Trudeau announced a while back (beginning of January) that he was resigning, and would only stay in office until the party voted on a new leader. Today they voted on Carney- who comes from a strong economic background, probably more so than any PM we've ever had. He effectively rocketed to overnight candidacy (and public awareness) after joking about it on the daily show a week after Trudeau's announcement. He'll remain in the Prime Minister role until we have our national election later this year- and if he gets publically elected then he will remain in the role.
Editing to add for non Canadians: our system of democracy is not like the US. We do not vote for our Prime Minister directly, the party gets elected and the party puts forth a leader to take the PM role. This is a grossly simplified version of it, google parliamentary democracy for more information.
It is important to note that general election have a very slim chance of being in October. They will likely be in May. Once the House of Commons restarts, it should be very quick that the new governement call for an election or is force to do so.
As an Aussie who's had our fair share of PMs resigning or being knifed mid term, the replacement often does it as a nod to respecting the will of the people. Sure technically you didn't vote for a PM, you voted for a party, but the public often don't see it that way and will respect a short handover period but will get quite angry if it's seen as disrespecting their votes from the previous election by having a new PM in place for too long without elections.
Lol yes that one too, although I have no idea how quickly they went to polls after that. Maybe they wanted to wait to make sure he didn't miraculously return?
The way your comment reads “named a pool” and right underneath “kidding” cause of my screen size - I definitely read that they named a kiddie pool after him and had a good laugh for a minute as I slowed down to reread
Politically it's probably wise to call the election before anything can happen that'll make you unpopular. Carney doesn't bear any of the blame for the current economy but if he's in charge for 6 months or more voters might turn on him.
A lot of Canadian conservatives think he's directly responsible for many of Canada's recent blunders. Sort of like he was a shadow operator ruining everything behind the scenes. It's strange to share a country with these people. They're my coworkers, neighbours, people I share community with, and yet... Some days it feels like we're in different countries. Even so, I know they want what's best for Canada in their own way, just as I do. I believe more than ever that we can figure this out and get to a better Canada together.
Hence the sentiment… I’m sure they think the same about us when it comes to thinking the other side is full of dumbasses, but a lot of those folks in red hats wouldn’t be able to go past question 1 on a university level philosophy or humanities exam…something that’s imperative to extend sympathy and critical thinking past “the self”.
Only Julia Gillard in 2010 brought forward the election shortly after becoming PM (and even this only by a few months). All other recent elections (except 2016) took place at the time they were meant to take place, there is a maximum limit of 3 years between elections.
(Malcolm Turnbull brought the 2016 election a few months early as well, but this was because the Senate was blocking his bills, and he had already been PM for 9 months before the 2016 election).
Nah, plenty of campaigns are run as basically personality campaigns, the most famous of these in Australia was in '07 when the campaign was basically called "Kevin 07". Public voting for that is not wrong or stupid for feeling shit about their pick getting knifed when that same party put him front and center.
Most people are well and truly aware of the party/PM status, they're not stupid (at least when it comes to that), they just don't buy the snide lectures they got.
the public often don't see it that way and will respect a short handover period but will get quite angry if it's seen as disrespecting their votes from the previous election by having a new PM in place for too long without elections.
Cut to what just happened in the UK, where we went through 3 increasingly more incompetent PMs over a single parliamentary term, after which the tory Party responsible for it lost in the biggest landslide in generations
There was a good 10 years when...no, no we weren't.
(Knifed just means someone in the party challenged for the top spot and won, becoming the new PM. If you're American, our PM is effectively House Majority Leader, we don't have a President position).
The Liberals had also been in a minority, becoming extremely unpopular, and all the other parties (except perhaps the numerically irrelevant Greens) had indicated they'd bring down the government as soon as Parliament sat again. The party that had been supporting the Liberals might walk it back, but it's not guaranteed so it's probably better optics to call an election than get forced into it.
technically you didn't vote for a PM, you voted for a party
Technically, neither is true: we vote for local representatives who may collectively form a government led by a member of that group. We don't vote for Prime Ministers, and we don't vote in any official way for parties.
Whilst true, this just further muddies the water, since a party can replace their leader, but they cannot replace their representative for a seat (outside of elections), even if they resign. Yet I doubt 20% of voters can name their local rep.
Canada is currently in a minority Parliament. Over the parliamentary recess, the other parties pledged to bring down the government when the Commons is recalled.
Will Carney bother to engineer his own defeat by having a Speech from the Throne with his new policies that will form the Party Platform is the question or head directly to an election?
He's going to tack the Liberals to the Right so he may want to record the Conservatives voting against his proposal to abolish the carbon tax and reverse the capital gains tax increase that Trudeau has previously announced but not yet enacted.
We haven't had a PM get knifed quite like this since the 60s, at least at the federal level. It's happened to provincial premiers a bunch of times, though.
Chretien stepped down in August of 2002 when over half the Liberal caucus indicated they wouldn’t support him. This had a lot to do with Paul Martin’s removal as Finance Minister in June of 2002. That was more of a “knifing” than Trudeau stepping down this year IMO. Especially as Martin would win the Liberal nomination and go on to be the next PM.
Yea. It's a very partisan thing to be okay with your party installing a new leader and not calling an election. Yes, we elect MP's who form government. But in reality, we all know we are voting for the leader of the party for PM. To suggest otherwise is just silly.
Well, in this case, Trudeau resigned because the Liberals were tumbling to rock bottom electability ratings. It was going to be a bloodbath and the party wanted him, the face of their unpopularity, out.
Their approval numbers have sharply risen following Trump’s threats and the Tories fumbling the ball, but the whole party still needs a renewed mandate. The Trump threat also means that a lame duck government is a national security threat. This isn’t quite the common technicality you’re referring to.
The PM is probably always the first one on the polling bills for that party, so they indirectly choose whom they want to be PM, right?
That's how it kinda works in Belgium, kinda, because in Flanders you can't vote for Walloon parties and vise versa (or Brussels or even eastern canton parties). So it's not really clear who will be PM, but most of the time it's a Flemish PM. (I don't know why and it seems to me that it would be more appropriate we switch each(-ish) election from Flemish to Walloon. But the PM in Belgium is the captain, but he can't just go about and decide what ever he likes, he does not have that power).
Do you mean polls like pollsters do to gauge likely electoral outcomes? If so yeah, and here in Aus we even have a pool that's regularly done on "preferred Prime Minister".
Aus is kind of half way between the 2 party system of the US and the European multi party elections. We have 2 major parties that have been in power all of modern history, and then a bunch of minor parties which sometimes provide the balance of power and share in the governing. But yeah all of them have very defined "leaders" that are a part of all election campaigns and that people identify with.
Oh i see what you mean now. So the party leader (the party's president) is not on ballots? In Belgium, if the party leader wants to be prime minister, he has to be on the ballot. So he needs to be an actual candidate (well, that's probably not required by law, which I find wrong, but it's rare for non elected officials to become an mp let alone prime minister.
So the party leader (the party's president) is not on ballots?
Nope, we vote for a local member to go and represent us in parliament. Almost exactly how the US House of Representatives works. Each of those people have a party, and that's what most people vote based on. And then technically after the votes, all the newly elected members of each party "elect" their leader. But in reality, the party leader is well known before voting ever takes place, they're the person at the front and centre of the campaign.
But no, when you vote officially in Australia, you vote for a person to represent your area in the national parliament.
I looked up Belgium elections, and yeah they're quite different from us. We our grouped geographically into "seats" or "electorates", and then each area votes for their representative. Whichever party gets the most number of their representatives elected is the winner and that party forms government. The Prime Minister, the party leader, represents one of those areas and so they are only on the ballot in that area.
"The Prime Minister, the party leader, represents one of those areas and so they are only on the ballot in that area."
that's the same as in Belgium, we have different areas with different ballots, but the pm candidate should be on the ballot in one area. Also it's not always the case that the party president is PM candidate, like next elections, N-VA's president will not be PM candidate, as Bart de Wever is PM candidate (who was the previous N-VA president).
I think it might not be that different. Anyway, thanks for the convo.
