The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - Carney is FLOPPING - Media thinks Liberals Trump Trade Strategy Is A FAIL!

00:00:00.000 Hey guys, Wyatt Claypool here, and welcome back to the National Telegraph YouTube channel.

00:00:06.320 It seems that the legacy media has finally figured out that Prime Minister Mark Carney and his liberal government

00:00:12.920 have no clue what they're doing when it comes to trade negotiations with Trump and the Americans.

00:00:19.000 They are now trying to offer advice to Carney, realizing that he has completely stalled out.

00:00:25.180 In fact, in the second clip I want to play for you guys today, we have Aaron O'Toole, the former Conservative Party leader,

00:00:32.840 who is sitting on Carney's trade advisory board trying to explain what Carney is doing wrong and what he needs to do to get any forward momentum on a deal.

00:00:43.480 When the people on your own advisory board are going to the media trying to explain what you're doing wrong, it's because you're not listening to their advice behind the scenes.

00:00:53.380 But anyways, in just a second here, we will be getting into the media clips.

00:00:57.120 But first, I just want to remind you guys, if you like the show, make sure to leave a like on the video.

00:01:02.040 That really helps me out.

00:01:03.500 Subscribe if you are not yet a subscriber.

00:01:05.660 Help us get to 100,000 subscribers sometime before the end of the year.

00:01:09.880 And also leave a comment on what you think and consider hitting the join button to become a National Telegraph member.

00:01:17.000 Our first clip today will be on Rosemary Barton's program on the CBC,

00:01:21.600 where her very left-leaning panel is coming to the realization

00:01:25.940 that Carney has been sitting around not getting a trade deal done

00:01:29.580 and effectively just making concessions for absolutely nothing

00:01:34.140 because, in fact, Carney, despite claiming that he's dealt with Donald Trump before,

00:01:38.700 does not know how to deal with Donald Trump.

00:01:40.920 So I don't know how many times I have to keep relearning this lesson

00:01:43.940 that the flatter Trump strategy doesn't really work.

00:01:46.880 Now, right off the bat, I included that little bit of what Andrew Coyne was saying,

00:01:53.800 because we're kind of starting up in the middle of this. I didn't need his entire commentary there.

00:01:58.160 But Carney isn't doing a flatter Trump strategy. If Carney was doing a flatter Trump strategy,

00:02:03.680 it would actually work better. The problem is Carney has no strategy. And when I say that,

00:02:09.800 I don't mean he's doing nothing. I mean, he'll flatter Trump one day, he'll kick at the Americans

00:02:15.280 the next day he'll go meet with the Chinese, and then he and Ford will be talking about

00:02:20.180 a Fortress North America plan, and then he'll be talking about how he doesn't need the U.S.,

00:02:24.380 and he's diversifying towards the EU. Carney's current strategy is just incoherent nonsense.

00:02:32.180 That may be true, Chantal, but I also don't know that the insult Trump strategy works either,

00:02:36.240 so I don't know how... Yes, actually, insult Trump strategy would even be better than, again,

00:02:41.480 the current plan which is do both which doesn't work at all how what what line you walk

00:02:50.040 no i agree that uh there is no line to walk because there is no line so you kind of do what

00:02:57.080 you can and the insult trump i think the the g6 the other six mostly to start with wanted uh the

00:03:07.880 Iran issue put to rest. Forget that the U.S. won or lost or whatever to restore some kind of

00:03:17.940 normality as far as you can get back to normality these days in getting oil across the strait and

00:03:26.860 tamping down hostilities. So that is one. That being said, considering that there is a July 1st

00:03:34.880 kind of deadline it's not a deadline you're dead on july 1st but we are in that period

00:03:42.100 uh no optimum scenario would have been for the prime minister and the president not only to meet

00:03:49.000 but to send together a signal to their teams that they wanted this settled yeah and that didn't

00:03:54.180 happen at the g7 and in part that's because of mark carney mark carney has not actually been

00:04:00.820 requesting meetings with Donald Trump. There was that hot mic moment when around a roundtable with

00:04:06.420 the other G7 leaders, Carney was caught on a hot mic going up to him and trying to explain

00:04:10.960 the Chinese EV importation policy that he has, the agreement he has with China,

00:04:16.200 which demonstrated more desperation on Carney's part, that he's really hoping that Trump buys,

00:04:22.400 that this is not China EV dumping in Canada. And just 49,000, it's a hard cap, even though

00:04:28.080 the cap will then continue to go up every single year. It demonstrates that he doesn't know how

00:04:33.020 to negotiate because he's too concerned about basically his beans on his side of the table

00:04:39.340 not being given away, even though he's not willing to trade them for more beans back.

00:04:46.040 That is all we are trying to do. Carney has a sort of set of cards or he has a whatever. He

00:04:50.780 has some amount of resources and he can trade those negotiating resources or other resources

00:04:55.720 back. We want the zero tariff chip. That is what we want for our side. We want the tariffs off.

00:05:03.360 And but Carney is too worried about his China agreement and his supply management and other

00:05:09.140 sort of Canadian subsidy policies more than he's worried about actually getting our economy

00:05:14.060 kickstart again with zero tariffs. And so he's basically locked in this situation where he's

00:05:19.160 just trying to justify himself to Trump rather than simply actually doing a hardball negotiation

00:05:24.360 in order to get things that Canadians want.

00:05:27.000 And is that a problem, Althea, for the prime minister?

00:05:31.340 Because they have been signaling that they don't think

00:05:34.260 that they're going to meet that deadline.

00:05:35.880 But if there's no even conversation, as Chantal says,

00:05:38.620 that we know of anyway, where they said,

00:05:40.300 let's get this deal done and the president turns around

00:05:42.480 and says the same stuff he's been saying,

00:05:44.700 I don't know how much that matters.

00:05:47.540 Well, there was a discussion that happened on the sidelines

00:05:50.820 between our chief negotiator and the minister in charge of the Canada-US relation with their

00:05:56.280 counterpart. I think it does signal that Trump does not want to come to the table and that perhaps

00:06:02.080 Canada has not conceded enough to get Trump to want to have a bilateral meeting with Prime

00:06:07.620 Minister Carney. I don't think that we need to be worried about that though. I mean it would have

00:06:11.660 been a very positive signal had that happened. That signal is not there for obvious reasons and

00:06:16.320 the president kind of elaborated on those reasons after the G7 was over. I also don't think that

00:06:24.620 we need to, you know, assume worst case scenario, because I think this is like pre-negotiation

00:06:31.020 posturing, and we will see what actually emerges in terms of later on this summer and into the fall.

00:06:36.820 The problem is we actually are in the worst scenario right now. They're trying to say it's

00:06:42.080 all right. At the same time, you can see Althea Raj and the other people on the panel basically

00:06:48.060 just pointing at the fact that Carney has been giving up a lot of concessions effectively just

00:06:53.940 to get to the negotiating table. And that still hasn't even happened yet. And it's not about

00:06:59.080 Canada hasn't made enough concessions. Maybe from Trump's perspective, that's what he would say.

00:07:05.260 But from our perspective, I would say that we haven't established enough leverage to get to

00:07:10.740 the negotiating table. Now, I hate the digital services tax. I hated the streaming tax. But

00:07:17.340 if I were the liberals and I believe in those things, which I don't, it's just a tax on

00:07:21.800 consumers. In fact, I really don't care if it's a tax on business or consumers. The government

00:07:26.320 taxes enough and we should be lowering or eliminating taxes. But if I were the liberals,

00:07:31.780 I would have kept those things in place and said, well, you know what? How about we meet

00:07:36.000 and we'll figure out how to get rid of those if we can get rid of some of your tariffs.

00:07:39.300 That would be fantastic. But Carney doesn't even realize when he has leverage, even the little bits

00:07:45.700 of moments where he gets his hand on some leverage. He looks at it, doesn't know what it is, and just

00:07:50.240 throws it in the fire. And it's like, oh my goodness, dude, do something that's going to

00:07:54.480 increase our leverage. Either impose taxes that you say that you'll only take down if they will

00:08:01.400 remove some of their tariffs, or you just start eliminating our own taxes on our side to make

00:08:06.640 our economy better so we have more economic power against the Americans. But Carney has picked no

00:08:12.820 strategy, as I've been explaining from the top here. We aren't giving up any concessions. We

00:08:17.740 also aren't making any demands. We're not raising any taxes and keeping it there in order to put

00:08:23.380 some pressure on the Americans. At the same time, we're also not lowering our own taxes domestically

00:08:28.340 to make us a better business environment than the average American state. In fact, our GDP is now

00:08:34.760 lower than Alabama, as you have seen be highly publicized over the past few months. Anyways,

00:08:40.940 but that's it for that clip. I now need to take you into the Aaron O'Toole clip,

00:08:45.500 and I'm blown away that I actually agree with Aaron O'Toole. He is, like, easily the most liberal

00:08:52.200 Conservative Party leader since Joe Clark, terrible leader of the Conservative Party,

00:08:57.780 basically is not really conservative in any way, shape, or form, but he actually hits the nail on

00:09:02.940 the head here. What he says is not profound, but it is profound to be spoken on the CBC because the

00:09:09.180 CBC has mostly just been cheerleading Mark Carney up until recently where they're now just confused

00:09:16.000 by the lack of progress. He actually vocalizes that to get a trade deal, you might have to give

00:09:22.580 up something, which is going to blow the minds of elbows up liberals because they believe you just

00:09:27.460 go elbows up, you go aggressive, you ask for everything and say you're going to give them

