The affection for Carney comes not from his perceived advantages, but due to the dismal state of the mediocre alternatives. When you are desperate to find a winner, and terrified of what failure means (PP majority), you convince yourself of falsehoods.
Carney is a mirage. The same mirage that Kamala Harris was. Oh look, an intelligent, policy oriented person who will stand well in contrast to that buffoonish populist idiot on the other side. Surely voters will respond well to that? All my friends like serious people, so the country as whole will too! Right?
How did that work out in the USA?
We are facing a moment in politics that makes many of us uncomfortable. There is pure, unadulterated rage out there that is difficult to understand and even harder to confront. PP has tapped into that. He did not ascend to nearly 50% by accident. We may hate that truth. But it is a truth nonetheless.
People feel their lives have been demonstrably worse by Trudeau. They can’t afford basic goods. Their children will never be able to purchase a home. And they have been condescend to for years. If you don’t support the progressive agenda du jour you are ignorant. They were told it was wrong to believe in Canada because it’s a “genocidal state.” Etc.
All this from a snotty, privileged, hypocritical critical clown of a PM. One who fires women left right and centre yet who claims to be a feminist. I could go on. You all know the main points.
My overall message here is that the mood of the country has been badly misjudged for years. You cannot stop PP if you don’t understand why he is on fire. On fire despite saying some objectively preposterous things and striking me and many others as unserious.
Because people feel he understands what’s wrong in their lives. That is painful for readers of this blog to take in. Yet we must.
Carney is fool’s gold. He has no hope of connecting to Canadians in a short time frame. He needs to be standing up for Canada loudly and aggressively. He goes on a US television show to… show he’s cool? All but ceding the argument our culture is meaningless and we are already just desperate to be part of American life. I am infuriated with this choice.
It will only get worse.
And if he is asked, “Will you commit to remaining leader if you lose and represent the third party in the House? Will you spend the next ten years of your life (he’s 60!) rebuilding the party? A party you are only conveniently supporting now when you think you can swoop in and become leader?”…
I mostly agree with your post, but arguably Kamala Harris lost the election less because of any defects of her campaign and more due to lack of a runway to fully make herself known to the electorate.
In Carney's case, I would say that how he would communicate himself politically is more of an unknown than it was for Harris, given his near-complete absence of political experience.
That fact that he is an Albertan, a northern, very rural Albertan, will neutralise a lot of the ‘eastern elite’ nonsense from the west. Yes, Freeland to is from Alberta but that is already well ‘known’. That Carney is, not so much. Don’t underestimate this.
Oh please. Canadians move around a lot, right? For university, for work.
Did Stephen Harper lose his understanding of his hometown of Toronto when he moved as a young man to Alberta?
Did Pierre Poilievre forget about Calgary when he moved to Ottawa in his early 20s?
Leaving your hometown often enriches understanding of your roots.
I grew up in Alberta and then worked and raised a family in Ontario.
And every time I travel outside of Canada, I gain ever more understanding of my country.
Far from being broken, Canada is an amazing nation with unsurpassed freedom, economic opportunities, social mobility, natural resources, education, public services, diversity, etc.
Carney is a citizen of Canada (yes, born here), England (by Act of the UK Parliament - pretty special, no?), and also a citizen of Ireland (he CHOSE to become an Irish citizen in the 1980s). Andrew Scheer was roundly criticized for being a dual citizen of the USA. So, will Carney get the benefit of a double/triple standard and not be criticized?
In defense of Scheer - and I am not a proponent of him whatsoever - I would point out that he did not deny his US citizenship; it just never came up. When it did come up he agreed that he was a US citizen and undertook to drop that status. Will Carney agree to drop his UK or his Irish citizenship?
In any event, I know where you stand on Carney and you know where I stand.
carney has my confidence just for the simple fact he went on jon stewart. he should go on joe rogan next, and that's not a joke in the slightest.
politics is no longer about institutions and understanding them. it is selling. and carney making the pitch that PP is a career politician that has never sold a thing in his life is very compelling. the job of the PM will be to sell Canada, and as a country, concept, and vision, to both our people (which obviously includes voters) but also the world.
freeland has a great policy mind, but i cannot imagine her holding up nearly as well on a talk show, let alone at a town hall. the liberals will be cooked if she wins the leadership, but i don't think she will.
carney shouting out joly, leblanc and mackinnon is a pretty solid tell that they are all backing him.
