I wish I could vote for Karina Gould. What you see is what you get. Everything she said I want. I’m disabled, sick really, and I need the support she offers. I don’t think she has the experience even though she’d have Mark Carney, Frank Baylis, and the dynamic Chrystia Freeland to lean on.
Frank Baylis has excellent business street cred. I like his plans but I’m not sure his aggressive approach is what’s needed to deal with Trump. He knows where he stands and I like that.
Chrystia Freeland has toed the line and been an awesome trooper. Trump not liking her means she’s the person to go after him. I don’t think she can shed her boss to beat Poilievre. It pains me to say this.
That leaves Mark Carney. He is the personification of a head of an international economy or bank. He can no more be folksy when confronted with serious questions than Poilievre can be cuddly and resist being the calculating quisling he is.
Right now Canada needs someone with deep knowledge and understanding of macro economics who is not anchored to the past and will be unflappable. Mark Carney is a serious person for a serious time. Asking him to be something else is a mistake.
Karina Gould arguably has the most *relevant* experience to the job of being a party leader. No one is better able to understand how to maximize the working of a political party than someone who has a lifetime of involvement in its various institutions, both as an outsider and an insider.
Mark Carney for all his economic brilliance has no visible experience working with the institutions of a political party at any substantial level. There are an infinite number of ways he could potentially botch the handling of party authority, like meddling in candidacy approvals in the wrong way, allowing sycophants to capture party institutions, or sidelining approved party policy. Which of these might happen is unpredictable, because he has such little party political record to judge by.
I'm eager to see a replay of the House of Commons Committee from a few years ago, when Poilievre badgered the witness Carney as he tried to testify.
Poilievre performed his trademark bag of tricks: cherry-picked stats, staging for a video clip, etc.
His main MO was to not let Carney speak.
As Poilievre repeated the same leading question countless times, Carney simply shrugged, smiled, and calmly said, "If I may answer..." and "I'm trying to answer...."
I am dreaming of a debate where Poilievre interrupts, talks over, and generally badgers Carney.
Because Poilievre just cannot help himself.
That's who he is.
And Carney has shown that he is calm and has very thick skin.
He also has years of navigating sharp and quick-witted British media.
I can't wait to watch Poilievre try to bully Carney.
Which should be easy because he is. The liberals really need to lean into the narrative that PP has never worked a job outside of political lobbying. In 21 years in elected office he’s racked up the biggest pension on the hill, but despite time as a government minister he’s passed less legislation than Elizabeth May.
In more than two decades he’s accomplished nothing, and now he thinks he deserves a promotion
That’s an easy line to sell, and a hard image for him to shake
Could it be that Jean Chretien is right again? “Canadians are reasonable people, so be reasonable.”
All Carney needs to do is do lots of interviews and a couple of 22 minutes type appearances. He may be a bit dull, but he will mostly come across as competent, likeable and reliable. The debates may not matter that much.
Poilievre on the other hand cannot get to the finish line of a regular interview without insulting the interviewer. He will consistently reach ultimate dick level at the 5 minute mark or earlier. And 22 minutes or similar are just out of the question.
And while we are at it, Carney would be wise to call an election before the house gets back in session. Go immediately into a general election campaign and avoid the grandstanding by the leader of the opposition from the floor of the House (attacking a PM who does not have a seat in the house yet).
You are right, again. I hope they read your memos because you know your stuff. We need somebody with a good emotional intelligence and Carney has that.
"The better approach to Poilievre isn’t to fight him on that level, but to treat Poilievre as an irrelevance" - exactly. His calmness and quiet competence is a stark contrast. His face is assertive enough, doesnt need to attack verbally
Pretty well written but also completely delusional and full or nonsense injected bias and talking points. Glad there are so many great writers on substack makes it easy to delete the fluff such as this
The Liberals (Freeland) continually message the anti-Poilievre rant, to her detriment. The Liberal leadership campaign may install a great opposition party but at this stage we're choosing a party leader. Good running MP's will determine who the Prime Minister will be.
I wish I could vote for Karina Gould. What you see is what you get. Everything she said I want. I’m disabled, sick really, and I need the support she offers. I don’t think she has the experience even though she’d have Mark Carney, Frank Baylis, and the dynamic Chrystia Freeland to lean on.