00:09:30.460 nothing back and eventually the enemy breaks. But that is not how negotiations work. I mean,

00:09:35.960 the best scenario, I suppose, would be that the president and those in the administration believe

00:09:41.200 they have extracted concessions while we have offered very few concessions, if any. But some

00:09:47.940 of those irritants are they don't want to make cars with American automobile companies in Canada

00:09:53.460 anymore. I mean, do we lose that? Do we have to give up on dairy supply management? Where are the

00:09:58.280 potential gives here? Well, you hit it, David. We need to let the president feel he's extracted a

00:10:04.140 win, but it's actually not a loss for us. So I use energy as an example often. Our oil and gas can

00:10:13.180 actually help the Americans with energy security, with costs, get cost of living down. So Keystone

00:10:19.440 XL always comes up with the president. But on auto, the auto industry and the supply chains

00:10:25.520 for steel and aluminum are also being used for defense. The U.S. behind China on shipbuilding,

00:10:31.140 and that's been a real issue for 10 years in Congress, those same supply chains, why break

00:10:36.660 them up? They can help make a competitive auto industry. They can also help the U.S. with some

00:10:42.600 of its rearmament for defense. Our critical minerals can help with military need and with

00:10:48.520 electrification. So we have to sell ourselves a little bit more strategically. I was there under

00:10:54.160 the Trudeau attempts at Kuzma, and we didn't manage that executive relationship with the

00:10:59.880 president well. This time, I do see the government taking a more serious approach.

00:11:04.640 But with President Trump, we're also going to have to persevere through some of his

00:11:09.280 interventions. Yes, that's one way to put it. I suppose, what have we learned then

00:11:15.500 in between the approach that we once took and the one that we are now taking as a country?

00:11:20.420 What have we learned about, in particular, dealing with this president?

00:11:24.160 I think the biggest thing we've learned is the US concerns about China. The last time under

00:11:31.160 Ms. Freeland and Mr. Trudeau, we were quietly trying to broker a free trade agreement with

00:11:36.400 China. At the same time, the US were saying, we don't want to see Chinese dominance in rare earth 0.88

00:11:41.400 minerals, critical minerals, steel and aluminum. Now, this is the actual key point here. I let it

00:11:48.040 run for a while there, but this whole point, and some of it is kind of boilerplate, just sort of

00:11:53.780 liberal marketing of Canada, of we have such great minerals. We are part of your supply chain. We

00:11:59.880 help make goods manufacturing cheaper in the United States. That's all cool, fair enough,

00:12:04.620 that should be vocalized at some point. But this is the key thing. It annoys the Americans how

00:12:10.080 close Canada has gotten to China. And yet we keep trying to get closer while we also just demand

00:12:16.800 that the US be okay with it. We actually, after signing that Chinese trade agreement,

00:12:22.500 The US then passed stricter measures against forced labor and supply chains. That freaked us out. So we passed Bill C-35 because we realized that our deal with China puts us at risk of actually being hit by heavier tariffs because Canada is turning a blind eye to forced labor.

00:12:41.760 Now, Bill C-35 is supposedly cracking down on labor that come or, you know, goods that are heavily manufactured or or like minerals that are mined in areas or other resources that come from areas with Uyghur Muslim slave labor. 0.89

00:12:57.360 The problem is there's slave labor all over China. 0.98

00:13:00.020 And at the end of the day, by passing Bill C-35, we basically just signal to the Americans that we know we're effectively guilty of using slave labor.

00:13:07.560 But the problem is we refuse to just cut the tie.

00:13:10.860 We refuse to just reduce Chinese trade in order to get the 79% of exports we do to the US to be stronger. We should just focus on that 79%, not turning this 5% we have with China into 7%. It's so asinine what we are doing right now.

00:13:27.000 And that is what Aaron O'Toole is saying, that we are we are fighting tooth and nail to keep the five in direct, like in direct, like with it directly affecting and hurting our chances of maintaining the 79 percent we already have.

00:13:43.760 We could even grow the 79 percent to equal a greater amount of exports.

00:13:48.340 We didn't align our tariffs.

00:13:50.240 We didn't approach it as a fortress North America that you hear that term.

00:13:54.160 So now we are, about a year and a half ago, almost two years ago, we aligned on tariffs with China.

00:14:00.720 So the one thing Prime Minister Carney has to be very careful on, and you saw him talking to the president about this in France.

00:14:06.360 Yeah, the Chinese EVs.

00:14:07.540 The Chinese EVs.

00:14:08.760 We're finally in line on a North American approach to what we see as disruptive trade practices from China on what the president now calls critical minerals, metals, steel and aluminum.

00:14:20.740 Canada's aluminum supply for almost 100 years has been critical to the United States.

00:14:25.740 So we can't, because the U.S. is pushing us away.

00:14:28.360 They have a tariff on it.

