based on your assumption
My assumption? The candidate himself said it. The press reported it. And what did the CPC do? Not a single word from them.
Like for example what if they found some white supremacist crap in his history?
This is now an assumption.
.. kind of falls apart ..
You know what also falls apart? Your credence when on one day you say that the CPC has to support vaccine mandates to even have a chance to get elected and get triggered when everybody tells you how wrong you are and then 48 hours later you do a 180.
You told me that it's a losing strategy for the CPC to go against vaccine mandates. That supporting vaccine passports will only alienate the people who are already voting for the PPC. These are your words.
https://omegacanada.win/p/12jvytUfaK/x/c/4JDDSSAfIEo
https://omegacanada.win/p/12jvytUfaK/x/c/4JDDSSBnh5g
So tell me, is it still a losing strategy to oppose vaccine mandates and passports, because the only people who don't support these are going to vote for the PPC either way?
We've come to the point now where PPCers are fighting for mandatory vaccinations ...
And two days ago you were arguing that the CPC should support vaccine mandates and passports, because otherwise they wouldn't win an election.
The LPC got 33% already in 2019.
Dude, Trudope is older than O'Toole.
The Afghan elections did that.
Elections that surely didn't include the Taliban.
You're making the spurious argument that the peace deal (which the Taliban just threw to the wind) means we should.
I'm making the argument that they are the government of Afghanistan. And what Garneau throws around is irrelevant, because we will do what the US tells us to do in this case.
which the Taliban just threw to the wind
What should be the consequences?
The peace deal didn't appoint the US backed government as the government of Afghanistan. All it promised was negotiations between the Taliban and the US backed group.
So, should the US go back because the peace deal "didn't appoint the Taliban as government"?
What offensive? Half the Afghan army switched immediately sides and the other half ran away. The Taliban captured Kabul without firing a single shot. The moment the US pulled out, the US backed Afghan government stopped existing.
I mean, if you think that the Taliban broke the peace deal, are you of the opinion that the US should go back? Should Biden stop the final withdrawal and send in 200,000 troops to make sure that the Taliban keep their word of negotiations?
And the deal was never to supplant the Afghan government with the Taliban.
That wasn't the deal. The deal was that the Taliban and the US backed goernment will start "negotiations". And guess what. The Taliban won these "negotiations".
https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/02.29.20-US-Afghanistan-Joint-Declaration.pdf
If they are not going to be the next government of Afghanistan, why does the US need a peace deal with them (a peace deal that included things like releasing 5,000 Taliban fighters and lifting the UN sanctions against the Taliban)? Did Trump really think that the Taliban would just sit back in their caves in rural Afghanistan even after every US soldier left the country?
As if he could.
If you wear the right sunglasses you would see that it's all in the same colour.
They gained recognition when the US signed a peace deal with them a year ago.
Seems like he's done something right then.
I wonder how popular scrapping the child-care deals will be. Even Saskatchewan negotiated a deal out for over $1.2 billion in federal child care bucks.
We already talked about it. The old rules stated that parties had to meet two requirements out of the three. It was impossible for the PPC and Bernier to achieve that.
I don't know which pollsters they are going to use. You can find all the recent requirements and rules that changed here (and the explanation why they changed them):
This is what they say about the 4% requirement:
(iii): five days after the date the general election is called, the party receives a level of national support of at least 4%, determined by voting intention, and as measured by leading national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations’ most recently publicly-reported results.
With regards to criteria (iii), the Commission will select public opinion polls based on the quality of the methodology employed, the reputation of the polling organizations, and the frequency and timeliness of the polling conducted. The Commission may take professional advice to assist in selecting the leading national public opinion polls to be used in applying the criterion and will identify the selected polling organizations at the time the criterion is applied.
Public opinion polls taken five days after the election is called show national support of at least 4 per cent.
Bernier can't meet the other two requirements, but he doesn't have to. Only one of them has to be met.
Second poll showing the PPC over 4%. Seems like it's a given that Bernier will be attending the Leaders' debates.
Two days ago you were arguing that not supporting vaccine mandates was political suicide for the Conservatives. The CPC had all the time to say anything about the firing of this Yukon MP, but they didn't.
And guess what, going against vaccine mandates and passports is not political suicide, even in Canada.
Only possible way, sry.
The US spent over $80 billion training the Afghan military and they folded in a week, in most cases without a single shot fired. They either switched the sides and started to fight for the Taliban or they just ran away.
The only way the stop the Taliban is to keep Afghanistan occupied by US military forces for several generations. And absolutely nobody is in favour of that.
There are First Nation people in Hamilton?
Welcome to Politics 101.
Can't wait for the debates when Trudeau asks O'Toole if he had enacted the same vaccine mandate. I wonder how O'Toole will answer it.
Why shouldn't I believe him? Not even a month ago the CPC gave him the confidence to run in the next federal election.
https://twitter.com/jonasjsmith/status/1414949795236618243
And now he's gone. The CPC didn't give any explanation why they fired him.
You were explaining that the CPC has to be for vaccine mandates, otherwise they will lose the next election. And suddenly O'Toole comes out against vaccine mandates and you go around telling everybody how wonderful this is. The problem is not O'Toole here. You are the problem. You see someone criticizing the CPC and you run to their defence with "oh, they have to do this because otherwise they won't get elected" and "you just don't understand how to win elections" and a day later you look like an absolute retard, because the position you argued against is suddenly the CPC line.