Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???

[HavokFour]

Interesting. Goes against the old Youth = Liberal and Aged = Conservative theory.

But then again the whole world seems to be upside down now... And voting intentions can and will change and evolve. Hell I voted mostly LPC and NDP up until 2015.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2012914793229713623

It's simple: young people are stupid. In the past the LPC was a stupid vote, and now the CPC is a stupid vote .

There's a fairly huge rift that has formed in that age range between men and women, it's been discussed before in this thread.

 

[mariomike]

There's a fairly huge rift that has formed in that age range between men and women, it's been discussed before in this thread.

Do you have a positive or negative impression of Pierre Poilievre

Male -5%
Female -20%

Abacus Data 14 January, 2026

 

[MilEME09]

What I'm seeing with all these polls is that if Canada is attacked and the government "calls up" citizens to answer it's going to be 55+ year olds who are better educated, have more mental health illnesses, are anti-gun ownership, and are coming to the parade square in St-Jean from the city.

That's awesome.

beware the old person in the profession where people die young

 

[Jarnhamar]

beware the old person in the profession where people die young

Yeah I don't think the majority of 55+ year olds banging their chest about going to fight the US are vets.

 

[MilEME09]

Yeah I don't think the majority of 55+ year olds banging their chest about going to fight the US are vets.

Neither was 1/3 of the ukrainian army in 2022

 

[Jarnhamar]

Neither was 1/3 of the ukrainian army in 2022

Ukraine had forced mobilization in an active invasion. Keyboard bravado from 55+ civilians in a country not at war where isn’t comparable and 1/3 of the Ukrainian army isn't 55+ year olds with no military experience.

 

[Altair]

Carney leaves Davos without meeting Trump after speech on U.S. rupture of world order

President delivers address to World Economic Forum amid global uproar over U.S. threats to annex Greenland

www.theglobeandmail.com

Prime Minister Mark Carney is heading home Wednesday from a global gathering of political and business elites in Switzerland without meeting Donald Trump after delivering a major speech that blamed the U.S. President, without naming him, for rupturing the rules-based international order.
His office, speaking at 5:30 a.m. ET, said that at that time there were no plans for Mr. Carney to speak to Mr. Trump on Wednesday.
Mr. Carney left Davos for Zurich at approximately 8 a.m. ET, his office said – about the same time Mr. Trump arrived. The U.S. President delivered his own address to the gathering at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

Good.

There is no reason for Canada to engage with the US.

But a Carney done with the USA will clearly buy the....nah, I wont do it.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

He also stated that he had to prepare for a Cabinet retreat this weekend, and the return of Parliament on Monday.

In other words, focusing on his job and not the stage.

For bonus points, he blunts critiques that the WEF is his natural habitat / he is working for Soros / taking a European vacation during the dead of winter....

 

[Halifax Tar]

Carney leaves Davos without meeting Trump after speech on U.S. rupture of world order

President delivers address to World Economic Forum amid global uproar over U.S. threats to annex Greenland

www.theglobeandmail.com

Good.

There is no reason for Canada to engage in with the US.

But a Carney done with the USA will clearly buy the....nah, I wont do it.

I cant believe I am going to agree with you, but I am.

Canada needs to act as a sovereign and independent nation. When Trump is ready to talk like adults and reach a mutually beneficial arrangement we can talk. Until them Canada will act in Canada's best interest.

 

[MilEME09]

Ukraine had forced mobilization in an active invasion. Keyboard bravado from 55+ civilians in a country not at war where isn’t comparable and 1/3 of the Ukrainian army isn't 55+ year olds with no military experience.

only takes 1 choice by america to turn one into the other real quick, then suddenly your 56 year old baker from sasktoon is holding a M72 waiting to ambush a convoy on highway 1.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Exactly. So Carney shouldn't dick around and just be forthcoming like France.

I would take his quote from the Q&A in the Peace Fund as being a roundabout way of saying he won’t just pay into a Trump slush fund. I’d love him to say “screw that” to POTUS47 & Co. too in this I one, but some here have also been saying one should be very selective about poking this bear, so maybe he was choosing his moment & venue?

First rate speech, but how easy will it be to implement quickly? Boosters’ll say he’s the one to get ‘er done, but we have to be patient, while haters’ll ask why hasn’t this been done yesterday (with no trips overseas because he should be problem solving, not galavting/globe trotting).

 

[HavokFour]

I cant believe I am going to agree with you, but I am.

Canada needs to act as a sovereign and independent nation. When Trump is ready to talk like adults and reach a mutually beneficial arrangement we can talk. Until them Canada will act in Canada's best interest.

Trump probably wasn't in a very good mood either after the delay of having to turn around and swap planes on his trip to Davos last night. I can't imagine even if they did talk that it would be anything constructive.

Air Force One turns around shortly after takeoff for Trump's trip to Switzerland

Air Force One returned to Joint Base Andrews shortly after takeoff due to a minor electrical issue while President Donald Trump was en route to Switzerland, the White House said.

www.foxnews.com

 

[QV]

only takes 1 choice by america to turn one into the other real quick, then suddenly your 56 year old baker from sasktoon is holding a M72 waiting to ambush a convoy on highway 1.

I posit the odds of this are somewhere below negative one thousand.

I base this estimate on the unique interconnected culture between both countries, the likelihood USA militarily invades Canada, the general Canadian attitude towards violence and 2A, but also the average level of intelligence suggesting that would be pure folly.

 

[Brad Sallows]

only takes 1 choice by america to turn one into the other real quick, then suddenly your 56 year old baker from sasktoon is holding a M72 waiting to ambush a convoy on highway 1.

Surveys, like talk, are cheap.

 

[RangerRay]

I’m not the only one with a bad feeling about the Chinese agreement.

Michael Kovrig (@kovrig)

Last week’s Canada-China trade deal reflects a world where power and leverage matter more than efficiency or principles. Bloomberg asked me about Prime Minister Carney’s deal with China to swap tariffs on EVs for a quota and price floor in exchange for restored market access for Canadian...

substack.com

 

[Czech_pivo]

Yeah I don't think the majority of 55+ year olds banging their chest about going to fight the US are vets.

Probably not, but they are more likely to remember talking with their grandparents and possibly their parents about what sacrifice means through the service that they performed in 1939-1945 and in 1950-53. Too many of the younger ones (under 40) didn't have the chance to hear these stories first hand and learn/understand them sadly.

 

[PrairieFella]

I’m not the only one with a bad feeling about the Chinese agreement.

Michael Kovrig (@kovrig)

Last week’s Canada-China trade deal reflects a world where power and leverage matter more than efficiency or principles. Bloomberg asked me about Prime Minister Carney’s deal with China to swap tariffs on EVs for a quota and price floor in exchange for restored market access for Canadian...

substack.com

The China agreement will greatly benefit prairie farmers who are hurting atm. Thats a win in my book. Maybe some competition will be a good thing for the big 3.

 

[Czech_pivo]

I cant believe I am going to agree with you, but I am.

Canada needs to act as a sovereign and independent nation. When Trump is ready to talk like adults and reach a mutually beneficial arrangement we can talk. Until them Canada will act in Canada's best interest.

We have to accept the fact that we are not privy to all that is happening behind the scenes, the back stories that are happening. The vast majority of us on here are in the CAF or were in the CAF, I myself have never been, but I think that we all understand that events further up the food chain occur on the daily basis that the vast majority down the line aren't aware of.

I've read snippets of info that, through backchannels, Carney let Trump and his administration know exactly what we were going to do with Chinese EV's immediately and over the next 3-4yrs. Those same snippets said that Trump 'signed off' on it and was ok with it but a number of others in his administration were dead against it. The result, Trump publicly says after the announcement that if Canada can get a deal, then they should. No mention of Chinese EV's at all. Is that because 2 days earlier Trump said in Detroit of all places, that he wants the Chinese to build EV's in the US?

Carney needs to make the F35 announcement sooner rather than later. Follow this up with the firm commitment in late spring on the acquiring of 12 submarines - hell even embellish it a bit and put an addendum on it and say 12 subs plus options to acquire 3 more at a latter date. Doesn't cost us a penny to do this but from an optics point of view it adds alot of weight to the purchase - we are buying 12 with the option for 25% more.

 

[RangerRay]

Not popular opinion, but I have quibbles with the speech.

More recently, great powers began using economic integration as weapons. Tariffs as leverage. Financial infrastructure as coercion. Supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited. You cannot “live within the lie” of mutual benefit through integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination. The multilateral institutions on which middle powers relied— the WTO, the UN, the COP—the architecture of collective problem solving — are greatly diminished.
As a result, many countries are drawing the same conclusions. They must develop greater strategic autonomy: in energy, food, critical minerals, in finance, and supply chains. This impulse is understandable. A country that cannot feed itself, fuel itself, or defend itself has few options. When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself. But let us be clear-eyed about where this leads. A world of fortresses will be poorer, more fragile, and less sustainable.
And there is another truth: if great powers abandon even the pretence of rules and values for the unhindered pursuit of their power and interests, the gains from ‘transactionalism’ become harder to replicate. Hegemons cannot continually monetize their relationships. Allies will diversify to hedge against uncertainty. Buy insurance. Increase options. This rebuilds sovereignty— sovereignty which was once grounded in rules—but which will be increasingly anchored in the ability to withstand pressure.

Until two minutes ago, this is how we were talking about the PRC.

Contradicted by:

In the past few days, we have concluded new strategic partnerships with China and Qatar.

Contradicted by:

On Ukraine, we are a core member of the Coalition of the Willing and one of the largest per-capita contributors to its defence and security.

The PRC is an ally of Russia, supplying Vlad with essential materials and funding to carry out his atrocities.

This sounds good:

This is not naive multilateralism. Nor is it relying on diminished institutions. It is building the coalitions that work, issue by issue, with partners who share enough common ground to act together. In some cases, this will be the vast majority of nations. And it is creating a dense web of connections across trade, investment, culture on which we can draw for future challenges and opportunities. Middle powers must act together because if you are not at the table, you are on the menu. Great powers can afford to go it alone. They have the market size, the military capacity, the leverage to dictate terms. Middle powers do not.
But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what is offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating. This is not sovereignty. It is the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination.
In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice: to compete with each other for favour or to combine to create a third path with impact. We should not allow the rise of hard power to blind us to the fact that the power of legitimacy, integrity, and rules will remain strong — if we choose to wield it together.

But this is exactly what we did with the other hegemony, the PRC. We negotiated bilaterally from a position of weakness with a hegemon.

It would have been a great speech. But when he talks about the hegemons and switch the US for the PRC in your mind, we’re not living up to the ideals of the speech. He’s really talking about just one country.

 

[RangerRay]

The China agreement will greatly benefit prairie farmers who are hurting atm. Thats a win in my book. Maybe some competition will be a good thing for the big 3.

At what cost though?

We should be trying to find other markets outside the hegemonies. As Carney said, the middle powers need to come together. I just wish he was living up to those ideals.