Polls show Liberals would likely win a comfortable majority. Instead, they’re fighting for one seat at a time while Parliament hangs by a thread. That isn’t weakness. It’s a different kind of gamble.
If we look back to Carney's first election last spring (2025), that event was a colossal 1-2 month distraction, when we had tons of real-world things that needed attention (side note, Carney was still actually DOING all of that work, including European visits and economic pivots, WHILE campaigning!). But it was still a massive distraction.
That would be the same situation now, if we were to go to the polls - and possibly with unintended consequences. You would see Trump's minions ratcheting up all kinds of rhetoric that would be trying to sway things their way. We would be wasting time the we should be spending on economic pivots and what not (we just locked in a trade investment deal with UAE in a record 47 days -- fastest deal the UAE has ever made, and it begs the question "why now, why did they do that, with all the turmoil happening in their neck of the woods?")
I think your Quebec speculation is very interesting: And I do wonder what "strategically" will mean in their case. At present, Bombardier (and Quebec) have the biggest economic wins happening, largely due to Carney's efforts (and the fact Bombardier just happens to be located there) -- GlobalEye contracts, Gripen contracts on the horizon, Saudi Arabia ordering potentially 90-some Bombardier executive jets -- and former Bombardier facility Airbus (making the old C-Series planes) landing major order from Asia Airways -- well, the speculation now is how will the aviation industry there actually BUILD all of this (major expansion of capacity needed? Hmm, maybe Ontario could "repurpose" various mothballed auto factories . . . .).
So, how would this play out in Quebec??
The other side note: Carney likely has a "majority" in the House, even if not a literal one. Last time I looked, several other parties have vacancies in their lineup, too (Conservatives, being of particular interest). So is it even likely that Carney's 'minority' government could actually be defeated, if a confidence vote was called today? Answer: No -- even IF all opposition parties voted together, they wouldn't have enough votes.
The other thing: Carney has (amazingly) unprecedented good-will with most Canadian citizens (hmm, maybe excluding that "20%" from your previous posting yesterday - die-hard right-leaning conservatives, I guess??). So he has the "will of the people" behind him right now. While I'm sure he would capture a landslide majority, nobody wants an election right now when they are panicking about all of the economic turmoil -- that's what they want the government focused on. So he would lose a big piece of goodwill if he just did the usual political manipulation. He has no serious opposition - so why give them a microphone? Canadians want him to "Carney on" for now.
I totally agree. Mr. Carney has too much on his plate (plus distractions from south of the border and our own Alberta throwing more and more worries his way). He is not in this job to have power numbers, just enough. He has the Canadian people first on his list and we know it! Thanks. I will Carney on. 🇨🇦 I am so proud of all He is doing for us and for democracy.
With Mark Carney I get the sense that he is more focused on doing what needs to be done to safeguard the existence of Canada and less focused on the typical political power games. On the other hand, if PP was as popular as MC, you can be sure he'd be calling an election tomorrow. He's not a leader, he has no moral compass, just a politician who would take advantage of every opportunity.
That's really the contrast many Canadians are noticing.
Right now, Carney seems more interested in solving problems than collecting political victories.
Whether people support every decision or not, there's a sense that governing comes before campaigning.
And you're right about one thing... if a leader believes an election is mainly about maximizing political advantage, it's hard to resist the temptation.
Choosing not to, when the polls are in your favour, sends a very different message.
Being an Albertan and all the troubles we have coming up with this October referendum, I would not like to see a Federal Election called. DS is sticking her nose way out there with Carney and I was happy to see this evening on the news that he didn't really give a straight answer. Even though I am a strong supporter of Carney, I am not a Liberal. I think he would lose votes if he called an election right now.
Good comments and article, Fred. The only thing I can add is not spending hundreds of millions for a forgone conclusion. That money is needed mist by workers suffering under these tariffs.
Federal elections aren't cheap, and if the outcome is largely expected, many Canadians would probably rather see those hundreds of millions spent helping workers, businesses and communities dealing with the economic fallout from the tariffs.
I still think Beaches–East York leans strongly Liberal, but by-elections can always surprise us because turnout is lower and local issues often matter more than national trends.
The airport announcement may well be part of making sure voters are reminded the government is still delivering before they head to the polls.
If we look back to Carney's first election last spring (2025), that event was a colossal 1-2 month distraction, when we had tons of real-world things that needed attention (side note, Carney was still actually DOING all of that work, including European visits and economic pivots, WHILE campaigning!). But it was still a massive distraction.
That would be the same situation now, if we were to go to the polls - and possibly with unintended consequences. You would see Trump's minions ratcheting up all kinds of rhetoric that would be trying to sway things their way. We would be wasting time the we should be spending on economic pivots and what not (we just locked in a trade investment deal with UAE in a record 47 days -- fastest deal the UAE has ever made, and it begs the question "why now, why did they do that, with all the turmoil happening in their neck of the woods?")
I think your Quebec speculation is very interesting: And I do wonder what "strategically" will mean in their case. At present, Bombardier (and Quebec) have the biggest economic wins happening, largely due to Carney's efforts (and the fact Bombardier just happens to be located there) -- GlobalEye contracts, Gripen contracts on the horizon, Saudi Arabia ordering potentially 90-some Bombardier executive jets -- and former Bombardier facility Airbus (making the old C-Series planes) landing major order from Asia Airways -- well, the speculation now is how will the aviation industry there actually BUILD all of this (major expansion of capacity needed? Hmm, maybe Ontario could "repurpose" various mothballed auto factories . . . .).
So, how would this play out in Quebec??
The other side note: Carney likely has a "majority" in the House, even if not a literal one. Last time I looked, several other parties have vacancies in their lineup, too (Conservatives, being of particular interest). So is it even likely that Carney's 'minority' government could actually be defeated, if a confidence vote was called today? Answer: No -- even IF all opposition parties voted together, they wouldn't have enough votes.
The other thing: Carney has (amazingly) unprecedented good-will with most Canadian citizens (hmm, maybe excluding that "20%" from your previous posting yesterday - die-hard right-leaning conservatives, I guess??). So he has the "will of the people" behind him right now. While I'm sure he would capture a landslide majority, nobody wants an election right now when they are panicking about all of the economic turmoil -- that's what they want the government focused on. So he would lose a big piece of goodwill if he just did the usual political manipulation. He has no serious opposition - so why give them a microphone? Canadians want him to "Carney on" for now.
Grant, that's an excellent point.
A federal election isn't just a vote...
it's weeks of government attention being pulled away from trade, investment and economic negotiations at exactly the wrong time.
I also think you're right that Carney has something many leaders rarely enjoy... public goodwill.
He doesn't need to prove he can win another election.
Right now he needs to prove he can govern while Canada reshapes its economy.
As for Quebec, I suspect voters will ask a simple question... *Who's delivering results?*
Between aerospace, defence and investment announcements, that's a powerful argument if those jobs continue to materialize.
And your final point may be the biggest one of all.
If Parliament isn't in any real danger of bringing the government down, why hand the opposition weeks of free campaign coverage?
Sometimes the smartest political move is the one that never makes the evening news.
I totally agree. Mr. Carney has too much on his plate (plus distractions from south of the border and our own Alberta throwing more and more worries his way). He is not in this job to have power numbers, just enough. He has the Canadian people first on his list and we know it! Thanks. I will Carney on. 🇨🇦 I am so proud of all He is doing for us and for democracy.
Thanks, Judy.
I think that's exactly how many Canadians see it.
Right now, the priority isn't winning another election... it's keeping Canada moving through some very challenging times.
If the government keeps delivering results on trade, investment and protecting our economy, the politics can wait.
And I have a feeling "Carney on" may end up sticking.
With Mark Carney I get the sense that he is more focused on doing what needs to be done to safeguard the existence of Canada and less focused on the typical political power games. On the other hand, if PP was as popular as MC, you can be sure he'd be calling an election tomorrow. He's not a leader, he has no moral compass, just a politician who would take advantage of every opportunity.
Well said, Frank.
That's really the contrast many Canadians are noticing.
Right now, Carney seems more interested in solving problems than collecting political victories.
Whether people support every decision or not, there's a sense that governing comes before campaigning.
And you're right about one thing... if a leader believes an election is mainly about maximizing political advantage, it's hard to resist the temptation.
Choosing not to, when the polls are in your favour, sends a very different message.
It's probably the sensible thing to do. An election could be a major distraction a d I don't think Carney wants to be seen to be playing politics.
I think you've nailed it, Eric.
Right now, Canadians seem to want a government focused on governing, not campaigning.
If Carney can keep delivering results without turning everything into an election, that may end up being the stronger political move anyway.
Being an Albertan and all the troubles we have coming up with this October referendum, I would not like to see a Federal Election called. DS is sticking her nose way out there with Carney and I was happy to see this evening on the news that he didn't really give a straight answer. Even though I am a strong supporter of Carney, I am not a Liberal. I think he would lose votes if he called an election right now.
Thanks, Sandi.
I think that's how a lot of Canadians feel.
There are simply too many important issues unfolding right now to put the country into campaign mode.
Whether someone is Liberal or not, many seem more interested in seeing the government stay focused on governing than on seeking another mandate.
WHY SHOULD HE?
Exactly, Joanne.
If the government can keep doing its job and Parliament keeps functioning, there's no obvious reason to interrupt that with an election.
Right now, governing seems more important than campaigning.
EXACTLY. Canada is in SURVIVAL mode Timing is everything.
Good comments and article, Fred. The only thing I can add is not spending hundreds of millions for a forgone conclusion. That money is needed mist by workers suffering under these tariffs.
Thanks, Scott.
That's another important consideration.
Federal elections aren't cheap, and if the outcome is largely expected, many Canadians would probably rather see those hundreds of millions spent helping workers, businesses and communities dealing with the economic fallout from the tariffs.
So is the Beaches ( briefly home in my youth) a foregone conclusion? That airport decision suggests concern the NDP might bounce back.
Good question, Bev.
I still think Beaches–East York leans strongly Liberal, but by-elections can always surprise us because turnout is lower and local issues often matter more than national trends.
The airport announcement may well be part of making sure voters are reminded the government is still delivering before they head to the polls.