I said this on Twitter/X and I'll say it here: I didn't care that Clark was a Liberal, than a Conservative, than a Liberal again. If she had truly misspoken, I'm also willing to forgive.
What's hard to reconcile is the overlapping inconsistencies of these stories. It was easy to side step. When just heard this, as a political communications consultant, I had several better lines pop into my head almost immediately.
What also worries me, aside from Clark's response, is why wasn't she prepped for this question? Her campaign team had to know this was coming? That they couldn't cobble together a better story is really troubling.
When a literal CPC membership is not an administrative disqualification for running to be the leader of the Liberal party, it’s clear that as an organization they really don’t stand for much.
If the race really comes down to Carney, Clark, and maybe Freeland the way it’s looking like it might, the party is going to get annihilated in the next election in a way that eclipses the current Trudeau polling. And they’ll deserve it
Anyone from BC knows Clark is a Conservative in Liberals clothing. We also knows she lies at the drop of the hat.
If you really want juice, look at her debacle at SFU 30+ years ago, where she also lied lied lied. I honestly would vote for Pierre Poillivre over her, and that is saying something
Does it really matter in today’s world? I can think of several current politicians that lie easily and frequently. None of them suffer any consequences. South of the border we will have a president who routinely makes up his own universe of alternative facts and truths.
I suspect people will hardly notice this stumble by Clark. If she is able to raise the entry fee, she will be a candidate with a lot name recognition in a very small field. Her real test will come when she is required to speak French. So far I have not seen any evidence that her French lessons have paid off. This will be the real test if she is “ready” and serious about her ambitions.
The brazenness and *utter* stupidity of lying over something like this have killed Clark's hopes and rightfully so. Even if not for this, her close links with Chinese interests disqualify her in my view.
On a related note, Evan, do you have any idea why so many of the expected candidates are choosing instead to bow out - Leblanc, Joly, and now Anand? Is it just that they have no stomach for life on the back benches? Otherwise, something mysterious is going on here.
I said this on Twitter/X and I'll say it here: I didn't care that Clark was a Liberal, than a Conservative, than a Liberal again. If she had truly misspoken, I'm also willing to forgive.
What's hard to reconcile is the overlapping inconsistencies of these stories. It was easy to side step. When just heard this, as a political communications consultant, I had several better lines pop into my head almost immediately.
What also worries me, aside from Clark's response, is why wasn't she prepped for this question? Her campaign team had to know this was coming? That they couldn't cobble together a better story is really troubling.
Please get off X & move to Bluesky
Move over Conservative Clark......enter Steven MacKinnon please
who is holding PP's feet to the fire?
When a literal CPC membership is not an administrative disqualification for running to be the leader of the Liberal party, it’s clear that as an organization they really don’t stand for much.
If the race really comes down to Carney, Clark, and maybe Freeland the way it’s looking like it might, the party is going to get annihilated in the next election in a way that eclipses the current Trudeau polling. And they’ll deserve it
Anyone from BC knows Clark is a Conservative in Liberals clothing. We also knows she lies at the drop of the hat.
If you really want juice, look at her debacle at SFU 30+ years ago, where she also lied lied lied. I honestly would vote for Pierre Poillivre over her, and that is saying something
Does it really matter in today’s world? I can think of several current politicians that lie easily and frequently. None of them suffer any consequences. South of the border we will have a president who routinely makes up his own universe of alternative facts and truths.
I suspect people will hardly notice this stumble by Clark. If she is able to raise the entry fee, she will be a candidate with a lot name recognition in a very small field. Her real test will come when she is required to speak French. So far I have not seen any evidence that her French lessons have paid off. This will be the real test if she is “ready” and serious about her ambitions.
The brazenness and *utter* stupidity of lying over something like this have killed Clark's hopes and rightfully so. Even if not for this, her close links with Chinese interests disqualify her in my view.
On a related note, Evan, do you have any idea why so many of the expected candidates are choosing instead to bow out - Leblanc, Joly, and now Anand? Is it just that they have no stomach for life on the back benches? Otherwise, something mysterious is going on here.
Poor Jean Charest....he'll never really know if she voted for him or not!
BTW....Who's calling out Poilievre's 24/7 lying.
Not our bought and paid for Canadian media.
Yes! Brit PM Cameron certainly did do a great job investing in green energy, and the UK is now a leader in net zero.
Miles ahead of Canada.
I wish the Poilievre team would copy that Conservative vision!