| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 26 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 49:20:16 |
| Calls: | 632 |
| Files: | 1,187 |
| D/L today: |
7 files (5,100K bytes) |
| Messages: | 177,468 |
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36rC>PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on their body that can't be scratched!!!
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56?PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36?PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on >> their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his >'administration'.
I'll do it privately.--
You've made Canadians really really really angry. But you're used to being >hated aren't you. It's what American is made of and built upon. Bang Bang, >you're dead. In Trumps world it's more - -"I'm going to play with you for a >while before I kill you".
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56rC>PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36rC>PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>> On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on >> their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his 'administration'.
I'll do it privately.
You've made Canadians really really really angry. But you're used to being hated aren't you. It's what American is made of and built upon. Bang Bang, you're dead. In Trumps world it's more - -"I'm going to play with you for a while before I kill you".
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56rC>PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36rC>PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on >> their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his 'administration'.
I'll do it privately.
You've made Canadians really really really angry. But you're used to being hated aren't you. It's what American is made of and built upon. Bang Bang, you're dead. In Trumps world it's more - -"I'm going to play with you for a while before I kill you".
On 10/8/2025 2:59 PM, Tara wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56?PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36?PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>>> On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on
their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his
'administration'.
I'll do it privately.
You've made Canadians really really really angry. But you're used to being >> hated aren't you. It's what American is made of and built upon. Bang Bang, >> you're dead. In Trumps world it's more - -"I'm going to play with you for a >> while before I kill you".
That's quite the story you've written for yourself.
On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 18:59:05 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56?PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36?PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>>
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on
their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his
'administration'.
May your nose grow a beard is good.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
I'll do it privately.
You've made Canadians really really really angry. But you're used to being >> hated aren't you. It's what American is made of and built upon. Bang Bang, >> you're dead. In Trumps world it's more - -"I'm going to play with you for a >> while before I kill you".
On Oct 8, 2025 at 3:08:52?PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote:
On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 18:59:05 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56?PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36?PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>>>
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on
their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his
'administration'.
May your nose grow a beard is good.
Don't be silly. I don't mess around with little nose beards. This situation >calls for a serious curse. We're nice, we look for the good in everything and >do fair dealings, we compromise. But we can only be nice for so long.
I would suggest that if Americans get bombed by someone who hates them, that >they not try to land their escape planes in Newfoundland again.
--
I'll do it privately.
You've made Canadians really really really angry. But you're used to being >>> hated aren't you. It's what American is made of and built upon. Bang Bang, >>> you're dead. In Trumps world it's more - -"I'm going to play with you for a >>> while before I kill you".
On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 15:15:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:59 PM, Tara wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56?PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36?PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>>>> On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on
their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his
'administration'.
I'll do it privately.
You've made Canadians really really really angry. But you're used to being >>> hated aren't you. It's what American is made of and built upon. Bang Bang, >>> you're dead. In Trumps world it's more - -"I'm going to play with you for a >>> while before I kill you".
That's quite the story you've written for yourself.
This what it feels like from here. You and your pals are trying to
force your view of the world on the rest of the world. Until
recently, your opinions did not matter a lot beyond discussion fodder,
but now you have the power to impose your notions. The game has
changed. You are no longer an annoying buzz. You are a danger.
Fuck you and your denials. We don't buy it.
May your nose grow a beard.
On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 18:59:05 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56?PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36?PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>>
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on
their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his
'administration'.
May your nose grow a beard is good.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
I'll do it privately.
You've made Canadians really really really angry. But you're used to being >> hated aren't you. It's what American is made of and built upon. Bang Bang, >> you're dead. In Trumps world it's more - -"I'm going to play with you for a >> while before I kill you".
On Oct 8, 2025 at 3:08:52rC>PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote:
On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 18:59:05 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56?PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36?PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>>>
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on
their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his
'administration'.
May your nose grow a beard is good.
