Not only is Poilievre an unimpressive politician, he has also surrounded himself with equally unimpressive people. His team, without exception, has only one gear: attack Trudeau or the messenger. The imaginary prayer ban for today is a good example, it was not true a year ago and it is still not true. Nevertheless they go all out making this claim and use the Epoch Times as a reference. The base is loving it, but anyone outside the base is scratching their collectives heads.
Back to Poilievre, the lack of security clearance is definitely hurting him. And I expect this is only the beginning of the trouble for Poilievre when it comes to foreign interference. Without doubt he had help from India in his leadership race. And while he did not need this help, he received it nevertheless. It is all going to come out, and it is going to hurt him even more in the polls in th coming months.
"Governmental unpopularity only goes so far." Indeed.
The problem is that the mob excitement generated by "throw the bums out" is naturally unsustainable over time even when algorithmically exponentialized, but when young people are increasingly and alarmingly seen as the main victims of "big tech," but paralysis shockingly persists, surely it becomes clear that we have a SYSTEMIC problem beyond the purview of mere governance by WHOMEVER.
Most of our media is complicit in this problem because like big tech, big oil, and ALL big corporations, it's now primarily owned by greedy conservative/male interests, the same guys who embody neoliberalism and the whole capitalist system where corporations rule via disproportionately psychopathic CEO's bent on winning at ALL costs.
Only such literally otherworldly egotism could so blithely eschew their own essential "creatureliness," casually dismissing climate change while imagining relocating on fucking MARS FFS. And they accuse WOMEN of "living in their heads!" But women are also the natural adults in the room because they are the mothers, as in Mother Nature.
Again you have to wonder how different it might have been if we'd just called it "Father Nature," but oh no, the male "god idea" stole the show as usual....
But when the "bums" continue to patiently govern like the adults in the room which the Liberals clearly ARE, but out of proper respect have simply FAR too patiently indulged "Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition" even when they've gone full-on rogue by sporting the essential political immaturity of da proud boys' trademark libertarianism, thereby manifesting ever more destructive-of-all-our-institutions-including our-parliamentary-democracy and therefore civilization as we have known it?
Under those circumstances, time and the Trumpster fire so close by are definitely on the Liberals' side.
A note of optimism for the Liberals would be good. I agree with your take in the last paragraph ("...it's still highly likely a Conservative landslide."), but tightening polls could result in more of the furniture being saved, which leads to my next thought.
I'd love to read your thoughts on a suggestion raised on The Line podcast this weekend - that the Liberals call the election sooner rather than later, so that PM Poilievre has to deal with all the challenges heading Canada's way. (My list of items that won't lend themselves to the populism offered by the CPC: the recession that's just about here, the inflation and potentially higher interest rates resulting from Trump's economic policies, the cuts necessary to pay for the defence spending demanded by the Trump administration, and the Ontario farmers' reaction to finally lifting the dairy subsidies [I'm not sure if this version of the CPC will care too much about Quebec's reaction, given their Alberta base].)
I am a fan of the mischief you proposed in your last column re: the Fredericton clinic - at this point, anything that the Liberals can do to create internal challenges for the CPC will be useful in saving a little more of the furniture and setting up for a comeback.
One other column question - do you accept the notion that governments get tired (or even exhausted), and could this also be a reason for the Liberals to hand off the negotiations with the Trump folk to the Conservatives?
I realize these questions are cynical, and imply risking the health and well-being of the country by Conservative missteps in order to bring the Liberals back into power later, but I'm not at all confident that the Liberals can do better than furniture-saving at this point.
The Liberals will absolutely not hand over negotiations with the US to the Conservatives. It is an opportunity for the Liberals to shine and change the channel. I don’t know if it will make a difference in the election, but this is mostly an opportunity for the liberals.
Normally, I'd agree with you. But that ties back to the question of governments getting tired - the "A" team that the Liberals put forward in the negotiations in 2017-18 is either gone to new challenges, or at best is seven years older with fifteen years of wear on their bodies. The new "A"-level players won't join the Liberals right now (at best the future is uncertain, and could easily result in lost jobs in a short time period), and the Trump guys can read polls too - they can wait out the government as well. The risks for the Liberals are likely far greater than the potential benefits.
Actually, not too many of the key players from 2017/2018 have gone. Gerald Butts is no longer there, and Mulroney has passed, but many of the key players are still there. It may also give Carney something useful to do.
Now, I don’t think it is a given that Canada is number 1 on the list of priorities for the incoming administration. I think the focus is going to be internal, and perhaps NATO. I think we will see Trudeau reaching out to other NATO countries to assemble a united counter balance to a Trump administration.
I support what the Liberals have put in place, such as Pharma, Dental and proposed School Food Program, but until they address immigration reform in a very big and visible way they are not going to be re-elected
It's unfortunate this immigration 'thing' in Canada is the echo from the UK (which popularized Brexit) and the US current rhetoric. The Feds are being lobbied for immigration to fill missing labour demands by many different sectors - construction, agriculture, healthcare, etc . The lack of affordable housing is not immigration driven no matter how the real culprits trumpet. Interesting as well is how curbing the number of foreign students is having a negative affect on Universities and Colleges that were reliant on high tuition for foreign students to fund their institutions. The Feds provide education funding to Provinces however, that doesn't guarantee the Provinces pass those funds to post secondary institutions.
The real question remains - can more accurate information inform citizens or will Canadians continue to feed on sensational sound-bites?
Not only is Poilievre an unimpressive politician, he has also surrounded himself with equally unimpressive people. His team, without exception, has only one gear: attack Trudeau or the messenger. The imaginary prayer ban for today is a good example, it was not true a year ago and it is still not true. Nevertheless they go all out making this claim and use the Epoch Times as a reference. The base is loving it, but anyone outside the base is scratching their collectives heads.
Back to Poilievre, the lack of security clearance is definitely hurting him. And I expect this is only the beginning of the trouble for Poilievre when it comes to foreign interference. Without doubt he had help from India in his leadership race. And while he did not need this help, he received it nevertheless. It is all going to come out, and it is going to hurt him even more in the polls in th coming months.
"Governmental unpopularity only goes so far." Indeed.
The problem is that the mob excitement generated by "throw the bums out" is naturally unsustainable over time even when algorithmically exponentialized, but when young people are increasingly and alarmingly seen as the main victims of "big tech," but paralysis shockingly persists, surely it becomes clear that we have a SYSTEMIC problem beyond the purview of mere governance by WHOMEVER.
Most of our media is complicit in this problem because like big tech, big oil, and ALL big corporations, it's now primarily owned by greedy conservative/male interests, the same guys who embody neoliberalism and the whole capitalist system where corporations rule via disproportionately psychopathic CEO's bent on winning at ALL costs.
Only such literally otherworldly egotism could so blithely eschew their own essential "creatureliness," casually dismissing climate change while imagining relocating on fucking MARS FFS. And they accuse WOMEN of "living in their heads!" But women are also the natural adults in the room because they are the mothers, as in Mother Nature.
Again you have to wonder how different it might have been if we'd just called it "Father Nature," but oh no, the male "god idea" stole the show as usual....
But when the "bums" continue to patiently govern like the adults in the room which the Liberals clearly ARE, but out of proper respect have simply FAR too patiently indulged "Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition" even when they've gone full-on rogue by sporting the essential political immaturity of da proud boys' trademark libertarianism, thereby manifesting ever more destructive-of-all-our-institutions-including our-parliamentary-democracy and therefore civilization as we have known it?
Under those circumstances, time and the Trumpster fire so close by are definitely on the Liberals' side.
A note of optimism for the Liberals would be good. I agree with your take in the last paragraph ("...it's still highly likely a Conservative landslide."), but tightening polls could result in more of the furniture being saved, which leads to my next thought.
I'd love to read your thoughts on a suggestion raised on The Line podcast this weekend - that the Liberals call the election sooner rather than later, so that PM Poilievre has to deal with all the challenges heading Canada's way. (My list of items that won't lend themselves to the populism offered by the CPC: the recession that's just about here, the inflation and potentially higher interest rates resulting from Trump's economic policies, the cuts necessary to pay for the defence spending demanded by the Trump administration, and the Ontario farmers' reaction to finally lifting the dairy subsidies [I'm not sure if this version of the CPC will care too much about Quebec's reaction, given their Alberta base].)
I am a fan of the mischief you proposed in your last column re: the Fredericton clinic - at this point, anything that the Liberals can do to create internal challenges for the CPC will be useful in saving a little more of the furniture and setting up for a comeback.
One other column question - do you accept the notion that governments get tired (or even exhausted), and could this also be a reason for the Liberals to hand off the negotiations with the Trump folk to the Conservatives?
I realize these questions are cynical, and imply risking the health and well-being of the country by Conservative missteps in order to bring the Liberals back into power later, but I'm not at all confident that the Liberals can do better than furniture-saving at this point.
The Liberals will absolutely not hand over negotiations with the US to the Conservatives. It is an opportunity for the Liberals to shine and change the channel. I don’t know if it will make a difference in the election, but this is mostly an opportunity for the liberals.
Normally, I'd agree with you. But that ties back to the question of governments getting tired - the "A" team that the Liberals put forward in the negotiations in 2017-18 is either gone to new challenges, or at best is seven years older with fifteen years of wear on their bodies. The new "A"-level players won't join the Liberals right now (at best the future is uncertain, and could easily result in lost jobs in a short time period), and the Trump guys can read polls too - they can wait out the government as well. The risks for the Liberals are likely far greater than the potential benefits.
Actually, not too many of the key players from 2017/2018 have gone. Gerald Butts is no longer there, and Mulroney has passed, but many of the key players are still there. It may also give Carney something useful to do.
Now, I don’t think it is a given that Canada is number 1 on the list of priorities for the incoming administration. I think the focus is going to be internal, and perhaps NATO. I think we will see Trudeau reaching out to other NATO countries to assemble a united counter balance to a Trump administration.
I support what the Liberals have put in place, such as Pharma, Dental and proposed School Food Program, but until they address immigration reform in a very big and visible way they are not going to be re-elected
It's unfortunate this immigration 'thing' in Canada is the echo from the UK (which popularized Brexit) and the US current rhetoric. The Feds are being lobbied for immigration to fill missing labour demands by many different sectors - construction, agriculture, healthcare, etc . The lack of affordable housing is not immigration driven no matter how the real culprits trumpet. Interesting as well is how curbing the number of foreign students is having a negative affect on Universities and Colleges that were reliant on high tuition for foreign students to fund their institutions. The Feds provide education funding to Provinces however, that doesn't guarantee the Provinces pass those funds to post secondary institutions.
The real question remains - can more accurate information inform citizens or will Canadians continue to feed on sensational sound-bites?
To answer your question, the latter. Unfortunately.