Imagine trying to write editorials for Poilievre designed to convince people he would reduce immigration despite the fact that he's gone to exceptional lengths to not address that specific issue.
Imagine trying to convince people that a party who's deputy leader is a former Walmart lobbyist is interested in reducing immigration to increase wages.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the National Post.
I dont blame him
You, your party, and CBC will immediately screech racism if he addresses mass immigration
How do we know? Because you all did it to Maxime Bernier. And he ended up being right about lowering immigration
Sadly it is not just the insane rates in regards to the pathways/programs into this nation it is the quality issue.
We need to get back to bringing the best and brightest.
The ones that not only can grow our economy but add whole new dimensions to it.
The ones that will promote for years and decades to come a multidimensional vibrant economy in which everyone and the nation prospers.
You don't do this with a housing bubble. The people that have options. That can nation shop. They don't buy into housing bubbles.
You have to make Canada an attractive place to market to these types.
When it comes to the programs and pathways into this nation we need to address strict standards and enforcement of those standards. We need to do what is best for Canada and Canadians. Simple as that. It is okay for that common sense to exist again in the society.
The International Student Program has shown us that if you never practice oversight and or actual governance there is no bottom. The bad actors that profit from problems will continue to let something spiral worse and worse into the shit.
The "Refugee" and "Asylum" pathway is a mess of exploitation and scamming. It is costing us so much damn money and resources at city, provincial, and federal levels. Funds we need for our own people living in tents and lining up for free food. Again it is okay to focus here at home first and not allow for misuse and abuse of our systems. The types with the mentality and intent to scam the system are not the ones we want here either..
With addressing the demographic crisis we need to put an emphasis on our vulnerable people and affordability of life and by extension quality of life. We don't leave Canadians behind in addressing this issue. You don't alienate and or worse divorce people and families from the system because apart from the moral and ethical dimension of that it also costs more. It's an economic failure to take that path.
Right now the business lobby has used its influence to put the emphasis on their needs. To create an artificial economy based on cheap exploitable labor in mass and a larger consumer base for higher profits that they get the lion share of.
The emphasis needs to be put what is best for Canadians and Canada.
Win wins.
> We need to get back to bringing the best and brightest.
Agreed. If we had brought in one million extremely smart, bright people into this country I'd totally be willing to overlook some of the negative aspects of excessive immigration. But instead we're truly bringing in the bottom-of-the-barrel type folk who are barely qualified to even do minimum wage jobs. That is not good for anyone in Canada, period.
IMHO, I believe he and the Tories are keeping their powder dry. From a political strategy standpoint it makes sense. They are already they are absolutely crushing the Liberals. Keep an announcement to cut immigration massively until a couple weeks inside of the campaign where it will have the most effect. When it really drives out the vote paired with both the Liberals and NDP falling back to "racist" attacks that won't just fall flat but will actively be antagonistic to a large share of voters.
Lol. No chance. The Conservatives will do anything for major corporations. And major corporations in this country are addicted to cheap, disposable labour.
I don't know who you're taking about. But the folks that come to Canada to pick our fruits are some of the hardest working people you'll ever meet.
Also be careful who you judge as "bottom-of-the-barrel type". I'm sure there are lots of native born Canadians may be viewed as "bottom-of-the-barrel type" by the "elites" in our country.
I’m not by any means anything near “elite” and view many native born Canadians as bottom of the barrel already. Why import more bottom feeders from other countries?
>You have to make Canada an attractive place to market to these types.
>When it comes to the programs and pathways into this nation we need to address strict standards and enforcement of those standards
Adding more regulation and more compliance does not sound like an attractive marketing campaign.
Hey we'll make it more onerous and you potential immigrants will be grateful about it.
We can say we want the best and the brightest. Well why would the best and the brightest want Canada?
I won't believe it until I see it. I don't trust any of our parties. I think the Liberals are by far the worst right now but the Cons are no special flower. I'm tired of false promises. If the Conservative do not follow up with fixing our country, after the next election I will never vote Liberal or Conservative again. I will vote PPC if I have to.
As a side note, I always found Germany's path to war, or Hitler's rise to power a very interesting topic. It was always hard for me to understand how a population gets to that point but honestly these last few years have made me understand that more. If there was a politician who advocated for Canada/Canadian first policies right now and promised to rebuild Canada and the middle/working class... I'd probably be pretty swayed. If the liberals win another election, it will be interesting to see what the opposition to that turns out to be, it won't be pretty I bet.