Unlike Americans who are volitile, Canadians are slow to anger. We are tough
but quiet and we are peacemakers and keepers until we've reached a point where
we've had enough....well, we're there now.
Carney is a good person and respresents who we are. To see him have to grovel is hard to take. How some of you can't see that Trump is a bully, is beyond my
ken. Prob his supporters don't care.
It's too bad, really, because we (Canadians & Americans) were once friends. We
thought we were, anyway. But wait, we had a war between us once. You tried to take our territory. We fought you off. But we had help then. Not now.
Once we were all together. We split because we wanted different lives and valued different things. Those who wanted a brand new kind of government and those who were happy with the one they had. We were different kinds of people and our choices demonstrated that.
My daughter asked me: "Why are you even talking to American Trump supporters?"
Not anymore.
On 10/8/2025 2:06 PM, Tara wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 3:08:52?PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote:
On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 18:59:05 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56?PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36?PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on
their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his
'administration'.
May your nose grow a beard is good.
Unlike Americans who are volitile, Canadians are slow to anger. We are tough
but quiet and we are peacemakers and keepers until we've reached a point where
we've had enough....well, we're there now.
Carney is a good person and respresents who we are. To see him have to grovel
is hard to take. How some of you can't see that Trump is a bully, is beyond my
ken. Prob his supporters don't care.
It's too bad, really, because we (Canadians & Americans) were once friends. We
thought we were, anyway. But wait, we had a war between us once. You tried to
take our territory. We fought you off. But we had help then. Not now.
Once we were all together. We split because we wanted different lives and
valued different things. Those who wanted a brand new kind of government and >> those who were happy with the one they had. We were different kinds of people
and our choices demonstrated that.
My daughter asked me: "Why are you even talking to American Trump supporters?"
Not anymore.
I don't think any American dislikes any Canadian. I personally
don't know anyone who dislikes a Canadian.
Trump is insane. And I don't mean this as an insult. I mean it
as a diagnosis.
His popularity is plummeting. It is at 41% currently, as Jimmy
Kimmel pointed out yesterday, while Kimmel's is at 44%... >https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2025/10/07/trump-jimmy-kimmel-monologue-approval-rating/86561916007/
He's getting court cases thrown back in his face, FINALLY, and
this will increase as judges realize that they can do this, as
they realize they are the only current check on Trump's insane, >unconstitutional actions.
As I've mentioned before, the only final check on this mad-man
is when 17 Republican senators admit that he is damaging the
country, and vote to convict him of impeachment charges.
I don't know when it will come, but at this point I think it--
will happen.
Ned
On 10/8/2025 2:06 PM, Tara wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 3:08:52rC>PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote: >>
On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 18:59:05 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56?PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36?PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on
their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his
'administration'.
May your nose grow a beard is good.
Unlike Americans who are volitile, Canadians are slow to anger. We are tough
but quiet and we are peacemakers and keepers until we've reached a point where
we've had enough....well, we're there now.
Carney is a good person and respresents who we are. To see him have to grovel
is hard to take. How some of you can't see that Trump is a bully, is beyond my
ken. Prob his supporters don't care.
It's too bad, really, because we (Canadians & Americans) were once friends. We
thought we were, anyway. But wait, we had a war between us once. You tried to
take our territory. We fought you off. But we had help then. Not now.
Once we were all together. We split because we wanted different lives and
valued different things. Those who wanted a brand new kind of government and >> those who were happy with the one they had. We were different kinds of people
and our choices demonstrated that.
My daughter asked me: "Why are you even talking to American Trump supporters?"
Not anymore.
I don't think any American dislikes any Canadian. I personally
don't know anyone who dislikes a Canadian.
Trump is insane. And I don't mean this as an insult. I mean it
as a diagnosis.
His popularity is plummeting. It is at 41% currently, as Jimmy
Kimmel pointed out yesterday, while Kimmel's is at 44%... https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2025/10/07/trump-jimmy-kimmel-monologue-approval-rating/86561916007/
He's getting court cases thrown back in his face, FINALLY, and
this will increase as judges realize that they can do this, as
they realize they are the only current check on Trump's insane, unconstitutional actions.
