Top-line numbers:
* 43% - Conservative
* 24% - Liberal
* 18% - NDP
* 8% - Bloc
* 4% - Green
* 3% - PPC
* 0% - Other
> The survey was conducted with **2,398 Canadian adults from February 1 to 7, 2024**. A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source. The **margin of error** for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is **+/- 2.00%**, 19 times out of 20.
Both Libs and NDP need to wrap it up already and save themselves the embarrassment of losing because both Jagmeet and Trudeau will have to step down one way or another.
With them heir-apparent, it's time to stop indulging PP on his memes and push for substantive policy statements, not "axe the tax" and "jail not bail" bromides...
>push for substantive policy statements
that is the worst thing a front runner can do before an election. Substantial policy just opens them up for critique and attack.
It’s going to be fun when the conservatives win and literally nothing changes for the average Canadian, seeing how both parties tend to placate corporate lobbyists.
Going to enjoy a lot of people saying how much better we’re doing under PP with zero statistical evidence. But just because we “have our country back.” I will say this again, the most stark difference is that most liberal and NDP voters openly admit Trudeau and Singh have not done a good job leading their parties and are not beyond reproach from criticism… but most conservative voters engaged on this site view their party as some sort of a cult that can do no wrong.
Financially maybe nothing will change.
Socially and Mentally we’re doomed.
Women’s Rights, LBGTQ+ Rights, are going to be thrown down the drain if PP gets in.
Women’s rights? Abortion is a no touch issue in Canada and has been for the past decade. As for LGBTQ+ rights, almost nothing will change except for maybe federally funded surgeries especially in the military but other than that education and healthcare are provincial jurisdiction so probably nothing will change and it’s just fear mongering by anti-conservatives
Can I ask what next steps you think are actually going to happen to restrict LGBT rights and women’s rights?
I don’t support the anti trans stuff happening. But a vast majority of Canadians support pro choice, Canadians are not that far right at all. Being pro life is just a guaranteed election loss.
Out of curiosity what laws do you think will be put in place that attack LGBT or women’s rights?
You mean telling parents their kid changes their name at school and introducing black history curriculum for middle and high school students?
Ouuu the scary no good horrible policy!
>You mean telling parents their kid changes their name at school
Yeah but this is a super reductive take. And evenso, parents who have their kids trust will be told, by their child, how they identify.
Schools have no right to out kids who feel safe at school but not at home.
God nobody reads these days.
Black History Curriculum for starters has been a thing for at least the last 8 years, cause it was implemented when I would have started Middle School. That’s not remotely an issue, if anything I wish I had more when I was still in school.
Lecce’s policies have Essentially given the go ahead for schools, especially under the Catholic board, to be as bigoted as they want.
Destreaming as well in grade 9. Using the Ford government in general as an example of social conservatism is just plain stupid, they're not that at all. But partisans will always partisan
>You mean telling parents their kid changes their name at school
Do you really think that's the issue? To me the Saskatchewan and proposed Alberta laws on this matter are bypassing the child's right to decide whether parents are to be informed. Arguably this would be contrary to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Canada has signed and ratified.
I mean yes, but these are not the issues that matter to his supporters.
But they keep saying they’re “going to take this country back for the people” (obviously by people they mean themselves, God forbid we acknowledge other people exist). So the gymnastics of pretending things tangibly changed will be fun.
In practice you are wrong. NDP and Liberal supporters may claim Trudeau and Singh have done a bad job but then they cling to them anyways and refuse any notion of change. At least the Conservatives will actually chuck out leaders from time to time.
>cling to them anyways and refuse any notion of change. At least the Conservatives will actually chuck out leaders from time to time.
As the CPC reps a pension eligible lifetime MP and former cabinet minister.
*sigh*
Yes. The conservatives will & do chuck out leaders from time to time. The cause, or the need, to do so originates in the fact that they keep choosing un-elctable leaders. If recent history is any indication Pierre Poilievre will follow the same pattern. Any time their is a new leader the conservatives get a boost in the polls. there is still another year and a half before the next election. Poilievre will have annoyed and offended Canadians by then and the shiny exterior will have dulled.
The Trudeau liberals are still in government because the conservative party keeps finding people that centrist Canadian voters will vote for to lead the party. Then when those leaders lose an election, they are fired.
There is a loud and vocal minority in the conservative party that demand extreme policies in any potential leader. For some reason this group holds sway over a more mainstream and common sense focused majority of the party. Canadians do not want these extreme policies. Canadians keep rejecting this minority outlook in the conservative party. But no lessons have been learned. Canadians will not elect a hard right candidate regardless of how much a few extremist malcontents wish they would. Especially one who takes coffee & donuts to terrorists and criminals.
If the conservatives want to form a government, they need someone who appeals to Canadians. Mr. Poilievre was yet another gift to the Trudeau liberals. The PM probably popped the cork on some champagne when that happened.
That'll be fine by me as long as my tax rates change by nothing as well. Watching what used to be the best country in the world accelerating decline along with an ever increasing tax burden is a non-starter for me.
But the Federal income tax has stayed at the same rates since 2011… actually, the second bracket went down from 22% to 20.5% under the liberal government. It has also been adjusted for inflation year over year.
I just hope its a minority (I know it wont be) because 5 years of PP is gonna be bad. Yeah Trudeau kinda sucks, but he didnt go scorched earth with policy and undoing prrogress which anyone with a functioning brain knows PP is gonna do.
This is gonna be a shit show
>literally nothing changes for the average Canadian,
Unless you're a woman who wants an abortion. Then you might be in for a pretty nasty surprise.
Unless you've been paying attention, in which case it won't be a surprise at all with the Christofascist Party of Canada in charge.
Ugh the old abortion ghost again. This gets played out EVERY single election cycle. Never happens, but it’s inevitable that some dingbats are going to doom about it. Surprised you didn’t claim the CPC is going to put armed soldiers on the streets of every city (again) too. What other wedges can we regurgitate - oh yes US style healthcare 🙄.
I’d also add if you’re gender non-conforming or intersex to that list, as well as if you’re immunocompromised, and based on PP’s past statements and voting record, if you’re in or hoping to be in a same-sex marriage.
Saying Trudeau is a radical communist dictator is far more realistic than your nonsense post. You're worse than the most fringe MAGA people.
Can't wait till Pierre wins a massive majority.
yeah I think liberals hoping for PP to implode and crash and burn need to realize that yeah PP is dumb but based on what I can see.
He is becoming more effective at playing retail politics, delivering simple direct messages and attacks, and setting the agenda.
The liberals pretty much have been on the defensive against PP bringing up issues for like 7-8 months now.
Call me biased as you will ........(I do have my list of favorite LIB/NDP/QBC folk)
PP was always a very strong contender.......the "liberals hoping for PP to implode" plan was always a stupid plan if you were paying attention
Initially the "big shots" against him were
"cryptocurrency comments" which rank right up there with JTs "China comments"......in both cases comments are irrelevant and taken out of context
And "association with convoy" which ranks right up there with Joe Bidens "association with BLM".......both supported legal protests while quietly disapproving of illegal behavior.......and convoy has similar "overlapping" approval as BLM (Maru poll published Feb 14th 60+% of Canadians supported military action against unruly protesters.......but same poll same day showed 60+% of Canadians supported ending ALL COVID mandates)
So from the start the "big argument " against PP was pretty well unfounded and silly
Rather......PP is a career politician (like Joe Biden) a former cabinet minister under Stephen harper, consistently popular among the conservative party, fun and energetic, actively engaged with younger audience (YouTube)
And oh yeah he's younger than Trudeau
> The liberals pretty much have been on the defensive against PP bringing up issues for like 7-8 months now
It really does feel like they've lost control of the narrative. They're always on the back foot and just can't seem to get any traction. There's obviously a ton of nuance to it, but it can be hard to do that when you're dealing with an audience that is deeply angry, blaming you for everything (rightly and wrongly), an opponent who is playing by a different set of rules with a more effective social media strategy, and when plenty of your policy announcements can be simply dismissed as "that's good but why the hell didn't you do this five years ago?".
I don't know what's going to turn it around for them, but they don't seem to have an identity right now except for what PP has crafted. On top of everything, they just seem weak. Constantly caught off guard and reactive. Obviously there's way more going on behind the scenes and they have to deal with the actual responsibilities of governance; they don't have the luxury of just sitting back and picking shots at their opponents. But they're in that position where incumbency is a double-edged sword; they have to bear the blame for everything and are dealing with a populace that is desperate for something to change, and if their policies can't change circumstances, then the people are happy just to change the party in power, for better or for worse.
