Liberals are blocking journalists from asking Trudeau questions

[sasquatch]

Are Justin Trudeau's poll numbers falling?



That's not what I'm reading.

yeah, the prostitutes in the media are trying to keep their 600 million dollar bribe. here's the latest from angus reid

http://angusreid.org/election-2019-centre-left-scuffle/">http://angusreid.org/election-2019-centre-left-scuffle/

And he's losing areas like the 905 region, which is critical for his re-election. trust me. he's losing support, but these media whores will wave the pompoms right up until october 21st because they want that bribe money, and the dopes still stupid enough to believe it and want trudeau will have a meltdown 2016 U.S election style.

https://election.ctvnews.ca/liberals-getting-hammered-in-ontario-s-905-region-nanos-survey-1.4611553">https://election.ctvnews.ca/liberals-ge ... -1.4611553">https://election.ctvnews.ca/liberals-getting-hammered-in-ontario-s-905-region-nanos-survey-1.4611553



The rule of thumb with Nanos is that if thry say the liberals and the CPC are neck and neck, then chances are the CPC is ahead.

Sasquatch, I just saw a poll this morning that put the Liberals in the lead and just two seats short of a majority..



I guess we will see on the morning of the twenty second.

Are you talking about CBC poll tracker or 338 Canada? Yeah they are about the only two that are still trying to sell the idea the liberals are going to be swept into power, but recent polls are reflecting otherwise.



Even nanos is admitting Turdy is losing support and the CPC is ahead, and the only poll that has Trudeau ahead is that dumpster fire Toronto star.

https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/">https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/electio ... er/canada/">https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/

I forget which poll it was, but it had the Liberals at 34 and the Conservatives at 31..



I read it this morning.

That would be the Toronto Star one.

It seems you're right sasquatch....not the most reliable source.

And Nanos just released a new poll today showing a conservative lead widening

https://www.nanos.co/reports/">https://www.nanos.co/reports/

And it's nanos. they are liberal pollsters. if they say the CPC is ahead and the gap is widening, the LPOC better start panicking, because the boy blunder is screwing them, as they always poll liberals higher than they actually are.

What about IPSOS? Are they reliable?



A lot can change after the English language debate.

Certainly a lot can change for any given reason. Trudeau could have the best debate in his entire career and swing the polls in his favour or Scheer could expose him more of a fraud and widen his lead, or it would remain unchanged. we'll find out on october 7th and on.



And IPSOS is actually less accurate than Nanos. they were saying the NDP was going to take Ontario at one point(which clearly didn't happen). I find Angus reid tends to be the best one.

[Anonymous]

I'll be watching Angus Reid.....thank you sasquatch.

 ac_smile

[Anonymous]

Are Justin Trudeau's poll numbers falling?



That's not what I'm reading.

yeah, the prostitutes in the media are trying to keep their 600 million dollar bribe. here's the latest from angus reid

http://angusreid.org/election-2019-centre-left-scuffle/">http://angusreid.org/election-2019-centre-left-scuffle/

And he's losing areas like the 905 region, which is critical for his re-election. trust me. he's losing support, but these media whores will wave the pompoms right up until october 21st because they want that bribe money, and the dopes still stupid enough to believe it and want trudeau will have a meltdown 2016 U.S election style.

https://election.ctvnews.ca/liberals-getting-hammered-in-ontario-s-905-region-nanos-survey-1.4611553">https://election.ctvnews.ca/liberals-ge ... -1.4611553">https://election.ctvnews.ca/liberals-getting-hammered-in-ontario-s-905-region-nanos-survey-1.4611553



The rule of thumb with Nanos is that if thry say the liberals and the CPC are neck and neck, then chances are the CPC is ahead.

Sasquatch, I just saw a poll this morning that put the Liberals in the lead and just two seats short of a majority..



I guess we will see on the morning of the twenty second.

Are you talking about CBC poll tracker or 338 Canada? Yeah they are about the only two that are still trying to sell the idea the liberals are going to be swept into power, but recent polls are reflecting otherwise.



Even nanos is admitting Turdy is losing support and the CPC is ahead, and the only poll that has Trudeau ahead is that dumpster fire Toronto star.

https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/">https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/electio ... er/canada/">https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/

I forget which poll it was, but it had the Liberals at 34 and the Conservatives at 31..



I read it this morning.

That would be the Toronto Star one.

It seems you're right sasquatch....not the most reliable source.

And Nanos just released a new poll today showing a conservative lead widening

https://www.nanos.co/reports/">https://www.nanos.co/reports/

And it's nanos. they are liberal pollsters. if they say the CPC is ahead and the gap is widening, the LPOC better start panicking, because the boy blunder is screwing them, as they always poll liberals higher than they actually are.

What about IPSOS? Are they reliable?



A lot can change after the English language debate.

Certainly a lot can change for any given reason. Trudeau could have the best debate in his entire career and swing the polls in his favour or Scheer could expose him more of a fraud and widen his lead, or it would remain unchanged. we'll find out on october 7th and on.



And IPSOS is actually less accurate than Nanos. they were saying the NDP was going to take Ontario at one point(which clearly didn't happen). I find Angus reid tends to be the best one.

