Carney as Canadian leader

[StringJunky]

Do you think his extensive knowledge of financial infrastructure and awareness of the long term consequences of fiscal decisions will make him a useful person against Trump's shennanigans for Canada and its allies? 

Edited March 9 by StringJunky

[CharonY]

Potentially. And this is also the reason why quite a few Canadians might be inclined to vote for the Liberals, despite the fact that Trudeau was wildly unpopular, up until Trump got into office and started fights with everyone. Carney was especially known for helping Canada to navigate through the financial crisis 2008. That being said, it is still more likely that the Conservatives are going to win. Before Trump the Cons were on an easy path towards the absolute majority. And it wasn't even close, the seat projection was something like 237 seats vs 35 at the largest margin. Now it is around 156:143.

That being said, a economy student would (should) realize that what Trump is doing is not economically wise. But I think for quite a few moderates, the economic bona fides is what makes favour Carney over the Conservative leader (v). But again, the anti-Liberal sentiments run deep, especially in the Prairies.

I think the part of the left who were thinking of switching to Cons are rethinking that, now that the alignment of Poilievre with the far-right personalities (including support for the trucker convoys during the pandemic, interview with Peterson and other right wing social media personalities) is getting more uncomfortable with the right-wing in the USA making active threats against Canada.

 

[StringJunky]

32 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Potentially. And this is also the reason why quite a few Canadians might be inclined to vote for the Liberals, despite the fact that Trudeau was wildly unpopular, up until Trump got into office and started fights with everyone. Carney was especially known for helping Canada to navigate through the financial crisis 2008. That being said, it is still more likely that the Conservatives are going to win. Before Trump the Cons were on an easy path towards the absolute majority. And it wasn't even close, the seat projection was something like 237 seats vs 35 at the largest margin. Now it is around 156:143.

 

He was  Governor of the Bank of England as well, that's how I know of him. I think his term was even extended from 5 years to 7. He must have been a steady pair of hands.

[CharonY]

17 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

He was  Governor of the Bank of England as well, that's how I know of him. I think his term was even extended from 5 years to 7. He must have been a steady pair of hands.

I think the fact that he has expertise will make him attractive to quite a few folks. But there are some challenges, because of his tenure at the Bank of England. To some degree some folks see him as an outsider. At the same time it is also a bit of and advantages as that creates at least some distance to Trudeau. But at least it makes it harder to challenge him on merit,(plus he is a white man), especially as his primary opponent is a lifelong politician, from what I recall.

Edit: I should also add that Musk also endorsed the Con leader (likely out of principle) so that benefit rapidly turned sour, independent of expertise.

But again, projections suggest that the election could be close, but with a higher likelihood of a conservative win. So it is possible that Carney won't actually be able to do anything about Trump.

 

Edit2: I should probably add context: there will be new elections in Canada, and there is a high chance that snap elections will be called the moment the parliament reconvenes. So, the ability of Carney to do things before a new election will be limited.

[exchemist]

6 hours ago, CharonY said:

I think the fact that he has expertise will make him attractive to quite a few folks. But there are some challenges, because of his tenure at the Bank of England. To some degree some folks see him as an outsider. At the same time it is also a bit of and advantages as that creates at least some distance to Trudeau. But at least it makes it harder to challenge him on merit,(plus he is a white man), especially as his primary opponent is a lifelong politician, from what I recall.

Edit: I should also add that Musk also endorsed the Con leader (likely out of principle) so that benefit rapidly turned sour, independent of expertise.

But again, projections suggest that the election could be close, but with a higher likelihood of a conservative win. So it is possible that Carney won't actually be able to do anything about Trump.

 

Edit2: I should probably add context: there will be new elections in Canada, and there is a high chance that snap elections will be called the moment the parliament reconvenes. So, the ability of Carney to do things before a new election will be limited.

If things get really tough with Trump, perhaps Canada might go into coalition government, as in wartime. 

[MSC]

Pretty new to this topic but if someone could fill me in on a few questions; Is the conservative candidate likely to capitulate to Trump? How volatile is the polling in response to American threats to Canada?

[CharonY]

9 hours ago, exchemist said:

If things get really tough with Trump, perhaps Canada might go into coalition government, as in wartime. 

I have my doubts- the polarization of politics, at least in terms of public perception seems to be pretty bad in Canada. Also some conservatives have some affinity to Trump. Among conservative voters Trump sits at a net favourable of 33% according to a recent Angus poll. It is not very high, but represents some of the staunchest conservative voter sections. But again, the conservatives have effectively campaigned (though the official campaigns have not started yet) on a staunch anti-liberal, and anti-woke platform. A reversal would be difficult for them to pull off. At least for now, a conservative minority government looks like the most likely outcome.

3 hours ago, MSC said:

Pretty new to this topic but if someone could fill me in on a few questions; Is the conservative candidate likely to capitulate to Trump? How volatile is the polling in response to American threats to Canada?

I am not sure about capitulating, but his current issue especially for moderate voters I think is that he basically has aligned himself somewhat with the right-wing internet populism including:

- adopting "anti-woke" rhetoric

- joining podcasts of far right media and internet personality

- supporting the convoy protests during the pandemic

And probably a number of other things that I have not read about (am not really that plugged in, potentially the Canadians here can provide a different angle or an overall better perspective).

With regard to the volatility of the polling take a look at the vote and seat projections. CPC are the conservatives and LPC the liberals (source: https://338canada.com/)

 

[MigL]

M Carny might have financial acumen, however he's seen as a J Trudeau policy advisor, much the same as was held against C Freeland in her contest against M carney. He will inherit J Trudeau's faults. And business oriented people  don't seem to make good leaders ( D Trump, E Musk, etc. )
Then again, P Poilievre comes across as a little too 'slick', like a lawyer or used car salesman; you know he doesn't have YOUR best interests at heart.
And don't even get me started on the NDP.

Election is a toss-up.
( but I wish P McCay would run again )

 

Edited March 10 by MigL

[CharonY]

1 minute ago, MigL said:

Then again, P Poilievre comes across as a little too 'slick', like a lawyer or used car salesman;

And from what I read, he doesn't even have the practical job experience of a real lawyer or even salesman. What struck me was how (in my mind) ineffective his response to the Trump threats were. The substantial part were not different than what Trudeau said, which would arguably be fine, though not great. But the rest was really just a call to cut taxes and some grievances regarding the outgoing Canadian government. I suspect he needed to play to its base but I think it is part why the polls are swinging so wildly.

3 minutes ago, MigL said:

( but I wish P McCay would run again )

It looks to me that he would be pretty much a center pick. The question then to me is how much of a center Canada still has. Looking at the polls, it looks on average still healthier than the US situation, but I cannot keep wondering whether that is just a transient phase.

[exchemist]

13 hours ago, MigL said:

M Carny might have financial acumen, however he's seen as a J Trudeau policy advisor, much the same as was held against C Freeland in her contest against M carney. He will inherit J Trudeau's faults. And business oriented people  don't seem to make good leaders ( D Trump, E Musk, etc. )
Then again, P Poilievre comes across as a little too 'slick', like a lawyer or used car salesman; you know he doesn't have YOUR best interests at heart.
And don't even get me started on the NDP.

Election is a toss-up.
( but I wish P McCay would run again )

 

Poilievre: doesn't that mean rabbit(strictly hare) fur?

Mr. Rabbit Fur for PM! 😁

Edited March 11 by exchemist

[geordief]

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

Poilievre: doesn't that mean rabbit(strictly hare) fur?

Mr. Rabbit Fur for PM! 😁

Calling all sleuths (furrier and furrier)

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Poilièvre

"This etymology is missing or incomplete. Please add to it, or discuss it at the Etymology scriptorium. Particularly: “is this poil(hair)+lièvre(hare), a rabbit farmer raising for rabbit fur, or rabbit trapper fur hunter, furrier?"

 

 

plus "Perhaps from pois aux lièvres (“yellow pea (Lathyrus aphaca)”)"

 

 

"

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

Poilievre: doesn't that mean rabbit(strictly hare) fur?

Mr. Rabbit Fur for PM! 😁

If he can't shake the Trump connection...hare today...gone tomorrow...

[CharonY]

3 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

If he can't shake the Trump connection...hare today...gone tomorrow...

*groan*

Didn't Trump say at some point that he wasn't MAGA? Probably not entirely helpful...

[geordief]

19 minutes ago, CharonY said:

*groan*

Didn't Trump say at some point that he wasn't MAGA? Probably not entirely helpful...

I think it was Hitler who said he wasn't a Nazi

 

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1089896776514260&set=a.502824405221503&type=3

Edited March 11 by geordief

[CharonY]

I think one somewhat interesting aspect is that Carney's strengths, are to a large degree also his weaknesses.

For example, it is a benefit that he can distance himself somewhat from the Liberals, and considering the general anti-establishment and anti-politician attitude, him running as an outsider could be beneficial. Conversely, it means he is less plugged into politics and is likely less experienced at campaigning.

His role in central banks (and his general education and career) gives him some insights into financial matters, but then he could be considered part of the financial elite, as MigL mentioned.

