Poilievere ran with a cabinet that had constant issues of candidates calling out support for MAGA-like policies and conduct across the board. He threatened jail time for political rivals, had issues with various perspective MPs talking about their personal stances on repealing abortion protections or saying things regarding indigenous affairs that were racist or in denial of a well documented genocide. He made clear his position as anti-trans which many queer people rightly see as being simply the first domino to fall in the repeal of queer and a whole host of women's rights.

His economic policies were very much out loud every thing that Carney is up to now and perhaps you forgot that. Carney was in effect a traditional conservative politician with a liberal coat of paint. He wasn't talking about vote reform or taxation policies on billionaires. The kind of person you run when you want to shore up Conservative style financial values while basically not actively threatening civil rights issues like your opponents do. He was a traditional Conservative wet dream of basically everything a Whig government wants without the culture war bullshit If you think progressives actually liked Carney at the point of voting him is that's bloody insane. The man's a banker who has been strengthening old colonial ties and wheeling and dealing during a sovereignty crisis where the US, our historical trading partner is softly threatening annexation. The only reasons Conservatives are critical is because they think "Conservative" means "fiscally Conservative" and not the branch of political philosophy of the likes of Edmund Burke that thinks channeling money into the hands of the rich and conserving a social hierarchy that keeps certain people at the bottom and punishing deviance from a social norm, removing safety nets because "families" are easier to control than individuals. Meanwhile "Conservative" government spending has never actually been fiscally conservative historically. They just pump money into whatever makes their friends rich because that's kind of the point. It doesn't matter who is in the seat for government if they don't gave the pretty label that seems to say to them "This guy won't waste money" you can what if any scenario where your guy wouldn't be doing the same or worse. At least Carney had the shame to not say that shit out loud and feels like he needs to court the public instead of getting tacit endorsement for that kind of behavior right out the gate on election day the way Poilevre would of had.

[–] Foxer@lemmy.ca -1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

What absolute nonsense. Unless you define maga like Policies as being tax breaks and the like there is no comparison between trump's policies and Poilievres. If anything carney was far more trump like, with his build baby build comments and make Canada strong again stuff.

And no, carney is not putting in place PoilievreS economic policies. He said he would, he ran on them, but now he's running away from them. Remember when he promised to deal with interpreneurial trade? Then tried to walk it back when you realized it might be hard? Remember what he said he was going to get rid of the carbon tax but then doubled up the industrial carbon tax and associated fees? He never got rid of the regist legislation that is preventing companies from building pipelines and doing things in Canada, and now he suggesting that the Canadian taxpayer will pay for it just like they did under Justin Trudeau which is the absolute direct opposite of what the conservatives were going for.

Carney's platform was very much like the conservatives but his actual actions are nothing like the conservatives

And carney is absolutely threatening civil rights. Both the left and the right are deeply concerned about his online gestapo bills. The new police powers for search and seizure are deeply worrying. Etc etc

Conservative spending is the opposite of what you're saying. In harper's time for example spending was extremely targeted and did very well and did not flow into the hands of his buddies. Right now we have a scandal where it appears that Brooksfield bought into a company 15 days before carney agreed to give them billions of dollars in bailouts for their condos. Which is exactly what you were just talking about but it's not the conservatives doing it

Poilievre was clear about what his policy was. Get government spending under control and come up with a plan and March towards a balanced budget. Attract business investment to Canada by creating a favorable environment. Keep investment money in Canada by giving a break to those people who invest in Canadian investments instead of moving their money to America which is what has been happening for the last year and change. Focus on correcting the mistakes and problems of the last 10 years and get crime under control

None of those are bad things. You can say what you like but those are all things that even if you feel there are other priorities out there you can't say that those are bad things. And none of that is happening under Carney

[–] DrivebyHaiku@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

If your intention is to approach politics as team sport then your post makes sense but what about anything I said makes you think I am defending Carney? Polivere is simply the bigger asshole of the two and his economic policy was vibes based -but they are both shit and the Conservative base is just too hung up on minute differences to see that their shit also stinks. Until we actually reform the voting system we're stuck in this duality of it all going to shit as the Overton window shifts right and rights trickle away.

I'm not interested in playing defend or compare the assholes. You asked why he got voted in, that was all the point I had to make. He got voted in because he played conservative better than the Conservatives. It would have been their election otherwise. If you're thinking I give a shit what any conservative platform whether the label on the front is red or blue you can piss off.

[–] Foxer@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 hour ago

Your commentary is clearly intended to be a defensive carney it has nothing to do with team sports. I addressed your points point for point, there's nothing team-oriented about it

And nobody gives a crap who's to dig her asshole. If you want to hire someone to be your friend the last big brothers. But we're talking about here is who has the skills and knowledge experience and vision to be able to leave the country forward. There is absolutely no doubt that it's Poilievre over carney. Something that the only man to employ both of them pointed out quite clearly

Carney pretends that he's going to execute PoilievreS agenda because he knows it's popular and correct. But then he either can't or doesn't or both.

And you are literally playing "Defend or compare the assholes". That is the literal definition of what you're doing.

And no I didn't actually ask anything. I pointed out that your previous statements were entirely wrong and explain why point for point

I know why he got elected. He is an incredible snake oil or peddler and a continent who managed to convince those on the far left that someone with a long history of renovations and hiding the wealth of the 1% is a great idea. And he convinced liberals that he would be better than you know which he absolutely is not turning out to me. We're on the same downward trajectory