Scheer did poorly in the French language debate.

[Anonymous]

Are Justin Trudeau's poll numbers falling?



That's not what I'm reading.

yeah, the prostitutes in the media are trying to keep their 600 million dollar bribe. here's the latest from angus reid

http://angusreid.org/election-2019-centre-left-scuffle/">http://angusreid.org/election-2019-centre-left-scuffle/

And he's losing areas like the 905 region, which is critical for his re-election. trust me. he's losing support, but these media whores will wave the pompoms right up until october 21st because they want that bribe money, and the dopes still stupid enough to believe it and want trudeau will have a meltdown 2016 U.S election style.

https://election.ctvnews.ca/liberals-getting-hammered-in-ontario-s-905-region-nanos-survey-1.4611553">https://election.ctvnews.ca/liberals-ge ... -1.4611553">https://election.ctvnews.ca/liberals-getting-hammered-in-ontario-s-905-region-nanos-survey-1.4611553



The rule of thumb with Nanos is that if thry say the liberals and the CPC are neck and neck, then chances are the CPC is ahead.

Sasquatch, I just saw a poll this morning that put the Liberals in the lead and just two seats short of a majority..



I guess we will see on the morning of the twenty second.

Are you talking about CBC poll tracker or 338 Canada? Yeah they are about the only two that are still trying to sell the idea the liberals are going to be swept into power, but recent polls are reflecting otherwise.



Even nanos is admitting Turdy is losing support and the CPC is ahead, and the only poll that has Trudeau ahead is that dumpster fire Toronto star.

https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/">https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/electio ... er/canada/">https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/

I forget which poll it was, but it had the Liberals at 34 and the Conservatives at 31..



I read it this morning.

That would be the Toronto Star one.

It seems you're right sasquatch....not the most reliable source.

And Nanos just released a new poll today showing a conservative lead widening

https://www.nanos.co/reports/">https://www.nanos.co/reports/

And it's nanos. they are liberal pollsters. if they say the CPC is ahead and the gap is widening, the LPOC better start panicking, because the boy blunder is screwing them, as they always poll liberals higher than they actually are.

What about IPSOS? Are they reliable?



A lot can change after the English language debate.

Certainly a lot can change for any given reason. Trudeau could have the best debate in his entire career and swing the polls in his favour or Scheer could expose him more of a fraud and widen his lead, or it would remain unchanged. we'll find out on october 7th and on.



And IPSOS is actually less accurate than Nanos. they were saying the NDP was going to take Ontario at one point(which clearly didn't happen). I find Angus reid tends to be the best one.

Scheer did poorly in the French language debate.

I heard it was because of his personal position on abortion..



Hes said he won't reopen it just like Stephen Harper didn't, but that wasn't satisfactory for the other party leaders.

[Anonymous]

What a weasel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xURWBH7GS8g&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR3mA4zisCCb0uy3PeEnAo98xxnPAPBhg_RIHHhe1fFtpbW7SRSMLT7o46U">

[Bricktop]

That clown embarrasses your nation.

[Anonymous]

That clown embarrasses your nation.

We know.

[Anonymous]

By Brian Lilley of Sun News Media



Don't let PM regulate social media

No thanks, Trudeau!



Do you trust the federal government to regulate what you can say on social media?



More specifically, do you trust a minister who was formerly a radical environmental activist to be the one person responsible for coming up with regulations on what you can say on social media? I don't.



In the mandate letter given to Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, there is a clear direction to do just that.



"Create new regulations for social media platforms, starting with a requirement that all platforms remove illegal content, including hate speech, within 24 hours or face significant penalties," the letter said.



Removing illegal content or hate speech doesn't sound so bad, as long as we have well-defined terms and know what we are talking about.



The letter expands beyond that, though.



"This should include other online harms such as radicalization, incitement to violence, exploitation of children, or creation or distribution of terrorist propaganda," Trudeau's letter reads.



Now we are getting into tricky territory.



Sure, I think we should all be against any incitement to violence, the exploitation of children and yes, the distribution of terrorist propaganda.



ISIS and groups like it have spent far too long using social media and other online platforms to spread their calls to arms.



The tricky bit is radicalization, because I have to ask — who will define that term?



Will it be Steven Guilbeault?



Hate speech in the criminal code is defined as any communications which "incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace."



That is far beyond saying that you don't like a certain group of people.



The law also provides for defences such as truth or arguments made in good faith.



Would that apply to removing posts online?



Hate speech, which normally comes with an incitement to violence, is at least defined. Radicalization is not. Minister Guilbeault fits my definition of a radical, and I might fit his.



The first time I met the minister was in Montreal in the early 2000s — I believe he was with Greenpeace at the time.



He was already well-known in Quebec environmental circles and spoke to reporters like myself while he and his colleagues chained themselves to gas pumps.



See, they didn't want people driving cars or buying gas.



This would likely have been 2001 and let's be honest ... for many people there were not other options.



Many of us still don't have the option not to drive a car.



For close to 20 years, Guilbeault has found the act of commuting by car offensive, though now he has a car and driver at his beck and call 24/7.



