Canada General Discussion (2019-)

[mileslunn]

If anybody cares, I've been having all sorts of computer problems.

I said a couple months or so ago that Trudeau should apologize for not focusing on issues the public considered of primary importance and should do three things:

1.Promise to suspend planned increases in the carbon tax until inflation had returned to normal levels.

2.Promise to reduce the deficit to 'small' levels.

3.Reduce immigration and such to population increases that are sustainable.

I think they've acted on all three of these but without the apology the public hasn't really paid attention, especially on the $15 billion reduction in spending. I'm not sure what they've done with reducing the population increases, but I think they've made a couple moves in that direction, and they've made a complete hash of the carbon tax changes.

Agreed but he strikes me as very stubborn and not willing to admit he is wrong.  A big reason Ford despite all his mess ups and being very buffoonish has done as well as he has is he willing to admit he was wrong.  People like politicians who admit mistakes but Trudeau just doesn't strike me as that type.  Maybe biased but he comes across as someone who thinks he is smartest person in room and I have heard even others who know him say same thing.

He is the sort of politician who is very good when things are going well for him (think BoJo) but lacks the ability to change his mindset to deal with adversity, so his assets become liabilities.

Exactly, he is quite stubborn and tends to be unwilling to pivot when circumstances change.  Sort of opposite of Ford who doesn't have a lot of the positives that helped Trudeau win in 2015, but has survived as long as he does as whenever screws up, he is willing to back off and even say he was wrong.  Ford has multiple times said I made mistake whereas I don't recall Trudeau once every saying this was a mistake.  Lots compare Trudeau to Obama, but big difference is Obama was a great listener and he valued diverse advice and went on that while I get impression Trudeau thinks he is smartest person in room and only accepts advice if it jives with his preconceived view.

Harper was too very stubborn and big thing that costs him.  Only difference is he did back off a few times but it was obvious each case was based on bad polling not principles or realizing made a mistake and would have continued if didn't put party in jeopardy.  Chretien was opposite as very much a pragmatist and he was more about what works and didn't really care about its ideology or philosophy attached.  Its why ideologues on both sides hated him as on some issues leaned right, others left and wasn't consistent like Trudeau or Harper were.  Those two while maybe moderate, more because Canada is and you cannot win if stray too far from centre so more moderate out of necessity but both tried to push boundaries but not go beyond Overton Window while Chretien never went anywhere near edges of Overton Window.

[mileslunn]

Does anyone believe that Trudeau has more competency than Pedro Sanchez or even Chris Hipkins?

Less than Sanchez who despite losing popular vote is still PM.  Hipkins hard to say.  If Trudeau does win less because of him and more Poilievre does something.  And considering his willingness to pander to more extreme types and number of crazies in party not out of the realm of possibility. 

[mileslunn]

With lots of talk of re-alignment, I went on statscan website to check about urban vs. rural and what it would mean.  It seems in Atlantic Canada and Quebec is where Tories still have many rural they could gain and in former polls seem to suggest are gaining while latter most are going BQ.  By contrast Alberta is only provinces with loads of urban seats voting Conservative which says to me if Liberals or NDP were less hostile to province and energy sector they might have a chance there.  After all Notley won majority of those, but not all (thus why came up short).

Anyways using 400 people per sq. km which is what Statscan uses to define urban I got following

Atlantic Canada

27 rural (19 Liberal, 8 Conservative)
5 urban  (All Liberal)

Quebec

40 Urban (27 Liberal, 10 BQ, 2 Conservative, 1 NDP)
38 Rural  (22 BQ, 8 Liberal, 8 Conservative)

Ontario

72 Urban (66 Liberal, 3 NDP, 2 Conservative, 1 Green)
49 Rural (35 Conservative, 14 Liberal)

Manitoba

8 Urban (4 Liberal, 2 NDP, 2 Conservative)
6 Rural (5 Conservative, 1 NDP)

Saskatchewan

10 Rural (All Conservative)
4 Urban (All Conservative)

Alberta

18 Urban (14 Conservative, 2 NDP, 2 Liberal)
16 Rural (All Conservative)

BC

22 Rural (11 Conservative, 7 NDP, 3 Liberal, 1 Green)
20 Urban (12 Liberal, 6 NDP, 2 Conservative)

Territories

3 Rural (2 Liberal, 1 NDP)

Total:

