Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

CPC 2017: Bernier vs Alexander


Who will lead the federal Conservatives in June 2017?  

29 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, Argus said:

I'd say speaker of the house and house leader were more important positions than two years as a private school teacher.

At least Trudeau worked outside the walls of parliament. Scheer is a light weight and will be destroyed by Trudeau. Hopefully, the CPC will smarten up so the religious right doesn't win the leadership again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 488
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

He should be running for the liberals.

And proud of it. It would be terrible to be liked by racists, bigots, misogynists. The lower the score the better. 

I would go with O'Leary. Too many career politician idiots on the podium. Bernier is a dolt. He can't figure out how to use his  zipper is let alone a budget. I would vote for Bonnie Raitt not Li

18 hours ago, -1=e^ipi said:

Man, I can't win. 1 person in this thread thinks I'm an extreme socialist. The other thinks I'm an extreme libertarian.

Giving an endless stream of government money to anyone who wants it, without requiring anything of them, is certainly not libertarian.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Newfoundlander said:

At least Trudeau worked outside the walls of parliament. Scheer is a light weight and will be destroyed by Trudeau. Hopefully, the CPC will smarten up so the religious right doesn't win the leadership again.

I don't think there's ever been a leader of any political party who is as much of a lightweight as Trudeau. Were it not for his name and looks he'd never have made anything for himself in life. His family connections have gotten him everything he has, including every job he's held.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Argus said:

Giving an endless stream of government money to anyone who wants it, without requiring anything of them, is certainly not libertarian.

So in your view, Milton Friedman is not libertarian?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Argus said:

I don't think there's ever been a leader of any political party who is as much of a lightweight as Trudeau. Were it not for his name and looks he'd never have made anything for himself in life. His family connections have gotten him everything he has, including every job he's held.

 

Yet, he booted Harper from office and will prevent Scheer from ever getting to power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/27/2017 at 0:05 PM, Argus said:

O'Toole was the guy I gave my first vote to. Or maybe my second... I kept flipflopping back and forth and now I honestly don't remember. You might be right that nobody from among this group is going to beat Trudeau in the near term. He's bribing his way to success and as long as the economy holds up somewhat under his heavy taxes and stifling bureaucracy, well, Canadians like being bribed. Especially the ones in Atlantic Canada. But the bills are going to come due, and then Canadians will be "Hey! I'm expected to pay for this!?" 

He has also deferred 12b dollars of boat building,for yrs. That is not going to help with jobs for the east. This ship building could have brought a lot of young back from the west and help out with the senior pop problems in the east.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Newfoundlander said:

Yet, he booted Harper from office and will prevent Scheer from ever getting to power.

Trudeau will hang himself. When a G7 trip is called a success just because he did not say something stupid, his time is almost up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Newfoundlander said:

Yet, he booted Harper from office and will prevent Scheer from ever getting to power.

Is that the Harper that everyone said he would never lead a party and the same one that would never win a election and the same one that would never win a majority, that one?

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, -1=e^ipi said:

So in your view, Milton Friedman is not libertarian?

Is that the Miiton Friedman who supported open immigration but said it would never work in a welfare state?

No one who supports taking money from working people and then just handing it over to anyone who wants it, without questions or strings, for as long as they live, is a libertarian. And that includes you.

Edited by Argus
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Newfoundlander said:

Yet, he booted Harper from office and will prevent Scheer from ever getting to power.

There's a limit to how long he can continue to bribe the fattest people in Canada with government welfare cheques. Eventually the credit downgrades start up and we're spending so much servicing the debt we can't pour more swill into their troughs. Then the rest of Canada will rebel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, -1=e^ipi said:


Yeah there is. His name is Scheer.

And you know this because you've observed him in action for ten minutes, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Argus said:

And you know this because you've observed him in action for ten minutes, right?

From the guy who knows, in detail, someone's deepest religious belief based on the location of some fabric.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dialamah said:

From the guy who knows, in detail, someone's deepest religious belief based on the location of some fabric.

Once again you haven't the empathy or the wit to understand how religion works. I presume you are an atheist and have never associated with religious people, but I am not and I have. If you are so devoted to a religion that you follow all of its ridiculous rules to your great inconvenience your entire life everywhere you go then you must ascribe to the central tenets of that religion. And for Sikhs, abortion is only allowable in extreme cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Argus said:

Once again you haven't the empathy or the wit to understand how religion works. I presume you are an atheist and have never associated with religious people, but I am not and I have. If you are so devoted to a religion that you follow all of its ridiculous rules to your great inconvenience your entire life everywhere you go then you must ascribe to the central tenets of that religion. And for Sikhs, abortion is only allowable in extreme cases.

Its not I who lacks empathy and wit.  Its the guy who makes sweepingly negative and insulting statements about Liberals, immigrants and Muslims.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Its not I who lacks empathy and wit.  Its the guy who makes sweepingly negative and insulting statements about Liberals, immigrants and Muslims.

So I'm making a sweeping statement that Sikhs believe in Sikhism? :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Argus said:

No one who supports taking money from working people and then just handing it over to anyone who wants it, without questions or strings, for as long as they live, is a libertarian. And that includes you.


So libertarian means what? People that prefer less efficient government policies such as minimum wage, EI, welfare & progressive taxation to do essentially the same thing? Does it mean the rejection of the Pareto Principle?


I'll point out that Milton Friedman was a libertarian consequentialist, which is quite different from a libertarian non-consequentialist. Whether or not you consider me a libertarian or socialist or whatever I don't really care; I'm an empirical utilitarian, so I'm fine supporting either libertarian or socialist economic policy provided that empirical evidence suggests it will increase the social welfare of society.

Edited by -1=e^ipi
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Argus said:

There's a limit to how long he can continue to bribe the fattest people in Canada with government welfare cheques. Eventually the credit downgrades start up and we're spending so much servicing the debt we can't pour more swill into their troughs. Then the rest of Canada will rebel.


Might take a few decades though. Look at Venezuela.

Also, if social conservatives like Scheer and Hudak keep getting elected, then it will take even longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -1=e^ipi said:


Might take a few decades though. Look at Venezuela.

Also, if social conservatives like Scheer and Hudak keep getting elected, then it will take even longer.

Then we become Greece, and suddenly people see even their government pensions taken away. I'm okay with that. My stock portfolio is going really well, and much of it is in US stocks.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -1=e^ipi said:

So libertarian means what?

It means, at heart, leaving people alone. If you're stealing people's money to simply give to everyone who doesn't want to work that's an immense interference in people's lives. That is a cost that will only ever increase, and as more people get on it they'll vote only for politicians that will give them more - which means taking more from working people. That is a downhill spiral that ends up in Greece.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-05-28 at 0:24 PM, Argus said:

I'd like to point out that Chris Alexander, whose name is on the topic above, got about 1.25% support. 

Oh well and Andrew Sheer's name was not even included in the poll. This thing was rigged to fail.

Tell you something I find a little odd about the fellow. He's always smiling. I have watched the news for a few days now looking for a single shot where he is not smiling- never happened. Perhaps he's clued in to the fact that people like you more when you're smiling, no matter what you actually have to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

16 hours ago, Argus said:

There's a limit to how long he can continue to bribe the fattest people in Canada with government welfare cheques. Eventually the credit downgrades start up and we're spending so much servicing the debt we can't pour more swill into their troughs. Then the rest of Canada will rebel.

1

I'd agree with you if the Conservatives had a sensible leader as an alternative to Trudeau.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Newfoundlander said:

 

I'd agree with you if the Conservatives had a sensible leader as an alternative to Trudeau.

I think we define 'sensible' differently. I think most people out east define it as "someone who wants to increase our pogey and let us work fewer hours to get it".

Edited by Argus
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Argus said:

I think we define 'sensible' differently. I think most people out east define it as "someone who wants to increase our pogey and let us work fewer hours to get it".

I prefer my leader's to believe it equal rights and not be afraid of allowing caucus members to speak up because you're afraid of showing how out of touch you are. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...