[RD] Canadian federal election 2019: Voting day is October 21.

I'm not arguing it is a bad thing. Where I've seen it happen it was a good thing.
 
The Conservatives are just the best.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canad...false-byelection-calls-for-liberal-mps-riding

OTTAWA — The Conservatives have confirmed they are behind a rash of phone calls to Liberal MP Irwin Cotler’s Montreal-riding over the past couple of weeks in which constituents allegedly were told of Cotler’s resignation and a pending byelection.

[...]

Numerous constituents in Cotler’s Mount Royal riding have complained of receiving calls in recent weeks from a marketing research company insinuating he has resigned and asking them to support the Conservatives in an upcoming byelection.

On Tuesday, Conservative MPs took responsibility for the calls but said they were simply identifying supporters.

“Every political party in the House identifies its voters in one way or another,” Conservative MP John Williamson said. “This is an important part of the political process.”

[...]

Cotler has asked House Speaker Andrew Scheer to investigate the matter and determine whether his privileges as a member of Parliament have been breached by the calls.

Van Loan said if such a finding is made, it would have widespread ramifications for freedom of speech.

It's their "free speech" to disseminate lies directly to the public. :crazyeye:
 
Apparently some people from Alberta are mad about the election and are talking about separating. (Though I get the impression it's just a few very loud people.) Yeah, because I'm sure that a landlocked country dealing in oil would do well.
 
The Conservatives are just the best.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canad...false-byelection-calls-for-liberal-mps-riding

It's their "free speech" to disseminate lies directly to the public. :crazyeye:
Perhaps you should have mentioned that this happened in 2011... not that they've changed one bit, of course. There were robocalls to some people, telling them that voting day had been moved to October 22.

Apparently some people from Alberta are mad about the election and are talking about separating. (Though I get the impression it's just a few very loud people.) Yeah, because I'm sure that a landlocked country dealing in oil would do well.
Jason Kenney is doing what Brian Mulroney did during his time: Stir up fears of separatism, claim to be the only party who can fix the problem, and scare the people into supporting that or they'll be out on the street and destitute.

We're supposed to be having our first provincial budget today, and there was a lot of criticism of Kenney over waiting until after the federal election. I'll consider myself lucky if this doesn't end up with my disability benefits being cut, or the city agencies I deal with ending up with less funding and those benefits cut.

But Kenney is one of Harper's chief lapdogs, and he cheated to win the UCP leadership (currently under investigation by the RCMP). He's cheerfully fanning the flames of separatism, which has been a fringe/far-right wing issue for decades, since Pierre Trudeau's time. I seriously doubt that the figure of 50% is anywhere near accurate, though.

What I tell the Albertans who write their separatist comments on CBC.ca is "if you want to leave Canada, there's a country south of here that would love to have you. Bye."
 
Yeah, because I'm sure that a landlocked country dealing in oil would do well.

The gripes sound familiar for some reason. Reminds me of a power dynamic I've seen somewhere before.
 
I think one of the big fights was due to Alberta wanting an oil pipeline and B.C. not wanting one. But if they separate they'll have to send the pipeline through a separate country.
 
Right. We have that fight all the time. Oil outbids just about every other resource shipment on rail infrastructure. Like sugar beets, or corn, or wheat, and so forth. And when oil outbids inland produce, the cost of transport on them if they aren't produced immediately on a river that connects to the Mississippi goes up enough that it makes them non competitive with international, and to some extent domestic, markets. So the producers inland desperately want pipelines so we stop shipping it around on the rail infrastructure while ****stains sip $7 coffees in NY having philosophical problems with the relatively efficient shipment of large bulk liquids through tubes instead of piecemeal on the rails. They're just stupid pricks, but there's so many of them.
 
I took a little dive into Western secessionism in Canada and my god, has anyone seen the Saskatchewan premier's letter to the Liberals demanding they cancel the carbon tax? I say send in the bombers to keep those troglodytes from exploiting the oil sands anymore

So the producers inland desperately want pipelines so we stop shipping it around on the rail infrastructure while ****stains sip $7 coffees in NY having philosophical problems with the efficient shipment of large bulk liquids through tubes instead of piecemeal on the rails. They're just stupid *******s, but there's so many of them.

Quoted for posterity
 
Right. We have that fight all the time. Oil outbids just about every other resource shipment on rail infrastructure. Like sugar beets, or corn, or wheat, and so forth. And when oil outbids inland produce, the cost of transport on them if they aren't produced immediately on a river that connects to the Mississippi goes up enough that it makes them non competitive with international, and to some extent domestic, markets. So the producers inland desperately want pipelines so we stop shipping it around on the rail infrastructure while ****stains sip $7 coffees in NY having philosophical problems with the relatively efficient shipment of large bulk liquids through tubes instead of piecemeal on the rails. They're just stupid pricks, but there's so many of them.

Yes but that train will also go through a foreign country if Alberta secedes. So they might have to pay taxes or something.
 
Don't encourage them pls
Why not? Trump indirectly encouraged tens of thousands of Muslim asylum-seekers and migrants/refugees from Central America to cross the border illegally from the U.S. to Canada since 2017. These are people who have no trust in the U.S. immigration system and fear being deported. So they're trying their chances in Canada, resulting in border cities and towns trying to get extra resources to take care of them, and find places for them to live. Sure, a tent city in a stadium works in the summer, but in the winter you have to put them somewhere... and there's a lot of anger because the government appears more concerned about getting them into shelter than the already-Canadian homeless (which is another issue entirely that's been ongoing since before 2017).

