Another fact to make the Liberals concerned is that in both the 2019 and 2021 federal elections the Conservatives received more of the popular vote than the Liberals. In 2019 the Conservatives with Andrew Scheer as their leader received 34.3% of the popular vote compared to the Liberals 32.6%; and in 2021 the Conservatives under Erin O'Toole received 33.7% with the Liberals receiving 32.6%. Not to be overlooked are the crowds which Pierre Poilievre was receiving at his Meet and Greets. They far outnumber anything ever garnered by either Andrew Scheer or Erin O'Toole.
Only because "the left" is divided into three parties. The total Canadians voting Liberal, NDP, and Green is still well over 60%. Here in BC, the Conservatives routinely take central-BC ridings, dominant as the Liberals/NDP are on the seashore. But that's because the left *lets* them, as even there, the total lefty-vote, united, would beat the Conservatives.
And central BC has a whole new attitude to climate change, I hear. Something about being burned down.
You make a valid point, and personally I wonder about Jagmeet Singh and his ability to at least maintain the NDP support, and if not, where will those supporters go? To the Liberals or will the Conservatives pick up some? The NDP support the unions, while Poilievre has been very effective in gaining support among the voting workers. We will see, I guess.
The NDP are all but paying lip service to blue collar unionized workers. Their main focus is on urban professionals, particularly unionized members of the public service. This isn’t a feature on just the federal NDP, but right across Canada.
I recently went to my sister`s 60th birthday party where I met an old friend of mine who had moved to Kelowna from northern Alberta in the early 90`s. He had just recently moved back to Sylvan Lake and I asked him why. He said the first couple years were great but then the summers with the influx of tourists and smoke from wildfires became unbearable so they decided to move on. The cycle of summer heat and burning forest has been going on for a very long time so to suggest central BC has a new attitude towards climate change because of this phenomena might be a bit of a stretch.
Poll follows last year's heat dome and fires, but was done before the five Pinapple Expresses. I really doubt the floods that took out bridges, or this year's heat, have reduced the popularity any at all. More likely increased it, if only by a few percent.
If you get away from "top priority" (where "housing" is tough competition) and into just "important", then that was 85% even in 2020.
But I picked the 2021 CBC story because it *also* quotes a 30-year resident of Kelowna who says "It's never been this bad", never cost him $50,000 in business before.
I think Poilievre will wipe the floor with Trudeau as long as he stays away from the goofy stuff he was chanting about in the early days of the election. Canada should adopt the America two terms and you're out policy. Trudeau has lost touch with struggling Canadians, which shows in spades when he still wants to increase the carbon tax which won't make a wit of difference to climate change except to burden everybody. THAT is a deal breaker for me, a lifelong Liberal.
You cashed your carbon levy rebate check or took your tax credit didn't you? You are like many others assisted by an ignorant media in spreading misinformation about the carbon levy. Please desist.
Unfortunately, Trudeau is over the hill when it comes to understanding real issues. Adding to high gas prices at this time is a perfect example. No wonder though, he's probably never paid for a tank of gas in his life.
Gas prices are not Trudeau's fault. There is a war going on and crude prices have gone through the roof. Do yourself a favor and educate yourself on what makes up the price of gas. The cost neutral Carbon levy is not one of the many. I note that you have not said that the price of gas has gone down over the last quarter by nearly an average of 45 cents a liter, but here you are with a unreasoned hatred of the PM based upon bias and ignorance. Wait until your new champion trips over his own tongue and gets shredded for it in the days to come. Also Bruce how would you know if he has never bought gas? Do you understand what jurisdiction means in Canada?
The federal government is not responsible for everything. I think you need a civics lesson and an open mind to the truth that the propaganda you are being fed has not done you well.
I get the argument over carbon taxes. What I don't get is putting more tax on gas at a time when so many are struggling financially and are cutting back on food, etc. so that he can say Canada is fighting climate change. That to me is a person disconnected from the people. Lets face it, he's been in office too long. The American system of two terms and you're out is the way it should be here. He was good for two terms but is now past his due date. If Poilievre gets his act together Trudeau is toast, but if he doesn't Trudeau will get in by default only. Gas is 1.75/liter where I live and to go to a specialist or to fix my car, I have to drive 300 km. one way. Now you see why I'm ticked about an unnecessary gas tax hike. I voted for Harper 2x and Trudeau 2x so I'm not a hell bent anything but I do watch politics.
The petroleum industry LOVES IT when the rubes blames the government for their high gas prices. Here's Shell selling a narrative that up to 35% of fuel prices are from taxes;
But most fuel taxes are cents per liter, not cents per dollar, meaning that if market fuel prices rise, a good portion of fuel taxes doesn't. According to NRCAN's breakdown, assuming a 2$/l price at the pump, the most fuel taxes anyone in can pay in Canada is 23.5%;
Fair enough! Trudeau did not raise his "tax" on fuels. He is doubling the GST rebate for six months. I guess what ticks me off is that the right wing never give a cogent policy on what they will do to protect Canadians other than spending less. I am eighty years old and I remember my Grandfather and others saying Tory times are tough times. I don't see much difference 60 years on. Also Trudeau doesn't print money. The gover4nment sells bonds at ultra low interest rates to banks and other institutions. Watch the Tories campaign that To service the debt will bankrupt us because of increasing interest rates. This will be another self serving lie. The interest on Trudeau's debt is .5 % over the next 3o years, while commercial lending rates will be 5-8 times higher. It is always best to look under the rhetoric for the truth. Lies have a sugary taste because they are devised to deceive. Truths are not tasty. Most times they are bitter. In our fast moving news cycles
we most times don't have time to really think things through. Self serving politicians use public ignorance to their advantage. Here is a good example. Provinces get about 22-28% of there fu8nding from the Feds with NO STRINGS. If Canada's healthcare system is rotten, then Canadians must ho9d the provinces to account as health care is their jurisdiction. During Covid Trudeau gave them billions. Ontario for example didn't use that money to upgrade it healthcare and facilities for the elderly. Today the same problems remain there as were present prior to Covid. Where are the media on this?
Lastly, an anecdote for you. I am an asthmatic so I wear my mask everywhere I go. On a recent trip to the market an antivaxxer approached me and told me I didn't have to wear a mask. I pointed to my mask and said, "freedom!" He was so pissed of he lunged at me. I think we need a bit more polish today, what say you? Cheers.
Wayne as we get older, we see things through a clearer lens that is still fogged a bit for the younger folks/politicians who still preach how they will change everything for the good for everybody, and have them believe it. I don't watch acceptance speeches anymore for that reason. These young politicians who stand out are always full of good ideas and we always hope they will succeed. Unfortunately, the embeded bureaucracy is too much to overcome in a timely fashion for most and we get a variation of the last guy, with a different party name on his back. As far as age goes, I'm 73 and you have me beat, but when I was 20 you were 27 so you can remember the good times of the late 60's and early 70's as I do. Peace brother.
I think the last point is particularly important: The Conservative Party is sold on Polievre virtually without reservation. I might go as far as to say their commitment is deeper than it was to Harper, who inspired great loyalty but maybe didn't set many hearts racing. Polievre is the angry, lacerating voice of Conservatives' pent-up resentment, and they love him for it.
As others have pointed out, the Conservatives won the popular vote in the last two elections behind leaders they only half-heartedly endorsed. Most Canadians don't loathe Trudeau, but many of us are real tired of him, and you can only play the stop-the-fascists card so many times. A surprising number of people haven't mind up their minds about Polievre yet; the same is not true for Trudeau.
I think the next election might turn on the fact that one of the leaders is furiously driven to be Prime Minister, while the other seems to have forgotten why he's even in the job.
Well food for thought. I heard Jamil Jivani say on the Andrew Lawton show today, that the Conservative Movement is greater than the Conservative Party, and that Movement is what is energizing the populance. That is what we are seeing.
The author's problem -- how to turn the obvious enthusiasm for Polievre into a cause for concern. But is the enthusiasm actually for Pierre or is it for the project of getting rid of the tyrant who conducts political prosecutions against the truckers folk? Who wants a PM who obstructs justice to get a sweet deal for Lavalin? The list goes on.
It's not Pierre who is the cause for concern. It;s his opponent.
I think the real issue that we need to hone in on is the utter mediocrity of the entire field. Out of 37 million people we get (depending on your POV) Trudeau, Singh or Poilievre by default. None of them are offering anything dynamic or nuanced. It's either throw money at the status quo, deny money to it or just speak glibly.
But, doesn't Sandy Garossino have the right of it, that the election is so far away (potentially over 30 months) that the issues will be all different?
Energy costs were not an issue - save that they were so low, the oil industry feared ruin - just seven months ago. 17 months from now, we may be flooded with Russian and Iranian oil and gas, with just two peace treaties.
If we have two cold winters and not-hot summers in a row, claims of global-warming-hoax will still be around and potent; if the reverse (more likely), then the last hoax-claimers will be wiping egg from their faces.
If the central banks cure inflation with depression, we may be still in it, or be clearly coming out of it, into "broad sunlit uplands".
But I think it would be utter madness for either Trudeau or Singh to have an election in the next 18 months at minimum, so I don't think there will be one.
The next election could be far off enough for Poilievre to shift center just enough to make the center left truly not want to participate in the next election... or grenade his image Trump style.
Good observations Mr. Wells. PP will stay away from wild-eyed pronouncements shift towards the middle and trounce JT whose best before date has expired when he called last year's election.
Does JT really think a federal dental plan is a winner when the feds are up to their eyeballs in debt and mismanagement ( airport customs, passports, indian affairs, RCMP, etc etc) ? JT's argument that only he can keep the ''fascists'' from taking over will wear very thin once the campaign ramps up. He has no credible record to run on and his constant virtue signalling has the reverse effect.
Interesting analysis. Yes Polievre was able to do two speeches without including conspiracy theories and other crazy stuff. Time will tell if he is able to continue in this direction. Basically, he only got mad because one journalist dared asking him a question.
Today I went back and viewed Mrs. Poilievre's speech out of curiosity. Clearly she is a genuine person and a major asset to her husband's political career. If I could vote for her, I'd line up with the Conservatives. But five minutes into Pierre's speech and my gag reflex went off again. How can an intelligent, articulate fellow spend so much time building bridges of air? Why does he blame the Liberal Government for a massive deficit when its only purpose was to protect these same Canadians who voted for him from economic devastation and homelessness? This bullshit keeps mixing too freely with PP's occasional pearls of wisdom and insight, but when it hits the senses, off goes the gag reflex. This guy is either not a serious person, or he is contemptuous of his audience.
Mrs. Poilievre seems a nice lady, though, with a good story for a political audience.
The lines are drawn, sides have been picked, no quarter shall be given by those who were called names and told they should just die. Let the games begin!
The next few months will be pretty interesting. Lowly Liberal MPs are pleading for a deliberate tack to the center, an indication that the summer bbq circuit has given them an earful. Of course standing in the middle of slyly pretending that Liberals are centrist and hearing the concerns of ordinary workers is the NDP. Will the NDP tolerate a save the furniture move toward the center?
It would seem to me that Jagmeet Singh is holding some aces. Whether he knows how to play them, I guess we are about to find out.
My view on Poilievre's style and content is that he is sending the overarching message that he is a contender, that he can take Trudeau/the Libs on and chew them up and spit them out, i.e., that he is not the wimp that Scheer and O'Toole proved to be. If his read is that the Canadian public is waiting for and will respond to a STRONG aspirant to the PM title, then I think he is on the right track.
Another fact to make the Liberals concerned is that in both the 2019 and 2021 federal elections the Conservatives received more of the popular vote than the Liberals. In 2019 the Conservatives with Andrew Scheer as their leader received 34.3% of the popular vote compared to the Liberals 32.6%; and in 2021 the Conservatives under Erin O'Toole received 33.7% with the Liberals receiving 32.6%. Not to be overlooked are the crowds which Pierre Poilievre was receiving at his Meet and Greets. They far outnumber anything ever garnered by either Andrew Scheer or Erin O'Toole.
Only because "the left" is divided into three parties. The total Canadians voting Liberal, NDP, and Green is still well over 60%. Here in BC, the Conservatives routinely take central-BC ridings, dominant as the Liberals/NDP are on the seashore. But that's because the left *lets* them, as even there, the total lefty-vote, united, would beat the Conservatives.
And central BC has a whole new attitude to climate change, I hear. Something about being burned down.
You make a valid point, and personally I wonder about Jagmeet Singh and his ability to at least maintain the NDP support, and if not, where will those supporters go? To the Liberals or will the Conservatives pick up some? The NDP support the unions, while Poilievre has been very effective in gaining support among the voting workers. We will see, I guess.
The NDP are all but paying lip service to blue collar unionized workers. Their main focus is on urban professionals, particularly unionized members of the public service. This isn’t a feature on just the federal NDP, but right across Canada.
I recently went to my sister`s 60th birthday party where I met an old friend of mine who had moved to Kelowna from northern Alberta in the early 90`s. He had just recently moved back to Sylvan Lake and I asked him why. He said the first couple years were great but then the summers with the influx of tourists and smoke from wildfires became unbearable so they decided to move on. The cycle of summer heat and burning forest has been going on for a very long time so to suggest central BC has a new attitude towards climate change because of this phenomena might be a bit of a stretch.
Poll follows last year's heat dome and fires, but was done before the five Pinapple Expresses. I really doubt the floods that took out bridges, or this year's heat, have reduced the popularity any at all. More likely increased it, if only by a few percent.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/climate-change-is-top-federal-election-issue-for-b-c-voters-poll-finds-1.6131490
If you get away from "top priority" (where "housing" is tough competition) and into just "important", then that was 85% even in 2020.
But I picked the 2021 CBC story because it *also* quotes a 30-year resident of Kelowna who says "It's never been this bad", never cost him $50,000 in business before.
I think Poilievre will wipe the floor with Trudeau as long as he stays away from the goofy stuff he was chanting about in the early days of the election. Canada should adopt the America two terms and you're out policy. Trudeau has lost touch with struggling Canadians, which shows in spades when he still wants to increase the carbon tax which won't make a wit of difference to climate change except to burden everybody. THAT is a deal breaker for me, a lifelong Liberal.
You cashed your carbon levy rebate check or took your tax credit didn't you? You are like many others assisted by an ignorant media in spreading misinformation about the carbon levy. Please desist.
Unfortunately, Trudeau is over the hill when it comes to understanding real issues. Adding to high gas prices at this time is a perfect example. No wonder though, he's probably never paid for a tank of gas in his life.
Gas prices are not Trudeau's fault. There is a war going on and crude prices have gone through the roof. Do yourself a favor and educate yourself on what makes up the price of gas. The cost neutral Carbon levy is not one of the many. I note that you have not said that the price of gas has gone down over the last quarter by nearly an average of 45 cents a liter, but here you are with a unreasoned hatred of the PM based upon bias and ignorance. Wait until your new champion trips over his own tongue and gets shredded for it in the days to come. Also Bruce how would you know if he has never bought gas? Do you understand what jurisdiction means in Canada?
The federal government is not responsible for everything. I think you need a civics lesson and an open mind to the truth that the propaganda you are being fed has not done you well.
I get the argument over carbon taxes. What I don't get is putting more tax on gas at a time when so many are struggling financially and are cutting back on food, etc. so that he can say Canada is fighting climate change. That to me is a person disconnected from the people. Lets face it, he's been in office too long. The American system of two terms and you're out is the way it should be here. He was good for two terms but is now past his due date. If Poilievre gets his act together Trudeau is toast, but if he doesn't Trudeau will get in by default only. Gas is 1.75/liter where I live and to go to a specialist or to fix my car, I have to drive 300 km. one way. Now you see why I'm ticked about an unnecessary gas tax hike. I voted for Harper 2x and Trudeau 2x so I'm not a hell bent anything but I do watch politics.
The petroleum industry LOVES IT when the rubes blames the government for their high gas prices. Here's Shell selling a narrative that up to 35% of fuel prices are from taxes;
https://www.shell.ca/en_ca/motorists/my-fuels/understanding-fuel-pricing.html
But most fuel taxes are cents per liter, not cents per dollar, meaning that if market fuel prices rise, a good portion of fuel taxes doesn't. According to NRCAN's breakdown, assuming a 2$/l price at the pump, the most fuel taxes anyone in can pay in Canada is 23.5%;
https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/our-natural-resources/domestic-and-international-markets/transportation-fuel-prices/fuel-consumption-taxes-canada/18885
Fair enough! Trudeau did not raise his "tax" on fuels. He is doubling the GST rebate for six months. I guess what ticks me off is that the right wing never give a cogent policy on what they will do to protect Canadians other than spending less. I am eighty years old and I remember my Grandfather and others saying Tory times are tough times. I don't see much difference 60 years on. Also Trudeau doesn't print money. The gover4nment sells bonds at ultra low interest rates to banks and other institutions. Watch the Tories campaign that To service the debt will bankrupt us because of increasing interest rates. This will be another self serving lie. The interest on Trudeau's debt is .5 % over the next 3o years, while commercial lending rates will be 5-8 times higher. It is always best to look under the rhetoric for the truth. Lies have a sugary taste because they are devised to deceive. Truths are not tasty. Most times they are bitter. In our fast moving news cycles
we most times don't have time to really think things through. Self serving politicians use public ignorance to their advantage. Here is a good example. Provinces get about 22-28% of there fu8nding from the Feds with NO STRINGS. If Canada's healthcare system is rotten, then Canadians must ho9d the provinces to account as health care is their jurisdiction. During Covid Trudeau gave them billions. Ontario for example didn't use that money to upgrade it healthcare and facilities for the elderly. Today the same problems remain there as were present prior to Covid. Where are the media on this?
Lastly, an anecdote for you. I am an asthmatic so I wear my mask everywhere I go. On a recent trip to the market an antivaxxer approached me and told me I didn't have to wear a mask. I pointed to my mask and said, "freedom!" He was so pissed of he lunged at me. I think we need a bit more polish today, what say you? Cheers.
Wayne as we get older, we see things through a clearer lens that is still fogged a bit for the younger folks/politicians who still preach how they will change everything for the good for everybody, and have them believe it. I don't watch acceptance speeches anymore for that reason. These young politicians who stand out are always full of good ideas and we always hope they will succeed. Unfortunately, the embeded bureaucracy is too much to overcome in a timely fashion for most and we get a variation of the last guy, with a different party name on his back. As far as age goes, I'm 73 and you have me beat, but when I was 20 you were 27 so you can remember the good times of the late 60's and early 70's as I do. Peace brother.
I think the last point is particularly important: The Conservative Party is sold on Polievre virtually without reservation. I might go as far as to say their commitment is deeper than it was to Harper, who inspired great loyalty but maybe didn't set many hearts racing. Polievre is the angry, lacerating voice of Conservatives' pent-up resentment, and they love him for it.
As others have pointed out, the Conservatives won the popular vote in the last two elections behind leaders they only half-heartedly endorsed. Most Canadians don't loathe Trudeau, but many of us are real tired of him, and you can only play the stop-the-fascists card so many times. A surprising number of people haven't mind up their minds about Polievre yet; the same is not true for Trudeau.
I think the next election might turn on the fact that one of the leaders is furiously driven to be Prime Minister, while the other seems to have forgotten why he's even in the job.
I can get a list together a mile long of Trudeau controversial comments. You sound like you are quoting Rosemary Barton and that is beneath you
Well food for thought. I heard Jamil Jivani say on the Andrew Lawton show today, that the Conservative Movement is greater than the Conservative Party, and that Movement is what is energizing the populance. That is what we are seeing.
The author's problem -- how to turn the obvious enthusiasm for Polievre into a cause for concern. But is the enthusiasm actually for Pierre or is it for the project of getting rid of the tyrant who conducts political prosecutions against the truckers folk? Who wants a PM who obstructs justice to get a sweet deal for Lavalin? The list goes on.
It's not Pierre who is the cause for concern. It;s his opponent.
I think the real issue that we need to hone in on is the utter mediocrity of the entire field. Out of 37 million people we get (depending on your POV) Trudeau, Singh or Poilievre by default. None of them are offering anything dynamic or nuanced. It's either throw money at the status quo, deny money to it or just speak glibly.
But, doesn't Sandy Garossino have the right of it, that the election is so far away (potentially over 30 months) that the issues will be all different?
Energy costs were not an issue - save that they were so low, the oil industry feared ruin - just seven months ago. 17 months from now, we may be flooded with Russian and Iranian oil and gas, with just two peace treaties.
If we have two cold winters and not-hot summers in a row, claims of global-warming-hoax will still be around and potent; if the reverse (more likely), then the last hoax-claimers will be wiping egg from their faces.
If the central banks cure inflation with depression, we may be still in it, or be clearly coming out of it, into "broad sunlit uplands".
But I think it would be utter madness for either Trudeau or Singh to have an election in the next 18 months at minimum, so I don't think there will be one.
The next election could be far off enough for Poilievre to shift center just enough to make the center left truly not want to participate in the next election... or grenade his image Trump style.
The Liberals are right to worry, and the rest of us too.
Good observations Mr. Wells. PP will stay away from wild-eyed pronouncements shift towards the middle and trounce JT whose best before date has expired when he called last year's election.
Does JT really think a federal dental plan is a winner when the feds are up to their eyeballs in debt and mismanagement ( airport customs, passports, indian affairs, RCMP, etc etc) ? JT's argument that only he can keep the ''fascists'' from taking over will wear very thin once the campaign ramps up. He has no credible record to run on and his constant virtue signalling has the reverse effect.
Interesting analysis. Yes Polievre was able to do two speeches without including conspiracy theories and other crazy stuff. Time will tell if he is able to continue in this direction. Basically, he only got mad because one journalist dared asking him a question.
Today I went back and viewed Mrs. Poilievre's speech out of curiosity. Clearly she is a genuine person and a major asset to her husband's political career. If I could vote for her, I'd line up with the Conservatives. But five minutes into Pierre's speech and my gag reflex went off again. How can an intelligent, articulate fellow spend so much time building bridges of air? Why does he blame the Liberal Government for a massive deficit when its only purpose was to protect these same Canadians who voted for him from economic devastation and homelessness? This bullshit keeps mixing too freely with PP's occasional pearls of wisdom and insight, but when it hits the senses, off goes the gag reflex. This guy is either not a serious person, or he is contemptuous of his audience.
Mrs. Poilievre seems a nice lady, though, with a good story for a political audience.
The lines are drawn, sides have been picked, no quarter shall be given by those who were called names and told they should just die. Let the games begin!
Thoughtful as usual.
The next few months will be pretty interesting. Lowly Liberal MPs are pleading for a deliberate tack to the center, an indication that the summer bbq circuit has given them an earful. Of course standing in the middle of slyly pretending that Liberals are centrist and hearing the concerns of ordinary workers is the NDP. Will the NDP tolerate a save the furniture move toward the center?
It would seem to me that Jagmeet Singh is holding some aces. Whether he knows how to play them, I guess we are about to find out.
My view on Poilievre's style and content is that he is sending the overarching message that he is a contender, that he can take Trudeau/the Libs on and chew them up and spit them out, i.e., that he is not the wimp that Scheer and O'Toole proved to be. If his read is that the Canadian public is waiting for and will respond to a STRONG aspirant to the PM title, then I think he is on the right track.