Please change the title to the one in the article as per community rule 1.

I'm convinced that Poilievre is there to be so terrible that the opposition rallies around a single leader/party (Carney ATM), and squeezes out the alternative (NDP).

In other words, his job isn't to win, it's to turn Canada into a two-party system.

I'd recommend Mr. Pollievre read Jocko Willink's Extreme Ownership.

Leaders dont blame other people. Leaders don't cast failure on others. Leaders don't bitch and moan and hope something gets better.

Instead of finding out why members are leaving his party (disalignment of objectives? Inability to vote off party lines? Not enough cheezies in the break room?) and doing something about it; he is bitching about a system. Now I'm not advocating for the monolithicy of systems, bad or outdated systems must change. But using a system as a sink for accountability if not leadership behaviour.

It's not MY fault members are crossing the floor. It's the fault of the system for letting them change.

Mr. Pollievre, if you cannot lead a party of 140 people. If you cannot reconcile how to align the objectives of 140 people. If you cannot own the concerns of 140 people. Why do you think yourself capable of leading 40,000,000 people? Why do you think you can reconcile the objectives of 40,000,000 people? How do you think you have the capacity to pwn the concerns of 40,000,000 people?

Politics and party objectives ebb and flow, I've voted for just about every major party by this point in my life. But shitty leaders are shitty leaders. Conservative party members deserve more of their party. The house of Commons deserves more of it's opposition. Canadians deserve more of their politicians.

Poilievre — and other Conservative MPs — have in the past voted against a bill that would require MPs to automatically face a byelection if they changed parties.

"But that was when I thought they'd be floor crossing to my party!"