So the Cons rejected the idea of adopting a formal stance on climate change - as in not being willing to definitively state that it's a thing. It got voted down by a margin of 54 to 46. Looks like another 4yrs of Liberal rule.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-delegates-reject-climate-change-is-real-1.5957739
Posted by: syncro
So the Cons rejected the idea of adopting a formal stance on climate change - as in not being willing to definitively state that it's a thing. It got voted down by a margin of 54 to 46. Looks like another 4yrs of Liberal rule.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-delegates-reject-climate-change-is-real-1.5957739
Well hopefully the voting public is smart enough to stomp these turds though the shower grate in future elections, this is just fucking stupidity.
The shitty part is they are basically handing the next election to the Liberals which takes the pressure off of them to clean up their act. Who knows, maybe an NDP government in our lifetime?
Yeah good point, maybe a NDP opposition would work? Cons need to get their head out of the sand and accept the realities, no one but old farts give a fuck about social conservatism and denying science does nothing to convince younger voters that they are a viable alternative.
LOL
O'Toole also said he doesn't want Conservative candidates to be branded as "climate change deniers" in the next election campaign.
Maybe a start would be to not deny Climate Change as part of their party’s platform.
Hilarious post from the comment section of the CBC article:
What about the flat earth resolution? Did the Conservatives vote in favour of that one?
Posted by: Adam-West
Yeah good point, maybe a NDP opposition would work? Cons need to get their head out of the sand and accept the realities, no one but old farts give a fuck about social conservatism and denying science does nothing to convince younger voters that they are a viable alternative.
" One-time and possible future leadership contender Peter MacKay says the "stinking albatross" of Andrew Scheer's social conservative values cost the Conservatives the election. "
I love that line ^^ peter mackay wisely declined to run
Erin the Tool has a LOT of work ahead of him, he recently had to dump Derek Sloan a whacko-nut-job who had been a Con leadership hopeful, the Tool isnt going to form a government with whacko nut jobs cuz there are just not enough of them up here in Canada ,
Still these are the types of people coming out of the woodwork nowdays who feel they deserve to be heard whereas back in the day it was like yeah you can believe whatever you want you still don't get to run anything but the sunday service
The simple truth is that a fiscally conservative / socially centrist party with a pro-business / low deficit stance and a competent leader would do well in Canada but they just can't seem to get their shit together.
Moar gunz!
Three-sheets had a good point in reference to the fact that Canadian gun laws are quite a bit different that the ones in the US. Seeing as most of us on here live north of the 49, talking about what happens in the US wrt guns is mostly making noise. So what about our gun laws, do you think they strike a good balance or are they too strict or lax?
I thought they struck a decent balance with a few exceptions, including some transport regs and outright bans. I'd like to see some sort of long gun registry brought back - it's unfortunate the Liberals cocked it up so bad. Every firearm manufactured has a serial number so how hard can it really be to have a national database that tracks ownership?
Ask Zed for an indepth answer .
Protip.. .they already know which guns are registered to whom.
Posted by: syncro
Moar gunz!
Three-sheets had a good point in reference to the fact that Canadian gun laws are quite a bit different that the ones in the US. Seeing as most of us on here live north of the 49, talking about what happens in the US wrt guns is mostly making noise. So what about our gun laws, do you think they strike a good balance or are they too strict or lax?
I thought they struck a decent balance with a few exceptions, including some transport regs and outright bans. I'd like to see some sort of long gun registry brought back - it's unfortunate the Liberals cocked it up so bad. Every firearm manufactured has a serial number so how hard can it really be to have a national database that tracks ownership?
https://nsmb.com/forum/forum/nbr-not-biking-related-9/topic/guns-2381/?page=1
It’s all been covered here before
Posted by: three-sheets
Ask Zed for an indepth answer .
Protip.. .they already know which guns are registered to whom.
Registration doesn't equal ownership.
Posted by: Adam-West
Posted by: syncro
So the Cons rejected the idea of adopting a formal stance on climate change - as in not being willing to definitively state that it's a thing. It got voted down by a margin of 54 to 46. Looks like another 4yrs of Liberal rule.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-delegates-reject-climate-change-is-real-1.5957739
Well hopefully the voting public is smart enough to stomp these turds though the shower grate in future elections, this is just fucking stupidity.
LOL! Trudoh's still in right? /rhetorical
Posted by: syncro
Posted by: three-sheets
Ask Zed for an indepth answer .
Protip.. .they already know which guns are registered to whom.
Registration doesn't equal ownership.
Somehow it works for cars....besides, what whas the point of the registry any ways? To say, yeah, we didnt know he was going to flip out, but we did know about the old .303 he owned. . .
Posted by: three-sheets
Posted by: syncro
Posted by: three-sheets
Ask Zed for an indepth answer .
Protip.. .they already know which guns are registered to whom.
Registration doesn't equal ownership.
Somehow it works for cars....besides, what whas the point of the registry any ways? To say, yeah, we didnt know he was going to flip out, but we did know about the old .303 he owned. . .
I think it was more, "OK this guy flipped out and we have to pick him up. How many weapons are we up against when we get there?"
Forum jump:
