Yep. And ruin it for anyone else who wants to go there.
World Views--Rants and Raves: War, Politics, Government, Social Issues
- Thread starter Birdjaguar
- Start date
Zardnaar
Deity
Wonder if they're a group being used to make others look bad.
Or just really stupid.
Possibly both. Definitely the stupid part. I mean, who goes around vandalizing world heritage art objects and historical sites for an environmental protest? These are the people who threw stuff at paintings in an art gallery. They're not making any points for the environment, and they're making me wonder: If today they're throwing soup and paint, might they some day decide to throw bombs instead?
Zardnaar
Deity
So we are an island nation. 2 main ones. We have an interislander ferry system. One of them can carry freight.
Previous government signed contracts for 500 million with Korean shipyard to get 2 more ferries capable of carrying freight.
Incoming clowns canceled it for tax cuts for landlords.
Steering failure that 1 ferry hits the rocks and grounds itself. Refloated but damaged.
www.rnz.co.nz
Previous government signed contracts for 500 million with Korean shipyard to get 2 more ferries capable of carrying freight.
Incoming clowns canceled it for tax cuts for landlords.
Steering failure that 1 ferry hits the rocks and grounds itself. Refloated but damaged.
Stricken Aratere to be placed under detention order barring it from movement after grounding
The Aratere has been refloated - but when it's back in Picton can't move again until it gets the all-clear from investigators.
www.rnz.co.nz
Last edited:
Comrade Ceasefire
Simmer slowly
Leaders pretending they represent the interests of their respective countries and shoving their opinions and policies down the throats of the other 90% of the world.
LOL Biden was 2nd in the net approval/disapproval ratings!
LOL Biden was 2nd in the net approval/disapproval ratings!
Comrade Ceasefire
Simmer slowly
What's wrong with them grinning in a car?
Meanwhile Italians show how they act like adults in charge of a country...
Comrade Ceasefire
Simmer slowly
A combination of rates and mounting debt burdens has pushed annual interest payments to a staggering $847 billion, according to UNCTAD — a direct transfer of wealth from government coffers to (mostly) private investors. That’s double what it was a decade ago. UN data shows that fifteen nations spend more on interest payments than they do on education. Meanwhile, forty-six spend more on interest than they do on health.
unctad.org
A world of debt 2024
Comrade Ceasefire
Simmer slowly
Fair enough. Parliamentary brawls are limited to so few countries, so the rest must be sham democracies I guess.
Fair enough. Parliamentary brawls are limited to so few countries, so the rest must be sham democracies I guess.
"can be a sign" not "are the only signs"
Senethro
Overlord
Buddy, are you from a country where you can actually express disapproval meaningfully? And which way would you want it?
Comrade Ceasefire
Simmer slowly
Easy. As funny as in that photo with the numbers above their heads.
Or as funny as finishing a vid with a Sex Pistols song.
Last edited:
Bonyduck Campersang
Odd lookin duck
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2022
- Messages
- 4,635
In China if you wear a Hong Kong shirt the police haul you off and search you for explosives– wait
Ordnael
Emperor
IsraelCrimes seems like a poor source of actual factual news, sounds too much like a propaganda platform!
Who reads enough youtube comments to get scammed by them? They are the most inane of social media, why would anyone spend time there?
Like, Comment, Get Scammed: Characterizing Comment Scams on Media Platforms
Given the meteoric rise of large media platforms (such as YouTube) on the web, it is no surprise that attackers seek to abuse them in order to easily reach hundreds of millions of users. Among other social-engineering attacks perpetrated on these platforms, comment scams have increased in popularity despite the presence of mechanisms that purportedly give content creators control over their channel comments. In a comment scam, attackers set up script-controlled accounts that automatically post or reply to comments on media platforms, enticing users to contact them. Through the promise of free prizes and investment opportunities, attackers aim to steal financial assets from the end users who contact them.
In this paper, we present the first systematic, large-scale study of comment scams. We design and implement an infrastructure to collect a dataset of 8.8 million comments from 20 different YouTube channels over a 6-month period. We develop filters based on textual, graphical, and temporal features of comments and identify 206K scam comments from 10K unique accounts. Using this dataset, we present our analysis of scam campaigns, comment dynamics, and evasion techniques used by scammers. Lastly, through an IRB-approved study, we interact with 50 scammers to gain insights into their social-engineering tactics and payment preferences. Using transaction records on public blockchains, we perform a quantitative analysis of the financial assets stolen by scammers, finding that just the scammers that were part of our user study have stolen funds equivalent to millions of dollars. Our study demonstrates that existing scam-detection mechanisms are insufficient for curbing abuse, pointing to the need for better comment-moderation tools as well as other changes that would make it difficult for attackers to obtain tens of thousands of accounts on these large platforms.
Like, Comment, Get Scammed: Characterizing Comment Scams on Media Platforms
Given the meteoric rise of large media platforms (such as YouTube) on the web, it is no surprise that attackers seek to abuse them in order to easily reach hundreds of millions of users. Among other social-engineering attacks perpetrated on these platforms, comment scams have increased in popularity despite the presence of mechanisms that purportedly give content creators control over their channel comments. In a comment scam, attackers set up script-controlled accounts that automatically post or reply to comments on media platforms, enticing users to contact them. Through the promise of free prizes and investment opportunities, attackers aim to steal financial assets from the end users who contact them.
In this paper, we present the first systematic, large-scale study of comment scams. We design and implement an infrastructure to collect a dataset of 8.8 million comments from 20 different YouTube channels over a 6-month period. We develop filters based on textual, graphical, and temporal features of comments and identify 206K scam comments from 10K unique accounts. Using this dataset, we present our analysis of scam campaigns, comment dynamics, and evasion techniques used by scammers. Lastly, through an IRB-approved study, we interact with 50 scammers to gain insights into their social-engineering tactics and payment preferences. Using transaction records on public blockchains, we perform a quantitative analysis of the financial assets stolen by scammers, finding that just the scammers that were part of our user study have stolen funds equivalent to millions of dollars. Our study demonstrates that existing scam-detection mechanisms are insufficient for curbing abuse, pointing to the need for better comment-moderation tools as well as other changes that would make it difficult for attackers to obtain tens of thousands of accounts on these large platforms.
Narz
keeping it real
Kids these days raised by YouTube comments.
Wouldn't be surprised if your average teenager in 1st world spends more time reading comments than talking (or even texting) with RL friends.
Wouldn't be surprised if that's true for elders as well actually.
I follow a lot of YouTube channels. Some are reviews of favorite shows. Some are fan edits. Some are reaction channels. Some are informative history channels, emphasis on medieval/Tudor. There's a treasure trove of Harry Potter analysis videos. There's a guy who actually tests out some of the ideas in FRPGs to see if they really work (ie. which kind of frying pan makes the best weapon, or how many gold pieces could a D&D fighter realistically carry around while exploring and fighting).
The scam situations, though? Travel channel hosts have been impersonated, and so has one of the reaction channel hosts. They've made a point of telling the viewers, though - if you see me anywhere but here (or on their other usual social media sites), IT'S NOT ME.
Yes, I read comments. Yes, I leave comments. I've had some fun conversations on a few of those sites. There have been some frustrating arguments.
And yes, some of these channels are monetized and some people send money during livestreams (I never have).
About the most suspicious things I've seen, though, are on FB. It's getting easier to spot the plagiarists and the AI, and there are groups I belong to where even mentioning AI will result in a permaban.
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
Poilievre's office maintains tight control over what Conservative MPs say and do
Party staffers monitor caucus for signs of message indiscipline and fraternization with other MPs
After two years of Pierre Poilievre as their leader, many Conservative MPs say they are much less free now than they were before his arrival.The man who promised during his leadership run to make Canada "the freest country in the world" maintains tight control over the actions of his caucus members.
Normally loquacious Conservatives close up like oysters and dare not speak without their leader's approval. MPs are watched by Conservative staffers both inside and outside Parliament. Elected representatives are publicly called to order for deviating from the party line.
Conservative MPs' words and actions are closely scrutinized by the leader's office. Partisanship is encouraged. Fraternizing with elected officials from other parties is a no-no.
Those who follow these rules are rewarded. Those who don't often have to suffer consequences.
"There are always multiple people in the penalty box, there is always someone in trouble," one caucus member said.
"You don't need to be told what to do. You watch the leader and understand what's expected from you," one Conservative source said.
"The leader comes first. Do not undercut him," said another.
Radio-Canada spoke with more than a dozen elected representatives, employees and members of the Conservative Party of Canada from three different provinces. The sources were granted anonymity so they could express themselves freely. All reported a tightening of caucus discipline under Poilievre's leadership.
"Since Pierre became leader, you can feel the difference," said a source in the Conservative leader's entourage. "MPs don't get too comfortable. They're careful."
But some in the Conservative ranks are beginning to chafe at the restrictions.
Some elected officials feel they come to caucus "to be told what to do and what to think" by the leader, one Conservative source said.
"Sometimes the leader listens to suggestions. But often, his mind is already made up. It's often a one-way conversation," another source added.
"It's not ideal, but it works," one source said. The Conservatives have a 20-point lead in several polls.
"When you're leading, it's easy to keep discipline within the caucus. But if there's a drop in the polls … well, then we'll see."
If the leader invents a new slogan, "we know we'll have to use it," said a Conservative source.
Catchphrases deployed by Poilievre in the House of Commons and at media events (axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget, stop the crime) and terms of derision like "wacko," "radical," "Justinflation" and "Sellout Jagmeet Singh" are often picked up and repeated by Conservative MPs.
Take, for example, the word "wacko."
Poilievre was expelled from the House of Commons in April for using this word and refusing to withdraw remarks he made about Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Before that incident, the term had been used twice in the House of Commons in the previous 18 months. In the months since, Conservative MPs have repeated it more than 100 times in the Commons.
"If you repeat the slogans, you get rewarded," said a Conservative source.
"You are celebrated in front of the entire caucus for being a good cheerleader. And you get more speaking time in the House and during question period."
Those who refuse to parrot the lines lose their speaking time, another source added.
It's radio silence at the entrance to Conservative caucus meetings these days. Every Wednesday morning, journalists throw questions at the arriving MPs. Almost all of them pass without answering; some avoid making eye contact with journalists.
MPs from the other parties seldom hesitate to answer journalists' questions. And when Erin O'Toole and Andrew Scheer led the Conservatives, many Conservative MPs stopped by to chat with reporters every Wednesday.
In the early days of the Poilievre era, a press secretary for the leader was seen on a few occasions signalling MPs not to stop in front of the cameras. Like a policeman directing traffic, he seemed to be beckoning them to enter the room without responding to reporters.
More recently, press secretaries from Poilievre's office have been supervising the entrances to Parliament and monitoring journalists' scrums with MPs, with the goal of recording the exchanges. The Conservative Party is the only federal party that currently does this.
As a result, many Conservative MPs who used to be very outspoken are now reluctant to grant interviews to journalists without first receiving the go-ahead from Poilievre's office.
"It's not that unusual to act that way," said Yan Plante, a former Conservative adviser under Stephen Harper. "The leader's staff wants to limit the risks as much as possible and let the leader, the group's best communicator, do the heavy lifting."
He said holding the leash too tightly can also lead to problems.
"It can demoralize caucus members," Plante said. "Over time, it can become an internal threat, where you also have opposition within your own caucus."
The ones who watch caucus
Sources told Radio-Canada that Conservative Party staffers keep a close eye on MPs' activities — who's talking to reporters, who's deviating from the party line, who's fraternizing with MPs from other parties. Journalists have spotted party staffers taking notes and sources say these activities are reported to the leader's office."Everybody is being watched. What we say, what we do, who we talk to. We're told not to fraternize with MPs from the other parties. And that's not normal," a Conservative source said.
"To be a good MP, it's important to build relationships with colleagues from other parties. That's how Parliament works best for Canadians. But the leader's office won't let us."
Sources say Conservative staffers monitor MPs' interactions not only in the Commons chamber but also in the corridors of Parliament and at social events such as the Press Gallery dinner and the Speaker's garden party.
Poilievre's press attaché was even spotted jotting down the names of Conservative MPs attending the Press Gallery dinner this spring. It's an event that Poilievre — who has strained relations with the Parliamentary Press Gallery — and most of his MPs have avoided for the past two years.
"We don't get told not to go, but we can see that the leader doesn't go, so we do the same. Otherwise, it would be frowned upon," said one Conservative source.
Plante said that if Poilievre's office is maintaining this kind of tight control over MPs, it's going too far.
"Political employees were not elected by the people," he said.
"If I were a member of Parliament and this concerned me, I'd go to the leader to denounce the situation and say I'm not going to stand for this."
Personal discipline
Poilievre imposes iron discipline on himself. He works hard. He works late."We've been telling him for months that he needs to take a vacation, but he just won't listen," one source said.
"He's the one who decides everything. His main adviser is himself … The people around him are only there to realize the leader's vision."
Every message that bears Poilievre's name on social media must first receive his approval, the source added.
"He's not a dictator," the source said. "He has a vision, he knows where he's going and how to get there."
Poilievre's chief of staff "doesn't decide much," the source added. "He manages his calendar more than the party's policies."
"Pierre Poilievre went to the Harper school," said Plante, referring to the former Conservative prime minister in whose cabinet Poilievre served. "His entourage is made up of several people who went to the Harper school, where message discipline was important."
Poilievre follows his mentor's example in leading his troops. Unlike his predecessors, he can afford to do so.
Erin O'Toole needed three rounds of voting before being declared Conservative leader; he ended up with 57 per cent of the vote. Andrew Scheer needed 13 rounds and finished with 51 per cent. Both had heavily courted different factions of the party to gain the necessary support.
Poilievre won the leadership decisively on the first ballot, with 68 per cent of the vote.
"He doesn't owe anything to anyone," one Conservative source said. "He is not beholden to the religious wing of the party, or the social conservatives or the progressives."
"He has the credibility to keep people disciplined and to call delinquents to order," another source said.
"If you stray too far from the message, you get told pretty quickly," a third source said.
Recent examples abound. Conservative MPs who have expressed their opinions in public, or who have strayed slightly from the party's central message, have been swiftly called on the carpet by Poilievre's office and forced to course-correct.
If a Conservative elected official brings up a subject that contradicts or embarrasses the leader, "the message gets through pretty quickly," one Conservative source said.
Some MPs have lost speaking time in the Commons or in committees as punishment.
"It's a way for Pierre to point out who he likes and who he doesn't," a source added.
Here are several recent examples of Conservative MPs called out by Poilievre:
November 2024: Seventeen Conservative MPs who pleaded with the government to ensure that cities in their ridings received their share of a federal housing fund were publicly rebuffed by the leader's office.
In a news release distributed to the media without their consent, Poilievre forced those MPs to renege on their commitment to mayors in their ridings.
- Conservative MPs frustrated after Poilievre bars them from promoting housing fund: sources
- At least 17 Conservative MPs advocated for money from a housing program Poilievre vows to cut
- Conservative MPs backed communities seeking Liberal housing fund Poilievre vows to cut
Shortly thereafter — in a press release issued under his name but sent by the leader's office — Waugh wrote, "We need a carbon tax election now."
July 2024: Conservative MP Pierre Paul-Hus said that a Conservative government would not fund the Quebec City tramway project but that if "agreements are signed, we won't redo what's been done. We won't start undoing contracts ... we'll respect them".
A few hours later, he was forced to retract his statement on X after a call from the leader's office: "A Conservative government will NOT invest federal money in a tramway, no matter what Justin Trudeau promises."
June 2024: In an interview on a Liberal MP's podcast, Conservative MP Arnold Viersen said he looks forward to a day "when abortion is unthinkable." He also said he would vote against gay marriage if given the opportunity and hinted that he's banking on the strength of the Conservatives' religious caucus to change laws once in power.
Poilievre's office quickly issued a correction in the MP's name, saying his comments "don't represent the positions of the leader, nor the policies passed by Conservative Party members themselves."
- Pierre Poilievre disagrees with Conservative MP who wants to vote against same-sex marriage
- Liberal MP 'surprised' social conservative felt 'ambushed' by questions on abortion
Earlier this year, Ontario Conservative MP Karen Vecchio lost her chairmanship of the status of women committee under mysterious circumstances. Anita Vandenbeld, a Liberal MP on the same committee, claimed Vecchio "was punished because she collaborated too much with the other parties."
"She didn't subscribe to the Conservatives' idea that everything should be blocked in committee, especially not on issues like the Status of Women," Vandenbeld said.
Vecchio did not respond to Radio-Canada's request for her version of events. Poilievre's office said it's common practice to change committee chairs. But sources told Radio-Canada that Vecchio did not take the change well.
In January, MP Leslyn Lewis supported a petition calling for Canada to withdraw from the United Nations. As a result, her speaking time was reduced to question period. According to Radio-Canada's calculations, the frequency of her statements and questions in the Commons was cut in half in subsequent months.
Lewis and Poilievre's office did not respond to requests for comment.
Prime Minister Poilievre?
Will Poilievre's iron discipline and tight control of Conservative troops last if he becomes prime minister?"His personal challenge, I think, will be not to control everything," said Rodolphe Husny, a former Conservative adviser under Scheer. That will be hard for Poilievre, he said, "because I don't think it's in his personality to delegate."
Several Conservatives agreed.
"There's a very small circle around the leader. There's a lack of variety of opinion. That's our biggest challenge," said a Conservative source.
"Once in power, it's important to give some slack so that people feel freer ... to see a little more of our team members out in the media," Plante said.
But until then, the discipline Poilievre imposes on his MPs enables him to avoid most pitfalls and issue a consistent message.
It's a method that may merely generate resentment against an opposition leader, but can quickly become a pebble in a prime minister's shoe.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-iron-fist-caucus-discipline-1.7387552
And this guy is our next PM....
Also, is there a Canadian Politics thread buried somewhere?
To answer your last point first, I don't think so. I've been thinking about starting one, but I've been too angry to draft a coherent OP. If you want to start one, I'd gladly post in it.Poilievre's office maintains tight control over what Conservative MPs say and do
Party staffers monitor caucus for signs of message indiscipline and fraternization with other MPs
After two years of Pierre Poilievre as their leader, many Conservative MPs say they are much less free now than they were before his arrival.
The man who promised during his leadership run to make Canada "the freest country in the world" maintains tight control over the actions of his caucus members.
Normally loquacious Conservatives close up like oysters and dare not speak without their leader's approval. MPs are watched by Conservative staffers both inside and outside Parliament. Elected representatives are publicly called to order for deviating from the party line.
Conservative MPs' words and actions are closely scrutinized by the leader's office. Partisanship is encouraged. Fraternizing with elected officials from other parties is a no-no.
Those who follow these rules are rewarded. Those who don't often have to suffer consequences.
"There are always multiple people in the penalty box, there is always someone in trouble," one caucus member said.
"You don't need to be told what to do. You watch the leader and understand what's expected from you," one Conservative source said.
"The leader comes first. Do not undercut him," said another.
Radio-Canada spoke with more than a dozen elected representatives, employees and members of the Conservative Party of Canada from three different provinces. The sources were granted anonymity so they could express themselves freely. All reported a tightening of caucus discipline under Poilievre's leadership.
"Since Pierre became leader, you can feel the difference," said a source in the Conservative leader's entourage. "MPs don't get too comfortable. They're careful."
But some in the Conservative ranks are beginning to chafe at the restrictions.
Some elected officials feel they come to caucus "to be told what to do and what to think" by the leader, one Conservative source said.
"Sometimes the leader listens to suggestions. But often, his mind is already made up. It's often a one-way conversation," another source added.
"It's not ideal, but it works," one source said. The Conservatives have a 20-point lead in several polls.
"When you're leading, it's easy to keep discipline within the caucus. But if there's a drop in the polls … well, then we'll see."
If the leader invents a new slogan, "we know we'll have to use it," said a Conservative source.
Catchphrases deployed by Poilievre in the House of Commons and at media events (axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget, stop the crime) and terms of derision like "wacko," "radical," "Justinflation" and "Sellout Jagmeet Singh" are often picked up and repeated by Conservative MPs.
Take, for example, the word "wacko."
Poilievre was expelled from the House of Commons in April for using this word and refusing to withdraw remarks he made about Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Before that incident, the term had been used twice in the House of Commons in the previous 18 months. In the months since, Conservative MPs have repeated it more than 100 times in the Commons.
"If you repeat the slogans, you get rewarded," said a Conservative source.
"You are celebrated in front of the entire caucus for being a good cheerleader. And you get more speaking time in the House and during question period."
Those who refuse to parrot the lines lose their speaking time, another source added.
It's radio silence at the entrance to Conservative caucus meetings these days. Every Wednesday morning, journalists throw questions at the arriving MPs. Almost all of them pass without answering; some avoid making eye contact with journalists.
MPs from the other parties seldom hesitate to answer journalists' questions. And when Erin O'Toole and Andrew Scheer led the Conservatives, many Conservative MPs stopped by to chat with reporters every Wednesday.
In the early days of the Poilievre era, a press secretary for the leader was seen on a few occasions signalling MPs not to stop in front of the cameras. Like a policeman directing traffic, he seemed to be beckoning them to enter the room without responding to reporters.
More recently, press secretaries from Poilievre's office have been supervising the entrances to Parliament and monitoring journalists' scrums with MPs, with the goal of recording the exchanges. The Conservative Party is the only federal party that currently does this.
As a result, many Conservative MPs who used to be very outspoken are now reluctant to grant interviews to journalists without first receiving the go-ahead from Poilievre's office.
"It's not that unusual to act that way," said Yan Plante, a former Conservative adviser under Stephen Harper. "The leader's staff wants to limit the risks as much as possible and let the leader, the group's best communicator, do the heavy lifting."
He said holding the leash too tightly can also lead to problems.
"It can demoralize caucus members," Plante said. "Over time, it can become an internal threat, where you also have opposition within your own caucus."
The ones who watch caucus
Sources told Radio-Canada that Conservative Party staffers keep a close eye on MPs' activities — who's talking to reporters, who's deviating from the party line, who's fraternizing with MPs from other parties. Journalists have spotted party staffers taking notes and sources say these activities are reported to the leader's office.
"Everybody is being watched. What we say, what we do, who we talk to. We're told not to fraternize with MPs from the other parties. And that's not normal," a Conservative source said.
"To be a good MP, it's important to build relationships with colleagues from other parties. That's how Parliament works best for Canadians. But the leader's office won't let us."
Sources say Conservative staffers monitor MPs' interactions not only in the Commons chamber but also in the corridors of Parliament and at social events such as the Press Gallery dinner and the Speaker's garden party.
Poilievre's press attaché was even spotted jotting down the names of Conservative MPs attending the Press Gallery dinner this spring. It's an event that Poilievre — who has strained relations with the Parliamentary Press Gallery — and most of his MPs have avoided for the past two years.
"We don't get told not to go, but we can see that the leader doesn't go, so we do the same. Otherwise, it would be frowned upon," said one Conservative source.
Plante said that if Poilievre's office is maintaining this kind of tight control over MPs, it's going too far.
"Political employees were not elected by the people," he said.
"If I were a member of Parliament and this concerned me, I'd go to the leader to denounce the situation and say I'm not going to stand for this."
Personal discipline
Poilievre imposes iron discipline on himself. He works hard. He works late.
"We've been telling him for months that he needs to take a vacation, but he just won't listen," one source said.
"He's the one who decides everything. His main adviser is himself … The people around him are only there to realize the leader's vision."
Every message that bears Poilievre's name on social media must first receive his approval, the source added.
"He's not a dictator," the source said. "He has a vision, he knows where he's going and how to get there."
Poilievre's chief of staff "doesn't decide much," the source added. "He manages his calendar more than the party's policies."
"Pierre Poilievre went to the Harper school," said Plante, referring to the former Conservative prime minister in whose cabinet Poilievre served. "His entourage is made up of several people who went to the Harper school, where message discipline was important."
Poilievre follows his mentor's example in leading his troops. Unlike his predecessors, he can afford to do so.
Erin O'Toole needed three rounds of voting before being declared Conservative leader; he ended up with 57 per cent of the vote. Andrew Scheer needed 13 rounds and finished with 51 per cent. Both had heavily courted different factions of the party to gain the necessary support.
Poilievre won the leadership decisively on the first ballot, with 68 per cent of the vote.
"He doesn't owe anything to anyone," one Conservative source said. "He is not beholden to the religious wing of the party, or the social conservatives or the progressives."
"He has the credibility to keep people disciplined and to call delinquents to order," another source said.
"If you stray too far from the message, you get told pretty quickly," a third source said.
Recent examples abound. Conservative MPs who have expressed their opinions in public, or who have strayed slightly from the party's central message, have been swiftly called on the carpet by Poilievre's office and forced to course-correct.
If a Conservative elected official brings up a subject that contradicts or embarrasses the leader, "the message gets through pretty quickly," one Conservative source said.
Some MPs have lost speaking time in the Commons or in committees as punishment.
"It's a way for Pierre to point out who he likes and who he doesn't," a source added.
Here are several recent examples of Conservative MPs called out by Poilievre:
November 2024: Seventeen Conservative MPs who pleaded with the government to ensure that cities in their ridings received their share of a federal housing fund were publicly rebuffed by the leader's office.
In a news release distributed to the media without their consent, Poilievre forced those MPs to renege on their commitment to mayors in their ridings.
September 2024: As Poilievre tabled a confidence motion to bring down the government, Conservative MP Kevin Waugh questioned the utility of holding a federal election just as Saskatchewan voters were heading to the polls for provincial and municipal elections.
- Conservative MPs frustrated after Poilievre bars them from promoting housing fund: sources
- At least 17 Conservative MPs advocated for money from a housing program Poilievre vows to cut
- Conservative MPs backed communities seeking Liberal housing fund Poilievre vows to cut
Shortly thereafter — in a press release issued under his name but sent by the leader's office — Waugh wrote, "We need a carbon tax election now."
July 2024: Conservative MP Pierre Paul-Hus said that a Conservative government would not fund the Quebec City tramway project but that if "agreements are signed, we won't redo what's been done. We won't start undoing contracts ... we'll respect them".
A few hours later, he was forced to retract his statement on X after a call from the leader's office: "A Conservative government will NOT invest federal money in a tramway, no matter what Justin Trudeau promises."
June 2024: In an interview on a Liberal MP's podcast, Conservative MP Arnold Viersen said he looks forward to a day "when abortion is unthinkable." He also said he would vote against gay marriage if given the opportunity and hinted that he's banking on the strength of the Conservatives' religious caucus to change laws once in power.
Poilievre's office quickly issued a correction in the MP's name, saying his comments "don't represent the positions of the leader, nor the policies passed by Conservative Party members themselves."
A number of Conservative sources said they're not bothered by this degree of top-down control. "It avoids missteps and distractions," one said.
- Pierre Poilievre disagrees with Conservative MP who wants to vote against same-sex marriage
- Liberal MP 'surprised' social conservative felt 'ambushed' by questions on abortion
Earlier this year, Ontario Conservative MP Karen Vecchio lost her chairmanship of the status of women committee under mysterious circumstances. Anita Vandenbeld, a Liberal MP on the same committee, claimed Vecchio "was punished because she collaborated too much with the other parties."
"She didn't subscribe to the Conservatives' idea that everything should be blocked in committee, especially not on issues like the Status of Women," Vandenbeld said.
Vecchio did not respond to Radio-Canada's request for her version of events. Poilievre's office said it's common practice to change committee chairs. But sources told Radio-Canada that Vecchio did not take the change well.
In January, MP Leslyn Lewis supported a petition calling for Canada to withdraw from the United Nations. As a result, her speaking time was reduced to question period. According to Radio-Canada's calculations, the frequency of her statements and questions in the Commons was cut in half in subsequent months.
Lewis and Poilievre's office did not respond to requests for comment.
Prime Minister Poilievre?
Will Poilievre's iron discipline and tight control of Conservative troops last if he becomes prime minister?
"His personal challenge, I think, will be not to control everything," said Rodolphe Husny, a former Conservative adviser under Scheer. That will be hard for Poilievre, he said, "because I don't think it's in his personality to delegate."
Several Conservatives agreed.
"There's a very small circle around the leader. There's a lack of variety of opinion. That's our biggest challenge," said a Conservative source.
"Once in power, it's important to give some slack so that people feel freer ... to see a little more of our team members out in the media," Plante said.
But until then, the discipline Poilievre imposes on his MPs enables him to avoid most pitfalls and issue a consistent message.
It's a method that may merely generate resentment against an opposition leader, but can quickly become a pebble in a prime minister's shoe.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-iron-fist-caucus-discipline-1.7387552
And this guy is our next PM....
Also, is there a Canadian Politics thread buried somewhere?
There are a few non-Canadian YouTube reactors who react to Canadian culture-centric videos, though one of them is branching out into reacting to Canadian news (he uses CBC.ca as his source material). So he's trying to understand. And then he usually says some version of "but I thought Canadians were so nice!"
A dozen people in the comment section promptly tell him that we're polite, which is not the same as being nice.
My own view is that we're nice to tourists. But Canadian politics is a blood sport at times, and is anything but nice.
Poilievre is Harper 2.0, and his muzzling of his MPs is exactly what Harper did. It looks like the next election will see the return of potted plants to the all-candidates forums (this happened in 2011, if memory serves), because I can't see Poilievre allowing them to attend and speak at election forums where the public gets to ask unscripted questions. It started with one instance of the forum organizers being told the CPC candidate would not be there, so they put a potted houseplant in front of the chair where the candidate would normally have sat.
The idea caught on, and OVER FOUR DOZEN other instances of this happened, in ridings where Harper refused to allow his candidates to attend forums. He didn't know what questions would be asked, so he couldn't tell them what to say. And if he didn't know what they were going to say, he saw it as a risk that they might come across as indecisive, contrary to CPC policy, or worst of all, honest.
Red Deer was one of these ridings. I'd decided to attend the forum because I wasn't sure if I'd be supporting the NDP or Greens that time and wanted to evaluate the candidates in person. In place of the CPC candidate, there was a very nice houseplant sitting on the table.
The forum was held in the local seniors' centre, hosted by the Council of Canadians. At the beginning, they passed out pieces of paper and said we could each write down a question to ask the candidates, and the moderator would pick some of them, in addition to the questions they'd already decided to ask.
I looked at the houseplant, my sarcasm meter shot up, and I went for it. My question was (paraphrased) "Will the House be building an arboretum on the Conservative side to accommodate all the houseplants that will be representing these ridings?"
To my surprise, this was one of the questions chosen. The room exploded in laughter, some people applauded, and of course there was no Conservative candidate there to answer. The moderator invited any of the candidates there to answer, and it turned into a discussion of how democracy is not served when the people seeking office refuse to make themselves available to the public, to either ask questions or to air their concerns.
It made for a satisfying moment, and I found out later that someone had even mentioned it on the Council of Canadians' website.
Looks like it may be time to dust it off again, since I expect PP to be more of the same. Their usual parroting of the party line won't go over well during an unscripted forum where the Reformacons aren't in charge.
This sort of thing is already happening in Alberta, btw. Muzzling MLAs and telling them what to say and punishing the ones who don't cooperate... DanYell is already quite the dictator, and she's determined to take Alberta out of the CPP. They're bringing in Harper to oversee the provincial pension plan she wants to create (he's already been maneuvering in the backrooms for years, ever since Jason Kenney hijacked the old PC party and mashed it together with the Wildrose party to create the United Corruption Party (excuse me, "United Conservative Party").
She's also planning to attend Trump's inauguration and has delusions of being best chums with him, as if he gives a damn about Alberta. I suppose he might grant her a minute, if only to bask in the fact that he has so many fans here, and she's one of them.
But PP as Prime Minister... can you imagine him at a G20 summit, a foreign journalist from a media outlet that's well-respected in their country asks him a question, and he pulls his "I'm gonna eat an apple at the reporter and generally act like I'm 12" schtick?
Similar threads
