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.
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.
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.
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.
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.