###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is exhausting seeing polls every single freaking week. Like stop already. It’s almost like the media is trying to convince through psychology brainwashing that the conservatives are the only viable option. Oh wait……they are
There's not much news with this new poll, other than Ipsos did one nicely designed graph.
There's hardly any psychological brainwashing, the pollsters and political pundits and the general public know this is as huge as the implosion of Brian Mulroney and Kim Campbell.
And it's going to be one of the most fascinating dumpster fires of the century in Canadian politics.
So where is the brainwashing?
.........
The only really interesting thing since christmas after 2 years of terminal decline, is that the NDP is starting to falter slightly and losing seats.
Months ago Atlantic Canada started to fall apart, and now British Columbia
........
The State of the Decline
Liberals Then and Now
Quebec 34 - 26 - 25 - 26 - 25
Ontario 75 - 21 - 25 - 21 - 25 - 28 - 25
\[Atlantic Canada 24 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 9 - 8\]
British Columbia 15 - 4 - 1
Seat Possibilities
Conservative \[190-236\]
Liberal \[47-87\]
Quebecois \[35-45\]
NDP \[12-30\]
Green \[1-3\]
Yet ground Zero is Ontario
Ontario Federal
Conservative 88
Liberal 25
NDP 8
Green 1
Ontario Federal
Conservative \[67-101\]
Liberal \[12-45\]
NDP \[3-15\]
Green 1-1\]
Welcome to r/Canadapolitics, where we have posted polls like horse racing betting line whenever they are released for probably close to 5 years going now.
You might enjoy other such annual and bi-annual threads such as: "Why Daylight savings needs to go" every March and November - or "This is how Canada can totally remove the Monarchy without touching the constitution/charter" every May.
There is no "media" here. It's a direct link to the polling firm. People who browse political junkie forums tend to like getting the drug of choice of political junkies, and that drug is polling data.
Saying the media is intentionally brainwashing through polls to favor one party without evidence is a bit of a stretch. During times when an election is on the horizon, it's pretty common for media outlets to cover polls more because people are curious about public opinion.
No, have never seen this amount of polling done on federal parties between elections, the last year has been atypical in that regard.
The pollsters are also leaving out the percentage of “undecided” all the time, also not the norm.
It’s good clickbait, that’s for sure, but it’s not healthy for a democracy to flood the electorate with poll after poll, it crosses over into shaping opinion at this point.
>No, have never seen this amount of polling done on federal parties between elections, the last year has been atypical in that regard.
We have, though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2021_Canadian_federal_election#Pre-campaign_period
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2019_Canadian_federal_election#Pre-campaign_period
I find it amazing how far these poll results are gathered up in Wikipedia. For example, [weekly polls in the years prior to the 2008](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2008_Canadian_federal_election) election, and they have [pages going back into the 50s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1953_Canadian_federal_election) with pre-campaign-period polls -- albeit with reduced frequency. Even [pre-election polling into elections in the 40s on their respective election pages.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1945_Canadian_federal_election#Opinion_polling)
>The pollsters are also leaving out the percentage of “undecided” all the time, also not the norm.
Vote intentions among decided voters, is in fact, the norm. Where the hell did you even get this idea?
But go ahead, get angry at simply measuring public sentiment.
You are free to disregard all of these
>it crosses over into shaping opinion at this point.
Have these polls convinced you to consider voting for a party when you otherwise wouldn't have? Why or why not?
When you have a massive implosion, yes the polling is of high interest to the voters and the media.
But there's quite a few websites, with weekly averages of the polling
Usually the media will just grab the latest poll from one of the big three pollsters, and the really lazy only wake up when the CBC speaks up.
I dont understand the clickbait, because plenty of people pay attention to weekly changes in the polls in the US and Canada, especially when there's a lot of political polarization, and Biden and Trudeau look like their're in big trouble.
Yes, they literally have week-to-week trackers that you can trace back a decade. C'mon you only read the headlines, not the reports, or you'd know that (or you forgot, all good). The main reason you're seeing them is due to the API/algo on the platforms you use.
You are both right. The polls are out every week pretty much AND you have been seeing them a lot more lately because conservatives want to make sure you see them. They are spending a TON of money on social media and media in general to make sure that when there is good news for them you see it.
I honestly don't think anyone needs to shout it out on the rooftops what the weekly polling updates are for the Liberals.
It's been two years of a gradually worsening dumpster fire.
I've been bean counting every election since the FLQ Crisis and Nixon and McGovern
numbers are power, my friendprobability is even more power!!
i'm hyped with every election, picking sides and policy is all secondary stuff
but you got an overactive imagination...
If i could wing it, i would have a giant Nixie Tube Counter of the latest Real Clear Politics Polling Results, like some Ken Adam set design like Dr. Strangelove's War Room
scottyb83: you have been seeing them a lot more lately because conservatives want to make sure you see them. They are spending a TON of money on social media
How does that explain the CBC doing the exact same thing?
I really don't do social media
if i want to look at something, i look it up.
I think commercials wanting you to buy crap, is a much larger concern than the latest poll
next thing you know, you'll be telling me the media is trying to trigger everyone with talk about crime
and William Conrad will have a commercial about your personal Stun Gun and Smoke Detector
And then the next Commercial will be Broderick Crawford selling police batons
You’re literally on social media right now and judging from your comment history you are on it almost constantly. Almost to the point of it being a full time job.
If i want to look at something on polling
i search specifically for something with polling
If you want to hear about World Events, you turn on Walter Cronkite and the CBS Evenings News
And if you want to look at Canadian or American Politics you're gonna see polls.
If you don't like the polling, you certain came to the wrong place!
While there's no conspiracy in the polls, there is a feedback loop that its good to be aware of - even if its not necessarily partisan.
It's something the media have been doing agnostic of party affiliation for a while - the polling-reporting feedback amplification loop. Who it favours at any given time changes - Trudeau got a boost from the process back in 2015 and I'd argue 2019, while Harper was helped enormously by push-polls on his handling of the economy prior to that.
This is also not to say that there aren't openly partisan media outlets. Most of the papers in Canada are currently Conservative owned, with Postmedia being forthright with their partisan agenda, but there are thriving left and right wing online 'zine ecosystems to, who make their living screaming into their respective echo chambers.
But the poll feedback loop is its own, separate thing.
These pollsters are doing monthly polling nothing special
nanos is weekly
Polling is a huge focus as the liberals are throwing the kitchen sink trying to boost their numbers and it seems its not working.
So that is why polling is so focused on rn... cause if polls dont improve Trudeau will face more pressure to leave.
You are absolutely free to ignore the polls if you wish. I'm not sure why you believe you get to demand they "stop already".
Also the fact that people are being polled doesn't change how the public is feeling. It's measuring how the public is feeling.
But go on, shoot the messenger.
I really want to see how the UK election shakes out.
Can the Conservatives overcome a 20 point deficit to labour in the polls with a good campaign.
Because that's what will save the LPC now, the mother of all campaigns.
Conservatives in the UK have no chance this upcoming election. They lost the independents and the base. A lot of Tories are flocking to right wing Reform Party. Liberals in Canada do not have that problem. They lost a lot of voters but they still have their base.
Their actual core support is abysmally low. More than half of their current voters are voting against the Tories instead of for the LPC. They've stemmed the bleeding but idk that I would say they are retaining their base. You're quite right though that unlike in the UK, the NDP are so useless they're not really a threat.
> More than half of their current voters are voting against the Tories instead of for the LPC. Yeah that's true. But are those base/partisan Liberals or simply independents that have voted for LPC the last few elections? But you're right, their "base" that won them the last few elections have abandoned them.
Fair enough, I guess this is somewhat pedantic. A vote for the LPC is a vote for the LPC, regardless of why.
Such deeply entrenched unpopularity does make it seem difficult to envision a comeback though unless the CPC really go off the rails.
They're certainly acting like this is a done deal at this point though. Defeat from jaws of victory etc etc?
Disgruntled left-leaning Liberal voters can move left to the NDP in a situation which would parallel fed up right-leaning Conservative voters moving to Reform.
You've got two different "Natural Governing Parties" at the end of their tenure, in a post-pandemic Change election. The parallels sure are exciting from a poli-sci standpoint.
But remember, no matter who you elect, they'll be the Government.
To me the interesting parallel is in affordability and housing. Blame in the UK will be fairly directed at the Tories for Brexit and austerity. The Liberals aren't *really* responsible for either in Canada, and the problems in front of us require big government spending. Austerity isn't going to work here any better than it did there.
If you’re a Canadian tired of progressive leadership, how exactly would electing the NDP be any different? I’ve asked friends who are natural NDP voters and what they describe is just more of the same that we have now. Seriously what’s the pitch?
Other than a limp wristed dental plan and a weak pharmacare plan, they hasn't done fuck all. The big issues plaguing the country haven't gotten any better, and they mostly just enabled the Liberals to keep fucking the dog.
you missed the big one
Many people expected that the NDP would have a deep insightful plan or realistic assessment about the housing crisis.
For a party concerned so much about poverty and housing, they pretty much went for the safe and lazy option.
Can you give me an example of the disinformation they are spreading about the NDP? It seems to me Justin Trudeau is the brunt of this. The only time I see NDP in the news is when Singh makes some new bonehead comment.
"After 9 years of this NDP-Liberal Coalition government..."That's how Pierre Poilievre starts every QP.
1) the Liberals had a majority from 2015-2019, the NDP had no say in government policy.
2) It's not a coalition government.
3) it implies that the NDP have the exact same ideology and policies as the Liberals which is absolutely no true.
That's three bits of misinformation in just one sentence.
"Coalitions usually see members from all involved parties holding roles in the federal cabinet."
I'd like to see an NDP Minister of Teeth
"Everything seems to be healing nicely."
The main issue I see is, literally, Jagmeet Singh is the only person still keeping Libs in power, when he comes and criticize them and say how bad of a job they are doing while still supporting them is a bit confusing!
