Experimental Podcast Episode 0.59: What the Libs must do, what the CPC must not do, "Hey, we meant well" justice, a dumb debate, and Matt gets irradiated.
Poilievre needs to be good enough to go up against the legacy media caricature of himself that the Liberals will be running against. So the real question is, "To what extent have Canadian voters learned to outflank legacy media when gathering information and forming their judgments?" The Toronto Star and CBC, for example, are more potent adversaries for Poilievre than Trudeau is, for while they're all in the ring against him at least Trudeau is obliged to declare himself as an opponent, while the others still pretend they're there as referees. The outcome of the next federal election may hinge on what proportion of people buys this deception, vs. what proportion knows it's complete fiction. Poilievre in his own words will be fine and will persuade those able to hear him; but the filtered version will literally be a different story.
The narrative that Poilievre needs to provide specific policy proposals (more than he already has) to prove his legitimatacy isn't really valid. The argument against this narrative is that there is simply no need (and is in fact a bad idea) for the CPC to provide a specific policy list if there is no impending election.
The reasons are obvious - the Liberals, NDPs and their media acolytes will pick and choose selective policies to drive the wedge and campaign to label the CPC as the bad choice. Instead, what the CPC is doing now (highlighting current issues, providing broad solutions, ad campaign to introduce PP to the population) is clearly working - they are way up in the polls and their fundraising is almost 3 times that of the Liberals.
Messaging becomes defensive once you play the cards and allow the opposition to play theirs too.
Also, a lot can happen on the ground that requires a shift in strategy. What if interest rates and inflation are stable and start to decline? What if Minister Freeland balances a budget and Minister Anand miraculously finds $15 billion in “savings”? (Snicker) Or Justin Trudeau finally reads the writing on the wall? (Bigger snicker).
Summary: The Liberals are temporarily on the ropes and it is strategically desirable to keep the spotlight on them as they don’t seem to have a clue what to do. The usual demonizing tactics aren’t working and quite frankly the narrative is appearing desperate.
The topic of race-based sentencing blew my mind a little, and I'm a little surprised that the victim side of the equation doesn't get brought up more often. Limiting the application of race-based sentencing principles to non-violent crimes may be one way to keep the spirit of the idea intact, but without having the side-effect of 'discounting' the value of the lives of same-race victims.
Great stuff Matt & Jen. Isn't it great how history and politics repeats itself and nature cycles and recycles. You'll never run out of content! And, if you're upset with something just wait patiently for the next manic high, or should that be the next depressive low?
I'm worried now. Your style has hooked me. Does that mean familarity puts me into danger or that my newfound friends in the comment section will be more lenient?
All the burnt over areas, and I don't mean just the forests, are going to grow back like crazy and recapture all the bad stuff, and then burn again. "... Dust in the wind. All we are is dust in the wind. ..."
I really enjoyed the podcast. I cannot understand why the Federal government does not establish an Emergency Preparedness or Civil Defence Force. They could hire, say, 10 or 12,000 people from the old mill towns. Pay them union wages, train them to clean the forest of debris, fight fires and floods. They could also buy a fleet of water bombers. They might even be able to count this as part of our 2%. the problem with the carbon tax is that it takes blind aim at consumption and there is nothing to show for it. Linking it to actual initiatives may be a way to get their point across.
Trial court judges in Canada have little room for sentencing when the Criminal Code requires that they employ race based sentencing principles. A judge could choose to ignore those principles, but that judge would know that an appeals court would overturn or otherwise amend the sentencing decision. Doing that would be a waste of judicial resources and, potentially, amount to inappropriate judicial overreach at the trial court level
Parliament could address this issue in the Criminal Code in line with the Supreme Court of Canada‘s decision in Gladue.
Great podcast despite the tech details. The next question about the Liberals is why a storied party, having governed for longer than most other parties govern their democracies, has totally fallen apart, is tone deaf, has no policies or responses to critical economic/class issues? I get that comms/social media has changed, parties aren't what they used to be, but truly, where is the party brass, the people looking to the medium term? What has happened to this party that they don't hear what's happening to the country?
The CPC policy convention this weekend llustrates the danger/difficulties facing the leader. If any of the " grassroot policy initiatives " are adopted, they will loose a general election again. Maybe not enough "hardliners" have left for the PPC.
We are all being held hostage by a minority of crusaders who are convinced they know what is right and just for the rest of us. Ask O' Toole how well things work out when he tried to shift towards the center, and appeal to more moderate voters.
Matt and Jen, I appreciate your work Perhaps you could leave out the profanity, Although its probably a generational thing.
My conscience is demanding a confession. I didn’t listen to the podcast. Not because of any fully disclosed audio issue; but because I’m visual and prefer to speed read.
I truly did read and enjoy the transcript, and imitated the sounds of your great team shtick in my head. Does that earn me forgiveness, a new badge for filtering out a non-issue audio issue, or will The Line Readers’ Professional Standards Council send me for mandatory retraining?
