Canadian Federal Election

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Takeoff

They all also said, that the debate didn’t do anything to change the fortunes for any of the parties, and in that case Carney won. Pp showed that he could be a prime minister today, but the polls open tomorrow, way to late to change momentum in a meaningful way.

The thing to watch now is if PP and the CPC are able to able to get a result that's as high as polls have been showing. I'm kind of questioning if they actually will. If the CPC gets 37-40% win or lose, then PP will likely stay on as leader. If it's lower let's say 35-36% then it's questionable. Getting 37-40% will set up the CPC for a possible big win in the next election if the Carney Liberals (assuming they win) become unpopular. If it ends up being 34% or less then PP definitely won't be leader much longer.

A Conservative majority win is out of the question now and even a minority victory possibility is almost nil.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Architype

I had to read that a couple of times, because, of course car jackers and home invaders do go on to become mass murderers, it's just a natural progression.

I think our Canadian debates are much better and more informative than the American ones.

And I think the poll gap may narrow somewhat after this, let's see.

No clear winner in the debate.

That said, the Conservatives have been very stable, the surge in Liberal support has some at the expense of the NDP. When you look at through that lens I think it was a positive for the Liberals and negative for the NDP.

[Marshsparrow]

Jagmeet did nothing to convince NDP voters to come back to him... it was a trainwreck...

Blanchet okay, fine, whatever... some in RoC probably want to vote for him.

Carney I too think looked the most statesman, had good responses, had to fight off all three and we saw some humour and humility.

Poilievre when he responded and got a bit choked up and actually came across as not rehearsed and sincere (and maybe it was good acting) I thought connected the most - if we would have seen more of that leadership style starting when he won the CPC leadership, I think would have made this an entirely different campaign. He made no mistakes and seemed to laugh at Carney's jokes.

I think it lands now to the friends and family conversations this weekend and who actually gets out to vote. My father hasn't voted in 20+ years and he's voting this election (Carney) and when he did vote it was always Conservative - that to me says a lot.

[MonctonRad]

I think Poillievre won the debate, but Carney did well enough that he shouldn't be badly hurt. I will not be changing my voting intentions.

Singh was obnoxious and annoying, showing little or no decorum or respect for the rules of the debate. He was the obvious loser. He will be gone after the election.

Blanchett was OK. As I've said before, I have a soft spot for him. He strikes me as a straight shooter and somebody you could make a deal with.

I still predict a Liberal majority government after the election, which is what we need in our dealings with Emperor Donald I.

[travis3000]

Originally Posted by JakeLRS

My reaction to the English debate:

Carney won, and this is coming from someone who has been backing Poilievre. I am suspecting we'll see polls show this as well.

Carney: He looked like a prime minister, talked in a professional way, some very subtle jabs, and didn't really overtalk over others. The last quarter of the debate it started to get a little bit rocky. Whoever the advisor suggested to bring up "I'm not Justin" was a big saving grace for him. He did lose his footing a bit but balanced back (ie. China) except for on the softball question he threw to PP, where he should have known he would've had a very strong response. He also completely sidestepped on Brookfield and the tax loophole question.

Poilievre: A much different toned PP compared to yesterday where he was relatively laid back and was generally Prime Ministerial. Today, he decided to be more of the opposition head we're use to seeing but not to an extreme point as he did allow others to talk. He kind of shot himself in the foot during the first half of the debate where he constantly reiterated his phrases "10 years... liberal decade...". This got extremely tiring, yet he continued to bring it up throughout the debate. He seemed to gather his footing in the last 1/3 of the debate and actually finished relatively well.

Singh: A disrespectful disaster of a performance. He was constantly interrupting and really continued to overtalk Poilievre when he was trying to respond or bring up a point. He was the most unprofessional looking person on this stage. He had a small good stretch when it came to Mental Health, but he was acting extremely entitled and it got very very annoying when I was actually trying to listen to responses.

Blanchet: A fair debate. Threw some good jobs and held others to account. Stumbling on English was pretty hilarious.

Debate Format This was an amazing format, the direct question/answer between the moderator and candidate was very good and the questions were good across the board. The 1v1 was also a very good idea. Well done on that front and I hope to see it in the future.

Good analysis. I am planning to vote for Carney but I can judge something legitimately and fairly. Pierre actually did well IMO. He toned down his attack dog persona and didn't shit the bed at all. It was a solid performance from him. The rehearsed slogans were a tad annoying. I agree Carney proved he was up to the job. For a guy who has only been in politics for 2 months, he was thrown into the deep end and he held is own among people who are all seasoned politicians. He was very statesman like, and was the only leader who didn't interrupt. The softball question about security clearance though was a letdown.

Opinions vary, some think PP won, some think Carney won, everyone hated Singh lmao. That's a win for Carney being the front runner and won't change the numbers much outside of a point in either direction IMO. We can kiss a CPC majority away. The best result for PP will be a CPC minority, but the most likely outcome will be a strong LPC minority or small majority.

