Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor
So if am I understanding this correctly, based on what everyone seems to agree on:
1) Poilievre panders to the far right.
2) The phrase dog whistle has been used in politics around the world for decades (as the Wikipedia entry attests to) when referring to a person pandering to more extreme elements, particularly when using terms and phrases that really get their attention (e.g. WEF, digital ID, etc.)
But when a reporter asks him about pandering to the far right in that way using the phrase "dog whistle", that's all of the sudden fabricating an allegation to promote a Liberal narrative. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense...
|
Dog whistling is a fair bit of an accusation with a special connotation that goes well beyond political pandering, and ventures into xenophobia and racism elements.
The WEF, digital ID comments aren't ones which would be typically be termed as dog-whistling
The anglo-saxon comment however, is the quite controversial one that has been pointed to (and the one that eventually resulted in the podcast Aarongrey linked).
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/poil...cast-1.5910090
Does Poilievre pander? Yes. Does Poilievre practice populism? Undeniable. Dog-whistling is a bigger accusation that should be better quantified (especially if he practices it)