Can Justin Trudeau win next election in Canada?

[mileslunn]

Polls look really bad for Trudeau and winning next election seems unlikely, but wondering what people here think his chances are of having a come back.  While it is rare to come from that far behind, it is not totally unheard of.  I would say chances of Liberal majority with him as leader is probably in low single digits.  A minority whereby win most seats probably around 10% while chances of forming government by denying Tories a majority and then having a supply and confidence with NDP and possibly including BQ if needed is around 30%.  40% chance Tories fall short of majority and 20% chance Liberals stay on due to that while 10% chance they let Tories govern.

[CumbrianLefty]

Probably not.

[LabourJersey]

They can win, if the stars align for them.

But Canadians are very clearly unhappy with the ways things are, and Trudeau and the Liberals have been in power for a decade. Hard to see him winning another term.

[Make Canada Boring Again]

I think that in theory, Trudeau could actually win if he did a 180 on almost every single issue.

This may sound absurd, but the Liberal Party of Canada has (kind of) done this before - Jean Chretien was basically the opposite of Pierre Trudeau on many if not most issues, and this is kind of why the Liberals used to be able to remain in power for so long. They would sense where the wind is blowing and go in that direction. Similarly, Bonnie Crombie seems to be trying to do this in Ontario to some extent.

Now, Justin Trudeau is too ideological and stubborn to do this; his government is too attached to their failed immigration system (Marc Miller said he 'can't see a world' where he would reduce the 500K annual PR target), he also has too much contempt for his precedessors, even if they objectively made good decisions in some areas (blame Harper, blame Harper, blame Harper). The guy wouldn't even delay a carbon tax increase during an inflation crisis and an interest rate hike.

So, can Justin Trudeau win the next election in Canada? I think maybe the question should be, can Justin Trudeau exit his fantasies and start dealing with the real world? If so, then maybe there's a small chance he can.

[CumbrianLefty]

I am very much a pragmatist, but do wonder slightly what the point of winning would be if you had to u-turn on literally everything to do so.

Trudeau may be more inclined to go down fighting, if that is the case.

[Hatman 🍁]

I do wonder if a Trump victory might change things. If Trudeau can paint Poilievre as being cut from the same cloth as Trump, he could curb Poilievre's popularity. It's a huge hail Mary at this point, but it's the only way to move the needle at this point, I think.

[Make Canada Boring Again]

I am very much a pragmatist, but do wonder slightly what the point of winning would be if you had to u-turn on literally everything to do so.

Trudeau may be more inclined to go down fighting, if that is the case.

Maybe you're right but then Trudeau's premiership will go down in history as a failed attempt to try to move the overton window. Trudeau could at least adapt to the electorate he is trying to win over. As recently as 2019, his targets regarding immigration, carbon tax, etc. were not nearly as 'ambitious' (as the Liberals like to call it) as they are now, which is why Trudeau was able to win that election. Trudeau has gone so far on some of these policies that the popularity of these policies has dropped significantly even in the last two years or so. Not to mention that times and circumstances have changed - in 2019 the cost of living crisis wasn't nearly as bad, etc. If you go too out of step with the electorate, don't expect them to re-elect you.

The other thing is, governments need to have a willingness to learn from their mistakes. Trudeau's government clearly doesn't.

[Hatman 🍁]

I do wonder if another thing that might shift things away from the Tories is if the country is on fire again. Right now climate change isn't something that people are worried enough about and Poilievre running on 'axing the tax' might not be as effective if the country goes through another summer of horrible forest fires. People don't mind the mild winter we're having, but come summer time people might get worried about the environment again.

[mileslunn]

I do wonder if another thing that might shift things away from the Tories is if the country is on fire again. Right now climate change isn't something that people are worried enough about and Poilievre running on 'axing the tax' might not be as effective if the country goes through another summer of horrible forest fires. People don't mind the mild winter we're having, but come summer time people might get worried about the environment again.

I definitely think there is that, but I also find carbon tax support highly cyclical.  Tends to be popular when economy is doing well, not so popular when doing poorly.  When Dion announced his in 2007, polls showed public supported it, but then Great Recession hit and made it less popular.  In 2019 Scheer got hurt over his lack of support on climate change.  Although to be fair Liberals promised carbon tax wouldn't go over $50/ton so they came across as more centrist option on issue whereas now no party is really taking centrist approach.  Liberals and NDP go all in, Tories do nothing.

That being said it will be summer of 2025 that will be key not 2024.  We are however supposed to transit to a La Nina from current El Nino and usually La Nina years tend to be cooler while El Nino warm.  But by 2025 likely neither in El Nino or La Nina.

[super6646]

He has about as much a shot as the Tories have in Britain right now IMO.

There are too many structural factors going against him right now that are incredibly hard to shift. The immigration and cost of living crisis will not go away tomorrow, and many of the problems today are a direct result of terrible policy-making over the past decade that aren't so easy to fix. Even if Trudeau decides to magically get sensible on immigration, how many effing years does it take to get the bureaucratic apparatus to adapt to a new policy direction? It won't be tomorrow, and it certainly wont be in time for the next election. His "housing is not a federal responsibility" comment was the jumping-the-shark moment, you cannot go out to your constituents who are struggling and expect to receive anything but vitriol in the process.

Not that the Cons will help either, they're all on board for Canada 100m and turning this country into a total sh**thole in the process as well. It's a sad time to be a Canadian that is for sure, knowing that neither party will look to your best interest.

[Make Canada Boring Again]

I don't think any party is actually on board with 'Canada 100m' - the current immigration situation seems to be moreso as a result of carelessness of the feds rather than a deliberate long-term policy. Either way, the current immigration policy is becoming very unpopular, so it won't last very long. Any government that doesn't solve it is throwing their chances of getting re-elected down the toilet.

Regarding the Conservatives, Poilievre emphasizes the success of the old selective points based system we had under Harper & previous PMs, so I think he will fix the situation, but maybe I'm too hopeful.

[Tintrlvr]

Can he? Yes. Will he? Probably not.

[Pericles]

My guess is that the Liberals only really stand a chance if they have a new leader and the election is in their honeymoon period. Otherwise the mood for change would be too strong. Even then, unpopular governments are rarely saved by a change in leadership.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Can he? Yes. Will he? Probably not.

[Meclazine for Israel]

The opposition guy has some really strong points against him at the moment.

[dead0man]

I do wonder if a Trump victory might change things. If Trudeau can paint Poilievre as being cut from the same cloth as Trump, he could curb Poilievre's popularity. It's a huge hail Mary at this point, but it's the only way to move the needle at this point, I think.

I've seen maybe 4 minutes of Poilievre and he doesn't come across very Trumpy.  A bit snarky, but he doesn't seem as dumb as Trump, his thoughts are more focused.  It's very hard to listen to Trump speak because he's all over the place (probably why the dummies like him, they just wait to hear the code words then hoot and holler or boo and hiss depending on what code word the lead chimp said).  And snark is a good balance to whatever it is Trudeau does.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Can he? Yes. Will he? Probably not.

[IceAgeComing]

Didn't we have a thread on this a few weeks ago?

I mean anything can happen; never say never. However I cannot really think of a scenario where a politician seeking a fourth term in office where for two of those they were elected in minority governments who is polling 15-20% behind the opposition has managed to win. What is different this time to past elections is that Trudeau's personal figures are in the toilet - very distant second in Prefered PM to Polievre (only just ahead of Singh; and third party leaders tend to be underconsidered in these things because people do not think they'll win); and also -30 in approval ratings. Those latter two metrics are good to check how much of an upswing potential people have and these both show very limited potentials for the Liberals led by Trudeau. If they wanted to win they'd... encourage him to resign and find someone else but I don't know if there is anyone that can turn the tide.

Its the Canadian Liberals so they'll completely change after a loss and find someone else to win anyway

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Didn't we have a thread on this a few weeks ago?

I mean anything can happen; never say never. However I cannot really think of a scenario where a politician seeking a fourth term in office where for two of those they were elected in minority governments who is polling 15-20% behind the opposition has managed to win. What is different this time to past elections is that Trudeau's personal figures are in the toilet - very distant second in Prefered PM to Polievre (only just ahead of Singh; and third party leaders tend to be underconsidered in these things because people do not think they'll win); and also -30 in approval ratings. Those latter two metrics are good to check how much of an upswing potential people have and these both show very limited potentials for the Liberals led by Trudeau. If they wanted to win they'd... encourage him to resign and find someone else but I don't know if there is anyone that can turn the tide.

Its the Canadian Liberals so they'll completely change after a loss and find someone else to win anyway

The only thing I disagree with is your ending. It's a myth that the Federal Liberal Party completely changes after a loss. For instance, both the Democratic and the Republican Parties have changed far more in even the last 40 years than the Federal Liberal Party.

I think if you actually checked the Canadian Liberal Party's history, and not this myth, you'd see that the Canadian Liberal Party has been broadly consistent - at least with leaders who have won elections - since 1948 when Louis St Laurent replaced the conservative minded Mackenzie King as Liberal leader and Prime Minister. This is 76 years since the Liberals had the political cipher but conservative leaning Mackenzie King as leader.

Even in areas where the Liberal Party has supposedly changed, such as concern for balanced budgets, it was either that the Liberals governed in generally very good economic times as from 1948 to 1957 and then from 1963 to 1968 under Pearson or were forced to balance the budget, as under Chretien/Martin.

In the four main areas of foreign policy, social welfare, social policy and economic development, the only area of any significant difference has been on how to promote economic development (blue Liberals vs. Red Liberals) with some saying that both Pierre Trudeau and his son have essentially ignored that unlike St. Laurent and Chretien/Martin.

Other changes such as on social policy have seen the Liberals constantly on the slightly progressive side of the Canadian public as a whole but never pushing the public beyond where it already is with evolutionary changes in party policy leading to the point where Justin Trudeau was able to block socially conservative candidates from getting nominated as they were 'inconsistent with the Charter.'

Similarly on social welfare, the Liberals, since St. Laurent, have been consistent - pushing for expansion but cautious to ensure the finances were available. For instance, hardly anybody remembers that Medicare was delayed from being fully implemented for several years after it became national law in 1966.

For instance, prior to that, from Wiki:
St. Laurent oversaw the expansion of Canada's social programs, including the gradual expansion of social welfare programs such as family allowances, old age pensions, government funding of university and post-secondary education and an early form of Medicare termed Hospital Insurance at the time.

Obviously support and opposition to specific policies should change over time as facts, evidence and circumstances change, but, the Canadian Liberal Party has been broadly consistent in its overall philosophy for the last 76 years.

[Hatman 🍁]

I do wonder if a Trump victory might change things. If Trudeau can paint Poilievre as being cut from the same cloth as Trump, he could curb Poilievre's popularity. It's a huge hail Mary at this point, but it's the only way to move the needle at this point, I think.

I've seen maybe 4 minutes of Poilievre and he doesn't come across very Trumpy.  A bit snarky, but he doesn't seem as dumb as Trump, his thoughts are more focused.  It's very hard to listen to Trump speak because he's all over the place (probably why the dummies like him, they just wait to hear the code words then hoot and holler or boo and hiss depending on what code word the lead chimp said).  And snark is a good balance to whatever it is Trudeau does.

Well, their personas are entirely different, obviously. Trudeau would have to attack Skippy's policies as Trumpian. How he supported the convoy, how some of his MPs are against abortion, etc. Lots of fodder there. Anything illiberal Trump does, Trudeau can turn around and tell Canadians that PP is going to do the same thing here.

Of course, I'm grasping at straws here, but this is the only conceivable way of turning around this sinking ship, I think.

[Make Canada Boring Again]

I do wonder if a Trump victory might change things. If Trudeau can paint Poilievre as being cut from the same cloth as Trump, he could curb Poilievre's popularity. It's a huge hail Mary at this point, but it's the only way to move the needle at this point, I think.

I've seen maybe 4 minutes of Poilievre and he doesn't come across very Trumpy.  A bit snarky, but he doesn't seem as dumb as Trump, his thoughts are more focused.  It's very hard to listen to Trump speak because he's all over the place (probably why the dummies like him, they just wait to hear the code words then hoot and holler or boo and hiss depending on what code word the lead chimp said).  And snark is a good balance to whatever it is Trudeau does.

Well, their personas are entirely different, obviously. Trudeau would have to attack Skippy's policies as Trumpian. How he supported the convoy, how some of his MPs are against abortion, etc. Lots of fodder there. Anything illiberal Trump does, Trudeau can turn around and tell Canadians that PP is going to do the same thing here.

Of course, I'm grasping at straws here, but this is the only conceivable way of turning around this sinking ship, I think.

If this is the only strategy that the Liberals have, I don't think Trump-mongering will be very effective. Liberals did this to Harper in the 2006 election (saying that Harper = Bush 2.0 and so on), and failed.

People attribute their current economic difficulties to the Liberal government's economic policies (which is why things like the carbon tax, immigration, deficit spending in budgets, the government's record on housing have become so unpopular in the last little while) and I am not sure saying that 'Poilievre = scary right wing American boogeyman' will change that perception or at least convince people to ignore it.

[mileslunn]

I do wonder if a Trump victory might change things. If Trudeau can paint Poilievre as being cut from the same cloth as Trump, he could curb Poilievre's popularity. It's a huge hail Mary at this point, but it's the only way to move the needle at this point, I think.

I've seen maybe 4 minutes of Poilievre and he doesn't come across very Trumpy.  A bit snarky, but he doesn't seem as dumb as Trump, his thoughts are more focused.  It's very hard to listen to Trump speak because he's all over the place (probably why the dummies like him, they just wait to hear the code words then hoot and holler or boo and hiss depending on what code word the lead chimp said).  And snark is a good balance to whatever it is Trudeau does.

Well, their personas are entirely different, obviously. Trudeau would have to attack Skippy's policies as Trumpian. How he supported the convoy, how some of his MPs are against abortion, etc. Lots of fodder there. Anything illiberal Trump does, Trudeau can turn around and tell Canadians that PP is going to do the same thing here.

Of course, I'm grasping at straws here, but this is the only conceivable way of turning around this sinking ship, I think.

And also only works if Trump wins which is far from certain.  Very possible he loses again.  In some ways going this Fall would be best to take advantage of that but would have to start in August and end in September to avoid conflicting with three provincial elections (British Columbia, New Brunswick, and Saskatchewan).

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Well, as Minister for Democratic Renewal Poilievre tried to make it harder for people to vote, very Trumpian.
As Minister for Human Resources and Social Development he tried to steer resources to Conservative ridings, very Trumpian.
And Poilievre was implicated in the 'Pierre Poutine' Robocall scandal. Very Trumpian.
When people compare Poilievre to Trump, it's not like there aren't very good reasons for doing so.