Liberal Party members have chosen former central banker Mark Carney to be their new leader and the next prime minister of Canada.
Carney secured enough votes in the first round of voting to win the job, party president Sachit Mehra announced.
Good, but I won’t sleep easily until the crypto MAGAist Pierre Poilievre is on the ash heap of history.
Hes into crypto?
I too will love to see the knives out for PP once he loses the general election. He’s been such a sniveling Trunp toady no other party would support his party in a minority situation . All Carney has to do is prevent a conservative majority, my guess is that Carney has the potential to do even better than that.
Reminder of the Liberal’s record on proportional representation: “Liberals never wanted to “make every vote count.”… Electoral reform has become a bonbon offered at election. As far back as 1919, Liberals have campaigned on the promise of proportional representation”
Mark Carney’s position on electoral reform: “open”. However…
- He’s an economist, and the mathematics pairs quite nicely with the mathematics of electoral systems.
- His public persona is that he is intelligent. But when asked specifically about electoral reform and proportional representation, he says he’s uncertain and open to exploring options? Why would someone as smart as him be uncertain about ensuring every vote counts.
Means he’s unfamiliar with the issue, or doesn’t want to take a position lol
Given the Liberal’s failings on proportional representation, I tend to think it’s the latter: he doesn’t want to take a position
Entirely expected, but still a relief. He is the most likely Liberal candidate to potentially take a win from the Cons or at least take away a majority from them.
Explains why Conservative attack ads have been so focused on Carney lately. They’re scared!
Extremely.
A lot of polls put the Cons ahead of the Liberals by a few points, but trailing if Carney was leader.
The liberals chose well!
So we’ll likely be heading into an election in June.
Too bad for Chrystia Freeland. I think she would have been a great PM. I watched her speak a few times, and she is well-spoken, smart, and has that little edge like she’d really destroy you if you forced her to.
I would have voted for either, though, and I’m happy for Mark Carney. He’ll do a great job.
Politics is harsh. You have to have the personality to communicate effectively to the people. Chrystia just doesn’t have that politician’s personality. She isn’t engaging at all.
Not nearly as bad as PP. Every time I hear the guy speak, it’s like he’d rather be doing something else.
I think she’s kinda like Harris in the US. She probably would have done a good job, but is too similar to (and tainted by) the person before. It’s not worth the risk right now to choose her and lose to the cons.
It’s just not the time for her. I respect her deeply and thought she was great in the debate, and she did a great job last time Trump was in power.
I just think she couldn’t win the next fight (the general election), and frankly I think a PM who Trump completely loathes would become his punching bag instead of his foil. Freeland could take a punch for sure – don’t mean to imply she’s weak, but I think it wouldn’t help.
I worry about Carney not being an outspoken and charismatic leader against Trump. Between Pollievre and Trump I think he’s going to get dumped on, but I trust that he won’t care because he’ll be heads down enough on the technical sides of leadership it doesn’t matter. We’re already united, he can be a general and tactician.
I’m actually not worried about Carney being thoughtful and considered while Trump is a loud mouth moronic idiot with no coherent plan. Let Trunp be who he’s gonna be and we’ll do our thing, separate from the US clownshow. I mean we’ll have to deal with them a bit but it’s like a toxic ex who you have to deal with because you have kids together but other then that, you lead a completely separate life.
I just think she couldn’t win the next fight (the general election)
She’s too closely associated with Trudeau. I think Trudeau’s popularity turned around partially because he was leaving - his replacement wouldn’t be able to use that.
She will be invaluable to the country going forward.
She negotiated the USMCA with Trump in his 1st term.
I expect (if she runs again) she’ll be a minister.
She will be in cabinet for sure.
The only thing is, she showed how she supported JT for years then stabbed him in the back and wrote a treacherous letter ultimately taking JT down. If I was considering her as a minister I’d have to those actions into account. She’d be useful in some role against trump 2.0 but not so sure she wouldn’t try something similar again like what she did to JT.
I’m sure it was all planned between JT and Freeland. JT had decided to step down weeks before that. She did the letter to separate her from JT and be able to run for the leadership. It wasn’t enough for her to break the stigma though.
I am not that cynical. JT did not want to step down IMO. He’s young, essentially retiring at 53, and would have lead the liberals into the next election - which he may very well have lost. But with the Trunp stuff towards the end of his term, there’s a small chance he also could have eeked out a win. We’ll never know.
This was not a surprise
Carney’s win was not a surprise, but I think the margin that he won by was a surprise for many.
I was amazed that no one else even got into the double digits.
There was never a chance a woman would win as leader. The Liberals claim to be feminist but have never had a female in charge running the Liberal party.
I really don’t think that had much to do with it.
It should be no surprise that during an economic crisis, the candidate that successfully lead two central banks was selected.
Carney had nothing to do with Canada’s economy, it was Jim Flaherty. Carney did major economic damage to England and England was worse off when Carney left. He plans to bring in more taxes if he can’t increase current sales taxes plus increase income taxes.
Doing the same job here he had no influence and doing the same job there he ruined everything?
Maybe the UK is worse off because of Brexit, an event which had really only one outcome: worse trade policies, and using less efficient industries to compete against more efficient competitors.
Carney was against Brexit because it was bad economic policy for the UK to follow. They voted for it anyway twice and Carney helped them through it despite him not agreeing with it. The UK is still suffering now and is even talking about re-joining the EU.
Yeah that’s not really his fault at all, in his position I think it’s expected that regardless of the political situation you see it through.
He plans to bring in more taxes if he can’t increase current sales taxes plus increase income taxes.
Not sure where you’re getting this from but it goes directly against what he’s been saying throughout his campaign.
OMG a Minister of Finance and the Governor of the Bank of Canada had entirely different jobs to do, and different roles. They worked together but had different responsibilities.
He’s going to tax polluting industries. Instead of individuals. If the country elects the Liberals under Carney it’s a mandate to try new things. What those new things are, will be decided by a guy with an education in economics and experience as a policy maker as the Governor of two major global Banks.
Under Carney, everything you buy will get more expensive, plus you will have less money with higher taxes. Watch what happens to your money in 3 weeks on April 1st.
I’ve set a reminder to revisit this on April 1.
Please no. He’s not Trump.
Carney had nothing to do with Canada’s economy, it was Jim Flaherty.
Pfft. I was around back then and Flaherty was just Harper’s mouthpiece.
And for your information …
In practice, the (BoC) governor sets monetary policy independently of the government. Source
So glad you said this.
Thank you. :)
The liberals have maintained preferential hiring for women in the public service for decades, even though they are not the minority, nor have they been the minority since the early 2000s. Their policies are often very heavily entrenched in DEI mentalities, with zero tolerance for discussion / debate. Their feminist and minority-centric policies have explicitly alienated a large number of young men, particularly young white men, as was highlighted even during the introduction of the Liberal speeches/presentations on the cbc coverage.
Running a woman for leader is introducing a wedge issue in terms of voter opinion, at a time when the election results are really critical. Pretending like there aren’t still a lot of voters who have some degree of sexism is not realistic – and it’s of utmost importance that the Liberals do everything they can to challenge PP. I would rather they ran a man, with a higher chance of winning, than pretended like Freeland could win while she was overtly continuing to alienate male voters right up to the end with the “Man eater” music. Like imagine if a male candidate came out grooving to a song about beating women… what a stupid, divisive move.
That sort of blindness to the reality of the voting public, is precisely why the NDP are sunk. They run an overtly Sikh guy, who cozies up to Sikh’s at every public event he goes to… pretending like this isn’t going to alienate a bunch of voters, and be a huge issue in places like Quebec (where they’ve banned overt religious symbols in the past). It’s blind demographic politics optimism, with little serious regard to winning. Same goes for the Greens, when they put in that Black Lesbian Jewish Pro Palestine lawyer lady, who crashed and burned.
Freeland has polled fairly poorly against Poilievre and this is what everyone i know voted on - who can defeat him. Then there’s some of the bad takes she made. She sounded austerity-ish, made some anti-woke statements which play right in the cons’ hands.
Not to mention that she fiercely opposed electoral reform while Mark Carney gave a maybe.
The broad Canadian public is against woke policies. People want meritocracy, not identity. Read the public polling of the amount of people who support same sex marriage, it’s going down. Look at the polling numbers of the public turning against the ideology of transgenderism.
Please piss off to conservative lemmy’s. Or to the US. You have no coherent explanation of what is “woke” except for maybe it’s something undefined that you don’t personally like. You don’t speak for the broad Canadian public. Stop inflecting garbage US nonsense here. We’ve had gay marriage for more than 25 years and it’s never going away.
When you go outside, talk with random strangers and ask for their take on woke and check if people out in public support gay marriage. Get people;s opinion’s face to face that you don’t know previously, the internet is not the real world.
Congrats. You’re my first block on lemmy.
They’re a transphobic loser, you won’t miss much.
Um, dude? If you’re going to pretend to be a Canadian, might be good if you studied up on Canada first.
If instead you’re from one of the more disgustingly backward parts of rural Alberta, you might want to pay attention to what’s been happening in the rest of the country for the last fifty years or so, with emphasis on the past couple of months.
The broad Canadian public is against woke policies.
Proof please.
Read the public polling of the amount of people who support same sex marriage, it’s going down.
… and
Look at the polling numbers of the public turning against the ideology of transgenderism.
Please post the relevant polls.
crickets
Not unexpected. Those without facts rely only on their feewings.
I mean it’s possible that it may have fallen some due to the relentless campaign against it in thr US, coupled with the typical leakage of American propaganda into Canada. The support for gay marriage was never 100% so it’s conceivable that it may have dropped a bit but I don’t expect a dramatic change or anything approaching a majority against. Not coming off of 79% approval in 2023.
I really liked how Carney addressed the woke scare. He said that while America engages in a war on woke, Canadians will continue to value inclusiveness. Also he contrasted the US as a melting pot with Canada as a mosaic. Simple.
A quick look in Wikipedia shows in 2017 support for same sex marriage stood at 74% and in 2023 at 79%. Did it fall since then? To what?
