I don’t think PP is ideological so much as he is a knee-jerk populist. I would love to see a principle conservative in the tradition of Margaret Thatcher or even Cameron. But I would run for the Hills if Doug Ford got the nod. Ford is living proof that you can be a centrist knee jerk populist just as easily as a right wing knee jerk populist, and the damage is similar either way. His foolish gas tax cut (and elimination of vehicle registration fees last time) is nothing more than the most shallow populist pandering, and has left the province in rather dire financial straits.
They need a leadership race. Hopefully, they will vote for it. There are so many more talented people than P. in the party at the federal level and provincial level.
I really wish we would define what is pragmatic and what makes someone an ideologue in Canada.
I think it is clear that there was nothing pragmatic about Trudeau. He is an ideologue who spent more than our government could possibly generate. His actions even made it difficult for businesses to operate in Canada so the potential for earning taxes even shrunk. He grew the public sector to an unsustainable level.
I really don't understand what would make Poilievre an ideologue? His ideas seemed practical and common sense. Other than using the word ideologue in a derogatory way in which, Poilievre was somebody you disagreed with politically, in what sense was he an ideologue?
Ideology or practicality? Depends who’s leading, and where they’re leading
Hello Bruce. Thank you for sharing this data.
Your post does not provide the sample size and its breakdown by region for significance testing, but Quebec appears to be the
outlier: 25% of voters said they prefer leaders guided by ideology, more than anywhere else in the country.
Quebecers may express a comparatively higher openness to ideology, but they vote strategically. I’d argue this: Quebecers tend to choose ideologically driven leaders to run things in Quebec City and pragmatists to run things in Ottawa.
The 2025 federal election was a case in point. Mark Carney (seen by 64% of voters as a pragmatist) earned strong support in Quebec, even as the province scored highest on the “ideological preference” scale. When transfer payments and federal clout are on the line, Quebecers are practical. They vote for competence, not crusades.
I would say that the liberals have a much better understanding of how to message to canadians. For example, the l8berals recovered from 155 to 45% from December to April. They have continued to gain.
Now, this was clearly a premeditated program to change the narrative from trudeau to carney.
On the other hand, the pcs, unable to get any sort of counter narrative to land, even that carney and trudeau were both involved in the mess that dropped the, to 15%? Now maybe PP did this to himself, by attacking liberal subsidies, or refusing to have journos with his campaign, but most of that damage was done by march.
So the question is now, is any of it true? Carney so far has spoken about a substantial change, but has delivered nothing at all. One of the big issues for trudeau is a failure to deliver anything he promised. So carney is certainly not changing that. Then there is a fundamental problem of corruption and conflict of interest that is endemic in the lpc. That has not changed, and carney is a part of that party, not an outsider, as he claims. His father was a candidate for the liberals in elections in alberta?
The bigger issue is that maybe carney can keep this mess together through the summer, but eventually the liberal contagion will kill his support. The question is will Pp be able to use it, or do we need a new leader to counter the central canadian establishment who controls the media, banks and so on for their own benefit?
Politicians who stick a finger in the air and see which way the wind is blowing don’t last. What I like about Pierre is he is not a turncoat- not on his core beliefs, fundamentals of good government, money management or campaign managers.
The elephant in the room with the Reform based CPC is what's unfolding in the US. A significant cloud that hung over the CPC in the last election was the threat of a CPC government, led by Poilievre, rolling out a MAGA-lite agenda, which neither the CPC or Poilievre has addressed.
That Poilievre continues his 'one-trick-pony' ways and the lack of any promising alternatives in the CPCs isn't helping, nor is the spectre of Harper as the real king maker, who has a large whiff of anti-democracy following him in recent years.
Carney is much more the ideologue than Polievre. Look at Carney's life's work. Polievre simply isn't very appealing to most people except the constantly angry, while the ideologue Carney is seen as a moderate banker, which he is not.
The CPC would do well to find another leader, PP will never appeal to a majority of voters, though he will always have his fan club.
Great summary of the data you have collected, Bruce! Thank you. Have you tried to feed all your data into one of the Gen AI platforms to see if any particular prediction comes out on, for example, PP’s win percentage in the by-election, or in the leadership review?
I don’t think PP is ideological so much as he is a knee-jerk populist. I would love to see a principle conservative in the tradition of Margaret Thatcher or even Cameron. But I would run for the Hills if Doug Ford got the nod. Ford is living proof that you can be a centrist knee jerk populist just as easily as a right wing knee jerk populist, and the damage is similar either way. His foolish gas tax cut (and elimination of vehicle registration fees last time) is nothing more than the most shallow populist pandering, and has left the province in rather dire financial straits.
They need a leadership race. Hopefully, they will vote for it. There are so many more talented people than P. in the party at the federal level and provincial level.
Is there? They support him, I see nobody.
Meanwhile in Canada the people are ignored while the country is sold to the highest bidder. https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/article/98-of-canadian-households-tracked-receiving-social-assistance-live-below-poverty-line-report/
I really wish we would define what is pragmatic and what makes someone an ideologue in Canada.
I think it is clear that there was nothing pragmatic about Trudeau. He is an ideologue who spent more than our government could possibly generate. His actions even made it difficult for businesses to operate in Canada so the potential for earning taxes even shrunk. He grew the public sector to an unsustainable level.
I really don't understand what would make Poilievre an ideologue? His ideas seemed practical and common sense. Other than using the word ideologue in a derogatory way in which, Poilievre was somebody you disagreed with politically, in what sense was he an ideologue?
Ideology or practicality? Depends who’s leading, and where they’re leading
Hello Bruce. Thank you for sharing this data.
Your post does not provide the sample size and its breakdown by region for significance testing, but Quebec appears to be the
outlier: 25% of voters said they prefer leaders guided by ideology, more than anywhere else in the country.
Quebecers may express a comparatively higher openness to ideology, but they vote strategically. I’d argue this: Quebecers tend to choose ideologically driven leaders to run things in Quebec City and pragmatists to run things in Ottawa.
The 2025 federal election was a case in point. Mark Carney (seen by 64% of voters as a pragmatist) earned strong support in Quebec, even as the province scored highest on the “ideological preference” scale. When transfer payments and federal clout are on the line, Quebecers are practical. They vote for competence, not crusades.
I would say that the liberals have a much better understanding of how to message to canadians. For example, the l8berals recovered from 155 to 45% from December to April. They have continued to gain.
Now, this was clearly a premeditated program to change the narrative from trudeau to carney.
On the other hand, the pcs, unable to get any sort of counter narrative to land, even that carney and trudeau were both involved in the mess that dropped the, to 15%? Now maybe PP did this to himself, by attacking liberal subsidies, or refusing to have journos with his campaign, but most of that damage was done by march.
So the question is now, is any of it true? Carney so far has spoken about a substantial change, but has delivered nothing at all. One of the big issues for trudeau is a failure to deliver anything he promised. So carney is certainly not changing that. Then there is a fundamental problem of corruption and conflict of interest that is endemic in the lpc. That has not changed, and carney is a part of that party, not an outsider, as he claims. His father was a candidate for the liberals in elections in alberta?
The bigger issue is that maybe carney can keep this mess together through the summer, but eventually the liberal contagion will kill his support. The question is will Pp be able to use it, or do we need a new leader to counter the central canadian establishment who controls the media, banks and so on for their own benefit?
I might consider buying a subscription if it was in $Cdn and not $US.
Politicians who stick a finger in the air and see which way the wind is blowing don’t last. What I like about Pierre is he is not a turncoat- not on his core beliefs, fundamentals of good government, money management or campaign managers.
The elephant in the room with the Reform based CPC is what's unfolding in the US. A significant cloud that hung over the CPC in the last election was the threat of a CPC government, led by Poilievre, rolling out a MAGA-lite agenda, which neither the CPC or Poilievre has addressed.
That Poilievre continues his 'one-trick-pony' ways and the lack of any promising alternatives in the CPCs isn't helping, nor is the spectre of Harper as the real king maker, who has a large whiff of anti-democracy following him in recent years.
Carney is much more the ideologue than Polievre. Look at Carney's life's work. Polievre simply isn't very appealing to most people except the constantly angry, while the ideologue Carney is seen as a moderate banker, which he is not.
The CPC would do well to find another leader, PP will never appeal to a majority of voters, though he will always have his fan club.
Great summary of the data you have collected, Bruce! Thank you. Have you tried to feed all your data into one of the Gen AI platforms to see if any particular prediction comes out on, for example, PP’s win percentage in the by-election, or in the leadership review?
Woke cultists and progressive ideologues are the problem.
The only numbers at the end of day that matter are the ones in ballad box, unless it is a rigged election..?