Why the Liberal Party of Canada Chose Mark Carney as Justin Trudeau's Successor
Can Carney take on Trump?
TroibNews 
Canadian politics has suddenly become anything but dull. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is resigning after nearly ten years in office, largely due to declining support from both the public and his party. However, his departure is not without drama; he's engaged in a heated exchange with President Donald Trump regarding tariffs and controversial remarks about annexing Canada.
This situation has not only given Trudeau a temporary boost in popularity but could also provide a much-needed lifeline to his struggling Liberal Party as an election approaches. Additionally, the election of Mark Carney as the new Liberal leader on Sunday positions him to take office — albeit briefly — as prime minister.
Canada is required to hold a national election by October, but the Liberals are anticipated to call for a vote soon to take advantage of the Trump-related increase in the polls. Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre seemed to be on a clear path to victory until the new U.S. president entered the fray, yet current polls indicate that he still stands a reasonable chance of winning.
What lies ahead for Carney, Poilievre, and Trudeau? Nick Taylor-Vaisey, the PMG Ottawa bureau chief, offers insights.
This conversation has been condensed for clarity.
Why did the Liberals choose Mark Carney as their leader?
There are several reasons. Primarily, Mark Carney represents a departure from Trudeau, who faced significant unpopularity last year. This sentiment peaked when Trudeau’s second-in-command, Chrystia Freeland, unexpectedly resigned, signaling a countdown to Trudeau’s exit.
Unlike Freeland, who was part of Trudeau's cabinet, Carney comes without that baggage. Freeland sought leadership but was criticized for offering limited change. She was finance minister for several years, aligning closely with Trudeau's fiscal policies during the pandemic.
Carney brings a respected economic background, which many Liberals view as credible in the context of emerging from the pandemic and heading into a trade war. His somewhat subdued personality appeals to party members who see him as a viable candidate to turn their fortunes around.
Liberals have been downcast for over a year, often expecting to suffer a significant electoral defeat. Carney is seen as someone who might revive their chances.
You mentioned Trudeau’s unpopularity. Why did you phrase that in the past tense?
While he remains unpopular, the country appears to have moved on from Trudeau. Nevertheless, his recent role as a counterpoint to Trump has garnered him some favorable attention. Observers have praised him when he addresses Canadian interests and counters U.S. economic threats.
For a while, Trudeau’s voice had become grating to many, but that perception has softened. Though this doesn't suggest a swift comeback for him, it is noteworthy that his disapproval ratings have decreased while his approval has risen. This reflects the influence Donald Trump has on Canadian politics.
How significant is Trump in the upcoming election?
Donald Trump looms large in Canadian politics right now. His comments, whether on social media or in the Oval Office, surface discussions across the country. It's akin to the metaphor Pierre Trudeau, Justin’s father, once used: the U.S. is an elephant, and Canada is a mouse. Every time Trump makes an antagonistic remark, it sparks conversations among potential candidates, including the current prime minister and his Conservative rival, Pierre Poilievre.
Everyone reacts to Trump’s influence. He has claimed to be the most important figure in Canadian politics today, and many Canadians would likely agree.
What distinguishes this time in relation to Trump from his previous term in office?
While the first Trump administration was unpredictable, the dynamics between the U.S. and Canada were relatively established. The renegotiation of NAFTA, despite its challenges, yielded a trade agreement that he favored at the time. At that point, Trudeau was still enjoying buoyant popularity, fresh from a honeymoon phase.
By 2019, following a minority government win, the political landscape began to shift. The onset of COVID-19 further complicated things, and the relationship with Trump is now very different, with Canadian officials having to navigate a more antagonistic counterpart.
Is it accurate to suggest Trump has provided the Liberal Party, which has struggled, with a significant political boost? Should Trudeau be thanking him in some unconventional way?
There’s a strong argument in favor of that viewpoint. Much of the Liberal Party's improved polling can be linked to Trudeau’s decision to step back from politics, prompting voters to see the party as a brand rather than being solely associated with Trudeau's leadership.
Carney’s emergence as a credible contender has also proven beneficial. Polling indicates that whenever Carney's name is included, Liberal numbers rise. This increase may arise from a resurgence in patriotism and anxiety leading Canadians back to familiar political territory amid uncertainty surrounding Poilievre, who remains an unknown quantity.
If Carney secures power in the upcoming election, how might he engage with Trump? And how would Poilievre approach it?
Both will need to address the rising anxiety and patriotism I mentioned earlier. Engaging with Trump could require direct lines of communication to mitigate potential tensions.
However, there are also long-overdue priorities to manage domestically, such as reducing dependence on the United States. Achieving this will be a significant undertaking, as Canada has relied heavily on the U.S. for decades. Yet, politicians are discussing the reduction of interprovincial trade barriers and harmonizing regulations concerning trucking and labor mobility.
Both Poilievre and Carney have expressed intentions to foster better internal trade relations, thereby lessening dependency on the U.S. They’re also inclined to invest in infrastructure projects that enhance connectivity within Canada, focusing on east-west trade rather than north-south.
Trudeau has been a vocal supporter of Ukraine, presenting a contrast to Trump. Will his departure mean a major shift in Canada’s foreign policy, particularly regarding Ukraine? Would that change depending on whether Poilievre or Carney takes charge?
In reality, there is little divergence among the major political parties regarding Ukraine. Canada has a long-standing pro-Ukraine sentiment, fueled by a significant Ukrainian diaspora. However, support for Ukraine within Poilievre's broader constituency could lead to conflict, as some may oppose continued support in line with a "MAGA" standpoint. He risks discontent from multiple factions within his base if he tries to appease this viewpoint.
That said, supporting Ukraine aligns with his party’s historical position, as demonstrated by former Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a significant figure in Conservative policy. This aspect of foreign policy is unlikely to shift notably regardless of who leads.
As for Trudeau, his exit is accompanied by significant public confrontation with Trump. What’s next for him? Is there a possibility of his return to politics?
At 53, Trudeau is relatively young for a political figure. While he's currently unpopular, speculation of a comeback isn't at the forefront of discussions. Observers are pondering how he plans to exit the political arena. Notably, his father managed to return to power and enact impactful changes after an unexpected political defeat in 1979.
What's next for Trudeau is one of the many unresolved questions. He could return to public speaking, focusing on nonprofit initiatives, youth causes, or even founding an organization dedicated to particular issues.
Engaging in public speaking seems likely for him; it's a key aspect of his persona. However, I don’t foresee him immediately joining corporate boards or consultancy roles, as is common for many former politicians. Instead, I imagine he will take a step back for a while to focus on family.
Trump has jokingly suggested that Canada should become the 51st state, referring to Trudeau as a "governor." If it were to happen, would Canada seek to adjust the U.S. flag to feature a maple leaf instead of a star?
This is an intriguing proposition, though unrealistic in practice. However, imagining Canada at the negotiating table with the U.S. evokes thoughts of regional differences. Each province would likely present its distinct perspective, resulting in a complex dialogue that might overwhelm the Americans involved.
Ultimately, the endless bickering among Canadians could function as a deterrent against any notions of U.S. annexation.
Alejandro Jose Martinez for TROIB News
This situation has not only given Trudeau a temporary boost in popularity but could also provide a much-needed lifeline to his struggling Liberal Party as an election approaches. Additionally, the election of Mark Carney as the new Liberal leader on Sunday positions him to take office — albeit briefly — as prime minister.
Canada is required to hold a national election by October, but the Liberals are anticipated to call for a vote soon to take advantage of the Trump-related increase in the polls. Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre seemed to be on a clear path to victory until the new U.S. president entered the fray, yet current polls indicate that he still stands a reasonable chance of winning.
What lies ahead for Carney, Poilievre, and Trudeau? Nick Taylor-Vaisey, the PMG Ottawa bureau chief, offers insights.
This conversation has been condensed for clarity.
Why did the Liberals choose Mark Carney as their leader?
There are several reasons. Primarily, Mark Carney represents a departure from Trudeau, who faced significant unpopularity last year. This sentiment peaked when Trudeau’s second-in-command, Chrystia Freeland, unexpectedly resigned, signaling a countdown to Trudeau’s exit.
Unlike Freeland, who was part of Trudeau's cabinet, Carney comes without that baggage. Freeland sought leadership but was criticized for offering limited change. She was finance minister for several years, aligning closely with Trudeau's fiscal policies during the pandemic.
Carney brings a respected economic background, which many Liberals view as credible in the context of emerging from the pandemic and heading into a trade war. His somewhat subdued personality appeals to party members who see him as a viable candidate to turn their fortunes around.
Liberals have been downcast for over a year, often expecting to suffer a significant electoral defeat. Carney is seen as someone who might revive their chances.
You mentioned Trudeau’s unpopularity. Why did you phrase that in the past tense?
While he remains unpopular, the country appears to have moved on from Trudeau. Nevertheless, his recent role as a counterpoint to Trump has garnered him some favorable attention. Observers have praised him when he addresses Canadian interests and counters U.S. economic threats.
For a while, Trudeau’s voice had become grating to many, but that perception has softened. Though this doesn't suggest a swift comeback for him, it is noteworthy that his disapproval ratings have decreased while his approval has risen. This reflects the influence Donald Trump has on Canadian politics.
How significant is Trump in the upcoming election?
Donald Trump looms large in Canadian politics right now. His comments, whether on social media or in the Oval Office, surface discussions across the country. It's akin to the metaphor Pierre Trudeau, Justin’s father, once used: the U.S. is an elephant, and Canada is a mouse. Every time Trump makes an antagonistic remark, it sparks conversations among potential candidates, including the current prime minister and his Conservative rival, Pierre Poilievre.
Everyone reacts to Trump’s influence. He has claimed to be the most important figure in Canadian politics today, and many Canadians would likely agree.
What distinguishes this time in relation to Trump from his previous term in office?
While the first Trump administration was unpredictable, the dynamics between the U.S. and Canada were relatively established. The renegotiation of NAFTA, despite its challenges, yielded a trade agreement that he favored at the time. At that point, Trudeau was still enjoying buoyant popularity, fresh from a honeymoon phase.
By 2019, following a minority government win, the political landscape began to shift. The onset of COVID-19 further complicated things, and the relationship with Trump is now very different, with Canadian officials having to navigate a more antagonistic counterpart.
Is it accurate to suggest Trump has provided the Liberal Party, which has struggled, with a significant political boost? Should Trudeau be thanking him in some unconventional way?
There’s a strong argument in favor of that viewpoint. Much of the Liberal Party's improved polling can be linked to Trudeau’s decision to step back from politics, prompting voters to see the party as a brand rather than being solely associated with Trudeau's leadership.
Carney’s emergence as a credible contender has also proven beneficial. Polling indicates that whenever Carney's name is included, Liberal numbers rise. This increase may arise from a resurgence in patriotism and anxiety leading Canadians back to familiar political territory amid uncertainty surrounding Poilievre, who remains an unknown quantity.
If Carney secures power in the upcoming election, how might he engage with Trump? And how would Poilievre approach it?
Both will need to address the rising anxiety and patriotism I mentioned earlier. Engaging with Trump could require direct lines of communication to mitigate potential tensions.
However, there are also long-overdue priorities to manage domestically, such as reducing dependence on the United States. Achieving this will be a significant undertaking, as Canada has relied heavily on the U.S. for decades. Yet, politicians are discussing the reduction of interprovincial trade barriers and harmonizing regulations concerning trucking and labor mobility.
Both Poilievre and Carney have expressed intentions to foster better internal trade relations, thereby lessening dependency on the U.S. They’re also inclined to invest in infrastructure projects that enhance connectivity within Canada, focusing on east-west trade rather than north-south.
Trudeau has been a vocal supporter of Ukraine, presenting a contrast to Trump. Will his departure mean a major shift in Canada’s foreign policy, particularly regarding Ukraine? Would that change depending on whether Poilievre or Carney takes charge?
In reality, there is little divergence among the major political parties regarding Ukraine. Canada has a long-standing pro-Ukraine sentiment, fueled by a significant Ukrainian diaspora. However, support for Ukraine within Poilievre's broader constituency could lead to conflict, as some may oppose continued support in line with a "MAGA" standpoint. He risks discontent from multiple factions within his base if he tries to appease this viewpoint.
That said, supporting Ukraine aligns with his party’s historical position, as demonstrated by former Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a significant figure in Conservative policy. This aspect of foreign policy is unlikely to shift notably regardless of who leads.
As for Trudeau, his exit is accompanied by significant public confrontation with Trump. What’s next for him? Is there a possibility of his return to politics?
At 53, Trudeau is relatively young for a political figure. While he's currently unpopular, speculation of a comeback isn't at the forefront of discussions. Observers are pondering how he plans to exit the political arena. Notably, his father managed to return to power and enact impactful changes after an unexpected political defeat in 1979.
What's next for Trudeau is one of the many unresolved questions. He could return to public speaking, focusing on nonprofit initiatives, youth causes, or even founding an organization dedicated to particular issues.
Engaging in public speaking seems likely for him; it's a key aspect of his persona. However, I don’t foresee him immediately joining corporate boards or consultancy roles, as is common for many former politicians. Instead, I imagine he will take a step back for a while to focus on family.
Trump has jokingly suggested that Canada should become the 51st state, referring to Trudeau as a "governor." If it were to happen, would Canada seek to adjust the U.S. flag to feature a maple leaf instead of a star?
This is an intriguing proposition, though unrealistic in practice. However, imagining Canada at the negotiating table with the U.S. evokes thoughts of regional differences. Each province would likely present its distinct perspective, resulting in a complex dialogue that might overwhelm the Americans involved.
Ultimately, the endless bickering among Canadians could function as a deterrent against any notions of U.S. annexation.
Alejandro Jose Martinez for TROIB News
