I admit I'm amused by the vitriol in some of the responses. One adjective in the post's first paragraph is "low-stakes." But as Henry Kissinger said in another context, low stakes often makes for bitter politics. One guy wrote to say I "sure know how to suck up to the CPC." A Poilievre supporter said he'd "lost all respect for [me]." I'm thinking, If me needling Poilievre over losing his seat is all it takes, then how the hell did you have any respect for me before now? Anyway, glad everyone's full of beans this week.
Our problem at this time Paul, is far too many people out there ‘are full of beans’! The thrust of your proposal would significantly lower the temperature and lead to a spirit of multi-party co-operation we are going to need. Whether lib or con we all need to drop the inflammatory bullshit
I think the reason is that you seem to be giving a lot of grace to someone who has none.
There is no particular reason why Carney should go out of his way to be nice to someone who has literally put his life in danger by linking him to WEF conspiracies and the whackjobs who take them a little too literally.
Should Carney be vindictive? No. But he shouldn't go out of his way to accommodate someone who couldn't even have the decency to understand why the people in Ottawa were traumatized by insurrectionists taking over their city.
You raise points I fundamentally agree with, even as I'm coming at them from a slightly different angle.
Let's say the MP for Airdrie steps down to let Poilievre have his seat. If Carney is gracious to Poilievre, Poilievre will not respond in kind. But maybe it will turn the temperature down a very little bit. If it makes ten thousand Conservative-leaning people across the country feel like, "Hey, I still prefer Pierre to those awful Liberals, but that was a kind of classy thing the prime minister did. I still won't vote for him, but I hate him slightly less," that's good for national unity.
My dream is that the Overton window be shifted such that our politics be normal again and such that Poilievre and those who act like him have no place in our civic life. I understand the impulse to crush rather than coddle one's adversaries - boy, do I. But I feel like "more people acting like him" might be the worst way to get fewer people to act like him, you know?
I live in Centretown,. two blocks from the Red Zone when the truckers were in town. No-one in my neighbourhood was discomfited by the trucker protest; everyone could carry on their business without impediment (unless, of course, if they worked downtown). I understand that the convoy protest was very irritating to those living in the area, but if anyone genuinely feels "traumatized" by it, I suggest contacting a mental health professional.
The thrust of Paul's argument is that Carney should not go out of his way at all—neither to be nice or to be vindictive. The liberal attitude should be that Mad Men meme: "I feel bad for you." ... "I don't think about you at all."
That's a good point. This is yet another time when "what would Poilievre do?" is not a question grown-ups with some human decency should ask. I hope this whole thing is a growth experience for him. Setbacks can open the door to self-reflection and personal growth.
Your insinuation that he lost because the Liberals ganged up on him is odd.
A few extra volunteers is not the reason he lost.
He lost for one main reason. Between this election and the last election he came out as a MAGA-adjacent troll who vocally supported a convoy of insurrectionists that seized the city his riding IS IN, threatened it's citizens and left a mess in its wake.
Many people in Carleton work downtown, they don't forget what he did.
Maybe there are multiple reasons for things? Hadrian’s armies couldn’t have made the people of Carleton do what they didn’t want to do. But if you think doorknocking is irrelevant to an election outcome, I know hundreds and hundreds of Liberals you should meet.
The fact that Poilievre couldn't even be bothered to show up for his riding's candidates debate is more consequential and a symptom of his apathy for the people he represented.
Maybe some riding in rural Alberta won't care that their MP doesn't respect them, or their city, but Carleton does.
Pretty condescending comment about Alberta. An apology would be appropriate. Respecting Poilievre’s loss, I expect Paul was correct - the loss likely was a combination of Poilievre’s threat to reduce the federal civil service (making up a large proportion of the riding voters), Carney’s attractiveness as a Liberal leader, the Liberal Party volunteer door knockers, Poilievre’s lack of attention to his own riding while he campaigned nationally, and finally the merits and work of Bruce Fanjoy.
This happened all over the place. Any adept politician and campaign, and certainly any MP that knows his/ her riding would accommodate and plan for these changes. Why all the excuses for someone who sought the highest office in the land on what is the very basics of the job?
I mean, I think you and Paul are both right. Poilievre's support of the convoy galvanized support against him in the riding, *and* drove out-of-town volunteers to campaign against him, and it was an iterative process. It's important to note that party canvassers are rarely trying to change minds - they're trying to get their party's supporters to the polls. No question, Poilievre alienated some. No question, Liberal volunteers helped convince some subset of those voters to get out and vote.
The difference is that Mr. Wells suggested that those volunteers, driven by their disgust at Poilievre's own actions, represented something that is not "his fault".
Poilievre is absolutely at fault for his own actions, personality and morals. That is what drove the volunteers.
Let's be real - Carleton got more than some "extra attention". The LPC literally flooded that riding with volunteers, both the boots on the ground variety and phone banks from across the country. Nothing illegal about that, but to downplay the resources that were deployed in an effort to deliver this result is a little disingenuous.
As for all candidates meetings, how many did Mr Carney attend?
Albertans sure do care about who represents them and if Mr. Poilievre is forced upon them after they exercised their franchise just days ago, he should expect to work hard for their votes.
Hear hear. That strange remark about Albertans not caring if they have the respect of their representative was likely heat-of-the-moment. But it deserves an apology. We surely can't have devolved this quickly into treating other Canadians - anyone, really - as subhumans.
This is a PERFECT example of what online discourse does to us. These are Albertans, our country mates, ordinary people just like wherever “LSC” is from. But LSC just drops some insulting comment like it’s nothing. Because it’s all just anonymous text and endless glowing screens.
The internet is amazing for giving us forums like this one, but let’s face it, the human brain is not built for interacting like this, with no verbal or body language feedback from the person we’re talking to.
EDAs, the worker bees of our electoral system, wither and die when there is a long time MP because staff take on the work that volunteers do in an un-held riding. I don't know the state of the Carleton CPC EDA but there might not be much of it left after 20 years of Mr. Poilievre representing the riding . Not enough worker bees is a problem in any campaign.
In the last week of the election is was reported that volunteers were coming from as far away as Calgary to work the riding for Mr. Poilievre. The party knew that he was in trouble. He was in trouble because a) he views had become increasingly MAGA like b) his deeply negative messages didn't connect with the numbers of people he needed to win c) he promised to fire a lot of his constituents who work for the federal government d) he didn't understand the ballot question was Cdn. sovereignty & economic future and when he did, what he offered was luke warm at best e) he actively supported the Freedom Convoy which disrupted the lives of thousands of Ottawans f) Bruce Fanjoy won because he worked hard and listened to the people of Carleton. You could say a lot about Mr. Poilievre's but strong listening skills isn't one of his strengths.
I was hearing of rumblings in PPs riding even before Trudeau stepped down. Pierre did not read the room/riding very well. After 20 years, add the changes he wanted to push through, and at first, Carlton wasn’t sure what to do. Then things changed, and PM Carney appeared in the riding next door. The rest is history.
How long does Pierre have to find someone who will give up their seat? As Pierre owns 3 or 4 houses, at least 1 in the Ottawa area, I would expect him to give whoever is renting it 3 months' notice (An Ontario law?, it is a BC law), and no one has to worry about the Poilevre family being turned out on the street. I’m thinking he could get his wood man cave back. That’s a good thing, eh?
What if someone in BC or Alberta gives up their seat? Skippy will at least need a flat for when he is there. But he can afford to buy a place, even in BC.
Always find it fascinating when the people who market their proximity to power in this country, such as federal workers and consultants (benefit), don't know how to handle the protesters feeling disinfranchised attempting to interface with that power (cost). Many people who work around the country remember how you treated them, and don't forget what you did.
Maybe Trudeau should have at least talked to them and explained why he could not change the US decision not to allow non vaccinated truckers to enter the US. Just listen!
There is no world where the Prime Minister of Canada is going to debate people with Fuck Trudeau flags, insurrectionist views and Nazi paraphernalia about the merits of vaccination
He lost because (a) Ian Brodie shot his mouth off a week before the election about doing a DOGE in Ottawa and (b) a smiling, happy, upbeat Bruce Fanjoy showed up on the doorstep of every house in the riding. I saw Fanjoy in action last fall. Everyone told him he couldn't win (just as all the media said Poilievre owned the seat and couldn't lose the general). And it was tough. Redistribution gave away suburban seats and expanded the riding into the adjacent townships. That's why I thought Fanjoy would have a respectable showing but would not win. His campaign should be a case study for anyone who's told they can't win an election, right up there with Catherine McKenna's win over Paul Dewar in Ottawa Centre in 2015.
So how was it that he held the riding for 20 years then? It's funny how the people of Ottawa were so upset over the convoy when they didn't care a fig for what the people of Caledonia went through (which was a lot worse).
As a CPC supporter, I do think that Carney acting gratiously towards Pierre and governing the country compentently would do a lot to cool down the tension in this country and make Conservatives see him differently. There is going to be enough problems for the PM to deal with (America, Alberta, the PQ) that maybe just bringing down the temperature in this country a couple degrees would be nice.
Haha alright, but I don't know if talking like that "brings down the tempature". My point being, the Liberals have the chance to take the moral high ground and they should seize it. Continued pettiness only pushes us back to where we were under Poilievre/Trudeau. It's a new day in Canada!
A good question is "what would Mr. Poilievre do if the situation was reversed?" I don't live in his head so I can only speculate that he would put his foot on his opponent's neck and hold it there. Having said that, I think Mr Carney should call the byelection quickly and with a short time frame for the vote. I would suggest running a Liberal candidate to make it interesting, and probably let him stay in the opposition residence till the vote takes place. If this becomes the scenario we can only hope it does not turn into a Scorpion and the Frog story.
As you feel about Liberals in general, many Canadians feel about Poilievre in much the same way. Just possibly Poilievre has not been good at doing nice. Although he could try......
Would only disagree on sentiment that Liberals should refrain from running a candidate against Poilievre.
We don’t know what riding he’ll pick, or which MP will be replaced. But wherever it is, he will be parachuting into a riding NOT to serve the constituency of that riding, but to serve his own desires for power. I think that matters. Maybe the MP he replaces had deep roots in the community and was popular in their own right. Seems arrogant to assume everyone voted for party over the candidate, and some might not want Poilievre as their new MP.
As you say, he is not a newly elected leader so in this case I don’t think he deserves the free pass. And with an opponent he may be forced to answer local reporters questions.
You know, the Liberals could pass on running a candidate. But that doesn't mean the NDP has to. There's a party that might just be out to prove something.
Given the CPCs history of eating their own, I would suspect that Poilievre’s road to leadership this time around, however self-serving, would be done with the blessing of the party
To be fair to all, Liberal new MP and nice guy community activist Bruce Fanjoy did get footwork help from other local ridings, which is wholly acceptable. Word is his people had 500 helpers (!) including people phoning from Toronto and Vancouver. I think that’s great. the Conservatives similarly had flyins when it became clear the CPC was “in trouble”. The result was a massive participation rate in Carleton. Highest early voting in Canada. And 82% overall voting, compared to 69% nationally. That sounds like success to me.
All good points but the CPC should look for a new leader. Propaganda Pete and Andrew Scheer should move over to the People's Party where they really belong and let actual conservatives rebuild the party into something informed people could vote for.
