Funny how Liberal consultants and lobbyists like this and the ChatGPT CTV person can’t find a mere 800 positive words to spin Carney’s budget or his 78 billion deficit, but can easily pound out advice columns for the Conservative Party.

Man, judges and their hypothetical scenarios…

I read these headlines in Charlie Brown’s teacher’s voice.

. @lmiljan making the right points here: 1. What inducements did the government offer d'Entremont to cross? We still don't know. 2. Floor-crossing drama simply serves to distract attention from the budget, particularly the eye-popping deficit. https://t.co/DXfV7AWkdo

Media coverage which misunderstands the Conservative base will drive expectations into the basement approaching Poilievre’s leadership review. A bigger version of what happened in the Alberta by-election. Not unhelpful for Poilievre.

Royce Koop: The 'Red Tory' excuse for d’Entremont floor crossing is bogus https://t.co/T8JiOysO66

Ugh

There are plenty of other inducements but way to just let the politician reframe the question and avoid giving anything approaching a real answer.

Agreed but the ideological argument basically accepts d’Andremont’s and the LPC’s framing. It’s not true. There are many Red Tories in the CPC caucus who work very well with Poilievre e.g. see my last tweet with Michael Chong. The CPC is as unified now as when Harper was leader.

This is the key argument to me

For starters: did Carney or some other Liberal promise d’Entremont he wouldn’t have to face a renomination challenge prior to the next election, which he would almost surely lose? If so, that strikes me as a material inducement. Maybe someone—maybe even a journalist—could ask?

Re d’Entremont: the obvious question no journalist seems to be asking is what inducements the government provided for him to cross the floor. Beyond that and if the govt remains a minority, I don’t really care and wouldn’t distract attention from the problems of Carney’s budget.

Thank you Sterling Lyon!

Worth reading the whole great thread. The notwithstanding clause is the constructive, responsible reply to unacceptable judicial decisions. The fact that we have the clause means we can reject the emotionalism and vigilanteism of the sort Kinew expressed yesterday.

The Liberal Party continues toward extinction in provincial politics

Kinew explicitly said he would never use it and introduced legislation to defang s.99. Now with the SCC decision that view has fallen out of style, thus his massive vibe shift. It’s enough to give you whiplash.

With the Supreme Court of Canada doubling down on problematic aspects of its criminal sentencing jurisprudence, the notwithstanding clause may prove to be the most reliable, if not the only, option for lawmakers to restore credibility to the criminal justice system. My latest:

Hosting a Member of Parliament and critic from Canada's Official Opposition is a "high risk event." What rubbish. We should always push back against this little trick that some universities and student unions pull to stifle speech they don't like.

So we might have a federal election before the end of the year.....listen in as Winnipeg Sun columnists, Currier, Klein, Koo, and Pinsky discuss this and more on Inside Politics - watch here - https://t.co/dPK4NEgS0m

Amazing how quickly some of the fundamentals of Canadian politics have shifted beneath our feet