I assume this was meant to be in reply to my comment. I highly disagree with your contention that the threat of Trump is overblown. But put that aside. Let’s say I grant it, you’re absolutely right and the Liberals used the situation at the time to their advantage and pulled victory from the jaws of defeat.
Uh, so what? That’s the game. Poilievre tried to paint himself as a protector of Canada as well and the country didn’t buy it, at all. That’s on him and his leadership. It’s not a mitigation of his failure that he got rope-a-doped by what was looking to be a dead Liberal party.
You make it sound like Poilievre is Jagmeet Singh. Poilievre did lose the election, but not by much. The popular vote was less than 2% difference. And he GAINED 25 seats, the LIberals only gained 9 so percentage wise the Conservatives did a fantastic job of increasing their reach and constituency, just not enough to win the election. The loser in the election was the NDP who got decimated, but to pretend that “the country” thinks Poilievre is a loser is patently false.
He’s going to bide his time and when voters see how far the Liberals will sink us into debt, how ridiculous their gun buyback program is, and the next inevitable Liberal scandal, he will emerge to campaign for the next election. Carney’s doing a good job so far, but he’s still working with the gaggle of bozos who sank Canada as far as its fallen in the last 15 years. There will be a time to make things right again.
Once again, you’re ignoring the context around the last election to minimize the Conservative collapse. They were looking at an easy historic win until a world event happened and the Liberals were able to capitalize on it and the Conservatives couldn’t. Not a great demonstration of Poilievre’s ability to roll with the punches and play the game.
One thing Poilievre doesnt do is change his tune because it might be unpopular. He has stated and I totally believe its the case, that one of the main reasons he lost his own riding was that he was honest about the need to cut many gov jobs. Thats a message that doesnt sit well when you live in Ottawa. So Carney gets in and a few weeks later his message is, we’re going to need to cut a lot of government jobs. Lovely. And here we are. Poilievre didnt play games, he just said it like it is. And voters punished him for being honest. Weird.
We are at the beginning of ANOTHER LIberal term. We’re still in the honeymoon period for Carney. Give him about a year and a half and we’ll see where public sentiment sits. Because he’s still a Liberal and despite a good start, he has a LOT of Liberal baggage surrounding him and methinks a leopard doesnt change its spots that quickly.
On the positive side, some of the worst of the worst got the royal punting - Trudeau gone, Freeland demoted, Blair gone, Charette gone, Mendecino gone. If Carney keeps up the house cleaning and ACTUALLY does some of the things he’s been promising its going to be an uphill fight for Poilievre. But thats good for Canada.
I actually agree with you that Carney will ultimately serve to be an albatross around the neck of the Liberal party and probably serve up a majority to the CPC come next election. Though from the other end of things, I suspect his implementing neoliberal policy that continues to fail to address most pressing issues will sour him on a lot of the coalition he put together to win this go around. 30% of the budget going to the military is going to get a lot less popular if housing doesn’t improve or health transfers get cut.
I think its budgetary issues that are going to be his Achilles heel. Trudeau went crazy with cash and the last budget was what, 40 billion higher than estimated? The one that he planned to throw Freeland under the bus with? But Carney shows no sign of letting up. He doesnt even want to present a budget, most likely because he doesnt want to be held to account for it.
So everything’s going to look rosy as he taxes and spends but without fail, the day of reckoning is coming and thats going to fall on young people who aren’t going to be thrilled with the legacy of debt they’ll be carrying.
I assume this was meant to be in reply to my comment. I highly disagree with your contention that the threat of Trump is overblown. But put that aside. Let’s say I grant it, you’re absolutely right and the Liberals used the situation at the time to their advantage and pulled victory from the jaws of defeat.
Uh, so what? That’s the game. Poilievre tried to paint himself as a protector of Canada as well and the country didn’t buy it, at all. That’s on him and his leadership. It’s not a mitigation of his failure that he got rope-a-doped by what was looking to be a dead Liberal party.
You make it sound like Poilievre is Jagmeet Singh. Poilievre did lose the election, but not by much. The popular vote was less than 2% difference. And he GAINED 25 seats, the LIberals only gained 9 so percentage wise the Conservatives did a fantastic job of increasing their reach and constituency, just not enough to win the election. The loser in the election was the NDP who got decimated, but to pretend that “the country” thinks Poilievre is a loser is patently false.
He’s going to bide his time and when voters see how far the Liberals will sink us into debt, how ridiculous their gun buyback program is, and the next inevitable Liberal scandal, he will emerge to campaign for the next election. Carney’s doing a good job so far, but he’s still working with the gaggle of bozos who sank Canada as far as its fallen in the last 15 years. There will be a time to make things right again.
Once again, you’re ignoring the context around the last election to minimize the Conservative collapse. They were looking at an easy historic win until a world event happened and the Liberals were able to capitalize on it and the Conservatives couldn’t. Not a great demonstration of Poilievre’s ability to roll with the punches and play the game.
One thing Poilievre doesnt do is change his tune because it might be unpopular. He has stated and I totally believe its the case, that one of the main reasons he lost his own riding was that he was honest about the need to cut many gov jobs. Thats a message that doesnt sit well when you live in Ottawa. So Carney gets in and a few weeks later his message is, we’re going to need to cut a lot of government jobs. Lovely. And here we are. Poilievre didnt play games, he just said it like it is. And voters punished him for being honest. Weird.
We are at the beginning of ANOTHER LIberal term. We’re still in the honeymoon period for Carney. Give him about a year and a half and we’ll see where public sentiment sits. Because he’s still a Liberal and despite a good start, he has a LOT of Liberal baggage surrounding him and methinks a leopard doesnt change its spots that quickly.
On the positive side, some of the worst of the worst got the royal punting - Trudeau gone, Freeland demoted, Blair gone, Charette gone, Mendecino gone. If Carney keeps up the house cleaning and ACTUALLY does some of the things he’s been promising its going to be an uphill fight for Poilievre. But thats good for Canada.
I actually agree with you that Carney will ultimately serve to be an albatross around the neck of the Liberal party and probably serve up a majority to the CPC come next election. Though from the other end of things, I suspect his implementing neoliberal policy that continues to fail to address most pressing issues will sour him on a lot of the coalition he put together to win this go around. 30% of the budget going to the military is going to get a lot less popular if housing doesn’t improve or health transfers get cut.
I think its budgetary issues that are going to be his Achilles heel. Trudeau went crazy with cash and the last budget was what, 40 billion higher than estimated? The one that he planned to throw Freeland under the bus with? But Carney shows no sign of letting up. He doesnt even want to present a budget, most likely because he doesnt want to be held to account for it.
So everything’s going to look rosy as he taxes and spends but without fail, the day of reckoning is coming and thats going to fall on young people who aren’t going to be thrilled with the legacy of debt they’ll be carrying.