Connect with us

2025 Federal Election

Election 2025: The Great Rebrand

Published

22 minute read

The Opposition with Dan Knight

Same Swamp, New Faces — A Banker, A Backup Dancer, and the Guy Who Called It All Along

So yesterday in Canada, something remarkable happened. The Liberals—yes, those Liberals—called a snap election, and if you’ve been even half-awake over the past decade, you already know what that means. When the Liberal Party in Canada says “emergency,” it never actually means “emergency.” It means opportunity. For them. And for them only.

Mark Carney, the freshly minted Prime Minister—and, let’s be honest, Justin Trudeau with a slightly different haircut—stood at a podium yesterday morning and announced to Canadians that they were in the middle of the “most significant crisis of our lifetimes.” Was he talking about inflation? Out-of-control immigration? Broken infrastructure? Nope. He was talking about Donald Trump. Again.

That’s right. According to Carney, who just last year was managing money for billionaires and holding court at Davos, Canada is on the verge of collapse because Donald Trump slapped tariffs on steel and aluminum. And so naturally, Carney’s solution wasn’t to meet with Trump, or negotiate, or push back through diplomacy—it was to dissolve Parliament and call an election. Because, he says, “President Trump claims that Canada isn’t a real country. He wants to break us so America can own us. We will not let that happen.”

Now, pause and think about that. Not only is that an outright cartoon version of reality, it’s delivered in exactly the same breathy, fake-dramatic, overly rehearsed tone that Canadians have been forced to endure from Justin Trudeau for nearly a decade. You could close your eyes, hear Carney speak, and think—oh, there’s Justin again. The same cadence. The same halting pauses. The same sanctimonious, over-coached delivery. Gag. They’re not even trying to sound different.

And that’s what makes this so offensive. They took Trudeau’s empty suit, shoved in another Bay Street insider, gave him the same script, and now they’re pretending it’s a new era. Spoiler: it’s not. It’s just the same swamp, rebooted with a different narrator.

Now, let’s talk about what Carney actually did in his first week as Prime Minister. Because it’s telling. He kicked out Chandra Arya, a sitting Liberal MP who had the audacity to run in the leadership race. Arya has been in Parliament for nearly a decade, and just like that, he was removed by a secretive party committee. Why? Carney wanted the Nepean riding for himself. And now he’s running there. No nomination contest. No vote. No accountability. Just a velvet-glove power grab by Canada’s ruling class. Trudeau couldn’t have done it better. Or, frankly, more shamelessly.

And then—this is the best part—Carney starts copying Conservative policies word for word. You can’t make this up. Conservatives said axe the carbon tax? Carney axes it. Conservatives said remove GST on new homes? Carney removes it—for first-time buyers, of course, to maintain the illusion of difference. Conservatives opposed the capital gains tax hike? Carney kills the increase and says it’s to “reward builders for taking risks.” That’s a quote. From Trudeau’s former economic advisor.

So just to recap: they prorogued Parliament to hold an internal leadership race during what they now claim is a national economic emergency. Then they oust a sitting MP to parachute their new leader into a safe seat. Then that leader—who spent years on the record defending carbon taxes, wealth taxes, capital gains increases, and every other progressive scheme—miraculously converts to Poilievre-ism in under ten days. All while telling Canadians that he represents stability.

It’s insulting. And it’s obvious. But it only works if Canadians forget how we got here. If they forget that this is the same party that spent the last ten years telling them inflation wasn’t real, that housing was affordable if you just tried harder, and that freedom of expression was a threat to democracy.

Carney stood there and said, “We are stronger together,” and I nearly choked. Because you know who else said that, constantly, while dividing the country by class, speech, region, and vaccination status? Justin Trudeau.

Mark Carney isn’t here to save Canada. He’s here to save the Liberal Party from the consequences of its own failures. And if they cared this much about trade with the U.S., they wouldn’t have shut down Parliament to hold a leadership contest. They would have done their jobs.

Conservatives: Because Copying Us Is All the Other Parties Have Left

Because not even 12 hours later, Pierre Poilievre walked onto a stage in Toronto—and it wasn’t just any event. The room was packed. And I don’t mean in the polite, stage-managed “standing room only” kind of way that the media uses to make a half-empty gymnasium look respectable. I mean jammed. Wall to wall. Flags waving, signs flying, real energy. There was no teleprompter glass, no softly lit hardwood floor and marble backdrop. Just thousands of people, jammed into a venue, ready to hear a man speak who—love him or not—is not pretending to be someone else.

