This is why Polievre will win the election - the infamous 'apple' interview

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You contsantly mount serious defenses of him.

No I constantly mock your criticism because you're such a consistent doofus about it.

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

The comments were perfectly valid - and Maher is a well known leftie,

Now he's a well known doofus.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

And you're not even mocking that.

Awww.

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

No I constantly mock your criticism because you're such a consistent doofus about it.

 

Hell half the time i'm not even in the conversation and you do it

Sorry kiddo - you've totally been outed as  a justin supporter by your actions  

But as usual whenever you get caught at something that you're embarrased or angry about.. somehow it's MY fault   ROFLMAO!!!!!

Well in fairness now that Jaggers has sold his party to the liberals for cheap it's not like there's a lot of choice out there.  But still - I will never understand why you like justin so much. The guy has been a disaster.

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Awww.

LOL you're always so cute when you know you've been busted   

[Nefarious Banana]

33 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well in fairness now that Jaggers has sold his party to the Liberals for cheap it's not like there's a lot of choice out there.  But still - I will never understand why you like Justin so much.  

Would it be a physical attraction ?   ? ?

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Would it be a physical attraction ?   ? ?

Only in your fantasy.

[CdnFox]

15 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Would it be a physical attraction ?   ? ?

It's possible that like many trudeau supporters he just couldn't resist that hair  

[WestCanMan]

3 hours ago, herbie said:

As I've not seen one member state they live in Justin's riding I can safely say

NOBODY ON THIS BOARD VOTED FOR TRUDEAU

You vote for a party or a candidate, so even if you don't like the leader you vote for the party and you're stuck with the leader it chose.

Trudeau won because most people found the party they voted for less objectionable than the Tories. So supporting even more objectionable policies the way to get elected?

Riiiiight. 

FYI no one voted "for their Liberal MP" because Liberal MPs don't get to do anything aside from nod their head when Trudeau speaks.

Back-benchers are basically not allowed to talk in the HoC, and they vote as 1. 

Has your Liberal MP ever spoken in the HoC? Have they ever voted against anything the LPOC proposed? 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Riiiiight. 

FYI no one voted "for their Liberal MP" because Liberal MPs don't get to do anything aside from nod their head when Trudeau speaks.

Back-benchers are basically not allowed to talk in the HoC, and they vote as 1. 

Has your Liberal MP ever spoken in the HoC? Have they ever voted against anything the LPOC proposed? 

Do you even know who he is without looking it up? You'd be amazed how many voters don't. They're voting for the leader, and as far as they're concerned the local rep is just the proxy to put the leader in power.

[WestCanMan]

56 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Do you even know who he is without looking it up? You'd be amazed how many voters don't. They're voting for the leader, and as far as they're concerned the local rep is just the proxy to put the leader in power.

The last time I voted in Cloverdale the MP candidates were John Aldag (LPOC) and some crazy lady for the PCs, I can't even remember her name. 

I would have voted for Clifford Olson if I thought it would help defeat Trudeau. 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

The last time I voted in Cloverdale the MP candidates were John Aldag (LPOC) and some crazy lady for the PCs, I can't even remember her name. 

I would have voted for Clifford Olson if I thought it would help defeat Trudeau. 

LOL - sure.  And for a lot of people that's really all they know, they know the leader and the leader's platform and know nothing of the local person.  My mp is quite popular and i bet if i went around here nobody could tell me a single committee they've served on, what bills they put forward etc etc.

So without a doubt a lot of people vote for the leader of the party, even if they don't cast a ballot for the leader of the party.

[BeaverFever]

On 10/21/2023 at 11:24 AM, CdnFox said:

Sorry - no.  You said something was true.  I said that it was not true You insisted it was and when you tried to give examples you realized you were absolutely wrong and tried to change what you said.

As we both know now - you were entirely wrong. Nothing new there.

Polievre doesn't "Constantly cry marxist"  as you claim.  And in fact doesn't  "CONSTANTLY" cry anything with regards to the left - sure, he'll point out radical woke left wing behavior on occasion where it's appropriate but for the most part he actually focuses on specific failings of the liberal party, not 'wokeism' in general.

Tge vast vast vast majority of the time when he's talking he says the problems we have are gatekeepers - bureaucrats and red tape -  a lack of common sense in how we address issues - etc etc.  Not "the left" or 'the woke'.

