Welcome Guest!
In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2019 Federal Election
#76
(03-03-2019, 04:23 PM)jamincan Wrote:
(03-03-2019, 04:18 PM)jeffster Wrote: Trudeau promised us transparency and honesty, and Canadians have gotten neither from him.

In fairness to Trudeau, the very fact that we heard JWR's testimony is a testament that he is more transparent than anyone else before him.

I really don't think he had much choice. She was going to speak regardless. When Trudeau had announced that she could speak, I got the impression that it wasn't going to be good. It seemed to me that Trudeau sounded like a defeated person, and that the sh*t was going to hit the ceiling no matter.
Reply


#77
(03-03-2019, 07:10 PM)jeffster Wrote:
(03-03-2019, 04:37 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Don't fall into the trap of false equality.

Yes, there are extremists on the left.  They do not run the media, nor do they end up elected to the highest office, as is certainly the case in the US, I've seen this justified with false rhetoric all the time "a Hillary supporter said that capitalists are murderers, so it's okay for me to actually vote for a man who says Mexians are rapists, because both sides are equal".  Canada is not quite in the same state politically, but I believe I have been seeing the same kind of false equivalences being used.

While I have no love for Trudeau, he is not the equivalent of Trump, or Ford, or even Scheer at this point, even if some of his supporters are equally fanatical.

I do agree that Trudeau is not Trump. They're very different in their wants and desires. What they do have in common are blind worshippers and a general inability to tell the truth 100%. However, just because one believes in climate change and the other doesn't, it doesn't make ones lies less worse than the other.

As for extremists on the left running the media, I will say they have some control, at least in the USA.

Just one example was this: https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/2019...026886002/

Another one is this: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/l...816523002/

And this one: https://deadline.com/2019/03/washington-...202568450/

Really, poor reporting all around. But it does show that the media is controlled by more than one group. Sadly, with all the "Fake" news out there, it takes away from the 'real news' that worshippers refuse to believe. Such as the case with this SNC-Lavalin issue. Such as the case with the Russian collusion "Witch Hunt". They're both real, but both side refuse to believe.

No, the one issue does not make them equivalent, but an objective view of both, shows that one is vastly different from another.  You seem to be implying an equivalence here (and perhaps you don't intend to, but that's what I interpreted it reading). Both Trump and Trudeau have made statements which turned out to be not entirely true, but to say that makes them similar is misleading, Trump lies as a rule.  Even if you think all politicians lie most of the time, Trump has set a new benchmark that nobody even comes close to matching.

As for media, I'm not sure what those links are supposed to highlight, but at least in the US, FOX News is a major news organization (those links are not from agencies with anywhere near as much viewership), which has an explicit and intentional goal to sway public opinion to support the Republicans.  There is no other example in the US of an entity with both as much mindshare (ability) and also as clearly an explicit goal of misinforming the public.  There are major news outlets with a liberal bias (like NPR) but they don't even come close to the level of viewership and misrepresentation seen on FOX.
Reply
#78
(03-03-2019, 06:51 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(03-03-2019, 11:46 AM)Canard Wrote: Amazing how much sway the media has in forming what a Country will end up being like.

I would encourage you all to delve deeper into this at your leisure to see what is really happening beyond the facade that the sensationalist Media and frothing Conservatives are spinning.

“Delve deeper” in what way? What are you actually saying? What is the façade? What do you think is “really happening” behind said façade?

I don't know whether this is what Canard is referring to, but here is a very calm (opinion) article about what a DPA is and what that means in the SNC-Lavalin context:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/...ink-it-is/

My view on this whole thing is that it's politicizing the justice system, which is not a good thing. But I am not seeing any evidence of corruption or criminal behaviour here -- if there were, we would be seeing prosecutors in action already.

For sure this will hurt Trudeau and the Liberals. But the way leadership contests are run in Canada, I don't see how they would possibly have time to do that prior to this fall's election.
Reply
#79
The most that the Liberals could do would be to appoint an interim leader to hold things together until after the election, in the (exceedingly unlikely, imo) event that Trudeau were to resign between now and then.
Reply
#80
(03-03-2019, 07:42 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(03-03-2019, 07:10 PM)jeffster Wrote: I do agree that Trudeau is not Trump. They're very different in their wants and desires. What they do have in common are blind worshippers and a general inability to tell the truth 100%. However, just because one believes in climate change and the other doesn't, it doesn't make ones lies less worse than the other.

As for extremists on the left running the media, I will say they have some control, at least in the USA.

