• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Liberal Minority Government 2021 - ????

I did hear a former Liberal insider say he was told by other insiders that the LPC is worried that if JT leaves, under their flimsy membership and leadership rules, they are worried the party could be easily taken over by Team Hamas types. 😲
 
RangerRay said:
I did hear a former Liberal insider say he was told by other insiders that the LPC is worried that if JT leaves, under their flimsy membership and leadership rules, they are worried the party could be easily taken over by Team Hamas types. 😲
Click to expand...

LPC and NDP can battle each other on who is more radical.
 
Brad Sallows said:
We're going to have our own Trumpian/Bidenian tariffs on EVs, steel, and aluminum from China. I can hear skulls popping already.
Click to expand...
Good, they wouldn’t go far enough.

Why does it make sense we subsidize foreign production of goods made to lower environmental standards or impossible to even manufacture in country, when Canadian businesses get taxed and regulated into the ground? Either make a fair playing field (i.e. removing our restrictions so we actually have a free market in place) or level it out (i.e. tariff it until it reaches a similar cost of doing business in Canada).
 
RangerRay said:
I did hear a former Liberal insider say he was told by other insiders that the LPC is worried that if JT leaves, under their flimsy membership and leadership rules, they are worried the party could be easily taken over by Team Hamas types. 😲
Click to expand...

Lol I would love to see that happen lol
 
I did hear a former Liberal insider say he was told by other insiders that the LPC is worried that if JT leaves, under their flimsy membership and leadership rules, they are worried the party could be easily taken over by Team Hamas or a complete take over by China.
Click to expand...

Name them.
 
Tidbits from Team Red's House Leader from the cabinet retreat: Still not getting it (highlights mine) .....
www.ctvnews.ca

'We need to show Canadians what's next,' Trudeau's House leader says of fall Liberal strategy

Heading into the fall still struggling in the polls, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the federal Liberal caucus 'need to show Canadians what's next,' says Government House Leader Karina Gould.
www.ctvnews.ca www.ctvnews.ca
Heading into the fall still struggling in the polls, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the federal Liberal caucus "need to show Canadians what's next," says Government House Leader Karina Gould.

The latest weekly Nanos tracking shows the Conservatives holding a 15-point advantage over the Liberals, with more Canadians saying they'd prefer Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre as prime minister.

Absent taking a page from the U.S. Democrat's recent playbook and replacing their leader – a prospect cabinet ministers have rebuffed – Gould was asked by reporters at the cabinet retreat in Halifax, how the Liberals plan to address the electorate's appetite for change.

"The question is, what is the change that Canadians are looking for?" Gould said.

The minister said she's heard from constituents that they don't want to see Liberal-initiated social supports such as child-care and dental-care change – a prospect she said voters are concerned could be on the table with a Conservative government.

Instead, she said, she sees her party's path towards re-election through taking new steps to address Canadians' outstanding "feeling of unease" when it comes to the cost of living, and better selling their policies.

"We've been in government for nine years, that's a long time, and we've done a lot in that period of time," Gould said. "But now, we need to show Canadians what's next." ...
Click to expand...
Not much there yet re: "we understand what your problems are, we know they're real, here's what we're going to do about them ..."
 
Fabius said:
This is likely reinforcing those fears. LPC staff pulling their support due to lack of LPC support for the Palestinians.


Click to expand...
The Liberal Party of Canada is facing a revolt by ministerial staffers, mostly of Arab and Muslim origin, over the Trudeau government's handling of the war in Gaza and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict generally.
Click to expand...

Good. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out. We don’t need hamas sympathizers in canadian government.
 
Part 1 of 2

From John Ibbitson in today's Globe and Mail:

----------​

Poilievre must hold his tongue for the sake of his party’s image​


No wonder Conservatives are champing at the bit for an election. This week’s cabinet retreat suggests the Liberals have simply run out of steam.

But the Tories could still lose, if they let the next election turn into a replay of the one under way in the United States: a contest between the normals and the crazies.

To prevent that, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre needs to hold his tongue.

For the Liberals, the cabinet retreat turned into a rout, as one minister after another stood before a microphone to boldly reverse previous policies.

A government that greatly expanded the intake of temporary foreign workers and permanent residents is now cutting back on temporary foreign workers and may do the same with permanent residents.

