I think the attempt to portray people who reject the woke madness and its trail of unsuspecting victims as the unreasonable ones in this story is at best misguided, possibly even straight-up gaslighting.
I've personally always been a live and let live kind of guy, but being portrayed as a nazi by a bunch of crypto-communists (the woke movement has all the trappings of communism, from the denial of reality to the banishment of heterodox thinkers), for not believing in their make-believe cult is one bridge too far me.
Being polite and tolerant is all fine and dandy with reasonable people, but the progressives of today look increasingly like a bunch zombies hungry for flesh (no offence to zombies), with whom reason and deference doesn't work, and we run the risk of losing even more of our still somewhat normal culture if we don't start pushing back on their anti-human agenda, instead of nodding and rolling our eyes.
I for one welcome the BC and federal conservatives for pushing back and attempting to bring back some sanity to our lives. I don't have high hopes that they will succeed if they get elected, but at least someone is trying.
I was listening to Peterson's interview of Rustad this morning and he sounds like a normal, well-adjusted dude. So I don't see what the hubbub is about him. He didn't sound extreme in the least in any of his positions.
If advocating for girls to be able to compete in sports on a level playing field (meaning not having their faces caved in by biological males an order of magnitude more physical than them), is extreme, then call me a nazi. I won't take the bait this time.
I still think "woke" is a compliment. I don't see Conservatives bringing back anything useful, but based on Ontario, graft seems very high on the priority list.
Nice job of summarizing the evolution of party politics in B. C. but surprised at the idea that the current state of gender issues would be a negative for the Conservatives. It could be that my bias is determined by my reading choices, NP, WSJ and FP, but I think Rustad's position would be an added bonus for the Conservatives.
Weird piece, particularly this: "Rustad’s preoccupation with hot button social issues like transgendered athletes in female sports, gender-neutral washrooms and sexual orientation education in classrooms, threatens to alienate it from mainstream British Columbia voters." I would say it's the NDP's preoccupation of this that actually made it an issue in BC. In any case, I'd say more people are running from the NDP because, as they always do when in power long enough, they've blown a lot of money on god knows what. And people are pissed that despite all the money they've thrown at things, we have people openly doing drugs and blatantly stealing to support their habit. The subsidized housing projects for the drug addicted are merely there to support people's addictions and give them a place to store their stolen goods until they can sell them for more drug money. Healthcare is a total mess in the province, particularly outside of Greater Vancouver. Housing is such a screwup that nobody even wants to rent to others anymore because you'll never get rid of a bad tenant. The NDP has to wear this. They did well in the early days of Covid, but went downhill fast, right about the time when Horgan decided to call a mid-pandemic election solely to attempt to get more power. This is how the pendulum swings in BC. It has been the case in my 40 years in the province. The party formerly known as the Liberal party really screwed up their name change lol.
I'd suggest that those "hot button social issues" conversations some of his candidates insist on having come across as reactionary and exclusive. Something along the lines of "well, the gays may have gotten away with it but the Trans sure aren't". Is that how those comments are intended? Maybe, maybe not but it's how they're interpreted by more voters than you might realize.
And really, for what? Trans people make up a statistically irrelevant percentage of the population. Respect for how others choose to live their lives is a fundamental tenet of individualism. This whole issue (or non-issue in my view) doesn't make any sense to me. And practically speaking, there are no votes there.
Why have the supporters of biological males competing in women’s sports, the attitude that they have the right to come into any female space and that includes those of lesbians, never defended women? And that said biological males can be aggressive and very dismissive and disrespectful to the women who have the courage to resist this. Where is the understanding and defence of women?
I do not like my sex being constantly gaslit and thrown under the ‘progressive’ bus.
Why does nobody on the so called progressive side not seem to notice that trans men( who are biological women ) cause so little problems to men or anyone.
I am someone who has supported the right of trans people to live their lives in society in the sex they chose and have been on their side for over 50 years.
