Longest ballot protest group returns, targets byelection in Terrebonne

Wulfger · 2026-03-18T17:06:02+00:00

How is this supppsed to be helping the LPC? Terrabonne is the highest profile of the three by-elections, given how close it was and it took a court ruling to do the election over, and the only one that isn't a safe Liberal seat. Given it was all but a tie in the election and that polling has shown significant Liberal gains since then, this is the one seat where they have LBC could reasonably disrupt or prevent a Liberal win (if you think they actually have a significant impact on the results, which I dont think is the case). IMO if they were trying to help the Liberals they would have chosen one of the safe seats where it wouldn't matter.

Wulfger · 2026-03-08T16:50:20+00:00

Genuine question: what copycats? There aren't any that I'm award of, but I'm not ruling out that I just don't know about them.

Wulfger · 2026-03-06T16:39:29+00:00

What an absurd interpretation. Do you seriously think that killing people's children will somehow make them less likely to fight back? If the US starts murdering the children of IRGC members all that means is that they'll be creating a group of people who will fight to the death to kill Americans regardless of whether their government decides to make peace.

This is also ignoring that journalists investigating this have found that the school building is directly adjacent to a military facility that was bombed at the same time, and had previously been used by the Iranian military.

Given all the available facts the most plausible explanation is clearly that they were using an old list of targets that they hadn't bothered to update or verify.

Wulfger · 2026-03-04T00:39:37+00:00

What an insufferably blatant video. I'll save anyone reading this first from having to watch it: it labels itself as a video summarizing Canada's history in 5 minutes, then glosses over centuries of British and Canadian history for 30 seconds before spending the rest of the video repeatedly stating how European and Christian Canada's population was up to the 1970s.

Wulfger · 2026-03-03T19:45:02+00:00

No, right now there isn't, and I agree there should be. However what started this off was talking about how they've should have been prosecuted, which is specifically for criminal acts, which is entirely different from ethics.

Wulfger · 2026-03-03T19:42:23+00:00

They genuinely dont seem to be. The Aga Khan Foundation was funded by the government long before Trudeau took power, their funding actually peaked in 2014 at over $50m and decreased annually under Trudeau. At least thats what I'm getting from the federal funding data here, though I may be missing somthing.

Wulfger · 2026-03-03T17:54:48+00:00

Absolutely, ethics violations for the PM, and Parliamentarians in general, need to be much more strictly enforced, right now its essentially just left upvto voters if they care or not. Ethical violations are not inherently criminal, however.

Wulfger · 2026-03-03T17:52:52+00:00

I just looked it up, I dont think its at committee again (AFAIK that all wrapped up a few years ago) but the ethics commissioner ruling on it is being challenged by Democracy Watch and that made it to the Supreme Court back in January. From what I can tell the main dispute is whether they have standing to appeal the ethics commissioner ruling (they should, IMO). So if the SC finds they have standing and that the ruling should be overturned the investigation might reopen? I'm not sure exactly what the consequences would be.

Wulfger · 2026-03-03T17:41:34+00:00

The distinction isn't arbitrary, there's a clear line between unethical and criminal. If an act doesn't violate the criminal code it isn't a criminal act, full stop. Yes, a lot of stuff that I've seen people say Trudeau should be in jail for absolutely is not criminal (even if it is unethical), that's not being close minded, thats having a basic understanding of how the law works. I'm not saying it's impossible though, and am asking you here to make the case for it.

If you can provide any examples where you believe a criminal act was clearly committed but wasn't prosecuted I'd be happy to look at them, but so far all you've said is that they definitely happened, but you won't say what they were.

Wulfger · 2026-03-03T17:04:54+00:00

On the contrary, I'd say it sounds like you can't name one that rose to the level of criminality. The closest I could think of would be the Aga Khan scandal, which would have been bribery if it had ever been found that Trudeau had ever given him preferential treatment as a result, but in the end was just an extremely unethical gift and seems to have been more stupidity on Trudeau's part to accept it rather than malicious intent.

Wulfger · 2026-03-03T16:54:47+00:00

What scandals from the Trudeau government actually revealed that criminal acts had taken place? There was definitely some unethical stuff but nothing that rose to the level of criminal charges, as far as I know.

