One leader just bribed his way to a majority. The press stood by and did nothing, or lectured us about how this was all totally normal and acceptable.
The other leader dared question the economic wizardry of his Harvard and Oxford educated opponent who is running the largest deficit in history that didn't involve pandemic lockdowns. The press give him shit for it.
I believe Pierre is correct in his assessment as one can most certainly be thoroughly schooled (Carney) but remain hopelessly uneducated (also Carney’s huge deficit, continued foolish spending, increased bureaucracy, removing a pebble (excise tax on fuel) from an avalanche of price/cost of living burdens, appointing and retaining incompetent ministers, and jet-setting for agreements to talk about agreements just to name a few.
"The persistent out-flow of MPs from my party has absolutely nothing to do with my leadership tone and style, in any way, nor anything to do with the other party increasing its lead in the polls over mine. Nothing at all!"
Poilievre gets shit because he is exceptionally lacking in grace and humility, period. When he says that he's not just a better politician than Carney, but also someone whose YouTube education has supposedly made him a superior working professional and given him a superior general understanding of economics, then he really is just claiming to be the ultimate know-it-all twerp. He would be about as credible to give a condescending lecture to astronomers on astronomy, as he was in his comments about Carney.
Poilievre's perceived personality is entirely built by Liberal-supported media.
Can you provide examples of Poilievre being "exceptionally lacking in grace and humility" that are more egregious than "Thank you for your donation" or "often misogynistic and racist"?
If you can't tell the difference between the occasional MP crossing the floor for personal or policy reasons, and an unprecedented concerted campaign to induce mass floor crossing through promises of various perks big and small, I don't know what to say to you.
Your country just got stolen from you and people are bleating about the opposition leader and speculating about what a mean nasty guy he must be to fail to compete with "name your price". Think about that.
I voted for the CPC candidate in my riding last election. They lost. I think if you really wanted to see change you’d want to ask the hard questions as to why so it doesn’t happen again. Instead you sound like someone whose party captured bleating about how it’s everyone else’s fault your party is losing and losing badly. Think about that.
At one point the CPC were 25 point favourites in the polls and everything was going their way. People tend to be willing to put up with more when they’re winning. Not so much when they’re losing. We’ve all heard some of the stories about certain members busting into offices. You’d have to think there’s at least some truth to those stories. And I’m sure the Liberals did offer things to entice people to switch parties but the CPC can’t control that. They can only control how they do things on their end and it sure seems like they may have taken their position/people for granted. That’s on them and that’s ultimately on Pierre.
I'm guessing you don't have anything indicating actual bribery other than personal suspicions. I also suspect that being challenged on alleging something that's an actual crime under the criminal code, you're going to retreat to a justification that you actually meant personal inducements like getting a position in government or goodies for their riding. It's all kind of pathetic and indicative of a mindset that isn't going to get to the root cause of why the Conservatives keep losing and the Liberals keep winning.
Being book smart doesn't mean Carney is the man for the moment. What has he accomplished since becoming PM?
Lots of flights, lots of handshakes, lots of photo ops, a handful of meaningless MOU's... what exactly has changed in this country? The deficit and debt are sky high, cheques are flying out the window to this group and that group... band-aid solutions. Has anything gotten better? Have any issues been addressed and fixed? Are the lineups at food banks getting shorter? Is it easier to conduct business in Canada? Have any of the barriers to investment been cancelled? Is investment flowing back into the country? Are young graduates flocking back to Canada because of better opportunities?
There's no denying Carney is a smart man but he definitively isn't the man to help Canada and Canadians. He can't relate, can't empathize, has no insight into what it means to not being able to make ends meet. He's an arrogant, out of touch elitist who forgot his roots and seemingly believes himself smarter than all and revels in the attention and praises his elitist friends lavish on him.
If that's your cup of tea, have at'er but don't expect the country to stop circling the drain for a long, long time.
If Mr. Carney is such a great economist, how is it that he completely and utterly failed to anticipate rising demand for fossil fuels?
If Mr. Carney is such a skilled prognosticator, how is it that he failed with GFANZ, and economic warfare of banks and companies that continued to facilitate the safe, successful, and sustainable exploitation of oil and gas?
