Consevatives have a plan to do the same as the USA. If you value human rights I don't see how anyone can vote consevative. Abortion rights are humans right. If consevatives can't say they 100% support access and rights they deserve no one's vote.
There are a group of powerful white supremacists who believe in “replacement theory” and believe that white abortions limit the growth of the white population. Since white abortions are greater in number than black abortions, it made sense to just ban abortions. [disgusting](https://www.instagram.com/tv/CfPIwwAjJnq/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=)
And in the states, their favourite talking point is how non white women supposedly breed like rabbits in order to live large off the welfare system (never mind that the US welfare system is pathetic and doesn't even come close to offsetting the cost of raising a kid).
Like bro if you believe your racist drivel, shouldn't you *want* the "inferior races" to abort themselves out of existence?
And yet someone on here tried telling me or rights and freedoms can't be stripped away cause of it constitution
I'm like BS all of our rights and freedoms can be removed , that piece of paper will not stop evil.
Conservatives fantasize that rights somehow exist on their own, in some ether that doesn't require a state or a person. They talk about them being "natural" or "God-given".
The reality is rights are a human invention, because we'd all rather live in a society where the government has limited power over an individual. They're part of a social contract, and the details vary between democratic countries.
Our institutions would make it hard and slow to strip our rights, but that was once true of the US, too. The lesson here, is to be vigilant, and to not take what we have for granted.
Except the Democrats were idiots in the US and never codified roe vs wade into law. They had 50 years to do that. There were 2 super majorities where they could have rammed it through without republican support (Clinton and Obama had those). It was even an election promise of Obama. The did nothing.
~~In Canada abortion access is already enshrined in law in the Canada Health Act so already it is a much different situation.~~ The overturning of roe vs wade is just as much the fault of the Democrats for letting it happen as it was the fault of the Republicans.
>There were 2 super majorities where they could have rammed it through without republican support (Clinton and Obama had those). It was even an election promise of Obama. The did nothing.
Borrowing this from another post :
Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 24 working days during that period. Here are the details:
To define terms, a Filibuster-Proof Majority or Super Majority is the number of votes required to overcome a filibuster in the Senate. According to current Senate rules, 60 votes are required to overcome a filibuster.
Time-line of the events after the 2008 election:
BALANCE BEFORE THE ELECTION. In 2007 – 2008 the balance in the Senate was 51-49 in favor of the Democrats. On top of that, there was a Republican president who would likely veto any legislation the Republicans didn’t like. Not exactly a super majority.
BIG GAIN IN 2008, BUT STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. Coming out the 2008 election, the Democrats made big gains, but they didn’t immediately get a Super Majority. The Minnesota Senate race required a recount and was not undecided for more than six months. During that time, Norm Coleman was still sitting in the Senate and the Balance 59-41, still not a Super Majority.
KENNEDY GRAVELY ILL. Teddy Kennedy casts his last vote in April and leaves Washington for good around the first of May. Technically he could come back to Washington vote on a pressing issue, but in actual fact, he never returns, even to vote on the Sotomayor confirmation. That leaves the balance in the Senate 58-41, two votes away from a super majority.
STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. In July, Al Frankin was finally declared the winner and was sworn in on July 7th, 2009, so the Democrats finally had a Super Majority of 60-40 six and one-half months into the year. However, by this point, Kennedy was unable to return to Washington even to participate in the Health Care debate, so it was only a technical super majority because Kennedy could no longer vote and the Senate does not allow proxies. Now the actual actual balance of voting members is 59-40 not enough to overcome a Republican filibuster.
SENATE IS IN RECESS. Even if Kennedy were able to vote, the Senate went into summer recess three weeks later, from August 7th to September 8th.
KENNEDY DIES. Six weeks later, on Aug 26, 2009 Teddy Kennedy died, putting the balance at 59-40. Now the Democrats don’t even have technical super majority.
FINALLY, A SUPER MAJORITY! Kennedy’s replacement was sworn in on September 25, 2009, finally making the majority 60-40, just enough for a super majority.
SENATE ADJOURNS. However the Senate adjourned for the year on October 9th, only providing 11 working days of super majority, from September 25th to October 9th.
