The Numbers: A new polling low for Poilievre?

It's only been 4 years with PP?

As always, favorite podcast of the week. 😊

I new Toronto went Tory in 1957 because my MP, Eglinton, was Donald Fleming, and he got thrown out of the House for refusing to retract some statement he made. I was in grade 6 at the time. I did as well as Eric.

In grade 10 I predicted that the Social Credit un Real Caouette(?) would win over 20 seats. MY class mates said who? I was right, if i got the years right.

Thanks!

I hope the tgv comments sink him. I'm exhausted with the ridiculous backwardness of these people.

I'd like to enter the 21st century plz.

Next week do the 1958 election

The TGV is a disaster that project hs no future clienteles -who will use it in full swing of ageing population -and total winter disaster capability i.e look at the Ottawa LRT disaster ! Plamondon is hitiing on the right nails there.

If I become disenchanted with Carney, I would never look at PP.

Can you imagine reversing the role in trivia? Eric gives the answer, Philippe answers them in question (Jeopardy style)😅

32:20 what an odd rule, lived in BC my whole life and had no idea.

Is Wab Kinew helping NDP numbers?

Brad West is lining himself up to replace Eby

Love Wab Kinew. Dougie's private jet purchase and sale blew him out of the water. He's cooked. But he could move to federal and challenge for the Conservative leadership. PP, and the conservatives are lost, and leaderless. He's proven he doesn't have it in him to even LOOK like a 'prime minister in waiting'. He looks weak, and he's really caking on the orange make up. He's cooked as well.

Smith is cagey about possible results of a referendum ---can't really call it a "separation referendum" (gawd, she's slippery!). If an approval of Alberta secession is achieved---sort of---then the government will be bound to starting and carrying through the 'process of secession [?]' which she implies exists in the Constitution. It's almost impossible to believe she doesn't know the only possible "process" in the Constitution is the Amending Formula; otherwise there is nothing whatsoever in the Constitution about secession, no mention nor a single inference at all. She's content to let her base think there is, though.

So, yes, she's not incorrect in saying there's a process in the Constitution, but she omits that she's referring to the Amending Formula ---which actually is in the Constitution---and not to an existing process a province simply has to complete ---like filing divorce papers, or something---which, factually, is not now nor was there ever a process to secede in the Constitution. She's playing on common ignorance of constitutional law and assiduously avoids any reference to amending the Constitution because that, of course, requires a lot of negotiation and deliberation which takes a really long time. Not to mention that successfully getting seven provinces which represent more than half Canada's population to agree to an amendment faces as much precarity as it is easy for a single member of one of those seven provincial legislatures to rise to the roll call in the chamber with an Eagle feather in cher hands and vote "no."

It's not simply that Smith, with her mercurial attitude towards secession, doesn't want to say that it's probably impossible to achieve an amendment. She doesn't want to say that for political reasons (like maybe not disappointing the separatists?). But it's also because she wants to keep a powerful grievance-card in her playing-hand because ever-and-only completely confirmation-biased separatists will take her ambiguous implication of some kinda process to mean a perfunctory, rose-coloured step towards utopic secession and, already back on their heels, the separatists will react with predictable outrage if they believe something has been taken away from them---"unfairly," they naturally will claim---even though that something doesn't exist and never has. Smith can and always will depend on indignant outrage.

Of course she'll save the tRump-card for last by informing the angered mob what this "Amendment" actually is---or at least what the SCoC ruled two decades ago.

Hooooo-weee! Just wait 'til they find out that not only is an Amendment very difficult to get inserted into the Constitution, but also that it will say a secession requires all ten provincial legislatures and the federal parliament to approve of a secession. They sho ain't gonna like that news!

You mean Doug Fraud ? The Gravy Plane just put the last straw on the Camels 🐫 Back ! Just saying ...

Pierre is THE GREAT PRETENDER . Would be so good if he would come out with real concrete ideas 💡 like A WEALTH TAX ON THE BILLIONAIRES , sure could build affordable housing geared to income !
Carney needs some competitive ideas 💡 to make him move more to the center .... ? He could also say all of the young high school graduates could be into serious trade schools ! Business especially Conservative business could be given tax incentives to bring in the young , pay them a livable wage ? It is the duty of the older businesses to provide for their business longevity ! Old days the young were given 90 days training , decent mentors !

Eric; “It’s like a game of toddlers’ soccer, you don’t need to keep score” 😂

Looking ahead it seems the strait will stay closed. All the money swinging here and there to prop up WTI and Brent, and the finite use of the oil reserves has held stuff fairly constant. However that physically cannot last. The point being that a worldwide recession or a depression is starting to look baked in. And a lot of poor countries didn't get a good crop in, and central US is suffering a drought. Going to be genuine hunger and starvation up a notch from usual, coupled with a G20 wide recession/depression.

So which party 'benefits' from this? Picking the right 'narrative' talking points will be critical. Plucky liberals navigating a perilous world? That seems obvious. Plus more anti US rhetoric and talk of broadening our trade base. Cons will have to, as they have been, point out RELATIVE differences in G7 or G20 performance, a much less obvious narrative. Libs win the info war yet again. Depending if gas at say 2.49 a litre or more gets folk pondering whether we should promote pipelines and energy independence. As food prices start to REALLY climb in the fall.

Economy is gonna be sh*t thats a fact. Who can benefit though, politically?

Another negative video title against Polievre. I really like you guys but will have to unsubscribe. I know this is a personal polling podcast but unfortunately it takes away from the believability of your info.

I love this geek out, and don’t even live in Canada 😂

Pierre said his economic education is predicting the future. Well, I predict the conservatives will lose badly if Pierre stays into the next election. The NDP will be official opposition and he will lose his seat again.

Id conteset that the liberal drop is partially attributed to a rise from the CAQ. I think (and hope) what probably happens during the election in Quebec, is the PQ get a minority government. (though personally Id rather a liberal minority) I think the CAQ will keep some seats. The liberals will gain. The Quebec conservatives will get a handful and QS then the PQ will have the rest.

Grievance politics doesnt work in Canada.

The political landscape in the year before the election featured two main trends, both driven by distaste for specific figures. Much of the growth in support Poilievre had was caused by widespread dislike of Justin Trudeau. But Poilievre's growth caused a collapse in NDP support as progressive voters rushed to Carney to stop Poilievre.

With Carney now governing with a majority—and governing like Stephen Harper—Poilievre has lost both his appeal and his threat, so those anti-Trudeau centrists are moving to Carney while the anti-Poilievre progressive voters are now no longer afraid of Poilievre (and abandoning Carney as he governs from the centre-right).

Phillipe is the diabolical quiz master! 😊

Eric, being thrown a minority government during a massive political upturn 69 years ago to humble you tells you how rarefied the playing field is

Poilievre will get the same poll numbers because the Tory base will stick with him no matter what.They are like MAGA - they'll never vote for any party other than the PCs.

OMG, is Eric getting a participation badge ??? In this day in history...

The Fed would not have used technical…… the cons ran with it.

Out of all these “nation wide” polls, I have never been polled! How do they select the polling candidates?

Recent news reports indicate that Prime Minister Carney is responding positively to the concers of growing number of people alarmed about the environmental implcations of the Liberals haste to approve mega-projects (aka nation building projects, as the PM would say). Perhaps the PM's apparent drop in approval, and a corresponding bump up in support for the NDP, are voters disaffect by Carney;s willingness ti throw the environment under the bus. The Conservatives might also be wise to realize, ar at seriously consider, whether it be fair or foul, the possibility, thatr Mr. Poilievre just doesn't appeal to voters. If such be the case, by sticking with Poilievre, Conservatives may be unwittingly buttressing public support for the PM.

I think the last in, first out adapter applies for Liberal support. They largely got some support from dippers. I think the NDP will get a lot of the voters back from LPC. I reckon they’re going to get some vote from the CPC too - there’s lots of NDP/CPC swing ridings here in ON (e.g. Windsor area, Oshawa, Niagara, Hamilton, London, and some of the inner suburbs of the GTA.

Hypothetical question: if Canada had proportional representation and maybe 7-10 parties that would get over a 5% threshold (to pick a number). What would the parties look like and how would the popular vote break down?

Pierre not being in power is Canada's loss

The Conservative have no plan giving no direction just yelling everything is broken

Carney is worse than Harper, by far. Kind of Ottawa MAGA. Have to wonder why he hates our precious climate and environment so much.

Great show. Here is my take. I watch what the CPC puts out every day. The amount of distortion and even flat out lies is off the scale. Most recently, the CPC is saying that Canada is the only country in the OECD in a "full-blown" recession and that it is all Carney's fault. The technical definition is 2 back to back quarters of contraction. StatsCan calls Q1, 2026 flat within a rounding error. Q4, 2025 was the most marginal of declines. CD Howe has determined that it is too early to call a recession. We just had a blowout jobs number of 88,000 jobs created in May. We had 1.5% GDP growth in 2025, which was second highest in the G7. The IMF projects the same for Canada in 2026, again 2nd highest in the G7. The CPC now literally cheers any bad news for Canada and when there isn't any, they make it up anyway. This is a party that has an unelectable leader and has totally lost its way.

Is Doug Ford Done? We live in hope, we definitely live in hope!

0:00 Introduction

0:19 Federal polling landscape

5:43 Conservatives in the polls

12:35 BC NDP and Conservatives

13:26 Federal polling in Quebec

15:47 Provincial premiers approval ratings (Angus Reed)

16:24 Doug Ford's approval drop

18:14 Other premier approval trends

19:59 Manitoba's premier status

20:46 Alberta politics and the UCP referendum

26:20 British Columbia political landscape

32:52 Quebec provincial polling

36:45 Quebec electoral map

37:33 1957 Federal Election Trivia Quiz

52:01 Number of the week: Alberta referendum approval

53:07 Number of the week: Cost of living priorities

53:57 Outro

What do the San Antonio Spurs & Poilievre have in common?? They both know how to blow leads!!

Disappointed Liberals are going left (NDP and Green). Disappointed Conservatives are moving to small c conservative Carney Liberals. I don't see a lot of hope for the Poilievre CPC.