But I never could have imagined that biological men would think they were entitled to be allowed to so invade much that must be kept for biological women and that a mantra would be that a trans women is an actual women. So the message here is; biological women must sit down, shut up and know our place.
I never would have thought that kids in their teens could be actually be given any kind of medical help to transition.
I thought common sense and the knowledge of the teen brain would make it evident that transitioning must only start at age18 at the earliest. This has become the norm now in some European countries and the UK.
I do have hope that fairness and common sense will return to Canada; sooner rather than later.
I think the overton window of acceptable discourse has shifted so far to the left that they appear reactionary and exclusive, but even not so long ago, would not have been controversial.
It seems fair to say that many people in these comments agree that wokeness has gone too far, as much as we agree that people should be able to live their lives however they want. You won't find me disagreeing with either position.
But we have to make one very important distinction. When wokeness and all its attendant cult-like beliefs become the norm, and it becomes "impolite" to stray from that path, is where I draw the line.
I don't give two shits about what people do to their bodies and mind and if they choose to believe they can change gender on a whim, more power to them if that makes them happy, but here is where the red line is:
1. Don't touch the children (by that I mean push for irrevocable transition and make even the questioning of this illegal).
2. Don't proselytize, and push your insane ideas on me, or worse my kids.
3. Don't attack free speech under the guise of keeping people "safe". If snowflakes can't confront uncomfortable ideas, it's not incumbent on me to keep them "safe" from their own anxiety.
Until very recently, I thought that like a child's tantrum, this too shall pass. I no longer feel that way. Call me crazy, but I think if we're not vigilant and fight back, we're headed straight for Orwell's 1984. I has happened before and it's happening again.
Just look at the UK, Brazil, Ireland. The dominos are falling, brace for impact.
I agree with 1 and 3. I think I'd need a definition of proselytize to understand #2 better. #1 I don't think is actually a thing, or it's the incredibly rare exception rather than the rule. I mean, if you're not old enough to drink you're not old enough to get gender-altering surgery.
As for #1, what do you make of the fact that it's essentially illegal for a therapist to question a child's gender confusion and have to affirm whatever their patient is asserting, lest they lose their license? That's the entire premise of Peterson's fight with his own college. I asked a newly-licensed therapist friend and she confirmed that this was the case, while lamenting the fact that it essentially prevented her from doing her job. Talk about a great career start.
Even if only a single child transitions because of outside influence (I'm not referring to those for whom being in the wrong body persists into adulthood) and regrets it later, it's morally bankrupt to allow the transition, which amounts to literal castration, as they will no longer be able to have children later in life. Dr Mengele couldn't have dreamed a more evil eugenic plan.
While it may not be all that common statistically speaking, does that make it OK? That logic is at best flawed.
Someone said politics is downstream of culture. I think it's an important issue - perhaps not a keystone one - but it comes from the same place as the immigration policy, the "safe supply" of drugs, lack of housing, energy policy, etc.
Namely, the self-hatred of progressives and the denial of everything that made the west great and arguably the most successful civilizational movement in history.
If you don't fight these mind parasites on all fronts, those misanthropic ideas will keep popping back up. It's probably a good idea to stop trying to whack-a-mole one at a time and smash the whole god damn machine.
Thank you, Rob, for trying to enlighten Jen and Matt and their followers. Thanks Jen and Matt for choosing Rob to provide the enlightenment. Contrary to what other posters have stated, I think Rob wasn’t giving his own opinion of those who “reject the woke madness” - and FYI, I am one of those who reject it - but rather was using the terminology that is being floated by politicians, left-leaning media, social justice warriors and activists, and NDP voters. I find that Rob is one of the most fair and balanced political commentators in B.C. The bulk of the votes are located in the left-leaning Vancouver and Victoria and their suburbs. I’m not in love with Rustad, but I agree with Kevin Falcon that on his worst day, Rustad is better than Eby on his best day. Eby is a taller, younger Trudeau type right down to the “uhs”. Thanks, again Rob.
