You;ve surpassed yourself, Ewan. But I think you are mostly right.
Think of it this way. The CPC will win, proably with a big majority. This is what the Liberals need. It will give them a chance to rebuild, with new ideas and new people. Another win would do them, and Canada, no favours.
As to Mark Carney, does his new role mean that the Liberals are finally taking economic issues seriously? That would be good. Inflation is falling and the jobs market is still good. While it will take a long, long time to resorb the housing problem, lower interest rates would be a very good start == along with a more reasonable immigration policy. (What were tney thinking?)
And it si probably best to keep Carney behind the curtains at this time. The Liberals need his policies, not his campaigning skills. Don't give people yet another elite to get angry at.
All of Canada seems to have collective amnesia. Back in 2022 everybody was complaining that there were not enough workers. Companies could not get the workers, despite offering higher salaries. Politicians at all levels and from all parties were asking (some even demanding) for more workers. This was not a contentious issue.
Now, the Federal government got it exactly right? Probably not. Did some companies abuse the program and bring in more workers than really needed? Probably true as well. But the consensus back in 2022 was that Canada needed more workers and fast.
I agree that businesses were clamouring for more workers. I also agree that there were few if any voices opposed. But it turns out that, with a modicum of foresight, one could predict the impacts on housing, health services, and other social infrastructure. I believe that it is the government's job to take this "bigger picture" view, and act accordingly. The government didn't. reacting to the short term problem.
Anyway, the pandemic labour crunch was largely over by 2021, i.e. three years ago, yet the government did not readjust its policies. I don't lowering wages was the purpose of this prolongation, but it seems to have been convenient for many businesses.
You are rewriting history. The premiers were asking for more workers well into 2022. The news articles are not hard to find. And don’t the provinces have the best view on the limitations of housing, healthcare and other services? Why is this exclusively the federal government’s responsibility?
You are right about 2022. But how about 2023? Shortages were easing, yet the temporary workers program still went on. New objectives were only enacted this summer. Yes, housing, healthcare and other services are a provincial responsibility. But immigration is federal. The provinces should have been telling the federal government about looming problems. But the federal level also had a responsibility to inform itself as to the consequences of its policies, not just the main objective of the labour market, but also the side effects on other sectors.
Thank you for engaging in a civil conversation with me.
Also, in 2023, the feds allowed in 300,000 Ukrainian refugees on visas without time limits. That number is about a third of temp residents in 2023. Pretty big number that must have exerted knock-on effects on resources. Immigration dept officials advised against this policy. The Liberal govt pressed ahead anyway. Why? And why do they never talk about it??
It will be interesting to see where any rebuild comes from. There’s basically no provincial wing of the party left. A drubbing could easily leave the party with low single digit seats west of Ontario. A huge number of staffers and aids will have just lost their jobs.
What does a rebuild that revolves around a couple dozen MPs in each of Ontario and Québec look like? How do they engage the rest of the country? Do they avoid collapsing into what’s effectively a rump regional party?
Anyone who thinks that’s a potentially dire setup for a rebuild might be more inclined to push Trudeau out sooner. Anything that preserves a wider base might be worth doing
One wonders if we're headed to a 2 party system for a while. Cons v an amalgam of what remains of the Libs and what remains of the NDP. THe NDP do have viable provincial wings in the west. A more deft NDP leader might have figured that into the SACA calculations......but I share Evan's opinion of Singh.
Yeah, but Singh is also getting the boot after this election. With both the Liberals and NDP doing a rebuild at the same time, it will be interesting to see which one manages to capture public attention. I suspect it will be one or the other, not both.
I could see either one pulling it off. Neither has clear successors, and whichever one manages to snag someone with decent instincts and some charisma could basically sideline the other, and in many ways the NDP has a much deeper party bench
I don’t think he’d be a great choice, actually. But I think someone endorsed by him and other provincial NDP leaders could instantly have more national credibility than most Liberal second-stringers could manage
I actually wish Nenshi hadn’t gone for the provincial leadership in Alberta. He would have been one of the most interesting choices for either the national Liberals or NDP
You old but newly-minted con guys always go WAY too far in service of this "revolution" you imagine you're part of despite it actually being the opposite-- a tacky, stupid devolution. It's the ultimate half-baked plan that hasn't thought beyond sticking it to the always cooler, always kinder Liberals so you can convince yourselves AGAIN that YOU represent the majority of Canadians. This despite the fact that they/we historically and consistently prefer EVOLUTION.
I wouldn't trust any of you as far as I could throw you, but your weirdly avid hatred IS contagious.
I suggest that you've never met an over-the-top conservative narrative that you haven't championed like ALL the old Reform guys snickering behind the scenes at the bold antics of Harper's proud boys in short pants.
Some of us other older types have SEEN what you've done you know, destroying our once-respectable Canadian politics generally and the Progressive Conservative Party specifically to usher in the wholly REGRESSIVE Convoy Party of Canada, much helped by the relentless algorithms leading you and your ilk SO easily by the noses; it's almost like the big tech guys are on your side for some reason.... Elon Musk is the classic psychopath who wants to rule the world, and Mark Zuckerberg isn't exactly NORMAL either.
Never mind that it's also entirely DERIVATIVE as we've all SEEN in this decade of insanity, this "slow-moving coup" that has democracy teetering, but the Trumped circus down south is about to be schooled by a woman prosecutor whose stepkids apparently call her Mamala.
Enough of indulging the "boys will be boys" BS; time to shut it down before you take us all down with you.
There's a reason we never talk about a conservative democracy, only a liberal one.
That's hilarious. It's a parody of Pierre Poilievre, right?
Incivility is a warning sign of conflicts to come and divisions deepening. As unpleasant as some might find it, we need to continue to talk to each other. Otherwise, we are in danger of descending into U.S. style dystopia.
Sorry but that ship has sailed because talking, actual talking, takes TWO willing participants, and although the left goes out of their way (increasingly risking their own credibility I'd say) to be "inclusive" as part of their thing (that whole "when they go low we go high' idea of Michelle Obama's) the right doesn't even bother. It's the one thing I'll give them some credit for, not even pretending interest, quite the contrary. The AVIDITY of their dislike/hatred is undeniable, and speaks volumes.
If you google "conservative brain" which is a thing, some of the reasons for the basic antipathy emerge.
And what they and the GOP hate most is that they're not actually the majority because, as one comment here said, they're fundamentally undemocratic by nature, which is why we don't say, "conservative democracy," only "liberal democracy."
I take your point about the U.S. and its politics. But I don't think that you can generalize and apply it to Canadian politics lock, stock and barrel. The tone, perhaps, to some extent. But the substance?
I don’t think anybody is considering the Mark Carney appointment as the magic solution that will solve everything. It is also not presented as such by the Liberals. It does give some serious intellectual horse power to what the Liberals’ election platform will be for the next election. And as the next election will be about change, the Liberals need some fresh ideas.
So, what to do if you are governing party when your policies are generally poll well, but you do not get the credit for it. Philippe Champagne said it today: “keep delivering”. And I would add to this “on items you can control”. In the end the voters may change their mind at election time and support you after all. Or they may not, but then you have done what you could.
Now, is Trudeau the best person to “sell” this to the voters? I have a hard time seeing an alternative leader stepping in at short notice and making the case. Right now, Trudeau is the best the Liberals have got. Maybe Evan does not like it, but there is no magical unicorn leader waiting on the side lines to take over.
Finally, while a strong majority for Conservative is certainly a possibility with the first past the post system, the actual difference is not that dramatic. The Liberals are currently losing 6% of the voters, and the Conservatives are gaining 6%. Enough for a strong majority, but not a gap that cannot be closed.
Yeah and succumbing to THIS particular con "narrative" would also just echo what Singh has stupidly done, not to mention the increasingly irresponsible media continues to do with the utterly contrived feeding frenzy.
And in this context, pollsters are now officially part of the problem/gong show of being in constant election mode.
Scrimshaw, like all the other conservative Carney critics, has forgotten Stephen Harper appointed Carney to govern the Bank of Canada Poilievre said he would get rid of. (Poilievre also promoted bitcoin as safer than the Canadian dollar and proposed blowing public dollars on crypto "to fight inflation." He no longer mentions bitcoin because that blew up in his face.)
Here's what Harper who hired Carney said about Carney in in 2014.
"Prime Minister Stephen Harper, though, claimed bragging rights ...thanks to the naming of Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of Canada, to head an increasingly powerful body called the Financial Stability Board. “His appointment,” Harper said, “is both a tribute to his personal qualities and a reflection on Canada’s superior performance in monetary, fiscal and financial-sector policy areas.”
If Carney replaces Trudeau as leader - which could be a good move, this is likely to appeal to fiscal conservatives who respected Paul Martin. Poilievre is an incompetent lightweight and the proof of his fear of Carney is his rage-farming against a man he once admired and supported.
Of all the potential replacements Wes, who do you see as someone who could give PP a good run for his money? I am not a Liberal, so the question is genuine. Freeland isn't the answer imo.....brilliant yes but not a retail politician and I alway feel like I a getting a lecture from a school teacher. Anand? I personally would love to see a woman of colour as leader. Sean Fraser? Regardless, the reality might mean a period of being in opposition until the right combination of leader and time come together. With the Cons, this wilderness meant living through two weak leaders until they found their pit bull, god help us all.
I don't have much hope for any successor as a real contender from the known commodities (tho Anand or Fraser would be a refreshing change regardless). I think avoiding an early election as long as possible and riding interest rates down helps take the wind out of PP's sails a bit maybe. It's all a mess... I'm just going to try to vote for the most decent riding candidate who's not a CON and try to forget who their party leader is...
You;ve surpassed yourself, Ewan. But I think you are mostly right.
Think of it this way. The CPC will win, proably with a big majority. This is what the Liberals need. It will give them a chance to rebuild, with new ideas and new people. Another win would do them, and Canada, no favours.
As to Mark Carney, does his new role mean that the Liberals are finally taking economic issues seriously? That would be good. Inflation is falling and the jobs market is still good. While it will take a long, long time to resorb the housing problem, lower interest rates would be a very good start == along with a more reasonable immigration policy. (What were tney thinking?)
And it si probably best to keep Carney behind the curtains at this time. The Liberals need his policies, not his campaigning skills. Don't give people yet another elite to get angry at.
What were they thinking (on immigration)?
All of Canada seems to have collective amnesia. Back in 2022 everybody was complaining that there were not enough workers. Companies could not get the workers, despite offering higher salaries. Politicians at all levels and from all parties were asking (some even demanding) for more workers. This was not a contentious issue.
Now, the Federal government got it exactly right? Probably not. Did some companies abuse the program and bring in more workers than really needed? Probably true as well. But the consensus back in 2022 was that Canada needed more workers and fast.
I agree that businesses were clamouring for more workers. I also agree that there were few if any voices opposed. But it turns out that, with a modicum of foresight, one could predict the impacts on housing, health services, and other social infrastructure. I believe that it is the government's job to take this "bigger picture" view, and act accordingly. The government didn't. reacting to the short term problem.
Anyway, the pandemic labour crunch was largely over by 2021, i.e. three years ago, yet the government did not readjust its policies. I don't lowering wages was the purpose of this prolongation, but it seems to have been convenient for many businesses.
You are rewriting history. The premiers were asking for more workers well into 2022. The news articles are not hard to find. And don’t the provinces have the best view on the limitations of housing, healthcare and other services? Why is this exclusively the federal government’s responsibility?
You are right about 2022. But how about 2023? Shortages were easing, yet the temporary workers program still went on. New objectives were only enacted this summer. Yes, housing, healthcare and other services are a provincial responsibility. But immigration is federal. The provinces should have been telling the federal government about looming problems. But the federal level also had a responsibility to inform itself as to the consequences of its policies, not just the main objective of the labour market, but also the side effects on other sectors.
Thank you for engaging in a civil conversation with me.
Also, in 2023, the feds allowed in 300,000 Ukrainian refugees on visas without time limits. That number is about a third of temp residents in 2023. Pretty big number that must have exerted knock-on effects on resources. Immigration dept officials advised against this policy. The Liberal govt pressed ahead anyway. Why? And why do they never talk about it??
It will be interesting to see where any rebuild comes from. There’s basically no provincial wing of the party left. A drubbing could easily leave the party with low single digit seats west of Ontario. A huge number of staffers and aids will have just lost their jobs.
What does a rebuild that revolves around a couple dozen MPs in each of Ontario and Québec look like? How do they engage the rest of the country? Do they avoid collapsing into what’s effectively a rump regional party?
Anyone who thinks that’s a potentially dire setup for a rebuild might be more inclined to push Trudeau out sooner. Anything that preserves a wider base might be worth doing
One wonders if we're headed to a 2 party system for a while. Cons v an amalgam of what remains of the Libs and what remains of the NDP. THe NDP do have viable provincial wings in the west. A more deft NDP leader might have figured that into the SACA calculations......but I share Evan's opinion of Singh.
Yeah, but Singh is also getting the boot after this election. With both the Liberals and NDP doing a rebuild at the same time, it will be interesting to see which one manages to capture public attention. I suspect it will be one or the other, not both.
I could see either one pulling it off. Neither has clear successors, and whichever one manages to snag someone with decent instincts and some charisma could basically sideline the other, and in many ways the NDP has a much deeper party bench
In Wab we trust......but it's a bit too soon to know if he can make the jump to the national scene or if he wants to......
I don’t think he’d be a great choice, actually. But I think someone endorsed by him and other provincial NDP leaders could instantly have more national credibility than most Liberal second-stringers could manage
I actually wish Nenshi hadn’t gone for the provincial leadership in Alberta. He would have been one of the most interesting choices for either the national Liberals or NDP
JT will one day receive an appointment to the UN. Not sure when. But it will happen. It's his natural habitat.
Absolutely; with all the other international criminals.
Oh come ON.
You old but newly-minted con guys always go WAY too far in service of this "revolution" you imagine you're part of despite it actually being the opposite-- a tacky, stupid devolution. It's the ultimate half-baked plan that hasn't thought beyond sticking it to the always cooler, always kinder Liberals so you can convince yourselves AGAIN that YOU represent the majority of Canadians. This despite the fact that they/we historically and consistently prefer EVOLUTION.
I wouldn't trust any of you as far as I could throw you, but your weirdly avid hatred IS contagious.
I suggest that you've never met an over-the-top conservative narrative that you haven't championed like ALL the old Reform guys snickering behind the scenes at the bold antics of Harper's proud boys in short pants.
Some of us other older types have SEEN what you've done you know, destroying our once-respectable Canadian politics generally and the Progressive Conservative Party specifically to usher in the wholly REGRESSIVE Convoy Party of Canada, much helped by the relentless algorithms leading you and your ilk SO easily by the noses; it's almost like the big tech guys are on your side for some reason.... Elon Musk is the classic psychopath who wants to rule the world, and Mark Zuckerberg isn't exactly NORMAL either.
Never mind that it's also entirely DERIVATIVE as we've all SEEN in this decade of insanity, this "slow-moving coup" that has democracy teetering, but the Trumped circus down south is about to be schooled by a woman prosecutor whose stepkids apparently call her Mamala.
Enough of indulging the "boys will be boys" BS; time to shut it down before you take us all down with you.
There's a reason we never talk about a conservative democracy, only a liberal one.
That's hilarious. It's a parody of Pierre Poilievre, right?
Incivility is a warning sign of conflicts to come and divisions deepening. As unpleasant as some might find it, we need to continue to talk to each other. Otherwise, we are in danger of descending into U.S. style dystopia.
Sorry but that ship has sailed because talking, actual talking, takes TWO willing participants, and although the left goes out of their way (increasingly risking their own credibility I'd say) to be "inclusive" as part of their thing (that whole "when they go low we go high' idea of Michelle Obama's) the right doesn't even bother. It's the one thing I'll give them some credit for, not even pretending interest, quite the contrary. The AVIDITY of their dislike/hatred is undeniable, and speaks volumes.
If you google "conservative brain" which is a thing, some of the reasons for the basic antipathy emerge.
