The Gov't Privy Council was testing out the "elbows up" message months before trump announced tariffs at taxpayers expense for the liberals.

[CdnFox]

So it would seem that the liberals were using government resources to conduct focus groups to test drive and refine their political campaign message. This isn't any government business focus, this is strictly electioneering and planning. They knew they'd be going to the poll soon and they knew they were in trouble and they were testing out slogans and pitches that would work and they were doing it with government money.

I would hope even those who are on the left on this board would be upset by this and say it's not a good thing. But I realize that is probably wishful thinking

 

Holly Doan on X: "DOCUMENTS: Main themes of @liberal_party “elbows up” re-election campaign were tested in confidential federal focus groups by @PrivyCouncilCA months before the U.S. announced tariffs. https://t.co/WS8KS8rUwO #cdnpoli https://t.co/srApQ1v3gc" / X

[herbie]

Smart cookies, eh?
Whereas the Tories were still struggling to grasp the issue on voting day.

 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, herbie said:

Smart cookies, eh?
Whereas the Tories were still struggling to grasp the issue on voting day.

 

so how did they get almost 42% of the vote?

[Moonbox]

It's bizarre how much you'll spin your wheels on this, trying to cope that Poilievre losing not only the election, but also his own seat is irrelevant because he managed to come in second place in what ended being a two-party race.  

[Nationalist]

16 hours ago, herbie said:

Smart cookies, eh?
Whereas the Tories were still struggling to grasp the issue on voting day.

 

So...you're ok with using tax payer money to fund Liberal election focus groups?

[LinkSoul60]

13 hours ago, CdnFox said:

so how did they get almost 42% of the vote?

Justin Trudeau is the answer.  

Moral victories are for losers.  

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Moonbox said:

It's bizarre how much you'll spin your wheels on this, trying to cope that Poilievre losing not only the election, but also his own seat is irrelevant because he managed to come in second place in what ended being a two-party race.  

Sure, talking about politics on a political forum this absolutely bizarre 🙄🙄🙄🙄  How could something like this happen!  

You are such a twat. And I see you also have no explanation. Despite it being a two horse race where one side had severe advantages over the other he still managed to come within about a percent of the popular vote. And he held the liberals to a minority so he gets to take another crack at them before long

Now a loss is still a loss, and losing his seat is just absolutely embarrassing. But, that result does not jive with what you and many others are trying to sell about how Canadians would never vote for him and absolutely detest him and he could never possibly win an election. At any other point in our history that would have been a majority government.

And it's interesting that no matter how many times I ask cry babies such as yourself, none of you can come up with a simple answer to the question if he is so utterly unelectable and hated by all Canadians how did he manage to get almost 42% of the vote?

 

58 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Justin Trudeau is the answer.  

Moral victories are for losers.  

Justin was: gone.  He didn't get that vote because of Justin. If Justin was a factor then carney would have lost hands down

[LinkSoul60]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Justin was: gone.  He didn't get that vote because of Justin. If Justin was a factor then carney would have lost hands down

The conservatives got that % because of Trudeau/Liberal fatigue.  If anything that number is less than flattering considering our current challenges.

You need to quit waving your second place medal.  Moral victories are for losers.

[Moonbox]

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Sure, talking about politics on a political forum this absolutely bizarre

No, but framing PP's comical failure in the last election as a success sure is!  

8 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You are such a twat.

At least I'm not useless, unemployed, friendless and don't spend my entire day, every day, fighting on the internet like you!  

8 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

And I see you also have no explanation. Despite it being a two horse race where one side had severe advantages over the other

Exactly! After 10 years of Liberal mismanagement and disgust, and a +20% polling advantage for his party heading into the new year, Pierre Poilievre still (somehow) managed to make himself look like the worse option. Amazing!  🤣

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, LinkSoul60 said:

The conservatives got that % because of Trudeau/Liberal fatigue.

There's no evidence of that anywhere. In fact the evidence is that carney picked up his support because of that. People that were sick of the old liberals went to carney.

Quote

 If anything that number is less than flattering considering our current challenges.

Tell me you know nothing of politics without telling me  

If anything given the circumstances it's amazing he did that well.

So in other words you have no explanation as to why people who supposedly hate him and would never vote for him and he could never win went for him instead of Carney?

3 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

You need to quit waving your second place medal.  Moral victories are for losers.

Aw muffin! Are you feeling sad again that your guy didn't win a majority?

