|
cowofwar posted:Picking Pierre Elliot Trudeau's son to head the LPC. ahahaha
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:53 |
|
|
Yeah well that's just like, your opinion man!
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
Conservatives are sticking to the marriage is one man and one woman thing lol https://twitter.com/stephenlautens/status/736238535355813888 https://twitter.com/stephenlautens/status/736238783729926144 Glad they're going to keep fighting this issue that was settled a decade ago!
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Hahahahahhahahahahhahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
PK loving SUBBAN posted:Conservatives are sticking to the marriage is one man and one woman thing lol  Everyone who said weed was a stupid hill to die on, get a load of these guys publicly declaring they want to stay on the wrong side of history. Bonus points for taking aim at the courts for having the gall to go striking down all the illegal, unconstitutional poo poo they do.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
Helsing posted:I always thought that in a symbolic way each of these incidents tells us something about each party and how they relate to the past. Do you Liberals have any equally kitschy ways of plundering your historical legacy? I mean, other than the walking T-Shirt that you elected as your leader. cowofwar posted:Picking Pierre Elliot Trudeau's son to head the LPC. 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
if people are going to get their panties in a twist over a "family dynasty" running the country, can we at least get rid of the actual family dynasty who are our heads of state, thankkkkkkssssss.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:
Conservatives hate the constitution because it's Pierre Trudeau's legacy. You don't even hear Conservatives pay lip service to the constitution like they do in the States.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Whiskey Sours posted:Conservatives hate the constitution because it's Pierre Trudeau's legacy. You don't even hear Conservatives pay lip service to the constitution like they do in the States. Yep.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Whiskey Sours posted:Conservatives hate the constitution because it's Pierre Trudeau's legacy. You don't even hear Conservatives pay lip service to the constitution like they do in the States. Which is hilarious because the Charter is much a legacy of Pierre Trudeau as it is Progressive Conservatives who saw American individual liberties as a good thing, like Deifenbaker, who had pushing for a Bill of Rights since at least the 50s.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
I'm not sure how much continuity there really is between the modern Conservative Party and the old Progressive Conservatives. The "merger" between the Alliance and the PCs mostly seems to have resulted in the Alliance mellowing out on social issues while the PCs went all in for a kind of market fundamentalism that owes more to American neoconservatism than it does to old school British Toryism. If you look at the provincial precursors of the Harper government in the 1990s, Ralph Klein and Mike Harris, they were both also seen as breaks from their own party's pasts. This is part of why I thought it was so appropriate that the Manning Centre would have somebody dressed up as John A. Macdonald hawking T-shirts that say "Conservative" on them. I don't think you could invent a better metaphor for their relationship to history of conservative party's in Canada.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:I can't imagine why anyone isn't taking their side seriously. I agree that it's cool and good that a bunch of people are gonna have their lives ruined for something that won't be illegal in a year
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
At the very minimum once something is legalized anyone who's prosecuted and convicted of the legalized thing should have their conviction reversed and all record of the event expunged. Associated charges? Fine. A shithead pot dealer with a gun should keep his weapons convictions. Someone who's just selling? IDGAF, let him off.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:I agree that it's cool and good that a bunch of people are gonna have their lives ruined for something that won't be illegal in a year Is that why you're attacking me for saying their loudest advocate sounds like a total moron? Cause I'm not seeing the connection.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
PK loving SUBBAN posted:Conservatives are sticking to the marriage is one man and one woman thing lol Oh my god. One day after Harper resigns and already the social conservatives are taking over.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:Is that why you're attacking me for saying their loudest advocate sounds like a total moron? Cause I'm not seeing the connection. A lot of legitimate grievances or causes have very shrill and over-the-top advocates, and these advocates tend to get the most attention. The loudest and most visible advocate for fundamentally reforming the NDP is Barry Weisleder, somebody that no rational person should want in a position of real influence. Yet many of the grievances he harps about are basically accurate. People in this thread come off as mortally afraid of ever being associated with a political cause that could possibly have silly or embarrassing people involved. The more I read this thread the more that all this ironic detachment just comes off as a kind of insecurity.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
I'm just here to make fun of people who say dumb poo poo to the internet, I don't really care whose side they're on. Emery makes himself a really easy target when he compares a few dozen illegal pot shops set up by people who knew full well what they were doing was against the law, and were even warned to stop lest they be arrested, to the October Crisis or Operation Soap.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:Oh my god. What... Exactly could they be hoping to achieve by doing this, except for shooting themselves in the foot? Last polls I saw (reported in 2015 in the National Post) had 7/10 Canadians supporting same sex marriage. Hell, even among those identifying as Conservative voters, opposition to same sex marriage was only something like 30-40%. There's literally no scenario in which this does anything other than score brownie points with social cons (who, let's face it, are voting Con regardless) while completely alienating everyone in the moderate spectrum. They have got to be hoping that folks other than hardcore social cons just aren't paying attention...?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:I'm just here to make fun of people who say dumb poo poo to the internet, I don't really care whose side they're on. Emery makes himself a really easy target when he compares a few dozen illegal pot shops set up by people who knew full well what they were doing was against the law, and were even warned to stop lest they be arrested, to the October Crisis or Operation Soap. I mean, there's no question it's an incredibly stupid thing for Emery to say and it certainly speaks to the total lack of perspective many activists have about their favourite pet cause. Personally I'm just much more bothered by the slick PR-speak of the politicians and civil servants who are manoeuvring to make the world safe for yet another lovely corporate lobby that will engage in the very Canadian habit of allying with politicians to gouge consumers.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
Might just be a tweet not completely capturing the situation. HuffPo says they voted to keep gay marriage? I'm confused.quote:http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/05/27/conservative-convention-same-sex-marriage_n_10168380.html
