Majority — including two-in-five past Liberal voters — say Trudeau should step down: Angus Ried

[CdnFox]

Majority — including two-in-five past Liberal voters — say Trudeau should step down

Freeland top choice to replace Trudeau if he were to leave; CPC leads vote intent by 11 points

---

October 18, 2023 – Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has made clear his intention to lead the party into the next election, scheduled for 2025. Most voters, including a large portion of his own party supporters, feel he should step down before the next election.

A new study from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute finds more than half of Canadians (57%) holding the view that Trudeau should step down, while three-in-ten (28%) say he should lead the Liberals into the next election. Importantly, 2021 Liberal voters are divided, with close to equal numbers saying he should stay on (44%) or leave the party to a fresh face (41%).

The impetus to make a change may be building, as the Liberals trail the opposition Conservative Party by 11 points in vote intention. Currently, 39 per cent would vote for the CPC candidate in their riding, while 28 per cent say the same of the Liberals. One-in-five (21%) would vote for Jagmeet Singh’s New Democratic Party.

 

https://angusreid.org/trudeau-step-down-liberal-leadership-poilievre-carney-freeland/

 

 

[CdnFox]

And yet again - even more pressure to get trudeau to step down.  His party cannot force him to step down, but the liberals are obviosuly becoming very afraid that they'll lose SO badly that it could take them 10 years to recover again just like last time. And there is no 'trudeau' in the wings to bail them out.

As i've mentioned many times - they're on the clock.  If he doesn't step down soon there won't be time for a leadership race and for the new leader to get ready for the next election.  Especially if the ndp stabs the libs in the back and doesn't wait for the next election and goes to the polls shortly after a new leader gets elected,

I suspect we'll see even more of this stuff moving forward towards the end of the  year - once 2024 hits it's going to be really too late to swtich leaders easily

[BeaverFever]

Trudeau should definitely step down. As for Freeland, she’s the natural choice but unless she’s planning to bring in a major change in direction or something new like pharmacare she’s probably better off sitting out a round and running after PPs first term. Became people don’t just want a fresh face they want a new  set of priorities. 

Edited October 20, 2023 by BeaverFever

[Nefarious Banana]

28 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Trudeau should definitely step down. 

Hoping he'll do like his stepdad did and take a walk into a snowstorm, snowplow, or his admirers 'the snowflakes' . . . 

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Hoping he'll do like his stepdad did and take a walk into a snowstorm, snowplow, or his admirers 'the snowflakes' . . . 

Hoping he'll do like his brother and get buried in the snow

But - we are much better off with him in place for the next election. We'll win either way but with him there it would likely be a supermajority

[Guest]

11 hours ago, CdnFox said:

A new study from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute finds more than half of Canadians (57%) holding the view that Trudeau should step down, while three-in-ten (28%) say he should lead the Liberals into the next election. 

Add me to that 57%.

I have voted liberal a long time. Voted him in, because he seemed like a fresh voice.

Definitely regretted the vote, and how he has hurt my personal life with bad policy, is something that left me questioning whether am a liberal or not. 

To me, you know you're a garbage leader, when you can make voters switch parties and stick to it.

[Nationalist]

2 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Add me to that 57%.

I have voted liberal a long time. Voted him in, because he seemed like a fresh voice.

Definitely regretted the vote, and how he has hurt my personal life with bad policy, is something that left me questioning whether am a liberal or not. 

To me, you know you're a garbage leader, when you can make voters switch parties and stick to it.

Don't be too disappointed. It's not like the CPC brought anyone electable to the last 2 elections.

[Moonbox]

10 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Trudeau should definitely step down. As for Freeland, she’s the natural choice but unless she’s planning to bring in a major change in direction or something new like pharmacare she’s probably better off sitting out a round and running after PPs first term. Became people don’t just want a fresh face they want a new  set of priorities. 

Trudeau has been a disaster coming out of the lockdowns, but however smart Freeland may or may not be, she's a too-iconic part of the current government to be perceived as anything more than maintaining the status-quo.  Running with her at the helm would be akin to Hilary Clinton in 2016.  

Canadians want something different.  

[ExFlyer]

10 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Hoping he'll do like his stepdad did and take a walk into a snowstorm, snowplow, or his admirers 'the snowflakes' . . . 

Stepdad?

 

Justin has lost his way. He will never find the snow covered trail his father took LOL

Edited October 20, 2023 by ExFlyer

[BeaverFever]

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

Trudeau has been a disaster coming out of the lockdowns, but however smart Freeland may or may not be, she's a too-iconic part of the current government to be perceived as anything more than maintaining the status-quo.  Running with her at the helm would be akin to Hilary Clinton in 2016.  

Canadians want something different.  

I don’t entirely disagree with your point but the analogy with Hillary is maybe not so identical. Dem voters liked Obama and he probably would have been elected to a third term by a decent margin if that had been an option. However hey were cool to Hillary due to her cardboard cutout persona, her longstanding connections to the American business and political establishment, and her husband’s mixed legacy of austerity and neoliberal reforms. 
 

In contrast, Freeland is much more liked and respected than Trudeau  She has a serious and accomplished professional pedigree.  But as you say the challenge of running after JT resigns is convincing people of a pivot from the current Muppet in office w that is no small feat  

 

8-10 years is the natural life expectancy of a governing party before being voted out, provided that the opposition is united and stable so it’s natural that the Libs will lose the next election As I said she may be better off sitting out the next round as it might be unwinnable for any Liberal and then she can focus on making PP a one-term PM

[CdnFox]

55 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

In contrast, Freeland is much more liked and respected than Trudeau

That's not a reasonable bar to measure by.  Virtually all politicians are more liked and respected than trudeau right now.

Freeland woudln't be able to win. She MIGHT do slightly better - but maybe not.  remember what happened to the PC party when they put in a 'better liked and respected' female with only a short time tiill the next election where the leader wasn't liked.  And honestly she's horrible in front of a camera

The smart thing for them to do would be to talk her into accepting the leadership, run a very short leadership race where she's basically anointed, plan to deny pierre a majority and structure your campaign around that and probably take a loss but maybe hold him to a minority.  THen freeland steps down and they have a real leadership race but now good candidates know if they get elected they'll have a real chance of beating the cpc.  Nobody is going to want the job right now. who's a solid candidate.

 

[BeaverFever]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

That's not a reasonable bar to measure by.  Virtually all politicians are more liked and respected than trudeau right now.

Freeland woudln't be able to win. She MIGHT do slightly better - but maybe not.  remember what happened to the PC party when they put in a 'better liked and respected' female with only a short time tiill the next election where the leader wasn't liked.  And honestly she's horrible in front of a camera

The smart thing for them to do would be to talk her into accepting the leadership, run a very short leadership race where she's basically anointed, plan to deny pierre a majority and structure your campaign around that and probably take a loss but maybe hold him to a minority.  THen freeland steps down and they have a real leadership race but now good candidates know if they get elected they'll have a real chance of beating the cpc.  Nobody is going to want the job right now. who's a solid candidate.

 

I think Freeland is the solid candidate for the Libs but the next election is probably unwinnable for them  no matter who they have as their leader.
 

 As for camera performance Canadians can be more forgiving than in the USA where politics is mostly performative. Nobody really raves about Harper’s performance in front of the camera he was “Mr No Personality” and Chretien certainly had unique and unconventional character it was not appreciated in all quarters and he had a face no camera could love. I think Freeland can learn to not come off as “Hillary North,” as she doesn’t have the same historical baggage. 
 

Also if you’re referring to Kim Campbell, there are a lot of differences. The Conservative Party was disintegrating at the time as many members were splintering off into the Reform Party and Canada was embracing America’s Clinton-mania and so were looking to complete their own shift from conservative to liberal. We didn’t get a politician playing their Saxophone on late night TV but we got an unconventional leader who made a deliberate display of shunning a lot of the stuffiness and formalities of the office and presenting a plain-talking, scrappy, “unfiltered blue-collar”  type persona, which at the time was considered highly unconventional especially for Canada. 

Edited October 20, 2023 by BeaverFever

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

That's not a reasonable bar to measure by. 

Seriously. The house speaker that stepped down, was more respected than Trudeau, as most saw him having been the sacrificial lamb that was thrown under the bus to preserve what is left of Trudeau's image.

Honestly. You could literally put a bag of pucks with a medium double double from Timmies in a cup on top, and that would still have triple the respect that Trudeau has. 

I could literally cut a nasty fart in a packed elevator. That putrid gas, is more respected than Trudeau. 

A cat pooping on my suit left on my bed prior to work, is where I would start drawing the line in Trudeau's favor.

 

[CdnFox]

7 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

I think Freeland is the solid candidate for the Libs but the next election is probably unwinnable for them  no matter who they have as their leader.
 

Well the problem of course is why would she even try if it's likely she's going to lose anyway, even if she mitigates their losses? they'll toss her after guaranteed. So i doubt she's motivated to try.

 

Quote

 As for camera performance Canadians can be more forgiving than in the USA where politics is mostly performative.

They literally voted for trudeau's hair.  Polling not that long ago showed that the majority of women based their vote substantially on the candidate's smile.  It's a factor.

Quote

Nobody really raves about Harper’s performance in front of the camera he was “Mr No Personality” and Chretien certainly had unique and unconventional character it was not appreciated in all quarters and he had a face no camera could love. I think Freeland can learn to not come off as “Hillary North,” as she doesn’t have the same historical baggage. 

Harper had no charm for sure - and got a loss and 2 minorities and finally a majority as people judged him on track record over charm. And that's with him running pretty strong campaigns except for the last one.  As the saying goes if you don't have a charismatic man you better have a charismatic plan.

Chretien oozed charm and did very well with it - sure some didn't like him but lots swooned over him. Not so much his successor Paul who died pretty quick.

Quote

Also if you’re referring to Kim Campbell, there are a lot of differences.

Sure there were but not as many as you'd think.  And let's remember it was not long ago the libs were in third place behind the ndp in the house. The point is - sometimes the ball bounces the other way.

Freeland could very easily bounce the wrong way and lead the party to an even more disastrous defeat than Trudeau. So swapping her out for him is still a risk.

[OftenWrong]

Let's hope he doesn't step down, otherwise Liberal voters will return to their party, and who knows which choochemunga they will put forward next.

Yes Vaginia, there is a deeper hell...  

We need a change in direction. Not just replace him, although, we need that real bad...

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

 

We need a change in direction. Not just replace him, although, we need that real bad...

The worst nightmare is when Poilievre wins and has to actually deal with problems.

 

On the plus side, Chud memes will disappear as they have for Doug Ford...

It's pretty telling that the populists use such bullshitty tactics to help their team... I guess that's the new brand...

Btw lots of Cons were on the WEF list including Poilievre.  

Will those bogeymen disappear too?

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

The worst nightmare is when Poilievre wins and has to actually deal with problems.

 

Hardly.  That's when things get better.

These are not super complicated problems to deal with. Cut immigration back a little till we get on our feet.  Spend less money as a gov't.  Get rid of unnecessary bureaucracy .

It's pretty simple.  Trudeau doesnt' do it for ideological reasons - not because there's any great mystery to it.

Quote

On the plus side, Chud memes will disappear as they have for Doug Ford...

Oh i'm sure you'll still be around

Quote

It's pretty telling that the populists use such bullshitty tactics to help their team... I guess that's the new brand...

First off - justin was the ultimate populist. Promise what people want to hear - dont deliver.

Secondly - the idea that politicians should do something that the people want them to do is not actually new OR a bad idea. 

What you REALLY mean is you only want democracy when the politican is doing what you approve of - otherwise if they're doing what anyone else approves of its "populist".

Typical leftie.

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Btw lots of Cons were on the WEF list including Poilievre.

Doesn't seem like he's peddling allegiance to wef or their agenda, according to link.

Poilievre's Conservative Party embracing language

CBC, Aug 13 2023

Trust this time you'll read it in its entirety.  

 

[Michael Hardner]

3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Doesn't seem like he's peddling allegiance to wef or their agenda, according to link.

Poilievre's Conservative Party embracing language

CBC, Aug 13 2023

Trust this time you'll read it in its entirety.  

 

That article doesn't contradict my claim.  He cited WEF reports in the house of commons and was listed on their website as a contact.

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20210401060525/https://www.weforum.org/people/Pierre-poilievre

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

That article doesn't contradict my claim.  He cited WEF reports in the house of commons and was listed on their website as a contact.

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20210401060525/https://www.weforum.org/people/Pierre-poilievre

And? Do you have a point or just blathering as usual? The wef was well thought of before it became a hard left socialist think tank.

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

That article doesn't contradict my claim.  He cited WEF reports in the house of commons and was listed on their website as a contact.

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20210401060525/https://www.weforum.org/people/Pierre-poilievre

He's allowed to attend any conference he wants. He was not the PM or FM at the time.

Now that he's gonna be PM, he says the wef is out of here. Sounds good to me. You?

No?

I see... 

 

Edited October 22, 2023 by OftenWrong

[Michael Hardner]

8 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

He's allowed to attend any conference he wants. He was not the PM or FM at the time.

Now that he's gonna be PM, he says the wef is out of here. Sounds good to me. You?

No?

I see... 

 

You haven't contradicted my claim at all. 

Of course he can ban a lobbying group. But looks like he was all for it before it became a conspiracy theory.  

[Zeitgeist]

t’s awful what’s happened to Canada, from replacing the crucifixes on the crown with snowflakes to the vacuous cartoon passports.  Trudeau is intent on erasing our history and once great national vision.  Soon they’ll be putting the mentally ill to death.  It’s sick.  I don’t know how anyone can be proud of what’s unfolded in just eight years.  Canada has become a grotesque caricature of its highly respectable former self.

The federal government stands for nothing now except racist Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion tyranny and ineffectual climate policy that’s raising the cost of living and running our economy into the ground.  The nihilist post-national state once known as Canada feels like a hopeless place.  The Canada brand has been damaged beyond recognition with mischaracterizations of genocide.  Our government won’t even call out terrorism, let alone do anything about it.  The population has become so spiritually battered and indoctrinated that any alternative to the current leadership is labeled radical. People like Hardner are perfect examples of the now commonplace Chicken Little Canadian.

Edited October 22, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[Michael Hardner]

18 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

t’s awful what’s happened to Canada, from replacing the crucifixes on the crown with snowflakes to the vacuous cartoon passports.  Trudeau is intent on erasing our history and once great national vision.  Soon they’ll be putting the mentally ill to death.  It’s sick.  I don’t know how anyone can be proud of what’s unfolded in just eight years.  Canada has become a grotesque caricature of its highly respectable former self.

The federal government stands for nothing now except racist Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion tyranny and ineffectual climate policy that’s raising the cost of living and running our economy into the ground.  The nihilist post-national state once known as Canada feels like a hopeless place.  The Canada brand has been damaged beyond recognition with mischaracterizations of genocide.  Our government won’t even call out terrorism, let alone do anything about it.  The population has become so spiritually battered and indoctrinated that any alternative to the current leadership is labeled radical. People like Hardner are perfect examples of the now commonplace Chicken Little Canadian.

I'm proud to be called out in this directionless rant.

On a web board, if you want to discuss politics you have to try to be objective.  Your picture of the spiritually battered Canadian, as a result of the federal government, could never be proven so why even state that?

Of course Trudeau is unpopular, and for sure the economy is behind that.  No serious commenter would ascribe the situation to passport design, and DEI.

When the Conservatives win the next election, I suspect that you will immediately be satisfied by the superficial changes that the new government makes to the point where you believe national unity has been solved.

The truth is that huge economic problems are going to be approaching us, and the new government is going to be challenged.  I will support them as I do any Canadian government, and I will be on here with honest analysis and criticism of the real issues.

 

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

You haven't contradicted my claim at all. 

Of course he can ban a lobbying group. But looks like he was all for it before it became a conspiracy theory.  

Am not here to contradict your claims. Am saying your claims, are irrelevant.