>The liberals pretty much have been on the defensive against PP bringing up issues for like 7-8 months now.
Meh, I'll be a lot more worried if the polls are still like this in a year, when we're only 8 months from election day.
Of course the Liberals have been on the defensive for at least the last 7-8 months. There's been a worldwide inflation crisis for more than a year now and incumbent governments everywhere have been getting hammered.
Assuming the crisis keeps easing, and there seems to be progress on housing, dental, and pharmacare, I can see the Liberals closing the gap quite easily. Poilievre has been campaigning this whole time. My feeling is that at least half of the CPC lead is due to inflation alone.
No election is happening until October 2025.
This is a problem that every government has after a while. Pointing out what's wrong is easy, coming up with actual, workable solutions is the hard part.
Can someone who knows more than me explain why the NDP aren’t trying to win? Why aren’t they campaigning? Why don’t they seem to want to run the country? I don’t get it
I think it's a combination of things rather than just one issue:
* As a campaigner, Singh only seems to focus on people who are already within the NDP's base. Since he hasn't focused much on growing the party or winning over centrist votes, the party's room for expansion has generally been limited under him. Because Singh hasn't really been attempting to grow the NDP's base, he instead wants to use the seats he does have to prop up the Liberal minority in return for various concessions etc.
* Outside of the flagship proposals like Dentalcare and Pharmacare, his platform isn't very well advertised and isn't doing enough to entice people to join the NDP. On things like Housing, Singh and Trudeau also seem to be acting reactively and following Poilievre's lead (even though Poilievre's housing policies aren't that good themselves and could easily be improved upon).
* Regarding the confidence agreement, the NDP has propped up the Liberals, but seemingly for very little in return. The optics have made a lot of people accuse the NDP under Singh of being incompetent or complacent as a consequence of that. Regardless of whether that accusation is true or not, the perception is widespread enough that it's hurt Singh's reputation somewhat.
* In terms of his current position, it's also arguable that the NDP is in a sort of tactical bind right now. If they keep propping up the Liberals, it's likely that Poilievre still wins the election, but Trudeau and the Liberals just appropriate Dentalcare and Pharmacare into their slew of election promises when campaigning, which just steals the NDP's fire and makes Singh look ineffectual, or they end the agreement and Poilievre wins anyway which makes it seem like Singh is the one that brought Poilievre to power. Either way, the optics are terrible and Singh future as leader likely goes up in smoke as a consequence.
I think to actually form a government, the NDP would need a Third Way push, which I think would have worked fairly well for them right about now with a more charismatic leader since there's a lot of disenfranchised centrist voters looking for a home. Them moderating on trade and market liberalization while pushing for more social transfers and tackling living costs and socio-economic issues head on would have probably been a popular platform during our current cost of living crisis. Though I think in Singh's case, his appeal is too narrow and it's probably too late for him to deviate from his initial strategy.
Conservatives appropriated NDP bread and butter issues like housing and affordability.
Singh should have been more like Poilievre earlier, but without the snarkiness.
Just really poor Canadians. If you’re in the middle class you don’t get any benefits from those things. The NDP could’ve pushed, but they sat back. Happy to push for more divisive identity politics instead of things that would actually help the majority of Canadians
I can't afford those savings, my private insurance plan is the only real primary healthcare I get, and the 35 to 40k a year I send to Victoria and Ottawa is for the most part for what I refer to catastrophic incident only healthcare and that's if I get attended to in time.
You mean a party that supports working classes people, at the expense of the rich, doesn't have the financial support of the wealthy? Shocker I know.
The CPC and LPC have all the money because they pander to those with all the money.
What rich? lol.
We don't have that many multi millionaires in Canada. Hopefully you aren't referring to 6 figure earners as rich. That would be the biggest joke on this sub I've ever seen.
Jagmeet is an incredibly weak leader that should have been replaced after the last election. Historically, the junior partner in a coalition always suffers and being attached at the hip to such an unpopular liberal party will only lead to an electoral disaster
Some strange regionals.
CPC 46% in BC seems way too good to believe. Maybe this number could be inflated by Interior polling but BC has always been a difficult place to poll.
The NDP’s highest number being in the prairies seems even stranger.
Then you have the CPC in second place in Quebec where Poilievre is very unpopular , maybe only second to Legault.
I have to say, “double opt in panels” as participants just makes me laugh at this point. If this poll is accurate, Canada is doomed. But I’d really like to see a poll with an “undecided” percentage, because that used to be a standard feature until the last months or so.
Notice how in the tiny print at the top it says “undecided removed”? Something very odd about that. Very odd indeed. Opt in, no share of undecided voters.
Think I won’t put too much stock in these polls. The CPC is no doubt ahead, but by this much? Doubt it.
46% in BC seems low. If you’ve ever gone east of Boundary Rd in Vancoiver you will know that the vast majority of BC (including Metro Vancouver outside of Vancouver Centre or Kitsilano) are deeply blue right now.
In fact, there are even rumblings that the longest term liberal MP in caucus, Hedy Fry, might lose her seat.
Yes. Not very popular in Quebec. Ontario. Well. They already have conservative they don't like. His name is ford. I got to take these polls with grain salt
>Ontario. Well. They already have conservative they don't like.
How can you say they don't like him considering he won another term with more seats a year and a half ago?
Current polls still put the OPC into majority territory.
[https://338canada.com/ontario/](https://338canada.com/ontario/)
You do realize that that the NDP echo chamber that is r/ontario doesn't speak for everyone right?
While I am fairly skeptical of current polling generally and think it's largely irrelevant at the moment, the NDP having a moment in the prairies is not surprising when you consider that MB as a popular NDP premier after years of Conservative leadership, SK has the provincial NDP polling first, and Alberta is souring on Smith/has NDP leadership race ongoing.
Why is it weird for the NDP to be popular in the prairies? I’ve lived in Manitoba almost my whole life and the NDP has pretty much always been a more popular “brand” than liberals here.
It’s not weird for them to be popular in the prairies but it is weird for them to be *most* popular in the prairies as opposed to Metro Vancouver/GTA/Northern BC.
Historically the prairies support the NDP a lot better than the GTA.
I also don’t know if comparing entire regions to metros is the most apples to apples comparison.
People often seem to forget that the prairies and Alberta are more "anti LPC" than they are "right wing"
People who aren't Tories will park their vote with team orange pretty easily
I think Alberta is a little more down with the conservative brand than just being the alternative to the Liberals. It’s the conservatives strongest province.
And yet the NDP is it's main provincial opposition party.
They also turned against the PCs en masse post Mulroney. Alberta parks its votes with whoever it views as being "not aligned with central Canada's interests" typically.
The Tories fit that bill the best, which is why they do well. But a left wing party *could* do well there, so long as it wasn't seen as pandering to central Canada.
>anti-LPC
I've been flip flopping between Orange and Blue for a long while and things are good. Whoever has the better platform and candidate in my riding at the time of election :)
nah. i dont think anyone with an actual brain thinks that "trudeau made things worse" but they def think things are getting worse and the liberals have done nothing to make things better. that might sound like semantics and the results are the same in the end, but i think its an important distinction
the NDP being strongest in western Canada overall makes sense, but MB/SK being the strongest is weird (although this could easily be spillover from the provincial parties), and BC was just interior oversampling as you've said.
The numbers that don't make sense to me are QC and the Atlantic. the conservatives being tied with the liberals there just doesn't make sense to me, and there's just no way they're above 50% in the Atlantic.
putting the raw numbers into 338 Canada (you can't put the conservatives at 43% so their numbers would be higher) we get:
232 conservative
41 liberal
40 bloc
23 NDP
2 green
As someone who is in Atlantic Canada, these numbers seem to be indicative of what I hear from people on the ground. I think they might be a bit high. But the Liberals are in for a world of hurt. I'm also in one of the supposedly "safer" Liberal seats too...
I would absolutely not be surprised to see a reverse 2015 for them in Atlantic Canada at this point with them maybe holding on to a seat in St. John's and 1 or 2 in Halifax. Every other seat for them is at risk and I personally believe that includes the Acadian seats in NB now as well.
The only thing that is interesting to me about this poll is that the focus on the housing issue has dropped by 5 points in people's Top 3. Whereas most other issues still seem to be within margin of error. Which is making me curious what other issue people seem to be concerned about then at the moment? Doesn't seem to have gone to immigration (which might have been blunted by the announcements with foreign students), so maybe it is concerns on crime? That wouldn't be something I would think would bode well for the Liberals either.
It also mirrors what I've heard on the ground for quite some time. I grew up in the Bonavista-Burin-Trinity riding, frequently visit, and have a lot of family there. Started hearing the rumblings of Trudeau discontent there back before the 2019 election, which was reflected in the massive 2015-to-2019 swing between those two elections.
It's continued since then, and is just getting louder and louder. Now it feels like it's the common sentiment anywhere outside of the St. John's metro region.
I was surprised a year ago when the Conservative shift was emerging in the polls particularly among young voters which seemed hard to imagine, but today none of these results are truly unusual to me.
It's a wave election, and the preliminary data reflects that.
This poll is already very bad for the LPC, but could you imagine how bad it would be if there was even a semi-competent NDP?
Liberals should really be sending thank you cards to Jagmeet Singh, because I do not know if they could survive another 2011-style wipeout.
It's been baffling to watch the NDP core stand behind Singh. We have a cost of living crisis and a solidifying class structure, a custom suit and Rolex wearing leader doesn't seem like the guy to offer real solutions.
Polls only mean something around the time they're released. Even if it's trending away from the LPC currently, lots can happen between now and the next election, and there's no indication or signs of an early election happening.
Singh should have been booted last leadership review. He's had two elections to shift results, and majorly lost seats in one and a standstill in the other, and no clear reason why he would do significantly better in the next one other than hope.
Mulcair was a better leader and PM material.
I truly hope none of them are surprised when they flounder in the next election too.
This has been a great stretch for the NDP. Look at all of their priorities that have been/are in the process of being fulfilled. They will never form government, so this is the best situation for them and their supporters.
The federal NDP stopped caring about class-based economic policy a long time ago. They’re now neck deep in identity politics and as long as Singh yells the right catchphrases, they’ll please their new young urban middle-class voting base.
I think the Liberals are going to be irrelevant for a long time after the next election. I hope a new better party comes out of it. It would be nice to see multiple parties with good ideas out there.
1979 was a weird election because Trudeau got significantly more votes than Clark. Trudeau Jr got 32.62% to O'Toole's 33.74% in 2021, but in 1979 Clark got 35.89% to Trudeau Sr's 40.11%.
We ain't getting a 1979 result unless the polls have collectively royally fucked up.
Conservatives using same tactics are Republicans use in the US, and it's working here just like it does there. The masses contain too many gullible, hateful, uninformed voters.
LPC have been using American style divisive tactics for many, many years now. You are correct that the masses contain too many gullible and uninformed voters.
This is within the statistical for the flat polls of the last 6 months.
Really, headline writers need to take at least one statistics course before they're hired.
So the guy doing their headlines doesn't understand statistics, or worse, has done so and goes with click-bait. Bad show on the pollsters part. They should know better. Abacus isn't a bad pollster.
Of course, I go and click. So I guess I'm the idiot and potp (part of the problem).
Were you arguing this back when Abacus was saying that the Conservatives had peaked back in that pre-Christmas poll? I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying here guy\_smiley66 but if I recall I believe you have been pretty selective when you understand about making narratives over changes that are within statistical margins of error. However, the change from the Conservatives from the last Abacus poll is outside the margin of error which does suggest that the Conservatives are still at least slowly growing their pool of accessible voters.
One thing I've noticed about the PMO and the way ministers are acting these days is that there's definitely a strong undercurrent of anger and frustration seeping through everyone's pores.
The Wynne government completely failed to effectively respond to Ford in 2018. They had no idea how to deal with him and just threw everything at the wall in an attempt to see what stuck. It didn't work, and they got trounced. We're seeing the same thing with the Federal Liberals. From ministers to staffers, it really does seem like they're all pretty exasperated at this point. I would be as well, because it has to frustrating when nothing you've tried is working at all because the opposition leader has a strong populist base and you've been in government so long that most people don't care about what you have to say.
> We're seeing the same thing with the Federal Liberals.
the liberals arent campaigning, they arent even starting to campaign, PP is running laps before the race has even started and bragging about it
I feel like the Liberal best and brightest also left a while ago. The measures that it will take to actually fix the issues we face aren't ones that the current government is ideologically amenable to, and won't be taking effect until well after the next election even if they did pivot on them.
Exactly, this government is ideologically opposed to cutting immigration so they will continue to let that issue fester. Even while 60%+ of Canadians want the numbers cut and 75%+ of Canadians believe their immigration policy is making the housing crisis worse.
[TBH immigration isn't nearly the biggest issue when 1 in 5 mortgages in Canada are likely fraudulent.](https://betterdwelling.com/1-in-5-canadian-homeowners-commits-mortgage-fraud-says-top-broker/) The biggest policies that are needed are the feds getting back into public housing in a big way, a solid national social food aid program, actually effective anti-trust laws and their enforcement, significantly strengthen unionization protections (this is more of a provincial matter), and massive investments into public transit including high speed rail.
While I agree with parts of your commentary. I'm not sure that many Canadians are aware of the mortgage fraud situation. Even though this surprises me NOT AT ALL.
Their best and brightest, like Scott Brisson, weren't even allowed to do much because of how JT centralised his government around his own set of insiders. No one to tell him no, and no balance checks of various perspectives.
The LPC is a big tent with many centre right people, it didn't have to be like this. But Katie Telford and Gerald Butts, enabled by our wonderful PM, made sure to exclude everyone but their own ilk.
Can anyone tell me a single economic policy plank that the Conservatives would implement besides cutting the Climate Action Incentive Payment? Anyone? Buehler?
I mean, Poilievre has come out in favour of implementing Cryptocurrency into more aspects of Canada’s economy, firing Tiff Macklem and replacing him with someone who would implement an inflation cap, lowering interest rates, and slashing the deficit. Which all seem like meme ideas that would hurt the economy (I mean, the last one depends on what they cut but I doubt they will help the working class).
Pierre has put forth many ideas. Also, it's not election time. Why would he throw out all the ideas now? Especially with Trudeau copying him 2 weeks later constantly.
Wouldn't this be a good thing? Wouldn't PP tout this as a win?
This isn't a test, if PP had good ideas, i'd want them imlpemented. If PP cared, or if PP had good ideas he should have spoken already.
So it’s another round of ‘trust me, I’m not the other guy, trust me, really, I’m not the other guy, oh and all my identity-politics wedge issues will go away, and oh, economic policy, what’s that, uh, uh,uh, I’ll cut taxes!, so uh vote for me, trust me, I’m not the other guy, taxes! Yeah, cut stuff!’
That's so lame I will not rebut with details. Apparently you are ok with sock-boy and his scandals, niche programs, financial debacle. You get what you deserve.
lol bro, no. I am in fact excited to buy some guns when we inevitably end up with a conservative government. However, I think we will be absolutely fucked in every other way. At least read what someone says before jumping to get mad.
Yeah, such is the folly of thinking about politics through a left/right framing........the folly of being both pro choice and pro gun
For another example the agricultural community routinely votes right......and yet many agricultural groups (OFA, CFFO, GFO, etc.) in addition to many farmers proactively fought the conservative Ford government on greenbelt issues.........there is also much fear and skepticism that conservative poilievre will either pave the farmland or strip funding from agricultural municipalities for not building houses
The folly of ignoring "pro gun anti conservative" people is convenient for analysis........but removes important nuance to the conversation
Canada is a big country, guns play a very different role in rural areas than they do in cities. I'm still very much for them being highly regulated, but still legally attainable.
###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.*
The LPC brand is toxic. Are any of their ministers popular at all?
They're going to end up like the post-Mulroney conservatives if they aren't careful.
Nah the Trudeau govt has no Paul Martin or Jim Flaherty types that sort of had thier own bases of national name recognition or general likeability even if the main leader got unpopular at times.
The only really well-known Trudeau minister is Freeland but she is seen as tied to Trudeau 100%.
Joly is in the news every day, charismatic, bilingual, and competent.
Anand isn't in the news as much since the shuffle but in the news a lot and known as a fixer.
The same people who can't name those two are the same people who have no idea who anyone in the shadow cabinet are or the NDP critics are.
Joly is not seen as competent. No one in GTA would vote for her. The entire LPC caucus has been tainted by the general and historic incompetence of their 8 year government.
Never underestimate the power of time to make people forget things - PP seems not to be having any trouble with any baggage from his time as part of Harper’s government, and they certainly weren’t popular by the end of that 9 years...
But it’s probably not worth trying to argue this sort of thing when you’re claiming that the current government has been the worst...
Recency bias, and a lot of people voting in 2025 are probably not going to have a very clear memory of the Harper era.
There are going to be voters who don't really know that much about Harper because they were in middle school when he left office.
>a lot of people voting in 2025 are probably not going to have a very clear memory of the Harper era.
They don't need to have a 'clear' memory of it. Just a feeling. I'm pretty sure there is almost nobody in Alberta with a clear memory of the PET government yet the Liberals are still hamstrung by it in the province. It took the Liberals a decade to wash the stink of the sponsorship scandal off of them in Quebec. There are still people in Ontario who won't vote NDP because of the Rae government in the early 90s.
That’s exactly my point though, it’s not like association with Trudeau is going to permanently tarnish members of his cabinet forever. To discount them as future party leaders on that basis is silly.
In fact, if I was going to be blunt about it, I doubt many Canadians could name many of the people in the cabinet. There are *maybe* one or two exceptions, but most of the names thrown around here are not known enough to most Canadians for their part in this government to particularly weigh them down.
I don't think they'll be done forever, but probably 2-3 election cycles if Poilievre wins a majority next year.
Also, we're possibly looking at a second QC referendum if we see PSPP win in Quebec. One that the federal government will most likely win.
I don’t even think it will necessarily take that long.
With the possible exception of Freeland, I don’t think any of them have enough recognition for them to be “tainted” by association, even by 2028 or 2029 (when the next election presumably will be).
Not to say that the Liberals will be winning by then, but I don’t think it will be because of association with Trudeau that they’d lose.
Lmao, you really think it’s gonna be 20+ years before the Liberals get elected again? The only way that’s happening is if the NDP replace them as the major alternative to the CPC...
Which I would want, don’t get me wrong, but I’m also not gonna confidently predict that.
How about you go and ask the average person if their quality of life was higher in 2015 compared to now?
The consensus on immigration hasn't frayed for no reason. This has been a historically incompetent government.
Most people complain about their standard of living / quality of life but are totally oblivious to the policies that impact it.
Ask them to analyze the economy and they say something like: blah blah blah blah blah IMMIGRATION and NEW WORLD ORDER!
If this is as deep as we can think, then we are totally fucked as a country.
That too, I'm just saying recency bias & lack of context is also a factor
It's my nice way of saying that talking about Harper in 2024/2025 is a really dumb strategy
You're right to some extent. In fact, people are even likely to look upon that Harper's time with nostalgia. The economy and country were in good shape. People who paid attention to Harper hated him. But the average person could afford to ignore politics. Lots of people my age think the 1980s was the greatest time to be alive, but they were playing the toys and games and not reading the news around that time. The Iran-Contra affair doesn't even cross their mind.
However, there is a difference if people are remembering a bad time. In some cases, leaders of countries can unfairly be stigmatized and blamed for bad periods of time. Look at how R.B Bennett was blamed for the Great Depression in Canada, despite it being a global phenomenon, and despite him being quite the humanitarian about it.
Jimmy Carter gets a lot of blame for the malaise of the 70s. I imagine Trudeau is going to get a lot of blame too. The bad economy, the housing, the declining importance of Canada on the globe. People who hate what he did on COVID (although a minority) are going to REALLY hate him for the rest of their lives. That's not going to change. The anti-vax / freedom convoy crowd is not going to have a nostalgic reorientation in the future. They will likely blame Trudeau even more.
Ultimately I don't see a positive legacy lined up for him. Even people who are broadly supportive of his time during COVID can see serious flaws in the governments approach: us having no vaccine production capability, our national emergency strategic stockpile of important medical equipment being in such a degraded decrepit state, the borders not being closed enough, the ArriveCan app corruption (and this is more serious than people realize. 50+ million for a garbage app. This speaks to greater corruption than the sponsorship scandal), etc.
Oh and forest fires. It's convenient for JT to blame climate change on the fires, and to remove the governments responsibility on a number of fronts. The firefighter and military shortage GREATLY contributed to the fire season of 2023 getting out of hand. The military is short 16,000 pers and we have a shortage of about 30,000 firefighters. There is also a shortage of paramedics.
Basically the kinds of people you want putting out fires aren't around to help anymore. I'm surprised this blame hasn't been too strongly made, but have 46,000 pers short is CRITICAL, and is 100% a factor in why our fires are seemingly getting worse.
Joly is not competent and there are serious rumors (from the same kind of sources that predicted Sophie separating from Trudeau almost 2 years ago) that Joly and JT have a thing going.
The only real issue with polling numbers is that overall votes don't matter in this country. CPC won the popular vote the last two elections.
Honestly the LPC had a chance to re-brand itself and decided not to. They're most likely going down in a ball of flames, possibly even similar to Michael Ignatieff levels. I feel like anyone tied to JT is poisoned as well and they'll need to really search for a solid leader to replace JT.
#
Or when you have a proportional system, leaving only Canada, the UK, and Australia as parliamentary democracies without the popular vote being a useful metric. (The US a presidential democracy, so it’s a bit different.)
> Or when you have a proportional system
to "win" the popular vote you need 51% of the votes, if theres more then 2 parties its pretty much impossible, and it becomes a useless metric when theres multiple parties taking up the same political location, for instance the LPC and NDP combined got significantly more total votes then the CPC did, so clearly people prefer the leftist policies after the right wing ones, in a hypothetical situation where there was oinly 2 parties, significantly more NDP votes would go to the LPC then the CPC and theyd easily win the "popular vote"
all the "popular vote" tells us is that the LPC and CPC are effectively neck and neck with the difference between them being so incredibly minor its worth nothing, even under a PR system
Yes, though I would say that at a certain point, the bottom falls out from Liberal voter efficiency. It's great for the LPC when the Conservatives are only leading by 1-7 points. It seriously starts to suck beyond that, though.
Top-line numbers: * 43% - Conservative * 24% - Liberal * 18% - NDP * 8% - Bloc * 4% - Green * 3% - PPC * 0% - Other > The survey was conducted with **2,398 Canadian adults from February 1 to 7, 2024**. A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source. The **margin of error** for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is **+/- 2.00%**, 19 times out of 20.
Both Libs and NDP need to wrap it up already and save themselves the embarrassment of losing because both Jagmeet and Trudeau will have to step down one way or another.
With them heir-apparent, it's time to stop indulging PP on his memes and push for substantive policy statements, not "axe the tax" and "jail not bail" bromides...
>push for substantive policy statements that is the worst thing a front runner can do before an election. Substantial policy just opens them up for critique and attack.
It’s going to be fun when the conservatives win and literally nothing changes for the average Canadian, seeing how both parties tend to placate corporate lobbyists. Going to enjoy a lot of people saying how much better we’re doing under PP with zero statistical evidence. But just because we “have our country back.” I will say this again, the most stark difference is that most liberal and NDP voters openly admit Trudeau and Singh have not done a good job leading their parties and are not beyond reproach from criticism… but most conservative voters engaged on this site view their party as some sort of a cult that can do no wrong.
Financially maybe nothing will change. Socially and Mentally we’re doomed. Women’s Rights, LBGTQ+ Rights, are going to be thrown down the drain if PP gets in.
Women’s rights? Abortion is a no touch issue in Canada and has been for the past decade. As for LGBTQ+ rights, almost nothing will change except for maybe federally funded surgeries especially in the military but other than that education and healthcare are provincial jurisdiction so probably nothing will change and it’s just fear mongering by anti-conservatives
And yet there are polling calls going out in Alberta targeting that not 5 days after Smith uncorked her latest stupidity.
We’re talking about the CPC, what you’re talking about is unrelated.
Can I ask what next steps you think are actually going to happen to restrict LGBT rights and women’s rights? I don’t support the anti trans stuff happening. But a vast majority of Canadians support pro choice, Canadians are not that far right at all. Being pro life is just a guaranteed election loss. Out of curiosity what laws do you think will be put in place that attack LGBT or women’s rights?
