[defaultname]

"but it's not representative of the electorate"

The two parties supporting this measure got 8,862,977 votes. Every other party together got 8,287,006. And the best part still is that the Conservatives and BQ get to vote against this measure specifically because they know it will pass. It's a free vote where they get to claim overreach while also not suffering by defeating the measure and the ensuing problems end up being placed in their laps. That's how adversarial parliaments function.

So your claim about the electorate was simply wrong, even if we ignore that it is fundamentally ignorant in the way Canadian government even functions.

[mardifoufs]

The NDP's support was very weak but even then, my point was not about the Canadian parliament works. I'm very familiar with how our elections work, you just missed my point.

The comment I was replying to was assuming some sort of mass Canadian consensus/unity w.r.t to the situation which is obviously not the case, because as the figures you cited yourself show, trudeau doesn't have a very strong democratic mandate. I'm not saying the majority thinks this or that way, I'm saying the GP cannot assume a consensus.

Also if you are actually saying that the conservative party is just voting against because they know that it will pass, you probably missed the parliament debates of the past 2 weeks. Because they have been very very vocally opposed to what trudeau is doing. Much more so than at any other point during the pandemic.

If anyone is playing politics it's the NDP since they basically condemned trudeau while still voting in support, since they can't afford an election right now.

I don't know why you'd think that there's no opposition to such a radical measure (you are basically saying that even the CPC is not actually opposing this?!). I guess it's in line with the trend I've been seeing online of canadians ramping up the rhetoric against the protests

[defaultname]

"you just missed my point"

No, I didn't. You pointed out the number of votes between two parties to demonstrate mandate. Only the actual numbers betray a completely different situation. You don't get to casually claim that one whole set don't matter because it makes your story work better.

"NDP since they basically condemned trudeau"

Again you're speaking like you don't know how politics work in Canada. How else do you think they will frame it? They know that if it is not passed, armies of trucks (parked just outside the city in a set of farmer fields) will return back to Ottawa, and yes they would be blamed for that, and there would be consequences. So they support it while (perhaps rightly) pointing out that it is only necessary because of bungling by Trudeau. That's what they do.

Do you think 100% of Liberals and NDP support this? I have no doubt you'll say no, that you actually think most of them are against it. Now here's a better question - do you think 100% of Conservatives and BQ are against this? The notion is simply absurd, and both parties have leaned heavily on extraordinary powers historically. There are countless examples of Conservatives in particular demanding extreme responses to, for instance, aboriginal blockades. Historically the Conservatives have been a very law and order party.

And the emergency action should never have been necessary. My province, Ontario, has a literal army of officers, heavy equipment, and penalties and measures to squash this occupation at the outset. There was a bit of negligence, territorial behaviour, and perhaps intentional blindness, that led to it becoming such a problem.

Although it is a bit rich that the #1 reason given for opposition to the motion is that the motion was successfully used to clear Ottawa. Basically that now that the problem is superficially resolved, now it isn't necessary. Not that it was never necessary.

[mardifoufs]

I'm sorry but when did I ever say that every liberal is for what's happening or that every conservative is against?! I literally said that I'm not assuming any level of support, as opposed to what the comment I was replying to did. My point was that it's ridiculous to pretend there is a consensus. Of course I know that a lot of conservatives support the measures and if anything I'm sure the majority of Bloc supporters do. You are just ignoring what I said and assuming I just dont know how the system work.

Okay yes the CPC has been historically a law and order party so what? Trudeau has been very pro consensus/liberalism etc in the past too so what's your point? Just look at how he dealt with protests that he agreed with. And when has the CPC ever enacted the emergency measures act?

Not that it has anything to do with my original point anyways, which was that the original commenter was weirdly defensive about "attacking Canadian values" and that whole canadians don't necessarily agree with the American vision of freedom there is a huge line between that and agreeing wholesale with suspending the charter because of a protest.

You are also coming up with tons of ad-hoc explanations for everyone: the conservatives secretly support because of they are the party of law and order this but voted against, the ndp secretly supported this but attacked trudeau, the bloc secretly supported this but didn't. I guess that's your opinion (and not a fact) and yeah there is a lot of theater in parliamentary politics but even if we assume it's all just bs pandering they are still representing an electorate. The conservatives have had no problem voting for pandemic measures earlier when their voters supported it.

The CPC and PPC had a total of 40% of the votes, which is still a huge chunk of the population (yes not all of them are opposed to the measures but the only reliable figure we have is still the votes), which makes the GP's argument moot. That's it, it has nothing to do with what happens in parliement.

[defaultname]

"I literally said that I'm not assuming any level of support"

Your entire post was predicated on an assumption about the level of support.

"weirdly defensive"

It is neither defensive or weird. A lot of Americans in particular are grossly misinformed about {broadly gestures at almost everything related to this}, but they have very deep opinions. It's actually telling that you tried to portray the inverse (e.g. Canadians talking about America), when that simply isn't true: We are overwhelmed with American news and political happenings for time eternal, in media, news, social media, etc, where most Americans have a very superficial understanding of Canada for obvious, practical reasons. DHH's post panders to an alt-right crypto crowd, but to every Canadian it looks like ignorant clowning.

"You are also coming up with tons of ad-hoc explanations for everyone"

You're injecting a ridiculous number of strawmen. I argued against your statement that political positions on a vote = actual reasoned opinion. That has never, ever been the case in Canadian politics. No rational person expects it to be the case.

"agreeing wholesale with suspending the charter"

And with this statement, everything you've said on this entire topic has been completely discounted. The emergency act does not upset a single charter right. Not one. As with DHH ridiculous claims about martial law, it betrays that the speaker's hysterical take can be ignored as baseless rhetoric.

Further, the root post nowhere claimed "all Canadians support this". They noted that our base values are different and that many Americans aren't fully informed, and that is 100% true. As you've done with my posts, you're bizarrely spinning that out into something completely unsaid.