Canadian Politics Redux

1ThoughtKnown

Parksy said:

1ThoughtKnown said:

Gripe away. I think it’s hilarious. 

Politics has always been a popularity contest, now they go for clicks and likes which helps them get elected. 

Hate the game, not the player. 

This coming after the reporter negatively accused Pierre of being a populist. The exact strategy Trump successfully used.  Go figure. 

Accused him of being a populist, but didn’t know what it meant 

Parksy

1ThoughtKnown said:

Parksy said:

1ThoughtKnown said:

Gripe away. I think it’s hilarious. 

Politics has always been a popularity contest, now they go for clicks and likes which helps them get elected. 

Hate the game, not the player. 

This coming after the reporter negatively accused Pierre of being a populist. The exact strategy Trump successfully used.  Go figure. 

Accused him of being a populist, but didn’t know what it meant 

Again, circling around, the journalist sucked.  But he wasn't wrong in accusing Pierre of using populist tactics.

If I was the reporter, I would have simple responded by asking him why he puts importance on combatting "wokeness" in the House of Commons and on his YouTube channel... specifically using that term "woke."  I would ask why he sits down to do interviews with a right wing lightning rod like Jordan Peterson. I would ask why he got super cozy with the Freedom Convoy. I would ask why he holds so many rallies for support so far away from any election. 

I watched a panel discuss this on CTV  (call them what you will... but understand a lot of Canadians watch this) and 3 out of the 4 panelists repeated exactly what I'm saying. Meaning... they're looking at this through the same glass I am.  

Let's say you're the kind of person who hates Trudeau or you're the kind of person who just doesn't want him to be PM anymore (me) .. there is only one way to do this:  win an election.  What frustrates me about Pierre and some of his Conservative caucus is just like this PR viral video "win" ... I don't think they're seeing the forest through the trees.  

A video like this has the people who love him (Pierre) loving him more. And it's got a lot of people talking (like us) That's awesome and all.. but he doesn't need to keep his base happy or keep people on the right happy, or win votes from the PPC crowd.  This apple eating viral video appeals to the aforementioned. 

What he needs to win an election is he needs to convince voters on the left or central left to change their vote and go Conservative. He needs around 1.5M people who voted NDP and Liberal to vote Conservative. To do that, he shouldn't be mocking this reporter, he should be listening to him. 

Shot in the dark, but if the voters he needs are anything even remotely close to me.. they're gonna think like me and they're gonna think:

A:  You ARE a populist and you DO act like Trump sometimes. And that's not good. We fucking HATE Trump and Trumpism. 
B:  Making a low level journalist look stupid and then bragging about it on the internet doesn't make you look awesome it makes you look sad. 
C: Just in general, it is completely rude and dooshy to munch on an apple while a reporter... or anyone... is asking you questions while you're looking to be the next PM.  

I see a lot of folks on the internet (for what it's worth) and SkyNews, and Fox who are lovvvvving this clip because it "own's the libs" and "shuts down the woke media." That's generally not good for Pierre in my opinion. Stuff like this worked well for Trump in America... it won't work well in Canada. 

He needs to win an election. Trudeau has won the last three. The by-elections in the summer changed nothing... with the exception of the Liberals somehow gaining more support in Manitoba. 

Hopefully not going overboard with hockey references... but I again liken this to a losing team winning a massive brawl on the ice.  It's awesome, it feels great, you've accomplished something.....   but ultimately you didn't win the game. What matters most here? 

(apologies for long rant)  

Spunkie

^ Great take, P, except "dooshy" stems from the patriarchal gendered put-down word 'douche', so you spelled that wrong.

HughFreakingDillon

I gather his spelling was on purpose. 

HughFreakingDillon

and yes, that "journalist" was no journalist. I read he wasn't a journalist, just a local farmer. so which is it? and was he hand picked to speak to PP because he's so terrible at his job? what kind of journalist follows up an accusation with "well, I'm sure SOME people are saying that". gimme a break. 

Parksy

Spunkie said:

^ Great take, P, except "dooshy" stems from the patriarchal gendered put-down word 'douche', so you spelled that wrong.

This is a personal thing...  I've always for whatever reason preferred doosh over douche.  You're not wrong for correcting lol 

erebus

Good summation Parksy

I’m in the same boat. Tired of JT, would consider Cons, but never under PP.  Will have to focus on the best local candidate who will work best for the riding or consider abstaining. Or the third option, the way most Canadians vote, against who you don’t like…

DarthMaeglin

So a reporter gets himself in over his head and we blame the interview subject.

This after a video of Trudeau telling a man he has no agency was praised here by many.

 The best part of the Poilievre video is when he asks for examples of the language he’s accused of using and the reporter (because that’s what he was, at least in that moment) can’t even recall words used in a previous response (“gatekeepers” sticks in my mind).

At least Poilievre seems willing to take questions from all corners instead of flat out ignoring some outlets as the current PM does. If Poilievre had refused the interview because of an assumed bias on the part of the reporter would we now be criticizing him for not taking (what turned out to be) loaded questions?