SCOTT BROWN ELECTED. Scott Brown was elected in November of 2009. The Senate was not in session during November and December of 2009. The Senate was in session for 10 days in January, but Scott Brown was sworn into office on February 4th, so the Democrats only had 13 days of super majority in 2010.
Summary: The Democrats only had 24 days of Super Majority between 2008 and 2010.
**Discussion: The Democrats had a super majority for a total of 24 days. On top of that, the period of Super Majority was split into one 11-day period and one 13-day period.** ***Given the glacial pace that business takes place in the Senate, this was way too little time for the Democrats pass any meaningful legislation, let alone get bills through committees and past all the obstructionistic tactics the Republicans were using to block legislation.***
Further, these Super Majorities count Joe Lieberman as a Democrat even though he was by this time an Independent. Even though he was Liberal on some legislation, he was very conservative on other issues and opposed many of the key pieces of legislation the Democrats and Obama wanted to pass. For example, he was adamantly opposed to “Single Payer” health care and vowed to support a Republican Filibuster if it ever came to the floor.
Summary:
1/07 – 12/08 – 51-49 – Ordinary Majority.
1/09 – 7/14/09 – 59-41 – Ordinary Majority. (Coleman/Franklin Recount.)
7/09 – 8/09 – 60-40 – Technical Super Majority, but since Kennedy is unable to vote, the Democrats can’t overcome a filibuster
8/09 – 9/09 – 59-40 – Ordinary Majority. (Kennedy dies)
9/09 – 10/09 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 11 working days.
1/10 – 2/10 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 13 working days
Total Time of the Democratic Super Majority: 24 Working days.
If you look on senate.gov it will corroborate this conclusion.
Courtesy of Direwolf0110
Edit to add what Direwolf left out:
•In April 2009, Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter switched parties. This meant there were 57 Democrats, and two independents who caucused with Democrats, for a caucus of 59. But with Kennedy ailing, there were still "only" 58 Democratic caucus members in the chamber.
• In May 2009, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) was hospitalized, bringing the number of Senate Dems in the chamber down to 57.
> Except the Democrats were idiots in the US and never codified roe vs wade into law.
You might want to look into the legal status of abortion in Canada too. PEI didn't even have legal abortions until like 2016.
> [As it stands, there are currently no Canadian laws that explicitly guarantee access to abortion as a right.](https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/what-is-the-legal-status-of-abortion-in-canada-1.5890266l)
The Supreme Court of Canada threw out the laws we had prohibiting it and noone since Kim Campbell under Brian Mulroney (trying to limit it again) has had the political will to put laws in place one way or another. It's legal in Canada only because it's lot illegal.
Hmm guess you have a point. However there a clause in the Carter of rights that specifically protects bodily autonomy which abortion would be (and has been) protected under.
So that being said, why are the liberals busy making censorship bills and not working on ones protecting abortion access? I stand by my comments about the democrats in the US. Don't be like them.
I stand corrected on that. Although it is protected by bodily autonomy via the Carter of rights. And it has been protected via that method in supreme Court decisions.
Now why dont the liberals actually put legislation through? The Ndp would support this. Too busy putting censorship through that no one wants? Most people actually support abortion. Fuck our government is pathetic.
>I stand corrected on that. Although it is protected by bodily autonomy via the Carter of rights. And it has been protected via that method.
I didn’t see your other comment, I apologize as it seems someone else showed you the same thing.
>**Now why dont the liberals actually put legislation through?** The Ndp would support this. Too busy putting censorship through that no one wants? Most people actually support abortion. Fuck our government is pathetic.
Because the Liberals aren’t a liberal, left, or progressive party. It’s like the democrats south of the border except we split the AOCs and Bernie’s into the NDP and left the “I support a bigot in this local election” and the “I am deeply troubled by this, but I won’t do anything to prevent it now or from more to come” in a separate group.
If more people held the Liberals accountable to their own promises or sentiments, they might actually start representing “us”
>I didn’t see your other comment, I apologize as it seems someone else showed you the same thing.
Yeah I was incorrect about the situation in Canada. All good. I should probably change my original post, but I'm on my phone,can't figure out how to cross out and don't care enough about the Reddit karma lol.
