Canada General Discussion: Trudeau II

[DC Al Fine]

The NDP is still polling 15-20%, so it's just a reversion to the mean really. We're not in Audrey McLaughlin territory, and not even Alexa McDonough territory either.

Hell, they're in Jack Layton (04-10) territory, which wasn't exactly considered terrible at the time.

[Hatman 🍁]

The NDP is still polling 15-20%, so it's just a reversion to the mean really. We're not in Audrey McLaughlin territory, and not even Alexa McDonough territory either.

Hell, they're in Jack Layton (04-10) territory, which wasn't exactly considered terrible at the time.

The pundit class has short memories.

[136or142]

Andrew Scheer is arguably doing much worse than Jagmeet Singh. However, the vast majority of the Canadian punditocracy is conservative so that view hardly ever gets expressed.

The Conservatives are doing better in the polls than the result they received during the 2015 election, while the NDP is, at best, only doing as well (not a huge amount of difference either way) however I think the Conservatives are doing so in a way that could rebound on them negatively. They are clearly playing up fears over the irregular crossings and I think Scheer leaves himself open to charges that he is a dishonest fear monger.  Impossible to know how these things will work out, but this isn't the first time that Scheer has gone for short term gain at the possible expense of his longer term prospects.

[RogueBeaver]

Notley trashes Singh on the record as a thoughtless elitist who doesn't care about working people.

[DC Al Fine]

Notley trashes Singh on the record as a thoughtless elitist who doesn't care about working people.

Why don't the Liberals ever infight like this anymore?

[136or142]

Notley trashes Singh on the record as a thoughtless elitist who doesn't care about working people.

Why don't the Liberals ever infight like this anymore?

The New Brunswick Liberal government opposes the carbon tax.

[King of Kensington]

Andrew Scheer is arguably doing much worse than Jagmeet Singh. However, the vast majority of the Canadian punditocracy is conservative so that view hardly ever gets expressed.

The Conservatives are doing better in the polls than the result they received during the 2015 election, while the NDP is, at best, only doing as well (not a huge amount of difference either way) however I think the Conservatives are doing so in a way that could rebound on them negatively. They are clearly playing up fears over the irregular crossings and I think Scheer leaves himself open to charges that he is a dishonest fear monger.  Impossible to know how these things will work out, but this isn't the first time that Scheer has gone for short term gain at the possible expense of his longer term prospects.

I think Scheer will have difficulty catching on in the GTA and Greater Vancouver.  Running up the margins in the Prairies and rural Ontario won't translate into many seats.

The NDP will almost certainly lose ground in Quebec, but there may be an opening for Singh among progressives in Ontario and BC as well as in the Sikh community.   But he's not running "for PM."

[mileslunn]

Andrew Scheer is arguably doing much worse than Jagmeet Singh. However, the vast majority of the Canadian punditocracy is conservative so that view hardly ever gets expressed.

The Conservatives are doing better in the polls than the result they received during the 2015 election, while the NDP is, at best, only doing as well (not a huge amount of difference either way) however I think the Conservatives are doing so in a way that could rebound on them negatively. They are clearly playing up fears over the irregular crossings and I think Scheer leaves himself open to charges that he is a dishonest fear monger.  Impossible to know how these things will work out, but this isn't the first time that Scheer has gone for short term gain at the possible expense of his longer term prospects.

I think Scheer will have difficulty catching on in the GTA and Greater Vancouver.  Running up the margins in the Prairies and rural Ontario won't translate into many seats.

The NDP will almost certainly lose ground in Quebec, but there may be an opening for Singh among progressives in Ontario and BC as well as in the Sikh community.   But he's not running "for PM."

