I would recommend that the folks at The Line take a moment to read Sean Speer’s essay at The Hub this morning.
Pierre Poilievre has been consistent from the start: that is, the best way to stand up to President Trump is to fix our own problems; the ones we can control.
Running around like headless chickens serves no one but the opposition, and President Trumps’s negotiating team.
“Pivot, pivot; he needs to pivot” is an emotional, intellectually lazy mantra unworthy of your publication.
Pierre Poilievre has been consistent in wanting to establish an east-west energy corridor.
He has been consistent in the quest to facilitate more pipelines.
Immigration, the border, taxation, housing, bureaucratic & regulatory inertia……….. he has been spot on.
He has been critical of the “strategic partnership” with China.
Tighten up the screws a bit there folks; Pierre Poilievre has been consistently right from the beginning.
It's exhausting. The anti-Conservative narrative in this country is so strong that people can look all around them, at aspects of their daily lives that are far worse than they were 10 years ago, that have not improved one bit in a glorious year of the anointed King Carney, and then go on a sneering unhinged emotional rant against the opposition leader. I'm not exactly sure what they are afraid a Prime Minister Poilievre will do, and I'm not sure they even know what they are worried about other than 'bad man evil'. Oh, he'll "give Trump everything he wants" is a popular narrative. I'm not sure how that would differ from what is going on now.
It blows my mind specifically that anyone can live in Toronto or the GTA and not have their top issues be 1) cost of living, 2) ending essentially all immigration, and 3) crime / public safety / combating visible disorder and decay. But instead they screech about Donald Trump and deranged conspiracy theories about how Conservatives might 'ban abortion'.
It's clear that the current Liberal government is a deeply manipulative con job designed to keep insiders in power. There are whole classes of people in Ottawa and elsewhere, many of them wealthy and powerful, whose entire existence and livelihood depends on there never being a change in government, and that is who this is protecting. Mark Carney is an oligarch investment banker. He doesn't give a shit about you or me or any Canadians. He doesn't want to change anything from the prior government, other than token minimal roll-backs to the extent that he can falsely claim his government is no longer doing X incredibly unpopular thing that the public finally figured out is contrary to their interests. And his fucking world tour to get trade deals that we mostly already have, reported dutifully as triumphs by the captive media.
Canadians, and especially those in the GTA and BC Lower Mainland, have ignored Canada's problems because the requirements are peceived housing wealth. With real estate likley in a multi-year market, they may wake up to reality.
There were questions largely brought up by minor independent journalists (i.e. political Twitter users with moderate follower bases) and literally nobody else early in the 2025 election about "um, where does Mark Carney actually live?".
The question was never posed to him as far as I know and answers were never forthcoming.
Could you imagine if the opposition leader's wife and kids lived in the US? It's the only thing you would ever hear about him.
Edit: I've heard Alberta MP Michelle Rempel Garner catch shit for the fact that she's married to an American who lives there, and she doesn't even have an opposition critic role. The double standard is fucking wild.
What you are saying is true, but saying people aren’t hearing his message is blaming the listeners, not the messenger. Pierre simply has not done a good job communicating his stance on this issue. Continuously attacking the media doesn’t help either because it creates a situation where they aren’t going to give you the benefit of the doubt. He has to be smarter than this. Overall, I think his plan is absolutely the correct one, but he needs to sell to people who don’t understand this.
Lilley’s latest column, citing an example of a longtime liberal reader expressing surprise and relief at PP’s supposed awakening, and finally proposing solutions to what ails us.
It’s unsurprising that normies would think PP offered no solutions. He has all along and has been incredibly consistent at it, so much so that the liberals stole a lot of his policy ideas.
In fact one could argue that it’s been the opposite all along: the liberals only proposal was always “orange man bad” and they won on an empty platform. Great politics but really just the same reheated Trudeau era nonsense. Any policy that made sense came straight from the CPC’s platform.
That PP has missed the mark on messaging is arguable, but that he never offered solutions is undeniably untrue.
As for McDougall, well, his drivel continues to be thin on arguing ideas and using ad hominems instead.
You may not like jivani or - heaven forbid - Bernier, but they too have been incredibly consistent in their positions.
This particular chapter in Canadian politics is extraordinarily disappointing, from the point of view of an aging Canadian.
Pierre Poilievre took his message around the Canadian media, directly to Canadians.
Recall the YouTube video of him standing in front of a modest Vancouver home, explaining that a generation ago, a truck driver and a waitress could have afford to live there.
This is when he really started to catch fire.
So, his messaging has been excellent, to anyone open to hearing the message.
Where he has no skill, is in disingenuously selling a frightening narrative that he knows to be false.
This is a double-edged sword, in that 1) Canadians are quick to fall for the anti-American, “Orange-Man- Bad” reflexive alarms, and 2) the Liberals are experts at selling myths.
How does one “pivot” in reaction to a lie, other than continuing to increase efforts to tell the truth?
To me, the only thing different about Pierre's speech is that it got traction on cable TV. The news channels tend to prefer picking out soundbites and showing them out of context in order to suit their narrative. So maybe the audience itself is just becoming more receptive. Time will tell.
If I have to explain to you the difference between the consistency of a criminal, and the consistency of a politician, then I think this will be my last reply.
Pierre Poilievre identified the major problems facing Canada, constructed planned policies for each, and discussed how and when they would be implemented.
Your grand strategist has lowered the price of the toll road to PEI, and declared a “strategic partnership” with a sadistic, lawless, slave owning, torture state.
He has done nothing else to address Canada’s plight in the 12 months he has been in office.
You’re quick to draw on the ad hominems and false equivalencies, but until you can engage in good faith with the arguments, your opinions will be automatically dismissed as dogsh*t
Pierre Poilievre is not right about everything just because I say he is right; he is right because the facts and the outcomes have consistently showed it to be the case.
I had unsubscribed, then re subscribed. Regretted it immediately and asked for a refund. But of course, they won’t do that. So I am here to engage with some of the very smart people on the comment board until my subscription runs out in about ten-and-a-half months 🤣
He is attacking a captured MSM that is undeniably out for Blood and consistently biased against him. So while you have a point, what is he to do when the media will never give him a fair shake?
Canadians are one of the most propagandized people on earth and most of them don’t even know it.
Canadians think that just because there aren't fascist torchlight rallies and huge signs that say "Obey", it means they aren't being controlled and manipulated at an industrial scale.
But every time they turn on the TV or open a newspaper, and increasingly every time they see comments on social media or an online article, a very specific pro-government and pro-Liberal worldview is being subtly reinforced. Media chooses what to report, and holds different political parties to different standards, also based on that worldview. Once you see it, it's absolutely everywhere.
My pet theory is that this is why our elderly are the most left-wing people of their age bracket in the entire world but our young are not. Boomers have no media literacy and consume the most legacy media so are most affected by the leftist pro-government propaganda environment.
I contend that if we continue down the path of increasingly liberticide laws (cf bc human rights tribunal ruling on the school board trustee being fined $750k for the latest nonsense), we will finally realize the prophecy of the proverbial frog being brought to a slow boil.
I also contend that our current government contains many of the signs of proto-fascism, albeit wrapped in a “nice” package.
While we don’t have the brown shirts of yore, we see a lot of the trappings of authoritarian regimes being put in place and it wouldn’t take a huge leap to go from annoyingly bureaucratic to overtly oppressive, given the left’s penchant for suppressing speech and in the worst of cases, open advocacy for violence against those who dare think differently.
Fascism - hyper-nationalist authoritarianism ruled by a dictator and an elite - is inherently tailored to its host country.
I've long held that authoritarianism in Canada would come with a thick veneer of "niceness" and ostensible good intentions, because that's how you get the mass to go along with it. Meanwhile you have grannies with dyed blue streaks in their hair screaming bloody invective against any of the 'morally bad racist intolerant awful people' who dare challenge the regime. And soon to be literally jailing people for wrongspeak.
Canada is likely to go down a path of 'competitive athoritarianism' where we continue to hold technically free elections but the Liberals will somehow win every single one no matter what they do or what the issues are going in, thanks to mastery of the levers of power and the media narrative.
