00:00:00.240Ahoy everyone, Wyatt Claypool here, back for some more polling time on the whiteboard.
00:00:06.080Today we have an interesting subject we're going to be going over the numbers for,
00:00:10.740and that is what Canadians think about the current trade situation with the United States
00:00:15.980and what they feel about Mark Carney's current approach,
00:00:19.720both in terms of what he should do and how they approve of what he is actually doing.
00:00:25.220It's not looking great for Mark Carney.
00:00:27.200In fact, his approval rating when it comes to how he's dealing with the U.S. seems to be trending in the direction of late 2025 when the Liberals started losing to the Conservatives in the polls again.
00:00:39.320But in just a second, we're going to first start out with what Canadians think Canada should be doing.
00:00:43.640Then we will be getting into Mark Carney's approvals on this issue.
00:00:47.320But before we do that, I just want to remind you guys, if you like the channel, make sure to leave a like on the video.
00:00:52.400Subscribe if you are not yet a subscriber.
00:00:54.340if you really like this style of video it helps if more people become members of the channel by
00:00:59.680hitting the join button below the video and contributing a few dollars per month because
00:01:03.800this is very much niche content and I'm the only one who does it for a reason because not as many
00:01:10.140people like to watch these things but if you do it does help to contribute and then if you also
00:01:14.640live in the city of Calgary I am going to be running for a UCP nomination for the riding of
00:01:20.060Calgary Curry, which if you live in that riding and you want to support me, you can always sign
00:01:24.480up on my website at the pinned comment below, WyattClaypool.com, and then I'll try and give
00:01:30.440you a call and make sure you have a membership for when I am more formally in the race and trying
00:01:34.940to secure that nomination. Anyways, now let's get into the first question that came out of the new
00:01:40.580Angus Reid poll, which asked people about what approach they think Canada should take in the
00:01:46.120current trade dispute. Now, I've obviously had to pare down the text of each of the answers that
00:01:53.180people were giving. So, this one that says match is that Canada should match U.S. tariffs equally.
00:02:00.100Limit is that we should limit counter tariffs. Talk is that we should have no counter tariffs
00:02:05.800and instead just try and negotiate right now. And concession is, of course, that we should be making
00:02:11.280concessions in order to actually, you know, come to some sort of a new trade deal to get some U.S.
00:02:18.040tariffs off of us. There was also 12 percent, I'll say right off the top, 12 percent of people
00:02:24.020were just like undecided. They do not know. So I don't know 12 percent. So just keep that in the
00:02:33.060back of your mind that there is a significant portion of people who still don't have an opinion
00:02:37.840on this particular issue. From what they've seen, they just don't really know what the Prime
00:02:43.200Minister or Canada should be doing. So I have it in order of which results got the most votes from
00:02:50.600people or how many people chose each one. So it shouldn't be that shocking that we see match very
00:02:56.760high since there is a significant elbows-up voter contingent in this country. And it's not
00:03:03.540necessarily strategically bad to meet U.S. tariffs with Canadian counter tariffs. As long, at least
00:03:11.900in my opinion as a conservative, as you are using that as leverage to then try and go down to zero
00:03:16.760tariffs. The problem is the elbows up people seem to like just counter tariffs for the sake of
00:03:21.640counter tariffs without really a plan on what to do afterwards. But 34% of Canadians chose
00:03:28.340matching U.S. tariffs as the best path forward for the country right now, 34% right there.
00:03:36.720That is followed actually fairly closely behind by people who think that we should limit counter
00:03:42.040tariffs, which I would say is also one of the more correct options here. Tariffs hurt your
00:03:49.440own country as well. It's basically shooting yourself in the foot, hoping that you're doing
00:03:53.580more damage to your opponent than you are to yourself. The problem is we've had liberals
00:03:57.860running this country for 11 years. So our economy already is not very good. And so our attempt to
00:04:05.280hurt the U.S. more than they hurt us is a complete fool's errand. That doesn't mean, again, for
00:04:10.320negotiating purposes, you don't try and put in place some tariffs to gain some leverage to then
00:04:15.280trade those tariffs off to get some tariffs off of yourself. But again, the problem is we have 34%
00:04:20.840of the country who largely just seems to like counter tariffs because, you know, screw Donald
00:04:25.460Trump or whatever. But now let's go into the next one here, which is no counter tariffs and we
00:04:33.340should be negotiating. I was actually shocked this one got as high as it did. This ends up actually
00:04:38.740hitting 19% of Canadians thinking that we should not be putting in place counter tariffs at this
00:04:46.460time and we should be getting into trade talks and figuring out how we can solve this. I really
00:04:52.000like this shade of, you know, maroon-y purple. That's really nice. And then make concessions
00:04:57.240is obviously the lowest on this list. You know, how could it not be even if making concessions
00:05:04.260in a certain, to a certain extent is a smart move? It just sounds kind of weak. Now, I'd probably be
00:05:12.460somewhere between limit talk, limit concession, limit counter tariff, sorry, talk as well as make
00:05:20.520concessions, because you can't just simply be obstinate, hoping that the Americans are going
00:05:26.520to give you what you want, simply because you, you know, were very tough, you were very like
00:05:32.660elbows up, you're very patriotic. Trump doesn't really care. And in order to get something from
00:05:37.780him, you may need some leverage, maybe some limited leverage, but you actually at some point
00:05:42.280need to engage in some real horse trading, you may have to give away some things that you like
00:05:47.520in order to get some things that you like better. That's just how negotiating works. The liberals
00:05:52.460may have to give up supply management in order to get something like tariffs removed on soft lumber,
00:05:59.200steel, aluminum, I think copper is also in there as well. If you do that, you may benefit the
00:06:04.600economy more. There's a reason why actually provinces like Ontario, despite that being an
00:06:09.640epicenter for elbows up voting, that is actually the area that seems to be turning on counter
00:06:15.660tariffs the most alongside Quebec because a lot of manufacturing jobs are being lost in that
00:06:21.460province. No doubt there are going to be some very delusional people in downtown Toronto and
00:06:27.260downtown Montreal who think that Mark Carney's doing a brilliant job in his flip-flopping between
00:06:32.820acting tough on television and then secretly making concessions behind the scenes while getting
00:06:38.300absolutely nothing done. But for the most part, especially if you live in southwestern Ontario
00:06:42.980or if you're in a more manufacturing-heavy area of Quebec, this is not really going so hot.
00:06:49.140This isn't exactly what we thought it was going to be.
00:06:51.400But notice here, so 34% are effectively on board with the agenda of Mark Carney, David Eby, Wob Canoe,
00:06:59.780and I think I said Doug Ford, Wob Canoe, David Eby, Mark Carney.
00:07:11.680I'm not really even sure where everyone really stands in the merit times. It's the merit times. I'm not going to look up what people's exact positions on this stuff are. But this actually leaves, when you think about it, I would say what we have is we have 34% of people in the irrational category. Maybe some of them, like a third of them, are saying, you know, match their tariffs so then we can negotiate to get tariffs off. That would be more rational.
00:07:37.320I think that more so fits the limit people, the people saying we should limit the amount of new tariffs we put on.
00:07:43.380I would call this the kind of generally rational category.
00:07:48.300These people over here, it heavily outweigh the 34%.
00:07:52.820So the whole idea that there is this consensus on Canada trade policy and that we should be tough elbows up against Donald Trump or we can't be electorally successful as conservatives, nonsense.
00:08:06.140That's what Jason Kenney said on that, frankly, really awful panel on Juno News with Harrison Falconer and Anthony Koch as well, where they were saying that, well, you know, just like lockdowns and mandates, 80% of people, this is an actual claim Kenny made, 80% of people were fine with lockdowns and mandates when I was Premier of Alberta and was at a vocal 20% who was ruining it because they were heavily in my base trying to undermine my leadership.
00:08:30.120And he was then comparing that to, like, trade policy. It's an 80-20 issue where 80% of people want to go Mark Carney liberal elbows up or David Eby elbows up or whatever, and there's 20% of a bunch of pro-Trump maple mega, you know, troglodytes out there who want to concede.
00:08:50.160And like no one wants to concede, people want a trade deal because they want life to get better.
00:08:56.020Now look at this. This is definitely not an 80-20 issue, especially when 12% of people are also still up for grabs.
00:09:03.280Just to calculate this together so I don't do the math wrong, that leaves about 54, a majority of people,
00:09:12.920being somewhere between limiting counter tariffs, which obviously indicates that they want, you know,
00:09:18.860less tariffs in general, they probably want to negotiate horse trade a little bit to remove them,
00:09:23.540and to people who are fully just like, just make the concessions that we need to get a trade deal.
00:09:28.60054% to 34%, which is quite a ratio when you think about it.
00:09:34.340Not nearly the elbows-up view that people are trying to paint of Canada in the mainstream media
00:09:39.640and in more red Tory parts of conservative Twitter.
00:09:43.980In just a second here, I now want to erase this board,
00:09:46.660and then I want to go on to the specific questions they asked about supply management
00:09:50.460and if we should concede on that issue,
00:09:53.160because I think that that's a fairly, like, it's fairly telling
00:09:57.060when you actually ask people a specific question on,
00:09:59.940are you willing to give this up to get something else in return?
00:10:03.160A lot of people are chomping at the bit to say,
00:10:05.400oh, absolutely dump it if that gets this problem solved.
