I think ineffective pseudo-conservatives are even worse than crazy libs.
You always have to consider if the difference is worth it. I don't think the Canadian conservatives count as 'pseudo-conservatives', but that may be the fact that I'm not as familiar with them as I am with the corrupt puppet traitor frauds in Europe.
Because if you insist on people who are absolutely pure, you're going to end up like Mastriano in Pennsylvania. That is stupid.
No McCains, and no Mastrianos. Is that so hard?
all it really does is suppress any real conservative's chances and makes the Average Voter vote for the libs, because the people who called themselves cons have completely failed so let's try the other guys.
This is exactly right, which is why I did not bemoan the loss of the Tool. PP seems cool though, at least by Canadian standards.
I mean look at the absolute fucking state of the UK. 12 years of "conservative" rule, but all the people in charge were people who openly hate the UK's citizens and the fact that the plebes dared to take them out of their dream multinational empire. Next election they'll get psychotic Trotskyists from Labour, because who in their right mind would vote for the Tories when it just means another Johnson, May, or Poo In The Loo in charge?
Rishi has done better than I expected, but my expectations were 0.
You always have to consider if the difference is worth it. I don't think the Canadian conservatives count as 'pseudo-conservatives', but that may be the fact that I'm not as familiar with them as I am with the corrupt puppet traitor frauds in Europe.
Because if you insist on people who are absolutely pure, you're going to end up like Mastriano in Pennsylvania. That is stupid.
No McCains, and no Mastrianos. Is that so hard?
This is exactly right, which is why I did not bemoan the loss of the Tool. PP seems cool though, at least by Canadian standards.
Rishi has done better than I expected, but my expectations were 0.