Mediaboss Marketing

In my column last week, I took a tour of mostly right-wing conspiracy theories that are infecting our political dialogue with a vertigo-inducing warp of reality.

Its only fair that we explore some of the most prominent left-wing conspiracy theories this week, for no party has a true monopoly on tinfoil hats.

1. Maybe the most outrageous liberal conspiracy theory swimming out there now is that Donald Trump is a Russian asset.

I saw this post on X just the other day from Republicans Against Trump:

Feb. 19: The entire world: Putin murdered Navalny.

The Russian government: Navalny died from 'Sudden death syndrome'

Trump this morning: 'The sudden death of Alexi Navalny.'

Donald Trump is a Russian asset."

Ex-Republican lawmaker Liz Cheney issued a similar warning recently on CNNs State of the Union: I believe the issue this election cycle is making sure the Putin wing of the Republican Party does not take over the West Wing of the White House.

Throughout Donald Trumps presidency, information including a dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele posited collusion between Trumps aides and Russian operatives.

While liberal media outlets like MSNBC promoted these rumors, many more reputable news outlets never aired the claims from the dossier because they could never be verified. They turned out to be baseless. Special counsel Robert Muellers investigation found no evidence linking the Trump campaign to Russian interference in U.S. politics. But now these theories have reared their head again as Trump runs for his old office and seems to avoid most criticism of Vladimir Putin. That doesnt mean he works for the Russians.

We went down that road. The Clinton campaign planted a rumor in the press that Trump was a Russian asset, Constitutional scholar Rob Natelson told me. It turns out to be completely false. I dont see very many people buying into that. Most conspiracy theories tend to be for fund-raising purposes or so the left can titillate themselves about what danger they are in when they control every major commanding height in America. And Colorado.

2. A conspiracy theory Natelson does worry about is one that claims a handful of reform groups on the right are trying to overthrow the Constitution.

The most serious conspiracy theory is regarding Common Cause, said Natelson, who is a senior fellow in Constitutional Jurisprudence for the conservative Independence Institute in Denver. Common Cause, a watchdog group based in Washington, D.C., recently put out a fundraising letter that demonizes those seeking a convention for proposing new amendments under Article V of the Constitution.

Many different groups that favor constitutional amendments on campaign finance reform, a balanced federal budget, and extending term limits to Congress have called for such a convention of states.

Yet Common Cause depicts the whole lot as conspiring in a dangerous far-right plot promoting a secret plan to rewrite our Constitution.

These groups obviously represent a threat to the D.C. establishment, so many people who want to blunt that engage in conspiracy theories: This is a deep, dark conspiracy against the Constitution, theyre going to rewrite the Constitution, they are going to gut the Bill of Rights, said Natelson. This is all garbage but apparently generates contributions.

3. Another conspiracy theory out there is that right-wing groups will erupt in violence if Donald Trump loses the presidential race. Natelson believes this is left-wing conspiracy theorists crying wolf.

Many leftists seem to get a thrill from fantasies about right-wing violence. In the real world, however, large-scale domestic violence and intimidation come almost exclusively from the left rather than the right, Natelson said.

Leftist violence and intimidation went big time in 1968, at the Democratic Convention and in the Watts section of Los Angeles. It continued through the campus seizures in the 1970s, the 1980 Miami riots, the 1999 anti-World Trade Organization riots, the 2011 occupation of the Wisconsin state capitol, the 2018 occupation of the Hart Senate office building, the 2018 storming of the Supreme Court, the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, and on and on. Intimidation continues today, as mobs harass Supreme Court justices and their families.

And unlike the mostly spontaneous and nearly unique right-wing riot of Jan. 6, 2021, leftist uprisings sometimes kill dozens of people.

4. Another raging left-wing conspiracy theory: The Hamas attack was a false flag staged by Israel.

Ive seen this claim made right here in Colorado by pro-Palestinian protesters who have taken over the state Capitol and city council meetings.

Hashtags and terms linking Israel to false flag a staged event that casts blame on another party tripled on social media in the weeks after the attacks, according to the Network Contagion Research Institute, a nonprofit tracking disinformation.

This conspiracy theory comes from a small but growing group on the left that are so upset with Israels retaliation they deny the basic facts of the attacks, pushing a range of falsehoods.

The thing is, the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attack is among the most well-documented in history. A crush of evidence from smartphone cameras and GoPros captured Hamas breach of the border.

5. Next: The world can live without fossil fuels.

Last count, about 79% of our energy in the U.S. still comes from fossil fuels. Even if one assumes that fossil fuels are behind the rise in global temperatures over the last century, it is just not rational to believe that we can abandon fossil fuels for many, many years.

If fossil fuel production were stopped tomorrow, the world would quickly grind to a halt. Without that power, electricity grids would see widespread blackouts. Within a few weeks, a lack of oil still the major fuel used for trucking and shipping goods worldwide would impede deliveries of food and other essential goods, a Washington Post science reporter wrote recently.

Natelson believes the facts of climate change have gotten drowned in an ocean of climate propaganda" and the fight has become so politicized that claims are being exaggerated all the time and every weather event has been turned into a political football, whether it should be or not.

6. A Washington Post columnist, ABC News and Gloria Steinem all recently voiced versions of an ungrounded conspiracy theory that when Roe v. Wade was overturned the anti-abortion movement and the Supreme Court majority were merely pretending to oppose abortion while secretly wanting only to boost White birthrates for the sake of perpetuating dominance of the White race. Seventy-one million Catholics who oppose abortion for religious reasons will be surprised to hear this.

At the end of the day, my central concern isnt necessarily that the left embraces conspiracy theories more than the right, or vice versa.

A recent study published by Political Behavior found, in fact, that Americans who lean conservative in their political beliefs are no more likely to believe in conspiracy theories than liberals.

In addition, many conspiracy theories are equally supported by both sides of the political spectrum, the study found.

The larger concern to me is that people on the left and the right are losing their ability to distinguish conspiracy theory from plain old controversy or disagreement, or conspiracy theory from reality. My bigger worry is that facts no longer matter.

In a world awash in conspiracy theories everybody thinks they are being lied to and manipulated and theyre right. Now our disagreements are mostly about who is doing the lying and the reasons for the lies rather than healthy disagreement about the issues themselves.

In a new book, writer Naomi Klein worries that we have created a kind of Mirror World with our culture of conspiracy theory and the separate news and internet bubbles in which left and right dwell.

The Mirror World is a strange mirror image of the world where I live, she writes. Its a place where many ideas that I care about are being twisted and warped into dangerous doppelgnger versions of themselves. Think, for example, of Putin claiming that hes liberating Ukraine from fascism.

When looking at the Mirror World, it can seem obvious that millions of people have given themselves over to fantasy, to make-believe, to playacting, writes Klein. The trickier thing, the uncanny thing, really, is thats what they see when they look at us.

Read the rest here:
Six liberal conspiracy theories clouding politics | Business - Colorado Springs Gazette

The governing Liberals took their first major step toward national pharmacare Thursday as the health minister tabled a bill that paves the way for a universal drug program and secures NDP support in the House of Commons.

But Health Minister Mark Holland made clear there is still a long way to go before all drugs in Canada are covered under a federal program.

The bill allows the government to negotiate with provinces and territories to cover birth control, along with diabetes drugs and supplies, for anyone with a health card.

Holland said the cost is likely to be in the realm of $1.5 billion, but he said that estimate is very likely to change over the course of his talks with provinces.

This is a proof-of-concept opportunity to try (providing) two drugs on a universal, single-payer model, Holland said at a press conference Thursday.

Were going to have an opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of that model.

He said he believes the government will be able to show significant cost savings in fairly short order.

In addition to testing the waters on universal coverage, the bill also fulfils a promise made to the New Democrats, who touted the legislation Thursday as the fulfilment of a long-held dream.

This is historic. This is the dream of our party since the conception of our party, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said Thursday morning.

It is happening not by coincidence, it is happening because New Democrats fought and we forced the government to do this.

Pharmacare is a central pillar of the political pact between the two parties, which has the NDP helping the Liberals stave off an election in exchange for progress on a list of shared priorities.

Its future had seemed uncertain amid a months-long stalemate over the wording of the legislation and the number of drugs they planned to launch with.

The NDP announced they clinched the negotiations late last week, in the lead-up to a negotiated March 1 deadline to table a bill.

Health critic Don Davies, who led the negotiations for the New Democrats, said the final pieces were put in place over the weekend.

The Liberals fought us every step of the way. They resisted, they delayed, they opposed, but New Democrats persisted, said Davies.

The legislation makes reference to a single-payer, universal model something Davies said he insisted on.

And it includes universal coverage as a binding principle that must guide the implementation of a future pharmacare program.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre spoke to the media in the foyer of the House of Commons Thursday, but walked away when reporters asked him for his position on the governments pharmacare plans.

As it stands, Canada is the only country in the world with a universal health-care system that does not also have universal coverage for prescription drugs outside of hospitals.

In December, the NDP and Liberals agreed to push back the original timeline, which wouldve seen legislation fully passed by the end of last year.

The reticence on the Liberals part largely came down to cost.

A full fledged pharmacare program would cost the government nearly $40 billion a year by the time it is fully up and running, the parliamentary budget officer estimates.

Singh threatened to pull out of the deal if the March 1 deadline wasnt met with legislation that earned his approval, though he was open about a desire to keep the deal alive and see a pharmacare bill debated in the Commons.

The bill calls for the minister to put together a committee of experts to make recommendations about how to pay for a national, universal, single-payer plan within 30 days of the act receiving royal assent.

Alberta and Quebec have already said they want to opt out of the program and would rather put the money toward their existing drug plans.

We were not consulted about the federal governments plan and, although information available to us is limited, we have concerns about the proposed limited scope, Alberta Health Minister Adriana LaGrange said earlier this week.

LaGrange said Alberta intends to opt out of the program, but still wants to receive its per-capita share.

On the other hand, British Columbia already covers many contraceptives as part of its provincial pharmacare program, and Manitobas government has already pledged to do so as well.

Ontario also provides many contraceptives for people under the age of 25 who dont have private insurance, and has existing programs to support people with diabetes. The provincial government says it wants more information about what the bill will mean for those programs.

I was very clear with the minister when we spoke that Im not writing off anything, but Im also not buying into something where I dont know exactly whats there, Ontario Health Minister Sylvia Jones said Thursday.

Singh called it disappointing that provinces would dismiss the program out of hand, without seeing the details.

Despite the immediate concerns from Alberta and Quebec, Holland said he is very optimistic this is a plan we can deliver across the country.

In addition to the initial plans for diabetes and birth control drugs, the bill lays out several next steps and deadlines designed to nudge the government toward a bigger pharmacare plan.

Those steps include asking the new Canadian Drug Agency to develop a list of essential medicines within a year of royal assent, which would inform which drugs are covered in the future.

Here is the original post:
Liberals take first step toward pharmacare with bill for birth control, diabetes meds - Sylvan Lake News

TBILISI, DFWatchGeorgian Dream is in the process of preparing a legislative initiative to protect society from pseudo-liberal ideology and its inevitable harmful consequences. The country may face such a situation when we will be asked to legalize the so-called civil partnership, says Mamuka Mdinaradze, majority leader at the parliament.

Opposition political parties dub this as empty threat and Russian propaganda.

Mamuka Mdinaradze, one of the closest allies of the PM Irakli Kobakhidze, unveiled the initiative at the briefing after the majority meeting on Thursday. According to him, the draft law will be prepared in the next two weeks and submitted to parliament.

