Sure but you might try some of the other shows in similar style to the other ones you mentioned.

Buy Canadian means yeah, trying some different things, making small changes etc. Maybe, trying a new cop/detective show or another sitcom, or watching the first few seasons of the Expanse on Gem and sailing the high seas for the last two.

Also, for what it’s worth, an awesome no budget sci fi movie, Freaks is on Crave. Fully recommend going in knowing as little as possible.

Yup. I don’t think you can fault CBC gem for not, I dunno, pirating a prime “original” series. (Prime bought the rights once the sci fi channel or whatever it was called cancelled it.)

The first three seasons of the expanse are on CBC Gem.

I don’t watch many police/med procedurals (or much of what you’ve listed) but they seem to have a few procedurals etc, I think Republic of Doyle is one? Oh, Luther is a detective series and solid stuff, not sure if that scratches your itch? A couple others I don’t know much about… Kind of different and I do love Natasha Lyon so I’m biased but Pokerface seems like a fun take on the procedural.

Mr D is a sitcom, seems on par with Big Bang? Also, they have Portlandia which is sketch comedy but hilarious.

Might be a but highbrow but Reservation Dogs is great stuff.

To each their own though, good luck!

What sort of non sports shows do you usually enjoy?

It’s a joke, settle down.

(You are of course, welcome to make your own post without the editorialising…)

Yeah, I’ve been pretty impressed with how many Canadian or at least non American alternatives Costco has.

I’ve booed heartily and will probably continue to do so.

But on a related anthem note, while we ought to be furious and trump and his enablers, I think it’s important to remember that a lot of Americans are good, decent people.

This clip of the Buffalo Sabres fanbase heartily singing Oh Canada after the singer’s mic cut, hits me hard in the feels.

https://youtube.com/shorts/OgICDc1ibZ4

For the amount of “Carney is just Poilievre 2.0” and other nonsense I see, it doesn’t seem so in a meaningful sense.

This is really well written but I’m not entirely sure folks will actually read it.

Especially in a very progressive echo chamber like the Fediverse, the notion that the Conservatives may win power, hold it and do some pretty fantastically devastating things doesn’t seem to register. Similarly, the very real environmental costs of being tied to the United States don’t seem to factor.

wind projects were planned before Carney, the only difference I am aware of is that he’s promised these projects more federal dollars and loosening regulations to try to speed those things along.

Naw. Nothing had been officially planned though, because of the obvious benefits, these projects have had numerous working groups etc. But, there’s a difference between talking about something and doing it (try just talking about going to the gym instead of going.)

Direct air carbon capture is vaporware. Literally no proven scale-able methods exist.

I’m not sure what the words “largest in the world” means to you but…

This is the sort of tech the world will need to be able to adopt if we’re ever going to get a comprehensive CBAM or entice our recalcitrant Southern neighbours to go low carbon. Or consider say, Guyana, Nigeria or even Venezuala, all of which are developing nations investing heavily in their oil industries. The way we’re going to be able to come to a compromise with them is exactly this sort of technology.

Carney removed the EV mandate from domestic manufacturers

Almost like how they were removed across the continent… We don’t have any Canadian only manufacturers, so it was a pretty nonsensical plan after that happened.

and the only reason the tariffs were dropped was because China responded with counter tariffs on canola.

I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make here. Trudeau instituted a 100% tarrif on Chinese EVs. China retaliated. But the net result is that Carney undid a bad climate policy of Trudeau’s.

. In fifteen years when we have an oil pipeline and China has monopolized the EV and battery market, will we admit that we fucked up?

To your larger point, this is a weird binary choice. Again, we’ll have a pipeline but we should also have a large national electric grid, we’re aiming to more than double our clean energy production etc. AND, with a little luck, we’ll have done it without an angry Conservative party tearing things apart. (Witness the trump administration paying millions to get out of wind power deals seemingly out of spite.)

You might actually read the electrification strategy , it’s relatively well done and accessible. If you’re more into pictures, figure 4 kind of demonstrates the entire idea.

everyone is cool with Jamil Jirvani

I think almost no one was cool with that. Heck, you might read a more Conservative take on the negative reactions he received: https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/liberals-attack-jamil-jivani-help-trump-offer

The largest thing, imo, is expanding the electrical grid. All of our talk about green transition is nonsense if we don’t have a grid or system which can support the transition. None of the Trudeau era plans really grappled with this fairly obvious problem, because in my humble opinion, Trudeau was more concerned with sounding good than doing good.

The Darlington nuclear project is among the first of the announced national projects; North America’s first small scale nuclear reactor. Really useful for Canada especially where we have a lot of remote communities without easy access to other energy inputs. (You should see how much is power in the North is diesel and other really dirty fuels.)

If memory serves, the Alberta pipeline MOU comes with the world’s (possibly just North America’s) largest carbon capture mechanism, which is incredibly useful if we want to down the road join into the EU CBAM with other countries, which would be a climate change game changer.

The next tranche of major projects is supposed to include a major wind one for the North Atlantic (again, really useful and targeted transition as a lot of power used there is oil/gas for heating.)

On Conservation, Carney has announced plans to effectively double our protected Conservation both marine and land.

Also, just today, Carney announced an MOU that doubles BC’s clean power capacity while also upholding our northern tanker ban, which while not really climate change is really reassuring to hear as that ecosystem is fragile and very much at risk.

Again, is there more that could be done? Sure. But, instead of my temporary feel goods, I much prefer a plan and mandate that I think can effect long lasting change. These are the moves that position Canada for a durable green transition, without relying on a trump ex machina to win the Left the election every time. Carney’s approval rating is uniquely high in the G7 I think in large part because he’s doing a good job of straddling the line between the Right and Left on climate. That compromise means that I won’t see everything I want but neither will my Conservative friends.

Edit: Oh, and I completely forgot allowing tens of thousands of affordable Chinese EVs into the Canadian market over the strenuous objections of Conservative premier Doug Ford.

To call the current plan and actions “nothing” is either ignorant or disingenuous. Either way, it’s an incredibly silly thing to say.

Would you prefer something bigger, more ambitious and cancelled in four years?

People seem to be misunderstanding Carney’s point here, which is that the plan gave someone like Polievre ammo and a damned good chance of burning down Canada.

It really is worth watching the video, or reading the transcript (I couldn’t find one as of yet.) But he talks about the original plan which was entirely appropriate for the comparatively rosy pre trump era in which it was devised. These are different and bad times.

The Right, the radically anti climate right, is ascendent kind of across the globe. Had trump not been such a spectacular asshole, there’s a good chance Poilievre would be running things. Canada in contrast is one where you could see the Liberals walk this tightrope between the Left and Right. So while the Trudeau era plan is the one I’d prefer personally, I see a Carney plan as actually happening, in the long term (which is what matters) rather than being undone shortly by Poilievre or whomever.

How about just tell it like it is and gain influence with the countries that matter?

The entire rest of the world combined, is where less than 30% of our exports go. For literally millions and millions of Canadian families, the USA is insanely relevant.

When Carney stood up in Davos the world listened.

Yes. Because he had something worthwhile to propose, a framework upon which he has been executing throughout his time as leader.

Complaining about the Iran war, which is already seen by almost all as a failure is not a particularly worthwhile or novel hill on which to die. Remember when donald had a tantrum about Ford’s mean ads and cancelled trade talks? The unfortunate reality that does shape things is the country to which we send 70% of our exports has a man child president.

Not to mention that one of the biggest threats to any sort of peace is literally donald’s ego

Thinking that any leader or any serious politician is taking this as Carney’s actual position is just nonsense. You cannot watch the Collins question and answer in their entirety and say that’s a man who really backs what trump did.

disinhibits military adventurism

Right… I can see the scene now “Well, I wasn’t sure about going to war but then I remembered the disastrous Iran war and how Canada’s Prime Minister said nice things about it so away we go!”

Thankfully, no reasonable adult with any understanding of international relationships would feel the same.

edit: missed words

Choice 1: PM flatters trump at zero cost to anyone anywhere.

Choice 2: PM picks a fight with trump with zero gain to anyone anywhere.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Decisions decisions decisions.