Regarding the editorial “Drop the insults” [published Jan. 9], I’d love to think it was as simple as that.
Maybe the reason that “many left-wing folks insult, dismiss, and deride Pierre Poilievre” is that Poilievre’s style—not necessarily in the interview mentioned, but in everyday news clips—regardless of what he is asked is: blame Trudeau, do some grade-school-quality name-calling, quip that we need an election to “axe the tax” (as if there aren’t other reasons), and ignore the real question.
Why are they ahead in the polls? Not because of the clarity or appeal of their platform but rather because of disenchantment with the current government, a common theme for long-term governments anywhere.
Poilievre may think that his quips of “Axe the Tax,” “Build the Homes,” “Fix the Budget,” and “Stop the Crime” constitute a clear statement.
As a lifelong right-leaner, I don’t know what he means.
“Axe the Tax”—lose revenue, which doesn’t “Fix the Budget”, nor support climate action.
“Build the Homes”—tell cities and municipalities that they have to build more homes.
“Stop the Crime”—Poilievre was on protesters’ trucks in Ottawa encouraging the governor general to replace the elected government by some means not at all constitutional. So, stop crime, but it is OK to unlawfully overthrow our democratically-elected government.
“Smart” must be more than trite three-word quips that are as annoying “AF.”
“In-tune” must be more than echoing concerns solely to stir populist sentiment.
It’s a big ask of centrists and leftists to watch an almost two-hour “interview,” totally scripted, well choreographed, a right-wing host and sponsored by right-wing organizations whose views are diametrically opposite the audience.
Not smart, not in-tune, amazing that anybody would be surprised that the venue and choice of sponsors would kindle the kind of angst it did.
As to “residents, politicians and local leaders need to drop the vitriol,” most of what I would consider to be vitriol has come from the mouth of Poilievre himself and from his “F_Trudeau” movement.
I’ve never seen a “F_Poilievre” placard. For sure, we should be seeking common ground, but maybe there’s an onus on Conservatives to look themselves in the mirror and ask themselves if they really know and have clearly articulated what they believe in and how they’ll get the country there; if they have communicated it effectively; and if they exude their values themselves.
There’s no hope of enduring common ground otherwise.
Rae Simpson
Squamish