Just one example was this: https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/2019...026886002/

Another one is this: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/l...816523002/

And this one: https://deadline.com/2019/03/washington-...202568450/

Really, poor reporting all around. But it does show that the media is controlled by more than one group. Sadly, with all the "Fake" news out there, it takes away from the 'real news' that worshippers refuse to believe. Such as the case with this SNC-Lavalin issue. Such as the case with the Russian collusion "Witch Hunt". They're both real, but both side refuse to believe.

No, the one issue does not make them equivalent, but an objective view of both, shows that one is vastly different from another.  You seem to be implying an equivalence here (and perhaps you don't intend to, but that's what I interpreted it reading). Both Trump and Trudeau have made statements which turned out to be not entirely true, but to say that makes them similar is misleading, Trump lies as a rule.  Even if you think all politicians lie most of the time, Trump has set a new benchmark that nobody even comes close to matching.

As for media, I'm not sure what those links are supposed to highlight, but at least in the US, FOX News is a major news organization (those links are not from agencies with anywhere near as much viewership), which has an explicit and intentional goal to sway public opinion to support the Republicans.  There is no other example in the US of an entity with both as much mindshare (ability) and also as clearly an explicit goal of misinforming the public.  There are major news outlets with a liberal bias (like NPR) but they don't even come close to the level of viewership and misrepresentation seen on FOX.

You're right about Trump being a special type of liar, because he is untruthful in everything. Difference between Trump and Trudeau: Trump will say the first thing that comes to his mind, totally uneducated guess, and make them out to be true. He says things that leave the media scrambling to debunk or fact fine. Trudeau, on the other hand, is smart enough to not be tossing opinions and conspiracy theories onto social media every 10 minutes.

Those linked articles show the media leans towards the left, and will take shots at those right of centre, even if the stories had not been fully vetted.

It's not that the right leaning doesn't do the same. They do. Especially down south with the continued attacks on immigrants and climate change. As you mentioned, Fox News (and in particular, Fox & Friends).

However, this is really about our PM lying about knowledge of this SNC-Lanavin scandal, and subsequently, tossing a respected AG under the bus.
Reply
#81
(03-03-2019, 09:15 PM)tomh009 Wrote: ...
For sure this will hurt Trudeau and the Liberals. But the way leadership contests are run in Canada, I don't see how they would possibly have time to do that prior to this fall's election.

Oh come on, if the PCs were able to run a leadership race, and elect Ford and win a provincial majority, I have no doubt the Liberals should be able to run a leadership race, elect ....?  Except my snarky retort falls short here because I know of no left leaning politician who has Ford's mix of petty vindictiveness, incompetence, and singular focus on one city, mixed with an extreme and naive left wing ideology.
Reply
#82
(03-03-2019, 04:23 PM)jamincan Wrote:
(03-03-2019, 04:18 PM)jeffster Wrote: Trudeau promised us transparency and honesty, and Canadians have gotten neither from him.

In fairness to Trudeau, the very fact that we heard JWR's testimony is a testament that he is more transparent than anyone else before him.

However, what most people don't recognize is that JWR was only able to speak to what Justin allowed her to.  He only waived her privilege for a small part of the story.  Even in her own words, she said there is a lot more that she is not permitted to speak to at this point.
Reply


#83
Her privilege was waived for everything relevant to the issue, except (perhaps) wrt anything she was told after she had become Minister of Veteran Affairs. Her suggestion that there’s more out there suggests that one of the relevant players somehow confirmed (in her interpretation) that she was removed from the Justice/AG slot because of her lack of cooperation. That would contradict the official story, but would hardly take anyone by surprise.
Reply
#84
(03-04-2019, 08:06 AM)Rainrider22 Wrote:
(03-03-2019, 04:23 PM)jamincan Wrote: In fairness to Trudeau, the very fact that we heard JWR's testimony is a testament that he is more transparent than anyone else before him.

However, what most people don't recognize is that JWR was only able to speak to what Justin allowed her to.  He only waived her privilege for a small part of the story.  Even in her own words, she said there is a lot more that she is not permitted to speak to at this point.

What wasn't waived, however, was the latter part, after she was no longer AGM. While that may have held some interesting discussions, it would be far less relevant to the SNC situation.
Reply
#85
(02-26-2019, 02:39 PM)MidTowner Wrote: I'm not so sure. The NDP won Burnaby last night, but that should be a given that the leader wins his seat. They lost Outremont, which could foretell a poor showing in Quebec. The Liberals may do very well in Quebec again.

My thinking is that, if Bernier polls well between not and autumn, the Tories may try to shore up their base with various more-rightist policies and messaging that the Liberals can capitalize on to capture swing voters who might be easily convinced that Scheer is as "scary" as Harper. It's not hard to imagine Scheer saying something to a group like that truck convoy in Ottawa last week that the Liberals successfully turn into this cycle's version of the "old stock Canadians" remark.

