Vassy takes the knives to all comers!!
Don’t be deceived by the title below because everybody gets it, and everybody gets to squirm a bit. YouTube & “Liberal Minister Gets ROASTED On LIVE TV!”…
Liberals bring out the Knives
- Thread starter Retired_Can_Soldier
- Start date
Federal party leaders will square off in a televised French-language debate Wednesday and an English-language one on Thursday.
Liberal Leader Mark Carney; Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre; NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh; Bloc Quebecois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet, and somehow Green Party co-leader Jonathan Pedneault will face off in the French-language debate on April 16, with the English debate taking place on April 17.
(Jonathan Pedneault isn’t even a member of Parliament, but then again, neither is Mark Carney, so whatever…)
Each leader qualified for the debates based on meeting two of three criteria set by the federal debates commission, either by holding a seat in the House of Commons when the election was called, having a national polling average of at least four per cent by March 31, or have candidates endorsed in at least 90 per cent of federal ridings 28 days before the election.
Each debate will be 120 minutes without commercials, with an “emphasis” on open debate and questions asked by a single moderator.
Canada election: Here's how to watch the federal leaders' debates — Global News
The federal party leaders are expected to face off in French and English language election debates just days before Canadians can start voting in advanced polls.
"I think it simply benefits Canadian democracy to have the Greens at the table and have as many voices to debate the future of our country," he told reporters.
Debates commission defends inviting Greens despite party's candidate shortage — CBC News
The Leaders' Debates Commission is defending its decision to invite Green Party co–leader Jonathan Pedneault to this week's debates, even though the party is well short of a full slate of candidates.
"I have nothing against the Green Party, but if the rules disqualify it, how can we explain why it's invited to the debate? The main effect is to reduce the speaking time of others," Blanchet wrote in a French social media post.
More than 70 independent candidates running in Poilievre’s riding as part of co-ordinated protest — The Globe and Mail
Longest Ballot Committee wants to draw attention to need for electoral reform of first-past-the-post system
She has sort of step aside and will be watching the debate on the TV screen above the bar.
Anywho, back to the debates (English & French) both in Montreal ‘cuz Montreal.
In 2025, debate participants must check off two of the following three boxes: they must have one MP in Parliament; they must be polling at four per cent or more; they must have candidates running in 90 per cent of the country’s ridings.
The Greens, according to the debate authorities’ calculations, are polling at merely 2.7 per cent and therefore miss that mark on criterion two. They meet criterion three because they told debate authorities that they had a full candidate roster — but the party’s subsequent submissions to Elections Canada reveal that only 68 per cent of ridings will have Greens on the ballot. Whoopsies…
“The commission made its decision with respect to which political parties met the debate participation criteria 27 days before election day. The timelines were set to ensure that the debates producer has sufficient time to produce a debate of high quality,” a debate commission spokesperson told CBC.
So, instead of a leaders’ debate, we’ll also be getting a Green party advertisement on Wednesday and Thursday — an event to familiarize the country with its new co-leader, Jonathan Pedneault, who doesn’t have a hope of becoming an MP. Why is he involved in the debate(s) as a non-MP? Same reason as Carney I guess.
apple.news
In his Montreal-area riding’s 2023 by-election (Pedneault, not Carney), he came in fourth, losing to all three major federal parties. His time on stage will likely be forgettable, as will be his face, absent any gaffes or gasp-worthy jabs at others. Carney hasn’t even done a by-election in any riding to date, yet here we are.
The Greens are not always included in election coverage, but when they are, they take up about 20 per cent of space with less than three per cent support across the country. Not only does their spotlight outstrip their fleck of popularity by an order of magnitude, it opens the Overton window, giving a more centrist appearance to the Liberals and NDP.
A quick glance at the Green platform reveals that they’re just a more extreme version of the modern Liberals, anyway.
In 2025, debate participants must check off two of the following three boxes: they must have one MP in Parliament; they must be polling at four per cent or more; they must have candidates running in 90 per cent of the country’s ridings.
The Greens, according to the debate authorities’ calculations, are polling at merely 2.7 per cent and therefore miss that mark on criterion two. They meet criterion three because they told debate authorities that they had a full candidate roster — but the party’s subsequent submissions to Elections Canada reveal that only 68 per cent of ridings will have Greens on the ballot. Whoopsies…
Instead of revoking the Greens’ invitation to the debate, as would have been appropriate for leaders who don’t meet the modest standard that has been set, the debate commission insisted that no changes would be made in light of the flawed data.On Sunday, Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet took issue with Pedneault being allowed to participate.
"I have nothing against the Green Party, but if the rules disqualify it, how can we explain why it's invited to the debate? The main effect is to reduce the speaking time of others," Blanchet wrote in a French social media post.
“The commission made its decision with respect to which political parties met the debate participation criteria 27 days before election day. The timelines were set to ensure that the debates producer has sufficient time to produce a debate of high quality,” a debate commission spokesperson told CBC.
So, instead of a leaders’ debate, we’ll also be getting a Green party advertisement on Wednesday and Thursday — an event to familiarize the country with its new co-leader, Jonathan Pedneault, who doesn’t have a hope of becoming an MP. Why is he involved in the debate(s) as a non-MP? Same reason as Carney I guess.
Jamie Sarkonak: The Greens don't belong in the debates — National Post
They get too much attention as is
The Greens are not always included in election coverage, but when they are, they take up about 20 per cent of space with less than three per cent support across the country. Not only does their spotlight outstrip their fleck of popularity by an order of magnitude, it opens the Overton window, giving a more centrist appearance to the Liberals and NDP.
A quick glance at the Green platform reveals that they’re just a more extreme version of the modern Liberals, anyway.
And let’s be honest with ourselves: most of the attention that anyone aware of the personalities heading the Greens can be described as “rubbernecking.” Whether it was May’s wobbly press gallery dinner address and tribute to Omar Khadr, the messy palace coup against former leader Annamie Paul, or the misgendering controversy that cast a shadow over the interim leadership of Amita Kuttner, the party has proven to be an excellent generator of drama, and that’s about it.
Yet….
They’ll bounce it for a hockey game.
??Time changed for French-language leaders' debate due to Montreal Canadiens game — CBC News
The start time of Wednesday's French-language leaders' debate has been changed from 8 p.m. to 6 p.m. ET after two federal party leaders requested it not clash with a potentially consequential Montreal Canadiens hockey game.
Elbows up.....so I can I punch you in the upper rib cage under the arm pit and rapture a lung with a broken rib.Yet….
View attachment 28730
They’ll bounce it for a hockey game.
Time changed for French-language leaders' debate due to Montreal Canadiens game — CBC News
The start time of Wednesday's French-language leaders' debate has been changed from 8 p.m. to 6 p.m. ET after two federal party leaders requested it not clash with a potentially consequential Montreal Canadiens hockey game.
The leaders of Canada's four main political parties will square off for a second and final leaders' debate tonight in Montreal, after an initial French-language faceoff on Wednesday…so the rest of Canada can hear what Carney & Poilievre have to say when they’re in the same room for a change.
Liberal Leader Mark Carney, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh and the Bloc Québécois' Yves-François Blanchet will meet onstage for a final time before the April 28 vote, after a first debate that saw them spar on pipelines, the economy and U.S. President Donald Trump's trade war.
I’m gonna assume….Montreal?
Most backers of the Conservatives and the NDP hope for the future.Most supporters of the Liberals are afraid.
Fear is what they feel and fear equals U.S. President Donald Trump.
Who fuels the fear?
The Liberal party under Mark Carney. The message: Trump wants to annex Canada.
Carney is in the lead in this ballot battle because of the fear.When the talk is about other issues — cost of living, crime, housing, the economy, 10 lousy years of Liberal government — Carney’s crew loses.
It’s been quite a while since Trump has talked about Canada as the 51st state.
So, heading into the homestretch of this election race, Liberals were pumped when a CBC reporter asked Trump’s press person about why Trump lately hasn’t been going on about Canada becoming a state of the United States.
I’m shocked (not surprised though).
Since Mark Carney became Prime Minister on March 9, the Liberals have been leading in most opinion polls. The reason for this significant shift was fear, anger and revulsion about U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs. This, in turn, was combined with an unfounded belief that Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre was Trump’s Canadian equivalent, in spite of the fact (= Reality) the two leaders have vastly different political and ideological beliefs.
Carney has taken advantage of this good fortune that dropped in his lap. The Liberal strategy has been to lionize the progressive vote to combat Trump’s tariffs and turn this election into a two-party race. It’s worked to their advantage thus far.