00:10:08.140okay i've reset the board now i will re-explain my new abstract category system to cut down on
00:10:17.160the amount of words and the answers so this is asking people the question as canada negotiates
00:10:22.720should it put supply management on the table now firm means stand firm even if the u.s retaliates
00:10:29.860so that's what that represents chip represents use as bargaining chip last resort and as saying
00:10:37.260end supply management immediately and then of course that is i don't know now there are a lot
00:10:43.340of people who say you know we should stand firm although i actually don't really like the phrasing
00:10:48.540of the answer you know i mean when i say it sounds too triumphant when you give people sometimes a
00:10:54.460triumphant sounding option compared to other ones that have a more pro concession type language to
00:10:59.820it it will naturally outperform the rest of them that's why i find the answers kind of interesting
00:11:05.660here because it doesn't do nearly as well as you would think. It does quite well, but it gets 42%
00:11:12.220of the vote. And you could say, well, Wyatt, that's above 40%. That's quite high. Well, think
00:11:18.480about it this way. There were 43% of people who voted for the Liberal Party in the last federal
00:11:26.140election. There was another 6% who voted NDP, another 6% who voted Bloc Quebecois, another 2%
00:11:33.340who voted Green Party, and then the rest would have been, you know, conservative and 0.7% PPC.
00:11:40.020But that's not that high considering the elbows-up phenomenon infected multiple parties.
00:11:46.300Even conservatives could be technically swayed over the Jason Kenney-Doug Ford conservatives.
00:11:52.040Conservatives, quote-unquote. They could be swayed over to the stand firm section, probably.
00:11:56.920In fact, that sounds like exactly where people like Doug Ford are.
00:12:01.440But people saying it should be used as a bargaining chip, which I think is mostly the correct answer here,
00:12:07.480that is, and let's find a nice looking purple, I like this one,
00:12:12.180bargaining chip is picked by 28% of Canadians, which is decently high.
00:12:20.780And I actually don't think they necessarily agree with the next category here,
00:12:26.320which is the people who think that we should be ending supply management.
00:12:30.640probably a group of people who believe that we should be doing that from the very beginning.
00:12:35.040Oh my goodness, what kind of horrible rose-colored pen did I just pick up there?
00:12:50.520And then in the I don't know category, we end up having another 14% of people.
00:12:57.640Now, typically the rule of thumb is when you see undecided people in a poll, unless you know that the leading option tends to be extremely polarizing or there's some option on the board where whoever will ever pick that option has already picked it.
00:13:15.400typically I don't know people, undecided voters, will kind of move themselves into the categories
00:13:21.940like everyone else is already at. If anything, sometimes leading options will disproportionately
00:13:27.960grab up people who are undecided. This one is probably going to be pretty proportionate. So
00:13:33.440maybe when the I don't know category gets redistributed around here, firm would rise
00:13:39.400maybe to 45 46 47 but again when we add up the people who think that supply management should
00:13:47.400be used as a bargaining chip and the people who think it should be ended which let's be clear are
00:13:51.860effectively the same option the people who believe in supply management ending i believe it should
00:13:57.100end there's literally a end the dairy cartel little bag i got from the second street people
00:14:02.280on my wall i still think it should be used as a bargaining chip even though i think it should have
00:14:07.760been dead like two years ago before the tariff threat even came about. It should have never
00:14:12.700happened in the first place. I think that like, I think it should go, but I'm still smart enough
00:14:18.480as I think all 16% of the end people over here are that it should still be used as a bargaining
00:14:23.820chip at this very moment. But, and I don't think Angus Reid is a bad pollster. They're actually a
00:14:28.400very, very good pollster. You know, sometimes there's little errors in their polls. And when
00:14:32.220you see a result that really doesn't make sense, you got to take it with a slight grain of salt.
00:14:35.640Like, they have a new Alberta poll that only has UCP leading by 1%, and my friend Chris, the great Canadian bagel, who's an expert polling projectionist, and he does his own polls, says that they often have, like, math errors sometimes in their polls that they don't correct, and they'll have really wonky rural results where the rural results look like it's the city of Calgary rather than being deep rural conservative territory.
00:14:58.020And in this poll, what I think they did wrong is I think the options that they ended up giving makes it look like there's more decisive support for elbows-up policies than there really are.
00:15:09.200Because if I take this poll, and of course we add 28 and 16 together, there is a combined right here 44% of people who absolutely are willing to end supply management depending on whether they just want to do it automatically or if it's more of a push comes to shove thing.
00:15:31.000So in fact, a majority of people do not agree with the elbows up strategy. And I think the I don't know category in this particular instance would actually be far more amenable to having to getting rid of supply management if it means the tariffs are off. Because here's the thing. This is a classic example. If you're an elbows up voter, you're not shy about it. There's nobody who's undecided about being an elbows up CBC viewer.
00:15:56.400However, I don't know people just don't know the issue enough. If you explain to them, well, supply management actually already makes all of your chicken and eggs and dairy products more expensive. And hey, in this instance, we get the tariffs off while ending supply management. I think all those I don't knows would be like, oh, perfect, do it.
00:16:16.060and i think the conservative party should really think about not even think about just do it be
00:16:21.740anti-supply management there are already multiple supply management parties what are you doing you
00:16:28.220are not going to out supply management the ndp the liberals or the bloc quebecois be different
00:16:34.780be different be fiscally conservative there is no reason to be supporting this dead uh corporatist
00:16:42.060policy where we basically have, to the detriment of even other farmers, a select group of farmers
00:16:48.440who get just outsized supply management quotas that nobody else is allowed to eat into and
00:16:55.200there's no competition from the United States. And in provinces like Alberta, I was told
00:17:00.000by a guy at an event that actually Alberta's portion of the quota has gone up 12%, which
00:17:05.520is good, but it just indicates why don't we just get rid of it anyways if we're already
00:17:09.200having to make adjustments based on how bad it is. But the current system is stupid where Alberta can1.00
00:17:14.340have 12% of the population, but only 8% to 10% of the given quota, despite Alberta, for many of the0.99
00:17:22.400products in the supply management system, being an ideal place to actually, you know, raise chickens
00:17:28.220or have a dairy farm and all that stuff. It's one of those places, so it doesn't really make sense
00:17:33.640why we have less quota than elsewhere, when in fact, we should be able to disproportionately
00:17:39.160produce those products, especially with our much better tax systems that we have.
00:17:44.540So yet again, another example of there is not a carny liberal consensus on trade that we should
00:17:52.680just, you know, puff out our chests and tell the Americans to go screw themselves and something,
00:17:58.140something, something trade deal, because that's genuinely what the liberals' plan is.
00:18:02.100We're going to get on television and tell those Americans they can stick it where the sun don't shine.
00:18:08.080Have you ever heard of Laura Secord?1.00
00:18:22.060I don't think that there's any way that Canada wins, quote unquote, here without both sides feeling like they won.
00:18:29.260I think that we need to be pursuing a win-win policy when it comes to the trade deals, conceding on certain things, horse trading for low tariffs on everything else, you know, get rid of supply management, get rid of the China deal.
00:18:41.600There's some other things that we could do, lighten the stupid cultural policies that we have that, you know, subsidize CBC movies and make American companies pay for them.
00:18:52.120We could get rid of that stuff and we could have no tariffs and life would be better.0.68
00:18:55.980It would literally be better than when the tariffs first happened, which is funny that genuinely the tariffs may be the thing that finally ends supply management, a policy that is causing Canadians to spend multiple times more money a year when it comes to basic necessities than the Americans do.
00:19:12.140I think they found, I remember that study, people who make around like $50,000 or less than $70,000 a year are paying like 2% or more of their income every year into just paying for the increase of cost that supply management puts on things like eggs and chicken and whatnot when they go to the grocery store.
00:19:29.960that is literally like one and a half or two percent or whatever of their yearly income goes
00:19:36.100to paying for the cost of supply management deranged that we have this policy oh but why
00:19:41.420if we don't do it then the farms won't do well no no the supply management farms won't do well
00:19:46.860well we are artificially boosting certain farms to the detriment of other farmers to the entire
00:19:52.580detriment of non-supply management farming canadians and by the way supply management
00:19:57.040farmers will survive. Guess what? We should pair it up with a tax cut for farmers. I'm fine with
00:20:02.020that. They'll survive if we do it. I'm not trying to be callous here. Everyone loves subsidies and
00:20:08.860monopolistic rules and different sort of special cutouts whenever you're the one receiving them.
00:20:14.200This is the definition of a special interest overruling the general interest. Of course,
00:20:19.400it's the special interest of government employees to make it so that they're basically unfireable
00:20:23.420and they have massive pensions, and they basically don't have to work to get paid.
00:20:27.380Of course, that's their own special interest.
00:20:29.620And it's the general interest that we fire a bunch of those people.
00:20:32.820And then every time a government tries to fire people, there's a big protest and people whining of,
00:20:37.680oh, have a heart. You're stealing taxpayer money.
00:20:41.460Have a heart and quit your job. You're actually a thief.1.00
00:20:45.300Well, whatever. Now I'm just going down a rabbit hole.1.00
00:20:47.280But we're going to now erase this, and then we want to jump over to talking about
00:20:50.900mark carney's current approval ratings on the trade issue we will go from the last two times
00:20:56.060angus reed pulled this back 2025 and then the new two uh the new two times they've pulled it
00:21:01.500in 2026 because you'll notice a very distinct pattern reoccurring uh from 2025 and now in 2026
00:21:09.280i'm not the biggest fan of my penmanship on this one a hidden secret to whenever i do these white
00:21:15.760board videos is because the whiteboard is not obviously sitting straight at you it's sitting
00:21:19.480at an angle i have to write at an angle and i have to have like the words slightly descending
00:21:24.960this way as i do it so they look like they're on the same level because if i wrote it straight it
00:21:29.540would look like the words are ascending upwards it's a big mind puzzle every single time i do
00:21:34.800this but now you are not here to hear me ramble about whiteboard logistics you're here to see
00:21:39.560the numbers so back in july of 2025 the liberals were riding really high on the whole elbows up
00:21:48.460thing their stance when it comes to trade at that time trying to find a nicer looking red here
00:21:55.900their stance on trade was pretty popular at the time despite the fact that carney was running
00:22:01.740through his trade deadlines back in july 2025 people who are confident in getting a trade deal
00:22:08.700confident in carney's ability to get a trade deal with us um let's start with blue i guess
00:22:13.260we'll start with the people who are happy with them uh back then we had 46 percent of people
00:22:20.940thinking that they were confident in carney's ability to get a trade deal with the united
00:22:25.420states but and there was 45 percent of people were not confident now there is always going to
00:22:31.420be that contingency of people who think oh i'm not confident in his ability to do it because0.88
00:22:37.340you can't reason with Donald Trump and he's crazy or whatever. At the same time, it's like that
00:22:43.940still means that they don't actually think that Carney's doing anything here. They still think
00:22:48.720that he's basically spinning his tires and he's not achieving one of his major promises during
00:22:53.680the last federal election. But September of this year, there was 8% undecided, but I don't think
00:23:00.080I need to write those stats down. The undecideds tend to be in those lower single digits, so it
00:23:05.640Isn't really much of a factor here. But by the time we get to September of 2025, we have 53% of Canadians who are no longer confident that Mark Carney can secure a trade deal, with 42% thinking that he can.
00:23:23.860Now, that ended up going up in the early months of the year 2026 after his Davos speech and after little tiffs he had with Donald Trump that ended up making him look, you know, formidable and tough.
00:23:38.020Basically, every time Carney acted tough over the last year and a half, his numbers would go up.
00:23:44.340And then every time he'd make concessions, they'd go back down.
00:23:46.840Because remember, by September here, he's made concessions on the DST.
00:23:50.680It was revealed that he had dropped tariffs during the election while he said that he was putting tariffs on.
00:23:56.420A lot of stuff undermined his credibility.
00:23:59.560But after January and February of 2026, he started flying high again.
00:24:04.860And we then had the amount of people confident that he could get a trade deal at an all-time high of 51%, with only 42% of people doubting him.
00:24:16.300So a basically almost a swap from what it was in September 2025. But now let's jump ahead to July
00:24:25.480of 2026, the month that we are still in. Now 50% of Canadians are not confident that he can secure
00:24:33.620a trade deal, and the amount of people confident has fallen to 43%. And based on when this poll was
00:24:41.240conducted, there is probably going to be a limited amount of people who still have not actually
00:24:46.700really digested the Gordie Howe bridge issue, but that is probably what is primarily affecting
00:24:52.200things. So back in September, when it was between July and September, the negative numbers on Kearney
00:25:00.020had risen between that period from 45 to 53. So that was an 8% increase in how many people were
00:25:09.600confident in him, and it was a 4% decrease, meaning that it is in combined 12-point swing
00:25:17.940between that period. And then between September and April, we then had an increase of confidence
00:25:26.080in him by 9%, and a decrease in confidence by 11%, or a decrease in non-confidence by 11%,
00:25:39.500being an 18% swing. So that was a massive gain. He had a 12% loss back here, and let's have a
00:25:47.980different marker here so a 12 a 12 percent negative swing over here so negative overall
00:25:55.34012 in terms of the margin between the two numbers then we had a plus 18 percent between these two
00:26:03.580and then between these two we then have an eight percent increase in disapprovals
00:26:09.820of his approach and confidence. And we had a, that would be a 8% fall in his confidence rating
00:26:21.560as well, being then a negative 16% swing. So he's still doing like not as bad as he was in September
00:26:29.3402025, doing a little bit better right now, probably because new terror threats give a little
00:26:34.540bit of a rally around the flag effect to him. But we have a negative 16% swing since his highs
00:26:40.580back in April. Now, this is really bad for the Liberals because Carney just called three
00:26:46.460by-elections, one in Chiquitimi-le-Fior, which is going to be a knife fight between the Conservatives
00:26:51.460of the Bloc and the Liberals. But stuff like this gives the Conservatives an advantage. Carney is
00:26:56.940not the elbows-up Prime Minister, like he is, but his actual record on the ground is constantly
00:27:03.760making concessions and talking tough to the betterment of no actual Canadians. And then
00:27:10.000what we have is we have a by-election in Beaches, East York, which is safe liberal territory. People
00:27:16.840always cite the 338 number and say, well, the liberals are probably going to win with like 63%
00:27:21.780of the vote because they won with 60% last time. Yes, except Mike Layton is probably going to run
00:27:28.320for the NDP. The son of former NDP leader Jack Layton. It's a riding that previously went NDP
00:27:35.860when Jack Layton was the leader of the NDP. And Mike Layton's stepmother, Olivia Chow, is currently
00:27:41.980the mayor of Toronto. That guy is fairly politically talented, having won four, run three terms in the
00:27:49.120Toronto, for Toronto City Hall. Never lost. First time win, won with 54% of the vote. I think the
00:27:55.280next time was like 89% of the vote. And it's not that far away from Beach's East York. That guy
00:28:00.420wins by Saddam Hussein numbers municipally. I don't doubt that with his brand recognition0.97
00:28:06.160and with the fact that you're going to have a lot of elbows up type lefties going towards the NDP
00:28:11.200because Carney's being too weak, as well as combined with the name recognition of the NDP
00:28:15.420and the fact that we already know previously when they threw Avi Lewis's name, the current leader
00:28:20.400of the NDP's name into hypothetical polls for that riding with Main Street Research, that the NDP
00:28:27.060actually had a chance of narrowly winning. With Mike Layton, I think they could end up actually
00:28:31.780taking the majority of the vote. So that's a problem for the Liberals. And then we go over
00:28:36.400to North Vancouver Capilano, which may be the most likely for the Liberals to hold on to here.
00:28:42.260It is a safe Liberal seat. The problem is they've lost Jonathan Wilkinson, who was actually a major
00:28:47.380figure in helping make the seat safe. Oftentimes, a person's local appeal is not transferable to
00:28:53.640their successor, especially when you're just running some deputy chief of staff of Mark Carney,
00:28:58.940who has basically no connection to the riding over the past decade and a half. And the dude's
00:29:03.880basically just being paid off by the Liberals with a free MPCs. And the Green Left is ticked
00:29:09.020off with the Liberals for having said anything nice about potentially building a pipeline.
00:29:12.840And the Conservatives actually didn't do that bad last election. If they can push out 80% of the people who voted for them in the last federal election, they're going to be climbing up in their turnout. And the NDP and the Greens are also going to be pushing hard on that riding to demonstrate that they are chipping away at the Liberals as they are acting too conservative, quote unquote.
00:29:35.800Yes, Carney is more rhetorically pro-pipeline than Justin Trudeau.0.96
00:29:40.780I just don't actually believe he's serious about the MOU.
00:29:45.780Now, I never doubt that Danielle Smith, who has wanted to build pipelines probably since she was five years old, is sincere about wanting to build a pipeline.
00:29:54.800At the same time, it's not that, like, Carney's outwitting her or something like that and getting her to sign something.
00:30:00.080I just think that in a certain sense, she kind of has to go along with it or she'll be blamed for the fact that the pipeline is not going to be built because she's not being positive enough about it.
00:30:09.400Same time, I would, if I was her, I would push back harder when they shut down the northern route because David Eby didn't want it.
00:30:15.560But the thing is that really the funny thing with all this whole thing is it doesn't benefit Carney that much to have even signed the MOU with Smith because so much of the liberal vote is anti-pipeline and irrationally so.
00:30:31.060There's the business liberals who will like it and maybe that keeps votes from transferring over to the conservatives because those were the most likely votes to jump ship.
00:30:39.400At the same time, you don't put a plus, you don't put a 10 year long timeline building a pipeline if you're serious about building it. So in a lot of ways, Carney is suffering both, like suffering negative consequences for no reason because many conservatives don't believe that he actually is serious about building a pipeline because of all the restrictions he has on it and the endless consultations and the extremely long timeline and the fact that it's going to be built with public money.
00:31:04.320So conservatives aren't that jazzed about it, so they're not going to jump over to the liberals.
00:31:08.820But the Green left will actually probably abandon the liberals to go vote for the Green Party or the NDP
00:31:14.860simply because this is like a bridge too far for them or whatever.
00:31:19.140Anyways, but that should be it for this video, guys.
00:31:21.860Hopefully you liked this breakdown of stats in a more of a nonpartisan kind of a way
00:31:26.580in the sense that it's not partisan party polling here.
00:31:30.020But this should give you a good insight into why I believe the media narratives around sort of trade is nonsense and the Conservatives should just not listen to it.
00:31:40.680Holly has Conservatives, along with me saying that they need to run on bolder policies, 20% across the board tax cut, one point off the GST, they should run against supply management.
00:31:51.600That's another bold policy that they can run on.
00:31:53.900They are doing really good messaging right now on trade. They are hitting the liberals hard when it comes to their constant flip-flopping. But now that you've hit them really hard with a gut punch about Mark Carney being a complete coward when it comes to trade negotiations, he's scared if Trump doesn't want to negotiate with him in person, he keeps making concessions for no reason while talking tough, then you come in with your follow-up saying, we should be going really hard at the U.S., being willing to fully counter-tariff them.
00:32:22.980At the same time, let's actually talk. And maybe we can horse trade our way to something better with the looming threat that we will absolutely match them on everything. That is actually how you get a trade deal. That's what Claudia Scheinbaum does. The problem is, is that Carney isn't credible when his counter tariff proposals don't make any sense, because he's not willing to use them as bargaining chips. That's the problem. He simply thinks that you put in place counter tariffs, and then you wait for the US to remove theirs.
00:32:50.520It's like, no, no. And in fact, the threat of doing something is worse than actually doing it oftentimes. So what you should be doing, if you're Mark Carney or just you're the prime minister, is you go down to Washington, engage in direct talks with Trump for a week or two, basically showing all the things that you can do to basically hurt him before the midterm elections, causing the Republicans to lose the Senate in the House if you just say, I'm going to go full counter tariff on you and your life in the midterm elections are going to be a living hell.
00:33:19.780or you and I in public view can say I'll give you this you have to give me that I get rid of supply
00:33:26.880management you get rid of softwood lumber tariffs I rip up the China trade deal you get rid of
00:33:32.320aluminum steel and auto tariffs I do to get rid of the DST or whatever that's hurting Netflix and
00:33:38.620Disney or whatever you end up doing this for me that is what needs to happen here and I think that
00:33:43.680that would be a good thing for Polyev to intimate that he wants to do now that's the funny thing he
00:33:48.800can't just describe exactly what he wants to do, because in a certain sense, your trade policy is
00:33:53.760somewhat close to the chest. But I think that what Polioff should be saying is that we need to engage
00:33:59.400in hardball negotiations and figuring out how we can get the maximum for our country while giving
00:34:06.480up as little as possible. But we still need to actually use the word, we give up something,
00:34:11.980make a small concession. But what we do is you make small concessions for big gains. I think that
00:34:17.800a lot of canadians based on the polls are absolutely open to the idea that yeah you do
00:34:22.600have to give something up to get something you know you got to spend money to make money at
00:34:26.720times and this is kind of you got to spend your chips like supply management in order to get
00:34:31.580things like removing tariffs on autos a policy supply management that canadians shouldn't even
00:34:38.220like anyways because it hurts them there was another poll in this angus reed thing this is
00:34:41.840one thing i'll just show on screen digitally this is a delusional result but some of the stuff is
00:34:48.720kind of too minute to really um these questions were a bit unfair because the question here is
00:34:56.000what do you support or oppose canada making each concession one is removing tariffs on u.s vehicles
00:35:01.360one is returning u.s alcohol to liquor stores and what is allowing u.s dairy into canada u.s
00:35:06.000dairy into canada that is the one thing that has like extremely strong opposition because there's
00:35:11.200this propaganda that u.s dairy is like evil or whatever now if you say we don't like how hyper
00:35:16.480pasteurized they make their dairy products how about we do this sure they cannot send in hyper
00:35:22.800pasteurized dairy products in canada if they follow canada general standards they can send it
00:35:27.200into our country how about that but the problem is that those questions i think are a bit unfair
00:35:32.800because it's not attaching a it's not attaching a what will get back in or if we do this and it's
00:35:39.920it's just asking strong support or opposed now nobody likes the idea of making concession but
00:35:46.360if you said if we made these concessions we might be able to get a reciprocal tariff off
00:35:51.780i think then you would have support go up massively but from the standpoint of the way that
00:35:57.120that question was asked it's effectively useless because it's just making it sound like we're like
00:36:01.600scared children in the corner just like conceding this is not conceding the way that carney did on
00:36:06.600the Gordie Howe bridge, where you just gave the US 50% of the revenues of the tolls, like the toll
00:36:12.060revenues, in exchange for nothing, and then you lied about it, making it like two times as bad.
00:36:17.920If Carney was just straight up and saying, huh, this is going to be a headache. But I think in
00:36:21.940the next five, six years, it's not really going to matter that we split revenues, because the
00:36:26.720majority of economic benefit was the passive increase in exports. That's really what I wanted.
00:36:31.420If he said that, would have still looked bad, would have still had an impact on his approval
00:36:36.360ratings polling and how people think he's doing on trade uh but i think we would have been looking
00:36:41.180at a minus maybe 10 here or minus 9 we wouldn't be looking at a minus 16 because you messed up
00:36:48.840you looked weak and you lied about it but whatever with all that being said thank you guys for
00:36:54.300watching remember if you live in the city of calgary click on the link at the top of the
00:36:59.320comments why at claypool.com and if you are living in the riding that i'm planning on running for in
00:37:04.240Southwest Calgary, I will give you a call and make sure you understand what I'm doing in my campaign.
00:37:08.740I call people and I also like to ask them what they think about the current MLA, NDP MLA, Janet0.91
00:37:14.460Aramanco, who is a pro-drug nutcase. But sometimes locally, people can give you a good insight on
00:37:20.600how engaged they actually are. Do they actually, you know, talk to constituents? You know, what
00:37:26.400kind of communications they've seen from the person? I had one person from the ride and gave
00:37:31.480me a fantastic insight that they didn't really think this was going to be popular. But from
00:37:36.440talking to neighbors and just in casual conversation, they weren't even the ones
00:37:39.860bringing it up. People were actually in favor of more privatized healthcare options because they
00:37:44.940have seen with some of the limited privatization in Alberta, it's been quite good. So they're
00:37:50.800actually in favor of doing more of it, which I didn't expect in the riding that I'm running in
00:37:54.900because I was thinking it's going to be a default pro-public healthcare riding. It's like, no,
00:37:59.060people are actually pretty cool with it it's also a riding that do i want to break this now now maybe
00:38:05.140i'll do like an entire video overview of the riding at some point but it's very much a suburban
00:38:10.900urban riding you go you go more east towards downtown it's obviously more urban you go west
00:38:16.100it's more suburban suburban side much more tight in the last election between the ucp and ndp
00:38:21.540east side the ndp won like 18 points on the east side of the riding but on the east side the problem
00:38:28.180is last election there was a really big drug problem in that part of calgary like you could
00:38:32.980say the drug problem was everywhere in calgary but specifically on the east side of the riding
00:38:36.880because it's in the belt line right where the schumer injection site was at the time because
00:38:41.860the drug problem is really bad most people don't think well it was the mvp who opened it up in 2017
00:38:47.420they have the blame most people think about current government it's a problem so i want the other guys
00:38:53.920in. And so Janet Aramanco, who is a drug site advocate, a safe supply advocate, could come in0.84
00:39:01.460and say, you know what? We could solve all the death and disorder if we gave people cleaner drugs1.00
00:39:06.000and we gave them the safe place to do it. And they're not all scattered around the streets
00:39:09.100doing drugs and, you know, injecting smack between their toes. She could make that pitch credibly
00:39:14.100back in 23 because the UCP had only in the last couple of years started cracking down on the drug
00:39:19.040problem. So if it was getting better, it was still pretty not, it wasn't noticeable yet.
00:39:23.920Since then, the drug problem has gotten cleaned up a lot. It is far safer to be around there because they closed down the Schumer injection site. I've heard nurses and doctors are ecstatic about it because it makes their lives so much nicer. And a lot of the homeowners are happy that there's fewer just vagrants sitting around just passed out on the streets, you know, like accumulating trash around makeshift tent cities and whatnot.
00:39:48.420And because the UCP has done that, a lot of the people who previously voted by a margin of sometimes 20 points for the NDP in those areas right next to, you know, like Senalta and whatnot, they're actually moving UCP.
00:40:02.720And if they're moving UCP, the people in the more suburban Glen Morgan areas are super conservative.
00:40:08.880They're moving way more conservative, even though the UCP candidate lost by 13 points in that riding last election.
00:40:14.980There was actually some of the western parts that still voted UCP, so those places are going to be an area where I'm planning on trying to run up the score, and then massively battering Janet on the east when it comes to the drug issue, because goodness, if the MVP won the provincial election, and she became the addictions minister, because she's currently the addictions critic, hell to pay. That will be a terrible thing for the riding.
00:40:38.380Anyway, so I'm kind of giving you my general insights on campaigning, and hopefully that you'll find it interesting as I campaign for a riding, and I'm just fully open about what my strategies are and what I want to do, that you can kind of, like, come along with me on that journey, and I can kind of describe how elections work as I literally go through one in a tough swing riding that, in fact, should still be going NDP.
00:41:00.740I want to try and win back a tough riding and kind of prove that the way I do politics does work, in part because I am a political evangelist here, people.