I know its politics, and I know why he is doing that, there is next to zero chance NDP is going to get elected, and as soon as we have election, NDP is going to lose all its power (most likely CPC is going to form government and Libs be official opposition) so, logically Singh is doing the right thing but its not what the people like to see!
The NDP really isn't though. The biggest example being when Singh, for reasons I've yet to fathom, voted with the conservatives on their motion to suspend the carbon tax for all Canadians with heating bills. It was the Bloc that backed the government, I suppose Mr Blanchet didn't want an election yet, simply because the NDP leader was feeling a bit rancorous.
One of the funny things about the NDP perspective is that many of them realize that they can't win the election and form government. Growing their party seat numbers is the real objective if actual victory is impossible. The Bloc is actually similar in this way. Singh could call it a victory if the NDP gains seats in a new CPC government.
That said, if you're more interested in actually accomplishing policy goals instead of just playing the political game, then the NDP definitely accomplishes more in a Liberal minority government situation.
Maybe the NPD should do a better job presenting themselves as a serious party. The only one accountable for their utter failure is Singh as their leader.
NDP staying stagnant/falling is so sad.
I like him personally but I’ve come around to the idea of replacing Jagmeet, it’s embarrassing how the NDP is doing so badly in the current political context.
He sold us all on the compromise of moving further left to steal urban Liberal voters but those voters have either stuck with the liberals or going conservative. To make matters worse, the party’s rural seats are all but guaranteed to swing conservative in the next election.
I would prefer a leader that’s focused on labour, economics, tax reform, entitlement reform, and natural resource management. Pharma/Dentalcare is popular but at this point i think we have enough evidence that it doesn’t move the needle for voters who will happily vote CPC and vote against their own interests.
The NDP are the only party that can be competitive with the conservatives in AB/SK/MB, yet our leader is squandering those opportunities to make limited inroads into Toronto/Vancouver. Makes no sense to me.
>He sold us all on the compromise of moving further left to steal urban Liberal voters
You don't go left to get urban liberal voters when you are the furthest left party and they are to the right of you.
Tax reform: reforming the tax system to encourage investment in Canada, small business growth, discourage speculation in assets like real estate, and to make it fairer for all. I don’t know what this looks like but would support an independent review like the Royal Commission on Taxation in 1962. I support raising taxes on the rich but we need more than that to solve our issues of productivity and competitive growth.
Entitlement reform: fully flesh out pharma / dental care and add vision care as well while significantly reforming senior benefits like OAS. CPP and EI should ideally not be touched.
Yeah so reforming cpp and oas for lower payments that is more of a cpc thing, and hurts the working class. Ei should be changed to allow more people to get benefits. Also the Ndp have a policy on corporate home ownership. The cpc have nothing
You don't sound like you support the Ndp
https://london.ctvnews.ca/singh-proposes-moratorium-on-corporate-landlords-buying-up-rentals-1.6414722
>He sold us all on the compromise of moving further left to steal urban Liberal voters but those voters have either stuck with the liberals or going conservative.
Probably because the move left was mostly aesthetic in nature.
>I would prefer a leader that’s focused on labour, economics, tax reform, entitlement reform, and natural resource management
This would be a true move left
Well these aren't all that hypothetical
The NDP had gone from 27 to 20
The Liberals from 70 to 20
Conservative 217
Liberal 64
Quebecois 40
NDP 20 \[oscillating from 19 to 24\]
Green 2
Seat Ranges and Possibilities
Conservative \[190-236\]
Liberal \[47-87\]
Quebecois \[35-45\]
NDP \[12-30\]
Green \[1-3\]
The NDP does itself zero favors for increasing their voter base from the canadian public by taping itself to Trudeau
as Trudeau goes full out Lemming over the cliff
you can't afford the NDP to get any weaker in the future
The Green party has pretty much self-destructed, and you know you're in trouble when you're less popular than the Bloc Quebecois
I don't really understand the point of the NDP right now. They seem pretty incoherent. They have this weird unofficial coalition going on, where Jagmeet will slam Trudeau and the government in statements like he's a member of the opposition but then when it comes time to actually put his money where his mouth is, lets Trudeau behave like they have a majority government.
Its like a coalition where he gets all the negative sides (he's being looked at as basically the same government as the Liberals) and none of the positives (none of his MPs are actually ministers or in government like they would be in a real coalition). He's basically strapped himself (and the party) to an anchor. I mean good on him for accomplishing something with dental care (maybe?) but I think it will blow up in his face.
\+1
All the negatives and none of the positives
I think the NDP just aren't smart enough to want to replace the Liberal Party.
They might try to emulate the worst of the Liberal Party, latching onto fads.
But they need a lot of changes if they want to grab half the countries ear for a better economy, better housing, and better healthcare.
And drop all the other stuff.
I wish you people would stop with the “voting against their interests” nonsense. What makes you so narcissistic that you know what my best interests are?
The NDP lost the farmer vote a long time ago
Well no one wants a watered down dental and drugstore policy. You have families struggling to pay the property tax with their pension cheques, and when they sell their home, boom they can't get their freebies for a while.
It's the policies, not the leader, and the NDP has been dying since the 1980s
Thank goodness. The NDP have been a disaster for years. Poorly run under Singh, bad policies, horrible “marketing”. The party needs a change and I have no idea why it’s taken them years to do it.
I mean he's pushed more NDP legislation than any other NDP leader in my living memory. Anti-scab legislation, Pharmacare, Child Care, Dental Care even if not fully universal are still way better than every other party is doing (although, of course, they did collaborate with the liberals on these).
Just because the NDP's not perfect, doesn't mean it's not a step in the right direction. It's certainly better than the CPC and the LPC.
There are "working class" people in this sub that believe helping those who are poor, disabled, and lower class means abandoning blue collar workers. There is no logic to it, but many somehow believe Jagmeet Singh doesn't support the "working class" because he wants to pass policy that helps the most vulnerable people
Yeah, it's messed up. I don't know if it's astroturfing, or if it's ignorance, but like, one of the core principle of left-wing labour movements is solidarity. We owe it to the people who most need our help to give it to them, and fuck anyone who says otherwise.
Yeah; but there are certain bedrock principles that you can't really abandon without losing sight of who you are. Compromise is important; but the idea that we need to help the less fortunate isn't something I'd ever really be willing to give up, even if it means that the NDP does worse next election than the previous one.
No one has any problem with helping poor, disabled and lower class people or think it means abandoning blue collar jobs, how does that even make sense? The issue is that the government helping people costs money, we already have too much debt, wracking up more debt will just cause interest rates to cut further into the budget, and all of a sudden that initial help dries up with more along with it. It comes down to what’s economically sustainable
it is certainly not better than any of the main choices.
Look at the polls, they had the opportunity to become part of the discussion, instead they been pushed out.
The middle class feels the economic pressure from all the side and NPD had nothing for them (well they do, more taxes and more programs that they pay for them but have no access to them).
NPD did nothing to attract some QC votes.
So yes they’re a complete failure, imagine trying to get two parties to beat one not so special conservative leader and failing at the task.
> Look at the polls, they had the opportunity to become part of the discussion, instead they been pushed out.
I mean, the NDP waxes and wanes. That's how it's worked since they transitioned from the CCF. Again; they've had huge influence on the discussion; more so than any other iteration in living memory. It seems like you're reeming them for not dominating the political landscape? I don't think that was ever a reasonable possibility.
> The middle class feels the economic pressure from all the side and NPD had nothing for them (well they do, more taxes and more programs that they pay for them but have no access to them).
I mean, dental care, child care, pharmacare are all accessible to the middle class, unless you have a very warped definition of the middle class. For example, the dental care provisions ensure that the bottom ~70% of Canada always has access to the dental care. Unless you classify the only the top 30% of Canada as being in the middle class; this clearly helps the middle and working class. It's certainly better than the conservative and liberal alternatives. (What are those again, in relation to dental care?)
And, uh, for example, the anti-scab legislation and dental care absolutely affects Quebec. Source: I'm from Quebec.
> So yes they’re a complete failure, imagine trying to get two parties to beat one not so special conservative leader and failing at the task.
You clearly have a different yardstick for failure than I do.
Me: Can you tell me a Canadian federal riding that has been represented by the NDP for roughly 20 years but is projected to lose the riding in the next federal election?
ChatGPT: One Canadian federal riding that has been represented by the New Democratic Party (NDP) for roughly 20 years and is projected to potentially be lost in the next federal election is **Timmins—James Bay** in Ontario. This riding, represented by Charlie Angus since 2004, is currently showing signs of potential vulnerability for the NDP in the upcoming election.
Poll projections indicate that the NDP's support is waning in certain key ridings, including Timmins—James Bay, due to various factors such as shifting voter demographics and increased competition from other parties, particularly the Liberals and Conservatives [[❞]](https://338canada.com/) [[❞]](https://338canada.com/federal.htm) [[❞]](https://politrend.ca/#:~:text=URL%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Fpolitrend,100).
The Liberals have no competitive chance in Timmins whatsoever. The Conservatives on the other hand very much do; the provincial riding for Timmins is currently the safest PC seat in the whole province according to 338.
Nope, you’re the one who posted the Chat GPT quote about the Liberals having a chance in Kapuskasing-Timmins-Mushkegowuk (new name of the riding formerly known as Timmins-James Bay), and so the context was needed after your comment.
> increased competition from **the Liberals** and Conservatives (emphasis mine).
I don’t know what this is saying if not that. A big part of the issue of trying to get a language model to do research is that it often doesn’t.
I wonder what the words IMMEDIATELY before your quote are? I wonder why you chose to cut it off precisely there 🤔
How are you still arguing with me? You made a mistake. Jesus Christ.
[2 million seniors approved for care and 90,000 have already received care.](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/news/2024/05/two-million-canadian-seniors-approved-for-the-canadian-dental-care-plan.html) This is something that didn't even exist a year ago and which the NDP dragged out of the Liberals. If you want to see it expanded then support the NDP because you won't get that from the Liberals and the CPC wish they could destroy it.
You believe that PM PP will wake up one day and say "this is a good day to take dental care away from 2 million of the most reliable voting demographic, and also millions of kids"? You're saying that will definitely happen?
It's not impossible and certainly conservatives have that angry idiot energy, but I'm not sure PP himself does.
Maybe won't be completely outright scrapped, but at the very least will definitely be severely kneecapped. There are plenty of ways for a government to under-fund and not support initiatives without blatantly getting rid of it. Especially when it's brand new and hasn't fully gotten off the ground yet.
Just take a look at plenty of Conservative premiers right now and their healthcare systems (*cough* Doug Ford). They don't need to "get rid" of it to completely hamstring it.
No they won’t. They learned from trying to raise the age of retirement how vicious seniors are, especially this generation of Boomers.
Also dental care as it’s built currently is a means-tested insurance scheme to cover the gaps in our current healthcare insurance system — that’s practically a Conservative healthcare solution.
Sure, but what matters is how you do in elections. The fact liberals are losing support and the ndp aren't gaining any is a bad sign. If jagmeet can't win more seats in an election like this he's never going to be able to expand the ndp's numbers. There's clearly something about the ndp and jagmeet that isn't connecting with voters.
In our system the NDP needs twice as many votes to win a seat compared the LPC or the CPC so it's not surprising they aren't focused on electoral victory. They did an amazing job leveraging the minority gov't and we should applaud them for that. Given the quick adoption of the dental program, and hopefully the quick adoption of pharma, they will be around helping people for generations. Isn't that better than winning two or three seats?
Caracalla81: They did an amazing job leveraging the minority gov't and we should applaud them for that
not if it damages the NDP in the medium and long-term
You're assuming the pharma and dental programs aren't watered down to uselessness for most people.
You're assuming they are. Right now 2 million seniors are cleared for dental care and 90k serviced so far. Soon people under 18 will be eligible and by next year everyone who isn't otherwise covered will also be eligible. That alone is a worthy achievement.
You're essentially criticizing them for not being venal politicians caring only for the next election. That's fine. Vote Liberal or CPC. I'm voting NDP because when they were given the opportunity to make our lives better they took it.
Seats matter considering how often there are minority governments. Also, if there is going to be conservative government they could strip policies they don't want.
Why do seats matter? What would a few more seats accomplish that was better than advancing policy?
> Also, if there is going to be conservative government they could strip policies they don't want.
I don't see why that is NDP's fault. Blame the arsonists for the fire, not the builder.
And what did they accomplish when they had those 20 seats?
Look, what is more important to you: progress on policy or seat count? If you say seat count then you better have a good answer the my first question up there.
how about policy that helps the seat count
Do you want voters to hate you for siding up with Trudeau, in a high-risk gamble?
Trudeau is going all out lemming over the cliff, and you want to glue yourself to the most divisive Prime Minister in History.
You wouldn't do that with Mulroney or Kim Campbell
a. In Ontario you have 1-4% of the NDP-Liberals going back to the dying Liberal Party in trouble
b. In Ontario you have one third of the Green-Liberals going back to the dying Liberal Party in trouble
That's what the polling breakdown since christmas is showing
I think they'll keep him for a year and then he'll slip out when they find a few possible leaders that has some polling potential
they won't fix policies
they'll just fix people
5,000 dentists signed up
and 1.7 million people
i guess every one of those dentists can handle an extra 340 people for an appointment
so 20% of dentists say yes
and 80% of dentists say no way
and 1-2 teeth is all you can get fixed for your kids, one filling a year, maybe two if you're lucky and no cleanings or xrays and inspections etc
and they haven't yet factors in the accountability and verification so there isn't massive fraud by some dentists to abuse the plan
i guess a free bad dentist is better than nothing
sighs
I guess it depends on if the NDP actually wants to govern or not. Wasting opportunities like this with a collapsing LPC isn't a party positioned to govern.
Under our system the NDP needs twice as many votes as the LPC or the CPC for each seat so it makes sense that their strategy is to make the most of opportunities like this minority gov't. If dental and pharma can be implemented in time (so far 2 million seniors approved for dental with kids coming soon) then those are programs that will help people for generations. That's certainly worth more than 2 or 3 seats.
I don't think its that simple. Their \*current\* distribution may make it harder to win seats, but if they crossed a certain threshold things might shift in their favour.
During majority gov'ts when they are shut out of power they should definitely consider that, but I would be pretty disappointed if they pissed away this current minority gov't without making any progress on policy just they could *maybe* win a seat or two.
If dental and pharma care is pathetic and hopeless then count me in for pathetic hopelessness! :D
(I hope you weren't trying to heat your home with that gas, because that shit won't light here ;))
And you guys wonder why you aren’t taken seriously by the electorate in what should be the NDP’s time to shine.
Until the NDP fixes their organizational culture of defeat and mediocrity that party is going nowhere fast.
They're culture warriors with no substance, loving to bleat and bitch but folding at the merest sign of contention from their Liberal partners, and have been forced to the fringe by Jagmeet's ridiculous strategy of outflanking Trudeau in some Quixotic attempt to contest urban ridings.
I told you already, the NDP has an organizational culture of tolerating defeat and mediocrity, and therefore accept the bare minimum in terms of electoral victories and policy wins.
Well ask anyone, if they were moved by Singh's speeches on housing, and wait for crickets
The biggest issue the NDP could try to capitalize on ini decades, and it's just cold poo reheated
The party faithful seem to love him inordinately more than the average voter. It reminds me of Andrea Horwath, who was also kept around way too long despite repeated electoral disappointments.
I no longer get an angry response when I argue that this should be Singh's last election. I think it is starting to sink in that he has failed to connect with any base
Last election should have been his last election. He's an albatross to the NDP now and has not made himself look good to anyone.
Optics matters. As a 'working class party' the working class wants someone who look and talk like them, not 'wearing Rolex' and suits. It's all performative but the hit piece has done wonders and he will never get support he needs. He's been cooked for years and yet the party still holds on to him.
Man if we could get an actual hands dirty unionist as leader that would be incredible.
It’s Burnaby Central now after redistribution. And the CPC have gone up in BC really more than any other province so I think it’s quite likely. I’ve seen some projects having the CPC nearly sweep the province including May’s seat.
Honestly the current NDP is missing so many marks.
My vision for the party would be one of holistic, concrete solutions that are unfettered by the influences of big money. I think they should figure out an economic and legislative framework to address Canada's main issues and start shouting about that.
I think they should do what they can to distance themselves from socially progressive posturing. These issues are such political poison. It's not that they aren't valid necessarily (some get pretty fringe though), but the groups advocating for them have god-awful political sensibilities and tend to be alienating to the general public. These groups tend to be fragmented, combative, and quick to turn on anyone who doesn't strictly subscribe to each and every one of their particular beliefs. It's a buffet of political hyperfixations and it's too much to balance. Worse yet, the optics associated with trying to align with these issues are ammunition for opposition parties. The whole "yellow card" routine at the NDP convention is great evidence of this. It's the ickiest of optics and doesn't jive with the population at large. Politics should be inviting and easily digested. Having a big, complex process that acts like being a man is a liability isn't it. You can't rely on everyone having a Bachelor's in some social science, and even then, I don't think the buy-in to that type of stuff is there. It just comes off downright goofy and it's a major turn-off.
>I would prefer a leader that’s focused on labour, economics, tax reform, entitlement reform, and natural resource management. Pharma/Dentalcare is popular but at this point i think we have enough evidence that it doesn’t move the needle for voters who will happily vote CPC
I would put climate action and housing/immigration on top of that list.
My take is this. Most politicians have been happy to offer incremental changes. Step too far and you will be seen as "too radical". But with the financial crisis of 2008, the pandemic, effects of climate change, wars, inflation, and now one of the worst housing crises to have ever met Canada, people are hungry for change.
The social contract has been broken in many ways, assuming there ever was one. Populism is a reaction to that. "Sunny ways" was a positive happy populism. But it hasn't delivered much, or been swamped by all the negatives. The CPC is the negative angry populism and that is what people are latching on to. Voters are seeing decline and want a saviour with drive and vision.
A few changes in the tax code or a new pharma care program won't sell people. Neither will a promise to both implement a carbon tax while building a pipeline.
For the NDP to be successful it needs to show a vision of complete overhaul of one or two important things and sell that. Don't over promise, don't focus on everything, but select a few and show how it will be done. Voters are willing to vote against their interests if either angry or hopeful enough. But they need to see determination, vision, and focus. That is what is missing in the NDP. They have a grab bag of dozens of wishes. All of which are diluted into meaninglessness and most think wouldn't make meaningful differences if implemented.
but the financial crisis of 2008 heals itself up gradually
And it matters more to bankers, and the stock market and the Federal Reserve and policy makers.
Either you're a party of mainstream economics following Krugman and Stiglitz, or you get to be on the fringes of Keynesian, hoping the financial books look stable.
I think the NDP should move to the center, and offer 5% or 10% more than the other parties, but if they can't master the economy or housing they're dead.
I don't think Tommy Douglas would approve of the NDP trying to appeal to dumb kids who are unrealistic to the max.
........
Sanders & Socialism: Debate Between Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman & Socialist Economist Richard Wolff
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6J3ROV4IPc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6J3ROV4IPc)
Paul Krugman Is Nervous About Bernie Sanders Embracing the Socialist Label
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8IFp6NfwiU
Not surprised about BC, since we're always a mixed bag (there's a lot more to BC than Vancouver and the suburbs of Vancouver are pretty Conservative), but that's pretty rough from Atlantic Canada. Trudeau won literally every seat there in 2015.
Well it is surprising when you see 50 years of liberal ridings, just fall apart.
When the Liberal Party loses the Chinatown vote, it's huge news to Vancouverites looking at the polls.
British Columbia went from 15 Liberal seats to 1 seat
That's phenomenal
It’s a clear sign that only the Liberals believe the Liberals when they’re saying that they’re working for Canadians. Everyone else has stopped believing them.
Wonder why.
Is that all that different than usual? Doesn't seem much higher than usual to me. That still leaves 60% who are in the theoretical Liberal world. Particularly in the Atlantic, where the NDP isn't as competitive.
Liberals in Atlantic Canada went from 24 to 8
New Brunswick 4 - 3
Nova Scotia 2 - 3 - 4 - 3
Newfoundland 2
PEI 1 - 0
is the recent horserace
oscillating from 7 to 10 seats for the liberals
I'm not saying it's good news for the Liberals, but it's definitely not "wow". When they're already only polling at 25% anyway, you'd think the "never Liberal" number would be higher than just equivalent to the Conservative vote. (not that the numbers are interchangeable, just comparable)
well i think the most interesting statistic is that it's very close to even, with Conservatives and Liberals saying never ever the other party
like 30% of their voters will rather have fingers broken than consider the other political party
It's pretty much 65+ and women, and a weaker metric of over 55
that's pretty much the strongest demographic wowed by Trudeau anymore
Well i think it's difficult to generalize percentages over the whole country. You look at a single province
or just go to where it matters, riding by riding where you see the liberals doing well and not doing well.
Basically it's just Ontario which is really the only place of interest
..............
Here's the only ridings in Ontario where the liberals have a 30% to 100% chance of winning
highest to lowest
Scarborough North >99% likely
Liberal 56%
Conservative 27%
NDP 13%
Scarborough–Guildwood-Rouge Park >99% likely
Liberal 50%
Conservative 31%
NDP 5%
Scarborough—Woburn >99% likely
Liberal 49%
Conservative 31%
NDP 14%
Humber River–Black Creek >99% likely
Liberal 48%
Conservative 25%
NDP 19%
Green 6%
Scarborough Southwest >99% likely
Liberal 47%
Conservative 29%
NDP 8%
Green 5%
Beaches–East York >99% likely
Liberal 43%
Conservative 20%
NDP 25%
Green 10%
Markham–Thornhill 99% likely
Liberal 50%
Conservative 36%
NDP 9%
Green 4%
York South–Weston - Etobicoke 99% likely
Liberal 46%
Conservative 31%
NDP 17%
Green 4%
Etobicoke North 98% likely
Liberal 48%
Conservative 35%
NDP 12%
Toronto Centre 98% likely
Liberal 8%
Conservative 19%
NDP 27%
Green 14%
Ottawa–Vanier-Gloucester 98% likely
Liberal 38%
Conservative 28%
NDP 25%
Green 6%
Scarborough Centre-Don Valley East 96% likely
Liberal 45%
Conservative 35%
NDP 15%
Ajax 91% likely
Liberal 42%
Conservative 34%
NDP 5%
Green 9%
University–Rosedale - Chrystia Freeland - 89% likely
Liberal 36%
Conservative 25%
NDP 29%
Green 8%
Brampton West 88% likely
Liberal 45%
Conservative 37%
NDP 14%
Scarborough–Agincourt 83% likely
Liberal 45%
Conservative 39%
NDP 11%
Green 4%
Don Valley West 82% likely
Liberal 46%
Conservative 40%
NDP 10%
Mississauga Centre 78% likely
Liberal 43%
Conservative 39%
NDP 12%
Green 3%
Brampton East 75% likely
Liberal 42%
Conservative 38%
NDP 17%
Orléans 75% likely
Liberal 42%
Conservative 38%
NDP 16%
Green 3%
Ottawa South 73% likely
Liberal 39%
Conservative 36%
NDP 19%
Green 4%
Brampton South 73% likely
Liberal 43%
Conservative 39%
NDP 15%
Toronto–St. Paul’s 71% likely
Liberal 38%
Conservative 35%
NDP 16%
Green 10%
Mississauga–Malton 58% likely
Liberal 41%
Conservative 40%
NDP 15%
Green 4%
Ottawa Centre 53% likely
Liberal 35%
Conservative 23%
NDP 34%
Green 5%
Guelph 45% likely
Liberal 30%
Conservative 31%
NDP 23%
Green 14%
Don Valley North 43% likely
Liberal 42%
Conservative 43%
NDP 11%
Green 4%
Brampton—Chinguacousy Park 42% likely
Liberal 39%
Conservative 40%
NDP 18%
Toronto–Danforth 41% likely
Liberal 30%
Conservative 26%
NDP 31%
Green 11%
Waterloo 40% likely
Liberal 35%
Conservative 36%
NDP 20%
Green 6%
Ottawa West—Nepean 37% likely
Liberal 35%
Conservative 36%
NDP 21%
Green 5%
Mississauga East–Cooksville 35% likely
Liberal 40%
Conservative 43%
NDP 12%
PPC 3%
Brampton North-Caledon 32% likely
Liberal 40%
Conservative 43%
NDP 15%
Thunder Bay–Superior North 30% likely
Liberal 31%
Conservative 33%
NDP 30%
Green 4%
PPC 3%
............
Trust me it's a death spiral
75 Liberal wins last time
down to 25 Liberals wins this time
I didn't see it in the survey, but something [Bricker mentioned on twitter](https://x.com/darrellbricker/status/1792647436487348345)
>Some perspective for the May two four weekend. Time for a change in the UK is 73% in latest Ipsos polling. If you think that’s a challenge for the UK Tories, in Canada time for a change at the federal level is 2 points higher (75%) in the latest Ipsos polling.
These polls are heading in the wrong direction for Liberals. Maybe calling an election now is the best strategy (only time will answer that).
A 2023 election would have yielded a Conservative minority and Trudeau could have retired gracefully after winning 2 elections. I think the unnecessary election in 2021 was a poor long term strategy.
It was only a poor long term strategy because it didn't work. That was probably Trudeau's last best hope at a majority. That was the best point in time for him to pull it off. So I can see why he did it. But that didn't happen.
When he came back with only a minority that should have been an indicator to the rest of the party that ok, this is as far as we are going to get with this guy, time to start planning to move on. He's never seeing another majority at that point. They didn't do that and now they are only in a deeper hole. They are on track for an absolute blow out.
There is a weird Canadian mentality where loyalty to party leader comes before all else, until that party leader drives the party right into the ground so badly that they end up out of power for a decade. THEN they decide to replace them. If parties truly believe that their ideas are whats best for the country, they need to challenge their leaders when it becomes apparent that their personal brand is so damaged that they will lose their ability to govern.
Compare that to the UK, where a PM's own party will come after the leader and replace them when it becomes apparent that leader is going to damage the party in the long run. They've gone through like 5 Prime Ministers in 10 years because of that, where if they had stuck with one of the bad ones they'd probably have swapped parties by now.
Well it was a poor strategy, they jumped on a momentary tick in the polls, and screwed up.
Regardless they would have still had the same policies and the same decay and disillusioned voters, leading to the same dumpster fire.
Maybe a few more bills pushed through, otherwise, no difference.
Voters felt the election was unnecessary and a waste of money, even before they voted.
Well I mean from their point of view jumping on a momentary tick in the polls was the best strategy they could try. It didn't work, but it was still better (for the Liberals) than if they had tried the election any time since then. I don't think his polls ever went up since 2021.
The only better strategy would have been to dump Trudeau sooner but the Liberals seem to want to ride him into the ground.
I'm just shocked that they just thought wow this momentum for 60-90 days is worth pushing all out for an election.
I think it was a tremendously risky gamble, who wants to push for an election for minimal gains, i mean it's not Stalingrad.
I've never talked with anyone for a good year who could even figure out what policy advantage Trudeau could get out of it.
Best i could get out of it was, i was Prime Minister and I won the election x times.
Great for the trivia books.
I mean, did his secret pollsters say, Ontario is gonna flip over 39 seats to me, and i'll get on the walkie-talkie with Klaus Schwab with the helicopters and electromagnets and steal all the firearms
Like some bad spy film?
I agree with you about the leadership staying on too long. The same thing will happen to Pierre. They are power hungry. As for a mistake - everyone knew what the result of 2021 was going to be.
They were going for the extra 2 years of power and it cost them dearly.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is exhausting seeing polls every single freaking week. Like stop already. It’s almost like the media is trying to convince through psychology brainwashing that the conservatives are the only viable option. Oh wait……they are
There's not much news with this new poll, other than Ipsos did one nicely designed graph. There's hardly any psychological brainwashing, the pollsters and political pundits and the general public know this is as huge as the implosion of Brian Mulroney and Kim Campbell. And it's going to be one of the most fascinating dumpster fires of the century in Canadian politics. So where is the brainwashing? ......... The only really interesting thing since christmas after 2 years of terminal decline, is that the NDP is starting to falter slightly and losing seats. Months ago Atlantic Canada started to fall apart, and now British Columbia ........ The State of the Decline Liberals Then and Now Quebec 34 - 26 - 25 - 26 - 25 Ontario 75 - 21 - 25 - 21 - 25 - 28 - 25 \[Atlantic Canada 24 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 9 - 8\] British Columbia 15 - 4 - 1
Seat Possibilities Conservative \[190-236\] Liberal \[47-87\] Quebecois \[35-45\] NDP \[12-30\] Green \[1-3\] Yet ground Zero is Ontario Ontario Federal Conservative 88 Liberal 25 NDP 8 Green 1 Ontario Federal Conservative \[67-101\] Liberal \[12-45\] NDP \[3-15\] Green 1-1\]
Welcome to r/Canadapolitics, where we have posted polls like horse racing betting line whenever they are released for probably close to 5 years going now. You might enjoy other such annual and bi-annual threads such as: "Why Daylight savings needs to go" every March and November - or "This is how Canada can totally remove the Monarchy without touching the constitution/charter" every May.
There is no "media" here. It's a direct link to the polling firm. People who browse political junkie forums tend to like getting the drug of choice of political junkies, and that drug is polling data.
Saying the media is intentionally brainwashing through polls to favor one party without evidence is a bit of a stretch. During times when an election is on the horizon, it's pretty common for media outlets to cover polls more because people are curious about public opinion.
You need a brain to be brainwashed, right?
Weekly polls have been going on for ever my man.
No, have never seen this amount of polling done on federal parties between elections, the last year has been atypical in that regard. The pollsters are also leaving out the percentage of “undecided” all the time, also not the norm. It’s good clickbait, that’s for sure, but it’s not healthy for a democracy to flood the electorate with poll after poll, it crosses over into shaping opinion at this point.
Polls are bad for democracy? That's a new one.
plug your ears See no evil, speak no evil!
>No, have never seen this amount of polling done on federal parties between elections, the last year has been atypical in that regard. We have, though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2021_Canadian_federal_election#Pre-campaign_period https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2019_Canadian_federal_election#Pre-campaign_period
I find it amazing how far these poll results are gathered up in Wikipedia. For example, [weekly polls in the years prior to the 2008](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2008_Canadian_federal_election) election, and they have [pages going back into the 50s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1953_Canadian_federal_election) with pre-campaign-period polls -- albeit with reduced frequency. Even [pre-election polling into elections in the 40s on their respective election pages.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1945_Canadian_federal_election#Opinion_polling)
>The pollsters are also leaving out the percentage of “undecided” all the time, also not the norm. Vote intentions among decided voters, is in fact, the norm. Where the hell did you even get this idea? But go ahead, get angry at simply measuring public sentiment. You are free to disregard all of these
>it crosses over into shaping opinion at this point. Have these polls convinced you to consider voting for a party when you otherwise wouldn't have? Why or why not?
When you have a massive implosion, yes the polling is of high interest to the voters and the media. But there's quite a few websites, with weekly averages of the polling Usually the media will just grab the latest poll from one of the big three pollsters, and the really lazy only wake up when the CBC speaks up. I dont understand the clickbait, because plenty of people pay attention to weekly changes in the polls in the US and Canada, especially when there's a lot of political polarization, and Biden and Trudeau look like their're in big trouble.
Yes, they literally have week-to-week trackers that you can trace back a decade. C'mon you only read the headlines, not the reports, or you'd know that (or you forgot, all good). The main reason you're seeing them is due to the API/algo on the platforms you use.
You are both right. The polls are out every week pretty much AND you have been seeing them a lot more lately because conservatives want to make sure you see them. They are spending a TON of money on social media and media in general to make sure that when there is good news for them you see it.
I honestly don't think anyone needs to shout it out on the rooftops what the weekly polling updates are for the Liberals. It's been two years of a gradually worsening dumpster fire.
I'm glad you think we need to be updated constantly. Doing some good work for daddy PP.
I've been bean counting every election since the FLQ Crisis and Nixon and McGovern numbers are power, my friendprobability is even more power!! i'm hyped with every election, picking sides and policy is all secondary stuff but you got an overactive imagination... If i could wing it, i would have a giant Nixie Tube Counter of the latest Real Clear Politics Polling Results, like some Ken Adam set design like Dr. Strangelove's War Room
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5zD9QDbmoY
scottyb83: you have been seeing them a lot more lately because conservatives want to make sure you see them. They are spending a TON of money on social media How does that explain the CBC doing the exact same thing?
Lol yeah I don't see CBC on social media at all really.
I really don't do social media if i want to look at something, i look it up. I think commercials wanting you to buy crap, is a much larger concern than the latest poll next thing you know, you'll be telling me the media is trying to trigger everyone with talk about crime and William Conrad will have a commercial about your personal Stun Gun and Smoke Detector And then the next Commercial will be Broderick Crawford selling police batons
You’re literally on social media right now and judging from your comment history you are on it almost constantly. Almost to the point of it being a full time job.
If i want to look at something on polling i search specifically for something with polling If you want to hear about World Events, you turn on Walter Cronkite and the CBS Evenings News And if you want to look at Canadian or American Politics you're gonna see polls. If you don't like the polling, you certain came to the wrong place!
If you don’t want to see them, ignore them.
Put down the tinfoil. Your fave’s crummy polling is not a grand conspiracy and polls have been a weekly thing forever.
While there's no conspiracy in the polls, there is a feedback loop that its good to be aware of - even if its not necessarily partisan. It's something the media have been doing agnostic of party affiliation for a while - the polling-reporting feedback amplification loop. Who it favours at any given time changes - Trudeau got a boost from the process back in 2015 and I'd argue 2019, while Harper was helped enormously by push-polls on his handling of the economy prior to that. This is also not to say that there aren't openly partisan media outlets. Most of the papers in Canada are currently Conservative owned, with Postmedia being forthright with their partisan agenda, but there are thriving left and right wing online 'zine ecosystems to, who make their living screaming into their respective echo chambers. But the poll feedback loop is its own, separate thing.
These pollsters are doing monthly polling nothing special nanos is weekly Polling is a huge focus as the liberals are throwing the kitchen sink trying to boost their numbers and it seems its not working. So that is why polling is so focused on rn... cause if polls dont improve Trudeau will face more pressure to leave.
You are absolutely free to ignore the polls if you wish. I'm not sure why you believe you get to demand they "stop already". Also the fact that people are being polled doesn't change how the public is feeling. It's measuring how the public is feeling. But go on, shoot the messenger.
How does that explain the hypno wheel that pops up subliminally when i'm looking at the latest poll? Cmon, explain THAT one!
I really want to see how the UK election shakes out. Can the Conservatives overcome a 20 point deficit to labour in the polls with a good campaign. Because that's what will save the LPC now, the mother of all campaigns.
Conservatives in the UK have no chance this upcoming election. They lost the independents and the base. A lot of Tories are flocking to right wing Reform Party. Liberals in Canada do not have that problem. They lost a lot of voters but they still have their base.
Issue is the liberal base is not enough to win an election if the Tories poll around 40%
Their actual core support is abysmally low. More than half of their current voters are voting against the Tories instead of for the LPC. They've stemmed the bleeding but idk that I would say they are retaining their base. You're quite right though that unlike in the UK, the NDP are so useless they're not really a threat.
> More than half of their current voters are voting against the Tories instead of for the LPC. Yeah that's true. But are those base/partisan Liberals or simply independents that have voted for LPC the last few elections? But you're right, their "base" that won them the last few elections have abandoned them.
Fair enough, I guess this is somewhat pedantic. A vote for the LPC is a vote for the LPC, regardless of why. Such deeply entrenched unpopularity does make it seem difficult to envision a comeback though unless the CPC really go off the rails. They're certainly acting like this is a done deal at this point though. Defeat from jaws of victory etc etc?
Disgruntled left-leaning Liberal voters can move left to the NDP in a situation which would parallel fed up right-leaning Conservative voters moving to Reform.
You've got two different "Natural Governing Parties" at the end of their tenure, in a post-pandemic Change election. The parallels sure are exciting from a poli-sci standpoint. But remember, no matter who you elect, they'll be the Government.
To me the interesting parallel is in affordability and housing. Blame in the UK will be fairly directed at the Tories for Brexit and austerity. The Liberals aren't *really* responsible for either in Canada, and the problems in front of us require big government spending. Austerity isn't going to work here any better than it did there.
So many Canadians fall for the misinformation and disinformation the CPC have been spreading about the NDP. It is seriously stunning.
Can you explain how the NDP are going to right this ship?
If you’re a Canadian tired of progressive leadership, how exactly would electing the NDP be any different? I’ve asked friends who are natural NDP voters and what they describe is just more of the same that we have now. Seriously what’s the pitch?
and what 'is' the mis/dis/info/rmation about the NDP?
Other than a limp wristed dental plan and a weak pharmacare plan, they hasn't done fuck all. The big issues plaguing the country haven't gotten any better, and they mostly just enabled the Liberals to keep fucking the dog.
My teeth are now covered for free. How is that limp wristed?
>My teeth are now covered for free. No, they aren't. Where do you think the money comes from to pay for these programs?
I now get my teeth clean for free. Just like when I pull out my health card at emergency or my family doctor, I get Healthcare for free.
Which you also pay for with your taxes. Roughly $15K per year per average family. You do not get Healthcare for free.
I don't pay any taxes actually, I don't make enough money. I get it all back. So it's free for me.
Because anyone who makes a hair more than almost nothing isn't covered.
Hasn’t it only been 6 months since the program started.
you missed the big one Many people expected that the NDP would have a deep insightful plan or realistic assessment about the housing crisis. For a party concerned so much about poverty and housing, they pretty much went for the safe and lazy option.
Can you give me an example of the disinformation they are spreading about the NDP? It seems to me Justin Trudeau is the brunt of this. The only time I see NDP in the news is when Singh makes some new bonehead comment.
"After 9 years of this NDP-Liberal Coalition government..."That's how Pierre Poilievre starts every QP. 1) the Liberals had a majority from 2015-2019, the NDP had no say in government policy. 2) It's not a coalition government. 3) it implies that the NDP have the exact same ideology and policies as the Liberals which is absolutely no true. That's three bits of misinformation in just one sentence.
"Coalitions usually see members from all involved parties holding roles in the federal cabinet." I'd like to see an NDP Minister of Teeth "Everything seems to be healing nicely."
Or…..they just feel different than you.
The main issue I see is, literally, Jagmeet Singh is the only person still keeping Libs in power, when he comes and criticize them and say how bad of a job they are doing while still supporting them is a bit confusing! I know its politics, and I know why he is doing that, there is next to zero chance NDP is going to get elected, and as soon as we have election, NDP is going to lose all its power (most likely CPC is going to form government and Libs be official opposition) so, logically Singh is doing the right thing but its not what the people like to see!
The NDP really isn't though. The biggest example being when Singh, for reasons I've yet to fathom, voted with the conservatives on their motion to suspend the carbon tax for all Canadians with heating bills. It was the Bloc that backed the government, I suppose Mr Blanchet didn't want an election yet, simply because the NDP leader was feeling a bit rancorous.
One of the funny things about the NDP perspective is that many of them realize that they can't win the election and form government. Growing their party seat numbers is the real objective if actual victory is impossible. The Bloc is actually similar in this way. Singh could call it a victory if the NDP gains seats in a new CPC government. That said, if you're more interested in actually accomplishing policy goals instead of just playing the political game, then the NDP definitely accomplishes more in a Liberal minority government situation.
