Reminder their constitution doesn’t allow elections during war, for good reason - how tf are you supposed to vote when you’re being bombed?

I’m excited for these to come to Canada.

Sounds like AI is ready to replace CEOs

Lots of commenters who didn’t read… these were only used for voting on policy. The leadership vote was a paper ballot.

This is more likely extreme incompetence, not some nefarious plot.

It’s both. It’s a bubble because of the amount of investment and lack of actual revenue, but it’s also being used to replace humans. We will have to pick up the pieces when the bubble bursts, but in the mean time it’s going to concentrate wealth and lower the standard of living.

… but why would there be a need for games for in-car displays?

He manually updates the projections, though I’m not sure why he doesn’t update the Alberta one very often, could just be that the data is not very good with so few polls being done.

Read about his methodology - this is not a graph of every poll, it’s a projection on the aggregate.

The graph is a projection based on an aggregation of polls, it already accounts for it. For context, it’s from https://338canada.com/alberta

https://press.liaisonstrategies.ca/alberta-ucp-ndp-locked-in-tight-race/

The critical battleground of Calgary shows a competitive landscape, with the UCP leading at 48% and the NDP trailing at 43%.

I’ve been several times in the last few years and haven’t had any issues, they’re very welcoming and friendly.

(but not in Kyoto…)

It’s improving but NDP is still polling 5 points behind in Calgary, which is concerning

We are so fucked if we don’t dethrone this bitch next election

Plug-in vehicles must be under $50,000 to qualify and be made by countries Canada has free trade agreements with, which would exclude any vehicles made in China. The price cap will not apply to Canadian-made vehicles.

Would seem to exclude Teslas (both because they’re >50k and made in China lol), but it’s not clear to me if “plug-in vehicles” means EVs + PHEVs or just PHEVs

Means-testing would make it unnecessarily expensive. Just make it so it only applies to cheap EVs. Applying reabtes to used would be really nice but unfortunately is impossible because a car could be sold used an infinite number of times.

EV incentives are always going to benefit people who can afford cars, which is absolutely imbalanced, but the goal is to just get more EVs on the road and not wealth distribution.

Carney government would never do this, but we should just fund public transit so that it’s free, and fund EV bus fleets.

Hydrogen isn’t going to happen. So stop holding your breath.

I don’t believe in or care about hydrogen vehicles, just stating that not having an EV mandate is likely related to the SK MOU because Hyundai is specifically interested in hydrogen. I would not be surprised if this is also the precursor to a Japanese vehicle MOU since they also have an interest in hydrogen.

As for the move away from the EV mandate to “fuel efficiency”, we simply don’t have enough details to form a complete opinion yet.

Part of this could be related to the South Korea MOU. Hyundai could be looking to build hydrogen fuel cars here.

I assume he’s not committing to it either way until CUSMA is renegotiated. It’s probably a bargaining chip. On principal I do agree that we should scrap the entire F-35 contract in favour of Gripens though.

I never said both didn’t happen, but the important metric is how seats flipped (since afaik there’s no info on individual vote intention changes)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Canadian_federal_election#Seats_that_changed_hands

Liberals gained 7 from NDP, Conservatives gained 10 from NDP.

True, and it was actually the NDP that the Conservatives got a lot of vote share from, despite a lot of people assuming the Liberals got NDP votes.