National
No enthusiasm, no movement—just media spin trying to sell a Liberal comeback that doesn’t exist
Liberals Picks Mark Carney as their new leader and Calls It ‘Historic’—But Let’s Look at the Numbers
Oh, look—it’s the biggest non-event in Canadian politics: the Liberal Party leadership race! The CBC, bless their little subsidized hearts, have been hyping this up like it’s some kind of monumental moment for democracy. Like Canada is holding its breath to see who will replace Justin Trudeau.
And listen, I’ll say this—thank God we don’t have to watch Trudeau waffle around anymore. That guy spent nearly a decade embarrassing Canada on the world stage, throwing out empty platitudes, and burdening Canadians with crushing taxes while his buddies made millions off government contracts. Good riddance.
But here’s the thing: who are they replacing Trudeau with? Enter Mark Carney. The media is desperately trying to sell you this idea that he’s some kind of outsider. An outsider! Right. Because nothing says “outsider” like a guy whose signature is literally on the country’s currency.
Even John Stewart—who, once upon a time, was a sharp comedian but is now just another Democratic Party lapdog—got on The Daily Show and actually tried to push this nonsense. During the Liberal leadership debate, Carney himself got up there and tried to gaslight Canadians, claiming he’s not a politician, just a pragmatist. A pragmatist! Oh, of course. He’s not a career political insider—he’s just a guy who ran the Bank of Canada, then ran the Bank of England, then bounced around every globalist economic institution imaginable before parachuting into Ottawa. Just your average outsider, folks.
Mark, come on. You are literally the definition of an establishment insider. You’ve been embedded in the power structure of this country for decades. You’ve been making economic decisions that affect millions of Canadians while sitting in rooms with the wealthiest elites on the planet. But now, we’re supposed to believe you’re just a humble, practical guy stepping in to help? No, Mark—you’re running to be Prime Minister. That is literally the definition of being a politician. Own it.
Let’s talk about enthusiasm—or, more accurately, the total lack of it when it comes to the Liberal Party of Canada. The media is working overtime, trying to convince you that this party is roaring back to life after Trudeau’s exit, that a “new era” has begun, that Canadians are rallying behind their fresh new leader. And yet, when you actually look at the numbers, the whole thing falls apart faster than a Liberal campaign promise.
The Liberal leadership race—the big moment where the party supposedly reinvents itself, the grand rebirth, the resurrection the media won’t stop talking about—managed to pull in a whopping 151,899 votes. That’s everyone who participated. Just to be clear, this wasn’t some exclusive club—you didn’t have to pay to vote, you didn’t even have to show any real commitment. Memberships were free. The party was practically begging people to sign up. And still, after all the hype, all the coverage, all the desperate attempts to make this seem like a big deal, they couldn’t even break 152,000 votes.
Meanwhile, let’s rewind to 2022. The Conservative leadership race—where people actually had to pay money to vote—brought in 417,987 ballots. And just Pierre Poilievre alone? 285,000 votes. Let me repeat that—Poilievre, by himself, got almost twice as many votes as the entire Liberal Party could muster. But sure, let’s pretend there’s a massive groundswell of excitement for Mark Carney, a guy nobody outside the Laurentian elite even wanted in the first place.
And here’s where it gets even better. The polling—oh, the polling. For months, the Liberals have been sinking. Before Trudeau resigned, they were floundering at 24% support. Then, magically, within days of picking a new leader, they skyrocket to 33%? A 9-point jump in the blink of an eye? Wow, what a coincidence! You mean to tell me that the same Canadians who couldn’t be bothered to sign up for a free membership, the same Canadians who have overwhelmingly turned against this party, suddenly decided they’re on board again—just because the party swapped one out-of-touch elitist for another?
No. That’s not how this works. That’s not how enthusiasm works.
This isn’t some grand Liberal resurgence. This is the Liberal-friendly media manufacturing a comeback narrative because their government subsidies depend on it. The same journalists who screamed for years about the Conservative “far-right” threat are now bending over backwards to convince you that Mark Carney is a fresh outside
And you know what? Maybe if they had actually let Ruby Dhalla into this race, they would’ve stood a chance. Seriously. I had to do a double-take when I looked at her policies—supporting small business, tough on crime, actual immigration regulation—I mean, that’s how you win the center. That’s how you stop a Conservative majority and turn it into a minority government. If they had let her run, we’d be having a very different conversation right now.
But what did the Liberals do? Oh, they disqualified her over—get this—campaign finance irregularities. But guess what? They kept the money. That’s right. The party flagged “violations,” kicked her out, and then conveniently pocketed the cash. If that’s not the most Liberal Party thing I’ve ever heard, I don’t know what is.
