, 05.17.2019 06:46 AM

Unsunny ways

New Abacus Data stuff. My expert political guy analysis: Justin Trudeau is in some deep shit. He’s losing, Andrew Scheer and Elizabeth May are winning.

You’re welcome.


  1. the real Sean says:

    Globe reports today that Norman case was started by PM Zoolander. Are we surprised?

  2. Luke says:

    Looking at Grenier’s aggregate (along with by-election, JWR and JP speculation, and PEI), I do believe the Green Party’s current ascendance is real. I wonder if they can keep up the momentum and register in the minds of *lots*of disaffected progressive voters and nonvoters. Because I think there’ll still be a vote-Lib-to-keep-Scheer-out contingent that needs better convincing than a 9-11% polling average to vote Green. Here’s hoping. Screw Trudeau.

    • Mike Jeffries says:

      Be very careful about that. A Liberal minority with Green support will destroy Canada. Is that what you want? No, only a strong Conservative majority will “screw Trudeau”!

      • Luke says:

        Barking up the wrong tree. COnservative values don’t match mine, by and large. That party needs to do more to win my vote than would make any sense for it to bother.

  3. IMHO, it’s always the personal number (often Best PM) that kills governments. You can have a high government disapproval but if the PM is still liked, they have a chance of turning it around. Not so, if the PM is detested while the government remains relatively popular. In this case, the fork in the road is twining in the exact same direction…

    Whatever Pierre Elliott Trudeau did in 1979, didn’t work. 2019 feels a lot like that.

  4. And because the party’s face IS Justin, they are stuck running on his brand. They can’t bait and switch with Team Trudeau, cause that simply won’t wash. Justin is far too high-profile and politically all encompassing — and they can’t change that now. Justin sucks the oxygen out of every room he and his team are in. They all know that. In short, they’re screwed.

  5. Mark says:

    Scheer needs to win a majority or he’s screwed. It’s as simple as that. With a minority, a Con government will be lucky to last 6 months. I’m not as convinced as you that Trudeau is that screwed. Given all the negative these past few months, much deserved by the way, the end of US steel and aluminum tariffs, a positive Cabinet decision on TMX pipeline, and a couple other things over the summer will do much to lift the government’s appeal. There is still a fairly big anti-Conservative movement in this country, so most Liberals will end up holding their noses and will stick with JT. The Greens do appear to have some momentum, and that’s likely where I’ll place my vote in October.

    • Mark,

      Trudeau badly needs a reality check on tariffs: here’s my prediction how it will go. Trump removes the tariffs, the three countries eventually ratify and because Trump will not permit language in the agreement to prevent him going forward, once ratification is complete, Trump restores the tariffs against Canada and ADDS more of them to the list. I’m waiting for MacNaughton to prove me wrong. Tick, tick, tick, tick.

      • Mark says:

        Then Mexico or Canada, or both, signal their intent to withdraw within 6 months. A good run-up to the 2020 Presidential election campaign.

        • Ronald O'Dowd says:


          True enough, just like NAFTA. Point is, not only do we get rolled by Trump but then we further inflict the damage ourselves by withdrawing? Is that really possible domestically? I know I wouldn’t do it. Canadian farmers and businesses would suffer far too much. Trump’s got all the cards, at least until 2020. Canada needs to plan accordingly.

          • Mark says:

            I don’t disagree in theory. However, Trump does occasionally buckle when the chips are down and he’s shown some resolve from other counties. Case in point was Mexico and Canada saying we would not ratify USMCA without tariffs being lifted. As for your earlier comment on coalitions, agree that would be a bad idea. My point, however, is that minority government oppositions don’t need coalitions. What they need is cooperation on budget votes and other confidence matters.

          • Ronald O'Dowd says:


            Now I’m heading into the weeds: my point from Day One was that Garneau said the right thing but not at the right time. It shouldn’t have been no ratification unless…it should have been no SIGNATURE unless. That would have afforded Canada much more time to get a text in place preventing eventual reinstatement of tariffs by Trump. Then we would have moved to leverage mach two: no satisfactory text, no ratification. We can’t play that second round card now.