As Mdinaradze noted while talking about the need for the initiative, despite the fact that in 2017, the Constitution of Georgia recorded that marriage is a union between a man and a woman for the purpose of creating a family, we may face the reality when we are asked to legalize the so-called civil partnership.

Wilful propaganda of non-traditional lifestyle is what it is the responsibility of the Georgian society to fight against, he said.

We see severe trends in the spread of pseudo-liberal ideology worldwide. This propaganda is taking more and more crude forms and, most importantly, it has serious consequences. International studies confirm that in a number of countries, where pseudo-liberal ideology is especially actively spread, the number of people with non-traditional sexual orientation among 18-25-year-olds is already about 20 percent, and in some places even more. It is worrying that this indicator has increased three times in seven years, and the increase coincides exactly with the period when this propaganda was particularly active, Mdinaradze says.

We may face the reality when we are asked to legalize the so-called civil partnership. We have already had such a case when there was a demand from foreigners to introduce the terminology recognizing other genders besides female and male and we had to go through quite a serious struggle to reject it. Today pseudo-liberals in the world march against such terms as mother and father, wife and husband, etc. They ask to introduce the so-called gender neutral terminology such as parent 1 and parent 2, etc. The logical continuation of this would be, for example, to remove the gender record from the passport.

Every year in Georgia they try to thrust down our throat the so-called Pride, whereas sociological studies confirm that more than 90 percent of the population perceives it, quite rightly, as propaganda and is against holding Pride. Moreover, such aggressive propaganda, on the contrary, has a negative effect on the protection of the rights of people of different sexual orientation.

[] thus, the parliamentary majority believes that we should actively oppose this propaganda and should also use legislative mechanisms for this. Accordingly, weve decided to prepare a legislative initiative that will protect society from pseudo-liberal ideology and its inevitable harmful consequences. The draft law will be prepared and initiated in the parliament in the next two weeks. The draft will fully respect the principles and norms stipulated by the second chapter of the Constitution of Georgia, Mdinaradze said.

The Act on the Protection of Georgia is to be adopted, not this vague bill, against empty threats, said Ana Natsvilishvili, MP of opposition party Lelo.

The main task of these people is that instead of what the country needs, what the citizens of the country need: law, justice, protection of dignity by law, security, rights, protection of the country from Russian expansion, they come out and start doing things that serve to sideline the real problems and threats. It wont work, Natsvlishvili said to Palitranews.

Georgian Dream is now looking for topics that will bring them votes. In my opinion, this rhetoric is related to the PR campaign, and the opposition should act accordingly do not allow Dream to use this issue for the election and turn it into a successful PR, Vakhtang Dzabiradze, a political analyst and former Soviet dissident, said to Rezonansi newspaper..

Read more here:
Georgian Dream is preparing a bill against ideology of pseudo-liberals and wilful propaganda of non-traditional ... - Democracy & Freedom Watch

State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington Washington D.C. West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Puerto Rico US Virgin Islands Armed Forces Americas Armed Forces Pacific Armed Forces Europe Northern Mariana Islands Marshall Islands American Samoa Federated States of Micronesia Guam Palau Alberta, Canada British Columbia, Canada Manitoba, Canada New Brunswick, Canada Newfoundland, Canada Nova Scotia, Canada Northwest Territories, Canada Nunavut, Canada Ontario, Canada Prince Edward Island, Canada Quebec, Canada Saskatchewan, Canada Yukon Territory, Canada