Frank Baylis has excellent business street cred. I like his plans but I’m not sure his aggressive approach is what’s needed to deal with Trump. He knows where he stands and I like that.
Chrystia Freeland has toed the line and been an awesome trooper. Trump not liking her means she’s the person to go after him. I don’t think she can shed her boss to beat Poilievre. It pains me to say this.
That leaves Mark Carney. He is the personification of a head of an international economy or bank. He can no more be folksy when confronted with serious questions than Poilievre can be cuddly and resist being the calculating quisling he is.
Right now Canada needs someone with deep knowledge and understanding of macro economics who is not anchored to the past and will be unflappable. Mark Carney is a serious person for a serious time. Asking him to be something else is a mistake.
Karina Gould arguably has the most *relevant* experience to the job of being a party leader. No one is better able to understand how to maximize the working of a political party than someone who has a lifetime of involvement in its various institutions, both as an outsider and an insider.
Mark Carney for all his economic brilliance has no visible experience working with the institutions of a political party at any substantial level. There are an infinite number of ways he could potentially botch the handling of party authority, like meddling in candidacy approvals in the wrong way, allowing sycophants to capture party institutions, or sidelining approved party policy. Which of these might happen is unpredictable, because he has such little party political record to judge by.
Totally agree.
I'm eager to see a replay of the House of Commons Committee from a few years ago, when Poilievre badgered the witness Carney as he tried to testify.
Poilievre performed his trademark bag of tricks: cherry-picked stats, staging for a video clip, etc.
His main MO was to not let Carney speak.
As Poilievre repeated the same leading question countless times, Carney simply shrugged, smiled, and calmly said, "If I may answer..." and "I'm trying to answer...."
I am dreaming of a debate where Poilievre interrupts, talks over, and generally badgers Carney.
Because Poilievre just cannot help himself.
That's who he is.
And Carney has shown that he is calm and has very thick skin.
He also has years of navigating sharp and quick-witted British media.
I can't wait to watch Poilievre try to bully Carney.
Bring it on!
“treat Poilievre as an irrelevance”
Which should be easy because he is. The liberals really need to lean into the narrative that PP has never worked a job outside of political lobbying. In 21 years in elected office he’s racked up the biggest pension on the hill, but despite time as a government minister he’s passed less legislation than Elizabeth May.
In more than two decades he’s accomplished nothing, and now he thinks he deserves a promotion
That’s an easy line to sell, and a hard image for him to shake
Could it be that Jean Chretien is right again? “Canadians are reasonable people, so be reasonable.”
All Carney needs to do is do lots of interviews and a couple of 22 minutes type appearances. He may be a bit dull, but he will mostly come across as competent, likeable and reliable. The debates may not matter that much.
Poilievre on the other hand cannot get to the finish line of a regular interview without insulting the interviewer. He will consistently reach ultimate dick level at the 5 minute mark or earlier. And 22 minutes or similar are just out of the question.
And while we are at it, Carney would be wise to call an election before the house gets back in session. Go immediately into a general election campaign and avoid the grandstanding by the leader of the opposition from the floor of the House (attacking a PM who does not have a seat in the house yet).
Exactly, Carney should be who he is. We need a technocrats who can manage the economic turmoil we're in, not slogans.
I've said for years that the Liberals made a mistake trying to make Paul Martin appear progressive when we all knew he wasn’t.
You are right, again. I hope they read your memos because you know your stuff. We need somebody with a good emotional intelligence and Carney has that.
"The better approach to Poilievre isn’t to fight him on that level, but to treat Poilievre as an irrelevance" - exactly. His calmness and quiet competence is a stark contrast. His face is assertive enough, doesnt need to attack verbally
Mark Carney is not Jack Layton or Bernie Sanders. This is the reality in light of Pierre and Trump in the background.
Totally agree. Populism thrives on attention. Starving them of it is exactly the strategy that’s needed. I hope the Carney team is listening.
Pretty well written but also completely delusional and full or nonsense injected bias and talking points. Glad there are so many great writers on substack makes it easy to delete the fluff such as this
The Liberals (Freeland) continually message the anti-Poilievre rant, to her detriment. The Liberal leadership campaign may install a great opposition party but at this stage we're choosing a party leader. Good running MP's will determine who the Prime Minister will be.