He was the attack dog. He could rile up the base with dog whistles, and then Harper could come out and play the voice of the reasonable adult with a message of "we're a big tent party and he doesn't speak for all of us, but I won't deny him the right to voice his concerns".
It allowed the CPC to have their cake and eat it too.
But his schtick only works in that setup. If it's just him pandering to the reactionary right, he can't ALSO play the role of the responsible adult.
Case in point: Poilievre was able to come out and say really racist shit about First Nations people to rile up the CPC base, and then Harper was able to publicly say "no, bad boy" to make it look like the CPC didn't think that kind of behavior was acceptable. Of course it was all theatre, because PP faced no actual repercussions for it, he was playing his role.
Attack dog was working when people had Trudeau fatigue. Wasn’t even Trudeau fault, but he was the prime minister through a once in a lifetime pandemic which led to rising costs of living. A housing crisis and more, which gave PP a freebie as his way of being a politician now reaches the anger of the population.
The issue is once people start seeing clearly they just see a dude attacking with no solutions. Doesn’t work in that state.
Heading into 2026, Poilievre said he’s shifting his message to one of “hope” — a sharp contrast from his former “Canada is broken” message track.
I'll believe it when I see it. This guy has one mode - outrage - and that's been the case for 20 years
“I think at the end of the day, (the floor crossers) should respect their constituents voted for our Conservative plan for a more affordable and safe country,” Poilievre said.
I can only assume he regrets voting against a bill to restrict floor crossing, and thinks Alleslev should've remained a Liberal?
If he does indeed change his tune (which is doubtful), it's going to come across as so unbelievably fake and forced. Dude looks like he's pushing out a log when he smiles.
His persona has been so massively cultivated by PR firms and consultants its nearly impossible to see the true shitbag under all the layers anymore. The shitbag is definitely still there tho...
Dude lost a majority government, the election outright, and lost his own seat. He had to be parachuted in to quite possibly the single safest riding in the whole country; only to show up in parliament again and act like literally nothing has changed. The man is literally incapable of growth, learning, or humility.
I have seen multiple users [based on their post history, likely actual people and not bots] sincerely argue he didn't lose that election. They usually cite how conservative support remained steady, which they insist means he didn't lose.
I can understand someone taking the position of "yes, that election didn't go the way I'd hoped, but I still support him", but to refuse to see that election as anything other than Poilievre losing what everyone saw as a pro forma coronation? That's straight up copium.
Oh yeah I’ve seen it too; all about how he still got more votes than O’Toole and all kinds of other mental gymnastics shit. But the fact of the matter is that people voted for O’Toole; while a great many usual CPC voters definitely voted against Pierre.
And had multiple of his MPs quit or change teams while specifically citing him as the problem; and yet when asked about it in interviews still 100% denies he could be the problem.
He was a backbencher who made noise during question period. His kind of language is fine for that, but distasteful otherwise. He deals in hate and division, and I think those who say his message is more than that either agree with the bigotry or don't understand.
If he respected his constituents vote, he’d have stayed away from the Parliament. Cos that’s exactly what they wanted. I’m sure many feel defeated that he ran away to Alberta and is back again now.
Can we get a break from this guy and have a true opposition?
Poilievre was perfectly fine with floor-crossing when Emerson crossed the floor to the CPC two weeks after the 2006 election in exchange for a cabinet position and was, according to his Conservative opponent, planning it the whole time (and only ran as a Liberal because he knew a Conservative wouldn't get elected in a riding that hasn't voted Conservative since 1962).
He's tried to be positive in the past couldn't maintain it for a single press conference.
It also came across as completely disingenuous political theater rather than anything he believed in.
Being inflexible,entitled,smugly negative has been consistent through his many decades in politics so I have my doubts that PP is going to suddenly begin self reflection and personal growth much beyond being a weird 40 something teenage edgelord.
I don‘t see how it‘s a shift… having hope is perfectly consistent with being in the state of brokenness. Just meaningless semantics, but it will be the same old.
I think Poilievre achieved what he could as leader in the Trudeau era, and while I think it’s probably best for the party that he move on, if the alternative is Jamil Jivani - who will have JD Vance in his ear - then let’s all pray that Poilievre can course correct, unite his party, and stay on as leader.
I don't think Jivani would win nationally. Do you think the Alberta base would opt for him? He'd split the socan vote with whoever and allow a centrist to win. Jivani doesn't have the profile to win a national race. And, I'd note, Poillievre isn't really giving him one.
Oh, don't even know what he looks like, but i'm sure if he's made it this far without his looks holding him back, it's probably not that much of an issue then
He's a conservative in 2025, i trust him to give me good enough reasons to dislike him without having to care about his looks.
The notion that looks are important in politics comes and goes with eras. We're just having this discussion because for the last decade we had "the hottest world leader", but like everyone we've had our share of ugly leaders, and it's not really an issue i'd be worried about
He failed as an advisor for doug ford, and then proceeded to win and become an MP in Ontario as a fly in for a by-election. He pushes reform really hard so if they want to return to reform roots then he very well could. The problem is that he absolutely hates Ford, so he would get zero support from the Ontario Premier. That would show divisiveness in the "con party" if the premier endorsed Carney for instance. Could backfire on Jivani entirely and he would lose seats in Ontario.