That is your guy didn't win either, he fell short and just lost less badly than others. Which means he's going to face an election again and people on the liberal side of the fence are already called him a boot licker

Now here's a fun question for you. If in 6 months or a year an election is held and Poilievre does manage to get in, How much of a mood for revenge do you think the conservative voters are going to be in? After carney cheated like hell to win an election that he didn't deserve and the liberals have scammed Canadians for 10 years, losing the popular vote in most elections, when we finally get in after listening to you twats  go on like that, when we do get in guess what we're going to do?

[CdnFox]

Just now, Moonbox said:

No, but framing PP's comical failure in the last election as a success sure is!  

Oh dear, Are you stuck at that place where all you can do is lie about what people said again to try and make a point because you don't have one ? That always ends well for you.

 And yes, you are completely useless. Your only purpose in life is to follow me around on the Internet. And try desperately to make points. That you think, will make you look good, but inevitably make you look like a complete, uneducated Tard.

How's the math lessons going, by the way?   

3 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Exactly! After 10 years of Liberal mismanagement and disgust, and a +20% polling advantage for his party heading into the new year, Pierre Poilievre still (somehow) managed to make himself look like the worse option.

But he never had a 20% polling advantage over Carney.. This is a lie you guys like to tell. He would have totally won against Justin, and I think everybody acknowledges that, That's why his party threw him away. But Carney was able to cheat like hell and get in and run a quick campaign that took advantage of a crisis. And we now know he used public funds to help prep for that.

If anything the loser here was the NDP. And to a lesser degree the block. The Conservatives gained seats and gained a huge amount of the vote.

You obviously realize that Carney is a bit of a fraud and got in on cheating instead of merit or you wouldn't be so defensive about it. You'd be able to acknowledge that the Conservatives did good but that the Liberals managed to do better. Instead you've got to go on about how really actually honestly deep down even though it doesn't look that way the Conservatives did really really bad and nobody would ever elect PP which we both know is a lie.

[LinkSoul60]

9 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

That is your guy didn't win either, he fell short and just lost less badly than others.

Last I saw we only had one PM.

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

So...you're ok with using tax payer money to fund Liberal election focus groups?

So...you're ok with using tax payer money to  .....let an unelected person without a seat to live in Stornaway, the elected opposition housing rent free??  LOL

Kinda hypocritical Eh?

[Venandi]

The cost of two paid moves (out and then back in) would have been much more expensive than simply maintaining the status quo temporarily and it looks like that was the assessment made.

The by-election was a given early on and it would have been foolish to move him out prior to the issue being settled definitively. 

As to hypocrisy, in my view the elbows up thing wins a gold medal. Not even hypocrisy really; it was premeditated and fraudulent by design and intent. Even gym goers who routinely wore that obnoxious t-shirt no longer do, I haven't seen one in weeks... I think they all got burnt or cut into rags.

 

Edited July 8, 2025 by Venandi

[Moonbox]

42 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Oh dear, Are you stuck at that place where all you can do is lie about what people said again to try and make a point because you don't have one ?

What am I lying about?  It's not lying pointing out how ridiculous you look lauding Poilievre's comical failure in the election.  The Conservatives getting 41% of the vote and losing a two horse race is not a good result.  Trying to convince your it's impressive is a sad coping mechanism.  

The fact that Poilievre lost his own seat is a good indication of what went wrong.  The fact that he consistently polls poorly among Canadians and that his net favorability is a toilet flush should clue most people in, but not the deluded clowns who stroke to his image.  

42 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

 And yes, you are completely useless. Your only purpose in life is to follow me around on the Internet.

This sort of retarded statement would make more sense if I spent even 2% of the time you do here.  🤡

Edited July 8, 2025 by Moonbox

[CdnFox]

44 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Last I saw we only had one PM.

Who can't do anything without the support of other parties. He didn't win a majority. He may be prime minister but he still has to wear his leash

[CdnFox]

11 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

What am I lying about?  It's not lying pointing out how ridiculous you look lauding Poilievre's comical failure in the election. 

It absolutely is. Especially when you say I tried to claim it was a victory. I love that you realize you were completely in the wrong though, and are now trying to downplay it as "Lauding"   Which is still wrong.

What I said was how do you explain the fact that he got almost 42% of the vote, better than almost any other leader conservative were liberal going back to Mulroney, Given that your position is that he's utterly unelectable and nobody would ever vote for him and everyone hates him?

A question you still haven't been able to answer  

You're starting to look stupid again princess  

13 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

The fact that he consistently polls poorly among Canadians and that his net favorability is a toilet flush should clue most people in, but not the deluded clowns who stroke to his image.  

