2022 CPC Leadership Discussion: Et tu Redeux

[OldSolduer]

Agreed. Many say Trudeau rode into electoral success on a wave of populism. I think he did. Its not a bad thing

It’s not a great thing imo.

The public doesn’t always get what they want and it’s a good thing sometimes

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I would call the LPC ending the Carbon Tax populism.

Changing the name and means of collection is not an end to the carbon tax.

 

[Halifax Tar]

It’s not a great thing imo.

The public doesn’t always get what they want and it’s a good thing sometimes

There is a quandary there. Should the political class deny the electorate their wants from their Governance? I am very two sided about this, I can see why it might be a good thing, and I can see how it could be abused.

 

[OldSolduer]

There is a quandary there. Should the political class deny the electorate their wants from their Governance? I am very two sided about this, I can see why it might be a good thing, and I can see how it could be abused.

Absolutely. This is why we have judges that overturn court decisions IMO that were properly made. To wit: The asshole that murdered three Mounties in Moncton was given three consecutive life sentences - a proper sentence. The Supreme Court said that was cruel and unusual punishment and reduced it to three concurrent life sentences. Never mind that the asshole never thought about the cruel and unusual punishment he doled out to the families of the Mounties.

Rant over.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Absolutely. This is why we have judges that overturn court decisions IMO that were properly made. To wit: The asshole that murdered three Mounties in Moncton was given three consecutive life sentences - a proper sentence. The Supreme Court said that was cruel and unusual punishment and reduced it to three concurrent life sentences. Never mind that the asshole never thought about the cruel and unusual punishment he doled out to the families of the Mounties.

Rant over.

Judges are just people and just as fallible as anyone else. I don't like the idea of leaving the ability to over turn electorally mandated legislation to the whims of an unelected judge, or an unelected senate for that matter. But I also don't put much stock in our judiciary, so my biases are probably in my way.

 

[Remius]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1889700750223086058

Interesting take. Might drive away some of his base that cross pollinate with US politics. But those might be locked in solid regardless.

 

[brihard]

Judges are just people and just as fallible as anyone else. I don't like the idea of leaving the ability to over turn electorally mandated legislation to the whims of an unelected judge, or an unelected senate for that matter. But I also don't put much stock in our judiciary, so my biases are probably in my way.

Without that, who would curb potential parliamentary excesses? To illustrate the point with an absurd example- say an LPC minority backed by an NDP with enough seats to pass legislation were to vote to fully criminalize participation in the Conservative Party of Canada. The safeguard against that is the Courts applying our section 2 Charter protections.

Remember that when the courts strike down a law it’s generally on Charter grounds; that’s still law Parliament itself passed. Parliament retains paramount over most of the frequently used sections of the Charter via the Notwithstanding clause.

We don’t always like the results, but generally it’s a pretty effective balance. When the courts strike something down, Parliament can usually, if it wishes, take the matter back up.

 

[Quirky]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1889700750223086058

Interesting take. Might drive away some of his base that cross pollinate with US politics. But those might be locked in solid regardless.

Hasn't he already supported tariffing the US? How do you "kick the living shit out of Trump and MAGA?". Canada is not in a position to make threats beyond retaliating economically.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Without that, who would curb potential parliamentary excesses? To illustrate the point with an absurd example- say an LPC minority backed by an NDP with enough seats to pass legislation were to vote to fully criminalize participation in the Conservative Party of Canada. The safeguard against that is the Courts applying our section 2 Charter protections.

Remember that when the courts strike down a law it’s generally on Charter grounds; that’s still law Parliament itself passed. Parliament retains paramount over most of the frequently used sections of the Charter via the Notwithstanding clause.

We don’t always like the results, but generally it’s a pretty effective balance. When the courts strike something down, Parliament can usually, if it wishes, take the matter back up.

I know it's faux pas in the great white north, but I would like to see judges be elected.

I'd settle even for just an elected SCC.

Incidentally, I also think the senate also needs to be elected or done away with.

I understand these aren't universally supported positions.

