aGENT

Go vote!

Poolman has another year. But yeah, Myers and Beau expire this year, and hopefully Garland becomes easier to move when the cap goes up as well.

You calling me a joke, buddy?

Can you change votes? @Ribsthat didn't seem to be an option when setting up the poll.

Good call Deb... Ewww, can't have that.

Started a poll, feel free to vote and ass suggestions:

Mentioned to @Ribs about crowd sourcing the new forum name. Thought I'd help out with starting a poll/thread. We can add good names as they get suggested. Members vote on the winner, with ability to change vote at any time as new ones get suggested. Deadline is a few days before the season opener for the poll winning name to be announced and roll out new forum graphics/logos for the season opener! So far I think the prominent ones are CFF and FCDC, but feel free to put your creative hats on Canuck fans!

Need to come up with an official name first. I made a post about it in the Support and Feedback section:

Not that I know of

We don't really need them. It's they that lost out on fan engagement, not us.

Yup. Sure they added Orlov and DeAngelo...but those guys lean (DeAngelo especially) toward offense over defense. You move Pesce, and after Slavin, you don't really have any top 4 guys that you can rely on for defense first. Skej can (already has?) be replaced by Orlov. Slavin, Burns Orlov, Pesce Jones, CHatfield/DeAngelo ...is still a damn good two way D. You take Pesce out though....and things don't look so pretty (defensively anyway). I'm sure they were playing a bit of a game of chicken with his agent and trying to use a trade this summer as extension leverage, to try to hammer out favourable terms. But at this point, they're far better going all in this year WITH him, and roll the dice on extending him later/next summer.

Tomato, basil, mushroom , celery, peppers and onions in an egg and potato "hash", with avocado toasts on the side.

It's not new. It's the same failed, trickle down economics and slash social spending (costs more in the long run to repair the damage), while selling off Canadian resources to foreigners to "balance" the budget that the Cons have done every time they've been in power. All wrapped up in a more hateful, more extreme right, social agenda, with no environmental plan (and a complete lack of accepting how the environment affects the economy). Change for the sake of change is stupid enough. Changing to something proven to be even worse is.... Again, I'm no Liberal supporter, I'd happily accept a better alternative party. The Cons are not anything resembling that.

Who said it would be for nothing? Make a separate trade with the agreement they take him on waivers. Voila, Myers "traded" wherever the F we want.

Assuming the Canucks could actually find a taker, If he won't play ball with his trade clause to bottom teams, we always have waivers as an option.

We cleared cap, dropped a winger, gained a legit backup and all it cost us was a 2025 3rd...?

With all due respect, I never said I was "more important"...what a weird take. And those "blue collar" folks (I'm a tradesperson FYI) have been duped in to voting against their best interests by appealing to their (archaic) beliefs around things like abortion, LGBTQ+ rights etc.

The modern history of the conservative party is actually worse fiscal management than the Liberals.

When conservative actually stood for the environment, fiscal conservatism etc.. Sure, they brought something to the table. That's not today's conservatives. Can't support what they currently stand for. It's toxic and bad for the country and it's people.

I'm not a liberal supporter. I'm just VERY much anti Cons. None of the parties wholly "represent me". The Libs tried to nationalize oil almost half a century ago FYI. Your lot ensured that was never going to happen with its usual short-sightedness and ignorance. Instead of "selling" oil to your fellow Canadians at discount, to further our entire economy, you instead decided we sell it to US fat cats at a discount. Great work as usual.

Abusive ex kicks us out and we go crawling back...? No thanks.

We went through that largely unscathed thanks to policies the Liberal Martin had put in place. Harper in fact wanted to do many of the things (like deregulate banking) that caused the major issues the US had. His idea of balancing the books was to slash social program spending, Coast Guard spending etc (which actually costs more long term to correct the issues funding cuts cost) and sell the Canadian Wheat Board to Saudi's while giving foreign oil companies even more control of our natural resources. He was in fact piss poor and far worse than Trudea at fiscal governance. Like I said, some Canadians need a reminder every ten years or so, of why the Cons have no business in governance. Add in the bass-ackwards social polcies and laughable environmental plan, and they're a non starter.

Old site is dead to me. I will not stain my lips (or keyboard) by speaking (or typing) its name.

Garland + Myers

Well that's just not true. They might not be as extreme-right as some of the folks down South, but they are still right. Fiscally, absolutely. Centrist myself. Socially, environmentally...nope. Equality is not "too far" Got you a pipeline built Do we all understand that? It's one of the right's greatest hits, played on repeat. I don't see one from the Cons either. Largely because it's a far bigger problem than any one government. The "damage" (natural economics forces) needs to be "corrected" by people. About the only thing governments could do, that might make a small dent, would be to put a shart-tonne of funding in to public housing. Something neither party seems particularly interested in. Going from "ok with clear faults" to "way worse, with far more faults" is not restoring balance. Different =/= better.