I didn't find Mark Carney's response 'grumpy' at all.
I've worked on both sides of the communications coin - as a journalist and as a public relations consultant (aka 'the dark side LOL). As such, I know all about tough questions. Honestly, I think it's a bit cheeky of reporters to be entitled to be as pointed and sometimes even as aggressive as they like and to expect respondents to always answer with equanimity. I think Carney has been remarkably generous in his exchanges with media while Poilievre and his team have been disrespectful and mean (in the British sense of the word).
Poilievre has no policies of his own and just copies everything out of the MAGA playbook, so of course he has to copy the election denial stuff. Now he is planting the seeds to claim, in case he loses, that the election result is rigged, just like Trump did with the 2020 election. Poilievre is tied to the truck convoy people who already had the experience of occupying Ottawa for weeks. So is he thinking about calling upon them to repeat Jan 6 on Ottawa?
Good summary of another day on the campaign trail. The PP campaign looks like it's getting more Mega by the day. They just can't seem to get out of the 'nasty' lane. Grievance, controlled appearances, controlled media and just ugly nasty. Nothing positive or 'hopeful about the PP group. They've become the 'chip-on-shoulder' party.
I actually agree with Carney about the G&M article (as an old reporter). That was a sloppy drop to make, and it wouldn't have been hard to fact check the context. I don't think he was rude... he doesn't suffer fools.
The Narduwar interviews were great. A lot of fun and loved all of the gifts and how he surprised them with the connections to his choices.
A big mistake by the Globe and Mail because it didn’t seem to hard for others to figure out fairly quickly that those pictures came from an event. Can understand why Carney was blunt in his response, but probably not great to say you can’t believe everything you read in the G&M with all the attacks on journalism in general. Not sure how he best should have got his point across to make it stick though.
I didn't find Mark Carney's response 'grumpy' at all.
I've worked on both sides of the communications coin - as a journalist and as a public relations consultant (aka 'the dark side LOL). As such, I know all about tough questions. Honestly, I think it's a bit cheeky of reporters to be entitled to be as pointed and sometimes even as aggressive as they like and to expect respondents to always answer with equanimity. I think Carney has been remarkably generous in his exchanges with media while Poilievre and his team have been disrespectful and mean (in the British sense of the word).
Poilievre has no policies of his own and just copies everything out of the MAGA playbook, so of course he has to copy the election denial stuff. Now he is planting the seeds to claim, in case he loses, that the election result is rigged, just like Trump did with the 2020 election. Poilievre is tied to the truck convoy people who already had the experience of occupying Ottawa for weeks. So is he thinking about calling upon them to repeat Jan 6 on Ottawa?
Good summary of another day on the campaign trail. The PP campaign looks like it's getting more Mega by the day. They just can't seem to get out of the 'nasty' lane. Grievance, controlled appearances, controlled media and just ugly nasty. Nothing positive or 'hopeful about the PP group. They've become the 'chip-on-shoulder' party.
I actually agree with Carney about the G&M article (as an old reporter). That was a sloppy drop to make, and it wouldn't have been hard to fact check the context. I don't think he was rude... he doesn't suffer fools.
I mean, I’m no Liberal party supporter but Carney took a major W on that.
what do you mean by 'a major W'?
I love Carneys reaction “oh Jesus, of course “
The Narduwar interviews were great. A lot of fun and loved all of the gifts and how he surprised them with the connections to his choices.
A big mistake by the Globe and Mail because it didn’t seem to hard for others to figure out fairly quickly that those pictures came from an event. Can understand why Carney was blunt in his response, but probably not great to say you can’t believe everything you read in the G&M with all the attacks on journalism in general. Not sure how he best should have got his point across to make it stick though.