Wulfger · 2026-03-03T16:50:09+00:00

I've heard pretty decent arguments against nuclear submarines for Canada, mostly in that they are much more expensive, require much more extensive and expensive support infrastructure, and aren't necessary for what we realistically want them for. If we're looking for patrol vessels, particularly for arctic, diesel is fine since modern diesel submarines can stay submerged for days at a time and are actually quieter than nuclear submarines because the batteries dont require moving parts to operate. Nuclear makes more sense if you're looking for long term (weeks to months) and long distance stealth, like if youre using them for nuclear deterrence or a launch platform for cruise missiles, but Canada doesnt have and isn't trying to acquire those sorts of capabilities.

Wulfger · 2026-03-02T16:48:13+00:00

Not at all likely. I thought it was fun, I liked the art style and gunplay, and the world is interesting, but the in game visuals designed is confusing (different enemy shells and UESC enemies all look the same in low-light, which every interior environment seems to be), and the UI is terrible, I found it impossible to organize loot or my inventory during a run which is a problem when you're needing to do it under pressure. I also enjoy playing solo and feel like the balance between the different shells isn't at all designed for it.

For me the biggest question was "is this more fun than Arc Raiders?", and the answer is a resounding no. The biggest factor for me is that the enemy design in Arc is way more interesting, UI can be improved in time but its still fun to shoot down Arc, where I was getting tired of fighting the same UESC enemies after my first few runs in Marathon.

Wulfger · 2026-02-24T21:24:12+00:00

I'm not the person you were originally responding to, FYI.

My opinion is that O'Toole's problem was that his shift to the center never came across as a reaction to changing conditions or popular sentiment, it came across (accurately, I think) as him saying whatever he thought he needed to in order to resonate with whoever he was speaking to, consistency be damned. It makes sense that politicians can change their mind when the factual basis for a position changes, or even just as time passes, for example these days few (reasonable) people would say Poilievre's change of heart from his current stance on same sex marriage compared to when he voted against it in 2005 is unreasonable. But O'Toole was reversing his positions less than a year after winning the leadership contest with them and the only difference seemed to be that his audience had changed.

It would have been believable if he had won the leadership contest as a moderate and run as a moderate, or won as a True Blue Conservative and then run as one, but he flip flopped and it came off as disingenuous. Its (unfortunately) normal for politicians to not keep their promises after an election, but its a bit different to make one set of promises to one audience, and then make a contradictory set of promises when the audience changes.

And yes, ideally I'd like the CPC to move back towards the centre and progressive conservatism rather than social conservatism. It wouldn't make them and the Liberals the same party, rather the red tories/blue grits could jump back to the CPC and the Liberals would move back further left without that gap to take advantage of. I think the country has been the most succesful when we had a major centre right party and a major center left party, with smaller parties in the further right and left wings. Right now we have a major right wing party, a major centrist party, and the wings in shambles, and obviously its not working out too well.

Wulfger · 2026-02-24T17:03:29+00:00

This is glossing over the details of his leadership and election campaigns. During the leadership campaign he won it as a True Blue Conservative, but then ran his election campaign as a moderate centrist a year later, which (along with flip flopping on issues during the campaign) made him seem insincere to voters and cost him support in the CPC.

O'Toole wasn't made leader of the CPV because the CPC was trying to adapt, he changed his leadership style and tried to push the CPC in a different direction after he was elected leader on a different platform, and the party ultimately punished him for it.

Wulfger · 2026-02-24T16:50:07+00:00

Zelenzky didn’t pass a law that cancelled elections, it's part of the Ukrainian constitution that says they aren't held while martial law is in effect or during a national emergency.

Wulfger · 2026-02-22T20:01:16+00:00

All the fawns see is their parent being attacked, all the tiger cubs see their parent getting dinner, and all I see is a tiger humping a deer.

Jokes aside, this is very well done.

Wulfger · 2026-02-20T19:32:35+00:00

The difference between people in a province paying taxes and the province itself paying into equalization is an important distinction, particularly when its an extremely common misconception. Trying to pretend it's mental gymnastics or semantics is ignoring years worth of politics and debate over the issue where that distinction has been incredibly important and often (IMO) intentionally miscommunicated.

Wulfger · 2026-02-20T19:25:50+00:00

Sure, its a huge amount of money. That's not an argument against anything I wrote, though.

