— Feature, Musings —06.21.2023 12:44 PM
My latest: what those by-elections mean for Poilievre
Yes, the government is still the government.
Yes, the Official Opposition is still the Official Opposition.
Yes, the turnout was low.
Yes, nothing really changed.
Yes, the punditocracy reads too much into by-elections.
But, but, but: four by-elections happening on one day is nothing to shrug about. And, if you poke through the entrails, there is a warning to be seen.
For the Conservatives.
We know, we know: the Tories crushed the People’s Party leader, Maxime “Max” Bernier in Portage-Lisgar. Pierre Poilievre’s candidate got three times as many votes as Bernier.
Big deal. Bernier and the PPC have never won a seat in the House of Commons, not once, in hundreds of individual attempts since the PPC was formed half a decade ago.
Besides: Poilievre’s problem was never Bernier, now fading into nothingness in his rear view mirror. His problem is the guy on the road up ahead of him – Justin Trudeau.
It’s dumb to read too much into by-election results. Sure. But, stretching back to December’s Mississauga-Lakeshore result – where the Liberal vote went up, the Tory vote went down, and the dastardly Grits won – a worrying trend is developing for Conservatives.
The trend, which continued in this week’s by-elections, is this: the Liberal vote share went up, and the Conservative vote dropped. On by-election voting day, when it really counts, Trudeau’s Grits have outpaced Poilievre”s Tories.
Yes, yes: media polls continue to show Poilievre’s team ahead. But media polls are generally worth what you pay for them – nothing. Dogs, as former Conservative leader John Diefenbaker famously noted, “are the one animal that knows the proper treatment to give” to poles and polls.
The Tory base, who typically swoon at the mention of Pierre Poilievre’s name, don’t want to hear any of this. They’ll swarm the comments section of this column, wherever it appears, bleating that by-elections don’t matter, their guy held their two seats, blah blah blah. The usual.
But the reality is this: against the worst Liberal leader in generations – against a Liberal Party that has been adrift in a sea of scandal and controversies for months – the Poilievre party (because that is what it is) is not winning on the ground.
Don’t take our word for it. Former Conservative Erin O’Toole quit politics this month, too, and passed along some truths that every Tory should heed, but few will. Tories, said O’Toole last week, “have to win more votes in suburban and urban Canada.”
This week, following the four by-elections, O’Toole’s former chief was more direct. Longtime Tory stalwart Fred DeLorey was succinct: “What the heck is going on?”
As in, why has the Liberal vote increased, and the Conservative vote decreased, in multiple by-election results? There are a lot of “red flags” in the by-election numbers, said DeLorey to Postmedia, adding: “by-elections are strong indicators of where things are going…How are we going to win this election?”
O’Toole and DeLorey are good soldiers, and hasten to add that they support Pierre Poilievre and want him to beat Justin Trudeau and become Prime Minister. So do millions of Conservative voters.
But right now, based upon the available real-world evidence, Poilievre isn’t doing that. He isn’t winning when it matters.
His problem remains now what it has been since he became leader: Poilievre is beloved by the Tory base.
But the Tory base, increasingly, is out of touch with the country, with the cities and the ‘burbs.
And that’s why the real-world Liberal vote has been going up, and the Conservative vote has gone down.
Warren,
Pierre is counting on all those masses of young males with full balls. They didn’t show in byelections so why would 99% of them show up in the general? In short, that demographic is not nearly enough to take the CPC over the top. Plain as the nose on your face. Bigger tent guys, needed right now!
Are they supposed to become a pro-Bernardo party like the Liberals?
https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/warmington-justice-officials-charging-bernardo-victims-for-court-costs-shameful
Pedant,
Bernardo and other sadists who kill and torture have made their own beds, period. I’m thoroughly against capital punishment but would gladly make an exception in such cases. (At least we didn’t protect Klaus Barbie like the Yanks blatantly did.)
But your comment digresses more than anything else.
Read CIA.
Ronald,
My comment was obviously not directed at you personally.
My point was more so…if becoming a pro-Bernardo party won’t drive the self-described ‘centrists’ (who are actually affluent status quoists) away from the LPC, I’m not sure what Poilievre can possibly do to attract that particular subset of the population. They are not persuadable.
Pedant,
With respect, I don’t see how centrists qualify or quantify here. Absolute fools and highly delusional and incredibly naive people come in every political flavour. These so-called Bernardo advocates re: his type of incarceration, etc. are totally off their rockers — just plain nuts, period. Those convicted of such grisly crimes, in which they quite obviously took great pleasure are lucky to be in the 21st century, otherwise being drawn and quartered would be too good for them. They are incredibly more inhumane than that horrific type of punishment.
Ronald-that is not what he is saying. The Liberals have been acting like they are the pro Bernardo party and if that is not enough to drive the Tru-anons away, nothing will.
Pierre Poilievre: always angry.
Can’t connect with women.
Can’t connect with suburban voters.
For the Liberals, he’s the gift that keeps on giving.
They don’t lose any sleep over this guy.
Douglas,
He’s not always angry. He should be angry and on the attack in the House but that’s about it. It’s part of the job. After all, Harper was no marshmallow and he won three times. Pierre can do it too but stick to the solid centre-right, to increase our odds of winning a majority. Canadians are ready for real change but not radical change on all fronts. Pierre already knows that.
Douglas, seriously? Your boy has been an angry spoiled man child since he manhandled that NDP member EIGHT years ago in the House. And then proved it again when he told an Indigenous MP to fuck off on National Indigenous Peoples Day in the House. But you and the rest of the Tru-anons don’t care about any of that.
Martin,
Douglas is CPC. We were both on Team Charest (along with PJH). I was on only nominally so.
Right Ronald-and there you have the problem as I have laid out in various places. JT might as well be his boy because he is behaving and talking like he is. This is and always has been a binary choice(just like with Harper in your case). Still saying “if only Charest” instead of PP is complete and utter naive nonsense. The usual suspects would have destroyed him so you need to dance with the one that brung you. Didn’t you guys learn ANYTHING during the Reform/PC splits?
Martin,
Yes, this is a binary choice but not an unconditional one as regards political strategy. Douglas and I are concerned not with who happens to be the leader but how the leader delivers his positions and more importantly, what his positions ultimately will be in the election. Douglas knows far better than I what it takes to deliver a plurality of seats in the GTA. Pierre is the leader and can do as he wishes. What we both are saying is that it’s a mistake to almost automatically right off the GTA and solely concentrate elsewhere in order to win. We need to be large accommodative there. That doesn’t mean selling out our core principles but it does mean actually having some positions in our platform that a) the GTA can relate to and b) will attract increased support for the CPC in that critical voting area. Every seat counts so we need to make gains, even there. No doubt about that.
This is about political strategy to enlarge the tent and better improve our odds for a majority. Pierre is the leader and he has our support. The debate is entirely elsewhere.
Martin,
Respectfully, here’s what I learned from the Reform/PC splits: first off, if not united, we can’t win. Secondly, if being united MEANS we can’t do any better than serially win the consolation prize and ultimate “gold” star, namely the popular vote, à la Scheer and O’Toole, then we’re both ineffectual and unrealistic as to what it actually takes to win power, not to mention a majority. And finally, there comes a point down the road where the CPC, if it has only won the popular vote but failed to win power becomes an inadequate vessel to win power. And if that happens, it will be on all of us and then history will rhyme leading once again to a split into two useless political rumps. So, in short, we have to get the strategic political equation right THIS TIME, unlike previous leaders Scheer and O’Toole.
Ronald, my point is that many of our friends(not you) are still fighting the last leadership fight. It is not productive. Particularly when you are repeating nonsensical narratives from some in the media about things like PP’s anger issues. Pick a side and go all in.
Ronald, I’m back-trackin’.
You’re right: he’s not angry all the time.
And there’s many occasions when he ‘s angry for all the right reasons.
He must soften his tone.
Be a little more gentle in his delivery, and a little less condescending.
Vote rich GTA, with its very limited attention span, only cares about tone.
It doesn’t care about arguments, reasons, or making a case.
Less is more.
Less of Double P, and more of his key women caucus members.
Then the party’s polling numbers will be where they should be: north of 38%.
Just for the record, I will take an angry guy with an actual brain than our current PM whose smug arrogance knows know bounds and he has nothing upstairs or life experiences to back it up.
Douglas, I agree with your take on tone over content in urban centres.
For example, a calm, rational discussion about how the gun control laws affect non-urban residents may resonate far better in the GGTA, where gun violence is endemic. A tone that provides a sense of empathy for the problems inflicted on urban dwellers, who are not hunters, by criminals with hand guns may go over better with those who are unhappy with the current government, than the angry rants directed at raising funds from the Conservative base.
Kind of related. Listening to QP today and was multi-tasking and I hear Justin play the abortion card. So, I am thinking WTF was that all about and backed it up. He segued a reasonable question about Bernardo’s “freedom” to one about the freedom of choice. A settled matter but one that many in the media will keep letting Justin get away with playing. That will always be the problem no matter who is leading the party and no matter what the platform is but I digress.
Oh and on a side note, Justin dropped an f bomb on Leah Gazan during QP because she challenged him on what he has done so far at Grassy Knolls(among other things). He then lied about it the f bomb. We can give PP all the advice we want but it won’t matter because there are so many Truanons out there letting him get away with this shit. I had actually forgotten about this:
https://globalnews.ca/video/5104987/thank-you-for-your-donation-trudeau-to-first-nation-protesters-at-liberal-fundraiser
Martin,
Not me. That’s the perfect reflection of who this guy really, really, really is. If any of you don’t believe me, just check with the mistress. But then again, she’s not really reliable is she? She’s a lawyer after all.
Here is the exchange when Justin told Gazan to fuck off.
https://globalnews.ca/video/9784779/indigenous-peoples-day-mp-calls-upon-trudeau-to-implement-red-dress-alert-system-amid-genocide/amp/
Martin,
The woke phoney strikes again. So much respect for women as he has already amply demonstrated. I hope she cleans this fucker’s clock.
Here is the exchange. He is a liar and a scumbag:
Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderOral Questions
June 21st, 2023 / 3:25 p.m.
Conservative
Karen Vecchio Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
Mr. Speaker, I stand here in a bit of disbelief. Following some very difficult questions asked by my NDP colleague and friend from Winnipeg Centre, I watched, along with other members and colleagues, as the Prime Minister sat down and directed an F-bomb at the member for Winnipeg Centre, and a little bit more of that. Honestly, just play it back. I would ask for a formal apology and for the Prime Minister of Canada to stand and apologize to my female colleague and friend from Winnipeg Centre, especially on National Indigenous Peoples Day.
Links & Sharing
As spoken
Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderOral Questions
3:25 p.m.
Papineau Québec
Liberal
Justin Trudeau Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to let my answer to that question stand and say that I said absolutely nothing after finishing that answer.
Martin,
What more can anyone say, right, Curious V? Right, Scott?
Thank God for them chickens. They’re already on their way and will give him a lifetime memory he’ll never forget. Too bad that I’m old and totally inept when it comes to boxing.
Excellent commentary. Hopefully the next Conservative leader will be more electable. I wouldn’t be surprised though to see the party split into Western and Eastern versions.
He’s still trying to win the nomination, playing to his base, but when it’s time to vote, suburban and big city voters are going to look at this guy. What are they gonna see? A guy who has, since being elected the Conservative leader, played to his base – ignoring good advice from O Tool, that the party has to get closer to the moderate middle. He ignores said advice because he’s afraid his base will shift to the people’s party, just enough to cut him out in the next election. That’s not the only reason – more than for political strategy, that’s what he is – a guy who walks between the fringe of the conservative party and the people’s party and that’s not the kind of guy Canadians want. This has less to do with Trudeau than it has to do with the Fringe of the Conservative party wagging the dog.
I don’t know – 52% of Albertans voted for Danielle Smith.
I agree that that the Conservatives should be doing better. The by-election results are confounded by
-the unpopular move of the Conservatives parachuting a non-legacy candidate into Oxford
-the popular move of the Liberals parachuting a legacy candidate into Winnipeg South
Conclusion: Canadians are loyal to brands, two of the strongest being “Liberal” and “Trudeau”
“by-elections are strong indicators of where things are going…How are we going to win this election?”
Is there any evidence for this assertion? From my recollection, byelections are almost never an indicator of anything. The punditocracy claims that byelections are used by voters to punish sitting governments, but there’s virtually no track record or evidence of this actually happening. The low turnout can sometimes produce weird results though. In this latest round, Oxford was a weird case where the former CPC MP was campaigning for the Liberals. Winnipeg-South-Centre is a forever-Liberal seat (aside from 2011) with the emotional story of a son replacing his late father.
Poilievre does need to pick up some suburban seats, but he doesn’t need more urban seats so long as the strategy of appealing to working class ridings like Timmins bears fruit (and I believe it will).
As for Erin O’Toole – he ran on one of the most left-wing platforms of any nominally conservative party in Canada in decades. He was still taken down by the media and the elderly women of TruAnon.
Leftists constantly move the goalposts. Weren’t they telling us a year ago that Poilievre would drive the party to oblivion?
Yes that is the point and why my naive conservative friends need to stop with the crying in their milk about “if only we had elected MacKay or Charest as leader” or their sitting on their hands in 2021-a lot of what was really going on because O’Toole was” mean” to MacKay during the leadership campaign or how Harper was not quite red enough. We are the Goldilocks party. Boo hoo and grow the fuck up and focus on the real problem-that would be Justin. I am no politician but it is shocking to me how naive these people were and are about what is really going on in what is supposed to be what they do for a living. Truanon allies in the media would have destroyed Charest over China and MacKay over the F-35 controversy.
Of the 52 ridings between Lake Ontario and the 407, the Conservatives hold 6. Of the 34 ridings in Alberta, the Conservatives hold 32.
PP’s efforts appear to be focused on securing the last two ridings in Alberta, rather than figuring out how to capture 20 more seats in the Greater Greater Greater Toronto area.
The backroom boys and girls at the federal Conservative HQ should consider former Alberta Premier Jim Prentice’s accurate, but not prudent, comment to Rachel Notley during an ill-fated election campaign. It was something to the effect of “math is hard Rachel, but not that hard.”
Very simply put, until the Conservative Party figures out how to win a significant number, but not necessarily a majority, of the seats in the larger urban centres, they will be destined to by His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition.
PP’s efforts are focused on Timmins, Corner Brook, Nanaimo, Dawson, and Sydney. The strategy of groveling to fake centrists in Mississauga (who are actually status-quoists) is a proven failure.
And btw, if you haven’t noticed, the Liberals and their foul TruAnon sociopathic foot soldiers are doing a fairly good job alienating Muslim Canadians at the moment. The LPC is basically running the entire country to suit 70 year old affluent white women retired from public service and who became radicalized into extreme SJWs post-2015 and especially since Covid. I believe this will yield fewer electoral returns than the CPC appealing to workers, parents, people of faith (any faith), and the young.
Pedant, you cite five, maybe six ridings in smaller urban centres as a solution to making up a 20+ seat deficit?
The Conservatives hold so few seats in the major urban settings in Ontario, Quebec and BC that they can count them all on two hands and still order a round of beer.
PP et al can be true to their “ideology” or they can form a majority government. They can’t do both at the same time.
Pedant,
It’s not platform that killed O’Toole. It’s his being two-faced: one guy for the leadership race and a totally different guy in the election. And that’s precisely why O’Toole had to be ousted as leader. Pierre is consistent: he is who he is. It’s solely party platform that will either make him PM, or not make him PM. Simple as pie.
Everyone who has ever actually worked a campaign can quickly tell you exactly how many times an average voter mentioned by-election results as an issue….
Wow Seán. If that is the best argument the Conservatives have about PP’s bad night then we might as well give Trudeau another majority government right now.
WCJ,
I saw feds and provs lose byelections serially 6, 7, 8 times and then win re-election. So, Pedant has it right.
Ronald if that helps you sleep at night – great. PP saw his vote drop in all urban and suburban parts of all four tidings. He ate a little bit of the PPC party vote in rural areas. If his strategy is to increase the voting share in the ridings that the Cons win every election and alienate the swing voter he is doing an excellent job.
By the way if you add the Mississauga—Lakeshore by-election PP is five for five as leader where the Cons have seen their vote share go down. But hey it is just Canadian voters going to polls and rejecting him. Nothing to worry about.
Thanks WCJ…
Not a Conservative, thank you very much…
I’ve worked many campaigns including by-elections – which – BTW – are very fun and are highly recommended! You will make fast friends in by elections. It’s a political nerds paradise.
I remember one, when, yes, our strong organization possibly showed a foretelling of the future in a close battle… but another in which we absolutely mopped the f$%king floor against the Tories… but after that we went on towards a slow, declining defeat in the general a few years down the road.
The truth is political people love by-elections in the same way that sports nerds love drafts, combines, exhibition games and all star games. It means a lot to insiders. It’s like Christmas. I get it, I’m one of those people.
But to ordinary people? It’s just another Monday and an absurd waste of money.
Sean,
THEIR loss!
PP has consistently and directly appealed to the nastiest, small minded voters with comments that are obviously dishonest. Where has this got him? He has eaten into the PPC vote in some rural ridings and he has lost significant amounts of suburban and urban voters? Why? Because they quite rightly see him for the a-hole he is.
The idea that this jerk has “electability” is absurd. He is the latest albatross around the neck of the Conservative Party.
West Coast Jim… Boomer homeowner, purchased dirt cheap in 1985? Am I right (or close) in my assumption?
You’re not his target market. You can call the working class as many names as you like. Their votes are just as good as yours.
Pedant,
Agreed but who is going to make damned sure in every riding that all our vote turns out massively? It won’t be voters themselves and it won’t be Jesus. That’s for fucking sure.
You’ll have to get up pretty early in the morning if you want to convince me that Pierre Poilievre even gives a shit if he gets elected. He’ll do what he’s always done: play every dirty trick in the book, rely wholeheartedly on catchphrase jingoism, and play the victim when it inevitably doesn’t work out because he got the high profile job he wanted, and millions of adoring fools to go along with it. They’ll fill his pockets and kiss his feet, just like Justin Trudeau’s band of merry lemmings. And he’ll have roughly as many, albeit concentrated in just 3 provinces.
I tossed my Conservative membership right into a fire the day the (PPC) party decided Poilievre would make a good leader. I haven’t supported the Liberals since Chretien. Trudeau is indefensible, and taking the country down darker roads than socialist fever dreams ever predicted Stephen Harper would. But there is not a damn thing that suggests to me that Poilievre would be an improvement for our country.
We’re screwed, folks.
I notice you couldn’t articulate a single specific attribute or idea of Poilievre’s that you dislike, or even an example to back up your assertions. Oh my, a politician that uses catch phrases? Let’s freeze his bank account.
Pedant,
Does this mean Pierre won’t get to use The Bank of Canada’s CBDC? LOL.
I always thought that Poilievre was excellent for shadow
finance, but then he started foaming at the mouth about BTC and lost me completely.
He is a nice person and he has written back to me when I’ve written to him about issues, but BTC is for loons and he knows it.
Poilievre is a good Pitbull, but his first name is still Skippy, eh.
Don’t know what you’re talking about, Robert.
He thought BTC was interesting technology (it is) and stated that he wants Canada to be a leader in blockchain. God forbid Canada have other industries aside from fraudulent mortgage lending and foodbanks. The “opting out of inflation” comment was a bit strange but, meh. Seems like he was viewing BTC as digital gold, since gold is a longstanding hedge against inflation, and expressed that view awkwardly.
“Foaming at the mouth”?
I think there is a better than even chance that BTC is $100K+ by 2025 btw. And I’m far from a crypto pumper and wouldn’t care much if the whole edifice collapsed tomorrow.
Pedant,
Like you, I separate crypto generally from BTC. So much of crypto is basically fraudulent, a Ponzi scheme or a house of cards. As for BTC, personally, I won’t go there because of the ultimate intangible: the government theoretically outlawing it. I have no control nor guarantee on what Congress will perhaps ultimately do, so my risk assessment makes me go elsewhere.
Yup, I like DeFi but my impression is that Canada is far, far, back in that lane. A Poilièvre government would have a lot of catching up to do to get us to the point where we would even be competitive, via the private sector, much less a world leader. But hey, I’m definitely for going there under a CPC government framework and so-called encouragement policies.
BTC is ‘rat poison squared’ just as the Oracle of Omaha
claimed it is, Pedant. Buffett is rarely wrong about money.
Moreover, BTC is great for criminal money laundering, but it’s anything but good for central banking.
The central banks/BIS will outlaw BTC when they manufacture their own crypto coinage so that criminals
cannot engage in money laundering activity that undermines central banking & sovereign currencies.
Lastly, BTC will never broach $100k unless the central banks print free money again via lower-for-longer Monetary Policy. See Frontline’s _Age of Easy Money_ March 14th 2023. Lower for longer was a very big mistake that’ll never manifest again, ever. BTC is a margin bet whereby one needs margin via money markets.
I see you have disdain for Trudeau as well, so I’ll be more kind in my reply.
Catchphrase jingoism was practically invented by the left; honed by the Liberals over the past 20 years, and arguably perfected by Justin Trudeau. The thing is, the left believes that its catchphrases are somehow belonging to a moral high ground. They see no issue with using words like “racism” and “xxxx -phobic” as replies when they want to shut down conversation. It’s simply lazy debating, but they love it and somehow don’t see them for what they are.
I have to disagree with you, WK. None of these are swing ridings. They are were fairly safe seats for the party who won them.
Sure, the total vote percents may have fluctuated a bit, and we can pour over those details for hours and draw all sorts of theoretical conclusions – but in reality that sort of fluctuation happens in every election and means naught.
These fluctuations happen all the time between elections as well – we see them in opinion polls. It can be influenced by something as small as the news that week (a bit chagrining for those of us who care about politics, but sadly many swing voters are shallow in what motivates their vote).
I’d argue these elections only show that safe seats will remain safe seats in the next election.
The Liberals did well in Winnipeg and Montreal, but that shouldn’t surprise anyone. Many in Oxford were upset that Arpan Khanna was a parachute candidate. My guess is that the Conservatives are trying to increase their share of the ethnic vote.
The Liberals can still win in urban areas, so the suburbs will play a big role in the next election. If the Conservatives do well there, the Liberals will be in trouble.
Maxime Bernier placed a distant second in Manitoba, but the candidate from the last election, Solomon Wiebe, said he’d be lucky to get half of his percentage (22%), so he definitely exceeded that number. The Conservative candidate Branden Leslie was born in southern Manitoba and raised on a farm, but he no longer lives there and in fact even worked for Stephen Harper’s government. He’s definitely more connected to Ottawa than most voters realize.
Gilbert,
I hope Jason Kenney helps Pierre with minority outreach since Kenney excels at that.
Best case scenario:
The Conservatives are playing possum, putting in an effort in the four byelections, but holding the aces to play later. This keeps the Liberals guessing how many wedge issues from the last 20 elections will be needed to bat back a surging Blue Wave.
Worst case scenario:
This will be as good as it gets. Small ball aimed at the small minded and guaranteed to repel every voting age woman in the seat rich areas of Ontario.
I wish someone would tell Poilievre and his handlers that he has won the leadership race and it’s time to drop the frat party demeanour and start looking like someone who could go to a NATO meeting and be attention.
WV,
It’s not just our closest allies who are laughing their asses off when it comes to our Little Potato, Emperor Clueless Dumbass, the first. This guy is a pathetic joke in all serious diplomatic circles. Just place a few calls in all the right places. At least he’s held in higher regard than Madam Minister. I didn’t know that was even possible for such birds of a feather.
The CPC are only leading the polls because of Trudeau fatigue and the fact that nobody’s really paid attention to who Poilievre is yet. Once a writ is dropped and people get a good look at what an odious, unlikable and bigoted POS Poilievre is Canadians will think twice about voting CPC. He’s basically Canada’s Ted Cruz.
That being said, Canadians do like dumping governments after 8-10 years, so a CPC win is still possible, but the numbers point to a minority govt. At least that’s controllable.
Exactly. When they zero in on Poilievre, polls will adjust.
Curious V,
You sure like living in la la land. Your guy got two minorities in a row. In short, Canadians have ALREADY TWICE concluded that this guy is an empty suit who happens to be totally unqualified to be entrusted with another majority mandate. Period. So I suggest you all take a long, hard, look in the mirror before you come up with so-called firm conclusions about the other guy.
Ronald, you might not like Trudeau, but Poilievre is in the same boat as Trump and Danielle Smith – you should have stuck with O Tool.
Ronald-it is pointless. He is not following(or ignoring) the latest developments about Justin(make that any) and, like your question to him and Scot above, NEVER responds directly to any questions about his views on said developments. This is all you get when you ask Tru-anons direct questions about Justin’s foibles:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpGtBnVZLSk
And then the whataboutisms start. And then there are the inevitable complaints about his hair, nonsense from people (some allegedly on our side) about how he is angry(people need to actually watch his townhalls and stop believing what some some in the media are saying) and making nonsensical comparisons to T when it is Justin that operates like him and always has.
Curious,
If Pierre is in the same boat as Trump and Smith, I guess that means he gets to win on his first try. I definitely agree with that.
Ah yes. More non-specific smears from TruAnon. No actual examples provided. ‘Feelings’ over facts. You personally find him unlikable so you ascribe your own feelings onto the broader populace. Yes you’re *that* powerful and representative, Mr. Weiss.
A great way for the Conservatives to win votes is simple. They can tell Canadians that they don’t want Paul Bernardo’s vote.
Gilbert,
I would roll the dice on this with election ads containing as many Liberal clips as I can find. BUT, I would ONLY run them in the first part of the election campaign. The last part has to be all about our policy and positive approach to taking back Canada,
à la Morning In America Reagan ads in the 1980s.
Ah, the prospect of bringing sound, competent and ethical government management back to Canadian politics is an objective no Canadian can argue with. Yes, by all means, Canada will be back and our government will actually have at least a modicum of a clue of what it’s doing from the get-go, unlike the current regime in power.
One thing that seems to been overlooked was the degree of overt anti-South Asian racism displayed by the Liberal candidate and the Party during the Oxford by-election. Textbook example of a dog whistle.
So put that in your pipe and smoke it!
It was a reported on, just not widely. Would ruin a good nonsensical story. Too bad about that legacy MacKenzie had. Destroyed by a whiny, lazy, entitled daughter who wouldn’t lift a manicured finger to get the nomination. Tait and MacKenzie, couple of Tru-anons. It is laughable. I have been paying attention closely to that riding because I may end up getting moved there with the new borders which is beyond ridiculous. But I digress.
Dear MD
Salient and cogent observations my friend.