• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

New Canadian Politics Thread

I struggle with the whole JWR saga. My emotions tell me that I dislike her.

Then my brain tries to cut her some slack. But she just does all the same cynical political shit she accuses her opponents of and then acts like she is above the fray. Case in point, book release during an election campaign (unless that was planned before the writ dropped?). Am I missing something here?
You needn't struggle. Even a cursory examination of JWR's career will show you that she's only ever done one thing: look out for number one. Everything she says and does serves the singular purpose of self promotion. The fact of the matter is that if it wasn't SNC Lavalin it would have been something else. She was always going to manufacture something over which to go to war with her boss and grab the spotlight for herself.

She was called to the bar in 2000 and only worked as a lawyer for 3 years before leaving to become involved with the BC Treaties Commission in 2004. Then she was with the BC Assembly of First Nations beginning in 2009. When she ran for Parliament and was elected in 2015, Trudeau made her Justice Minister and Attorney General despite her near-complete lack of legal experience, which itself was over a decade out of date. But Trudeau wanted to signal his virtue and JWR ticked two important diversity boxes: female and indigenous.

Hilarity then ensued.

You can argue about SNC Lavalin engaging in bribery and clutch your pearls if you wish, but everyone knows that when dealing in the Middle East bribery (or "backsheesh", as it's known) is just a cost of doing business. You're dealing with governments that are irredeemably corrupt. So if you want to secure a contract that will create nearly 10,000 Canadian jobs you either pay the bribe or go home empty handed. Trudeau had to weigh the bribing (to which the government could have easily turned a blind eye, and to which previous Canadian governments have always done) against the value of creating 10,000 jobs for Canadians. He strongly suggested to JWR that she do the right thing and the right thing in this case, the greater good, was to secure those jobs. But the jobs weren't going to natives nor were they going to be in her home riding so JWR didn't care about them. She only saw an opportunity to grandstand.

Anyone who knows anything about tribal councils and indigenous self-government could tell you stories about the rampant corruption. But JWR doesn't care about that when it involves natives. She will rationalize behaviors from them that she won't countenance from a corporation that actually creates jobs as opposed to native governments which only cost the taxpayers money.

Fortunately, her political career is over and she knows it. Whatever bullshit she says about the "toxic culture" of politics the fact of the matter is that she knows she committed political suicide for her 15 minutes of fame. She is unelectable except in her tiny riding. She can't do anything as an independent backbencher except sit there, hoping to be the deciding vote on a confidence motion, which isn't likely. And as an independent she is given next to nothing in terms of parliamentary perqs and certainly no budget for anything other than an extra toner cartridges for the office photocopier. She's gone from Attorney General to a nobody. And her co-conspirator Jane Philpott did even worse, losing her seat to the Liberal candidate who was given JWR's old job. In fact, Philpott finished 3rd and vanished from politics overnight.

JWR is poison. No other party will touch her because they know she's a backstabber who can't be trusted. And just in case you think we lost someone good when she was fired, take a look at this critique of her tenure as Justice Minister. It was a shit show.


Feel free to hate this woman with a passion. She deserves it.
 
Fair enough.

Ultimate point for me is that a conservative government would literally kill people during a pandemic ...and the fact that they are willing to do so means a whole lot more plane rides with rich guys etc. if they were to gain power.

If a conservative party comes out that is willing to at minimum govern to save citizen's lives, I'd be willing to vote for them to prevent a liberal majority (due to the scandals you pointed out here). They can be a check on one another. Fact remains that even the CPC LEADER APPEARS more left leaning compared to other conservative parties around the world.

This election however...and even the next one if the CPC is repped by the same candidates or continue down the path of appeasing to a crazy base...the vote is a no brainer. One party kills, while the other has scandals. I'll take the scandalous party over the one that leads to death.

In fact , I feel so strongly about this that even bringing up the scandals is crazy to me. One party governs with no regards to human life. That party needs to go down and go down hard.
Fixed.

O'Toole doesn't seem to be too far right but he's still a Harperite so I'm inclined not to trust him as genuine.

I mean let's face it. Harper still runs that party. He's still the guy who gets to decide who stays and who goes. He installed Scheer and when Scheer failed him he got rid of Scheer and replaced him with O'Toole. He's as in control of the CPC in the same way Trump controls the GOP. If you vote CPC you are voting for Harper and for Harperism.
 
ok so the concerns are:

1. corruption. with 2 examples of arguable severity and/or relevance to Trudeau himself.
2. coziness with china. though he did arrest the chinese lady.
3. being left out of the recent Pacific security pact. France is also apparently upset at being left out.
4. attempting to raise taxes on small businesses.

Of these, I think i'm only really sympathetic to #4. While it's an age old practice, i've always hated using "Small Businesses" as cover for corporate tax breaks that only really help large corporations, and it's just as bad to see it in the reverse - Corporate Taxes being used as a cover to raise taxes on small businesses. For me the lumping in of small business with large corporations (as well as the professional income class with the super-wealthy class) is the biggest con in our economic system.

#3 is also concerning, though brand new, and I'm not quite sure what the implications are there.

#2 I think is fake news. I don't think he's cozy with china.

#1....eh. I think those are pretty weak examples of corruption, personally.
I'll disagree on the severity of the corruption. Childs play compared to what has gone on in the the U.S. sure, but I'm not sure that's the bar we want to be using.

Calling this election is also annoying. Ya sure, other parties would probably do the same, and I would be pissed then as well.

Anyway, another liberal minority is fine by me. Majority would be a lot tougher to stomach.
 
My point wasn't that WE and SNC aren't problems. But they are overblown procedural/government beurocracy issues, rather than the evil corruption conservatives tried to play it as.

He's just a dummy that didn't realize he was overstepping in SNC, (which he didn't force his way anyway) and doesn't get government procurement, which in fairness is a bitch.
 
My point wasn't that WE and SNC aren't problems. But they are overblown procedural/government beurocracy issues, rather than the evil corruption conservatives tried to play it as.

He's just a dummy that didn't realize he was overstepping in SNC, (which he didn't force his way anyway) and doesn't get government procurement, which in fairness is a bitch.
Are WE and SNC any worse than Mulroney's Airbus scandal or his acceptance of a $225K bribe from Karlheinz Schreiber? Or Harper's people cutting a cheque for $90K to cover Mike Duffy's "expenses" after he was made a Tory Senator? Or the robocall scandal? Or Tony Clement's "legacy fund" for the 2010 G8 Summit that directed $50 million worth of infrastructure monies into his own riding?

To say nothing of Harper prorogation of Parliament which he did so that the Tories could shut down the Afghan detainee scandal and all the embarrassing questions they'd have normally had to face during Question Period?

We survived those scandals. We can and will survive WE and SNC (which, if we're being honest, nobody really cares about and which 95% of Canadians couldn't even remember, if indeed they ever paid attention to them to begin with)
 
Fair enough.

Ultimate point for me is that a conservative government would literally kill people during a pandemic ...and the fact that they are willing to do so means a whole lot more plane rides with rich guys etc. if they were to gain power.

If a conservative party comes out that is willing to at minimum govern to save citizen's lives, I'd be willing to vote for them to prevent a liberal majority (due to the scandals you pointed out here). They can be a check on one another. Fact remains that even the CPC is more left leaning compared to other conservative parties around the world.

This election however...and even the next one if the CPC is repped by the same candidates or continue down the path of appeasing to a crazy base...the vote is a no brainer. One party kills, while the other has scandals. I'll take the scandalous party over the one that leads to death.

In fact , I feel so strongly about this that even bringing up the scandals is crazy to me. One party governs with no regards to human life. That party needs to go down and go down hard.
there is an ad on tv here (not sure if it is everywhere)
where they are mocking trudeau for not caring about money but instead caring about people

it is so weird - it is basically an ad for trudeau paid for my the cons
 
I don’t really get the criticism of Canada being “left out” of the security pact between the US, Britain & Australia.

Britain was already a member of the pact with the US sharing nuclear submarine technology dating back to the Cold War, so their involvement in this is nothing new.

The one new addition was Australia, and they were added because the aim of this move by the Biden admin was to help contain China in the South Pacific.

So...what military bases or territory does Canada have in the South Pacific that would warrant our involvement in this, exactly?