This is also what I see. And I know that many people here in Canada from formerly communist European countries recognize in their nostrils an increasingly strong stench of a Marxist totalitarian dictatorship. In this case the strong stench of a Marxist totalitarian dictatorship originates from Central Canada and BC lower mainland.
I actually do like Pierre. Always have. I’ve been watching him in the House for years. It would be unfortunate if he ended up being the best prime minister we never had.
I'd rather risk losing with someone like Poilievre than win with someone like Doug Ford, or even Erin O'Toole at this point. If it's not a leader who will actually make big and badly-needed changes, then you are just picking between Liberals in different coloured hats.
For me, politics is sales. Politicians are salespeople. Human beings typically don't buy things from people they don't like or trust. Likeability means trust. Trust means votes. Votes means you might even win. Unlikability means the opposite. If the CPC ever hopes to form a government they need a leader who isn't a smarmy twat. Again, nothing personal.
Why Canadians think Carney can deal with Trump mystified me last spring and I still don’t get it. One minute, he’s elbows up, the next he’s apologizing to the orange fascist for a TV ad.
One of the tests Carney must face to get Canada back on the road to success is the creation of one Canadian marketplace instead of 13 small ones.
The Federal government got down to business on this but the provinces appear to be quietly dragging their heels. No doubt there will be some local businesses that may not survive this transition and that will spark heartfelt resistance. The national government has to grapple with this issue and drive home to the electorate that in a struggle for economic survival, a balkanized internal economy is an unafforable luxury and a recipe for national failure.
One move the Feds could now make is to create a report of the outstanding impediments (both Federal AND Provincial) to the single market. Shine a light on it. If neither Carney nor Poilievre develop the skill to sell and implement a tough issue like this, we are indeed in the soup. Maybe the two men could get together on this one! That would be a stimulating change from business as usual.
The Feds could also stop the insane catering to Quebec that results in a policy that prevents an Alberta distiller from selling its product in Saskatchewan because of no French labeling. When the f@@k did guaranteeing bilingual Federal Government services across Canada morph into preventing Canadian free enterprise from dealing with clients in whatever language made business sense?
Especially when everyone now carries a Star Trek style Universal Translator in their pocket with which they can reliably read labeling in English, French, or Mandarin Chinese.
Maybe the distiller should think like distillers and vintners from around the world that tool up to meet the various requirements in international markets. If the distiller's big dream starts and ends with Saskatchewan, maybe the label cost is not worth it. I'd rather our 13 governments get your distiller to aim their sights higher, put on a bilingual label on and go for a national brand while also leaning on Quebec to list the product on Quebec shelves.
That would involve dismantling the myriad of federal policies that favor ON and especially QC.... Never going to happen. They can't even get rid of something as inconsequential as supply management.
The federal Liberals are playing with fire if they don't deliver an approved pipeline to the coast and unblock the production to fill it. Recent weeks have seen worrying signs that they are up to games:
Well written. Sadly PP reminds me us all how and why he lost so badly when he had the largest open net (maybe too soon for that one) in decades.
His policies are excellent, he speaks the truth about the many Liberal failings.
It just took him over a year to speak out about Trump. Such an obvious win, as Canadians detest the pedophile felon. If he had that spine, he would be the PM now.
This is the challenge for conservatives, they feel they need to pander to the extreme right chemtrail nut jobs, and now the separatists, and now the Trumpers. They dont.
If only they stood up for what was sensible and had the courage to do so, these fringe groups would shrivel up in their influence.
The truth now is PP is seen as an unlikeable (election) loser. He's damaged goods and is a bit of a meme. The CPC needs a new face and a new approach.
No. It is the 50% of voters who are easily psy opped, easily lied-to never-learning saps, keeping a collection of corrupt "Liberal" sacs in power, increasingly ruining Canada.
Blaming the voters and not the failed politician is a strategy, it’s just not goin to get the CPC further ahead. It also removes all responsibility from the man who totally blew it.
I agree with the assessment. Poilievre did do a good job with this speech. And, yes, people like Jovani and Smith (and the perspectives they publicly espouse are a problem—a serious problem—for Poilievre.
I was a little disappointed, though, about the strategist’s tendency to reduce things to “getting the vibe” right.