173 Rural (93 Conservative, 46 Liberal, 22 BQ, 11 NDP, 1 Green)
165 Urban (114 Liberal, 26 Conservative, 14 NDP, 10 BQ, 1 Green)

If you use 200 people per square km you get following so similar

Atlantic

Rural 25 (17 Liberal, 8 Conservative)
Urban 7 (All Liberal)

Quebec

Urban 43 (28 Liberal, 12 BQ, 2 Conservative, 1 NDP)
Rural 35  (20 BQ, 8 Conservative, 7 Liberal)

Ontario

Urban 79 (70 Liberal, 5 Conservative, 3 NDP, 1 Green)
Rural 42 (32 Conservative, 8 Liberal, 2 NDP)

Manitoba

No change

Saskatchewan

Rural 9
Urban 5

Alberta

No change

BC

Urban 25 (14 Liberal, 7 NDP, 3 Conservative, 1 Green)
Rural  17  (10 Conservative, 6 NDP, 1 Liberal)

Territories same

Totals

Urban 185 (125 Liberal, 31 Conservative, 15 NDP, 12 BQ, 2 Green)
Rural 153 (88 Conservative, 35 Liberal, 20 BQ, 10 NDP)

So in summary, Conservatives have lots of rurals available in Atlantic Canada which if polls are accurate are swinging towards them.  Quebec still have lots available too, but BQ is mostly rural thus challenge there.  Ontario, most they don't have are either in Northern Ontario, which polls suggest swinging towards them or Southern ones that are predominately urban/suburban with only a bit of rural on the edge and most of those are over 200 but under 400 people per square km.  Glengarry-Prescott-Russell only true rural in Southern Ontario and going Liberal as predominately Francophone.  Kitchener-Conestoga is mixed while Kanata-Carleton mostly suburban but has sizeable rural while Pickering-Uxbridge is about 90% suburban, 10% rural while in land 80% rural, 20% suburban and off course in latter three, Tories dominated the rural polls but lost due to urban/suburban ones.

In BC also have a few, particularly Vancouver Island and two Interior.  In Lower Mainland, there are a few ridings that fall below such as North Vancouver as extends back into the mountains, but is pretty much 100% suburban as no one lives there.

For NDP, they are more urban and certainly the rural ones they hold are more vulnerable but still have some legacy blue collar ones in BC and Northern Ontario but whether they can hold those or not remains to be seen.

Asides from odd one here and there, most urban Tory ridings are located in Alberta and indeed if Edmonton and especially Calgary started voting like other cities their size, Tories would have a far more difficult path.

So in summary, Tory path on rurals only is very narrow and each census gets harder and harder.  Liberals can win minority easily on urban only, but to get a majority they need at least some rural ridings or at least in mixed ones win the urban parts by large enough margins to offset rural parts.

[mileslunn]

Next year we have three provincial elections unless one other goes early.

British Columbia: Barring some major scandal, Eby should easily win and probably a sizeable majority.  Real prize is who comes in second as likely parties on right merge or voters coalesce around one in 2028 so whomever comes in second has upper hand.  Right now BC Conservatives have momentum and they do seem to represent modern right more which is more populist than pro business.  But at same time some could be confusion with BC United.  In 2012 BC Liberals and BC Conservatives were nearly tied but once campaign started, they plummeted and most returned to BC Liberals.  Still their rise probably pulls BC United more to right than they would like. As for who forms opposition, I think both have reasonable chance and could even see a case where party that comes in second in votes doesn't in seats just depending on distribution.

New Brunswick:  Of three provincial, this is without question the most contested.  PCs are in a tough spot and Higgs could very well lose.  Only thing in his favour is PC vote more efficient so can narrowly lose popular vote and still win majority.  However with Greens in teens, wouldn't be surprised if many Green and NDP votes move towards Liberals to defeat Higgs.  And its also majority or bust.  NB Greens have made clear in a minority government, they will back Liberals irrespective of seat count.  At this point I think it is truly a toss up and could go either way.  Campaign will matter a lot here too.