John Ibbitson had an interesting article on the irregular crossers and actually it could go either way.  Polls clearly show most Canadians want stronger action on it and while generous with immigration, people tend to not like those coming in illegally thus risk for Liberals, particularly in Quebec which tends to be more nationalistic.  On the other hand if the Tories come across as xenophobic could hurt them big time especially in the GTA and Lower Mainland.  As for the GTA, I could still see them making big gains in the 905 belt, after all Harper got over 40% in most 905 ridings in 2015 so it will come down to splits.  If NDP does poorly then 905 stays red, but NDP gains then the splits are enough to allow the Tories to flip most of those ridings they got over 40%.  In the Lower Mainland suburbs, again also comes down to splits.  The Tories were rock bottom so expect them to improve a bit in 2019, but obviously well short of where they were in 2011.  If you have a perfect three way split like you did in 2004, they could win a whole wack of seats with only 1/3 of the vote, but if not I suspect they won't win many west of Langley.

[136or142]

Andrew Scheer is arguably doing much worse than Jagmeet Singh. However, the vast majority of the Canadian punditocracy is conservative so that view hardly ever gets expressed.

The Conservatives are doing better in the polls than the result they received during the 2015 election, while the NDP is, at best, only doing as well (not a huge amount of difference either way) however I think the Conservatives are doing so in a way that could rebound on them negatively. They are clearly playing up fears over the irregular crossings and I think Scheer leaves himself open to charges that he is a dishonest fear monger.  Impossible to know how these things will work out, but this isn't the first time that Scheer has gone for short term gain at the possible expense of his longer term prospects.

I think Scheer will have difficulty catching on in the GTA and Greater Vancouver.  Running up the margins in the Prairies and rural Ontario won't translate into many seats.

The NDP will almost certainly lose ground in Quebec, but there may be an opening for Singh among progressives in Ontario and BC as well as in the Sikh community.   But he's not running "for PM."

John Ibbitson had an interesting article on the irregular crossers and actually it could go either way.  Polls clearly show most Canadians want stronger action on it and while generous with immigration, people tend to not like those coming in illegally thus risk for Liberals, particularly in Quebec which tends to be more nationalistic.  On the other hand if the Tories come across as xenophobic could hurt them big time especially in the GTA and Lower Mainland.  As for the GTA, I could still see them making big gains in the 905 belt, after all Harper got over 40% in most 905 ridings in 2015 so it will come down to splits.  If NDP does poorly then 905 stays red, but NDP gains then the splits are enough to allow the Tories to flip most of those ridings they got over 40%.  In the Lower Mainland suburbs, again also comes down to splits.  The Tories were rock bottom so expect them to improve a bit in 2019, but obviously well short of where they were in 2011.  If you have a perfect three way split like you did in 2004, they could win a whole wack of seats with only 1/3 of the vote, but if not I suspect they won't win many west of Langley.

I agree that 30% is the Conservative base but I don't agree completely that they hit rock bottom. They had 140 or so incumbents running again (to be sure some of the riding boundaries had changed, but they mainly got smaller.) This time they'll have about 90.  It's the Liberals this time who will benefit from any 'incumbent vote.'

This is a factor that has clearly NOT been taken into account in the discussion to this point.

[mileslunn]

Andrew Scheer is arguably doing much worse than Jagmeet Singh. However, the vast majority of the Canadian punditocracy is conservative so that view hardly ever gets expressed.

The Conservatives are doing better in the polls than the result they received during the 2015 election, while the NDP is, at best, only doing as well (not a huge amount of difference either way) however I think the Conservatives are doing so in a way that could rebound on them negatively. They are clearly playing up fears over the irregular crossings and I think Scheer leaves himself open to charges that he is a dishonest fear monger.  Impossible to know how these things will work out, but this isn't the first time that Scheer has gone for short term gain at the possible expense of his longer term prospects.

I think Scheer will have difficulty catching on in the GTA and Greater Vancouver.  Running up the margins in the Prairies and rural Ontario won't translate into many seats.

The NDP will almost certainly lose ground in Quebec, but there may be an opening for Singh among progressives in Ontario and BC as well as in the Sikh community.   But he's not running "for PM."