It feels like BC provincial politics is repeating a cycle that we saw in the '90s: back then, we saw the defeat of an increasingly rickety, unpopular, scandal-plagued right wing Social Credit by the NDP. The first part of that NDP government was relatively moderate before a change of leaders led to a sharp leftward turn and an escalating series of blunders. A new right wing successor party rose, attracted a lot of the remnants of the old Socreds, and defeated the NDP. They in turn became increasingly unpopular and plagued with corruption scandals and were defeated by the NDP (barely.) The NDP started out in a relatively moderate direction until they changed leader and pivoted hard left, and now a new right wing successor party has emerged...
I’m not so sure “mainstream” BC voters don’t actually lean towards Rustad’s position on (hot button) social issues like transgendered athletes in female sports, gender-neutral washrooms, etc. Perhaps he will alienate himself from downtown Vancouver and Victoria and the university campuses, but it’s hard to claim that those constituencies represent “mainstream British Columbia voters." And under what circumstances would those constituencies ever consider voting for anyone other than a left wing party?
..... a clarification: during the last 20 or so years, the "left" has ever so glaringly become the "left wingnut party". The old "left" that some of us remember, the "left" with whom you could discuss, is gone. Only a few splinters remain, mostly gone quiet for fear of being cancelled - by the "left wingnut party" .
Great look into BC politics, thanks. I do note, however, that it is not actually fringe that think that men should not compete in women's sports, and Rustad’s "preoccupation" with gender-neutral washrooms and sexual orientation education in classrooms is actually a concern that many people share.
BC Voters would like to know if Rustad will be identified on the list of politicians who accept the invitations of the Chinese consular officials to socialize with the United Front(UF), to sympathize with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) officials to accept financial support and to be willing to vote with the conscience of foreigners and favour China, not British Columbia and Canada.
Several current candidates for office have the taint of B.C. being the only “Belt and Road” location in Canada with a Surrey location established during the Liberal Christy Clark era.
Elections Canada have not developed a checklist for constituency leaders to use when vetting a candidate, despite knowing elections were happening in several provinces. It must be assumed that interference happens at all levels of voting- civic, provincial, federal.
As with Trudeau, photos of CCP celebrations, attendance at United Front events, offers to host events for candidates, donations to the candidate signal interest from China. Candidates need to be questioned further if their photo albums contain those pictures of record.
Would be an interesting article to read if Rob Shaw could contemplate this currently under discussed topic.
I’m guessing pols don’t get invites directly from Chinese consular officials, but from astroturf “community business organizations” which are United Front front organizations.
It seems that Kevin Falcon took a page out of the Biden book and collapsed his party to support the BC Conservatives in an effort to defeat the NDP. Okay, depending on your opinion and political view that this was a courageous or necessary move, Mr. Falcon, or his successor, could have used the next four years to bring the party back to life instead of simply collapsing it to support a party they heavily criticized. Where is the integrity in this? I have always voted centre right over the years and for a party that offered a balanced approach to fiscal management, economic growth and social issues. Now I find myself questioning who to vote for? A NDP party that is fiscally irresponsible, taxes us to death and is steering the province into another downgrade of our credit rating? The NDP, after announcing a 5 billion dollar deficit, actually stated that being the worst of the best is a good thing given the fact that the BC debt to GDP ratio is best of all provinces. Wow, great job NDP, only 5 billion in the hole this year with absolutely no intention to fix it. The alternative is to vote for a far to the right party with a leader who we don't really know, who has some pretty strange opinions when it comes to climate change, carbon taxes, vaccine mandates and so forth. It is like our federal election; who to vote for? The " left of centre left" Trudeau or the populist bully and not so statesman like "right of centre right" Poilievre? Not a great choice at all in my opinion but then I always believed that not voting at all really disqualifies you from criticizing a ruling or opposition party.
It think Falcon took a cold hard look at the situation and did what he had to do. That party was unrebuildable. And he owns a good chunk of that and at least admitted it.