    • Mark,

      With respect, explain to me how this is any different than Harper’s two minorities, one propped up by Ignatieff and the other by Layton (abstention).

      • As an aside, I was one of Ignatieff’s most fervent backers but I totally disagreed with him on the coalition. When you get your chance, you take it, period. By backing away and supporting a Harper budget, Michael branded himself as Harper-lite. And that was more fatal than Just Visiting. By the time we finally got around to toppling Harper, the damage was done having alienated most of a progressive coalition. They sat at home on their hands while Harper went on to win a majority. A choice between Harper and Harper-lite led to the voting public choosing Harper.

      • Layton only supported Harper once in exchange for several billion in EI improvements. The BQ supported them once for several billion for Quebec. The Liberals under Dion and Ignatieff supported them the rest of the time in exchange for nothing.

        • Ronald O'Dowd says:


          Good point. I often wonder how it would have turned out what with the less than six months after an election constitutional convention = no, no. Even beyond that, an election would have eventually rolled around after a period of coalition government but what then? It’s all pure speculation I suppose. Advantage who?

  6. Fred from BC says:

    I just read Elizabeth May’s environmental ‘platform’.

    These people (the Green Party) are scary, good intentions or not…and the people say they who would vote for them need to take a good, long look at what they are actually supporting.

  7. Lanny S. says:

    Looks good for Trudeau. He has weathered the best that could be thrown at him and only down 3 points. He’s a shoo in and that’s a good thing.

  8. Tod Cowen says:

    The three sets of numbers really don’t foot. JT is underwater by 14 points, “government approval” is underwater by 16 points, but the Liberals are only behind by 3? Voters don’t like the PM, and don’t like the government, but they’re within the MOE of voting them back in?

    Perhaps smarter political minds than mine (ie, everyone else commenting here) can unpack this. Maybe it’s a Canadian thing I no longer understand, having left 30+ years ago after UofT.

    • Gord says:

      They don’t like him, but are leery of the alternative. Scheer has not closed the sale by a long stretch. One campaign blunder and all bets are off.

      The Liberals will trot out their “scary Tories” playbook again and squeeze the progressive vote, just like in 2004 – ie Greens and Dippers, vote for us or you get Scheer. Could easily work again. Look how NDP support melted like snow in July in 2015 when the media anointed JT as the anti-Harper candidate.

      • It’s helps to have the Ontario Conservatives and probably the Alberta Conservatives doing all the scary things.

      • Gord,

        Let me take this apart piece by piece: first off, Harper was a right-of-centre incumbent who had been in power for ten very long and contentious years. Trudeau is hardly right-of-centre. Secondly, remember that 2004 tactics failed miserably in 2006. Scheer, by any sense of the imagination is at worst a kindler, gentler, less know-it-all version of Harper. So, running against Harper vs. Scheer is not even remotely the same ball game.

        Scheer coming out against monkeying around with abortion and a woman’s right to choose is ample proof of that. Doubt Harper would ever have done that.

    • It’s not like Scheer is massively more popular. In fact more people still have a positive impression of Trudeau then Scheer.

    • Lanny S. says:

      The media and others have stoked up anti Trudeau rhetoric and it has influenced many people but the thought of a right wing government going hand in hand with the orange menace has tempered this influence. Also, the Goverment is running along just fine and petty scandal mongering won’t change that.

  9. Like I said over and over again, the very minute that the PM turfed JWR and JP, that was the literal end for this government. EVERY female cabinet minister and MP already knows that. Trudeau, not so much.

    Women are absolutely critical in the next campaign and after this totally inept move, expect most Liberal women to warm the bench, or vote for someone else.

  10. Ronald O'Dowd says:


    If we could survive Trudeau vs. Lévesque, we sure as hell can survive Trudeau vs. Kenney. This is a democracy after all not conditional on who people DARE to vote for.

    • Ronald O'Dowd says:

      And besides, everyone knows Kenney doesn’t really have the balls to go sovereignist. It’s just not really that clever bullshit. Let him focus on equalization where Alberta and BC have more than a legitimate case to make.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *