he doesnt give a shit about the white house. burn down mar a lago.
the answer to that is a bit boring and less two dimensional. it took about a year for that to happen, from 2016 to early 2017 if memory serves. if you want to know what really happened, he tried, made a commitee, they took polls, surveys, townhalls, all the answers were conflicting, there was no consensus on a single system. he also didnt want to force his own prefered system that was popular with liberals (ranked ballots) as it would have looked like he was trying to service liberals, where as the others leaned towards proportional representation, which would have lead to things like fringe groups (think freedom convoy, proud boys, anti vaxxers, pro lifers, western and eastern seperatists, etc etc) having more sway and power over policy. imagine maple MAGA and western seperatists having more say now during all this 51st state bullshit.......wouldnt be very fun to deal with.
Trudeau made a clear promise, explored it seriously, but ultimately abandoned it due to a mix of political risk, lack of public agreement on the replacement system, and competing national priorities. trump being a twat, and all that other fun stuff. Critics said he bailed when it no longer suited him; defenders say he chose caution over forcing a divisive change. Both are kinda right.
its a milktoast answer, but the truth usually is with canadian politics. occams razor and all that. i know pierre and the cons werent running on election reform either this time around. so at least he got that conversation going and began the study for a future government to reference down the line when it comes up again.
i hope our system continues to evolve to better suit canadians down the line. and educate us properly so we can all make informed decisions on policy rather than red or blue tribalism like the US. thats not who we are. and we should continue to refuse that way of thinking. its beneath us.
mainly immigration and housing, however, this is mostly conservative spin. they had a heavy hand in causing the whole crisis, by request to the federal government from con premiers (doug ford, pallister, etc) for immigrants specifically during covid. going so far as to fudge numbers of available and projected housing so they could get more money for immigrants from the fed, and use the immigrants to stagnate wages and drive up housing costs for their investment properties and builder buddies. then cons began spinning the fallout as a liberal ploy when people started getting angry about prices going up for everything.
the federal government does not have the power to force immigrants into a specific province, they can coerce them through incentives. which all of these "anti immigration" premiers, gleefully accepted.
he accomplished a lot during his decade. legalized pot, created a lot of jobs, pushed for equal rights, helped indigenous people through funding and infrastructure and social programs. its a long list. he mostly seemed to ignore the attacks from the cons and just kept his head down and focused on policy and political theater when he felt he had to.
he had a few controversies, but its nothing the cons havent done before and got away with in the past. people have short memories however, and they love american social media, and regular media, so it was a matter of time before a lot of young heads turned to the right. thankfully trump made such an ass out of himself and pierre took too many notes from him. so thats the reason he lost mainly. we didnt want kmart trump in power. and so a lot of those heads turned to the left again.
he was a good leader, for the most part. but no leader is without fault or controversy. i agree with his stances, but maybe not all of his methods. hes human.
im looking forward to it.
with a deep sense of pleasure.
its mainly prior suggestion, followed by the brain filling in gaps of unknowns with that suggestion.
wheelchair accessability.
"im gonna pay you 5 grand to creampie your wife for the economy"
why wait when you can be the change.
unlike you, i dont "skim" counter arguments, i prefer to read and understand where they went wrong, or right. lets dive in to your mind a bit, shall we?
"Of course I'm aware it's the largest item in its category once you filter spending into categories that specifically remove welfare and debt spending."
Yeah, that’s kind of the point. You're minimizing military spending by slicing up the budget categories until the elephant in the room fits in a closet. Within discretionary spending—the part Congress actually debates every year—military spending is the single biggest slice by far. In FY2024, the U.S. military budget was $842 billion, dwarfing most other departments. Acting like that’s a meaningless stat is disingenuous.
"Discretionary spending specifically is a small part of government expenditure..."
Only because mandatory programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are locked in. But when it comes to spending decisions our elected officials actively control, defense gets the lion’s share. So yeah, it's still relevant.
"Military industrial complex doesn’t exist."
Come on. This isn’t a conspiracy theory, it’s literal U.S. presidential history. Eisenhower coined the term in 1961 warning about the influence of the defense industry on public policy. Since then, the intertwining of defense contractors, government funding, and foreign policy has been extensively documented. Pretending it’s fake is like saying lobbying doesn’t exist.
"Majority of rich nations have debt."
Sure. But the existence of debt doesn’t make all spending equal. A lot of those nations invest more proportionally in healthcare, infrastructure, and education. The U.S., meanwhile, throws nearly half of its discretionary budget at the Pentagon, while millions can’t afford basic meds. So debt isn’t the problem—how you spend is.
"US has 'free' healthcare it’s just worse than non-existent."