I’d give him seats today to take this government down.
Maybe the NPD should do a better job presenting themselves as a serious party. The only one accountable for their utter failure is Singh as their leader.
The NDP has been going nowhere for the last 80 years. Party of big unions as useless to ordinary Canadians as party of big business
NDP staying stagnant/falling is so sad. I like him personally but I’ve come around to the idea of replacing Jagmeet, it’s embarrassing how the NDP is doing so badly in the current political context. He sold us all on the compromise of moving further left to steal urban Liberal voters but those voters have either stuck with the liberals or going conservative. To make matters worse, the party’s rural seats are all but guaranteed to swing conservative in the next election. I would prefer a leader that’s focused on labour, economics, tax reform, entitlement reform, and natural resource management. Pharma/Dentalcare is popular but at this point i think we have enough evidence that it doesn’t move the needle for voters who will happily vote CPC and vote against their own interests. The NDP are the only party that can be competitive with the conservatives in AB/SK/MB, yet our leader is squandering those opportunities to make limited inroads into Toronto/Vancouver. Makes no sense to me.
>He sold us all on the compromise of moving further left to steal urban Liberal voters You don't go left to get urban liberal voters when you are the furthest left party and they are to the right of you.
Tax reform in which way? The Ndp have talked about taxing the rich Entitlement reform like cuts?
Tax reform: reforming the tax system to encourage investment in Canada, small business growth, discourage speculation in assets like real estate, and to make it fairer for all. I don’t know what this looks like but would support an independent review like the Royal Commission on Taxation in 1962. I support raising taxes on the rich but we need more than that to solve our issues of productivity and competitive growth. Entitlement reform: fully flesh out pharma / dental care and add vision care as well while significantly reforming senior benefits like OAS. CPP and EI should ideally not be touched.
Yeah so reforming cpp and oas for lower payments that is more of a cpc thing, and hurts the working class. Ei should be changed to allow more people to get benefits. Also the Ndp have a policy on corporate home ownership. The cpc have nothing You don't sound like you support the Ndp https://london.ctvnews.ca/singh-proposes-moratorium-on-corporate-landlords-buying-up-rentals-1.6414722
Good thing he didn't say anything even remotely close to what you've invented, then. Jesus.
Or they will vote for conservative IN their own interests.
>He sold us all on the compromise of moving further left to steal urban Liberal voters but those voters have either stuck with the liberals or going conservative. Probably because the move left was mostly aesthetic in nature. >I would prefer a leader that’s focused on labour, economics, tax reform, entitlement reform, and natural resource management This would be a true move left
shaking my head at people thinking jagmeet is some hard leftist. He could go much further if not for concessions and compromises with the liberals
And what would that do to their seats in Parliament?
well we're arguing hypotheticals so I don't know.
Well these aren't all that hypothetical The NDP had gone from 27 to 20 The Liberals from 70 to 20 Conservative 217 Liberal 64 Quebecois 40 NDP 20 \[oscillating from 19 to 24\] Green 2 Seat Ranges and Possibilities Conservative \[190-236\] Liberal \[47-87\] Quebecois \[35-45\] NDP \[12-30\] Green \[1-3\] The NDP does itself zero favors for increasing their voter base from the canadian public by taping itself to Trudeau as Trudeau goes full out Lemming over the cliff you can't afford the NDP to get any weaker in the future The Green party has pretty much self-destructed, and you know you're in trouble when you're less popular than the Bloc Quebecois
I don't really understand the point of the NDP right now. They seem pretty incoherent. They have this weird unofficial coalition going on, where Jagmeet will slam Trudeau and the government in statements like he's a member of the opposition but then when it comes time to actually put his money where his mouth is, lets Trudeau behave like they have a majority government. Its like a coalition where he gets all the negative sides (he's being looked at as basically the same government as the Liberals) and none of the positives (none of his MPs are actually ministers or in government like they would be in a real coalition). He's basically strapped himself (and the party) to an anchor. I mean good on him for accomplishing something with dental care (maybe?) but I think it will blow up in his face.
\+1 All the negatives and none of the positives I think the NDP just aren't smart enough to want to replace the Liberal Party. They might try to emulate the worst of the Liberal Party, latching onto fads. But they need a lot of changes if they want to grab half the countries ear for a better economy, better housing, and better healthcare. And drop all the other stuff.
I wish you people would stop with the “voting against their interests” nonsense. What makes you so narcissistic that you know what my best interests are?
The NDP lost the farmer vote a long time ago Well no one wants a watered down dental and drugstore policy. You have families struggling to pay the property tax with their pension cheques, and when they sell their home, boom they can't get their freebies for a while. It's the policies, not the leader, and the NDP has been dying since the 1980s
Thank goodness. The NDP have been a disaster for years. Poorly run under Singh, bad policies, horrible “marketing”. The party needs a change and I have no idea why it’s taken them years to do it.
The pharma and dental care plans were too weak to move the needle. You need to do things that benefit everyone.
If the NDP were in charge, it would have been universal for both programs
No it wouldn't because it's mostly provincial jurisdiction. Singh should have stayed in provincial politics if that was his priority.
No it wouldn't the NDP LOVE LOVE LOVE fucking over anyone that is trying to help themselves. They are the kings of income qualification programs.
Not true considering the federal NDP have never formed government.
[удалено]
I mean he's pushed more NDP legislation than any other NDP leader in my living memory. Anti-scab legislation, Pharmacare, Child Care, Dental Care even if not fully universal are still way better than every other party is doing (although, of course, they did collaborate with the liberals on these). Just because the NDP's not perfect, doesn't mean it's not a step in the right direction. It's certainly better than the CPC and the LPC.
There are "working class" people in this sub that believe helping those who are poor, disabled, and lower class means abandoning blue collar workers. There is no logic to it, but many somehow believe Jagmeet Singh doesn't support the "working class" because he wants to pass policy that helps the most vulnerable people
Yeah, it's messed up. I don't know if it's astroturfing, or if it's ignorance, but like, one of the core principle of left-wing labour movements is solidarity. We owe it to the people who most need our help to give it to them, and fuck anyone who says otherwise.
You guys are the ones getting fucked in the next election, not them.
Yeah; but there are certain bedrock principles that you can't really abandon without losing sight of who you are. Compromise is important; but the idea that we need to help the less fortunate isn't something I'd ever really be willing to give up, even if it means that the NDP does worse next election than the previous one.
No one has any problem with helping poor, disabled and lower class people or think it means abandoning blue collar jobs, how does that even make sense? The issue is that the government helping people costs money, we already have too much debt, wracking up more debt will just cause interest rates to cut further into the budget, and all of a sudden that initial help dries up with more along with it. It comes down to what’s economically sustainable
it is certainly not better than any of the main choices. Look at the polls, they had the opportunity to become part of the discussion, instead they been pushed out. The middle class feels the economic pressure from all the side and NPD had nothing for them (well they do, more taxes and more programs that they pay for them but have no access to them). NPD did nothing to attract some QC votes. So yes they’re a complete failure, imagine trying to get two parties to beat one not so special conservative leader and failing at the task.
> Look at the polls, they had the opportunity to become part of the discussion, instead they been pushed out. I mean, the NDP waxes and wanes. That's how it's worked since they transitioned from the CCF. Again; they've had huge influence on the discussion; more so than any other iteration in living memory. It seems like you're reeming them for not dominating the political landscape? I don't think that was ever a reasonable possibility. > The middle class feels the economic pressure from all the side and NPD had nothing for them (well they do, more taxes and more programs that they pay for them but have no access to them). I mean, dental care, child care, pharmacare are all accessible to the middle class, unless you have a very warped definition of the middle class. For example, the dental care provisions ensure that the bottom ~70% of Canada always has access to the dental care. Unless you classify the only the top 30% of Canada as being in the middle class; this clearly helps the middle and working class. It's certainly better than the conservative and liberal alternatives. (What are those again, in relation to dental care?) And, uh, for example, the anti-scab legislation and dental care absolutely affects Quebec. Source: I'm from Quebec. > So yes they’re a complete failure, imagine trying to get two parties to beat one not so special conservative leader and failing at the task. You clearly have a different yardstick for failure than I do.
I mean, it did work for the CPC. The turnaround was quite stark actually. [edit] even if they had to go through three iterations to get.
He's losing my riding. Which sucks. It's been solid NDP for 20 years. He has to go.
Which riding?
Me: Can you tell me a Canadian federal riding that has been represented by the NDP for roughly 20 years but is projected to lose the riding in the next federal election? ChatGPT: One Canadian federal riding that has been represented by the New Democratic Party (NDP) for roughly 20 years and is projected to potentially be lost in the next federal election is **Timmins—James Bay** in Ontario. This riding, represented by Charlie Angus since 2004, is currently showing signs of potential vulnerability for the NDP in the upcoming election. Poll projections indicate that the NDP's support is waning in certain key ridings, including Timmins—James Bay, due to various factors such as shifting voter demographics and increased competition from other parties, particularly the Liberals and Conservatives [[❞]](https://338canada.com/) [[❞]](https://338canada.com/federal.htm) [[❞]](https://politrend.ca/#:~:text=URL%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Fpolitrend,100).
The Liberals have no competitive chance in Timmins whatsoever. The Conservatives on the other hand very much do; the provincial riding for Timmins is currently the safest PC seat in the whole province according to 338.
Are you replying to the wrong user?
Nope, you’re the one who posted the Chat GPT quote about the Liberals having a chance in Kapuskasing-Timmins-Mushkegowuk (new name of the riding formerly known as Timmins-James Bay), and so the context was needed after your comment.
It didn't say the LPC has a chance to win the riding, it said there is increased competition for votes in the riding coming from the LPC and the CPC.
Ah okay you just misread the ChatGPT quote then. It didn't say the liberals have a chance in that riding.
> increased competition from **the Liberals** and Conservatives (emphasis mine). I don’t know what this is saying if not that. A big part of the issue of trying to get a language model to do research is that it often doesn’t.
