I just got an e-mail that said Dustin Van Vugt and a couple of board members have been fired over "accounting irregularities". The plot thickens.
Printable View
I just got an e-mail that said Dustin Van Vugt and a couple of board members have been fired over "accounting irregularities". The plot thickens.
Yea that was 2 days ago . Guess some of the party were unaware of the extra spending.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
Yes unfortunately, repeat performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
Yep! To the party faithful (like me) this is so frustrating,it's enough to set old folks to f........having sex.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
So let’s be clear....
The main reason the cons did not win a plurality of seats, despite having the popular vote. Was due to his catholic beliefs. Aka anti abortion, anti LBTQ. And, as a result, primarily, residents of the GTA, not being able to get past that, vote for him.
And that’s the parties fault?
/boggle
Call a spade a spade.
In Canada, it is illegal to discriminate against anyone, let alone a job applicant, for their religious beliefs.......
Yet, the so called left who spew platitudes about inclusion, spew vitriol towards bigots ( defined as intolerance towards others beliefs) etc etc....
Lets also be clear on this next point. Many people who, sorry many self centered bigots that couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Scheer, had the option of voting NDP. Instead the GTA still voted RED...despite all the brainfarts, embarrassments, SNC, hypocrisy, etc.
The problem is not “conservatives” nor who they choose as leaders.
The problem is the electorate
The problem will always be the electorate from the point of view of the losing side. Canada has changed a lot in the last 50 years. Population has concentrated in cities, rural communities have diminished with the demise of the family farm. Demographics have shifted in favour of the political left.
Nothing will really be fixed until it’s too late I’m afraid.
Pretty much hunter.
Take the Wynne party. Is it the Liberal parties “fault” they chose her leader, or the electorates fault they were re-elected following 2008?
JT?
I have no real issues with change/new leaders. Prefer it actually. The electorate can’t really be “blamed” when a party first comes in. Until a party has had a chance, any misgivings about them or the leader are purely supposition.
Scheer?
Maybe he’d turn out to be anti abortion, and attack women’s rights.
JT
In one term proved to be unfit.
Done, that’s all there is to it. Except the GTA, as they did here 2008-2016.....
I don't think we're admitting that the choice of a candidate or their popularity has a lot to do with their looks. These characters are groomed to appear just so in front of a television. If Sheer didn't have dimples and look like a teenager he'd have done better. Take Trudope for example. He sure wasn't voted in because of his brains.
Polls out yesterday saying Ambrose has the best “winnability”’.Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
Worded differently, if the cons want to win, she’s the best bet. For the same reasons Scheer had to go. The GTA.
So when you shine a different light on that, it’s not about records, or policies..it’s about shallow appearances...
And “whose” fault is that.
I'm pretty sure none of what you wrote will change any of their opinions. In the end, we have a society that is conducive to just saying what you need to get in office, because Lord forbid you have an opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by LoR