So if I encourage people to leave who don't want to be part of Canada anyway, at least it won't be 50,000 of them. The thing is, they claim to speak for everyone here, and they definitely do not. The First Nations people in Quebec have made it very clear that they prefer to remain part of Canada, and it's likely the FN in Alberta would also want that... because even though they also claim to be separate nations and some claim they're not Canadian, they'd still get a better deal being legally part of Canada than some upstart little country that wouldn't last.

As far as I'm concerned, if they want to cease being Canadians, there are approximately 200 other countries in the world. They can pick one, an

I took a little dive into Western secessionism in Canada and my god, has anyone seen the Saskatchewan premier's letter to the Liberals demanding they cancel the carbon tax? I say send in the bombers to keep those troglodytes from exploiting the oil sands anymore
Link?
 
Why not? Trump indirectly encouraged tens of thousands of Muslim asylum-seekers and migrants/refugees from Central America to cross the border illegally from the U.S. to Canada since 2017. These are people who have no trust in the U.S. immigration system and fear being deported. So they're trying their chances in Canada, resulting in border cities and towns trying to get extra resources to take care of them, and find places for them to live. Sure, a tent city in a stadium works in the summer, but in the winter you have to put them somewhere... and there's a lot of anger because the government appears more concerned about getting them into shelter than the already-Canadian homeless (which is another issue entirely that's been ongoing since before 2017).

All the anger towards the migrants is sad. Because it's only a very small amount. And in a lot of places the population is aging faster than can be replaced. So encouraging people to go there and settle down should be good.
 
Taxes come either way. If, for whatever crazy reason Alberta were to leave Canada(which seems farfetched, getting screwed by coastals is normative everywhere(it seems, it's an exaggeration(a little bit))), that could either be put up with, or tbh, it might have more in common with states like the Dakotas and whatnot than it does with BC.
 
Trump indirectly encouraged tens of thousands of Muslim asylum-seekers and migrants/refugees from Central America to cross the border illegally from the U.S. to Canada since 2017.

The main difference is that those people will generally prove to be assets to your country.

So if I encourage people to leave who don't want to be part of Canada anyway, at least it won't be 50,000 of them. The thing is, they claim to speak for everyone here, and they definitely do not. The First Nations people in Quebec have made it very clear that they prefer to remain part of Canada, and it's likely the FN in Alberta would also want that... because even though they also claim to be separate nations and some claim they're not Canadian, they'd still get a better deal being legally part of Canada than some upstart little country that wouldn't last.

Yeah, this is the other angle I was curious about. These white people have some weird ideas. I'd be totally okay with returning Alberta and Saskatchewan to Native sovereignty...


https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/vb5jbj/what-justin-trudeau-can-do-about-wexit


not literally a "letter to the Liberals" but close enough
 
I await the lamentations for the death of democracy in Canada. Should be coming any day now.

"Democracy" makes Israel practically ungovernable - for similar reasons to the old Weimar Republic...

And most Americans are too deluded and self-righteous to realize they never had it in the first place. They're "vaunted and enlightened" Founding Fathers were actively hostile to the idea.
 
Don't encourage them pls

Dark horse 51st state candidate! What a fun map that would make.

and there's a lot of anger because the government appears more concerned about getting them into shelter than the already-Canadian homeless (which is another issue entirely that's been ongoing since before 2017).

Is it *really* another issue in practice? Resources are finite, governments rarely set policy to maximize their availability, and putting them one place denies putting them in another.

And most Americans are too deluded and self-righteous to realize they never had it in the first place. They're "vaunted and enlightened" Founding Fathers were actively hostile to the idea.

Didn't Americans call the nation a republic well into the 19th century? At least the emphatic insistence on democracy seems to be post-WW2 stuff, rooted more in propaganda than reality.
 
Perhaps you should have mentioned that this happened in 2011... not that they've changed one bit, of course. There were robocalls to some people, telling them that voting day had been moved to October 22.

Oh, yeah. It was connected to a larger point/event that I seemingly forgot to include. And that I can't find anymore... :think:

Okay. It was connected to the Warren Kinsella debacle, with the Conservatives paying a journalist with the Toronto Sun to smear Trudeau and the PPC. Basically saying "This is nothing new for the Conservatives."

Interesting article about the Kinsella thing: https://www.canadalandshow.com/warren-kinsella-postmedia-seek-and-destroy-ppc
 
Didn't Americans call the nation a republic well into the 19th century? At least the emphatic insistence on democracy seems to be post-WW2 stuff, rooted more in propaganda than reality.

Perhaps you're right. And looking at the "Republics" in the world at the time of the Philadelphia Convention - the Dutch Republic, the Florentine Republic, the Genoan Republic, the Republic of Pisa, the Most Serene Republic of Venice, and the de facto independent Republics of the Hanseatic City-States along the Rhine and Baltic Coasts - all highly corrupt, plutocratic, mercantilist, highly socially stratified, nepotistic, and grandiose nations who shameless bought wars just to increase profits of their merchants and companies, and had any consultations by their citizens as to the leadership just rubberstamps of the decisions already made by filthy rich plutocrats - yes, I do think you're onto something!
 
Top Bottom