A government that once hoped to conclude a free-trade agreement with China slapped a 100-per-cent tariff on Chinese electric vehicles, matching a similar American move.

A government that has been promising for nine years to jump-start a massive new housing program offered a clutch of federally owned properties that might, somehow, one day, be used for housing.

A government that faces the chronic challenge of internal trade barriers and the increasingly acute problem of lagging productivity has plans to convene a working group to study the situation.

--- End of Part 1 ---​
 
Part 2 of 2

From John Ibbitson in today's Globe and Mail:

----------​

Poilievre must hold his tongue for the sake of his party’s image​

...
Exhaustion.

A few Liberal supporters, substituting wild optimism for cold reality, believe the revival of Democratic fortunes in the American election campaign could somehow be replicated in Canada.

But that revival began with President Joe Biden making way for Vice-President Kamala Harris as the nominee. Justin Trudeau says he is determined to lead his party into the next election. Unless the Liberals lose Montreal’s LaSalle-Émard-Verdun in the Sept. 16 by-election, to complement the June loss in Toronto-St. Paul’s, it seems likely that he will.

The Liberals may have one hope: that Mr. Poilievre perversely gives them the ammunition they need to brand the Conservative Leader as extreme.

Democratic vice-presidential candidate Tim Walz scored a hit when he labelled his Republican opponents as “weird.”

Donald Trump is the same narcissistic carnival barker he was in 2016 and 2020. But this time, instead of having the stolid Mike Pence as his running mate, he has Hillbilly Elegy author J.D. Vance, who did not endear himself when he claimed the country was being run by a clutch of childless cat ladies.

Mr. Trump has also brought on board anti-vaxxer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, who once ran for the Democratic presidential nomination but who now is full-on MAGA.

If Vice-President Kamala Harris wins the presidency, it may be in part because the Democrats successfully depicted their Republican opponents as a “circle of weirdos.”

Mr. Poilievre is helping the Liberals paint him with the same brush.

There is the old stuff: his hanging out with the anti-vaxxer crowd; his strange fixation with cryptocurrencies; his nod to World Economic Forum conspiracy theorists; his promise to fire the governor of the Bank of Canada and to defund the CBC.

More recently it has become a question of the language he uses. Mr. Poilievre and his advisers call Mr. Trudeau “wacko.” They call university professors “hackademics.” They made fun of an expert “with 23 letters behind her name.” They deride the “bought-and-paid-for media.”

Such language thrills party activists while not drawing much attention more broadly because the remarks are mostly limited to social media.

But the Conservatives’ future hinges on the support of middle-class suburban voters. If those voters come to believe that the Poilievre Conservatives are carbon copies – or even pale imitations – of Trump Republicans, they will turn away from the party.

That’s why every incendiary line Mr. Poilievre and his advisers tweet is likely to appear in a future Liberal attack ad. The Conservatives want to make the election a referendum on Mr. Trudeau and his three terms in government. The Liberals would much prefer the election be about Mr. Poilievre and his alleged extremism.

The election is Mr. Poilievre’s to lose. The one sure way he could lose it would be to make that election a choice between normals and crazies.

- 30 -
​
There is some sound advice in there. Very many Canadians are too much influenced by US politics.
 
Robyn Urback, writing in the Globe and Mail, says that there is a new level of excitement, now, in the US campaign, which is absent in Canada's politics:

-----------​

‘Joy’ is working for the Kamala campaign, but it won’t work in Canada’s current climate​

Canadian politicians love to look down south and try to adopt America’s trends, debates and cultural wars as our own. They rarely fit, but it doesn’t stop them from smashing the wrong puzzle pieces together with their fists and, for example, announcing new Canadian gun control measures after a mass shooting in Texas.

We’re already seeing it happen over the course of the U.S. presidential election campaign. Liberal MP Mark Gerretsen has been trying to transpose the Democrats’ highly effective “weird” label for Republicans onto Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, with little success. Indeed, it’s roughly as effective as trying to cheat off a fellow student’s exam paper when the teacher has scrambled up the order of questions for each test.

And yet, they persist. CBC News reported last week that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is looking to echo the message of joy and optimism that reverberated through the recent Democratic National Convention, in hopes that it might help lift the party up from its 17-point rut.

It’s clear that the message is working for Vice-President Kamala Harris, who has managed to turn a race that President Joe Biden was poised to lose into one she now leads. In her speech to the convention, Ms. Harris spoke of a “nation ready to move forward,” and about fighting for the future of America while “guided by optimism and faith.” It was in stark contrast to the speech from former president Donald Trump to the Republican National Convention, in which he referenced Hannibal Lecter from The Silence of the Lambs and called America a “dumping ground for the rest of the world.”

The optimism message is a winner for Ms. Harris both because of the messenger, and because of the timing. Ms. Harris is a fresh face for the top of the ticket; she resuscitated a dying campaign and brought with her the prospect of actual electoral success, which will naturally breed excitement, hope and joy. Her election would be historic for women in America, which in itself evokes emotion and enthusiasm. And the joy message works because it seems to genuinely suit Ms. Harris’s personality, and voters know authenticity. Though Republicans briefly tried to attack her for her laugh, that angle flopped and they’ve abandoned it; Ms. Harris’s laugh is actually one of the more endearing things about her.

The message might not have taken off if the campaign had coincided with a more fraught social and economic atmosphere in the U.S. But generally speaking, things are good: violent crime, including murder, rape and aggravated assault, is dropping, according to FBI data. Inflation is slowing. The economy is booming. There are still plenty of problems, of course, but when things are relatively stable, it’s easy to get excited about the possibility of even better. But when things are bad, it’s hard to convince voters to smile and celebrate the future; instead, they tend to gravitate toward politicians who mirror their frustrations and echo their anger.

That’s why a message of joy and optimism won’t work in the current Canadian climate. To be frank: things aren’t great. The homicide rate in Canada has been steadily rising over the past decade (though down slightly in 2023). Car theft is so ubiquitous that Costco is selling driveway security bollards. Canada had the highest housing price-to-income ratio among Group of Seven countries, according to 2024 Q1 data compiled by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. One in five Canadians doesn’t have access to regular primary health care. And though like the U.S., inflation in Canada is slowing, our per-person growth is stagnant, and the unemployment rate, particularly among youth and new immigrants, is rising. If Mr. Trudeau stood before a crowd of non-partisan Canadians and told them to rejoice over the great possibilities and opportunities Canada holds, he’d probably get booed out of the room. They want to hear him first explain why those arrested for car theft keep getting let out on bail.

But even if the climate was right, Mr. Trudeau would be the wrong messenger. His face is not fresh – it’s nine years in – and it’s the one that many voters hold responsible for the myriad social and economic problems currently plaguing the country. A new Liberal leader would potentially be able to pull it off, but he or she would still be burdened with the weight of the incumbent government’s baggage. And needless to say, it wouldn’t work for Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre either (not that there are any indications that he would try); his personality doesn’t suit a “hope and change” spirit. Instead, he has quite aptly tapped into the frustrations of the Canadian electorate, and echoed them back to demonstrate that they are being heard.

This is called understanding Canada’s unique conditions, and tailoring a message distinct from that in the United States. We are a whole separate country after all; we don’t need to cheat off of America’s exam paper.

----------

Two points:
  • First, and slightly off topic, Canada may not be 'broken' but neither are we sharing, fully, in the US' generally improving socio-economic state ... and a lot of people, maybe almost 60%, blame Prime Minister Trudeau for that; but
  • Second, and on topic, all the indicators seem to point to a possible, not certain, but very possible Harris victory.
 
Edward Campbell said:
Robyn Urback, writing in the Globe and Mail, says that there is a new level of excitement, now, in the US campaign, which is absent in Canada's politics:

-----------​

‘Joy’ is working for the Kamala campaign, but it won’t work in Canada’s current climate​

Canadian politicians love to look down south and try to adopt America’s trends, debates and cultural wars as our own. They rarely fit, but it doesn’t stop them from smashing the wrong puzzle pieces together with their fists and, for example, announcing new Canadian gun control measures after a mass shooting in Texas.

We’re already seeing it happen over the course of the U.S. presidential election campaign. Liberal MP Mark Gerretsen has been trying to transpose the Democrats’ highly effective “weird” label for Republicans onto Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, with little success. Indeed, it’s roughly as effective as trying to cheat off a fellow student’s exam paper when the teacher has scrambled up the order of questions for each test.

And yet, they persist. CBC News reported last week that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is looking to echo the message of joy and optimism that reverberated through the recent Democratic National Convention, in hopes that it might help lift the party up from its 17-point rut.

It’s clear that the message is working for Vice-President Kamala Harris, who has managed to turn a race that President Joe Biden was poised to lose into one she now leads. In her speech to the convention, Ms. Harris spoke of a “nation ready to move forward,” and about fighting for the future of America while “guided by optimism and faith.” It was in stark contrast to the speech from former president Donald Trump to the Republican National Convention, in which he referenced Hannibal Lecter from The Silence of the Lambs and called America a “dumping ground for the rest of the world.”

The optimism message is a winner for Ms. Harris both because of the messenger, and because of the timing. Ms. Harris is a fresh face for the top of the ticket; she resuscitated a dying campaign and brought with her the prospect of actual electoral success, which will naturally breed excitement, hope and joy. Her election would be historic for women in America, which in itself evokes emotion and enthusiasm. And the joy message works because it seems to genuinely suit Ms. Harris’s personality, and voters know authenticity. Though Republicans briefly tried to attack her for her laugh, that angle flopped and they’ve abandoned it; Ms. Harris’s laugh is actually one of the more endearing things about her.

The message might not have taken off if the campaign had coincided with a more fraught social and economic atmosphere in the U.S. But generally speaking, things are good: violent crime, including murder, rape and aggravated assault, is dropping, according to FBI data. Inflation is slowing. The economy is booming. There are still plenty of problems, of course, but when things are relatively stable, it’s easy to get excited about the possibility of even better. But when things are bad, it’s hard to convince voters to smile and celebrate the future; instead, they tend to gravitate toward politicians who mirror their frustrations and echo their anger.

That’s why a message of joy and optimism won’t work in the current Canadian climate. To be frank: things aren’t great. The homicide rate in Canada has been steadily rising over the past decade (though down slightly in 2023). Car theft is so ubiquitous that Costco is selling driveway security bollards. Canada had the highest housing price-to-income ratio among Group of Seven countries, according to 2024 Q1 data compiled by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. One in five Canadians doesn’t have access to regular primary health care. And though like the U.S., inflation in Canada is slowing, our per-person growth is stagnant, and the unemployment rate, particularly among youth and new immigrants, is rising. If Mr. Trudeau stood before a crowd of non-partisan Canadians and told them to rejoice over the great possibilities and opportunities Canada holds, he’d probably get booed out of the room. They want to hear him first explain why those arrested for car theft keep getting let out on bail.

But even if the climate was right, Mr. Trudeau would be the wrong messenger. His face is not fresh – it’s nine years in – and it’s the one that many voters hold responsible for the myriad social and economic problems currently plaguing the country. A new Liberal leader would potentially be able to pull it off, but he or she would still be burdened with the weight of the incumbent government’s baggage. And needless to say, it wouldn’t work for Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre either (not that there are any indications that he would try); his personality doesn’t suit a “hope and change” spirit. Instead, he has quite aptly tapped into the frustrations of the Canadian electorate, and echoed them back to demonstrate that they are being heard.

This is called understanding Canada’s unique conditions, and tailoring a message distinct from that in the United States. We are a whole separate country after all; we don’t need to cheat off of America’s exam paper.

----------

Two points:
  • First, and slightly off topic, Canada may not be 'broken' but neither are we sharing, fully, in the US' generally improving socio-economic state ... and a lot of people, maybe almost 60%, blame Prime Minister Trudeau for that; but
  • Second, and on topic, all the indicators seem to point to a possible, not certain, but very possible Harris victory.
Click to expand...
So assuming we’re going with the election being Oct 2025, I think that a change in LPC leadership will move the needle despite the weight of the baggage. A lot can happen in a year, but it has to be the right charismatic (and I emphasize that) leader.

I see different questions here. People are sick of the current CPC govt under Trudeau and will vote for a mustard stain on a napkin, but are people generally lashing out and voting for the “natural other party” CPC, or specifically Poilievre? Poilievre is popular because most people meld him with the current popularity of the CPC. NDP doesn’t have enough of a bloc to sway anything.

So, if [insert charismatic politician X] decides to run for LPC leadership and wins, they can:
  1. Say that they are no longer Trudeau’s party. CPC will say “well it’s the same general bones” but the new LPC can say “so when you were railing against Trudeau, did you really mean LPC? Because the ads are all about Trudeau.”
  2. CPC will have to answer that question. If it’s Trudeau, then it’s not him anymore (like down in the US). If it’s LPC, then they’re changing from the top so it’s possible (likely or not doesn’t matter in the debate) there are some changes too.
The big change will be that the new LPC can say to the voters “the CPC has railed against Trudeau for years. We have changed and now it’s not him at the helm”. CPC will surely say “but it’s the same party” in which case the LPC will say “so are you saying that Poilievre’s CPC is the same as Harper’s CPC?”

I don’t like the “gotcha” aspects but if I, on a day off, having a beer and just thinking about the back-and-forth can suggest this, then surely people who get paid to do so can suggest more elaborate schemes.

Edit: Damn I should have put it in the CPC thread, not this one. The threads are starting to meld, which isn’t unlike CANUS politics…
 
dimsum said:
Edit: Damn I should have put it in the CPC thread, not this one. The threads are starting to meld, which isn’t unlike CANUS politics…
Click to expand...
Actually, since you're dealing with Team Red & Team Blue, I moved this (as well as the article you're responding to) into the "Current government" thread since we don't have a specific federal election campaign thread yet.

Milnet.ca Staff
 
dimsum said:
So assuming we’re going with the election being Oct 2025, I think that a change in LPC leadership will move the needle despite the weight of the baggage. A lot can happen in a year, but it has to be the right charismatic (and I emphasize that) leader.

I see different questions here. People are sick of the current CPC govt under Trudeau and will vote for a mustard stain on a napkin, but are people generally lashing out and voting for the “natural other party” CPC, or specifically Poilievre? Poilievre is popular because most people meld him with the current popularity of the CPC. NDP doesn’t have enough of a bloc to sway anything.

So, if [insert charismatic politician X] decides to run for LPC leadership and wins, they can:
  1. Say that they are no longer Trudeau’s party. CPC will say “well it’s the same general bones” but the new LPC can say “so when you were railing against Trudeau, did you really mean LPC? Because the ads are all about Trudeau.”
  2. CPC will have to answer that question. If it’s Trudeau, then it’s not him anymore (like down in the US). If it’s LPC, then they’re changing from the top so it’s possible (likely or not doesn’t matter in the debate) there are some changes too.
The big change will be that the new LPC can say to the voters “the CPC has railed against Trudeau for years. We have changed and now it’s not him at the helm”. CPC will surely say “but it’s the same party” in which case the LPC will say “so are you saying that Poilievre’s CPC is the same as Harper’s CPC?”

I don’t like the “gotcha” aspects but if I, on a day off, having a beer and just thinking about the back-and-forth can suggest this, then surely people who get paid to do so can suggest more elaborate schemes.
Click to expand...
Right now the CPC belongs to Mr Poilievre; I think his position as leader is unassailable. But see the many comments, some of which I have posted, about his general 'dislikability.'

I think there could be a charismatic LPC leader who could hold Mr Poilievre to a minority or even, almost miraculously, scrape up a weak Liberal minority but I'm afraid that (s)he is not in the current cabinet, maybe not even in the caucus.

My hunch is that Mr Poilievre will win a majority in 2025, not matter who leads the Liberals, with something just below 40% of the popular vote and will then turn out to be a disappointment to enough Canadians to allow the LPC to return to power, but with a minority, again, in 2029. Then, circa 2030, it will be time for both parties to get serious about selecting leaders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RangerRay
    • Like
    • Insightful
2024 BC Election
22 23 24
Replies
472
Views
44K
daftandbarmy
daftandbarmy
Edward Campbell
    • Like
    • Insightful
The Next Canadian Government
18 19 20
Replies
394
Views
23K
Colin Parkinson
Colin Parkinson
Kirkhill
    • Like
    • Insightful
Chretien as Defender of Parliamentary Supremacy and the Notwithstanding Clause.
Replies
5
Views
667
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
K
    • Trolling
    • Humorous
Politicized Climate Change as Wealth Redistribution
Replies
3
Views
592
daftandbarmy
daftandbarmy
Kirkhill
    • Insightful
Short War Illusion
Replies
0
Views
309
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Back
Top