Canadian voters couldn't wait to punt them from office not that long ago, but now Mark Carney is just three by-elections away from a decisive edge in Parliament
The biggest problem with Carney is that he simply doesn't get anything done. That's an improvement over Trudeau (who got bad things done) but the bar is very low. Where are the changes to immigration policy? Where are the pipelines? What happened to eliminating intra-provincial trade barriers? Where are all the new houses? Where are all the new ships and the revitalized military? Capital and investment continues to flee south while Carney keeps hiring more government employees. The only promise he's kept is to continue running up the debt. Another 4 years of bad government could finish us off.
There won't be a pipeline as long as Alberta is talking about separation....well, maybe to the US, where they can sell more at a discount. It's hard to build homes when idiots, like Doug Ford, give away the water resources that would support them to his political friends. And isn't it up to the provinces to end interprovincial trade barriers?
There wont be a pipeline whether Alberta is discussing separatism or not. Under Carney, or any Liberal there will NEVER be a pipeline...and with BC activists the same holds true. The ONLY hope of ever getting a pipeline is south to Seattle or Oklahoma but only if republicans and Conservatives overlap in government which does not seem likely for at least 3 more years at this point!
And yet, Rachel leased a huge fleet of tank cars that would be moving today, creating huge revenue. Jason chose the Alberta taxpayers to pay the cancellation fees instead. Zero environmental restrictions or delays. And yes, separation talk is killing investment in Alberta.
Republicans and Conservtives being the 2 parties that don't care at all about the environment or the long term future.....where oil volume is a fraction of what it is today.
2033 is the Conservatives' next chance to form government unless Carney is stupid enough to call one early, since the CPC wasn't smart enough to dump Pierre after his disastrous showing in the last election.
Nonetheless, it is there. There is a pipeline. And the response of Albertans is some combination of 'there is no pipeline' and 'we want an infinite number of pipelines immediately.'
Lest we forget, Keystone XL was killed by opposition in the US, not Canada. TCL has also abandoned the project despite Donald Trump's efforts to revive it.
TCE? Anyway, the Keystone pipeline is now owned by a spin off company named Southbow (trades as SOBO.TO). Reviving Keystone XL is mostly about weighing the risks and rewards, and that balance has pretty significantly shifted.
George, I think it is important to also remember that Keystone XL was vetoed by two US Presidents - both Democrats- even after it passed the necessary regulatory hurdles and democratic votes in two US legislatures.
Yes, it is up to the provinces to end intra-provincial trade barriers but that didn't stop Carney from promising to do it. In any case, if it was important to him he could get it done. He's just more into photo ops and jet-setting than in boring heavy lifting at home.
He can push. He doesn't control it. He is pushing. But the idea that he can pivot the nation's trade away from the US by just sitting in his office doesn't seem realistic. No, it doesn't happen instantly with the flick of a magic wand, and I'm as frustrated by the pace of change as anyone. But I'd rather have someone who is making the effort than one who pretends the current US ends with Trump's death. What they are will take some time to determine, but unreliable is the only currently appropriate adjective.
There’s been more than just the CEO changed. Guillbeault, Freeland, Blair, McKenna, Butts and Telford are all gone. Which remaining Liberal do you want gone? Joly? Sure, but she’s just one person. I never really had an issue with Champagne, Fraser or Anand and certainly not on the scale of those who are gone.
Freeland is still in the orbit, Blair is the new High Commissioner to the UK, McKenna, Butts and Telford are still around, just not putting in 80 hour weeks.
What do I want? A government that isn't beholden to Montreal and Ottawa. That is what we still have.
Now that Idlout has crossed the floor the majority is all but secured. Disappointing. I do not get why so many people are enamoured by Carney. It’s been a year and where are the results?
I hate to break it to you, but Canadians are arseholes. In our new, post-national world, everyone is in it for themselves. "To hell with the auto plant workers. I'm not one of them, so it doesn't bother me if those jobs go to Mexico."
I never mentioned existential crisis. Mine was about feeling tangible effects from a new government. You went to one which was in power when I was born. That's quite awhile ago.
Once Carney gets a majority watch how his “values” change and his true agenda comes out. Back to carbon taxes and every other ideological bit of insanity and inanity imposed upon us by his predecessor. Why so many voters are set on destroying an economy and a culture will be something for future historians to try and parse.
First they will destroy what remains of Canada to establish their homeland conditions lots of them profess so horribly to miss, (which is why they emigrated to Canada), and then they will start fighting among each other. Laurentian oligarchic corruptocras, with the help of their own inane multiculti bullshit, will find themselves to become barely tolerated as servants and dhimmis.
There is the spirit and the letter of the law. While the floor-crossers (and those who "nudge" them) aren't doing anything illegal, it is a slap in the face of their constituents who expected them to uphold a certain agenda.
In spirit, this is disgusting and dare I say, highly anti-democratic.
But that hasn't stopped the liberals before, has it?
It's like anything: It may have been fine when it was used occasionally. But it's been blatantly abused and should now be prevented or seriously limited.
This isn't just a Liberal issue. Stephen Harper had zero problems with it, most notably in 2006 when Liberal MP David Emerson joined the Conservative cabinet immediately after being re-elected as a Liberal. A political maneuver is always an affront to democracy when it helps the other guy and always business as usual when it help you. I don't have a good solution to that.
As far as I can tell no PM has ever gone on a serious fishing expedition to flip enough MP's to create a majority. Other parties, Liberals included, accepting floor crossers before does not equate to this shitshow.
If I had unlimited money and ability to grant favours, and enough shameless willingness to use it as Mark Carney apparently is (e.g. $50M+ to Idlout's riding for a university and $177M in extra northern development funds), I could probably flip 20 MP's to go to a completely new single-issue party based around insisting that the moon is made out of cheese.
You're pretty fixated on the idea that this is all about illicit bribery, and not paying sufficient attention to the fact that the Conservative Party is fractured, and Poilievre has worsened it to the point that members are defecting. One thing I've observed over the years is that the opinion of elected members of Parliament tells you more about the measure of a party leader or leadership candidate than the reaction of the party base. The MPs know the guy and have worked with him. The party base only sees the public image that the leader/leadership candidate wants to project. If Poilievre is losing people to the Liberals, it's because they're already alienated, not just inducements.
There are always disgruntled MP's and because the seat gap to reach a majority coming from the election was unusually narrow and this iteration of the Liberals under Carney is particularly ruthless and unethical, of course they would be ramping up inducements to an unusually high level.
Emerson was helpful to the Conservative government as a trade minister. I am not sure of the value the current batch of floor crossers offers the government, aside from their votes.
The Emerson incident is particularly egregious because it looked like he had agreed to switch parties even before the election. Otherwise the idea is that you're electing your MP for their judgment and if they decide the best way to represent their district is to cross the floor then so be it. If you don't like the results vote them out next time.