And what the fuck would we do with nuclear submarine propulsion technology? What does anyone figure the Canadian approval rating would be for the suggestion that we should spend billions-to-trillions to start building and maintaining a fleet of nuclear submarines to patrol the South Pacific?
 
there is an ad on tv here (not sure if it is everywhere)
where they are mocking trudeau for not caring about money but instead caring about people

it is so weird - it is basically an ad for trudeau paid for my the cons
I have seen similar FB ads too... ...it is bizarre.

The CPC is running a whole bunch of ads with... JTs face on them! I mean I guess they're trying to fire up the base? Seems like they're getting eaten from both ends though, the loonies running to the PPC and moderates to the Libs
 
I would say Canada, as one of the major western democracies in the Pacific, not even being aware the pact was in the works seems pretty significant. And the pact covers more than just getting Australia some nuclear subs. Of the Five Eyes, both Canada and NZ have taken a soft approach with China, and both were relegated to the sidelines for this one.
 
Last edited:
The Hail Mary Jody Wilson-Raybould book release hasn't gained much traction. Maybe even the people who stirred up all that faux-outrage over that issue appear bored with it.
I'm waiting for the audiobook release. Each copy personally made by JWR herself!
 
there is an ad on tv here (not sure if it is everywhere)
where they are mocking trudeau for not caring about money but instead caring about people

it is so weird - it is basically an ad for trudeau paid for my the cons
Yeah there's a point at which you'd expect them to edit the clip so that JT's remarks can be "properly" taken out of context. If they had cut him off after he says "I really don't think about monetary policy" then that would be one thing. But they let him keep speaking and the next thing he says is "I care more about families" which effectively does two things: puts his remark about fiscal policy into context and reminds people that they don't care about fiscal policy either and that if the Cons care about them more than they care about families then maybe they shouldn't get a mandate.

If I didn't know better I'd swear that the ad agency hired by the Cons is chock full of Liberal supporters who are subversively getting Trudeau some free advertising because the Cons are really bad at this. The Willy Wonka spoof looked like it was made by a 14 year old who just figured out how to use clip art. And this one, which they are running constantly, makes Trudeau look compassionate.
 
Yeah there's a point at which you'd expect them to edit the clip so that JT's remarks can be "properly" taken out of context. If they had cut him off after he says "I really don't think about monetary policy" then that would be one thing. But they let him keep speaking and the next thing he says is "I care more about families" which effectively does two things: puts his remark about fiscal policy into context and reminds people that they don't care about fiscal policy either and that if the Cons care about them more than they care about families then maybe they shouldn't get a mandate.

If I didn't know better I'd swear that the ad agency hired by the Cons is chock full of Liberal supporters who are subversively getting Trudeau some free advertising because the Cons are really bad at this. The Willy Wonka spoof looked like it was made by a 14 year old who just figured out how to use clip art. And this one, which they are running constantly, makes Trudeau look compassionate.

I think they're probably just not very smart. Even if they cut the quote off at "monetary policy..." that doesn't mean what these dummies seem to think it means.
 
I would say Canada, as one of the major western democracies in the Pacific, not even being aware the pact was in the works seems pretty significant. And the pact covers more than just getting Australia some nuclear subs. Of the Five Eyes, both Canada and NZ have taken a soft approach with China, and both were relegated to the sidelines for this one.
The idea that Canada was caught off guard or didn't know about this is highly misleading.

And if you asked me which "western" democracies were "soft" on China, Australia would be right at the top of my list. Don't be fooled by the fact that they sometimes have xenophobic politicians stumbling their way through the bilateral relationship. Australia is more dependent on China economically than almost anyone. And they know it.
 
I would say Canada, as one of the major western democracies in the Pacific, not even being aware the pact was in the works seems pretty significant. And the pact covers more than just getting Australia some nuclear subs. Of the Five Eyes, both Canada and NZ have taken a soft approach with China, and both were relegated to the sidelines for this one.
what makes you think Canada was unaware this was happening?
 
I hear a lot of bitching about being 'soft on China' but very little in the way of what being 'hard on China' would look like in terms of concrete actions.

And I get it, cause they're fucking autocratic tyrannical anti-democratic despots who are basically flipping the rest of the world the bird. But, what can we actually do about it as a middle power? A middle power whose economy is extraordinarily linked/dependent on the Chinese market...

Harper did the same thing in opposition, talk a mean game on China. Once he was in office his tune changed...
 
Back
Top