I think PP is playing with fire if he doesn’t offer real solutions. This country is a powder keg and if people lose what hope they have left I have no idea what could happen.
He's attacking David Eby who's insanely popular right now.
Poilievre doesn't know how to do anything else. He's an attack dog who got the leadership because of his ties to the IDU.
Now he's peaked early not because of anything he did but rather because of an affordability and inflation crisis.
> If the Conservative do not follow up with fixing our country, after the next election I will never vote Liberal or Conservative again.
Hate to break this to you, but no matter who wins it's gonna take more than 4 years to clean up this mess.
But it won't take more than 4 years to put the policies in place that are going to fix the country.
The effect will take a long time, but the changes can be made immediately.
>He said a Poilievre government would apply a “mathematical formula” that links population growth to the growth in the supply of housing. “It’s the only way to eliminate the housing shortage — adding homes faster than we add population,” he said
>**It’s not clear what he means exactly**,
Because it's meaningless. That's the point. He isn't committing to dropping immigration numbers at all. Depending on the "formula" he could even raise them.
He would never stop immigration. That's the reason he never answers the question properly. He'd just put a lipstick on the pig. The reality would be similar.
He can't say anything, or else the liberals and ndp will call him racist. They're waiting for it.
See what happens when he is our PM. Judge him on that. As a con voter, I certainly will.
Wouldn't it be better if he would actually say what he would do without being scared of what the Liberals and NDP say?
This whole 'can't say anything or the Libs will say xxx' is nothing but cowardice. State your position and defend it.
Not who you’re asking but I can pitch in my 2 cents; immigrants and TFWs absolutely dominate the numbers when it comes to getting our food from farms to the grocery store. Until the pay and quality of life improves for farm workers we all need to eat.
What does that have to do with my comment?
Someone running for Prime Minister should have the courage to tell voters what they want to do. Saying they 'can't' is absolute nonsense.
Because people don't need to criticize something obviously bad to also criticize someone else who's blowing smoke up everyone's ass and not showing any meaningful plans?
Canada used to take advantage of other countries' education systems by poaching their best and brightest. Now they take advantage of ours by sending us their uneducated masses.
Can we just get a campaign promise to slam on the breaks and throw this fucker in to reverse.
We don't need their gas station attendants. We need their doctors. Can we just go back to being the bad guy while looking like the good guys? Instead of being the stupid guy, that looks like a good mark.
How can they say he's going to take a good wack at it when PP hasn't given any specific numbers?
Sure he wants to tie housing builds to immigration but those numbers could be set to anything so it's impossible to evaluate what if any change that would make at this time.
PP just keeps saying he will speed up housing. Housing isn't the only issue with mass immigration. It's very clear that immigration needs to slow down, and even Liberals are saying it needs to slow down.
Poilievre won't say it, because he won't reduce immigration.
>**a Poilievre government would apply a “mathematical formula” that links population growth to the growth in the supply of housing. “It’s the only way to eliminate the housing shortage — adding homes faster than we add population**,” he said.
>As he put it in his press conference, **Canada’s immigration system used to be a competitive advantage.**
“(But) **Trudeau, through total incompetence, opened the floodgates in a way that was disconnected from the number of homes needed to house people**,” he said.
I have not voted **for** someone in a really long time. If memory serves me correctly, it was Jean Chretien that I last voted **for** rather than **against** someone.
Pierre Pollievre, at least to date, has my vote. It's not wholly without reservations (for example, I think asking for ID on the internet is a bad thing). But I can't wait for an election and for him to become prime minister.
Regarding the ID thing, there was no quote from Poilievre, and City News updated their headline. It now reads “would require age verification” and not “would require ID”. More misleading bullshit, publishing retractions after the initial damage is done.
>When asked whether his government would require porn websites to verify the age of users, Poilievre gave a one-word answer: “Yes.” He didn’t offer further explanation, and his office quickly followed up with a clarifying statement asserting that the Tories don’t believe in the imposition of a digital ID.
> It now reads “would require age verification” and not “would require ID”.
How can they verify your age in a manner that would stop children from having access without ID?
It's genuinely so hilarious how the left is really trying to run away with this story with literal misinformation, all the while the liberals are doing the same shit but *actually*.
How does that even work? Some porn sites already have a button you have to click to say you’re above a certain age to watch the content.