Saskatchewan: Moe should win again due to Saskatchewan Party dominance in rural areas but I suspect it will be closer than last 3 elections  and wouldn't be shocked if NDP gets over 20 seats.  With risk of a splinter right wing party hurting Saskatchewan Party in rural areas, I can see party moving rightward and that likely costs them some of their urban seats which are more moderate.  Also just general fatigue of government should help NDP.  Problem for NDP is more nowadays right has lock on rural areas throughout Anglosphere with few exceptions so until Regina + Saskatoon grow enough to outvote rest of province (which they will in time), NDP winning will be very tough.  Essentially they would have to sweep both cities, win both Prince Albert seats, both Moose Jaw seats and two northern and even then I think that barely gets them over the line.  Still if desire for change strong enough and Beck is seen as a credible alternative there is an outside chance of upset but unlikely. 

Federally I don't think there will be an election, but be interesting what happens with federal polls. Tories appear maxed out but globally it seems right is getting levels of support that were unthinkable not long ago.  Trudeau says he won't go but if poll numbers don't recover, can he hang on?  Likewise if Trump wins (which is a very real possibility), does that harm Conservative poll numbers?  I think no election as NDP absolutely doesn't want Tories in power as they want a more left wing Canada and a Poilievre win would undo all of that so even if they move into second, will only pull plug if Tories fall back to low 30s.  For Liberals will they move left to try and consolidate left or will they pivot to centre to try to win back some soft Tory voters who are tired of Liberals but uneasy about Poilievre?  I could see some left wing policies coming down pipe like UBI, single payer pharmacare, wealth tax etc.  All popular and all hated by Tory base so easy way to trip up Poilievre.  My guess is no federal election, but possible Trudeau goes during US election so he can use GOP as backdrop to fearmonger about Tories.  Many have said it won't work, but I think while won't work with most, it will work with enough to tip the election away from a Tory majority as only need a small number to do that.

[mileslunn]

Another question is short of a blue wave in Quebec, do people think Tory vote has hit ceiling?  Liberals have not hit floor as possible NDP pulls ahead of them, but I tend to think Tories are at ceiling and can only climb higher if there is a blue wave in Quebec and usually Quebec tends to have big swings during the campaign not before.

Other question, is are Liberals toast or do they have a path back?  Obviously anything is possible in politics and likewise they are obviously underdogs, but I mean barring some extreme surprise is there any realistic chance of them winning?

My view is if Trudeau stays on, chances of beating Tories in seats is very slim but could deny them a majority and maybe much like Sanchez did in Spain stay on by getting and NDP and perhaps BQ support.  But a Trudeau led Liberal party winning most seats let alone a majority seems far fetched.

Now if change leaders it is a higher risk/higher reward.  With a new leader, I absolutely think Liberals can come back and win.  But at same time chances of them falling to third place are also much higher too.  Trudeau has a core base that loves him thus why if you are one who thinks Liberals are going to lose, at least with Trudeau you can form opposition.  But due to baggage, a lot really don't like him, meaning he has a very low ceiling in vote potential.  By contrast Canada has not taken a sharp turn right.  Canada is still broadly a centrist to slightly left of centre country meaning many out there who want Trudeau gone but don't want a big shift right and a new leader might be able to win those back.

Some on right are giddy about this being the big shift right they have always hoped for.  I don't think Poilievre will shift country dramatically to right like Thatcher did in UK or Reagan in US.  Either he will take incrementalist approach like Harper, more populist like Ford or maybe hardline like Harris but gets tossed after one or two terms and Liberals or NDP undo all the changes and party spends a decade or two in the wilderness.  Reagan and Thatcher pulled country rightward as both Labour and Democrats moved to centre and abandoned any idea of going back to way things were before and few like Corbyn who tried to lost badly.  By contrast Harris moved Ontario to right, but OLP over 15 years in power largely undid most of his legacy but gradually.  If like Harper, only moves country right if in power for a very long time and I think nowadays people fatigue of governments a lot faster than in past so chance of Tories lasting over 10 years seems slim.  I actually think we may be entering age where 8 years is maximum shelf life of government.  If like Ford, he will back off more right wing ideas when public backlash to try and stay liked.  However, I think Ford wants to be liked whereas I don't think Poilievre cares if he is hated by large portion of population so he will likely either be like Harris or Harper. 

So question is, have Tories hit ceiling or can they go even higher and how high?

Do Liberals have path back to power both with and without Trudeau?

And will a Poilievre win mean big shift right or will Canada largely remain politically like it is now or even see a left wing backlash?

[mileslunn]

I think it is quite illustrative that a major part of the Tory poll surge has been housing - not these days what is generally considered a "right wing" issue. This may indicate that whilst voters are thinking of a change, they want the Tories to manage things better rather than surge massively to the right.

Of course, this is a generalisation. But I do think that if the Tories see a win next time as a reason to go full Milei/Truss, they will be making quite a big mistake.

Absolutely although I think Poilievre shares similar ideology with those two but whether he can show restraint or not don't know.  Smith is a lot like those two, but surprisingly has been more a populist, although I think problem with her is she is not very bright and also much of caucus supported Toews so would have more trouble getting party behind her on such thing. 

[mileslunn]

Another question is short of a blue wave in Quebec, do people think Tory vote has hit ceiling?  Liberals have not hit floor as possible NDP pulls ahead of them, but I tend to think Tories are at ceiling and can only climb higher if there is a blue wave in Quebec and usually Quebec tends to have big swings during the campaign not before.

Other question, is are Liberals toast or do they have a path back?  Obviously anything is possible in politics and likewise they are obviously underdogs, but I mean barring some extreme surprise is there any realistic chance of them winning?

My view is if Trudeau stays on, chances of beating Tories in seats is very slim but could deny them a majority and maybe much like Sanchez did in Spain stay on by getting and NDP and perhaps BQ support.  But a Trudeau led Liberal party winning most seats let alone a majority seems far fetched.

Now if change leaders it is a higher risk/higher reward.  With a new leader, I absolutely think Liberals can come back and win.  But at same time chances of them falling to third place are also much higher too.  Trudeau has a core base that loves him thus why if you are one who thinks Liberals are going to lose, at least with Trudeau you can form opposition.  But due to baggage, a lot really don't like him, meaning he has a very low ceiling in vote potential.  By contrast Canada has not taken a sharp turn right.  Canada is still broadly a centrist to slightly left of centre country meaning many out there who want Trudeau gone but don't want a big shift right and a new leader might be able to win those back.

Some on right are giddy about this being the big shift right they have always hoped for.  I don't think Poilievre will shift country dramatically to right like Thatcher did in UK or Reagan in US.  Either he will take incrementalist approach like Harper, more populist like Ford or maybe hardline like Harris but gets tossed after one or two terms and Liberals or NDP undo all the changes and party spends a decade or two in the wilderness.  Reagan and Thatcher pulled country rightward as both Labour and Democrats moved to centre and abandoned any idea of going back to way things were before and few like Corbyn who tried to lost badly.  By contrast Harris moved Ontario to right, but OLP over 15 years in power largely undid most of his legacy but gradually.  If like Harper, only moves country right if in power for a very long time and I think nowadays people fatigue of governments a lot faster than in past so chance of Tories lasting over 10 years seems slim.  I actually think we may be entering age where 8 years is maximum shelf life of government.  If like Ford, he will back off more right wing ideas when public backlash to try and stay liked.  However, I think Ford wants to be liked whereas I don't think Poilievre cares if he is hated by large portion of population so he will likely either be like Harris or Harper.  

So question is, have Tories hit ceiling or can they go even higher and how high?

Do Liberals have path back to power both with and without Trudeau?

And will a Poilievre win mean big shift right or will Canada largely remain politically like it is now or even see a left wing backlash?

I think Poilievre will be slightly more like Doug Ford when governing - by that I mean he will be a mix of moderate economic policies (largely in response to public backlash) and moving the country to the economic right. Ford also wanted to slash the size of government when campaigning, but he immediately moderated that stance when he came to power. However, that doesn't mean Ford hasn't moved Ontario to the right on some issues - particularly on healthcare where he has allowed more private healthcare facilities.

With that said, I hope Poilievre keeps true to his promise of reducing government spending and keeping it under control rather than the mistakes Doug Ford has made, namely running increasing deficits during the first two years of his government.

If Poilievre ends up being 'too right-wing' however, I think there is a risk of a left-wing backlash from the Canadian equivalent of Bernie Sanders-type people, mainly in the NDP. However, I'm not sure such a movement will be that successful - the Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn types have flopped very hard in other English-speaking countries and I don't think Canada would be any different.

US is more skeptical of socialism than Canada so while not sure if Bernie Sanders could win here, he would definitely have better chance than in US.  Corbyn agreed although if he faced Truss who knows what would have happened.  Johnson was big on spending and avoided austerity.  He was more a populist than traditional small government type.

[mileslunn]

Another question is short of a blue wave in Quebec, do people think Tory vote has hit ceiling?  Liberals have not hit floor as possible NDP pulls ahead of them, but I tend to think Tories are at ceiling and can only climb higher if there is a blue wave in Quebec and usually Quebec tends to have big swings during the campaign not before.

Other question, is are Liberals toast or do they have a path back?  Obviously anything is possible in politics and likewise they are obviously underdogs, but I mean barring some extreme surprise is there any realistic chance of them winning?

My view is if Trudeau stays on, chances of beating Tories in seats is very slim but could deny them a majority and maybe much like Sanchez did in Spain stay on by getting and NDP and perhaps BQ support.  But a Trudeau led Liberal party winning most seats let alone a majority seems far fetched.

Now if change leaders it is a higher risk/higher reward.  With a new leader, I absolutely think Liberals can come back and win.  But at same time chances of them falling to third place are also much higher too.  Trudeau has a core base that loves him thus why if you are one who thinks Liberals are going to lose, at least with Trudeau you can form opposition.  But due to baggage, a lot really don't like him, meaning he has a very low ceiling in vote potential.  By contrast Canada has not taken a sharp turn right.  Canada is still broadly a centrist to slightly left of centre country meaning many out there who want Trudeau gone but don't want a big shift right and a new leader might be able to win those back.

Some on right are giddy about this being the big shift right they have always hoped for.  I don't think Poilievre will shift country dramatically to right like Thatcher did in UK or Reagan in US.  Either he will take incrementalist approach like Harper, more populist like Ford or maybe hardline like Harris but gets tossed after one or two terms and Liberals or NDP undo all the changes and party spends a decade or two in the wilderness.  Reagan and Thatcher pulled country rightward as both Labour and Democrats moved to centre and abandoned any idea of going back to way things were before and few like Corbyn who tried to lost badly.  By contrast Harris moved Ontario to right, but OLP over 15 years in power largely undid most of his legacy but gradually.  If like Harper, only moves country right if in power for a very long time and I think nowadays people fatigue of governments a lot faster than in past so chance of Tories lasting over 10 years seems slim.  I actually think we may be entering age where 8 years is maximum shelf life of government.  If like Ford, he will back off more right wing ideas when public backlash to try and stay liked.  However, I think Ford wants to be liked whereas I don't think Poilievre cares if he is hated by large portion of population so he will likely either be like Harris or Harper.  

So question is, have Tories hit ceiling or can they go even higher and how high?

Do Liberals have path back to power both with and without Trudeau?

And will a Poilievre win mean big shift right or will Canada largely remain politically like it is now or even see a left wing backlash?

I think Poilievre will be slightly more like Doug Ford when governing - by that I mean he will be a mix of moderate economic policies (largely in response to public backlash) and moving the country to the economic right. Ford also wanted to slash the size of government when campaigning, but he immediately moderated that stance when he came to power. However, that doesn't mean Ford hasn't moved Ontario to the right on some issues - particularly on healthcare where he has allowed more private healthcare facilities.

With that said, I hope Poilievre keeps true to his promise of reducing government spending and keeping it under control rather than the mistakes Doug Ford has made, namely running increasing deficits during the first two years of his government.

If Poilievre ends up being 'too right-wing' however, I think there is a risk of a left-wing backlash from the Canadian equivalent of Bernie Sanders-type people, mainly in the NDP. However, I'm not sure such a movement will be that successful - the Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn types have flopped very hard in other English-speaking countries and I don't think Canada would be any different.

US is more skeptical of socialism than Canada so while not sure if Bernie Sanders could win here, he would definitely have better chance than in US. Corbyn agreed although if he faced Truss who knows what would have happened.  Johnson was big on spending and avoided austerity.  He was more a populist than traditional small government type.

This is a little bit complicated because many factors go into this. Support for socialism as an idea is one thing but it's also important to look at specific policies.

US is slightly more sceptical of 'socialism' than Canadians, but it's not a very large difference (36% support for socialism in the US while 42% support for socialism in Canada - although note, how socialism is defined is also relevant. A lot of Canadians/Americans think socialism = universal healthcare, but Canada already has that, so it wouldn't make that much of a difference in terms of voting preferences here as much as it does in the US).

However, Canada is also a lot more pro oil and pro fossil fuel energy than the US, with support for projects like the Keystone XL pipeline being bipartisan (supported by CPC+LPC here), while being opposed by Democrats in the US. One of Bernie Sanders' signature policies was to dismantle the fossil fuel industry and I don't think that would be popular here.

Canadians are also more supportive of free trade (or at least liberalized trade) agreements like NAFTA and TPP than Americans are, and Sanders was very opposed to free trade as well.

There are many factors and policies that go into whether someone with Sanders' economic views would be popular in a country. With that said, I think someone like Sanders is very unlikely to get elected in Canada.

I think Canada has just as many types who want to phase our fossil fuels as US maybe more.  I think big reason is more it is generally understood you never as a serious party do something that risks splitting the country.  Shutting down fossil fuels would likely lead to Alberta and Saskatchewan separating while in US states with large fossil fuels are more diversified or too small to stand on own so threat of secession is less. 

[mileslunn]

Liberals seem to want to tie Poilievre to Trump and wondering if others think it will work or not.  I tend to think it actually might.  I don't think you will see a massive swing, but might help push NDP down and maybe lead to a few Red Tories/fatigued Liberals crossing over but I doubt it will erase a 15 point deficit.  At most maybe a 5 point swing.  Main thing though is a lot depends how they play it as people don't have to believe it per se, just must find it plausible for it to work.  But if seems too over the top and people don't even find it plausible it won't work.

[mileslunn]

Liberals seem to want to tie Poilievre to Trump and wondering if others think it will work or not.  I tend to think it actually might.  I don't think you will see a massive swing, but might help push NDP down and maybe lead to a few Red Tories/fatigued Liberals crossing over but I doubt it will erase a 15 point deficit.  At most maybe a 5 point swing.  Main thing though is a lot depends how they play it as people don't have to believe it per se, just must find it plausible for it to work.  But if seems too over the top and people don't even find it plausible it won't work.

If they want to actually tie him to Trump, then they better be prepared gamble on the November (snap) election like Sunak seems to want in the UK.

Agreed although if Trump wins then might even be more effective as many assume he will be like first term while every reason to believe he will be worse as the more qualified types who restrained his worse impulses won't be part of cabinet.  Off course if Biden wins, then yeah Trump becomes irrelevant by 2025.  And as for US election way too early to say.  I would give Trump slight edge, but its like maybe 55% chance of a Trump win, 45% chance of a Biden win.

[mileslunn]

Liberals seem to want to tie Poilievre to Trump and wondering if others think it will work or not.  I tend to think it actually might.  I don't think you will see a massive swing, but might help push NDP down and maybe lead to a few Red Tories/fatigued Liberals crossing over but I doubt it will erase a 15 point deficit.  At most maybe a 5 point swing.  Main thing though is a lot depends how they play it as people don't have to believe it per se, just must find it plausible for it to work.  But if seems too over the top and people don't even find it plausible it won't work.

If they want to actually tie him to Trump, then they better be prepared gamble on the November (snap) election like Sunak seems to want in the UK.

Agreed although if Trump wins then might even be more effective as many assume he will be like first term while every reason to believe he will be worse as the more qualified types who restrained his worse impulses won't be part of cabinet.  Off course if Biden wins, then yeah Trump becomes irrelevant by 2025.  And as for US election way too early to say.  I would give Trump slight edge, but its like maybe 55% chance of a Trump win, 45% chance of a Biden win.

of course if trump dont win this will backfired massive

Thus why I have a hunch they will go in Fall 2024 instead of Fall 2025 so they can use Trump either way since he will be in front page news whereas wait until 2025 risk it won't work if he loses.

[mileslunn]

Not a bad strategy - that's why I've been saying all along that the Liberals will win.

I am not as bold as that, but I do think their chances are much better than most say and I am one who believes polls will tighten.  I actually could see a repeat of what happened in Spain this summer where Tories win plurality, say 140 seats, but Trudeau gets support of not just NDP, but also BQ much like Sanchez got Catalan separatists on board and signs and supply and confidence for party to stay in power until 2029.