Poilievre= A
Carney= A-
Blanchet= B+
Singh= D

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by casper

Yes, he did.

On the good side, they cancelled the post debate Q&A with reporters. I guess rebel news did enough to damage the credibility of the media that it was just dropped.

The only credibility damaged (if it had any) was of Rebel News.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

• Video Link

Very interesting interview with Prime Minister Mark Carney on professor Scott Galloway's podcast.

Was a bit like a deep dive into a lot of the topics discussed in his Daily Show interview. Not sure we will see the Prime Minister back on TDS before election day, but it's nice to dream...perhaps a satellite interview. 🛰 📺 📡

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I think Poillievre won the debate, but Carney did well enough that he shouldn't be badly hurt. I will not be changing my voting intentions.

Singh was obnoxious and annoying, showing little or no decorum or respect for the rules of the debate. He was the obvious loser. He will be gone after the election.

Blanchett was OK. As I've said before, I have a soft spot for him. He strikes me as a straight shooter and somebody you could make a deal with.

I still predict a Liberal majority government after the election, which is what we need in our dealings with Emperor Donald I.

I wouldn't call that much of a victory. I was happy to see Singh was willing to put partisanship aside and break with politeness to attack the most anti progressive stances spouted on that debate stage, which came pretty much exclusively from the mouth of Pierre Poilievre.

I think Carney won the debate when he told Mr. Blanchett in French that he was only joking.

The one idea from Pierre I really liked is the idea of Canada exporting a bunch of LNG to India. Just like one of the only good thing Harper's did, in terms of foreign policy, was to resume nuclear cooperation with India.

Here on a site called Skyscraperpage, where I think we are all very in tuned about the "housing crisis" I think Singh was 100% in the right mentioning that Pierre Poilievre only say 6 affordable homes built during his time as housing minister... Pierre was absolutely full of it with most of his ideas and plans for how to fix the housing crisis or right our domestic economy.

I'm hoping the NDP can maintain official party status without putting the Liberals in the minority. I think this is very much possible, as long as enough people are willing to vote strategically.

A minority government situation could be a recipe for disaster considering the length remaining in President Trump's second term... Canada absolutely needs a Liberal majority to stick with a unified and coherent policy response to this existential crisis for the next four years.

I especially did not care for Mr. Singh trying to turn Gaza into a Wedge issue against Mr. Carney, when it's Mr. Poilievre who has the most blatantly anti Palestinian stances and viewpoints on the Israel-Palestine conflict. For anyone with any sort of functioning brain and ability to understand geopolitics... Canada doesn't really matter much in terms of Israel-Palestine, but Mark Carney is at least far more pro Palestinian than Pierre Poilievre is. Voting NDP this election over the issue of Gaza would be the equivalent of voting for Jill Stein in the last US Presidential election... aka a mistake.

[savevp]

Originally Posted by EnvisionSaintJohn

I was happy to see Singh was willing to put partisanship aside and break with politeness to attack the most anti progressive stances spouted on that debate stage, which came pretty much exclusively from the mouth of Pierre Poilievre.

It would seem most disagree with you; that talking over opponents and disrespecting the debate format aren't justified simply because the perpetrator is progressive.

[Marty_Mcfly]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

Jagmeet did nothing to convince NDP voters to come back to him... it was a trainwreck...

Blanchet okay, fine, whatever... some in RoC probably want to vote for him.

Carney I too think looked the most statesman, had good responses, had to fight off all three and we saw some humour and humility.

Poilievre when he responded and got a bit choked up and actually came across as not rehearsed and sincere (and maybe it was good acting) I thought connected the most - if we would have seen more of that leadership style starting when he won the CPC leadership, I think would have made this an entirely different campaign. He made no mistakes and seemed to laugh at Carney's jokes.

I think it lands now to the friends and family conversations this weekend and who actually gets out to vote. My father hasn't voted in 20+ years and he's voting this election (Carney) and when he did vote it was always Conservative - that to me says a lot.

I did notice a few points where Pierre and Mark looked at each other and smiled and laughed. I think it's easy to forget when watching a session of parliament unfold, or when watching a campaign, that all party leaders likely have more in common than not. When the media and reporters aren't around these guys are probably pretty friendly with one another.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by savevp

It would seem most disagree with you; that talking over opponents and disrespecting the debate format aren't justified simply because the perpetrator is progressive.

I guess I should have said electoral politics instead of partisanship.

I think Singh was an effective attack dog for Carney until the end when he tried to make it about Gaza. But be for that, Singh made a lot of good points calling out Pierre on his bullshit.

[FrAnKs]

At the beginning of this federal campaign, I thought I would vote for Blanchet but I switched my vote several weeks ago for Carney. I think we have to stand united against the OrangeFührer and that’s why I think we need a strong LPC majority.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by FrAnKs

At the beginning of this federal campaign, I thought I would vote for Blanchet but I switched my vote several weeks ago for Carney. I think we have to stand united against the OrangeFührer and that’s why I think we need a strong LPC majority.

Over 6000 replies and nearing 250,000 views. This is my favourite reply in the thread thus far.

[Taeolas]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

The debate didn’t really change anything for me - I’m still undecided. I like Mark Carney the most out of the leaders, but in my riding I like the incumbent NDP candidate the most, and our Liberal candidate is a paper candidate who doesn’t live in the riding. But I was also not impressed with Singh’s constant interrupting in the debate.

Vote for your heart, and maybe take a look at how your riding is leaning.

An NDP seat in Parliament isn't the end of the world; Carney seems well on his way to a majority, and even a minority that could be propped by the NDP isn't so bad.

The worst that can happen is vote splitting happening and your riding flips to the CPC coming up the middle. So if there's a realistic chance of that happening, then maybe hold your nose and vote the more likely winner.

But otherwise, I'd say vote who you want, and it sounds like it would be for your local incumbant NDP candidate, instead of the LPC one; and that's fine.

[LikesBikes]

For yesterday's debate, is it too corny to say Canada won? The leaders were for the most part respectful to each other and the discussion was policy based. Seems like partisans are happy with how their leaders did and the average voter landed somewhere between liking Carney or PP. Compared to debates in the US which have been gongshows for so long now, it was refreshing to see our leaders act mature, intelligent and even witty in some cases.

As a partisan myself I thought Carney performed the best as he came across like an actual leader instead of a fighter. Him not interupting people or using too much political jargon was honestly refreshing for a politician. Maybe some people thought his 3-point schtick was boring, but I found it helpful and endearing in a weird way. His politeness also was nice to see and just kind of stereotypically Canadian. He wasn't forceful or talking over people, but he stuck to his guns and wasn't a push over.

At the same time, I don't think PP came off like an ass as much as I was expecting. His rhetoric on crime really ran me the wrong way, but overall he felt more similar to Erin O'Toole than Trump or DeSantis (who in my mind is who PP reminds me the most of). Thankfully he has only made this pivot in the last week of the campaign so I hope and don't think all that many people are going to be convinced by it. My only frame of reference for average people think about politics are my coworkers and it's pretty clear the vast majority are creeped out by PP and at this point are pro-Carney, with exceptions being the young dude cohort though definitely is being swayed significantly to the right and still young lefties thinking the NDP has a chance.

[BlackDog204]

"Independent" news such as Rebel, Juno, Western Standard, and others should never be accredited again. Levant and company are not journalists, but glorified thugs, that try and make themselves the news, for monetary gain.

If I were Carney, I would also look into passing a bill limiting foreign ownership of Canadian media (I.e. Postmedia). What a clown show Rebel News is.

[savevp]

Originally Posted by EnvisionSaintJohn

I think Singh was an effective attack dog for Carney

Unfortunately, thats all Singh will ever be. The NDP propped up a reviled Liberal government. And now, fearful of the current Conservative direction, progressive voters are overwhelmingly switching to the Liberals to prevent a Tory government.

If Singh had any political sense, the first thing he'd do is stop inciting fear of the Conservatives, and try to convince progressive voters that the NDP are a safe choice. Instead, and not for the first time, he's wasted his opportunity by sniping at the 'enemy of his enemy' politically, and continuing to do the hard work for the Liberals.

He's got his pension now, so he doesn't care, but the NDP kicking Singh's brand of Rolex identity-socialism to the kerb will be good for the movement.

[BlackDog204]

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by LikesBikes

For yesterday's debate, is it too corny to say Canada won? The leaders were for the most part respectful to each other and the discussion was policy based. Seems like partisans are happy with how their leaders did and the average voter landed somewhere between liking Carney or PP. Compared to debates in the US which have been gongshows for so long now, it was refreshing to see our leaders act mature, intelligent and even witty in some cases.

As a partisan myself I thought Carney performed the best as he came across like an actual leader instead of a fighter. Him not interupting people or using too much political jargon was honestly refreshing for a politician. Maybe some people thought his 3-point schtick was boring, but I found it helpful and endearing in a weird way. His politeness also was nice to see and just kind of stereotypically Canadian. He wasn't forceful or talking over people, but he stuck to his guns and wasn't a push over.

My only frame of reference for how average people think about politics are my coworkers and it's pretty clear the vast majority are creeped out by PP and at this point are pro-Carney, with exceptions being the young dude cohort though definitely is being swayed significantly to the right and still young lefties thinking the NDP has a chance.

Spot on

[TorontoDrew]

I just went to go advance vote in my riding Toronto--Danforth. The line was way too long for me to stick around. I was told it would be about 1.5 hrs so I left. I'll try again around at dinner time. I've never seen a turnout like this for early voting.