Believe it or not, some of us actually do believe in certain principles and support certain politicians and policies because they appeal to or stand up for those principles.
Principles IMHO are the G-spot of Canadian political parties - extremely difficult to find. Agree they may be easier to find looking at individual candidates.
I have met principled politicians, even those hiding in plain sight. Our problem is the ugly machinery and systems of centrally imposed control that all of the political parties have built over the past half century.
I'm tempted to blame the party leaders' office staff and advisors for this, but the alternatives to such fascist levels of message control are Jamil Javani and his ilk.
I agree completely. The centralized control has resulted in total squelching of individual opinions At least in public. Not sure about caucus. And then the candidate selection process -including loyalty to leader tests- results in bland look and sound alike “unsullied” (Game of Thrones definition) candidates in all parties so after a while you see no difference and just give up on the process. Kind of like the former Soviet Union with only one party except that you can choose your color
Surely Javani's reductio ad absurdum characterization of Canadians' response to Donald Trump's hazing, bullying and threats ("hissy fits") was NOT helpful to Pierre Poilievre's cause?
"What happens when Canada needs bold action but the global figure most closely associated with political radicalism is the man Canadians hate the most in the entire world?"
Unless Alberta and the Western Canada in general do have an unyielding desire to become impoverished open air prisons, it is time to separate from the increasingly dystopian increasingly lefto-dictatorial Central Canada and BC lower mainland.
"Had Poilievre been able to come up with a similar message in the heat of last year’s campaign he would probably be in the kitchen calling the shots on Trump and the Canadian economy today."
Sure, maybe, BUT...
The main thrust of his speech was that cozying up to China is NOT the answer to Trump.
That is NOT an argument which would have carried the day a year ago - because a year ago, Carney was still saying that China was Canada's biggest security threat.
Poilievre's message back then is still his main message today - he wants to be the leader who will stick to his knitting, and FIX what ails Canada, most of which is INTERNAL, not external. He wants to work on the things we CAN control, and do the painful work of building Canada back up after a disastrous decade.
....as opposed to Carney who says out loud that he wishes to lead a "new world order" and rather than amending any of the flawed legislation of Trudeau the Younger, he prefers to "work around" these laws by creating exemptions for a select few - and he insists on spending MOST of his time
swanning around the world signing pretend agreements with countries we ALREADY have free trade with.
Call me crazy, but maybe the guy who actually wants to fix stuff should get a turn...
I would recommend that the folks at The Line take a moment to read Sean Speer’s essay at The Hub this morning.
Pierre Poilievre has been consistent from the start: that is, the best way to stand up to President Trump is to fix our own problems; the ones we can control.
Running around like headless chickens serves no one but the opposition, and President Trumps’s negotiating team.
“Pivot, pivot; he needs to pivot” is an emotional, intellectually lazy mantra unworthy of your publication.
Pierre Poilievre has been consistent in wanting to establish an east-west energy corridor.
He has been consistent in the quest to facilitate more pipelines.
Immigration, the border, taxation, housing, bureaucratic & regulatory inertia……….. he has been spot on.
He has been critical of the “strategic partnership” with China.
Tighten up the screws a bit there folks; Pierre Poilievre has been consistently right from the beginning.
It's exhausting. The anti-Conservative narrative in this country is so strong that people can look all around them, at aspects of their daily lives that are far worse than they were 10 years ago, that have not improved one bit in a glorious year of the anointed King Carney, and then go on a sneering unhinged emotional rant against the opposition leader. I'm not exactly sure what they are afraid a Prime Minister Poilievre will do, and I'm not sure they even know what they are worried about other than 'bad man evil'. Oh, he'll "give Trump everything he wants" is a popular narrative. I'm not sure how that would differ from what is going on now.
It blows my mind specifically that anyone can live in Toronto or the GTA and not have their top issues be 1) cost of living, 2) ending essentially all immigration, and 3) crime / public safety / combating visible disorder and decay. But instead they screech about Donald Trump and deranged conspiracy theories about how Conservatives might 'ban abortion'.
It's clear that the current Liberal government is a deeply manipulative con job designed to keep insiders in power. There are whole classes of people in Ottawa and elsewhere, many of them wealthy and powerful, whose entire existence and livelihood depends on there never being a change in government, and that is who this is protecting. Mark Carney is an oligarch investment banker. He doesn't give a shit about you or me or any Canadians. He doesn't want to change anything from the prior government, other than token minimal roll-backs to the extent that he can falsely claim his government is no longer doing X incredibly unpopular thing that the public finally figured out is contrary to their interests. And his fucking world tour to get trade deals that we mostly already have, reported dutifully as triumphs by the captive media.
Amen
Canadians, and especially those in the GTA and BC Lower Mainland, have ignored Canada's problems because the requirements are peceived housing wealth. With real estate likley in a multi-year market, they may wake up to reality.
Carney and his family live in the USA.
There were questions largely brought up by minor independent journalists (i.e. political Twitter users with moderate follower bases) and literally nobody else early in the 2025 election about "um, where does Mark Carney actually live?".
The question was never posed to him as far as I know and answers were never forthcoming.
Is that substantiated?
Not sure one can actually say Carney "lives" anywhere - other than the jet carrying him from place to place.
But his wife and family do indeed live in the USA.
As does the business he used to lead (and will again as soon as he stops pretending to be Canada's PM)
Could you imagine if the opposition leader's wife and kids lived in the US? It's the only thing you would ever hear about him.
Edit: I've heard Alberta MP Michelle Rempel Garner catch shit for the fact that she's married to an American who lives there, and she doesn't even have an opposition critic role. The double standard is fucking wild.
I'm reminded of the fact that Sheer was considered unelectable - in part because he held two passports.
Carney has THREE, and I don't recall it coming up AT ALL during last year's election campaign.
It's institutional at this point, we (as a country) hold Liberals to a completely different set of standards than Conservatives.
What you are saying is true, but saying people aren’t hearing his message is blaming the listeners, not the messenger. Pierre simply has not done a good job communicating his stance on this issue. Continuously attacking the media doesn’t help either because it creates a situation where they aren’t going to give you the benefit of the doubt. He has to be smarter than this. Overall, I think his plan is absolutely the correct one, but he needs to sell to people who don’t understand this.
Lilley’s latest column, citing an example of a longtime liberal reader expressing surprise and relief at PP’s supposed awakening, and finally proposing solutions to what ails us.
It’s unsurprising that normies would think PP offered no solutions. He has all along and has been incredibly consistent at it, so much so that the liberals stole a lot of his policy ideas.
In fact one could argue that it’s been the opposite all along: the liberals only proposal was always “orange man bad” and they won on an empty platform. Great politics but really just the same reheated Trudeau era nonsense. Any policy that made sense came straight from the CPC’s platform.
That PP has missed the mark on messaging is arguable, but that he never offered solutions is undeniably untrue.
As for McDougall, well, his drivel continues to be thin on arguing ideas and using ad hominems instead.
You may not like jivani or - heaven forbid - Bernier, but they too have been incredibly consistent in their positions.
But I guess ragebaiting gets clicks, eh?
This particular chapter in Canadian politics is extraordinarily disappointing, from the point of view of an aging Canadian.
Pierre Poilievre took his message around the Canadian media, directly to Canadians.
Recall the YouTube video of him standing in front of a modest Vancouver home, explaining that a generation ago, a truck driver and a waitress could have afford to live there.
This is when he really started to catch fire.
So, his messaging has been excellent, to anyone open to hearing the message.
Where he has no skill, is in disingenuously selling a frightening narrative that he knows to be false.
This is a double-edged sword, in that 1) Canadians are quick to fall for the anti-American, “Orange-Man- Bad” reflexive alarms, and 2) the Liberals are experts at selling myths.
How does one “pivot” in reaction to a lie, other than continuing to increase efforts to tell the truth?
To me, the only thing different about Pierre's speech is that it got traction on cable TV. The news channels tend to prefer picking out soundbites and showing them out of context in order to suit their narrative. So maybe the audience itself is just becoming more receptive. Time will tell.
Donald, you’re on fire today!
lol. criminals, cons, sex traffickers, grave robbers, thieves... they all tend to be consistent. not sure the point.
