I don’t get how they can say they “need to learn”, yet take no actions to “learn”. Calling it a dry run perfectly encompasses the logic that fills the Liberal party nowadays, they lost because they were unlucky, not that they did anything wrong. They’re just going to keep running the same candidate in LaSalle and St Paul’s, since they’re good party loyalists who deserve to win, and who cares about open nominations. They will never change because that would require admiring they are wrong.
>She adds that for Montreal’s byelection, the Liberal party had nearly 500 volunteers on the ground campaigning
And this is not a positive. They had probably 10 times more volunteers than the other parties, and still lost
semucallday on
> “When you talk to me about a stronghold, that’s the media spin,” she says. “We’re talking about a byelection where, for now, not even 40 per cent of people have participated in.”
Why do they use this talking point? This party already has a credibility problem. They don’t have to self-flagellate, but saying this riding wasn’t a stronghold fools no one. And 40% turnout is high for a byelection.
Wouldn’t being dismissive like this further turn off voters in that riding who could swing to you if you showed humility, who may have voted for you in the past and might do so again if they felt you were listening to them?
Ironically, their attempt to downplay the result only reinforces the problems that the electorate has with them.
gravtix on
I think it’s just voter suppression and disenfranchisement at this point with how things are in the country and you’ve got a meter long ballot to choose from as well.
HotbladesHarry on
The liberals are honestly acting like all their problems will be solved when the Hale-Bop Comet takes them all away to a better Canada in the sky.
feb914 on
idk if this is planned or not, but a different minister (Duclos) appeared in CBC-equivalent of the show and did much better.
playing down the result by saying that only 40% of people show up even when you deploy 500 volunteers on the ground is a sign that either your ground game suck (despite the 500 people) or you have no other voters to care enough to come out and vote for your party.
5 Comments
I don’t get how they can say they “need to learn”, yet take no actions to “learn”. Calling it a dry run perfectly encompasses the logic that fills the Liberal party nowadays, they lost because they were unlucky, not that they did anything wrong. They’re just going to keep running the same candidate in LaSalle and St Paul’s, since they’re good party loyalists who deserve to win, and who cares about open nominations. They will never change because that would require admiring they are wrong.
>She adds that for Montreal’s byelection, the Liberal party had nearly 500 volunteers on the ground campaigning
And this is not a positive. They had probably 10 times more volunteers than the other parties, and still lost
> “When you talk to me about a stronghold, that’s the media spin,” she says. “We’re talking about a byelection where, for now, not even 40 per cent of people have participated in.”
Why do they use this talking point? This party already has a credibility problem. They don’t have to self-flagellate, but saying this riding wasn’t a stronghold fools no one. And 40% turnout is high for a byelection.
Wouldn’t being dismissive like this further turn off voters in that riding who could swing to you if you showed humility, who may have voted for you in the past and might do so again if they felt you were listening to them?
Ironically, their attempt to downplay the result only reinforces the problems that the electorate has with them.
I think it’s just voter suppression and disenfranchisement at this point with how things are in the country and you’ve got a meter long ballot to choose from as well.
The liberals are honestly acting like all their problems will be solved when the Hale-Bop Comet takes them all away to a better Canada in the sky.
idk if this is planned or not, but a different minister (Duclos) appeared in CBC-equivalent of the show and did much better.
playing down the result by saying that only 40% of people show up even when you deploy 500 volunteers on the ground is a sign that either your ground game suck (despite the 500 people) or you have no other voters to care enough to come out and vote for your party.