Justin Trudeau is just not that into you

The MyDemocracy.ca farce and how Canada’s boyfriend suddenly lost interest in us


 
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau leaves the stage following a discussion on women's leadership, Thursday, November 24, 2016 in Monrovia, Liberia. (Adrian Wyld/CP)

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau leaves the stage following a discussion on women’s leadership, Thursday, November 24, 2016 in Monrovia, Liberia. (Adrian Wyld/CP)

This week, the federal government channelled Cosmopolitan with the launch of MyDemocracy.ca. Instead of a “What’s your sex style?” quiz, however, Canadians got to determine their “democracy style”—whether they’re “innovators,” “co-operators,” “pragmatists,” “challengers” or “guardians,” each described like a horoscope, but with less science.

The farcical project, billed as “an innovative way to join the national conversation on electoral reform,” is neither interactive nor focused on electoral reform: participants aren’t even asked which voting system they’d prefer. How the information will be marshalled is unknown. Backlash, in the House of Commons and on social media, was swift.

The reaction isn’t only to Liberal backtracking on a topic in equal parts glaze-inducing, fractious and vital. The episode also appears to mark a tipping point in Justin Trudeau’s avatar as the nation’s progressive, swoon-worthy boyfriend. Suddenly, he’s the guy who orders for his date without asking what she wants then ignores her ensuing protest.

It was Trudeau who raised the electoral reform “conversation,” unbidden, during the election campaign. He promised 2015 “will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system.” He vowed to “make every vote count,” a vow that suggested support for proportional representation (PR), a system under which the percentage of seats a party receives more closely mirrors the popular vote. Certainly, there’s been much electoral reform busy-work: Minister of Democratic Institutions Maryam Monsef toured the country; an all-party committee heard from some 200 experts and delivered a 333-page report recommending PR, to be decided by a national referendum.

More from Anne Kingston: How 2016 became the year of the ‘nasty woman’

Yet with a Liberal majority (based on 39.6 per cent of the vote), gears shifted; electoral reform is now portrayed as complex and overwhelming—even “radical,” to use a favoured talking point. The putative quest for fairer representation has summoned the more autocratic qualities of a “sunny ways” government—one that favours a stacked ballot system, does not want a referendum and now talks of reaching “consensus” with the clock ticking. In October, the PM told Le Devoir that “the motivation to want to change the electoral system is less urgent,” given how delighted Canadians are with his government. Last week, Monsef mocked and misrepresented her own committee’s work in the House while flouting its no-props rule: she held up a paper containing the Gallagher Index, a calculation used to gauge a voting system’s proportionality, calling it “an incomprehensible formula” as if it were the national homework assignment from hell.

Electoral reform isn’t the Liberals’ first reversal or backpedal on election promises—that list includes pledges made to First Nations, to lead on climate change, to clean up cash-for-access fundraising. But it was the most symbolically freighted gesture of a candidate who operates superbly on the level of symbolism. Yes, there was opportunism in Trudeau bogarting a long-time NDP platform, but the electoral reform promise also cemented him as a “real change” politician willing to shatter a first-past-the-post model that benefits big parties like the Liberals. It was more than symbolism, of course: electoral reform, PR particularly, has been proven to result in more diversity and greater female representation.

Now the nation’s boyfriend appears to be manifesting the same stonewalling, talking-point-reliance and dismissal-of-evidence tendencies that saw the last guy dumped. In a meeting with the Toronto Star, Trudeau called the electoral reform quiz “a fun little questionnaire that gets into values rather than models, to help us see if there are underlying principles and things that Canadians all agree on broadly that can drive a solution for electoral reform.” Yet Canadians have already agreed broadly: close to 63 per cent voted Liberal, NDP, Green or Bloc; all support electoral reform. In the past, the sight of the PM shirtless or doing push-ups for a good cause would have saved the day and summoned international envy. But Trudeau’s Instagrammable goodwill is running dry of late between his cringe-inducing encomium to Fidel Castro and pipeline approvals that shredded his eco cred. Inattention has become another concern; new stats indicate the PM is more absent than not for question period; he wasn’t present to witness Monsef’s blowout last week or for the ensuing furor this week.

But if a government can subject a nation to a loaded Cosmo-style quiz on electoral reform, it’s only reasonable that the country can turn for its political guidance to a 2004 dating bestseller, one that famously instructed women to heed a fellow’s actions, not his words. The advice is equally relevant dealing with a politician’s apparent cynical hypocrisy toward a bold election platform that made a nation fall for him (along with the vow to legalize pot). And unless there’s an unexpected policy reversal, it’s the only takeaway, as heartbreaking as it may be: Canada, Justin Trudeau is just not that into you.


 

Justin Trudeau is just not that into you

  1. Another jilted lover, bewitched, beguiled and bewildered. It only benefits fringe parties who feel its the path to victory, even the cons love this idea, as long as they are not in government. I know if electoral reform doesn’t see the light of day again, it won’t be a heartbreaker for me, it’s not going to improve my life, or help pay for my healthcare, and it isn’t going to build roads. I don’t think NDP voters, voted for Trudeau because of electoral reform, I think most of the NDP vote went to Trudeau because Mulcair turned into Harper, and if their is anything the NDP didn’t want for the next 4 years, was ‘Harper’ and ‘Austerity’, two words that made the progressives in the NDP cringe. I’m sure most will come to terms with this over time, after all relationships can be rocky at times, this is only a little tiff, time heals all.

    • I’m curious, has the author of this article ever been to Cuba for a vacation or any other visit besides research, or any friends or family, and if so, does the author rag on their family or friends who have been to Cuba. I find this Cuba thing a little like the Birth Control thing in the Catholic Church, Catholics will rail against the birth control pill, but they don’t mind taking it, Hypocrites.. Half of this country have dipped their toes in the sands of Cuba, I hope their conscience doesn’t bother them, Hypocrites.

      • You do understand that it was Castro who allowed The U.S.S.R to install nuclear missiles on Cuban territory? Trudeau’s senior’s bromance with Castro was strategic. Justin simply used that for political gain in Quebec.

        • Have you or family members or even your friends been to Cuba in the lives, if so, i hope you made it clear to them about Mr. Castro, Hypocrite. I bet you were in Cuba for a holiday, you Hypocrite. The cons didn’t mind Castro, i have seen many pictures of Con members in smiling selfies with Raul, and i wonder how many NDP party members and PMs soaked their toes in the sandy beaches of Cuba. Your all alike.

          • a trip to cuba does not equate to praise for Castro. In fact, it is one of the few ways to actually help the Cuban people.
            .
            Trudeau thinks Castro was a ‘swell guy’
            .
            And no, I’ve never been to Cuba.

        • Please deal with the facts instead using empty words and attacks.
          Explain why PM’s approval rating is higher now then when he was elected a year ago?
          Even in Alberta his approval rating is over 32%!!
          With new income tax rates my wife and I pay $680 less income tax under Liberal Government.

          • But how much more will you pay for other taxes? And lower taxes for a few, isn’t going to pay down the interest on all the money Turdeau is throwing at other countries.

        • So what if Cuba allowed that 65 years ago!! USSR is gone 18 years ago.
          Why do not you condemn Germany, Turkey, Italy and Rumania for allowing US to install nuclear bombs in their countries, close to Russia?
          Double standards or what?

          • Thats where i have a problem with your response DC Toronto, if we didn’t have open skies with Cuba, you wouldn’t be able to Help the people, and if people are that concerned about Cuba, they should be protesting in from of Travel agencies who sell off these trips, instead of going to Cuba and soaking up the sun, and hoping it helps the people. It helps Castro more than the people. The money spent in Cuba, goes in Castro’s treasury, in fact you are feeding the Castro regime, so your response is a little bit of a stretch.