Mr. Stinson should take a moment to review Michelle Rempel-Garner’s Substack offering posted this morning.
Shh, we're not allowed to question him on economic issues. The press says so. And the man himself will roll his eyes at you dismissively and give no response, which will be reported as a massive gotcha.
Because we all know that no highly-qualified expert has ever before been wrong or full of shit about anything to do with their area of expertise, or has been biased by the prospect of enormous personal gain.
I knew Canadians were credential obsessed, but this is next level.
For me it's just fresh meat he throws to the element of the CPC that loves to hear and see stupid publicity stunts and grade school insults. About 18% I think. For me, I think most non-partisan human beings would agree this dumb video further confirmation that a change is badly needed in the CPC. One that aligns with most most non-partisan human beings who just want them to do their @$%$ jobs.
Carney's economic chops are fair game. Poilievre's attack on them was idiotic. It might impress lowbrow, low information fanboys, but just sounds stupid to everybody else. Read Michelle Rempel Garner's newsletter this morning to see how you make a more effective and cutting critique. If all you've got is an animus towards Carney and expertise in general, brace yourself for an extended period of electoral failure.
If PP is going back to @#$hole mode then he has learned nothing. And maybe that's the point. If your party is going down in flames, why not burn the whole thing down. The outcome of this approach is absolutely certain unless PP suddenly becomes super non-stick coated lovable leader-man.
He spent two decades being an attack dog. That #$% is baked into the guy now.
As mentioned here before: people will only vote for those they like and trust. Emphasis on LIKE. He is unlikeable. He could not close the deal when he had a chance. He is the wrong guy to lead the party.
In sales (which politics happens to be) would you buy something from a person you do not like and do not trust?
This is just how PP is. It's hard charged partisanship all day, all night, you betcha!
Time for new blood.
From outside the party.
Peter MacKay is not new blood - he is yesterday's man.
I don't think Poilievre and his populist/very online faction of the party are going to give up power willingly. However, they might need a serious electoral beatdown before it becomes obvious that their approach is a dead end. The Conservatives lost in 2025, but had a strong share of the popular vote. Poilievre and the populists will point to that and blame Boomers and the NDP vote defecting to the Liberals for their failure to win. However, it seems more likely that they hit a high water mark because dissatisfaction with the Liberals was so great after the Trudeau years that people were willing to set aside their concerns about Poilievre.
That was me in 2025: no confidence that Carney was going to be able to accomplish much as a political neophyte leading the same tired, incompetent Liberal government. On the other hand, Poilievre's campaign wasn't offering much other than attitude and dumbed-down sloganeering. Still, I had higher hopes for a residual Conservative brain trust from the Harper era than anything on evidence in the Trudeau Liberals.
Nope they sure won't give up power. I fully expect the CPC will split back to pre-David Orchard. Its a party that clearly values ideological purity rather than what voters need. It has become the NDP of the left.
As a Albertan who supports parties on the right side of center I encourage the CPC to ask this question -do you truly believe PP will win over the majority of Ontario & Quebec and lead the Party to a win in the next election?
If I hope so is your answer then let me ask you this - are you willing to wait three more years in opposition just to have Ontario & Quebec say again we just don't like PP, so maybe next time.
Poilievre was more graceful and acted more like a normal human being in his recent interviews with Peter Mansbridge, Paul Wells, and Joe Rogan. There has been no uptick in the polls for him as a result, but that is probably indicative of the shift in tone not being persistent enough to be noticed by the general population. Mocking Carney's education would seem to confirm suspicions that his recent changes in behaviour were forced and never actually going to last.
This article is a great example of picking selective events and quotes and framing a predetermined narrative around it - with no room made for contradictory events or quotes. Classic mainstream journalism - now here at The Line.
The only mystery in all of this is the CPC blindness to the reality that Pierre is an asshole that Canadians will not elect. They will deflect to any and every conspiracy theory imaginable to avoid staring reality in the face. They're on track to lose a 5th straight election; one because Harper didn't want to win, one because they sewered their own candidate and three because their leader is an out-of-touch, detestable clown. But they, somehow, want to blame the Liberals for winning.