HughFreakingDillon

let's be real here. a politician's willingness to speak to press (or anyone) is wildly different when you are campaigning for the job vs when have the job. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

let's be real here. a politician's willingness to speak to press (or anyone) is wildly different when you are campaigning for the job vs when have the job. 

So when was the last election campaign where Trudeau answered questions from Rebel News (much less gave a full interview) for example? And Trudeau is currently actively campaigning as much or more than Poilievre is, he just gets to do it under the banner of “government announcements”, so I can see why there’s some confusion.

HughFreakingDillon

the standards are different. he would have had the same battle when he was up against Harper. And I'm sure Harper got criticized by the left just as Trudeau is now by the right. that's the game. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

the standards are different. he would have had the same battle when he was up against Harper. And I'm sure Harper got criticized by the left just as Trudeau is now by the right. that's the game. 

So why does Trudeau actively avoid certain media outlets, even (especially) when campaigning?

And beyond talking with his mouth full Poilievre really doesn’t do anything wrong in the video. Attacking him for using the video for self-promotion is disingenuous at best.

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

the standards are different. he would have had the same battle when he was up against Harper. And I'm sure Harper got criticized by the left just as Trudeau is now by the right. that's the game. 

Apologies but I need you clarify what you mean by this, despite my reply.

DarthMaeglin

Let’s be honest here, the Conservative Party of Canada has previously put forward 3 perfectly reasonable candidates as leaders: Harper, Scheer and O’Toole and all three were rejected in favour of Trudeau’s bombast (style over substance) or perhaps out of anti-Conservative paranoia. Now the Conservatives are being criticized for essentially running another blowhard against the current blowhard PM. I choose to laugh instead of cry, lol.

HughFreakingDillon

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

the standards are different. he would have had the same battle when he was up against Harper. And I'm sure Harper got criticized by the left just as Trudeau is now by the right. that's the game. 

So why does Trudeau actively avoid certain media outlets, even (especially) when campaigning?

And beyond talking with his mouth full Poilievre really doesn’t do anything wrong in the video. Attacking him for using the video for self-promotion is disingenuous at best.

I don't know. you'd have to ask him. 

I am one of the few that won't find fault in how PP acted in that "interview". I don't think he was a dick or rude. he was challenging the claims he made in a calm manner. I don't know why people are whining about it. the interviewer was absolutely terrible. he was so unprepared. You can make an accusation without being prepared to back it up with quotes. Complete failure. 

HughFreakingDillon

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

the standards are different. he would have had the same battle when he was up against Harper. And I'm sure Harper got criticized by the left just as Trudeau is now by the right. that's the game. 

Apologies but I need you clarify what you mean by this, despite my reply.

I think the opposition has to do the work to make get their message across to convince voters. That's why they have to be willing to talk to any and all outlets to get their message across. You can pick and choose when you are in the incumbent. 

To use an old pro rasslin' Bobby The Brain Heenan line: "you're the champ. you don't have to beat him. he has to beat you"

Parksy

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

the standards are different. he would have had the same battle when he was up against Harper. And I'm sure Harper got criticized by the left just as Trudeau is now by the right. that's the game. 

Apologies but I need you clarify what you mean by this, despite my reply.

I think the opposition has to do the work to make get their message across to convince voters. That's why they have to be willing to talk to any and all outlets to get their message across. You can pick and choose when you are in the incumbent. 

To use an old pro rasslin' Bobby The Brain Heenan line: "you're the champ. you don't have to beat him. he has to beat you"

I use the same analogy to people all the time.   To beat the Champ, you need to really beat the Champ.  Like it or not, being the PM gives JT an upper hand. 

@Darth... in hindsight, I do honestly wish I supported O'Toole. I think he would have been a way way way better PM than JT.   At the time, the way I voted was more aimed against the hated of Trudeau than my liking of the Liberals. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

the standards are different. he would have had the same battle when he was up against Harper. And I'm sure Harper got criticized by the left just as Trudeau is now by the right. that's the game. 

Apologies but I need you clarify what you mean by this, despite my reply.

I think the opposition has to do the work to make get their message across to convince voters. That's why they have to be willing to talk to any and all outlets to get their message across. You can pick and choose when you are in the incumbent. 

To use an old pro rasslin' Bobby The Brain Heenan line: "you're the champ. you don't have to beat him. he has to beat you"

Thanks, I appreciate the clarification, though I do feel a bit differently on the topic in that I don’t see it as good politics to freeze out media outlets as the incumbent, but you do make a fair point.

HughFreakingDillon

and you really believe JT should legitimize Rebel News? there's nothing news about them. it's Canadian InfoWars. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

and you really believe JT should legitimize Rebel News? there's nothing news about them. it's Canadian InfoWars. 

Why not? (Leaving aside any personal feelings about any specific outlet.)

 I’m not comfortable with government of any stripe telling me what’s acceptable news and what’s not.