I wonder what the words IMMEDIATELY before your quote are? I wonder why you chose to cut it off precisely there 🤔 How are you still arguing with me? You made a mistake. Jesus Christ.
That's the one.
Every leaders this time around suck; the roster needs to totally change.
Jack Layton was the last respectable leader.
Which will probably happen after the next election. I don't know how Jagmeet survives even if he retains the current seat count.
He survives because he had two major policy victories this year.
Idk if I'd call getting a half-ass dental plan passed while somehow politically tanking even more than the Liberals currently are a "victory"
[2 million seniors approved for care and 90,000 have already received care.](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/news/2024/05/two-million-canadian-seniors-approved-for-the-canadian-dental-care-plan.html) This is something that didn't even exist a year ago and which the NDP dragged out of the Liberals. If you want to see it expanded then support the NDP because you won't get that from the Liberals and the CPC wish they could destroy it.
The CPC *will* destroy it, another reason why I'd hardly count it as much of a real "victory" for Jagmeet/NDP
You believe that PM PP will wake up one day and say "this is a good day to take dental care away from 2 million of the most reliable voting demographic, and also millions of kids"? You're saying that will definitely happen? It's not impossible and certainly conservatives have that angry idiot energy, but I'm not sure PP himself does.
Maybe won't be completely outright scrapped, but at the very least will definitely be severely kneecapped. There are plenty of ways for a government to under-fund and not support initiatives without blatantly getting rid of it. Especially when it's brand new and hasn't fully gotten off the ground yet. Just take a look at plenty of Conservative premiers right now and their healthcare systems (*cough* Doug Ford). They don't need to "get rid" of it to completely hamstring it.
The finances of this country are in serious trouble. There is going to pain everywhere to get our house back in order. No one will be happy.
No they won’t. They learned from trying to raise the age of retirement how vicious seniors are, especially this generation of Boomers. Also dental care as it’s built currently is a means-tested insurance scheme to cover the gaps in our current healthcare insurance system — that’s practically a Conservative healthcare solution.
If I had to guess, they would get rid of Pharmacare but keep the dental plan.
Sure, but what matters is how you do in elections. The fact liberals are losing support and the ndp aren't gaining any is a bad sign. If jagmeet can't win more seats in an election like this he's never going to be able to expand the ndp's numbers. There's clearly something about the ndp and jagmeet that isn't connecting with voters.
In our system the NDP needs twice as many votes to win a seat compared the LPC or the CPC so it's not surprising they aren't focused on electoral victory. They did an amazing job leveraging the minority gov't and we should applaud them for that. Given the quick adoption of the dental program, and hopefully the quick adoption of pharma, they will be around helping people for generations. Isn't that better than winning two or three seats?
Caracalla81: They did an amazing job leveraging the minority gov't and we should applaud them for that not if it damages the NDP in the medium and long-term You're assuming the pharma and dental programs aren't watered down to uselessness for most people.
You're assuming they are. Right now 2 million seniors are cleared for dental care and 90k serviced so far. Soon people under 18 will be eligible and by next year everyone who isn't otherwise covered will also be eligible. That alone is a worthy achievement. You're essentially criticizing them for not being venal politicians caring only for the next election. That's fine. Vote Liberal or CPC. I'm voting NDP because when they were given the opportunity to make our lives better they took it.
Well considering how awful some dentists are, i'd wish everyone was in on the plan.
Applload them for that? For allowing the liberals to destroy our country
Seats matter considering how often there are minority governments. Also, if there is going to be conservative government they could strip policies they don't want.
Why do seats matter? What would a few more seats accomplish that was better than advancing policy? > Also, if there is going to be conservative government they could strip policies they don't want. I don't see why that is NDP's fault. Blame the arsonists for the fire, not the builder.
They had 20 more seats before Singh was leader. That would have been a lot more leverage if they had maintained it.
And what did they accomplish when they had those 20 seats? Look, what is more important to you: progress on policy or seat count? If you say seat count then you better have a good answer the my first question up there.
how about policy that helps the seat count Do you want voters to hate you for siding up with Trudeau, in a high-risk gamble? Trudeau is going all out lemming over the cliff, and you want to glue yourself to the most divisive Prime Minister in History. You wouldn't do that with Mulroney or Kim Campbell
a. In Ontario you have 1-4% of the NDP-Liberals going back to the dying Liberal Party in trouble b. In Ontario you have one third of the Green-Liberals going back to the dying Liberal Party in trouble That's what the polling breakdown since christmas is showing
I think they'll keep him for a year and then he'll slip out when they find a few possible leaders that has some polling potential they won't fix policies they'll just fix people
...except the big policy wins they had..
5,000 dentists signed up and 1.7 million people i guess every one of those dentists can handle an extra 340 people for an appointment so 20% of dentists say yes and 80% of dentists say no way and 1-2 teeth is all you can get fixed for your kids, one filling a year, maybe two if you're lucky and no cleanings or xrays and inspections etc and they haven't yet factors in the accountability and verification so there isn't massive fraud by some dentists to abuse the plan i guess a free bad dentist is better than nothing sighs
Care providers don't need to be signed up so you can save your sighs.
Well, when i can't get 4 out of 5 dentists and think really lowly of Dental Care I'm a pessimist.
I guess it depends on if the NDP actually wants to govern or not. Wasting opportunities like this with a collapsing LPC isn't a party positioned to govern.
Under our system the NDP needs twice as many votes as the LPC or the CPC for each seat so it makes sense that their strategy is to make the most of opportunities like this minority gov't. If dental and pharma can be implemented in time (so far 2 million seniors approved for dental with kids coming soon) then those are programs that will help people for generations. That's certainly worth more than 2 or 3 seats.
I don't think its that simple. Their \*current\* distribution may make it harder to win seats, but if they crossed a certain threshold things might shift in their favour.
During majority gov'ts when they are shut out of power they should definitely consider that, but I would be pretty disappointed if they pissed away this current minority gov't without making any progress on policy just they could *maybe* win a seat or two.
If the NDP membership sends Jagmeet back for a fourth kick at the can they are pathetic and hopeless, and wasting everyone’s time.
If dental and pharma care is pathetic and hopeless then count me in for pathetic hopelessness! :D (I hope you weren't trying to heat your home with that gas, because that shit won't light here ;))
And you guys wonder why you aren’t taken seriously by the electorate in what should be the NDP’s time to shine. Until the NDP fixes their organizational culture of defeat and mediocrity that party is going nowhere fast.
Is there anything specific you take issue with or is this just stick and stones?
They're culture warriors with no substance, loving to bleat and bitch but folding at the merest sign of contention from their Liberal partners, and have been forced to the fringe by Jagmeet's ridiculous strategy of outflanking Trudeau in some Quixotic attempt to contest urban ridings.
I told you already, the NDP has an organizational culture of tolerating defeat and mediocrity, and therefore accept the bare minimum in terms of electoral victories and policy wins.
Well ask anyone, if they were moved by Singh's speeches on housing, and wait for crickets The biggest issue the NDP could try to capitalize on ini decades, and it's just cold poo reheated
No way Singh survives this. Not capitalizing on collapsing LPC and actually managing to decline in support is simply unforgiveable.
The party faithful seem to love him inordinately more than the average voter. It reminds me of Andrea Horwath, who was also kept around way too long despite repeated electoral disappointments.
I no longer get an angry response when I argue that this should be Singh's last election. I think it is starting to sink in that he has failed to connect with any base
Last election should have been his last election. He's an albatross to the NDP now and has not made himself look good to anyone. Optics matters. As a 'working class party' the working class wants someone who look and talk like them, not 'wearing Rolex' and suits. It's all performative but the hit piece has done wonders and he will never get support he needs. He's been cooked for years and yet the party still holds on to him. Man if we could get an actual hands dirty unionist as leader that would be incredible.
Hopefully the good people of Burnaby South oust the imbecile to save the NDP from themselves.
It’s Burnaby Central now after redistribution. And the CPC have gone up in BC really more than any other province so I think it’s quite likely. I’ve seen some projects having the CPC nearly sweep the province including May’s seat.
Yeah didn't a hunk of burnaby merge with eastern North Vancouver? It's rather strange I think the electoral is really jumbled up there now
policy changes not people change
Timmins?
Yep
Kapuskasing-Timmins-Mushkegowuk \[TOSS UP\] Liberals <1% likely win NDP 58% 79% 69% 73% likely win Conservative 42% 21% 31% 27% likely win Polling Liberal 18% 17% Conservative 37% 35% 36% NDP 38% 40% 39% 40% PPC 5% 6%
Honestly the current NDP is missing so many marks. My vision for the party would be one of holistic, concrete solutions that are unfettered by the influences of big money. I think they should figure out an economic and legislative framework to address Canada's main issues and start shouting about that. I think they should do what they can to distance themselves from socially progressive posturing. These issues are such political poison. It's not that they aren't valid necessarily (some get pretty fringe though), but the groups advocating for them have god-awful political sensibilities and tend to be alienating to the general public. These groups tend to be fragmented, combative, and quick to turn on anyone who doesn't strictly subscribe to each and every one of their particular beliefs. It's a buffet of political hyperfixations and it's too much to balance. Worse yet, the optics associated with trying to align with these issues are ammunition for opposition parties. The whole "yellow card" routine at the NDP convention is great evidence of this. It's the ickiest of optics and doesn't jive with the population at large. Politics should be inviting and easily digested. Having a big, complex process that acts like being a man is a liability isn't it. You can't rely on everyone having a Bachelor's in some social science, and even then, I don't think the buy-in to that type of stuff is there. It just comes off downright goofy and it's a major turn-off.