I'd prefer strategists who respond and change to meet the moment.
PP doesn't have a track record there; maybe blame his strategist, but he went along with it.
If I have to explain to you the difference between the consistency of a criminal, and the consistency of a politician, then I think this will be my last reply.
Pierre Poilievre identified the major problems facing Canada, constructed planned policies for each, and discussed how and when they would be implemented.
Your grand strategist has lowered the price of the toll road to PEI, and declared a “strategic partnership” with a sadistic, lawless, slave owning, torture state.
He has done nothing else to address Canada’s plight in the 12 months he has been in office.
We tried it your way; your way doesn’t work.
lilies as fringe as any "from the river to the sea" nutjob. just a different tribe
Arguably the elbows up crowd are also their own tribe and just as strident in their beliefs and inflexibility.
You’re quick to draw on the ad hominems and false equivalencies, but until you can engage in good faith with the arguments, your opinions will be automatically dismissed as dogsh*t
I would respectfully disagree that it’s the messenger who takes the blame.
Responsible citizens seek out the information they need to make an intelligent choice.
So, it’s the responsibility of the listener to glean that information.
Being seduced by the messenger is precisely how we ended up with Prime Minister Trudeau.
nonsensical. he doesnt get to choose what's true or right just because you like it. democracy remember?
Pierre Poilievre is not right about everything just because I say he is right; he is right because the facts and the outcomes have consistently showed it to be the case.
Inflation, housing, safe-supply, crime/bail, regulatory inertia, immigration, natural resource extraction, falling standards of living, affordability……..
Shall I go on?
sji is set in his/her ways, methinks.
The folks at the Line are particularly guilty of falling for the “appearance & tone over substance” myth, in my opinion.
The reason this disappoints me so, is because I expect more of them.
Ditto. Only "expected" for me. My high expectations are decidedly in the past tense now.
So much so that I’ve been pondering subscribing somewhere else.
I had unsubscribed, then re subscribed. Regretted it immediately and asked for a refund. But of course, they won’t do that. So I am here to engage with some of the very smart people on the comment board until my subscription runs out in about ten-and-a-half months 🤣
For about a year+ I have been giving The Line increasingly frequent and increasingly heavier big fat FAILS.
He is attacking a captured MSM that is undeniably out for Blood and consistently biased against him. So while you have a point, what is he to do when the media will never give him a fair shake?
Canadians are one of the most propagandized people on earth and most of them don’t even know it.
Canadians think that just because there aren't fascist torchlight rallies and huge signs that say "Obey", it means they aren't being controlled and manipulated at an industrial scale.
But every time they turn on the TV or open a newspaper, and increasingly every time they see comments on social media or an online article, a very specific pro-government and pro-Liberal worldview is being subtly reinforced. Media chooses what to report, and holds different political parties to different standards, also based on that worldview. Once you see it, it's absolutely everywhere.
My pet theory is that this is why our elderly are the most left-wing people of their age bracket in the entire world but our young are not. Boomers have no media literacy and consume the most legacy media so are most affected by the leftist pro-government propaganda environment.
I contend that if we continue down the path of increasingly liberticide laws (cf bc human rights tribunal ruling on the school board trustee being fined $750k for the latest nonsense), we will finally realize the prophecy of the proverbial frog being brought to a slow boil.
I also contend that our current government contains many of the signs of proto-fascism, albeit wrapped in a “nice” package.
While we don’t have the brown shirts of yore, we see a lot of the trappings of authoritarian regimes being put in place and it wouldn’t take a huge leap to go from annoyingly bureaucratic to overtly oppressive, given the left’s penchant for suppressing speech and in the worst of cases, open advocacy for violence against those who dare think differently.
Fascism - hyper-nationalist authoritarianism ruled by a dictator and an elite - is inherently tailored to its host country.
I've long held that authoritarianism in Canada would come with a thick veneer of "niceness" and ostensible good intentions, because that's how you get the mass to go along with it. Meanwhile you have grannies with dyed blue streaks in their hair screaming bloody invective against any of the 'morally bad racist intolerant awful people' who dare challenge the regime. And soon to be literally jailing people for wrongspeak.
Canada is likely to go down a path of 'competitive athoritarianism' where we continue to hold technically free elections but the Liberals will somehow win every single one no matter what they do or what the issues are going in, thanks to mastery of the levers of power and the media narrative.
This is also what I see. And I know that many people here in Canada from formerly communist European countries recognize in their nostrils an increasingly strong stench of a Marxist totalitarian dictatorship. In this case the strong stench of a Marxist totalitarian dictatorship originates from Central Canada and BC lower mainland.
and lost
For me, Poilievre is unlikeable to most human beings, I think. Could be wrong but there you go.
Why do you need to like your politicians?
Why is it not enough that they be organized, engaged, & effective?
I actually do like Pierre. Always have. I’ve been watching him in the House for years. It would be unfortunate if he ended up being the best prime minister we never had.
I'd rather risk losing with someone like Poilievre than win with someone like Doug Ford, or even Erin O'Toole at this point. If it's not a leader who will actually make big and badly-needed changes, then you are just picking between Liberals in different coloured hats.
For me, politics is sales. Politicians are salespeople. Human beings typically don't buy things from people they don't like or trust. Likeability means trust. Trust means votes. Votes means you might even win. Unlikability means the opposite. If the CPC ever hopes to form a government they need a leader who isn't a smarmy twat. Again, nothing personal.
The country just finished 10 years of rule by a smarmy twat 😂
Smarmy narcissistic twat. :)
Knowing that, how do you explain that one smarmy twat could win and not the other? By that logic, smarmy twats are highly likeable.
😂 well said!
Why Canadians think Carney can deal with Trump mystified me last spring and I still don’t get it. One minute, he’s elbows up, the next he’s apologizing to the orange fascist for a TV ad.
Dear Pierre, choose the country, loose the rednecks, you and the CPC will be better for it.
loose the rednecks = Wexit, separation at you doorstep.
It is encouraging to see Poilievre's latest move.
One of the tests Carney must face to get Canada back on the road to success is the creation of one Canadian marketplace instead of 13 small ones.
The Federal government got down to business on this but the provinces appear to be quietly dragging their heels. No doubt there will be some local businesses that may not survive this transition and that will spark heartfelt resistance. The national government has to grapple with this issue and drive home to the electorate that in a struggle for economic survival, a balkanized internal economy is an unafforable luxury and a recipe for national failure.
One move the Feds could now make is to create a report of the outstanding impediments (both Federal AND Provincial) to the single market. Shine a light on it. If neither Carney nor Poilievre develop the skill to sell and implement a tough issue like this, we are indeed in the soup. Maybe the two men could get together on this one! That would be a stimulating change from business as usual.
The Feds could also stop the insane catering to Quebec that results in a policy that prevents an Alberta distiller from selling its product in Saskatchewan because of no French labeling. When the f@@k did guaranteeing bilingual Federal Government services across Canada morph into preventing Canadian free enterprise from dealing with clients in whatever language made business sense?
Especially when everyone now carries a Star Trek style Universal Translator in their pocket with which they can reliably read labeling in English, French, or Mandarin Chinese.
The three official (or official to be) languages of the Federal Government 😆.
Maybe the distiller should think like distillers and vintners from around the world that tool up to meet the various requirements in international markets. If the distiller's big dream starts and ends with Saskatchewan, maybe the label cost is not worth it. I'd rather our 13 governments get your distiller to aim their sights higher, put on a bilingual label on and go for a national brand while also leaning on Quebec to list the product on Quebec shelves.
That would involve dismantling the myriad of federal policies that favor ON and especially QC.... Never going to happen. They can't even get rid of something as inconsequential as supply management.
The federal Liberals are playing with fire if they don't deliver an approved pipeline to the coast and unblock the production to fill it. Recent weeks have seen worrying signs that they are up to games:
https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/carneys-energy-superpower-talk-isnt-cutting-it-we-need-action-heather-exner-pirot-in-the-hub/
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/ivison-mark-carney-danielle-smith-mou
All of the Alberta referendum questions could easily turn into "Do you hate Ottawa?"
Well written. Sadly PP reminds me us all how and why he lost so badly when he had the largest open net (maybe too soon for that one) in decades.
His policies are excellent, he speaks the truth about the many Liberal failings.
It just took him over a year to speak out about Trump. Such an obvious win, as Canadians detest the pedophile felon. If he had that spine, he would be the PM now.
This is the challenge for conservatives, they feel they need to pander to the extreme right chemtrail nut jobs, and now the separatists, and now the Trumpers. They dont.
If only they stood up for what was sensible and had the courage to do so, these fringe groups would shrivel up in their influence.
The truth now is PP is seen as an unlikeable (election) loser. He's damaged goods and is a bit of a meme. The CPC needs a new face and a new approach.
No. It is the 50% of voters who are easily psy opped, easily lied-to never-learning saps, keeping a collection of corrupt "Liberal" sacs in power, increasingly ruining Canada.
Blaming the voters and not the failed politician is a strategy, it’s just not goin to get the CPC further ahead. It also removes all responsibility from the man who totally blew it.
I agree with the assessment. Poilievre did do a good job with this speech. And, yes, people like Jovani and Smith (and the perspectives they publicly espouse are a problem—a serious problem—for Poilievre.
I was a little disappointed, though, about the strategist’s tendency to reduce things to “getting the vibe” right.
Believe it or not, some of us actually do believe in certain principles and support certain politicians and policies because they appeal to or stand up for those principles.
For us it isn’t about “vibes”.
Principles IMHO are the G-spot of Canadian political parties - extremely difficult to find. Agree they may be easier to find looking at individual candidates.
I have met principled politicians, even those hiding in plain sight. Our problem is the ugly machinery and systems of centrally imposed control that all of the political parties have built over the past half century.
I'm tempted to blame the party leaders' office staff and advisors for this, but the alternatives to such fascist levels of message control are Jamil Javani and his ilk.
It is a conundrum.
I agree completely. The centralized control has resulted in total squelching of individual opinions At least in public. Not sure about caucus. And then the candidate selection process -including loyalty to leader tests- results in bland look and sound alike “unsullied” (Game of Thrones definition) candidates in all parties so after a while you see no difference and just give up on the process. Kind of like the former Soviet Union with only one party except that you can choose your color
Cardinally wrong about Jamil Javani .
Really?
Surely Javani's reductio ad absurdum characterization of Canadians' response to Donald Trump's hazing, bullying and threats ("hissy fits") was NOT helpful to Pierre Poilievre's cause?
Honestly, I think it was the most succinct and accurate description possible of Canada's attitude and actions since Nov 2024.
He got in trouble because it was TOO honest.
No excuse whatsoever for his inane line about The Donald "loving" us - that was just abjectly stupid and tone deaf.
No-one has summarized the core problem better:
"What happens when Canada needs bold action but the global figure most closely associated with political radicalism is the man Canadians hate the most in the entire world?"
It’s time to unplug and reset. Indeed.
Unless Alberta and the Western Canada in general do have an unyielding desire to become impoverished open air prisons, it is time to separate from the increasingly dystopian increasingly lefto-dictatorial Central Canada and BC lower mainland.
Indeed it is time to unplug and reset.
"Had Poilievre been able to come up with a similar message in the heat of last year’s campaign he would probably be in the kitchen calling the shots on Trump and the Canadian economy today."
Sure, maybe, BUT...
The main thrust of his speech was that cozying up to China is NOT the answer to Trump.
That is NOT an argument which would have carried the day a year ago - because a year ago, Carney was still saying that China was Canada's biggest security threat.
Poilievre's message back then is still his main message today - he wants to be the leader who will stick to his knitting, and FIX what ails Canada, most of which is INTERNAL, not external. He wants to work on the things we CAN control, and do the painful work of building Canada back up after a disastrous decade.
....as opposed to Carney who says out loud that he wishes to lead a "new world order" and rather than amending any of the flawed legislation of Trudeau the Younger, he prefers to "work around" these laws by creating exemptions for a select few - and he insists on spending MOST of his time
swanning around the world signing pretend agreements with countries we ALREADY have free trade with.
Call me crazy, but maybe the guy who actually wants to fix stuff should get a turn...