Trudeau
#181
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2017
Location: Halifax, NS
Posts: 345
Re: Trudeau
No, let's really not.
I provided some specific illustrations to show how, in a world where marriage is defined in such limited and limiting terms, same-sex couples are discriminated against as a matter of law.
That is, objectively, incompatible with an "opinion" that you are not being discriminatory by believing - in the face of the evidence - that no such discrimination occurs.
I don't care what religious beliefs you claim, or on what basis you make your assertion that marriage is somehow defined by the rules in your book and your book only. That, clearly, is an opinion that you hold. But where that personal belief-based opinion impinges on the "basic human dignity" (your words) of others, then that's not OK.
I provided some specific illustrations to show how, in a world where marriage is defined in such limited and limiting terms, same-sex couples are discriminated against as a matter of law.
That is, objectively, incompatible with an "opinion" that you are not being discriminatory by believing - in the face of the evidence - that no such discrimination occurs.
I don't care what religious beliefs you claim, or on what basis you make your assertion that marriage is somehow defined by the rules in your book and your book only. That, clearly, is an opinion that you hold. But where that personal belief-based opinion impinges on the "basic human dignity" (your words) of others, then that's not OK.
I am not here to debate same sex marriage with you, since it is the settled law of the land. I believe the conservative party dropped its intent to change that from its charter, or whatever it is.
As for making assumptions about people you don't know... unbecoming. I am leaving it there whether you want to or not.
#182
Re: Trudeau
#183
Re: Trudeau
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...e_iOSApp_Other
It seems likely he will win again though given the alternatives.
#186
#187
Re: Trudeau
I could have written it differently to make it more clear. It was just that it was his double standard I was referencing so the contrast was his inconsistent treatment of two blokes who had done similar things...one on his team and one on the other.
If I meant it was your man - really yours, TD - it wouldn't have been a double standard. Hope that clarifies it.
If I meant it was your man - really yours, TD - it wouldn't have been a double standard. Hope that clarifies it.
#188
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2017
Location: Halifax, NS
Posts: 345
Re: Trudeau
I could have written it differently to make it more clear. It was just that it was his double standard I was referencing so the contrast was his inconsistent treatment of two blokes who had done similar things...one on his team and one on the other.
If I meant it was your man - really yours, TD - it wouldn't have been a double standard. Hope that clarifies it.
If I meant it was your man - really yours, TD - it wouldn't have been a double standard. Hope that clarifies it.
Anyways, I am outta this thread... seems to be getting a bit too shrill.
#189
Re: Trudeau
Probably not. 60-something percent of that one-in-four are Conservative voters; I suspect they are generally offended by the idea of Trudeau, and this has changed neither their offendedness nor their voting intention. I haven't done the math of multiplying the offence percentage by the voting intention percentage, but at a glance it looks as though this really hasn't changed the overall pattern of voter intention at all.
#190
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 2,900
Re: Trudeau
It seems professional pollsters disagree with Oakvillian:
https://news.yahoo.com/conservatives...200234461.html
https://news.yahoo.com/conservatives...200234461.html
#191
Re: Trudeau
It seems professional pollsters disagree with Oakvillian:
https://news.yahoo.com/conservatives...200234461.html
https://news.yahoo.com/conservatives...200234461.html
As one of the slightly-less-rabid comments on the Yahoo piece notes, the more astonishing story here is that, after Blackface-Gate, Scheer's numbers haven't moved. This is where Scheer should be absolutely burying Trudeau. If I were a Conservative strategist, I'd be pretty worried about that about now.
#192
Re: Trudeau
Did you read the article? The Conservative polling numbers are "stagnant" (because, according to the article, "Scheer has been 'unable to persuade voters unhappy with Trudeau to look at the Conservative Party.'" The Libs have in fact lost ground (a couple of percentage points) to the Greens. While doubtless there are a few who have been moved to change their voting intention by the blackface photos, it's as likely a result of the Greta Thunberg effect and genuine concerns about lack of action on the climate.
As one of the slightly-less-rabid comments on the Yahoo piece notes, the more astonishing story here is that, after Blackface-Gate, Scheer's numbers haven't moved. This is where Scheer should be absolutely burying Trudeau. If I were a Conservative strategist, I'd be pretty worried about that about now.
As one of the slightly-less-rabid comments on the Yahoo piece notes, the more astonishing story here is that, after Blackface-Gate, Scheer's numbers haven't moved. This is where Scheer should be absolutely burying Trudeau. If I were a Conservative strategist, I'd be pretty worried about that about now.
https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...-he-become/amp
Trudeau’s best tactic is probably to continue to pretend Doug Ford is the opposition.
#193
Re: Trudeau
I'm now seeing very many facebook posts, from people I would not have thought politically active, on the theme that Trudeau's been an idiot but one should not lose sight of the big picture; Scheer is a man from the 1950s, the Brits and the Americans have chosen poorly, don't make the same mistake. I doubt that bots or political consultants subscribe to equine or aquarium threads so I think there's a real fear among Canadians that Trudeau's foibles could let in a dangerous regressive. Ford would serve as well as Johnson or Trump as an example of what the Conservatives have to offer. (Did the conservatives drop "progressive" from their name, btw? They certainly dropped it from their policies).
#194
Re: Trudeau
"A re-elected Liberal government will make sure every Canadian has access to a family doctor, to mental health services, to affordable prescription drugs and to national pharmacare."
Originally Posted by Andrew Scheer
Trudeau will say anything to get re-elected.
Andrew Scheer has recently announced a new addition to his platform of cutting costs for Canadians by saying he would offer rebates to Canadians “for the five percent tax charged on all residential home energy, including heating oil, electricity, natural gas, propane, wood pellets, and other heating sources.” https://www.thepostmillennial.com/sc...nd-carbon-tax/
Is the difference here that it's wrong to say anything to get re-elected but it's okay to say anything to get elected or is this just more hypocrisy?
Is the difference here that it's wrong to say anything to get re-elected but it's okay to say anything to get elected or is this just more hypocrisy?
#195
Re: Trudeau
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer said Tuesday in London, Ont. that after repealing the Liberals’ climate pricing plan, they would bring back “very popular” tax credits including the Children’s Sports and Fitness tax credit. - https://globalnews.ca/video/5947238/...ar-tax-credits