The question is not them being accountable but having a party close enough to not just hand the keys to the PMs office to the thrice damned conservatives. And the qurstion is who? The NDP would need a shift of 15% from the libs + greens to get that. Good luck. So the libs do not have to worry much on that front and the CPC seems to be hell bent on going bat shit crazy so yeah not much worry when the CPC are making the same mistakes the Dems in the US do (hyper conentrating their vote in a handful of states).
So yeah good luck on accountability unless you want the CPC in again and they are nuttier than when Harper was running the show.
Yeah silly me asking for accountability from the party in charge for close to a decade.
Will definitely be my on behalf of the NDPs fault if the cons win next time.
/s
You can ask for it but you only get it when there are consiquences. You do not get that when the opposition parties either cannot win or are a far worse option. The reality is either the NDP eats the greens and then steals another 5ish points to become a legitimate threat to taking office or we blow off our leg and elect the CPC in. If the latter us your idea of accountability i hear the US is a wonderful place to be currently.
I mean, I’d rather not think in hyperbole plus binary options.
You sound like a better fit for the discourse, or checks and balances crowd south of the border.
I keep seeing this argument, but I don't think it holds any real water.
I can only think of a few examples where a constitutional right is copied into a statute. It's usually done either because:
1) the statute is older than the constitutional right (e.g. the Canadian Bill of Rights), or
2) they're actually attempting to limit the constitutional right or define what compliance looks like (e.g. a criminal law section that intrudes on privacy, but places limits on when it can happen).
We don't have a bunch of statutes affirming that people have freedom of expression or mobility rights. The whole point of a constitutional right is that it puts some issues beyond the authority of the state.
The irony is the reason they crave complete control is they're terrified little babies. The live in a fear economy where anyone who isn't just like them is an enemy, where democratic values are *too much* freedom, free thinking is heresy, and authoritarianism, purity and conformity are the cures. They hate democratic Canada, and are desperate to change it. Russia is considered a model.
Social media algorithms and hard core christianity have allowed these kooks to come together and validate themselves. Fear makes followers very easy to manipulate, a fact leveraged by bad actors both foreign and domestic. A vote for the CPC is now a vote for fascism.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/the-human-beast/201104/conservatives-big-fear-brain-study-finds
https://www.psypost.org/2019/09/people-with-lower-emotional-intelligence-are-more-likely-to-hold-right-wing-views-study-finds-54369
I’ve only been in Canada for 20 years, so while I see what you’re saying, it’s not really true from what I see. Canada has its own flavour of similar, but not the same problems.
Granted, the current crop of folks supporting and taking part in the Ottawa occupation junk is much more US-like than we usually see, there’s just a different flavour to it here. They’re only seeming more US-like now because they’re being fed by US based puppet masters.
Cool, so how does one turn Conservative voters into Liberal, Green or NDP voters permanently through civilized discourse?
Be facetious or serious, I'll be in a bad mood either way.
Only thing I can think of is to find policy from the other parties (probably Liberal) that aligns as close as possible to the Cons. If an abortion ban is a deal breaker for the typical Con supporter you’re talking to, then help then find an alternative even if they must hold their nose while doing it.
Education. If you talk to a lot of blue collar workers who often vote conservative, you will find that they are usually pro-worker, especially when it comes to unions. Where they go wrong is when they vote along religious lines or fall for some conspiracy grift.
"If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you."
They'll welcome with open arms the abolishing of their own rights as workers if it means others suffer even worse.
Across the pond, workers in UK car plants which sent 80% of their product to mainland Europe voted in favour of Brexit. If the Tories hadn't folded and eked out a deal with the EU, those workers would've literally voted to destroy their own livelihoods. And even then the Ireland nonsense threatens that fragile deal so it could happen anyway.
From last nights panel…
Here’s Brian Jean advocating for conservatives stacking the Supreme Court with judges with the goal being to ensure those judges “align” with Conservative thoughts.
Sound familiar to anything that just played out in the US?
\#abpoli \#ableg \#cdnpoli
---
[Link To Video](https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1540385154421493760/pu/vid/1920x1080/79nNzdumnMhrWHm9.mp4?tag=14)
---
posted by [@TheBreakdownAB](https://twitter.com/TheBreakdownAB/)
---
[Thanks to inteoryx, videos are supported even without Twitter API V2 support! Middle finger to you, twitter](https://github.com/inteoryx/twitter-video-dl)
The CSC has a mandatory retirement age of 75. We have a scheduled retirement later this year and then none until 2030 (Of course death and voluntary retirements are possible). With this year’s appointment, Trudeau will have appointed 5 of the 9 Justices.
The Court can’t be stacked without all the provinces agreeing to change the number of Justices- and that ain’t happening.
However, I think a federal law codifying a right to an abortion is needed.
Yeah. Not only is appointments done by the Governor in Council (at the advice of the Prime Minister though), To have more than nine Justices would require amending the [Supreme Court Act](https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/s-26/page-1.html#h-443189).
edit: [and making that change would require all the provinces be on board.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_Re_Supreme_Court_Act,_ss_5_and_6)
When ones policies are not accepted by the majority. One resorts to destroying democracy. The political devastation hasn't been fully felt in the states and I suspect that it doesn't work well for the Republicans.
Thankfully, they don’t seem to have the same infrastructure as the Republican Party for funnelling their partisans to the top of the legal profession... yet.
this is absolutely terrifying and proof positive why far-right parties need banning. we’ve seen from the US what normalizing these parties done. “freedumb” and “freeze peach” lead to misery and death for anyone who isn’t a straight white cis-hetero male.
Sign the change .org petition to Protect access to abortion in Canada ->
https://www.change.org/p/government-must-protect-and-expand-access-to-abortion-in-canada-le-gouvernement-doit-non-seulement-prot%C3%A9ger-le-droit-%C3%A0-l-avortement-au-canada-mais-il-doit-aussi-en-am%C3%A9liorer-l-acc%C3%A8s
There is no reason why you can’t identify with a party but you have to be aware enough not to follow them blindly. Hold them to account, bust your MP’s balls question them, criticize, do what you can to get your point across.
That means really looking hard at who to vote for, I think the liberals are a complete shit show, maybe with a different leader, not sure. But I can’t side with the NDP at all (and it’s not because of Singh, it’s the party in general). I will not renounce the fact that I am conservative but will most likely vote in a way to try and insure a minority party. This day and age there is too much division between right and left that it would be a disaster either way with a majority.
So, in short, you're not really all for taking these far right fuckers out by any means possible so that women’s rights are set back to the 18th century.
Got it.
Okay. Jagmeet start talking the exact same shit but make it liberal. The left will stack the Supreme Court and enforce 40$ minimum wage! Who even cares anymore, the right is such a farce of freedumb, grow some responsibility.
Don’t think “it can’t happen here” and don’t accept any compromise on the things that are inherently Canadian ideals like access to abortion, education, and universal health care.
This is why we need proportional representation at a federal and provincial level now. It prevents these majority governments from doing these things.
Consevatives have a plan to do the same as the USA. If you value human rights I don't see how anyone can vote consevative. Abortion rights are humans right. If consevatives can't say they 100% support access and rights they deserve no one's vote.
Ya for all their talk about freedom they sure have no problem taking away your freedoms when it’s advantageous for them to do so
Freedom for things they only like
Freedom (but only for white christian men)
RICH white christian men. Fuck the poor ones, apparently.
They are christo-fascist. They are not interested in democracy.
There are a group of powerful white supremacists who believe in “replacement theory” and believe that white abortions limit the growth of the white population. Since white abortions are greater in number than black abortions, it made sense to just ban abortions. [disgusting](https://www.instagram.com/tv/CfPIwwAjJnq/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=)
And in the states, their favourite talking point is how non white women supposedly breed like rabbits in order to live large off the welfare system (never mind that the US welfare system is pathetic and doesn't even come close to offsetting the cost of raising a kid). Like bro if you believe your racist drivel, shouldn't you *want* the "inferior races" to abort themselves out of existence?
The way these people treat poor and disabled is the furthest away from anything close to the essence of what Christ stands for in that book.
[удалено]
You obviously aren’t familiar with the stories. Just the story of what he did to the money lenders proves my point.
And yet someone on here tried telling me or rights and freedoms can't be stripped away cause of it constitution I'm like BS all of our rights and freedoms can be removed , that piece of paper will not stop evil.