John Ibbitson had an interesting article on the irregular crossers and actually it could go either way.  Polls clearly show most Canadians want stronger action on it and while generous with immigration, people tend to not like those coming in illegally thus risk for Liberals, particularly in Quebec which tends to be more nationalistic.  On the other hand if the Tories come across as xenophobic could hurt them big time especially in the GTA and Lower Mainland.  As for the GTA, I could still see them making big gains in the 905 belt, after all Harper got over 40% in most 905 ridings in 2015 so it will come down to splits.  If NDP does poorly then 905 stays red, but NDP gains then the splits are enough to allow the Tories to flip most of those ridings they got over 40%.  In the Lower Mainland suburbs, again also comes down to splits.  The Tories were rock bottom so expect them to improve a bit in 2019, but obviously well short of where they were in 2011.  If you have a perfect three way split like you did in 2004, they could win a whole wack of seats with only 1/3 of the vote, but if not I suspect they won't win many west of Langley.

I agree that 30% is the Conservative base but I don't agree completely that they hit rock bottom. They had 140 or so incumbents running again (to be sure some of the riding boundaries had changed, but they mainly got smaller.) This time they'll have about 90.  It's the Liberals this time who will benefit from any 'incumbent vote.'

This is a factor that has clearly been taken into account in the discussion to this point.

True enough, although amongst the base I sense a strong hatred of Trudeau.  Not enough to defeat him, but enough to make it tough for Liberals make inroads.  Also many Blue Liberals are not overly happy with Trudeau either and with Scheer being unknown a lot will depend on how disciplined a campaign he runs.  If he panders too much to his base they will swing back, but if he runs a disciplined one like Harper did in 2006, I could see him picking up many of those.  Not enough to actually win the election, far from it.  Although Nanos which is the most accurate pollster has Liberals only 0.3 ahead so while a lot can happen between now a next year, I would probably want the Liberals to have a bigger lead before safely concluding they are going to win.  That being said don't think Scheer will become PM in 2019 since I cannot see a path to 170 for the Tories and if they fail to win a majority, NDP will prop up the Liberals much like Greens are for BC NDP.

[Poirot]

Illegal border crossing seems a good issue for Scheer. Angus Reid poll shows he is more trusted than Trudeau on this.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/angus-reid-border-poll-1.4771961

[136or142]

Andrew Scheer is arguably doing much worse than Jagmeet Singh. However, the vast majority of the Canadian punditocracy is conservative so that view hardly ever gets expressed.

The Conservatives are doing better in the polls than the result they received during the 2015 election, while the NDP is, at best, only doing as well (not a huge amount of difference either way) however I think the Conservatives are doing so in a way that could rebound on them negatively. They are clearly playing up fears over the irregular crossings and I think Scheer leaves himself open to charges that he is a dishonest fear monger.  Impossible to know how these things will work out, but this isn't the first time that Scheer has gone for short term gain at the possible expense of his longer term prospects.

I think Scheer will have difficulty catching on in the GTA and Greater Vancouver.  Running up the margins in the Prairies and rural Ontario won't translate into many seats.

The NDP will almost certainly lose ground in Quebec, but there may be an opening for Singh among progressives in Ontario and BC as well as in the Sikh community.   But he's not running "for PM."

John Ibbitson had an interesting article on the irregular crossers and actually it could go either way.  Polls clearly show most Canadians want stronger action on it and while generous with immigration, people tend to not like those coming in illegally thus risk for Liberals, particularly in Quebec which tends to be more nationalistic.  On the other hand if the Tories come across as xenophobic could hurt them big time especially in the GTA and Lower Mainland.  As for the GTA, I could still see them making big gains in the 905 belt, after all Harper got over 40% in most 905 ridings in 2015 so it will come down to splits.  If NDP does poorly then 905 stays red, but NDP gains then the splits are enough to allow the Tories to flip most of those ridings they got over 40%.  In the Lower Mainland suburbs, again also comes down to splits.  The Tories were rock bottom so expect them to improve a bit in 2019, but obviously well short of where they were in 2011.  If you have a perfect three way split like you did in 2004, they could win a whole wack of seats with only 1/3 of the vote, but if not I suspect they won't win many west of Langley.

