Good for Trudeau trying to explain to maga idiots what these idiotic tariffs will do to the American people. I'm an American but i stand with Canada. Fuck Trump.
Good for Trudeau trying to explain to maga idiots what these idiotic tariffs will do to the American people. I'm an American but i stand with Canada. Fuck Trump.
just watched that presser. put it in simple terms hopefully even stupid magats understand.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
Why do you constantly deflect to Trudeau? He’s done. Old news. Neither I nor Palecek supported Trudeau ever. So why constantly bring him up? Not liking Trudeau & the Liberals has nothing to do with what a scumbag PP is and has always been.
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
Why do you constantly deflect to Trudeau? He’s done. Old news. Neither I nor Palecek supported Trudeau ever. So why constantly bring him up? Not liking Trudeau & the Liberals has nothing to do with what a scumbag PP is and has always been.
I was trying to illustrate how one-sided the analysis you provided is, nothing more, nothing less. As well as how the piece is lacking in proofs (or am I supposed to do my homework again, lol).
I could easily say I’ve just been watching Trudeau for years just like Palecek has been watching Poilievre. Many here will choose to blow me off and insult me by calling me obsessed instead.
Edited to clarify the meaning of a sentence.
Post edited by DarthMaeglin on
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
Why do you constantly deflect to Trudeau? He’s done. Old news. Neither I nor Palecek supported Trudeau ever. So why constantly bring him up? Not liking Trudeau & the Liberals has nothing to do with what a scumbag PP is and has always been.
I was trying to illustrate how one-sided the analysis you provided is, nothing more, nothing less. As well as how the piece is lacking in proofs (or am I supposed to do my homework again, lol).
I could easily say I’ve just been watching Trudeau for years just like Palecek has been watching Poilievre. Many here will choose to blow me off and insult me by calling me obsessed instead.
Edited to clarify the meaning of a sentence.
Your only point constantly seems to be F’ Trudeau. It’s serves no purpose other than to deflect criticism from PP. The one sidedness seems to be mostly coming from you. Card carrying member of the Conservative party?
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right.
I don’t carry any party’s card.
What about my questions and comments about the column you posted? (I believe in the quote I’ve focused my comments by removing maybe a quarter of what I’d written.)
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
What I’ve been criticizing the last 9 years has been the party forming the government and its leader. I would think the reason is obvious, you should be able to watch and see my criticisms of the Liberals drop right off when they form His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition.
Many here feel I’ve been harsh on Trudeau and I have been, but that’s primarily because he’s provided the material to be critical of (at least I think I’m allowed to choose what I criticize just as others are allowed to justify his actions). I’m not going to apologize for holding the Prime Minister to a higher standard than other politicians.
A couple times I’ve tried to agree with the government but I don’t expect those instances to be remembered.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
Why do you constantly deflect to Trudeau? He’s done. Old news. Neither I nor Palecek supported Trudeau ever. So why constantly bring him up? Not liking Trudeau & the Liberals has nothing to do with what a scumbag PP is and has always been.
I was trying to illustrate how one-sided the analysis you provided is, nothing more, nothing less. As well as how the piece is lacking in proofs (or am I supposed to do my homework again, lol).
I could easily say I’ve just been watching Trudeau for years just like Palecek has been watching Poilievre. Many here will choose to blow me off and insult me by calling me obsessed instead.
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
I feel like you're translating political tactics into "style". The two are very much not the same.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
Why do you constantly deflect to Trudeau? He’s done. Old news. Neither I nor Palecek supported Trudeau ever. So why constantly bring him up? Not liking Trudeau & the Liberals has nothing to do with what a scumbag PP is and has always been.
I was trying to illustrate how one-sided the analysis you provided is, nothing more, nothing less. As well as how the piece is lacking in proofs (or am I supposed to do my homework again, lol).
I could easily say I’ve just been watching Trudeau for years just like Palecek has been watching Poilievre. Many here will choose to blow me off and insult me by calling me obsessed instead.
Edited to clarify the meaning of a sentence.
What do you think Palecek’s bias is?
He’s not investigating if Poilievre is Trump, he’s asserting it (hence why I’m treating it as a column, not an article). There is no attempt at objectivity and it deals almost exclusively in generalities with little or no proof.
If he’s been watching Poilievre since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxers, he should be able to easily point to specifics to back up his claims but doesn’t.
He talks about Poilievre hurling personal insults, to reframe, has he listened to Singh talk about the Conservatives lately?
Again, his presumably witty use of Pierre Trump throughout the opinion piece clearly illustrates his bias to me. Put simply he’s anti-Poilievre and likely anti-conservative as well.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
I feel like you're translating political tactics into "style". The two are very much not the same.
I simply think the two are actually very closely linked.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
I feel like you're translating political tactics into "style". The two are very much not the same.
I simply think the two are actually very closely linked.
If you think that, then I don't understand why you're minimizing it so much. Trump's political tactics make up a huge part of why he's so awful.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
Why do you constantly deflect to Trudeau? He’s done. Old news. Neither I nor Palecek supported Trudeau ever. So why constantly bring him up? Not liking Trudeau & the Liberals has nothing to do with what a scumbag PP is and has always been.
I was trying to illustrate how one-sided the analysis you provided is, nothing more, nothing less. As well as how the piece is lacking in proofs (or am I supposed to do my homework again, lol).
I could easily say I’ve just been watching Trudeau for years just like Palecek has been watching Poilievre. Many here will choose to blow me off and insult me by calling me obsessed instead.
Edited to clarify the meaning of a sentence.
What do you think Palecek’s bias is?
He’s not investigating if Poilievre is Trump, he’s asserting it (hence why I’m treating it as a column, not an article). There is no attempt at objectivity and it deals almost exclusively in generalities with little or no proof.
If he’s been watching Poilievre since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxers, he should be able to easily point to specifics to back up his claims but doesn’t.
He talks about Poilievre hurling personal insults, to reframe, has he listened to Singh talk about the Conservatives lately?
Again, his presumably witty use of Pierre Trump throughout the opinion piece clearly illustrates his bias to me. Put simply he’s anti-Poilievre and likely anti-conservative as well.
Respond to his post with your questions. I’m sure he’ll be happy to answer them and provide more insight. I’d also recommend looking at the way PP has voted and which votes he has abstained from in his career.
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
I feel like you're translating political tactics into "style". The two are very much not the same.
I simply think the two are actually very closely linked.
If you think that, then I don't understand why you're minimizing it so much. Trump's political tactics make up a huge part of why he's so awful.
I think maybe I haven’t been fully clear in the point I have been trying to make in regards to similarities to our own politicians.
What I have been saying is that Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau share many similarities in their personalities, who they are as people. My comparison is above I believe.
I don’t deny that Poilievre has adopted some points from the Trump playbook. But pointing out that many of those same points were taken on by Trudeau on his road to the PMO shouldn’t be blown off as deflection. To clarify, all politicians play those games. We’re about to watch the Conservatives talk about how broken Canada is, and four years later I’m quite confident stating that the Liberals will be back to making the same claim.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
I feel like you're translating political tactics into "style". The two are very much not the same.
I simply think the two are actually very closely linked.
If you think that, then I don't understand why you're minimizing it so much. Trump's political tactics make up a huge part of why he's so awful.
I think maybe I haven’t been fully clear in the point I have been trying to make in regards to similarities to our own politicians.
What I have been saying is that Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau share many similarities in their personalities, who they are as people. My comparison is above I believe.
I don’t deny that Poilievre has adopted some points from the Trump playbook. But pointing out that many of those same points were taken on by Trudeau on his road to the PMO shouldn’t be blown off as deflection. To clarify, all politicians play those games. We’re about to watch the Conservatives talk about how broken Canada is, and four years later I’m quite confident stating that the Liberals will be back to making the same claim.
First thing that’s made sense to me. We live in a 2 party system and they both suck. They’ve been taking turns ruining the country 10 yrs at a time forever.
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
that's because all he has is style in terms of the last few years.
2025 Pierre is nothing like 2015 Trudeau.
In that each politician is bullshitting to get support and votes is generally where the comparison stops.
Pierre's letter to Trudeau in late October I think says a LOT about Pierre and unfortunately that rhetoric is right in line with Mr. Trump.
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
I feel like you're translating political tactics into "style". The two are very much not the same.
I simply think the two are actually very closely linked.
If you think that, then I don't understand why you're minimizing it so much. Trump's political tactics make up a huge part of why he's so awful.
I think maybe I haven’t been fully clear in the point I have been trying to make in regards to similarities to our own politicians.
What I have been saying is that Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau share many similarities in their personalities, who they are as people. My comparison is above I believe.
I don’t deny that Poilievre has adopted some points from the Trump playbook. But pointing out that many of those same points were taken on by Trudeau on his road to the PMO shouldn’t be blown off as deflection. To clarify, all politicians play those games. We’re about to watch the Conservatives talk about how broken Canada is, and four years later I’m quite confident stating that the Liberals will be back to making the same claim.
First thing that’s made sense to me. We live in a 2 party system and they both suck. They’ve been taking turns ruining the country 10 yrs at a time forever.