Will Guilbeault decide that statements in support of the oil and gas sector too radical for social media?



Will he decide that political statements that he disagrees with are likewise too radical?



That may seem far fetched, but during the last election the Liberals actually began calling media reports they disagreed with "fake news" — a term that would require removal from social media.



In fact, a Sun column by Mark Bonokoski was labelled as such when it raised the issue of the Liberals considering taxing the sale of your home.



The idea popped up in a Liberal caucus document of ideas to consider and the column was completely valid, but it was still banned by Facebook.



A report by Global News on changes to military health payments was called "misinformation" by Trudeau just hours before the government reversed the changes the report outlined.



This happened to wellknown and reputable news organizations — imagine what could happen to you.



We need to tread carefully as Trudeau takes us down a very dangerous path that I don't think we should be on.

[Blazor]

Do you trust the federal government to regulate what you can say on social media?



"Create new regulations for social media platforms, starting with a requirement that all platforms remove illegal content, including hate speech, within 24 hours or face significant penalties," the letter said.



Removing illegal content or hate speech doesn't sound so bad, as long as we have well-defined terms and know what we are talking about.



The letter expands beyond that, though.



"This should include other online harms such as radicalization, incitement to violence, exploitation of children, or creation or distribution of terrorist propaganda," Trudeau's letter reads.

This is some tricksy shit!



Did you know, they teach officers and agents here, that our Founding Fathers were terrorists! So if you are a patriot, you are a terrorist! This will ban patriotism pretty much, and resistance to government tyranny.



Blazor says FUCK THAT!



I dont do social media, as it is a censoring shit hole, but this is even worse.

[Anonymous]

Do you trust the federal government to regulate what you can say on social media?



"Create new regulations for social media platforms, starting with a requirement that all platforms remove illegal content, including hate speech, within 24 hours or face significant penalties," the letter said.



Removing illegal content or hate speech doesn't sound so bad, as long as we have well-defined terms and know what we are talking about.



The letter expands beyond that, though.



"This should include other online harms such as radicalization, incitement to violence, exploitation of children, or creation or distribution of terrorist propaganda," Trudeau's letter reads.

This is some tricksy shit!



Did you know, they teach officers and agents here, that our Founding Fathers were terrorists! So if you are a patriot, you are a terrorist! This will ban patriotism pretty much, and resistance to government tyranny.



Blazor says FUCK THAT!



I dont do social media, as it is a censoring shit hole, but this is even worse.

Our pm gives our tax dollars to online media that is loyal to him. And that doesn't include the 1.1 billion bucks per year we give our state owned media mouthpiece, the CBC.

[Anonymous]

Trudeau has a problem with any speech he personally doesn't like.



Be wary of government social media meddling



Here's the question though: Is it the job of government to wade into online offensiveness?



Prime Minister Justin Trudeau clearly thinks so. He is once again firing up his cabinet with the notion that they need to police the Internet to eradicate online "hate".



As Brian Lilley explained in a recent column, Trudeau has tasked new Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault with cleaning up the online realm.



Guilbeault's mandate letter calls on him to "create new regulations for social media platforms, starting with a requirement that all platforms remove illegal content, including hate speech, within 24 hours or face significant penalties."



[size=150]They don't go on to define their terms though. What is hate speech?



Is it just speech the Liberals hate?

[/size]

There are already laws on the books about defamation, libel, making threats against people and more. These are as they should be and they apply to the online realm. How much broader does Trudeau plan to take things?



The mandate letter continues: "This should include other online harms such as radicalization, incitement to violence, exploitation of children, or creation or distribution of terrorist propaganda."



If Trudeau wants to get public support for this, he's going to have to define his terms thoroughly and do it soon.



It's always wise to be wary of governments meddling into matters of speech.

[Anonymous]

What is hate speech?



Is it just speech the Liberals hate?

Of course.

[Anonymous]

https://scontent.fyxd1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/79915951_2477806742344682_6825495699623247872_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ohc=ujB9m3YG5YgAQmJHBpt3M88FnOj9UO0QYPfaDs1SnxIxLyeKIx1ImVMgQ&_nc_ht=scontent.fyxd1-1.fna&oh=c2abb324b816a93dc4d17c2e04716443&oe=5E6B0B5A">

[Thiel]

https://scontent.fyxd1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/79915951_2477806742344682_6825495699623247872_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ohc=ujB9m3YG5YgAQmJHBpt3M88FnOj9UO0QYPfaDs1SnxIxLyeKIx1ImVMgQ&_nc_ht=scontent.fyxd1-1.fna&oh=c2abb324b816a93dc4d17c2e04716443&oe=5E6B0B5A">

Progressive tyranny.

[Anonymous]

https://scontent.fyxd1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/79915951_2477806742344682_6825495699623247872_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ohc=ujB9m3YG5YgAQmJHBpt3M88FnOj9UO0QYPfaDs1SnxIxLyeKIx1ImVMgQ&_nc_ht=scontent.fyxd1-1.fna&oh=c2abb324b816a93dc4d17c2e04716443&oe=5E6B0B5A">

Yes