Trudeau Popularity - or not. Nanos research

[The Bread Guy]

Media could take a lessons learned here.

I would much prefer the media to announce a happening without much detail. ONLY what they know at the time is true. They can caveat it and say more detail will be released as it comes in. I would be much more inclined to believe a report that come that way than some sensational, 'we're first' report full of some reporter's guesses and extrapolations.

Generally, bang on - but remember that when media say “this is all we know” and you think they’re covering up for someone you don’t support.

The bit about the alleged obstruction, though, was released by an MP via YouTube - you should let that guy know your concerns

 

[rmc_wannabe]

The amount if

They can be dismissed by the Governor General (it has been done, 1896 the PM who refused to step down was no longer recognized), just as the Governor General can dissolve parliament if they wish. I would argue now is a good time to do that with the obvious lack of public support for the current government coupled with the obvious corruption being displayed by said government.

I think they should use their powers. Reign in the worst of our current system. The system we have is supposed to have two equal houses (the senate and the house of commons) as well as the crown overseeing it all. Instead we choose to abandon the checks and balances inherent to our system and basically allow the house of commons to dominate with no real controls being utilized.

It is worse than the American system when we fail to use it properly as we are essentially giving total control to one party with nothing to really stop their excesses thanks to the lack of will to use the powers at their disposal.

As someone who's grandparents saw a constitutional monarchy dissolve into a fascist dictatorship before their very eyes... I agree.

 

[The Bread Guy]

.. I think they should use their powers. Reign in the worst …

As much as I’m underwhelmed by curremt management, gotta be veeeerrrry careful seeing powers used when one doesn’t like the current team, lest one complains if the same powers are used against a team one supports.

Notwithstanding clause was supposed to be a “nuclear option,” too,

 

[YZT580]

As much as I’m underwhelmed by curremt management, gotta be veeeerrrry careful sering powers used when one doesn’t like the current team, lest one complains if the same powers are used against a team one supports.

Notwithstanding clause was supposed to be a “nuclear option,” too,

for those of you who have actually gone somewhere by train, remember the cord hanging down labelled emergency stop? Also on the sign is a warning of the consequences for pulling that cord. The intent of the warning is to prevent unnecessary emergency stops obviously. Removing the cord is the obvious permanent solution to the problem of false alarms yet the cords still hang in the same place. Just in case. It is anticipated that the passenger will evaluate the situation, consider the consequences, and then act as the safety of train, and his/her own safety dictates. The same thought process applies here. The option of terminating parliament is always available just in case. The GG must consider the situation and the possible repercussions but, if necessary, they still need to have the courage to pull the cord.

 

[Eaglelord17]

As much as I’m underwhelmed by curremt management, gotta be veeeerrrry careful sering powers used when one doesn’t like the current team, lest one complains if the same powers are used against a team one supports.

Notwithstanding clause was supposed to be a “nuclear option,” too,

Its not just a matter of not liking the current team, it is a matter of a exceptionally underperforming minority government who is overstepping their boundaries in so many areas.

Stacking the courts through straight up bribery (donating to the Liberal party is basically a requirement at this point, 76.3% of judges appointed since 2016 have donated to them), invoking legislation they really shouldn’t have, the myriad of scandals they have had over the last decade, the latest one with the arrivecan app (at least 60m scammed, hard to fully calculate as they purposely destroyed the records), etc.

If we aren’t willing to utilize those powers for a government acting as this one is, why not just dissolve the senate and get rid of the GG? These aren’t minor issues, they are major. Dissolving parliament and calling a election isn’t the worst thing, its giving the power to the voters. Because this current government doesn’t have the courage to fall on their sword, sometimes you need to take the option from them.

If we are all dumb enough to vote them back in at that point, we get what we deserve.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

As much as I’m underwhelmed by curremt management, gotta be veeeerrrry careful sering powers used when one doesn’t like the current team, lest one complains if the same powers are used against a team one supports.

The problem with red lines is that they actually need to have consequences when crossed; otherwise the line is moved to avoid having to apply the consequences.

I am no fan of the current management either. I am also not a huge fan of the potential replacement. That said, I am also not a fan of the Head of Government conducting himself in a wholly unethical and (potentially) criminal manner without consequence. If he holds confidence of the House due to political gaming of the system, it should be well within Royal Perogative to step in if required.

 

[The Bread Guy]

I can guess what the answer'll be, but has anyone considered petitioning The King on this?

We'll have to see if the next government (assuming the best current bet of Blue) gives more powers to the GG allowing this to happen, then.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I can guess what the answer'll be, but has anyone considered petitioning The King on this?

We'll have to see if the next government (assuming the best current bet of Blue) gives more powers to the GG allowing this to happen, then.

Based on the way world and domestic affairs are playing out for the UK these days, and the 'cancer thing', HM The King would probably be like...

 

[Haggis]

I can guess what the answer'll be, but has anyone considered petitioning The King on this?

"You colonials made this mess, you get to live with it."

We'll have to see if the next government (assuming the best current bet of Blue) gives more powers to the GG allowing this to happen, then.

No right thinking government is likely to do anything that will make it easier for them to lose power.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I can guess what the answer'll be, but has anyone considered petitioning The King on this?

Letters Patent from George VI in 1947 handed the Reserve Powers to the GG. Petitioning the King would not have the desired effect.

We'll have to see if the next government (assuming the best current bet of Blue) gives more powers to the GG allowing this to happen, then.

To be frank, the GG has the reserve powers to dissolve parliament, dismiss a PM, or withold/delay Royal Assent (vetoing a Bill) if any of these powers will prevent a delineation from the principles of Responsible Government.

Actually exercising them, however, is a different story; as the Governors General of late have been political appointments, vice the intended role of the position being apolitical. There's a reason that British nobility assumed those positions in the past, as the interests of the Crown were protected from the influence of politicking in the Realms.

 

[Good2Golf]

No right thinking government is likely to do anything that will make it easier for them to lose power.

Like changing the current electoral system (even if some promised to change it.., )

 

[CBH99]

No right thinking government is likely to do anything that will make it easier for them to lose power.

On the surface and in all practicality, I agree with you. No sitting government will do anything to make it easier for them to lose power...

But imagine a government that used common sense, could define the difference between a male & a female, had a fiscal policy that didn't assume budgets balanced themselves and didn't double our national debt, developed our industries rather than kneecapped them, wasn't openly corrupt, and implemented changes to hold itself more accountable & more transparent even at the risk of those changes removing them from power in the future

Basically a government that actually did what's best for the country, and not just what's best for itself...


Even if those changes could potentially cause that government to lose power down the road, that government would have an overwhelming amount of support & some long term solid credibility with Canadians

 

[Remius]

338Canada Canada | Poll Analysis & Electoral Projections

338canada.com

Latest aggregate. LPC polling up a bit in popular support and CPC down. Still bottom of the barrel.

Not sure what accounts for it. Could be the CPC deviating from its bread and butter issue and wading into social issues unnecessarily. Could also be positive reaction to pharmacare.

Could also be a combination.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

338Canada Canada | Poll Analysis & Electoral Projections

338canada.com

Latest aggregate. LPC polling up a bit in popular support and CPC down. Still bottom of the barrel.

Not sure what accounts for it. Could be the CPC deviating from its bread and butter issue and wading into social issues unnecessarily. Could also be positive reaction to pharmacare.

Could also be a combination.

Or statistical noise.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Notwithstanding clause was supposed to be a “nuclear option,” too,

This is a political myth that took root as a result of the Supreme Court saying so in some of the earlier Charter decisions.

While some Premiers were against the clause, they soon lost their faith in the Courts to behave rationally and for the public good rather than try to change almost everything. As a result, we can expect more and not less of the use of section 33.

 

[Furniture]

338Canada Canada | Poll Analysis & Electoral Projections

338canada.com

Latest aggregate. LPC polling up a bit in popular support and CPC down. Still bottom of the barrel.

Not sure what accounts for it. Could be the CPC deviating from its bread and butter issue and wading into social issues unnecessarily. Could also be positive reaction to pharmacare.

Could also be a combination.

Wading into social issues "unnecessarily", or in plain English; wading into social issues because activist "reporters" keep trying to pin a scary secret agenda on the CPC, and refuse to ask questions relevant to normal Canadians.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Wading into social issues "unnecessarily", or in plain English; wading into social issues because activist "reporters" keep trying to pin a scary secret agenda on the CPC, and refuse to ask questions relevant to normal Canadians.

The problem with having SoCons at your base, much like having militant Neo-Marxists on the Left, is that keeping your mouth shut on an issue is the same as taking the side of the "oppressor."

Canadians are centrist at heart, who are cheap as fuck when it comes to their economy and generally laissez-faire on most social issues ("Do your thing, just leave me out of it.")

If PP were to come out today and say "We want to build a Canada that's prosperous for all Canadians. One that follows the tenants of justice, stewardship, and equality. Division will be our undoing..." or some crap... the election is in the bag.

The second he takes the bait and tries to play to the SoCon minority within Canada... well... join Max Bernier at the "I could have been a contender!" corner of the bar.

 

[Furniture]

The problem with having SoCons at your base, much like having militant Neo-Marxists on the Left, is that keeping your mouth shut on an issue is the same as taking the side of the "oppressor."

Canadians are centrist at heart, who are cheap as fuck when it comes to their economy and generally laissez-faire on most social issues ("Do your thing, just leave me out of it.")

If PP were to come out today and say "We want to build a Canada that's prosperous for all Canadians. One that follows the tenants of justice, stewardship, and equality. Division will be our undoing..." or some crap... the election is in the bag.

The second he takes the bait and tries to play to the SoCon minority within Canada... well... join Max Bernier at the "I could have been a contender!" corner of the bar.

Fair points, but to be fair to PP he hasn't stated any position that is far off of what Canadians state.

The media portrays his stances as "far right" or "SoCon", but they seem well aligned with "centrist" poll answers.

What has happened in the West is that the Twitterati rule the media, and assume their positions are "normal". What they fail to truly grasp is that "normal" people don't share their opinions on many topics.

To be fair to the media, even those of us active on the political sub-forums are a tiny minority of people with many opinions not shared by the average voter. The difference is, we are amateur people with at least a passing interest, not trained professionals who should know better and try to be better.

 

[Brad Sallows]

What has happened in the West is that the Twitterati rule the media, and assume their positions are "normal". What they fail to truly grasp is that "normal" people don't share their opinions on many topics.

The people Peggy Noonan refers to as "the protected" control most of the levers of power and information (which they refer to as "mainstream") and are distinctly out-of-touch with "the unprotected" for the most part. The result is that they push what they favour while believing they are on "the right side of history" and without understanding the depth and scope of quiet objection. "The protected" doesn't just mean the people in the top tiers of government and institutions and corporations; it includes a lot of people who are basically upper or high middle class. They probably don't think of themselves as "protected", and they don't know how much of a bubble they really occupy. The "average" person is not nearly as engaged or preoccupied with social issues, and cares more about fairness ("output legitimacy") than process ("input legitimacy").

Resentment accumulates into rage. They know it and applaud it when it surfaces in a favoured group (eg. people historically oppressed) but they seem unable to concede that an unfavoured group is entitled to the same thing.

 

[CBH99]

Now you’re just putting words (parties?) in my mouth. It may surprise you that I didn’t vote LPC last time, and don’t usually vote LPC. If O’Toole was still running for the CPC, he’d have my vote in an instant.

The next election though? We’ll see.

I showed up to this party a bit late, or so I thought I had... (Maybe I did, or maybe I'm missing some things)

What was it about O'Toole that you liked so much more than PP??



(Actual question, I'm not as familiar with O'Toole as I perhaps should be)