1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm against him running, but I won't cry if he wins. I just don't think an attack dog like him is going to be so good on the defense.

Prior to this, he could attack easy targets from the leisure of his comfy seat in parliament. Now, he's going to have to defend himself. I've never seen a Polvierre on the back foot.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

Cons are pro-immigration in terms of strict value-based immigrants. Even Harper admitted that the Canadian immigration system (not the refugee system) was designed to bring in Conservative voters.

Immigrants to Canada are skilled, have money, and buy property.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

He's declined in the past, and he's more of a gallery sniper, he is designed as an attack dog. Running the country isn't about making good soundbites in Question Period, which, don't get me wrong, PP is great at, but I think he understands the mantle of leadership is not meant for him.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

I knew it. I was certain they'd do it, and I could see O-tool squirming every time it came up. Good on you CPC, let's see what you got this time.

-1
Flarisu -1 points ago +1 / -2

I dont think PP will run, and I think he's smart enough to know that he shouldnt.

2
Flarisu 2 points ago +2 / -0

I guess they maybe learned what the word "Universal" means in "Universal Health Care"?

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

Dumb as his crime was, it wasn't violent, so I don't think he will be incarcerated.

4
Flarisu 4 points ago +4 / -0

There's a lot of PPC activity on r/canada, weirdly.

It's all downvoted, generally near the bottom of any given thread - but it's there.

5
Flarisu 5 points ago +5 / -0

Fuck, my family didn't suffer tragedy and flee europe so that swine like this could advocate for the system that killed millions.

I find some solace knowing he'll never reproduce, at least.

6
Flarisu 6 points ago +6 / -0

Wait till Feb of next year where all these CERB babies who collected because the government had literally no checks against it get big fat tax bills they can't pay - which we also will have to pay for.

5
Flarisu 5 points ago +6 / -1

All you need is a common enemy. Jews, a Virus, an enemy Nation, Communism, whatever. If you'll justify extreme actions to destroy that enemy, you'll justify giving the government extreme power to enact that destruction. History tells us that, once given, the government seldom lets go of such power.

Just know that in most cases where the country went to shit because of absurd levels of government power - the people saw it coming for decades, and the people gave them that power.

4
Flarisu 4 points ago +4 / -0

No need. Just lose the election in 2023, hold off explaining anything till then, then when whatever government that wins tries to dig us out of the hole with austerity measures, bitch so hard at the "hardships" that you're actually the source of - then secure a quick majority the next election that lasts another decade.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

-Using the other pipelines, we aren't really at max pipeline capacity yet, keystone still exists, keystone XL was an expansion

-Canadians buy canadian-made cars, generally

-The tariff every time it's implemented the WTC finds its a violation and the US walks it back, Clinton tried (failed), Obama tried (failed), Trump tried (failed), and this is Biden's attempt. It's more tradition than anything.

0
Flarisu 0 points ago +2 / -2

Make Great Deals

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

Cool, the chinese-communist-party-admirer and the guy who was given AB on a silver platter now spend my money for child care when I have no children.

Great. This almost makes me want to vote for Notley - at least she and her party are honest about their communist inklings.

3
Flarisu 3 points ago +3 / -0

Well it's not about conservatism, it's about winning. The cons are just as liable as the feds of spending public funds on largesse for the voters. You can't afford to be principled if your principles can be sacrificed for a few thousand more voters.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

CSIS sees ‘unprecedented’ increase in violent online rhetoric during COVID

unprecedented

COVID

That's right. Covid in no way precedented these events. How could people possibly be angry with the ways politicians handled COVID? It's simply not possible.

-Global News

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

I would be very delighted if I was wrong about this, don't get me wrong. I just don't think he will run - he rather enjoys his role as a gallery sniper.

6
Flarisu 6 points ago +6 / -0

Polvierre stated he has no intentions to run for leadership. To be fair, he is a great attacker, but I don't think he can take heat as well as he gives it.

3
Flarisu 3 points ago +3 / -0

Harper was boring. We need boring back. I'm tired of politics being "exciting".

2
Flarisu 2 points ago +2 / -0

Rempel has that "tabloid" vibe to her that everyone hates about media, I don't understand why people eat her shit at all.

2
Flarisu 2 points ago +2 / -0

It pays to be an indian. The amount of money this woman has made off of the farce... for that kind of money, I'd be whatever race you tell me!

3
Flarisu 3 points ago +3 / -0

he talks a talk but he knows who pays the bills.

You can't spend retarded amounts of money unless someone's bringing in the bacon.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›