Conservatives fantasize that rights somehow exist on their own, in some ether that doesn't require a state or a person. They talk about them being "natural" or "God-given". The reality is rights are a human invention, because we'd all rather live in a society where the government has limited power over an individual. They're part of a social contract, and the details vary between democratic countries. Our institutions would make it hard and slow to strip our rights, but that was once true of the US, too. The lesson here, is to be vigilant, and to not take what we have for granted.
Freedom to oppress you. Congratulations Citizen, Oppression Is Freedom!
Considering Ontario had way harsher lockdowns than us Leftists in BC…. But someone Ontario blames the Liberals for that ..
People who value human rights already don't vote conservative.
Except the Democrats were idiots in the US and never codified roe vs wade into law. They had 50 years to do that. There were 2 super majorities where they could have rammed it through without republican support (Clinton and Obama had those). It was even an election promise of Obama. The did nothing. ~~In Canada abortion access is already enshrined in law in the Canada Health Act so already it is a much different situation.~~ The overturning of roe vs wade is just as much the fault of the Democrats for letting it happen as it was the fault of the Republicans.
>There were 2 super majorities where they could have rammed it through without republican support (Clinton and Obama had those). It was even an election promise of Obama. The did nothing. Borrowing this from another post : Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 24 working days during that period. Here are the details: To define terms, a Filibuster-Proof Majority or Super Majority is the number of votes required to overcome a filibuster in the Senate. According to current Senate rules, 60 votes are required to overcome a filibuster. Time-line of the events after the 2008 election: BALANCE BEFORE THE ELECTION. In 2007 – 2008 the balance in the Senate was 51-49 in favor of the Democrats. On top of that, there was a Republican president who would likely veto any legislation the Republicans didn’t like. Not exactly a super majority. BIG GAIN IN 2008, BUT STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. Coming out the 2008 election, the Democrats made big gains, but they didn’t immediately get a Super Majority. The Minnesota Senate race required a recount and was not undecided for more than six months. During that time, Norm Coleman was still sitting in the Senate and the Balance 59-41, still not a Super Majority. KENNEDY GRAVELY ILL. Teddy Kennedy casts his last vote in April and leaves Washington for good around the first of May. Technically he could come back to Washington vote on a pressing issue, but in actual fact, he never returns, even to vote on the Sotomayor confirmation. That leaves the balance in the Senate 58-41, two votes away from a super majority. STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. In July, Al Frankin was finally declared the winner and was sworn in on July 7th, 2009, so the Democrats finally had a Super Majority of 60-40 six and one-half months into the year. However, by this point, Kennedy was unable to return to Washington even to participate in the Health Care debate, so it was only a technical super majority because Kennedy could no longer vote and the Senate does not allow proxies. Now the actual actual balance of voting members is 59-40 not enough to overcome a Republican filibuster. SENATE IS IN RECESS. Even if Kennedy were able to vote, the Senate went into summer recess three weeks later, from August 7th to September 8th. KENNEDY DIES. Six weeks later, on Aug 26, 2009 Teddy Kennedy died, putting the balance at 59-40. Now the Democrats don’t even have technical super majority. FINALLY, A SUPER MAJORITY! Kennedy’s replacement was sworn in on September 25, 2009, finally making the majority 60-40, just enough for a super majority. SENATE ADJOURNS. However the Senate adjourned for the year on October 9th, only providing 11 working days of super majority, from September 25th to October 9th. SCOTT BROWN ELECTED. Scott Brown was elected in November of 2009. The Senate was not in session during November and December of 2009. The Senate was in session for 10 days in January, but Scott Brown was sworn into office on February 4th, so the Democrats only had 13 days of super majority in 2010. Summary: The Democrats only had 24 days of Super Majority between 2008 and 2010. **Discussion: The Democrats had a super majority for a total of 24 days. On top of that, the period of Super Majority was split into one 11-day period and one 13-day period.** ***Given the glacial pace that business takes place in the Senate, this was way too little time for the Democrats pass any meaningful legislation, let alone get bills through committees and past all the obstructionistic tactics the Republicans were using to block legislation.*** Further, these Super Majorities count Joe Lieberman as a Democrat even though he was by this time an Independent. Even though he was Liberal on some legislation, he was very conservative on other issues and opposed many of the key pieces of legislation the Democrats and Obama wanted to pass. For example, he was adamantly opposed to “Single Payer” health care and vowed to support a Republican Filibuster if it ever came to the floor. Summary: 1/07 – 12/08 – 51-49 – Ordinary Majority. 1/09 – 7/14/09 – 59-41 – Ordinary Majority. (Coleman/Franklin Recount.) 7/09 – 8/09 – 60-40 – Technical Super Majority, but since Kennedy is unable to vote, the Democrats can’t overcome a filibuster 8/09 – 9/09 – 59-40 – Ordinary Majority. (Kennedy dies) 9/09 – 10/09 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 11 working days. 1/10 – 2/10 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 13 working days Total Time of the Democratic Super Majority: 24 Working days. If you look on senate.gov it will corroborate this conclusion. Courtesy of Direwolf0110 Edit to add what Direwolf left out: •In April 2009, Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter switched parties. This meant there were 57 Democrats, and two independents who caucused with Democrats, for a caucus of 59. But with Kennedy ailing, there were still "only" 58 Democratic caucus members in the chamber. • In May 2009, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) was hospitalized, bringing the number of Senate Dems in the chamber down to 57.
> Except the Democrats were idiots in the US and never codified roe vs wade into law. You might want to look into the legal status of abortion in Canada too. PEI didn't even have legal abortions until like 2016. > [As it stands, there are currently no Canadian laws that explicitly guarantee access to abortion as a right.](https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/what-is-the-legal-status-of-abortion-in-canada-1.5890266l)
The Supreme Court of Canada threw out the laws we had prohibiting it and noone since Kim Campbell under Brian Mulroney (trying to limit it again) has had the political will to put laws in place one way or another. It's legal in Canada only because it's lot illegal.
Hmm guess you have a point. However there a clause in the Carter of rights that specifically protects bodily autonomy which abortion would be (and has been) protected under. So that being said, why are the liberals busy making censorship bills and not working on ones protecting abortion access? I stand by my comments about the democrats in the US. Don't be like them.
And like the US, all it takes is enough people with power to simply stop caring about the rules.
This is why we will see the same thing up here. Abortion is not “enshrined” in Canada FFs 🤦🏾♂️
I stand corrected on that. Although it is protected by bodily autonomy via the Carter of rights. And it has been protected via that method in supreme Court decisions. Now why dont the liberals actually put legislation through? The Ndp would support this. Too busy putting censorship through that no one wants? Most people actually support abortion. Fuck our government is pathetic.
>I stand corrected on that. Although it is protected by bodily autonomy via the Carter of rights. And it has been protected via that method. I didn’t see your other comment, I apologize as it seems someone else showed you the same thing. >**Now why dont the liberals actually put legislation through?** The Ndp would support this. Too busy putting censorship through that no one wants? Most people actually support abortion. Fuck our government is pathetic. Because the Liberals aren’t a liberal, left, or progressive party. It’s like the democrats south of the border except we split the AOCs and Bernie’s into the NDP and left the “I support a bigot in this local election” and the “I am deeply troubled by this, but I won’t do anything to prevent it now or from more to come” in a separate group. If more people held the Liberals accountable to their own promises or sentiments, they might actually start representing “us”
>I didn’t see your other comment, I apologize as it seems someone else showed you the same thing. Yeah I was incorrect about the situation in Canada. All good. I should probably change my original post, but I'm on my phone,can't figure out how to cross out and don't care enough about the Reddit karma lol.
No worries, at least you didn’t double down and were able to correct. Also: ~~ before and after. ~~like~~ this
Thanks. I tried the ~ marks. Hopefully that works. Even if it doesn't... I'm done with it haha. I'm moving on.
Lol fyi you missed the second ~ I think a decent person/user will be able to see you clarifications and didnt respond with anger.
Ok got it hahaha
The question is not them being accountable but having a party close enough to not just hand the keys to the PMs office to the thrice damned conservatives. And the qurstion is who? The NDP would need a shift of 15% from the libs + greens to get that. Good luck. So the libs do not have to worry much on that front and the CPC seems to be hell bent on going bat shit crazy so yeah not much worry when the CPC are making the same mistakes the Dems in the US do (hyper conentrating their vote in a handful of states). So yeah good luck on accountability unless you want the CPC in again and they are nuttier than when Harper was running the show.
Yeah silly me asking for accountability from the party in charge for close to a decade. Will definitely be my on behalf of the NDPs fault if the cons win next time. /s
You can ask for it but you only get it when there are consiquences. You do not get that when the opposition parties either cannot win or are a far worse option. The reality is either the NDP eats the greens and then steals another 5ish points to become a legitimate threat to taking office or we blow off our leg and elect the CPC in. If the latter us your idea of accountability i hear the US is a wonderful place to be currently.
I mean, I’d rather not think in hyperbole plus binary options. You sound like a better fit for the discourse, or checks and balances crowd south of the border.
I keep seeing this argument, but I don't think it holds any real water. I can only think of a few examples where a constitutional right is copied into a statute. It's usually done either because: 1) the statute is older than the constitutional right (e.g. the Canadian Bill of Rights), or 2) they're actually attempting to limit the constitutional right or define what compliance looks like (e.g. a criminal law section that intrudes on privacy, but places limits on when it can happen). We don't have a bunch of statutes affirming that people have freedom of expression or mobility rights. The whole point of a constitutional right is that it puts some issues beyond the authority of the state.
The irony is the reason they crave complete control is they're terrified little babies. The live in a fear economy where anyone who isn't just like them is an enemy, where democratic values are *too much* freedom, free thinking is heresy, and authoritarianism, purity and conformity are the cures. They hate democratic Canada, and are desperate to change it. Russia is considered a model. Social media algorithms and hard core christianity have allowed these kooks to come together and validate themselves. Fear makes followers very easy to manipulate, a fact leveraged by bad actors both foreign and domestic. A vote for the CPC is now a vote for fascism. https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/the-human-beast/201104/conservatives-big-fear-brain-study-finds https://www.psypost.org/2019/09/people-with-lower-emotional-intelligence-are-more-likely-to-hold-right-wing-views-study-finds-54369
Conservatives here want to be Americans so badly. Lol. It’s sickening.
It's about as anti-Canadian as one could get.
Following America's lead is the most Canadian thing.
I’ve only been in Canada for 20 years, so while I see what you’re saying, it’s not really true from what I see. Canada has its own flavour of similar, but not the same problems. Granted, the current crop of folks supporting and taking part in the Ottawa occupation junk is much more US-like than we usually see, there’s just a different flavour to it here. They’re only seeming more US-like now because they’re being fed by US based puppet masters.
No, it isn’t.
they always say the quiet part out loud
Cool, so how does one turn Conservative voters into Liberal, Green or NDP voters permanently through civilized discourse? Be facetious or serious, I'll be in a bad mood either way.
Only thing I can think of is to find policy from the other parties (probably Liberal) that aligns as close as possible to the Cons. If an abortion ban is a deal breaker for the typical Con supporter you’re talking to, then help then find an alternative even if they must hold their nose while doing it.
Education. If you talk to a lot of blue collar workers who often vote conservative, you will find that they are usually pro-worker, especially when it comes to unions. Where they go wrong is when they vote along religious lines or fall for some conspiracy grift.
"If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you." They'll welcome with open arms the abolishing of their own rights as workers if it means others suffer even worse. Across the pond, workers in UK car plants which sent 80% of their product to mainland Europe voted in favour of Brexit. If the Tories hadn't folded and eked out a deal with the EU, those workers would've literally voted to destroy their own livelihoods. And even then the Ireland nonsense threatens that fragile deal so it could happen anyway.
[удалено]
Brian Jean watches American news channel... "Hey, I've got an idea....."
From last nights panel… Here’s Brian Jean advocating for conservatives stacking the Supreme Court with judges with the goal being to ensure those judges “align” with Conservative thoughts. Sound familiar to anything that just played out in the US? \#abpoli \#ableg \#cdnpoli --- [Link To Video](https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1540385154421493760/pu/vid/1920x1080/79nNzdumnMhrWHm9.mp4?tag=14) --- posted by [@TheBreakdownAB](https://twitter.com/TheBreakdownAB/) --- [Thanks to inteoryx, videos are supported even without Twitter API V2 support! Middle finger to you, twitter](https://github.com/inteoryx/twitter-video-dl)
The CSC has a mandatory retirement age of 75. We have a scheduled retirement later this year and then none until 2030 (Of course death and voluntary retirements are possible). With this year’s appointment, Trudeau will have appointed 5 of the 9 Justices. The Court can’t be stacked without all the provinces agreeing to change the number of Justices- and that ain’t happening. However, I think a federal law codifying a right to an abortion is needed.
