, 09.18.2022 12:19 PM

KINSELLACAST 228: Adler! Lilley! Kheiriddin! Belanger! No questions – but great tunes from Sleaford Mods, Lovely Eggs & more!


  1. Warren,

    Akin did the right thing by apologizing but is this a preview of coming attractions? Any campaign that is seeking power and the favour of voters TAKES questions. Failure to do so only undermines the possible support of swing voters.

    But then they’ll say that Trudeau, Biden, etc., also refused to take questions but clue in people, they didn’t do that while seeking office. At least most of them didn’t.

    • Or if you prefer, the top job.

      • Martin Dixon says:

        It worked fine for Ford during the last campaign. Limited access. To keep beating a dead horse, here is what I think is going on but only reported sporadically.


        Their probable response to all the media handwringing about the Akin PP dust up if they actually ever hear about it?

        “Ok boomer”.

        And yes, Warren must have played the Lovely Eggs track before. I had the track and I have no idea how I would have heard it otherwise.

        • Martin,

          What’s your take on 200K+ who ended up not voting and what does that statistic mean for a future federal election? And perhaps more importantly WHY they ultimately didn’t vote?

          • Martin Dixon says:

            Maybe they could see the writing on the wall like I did. And since I am looking for the most optimistic view(which is what we all need to do to take JT down), it needs to be pointed out that the last overwhelming win was by JT. There were 300,000 members. 130 thousand registered to vote and 104000 voted. Until this year, that was the gold standard in leadership campaigns. We crushed all those numbers. Absolutely no comparison and JT was Liberal royalty and basically ran against no one ultimately. If you really want to use the 200k no shows against him, have at it. I don’t plan to.

          • Martin,

            I’m not using it against PP, our new leader, I’m just trying to extrapolate what it might or might not mean in the general. Call it an academic exercise, if you will.

          • I’m also not going to feed you bullshit that I positively love PP, but hey, democracy has spoken and democracy is always right whether I happen to like the end result or not. PP is our legitimate leader so he can take it from here. We all could provide plenty of insightful and helpful advice. My impression is that A) they are already know-it-alls and B) think they are miles ahead of the rest of us, strategically speaking. I’d call that, at minimum, wishful thinking. But some people just can’t help themselves: they’ve just got to keep hitting their heads on that wall, over and over again. Just ask Byrne.

  2. If Poilièvre has had a bad first week, then whose fault is it? Where does the buck stop in this OLO? Who, no doubt a flunky, gets to be pro-forma and summarily thrown under the bus next week? Tick, tock. Tick, tock.

  3. I’m troubled with what happens to senior people when a leader goes down, or a new one comes in: Clarke and now Rayes. Not a pattern I want to see repeated.

    • Sean says:

      I’m more troubled about the knuckleheads who insist on staying around after a historic humiliation… as if the party can’t survive without them.

  4. Martin Dixon says:

    I have been telling my fiends that QP will be must see TV starting this week but JT off to the the UN assembly which(unless I miss my guess), PP will make hay out of.

    • Martin,

      For us, political junkies, absolutely. But we’re pretty too much in the Ottawa bubble as it is. They barely pay attention to politics in a federal election, so PP’s won’t likely be moving seriously poll numbers anytime soon.

      • Sean says:

        Chimps trying to figure out how to put on lulu pants would have a greater entertainment and educational value than watching Justin debate PP.

  5. The Doctor says:

    Ugh, that screenshot of the Polievre fundraising pitch just makes me want to groan. The whole discussion of the media, media bias etc. that takes place in our political sphere is typically so inane. It’s just people talking past one another.

    One of the things that’s so frustrating about it, for those of us who like to see informed debate, is that humans are biased. There is extensive research on this. The subject is quite interesting.

    But the point is that people who constantly rant and rave about media bias seem to think that there’s some achievable alternative universe out there where no media bias exists. It’s so fucking stupid, words fail me.

    There always will be some bias of some sort in every single media outlet. Without fail. The only thing we can realistically hope for out of major media outlets is that they behave like credible journalistic organizations with respect to such things as sourcing and attribution within stories, correcting errors and omissions, publishing retractions and labelling opinion pieces as opinion etc.

    • Martin Dixon says:

      The problem is that most of the media won’t admit it. As a matter of fact, they are offended by the suggestion. Of course your reporting will be biased based on your political views. That is a self evident view.

      • The Doctor says:

        Where is the actual evidence, via research, polling or other empirical evidence, of what you assert in your first two sentences?

        • Martin Dixon says:

          Just watch what they say when challenged. Get very upset. It is just human nature that their coverage would be biased based on their political views. And there has been work in the area despite the fact that I think it is a self evident truth.

          “Journalists, nevertheless, often feel compelled to try to prove that they are “unbiased.”


          And there have been studies about how they vote:


          I am not ranting and raving about it. It is just a reality that needs to be manged if you are a politician. When I want to see the talking points of both sides, I flip on CNN and then Fox. I actually find it funny and so predictable. I get my real close to unbiased daily news fix from The Newshour on PBS.

          • The Doctor says:

            I agree Newshour on PBS is very credible. But the fact is, I see Trump supporters on Breitbart claiming that PBS is a commie organization and it’s a favourite talking point of Trumpists and US conservatives that they want to eliminate all government funding for PBS.

            But the reason I asked for actual empirical/study evidence is because I think that if you sat most journalists down for a beer and asked them, most of them would admit that their organizations are biased one way or another. But it also depends what kind of bias and where it’s manifested. It can be weird that way. Some organizations are very biased on the editorial/opinion front but quite scrupulously neutral on the actual gumshoe reporting front.

            Then there’s the matter of story selection and omission, which can be very insidious because that can be difficult to detect unless you’re aware of what everyone else is doing on the spectrum. This is where I fault the American version of CNN and MSNBC in particular, but also Fox. Breitbart is the absolute worst when it comes to this IMO (i.e., refusing to even run stories that would upset their alt-right narrative).

            A really odd and interesting one for me is the difference between CNN’s American feed and their global/European feed. Their international version is way, way less partisan and far more objective than their American feed. Internationally, no Don Lemon, no Al Sharpton, credible anchors, etc. They’re obviously making a judgment about the nature of their audiences (ordinary Americans versus business and recreational English-speaking internationals travellers). Also to a lesser extent regular NYT versus the International NYT print edition (again the latter is far less partisan, not as many screeching op-eds etc.)

    • Doc,

      I would come at it this way: a successful leader has to not engineer a reverse hard-on with the media that most politicians secretly despise in their heart of hearts. If a politician goes out of his or her way to label the press as the enemy, as has already been done, well don’t be fucking surprised when they make it collectively their life mission to go after you and your party full bore. Kind of to be expected, you think?

    • Martin Dixon says:

      So after I posted that, I did what I should have done and normally do when I see something that just can’t be true, I looked into it. Then saw a bunch of posts that it was from the jubilee. Oops. Glad I didn’t make a big deal about it. But it appears it is real. Not really a twitter guy but loving the various music jokes, especially about Nickleback.

      I have always preferred this karaoke version myself:


      That has not changed.

  6. Sean says:

    Belanger is right at 47.00 . Akin served himself up like a golf ball on a tee. An obvious baiting situation and surprising he fell for it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.