[afransen]

How big of a lead does one need before it becomes irresistibly tempting to call a snap election?

The trouble is it would be off-brand for Carney to engage in nakedly political opportunism by calling an election when it is favourable to his party. You can bet that the Liberals are furiously workshopping narratives that could justify an early election call. Trump making moves to cancel CUSMA this summer might be it. In the mean time, things are looking grim for a lot of Red Tories in suburban ridings. There might be a few more floor crossers that could be persuaded, so Carney may end up with a narrow majority. He would probably prefer to have a commanding majority and a refreshed mandate to be able to really engage in reforms that might be politically difficult in the short term with the risk of some backbench MPs revolting.

 

[Towered]

I'm not saying it's a good idea, but I bet this exact calculus is happening behind the scenes. As in, there must be a crossover point where a lead gets so large that it overcomes any anger at the power grab move. That's when it becomes too tempting to lock in a 4-year majority government.

Well, the gamble worked out swimmingly for Thug. Not so much for Peterson...

 

[lenaitch]

That's a risky play even with a big lead in popular support because it could anger some voters who see it as an unnecessary waste or a cynical attempt to power grab.

I agree. Also, he doing well against a known opponent. Why call and election that will likely spawn a new one. I am sure the party operatives want an election because power is a drug to them. I hope he can keep them in check.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

The Middle East thread has been reopened and posts moved

Bring a hardhat and hazmat suit? >.<

 

[Full Metal Junkie]

Updated statement on the Iran war from PM Carney:

 

[narduch]

Another pathetic statement from Carney

 

[Full Metal Junkie]

Another pathetic statement from Carney

Once again, there's nothing factually incorrect about the statement. However, rhetorically speaking, now it's a lot more "fence-sitty" than before. I thought that's what you guys wanted? Mentions of the fictional "international law" that everyone's ignoring, appeals to "let's play pat-a-cakes, let's all be friends" and let's negotiate with the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism that keeps massacring people by their thousands. I thought that's what you wanted to hear, no?

 

[zang]

Once again, there's nothing factually incorrect about the statement. However, rhetorically speaking, now it's a lot more "fence-sitty" than before. I thought that's what you guys wanted? Mentions of the fictional "international law" that everyone's ignoring, appeals to "let's play pat-a-cakes, let's all be friends" and let's negotiate with the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism that keeps massacring people by their thousands. I thought that's what you wanted to hear, no?

Can you stop with the high-and-mighty trolling BS?