RaskolnikovsAxe

This is not entirely unlikely. And I would not prima facie be against this approach.

Except for the fact that the common people don't get nuance like this, and it just makes the division infinitely worse. The rest of Canada is going to consider Alberta to be traitors, and the part of Alberta that are traitors are going to get fired up with false hope, further stoking their hatred when they are inevitably let down.

Maybe this is the only way to get east west pipelines. Maybe there are pieces in place behind the scenes. Unfortunately I think it's unlikely to be this sophisticated, because Smith doesn't come across to me as a sophisticated thinker. I'm inclined to think the simpler explanation is that Smith is self serving and we really have rural Albertans who have grown up knowing nothing but hatred for eastern liberals, and they've been sold a bill of goods that they don't question and wouldn't understand if they did.

What do you believe this article is concluding? Do you think it's a completely objective and fair assessment of the topic?

Alberta went for many years benefiting from equalization. Saskatchewan just recently became a 'have' province after spending decades as a have not. Yes, both provinces were sucking off Ontario's tit while they were scratching dirt trying to feed themselves, and there were no complaints then...but now, conveniently when oil oligarchs started deciding the politics of those two provinces, now they become ungrateful assholes who want to keep all their money and not help anyone else. Fuck you, I got mine. A tale as old as time.

We need to nationalize oil and gas and start a proper sovereign wealth fund. Get the private money (especially US) out of there. As soon as we do that I bet all this division would fizzle out.

This can't be a real thing.

If they move it will raise the average IQ of both countries.

No kidding...this corpulent hemorrhoid is as soft as baby shit, what the fuck is he going on about?

The day Idi AnOrange Dada decides to shuffle off his mortal coil will be the day the world can start to heal. And it will be a long, long road, littered with a hopefully diminishing cadre of cultist partisans.

Yeah as I said in another thread, it's a Triumph for Diaperius Maximus.

Truly, America is a parody of itself.

I'm Canadian, with a family that's been in the military and fought in every war as far back as we trace our genealogy on the continent. United Empire Loyalists that separated from a New Jersey revolutionary family to move to Ontario.

Having said all of that, my comment was only meant to illustrate that even Canada, with a population and a manufacturing base a fraction of the US, bled more per capita. But not according to any American narritives, certainly not according to Trump and his cult.

Yeah, if we're being honest, Russia fought beyond the bounds of mere bravery, and sacrificed in numbers incomprehensible in the west. And their country is still suffering national PTSD from it.

Even Canada sacrificed more per capita than the US in both world wars.

The above may have been different if the US had been there from the beginning, rather than showing up two years late. Don't talk about bravery, brilliance and principle when you can't even be bothered to join the fight until after everyone is beat to a pulp. And if you do, try not to brag and boast for decades about how amazing you were.

You have to accept strength and bravery of the ordinary US soldiers

No argument there. My fathers family was in the military as far back as we can trace it reliably, on both sides of the border (United Empire Loyalists in New Jersey who split up their family of revolutionaries when they left for Ontario). I'll not disparage the bravery and sacrifice of the soldiery. I never intended that.

I just can't stand the disrespectful bullshit coming from Idi An Orange Dada. He's as soft as baby shit. And it's such a terrible image for America.

I would argue real democracy is incompatible with the current authoritarian version of conservatism, and obviously historical conservatism was created to support the monarchy, but modern conservatism is not necessarly the same as either of those, and can be reimagined. In fact I think it will necessarily need to do so, since it will face a reckoning after Trump. It has the opportunity to create a movement that can truly connect with the people.

I have a proposal for conservatives in Canada, that I offer legitimately in the spirit of getting the best for the country: Become the party of democracy. Ditch the crazies (and their reactionary grievance politics), and embrace electoral reform.

I know most people say electoral reform is the kiss of death for them, but I'm not sure I agree:

1. If they kick out the crazies, they will be a smaller party and their chances at holding SOME power will increase if we have some manner of PR or ranked ballot in place.
2. The Liberals have taken the patriotism brand from them (Poilievre was an idiot for giving that one up to them), but they can take the democracy brand from them easily if they shift their approach - especially since the Liberals have fumbled electoral reform so badly ("We will do what the Liberals couldn't do...because we're the party of democracy!"). It also gives them a patriotic 'foot in the door', since they can tie democracy to Canadian identity and fundamental Canadian values. Finally, it will distinguish them from the Republicans and the US in general, which is what they need to do right now.
3. When people make the claim that the Conservatives would suffer under electoral reform, the calculus assumes that voting habits don't change...but this is a foolish assumption, particularly in this case, since this maneuver would fundamentally shift the landscape
4. Conservatives would be rebranding entirely and would be perceived as a brand new party - truly the party of change.
5. Canadian Conservatives would set an example for right wing governments around the world
6. They would become a party truly back in the political centre, and would easily steal Liberals back to them.

None of this means they need to abandon their economic ideology, although they may find they need to tweak it.

HOWEVER - this would require:

1. Get rid of Poilievre and the others like him (Javani, etc.). They are toxic to good faith politics. They consider their opponents enemies, part of the out-group, and they will never be trusted enough to pull this off honestly. Also, this requires vision and an ability to unify people behind that vision - in other words, it requires leadership - and Poilievre is not a leader. He does not do vision or unity.
2. The Conservatives would need to accept and embrace the idea of coalition governments and minority governments, since they are fundamentally the most democratic type of government and would therefore be just as legitimate as majority governments.
3. They would need to actually care about democracy, and human rights, since they are fundamentally linked. This means a shift in policy towards indigenous and minority groups (thus why they need to ditch the crazies).

This isn't to say they wouldn't get a majority government ever (or indeed that no party ever would). In fact, I believe that the proper Conservative leader could do this in a way that would probably give them a good shot at a landslide victory in the next election. Carney has a very tough road ahead of him, but for sure the one thing that will help him get re-elected is the Conservatives digging in their heels and doing the same thing, but harder. They need to fundamentally change, and a change like this would give them the best fighting chance at looking like a trusted party to take Canada to a better place.