Post-election live chat with Aaron Wherry

Discuss the ins and outs of the campaign that was with our politics blogger, beginning at 2 pm


Filed under:

Post-election live chat with Aaron Wherry

  1. Aaron, why do you think no political journalists predicted a Tory majority?

  2. What was the biggest weakness of the Liberal Party in this election? The lack of ground support? The upper management of the party? The leader? What needs to improve the most in their organization to meet the next election?

  3. Aaron is the Liberal Party's version of the Iraqi Information Minister.

    • Well said! Wondering if my question up yonder will die in moderation…

    • First, I was the one moderating questions, not Aaron. Second, the reason your comments weren't posted is because they were inane.

      Hope that clears things up for you.

  4. Q: "What are the greatest challenges for the NDP going forward?"

    A: "Checking with their new MPs' parents to ensure they've got permission for this four-year field trip, I suppose."

    LOL Aaron. Quote of the day!

    • loved that one too.

  5. or perhaps you are reading too much into his choice of links or witty/snarky/pithy titles and brief comments that sometimes accompany them?

  6. Crit, what twigged you to ask the DFW question? Did Aaron drop a reference along the way that I missed or forgot?

  7. Why didn't someone ask Aaron why he can't comprehend the legitimacy of distinguishing between the policies and political culture of the provincial prairie NDP parties and the federal NDP?Also, someone should have asked him whether he feels that he contributed to the defeat of the federal Liberals, since several analysts (including Liberals) have suggested that one of the Liberals' problems was that they assumed the electorate had as much contempt for Harper as they did – does Aaron believe that the 24/7 Harper-hater echo chamber that he ran for the past several years contributed any of the bricks to the wall of that echo chamber?

  8. No, it doesn't seem like the same person. At all. I find his credibility lacking.

    For instance, answering the question:
    You backtracked somewhat from the scathing piece you wrote on April 26, entitled "The daring Mr. Harper". Why? Looking back with a cooler perspective now that the campaign is over, do you stand by your assessment of the PM?

    this answer:
    "It wasn't meant to be, or seem to be, a rant"

    That's seems absurd to me. I think he is being dishonest. In fact, he sounds a lot like a politician, to me.

    It was such a rant that an addendum was added, along the lines of "despite everything I said, he may have some good qualities"

    It was 100% a scathing one-sided attack on the character, methods, policies, and strategies of the prime minister, from beginning til end, up until the addendum.

    Maybe that's what he's asked to do. Who knows. All I know is, the two people cannot be squared – it lacks credibility.