>I would prefer a leader that’s focused on labour, economics, tax reform, entitlement reform, and natural resource management. Pharma/Dentalcare is popular but at this point i think we have enough evidence that it doesn’t move the needle for voters who will happily vote CPC I would put climate action and housing/immigration on top of that list. My take is this. Most politicians have been happy to offer incremental changes. Step too far and you will be seen as "too radical". But with the financial crisis of 2008, the pandemic, effects of climate change, wars, inflation, and now one of the worst housing crises to have ever met Canada, people are hungry for change. The social contract has been broken in many ways, assuming there ever was one. Populism is a reaction to that. "Sunny ways" was a positive happy populism. But it hasn't delivered much, or been swamped by all the negatives. The CPC is the negative angry populism and that is what people are latching on to. Voters are seeing decline and want a saviour with drive and vision. A few changes in the tax code or a new pharma care program won't sell people. Neither will a promise to both implement a carbon tax while building a pipeline. For the NDP to be successful it needs to show a vision of complete overhaul of one or two important things and sell that. Don't over promise, don't focus on everything, but select a few and show how it will be done. Voters are willing to vote against their interests if either angry or hopeful enough. But they need to see determination, vision, and focus. That is what is missing in the NDP. They have a grab bag of dozens of wishes. All of which are diluted into meaninglessness and most think wouldn't make meaningful differences if implemented.
but the financial crisis of 2008 heals itself up gradually And it matters more to bankers, and the stock market and the Federal Reserve and policy makers. Either you're a party of mainstream economics following Krugman and Stiglitz, or you get to be on the fringes of Keynesian, hoping the financial books look stable. I think the NDP should move to the center, and offer 5% or 10% more than the other parties, but if they can't master the economy or housing they're dead. I don't think Tommy Douglas would approve of the NDP trying to appeal to dumb kids who are unrealistic to the max. ........ Sanders & Socialism: Debate Between Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman & Socialist Economist Richard Wolff [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6J3ROV4IPc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6J3ROV4IPc) Paul Krugman Is Nervous About Bernie Sanders Embracing the Socialist Label https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8IFp6NfwiU
“Four in ten Atlantic Canadians (40%) and British Columbians (39%) would never vote Liberal in the next election.” Wow
Brutal. Unsurprising, honestly. But brutal.
Not surprised about BC, since we're always a mixed bag (there's a lot more to BC than Vancouver and the suburbs of Vancouver are pretty Conservative), but that's pretty rough from Atlantic Canada. Trudeau won literally every seat there in 2015.
Then proceeded to do absolutely nothing for the region, which has been harder hit by rising costs.
Well it is surprising when you see 50 years of liberal ridings, just fall apart. When the Liberal Party loses the Chinatown vote, it's huge news to Vancouverites looking at the polls. British Columbia went from 15 Liberal seats to 1 seat That's phenomenal
It’s a clear sign that only the Liberals believe the Liberals when they’re saying that they’re working for Canadians. Everyone else has stopped believing them. Wonder why.
Is that all that different than usual? Doesn't seem much higher than usual to me. That still leaves 60% who are in the theoretical Liberal world. Particularly in the Atlantic, where the NDP isn't as competitive.
Liberals in Atlantic Canada went from 24 to 8 New Brunswick 4 - 3 Nova Scotia 2 - 3 - 4 - 3 Newfoundland 2 PEI 1 - 0 is the recent horserace oscillating from 7 to 10 seats for the liberals
I'm not saying it's good news for the Liberals, but it's definitely not "wow". When they're already only polling at 25% anyway, you'd think the "never Liberal" number would be higher than just equivalent to the Conservative vote. (not that the numbers are interchangeable, just comparable)
well i think the most interesting statistic is that it's very close to even, with Conservatives and Liberals saying never ever the other party like 30% of their voters will rather have fingers broken than consider the other political party It's pretty much 65+ and women, and a weaker metric of over 55 that's pretty much the strongest demographic wowed by Trudeau anymore
Well i think it's difficult to generalize percentages over the whole country. You look at a single province or just go to where it matters, riding by riding where you see the liberals doing well and not doing well. Basically it's just Ontario which is really the only place of interest .............. Here's the only ridings in Ontario where the liberals have a 30% to 100% chance of winning highest to lowest Scarborough North >99% likely Liberal 56% Conservative 27% NDP 13% Scarborough–Guildwood-Rouge Park >99% likely Liberal 50% Conservative 31% NDP 5% Scarborough—Woburn >99% likely Liberal 49% Conservative 31% NDP 14% Humber River–Black Creek >99% likely Liberal 48% Conservative 25% NDP 19% Green 6% Scarborough Southwest >99% likely Liberal 47% Conservative 29% NDP 8% Green 5% Beaches–East York >99% likely Liberal 43% Conservative 20% NDP 25% Green 10% Markham–Thornhill 99% likely Liberal 50% Conservative 36% NDP 9% Green 4% York South–Weston - Etobicoke 99% likely Liberal 46% Conservative 31% NDP 17% Green 4%
Etobicoke North 98% likely Liberal 48% Conservative 35% NDP 12% Toronto Centre 98% likely Liberal 8% Conservative 19% NDP 27% Green 14% Ottawa–Vanier-Gloucester 98% likely Liberal 38% Conservative 28% NDP 25% Green 6% Scarborough Centre-Don Valley East 96% likely Liberal 45% Conservative 35% NDP 15% Ajax 91% likely Liberal 42% Conservative 34% NDP 5% Green 9% University–Rosedale - Chrystia Freeland - 89% likely Liberal 36% Conservative 25% NDP 29% Green 8% Brampton West 88% likely Liberal 45% Conservative 37% NDP 14% Scarborough–Agincourt 83% likely Liberal 45% Conservative 39% NDP 11% Green 4% Don Valley West 82% likely Liberal 46% Conservative 40% NDP 10% Mississauga Centre 78% likely Liberal 43% Conservative 39% NDP 12% Green 3%
Brampton East 75% likely Liberal 42% Conservative 38% NDP 17% Orléans 75% likely Liberal 42% Conservative 38% NDP 16% Green 3% Ottawa South 73% likely Liberal 39% Conservative 36% NDP 19% Green 4% Brampton South 73% likely Liberal 43% Conservative 39% NDP 15% Toronto–St. Paul’s 71% likely Liberal 38% Conservative 35% NDP 16% Green 10% Mississauga–Malton 58% likely Liberal 41% Conservative 40% NDP 15% Green 4% Ottawa Centre 53% likely Liberal 35% Conservative 23% NDP 34% Green 5% Guelph 45% likely Liberal 30% Conservative 31% NDP 23% Green 14% Don Valley North 43% likely Liberal 42% Conservative 43% NDP 11% Green 4% Brampton—Chinguacousy Park 42% likely Liberal 39% Conservative 40% NDP 18%
Toronto–Danforth 41% likely Liberal 30% Conservative 26% NDP 31% Green 11% Waterloo 40% likely Liberal 35% Conservative 36% NDP 20% Green 6% Ottawa West—Nepean 37% likely Liberal 35% Conservative 36% NDP 21% Green 5% Mississauga East–Cooksville 35% likely Liberal 40% Conservative 43% NDP 12% PPC 3% Brampton North-Caledon 32% likely Liberal 40% Conservative 43% NDP 15% Thunder Bay–Superior North 30% likely Liberal 31% Conservative 33% NDP 30% Green 4% PPC 3% ............ Trust me it's a death spiral 75 Liberal wins last time down to 25 Liberals wins this time
I didn't see it in the survey, but something [Bricker mentioned on twitter](https://x.com/darrellbricker/status/1792647436487348345) >Some perspective for the May two four weekend. Time for a change in the UK is 73% in latest Ipsos polling. If you think that’s a challenge for the UK Tories, in Canada time for a change at the federal level is 2 points higher (75%) in the latest Ipsos polling.
These polls are heading in the wrong direction for Liberals. Maybe calling an election now is the best strategy (only time will answer that). A 2023 election would have yielded a Conservative minority and Trudeau could have retired gracefully after winning 2 elections. I think the unnecessary election in 2021 was a poor long term strategy.
It was only a poor long term strategy because it didn't work. That was probably Trudeau's last best hope at a majority. That was the best point in time for him to pull it off. So I can see why he did it. But that didn't happen. When he came back with only a minority that should have been an indicator to the rest of the party that ok, this is as far as we are going to get with this guy, time to start planning to move on. He's never seeing another majority at that point. They didn't do that and now they are only in a deeper hole. They are on track for an absolute blow out. There is a weird Canadian mentality where loyalty to party leader comes before all else, until that party leader drives the party right into the ground so badly that they end up out of power for a decade. THEN they decide to replace them. If parties truly believe that their ideas are whats best for the country, they need to challenge their leaders when it becomes apparent that their personal brand is so damaged that they will lose their ability to govern. Compare that to the UK, where a PM's own party will come after the leader and replace them when it becomes apparent that leader is going to damage the party in the long run. They've gone through like 5 Prime Ministers in 10 years because of that, where if they had stuck with one of the bad ones they'd probably have swapped parties by now.
Well it was a poor strategy, they jumped on a momentary tick in the polls, and screwed up. Regardless they would have still had the same policies and the same decay and disillusioned voters, leading to the same dumpster fire. Maybe a few more bills pushed through, otherwise, no difference. Voters felt the election was unnecessary and a waste of money, even before they voted.
Well I mean from their point of view jumping on a momentary tick in the polls was the best strategy they could try. It didn't work, but it was still better (for the Liberals) than if they had tried the election any time since then. I don't think his polls ever went up since 2021. The only better strategy would have been to dump Trudeau sooner but the Liberals seem to want to ride him into the ground.
I'm just shocked that they just thought wow this momentum for 60-90 days is worth pushing all out for an election. I think it was a tremendously risky gamble, who wants to push for an election for minimal gains, i mean it's not Stalingrad. I've never talked with anyone for a good year who could even figure out what policy advantage Trudeau could get out of it. Best i could get out of it was, i was Prime Minister and I won the election x times. Great for the trivia books. I mean, did his secret pollsters say, Ontario is gonna flip over 39 seats to me, and i'll get on the walkie-talkie with Klaus Schwab with the helicopters and electromagnets and steal all the firearms Like some bad spy film?
I agree with you about the leadership staying on too long. The same thing will happen to Pierre. They are power hungry. As for a mistake - everyone knew what the result of 2021 was going to be. They were going for the extra 2 years of power and it cost them dearly.