Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre thinks it would be “not fair” for the Liberals to oust Prime Minister Justin Trudeau now, as in his view they are “morally obligated” to keep him.
Poilievre’s comments come ahead of another potentially significant Liberal caucus meeting Wednesday, during which members are expected to continue discussions around the party’s leadership and the next election.
“I think the Liberals are morally obligated to keep Justin Trudeau,” Poilievre told 580 CFRA’s The Morning Rush host Bill Carroll in a radio interview on Tuesday.
Giving the highest possible benefit of the doubt - what could Poilievre’s angle possibly be by saying this? What does he think it gains him?
Wouldn’t a better political move be to say something like “run whoever you want. x, y, and z policies are what matter and that’s what our party is going to fight for”? I mean, even if it’s a lie, wouldn’t that be a much more politically savvy thing to say? Off the top of my head I can think of 3 or 4 other angles to take that seem a lot better than “the Liberals have a moral responsibility to keep their current leader”. That’s like, high school debate level shit.
Poilievre has been on Parliament Hill for 20 years. I’m just continually baffled by what appear to me to be obvious blunders in a game he should know very well. Is there something I’m missing?
My assumption is that this angle is the easiest to get people to be angry about. Most of his platform is getting people angry about things that don’t exist or excited about solutions that won’t solve anything. IMO getting people to be angry about a leadership change is more of the same.