Instead, they’re giving us Mark Carney, a guy who has zero grassroots appeal, who has never won an election in his life, and who thinks he can waltz into power simply because the Laurentian elite think it’s his turn. That’s the play here, folks. The media is going to prop him up, the political insiders are going to rally around him, and the Liberals are hoping that Canadians just go along with it.
But here’s the truth: Canadians aren’t buying it. The numbers prove it. The excitement isn’t there. The support isn’t there. And come election time, the Liberals are going to get a very rude awakening.
source:
- Mark Carney detailed profile and political aspirations
- AP News article on Mark Carney’s leadership bid
- CTV News profile on Mark Carney’s leadership run
- Liberal Party membership numbers announcement
- CBC News Poll Tracker for Canadian elections
- Ruby Dhalla’s Wikipedia page with political history
- CBC News report on Ruby Dhalla’s disqualification
- CBC News guide on following Liberal leadership coverage
Business
The numbers Canada uses to set policy don’t add up
This article supplied by Troy Media.
By Roslyn Kunin
Canada’s biggest policy mistakes come from treating complex systems as simple math
Here is an old story with a valuable message. In the directed economy of the USSR, it was the government, not markets, that decided what and how much was to be produced.
Take metalware for the kitchen: mugs, mixing bowls, pots, pans, dishpans and washtubs. The government decided how much people needed and ordered the industry to produce that many tons at the lowest possible price.
Quotas were met, the appropriate tonnage was produced and costs were controlled. But no mug, pot or dishpan was to be found. The industry found that the easiest way to meet its cost and quantity requirements was to produce nothing but washtubs.
It is a valuable reminder today for Canada: when policymakers rely on a single number to steer complex systems, they almost always get the wrong results.
There are at least three reasons why we need better analysis in policymaking. The first is that the things inside a total number are not all the same. Mugs and washtubs are not interchangeable.
The second is unintended consequences. How did devoting metal to domestic products affect other metal-using sectors like automobile production? The same pattern appears in modern Canadian policy: shifting one number often disrupts systems we depend on elsewhere.
Third, picking a number to solve a problem is often an easy way to avoid doing a rigorous cost-benefit analysis that would offer a clear indication of the overall effectiveness and impact of any decision. Too often, our debates jump straight to targets instead of evidence.
We like to think that policy decisions in Canada are decided on more than just picking a magic number and waiting for it to solve a problem. That is not always the case. Policies for both the housing market and labour market could benefit from more detailed analysis.
Canada faces a severe housing shortage, not only in the major cities, but also in smaller centres as people move there from metro areas and push up home prices. One-number thinking has led the government to drastically cut back the number of people coming into Canada on a permanent or temporary basis believing that thousands of fewer new arrivals will make available thousands more housing units.
This is not likely, especially when considering temporary workers. Many of these are international students. The number of housing units freed by their absence is significantly lower than the reduction in student visas issued. Many students stay in dorms or other student housing. Others crowd together in apartments or houses to save costs. Not much housing is freed to deal with the shortage.
One serious unintended consequence of cutting back student visas is the negative impact on educational institutions which have been relying on the generous fees that foreign students pay to deal with the constrained fees and limited funding imposed on them by governments.
Cutting back on the number of temporary foreign workers (TFWs) will also have a minimal effect on the supply of housing in the major centres where shortages are most severe. TFWs are most needed in industries like agriculture and in smaller centres where their absence will be sorely felt.
Looking at the labour market, it is unrealistic to expect unemployed Canadians to fill these job gaps. People in major cities rarely move to remote areas to take lower-paying work. Cutting back TFWs will harm the sectors and places that rely
on them. Differences in geography, occupations and preferences ensure that workers are not interchangeable.
Homes are not interchangeable either. They have to be in the places where people choose to live, and they have to be affordable. In many places like Vancouver, the actual and potential number of homes is enough to house everyone who needs one, especially if the development permits now being sought result in actual construction. But in cities like Vancouver and Toronto, the benchmark price of a home has risen far faster than wages for more than a decade, making many new units unaffordable even when supply increases.
Builders are now having trouble filling existing units because they did not pay enough attention to affordability. The cost of producing a housing unit is higher than what most Canadians can pay, even after the size of a home has shrunk below what most Canadians are used to. As a result, builders are lowering prices and rents and offering other inducements to potential residents. Builders are now lowering prices and rents and/or offering other inducements to potential residents.
Let us hope that our educational institutions will be able to produce, and our immigration policies will allow us to admit, qualified people who can develop and implement policies based on more than one number.
Canada needs decisions grounded in reality, not wishful targets.
Dr. Roslyn Kunin is a respected Canadian economist known for her extensive work in economic forecasting, public policy, and labour market analysis. She has held various prominent roles, including serving as the regional director for the federal
government’s Department of Employment and Immigration in British Columbia and Yukon and as an adjunct professor at the University of British Columbia. Dr. Kunin is also recognized for her contributions to economic development, particularly in Western Canada.
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.
Crime
How Global Organized Crime Took Root In Canada
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
Weak oversight and fragmented enforcement are enabling criminal networks to undermine Canada’s economy and security, requiring a national-security-level response to dismantle these systems
A massive drug bust reveals how organized crime has turned Canada into a source of illicit narcotics production
Canada is no longer just a victim of the global drug trade—it’s becoming a source. The country’s growing role in narcotics production exposes deep systemic weaknesses in oversight and enforcement that are allowing organized crime to take root and threaten our economy and security.
Police in Edmonton recently seized more than 60,000 opium poppy plants from a northeast property, one of the largest domestic narcotics cultivation operations in Canadian history. It’s part of a growing pattern of domestic production once thought limited to other regions of the world.
This wasn’t a small experiment; it was proof that organized crime now feels confident operating inside Canada.
Transnational crime groups don’t gamble on crops of this scale unless they know their systems are solid. You don’t plant 60,000 poppies without confidence in your logistics, your financing and your buyers. The ability to cultivate, harvest and quietly move that volume of product points to a level of organization that should deeply concern policymakers. An operation like this needs more than a field; it reflects the convergence of agriculture, organized crime and money laundering within Canada’s borders.
The uncomfortable truth is that Canada has become a source country for illicit narcotics rather than merely a consumer or transit point. Fentanyl precursors (the chemical ingredients used to make the synthetic opioid) arrive from abroad, are synthesized domestically and are exported south into the United States. Now, with opium cultivation joining the picture, that same capability is extending to traditional narcotics production.
Criminal networks exploit weak regulatory oversight, land-use gaps and fragmented enforcement, often allowing them to operate in plain sight. These groups are not only producing narcotics but are also embedding themselves within legitimate economic systems.
This isn’t just crime; it’s the slow undermining of Canada’s legitimate economy. Illicit capital flows can distort real estate markets, agricultural valuations and financial transparency. The result is a slow erosion of lawful commerce, replaced by parallel economies that profit from addiction, money laundering and corruption. Those forces don’t just damage national stability—they drive up housing costs, strain health care and undermine trust in Canada’s institutions.
Canada’s enforcement response remains largely reactive, with prosecutions risk-averse and sentencing inadequate as a deterrent. At the same time, threat networks operate with impunity and move seamlessly across the supply chain.
The Edmonton seizure should therefore be read as more than a local success story. It is evidence that criminal enterprise now operates with strategic depth inside Canada. The same confidence that sustains fentanyl synthesis and cocaine importation is now manifesting in agricultural narcotics production. This evolution elevates Canada from passive victim to active threat within the global illicit economy.
Reversing this dynamic requires a fundamental shift in thinking. Organized crime is a matter of national security. That means going beyond raids and arrests toward strategic disruption: tracking illicit finance, dismantling logistical networks that enable these operations and forging robust intelligence partnerships across jurisdictions and agencies.
It’s not about symptoms; it’s about knocking down the systems that sustain this criminal enterprise operating inside Canada.
If we keep seeing narcotics enforcement as a public safety issue instead of a warning of systemic corruption, Canada’s transformation into a threat nation will be complete. Not because of what we import but because of what we now produce.
Scott A. McGregor is a senior fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and managing partner of Close Hold Intelligence Consulting Ltd.
-
Alberta1 day ago‘Weird and wonderful’ wells are boosting oil production in Alberta and Saskatchewan
-
Business2 days agoCanada is failing dismally at our climate goals. We’re also ruining our economy.
-
Crime2 days ago‘Modern-Day Escobar’: U.S. Says Former Canadian Olympian Ran Cocaine Pipeline with Cartel Protection and a Corrupt Toronto Lawyer
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta to protect three pro-family laws by invoking notwithstanding clause
-
Artificial Intelligence2 days agoLawsuit Claims Google Secretly Used Gemini AI to Scan Private Gmail and Chat Data
-
Health1 day agoCDC’s Autism Reversal: Inside the Collapse of a 25‑Year Public Health Narrative
-
Energy1 day agoThe Carney Government is Hijacking the Phase “Energy Superpower” to Advance Their Agenda
-
Crime1 day agoCocaine, Manhunts, and Murder: Canadian Cartel Kingpin Prosecuted In US