As I've mentioned before, the only final check on this mad-man
is when 17 Republican senators admit that he is damaging the
country, and vote to convict him of impeachment charges.
I don't know when it will come, but at this point I think it
will happen.
Ned--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
On 10/8/2025 2:06 PM, Tara wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 3:08:52rC>PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote: >>
On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 18:59:05 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:34:56?PM EDT, "Tara" <tsm@fastmail.ca> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2025 at 2:26:36?PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
May every Trump voter and follower in the U.S. of A. have a constant itch on
their body that can't be scratched!!!
Just call it a Curse from Canada. Because weve had enough bud.
And I can think of a much more serious Scottish curse to put on Trump and his
'administration'.
May your nose grow a beard is good.
Unlike Americans who are volitile, Canadians are slow to anger. We are tough >> but quiet and we are peacemakers and keepers until we've reached a point where
we've had enough....well, we're there now.
Carney is a good person and respresents who we are. To see him have to grovel
is hard to take. How some of you can't see that Trump is a bully, is beyond my
ken. Prob his supporters don't care.
It's too bad, really, because we (Canadians & Americans) were once friends. We
thought we were, anyway. But wait, we had a war between us once. You tried to
take our territory. We fought you off. But we had help then. Not now.
Once we were all together. We split because we wanted different lives and
valued different things. Those who wanted a brand new kind of government and >> those who were happy with the one they had. We were different kinds of people
and our choices demonstrated that.
My daughter asked me: "Why are you even talking to American Trump supporters?"
Not anymore.
I don't think any American dislikes any Canadian. I personally
don't know anyone who dislikes a Canadian.
Trump is insane. And I don't mean this as an insult. I mean it
as a diagnosis.
His popularity is plummeting. It is at 41% currently, as Jimmy
Kimmel pointed out yesterday, while Kimmel's is at 44%... https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2025/10/07/trump-jimmy-kimmel-monologue-approval-rating/86561916007/
He's getting court cases thrown back in his face, FINALLY, and
this will increase as judges realize that they can do this, as
they realize they are the only current check on Trump's insane, unconstitutional actions.
As I've mentioned before, the only final check on this mad-man
is when 17 Republican senators admit that he is damaging the
country, and vote to convict him of impeachment charges.
I don't know when it will come, but at this point I think it
will happen.
Ned
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby
increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby
increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy. >>
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby
increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy. >>>
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually
opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby
increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy. >>>>
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually
opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you
impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in
defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The
agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not
that we care about your problems with propaganda.
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby
increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy. >>>>
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually
opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you
impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in
defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The
agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not
that we care about your problems with propaganda.
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does >>>>> not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that >>>>> way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby
increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually
opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you
impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in
defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The
agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not
that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own
ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
On Oct 10, 2025 at 9:55:13rC>AM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does >>>>>> not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that >>>>>> way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby
increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually
opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you
impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in
defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The
agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not
that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own
ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
Americans are socially and politically polarized. Canadians are not.
I originally posted that article to show/inform Americans (most everyone here), what's going on in my country in relation to yours and how we feel about it. I'm all about information and awareness, not propaganda or trying to
convince.
I have no desire to convince anyone of anything. The results are inauthentic and I've never wanted that kind of on-going responsibility.
Don't worry, I won't be posting any more info.
On 10/10/2025 10:39 AM, Tara wrote:
On Oct 10, 2025 at 9:55:13rC>AM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does >>>>>>> not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that >>>>>>> way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby
increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually
opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no >>>> reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you
impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in
defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home >>>> with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The
agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not
that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone. >>> It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good >>> thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own
ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
Americans are socially and politically polarized. Canadians are not.
I originally posted that article to show/inform Americans (most everyone
here), what's going on in my country in relation to yours and how we feel
about it. I'm all about information and awareness, not propaganda or trying to
convince.