I agree that 30% is the Conservative base but I don't agree completely that they hit rock bottom. They had 140 or so incumbents running again (to be sure some of the riding boundaries had changed, but they mainly got smaller.) This time they'll have about 90.  It's the Liberals this time who will benefit from any 'incumbent vote.'

This is a factor that has clearly NOT been taken into account in the discussion to this point.

True enough, although amongst the base I sense a strong hatred of Trudeau.  Not enough to defeat him, but enough to make it tough for Liberals make inroads.  Also many Blue Liberals are not overly happy with Trudeau either and with Scheer being unknown a lot will depend on how disciplined a campaign he runs.  If he panders too much to his base they will swing back, but if he runs a disciplined one like Harper did in 2006, I could see him picking up many of those.  Not enough to actually win the election, far from it.  Although Nanos which is the most accurate pollster has Liberals only 0.3 ahead so while a lot can happen between now a next year, I would probably want the Liberals to have a bigger lead before safely concluding they are going to win.  That being said don't think Scheer will become PM in 2019 since I cannot see a path to 170 for the Tories and if they fail to win a majority, NDP will prop up the Liberals much like Greens are for BC NDP.

I agree with the characterization from Ibbitson, but the way I'd put it is the Conservatives seem to be playing for short term political gains at the possible expense at the ballot box.  Not only in terms of xenophobia but also in terms of being characterized as a fear-monger (on irregular border crossings, on marijuana legalization, on deficit spending on the one hand and then calling for massive tax cuts to match Trump and the U.S lest the Canadian economy collapse.)  Except to the hard core conservatives they can hardly counter that being concerned about and wanting to address global warming is fear mongering any more.

The issue here though is that Scheer seems to be incapable of learning from his mistakes. When he was first elected as leader I believe the first issue he addressed was 'free speech' on university campuses and not surprisingly after a few months he had to walk it back by essentially saying 'when I meant free speech for everybody, I didn't literally mean 'everybody''

These Conservatives seem to be increasingly addicted to scoring the immediate political points as they are increasingly right wing (reactionary) populist.  Certainly it's my bias that I want and hope that it ends up hurting them bigly, but that it will is, I think, much greater than just a 'non zero possibility.'

[King of Kensington]

I don't see Scheer winning but the Tories at least avoided catastrophe by not going with Bernier.

[mileslunn]

I don't see Scheer winning but the Tories at least avoided catastrophe by not going with Bernier.

I think Leitch, Trost, and Lemieux would have been even more catastrophic.  Michael Chong on paper seemed like the one who would be the toughest challenge, but probably much like Patrick Brown, the party would have tried to find a way to dump him ahead of time.  Lisa Raitt and Erin O'Toole probably would have done better than Scheer but not sure if it would be enough to win.  I think on the carbon tax issue, the Tories will only change after the lose an election over it and even then it might take a few before they decide it is a vote losing issue.  I actually don't think it has as big an impact either way.  I think the PCs in Ontario would have won either way and the carbon tax had very little impact either way.

[RogueBeaver]

Don't think Bernier would've been a disaster. Sure he wouldn't have won but you could say the same for any other major contender, since JT's name isn't Joe Clark and there won't be a depression next year.

[DC Al Fine]

Don't think Bernier would've been a disaster. Sure he wouldn't have won but you could say the same for any other major contender, since JT's name isn't Joe Clark and there won't be a depression next year.

Eh, Bernier doesn't seem to play well with others and is a little too attached to his libertarianism.

[RogueBeaver]

I still don't see how that means less than 90-odd seats, since all those hard nationalist votes have to go somewhere here next year in a 2-party race. Maybe some close ON suburban seats from last time, taking only Fundy Royal and NB Southwest out East.