00:14:29.260 They have a tariff on it.

00:14:30.140 And it's causing aluminum shortages with the Strait of Hormuz crisis as well.

00:14:34.300 So I think we have to realize that some of these initiatives the Prime Minister is looking at with China

00:14:40.260 may have to be tossed in the negotiating discussion on KUSMA

00:14:45.040 because the U.S. relationship is critical to our economy.

00:14:49.500 China is very important for agriculture in a couple of sectors,

00:14:52.380 but we cannot run into the arms of China because the U.S. is giving us challenges.

00:14:57.740 And that's the balance the government has to take and what our committee has said to them

00:15:02.820 because the people of our committee that have employees in the U.S.,

00:15:06.620 they're hearing these concerns about Canada and China.

00:15:09.540 So I do think the Prime Minister is walking a tightrope.

00:15:11.740 So far, he's walking it.

00:15:13.660 And as a Canadian, I want to see us walk it successful

00:15:16.360 and get a deal that will help, particularly workers.

00:15:19.280 I used to represent auto workers in Oshawa.

00:15:22.440 I know how worried the auto parts sector is.

00:15:25.560 So we need a deal, and I think we're putting forward

00:15:28.460 both the negotiation table and the relations with the president to get one.

00:15:33.180 See, and that's what he's trying to signal to Carney,

00:15:36.440 because he said that him and the committee that Carney has put together

00:15:40.220 to advise him on trade negotiations with the United States

00:15:43.280 are telling him that it's the China element that you have to drop. It's not like they haven't told

00:15:48.780 this to Carney yet. They did tell it to him. Aaron O'Toole just said that they've been advising him

00:15:53.760 on this. And as of two, three days ago, Carney gets caught on a hot mic trying to basically

00:15:59.000 almost beg Trump to not be concerned about the EV dumping. And it is EV dumping. I'm a free trade

00:16:06.060 guy, but China does not adhere to the rules of free trade. They violate patents, they steal

00:16:13.100 copyright materials, and effectively, they don't have to go through all the R&D for new products,

00:16:18.280 they just steal it and then manufacture it cheaply with a lot of forced labor. So you can't actually

00:16:24.140 allow these people to just dump products that are cheaper onto your market, because they are not

00:16:29.380 actually, it would be like, would we put up with just different companies popping up with literally

00:16:35.700 stolen products from another one that had to put billions of dollars into development and they're

00:16:40.020 just selling it cheaper because they didn't have to go through the r&d process no they'd get

00:16:44.480 prosecuted into the floor but apparently if you go do it in another country then it's just free

00:16:49.460 trade i am in favor of free trade but free trade actually has to be legal as well you can't just

00:16:56.000 say well you know they just make it cheaper than us it's like well they're using slaves so i don't

00:17:01.380 really see it that way. But you get my point here. Carney does not want to give up this China thing.

00:17:07.780 I don't know why he believes in it so much. Maybe he is just genuinely that anti-American. He wants

00:17:13.500 Canada to grow closer to the global south. And then also what we have with or the global east

00:17:20.400 as well, east and south. And then he also will not touch supply management. The funny thing is,

00:17:26.820 in this scenario, if we put on, okay, we will stop letting EVs into Canada. Yes, they might

00:17:34.060 hit our canola. America, you just have to buy more canola from us. We could just make that

00:17:38.120 part of a deal. You had to buy more seafood products and canola. That is it. In order to 0.97

00:17:43.260 make up for the fact that China's going to tariff us on those, we will stop letting them trade cars

00:17:48.000 into Canada. They will ban our canola, but then you had to buy canola. But in exchange, you guys

00:17:53.720 will go down to zero tariffs with us, we will give up all of our China stuff, and we will give

00:17:58.660 up supply management. Two policies that aren't even good for Canadians. It's more of a national

00:18:04.260 security thing on the China side, but with supply management, as I showed on the show yesterday,

00:18:09.100 and I want to pull it up again now because it's just such an interesting chart. Supply management

00:18:13.920 is terrible for the average consumer. The average consumer is being hurt by supply management.

00:18:21.640 Right now, Canadians are paying massive amounts of money just for the regulatory cost of supply management.

00:18:29.960 Do I have it here? Am I missing it?

00:18:32.580 I'm going to find it in just a second here, everybody.

00:18:36.020 We'll be getting to it.

00:18:37.280 So for right now, in terms of it, it breaks it down into quintiles.

00:18:41.140 So 20, like the bottom 20% of people at the moment are currently paying about 1.25% of

00:18:49.900 their income, their household's income every year, just for the costs of supply management.

00:18:56.860 I'm going to pause actually just so I can find this chart just because I'm just fumbling

00:19:00.120 around too much at the moment.

00:19:02.180 Okay, here we go.

00:19:03.320 I found it.

00:19:03.980 It's such a good post.