And that’s what stood out. Because just a few hours earlier, the guy we’re supposed to believe is “Canada’s new leader” was up there imitating Trudeau like he was auditioning for a Heritage Minute. Meanwhile, Pierre Poilievre stepped up to the mic in front of a roaring crowd and gave the kind of speech you only give when you know the system is broken—and you’re done pretending it’s not.

He wasted no time. “They are replacing Justin Trudeau with his economic advisor and handpicked successor,” he said, with just the right amount of disbelief. “They are the same Liberals—with the same ministers, the same MPs, the same advisors, the same policies—and even today, making the same promises they’ve been breaking for over ten years.” And that was the shot. Because it’s true. You can swap the man at the podium, but if the script is the same, what exactly has changed?

And this crowd—Toronto of all places, once assumed to be off-limits for conservatives—ate it up. Not because Poilievre was delivering poetry. Not because he was spinning fantasy. But because he was naming the thing everyone else is afraid to say: that Carney is a continuation, not a correction. That the Liberals didn’t bring in a fixer—they brought in the architect of the mess.

He dug in hard on the hypocrisy. Carney signs a paper saying he’s axing the carbon tax, but in the next breath, he’s introducing an industrial carbon tax—one that, as Poilievre pointed out, will slam Canadian steel, fertilizer, aluminum—basically anything that still gets built in this country. And while Carney was trying to convince reporters that “big companies are not producing things that Canadians consume,” Poilievre rattled off a list—cars, microwaves, dishwashers, ovens, tools. “Do you use any of those things?” he asked the crowd. The answer was obvious.

This wasn’t some campaign rally gimmick. He was hitting on what people actually feel every time they check out at the grocery store, or look at their gas bill, or walk past an empty lot that could’ve been housing, but isn’t. And he tied it back—not to abstract ideology, but to specific betrayal. “Only six days after Trump threatened tariffs on our country,” he said, “Mark Carney moved his company’s headquarters to New York. Trump’s hometown.”

It landed because it was real.

He even took a swing at the latest attempt by Liberals to soft-peddle their record: making election promises they’ve already broken in the past. “Mr. Carney,” he said, “was literally repeating the election promise about income tax that Justin Trudeau and the Liberals broke ten years ago.” The same people. The same spin. “Same advisors, same strategic planners, same scriptwriters,” he said. “Even the same Gerald Butts.”

He mocked the contradictions. Carney as the man who opposed Canadian pipelines while his company invested billions in foreign fossil fuels. Carney as the guy calling for economic patriotism while quietly shifting money, assets, and power out of Canada. And for a man whose supporters frame him as a high-minded global statesman, Poilievre made him look like something much more familiar: just another Liberal insider, too comfortable to care about consequences.

Now, let’s be clear. This wasn’t some flawless sermon. Poilievre still leans heavily into slogans. “Bring it home.” “Common sense.” “Canada First.” But that didn’t matter. Because what mattered was that the people in that room knew he wasn’t acting. They knew he was angry. And they are too.

You could feel it. And if this momentum holds, it’s not going to matter how many new faces the Liberals roll out. Canadians aren’t voting on charisma anymore. They’re voting on pain. On price tags. On broken promises. And right now, the guy they sent out to fix the mess is being called out—loudly—as the man who helped make it.

NDP: From Enabler to Opponent

So after a packed-out Conservative rally where Poilievre lit up the stage and torched the Trudeau–Carney regime for everything from exploding deficits to a carbon tax dressed up in new packaging, we got this. Jagmeet Singh, the man who kept Justin Trudeau’s tired, collapsing government on life support for nine years, suddenly wants you to believe he’s the resistance.

You almost have to laugh.

There he was, standing in front of a carefully arranged room—less electric, more echo chamber—launching a campaign not against the very government he propped up, but against the man he helped install.

Jagmeet Singh opened his speech with the usual acknowledgments and land statements, moved quickly into identity platitudes, and then took a sharp turn into fantasy: painting himself as the anti-establishment warrior who “fought for dental care,” “delivered pharmacare,” and “forced the government to act.”

But hang on a second—what government was that again?

Oh right. The one he kept alive through confidence votes, budget approvals, and joint legislative deals. The one that spent the last decade inflating the housing market, ballooning the deficit, and silencing dissent. The government of Justin Trudeau. Which, as of this month, is now the government of Mark Carney, Trudeau’s handpicked successor.

You see where this is going?

Singh stood on that stage slamming Mark Carney—saying “he can’t be trusted,” that he “helped banks and investors profit off the housing crisis,” and that “he’s spent his career working for billionaires.” All true. But where was that spine the last nine years when he was voting to keep those exact same people in power?

Let’s not forget: Singh voted in favor of Trudeau’s emergency powers during the trucker convoy. He backed the carbon tax increases. He played defense every time the Liberals stumbled through scandal, censorship bills, and failed green policies. If Mark Carney is the wrong man to lead, then so was Justin Trudeau—and Singh stood right behind both of them, nodding along and calling it “progress.”

Now he wants to pretend he’s the alternative?

At one point, Singh even called Carney’s Canada a “house with a leaky roof,” and Poilievre’s vision a “cracked foundation.” He said, “neither will hold up when the storm hits.” But here’s the thing—he built the first house, brick by brick, with Trudeau. And now he wants credit for warning that it’s collapsing.

He also claimed he’s “the only federal leader not endorsed by Trump or Elon Musk.” Which would be hilarious if it wasn’t so desperate. That’s not a policy position—it’s a cry for relevance. When your platform is crumbling, just scream “Trump” loud enough and hope no one asks how you voted in Parliament last month.

Bottom line? Jagmeet Singh wants to run against a government he enabled, a system he reinforced, and a crisis he helped fund. He can’t walk into this election draped in the orange cape of the working class while pretending his fingerprints aren’t all over the Liberal disaster Canadians are living through.

Final Thoughts

So here we are. The stage is set. The actors are in position. And Canadians—God bless them—are being asked to choose between three brands of nonsense, each more insulting than the last.

Option one: Justin Trudeau 2.0—Mark Carney. The Liberals’ idea of change is hiring the guy who advised the last one. If that sounds familiar, it should. It’s like firing the drunk pilot, then handing the controls to the guy who told him to hit the throttle. Carney spent his career bouncing between central banks and billion-dollar boardrooms, lecturing working people about “sustainability” while padding portfolios in Manhattan. But now—suddenly—he’s wearing rolled-up sleeves, talking about “the middle class,” and reading lines from Pierre Poilievre’s economic playbook like he just discovered inflation existed. The best part? He delivers it all in that same Trudeau tone—breathy, performative, like he’s always on the verge of tears because he just cares so much. Gag. They didn’t even give him a new script. Just a new face, same puppet strings.

Option two: Jagmeet “I Have No Shame” Singh. This guy. He spent nine years keeping the Trudeau government alive—nine years voting for their budgets, defending their scandals, rubber-stamping their lockdowns, mandates, censorship bills, and everything else that turned this country upside down. But now that the Liberals slapped a different face on the same failing government, Singh wants you to believe he’s suddenly the resistance. Like we all forgot he was Trudeau’s human crutch in Parliament. “We delivered dental care,” he says. Buddy, you delivered Trudeau. Over and over again. The only thing Jagmeet Singh has resisted is accountability.

And now he wants to tell you Carney can’t be trusted? That he’s a Bay Street elitist? You voted for him. You kept his party in power. Spare us the late-stage conversion. You don’t get to spend nine years enabling a political dumpster fire and then run from the smoke like you just smelled it. It’s pathetic. And more importantly, it’s insulting.

Option three: Pierre Poilievre. Not perfect. Not polished. But also? Not pretending. He’s not fake crying at a podium. He’s not reciting script lines passed down from Liberal focus groups. He’s not flipping on policy every 72 hours. He’s telling Canadians the system is broken, and he’s naming names. He’s naming Carney. He’s naming Trudeau. He’s naming the insiders, the lobbyists, the international finance guys who’ve been running this country like their own ATM for the last decade.

And what are the Liberals doing? Stealing his policies. Axe the tax? Carney now says he’ll axe it. GST off homes? Carney’s on board. Capital gains hike? Poof—canceled. You know what that tells you? They know what they did. They know he’s right. And instead of admitting it, they’re plagiarizing the guy they called “dangerous.”

So what are we voting for?

We’re voting to find out just how stupid they think we are.

Because this isn’t just an election—it’s a referendum on whether Canadians have the memory span of a fruit fly. Whether we’re going to look at a Trudeau clone in a tailored suit and say, “Yes, that’s different.” Whether we’re going to let the guy who voted for all of it now tell us he’s the only one who can fix it. And whether we’re going to believe, for even one second, that the party that gave us this mess deserves one more try.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

2025 Federal Election

The Last Of Us: Canada’s Chaos Election

Published on

Show me good loser and I’ll show you a loser— Leo Durocher

There’s an expression that goes, you’re not allowed to die until all the people in your life have disappointed you. That trenchant observation is particularly relevant to those who woke up on April 29 to discover that their neighbours and friends in Canada have opted to give the federal Liberals (under new leader Mark Carney) another four years to continue Canada’s descent into irrelevance.

These are the same Liberals sans Carney who were polling in the low 20s six months earlier. Their cabinet members were quitting in droves. In the finest Wag The Dog tradition, a sure victory for Canada’s Conservatives was then transformed into a humiliating defeat that saw the Tories leader Pierre Poilievre lose the seat he’d represented for 20 years. The debate in the chattering classes now is how much was Poilievre’s fault?

In a minor vindication the Liberals were seemingly denied a majority by three seats (169-144) . How they balance that equation to advance their pet projects on trade, climate, gender, free speech, native rights and Donald Trump was unknowable Which is why the Grits have turned to dumpster diving MPs like Elizabeth May and keffiyeh-clad NDP to achieve a workable majority..

Suffice to say that neophyte Carney, without any support system within the Liberals, is being highly influenced by the Justin Trudeau faculty lounge left behind after the disgraced three-term PM slunk off into the night.

It’s not all beer and skittles. No sooner had the Liberal pixie dust settled than Carney was hit with Bloc leader Yves-Francois  Blanchet announced unequivocally that energy pipelines were still a no-go in electrified Quebec. Alberta premier Danielle Smith lowered the requirement for a separation referendum from 600 K signatures to around 170 K— a very doable mark in pissed-off Alberta.

Saskatchewan premier Scott Moe outlined his demands on Carney if his province is not to join Alberta. And former British PM Tony Blair, who’d worked with Carney in the UK, announced that Carney’s pet project Net Zero was a loser for nations. Finally RBC revealed it was moving beyond diversity toward “inclusion” by removing “unconscious bias” among its upper ranks.

Such is the backwash from April 28. If you listened to the state-supported media on election night you might think that Trump had picked on poor, innocent friend next door Canada. His outrageous 51st state jest did send the Canadian political apparatus into panic. A Liberal party that proclaimed Canada a postmodern state with no real traditions (lowerering flags to half mast for six months to promote their Rez School genocide hustle) suddenly adopted the flag-waving ultra-patriotic visage of expatriate comedian Mike Myers.

Instead the commentariat was spitballing about how to make the House of Commons function more smoothly or if Carney should depart for Europe immediately or in a month to meet his true constituents in the EU commentariat. China? Wassat’? Urban crime? I can’t hear you. Canada as fentanyl capital of the West? Not interested.

Astonishingly, many people who should know better bought it. It was Boomers waking from a long nap to impose their cozy values one final time on the nation they’d created via Trudeau. Comfy ridings like Oakville, Burlington, North Vancouver, Ottawa Centre and Charlottetown mailed it in for another four years. Academic hotbeds like Western (London), Laurier (Kitchener),  Waterloo, UNB (Fredericton),  U Calgary (Confederation) Alberta (Strathcona) and UBC (Vancouver) also kept the radical dream alive.

Meanwhile shrieks of “Panic!” over Trump decimated the Bloc (22 seats) and the NDP (7 seats) with their support transferred to a banker-led party that had been poison to them only six months earlier. You could not have written a more supportive script for a party who had neglected the essentials in traditional Canada while pursuing radical policies to please the globalists of the West.

Speaking of time capsules, you’d have been hard-pressed to find a more retro scene than the one produced by the legacy TV networks. With their emphasis on the horse-race story the tone, the panels, the hosts could have easily been teleported from 1990s. While many were interested in the micro of government finance, most listeners were expecting maybe a word or two on the collapsed state exposed by Trump’s aggressive negotiating.

As we’ve mentioned often before, Canada’s allies are appalled by the takeover of the country by malign actors, drugs traffickers, money launderers, real-estate manipulators and Chinese subterfuge. Trump’s generic reference to the border was a catch-all for the corruption swallowing the election process and the finance of the country.

That avoidance was echoed by pollsters who spent the night talking about how the final figures reflected their findings. Except for those that didn’t— Conservatives vote tally over 41 percent and Liberals well under 200 seats. What was avoided was the cumulative effect of highly inflated Liberal polling during the campaign, the “why-bother?” narrative they sold to voters appalled by the Liberals manipulation of the process to switch leaders and hold a micro-campaign of 36 days.

While Donald Trump has announced he’ll work with Carney on tariffs, it’s still highly likely that this was the final Canadian election fought by the old rules where the have-nots (Atlantic Canada) the haves-but-outraged (Quebec) and the indolent (Ontario) control the math for making government. The money pump (Alberta, Saskatchewan) will seek to attract eastern BC and southern Manitoba to their crew. In the worst case Carney may be the nation’s final PM of ten provinces plus territories.

Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster  A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster. His new book Deal With It: The Trades That Stunned The NHL And Changed Hockey is now available on Amazon. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his previous book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org. You can see all his books at brucedowbigginbooks.ca.

Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

The Liberals torched their own agenda just to cling to power

Published on

This article supplied by Troy Media.

Troy Media By Pat Murphy

The Liberals just proved they’ll do anything to win, including gutting key Trudeau-era policies

With the general election safely in the rear-view mirror, here are some observations.

The Liberal will to power

To me, the most surreal moment came during Mark Carney’s speech on the night he won the Liberal leadership. Raucous cheers ensued when he
declared the abolition of the consumer carbon tax and the retreat from the increase in capital gains inclusion rates. If you knew nothing about Canadian politics, you’d think this jubilation was in response to the assertion of long-cherished Liberal policies and principles.

But, of course, it was nothing of the sort.

In fact, the policies being jettisoned were Liberal in origin and had been hitherto fiercely defended. If you criticized the carbon tax, you were labelled a climate change “denier.” And if you were opposed to the capital gains changes, you were indifferent to increased inequality, the spread of child poverty and various other social ills.

This ability to shamelessly execute dramatic policy flips is indicative of the Liberals’ intense passion for power. And however cynical it may be, it’s one of the keys to their status as Canada’s “natural governing party.”

Thus we have Mark Carney presenting as someone who “just got here,” a tactic designed to disassociate himself from the previous Liberal government. It was  immaterial that he was an adviser to that same government, has stocked his team with its alumni and was an early advocate of carbon taxes. Instead of the enthusiastic net-zero hawk, he ran as the sober, economics-savvy technocrat whose banking and private sector experience is tailor-made for the current trade-war turbulence.

Does this mean that Carney has abandoned the ideological agenda of his unpopular Liberal predecessor? Not necessarily—and probably not at all.
Still, it worked politically. Will to power isn’t something to be sneezed at.

Conservative blues

There’s no sugar-coating the fact that it’s been a deeply disappointing election for the Conservatives. After being the “inevitable” government-in-waiting just four months ago, the combination of Justin Trudeau’s departure and Donald Trump’s trade war totally upended the electoral landscape. And to add insult to injury, their leader, Pierre Poilievre, lost his seat. That said, not everything is doom and gloom.

Compared to the actual results from the previous (2021) election, the Conservatives gained 25 seats. Or if you prefer adjusting the 2021 results to
reflect the new electoral boundaries, the seat gain comes to 18. Either way, the direction is non-trivially positive.

The popular vote share of 41.4 per cent is similarly impressive. Looking over the past 60 years, the Conservative median vote was in the 35 to 36 per cent range. You might call that their natural base. Only Brian Mulroney’s fragile coalition ever brought them north of 40 per cent.

And as Poilievre has been criticized for simply playing to the base, it’s fair to ask whether 41 per cent or thereabouts is the party’s new base. If it is, the
Conservative future is potentially promising.

Mind you, Poilievre might not be around to personally reap the rewards.

The NDP debacle

It was the worst of times for the NDP. Their support collapsed, dropping to its lowest ever level in terms of vote share, and they lost official party status. In the process, they shed over 70 per cent of their caucus and were wiped out in voter rich Ontario. Some of this misfortune may be attributed to their propping up the Trudeau government, thus tending to blur the difference between the two parties. So when Trump’s trade war hit, it was easy for NDP voters to flee to Carney’s perceived safe pair of hands.

To the extent that’s true, there’s a historical echo. Between 1972 and 1974, the NDP supported Pierre Trudeau’s Liberal minority in return for various policy concessions. Then the Liberals pulled the plug, winning a majority in the ensuing election while the NDP lost almost half of their seats. It was that will to power again!

This underlines the dilemma confronting parties like the NDP. Do they want to ruthlessly compete for power? Or are they content with shaping public debate, gradually making once-radical ideas seem mainstream and pushing the boundaries of what society sees as politically acceptable?

It’s a very real—and honourable—trade-off choice.

The pollsters

In a post-election interview, poll aggregator Philippe J. Fournier was generally satisfied with his model’s performance. And if you take margins of error into account, he was justified in doing so.

Nonetheless, his final projection had the Liberals at 186 seats and the Conservatives at 124. The respective actuals were 169 and 144. And he
significantly underestimated the Conservatives in Ontario while overestimating the Liberals in Alberta.

Vindication is sometimes in the eye of the beholder.

Troy Media columnist Pat Murphy casts a history buff’s eye at the goings-on in our world. Never cynical – well, perhaps a little bit.

The views, opinions, and positions expressed by our columnists and contributors are solely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of our publication.

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.

Continue Reading

Trending

X