Yeah, well I vote NDP, so.... Maybe Canada should try that instead of just doing the same thing over and over.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
I feel like you're translating political tactics into "style". The two are very much not the same.
I simply think the two are actually very closely linked.
If you think that, then I don't understand why you're minimizing it so much. Trump's political tactics make up a huge part of why he's so awful.
I think maybe I haven’t been fully clear in the point I have been trying to make in regards to similarities to our own politicians.
What I have been saying is that Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau share many similarities in their personalities, who they are as people. My comparison is above I believe.
I don’t deny that Poilievre has adopted some points from the Trump playbook. But pointing out that many of those same points were taken on by Trudeau on his road to the PMO shouldn’t be blown off as deflection. To clarify, all politicians play those games. We’re about to watch the Conservatives talk about how broken Canada is, and four years later I’m quite confident stating that the Liberals will be back to making the same claim.
First thing that’s made sense to me. We live in a 2 party system and they both suck. They’ve been taking turns ruining the country 10 yrs at a time forever.
Yeah, well I vote NDP, so.... Maybe Canada should try that instead of just doing the same thing over and over.
Former federal NDP voter and current provincial NDP voter. The current federal NDP is a shadow of it's former self.
Ditch the current leader and get their act together and I will support them again.
When the Libs moved left I moved to them.
And by no means do I consider this country ruined like the poster above you. Can we do better, of course. But one only needs to look south to see what an actual dumpster fire is.
This where I have to laugh. Do I actually consider this country ruined beyond repair? No, never said so.
Has this country failed to thrive under Trudeau’s government? Yes, I do feel that way and believe that some of the effects of their policies will be felt for several generations, but this nation is strong and will rebound.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
I feel like you're translating political tactics into "style". The two are very much not the same.
I simply think the two are actually very closely linked.
If you think that, then I don't understand why you're minimizing it so much. Trump's political tactics make up a huge part of why he's so awful.
I think maybe I haven’t been fully clear in the point I have been trying to make in regards to similarities to our own politicians.
What I have been saying is that Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau share many similarities in their personalities, who they are as people. My comparison is above I believe.
I don’t deny that Poilievre has adopted some points from the Trump playbook. But pointing out that many of those same points were taken on by Trudeau on his road to the PMO shouldn’t be blown off as deflection. To clarify, all politicians play those games. We’re about to watch the Conservatives talk about how broken Canada is, and four years later I’m quite confident stating that the Liberals will be back to making the same claim.
First thing that’s made sense to me. We live in a 2 party system and they both suck. They’ve been taking turns ruining the country 10 yrs at a time forever.
Yeah, well I vote NDP, so.... Maybe Canada should try that instead of just doing the same thing over and over.
So all I’ve been able to find is people think Poilievre is Trump based on his style, that’s it. As I pointed out above, 2025 Poilievre is sounding an awful lot like 2015 Trudeau.
Palecek has been watching PP since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxer shorts. He knows what he’s talking about.
After looking up substacks and discovering they’re basically blog posts I went back and reread the column. I’ve had columns from legitimate publications blown off here and I’m getting really, really confused as to what the standard is here.
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
I feel like you're translating political tactics into "style". The two are very much not the same.
I simply think the two are actually very closely linked.
If you think that, then I don't understand why you're minimizing it so much. Trump's political tactics make up a huge part of why he's so awful.
I think maybe I haven’t been fully clear in the point I have been trying to make in regards to similarities to our own politicians.
What I have been saying is that Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau share many similarities in their personalities, who they are as people. My comparison is above I believe.
I don’t deny that Poilievre has adopted some points from the Trump playbook. But pointing out that many of those same points were taken on by Trudeau on his road to the PMO shouldn’t be blown off as deflection. To clarify, all politicians play those games. We’re about to watch the Conservatives talk about how broken Canada is, and four years later I’m quite confident stating that the Liberals will be back to making the same claim.
First thing that’s made sense to me. We live in a 2 party system and they both suck. They’ve been taking turns ruining the country 10 yrs at a time forever.
Yeah, well I vote NDP, so.... Maybe Canada should try that instead of just doing the same thing over and over.
Former federal NDP voter and current provincial NDP voter. The current federal NDP is a shadow of it's former self.
Ditch the current leader and get their act together and I will support them again.
When the Libs moved left I moved to them.
And by no means do I consider this country ruined like the poster above you. Can we do better, of course. But one only needs to look south to see what an actual dumpster fire is.
Never said it was ruined, but that the Libs & Cons just take turns working towards ruin. So long as they both continue to serve corporate interests over regular working people my opinion of both parties will not change.
As for the fed NDP, it’s mind boggling to me they didn’t support Peter Julian’s attempt at party leadership. He’s been an all star his whole career. Quite possibly the hardest working man in Canadian politics. Tirelessly fights for the people of his riding and working class people Canada wide.
No one said you said that. PP says that. Constantly.
Did anyone notice he recently sat down with the esteemed (lol) jordan peterson to talk about the woke mind virus? Not at ALL trump like.
There was a comment along the lines of the poster above thinks Canada’s broken, which could only be referring to me.
That aside I’m just passing through to make a mea culpa.
In my last post I disputed that I think Canada’s broken, however while I personally wouldn’t use the word “broken” (hurting or suffering would be my options) at the end of the day, if someone asked me if I agreed with the Conservative jingo of “Canada is broken” as written I would have to actually say yes.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Comments
-EV 8/14/93
https://palecek.substack.com/p/beware-of-pierre-trump
-EV 8/14/93
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
He says a lot but proves very little and betrays his bias by using Pierre Trump throughout, as well as his assessment of free market democracy. There’s only one direct quote in the entire piece.
I can buy into his argument that Poilievre employs some aspects of Trump’s style, but Poilievre is FAR from the only one and it’s not confined to the right. Personal insults? Have you heard Trudeau speak?
As I watched Trump speak last night I couldn’t help but flashback to 2015 when he opened with “America is back!”
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
I could easily say I’ve just been watching Trudeau for years just like Palecek has been watching Poilievre. Many here will choose to blow me off and insult me by calling me obsessed instead.
Edited to clarify the meaning of a sentence.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
I don’t carry any party’s card.
What about my questions and comments about the column you posted? (I believe in the quote I’ve focused my comments by removing maybe a quarter of what I’d written.)
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Many here feel I’ve been harsh on Trudeau and I have been, but that’s primarily because he’s provided the material to be critical of (at least I think I’m allowed to choose what I criticize just as others are allowed to justify his actions). I’m not going to apologize for holding the Prime Minister to a higher standard than other politicians.
A couple times I’ve tried to agree with the government but I don’t expect those instances to be remembered.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
I feel like you're translating political tactics into "style". The two are very much not the same.
If he’s been watching Poilievre since he was a shitstain on Harper’s boxers, he should be able to easily point to specifics to back up his claims but doesn’t.
He talks about Poilievre hurling personal insults, to reframe, has he listened to Singh talk about the Conservatives lately?
Again, his presumably witty use of Pierre Trump throughout the opinion piece clearly illustrates his bias to me. Put simply he’s anti-Poilievre and likely anti-conservative as well.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
If you think that, then I don't understand why you're minimizing it so much. Trump's political tactics make up a huge part of why he's so awful.
What I have been saying is that Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau share many similarities in their personalities, who they are as people. My comparison is above I believe.
I don’t deny that Poilievre has adopted some points from the Trump playbook. But pointing out that many of those same points were taken on by Trudeau on his road to the PMO shouldn’t be blown off as deflection. To clarify, all politicians play those games. We’re about to watch the Conservatives talk about how broken Canada is, and four years later I’m quite confident stating that the Liberals will be back to making the same claim.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
2025 Pierre is nothing like 2015 Trudeau.
In that each politician is bullshitting to get support and votes is generally where the comparison stops.
Pierre's letter to Trudeau in late October I think says a LOT about Pierre and unfortunately that rhetoric is right in line with Mr. Trump.
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx
Yeah, well I vote NDP, so.... Maybe Canada should try that instead of just doing the same thing over and over.
Ditch the current leader and get their act together and I will support them again.
When the Libs moved left I moved to them.
And by no means do I consider this country ruined like the poster above you. Can we do better, of course. But one only needs to look south to see what an actual dumpster fire is.
-EV 8/14/93
Has this country failed to thrive under Trudeau’s government? Yes, I do feel that way and believe that some of the effects of their policies will be felt for several generations, but this nation is strong and will rebound.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
-EV 8/14/93
As for the fed NDP, it’s mind boggling to me they didn’t support Peter Julian’s attempt at party leadership. He’s been an all star his whole career. Quite possibly the hardest working man in Canadian politics. Tirelessly fights for the people of his riding and working class people Canada wide.
That aside I’m just passing through to make a mea culpa.
In my last post I disputed that I think Canada’s broken, however while I personally wouldn’t use the word “broken” (hurting or suffering would be my options) at the end of the day, if someone asked me if I agreed with the Conservative jingo of “Canada is broken” as written I would have to actually say yes.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022