I find that a lot of people who still get excited at the prospect of debating the Freedom Convoy, three years later, draw energy from a cartoonish understanding of who was on the side they disagree with. If you think downtown Ottawa is populated by WEF frequent flyers, or that everyone who parked there three Februaries ago was a hardened insurrectionist, you may need to get out more.
I have to disagree with you on this one. I know a few of the young people who live there, my physiotherapist and her partner for example, and the coffee shop staffers, etc., the people who work for NFPs and NGOs, etc. , and I was told first hand about the treatment they were subjected to. It is amazing the lack of recognition or acknowledgement by those across the country who claim naivety, patriotism, free speech, etc., on the part of those who visited for three solid weeks. This was not an occupation of Parliament Hill, it was real people with real lives. Three weeks!
Wow! so dismissive of other's perspectives when they don't match yours. I just picked the one word that summed up your bias, the entire comparison tries to create an equivalency between real people and their lives being completely overturned for three weeks, as if the other perspective can just be passed off as 'everyone who parked there three Februarys ago ...' are somehow not equated to 'engaging in criminal intimidation for three weeks' or similar depictions of their behavior. They were not occupying Parliament Hill, they were taking over a community.
I am so sorry that you cannot accept another perspective.
I thought your rules required respectful dialogue and disagreement.
While I agree that Carney will be too busy (not appear to be, as you seem to be suggesting, Paul) to be concerned with the literal melodrama of the CPC leader (that is ALL that he is right now), why should he, or anyone else bend themselves into a pretzel in order to accommodate Mr. Poilievre, who, again, is not in any way attached to the Government of Canada currently?
Let's not treat his loss, or really, Fanjoy's victory, as nothing. It was something. It was democracy. The people have spoken. The ONLY people who had direct say in Mr. Poilievre election gave him a pass. And Poilievre, as of yesterday, anyway, hadn't spoken to Fanjoy to do the decent offering of concession and congratulations. He is clearly consumed by his own personal fate and how to get back in the house, as if he'd misplaced his keys as opposed to being turfed by the very voters whom he took for granted.
I do not happen to think that Carney will rag the puck and not call a by-election until later, but absolutely Poilievre should have opponents in the race because he will be a parachute candidate with no attachment to whatever constituency in Alberta or elsewhere he will be foisted upon, and those voters deserve a CHOICE. They will have suffered 1) a bait and switch and 2) will have to endure another election. Yet, this conversation seems only to be about Poilievre and his sacred opportunity to have a swift and obstacle-free return to the House. Isn't it about the VOTERS and CITIZENS who these people are supposed to represent?
Even on Conservative reddit (r/wildrose) they are already calling PP 'Carleton's sloppy seconds', so no one should be thinking that a majority of voters anywhere will absolutely enamoured of giving someone so focused on 'owning the Libs' and his crowd size that he missed the basics, a 'paved' second chance that is afforded to no one else and crucially, that he would offer to no one else.
I like your thinking P-dub. It would show real strength to pave the way for Poilievre back to a seat in the House. "I'm not afraid to face you in QP!" Anyway, Poilievre will take a seat so safely Conservative, it would be pointless to challenge him, and at least if he runs unopposed, it blunts the "victory" of his "triumphant return." But where do you think he'll run? I'd be delighted if he took a seat occupied by some utter fencepost like Arnold Viersen or Rachel Thomas, the sort of brainless MAGA seatwarmer Canada can do without.
I agree with you, Paul, that a by-election should be called as soon as possible. Your second reason ranks highest with me. If Carney is indeed the values-driven person he claims to be, and I believe he is, he should demonstrate this and follow the time-honoured principle: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Letting him stay at Stornaway, probably the most practical choice since one way or the other Poilièvre will be back, is also the right thing to do for the same reason. Carney won the election. He doesn't need to take revenge by punishing his opponent.
It is difficult to be gracious with a man as reflexively nasty as Poilièvre. Trying not to be as nasty as he would be, however, is good advice. Your argument, however, that waiting to call a by-election late would cause a busy PM any more distraction than calling it early is specious. It is a single, momentary decision either way. Still, I agree that it should be called earlier rather than later. As for whether the Liberals should run anyone against him, it depends. If the MP he aims to replace is from a long-safe Conservative riding buried in rural Alberta, don’t run anyone. You’re not going to beat him there anyway. If, on the other hand, he chooses to make a show of running in a recently-acquired GTA seat, run a “star” against him and beat his behind as hard as you can. Don’t be gratuitously nasty, but don’t let him walk on you either. Stornaway is a trifle. The person he appoints to take his place in the House while he can’t be there is unlikely to demand that he leave. So leave him and his family there.
I would be much more hard-nosed. Pierre Poilievre spews hatred. He would not survive a real-world job interview. He was paid $299,900 last year and enjoyed a $200,000+ official residence expense allowance on top of that. He threw that all away and now expects sympathy and cooperation. At the very least, I would keep him in the cooler throughout 2025. Let his party pay him an ordinary MP’s salary at no expense to this taxpayer. Don’t let him assume that he’s entitled to Stornaway just because we’re all nice Canadians. He’s a person who plays hard and never yields; he neither attracts nor deserves kindness from the very people he has mercilessly disparaged for 20 years. His pitiful result in Carleton should sting, not be minimized.
I agree, I'd never hire the man. He'd probably not last a full interview in my office. Somebody in these comments called him "reflexively nasty", a perfect description - along with PW's calling him "hollow". But for heaven's sakes, let the family stay in their house until his near term fate is decided.
Re the byelection, is there some harm I don't see in waiting to call it till after the G-7?
Absolutely agree on all accounts, set a new tone in this country, we've had 10 years of theatrics and Shakespearean show performances from his predecessor, Carney can demonstrate that maybe change means change and not more of the same.
Mr. Poilievre has certainly EARNED his current predicament, of being unemployed, homeless, and without friends.
Those softies among us would act essentially to reward his poor behavior by negating all consequences, in the belief that he will be touched by grace, and, renewed, would become the person we always thought he should be, but has never seemed even slightly interested in becoming.
Another argument is that we should instead follow the rules and/or conventions.
Firstly, Stornoway is for winners, not for losers. He should be made to vacate immediately.
Secondly, he is no longer a parliamentarian, and should therefore have none of their privileges until he earns them in a by-election, to be held at the pleasure of whomever is inexplicably willing to sacrifice their own privileges for him, and of the those who won the election.
The most significant competitive weakness of progressives is that they too quickly turn the other cheek, while regressives just go even lower, and then win. Have we learned nothing from America?
Perhaps then, we should simply ask, if the circumstances were reversed, "what would Jenni Byrne do?"
I agree so much with all of this. For perspective, today Peter Julian, also an MP since 2004, and the House Leader for his own party, noted that he has 20 days to do 5 moves: out of his constit office, out of his campaign office, out of his MP office, out of the House Leader's office and out of his Ottawa's apartment. No one is giving him a free pass. He has served loyally and now he's lost and he's taking it on the chin and getting it done. I have utter respect for that.
Brutal. Poilievre instead, having lost the election doubly, country and constituency, will be covered with gold by the Conservatives, and feels entitled to also be by his adversaries, the victorious governing party.
Repel the voters, squander the lead, lose the riding, concede the defeat, contest the byelection, rejoin the House, continue the tantrum, slander the competent, blame the media, collect the pension.
No. The ugliness of modern Canadian politics (for which Poilievre himself was partially responsible) needs to be rejected, just as Canadians rejected Trudeau).
I agree that "The ugliness of modern Canadian politics" needs to be rejected, but not that Trudeau is responsible for it, although he didn't do enough to prevent it.
We need to hold Poilievre explicitly and publicly to account, or we essentially condone, normalize and perpetuate such corrosive behavior.
I do not like Pierre Poilievre's ugly politics, or his mean-spirited approach to public policy.
WRT Justin Trudeau, I was so deeply disappointed by him, as I expected him to follow in his father's footsteps. I know that Pierre Trudeau was not an easy man, but he was a great prime minister in many respects (the repatriation of the Constitution and his willingness to stand against the illiberal tribalism of Quebec nationalists were hugely important).
JT never really lived up to that legacy--and his fundamentally solipsistic approach to progressive politics were very much a complementary foil to the divisive populism of Pierre Poilievre and Andrew Scheer (not to mention Stephen Harper).
And on foreign and defence policy in particular, he was essentially a failure.
PP owns 3 or 4 houses. One or two in Ottawa, the others in Alberta. I believe they are all currently rented out. So he is not homeless, not by a long shot.
We should never reward his bad behaviour. No one's bad behaviour. Rules/conventions are good. If he cannot get some poor sot to give up a riding (fairly decent pay, great benefits, excellent pension) within a reasonable time limit, 5,6 weeks, then yes, he should move out of Stornoway. And yes, run a Liberal and an NDP, and a Green if they like. Give the people a wide-ranging choice, as their original pick is tossed aside.
It's unlikely that he wouldn't be elected in another riding in a byelection. He has young kids & moving is disruptive for kids. Lets not punish his kids for the sins of their father.
He's not "homeless" - my understanding is that he's been investing in real estate since his election as MP - he probably owns a number of homes.
And re: Stornoway, I think pretty much by definition, Stornoway is the residence of the leader of the party that lost the last election. He could have won every single vote in Carleton - he'd still have lost the national election. He'd have lived in Stornoway not by dint of having won his seat, but by dint of having lost the country.
You've convinced me, on all counts. It would be the classy thing to do, and can't we please be classy? I know it's 2025, but come on. A good step towards demonstrating that the "New and We Promise, Improved" - Liberals aren't all talk.
I like your arguments Mr Wells. It would be entirely consistent with the PM’s victory speech to be magnanimous towards the CPC leader. I say that knowing to my core that the same graciousness would not come from PP but that is irrelevant here.
I admit I'm amused by the vitriol in some of the responses. One adjective in the post's first paragraph is "low-stakes." But as Henry Kissinger said in another context, low stakes often makes for bitter politics. One guy wrote to say I "sure know how to suck up to the CPC." A Poilievre supporter said he'd "lost all respect for [me]." I'm thinking, If me needling Poilievre over losing his seat is all it takes, then how the hell did you have any respect for me before now? Anyway, glad everyone's full of beans this week.
Our problem at this time Paul, is far too many people out there ‘are full of beans’! The thrust of your proposal would significantly lower the temperature and lead to a spirit of multi-party co-operation we are going to need. Whether lib or con we all need to drop the inflammatory bullshit
I think the reason is that you seem to be giving a lot of grace to someone who has none.
There is no particular reason why Carney should go out of his way to be nice to someone who has literally put his life in danger by linking him to WEF conspiracies and the whackjobs who take them a little too literally.
Should Carney be vindictive? No. But he shouldn't go out of his way to accommodate someone who couldn't even have the decency to understand why the people in Ottawa were traumatized by insurrectionists taking over their city.
You're assuming the people who are upset about what I wrote agree with you. That assumption is about half wrong.
You raise points I fundamentally agree with, even as I'm coming at them from a slightly different angle.
Let's say the MP for Airdrie steps down to let Poilievre have his seat. If Carney is gracious to Poilievre, Poilievre will not respond in kind. But maybe it will turn the temperature down a very little bit. If it makes ten thousand Conservative-leaning people across the country feel like, "Hey, I still prefer Pierre to those awful Liberals, but that was a kind of classy thing the prime minister did. I still won't vote for him, but I hate him slightly less," that's good for national unity.
My dream is that the Overton window be shifted such that our politics be normal again and such that Poilievre and those who act like him have no place in our civic life. I understand the impulse to crush rather than coddle one's adversaries - boy, do I. But I feel like "more people acting like him" might be the worst way to get fewer people to act like him, you know?
I live in Centretown,. two blocks from the Red Zone when the truckers were in town. No-one in my neighbourhood was discomfited by the trucker protest; everyone could carry on their business without impediment (unless, of course, if they worked downtown). I understand that the convoy protest was very irritating to those living in the area, but if anyone genuinely feels "traumatized" by it, I suggest contacting a mental health professional.
The thrust of Paul's argument is that Carney should not go out of his way at all—neither to be nice or to be vindictive. The liberal attitude should be that Mad Men meme: "I feel bad for you." ... "I don't think about you at all."
That's a good point. This is yet another time when "what would Poilievre do?" is not a question grown-ups with some human decency should ask. I hope this whole thing is a growth experience for him. Setbacks can open the door to self-reflection and personal growth.
Well, hopefully Canadians can unite over the World Cup next year cause it certainly is not happening over Toronto winning the Stanley Cup.
Leafs and Oilers in the Stanley Cup final.
I am game for that :)
Your insinuation that he lost because the Liberals ganged up on him is odd.
A few extra volunteers is not the reason he lost.
He lost for one main reason. Between this election and the last election he came out as a MAGA-adjacent troll who vocally supported a convoy of insurrectionists that seized the city his riding IS IN, threatened it's citizens and left a mess in its wake.
Many people in Carleton work downtown, they don't forget what he did.
Maybe there are multiple reasons for things? Hadrian’s armies couldn’t have made the people of Carleton do what they didn’t want to do. But if you think doorknocking is irrelevant to an election outcome, I know hundreds and hundreds of Liberals you should meet.
Lots of ridings get extra attention.
The fact that Poilievre couldn't even be bothered to show up for his riding's candidates debate is more consequential and a symptom of his apathy for the people he represented.
Maybe some riding in rural Alberta won't care that their MP doesn't respect them, or their city, but Carleton does.
Pretty condescending comment about Alberta. An apology would be appropriate. Respecting Poilievre’s loss, I expect Paul was correct - the loss likely was a combination of Poilievre’s threat to reduce the federal civil service (making up a large proportion of the riding voters), Carney’s attractiveness as a Liberal leader, the Liberal Party volunteer door knockers, Poilievre’s lack of attention to his own riding while he campaigned nationally, and finally the merits and work of Bruce Fanjoy.
...don't forget that the riding's boundaries were also adjusted - it is a far more urban riding now than it was in 2021.
This happened all over the place. Any adept politician and campaign, and certainly any MP that knows his/ her riding would accommodate and plan for these changes. Why all the excuses for someone who sought the highest office in the land on what is the very basics of the job?
Note: I didn’t claim this was the sole reason he lost, I acknowledged it as a factor.
I mean, I think you and Paul are both right. Poilievre's support of the convoy galvanized support against him in the riding, *and* drove out-of-town volunteers to campaign against him, and it was an iterative process. It's important to note that party canvassers are rarely trying to change minds - they're trying to get their party's supporters to the polls. No question, Poilievre alienated some. No question, Liberal volunteers helped convince some subset of those voters to get out and vote.
The difference is that Mr. Wells suggested that those volunteers, driven by their disgust at Poilievre's own actions, represented something that is not "his fault".
Poilievre is absolutely at fault for his own actions, personality and morals. That is what drove the volunteers.
Yes, and he got trounced. It brings to the forefront his central problem as leader, unlikability. Democracy can work in strange ways.
The Conservative candidates in general did not show up for all-candidates meetings.
Let's be real - Carleton got more than some "extra attention". The LPC literally flooded that riding with volunteers, both the boots on the ground variety and phone banks from across the country. Nothing illegal about that, but to downplay the resources that were deployed in an effort to deliver this result is a little disingenuous.
As for all candidates meetings, how many did Mr Carney attend?
Another Laurentian ‘elite’ who has likely never spent time in Alberta!
Albertans sure do care about who represents them and if Mr. Poilievre is forced upon them after they exercised their franchise just days ago, he should expect to work hard for their votes.
Horseshit. He'll waltz into Battle River and they'll thank him for it.
Just as they'd vote for a fire hydrant if you hung a "Fuck Trudeau" tie on it.
Hear hear. That strange remark about Albertans not caring if they have the respect of their representative was likely heat-of-the-moment. But it deserves an apology. We surely can't have devolved this quickly into treating other Canadians - anyone, really - as subhumans.
This is a PERFECT example of what online discourse does to us. These are Albertans, our country mates, ordinary people just like wherever “LSC” is from. But LSC just drops some insulting comment like it’s nothing. Because it’s all just anonymous text and endless glowing screens.
The internet is amazing for giving us forums like this one, but let’s face it, the human brain is not built for interacting like this, with no verbal or body language feedback from the person we’re talking to.
EDAs, the worker bees of our electoral system, wither and die when there is a long time MP because staff take on the work that volunteers do in an un-held riding. I don't know the state of the Carleton CPC EDA but there might not be much of it left after 20 years of Mr. Poilievre representing the riding . Not enough worker bees is a problem in any campaign.
In the last week of the election is was reported that volunteers were coming from as far away as Calgary to work the riding for Mr. Poilievre. The party knew that he was in trouble. He was in trouble because a) he views had become increasingly MAGA like b) his deeply negative messages didn't connect with the numbers of people he needed to win c) he promised to fire a lot of his constituents who work for the federal government d) he didn't understand the ballot question was Cdn. sovereignty & economic future and when he did, what he offered was luke warm at best e) he actively supported the Freedom Convoy which disrupted the lives of thousands of Ottawans f) Bruce Fanjoy won because he worked hard and listened to the people of Carleton. You could say a lot about Mr. Poilievre's but strong listening skills isn't one of his strengths.
I was hearing of rumblings in PPs riding even before Trudeau stepped down. Pierre did not read the room/riding very well. After 20 years, add the changes he wanted to push through, and at first, Carlton wasn’t sure what to do. Then things changed, and PM Carney appeared in the riding next door. The rest is history.
How long does Pierre have to find someone who will give up their seat? As Pierre owns 3 or 4 houses, at least 1 in the Ottawa area, I would expect him to give whoever is renting it 3 months' notice (An Ontario law?, it is a BC law), and no one has to worry about the Poilevre family being turned out on the street. I’m thinking he could get his wood man cave back. That’s a good thing, eh?
What if someone in BC or Alberta gives up their seat? Skippy will at least need a flat for when he is there. But he can afford to buy a place, even in BC.
Always find it fascinating when the people who market their proximity to power in this country, such as federal workers and consultants (benefit), don't know how to handle the protesters feeling disinfranchised attempting to interface with that power (cost). Many people who work around the country remember how you treated them, and don't forget what you did.
Maybe Trudeau should have at least talked to them and explained why he could not change the US decision not to allow non vaccinated truckers to enter the US. Just listen!
There is no world where the Prime Minister of Canada is going to debate people with Fuck Trudeau flags, insurrectionist views and Nazi paraphernalia about the merits of vaccination
The Fuck Carney flags are selling like hot cakes. So much for a reset.
Ok.Thanks
Ok I get it. No reason to debate he just had explain why. The people of Ottawa lost here. A sad time for Canada
That still would not have helped
He lost because (a) Ian Brodie shot his mouth off a week before the election about doing a DOGE in Ottawa and (b) a smiling, happy, upbeat Bruce Fanjoy showed up on the doorstep of every house in the riding. I saw Fanjoy in action last fall. Everyone told him he couldn't win (just as all the media said Poilievre owned the seat and couldn't lose the general). And it was tough. Redistribution gave away suburban seats and expanded the riding into the adjacent townships. That's why I thought Fanjoy would have a respectable showing but would not win. His campaign should be a case study for anyone who's told they can't win an election, right up there with Catherine McKenna's win over Paul Dewar in Ottawa Centre in 2015.
So how was it that he held the riding for 20 years then? It's funny how the people of Ottawa were so upset over the convoy when they didn't care a fig for what the people of Caledonia went through (which was a lot worse).
You understand Carleton riding is in Ottawa right? And Caledonia is not. That is why.
As a CPC supporter, I do think that Carney acting gratiously towards Pierre and governing the country compentently would do a lot to cool down the tension in this country and make Conservatives see him differently. There is going to be enough problems for the PM to deal with (America, Alberta, the PQ) that maybe just bringing down the temperature in this country a couple degrees would be nice.
Agree that bringing down the temp would be nice and Carney may well do so. Has PP ever tried this approach? Might have saved him his riding.
Haha alright, but I don't know if talking like that "brings down the tempature". My point being, the Liberals have the chance to take the moral high ground and they should seize it. Continued pettiness only pushes us back to where we were under Poilievre/Trudeau. It's a new day in Canada!
A good question is "what would Mr. Poilievre do if the situation was reversed?" I don't live in his head so I can only speculate that he would put his foot on his opponent's neck and hold it there. Having said that, I think Mr Carney should call the byelection quickly and with a short time frame for the vote. I would suggest running a Liberal candidate to make it interesting, and probably let him stay in the opposition residence till the vote takes place. If this becomes the scenario we can only hope it does not turn into a Scorpion and the Frog story.
Nothing will bring down the temperature of people who don't care about facts.
I don't think the Liberals are good at doing nice...although they could try it. I still think they are dicks.
As you feel about Liberals in general, many Canadians feel about Poilievre in much the same way. Just possibly Poilievre has not been good at doing nice. Although he could try......
Ouf...the irony is strong here.
100% in agreement.
This is exactly right. Grace.
Good thoughts.
Would only disagree on sentiment that Liberals should refrain from running a candidate against Poilievre.
We don’t know what riding he’ll pick, or which MP will be replaced. But wherever it is, he will be parachuting into a riding NOT to serve the constituency of that riding, but to serve his own desires for power. I think that matters. Maybe the MP he replaces had deep roots in the community and was popular in their own right. Seems arrogant to assume everyone voted for party over the candidate, and some might not want Poilievre as their new MP.
As you say, he is not a newly elected leader so in this case I don’t think he deserves the free pass. And with an opponent he may be forced to answer local reporters questions.
100% this.
If he were a first-time leader that would be one thing. The fact is he has been an MP for 20 years and will be parachuted in.
He is a known quantity and the people of the riding deserve a chance to say whether or not he reflects their values, with a full slate of options.
You know, the Liberals could pass on running a candidate. But that doesn't mean the NDP has to. There's a party that might just be out to prove something.
And needs the seat!
There’s a rumour he’ll run in Edmonton Griesbach, where the NDP incumbent lost, with a significant vote split.
Given the CPCs history of eating their own, I would suspect that Poilievre’s road to leadership this time around, however self-serving, would be done with the blessing of the party
To be fair to all, Liberal new MP and nice guy community activist Bruce Fanjoy did get footwork help from other local ridings, which is wholly acceptable. Word is his people had 500 helpers (!) including people phoning from Toronto and Vancouver. I think that’s great. the Conservatives similarly had flyins when it became clear the CPC was “in trouble”. The result was a massive participation rate in Carleton. Highest early voting in Canada. And 82% overall voting, compared to 69% nationally. That sounds like success to me.
Carlton also had the amazing expandable accordion ballot. 1m in length!
That should be a hinderance (or boost) to all equally. Possibly less for Poilievre because of name recognition.
All good points but the CPC should look for a new leader. Propaganda Pete and Andrew Scheer should move over to the People's Party where they really belong and let actual conservatives rebuild the party into something informed people could vote for.
Bring back the PCs.
I find that a lot of people who still get excited at the prospect of debating the Freedom Convoy, three years later, draw energy from a cartoonish understanding of who was on the side they disagree with. If you think downtown Ottawa is populated by WEF frequent flyers, or that everyone who parked there three Februaries ago was a hardened insurrectionist, you may need to get out more.
I have to disagree with you on this one. I know a few of the young people who live there, my physiotherapist and her partner for example, and the coffee shop staffers, etc., the people who work for NFPs and NGOs, etc. , and I was told first hand about the treatment they were subjected to. It is amazing the lack of recognition or acknowledgement by those across the country who claim naivety, patriotism, free speech, etc., on the part of those who visited for three solid weeks. This was not an occupation of Parliament Hill, it was real people with real lives. Three weeks!
Yes, I will still get excited Paul, some cartoon.
It's not at all clear to me which claim of mine you're trying to rebut here.
just parking... really?!
Wow. I really can't do much with such a mulishly literal-minded reading of one word. Best of luck to you.
I mean, I wrote a book about the thing and several thousand words of coverage over several months. But go ahead and fixate on a word.
Let me quote you:
I'm amused by the vitriol in some of the responses...
Wow! so dismissive of other's perspectives when they don't match yours. I just picked the one word that summed up your bias, the entire comparison tries to create an equivalency between real people and their lives being completely overturned for three weeks, as if the other perspective can just be passed off as 'everyone who parked there three Februarys ago ...' are somehow not equated to 'engaging in criminal intimidation for three weeks' or similar depictions of their behavior. They were not occupying Parliament Hill, they were taking over a community.
I am so sorry that you cannot accept another perspective.
I thought your rules required respectful dialogue and disagreement.
Do you have any other personal insults for me?
Have a great day Paul.
While I agree that Carney will be too busy (not appear to be, as you seem to be suggesting, Paul) to be concerned with the literal melodrama of the CPC leader (that is ALL that he is right now), why should he, or anyone else bend themselves into a pretzel in order to accommodate Mr. Poilievre, who, again, is not in any way attached to the Government of Canada currently?
Let's not treat his loss, or really, Fanjoy's victory, as nothing. It was something. It was democracy. The people have spoken. The ONLY people who had direct say in Mr. Poilievre election gave him a pass. And Poilievre, as of yesterday, anyway, hadn't spoken to Fanjoy to do the decent offering of concession and congratulations. He is clearly consumed by his own personal fate and how to get back in the house, as if he'd misplaced his keys as opposed to being turfed by the very voters whom he took for granted.
I do not happen to think that Carney will rag the puck and not call a by-election until later, but absolutely Poilievre should have opponents in the race because he will be a parachute candidate with no attachment to whatever constituency in Alberta or elsewhere he will be foisted upon, and those voters deserve a CHOICE. They will have suffered 1) a bait and switch and 2) will have to endure another election. Yet, this conversation seems only to be about Poilievre and his sacred opportunity to have a swift and obstacle-free return to the House. Isn't it about the VOTERS and CITIZENS who these people are supposed to represent?
Even on Conservative reddit (r/wildrose) they are already calling PP 'Carleton's sloppy seconds', so no one should be thinking that a majority of voters anywhere will absolutely enamoured of giving someone so focused on 'owning the Libs' and his crowd size that he missed the basics, a 'paved' second chance that is afforded to no one else and crucially, that he would offer to no one else.
I like your thinking P-dub. It would show real strength to pave the way for Poilievre back to a seat in the House. "I'm not afraid to face you in QP!" Anyway, Poilievre will take a seat so safely Conservative, it would be pointless to challenge him, and at least if he runs unopposed, it blunts the "victory" of his "triumphant return." But where do you think he'll run? I'd be delighted if he took a seat occupied by some utter fencepost like Arnold Viersen or Rachel Thomas, the sort of brainless MAGA seatwarmer Canada can do without.
I agree with you, Paul, that a by-election should be called as soon as possible. Your second reason ranks highest with me. If Carney is indeed the values-driven person he claims to be, and I believe he is, he should demonstrate this and follow the time-honoured principle: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Letting him stay at Stornaway, probably the most practical choice since one way or the other Poilièvre will be back, is also the right thing to do for the same reason. Carney won the election. He doesn't need to take revenge by punishing his opponent.
It is difficult to be gracious with a man as reflexively nasty as Poilièvre. Trying not to be as nasty as he would be, however, is good advice. Your argument, however, that waiting to call a by-election late would cause a busy PM any more distraction than calling it early is specious. It is a single, momentary decision either way. Still, I agree that it should be called earlier rather than later. As for whether the Liberals should run anyone against him, it depends. If the MP he aims to replace is from a long-safe Conservative riding buried in rural Alberta, don’t run anyone. You’re not going to beat him there anyway. If, on the other hand, he chooses to make a show of running in a recently-acquired GTA seat, run a “star” against him and beat his behind as hard as you can. Don’t be gratuitously nasty, but don’t let him walk on you either. Stornaway is a trifle. The person he appoints to take his place in the House while he can’t be there is unlikely to demand that he leave. So leave him and his family there.
I would be much more hard-nosed. Pierre Poilievre spews hatred. He would not survive a real-world job interview. He was paid $299,900 last year and enjoyed a $200,000+ official residence expense allowance on top of that. He threw that all away and now expects sympathy and cooperation. At the very least, I would keep him in the cooler throughout 2025. Let his party pay him an ordinary MP’s salary at no expense to this taxpayer. Don’t let him assume that he’s entitled to Stornaway just because we’re all nice Canadians. He’s a person who plays hard and never yields; he neither attracts nor deserves kindness from the very people he has mercilessly disparaged for 20 years. His pitiful result in Carleton should sting, not be minimized.
I agree, I'd never hire the man. He'd probably not last a full interview in my office. Somebody in these comments called him "reflexively nasty", a perfect description - along with PW's calling him "hollow". But for heaven's sakes, let the family stay in their house until his near term fate is decided.
Re the byelection, is there some harm I don't see in waiting to call it till after the G-7?
Absolutely agree on all accounts, set a new tone in this country, we've had 10 years of theatrics and Shakespearean show performances from his predecessor, Carney can demonstrate that maybe change means change and not more of the same.
Mr. Poilievre has certainly EARNED his current predicament, of being unemployed, homeless, and without friends.
Those softies among us would act essentially to reward his poor behavior by negating all consequences, in the belief that he will be touched by grace, and, renewed, would become the person we always thought he should be, but has never seemed even slightly interested in becoming.
Another argument is that we should instead follow the rules and/or conventions.
Firstly, Stornoway is for winners, not for losers. He should be made to vacate immediately.
Secondly, he is no longer a parliamentarian, and should therefore have none of their privileges until he earns them in a by-election, to be held at the pleasure of whomever is inexplicably willing to sacrifice their own privileges for him, and of the those who won the election.
The most significant competitive weakness of progressives is that they too quickly turn the other cheek, while regressives just go even lower, and then win. Have we learned nothing from America?
Perhaps then, we should simply ask, if the circumstances were reversed, "what would Jenni Byrne do?"
I agree so much with all of this. For perspective, today Peter Julian, also an MP since 2004, and the House Leader for his own party, noted that he has 20 days to do 5 moves: out of his constit office, out of his campaign office, out of his MP office, out of the House Leader's office and out of his Ottawa's apartment. No one is giving him a free pass. He has served loyally and now he's lost and he's taking it on the chin and getting it done. I have utter respect for that.
Brutal. Poilievre instead, having lost the election doubly, country and constituency, will be covered with gold by the Conservatives, and feels entitled to also be by his adversaries, the victorious governing party.
None of this is just.
Repel the voters, squander the lead, lose the riding, concede the defeat, contest the byelection, rejoin the House, continue the tantrum, slander the competent, blame the media, collect the pension.
I know. I'm exhausted.
No. The ugliness of modern Canadian politics (for which Poilievre himself was partially responsible) needs to be rejected, just as Canadians rejected Trudeau).
I agree that "The ugliness of modern Canadian politics" needs to be rejected, but not that Trudeau is responsible for it, although he didn't do enough to prevent it.
We need to hold Poilievre explicitly and publicly to account, or we essentially condone, normalize and perpetuate such corrosive behavior.
I do not like Pierre Poilievre's ugly politics, or his mean-spirited approach to public policy.
WRT Justin Trudeau, I was so deeply disappointed by him, as I expected him to follow in his father's footsteps. I know that Pierre Trudeau was not an easy man, but he was a great prime minister in many respects (the repatriation of the Constitution and his willingness to stand against the illiberal tribalism of Quebec nationalists were hugely important).
JT never really lived up to that legacy--and his fundamentally solipsistic approach to progressive politics were very much a complementary foil to the divisive populism of Pierre Poilievre and Andrew Scheer (not to mention Stephen Harper).
And on foreign and defence policy in particular, he was essentially a failure.
PP owns 3 or 4 houses. One or two in Ottawa, the others in Alberta. I believe they are all currently rented out. So he is not homeless, not by a long shot.
We should never reward his bad behaviour. No one's bad behaviour. Rules/conventions are good. If he cannot get some poor sot to give up a riding (fairly decent pay, great benefits, excellent pension) within a reasonable time limit, 5,6 weeks, then yes, he should move out of Stornoway. And yes, run a Liberal and an NDP, and a Green if they like. Give the people a wide-ranging choice, as their original pick is tossed aside.
It's unlikely that he wouldn't be elected in another riding in a byelection. He has young kids & moving is disruptive for kids. Lets not punish his kids for the sins of their father.
He's not "homeless" - my understanding is that he's been investing in real estate since his election as MP - he probably owns a number of homes.
And re: Stornoway, I think pretty much by definition, Stornoway is the residence of the leader of the party that lost the last election. He could have won every single vote in Carleton - he'd still have lost the national election. He'd have lived in Stornoway not by dint of having won his seat, but by dint of having lost the country.
George, you're ruining my turn of phrase!
Perhaps you're correct; perhaps Stornoway IS the residence for losers. But surely you need to be a parliamentarian first?
We should aim for better than what Jenni Byrne would do. :-)
You've convinced me, on all counts. It would be the classy thing to do, and can't we please be classy? I know it's 2025, but come on. A good step towards demonstrating that the "New and We Promise, Improved" - Liberals aren't all talk.
I like your arguments Mr Wells. It would be entirely consistent with the PM’s victory speech to be magnanimous towards the CPC leader. I say that knowing to my core that the same graciousness would not come from PP but that is irrelevant here.