It’s such a quick change - just a week before they officially chose Carney, CBC gave the Cons an 80% chance of winning, and a 50% chance of a majority. A month ago it was 90%.
PP needs to talk about Trump and get his policies in the paper. Even that is hard now, because there is such a panoply of outrageousness flowing north from America fighting for headlines.
Trump on the tv saying he hates PP, and he would rather a Liberal government, ‘they’re weak!’, clearly a ham handed attempt to help PP.
PP doing the same, he ‘hates’ Trump! Yeah, right!
His whole campaign is hate, attack and divide. Could not be more Trumpy.
I thought the hate, attack and divide was the liberal strategy. Different strokes, I guess. If you’re upset he attacks Liberals for their hypocrisy and corruption? That’s his job.
If Trump wants PP to win, would that not make it more likely that he would stop his tariffs because he’d have someone he respects as PM. Both sides win. So, you should vote PP.
If you watch what Trump said and how he said it, it didn’t strike me that he was anything but honest, at least in the moment, in what he said. You can usually tell when he is being a blowhard, it didn’t seem so in this instance.
I guess PP could be lying in that he would protect Canada if he’s elected, I guess Trump is lying that PP is no friend of his. What I do know is that Carney is likely hiding something in his investments. He says he is following the reporting rules (as in the bare minimum). My thought is he will do that for all the things he does. The bare minimum. And because of that there will be Liberal scandal after scandal as has already been the case. The almost same cast of characters in his cabinet as under Trudope supports that contention.
Tiresome Uzi - always conspiracy under the rug. Give it up.v 
100% from the Conservatives. Asking people to wear masks and get vaccinated was not intended to divide anyone.
I can tell he’s a blowhard when his lips are moving.
Trump doesn’t have friends, he has people that he knows as long as it benefits him. Then he “barely knows the guy, met him once or twice”.
And I thought Conservatives wanted capitalists that pulled themselves up by their bootstraps? Why the hate directed at Carney for the sin of being successful?
Bootstraps are one thing, kickbacks are another. Why not tell us his investments? If he had $10M in Canadian Tire, why not report it? At this time he is no different than Trump not showing his tax returns. You’d be up in arms about Trump not doing it, so why not Carney?
But like wearing blackface: It is only wrong when the other guy does it.
How about being unable or unwilling to get a security clearance? This is a man you want to be PM?
Are you declaring those things as being equal? Not wanting to get a security screening so he isn’t blocked from discussing something the government declares as secret, and not disclosing potential conflicts of interest from voters? The same is it?
I’m pretty sure PP will get that screening if he becomes PM. I’m pretty sure that Carney will not disclose his conflicts. But unlike Trudeau, who jets off to private islands and was blatant in his discressions, it is likely that Carney is smarter than that and will continue to benefit from the position he has been appointed to.
You keep bringing up Trudeau in blackface. I’ve got to break it you gently: Trudeau is not running in this election and is no longer PM.
PP not getting clearance to find out what is happening with foreign interference is irresponsible. He is abdicating his responsibility as the Leader of His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition and choosing instead the role of Court Jester.
Not necessarily. The act that creates the committee for foreign intelligence is relatively new. One significant feature is that any MP who chooses to be on that committee is barred from discussing anything they learnt (on the committee) in the House of Commons. The statute overrides parliamentary privilege of freedom of speech in the House, and makes it a criminal offence to comment publicly on information learnt from being on the committee.
Poilievre’s position is that as Leader of the Opposition, he has to be able to criticise anything that the government does; that’s what the parliamentary privilege of freedom of speech is meant to protect.
The act was held to be unconstitutional in the Ontario Superior Court, but then was upheld in the Ontario Court of Appeal. The case is now going to the Supreme Court.
While I will defer to your assessment of the law, my position remains that acting as a vital check on the power of a minority government requires him to know the facts. Poilievre would prefer to criticize from a position of ignorance.
How can he act as a vital check if he’s not allowed to open his mouth? that’s his position, as I understand it.
I see Carney is now talking about removing the GST for new homebuyers. I’ve heard this before. Somewhere. You sometimes get the idea there are only three or four ideas floating around Canada, at least as far as politicians are concerned.
We know that his major holdings are (or rather, were when they were put into a blind trust, probably still are, but it’s a blind trust so nobody including Carney actually knows aside from the trustee) in Brookfield Asset Management. He’s following the asset disclosure rules and working with the office of the ethics commissioner to ensure compliance, but you’re mad that he isn’t following them even more? Plus he’s stated straight out that he’ll recuse himself from discussion of anything directly impacting BAM.
Until there’s something resembling smoke, I don’t see why we should suspect there’s a fire here. If, after being elected to another Liberal majority, he starts making sweeping changes to financial regulations that appear to benefit certain specific sectors of business and still refuses to divulge what his holdings were or whether they involved those sectors, then I’ll share your outrage.
Ugh. This is not a good idea. The problem with the housing market isn’t that people don’t have enough money to spend on housing. It’s that there’s not enough housing to spend it on.
That said, the official Conservative policy cited upthread which amounts more or less to punishing municipalities if they do anything to impede what housing developers want to do is likewise stupid. Housing developers don’t want housing prices to fall. That’s why they focus on building as much large, upscale product as they can, and only build more modest offerings where municipal regulations force them to.
What we need to do is incentivize densification in areas already supported by civic infrastructure. And also incentivize modest housing units and de-incentivize larger units, because the same construction industry capability that can build 1 3000ft2 house can build 2 1200ft2 houses. Left to their own devices, developers will opt for the former because it’ll make them more profit, but that’s not the course that will actually mitigate housing problems.
I wonder if PP has considered stepping down if his party does not form government in the next election.
100% he’ll step down. Anything less then forming a minority and the CPC will get rid of him.
If Scheer and O’Toole (who both WON the popular vote AND forced the Liberals into a minority government) couldn’t hold on to their positions after their losses for certain PP will be axed for blowing a 25 point lead.
He delivers or he’s out.
This for sure. I can practically see the party fragmenting with the few Red Tories left forming a rump Progressive Conservative Party.
Poilievre would likely need a win to remain leader.
Support for the Conservatives has remained static, and high in Alberta. But the NDP have cratered at 10-13% and the Liberals seem to have won most of these intended votes. This makes them competitive in BC, ahead in Ontario and Québec and Atlantic Canada.
Poilievre has been successful at getting media attention for his policies. The Liberals under Carney have very much tried to steal his most popular ideas, with some apparent success. The CBC poll currently gives the Libs a 51% chance of majority and a 76% chance of winning.
Fascinating. A month truly is an eternity in politics.