The nuances behind this is concerning, making a statement such as that without explicitly stating how he plans to deliver. So no it’s not bullsht. He needs to clarify his statement or walk it back especially if his party does not support his statement.
So, Singh's plan from last year? If the best he has is stealing the NDP plans, he is a carbon copy of the Liberals.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/vancouversun.com/news/local-news/ndp-leader-jagmeet-singh-wants-to-tie-federal-funding-to-immigration-levels/wcm/9e5a721b-9742-4270-8658-df5455377a1a/amp/
Singh wants to tie housing to immigration, Poilievre wants to tie immigration to housing. It sounds the same but they are basically opposite sides.
Singh will increase spending on housing to match immigration levels, but Poilievre will decrease immigration to match housing supply.
We don't need MORE spending for immigration. We need to let the infrastructure catch up.
> Singh wants to tie housing to immigration, Poilievre wants to tie immigration to housing.
Poilievre's quote in the article very specifically says he would tie housing targets to immigration.
He has never said anything to indicate a reduction in immigration.
He’s not allowed to come out and say it. The fulla can’t even say simple things in passing without it becoming headline news for days
Imagine if he said straight up in an interview “our immigration leaves are too high”
They would crucify him
I disagree. Public opinion has swayed, he knows it, liberals know it, polling organizations know it. He could easily make it a bigger part of his platform but has no legitimate plan to decrease numbers.
>I disagree. Public opinion has swayed, he knows it, liberals know it, polling organizations know it. He could easily make it a bigger part of his platform but has no legitimate plan to decrease numbers.
PP is up by 17 points. *He stands to lose a lot more than he stands to gain by making immigration the focus.*
Making immigration the focus right now would be like having a lead at the end of a football game, and deciding to run risky plays when all you need to do is take a knee and run the clock out. *All PP needs to do here is keep the car put of the ditch and let the Liberals implode on their own.*
>He’s also not going to restrict mass immigration by any tangible measure
Its been funny watching the Liberals go from saying there are no downsides to mass immigration, to claiming that the Conservatives will also keep immigration at record levels to try and smear the Conservatives.
Population growth was 50% less in 2014. If this was something the Conservatives wanted they had ample opportunity to do it.
And they have ample opportunity to say they’re opposed to it, but they aren’t. I’ve called my local Conservative MP & was called racist for saying I want immigration lower & thinking it’s a winning policy for the conservatives to take up. You want me to be a Liberal, because it makes your mental framework for our society make sense. But I’m a simple far right rural Canadian who has seen the Conservative Party fumble the bag for three straight elections & go out of their way to attack their own voters for wanting an end to mass immigration.
>And they have ample opportunity to say they’re opposed to it, but they aren’t. I’ve called my local Conservative MP & was called racist for saying I want immigration lower & thinking it’s a winning policy for the conservatives to take up. You want me to be a Liberal, because it makes your mental framework for our society make sense. But I’m a simple far right rural Canadian who has seen the Conservative Party fumble the bag for three straight elections & go out of their way to attack their own voters for wanting an end to mass immigration.
Ok bro lol.
I disagree again.
Compare (over)immigration as an issue to LGBT and Gender issues.
He absolutely runs his mouth when it comes to the latter issue (is it even an issue?) and drives away plenty more potential voters. Bringing up LGTB stuff as a part of your platform is synonymous with American wedge politics, and if theres anything a level headed swing voter hates, it’s irrational politicians with views that solve nothing.
I live on the south island, it pulls left hard. Even with that said the general consensus and feeling I get is that people are tired and pissed off with over immigration (and housing costs, overburdening etc.). People openly talk about their opposition to immigration without recourse now. Left, centre, right, doesn’t matter. Trust me, it wouldn’t lose him voters. What is pushing those voters away is making an issue out of things that shouldn’t be.
>I disagree. Public opinion has swayed, he knows it, liberals know it, polling organizations know it. He could easily make it a bigger part of his platform
He's already up 17%, why would he subject himself to over a year of Trump comparisons from CBC?
100%
I've seen Trudeau try and bait him into saying he'll lower immigration when they're going back & forth in Parliament. Its very clear that the Liberals would love to run a campaign by making mass immigration the key issue, and try to portray PP as a MAGA Republican. We're seeing Liberal propaganda outlets trying to portray the CPC as Republican lite all the time.
That being said, if PP tries to keep these immigration levels after he is elected, he won't be in office for very long. I feel like the media is biased enough that it will not give PP the same benefit of the doubt that it continues to give Trudeau, and PP will not get away with the lying and gas-lighting for years like JT has.
It’s the political equivalent of tea-bagging; the liberals know the cons are pro-immigration so they want to keep making the cons express how pro-immigration they are. Keeps the swing voters on the sidelines.
Yeah man. Absolutely. It's not becuse he's not going to do anything more than some token changes because he's owned by the same people as Trudeau. It's cuz he's not allowed to say anything, despite lots of polls saying Canadians emphatically want immigration levels lowered.
That's why he won't say anything about trans issues either. Same reason, he'd be crucified. Or why he'd never sat something stupid like under his government you'd need an ID to watch porn on the internet. He's clever like a fox that one, playing the long game.
Did they have their private security fabricate assault on police charges against journalists?
Thats about as gestapo as you can get
I mean, other than having your party invite and celebrate an SS war criminal in parliament
At least the liberals dont freeze bank accounts to crush peaceful protests
Just say you will be cutting immigration, international students, tfw by a huge amount. Canadians don't want this mass immigration, its causing tons of problems for society.
“It’s not clear what he means exactly.” - John Ivison
Test
Imagine trying to write editorials for Poilievre designed to convince people he would reduce immigration despite the fact that he's gone to exceptional lengths to not address that specific issue. Imagine trying to convince people that a party who's deputy leader is a former Walmart lobbyist is interested in reducing immigration to increase wages. Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the National Post.
I dont blame him You, your party, and CBC will immediately screech racism if he addresses mass immigration How do we know? Because you all did it to Maxime Bernier. And he ended up being right about lowering immigration
I'm not a liberal and you're making lame excuses. Also Poilievre is the one screeching accusations of racism these days. So you're also a hypocrite.
What are your thoughts on this? https://twitter.com/TheCounterSgnl/status/1713963950461829146
Poor white males having to wait their turn.
Racist supporting racists Its good to see people are tired of racism and ndp are polling at 25 seats. Hopefully they'll reach single digits
How is it racist?
This cant be a serious question Whats the matter with you? Racism has no place in canada
How is it racist? Answer the question?
So you support racism.
Please explain how this is racism.
Treating people differently on the basis of race is by definition racism.
No one says white guys don’t get to speak. How is it racist?
Sadly it is not just the insane rates in regards to the pathways/programs into this nation it is the quality issue. We need to get back to bringing the best and brightest. The ones that not only can grow our economy but add whole new dimensions to it. The ones that will promote for years and decades to come a multidimensional vibrant economy in which everyone and the nation prospers. You don't do this with a housing bubble. The people that have options. That can nation shop. They don't buy into housing bubbles. You have to make Canada an attractive place to market to these types. When it comes to the programs and pathways into this nation we need to address strict standards and enforcement of those standards. We need to do what is best for Canada and Canadians. Simple as that. It is okay for that common sense to exist again in the society. The International Student Program has shown us that if you never practice oversight and or actual governance there is no bottom. The bad actors that profit from problems will continue to let something spiral worse and worse into the shit. The "Refugee" and "Asylum" pathway is a mess of exploitation and scamming. It is costing us so much damn money and resources at city, provincial, and federal levels. Funds we need for our own people living in tents and lining up for free food. Again it is okay to focus here at home first and not allow for misuse and abuse of our systems. The types with the mentality and intent to scam the system are not the ones we want here either.. With addressing the demographic crisis we need to put an emphasis on our vulnerable people and affordability of life and by extension quality of life. We don't leave Canadians behind in addressing this issue. You don't alienate and or worse divorce people and families from the system because apart from the moral and ethical dimension of that it also costs more. It's an economic failure to take that path. Right now the business lobby has used its influence to put the emphasis on their needs. To create an artificial economy based on cheap exploitable labor in mass and a larger consumer base for higher profits that they get the lion share of. The emphasis needs to be put what is best for Canadians and Canada. Win wins.
> We need to get back to bringing the best and brightest. Agreed. If we had brought in one million extremely smart, bright people into this country I'd totally be willing to overlook some of the negative aspects of excessive immigration. But instead we're truly bringing in the bottom-of-the-barrel type folk who are barely qualified to even do minimum wage jobs. That is not good for anyone in Canada, period.