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
JVNO posted:What... Exactly could they be hoping to achieve by doing this, except for shooting themselves in the foot? Last polls I saw (reported in 2015 in the National Post) had 7/10 Canadians supporting same sex marriage. Hell, even among those identifying as Conservative voters, opposition to same sex marriage was only something like 30-40%. There's literally no scenario in which this does anything other than score brownie points with social cons (who, let's face it, are voting Con regardless) while completely alienating everyone in the moderate spectrum. The answer is that the people passing this resolution just spent ten years supporting an in-power Conservative government that, thanks to the fact that it was being run by competent politicians who recognized that these issues were political losers, always kept them at arm's length and tried to minimize the social conservative wing of the party as much as possible. These people have ten years of pent-up frustrations: We were in power for a decade, why didn't we do anything about abortion/the gays/the immigrants? A move like this is not about winning elections, it's about a frustrated but influential bloc within the Conservative Party wanting a party that actually represents what they think on social issues. And despite these issues being essentially settled in Canadian legal and political circles, the fact that they remain issues in America and so much American media bleeds into Canada means they remain on the brains of Canadian social conservatives.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:Might just be a tweet not completely capturing the situation. HuffPo says they voted to keep gay marriage? I'm confused. quote:“I was told that the purpose of this resolution was to get people like me out of the party.... It will drive people out of our party.” 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
I thought the CPC was pretty bad under Harper, but it looks like it's true that he was actually reigning in their shittiness 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
So glad Burnt Toast is my MP what a stand up guy. Between this and his opposition to International Planned Parenthood I couldn't ask for a better MP.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
Oh... So Harper was the hip, in touch, professional Conservative by comparison? Hope they enjoyed those 10 years.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
I'm willing to bet that it's red meat to the base, while hoping that since it's already legal, most people on the fence about voting Con will rationalize it by saying, "Yeah, well, they're not really going to make it illegal..." or something like that. Like when some people defend their Donald Trump support with, "I know about the crazy stuff, but it's not like a president can do everything he says he wants to..."
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:Might just be a tweet not completely capturing the situation. HuffPo says they voted to keep gay marriage? I'm confused. The chair said the vote to debate was just about the income splitting bit but the tweeter thought differently. Not defending them because there are a ton of idiot social conservatives there but it's not quite as bad as it looks. Helsing posted:I mean, there's no question it's an incredibly stupid thing for Emery to say and it certainly speaks to the total lack of perspective many activists have about their favourite pet cause. Personally I'm just much more bothered by the slick PR-speak of the politicians and civil servants who are manoeuvring to make the world safe for yet another lovely corporate lobby that will engage in the very Canadian habit of allying with politicians to gouge consumers. It's just capotilsm, roll with it. We're the douchebags who like the band but hate the fans. Postess with the Mostest fucked around with this message at 21:58 on May 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:he was actually reigning in their shittiness True as you spelled it, maybe not as you meant it.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:True as you spelled it, maybe not as you meant it. Ahaha, oops. But I'll let it stand.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
I like to eat at capotle
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
ZShakespeare posted:I like to eat at capotle I liked Philip Seymour Moffatt in that movie about him.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:Might just be a tweet not completely capturing the situation. HuffPo says they voted to keep gay marriage? I'm confused. The tweet quoted was about the income splitting part of the motion. The HuffPo article seems to be about adding the marriage part to Saturday's plenary for a full vote or whatever. Goddamn, Twitter is the worst form of communication.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
How the gently caress are all the votes at cpc only like 300 delegates? Even in 2012 we had 4 digits
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Helsing posted:At the 2011 NDP convention I remember that they had an actor impersonate Tommy Douglas and give the exact same speech that he had given at the NDP's founding convention fifty years earlier. I remember thinking there was something both kitschy and perverse about recreating Douglas' slogans and words at the same time that the party was trying to remove any hint of socialism from the party constitution. Is there any sort of signup for party conventions? I was always kind of curious to go to one for each party and see what they were like but figured if you acted with anything but out and out hostility they'd keep bugging you to join, like JWs.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:How the gently caress are all the votes at cpc only like 300 delegates? Even in 2012 we had 4 digits I think that's the point of the plenary -- this is just setting up the agenda for the big issues, and the plenary is a full scale vote. Jan fucked around with this message at 22:43 on May 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
tetsul posted:Is there any sort of signup for party conventions? I was always kind of curious to go to one for each party and see what they were like but figured if you acted with anything but out and out hostility they'd keep bugging you to join, like JWs. You can generally attend party conventions as a non-voting observer if you're willing to pay the fees, which are a lot higher if you're not a party member. To actually participate as a delegate you need to be elected or be part of certain affiliated organizations, depending on which party.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Note: if the new constitution passes anyone can sign up to be a delegate moving forward to LPC conventions
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Can't wait to pull some oldschool Trot entryism on the LPC.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
Helsing posted:You can generally attend party conventions as a non-voting observer if you're willing to pay the fees, which are a lot higher if you're not a party member. To actually participate as a delegate you need to be elected or be part of certain affiliated organizations, depending on which party. Holy poo poo, $1400 for an observer at the CPC convention? Nothing would make me that curious. It's probably for the best. Going to a party convention is just a slippery slope leading to have a drawing of a party leader as an avatar.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 23:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:53 |
|
|
I wonder what all the gay tories are going to vote??????
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 23:04
|
|
