The Candice Malcolm Show - Legacy Media bias EXPOSED by Juno News analysis. You’ll never guess the worst offender!

00:00:00.000 Hi, I'm Candice Malcolm, and this is The Candice Malcolm Show. I hope everyone had a wonderful

00:00:06.700 long weekend. I don't usually take long weekends off unless they're like religious holidays,

00:00:11.360 but given that Easter happened during the election, we didn't really take any time off

00:00:15.340 around here at Geno News. I took the day with my family, and I have to say I'm feeling

00:00:19.060 very refreshed and energized to start the week, and great to be back with you. Now,

00:00:23.240 folks, you know this, and I know this. The legacy media is lying to you. They are lying to you.

00:00:28.120 They are pretending that they are neutral, that they are the arbiters of facts and the truth,

00:00:32.400 but they're not. And so we decided here at Geno News to do an analysis. We actually worked with

00:00:37.640 ChatGPT, which is an AI search engine, and had ChatGPT analyze all of the news stories by the

00:00:44.520 legacy media during the election and assign them a score. And I'm going to walk you through this

00:00:49.720 report today on the show, and you will be surprised. I was surprised by who the worst offender, who the

00:00:54.700 absolute worst, most biased media outlet is in Canada. We're going to get to that very shortly.

00:01:00.200 First, I am pleased to be joined for this episode by my friend Hamish Marshall. Hamish is a director

00:01:05.180 at One Persuasion, which is a polling company and a government relations firm based in Ontario.

00:01:11.260 He was our in-house pollster during the 2021 federal election. Before that, in 2019, he was the national

00:01:17.640 campaign manager for the Conservative Party, and he ran Andrew Scheer's winning leadership campaign.

00:01:22.580 This time around, we had his colleague, David Murray, also of One Persuasion, as our in-house

00:01:28.560 pollster. And I know we all very much enjoy having David's insights during the campaign. But

00:01:33.420 Hamish, it's great to have you back on the show. How are you?

00:01:36.660 It's great to be here. Fantastic. It was nice to take the long weekend away with the kids as well.

00:01:41.000 Great. Well, I want to walk through this report that we just put out at Geno News because I think it

00:01:46.820 tells us what we all knew, which is that the media lies to us. The media is biased. And so I'll just

00:01:51.720 explain what we did. We worked with the search engine, the AI search engine, chat GPT, and had

00:01:56.540 them look at every single article that was published by the legacy media throughout the course of the

00:02:01.300 campaign. And we had them assign a score. So they looked at the stories that focused on Mark Carney.

00:02:06.920 And if the story was very favorable to Mark Carney, he got a plus two. If it was somewhat favorable,

00:02:12.460 plus one. If it was neutral, zero. And then if it was critical, they got minus one and very

00:02:17.840 critical, minus two. And so and then they did the same thing for Pierre Polyev. So first,

00:02:23.200 I'll talk about CTV. CTV came in third place, the third worst offender in our list here. And overall,

00:02:29.840 looking at all the stories in the campaign, Carney had a score of plus three, whereas Polyev had a

00:02:36.660 negative nine. So you could just tell just from that that Polyev was viewed much more negatively by

00:02:42.800 CTV. Carney much more positively plus three. Second place, second worst offender was CBC. And this

00:02:49.180 may surprise you. I would have assumed that they were the worst, but they're not. They're the second

00:02:52.240 worst. So they had Carney, Mark Carney plus five and Pierre Polyev negative 11. I don't think that

00:02:58.860 would surprise anyone that Polyev was painted in a negative light for more, more often than not. In

00:03:04.060 fact, when we looked at the stories, we couldn't find any examples of positive, of very positive

00:03:08.400 coverage of Pierre Polyev. But the worst offender, Hamish, was the Globe and Mail. The Globe and Mail,

00:03:14.940 they're seen as the national newspaper record in Canada, like to put themselves as being, you know,

00:03:19.800 honest, sincere journalists. But they had Mark Carney at plus nine and Pierre Polyev at negative 15,

00:03:25.920 which was the biggest delta, the biggest difference, the most negative coverage. So Canadians that are

00:03:31.480 consuming their news from these outlets, I would say these are probably the biggest, the most popular

00:03:35.820 one, CBC, CTV on television. And then the Globe and Mail is still probably the most read newspaper

00:03:40.780 in Canada. All of them would have given you a very negative impression of Pierre Polyev, positive of

00:03:47.620 Mark Carney. What do you make of that? Well, I mean, I'm not entirely shocked. I would have thought the

00:03:52.300 CBC would be worse as well. But the Globe and Mail, Mark Carney is the Globe and Mail's sort of liberal.

00:03:58.360 You know, he hearkens, he presents himself, of course, as this pragmatic, business-friendly liberal,

00:04:03.040 and not the eco-radical that it's pretty clear from his book that he is. So he's a sort of liberal

00:04:09.420 that they would have loved to support. And I think we can see in the in the in these figures that have

00:04:13.480 come out that that's clearly where the mind's at. The thing that maybe helped the CBC not get the

00:04:18.720 worst place prize was that what I found in the election is if there was a story that was bad

00:04:23.200 about Carney, something had happened, he had to fire a candidate or something objectively bad happened,

00:04:27.200 the CBC just wouldn't cover it. So they wouldn't even write a story that was but they wouldn't try to

00:04:31.120 make a bad story look a bit better or put a positive spin on it. They just simply wouldn't

00:04:35.340 mention it at all. So I wonder how much that had an impact on making the CBC not appear quite as bad

00:04:41.040 as the Globe and Mail. Well, I think that there's also been like a decade of preconditioning for the

00:04:46.320 CBC or probably longer, right? But the one thing I noticed throughout the entire Trump era, the first

00:04:51.740 time around his first presidency, was that the CBC lead story would always be Trump related. Like it

00:04:56.780 didn't matter how big of a scandal Justin Trudeau had gotten himself into, how horrible, something

00:05:01.500 horrible that he had done for our country. The lead story on the national news for CBC was always

00:05:06.380 orange man bad, Trump terrible. So you're right, in some ways it's like they don't even need to cover

00:05:10.880 the Canadian election in a certain way. It's just the choice of what stories they cover. And I'm sure

00:05:15.720 that that happened during this campaign where they were, you know, lead story was something horrible

00:05:20.000 about Donald Trump, which would make Canadians who were watching feel fearful without even

00:05:25.140 mentioning the Canadian election. And this is something that we have. And so overall, we did

00:05:30.040 something called the tilt scoreboard. And so this is a number from one to 10. So if you're a one,

00:05:34.980 you were tilting heavily towards Mark Carney. If you were a 10, you would have been tilting heavily

00:05:39.620 towards Pierre Polyev. A five would be neutral. The Globe and Mail score, tilt score was a one.

00:05:46.160 CBC News was somewhere between a two or three. And CTV was three. So none of them even close to neutral.

00:05:51.780 They were all markably, heavily pro-Carney in this campaign. And, you know, in some ways it's

00:05:59.300 predictable, but it's such a disservice. When you look at how close the election was, I haven't had

00:06:03.660 you on since the election results came in. We had the Conservatives coming in at around 41 percent,

00:06:09.140 the Liberals coming in at around 43 percent. You know, that's a close election. Even if it didn't

00:06:14.160 translate necessarily that way, it looks like Carney's going to find a way to edge as close to a majority

00:06:18.720 government as possible. But with such a close campaign, I think it's clear that the media was

00:06:24.420 the deciding factor in this campaign. What do you think?

00:06:26.980 Oh, I think they were absolutely a huge asset in Carney's arsenal. No question. I think it's

00:06:33.180 also interesting that these most biased media are, you know, in television and newspapers.

00:06:40.000 And there's a skew there towards older viewers and older readers, older people. We've seen that

00:06:46.440 there was a huge age difference in this campaign where younger people supported the Conservatives

00:06:51.220 at a much higher level and Liberals were much more likely to be over 55, over 65. And I think it's

00:06:58.020 not a coincidence that as, you know, I don't know anybody. I'm 46. I don't know anybody my age who

00:07:03.980 has cable anymore. I don't know people who watch CBC news anymore. But, you know, who are my age?

00:07:10.080 My parents do. And I think the demographic of people who still watch the legacy media is very

00:07:16.260 much older. And I don't think it's a coincidence. That's a coincidence. It's a bit of a chicken in

00:07:20.380 the egg. Perhaps they gave their viewers who were already leading that way something that they were

00:07:24.720 expecting. They played to their audience. But on the other hand, it probably also influenced a large

00:07:28.600 chunk of their audience to, you know, give Carney a second look or to give them reasons not to vote

00:07:34.440 Conservative. So but the great news is that as this process keeps happening, is this mainstream media

00:07:40.140 becomes less and less relevant as time goes on with each passing week. Well, I want to visit the

00:07:45.660 polls with you because I know you're a pollster and we here at Juno News are quite critical. Actually,

00:07:50.320 we're so skeptical, Hamish, of the legacy media that that's why we decided to do our own Juno polls

00:07:55.180 throughout the campaign. We worked with David Murray and we had our own look. So like when I

00:08:00.300 talked to friends, people were like, oh, were you surprised or disappointed by the election outcome?

00:08:03.660 I'm like, no, that's pretty much what I thought would happen because we had the polls and the

00:08:06.660 numbers that David was giving us is pretty much exactly what it turned into on election night off

00:08:11.680 by a point or two. But I did notice that the legacy media and their mainstream polls and

00:08:16.820 specifically the polling aggravators did not get things quite so accurate. And so I, you know,

00:08:24.040 we've talked about this on the show before that many of the legacy media outlets were projecting

00:08:28.740 that it was going to be a big liberal blowout, that the liberals were going to get historic

00:08:32.460 numbers. Some of the polling at the very end had the conservatives polling in the sort of mid to

00:08:36.940 upper 30s where they ended up getting 41%. I don't think anyone accurately projected the numbers

00:08:41.780 as they came in. I'm curious though, what's your perspective? Are you as skeptical about the

00:08:46.740 pollsters as I am?

00:08:47.620 No, I look, I'm a professional pollster. So I, and I believe most, not maybe not all,

00:08:53.660 but most people in this industry are trying to do their best to get the right numbers. There's

00:08:57.760 parameters, there's things that make that difficult, but I think they're coming there

00:09:00.920 with the intention of being accurate. What I will say is that the, on average, when you look at the

00:09:07.360 final results and you look at what the pollsters had conservatives, they were down about, on average,

00:09:13.260 about 2% lower than what the conservatives actually got. I think it worked out to sort of 39.7 or I'm

00:09:18.500 not sure. So it's 39 point something. If you look at the final poll of-

00:09:23.260 I have, I have the, the final vote based on the aggregate from 338. So they had the liberal

00:09:28.500 party at 42. They projected the conservatives would come in at 39, NDP nine, block six, green two.

00:09:34.900 Compare that to what actually happened was that the liberals finished at 43.8, conservatives 41.3,

00:09:40.440 NDP at 6.3, block at 6.3, and green at 1.2. So yeah, they look like they got the conservatives

00:09:47.200 wrong by 2.3% and the liberals by one point. Some say the bubbles in an arrow truffle piece

00:09:55.020 can take 34 seconds to melt in your mouth. Sometimes the very amount you're stuck at the

00:09:59.640 same red light. Rich, creamy, chocolatey arrow truffle. Feel the arrow bubbles melt. It's

00:10:06.440 mind bubbling. 1.8%. Yeah. So like that's, that's, that's pretty accurate. These polls

00:10:12.040 often have a margin of error of plus or minus 3%. So those numbers are not, they're not, I don't

00:10:16.920 think that's an indictment of, of the industry. And they got there in the end. It's also a bit

00:10:21.220 systematic. If you go back and look at the last two elections, conservative votes, the final

00:10:26.280 projection, projections before the election, they always underestimate conservative vote by an

00:10:31.160 average of about 2%. But it's not like it's 8%. There's a couple of pollsters that are way off,

00:10:35.800 of course, but on average, the numbers are, especially if they were down by the liberals,

00:10:39.560 by a couple of points, it's not, not that bad. What I think happened and, you know, what I saw in the

00:10:44.180 campaign was that we obviously saw polling that in some cases earlier in the campaign, a couple of

00:10:47.940 weeks into the campaign show the conservatives down 8, 10, 12 points, depending on the pollster.

00:10:52.980 And we were hearing from conservative campaigners, this incredible response to the door. And there

00:10:57.760 was this, this, this dichotomy. What ended up happening is that, is it, first of all, a couple

00:11:03.300 of things happened. One is I think as the last three weeks of the campaign, the conservatives

00:11:06.820 ran a very good campaign in the last three weeks of the campaign and made up a lot of votes and

00:11:10.320 actually gained momentum for the campaign. And if the campaign had got another week or two,

00:11:14.260 I think the results could have been very, very different. The other thing that happened is that

00:11:18.460 conservatives at the doors were getting good results because we were, we were, conservatives were

00:11:23.160 finding support of the doors at a level higher than they're ever used to being. To get 41.4%

00:11:29.700 of the vote, as the conservatives did in the end, that's a higher level than any party in Canada

00:11:34.920 since the 1988 federal election. So there's no, there's concert, any conservative that's been

00:11:40.900 involved in campaigning at any point since say 1993 has been, has been used to seeing lower results

00:11:47.260 of the doors overall. This felt very good on the ground. And we heard anecdotal stories. I know your

00:11:52.280 reporters found anecdotal stories of lots of people out supporting conservatives because

00:11:55.880 conservatives did far better than they ever had historically. They got 8 million votes. I mean,

00:12:01.240 no party had ever gotten more than 7 million in the past. And frankly, what Carney profited from

00:12:06.460 more than anything else wasn't the strength of the liberal party, but the complete and utter collapse

00:12:10.340 of the NDP. This is, you know, I think Pierre Pauli have said it after the election. If conservatives

00:12:16.260 had gotten 41.4% in any other election in the last 30 years, it would have been an absolute blowout.

00:12:21.480 Um, and the circumstances were different and obviously it didn't work out this way, but the

00:12:26.920 coalition that has been built that, uh, in the end, I think, uh, it was, is, is extremely exciting

00:12:32.360 and extremely powerful. And if Pauli have can build on that into the next election, he's going to have

00:12:37.180 an incredible base. Well, it's true. I remember talking to some friends who were out campaigning

00:12:42.600 specifically in Toronto in the GTA. And I said, I don't care what the pollsters say. This feels like a

00:12:47.420 winning campaign. It feels like we're winning. And I was looking at the numbers and I was saying,

00:12:51.340 yeah, that's because it's possible that Pauli will get a higher percentage of the vote than

00:12:56.180 Stephen Harper ever did and still lose and still lose to a majority liberal government. I'm just

00:13:01.300 pleased that the conservatives were able to hold Carney to a minority, although it looks like it's

00:13:06.140 getting pretty close and pretty tight. So overall, Hamish, like what is your analysis? Do you think that

00:13:11.660 Poliev ran a good campaign? Is he going to stay on as leader? When do you think the next election

00:13:16.240 will be, do you think Carney will be able to put together a majority here? Or do you think that

00:13:19.420 we'll have a minority that typically lasts, you know, 18 to 24 months? Oh, so there's a lot of that.

00:13:25.540 Look, I, I think, I think the campaign was well run. I think the campaign, especially the last three

00:13:29.960 weeks really came together. Uh, Poliev's performance in the debates, I think were, were, were a very strong

00:13:35.200 asset for him. He did very well. Um, and I think that we saw over that time, uh, the conservative,

00:13:41.540 uh, base grow and got them out to vote in a good way. Obviously not enough, more needs to be done,

00:13:46.820 but I, I think the campaign, uh, especially the part, particularly in April was very, was very,

00:13:51.400 very good. Um, I think that, uh, Poliev should and will stay on. I think he's got the support of the

00:13:58.660 vast majority of conservatives and, you know, even the people I know who didn't support him in the

00:14:04.020 original leadership when he ran it, when he won three years ago are now saying things like,

00:14:08.680 well, last thing we need is more leadership turmoil. We've been dumping leaders after each

00:14:12.380 election. Let's have some continuity. Let's build from here. So I think he's going to stay on his

00:14:16.340 leader. Um, and the, whether, I don't think Carney is going to get to a majority. There's two seats

00:14:22.500 left, uh, to be, to be recounted. Um, the liberals are, uh, on paper ahead in one and the conservatives

00:14:28.940 are on paper ahead in the other. Um, the, the one, the conservatives are the head are head in,

00:14:33.520 and I think is going to, it's by enough that it would be very, very difficult to be overcome in

00:14:36.800 a recount. Uh, the one the liberals are ahead and it's only 12 votes. Anyway, we'll see what happens,

00:14:42.320 um, uh, there, but I don't think he's going to get to a majority. Look, the biggest thing for him

00:14:47.240 is for Carney's ability to stay on comes down to the revival of the NDP. The bloc, we'll see what

00:14:53.420 they do. They said they don't want an election for a year. They need to raise money. If they're

00:14:56.900 polling number, if the bloc's polling numbers get, get good in Quebec, I think we'll see them

00:15:01.340 going on the war path, but that's not enough. Uh, it's going to come down to the NDP or what's

00:15:05.920 left of the greens, I suppose, depending on what the actual numbers are in the end. Um,

00:15:09.500 and the NDP leadership, I don't think is going to be that quick. I think we're going to see the NDP

00:15:13.560 take a year, 18 months. And I don't think there were, there's any chance of there being an election

00:15:18.100 until the NDP have a new leader and, you know, uh, have maybe shown some signs of life,

00:15:24.120 uh, and stop polling in single digits. Well, we showed this image on the show,

00:15:29.340 I think last week that in Canada, I think that the rebate, you get, you get a rebate from the

00:15:33.900 government and taxpayers subsidize political parties. Um, if you get 10% of the vote in a

00:15:38.820 riding. And I think the NDP missed that in the overwhelming majority, like 85% or something like

00:15:43.920 that. So we've talked about this a lot, uh, as you know, news and on the Kenneth Malcolm show that

00:15:48.940 the NDP has financial problems and they take on a lot of debt to run these campaigns. And part of

00:15:53.980 the reason, I know part of the reason why Jagmeet Singh never triggered an election was because he

00:15:58.120 wanted his pension or because he wanted to be in that power seat. And he said that he was doing

00:16:02.500 everything he could to block the conservatives from getting into government, which is not really

00:16:06.420 his job. But anyway, I think a big part of it that is unspoken is that the finances of that party

00:16:11.960 are in shambles and right now they don't have a leader. So I don't see any incentive whatsoever for

00:16:16.600 them to try to force another election when they just aren't organized and don't have that. I do

00:16:22.180 want to talk about Pierre Polyev though, because it seems like we're going to have a parliament

00:16:26.200 without Polyev at first. Anyway, CTV was reporting that the clock starts ticking on the by-election

00:16:32.220 of Polyev as he hopes to return to parliament. So according to federal law, Damien Couric, who

00:16:37.340 stepped aside so that Polyev could take a seat, they're saying that he must sit as member of

00:16:41.560 parliament for 30 days before he could tender his resignation. After that, the Speaker of the

00:16:46.160 House of Commons would have to report the vacancy to the chief electoral officer, at which point

00:16:50.300 the government would have 11 to 180 days to call a by-election. By-elections can last

00:16:55.460 a minimum 36 days. So the soonest that Polyev could be elected would be early August. There's

00:17:01.980 of course a holiday in early August. So we might not be talking until the second week of August.

00:17:07.800 Now, Mark Carney had previously said that he won't delay and that he'll get Polyev the opportunity

00:17:13.080 with a by-election as fast as possible. We have a clip of him saying that. Let's play that.

00:17:19.200 I've already indicated to Mr. Polyev that if it's the decision of him and the Conservative Party to

00:17:25.700 trigger, if I can put it that way, a by-election, I will ensure that it happens as soon as possible.

00:17:33.440 No games, nothing, straight.

00:17:35.680 Yeah. So the CBC was like applauding him and cheering him on last week saying, what a great

00:17:40.860 guy. He's not even being partisan. He's just letting Polyev have a seat right away. But then,

00:17:45.520 of course, these convoluted rules step in and it looks like we are going to have a summer without

00:17:49.600 Polyev in the House. What do you make of all this? And strategically, what do you think Polyev

00:17:53.160 should be doing?

00:17:54.140 Well, look, I think these are the rules. The reason they have to wait 30 days is that 30 days is the time

00:18:00.060 that someone can legally challenge the outcome of an election. So in theory, if the election, if

00:18:04.640 someone could file a challenge saying Damien Couric cheated and therefore shouldn't be the MP, then he

00:18:10.560 wouldn't be allowed to resign. So they have to wait for that 30 day period to be gone in order for him

00:18:15.060 to be allowed to resign. Look, I frankly think that, you know, that it's going to be a very short

00:18:21.320 session of Parliament starting, you know, next week or whenever it is very soon. It'll be over in

00:18:27.260 three or four weeks. You know, Mr. Polyev, I'm sure, will be around the House of Commons.

00:18:32.000 We'll still be able to scrum in front of the House of Commons, as he always did. And we'll have a few

00:18:37.280 last clips of him in question period. But he'll be back in the House for the return of the House in

00:18:43.500 September, which is when, you know, things will start getting really, really interesting. I think,

00:18:49.220 you know, Carney, most of his MPs are probably still finding their way to the washroom right now and

00:18:53.580 around the House of the Commons. I don't expect this first session to be particularly

00:18:57.220 exciting. So I don't think it makes a massive difference. Of course, we'll have, as I said,

00:19:02.080 a few last clips of Polyev tearing the Liberals to shreds in the House. But I think we can all

00:19:07.780 manage for a few weeks. So I don't think it's that big of a deal. And it gets an opportunity

00:19:14.480 for Polyev to spend the summer out doing the barbecue circuit as well. So I don't think it's a

00:19:22.180 great problem. Now, so one of the big news stories to come out of last week was that the

00:19:27.980 Carney Liberals will not table a budget this spring. They claim that they don't have time.

00:19:33.300 And so instead, we won't get one until the fall. Of course, we didn't get one. I mean, the fall

00:19:39.160 economic budget, it was kind of in shambles. That was right when Chrysia Freeland was resigning. And

00:19:44.880 it seems to me we don't have any sort of financial accountability right now. And given that Mark

00:19:52.120 Carney said that he's here to help manage the crisis, that this is a crisis that we're dealing

00:19:56.680 with with the tariffs, it just seems wildly irresponsible for someone as professional and

00:20:02.700 grown up and mature as we're told that Mark Carney is, he's the man for crisis, that he can't even get

00:20:07.640 a budget put out. So his finance minister, Francois-Philippe Champagne, basically just said

00:20:14.320 that the world has changed in the last six weeks and that Canadians understand that, therefore we

00:20:19.020 don't need a budget. Let's play that clip. I want to ask you explicitly, will there be an actual

00:20:24.400 budget in 2025? There will be a fall economic statement when we're coming back. How are we as

00:20:29.640 Canadians to hold your government accountable for what you're promising if you're not going to be

00:20:33.980 transparent about it for six months or so? And I take your point about the timeline,

00:20:37.420 there's still another month. And I would say this is a new government. So let's start,

00:20:41.280 if we're going to start, this is a new government, new legislature, new prime minister. So the

00:20:45.800 direction is very clear. He's been very... But you're still the finance minister. Yeah, I'm still

00:20:48.780 the finance minister. And I would say the world has changed also in six weeks. So Canadians understand

00:20:53.160 that. What? What do you make of that, Hamish? I mean, I think it's outrageous, right? I think one of the

00:21:01.300 most important things we always have to remember about liberals is what they say and what they do

00:21:05.560 is different. And we should always measure them on what they do, not what they say. Because they

00:21:09.580 often say things that at first glance seem very reasonable or smart and actually end up doing

00:21:13.880 terrible things. Carney has come up with this whole brand of being this responsible fiscal manager.

00:21:19.340 And instead, we get this idea that, you know, we might not have a budget all this year. He's now

00:21:23.060 backtracked a little and indicated there might be one, but he'll just rename the fall economic

00:21:27.900 statement as a budget. The fact of the matter that he thought that it would be acceptable for

00:21:32.880 him to get elected, claiming to be all new, all different, as a new type of liberal, and then not

00:21:37.520 have a budget on his supposed strength in economics shows that he's actually not a new type of liberal.

00:21:42.300 He's very, very much in the vein of Justin Trudeau and everything we've seen in the past. And that

00:21:47.520 sort of arrogance and dismissal of the way the government's supposed to work, of the accountability

00:21:53.620 the Canadian's desire, I think is going to become a real ring around his neck. He's really going to

00:22:04.060 be, I think we're going to discover that he, that Bloom is going to come off this guy very,

00:22:08.060 very, very fast. The smartest thing he ever did was call that election as fast as he did.

00:22:13.240 You know, I've seen, remember Stephen Harper getting elected in January of 2006, and they still,

00:22:19.460 there was still a budget in March. They managed to do that. I don't know why Mr. Carney couldn't

00:22:24.240 have a budget in June. I'm not saying he has to have one this week, but he could have one in June

00:22:27.920 sometime. That's a perfectly amount of, a reasonable amount of time. He's got a platform full of things

00:22:33.520 he thinks are great. They should do that. They can cut and paste that in large parts into a budget.

00:22:38.240 It doesn't have to, you know, this is something that is doable. He just didn't think he needed to do

00:22:42.380 it. He isn't actually planning and delivering the change he promised. And I think that's a real problem

00:22:46.900 for him. And, you know, Canadians have every right to be annoyed and disappointed.

00:22:53.060 Well, you're right. I think that to a lot of Canadians, clearly, they felt that Carney was

00:22:57.520 the change that the country needed. They felt satisfied with the change within the liberal

00:23:01.260 leadership and said, you know, we'll give Mark Carney a chance. And I think last week should have been a

00:23:07.280 real eye-opener for many of those Canadians. Because, sure, Carney's totally different than

00:23:12.360 Justin Trudeau. He was advising behind the scene for some period of Trudeau's tenure. But still,

00:23:18.460 you know, he has his own experience, his own person. He steps in and he does represent some

00:23:22.460 kind of change. But then for him to release that cabinet and introduce all of the same characters,

00:23:27.900 like, how is it that Canada is going to turn around its fortunes when he still has

00:23:32.980 Melanie Jolie, Stéphane Galbault, Chrysia Freeland, and, yes, François-Philippe Champagne

00:23:39.160 running the show, right? Like, we're supposed to be impressed by his resume and his Rolodex and all

00:23:45.460 of his connections. Like, where are all these high-profile, you know, globalist types that

00:23:50.860 could step in, right? Why isn't he pulling people from Scotiabank and RBC or, you know, London and New

00:23:57.080 York and Goldman Sachs and all of these, like, impressive people who have saved companies and

00:24:01.940 built empires? Like, why aren't any of them stepping in? Why do we have this same pathetic group of people

00:24:07.840 that were standing side by side with Justin Trudeau and destroyed the country? That's a bit of a

00:24:12.340 rhetorical question. I want to point out that Mark Carney was in Rome. He was speaking to reporters

00:24:17.200 and he said that there's not much value in a budget, that Canadians just don't really need to know

00:24:22.640 not much value. Let's play that clip. There is not much value in my judgment, and it's considered

00:24:28.740 judgment and it's judgment based on experience, that there is not much value in trying to rush through

00:24:35.520 a budget in a very narrow window, three weeks, with a new cabinet, effectively a new finance minister.

00:24:44.140 Effectively? No. Champagne was the finance minister before the election as well, and it's a new cabinet.

00:24:49.520 No, I mean, there's one or two new faces. I mean, there are some new faces. Many of them will be

00:24:54.380 familiar. Someone like Evan Solomon is a new face, but he's a long-time liberal insider. Same with Gregor

00:25:00.040 Robertson, the longtime mayor of Vancouver, who was an abject failure in that role, and now he's a

00:25:05.080 housing minister. So, you know, you have sort of a new cabinet, but not really. Most of them are

00:25:09.920 Trudeau-era liberal cabinet ministers. The new faces are not that new. What do you make of all that?

00:25:17.580 Well, look, I think he's making a huge, huge mistake with putting a lot of these traditional

00:25:22.020 ministers, these old Trudeau ministers, in these senior positions of power. Because I will tell you

00:25:25.700 something. I worked in the prime minister's office many, many years ago, and the government of Canada

00:25:29.800 is a large, unwieldy beast, and it's only become larger since I was there. It's got so many moving

00:25:36.340 parts, and the prime minister can make change. If the prime minister quits his direct personal

00:25:42.080 attention on an issue, he can get the department to do something dramatically different. But it takes

00:25:47.200 force of will, and there's just too many things for any one human to do, which is why we have a

00:25:52.140 cabinet. And, but in many cases, especially if you've got weak cabinet ministers or cabinet ministers

00:25:56.760 who don't really want to do what the prime minister, you know, wants them to do, or sort of

00:26:00.720 feels, they don't feel the urgency, is that things will just drift along. The bureaucratic inertia in

00:26:06.860 Ottawa is incredible. And if you've got a weak minister or a minister who doesn't really want to

00:26:12.540 change things, things will not change. Things will continue in exactly the same path. So even if we

00:26:18.300 take Carney at his word and believe he wants to change things, which I don't, and I think that

00:26:22.060 would be a mistake. But even if we believe he wants to change things, the fact that he's got

00:26:26.120 a bunch of Trudeau retreads who don't really want to change things, and weak other ministers,

00:26:30.980 many of whom have been elected for 15 minutes, really indicates to me that we're going to see

00:26:36.520 very, very much more of the same, and very, very little change. The way he's dismissive of the

00:26:41.680 budget, I think, is a big mistake. Like, I spent a lot of time polling Canadians and working in politics.

00:26:46.700 There's not a, you know, we all pay attention to politics far more than the average person.

00:26:50.680 But there are a few big things that people pay attention to. People know that the budget matters.

00:26:55.240 They, you know, interest in politics spikes around budgets, whether provincial budget or federal

00:26:58.800 budget. That's a thing that it's a big set piece that governments see as an asset. The fact that he

00:27:04.200 doesn't even see it as a potential asset to drive his own message says a lot about him and how sort of

00:27:10.700 dismissive he is of the way that Canadians interact with politics to understand what's going on.

00:27:17.560 And his very much attitude is, things are fine. Just trust me. I've got it under control.

00:27:22.360 And, you know, I think that's a big, big mistake on his part.

00:27:26.280 Well, I think you're right. And I think that his priorities have been shown, right? Like,

00:27:29.660 he got elected, he got selected leader by the Liberal Convention. And I think the next day,

00:27:35.520 he jumped on an airplane and went to France and then the UK. Here he is in Rome. He's preparing for

00:27:41.180 the G7 meeting, which I think is going to be like the highlight for him of being prime minister,

00:27:46.480 is that he gets to host this G7 meeting in Canada. And he talks about it a lot. It seems to me that

00:27:50.960 his priorities are not inside Canada, not the budget. So him not doing a budget, I think,

00:27:55.000 perfectly reflects that.

00:27:56.620 You know, most prime ministers, especially ones who are long serving, go through a period where

00:28:00.660 they get elected, they're very focused on domestic issues. And six, seven, eight years in,

00:28:04.980 domestic issues are a little less interesting. They've been dealing with them intently for a few years,

00:28:09.100 and they get more involved in international politics. And that happens to all prime ministers,

00:28:13.280 the good ones and the bad ones. There's a draw of internationalism, usually at some point year six

00:28:18.120 or seven. With Carney, it seems to start in day six or seven. You know, instantly, you know,

00:28:24.040 the fact that he's been prime minister for, you know, eight, nine weeks, and he's been to Europe

00:28:28.080 twice is mind blowing. And you're right, he's going to be his greatest disappointment of the G7 is

00:28:35.160 that it's being held here and he doesn't get to go to Europe again.

00:28:37.460 Well, I think he loves hosting it. I think he's going to really lean into that.

00:28:42.440 And again, yeah, he's definitely looking forward to that much more than being held accountable

00:28:48.140 in the House of Commons. Well, Hamish Marshall, great to have you back on the show. Always

00:28:51.860 appreciate your insights and your commentary. Appreciate your time today.

00:28:56.540 Thank you so much for having me.

00:28:58.020 All right, folks. Thanks so much. Solid time we have today. We'll be back again tomorrow

00:29:00.740 with all the news. I'm Candice Malcolm. This is the Candice Malcolm Show. Thank you and God bless.

00:29:04.520 .

00:29:05.100 .

00:29:07.840 .

00:29:09.460 .

00:29:09.520 .

00:29:11.520 .

The Candice Malcolm Show - May 20, 2025

Legacy Media bias EXPOSED by Juno News analysis. You’ll never guess the worst offender!

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript