On reflection I probably should have labeled it as “Federal Election Commences” which was the point in time I meant to mark.
Two things I saw around that point. And to clarify I was more focused on the Liberals’ significant recovery (which I saw as the action) vice the CPC modest decline (which I interpreted as the consequence).
First was that the election allowed all the other parties to get some attention. With Parliament prorogued since December the CPC etc didn’t have a platform. Also the media was fully engaged in watching the Liberal leadership race. The Liberals were still governing and getting some attention talking about Trump, but the other parties were squeezed out. The election call changed the playing field.
Second is that before an election people can say anything in a poll. But around when the election is called things get real and poll support is presumably more reflective of who they really will vote for.
My interpretation of this was that NDP and BQ support declined pre-election while Trump was being scary and they were out of the spotlight. Then dropped further when it became time to make an election decision. CPC support declined pre-election for the same reasons but started to recover during the election period.
It takes time for public sentiment to shift. What I see in the Liberal line is that the momentum they gathered starting when Trudeau announced his plan to resign carried them a couple of weeks into the election period. Someone commented in the late days that the CPC was on track to win a majority government if the election was held on 30 May. But unfortunately for them it was scheduled for 28 April.
So I agree on the Trudeau and Trump effects. My own post-election analysis (shameless plug!) has focused on Trump and people rallying behind the Liberals to protect them. I disagree with Mulcair on a lot of issues no doubt, but I find him a good commentator. However I’m not convinced he has that sort of influence.
Great article. I’m glad you found my graph informative and useful for your piece.
We'll let people look at our two interpretations of point F and decide for themselves. Some will agree with me, some with you, and some will have entirely different theories.
I think looking at the swing of working class/union voters to the populist Right is a better explanation than voter turnout. It’s the same phenomenon that happened in the US.
I believe that the blue collar private sector labor, particularly in BC have come to the realization that net zero and "reconciliation" have become synonymous with deindustrialization and the evidence of such was the result of the BC provincial election last fall as well as on Vancouver Island federally. The Conservatives typically equivocate on such policies to maintain their pandering to the "middle" but are seen optimistically as weak at best. The demise of the NDP has resulted in essentially a two party race likely precluding a return to the Harper government situation where Conservative power was wholly dependent on the leftist vote split. This reinforces the notion that western concentration of Conservative support is hopelessly wasted within confederation but possibilities abound for a potential independent nation.
Most Canadians don’t have the time to research what is going on. They trust the government and the media. The Lieberals have conned us and in such an eloquent way.
I think that this was planned far in advance. Carney was advising Trudeau. He wanted to be PM.
The American election of Trump was the time to act for liberals.
Butts et al were now able to call in Carney just at the right time
The staged resignation of carneys ‘comare’ christia was suspect.
The ‘ousting’ of Chandra Arya from his Nepean seat and whose son works for Brookfield was suspect.
The changing of PP’s electoral district was suspect.
Trumps 51st statement and tariffs used to scare Canadians was suspect. Canada would have laughed it off if the past 10 years of liberal ineptitude had not put us in such a dire economic situation.
Lets nit forget Singh whos relationship with the liberals was suspect for years.
This whole election was suspect and a disappointment.
I think luck played a bigger role than what you describe. I'm just not onboard with considering the Liberals a group of strategic masterminds. They did a good job adapting to the situation, but they're not smart enough to be evil geniuses.
You don’t have to interview any voters to know “with certainty” that most voted the way they did because of systematic errors in their understanding of the economy and other relevant issues.
Why?—Because it’s not worth their time to do the work necessary to actually understand their country and its issues.
Thanks for the shout out.
I’ll take a moment to explain/”defend” point F.
On reflection I probably should have labeled it as “Federal Election Commences” which was the point in time I meant to mark.
Two things I saw around that point. And to clarify I was more focused on the Liberals’ significant recovery (which I saw as the action) vice the CPC modest decline (which I interpreted as the consequence).
First was that the election allowed all the other parties to get some attention. With Parliament prorogued since December the CPC etc didn’t have a platform. Also the media was fully engaged in watching the Liberal leadership race. The Liberals were still governing and getting some attention talking about Trump, but the other parties were squeezed out. The election call changed the playing field.
Second is that before an election people can say anything in a poll. But around when the election is called things get real and poll support is presumably more reflective of who they really will vote for.
My interpretation of this was that NDP and BQ support declined pre-election while Trump was being scary and they were out of the spotlight. Then dropped further when it became time to make an election decision. CPC support declined pre-election for the same reasons but started to recover during the election period.
It takes time for public sentiment to shift. What I see in the Liberal line is that the momentum they gathered starting when Trudeau announced his plan to resign carried them a couple of weeks into the election period. Someone commented in the late days that the CPC was on track to win a majority government if the election was held on 30 May. But unfortunately for them it was scheduled for 28 April.
So I agree on the Trudeau and Trump effects. My own post-election analysis (shameless plug!) has focused on Trump and people rallying behind the Liberals to protect them. I disagree with Mulcair on a lot of issues no doubt, but I find him a good commentator. However I’m not convinced he has that sort of influence.
Great article. I’m glad you found my graph informative and useful for your piece.
You welcome! Nice graph.
We'll let people look at our two interpretations of point F and decide for themselves. Some will agree with me, some with you, and some will have entirely different theories.
I think looking at the swing of working class/union voters to the populist Right is a better explanation than voter turnout. It’s the same phenomenon that happened in the US.
I'm sure it was a factor.
I believe that the blue collar private sector labor, particularly in BC have come to the realization that net zero and "reconciliation" have become synonymous with deindustrialization and the evidence of such was the result of the BC provincial election last fall as well as on Vancouver Island federally. The Conservatives typically equivocate on such policies to maintain their pandering to the "middle" but are seen optimistically as weak at best. The demise of the NDP has resulted in essentially a two party race likely precluding a return to the Harper government situation where Conservative power was wholly dependent on the leftist vote split. This reinforces the notion that western concentration of Conservative support is hopelessly wasted within confederation but possibilities abound for a potential independent nation.
Two thoughts:
1) I think Western separatism has less of a chance than Quebec separatism
2) The US has a two party system and conservatives down there win elections.
Most Canadians don’t have the time to research what is going on. They trust the government and the media. The Lieberals have conned us and in such an eloquent way.
I think that this was planned far in advance. Carney was advising Trudeau. He wanted to be PM.
The American election of Trump was the time to act for liberals.
Butts et al were now able to call in Carney just at the right time
The staged resignation of carneys ‘comare’ christia was suspect.
The ‘ousting’ of Chandra Arya from his Nepean seat and whose son works for Brookfield was suspect.
The changing of PP’s electoral district was suspect.
Trumps 51st statement and tariffs used to scare Canadians was suspect. Canada would have laughed it off if the past 10 years of liberal ineptitude had not put us in such a dire economic situation.
Lets nit forget Singh whos relationship with the liberals was suspect for years.
This whole election was suspect and a disappointment.
I think luck played a bigger role than what you describe. I'm just not onboard with considering the Liberals a group of strategic masterminds. They did a good job adapting to the situation, but they're not smart enough to be evil geniuses.
You don’t have to interview any voters to know “with certainty” that most voted the way they did because of systematic errors in their understanding of the economy and other relevant issues.
Why?—Because it’s not worth their time to do the work necessary to actually understand their country and its issues.