TreeBeard

PP declined his pension?

Where did I say I was voting for the Libs? 😂

If you think Carney works for Satan, why do you care what he says his policies are? That’s part of it. Poilievre has a past record in government. It’s an awful one.

The latest polls haven’t budged…. Libs still most likely to form government. What can PP do to increase his chances? Bragging about crowd sizes doesn’t seem to be a winning formula. Is that giving Cons, and their supporters, a false sense?

If everyone else is stupid and an a-hole, it’s likely you who is the issue.

Can you give an example of this happening?

And yet, voters seem set to give them another chance under a new leader. Does that tell you anything about the CPC and/or Poilievre?

Did they do it?

That argument just doesn’t fly with normal Canadians. They don’t want a retrospective on who to blame; they want a plan for a leader who is best able to steer us through the USA turmoil. A career politician with no work experience and with no legislative record other than voting against everything, or the head of multiple national banks.

A couple more Conservative candidates were turfed. One said his opponent t was “playing the victim card” as a survivor of the massacre at École Polytechnique. https://www.ctvnews.ca/federal-election-2025/article/tories-drop-quebec-candidate-who-said-massacre-survivor-was-playing-victim-game/ Another for implying Indians should be deported to be killed (?) by the Indian government. Yeah, it’s a weird premise. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/conservative-party-candidate-dropped-etobicoke-north-1.7500698

The funny part is she’s hurting Poilievre’s chances of being elected. He doesn’t need more fringe votes from separatists. He needs votes from normal Canadians outside of the Prairies. The Conservative brand being angry separatist if they don’t get their way won’t help him. Manning forced Poilievre to imply that a Liberal 4th term isn’t the end of the world! He had to defend Carney winning! But he couldn’t say anything that even implied he is pro-secession; that would have sealed the Cons’ electoral fate. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/poilievre-disagrees-ex-reform-boss-171850864.html Manning wrote: “Voters, particularly in central and Atlantic Canada, need to recognize that a vote for the Carney Liberals is a vote for Western secession — a vote for the breakup of Canada as we know it.” While campaigning at a manufacturing plant in Kingston, Poilievre was asked whether he agrees with Manning’s statement. “No, we need to unite the country,” he told reporters. “We need to bring all Canadians together in a spirit of common ground.

Then why would I care what he has to say? How do I know he’s not just a partisan hack talking out his ass?

Didn’t they vote for a premier who is of that mind? How could they be as fringe as you claim when Albertans elected a premier with these exact views?

Poilievre’s own party is forcing him to turn his back on his Alberta base with the secession talk. It’s Conservative vs Conservative! Imagine having to fight with other leaders in your party over whether secession is a good idea! Poor Poilievre! https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7502543 Smith's exuberance over the tariff announcement did not sit well with two members of former prime minister Harper's cabinet, who pointed out that Quebec and Ontario are still facing 25 per cent tariffs on steel and aluminum, and automotive exports to the U.S. "With respect, Premier, this is not a good day for Canada or the world," James Moore said in a social media post. "When Alberta is economically attacked, it is bad for Canada. "Thousands of Canadians in the auto, steel, aluminum and other industries may be losing their jobs. This is not a 'BIG WIN.' Canadians stand together." Describing the tariffs on auto imports as a "devastating blow to hundreds of thousands of good, honest, hard-working Canadians," Jason Kenney, also a former Alberta premier, told Ontarians in a social media post that "the vast majority of Albertans stand proudly with you, and have your back." Kenney even went on to challenge Smith's position on energy, saying that "everything should be on the table" response-wise in order to "defend all industries and jobs" from U.S. trade action