00:19:05.300 i just want to read the whole thing again like i did yesterday vincent just so a gel so here says

00:19:11.620 supply management in canada costs 1.25 of the income of the poorest quintile of households

00:19:18.100 one single policy affecting five products milk butter chicken eggs and cheese raises prices by

00:19:24.420 reducing supply enough to represent 1.25 of the income of the poor if you're a politician do not

00:19:30.980 talk to me about poverty alleviation, Canada, if you don't want to scrap supply management.

00:19:36.500 Now, look at this. This is the mean supply management cost per household. Your obviously

00:19:41.060 top quintile spends the most money on goods in general, so they pay the most when it comes to

00:19:46.160 supply management, but it represents a far smaller cost of their yearly income. But quintile one,

00:19:52.400 people really pinching their pennies to make sure or more watching their pennies to make sure

00:19:57.740 that they are able to stay solvent. The bottom quintile, bottom 20% of households in terms of

00:20:04.780 income pay $279 a year just to afford the cost that supply management policies stack on top

00:20:13.000 of products. This is $279. It's not like this is the cost of all five of those products per year,

00:20:22.020 obviously. This is just the cost added on top of it. And the second chart shows what percentage

00:20:27.360 of your income every year, not post-tax income, not profit. This is income in general. 1.25%

00:20:37.760 of bottom quintile income just goes towards paying the cost, just the cost of supply management

00:20:46.620 on top of what the products already cost, what they should be costing only. That is absolutely

00:20:54.260 ridiculous even middle income families are put from quintiles two to four hey 0.7 uh 0.69 to 0.78

00:21:03.680 percent of their income and yes every i find a lot of people see this stuff and they they think 0.64

00:21:09.000 well it's not more than one percent or it's not a few it's only it's less than a percent it doesn't

00:21:13.740 matter how many things how many things does the government do to you per year that cost 0.5 0.2

00:21:20.600 0.1, 0.7% of your income. And if they just got rid of those stupid regulations, 0.99

00:21:25.320 you would be literally saving 3, 4, 5% of your yearly income every year, not having to spend it 1.00

00:21:32.060 on stupid garbage. Supply management is stupid garbage. And in a negotiation with the Americans 1.00

00:21:38.440 on trade, it's a very easy win to give to Trump. The psychology of Trump is very simple. He's a

00:21:45.020 very simplistic man, but at the same time, he's very complicated. But when it comes to winning,

00:21:49.620 He's very simple. He likes winning. You have to give him something so he can go into the midterm

00:21:54.620 election saying, I won. I won against Canada. And guess what? We'll just be quiet about it for a

00:21:59.940 week. And then we can start saying we actually won too. We actually won massively. Zero tariffs.

00:22:04.760 Supply management wasn't good for Canadians anyways. We got rid of it. We got rid of the

00:22:08.180 Chinese EVs. They're a national security threat. And we have this fantastic free trade situation 1.00

00:22:12.640 with the United States now. But we don't want to do it because Carney, I think it's an ego problem

00:22:18.120 and it's an anti-American problem. I think he kind of, not even secretly, he secretly despises

00:22:25.340 America even more than he already does publicly. And I think that he also sees Trump as this

00:22:31.780 disgusting non-sophisticate. You know, you see, Carney's the sophisticate and Trump is not a 0.93

00:22:37.480 sophisticate. And so Carney shouldn't even have to be asking Trump for anything. He shouldn't have

00:22:42.800 to negotiate with this buffoon. And because Carney is so terrified of being out-negotiated 0.99

00:22:49.780 by the non-sophisticate, he's just refusing to negotiate at all, meaning that he is driving the

00:22:55.820 Canadian economy into quarters of decline. We are in a recession right now because Carney's ego is

00:23:03.500 too big to get into the boardroom with Trump and actually hammer out a deal, make some concessions,

00:23:09.040 make some demands and put something together at the end of the day where both men can leave the

00:23:13.380 room saying they won. Will people on both sides back in their own countries? In Canada, the

00:23:18.920 conservatives will say that Carney lost in some way. In America, the Democrats will say that

00:23:23.960 Trump lost in some way. That's politics. I'm a conservative. I don't really want Carney to

00:23:29.660 succeed in office because he's mostly doing bad things for the country and I like to see a big

00:23:34.260 change. But if I was on Carney's side, I would just be like, you're popular right now, make a

00:23:39.520 couple of concessions, get a couple wins out of it, and you'll be fine. The economy will be back

00:23:44.380 on track. And that's what really matters. I'd be saying the same thing to Trump. Get a couple

00:23:48.760 concessions, give a big thing on the other side for the Canadians. Both of you can walk away 0.97

00:23:53.580 winning and you can lower prices going into the midterm elections and win. That's all each side

00:23:58.780 needs to do. But Carney is the real roadblock here because he thinks that Trump should just

00:24:02.840 have to eat a loss on this and Canada should get what it wants and America shouldn't get anything.

00:24:07.820 I'm not anti-Canadian to point out we're a country of 41 million people. They're a country of over

00:24:12.740 340 million people. We have a little less power here. That doesn't mean that we should just

00:24:17.960 basically eat a big loss on this. That just means that sort of thematically, especially because we

00:24:24.440 don't have any elections coming up like the Americans, thematically, we have to let Trump

00:24:28.940 think he has a big win here but carney refuses to do it it's and it's because the elbows up base 1.00

00:24:35.200 he cannot disappoint the elbows up base because the the laura babcocks of the world those sorts 0.98

00:24:41.820 of people refuse to see trump the americans as like normal human beings that should be dealt 1.00

00:24:49.040 with on a one-to-one level they see them as so much lower they would rather canada keep shooting

00:24:54.920 ourselves in the foot, rather than signing trade agreement, that's also good for the Americans.

00:25:00.000 That is anathema to them. Anyways, so is that it for this video? Or is there anything else I want

00:25:06.860 to talk about? Actually, you know what I do want to talk about? I'm going to fit this into this

00:25:10.140 video, because I feel like it's a standalone video wouldn't do very well. But we have a new

00:25:16.460 pullout that I find very, very exciting. And it has nothing to do with Canadian like parties or

00:25:23.720 where the parties stand right now in national polls. It's about the death penalty. I really

00:25:32.340 like this poll because I really like the death penalty for humanitarian reasons because I believe 0.99

00:25:38.000 that we should be killing killers. This is the death penalty's approval rating right now in

00:25:43.700 Canada. The death penalty is, is the question, and the answers are sometimes appropriate, 0.83

00:25:48.900 never appropriate, always appropriate. 56% of Canadians think it's sometimes appropriate for

00:25:54.840 the death penalty. Combined with 14% who say it's always appropriate, that is a 70% approval rating

00:26:04.260 on the death penalty with only 23% saying it's never appropriate and 7% more being undecided.

00:26:10.940 The federal Conservative Party should be running on bringing back the death penalty. We would not

00:26:15.860 have to be dealing with paul de bernardo in minimum security prison if we just hung the guy

00:26:21.440 i don't i don't even like lethal injection just bring back something that's fast and easy

00:26:25.940 bullets don't cost a lot of money that would be an easy win for the federal conservatives to run on

00:26:31.180 because it's a good theatrical thing to run on begging and getting rid of serial murderers is 0.96

00:26:38.560 a good idea and that's all you have to run on multiple murders should be put to death the

00:26:42.900 Conservatives should run on bringing that back. They should also run on being pro-life at the

00:26:47.560 same time, saying that we should be banning later-term abortions. These are actually big

00:26:52.980 vote-getters, people. I know everyone says, no, you don't touch the abortion issue because

00:26:56.900 everyone who's ever been a hack commentator in legacy media says it would lose the Conservative

00:27:01.840 Party votes. It would not. Late-term abortion has an approval rating in Canada. If you actually

00:27:08.040 ask people if you would ban it like fourth trimester, third trimester, it polls like

00:27:12.300 salmonella. Nobody actually likes those practices. And if you ran on banning super late-term abortion,

00:27:18.460 a lot of people would be like, well, I didn't realize it was even legal. And then your opponent

00:27:22.500 has to justify not banning it, which is a bit uncomfortable. And there are so many socially

00:27:27.760 conservative, church-going people we lose to the liberals every year because they live in the

00:27:32.800 Maritimes. They live in Eastern Ontario. They live in North Ontario. And they vote liberal,

00:27:38.760 not because they have liberal values, but because the conservatives don't run on anything

00:27:42.680 socially conservative. So what's the point? They're not voting their values by voting

00:27:46.160 conservatives because the conservatives only run on economics. And so they vote for their pensions

00:27:50.880 because they're over the age of 65. And well, the conservatives are basically just going to

00:27:56.620 maintain my pension. Liberals are running on increasing benefits. I'll vote for that. It's

00:28:03.280 not like the conservatives are pro-life. So why don't I vote for the liberals? Because they're

00:28:06.520 both not pro-life, but the liberals are offering me more money. That describes a large portion of

00:28:12.420 voters. I'm not saying 30%. Like everything, usually 2% or 3% is actually a lot of voters

00:28:17.980 in terms of a specific interest group. I guarantee you 2% or 3% of people who currently vote liberal

00:28:24.440 and are over the age of 60 would actually consider going towards the conservatives if they ran on

00:28:30.420 pro-life family value policies. Because right now, the conservative's theme is finances,

00:28:37.860 economics and finances. And it's not even particularly spicy financial issues.

00:28:42.060 Run on a 20% across-the-board tax cut. 20% corporate tax cut. One point off the GST,

00:28:49.020 run on something like that if you're going to run on economics. But even then, the conservatives

00:28:52.500 are running on blah policies. They're running on, well, I'll give you a boutique tax credit if you

00:29:00.060 invest your money in a Canadian company. It's like, okay, okay, I get it, guys. That's a very

00:29:05.480 low effort way of cutting taxes, and then you don't have to justify how you're going to balance

00:29:10.180 the budget because it's easier if you don't reduce revenues. But revenues will be easier to collect in

00:29:15.680 the future in taxes. If you just cut taxes now, grow the economy. Stop trying to maintain the

00:29:22.180 majority of taxes on the economy as they are, hoping that you'll grow into a bigger economy

00:29:27.780 me in 10 years. You won't. You need a massive tax cut, or you'll never compete with the Americans.

00:29:34.220 This is now, as we're getting later into the video, I can kind of just tell you things that

00:29:38.460 I hear inside politics. I have heard, and I hope it's not true, that Pierre Polyev has given up,

00:29:45.220 that Polyev doesn't really call MPs back anymore, not really trying to make caucus like him anymore.

00:29:50.960 He's just kind of sitting there, and some people are saying he sees the writing on the wall,

00:29:56.000 or he thinks there's writing on the wall,

00:29:57.600 seeing that he might get thrown out as leader in the fall.

00:30:01.020 If he thinks that, my goodness, try something.

00:30:05.540 Polyev, try something.

00:30:06.720 I don't even disagree with him most of the time

00:30:08.560 in terms of the way he goes after liberals.

00:30:10.900 That's fine.

00:30:11.900 You have to offer something big on the other side

00:30:13.960 or else you can be buttonholed as just the naysayer of Mark Carney.

00:30:19.140 Run on a thematic change to what the liberals are doing.

00:30:25.060 massive tax cuts, massive social reform, a very freedom-minded policy that brings family values

00:30:32.840 back into the government's lexicon. I think that would be a good idea. That is what you need to

00:30:38.960 run on. It needs to be low taxes and like families and apple pie. Right now, it feels like the 0.99

00:30:45.300 commerce party a little bit. And again, I don't even disagree with them on commerce exactly.

00:30:49.500 It's still not impactful enough what they're doing. You have to have a big tax cut,

00:30:54.240 pro-life policies, run on the death penalty, run on a massive crackdown on crime, run on getting 0.99

00:31:00.100 rid of Chinese trade. Not like fully, but let's restrict it and go more with the Americans. Let's 0.88

00:31:05.620 not deal with third world dictators and developing world technocrats. Let's stop it. That would be 1.00

00:31:12.340 great. But I feel like right now, based on what I hear behind the scenes, Polyev is just hoping

00:31:18.380 that Carney hits a giant economics brick wall and then he'll win. Carney is not a dumb man. 0.98

00:31:24.660 He's not smart either, but he can adapt when the economy is doing bad. He will adapt. He'll throw 0.93

00:31:31.340 more money at certain sectors and make it look like the GDP is increasing. He can pull out of

00:31:36.580 this tailspin when it comes to the economy if he needs to, to get himself together for another

00:31:41.480 election. And I really hope that the conservatives, like so many conservatives, don't just sit there

00:31:47.220 and wait to win. You will lose if you wait to win. That's why we lost in 25. That's why we lost in

00:31:52.360 2021. That's why we lost in 2019. And guess what? That's why Stephen Harper lost in 2015. Stephen

00:31:59.960 Harper lost in 2015 because Jenny Byrne is a terrible campaign manager. And in fact, Stephen

00:32:05.500 Harper lacked the instincts to say this wasn't working. I don't mind Stephen Harper. Don't love

00:32:10.900 him. Don't hate him. Not like I think he was a bad prime minister. I just think probably could

00:32:14.720 have done more regardless though he could have gotten he but the thing is the 2015 campaign

00:32:19.760 was a safe campaign it was a safe campaign saying stick with me don't go with Volcker

00:32:25.400 don't go with Trudeau they're crazy don't go with them stick with us we've slightly lowered your

00:32:31.880 taxes and it's like oh my goodness where is the oomph where is the impact run on something big

00:32:37.700 This is Blaine Higgs was a really good premier of New Brunswick. Blaine Higgs lost the 2024 election because Blaine Higgs didn't cut taxes. Simple as that. He was actually a really good socially conservative premier. Fantastic. He's actually him and the former People's Alliance leader who then merged into the PCs, Chris Austin. They kicked off the parental rights movement in Canada.

00:33:02.740 They did a great job on that front. They even balanced a budget for three years in a row in New Brunswick, which sounds fake. It sounds fake that a maritime province actually balanced the budget for one year, let alone three. But then he ran on, if you elect me, I'll cut the PST by two points. And it's like, oh my goodness, Blaine, cut income taxes and knock a point or two off the PST before the election. Do it and then run on the fact you did it.

00:33:30.640 Never be in for two terms running for your third term saying, hey, if you left me for

00:33:34.440 this third term, I'll give you tax relief.

00:33:37.380 Give them tax relief a year and a half beforehand, then run on the fact you did it. 0.98

00:33:41.940 Same thing with Danielle Smith right now. 1.00

00:33:43.800 She should be finding a way of cutting taxes in the next budget, even by 1%. 1.00

00:33:49.100 That would be great. 1.00

00:33:50.840 Move towards a flat tax.

00:33:52.480 That's a great narrative to run on.

00:33:53.920 If you just generally keep things stable, general stability is not enough to get people

00:33:58.940 to go out to the ballot box.

00:34:00.200 People want excitement. They want forward momentum.

00:34:03.260 That's why people in Manitoba, like the truly awful NDP Premier, Wob Canu,

00:34:08.440 he's good at manufactured momentum. 0.70

00:34:10.940 And the PCs in Manitoba, led by the horrible OB-Con, 0.70

00:34:14.360 suck at manufacturing political momentum in opposition.

00:34:19.000 They basically just sit there and say, 0.99

00:34:20.140 well, I would have done basically what Wob Canu did, but more responsibly.

00:34:24.980 whoa oh my goodness wally daldrich should really be the manitoba pc leader you'd actually have a

00:34:30.980 real conservative heading up a party for once but whatever this is why in british columbia the party

00:34:36.260 i work for 1bc we run on a 25 across the board tax cut two points off the pst defund the

00:34:42.620 reconciliation industry defund dei and pride nonsense just get back towards basics the

00:34:49.740 government should be doing no bible classes and schools not the government's job nothing you don't

00:34:54.680 need the government to be a socially conservative government that teaches it, but it should enable

00:34:58.840 more, it should enable socially conservative activities by not funding hyper-progressive

00:35:04.960 activities. Make it a free market of social choices. That is what we need. Anyways, this video

00:35:11.540 has turned into a big political ramble by the end, but I hope Polly of people listen to me.

00:35:17.000 The messaging needs to be sharper on your own policy. Stop it with I'll get rid of the industrial

00:35:22.760 carbon tax and we'll reduce gas taxes for a year no income taxes down permanently kickstart the

00:35:31.140 economy that's what you want to say i want to kickstart the economy mark carney is just having

00:35:36.140 us pushing us into managed decline run on that i'm agitated now guys what can i say anyways that

00:35:44.860 should be actually it for this video i like how i said that should be it for this video at like the

00:35:49.280 22-minute mark, and we're now at 35 minutes, but that's just what happens on the wild and wacky

00:35:54.420 world of Wyatt Claypool here. Anyways, make sure you like the video, subscribe, consider hitting

00:36:01.400 the join button and becoming a member of the channel. YouTube has been kicking my butt recently. 0.87

00:36:06.360 In fact, actually, no, this isn't the end of the video, guys. Tricked ya. The real members of the 0.95

00:36:11.560 channel stick to the very, very bitter end here, and I want to show you the back end of the channel,

00:36:17.320 at least in part to show you just how much youtube sometimes kicks me in the face

00:36:22.640 youtube right now has been absolutely like like dumping on me when it comes to uh view counts of

00:36:29.820 videos so i'll just zoom in here uh but you can see here in the last dozen videos i've made or so

00:36:37.180 or the last few videos it has been like flatlining in like the in like the tens of thousands 19 000

00:36:44.240 11, 10, 10, 15, 22, 38, that was nice, 16, 27, 25, 7, 22, 18, even though I have over 90,000

00:36:53.480 subscribers, I've been talking about this to Jasmine Lane behind the scenes, even though she 0.88

00:36:59.100 has a much bigger channel than me, so obviously she has more views, but she also has the problem

00:37:02.400 where a video will be released, and no subscribers will get a notification, you'll click on your

00:37:08.640 subscription feed, you won't even see my videos, and so my video will come out, it'll be immediately

00:37:13.600 like flat line like barely crawling over a thousand views by the hour mark and it's just

00:37:18.320 maddening to live through so if you are subscribed to the channel make sure you hit the notification

00:37:24.440 bell make sure you comment make sure you like i do scroll through the comments but in part people

00:37:30.260 should comment because it makes it so that youtube doesn't kick me in the face as much because i'm 0.50

00:37:34.780 apparently engagement is king these days i don't even know youtube just sucks it just does not

00:37:40.840 function properly it wants to show you like a mr beast video and all you watch is canadian 0.90

00:37:44.960 politics it's just stupid well anyways with all that being said i'm finally done here guys and 0.56

00:37:50.740 i'll see you all later 0.74

The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - June 19, 2026

Carney is FLOPPING - Media thinks Liberals Trump Trade Strategy Is A FAIL!

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript