Tag Archives: Pierre Poilievre

Roundup: Poilievre on the first ballot

Posted on by

Not unexpectedly, Pierre Poilievre won the Conservative leadership race quite handily on the first ballot, with some sixty-eight percent of the vote, and winning the point share in about 300 of the 338 ridings around the country. This is going to be declared “decisive,” and that it will force the caucus to rally around him, but I have some doubts, particularly as you had MPs who were openly questioning their future in the party under a Poilievre win. We’ll see where they go in the coming weeks, but Poilievre is already making some backroom changes, including replacing the board of the party’s fundraising arm—because replacing the entire party machinery with loyalists is one way to ensure that the membership is stymied from holding you to account in the future (and yes, the Liberals are most especially guilty of this after Trudeau oversaw the party’s constitution be replaced with one dedicated to total control by the leader’s office). We’ll also see who he picks for his front-bench.

As for what this means moving to the next election, there is a lot of doubt that Poilievre is going to “pivot to the centre,” because he doesn’t think he can win there. He is likely to try and get more votes from the far-right, and access votes from there by appealing to them in various ways, as he has explicitly done so far, whether it was supporting the occupation in Ottawa, or playing along with conspiracy theories like those around the World Economic Forum. You’re going to have a lot of talking heads bring up that “300 ridings!” figure to show that he somehow has support across the country, when that is a massive sample selection bias, which shows that he knows how to organize small numbers nationally, but says nothing about the broader public. And while this thread from Justin Ling is good to read, I will echo his caution that calling Poilievre a “white supremacist” plays into his hands—his wife is from Venezuela, his children are mixed-race, and if the media tries the narrative on him, he will eviscerate them for it, while reminding everyone yet again about Trudeau’s history of Blackface. His opponents can’t play the game he wants them to play, but we’ll see if they have the capacity or ability. As for media, well, I suspect they will continue to keep both-sidesing his lies, and he’ll keep beating up on them, and on and on it goes.

For pundit reaction, Aaron Wherry remarks on Poilievre’s vow to remain as loud and antagonistic a populist as possible, and how he has been willing to undermine the institutions of democracy his whole careers. Jen Gerson considers Poilievre’s win the death knell of moderate conservatism in Canada, but it’s less a question of policy than of temperament. Althia Raj buys into the notion that Poilievre’s caucus will be more united, which frees up energy to fight the Liberals. Chantal Hébert believes that Poilievre’s victory will convince Trudeau to stay on for the next election, believing that he can’t let Poilievre win.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 200:

The counter-offensive, particularly in the north-eastern part of Ukraine, has been advancing at a rapid pace, and Russians are fleeing with minimal resistance, leaving a lot of weapons and ammunition behind. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy put out a video mocking the Russian retreat, saying that it’s showing their best side. Further south, the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant has now been completely shut down in order to prevent a nuclear catastrophe as shelling continues in the region. Meanwhile, in Sloviansk, in Donetsk province, continues to see artillery attacks as Russian forces try to take the entire Donbas region. While the counter-attack is a positive sign, it is likely that the conflict will continue for some time, with the added complication that Western allies are starting to run out of inventory to donate to the effort, and everyone needs to beware of what Putin may do when he feels like he’s been backed into a corner.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Calls to further isolate Belarus

Posted on by

The continued shelling of Mariupol marked day sixteen of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, while the Russians were aggressively pushing disinformation and propaganda about what happened there. It also looks like that long convoy on the way to Kyiv has broken up, and redeployed elsewhere. The US, European Union and G7 are all moving to follow Canada’s lead in revoking Russia’s “most favoured nation” trade status, while Belarus’ exiled opposition leader called for tighter sanction on that country, including having it removed from the SWIFT system as well, as she seeks diplomatic isolation of the Lukashenko regime, as well as Canadian recognition of her “government in exile.”

Justin Trudeau’s final stop on his European tour was in Poland, where he met with Ukrainian refugees who had fled across the border. Trudeau later said that Putin would lose the war, and that he would face consequences for his illegal war and the war crimes that come along with it. It has also been announced that Volodymyr Zelenskyy will likely address Canada’s Parliament on Tuesday, which is during the March Break, meaning that MPs and senators will fly into Ottawa for a day, then fly back out again.

Closer to home, the Chief of Defence Staff says that Russia’s re-occupation of its Cold War bases in its far north are of concern to Canada, and that we shouldn’t be complacent. General Eyre’s big challenge remains recruitment, however, which is not going to be an easy nut to crack, particularly as culture change is still underway within our military ranks. Of course, we should also remember that it’s extremely unlikely to face any kind of northern invasion because it’s simply not feasible. Seriously.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Ford wakes up after letting Ottawa suffer

Posted on by

After being content to let Ottawa suffer under occupation by grifters, extremists and conspiracy theorists for the past two weeks, Doug Ford woke up and got serious now that the Ambassador Bridge is threatened. He declared a state of emergency and promised permanent legislation about blocking critical infrastructure, with fines of up to $100,000 and up to a year imprisonment, but that didn’t seem to help motivate police any. It was an injunction in Windsor that seems to have had more of an impact (and I find the notion that police will enforce an injunction but not uphold the laws on the statute books to be a concerning development with the rule of law). They were promising enforcement, but we’ll see, given that the crowd only grew once the injunction came into effect.

Meanwhile, I find myself a bit at a loss about the demands that Justin Trudeau “show leadership” in this situation. Every time I ask someone just which federal levers he should be deploying, I get static in reply. When pressed on the topic on Power & Politics the other day, Jagmeet Singh flailed and handwaved before resorting to a Jaida Essence Hall and trying to make a bunch of erroneous statements about healthcare funding. Trudeau cannot simply assert authority in this situation—it frankly does not meet the test for the Emergencies Act, and I’m not convinced this is a situation that requires it. I fail to see the utility of trying to get the RCMP to bigfoot the Ottawa Police as a) they don’t have the expertise in this situation, and b) they don’t have the numbers, particularly in the area. He’s not going to call in the military, because that is a very, very bad idea and more to the point, it’s the premier or his attorney general who needs to make the request for the aid to civil power under the National Defence Act. What else should Trudeau be doing? He told the convoy to go home on the first Monday (meaning, day four) during Question Period and elsewhere (you know, when members of the media accused him of being “in hiding” when he was in COVID isolation and still attending the House of Commons virtually). He’s been making calls the whole time, though not necessarily as performatively as is being demanded. So how else should he be “showing leadership”? What other powers should he be deploying? And even more to the point, why should he be playing into the trap that Ford and the extremist organizers themselves are laying out for him that is trying to put him at the centre of this?

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre first out of the gate

Posted on by

First out of the gate to declare his intention to run for the leadership of the Conservative Party was Pierre Poilievre, who opted not to run the last time citing family concerns. Of course, numerous Conservative MPs and partisans have immediately lined up to support Poilievre, while others over social media have been digging up his long history of petulance, racist comments, and outright fictions, not that this will dissuade those who think that he’s just the guy to “own the Libs,” and move the party even more in a populist direction. Brace yourselves for an onslaught of outright fiction, because that’s the kind of politician Poilievre is.

https://twitter.com/dgardner/status/1490119318981562372

https://twitter.com/dgardner/status/1490121403127021568

Continue reading →

Roundup: Bergen plagiarizes “good people on both sides” argument

Posted on by

The leaks continue to come out about interim Conservative leader Candice Bergen, and it’s another one about the grifter convoy—before it turned into an occupation—where she insisted to Erin O’Toole that they should show support for it because there are “good people on both sides.” Yes, that’s right—the classic Trump line in excusing a rally that included literal neo-Nazis in attendance. I would say that this is unbelievable, but no, it’s completely believable for Bergen. She also shook up her leadership team to get rid of the more reasonable Gérard Deltell as House Leader in favour of the more bombastic John Brassard, and added Lianne Rood to the team as deputy whip. Rood has also been tweeting support for the grifter occupation, so yeah, this is going well.

If there is a silver lining to these leaks it’s that it’s a sign that there are decent people with a conscience in the upper echelons who are willing to fight back against her embrace of Trumpism, for what it’s worth. We have seen a few cracks show—Pierre Paul-Hus tweeted his condemnation of the occupation, and Senator Dennis Patterson quit the caucus and joined the Canadian Senators Group because he’s so disgusted that the party embraced an occupation where hate symbols have been openly displayed.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Moe defends the Saskatchewan Nation

Posted on by

Saskatchewan premier Scott Moe is in trouble. The COVID numbers in his province are still out of control, five of the patients that they had to airlift to Ontario because they didn’t have enough ICU capacity have died, and his approval ratings are plummeting. So what does Moe think the solution to his problems is? Taking a page from Jason Kenney’s playbook and trying to pick fights with Ottawa, and in keeping with Kenney’s playbook, Moe has decided to also try adopting a tactic of “We want what Quebec has!” and wants Saskatchewan to be declared a “nation within a nation.”

That’s right – the nation of Saskatchewan, which is defined not by language (though they do call hoodies “bunny hugs” there, so that counts, right?) or by culture (going to Roughriders games is a distinct culture from the rest of Canada, right?), but by…well, he won’t exactly say. Which is pretty much where the rationale for his argument falls apart entirely. Because he doesn’t actually know what the hell he’s talking about, he is aping talking points from Kenney and company, and spouting a random sampling of phrases from Quebec nationalists, and hoping it gives him credibility. Rest assured, it doesn’t.

The other thing that Moe seems to forget that this kind of nationalism/separatism talk has consequences. In Quebec, it devastated their economy in the seventies and eighties as head offices departed for Toronto, and the former financial capital of the country, Montreal, was a corporate graveyard. Not sure that this is an outcome that Moe is gunning for, but hey, those who fail to learn history correctly… Moe seems to think that he can get more autonomy from the federal government in this way, but he doesn’t actually make any case for it. He brays that Quebec has their own immigration deal with the federal government (because they are prioritizing francophones – and they are now facing labour shortages because they have been overly restrictive), or that they got a special deal around national childcare (because they already had a system in place that meets the criteria where Saskatchewan does not), but doesn’t acknowledge the reasons why, and is simply playing people for idiots. But really, this is all Moe just being Jason Kenney’s Mini-Me, and it’s not going to work.

Continue reading →

Roundup: False narratives about the Q2 GDP

Posted on by

The figures for second quarter GDP were released yesterday, and they weren’t as good as had been expected. There was a surprise contraction of 1.1% annualized, which caught economists off-guard (and perhaps Statistics Canada as well, as their flash estimate a month previous had still shown growth). The majority of these declines were in the months of April and May because of the third wave, as June had shown robust growth in nearly all sectors as economies around the country re-opened – and those declines were largely in the areas of home resales and exports. To an extent, the home resales was a bit of a correction – after giant increases in previous quarters, most especially Q3 of 2020, the market slowed down.

For Erin O’Toole and Pierre Poilievre, however, these figures were a cataclysmic sign that Trudeau can’t “manage” the economy, and that it’s deficits that are leading to inflation, which is insane. A lot of the weakness is attributable to the Third Wave and its associated lockdowns, and that is squarely the fault of premiers who opened up too soon, reduced restrictions too fast, and then were too slow to re-impose them (and we’re going to get more of that in the oncoming fourth wave). More than anything, it’s reflective that O’Toole and Poilievre aren’t even bothering to read the data beyond the headlines, and are slotting it into pre-arranged talking points which are so divorced from reality that it should be concerning to anyone paying the slightest bit of attention. The fact that Poilievre is goading the Bank of Canada over Twitter is a Very Bad Thing. He’s continuing to politicise them, and feeding into a bunch of poisonous populist narratives, and O’Toole is joining him for the ride. This is a very bad thing for our economy, and it doesn’t matter that they’re doing it all for show and that they probably will keep things status quo should they form government – the fact that they are polarising the debate and riling up these same toxic mobs that have been following Trudeau’s campaign around is absolutely a problem. This kind of rhetoric should be disqualifying for anyone who seeks higher office in this country.

Meanwhile, as you may have heard, Erin O’Toole reiterated his promise to balance the budget without making any cuts (in spite of promising earlier to cut things like the CBC) because he’s going to grow the economy enough. Why does that sound familiar?

https://twitter.com/robert_hiltz/status/1432799152266694657

Continue reading →

Roundup: O’Toole’s use of stock photos is telling

Posted on by

You may have noticed that Erin O’Toole has been launching a new social media campaign about the dire state of our economy, using stock photo images to illustrate his points. Over my years in journalism, I have come to be very wary of the use of stock images by parties in their advertising, because much of it is inherently deceptive or manipulative (aside from being cheap to slap into their products) – and I will fully credit Glen McGregor for this.

So, what have we seen with two of O’Toole’s posts? One of them was about January’s brutal job numbers, accompanied by a stock photo of a young white guy in a hoodie, looking somewhat distressed. The problem? Those same job numbers showed disproportionate losses among women and visible minorities because the most affected sectors were wholesale and retail trade, as well as accommodation and food services – which makes sense given all of the closures in the second wave. In other words, the images he put up was not only tone deaf, but speaks to just who he thinks his voter base will respond sympathetically to, which says a lot. (The only upside here is that he model was actually Canadian and not a Romanian, but when said model found out about it, he chimed in).

https://twitter.com/TunaPhish09/status/1359408430264377347

O’Toole posted another one yesterday about standing up for Canadian workers, using a photo of a (white) construction worker. But again, if you look at last month’s job numbers, construction jobs were actually up – they were the main driver of goods-producing jobs (which were a net gain rather than a net loss on the month). Again, though, this is about what O’Toole is signalling what kinds of jobs he thinks matters, and it’s not where the losses have been. As he starts to make a lot of noise about his recovery plans and supposed economic dream team, he is sending very loud signals about what he thinks the recovery should look like, and it appears to be pretty divorced from what everyone else thinks it should look like, and that is something worth paying attention to.

Continue reading →

Roundup: O’Toole’s risky, ideological experiment

Posted on by

Erin O’Toole met with the Toronto Star’s editorial board yesterday, and indicated that any election won’t be his doing, which would indicate that he’s in no rush to call non-confidence with this government – and why would he? Should he topple the government (in a pandemic), he would not only have to wear that decision, but also try to explain how he would do things differently around things like vaccine procurement – something which he won’t actually do because he knows that we don’t have the domestic capacity to produce them, and that the current delays are outside of this government’s control. He won’t say those things out loud, because he needs to create a narrative about this government “failing,” even though he couldn’t do any better, but the truth has apparently never been a barrier for O’Toole (nor his predecessor).

What O’Toole is trying to do is set up a competing narrative for the post-pandemic recovery, where he gets to frame the Liberals’ plans of “build back better” – focused on green and inclusive growth – as being some kind of risky, ideologically-driven “experimentation.” The problem with this, of course, is that his plans for getting the economy back to status quo is that the old normal led us to this point – including the thousands of deaths that happened as a result of this pandemic. It would seem to me that trying to get to the old normal is risky and ideological, because they have proven to have failed, and were stifling growth – remember that calls for inclusive growth predate the pandemic and were highlighted by those radical ideologues at the Bank of Canada as a necessary pathway if the Canadian economy was to continue growing at a point where we had reached “full employment” and future growth was going to be constrained. Nevertheless, O’Toole is pandering to a voter base (and, frankly, a pundit class) that fails to see that the future economic drivers are going to be the green economy and ensuring that we get more women and minorities into the workforce. For a party that likes to fancy itself as “good economic managers,” they seem to be completely blinkered on where the market is heading, and are trying to chart a path that everyone else is rapidly abandoning.

Meanwhile, O’Toole’s finance critic, Pierre Poilievre, has been putting on a big dog and pony show about our unemployment rate over the past few days, and thinks he has a winning line in talking about “paycheques versus credit card debt,” but he’s basing it on a false premise that unemployment figures are directly comparable – they’re not, and as a former employment minister, he knows that and is lying to you. (He also knows that places like the US have their economies opened with massive death tolls as a result, but those are just details, right?)

Continue reading →

Roundup: Setting up the failure narrative

Posted on by

The Conservatives spent Sunday trying to pre-position the narratives for today’s fiscal update by setting it up to fail, saying it needs a testing and vaccine roll-out plan to be effective – which are both areas of provincial jurisdiction and he knows it. The provinces have been given millions of rapid tests, and it’s up to them to roll them out (which most haven’t been, preferring to sit on them and wait instead) – and no, rapid at-home testing is still pretty much a figment of the imagination because the technology to make them like a pregnancy test still doesn’t exist. Likewise, we are still at a point where there are too many unknown variables with vaccines to make any definitive plans, which again, O’Toole knows but is pretending otherwise. O’Toole also tried to make the case that the government put “all their eggs” in the CanSino vaccine candidate basket, which was never able to leave China for testing, but absolutely nothing bears that out, given the massive investments in other local vaccine candidates, and ensuring that Canada would be positioned for access for other vaccine candidates that we couldn’t produce domestically.

To that end, the chairman of Moderna says that Canada is actually near the front of the line with their vaccine – which doesn’t require the same cold-storage chain that the Pfizer drug does – because we pre-ordered early. Of course, they can only produce so many vaccines so fast, so of course early doses are going to be lower than everyone would like, but they’re getting there (once they get approval). But then comes along Saskatchewan premier Scott Moe, who demands that the federal government get more doses faster – somehow. Apparently, they can wave a magic wand, or send bribes, or something. In reality, this is just Moe’s rather transparent attempt at making the federal government’s efforts look insufficient, so that it can distract from his own poor attempt to control the spread of the virus in his own province (and expect to see more of this from other premiers, particularly conservative ones).

In other pandemic news, the Alberta government has started listed co-morbidities with their death counts, as a rhetorical way of trying to lessen the actual impact of COVID deaths, trying instead to show that the people died of other complications and not COVID itself – which is bullshit, and a way for Jason Kenney to absolve himself of responsibility for his lack of action. And make no mistake, this is classic Kenney behaviour – and there is no small amount of irony that the man who keeps preaching “personal responsibility” in this pandemic is the one who refuses to take any measure of responsibility for his decisions.

Continue reading →