Who is distancing from who?

Been reading quite a few comments concerning Tom Flanagan and speculation that the CPC is distancing itself from him.

I don't really see that, but maybe I've missed some information.

Shelley Palin Glover's dumbass comments were just that: stupid words from a stupid woman.  She may have chosen to respond to questions about Flanagan's comments surrounding how the CONs have been royally screwing up their expressed justification of proroguing, but I don't see that as being the party line for a couple of reasons:  I have yet to hear of any other CON taking the same line, and I can't see publicly trashing Flanagan as good for the CPC.  His beliefs are hard core far right, he has never swayed from that, and he probably is saying aloud what many conservatives are thinking.

Harper may have a temporary strangle hold on his MPs, but with screw up after screw up, and his inability to climb out of minority territory after four years where he has had so much direct control over the party's message, there are likely several influential members who are thinking it's time for him to go before he sets the party back even further.

I'm inclined to believe that Flanagan is one of those people.  He still spouts the same hard right ideology, but in this latest interview, he drew a line.  After the short clip of Flanagan, the interviewer adds that Flanagan "went on to say this proves that he is no Harper stooge."

That sounds more to me like Flanagan has come to the realization that Harper is bad for the party, not someone he wishes to support fully, and he is making that clear by offering up Harper by name - possibly because he knows it's time to oust Mr. Petulant and back someone else.

The CPC can try to hang in there, try to ride out this latest dive in the polls brought on yet again by Harper's actions, arrogance, and failure to connect with the public, but I think most members are realizing there is a very high possibilitry this fall will happen again and again.  In addition, the public is not warming to Harper, not after four years, and there are so many instances of his deceit and callousness that the opposition can keep reminding us of.

There is growing international criticism of Harper as well, due to his poor performances on international issues.  By running his party and the government as a one man show, anyone considering his continued role as leader knows that decisions made by the CPC and the current government rest squarely on his shoulders.  If our reputation has dropped internationally, it is due principally to Harper's actions and choices.

Four years is long enough for him to have demonstrated his own impact as PM.  Blaming the Liberals for current problems no longer flies, since it is easy to show direct connection between negative consequences and the actions, policies, and changes implemented under his leadership.  Nor does saying the Liberals did it before work, since he has done little to change systems and policies that allowed the Liberals to perform badly.

The CPC seems to have lost some cohesion, lately.  More people talking without scripted notes, more leaks to the press.

I don't believe in the apocalypse, but Harper may.  He may be about to meet his own, personal day of judgement.