Calling early elections seem to be quite the trend in Canada.

During the pandemic Trudeau did it, at a high cost to the taxpayer and no real results, same number of seats as before.

Now Ford wants an early election at a cost of 75 Million to the taxpayer. Ford states that a strong mandate and the US election and Trump would make that necessary, but he already has a strong majority. Most likely Ford is trying to distract from some unknown scandal?

And then there is the federal election this year, most likely it'll also be an early election.
One just has to think what money could be saved and spent on other matters ( health care, etc... ) instead of constantly calling early elections.
Is this really all necessary?

I have no idea about the political situation in Ontario, so I can't comment about that but...

I would be amazed if anyone doesn't want a Federal Election as soon as possible. As a result of the constitutional challenge that is wending its way through Federal Court, the prorogation may be deemed inappropriate and, if so, Parliament will resume, the Government is likely to fall as a result of a non-confidence vote (if Singh does what he has stated he will but we have been there before) and the election may happen sooner than the government wants.

I always question the "additional cost" put forward by the public service. They are paid regardless and, while I accept that there may be some overtime, or additional temporary workers, involved, it appears to me that the vast majority of the "cost" would have been incurred anyway.

They knew that covid might cause economic fallout and inflation, that's why they did it, to basically reset the 5 year countdown to try and avoid an election during the rough times.

I think that Jagmeet Singh will support the Liberals continue in power under the guise of helping the Feds fight against the Trump tariffs. I'm just waiting for PP to get his underwear in a twist when he doesn't get his way with an early election.

Why would PP want an election? He's in an untenable position; he's presented himself as a Trump lackey and Trump has turned against Canada.

He's hoping people haven't realized yet, and him winning will be even less likely once Carney becomes liberal leader (provided the liberals don't select Freeland).

Why do you think that would change people's opinions? Didn't he support all of the policies that Trudeau implemented? What do you believe he is going to do any differently than Trudeau?

All the effort has been focused on attacking Trudeau - "he's not ready", "he's a drama teacher",etc. now he's gone, that all falls flat.

Actual policies are a small part of elections, people tend to gravitate to people they know, respect and show good leadership. Most people are very uninformed when it comes to choosing who to vote for, for example in the recent BC elections, many people voted provincial conservative because they thought it was a federal election.

Unlike Trudeau, Carney is insanely well qualified and experienced. People want reassurance during these uncertain times, and Carney delivers that. The liberal party has a long history in Canada and Carney is tapping into that liberal nostalgia too.

Personally I think policy wise Carney will do a better job listening to the right people, Trudeau often ended up listening to corporate lobbyists and other self interested people, I think Carney will do a better job recognizing that.

But I'll admit it's mostly vibes based, but that's often how these things play out.

I always wonder how people know this. Did any of your friends tell you that they voted thinking they were voting in a federal election?

I would argue against Carney being insanely well qualified and experienced, as a politician.

I agree that lots of the electorate have no idea about policies, or why one may be better than the other. The impression I get is that they simply want the government to give money to them, apparently, oblivious to the the fact that the government can only do so if it takes it from another entity.

Freeland did not support all the economic decisions JT made, hence her eventual resignation. Carney was an advisor to JT but that not mean that Trudeau did everything or even anything Carney advised.

Carney is not well qualified as a politician and I expect that to be in his favour. Trump is hardly a 'real' politician in the traditional sense. Meanwhile PP has only ever been a politician, never had a real world job, not even as a drama teacher.

PP has been going on for months or even longer that Canada needs an 'Axe the Tax' election without delay. I'm still trying to figure out why PP wants to axe the carbon tax - 80% of households get more rebate than the tax costs them so why does he want to make us worse off just because he doesn't like Trudeau (does anyone?!).

PP has been going on for months or even longer that Canada needs an 'Axe the Tax' election without delay. I'm still trying to figure out why PP wants to axe the carbon tax - 80% of households get more rebate than the tax costs them so why does he want to make us worse off just because he doesn't like Trudeau (does anyone?!).

You have just aptly demonstrated what I stated above.

The aim was to reduce carbon emissions wasn't it and, on that metric, it has been an abject failure. If it was intended to be a redistribution of income policy, there is an argument that has been a success.

I am given to understand that actually the carbon reduction emissions under the Carbon Tax has been successful in getting industry to reduce their emissions (or at least invest in processes that will be successful) and successful in benefiting ordinary households also. If that is true then what is not to like about the Carbon Tax?