 

[Remius]

Hasn't he already supported tariffing the US? How do you "kick the living shit out of Trump and MAGA?". Canada is not in a position to make threats beyond retaliating economically.

I think his post has more to do with his last article on the subject. PP has a trump problem.

If he focuses on woke stuff, cutting all foreign aid, gutting the public service, deportations etc he may accelerate the polls away from him. That’s the stuff kinsellla is warning about.

Canadians are seeing the effects south of the border and the polling numbers may be a reflection of the hemorrhage that is happening.

 

[Remius]

I know it's faux pas in the great white north, but I would like to see judges be elected.

No thanks. Elected judges are the last thing we need. Catering to 4 year election cycles is bad enough as it is for policy. I’d go even harder the other way and enforce more training and career pathing to get there.

I'd settle even for just an elected SCC.

See above.

Incidentally, I also think the senate also needs to be elected or done away with.

That is something that should be done.

I understand these aren't universally supported positions.

 

[MrWhyt]

Elected judges are the last thing we need.

that just turns judges into politicians. I don't want their judgements swayed by what they think will get them the most votes.

 

[GR66]

I know it's faux pas in the great white north, but I would like to see judges be elected.

I'd settle even for just an elected SCC.

Incidentally, I also think the senate also needs to be elected or done away with.

I understand these aren't universally supported positions.

I'll vote a hearty Hell No for that one.

While there certainly may be some issues with how our judges are appointed (and the perceived political slant of some) I'd much rather have judges that are selected for their comprehensive understanding of the law and their ability to interpret the laws as written rather than judges that are elected based on their popularity.

If there are issues identified with the current selection process then fix them. Don't throw the apolitical baby out with the populist bathwater. We already have popularly elected partisan officials that write the laws. Let them be interpreted in their application by a non-partisan judiciary.

 

[Halifax Tar]

No thanks. Elected judges are the last thing we need. Catering to 4 year election cycles is bad enough as it is for policy. I’d go even harder the other way and enforce more training and career pathing to get there.

See above.

That is something that should be done.

I'll vote a hearty Hell No for that one.

While there certainly may be some issues with how our judges are appointed (and the perceived political slant of some) I'd much rather have judges that are selected for their comprehensive understanding of the law and their ability to interpret the laws as written rather than judges that are elected based on their popularity.

If there are issues identified with the current selection process then fix them. Don't throw the apolitical baby out with the populist bathwater. We already have popularly elected partisan officials that write the laws. Let them be interpreted in their application by a non-partisan judiciary.

Like I said, I know I'm an outlier here.

 

[dapaterson]

Like I said, I know I'm an outlier here.

Next we can let the Killicks elect the Chiefs.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Next we can let the Killicks elect the Chiefs.

The only Chiefs that would fear that have something to hide or be ashamed of.

Just like 360 review.

If you're worried the majority of your subordinates wouldn't elect you given the chance you probably need to do some soul searching.

 

[ArmyRick]

We don't want elected judges, bad outcomes from that in my view.

We need better written and more clearer laws. Thats up to politicians.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Rumour are the libs are going to call an election around Mar 10.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1889700750223086058

Interesting take. Might drive away some of his base that cross pollinate with US politics. But those might be locked in solid regardless.

It sounds like Kinsella's liberal brain cells are firing again. We don't need to be fear mongering. Trudeau is already doing that in spades.

And I'm pretty sure PP doesn't need speaking points from an opinion commentator.

 

[Remius]

Rumour are the libs are going to call an election around Mar 10.

Rumours for now but it would make sense.

It sounds like Kinsella's liberal brain cells are firing again. We don't need to be fear mongering. Trudeau is already doing that in spades.

It is Kinsella but he makes a good point given what is happening.

And I'm pretty sure PP doesn't need speaking points from an opinion commentator.

I am sure he will do exactly what he will do.

 

[ModlrMike]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1889700750223086058

Interesting take. Might drive away some of his base that cross pollinate with US politics. But those might be locked in solid regardless.

I'd be willing to bet their patriotism outshines their temporary affection for the man from the south.