Poilievre and his team overplayed their hand in the past weeks. If your only response to everything is to attack, you can easily go off track. And clearly people and the press (I still credit Evan for this) are now paying attention.
Now, I don’t think Poilievre cares about this dip at all. His main priorities are raising money, raising money and raising money. And this is still going really well, and it really does not matter if they are at 34% or 41%. The only surprising bit that Poilievre and his team don’t same to worry about having to defend particular positions or behaviour during this money raising exercise. Apparently in their calculation this will matter less when it is time for an election. I think they will be wrong, but maybe wishful thinking on my part.
I think people who believe that PP can sustain a 20 points leader until the next elections, which will be most likely in 2025, are either ignorant or brainwash. Yes, the pooling has been extremely bad for the libs lately and should be a wake call. However, good and bad poolings are something that can come and go. Also, the biggest asset for the liberals right now are Polievre himself who keep making weird decisions. Campaign also matter and it is not only a question of money. Both the NPD wave in 2011 and the Trudeau elections in 2015 prove it.
A shot in the arm for Liberals, as you say, but also a much-needed wake-up call for Conservatives.
If they are at all serious in their pursuit of power, the Conservatives just might learn that childish stunts don't impress the average voter, and that negativity only goes so far. Learning such lessons early -- if they do learn them -- might save them from serious blunders closer to election time.
On the other hand, it's not clear that attack dogs can learn new tricks.
I would be careful reading too much into the list of Conservative policies that Conservative voters disagree with. For example, the recent Dutch election was fascinating. The right-wing populist PVV surged to a clear victory, despite exit polls where a majority of their own voters disagreed with most of their platform.
In fact, basically the only part of their platform their voters broadly agreed on was their anti-immigration policy. But since the PVV was the only major party with that platform an awful lot of voters held their noses and voted based on their priority one, despite disagreeing on everything else.
Right now my guess is that the next election gets decided on issues of immigration and housing/affordability, with Climate being a lagging third. After that no other policy will move the needle.
Any parties or activists who care about anything outside of those 2/3 things better start caring about them quickly. Because whoever wins on those issues will get to set policy for everything else
I think you are being too generous to the Dutch here (I was born in the Netherlands). I am afraid and ashamed that the 24% of voters that voted for Wilders are supporting most of his positions. They did not hold their noses, they supported this right wing nationalist party with enthusiasm.
In the last elections in the Netherlands all parties had a position on immigration. Several parties proposed more strict conditions. However, Wilders was the only one who equated constraining immigration with constraining Islam/Muslims. The 24% that voted for him liked that element in particular as they had several alternatives without the racism.
Poilievre and his team overplayed their hand in the past weeks. If your only response to everything is to attack, you can easily go off track. And clearly people and the press (I still credit Evan for this) are now paying attention.
Now, I don’t think Poilievre cares about this dip at all. His main priorities are raising money, raising money and raising money. And this is still going really well, and it really does not matter if they are at 34% or 41%. The only surprising bit that Poilievre and his team don’t same to worry about having to defend particular positions or behaviour during this money raising exercise. Apparently in their calculation this will matter less when it is time for an election. I think they will be wrong, but maybe wishful thinking on my part.
"he’s looked less like a Prime Minister in waiting than a shitposter in waiting" 👨🏻🍳💋🤏🏻
I think people who believe that PP can sustain a 20 points leader until the next elections, which will be most likely in 2025, are either ignorant or brainwash. Yes, the pooling has been extremely bad for the libs lately and should be a wake call. However, good and bad poolings are something that can come and go. Also, the biggest asset for the liberals right now are Polievre himself who keep making weird decisions. Campaign also matter and it is not only a question of money. Both the NPD wave in 2011 and the Trudeau elections in 2015 prove it.
A wake call: nice.
A shot in the arm for Liberals, as you say, but also a much-needed wake-up call for Conservatives.
If they are at all serious in their pursuit of power, the Conservatives just might learn that childish stunts don't impress the average voter, and that negativity only goes so far. Learning such lessons early -- if they do learn them -- might save them from serious blunders closer to election time.
On the other hand, it's not clear that attack dogs can learn new tricks.
The Cons peaked at 16 a few weeks ago ( forget Nanos )and started to slowly slide. Peaking too soon is just the karma dog biting your ass.
Are the gullible becoming aware of Poilievres weaknesses
I would be careful reading too much into the list of Conservative policies that Conservative voters disagree with. For example, the recent Dutch election was fascinating. The right-wing populist PVV surged to a clear victory, despite exit polls where a majority of their own voters disagreed with most of their platform.
In fact, basically the only part of their platform their voters broadly agreed on was their anti-immigration policy. But since the PVV was the only major party with that platform an awful lot of voters held their noses and voted based on their priority one, despite disagreeing on everything else.
Right now my guess is that the next election gets decided on issues of immigration and housing/affordability, with Climate being a lagging third. After that no other policy will move the needle.
Any parties or activists who care about anything outside of those 2/3 things better start caring about them quickly. Because whoever wins on those issues will get to set policy for everything else
I think you are being too generous to the Dutch here (I was born in the Netherlands). I am afraid and ashamed that the 24% of voters that voted for Wilders are supporting most of his positions. They did not hold their noses, they supported this right wing nationalist party with enthusiasm.
In the last elections in the Netherlands all parties had a position on immigration. Several parties proposed more strict conditions. However, Wilders was the only one who equated constraining immigration with constraining Islam/Muslims. The 24% that voted for him liked that element in particular as they had several alternatives without the racism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carleton_(Ontario_federal_electoral_district)
mebbe ask yourselves why I copied & pasted that here
ps - anybody here, including our host - listen to Fred DeLorey’s podcast with Cole Hogan ?
I did, the Boss did too.. I learned two highly useful things by doing so..
I learned nothing from this post or comments that I can apply.. note the word ‘apply’