Poilievre’s maple MAGA methodology

The guy standing behind Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre in the news conference (his public safety critic, Frank Caputo) bore a profoundly unsettling, heavyset resemblance to Trump acolyte Stephen Miller, a similarity that distracted me briefly from Poilievre’s remarks until I heard his outrageous claim that Prime Minister Mark Carney first approved Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s tariff ad and then torpedoed the trade talks with the U.S. He repeated the double-barrelled lie many times.

I waited for two of three Canadian news networks (I can’t pogo-stick around channels fast enough to monitor all three simultaneously) to call him out. And did our media do that?

CTV threw to a commercial break immediately upon cutting away from the Poilievre newser once the man stopped speaking. Not a shred of analysis regarding the falsehoods Poilievre repeated during the newser.

CBC’s Janyce McGregor had the temerity to suggest “we should maybe take a bit of a pause here” and noted that Carney was, yes, aware of the ad, but we “don’t think there are enough facts to ‘stand that up.’” (Poilievre’s claim that Carney “approved” it). No reference to the flat-out lie that Carney terminated the trade talks.

For the record, Carney did not “approve” the ad. We know he was aware of it; his “approval” was unnecessary. Doug Ford’s a grown-up who can run ads without Carney’s permission. So, for that matter, is B.C. Premier David Eby, who’s threatening to position ads into America about softwood lumber tariff implications for consumers there.

Carney did not torpedo the trade talks. There can’t be a Canadian out there who doesn’t know U.S. President Donald Trump threw a tantrum, terminated the talks himself, and then screamed he would toss another 10 per cent onto the tariffs against Canada. Carney is now dealing with the fallout.

As a child, I played simple card games, learning at the age of six that you never, ever show your cards to the other side. And I recently read Carney’s book Values: Building a Better World for All. It was an extremely tough slog: that man’s thought processes and world view are stunningly complex. I came away with an understanding that the game Carney is playing against Trump is one for which he is more superbly equipped intellectually than arguably any other national leader on the world stage. He’s not discussing strategy in public, and he’s pointedly repeating he won’t.

It beggars belief that Poilievre could be unaware of the facts. He has chosen to continue his Trump-style approach.

Lie. Distort facts until they no longer resemble reality. Spew campaign-style slogans with not a shred of supporting policy plan details.

The glaring downside of the media’s capacity to broadcast politicians live, unedited, is that some politicians feel free to lie without consequences. Forty years ago, this wasn’t possible: tape rolled and was tightly edited before broadcast, falsehoods screened out or exposed (at least in the newsrooms where I worked) by the reporter in the news story, shaming the liar. Politicians knew that. So they either didn’t lie, or ducked awkward questions.

That’s changed. Now, live material gushes out unchecked and uncorrected.

Does it matter?

It matters. Our news networks are following the exact path the American networks took with Trump: let the man lie to voters for as long as he wants to, whenever he wants to, and don’t bother to follow up immediately — or interrupt — with real-time fact-checks. Occasionally, a symbolic stab is made at noting a particularly egregious falsehood.

That is terrifying, because there are three firewalls in Canada that can stop a man who daily copies more and more pages from the Trump playbook in his passion to reach our country’s highest elected political office.

The first firewall is the media, which is failing. True, anchors aren’t supposed to editorialize; but is it editorializing to correct a lie with the fact, and note that the purveyor of the untruth did, in fact, lie? Commentators mostly bloviate, occasionally gleefully letting slip some tidbit of political backroom gossip.

The second firewall: the Conservatives’ backroom power brokers. The bits of gossip seem to indicate increasing behind-the-scenes unease with Poilievre. But are they willing to endure him if they think he can drive a successful election their way?

Which brings us to the third firewall: voters. If a snap election were to be called through a non-confidence vote at some point, there just might be enough ignorant, gullible Canadians out there — this time around — to fall for Poilievre’s act.

If the first firewall feeds them enough unexamined lies, will the voters have sufficient collective common BS detection skills to refuse to vote for those liars? Having seen the level of ignorance in America, seeing ugly signs of it rising here, I don’t trust that third firewall one bit.

But then, I don’t trust the first or second ones, either.

Political junkie journalist Judy Waytiuk, now a Substack columnist at spoutingoff.com, did her share of anchoring and political reporting over the decades.