@WenBraun:
He’s sunk to a new low. If the party doesn’t vote him out in the leadership review, they will be done.
Cole Bennett:
“On paper, that sounds like a triumph. In reality, it’s not a comeback, it’s a walk of shame.”
@peepeeLEpuke:
Time says this piece of garbage should resign
Are you listening con party????
@PierrePoilievre is a hated dick
@LPC_Hack:
Battle River Crowfoot Riding past results: H to L
2025 (Kurek): 53,684
2019 (Kurek): 53,309
2015 (Sorenson): 47,552
2021 (Kurek): 41,819
2025 (Poilievre): 40,548
That’s it.
Poilievre had 13,136 votes less in BRC than Kurek and the lowest vote totals in history of the riding.
@nut_meggy:
Congratulations to the folks of Battle-River Crowfoot because regardless of the outcome today, you’ll probably never have to see Pierre Poilievre in your riding again!
Canada’s Pierre Poilievre Should Step Aside by David Moscrop, Aug 20, 2025, Time
Canada’s Pierre Poilievre is back after an election loss for the ages.
The Conservative Party leader won a by-election on Monday in Battle River-Crowfoot, a Tory electoral district in Alberta that he’s never lived in. He can finally return to Parliament after the embarrassment of losing his own seat of Carleton in Ottawa during the federal election in April, which saw the Conservatives blow a more than 20-point lead to a Liberal Party led by former central banker Mark Carney.
Poilievre won his by-election with 80% of the vote. A casual observer might assume there may be few demanding Poilievre quit as Tory leader with such a healthy margin, mistaking a single parliamentary district for the country—or the party. That’s a fair enough mistake. Some folks, including me, were making the case only months ago for him to stay on. After all, the Conservatives had managed a strong general election performance with 41% of the vote, but were punished by first-past-the-post. Poilievre was a steady hand who just had to wait for the Liberals to implode, which they would, eventually, as all Liberals do in time.
April gave way to May and June, and as summer settled in, the Liberals remained atop the polls as Carney continued to wrong-foot the Conservatives by giving them just about everything they wanted. There was something of a Greek tragedy to it, with Poilievre getting his way—the end of the unpopular carbon tax
I loved the carbon tax! It reduced emissions, and helped people in the poverty range, like me – we got more back than we paid but of course, the haters of anything protective of the air we breath and livable climate we rely on to survive hated it, screamed against it, not because they hated the carbon tax (they did not understand it), rather because they hated that Trudeau made it happen and is more handsome and kind than they are, lower taxesbut not for any Canadians who need it, Carney’s cut taxes for the rich and middle class who assuredly do not need it when so many poor are struggling to pay rent and buy food, lower internal trade barriers, and a government that was all-in on building big, national infrastructure projects. When Air Canada flight attendants went on strike in recent days, Carney’s labor minister asked the Canada Industrial Relations Board to order them back to work, a move one might have expected from Poilievre. Carney is a Harper con, he’s leading the same party as Pee Pee, just under a fraudulent name to con Canadians.
Critics have been asking whether, with Liberals like these, one even needs Conservatives, or ones like Poilievre, at least.
In January, Poilievre faces a leadership review, and now’s the time to ask if he should stay on. Increasingly, the answer is no. Of course, he won his by-election with ease. But it’s one of the safest Tory seats in Canada, and was vacated by Damien Kurek, who stepped aside so his leader could waltz back into office. It was a move that undermined Poilievre’s leadership even as it affirmed it, having to contest a tap-in putt of a district when months earlier he seemed a shoo-in for Prime Minister.
Since April, Poilievre has been unable to make up ground against Carney’s Liberals. A big problem for the Conservative leader is that when voters meet him, when they get to know him, they don’t like him, which puts his party at a structural disadvantage.
The Angus Reid Institute’s Poilievre monitor finds the Conservative leader’s unfavorability numbers persistently high. Going back to the fall of 2022, over 50% of those surveyed disliked Poilievre. That number never got better than 49%, and now sits at 57%. His numbers are particularly dismal among women and younger voters, but even among the 55+ age bracket that traditionally votes Conservative, Poilievre manages just 39% approval.
What’s more, during the last federal election, where leadership was a constant theme amid the unprecedented threats from President Donald Trump to make Canada the “51st state” and impose devastating tariffs, Carney outpaced Poilievre on likability and governance qualities. In July, Abacus Data found that Carney still beat Poilievre on key leadership metrics, an advantage that, should it hold, could help the Liberals eventually turn their parliamentary minority into a majority.
