22 Replies to “Poilievre and Peterson”

  1. Too long for me. One interesting note from people out here on Bancouver Island that I have talked to: They do not like Poilievre. When I ask them why they don’t really know except to say he looks too radical and too far right for them. They profess to be conservative but will not vote for him. They all like Charest and are going to vote for him, which really makes me think. They do not believe Canada is ready for a black woman leader so will not support Lewis. I told them that I can never vote for another Quebecer. I worked in Gatineau Quebec in National Defense for 11 years and have first hand knowledge as to just how corrupt the French Canadian politicians are. It is in their DNA. All one has to do is to look at what we have now.

    1. @jaymo: It’s the same everywhere. It’s because the great majority of the electorate was educated in neo-eco-Marxism. All Canadian high schools + universities are fully committed to this cancer. Plus, all media groomed and grooms the audience DAILY into the axiom that whatever Liberals/NDP say, must be good. I heard back in Andrew Scheer time, some lady from a downtown office Toronto: “who would vote for THAT?!?” Like Andrew Scheer was some Dracula. Whereas my impression of him was of a Pillsbury matured doughboy. Same with Erin theTool: election time was vilified by all media channels but after election, the msg was “actually he’s good for Conservatives, he shouldn’t be fired”. I think us-the minority are like Nada from They Live movie:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/They_Live#Plot

      We see their crap, we tell everyone what/why is wrong but pretty much everyone is groomed to be a slave and comply. Problem is that there’s no way we can make the great majority see what we see. In the movie they succeeded, in our reality I don’t see a way. Even this conversation between Poilievre and Peterson, no matter how decent and common sense and logical, it will not make a splash in Canada.

  2. “… as to just how corrupt the French Canadian politicians are… ”

    – And John Charest is perfectly representative of the breed. His own perks and power are the only things that have ever interested him.

  3. Michelle Rempel Garner /Patrick Brown – so ashamed of this candidate attacking PP on his support of Freedom Convoy. Anyone paying attention would know that Tamara and Chris said early in the convoy that Pat King did not represent them or this protest. MRG /PB you are obviously dishonest and desperate

    1. I used to really like her, she was my MP for a time before they redrew the riding boundaries. I am now represented by a hay bale painted blue.

      Lately though MRG has been sliding left and now into the greasy clutches of Brown.

      I always thought that MRG and PP would make a very strong team. Like Joly and Trudeau, except without the federally funded “vacations”. (shudder).

  4. This is the difference between O’Toole and Pollievre. O’Toole wanted to please the anti-Peterson crowd and declined the chance to be on this massive podcast.

    1. O’Toole doesn’t have the tools necessary to discuss intellectual topics with Peterson. He has no logical, intellectual, argument for his fascist imposition of COVID rules. Not to mention his slurring of The Truckers.

      1. O’Toole is just another ring knocker from Canada’s lakeside agōgē want-to-be.
        Freedom of speech is not a degree program there.

  5. Progressive Conservatives are nothing but placeholders for Liberals on those occasions when the electorate gets a bellyful of their arrogance and corruption. We had a decent PM in Harper, who came up through the trenches from Reform, but Stephen was dragging the dead-weight of an Eastern caucus more liberal than conservative.

    There is only one path for Canadian conservatives, and that involves separation. A new country from The Lakehead to interior BC and up to Alaska and the Arctic, armed with a constitution that absolutely forbids personal enrichment through government, would quickly become a world power and serve as the beacon of liberty and opportunity that USA once was.

    1. A new smaller easier to control country where civil war against the other will surmount your new found freedoms for your safety.

      Divide and Conquer

      Canada It’s West / East

      USA

      North
      ———
      South

      Works like a charm every time

      1. Russia controls most of the Arctic … perhaps Russia could cross the North Pole and extend their territory to include Southern Alberta and Saskatchewan? I suggest life and future prospects would be better as a Russian citizen than as a subject of Czar Trudeau.

        And it’s guaranteed the Canadian military would put up a weaker fight than the Ukrainians

  6. You know Pollievre is saying and doing all the right stuff by the direct attacks from MSM.

  7. Having a platform in no way makes them anything other than another talking head. Heads if you want the plural. Neither are the intellectual superior of many who post here on SDA.

    1. I have a question for him:
      “Will you declare the WEF a terrorist organization?”

  8. Canada will never reach it’s full potential until we get rid of the liberal party. this albatross around our necks has been around long enough

  9. Canada only exists because “upper” and “lower” Canada hated the Americans more than they hated each other.
    The colonies of the west are there only to plunder and abuse.

Navigation