Carney made a joke of it because it’s completely laughable. PP is the real joke. A dumb comment from a man who is in a free fall. He will be remembered as the man who floundered the biggest lead and widest open net in recent canadian political history, little more. The sooner he quits or the CPC cans him the better for everyone.
Doug “Bozo” Ford as the leader of the Federal Conservatives? With his track record of cozying (toadying) up to whoever is leading the Canadian Liberal Party? Might as well go to a one party state like the former Soviet Union. The candidates for both Federal parties are so vetted ( think “Unsullied” as in Game of Thrones) that there is no real choice anyway.
Man, PP just can't stop shooting himself in the foot. Look, I am all for mocking useless post-secondary education - step right up all you gender-studies grads! But economics at Harvard and Oxford? What kind of attack is that? And it's not as if there are no actual grounds to attack Carney's fiscal management thus far.
This reminds me of his dumb comment a few months ago about the Nazis actually being socialists, as if the Nazis are best known for their economic policies. Despite there being no shortage of grounds on which to totally shred socialism, he reached for the Nazis.
These are total non-sequiturs from him on battlegrounds where he has tons of legitimate ammunition. When you see this it is tough to conclude that he is not more interested in personal insults than scoring legitimate points. It's a shame because he does have it in him to make persuasive, articulate arguments that stay on point.
Things are great for the liberals because they are blessed with a fearful, uninformed, gullible electorate, an unscrupulous leader, a complicit media machine. The liberals thrive on fear and division. Trump provides them with enough ammunition for the moment and as soon as they can't blame Trump, J D Vance will likely become the new target of the dutiful legacy media.
Poilievre could walk on water, it would never be enough. The media will continue to destroy him because he represents a threat to their survival.
On the subject of the media - for me, the national media is dying because a generational shift has occurred. The loss of regional voices and the fact that everyone with an internet can 'do the news'. 43% of adults under 30 now regularly get their news from TikTok. Think about that for a second and try not to shudder. This is news in 2026.
For gen Z, TikTok has surpassed YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram as the top social news source. Technology is destroying the traditional media paradigm and of course our taxes go to their wages now.
Carney is impressive. Whether you like the Liberal Party or not they have a knack for rising to the occasion. Trump likes shiny baubles. In terms of education, stature and global connections Carney is Canada’s shiny bauble. Poilievre is a known domestic commodity but globally not so much. Canadians are also known for liking shiny baubles, just not domestic ones. A global shine needs to be applied.
Failure can be a good thing if you learn from it. Letting a Conservative leader have another shot at leading a party through an election is a good idea for that reason: Stephen Harper failed to defeat the Liberals in 2004, but used the lessons from that experience to win in 2006, 2008, and 2011.
There's worrying signs that Poilievre isn't going to learn and isn't going to change. His political career has been centered on the role of partisan attack dog, and he's had 20 years to show some growth on that front but hasn't. He wouldn't or couldn't alter his election strategy after Trudeau resigned and Carney changed tactics, and his reaction to his election loss was at least initially to blame it all on exogenous factors like Canadian backlash against Trump.
The sheer number of floor crossings since 2025 can't just be blamed on Liberal efforts either: there's a lot of discontent with Poilievre's leadership. People were willing to put up with a lot when they were sure that the end result would be serving in a Conservative government; take that away and it becomes far less palatable.
One leader just bribed his way to a majority. The press stood by and did nothing, or lectured us about how this was all totally normal and acceptable.
The other leader dared question the economic wizardry of his Harvard and Oxford educated opponent who is running the largest deficit in history that didn't involve pandemic lockdowns. The press give him shit for it.
Poilievre's mistake was questioning Carney's intelligence when he should have been questioning his benevolence.
I believe Pierre is correct in his assessment as one can most certainly be thoroughly schooled (Carney) but remain hopelessly uneducated (also Carney’s huge deficit, continued foolish spending, increased bureaucracy, removing a pebble (excise tax on fuel) from an avalanche of price/cost of living burdens, appointing and retaining incompetent ministers, and jet-setting for agreements to talk about agreements just to name a few.
Poilievre's mistake was questioning anything about Carney... If you question the boss, the media pit bull will come barking.
"The persistent out-flow of MPs from my party has absolutely nothing to do with my leadership tone and style, in any way, nor anything to do with the other party increasing its lead in the polls over mine. Nothing at all!"
Poilievre gets shit because he is exceptionally lacking in grace and humility, period. When he says that he's not just a better politician than Carney, but also someone whose YouTube education has supposedly made him a superior working professional and given him a superior general understanding of economics, then he really is just claiming to be the ultimate know-it-all twerp. He would be about as credible to give a condescending lecture to astronomers on astronomy, as he was in his comments about Carney.
Yes I already know you hate Pierre Poilievre.
Poilievre's perceived personality is entirely built by Liberal-supported media.
Can you provide examples of Poilievre being "exceptionally lacking in grace and humility" that are more egregious than "Thank you for your donation" or "often misogynistic and racist"?
Every party, every time, without exception is outraged by the sheer corruption and moral bankruptcy of floor-crossers....
Meh.
And gangsters save their most horrific treatment for disloyalty.
If you can't tell the difference between the occasional MP crossing the floor for personal or policy reasons, and an unprecedented concerted campaign to induce mass floor crossing through promises of various perks big and small, I don't know what to say to you.
If you can’t tell that probably means something in the party they’re fleeing stinks too I don’t know what to say to you.
Your country just got stolen from you and people are bleating about the opposition leader and speculating about what a mean nasty guy he must be to fail to compete with "name your price". Think about that.
I voted for the CPC candidate in my riding last election. They lost. I think if you really wanted to see change you’d want to ask the hard questions as to why so it doesn’t happen again. Instead you sound like someone whose party captured bleating about how it’s everyone else’s fault your party is losing and losing badly. Think about that.
They were happy to run for that party a year ago. What changed?
At one point the CPC were 25 point favourites in the polls and everything was going their way. People tend to be willing to put up with more when they’re winning. Not so much when they’re losing. We’ve all heard some of the stories about certain members busting into offices. You’d have to think there’s at least some truth to those stories. And I’m sure the Liberals did offer things to entice people to switch parties but the CPC can’t control that. They can only control how they do things on their end and it sure seems like they may have taken their position/people for granted. That’s on them and that’s ultimately on Pierre.
I'm guessing you don't have anything indicating actual bribery other than personal suspicions. I also suspect that being challenged on alleging something that's an actual crime under the criminal code, you're going to retreat to a justification that you actually meant personal inducements like getting a position in government or goodies for their riding. It's all kind of pathetic and indicative of a mindset that isn't going to get to the root cause of why the Conservatives keep losing and the Liberals keep winning.
Do you have any evidence that bribery has occurred?
And when a leader makes a spikey comment, it helps to have a hint of substance behind it. It should reveal a legitimate issue or concern.
Criticizing Trudeau economic creds would sound good, and would have been accurate. Criticizing Carney on that sounds like flailing.
What is Carney doing right?
I don’t say he was doing anything right (or wrong). The critique from the Conservative leader was about his education in economics. That fails.
Apologies.
I didn't realize Poilievre was talking about his education. Carney certainly has been trained in economics.
I had assumed Poilievre meant his abilities. Carney's don't seem to match what is on his CV. Or maybe he isn't trying to achieve a prospering economy.
Being book smart doesn't mean Carney is the man for the moment. What has he accomplished since becoming PM?
Lots of flights, lots of handshakes, lots of photo ops, a handful of meaningless MOU's... what exactly has changed in this country? The deficit and debt are sky high, cheques are flying out the window to this group and that group... band-aid solutions. Has anything gotten better? Have any issues been addressed and fixed? Are the lineups at food banks getting shorter? Is it easier to conduct business in Canada? Have any of the barriers to investment been cancelled? Is investment flowing back into the country? Are young graduates flocking back to Canada because of better opportunities?
There's no denying Carney is a smart man but he definitively isn't the man to help Canada and Canadians. He can't relate, can't empathize, has no insight into what it means to not being able to make ends meet. He's an arrogant, out of touch elitist who forgot his roots and seemingly believes himself smarter than all and revels in the attention and praises his elitist friends lavish on him.
If that's your cup of tea, have at'er but don't expect the country to stop circling the drain for a long, long time.
