What Happened in Canada (And Why America Should Care)

Canadians shooting themselves in the foot

Yes, Trump was a factor in this election. Canada’s Baby Boomers listed “standing up to Trump” as their Number One priority, and they voted accordingly. Voters thought that multi-nationalist globalist banker turned sometime politician Mark Carney would stand up to Trump on all the tariff, immigration, and national sovereignty issues. Trump’s tariff war sparked outrage and pushback, too, although I applaud Trump for calling out our northern neighbor’s unfair trade practices. Still, the April 28th, 2025, election results are not all Trump’s fault. Canadians bear ultimate responsibility, and if sticking it to “Ugly Orange American President” means shooting themselves in the foot, all power to them. I have never understood the wisdom of voting against your best interests because you don’t like someone. Then again, I’m not a liberal, governed by feelings and identity politics. Too many Canadians are, however.

Not only is Canada a liberal country, but the unique brand of Canadian nationalism is decidedly left-wing, too, as Vancouver, BC political pundit J.J. McCoullough has pointed out. Canadians take pride in their single-payer healthcare system (even though many Canadians resort to the United States to get better care because they don’t live long enough to wait for it in their own country). They cherish their gun-control culture. They have bought into “diversity is our strength” for decades. They are all in on the climate change cult. They had long-ago accepted same-sex “marriage.” They do not cherish freedom of speech up there, the way we do down here. More importantly, Canadian identity is mostly based on being “Not-America.” I am not surprised that Donald Trump talks about turning Canada into the 51st State. America so dominates the country’s politics and identity, they might as well join us.

Let’s look at the bigger issue: How could a political party that was riding a huge wave of support, enough that the incumbent Liberals were looking at third-party status not even five months ago? Pierre Poilievre election fatigue, perhaps? He had a bit of the “Hillary Clinton” inevitability aura, which bores the voters. A year is a lifetime in politics, and that dragged out, inevitably dragging down Poilievre’s chances. How bad did it get for “the inevitable” Poilievre? He lost his own riding. OUCH!

Poilievre reverted into the diversity game

Second, Poilievre’s campaign focused on dismantling the deeply (and justifiably) unpopular and now long-gone Justin Trudeau. As long as the would-be son of Fidel Castro was the Liberal leader and prime minister, Canadians were prepared to give the Conservative Party the largest parliamentary mandate in Canadian history. Trudeau resigned, prorogued parliament, then the Liberals selected a non-descript standard-bearer. Liberal voters warmed up to this new guy, and Poilievre didn’t pivot effectively. Their flawed calculation rested on hating Trudeau, but still loving Liberalism.

He sounded like Trump, until Trump sounded off on turning Canada into the 51st State. Then Poilievre tried to distance himself from Trump, but not the policies, decidedly right-wing, which reminded everyone of Trump. Poilievre was stuck between a glacier and a hard place. Canada needs a constitutional republican resurgence, yet in order to achieve that transformation, they have to be more like … America. Canadians don’t want their country to be more like America, i.e. more prosperous or free (at least for now).

I don’t accept the criticisms from right-wing pundits faulting Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre for being “cringe” because he was all performance. He ate an apple while dismantling a liberal propagandist pretending to be a journalist. That was golden and delicious! In fact, there was far too little of that. He needed to stick with hitting the Canadian liberal pundits and political class non-stop, tying Liberal incumbents to Trudeau, not Trump.

A number of Canadian friends told me that they could not vote Conservative because Poilievre and Co. were not conservative enough. Yes, he talked about “Canada First.” Yes, he talked about protecting freedom of speech and making Canada a prosperous country. He talked against wokeness and foreign aid, and he talked about leaving the World Economic Forum. Then he talked about allowing more immigrants (legally) into the country. He reverted into the diversity game, trying to be everything to all Canadians. It wasn’t in his heart.

Four more years of sex mutilation of minors, euthanasia, radical abortion, climate alarmism

He was still somewhat liberal, dithering on whether he would end Ukraine funding, and his tough talk about restoring freedom of speech came off as very hollow in the face of his voting record, including the infamous C-4, which criminalizes change therapy, a law imposing stiffer penalties than for robbery.

Poilievre was a career politician, too; there was no escaping that. He had represented his Carleton, Ontario riding for over twenty years. He served in the Harper government when the Conservatives ruled the country. He did strike a strong, populist tone when he ran for leader of the Conservative Party. But that’s just it: he struck a tone.

But we can’t lay all the blame on the Conservative leader. His conservative message could not resonate with a resolved liberal public and really bad tariff-Trump timing.

Is there no hope for the Great White North?

Never say never. Argentina was a socialist basket case for a century, but they just elected an unsparing libertarian who is cutting everything, lowering inflation, and restoring manifold prosperity. If Argentina can be great again, so can Canada.

Until then, Canadians get four more years of Obama-Trudeau-Carney. Will they suffer more of the same, or will Carney move to the right to save the country? Most likely, Canadians will have to settle for four more years of sex mutilation of minors, euthanasia, radical abortion, climate alarmism, and every other anti-liberty proposal imaginable.