The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - June 09, 2026


Liberals' Poll Lead CRUSHED by 4% After Recession – Carney in Trouble？


Episode Stats


Length

32 minutes

Words per minute

173.61

Word count

5,663

Sentence count

243


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
00:00:00.000 Ahoy, everyone. It's whiteboard time on the National Telegraph, where we go over some Canadian national polling numbers and explain how they are being affected by recent events in Canadian politics.
00:00:12.900 Today on the show, we will be specifically discussing the new numbers out of abacus data that show the Mark Carney liberal lead heavily falling off right now in the aftermath of the recession,
00:00:24.340 issues around trade talks, as well as the resurgency of the NDP in provinces like British
00:00:31.260 Columbia and Ontario. So we're going to be starting off with the national numbers, how they've changed
00:00:36.600 since the last Abacus data poll, and later on this video I might also just go into making fun of the
00:00:42.680 new Nanos poll. I know everyone's saying, oh my goodness, pure Polyev has cooked, the conservatives
00:00:47.520 can't win, and I'm going to explain why I don't trust that poll. I don't dislike everything that
00:00:54.540 comes out of nanos, but when a polling firm puts something out that's ridiculous,
00:00:59.640 you ignore it. That's not just saying ignore numbers you don't like. That is saying ignore
00:01:03.840 numbers that don't make any sense, and I'm going to later explain why the nanosurvey makes no sense.
00:01:11.120 But before I get into the abacus data numbers, I just want to remind you guys, if you like the
00:01:15.700 show, make sure to leave a like on the video. Subscribe if you are not yet a subscriber. I'm
00:01:20.380 still on my hard charge to try and get to 100,000 subscribers. And of course, if you want to support
00:01:26.120 the show and sort of these niche type videos I make on the whiteboard, consider hitting the
00:01:30.580 join button below the video and becoming a channel member, contributing a few dollars a month to make
00:01:36.100 it more sustainable for me and allow me to be less reliant on the YouTube algorithm. Anyways,
00:01:41.540 Without further ado, let's get into these numbers, and I'm just going to show you what the current numbers are, and then I'll show you what the change was since the last Abacus Data survey.
00:01:52.180 So right now, we do have the Liberals in the lead, and that should not be surprising right now.
00:01:57.440 Again, because of Mark Carney's fighting with Trump and the Americans, he kind of has this patriotic rally around the flag kind of effect going on for the Liberal Party.
00:02:06.820 So the Liberals currently are at 44% in the new Abacus data poll. But you'll notice that's only about half a percent better than they actually did in the last federal election.
00:02:19.980 So although everyone keeps saying that Mark Carney is wildly popular, they do need to sort of remember that he really hasn't budged in most polls since the last election.
00:02:32.560 He's a little bit up, he's a little bit down, but he's usually been hovering around that 44-43% number.
00:02:39.460 In the last Abacus poll, he was up at 47%, but that was a bit of a popularity spike.
00:02:45.160 It was a bit of an outlier compared to what they've normally been putting him at.
00:02:49.180 But then let's move on to Pierre Polyev's conservatives, who are currently sitting at 36%. Definitely not amazing. That is down from the previous election when they had about 41.5% of the vote, but also not that bad. It's not the giant fall off that people are saying is occurring and you have to get rid of Pierre Polyev and the conservatives can't win.
00:03:12.420 it's basically a couple news cycles separate the liberals and the conservatives liberals have a
00:03:18.820 couple bad news cycles it could be a tie ball game pretty quickly here and in fact the conservatives
00:03:24.500 actually have a more efficient vote these days so each vote for the conservatives is worth more than
00:03:30.160 a vote for the liberals it depends on where your vote allocation or what your vote allocation looks
00:03:35.400 like liberals back in 2015 2019 2021 used to have more efficient voting than the conservatives
00:03:41.840 and recently it has swapped then we have the NDP at not a great number but respectable considering
00:03:50.000 what they were at last election they are at 11 percent of the vote that is partly probably
00:03:57.320 because Avi Lewis has tacked out a position left wing enough from Mark Carney that he actually
00:04:03.620 has the ability to differentiate himself more than Jagmeet Singh did with Justin Trudeau
00:04:08.580 And also just because I think there's a couple of files that Mark Carney has rhetorically blundered on, giving room to the NDP to sort of cut into his support base.
00:04:18.580 We have the Bloc Québécois here at 6% of the vote. That's effectively where they were at last election. And we have the Green Party of Canada sitting at 3%, which would actually bring them up from just one seat with Elizabeth May to them maybe having two or three seats, depending on where that 3% is allocated.
00:04:41.200 if they can pick up another seat on Vancouver Island potentially or if they're able to grab
00:04:46.840 Kitchener back which they had won previously and then by election back I think like 2023-2022
00:04:52.860 sometime there or it might have been 21 regardless from some it was 21 yeah there was some like
00:04:58.520 crazy liberal candidate who got had to be kicked out and then that caused the greens to surge
00:05:03.660 because that's where all the liberals like abandoned support towards regardless though
00:05:08.960 this is the current national picture of where the Canadian population is at right now. This
00:05:17.320 is, of course, an 8% lead for the Liberal Party. But although this would be strong numbers in a
00:05:24.260 general election, it is a significant drop-off since the last Abacus data poll that came out.
00:05:30.620 And I like Abacus because they tend to have very consistent polling. When I say that,
00:05:36.100 That doesn't mean that there isn't sometimes swings that occur, but the swings make sense.
00:05:41.080 They follow the news cycle.
00:05:42.520 If it's a bad news cycle for the conservatives, the conservatives are down.
00:05:46.040 Bad news cycle for the liberals, the liberals are down.
00:05:48.680 Good news cycle for the liberals, they'll be up.
00:05:51.080 And the proportion that they rise and fall makes sense.
00:05:54.640 They're not just jumping up six points and falling down 10.
00:05:58.280 That's what other pollsters show, and that is a bad pollster.
00:06:02.300 That is not how public opinion works.
00:06:04.160 Do you think if you go knock on your neighbor's door after something happens on the news, they're going to be like, never voting for those guys again? It takes a while. If you surveyed probably 20 people you know about how their voting patterns change month to month, it's slow. Maybe one of them tends to flip-flop a little bit more in the news cycle matters. Most people stick to who they were voting for last time because it's who ideologically represents them or who represents them best, at least on the one or two issues they really care about.
00:06:32.660 But now let's go over what the changes were since the last poll from Abacus.
00:06:39.120 So the Liberals are actually down 3% since the last Abacus data poll.
00:06:46.600 Conservatives haven't benefited that much, but they've still benefited.
00:06:49.740 They are up 1% of the vote.
00:06:52.380 We have the NDP up 3%, the Bloc Québécois holding neutral, not moving anywhere,
00:06:59.720 and the Green Party of Canada moving up by one point.
00:07:04.880 Now, this is a very bad trend for the Liberals
00:07:08.020 because, as you can see, they were previously at 47%,
00:07:12.920 with the Conservatives at 35%, a 12% lead for the Liberals.
00:07:18.820 That's probably a little bit hyperbolic of a lead,
00:07:22.040 but if the news cycle is good for the Liberals,
00:07:24.240 the Liberal voters are more likely to pick up the phone and answer a poll,
00:07:27.400 leading to them having slightly better numbers than the conservatives or better numbers than
00:07:32.680 they should have. But again, we have now fallen from 12% to 8%. So a third of the liberal lead
00:07:40.320 was wiped out in a single news cycle, and it is because of the recession. We have the NDP
00:07:46.740 mainly benefiting from this change in the polling, and this is going to start heavily
00:07:52.640 cutting into the liberal seats because the NDP below 10, like around 6%, 7%, they're going to win
00:07:59.620 10 seats maybe at best. Once they start pushing above 10%, that's when they're starting to win
00:08:06.660 16, 18, 20 seats, 25 seats. If this number can get to 15%, 13% even, they are probably winning
00:08:16.360 about 18, 19 seats in areas that the liberals should be winning the seats. So it's not like
00:08:21.980 it's going to be hurting the conservatives. All of the NDP gains are off of the liberals. And in
00:08:27.460 fact, the conservatives are also gaining. I believe they took a point either from, you know,
00:08:32.160 undecided other or PPC. And so the conservatives don't actually care about whether how well the
00:08:38.360 NDP are doing in the sense that it's not like it's going to hurt them. They don't need to fend
00:08:42.100 off NDP opponents. The only time, the only relationship the conservatives have with the NDP
00:08:48.200 is bleeding off their working class voters
00:08:50.480 who are never going to go back
00:08:52.140 because the NDP are not a working class party.
00:08:54.760 It is a party for urbanite progressive activists.
00:08:58.780 And the problem is that's a voting bloc
00:09:01.140 that they share with the Liberal Party of Canada.
00:09:04.460 And if I was to predict what's going to happen next in the polls,
00:09:07.760 I think we are then going to start seeing
00:09:09.620 the Bloc Québécois start shifting upwards.
00:09:12.120 And it's because of the trade issues going on right now.
00:09:14.920 I think this drop-off is mostly because of, one, the recession, and then, two, the fact that, effectively, because Mark Carney signed the MOU pipeline deal with Alberta, it has opened up the left flank for the NDP to chip away at because they're now the only environmental party based on the narrative that they can now spin.
00:09:36.460 Even though Mark Carney was never going to build a pipeline, it still looks bad, though, for him to lose Jonathan Wilkinson and Nader Skine-Smith and Stephen Gilbeau, who are all big environmental hawks.
00:09:50.340 Because those guys are leaving, both the NDP and the Bloc Québécois can accuse the Liberals of being basically bought out by conservative oil and gas forces out there.
00:10:01.780 It's not true, but it is true in the minds of many left-wing voters who will leave the NDP,
00:10:07.980 so the Liberal Party, to the NDP and the Bloc. That's why I'm thinking the Bloc is going to
00:10:12.340 see a bump in the next poll or so, but the Bloc rise tends to happen a little more slowly over
00:10:17.140 time. You know, it's a party that only exists in one province. The amount of people you sample in
00:10:21.760 Quebec every poll tends to be pretty low. If the Bloc can get to 7% or 7.5%, they actually would
00:10:31.120 edge out the Liberal Party in Quebec, and they would start winning the majority of seats.
00:10:35.700 And they're also now opening up on Mark Carney for walking back the tripling of the streaming
00:10:41.820 tax, because that was going to be a big subsidy for Quebec media. They're hitting him for that,
00:10:47.960 saying that he's caving to Donald Trump. They're hitting him over Stephen Gilbeau resigning,
00:10:52.220 saying they are no longer an environmentalist government. They're hitting them all over all
00:10:57.600 these things, that is going to be fairly a good argument for Quebec voters, for the voters in that
00:11:04.040 kind of Montreal donut area where the Bloc Quebecois have a good chance of picking back up
00:11:09.440 all of those suburban ridings in the Montreal area. In fact, the NDP could even pick up some
00:11:14.320 ridings in downtown Montreal, like Stephen Gilbeau's riding that they used to hold because of
00:11:20.460 the Liberal Party now basically ceding the radical left environmental message back over to the NDP
00:11:26.960 and the Bloc Québécois, even though the LPC, the Liberal Party of Canada, is never going to build a
00:11:32.380 pipeline. So they're in the worst of both worlds right now. Business liberals don't really think
00:11:37.320 they're going to build a pipeline. They've even actually just started walking away from getting
00:11:41.460 rid of some bad environmental regulations. So the business liberals don't trust them, but they're
00:11:46.620 also not radical enough for the NDP, the Bloc, and the Green Party's sort of swing voters that
00:11:53.280 they share with the Liberal Party. In just a second here, I now just want to jump over to
00:11:57.880 some provincial numbers to show you what's kind of going on under the surface of the national
00:12:02.540 numbers. And then I want to come back and start pointing and laughing at the new nanosurvey and
00:12:08.500 explaining why in detail it makes no sense. And then actually I want to tack something else onto
00:12:13.640 this video because I just remembered it. People have been talking about the 88,000 new jobs in
00:12:19.060 May that were created and how people say they're seasonally
00:12:21.520 adjusted. They're not really seasonally adjusted. They're
00:12:24.640 seasonally adjusted based on a very narrow definition. When you
00:12:29.520 actually look at the jobs under the surface, they're seasonal
00:12:32.060 jobs. But because they're technically not always reoccurring
00:12:36.140 seasonal jobs, that means they are not seasonal. It's silly, but
00:12:40.060 I'll get to it in just a second and explain what's going on with
00:12:43.220 that later on in the video. But first, let's get back over to
00:12:46.120 those regional numbers.
00:12:49.060 Thank you for you being patient, even though it's paused and I delete race everything while it's paused, but thank you for, I don't even know what you did. I guess I ruined my point there. Anyways, I'm back to do the regional numbers here. So we have the three, I would say, are big swing provinces that at least matter to this video. Yes, Quebec is also a swing province. As you see, though, the Bloc Capicois really haven't moved. So the Quebec numbers really haven't moved. So we don't really need to look at them.
00:13:15.160 So the ones that we're going to look at today, though, are Atlanta, Canada, Ontario, and British Columbia.
00:13:22.460 Atlanta, Canada, I find it kind of odd how much this province is moving right now.
00:13:28.120 Now, it's basically a two-party region.
00:13:31.300 Yes, the NDP can kind of pull fine in Atlanta, Canada, but based on the fact that there's no other parties really present splitting any vote, the NDP have no chance of winning a seat.
00:13:42.060 So I'm just going to write down the percentage form what we are currently seeing from these regions. Right now in Atlanta, Canada, the Liberals are at 50% of the vote, but the Conservatives are still at 41% here.
00:13:59.240 So, yes, the Liberals are leading by nine points, but based on the different environments in the various maritime provinces, the Conservatives are kind of neck and neck with the Liberals in that region, simply because, yes, the Liberals do well generally in the Maritimes, but they do well in Halifax and Charlottetown and St. John's, and they'll do very, very well there.
00:14:22.200 But in the more suburban rural areas of the Maritimes, the Conservatives do very well as well.
00:14:27.620 So they would actually be picking up seats in a future election in Atlanta, Canada.
00:14:31.860 And then we just have the NDP at 8%, basically irrelevant.
00:14:37.880 But this is how much things have changed in this region since the last Abacus data poll.
00:14:42.420 Now, the margin of error when you get down to a regional level is higher, but this still demonstrates a momentum shift.
00:14:48.460 Even, let's say, in reality, the amount of the fall of the Liberals in this area isn't as bad as what we see in this particular poll.
00:14:58.600 So the Liberals in Atlantic Canada have fallen by six points, and the Conservatives are up by 7%, a very big change since the last poll that Abacus Data did.
00:15:13.320 And then we have Ontario, where the Liberals aren't currently at 46%. We have the Conservatives at 37%. And the NDP are now at 12% of the vote. The Greens are also at 3%, PPC too, but I don't think that really matters to us here.
00:15:34.720 And then in British Columbia, this is the smallest lead the Liberals currently have in the swing provinces. They are at 43%, a little below their national average. Conservatives are at 36%. And the NDP is at their highest area.
00:15:53.720 Actually, they're doing best in Manitoba, but that's a little bit of a misnomer because they always combine the numbers of Saskatchewan.
00:15:59.940 But they are currently at 15% in British Columbia.
00:16:05.720 But let's go over the changes because the changes are telling about the momentum currently in the country or the problems that Carney is facing.
00:16:12.880 We have the Liberal Party going down five points in Ontario, Conservatives up just one point, but the NDP up four points, this being mostly an NDP gain to the Liberals' loss.
00:16:29.120 We then have, in British Columbia, the Liberals suffering their deepest fall of 8%, the Conservatives up 2 points, and the NDP up 4 points, with the Greens having actually also gone up 3 points from 2 to 5, but we're just not including them here.
00:16:51.300 This is a problem for Mark Carney. It should be very obvious for you to see. This is not the only
00:16:55.940 poll showing this. Liaison, in fact, actually has the Conservatives leading in British Columbia now
00:17:01.640 with around 34% of the vote to the Liberals 32 because they have a massive surge for the NDP
00:17:08.060 where they're now sitting at like 23% in that province. Do I actually think they're doing that
00:17:13.500 well there? Probably not. But again, sometimes a poll that's even hyperbolic with its results can
00:17:20.180 show you what the momentum shift is. Liberals are losing their left flank to the NDP because
00:17:26.780 Carney's more conservative rhetoric on oil and gas. At the same time, he's not actually going to
00:17:32.840 build a pipeline, meaning that he's not actually hurting the conservatives that much anyways,
00:17:37.580 because the conservative, you know, conservative voters are not going to actually move towards
00:17:41.820 Carney unless he gets pipe into the ground and he's not doing it. And so Carney has built himself
00:17:48.080 a, you know, effectively a perfect way for the liberals to lose British Columbia.
00:17:53.780 Talk like a conservative on oil and gas while never actually giving results. The frantic left
00:18:00.120 wing Greens or the lefty Green voters are going to run towards the NDP and the Green Party while
00:18:06.420 the business liberals are slowly getting frustrated and shifting towards the conservatives.
00:18:11.280 Plus, Mark Carney, his failure to deal with the Cowichan land title case properly and signing over the entire lower mainland's title to the Musqueam has been a great way of moving people who are actually in that older demographic, that home-owning demographic, towards the conservatives, even though that is the group that the liberals are supposed to be doing the best with across the country right now.
00:18:36.940 BC is just right now currently a basket case for the Liberals. They are doing everything in their
00:18:43.040 power to reduce their strength in one of the regions that they used to do the best in,
00:18:48.720 the Lower Mainland. They could lose crazy amounts of seats in the Lower Mainland,
00:18:53.360 both to their left as well as to their right. And we are going to be testing this theory this summer
00:18:58.500 in the riding of North Vancouver Capilano, where Jonathan Wilkinson, one of the green left
00:19:03.840 liberal MPs is resigning. And if Avi Lewis is going to do what I think he's going to do,
00:19:10.020 he's going to throw an NDP candidate in there and a bunch of money behind them because he needs to
00:19:14.880 prove the NDP is back. They only got 4% in that riding in the last election, even though previously
00:19:20.020 they would usually get 20. He needs to demonstrate that the NDP isn't dead under his leadership,
00:19:24.920 so he is going to toss money at that riding. I think the Greens are also going to put a lot of
00:19:29.800 money in it. The conservatives definitely are. And Jonathan Wilkinson, although it was a safe
00:19:34.640 liberal riding under his watch, previously it had been a conservative riding multiple times in the
00:19:40.680 last 30 years. It's not exactly a riding that's always been to the left and that like basically
00:19:47.600 Carney doesn't have to worry. He is going to have to worry about what's going to happen with the
00:19:52.000 riding now that the MP is leaving who made the liberals safe in that area. And he's leaving
00:19:57.420 while basically condemning partly the liberals for going too soft when it comes to the environment.
00:20:04.040 Anyways, so in just a second here, I'm then going to erase all this stuff,
00:20:07.940 and I want to bring you back, explain the nanos thing,
00:20:10.560 and then we're going to be getting into the job numbers.
00:20:15.140 This is the nanos suck segment of this episode.
00:20:19.540 Now, that is a bit hyperbolic because I actually sometimes like nanos.
00:20:23.280 They're actually quite accurate during general elections,
00:20:26.900 But between general elections, they go to a cheaper form of their polling that tends to also have a much higher miscibility rate.
00:20:35.760 That doesn't mean they're always wrong between elections.
00:20:38.480 That just means that when they are wrong, they can be wrong really, really big.
00:20:43.420 And this is what their most recent poll numbers are.
00:20:47.700 So I'll just quickly write down these things because I forgot to before.
00:20:51.660 This is when I'm supposed to tell you guys, thank you for your patience.
00:20:55.080 not when I literally hit pause and then restart and say thank you for your patience even though
00:20:59.680 you literally didn't wait at all. So we have LPC here, CPC, and NDP. I don't even think I need to
00:21:09.580 bother with the block quebec clock. You guys don't really need to see those numbers too to get my
00:21:14.500 point on why this poll is so bad. They're at 7% if you need to know. In this poll though they have
00:21:20.400 nanos as the liberals at 42 percent which is in fact a couple points worse than they did in the
00:21:26.400 last election 42 basically within the margin of error they're effectively out where they used to
00:21:33.080 be they have in this poll the conservatives at just 29 percent of the vote and the NDP
00:21:44.700 are at 13, holding from where they were in the last Nanos poll. Now, why does this not make any
00:21:52.900 sense? Well, I'm just going to first show you what the swing was since the last Nanos poll.
00:21:58.860 Since the last Nanos poll, the Liberals are doing 2% better than they were, the Conservatives are
00:22:04.740 doing 4 points worse, and the NDP are holding steady at 13, Block is holding steady at 7,
00:22:11.280 And then I believe the Greens are up one and they're at six percent, which is a big overpull for the Greens.
00:22:16.340 I don't know what the Greens are currently doing that would be making their popularity go up.
00:22:21.040 But do you know why this doesn't make sense? Why this swing doesn't make sense?
00:22:24.380 I'm not just saying conservatives are too low. That's why it doesn't make sense.
00:22:27.560 Maybe one day the conservatives will mess up so bad that 29 percent makes sense for them in a poll.
00:22:33.500 This doesn't make sense because every poll that Nanos does, Nanos releases numbers of around 1,000 respondents, but they don't actually poll 1,000 people every time they release a poll.
00:22:47.740 They tend to release more numbers than all the other firms because they release new numbers every three or four days, but that's because they actually only do the 1,000 responses in quarters.
00:22:59.240 it's made up of four quarters what they will do is that they will pull around 250 260 270
00:23:09.120 oftentimes their their number will be a little bit above a thousand on how many they sample but
00:23:13.940 thousands their goal but every few days they'll basically knock off the bottom the lowest one
00:23:21.540 forth and replace it with another new quarter, another new 250. And so when you see a swing
00:23:31.760 between the Conservatives and Liberals of six points, putting the Conservatives down to 29%,
00:23:38.860 that means that the new 250 people that they polled are far more liberal than the overall
00:23:46.400 result is because it used to be 33% conservative to 40% liberal. Now that's, I don't think the
00:23:53.960 conservatives are that low. And even the liberals probably are more like at 43 and the conservatives
00:23:58.820 are more at like 35 or 36 right now, regardless of those numbers, just inherently being weird on
00:24:05.160 their face in general, the conservatives down at the below at around only 33% or 32, but a 6% swing
00:24:12.720 When you only hold 250 more people, that would require the most recent 250 that they hold to be like 65% liberal.
00:24:25.040 No, your sample, each new quarter of your sample that you add in to bump off the last quarter that then goes out,
00:24:34.800 it should at least look somewhat like the other quarters.
00:24:38.920 Maybe it's a little bit higher or a little bit lower for one party or another based on
00:24:42.660 the news cycle.
00:24:43.680 There should be a change.
00:24:45.020 But the theory of this is that it actually makes the polling more stable because it's
00:24:48.920 supposed to be shock resistant, that you don't just have one new poll of 1,200 people in
00:24:54.080 a bad news cycle make one party look great and one party look bad.
00:24:57.080 The whole idea is it comes in little cycles so that the polling numbers tend to go up
00:25:02.280 a little bit slower and down a little bit slower.
00:25:03.940 But if you're having a 6% swing between the new quarters that you're adding in, that means you failed as a pollster. You are literally having polling samples you're adding into the mass that are like 60% liberal, that are like, what, like 23% conservative and 13% NDP still? No, that's not how statistics works.
00:25:27.040 That's not how public opinion works.
00:25:29.660 Nanos, if they're looking at these readouts and they're not saying, huh, we should try and do that 250 sample again, or maybe we should just do a full 1200 to see if that actually holds up with a higher sample.
00:25:41.660 250 sample is nothing.
00:25:44.740 That is a completely nothing sample.
00:25:46.780 And the thing is, they still do the polling slow enough that by the time that this new 250 respondents is going to be replaced, they're going to be like three weeks old.
00:25:57.940 So the problem is we have like three-week-old, really liberal-leaning samples included in future numbers now for multiple weeks, and it's going to make the Conservatives look like they're doing terrible simply because two weeks ago we had this extreme outlier result where like two-thirds of Canadians were voting Liberal, even though if you walk around in the world, it doesn't feel like that.
00:26:22.260 I'm not just saying go out there and if it feels conservative out there, it's more conservative.
00:26:26.720 I'm just saying when liberals or any party is leading massively, you can tell.
00:26:32.680 You'll walk by a coffee shop and people are talking about how much they hate the government or they hate the opposition.
00:26:38.740 You'll start to come up in conversations over time, not just if you'll walk out the door and people are screaming what they're voting.
00:26:44.040 But there's a vibe that kind of exists when one party is just rocketing through the roof and above by 20% or the main opposition is only at 29. We would notice it. There would be people not even showing up to poly of events in Alberta. People would just kind of be getting, you know, not donating anymore. They stopped caring. Really not the environment out there.
00:27:06.700 In fact, the conservative base is pretty much intact from where it was at last election, and the liberals, although they've been generally popular, at the same time, when you look over a lot of polls, they've kind of just stayed at where they were at last election, and that was elevated compared to previous elections, but it's not like they're soaring into the sky compared to election day.
00:27:28.080 If anything, you could just say that their main success has been able to maintain what was a really good support level, 43%, since then, and being a little bit above or a little bit below.
00:27:37.580 But we're not in an environment yet where one party just keeps gaining and one party keeps losing.
00:27:43.660 That's why I trust Abacus.
00:27:45.340 Liberals are ahead 8%.
00:27:46.780 That would still be a massive majority for them.
00:27:49.300 That'd be above 190 seats if we had an election today.
00:27:51.800 But there is a difference between having a 8% lead for the Liberals and a 13% lead that puts the Conservatives below 30%.
00:28:01.140 That is just not realistic.
00:28:03.740 Anyways, in just a second here, then I just wanted to quickly, I don't even need to clear the board.
00:28:08.360 I just want to talk about those, people have been messaging me about when I did my video on the 88,000 jobs that the Liberals had created.
00:28:16.920 because people have been telling me, and they are right, that the government says that they
00:28:20.960 seasonally adjust the numbers. So the 88,000 already has seasonal workers taken out of it.
00:28:28.740 That's only technically true. What they do is they remove seasonal workers that are basically like
00:28:36.100 landscaping company workers who literally come back every single year, no matter what.
00:28:43.160 That it doesn't take out seasonal workers that were created this year and might not come back next year. There's a reason why in that 88,000 number, it still includes massive amount of hotel and food service staff, people who work in cultural and recreational fields and transportation.
00:29:02.760 It's not because the hotel and the food and the cultural tour sector is just booming right now and it's going to go all year.
00:29:11.580 It's just because those jobs were previously not created in previous years because last year we just had the tariff situation hit.
00:29:18.860 And so a lot of people were just not hiring out of fear.
00:29:22.620 And because those jobs were not created last May, this May is not considered seasonal.
00:29:27.980 So it looks like full-time permanent jobs.
00:29:30.780 They are not. I'm sorry, but the hotel up in Yellowknife is not going to be keeping those people, all the new workers they hired on in May throughout the year. It's not going to happen. The food service industry that needs to hire a bunch of people because people are traveling all over during the summer and you need more people at your fast food restaurant in the sort of stopover town between destinations, you're not going to be able to keep all 80 of them employed during the winter.
00:29:56.780 but if those jobs technically were not created in the previous year they don't get a seasonally
00:30:02.880 adjusted seasonal adjustments only apply to jobs that are created every single year no matter what
00:30:10.940 which is only like a few thousand it's all the people who work in landscaping who work maybe in
00:30:16.140 deck building and they've been literally rehired again and again every single year that is all
00:30:23.040 that a seasonal adjustment actually adjusts for you can literally can that's how stupid it is
00:30:27.760 seasonal adjustment doesn't just adjust out the vast majority of seasonal jobs and then we also
00:30:34.880 have the fifa jobs part of the 88 000 which are definitely seasonal but because fifa doesn't
00:30:40.440 happen every year it's technically not seasonal and then we also have a half a quarter of the
00:30:46.800 jobs created or the like of all the jobs in may that were created were mostly census public sector
00:30:52.640 jobs because we need people working the census. Fair enough. That makes sense. But this is not
00:30:58.800 a Mark Carney economic miracle. All these things happened in spite of Mark Carney. FIFA had been
00:31:05.200 scheduled to take place in North America for a few years now. Every few years, a country's bid
00:31:11.540 on where the next FIFA is going to be taking place. The census was always going to happen
00:31:19.500 this year whether carney was uh prime minister whether trudeau was still prime minister or
00:31:24.620 whether pure poly became prime minister and it would be equally cynical for any of those other
00:31:29.260 men who have taken credit if they were currently prime minister right now and then again seasonally
00:31:34.700 adjusted doesn't get rid of all the seasonal jobs so in four or five months here we're going to see
00:31:39.180 a giant fall off probably 94 or five probably three months we're going to see a giant fall off
00:31:43.900 of jobs and the liberals are going to be oh why did that happen oh they were just seasonal don't
00:31:47.820 worry about it they were all seasonal except they weren't acting like they were seasonal they were
00:31:50.940 like we already seasonally adjusted out all the seasonal workers no you didn't you seasonally
00:31:56.460 adjusted out the consistently seasonal jobs not the ones that pop up this year but sometimes they
00:32:02.300 don't pop up next year the the economy is far more complicated you can't schedule ahead of time how
00:32:07.740 many seasonal jobs are going to be created by a business every single year but whatever what do
00:32:13.340 i know i'm not an economist guys but uh that should be it for this video hopefully there you'll learn
00:32:19.340 something hopefully this put your kids to sleep if they weren't going to sleep any anything uh that
00:32:25.420 i can hope for i hope it happened to you uh anyways with all that being said thank you guys for
00:32:29.980 watching like share subscribe consider hitting that join button and becoming a channel member
00:32:34.940 And I'll see you guys all next time.