If Mr. Carney is such a great economist, how is it that he completely and utterly failed to anticipate rising demand for fossil fuels?
If Mr. Carney is such a skilled prognosticator, how is it that he failed with GFANZ, and economic warfare of banks and companies that continued to facilitate the safe, successful, and sustainable exploitation of oil and gas?
Mr. Stinson should take a moment to review Michelle Rempel-Garner’s Substack offering posted this morning.
Shh, we're not allowed to question him on economic issues. The press says so. And the man himself will roll his eyes at you dismissively and give no response, which will be reported as a massive gotcha.
Because we all know that no highly-qualified expert has ever before been wrong or full of shit about anything to do with their area of expertise, or has been biased by the prospect of enormous personal gain.
I knew Canadians were credential obsessed, but this is next level.
The greatest hoax of the 20th Century is the belief of a government spending multiplier that magically enhances the spending of the government.
There is no theoretical or econometric basis for Keynesian economics.
And yet, here we are with the foremost proponent, & most committed adherent, going full speed into spending oblivion.
For me it's just fresh meat he throws to the element of the CPC that loves to hear and see stupid publicity stunts and grade school insults. About 18% I think. For me, I think most non-partisan human beings would agree this dumb video further confirmation that a change is badly needed in the CPC. One that aligns with most most non-partisan human beings who just want them to do their @$%$ jobs.
Carney's economic chops are fair game. Poilievre's attack on them was idiotic. It might impress lowbrow, low information fanboys, but just sounds stupid to everybody else. Read Michelle Rempel Garner's newsletter this morning to see how you make a more effective and cutting critique. If all you've got is an animus towards Carney and expertise in general, brace yourself for an extended period of electoral failure.
I read it, loved it, she's 100% bang on.
If PP is going back to @#$hole mode then he has learned nothing. And maybe that's the point. If your party is going down in flames, why not burn the whole thing down. The outcome of this approach is absolutely certain unless PP suddenly becomes super non-stick coated lovable leader-man.
He spent two decades being an attack dog. That #$% is baked into the guy now.
As mentioned here before: people will only vote for those they like and trust. Emphasis on LIKE. He is unlikeable. He could not close the deal when he had a chance. He is the wrong guy to lead the party.
In sales (which politics happens to be) would you buy something from a person you do not like and do not trust?
This is just how PP is. It's hard charged partisanship all day, all night, you betcha!
Time for new blood.
From outside the party.
Peter MacKay is not new blood - he is yesterday's man.
I don't think Poilievre and his populist/very online faction of the party are going to give up power willingly. However, they might need a serious electoral beatdown before it becomes obvious that their approach is a dead end. The Conservatives lost in 2025, but had a strong share of the popular vote. Poilievre and the populists will point to that and blame Boomers and the NDP vote defecting to the Liberals for their failure to win. However, it seems more likely that they hit a high water mark because dissatisfaction with the Liberals was so great after the Trudeau years that people were willing to set aside their concerns about Poilievre.
That was me in 2025: no confidence that Carney was going to be able to accomplish much as a political neophyte leading the same tired, incompetent Liberal government. On the other hand, Poilievre's campaign wasn't offering much other than attitude and dumbed-down sloganeering. Still, I had higher hopes for a residual Conservative brain trust from the Harper era than anything on evidence in the Trudeau Liberals.
Nope they sure won't give up power. I fully expect the CPC will split back to pre-David Orchard. Its a party that clearly values ideological purity rather than what voters need. It has become the NDP of the left.
As a Albertan who supports parties on the right side of center I encourage the CPC to ask this question -do you truly believe PP will win over the majority of Ontario & Quebec and lead the Party to a win in the next election?
If I hope so is your answer then let me ask you this - are you willing to wait three more years in opposition just to have Ontario & Quebec say again we just don't like PP, so maybe next time.
Poilievre was more graceful and acted more like a normal human being in his recent interviews with Peter Mansbridge, Paul Wells, and Joe Rogan. There has been no uptick in the polls for him as a result, but that is probably indicative of the shift in tone not being persistent enough to be noticed by the general population. Mocking Carney's education would seem to confirm suspicions that his recent changes in behaviour were forced and never actually going to last.