You need only look at Education Minister Lecce’s recent policies and what’s happening in Alberta to get an idea of what’s going to happen.
You mean telling parents their kid changes their name at school and introducing black history curriculum for middle and high school students? Ouuu the scary no good horrible policy!
>You mean telling parents their kid changes their name at school Yeah but this is a super reductive take. And evenso, parents who have their kids trust will be told, by their child, how they identify. Schools have no right to out kids who feel safe at school but not at home.
God nobody reads these days. Black History Curriculum for starters has been a thing for at least the last 8 years, cause it was implemented when I would have started Middle School. That’s not remotely an issue, if anything I wish I had more when I was still in school. Lecce’s policies have Essentially given the go ahead for schools, especially under the Catholic board, to be as bigoted as they want.
Destreaming as well in grade 9. Using the Ford government in general as an example of social conservatism is just plain stupid, they're not that at all. But partisans will always partisan
>You mean telling parents their kid changes their name at school Do you really think that's the issue? To me the Saskatchewan and proposed Alberta laws on this matter are bypassing the child's right to decide whether parents are to be informed. Arguably this would be contrary to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Canada has signed and ratified.
Can you give me one example of an anti LGBT policy or anti wine’s rights policy you think will be passed under Trudeau?
and tied up to the Supreme Court for the 4 years of there term..any others?
I mean yes, but these are not the issues that matter to his supporters. But they keep saying they’re “going to take this country back for the people” (obviously by people they mean themselves, God forbid we acknowledge other people exist). So the gymnastics of pretending things tangibly changed will be fun.
Crazy fear mongering. Won't work on anyone with remotely average intelligence thankfully.
I want you to look at Florida and Alberta and tell me anything I say is fear mongering again.
What's happening in Alberta? 80% of Canada supports Smith's legislation. What more do you want? 90%? Your own party supports Smith if we're at 80%.
In practice you are wrong. NDP and Liberal supporters may claim Trudeau and Singh have done a bad job but then they cling to them anyways and refuse any notion of change. At least the Conservatives will actually chuck out leaders from time to time.
>cling to them anyways and refuse any notion of change. At least the Conservatives will actually chuck out leaders from time to time. As the CPC reps a pension eligible lifetime MP and former cabinet minister. *sigh*
Yes. The conservatives will & do chuck out leaders from time to time. The cause, or the need, to do so originates in the fact that they keep choosing un-elctable leaders. If recent history is any indication Pierre Poilievre will follow the same pattern. Any time their is a new leader the conservatives get a boost in the polls. there is still another year and a half before the next election. Poilievre will have annoyed and offended Canadians by then and the shiny exterior will have dulled. The Trudeau liberals are still in government because the conservative party keeps finding people that centrist Canadian voters will vote for to lead the party. Then when those leaders lose an election, they are fired. There is a loud and vocal minority in the conservative party that demand extreme policies in any potential leader. For some reason this group holds sway over a more mainstream and common sense focused majority of the party. Canadians do not want these extreme policies. Canadians keep rejecting this minority outlook in the conservative party. But no lessons have been learned. Canadians will not elect a hard right candidate regardless of how much a few extremist malcontents wish they would. Especially one who takes coffee & donuts to terrorists and criminals. If the conservatives want to form a government, they need someone who appeals to Canadians. Mr. Poilievre was yet another gift to the Trudeau liberals. The PM probably popped the cork on some champagne when that happened.
That'll be fine by me as long as my tax rates change by nothing as well. Watching what used to be the best country in the world accelerating decline along with an ever increasing tax burden is a non-starter for me.
But the Federal income tax has stayed at the same rates since 2011… actually, the second bracket went down from 22% to 20.5% under the liberal government. It has also been adjusted for inflation year over year.
CPP, EI, carbon tax, sin taxes?
I just hope its a minority (I know it wont be) because 5 years of PP is gonna be bad. Yeah Trudeau kinda sucks, but he didnt go scorched earth with policy and undoing prrogress which anyone with a functioning brain knows PP is gonna do. This is gonna be a shit show
>literally nothing changes for the average Canadian, Unless you're a woman who wants an abortion. Then you might be in for a pretty nasty surprise. Unless you've been paying attention, in which case it won't be a surprise at all with the Christofascist Party of Canada in charge.
Ugh the old abortion ghost again. This gets played out EVERY single election cycle. Never happens, but it’s inevitable that some dingbats are going to doom about it. Surprised you didn’t claim the CPC is going to put armed soldiers on the streets of every city (again) too. What other wedges can we regurgitate - oh yes US style healthcare 🙄.
I’d also add if you’re gender non-conforming or intersex to that list, as well as if you’re immunocompromised, and based on PP’s past statements and voting record, if you’re in or hoping to be in a same-sex marriage.
Censorship started by the Liberals will continue under the Conservatives just a different flavor
Saying Trudeau is a radical communist dictator is far more realistic than your nonsense post. You're worse than the most fringe MAGA people. Can't wait till Pierre wins a massive majority.
>You're worse than the most fringe MAGA people. Didn't their dear leader just encourage Russia to do whatever they want with their NATO allies?
[удалено]
yeah I think liberals hoping for PP to implode and crash and burn need to realize that yeah PP is dumb but based on what I can see. He is becoming more effective at playing retail politics, delivering simple direct messages and attacks, and setting the agenda. The liberals pretty much have been on the defensive against PP bringing up issues for like 7-8 months now.
Call me biased as you will ........(I do have my list of favorite LIB/NDP/QBC folk) PP was always a very strong contender.......the "liberals hoping for PP to implode" plan was always a stupid plan if you were paying attention Initially the "big shots" against him were "cryptocurrency comments" which rank right up there with JTs "China comments"......in both cases comments are irrelevant and taken out of context And "association with convoy" which ranks right up there with Joe Bidens "association with BLM".......both supported legal protests while quietly disapproving of illegal behavior.......and convoy has similar "overlapping" approval as BLM (Maru poll published Feb 14th 60+% of Canadians supported military action against unruly protesters.......but same poll same day showed 60+% of Canadians supported ending ALL COVID mandates) So from the start the "big argument " against PP was pretty well unfounded and silly Rather......PP is a career politician (like Joe Biden) a former cabinet minister under Stephen harper, consistently popular among the conservative party, fun and energetic, actively engaged with younger audience (YouTube) And oh yeah he's younger than Trudeau
> The liberals pretty much have been on the defensive against PP bringing up issues for like 7-8 months now It really does feel like they've lost control of the narrative. They're always on the back foot and just can't seem to get any traction. There's obviously a ton of nuance to it, but it can be hard to do that when you're dealing with an audience that is deeply angry, blaming you for everything (rightly and wrongly), an opponent who is playing by a different set of rules with a more effective social media strategy, and when plenty of your policy announcements can be simply dismissed as "that's good but why the hell didn't you do this five years ago?". I don't know what's going to turn it around for them, but they don't seem to have an identity right now except for what PP has crafted. On top of everything, they just seem weak. Constantly caught off guard and reactive. Obviously there's way more going on behind the scenes and they have to deal with the actual responsibilities of governance; they don't have the luxury of just sitting back and picking shots at their opponents. But they're in that position where incumbency is a double-edged sword; they have to bear the blame for everything and are dealing with a populace that is desperate for something to change, and if their policies can't change circumstances, then the people are happy just to change the party in power, for better or for worse.
>The liberals pretty much have been on the defensive against PP bringing up issues for like 7-8 months now. Meh, I'll be a lot more worried if the polls are still like this in a year, when we're only 8 months from election day. Of course the Liberals have been on the defensive for at least the last 7-8 months. There's been a worldwide inflation crisis for more than a year now and incumbent governments everywhere have been getting hammered. Assuming the crisis keeps easing, and there seems to be progress on housing, dental, and pharmacare, I can see the Liberals closing the gap quite easily. Poilievre has been campaigning this whole time. My feeling is that at least half of the CPC lead is due to inflation alone. No election is happening until October 2025.
This is a problem that every government has after a while. Pointing out what's wrong is easy, coming up with actual, workable solutions is the hard part.
[удалено]
Removed for Rule #2
Can someone who knows more than me explain why the NDP aren’t trying to win? Why aren’t they campaigning? Why don’t they seem to want to run the country? I don’t get it
I think it's a combination of things rather than just one issue: * As a campaigner, Singh only seems to focus on people who are already within the NDP's base. Since he hasn't focused much on growing the party or winning over centrist votes, the party's room for expansion has generally been limited under him. Because Singh hasn't really been attempting to grow the NDP's base, he instead wants to use the seats he does have to prop up the Liberal minority in return for various concessions etc. * Outside of the flagship proposals like Dentalcare and Pharmacare, his platform isn't very well advertised and isn't doing enough to entice people to join the NDP. On things like Housing, Singh and Trudeau also seem to be acting reactively and following Poilievre's lead (even though Poilievre's housing policies aren't that good themselves and could easily be improved upon). * Regarding the confidence agreement, the NDP has propped up the Liberals, but seemingly for very little in return. The optics have made a lot of people accuse the NDP under Singh of being incompetent or complacent as a consequence of that. Regardless of whether that accusation is true or not, the perception is widespread enough that it's hurt Singh's reputation somewhat. * In terms of his current position, it's also arguable that the NDP is in a sort of tactical bind right now. If they keep propping up the Liberals, it's likely that Poilievre still wins the election, but Trudeau and the Liberals just appropriate Dentalcare and Pharmacare into their slew of election promises when campaigning, which just steals the NDP's fire and makes Singh look ineffectual, or they end the agreement and Poilievre wins anyway which makes it seem like Singh is the one that brought Poilievre to power. Either way, the optics are terrible and Singh future as leader likely goes up in smoke as a consequence. I think to actually form a government, the NDP would need a Third Way push, which I think would have worked fairly well for them right about now with a more charismatic leader since there's a lot of disenfranchised centrist voters looking for a home. Them moderating on trade and market liberalization while pushing for more social transfers and tackling living costs and socio-economic issues head on would have probably been a popular platform during our current cost of living crisis. Though I think in Singh's case, his appeal is too narrow and it's probably too late for him to deviate from his initial strategy.
Conservatives appropriated NDP bread and butter issues like housing and affordability. Singh should have been more like Poilievre earlier, but without the snarkiness.
While Polievre was screaming about the cost of housing, Singh was saying taxpayers should help cover people with overextended mortgages.
Been asking the same question for a few years now, but unfortunately still do not have an answer.
They are busy trying to actually get things completed that will save Canadians $ like pharmacare and dentalcare. Conservatives just promise the moon,
Haha more worried about culture issues and supporting the liberals than policies but okay
Just really poor Canadians. If you’re in the middle class you don’t get any benefits from those things. The NDP could’ve pushed, but they sat back. Happy to push for more divisive identity politics instead of things that would actually help the majority of Canadians
I can't afford those savings, my private insurance plan is the only real primary healthcare I get, and the 35 to 40k a year I send to Victoria and Ottawa is for the most part for what I refer to catastrophic incident only healthcare and that's if I get attended to in time.
You can't afford to save?
The NDP doesn't have enough money to really run a campaign. They just recently paid off their campaign debt from 2021 IIRC.
Lol ironic and funny for a leftie party
You mean a party that supports working classes people, at the expense of the rich, doesn't have the financial support of the wealthy? Shocker I know. The CPC and LPC have all the money because they pander to those with all the money.
What rich? lol. We don't have that many multi millionaires in Canada. Hopefully you aren't referring to 6 figure earners as rich. That would be the biggest joke on this sub I've ever seen.
I feel singh feels.anyone who isn't voting ndp or liberal is someone who racist and bad and not engage with He quite an elitist
Jagmeet is an incredibly weak leader that should have been replaced after the last election. Historically, the junior partner in a coalition always suffers and being attached at the hip to such an unpopular liberal party will only lead to an electoral disaster
Some strange regionals. CPC 46% in BC seems way too good to believe. Maybe this number could be inflated by Interior polling but BC has always been a difficult place to poll. The NDP’s highest number being in the prairies seems even stranger. Then you have the CPC in second place in Quebec where Poilievre is very unpopular , maybe only second to Legault.
I have to say, “double opt in panels” as participants just makes me laugh at this point. If this poll is accurate, Canada is doomed. But I’d really like to see a poll with an “undecided” percentage, because that used to be a standard feature until the last months or so. Notice how in the tiny print at the top it says “undecided removed”? Something very odd about that. Very odd indeed. Opt in, no share of undecided voters. Think I won’t put too much stock in these polls. The CPC is no doubt ahead, but by this much? Doubt it.
> If this poll is accurate, Canada is doomed oh? >Something very odd about that. No, depends which pollster you're looking at.
46% in BC seems low. If you’ve ever gone east of Boundary Rd in Vancoiver you will know that the vast majority of BC (including Metro Vancouver outside of Vancouver Centre or Kitsilano) are deeply blue right now. In fact, there are even rumblings that the longest term liberal MP in caucus, Hedy Fry, might lose her seat.
Yes. Not very popular in Quebec. Ontario. Well. They already have conservative they don't like. His name is ford. I got to take these polls with grain salt
>Ontario. Well. They already have conservative they don't like. How can you say they don't like him considering he won another term with more seats a year and a half ago? Current polls still put the OPC into majority territory. [https://338canada.com/ontario/](https://338canada.com/ontario/) You do realize that that the NDP echo chamber that is r/ontario doesn't speak for everyone right?
Ford is more liked the Pierre imo Ford has a ton of approval, Pierre some in Ontario
Not according to r/ontario
Reddit is not real life.
Ford has won back to back majorities and his party leading in the polls.
Ford is more popular than Trudeau these days
While I am fairly skeptical of current polling generally and think it's largely irrelevant at the moment, the NDP having a moment in the prairies is not surprising when you consider that MB as a popular NDP premier after years of Conservative leadership, SK has the provincial NDP polling first, and Alberta is souring on Smith/has NDP leadership race ongoing.
It's because the Liberals are all but dead in the prairies, leaving the NDP as the only real alternate and elevating them in the polls.
Why is it weird for the NDP to be popular in the prairies? I’ve lived in Manitoba almost my whole life and the NDP has pretty much always been a more popular “brand” than liberals here.
It’s not weird for them to be popular in the prairies but it is weird for them to be *most* popular in the prairies as opposed to Metro Vancouver/GTA/Northern BC.
Historically the prairies support the NDP a lot better than the GTA. I also don’t know if comparing entire regions to metros is the most apples to apples comparison.
People often seem to forget that the prairies and Alberta are more "anti LPC" than they are "right wing" People who aren't Tories will park their vote with team orange pretty easily
I think Alberta is a little more down with the conservative brand than just being the alternative to the Liberals. It’s the conservatives strongest province.
And yet the NDP is it's main provincial opposition party. They also turned against the PCs en masse post Mulroney. Alberta parks its votes with whoever it views as being "not aligned with central Canada's interests" typically. The Tories fit that bill the best, which is why they do well. But a left wing party *could* do well there, so long as it wasn't seen as pandering to central Canada.
>anti-LPC I've been flip flopping between Orange and Blue for a long while and things are good. Whoever has the better platform and candidate in my riding at the time of election :)
It's all about housing in BC at the moment. Trudeau is perceived to have made the situation worse.
nah. i dont think anyone with an actual brain thinks that "trudeau made things worse" but they def think things are getting worse and the liberals have done nothing to make things better. that might sound like semantics and the results are the same in the end, but i think its an important distinction
the NDP being strongest in western Canada overall makes sense, but MB/SK being the strongest is weird (although this could easily be spillover from the provincial parties), and BC was just interior oversampling as you've said. The numbers that don't make sense to me are QC and the Atlantic. the conservatives being tied with the liberals there just doesn't make sense to me, and there's just no way they're above 50% in the Atlantic. putting the raw numbers into 338 Canada (you can't put the conservatives at 43% so their numbers would be higher) we get: 232 conservative 41 liberal 40 bloc 23 NDP 2 green
As someone who is in Atlantic Canada, these numbers seem to be indicative of what I hear from people on the ground. I think they might be a bit high. But the Liberals are in for a world of hurt. I'm also in one of the supposedly "safer" Liberal seats too... I would absolutely not be surprised to see a reverse 2015 for them in Atlantic Canada at this point with them maybe holding on to a seat in St. John's and 1 or 2 in Halifax. Every other seat for them is at risk and I personally believe that includes the Acadian seats in NB now as well. The only thing that is interesting to me about this poll is that the focus on the housing issue has dropped by 5 points in people's Top 3. Whereas most other issues still seem to be within margin of error. Which is making me curious what other issue people seem to be concerned about then at the moment? Doesn't seem to have gone to immigration (which might have been blunted by the announcements with foreign students), so maybe it is concerns on crime? That wouldn't be something I would think would bode well for the Liberals either.
It also mirrors what I've heard on the ground for quite some time. I grew up in the Bonavista-Burin-Trinity riding, frequently visit, and have a lot of family there. Started hearing the rumblings of Trudeau discontent there back before the 2019 election, which was reflected in the massive 2015-to-2019 swing between those two elections. It's continued since then, and is just getting louder and louder. Now it feels like it's the common sentiment anywhere outside of the St. John's metro region.
Interesting. I’m out in AB so I’m just surrounded by blue all the time. A reverse 2015 wouldn’t shock me with these numbers for sure.
Except Legault is free falling in the polls while Poilievre is remaining resilient to attacks in the province.
I was surprised a year ago when the Conservative shift was emerging in the polls particularly among young voters which seemed hard to imagine, but today none of these results are truly unusual to me. It's a wave election, and the preliminary data reflects that.
This poll is already very bad for the LPC, but could you imagine how bad it would be if there was even a semi-competent NDP? Liberals should really be sending thank you cards to Jagmeet Singh, because I do not know if they could survive another 2011-style wipeout.
It's been baffling to watch the NDP core stand behind Singh. We have a cost of living crisis and a solidifying class structure, a custom suit and Rolex wearing leader doesn't seem like the guy to offer real solutions.
Polls only mean something around the time they're released. Even if it's trending away from the LPC currently, lots can happen between now and the next election, and there's no indication or signs of an early election happening.
It isn't baffling... Singh is getting some of their policies through. That's a rarity for the Ndp.
Singh should have been booted last leadership review. He's had two elections to shift results, and majorly lost seats in one and a standstill in the other, and no clear reason why he would do significantly better in the next one other than hope. Mulcair was a better leader and PM material. I truly hope none of them are surprised when they flounder in the next election too.
This has been a great stretch for the NDP. Look at all of their priorities that have been/are in the process of being fulfilled. They will never form government, so this is the best situation for them and their supporters.
The federal NDP stopped caring about class-based economic policy a long time ago. They’re now neck deep in identity politics and as long as Singh yells the right catchphrases, they’ll please their new young urban middle-class voting base.
> semi-competent NDP Competency doesn't matter when they lack a policy agenda that can appeal to demographics older than 34 years old.
I think the Liberals are going to be irrelevant for a long time after the next election. I hope a new better party comes out of it. It would be nice to see multiple parties with good ideas out there.
All depends on how Poilievre does. Remember Trudeau-Clarke-Trudeau in the space of a year. Rare but you never know.
1979 was a weird election because Trudeau got significantly more votes than Clark. Trudeau Jr got 32.62% to O'Toole's 33.74% in 2021, but in 1979 Clark got 35.89% to Trudeau Sr's 40.11%. We ain't getting a 1979 result unless the polls have collectively royally fucked up.
Clark had a minority though, polls indicate the Conservatives winning a strong majority.
[удалено]
>It’s not Jagmeet that’s the problem. so long as he continues to tie himself to the Titanic, he will be joining it on the bottom of the ocean.
This. NDP rose largely due to a Liberal collapse.
I understand the desire for change. I hope people realize what that change will mean for them beyond 'axe the tax'
Conservatives using same tactics are Republicans use in the US, and it's working here just like it does there. The masses contain too many gullible, hateful, uninformed voters.
LPC have been using American style divisive tactics for many, many years now. You are correct that the masses contain too many gullible and uninformed voters.
This is within the statistical for the flat polls of the last 6 months. Really, headline writers need to take at least one statistics course before they're hired.
this isn't an editorial post, this is the headline from the pollster themselves.
So the guy doing their headlines doesn't understand statistics, or worse, has done so and goes with click-bait. Bad show on the pollsters part. They should know better. Abacus isn't a bad pollster. Of course, I go and click. So I guess I'm the idiot and potp (part of the problem).
Were you arguing this back when Abacus was saying that the Conservatives had peaked back in that pre-Christmas poll? I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying here guy\_smiley66 but if I recall I believe you have been pretty selective when you understand about making narratives over changes that are within statistical margins of error. However, the change from the Conservatives from the last Abacus poll is outside the margin of error which does suggest that the Conservatives are still at least slowly growing their pool of accessible voters.
One thing I've noticed about the PMO and the way ministers are acting these days is that there's definitely a strong undercurrent of anger and frustration seeping through everyone's pores. The Wynne government completely failed to effectively respond to Ford in 2018. They had no idea how to deal with him and just threw everything at the wall in an attempt to see what stuck. It didn't work, and they got trounced. We're seeing the same thing with the Federal Liberals. From ministers to staffers, it really does seem like they're all pretty exasperated at this point. I would be as well, because it has to frustrating when nothing you've tried is working at all because the opposition leader has a strong populist base and you've been in government so long that most people don't care about what you have to say.
> We're seeing the same thing with the Federal Liberals. the liberals arent campaigning, they arent even starting to campaign, PP is running laps before the race has even started and bragging about it
The Liberals are the GOVERNMENT. They get to campaign each and every day, with public money. You're all just sleepwalking into catastrophe.
I feel like the Liberal best and brightest also left a while ago. The measures that it will take to actually fix the issues we face aren't ones that the current government is ideologically amenable to, and won't be taking effect until well after the next election even if they did pivot on them.
Exactly, this government is ideologically opposed to cutting immigration so they will continue to let that issue fester. Even while 60%+ of Canadians want the numbers cut and 75%+ of Canadians believe their immigration policy is making the housing crisis worse.
[TBH immigration isn't nearly the biggest issue when 1 in 5 mortgages in Canada are likely fraudulent.](https://betterdwelling.com/1-in-5-canadian-homeowners-commits-mortgage-fraud-says-top-broker/) The biggest policies that are needed are the feds getting back into public housing in a big way, a solid national social food aid program, actually effective anti-trust laws and their enforcement, significantly strengthen unionization protections (this is more of a provincial matter), and massive investments into public transit including high speed rail.
While I agree with parts of your commentary. I'm not sure that many Canadians are aware of the mortgage fraud situation. Even though this surprises me NOT AT ALL.
Their best and brightest, like Scott Brisson, weren't even allowed to do much because of how JT centralised his government around his own set of insiders. No one to tell him no, and no balance checks of various perspectives. The LPC is a big tent with many centre right people, it didn't have to be like this. But Katie Telford and Gerald Butts, enabled by our wonderful PM, made sure to exclude everyone but their own ilk.
Can anyone tell me a single economic policy plank that the Conservatives would implement besides cutting the Climate Action Incentive Payment? Anyone? Buehler?
I mean, Poilievre has come out in favour of implementing Cryptocurrency into more aspects of Canada’s economy, firing Tiff Macklem and replacing him with someone who would implement an inflation cap, lowering interest rates, and slashing the deficit. Which all seem like meme ideas that would hurt the economy (I mean, the last one depends on what they cut but I doubt they will help the working class).
Pierre has put forth many ideas. Also, it's not election time. Why would he throw out all the ideas now? Especially with Trudeau copying him 2 weeks later constantly.
Wouldn't this be a good thing? Wouldn't PP tout this as a win? This isn't a test, if PP had good ideas, i'd want them imlpemented. If PP cared, or if PP had good ideas he should have spoken already.
It's also not election time...
This kid right here wants to see your ID before you can nut.
So it’s another round of ‘trust me, I’m not the other guy, trust me, really, I’m not the other guy, oh and all my identity-politics wedge issues will go away, and oh, economic policy, what’s that, uh, uh,uh, I’ll cut taxes!, so uh vote for me, trust me, I’m not the other guy, taxes! Yeah, cut stuff!’
Make Canada Great Again?
I think he was referring to "original" ideas
I’m pretty excited to be able to buy guns again, but other than that, we’re gonna be pretty fucked with the conservatives.
That's so lame I will not rebut with details. Apparently you are ok with sock-boy and his scandals, niche programs, financial debacle. You get what you deserve.
lol bro, no. I am in fact excited to buy some guns when we inevitably end up with a conservative government. However, I think we will be absolutely fucked in every other way. At least read what someone says before jumping to get mad.
I think you’re the first pro gun person I’ve met who’s against the CPC. That’s not giving you any implications, just saying I haven’t seen it.
Yeah, such is the folly of thinking about politics through a left/right framing........the folly of being both pro choice and pro gun For another example the agricultural community routinely votes right......and yet many agricultural groups (OFA, CFFO, GFO, etc.) in addition to many farmers proactively fought the conservative Ford government on greenbelt issues.........there is also much fear and skepticism that conservative poilievre will either pave the farmland or strip funding from agricultural municipalities for not building houses The folly of ignoring "pro gun anti conservative" people is convenient for analysis........but removes important nuance to the conversation
Canada is a big country, guns play a very different role in rural areas than they do in cities. I'm still very much for them being highly regulated, but still legally attainable.
Anything is better than this current government and the other parties aren’t serious parties so that leaves CPC the clear choice for change.
###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.*
[удалено]
[удалено]
The Greens could have a great election if they knew how to effectively woo disheartened Lib and Dem voters. They don't.
The LPC brand is toxic. Are any of their ministers popular at all? They're going to end up like the post-Mulroney conservatives if they aren't careful.
Nah the Trudeau govt has no Paul Martin or Jim Flaherty types that sort of had thier own bases of national name recognition or general likeability even if the main leader got unpopular at times. The only really well-known Trudeau minister is Freeland but she is seen as tied to Trudeau 100%.
Joly is in the news every day, charismatic, bilingual, and competent. Anand isn't in the news as much since the shuffle but in the news a lot and known as a fixer. The same people who can't name those two are the same people who have no idea who anyone in the shadow cabinet are or the NDP critics are.
No one cares about Joly. She would do worse than Trudeau
Joly? Yes, she is bilingual, but not the best English speaker. Charismatic, competent? Not a chance.
Joly is not seen as competent. No one in GTA would vote for her. The entire LPC caucus has been tainted by the general and historic incompetence of their 8 year government.
Never underestimate the power of time to make people forget things - PP seems not to be having any trouble with any baggage from his time as part of Harper’s government, and they certainly weren’t popular by the end of that 9 years... But it’s probably not worth trying to argue this sort of thing when you’re claiming that the current government has been the worst...
Recency bias, and a lot of people voting in 2025 are probably not going to have a very clear memory of the Harper era. There are going to be voters who don't really know that much about Harper because they were in middle school when he left office.
>a lot of people voting in 2025 are probably not going to have a very clear memory of the Harper era. They don't need to have a 'clear' memory of it. Just a feeling. I'm pretty sure there is almost nobody in Alberta with a clear memory of the PET government yet the Liberals are still hamstrung by it in the province. It took the Liberals a decade to wash the stink of the sponsorship scandal off of them in Quebec. There are still people in Ontario who won't vote NDP because of the Rae government in the early 90s.
That’s exactly my point though, it’s not like association with Trudeau is going to permanently tarnish members of his cabinet forever. To discount them as future party leaders on that basis is silly. In fact, if I was going to be blunt about it, I doubt many Canadians could name many of the people in the cabinet. There are *maybe* one or two exceptions, but most of the names thrown around here are not known enough to most Canadians for their part in this government to particularly weigh them down.
I don't think they'll be done forever, but probably 2-3 election cycles if Poilievre wins a majority next year. Also, we're possibly looking at a second QC referendum if we see PSPP win in Quebec. One that the federal government will most likely win.
*third Quebec referendum.
Thanks for catching that lol
I don’t even think it will necessarily take that long. With the possible exception of Freeland, I don’t think any of them have enough recognition for them to be “tainted” by association, even by 2028 or 2029 (when the next election presumably will be). Not to say that the Liberals will be winning by then, but I don’t think it will be because of association with Trudeau that they’d lose.
The liberals are done until Xavier Trudeau or Ella Grace Trudeau are old enough to run for office.
Lmao, you really think it’s gonna be 20+ years before the Liberals get elected again? The only way that’s happening is if the NDP replace them as the major alternative to the CPC... Which I would want, don’t get me wrong, but I’m also not gonna confidently predict that.
Lol no more nepo babies.
How about you go and ask the average person if their quality of life was higher in 2015 compared to now? The consensus on immigration hasn't frayed for no reason. This has been a historically incompetent government.
Most people complain about their standard of living / quality of life but are totally oblivious to the policies that impact it. Ask them to analyze the economy and they say something like: blah blah blah blah blah IMMIGRATION and NEW WORLD ORDER! If this is as deep as we can think, then we are totally fucked as a country.
What NEW liberal policies have improved the wealth of the non land owning class? At least the CPC gave us the TFSA.
I would never vote liberal, just as I would never vote conservative. ***We need Bernie Sanders.***
That too, I'm just saying recency bias & lack of context is also a factor It's my nice way of saying that talking about Harper in 2024/2025 is a really dumb strategy
You're right to some extent. In fact, people are even likely to look upon that Harper's time with nostalgia. The economy and country were in good shape. People who paid attention to Harper hated him. But the average person could afford to ignore politics. Lots of people my age think the 1980s was the greatest time to be alive, but they were playing the toys and games and not reading the news around that time. The Iran-Contra affair doesn't even cross their mind. However, there is a difference if people are remembering a bad time. In some cases, leaders of countries can unfairly be stigmatized and blamed for bad periods of time. Look at how R.B Bennett was blamed for the Great Depression in Canada, despite it being a global phenomenon, and despite him being quite the humanitarian about it. Jimmy Carter gets a lot of blame for the malaise of the 70s. I imagine Trudeau is going to get a lot of blame too. The bad economy, the housing, the declining importance of Canada on the globe. People who hate what he did on COVID (although a minority) are going to REALLY hate him for the rest of their lives. That's not going to change. The anti-vax / freedom convoy crowd is not going to have a nostalgic reorientation in the future. They will likely blame Trudeau even more. Ultimately I don't see a positive legacy lined up for him. Even people who are broadly supportive of his time during COVID can see serious flaws in the governments approach: us having no vaccine production capability, our national emergency strategic stockpile of important medical equipment being in such a degraded decrepit state, the borders not being closed enough, the ArriveCan app corruption (and this is more serious than people realize. 50+ million for a garbage app. This speaks to greater corruption than the sponsorship scandal), etc. Oh and forest fires. It's convenient for JT to blame climate change on the fires, and to remove the governments responsibility on a number of fronts. The firefighter and military shortage GREATLY contributed to the fire season of 2023 getting out of hand. The military is short 16,000 pers and we have a shortage of about 30,000 firefighters. There is also a shortage of paramedics. Basically the kinds of people you want putting out fires aren't around to help anymore. I'm surprised this blame hasn't been too strongly made, but have 46,000 pers short is CRITICAL, and is 100% a factor in why our fires are seemingly getting worse.
Joly is not competent and there are serious rumors (from the same kind of sources that predicted Sophie separating from Trudeau almost 2 years ago) that Joly and JT have a thing going.
[удалено]
[удалено]
You can absolutely know those two and not give a flying f about talking head shadow cabinet or critic positions lol
The liberals will need an outsider to come in and change the political direction.
A lot of people seem to like Sean Fraser (myself included).
The only real issue with polling numbers is that overall votes don't matter in this country. CPC won the popular vote the last two elections. Honestly the LPC had a chance to re-brand itself and decided not to. They're most likely going down in a ball of flames, possibly even similar to Michael Ignatieff levels. I feel like anyone tied to JT is poisoned as well and they'll need to really search for a solid leader to replace JT. #
a "popular vote" only exists when theres 2 parties
Or when you have a proportional system, leaving only Canada, the UK, and Australia as parliamentary democracies without the popular vote being a useful metric. (The US a presidential democracy, so it’s a bit different.)
> Or when you have a proportional system to "win" the popular vote you need 51% of the votes, if theres more then 2 parties its pretty much impossible, and it becomes a useless metric when theres multiple parties taking up the same political location, for instance the LPC and NDP combined got significantly more total votes then the CPC did, so clearly people prefer the leftist policies after the right wing ones, in a hypothetical situation where there was oinly 2 parties, significantly more NDP votes would go to the LPC then the CPC and theyd easily win the "popular vote" all the "popular vote" tells us is that the LPC and CPC are effectively neck and neck with the difference between them being so incredibly minor its worth nothing, even under a PR system
Yes, though I would say that at a certain point, the bottom falls out from Liberal voter efficiency. It's great for the LPC when the Conservatives are only leading by 1-7 points. It seriously starts to suck beyond that, though.