1 week Ago By By Deveryn Ross
A number of political pundits across the nation claim that the decisive issue in the 2025 federal election — the “ballot-box question” upon which the outcome of the election will be decided — is which party and leader will most effectively stand up to U.S. President Donald Trump and his administration on matters of trade and security.
Read this article for free: Already have an account? As we navigate through unprecedented times, our journalists are working harder than ever to bring you the latest local updates to keep you safe and informed. Now, more than ever, we need your support. Starting at $15.
99 plus taxes every four weeks you can access your Brandon Sun online and full access to all content as it appears on our website. or call circulation directly at (204) 727-0527. Your pledge helps to ensure we provide the news that matters most to your community! To continue reading, please subscribe: *$1 will be added to your next bill.
After your 4 weeks access is complete your rate will increase by $4.99 a X percent off the regular rate. A number of political pundits across the nation claim that the decisive issue in the 2025 federal election — the “ballot-box question” upon which the outcome of the election will be decided — is which party and leader will most effectively stand up to U.
S. President Donald Trump and his administration on matters of trade and security. Read unlimited articles for free today: Already have an account? Opinion A number of political pundits across the nation claim that the decisive issue in the 2025 federal election — the “ballot-box question” upon which the outcome of the election will be decided — is which party and leader will most effectively stand up to U.
S. President Donald Trump and his administration on matters of trade and security. Other pundits suggest the top issues on voters’ minds when they enter the voting booth (or when they voted in advance polls) would be items such as affordability, taxation and access to affordable housing.
They’re both wrong. Election 2025 has become a referendum on Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre, focused primarily on whether he possesses the skills, education, values and temperament to safely navigate this nation through the many challenges it is currently experiencing. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre speaks at a campaign rally in Oshawa, Ont.
, earlier this month. (The Canadian Press files) Viewed through that lens, Canadians are considering whether he is the best choice to stand up to the Trump administration, or if Liberal Leader Mark Carney and his team would be the better, safer option. Those same Canadians are asking themselves if Poilievre is really the right guy to represent our nation on the international stage, in the G7 and in NATO.
They are reflecting on whether he can be trusted to respect the Charter and solve the housing, affordability and addictions issues so many Canadians are facing, or whether he would just make things worse. They wonder if he has the character and maturity to put the national interest ahead of his partisan instincts. Though approximately 38 per cent of Canadian voters appear to believe that Poilievre is the correct choice on those issues, a far larger percentage take the opposite view.
And, on the issue of relations with Trump in particular, they firmly believe Carney is the person to be trusted to handle that pivotal task. That conclusion has re-energized the traditional base of support for the Liberals, but it has also caused many NDP supporters — and even a slice of traditional Conservative voters — to shift their support to the Liberals in order to prevent Poilievre from becoming prime minister. That’s not speculation; it’s fact.
Earlier this week, former Conservative cabinet minister Lisa Raitt told the CBC’s David Common that “What I am hearing from people who are not giving Conservatives their vote is that they like the Conservative policies, but they want Mark Carney to implement them ...
As they’re discerning where their vote is gonna go, they think that the policy platform is sound. What they’re not thrilled about, unfortunately, is our leader.” I have been hearing the same thing from Conservative campaign workers for the past couple of weeks: people may like aspects of the Tory platform, but they can’t compel themselves to vote for Poilievre.
In the case of New Democrats, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh told the Toronto Star earlier this week that, in order to stop Poilievre, he put the interests of the nation ahead of the interests of his party. “While we could have won lots of seats,” he said, “it would have meant a Pierre Poilievre majority Conservative government, and I could not stomach that.” I have heard the same thing from New Democrats, many of whom have decided that keeping Poilievre out of the Prime Minister’s Office is a more pressing priority than electing NDP MPs.
The past month of opinion polls, showing the Liberals way up and the NDP way down, prove that the NDP-Liberal shift is real and has a good chance of accomplishing its strategic objective. It did not have to be this way, but this is the electoral reality the Conservatives created by, first, electing Poilievre as party leader and, second, defiantly relying on a “leader-centric” campaign strategy that put far too much focus on the leader and far too little focus on the team around him. Given the reality that Poilievre has always been a polarizing figure in Canadian politics for so long, is prone to making cutting and caustic remarks, has always had negative approval and likability ratings, and has consistently polled at a lower level than his party, it is was a serious error to make him the focal point of the Conservative campaign.
The Conservative campaign architects thought they could win the election despite all those problems, but they were wrong. They knew that Liberals and New Democrats had such a deeply negative opinion of Poilievre, but never anticipated that supporters of the other two parties would unite to stop him from becoming PM. That mistake could cost the Conservatives the victory that seemed so certain just weeks ago.
Advertisement Advertisement.
