So is the conservative platform in many respects.
Mike Carney to replace Trudeau as Canada’s new PM
- Thread starter stinkynuts
- Start date
People are, imo, projecting what they want to believe Carney is, without actually checking what he really is. Telling me what his policy is ,and that I must vote for him, when he himself hasn't done that.
And until then, he is nothing more than a private equity guy. I generally think they are scumbags. It's built into the job description. They will sell people out for cash.
57 pages. It's not generic. It's quite clear on issues. It's fine if you don't like them. But don't lie about content.
At the risk of being accused of being pseudo-intellectual, I disagree.
Socialism, Communism, Capitalism are relatively absolute terms, there are tenets to those ideologies that you can revert to in discussion or argument.
Even those concepts are somewhat malleable with historical perspective.
There are no tenets to left, right, centre.
Labelling someone as pseudo-intellectual for a reasonable response, albeit a different one, is unwarranted in my opinion.
He's 100% neo-liberal. The overton window is so far right at the moment that moderate centrists are seen at the extreme left. BUT, politics is a bus, not a taxi. I'd rather get taken closer to my destination than further away.
And by on the same token, PP has a voting record: Against affordable housing, pro putin, pro banks, against healthcare, against the environment, etc, etc. etc.
20 years of Pierre Poilievre is enough.
Tune in to see Pierre's record over the past 20 years.
I'm not.
Tell me this isn't generic?
These 57 pages are generic statements of intent.
You shouldn't pretend otherwise.
It is clear. Do you need twenty pages on each policy? About the same right? After that it's implementation details. What will the Liberal party put up? About the same right?
Show the Liberal Policy too. Show how it is substantially different in scope and detail.
In the USA yes, in Canada? The Overton window remains imo within the last 30 years of record. Under Trudeau socially more left(mostly fluff).He's 100% neo-liberal. The overton window is so far right at the moment that moderate centrists are seen at the extreme left. BUT, politics is a bus, not a taxi. I'd rather get taken closer to my destination than further away.
And by on the same token, PP has a voting record: Against affordable housing, pro putin, pro banks, against healthcare, against the environment, etc, etc. etc.
20 years of Pierre Poilievre is enough.
Tune in to see Pierre's record over the past 20 years.pierresrecord.ca
Ok, now you're just distracting from the original point.
Show me where I'm projecting what I want to believe Carney is, or promoting his policies, or that you have to vote for him.
When you say you generally think private equity guys are scumbags, does that mean there are exceptions or does that mean 100% of them with no exception.
This was your original comment.
All of a sudden it's all about him.
It's a bit confusing.
It can be both. It is about him, and about the party. And I said "people", as in colleagues, friends, and yes others on this site and other media.
But in essence you are asking me to defend my present position that Carney not is the right choice. But that is not the default position. The Liberals are not, despite their own hubris, the "Natural Governing Party of Canada". They need to earn my vote. Carney needs to prove he deserves the job.
Imo Pierre has proven he deserves the job. That the Conservatives deserve to govern.
Instead of telling me why I shouldn't vote for someone. Tell me why I should vote for Carney. Because so far, being a banker and private equity guy isn't enough. It isn't a selling point.
I'm sure there are a few private equity guys who are complete scumbags. But you don't get to be chairman without being ruthless.
I can't really argue about the last 30 years, but we are WAY right of the post-war era.
We're in a housing crisis. The obvious solution is a Crown Corp building houses. Like we did in the "great" times post war. No federal politician is even talking about it.
Grocery chains have been convicted of price fixing. The obvious solution is enforcing anti-trust legislation and breaking them up. No federal politician is even talking about it.
We're in a climate crisis, combined with a gas-and-vehicle affordability crisis. The obvious solution is Crown Corp (line CN was...) to build and operate transit. Trudeau announced a PPP, meaning public money will be transferred to private companies, with no knowledge or capacity being built in the public sector.
We're in a healthcare crisis, and in this province at least, we are funding private services, rather than beefing up the public ones.
Facetious answer: Regan.
Long form: 3 generations of austerity politics and shifts to the right in policy.
Again, What time period was "Great"? Roughly post war to ~1975?
What was the highest marginal tax rate in that period? How about the corporate tax rate?
We've limited our toolbox to Tax Cuts and Quantitive Easing. Both of these starve social services and flow money to the capital class.
Yes, I expect they will.
These kinds of things are always vague and generic.
Implementation details are hugely important.
I just find it interesting that you are complaining about things being "generic" in only one case, though.
That's a bit disingenuous of you, though.
You have said, quite clearly here, that Pierre has "earned your vote" and that the Conservatives deserve to govern.
Clearly, when someone is saying you shouldn't vote for them, they are saying they don't in fact deserve your vote.
Meanwhile, you are explicitly saying that the Liberal party "needs a trip to the woodshed".
This is explicitly you saying that people should not vote for them. Not because of anything Pollievre has done, but because they should be taught a lesson.
It can be both.
Pierre has earned my vote.
The Liberals haven't lost it.
Why can't it be both. That's, in fact, the usual case, especially with a govt part it's prime. I did the same with the Conservatives under Mulroney. A leadership change meant nothing. They lost my vote, and I voted for Chretien.
It absolutely can be both.
You're the one who constantly tells people it can't be.
The Conservative one you are touting is also 2023.
I'm not sure why you keep insisting on double standards for the Conservatives.
I expect both will be coming out with 2025 versions for the 2025 election.
