LPC leadership race - 2025

[FSTO]

He launched his campaign in Edmonton.

The LPC lives for anti-American silliness, so his soft launch in America was just plain dumb.

And a slap in the face of the Canadian media the LPC loudly proclaims to support.

 

[brihard]

Weak excuses for a guy who should know better. The LPC lives for anti-American silliness, so his soft launch in America was just plain dumb.

Like I said, I personally don’t give a shit about campaign theatre or how one is launched. And people hint and tease at candidacy well before they formally announce. Maybe that factors for you; it just doesn’t for me. Carney showed up on US TV and teased at a leader run before he formally kicked off and announced his campaign here. Big meh for me.

If he imagined he was going to draw in CPC voters because he was being conciliatory toward America, he clearly doesn't understand why people dislike the LPC.

Why would he be trying to draw in CPC voters for the Liberal leadership campaign? Your reaction would make more sense if this was how he kicked off a campaign for a general election as Liberal leadership. But it’s not. He’s competing within the Liberal party against, realistically, one other serious contender. He’s running for the LPC to elect him as leader and so to select him as temporarily the PM. The general election is a later step that could be any time between mid April and October. By that time, the table will be set probably quite differently, and we’ll likely be in some kind of economic crisis caused by arbitrary actions from the U.S. but that don’t necessarily enjoy broad support there. There’s going to be serious wheels-within-wheels when the actual election comes. Make sure you keep some outrage dry for then; you’re gonna need it.

 

[ArmyRick]

Like I said, I personally don’t give a shit about campaign theatre or how one is launched. And people hint and tease at candidacy well before they formally announce. Maybe that factors for you; it just doesn’t for me. Carney showed up on US TV and teased at a leader run before he formally kicked off and announced his campaign here. Big meh for me.



Why would he be trying to draw in CPC voters for the Liberal leadership campaign? Your reaction would make more sense if this was how he kicked off a campaign for a general election as Liberal leadership. But it’s not. He’s competing within the Liberal party against, realistically, one other serious contender. He’s running for the LPC to elect him as leader and so to select him as temporarily the PM. The general election is a later step that could be any time between mid April and October. By that time, the table will be set probably quite differently, and we’ll likely be in some kind of economic crisis caused by arbitrary actions from the U.S. but that don’t necessarily enjoy broad support there. There’s going to be serious wheels-within-wheels when the actual election comes. Make sure you keep some outrage dry for then; you’re gonna need it.

No matter how you slice it or dress it up, Mark Carney is going to lose a lot of potential voters because of his soft launch on American TV. It goes along with the message the CPC is effective at getting out. Between his Irish, Canadian and British citizenships and his long dedicated work to the WEF, he has everyone's interest but Canadians at his top priority.

 

[Jarnhamar]

No matter how you slice it or dress it up, Mark Carney is going to lose a lot of potential voters because of his soft launch on American TV.

I disagree with you here ArmyRick. I think the irony (hypocrisy?) is lost on gladly ignored by Liberal supporters.

Two months ago they were applauding Trudeaus "feminist" response to Trump being elected. Now the self-described progressive party has a chance for the first Liberal female Prime Minister. Will they embrace her? No. They're going to rally around the old rich white male who is connected to the corporate elite after spending a year attacking Poilievre for being, you guessed it, an old rich white male who is connected to the corporate elite.

 

[Good2Golf]

Two months ago they were applauding Trudeaus "feminist" response to Trump being elected. Now the self-described progressive party has a chance for the first Liberal female Prime Minister. Will they embrace her? No. They're going to rally around the old rich white male who is connected to the corporate elite after spending a year attacking Poilievre for being, you guessed it, an old rich white male who is connected to the corporate elite.

On brand for the Liberals. People were happy to believe Trudeau when he said he is a feminist, or cares about indigenous peoples, or supported electoral reform, or, or, or…deeds don’t speak louder than breathily moist-spoken words.

 

[ArmyRick]

I disagree with you here ArmyRick. I think the irony (hypocrisy?) is lost on gladly ignored by Liberal supporters.

Two months ago they were applauding Trudeaus "feminist" response to Trump being elected. Now the self-described progressive party has a chance for the first Liberal female Prime Minister. Will they embrace her? No. They're going to rally around the old rich white male who is connected to the corporate elite after spending a year attacking Poilievre for being, you guessed it, an old rich white male who is connected to the corporate elite.