 

So you lose twice.  As you've now conceded what you ACUALLY said was entirely wrong, and even what you sort of meant is wrong. He's not fixated on left wingers, he attributes most of Canada's problems to bad economic choices and bureaucracy.

You failed that one hard kid  

 

 

So just to circle back here’s a supercut of PP in parliament ranting about “the left” and accusing the other parties of socialism, communism etc despite his completely and hilariously false claim that he doesn’t see things as left and right  There’s one or two more “Marxist” accusations in there for you as well  

Sorry but you’re a gullible dupe for blindly Parroting his obviously false claims  

 

[BeaverFever]

The best way to break Pierre Poilievre’s media-baiting strategy: ask actual questions
 

….

You can see why conservatives would seize on it. It’s more than just a reporter being made to look silly – it’s a TKO for conservatives generally over the mainstream media. The video has gone viral, gushed over by well-known righties in the United States and fuelling a fresh round of Conservative Party fundraising. Certainly Mr. Poilievre seems pleased by his showing: He’s the one who posted it.

And yet, it’s basically a party trick. I’ve seen him do it before. Rather than answer the question, you turn it back on your questioner, forcing him to cite sources and otherwise document his question on the spot. You can do that with just about anything, if you’re brazen enough. At one point Mr. Poilievre challenges the interviewer’s suggestion that he uses polarizing ideological language (“Like what?” “Uh, ‘left-wing,’ you know, this and that …”), then blithely follows with: “I never really talk about left and right.” It didn’t take the Liberals long to post a video with about a dozen instances of Mr. Poilievre publicly attacking “the left,” “socialists” etc. But it’s a little harder to come up with those when you’re standing in the middle of an apple orchard.

Still, if journalists would like to avoid making themselves props in Mr. Poilievre’s media-baiting strategy, there’s a simple enough remedy: Don’t ask loaded questions! In fairness, it’s difficult to avoid falling into this trap. It’s all too easy to imagine the confrontational, accusatory style (“Isn’t it true your company has been dumping toxic waste in the river?”) is how you “get tough” with an interview subject.

In fact, it’s the simplest thing for the interviewee to flip to his or her advantage. A question that is not really a question offers cover to give an answer that is not really an answer. A breezy “not at all,” a pivot to your preferred talking point (“in fact we care deeply about the environment”), and you’re away.

….

You may recall Tom Mulcair’s finest hour, as opposition leader during the Mike Duffy affair. As long as he stuck to the usual opposition leader-type questions (“when will the minister admit …”), he got nowhere. It was only when he started asking those short, open-ended questions that he started making yards. Or if you want a more pertinent example: That’s what Mr. Poilievre is doing, interviewing his interviewer.

What do you mean by that? Like what? Give me an example. It’s devastating, really. More reporters should try it.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-best-way-to-break-pierre-poilievres-media-baiting-strategy-ask/

 

 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

So just to circle back here’s a supercut of PP in parliament ranting about “the left” and accusing the other parties of socialism, communism etc despite his completely and hilariously false claim that he doesn’t see things as left and right  There’s one or two more “Marxist” accusations in there for you as well 

Aww muffin - so you're still feeling stupid over your comment you coudn't back up i take it   LOLOL - well that's understandable. 

BTW - he says he doesnt' see things as left and right - and he's spoken about that many times. That does not mean he doesn't see people who identify as on the left or who have agendas that they see as left wing agendas    Just because he doesn't believe that we should make it all about left and right doesn't mean he thinks EVERYONE'S like that Or that the left doesn't exist

I don't believe in being stupid - but i acknowledge that YOU exist regardless.  See how that works?

ROFLMAO - sounds like you're comprehension problems got the best of you again But i do love how once you get your teeth into something that makes you look stupid you just keep going and going  

God you are nothing if not entertaining!

Edited October 28, 2023 by CdnFox

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

The best way to break Pierre Poilievre’s media-baiting strategy: ask actual questions
 

 

Well that would mean global, the star, the cbc, etc would never be allowed to ask him ANYTHING then

Just look at the bias in that headline alone -  "We must break PP -  we should do it by being less bias!!!!"  Well done sparky.

 

[BeaverFever]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Well that would mean global, the star, the cbc, etc would never be allowed to ask him ANYTHING then

Just look at the bias in that headline alone -  "We must break PP -  we should do it by being less bias!!!!"  Well done sparky.

 

Andrew Coyne is no liberal in fact I suspect he probably prefers CPC. And you need to re-read the title, he doesn’t say break PP. he says break his “media-baiting strategy”

[BeaverFever]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Aww muffin - so you're still feeling stupid over your comment you coudn't back up i take it   LOLOL - well that's understandable. 

BTW - he says he doesnt' see things as left and right - and he's spoken about that many times. That does not mean he doesn't see people who identify as on the left or who have agendas that they see as left wing agendas    Just because he doesn't believe that we should make it all about left and right doesn't mean he thinks EVERYONE'S like that Or that the left doesn't exist

I don't believe in being stupid - but i acknowledge that YOU exist regardless.  See how that works?

ROFLMAO - sounds like you're comprehension problems got the best of you again But i do love how once you get your teeth into something that makes you look stupid you just keep going and going  

God you are nothing if not entertaining!

Your hilarious and pathetic non-sensical excuse-making is what’s entertaining!

The “I don’t see things as left and right” is his newest schtick for this political cycle, his 20-yr record speaks for itself. Nobody identifies as “communist” or “Marxist” as he so frequently calls them and I don’t think Trudeau or any LPC  publicly labels themselves to be “leftists” either- those are labels PP assigns them during his many tirades against “the left which he hilariously claims to not see
 

Sorry you’ve been proven wrong yet again but keep denying reality and screaming “Nobody can force me to admit anything!”  - it’s what you do best   

Edited October 28, 2023 by BeaverFever

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Andrew Coyne is no liberal in fact I suspect he probably prefers CPC. And you need to re-read the title, he doesn’t say break PP. he says break his “media-baiting strategy”

Breaking pp or breaking his strategy is the same thing, and he's deliberately pointing to that and the left wing media's attempt to go after pp.  Thats literally the whole point.  Thanks for paying attention.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Your hilarious and pathetic non-sensical excuse-making is what’s entertaining!

You always say that when you're losing an argument

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

The “I don’t see things as left and right” is his newest schtick for this political cycle, his 20-yr record speaks for itself.

It does - he's always voted on what he thinks is best not based on what's left or right.  Give me an example of when he voted on something for no better reason than it was 'right wing'.  I mean - if his track record is that extensive there must be lots of examples right?

LOL - you're about to look stupid again i suspect

Quote

Nobody identifies as “communist” or “Marxist” as he so frequently calls them

Well in fact many do. And others speak of marx's works or follow his teachings even tho they may not call themselves marxist specifically. And as we've already seen from you the idea that he's out there calling tonnes of people marxist is simply not true.

Quote

and I don’t think Trudeau or any LPC  publicly labels themselves to be “leftists” either

Sure they do.  You honestly don't think that the liberal party considers itself to be left of center? of course they do. They use 'marketing terms like  "progressive" and such - but do you honestly believe there's ANYONE in canada, including any liberals, who think justin and the liberals are a RIGHT wing party?  Anyone sane?

 

Quote

Sorry you’ve been proven wrong yet again but keep denying reality and screaming “Nobody can force me to admit anything!”  - it’s what you do best   

Sorry but the fact you have to declare that pretty much shows you know that it's not me that's wrong   LOLOL

Sorry kid.  Lets recap

You claimed that PP cries "Marxist" constantly. That turned out to be false.  You're mad at ME because YOU were wrong.

You claim that anyone who acknowledges there's people on the left of the political spectrum MUST view ALL issues in terms of left and right and we've seen that's just dumb.  LIke i said - i can acknowledge you're an 1diot without being one myself.

You now claim that PP's history proves he only thinks of issues as left or right and doesn't look at an issue to see what's the best choice - and havne't provided any examples of that. I doubt you will either, ,

 

Yeah - sorry kid. It's not me that was proven wrong here   and the best part is you did most of the 'proving' yourself, but somehow it's all my fault  

[sharkman]

On 10/18/2023 at 7:08 AM, Moonbox said:

You do realize this is almost certainly a staged interview, right?  

That being said, there's no question that PP is a better communicator than Trudeau, avoiding the shallow grandiloquence and bromidic nothing-speak of the latter. 

That “interview” was as fake as a 3 dollar bill.  

[BeaverFever]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Breaking pp or breaking his strategy is the same thing, and he's deliberately pointing to that and the left wing media's attempt to go after pp.  Thats literally the whole point.  Thanks for paying attention.

The article is clearly a critique of the reporter’s poor questioning not a call to bring down PP.   Coyne is no anti-conservative. Thank for NOT paying attention. 

[CdnFox]

21 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

The article is clearly a critique of the reporter’s poor questioning not a call to bring down PP.  

The article is clearly referencing the lefts desire to get a 'gotcha' moment when doing interviews.  Then they wind up looking like 1diots ( you can probably relate )  

The reporter is pointing out why that kind of thinking is bad and blows up in their face. It's not that they're just bad questions, it's that they're questions that are "loaded" and intended to trick him into an answer that makes him look bad.  It says right in the article:  "Still, if journalists would like to avoid making themselves props in Mr. Poilievre’s media-baiting strategy, there’s a simple enough remedy: Don’t ask loaded questions! "

The guy went into the interview trying to make PP look bad. That was the point of his 'loaded questions".  Now he looks like an 1diot and PP looks good and yes, this isn't the first time he's done that by any stretch.  Loaded questions are easy to shoot down, and if it's bias it winds up looking exactly like what it is.

Oh - and andrew coyne is definitely to the left. While he refers to himself as conservative, he's slightly left of Mike Cheong.  He's written numerous articles on why the conservative party should move to the left.  HE's an old school red tory who misses the days when there was basically no difference between the libs and the PC. 

He does NOT approve of PP at all.

[BeaverFever]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

t does - he's always voted on what he thinks is best not based on what's left or right.  Give me an example of when he voted on something for no better reason than it was 'right wing'.  I mean - if his track record is that extensive there must be lots of examples right?

 

OMG That is the dumbest thing you’ve ever said on this forum . You want me to give you an example where PP said publicly “I dont actually believe in what i’m voting for I’m just doing it because it’s right wing”. And according to your idi0t logic:

1) that is what “seeing the world in terms of left and right” means

2) He would openly admit that to the public 

if that’s the case then no human being eho has ever walked the face of the earth has ever viewed anything in terms of left s right. 
 

PP is always talking about denouncing “the left” calling them socialists marxists, communists etc. probably moreso than any other conservative politician, every chance he can. You’ve been presented with ample quotes and video clips your continued denial of reality ridiculous justification attempts and absurd excuses are absolutely pathetic. 
 

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Well in fact many do. And others speak of marx's works or follow his teachings

Who calls themselves Marxist, speaks of his works and follows his teachings? Be specific and provide examples. 
 

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

And as we've already seen from you the idea that he's out there calling tonnes of people marxist is simply not true.

You’ve been provided quotes and videos of him doing it. And you’re even defending him doing it (“they are Marxists”h while denying that he did it. What more evidence do you need?

 

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

but do you honestly believe there's ANYONE in canada, including any liberals, who think justin and the liberals are a RIGHT wing party?  Anyone sane?

Well you ate the one twisting yourself into pretzels trying to claim that PP doesn’t see things as left and right and he only calls liberals leftist so much because that’s what they call themselves. He wouldn’t be using the name if it had no meaning to him. Show me an example of liberals calling themselves leftists. 
 

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You claimed that PP cries "Marxist" constantly. That turned out to be false.  You're mad at ME because YOU were wrong.

That turned out to be correct and directly quoted and caught on tape. You’re just desperately making absurd excuses for it

 

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You claim that anyone who acknowledges there's people on the left of the political spectrum MUST view ALL issues in terms of left and right and we've seen that's just dumb. 

Not quite what I claimed. I claimed some who frequently and loudly denounces “the left”, “leftist policies” and other analogous terms like “socialism”’, “Marxist”, “communist” etc clearly can’t claim they don’t think about  things in terms of left vs right. 

 

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

i can acknowledge you're an 1diot without being one myself.

 

I strongly disagree with that statement because you definitely are being one right now. 
 

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You now claim that PP's history proves he only thinks of issues as left or right and doesn't look at an issue to see what's the best choice

False I have claimed nothing of the sort. This is a perfect example of you being the 1diot, as mentioned above. 

[BeaverFever]

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The article is clearly referencing the lefts desire to get a 'gotcha' moment when doing interviews.  Then they wind up looking like 1diots ( you can probably relate )  

The reporter is pointing out why that kind of thinking is bad and blows up in their face. It's not that they're just bad questions, it's that they're questions that are "loaded" and intended to trick him into an answer that makes him look bad.  It says right in the article:  "Still, if journalists would like to avoid making themselves props in Mr. Poilievre’s media-baiting strategy, there’s a simple enough remedy: Don’t ask loaded questions! "

The guy went into the interview trying to make PP look bad. That was the point of his 'loaded questions".  Now he looks like an 1diot and PP looks good and yes, this isn't the first time he's done that by any stretch.  Loaded questions are easy to shoot down, and if it's bias it winds up looking exactly like what it is.

Oh - and andrew coyne is definitely to the left. While he refers to himself as conservative, he's slightly left of Mike Cheong.  He's written numerous articles on why the conservative party should move to the left.  HE's an old school red tory who misses the days when there was basically no difference between the libs and the PC. 

He does NOT approve of PP at all.

Yes Coyne is criticizing the reporter who interviewed PP for trying to do a “gotcha” interview. Coyne is not saying “Let’s break PP” as you originally suggested. 
 

Coyne may be a Red Tory (or not) but to say they are job different than the liberals or that Coyne values are aligned to Liberals is ridiculous. He spend most of his ink lambasting Liberal policies, gaffes and scandals and moaning about the deficit and what he sees as excessive spending.  He’s not out to get PP, although I think he would probably personally prefer politicians who are more of a Stephen Harper type over performative politicians like PP or Trudeau. 

[CdnFox]

11 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

OMG That is the dumbest thing you’ve ever said on this forum . You want me to give you an example where PP said publicly “I dont actually believe in what i’m voting for I’m just doing it because it’s right wing”. And according to your idi0t logic:

Well then you should have tonnes of examples of him voting that proves he doesn't vote what's best, but rather based on 'right/left'.

No?  Nothing? Not a single one?  But it's his WHOLE voting history - surely to god there must be SOME if it's his WHOLE 20 year voting history? No?

Hmmm.  So you basically were making sh*t up again and to try to cover that up you went for insults.

My god you're pathetic.  "HIS WhOlE VoTinG CAreEeeEr PROVES It!!!!!! '   Got an example?  "NOOOOOO YOU"RE MEAN FOR ASKING FOR ONE!!!"

LOL

Quote

1) that is what “seeing the world in terms of left and right” means

It isn't even close  

Quote

2) He would openly admit that to the public 

Cite? No? Hmmmmm

 

The rest of your screed is the same, and the answers are pretty obvious.  The fact that other people who see themselves on the left or right exist and he acknowledges that does not mean that he likes to view topics as being left or right, or talks about them in terms of left or right.

Sure - there are lots of left leaning people out there. But - when he talks about reducing beurocracy - he's not looking at it as left or right.  When he says people should be able to get a  passport in  less than 10 years - that's not a left or right thing, that's something we all want.  When he talks about people wanting to be able to afford a home, that's not a left or right thing.  Left wingers want a home as well.  When he talks about the need to provide stable medical funding to the provinces that's something the left and right would probalby agree on. 

I could go on for ages - virtually all the things he looks at and proposes are not about 'left or right' and they're not "well the right wants this or the left wants that".  They're stuff that are needed in general by Canadians and whether your left or right wont' make a difference.

You've utterly failed to provide a single example where he's not like that.  Not one. At all.  You CLAIM he's like that constanty but can't find an exampe.

How do you not get something that simple.  I don't know if i can spell it out any futher for you.  But all you've done is proven you're a partisan loser who expects all people to be partisan losers just like you. And they're not.

 

Justin admits he does things because they're left wing all the time btw - he specifically states he's following a feminist agenda, he says he's appointing women 50 50 for the left wing ideology of equity of outcome and when asked for his logic he says "because it's 2015".  That's his whole reasoning.

Soooo  yeah.

[Jack9000]

interview has nothing to do with him winning.. it just proved he is the same pompous jerk  he has been since the early harper days but we already new that the right wingers get a kick out of it because there personality matches him . he will win because trudeau will of been in power for like 9 years or more by election time.. more then anything else..  he has 0 ideas   amazing how he can trick people into thinking they will be able to own a house under him but not under trudeau..