That is, until recently.
apple.news
Carney has taken advantage of this good fortune that dropped in his lap. The Liberal strategy has been to lionize the progressive vote to combat Trump’s tariffs and turn this election into a two-party race. It’s worked to their advantage thus far.
That is, until recently.
Michael Taube: Are cracks developing in the Liberal strategy to lionize the progressive vote? — National Post
Cracks appear to be developing as support for the New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois have slowly improved in some polls
Sounds like Malarkey Carney to me. Canadians never forgot.Since Mark Carney became Prime Minister on March 9, the Liberals have been leading in most opinion polls. The reason for this significant shift was fear, anger and revulsion about U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs. This, in turn, was combined with an unfounded belief that Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre was Trump’s Canadian equivalent, in spite of the fact (= Reality) the two leaders have vastly different political and ideological beliefs.
Carney has taken advantage of this good fortune that dropped in his lap. The Liberal strategy has been to lionize the progressive vote to combat Trump’s tariffs and turn this election into a two-party race. It’s worked to their advantage thus far.
That is, until recently.
Michael Taube: Are cracks developing in the Liberal strategy to lionize the progressive vote? — National Post
Cracks appear to be developing as support for the New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois have slowly improved in some polls
See post 205 here below:
I guess they learned their lesson after Trudeau though.
Liberal MPs vote against having power to remove Carney as leader — The Globe and Mail
Liberal caucus decides to not adopt the Reform Act, which is designed to give MPs more of a say over how they’re governed
One MP called the Reform Act “a mechanism that reminds the leader that they’re there because of caucus.”
Another described it as a safeguard. A third said it was generally a good idea, given caucus’ experience of being under the thumb of Trudeau and his inner circle. Oh well…
And here we are. Contrary to what many in the West (West in general, or Western Canada? It’s not clear here) believe, some countries dislike democracy, preferring the strongman, the firm ruler, the dictator.
So it is with the Liberals who have shunned accountability and democracy in favour of the autocratic leader.
Considering the problems the Liberals had with the last guy, it must be the case that some turkeys really do vote for Christmas.
On Sunday, a majority of the Liberal caucus voted down a motion to adopt the rules set out in the Reform Act, a decade old law to give MPs more power.
Michael Higgins: Liberal caucus submits to Carney as it did to Trudeau — National Post
MPs too afraid to adopt Reform Act rules
The private bill sponsored by Conservative Michael Chong passed its third reading in the House in 2014 with an impressive 260 votes for with only 17 against. That was at a time when the conservatives were the governing body, but the liberals have been in power for the fourth consecutive term now since 2015.
At the time, Chong said, “I don’t expect that all the rules will be adopted all at once, but in the long run, party caucuses will democratize themselves and empower themselves.”
After each federal election, parties vote on whether to adopt Reform Act rules or not. In this case, for the last four consecutive four elections since this laws inception, the liberals have chosen “or not”….
Elbows in your ears!And here we are. Contrary to what many in the West (West in general, or Western Canada? It’s not clear here) believe, some countries dislike democracy, preferring the strongman, the firm ruler, the dictator.
So it is with the Liberals who have shunned accountability and democracy in favour of the autocratic leader.
Considering the problems the Liberals had with the last guy, it must be the case that some turkeys really do vote for Christmas.
On Sunday, a majority of the Liberal caucus voted down a motion to adopt the rules set out in the Reform Act, a decade old law to give MPs more power.
One of the central planks of the Reform Act would give caucus members the right to trigger a review of the party leader.
Michael Higgins: Liberal caucus submits to Carney as it did to Trudeau — National Post
MPs too afraid to adopt Reform Act rules
The private bill sponsored by Conservative Michael Chong passed its third reading in the House in 2014 with an impressive 260 votes for with only 17 against. That was at a time when the conservatives were the governing body, but the liberals have been in power for the fourth consecutive term now since 2015.
At the time, Chong said, “I don’t expect that all the rules will be adopted all at once, but in the long run, party caucuses will democratize themselves and empower themselves.”
After each federal election, parties vote on whether to adopt Reform Act rules or not. In this case, for the last four consecutive four elections since this laws inception, the liberals have chosen “or not”….