 

[Peterkin]

On 3/10/2025 at 9:56 AM, MSC said:

Pretty new to this topic but if someone could fill me in on a few questions; Is the conservative candidate likely to capitulate to Trump? How volatile is the polling in response to American threats to Canada?

Yes, I think so. Maybe not to the point of petitioning for statehood, but more than most of us would approve of. His rhetoric has been alarmingly trumpist. I hope that puts even some of the far-right patriots off him. 

I don't know about the polling, but we're riled up enough to boycott US products and cancel vacations. 

18 hours ago, exchemist said:

He will inherit J Trudeau's faults.

I don't think so. Trudeau's faults are mostly silly mistakes; this guy looks anything but silly.

 

On 3/10/2025 at 4:22 PM, MigL said:

And business oriented people  don't seem to make good leaders

He's a banker, not a 'real estate developer' or any other kind of salesman. He actually understands money, how it works, how it circulates. That's quite different from just trying to rake in as much of it as one can before one's scam is discovered. My concern is: does he understand anything else - like the existential crises we're sailing directly into? Can he handle climate change, microplastics, pandemics....?  Better than the reprehensible Polievre, but how well? Maybe he's smart enough to collect very good advisors. 

[exchemist]

2 hours ago, Peterkin said:

Yes, I think so. Maybe not to the point of petitioning for statehood, but more than most of us would approve of. His rhetoric has been alarmingly trumpist. I hope that puts even some of the far-right patriots off him. 

I don't know about the polling, but we're riled up enough to boycott US products and cancel vacations. 

I don't think so. Trudeau's faults are mostly silly mistakes; this guy looks anything but silly.

 

He's a banker, not a 'real estate developer' or any other kind of salesman. He actually understands money, how it works, how it circulates. That's quite different from just trying to rake in as much of it as one can before one's scam is discovered. My concern is: does he understand anything else - like the existential crises we're sailing directly into? Can he handle climate change, microplastics, pandemics....?  Better than the reprehensible Polievre, but how well? Maybe he's smart enough to collect very good advisors. 

You are quoting @MigL , not me, about inheriting Trudeau’s faults.

[StringJunky]

8 hours ago, Peterkin said:

He's a banker, not a 'real estate developer' or any other kind of salesman. He actually understands money, how it works, how it circulates. That's quite different from just trying to rake in as much of it as one can before one's scam is discovered. My concern is: does he understand anything else - like the existential crises we're sailing directly into? Can he handle climate change, microplastics, pandemics....?  Better than the reprehensible Polievre, but how well? Maybe he's smart enough to collect very good advisors. 

Yeah, he's more technocrat and civil servant style of thinking. He's nothing like most politicians. He's actually skilled in his profession. I don't think there are enough experts in government. Maybe they are better as advisors, we'll see. He strikes me as more pragmatic in his policy decisions rather than a blinkered ideologist.

If anything, it's another country drawn in to the global political conversation, which is good. It helps to show FR Americans that their country can't exist as an isolated economic island where their decisions have no effect on their neighbours and wider world. Geographic separation, means increasingly little nowadays

Edited March 12 by StringJunky

[Peterkin]

8 hours ago, exchemist said:

You are quoting @MigL , not me, about inheriting Trudeau’s faults.

Sorry; my quoter robot got confused.

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

It helps to show FR Americans that their country can't exist as an isolated economic island where their decisions have no effect on their neighbours and wider world.

I don't think the Trumpist segment gives a toss about their effect on the world. Just as they don't care how many American lives DOGE is destroying: they celebrate the tough-guy stance - against Europe, against the media, against institutions and 'big government'. They do not converse about politics: they boo or cheer. And even when - not if - these tough-guy actions rebound on their own children, their own welfare, their own financial security, there will always be someone else to blame.  

[CharonY]

Interestingly, the former conservative premier Harper has claimed that Carney is taking unjustified credit for the handling of the financial crisis, as the credit should have gone to the Finance Minister.

Quote

“I have listened, with increasing disbelief, to Mark Carney’s attempts to take credit for things he had little or nothing to do with back then,” Harper writes.

“He has been doing this at the expense of the late Jim Flaherty, among the greatest finance ministers in Canada’s history, who sadly is not here to defend his record. But let me be very clear: the hard calls during the 2008-2009 global financial crisis were made by Jim.”

But a Flaherty staffer has a different opinion:

Quote

"Oh please. I was there and Carney played a big role," Pothier said. "Flaherty and Harper provided the political leadership that was key, but Carney was on deck with insight and smart monetary policy."

Carney has publicly praised Flaherty, calling him a "mentor" and a "lovely human being." 

"I respected him enormously," said Carney in an interview after Flaherty's death. "I'm very grateful for everything he did for me, and I owe him a great debt."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harper-carney-financial-crisis-1.7473091

 

That actually sounds pretty positive to me as a whole, as it suggests that Carney has worked well with folks on the individual level. Carney will be surrounded by a lot of politicians, so being the guy with the ideas could also do good things (hopefully).

[StringJunky]

7 minutes ago, CharonY said:

That actually sounds pretty positive to me as a whole, as it suggests that Carney has worked well with folks on the individual level. Carney will be surrounded by a lot of politicians, so being the guy with the ideas could also do good things (hopefully).

Another plus.

Edited March 12 by StringJunky

[Peterkin]

You have to wonder whether Harper's comment was more partisan than accurate. You have to wonder about the motivation of any comment Harper ever made on any subject.

However, having worked in a Conservative administration gives Carney some valuable insight... well, hindsight, anyway, though he may still understand the regrettable Polievre better than I do. I just hope he's able to communicate well enough for the voters to understand. They can be pretty dense, voters. 

Edited March 13 by Peterkin
spelling, of course

[CharonY]

15 hours ago, Peterkin said:

You have to wonder whether Harper's comment was more partisan than accurate.

I don't think that there is a lot of wondering here. It is the a classic spin, but at least not an outright lie. Pretty much old school, compared to what is going on elsewhere.

One thing that is a perhaps unsurprising b is the fact that the Canadians basically react to the same thing as everyone else: a common foe. Now, a difference is here of course that the threats are much more real (then, say Immigrants or DEI), but it again shows to what the electorate is responding strongly to.

 

[MigL]

On 3/12/2025 at 12:24 AM, Peterkin said:

Trudeau's faults are mostly silly mistakes

J Trudeau's faults are far from silly mistakes.
We could start with his election promises of proportional representative Government, until he won a majority and decided it wasn't in his party's best interest anymore; until the later election when they were a minority and bought another party's support ( NDP )  with undelivered promises, to stay in power well past his best before date.
Or the great show he made of cancelling 'Harper's' F-35 program ( which the previous Liberal Government had locked us into ) as being too expensive, then, 14 years later after buying Junk from Australia to keep our planes from falling out of the sky, purchasing more of them then Harper intended to; they must have gone on sale.
Or his virtue signaling on race and gender, before stories about him in blackface and groping young women surfaced, and the appalling way he treated women in his party/cabinet.
Or his 'flexible' ethics when dealing with Liberal donating firms doing illegal business in other countries.
And how about the Carbon Tax/Rebate which does absolutely nothing for the environment ? I would not mind if he took the tax dollars and invested them in infrastructure so I could charge an EV along the highways, but a wealth redistribution scam intended to buy votes is useless in combatting climate change.
( need I go on ? )

 

On 3/12/2025 at 12:24 AM, Peterkin said:

He's a banker, not a 'real estate developer' or any other kind of salesman. He actually understands money, how it works, how it circulates.

Then maybe he should stick to being a banker.
Politicians have to know how people work, because they represent all their constituents. They don't represent their constituent's money. The problem with putting elitists in power, who think that they are good at everything , is that you end up with 'business men' like D Trump, who are good at ripping people off, and think that policy is done by extortion. To them, the 'deal' is more important than how it affects the people.
Then again, I am judging him on very little information. He hasn't gone into full campaign mode yet, so I can't judge him on election promises, or their eventual delivery. I would think none of us know how well either M Carney or P Poilievre will serve. You cast your vote and you take your chances.

Just because I dislike P Poilievre does not mean I will forgive J Trudeau's faults, nor those of his advisors, like Freeland and Carney.

And speaking of 'elitists' ...

17 hours ago, Peterkin said:

They can be pretty dense, voters. 

Is that you, Hillary ?  😄

Edited March 13 by MigL

[Peterkin]

7 hours ago, CharonY said:

Now, a difference is here of course that the threats are much more real (then, say Immigrants or DEI), but it again shows to what the electorate is responding strongly to.

Well, it's an existential threat.... Greenlanders are not widely divided on the issue either.

 

6 hours ago, MigL said:

( need I go on ? )

No, the points are well made. I was aware of some, not of others. The blackface thing is a crock, and I never really believed that proportional representation is doable in this political climate, but the others certainly have merit. He did right to resign and probably should have done it sooner, for all our sakes. But it's done now. 

 

6 hours ago, MigL said:

Then maybe he should stick to being a banker.

Maybe, but somebody has to take over, and the biggest clear and present danger is economic, and he's had some experience at advising government on economic threats. Otherwise, true, we don't know how he'll perform in politics. My guess: he's nowhere near as toxic as Polievre.