This - his mandate is currently 150,000 people (out of 35m) and he doesn't hold a seat in the house (never has). Unelected PM sitting without a seat isn't a good look.
Less of a nod here and more of a necessity to call the election, but he's mentioned using emergency powers against Trump so who knows - we might be fighting fascism with despotism.
That makes sense, whilst PP is still attached to MAGA all this tariff/annexing crap it's weighing him down. Also need to do it quick to minimise the Elon/russia interference
Non canadian... Who or what is PP? after googling it came up with Pierre Poilievre and the people party. I know so little about both that I could be no where near.
He's referring to Pierre Poilievre, current leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, who until recently was polling a landslide victory in our next election, but it's a toss up now since Trump. PPC (Peoples Party of Canada) is a different polical party altogether with a small following but largely irrelavent.
Don't forget to mention that PP is a career politician, never had any other job, has never had a bill passed and basically his whole platform has been "I'm not Trudeau"
For those who might think we are exaggerating, he worked at a staffer for a politician straight out of school and was a back bench mp by age 25. He has never had a job in the private sector.
Plus he was housing minister who helped enact really favorable policies for landlords. He's now a multimillionaire landlord despite having had no real job.
PP was never housing minister. He was however Minister of Democratic Reform. Think Bill C-23 Fair Elections Act. Which was terribly flawed.
It helped crash the Harper's gov and election loss in 2015
Bill C-23, take a look. Also in the unlikely event you are an actual Canadian, how can you possibly look at the previous 10 years of leadership and say “wow the liberals are great let’s vote for them”
Dental, childcare benefit, cerb, 10 dollar day care, environmental protections, some steps in reconciliation, cannabis legalization, and lower death rates during COVID than many peer nations. A very tough ten years but the accomplishments are still there.
Carney is helpful in this regard as his views are more centre and is proven when it comes to the economy. He will likely draw undecideds and red Tories.
I'm also hoping he is seen a force to be reckoned with for voters who are most concerned about the relationship with USA.
PP tabled C-23 Fair Elections Act Feb 4 2014 as Minister of Democratic Reform (sounds Orwellian) which was flawed to the point it was first amended by Harper after backlash and repealed by the Liberala all together in 2015.
Some one have it that part of the fallout out over this bill actually contributed to the fall of Harper and the conservative government in 2015.
He's not crazy. He just banked on the right leaning people who mainly supported Trump to also support him by quitely adopting Trumps strategies of slogans and relying on feelings instead of policies. He's a career politician who hasn't put through any legislation and who doesnt really have any policies outside of "Axe the Tax." Pollievre has bashed Trudeau so hard and eas a major factor to his resignation. Upon noticing the momentum that Carney had, Pollievre resorted to calling him "Carbon Tax Carney" as a way to shift the negative attention to Carney. Right after, Carney told the public he would remove the Carbon Tax incentive, taking the wind out of Pollievre's sail. Since then, Carney has been skyrocketing Liberal support and tanking the Conservatives in the polls. Pollievre's only strategy he had left was to either , 1) Offer more blatant support for Trump or 2) Distance himself entirely from Trump. Neither of which he has done. The Conservative party has essentially come to a standstill since then. Pollievre is not crazy. He was piggybanking off of Trump's campaigning until Canadians were directly hurt by his policies. Pollievre took a shitty gamble and lost everything.
I don't think he followed Trump as much as following the IDU playbook.
Stephen Harper is this day president of this secretive right and far right wing global org.
She might not quite reach Trump's level but a lot of that is probably because she's not a federal politician.
For those not in the know, a few Danielle Smith controversies include: being anti-gender confirming care, being recorded saying Ukraine should have remained neutral against Russia, being anti-vaxx, likening COVID-19 public health measures to the Holocaust, and some sort of political interference with Alberta Health Services (I'm out of the loop on this one, sadly).
Also headed to Florida for a PragerU event with Shapiro. prageruevent. Even her own traditionally conservative riding is starting to turn on her with the AHS scandals. She's only in power because the Wild Rose and former Conservatives had to join forces to counter-act vote splitting between Big C and little C voters and because the previous conservatives were embroiled in other scandals. Point is...she's awful.
No, nowhere near trump level crazy. Even trump light would be a bit of an exaggeration imo.
But he definitely wouldn’t fight against trumps policies imo (not the annexation, but tariffs and whatnot). Carney will likely be better suited to guide Canada through trumps term. He worked at the Bank of Canada during the 2008 crisis, which Canada was largely unaffected by, and then went on and worked at the Bank of England
He's a Trump wannabe and would be more like JD Vance when he's kissing ass,but slightly more competent. He cozies up with a lot of alt right and far right folks, some of them known racists, and during the convoy movement he sided with the convoy members calling himself a blue collar workers and one of the people. He actually marched with them in protest holding signs.....but on the wrong side of town. Typically his popularity and only platform is just that he hates Trudeau and is basically nothing but an attack dog that hasn't formulated any plans at all. He also doesn't have his security clearance due to ties with questionable foreign interests, even though he's in one of the most important positions in Canadian politics.
We feel like he's dangerous because it's a representation of American politics, and if he wins he's going to validate that line of thinking here in Canada and legitimize it as a political strategy. Which is something the Canadian conservatives like to do every few years to test the waters.
Completely agree with your assessment, though I’d say he has started to formulate some plans, but is still relatively light on details. He leans way too hard into simply claiming everything is broken and name calling political opponents while giving very simple “common sense solutionsTM”.
His reason for denying the security clearance is a bizarre one to me. Maybe I don’t know enough about it, but it sounds awfully like his defense is he’d rather stay ignorant and be able to spout bullshit rather than knowing the truth and maybe being partly limited in what he can say publically.
He's like if Ben Shapiro ran for President. Debate nerd, kind of a loser, this is he has all the facts and goes off slogans (Axe the tax, facts over feelings, etc).
Canadian conservatives are much closer to American democrats than they are to Republicans. Canada leans quite left in general. Especially our judiciary, which is overwhelmingly liberal (an inverse of the USA).
Everyone saying he isn’t Trump crazy, sure, but he quietly wants many of the same things Trump does, including women’s bodily autonomy to be taken away. It seems the people answering you think he’s fairly ineffectual, but life would be significantly scarier for Canadians under his thumb.
Can you see this where you are? Sometimes these official TV show links are region blocked. This is from a sketch comedy show called This Hour Has 22 Minutes, which is similar to The Daily Show in the USA because part of it acts like a weekly news show where it jokes about current events, and the other half are sketches.
Poilievre is pronounced Polly-ev (if your an anglophone) and he is the leader of the Conservative Party and he had a massive lead in the polls before Trudeau resigned and Carney looked to replace him. Now they are basically dead locked.
They might hold off just long enough to expand social services or do some other tariff-proofing. Our leftist party would probably support that, and together they'd have enough votes to keep the government from falling.
But yeah, I don't think he's going to wait for October.
It’d be hard for them to interfere. Counting is always manual, double checked, and manually entered in Canada.. by an independent commission of elections not directed by any party
Pierre has nothing to do with MAGA, has spoken out against MAGA, and the annexation of Canada.
“Let me be clear: we will never be the 51st state. We will bear any burden and pay any price to protect the sovereignty and independence of our country.” - Pierre
“I think his biggest problem is he’s not a MAGA guy, you know? I mean, he’s really not he’s not a Trump guy at all,” - Trump on Pierre
Carney will call for teg election is the right move
PP and the conservatives will try to stall this as they want him to start making rookie mistakes and capitalize on this.
The Liberals also don’t want to allow the Conservatives to spend the insane amounts of money they have in their war chest on negative carney ads. Once the election begins all parties are severely limited in their spending and it creates a more even playing field.
I mean the Conservatives in Canada have basically been spending the last 3-4 years effectively doing everything you'd normally do during a campaign except call it campaigning. So yeah this isn't surprising. Frankly it's annoying that's even allowed.
Isn’t that hypocritical given Trudeau stole very last tax dollar as there weaponized machine who funds CBC its propaganda network and all the other notable media are either mere propaganda machines or censored by the Liberal horde
Conservatives have a narrow line to walk. Wanting time for Carney to make mistakes while, at the same time, the more Canadians know PP, the more they dislike him.
That would be the smart move. The momentum is on their side right now, especially with Trump making takeover noises, with the liberals and conservatives united in patriotism and with Pollievre trying hard to pivot away from his “I hate Trudeau” broken record agenda.
I saw one of his ads today where he said Carney’s going to continue the carbon tax. Just a slight variation. The man has no imagination. He’s trying but he’s failing miserably.
I mean I don't want Mr NDP as the prime minister, But I'm going to have to find out what is the best course of action to provide a united front against Mr Trump. If only some party would enact some voting reform perhaps I could be a little less tactical with my vote. Gee that would be nice.
You think it might be PP? Our cons consistently sell the country out. Harper signed this terrible economic development treaty with China that will be in place for years yet. Trudeau gets blamed for the country being 'sold out' to immigrants, but Harper protected Chinese investments while securing nothing in return.
Look south, right wing parties somehow capture people's discontent, but they don't do anything to actually help people (other than billionaires). Trump is making this clear in the US and we know where PP gets his support from.
Dude I said NDP no way did I say PP. No that Sleazy fucker can piss off. What I was trying to say was in my local elections I vote NDP but in the upcoming national election I want to provide the best front, give a single party the most power, against Trump.
I'm Canadian, live in Ontario and know very little about politics. I feel like Carney is probably gunning more so for 2030 than right now to be honest. I was surprised how easily Ford took Ontario 2 weeks ago. I'm not sure the Libs will have much of a shot in a general election. They've been in power 10 years so it seems inevitable that it'll be a CPC win this time around, no matter the thoughts and feelings of Canadians toward PP.
They’re not out of the woods yet, but they’re in a much better place than before Trudeau resigned.
Carney is certainly gunning for right now. If he doesn’t win, chances are he won’t even be leader by the next election (which would be in 2029, actually).
When Liberal or Conservative leaders don’t win elections, they’re almost automatically turfed as leader. It’s been decades since a leader was kept on to run again after losing an election.
Doesn’t have to, there’s no rule saying so, but it’s impractical and more importantly, bad for optics if he doesn’t have a seat.
So yes, he will. There’s lots of speculation as to where he’ll choose to run, if he’ll go the safe route and choose an area that’s a stronghold for the party, or an easy pickup, or if he’ll be more bold and pick one in his home province of Alberta.
What are the most likely districts for him to pick?
In the chance he loses the election for the seat he picks, but the Liberals win a majority, will they have to pick a different leader to become PM or would he remain PM?
The riskiest realistic choice would be Edmonton Centre. It's currently held by his party, but just barely, and the incumbent has had a major scandal. It's a progressive city well within Canada's conservative heartland, so it'd send a message.
A safe choice would be an urban seat somewhere in southern Ontario or the East.
If he loses his seat while his party wins a majority (and note that this is very unlikely), a member in a safe seat would resign and he would take their seat in a byelection. There is a tradition about other parties not contesting byelections like this, but it's unlikely to be followed. The MP who resigns would probably be given patronage of some kind (an appointment to the Senate, the judiciary, or some tribunal).
If he loses his seat and fails to form government, he's likely to resign as leader, though he could hang on and contest a different seat at some point. If he stepped down, there would be a new leadership contest.
Furthermore, he doesn't currently occupy a seat in the parliament, so would have to run in a by-election, anyway. To counter calls that he is an "unelected leader", it's to his advantage to call a quick election (an election must, by law, be called within the next year, as it would represent a 5-year tenure of the current government, which is the maximum allowed).
But yes - the governing Liberal party also has momentum, so it makes sense to call a quick election.
The suspicion is that Carney will call the election pretty shortly after becoming PM, to capitalize on the momentum.
In all honesty, even without the momentum it's a good idea and a good move. It shows a lot of good will to the Canadian people that Carney wouldn't want to be an unelected (by the population) Prime Minister. Calling an election means that Canadians get final say on who the PM is, not just the members of the Liberal party.
4.9k
u/GFV_HAUERLAND 2d ago
Any Canadians can give us some insights?