        • And you realize that, prior to the Cuba thing, the Turks allowed the Americans to install nuclear missiles, pointed at Russia, in their country? Without anybody bringing the world to the ‘brink of nukuler annihilation’ over that? They were , quietly removed (as part of the Cuban settlement, eh) leaving behind a bunker full of nuclear bombs – which came very much into the news last year when the Turks (temporarily) closed (and seemed that they might take over) the US airbase at Incirlik.

    • You must not be a Conservative voter in Toronto or the east. You must not be a Liberal voter in most of the west, you must not be a Green voter outside of Saanich–Gulf Islands. Political parties by and large aren’t fans. Because it is for the voters. Power to the voters instead of the parties? No, we can’t have that! Remember, every political party dreams of the day when they too can be against proportional representation.

      • I don’t care about Greens, Grits and Cons, I’m telling you the pulse of the country, and the pulse of the country is beating hard for the direction, its going in now. Single parents with young children love this guy, he has made their lives less complicated with the burden of tax free baby bonus, no other government has ever topped that. The other parties are going to have to find quite the sound system to replace it, and if single mothers and dads feel another new government want to take it away from them, i think them moms and dad voters will have their say, and that sir or madam is the pulse of the country, and just to add, i know a lot of rig workers who love this new tax break under $200,000, i hear that heartbeat again, can you? I bet they don’t care about electoral reform, i bet half don’t even care. As long as economy is working for these people, Trudeau will be around for a long time to come. The only weakness Trudeau could fall prey to, is, Complacency and Cronyism, taking voters for granted.

        • Carpet Bomber your so drunk on the kool aid you don’t know which way is up. Your so lost in your own bubble your hopelessly lost. Justin won by making all kinds of promises to people he couldn’t possibly keep. He was the candy man bringing everyone cake and candy and voters foolishly believed him. I think Justin started to believe his own bs. Now the banal reality of running the country has exposed him for who he is—a mediocre drama teacher who is in over his head.

          • And the Harper government or the NDP party weren’t handing out candy during the last election were they, where were you to, your the one drinking the kool aid. Trudeau is a politician like any of them, and not a magician, it takes time to deliver all promises, and sometimes it takes two terms just to get the smell of the last government out. Tell me, who is your choice, Mad Dog Mulcair, or Wallflower Steve. Besides some of the promises Trudeau was offering, one important message he was telling Canadians , i am not Steve Harper, or Tom Mulcair, and no, i won’t put Canadians through 4 more years of Austerity, BINGO! As i have said many times, fringe parties, or parties that have lost an election would love electoral reform, just to get some skin back in the game again. Liberals would be shooting themselves in the foot to give into this electoral reform, it would be political suicide, for any party that is in government, Trudeau got caught up in populist politics for a moment when he promised this piece of wasted policy, and i would say their may be more promises broke, yet to come, So keep the Kleenex on hand, you still may need it. Jilted lovers go through a lot of Kleenex.

    • Though I traditionally vote Liberal, it was late in the electoral cycle before I decided to go Liberal over NDP. Harper was well past his “best before” date, but Trudeau’s support of, and promised half-measures to change, C-51 had me seriously leaning NDP.

      It was pretty clear that Trudeau was over-promising, and would likely end up under-delivering. But his promise of electoral reform was a key promise in swinging my vote back to the Libs.

      If he breaks this one, I’ll likely park my vote elsewhere next election. This is one of a few promises that are deal-breakers if not kept. It’s not looking good for several others either.

      I have come to the conclusion Trudeau made this promise thinking the best he could hope for would be a minority government, which would require him to work with other parties anyway. But now that FPTP has given him a majority, he’s liking the taste of power & thinking he can do it a second time. So, time to ditch reform. He’ll likely find that to be a major blunder.

      With the way things have been going lately, he’d better hope the Cons and NDP pick real losers for leaders, or he could wind up a one-term PM.

      • NDP will never form government federally, it’s just not going to happen, they are a left party, if they tilt too much to the center, the far left side of the party will move to the Green, Green will never win, and from the look at last nights leadership race in the Conservative party, Trudeau looks good for at least 2023-24, actually i think Trudeau would like to surpass his father as the longest serving PM, and it looks good for him to get there. The NDP will always be a round to help the conservatives by trying to stick a wedge between each other, when they should be thinking about joining the liberals(after Tom leaves), it would be the only way that any of the NDP MPs will ever know what it feels like to be in government. Question for you is, and be honest, don’t be silly, Who in this country could ever take the NDP to government in the next election, seriously now, and don’t say Nathan Cullen, he is not a leader, he is a follower and the NDP just doesn’t have anyone, in or out of their caucus with the kind of charisma and character, and even the connection that Trudeau has with the country. The conservatives were trying to create buzz with their leadership race last night, and i had all i could do to find a story on it, online today, it was like watching a revival of the Harper government, i mean none of them, not one tried to distant themselves from Harper, so it will take a lot of work to get the smell of Harper off of them. Once the pot gets passed, Trudeau will have the throttle on the throats of the other 2 parties, cons don’t want legal weed, and the NDP want decriminalization. Once the weed starts to flow, Canadians are not going to want to go back to the old dinosaur days of zero to.

        • Wow C.B. what on Earth are you mixing with your KoolAid.

        • Trudeau will be a one term PM! When people do their taxes and realize that none of those supposed tax benefits are actually benefits, he will be gone. He gives with one hand and takes away double with the other. He is worse than his father and that is saying something.

  2. Another biased MacLean story, I certainly can’t call it reporting.

    • Kingston isn’t a reporter.

  3. ‘He vowed to “make every vote count,” a vow that suggested support for proportional representation (PR)’

    Well, to be fair, the preferential ballot can also be said to make every vote count, as one doesn’t have to worry about ‘wasting’ one’s vote on a preferred candidate/party that is unlikely to win.

    • Ranked Ballots is a form of PR. The media is going full propaganda on the issue, and is being extremely hypocritical. the mydemocracy survey is excellent, but various groups don’t like that it is objective and comprehensive, rather than being a simple question of ‘do you want a referendum?,’ or adding up to a specific form of PR. The mydemocracy survey is smart, and allows a person to precisely present their position, not the Liberal party’s, on how they think elections should be in Canada.

      • p65 of ERRE committee Report to Parliament: Ranked Ballots in Single-Member Constituencies..
        shortcoming of the use of ranked ballots in single member constituencies is that it is a majoritarian system (not a proportional representation system where every vote counts).

        p68 of ERRE
        ‘The alternative vote (aka ranked ballot) is not a kind of PR and the outcomes it produces are not that different from first past the post, really, so in some ways I think it would be a huge amount of effort to achieve very little if Canada had a really strong deliberative process and then simply moved to the alternative vote. It wouldn’t make a great deal of difference.
        Yes, I think so, because the results of Australian elections tend to be just as disproportional as elections in Britain or Canada, for example. You don’t get very close proportionality, and in particular the smaller parties really lose out systematically’

        • Proportionality is a red herring. Good governance is what the nation is seeking, A preferential ballot makes sure that each voter’s preference is considered to get to the choice of representation the voter intends.

      • Ranked ballots are not and never will be PR. Ranked ballots are a way for the most centrist party to always win because if they aren’t choice #1, they will be always be #2. Ranked ballots got Alberta Ed Stelmach because he was #2. They don’t get voters the best choice. In a tight race, they get you second choice. How did Dion win the leadership of the Libs? Ranked ballot.

      • The Mydemocracy survey is excellent??!! Smart??!! It’s a long-winded bag of uselessness. You haven’t done it have you?

        • I have done it and I think the survey is excellent. You are free to differ but your opinion is no better than mine. Sorry to spoil your self-indulgence.

        • I thought the survey was very good as well.

          • hahahahahah –
            And do you think horoscopes are for real? And that the Bachelor, 90m day Fiance, or other similar reality shows, are real life??

  4. No matter how goofy you think the quiz is at least it has people talking about electoral reform.

    We also have to keep in mind in this day and age of hacking any ‘direct’ question survey result would be questionable.

