Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[belsarius]

Sounds like a guy who just spent all day talking to two of his biggest allies and his Monarch about the severity of geopolitics today and then gets asked about something completely off topic in an attempt to create a controversy where there is none. I think he could have been a lot testier than he was.

[Torture]

This attack only works because it is well known that PP is always 100% professional with the media and never attacks them. Right?

[Ryan Coke]

Man, the partisans would be all over PP for answering like that. Shocking that they just make excuses for their team though.

You know your allowed to admit your team isn’t perfect right?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

Man, the partisans would be all over PP for answering like that. Shocking that they just make excuses for their team though.

You know your allowed to admit your team isn’t perfect right?

Absolutely fair. Barton should never have continued with that boneheaded question. I can admit when the CBC gets it wrong.

[Delthefunky]

I kept waiting for something controversial. Did I miss it?

[Torture]

Not defending it, he needs to be prepared for gotcha questions. But right wing pundits losing their minds over it? Go munch on an apple in your glass houses....

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by belsarius

Sounds like a guy who just spent all day talking to two of his biggest allies and his Monarch about the severity of geopolitics today and then gets asked about something completely off topic in an attempt to create a controversy where there is none. I think he could have been a lot testier than he was.

Maybe you're new to press conferences but the media almost always ends up asking off topic questions. It should be expected by any politician.

Maybe he should only accept planted questions if he wants to control the narrative and discussion.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Maybe you're new to press conferences but the media almost always ends up asking off topic questions. It should be expected by any politician.

Maybe he should only accept planted questions if he wants to control the narrative and discussion.

He did control the discussion. Having trouble with this one too?

[Ped]

Carney needs to answer questions better but she basically accused him of lying.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Maybe you're new to press conferences but the media almost always ends up asking off topic questions. It should be expected by any politician.

Maybe he should only accept planted questions if he wants to control the narrative and discussion.

So what’s your specific issue with how he answered the question?

How would you have liked him to answer the question?

[Slava]

I’m not sure what they hope to uncover with those assets. He’s got Brookfield shares, RSUs and other savings from his employment over the years. No one should be surprised by this.

[Drak]

Maple MAGA is just in here complaining with faux outrage because they were told to.

[Mephisto]

Originally Posted by Slava

I’m not sure what they hope to uncover with those assets. He’s got Brookfield shares, RSUs and other savings from his employment over the years. No one should be surprised by this.

Yeah. Guy worked all over the world - spent a decade at Goldman Sachs. He owns a lot of stuff. Opening up to disingenuous donkeys like Brian Lilley before you have to doesn't make any sense.

Although as a liberal he'll have to make nice with Rosemary Barton sooner or later.

[blender]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Maybe you're new to press conferences but the media almost always ends up asking off topic questions. It should be expected by any politician.

Maybe he should only accept planted questions if he wants to control the narrative and discussion.

Seemed like he controlled the narrative just fine.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by GGG

So what’s your specific issue with how he answered the question?

How would you have liked him to answer the question?

With greater tact and diplomacy. He came across as significantly annoyed by the line of questioning and went on to attack and disparage a reporter.

You can actually watch the full 30 minute press conference. The question before the blind trust question actually set him off and then this question seemed to really burn him. Towards the end a couple other reporters were asking him questions and he tried to interrupt a couple times and wouldn't let them finish their questions. He needs to polish things up quite a bit because this is going to be his life day in and day out now as a politician.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Werent' all the rightwingers up in arms with Rosemary Barton being to bias towards the Libs?

Probably but most of us stopped paying attention to her years ago.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

With greater tact and diplomacy. He came across as significantly annoyed by the line of questioning and went on to attack and disparage a reporter.

I was wondering how long it’d take you to start lying about it.

[Firebot]

The irony of some usual posters all huffy and puffy because notorious CBC "hard right winger" Rosemary Barton asked a very normal follow up question to a snarky deflection by Carney on what was a pretty softball question by Stephanie Levitz really says it all.

Considering all the partisan conspiracy theories into why Poilievre never got his security clearance and very defensive of some narrative questions to Poilievre by reporters in the past, they should theoretically be pretty objective about what should be rather benign questions on Carney's assets that he eventually needs to disclose anyways if they weren't partisan. With the blatant corruption happening down south, being a little prudent with our prime minister to avoid conflicts of interest is a good idea, past, current and potential future ones.

But good to know the CBC is now wrong and these were boneheaded reporter questions Not like this has not been in question ever or reported on.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mar...rust-1.7480909

The problem comes is that Carney is in a particular spot that is not covered as he just took office as PM recently without being elected (does not need to disclose his assets as a result), and may get elected prime minister for 4 years without needing to disclose his assets for Canadians to review until after he's elected the way the rules are written. In the meantime, he's prime minister with these undisclosed assets. Carney's claim that a blind trust is enough in his current situation may be technically true, but it's leaving questions unanswered on information that would normally be available publicly to Canadians but are not.

Poilievre for example has full disclosure available publicly

https://prciec-rpccie.parl.gc.ca/EN/...b-002655368060

Of course Barton being a little snarky herself about Conservatives suddenly cheering her on.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1901787122639438043

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I was wondering how long it’d take you to start lying about it.

Go on? Lying about what?

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Slava

I’m not sure what they hope to uncover with those assets. He’s got Brookfield shares, RSUs and other savings from his employment over the years. No one should be surprised by this.

Carney should just disclose, as he would in a normal situation as PM. That's where the line of questioning from reporters today came from.

Just because he technically does not have to in his unique situation, to snark back at reporters on the question is poor tact and works against him.

Much like Poilievre not getting his security clearance raises more questions than answers, this does the same, even if nothing is afoot. Just disclose and be done with another CPC attempted ammunition.