[mileslunn]

With Liberals trying to compare Poilievre to Trump, one poll by Abacus showed approximately 1 in 6 Liberal and 1 in 7 NDP voters would vote for Trump if in US.  Who the heck would these be?  I can see why maybe some who voted for two parties in past would support Trump, but cannot understand why anyone who still votes for them would prefer Trump over Biden.  I mean a Conservative voter wanting Biden to win that I can see.  Heck even a PPC voter favouring Biden seems more plausible (albeit unlikely) than a Liberal or NDP who favours Trump.

[mileslunn]

With Liberals trying to compare Poilievre to Trump, one poll by Abacus showed approximately 1 in 6 Liberal and 1 in 7 NDP voters would vote for Trump if in US.  Who the heck would these be?  I can see why maybe some who voted for two parties in past would support Trump, but cannot understand why anyone who still votes for them would prefer Trump over Biden.  I mean a Conservative voter wanting Biden to win that I can see.  Heck even a PPC voter favouring Biden seems more plausible (albeit unlikely) than a Liberal or NDP who favours Trump.

I mean many WWC voters in Canada still vote Lib or NDP so my guess is those types of voters.

Some but they are trending Conservative as places like Brantford-Brant, Essex, Kenora, Kootenay-Columbia all examples of white working class that have turned blue.  Rural Newfoundland, Cape Breton Island, Saguenay, Niagara Centre, Hamilton East-Stoney Creek, Windsor-Tecumseh, Northern Ontario, Skeena-Bulkley Valley and North Island-Powell River didn't go Conservative last election but were closer than normal and are trending rightward and if polls stay where are likely due flip next election. 

I can get how someone who voted Liberals in 90s supports Trump as party did have some fairly right wing MPs then unlike now while for NDP I could see someone who voted for Ed Broadbent or Jack Layton might since despite differences but appealed to white working class, but Singh I doubt does nearly as much and Trudeau much like Democrats very much appeals to urban/suburban educated class.

[mileslunn]

On Budget, I feel government stuck too much in 2015 thus not getting bounce they wanted.  At this point I don't think big spending has popularity it once had.  This tends to go in cycles and many felt Harper was too cautious so were happy to see a looser fiscal policy.  But with inflation above 2% and higher interest rates hurting people, many worry big spending will just make it tougher to reduce interest rates which is key to Liberals recovering.

On Capital gains, I think Trudeau is trying to playing class warfare as in 2015 his promise to tax top 1% more worked well.  However that was in background of Occupy Wall Street when taxing the rich was more popular.  It is still popular today but I don't think it alone is enough to help party recover.  And with low productivity some will question whether it makes that worse.  There are strong arguments for and against raising capital gains, but I think in bigger picture people may notionally want to tax rich more but is only top issue for a subset of progressives who are in NDP or Liberal column anyways.   Most for higher taxes on the rich won't necessarily vote Liberal over this unless they see personal benefits.  People vote on who will help make my life better, not on high level philosophical questions.

I think Liberals were hoping Poilievre would take bait which he hasn't.  But had they followed provincial premiers, most Conservative ones have not reversed top rate hikes done by previous administrations so unlike GOP in US where cutting taxes for rich is still a major policy, not sure that is case in Canada.  Conservatives are for lower taxes, but I suspect emphasis will be on that for lower and middle income earners.  Poilievre probably does believe top rates are too high, but doubt it is a top priority for him.  After all Ford and Smith have both left top rate hikes Notley & Wynne brought in, in place.  Much like in 2015, I feel Trudeau focusing too much on what is happening south of border not here where income inequality is a much bigger issue and where GOP still very much is about cutting taxes for the rich.  Big reason for difference comes to campaign finance as most conservative tax cuts to rich came before corporate donations banned and personal were not limited.  Ever since campaign donation limits brought in and corporate banned, tax cuts for high earners have been a lot less common.  US doesn't have those so have to keep donors happy.

Bigger problem with capital gains hike is more opposition from doctors and also fear may hit some cottage owners.  I get impression this was very much aimed at millennials and Gen Z where few will be impacted, but at end of day not sure how easily they can win back that cohort.  While Liberals trailing amongst all age groups, they are strongest amongst boomers not Gen Z and millennials.  I think latter is less loyal to any party and gets impatient a lot quicker so when they decide they've had enough pretty tough to win them back.  Off course Conservatives could discover to this group will turn on them pretty quickly if things don't improve.