And yes, we are poorly led federally and provincially. Eby has screwed up so badly on multiple files that I couldn't vote for him. Rustad I'll listen to. At least he appears to be purging the 5G loons.
A good article! It just needs a few more points to contemplate upon: Both the BC United and BC Conservatives had already nominated many, if not most, of their candidates before this shot-gun wedding. The sheer complexity of determining who will run and who will bow out is a political nightmare across most of BC's 93 ridings. There are/were high profile people (including United incumbents) and earnest newcomers being tossed aside or simply quitting for wont of an available electoral district. Added to this was how United leader Falcon only told the candidates and party officials of his decision via teleconference literally minutes before the announcement press conference. (the presser was delayed for almost 30 minutes while he surprised his people about his unilateral decision.) United became Untied. Will the BC Conservatives have enough time to unite for the election? They still need to put together a party platform while the team isn't even yet formed.
Thanks for your piece Rob (I very much enjoyed "A Matter of Confidence"!) and thanks Matt and Jen for making good on your promise to include more about our weird westernmost province in your publication.
Also, it needs stating: anyone who even hints about exercising skepticism about the role of CO2 in anthropogenic climate change should be immediately discredited, but alas, here we are.
Is the genesis of politicians expressing utterly stupid idea's and conspiracy theories not linked to the GOP in 2015? It seems they've all been going downhill fast since then. Common sense is nowhere near common, and humanity seems to have lost its built in "stink test" about whether something is believable. Stupid has invaded politics to unimaginable levels of stupidity. As I've said many times, actual "leaders" are on the endangered species list.
I think the attempt to portray people who reject the woke madness and its trail of unsuspecting victims as the unreasonable ones in this story is at best misguided, possibly even straight-up gaslighting.
I've personally always been a live and let live kind of guy, but being portrayed as a nazi by a bunch of crypto-communists (the woke movement has all the trappings of communism, from the denial of reality to the banishment of heterodox thinkers), for not believing in their make-believe cult is one bridge too far me.
Being polite and tolerant is all fine and dandy with reasonable people, but the progressives of today look increasingly like a bunch zombies hungry for flesh (no offence to zombies), with whom reason and deference doesn't work, and we run the risk of losing even more of our still somewhat normal culture if we don't start pushing back on their anti-human agenda, instead of nodding and rolling our eyes.
I for one welcome the BC and federal conservatives for pushing back and attempting to bring back some sanity to our lives. I don't have high hopes that they will succeed if they get elected, but at least someone is trying.
I was listening to Peterson's interview of Rustad this morning and he sounds like a normal, well-adjusted dude. So I don't see what the hubbub is about him. He didn't sound extreme in the least in any of his positions.
If advocating for girls to be able to compete in sports on a level playing field (meaning not having their faces caved in by biological males an order of magnitude more physical than them), is extreme, then call me a nazi. I won't take the bait this time.
Very well worded, and for me, heading in the correct direction .
I still think "woke" is a compliment. I don't see Conservatives bringing back anything useful, but based on Ontario, graft seems very high on the priority list.
I don't understand what you mean. Can you please clarify?
Nice job of summarizing the evolution of party politics in B. C. but surprised at the idea that the current state of gender issues would be a negative for the Conservatives. It could be that my bias is determined by my reading choices, NP, WSJ and FP, but I think Rustad's position would be an added bonus for the Conservatives.
Weird piece, particularly this: "Rustad’s preoccupation with hot button social issues like transgendered athletes in female sports, gender-neutral washrooms and sexual orientation education in classrooms, threatens to alienate it from mainstream British Columbia voters." I would say it's the NDP's preoccupation of this that actually made it an issue in BC. In any case, I'd say more people are running from the NDP because, as they always do when in power long enough, they've blown a lot of money on god knows what. And people are pissed that despite all the money they've thrown at things, we have people openly doing drugs and blatantly stealing to support their habit. The subsidized housing projects for the drug addicted are merely there to support people's addictions and give them a place to store their stolen goods until they can sell them for more drug money. Healthcare is a total mess in the province, particularly outside of Greater Vancouver. Housing is such a screwup that nobody even wants to rent to others anymore because you'll never get rid of a bad tenant. The NDP has to wear this. They did well in the early days of Covid, but went downhill fast, right about the time when Horgan decided to call a mid-pandemic election solely to attempt to get more power. This is how the pendulum swings in BC. It has been the case in my 40 years in the province. The party formerly known as the Liberal party really screwed up their name change lol.