Lemme re-phrase. AFTER the snake derby is over (the LPC leadership coronation of Mark while pretending its a race), and we hopefully move to an election (Jags, I am looking at you), then this maybe yet another knife cut that hurts the LPC is in the federal election.

Warren Kinsella says "define yourself before your opponents do", unfortunately for Mark, the CPC is already all over this.

 

[brihard]

No matter how you slice it or dress it up, Mark Carney is going to lose a lot of potential voters because of his soft launch on American TV. It goes along with the message the CPC is effective at getting out. Between his Irish, Canadian and British citizenships and his long dedicated work to the WEF, he has everyone's interest but Canadians at his top priority.

Really? Who are these undecided voters that you imagine will decide this based on him showing up on American TV before announcing? I doubt many exist.

While I agree with you that a lot of votes are still up for grabs in the next election - moreso than would have been were Trudeau to be running - I think anyone still sitting here undecided is far more likely to be focused on more significant issues like tariff threats, the economy, housing and immigration, rather than meaningless and inconsequential nonsense like this.

I’m not eligible to vote for Liberal leader, so like most of you I’m just going to be watching to see how it plays out. When we come into an election, yes my vote is up for grabs, but no, a pre-leadership-campaign TV spot won’t be a factor. It’s just something partisans will make angry partisan noises about.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I disagree with you here ArmyRick. I think the irony (hypocrisy?) is lost on gladly ignored by Liberal supporters.

Two months ago they were applauding Trudeaus "feminist" response to Trump being elected. Now the self-described progressive party has a chance for the first Liberal female Prime Minister. Will they embrace her? No. They're going to rally around the old rich white male who is connected to the corporate elite after spending a year attacking Poilievre for being, you guessed it, an old rich white male who is connected to the corporate elite.

Some liberals are voting for a female! We're not all hypocrites.

Freeland for PM!

 

[Kirkhill]

How BlackRock Helped Stack Exxon's Board With Climate Radicals

The Big Three used the power they derive from investing other people's money to force compliance with a radical political goal.

thefederalist.com

How BlackRock And The Rest Of The ‘Climate Cartel’ Stacked Exxon’s Board With Fossil Fuel Haters​

The Big Three used the power they derive from investing other people’s money to force compliance with a radical political goal.

A recent House Judiciary Committee report details how America’s largest financial institutions, colluding with climate activists, imposed radical environmental policies on the American economy, subverting both our self-government and free markets. It focuses on the successful effort to insert climate activist directors on the board of energy giant ExxonMobil.

According to the report, there is “substantial evidence of a ‘climate cartel’ of financial institutions” including the “Big Three” asset managers (BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard), several massive state pension funds, European investment firms, and the two foreign-owned proxy advisory firms that dominate the American market.

This cartel coordinated its efforts through a network of “alliances” that included “left-wing environmental activist” groups such as the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero and The Net Zero Asset Managers initiative (NZAM). The Big Three belonged to both.

The cartel made Exxon a “focus company” on its “climate blacklist,” subjecting Exxon to “a barrage of shareholder pressure campaigns — more than any other company in the world” — all designed to force Exxon to reduce its fossil fuel production.

....
2021

Mark Carney hosts first GFANZ CEOs meeting - Climate Champions

The first meeting of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) CEO Principals Group has taken place. The Group discussed GFANZ’s priorities, workstreams and deliverables for COP26 and beyond.

racetozero.unfccc.int

“I was honoured to chair today’s first meeting of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) CEO Principals Group. The Group discussed GFANZ’s priorities, workstreams and deliverables for COP26 and beyond. We will meet periodically through the year to help unlock the systemic change needed to finance the global transition to net zero.”

