Jagmeet Singh, probably the biggest political loser?

[MARS]

Singh seems to be a bit testy lately. I wonder if he's OK?

Of course not.

He was verbally accosted like…24 hrs before?

If it had been me, I would have lost my temper and likely committed an act of physical violence, most likely in the form of a throat punch.

That would have, of course, landed me in jail awaiting charges of assault. My future prospects would have certainly taken a turn for the worse.

But the Leader of the NDP is much more mature, and thus restrained individual than I am and responded in an adult fashion using his words. That’s what makes him suitable to be a politician.

But for sure he is still affected by it. Who wouldn’t be? And then he finds himself getting accosted in the House, when the rules of the HoC state that questions are to be directed to the Government, which the Leader of the NDP is decidedly not, and sure yeah, the guy is going to react. Again, using his words and not the way I would have, which again, likely would have involved an act of violence.

So no, he’s not ok, obviously. It ignorant to think that he might be.

 

[Good2Golf]

Though maybe not of the calibre of Chrétien, who in QP the day after giving Bill Clennett a renowned Shawinigan Handshake, was smiling and taking questions from Jean Charest like a champ.

 

[Furniture]

If an NDP or LPC MP goaded them into doing so? I’m not so sure.

But that hasn’t happened (yet).

Goaded into doing so?

So we don't expect the leader of the NDP to be a mature adult who can control his emotional reactions to words in the HoC?

I get that you dislike the CPC, but start holding your side to account when they misbehave.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Goaded into doing so?

So we don't expect the leader of the NDP to be a mature adult who can control his emotional reactions to words in the HoC?

I get that you dislike the CPC, but start holding your side to account when they misbehave.

I'm sure he will expect the same decorum for the opposition when the rolls are reversed.

 

[dimsum]

Goaded into doing so?

So we don't expect the leader of the NDP to be a mature adult who can control his emotional reactions to words in the HoC?

I get that you dislike the CPC, but start holding your side to account when they misbehave.

I'm sure he will expect the same decorum for the opposition when the rolls are reversed.

Absolutely I do. But, in this instance and the “wacko” instance, it was the Opposition that started the name-calling. If the CPC forms govt and whoever the Opposition is starts resorting to name-calling in the House (or social media), you can quote me that I will call them out.

This is grade-school BS.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Absolutely I do. But, in this instance and the “wacko” instance, it was the Opposition that started the name-calling. If the CPC forms govt and whoever the Opposition is starts resorting to name-calling in the House (or social media), you can quote me that I will call them out.

This is grade-school BS the way most Westminster Parliamentary systems work.

There, FTFY

 

[Rifleman62]

Sticks and Stones......

Some people as so delicate.

 

[Remius]

Tone policing from the CPC quarters? lol.

The same people that said Chrystal Freeland should toughen up when she was accosted ? That minimized when people threw rocks at the PM? When a CPC member posted bull eyes on two senators in a social media post and people went to their kids school to make threats? Or when Catherine Mckenna had her office vandalized with threats and people said to suck it up?

Jagmeet Singh basically called out a polarized freedom Convoy individual who just before was at a protest that disrupted a Terry Fox ceremony and being overall jerks all week and once again being encouraged by PP and his party. Politicians don’t have to take that and should stand up that using language they understand.

Spare me your sudden concern for decorum.

As to the the HOC incident, Singh let it get to him. He lost control and likely regrets it now. It’s isn’t something he should have said But PP, like the schoolyard brat standing behind his buddies is doing everything he can to create and encourage that environment. One more thing, for me, to park my vote somewhere else.

 

[ArmyRick]

The PM role isn’t one to “try out” to see if one is good or not.

Well JT has had three kicks at the can and sucks at it everytime.

2015, majority, understandable he was a fresh face and untested

2019, minority, Canadians were basically putting him on probation as PM.

2021, Trudeau calls a snap election and same results, this shows most Canadians really didn't have faith in him. Some slimy deal making with the NDP and then the Bloc, and guess what? He is paying for it. Losing Toronto St Pauls and then the Former riding of Lametti (Both Liberal strong holds) is a clear message. Canada is done with Trudeau.

So we fire JT and the majority will install PP as PM, and if its a majority, it won't be for a "try out".

 

[ArmyRick]

Of course not.

He was verbally accosted like…24 hrs before?

If it had been me, I would have lost my temper and likely committed an act of physical violence, most likely in the form of a throat punch.

That would have, of course, landed me in jail awaiting charges of assault. My future prospects would have certainly taken a turn for the worse.

But the Leader of the NDP is much more mature, and thus restrained individual than I am and responded in an adult fashion using his words. That’s what makes him suitable to be a politician.

But for sure he is still affected by it. Who wouldn’t be? And then he finds himself getting accosted in the House, when the rules of the HoC state that questions are to be directed to the Government, which the Leader of the NDP is decidedly not, and sure yeah, the guy is going to react. Again, using his words and not the way I would have, which again, likely would have involved an act of violence.

So no, he’s not ok, obviously. It ignorant to think that he might be.

Boo hoo. Jagmeet could have behaved much more parliamentarian and ignored the "corrupt bastard" comment like the other 3 leaders do. Hell Trudeau is an expert at ignoring some of the worst insults imaginable. Singh should take a lesson, it was a very bad look for him. And he is gutless, he only did it because PPS was standing right there.

 

[dimsum]

Well JT has had three kicks at the can and sucks at it everytime.

2015, majority, understandable he was a fresh face and untested

2019, minority, Canadians were basically putting him on probation as PM.

2021, Trudeau calls a snap election and same results, this shows most Canadians really didn't have faith in him. Some slimy deal making with the NDP and then the Bloc, and guess what? He is paying for it. Losing Toronto St Pauls and then the Former riding of Lametti (Both Liberal strong holds) is a clear message. Canada is done with Trudeau.

So we fire JT and the majority will install PP as PM, and if its a majority, it won't be for a "try out".

Sure, but what you are suggesting is different than “well Poilievre should be PM”.

If he wins, then yes. But there is a difference between he will win (or not) vs he should (as in “we should give it to him”, not in the probabilities sense) win.

 

[ArmyRick]

“well Poilievre should be PM”.

If he gets the votes as per FPS, then he damn well should be. And will be. Your playing semantics.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Sure, but what you are suggesting is different than “well Poilievre should be PM”.

If he wins, then yes. But there is a difference between he will win (or not) vs he should (as in “we should give it to him”, not in the probabilities sense) win.

All of these statements can be true at the same time:

Poilievre is likely to be the next PM of Canada
Poilievre is the best option of the current crop of leaders to be the next PM of Canada
Poilievre has not demonstrated that he is likely to be a good PM.

Being the best of a truly shitty crop doesn't make one good.

 

[dimsum]

If he gets the votes as per FPS, then he damn well should be. And will be. You’re playing semantics.

Yes, he’s on track to win. Right now.

He hasn’t called a vote of no -confidence yet. I don’t have a crystal ball to say whether the other parties will support it but so far the BQ has said no.

What I am saying is that there is a difference between him winning an election and people saying he deserves to win an election. That’s not semantics - that’s a difference in viewpoint.

Thought experiment - if the CPC doesn’t win next election, there may be people who said he “should” have won. That’s the distinction I’m talking about.

…and as I’m writing this, @IKnowNothing posted something similar to my views.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

PP is probably the necessary transition from the Trudeau era trainwreck. The Liberals need to be beat, badly, to reform themselves.

Whether he gets more than one term as PM is entirely up to him and how he behaves.

 

[Rifleman62]

He hasn’t called a vote of no -confidence yet. I don’t have a crystal ball to say whether the other parties will support it but so far the BQ has said no.

What sparked this incident was Singh stating the NDP WILL NOT support the CPC nonconfidence motion.
Seems you missed that.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Whether he gets more than one term as PM is entirely up to him and how he behaves.

The funny thing is, the PM Canada needs right now is a boring, statesmanlike leader that can come in, make some deeply and widely unpopular course corrections with respect to how much money we spend and what on, while calming the room down. That's likely the recipe for a single term.

I'll be surprised, and extremely impressed if PP is that guy, and would vote for a 2nd term.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

PP would do very well if he is a boring PM. I agree.

 

[Good2Golf]

I want a PM who isn’t intertwined with a malevolent state actor, nor who will go to great lengths to keep Canadians from knowing the degree to which such a malevolent state actor has gone to influence Canadian politics, finances and for all intents and purposes, our sovereignty. It boggles my mind that some people are actually okay with that.

 

[childs56]

So Singh is threatening violence against a guy who it appears to be bothering him. Supposedly called him a name. (It sounds like a person behind that guy did the name calling). Then Singh calls the guy a coward.....
The next day Singh calls out Pierre Poilievre in parliment in the middle of the floor.
Who is the actual bully here?
All sides call each other names, all sides engage in banter and are all equally responsible for the verbal escalation.
Only the individual is responsible for Engaging in physical escalation. That person is Jagmeet Singh. The guy is a bully, his true behaviors are comming out and people still justify his escalating poor behaviour.

To many except poor behavior from our politicians. It is very evident reading some supporting his stance.