I have no desire to convince anyone of anything. The results are inauthentic >> and I've never wanted that kind of on-going responsibility.
Don't worry, I won't be posting any more info.
I wouldn't want to discourage you from posting anything you find interesting. Just because I might object to or critique something is no reason to stop IMO.
As to Canada's monolithic social consciousness, I don't doubt you that
it appears overwhelming in its uniformity. But you do have some
dissidents even if they aren't reported by the government supported media.
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does >>>>> not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that >>>>> way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby
increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually
opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you
impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in
defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The
agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not
that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good >thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own
ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
On 10/10/2025 10:39 AM, Tara wrote:
On Oct 10, 2025 at 9:55:13rC>AM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does >>>>>>>> not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that >>>>>>>> way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually
opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no >>>>> reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you
impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in
defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home >>>>> with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The
agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not
that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone. >>>> It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good >>>> thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
Americans are socially and politically polarized. Canadians are not.
I originally posted that article to show/inform Americans (most everyone >>> here), what's going on in my country in relation to yours and how we feel >>> about it. I'm all about information and awareness, not propaganda or trying to
convince.
I have no desire to convince anyone of anything. The results are inauthentic
and I've never wanted that kind of on-going responsibility.
Don't worry, I won't be posting any more info.
I wouldn't want to discourage you from posting anything you find
interesting. Just because I might object to or critique something is no
reason to stop IMO.
As to Canada's monolithic social consciousness, I don't doubt you that
it appears overwhelming in its uniformity. But you do have some
dissidents even if they aren't reported by the government supported media.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
Nothing is 100%. That would be too scary.
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does >>>>>> not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that >>>>>> way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby
increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually
opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you
impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in
defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The
agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not
that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own
ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of
an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not.
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a
person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and
dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st
state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you
about what canadians think?
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does >>>>>>> not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that >>>>>>> way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby
increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually
opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no >>>> reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you
impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in
defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home >>>> with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The
agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not
that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible
regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good >>> thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own
ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of
an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth
presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not.
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a
person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and
dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st
state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you
about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does >>>>>>>> not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that >>>>>>>> way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually
opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no >>>>> reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you
impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in
defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home >>>>> with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The
agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not
that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone. >>>
regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good >>>> thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of
an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth
presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not.
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a
person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and
dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st
state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you
about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much
like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, polievre's popularity tanked.
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does >>>>>>>>> not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that >>>>>>>>> way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no >>>>>> reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you
impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home >>>>>> with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone. >>>>
regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good >>>>> thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth
presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a
person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and
dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st
state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you
about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much
like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada,
polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and >became a big deal?
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>> regardless of how presented.
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no >>>>>>> reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home >>>>>>> with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone. >>>>>
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good >>>>>> thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st
state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much
like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada,
polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and
became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny
his previous alignment.
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>> regardless of how presented.
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no >>>>>>> reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home >>>>>>> with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone. >>>>>
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good >>>>>> thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st
state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much
like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada,
polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and
became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny
his previous alignment.
On 10/10/2025 2:49 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no >>>>>>>> reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home >>>>>>>> with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>>> regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>>>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st >>>>>> state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much
like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, >>>> polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and
became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny
his previous alignment.
"Pierre Poilievre publicly responded to Donald Trump's suggestion that
Canada become the 51st U.S. state by urging him to stay out of Canada's election, stating, rCLPresident Trump, stay out of our election. The only people who will decide the future of Canada are Canadians at the ballot boxrCY.
"He emphasized CanadarCOs sovereignty, declaring, rCLCanada will always be proud, sovereign and independent and we will NEVER be the 51st staterCY. Poilievre also used the moment to advocate for national strength, saying Canadians could vote for change to rCLstrengthen our country, stand on our own two feet and stand up to America from a position of strengthrCY.
Earlier, in February 2025, he had similarly asserted on social media, rCLCanada will never be the 51st state. Period. We are a great and independent countryrCY.
Hmmm. Maybe he should have tried something different from Carney.
On 10/10/2025 2:49 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no >>>>>>>> reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home >>>>>>>> with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>>> regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>>>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st >>>>>> state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much
like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, >>>> polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and
became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny
his previous alignment.
"Pierre Poilievre publicly responded to Donald Trump's suggestion that >Canada become the 51st U.S. state by urging him to stay out of Canada's >election, stating, oPresident Trump, stay out of our election. The only >people who will decide the future of Canada are Canadians at the ballot >boxo.
"He emphasized CanadaAs sovereignty, declaring, oCanada will always be >proud, sovereign and independent and we will NEVER be the 51st stateo. >Poilievre also used the moment to advocate for national strength, saying >Canadians could vote for change to ostrengthen our country, stand on our
own two feet and stand up to America from a position of strengtho.
Earlier, in February 2025, he had similarly asserted on social media, >oCanada will never be the 51st state. Period. We are a great and
independent countryo.
Hmmm. Maybe he should have tried something different from Carney.
On Oct 10, 2025 at 2:49:40?PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no >>>>>>>> reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home >>>>>>>> with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>>> regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>>>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st >>>>>> state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much
like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, >>>> polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and
became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny
his previous alignment.
Sorry, but there never was an alignment. And he never was, or claimed to be >like Trump. This, from 2024 before the election. >https://thevarsity.ca/2024/11/03/opinion-no-pierre-poilievre-is-not-donald-trump/
I think our Conservative party is comparable to and sort of aligns politically >with the American center right. Emphasis on Center.
On Oct 10, 2025 at 3:06:18rC>PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
On 10/10/2025 2:49 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>>>> regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>>>>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>>>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st >>>>>>> state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much
like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, >>>>> polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and >>>> became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny
his previous alignment.
"Pierre Poilievre publicly responded to Donald Trump's suggestion that
Canada become the 51st U.S. state by urging him to stay out of Canada's
election, stating, rCLPresident Trump, stay out of our election. The only
people who will decide the future of Canada are Canadians at the ballot
boxrCY.
"He emphasized CanadarCOs sovereignty, declaring, rCLCanada will always be >> proud, sovereign and independent and we will NEVER be the 51st staterCY.
Poilievre also used the moment to advocate for national strength, saying
Canadians could vote for change to rCLstrengthen our country, stand on our >> own two feet and stand up to America from a position of strengthrCY.
Earlier, in February 2025, he had similarly asserted on social media,
rCLCanada will never be the 51st state. Period. We are a great and
independent countryrCY.
Hmmm. Maybe he should have tried something different from Carney.
It was Carney who moved right. Now there isn't much difference in policy. If Poilievre moves too far right now, he's toast and he knows it.
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 19:12:39 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca>
wrote:
On Oct 10, 2025 at 2:49:40?PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>>>> regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>>>>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>>>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st >>>>>>> state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much
like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, >>>>> polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and >>>> became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny
his previous alignment.
Sorry, but there never was an alignment. And he never was, or claimed to be >> like Trump. This, from 2024 before the election.
https://thevarsity.ca/2024/11/03/opinion-no-pierre-poilievre-is-not-donald-trump/
I think our Conservative party is comparable to and sort of aligns politically
with the American center right. Emphasis on Center.
Hmm, not the way I heard it.
I would say canadian conservative is like us liberal.
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 19:12:39 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca>
wrote:
On Oct 10, 2025 at 2:49:40?PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>>>> regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>>>>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>>>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st >>>>>>> state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much
like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, >>>>> polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and >>>> became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny
his previous alignment.
Sorry, but there never was an alignment. And he never was, or claimed to be >> like Trump. This, from 2024 before the election.
https://thevarsity.ca/2024/11/03/opinion-no-pierre-poilievre-is-not-donald-trump/
I think our Conservative party is comparable to and sort of aligns politically
with the American center right. Emphasis on Center.
