Poilievre's Loss in Carleton

[ExFlyer]

40 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

IT's called "Truth"..

 

Truth is the last 3 cons lost and left the building LOL

Hey LOSER, I don't give a sh!t...you lost and that makes my day...every day

Keep trying but it will not make you a winner...like my team is Ha Ha Ha

Only a loser will keep on making excuses and whining about losing and...you is a LOSER!!!!

 

Edited May 4 by ExFlyer

[CdnFox]

7 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Spastic  is a seizure?  Okay.  Well that explains a lot about you.  

 

Sure.... you having a seizure says a lot about me   The only thing it says about me is that i upset you so much you have seizures.   

[CdnFox]

46 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Truth is the last 3 cons lost and left the building LOL

 

Nope.  The truth is that the last two lost and they were thrown out but not because they lost. 

The other one won 3 elections and then decided to step down when he didn't win the 4th.  Wasnt even the party's decision 

And the last one is still around and held your guy to a minority and will soon be kicking his ass....  just like harper did in his day  LOLOL

That's why you're whining like a baby about all of this  

Conservatives don't throw their people out just for losing elections. Liberals do that, conservatives never have.

[August1991]

On 5/2/2025 at 5:06 PM, TreeBeard said:

As I predicted, PP found someone in a safe seat in Alberta to resign so he could run. 
 

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/conservative-mp-gives-up-seat-for-pierre-poilievre-to-run-in-byelection/

As you predicted!

=====

PS. Should I buy, or sell MSFT tomorrow?

[ExFlyer]

6 hours ago, August1991 said:

As you predicted!

=====

PS. Should I buy, or sell MSFT tomorrow?

So, he will now run in Alberta. He is Albertan.  Will he be a resident or own a house there (A La Mike Duffy) ?

Will he follow or support Danielle Smiths campaign to separate Alberta from Canada?

https://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/story/69079/pierre-poilievres-voting-record-and-the-politics-of-exclusion/

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

On 5/4/2025 at 6:07 PM, WestCanMan said:

• While Poilievre was travelling all across the country, visiting probably 300+ ridings, his opponent was campaigning in his riding that whole time

That’s true of every leader. It’s a balancing act they are expected to be able to manage. I asked here whether Poilievre was in danger before the election because the CBC was reporting that the party had belatedly begun to accept reality and moved more of its people there. 

Poilievre is a divisive figure, not a uniter - that’s been his style for years - and it bit him in the nether regions when he needed neutrals to get him over the line.

 

 

 

[herbie]

Just never gonna admit PP's unpopular. He got slaughtered in his won riding and they'll use the lamest of excuses to say otherwise.

So when he runs in Alberta and doesn't get 82% support of voters like the last guy, they'll deny that proves anything too.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

That’s true of every leader. It’s a balancing act they are expected to be able to manage. I asked here whether Poilievre was in danger before the election because the CBC was reporting that the party had belatedly begun to accept reality and moved more of its people there. 

Poilievre is a divisive figure, not a uniter - that’s been his style for years - and it bit him in the nether regions when he needed neutrals to get him over the line.

 

 

 

He was fine before the election, and the guy who won mentioned that until trump and carney for the two years before he got absolutely nowhere with his efforts. 

But once the election got called people were worried about trump and things changed quickly. 

They should have noticed, they know he's busy with the campaign. But according to the guy lawnsigns didn't even start going out till a week before the election. Whomever PP left in charge missed the signs and dropped the ball. But i really wonder in the face of trump if anything would have saved it. 

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

That’s true of every leader. It’s a balancing act they are expected to be able to manage. I asked here whether Poilievre was in danger before the election because the CBC was reporting that the party had belatedly begun to accept reality and moved more of its people there. 

Sure, but while Carney is gone the CBC is covering up his lies (established fact 😉) and pumping his tires every day. 

Poilievre didn't just gift the CBC $1B taxpayer dollars a year, he doesn't get any CBC propaganda. Just slander. 

Quote

Poilievre is a divisive figure, not a uniter - that’s been his style for years - and it bit him in the nether regions when he needed neutrals to get him over the line.

That's not true at all. You just got caught spreading CBC propaganda, dude. 

FYI divisive is like Trudeau separating people by pseudovax status, calling the unvaxed "racists and misogynists", and asking Canadians if the unvaxed should even be tolerated. 

Poilievre has never said anything even remotely close to that.

Step away from the crackpipe and order some Big Pharma Bug Fizz. It cures covid. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Sure, but while Carney is gone the CBC is covering up his lies (established fact 😉) and pumping his tires every day. 

Poilievre didn't just gift the CBC $1B taxpayer dollars a year, he doesn't get any CBC propaganda. Just slander. 

That's not true at all. You just got caught spreading CBC propaganda, dude. 

Just curious. Do you see yourself as a uniter or a divider? 

[Moonlight Graham]

On 5/7/2025 at 9:33 AM, ExFlyer said:

 

Didn't vote for a 60b deficit though.

Edited yesterday at 01:10 AM by Moonlight Graham

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

 

Poilievre is a divisive figure, not a uniter - that’s been his style for years - and it bit him in the nether regions when he needed neutrals to get him over the line.

 

As @WestCanMan said he's never been divisive. He can be abrasive attacking his enemies but if anything he's extremely inclusive and if you've seen one of his ralleys it's all about bringing people together, letting them partake in the promise of canada, and building a future. 

Divisive people don't attract as many people as he did, and from as many different groups as he did. 

The CBC et al like to portray him as another trump and claim he's divisive but that's just simply not the case. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

There is a tendency to consider events inevitable after they have happened and to become dogmatic about causes and effects. However, there are several factors that one may reasonably imagine went down worse with Carleton voters: 

 

1. The convoy.

Quote

…the one issue that gets frequently mentioned by Carleton residents was Poilievre’s support of members of the convoy protest that occupied downtown Ottawa in early 2022. The image of Poilievre delivering Tom Horton’s coffee to supporters is one that many Ottawa residents have not forgotten, including some in Carleton.
 

Quote

“The convoy definitely cost him a lot. He should have stayed the hell away from it,” Turnbull says.

 

2. Likeability:

Quote

Poilievre’s personality also gave the Liberals an edge, according to Fanjoy. The Conservative leader was a polarizing figure in the riding with a fierce base of support, but there were growing numbers of people who were uncomfortable with his style – especially women, both nationally and at the riding level. Critics complained about the “Trumpiness” of some of his language – the use of woke, for example.

Quote

Marjory LeBreton, a former adviser to Stephen Harper and former Conservative Senator, lives in the Carleton riding and gave an early warning about some of those concerns. In June of 2022, she publicly expressed worries about the direction of the Conservative party, noting the embrace by some of its members of the convoy blockade. She resigned from Carleton’s Conservative board.

Quote

Mark Towhey, a broadcaster and former chief of staff to Toronto mayor Rob Ford, agreed that Poilievre’s attack dog persona and likeability issues were factors in him losing his seat. Poilievre took steps to change his tone, which won him kudos during debates, but that likely came too late, said Towhey.

3. Public servants.

Quote

Meanwhile, Towhey said the Conservatives’ plans to reduce the size of the federal public servicelikely lost him votes in the riding, even if Poilievre was careful to say it would be done through attrition.

Sixteen per cent of the riding is made up of government employees. “All of whom might have heard: ‘there goes my job,'” Towhey says.

 

https://ottawacitizen.com/feature/how-pierre-poilievre-lost-carleton

Edited yesterday at 03:24 AM by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

There is a tendency to consider events inevitable after they have happened and to become dogmatic about causes and effects. However, there are several factors that one may reasonably imagine went down worse with Carleton voters: 

 

1. The convoy.

 

2. Likeability:

3. Public servants.

 

https://ottawacitizen.com/feature/how-pierre-poilievre-lost-carleton

They may have all played a role but it's pretty obvious what the issue was, and that was trump and carney. 

As i said the guy you were quoting himself noted that he got NOWHERE in two years but things changed overnight when trump and carney came along,

The convoy was cbc propaganda. Just like it was when they claimed MAGA in the us was funding it, which turned out to be completely untrue despite their early insistence (retraction page 67).  Then they claimed the russians were behind it all which was also untrue. 

I'm sure some people don't like him. He can seem abrasive. I don't like carney. But literally tens if not hundreds of thousands of people do like Poilievre. Vastly more people voted for him to be the leader of his party than Carney's did for him. He got a similar number of people to vote for him in the election. And young people tend to like people that are willing to stand up to bullies and that's what he does. The CBC likes to pretend he's the bully but the reality is he stands up to CBC reports another mainstream reporters when they try and bully it. And younger people see that.

At the end of the day the reason he lost was Trump and Carney and Justin Trudeau leaving. 

Until that moment he was polling to win a massive victory same as always. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

They may have all played a role but it's pretty obvious what the issue was, and that was trump and carney. 

As i said the guy you were quoting himself noted that he got NOWHERE in two years but things changed overnight when trump and carney came along,

The convoy was cbc propaganda. Just like it was when they claimed MAGA in the us was funding it, which turned out to be completely untrue despite their early insistence (retraction page 67).  Then they claimed the russians were behind it all which was also untrue. 

I'm sure some people don't like him. He can seem abrasive. I don't like carney. But literally tens if not hundreds of thousands of people do like Poilievre. Vastly more people voted for him to be the leader of his party than Carney's did for him. He got a similar number of people to vote for him in the election. And young people tend to like people that are willing to stand up to bullies and that's what he does. The CBC likes to pretend he's the bully but the reality is he stands up to CBC reports another mainstream reporters when they try and bully it. And younger people see that.

At the end of the day the reason he lost was Trump and Carney and Justin Trudeau leaving. 

Until that moment he was polling to win a massive victory same as always. 

Do you believe Poilievre’s position on the convoy was popular in Ottawa? 

Either way, Poilievre provokes strong opinions. Some people like him but a lot of people dislike him intensely, especially women. In that sense he divides people much more than, say, Erin O’Toole or Scheer did. His party did very well and yet he was thumped in his riding. It wasn’t close. That says something. 

In the same way, I suspect, for example, that Carney will be a less divisive figure with ordinary Canadians than Trudeau was. His personality is less extroverted, less obtrusive. There’s less about him to get annoyed about. 

 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 05:33 AM by SpankyMcFarland

[ExFlyer]

11 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Didn't vote for a 60b deficit though.

No one want a deficit but we all should know that without income (higher taxes etc) it is impossible to balance a budget.

Then again the according to PP,  the Conservative government to carry a projected deficit of $31 billion this year alone.

 

Edited yesterday at 12:49 PM by ExFlyer

[WestCanMan]

13 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Just curious. Do you see yourself as a uniter or a divider? 

Just curious, why did you change the topic from CBC getting caught lying for Carney? Do you think it's false, that it didn't help hum, that his bribe had nothing to do with their help, or do you just not want to talk about it? 

Quote

Do you see yourself as a uniter or a divider? 

It depends on what you're talking about.

Leftists are dividers racially, by vax-status and along party lines. I'm not a "divider" in that regard, although I do tell inconvenient truths about leftists.

As far as Canada is concerned, I am 100% in favor of splitting the country.

[Nefarious Banana]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

No one want a deficit but we all should know that without income (higher taxes etc) it is impossible to balance a budget.

Then again the according to PP,  the Conservative government to carry a projected deficit of $31 billion this year alone.

 

We have a huge deficit to pass on to our grandchildren's children . . . and SFA to show for it.  

[WestCanMan]

11 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

There is a tendency to consider events inevitable after they have happened and to become dogmatic about causes and effects. However, there are several factors that one may reasonably imagine went down worse with Carleton voters: 

 

1. The convoy.

 

2. Likeability:

3. Public servants.

 

https://ottawacitizen.com/feature/how-pierre-poilievre-lost-carleton

1) You're just quoting people who don't want to acknowledge the fact that CBC propaganda, bought and paid for with BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars, had anything to do with Xi-Fanboy's win. 

• CBC reporter: "Great win champ. How'd you do it?"
• Champ: "Uh, we had great goaltending and outworked the other team"
• Critic: "Don't you think the 64 powerplays had something to do with the win? The other team never had more than 4 skaters on the ice all night... The ref even has a tattoo of your team logo on his face. We saw you slipping him $100 bills all night"
• Champ & Reporter: "You're divisive."

2) As far as covid-era likability is concerned, Trudeau is a negative 100%, but again he had the CBC lying for him and covering up constantly. Most Canadians don't even know that Trudeau called the unvaxxed "racists and misogynists" and asked the public if we should even be "tolerated". FYI that's a step away from outright war. 

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

No one want a deficit but we all should know that without income (higher taxes etc) it is impossible to balance a budget.

Then again the according to PP,  the Conservative government to carry a projected deficit of $31 billion this year alone.

 

When Trudeau started his war on domestic energy, not only did he make energy consumption more expensive for Canadians, he also made it more expensive for businesses, and their higher cost to do business was passed along to consumers as well, raising the cost of everything. 

Then Canadians end up with less disposable income, there's less money going around (aside from what's spent paying off loans, and Canadian companies are even less competitive.  

If you wanted to draw up a plan for "How to screw an economy" on the board, raising energy prices only falls behind water/food shortages on the to-do list. 

[ExFlyer]

2 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

We have a huge deficit to pass on to our grandchildren's children . . . and SFA to show for it.  

We have "a huge deficit to pass on to our grandchildren for decades. Here are some facts "Canada's federal budget has been in deficit for most of the period since 1969, with the last balanced budget being in 1969-70. There was a string of 27 consecutive federal budget deficits from 1969-70 to 1996-97. After a period of surpluses from 1997-98 to 2001, the budget has again been in deficit, with the federal government running a deficit for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024"

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/commentary/really-quick-history-canadas-federal-debt

Edited yesterday at 04:29 PM by ExFlyer

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

When Trudeau started his war on domestic energy, not only did he make energy consumption more expensive for Canadians, he also made it more expensive for businesses, and their higher cost to do business was passed along to consumers as well, raising the cost of everything. 

Then Canadians end up with less disposable income, there's less money going around (aside from what's spent paying off loans, and Canadian companies are even less competitive.  

If you wanted to draw up a plan for "How to screw an economy" on the board, raising energy prices only falls behind water/food shortages on the to-do list. 

Ho hum...get some facts.

We have "a huge deficit to pass on to our grandchildren for decades. 

Here are some facts "Canada's federal budget has been in deficit for most of the period since 1969, with the last balanced budget being in 1969-70. There was a string of 27 consecutive federal budget deficits from 1969-70 to 1996-97. After a period of surpluses from 1997-98 to 2001, the budget has again been in deficit, with the federal government running a deficit for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024"

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/commentary/really-quick-history-canadas-federal-debt

[CdnFox]

11 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Do you believe Poilievre’s position on the convoy was popular in Ottawa? 

I don't believe anyone really cared until the CBC and others made a huge deal out of it and kept it in the front page making it sound like he sided with them and was some sort of neo-Nazi. I believe with the right propaganda you can convince people of anything whether it's true or not.

Quote

Either way, Poilievre provokes strong opinions. Some people like him but a lot of people dislike him intensely, especially women. In that sense he divides people much more than, say, Erin O’Toole or Scheer did. His party did very well and yet he was thumped in his riding. It wasn’t close. That says something. 

It doesn't say anything about him really. The guy who won that writing was crystal clear that for 2 years he door knocked and worked his ass off and got absolutely nowhere. They redo the writing boundaries and there was a slight bit of movement but he still wasn't getting anywhere. The moment that justin Trudeau left, trump came along and started the 51st state nonsense, and Kearney took over things changed

And what that tells us is people were afraid of trump and they believe carney was the best choice to fight him

Quote

 

In the same way, I suspect, for example, that Carney will be a less divisive figure with ordinary Canadians than Trudeau was. His personality is less extroverted, less obtrusive. There’s less about him to get annoyed about. 

 

It won't matter. The divisions that Trudeau created are there and they're not going away, and if you doubt what I say take a look at what's happening in Alberta and Quebec right now.

It's probable that carney won't start as many divisions, Trudeau ran all of his elections on division and hatred hoping to that would propel him to power. But the polling is also crystal clear that he would have lost and would have given the tories a strong majority if it wasn't for trump. You take trump out of the mix and Poilievre is the prime minister with a majority

Will trump be in the mix next time? I have to wonder. The NDP will have a new leader and they will be looking to regain some of their stuff, although they will be ultra broke

Edited yesterday at 04:37 PM by CdnFox

[Moonlight Graham]

5 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

No one want a deficit but we all should know that without income (higher taxes etc) it is impossible to balance a budget.

Then again the according to PP,  the Conservative government to carry a projected deficit of $31 billion this year alone.

 

Right the Liberals want to give everyone free goodies but don't want the political hit of raising taxes to pay for it.   So they'll make future generations pay for it, with interest, just so theycam keep getting elected.  Very fiscally responsible of them.

Meanwhile nobody can afford a house and our healthcare system sucks.

[ExFlyer]

29 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Right the Liberals want to give everyone free goodies but don't want the political hit of raising taxes to pay for it.   So they'll make future generations pay for it, with interest, just so theycam keep getting elected.  Very fiscally responsible of them.

Meanwhile nobody can afford a house and our healthcare system sucks.

Bottom line is that all governments have operated on deficits.