We have oil and endless pro-Palestine protests on parliament hill; sounds like a lock
Latest Canadian Lunacy
- Thread starter Cynllo
- Start date
I would argue Shik is a much higher quality Indian than ordinary Hindus. That said, Canadian culture may have completely infected their mindset with Talmudic Woke nonsense, ruining most or all of them.
Either way, they will never be Canadian; not the way I think of being Canadian anyway.
Last edited:
Alberta and Saskatchewan look based, but I understand they are pretty badly infected with wokes too. I'm surprised their electoral results are so strong.
Well they don't want to house feral Indians in -50c cold snaps. It's not like they're gonna poop outside.
Lots of talk of succession, hopefully the referendum will push through and get the ball rolling. Québec has already set a precedent for this years ago...
El Dorado
Other Christian
That's not really saying much. Having lived 4 years of my life in Abbotsford BC, which is infested with them, the only good thing I've found with them is that they hate Muslims.
Sikhs are the most tribal and communal of all south Asians, that's why Canadian politicians have to simp so much to them. In that sense they really are the least likely to integrate in the West, unlike upper caste Indian immigrants who intermarry (see Vance, Tulsi, Kamala, Haley etc).
100%. They hate the west and have been exploiting it for years. Time to give them a taste of their own medicine...
Now is the time for any western provinces to jump ship and join the US. Trump is the president to do it under in my opinion as well.
Based_Christian_Dude
Catholic
Well this was a strange week for Canada. I was talking with a few folks about the elections and a lot of them said they think Trudeau's policies were "okay" enough to tolerate despite the issues in their daily lives that they continued to vote for Liberal, and they were also afraid of the US. Personally, this election is a good contrast and an quasi-alternative history example of what happens if Kamala had won the US.
There's an active succession movement in Alberta from what I hear. It really gained huge resurgence during ruling of Trudeau the Tosser.
Alberta gets the attention because they have the bigger population and economy but I read a mainstream news article shortly before the election that said 30% of people from Saskatchewan would choose to leave Canada if Carney was elected.
Considering that another 30% of Canadas population are foreign born, and I’ll assume they would choose not to leave Canada since they chose to join Canada… that means something like 50% of real Canadians living in Saskatchewan are now ready to leave.
I get a kick out of the fact that migrants probably think Canada is still great while real Canadians can see the writing on the wall… migrants are still eager to come here and live in the decaying remnants of a white country while a large percentage of whites are eager to leave haha. The situation can get a lot worse in Canada and it will still be better than the countries their people built.
Things will be even worse if First Past the Post goes. The Conservatives and the Liberals, rivals as they are, nevertheless benefit the most from this format.
The only reason the Liberals have not tried to initiate a proportional system is because they’d have to share more power with the NDP and Greens.
No one should be surprised Canada is failing. 55-60% or 60%+ of the votes go to functionally leftwing parties. Pretty much always. Poilievre could have won 200 seats on Monday and the majority of Canadians would still be leftwing.
The UK and Australia have serious problems and electoral mandates are betrayed, but at least their voters can elect non-outright leftwing governments with a majority (by adding up the non-leftwing party vote totals).
Conservatives pretty much only ever have a shot in Canada because of a First Past the Post voting system.
Harper was the best Canada could hope for, and even when he got his seat majority in the Commons, the majority of actual votes went to leftist parties with fully stated leftwing views (Liberals/NDP/Greens) or a separatist party that captures secessionist leftwing and non-leftwing Francophones and votes leftwing in office (Bloc Quebecois).
In Australia by contrast, you conceivably have a majority of people voting for center-right to rightwing parties two out of every three elections.
Canadians can’t even pass this first hurdle.
The only reason the Liberals have not tried to initiate a proportional system is because they’d have to share more power with the NDP and Greens.
No one should be surprised Canada is failing. 55-60% or 60%+ of the votes go to functionally leftwing parties. Pretty much always. Poilievre could have won 200 seats on Monday and the majority of Canadians would still be leftwing.
The UK and Australia have serious problems and electoral mandates are betrayed, but at least their voters can elect non-outright leftwing governments with a majority (by adding up the non-leftwing party vote totals).
Conservatives pretty much only ever have a shot in Canada because of a First Past the Post voting system.
Harper was the best Canada could hope for, and even when he got his seat majority in the Commons, the majority of actual votes went to leftist parties with fully stated leftwing views (Liberals/NDP/Greens) or a separatist party that captures secessionist leftwing and non-leftwing Francophones and votes leftwing in office (Bloc Quebecois).
In Australia by contrast, you conceivably have a majority of people voting for center-right to rightwing parties two out of every three elections.
Canadians can’t even pass this first hurdle.
Last edited:
El Dorado
Other Christian
And yet, yesterday, Australia had its own federal election, in which Labor took ALL 150 seats in the House of Representatives and 40/76 seats in the Senate. And Australia doesn't have a FPTP system, but a ranked-choice system, so explain that...
If Alberta secedes, it will be the end of Canada. BC would follow, as it would be cut off from the rest of Canada. Saskatchewan would merge with Alberta, no question, and Manitoba might follow. The great majority of the population in what would be left over would be in Ontario, there would be tensions with Quebec, which could split, and if Quebec splits, the Maritimes would be isolated and under pressure to join the contiguous US (Maine). From there on, the US could play hardball and force both Ontario and Quebec to join as Ontario is landlocked and Quebec depends on the US market.
Whether this happens or not will depend on the political will and leadership on both sides of the border over the next 5-10 years. Carney would have to bend over for Alberta, even out provincial transfers and grant it privileges over its oil exports in order to stymie the nascent independence movement there.
Last edited:
It’s very easy to explain: I said every two out of three elections.
What exactly are you trying to critique me about?
Of the last 11 elections, the Coalition won seven (63.6%) and Labor four (36.4%). Labor winning in 2025 does not disprove what I said. A majority of both 1996- and 1945- elections have been won by the Coalition.
You are completely strawmaning what I actually said for reasons unbeknownst to me.
Also, the situation is bad but you are grossly exaggerating the number of seats Labor won. It was NOT 150/150 Labor wins in the House.
Where did you get this information from? They have taken 80-something so far in the House, with about 10% of seats to be decided. They will end up with around 90. The Labor/Greens/Teal vote will be around 100/150.
You are wrong about the Senate as well. Labor will have about 28 and the Greens 11-13 most likely. Still awful, but far from the 50+ Labor/Greens bloc of 76 that your 40 Labor Senate seats figure presumes.
El Dorado
Other Christian
My mistake; I merely misinterpreted something that I read online and was asking for clarification as I'm not that familiar with Australian politics/elections.
I was not trying to 'strawman' you. Automatically accusing a stranger who posed a question based on an admitted misunderstanding of 'strawmaning' you shows a degree of paranoia and persecution complex.
Your reply comes off as somewhat angry and unhinged. Uneccesarily putting things in bold-face is not far off from putting them in ALL CAPS...
I'll make you a deal: I won't say peep about anything to do with Australia if you agree to stay off of this Canadian thread (If you're not Canadian).
I'll pray for your troubled heart and soul.
I was not trying to 'strawman' you. Automatically accusing a stranger who posed a question based on an admitted misunderstanding of 'strawmaning' you shows a degree of paranoia and persecution complex.
Your reply comes off as somewhat angry and unhinged. Uneccesarily putting things in bold-face is not far off from putting them in ALL CAPS...
I'll make you a deal: I won't say peep about anything to do with Australia if you agree to stay off of this Canadian thread (If you're not Canadian).
I'll pray for your troubled heart and soul.
Last edited: