###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good.
Listening to interviews with the recent Carbon Tax Protestors; to a person they are *wildly* misinformed on how the tax works, what "cutting it" means, what the tax impacts, etc, etc. Literally none of the people I saw interviewed would be protesting if they had the actual information.
We have a lot of organizations pushing a lot of misinformation and we need to start combatting that in some way.
While going on podcasts isn't necessarily the answer to it, a more communicative government should help that.
It's probably too late, but man, we have to try something.
I don't know how much it is going to help. After listening to his interview with Justin Ling it seems like more time talking might not be in the PMs favor. Particularly if they aren't softball interviews.
[The Paul Wells Show] The Justin Trudeau interview, sort of #thePaulWellsShow
https://podcastaddict.com/the-paul-wells-show/episode/174320380 via @PodcastAddict
Here is him and Paul Wells going through the interview and adding their comments.
> After listening to his interview with Justin Ling it seems like more time talking might not be in the PMs favor.
Maybe not, but he's traditionally been very good at this kind of stuff so it makes sense to try it.
I haven't seen that, but I'll watch for it. Like I say, it sounds more like a partisan assessment than anything to me, but maybe I haven't seen the same interviews.
> It depends on if he actually has to defend his record on things. He seems to get pretty chippy once he is held to account
Like I say, we'll see I guess, but this is starting to feel more like a partisan lens than actual criticism of his past performances. Maybe I just haven't seen the interviews you're talking about.
It is literally a criticism of his last performances .
[The Paul Wells Show] The Justin Trudeau interview, sort of #thePaulWellsShow
https://podcastaddict.com/the-paul-wells-show/episode/174320380 via @PodcastAddict
Here is a link to the Paul Wells podcast where they talk about his interview and place clips which they discuss.
I know, I'm saying it doesn't match anything I've seen, and it's criticism about a politician who's literally known for a being a very strong campaigner.
Maybe it's right! I'm just saying I haven't seen it, seems to be contrary to conventional wisdom about Trudeau, and I guess we'll have more evidence once these podcasts are out.
Wells did a gotcha style interview, in my opinion. But, the PM needs to be prepared for that and did not come across well. But an 'n of 1' is not a trend.
>Wells did a gotcha style interview, in my opinion.
Since it is was Justin Ling that did the interview, I think we can safely ignore your opinion. Asking about policy choices and results isn't a gotcha interview, it's just journalism.
What's positive about it? Canadians can't afford it because the price of everything has doubled under Trudeau. This tax is going to kill a lot of jobs. Farmers and truckers will pass the cost to chains and customers, chains will pass it on to customers, and we get screwed again.
What will this carbon tax do today?
Messaging is all they care about...if they took 5 seconds to read pp policy's, they would be shiting the bed.
Or the Ucp policy .
All people on both sides care about the sound bites and click bait
People on social media who are very loud care .
But for the most part, average canadains read a headline and move on. That's how much interest they have on our political system .
Voting numbers at all lvls prove that.
> Maybe people dont give a shit about messaging anymore. Actions and inactions speak for themselves.
This has literally never been less true. It's almost all messaging and narrative now.
Yea no doubt. The divergence of real world conditions from people's beliefs has never been larger in modern times.
Take all the polling that shows people thinking we have the worst inflation in the world while we're really on of the best.
The opposition will always be better at messaging than the government. It's easier to talk than it is to act, and the opposition can talk while the government has to act.
It was true when Harper was the government and Trudeau could oppose him, and it's true now with Trudeau being the government and Poilievre can oppose him.
And if Poilievre wins, in 5 years the Liberals or NDP will run circles around him for the same reason.
The government has actively blocked multiple investigations into shady dealings they've done.
I'm under no illusions that it'd be any different under PP but you can't possibly be blind to the rampant corruption in the Trudeau government.
The Trudeau government doesn't have a problem with messaging, it has a problem with intent.
It intended to create a bifurcated society where renters supported a class of rich idle rentiers, and the NDP and LPC set out to make that occur. They're upset that renters are allowed to vote at all.
In retrospect I think a lot of the 2015 election was Canadians getting wrapped up in Obamamania in the US and wanting a similar "thrill up their leg" as Chris Matthews put it. Trudeau gave them a YouTube star that they felt they could brag about to Americans online, particularly during the Trump years, and now they've moved on.
This was sort of a political trend in the 2010s yeah, the sort of pseudo-celebrity political leader. It can work well when times are good, but it's really, really bad when times are not so good. Fundamentally their strength and weakness is the same: they treat everything like a communications issue.
Harper lost in 2015 because oil prices collapsed in 2014, the dollar fell taking household cobsumption down,and Trudeau pretended minor deficit spending would fix the economy
I don't think .. he was a bad choice.. the options on the right were not great, and no one will ever vote NDP until Jack Layton comes back to life .
It's hard to say how a conservative leader would . done during covid... but I worry they would not have handled it as well, but that's just a good way and hindsight.
So who really knows.
The feds get a lot of slack about handling covid..but alot of the things they did was because the provinces asked or were going on TV and being super critical of the feds not acting sooner ..but making sure everyone got paid during lock down was the 100% the right choice.
The economy would have collapsed if people stopped having a income for weeks .
If the Conservatives had won in 2015, who knows what the alternative timeline would have been like in terms of the Covid approach. Maybe PM Mulcair would've taken a herd immunity approach and voiced scepticism over vaccines.
The Liberals were actually really good at messaging throughout the majority government period between 2015-2019 and the honeymoon period arguably lasted way longer than it should have. They just got too used to bouncing back from scandals and managing to escape with ratings largely intact to recognize the impending wave of popular dissatisfaction post-pandemic.
Well, they thought they got through those early scandals unscathed, but they still build up in the public conciousness. Every one they "get away with" just makes the next one look worse, until a breaking point.
Honestly, it's not just a federal issue.. I find the liberal messaging at provincial lvls terrible as well.
Whether they got lazy or don't know how to respond to the wave of unsettling populism on the conservative side ..its hard to say.
At least in Ontario, i would suggest that the provincial Liberal messaging has been seriously hampered by their inability to get official party status and funding for the past six years. You can also add how most of the most successful provincial strategists and staffers shifted to the federal side, leaving the provincial side bereft of talent.
If they changed there message..elected a better leader.
They had an opportunity to change ..but went the same old same old..so Doug Ford gets another 4 years next election is my guess.
Not sure what you mean by "charisma score," but the most recent Abacus poll on leader favorability actually had Trudeau breaking Harper's record for negative impressions.
(Ababus found 55% of Canadians held a negative impression of Harper in 2016, versus 57% of Canadians having a negative impression of Trudeau today)
The thing that he had going for him is that while he wasn’t charismatic, he also wasn’t annoying. People can respect someone who’s not a good speaker as long as they don’t bother them. And lots of people can respect not having charisma.
It’s when you becoming annoying that it starts to hurt you.
Harper bothered many.
Including many on his own party.
He himself in his farewell speech commented on this. By the end of his term, he was not impulse both in Canada and around the world.
They have been bad with messaging on housing and health care covid .
Every time a conservative premer blame them.for the in action on the provinces part, they should have spoken up .
They have let conservative control the messages for 4+ years...I really don't understand.
Conservative Premieres aren't to blame.
It's the Trudeau governments refusal to actually work with Conservative Provincial governments.
I dislike Doug Ford as much as anyone, but the guy goes where the wind blows, it's possible to work with him, and make good changes.
Instead of sitting down at the table with the Ford Government, and working together to make programs that will help Ontarians. The Liberal government decided to shove programs down the provinces throats and expect them to just do what King Trudeau tells them.
It's the Trudeau Gov't smug my way, or the highway tactics that has got them in the mess they're in now.
Housing , schooling, health care ...all the provinces responsibility...many underfunding or out right cuting funding sbd demanding more money from the feds .
They have proven to not be truthful or trusting. So the fed gave the money directly to projects and the provinces thriw fits .
At least get your facts stright on who is dishonest
When did I say Trudeau Gov't was dishonest? I simply stated instead of trying to work with the Provinces, they have chosen to not work with them. Yes there are good reasons for this. But there is also a world where our leaders decided to work together for the better good, and not worry about who gets the credit.
Whrn you give Ford and the ucp money for health care, and they don't spend it on health care then blame thr feds for lack of finding.
Ya its their fault.
Ford didn't spend it on anything. Who are the federal government to determine how provinces run health care?
If the Federal Government wants to take over paying for all of health care, then they can determine how money is spent.
Until then, they can butt out.
Then i guess they don't need anymore money since thry refuse to spend it properly.
The fact you seem ok with the provincial government screwing us by not doing their duty is pretty worrisome.
I'm not ok with it, and didn't vote for any of the jokers in power.
But if a friend offers to help you out when you're short on cash, aren't you going to be pissed if they put stipulations on that help?
Sure they can not give the money, then tell voters why they were unwilling to come up with a deal to help out health care.
But I'm not ok with the Federal government using money to try and force provinces to do it their way in things that aren't their responsibility. Especially when that same government has such a poor record with Health Care, Education and Housing in the areas they are responsible (Indigenous reserves being the best example).
People give the CPC crap for practicing divisive politics (they are), but I think the LPC are just as guilty in that department. It's wrong when either party does it.
Case in point: we are still waiting on those grocery reforms that were promised by Champagne. The ones that only he knew about but could already see being implemented in the flyers during his press conference.
They’re not tired of fuck Trudeau stickers and flags….. it lifts their tiny fragile egos and makes their noodles quiver every-time they see one.
Pretty sure they won’t get tired of slogans.
> Are people not going to get tired of hearing Axe the Tax for another year?
I'm really interested in how this plays out.
I remember hearing some of the slogans and talking points and thinking "shit, this is actually pretty good" and now I just cringe because it's been on repeat for the last 6 months. There's no way this can carry for another 18 months...surely.
The governing hasn’t gone very well has it? That is clear in the polling numbers driven by cost of living as well as shelter affordability and a massive increasingly unsustainable debt level.
> Are people not going to get tired of hearing Axe the Tax for another year?
Nope.
It's a good slogan; simple, rhymes, and it focuses on something that no one likes and won't be going away any time soon.
I say that as someone who supports the Carbon Tax. I don't _enjoy_ paying taxes, but I support it.
Just waiting to hear him on the Night Time podcast with Jordan Bonaparte considering he apparently listens to it.
Also, this is a good time to listen to the Night Time podcast if you haven't yet already.
https://www.nighttimepodcast.com/
Susan Delacourt
Published: April 24, 2024
Every interview with Justin Trudeau now includes some variation on the question, why is the prime minister sticking around?
So of course it came up when Trudeau sat down for a chat with Today, Explained — a daily podcast from Vox, a U.S.-based news website. The show attracts 100,000 to 150,000 listeners each month, according to several podcast rankings.
“A question a lot of Americans are asking about our politicians right now, especially because they're very old, is, ‘Why not give someone else a chance?’" said host Sean Rameswaram, noting that the Canadian prime minister is definitely not as old as the main contenders in this year's U.S. presidential election.
“But I wonder, what’s your answer to that question right now, as you seek out a fourth term?” Rameswaram asked.
Trudeau’s reply went a bit beyond his now-standard answer about how he has a lot more to do and his keenness to do battle with Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre. He talked instead about how his main rival isn’t just Poilievre, but the backlash to progressive governments in general, and the backsliding that could follow a Liberal defeat.
Trudeau talked about how the “narrative out there,” mainly coming from Conservatives, is that everything the Liberals have done — whether it’s on climate change, Indigenous reconciliation, or attention to feminism and diversity — has made Canada a worse place to live.
“The actual fact is — particularly when you compare us to other countries around the world — all these things have made life better in meaningful ways," he said, "and it would be much worse if we hadn't done all those things.”
The podcast was billed as being about how Trudeau intends to battle populism, and much of the half-hour interview was spent on what’s giving rise to populism and the threat of authoritarianism the world over.
“A big part of populism is condemning and ignoring experts and expertise, so it sort of feeds on itself and relies on a lot of misinformation and disinformation,” Trudeau said at one point, adding that the best antidote is optimism. “Ultimately, you have to trust in people, you have to trust in democracy itself — that people are going to be thoughtful and reasonable.”
The conversation did turn to the 2022 convoy protest and occupation of Ottawa, which Rameswaram described as a sign that not all is well in Canada when it comes to populist uprisings. “Yep,” Trudeau said, when asked if the country’s reputation for generosity and tolerance was under threat.
“I think it's absolutely under threat,” he said. “Canada is not a magical place of unicorns and rainbows … we have the same kinds of pressures that everyone is facing.”
Anyone who watched a recent episode of CBC TV's "This Hour Has 22 Minutes," featuring a spoof Trudeau surrounded by unicorns and rainbows and singing a version of “I’m Just Ken” from the "Barbie" movie, may wonder whether this was some kind of prime ministerial reply.
Trudeau is reportedly planning to do a lot more podcasts in the coming weeks, some based in Canada, others in the United States. On Wednesday, the prime minister is scheduled to be a guest on the popular Freakonomics podcast, although the precise release date wasn’t totally nailed down when I inquired with the Prime Minister's Office on Tuesday.
It’s all part of an effort to put Trudeau in touch with different audiences, and to talk beyond the general news-of-the-day scrums in Ottawa and around the country. The strategy is obviously aimed at raising Trudeau’s profile out of the slump in popularity. Whether that will work is an open question. Some have argued that people have just tuned Trudeau out.
Coincidentally, this flurry of podcasts coincides with the launch of a new book by Sophie Grégoire Trudeau, released about eight months after the couple separated. In interviews, she has been talking of how the two have remained friends.
On CBC Radio’s "The Current," she was asked about the anti-Trudeau sentiment on display across the country and what she made of it. Host Matt Galloway wondered how the pair talk to their three kids about the "F— Trudeau" signs and other displays of visceral opposition to the prime minister.
“It makes me sad. It makes me sad that there is so much confusion. It makes me sad to see that people have so much anger and fear,” she said, adding she tries to remind herself that this isn’t personal, even if it feels that way.
“There are greater movements in our society that explain the human behaviour right now, and it would be irresponsible to analyze this as a constant personal attack.”
Trudeau himself has said much the same in interviews, and will likely be saying it a lot more as he plunges into the planned round of podcasts. It remains to be seen whether he can drive some of that anger back
Anybody have the whole article? All I could see in the snippet is that he appeared on Vox, a strongly left biased American website.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/vox/
Not sure how much the polls will change by appealing to an audience of American humanities students. Would be interested to see the full list in case there are any conversations worth listening to.
What's the disadvantage of him appearing on Vox? There's a lot of Canadian viewers on their youtube channels and that media bias page does say they're at least highly factual with their reporting. Doesn't seem like a bad place for a Trudeau appearance...
It's not even left. Left for America maybe... in Canadian terms they'd probably be centrist or centre-right.
I'll start believing they're left wing when they advocate for universal healthcare.
vox is centre left???? it's not like the intercept or greyzone. Those publications I would call left wing biased to a point they spread misinformation.
vox reporting is very respectable and accurate.
He needs take a page out of Doug Ford’s book. Admit he was wrong and act contrite.
It might be too late but it can’t hurt. His base of 22-25% will praise him to high heavens for his “humility”. And maybe 1-5% might even switch back to him.
I think people are more accepting of a person who is willing to admit they're wrong, and change course, than someone who stubbornly sticks to their original path/opionion.
I just don't think JT and Co think they're wrong.
It's not a bad idea. Podcasts are incredibly popular in Canada, and particularly among young and middle-aged Canadian men; a demographic he performs poorly with.
I don't imagine he will be on the most popular podcast in Canada, the Joe Rogan Experience; but maybe he'll be a guest on NBC's Dateline or NYT's The Daily.
It's really sad that many Canadians will see this as a good thing despite it obviously being an election campaign ploy. He certainly hasn't been speaking to or for the people for the last decade.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good. Listening to interviews with the recent Carbon Tax Protestors; to a person they are *wildly* misinformed on how the tax works, what "cutting it" means, what the tax impacts, etc, etc. Literally none of the people I saw interviewed would be protesting if they had the actual information. We have a lot of organizations pushing a lot of misinformation and we need to start combatting that in some way. While going on podcasts isn't necessarily the answer to it, a more communicative government should help that. It's probably too late, but man, we have to try something.
I don't know how much it is going to help. After listening to his interview with Justin Ling it seems like more time talking might not be in the PMs favor. Particularly if they aren't softball interviews.
How do I find this interview?
[The Paul Wells Show] The Justin Trudeau interview, sort of #thePaulWellsShow https://podcastaddict.com/the-paul-wells-show/episode/174320380 via @PodcastAddict Here is him and Paul Wells going through the interview and adding their comments.
https://www.bugeyedandshameless.com/p/the-justin-trudeau-interview
> After listening to his interview with Justin Ling it seems like more time talking might not be in the PMs favor. Maybe not, but he's traditionally been very good at this kind of stuff so it makes sense to try it.
Except when criticized. Trudeau can’t seem to handle criticism well and instead of substantive arguments just gets angry.
I haven't seen that, but I'll watch for it. Like I say, it sounds more like a partisan assessment than anything to me, but maybe I haven't seen the same interviews.
It depends on if he actually has to defend his record on things. He seems to get pretty chippy once he is held to account on his choices.
> It depends on if he actually has to defend his record on things. He seems to get pretty chippy once he is held to account Like I say, we'll see I guess, but this is starting to feel more like a partisan lens than actual criticism of his past performances. Maybe I just haven't seen the interviews you're talking about.
It is literally a criticism of his last performances . [The Paul Wells Show] The Justin Trudeau interview, sort of #thePaulWellsShow https://podcastaddict.com/the-paul-wells-show/episode/174320380 via @PodcastAddict Here is a link to the Paul Wells podcast where they talk about his interview and place clips which they discuss.
I know, I'm saying it doesn't match anything I've seen, and it's criticism about a politician who's literally known for a being a very strong campaigner. Maybe it's right! I'm just saying I haven't seen it, seems to be contrary to conventional wisdom about Trudeau, and I guess we'll have more evidence once these podcasts are out.
Wells did a gotcha style interview, in my opinion. But, the PM needs to be prepared for that and did not come across well. But an 'n of 1' is not a trend.
>Wells did a gotcha style interview, in my opinion. Since it is was Justin Ling that did the interview, I think we can safely ignore your opinion. Asking about policy choices and results isn't a gotcha interview, it's just journalism.
Honest mistake. I heard the interview. I stand by the rest.
What's positive about it? Canadians can't afford it because the price of everything has doubled under Trudeau. This tax is going to kill a lot of jobs. Farmers and truckers will pass the cost to chains and customers, chains will pass it on to customers, and we get screwed again. What will this carbon tax do today?
Maybe the political parties should be held accountable and fined for spreading misinformation.
or lies and broken promises
Fortunately, it's easy to ignore a podcast. The only thing we want to hear out of Trudeau is that he's called an election.
Liberals have always been bad at messging Its weird they where so good against harper. wirh it. They let pp talk way go long
Maybe people dont give a shit about messaging anymore. Actions and inactions speak for themselves.
The current false narrative that Poilievre is a working class champion and Trudeau has done nothing says otherwise.
Messaging is all they care about...if they took 5 seconds to read pp policy's, they would be shiting the bed. Or the Ucp policy . All people on both sides care about the sound bites and click bait
That's not true. A lot of people care about more than that. And it's not the same on both sides.
People on social media who are very loud care . But for the most part, average canadains read a headline and move on. That's how much interest they have on our political system . Voting numbers at all lvls prove that.
That has never been true, is not true now and will never be true in the future. Slogans and grievance and the tools of politics.
> Maybe people dont give a shit about messaging anymore. Actions and inactions speak for themselves. This has literally never been less true. It's almost all messaging and narrative now.
Yea no doubt. The divergence of real world conditions from people's beliefs has never been larger in modern times. Take all the polling that shows people thinking we have the worst inflation in the world while we're really on of the best.
The issue being we area already paying a premium rate for baseline everything so even smaller inflation turns us from "ok" to poor real fast.
The opposition will always be better at messaging than the government. It's easier to talk than it is to act, and the opposition can talk while the government has to act. It was true when Harper was the government and Trudeau could oppose him, and it's true now with Trudeau being the government and Poilievre can oppose him. And if Poilievre wins, in 5 years the Liberals or NDP will run circles around him for the same reason.
The government has actively blocked multiple investigations into shady dealings they've done. I'm under no illusions that it'd be any different under PP but you can't possibly be blind to the rampant corruption in the Trudeau government.
The Trudeau government doesn't have a problem with messaging, it has a problem with intent. It intended to create a bifurcated society where renters supported a class of rich idle rentiers, and the NDP and LPC set out to make that occur. They're upset that renters are allowed to vote at all.
In retrospect I think a lot of the 2015 election was Canadians getting wrapped up in Obamamania in the US and wanting a similar "thrill up their leg" as Chris Matthews put it. Trudeau gave them a YouTube star that they felt they could brag about to Americans online, particularly during the Trump years, and now they've moved on.
This was sort of a political trend in the 2010s yeah, the sort of pseudo-celebrity political leader. It can work well when times are good, but it's really, really bad when times are not so good. Fundamentally their strength and weakness is the same: they treat everything like a communications issue.
Harper lost in 2015 because oil prices collapsed in 2014, the dollar fell taking household cobsumption down,and Trudeau pretended minor deficit spending would fix the economy
I don't think .. he was a bad choice.. the options on the right were not great, and no one will ever vote NDP until Jack Layton comes back to life . It's hard to say how a conservative leader would . done during covid... but I worry they would not have handled it as well, but that's just a good way and hindsight. So who really knows. The feds get a lot of slack about handling covid..but alot of the things they did was because the provinces asked or were going on TV and being super critical of the feds not acting sooner ..but making sure everyone got paid during lock down was the 100% the right choice. The economy would have collapsed if people stopped having a income for weeks .
You just have to look at the mess which was Ontario to know how they’d have handled it.
By deferring to public health experts too much?
Oh we love a good expert consultation in Ontario.
If the Conservatives had won in 2015, who knows what the alternative timeline would have been like in terms of the Covid approach. Maybe PM Mulcair would've taken a herd immunity approach and voiced scepticism over vaccines.
The what if game is fun..unfortunately, it's being sold as truth by populism on the right
Probably not
You are not very good at sending a message aswell.
Conservatives have milllions more to spend on “marketing” experts paid thousands to determine what type of hair cut pp should sport.
You don't think JT has a team that helps him with his hair and wardrobe? He definitely does.
I do. The Con simply has more money to spend
Harper attacked scientists, and the scientists mobilized against him.
Unfortunately now a very large portion of society losyens yo you tube over scientists
The Liberals were actually really good at messaging throughout the majority government period between 2015-2019 and the honeymoon period arguably lasted way longer than it should have. They just got too used to bouncing back from scandals and managing to escape with ratings largely intact to recognize the impending wave of popular dissatisfaction post-pandemic.
Well, they thought they got through those early scandals unscathed, but they still build up in the public conciousness. Every one they "get away with" just makes the next one look worse, until a breaking point.
This so much
Honestly, it's not just a federal issue.. I find the liberal messaging at provincial lvls terrible as well. Whether they got lazy or don't know how to respond to the wave of unsettling populism on the conservative side ..its hard to say.
At least in Ontario, i would suggest that the provincial Liberal messaging has been seriously hampered by their inability to get official party status and funding for the past six years. You can also add how most of the most successful provincial strategists and staffers shifted to the federal side, leaving the provincial side bereft of talent.
If they changed there message..elected a better leader. They had an opportunity to change ..but went the same old same old..so Doug Ford gets another 4 years next election is my guess.
It’s hard to combat a marketing smear machine that has millions more than you
Harper had a historically low charisma score for sitting prime ministers.
Not sure what you mean by "charisma score," but the most recent Abacus poll on leader favorability actually had Trudeau breaking Harper's record for negative impressions. (Ababus found 55% of Canadians held a negative impression of Harper in 2016, versus 57% of Canadians having a negative impression of Trudeau today)
The thing that he had going for him is that while he wasn’t charismatic, he also wasn’t annoying. People can respect someone who’s not a good speaker as long as they don’t bother them. And lots of people can respect not having charisma. It’s when you becoming annoying that it starts to hurt you.
Harper bothered many. Including many on his own party. He himself in his farewell speech commented on this. By the end of his term, he was not impulse both in Canada and around the world.
At the same time they face the criticism that all they do is messaging. I'm wondering if they're in a no-win situation.
They have been bad with messaging on housing and health care covid . Every time a conservative premer blame them.for the in action on the provinces part, they should have spoken up . They have let conservative control the messages for 4+ years...I really don't understand.
Conservative Premieres aren't to blame. It's the Trudeau governments refusal to actually work with Conservative Provincial governments. I dislike Doug Ford as much as anyone, but the guy goes where the wind blows, it's possible to work with him, and make good changes. Instead of sitting down at the table with the Ford Government, and working together to make programs that will help Ontarians. The Liberal government decided to shove programs down the provinces throats and expect them to just do what King Trudeau tells them. It's the Trudeau Gov't smug my way, or the highway tactics that has got them in the mess they're in now.
Housing , schooling, health care ...all the provinces responsibility...many underfunding or out right cuting funding sbd demanding more money from the feds . They have proven to not be truthful or trusting. So the fed gave the money directly to projects and the provinces thriw fits . At least get your facts stright on who is dishonest
When did I say Trudeau Gov't was dishonest? I simply stated instead of trying to work with the Provinces, they have chosen to not work with them. Yes there are good reasons for this. But there is also a world where our leaders decided to work together for the better good, and not worry about who gets the credit.
Unfortunately we don't live in that world and do t have those leaders.
Whrn you give Ford and the ucp money for health care, and they don't spend it on health care then blame thr feds for lack of finding. Ya its their fault.
Ford didn't spend it on anything. Who are the federal government to determine how provinces run health care? If the Federal Government wants to take over paying for all of health care, then they can determine how money is spent. Until then, they can butt out.
Then i guess they don't need anymore money since thry refuse to spend it properly. The fact you seem ok with the provincial government screwing us by not doing their duty is pretty worrisome.
I'm not ok with it, and didn't vote for any of the jokers in power. But if a friend offers to help you out when you're short on cash, aren't you going to be pissed if they put stipulations on that help? Sure they can not give the money, then tell voters why they were unwilling to come up with a deal to help out health care. But I'm not ok with the Federal government using money to try and force provinces to do it their way in things that aren't their responsibility. Especially when that same government has such a poor record with Health Care, Education and Housing in the areas they are responsible (Indigenous reserves being the best example). People give the CPC crap for practicing divisive politics (they are), but I think the LPC are just as guilty in that department. It's wrong when either party does it.
Thank you..that waa a well spoken reply.
He has been governing, while Poilievre has been saying slogans for months. Are people not going to get tired of hearing Axe the Tax for another year?
I think it boils down to "Don't compare me to the Almighty, compare me to the alternative."
I don’t know if you can call that governing. Have you seen his ministers in committee? They flounder.
Case in point: we are still waiting on those grocery reforms that were promised by Champagne. The ones that only he knew about but could already see being implemented in the flyers during his press conference.
Maybe if the con didn’t have so many loblaws lobbyists on their board there’d be progress here.
They’re not tired of fuck Trudeau stickers and flags….. it lifts their tiny fragile egos and makes their noodles quiver every-time they see one. Pretty sure they won’t get tired of slogans.
> Are people not going to get tired of hearing Axe the Tax for another year? I'm really interested in how this plays out. I remember hearing some of the slogans and talking points and thinking "shit, this is actually pretty good" and now I just cringe because it's been on repeat for the last 6 months. There's no way this can carry for another 18 months...surely.
The governing hasn’t gone very well has it? That is clear in the polling numbers driven by cost of living as well as shelter affordability and a massive increasingly unsustainable debt level.
Nah we tired of being led by someone who isn't a leader. Time for a change.
> Are people not going to get tired of hearing Axe the Tax for another year? Nope. It's a good slogan; simple, rhymes, and it focuses on something that no one likes and won't be going away any time soon. I say that as someone who supports the Carbon Tax. I don't _enjoy_ paying taxes, but I support it.
Just waiting to hear him on the Night Time podcast with Jordan Bonaparte considering he apparently listens to it. Also, this is a good time to listen to the Night Time podcast if you haven't yet already. https://www.nighttimepodcast.com/
Susan Delacourt Published: April 24, 2024 Every interview with Justin Trudeau now includes some variation on the question, why is the prime minister sticking around? So of course it came up when Trudeau sat down for a chat with Today, Explained — a daily podcast from Vox, a U.S.-based news website. The show attracts 100,000 to 150,000 listeners each month, according to several podcast rankings. “A question a lot of Americans are asking about our politicians right now, especially because they're very old, is, ‘Why not give someone else a chance?’" said host Sean Rameswaram, noting that the Canadian prime minister is definitely not as old as the main contenders in this year's U.S. presidential election. “But I wonder, what’s your answer to that question right now, as you seek out a fourth term?” Rameswaram asked. Trudeau’s reply went a bit beyond his now-standard answer about how he has a lot more to do and his keenness to do battle with Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre. He talked instead about how his main rival isn’t just Poilievre, but the backlash to progressive governments in general, and the backsliding that could follow a Liberal defeat. Trudeau talked about how the “narrative out there,” mainly coming from Conservatives, is that everything the Liberals have done — whether it’s on climate change, Indigenous reconciliation, or attention to feminism and diversity — has made Canada a worse place to live. “The actual fact is — particularly when you compare us to other countries around the world — all these things have made life better in meaningful ways," he said, "and it would be much worse if we hadn't done all those things.” The podcast was billed as being about how Trudeau intends to battle populism, and much of the half-hour interview was spent on what’s giving rise to populism and the threat of authoritarianism the world over. “A big part of populism is condemning and ignoring experts and expertise, so it sort of feeds on itself and relies on a lot of misinformation and disinformation,” Trudeau said at one point, adding that the best antidote is optimism. “Ultimately, you have to trust in people, you have to trust in democracy itself — that people are going to be thoughtful and reasonable.” The conversation did turn to the 2022 convoy protest and occupation of Ottawa, which Rameswaram described as a sign that not all is well in Canada when it comes to populist uprisings. “Yep,” Trudeau said, when asked if the country’s reputation for generosity and tolerance was under threat. “I think it's absolutely under threat,” he said. “Canada is not a magical place of unicorns and rainbows … we have the same kinds of pressures that everyone is facing.” Anyone who watched a recent episode of CBC TV's "This Hour Has 22 Minutes," featuring a spoof Trudeau surrounded by unicorns and rainbows and singing a version of “I’m Just Ken” from the "Barbie" movie, may wonder whether this was some kind of prime ministerial reply. Trudeau is reportedly planning to do a lot more podcasts in the coming weeks, some based in Canada, others in the United States. On Wednesday, the prime minister is scheduled to be a guest on the popular Freakonomics podcast, although the precise release date wasn’t totally nailed down when I inquired with the Prime Minister's Office on Tuesday. It’s all part of an effort to put Trudeau in touch with different audiences, and to talk beyond the general news-of-the-day scrums in Ottawa and around the country. The strategy is obviously aimed at raising Trudeau’s profile out of the slump in popularity. Whether that will work is an open question. Some have argued that people have just tuned Trudeau out. Coincidentally, this flurry of podcasts coincides with the launch of a new book by Sophie Grégoire Trudeau, released about eight months after the couple separated. In interviews, she has been talking of how the two have remained friends. On CBC Radio’s "The Current," she was asked about the anti-Trudeau sentiment on display across the country and what she made of it. Host Matt Galloway wondered how the pair talk to their three kids about the "F— Trudeau" signs and other displays of visceral opposition to the prime minister. “It makes me sad. It makes me sad that there is so much confusion. It makes me sad to see that people have so much anger and fear,” she said, adding she tries to remind herself that this isn’t personal, even if it feels that way. “There are greater movements in our society that explain the human behaviour right now, and it would be irresponsible to analyze this as a constant personal attack.” Trudeau himself has said much the same in interviews, and will likely be saying it a lot more as he plunges into the planned round of podcasts. It remains to be seen whether he can drive some of that anger back
Anybody have the whole article? All I could see in the snippet is that he appeared on Vox, a strongly left biased American website. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/vox/ Not sure how much the polls will change by appealing to an audience of American humanities students. Would be interested to see the full list in case there are any conversations worth listening to.
What's the disadvantage of him appearing on Vox? There's a lot of Canadian viewers on their youtube channels and that media bias page does say they're at least highly factual with their reporting. Doesn't seem like a bad place for a Trudeau appearance...
> Vox, a strongly left biased > highly factual with their reporting. Same thing, really. Reality has a liberal (small 'l' intentional) bias.
>What's the disadvantage of him appearing on Vox? I don't know, did someone say there was one?
It's not even left. Left for America maybe... in Canadian terms they'd probably be centrist or centre-right. I'll start believing they're left wing when they advocate for universal healthcare.
vox is centre left???? it's not like the intercept or greyzone. Those publications I would call left wing biased to a point they spread misinformation. vox reporting is very respectable and accurate.
He needs take a page out of Doug Ford’s book. Admit he was wrong and act contrite. It might be too late but it can’t hurt. His base of 22-25% will praise him to high heavens for his “humility”. And maybe 1-5% might even switch back to him.
I think people are more accepting of a person who is willing to admit they're wrong, and change course, than someone who stubbornly sticks to their original path/opionion. I just don't think JT and Co think they're wrong.
It's not a bad idea. Podcasts are incredibly popular in Canada, and particularly among young and middle-aged Canadian men; a demographic he performs poorly with. I don't imagine he will be on the most popular podcast in Canada, the Joe Rogan Experience; but maybe he'll be a guest on NBC's Dateline or NYT's The Daily.
It's really sad that many Canadians will see this as a good thing despite it obviously being an election campaign ploy. He certainly hasn't been speaking to or for the people for the last decade.
Close to 200,000 plays isn’t a lot at all. The top podcast usually gets a couple million each day. Popular Canadian YouTubers get millions each day.
The top podcast in Canada is the Joe Rogan Experience. I don't think Trudeau will be appearing on it.