Poilievre said in July “every election comes with lessons.” But his tone never shifted.He’s just as repulsive, whiny, boring, cruel and irritatingly stupid. He remained the same doctrinaire culture warrior. In August, Poilievre attacked Canada’s electric vehicle mandate, calling it “Carney’s tax” in a move reminiscent of his party’s “axe the tax” battle against carbon pricing. The play comes as Trump takes on California’s EV mandate. But the focus makes Poilievre look too close to Trump and risks backfiring if Carney goes ahead and once again ditches a Justin Trudeau-era policy.
Perhaps the most damning thing you can say about Poilievre is he’s become redundant.OMG! Pissy Panties ain’t gonna like that! He thinks he’s God’s gift to everyone and thing.
He’s a less capable, less experienced, less likable iteration of a business Liberal committed to low taxes, a lean regulatory regime, and infrastructure and resource development.
The Conservatives could do with a reset—a return to the drawing board. They need a likable leader who at the very least seems like they have the capacity to touch grass from time to time. The odds are that the Liberals, now nearly 10 years in power, will do themselves in, as all governments do. But Poilievre has proven that he’s unwilling or unable to adapt to a political moment that’s different from the advantageous one his party enjoyed before Trump and tariffs. For that reason alone, there’s good cause for the Conservatives to ditch Poilievre sooner than later.
Come January, if the party hasn’t managed better fortunes, some Conservatives might try to do just that.
80% OF NOTHING: THE CONSERVATIVES’ HOLLOW BYELECTION WIN by Cole Bennett, Aug 19, 2025, cole.notcole
Pierre Poilievre strolled back into Parliament last night with an overwhelming 80% of the vote in the Battle River–Crowfoot byelection. On paper, that sounds like a triumph. In reality, it’s not a comeback, it’s a walk of shame.
Let’s not forget why this byelection even happened: Poilievre lost his own seat as party leader in the last federal election. His Conservatives not only failed to form government, they managed to squander one of the most favorable political climates they could have hoped for. Losing both his riding and the election wasn’t just bad luck, it was a full-throated rejection of his leadership and his party’s outdated, toxic brand.
A real comeback looks like the Liberal Party just months ago. Four months before the election, they were staring down a 25-point polling deficit. Commentators had already written their political obituary. And yet, when it mattered, the Liberals surged back and formed government, falling just three seats shy of a majority. That’s what turning things around looks like. That’s what momentum looks like.
What happened in Alberta last night? That was a safe seat falling back into Conservative hands. It means nothing.
The Conservatives remain exactly where they were: lost, bitter, and directionless. Their refusal to pivot is crystal clear in the polls, which show that even Canadians who voted Conservative in the last election wouldn’t do so today. The party’s response? To double down on false narratives and fearmongering. They claim EV mandates will “ban your gas car.” They shout about a mythical $20,000 “tax” on gas-powered vehicles. They keep lying because they don’t have solutions.And they have limited intelligence in their racist bigoted Nazi Harper IDU KKKlan, they hate women and girls, and have no imagination or humanity
More damning still, the Conservative Party has yet to acknowledge, let alone repair, the damage they inflicted during their election campaign. Whole communities were ignored, marginalized, and vilified in their desperate attempts to wedge politics. Instead of rebuilding bridges, they’ve chosen to stay the course: attack, divide, and alienate.
So, what does Poilievre’s byelection win really mean? Nothing.
It doesn’t reset the failures of the Conservative Party. It doesn’t erase the fact that their leader is still limping back into Parliament after Canadians rejected him. And it certainly doesn’t change the fact that the Conservatives are still the same old losing party with the same losing attitude.
The Conservatives can claim victory all they want, but the country sees them for what they are: a party incapable of growth, incapable of honesty, and incapable of winning.
Susan Macaulay:
Hateful is what they are imho.
Ken Smith:
I would add that they still would implement as much of their copy of Project 2025, diminshing all social programs, personal freedoms, health care availability, and promote racial disrespect, and more. They do not have a positive, cooperative bone in their body. …
Joan Gaetz:
Yes! Everything you said Cole! An accurate and damning assessment in my view!
Refer also to:
“Guess where Pierre is having his by election party … NOT in Battle River Crowfoot!!! OTTAWA another reason doesn’t give a damn about us.”
@JLJohnston:
They knew they were being used. They don’t care. They are preprogrammed from birth to vote conservative and lack the intellectual capacity to engage in critical thinking.