And what they and the GOP hate most is that they're not actually the majority because, as one comment here said, they're fundamentally undemocratic by nature, which is why we don't say, "conservative democracy," only "liberal democracy."
I take your point about the U.S. and its politics. But I don't think that you can generalize and apply it to Canadian politics lock, stock and barrel. The tone, perhaps, to some extent. But the substance?
Give it up Evan, even Nate supports Justin remaining.
And AOC supported Biden staying. Your point?
Poilievre loves Liberals like you. A fifth columnist couldn't do better for election.
I don’t think anybody is considering the Mark Carney appointment as the magic solution that will solve everything. It is also not presented as such by the Liberals. It does give some serious intellectual horse power to what the Liberals’ election platform will be for the next election. And as the next election will be about change, the Liberals need some fresh ideas.
So, what to do if you are governing party when your policies are generally poll well, but you do not get the credit for it. Philippe Champagne said it today: “keep delivering”. And I would add to this “on items you can control”. In the end the voters may change their mind at election time and support you after all. Or they may not, but then you have done what you could.
Now, is Trudeau the best person to “sell” this to the voters? I have a hard time seeing an alternative leader stepping in at short notice and making the case. Right now, Trudeau is the best the Liberals have got. Maybe Evan does not like it, but there is no magical unicorn leader waiting on the side lines to take over.
Finally, while a strong majority for Conservative is certainly a possibility with the first past the post system, the actual difference is not that dramatic. The Liberals are currently losing 6% of the voters, and the Conservatives are gaining 6%. Enough for a strong majority, but not a gap that cannot be closed.
Yeah and succumbing to THIS particular con "narrative" would also just echo what Singh has stupidly done, not to mention the increasingly irresponsible media continues to do with the utterly contrived feeding frenzy.
And in this context, pollsters are now officially part of the problem/gong show of being in constant election mode.
Polls are cheap journalism. Easy to write. Lots of clicks. We get what we pay for.
I respect you tremendously, disagree with you politically but am amazed how you are able to find new levels of anger with each post.
Scrimshaw, like all the other conservative Carney critics, has forgotten Stephen Harper appointed Carney to govern the Bank of Canada Poilievre said he would get rid of. (Poilievre also promoted bitcoin as safer than the Canadian dollar and proposed blowing public dollars on crypto "to fight inflation." He no longer mentions bitcoin because that blew up in his face.)
Here's what Harper who hired Carney said about Carney in in 2014.
https://macleans.ca/news/canada/the-canadian-hired-to-save-the-world/
"Prime Minister Stephen Harper, though, claimed bragging rights ...thanks to the naming of Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of Canada, to head an increasingly powerful body called the Financial Stability Board. “His appointment,” Harper said, “is both a tribute to his personal qualities and a reflection on Canada’s superior performance in monetary, fiscal and financial-sector policy areas.”
If Carney replaces Trudeau as leader - which could be a good move, this is likely to appeal to fiscal conservatives who respected Paul Martin. Poilievre is an incompetent lightweight and the proof of his fear of Carney is his rage-farming against a man he once admired and supported.
As a lifelong Liberal and a supporter of both Trudeaus in the past, I really hate that you are so right on. Sigh!
If he resigned wouldn't that increase the likelihood of a no confidence vote and even less time for a leadership race?
Of all the potential replacements Wes, who do you see as someone who could give PP a good run for his money? I am not a Liberal, so the question is genuine. Freeland isn't the answer imo.....brilliant yes but not a retail politician and I alway feel like I a getting a lecture from a school teacher. Anand? I personally would love to see a woman of colour as leader. Sean Fraser? Regardless, the reality might mean a period of being in opposition until the right combination of leader and time come together. With the Cons, this wilderness meant living through two weak leaders until they found their pit bull, god help us all.
I don't have much hope for any successor as a real contender from the known commodities (tho Anand or Fraser would be a refreshing change regardless). I think avoiding an early election as long as possible and riding interest rates down helps take the wind out of PP's sails a bit maybe. It's all a mess... I'm just going to try to vote for the most decent riding candidate who's not a CON and try to forget who their party leader is...