1. The following individuals attended the meeting: Rt Hon Alok Sharma MP (President of COP26), Mark Carney (the Prime Minister’s Finance Advisor for COP26 and UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance), Nigel Topping, (High Level Climate Action Champion for COP26), Oliver Baete (Allianz), Amanda Blanc (Aviva), Thomas Buberl (AXA), Juan Carlos Mora Uribe (Bancolombia), Larry Fink (Blackrock), Seiji Inagaki (Dai-ichi Life), Nili Gilbert (David Rockefeller Fund), David Blood (Generation IM), Michelle Scrimgeour (LGIM), David Schwimmer (LSEG), Alison Rose (NatWest), Jon Johnsen (PKA), Shemara Wikramanayake (Macquarie), Hiro Mizuno (UN Special Envoy on Innovative Finance and Sustainable Investments), Mary Schapiro (Head of TCFD Secretariat)
2. The current member list of the CEO Principals Group is: Mark Carney, Nigel Topping, (High Level Climate Action Champion for COP26), Oliver Baete (Allianz), Amanda Blanc (Aviva), Thomas Buberl (AXA), Juan Carlos Mora Uribe (Bancolombia), Brian Moynihan (Bank of America), Larry Fink (Blackrock), Jane Fraser (Citigroup), Seiji Inagaki (Dai-ichi Life), Nili Gilbert (David Rockefeller Fund), David Blood (Generation IM), Noel Quinn (HSBC), Joshua Oigara (KCB Group), Michelle Scrimgeour (LGIM), David Schwimmer (LSEG), Shemara Wikramanayake (Macquarie), Alison Rose (NatWest), Jon Johnsen (PKA), Ana Botin (Santander).
3. The CEO Principals Group is the senior group of GFANZ. To support GFANZ in unlocking the systemic change needed to reach net zero, the group’s purpose is to: set the strategic direction and priorities of GFANZ; provide a forum for strategic coordination among net zero finance leaders on campaigns, workplans and how to maximise real economy and real world impact; catalyse technical collaboration; demonstrate leadership; and monitor progress.

....

Canada 2020

Canada's leading, independent, progressive think-tank

canada2020.ca

Canada 2020 is Canada’s leading independent, progressive think tank.

Founded in 2006, Canada 2020 produces original research, hosts events and starts conversations about Canada’s future. An active member of the Global Progress network, Canada 2020’s goal is to build a community of progressive ideas and people that will move and shape governments.

Canada 2020 associates the Liberal Party of Canada with the US Democrats through Hillary Clinton's advisor John Podesta and his Center for American Progress. Invitees at Canadian conventions have included Hillary, Obama, Keir Starmer of the UK Labour Party and, of course, Mark Carney.

....

So how is Mark's Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero doing?

https://www.corporateknights.com/responsible-investing/cracks-showing-in-mark-carneys-net-zero-financial-alliance/

Cracks showing in Mark Carney’s net-zero financial alliance​

Two pension funds leave GFANZ; JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and Canadian banks consider exit​

by Eugene Ellmen
October 3, 2022

Mark Carney’s US$130-trillion Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) has lost two pension funds and a consulting company in recent weeks, and some large U.S. and Canadian banks are threatening to withdraw because of new membership criteria requiring a fossil fuel phase-down.

GFANZ, which made international headlines and represented one of the planet’s best hopes for meaningful climate action a year ago, is facing growing discontent within its membership of global banks, insurers, investment managers and consultants, and asset owners. The displeasure, especially by large North American banks, threatens to rupture the increasingly fragile alliance.

“Those are some of the biggest players on Wall Street, and if they leave does that cause some kind of domino effect, giving the impetus to other parties to say, ‘Hey, if they left why can’t I leave?” says Baltej Sidhu, an analyst with National Bank of Canada, in an interview with The Globe and Mail.

Carney, the former governor of the Bank of England (and Canada) established GFANZ with billionaire Michael Bloomberg at the COP26 UN climate summit last November in Glasgow. Under the initiative, more than 400 financial institutions from 45 countries managing assets of US$130 trillion agreed to the goal of net-zero portfolio emissions by 2050, as well as interim CO2 reductions.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/climate/carney-esg-climate-finance-1.7428281

BlackRock exit a major blow to Mark Carney's net-zero finance alliance

BlackRock quits climate alliance amid Wall Street exodus - The Logic

BlackRock’s departure from the sustainable finance alliance is the biggest blow yet to the Mark Carney-led initiative.

thelogic.co

Major Canadian Banks Withdraw From Global Climate Finance Alliance

www.theepochtimes.com

...

Carney, as much as anyone, is responsible for stranding Alberta's oil and gas, Carney and his friends at Rockefeller and Tides and the Center for American Progress, including Michael Bloomberg.

And the Liberal Party has whole heartedly embraced not just Carney but his entire Net Zero philosophy.

And Alberta is now supposed to trust that Carney and the Liberals will fight to keep Alberta hydrocarbons flowing to the US, the last market they have left open to Alberta, when they have been fighting for a decade and more to shut Alberta down.

And Doug Ford, with his federally subsidized battery plants, has benefited from those Net Zero decisions. Funded by Alberta oil and gas.

...

Thanks but no thanks. Fox and henhouse.

 

[MilEME09]

Lemme re-phrase. AFTER the snake derby is over (the LPC leadership coronation of Mark while pretending its a race), and we hopefully move to an election (Jags, I am looking at you), then this maybe yet another knife cut that hurts the LPC is in the federal election.

Warren Kinsella says "define yourself before your opponents do", unfortunately for Mark, the CPC is already all over this.

Well the government would only need to hold on 3 months, as June 23rd or the friday after (if the 23rd falls on a weekend) is the last day before the summer break. At which time the house likely would not return as the writ will drop in either august or September for a Oct 20th vote.

 

[ArmyRick]

Really? Who are these undecided voters that you imagine will decide this based on him showing up on American TV before announcing? I doubt many exist.

LOOK at what I said (No, I am not "angry")

this maybe yet another knife cut that hurts the LPC is in the federal election.

Death by a thousand cuts. Read carefully. Details.

 

[brihard]

LOOK at what I said (No, I am not "angry")

Death by a thousand cuts. Read carefully. Details.

I did. You said “No matter how you slice it or dress it up, Mark Carney is going to lose a lot of potential voters because of his soft launch on American TV.”

That was a pretty absolute statement. “Now matter how you slice it…” “is going to…” “a lot”.

I see that you basically walked it back as I was typing my reply- but I read what you originally actually wrote just fine. If you then realized you took a stronger position than you can defend and chose to walk it back, I can respect that.

 

[ArmyRick]

Well the government would only need to hold on 3 months, as June 23rd or the friday after (if the 23rd falls on a weekend) is the last day before the summer break. At which time the house likely would not return as the writ will drop in either august or September for a Oct 20th vote.

Whats your point here?

I am asking a question and no, don't accuse me of being all "ragey" or "angry". Why do you think they will actually hold on? I have seen lots of calls by people first thinking Trudeau will never step down (ohh look), he won't prorogue the government (he did), then add in the X factors that are unknown (What will Donald Trump do next?) and Jagmeet who can still pull a few slaps on the LPC (like not letting up on the house motion to produce documents).

Its a minority government, and it is NOT up to them to hold on. Its up to the opposition parties to decide the fate of the LPC. And I believe if Jagmeet smells blood in the water, there will be no deal.

 

[ArmyRick]

I did. You said “No matter how you slice it or dress it up, Mark Carney is going to lose a lot of potential voters because of his soft launch on American TV.”

That was a pretty absolute statement. “Now matter how you slice it…” “is going to…” “a lot”.

I see that you basically walked it back as I was typing my reply- but I read what you originally actually wrote just fine. If you then realized you took a stronger position than you can defend and chose to walk it back, I can respect that.

It turned a lot of people off. Even Vassey and some other news commentators said it.

 

[brihard]

It turned a lot of people off. Even Vassey and some other news commentators said it.

No doubt Canadian TV personalities would be a bit butthurt about. I stand by what I said; undecided voters are likely looking for much meatier things than that to decide how to vote, whenever that should be.

 

[The Bread Guy]

... a pre-leadership-campaign TV spot won’t be a factor for voters as a whole. It’s just something partisans will make angry partisan noises about.

Lot of truth right there with my bit in yellow. People who I know are pumped are political junkies/nerds like myself, loving all the "insider baseball" details, sorta-kinda like much of the discussion in these parts. Even my Red partisan friends are just tweezing & hyping the differences, real and/or perceived, between the (pretty much) two front runners. Just to put a wild-ass guess figure to it (based on crowds in rooms I hang out in), that might be, say, 5-10% of the general electorate, at least those outside the party machines working on/voting for a leader.

As far as "who am I going to vote for?", most of the people I talk to who aren't tracking Team Red's Running of the Snakes as superfans (both Red & Blue) are still generally pissed at 1) economic conditions, 2) gun rules and/or 3) WTF's going to happen with POTUS47 (depending on the gang I'm hanging with - with overlap on those three factors as well).

While the leadership run "scouting assessments" may affect the superfans some, my guess is voters, as a group, will likely pay way more attention once it's down to PP versus Red's final choice. And when that happens, it'll be even more important for the leaders to be on their game because a pothole in a leadership run tends to play way less loudly than than a similar pothole in a campaign.

 

[ArmyRick]

Lot of truth right there with my bit in yellow. People who I know are pumped are political junkies/nerds like myself, loving all the "insider baseball" details, sorta-kinda like much of the discussion in these parts. Even my Red partisan friends are just tweezing & hyping the differences, real and/or perceived, between the (pretty much) two front runners. Just to put a wild-ass guess figure to it (based on crowds in rooms I hang out in), that might be, say, 5-10% of the general electorate, at least those outside the party machines working on/voting for a leader.

As far as "who am I going to vote for?", most of the people I talk to who aren't tracking Team Red's Running of the Snakes as superfans (both Red & Blue) are still generally pissed at 1) economic conditions, 2) gun rules and/or 3) WTF's going to happen with POTUS47 (depending on the gang I'm hanging with - with overlap on those three factors as well).

While the leadership run "scouting assessments" may affect the superfans some, my guess is voters, as a group, will likely pay way more attention once it's down to PP versus Red's final choice. And when that happens, it'll be even more important for the leaders to be on their game because a pothole in a leadership run tends to play way less loudly than than a similar pothole in a campaign.

It will be interesting to see if there will be any mudslinging between Freeland, Gould and Carney (Who knows? Bayliss may surprise us all yet with a few surprises). The mud will be carbon tax, economy, trade issues with USA, leaning to the center on everything and maybe defence spending? (Given the Russian-Ukraine war and the need to show Trump we can be strong)

Will that mudslinging carry over to the next election?

 

[Remius]

Whats your point here?

I am asking a question and no, don't accuse me of being all "ragey" or "angry". Why do you think they will actually hold on? I have seen lots of calls by people first thinking Trudeau will never step down (ohh look), he won't prorogue the government (he did), then add in the X factors that are unknown (What will Donald Trump do next?) and Jagmeet who can still pull a few slaps on the LPC (like not letting up on the house motion to produce documents).

Its a minority government, and it is NOT up to them to hold on. Its up to the opposition parties to decide the fate of the LPC. And I believe if Jagmeet smells blood in the water, there will be no deal.

Likely in regards to your suggestion that Singh might help bring down the gvt. I think he now has an excuse not to do that and will keep the LPC propped up until the summer session.

The NDP has no money to run an effective campaign right now.

 

[brihard]

It will be interesting to see if there will be any mudslinging between Freeland, Gould and Carney (Who knows? Bayliss may surprise us all yet with a few surprises). The mud will be carbon tax, economy, trade issues with USA, leaning to the center on everything and maybe defence spending? (Given the Russian-Ukraine war and the need to show Trump we can be strong)

Will that mudslinging carry over to the next election?

Yeah, fair question. Chucking any shit amongst themselves would come back to bite the winner and the party in the eventual election. This is also a very different campaign with a different audience than the general election. What they’re trying to sell is “I will give our party the best possible chance in the election”. That will be both overall electability, but also their likely degree of success in prolonging cooperation with the NDP and putting that election off to a future where they have hypothetically increased support- and the ability to earn that support.

Canadian politics have certainly never seen a leadership campaign like this one.

 

[MilEME09]

Whats your point here?

I am asking a question and no, don't accuse me of being all "ragey" or "angry". Why do you think they will actually hold on? I have seen lots of calls by people first thinking Trudeau will never step down (ohh look), he won't prorogue the government (he did), then add in the X factors that are unknown (What will Donald Trump do next?) and Jagmeet who can still pull a few slaps on the LPC (like not letting up on the house motion to produce documents).

Its a minority government, and it is NOT up to them to hold on. Its up to the opposition parties to decide the fate of the LPC. And I believe if Jagmeet smells blood in the water, there will be no deal.

The point is they actually need to survive 3 months not 6, and in a minority government situation it's upto the government to work with the opposition to pass legislation, and maintain the confidence of the house. While you are right the opposition parties ultimately decide the governments fate, it is the liberals who have to collaborate in order to chose their fate.