2022 CPC Leadership Discussion: Et tu Redeux

[dimsum]

People who ask "when did you stop beating your wife" questions deserve to be shot down, and no-one should defend them.

I’m not defending the reporter here.

I’m saying that the manner in which PP (or JT, or anyone else) responds is important. As a prospective leader of a country, you’re supposed to project calm and measured responses to questions.

I’m not saying that JT is doing this well either, but their response style, even to questioning styles they don’t like, shouldn’t be the same as comments on a social media.

 

[Kirkhill]

I’m not defending the reporter here.

I’m saying that the manner in which PP (or JT, or anyone else) responds is important. As a prospective leader of a country, you’re supposed to project calm and measured responses to questions.

I’m not saying that JT is doing this well either, but their response style, even to questioning styles they don’t like, shouldn’t be the same as comments on a social media.

Sometimes an effective leader has to demonstrate, judiciously, a willingness to drop the gloves.

 

[ArmyRick]

Just an observation. Most of you know, I can't stomach JT. At this time I have fairly high confidence in PP leadership and his brand of conservatives. I will yank that support for him in a second if he becomes PM and shows complete lack of integrity, accountability and transparency.

I also think its refreshing to see PP push back against the insanely loaded and frankly stupid questions (many of which are deliberately trying to make him look foolish such as the border car exploding incident).

The PM on the other hand, gets soft ball questions most of the time. He doesn't have the guts to bring Rebel news (which court recognized as legit media) around. And he keeps pitching money t help the dying or very poorly mismanaged (and not adoptive) legacy media.

PP is really resonating with Canadians. I spend a fair amount of time (especially at 2am when the dogs are out chasing coyotes), scrolling through things on social media. Just about every Liberal MP (and especially the more prominent ones) get comment after comment just totally thrashing them and basically saying everything nasty under the sun. I like to compare it to what PP and his conservatives post, and interesting, the ratios are not even close. Not at all. If you don't know what ratio'd means on social media, look it up. And yes its important, the people who are very heavy into social media make up a very large part of the voting demographic. I mean offence when I say this, I am brutally honest (call me an asshole or tell me to f off if it makes you feel better), I still find some here are looking for anything even small and miniscule to criticize PP (OMG! PP came out of the bathroom after flushing and didn't wash his hands, lets make it a national scandal) and still omit or blow off JT sins (Blows 60 million, ahhh nothing to worry about folks, just focus on climate and hate). The truth is, I think many of you are very tone deaf and can't read the room. The room being Canada.

My prediction is if their is an election right now or in six months, PP is going to blast Trudeau and Singh right back to the status of irrelevance. I still compare this to he Kathleen Wynne effect of 2018. Canadians are fed up. I won't bother listing all the reasons why, it is rather obvious.

 

[ArmyRick]

And to be clear, I get most of my news from these agencies
-Rebel News
-True North News
-Global
-CTV
-CBC (Yup, I cross check and get some initial stories from even these bozos)
-Western Standard
-National Post
-Toronto Sun
-Globe and Mail

Its interesting Man, many times the FACTS of a story (Who, when, what, date, time) are usually pretty consistent from most of these news sources. Its when they play it up or play it down or offer opinions is where they differ significantly.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I’m of two minds of this episode. Yeah, this reporter was completely off side with his loaded questions and then looked incredibly bad when he was challenged on the basic premises of his attempted “gotcha” questions. I mean, if you’re going to ask the Leader of His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition those kind of questions, you better be ready to explain when challenged.

At the same time, this appeared to be a case of “punching down”. I mean, this guy was obviously no Woodward or Bernstein, or even a Bob Fife. From what I’ve heard, he was the sole overworked reporter, and possibly editor, of some tiny news outlet no one outside the Okanagan has ever heard of. Still doesn’t excuse those stupid questions and “deer-in-the-headlights” reaction to some rightful pushback. But I don’t think Pierre looked heroic either.

No one covered themselves in glory in this episode.

Interesting. To me it looked like a benign interview and then the reporter ambushed PP and PP pushed into it and took the tone back to the reporter. Perhaps if this reporter is such a small fry he shouldn't be talking to people at PPs level. Its obvious PP is no ones fool and he is well aware our media is out to paint him into a corner.

I don't know, I don't see any punching down, I saw a guy who played FAFO and lost. But again, biases and all that jazz.

I’m not defending the reporter here.

I’m saying that the manner in which PP (or JT, or anyone else) responds is important. As a prospective leader of a country, you’re supposed to project calm and measured responses to questions.

I’m not saying that JT is doing this well either, but their response style, even to questioning styles they don’t like, shouldn’t be the same as comments on a social media.

I think this resonated in a positive way and acted really as a sort of confirmation to a good chunk of Canadians... "Holy cow the media really is out to get him". Because that's certainly how PP managed to spin in...

 

[brihard]

If a boss or subordinate came to you and said "experts" say you are full of shidt, what would you say?

Depends. Are they actually experts in something I’m opining on? Do I have real experience, education or training in the subject? Is it more likely than not that the experts are correct?

The concept of “expertise” is not some partisan myth. Do some experts go outside their arcs, or manipulate things to suit their personal preference? Yes. Do most? I don’t believe so.

When I go to the doctor, or bring my car for repairs, or hire an electrician, or seek a specific technical opinion on something I’m investigating, I’m glad there are experts out there. Most of the time when an expert has told me I’m full of shit (usually in much nicer terms), they’ve been right.

 

[ArmyRick]

Interesting. To me it looked like a benign interview and then the reporter ambushed PP and PP pushed into it and took the tone back to the reporter. Perhaps if this reporter is such a small fry he shouldn't be talking to people at PPs level. Its obvious PP is no ones fool and he is well aware our media is out to paint him into a corner.

I don't know, I don't see any punching down, I saw a guy who played FAFO and lost. But again, biases and all that jazz.



I think this resonated in a positive way and acted really as a sort of confirmation to a good chunk of Canadians... "Holy cow the media really is out to get him". Because that's certainly how PP managed to spin in...

Everything I see, shows most Canadians are behind PP slapping down belligerent media

 

[ArmyRick]

Depends. Are they actually experts in something I’m opining on? Do I have real experience, education or training in the subject? Is it more likely than not that the experts are correct?

The concept of “expertise” is not some partisan myth. Do some experts go outside their arcs, or manipulate things to suit their personal preference? Yes. Do most? I don’t believe so.

When I go to the doctor, or bring my car for repairs, or hire an electrician, or seek a specific technical opinion on something I’m investigating, I’m glad there are experts out there. Most of the time when an expert has told me I’m full of shit (usually in much nicer terms), they’ve been right.

Take Michael Mann, the so called "climate expert" who put forth the infamous hockey stick graph. I watched many a podcast and interview with his colleges and former peers who have openly stated he falsified or deliberately misrepresented the info.

 

[Kirkhill]

Depends. Are they actually experts in something I’m opining on? Do I have real experience, education or training in the subject? Is it more likely than not that the experts are correct?

The concept of “expertise” is not some partisan myth. Do some experts go outside their arcs, or manipulate things to suit their personal preference? Yes. Do most? I don’t believe so.

When I go to the doctor, or bring my car for repairs, or hire an electrician, or seek a specific technical opinion on something I’m investigating, I’m glad there are experts out there. Most of the time when an expert has told me I’m full of shit (usually in much nicer terms), they’ve been right.

I trust an expert to fix my power steering. I don't use an expert to run my life.

 

[brihard]

Take Michael Mann, the so called "climate expert" who put forth the infamous hockey stick graph. I watched many a podcast and interview with his colleges and former peers who have openly stated he falsified or deliberately misrepresented the info.

Shrug I was speaking to the concept of experts and expertise generally, not any one in particular. As bizarre as the climate has been for the past few years, I see no percentage in detouring down that rabbit hole here.

 

[ArmyRick]

Shrug I was speaking to the concept of experts and expertise generally, not any one in particular. As bizarre as the climate has been for the past few years, I see no percentage in detouring down that rabbit hole here.

Agreed. Lets plug that hole up with cement in this thread, and leave it. It was meant as an example to experts not experts

 

[OldSolduer]

When I go to the doctor, or bring my car for repairs, or hire an electrician, or seek a specific technical opinion on something I’m investigating, I’m glad there are experts out there. Most of the time when an expert has told me I’m full of shit (usually in much nicer terms), they’ve been right.

I recognize those people as experts in their field. I don't trust a lot of climatology "experts" or social "experts"

 

[Haggis]

I trust an expert to fix my power steering. I don't use an expert to run my life.

You don't have a life coach? How do you survive?

 

[ModlrMike]

If you ask a loaded question, you deserve to have your preconceptions challenged. That's exactly was PP is doing, and Canadians appear firmly in favour of it.

 

[QV]

I recognize those people as experts in their field.

Sure. But I still look into it.... I mean the car salesmen is probably an expert in auto sales... but before I buy a car I definitely look into it and take the expert's view on that with a grain of salt. Same with vehicle repairs... same with vaccines, same with everything.

The way "trust the experts" has been pushed in the last 4 years is synonymous with saying "don't look into it".

 

[Haggis]

The way "trust the experts" has been pushed in the last 4 years is synonymous with saying "don't look into it".

The line between "expert" and "celebrity" (which includes politicians) has become blurred. In fact, I don't trust the word of any politician on any topic other than politics.

 

[suffolkowner]

Take Michael Mann, the so called "climate expert" who put forth the infamous hockey stick graph. I watched many a podcast and interview with his colleges and former peers who have openly stated he falsified or deliberately misrepresented the info.

How is Michael Mann not an expert? His "hockey stick" analysis is one of the most replicated studies in science

 

[Brad Sallows]

How is Michael Mann not an expert? His "hockey stick" analysis is one of the most replicated studies in science

The "hockey stick" is just different measurements stitched together, based on the unproven and unprovable assumption that "all other things being equal" applies to the older measurements.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Depends. Are they actually experts in something I’m opining on? Do I have real experience, education or training in the subject? Is it more likely than not that the experts are correct?

The concept of “expertise” is not some partisan myth. Do some experts go outside their arcs, or manipulate things to suit their personal preference? Yes. Do most? I don’t believe so.

When I go to the doctor, or bring my car for repairs, or hire an electrician, or seek a specific technical opinion on something I’m investigating, I’m glad there are experts out there. Most of the time when an expert has told me I’m full of shit (usually in much nicer terms), they’ve been right.

I think there is a difference. A real bona-fide expert standing in front of you is allowable. Having someone say "Experts are saying so and so about you" and then not being able to identify those experts when asked, is wrong. It shows lack of prep and knowledge on the subject of the question, by the reporter. Especially if you know the supposed facts of the question are false. PP wasn't punching down or being mean to a obnoxious reporter by trying to establish the facts. That reporter, who kept speaking over him, ignoring his questions and just kept repeating her false narrative got everything she deserved. Maybe next time she'll be factual and more polite when she has to ask a question. I know if it were me in PP's position the reporters acting like this would face a frosty day in hell before I called on them, or their outlet again.

 

[Kirkhill]

Charity begins at home....

Poilievre says he would ‘cut wasteful foreign aid,’ work towards NATO spending target​

POINTE-CLAIRE, QUE.
THE CANADIAN PRESS
PUBLISHED 4 HOURS AGOUPDATED 1 HOUR AGO

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is pledging that a future government would cut what he calls “wasteful foreign aid” and would not allow funding to go to “dictators, terrorists and multinational bureaucracies.”

He made the comment Thursday in response to a question about his position on NATO’s military spending targets, as ministers from the military alliance meet in Brussels.

Poilievre is offering early insights this week into his thoughts on defence spending, as he continues to focus his messaging on cost-of-living issues – and as public opinion polls show Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberals trailing the Tories.

The Conservative leader’s office says a future Poilievre government “will work toward meeting Canada’s NATO spending commitment” of two per cent of its GDP, as Ottawa continues to fall well short of the target.

Last month, Poilievre pledged to permanently stop funding a United Nations agency that supports Palestinians amid allegations some of its staff played a role in the Oct. 7 attack on Israel.

After the accusations emerged, the federal Liberals said they would pause funds for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, known as UNWRA.

The former Conservative government of Stephen Harper halted funding for the agency back in 2010, and the Liberals restored it in 2016 after coming into power. In 2010, Harper announced his government would freeze foreign aid for five years as a way to balance the budget. Spending cuts came two years later.

Poilievre has pledged to also withdraw from the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and slash the Canada Infrastructure Bank.

Well...It's not nothing.

He vowed on Thursday to find more money for defence spending by taking aim at bureaucracy and defence contractors.

This though... so many promises, so little success.

Poilievre says he would ‘cut wasteful foreign aid,’ work towards NATO spending target

Poilievre is offering early insights into his thoughts on defence spending, as he continues to focus his messaging on cost-of-living issues

www.theglobeandmail.com