Why would it stop any of them? If a Liberal crossed to the conservatives tomorrow they'd be welcomed with open arms too as they have been in the past. Every party hates when they lose one but love it when they gain from it.
There is a HUGE difference between going from governing party to opposition and doing from opposition to governing party. And a huge difference between leaving for a valid reason such as a major policy issue, pressure from constituents, etc., to leaving for purely opportunistic reasons, a bribe, etc.
And what do constituents do about it? Vote for someone else who could cross the floor? There is absolutely no guarantee that they wouldn't. So many there do need to be some rules put into place, at least about disclosure of bribes, subjecting the floor crosser to an immediate by-election of something. As always, it take one person taking advantage of something to spur reform. I think we're at that stage now.
There are already laws against bribes. This is the system we live in. We shouldn't be giving parties and leaders even more power than they already have. It's too much as is.
I don't think the MPs have to worry about people looking into it. Besides, I am always amazed when we find out how little it takes to corrupt a politician.
And we wonder why daughter Alberta has rising rates of those who do not wish to continue this incestuous 'relationship' with father Ottawa. Considering the legislation before the House these days, elbows up seems to mean bend over.
Once the precedent is set that it is acceptable to promote minority to majority through floor crossings, this becomes yet another lever of power that government can reach for to entrench themselves.
20 seats short but in government? No problem. Reach for the usual promises of favours to their ridings, post politics hiring opportunities, ambassadorships, but why not also a little under the table Bitcoin, maybe some juicy inside information to play Polymarket?
The usual "um actually" people remind you that floor crossings are technically allowed. Voters wonder why they bothered showing up.
You're overlooking the more significant factors: being an opposition MP sucks, and they're unhappy with their own parties and party leadership. Cross the floor, serve out your term as a backbencher for the government, and you might actually get to do something. As far as the aspersions of bribery, that sounds like unsubstantiated sour grapes.
For an MP to betray their party, the leader whose platform they ran under, the EDA that supported them, the volunteers that gave up time for them, and the voters who put them into their office, without a major schism or change in party policy or direction to justify it, I assume the absolute worst and demand evidence to the contrary.
This is a very serious thing to do if it's done in good faith, and there should be very clear and obvious reasons for it, not just "waa, I wanted to be in government!". I don't buy that.
No party or leader is owed blind loyalty. That's what they all seem to expect. We might as well have a house of clapping seals with the controls they have on them.
Which is fine. We should see more of that. Argue with the party leader when you disagree with policy or direction. Vote against your party and tell them why. Go sit as an independent for a while. We didn't see any of this in these defectors though. Just opportunistically going for the maximum option, probably for maximum personal gain.
I don't accept the "independence" argument for these floor crossers. They grew a spine exactly this one time and half of them can't even keep their reasons straight as to why.
Fair enough. I'm not really affected by any of it because none of them are my MPs. I didn't vote for my current MP and if he crossed I still wouldn't.
Whatever happens going forward is up to their constituents. It will be interesting to see how many of them get reelected, defeated or just chose not to run again.
There would be if the trained seals would learn to grow a backbone. They surrendered their powers but they can take it back as soon as they find their spines. I'm not counting on it anytime soon though.
I still think the there is something up with the polls. I know of no one who has changed their mind to Carney. In fact I know of several questions him. Im in my 60's , all my well educated grandkids are Conservative, neices, nephews etc etc. All age groups.
The polls that are getting circulated are bought and paid for by the Liberal Party, and it shows. For the first time in my life, I'm in "why even bother voting"? And I get the feeling that Gerry Butts is still a very big player here. But I honestly had no idea just how slimy Carney could be. And we all know that he would quit on the spot if he ever had to be opposition leader. He's in it for the control it gives him.
Most polls are of "online panels," groups of people put together by the polling companys, a subset of whom are polled each time. The description of the polls say statistics cannot be calculated on the data. If a poll is not statistically rigourous, what exactly is it?
I signed up for one of these panels for like a week. I got spammed with myriad of random surveys and promptly quit. Not sure what the demographic lean of those willing to participate is or what that says.
I've stopped looking at all of the polls to be honest. It's too depressing and there are too many weird confounding factors, mostly incumbent-friendly, happening at the moment, including a literal shooting war involving the US in the Middle East, in case we forgot about that.
Also why are they accepting/encouraging floor crossers and undermining the rationale for a quick election if they would get a 100 seat majority if these polls are accurate?
Because Carney is, after all, a banker - which means he is hugely allergic to risk.
And another general election right now would be a risk, no matter what the polls say.
He would have to actually stay in Canada for up to six weeks, and somehow defend his ‘record’. Inconveniently, his record is lamentable.
He had promised to build, build, build - and so far all he has built is a whole new set of bureaucracies. (Didn’t he specifically promise to reduce bureaucracy???)
While I don't think the Liberals are sustainably 15 points ahead, they are ahead enough for a decent sized majority if there were an election in the next six weeks. Donald Trump has been a massive ally to our ruling party, a better friend than they could ever have imagined, terrifying voters into their arms with his fresh round of complete unhinged chaos in 2026. I bet they hope he does run in 2028, and wins! I digress.
But Carney may want to take the sure bet. Who cares if it strips away another bit of our democratic pretenses. Abuse of prorogation and his entire installation process last year already did a great job of that. It's clear he doesn't respect norms, has no honour, and will do anything to remain in power. He's going to be harder to dislodge than even Trudeau was.
Canada's a nation of 40 million people spread over territory that spans 5500 km from coast to coast. Your family and social circle are almost certainly not a representative sample for polling purposes. Complaints about polls leaves people sounding like New York Times film critic Pauline Kael: “I can’t believe Nixon won. I don’t know anyone who voted for him.”
Have you read any of the polls? Filled with leading questions. Being a critical reader/interpreter of polls, doesn’t make on a conspiracy theorist. And sure my friends and family aren’t representative samples of anything. But I do know that they don’t necessarily think about issues deeply. My mom votes Liberal because my dad always did. My cousin believes the elbow-up propaganda. I have more such stories. Mention an actual issue and they say, “I’ve never heard of that.”
Looking at the Nanos political tracking poll questions, I don't know where you're getting the impression that they're asking leading questions. The issues questions are unprompted responses, so people are saying what's on their mind. IN the other cases, they're asking voting intentions and opinion of the various party leaders. Poilievre is doing rather badly in their preferred leader metric: "Question - For each of the following federal political party leaders, do you think they have or do not have the qualities to be a good political leader?" What exactly is a leading question there?
In my opinion, yes. I distrust most polls and think they are used more to attempt to influence public opinion than to reflect it. Those inflated polls probably got a lot of people scared and running in the other direction. It's not a partisan issue for me.
The shock for me was that Trudeau was re-elected in 2019. How Andrew Scheer found a way to lose that rivals only Tim Hudak losing to Kathleen Wynne. The Conservatives torpedoed their own guy in 2021. Now, they've decided to keep a dead horse who is bound to lose in 2029. It's not the Liberals' fault that they win.
As for floor crossings, I think they're a betrayal of democracy. This notion that we elect the MP is utter nonsense. We're voting for a party platform, and the Leader is its conductor. So we're voting for a PM. I still believe that crossing the floor should require a by-election, so the citizens choose who represents them.
Scheer was/is even more obnoxious than Poilievre. I remember in the first debate he came out of the gate like a real tough guy and he looked ridiculous. There was also his US citizenship that he didn't disclose and still has. PP was actually an improvement as strange as that may sound.
Right now the Liberals have a huge advantage in a leader who seems serious and competent. Canadians have been looking for a sense of normalcy in a turbulent world, and Carney contrasts sharply with the clown show in the US and also the performative buffoonery that characterized his predecessor and the leaders of the other political parties in the Trudeau era. Couple that to a still-formidable political machine more interested in power than ideology, and it’s unsurprising to see the federal Liberals back in contention.
Carney and the Liberals are also benefiting from the weakness of the other parties, just as the Chretien government did back in the ‘90s. Chretien had both a weak NDP and a fractured right; Carney’s got a leaderless and flailing NDP and a Conservative Party that’s nominally United, but with internal fissures between populists and traditional Tories.
Carney’s still in what I’d have to call a honeymoon period: he’s riding high, and hasn’t been in power long enough to show whether he can actually follow through with his promises or accumulate scandals and failures. The opposition has been in rough shape. The NDP is useless and verging on irrelevant, and Poilievre seems to have been sulking and licking his wounds since the election. I’m only starting to see some glimmers of a new anti-Carney strategy from the Conservatives over the past couple of months.
It doesn't hurt that every media outlet other than the Post has been singing his praises non stop since day one. I maintain that the leadership switch would have been laughed out of the room in any other country as the transparent and desperate move that it was. But not in Canada. Here formerly legitimate sources like the Globe and Mail maintained that this was a totally acceptable thing to do and a genuine break from the prior government despite no indication that was the case.
If only a Blacklocks subscription didn't cost as much as a premium cable bill. They seem to report the most amazing things but like three people can read more than the header so it gets lost. I know you get what you pay for but people are cheap.
But you don't think government subsidies promised by only one of the two viable potential governing parties creates any perverse incentives to keep the subsidy-friendly one in power?
I'm looking at the state of media in the US. I have yet to see any proof that subsidies to media to keep them afloat are any more dangerous than billionaire owners deciding what does and doesn't get shown. I'll take CBC or BBC News over every single American newscast 7 days a week. No, the situation is far from perfect, but what else would you suggest? The idea of media just reporting factual news died with the 24/7 news cycle and the need to get the story out first, instead of getting it out right.
Yes, mainstream media tends to lean towards the Liberals. In an age of cratering newspaper subscriptions and plummeting TV news ratings, it doesn't have the importance it once had. Also, complaining about unfair media coverage tends to avoid discussing many things that Poilievre and the Conservatives screwed up in the last election: put the blame on something they haven't got much influence over rather than accepting responsibility for things that were *completely* in their control.
Voters are weird. IMO, liberals and ontario pcs have been a disaster for Ontario and canada and yet, voters re-elected both governments because orange man bad.
Yes. We are doing it again. I think, however that when we say we are doing it again, we originally were talking about Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa versus the ROC. Well, now Carney is picking up significant interest on the prairies and I would be curious to see the numbers for all provinces because I have a feeling that the Liberals are going to absolutely mop the floor with the CPC.
Cracks are already appearing in the 'conservative big tent'. Two floor crossers, Jamil Jivani literally undermining PP's leadership. Leadership of the CPC is beholden to Trumpers in the CPC. I know the CPC will say they are that big old tent (which now resembles a regional fortress) and anyone is free to say what they like, the problem is the CPC has a regular ability to blow itself up with bozo eruptions. And if anyone can say what they want then who precisely is in charge.
CPC needs to get it through their thick heads they were 20 points ahead of Katy Perry's bf and it disappeared as soon as someone who was *not Katy Perry's boyfriend" became leader of the Liberals. That lead in the polls was not because of PP and anything he did.
PP has an unrecoverable likeability problem and it is showing now in the polls big time when asked who would be the best PM.
I believe that when we have an election this year (good chance) the CPC is going to face another historic loss - for some reason I think 40 seats and I have to figure out why that is.
If the Liberals get in with a majority I predict the CPC won't be around in a year and will have splintered back into its progressive conservative vs refooooooooorm elements. (For the record, I think the world progressive should be scratched. I think Katy Perry's BF did permanent harm to progressives.
You seem to desire this, basically licking your lips. Why is that? Things going so well now that any change would be bad? Conservative ideas only good when the half assed announcement stage comes from a Liberal?
I see no future in Canada as it is. My work is not rewarded, it's impossible to get ahead, our society is degraded and diluted and worsened by the day. The last 10 years have been a nightmare as a young-ish professional 'old stock Canadian'. The worst people are rewarded and incentivized, those who try hardest are punished.
The current situation is borne out of manipulation, propaganda and the most intense forms of foreign interference from the south, not from anything the current government has done to deserve it. Indeed despite all their efforts on the merits, they just can't seem to lose. There is nothing particularly objectionable or unusual or wrong about the Canadian Conservative movement. It's bog standard centre right. We are just hit over the head all day every day with spurious bullshit about how awful they are, using arguments like the ones you seem to make so gleefully.
I don't know if this is team sports to some, but this isn't a game to others.
Licking my lips? Dude I want constitutional talks because that's the only way we can fix confederation if that is even possible. The current government keeps winning elections. Manipulation of whom? I think most folks know when they are being sold a bill of crap. Canada has a hell of a lot of work to do if we are going to be a unified country. Anyone not taking Alberta separatism seriously needs to get their head examined. The damned world is gone to shit. We need each other.
No, We do NOT need each other. Alberta and the rest of West Canada most absolutely have no use for the rest of Canada, that includes Lower Mainland BC.
I'd also really be interested in seeing some demographic breakdowns of who falls into the separatist camp. A lot of these guys seem to have some other issues that they're projecting onto a resentment of the current status quo. When I hear people ranting about being unable to get ahead as an "old stock Canadian" and the "worst people" getting incentivized, my experience as an engineering director (and an "old stock Canadian" myself) is suggesting there's something else going on there...
According to the pollster that Jen spoke to a little while ago, when it is explained to people what they would LOSE with separation the percentage drops to 12%.
I am completely baffled by the current canadian voter. There is NOT one financial metric where Canada is doing well right now, we appear to be on the cusp of a recession if not already upon us, which will morph into a depression that is entirely home grown, since no other G7 country is in a similar position but Canadians seem willing to reward this failure, and opposition MPs seem willing to support it with floor crossing.
It is completely beyond me what needs to happen for these voters to realize they are being lied to by the media they consume. Carney has done absolutely nothing but sign MOUs and make big announcements about them, no concrete successes as measured by concrete results have materialized, not one shovel has hit the ground yet on any "major project". Not one shipment of good has arrived or departed based on trade agreements....What has been accomplished is a new bureaucratic office, nothing more.
The Conservative party has an inherent structural weakness. The Progressive Conservative versus Reform divide has never truly meshed. Leaders who are palatable to the rest of Canadians are not liked by the party's hardcore. PP knows how to manipulate the hardcore but is disliked, if not loathed, by most Canadians. His whole approach is about fooling voters into supporting him which doesn't work for anyone who isn't in the tank or at all thoughtful. His recent "Lies under The Gardener Expressway" walkabout is just more of the same. He tries to pin the increasing gasoline prices on the Liberals because if he told the truth - that it is caused by Trump's foolish/incompetent/insane attacks on Iran he would lose the Trumplicans in his party. I don't know how the party squares this circle. It's almost like PP and Andrew Scheer would be happier in the People's Party but that schism would leave the right divided for a very long time.
I have posted this similar answer before. We have a majority center left voting base in Canada. 3 parties have traditionally shared that center left group, on the right is one party. A widely held coalition that does well when the NDP are strong. with a collapse in NDP and Green votes the Libs will be in ideal position regardless of what the cons do. It's a tough nut to crack as more moderate viewpoints put stress on the right coalition. Maintaining a happy base is an important aspect of party management. Orange man bad feels is not going away. Let it eat Carney alive. Stick to your strong suit. Economy, Justice, cost of living. It will get so bad that you will win, I believe it will be a long term winning base as well as the boomers are the only group supporting the libs. all younger gen cohorts are in your camp. That will pay off.
Right wing politics in Canada has been in trouble for the past decade because part of the right wing coalition has abandoned pragmatism and has instead been insisting on their own maximalist objectives. A right wing leader can't maintain control of their party without them, but their positions are toxic to the broader electorate. Danielle Smith thought she found a way to placate them, but has discovered that giving them what they want only invites more and bigger demands. So, now the Alberta government is playing footsy with separatists.
I like Pierre and I know many who do and my Conservative MP (in a previously NDP riding) has done more for the community that the last MP did over the course of two or three terms. I see a LOT of Liberal-sponsored propaganda and don't fall for it as easily as a lot of people do (not implying that you do, but your comments about the People's Party hint that you might!) Like drug addicts, maybe this country needs to hit wrong bottom before we are open to the idea of rehab. Sad but true.
I mentioned the People's Party because Poilievre's trying to prevent people in his party from switching over and he does that by leaning harder right. By doing that he alienates the far greater number of people who lean towards the centre or left. I'm going to ask a serious question here - why do you like Pierre? I'd really like to know.
Because he’s smart, funny, articulate, does his research, and acts more ethically than a hell of a lot of people both in and out of politics. He’s also thick skinned enough to put up with all the bullshit the Liberal Party throws at him, although he shouldn’t have to.
I very much appreciate you answering. I see quite a different person. I agree that he is smart, thick skinned and does his research but I find him to be dishonest and manipulative. I guess we should leave it there.
The Liberals used the Trump factor during their first majority government to virtue signal to both domestic and global audiences that Canada represented a higher calling than petty national interests. They now use Trump for the exact opposite. The buffoon has become the boogie man. The Liberals had an obligation to make Canada resistant to both and did neither. They brought in Trudeau to resurrect the party. Carney seems to be their redeemer. Canada is the stage on which all the Liberal shenanigans play out. The stage is creaking.
We have an electorate brainwashed by polls (that are ridiculously biased, if you actually take a look at the questions), a bought media, and strong attempts to muzzle independent media (like Blacklock's reporter). The one good thing about a Carney majority, when he's done, the country may very well be FUBAR and there will be no one to blame but him and his party. In the meantime, the Line will still be declaring "Pierre didn't pivot!"
The biggest problem with Carney is that he simply doesn't get anything done. That's an improvement over Trudeau (who got bad things done) but the bar is very low. Where are the changes to immigration policy? Where are the pipelines? What happened to eliminating intra-provincial trade barriers? Where are all the new houses? Where are all the new ships and the revitalized military? Capital and investment continues to flee south while Carney keeps hiring more government employees. The only promise he's kept is to continue running up the debt. Another 4 years of bad government could finish us off.
That's one of his problems. The biggest one I would say is that he's not in it for Canada.
There won't be a pipeline as long as Alberta is talking about separation....well, maybe to the US, where they can sell more at a discount. It's hard to build homes when idiots, like Doug Ford, give away the water resources that would support them to his political friends. And isn't it up to the provinces to end interprovincial trade barriers?
There wont be a pipeline whether Alberta is discussing separatism or not. Under Carney, or any Liberal there will NEVER be a pipeline...and with BC activists the same holds true. The ONLY hope of ever getting a pipeline is south to Seattle or Oklahoma but only if republicans and Conservatives overlap in government which does not seem likely for at least 3 more years at this point!
And yet, Rachel leased a huge fleet of tank cars that would be moving today, creating huge revenue. Jason chose the Alberta taxpayers to pay the cancellation fees instead. Zero environmental restrictions or delays. And yes, separation talk is killing investment in Alberta.
Republicans and Conservtives being the 2 parties that don't care at all about the environment or the long term future.....where oil volume is a fraction of what it is today.
2033 is the Conservatives' next chance to form government unless Carney is stupid enough to call one early, since the CPC wasn't smart enough to dump Pierre after his disastrous showing in the last election.
How is separation killing investment in Alberta? Please show your homework.
Chicken Little only serves to diminish the unity vote.
https://afl.org/premier-smiths-separatist-rhetoric-is-the-biggest-threat-to-alberta-prosperity/
https://www.ctvnews.ca/edmonton/alberta-primetime/article/alberta-independence-would-go-terribly-badly-economist/
https://www.ctvnews.ca/calgary/article/they-are-very-concerned-atco-ceo-says-alberta-separation-conversation-is-scaring-potential-investors/
That should get you started. Let me know if you need help packing.....
Zero referenced facts. All just opinion, hearsay and conjecture. Alberta Federation of Labour? Lol.
You can do better than that.
Trudeau literally bought Alberta a pipeline, which got built and ships oil.
This is trivial to discover, not least because it was national headlines for the better part of a year.
Only after Trudeau scared off all the private investors and then realized without oil exports Canada would eventually be broke.
Nonetheless, it is there. There is a pipeline. And the response of Albertans is some combination of 'there is no pipeline' and 'we want an infinite number of pipelines immediately.'
Neither impresses.
Good job on doing what was necessary for the country not to collapse economically I suppose.
Lest we forget, Keystone XL was killed by opposition in the US, not Canada. TCL has also abandoned the project despite Donald Trump's efforts to revive it.
TCE? Anyway, the Keystone pipeline is now owned by a spin off company named Southbow (trades as SOBO.TO). Reviving Keystone XL is mostly about weighing the risks and rewards, and that balance has pretty significantly shifted.
George, I think it is important to also remember that Keystone XL was vetoed by two US Presidents - both Democrats- even after it passed the necessary regulatory hurdles and democratic votes in two US legislatures.
And? I was responding to a post claiming that somehow the US was the answer to getting more pipeline capacity built.
Yes, it is up to the provinces to end intra-provincial trade barriers but that didn't stop Carney from promising to do it. In any case, if it was important to him he could get it done. He's just more into photo ops and jet-setting than in boring heavy lifting at home.
He can push. He doesn't control it. He is pushing. But the idea that he can pivot the nation's trade away from the US by just sitting in his office doesn't seem realistic. No, it doesn't happen instantly with the flick of a magic wand, and I'm as frustrated by the pace of change as anyone. But I'd rather have someone who is making the effort than one who pretends the current US ends with Trump's death. What they are will take some time to determine, but unreliable is the only currently appropriate adjective.
This 100%
The Trudeau Liberals are still in power. Carney thought a new CEO changes things without changing the whole organization. Lol
There’s been more than just the CEO changed. Guillbeault, Freeland, Blair, McKenna, Butts and Telford are all gone. Which remaining Liberal do you want gone? Joly? Sure, but she’s just one person. I never really had an issue with Champagne, Fraser or Anand and certainly not on the scale of those who are gone.
Freeland is still in the orbit, Blair is the new High Commissioner to the UK, McKenna, Butts and Telford are still around, just not putting in 80 hour weeks.
What do I want? A government that isn't beholden to Montreal and Ottawa. That is what we still have.
Now that Idlout has crossed the floor the majority is all but secured. Disappointing. I do not get why so many people are enamoured by Carney. It’s been a year and where are the results?
The results are Brookfield's contracts.
I hate to break it to you, but Canadians are arseholes. In our new, post-national world, everyone is in it for themselves. "To hell with the auto plant workers. I'm not one of them, so it doesn't bother me if those jobs go to Mexico."
Proof that at least a half of the voters are on par with stupid cattle.
The riding in which I live would vote Liberal if the Grits ran a burnt-out tree stump painted red.
At least cattle serve a purpose.
I can't think of any government that got many tangible results after one year. Not positive ones anyway.
10 downvotes for willful amnesia.
Ever heard of Brian Mulroney?
Oh, so nearly half a century ago.
That was not a criterion of your question.
Are we still facing an existential crisis? Or is that just for elections?
I never mentioned existential crisis. Mine was about feeling tangible effects from a new government. You went to one which was in power when I was born. That's quite awhile ago.
Once Carney gets a majority watch how his “values” change and his true agenda comes out. Back to carbon taxes and every other ideological bit of insanity and inanity imposed upon us by his predecessor. Why so many voters are set on destroying an economy and a culture will be something for future historians to try and parse.
Except all the historical documents will be redacted or destroyed
Time to learn Mandarin.
No. You better learn what China REALLY is. Learn from Chinese dissidents, not from government sources.
That wasn't serious. I have enough trouble with English.
I am curious how the Chinese, Indians and Muslims are going to get along in Canada.
First they will destroy what remains of Canada to establish their homeland conditions lots of them profess so horribly to miss, (which is why they emigrated to Canada), and then they will start fighting among each other. Laurentian oligarchic corruptocras, with the help of their own inane multiculti bullshit, will find themselves to become barely tolerated as servants and dhimmis.
There is the spirit and the letter of the law. While the floor-crossers (and those who "nudge" them) aren't doing anything illegal, it is a slap in the face of their constituents who expected them to uphold a certain agenda.
In spirit, this is disgusting and dare I say, highly anti-democratic.
But that hasn't stopped the liberals before, has it?
It's like anything: It may have been fine when it was used occasionally. But it's been blatantly abused and should now be prevented or seriously limited.
This isn't just a Liberal issue. Stephen Harper had zero problems with it, most notably in 2006 when Liberal MP David Emerson joined the Conservative cabinet immediately after being re-elected as a Liberal. A political maneuver is always an affront to democracy when it helps the other guy and always business as usual when it help you. I don't have a good solution to that.
.
As far as I can tell no PM has ever gone on a serious fishing expedition to flip enough MP's to create a majority. Other parties, Liberals included, accepting floor crossers before does not equate to this shitshow.
Might be more accurate to say that no PM has been this successful on a fishing trip to flip MPs.
If I had unlimited money and ability to grant favours, and enough shameless willingness to use it as Mark Carney apparently is (e.g. $50M+ to Idlout's riding for a university and $177M in extra northern development funds), I could probably flip 20 MP's to go to a completely new single-issue party based around insisting that the moon is made out of cheese.
You're pretty fixated on the idea that this is all about illicit bribery, and not paying sufficient attention to the fact that the Conservative Party is fractured, and Poilievre has worsened it to the point that members are defecting. One thing I've observed over the years is that the opinion of elected members of Parliament tells you more about the measure of a party leader or leadership candidate than the reaction of the party base. The MPs know the guy and have worked with him. The party base only sees the public image that the leader/leadership candidate wants to project. If Poilievre is losing people to the Liberals, it's because they're already alienated, not just inducements.
There are always disgruntled MP's and because the seat gap to reach a majority coming from the election was unusually narrow and this iteration of the Liberals under Carney is particularly ruthless and unethical, of course they would be ramping up inducements to an unusually high level.
Also the last floor crosser was from the NDP.
Emerson was helpful to the Conservative government as a trade minister. I am not sure of the value the current batch of floor crossers offers the government, aside from their votes.
The Emerson incident is particularly egregious because it looked like he had agreed to switch parties even before the election. Otherwise the idea is that you're electing your MP for their judgment and if they decide the best way to represent their district is to cross the floor then so be it. If you don't like the results vote them out next time.
Why would it stop any of them? If a Liberal crossed to the conservatives tomorrow they'd be welcomed with open arms too as they have been in the past. Every party hates when they lose one but love it when they gain from it.
There is a HUGE difference between going from governing party to opposition and doing from opposition to governing party. And a huge difference between leaving for a valid reason such as a major policy issue, pressure from constituents, etc., to leaving for purely opportunistic reasons, a bribe, etc.
The principle is the same no matter what the reason or the direction. Now it's up to their constituents to decide if they agree or not with the move.
And what do constituents do about it? Vote for someone else who could cross the floor? There is absolutely no guarantee that they wouldn't. So many there do need to be some rules put into place, at least about disclosure of bribes, subjecting the floor crosser to an immediate by-election of something. As always, it take one person taking advantage of something to spur reform. I think we're at that stage now.
There are already laws against bribes. This is the system we live in. We shouldn't be giving parties and leaders even more power than they already have. It's too much as is.
Let's see if the charges against the son of the most recent floor crosser get stayed or not.
Most Canadians are on the left. 60% according to pollsters.
This is one of the advantages of that. People don't mind if their team does this so most people don't mind.
I am repeating myself, but there is no law against paying MPs to cross the floor, nor is there any law requiring disclosure of such payments.
The Liberals are a brokerage party. They broker the trade. I'd look at the family of those who jump and what life changes have occured.
I don't think the MPs have to worry about people looking into it. Besides, I am always amazed when we find out how little it takes to corrupt a politician.
And we wonder why daughter Alberta has rising rates of those who do not wish to continue this incestuous 'relationship' with father Ottawa. Considering the legislation before the House these days, elbows up seems to mean bend over.
Once the precedent is set that it is acceptable to promote minority to majority through floor crossings, this becomes yet another lever of power that government can reach for to entrench themselves.
20 seats short but in government? No problem. Reach for the usual promises of favours to their ridings, post politics hiring opportunities, ambassadorships, but why not also a little under the table Bitcoin, maybe some juicy inside information to play Polymarket?
The usual "um actually" people remind you that floor crossings are technically allowed. Voters wonder why they bothered showing up.
You're overlooking the more significant factors: being an opposition MP sucks, and they're unhappy with their own parties and party leadership. Cross the floor, serve out your term as a backbencher for the government, and you might actually get to do something. As far as the aspersions of bribery, that sounds like unsubstantiated sour grapes.
For an MP to betray their party, the leader whose platform they ran under, the EDA that supported them, the volunteers that gave up time for them, and the voters who put them into their office, without a major schism or change in party policy or direction to justify it, I assume the absolute worst and demand evidence to the contrary.
This is a very serious thing to do if it's done in good faith, and there should be very clear and obvious reasons for it, not just "waa, I wanted to be in government!". I don't buy that.
No party or leader is owed blind loyalty. That's what they all seem to expect. We might as well have a house of clapping seals with the controls they have on them.
Which is fine. We should see more of that. Argue with the party leader when you disagree with policy or direction. Vote against your party and tell them why. Go sit as an independent for a while. We didn't see any of this in these defectors though. Just opportunistically going for the maximum option, probably for maximum personal gain.
I don't accept the "independence" argument for these floor crossers. They grew a spine exactly this one time and half of them can't even keep their reasons straight as to why.
Fair enough. I'm not really affected by any of it because none of them are my MPs. I didn't vote for my current MP and if he crossed I still wouldn't.
Whatever happens going forward is up to their constituents. It will be interesting to see how many of them get reelected, defeated or just chose not to run again.
Are there free votes in Parliament? No? Then ordinary MP’s are clapping seals(no insult intended to the seals)
There would be if the trained seals would learn to grow a backbone. They surrendered their powers but they can take it back as soon as they find their spines. I'm not counting on it anytime soon though.
Fun fact: there is no law against paying MPs to cross the floor, nor is there any law requiring disclosure of such payments.
It's "technically allowed", the best kind of allowed!
I still think the there is something up with the polls. I know of no one who has changed their mind to Carney. In fact I know of several questions him. Im in my 60's , all my well educated grandkids are Conservative, neices, nephews etc etc. All age groups.
The polls that are getting circulated are bought and paid for by the Liberal Party, and it shows. For the first time in my life, I'm in "why even bother voting"? And I get the feeling that Gerry Butts is still a very big player here. But I honestly had no idea just how slimy Carney could be. And we all know that he would quit on the spot if he ever had to be opposition leader. He's in it for the control it gives him.
Why don't Conservatives publish their own polls???????????
Why aren't Conservatives Liberals???????????
Most polls are of "online panels," groups of people put together by the polling companys, a subset of whom are polled each time. The description of the polls say statistics cannot be calculated on the data. If a poll is not statistically rigourous, what exactly is it?
Propaganda
I signed up for one of these panels for like a week. I got spammed with myriad of random surveys and promptly quit. Not sure what the demographic lean of those willing to participate is or what that says.
I've stopped looking at all of the polls to be honest. It's too depressing and there are too many weird confounding factors, mostly incumbent-friendly, happening at the moment, including a literal shooting war involving the US in the Middle East, in case we forgot about that.
Also why are they accepting/encouraging floor crossers and undermining the rationale for a quick election if they would get a 100 seat majority if these polls are accurate?
Exactly
Because Carney is, after all, a banker - which means he is hugely allergic to risk.
And another general election right now would be a risk, no matter what the polls say.
He would have to actually stay in Canada for up to six weeks, and somehow defend his ‘record’. Inconveniently, his record is lamentable.
He had promised to build, build, build - and so far all he has built is a whole new set of bureaucracies. (Didn’t he specifically promise to reduce bureaucracy???)
Anyway, far too much risk.
Way easier to simply buy a few MPs.
What a country.
You might be right.
While I don't think the Liberals are sustainably 15 points ahead, they are ahead enough for a decent sized majority if there were an election in the next six weeks. Donald Trump has been a massive ally to our ruling party, a better friend than they could ever have imagined, terrifying voters into their arms with his fresh round of complete unhinged chaos in 2026. I bet they hope he does run in 2028, and wins! I digress.
But Carney may want to take the sure bet. Who cares if it strips away another bit of our democratic pretenses. Abuse of prorogation and his entire installation process last year already did a great job of that. It's clear he doesn't respect norms, has no honour, and will do anything to remain in power. He's going to be harder to dislodge than even Trudeau was.
Canada's a nation of 40 million people spread over territory that spans 5500 km from coast to coast. Your family and social circle are almost certainly not a representative sample for polling purposes. Complaints about polls leaves people sounding like New York Times film critic Pauline Kael: “I can’t believe Nixon won. I don’t know anyone who voted for him.”
Have you read any of the polls? Filled with leading questions. Being a critical reader/interpreter of polls, doesn’t make on a conspiracy theorist. And sure my friends and family aren’t representative samples of anything. But I do know that they don’t necessarily think about issues deeply. My mom votes Liberal because my dad always did. My cousin believes the elbow-up propaganda. I have more such stories. Mention an actual issue and they say, “I’ve never heard of that.”
Looking at the Nanos political tracking poll questions, I don't know where you're getting the impression that they're asking leading questions. The issues questions are unprompted responses, so people are saying what's on their mind. IN the other cases, they're asking voting intentions and opinion of the various party leaders. Poilievre is doing rather badly in their preferred leader metric: "Question - For each of the following federal political party leaders, do you think they have or do not have the qualities to be a good political leader?" What exactly is a leading question there?
https://nanos.co/category/political-tracking/
So when Poilievre was way up in the polls before Trudeau resigned were they wrong then? Were the wrong people being asked leading questions?
In my opinion, yes. I distrust most polls and think they are used more to attempt to influence public opinion than to reflect it. Those inflated polls probably got a lot of people scared and running in the other direction. It's not a partisan issue for me.
The polls in Canada have a pretty good track record. They were only off by a couple seats last year.
Polls influence voters. What can I say?
The BC Conservative party's bizarre rise from the dead was largely because polls suddenly normalized the idea that they might be a contender.
The shock for me was that Trudeau was re-elected in 2019. How Andrew Scheer found a way to lose that rivals only Tim Hudak losing to Kathleen Wynne. The Conservatives torpedoed their own guy in 2021. Now, they've decided to keep a dead horse who is bound to lose in 2029. It's not the Liberals' fault that they win.
As for floor crossings, I think they're a betrayal of democracy. This notion that we elect the MP is utter nonsense. We're voting for a party platform, and the Leader is its conductor. So we're voting for a PM. I still believe that crossing the floor should require a by-election, so the citizens choose who represents them.
That may be what you vote for. I vote for an MP. If I like the party but not the candidate - they won't get my vote.
Scheer was/is even more obnoxious than Poilievre. I remember in the first debate he came out of the gate like a real tough guy and he looked ridiculous. There was also his US citizenship that he didn't disclose and still has. PP was actually an improvement as strange as that may sound.
Right now the Liberals have a huge advantage in a leader who seems serious and competent. Canadians have been looking for a sense of normalcy in a turbulent world, and Carney contrasts sharply with the clown show in the US and also the performative buffoonery that characterized his predecessor and the leaders of the other political parties in the Trudeau era. Couple that to a still-formidable political machine more interested in power than ideology, and it’s unsurprising to see the federal Liberals back in contention.
Carney and the Liberals are also benefiting from the weakness of the other parties, just as the Chretien government did back in the ‘90s. Chretien had both a weak NDP and a fractured right; Carney’s got a leaderless and flailing NDP and a Conservative Party that’s nominally United, but with internal fissures between populists and traditional Tories.
Carney’s still in what I’d have to call a honeymoon period: he’s riding high, and hasn’t been in power long enough to show whether he can actually follow through with his promises or accumulate scandals and failures. The opposition has been in rough shape. The NDP is useless and verging on irrelevant, and Poilievre seems to have been sulking and licking his wounds since the election. I’m only starting to see some glimmers of a new anti-Carney strategy from the Conservatives over the past couple of months.
It doesn't hurt that every media outlet other than the Post has been singing his praises non stop since day one. I maintain that the leadership switch would have been laughed out of the room in any other country as the transparent and desperate move that it was. But not in Canada. Here formerly legitimate sources like the Globe and Mail maintained that this was a totally acceptable thing to do and a genuine break from the prior government despite no indication that was the case.
Yes, not nearly enough Canadians read Blacklock's Reporter and Glavin's and Cooper's substacks.
If only a Blacklocks subscription didn't cost as much as a premium cable bill. They seem to report the most amazing things but like three people can read more than the header so it gets lost. I know you get what you pay for but people are cheap.
It costs a lot of money to do what they do. They aren't just regurgitating government press releases. Where does one get premium cable for $300/year?
That's more than Crave TV which has most of HBO.
But now I feel guilty for not supporting them.
The Post's US ownership has destroyed its credibility.
But you don't think government subsidies promised by only one of the two viable potential governing parties creates any perverse incentives to keep the subsidy-friendly one in power?
I'm looking at the state of media in the US. I have yet to see any proof that subsidies to media to keep them afloat are any more dangerous than billionaire owners deciding what does and doesn't get shown. I'll take CBC or BBC News over every single American newscast 7 days a week. No, the situation is far from perfect, but what else would you suggest? The idea of media just reporting factual news died with the 24/7 news cycle and the need to get the story out first, instead of getting it out right.
You may have heard of Travis Dhanraj lately.
You can choose to believe the CBC and BBC aren't biased but you are definitely choosing a belief.
I'm aware of his situation. There are clearly serious issues. They're still not as bad as FOX et al.
Yes, mainstream media tends to lean towards the Liberals. In an age of cratering newspaper subscriptions and plummeting TV news ratings, it doesn't have the importance it once had. Also, complaining about unfair media coverage tends to avoid discussing many things that Poilievre and the Conservatives screwed up in the last election: put the blame on something they haven't got much influence over rather than accepting responsibility for things that were *completely* in their control.
Seems is the key word, he talks a good game but his results resemble the Toronto Maple Leafs, you just are not willing to look close enough!
Voters are weird. IMO, liberals and ontario pcs have been a disaster for Ontario and canada and yet, voters re-elected both governments because orange man bad.
Orange man bad is such a terrible way to go about politics in Canada.
It truly is depressing. The “ new” Liberal government which everyone seems to be buying with their heads firmly up their asses.
Yes. We are doing it again. I think, however that when we say we are doing it again, we originally were talking about Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa versus the ROC. Well, now Carney is picking up significant interest on the prairies and I would be curious to see the numbers for all provinces because I have a feeling that the Liberals are going to absolutely mop the floor with the CPC.
Cracks are already appearing in the 'conservative big tent'. Two floor crossers, Jamil Jivani literally undermining PP's leadership. Leadership of the CPC is beholden to Trumpers in the CPC. I know the CPC will say they are that big old tent (which now resembles a regional fortress) and anyone is free to say what they like, the problem is the CPC has a regular ability to blow itself up with bozo eruptions. And if anyone can say what they want then who precisely is in charge.
CPC needs to get it through their thick heads they were 20 points ahead of Katy Perry's bf and it disappeared as soon as someone who was *not Katy Perry's boyfriend" became leader of the Liberals. That lead in the polls was not because of PP and anything he did.
PP has an unrecoverable likeability problem and it is showing now in the polls big time when asked who would be the best PM.
I believe that when we have an election this year (good chance) the CPC is going to face another historic loss - for some reason I think 40 seats and I have to figure out why that is.
If the Liberals get in with a majority I predict the CPC won't be around in a year and will have splintered back into its progressive conservative vs refooooooooorm elements. (For the record, I think the world progressive should be scratched. I think Katy Perry's BF did permanent harm to progressives.
You seem to desire this, basically licking your lips. Why is that? Things going so well now that any change would be bad? Conservative ideas only good when the half assed announcement stage comes from a Liberal?
I see no future in Canada as it is. My work is not rewarded, it's impossible to get ahead, our society is degraded and diluted and worsened by the day. The last 10 years have been a nightmare as a young-ish professional 'old stock Canadian'. The worst people are rewarded and incentivized, those who try hardest are punished.
The current situation is borne out of manipulation, propaganda and the most intense forms of foreign interference from the south, not from anything the current government has done to deserve it. Indeed despite all their efforts on the merits, they just can't seem to lose. There is nothing particularly objectionable or unusual or wrong about the Canadian Conservative movement. It's bog standard centre right. We are just hit over the head all day every day with spurious bullshit about how awful they are, using arguments like the ones you seem to make so gleefully.
I don't know if this is team sports to some, but this isn't a game to others.
Licking my lips? Dude I want constitutional talks because that's the only way we can fix confederation if that is even possible. The current government keeps winning elections. Manipulation of whom? I think most folks know when they are being sold a bill of crap. Canada has a hell of a lot of work to do if we are going to be a unified country. Anyone not taking Alberta separatism seriously needs to get their head examined. The damned world is gone to shit. We need each other.
No, We do NOT need each other. Alberta and the rest of West Canada most absolutely have no use for the rest of Canada, that includes Lower Mainland BC.
I live in the west.
30% want out, last time I looked. So, a million people. That's a movement. I can't wait to see the petition numbers so we can get a firm percentage.
I'd also really be interested in seeing some demographic breakdowns of who falls into the separatist camp. A lot of these guys seem to have some other issues that they're projecting onto a resentment of the current status quo. When I hear people ranting about being unable to get ahead as an "old stock Canadian" and the "worst people" getting incentivized, my experience as an engineering director (and an "old stock Canadian" myself) is suggesting there's something else going on there...
I suspect you are right
According to the pollster that Jen spoke to a little while ago, when it is explained to people what they would LOSE with separation the percentage drops to 12%.
That very accurately said, if Carney calls an election this year, I will not vote for him. I will not support having an election for election's sake.
Like the pandemic one. Yup.
I am completely baffled by the current canadian voter. There is NOT one financial metric where Canada is doing well right now, we appear to be on the cusp of a recession if not already upon us, which will morph into a depression that is entirely home grown, since no other G7 country is in a similar position but Canadians seem willing to reward this failure, and opposition MPs seem willing to support it with floor crossing.
It is completely beyond me what needs to happen for these voters to realize they are being lied to by the media they consume. Carney has done absolutely nothing but sign MOUs and make big announcements about them, no concrete successes as measured by concrete results have materialized, not one shovel has hit the ground yet on any "major project". Not one shipment of good has arrived or departed based on trade agreements....What has been accomplished is a new bureaucratic office, nothing more.
If someone benefits from the status quo, they’re less likely to support changes that could threaten that benefit said all the boomers....
The Conservative party has an inherent structural weakness. The Progressive Conservative versus Reform divide has never truly meshed. Leaders who are palatable to the rest of Canadians are not liked by the party's hardcore. PP knows how to manipulate the hardcore but is disliked, if not loathed, by most Canadians. His whole approach is about fooling voters into supporting him which doesn't work for anyone who isn't in the tank or at all thoughtful. His recent "Lies under The Gardener Expressway" walkabout is just more of the same. He tries to pin the increasing gasoline prices on the Liberals because if he told the truth - that it is caused by Trump's foolish/incompetent/insane attacks on Iran he would lose the Trumplicans in his party. I don't know how the party squares this circle. It's almost like PP and Andrew Scheer would be happier in the People's Party but that schism would leave the right divided for a very long time.
I have posted this similar answer before. We have a majority center left voting base in Canada. 3 parties have traditionally shared that center left group, on the right is one party. A widely held coalition that does well when the NDP are strong. with a collapse in NDP and Green votes the Libs will be in ideal position regardless of what the cons do. It's a tough nut to crack as more moderate viewpoints put stress on the right coalition. Maintaining a happy base is an important aspect of party management. Orange man bad feels is not going away. Let it eat Carney alive. Stick to your strong suit. Economy, Justice, cost of living. It will get so bad that you will win, I believe it will be a long term winning base as well as the boomers are the only group supporting the libs. all younger gen cohorts are in your camp. That will pay off.
Right wing politics in Canada has been in trouble for the past decade because part of the right wing coalition has abandoned pragmatism and has instead been insisting on their own maximalist objectives. A right wing leader can't maintain control of their party without them, but their positions are toxic to the broader electorate. Danielle Smith thought she found a way to placate them, but has discovered that giving them what they want only invites more and bigger demands. So, now the Alberta government is playing footsy with separatists.
I like Pierre and I know many who do and my Conservative MP (in a previously NDP riding) has done more for the community that the last MP did over the course of two or three terms. I see a LOT of Liberal-sponsored propaganda and don't fall for it as easily as a lot of people do (not implying that you do, but your comments about the People's Party hint that you might!) Like drug addicts, maybe this country needs to hit wrong bottom before we are open to the idea of rehab. Sad but true.
I mentioned the People's Party because Poilievre's trying to prevent people in his party from switching over and he does that by leaning harder right. By doing that he alienates the far greater number of people who lean towards the centre or left. I'm going to ask a serious question here - why do you like Pierre? I'd really like to know.
Because he’s smart, funny, articulate, does his research, and acts more ethically than a hell of a lot of people both in and out of politics. He’s also thick skinned enough to put up with all the bullshit the Liberal Party throws at him, although he shouldn’t have to.
I very much appreciate you answering. I see quite a different person. I agree that he is smart, thick skinned and does his research but I find him to be dishonest and manipulative. I guess we should leave it there.
The Liberals used the Trump factor during their first majority government to virtue signal to both domestic and global audiences that Canada represented a higher calling than petty national interests. They now use Trump for the exact opposite. The buffoon has become the boogie man. The Liberals had an obligation to make Canada resistant to both and did neither. They brought in Trudeau to resurrect the party. Carney seems to be their redeemer. Canada is the stage on which all the Liberal shenanigans play out. The stage is creaking.
We have an electorate brainwashed by polls (that are ridiculously biased, if you actually take a look at the questions), a bought media, and strong attempts to muzzle independent media (like Blacklock's reporter). The one good thing about a Carney majority, when he's done, the country may very well be FUBAR and there will be no one to blame but him and his party. In the meantime, the Line will still be declaring "Pierre didn't pivot!"