Amen to this B-
I'd suggest that those "hot button social issues" conversations some of his candidates insist on having come across as reactionary and exclusive. Something along the lines of "well, the gays may have gotten away with it but the Trans sure aren't". Is that how those comments are intended? Maybe, maybe not but it's how they're interpreted by more voters than you might realize.
And really, for what? Trans people make up a statistically irrelevant percentage of the population. Respect for how others choose to live their lives is a fundamental tenet of individualism. This whole issue (or non-issue in my view) doesn't make any sense to me. And practically speaking, there are no votes there.
Biological men do not belong in Women's sports, and never will. Start a new category, if they must.
Why have the supporters of biological males competing in women’s sports, the attitude that they have the right to come into any female space and that includes those of lesbians, never defended women? And that said biological males can be aggressive and very dismissive and disrespectful to the women who have the courage to resist this. Where is the understanding and defence of women?
I do not like my sex being constantly gaslit and thrown under the ‘progressive’ bus.
Why does nobody on the so called progressive side not seem to notice that trans men( who are biological women ) cause so little problems to men or anyone.
I am someone who has supported the right of trans people to live their lives in society in the sex they chose and have been on their side for over 50 years.
But I never could have imagined that biological men would think they were entitled to be allowed to so invade much that must be kept for biological women and that a mantra would be that a trans women is an actual women. So the message here is; biological women must sit down, shut up and know our place.
I never would have thought that kids in their teens could be actually be given any kind of medical help to transition.
I thought common sense and the knowledge of the teen brain would make it evident that transitioning must only start at age18 at the earliest. This has become the norm now in some European countries and the UK.
I do have hope that fairness and common sense will return to Canada; sooner rather than later.
On this I agree. But my analysis of the politics ihere is still correct.
I think the overton window of acceptable discourse has shifted so far to the left that they appear reactionary and exclusive, but even not so long ago, would not have been controversial.
It seems fair to say that many people in these comments agree that wokeness has gone too far, as much as we agree that people should be able to live their lives however they want. You won't find me disagreeing with either position.
But we have to make one very important distinction. When wokeness and all its attendant cult-like beliefs become the norm, and it becomes "impolite" to stray from that path, is where I draw the line.
I don't give two shits about what people do to their bodies and mind and if they choose to believe they can change gender on a whim, more power to them if that makes them happy, but here is where the red line is:
1. Don't touch the children (by that I mean push for irrevocable transition and make even the questioning of this illegal).
2. Don't proselytize, and push your insane ideas on me, or worse my kids.
3. Don't attack free speech under the guise of keeping people "safe". If snowflakes can't confront uncomfortable ideas, it's not incumbent on me to keep them "safe" from their own anxiety.
Until very recently, I thought that like a child's tantrum, this too shall pass. I no longer feel that way. Call me crazy, but I think if we're not vigilant and fight back, we're headed straight for Orwell's 1984. I has happened before and it's happening again.
Just look at the UK, Brazil, Ireland. The dominos are falling, brace for impact.
I agree with 1 and 3. I think I'd need a definition of proselytize to understand #2 better. #1 I don't think is actually a thing, or it's the incredibly rare exception rather than the rule. I mean, if you're not old enough to drink you're not old enough to get gender-altering surgery.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proselytize
As for #1, what do you make of the fact that it's essentially illegal for a therapist to question a child's gender confusion and have to affirm whatever their patient is asserting, lest they lose their license? That's the entire premise of Peterson's fight with his own college. I asked a newly-licensed therapist friend and she confirmed that this was the case, while lamenting the fact that it essentially prevented her from doing her job. Talk about a great career start.