Yawn. So how did he get 42% of the vote?

 

No matter how you choose to lie, whether it's the lie about him having a 20% advantage over carney or the lie that nobody would ever vote for him or whatever, the reality is that he actually got the vote that he's been pulling he would get for about a year. Whether or not they like the guy, almost as many Canadians would like to see him as prime minister as carney.

[LinkSoul60]

19 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Who can't do anything without the support of other parties. He didn't win a majority. He may be prime minister but he still has to wear his leash

He won the election.  Get over it.

[herbie]

Look at the responses here. Not only did the Tories screw up by failing to see the focus issue at the time of the election, their supporters here still can't.....

and months later, when The Mango M0ron and his trade and annexation threats are still the real issue of the day, the party has come up with zero ideas or contributions.

 

[ExFlyer]

56 minutes ago, Venandi said:

The cost of two paid moves (out and then back in) would have been much more expensive than simply maintaining the status quo temporarily and it looks like that was the assessment made.

The by-election was a given early on and it would have been foolish to move him out prior to the issue being settled definitively. 

As to hypocrisy, in my view the elbows up thing wins a gold medal. Not even hypocrisy really; it was premeditated and fraudulent by design and intent. Even gym goers who routinely wore that obnoxious t-shirt no longer do, I haven't seen one in weeks... I think they all got burnt or cut into rags.

 

The day after the election, PP held no position in government. He, like all others that lost their seats had to move back.

So, assuming he wins, he got to live rent free for 5 months??  If it  was a Liberal the conservative would have tossed him out.

I hope the conservative party is paying for all his touring and back and forth travelling expenses??

The elbows up thing the comedian Mike Meyers said on Saturday Night Live?? Anyone, person, candidate or political party could have used that. It was already in pubic domain. What is hypocritical about that??

 

[herbie]

ADD: that if over-reliance on the US market, trade diversity and standing up for purely Canadian interests was not an issue for the CPC long before there was an election it only points to yet another instance of lack of vision and reliance on sitting with their thumb up their a$$ keeping to the status quo.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

He won the election.  Get over it.

i Never said he didn't. You're the one here getting upset  

Boy, a simple question sure gets you lefties with your panties in it knot doesn't it?

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

The day after the election, PP held no position in government.

 

But he was leader of the opposition party. Even though he couldn't officially be the leader of the opposition itself because he wasn't in parliament

But it was recognized that it would cost the taxpayers more money to move Andrew Scheer in and move him out and then reverse that and it would be to just let him stay while he was undergoing the bioelection

So the reasoning behind this was actually to save taxpayers money.

Why are you angry about saving taxpayer money?

Edited July 8, 2025 by CdnFox

[ExFlyer]

44 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

i Never said he didn't. You're the one here getting upset  

 

But he was leader of the opposition party. 

So what?? Who is upset? You think that stating facts is being upset?? Sounds like you are the pone that cannot get over it LOL

He has no position in government. He is still living off the government teat. That's a fact. He is a LOSER. That's a fact. 

Not a matter of saving taxpayer money but he should thank the Liberals for letting him rent free. LOL

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, ExFlyer said:

So what?? Who is upset?

Calm down you're going to blow up blood vessel

Quote

You think that stating facts is being upset?? Sounds like you are the pone that cannot get over it LOL

Yep. Which isn't even that weird for you, you get upset over a simple facts literally everyday

Quote

He has no position in government. He is still living off the government teat. That's a fact. He is a LOSER. That's a fact. 

No that's not true, leader of the political party is a position. I mean technically nobody outside of the liberal party has any positions in government, the liberal party currently forms government. But he does have a role to play in the governance of canada. 

Quote

Not a matter of saving taxpayer money but he should thank the Liberals for letting him rent free. LOL

Course it's a matter of saving money.  To quote:

“It would be more costly to taxpayers to move the family out and then right back into the residence later this summer,” Mr. Scheer said in a statement on Monday.

“I have no intention to move into the residence and so we expect the family will just remain there through this short transition phase,” he said.

 

And Andrew Scheer is the person he would be thanking, he was the one who made the decision.

You don't think or read much before talking to you?

 

[eyeball]

8 hours ago, CdnFox said:

But he never had a 20% polling advantage over Carney.. This is a lie you guys like to tell. He would have totally won against Justin, and I think everybody acknowledges that, That's why his party threw him away.

Yabut if Carney was Just like Justin how could PP possibly lose?