Given how much they wring their hands about the fact that Carney “has failed to make a deal” with the US - ie, roll over and let them screw us even more - I think many would support a Trump-Vance crony. He would no doubt promise to secure a deal. Maybe even a HUGE one.
I think Poilievre probably needs to be replaced with a fresh voice but if the conservative party thinks that Jivani is a move in the right direction then they are completely unable or unwilling to read the room at this point.
I think he could have achieved more. In early (pre-election run-up) appearances he seemed pretty sanguine. I don't know what being the face of a party does to you, or what people start to ask or require of you, but he seemed to fold over time. Culminating in his complete failure to react to Trump spouting off about annexation and other dumbass ideas. It was a complete layup to simply say 'I believe the bad thing is bad', but he was too worried about posturing or future relations or something. He simply did not appear to have a take on it or was afraid to take a stance, and people recognized that as a lack of courage and leadership.
Let's not forget PP was definitely pro-Trump until it wasn't in his best interest. His tactics are still the same as what Trump did and continues to do: create an environment that casts the left-leaning liberals in a negative light, without any solid plans on how to change it. He criticizes with the implication that his party will do better, and most likely they won't.
He was even bragging about his rally turnouts just like Trump. Canadians decided they didn’t want that, they wanted an adult in the room. We’re not like America.
The Conservatives and the Republicans are both members of the IDU. They are ideologically aligned even if Canadian Conservatives are too ashamed to admit it.
PP would say anything. He was pro Trump because he thought it would play well. I'd say he would push his own grandmother down the stairs if he thought it would get him elected
Let's not forget PP was definitely pro-Trump until it wasn't in his best interest.
Agreed, but some nuance is warranted, because the pro-Poilievre crowd is going to ask you to defend a literal and pedantic interpretation of these words in a sense that likely was not meant. (I see this already happening in one of the reply threads.)
Facts:
- Danielle Smith stated on an ultra-right wing media outlet, Breit Bart, that "the perspective Pierre would bring would be very much in sync with the new direction in America"
- Poilievre never disavowed this statement by Smith other than to point to the fact that Trump said he disliked Poilievre.
- Smith's statement implied that Poilievre's government would be enacting a similar agenda to what Trump was doing. This has nothing to do with whether Trump personally liked Poilievre.
- It beggars credulity to believe that Trump, the guy who lies constantly, was actually telling the truth about whether he likes Poilievre.
- Jenny Byrne, Pierre Poilievre's campaign manager, very much supported MAGA politics, famously being photographed wearing a MAGA hat. Candice Bergen was also in this same camp, also being photographed wearing a MAGA hat.
- Poilievre never made any unequivocal statements denouncing Trump or the MAGA movement. The strongest statement Poilievre made was to ask Trump to "cut it out" with respect to the 51st state comments. For those asking why he needed to denounce Trump and MAGA, I point you to all the points above. It would be very easy to read into the above facts that Poilievre was at least sympathetic to MAGA and Trump, if not worse. Why not just make clear "I do not like MAGA, my government does not and will not align with Trump or Trump-like politics". It's the easiest effing thing to say given the barrage of criticism that he received, yet he couldn't even bring himself to do that.
For the Poilievre supporters still saying "But that doesn't prove he's pro-Trump." In a literal and uncharitable interpretation of the claim, it certainly doesn't. But I'm being charitable to the Redditor above. Poilievre is most definitely pro-Trump in the sense that Trump-like and MAGA politics appeals to him, and that the agenda he wanted to enact against the "woke leftist elites" bore similarities to what Trump was doing.
If Poilievre supporters still don't see that, I invite them to move on. I will be taking Mark Twain's advice on this and not arguing with them.
I get that this is a fun talking point, but Jivani isn't in any position to be chosen as leader. There are many other much more senior and much more liked people in the party.
Look, to be blunt, it was a tough ask for Singh even if he was an excellent politician and leader which he is not, to be in contention for PM and he's part of the NDP. Jivani likewise has little to no hope especially being part of the CPC.
We basically needed the most whitebread, staid looking 60 year old guy in Mark Carney to revive the absolute corpse-husk that was the Liberal party in early 2025. Absolutely zero risks at all in that pick.
Mackay? Chong? Maybe even Harper or O'toole again? Hard to make an actual pick when there isn't actually a list to pick from. Not really the conversation thats happening though.
But a two year MP, who has never even sat on a comittee and doesnt hold even a shadow position isn't going to be very many people's picks.
The CPC is so antagonistic towards anyone seen as a Red Tory or small c conservative that I would be EXTREMELY surprised to see them allow one to run - particularly Doug Ford or Tim Houston after the public spats on the campaign trail.
Regardless of feelings on Poilievre, I honestly can't imagine Jamil Jivani winning an election. He's an unhinged freak, and perhaps more importantly, he looks like a baby and an egg had an egg baby.
He's an attack dog rather than a proper leader of the opposition.
He doesn't offer a viable alternative or better solutions. He just says stuff about lost liberal decade, axe the tax boots not suits etc. ad naseum.
The fact I'm not the first one to compare them to Ban and Joker in this thread is fantastic. Even Poilievre's supporters can't discuss his flaws or liabilities without invoking Trudeau's name.
That list of things he's fighting for are all of the things conservatives regularly target for cuts. Social services and housing, drug addiction services...
“Well looks like Mr X is more concerned with having his head in the clouds than focusing on the economy”
(Lends PP $5 for lunch)
“Wow, despite the Canadian economy being in shambles Mr X seems to have no problem throwing money around to his friends”
(Holds the door open for PP)
“With all the time Mr X is wasting on holding doors for his friends instead of writing legislation, it’s no wonder businesses are fleeing this country.”
100% he is, he is as irrelevant as the ground hog predicting the weather. He should just quit talking and go back to being a worker for CP, since he ain't done anything else in his entire life.
Well I haven't seen him doing anything constructive to help get the government going. To me, that is critical for the parties, and we haven't seen it in decades, from any party. Even the NDP only did what they did for virtue signalling for a small group of professional yellers, not to help the country become better. In the end, we need industry. Trying to shut down every avenue for industry is beyond stupid.
Fighting to stay "relevant". He's only catoring to the fringe and possible future losses to the PPC while pushing away the swing votes he actually needs and driving center-right CPC supporters, like me, away.
I don't like Poilievre, but we've seen the erosion of the middle class for corporate interests happen consistently over the last 10 years, and Poilievre and the CPC aren't responsible for that.
Poilievre has railed on and on about "we're not the Liberals", and that's true, but it's also true that their policy platform is centered around corporate subsidies, tax breaks, and deference to private industry over fixing the public services they complain are broken.
That's why his message is "Liberals bad" and not "Conservatives good"; he knows that making a positive argument for his party based on advantageous policy platform is a losing argument.
Firstly, one being bad doesn’t mean the other isn’t also bad. I do not intend to defend anything about the liberal party of Canada but there is nothing presented by the Conservative Party of Canada that would solve any of our federal problems.
Change to a worse option because we pretend it is a binary A or B choice isn’t a good change.
Furthermore, we have a complicated system where our provinces are responsible for a lot that goes on in our lives. The nations most populace province running a conservative government for most of that same decade is more directly indicative of most peoples’ problems.
Can we please cut this dweeb off the taxpayer's teet already and replace him with someone that is actually worth voting for. You know, maybe someone who doesn't rely on strawman arguments and outrage, someone who actually has a plan, or at the very, very minimal someone who is capable of informed decision making.
So gd sick of this whiney loser.
Of course not, Pierre. You’re fighting for your personal stake in a world where you’ve been hard ejected from federal and even regional relevance.
If weird conservasimps didn’t literally concede their position to prop up your Trumpian brand of ragebait, you might be forced into the abject desolation of personal responibility and working for a living.
Atta boy PP! You truly are a true contrarian. If there’s a point to argue no matter how true or how much you agree with it you’ll be there on the front lines arguing it.
I am so proud of you for always finding a hill to die on.
I dunno…20 years of public statements, your relationships with people like Jenni Byrne, as well as your voting record, seem to indicate otherwise. 🤷♂️
I mean people see what they see. The overwhelming majority of content you see from him is fighting the Liberal government. I know it's important to have oppositional representation but I really think they should consider another strategy.
There have been a few times when I thought he was actually producing something attractive, which were a few of his educational videos where he explained his ideas very clearly and what the issues he felt were with the economy. It felt like a much more reasonable critique and less partisan. Even if you don't believe in those ideas, you at least feel a bit more confident in their abilities and you can get where they're coming from.
We also just saw that this was a winning formula for Mamdani. Mamdani made a bunch of videos explaining the problems with his city and gave his ideas on how to fix them. Now I know the political climate and landscape in NYC is different from Canada as a whole but social media itself is fairly constant, and I think Poilievre should lean into that more. If he doesn't want Mamdani inspiration for that he can also look to Reagan who was very popular and did the same thing of getting on TV and explaining his ideas with the charts.
The truth is, Canada is in a difficult spot right now and any PM would be facing a daunting challenge, providing plenty of fodder for the opposition to complain about. But Canadians generally know this, and want a pragmatic decision-maker to lead through the tough choices. Pollievre has constantly been doing the easy thing and complaining- he needs to show he can make the unpopular but necessary decisions.
Comments are hilarious. If Pierre was that bad as the leader of the opposition the liberals would want him to stay. They and their supporters want him gone because he’s a threat to them.
Yes when Liberals were crossing over to the Cons I didn’t hear them say anything about democracy. Why didn’t they vote with the NDP to stop floor crossing ? Stop with the hypocrisy.
If Jivani ever became PM, it would irreparably harm this country by undermining its long held values of fairness, independence, and no preferred religion . As a diehard federalist half-Franco half-Anglo Quebecer, it might be just enough to push me over the edge and vote for sovereignty. I’ve always said that I’d never vote for an irreversible change (sovereignty) to counter a reversible change (bad government), but Jivani is the type that could make structural changes that would align Canada with his BFF’s vision of a vassal state if not a full merger. I’d take an independent Quebec over that any day, not that I’d have much confidence that the US would let us get away with it for very long.
I had my doubts about Poilievre's intentions when he first came into the job, but with the sheer number of hit-pieces being printed about him in the legacy media, along with the lengths the Laurentian establishment, including the Red Tory wing of his own party are going to to discredit him, I'm starting to think he might actually be the only political leader in this country who isn't WEF'd up to the gills. The enemies of the working class wouldn't be so desperate to get rid of him otherwise.
By hit pieces do you mean articles talking about the stupid shit that comes out of his mouth? He’s his own worst enemy, I have no sympathy for him or anyone who supports him.
Ohhhh yes he is!
Came here to say this.
He's accomplished absolutely nothing in his time in Parliament. He has no plans, and not even a concept of a plan.
His whole raison d'etre is to stand up in Question Period and throw clever questions at the PM and his cabinet.
During the Harper years, he DID serve a purpose.
He was the attack dog. He could rile up the base with dog whistles, and then Harper could come out and play the voice of the reasonable adult with a message of "we're a big tent party and he doesn't speak for all of us, but I won't deny him the right to voice his concerns".
It allowed the CPC to have their cake and eat it too.
But his schtick only works in that setup. If it's just him pandering to the reactionary right, he can't ALSO play the role of the responsible adult.
Case in point: Poilievre was able to come out and say really racist shit about First Nations people to rile up the CPC base, and then Harper was able to publicly say "no, bad boy" to make it look like the CPC didn't think that kind of behavior was acceptable. Of course it was all theatre, because PP faced no actual repercussions for it, he was playing his role.
Clever? I'd say more "theatric" personally. He's swinging for clever and hitting himself with the bat.
PP had a good attack dog persona, but he just became a freakin' puppy infront of Trump during that 51st state/tariff drama.
I am not even sure is he can back his fighting spirit when it matters.
Reminds me of our dog... bark bark bark... but if push came to shove, she hides behind us.
Attack dog was working when people had Trudeau fatigue. Wasn’t even Trudeau fault, but he was the prime minister through a once in a lifetime pandemic which led to rising costs of living. A housing crisis and more, which gave PP a freebie as his way of being a politician now reaches the anger of the population.
The issue is once people start seeing clearly they just see a dude attacking with no solutions. Doesn’t work in that state.
It's working on way too much people if you ask me.
Knock it off!
Can you explain how? He seemed pretty firm in his opposition to Trump's tariffs.
How is Poilievre saying, "Knock it off," an example of standing firm?
Just stop lying or being ignorant. Do you still think he's going to ban abortion too? lol
[removed]
Don't forget clever slogans
It’s not even clever, it’s stuff like “the liberals pass a bill to end child poverty yesterday, why are their still poor children this morning?”
Well actually his whole plan is to lead onto a concept of plan so the plan is planning a plan to be planned. Do you even plan?😂
I'll argue it isn't fighting. More like teenage rebel without a clue, just immediately say and do the opposite tantrums.
He already told you once!
No he hasn't.
Yes he has!
Look, I came here for an argument.
Go wax your backs!
The second I read this headline here's what popped into my head:
"Pfffftt"
Poilievre is becoming more and more like a panto villain. I just can't take him seriously at this point.
FIGHT THE FIGHT
The man is a personification of Monty Python’s Argument Clinic sketch…
In politics when you explaining your losing...
I'll believe it when I see it. This guy has one mode - outrage - and that's been the case for 20 years
I can only assume he regrets voting against a bill to restrict floor crossing, and thinks Alleslev should've remained a Liberal?
If he does indeed change his tune (which is doubtful), it's going to come across as so unbelievably fake and forced. Dude looks like he's pushing out a log when he smiles.
His persona has been so massively cultivated by PR firms and consultants its nearly impossible to see the true shitbag under all the layers anymore. The shitbag is definitely still there tho...
Wait. This is a cultivated persona? This is the best he could do? Wow.
Dude lost a majority government, the election outright, and lost his own seat. He had to be parachuted in to quite possibly the single safest riding in the whole country; only to show up in parliament again and act like literally nothing has changed. The man is literally incapable of growth, learning, or humility.
I have seen multiple users [based on their post history, likely actual people and not bots] sincerely argue he didn't lose that election. They usually cite how conservative support remained steady, which they insist means he didn't lose.
I can understand someone taking the position of "yes, that election didn't go the way I'd hoped, but I still support him", but to refuse to see that election as anything other than Poilievre losing what everyone saw as a pro forma coronation? That's straight up copium.
That just makes him look even worse imo.
Conservatives did generally pretty well accross the country, yet he lost his seat. Pretty strong message.
There are plenty of voters that resonate with conservative ideas, but clearly have no confidence in the leadership of the party.
Oh yeah I’ve seen it too; all about how he still got more votes than O’Toole and all kinds of other mental gymnastics shit. But the fact of the matter is that people voted for O’Toole; while a great many usual CPC voters definitely voted against Pierre.
And had multiple of his MPs quit or change teams while specifically citing him as the problem; and yet when asked about it in interviews still 100% denies he could be the problem.
The smile came out of no where. It looks like he sits there with an earpiece and someone whispers into his ear "smile, youre frowning".
So the new slogan will be ‘Sunny Ways!’ 😂
"It's 2026."
I believe it. But it won’t be what anyone expects.
I don’t think Poilievre actually understands what “hope” and real positivity mean. It’s not part of his personality.
So we’ll get “hope”, but it will really be the same old slogans and anti-woke bullshit just wrapped in a new package.
He was a backbencher who made noise during question period. His kind of language is fine for that, but distasteful otherwise. He deals in hate and division, and I think those who say his message is more than that either agree with the bigotry or don't understand.
I don't think people realize how bad this guys voting history is and against the average Canadian it's been.
He will never want to help Canadians
he may say its hope, but it will still be focused on the terrible things that we need to have hope to get past
If he respected his constituents vote, he’d have stayed away from the Parliament. Cos that’s exactly what they wanted. I’m sure many feel defeated that he ran away to Alberta and is back again now.
Can we get a break from this guy and have a true opposition?
"My foreign billionaire backers 'hope' to exert total control control of the country"
Poilievre was perfectly fine with floor-crossing when Emerson crossed the floor to the CPC two weeks after the 2006 election in exchange for a cabinet position and was, according to his Conservative opponent, planning it the whole time (and only ran as a Liberal because he knew a Conservative wouldn't get elected in a riding that hasn't voted Conservative since 1962).
Lol probably.
He's tried to be positive in the past couldn't maintain it for a single press conference. It also came across as completely disingenuous political theater rather than anything he believed in.
Being inflexible,entitled,smugly negative has been consistent through his many decades in politics so I have my doubts that PP is going to suddenly begin self reflection and personal growth much beyond being a weird 40 something teenage edgelord.
I don‘t see how it‘s a shift… having hope is perfectly consistent with being in the state of brokenness. Just meaningless semantics, but it will be the same old.
I think Poilievre achieved what he could as leader in the Trudeau era, and while I think it’s probably best for the party that he move on, if the alternative is Jamil Jivani - who will have JD Vance in his ear - then let’s all pray that Poilievre can course correct, unite his party, and stay on as leader.
The fact that the alternative is someone even more unlikeable than Poilievre is very concerning.
I don't think Jivani would win nationally. Do you think the Alberta base would opt for him? He'd split the socan vote with whoever and allow a centrist to win. Jivani doesn't have the profile to win a national race. And, I'd note, Poillievre isn't really giving him one.
On that note, Poilievre isn't really giving anyone a profile.
He is a very unusual looking guy and people are shallow. I think that is enough to sink a PM bid
Are we talking about poilievre?
Cause his appearance isn't the reason why he's not liked
I meant JJ
Oh, don't even know what he looks like, but i'm sure if he's made it this far without his looks holding him back, it's probably not that much of an issue then
Big difference between local politics, federal politics and global politics
Being a back bencher MP
vs being in the cabinet
vs being the face of Canada
He's a conservative in 2025, i trust him to give me good enough reasons to dislike him without having to care about his looks.
The notion that looks are important in politics comes and goes with eras. We're just having this discussion because for the last decade we had "the hottest world leader", but like everyone we've had our share of ugly leaders, and it's not really an issue i'd be worried about
I was going with what the CPC base would go with
odd looking
ethnic name
visibly non-white
I figured with just those three variables he would not be viable for them as head of the party
Obama had a lot of doubters when he ran to be the democratic candidate in 2008, his name alone was a major issue for people and he was black
But he was a sexy dude and he was appealing to the left
There's no way Jivani is the next Conservative leader right?
They can't possibly be that out of touch..
He failed as an advisor for doug ford, and then proceeded to win and become an MP in Ontario as a fly in for a by-election. He pushes reform really hard so if they want to return to reform roots then he very well could. The problem is that he absolutely hates Ford, so he would get zero support from the Ontario Premier. That would show divisiveness in the "con party" if the premier endorsed Carney for instance. Could backfire on Jivani entirely and he would lose seats in Ontario.
Also...no chance the Alberta base votes for him. They are who they are.
Given how much they wring their hands about the fact that Carney “has failed to make a deal” with the US - ie, roll over and let them screw us even more - I think many would support a Trump-Vance crony. He would no doubt promise to secure a deal. Maybe even a HUGE one.
Immediate annexation into a single territory?
Conservative party delegates: Hold my beer!
They wont care if he speaks French poorly, but he's already an ethnic and he is sort of strange looking so I don't think the base will like him
According to a lot of that base, using their logic, Janvi and Lantsman would be a DEI hire.
Vivek Ramaswamy was somehow shocked people didn't like him because he was brown during the Iowa primary
Like buddy, what world are you operating in?
"I'm one of the good ones!"
Yes, they can.
https://provincialtimes.ca/questions-mount-over-jamil-jivanis-nationwide-restore-the-north-tour/
I think Poilievre probably needs to be replaced with a fresh voice but if the conservative party thinks that Jivani is a move in the right direction then they are completely unable or unwilling to read the room at this point.
I think he could have achieved more. In early (pre-election run-up) appearances he seemed pretty sanguine. I don't know what being the face of a party does to you, or what people start to ask or require of you, but he seemed to fold over time. Culminating in his complete failure to react to Trump spouting off about annexation and other dumbass ideas. It was a complete layup to simply say 'I believe the bad thing is bad', but he was too worried about posturing or future relations or something. He simply did not appear to have a take on it or was afraid to take a stance, and people recognized that as a lack of courage and leadership.
Let's not forget PP was definitely pro-Trump until it wasn't in his best interest. His tactics are still the same as what Trump did and continues to do: create an environment that casts the left-leaning liberals in a negative light, without any solid plans on how to change it. He criticizes with the implication that his party will do better, and most likely they won't.
He was even bragging about his rally turnouts just like Trump. Canadians decided they didn’t want that, they wanted an adult in the room. We’re not like America.
The Conservatives and the Republicans are both members of the IDU. They are ideologically aligned even if Canadian Conservatives are too ashamed to admit it.
PP would say anything. He was pro Trump because he thought it would play well. I'd say he would push his own grandmother down the stairs if he thought it would get him elected
Agreed, but some nuance is warranted, because the pro-Poilievre crowd is going to ask you to defend a literal and pedantic interpretation of these words in a sense that likely was not meant. (I see this already happening in one of the reply threads.)
Facts: - Danielle Smith stated on an ultra-right wing media outlet, Breit Bart, that "the perspective Pierre would bring would be very much in sync with the new direction in America" - Poilievre never disavowed this statement by Smith other than to point to the fact that Trump said he disliked Poilievre. - Smith's statement implied that Poilievre's government would be enacting a similar agenda to what Trump was doing. This has nothing to do with whether Trump personally liked Poilievre. - It beggars credulity to believe that Trump, the guy who lies constantly, was actually telling the truth about whether he likes Poilievre. - Jenny Byrne, Pierre Poilievre's campaign manager, very much supported MAGA politics, famously being photographed wearing a MAGA hat. Candice Bergen was also in this same camp, also being photographed wearing a MAGA hat. - Poilievre never made any unequivocal statements denouncing Trump or the MAGA movement. The strongest statement Poilievre made was to ask Trump to "cut it out" with respect to the 51st state comments. For those asking why he needed to denounce Trump and MAGA, I point you to all the points above. It would be very easy to read into the above facts that Poilievre was at least sympathetic to MAGA and Trump, if not worse. Why not just make clear "I do not like MAGA, my government does not and will not align with Trump or Trump-like politics". It's the easiest effing thing to say given the barrage of criticism that he received, yet he couldn't even bring himself to do that.
For the Poilievre supporters still saying "But that doesn't prove he's pro-Trump." In a literal and uncharitable interpretation of the claim, it certainly doesn't. But I'm being charitable to the Redditor above. Poilievre is most definitely pro-Trump in the sense that Trump-like and MAGA politics appeals to him, and that the agenda he wanted to enact against the "woke leftist elites" bore similarities to what Trump was doing.
If Poilievre supporters still don't see that, I invite them to move on. I will be taking Mark Twain's advice on this and not arguing with them.
Appreciate the clarity.
I get that this is a fun talking point, but Jivani isn't in any position to be chosen as leader. There are many other much more senior and much more liked people in the party.
Look, to be blunt, it was a tough ask for Singh even if he was an excellent politician and leader which he is not, to be in contention for PM and he's part of the NDP. Jivani likewise has little to no hope especially being part of the CPC.
We basically needed the most whitebread, staid looking 60 year old guy in Mark Carney to revive the absolute corpse-husk that was the Liberal party in early 2025. Absolutely zero risks at all in that pick.
Who's your pick?
Mackay? Chong? Maybe even Harper or O'toole again? Hard to make an actual pick when there isn't actually a list to pick from. Not really the conversation thats happening though.
But a two year MP, who has never even sat on a comittee and doesnt hold even a shadow position isn't going to be very many people's picks.
Very much the conversation that's happening, no matter how hard some try to ignore.
Succession discussion is like the MAIN point of contention due to the floor crossing.
The man's such a bad leader that he's shedding MPs.
"Jamil isnt a serious pick" is a great statement though.
Yes, that will guarantee Carney’s future as Prime Minister!
I say Doug Ford replaces pp
No way that guy gives up being Premier, or else he won't get to be mayor of Toronto anymore.
The Fords see themselves as the Canadian Kennedys. They’d do anything to have more power & status
AS PM he can take a fuller revenge on the councilors who were mean to his brother for being drunk and high at work
I think he's having more fun selling Ontario to his developer friends
The CPC is so antagonistic towards anyone seen as a Red Tory or small c conservative that I would be EXTREMELY surprised to see them allow one to run - particularly Doug Ford or Tim Houston after the public spats on the campaign trail.
Regardless of feelings on Poilievre, I honestly can't imagine Jamil Jivani winning an election. He's an unhinged freak, and perhaps more importantly, he looks like a baby and an egg had an egg baby.
He’s fighting for free housing. For himself, at Stornaway…
He's an attack dog rather than a proper leader of the opposition. He doesn't offer a viable alternative or better solutions. He just says stuff about lost liberal decade, axe the tax boots not suits etc. ad naseum.
To be honest I don’t think Poilievre even knows what he’s doing anymore.
Without Trudeau, he has nothing.
Hes Lego Joker from Lego Batman. Without Batman, who even is he?
The fact I'm not the first one to compare them to Ban and Joker in this thread is fantastic. Even Poilievre's supporters can't discuss his flaws or liabilities without invoking Trudeau's name.
He's like the villain from the Genghis Khan video - sad and despondent now that his rival is defeated.
You can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube. Poilievre is what he is and he can’t change that.
I wonder if he looks at himself in the mirror every morning and says to himself “you’re a fighter you tiger you”.
Yes you are and on top of that you're bad at it.
That list of things he's fighting for are all of the things conservatives regularly target for cuts. Social services and housing, drug addiction services...
C'mon. Who is buying that?
Yeah... Yeah you are.
(Asks PP how his day is going)
“Well looks like Mr X is more concerned with having his head in the clouds than focusing on the economy”
(Lends PP $5 for lunch)
“Wow, despite the Canadian economy being in shambles Mr X seems to have no problem throwing money around to his friends”
(Holds the door open for PP)
“With all the time Mr X is wasting on holding doors for his friends instead of writing legislation, it’s no wonder businesses are fleeing this country.”
Nice to see people on welfare trying hard .
Just fucking leave bro, nobody wants you or your policies. How hard is it to admit that?
Said the self-proclaimed tax fighter who never once fought for or achieved any tax-reducing legislation in his two decades in politics.
Except that’s exactly what he’s doing.
100% he is, he is as irrelevant as the ground hog predicting the weather. He should just quit talking and go back to being a worker for CP, since he ain't done anything else in his entire life.
Well I haven't seen him doing anything constructive to help get the government going. To me, that is critical for the parties, and we haven't seen it in decades, from any party. Even the NDP only did what they did for virtue signalling for a small group of professional yellers, not to help the country become better. In the end, we need industry. Trying to shut down every avenue for industry is beyond stupid.
That's right - he's fighting so he won't have to find a REAL JOB outside of government for the first time in his adult life.
Fucking weakling.
Me when I get on my sisters nerves knowing I'm wrong but I have to commit to the bit
Lol he 100% is.
Fighting to stay "relevant". He's only catoring to the fringe and possible future losses to the PPC while pushing away the swing votes he actually needs and driving center-right CPC supporters, like me, away.
We know, he’s fighting for corporate interests and the erosion of the middle class.
I don't like Poilievre, but we've seen the erosion of the middle class for corporate interests happen consistently over the last 10 years, and Poilievre and the CPC aren't responsible for that.
Don't forget, it's not left vs right, it's up vs down.
Both the CPC and LPC are neoliberal parties.
Poilievre has railed on and on about "we're not the Liberals", and that's true, but it's also true that their policy platform is centered around corporate subsidies, tax breaks, and deference to private industry over fixing the public services they complain are broken.
That's why his message is "Liberals bad" and not "Conservatives good"; he knows that making a positive argument for his party based on advantageous policy platform is a losing argument.
Honestly Poilievre is less of a neo-liberal than previous CPC leaders.
He's populist with zero moral compass.
I can't rightly dispute that. Sad times.
Fuck man longer than that
Well before 10 years ago the CPC was responsible for the decline.
The power of labour unions sort of peeked in the post-ww2 period
That is when individual people had it best
Weaker unions, weaker labour organization etc. has lead to a decline of the last 1/2 century
In that sense the LPC and CPC are very similar in bowing to monied interests
They just have a different flavour in how, like good cop / bad cop
Ex:
Canadians: Please help with affordability
CPC: NO!
LPC: NO! BLM 🏳️🌈
Firstly, one being bad doesn’t mean the other isn’t also bad. I do not intend to defend anything about the liberal party of Canada but there is nothing presented by the Conservative Party of Canada that would solve any of our federal problems.
Change to a worse option because we pretend it is a binary A or B choice isn’t a good change.
Furthermore, we have a complicated system where our provinces are responsible for a lot that goes on in our lives. The nations most populace province running a conservative government for most of that same decade is more directly indicative of most peoples’ problems.
Just because the liberals are bad doesn’t mean the conservatives can’t be worse.
Both are capitalist parties.
I have no problem with capitalism, I also have no problem with socialism.
The only thing I care about is the net benefit to Canadian citizens.
If you want what’s best for average Canadians it’s never going to be “their employers should run the country”
Rational response. What Canadians need is more buying power and reduced prices on darn near everything.
The average person living in this country is worse off year to year and it is a wealth versus poverty issue, not a conservative versus liberal issue.
Also the right for corporations to pollute with impunity
Is that why you voted for a corporate banker that still refuses to stop LMIAs because Tim Hortons’ bottom line is more important than Canadian jobs?
Do you just buy into whatever right wing propaganda you want or is more nuanced? Have you seen the recent population numbers?
One drop in one quarter doesn’t erase years of importing 500,000 people mostly from one region in one country.
Which overnight solution was offered by the cons?
That’s not how it works “free Canadian”
You aren’t deporting 500k people overnight.
At least he knows he's on his way out and doing interviews. Seems to be making him look worse though.
Is this the Beaverton?
can't unfuck what was spoken
Can we please cut this dweeb off the taxpayer's teet already and replace him with someone that is actually worth voting for. You know, maybe someone who doesn't rely on strawman arguments and outrage, someone who actually has a plan, or at the very, very minimal someone who is capable of informed decision making. So gd sick of this whiney loser.
False.
I'll give you one guess who Pierre thinks is at fault for Pierre having had such bad messaging for a decade (hint: it isn't himself)
Haha -- he is finally realizing how most of us see him
Pierre is the parliamentary attack chihuahua.
If you need to say it out loud, you definitely are.
Poilievre probably believes the root causes of fighting is fighters.
(If you're unfamiliar with the reference, google for "The root causes of terrorism is terrorists." Guess who dropped that nugget of wisdom.)
Of course not, Pierre. You’re fighting for your personal stake in a world where you’ve been hard ejected from federal and even regional relevance.
If weird conservasimps didn’t literally concede their position to prop up your Trumpian brand of ragebait, you might be forced into the abject desolation of personal responibility and working for a living.
We couldn’t possibly have that, could we?
"I'm fighting for the sake of my billionaire backers, who think you all deserve less"
Some honesty, finally.
He's of course, a closeted fascist and is fighting for that.
Atta boy PP! You truly are a true contrarian. If there’s a point to argue no matter how true or how much you agree with it you’ll be there on the front lines arguing it.
I am so proud of you for always finding a hill to die on.