I believe the Liberals have the possibility of campaigning to younger voters with the same type of more progressive rhetoric they used in 2015; and to older, more moderate voters with their actual record of governance since.

I think it's easy to see how likely the above prediction is when you consider the story the media took away from Scheer's town hall in Kitchener last night. CBC's headline is "Scheer says he didn't hear question about Clinton 'pizzagate' lie during town hall."

At the town hall, a certifiable nut job asked Scheer about Trudeau's government giving money to, among others, the Clinton Foundation. He refers to it as being part of "child trafficking and child sacrifice" before his ultimate question is "The PM, if he knows about the foundation, should he be in jail for this?"

Scheer declined to inform the gentleman that a great deal of what he said was dangerous nonsense, and went into a canned response that reference the Clinton Foundation and Trudeau's other questionable spending. The next day, he claimed simply not to have heard that part of the question that mentioned "pizzagate" and "child sacrifice." Maybe. Or maybe he felt uneasy about giving the what-for to someone at a friendly event. Especially when members of the audience applauded the nonsense about the Clinton Foundation.

Eventually something like this is going to result in something the Grits can really make hay out of.
Reply
#86
The Conservative Party nominated former MP Stephen Woodworth to be its candidate in Kitchener Centre. His opponent was Mary Henein Thorn, who was the OPC's candidate last year.

Woodworth has experience, but holds some controversial views that will be remembered by a lot of voters.
Reply
#87
(04-18-2019, 03:27 PM)MidTowner Wrote: The Conservative Party nominated former MP Stephen Woodworth to be its candidate in Kitchener Centre. His opponent was Mary Henein Thorn, who was the OPC's candidate last year.

Woodworth has experience, but holds some controversial views that will be remembered by a lot of voters.

From Wikipedia:

Quote:In 2012, Woodworth introduced Motion 312, a private member's motion attempting to re-open the debate around Canadian abortion law. The bill proposed to create a special committee to redefine Canada's legal definition of human being. The motion was defeated 203-91. In 2013, Woodworth followed up with a second private member's motion, Motion 476, again attempting to challenge Canada's abortion laws. However, Woodworth failed to receive the unanimous consent of Parliament required to reopen the debate after his previous motion was defeated
Reply
#88
(04-18-2019, 03:27 PM)MidTowner Wrote: The Conservative Party nominated former MP Stephen Woodworth to be its candidate in Kitchener Centre. His opponent was Mary Henein Thorn, who was the OPC's candidate last year.

Woodworth has experience, but holds some controversial views that will be remembered by a lot of voters.

I remember a lot about him.  I remember specifically his regressive views on women's rights, but also his refusal to so much as reply to me when I raised the voting rights issue when Harper was trying to take away my, and my friend's vote.

He's a terrible MP regardless of how you feel about the PCs.
Reply


#89
(04-18-2019, 06:48 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(04-18-2019, 03:27 PM)MidTowner Wrote: The Conservative Party nominated former MP Stephen Woodworth to be its candidate in Kitchener Centre. His opponent was Mary Henein Thorn, who was the OPC's candidate last year.

Woodworth has experience, but holds some controversial views that will be remembered by a lot of voters.

I remember a lot about him.  I remember specifically his regressive views on women's rights, but also his refusal to so much as reply to me when I raised the voting rights issue when Harper was trying to take away my, and my friend's vote.

He's a terrible MP regardless of how you feel about the PCs.

Say what?

I agree Woodworth was not a good MP - it seemed to me that he was more concerned with pursuing his own agenda than with representing his constituents in Ottawa.
Reply
#90
(04-18-2019, 10:11 PM)panamaniac Wrote:
(04-18-2019, 06:48 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I remember a lot about him.  I remember specifically his regressive views on women's rights, but also his refusal to so much as reply to me when I raised the voting rights issue when Harper was trying to take away my, and my friend's vote.

He's a terrible MP regardless of how you feel about the PCs.

Say what?

I agree Woodworth was not a good MP - it seemed to me that he was more concerned with persuing his own agenda than with representing his constituents in Ottawa.

Haper's electoral changes would have eliminated the ability to vouch for other's to allow them to vote, when one person lacks the proper proof of residency.  As students who are occasionally on work terms, who might be staying in non-traditional housing, one does not always have the proof of address needed to vote.

I have done this for people I know, who would not have been able to vote without it, and I was very nearly in such a situation as well.

That was among the other bad things in that bill, but it was the one which most directly affected me.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links