This is just flat-out wrong. The U.S. doesn’t have free healthcare. Medicare, Medicaid, and the VA serve limited populations. Everyone else deals with high premiums, co-pays, and surprise bills. It’s literally the most expensive healthcare system in the world and still leaves millions under- or uninsured. So, no—it’s not “free,” and it’s not “worse than non-existent.” It’s just expensive and dysfunctional.
"Plenty of countries have 'large' homeless populations."
That’s not the flex you think it is. The U.S. has one of the highest homelessness rates in the developed world, especially when measured against GDP per capita and housing stock. Comparing yourself to failing models doesn’t excuse your own failure.
"None of this is a capitalism problem. It’s all the fault of poor governance."
Okay, but governance is shaped by the economic system. Capitalism, unregulated or poorly regulated, gives outsized power to corporations and billionaires who influence policy to protect their interests. That’s how you end up with tax loopholes, underfunded social programs, and endless defense budgets. Governance doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It’s downstream of capitalism in practice. the system itself is easily corruptable, making it extremely flawed.
"They’d be in a far worse spot if they were at the mercy of their government for everything."
You’re already at the mercy of someone, either corporations or government. One is profit-driven, the other at least theoretically answerable to voters, or at least "was". Acting like total privatization leads to freedom is just libertarian fanfic. and utterly insane.
TL; because i know you DR: You're trying to minimize systemic issues by pretending they’re just bad luck or bad governance. But when you zoom out, they’re structural, tied to how capitalism works in the U.S. and who holds the power. Stop gaslighting people with bootstraps logic, its fox news drivel, and its not respected here.
read more, you obviously need to. if anyone here is posting a "vibes based" response, its you dude. i get you have a hard on for the "free market" but if you knew one thing about economics you'd know that the US stock market is the most corrupt one on earth, literally redesigned over the decades to filter money and shares from suckers to big fish, who in turn use it as leverage against the governments of the world. So they can further their agendas of power, control, and wealth aquisition. Trump, the "president", was literally purchased and placed in his seat by a man who leveraged his overpriced, artificially inflated "hype" stock as collateral to buy a social media platform so he could spread the same rhetoric and misinformation you are currently spreading. that is a feature of capitalism, along with recessions that increase in frequency decade after decade. all so they can reap the new crops of small businesses and assets of the people for a song.
if you have any questions or statements. Im happy to educate any readers of these comments, correctly, with my responses.
wonderful! now they have furthered their agenda of pushing antivax rhetoric so they can keep the population sickly and dying under a for profit healthcare system! yay!
the department of defence spending is the single largest catagory within discretionary spending. 842 billion in 2024 alone. easily verifiable if you cared enough to even type it into google. or use the wayback machine for pre trump admin white washing of .gov websites if you like it raw. dont even attempt to lump in social security and medicaid together along with several other discretionary spending categories like a talking head at fox news would to make your "point", thats misinformation, or straight up confusion on your part.
this isnt a vibe, its a fact. so, with all do respect, perhaps practice what you preach, and do your research.
then why is the american military the largest expenditure by the US government? why does the military industrial complex exist? why does the "richest nation on earth" have the largest debt, no free healthcare, a massive homeless population, but also the most billionaires? why do they survive by exploiting third world countries where people starve to death daily? why do they constantly undermine socialist and communist movements in other countries that have valuable resources? going so far as to assassinate popular leaders and trading them for puppet dictators?
thats literally capitalism living off the backs of the poor, and murdering them for profit, and they have to keep them poor so they can take advantage of them. thats why capitalism hates unions, labour laws, and social reform at home and abroad. it effects the bottom line and maximum profit margins. its inherent in the system, and a part of its structure. its what allows it to "work" in the first place. and whenever capitalism has its way, unchecked, the poor suffer and die as a result. through no fault of their own besides being born into an unequal society, with little or no opportunity because of their lack of starting capital, compared to the wealthier participants in the same system.
i implore you to read almost any book on american history and economics. the US itself was built on genocide and slavery for the purpose of profit, under the guise of freedom. and that simply evolved into different forms over the years, its still prevalent to this day.
i wish you well on your journey of self education on this topic.
"they didnt tell me how wonderful the vaticans taste in furniture was.....mmm..mmm..mmmm..."
just because we have shiny new inventions every year doesnt mean its working for everyone. the entire system of capitalism is based on taking advantage of the poor. to the point of killing them directly and indirectly en mass, through war and poverty related illness. so that the rich can own more property and assets.
its a horrible system.
pretty funking bonkers either way honestly.
hes playing with public sympathy. im sure right wing americans, ironically, will eat it up.
what has PP done that isnt a talking point?
tool making most likely. also fire keeping, and cooking.