06.30.2022 12:51 PM

What a fucking disgrace

21 Comments

  1. Well, this MacKenzie is at the very least disgusted. Time for me to modify my ballot once again.

  2. Arron Banks says:

    I love the scene from HBO’s 2012 film “Game Change” (an increasingly scary prophetic film) where the race is getting desperate and John McCain’s advisors tell him they’ve got a video of Barack Obama’s pastor saying “goddamn America”: McCain responds that while it might be true Obama’s pastor did say those things, he’s not going to use it because:

    “There’s a dark side to American populism. Some people win elections tapping into it. I’m not one of those people.”

    Pierre can’t claim ignorance here. He’s willingly playing with fire and for what? Votes? Power? Does it mean that much to him? Automatically (in my books) disqualifies him from being Prime Ministerial (and that’s saying something because the Liberal and NDP leader don’t need any more help lol)

  3. Pedant says:

    Neo-Nazi links? I haven’t seen any evidence for this. Not even the justin-journos in the mainstream media are saying this. The “worst” that can be said about James Topp is that he spoke out against the authoritarian mandates. He is a veteran who walked from BC to Ontario. Poilievre agreed to meet him knowing the justin-journos would shriek but what does it matter? The only people listening to them are those who would never vote Conservative anyway.

    • Gary says:

      Willfully blind comment? Based on your previous remarks here, I would say so. PP is the early symptom of the political cancer that has consumed the U.S.

      • Pedant says:

        The left in Canada is strangely obsessed with US culture wars. Maybe because they have no real identity of their own? Trudeau seems to style himself a Blue State Governor and TruAnon follows.

        I’m sorry to break it to you but the current divide in Canada is a homegrown issue. Federal and provincial governments (yes, Doug Ford is as much to blame as Justin Trudeau) shut down small businesses, crushed the working class while propping up the laptop class, and coerced people to take hastily developed injections against a virus with a 99.99999% survival rate under threat of complete banishment from society.

        In any democracy, the above actions are going to generate a reaction. Canada compounds the situation by remaining one of the only Western countries still imposing draconian restrictions on travel, including mandatory random testing of VACCINATED entrants by biolab firms (given very lucrative contracts) through threat of fines and imprisonment to those who resist the invasive testing.

        Poilievre is listening to groups most reviled by the mainstream Boomer establishment: the young, the working class, small business owners, religious groups, those without inherited unearned wealth, those without financial assets.

  4. Pedant,

    You can’t say with any level of credible certainty that the only people listening […] “are those who would never vote Conservative anyway.”

    Winning the next election is by addition — I don’t care what the polls say about winning without addition. Our momentum is solely based on Trudeau and his government’s net negative rating (just like Biden). Remove that from the equation and the Liberals would still be in the lead. Translation: We can’t count on a win without positive additions east of the lake head. Otherwise, we will ultimately lose. And if the leader sticks to some goofball issues that have no societal consensus in this country, that will ULTIMATELY lead to subtraction of our potential vote east of the lake head. Period.

    • Pedant says:

      Poilievre, in addition to consolidating the Conservative base, is targeting non-voters who feel marginalized and have sat out recent elections.

      Trudeau won by pulling in new voters in 2015 and Trump did the same in 2016. So it is a viable strategy. Whether or not it works remains to be seen.

      What will certainly NOT work is trying to appeal to 70-year old white affluent women in Oakville named Janet (i.e. the people who actually follow and trust mainstream media). She has a crush on Trudeau and is a lost cause. But Janet’s 30-something son Dan, working long hours and paying excessive income tax while still unable to afford a decent home thanks to the Trudeau housing bubble…HIS vote is very much up for grabs.

      • Pedant,

        Well, you hit the nail on the head with this sentence:
        “So it is a viable strategy. Whether or not it works remains to be seen.”

        Trudeau won in 2015 because the electorate was largely sick of Harper and viewed Trudeau as an acceptable alternative. Today, people are largely sick of Trudeau — but the billion dollar question is whether Poilièvre and especially his policies are conducive to swinging the next election in his direction. Right now, I seriously have my doubts. But at least for him it’s theoretically 50-50.

        Of course, it’s a side issue but nonetheless relevant that effective political strategy should never be based SOLELY on 50-50 odds but I digress. LOL.

  5. Warren has post-doctorate type expertise on hate and groups and individuals related thereto: so if he says they’re neo-Nazis, then you can take it to the bank.

    In addition, Poilièvre should fire the staffer who either briefed him incorrectly or incompletely about these people and those among them who have said links to neo-Nazis. (I won’t be holding my breath in the interim.)

    • PJH says:

      PP is a big boy who has been described by people in the know as a ‘brilliant one man band self promoter”

      His is a policy-free campaign. Instead, he is stirring up anger and division in order to provoke our members to vote for him.

      If anyone had an inkling about this march, and calculated its effect, it was PP himself.

  6. PJH says:

    I’ve let my Conservative MP(and poster boy for PP) know that if this little weasel of a man wins the leadership of the party….Im out…..

    If PP becomes leader, I predict the party will crash and burn in the next Federal election, and that divorce proceedings of the unholy alliance(no pun intended) of 2003 will begin, God willing….

    • PJH,

      I voted against the merger but was strategically wrong given Harper’s years in government. Will we crash and burn? Sure we could.

      But I’ll never work in favour of or support a divorce because in 2022 you simply can’t unscramble them eggs successfully, especially with the lunatic PPC sadly still breathing.

      If Poilièvre wins this race, as I expect, he will have to convince me (and so many others) that he has a decent shot at winning. Otherwise…I simply won’t lift a finger in the campaign and my wallet will remain rock solid closed.

      If Pierre is a strategic disaster, then this leadership will soon pass in relatively short order à la O’Toole. Not predicting it as a given but right now looking at his overall policies, a lot of them are net losers or quite simply right-wing crap that’ll get no serious transaction in a federal election.

      • PJH says:

        All well and good Mr. O’Dowd….but how many times do we repeat the same exercise over and over again electing the wrong leader(s) because the RefooormaTory/Fundmentalist/Pro-Life factions and the entrenched party brass(see above) cant seem to wake up and realize their ideas are not going to get us elected where it counts… urban Quebec, urban Ontario, urban BC…not forgetting about the Martitimes either….to allow us to form at least a minority govt, and that most of the aforementioned groups would die rather than see the reins of power passed to more enlightened individuals…

        600k plus memberships sold, and the various campaigns are only giving a weekend to examine them all and check for abnormalities, duplicate memberships, memberships in other parties, etc.?Methinks the fix is in already.

        It’s like banging your head against the wall….it feels so good when you stop….

        You may want to soldier on, and I admire you for it, but quite frankly, Ive had enough…..

        • Pedant says:

          “Methinks the fix is in already.”

          Is this the new evidence-free talking point from the alt-left? That Poilievre cheated his way to the CPC leadership?

          • Pedant,

            Please explain why the opinion of one person is suddenly the mass opinion of the “alt-left”. Thanks.

            But back to the substance of the remark: many of us know at least one CPC member who thinks the Scheer vs. Bernier and O’Toole vs. MacKay races were at the very least massaged. I don’t buy into that kind of thing but hey, we both know it’s out there. So…it’s no surprise to any of us if people may be inclined to some extent to have doubts this time even though the party is smart enough not to risk its reputation by playing fast and loose with the voting results. They would never, ever, do that.

  7. PJH,

    I certainly hear and get where you’re coming from and respect your view. God only knows how it ultimately will turn out.

  8. I spoke with Pierre by burner phone once years ago and did not get his measure, although he seemed to agree with some of my remarks way back then.

    Poilièvre has a clear choice: he can become the next O’Toole by following his path of embracing the unvaccinated and supporting truckers — both issues which erased and then vaporized the CPC lead three weeks before the vote, OR he can pivot for strategic and tactical reasons. In other words, PP will basically decide whether he wins or loses by a combination of his own conduct or lack thereof (just like Harper did in 2004). Every sentient Conservative already knows that. And likely voters know it even more than CPC MPs, Senators, members and supporters.

    Scheer basically got blown out of the water by being authentic while O’Toole quite deliberately did the exact opposite and deservedly got tossed by caucus after the loss which 10,000% was O’Toole’s fault and no one else’s. Life lesson there for you Pierre. You think?

  9. R. Marut says:

    I’m a fucking idiot. Spam me.

    halcroves2018@gmail.com

Leave a Reply to Steve T Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.