Hmm, not the way I heard it.
I would say canadian conservative is like us liberal.
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 19:12:39 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca>
wrote:
On Oct 10, 2025 at 2:49:40?PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>>>> regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own >>>>>>>> ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>>>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st >>>>>>> state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much
like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, >>>>> polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and >>>> became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny
his previous alignment.
Sorry, but there never was an alignment. And he never was, or claimed to be >>like Trump. This, from 2024 before the election. >>https://thevarsity.ca/2024/11/03/opinion-no-pierre-poilievre-is-not-donald-trump/
I think our Conservative party is comparable to and sort of aligns politically
with the American center right. Emphasis on Center.
Hmm, not the way I heard it.
I would say canadian conservative is like us liberal.
On Oct 10, 2025 at 3:43:27?PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 19:12:39 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca>
wrote:
On Oct 10, 2025 at 2:49:40?PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote: >>>
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>>>>> regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own
ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>>>>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>>>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st >>>>>>>> state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much >>>>>> like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, >>>>>> polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and >>>>> became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny
his previous alignment.
Sorry, but there never was an alignment. And he never was, or claimed to be >>> like Trump. This, from 2024 before the election.
https://thevarsity.ca/2024/11/03/opinion-no-pierre-poilievre-is-not-donald-trump/
I think our Conservative party is comparable to and sort of aligns politically
with the American center right. Emphasis on Center.
Hmm, not the way I heard it.
I would say canadian conservative is like us liberal.
US Liberals - do you mean Democrats?
On 10/10/2025 3:43 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 19:12:39 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca>
wrote:
On Oct 10, 2025 at 2:49:40?PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote: >>>
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides.
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>>>>> regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own
ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of >>>>>>>> an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not. >>>>>>>>
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st >>>>>>>> state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much >>>>>> like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, >>>>>> polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and >>>>> became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny
his previous alignment.
Sorry, but there never was an alignment. And he never was, or claimed to be >>> like Trump. This, from 2024 before the election.
https://thevarsity.ca/2024/11/03/opinion-no-pierre-poilievre-is-not-donald-trump/
I think our Conservative party is comparable to and sort of aligns politically
with the American center right. Emphasis on Center.
Hmm, not the way I heard it.
I would say canadian conservative is like us liberal.
Meanwhile the left side of the US Dems are calling themselves Democratic Socialists now.
On Oct 10, 2025 at 4:08:34rC>PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
On 10/10/2025 3:43 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 19:12:39 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca>
wrote:
On Oct 10, 2025 at 2:49:40?PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote: >>>>
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state
Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides. >>>>>>>>>>>
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The >>>>>>>>>>> agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not >>>>>>>>>>> that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>>>>>> regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own
ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of
an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth >>>>>>>>> presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not.
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a >>>>>>>>> person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>>>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st >>>>>>>>> state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you >>>>>>>>> about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much >>>>>>> like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, >>>>>>> polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and >>>>>> became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny >>>>> his previous alignment.
Sorry, but there never was an alignment. And he never was, or claimed to be
like Trump. This, from 2024 before the election.
https://thevarsity.ca/2024/11/03/opinion-no-pierre-poilievre-is-not-donald-trump/
I think our Conservative party is comparable to and sort of aligns politically
with the American center right. Emphasis on Center.
Hmm, not the way I heard it.
I would say canadian conservative is like us liberal.
Meanwhile the left side of the US Dems are calling themselves Democratic
Socialists now.
haha. That would be what our left wing party (New Democrats) call themselves. They lost so many seats in the last election that they no longer have official
party status in Parliament. But they will be back - We need them to keep everything in balance. And to blackmail the Libs. for support (or not) ;). Anyway, I appreciate your interest in how things work here. My views seem to be simpatico with and typical of the majority of Canadians. I know my country and it's mood pretty well. I'm interested about how other countries work (or don't work) and why.
