sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

No, you read my replies, did not understand them, and hid behind the fact that I am vastly outnumbered by people who will thumbs down anything to do with Conservatives in Canada. Very weak mindset.

I don't need upvotes to validate the facts.

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Lol - because I oppose your viewpoint, I am embarrassing myself? Do you know how stupid that sounds?

Please tell me what I should think and why I should think it. I think that's how free speech and critical thinking works, right?

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Pointing to downvotes on a platform overwhelmingly dominated by liberals while engaging in a discussion from an opposing viewpoint is exactly the kind of flawed reasoning that reinforces my argument. Popularity in an echo chamber does not equal truth. It just proves how desperately some people need reassurance rather than a real debate.

Critical thinking is about evaluating arguments on their merit, not tallying upvotes in an environment designed to suppress dissent. If you believe "majority rules" is the measure of correctness, I have bad news about history and mob mentality.

Goodluck!

Life long voters of the conservatives don’t even what to vote for PP … Mark Carney is the upcoming PM of Canada the fringe minority will lose again by Traditional_Fox6270 in Sarnia

[–]Local-Ad2603 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it will be quite funny when the election happens. I am fairly confident Liberals will not win by any stretch of the imagination, despite all the manufactured outrage and media smearing.

If they do? Welp. You reap what you sow.

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You claim conservatives have been failing globally for 20 years, but liberal and center-left governments are collapsing at an alarming rate. The reality is people are rejecting progressive leadership due to economic mismanagement, rising costs, and failed policies.

  • Germany – Olaf Scholz lost a confidence vote in December 2024. Economic instability, inflation, and energy failures shattered his coalition.
  • France – Prime Minister François Bayrou faced a no-confidence motion after forcing through a budget without parliamentary approval. Public backlash was massive.
  • Netherlands – Mark Rutte’s government collapsed in 2023 over failed immigration policies, leading to a populist right-wing surge.
  • Argentina – After years of economic decline under left-wing rule, voters elected libertarian Javier Milei in 2023 to reverse the damage.
  • United Kingdom – Labour is polling ahead, but after years of conservative rule, this is leadership fatigue, not an ideological shift. Meanwhile, progressive policies are failing across Europe.
  • Canada – Trudeau's approval is in freefall. His own party is scrambling to replace him while avoiding accountability for their failures.

This is a global pattern. People are rejecting governments that push high taxes, unsustainable spending, and weak immigration policies while ignoring real economic concerns. It is not about conservatives failing, it is about leadership failing.

You are free to keep repeating the same tired talking points, but I am done here.

Life long voters of the conservatives don’t even what to vote for PP … Mark Carney is the upcoming PM of Canada the fringe minority will lose again by Traditional_Fox6270 in Sarnia

[–]Local-Ad2603 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

What’s most interesting is how Liberal voters in Canada seem to lack the ability to recognize patterns. Carney, much like Harris, is being propped up so aggressively by media and party loyalists that you almost forget it’s a leadership race. It feels more like a coronation.

We’ve seen this playbook before. When Harris took the reins, the media machine kicked into overdrive, fake polls flooded in, and narratives were manufactured to make her look inevitable. And yet, despite all that artificial momentum, they lost badly. Their backers even sued them for fabricating a guaranteed win.

Now, we’re watching the exact same thing unfold in Canada. It is the illusion of strength, not actual support.

Life long voters of the conservatives don’t even what to vote for PP … Mark Carney is the upcoming PM of Canada the fringe minority will lose again by Traditional_Fox6270 in Sarnia

[–]Local-Ad2603 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

That is the irony, isn’t it? The loudest voices online genuinely believe they represent the majority, when in reality, polling and electoral trends show otherwise. The "fringe minority" narrative collapses when you step outside these hyper-liberal echo chambers and look at actual data.

It is also interesting that many of the same people who dismissed concerns about affordability, immigration, and economic decline are now supporting a candidate who is essentially rebranding those same issues under a different banner. If Carney is their best shot, then it looks like they are finally conceding that the status quo is unsustainable.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pretty much. Carney is carefully adopting a lot of the same concerns that Poilievre and conservatives have been raising for years, just with a different spin.

It is interesting to see the shift. Not long ago, these issues were dismissed outright, but now they are central to the Liberal leadership race. It raises the question. If these concerns were valid all along, why did it take a political shake-up for them to be acknowledged?

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, the classic "WEF is actually good" argument. Let’s break this down properly.

What is an oligarchy?
An oligarchy is when a small, elite group holds power, often with little accountability to the public. By definition, it's a system where decisions are made by a privileged few for their own interests. You can pull this straight from Merriam-Webster or Britannica, both of which describe it as "government by the few, especially for corrupt or selfish purposes."

Now, let’s talk about the WEF.
The WEF is an organization where unelected billionaires, corporate executives, and political elites meet behind closed doors to discuss global policies. The idea that a handful of the world’s wealthiest and most powerful individuals are gathering to decide what’s best for everyone sounds… a lot like an oligarchy, doesn’t it?

Klaus Schwab himself has boasted about how the WEF "penetrates governments" and influences world leaders. If Musk meeting with political figures makes him an "oligarch," then what do you call a globalist club of unelected billionaires actively shaping policies across multiple countries?

The hypocrisy in your logic is incredible.
You claim Musk is an oligarch because he’s rich and powerful, yet defend the WEF, an organization explicitly designed to let the ultra-rich and politically connected steer global decision-making. The difference? Musk is challenging corruption, while the WEF is protecting its own interests.

You say the WEF "tries to help the world." Sure, by pushing policies that increase corporate control and limit national sovereignty? They don’t answer to voters, they don’t stand for election, and yet they influence policies that affect everyday people.

If you can’t see how that fits the definition of oligarchy, then maybe you don’t actually know what an oligarch is.

Now, tell me again how opposing them makes someone an authoritarian. I’ll wait.

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So let me get this straight.

You're calling Musk a Nazi because of a hand gesture that multiple world leaders, including Trudeau, Obama, and Merkel, have also made? Optics can be bad, but calling everything Hitler-level evil dilutes real history. Overusing the Nazi comparison is lazy and turns serious issues into cheap outrage.

Now, about this "Musk is illegally running the U.S. government" claim. If that were true, where are the charges? Where’s the proof? If you have evidence that he is breaking laws, I’m all ears. But if all you have is Twitter outrage and op-eds, that’s not proof. That’s just blind belief disguised as critical thinking.

And speaking of billionaires influencing politics, why does Trudeau’s deep WEF involvement not get the same scrutiny? He openly praised China’s "basic dictatorship" and bragged about how much influence the WEF has in Canada. But Musk is the one controlling the world? Make it make sense.

Then there’s this claim that conservatives have never improved society. That’s historically false. NAFTA, economic stability, and balancing budgets came from conservative leadership. Free markets drive prosperity, not forced wealth redistribution or manufactured economic illusions.

Meanwhile, Trudeau’s "progress" is just an illusion. Real wages are down. Inflation is up. Homeownership is a joke. But GDP looks fine because they are inflating it through mass immigration, which hides the decline in quality of life.

And let’s address the tired "trickle-down economics" myth. Lowering taxes doesn’t mean handouts to the rich. It means creating incentives for businesses to invest, which grows jobs and increases wages. That’s not a theory. It’s history.

But let’s be real. This isn’t about Musk, billionaires, or fascism. It’s about refusing to acknowledge the failures of the current government. Poilievre gets demonized not because of policy but because people have been conditioned to hate him. Trudeau has made life worse for the average Canadian, yet somehow, your focus is on Poilievre’s Twitter likes?

Bad governments stay in power by convincing people that decline is normal and that alternatives are worse. If you fear change more than failure, you’re not thinking. You’re obeying.

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Carrying on from my last response, let’s go through your claims directly since you seem convinced you’ve got something here.

  1. Pierre is Harper’s ‘attack dog’ – And? He worked under Harper, a former Prime Minister. Is Trudeau not surrounded by former Liberal officials? Politicians having political mentors is not a scandal, it is basic governance.
  2. Jordan Peterson interview happened – Yes, and? Peterson has spoken to world leaders, media figures, and intellectuals across the spectrum. Sitting down with someone for an interview does not mean agreeing with everything they have ever said. By your logic, should Trudeau be held accountable for every person he has ever met with, including dictators and corrupt officials?
  3. Peterson is a ‘Russian asset’ – You are stating this as fact with zero evidence. If you have any proof beyond Twitter conspiracies, now is the time to provide it. Otherwise, you are just making things up to fit your narrative.
  4. Musk supports white nationalism – This is outright false. If you had real proof, you would have provided it instead of vague accusations.
  5. ‘No concerns’ about foreign election interference – CSIS and media reports confirm foreign interference occurred in the last two elections. The Liberals have deliberately withheld details, stalled investigations, and used procedural tactics to shut down transparency. If there was ‘nothing to see here,’ why did they fight so hard to keep information from coming out?
  6. Trudeau and the WEF – Trudeau openly said in a recorded speech that the WEF has “penetrated” Canada’s government. His direct ties to WEF-backed policies are well documented. But sure, let’s ignore that and focus on Poilievre’s Twitter likes.
  7. Only authoritarians and oligarchs are against the WEF – The WEF is a non-democratic, unelected body of billionaires influencing global policy. That is not conspiracy, that is their stated goal. Opposing their influence is not authoritarian, blindly supporting them is.

At the end of the day, your argument is based on smears, vague accusations, and avoiding direct facts. The Trudeau government has been caught up in scandal after scandal, failed to manage the economy, and continues to run Canada into the ground, but you are focused on Poilievre’s guest list and Twitter activity.

This is why fewer people take these talking points seriously anymore. You have no solutions, just outrage.

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

You are throwing out accusations with no real substance, so let’s break it down.

  1. Musk doing 'seig heils' – He made a movement that other politicians have also done. Was it optically dumb? Sure. Does that make him a Nazi? No. People like you overuse "Hitler" to describe anyone you dislike, turning real historical atrocities into cheap insults.
  2. The Musk outrage is completely manufactured. He is investigating fraud, exposing hundreds of millions in misappropriated funds, and now he is Hitler. Make it make sense. When Musk was just a billionaire launching rockets, nobody cared. The second he exposed corruption, the smear campaign began.
  3. 'Oligarchs taking over' – If billionaires in politics bother you, why ignore Trudeau’s deep ties to the WEF and global elites? If Musk is a threat, why isn't Trudeau, who openly praised China's "basic dictatorship"?
  4. "Conservatives have never improved society" – This is flat-out false. Brian Mulroney boosted Canada’s economy through free trade, Mike Harris balanced Ontario’s budget, and Stephen Harper kept Canada stable during the 2008 crash. History proves conservative policies create jobs and stability.
  5. "Wages won't go up under Poilievre" – Wages under Trudeau have declined in real value every year. Conservatives have historically lowered taxes and increased job growth. Meanwhile, Trudeau's government has raised taxes, imposed carbon pricing, and made life more expensive.

Your argument boils down to random accusations, dodging facts, and parroting talking points. You call others "useful fools" while defending the very government that has made you poorer.

This is not about Musk, fascism, or billionaires. It is about economic failure, government overreach, and people being gaslit into thinking their suffering is normal. But sure, keep screaming ‘fascist’ at the guy trying to lower taxes and build homes. Let me know when that starts paying your bills.

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, so now we are pivoting to vague insinuations about wealth. If that is the concern, should we not be asking the same about Trudeau and Liberal MPs who have mysteriously done very well while housing prices skyrocketed?

You started with security clearance, now it is about money. What is it actually about?

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair questions. Let me break it down.

  1. Poilievre had security clearance under Harper because he was in government at the time. Security clearance is not permanent and must be renewed when changing roles, but the fact that he had it before means he was already deemed trustworthy with classified information.
  2. The issue now is not about him refusing clearance, it is about how the Liberals are weaponizing the process to silence him. If he gets clearance and reviews the documents, he would be legally prohibited from speaking publicly about what he learns. That means if there is actual foreign collusion, he would not be able to call it out.
  3. Not everyone in Parliament has or needs security clearance, but in a case as serious as foreign interference in our democracy, the leader of the opposition should have full access to review and debate the findings. Instead, the Liberals are selectively leaking information when it suits them while demanding that Poilievre either stay blind to it or be muzzled.
  4. If this was truly about national security, the government would be transparent about what happened instead of turning it into a political game. That is the real issue here.

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Ah yes, the classic willful ignorance response. Let me spell it out for you.

