My Aching Joints

I have to admit I am feeling somewhat abused these days, and my psychic joints are paying the price. First it was 'elbows up', then it was 'elbows down", followed by the latest exercise, clearly the most painful of all, 'bowing down',  Like the old man on the porch brandishing his cane, I want to tell the kids to either get off my lawn or show some spine.

And I am clearly not alone in my sense of injury. The other day, Andrew Phillips wrote:

I won’t pretend to know what was going through the PM’s mind as he bowed to the president [i.e., apologized for the Reagan-Ford ad]. I can only assume he was thinking many of the same things any self-respecting Canadian would be thinking. Such as: “I can’t believe I have to do this.”

And what did Carney get for that act of self-abasement? Nothing, as far as we can tell.

But this apology is troubling for a lot of reasons. It’s not just that it makes Canada look weak and divided, though the hard reality is that this country is both of those things right now, much as we’d all like to think otherwise.

It’s worse than that. It reinforces the worst of all the things we’ve learned about Trump and how he deals with anyone who gets in his way. Which is that, according to him and his acolytes, pushing back is the greatest sin for those he’s decided to lean on.

Such grovelling, according to Phillips, is an affront to truth.

It accepts the premise that it’s illegitimate for Canada to make its case with the United States openly and unapologetically. It undercuts the notion that talks between Canada and the U.S. are a dialogue between two parties with their own valid interests. Not between equals, exactly, but between countries that have the most basic right to advocate for themselves.

Letters to the editor reflect widespread discontent with what Carney did. 

Carney’s apology to Trump an embarrassment for Canada

As a proud Canadian I was embarrassed when Prime Minister Mark Carney apologized to President Donald Trump for Doug Ford’s TV ad, a perfectly fair critique of Trump’s reckless tariff threats.

That ad spoke truth to power. Carney’s apology spoke weakness to it.

This wasn’t leadership. It was capitulation. Apologizing when nothing wrong was done isn’t defaulting to Canadian politeness. Rather, it erodes our credibility and emboldens bullies. Trump’s bluster over tariffs is the real offence — risking a trade war that harms everyone. Ford did what was right by advertising the truth. Whereas Carney’s needless deference whitewashes the aggressor and makes Canada look weak.

Where does this end? Will Carney next grovel to U.S. ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra, the Trump clone whose rhetoric has been laced with expletives?

At this rate, Carney will likely apologize on our behalf for existing on the same continent. It’s time for Carney to reclaim the persona he showed during his election run: the bold economist who charmed Americans on The Daily Show with wit, courage, candor and unapologetic smarts. He was the anti-Trump: thoughtful, internationalist, unafraid to call out nonsense.

Canadians aren’t being led right now; we’re being shamed. We voted for a leader who’d stand tall on the world stage, “Elbows Up,” advocating for fair trade, enduring alliances and a respected Canada.

Prime Minister Carney, stop apologizing when you are in the right. Reclaim your voice. Our pride and our principles depend on it.

Tony D’Andrea, Toronto

Our PM needs to stop apologizing to our neighbour to the south

Canada owes no apologies to Donald Trump or the United States. Trump cares only about his ego and the almighty dollar.

I’m sure many decent Americans would agree. The apology our prime minister owes is to Canadians for wilting under pressure.

Stop being nice and stand up for our country.

That is what strong leaders do.

Rick Lockman, Orillia, Ont.

You stand up to bullies, you don’t say sorry to them

As a left-winger, I never thought I’d ever say this, but I’m totally on Doug Ford’s side when it comes to standing up to Trump.

You cannot appease bullies and tyrants, you must confront them. Ford was right to run the Reagan ad during the World Series. Prime Minister Mark Carney was wrong to apologize for it to a wannabe dictator.

It’s as if Carney decided to go as Neville Chamberlain for Halloween.

Steve Andrews, Toronto

Here's one more:

Good cop, bad cop

Re “Ford the bully, Carney the conciliator: the dream team” (Report on Business, Nov. 3): Sure, we’re known for politeness, but there’s a difference between courtesy and submission. When Doug Ford aired the truth about tariffs on U.S. television, that was courage.

That’s why Mark Carney’s apology shames me as a proud Canadian. After nine months of failed diplomacy, he should read the national mood of resistance to Donald Trump.

Mr. Ford stood up for Canada; Mr. Carney bowed down. His deference whitewashes the aggressor and makes us look like beggars in our own backyard.

We voted for a leader who’d stand tall on the world stage, “elbows up,” advocating for fair trade, enduring alliances and a respected Canada. He should rediscover the bold economist who once charmed Americans on The Daily Show with wit, courage and candor, and spoke truth without flinching.

Mr. Carney should stop apologizing when he is in the right and reclaim his voice. Our pride and principles depend on it.

Tony D’Andrea Toronto

National pride is a delicate virtue, one that needs to be regularly nourished by strong, visionary leadership. I fear that presently, there is a deep void that no one, as far as I can discern, seems fit to fill. 

A Small Man With Small Ideas

If you led a majority government and were riding high in the polls, what would you do with your power? Would you have a vision for a better future for the people? Would you enact far-reaching legislation  benefitting the majority? Would you, in other words, demonstrate on a daily basis that the people's trust in you was been well-placed?

If you are Ontario Premier Doug Ford, the answer to all of the above is a resounding "No."

Consider the evidence. After a four-and-a-half month legislative absence, most of what the government of Ontario has 'accomplished' is small-minded, more befitting a city mayor than the leader of Canada's most powerful province. Indeed, it has in fact been suggested by many that Doug Ford never got the job he really wanted: the mayoralty of Toronto. While he may have lost that race to John Tory in 2014, he has never lost his interest in meddling in what are clearly municipal matters.

Take the issue of bike lanes, which Ford believes is part of a "war on cars." Despite the fact that his efforts to dismantle them in Toronto are now on hold thanks to a ruling that deemed them unconstitutional, indefatigable Doug is appealing the decision. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruled 

that removal of the target bike lanes will put people at increased risk of harm and death, which engages the right to life and security of the person."

Citizens' safety seems but of passing interest to this premier. What other explanation can there be for his latest legislation to ban speed cameras, proclaiming them to be a mere cash grab from, once again, motorists. This decision, which was hotly opposed by most rational people including mayors and parents (they were deployed mainly near schools) saw many trying to seek compromise with an obdurate Ford. 

Instead of a ban, the mayors said the province should consider implementing the following measures on ASE in school zones:

• setting cameras at a reasonable threshold before a ticket is issued
• time of day operations tied to school and community use times
• a warning ticket issued on the first offence
• a set fine that is not double due to community safety zone
• large signs alerting drivers to the presence of the cameras
• blackout on additional fines for seven days after receiving the first ticket

All efforts were to no avail, and the cameras will be deemed illegal as of mid-November. 

The Ministry of Transportation has stated that eventually they will put up more signage in designated areas, along with speed bumps and roundabouts. There is thus far no indication that the province will pay for those changes. 

Although I could go on, I will give just one more example of a government consumed by minutia that apparently crowds out any 'big ideas' (Doug Ford's tunnel fantasy notwithstanding). A few weeks ago Paul Calandra, Ford's Education Minister, was prepared to introduce legislation to fire Brant Haldimand Catholic School Board trustee Mark Watson for not paying back his portion of $45,000 for a lavish trip to Italy. Fortunately, Watson resigned and the legislation did not move forward.

So there we have it - a small-minded premier with small-minded ideas. One suspects and hopes that once Ford doffs his Captain Canada costume, it will be apparent to many that the emperor indeed has no clothes.

An Encouraging Sign?

Like an elderly, obstreperous uncle included in festive celebrations to the lasting regret of the rest of the family, it would appear that in some quarters, Donald Trump has overstayed his welcome. Or, if I may switch to a metaphor, cracks are starting to appear in the foundation of his support. 

The other day, five Republican senators joined their Democrat colleagues in voting to roll back Trump's tariffs on Brazil.

By a vote of 52 to 48, the Senate approved a measure that would roll back the 50% tariffs on Brazil imposed by President Trump in July. Five Republicans joined with Democrats to pass it: Susan Collins of Maine, Alaska's Lisa Murkowski, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Kentucky's Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul.

The success of the resolution, which needed just a simple majority to pass, may only prove symbolic. Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is unlikely to bring the measure up for a vote in the House, and even if he did President Trump would almost certainly veto it.

The vote wasn't the first time Senate Republicans have broken with Trump on tariffs. In April, a measure to block tariffs on Canada drew a simple majority of the Republican-led Senate as a handful of G.O.P senators joined Democrats to push the measure across the finish line. Kaine and Paul co-sponsored the measure, and McConnell, Collins and Murkowski voted in favor. 

That the vote may merely  be symbolic is only secondarily significant; more worrying for Trump should be the fact that even a few members of his own party are willing to break ranks with his heedless tariff policies. Surely a greater rift is possible?  

On another front, it appears that the American public is not entirely behind Trump's treatment of Canada.

Donald Trump, no fan of CNN, likely wasn’t watching on Monday when the network’s poll expert ripped into the president for his tariff tantrum with Canada — and revealed how much damage it could be doing to him.

Back last November, [Harry] Enten said, a slight majority of Americans — 52 per cent — were in favour of tariffs. Now, 60 per cent are telling the pollsters they oppose new tariffs.

 Enten then went on to compare how Americans feel about Trump to how they feel about Canada. The president is definitely in a popularity slump, Enten said, while Canada is not.

“The net popularity rating of Canada is plus 49 percentage points,” Enten said. “Look at the net popularity rating of Donald Trump here in the United States. It’s minus 10. We’re talking about Canada coming out nearly 60 points ahead on the net popularity rating.” 

Of course, any news that Trump doesn't like he automatically mislabels as fake news. We can only hope momentum builds to the point where even the mad king cannot ignore the battering at his gates.

UPDATE: This from Global News:

The U.S. Senate passed legislation Wednesday that would nullify U.S. tariffs on Canada, just as U.S. President Donald Trump is engaged in trade talks in Asia as well as an increasingly bitter trade spat with U.S.’s northern neighbor that is one of its largest economic partners.

The 50-46 tally was the latest in a series of votes this week to terminate the national emergencies that Trump has used to impose tariffs.

While the resolutions won’t ultimately take effect, they have proven to be an effective way for Democrats to expose cracks between the president’s trade policy and Republican senators who have traditionally supported free trade arguments.

It's Plain To See

Just a brief post today. For anyone clear-headed enough to see, it is obvious that the United States is led by a man-baby. Trump's recent tantrum over Doug Ford's ad attests to that fact. Two letters in today's Star are offer some thoughtful reflection on his 'leadership'.

Susan Delacourt’s opinion piece caused me to think outside the box. Since neither thoughtful and informed discussions, nor good cop-bad cop tactics are effective ways to get Donald Trump to consider fair negotiations, how about bringing together different kinds of experts that might know better how to crack that nut?

Since Trump acts like a petulant and vindictive child, why not try brainstorming with a team of leading child psychologists to explore ways to tap into a more rational side of Trump?

Think about it: All methods of negotiating, such as those that might be taught at Harvard Law School mentioned in the opinion piece, assume rational and mature thought as a base line.

So why not try an approach with Trump more suited to deal with the behaviour he is demonstrating?

Annie Brown, Newmarket

 

 As an American now living in Canada, I would like to thank our president and his loose cannon rhetoric.

Since his failed bid to annex this fine country, angry Canadians are spending their vacation money at home. I live in rural Cape Breton, and we had the best tourist season ever.

Keep up the good work King Donald.

Martin Aucoin, Margaree, N.S. 

Perhaps a measure of wry disengagement is part of the antidote to Trump's childishness; it may help to save both our national character and our sense of humour.

And The Walls Came Tumbling Down

In conversation the other night with my wife, I opined that the Americans have to hit rock bottom before having any chance of digging themselves out of the morass they've created by giving Trump his second presidency. She asked, "Well, what is rock bottom?" While I had no real answer, I suggested that perhaps reactions to the destruction of a good part of that historical institution, the White House, might be the start. 

I was perhaps mistaken.

Even I, one with little sympathy for the U.S., am stunned and somewhat sickened by the wanton destruction of the East Wing to make way for a huge (90,000 sq. ft), gold-plated ballroom that will serve the elite. Surely a good portion of Americans would see it as a metaphor of all the terrible and tawdry things their president has wrought since beginning his second term.

Actually, no, if an article in the NYT is any indication. They talked to seven voters, admittedly a small number, about their reactions to the destruction.

Randy Dutton, a retired Navy commander and a Republican, was pleased with Mr. Trump’s efforts to remake the East Wing. It made sense on many levels, he said, because Mr. Trump and future presidents will now have more space to have receptions.

“Almost every president has wished to have more space for entertaining,” he said. “Guest lists for presidents and kings can get pretty big. Diplomatically, if you can get more people in there, you can enhance the prestige of the United States.”

Not everyone shares Dutton's enthusiasm.

Thien Doan, a Democrat, ... feels outraged.

“We’re desecrating a part of history that we should have been celebrating,” Mr. Doan said.

The ballroom doesn’t seem necessary to him. Instead, he sees it as a vanity project.

“They’re molding buildings and the country after his own image,” he said. “It shouldn’t be about him. It should be about the people.”

Those who voted for Trump seem unperturbed by the plans; instead, some turn their guns on those who criticize the destruction.

Brian D. Kozlowski, who voted for Mr. Trump, said he was not especially interested in the White House demolition and construction.

“What is interesting,” he said, is the reaction from Mr. Trump’s critics, whom he called the “far left.”

 “It doesn’t matter what the administration does,” he said. “Criticism is levied extra hard — and provided more media coverage — because it’s President Trump.”

Others are simply conflicted.

 Adria Laboy, who calls herself a political independent, has mixed feelings about the president’s decision to start building a ballroom this year. On the one hand, the multimillion-dollar construction project will create jobs, she said, but on the other hand, the timing seems off, given all the other urgent issues.

“It’s a weird time to see it,” said Ms. Laboy, who does community outreach for a health insurance agency. “We have all these things happening, like crime, him trying to control crime in certain cities.”

“And then they’re building a ballroom. It just doesn’t make sense.”

Even Democrats don't seem all that phased.

Annabelle Collins, who voted for Kamala Harris ...   feels indifferent about the president’s efforts to change it.

“To me, it’s just a building,” she said. 

Yet even while saying this, she adds an acute observation which I thought would be commonly shared.

If anything, for Ms. Collins, the demolition of the East Wing served as a metaphor: “It almost symbolizes what he’s doing to American democracy.”

While it would be good to see how national polls report Americans' reaction to this massive act of vandalism, it is perhaps telling that for the most part, they do not seem especially concerned about Trump's desecration. That, more than anything else, should chill the rest of us. 

 

 

Progressive Bloggers Is Back

 And it's at the same web address: https://progressivebloggers.ca/

Trump's Trade Tantrum

 

I was going to write about something else today, but now that Trump has had his predictable tantrum over the above ad, perhaps this will serve as a wakeup call to Mark Carney and his government that any hope of securing a stable, long lasting trade agreement with the U.S. is but a sad delusion.

Trump had this to say:

U.S. President Donald Trump says he is terminating all trade negotiations with Canada over an advertisement by the Ontario government that uses the late U.S. president Ronald Reagan's own words to send an anti-tariff message to American audiences.

In a late-night post to his Truth Social platform, Trump attacked the ad, which he attributed to Canada rather than Ontario, as fraudulent and fake.

"TARIFFS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY, AND ECONOMY, OF THE U.S.A." Trump wrote. "Based on their egregious behavior, ALL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS WITH CANADA ARE HEREBY TERMINATED."

In a later post on Friday morning, Trump claimed “CANADA CHEATED AND GOT CAUGHT!!!"

"They fraudulently took a big buy ad saying that Ronald Reagan did not like Tariffs, when actually he LOVED TARIFFS FOR OUR COUNTRY, AND ITS NATIONAL SECURITY,” he wrote. “Canada has long cheated on Tariffs, charging our farmers as much as 400 [per cent]. Now they, and other countries, can’t take advantage of the U.S. any longer."

Clearly, the time is drawing very near when we have to assert both our trade independence and sovereignty, as the mad king will not stop until he has crushed both. Appeasement attempts have been an abject failure, and we need to assert the leverage we have: energy and rare earth minerals come readily to mind. 

The only bright spot that has emerged thus far, marking a departure from our usual supine reaction to the U.S., is the fact that there are going to be tangible penalties for both Stellantis and GM over their ceasing production at two plants in Ontario.

As CBC News first reported, the two multinational manufacturers will no longer be exempt from paying Canada’s retaliatory tariffs on as many U.S.-assembled vehicles as before.

The move is an attempt to put pressure on the companies to reinvest in Canadian production and workers to get this benefit back and avoid a big tariff bill.

"This action follows the automakers' unacceptable decision to scale back their manufacturing presences in Canada, directly breaching their commitments to the country and Canadian workers," the government said in a late-night media release.

And those penalties will be consequential.

 The ministers announced that effective immediately, the government is lowering the amount of American-assembled vehicles GM can import tariff-free by 24 per cent and cutting Stellantis's amount by 50 per cent.

"I think Canadians and the industry want the government to be tough on companies that don't own up to those partnerships that in many cases have been worth billions," said Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association.

"This is a great move."

While these tariffs will raise the Canadian price of GM and Stellantis vehicles, the obvious answer, and likely intent of the penalties, is for consumers to avoid buying their products. Since Canada represents a very important market for American cars, this move will hurt their profits considerably.

Perhaps we are finally deciding that we will no longer give our lunch money to the bully. 

 

UPDATED: All Is Not Lost?

There are many days when it's hard to feel hope. It is especially true when we think about the relentless bullying Canada receives at the hands of the mad king, Donald Trump. High tariffs, or high tariff threats, are  the only arrows in his small quiver, and our economy is suffering as a result. Sadly, in sharp contrast to the rousing, even bellicose, Liberal rhetoric of our last federal election, it seems we are turning over, with nary a word, our lunch money to the fascist and receiving nothing in return, just more abuse. 

Capitulation is never a pretty sight; however, Mark Carney refuses to get tough, even undoing counter-tariffs that he had imposed against the United States. The conclusion I draw is that we are giving up the fight. The soothing promise of better relations in the future with Trump (i.e., a renegotiation of the CUSMA agreement) seems to be the justification for our meekness, but there is nothing at all to suggest a winning strategy is at play here.

Jim Stanford says it doesn't have to be this way. The insufferable insistence by the U.S. that they alone will manufacture North American automobiles cannot be allowed to stand, and Stellantis's announcement that it will commit to a $13-billion American expansion at the expense of its Brampton works demands a strong Canadian response.

[T]he sheer gall of Stellantis’ action is shocking. It is breaking explicit commitments made to all its key partners: its own workers (in a binding labour contract), the federal and provincial governments (in binding covenants attached to various subsidies), and auto parts companies (which invested hundreds of millions in new tooling and capital for Brampton).

Despite the fact that our auto exports to the U.S. are down considerably, Stanford warns of something even worse:

If corporations respond to Trump’s extortion by shifting long-run investment to the U.S., Canada’s industrial capacity will be destroyed.

That’s why the Stellantis decision cannot stand. It would set a precedent that quickly spreads into all other high-tech industries.

It’s no coincidence these 232 tariffs are aimed at every one of Canada’s high-tech success stories: auto, trucks, steel and other basic metals, soon to be joined by aerospace, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, industrial machinery and more.

Strong government action is required:

Last year Stellantis sold 130,000 new vehicles here — most imported, most of those from the U.S. At present Stellantis mostly avoids Canada’s 25 per cent counter-tariff on vehicle imports from the U.S., thanks to a clever Canadian duty remission program.

 Ottawa should threaten full 25 per cent tariffs on all Stellantis imports (costing $1.5 billion per year), until it recommits to completing the tooling at Brampton, paying interim income support to its workforce and then fully utilizing the plant when it’s finished.

Pushing back against Stellantis will send a signal to companies in every other high-tech industry. If you want access to Canada’s market, Canada’s resources and Canada’s supply chains, you must maintain a full-fledged production footprint here.

That Stellantis made such the decision it did is a testament to the abject failure of the Carney government's appeasement efforts, which included

multiple concessions and personal flattery. While we talk nice, [Trump] races full-speed to steal as many high-tech, high-wage jobs as he can. 

I read this morning that Industry Minister Melanie Joly summoned Stellantis to  Ottawa to explain itself. I'm sure she gave them a stern talking to, and threatened unspecified 'consequences'. However, since the Carney government has raised appeasement to a national level, I have my deep doubts whether anything substantive will be done, and people like Jim Stanford will likely find that his strong, sound advice will be not be taken under advisement. 

UPDATE: Well, another one bites the dust. GM Canada has announced the closure of the Ingersol plant, putting 1200 people out of work. It is the plant that the provincial and federal governments invested $500 million towards retooling to make electrified Bright Drop vans. The company cites low demand, but assured everyone that they "look forward to continuing our discussions with the government and our partners to identify other opportunities."

I'll just bet they do, eh?

UPDATED: A Balm to The Spirit

While I often talk about critical thinking on this blog, I always say that I aspire to the ideal it represents. And there is one offence I regularly commit that is anathema to the spirit of critical thinking: my wholesale condemnation of the 'United' States, which, technically speaking, is a gross overgeneralization.. But that condemnation comes not just because of who leads them; it is also thanks to the ingrained ethos of Americans, that they are the greatest in the world, their guns ensure their safety, etc. etc. ad nauseam.

My friend Gary often points out that there are good Americans, people who are totally opposed to the malignant, narcissistic fascist dictator (I'm not sure there is any other kind) who currently occupies the White House. My stock response is usually something along the lines of, "Yeah, but look who they elected to lead them." To that I might add the legislative body, Congress, so cravenly supine and obsequious in the face of their mad king's depredations.

One thing dictators hate is to be mocked and protected against. Their fragile egos, bolstered by the people they surround themselves with, just cannot accept that they aren't universally loved. I was therefore heartened by yesterday's grand display of opposition to the tyrant. Here are some photos from the No Kings Protests that took place across America and, indeed, the world. Perhaps the spirit of America is not dead yet.

Oh, and this one has to hurt:

UPDATE: I just found some more photos that really pack a punch and show the fury of Americans at Trump and his cronies:

UPDATED: A Pale Reflection, But Still A Reflection

I had a phone conversation the other day with a friend I rarely see. A Canadian by birth, Jon has worked for many years outside of the country, first in Britain and then in United States, where he now resides. Whenever he calls, our conversation inevitably turns to his country of current residence; we both abhor what has happened, and agree that fascism has arrived there.

I told him that even though we have the Trumpian element here, (apparently, about 25% of Conservative supporters like Trump) political sentiments on the whole are far less extreme and far more sane than in his country. Unfortunately, I may have spoken too soon.

PP, or Trump lite, is sounding more and more like the fascist, echoing his language and aims in two key areas.

[T]he federal Conservative party ... has released a new petition taking aim at DEI and what it calls “bloated” bureaucracy and “identity checkboxes.”

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre sent the link out to his X followers on Thanksgiving Monday, imploring them to sign on to end DEI and “restore the merit principle.”

There’s even a new slogan from the party that brought you “axe the tax”: “DEI spending and government waste needs to DIE,” the petition reads.

As we know, Herr Trump has taken it upon himself to end DEI in his country, playing upon the popular, and essentially racist, assertion that such programs hire those who are less qualified than white people, thereby essentially discriminating against the 'beleaguered' white race. I won't bother explaining why this is a foul canard, but if you don't believe me, do your own research from reputable sources.

The second play from the Trump playbook is PP's stance on birthright citizenship.

Poilievre also endorsed what another Conservative MP, Michelle Rempel Garner, was preaching — an end to birthright citizenship. Or, as Poilievre called it in another post, “birth tourism.”

Again, there’s an echo from one of Trump’s first executive orders on taking office.

“The privilege of United States citizenship is a priceless and profound gift,” the order states, going on to explain that citizenship would not be conferred to any child born in that country to a mother or father not lawfully present in the U.S. or there on a temporary basis.

“Canadian citizenship is a honour and privilege, and it must always be treated as such,” Poilievre said in an Oct. 10 post on X, formerly Twitter.

The racists amongst us will refuse to believe that  

[n]either of these seemingly Trump-inspired initiatives by the Conservatives are scourges in Canada. Fewer than 1,500 of the nearly 400,000 children born in Canada in 2024 were born to mothers whose residence was outside Canada. Railing against diversity, equity and inclusion may get some politicians votes, but it can also play into backlash against immigrants — which the Conservatives always hasten to point out, they’d never do.

There can also be consequences for stoking this ugliness:

... in the words of Greg Lyle, a much-respected pollster from Innovative Research, all these echoes of Trumpism from Conservatives in Canada amounts to “playing with fire.”  

Lyle sent me a couple of slides from his big post-election survey, showing that nearly three quarters of voters who believed it was time for a change in Canada also agreed that Poilievre sounded and acted too much like Trump. That sentiment was actually shared by more than half the poll respondents, who included Conservative voters.

PP knows he is popular among young men.  However, if his purpose is to stoke even more discontent with their lot in life, he should also reckon with the fact that older people tend to be the larger demographic in voting, and that younger people are less enthused about going to the polls. Indeed, Canada's Mini-Me may find that there is a heavy price to be paid for his repugnant political calculus.

UPDATE: I just came across an editorial cartoon that seems perfect for both this post and the times: