“Warren Kinsella's book, ‘Fight the Right: A Manual for Surviving the Coming Conservative Apocalypse,’ is of vital importance for American conservatives and other right-leaning individuals to read, learn and understand.”

- The Washington Times

“One of the best books of the year.”

- The Hill Times

“Justin Trudeau’s speech followed Mr. Kinsella’s playbook on beating conservatives chapter and verse...[He followed] the central theme of the Kinsella narrative: “Take back values. That’s what progressives need to do.”

- National Post

“[Kinsella] is a master when it comes to spinning and political planning...”

- George Stroumboulopoulos, CBC TV

“Kinsella pulls no punches in Fight The Right...Fight the Right accomplishes what it sets out to do – provide readers with a glimpse into the kinds of strategies that have made Conservatives successful and lay out a credible roadmap for progressive forces to regain power.”

- Elizabeth Thompson, iPolitics

“[Kinsella] deserves credit for writing this book, period... he is absolutely on the money...[Fight The Right] is well worth picking up.”

- Huffington Post

“Run, don't walk, to get this amazing book.”

- Mike Duncan, Classical 96 radio

“Fight the Right is very interesting and - for conservatives - very provocative.”

- Former Ontario Conservative leader John Tory

“His new book is great! All of his books are great!”

- Tommy Schnurmacher, CJAD

“I absolutely recommend this book.”

- Paul Wells, Maclean’s

“Kinsella puts the Left on the right track with new book!”

- Calgary Herald

On socks, Alberta and No More Mr. Spice Guy.


The cover of the next LP, SFH Kinda Suck. Remind you of anything?

L - R: Bjorn von Flapjack III, Winkie, Snipe. In witless protection program: Steve Deceive.

L – R: Bjorn von Flapjack III, Winkie, Snipe. In witless protection program: Steve Deceive.

to prevent her from bouncing down the stairs, that is.  The still GG, not the one presently in the crosshairs of Kevin Donovan.

On Spotify!

From Leger.

Facebook reminded me.  The slide, meanwhile, reminds all of us that there are no certainties in politics – everything can change in an instant, and in ways few of us foresee, too (cf. Brexit, Trump).


…well, they can be, actually.  Following me, for instance: shouldn’t you all be outside, playing a sport or something?

Anyway, I am grateful that my 140-character-consciousness has some appeal. And, Justin Trudeau, watch out: I’m coming after you.

Screen Shot 2017-07-18 at 8.11.50 PM

From our friends at Campaign Research, who are among the (exceedingly small) group who are the best pollsters in Canada.

A War Room/www.warrenkinsella.com exclusive!  Comments are open.


TORONTO, JULY 12, 2017 – In the sixth wave of the Campaign Research Poll, a provincial online public opinion omnibus survey conducted among a sample of 943 Ontario voters, just fewer than 4 in 10 will vote Progressive Conservative if a provincial vote were held tomorrow (38%), whereas just more than 3 in 10 will vote Liberal (31%). Fewer than a quarter will vote for the NDP (23%) and few will vote Green (6%).

These results are almost identical to those noted last month (June 13, PCs – 38%, Liberals – 30%, NDP – 24%). The PC vote is especially strong among the oldest (46%), males (44%) more so than females (33%), federal Conservatives (93%), those in mid income groups ($60K to $80K – 52%) and in the GTA surrounding Toronto (42%). The Liberal vote is strongest among the youngest (45%), females (36%), rather than males (27%), in the city of Toronto (39%), among federal Liberals (69%), and the wealthy ($80K to $100K – 41%). The NDP vote is common to areas outside the GTA and Toronto (27%), among federal New Democrats (89%) and mid income groups ($40K to $60K – 33%).

LEADER APPROVALS ARE GENERALLY STABLE Premier Wynne has the approval of fewer than one in five Ontarians (17%), and her net favourability score (approve minus disapprove) is a dismal -52. This compares to last month, when her approval was at 18% and her net score was -51. Patrick Brown has the approval of 3 in 10 (30%) and his net score is a positive +6. This compares to last month (June 13) when his approval was identical (30%) and his net was +9. His greatest problem continues to be that voters are too unfamiliar with him to have an opinion (47%). Close to 4 in 10 approve of Andrea Horwath (38%, almost twice her party’s vote share, and her net score is a very positive +16. This is down from last month when her approval was 41% and her net favourability was +23.

TWO THIRDS SEE GOVERNMENT CHANGING, GOOD JOB OR NOT Two thirds of Ontarians think the government needs to change (64%), whether they think it has done a good job overall (18%) or a poor one (46%). Just one quarter thinks the government deserves to be reelected (25%), whether it has done a good job (16%) or not (9%). Liberals are, not surprisingly, most likely to say the government has done a good job and deserves to be reelected (47%), although one quarter of Liberals think it’s still time for a change, even if the government has done well (23%). Among PC supporters, most believe a bad job has been done and the government needs to change (78%). Among New Democrats, half think the government has done a bad job and must go (50%), while more than a quarter say a good job has been done, but the government still must change (28%).

So, I was on Evan Solomon’s show on CFRA yesterday afternoon, with my pals Karl Belanger and Monte Solberg, and Evan asked us about Justin Trudeau’s Spotify list.  Given that Trudeau’s list contained stuff “you could hear in an elevator anywhere in Canada,” I said, to general merriment, Evan challenged me to provide a better alternative.

Thus, SFH’s newest hit-to-be, Kinda Sucks, was flushed out of hiding.  Here it is, newly mastered – along with how the cover will look, soon to be clutched in the sweaty maulers of millions of teens around the globe.

Watch for it on iTunes and independent record shops near you, Evan!


When every other explanation fails, there’s always stupidity. Remember that, boys and girls.

Let us explain. Back at the beginning of time, when this writer wrote for the Calgary Herald and the Ottawa Citizen and the like, media folks still had expense accounts. It’s true, we did. We would gather at local canteen, and dissect the latest bit of political skullduggery, and charge our beneficent corporate overlords.

So, if Prime Minister Brian Mulroney had declared that he intended to “roll the dice” with the Constitution, as he did, we figured he couldn’t possibly mean that. Because, you know, actually “rolling the dice” with a nation’s supreme statute would be utterly reckless and irresponsible, and would have the potential to destroy said nation. So it couldn’t possibly be that. No way.

Therefore, we would assume some grand strategy was at work. Mulroney was being diabolically clever, and putting the Premiers on notice. Or he was being Machiavellian, and attempting to stampede the Opposition onto his side of the argument. Or, whatever. (The expense accounts would get strained, at this point.)

Steven Harper, too. When, mid-campaign in 2015, he abruptly stopped talking about his main political strength (the economy), and started talking about an issue that absolutely no one else was talking about (the niqab), lots of media folks thought the then-Conservative leader knew something the rest of us didn’t. The economy is the main concern of millions (that is, millions) of Canadians, and the wearing of the niqab in a lineup had come up twice (that is, twice) in the preceding months. But Harper Is A Strategic Genius, etc. etc. He knows what he’s doing, etc.

Well, no. It was knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing, dog-whistle politics of the worst kind. It was pathetic and desperate. It was, in fact, a complete repudiation of every previous effort Messsrs. Harper and Kenney had made to, um, curry favour with New Canadians. It was like holding a hand grenade, pulling the pin, and saying, just before blowing oneself to smithereens: “Canadians will greatly admire the bold and decisive move I am about to make.”

Which brings us, in a circuitous fashion, to Donald “Diaper” Trump, Jr.

(A word of explanation: back in his salad days at the University of Pennsylvania, the younger Donald was renowned as the Big Drunk on Campus. As his classmate Scott Melker was seen recounting this week on Facebook: “Donald Jr. was a drunk on campus. Every memory I have of him is of him stumbling around the campus, falling over or passing out in public, with his arm in a sling from injuring himself while drinking. His nickname was “Diaper Don” because of his tendency to falls asleep in other people’s beds and urinate. I always felt terrible for him.”)

A week or so ago today, Diaper Don was being hounded by the ink-stained wretches and wretchesses at the New York Times. They were onto a story that Diaper Boy – aided and abetted by his brother-in-law, and his father’s top campaign boss – had met with Russian operatives in June 2016 to receive damaging information about Hillary Clinton.

The Times didn’t have the documentary proof, however. They just had dribs and drabs from three anonymous sources. Diaper Don and the geniuses at the White House serially offered up a variety of explanations for the meeting, none of which made sense, and none of which were actually true. But it was still the Donald Jr., on the record, versus three anonymous weasels, largely off the record. It was a plausibly deniable position, because there was no paper proof.

So, what did Diaper Don do?

He gave the media proof.

Ho ho ho, the Trumpkins crowed. Donny showed the Deep State! He stole the scoop away from the Times! He went first, and owned the news cycle! He defined the story before it could be defined! He’s a genius! Nothing burger, etc.!

Well, no.

Diaper Don gave the news media the entire email exchange between himself and some crypto-Soviet sleazebag, who told him – and we are putting this in all-caps, because it actually merits it – that: “THIS SENSITIVE INFORMATION IS PART OF RUSSIA AND ITS GOVERNMENT’S SUPPORT FOR MR. TRUMP.”

Upon receiving this “sensitive information” from the Kremlin, did Diaper Don go to the feds, to report a possible crime? Did he notify the media and summarily condemn it? Did he take steps to protect his father, then losing to Hillary Clinton?

Um, no. He cheerily went to the meeting, at Trump Tower, and he helpfully brought along his brother-in-law (who now works at the White House, and is under criminal investigation, because Russia) and the top campaign boss (who is now registered as a pro-Russia lobbyist, and is also under criminal investigation, because Russia). And, three days later, the hacked Clinton campaign emails started to spill out.

The general consensus is that Diaper Don has now handed Robert Mueller, the special counsel probing all of this Trumprussia stuff, the proverbial smoking gun. He has offered the proof that no one previously had: namely, that Donald Trump – and his family, and his most-senior campaign operatives – knowingly and maliciously conspired with Russia to cheat, and steal the election from the real president, Hillary Clinton.

Sometimes, boys and girls, there is no grand strategy. Sometimes, there is no diabolically-clever tactic being deployed. Sometimes, it simply is what it looks like.

You know: stupid.