The preoccupation with Mr. Trump is not seeing the forest for the trees. The fundamental problem is not the POTUS, but an economy so moribund that it will take a decade to revive while the "have" provinces ask the obvious. Why bother?
Ontario is about to take an economic shit kicking and possibly become a permanent "have not". The problem is compounded by the geopolitical divisions, encouraged by the LPC, in which the "haves" are going to be blue, but are expected to bale out the reds.
You have correctly diagnosed the real existential crisis facing Canada. Canada will survive Trump. It may not survive a Liberal election win. Alberta and Saskatchewan are fed up with the inequity of this confederation. It is simply not fair to that region and people there are waking up to how rigged the system is. A conservative election win would at least delay a sovereignty referendum in Alberta but Canada has been so badly mismanaged by the Liberals that the damage may be too much for the conservatives to repair with smaller government and sane economic policies that attract investment. The US shift presents a great opportunity for Canada to shift as well ... away from the sacred cows of West to East "equalization", subsidized and protect auto, manufacturing, dairy etc. industries and allowing our economy to grow at least less artificially hindered by political calculation and the strategic sowing of regional divisions. I doubt Canadians will make the most of this opportunity - we never have.
Trump did not ruin health care, crime or productivity. To focus on him is wrong, but Canadians are showing time and time again, to lack focus and reward failure.
"Liberals don't have that." Because top-level Liberals are brutal in suppressing diverse opinions among their MP flunkies. MPs are there to support the PM, not to represent their constituents.
That's the way every party is and has been for at least 20 years. We gave party leaders and the PMO way way too much power and I don't see any leader or party reversing that in the slightest.
Our next Prime Minister could very well be decided by Donald Trump. He is nothing buy wily and he could intentionally make some dramatic move that would skew the election to the favour of one of the candidates
AND, please don't anyone tell me he is beyond that.
PP needs wedges. 1st he should now get a security clearance. Take away Liberal talking points. Then he should go after Carney for not declaring his millions in offshore accounts. Go on the offensive.
Carney just pivoted to affordability with his "Home Canada Build" announcement. Maybe the conservatives suspected the Trump scare would be short lived. Surprised it was Bremmer that killed it, although maybe he is just trying to grind Trump's gears.
What I cannot figure out is how PP sticking to the ideas and policies that he has had for years is being criticized but the Carney Liberals can do a 180 on most of their policies and people are prepared to accept that there will be a different outcome. Please someone explain that one to me!
The LPC has copied virtually all the CPC policies and that seems just fine even though we know that the LPC always does that to win then turns back to the old 'let's line our pockets. Apparently you believe that PP is the problem in the election - really?
how have your savings and investments performed in the last month? Who brought all that down on us - the President or the LPC government in Canada. The reports on Carney out of the UK are virtually all negative and strongly urge Canadians not to trust Carney but that is ignored as well. The LPC has a candidate who encourages supporters (with media present) to kidnap a CPC candidate and turn him over to the Chinese consulate - Carney DEFENDS him as do other LPC MPs and apparently that is just fine with voters as well. WTFudge folks???
The Fedral parties were/are focused on the major issues you discussed (Healthcare, crime, housing...). However, these areas are large the responsibility of Provincal governments. As a result, defence, international relations (including trade) suffered from neglect.
After 20 Jan, it is plain the one security cannot be taken for granted. Only one party seem to realize this.
Carney (not sure about the rest of the LPC) has shown signs that he realizes that Defence and securing that support of our allies us import. I am yet to see this from Poilievre.
This Chiang story is incredible. I can't remember anything even close to it in my lifetime. It's like something out of a 1970s Teamsters election rather than a 2025 Canadian Federal Election. Definitely looking forward to a Law and Order episode based very loosely on these facts some day.
1. Crime and disorder. I have noticed a modest but distinct improvement in recent months. For example, I see less acting-out on the TTC. Still a lot, but less. I do hear "security incident" announcements with some regularity, but perhaps this is an indication that they are on the issue with better patrolling. In addition, at least the parks I frequent seem to have fewer tents. And at one of these parks, I have seen those mini-trailers replace almost all the tents. The mini-trailers were provided by a volunteer or non-profit, and the city apparently didn't like them. But they seem to be an improvement for everyone involved: the homeless and park users. They are tidier and more secure; I think they might be heated. It isn't real housing, but it's better than the street, than tents, or most shelters. It should be seriously considered.
2. A lot of the problem with crime seems to be delays in trials that cause cases to be abandoned. (And this goes for everyone from the vagrant street thug up to Trump himself). It's not lack of policing or an indulgent 'bleeding-heart' mentality so much as a court problem. We don't need a police state; we need due process, a big part of which is getting things done on time. Might be worth a Line column. (Toronto Life did: https://torontolife.com/deep-dives/i-was-nearly-beaten-to-death-by-my-partner-the-case-was-dismissed-because-it-took-to-long-to-get-to-trial/).
3. Frame the nation's problems as something that Trump has brought to a head in a critical way, but the best response is to do stuff we should have been doing anyway. Secure the Arctic, become more economically independent or resilient, protect our agricultural land and greenbelt so we don't have to get as much food from outside, build infrastructure including (reluctantly for I lean green) an east-west pipeline that doesn't go through the US. Build that pipeline under the Trans-Canada Highway to reduce environmental impacts and ensure that any repairs are immediately accessible.
For Boomer Liberal voters, Trump is the meme for change. They are terrified that PP wants to be sufficiently DOGE-like that some of their entitlements might disappear. Their Maslow's-bottom-rung-need is to maintain their house price. When PP talks about carroting municipalities to build multi-unit homes on their single family deserts, Boomers become Ninja NIMBYs.
PP doesn't need to pivot to "deal with Trump". We'll see on April 2 that Carney has no "elbows up" that influences Trump at all. PP needs to get the young out to vote. Make it a change election. The Liberals broke Canada over the last decade. PP needs to sell his change agenda aggressively. Even if that means losing the small Boomer cohort that votes Conservative.
A minor quibble: PP can lose his voce cords, it is the young vote that must get their behinds to the voting booth if they want to have any influence on the election results. Do not anyone give the young vote any free pass on this.
Second minor quibble: Nobody needs to make this a change election. This was already a massively consequential change election before the writ was dropped. If Marx Carnage and his party of apocalypse mongers win in any way, they will indeed cause a minor but consequential apocalypse. Notice how they already ignore a decision by the Supreme Court.
Really enjoyed the discussion with Stephanie (not surprising given the tough question she asked Carney in London). I’d still like to know from Matt what a pivot by the Conservatives would look like in practice? Like what should they do or say. Empty symbolism like elbows up? I’ve been listening to PP regularly and have heard him denounce Trump, say we’ll never be the 51st state. Should he do what Carney did in the leadership race and insult Trump? Genuinely curious.
Ms. Levitz commented that there was probably a case study about Conservative infighting. There is. It's called "The Tory Syndrome" and it was written in 1979. I haven't read it in over 30 years, but I remember it being a good analysis. It's 45 years old, but the essential fractured dynamics of the various incarnations of the Conservative Party have never changed, other than in the Harper era. Tories have always wanted to be right, and to fight each other. The Liberals mostly just want to win power.
The Liberal *used to* have factions battling it out through press leaks, as was obvious to anybody old enough to remember the Chretien-Martin civil war. However, that was over 20 years ago, and the party has deteriorated steadily over that time. Moreover, Trudeau had a habit of purging dissenting voices and potential challengers. They're stuck with an unhealthy monoculture of clapping seals. I have to wonder if that might change somewhat if Carney ekes out a win in this election? A lot of Liberals departed; a new Liberal caucus would be filled with a lot of new faces. Would they end up getting crushed with the same PMO control freakery, or would the Liberals start to show a little more vigor with an injection of new perspectives?
I'm worried that the Poilievre faction of the Conservatives have been in an echo chamber that's causing them to miss political cues. I'm even more worried that Poilievre supporters are in even more of an echo chamber, and they're holding the door shut with all their strength to keep bad news out. A lot of the reaction to the Liberal surge has been shock and denial that it could be happening. Criticism of the Poilievre campaign is rebutted summarily, often in an aggressive, hostile way. This denial of reality and rejection of information that makes people sad or angry was the fuel for the "stolen election" narratives that have roiled American politics over several elections. I really don't want to see it come to Canada, but the whole Trucker Convoy episode in 2022 suggests it may already be here.
Being annihilated electorally in 2011 and then miraculously revived under a cult of personality will tend to drive out dissenters. There are would-be sacrificial candidates who now have a 10 year career as MP's thanks to the Trudeau administration. They are just happy to have been invited to the party and will go along with whatever.
A big part of the problem on the current CPC end is that it's not clear how much of the current predicament was avoidable or can even be actively corrected. If you are Poilievre how do you actually fight or negotiate with Trump if you aren't the PM? Anti-American nationalism is pretty much a Liberal dominated thing and looks fake when Conservatives do it. What the hell do you do about a collapsing NDP and Bloc? You can try to hold on to ever single Liberal who parked their vote with you during the end of the Trudeau era but even if you do, the math is very hard if the NDP goes to zero.
Oh there will definitely be some dark consequences if the Liberals win under these circumstances. There is a really good case to argue that the election was manipulated both inside Canada (prorogation and performative leadership race) and outside (everything to do with Trump and tariffs, plus the LPC timing to coincide with these). Tons of people will react like the election was fully rigged.
The preoccupation with Mr. Trump is not seeing the forest for the trees. The fundamental problem is not the POTUS, but an economy so moribund that it will take a decade to revive while the "have" provinces ask the obvious. Why bother?
Ontario is about to take an economic shit kicking and possibly become a permanent "have not". The problem is compounded by the geopolitical divisions, encouraged by the LPC, in which the "haves" are going to be blue, but are expected to bale out the reds.
Let's ask Ms. Smith and Mr. Moe, will you bother?
You have correctly diagnosed the real existential crisis facing Canada. Canada will survive Trump. It may not survive a Liberal election win. Alberta and Saskatchewan are fed up with the inequity of this confederation. It is simply not fair to that region and people there are waking up to how rigged the system is. A conservative election win would at least delay a sovereignty referendum in Alberta but Canada has been so badly mismanaged by the Liberals that the damage may be too much for the conservatives to repair with smaller government and sane economic policies that attract investment. The US shift presents a great opportunity for Canada to shift as well ... away from the sacred cows of West to East "equalization", subsidized and protect auto, manufacturing, dairy etc. industries and allowing our economy to grow at least less artificially hindered by political calculation and the strategic sowing of regional divisions. I doubt Canadians will make the most of this opportunity - we never have.
Trump did not ruin health care, crime or productivity. To focus on him is wrong, but Canadians are showing time and time again, to lack focus and reward failure.
"Liberals don't have that." Because top-level Liberals are brutal in suppressing diverse opinions among their MP flunkies. MPs are there to support the PM, not to represent their constituents.
That's the way every party is and has been for at least 20 years. We gave party leaders and the PMO way way too much power and I don't see any leader or party reversing that in the slightest.
I agree. The riding associations should determine the candidates.
Our next Prime Minister could very well be decided by Donald Trump. He is nothing buy wily and he could intentionally make some dramatic move that would skew the election to the favour of one of the candidates
AND, please don't anyone tell me he is beyond that.
Ford's camp is trying to tank the federal campaign so Ford can run to lead the federal party.
Ford will be in a for a shock when he actually has to go against a competent opponent.
PP needs wedges. 1st he should now get a security clearance. Take away Liberal talking points. Then he should go after Carney for not declaring his millions in offshore accounts. Go on the offensive.
It's Canada. It probably takes 8 months to get a security clearance and that's if they expedite it but they would only do that for a Liberal.
That security clearance is a muzzle and so is of no use to PP. A totally fake problem blown up by LIEbranos, MSM and CBC.
Carney just pivoted to affordability with his "Home Canada Build" announcement. Maybe the conservatives suspected the Trump scare would be short lived. Surprised it was Bremmer that killed it, although maybe he is just trying to grind Trump's gears.
What I cannot figure out is how PP sticking to the ideas and policies that he has had for years is being criticized but the Carney Liberals can do a 180 on most of their policies and people are prepared to accept that there will be a different outcome. Please someone explain that one to me!
The LPC has copied virtually all the CPC policies and that seems just fine even though we know that the LPC always does that to win then turns back to the old 'let's line our pockets. Apparently you believe that PP is the problem in the election - really?
how have your savings and investments performed in the last month? Who brought all that down on us - the President or the LPC government in Canada. The reports on Carney out of the UK are virtually all negative and strongly urge Canadians not to trust Carney but that is ignored as well. The LPC has a candidate who encourages supporters (with media present) to kidnap a CPC candidate and turn him over to the Chinese consulate - Carney DEFENDS him as do other LPC MPs and apparently that is just fine with voters as well. WTFudge folks???
Time to wake up Canada
The Fedral parties were/are focused on the major issues you discussed (Healthcare, crime, housing...). However, these areas are large the responsibility of Provincal governments. As a result, defence, international relations (including trade) suffered from neglect.
After 20 Jan, it is plain the one security cannot be taken for granted. Only one party seem to realize this.
Carney (not sure about the rest of the LPC) has shown signs that he realizes that Defence and securing that support of our allies us import. I am yet to see this from Poilievre.
This Chiang story is incredible. I can't remember anything even close to it in my lifetime. It's like something out of a 1970s Teamsters election rather than a 2025 Canadian Federal Election. Definitely looking forward to a Law and Order episode based very loosely on these facts some day.
A few thoughts.
1. Crime and disorder. I have noticed a modest but distinct improvement in recent months. For example, I see less acting-out on the TTC. Still a lot, but less. I do hear "security incident" announcements with some regularity, but perhaps this is an indication that they are on the issue with better patrolling. In addition, at least the parks I frequent seem to have fewer tents. And at one of these parks, I have seen those mini-trailers replace almost all the tents. The mini-trailers were provided by a volunteer or non-profit, and the city apparently didn't like them. But they seem to be an improvement for everyone involved: the homeless and park users. They are tidier and more secure; I think they might be heated. It isn't real housing, but it's better than the street, than tents, or most shelters. It should be seriously considered.
2. A lot of the problem with crime seems to be delays in trials that cause cases to be abandoned. (And this goes for everyone from the vagrant street thug up to Trump himself). It's not lack of policing or an indulgent 'bleeding-heart' mentality so much as a court problem. We don't need a police state; we need due process, a big part of which is getting things done on time. Might be worth a Line column. (Toronto Life did: https://torontolife.com/deep-dives/i-was-nearly-beaten-to-death-by-my-partner-the-case-was-dismissed-because-it-took-to-long-to-get-to-trial/).
3. Frame the nation's problems as something that Trump has brought to a head in a critical way, but the best response is to do stuff we should have been doing anyway. Secure the Arctic, become more economically independent or resilient, protect our agricultural land and greenbelt so we don't have to get as much food from outside, build infrastructure including (reluctantly for I lean green) an east-west pipeline that doesn't go through the US. Build that pipeline under the Trans-Canada Highway to reduce environmental impacts and ensure that any repairs are immediately accessible.
For Boomer Liberal voters, Trump is the meme for change. They are terrified that PP wants to be sufficiently DOGE-like that some of their entitlements might disappear. Their Maslow's-bottom-rung-need is to maintain their house price. When PP talks about carroting municipalities to build multi-unit homes on their single family deserts, Boomers become Ninja NIMBYs.
PP doesn't need to pivot to "deal with Trump". We'll see on April 2 that Carney has no "elbows up" that influences Trump at all. PP needs to get the young out to vote. Make it a change election. The Liberals broke Canada over the last decade. PP needs to sell his change agenda aggressively. Even if that means losing the small Boomer cohort that votes Conservative.
A minor quibble: PP can lose his voce cords, it is the young vote that must get their behinds to the voting booth if they want to have any influence on the election results. Do not anyone give the young vote any free pass on this.
Second minor quibble: Nobody needs to make this a change election. This was already a massively consequential change election before the writ was dropped. If Marx Carnage and his party of apocalypse mongers win in any way, they will indeed cause a minor but consequential apocalypse. Notice how they already ignore a decision by the Supreme Court.
Really enjoyed the discussion with Stephanie (not surprising given the tough question she asked Carney in London). I’d still like to know from Matt what a pivot by the Conservatives would look like in practice? Like what should they do or say. Empty symbolism like elbows up? I’ve been listening to PP regularly and have heard him denounce Trump, say we’ll never be the 51st state. Should he do what Carney did in the leadership race and insult Trump? Genuinely curious.
Ms. Levitz commented that there was probably a case study about Conservative infighting. There is. It's called "The Tory Syndrome" and it was written in 1979. I haven't read it in over 30 years, but I remember it being a good analysis. It's 45 years old, but the essential fractured dynamics of the various incarnations of the Conservative Party have never changed, other than in the Harper era. Tories have always wanted to be right, and to fight each other. The Liberals mostly just want to win power.
The Liberal *used to* have factions battling it out through press leaks, as was obvious to anybody old enough to remember the Chretien-Martin civil war. However, that was over 20 years ago, and the party has deteriorated steadily over that time. Moreover, Trudeau had a habit of purging dissenting voices and potential challengers. They're stuck with an unhealthy monoculture of clapping seals. I have to wonder if that might change somewhat if Carney ekes out a win in this election? A lot of Liberals departed; a new Liberal caucus would be filled with a lot of new faces. Would they end up getting crushed with the same PMO control freakery, or would the Liberals start to show a little more vigor with an injection of new perspectives?
I'm worried that the Poilievre faction of the Conservatives have been in an echo chamber that's causing them to miss political cues. I'm even more worried that Poilievre supporters are in even more of an echo chamber, and they're holding the door shut with all their strength to keep bad news out. A lot of the reaction to the Liberal surge has been shock and denial that it could be happening. Criticism of the Poilievre campaign is rebutted summarily, often in an aggressive, hostile way. This denial of reality and rejection of information that makes people sad or angry was the fuel for the "stolen election" narratives that have roiled American politics over several elections. I really don't want to see it come to Canada, but the whole Trucker Convoy episode in 2022 suggests it may already be here.
Being annihilated electorally in 2011 and then miraculously revived under a cult of personality will tend to drive out dissenters. There are would-be sacrificial candidates who now have a 10 year career as MP's thanks to the Trudeau administration. They are just happy to have been invited to the party and will go along with whatever.
A big part of the problem on the current CPC end is that it's not clear how much of the current predicament was avoidable or can even be actively corrected. If you are Poilievre how do you actually fight or negotiate with Trump if you aren't the PM? Anti-American nationalism is pretty much a Liberal dominated thing and looks fake when Conservatives do it. What the hell do you do about a collapsing NDP and Bloc? You can try to hold on to ever single Liberal who parked their vote with you during the end of the Trudeau era but even if you do, the math is very hard if the NDP goes to zero.
Oh there will definitely be some dark consequences if the Liberals win under these circumstances. There is a really good case to argue that the election was manipulated both inside Canada (prorogation and performative leadership race) and outside (everything to do with Trump and tariffs, plus the LPC timing to coincide with these). Tons of people will react like the election was fully rigged.