Perfection is the Enemy of the Good

Since Parliament resumed I have been watching some progressive commentators lamenting that Mark Carney is "governing from the right". That is not true of course. He is governing from the centre but after 10 years of Justin Trudeau it just seems that Mark Carney is right wing.

I have said it many times before that Justin Trudeau was the most progressive PM, who lead the most progressive government, since his father and he will be the last progressive PM for at least the next two decades, probably longer. 

However, that did not stop many progressive commentators and voters from turning on him as much as the Conservatives did. Scratch that, the Conservatives never liked him but progressives did not take long to join them. 

"But he bought a pipeline" progressives cried. 

He also brought in the CERB and other supports for citizens during Covid. If anybody besides Mr. Trudeau would have been PM they would have followed the old government playbook of shoveling 10s of billions of dollars at big business to encourage them not to lay people off. Of course, those same businesses would have given big dividends to their shareholders and bonuses to the company senior management and then they would have laid off 10s of thousands of workers. The reason why Canada came out of the pandemic so well, economically, is because the progressive government of Justin Trudeau put people over corporations.

"He broke his promise on electoral reform" progressives lamented. He also brought in national childcare, national dental care and other programs that directly assist Canadians in raising their children and taking care of themselves.

His reward in 2019 and 2021 was for progressive voters to desert the Liberals for the NDP in large enough numbers to deny them a majority government. And in 2024, if you believe the polls, it looked like enough would abandon him to allow the Conservatives to form a majority government. Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth.

It is ironic, after the Liberals got rid of their progressive leader and elected a more traditional, centrist leader, progressives deserted the NDP and the Greens in droves for the Liberals. You guys were one election too late and now you have to live with the consequences.

Progressives had it great with Justin Trudeau. He brought in so many of the policies and programs that progressives had been calling for since Brian Mulroney began dismantling PET's progressive programs. There was no one else besides Justin Trudeau who would have done so. None of those who were pegged as his likely successor, before Mark Carney came on the scene, were as progressive as he was. So his replacement was always going to go back to the right.

That did not seem to matter to many progressive because he was not the perfect progressive. He pursued just too many policies and programs that they did not like so many decided he had to go.

Now, after contributing to forcing him out, they complain about the new government not being progressive enough. *Slowly butts head against a wall*.

Too freaking bad! The Conservatives can be forgiven for not liking Justin Trudeau and his government. It was a matter of profound ideological differences for them. For progressives they were just too stupid and short sighted to realize how good they had it and that is on you if you were one of them. I have no sympathy for you.

Moderate Conservatives Lost an Opportunity

The CPC needed to be humiliated in the last election. That was the only way for moderate conservatives to regain their voice in Canadian politics. They lost it to populist conservatives, who took over the Conservative Party of Canada, when Stephen Harper was elected leader of the CPC.

As a result the CPC has been drifting further and further to the right until they can now be truthfully called Maple MAGA. 

The last election was a golden opportunity to change that. All moderate conservatives had to do what to hold their nose, for this one election, and vote Liberal. If the CPC would have been reduced to less than 100 seats then the grip of Maple MAGA could have been broken. The irony is by doing so moderate conservatives would have been voting for one of their own. Make no mistake, Mark Carney would not have been out of place in Brian Mulroney's cabinet and he would have blended into a Joe Clark cabinet very well.

However, moderate conservatives just could not bring themselves to do that, at least not in large enough numbers to make a difference. The end result is the CPC lost but not badly enough for them to believe that they actually need to change and renew their party. Pierre Poilievre will win his by-election and he will continue to rule his party much like he did before the election.

Or, he could still lose his grip on the party but his replacement will not be any different from him. Maple MAGA has been emboldened by the increase in the CPC seat count so no matter who winds up leading them into the next election their differences from Mr. Poilievre will be nothing more than differences in packaging and style. They will still be Maple MAGA.

Moderate conservatives forfeited their voice in Canadians Federal politics for at least a decade and probably longer.

Election Assessment: NDP

The NDP find themselves in an existential crisis because their latest election campaign was the culmination of more than a decade of bad political decisions. The way they were going it was just a matter of time before they suffered the fate they suffered on April 28.

I cannot really say anything specific about their campaign except that it was apparent early on that they realized they had no chance and just phoned it in. 

All of this started with Jack Layton. I know that he has been deified by NDP partisans because he managed to take the perennial third party and make it the Official Opposition against a majority government. The problem is he did so by making the NDP just another political party and one that has never learned how to win at the federal level.

Before Jack Layton, the NDP had the reputation of being the conscience of Parliament. They always pursued principled positions and they used that to keep the other parties honest, even when those parties lead majority governments. Jack Layton, decided to move away from that and help the Conservatives in their attempt to eliminate the Liberal Party of Canada. His two successors continued that pursuit. The only problem with that is they were unsuccessful and the result of April 28 was inevitable. It was only a matter of time.

That result is a repeat of the 1993 election. After that election they no longer had official party status because they won around 7 seats. At the time everybody who followed politics was upset by this. We all thought they deserved better. They were just caught up in the wave of revulsion Canadians had towards the Mulroney Tories, who were reduced to two seats in that election and would eventually be swallowed by the Reform Party. This time, I do not know anybody who cares about what happened to the NDP, except for the most partisan of NDP partisans. I know I do not care and as far as I am concerned they can be completely eliminated and I would not shed a tear.

So what happens now?

In the short term they will support the Liberals in everything because they will not want an election any time soon. So as long as all of the recounts currently taking place do not reduce the Liberals to under 165 seats the Liberals will be able to govern as if they have a majority for the foreseeable future.

As for the NDP that will be up to them. What they need to do is rebuild their party from the ground up. That is what they did after 1993. It took them almost a decade, and two leaders, to come back to respectability but they did it. However, what I expect will happen is they will try to go for the quick fix. They will try to get back into the game by the next election. If they succeed then that would be good on them but there is a very real risk that they will fail and failure will mean the destruction of the NDP as a political force at the Federal level. 

We will have to see how their leadership election progresses to see what approach they will decide to follow.

Election Assessment: Conservatives

The Conservatives lost the election on April 28 but not by as much as many believed it would. However, that is very significant because as late as the end of January everybody and their brother were saying that the Conservatives were poised to form a huge majority government. That was BS of course, over the course of an election everything would have come back to the centre, regardless of whether Justin Trudeau had stayed on and Donald Trump had not opened his mouth. However, the perception is the Conservatives blew it big time.

The Conservatives can blame Donald Trump to some extent. His talking about making Canada the 51st state in the weeks leading up to the election did not help. It created a great sense of patriotism, which gave the incumbent Liberals the best opportunity to work with that to unite the country behind them. However, as I stated in my previous post the Liberals failed to fully exploit that opportunity.

So much of the responsibility for the Conservative loss lies with Pierre Poilievre and the campaign he lead. The Liberal campaign sucked but the Conservative campaign was brutal. Pierre Poilievre has the charisma of an angry turnip but he could have overcome that to some extent if he would have had any political instincts and acumen. At every turn, when he had the chance to make the right political decision he did the exact opposite. The number of examples of his political ineptness are too many to articulate here. Someone should write a book about it. 

However, I will pick the example of the Liberals zeroing the Carbon Tax as a case study. That decision worried me because it could have been spun as a sign of weakness that would have dogged the Liberal campaign until the end if the Conservatives would have played it right and they would have been right because it was a sign of weakness. They did not do that however. When Mark Carney eliminated the Carbon Tax the Conservatives became hostile. They claimed it was not real and that PM Carney was just another Justin Trudeau. When I saw that I breathed a sigh of relief because I knew it would not resonate. What I feared and what the Conservatives should have done was take the freaking win. They spent 3 years demanding the Liberals "Axe the Tax" and the Liberals did just that. They won the war but then had no idea what to do afterwards and lost the peace. What they should have done was congratulate the Liberals in finally agreeing with them. They should have ridiculed the Liberals while thanking them, which they deserved. When the price of gasoline dropped by over 20 cents per litre on April 1, Pierre Poilievre should have shouted "I did this", with a regular and online ad campaign and with his MPs and candidates going onto social media to say the same thing. He should have continued by bringing up the topic during the debates. Doing so would have cemented his victory in the minds of voters and it might have shaken enough votes loose for him to actually win. Of course he did not do so. It was interesting, the week before the debates a pollster asked respondents who they credited with eliminating the Carbon Tax. Fifty two percent of respondents said Mark Carney and only 25% said Pierre Poilievre. So after three years of hard slogging, until they finally won, they did not receive credit for their victory. That pretty much sums up the political stupidity of the Pierre Poilievre.

So where to the Conservatives go from here. On the one hand the Conservatives did pick up 24 more seats over their 2021 result. On the other hand they lost an election that they were expected to win and Pierre Poilievre lost his own seat. So Mr. Poilievre could make a plausible argument for staying on as leader but there is also a plausible argument for his resigning. Added to this, it is probable that the Liberals will lose the next election. The probability of them winning a 5th consecutive election are extremely low. So, the leader of the CPC, during the next election, will probably become PM. That is going to make those who want to replace Mr. Poilievre quite motivated to make him leave.

The result could be some real fireworks coming from the Conservatives over the next little while and it could last quite some time. If Mr. Poilievre does not go quickly the infighting in the CPC will just become more vicious the longer he clings to his position. 

That is going to motivate Mr. Poilievre to try to bring down the Liberal government sooner rather than later but with both the NDP and the Bloc having no interest in another election that will not happen. And every time he fails to bring down the government will weaken his grip on the party that much more. I am not going to say that the CPC will split. Nothing that dramatic will happen but the infighting will be hard to miss and as long as it goes on the Liberals will be able to govern without an effective opposition.

Election Assessment: Liberals

The Liberals won the election last night. That cannot be disputed. However, you cannot shake the feeling that they squandered an opportunity for a majority government and they only have themselves to blame.

The Liberals had the best conditions for winning a majority government since 2015. They had the orange gas bag in the US making threats against Canada. They had a brand new leader who seemed uniquely qualified to deal with that very same gas bag. Their chief opponent ran a terrible campaign. (More on that in my next post.)

So what happened?

First of all, Mark Carney has very little charisma. He looks and acts like the technocrat that he is. Part of the job of the leader of a political party is to connect with Canadians on an emotional level and he failed to do that. It is true that he came across as the most competent but that was not enough. It is rarely enough. The campaign that he ran was boring and uninspiring. 

Second, the Conservatives ceded the Donald Trump issue to the Liberals and they did not take full advantage of it. At the beginning of the campaign Donald Trump dominated but that faded after the phone call between him and PM Carney. Although the issue never went away it dropped off as THE issue of the campaign, thus letting the Conservatives off the hook for their woefully inadequate response to Donald Trump's threat to Canada. I compared this campaign to the 1988 election. The big difference between that one and this one was the Liberals never relented using the perceived threat to our sovereignty that was represented by the Canada/US Free Trade Agreement. The Liberals should have done the same thing this time. They did not have to be over the top and they did not have to go into any histrionics. All they had to do was remind Canadians of Mr. Trump's actions and words for the whole campaign. Instead of that we had the Liberals talk about Trump's action impacting the global economy, probably creating a global economic crisis. Great, that is all true but that does not hit you in the gut like Donald Trump's direct threats against Canada. 

I was not impressed by the Liberal campaign and it would appear a large number of Canadians agreed. While I still voted for them anyway it would appear that millions of Canadians decided not to. That is on them.

So what does it mean for their ability to govern?

For now not much and there is a chance that they could govern with their near majority for quite some time. The NDP is going to be addressing a potential existential crisis. This happened to them in 1993 and it took eight years and two elections for them to come back. It could very well that as long this time which means that they may not want to force an election during the next four years. They could very well prop them up while they get their own house in order. That could last anywhere from 18 months to four years.

As well, their chief opponent is going to be going through some stuff in the coming months. I would imagine infighting, while they deal with it, will leave them unwilling to force an election, even if they could get the other parties to agree, which they would not do.

So the Liberals probably have a guaranteed window of about 18 months to push through their key election promises. After that they will be operating on borrowed time and their opponents will probably ramp up the shenanigans to disrupt their ability to govern. So they better move quickly.

One final note, it is very likely that this will be the Liberals' last term for quite sometime. This should also motivate them to move quickly.

Final Thoughts on the Election

It's election day and millions of Canadians are going to their polls and voting for the next government of Canada. This will be on top of the over 7 million who voted last weekend.

The events in Vancouver on the weekend were a tragedy and it is disheartening to see both main contenders for PM using it for political purposes. Mr. Poilievre and the Conservatives were about as subtle as a kick in the crotch with their approach, putting up videos that essentially said "See, we told you so." Mr. Carney was a little more subtle, attending the vigil with the Premier of BC but make no mistake that was the two politicians using the tragedy to score political points.

I was expecting a nastier campaign than what we got. By and large the Liberal campaign stayed positive and did not use the gold mine of statements and actions that Mr. Poilievre has made over the decades against him. They just seemed to focus on the Donald Trump threat. I was expecting more negativity from the Conservative campaign. It was negative but it seems they held back.

I have stated many times in this space that I do not put much stock in polls. That is particularly true for polls conducted in between elections. However, polling that takes place during an election are a little more useful as the pollsters are going to have to compare their estimates against the poll that really counts and if they are too far off they will lose credibility. Considering the fact that polling companies use their polls as marketing tools for the money making business they have an interest in getting it right. Indeed, I would say that they have an incentive to ere on the side of caution. As a result we can probably take what the polls are saying as a general indicator of the relative positions of the parties in public support. If the final polls of the campaign indicate that the Liberals are 4 percentage points ahead of the Conservatives, on average, and that both the NDP and Bloc are going to get creamed then we can believe that is what they are seeing in their polling. Whether that turns out to be reality remains to be seen but it is probable that they are seeing a truish picture.

When this election started the Liberals were "winning" over 200 seats according to the polls and the seat models that have proliferated in recent years. I never believed that and I stated in my last post that they would probably coalesce around 180 to 185 for the Liberals by the end and I was correct.

So who is going to win. I would say it is the Liberals and they will probably win between 165 and 185 seats. 

I am not basing this completely on the polls. I am basing it on how the campaigns worked during the final week. The Liberals spent the week campaigning in Opposition ridings. The Conservatives spent the week in their own ridings. In other words, it looked like the Conservatives are running a "save the furniture" campaign in the final week and not one where they expect to win. The last time that happened federally was in 2015, when Justin Trudeau won a majority government. We also saw it in 2011 when Michael Ignatieff spent the last week of that campaign running around Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. It did not save the Liberals from being relegated to 3rd party status against a majority Harper government.

Can the Conservatives still win? Theoretically they can but everything will have to go right. Their voters will have to come out, Liberal voters will have to stay home AND the NDP and the Bloc will have to perform well above what the polls are saying, I mean like 10 points above. I know that some Conservatives believe that if their party can actually tie the Liberals in the popular vote they could win but that is simply not true. With two exceptions the Conservatives have only won when the NDP does well. If that does not happen the Conservatives would need to win the vote by at least a 5 percentage point margin. They are now down by 4%. Will the election swing 9 points to the right on election day? Again, it is possible but it is not probable.

So it is possible that the Conservatives can win but it is also possible that the late breakers, those who do not decide on who to vote for until election day, break hard for the Liberals, which could make this a blowout. The high estimate for the seat modelers puts the Liberals at 200-220 seats. Neither outcome is probable but we will just have to wait and see for a few more hours.

Some More Thoughts on the Election

The higher than normal turnout at the advanced polls is impressive but it does not mean that there will be a higher turnout overall. What is does mean is that a higher number of voters had made up their minds in time to vote early than in the past. What that means to the overall result remains to be seen. However, it is nice to see that people seem to be engaged enough in this election to want to vote in such numbers a week before election day.

As expected, the debates were boring and banal. As usual, I could not sit through more than 15 minutes of the English debate before I found something more useful to do. I am always impressed with those who can sit through them and grateful for those commentators who do it professionally, without losing their damned minds. Also, as expected, who won depends on who you support. According to Liberal partisans Mark Carney crushed the others but Conservative supporters indicate that it was Pierre Poilievre who ran away with it. In the end their impact will probably be negligible.

I tend to dismiss polling in between elections for reasons I have stated in this space many times before. I tend not to dismiss them out of hand during elections because people will have the actual results of the election on which to compare their estimates. That makes the polling companies more careful in conducting their polls. So the pollsters showing the Liberals winning the election with anywhere from 173 to 192 seats is plausible but that gap is still an issue. My guess is it will coalesce at around 180-185 by April 28, assuming this is not a big polling miss and assuming a reasonable voter turnout.

I do not believe that the turnout will be any worse than in 2021. The advance polls would seem to indicate that Canadians are energized enough by the campaign that they will show up on April 28.

I also do not believe that we are seeing a polling miss. I have stated here before that all of the political parties have data analytics teams. These teams have data and statistical tools available to them that dwarf what the media pollster provide us. They have traditional polling data, they have the data they are receiving from each of the local campaigns and they have big data that is available to them through social media and the internet. They will all have top-of-the-line data analytics, including machine learning and AI, to make sense of all of that data. That will allow them to be able to provide their respective campaign teams voting estimates down to the individual ridings that would be as accurate as the national estimates we see in the media polls. As well, they will have developed predictive algorithms to help them foresee the future to a certain extent, probably a day or two in advance.

This has implications for some of the things we are seeing with the campaigns. First, the Liberals are still putting out advertizements and talking about the Trump threat because their data analytics are stating that there are enough Canadians concerned about it to make it worthwhile. It is highly likely that his threat is an important enough issue to a sufficient number of Canadians, and that the Liberals are in the best position to benefit from it, for the Liberals to keep talking about it. It could very well be the issue that will bring them the victory. Judging by how much Conservative commentators are trying to play down the Trump threat I would say that they are in agreement with the Liberal analytics team.

Second, Mark Carney has been going around the country and campaigning in Conservative and NDP held ridings since the end of the English debate. During the final stages of the election campaign, when a leader of a party campaigns in ridings that are currently held by their opponents, it usually means that their data analytics team has indicated it could be a pick up for their party. The last time I saw the Liberals do this was in 2015 and the last time I saw the Conservatives do this was in 2011. Both were majority victories for them. If the media polls are currently stating the Liberals are on track to win a majority government the actions of the national campaign would seem to back that up.

Pierre Poilievre should stay away from playing poker because his poker face is terrible. He looks miserable out there. Gone are the big rallies that he had during stage two. Now he just has staged announcements, attended by just a handful of people as props, and his facial expressions and body language are of someone who does not hold out much hope of winning. As well, the Conservative campaign trotted out Stephen Harper about two weeks ago and then released an actual advertizement featuring the former PM. In 2008 and 2011, when the Liberals trotted out Jean Chrétien half-way through the campaign, I knew that it was over for them. Having Stephen Harper appear in an advertizement is pretty much conclusive evidence that they are losing.

I stated when this election started that there would be two competing forces at play. The one is the fear of Donald Trump and what he could do to our country. The second is the desire for change that always exists for a government that has been in power more than eight years. With one week left until the election ends it would appear that the first one is driving this election. There does not appear to be a "throw the bums out" sentiment of sufficient strength to threaten the Liberals with a loss. It could manifest during the final week but I doubt it. If it was going to manifest itself in sufficient strength to give the Conservatives a chance of victory we would have been seeing signs of it from the beginning of the campaign.

Some Random Thoughts on the Election

In no particular order.

Some in the media and the Conservative side of the election are claiming that the Liberals are hiding Mark Carney for...reasons. This assertion comes from him "pausing" his campaign to take care of some PM stuff. What they are trying to sell with this line of reasoning is a non-eventful week, which saw the Conservatives ineffectively throwing everything including the kitchen sink at the wall, has seen them turn the tide against the Liberals. I even saw one dude mention that the Liberal internals must be terrible. The problem with that is leaders tend to campaign harder when things are not going well. Indeed, it can be manic. During the 2006 change election Paul Martin was campaigning like a mad man at this stage while Stephen Harper had a much less packed agenda. Perhaps the Liberal "internals" are actually saying that things are going so well for the Liberals that Mark Carney can take a little break. Or, hear me out, maybe he paused his campaign to actually address a global financial crisis that was triggered by the idiot who currently occupies the White House.

The contrast between the Liberal and Conservative campaigns is stark. For the Conservatives you would almost think Pierre Poilievre was running a Liberal campaign because he mentions them as often as he mentions his own party. Their ads on TV mention the Liberals more than the Conservatives by a ratio of almost 2:1. The Liberals campaign barely mentions the Conservatives. Mr. Carney only mentions them in passing during his campaign stops and I have not seen a single Liberal TV ad mention them. It is almost like the Liberals do not believe the Conservatives are relevant right now.

I saw the new Liberal TV ad, referencing the current economic turmoil unleashed by the orange blob to the south, yesterday during the hockey game. As political ads go it was nothing extraordinary. However, let's remember that political parties test their ads before releasing them so the release of this one would seem to indicate that Donald Trump and his stupidity is still very much on the minds of Canadians. If that is the case and it remains so until April 28 the Liberals are in the best position to win this election.

I see many Conservatives asserting that things will change after the debates. Perhaps, but as things stand now Pierre Poilievre will have to knock it out of the park AND Mark Carney would have to be a bumbling idiot. Anything is possible in politics but it should be noted that debates rarely have that much of an impact on election outcomes. Most of the time the debates are boring and banal, where party leaders toss out competing talking points.

In 2015 the Liberals crowed a great deal about the size and enthusiasm of the crowds that Justin Trudeau was attracting and the Conservatives played them down. This time the opposite is true. The whole thing with crowd size was silly then and it is silly now. Many years ago I helped my local Liberal candidate win an election. I once accompanied her to an all-candidates debate and was surprised and concerned by the number of Reformers who showed up to heckle her. I spoke to her after the debate about it and she stated that she had now problem with it. If they were spending their evening in a room heckling her they were not out knocking on doors and identifying their vote. She won that riding by over 10000 votes during that election. The foundation of an election win is established on the ground, in the individual ridings. If Conservative partisans want to waste time attending a rally instead of identifying their voters then I have no problem with that.

This is not feeling like a change election. I could be wrong and that sentiment could explode onto the scene over the next two weeks but that would be a first if it happens. Usually you can see a change election coming long before the writ is dropped. Usually, you can certainly see it as the campaign unfolds. However, for this election I am just not seeing it and believe me I have been looking for the signs from the beginning. I am just not seeing it, which is surprising considering how long the Liberals have been in power.

The polls indicating the Liberals will win 200 seats are about as believable as the polls that stated the Conservatives would win 200 seats. I am becoming more convinced that this election is all about Donald Trump and will remain so until the end. As a result, I believe the Liberals have the greatest chance of winning but their seat count will probably be between 165 and 185 if they do. There is still a chance for the Conservatives to win but time is running out for them. There are two weeks left in the campaign and public opinion usually does shift that quickly. Many point to the shift for the Liberals but I like to remind people who do so that the shift began at the beginning of January and it took almost 10 weeks before it shifted enough to benefit the Liberals. Will public opinion shift as markedly over the next two weeks. It is possible but highly unlikely.

Are Voters Paying Attention? / Who Will Show up on April 28?

These are two questions I have heard in the last couple of days from largely Conservative commentators and pollsters.

The first question is the result of the fact we are in stage two of the election campaign. See, there are three stages in a campaign. 

The beginning is stage one and it is exciting, we see the candidates for the first time and we see the first few polls, which is all the media really cares about during an election campaign.

We enter stage two 10-14 days after the writ is dropped. This is the time of the campaign when nothing much happens. The candidates announce a bunch of policy promises, the media parse every little detail about the Liberals to try to find something to focus on and the polls become stagnant.

Stage three is the final sprint to the finish, with the debates being the starting guns. This is when things begin to move if they are going to move.

So we are in stage two. It should be noted that the question of whether voters are paying attention was asked by a pollster. His answer was no. He was saying this in context of the Liberal lead and whether it would change. He did not specifically say it but he implied that once they do begin to pay attention we might see some movement of the polls towards the Conservatives.

Funny thing is if this was an ordinary election campaign I would agree with him. Canadians do not pay attention to politics, which has been a pet peeve of mine for quite some time. They do not pay attention in between elections and they do not pay attention during election campaigns. Many will not begin to pay attention until election day. However, this is not an ordinary election campaign. For better or for worse Donald Trump has made everybody stand up and take notice and he did it just before and during the beginning of a Federal election campaign in this country. So they are paying attention to him and that has raised the awareness of Canadians that we are going through an election campaign. I had an interesting conversation with someone this week who is someone who does not pay attention to politics, often to the point of not bothering to vote every time. During my wife's birthday gathering he mentioned that he would be voting for Mark Carney this time because he believed he would be best at dealing with Donald Trump. This opinion was not solicited by anybody. (I would not start a political discussion at my wife's birthday celebration, I value my life). This is anecdotal but I believe it does show that Canadians are a little more engaged for this election, probably not as much as I am but enough to answer yes to that first question. I stated in an earlier post that this election feels like the 1988 Free Trade election and that feeling has only strengthened in the last few days.

This brings me to the second question. It was also posed by a Conservative pollster and his answer again was designed to give some hope to Conservative supporters. Another of my pet peeves is Conservatives do seem to be more motivated to vote than progressives. Buoyed by their hate and anger they do tend to be more inclined to vote. 

However, that only becomes an issue if the election is close and even then only sometimes. It is what cost VP Harris the election in the US in November (which is a straw Conservatives have been grasping like a life preserver since the beginning of March) but comparing that election to the current Federal election is a stretch. I would point out that both the 2019 and the 2021 Federal elections were extremely close but Liberals came out as much as Conservatives did. That is why they won. 

With this becoming more and more the Trump election it would be very surprising if Liberals did not come out again this time. Indeed, as I stated previously, he seems to be energizing Canadians, convincing some, who have spotty records of participating in our elections, to participate this time. Turnout for the elections leading up to 1988 were trending downwards. The 1988 election bucked that trend. It would not surprise me that this election will also buck that trend. We will see on April 28.

I do not believe that many commentators and the CPC have yet to grasp that this election is different from that last few, at least the first two weeks of it have been. They have not adjusted to that reality. So while these two questions might have been valid in previous elections and they will be valid in future elections I think this time they are probably not the correct questions to be asking during stage two of this election?

The Polls are Still Ridiculous

I have stated many times in this space that I never believe the polls. They can sometimes be a useful tool to get a general sense of things but they should never be taken as the true picture of the political situation in this country.

If you want to receive the truer picture of how things are look at what the parties are doing.

During an election campaign I find the best way to do that is to watch the leaders speak with the sound turned off. Nothing they say is important because most just follow talking points. However, with the sound off you can read their facial expressions and body language without distraction.

Looking at Mark Carney's I would say that the Liberal Party's data analytics team is probably agreeing with what the media polls are saying. They are in the lead with a reasonably comfortable cushion. He is relaxed and natural at the podium and there are no fear or anxiety markers on his face or in this body language. He can probably thank Donald Trump for that and he should be really thankful because his campaign so far has been lackluster. It lacks vision, being just a campaign where he throws out random policy promises. Make no mistake, most of his policies ideas are good ones but they are not being held together by an overarching theme or vision. If Donald Trump was not looming over the election he would probably be hard pressed to push back any desire for change.

Looking at Pierre Poilievre I would say his data analytics team agrees with their Liberal counterparts. He looks terrible at the podium. His smile is pasted on but the rest of his face is stuck in a permanent frown. The way he moves at the podium would also indicate that he is not having fun. It is true that he just might not like being at that podium but he has stood behind many when it appeared he would win the election and his body language and face were much different. His campaign is just as lackluster as the Liberal one. It is also completely lacking in any overarching theme or vision. However, he has the advantage of the Liberals being in power for a decade. Without Donald Trump all he would have had to do this time is try to appear non-threatening and he would be on his way to a possible election victory. At the very least it would probably be alot closer than it appears to be.

Mr. Singh looks like he is phoning it in. Enough said.

Mr. Blanchette is not looking happy either. Quebecers have always feared the US more than Canada because it is a big English speaking country to their south. They know that if the US wanted to throw its weight around on the continent the French language would be one of the first victims. Therefore, even the most ardent separatist is looking for the federalist party that will most protect against that. Most Quebecers have heard the anti-French rhetoric from the Reform wing of the CPC and they know that the NDP has no chance of forming a government so the Liberals probably look pretty good right now.

If I were to guess the current political situation in the campaign I would say that the Liberals are indeed in the "driver's seat" and that it is their election to lose at this point. Neither the Liberals or the Conservatives are running good campaigns but so far the fear of Donald Trump appears to be trumping any desire for change in the country. This is to the Liberals' advantage. Although my head says that could change my gut is increasingly saying that it will not change quickly enough for the Conservatives to win the election.

Donald Trump is not Going Anywhere

I have been reading some Conservative commentators on social media and they are stating that the policies being presented by the CPC have the potential to turn things around for them. One commentator even stated that they could take voters' mind off of Donald Trump.

As a Liberal supporter I really hope the Conservatives go with that idea. As the political animal that I am I believe it is nuts to make such an assertion.

This election is shaping up to be like the 1988 Free Trade election. The Liberals, the Progressive Conservatives and the New Democratic Party (Yes there were only three parties then.) all presented great and not-so-great policy proposals. As well, each party leader committed gaffes that would have caused them trouble in typical election campaigns. However, they were largely ignored because Canadians were riled up by the FTA between Canada and the US. For context this was the precursor to the NAFTA. The country was very divided on the issue and it dominated that election, squeezing out every other consideration.

This election is shaping up to be the Donald Trump election. That is, Canadians are riled up by his words and actions towards Canada and they are going to dominate the campaign. He seems to have looked away from Canada for now, focusing more on Greenland, but Canadians are not going to forget what he has been saying and doing to Canada by the end of the campaign. And that will be reinforced because Donald Trump is not going to stop talking or acting like a lunatic. He will be constantly in the headlines and that will remind Canadians of how much of a threat he is to Canada's interests on a daily basis.

Any political party that believes otherwise is setting themselves up for a fall. Canadians are justifiably anxious about how Donald Trump could impact their future and they are looking to the Liberals and the Conservatives (sorry NDP) to see how they are going to address the Trump threat. So far the Conservatives have ceded that ground to the Liberals and as long as they do nothing else they say or do will have a positive impact on their election chances. 

I do believe that the Liberals can lose this election but only if the Conservatives begin to address that orange elephant in the room in a meaningful way. If they do not then in all probability this will not be a change election.

What will be the Ballot Question?

For every election political commentators always ask what will be the ballot question for voters come election day.

They then assert all sorts of guesses; taxes, the environment, housing prices, social issues, you name it. 

They are all wrong. For every election of the last 50 years the ballot question has been "Do I want to change the government?". The one exception was the 1988 election when the ballot question was about whether Canadians wanted to ratify the Free Trade Agreement between the US and Canada. The answer was no but the no votes were split between the Liberals and the NDP and the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada won. Their decision to proceed with the ratification despite a sizable majority of Canadians being against it was a big contributing factor to the eventual demise of the PCPC. 

This election was shaping up to be another election about whether Canadians wanted to change governments but Donald Trump threw a big wrench into that. Now it is looking more like the 1988 election because he has managed to make all about him and how the next Canadian government is going to handle him. That puts the Conservatives into a bit of a bind at several levels.

First, it cannot be denied that there is a certain affinity between the CPC and Donald Trump. They have shared political advisors, more than a few prominent Conservatives have been seen wearing MAGA hats and entertaining or being entertained by MAGA influencers. That creates serious questions amongst many Canadians of whether a CPC government can be trusted to look out for Canadian interests in its dealings with the Trump administration. Speaking to my Conservative neighbour about just that topic it would appear that many do not believe they will, which would explain why he has a Liberal sign on his lawn this time. Maybe the softer tone by Trump administration may mitigate this but I would not count on it. Regardless of his new tone he will be in the news every day for the remainder of the election campaign and that will not make the Conservatives' Donald Trump problem go away.

Donald Trump has reduced the desire for change in the country. Before his reelection there appeared to be some desire for change. I am not certain how intense it was. It is anecdotal evidence at best but I do know that while most of my Conservative family members did not like Justin Trudeau they also believed that Pierre Poilievre was an asshole. They absolutely hated the Trucker Convoy of a few years ago. They saw it as an insurrection and they are savvy enough to realize that Mr. Poilievre had a hand in it. (Me reminding them of that helped). So that desire for change was always soft. I do not trust polls that much but I will say that before Donald Trump the polls were saying that the desire for change was around 60% and that has since fallen to around 55%. If it stays that way for the remainder of the election campaign then the Liberals will win. If 40 to 45% of the electorate decide not to change the government that would probably result in a Liberal majority government because the remainder would be split between five other parties. For context during the last change election in 2015, pollster were indicating that the desire for change had hit the 70% mark just a few days before election day.

The Conservatives have another problem. They have made politics personal. In 2004 and 2006 they had the Sponsorship Scandal to hammer the Liberals with. However, once they gained power they stopped talking about Liberal policies and started targeting the leader of the party. They targeted Mr. Dion, Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Trudeau. In all three cases it took years to make Canadians dislike the Liberal leaders, including 10 years for Mr. Trudeau. They have a few short weeks to do the same thing to Mark Carney. The result is if there was a desire for change it was a desire for a change in PM, which has taken place. They essentially ignored the Liberal Party and what it was doing so any desire for change does not seem to be directed at the Liberal government per se.

So, the answer to my question is still going to be whether Canadians want to change the government. Right now I would say the answer is an emphatic no. That could change in the next few weeks. However, we will probably need to be seeing signs of it in the next week to 10 days. Otherwise, I would guess that the results of the election on April 28 will be a Liberal government.

An Assessment of Justin Trudeau's Time as Leader

Justin Trudeau has left politics. With the swearing in of Mark Carney as PM and the election call Mr. Trudeau has started his post politics life. As I usually do I am going to provide an assessment of his time as leader of the Liberal Party and Prime Minister.

I will acknowledge that I am biased. I thought he did a generally good job as PM and Liberal Party leader although he was certainly not perfect.

As party leader I have stated many times in this space that he deserves a great deal of credit for throwing the old party establishment in the dustbin and dragging the Liberal Party into the 21st century. I believe if he had not done that then the last decade would not have been a Liberal one.

However, he did seem to have serious issues with handling some of the personalities within his caucus. Jodi Raybould Wilson could have been dismissed as an aberration, the result of his ham fisted handling of a minister who may not have been a team player in the end. However, he was even more ham fisted with Christia Freeland, who demonstrated that she was very much of a team player through almost a decade in his cabinet. As well, his handling, or lack thereof, of the caucus revolt late last year was stunning. Another leader would have started dealing with that before it reached critical mass but it seemed he did nothing. Certainly he did not seem to try to employ the various tools available to party leaders to convince dissenters to mute their concerns.

As Prime Minister we can say that he did some good, bad and ugly things.

The Good

• The general approach to governing. His government tended to use evidence to make decisions instead of ideology and they were not afraid to make the tough choices even if it might cost them votes. We can only hope that succeeding governments live up to that standard.
• The Trudeau government was the most progressive government this country has had since Trudeau the Senior. The next government, regardless of who wins the next election, will not match that.
• The handling of the health and economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. It was a masterclass of crisis management during a once in a century global crisis. The economic decisions of his government are the reason why we have one of the strongest economies on the planet. As well, if you are someone who receives a COVID shot each year you can thank the Trudeau government for that. They made certain to secure enough doses of the vaccines to provide for all Canadians until around 2035.
• The environmental polices of the Trudeau government. Although the Carbon Levy receives most of the attention it was just a small part of an very comprehensive and robust plan to tackle environmental issues. The Carbon Levy may be going but the rest is staying.
• The anti-poverty measures of the government. From the Child Care Benefit to the Dental benefit and $10 per day child care plan his government made great strides in reducing poverty and helping Canadians with paying for essential services.
• The government's handling of Donald Trump.

The Bad

• He bought a pipeline. The reason why he had to do so is because the economic case for that pipeline was so weak the private sector establishments that began it backed out. It was a purely political decision and it could have resulted in Canada owning a a giant white elephant. The second Trump presidency might have made it more economically viable but that could not have been foreseen when they decided to buy it.
• The government's communications was terrible. The media in this country is extremely hostile to the Liberals. That hostility predates Justin Trudeau's leadership. Just ask, Mr. Dion and Ignatieff about that. The government never adapted its communications to that reality. Interestingly we finally began to see better communication towards the end of PMJT's tenure but it was too little and certainly too late.
• The change to the Capital Gains tax was silly. While I agreed with it in principle its announcement and planned implementation were so poorly done that it only caused them grief for almost no benefit for Canadians. 
• The Trudeau government was way too slow in reacting to the precipitous rise in housing prices after the Pandemic. They had a very good housing strategy before it but they failed to review whether it was still valid after the Pandemic.

The Ugly

• Breaking the promise to change how we vote. While this issue only really appeals to a very small subset of the electorate it was still ugly. The funny thing is it could have been prevented and we could have had a new voting system since 2019 if Mr. Trudeau would have stuck to his first instincts. You may recall that he wanted to strike a Parliamentary committee to address this issue, where its membership would be set by the number of seats each party had in the House. Of course, the Opposition howled because that would have given the Liberal the majority on the committee. They demanded the composition be by the popular vote of the 2015 election instead and he caved. The rest was predictable. With no party having a majority and no party willing to compromise on what electoral reform would look like for them the Committee wasted over two years in fruitless debate before the government pulled the plug. I still wonder is Mr. Trudeau's decision to cave was a rookie mistake or a calculated move to make it look like he was trying to keep a promise he never had any intention of keeping.

In general, Justin Trudeau did a very good job as PM and the Leader of the Liberal Party. I am certain that he would do some things quite differently if he were given some do overs. However, he can take pride in the fact that he left the country is as good a shape as when he became PM (and some can argue it is in better shape). As well, he left the Liberal Party in good shape. It will be up to his successors to see if they can leverage that for the future.

Election 2025

The 2025 Federal election is off and running. So who is going to win?

Usually I feel comfortable answering that question but this time it is a tossup.

On the one hand, you have a governing party that has been such going on 10 years. Historical voting patterns would indicate that they really have very little chance of winning.

On the other hand, Donald Trump has upended politics almost everywhere, including Canada. His tariffs and his threats have totally changed the political dynamic in this country. Justin Trudeau, secure in the knowledge that he was going to be leaving public service, took the gloves off and challenged Donald Trump at every opportunity. His actions and demeanour during those first few weeks of Donald Trump's term gave upset Canadians something to rally around. Mark Carney is benefited from that right now. We will have to see if he can take advantage of it.

Helping him is the fact Pierre Poilievre seems not to have noticed the political dynamic has changed. He is still running the same campaign that he has been running since he won the leadership of the CPC three years ago. That might have worked when our relationship with the US was calm and uneventful and it could still be working is we were dealing with a President Harris but it does not currently look to be working with President Trump.

As well, this change in dynamic has resulted in things that were not very important a few months ago becoming important, namely probable Indian government interference in his election as leader of the CPC and his refusal to get a security clearance. A few months ago these were only important to those living in the Ottawa bubble but with Canadians being more fearful for our sovereignty the idea of foreign interference in our politics is taking on a greater significance outside of that bubble. Add to this the silliness of Danielle Smith talking to American alt-right commentators, in ways that make it look like her and Mr. Poilievre might not be so against Trump's threats to our sovereignty, is not helping the Conservative electoral fortunes. BTW, watching Ms. Smith just further demonstrates that you could dress a rock in Conservative clothing in that province and they would vote for it. The utter extent of her political tone deafness proves to me that if she would have tried to win an election in any other province of this country she would have lost big.

So three days into the campaign the media polls are showing the Liberals are in a comfortable lead, with seat counts anywhere from 180 to over 200 seats being in play. I do not believe any media poll but it should be noted that the Liberals are looking comfortable while the Conservatives are looking increasingly uncomfortable. I believe that indicates that their data analytics teams are showing the media polls are not totally out to lunch.

So I would say the the early advantage goes to the Liberals. However, the two dynamics that could decide this election is the desire for change from the Liberals after 10 years and the fear of Donald Trump. If the first one prevails on April 28 then the Conservatives will win. If the second one prevails then the Liberals are best placed to take advantage of that and they will probably win. 

Please do not ask me which dynamic will prevail in the end.

Polling Correction

The alternative title for this post could also be: I told you so.

The latest media polls are indicating that the Conservatives and the Liberals are essentially tied, with at least one poll indicating that the Liberals have taken a slim lead. This should surprise no one.

The polls indicating that the Conservatives were up by 20 points were never credible and they were always going to change in favour of the Liberals. We know this because minority governments that find themselves down by 20 points do not continue to govern for over a year after the polls say as much. At no time during the last 18 months has there ever been a credible threat to the Liberals in the House of Commons.

Many are saying that the reason for the change in the polls is the resignation of Justin Trudeau, the threatening stupidity of Donald Trump and the rise of Mark Carney. This is not completely true. If Justin Trudeau had not resigned the polls would be doing the exact same thing they are doing now. The only difference is the stupidity of Donald Trump has caused the change to be more rapid than it would have normally. 

Justin Trudeau was not as unpopular as the pollsters stated and Pierre Poilievre is still a politician with all of the charisma of an angry turnip and absolutely no political instincts or acumen. When an election finally seemed imminent, which it did just before the New Year, the pollsters had to engineer the polling correction to maintain their credibility. If they would have been as far off as they would have been they would have lost all credibility, which would have impacted their paying business lines.

As well, as I stated a year ago the convergence of the polls has caused the "collapse" of Conservative support to become a big story. Even Conservative friendly media outlets have been commenting on it, although their columnists have been trying to spin it as positively as possible. This kind of narrative is not good for the Conservatives if they really do want to trigger an election this spring. 

A word of caution though. The Liberals are in year 10 of being in power. Historical voting patterns indicate that governments are operating on borrowed time after year 8. The Liberals are going to have their work cut out for them and they could very well lose, despite the recent good news. 

Polls are useless and latest ones are no different in that regard. However, the media love them to spin narratives and the latest one should worry the Conservatives. 

Bold Prediction

Donald Trump will not be president this time next year.

There is no way his bull in the china shop routine can last more than a few months before something gives.

The 25th Amendment will probably be the means of his departure but I would not rule out other more extreme means.

Don't Blame MAGA for Electing Trump

MAGA was always going to vote for Donald Trump. That was to be expected and they lived up to expectations. As I stated weeks ago they showed up but they did not increase in number. Donald Trump received roughly the same number of votes in 2024 as he did in 2020 and 2016 for that matter.

The reason why Donald Trump won is because millions of Democratic voters who voted for Joe Biden did not bother to vote. The reason for that is still being debated but if anybody believes that Kamala Harris' skin colour and gender was not a factor I would like them to contact me. I am looking for investors to build a bridge between Tokyo and Victoria, BC and you seem like prime candidates.

Democratic voters who stayed home on election day are the reason why Donald Trump won the election. They are also the reason why the Republicans won both Chambers of Congress as well. So if you want to blame someone for Donald Trump's election blame them.

Please Stop

Just stop comparing the modern United States to the Weimer Republic.

I have been seeing these comparison by people as a way for them to demonstrate that the US is going down the same path as Weimer Germany, which of course led to the rise of Adolph Hitler. They state that Hitler was elected and we all know what happened afterwards.

While I like the attempt at not reliving history the comparison is so superficial that it serves no real purpose except to frighten people.

Looking deeper you can see the comparison does not hold up.

First, the Weimer Republic was a 14 year democratic experiment that replaced a centuries old autocratic system, in Germany, after the First World War. In other words Germany had no democratic tradition before 1919. The German people were used to being ruled by an autocrat, they had no idea how to "do democracy" and they had no idea how to prevent going back to autocracy, assuming they wanted to prevent it. Of course, the United States is one of the oldest democracies in the world. It has had almost 250 years to develop, nurture and build that democracy. Anybody who believes that it could be overthrown by a wannabe autocrat that easily is very much mistaken.

Second, the Weimer government was the only government that had any power in Germany after 1919. Therefore, the Nazis only had to focus on it. They did not have to worry about other people in Germany having other power bases that could compete with theirs. The United States is a federal system. They have 50 individual power bases in their 50 states. Some of them might agree with Donald Trump and they might even accept autocracy but what they will not do is give up any of their own power to achieve it. Meanwhile there are many states with people who would actively resist the US reverting to autocracy with whatever tools they could lay their hands on. And that does not even touch on the various power bases within the Federal government who could work against any efforts to overthrow American democracy.

Third, Weimer Germany was the result of the Treaty of Versailles, which was designed to humiliate Germany and the Germans after the First World War. It beggared the German people and ironically created a true united German nationalism. Before the Treaty most Germans identified with their region of Germany, such as being Prussian, Saxon or Bavarian. After the Treaty they began to think of themselves as Germans. So when the Nazis came along the German people were ready to hear and support the Nazi message of reestablishing German pride and power and they united behind them. It is interesting, Hitler won just over 30% of the vote in 1933. If he would have allowed elections to take place, as scheduled, in 1937 he would have won a majority of the vote, possibly a landslide. The US is divided, probably more divided than it has been since the end of the US Civil War. What it means to be American is no longer agreed upon by its people. If one person or group of Americans tries to overthrow the current democratic order they will be resisted and fought by other groups who disagree with them.

Finally, Adolph Hitler was an evil, hate filled son of a bitch. However, he was also a shrewd politician with a well defined plan to achieve his goals and the discipline to stay focused and carry through on those plans. He also surrounded himself with a cadre of capable men who could assist him in achieving his goals. Donald Trump, on the other hand, has the attention span and temperament of an enraged toddler. He may have delusions of becoming a dictator but he lacks the wherewithal to achieve it and the people he has hired that could assist them are about as intelligent as he is, which is to say not very intelligent at all.

So, making the claim that US democracy is in mortal danger from Donald Trump because he was elected, as Hitler was in 1933, is just wrong on so many levels. I would remind you that the founders of the United States designed a government with the primary purpose of preventing one of them from setting themselves up as a king. After almost 250 years that system is still pretty much intact so a would be king is going to find it difficult to become one.

That is not to say that Mr. Trump and some of his more capable people could not pull it off but it would take years to do it and they do not have that kind of time. They have about six months. At that point the internal data analytics within the Republican Party will begin to show the beginning of a surge in support for the Democrats. A surge, that if left unchecked, would sweep the Republicans out of power in the House and the Senate. The Republican leaders in both Chambers will want to prevent that and their only real chance of doing so will be to distance themselves from Donald Trump, and begin to obstruct some of is agenda. We saw that from the end of 2017 to the mid-term elections of 2018 during Mr. Trump's first term. And that was when his more baser instincts were kept in check by some of the people around him. They are long gone and he has surrounded himself with yes men who will make no attempt to urge him to moderate. The result will be a huge backlash that we will see in November of 2026. Once that happens and Congress is in the hands of the Democrats the Trump Presidency will essentially be at an end and any further attempts to overthrow America's democracy will end with it.

The next few months are going to be difficult and Donald Trump and his group of village idiots will do untold damage to the US and its people. However, despite his desires, he will not be able to overturn American democracy before changes in the political situation in the country begin to frustrate those desires. When you add that to the total lack of discipline on his part the more likely outcome of the next few years of the Trump presidency will be a Democratic Congress in 2026 and them adding the White House in 2028.