• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

2022 CPC Leadership Discussion: Et tu Redeux

A populist approach (which you really think he is aiming at?) is aimed at winning populist, no?

A populist in terms of being patriotic to Canada is fine BTW. It often gets muddled and mixed up with extremist/racist/misogynist, etc)
It's not a fine approach. It's an blindly anti-establishment, anti-elite approach, regardless of who's actually "right". The populist leader caters to screams and demands of the populace, regardless of whether what they are demanding makes sense, is actually helpful, is based on actual fact, etc.

You might argue, "if the people demand it, we should give it to them". That's the populist approach. But if the people are demanding something that doesn't make any sense because they've been fed outright lights and fabrications by social media and mainstream media, then what they are demanding is flawed, and you would hope that a knowledgeable leader would do the right thing instead, and not just feed their flames for their own benefit.

Of course, the opposite exists and is equally flawed; ignoring the will and demands of the people and letting the country be run by self-interested elites: elitism. The money is in the middle: pluralism.
 
It's not a fine approach. It's an blindly anti-establishment, anti-elite approach, regardless of who's actually "right". The populist leader caters to screams and demands of the populace, regardless of whether what they are demanding makes sense, is actually helpful, is based on actual fact, etc.

You might argue, "if the people demand it, we should give it to them". That's the populist approach. But if the people are demanding something that doesn't make any sense because they've been fed outright lights and fabrications by social media and mainstream media, then what they are demanding is flawed, and you would hope that a knowledgeable leader would do the right thing instead, and not just feed their flames for their own benefit.

Of course, the opposite exists and is equally flawed; ignoring the will and demands of the people and letting the country be run by self-interested elites: elitism. The money is in the middle: pluralism.
Ohhhh, knowing one, What is it that people want from our political leaders that is "so wrong"?

Accountability? Thats very reasonable
Integrity? Thats very reasonable
Transparency? Thats very reasonable
Leadership? Thats very reasonable

Don't any of those things make sense? Get my drift? How about a government that has long shot past the minimum level of any of those character traits? Like Trudeau.

Now, lets look at Pierre as an opposition leader. He has tried to hold the government to account on damn every file and decision they are responsible for. He would have brought down the government by now if Singh didn't sell his soul and his party out to Trudeau.

The right thing is to do for an opposition leader to hold Trudeau to account, thats what Pierre is doing.
 
My line in the sand? WHEN Pierre gets elected PM, if he starts breaking promises and blows it hard, I will pull my support for him fast and hard. I DROPPED my support for the conservatives before when they were in power. I won't hesitate to do it again.
Woah…ArmyRick, don’t forget that PP will also have to accumulate at least three (3) ethical strikes, before you go hard and fast! 😉
 
It's not a fine approach. It's an blindly anti-establishment, anti-elite approach, regardless of who's actually "right". The populist leader caters to screams and demands of the populace, regardless of whether what they are demanding makes sense, is actually helpful, is based on actual fact, etc.

You might argue, "if the people demand it, we should give it to them". That's the populist approach. But if the people are demanding something that doesn't make any sense because they've been fed outright lights and fabrications by social media and mainstream media, then what they are demanding is flawed, and you would hope that a knowledgeable leader would do the right thing instead, and not just feed their flames for their own benefit.

Of course, the opposite exists and is equally flawed; ignoring the will and demands of the people and letting the country be run by self-interested elites: elitism. The money is in the middle: pluralism.
Anti-establishment? The Federal government certainly needs a serious downsizing and forced to be made more efficient, Tax payers have that right.
Anti-elite? When elites like Schwab, Soros, Gates are deliberately trying to shape and influence ELECTED officials, then damn straight we should stand up against them!
Because they have been fed outright lies? You mean like Trudeau, Freeland and that whole damn party?
 
This on the other hand is what a panicked, cry-baby temper tantrum leader who cries about being held to account for his actions and policies.

 
Of course, according to you, NO ONE is the perfect candidate for Prime Minister, right?

Ever hear its better to have an 80% solution on time rather than 100% solution never?

It means no one is perfect (except @OldSolduer )

Except, as it roughly stands at the moment, the CPC with Poilievre at the helm is a 35% solution. Even though the LPC trails that, the PM's 'personal' favorability is ahead of PP (though neither are 'well liked' throughout the country). It's that difference and the traditional efficiency of the Liberal vote that may upset the Conservative goal. As much you may think hope that Canadians should hold their noses and vote for Poilievre despite misgivings, most elections end up being personality contests.
 
A populist approach (which you really think he is aiming at?) is aimed at winning populist, no?

A populist in terms of being patriotic to Canada is fine BTW. It often gets muddled and mixed up with extremist/racist/misogynist, etc)
No it’s a style of politics he is using to gain support or momentum.

Populist is a common term. It can be used by the left or the right or whatever political spectrum. But yes, populism can be mixed in with extremism, racism, socialism, liberalism, nationalism etc etc. However that is not always the case. And no, I do not think that PP is a nationalist. I do think he is a populist though.

Left wing populism and right wing populism are common themes. Trudeau used left wing populism to get himself elected in 2015. Sunny ways and all that.

PP is using populism as well. That tweet we are talking about certainly is an example. Which is why I say people should not be shocked or surprised. It’s been his MO for a while.

He’s all about « people » against the establishment and the elites etc. Freedom, pay checks etc etc.

It’s all about telling people what they want to hear. It’s normally light on specifics. It exists on all sides of the political spectrum.
 
Telling people what they want to hear? Have you ever listened to anybody during an election? Ever? Its what politicians do to earn your vote.
 
It's not a fine approach. It's an blindly anti-establishment, anti-elite approach, regardless of who's actually "right". The populist leader caters to screams and demands of the populace, regardless of whether what they are demanding makes sense, is actually helpful, is based on actual fact, etc.

You might argue, "if the people demand it, we should give it to them". That's the populist approach. But if the people are demanding something that doesn't make any sense because they've been fed outright lights and fabrications by social media and mainstream media, then what they are demanding is flawed, and you would hope that a knowledgeable leader would do the right thing instead, and not just feed their flames for their own benefit.

Of course, the opposite exists and is equally flawed; ignoring the will and demands of the people and letting the country be run by self-interested elites: elitism. The money is in the middle: pluralism.

Interesting. Isn't the very idea of democratically elected officials essentially populism ? If our elected officials are to represent us, then shouldn't the represent the concerns of their people ?

For the record I have issue with the amount of steering the elites are doing now, maybe always?And not just in Canada in the west as a whole.

I think the Fed needs to be reeled in. It's becoming apparent there is more than one version of Canada in this Nation. And for the sake of the whole, perhaps we need a more outward facing Fed Gov and more accountable and responsible Prov and Municipal Govs.

I feel like we've argued this before.
 
If I were to compare this to a similar situation, lets look at Ontario.

Kathleen Wynne clobbered the cons in 2014 and went onto keep governing. However by 2018, her out of control government spending and one issue in particular, hydro bills, I believe (and may be wrong) got her voted out of office and made the Ontario Libs a minivan party.

Its not like Doug Ford is really charasmatic or anything, he was the option that the sobered up Ontario went with.
 
Interesting. Isn't the very idea of democratically elected officials essentially populism ? If our elected officials are to represent us, then shouldn't the represent the concerns of their people ?
Not necessarily but populism can increase representation. The issue is at the expense of proper governance or institutional damage in many cases.
For the record I have issue with the amount of steering the elites are doing now, maybe always?And not just in Canada in the west as a whole.
The irony being that PP is an elite. He’s never been anything but.
I think the Fed needs to be reeled in. It's becoming apparent there is more than one version of Canada in this Nation. And for the sake of the whole, perhaps we need a more outward facing Fed Gov and more accountable and responsible Prov and Municipal Govs.
A re-negociation of the federation may or may not be in order. But that can also be achieved without populist approaches. Danielle Smith comes to mind with her promises and subsequent backtracking when time to follow through happens.
I feel like we've argued this before.
Yes.
 
@Remius

Background and childhood[edit]​

Poilievre was born on June 3, 1979,[4] in Calgary, Alberta to a 16 year-old biological mother, who was of Irish Canadian descent on her father's side.[3][5] Poilievre was adopted by schoolteachers Marlene and Donald Poilievre, who is French Canadian,[6] shortly after being born.[3][7] Poilievre was raised in a modest household in suburban Calgary, he played ice hockey and went on camping trips with his younger brother, Patrick, who had also been adopted from their biological mother by Marlene and Donald.[8]

Growing up, Poilievre worked as a paperboy for the Calgary Sun.[9] He attended Henry Wise Wood High School,[10] and was on a wrestling team until he was forced to stop due to a temporary shoulder tendinitis injury, at the age of 14. Following the injury, Poilievre attended an Alberta Tory riding-association meeting as a new hobby.[8] As a result, he became interested in politics and started reading political books, including Milton Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom, a book that greatly influenced his politics.[8]

Poilievre became active in the Reform Party and the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta by participating in meetings of both parties.[8][11] At the age of 16, Poilievre sold Reform Party memberships for Jason Kenney and also did telephone canvassing for him.[12] He also knocked on doors for political campaigns and served on a riding association. Shortly after turning 17 years old, Poilievre was a delegate to the Reform Party 1996 national convention in Vancouver, British Columbia. Poilievre's parents, Marlene and Donald, who had married in 1971, separated when he was in his mid-teens. Poilievre's father, Donald, later came out as a gay man.[8]

Source


So elites come from modest backgrounds? Elites deliver newspapers? What elites compete in wrestling? He played ice hockey and went camping. Whats so elite about that?

You threw something out there that isn't true. and doesn't stick.
 
Not necessarily but populism can increase representation. The issue is at the expense of proper governance or institutional damage in many cases.

That's a tight rope rope to walk. I want our elected officials to be working for the populace. Not the other way around. Institutions should be razed and forgotten or rebuilt if they are no long reflective of the society they are meant to serve.

The irony being that PP is an elite. He’s never been anything but.

I think you are stretching the term elite there. And probably not using it in the intended spirit.

A re-negociation of the federation may or may not be in order. But that can also be achieved without populist approaches. Danielle Smith comes to mind with her promises and subsequent backtracking when time to follow through happens.

I used to argue that Canada is actually just portions of Ont and Que and there everywhere else are basically distinct colony's being managed. A renegotiation or the federation would have to see much power leaving the Ont - Que corridor. And much like expecting politicians to legislate their own pay drop, I don't see it happening. Separations by referendum, I do.
 
There is more than one category of Elite. And yes JT is also an elite. Never said otherwise.

I am definitely not putting words in your mouth.

I am just trying to understand your method. And how you came to your position.
 
Thanks to Lumber, we have spent 4 pages arguing PP’s use of quotation marks in a tweet.

Instead, the real issue is that the PM effective brushed off an Ally (Japan) in their quest for energy supply security, which does have geo-political ramifications that do favour Russia. And have further negative national unity effects in Canada.

But, hey, as long as climate activists in the Danforth are onboard, what the hell. Am I right?
 
Back
Top