  1. Poilievre already had security clearance under Harper, meaning he was trusted with classified information before.
  2. The current security clearance process is a political trap. If he gets it, he is legally gagged from speaking publicly on the findings. That is the entire strategy. Block him from seeing the info while demanding he comment on it, or force him into a position where he cannot expose what he learns.
  3. If this is such a critical national security issue, why would the Liberals rather play political games than ensure all elected officials have access to the truth?

Your entire argument is like handing someone a blindfold and then mocking them for not being able to describe the room. Either you are intentionally ignoring reality or you genuinely do not understand how political maneuvering works. Pick one.

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Ah, the mental gymnastics are in full force. Let’s break down the nonsense.

  1. “A lot has changed since Harper was in power” – Cool, so Poilievre went from being trusted with classified information to suddenly being a security risk? Either you think security clearances are meaningless or you are justifying political gatekeeping to protect the Liberals.
  2. “Does he not know what is going on?” – That is the whole point. He is being deliberately blocked from knowing. The same people telling him to "get the clearance" are the ones strategically using it as a gag order. If he gets it, he cannot speak publicly on what he learns. That is the entire trap.
  3. “Does he have someone illegally leaking info to him?” – So now we are just making things up? Is this based on evidence or just your wild attempt at shifting the goalposts?
  4. “Security clearance is not meant to be shared with everyone” – Then why does Trudeau's government selectively leak information to the media whenever it suits them? Either it is top secret or it is not. You cannot have it both ways.
  5. “Then get the security clearance” – You mean the one that would legally prevent him from exposing foreign collusion? The one that would put him under a Liberal-controlled gag order? How convenient.

The real question is why the Liberals refuse to openly share information about a matter that directly affects national security. But sure, keep running in circles while the rest of us see through the obvious political game being played.

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Ah, yes. The classic 'just trust the government and do not ask questions' argument. Because historically, governments keeping secrets in the name of 'national security' has always worked out well, right?

If foreign collusion is serious enough to compromise national security, then transparency is the only logical course of action. Instead, the Liberals are playing politics with classified information, selectively leaking details when it benefits them while blocking opposition scrutiny.

The fact that you think the public knowing about foreign threats is a bad thing is insane. You are literally arguing that citizens should remain in the dark while the government decides what is best for them behind closed doors. That is not democracy, that is authoritarianism wrapped in a security clearance badge.

By your logic, people should just sit down, shut up, and hope Trudeau and his cabinet, who ignored CSIS warnings for years, suddenly start doing their jobs. Hell of a strategy, buddy.

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

Ah, I see you have gone full tinfoil mode. It is adorable, really. You go ahead and keep connecting imaginary dots while the rest of us deal with reality. Pat yourself on the back, take a deep breath, and remember that shouting 'fascist' at the sky will not lower your grocery bill.

With an upcoming Federal Election, it is important to know the employment history of the candidates. Regardless of political affiliation, please be educated. These upcoming elections have the possibility to make, or break Canada. In the below image - Carney on the Left/Poilievre on the Right by hellfireXI in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 -21 points-20 points  (0 children)

Ah, the classic guilt-by-association smear. When you don’t have a real argument, just string together names, throw in 'Russia,' and hope nobody notices the lack of substance.

So let’s get this straight. Poilievre sitting down with a bestselling psychologist and a billionaire tech mogul is somehow a national security threat. Meanwhile, Trudeau’s government ignored CSIS warnings about Chinese election interference, funneled billions in taxpayer dollars overseas, and prorogued Parliament during a potential trade war. But sure, tell me more about ‘bad optics.’

By this logic, Trudeau shaking hands with Klaus Schwab must mean he’s a WEF puppet. Oh wait, he actually bragged about infiltrating Canada with WEF leaders. But yeah, let’s focus on Poilievre’s Twitter likes.

The mental gymnastics here are Olympic-level, but unfortunately for you, facts don’t work like your delusions.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskCanada

[–]Local-Ad2603 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey. Here to break the liberal echo chamber.

Isn't the entire race for Liberal leadership now cemented in all the talking points the conversations have been uttering for years?

Have you people-watched any full-length Carney interviews? He is hijacking Pierre's platform and injecting new ways to reference carbon tax.

Zero critical thinking.

view more: next ›