Federal Government & Politics II

[Marty_Mcfly]

Latest Nanos tracker numbers showing a pullback in Liberal support from last week.

CPC: 40.8%
LPC: 24.9%
NDP: 20.4%
BQ: 5.7%
GRN: 5.6%
PPC: 1.6%

EDIT: Mainstreet also with a new poll showing an 18 point CPC lead. Abacus may have been an outlier after all.

[whatnext]

And you wonder why rental is so expensive now in Canada. It ain't the supply, it's the demand:

charthousing by bcborn, on Flickr
Credit: Brendan Bernard on X
https://twitter.com/BrendonBernard_

Brendon Bernard
@BrendonBernard_
In normal times, the population growth numbers aren't the hot economic data point, but here were are!

The story remains the same, just have to increase the range on the y-axis. Huge boom in non-permanent newcomers drives y/y Canadian population growth to 1.25 million.
https://twitter.com/BrendonBernard_/...50274907558066

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by Marty_Mcfly

Latest Nanos tracker numbers showing a pullback in Liberal support from last week.

CPC: 40.8%
LPC: 24.9%
NDP: 20.4%
BQ: 5.7%
GRN: 5.6%
PPC: 1.6%

EDIT: Mainstreet also with a new poll showing an 18 point CPC lead. Abacus may have been an outlier after all.

Originally Posted by shreddog

Or it could be a hiccup? Think we should wait for a couple more to establish a trend.

So last week's poll does seem more likely to have been a hiccup then as opposed to a trend.

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Looks like PP's gaffes the other week have had some impact.

Or not

[Hackslack]

Seeing as the Libs are outright banning the sale of ICE vehicle, can they now also cancel the Carbon tax. The intent of the carbon tax was for the market to naturally shift away from ICE vehicles, or at least that what we were told, being the “least expensive way” to reduce emissions, but seeing that the Libs had to implement a policy to ban the sale of ICE, then it makes no sense to keep taxing. Unless the tax is for the low income earners which, Trudeau has admitted, low income earners rely on the carbon rebate… can they at least then call it what is is, a wealth transfer tax…

Anyway, cool to see the government having to implement such strict policies over a very tight timeline to achieve something we were told the carbon tax would fix. Big two thumbs up for this government.

[Docere]

There's some talk about this St. Paul's by-election being a "test" of the Jewish vote following the UN vote. St. Paul's has the fourth largest Jewish population in the country. It's a very small-"l" liberal riding though and it's been safe for the federal Liberals since 1993. The Jewish community in St. Paul's is also more progressive than it is in say, Eglinton-Lawrence. A segment could "send a message" though.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Docere

There's some talk about this St. Paul's by-election being a "test" of the Jewish vote following the UN vote. St. Paul's has the fourth largest Jewish population in the country. It's a very small-"l" liberal riding though and it's been safe for the federal Liberals since 1993. The Jewish community in St. Paul's is also more progressive than it is in say, Eglinton-Lawrence. A segment could "send a message" though.

The riding is about 15% Jewish so I don't know if that's really enough to make much of a difference. And while conservatives have won there in the past it was progressive ones. PP isn't someone who I see connecting well with the riding's constituents. We don't know who the candidates will be but the LPC candidate will have the best chance of winning if there are no big names running.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Marty_Mcfly

Latest Nanos tracker numbers showing a pullback in Liberal support from last week.

CPC: 40.8%
LPC: 24.9%
NDP: 20.4%
BQ: 5.7%
GRN: 5.6%
PPC: 1.6%

EDIT: Mainstreet also with a new poll showing an 18 point CPC lead. Abacus may have been an outlier after all.

The Nanos poll shows that 16% were undecided which is quite significant. And for best PM 20% were undecided.

[Docere]

Right, today's Conservatives aren't really a good fit for an urbane and educated riding like St. Paul's. They really don't have a chance there. Federally it's been Liberal since 1993 and provincially it's held by the NDP.

There are two big names who are considering a run for the Liberals: Councillor Josh Matlow and Dr. Eric Hoskins.