Agreed. And he'll be announcing in Edmonton apparently? Perfect, because he's FROM there. Sucks to be Denial Smith with a Harvard guy on one flank and now a Rhodes scholar on the other.
Best thing is that he LEADS with climate change as not only THE reality, but also as THE economic opportunity it is.
I feel some of the hope I felt with Kamala returning, and still feel with Nenshi in the wings.
One of the worst consequences of these right wing/bad boy/chaos pedlars/anarchists/libertarians smirking while they move fast and break things is how it's taken away our precious hope for the future that has become, quite terrifyingly, hope for the very survival of our species AND our magical, natural world, the only thing that's TRULY sacred. As is the truth itself.
Listening to CBC this morning, I was pleased to hear a councillor in Calgary's beleaguered progressive municipal government suggest a review of the role of misinformation in the context of various recurring issues in the city (like re-zoning, a no-brainer.) Also interesting, and telling about where we are, was the use of YET ANOTHER word for lying (the conservative's wheelhouse) which was MALINFORMATION.
This is the one advantage the Liberals have over these "cons," which before social media would have been a slam-dunk, and the fact that it isn't is a "triumph of marketing" like no other we've seen.
Interestingly, Apple is now seeing the need to differentiate itself in this "new culture" where Trumpists want to remove diversity and inclusion hiring, and which Zuckerberg refers to when removing fact-checking FFS.
These assholes always go too far; it's their Achilles heel.
I was skeptical of Carney until I watched the interview with Jon Stewart. That was NOT Ignatieff, not even close. I have no doubt that he has faced off many times with powerful people and knows the drill. I'm with you. Pleasantly surprised, still a tad skeptical, but he certainly seems to have what we need to throw some water on the arson being foisted on Canada by PP. Maybe even enough to turn the tide.
Yes, a lot of people are really pissed off, but I truly believe that good sense still has a chance. Probably a smug thing to say but I think the people in this country have a higher mental capacity than those in the US, so Kamilla isn't a good way to measure our electorate. PP and that crowd is a menace and we have to stop them.
You're bang on here Scrim. Carney is the least worst option and I dare hope he may prove to be a good option...maybe even great? (probably too much).
I'm not a Freeland hater, I think she has a lot of strengths, but she's shown to be not great on the spot with difficult questions (even if they're questions she ought to have seen coming), which the newly minted PM will need ASAP. Also, not as much stink from the Trudeau administration (as you mentioned).
Maybe this is too much cope, but if Carney can prove strong against MAGA in these crucial first few months, he MIGHT give Polivere a run.
If I were him, I'd ignore any of Polivere's "culture war" attacks and keep focus on Canada's economy and sovereignty.
I’m reluctant to put much faith in any of the potential candidates until we start getting statements about which Trudeau policies they support, and which ones they’re willing to publicly say were mistakes. How much of his baggage they’re willing to accept saddling themselves with in service of not upsetting the current Liberal inner circle
It worries me that there has so far been almost zero public discussion from party figures discussing areas where Trudeau policies may have been mistakes or otherwise need reassessment under a new leader.
It feels like the party core has finally accepted that Trudeau was no longer tenable, but that it was just bad PR. That there was no actual foundation to any of the criticisms. It feels like they think they can swap Trudeau, and then continue on and everything will reset.
That Katie Telford has reportedly been pushing Carney behind the scenes is of some concern to me. I have trouble picturing the person who might be most responsible for preventing any course corrections over the last year suddenly supporting anyone who’s going to meaningfully reassess policy
I believe this leadership race and the general election following it, will be light on policy. It will all be about who can counter the orange menace from South of the border. Nothing else will matter.
I think it’s going to be light on policy because right now people only care about a couple linked issues, and they’re all economic and cost-of-living. So a broad assortment of policy positions are meaningless. But if they don’t have a few strong answers they may as well not bother
I kind of feel that, like PP, the liberal contestants will start their litanies of promises when they actually start their race. Give it time. Another week maybe?
I remember him as Govener of the Bank of Canada. Back in 2008 when we later found out he was part of the 100 billion dollar give away to the financaial sector pumping up assest prices. None of my friends can afford homes and social mobility has been wiped. I remember him too well. Its Cerney or Freeland? Then the Liberal Party is in serious crisis...
"Pierre Poilievre is a dangerous politician who will do significant damage to this country if we let him run it." ...what? The Liberals have run this country for almost 10 years and have done MASSIVE, LASTING damage to it. You cannot hope to convince voters that Poilievre is MORE dangerous when the so-called good guys have left Canada a smoking ruin.
The very best thing the new Liberal leader can do is repeatedly, humbly and frankly admit how badly their party has governed Canada for a decade, and then come out with a platform to clearly show how he/she will do things differently and better. The humility, if sincere, will allow them to reclaim some of the moral high ground. Even then, it will take years of convincing to win back voters. And most likely, Poilievre himself will do a lot of work to drive voters away - the man is instinctively pugnacious and unpleasant.
And yes, the Liberals need someone without any taint of connection to Trudeau. Freeland is mired in that muck. Carney is being advised by Telford/Butts, so that's no good either. I'm normally a federal Liberal/provincial NDP voter, but for now I'm taking a look at Dominic Cardy and his new Canadian Future Party.
I've been watching a lot of Peter Mansbridge's podcast, with Bruce Anderson and Chantal Hebert.
I think the big question for the next four years is, who can deal with Trump (tariffs, annexation threats, economic coercion) and the resulting economic fallout?
I think either Mark Carney or Chrystia Freeland seem like reasonable candidates. With Carney, the big question is how he'll do as a politician. He's been a public figure for years and he's done a lot of interviews, which people may find interesting to look at. (There's a British podcast, "The Rest is Politics," with Rory Stewart and Alastair Campbell. Carney was on it about a year ago.) But there's still big questions. How good is he at picking up on what people want? How good will he be at keeping up with the intense pace of the role?
With Freeland, my impression is that she's liked and respected within the party, and she's certainly been the workhorse of the Trudeau government, serving as minister for foreign affairs and then finance. She doesn't have to spend any time getting up to speed on how politics works, or how government works. But in the leadership race, there'll be Trudeau loyalists who are mad at her for pushing him out ("he who holds the knife will never wear the crown"). And with the wider electorate, it's difficult to blame Trudeau for the missteps of the last nine years when she's been so closely identified with his policies and his budgets.
Chantal Hebert says that both Carney and Freeland should be able to handle a debate in French (unlike Christy Clark).
Dale Smith thinks it's a mistake to go with Carney. "In many ways I am reminded of Bill Morneau, who didn’t take very well to political life in part because he was a 'star' candidate who was parachuted into a safe riding without needing to contest a nomination or really campaign very hard for his riding. It led to his inability to understand how to fight for his policies politically." https://looniepolitics.com/stop-looking-for-saviours-outside-of-the-caucus/
I'm looking forward to the leadership race. I think it may be a bit premature to make up your mind at this point.
What a difference a single interview can make. For me there were two positives.
First, Carney came across as friendly, humorous and at the same time careful and competent. Not academic at all. Far from elitist. Of course we would like to see a few more interviews, perhaps ones with some more policy. But in the end policy will not matter in this leadership race or the next election, the only thing that will matter is this person capable of defending Canada against Trump.
The second positive was his carbon tax comment. It is clear what he will do, the consumer carbon tax will dropped. The argument of “let’s work on industrial emissions first and focus on consumer emissions later” will be well received. It shows that Carnet is a practical politician. Impossible for the Trudeau team to do, but an outsider like Carney can be nimble on this file.
So Carney is off to a great start. It is quite something that there is a large group of Liberals thinking that carney as the next might just work. It makes you wonder though, will the other contenders be able to raise the entry fee now there is a clear front runner?
By what possible definition is Freeland not a massive establishment politician, firmly entrenched in the elite?
For that matter, none of the potential candidates have talked even the slightest bit of policy yet. Any differentiation between them is purely vibes-based at this point
The affection for Carney comes not from his perceived advantages, but due to the dismal state of the mediocre alternatives. When you are desperate to find a winner, and terrified of what failure means (PP majority), you convince yourself of falsehoods.
Carney is a mirage. The same mirage that Kamala Harris was. Oh look, an intelligent, policy oriented person who will stand well in contrast to that buffoonish populist idiot on the other side. Surely voters will respond well to that? All my friends like serious people, so the country as whole will too! Right?
How did that work out in the USA?
We are facing a moment in politics that makes many of us uncomfortable. There is pure, unadulterated rage out there that is difficult to understand and even harder to confront. PP has tapped into that. He did not ascend to nearly 50% by accident. We may hate that truth. But it is a truth nonetheless.
People feel their lives have been demonstrably worse by Trudeau. They can’t afford basic goods. Their children will never be able to purchase a home. And they have been condescend to for years. If you don’t support the progressive agenda du jour you are ignorant. They were told it was wrong to believe in Canada because it’s a “genocidal state.” Etc.
All this from a snotty, privileged, hypocritical critical clown of a PM. One who fires women left right and centre yet who claims to be a feminist. I could go on. You all know the main points.
My overall message here is that the mood of the country has been badly misjudged for years. You cannot stop PP if you don’t understand why he is on fire. On fire despite saying some objectively preposterous things and striking me and many others as unserious.
Because people feel he understands what’s wrong in their lives. That is painful for readers of this blog to take in. Yet we must.
Carney is fool’s gold. He has no hope of connecting to Canadians in a short time frame. He needs to be standing up for Canada loudly and aggressively. He goes on a US television show to… show he’s cool? All but ceding the argument our culture is meaningless and we are already just desperate to be part of American life. I am infuriated with this choice.
It will only get worse.
And if he is asked, “Will you commit to remaining leader if you lose and represent the third party in the House? Will you spend the next ten years of your life (he’s 60!) rebuilding the party? A party you are only conveniently supporting now when you think you can swoop in and become leader?”…
… will anyone really believe the answer is “yes”?
I mostly agree with your post, but arguably Kamala Harris lost the election less because of any defects of her campaign and more due to lack of a runway to fully make herself known to the electorate.
In Carney's case, I would say that how he would communicate himself politically is more of an unknown than it was for Harris, given his near-complete absence of political experience.
That fact that he is an Albertan, a northern, very rural Albertan, will neutralise a lot of the ‘eastern elite’ nonsense from the west. Yes, Freeland to is from Alberta but that is already well ‘known’. That Carney is, not so much. Don’t underestimate this.
Carney was born in Ft Smith, (then the) NWT. His family moved to Edmonton when he was a kid.
I agree -- virtually nobody knows this, or anything about him.
Huge advantage right now.
Both Carney and Freeland are FROM Alberta; they are NOT Albertans.
In other words, they left us and they no longer - if they ever did - understand us.
Oh please. Canadians move around a lot, right? For university, for work.
Did Stephen Harper lose his understanding of his hometown of Toronto when he moved as a young man to Alberta?
Did Pierre Poilievre forget about Calgary when he moved to Ottawa in his early 20s?
Leaving your hometown often enriches understanding of your roots.
I grew up in Alberta and then worked and raised a family in Ontario.
And every time I travel outside of Canada, I gain ever more understanding of my country.
Far from being broken, Canada is an amazing nation with unsurpassed freedom, economic opportunities, social mobility, natural resources, education, public services, diversity, etc.
Let's continue building together!
Okay, try this.
Carney is a citizen of Canada (yes, born here), England (by Act of the UK Parliament - pretty special, no?), and also a citizen of Ireland (he CHOSE to become an Irish citizen in the 1980s). Andrew Scheer was roundly criticized for being a dual citizen of the USA. So, will Carney get the benefit of a double/triple standard and not be criticized?
Scheer was not honest or up front about his dual citizenship.
And with due respect, Scheer's qualifications were not special enough to become Governor of the Bank of England.
In defense of Scheer - and I am not a proponent of him whatsoever - I would point out that he did not deny his US citizenship; it just never came up. When it did come up he agreed that he was a US citizen and undertook to drop that status. Will Carney agree to drop his UK or his Irish citizenship?
In any event, I know where you stand on Carney and you know where I stand.
It has been good conversing with you, Maggie.
If he's the next PM and Poilievre beats him, that'll be three of the last four PM's from Alberta...and one from the Liberal Party to boot.
John Ibbitson and Darrell Bricker's: The Big Shift was right, the Laurentian Consensus is dying...probably even quicker than they'd expected.
carney has my confidence just for the simple fact he went on jon stewart. he should go on joe rogan next, and that's not a joke in the slightest.
politics is no longer about institutions and understanding them. it is selling. and carney making the pitch that PP is a career politician that has never sold a thing in his life is very compelling. the job of the PM will be to sell Canada, and as a country, concept, and vision, to both our people (which obviously includes voters) but also the world.
freeland has a great policy mind, but i cannot imagine her holding up nearly as well on a talk show, let alone at a town hall. the liberals will be cooked if she wins the leadership, but i don't think she will.
carney shouting out joly, leblanc and mackinnon is a pretty solid tell that they are all backing him.
Agreed. And he'll be announcing in Edmonton apparently? Perfect, because he's FROM there. Sucks to be Denial Smith with a Harvard guy on one flank and now a Rhodes scholar on the other.
Best thing is that he LEADS with climate change as not only THE reality, but also as THE economic opportunity it is.
I feel some of the hope I felt with Kamala returning, and still feel with Nenshi in the wings.
One of the worst consequences of these right wing/bad boy/chaos pedlars/anarchists/libertarians smirking while they move fast and break things is how it's taken away our precious hope for the future that has become, quite terrifyingly, hope for the very survival of our species AND our magical, natural world, the only thing that's TRULY sacred. As is the truth itself.
Listening to CBC this morning, I was pleased to hear a councillor in Calgary's beleaguered progressive municipal government suggest a review of the role of misinformation in the context of various recurring issues in the city (like re-zoning, a no-brainer.) Also interesting, and telling about where we are, was the use of YET ANOTHER word for lying (the conservative's wheelhouse) which was MALINFORMATION.
This is the one advantage the Liberals have over these "cons," which before social media would have been a slam-dunk, and the fact that it isn't is a "triumph of marketing" like no other we've seen.
Interestingly, Apple is now seeing the need to differentiate itself in this "new culture" where Trumpists want to remove diversity and inclusion hiring, and which Zuckerberg refers to when removing fact-checking FFS.
These assholes always go too far; it's their Achilles heel.
I was skeptical of Carney until I watched the interview with Jon Stewart. That was NOT Ignatieff, not even close. I have no doubt that he has faced off many times with powerful people and knows the drill. I'm with you. Pleasantly surprised, still a tad skeptical, but he certainly seems to have what we need to throw some water on the arson being foisted on Canada by PP. Maybe even enough to turn the tide.
Yes, a lot of people are really pissed off, but I truly believe that good sense still has a chance. Probably a smug thing to say but I think the people in this country have a higher mental capacity than those in the US, so Kamilla isn't a good way to measure our electorate. PP and that crowd is a menace and we have to stop them.
You often bring out my argumentative side, but today ? I agree with you. Mark Carney is a light in a very dark tunnel.
You're bang on here Scrim. Carney is the least worst option and I dare hope he may prove to be a good option...maybe even great? (probably too much).
I'm not a Freeland hater, I think she has a lot of strengths, but she's shown to be not great on the spot with difficult questions (even if they're questions she ought to have seen coming), which the newly minted PM will need ASAP. Also, not as much stink from the Trudeau administration (as you mentioned).
Maybe this is too much cope, but if Carney can prove strong against MAGA in these crucial first few months, he MIGHT give Polivere a run.
If I were him, I'd ignore any of Polivere's "culture war" attacks and keep focus on Canada's economy and sovereignty.
I would be SO excited to watch a live debate between Mark and PP!
I’m reluctant to put much faith in any of the potential candidates until we start getting statements about which Trudeau policies they support, and which ones they’re willing to publicly say were mistakes. How much of his baggage they’re willing to accept saddling themselves with in service of not upsetting the current Liberal inner circle
It worries me that there has so far been almost zero public discussion from party figures discussing areas where Trudeau policies may have been mistakes or otherwise need reassessment under a new leader.
It feels like the party core has finally accepted that Trudeau was no longer tenable, but that it was just bad PR. That there was no actual foundation to any of the criticisms. It feels like they think they can swap Trudeau, and then continue on and everything will reset.
That Katie Telford has reportedly been pushing Carney behind the scenes is of some concern to me. I have trouble picturing the person who might be most responsible for preventing any course corrections over the last year suddenly supporting anyone who’s going to meaningfully reassess policy
I believe this leadership race and the general election following it, will be light on policy. It will all be about who can counter the orange menace from South of the border. Nothing else will matter.
I think it’s going to be light on policy because right now people only care about a couple linked issues, and they’re all economic and cost-of-living. So a broad assortment of policy positions are meaningless. But if they don’t have a few strong answers they may as well not bother
I kind of feel that, like PP, the liberal contestants will start their litanies of promises when they actually start their race. Give it time. Another week maybe?