    Do I think they could have done a better job? Yup. I will give them credit for trying.

    That whole Castro thing was a cluster fuck.

  5. The more the public ascribes supernatural powers to its leader, the more will be the disappointment when the leader inevitably fails to live up to those superhuman expectations.
    Last year’s Federal election turned out to be nothing more than “a beauty contest”.
    So what we ended up with a winner who was brawn rather than brains. Which brings us to today’s sober second thoughts about our PM.
    I can’t wait until Next January when President Trump figuratively takes the immature Justin Trudeau over his knee and administers a good spanking.

  6. Next time don’t elect a “boyfriend,” elect a leader.

    Don’t voted based on looks and last name, vote based on experience, character and proven abilities.

    Just a thought.

    • Given the opposition parties and their candidates; I feel just fine with what we have.
      And , no, I didn’t vote for a ‘boyfriend”. I voted for change, and a reversal of the policies of the past eight years.

      • You voted to be sold out to the global 1’%ers, who Trudeau is inviting and welcoming with open arms, to asset-strip Canadian infrastructure using out own money with his privatization bank, and weigh Canadians down with tolls and user fees, rentier income streams flowing to the global 1%.

        That is his economic plan.

      • Funny thing Peg. You voted for change but you got the same thing all over again. Trudeau admires despots. He admired Harper and now he acts just like him.

      • Well, too bad you didn’t get it…

      • Are you disappointed that “Real Change” apparently includes approval of Conservatives pipelines, the Conservatives emissions targets, the Conservative’s planned health care transfers, and no electoral reform?

        • Yea plus selling even more arms to the Saudis than the Conservatives promised.

    • You speak of experience, character and proven abilities. Yet Harper had none of these. Although obtaining a degree in economics, and then abandoning the field to become a career politician without spending more than a few months working at an actual job, is an ability of sorts. Just not one most people want in a leader.

  7. Let’s just skip the propaganda spin on this subject. The MyDemocracy survey is obviously excellent, and allows everyone to perfectly express what their preference is for Canada’s electoral system.

    Some people appear to be confused by the presentation, because, rather than presenting blunt questions of ‘FPTP or PR?,’ or ‘referendum or no?,’ the survey questions smartly find which aspects of all systems people are most wanting, and avoids pre-determined partisan answering, by giving context for the different aspects of a potential electoral system.

    The MyDemocracy questions add up to either a FPTP system, or some form of PR, and produce a deeper understanding of the perspectives behind the preferences, while not coercing a person towards a particular outcome: A person is able to place their agreement-level as any of strongly-agree / somewhat-agree / neutral / somewhat-disagree/ strongly-disagree.

    There really is nothing missing from the mydemocracy survey, it just isn’t as blunt about gathering the information as some people expect – which I think is for the sake of getting a well-considered and not a pre-determined response to a loaded question, such as: ‘FPTP or PR?’

    For example, someone who wants FPTP would not agree with:

    “It is better for several parties to have to govern together than for one party to make all the decisions in government, even if it takes longer for government to get things done.”

    “It should always be clear which party is accountable for decisions made by government, even if this means that decisions are only made by one party.”

    “Voters should be able to express multiple preferences on the ballot, even if this means that it takes longer to count the ballots and announce the election result.”

    “A party that wins the most seats in an election should still have to compromise with other parties, even if it means reconsidering some of its policies.”

    And a person who wants FPTP would have clear choices in response to:

    “A government where one party governs and can make decisions on its own OR a government where several parties have to collectively agree before a decision is made?”

    “One party governs and is solely accountable for policy outcomes OR several parties must cooperate to govern and they share accountability for policy outcomes?”

    “Ballots should be as simple as possible so that everybody understands how to vote OR ballots should allow everybody to express their preferences in detail?”

    And under the list of priorities, a person who wants FPTP would be inclined to select:

    “Governments that can make decisions quickly”

    “Ensuring the voting process is easy to understand”

    “Governments that can easily be held accountable by voters”

    And a FPTP person would be disinclined to choose as priorities:

    “Governments that collaborate with all parties”

    “Allowing voters to express a wide range of preferences when voting”

    “Increasing the presence of smaller parties in Parliament”

    … and other things.

    And if a person who thinks they want FPTP actually agrees with some of those things, then they don’t actually completely want FPTP, because those things are not present in FPTP, anymore than cake is present in a glass of water. If a person wants a glass of water, but answers these types of questions that what they want contains flour, icing, maybe some fruit, and a candle on top, then that’s not a glass of water that they’re thinking of, and is closer to being cake.

    • Is it true one can vote as many times as one wants to on this online survey? If so, doesn’t that skew the results somewhat? What is wrong with a referendum? Why does Trudeau suddenly doubt that Canadians know what they want? Would it be because his Committee report indicated that they do? We know how ranked ballots work. Most political parties use them. They suck.

      • A person can re-take the survey, though there’s no indication of whether their second results will overwrite their first results or not. However, obviously, there are often multiple eligible voters living in a single house, and so there should be a way for each eligible voter to take the survey without being disallowed to participate in the survey because someone else from their IP address already took the survey.

        I haven’t heard anything about Ranked Ballots sucking. As a form of PR, they sound like they’re the most decisive, and don’t favour any party, but give the most power to the electorate to change governments if there’s a general dissatisfaction with the incumbent one.

        • Alrighty so there are a few problems with whether or not the same person is giving repetitive opinions vs. Multiple eligible voters in a single household with this survey. Why not just have a referendum? No question of whether it is one person giving repetitive opinions or multiple eligible voters. As for your not hearing about ranked ballots sucking….sorry didn’t you hear how Ed Stelmach, Allison Redford and Stephane Dion all got elected to lead their respective parties…ranked ballots. They do suck. Canadians were asked about what they want by a committee established by the government. Canadians want proportional representation, not ranked ballots. Libs know the difference. That is why they are fretting over the whole issue.

    • To state the obvious, your comment “The MyDemocracy survey is obviously excellent, and allows everyone to perfectly express what their preference is for Canada’s electoral system” sounds an awful lot like empty propaganda.

      • To state the obvious, your denigrating a genuine and substantiated comment as propaganda because it supports a position that isn’t your own sounds an awful lot like empty propaganda.

        • Have another glass of kool aid.

  8. What questions should the survey have asked? The ones the multi-party Electoral Reform Committee wanted asked, the ones they already asked online: Should the number of seats held by a party reflect the proportion of votes cast for that party? They got 71% yes, 17% no. Should we change the system? 70% yes, 27% no. Should no one party hold a majority of seats? 54% said yes, 28% no.
    The well-researched 318-page Report of the multi-party committee includes “Recommendation 12. Observation: The Committee acknowledges that, of those who wanted change, the overwhelming majority of testimony was in favour of proportional representation.” So the choice is between FPTP and PR.
    But instead the Ministry is distracting attention away from the multi-party Committee Report.
    Justin Trudeau, to his credit, is still saying he intends to keep the promise. Please, do it.

  9. Good article. We need proportional representation, just like in New Zealand, Germany, etc. etc. The first-past-the-post guys are the Empire boys in UK/US/Canada. Time to quit that club. We need a future world. JT *IS* sadly like the guy that turned out not to be boyfriend material, not at all.

    • I don’t have any privacy so I don’t give a fuck. Thump, thump, thump.

      Stay Out Of My House.

  10. Excellent article and bang on; Trudeau has lost interest in us. The party beckons.

    Regarding Castro, it is beautiful irony that Trudeau’s cash for access fundraising with millionaires and billionaires, are exactly the people Castro kicked out of Cuba.

    Mydemcracy.ca is designed to confuse, frustrate and distract. I’ll take the committees word any day.

  11. Over here (on PEI) we were given a direct referendum…. having gone through the effort of learning about the different options and placing my vote…. I (we) were told the turn out wasn’t good enough… and they advocated for the people who didn’t vote. Assuming they would have overwhelmingly voted differently.

    Anyway, we were told, “next time, we will have a binding referendum”…. seriously, I’m not surprised that political parties back away from their promises. They all tend to do it.

    But, as a tax payer myself, I think if they run on campaign promises and back away from the majority of them…. the electorate should have some big red button that we can push to hold them accountable.

    A big transparency button. Show us your data, show us your studies, show us what you’re making your decisions with….. because we don’t like being lied to anymore. Heck, it’s costing us a lot of $$.

  12. 39.5 % according to the Elections Canada Official Website!!

  13. Elsewhere on this web site there is an interview with someone who explains very well what the survey is trying to achieve and why it is helpful to do. I did the survey and it is helpful – to me. It helps me understand some of the key trade-offs for these different voting systems. Anne Kingston has it wrong and worse, she is misinformed and ignorant. I look forward to her apology when she realises how messed up her article is. Unless, of course, she is just a little too invested in her opinion.

  14. “He vowed to “make every vote count,” a vow that suggested support for proportional representation (PR), a system under which the percentage of seats a party receives more closely mirrors the popular vote.”
    If a falsehood is repeated often enough, people believe it. And it is with this house built on sand, this house, divided against itself on partisan lines, for electoral reform, that Canada decides its future. The consequence would be to replace the representative principle with the partisan principle. This would make another know-nothing democracy more of a party oligarchy.
    Google: ERRE>Work>Electoral Reform>Briefs) namely, BC Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform (September 23).
    Richard Lung.
    Website: Democracy Science; with links to 3 free e-books on election method: Peace-making Power-sharing; Scientific Method of Elections; Science is Ethics as Electics.

  15. Ordering your 2017 model from Justin’s dealership gets you the political color de jure, not what you ordered doesn’t it? There’s lots filled with red cars at the factory awaiting shipment.

  16. Would l’il potato dare to toss incompetent ministers under a bus? In spite of how bad Freeland and Monsef are, l’il potato is a feminist and will tolerate any disasters from them.

  17. The feeling is mutual.

  18. Editor:

    I participated (presumably by random pick) in a meeting in a series of cross-Canada meetings as organized, conduct and hosted by “Project Tessera” (fact check: Google it) in an apparent attempt to define, organize and systemize if not prioritize “Canadian values”.

    Now it is starting to look like this is an effort to define “politically correct” Canadian values, so that it can be studied and used by ivory tower intellectuals and stuffed-shirt bureaucrats if not our “political elite for mathematical “statistical”, reasoning purposes.

    It seems more than obvious will be that there will be a lot more political, confusing, incomprehensible “Greek” involved, rather than mathematical “Greek” when the data is finally analysed. and results published.

    Umm, since when does freedom of conscience, if not thought, opinion, expression and belief bow down to “political correctness?”

    When does political correctness start to become tyrranny? Especially if any attempt is made to impose it politically . . .

    This amorphous whole called “Canadian values” is a function of some 33 million individual Canadian citizen’s values; which are very much like anybodies’ very simple “human” values, (not legal rights) anywhere else in the world.

    It is just so 2016 now . . . Today In Canada, if you need permission, legally or otherwise, to exercise your conscience, you simply do not have one.

    When we realize what that means, nobody can ever take it way from us.

    In closing, best wishes and best regards to all

    Mr. Brian Leslie Engler,

  19. Stay at home mom Kelly Richards from New York after resigning from her full time job managed to average from $6000-$8000 a month from freelancing at home… This is how she done it
    sssssssssssssssbbbbbbbbbbbbbfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

    ❥❥❥❥❥❥❥ http://JobNews80.Com

  20. Stay at home mom Kelly Richards from New York after resigning from her full time job managed to average from $6000-$8000 a month from freelancing at home… This is how she done it

    sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

    ❥❥❥❥❥❥❥ http://JobNews80.Com

  21. Are ya kiddin’? Anybody who would ‘mellow’ the ambiance at a Canada Service Kiosk by installing a pot dispensing machine is a man of the people in my book. Imagine going into one of those where people looked like they were having a good time.