On 10/10/2025 21:37, Tara wrote:
On Oct 10, 2025 at 4:08:34rC>PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
On 10/10/2025 3:43 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 19:12:39 -0000 (UTC), Tara <tsm@fastmail.ca>
wrote:
On Oct 10, 2025 at 2:49:40?PM EDT, "Noah Sombrero" <fedora@fea.st> wrote: >>>>>
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:42:24 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:54 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 13:44:12 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/10/2025 11:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:55:13 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:46:01 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/9/2025 9:16 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 08:59:08 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2025 2:26 PM, Wilson wrote:
On 10/8/2025 1:58 PM, Tara wrote:
outrages uttered by an unhinged head of state >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sigh. They may never learn.
The thing here is, this sort of ad hominem used in news articles does
not work to convince anyone. It riles up those who already think that
way but it also riles up those who think the opposite. Thereby >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> increasing the polarization of society.
As seen in the last presidential election, overall it's a failed strategy.
But still they continue with it.
You mean *we* (both sides) continue with it.
I was addressing the original "news" article, which was actually >>>>>>>>>>>>> opinion, thinly disguised propaganda.
To the extent that it did not it did not tell both sides. >>>>>>>>>>>>
On the other hand, this was from a canadian source. Canadians have no
reason to get involved in your propaganda wars. Except when you >>>>>>>>>>>> impose 40% tariffs, etc. Then canadians can have a word to say in >>>>>>>>>>>> defense of their own interests. Be dismayed at how their pm came home
with so little to show. No we don't think it was his failing. The
agreement up here is that the g&m article was mostly right on. Not
that we care about your problems with propaganda.
The point is, that sort of propaganda is not working to convince anyone.
Convincing anyone of anything was not the intent. Not even possible >>>>>>>>>> regardless of how presented.
It's just furthering social polarization. If Canada thinks that's a good
thing to do, well that *is* what nation states do to further their own
ends. And it's helpful to recognize it for what it is.
That article was not a product of a nation state. It was a product of
an individual who had something useful to say, an understanding worth
presenting to canadians. You are an accidental observer.
You need not like what he said. It was guaranteed that you would not.
There are a few people who disagree in canada. That need not deter a
person from presenting worthy understanding.
Poilievre might well have defeated carney. But along came himbo and >>>>>>>>>> dumped a load of tariffs, suggested that canada should be the 51st >>>>>>>>>> state. Boom, Poilievre is out carney is in. What does that tell you
about what canadians think?
It does not tell me much to be honest.
I forgot to mention that Poilievre claimed the virtue of being much >>>>>>>> like himbo. Himbo canadian style. When himbo did his dirt to canada, >>>>>>>> polievre's popularity tanked.
What exactly did he say about Trump after that whole thing blew up and >>>>>>> became a big deal?
Not much. Nothing much he could say. There was no way he could deny >>>>>> his previous alignment.
Sorry, but there never was an alignment. And he never was, or claimed to be
like Trump. This, from 2024 before the election.
https://thevarsity.ca/2024/11/03/opinion-no-pierre-poilievre-is-not-donald-trump/
I think our Conservative party is comparable to and sort of aligns politically
with the American center right. Emphasis on Center.
Hmm, not the way I heard it.
I would say canadian conservative is like us liberal.
Meanwhile the left side of the US Dems are calling themselves Democratic >>> Socialists now.
haha. That would be what our left wing party (New Democrats) call themselves.
They lost so many seats in the last election that they no longer have official
party status in Parliament. But they will be back - We need them to keep
everything in balance. And to blackmail the Libs. for support (or not) ;). >> Anyway, I appreciate your interest in how things work here. My views seem to >> be simpatico with and typical of the majority of Canadians. I know my country
and it's mood pretty well. I'm interested about how other countries work (or >> don't work) and why.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUBAx8jbYNs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS-0Az7dgRY