I remember him as Govener of the Bank of Canada. Back in 2008 when we later found out he was part of the 100 billion dollar give away to the financaial sector pumping up assest prices. None of my friends can afford homes and social mobility has been wiped. I remember him too well. Its Cerney or Freeland? Then the Liberal Party is in serious crisis...
Evan, I accept your apology!
Glad you've come onside.
Captain Canada Carney is about to tie the game and send us into OT.
Let's go!!!
"Pierre Poilievre is a dangerous politician who will do significant damage to this country if we let him run it." ...what? The Liberals have run this country for almost 10 years and have done MASSIVE, LASTING damage to it. You cannot hope to convince voters that Poilievre is MORE dangerous when the so-called good guys have left Canada a smoking ruin.
The very best thing the new Liberal leader can do is repeatedly, humbly and frankly admit how badly their party has governed Canada for a decade, and then come out with a platform to clearly show how he/she will do things differently and better. The humility, if sincere, will allow them to reclaim some of the moral high ground. Even then, it will take years of convincing to win back voters. And most likely, Poilievre himself will do a lot of work to drive voters away - the man is instinctively pugnacious and unpleasant.
And yes, the Liberals need someone without any taint of connection to Trudeau. Freeland is mired in that muck. Carney is being advised by Telford/Butts, so that's no good either. I'm normally a federal Liberal/provincial NDP voter, but for now I'm taking a look at Dominic Cardy and his new Canadian Future Party.
I've been watching a lot of Peter Mansbridge's podcast, with Bruce Anderson and Chantal Hebert.
I think the big question for the next four years is, who can deal with Trump (tariffs, annexation threats, economic coercion) and the resulting economic fallout?
I think either Mark Carney or Chrystia Freeland seem like reasonable candidates. With Carney, the big question is how he'll do as a politician. He's been a public figure for years and he's done a lot of interviews, which people may find interesting to look at. (There's a British podcast, "The Rest is Politics," with Rory Stewart and Alastair Campbell. Carney was on it about a year ago.) But there's still big questions. How good is he at picking up on what people want? How good will he be at keeping up with the intense pace of the role?
With Freeland, my impression is that she's liked and respected within the party, and she's certainly been the workhorse of the Trudeau government, serving as minister for foreign affairs and then finance. She doesn't have to spend any time getting up to speed on how politics works, or how government works. But in the leadership race, there'll be Trudeau loyalists who are mad at her for pushing him out ("he who holds the knife will never wear the crown"). And with the wider electorate, it's difficult to blame Trudeau for the missteps of the last nine years when she's been so closely identified with his policies and his budgets.
Chantal Hebert says that both Carney and Freeland should be able to handle a debate in French (unlike Christy Clark).
Dale Smith thinks it's a mistake to go with Carney. "In many ways I am reminded of Bill Morneau, who didn’t take very well to political life in part because he was a 'star' candidate who was parachuted into a safe riding without needing to contest a nomination or really campaign very hard for his riding. It led to his inability to understand how to fight for his policies politically." https://looniepolitics.com/stop-looking-for-saviours-outside-of-the-caucus/
I'm looking forward to the leadership race. I think it may be a bit premature to make up your mind at this point.
What a difference a single interview can make. For me there were two positives.
First, Carney came across as friendly, humorous and at the same time careful and competent. Not academic at all. Far from elitist. Of course we would like to see a few more interviews, perhaps ones with some more policy. But in the end policy will not matter in this leadership race or the next election, the only thing that will matter is this person capable of defending Canada against Trump.
The second positive was his carbon tax comment. It is clear what he will do, the consumer carbon tax will dropped. The argument of “let’s work on industrial emissions first and focus on consumer emissions later” will be well received. It shows that Carnet is a practical politician. Impossible for the Trudeau team to do, but an outsider like Carney can be nimble on this file.
So Carney is off to a great start. It is quite something that there is a large group of Liberals thinking that carney as the next might just work. It makes you wonder though, will the other contenders be able to raise the entry fee now there is a clear front runner?
I think you are wrong and are listening to the elites.... Carney is another Ignatieff..... Disaster....
I believe Freeland is our only hope, even if slim........
By what possible definition is Freeland not a massive establishment politician, firmly entrenched in the elite?
For that matter, none of the potential candidates have talked even the slightest bit of policy yet. Any differentiation between them is purely vibes-based at this point