Dear editor,
In reference to the Poilievre holds rally in Black Creek (Sept. 20) should we not send kudos to the 鈥減rotester鈥� who felt it was necessary to voice his objection to Poilievre?
Although we have no idea what this protester said, would a follow up to hear what the 鈥渉eckler鈥� was upset about be possible?
How does the mean spirited, damaging rhetoric define Mr. Poilievre? Aren鈥檛 we experiencing polarized democracy leading to diminished outcomes in our politics? The bully pulpit occupied by Mr. Poilievre leads toward a diminished discussion about useful solutions for our country鈥檚 problems.
Apparently, there were no opportunities to ask questions at the end of this 鈥渃onvoluted narrative.鈥� Was this because Mr. Poilievre had no answers to the complex questions facing our country?
B. Elliott,
Courtenay