I grew up in the riding BTW.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Docere

Right, today's Conservatives aren't really a good fit for an urbane and educated riding like St. Paul's. They really don't have a chance there. Federally it's been Liberal since 1993 and provincially it's held by the NDP.

There are two big names who are considering a run for the Liberals: Councillor Josh Matlow and Dr. Eric Hoskins.

I grew up in the riding BTW.

Oh those are two big names for the Liberals for sure. I remember when Hoskins was minister of health for Ontario.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Loco101

Oh those are two big names for the Liberals for sure. I remember when Hoskins was minister of health for Ontario.

Hoskins resigned just before the election where Wynne got obliterated. I wonder what he would do in 2025 if polls look like they do now.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Seeing as the Libs are outright banning the sale of ICE vehicle, can they now also cancel the Carbon tax. The intent of the carbon tax was for the market to naturally shift away from ICE vehicles, or at least that what we were told, being the “least expensive way” to reduce emissions, but seeing that the Libs had to implement a policy to ban the sale of ICE, then it makes no sense to keep taxing. Unless the tax is for the low income earners which, Trudeau has admitted, low income earners rely on the carbon rebate… can they at least then call it what is is, a wealth transfer tax…

Anyway, cool to see the government having to implement such strict policies over a very tight timeline to achieve something we were told the carbon tax would fix. Big two thumbs up for this government.

Are you implying some cognitive dissonance on JTs part????

[Truenorth00]

Happy with the mandate. Automakers will finally stop with the ridiculous months long waits for Canadians while they prioritized other markets with mandates or more generous incentives.

The mandate also let's automakers count plug in hybrids. And looking at PHEV and BEV sales in Canada, the country is roughly on track with the mandate anyway.

There will be lots of bitching about it on politics forums and then everybody is going to forget about it as availability gets better in a few months.

[Marty_Mcfly]

Originally Posted by Loco101

The Nanos poll shows that 16% were undecided which is quite significant. And for best PM 20% were undecided.

Mainstreet a little less extreme, with just 10% undecided, but even with undecideds included the CPC have a 17% lead. I guess if all undecideds broke Liberal you'd get a CPC minority, but that would seem like an unlikely way for the undecided voters to break.

[lio45]

It’s perfectly normal to be “undecided” when asked who of Poilievre/Trudeau/Singh would be the best PM. It doesn’t correlate at all with not wanting to hit the eject button on the current government. The only correlation is in reverse (i.e. name Trudeau as best PM = going to vote to reelect the incumbent). I’d actually assume anyone undecided for “best PM” at this point — anyone who can’t even bring themselves to say JT is the best option we have right now for PM — isn’t going to vote Liberal.

Also, it’s conceivable that many undecided want the incumbent out but just haven’t decided yet which is the best ABL option in their riding.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Seeing as the Libs are outright banning the sale of ICE vehicle, can they now also cancel the Carbon tax. The intent of the carbon tax was for the market to naturally shift away from ICE vehicles, or at least that what we were told, being the “least expensive way” to reduce emissions, but seeing that the Libs had to implement a policy to ban the sale of ICE, then it makes no sense to keep taxing. Unless the tax is for the low income earners which, Trudeau has admitted, low income earners rely on the carbon rebate… can they at least then call it what is is, a wealth transfer tax…

Anyway, cool to see the government having to implement such strict policies over a very tight timeline to achieve something we were told the carbon tax would fix. Big two thumbs up for this government.

In fairness to the government the policies can work together. Even 2035 phase out (Which is 100% not happening) would see a lot of ICE vehicles on the road into the 2040s. A high carbon tax would see those who want or need an ICE still limit how much they use it and of course work together with other carrots and sticks to retire them as early as possible. If we have $6 a litre gas a new EV looks better than your 5 year old Camry in 2039. Of course this is all fantasy land nonsense but there is some logical consistency if you think A) Climate change is THE existential issue of the 2030s and B) what Canada does has any impact whatsoever on the worldwide result.

[Marty_Mcfly]

New Leger showing a 10% CPC national lead. Not a huge shift from their previous poll in late November (CPC -2; LPC +2)

CPC: 38%
LPC: 28%
NDP: 18%
BQ: 7%
GRN: 5%
PPC: 2%
Other: 2%

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

In fairness to the government the policies can work together. Even 2035 phase out (Which is 100% not happening) would see a lot of ICE vehicles on the road into the 2040s. A high carbon tax would see those who want or need an ICE still limit how much they use it and of course work together with other carrots and sticks to retire them as early as possible. If we have $6 a litre gas a new EV looks better than your 5 year old Camry in 2039. Of course this is all fantasy land nonsense but there is some logical consistency if you think A) Climate change is THE existential issue of the 2030s and B) what Canada does has any impact whatsoever on the worldwide result.

The mandate isn't nearly as onerous as everyone whining about it thinks. It's only new sales. Only on Light Duty Vehicles. And includes plug in hybrids. That's about as mild an intervention as ever. The idea that the government is going to show up with a tow truck and confiscate your gas car (or whatever other fearmongering fantasy is running around) is patently ridiculous. Come 2035, easily 60-70% of vehicles on the road will still be ICEVs.

We've also seen what automakers do with no mandates. Long wait times and higher prices for EVs in Canada, while they prioritize markets with mandates or massive subsidies. Heck, we see this inside Canada itself. Compare wait times and retail pricing for the same EV model in Ontario vs Quebec (which imposes a provincial mandate).

Lastly, every $20/t in carbon tax adds 4.4¢/L to gas prices (not including HST). Even if the carbon tax kept going up by $20/t till 2040 (something not currently planned for), you'd be paying 81¢/L in carbon tax. This would make gas about ~$2/L assuming $70/bbl and current taxes and fees. We're not going to be seeing $6/L gas in our lifetime unless Saudi Arabia and Alberta get nuked at the same time.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Happy with the mandate. Automakers will finally stop with the ridiculous months long waits for Canadians while they prioritized other markets with mandates or more generous incentives.

The mandate also let's automakers count plug in hybrids. And looking at PHEV and BEV sales in Canada, the country is roughly on track with the mandate anyway.

There will be lots of bitching about it on politics forums and then everybody is going to forget about it as availability gets better in a few months.

From a PR perspective they could have picked a number like 90% or 95% and maybe avoided some of the right wing freakout we are seeing everywhere.

But yes as BC has proven, mandates are the way to get the cars on the road. There is demand, but dealers need to stock and sell them, not bait and swtich to get you into another vehicle.

[Build.It]

EV mandates make a massive assumption that EV cars will be just as cheap/convenient to own/operate by 2035 as ICE cars are today, which is unlikely. Unless there is some breakthrough that allows you to safely charge a 5000lb vehicle to full in 5 minutes, the likely outcome of EV mandates are massive inflation of used ICE cars. This is something for the market to sort out, not governments.

Another key thing people aren't talking about is that they are also mandating that by 2026 (basically 2 years from now since it's already December) that 20% of all sales are to be EVs. Well that requires people to actually buy these EV/Plug-in cars, which they are struggling to sell at the moment. Are they going to tell automakers/dealerships that they cannot sell any additional ICE cars until their EV/Plug-in sales have caught up. The likeliest outcome as far as I can tell of this is that far fewer cars will be sold per year, which means we will start seeing massive used car price inflation starting as early as 2 years from now. Combine that with a period of higher interest rates, and the outcome to the average family's finances will be even more devastating than they are facing currently. This won't have much of an effect on the small minority of Canadians whose living situations don't require personal ownership of a vehicle, but for everyone else this will result in a massive deterioration of their quality of life.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

From a PR perspective they could have picked a number like 90% or 95% and maybe avoided some of the right wing freakout we are seeing everywhere.

Do you honestly believe the drama queens overreacting to this would do any less if the number was 90%? It's not even a consumer mandate. It's an OEM mandate. They have to do the work of trying to convince consumers to buy the EVs or they pay fines. No consumer is going to be paying more at the end of the day. That's the best part. We're about to see EV offerings and prices dramatically improve in Canada.

Just think of all the automakers lately who would rather idle an EV assembly line shift than make more to sell in Canada. They do that because they know they can sell a gas model here for a higher margin. Now that calculus changes.