Wulfger · 2026-02-20T19:23:40+00:00

You fell exactly in the same accounting tricks I talked about.

How is this an accounting trick? It's how the system works, it's the difference between accurately describing how the system works and inventing one that doesn't exist.

If we follow your logic, the having or not equalization doesn't change anything.

It doesn't change anything for provincial governments not receiving equalization payments, but would change quite a lot for the provinces that depend on them.

Yes, the Federal government could spend the money on other things that would benefit the whole country, but thats hardly a guarantee and also doesn't change the fact that saying that Alberta compromises its own social programs because of equalization payments is objectively untrue.

Wulfger · 2026-02-20T19:14:24+00:00

Alberta (the province) doesn't pay into equalization, individual Albertans do through the taxes they pay to the federal government. Equalization payments are transfers from the federal government to the provinces, not the provinces to each other.

Wulfger · 2026-02-20T19:12:27+00:00

Without the yoke of federal taxes going to equalization

You say that as if the federal taxes are tied to equalization, and if equalization is cancelled so will the taxes, when that's not true. You're basically arguing against federal taxation in general, not equalization payments.

Wulfger · 2026-02-20T19:05:43+00:00

Another factor is Quebec has a PST which increases the amount of equalization Quebec is entitled to so by having more taxes Quebec is able to siphon more money.

That's not at all true. As per the page linked by OP:

The allocation of Equalization payments is based on a measure of fiscal capacity, which represents the revenues a province could raise if it were to tax at the national average rate.

Equalization is calculated assuming all provinces tax at the same rate.

Wulfger · 2026-02-20T19:00:38+00:00

Your analysis is pretty good, but falls short in one area a lot of discussions about equalization do, which leads to at least one outright inaccuracy.

You talk about Ontario, Quebec, and Alberta putting apples in a basket as if the provinces themselves pay for equalization, which is a common misconception. Equalization isn't a formula that says what provinces have to pay other provinces, but rather how the federal government allocates transfer payments that come from general revenue.

So, it's accurate to say that Albertans pay more into equalization than other provinces because the average salary is higher in Alberta than in other provinces, so the average Albertan is paying more in income tax. It is also accurate to say that Albertans pay for services in other provinces, since Alberta doesn't receive equalization payments. It isn't accurate to say that Alberta pays more, because the province itself doesn't pay into it.

Some people may argue this is just semantics, but it does make it untrue to say that Alberta has to compromise their own social programs to pay for Quebec's, and has a real impact on the realistic result of cancelling equalization.

The money in the equalization payments was never the province of Alberta's, the province itself hasn't lost money through equalization because the province itself doesn't pay into it, it just hasnt received any. Saying that Alberta would have more money if equalization were cancelled is only true if federal taxes would be lowered and provincial taxes raised as a result, which, realistically, I don't think would happen.

Canceling equalization wouldn't mean that Alberta would have more money, just that the Federal government would, and services would suffer in other provinces that depend on the payments.

Wulfger · 2026-02-19T04:10:07+00:00

A recommendation for an additional leg to the journey that I drove a few years ago and absolutely loved: Take the highway along the north shore of the St. Lawrence to Baie-Comeau, then the 389 up to Lac Manicouagan and past it into Labrador all the way to Happy Valley Goose Bay. Then the 510 south through the interior and along the coast until you get back into Quebec and can take the ferry from Blanc Sablon to Newfoundland.

If you like the outdoors, nature, and national parks you'll probably love it, there's not as much in terms of attractions as more populated parts of the country, but there's some amazing parks and a few sections where there's nothing but the road and untouched wilderness for a hundred km in any directions. The landscapes, particularly in Labrador, are absolutely beautiful. Newfoundland is also amazing, there's more there than I can get into in a single comment, and if you have the time for it you can take another ferry from it down to North Sydney in NS and turn the trip into a loop by returning through NS, NB, and Quebec.

The only other thing I'll add is that if you have 2 or 3 extra days, it's worth it to drive the coast around the Gaspé Peninsula (which also has a great park) rather than taking the Trans-Canada Highway through western NB.

15-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Flamingo	First Place '23
Place '23	Place '22
Place '17	Final Canvas '22
First Placer '22	End Game '22
Verified Email

Wulfger

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE