• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

2022 CPC Leadership Discussion: Et tu Redeux

To be honest, Akin surprised me with the lead-in jousting. He’s normally pretty balanced. While I wouldn’t go as far as to count him in Christie Blatchford’s (RIP) cadre, I would count him amongst the Murray Brewsters and Ashley Burkes of Canadian journalism. He did catch himself the day after and give him credit where credits it due. PP was playing hurt feelings a bit too, but I don’t think he was showing a brash/wonton disregard for Canadian press overall, and I took his semi-light tongue-in-cheek plaintive response to Akin as a reasonable part of the to’ing and fro’ing.
 
To be honest, Akin surprised me with the lead-in jousting. He’s normally pretty balanced. While I wouldn’t go as far as to count him in Christie Blatchford’s (RIP) cadre, I would count him amongst the Murray Brewsters and Ashley Burkes of Canadian journalism. He did catch himself the day after and give him credit where credits it due. PP was playing hurt feelings a bit too, but I don’t think he was showing a brash/wonton disregard for Canadian press overall, and I took his semi-light tongue-in-cheek plaintive response to Akin as a reasonable part of the to’ing and fro’ing.
My reaction would be far more subdued if it weren't for the contents of the email. Given his (Akin's) background, smirking and calling Akin a Liberal heckler is honestly kind of funny. But the email was outright manipulative lies.

And to be honest, based on just PP/Koch's portrayal, I was quite surprised as well. But given the near past backstory (not taking questions), PP's wide brush attacks on all media and refusal to engage generally, and his attack on Rachel Gilmore/ Global specifically, I could see a guy of Akin's principles and standing getting to the point of a profound personal and professional (not political) dislike and boiling over.
 
From what I saw, posted here, PP never had a chance to state his point(s) and he was instantly let into by Akin. With Akin trying to talk over PP from the get go.

If that's the reception I received, I wouldn't stick around for questions either.
I believe this was the second press 'conference' in 3 days with these rules, so probably better to call it out now rather than let it become a trend. There may be some more background context, as he was pretty pissed off at this, but he wasn't wrong.

Also, doesn't seem PP actually answered his question about walking back on being able to fire the BoC President, which is a straight up lie that has sat for a few months now.
 
I believe this was the second press 'conference' in 3 days with these rules, so probably better to call it out now rather than let it become a trend. There may be some more background context, as he was pretty pissed off at this, but he wasn't wrong.

Also, doesn't seem PP actually answered his question about walking back on being able to fire the BoC President, which is a straight up lie that has sat for a few months now.

Most of the discussion re this presser was based on most seeing or listening only to the interaction between Poilievre and Akin. I mentioned before that I wasn't aware if, after stating that he would take two questions (? due to Akin's prodding, perhaps), whether or not PP did actually take questions. Thanks to CPAC, I have been enlightened.


2:11 agrees to take two questions, continues with his presentation
9:22 takes the first of two questions
10:51 second question
11:40 finishes answer, immediately turns and leaves followed by his press secretary
(note: times edited to correspond to the YouTube timings, there's a couple of seconds difference in versions)

And you are correct, he didn't answer Akin's question.
 
Last edited:
Sigh... if Justin Trudeau is responsible for 10% inflation across the globe he's a lot more effective than they make out, nice of him to twist the narrative on why Rayes left when he was pretty clear that he didn't want to be in the CPC under PP.

I absolutely hate the meaningless 'talking points' like that they work into every conversation.
 
A difference between Harper and Poilievre is that Harper's policy was reactive and Poilievre's is pre-emptive.
 

I guess if you raise enough money you can climb out of the dog house but I’m not sure how wise this appointment is…
Probably wiser than someone appointing a toxic, egotistical alleged aggravated assaulter and inadvertent killer of pedestrians to an influential position representing a hierarchical monarchical influential position in a procedural and governmentally representative role…
 
Probably wiser than someone appointing a toxic, egotistical alleged aggravated assaulter and inadvertent killer of pedestrians to an influential position representing a hierarchical monarchical influential position in a procedural and governmentally representative role…
Who?
 
Probably wiser than someone appointing a toxic, egotistical alleged aggravated assaulter and inadvertent killer of pedestrians to an influential position representing a hierarchical monarchical influential position in a procedural and governmentally representative role…
I attribute that to poor vetting to push an agenda.

The whole country saw a boudoir pic of Clement…crime.
 
Google:

toxic assault pedestrian monarch representative

‘They’ are on the first page of results…
Yeah I tried ''Mary simon kill''. Wasn't too far off, but not quite it!

(Also I might be on an three-letter agency's list now)
 
Back
Top