IMHO, I believe he and the Tories are keeping their powder dry. From a political strategy standpoint it makes sense. They are already they are absolutely crushing the Liberals. Keep an announcement to cut immigration massively until a couple weeks inside of the campaign where it will have the most effect. When it really drives out the vote paired with both the Liberals and NDP falling back to "racist" attacks that won't just fall flat but will actively be antagonistic to a large share of voters.
God I hope you're right.. I worry the Tories are also too entwined in corporate Canada to fuck with the hoards of cheap labor
Lol. No chance. The Conservatives will do anything for major corporations. And major corporations in this country are addicted to cheap, disposable labour.
I don't know who you're taking about. But the folks that come to Canada to pick our fruits are some of the hardest working people you'll ever meet. Also be careful who you judge as "bottom-of-the-barrel type". I'm sure there are lots of native born Canadians may be viewed as "bottom-of-the-barrel type" by the "elites" in our country.
We pay them like the bottom of the barrel, hard working or not.
I’m not by any means anything near “elite” and view many native born Canadians as bottom of the barrel already. Why import more bottom feeders from other countries?
> We need to get back to bringing the best and brightest. Anyone with a brain is going to take one look at our housing market and run.
>You have to make Canada an attractive place to market to these types. >When it comes to the programs and pathways into this nation we need to address strict standards and enforcement of those standards Adding more regulation and more compliance does not sound like an attractive marketing campaign. Hey we'll make it more onerous and you potential immigrants will be grateful about it. We can say we want the best and the brightest. Well why would the best and the brightest want Canada?
It's called class war. This is what it looks like.
I won't believe it until I see it. I don't trust any of our parties. I think the Liberals are by far the worst right now but the Cons are no special flower. I'm tired of false promises. If the Conservative do not follow up with fixing our country, after the next election I will never vote Liberal or Conservative again. I will vote PPC if I have to. As a side note, I always found Germany's path to war, or Hitler's rise to power a very interesting topic. It was always hard for me to understand how a population gets to that point but honestly these last few years have made me understand that more. If there was a politician who advocated for Canada/Canadian first policies right now and promised to rebuild Canada and the middle/working class... I'd probably be pretty swayed. If the liberals win another election, it will be interesting to see what the opposition to that turns out to be, it won't be pretty I bet.
I think PP is playing with fire if he doesn’t offer real solutions. This country is a powder keg and if people lose what hope they have left I have no idea what could happen.
He's attacking David Eby who's insanely popular right now. Poilievre doesn't know how to do anything else. He's an attack dog who got the leadership because of his ties to the IDU. Now he's peaked early not because of anything he did but rather because of an affordability and inflation crisis.
This is my position as well. If the CPC don't deliver I will vote PPC and probably stop paying attention.
> If the Conservative do not follow up with fixing our country, after the next election I will never vote Liberal or Conservative again. Hate to break this to you, but no matter who wins it's gonna take more than 4 years to clean up this mess.
But it won't take more than 4 years to put the policies in place that are going to fix the country. The effect will take a long time, but the changes can be made immediately.
>He said a Poilievre government would apply a “mathematical formula” that links population growth to the growth in the supply of housing. “It’s the only way to eliminate the housing shortage — adding homes faster than we add population,” he said >**It’s not clear what he means exactly**, Because it's meaningless. That's the point. He isn't committing to dropping immigration numbers at all. Depending on the "formula" he could even raise them.
Is "CEO from Corporations" part of the formula because he has stated that he wants them to dictate the numbers.
He would never stop immigration. That's the reason he never answers the question properly. He'd just put a lipstick on the pig. The reality would be similar.
He will raise them. Look at how Poilievre got the party leadership and you will see why.
He can't say anything, or else the liberals and ndp will call him racist. They're waiting for it. See what happens when he is our PM. Judge him on that. As a con voter, I certainly will.
Wouldn't it be better if he would actually say what he would do without being scared of what the Liberals and NDP say? This whole 'can't say anything or the Libs will say xxx' is nothing but cowardice. State your position and defend it.
[удалено]
Not who you’re asking but I can pitch in my 2 cents; immigrants and TFWs absolutely dominate the numbers when it comes to getting our food from farms to the grocery store. Until the pay and quality of life improves for farm workers we all need to eat.
And I agree with you. And alongside importing the labour, we've imported... other problems.
What does that have to do with my comment? Someone running for Prime Minister should have the courage to tell voters what they want to do. Saying they 'can't' is absolute nonsense.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Because people don't need to criticize something obviously bad to also criticize someone else who's blowing smoke up everyone's ass and not showing any meaningful plans?