"Stop calling me a contrarian!"...Pierre Poilievre, probably.
I dunno…20 years of public statements, your relationships with people like Jenni Byrne, as well as your voting record, seem to indicate otherwise. 🤷♂️
says man constantly fighting for the sake of fighting
Actions, not words, Pierre.
I hate to say it bro but I think your time is done
Okay, bud
I mean people see what they see. The overwhelming majority of content you see from him is fighting the Liberal government. I know it's important to have oppositional representation but I really think they should consider another strategy.
There have been a few times when I thought he was actually producing something attractive, which were a few of his educational videos where he explained his ideas very clearly and what the issues he felt were with the economy. It felt like a much more reasonable critique and less partisan. Even if you don't believe in those ideas, you at least feel a bit more confident in their abilities and you can get where they're coming from.
We also just saw that this was a winning formula for Mamdani. Mamdani made a bunch of videos explaining the problems with his city and gave his ideas on how to fix them. Now I know the political climate and landscape in NYC is different from Canada as a whole but social media itself is fairly constant, and I think Poilievre should lean into that more. If he doesn't want Mamdani inspiration for that he can also look to Reagan who was very popular and did the same thing of getting on TV and explaining his ideas with the charts.
He’s fighting for his pension
As the proverb says “ empty vessels make the most noise"
The truth is, Canada is in a difficult spot right now and any PM would be facing a daunting challenge, providing plenty of fodder for the opposition to complain about. But Canadians generally know this, and want a pragmatic decision-maker to lead through the tough choices. Pollievre has constantly been doing the easy thing and complaining- he needs to show he can make the unpopular but necessary decisions.
Comments are hilarious. If Pierre was that bad as the leader of the opposition the liberals would want him to stay. They and their supporters want him gone because he’s a threat to them.
Someone who blew a 25 point lead in the polls and lost his own seat isn’t a threat to anyone.
Poilievre and the Cons are neck and neck with The Great Economist and his Shining Resume.
Good for them. Let’s see them win an election and form government. One more floor crosser and they will be out of government for 15 years.
Obtaining a majority undemocratically and then failing to call an election is not the flex you think it is.
Yes when Liberals were crossing over to the Cons I didn’t hear them say anything about democracy. Why didn’t they vote with the NDP to stop floor crossing ? Stop with the hypocrisy.
Floor crossings are a democratic part of the Westminster parliamentary system whereas parties aren't mentioned once in the constitution.
Also, hardly undemocratic if your dear leader voted against floor crossing legislation and happily lauded MPs crossing to his side.
But Slogan McSloganface trails in preferred prime minister 52% to 26%. And being tied means a Libersl minority...
What's hilarious is people who think every negative comment is some 5D chess manipulation play by LPC shadow operatives.
We just don't like him, my guy. That's honesty, not narrative shaping.
We do want him to stay, if only for the potential of his losing another election and ensuing hilarity.
Where did you see that they want him gone? They want him to stay so that his MP's keep fleeing 😂
I swear it’s uh farm activity. It doesn’t make sense how deluded some of these people are.
Carney likely does want him to stay on. He couldn't get that election in PP's new riding going any faster.
Hes already proven hes not a threat. Why do you guys try to spin this so hard lol
If Jivani ever became PM, it would irreparably harm this country by undermining its long held values of fairness, independence, and no preferred religion . As a diehard federalist half-Franco half-Anglo Quebecer, it might be just enough to push me over the edge and vote for sovereignty. I’ve always said that I’d never vote for an irreversible change (sovereignty) to counter a reversible change (bad government), but Jivani is the type that could make structural changes that would align Canada with his BFF’s vision of a vassal state if not a full merger. I’d take an independent Quebec over that any day, not that I’d have much confidence that the US would let us get away with it for very long.
The problem is you are fighting instead of working as a leader of the party or leader of the opposition.
The why is a separate matter.
Milhouse doesn't do what Milhouse does for Milhouse. Milhouse does what Milhouse does because Milhouse is... Milhouse.
and another thing: im not mad. please dont put in the newspaper that i got mad.
I had my doubts about Poilievre's intentions when he first came into the job, but with the sheer number of hit-pieces being printed about him in the legacy media, along with the lengths the Laurentian establishment, including the Red Tory wing of his own party are going to to discredit him, I'm starting to think he might actually be the only political leader in this country who isn't WEF'd up to the gills. The enemies of the working class wouldn't be so desperate to get rid of him otherwise.
By hit pieces do you mean articles talking about the stupid shit that comes out of his mouth? He’s his own worst enemy, I have no sympathy for him or anyone who supports him.
Poilievre literally attended a WEF conference...with Stephen Harper.
Carney is a globalist elite, and who's wife was friends with Gislaine Maxwell.
Shh! Don't blow his cover!
Career politician by day, plucky maverick by night!
He's going to fight the establishment elites by disguising himself as one for 20 years!
No, he's fighting for personal power, just a like all politicians.
They would replace him in a second if they had somebody more recognizable than him.
I thought this was a Beaverton.
lol so did I! That one and the other article about Carney being a counterfeit conservative
As we would say in my home country, “no que va” , translate = “no, really?”
He has a lot to learn. When will he learn? As leader of the opposition or as the former leader of the opposition?
I’m fighting to keep my gravy train a rollin ( his inner dialogue)
Why do I think every article about PP is the beaverton?
I don't know what laugh at anymore