[Hatman 🍁]

Illegal border crossing seems a good issue for Scheer. Angus Reid poll shows he is more trusted than Trudeau on this.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/angus-reid-border-poll-1.4771961

The word is irregular.

[mileslunn]

Illegal border crossing seems a good issue for Scheer. Angus Reid poll shows he is more trusted than Trudeau on this.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/angus-reid-border-poll-1.4771961

The word is irregular.

Technically both are correct as signs at the border do read illegal so entering Canada at any point other than a point of entry is illegal, however if one claims asylum they must be given a full hearing and how they entered Canada is not factored in when making the final decision.  Essentially its like if your life was in danger and you had to trespass to seek help, you are still trespassing but due to the circumstances you would not be penalized for it.  I am not sure the legal term but when two laws conflict and one supercedes it.  Nonetheless anyone who crosses illegally without declaring asylum is entering illegally but if they declare asylum how they entered is irrelevant.  As for terminology it is perhaps better to say irregular than illegal, but making a big stink about it is not exactly an issue that is going to get a lot of support outside your downtown progressives who would never vote Conservative anyways. 

[mileslunn]

Maxime Bernier last night goes on twitter tirade on diversity that I think many would say is bigoted.  While tough to say the exact impact as no election coming up, probably a good thing for the party he was not chosen as leader.  Kick him out and that could divide the party, but let him stay on and he might say or tweet something stupid during the election campaign which sinks the party.

[DC Al Fine]

I still don't see how that means less than 90-odd seats, since all those hard nationalist votes have to go somewhere here next year in a 2-party race. Maybe some close ON suburban seats from last time, taking only Fundy Royal and NB Southwest out East.

Maxime Bernier last night goes on twitter tirade on diversity that I think many would say is bigoted.  While tough to say the exact impact as no election coming up, probably a good thing for the party he was not chosen as leader.  Kick him out and that could divide the party, but let him stay on and he might say or tweet something stupid during the election campaign which sinks the party.

See this is what I mean. Dude has repeatedly shown he has no discipline. He'd have a much, much higher downside risk in a campaign than Scheer.

[2952-0-0]

I still don't see how that means less than 90-odd seats, since all those hard nationalist votes have to go somewhere here next year in a 2-party race. Maybe some close ON suburban seats from last time, taking only Fundy Royal and NB Southwest out East.

Maxime Bernier last night goes on twitter tirade on diversity that I think many would say is bigoted.  While tough to say the exact impact as no election coming up, probably a good thing for the party he was not chosen as leader.  Kick him out and that could divide the party, but let him stay on and he might say or tweet something stupid during the election campaign which sinks the party.

See this is what I mean. Dude has repeatedly shown he has no discipline. He'd have a much, much higher downside risk in a campaign than Scheer.

Frank Graves of Ekos says that since the June Ontario election, the Federal Liberals have surged in Ontario from a 10 point deficit to a 10 point lead. And, that was before the Twitter feud with the Saudis, which will surely boost them further.

[mileslunn]

With the Liberals clearly leaning in the progressive direction and conservatives pandering more to their base, does anyone think there are enough Blue Liberals/Red Tories out there that a party that appealed to them could gain traction or are we in a more polarized era where such demographic is not as big as it once was.  Also will be interesting to see which party or how they split next election.  I tend to assume around 50-60% of Canadians sit left of centre, 30% are part of the conservative base while 10-15% make up those Blue Liberals/Red Tories, but what are others thoughts?

[RogueBeaver]

Mad Max is getting into Leitch territory. https://twitter.com/MaximeBernier/status/1029461602007797760 https://twitter.com/MaximeBernier/status/1029522177765326848

[Kingpoleon]

Mad Max is getting into Leitch territory. https://twitter.com/MaximeBernier/status/1029461602007797760 https://twitter.com/MaximeBernier/status/1029522177765326848

>Bernier attempting a sophisticated philosophical debate with Trudeau about diversity of opinions using hyperbole

Someone could use some rhetoric and debate classes.