Bruce Anderson

Does he believe that his caucus looks at that and says, yes, that's exactly the kind of leadership that is rallying and confidence building for us?

I don't think any of those things are true.

So I think he's just kind of meandering from spot to spot.

but doesn't really have a sense of is there a role for him in a Carney world?

Does his party really want him to be there despite the whatever it was, 87% support that he got in that vote a little while ago?

And if there is a role, what is it?

So he obviously also doesn't have –

the kind of relationship with his caucus that we've seen embattled leaders in the past try to have with theirs.

In other words, to act with a sense of decisiveness and force, to punish people who step outside the lines or paint outside the lines, to reward people who are kind of visibly loyal to him.

He doesn't seem to play that leadership role that way, and I think it's probably a mistake for him.

I think it looked embarrassing for the Conservatives to have Giovanni go down again and have the leader say, I don't have any information about what he's doing there.

You know, it's a terrible clip, I think.

I also think he's sort of drawing some of the people who, from my standpoint, would have been...

Among the leading lights in his front bench should have a gender Adam chambers.

They're now talking a kind of a poly of language, whether it's about Canada us or other issues, which I don't think is a great look for the for the conservative opposition and example.

for me, was Adam Chambers gave a quick scrum the other day.

And he talked about how it was time for politicians on both sides of the border to stop treating the Canada-U.S.

trade situation only on the basis of what is their domestic political interest.

And what he was implying was that Canada was staying away from the table in order to

in order for the Liberals to have a bigger lead over the Conservatives or something like that, which, again, I thought was a terrible take.