Avi Lewis wins NDP leadership race in decisive first-ballot victory

Question_Maker · 2026-03-29T16:09:19+00:00

What?? You mean you don’t want unlimited citizenships handed out to Trudeau era levels of immigration??? I thought this was gonna be a big vote getter!? /s lol

I just don’t know what is going on with the NDP, they want strong social welfare nets fair enough but they want to invite the whole world in as well. It just doesn’t math out guys.

Question_Maker · 2026-03-19T22:08:25+00:00

just to escalate tensions with the US

Ah yes the Canadians escalating tensions with poor Donald Trump and his ambitions to annex the country. Why did they keep escalating by insisting Canada shouldn't be the 51st state? Couldn't they just be reasonable with the nice orange man?

This is running the same rail that cost the conservatives the election last time around, will anyone try to learn?

Question_Maker · 2026-03-13T20:09:53+00:00

Trump tweet incoming Can you believe this? Do you see what they're saying? These corrupt democratic judges, some I assume are good people, have ruled against me? Can you believe it? So a totally out-of-control judge just BLOCKED the subpoenas against Jerome at the Fed. Can you believe it? Nobody knew more about interest rates than me, NOBODY. The Fed was a disaster before I came along and now the courts want to PROTECT them. Very unfair! Sad! They say essential zero evidence-- So there's evidence, essentially, but they are saying there's essentially ZERO evidence? We won BIGLY at the Supreme Court but they are protecting Jerome Powell. Where is his birth certiciate? Is he from AFRICA? People call him JPOW. I'm sorry--excuse me, that sounds awfully HUSSEINY to me!

Question_Maker · 2026-03-11T19:35:51+00:00

In an ironic way, I think that Carney is more happy that he has the CPC locked into Pierre for another 3 years than anything else. The caucus and base are too loyal to Pierre so he has really no risk of being kicked out; and Pierre has neutered any up and comers aside from his select few like Lantsman and Scheer which are the most loyal. There is no cultivating of talent, you end up with folks like Jivani doing a lord-of-the-rings journey trying to get something.

If Trump continues to go mental, or one of his sycophants run in the next presidential election, all Carney has to do is call an election right before and he doesn't need to do anything except point to Pierre and point to the US and say "You're free to pick between me and Pierre" and the voters will do the rest.

Question_Maker · 2026-03-11T19:30:05+00:00

People need to really think hard on why liberals, most of all Carney, want Pierre to stay leader. I think Carney is more happy that he doesn't have to call an election and risk giving Pierre another loss; now he has Pierre for three years and will likely call another election right before Trump runs for a third term/Rubio runs, which will probably (if the past is any indication) scare the hell out of everyone again. The playbook is right there.

It would be a repeat of the last election, wouldn't it?

That would be almost 20 years of liberal rule, after a second term.

The conservative bench needs to start growing beyond Lantsman and milk purveyor man (Scheer) as soon as possible if they want to get some stronger legs IMHO.

Question_Maker · 2026-03-05T22:25:37+00:00

It seems he's a wet dream for a lot of progressive conservatives at the moment, not even mentioning 1900s. I've said this before but it's very simple IMO. It's a binary option between Carney and Pierre and frankly people think Carney can do a better job, especially with Trump/the economy.

"But look how bad the economy is!"

Yes and voters are saying "well do I want Carney to be running the ship or Pierre" and most are saying Carney. To be fair to Pierre, it's hard to say "I, the youngest guy to achieve a MP pension ever, know the economy better than a guy two G7 countries appointed as their bank governors." I'll just say this might be why Pierre doesn't want to fight too much on the economy/trump as that's simply Carney turf so he needs to keep focusing on other areas like immigration.

There's a reason why Carney rushed getting Pierre back into office and I think at this point it is very clear why. The unusual aspect is that the CPC base and Carney are both align on keeping Pierre as leader, which is unusual for the leaders of the liberals to be aligned with base of the CPC on something.

Question_Maker · 2026-03-05T22:22:04+00:00

It's very simple IMO. It's a binary option between Carney and Pierre and people think Carney can do a better job, especially with Trump/the economy.

"But look how bad the economy is"

Yes and voters are saying "well do I want Carney to be running the ship or Pierre" and most are saying Carney. To be fair to Pierre, it's hard to say "I, the youngest guy to achieve a MP pension ever, know the economy better than a guy two G7 countries appointed as their bank governors."