Zip Code

Country United States of America US Virgin Islands United States Minor Outlying Islands Canada Mexico, United Mexican States Bahamas, Commonwealth of the Cuba, Republic of Dominican Republic Haiti, Republic of Jamaica Afghanistan Albania, People's Socialist Republic of Algeria, People's Democratic Republic of American Samoa Andorra, Principality of Angola, Republic of Anguilla Antarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S) Antigua and Barbuda Argentina, Argentine Republic Armenia Aruba Australia, Commonwealth of Austria, Republic of Azerbaijan, Republic of Bahrain, Kingdom of Bangladesh, People's Republic of Barbados Belarus Belgium, Kingdom of Belize Benin, People's Republic of Bermuda Bhutan, Kingdom of Bolivia, Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana, Republic of Bouvet Island (Bouvetoya) Brazil, Federative Republic of British Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago) British Virgin Islands Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria, People's Republic of Burkina Faso Burundi, Republic of Cambodia, Kingdom of Cameroon, United Republic of Cape Verde, Republic of Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad, Republic of Chile, Republic of China, People's Republic of Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia, Republic of Comoros, Union of the Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, People's Republic of Cook Islands Costa Rica, Republic of Cote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of the Cyprus, Republic of Czech Republic Denmark, Kingdom of Djibouti, Republic of Dominica, Commonwealth of Ecuador, Republic of Egypt, Arab Republic of El Salvador, Republic of Equatorial Guinea, Republic of Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Faeroe Islands Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Fiji, Republic of the Fiji Islands Finland, Republic of France, French Republic French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon, Gabonese Republic Gambia, Republic of the Georgia Germany Ghana, Republic of Gibraltar Greece, Hellenic Republic Greenland Grenada Guadaloupe Guam Guatemala, Republic of Guinea, Revolutionary People's Rep'c of Guinea-Bissau, Republic of Guyana, Republic of Heard and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras, Republic of Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China Hrvatska (Croatia) Hungary, Hungarian People's Republic Iceland, Republic of India, Republic of Indonesia, Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq, Republic of Ireland Israel, State of Italy, Italian Republic Japan Jordan, Hashemite Kingdom of Kazakhstan, Republic of Kenya, Republic of Kiribati, Republic of Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait, State of Kyrgyz Republic Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon, Lebanese Republic Lesotho, Kingdom of Liberia, Republic of Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein, Principality of Lithuania Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Macao, Special Administrative Region of China Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar, Republic of Malawi, Republic of Malaysia Maldives, Republic of Mali, Republic of Malta, Republic of Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania, Islamic Republic of Mauritius Mayotte Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco, Principality of Mongolia, Mongolian People's Republic Montserrat Morocco, Kingdom of Mozambique, People's Republic of Myanmar Namibia Nauru, Republic of Nepal, Kingdom of Netherlands Antilles Netherlands, Kingdom of the New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua, Republic of Niger, Republic of the Nigeria, Federal Republic of Niue, Republic of Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway, Kingdom of Oman, Sultanate of Pakistan, Islamic Republic of Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama, Republic of Papua New Guinea Paraguay, Republic of Peru, Republic of Philippines, Republic of the Pitcairn Island Poland, Polish People's Republic Portugal, Portuguese Republic Puerto Rico Qatar, State of Reunion Romania, Socialist Republic of Russian Federation Rwanda, Rwandese Republic Samoa, Independent State of San Marino, Republic of Sao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic of Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of Senegal, Republic of Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles, Republic of Sierra Leone, Republic of Singapore, Republic of Slovakia (Slovak Republic) Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia, Somali Republic South Africa, Republic of South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands Spain, Spanish State Sri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic of St. Helena St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. Pierre and Miquelon St. Vincent and the Grenadines Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Suriname, Republic of Svalbard & Jan Mayen Islands Swaziland, Kingdom of Sweden, Kingdom of Switzerland, Swiss Confederation Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand, Kingdom of Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of Togo, Togolese Republic Tokelau (Tokelau Islands) Tonga, Kingdom of Trinidad and Tobago, Republic of Tunisia, Republic of Turkey, Republic of Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda, Republic of Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom of Great Britain & N. Ireland Uruguay, Eastern Republic of Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Viet Nam, Socialist Republic of Wallis and Futuna Islands Western Sahara Yemen Zambia, Republic of Zimbabwe

Go here to read the rest:
Conservatives and liberals invited to event on polarization, first in statewide series - ECM Publishers

Open this photo in gallery:

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Ontario Premier Doug Ford attend an announcement at Seneca College, in King City, Ont., on Feb. 9.Chris Young/The Canadian Press

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Ontario Premier Doug Ford depend on the same voters to stay in power. They used to fight each other for those voters support. Then they learned that co-operation worked better. Now it seems theyre fighting again. Its a fight that Mr. Trudeau is likely to lose.

Depending on where you draw the boundaries, there are about 6.5 million people in the Greater Toronto Area. After you deduct the roughly 900,000 people living in central Toronto, who often have different voting patterns than the rest, that makes about 5.6 million people in the suburban GTA, representing 14 per cent of Canadas population.

The voters of the suburban GTA tend to vote as a block. For more than six decades, since the days of John Diefenbaker and Lester Pearson federally and Leslie Frost and John Robarts provincially, they have almost always supported the political party that ended up forming the government.

In the 2021 federal and 2022 provincial elections, they installed Liberals on Parliament Hill and Progressive Conservatives at Queens Park.

After he was first elected in 2018, Mr. Ford behaved as though he was the unofficial opposition to Mr. Trudeau, waging war especially over the federal carbon tax. But when Mr. Ford found his popularity waning, he pivoted, co-operating with Ottawa so closely during the pandemic that he declared: I absolutely love [Deputy Prime Minister] Chrystia Freeland. Shes amazing.

He had learned one of the most important lessons in Canadian politics: suburban GTA voters are happy to see one party in office federally and another provincially, but they want the two to get along.

Although Mr. Trudeau held Mr. Ford responsible in part for the blockades that led the Prime Minister to invoke the Emergencies Act, the two governments co-operated during negotiations to protect the North American free-trade agreement and in bringing new automotive plants to the province.

But last week, Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault sounded anything but co-operative when he announced there would be no more federal funding for any major expansion of the countrys network of roads: We can very well achieve our goals of economic, social and human development without more enlargement of the road network, he declared.

Im gobsmacked, the Premier tweeted in response. A federal minister said they wont invest in new roads or highways. He doesnt care that youre stuck in bumper to bumper traffic. I do. Were building roads and highways, with or without a cent from the feds.

The Ford government wants to build a major new highway, the 59-kilometre Highway 413, with the aim of easing congestion in York, Peel and Halton regions in the GTA.

Environmental groups and public-transit advocates stoutly oppose the highway, and the Trudeau government has subjected it to a time-consuming environmental review. The Ford government has gone to court to force Ottawa to stop interfering.

Regardless of that outcome, its reasonable to assume that the 413 will receive not a penny of federal funding for as long as Mr. Guilbeault is Environment Minister.

The GTA is one of the fastest-growing regions in North America. Its population is projected to balloon from 7.2 million in 2022 to 10.5 million by 2046.

While investments in public transit are important, about three-quarters of all workers in the Toronto Census Metropolitan Area, which includes most of the Greater Toronto Area, commute by car, according to Statistics Canada

In the next federal election, you can count on seeing this: Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre will plant himself somewhere along the planned path of Highway 413. He will declare that a Conservative government will scrap the environmental review and pay its full share of the cost of the new road.

He might even crib from a line that PC leader Mike Harris used in the 1995 Ontario election campaign, when he promised a four-lane highway linking Ottawa to Highway 401 by 1999 with no ifs, no ands, no buts and no tolls. The Tories took two Ottawa seats from the Liberals in that election.

Highway 416 was completed on schedule.

The Liberals, unless they are prepared to jettison Mr. Guilbeault, will probably have no choice but to oppose Highway 413, just as the provincial Liberals and NDP opposed it during the 2022 provincial election.

In that election, Mr. Fords PCs swept the ridings the new highway would go through. Care to predict what the outcome would be federally?

Link:
Opinion: The federal Liberals and Ontario Tories are fighting again and it won't end well for Trudeau - The Globe and Mail