19 Comments

Just today I was listening to the audio version of Paul Wells' book on Trudeau. Wells explained that Trudeau is not an attention-seeker as much as an attention-user. Much as I am critical of the man myself and took note of his cynicism in his 2012 leadership contest announcement speech, I am not sure that he truly is much of an exceptional "narcissist". If he sacrificed his marriage for the sake of prolonging his political career, he may be currently desperate to reap continued political returns on sunk costs.

I would also object to the characterization of his 2019 and 2021 campaigns as "divisive", even if neither inspired my support. There is not anything particularly exceptional about bringing up a rival's policy record, or running on a vaccine mandate change. It does not matter if Trudeau made a policy reversal, no one is forced to oppose the policy and if there is a debate then the debate is a shared responsibility among rival parties. The country is not so fragile that it cannot handle a vaccine mandate debate, and Trudeau did not say anything outrageous in support of the policy whether or not he was entirely fair to his rivals throughout the campaign.

Despite the bridges that Trudeau has burned, he's not close to being as bad as Harper was as Prime Minister. Whereas the Trudeau era brought us a Prime Minister who was disgraceful in personal judgment and the conduct of his office, the Harper era brought us a government that every other week was insufferably testing a new precedent for the weakening of our democracy. Whatever his mistakes, Trudeau at least temporarily stemmed the tide of democratic decline, even if he perhaps did not leave much of a legacy for permanent improvement.

Expand full comment

Maybe, but I also think its part of the parties continuing trend towards leader worship. Too many people are focused on the leader, and it shows. You see it first in Harper, then Trudeau, and now Pierre.

Expand full comment

Evan, really? Give it a rest.

Expand full comment

Well said Evan. He has been a disgraceful PM and the Liberals’ defence of his ethical transgressions deplorable. They would have been better served by ridding themselves of him years ago. And now he has brought us PP, who will undo what remains of any “progressive” legacy he created regardless.

His selfishness the past few weeks has been next level hideous. He allowed the country to linger in uncertainty while he desperately tries to strategize a way to remain.

I hope the Liberals are prepared for 8-10 years in the wilderness. Their only saving grace is that the NDP are so utterly incompetent and lead by such a buffoon that they are unlikely to establish themselves as a credible alternative.

Expand full comment

My feeling on reading this is that it's a bit of overreach on Trudeau personally, and more a scathing indictment of politics as they are in Canada and the inability of anyone, no matter how well intentioned, to escape engaging in those machinations and be successful. I more blame both the 1) loathsome CPC attack dogs who, from Day 1, eviscerated people like Sophie and environment minister McKenna, and farmed enough rage to encourage a sausage maker from Manitoba to drive a weapon-loaded pickup through the gate of Rideau Hall, and then continued to double down on lies and misinformation as their only message; and 2) the ham-fisted LPC comms team—who should all be fired, then fired again—for failing so badly to communicate good and often great policy, and for likely steering some of the positions, lies and so-called "moral failings" you cite.

Expand full comment

Excellent observations and important to remember going forward.

Expand full comment

Terrible words with that said obviously the conservatives never harmed you like Harper did. Trudeau was almost like a Tommy Douglas, my friends who suffered under Harper were helped under Trudeau. I know people that work at parliament and they said he is hard working and compassionate. Had people with credentials at his side like it should be.

This mostly male finger pointing 🫵 gets on a females nerves, the females who are open to include him and see a better place under Trudeau. As of now our conservative provinces are letting abuses on children and female’s, they are robbing our lives. Getting away with rape and domestic abuse yet you call Justine what he isn’t and people watch every lousy post to harm him. The guy never had a chance under rednecks and capitalists. Women who hate on him are not up on their politics and many looking for attention. The worst of the worst bunch of Canadians embarrassed our country. And they weren’t the liberals, NDP they were paid criminals supported by Rcons and cult churches. I appreciate Trudeau who helped the sick, seniors and made our pensions better. He’s not the problem it’s male hate that is. The bullies and greedy people who stand by and do nothing to help those attacked by conservatives. Just because you guys never had your lives attacked by conservatives doesn’t change the reality that Trudeau stood up for everyone. Now who are men some women gonna hate? Trudeau was planning on retiring anyways but no one was ready for the job. Not many people wanna run for politics because of the death traps that conservatives bait with. This country has a hate problem that never goes away.

Expand full comment

Perhaps one of the continuing issues with political parties and politics in general is a focus only on the Leader and less on the collaborative necessity of the caucus and the full slate of MPs. Governing is too complex for one person. It really does take a team and a cohesive team. Yes, the PM is the frequent 'spokes-person' however, there is no good reason why this is the case? The strength of a party is exhibited by the work of the team - pulling in the same direction, as opposed to the 'Command and Control' behaviour of the current 'Conservative' (I don't think they are Conservative any longer) party. I've been impressed by the capacity for collaboration between the Libs & NDP and the NDP and Green Parties - with a focus on delivering policy to better the lives of Canadians.

Expand full comment

We, in B.C. who have wished for this since 2021, are pleased.

Now, we have slim margin to revive the party.

Lots of capacity and I already have my eye on a new leader, well I’ve had my eye on a couple for a few years.

And a reminder that the Liberal Party values are viable and still the best choice.

Expand full comment

Well said, and I couldn't agree more. This last stunt of leaving things until the crucial moment when Trump enters the picture to tear us apart is reprehensible, yet an exemplar of his self-absorbed character.

Expand full comment

I think people seek one thing when voting in a new PM and government - HOPE that things wll improve under new leadership. The record of each government and PM needs to be carefully explored prior to making judgement and at times we have to wait a while to see the impact and lasting effects of a PM Harper or PM Trudeau. Sadly I too have been disappointed when viewing thigns from a larger context. What amazes me is how the Liberal Party does not have in their constitution for removing a leader that doesn't meet ethical standards or provides leadership in the tough times passed and that are near. All we can do is hope the next government acts more thcially, openly and provdes leadership. Good government is not under the "guaranteed list of items in our lives.

Expand full comment

We make the mistake of making this about personalities, rather than politics.

If we had proportional representation, a 40% Con vote could be managed by LPC+NDP+Greens getting 50%. Instead, we had policies that were about tax cuts, subsidies, and shared programs with the provinces, who have no interest in making them work. Most people have very little saving and capacity to weather disruptive inflation as we have seen. What is their solution to the cost-of-living crisis, housing unaffordability, social/economic mobility constraints, healthcare collapse, erosion of educational systems and post-secondary tuition scams, excess immigration/refugees soaking up housing, and society collapsing without climate mitigation (i.e., cities fail, agriculture fails, food supply fails, economy collapses... etc. an existential and exigent problem that paper straws will not address)?

People need to know a progressive government has their back, not Mob Ford’s, Fishy Francois’, and Dumb Dani's backs, along with corporate Canada's incessant wants to emulate Yankee neoliberalism and oligopolies.

The party is visionless in a time when authoritarianism and fascism now is the dominant system in China, India, USA, and parts of Europe. There is no global defender of liberal democracy, the enlightenment project, open society, and the New Deal framework that saved the USA/Canada, defeated fascist Europe/Japan, and rebuilt Europe. Instead, we've got buffoons rushing to castigate anyone saying genocide does not just happen when our enemies (Russia, Burma, and China) are doing it.

Whoever is capable of creating a coherent vision of a prosperous and stable Canada, along with using anti-system rhetoric will win. At this juncture, because the masses are morons, that is PP and his band of merry nihilists and Putin/Modi ethno-nationalist fascist handjob experts.

The only solution is for the next LPC leader (God help us if it is either Freeland, Joly, or LeBlanc who are hopeless hacks) to vigorously repudiate Trudeau (starting now) and build an anti-fascist and pro-Middle class agenda that promises to build homes (WW2 level production), cut immigration, and rebuild Canada; even if that means blowing up the constitution that empowers all these loser provincial premiers who are on the take.

The alternative is collapse, which I am sure the useless hacks in the PMO's office and MPs/doorknobs looking for lobbyist gigs consider a growth option.

-

BTW JWR was was a conservative DEI hire, whose father openly said Natives should be able to secede from the Federation and join other (possibly enemy) nations. Her husband became a federal lobbyist as soon as she became a Minister. How is that remotely ethical? She was incompetent, petulant, and lied in public about the events in question. SNC-Lavalin was a nothing burger. That's politics everywhere. Neither unethical nor unsound. Any politician not going to bat for businesses in their own riding shouldn't be in politics.

Expand full comment

What is a single lie told by Jody Wilson-Raybould?

Expand full comment

She misrepresented herself multiple times. She publicly lied about the extent to which she was asked by Trudeau to consider deferred prosecution. When pressed on television if there was a direct demand, she said no. Feelings (which she claims is what she telepathically could gleen) aren't a real thing. Words and actions are. That is a question of credibility and transparency.

“I did not want her to lie,” Trudeau said during a campaign event in Mississauga, Ont., where he started his public remarks by honouring the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. “I would never do that. I would never ask her that. That is simply not true.”

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2021/09/11/news/trudeau-wilson-raybould-lie-snc-lavalin-affair

She was kicked out of the Liberal caucus for lying, misrepresentations, and open deceit.

Second, she was and remains the worst type of DEI hire. An incompetent face selling diversity, but failing to do her job as Justice Minister. She even refused to exit her ministerial office afterwards. Look where her BFF Philpott is today. Being Mob Ford's useful donkey on healthcare.

All swine.

Expand full comment

If you are in a workplace and multiple of your superiors (who have the collective power to fire you) come to you over and over again, asking "Have you considered whether you are wrong? By the way, have you considered that you are wrong? Oh, and could you please take a step back and once again consider that you could be wrong?", that is obviously a form of pressure, if not of harassment. No one accused Trudeau of "directing" Jody Wilson-Raybould to defer the prosecution, he was accused of pressuring her to do so.

A contrary statement from Trudeau is not definitive proof of Wilson-Raybould telling any lie, it merely demonstrates that there are conflicting accounts of one conversation without definitive proof of either side being correct. And given that this is the same Prime Minister who promised that 2015 would be the last election under the current electoral system, his honesty record prior to the SNC Lavalin affair was already of dubious standing.

Expand full comment

Yes, you are correct about "pressure", but is there any government where Ministers get to freelance? Maybe C.D. Howe during WW2, but who else? There is this weird dynamic where people who serve in cabinet say they are autonomous agents exempt from hierarchal demands. If the PM fires you, because you don't meet his/her expectations, that's it. If it is her job to do what she told, then not doing so is insubordination, unless it is criminal.

I have no personal fancy towards Trudeau, because he is a proven liar and opportunist, but so is JWR in my opinion. As this thread has illustrated, she embellished her story, misrepresented the events, which no one else confirms, and then claims to be a victim.

Again, where is the scandal? Was Trudeau bought off? Was money exchanged? Was there quid pro quo? Instead, real crime conducted by Mob Ford, Jason Kenney, PP, and the Harper government (where is Pierre Poutine?) is memory holed.

Expand full comment

A Cabinet Minister does serve entirely at the whims of the Prime Minister, and the Prime Minister can in principle fire a Minister for having shoes that the former does not like. But there is also a reality that the Prime Minister can only exert control to a point without creating bad optics, and that Ministers can not be forced to be obedient sheep even as they must hide disagreements from publicity while still in Cabinet.

In Trudeau's case, he was obviously self-conscious of the ramifications of demoting an Indigenous woman to a lesser Cabinet post and/or self-conscious of the limited capacity to order around Ministers. So he tried to have his cake and eat it too, by trying to pester his Justice Minister into caving and doing his bidding. He did not have the humility and introspection to consider that his Justice Minister might have good reason to resist him, and he did not consider that a non-lawyer like himself may not understand the Shaw Doctrine. And he tried to create a new precedent for governments interfering in criminal cases targeting firms that are considered close to the governing party.

Harper was guilty of many abuses of power, but Liberals would have universally condemned him if he had attempted to interfere in the criminal prosecution of a Conservative-friendly firm.

This was more or less the same thing that did Trudeau last month: trying to have his cake and eat it too, with the pre-firing of Freeland that was done to avoid the bad optics of firing her without warning, while still planning to gaslight Freeland by having her present the deficit and then be fired thereafter. This time the same trick did Trudeau in for good.

Expand full comment

Fair enough. Thanks for the exchange.

Cheers.

* C.D. Howe

Expand full comment

Tell me you have a kind one in the drafts 😭

Expand full comment