2022 CPC Leadership Discussion: Et tu Redeux

[Lumber]

This was what I was talking about when I said (something to the effect ) that I did not like the idea of PP as PM because he will sow an environment of mistrust and anger, and destroy civility. Attacking the ENTIRETY news media and saying the only way to get truth is to have it delivered to your door by the Conservative Party of Canada is inflammatory and dangerous.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1569857712569073665

 

[Halifax Tar]

This was what I was talking about when I said (something to the effect ) that I did not like the idea of PP as PM because he will sow an environment of mistrust and anger, and destroy civility. Attacking the ENTIRETY news media and saying the only way to get truth is to have it delivered to your door by the Conservative Party of Canada is inflammatory and dangerous.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1569857712569073665

Is it a lie that a member of the media, David Akin, was shouting obscenities at PP ?

You talk of civility but I don't think you know what that means.

 

[Lumber]

Is it a lie that a member of the media, David Akin, was shouting obscenities at PP ?

No, I saw the video, he definitely did. Why would you even ask that? I never insinuated it didn't happen.

The proper response to a single "liberal heckler" is to call out that heckler, or call out his boss, or call out his news station, and remind people that an independent (and ideally, civil) media and proper discourse is fundamental to a well functioning democracy.

You don't send an email blast out to the entire country (specially to his supporters) saying, "see, because of this one guy, we should get rid of all independent and publicly funded news, and you should all just let us, the wise and benevolent leaders of the CPC, tell you what's true."

 

[Halifax Tar]

No, I saw the video, he definitely did. Why would you even ask that? I never insinuated it didn't happen.

The proper response to a single "liberal heckler" is to call out that heckler, or call out his boss, or call out his news station, and remind people that an independent (and ideally, civil) media and proper discourse is fundamental to a well functioning democracy.

You don't send an email blast out to the entire country (specially to his supporters) saying, "see, because of this one guy, we should get rid of all independent and publicly funded news, and you should all just let us, the wise and benevolent leaders of the CPC, tell you what's true."

1 Because David Akin isn't a Liberal heckler he's a media personality.

2 Because PP has been and will be under attack from the media for the duration of his time as leader of the CPC. They have placed him firmly on a defensive footing.

 

[Lumber]

1 Because David Akin isn't a Liberal heckler he's a media personality.

2 Because PP has been and will be under attack from the media for the duration of his time as leader of the CPC. They have placed him firmly on a defensive footing.

1. This was the term PP himself used in the video, though not in the letter.

2. I'm not sure your point here? Are you saying that because PP will be under attack from the media the whole time, he has to try and go around the media? What about the media that is supportive of him? National Post, True North, Western Standard, Rebel News... Calgary Herald?

 

[Lumber]

Also, the Globe and Mail, apparently.

 

[Edward Campbell]

1. This was the term PP himself used in the video, though not in the letter.

2. I'm not sure your point here? Are you saying that because PP will be under attack from the media the whole time, he has to try and go around the media? What about the media that is supportive of him? National Post, True North, Western Standard, Rebel News... Calgary Herald?

That was the Harper strategy and I suspect it will be Pierre Poilievre's, too. And I suspect that Post Media and Sun Media will both watch, happily, even cheer him on. gleefully, from the sidelines because Mr. Poilievre is attacking their competitors.

Will the strategy work?

It didn't for Prime Minister harper - the "old," mainstream media - CBC, the Toronto Star, CTV, even the normal pro-Conservative Globe and Mail, etc - remained hostile and the Conservatives wee unable to reach past them and speak, directly, to local audiences. Even independent outlets like CHCH/Channel Zero would not give the Conservatives a direct, local "voice" because they didn't want to be seen as openly partisan.

Can it work now?

Maybe. As others have pointed out, we, Canadians, are becoming more and More and MORE divided on socio-political as opposed to economic grounds. There are, now, more ways to "speak" directly to Canadians than there were even a decade ago.

 

[IKnowNothing]

And I suspect that Post Media and Sun Media will both watch, happily, even cheer him on. gleefully, from the sidelines because Mr. Poilievre is attacking their competitors.

Ah yes. Sun and Post media, where noted Liberal heckler/ mouthpiece David Akin spent most of a decade in progressively senior political roles. Adds up.


The outburst was definitely uncharacteristically unprofessional, but when David Akin is being called out as not to be trusted the message isn't "Watch out for media bias" it's "Thou shall not contradict Pierre"

 

[Good2Golf]

You don't send an email blast out to the entire country (specially to his supporters) saying, "see, because of this one guy, we should get rid of all independent and publicly funded news, and you should all just let us, the wise and benevolent leaders of the CPC, tell you what's true."

Perhaps he should skip the letters and go straight to publicly pontificating with a wide brush as PM about how the media on the whole is behaving deplorably and against Canadian values…

 

[Remius]

David Akin was out of line. He even looked a little nuts.

But…

He isn’t exactly a “liberal heckler” if you look at his background. Also, I got the letter about the media being the enemy and to send money.

Not actually shocked to be honest. PP will use social media and will stoke that sort of thing so I have no idea why anyone would be surprised.

Will be an interesting time.

 

[Navy_Pete]

David Akin was out of line. He even looked a little nuts.

But…

He isn’t exactly a “liberal heckler” if you look at his background. Also, I got the letter about the media being the enemy and to send money.

Not actually shocked to be honest. PP will use social media and will stoke that sort of thing so I have no idea why anyone would be surprised.

Will be an interesting time.

Interesting how Chrystia Freeland being verbally attacked should suck it up and not be a snowflake, when it's PP he needs protected and funded to fight back against it.

So much for a move towards the centre post campaign win; here's hoping for a LPC party back to the centre (under a new leader).

 

[Kirkhill]

That was the Harper strategy and I suspect it will be Pierre Poilievre's, too. And I suspect that Post Media and Sun Media will both watch, happily, even cheer him on. gleefully, from the sidelines because Mr. Poilievre is attacking their competitors.

Will the strategy work?

It didn't for Prime Minister harper - the "old," mainstream media - CBC, the Toronto Star, CTV, even the normal pro-Conservative Globe and Mail, etc - remained hostile and the Conservatives wee unable to reach past them and speak, directly, to local audiences. Even independent outlets like CHCH/Channel Zero would not give the Conservatives a direct, local "voice" because they didn't want to be seen as openly partisan.

Can it work now?

Maybe. As others have pointed out, we, Canadians, are becoming more and More and MORE divided on socio-political as opposed to economic grounds. There are, now, more ways to "speak" directly to Canadians than there were even a decade ago.

Can I take advantage of your age? I would enjoy hearing your remembrances of how Diefenbaker was perceived.

 

[Kirkhill]

As to bypassing media...

"The Church in Peril" - Pamphlets being published in the Netherlands.

Samizdat predates the Internet. And Samizdat predates Samizdat.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Can I take advantage of your age? I would enjoy hearing your remembrances of how Diefenbaker was perceived.

The key thing to remember is that Dief was a populist before that word became popular. But, in my opinion, you must see Diefenbakjer in tandem with TC Douglas.

He, and Tommy Douglas, too, were old style "preachers" - Dief was a noted trial lawyer and Douglas was, in fact, an evangelical (Baptist) minister. They were both outstanding stump speakers - spellbinding is not too strong a word.

Both espoused anti-establishment, "populist" ideals, ideas and policiers. Both championed the "little guys" against Bay Street and, more generally, against what we now call the Laurentian Consensus or the Laurentian Elites. Both, quite unintentionally, laid the paving stones for Pierre Trudeau's own form of illiberal (my opinion, again) populism.

 

[Kirkhill]

The key thing to remember is that Dief was a populist before that word became popular. But, in my opinion, you must see Diefenbakjer in tandem with TC Douglas.

He, and Tommy Douglas, too, were old style "preachers" - Dief was a noted trial lawyer and Douglas was, in fact, an evangelical (Baptist) minister. They were both outstanding stump speakers - spellbinding is not too strong a word.

Both espoused anti-establishment, "populist" ideals, ideas and policiers. Both championed the "little guys" against Bay Street and, more generally, against what we now call the Laurentian Consensus or the Laurentian Elites. Both, quite unintentionally, laid the paving stones for Pierre Trudeau's own form of illiberal (my opinion, again) populism.

Is it fair to say that neither Tommy nor the Dief were well received in Montreal's Square Mile, Ottawa or Bay Street? Was there a difference between the way the Globe, the Star and the Telegram covered them?

PS - I take a degree of exception to the "evangelical" label. Baptists were baptists long before some of their number became evangelicals. In my opinion Tommy was well anchored in the conventional protestant community. As was Dief for that matter, he too was a Baptist. (Scots-German).

 

[Edward Campbell]

Is it fair to say that neither Tommy nor the Dief were well received in Montreal's Square Mile, Ottawa or Bay Street? Was there a difference between the way the Globe, the Star and the Telegram covered them?

They were covered much, much differently, because:

1. Dief was the PM - he won what was, then, the biggest majority government in Canadians history - and he had some downright crazy ideas. This is, still, 50 years on, an excellent analysis; but​

2. the Toronto based media was much kinder to Tommy Douglas because -​

a. they supported his medical insurance scheme, and​

b. the CCF enjoyed general media support as the "conscience off parliament" and they were never a threat to the Laurentian Consensus.​

 

[Kirkhill]

Actually, @Edward Campbell

You might be suggesting that Diefenbaker and Douglas, as populists, presage Trump and Sanders. Two sides of the same anti-establishment coin.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Status of media has changed since Harper was in office.

Accepting money from government may have been necessary, but it wasn't "free". It's cost them credibility among some people.

The question is whether they respond to the goad. If they do, they emphasize the point.

 

[Kirkhill]

They were covered much, much differently, because:

1. Dief was the PM - he won what was, then, the biggest majority government in Canadians history - and he had some downright crazy ideas. This is, still, 50 years on, an excellent analysis; but​

2. the Toronto based media was much kinder to Tommy Douglas because -​

a. they supported his medical insurance scheme, and​

b. the CCF enjoyed general media support as the "conscience off parliament" and they were never a threat to the Laurentian Consensus.​

Thanks for the reference on Diefenbaker. At first glance it appears something other than a hagiography.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Actually, @Edward Campbell

You might be suggesting that Diefenbaker and Douglas, as populists, presage Trump and Sanders. Two sides of the same anti-establishment coin.

Yes, I am ... they made Trump (and Justin Trudeau who I see as the flip side of the same coin) look like amateurs. I watched several of the Trump (and Trudeau) speeches (none from start to finish, I think) and neither could hold a candle to either Dief the Chief or Tommy Douglas. Both Diefenbaker and Douglas had big ideas - some were crazy, to be sure - but they were big, and they could stir a crowd with them - with positive ideas, not recycled hate. Trump (and Trudeau) just tried/try to stoke already simmering anger.

Trump (and Trudeau) were/are amateur populists; Diefenbaker and Douglas were the real deal.