Poilievre needs to be good enough to go up against the legacy media caricature of himself that the Liberals will be running against. So the real question is, "To what extent have Canadian voters learned to outflank legacy media when gathering information and forming their judgments?" The Toronto Star and CBC, for example, are more potent adversaries for Poilievre than Trudeau is, for while they're all in the ring against him at least Trudeau is obliged to declare himself as an opponent, while the others still pretend they're there as referees. The outcome of the next federal election may hinge on what proportion of people buys this deception, vs. what proportion knows it's complete fiction. Poilievre in his own words will be fine and will persuade those able to hear him; but the filtered version will literally be a different story.
The narrative that Poilievre needs to provide specific policy proposals (more than he already has) to prove his legitimatacy isn't really valid. The argument against this narrative is that there is simply no need (and is in fact a bad idea) for the CPC to provide a specific policy list if there is no impending election.
The reasons are obvious - the Liberals, NDPs and their media acolytes will pick and choose selective policies to drive the wedge and campaign to label the CPC as the bad choice. Instead, what the CPC is doing now (highlighting current issues, providing broad solutions, ad campaign to introduce PP to the population) is clearly working - they are way up in the polls and their fundraising is almost 3 times that of the Liberals.
Messaging becomes defensive once you play the cards and allow the opposition to play theirs too.
Also, a lot can happen on the ground that requires a shift in strategy. What if interest rates and inflation are stable and start to decline? What if Minister Freeland balances a budget and Minister Anand miraculously finds $15 billion in “savings”? (Snicker) Or Justin Trudeau finally reads the writing on the wall? (Bigger snicker).
Summary: The Liberals are temporarily on the ropes and it is strategically desirable to keep the spotlight on them as they don’t seem to have a clue what to do. The usual demonizing tactics aren’t working and quite frankly the narrative is appearing desperate.
The topic of race-based sentencing blew my mind a little, and I'm a little surprised that the victim side of the equation doesn't get brought up more often. Limiting the application of race-based sentencing principles to non-violent crimes may be one way to keep the spirit of the idea intact, but without having the side-effect of 'discounting' the value of the lives of same-race victims.
Great stuff Matt & Jen. Isn't it great how history and politics repeats itself and nature cycles and recycles. You'll never run out of content! And, if you're upset with something just wait patiently for the next manic high, or should that be the next depressive low?
I'm worried now. Your style has hooked me. Does that mean familarity puts me into danger or that my newfound friends in the comment section will be more lenient?
All the burnt over areas, and I don't mean just the forests, are going to grow back like crazy and recapture all the bad stuff, and then burn again. "... Dust in the wind. All we are is dust in the wind. ..."
I really enjoyed the podcast. I cannot understand why the Federal government does not establish an Emergency Preparedness or Civil Defence Force. They could hire, say, 10 or 12,000 people from the old mill towns. Pay them union wages, train them to clean the forest of debris, fight fires and floods. They could also buy a fleet of water bombers. They might even be able to count this as part of our 2%. the problem with the carbon tax is that it takes blind aim at consumption and there is nothing to show for it. Linking it to actual initiatives may be a way to get their point across.
Trial court judges in Canada have little room for sentencing when the Criminal Code requires that they employ race based sentencing principles. A judge could choose to ignore those principles, but that judge would know that an appeals court would overturn or otherwise amend the sentencing decision. Doing that would be a waste of judicial resources and, potentially, amount to inappropriate judicial overreach at the trial court level
Parliament could address this issue in the Criminal Code in line with the Supreme Court of Canada‘s decision in Gladue.
Great podcast despite the tech details. The next question about the Liberals is why a storied party, having governed for longer than most other parties govern their democracies, has totally fallen apart, is tone deaf, has no policies or responses to critical economic/class issues? I get that comms/social media has changed, parties aren't what they used to be, but truly, where is the party brass, the people looking to the medium term? What has happened to this party that they don't hear what's happening to the country?
The CPC policy convention this weekend llustrates the danger/difficulties facing the leader. If any of the " grassroot policy initiatives " are adopted, they will loose a general election again. Maybe not enough "hardliners" have left for the PPC.
We are all being held hostage by a minority of crusaders who are convinced they know what is right and just for the rest of us. Ask O' Toole how well things work out when he tried to shift towards the center, and appeal to more moderate voters.
Matt and Jen, I appreciate your work Perhaps you could leave out the profanity, Although its probably a generational thing.
See this remains an "experimental podcast" with all the audio issues.
As noted at the outset.
My conscience is demanding a confession. I didn’t listen to the podcast. Not because of any fully disclosed audio issue; but because I’m visual and prefer to speed read.
I truly did read and enjoy the transcript, and imitated the sounds of your great team shtick in my head. Does that earn me forgiveness, a new badge for filtering out a non-issue audio issue, or will The Line Readers’ Professional Standards Council send me for mandatory retraining?
Indeed. No surprises.