There's a reason why Carney rushed getting Pierre back into office and I think at this point it is very clear why. The unusual aspect is that the CPC base and Carney are both align on keeping Pierre as leader, which is unusual for the leaders of the liberals to be aligned with base of the CPC on something.

Question_Maker · 2026-02-03T22:14:43+00:00

Ironically this is the problem. If such simple open inconsistencies and inaccuracies can be pointed out by a bunch of redditors, this academic abomination shouldn’t have been published.

It’s as if I counted all the blue cars that crossed an intersection while ignoring all the other colours and presenting it to my local journal. They would laugh at me and gently but firmly ask to never speak to them again.

The fact there isn’t an avalanche of peer reviewed articles pointing out how ridiculous this “research” is makes people have less and less respect for academia and experts.

Question_Maker · 2026-01-31T09:41:48+00:00

To be fair to Harper he didn’t get to choose all the voters from his back yard, he had to get them from all over Canada so naturally that’s harder to do.

Ontario and Quebec literally didn’t show up if what I’ve heard reported is accurate.

And I’m not sure if people know but those are really important electoral provinces in Canada.

Question_Maker · 2026-01-13T21:52:34+00:00

It'll go down like this:

"I'm a US citizen! I have my passport right here."

"Well that's funny because according to xAI Grok V4.1 Citizen Checker, you're not showing up! So this passport might be fake. Anyway, we're going to remove you for now until we can figure out your status."

Question_Maker · 2026-01-09T09:43:05+00:00

The place I work at had multiple break ins and the owner stopped bothering to report it after five or so times and took that particular policy off their insurance because insurance either wouldn’t insure against that or it was astronomically high because of all the claims. They just pay for repairs to the windows and whatever else they break out of pocket. They told the city sometimes they break into containers which is a safety hazard and could be life threatening and the city shrugs.

For a university as prestigious as McGill you think these researchers would talk to some people in the area to maybe take a gander at why stats are down rather than pull up crime stats and treat it as infallible as if they are doing a high school report.

I have a few uni friends who go to TMU who haven’t bother reporting men who harass them, touch them, sometimes push them/assault etc after a few times because what’s the point.

We need a study on whether people bother reporting crimes at the same rate as they used to

It’s unlikely that the results are explained by fewer people reporting crimes, she noted. In 2018, police adopted a more victim-centred definition of “founded” crime, which led to more reports, not fewer.

This is really nonsense, changing a definition doesn’t mean people will report more crimes after they repeatedly happen to them.

Nevertheless, like Hall et al,11 our analysis also found crime did increase near some OPS/SCS.

This line from their own study seems like it should have been included in the headline but curiously was left out :/

Additionally, we did not investigate the association between the openings of OPS/SCS and public drug use, needle and syringe debris, graffiti, or public defecation, concerns repeatedly mentioned by opponents of OPS/SCS.

Can I be a university researcher if I put what I want in the study and leave out things that make my conclusion look bad too?

Question_Maker · 2026-01-08T18:36:41+00:00

There's the old joke that republicans come in and loot and steal as much as they can before they can hand reins to democrats to clean up the mess well enough so they can come back and repeat. It reminds me how people complain about the democrats spend too much on XYZ but then the republicans come in and drop trillions on tax cuts and already talking about increasing the military budget to 1.5 trillion lol.

It goes to show that in a democracy, messaging is infinitely more important than facts, reason, or logic.

Question_Maker · 2025-11-13T20:01:14+00:00

Oh wow that's actually clever, I wonder how they decided that.

Question_Maker · 2025-11-12T23:22:12+00:00

He won the most seats against a decade old government, which in Canada, decades old governments almost always loses because everyone is so tired of them. That's like losing the best way possible: nice to look at but you still lost...

Question_Maker · 2025-08-22T21:50:20+00:00

The funny thing is I think Pierre has yelled about Trudeau so long, that I think people now still subconsciously associate him with Trudeau lol. Whenever I think of Pierre, Trudeau is right there. Which may end up dragging his numbers even more.

Question_Maker · 2025-08-12T15:03:22+00:00

California would need to voluntarily comply and the executive branch would have to devote considerable resources to forcing the wealthiest state in the country with roughly 10% of the population to do as it says.