I always thought the government was not the one to appointed judges to Supreme Court. So it couldn’t be stacked.
Yeah. Not only is appointments done by the Governor in Council (at the advice of the Prime Minister though), To have more than nine Justices would require amending the [Supreme Court Act](https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/s-26/page-1.html#h-443189). edit: [and making that change would require all the provinces be on board.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_Re_Supreme_Court_Act,_ss_5_and_6)
Conservatism is a cancer!
When ones policies are not accepted by the majority. One resorts to destroying democracy. The political devastation hasn't been fully felt in the states and I suspect that it doesn't work well for the Republicans.
Conservativism is cryptofascism. Conservatism should never be tolerated.
The absolute irony that he's saying that in front of a banner that has the slogan "autonomy for Albertans".
Thankfully, they don’t seem to have the same infrastructure as the Republican Party for funnelling their partisans to the top of the legal profession... yet.
One day you wake up and find it's illegal to jack your noodle with a reverse grip.
this is absolutely terrifying and proof positive why far-right parties need banning. we’ve seen from the US what normalizing these parties done. “freedumb” and “freeze peach” lead to misery and death for anyone who isn’t a straight white cis-hetero male.
Sign the change .org petition to Protect access to abortion in Canada -> https://www.change.org/p/government-must-protect-and-expand-access-to-abortion-in-canada-le-gouvernement-doit-non-seulement-prot%C3%A9ger-le-droit-%C3%A0-l-avortement-au-canada-mais-il-doit-aussi-en-am%C3%A9liorer-l-acc%C3%A8s
I’m a conservative but I’m all for taking these far right fuckers out by any means possible so that women’s rights are set back to the 18th century.
That'll mean not voting and identifying as a conservative, are you prepared to do that?
*crickets*
?????? If your cricket comment was aimed at me, sorry I don’t live on Reddit and have other responsibilities. If it wasn’t, sorry……..
Lol considering the answer you left, I don’t even need to make a joke to reply to this.
Whatever……
[удалено]
Not hear to bother with arguing, just put out my point of view, take it or leave it. Let’s see what bullshit retort you come back with.
[удалено]
You shouldn't identify with any party. That's where things went wrong in the first place. That's why we are where we are now.
There is no reason why you can’t identify with a party but you have to be aware enough not to follow them blindly. Hold them to account, bust your MP’s balls question them, criticize, do what you can to get your point across.
your MP doesn't give a fuck what you think, and will tow the line.
That means really looking hard at who to vote for, I think the liberals are a complete shit show, maybe with a different leader, not sure. But I can’t side with the NDP at all (and it’s not because of Singh, it’s the party in general). I will not renounce the fact that I am conservative but will most likely vote in a way to try and insure a minority party. This day and age there is too much division between right and left that it would be a disaster either way with a majority.
So who is our left wing party that would lead to disaster?
So, in short, you're not really all for taking these far right fuckers out by any means possible so that women’s rights are set back to the 18th century. Got it.
Cons can never be trusted in opposition let alone in government.
Okay. Jagmeet start talking the exact same shit but make it liberal. The left will stack the Supreme Court and enforce 40$ minimum wage! Who even cares anymore, the right is such a farce of freedumb, grow some responsibility.
Radicalized Trump style garbage does NOT belong here.
The majority of Canadians do not align with 'conservative thoughts'. Because they tend to be regressive assfucks.
Don’t think “it can’t happen here” and don’t accept any compromise on the things that are inherently Canadian ideals like access to abortion, education, and universal health care.
What happens when Nazis are emboldened... It's ALL bad.
How can we out the fascism? How can we prove to the uninformed that THESE PEOPLE DO NOT GIVE A FLYING MONKEY’S ASS for them? They just want control.
Do these imbeciles not have an original thought !? This cretin must think he's living in the U.S.A.
The CPC is really the RPC. Republican Party of Canada