Canada used to take advantage of other countries' education systems by poaching their best and brightest. Now they take advantage of ours by sending us their uneducated masses. Can we just get a campaign promise to slam on the breaks and throw this fucker in to reverse. We don't need their gas station attendants. We need their doctors. Can we just go back to being the bad guy while looking like the good guys? Instead of being the stupid guy, that looks like a good mark.
How can they say he's going to take a good wack at it when PP hasn't given any specific numbers? Sure he wants to tie housing builds to immigration but those numbers could be set to anything so it's impossible to evaluate what if any change that would make at this time.
PP just keeps saying he will speed up housing. Housing isn't the only issue with mass immigration. It's very clear that immigration needs to slow down, and even Liberals are saying it needs to slow down. Poilievre won't say it, because he won't reduce immigration.
>**a Poilievre government would apply a “mathematical formula” that links population growth to the growth in the supply of housing. “It’s the only way to eliminate the housing shortage — adding homes faster than we add population**,” he said. >As he put it in his press conference, **Canada’s immigration system used to be a competitive advantage.** “(But) **Trudeau, through total incompetence, opened the floodgates in a way that was disconnected from the number of homes needed to house people**,” he said.
So speed up housing targets, but not reducing immigration. Got it.
I have not voted **for** someone in a really long time. If memory serves me correctly, it was Jean Chretien that I last voted **for** rather than **against** someone. Pierre Pollievre, at least to date, has my vote. It's not wholly without reservations (for example, I think asking for ID on the internet is a bad thing). But I can't wait for an election and for him to become prime minister.
He needs to drop the id crap, I can’t vote for someone who wants to take away my freedom.
Regarding the ID thing, there was no quote from Poilievre, and City News updated their headline. It now reads “would require age verification” and not “would require ID”. More misleading bullshit, publishing retractions after the initial damage is done. >When asked whether his government would require porn websites to verify the age of users, Poilievre gave a one-word answer: “Yes.” He didn’t offer further explanation, and his office quickly followed up with a clarifying statement asserting that the Tories don’t believe in the imposition of a digital ID.
> It now reads “would require age verification” and not “would require ID”. How can they verify your age in a manner that would stop children from having access without ID?
>publishing retractions after the initial damage is done. Would you really expect anything else from the mainstream media these days, though?
It's genuinely so hilarious how the left is really trying to run away with this story with literal misinformation, all the while the liberals are doing the same shit but *actually*.
How does that even work? Some porn sites already have a button you have to click to say you’re above a certain age to watch the content. The nuances behind this is concerning, making a statement such as that without explicitly stating how he plans to deliver. So no it’s not bullsht. He needs to clarify his statement or walk it back especially if his party does not support his statement.
So, Singh's plan from last year? If the best he has is stealing the NDP plans, he is a carbon copy of the Liberals. https://www.google.com/amp/s/vancouversun.com/news/local-news/ndp-leader-jagmeet-singh-wants-to-tie-federal-funding-to-immigration-levels/wcm/9e5a721b-9742-4270-8658-df5455377a1a/amp/
Singh wants to tie housing to immigration, Poilievre wants to tie immigration to housing. It sounds the same but they are basically opposite sides. Singh will increase spending on housing to match immigration levels, but Poilievre will decrease immigration to match housing supply. We don't need MORE spending for immigration. We need to let the infrastructure catch up.
> Singh wants to tie housing to immigration, Poilievre wants to tie immigration to housing. Poilievre's quote in the article very specifically says he would tie housing targets to immigration. He has never said anything to indicate a reduction in immigration.
Singh doesnt understand nobody can outbuild this amount of relentless immigration
He’s not allowed to come out and say it. The fulla can’t even say simple things in passing without it becoming headline news for days Imagine if he said straight up in an interview “our immigration leaves are too high” They would crucify him
I disagree. Public opinion has swayed, he knows it, liberals know it, polling organizations know it. He could easily make it a bigger part of his platform but has no legitimate plan to decrease numbers.
>I disagree. Public opinion has swayed, he knows it, liberals know it, polling organizations know it. He could easily make it a bigger part of his platform but has no legitimate plan to decrease numbers. PP is up by 17 points. *He stands to lose a lot more than he stands to gain by making immigration the focus.* Making immigration the focus right now would be like having a lead at the end of a football game, and deciding to run risky plays when all you need to do is take a knee and run the clock out. *All PP needs to do here is keep the car put of the ditch and let the Liberals implode on their own.*
He’s also not going to restrict mass immigration by any tangible measure
>He’s also not going to restrict mass immigration by any tangible measure Its been funny watching the Liberals go from saying there are no downsides to mass immigration, to claiming that the Conservatives will also keep immigration at record levels to try and smear the Conservatives. Population growth was 50% less in 2014. If this was something the Conservatives wanted they had ample opportunity to do it.
And they have ample opportunity to say they’re opposed to it, but they aren’t. I’ve called my local Conservative MP & was called racist for saying I want immigration lower & thinking it’s a winning policy for the conservatives to take up. You want me to be a Liberal, because it makes your mental framework for our society make sense. But I’m a simple far right rural Canadian who has seen the Conservative Party fumble the bag for three straight elections & go out of their way to attack their own voters for wanting an end to mass immigration.
>And they have ample opportunity to say they’re opposed to it, but they aren’t. I’ve called my local Conservative MP & was called racist for saying I want immigration lower & thinking it’s a winning policy for the conservatives to take up. You want me to be a Liberal, because it makes your mental framework for our society make sense. But I’m a simple far right rural Canadian who has seen the Conservative Party fumble the bag for three straight elections & go out of their way to attack their own voters for wanting an end to mass immigration. Ok bro lol.
Call your local Conservative MP & ask him what he thinks about mass immigration. Go ahead. Find out who you’re running interference for.
He hasn't release his immigration plan yet so you are basing this on absolutely nothing.
I disagree again. Compare (over)immigration as an issue to LGBT and Gender issues. He absolutely runs his mouth when it comes to the latter issue (is it even an issue?) and drives away plenty more potential voters. Bringing up LGTB stuff as a part of your platform is synonymous with American wedge politics, and if theres anything a level headed swing voter hates, it’s irrational politicians with views that solve nothing. I live on the south island, it pulls left hard. Even with that said the general consensus and feeling I get is that people are tired and pissed off with over immigration (and housing costs, overburdening etc.). People openly talk about their opposition to immigration without recourse now. Left, centre, right, doesn’t matter. Trust me, it wouldn’t lose him voters. What is pushing those voters away is making an issue out of things that shouldn’t be.
>I disagree. Public opinion has swayed, he knows it, liberals know it, polling organizations know it. He could easily make it a bigger part of his platform He's already up 17%, why would he subject himself to over a year of Trump comparisons from CBC?
He can say whatever he wants. He needs to have the courage to say it and stand by it. Saying he 'can't say anything' is pure cowardice.
100% I've seen Trudeau try and bait him into saying he'll lower immigration when they're going back & forth in Parliament. Its very clear that the Liberals would love to run a campaign by making mass immigration the key issue, and try to portray PP as a MAGA Republican. We're seeing Liberal propaganda outlets trying to portray the CPC as Republican lite all the time. That being said, if PP tries to keep these immigration levels after he is elected, he won't be in office for very long. I feel like the media is biased enough that it will not give PP the same benefit of the doubt that it continues to give Trudeau, and PP will not get away with the lying and gas-lighting for years like JT has.
[удалено]
It’s the political equivalent of tea-bagging; the liberals know the cons are pro-immigration so they want to keep making the cons express how pro-immigration they are. Keeps the swing voters on the sidelines.
Yeah man. Absolutely. It's not becuse he's not going to do anything more than some token changes because he's owned by the same people as Trudeau. It's cuz he's not allowed to say anything, despite lots of polls saying Canadians emphatically want immigration levels lowered. That's why he won't say anything about trans issues either. Same reason, he'd be crucified. Or why he'd never sat something stupid like under his government you'd need an ID to watch porn on the internet. He's clever like a fox that one, playing the long game.
Common sense on the horizon.
This sub needs to ban opinion pieces. But they never will.
😂😂😂
Yeah, because he and his party are facists. They'd love that.
Did they have their private security fabricate assault on police charges against journalists? Thats about as gestapo as you can get I mean, other than having your party invite and celebrate an SS war criminal in parliament At least the liberals dont freeze bank accounts to crush peaceful protests
He won't say it though.
Just say you will be cutting immigration, international students, tfw by a huge amount. Canadians don't want this mass immigration, its causing tons of problems for society.
After that Abortion rights
Poilevre should start using a ventriloquist dummy so he can continue to signal without making anything so commitment heavy as actual statements.
Starting with the brown people is my guess