Even if only a single child transitions because of outside influence (I'm not referring to those for whom being in the wrong body persists into adulthood) and regrets it later, it's morally bankrupt to allow the transition, which amounts to literal castration, as they will no longer be able to have children later in life. Dr Mengele couldn't have dreamed a more evil eugenic plan.
While it may not be all that common statistically speaking, does that make it OK? That logic is at best flawed.
Is it wrong? Absolutely. Does it deserve to be a centerpiece of an election platform? Sorry but no.
Just being pragmatic here.
Someone said politics is downstream of culture. I think it's an important issue - perhaps not a keystone one - but it comes from the same place as the immigration policy, the "safe supply" of drugs, lack of housing, energy policy, etc.
Namely, the self-hatred of progressives and the denial of everything that made the west great and arguably the most successful civilizational movement in history.
If you don't fight these mind parasites on all fronts, those misanthropic ideas will keep popping back up. It's probably a good idea to stop trying to whack-a-mole one at a time and smash the whole god damn machine.
Ditto. See my comment.
Thank you, Rob, for trying to enlighten Jen and Matt and their followers. Thanks Jen and Matt for choosing Rob to provide the enlightenment. Contrary to what other posters have stated, I think Rob wasn’t giving his own opinion of those who “reject the woke madness” - and FYI, I am one of those who reject it - but rather was using the terminology that is being floated by politicians, left-leaning media, social justice warriors and activists, and NDP voters. I find that Rob is one of the most fair and balanced political commentators in B.C. The bulk of the votes are located in the left-leaning Vancouver and Victoria and their suburbs. I’m not in love with Rustad, but I agree with Kevin Falcon that on his worst day, Rustad is better than Eby on his best day. Eby is a taller, younger Trudeau type right down to the “uhs”. Thanks, again Rob.
It feels like BC provincial politics is repeating a cycle that we saw in the '90s: back then, we saw the defeat of an increasingly rickety, unpopular, scandal-plagued right wing Social Credit by the NDP. The first part of that NDP government was relatively moderate before a change of leaders led to a sharp leftward turn and an escalating series of blunders. A new right wing successor party rose, attracted a lot of the remnants of the old Socreds, and defeated the NDP. They in turn became increasingly unpopular and plagued with corruption scandals and were defeated by the NDP (barely.) The NDP started out in a relatively moderate direction until they changed leader and pivoted hard left, and now a new right wing successor party has emerged...
That is how I see it as well. I didn’t live here for the So-Cred stuff; although, I was aware of it. The rest of it played out as you describe.
I’m not so sure “mainstream” BC voters don’t actually lean towards Rustad’s position on (hot button) social issues like transgendered athletes in female sports, gender-neutral washrooms, etc. Perhaps he will alienate himself from downtown Vancouver and Victoria and the university campuses, but it’s hard to claim that those constituencies represent “mainstream British Columbia voters." And under what circumstances would those constituencies ever consider voting for anyone other than a left wing party?
Sadly, Vancouver, Victoria, and the Universities have a large number of the constituencies.
..... a clarification: during the last 20 or so years, the "left" has ever so glaringly become the "left wingnut party". The old "left" that some of us remember, the "left" with whom you could discuss, is gone. Only a few splinters remain, mostly gone quiet for fear of being cancelled - by the "left wingnut party" .
Great look into BC politics, thanks. I do note, however, that it is not actually fringe that think that men should not compete in women's sports, and Rustad’s "preoccupation" with gender-neutral washrooms and sexual orientation education in classrooms is actually a concern that many people share.
BC Voters would like to know if Rustad will be identified on the list of politicians who accept the invitations of the Chinese consular officials to socialize with the United Front(UF), to sympathize with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) officials to accept financial support and to be willing to vote with the conscience of foreigners and favour China, not British Columbia and Canada.
