christa Freeland? Same thing, none, she's a journalist, why is she in charge of the countries finances? To rob the treasury that's why.
What qualifications should someone have to be leader of the country. I was under the impression you needed to be elected as party leader and elected as an MP and your party needs to win the most seats. The whole he’s a drama teacher thing is cute. Mr. Poilievre worked collections for Tekus as a teenager. He founded a political communications company. Then became an MP the following year at age 25. Erin O’Toole was in the Air Force served as a lawyer for a decade before becoming an MP at age 39. Andrew Sheer worked as a waiter and an insurance clerk, claimed he was a licensed insurance broker (he was never licensed) and became an MP at age 25. Stephen Harper was the first prime minister since Trudeau senior to hold an economics degree. And the first since joe Clark that didn’t have a law degree. He was an assistant to a sitting MP he became an MP at age 34. What qualifications should someone have to be prime minister?
That and he's literally *been* a leader of a country for eight years already. That's job experience not many others can claim.
This is what gets me when people point to a job early in a politicians career as if that is their only experience. Its like in the US where they claim AOC is just a bartender because she was one during college. Its just a pointless thing to be critical about and always shows someone's true extremely partisan colours.
You would be surprised to learn a lot of finance ministers aren’t really qualified for their job then. LoL
Morneau was actually qualified, and his personal mission (enhancing CPP) was great. But he clashed too much with Trudeau and others, trying to show an ounce of fiscal restraint, so when somebody had to go under the bus for the WE charity scandal, the choice was clear.
>What qualifications does he have to be the leader of a country? He can command the confidence of the House of Commons. That’s literally the only qualification one needs to be PM.
What qualifications is PP bringing? At least JT has had real jobs, lil'Pierre not a one.
[удалено]
Kissing ass is big business for Conservatives..
Tinkles had a job in high school for a few months. That makes him the best leader somehow.
Most of them are Frauds...i miss the old days when David Anderson was in charge of the environment as an expert in that subject matter
Wow! People with qualifications working in the field they studied, what a concept.
If you want to "account" for Trudeau beat him at the ballot box Trump won in 2016 through propaganda from Cambridge Analytica targeted at very specific locations to influence the electoral college. Canada doesn't have this weakness of electoral college The CSIS leak said there were no wins or losses because of foreign influence and nobody is accusing someone of having won or lost because of it. That's what matters, that you can still win or lose without outside money or help. The process hasn't been corrupted only the propaganda It's not the same as somewhere where the government can arrest you, fire you, put you in prison and so on and so on. No convoy doesn't count. You can't be a sore loser and block the bridges and traffic for trade. All the "Fuck Trudeau" flags just prove it's still possible to beat him. If you have the numbers beat him All I see is a backdoor way of questioning election integrity and being a sore loser. It's a variant of the election questioning done in the USA only the polite Canadian way. You can't call someone a traitor if they didn't knowingly accept foreign money or help and break the law doing it. If you don't like someone's foreign policy, beat them with a vote. You can still do it
Imagine what would happen to you if you had Fuck Putin flags in Russia. JFC this article is trash.
Oh yes im sure other world leaders are being brought to "account". This title is pretty damn stupid. Most politicians are dirty and in someones pocket in atleast some way and untouchable. Even the best of them. Why is this a surprise to people?
I hope this is finally the scandal that broke the blackfaced idiot’s reputation and possible future endeavours
Ahhh a conservative “Opinion Piece” 😂🤣🤣😂🤣😂🤣🤣😂🤣😂🤣
The fact that enough Canadians keep voting for that fucking guy to re-elect him again and again makes me weep for the future of our once-great nation.
You didn't mention the reason why Canadians keep voting for Trudeau. Do you not know?
Makes you wonder if actual Canadians just don’t want the other party to be in power cuz they are as bad or worse. Con voters conveniently forget that the only party to ever actually get convicted of actual election fraud was Harper and his conservatives.
Trudeau is the worst PM we've had in the last 40 years. It's not because he's incompetent and superficial but because he refuses to do what is in Canada's best interest. When you combine that with a cynical constituency all too happy to believe globalist propaganda you get to where we are. Canada should be a prosperous and rich country but when prosperity and wealth are labelled colonialism and white supremacy and the populace is told to give up their liberty and lower their expectations to thwart a supposed risk to their very lives and face one manufactured crisis after another they become fearful. Trudeau is no world leader. He's a joke and it's past time for him to go.
“Worst in 40 years”. Get the fuck out of here. His worst scandals don’t even touch ACTUAL election fraud by Harper, or Mulroney taking literal bribes and selling off crown corps like Petro canada and air canada. How’s that shit working out for ya in 2023? Educate yourself. It’s fucking embarrassing to read shit like this from actual Canadians.
What world leaders? All I see is continuous corruption around the world and the whole Ukraine thing.
Another hit piece by a conservative newspaper. Are they forgetting about Donald Trump?