This article is a great example of picking selective events and quotes and framing a predetermined narrative around it - with no room made for contradictory events or quotes. Classic mainstream journalism - now here at The Line.
The only mystery in all of this is the CPC blindness to the reality that Pierre is an asshole that Canadians will not elect. They will deflect to any and every conspiracy theory imaginable to avoid staring reality in the face. They're on track to lose a 5th straight election; one because Harper didn't want to win, one because they sewered their own candidate and three because their leader is an out-of-touch, detestable clown. But they, somehow, want to blame the Liberals for winning.
And whose #@$% idea was it to let Andrew Scheer ever talk to the media?
Carney made a joke of it because it’s completely laughable. PP is the real joke. A dumb comment from a man who is in a free fall. He will be remembered as the man who floundered the biggest lead and widest open net in recent canadian political history, little more. The sooner he quits or the CPC cans him the better for everyone.
Doug “Bozo” Ford as the leader of the Federal Conservatives? With his track record of cozying (toadying) up to whoever is leading the Canadian Liberal Party? Might as well go to a one party state like the former Soviet Union. The candidates for both Federal parties are so vetted ( think “Unsullied” as in Game of Thrones) that there is no real choice anyway.
Man, PP just can't stop shooting himself in the foot. Look, I am all for mocking useless post-secondary education - step right up all you gender-studies grads! But economics at Harvard and Oxford? What kind of attack is that? And it's not as if there are no actual grounds to attack Carney's fiscal management thus far.
This reminds me of his dumb comment a few months ago about the Nazis actually being socialists, as if the Nazis are best known for their economic policies. Despite there being no shortage of grounds on which to totally shred socialism, he reached for the Nazis.
These are total non-sequiturs from him on battlegrounds where he has tons of legitimate ammunition. When you see this it is tough to conclude that he is not more interested in personal insults than scoring legitimate points. It's a shame because he does have it in him to make persuasive, articulate arguments that stay on point.
Things are great for the liberals because they are blessed with a fearful, uninformed, gullible electorate, an unscrupulous leader, a complicit media machine. The liberals thrive on fear and division. Trump provides them with enough ammunition for the moment and as soon as they can't blame Trump, J D Vance will likely become the new target of the dutiful legacy media.
Poilievre could walk on water, it would never be enough. The media will continue to destroy him because he represents a threat to their survival.
On the subject of the media - for me, the national media is dying because a generational shift has occurred. The loss of regional voices and the fact that everyone with an internet can 'do the news'. 43% of adults under 30 now regularly get their news from TikTok. Think about that for a second and try not to shudder. This is news in 2026.
For gen Z, TikTok has surpassed YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram as the top social news source. Technology is destroying the traditional media paradigm and of course our taxes go to their wages now.
There is no doubt about the dumbing down of society effect.
Carney is impressive. Whether you like the Liberal Party or not they have a knack for rising to the occasion. Trump likes shiny baubles. In terms of education, stature and global connections Carney is Canada’s shiny bauble. Poilievre is a known domestic commodity but globally not so much. Canadians are also known for liking shiny baubles, just not domestic ones. A global shine needs to be applied.
PP's bored and exhausted by all the winning? We almost just can't take all this winning.
A shitty article by a Liebertati shill.
Failure can be a good thing if you learn from it. Letting a Conservative leader have another shot at leading a party through an election is a good idea for that reason: Stephen Harper failed to defeat the Liberals in 2004, but used the lessons from that experience to win in 2006, 2008, and 2011.
There's worrying signs that Poilievre isn't going to learn and isn't going to change. His political career has been centered on the role of partisan attack dog, and he's had 20 years to show some growth on that front but hasn't. He wouldn't or couldn't alter his election strategy after Trudeau resigned and Carney changed tactics, and his reaction to his election loss was at least initially to blame it all on exogenous factors like Canadian backlash against Trump.
The sheer number of floor crossings since 2025 can't just be blamed on Liberal efforts either: there's a lot of discontent with Poilievre's leadership. People were willing to put up with a lot when they were sure that the end result would be serving in a Conservative government; take that away and it becomes far less palatable.