Several current candidates for office have the taint of B.C. being the only “Belt and Road” location in Canada with a Surrey location established during the Liberal Christy Clark era.
Elections Canada have not developed a checklist for constituency leaders to use when vetting a candidate, despite knowing elections were happening in several provinces. It must be assumed that interference happens at all levels of voting- civic, provincial, federal.
As with Trudeau, photos of CCP celebrations, attendance at United Front events, offers to host events for candidates, donations to the candidate signal interest from China. Candidates need to be questioned further if their photo albums contain those pictures of record.
Would be an interesting article to read if Rob Shaw could contemplate this currently under discussed topic.
I’m guessing pols don’t get invites directly from Chinese consular officials, but from astroturf “community business organizations” which are United Front front organizations.
Where’s Amor de Cosmos when you need him?
It seems that Kevin Falcon took a page out of the Biden book and collapsed his party to support the BC Conservatives in an effort to defeat the NDP. Okay, depending on your opinion and political view that this was a courageous or necessary move, Mr. Falcon, or his successor, could have used the next four years to bring the party back to life instead of simply collapsing it to support a party they heavily criticized. Where is the integrity in this? I have always voted centre right over the years and for a party that offered a balanced approach to fiscal management, economic growth and social issues. Now I find myself questioning who to vote for? A NDP party that is fiscally irresponsible, taxes us to death and is steering the province into another downgrade of our credit rating? The NDP, after announcing a 5 billion dollar deficit, actually stated that being the worst of the best is a good thing given the fact that the BC debt to GDP ratio is best of all provinces. Wow, great job NDP, only 5 billion in the hole this year with absolutely no intention to fix it. The alternative is to vote for a far to the right party with a leader who we don't really know, who has some pretty strange opinions when it comes to climate change, carbon taxes, vaccine mandates and so forth. It is like our federal election; who to vote for? The " left of centre left" Trudeau or the populist bully and not so statesman like "right of centre right" Poilievre? Not a great choice at all in my opinion but then I always believed that not voting at all really disqualifies you from criticizing a ruling or opposition party.
It think Falcon took a cold hard look at the situation and did what he had to do. That party was unrebuildable. And he owns a good chunk of that and at least admitted it.
And yes, we are poorly led federally and provincially. Eby has screwed up so badly on multiple files that I couldn't vote for him. Rustad I'll listen to. At least he appears to be purging the 5G loons.
Just a note that there are several typos and grammatical errors in the article.
We give prizes to commentators who point them out so we can fix. :) JG
so what?
A good article! It just needs a few more points to contemplate upon: Both the BC United and BC Conservatives had already nominated many, if not most, of their candidates before this shot-gun wedding. The sheer complexity of determining who will run and who will bow out is a political nightmare across most of BC's 93 ridings. There are/were high profile people (including United incumbents) and earnest newcomers being tossed aside or simply quitting for wont of an available electoral district. Added to this was how United leader Falcon only told the candidates and party officials of his decision via teleconference literally minutes before the announcement press conference. (the presser was delayed for almost 30 minutes while he surprised his people about his unilateral decision.) United became Untied. Will the BC Conservatives have enough time to unite for the election? They still need to put together a party platform while the team isn't even yet formed.
Thanks for your piece Rob (I very much enjoyed "A Matter of Confidence"!) and thanks Matt and Jen for making good on your promise to include more about our weird westernmost province in your publication.
Also, it needs stating: anyone who even hints about exercising skepticism about the role of CO2 in anthropogenic climate change should be immediately discredited, but alas, here we are.
Is the genesis of politicians expressing utterly stupid idea's and conspiracy theories not linked to the GOP in 2015? It seems they've all been going downhill fast since then. Common sense is nowhere near common, and humanity seems to have lost its built in "stink test" about whether something is believable. Stupid has invaded politics to unimaginable levels of stupidity. As I've said many times, actual "leaders" are on the endangered species list.