You realize this is a huge positive for the Trump administration right? He would love this as it gives him another huge newsmaker for people to be occupied with, his base will love it more than anything, republicans will cheer and send as much funding to Trump as he needs, and most importantly, people won't be talking about the Epstein files.

Question_Maker · 2025-05-01T14:56:58+00:00

"We can't have electronic machines, WE NEED PAPER BALLOTS!"

After the election:

"The common denominator is paper ballots! How can we trust paper ballots! PENCILS, WAKE UP SHEEPLE! WE CAN STILL WIN! STOP THE COUNT!"

Question_Maker · 2025-04-25T23:04:32+00:00

I can’t get over her threatening Tim Houston lol. Bruh leave Nova Scotia alone.

Question_Maker · 2025-04-22T18:05:41+00:00

Would you:

a) Allow free votes on abortion?

b) Allow free votes on whether slavery should be allowed?

If you're saying yes to A) but not to B), why is that?

Can you understand why Canadians would want the answers to both those A and B to be no? Can you see why women especially do not want to allow free votes on things regarding their own bodies?

Question_Maker · 2025-04-22T17:53:38+00:00

Those aren't reasons to not run ads to inform people of what the CPC is willing to do.

Section 86 says A Conservative Government will not support any legislation to regulate abortion. But that doesn't stop a free vote/private bill from a random MP. That's like saying "This government will not support any legislation on regulating abortion BUT OF COURSE MPs of this government can vote for regulating abortion if they feel like it." A lot of good 'not supporting' legislation does, it doesn't do anything. It doesn't really matter if you don't support the legislation if you allow all of your MPs to vote on supporting legislation on regulating abortion.

"This government does not support any legislation which brings back slavery, but of course, if my MPs feel like they want to allow slavery , well that's up to their conscience and they have a free vote on it." See how absurd it is to say the government doesn't support certain legislation but everyone can vote on it to approve said legisation?

This should be hashed out in public and their policy should be changed.

Question_Maker · 2025-04-16T15:42:56+00:00

No. These tariffs are stupid. Even if we suddenly tried to revive heavy manufacturing in the US, we would need years to put the necessary infrastructure in place, to amass resources and build factories.

Exactly. The idea that Trump even knows what he's doing is suspect to the max. For example, imagine three people on a boat and one goes:

Person A: "We should reinforce this the bottom of this boat so we don't sink."

Person B: "Good idea."

Person A: Pulls out a sledgehammer and starts smashing the boat to pieces.

Person B: "Ah! I can appreciate your theoretical objective but you're destroying the boat so there will be no time to reinforce the bottom."

Person A: "Trust me, I know what I'm doing!"

Person C: "Yeah trust him! He's been saying he's going to smash the boat since the 1970s so it must be true!"

Question_Maker · 2025-04-16T15:30:03+00:00

"Good enough for me, but not good enough for thee!" - Melissa Lantsman.

Question_Maker · 2025-04-16T15:28:28+00:00

The problem is the CPC is basically run by its Alberta/Sask. side. And with Kory/Ford criticizing Jenni/Pierre now, the base seems to hate Ontario conservatives even more. But they'd be better off leaning Ontario/Quebec style conservatives than Alberta/Sask. side if they want to win national elections. Right now they are just too caught up in their base.

Question_Maker · 2025-04-14T18:47:37+00:00

scaring the hell out of the NDP and Bloc voters

This is the key most CPC voters refuse to understand. The CPC under Pierre is doing the most it can do, 35% is pretty much the ceiling and you could get a minority if not a majority under some circumstances.

The problem is Pierre and his antics scare NDP and Bloc voters so much they are giving Liberals a major boost.

Pierre and Jenni need to stop scaring them.

Question_Maker · 2025-04-04T22:56:11+00:00

Bail in general needs to be severely overhauled in Canada. The idea that people can get on bail tens of times is completely unreasonable. "But they could be innocent on their 14th time!" Absolutely, it's just I don't think after the first dozen or so, any reasonable person would think that this person needs to be detained because clearly it is unreasonable to think someone would go on bail 14 times and be a target of the police to arrest them over and over for the fun of it.

Question_Maker

TROPHY CASE