adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Politics

Pierre Poilievre: Rooted in Western Canadian Conservative Populism. Who does He Represent?

Published

 on

House of Commons to break for the holidays, return in January

Where do Pierre Poilievre’s loyalties lay? With those who support him financially and politically, or with Canadian citizens and the nation he wants to lead. Can it be both?

Poilievre has an ideology based on the Reform-conservative Tradition of Western Canada. Not a centralist, nor beholding to the urban centers of Canada, this man claims to represent those within our nation that are unrepresented by any other political party, those whose voice has been ignored, misunderstood, and misrepresented by the progressive forces that presently rule Canada. He claims to represent the little guy while racking in the millions of dollars donated to his party by corporations, businesses, and wealthy folk.

What is his plan of attack against the Liberals, but to attack the CBC, a Canadian Institution that does much that private broadcasters will not do, like represent and reach all areas of Canada? Does he institute new and innovative ideas that will protect Canadian Culture and create jobs? No, he wants to close the CBC down or at least sell it to one of Canada’s Communications multi-monopolies like Bell or Rogers. Conservatism with no grasp of what Canadians want, a movement that represents Big Corporations, believing in ideals of the past while ignoring the present.

Can Pierre represent the little guy while accepting truckloads of funds from the oil, agricultural and corporate sectors? Encana(Oil), TransCanada(Energy), Enbridge(Energy), TransAlta(Energy), and so on, with the names of many of Canada’s largest corporations, competing to donate their funds to who they believe may be Canada’s new Prime Minister very soon from now. Convoy donors gave the CPC over $406,000 during their leadership race, many in favor of the present leader. Pierre had many a selfie with these convoy participants, drawing upon any media attention he could get. Did Pierre call the immediate dismantling of the convoy protest with the immediate arrest of the convoy leadership? Not for 2-3 weeks. I guess he believes in the old adage “My enemies enemy is my friend. The convoy’s enemy was Prime Minister Trudeau, and the extraordinary – health protocols applied by the Liberal Administration. Instead of showing clear opposition against the protestor’s illegal actions, he showed hidden hushed support for them, hoping upon hope that the Liberal Administration’s popularity would be harmed.

Pierre Poilievre hopes to become Canada’s Trump, lifted to power through public grass-rooted support. Pierre Poilievre is not a Doug Ford. Not even close. Pierre is a true populist Conservative, owned by Western Canada’s Energy Sector, hoping to conserve this sector’s influence and economic power. Populism does not mean progressive folks, and he is not progressive. Doug Ford has been able to apply for progressive programs while attempting to remain fiscally grounded. Pierre Poilievre wishes to run the Canadian Government like a Corporation, and we know just how much corporations give a damn about the average Johnny Canuck eh? Look at your cost of living, with food, clothing, transportation, education, and basically, all costs skyrocketing upward. Who controls those costs by the way? Well, Pierre Poilievre’s good friends the corporations of Canada. Pierre says profit is not a bad word, and indeed it is not, but greed, inflation, and mass profiteering surely are, especially when the money taken/given comes from the public pocketbooks.

Pierre Poilievre’s insistence that Canadians rely entirely upon the creative momentum of private enterprise, to create jobs, and protect our environment and economic structure is simplistic at best. Lower taxes and less regulation he proclaims will grow our economy, all the while trusting corporations to carry out their business with the average Johnny Canuck always in mind, Canadian’s needs and wishes respected fully. Yeah, Right.

Political Conservatism: Committed to traditional values and ideas with opposition to change or innovation. Favoring views of “free enterprise”, private ownership, and socially traditional ideals.

Political Progressive: To make a better world. Progress from the old tired tried values to newer innovatively progressive ones, that are hopefully better than past ideals/methodology.

Note: sourced from Canada.ca, CRS, and Statistics Canada

Steven Kaszab
Bradford, Ontario
skaszab@yahoo.ca

Politics

Trump is consistently inconsistent on abortion and reproductive rights

Published

 on

 

CHICAGO (AP) — Donald Trump has had a tough time finding a consistent message to questions about abortion and reproductive rights.

The former president has constantly shifted his stances or offered vague, contradictory and at times nonsensical answers to questions on an issue that has become a major vulnerability for Republicans in this year’s election. Trump has been trying to win over voters, especially women, skeptical about his views, especially after he nominated three Supreme Court justices who helped overturn the nationwide right to abortion two years ago.

The latest example came this week when the Republican presidential nominee said some abortion laws are “too tough” and would be “redone.”

“It’s going to be redone,” he said during a Fox News town hall that aired Wednesday. “They’re going to, you’re going to, you end up with a vote of the people. They’re too tough, too tough. And those are going to be redone because already there’s a movement in those states.”

Trump did not specify if he meant he would take some kind of action if he wins in November, and he did not say which states or laws he was talking about. He did not elaborate on what he meant by “redone.”

He also seemed to be contradicting his own stand when referencing the strict abortion bans passed in Republican-controlled states since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Trump recently said he would vote against a constitutional amendment on the Florida ballot that is aimed at overturning the state’s six-week abortion ban. That decision came after he had criticized the law as too harsh.

Trump has shifted between boasting about nominating the justices who helped strike down federal protections for abortion and trying to appear more neutral. It’s been an attempt to thread the divide between his base of anti-abortion supporters and the majority of Americans who support abortion rights.

About 6 in 10 Americans think their state should generally allow a person to obtain a legal abortion if they don’t want to be pregnant for any reason, according to a July poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Voters in seven states, including some conservative ones, have either protected abortion rights or defeated attempts to restrict them in statewide votes over the past two years.

Trump also has been repeating the narrative that he returned the question of abortion rights to states, even though voters do not have a direct say on that or any other issue in about half the states. This is particularly true for those living in the South, where Republican-controlled legislatures, many of which have been gerrymandered to give the GOP disproportionate power, have enacted some of the strictest abortion bans since Roe v. Wade was overturned.

Currently, 13 states have banned abortion at all stages of pregnancy, while four more ban it after six weeks — before many women know they’re pregnant.

Meanwhile, anti-abortion groups and their Republican allies in state governments are using an array of strategies to counter proposed ballot initiatives in at least eight states this year.

Here’s a breakdown of Trump’s fluctuating stances on reproductive rights.

Flip-flopping on Florida

On Tuesday, Trump claimed some abortion laws are “too tough” and would be “redone.”

But in August, Trump said he would vote against a state ballot measure that is attempting to repeal the six-week abortion ban passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis.

That came a day after he seemed to indicate he would vote in favor of the measure. Trump previously called Florida’s six-week ban a “terrible mistake” and too extreme. In an April Time magazine interview, Trump repeated that he “thought six weeks is too severe.”

Trump on vetoing a national ban

Trump’s latest flip-flopping has involved his views on a national abortion ban.

During the Oct. 1 vice presidential debate, Trump posted on his social media platform Truth Social that he would veto a national abortion ban: “Everyone knows I would not support a federal abortion ban, under any circumstances, and would, in fact, veto it.”

This came just weeks after Trump repeatedly declined to say during the presidential debate with Democrat Kamala Harris whether he would veto a national abortion ban if he were elected.

Trump’s running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, said in an interview with NBC News before the presidential debate that Trump would veto a ban. In response to debate moderators prompting him about Vance’s statement, Trump said: “I didn’t discuss it with JD, in all fairness. And I don’t mind if he has a certain view, but I don’t think he was speaking for me.”

‘Pro-choice’ to 15-week ban

Trump’s shifting abortion policy stances began when the former reality TV star and developer started flirting with running for office.

He once called himself “very pro-choice.” But before becoming president, Trump said he “would indeed support a ban,” according to his book “The America We Deserve,” which was published in 2000.

In his first year as president, he said he was “pro-life with exceptions” but also said “there has to be some form of punishment” for women seeking abortions — a position he quickly reversed.

At the 2018 annual March for Life, Trump voiced support for a federal ban on abortion on or after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

More recently, Trump suggested in March that he might support a national ban on abortions around 15 weeks before announcing that he instead would leave the matter to the states.

Views on abortion pills, prosecuting women

In the Time interview, Trump said it should be left up to the states to decide whether to prosecute women for abortions or to monitor women’s pregnancies.

“The states are going to make that decision,” Trump said. “The states are going to have to be comfortable or uncomfortable, not me.”

Democrats have seized on the comments he made in 2016, saying “there has to be some form of punishment” for women who have abortions.

Trump also declined to comment on access to the abortion pill mifepristone, claiming that he has “pretty strong views” on the matter. He said he would make a statement on the issue, but it never came.

Trump responded similarly when asked about his views on the Comstock Act, a 19th century law that has been revived by anti-abortion groups seeking to block the mailing of mifepristone.

IVF and contraception

In May, Trump said during an interview with a Pittsburgh television station that he was open to supporting regulations on contraception and that his campaign would release a policy on the issue “very shortly.” He later said his comments were misinterpreted.

In the KDKA interview, Trump was asked, “Do you support any restrictions on a person’s right to contraception?”

“We’re looking at that and I’m going to have a policy on that very shortly,” Trump responded.

Trump has not since released a policy statement on contraception.

Trump also has offered contradictory statements on in vitro fertilization.

During the Fox News town hall, which was taped Tuesday, Trump declared that he is “the father of IVF,” despite acknowledging during his answer that he needed an explanation of IVF in February after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos can be considered children under state law.

Trump said he instructed Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., to “explain IVF very quickly” to him in the aftermath of the ruling.

As concerns over access to fertility treatments rose, Trump pledged to promote IVF by requiring health insurance companies or the federal government to pay for it. Such a move would be at odds with the actions of much of his own party.

Even as the Republican Party has tried to create a national narrative that it is receptive to IVF, these messaging efforts have been undercut by GOP state lawmakers, Republican-dominated courts and anti-abortion leaders within the party’s ranks, as well as opposition to legislative attempts to protect IVF access.

___

The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Saskatchewan Party’s Scott Moe, NDP’s Carla Beck react to debate |

Published

 on

 

Saskatchewan‘s two main political party leaders faced off in the only televised debate in the lead up to the provincial election on Oct. 28. Saskatchewan Party Leader Scott Moe and NDP Leader Carla Beck say voters got a chance to see their platforms. (Oct. 17, 2024)

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Saskatchewan political leaders back on campaign trail after election debate

Published

 on

 

REGINA – Saskatchewan‘s main political leaders are back on the campaign trail today after hammering each other in a televised debate.

Saskatchewan Party Leader Scott Moe is set to make an announcement in Moose Jaw.

Saskatchewan NDP Leader Carla Beck is to make stops in Regina, Saskatoon and Prince Albert.

During Wednesday night’s debate, Beck emphasized her plan to make life more affordable and said people deserve better than an out-of-touch Saskatchewan Party government.

Moe said his party wants to lower taxes and put money back into people’s pockets.

Election day is Oct. 28.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 17, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending