I’m voting for whomever captures that turf irrespective of their party affiliation.
KvotheG on
Mark Carney is not Stephen Harper.
What is fair to say, is that Mark Carney, as Governor of the Bank of Canada, was in the same room as Stephen Harper and Jim Flaherty, where I’m sure they asked Carney for his advice to help structure economic and fiscal policy during that era. There was agreement on that front. It was the 2008 economic crisis, and we needed unity as a country, even if the captain steering the ship wasn’t elected by all Canadians.
Was Carney a Harper Conservative? Not necessarily. Carney, in his role, could have prevented Harper from going further right or implementing worse policies. Harper and Flaherty obviously respected Carney to listen to him. The LPC was a disaster as an alternative due to years of infighting that not many Canadians considered a serious option at the time.
If YOU could influence policy, and you had the ear of the captain who you don’t agree with, but is willing to listen to you, wouldn’t you? The LPC is a big tent party, and has been doing big tent politics far longer than the NDP or the CPC has. They’re good at it, and being centrists, it gives the flexibility to welcome differing schools of thought.
There’s room in the LPC for right-wing leaning ideas if it’s pragmatic. That does not make them Harper’s CPC, and even Poilievre’s CPC is no longer Harper’s CPC, so what option do the moderates have? The LPC simply responded to the mood of the country.
EarthWarping on
Crazy the NDP arent really relevant in this space despite there being a big space for a left wing party with ideals this time.
[deleted] on
[removed]
[deleted] on
[removed]
CSZuku on
The liberals are dead center under Carney not left or right .
I would like to know why the Canadian Government had allowed foreign ownership to news and TV networks in Canada .
Much of the Canadian media Canadians consume — especially English-language newspapers and news websites — is owned or influenced by a handful of big corporations, including U.S. investment firms and American interests. This means U.S. politics and narratives can shape what Canadians hear and see, especially outside outlets like CBC and Quebec media. �
Wikipedia +1
In the United States, major conservative figures and Republican–aligned media networks control a large share of domestic TV and news coverage. There is also significant investment from foreign money — for example, Jared Kushner’s firm backed by Saudi capital competing for major U.S. media assets — which raises questions about how narratives are influenced even in the U.S. political sphere.
This concentration of media ownership and foreign investment can skew political messaging, fuel partisan divides, and spread narratives that many Canadians would otherwise reject — especially on issues like guns, abortion, and social policy. That’s why it’s important to pay attention to who owns the media and where their incentives lie.
📌 Canadian Media Ownership Resource
You can see lists and analysis of media ownership in Canada here:
👉 Wikipedia — Media ownership in Canada (shows major companies and concentration): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_ownership_in_Canada �
Wikipedia
This page explains how most Canadian news outlets are part of a small number of large companies — and not all are Canadian-controlled.
OrbAndSceptre on
Rage bait. Carney reversing the carbon tax, imposing visas on abuse prone countries, and mandatory minimums and bail reform is responsive to Canadians’ concerns.
Even then, the carbon tax wasn’t bringing back a Harper policy. Neither is imposing visas or criminal justice changes. Harper didn’t dream up of those ideas either.
dysthal on
in europe, they understand liberal means right-wing. here, we need to get our foot stepped on a thousand times before we even question their position.
jello_sweaters on
Here we see the 2026 Poilievre playbook; they’ve realized they’re never going to convince Canadians to elect them directly, so instead they’ll try and get the centre-left to leave the Liberals.
Klutzy_Ostrich_3152 on
You’re making it sound like “they changed their minds”. Most Liberals in parliament today were not in parliament when Harper was PM. It’s a new crew, with a new leader. I’m happy our political parties can evolve with the times and adopt policies that make sense. So tired of this rigid partisan approach where a party can’t ever change their mind
Tender_Flake on
Conservatives are so butt hurt about a Liberal government in power that they cannot even celebrate the fact that a progressive government is actually using some of their ideas from way back.
Some Conservatives and their shilling media partners cannot seem to look past it but instead conjure up boogiemen of the past, like Trudeau.
RNTMA on
I think a lot of people are exposing their age with the Harper-Carney comparisons. Carney has moved back to the centre on some of Trudeau’s crazier policies, but he’s also moved to the left of Trudeau and far away from Harper on foreign policy. Recognizing Palestine is something Trudeau wouldn’t do, and especially not evangelical Harper.
13 Comments
[removed]
Fiscally conservative, socially liberal.
I’m voting for whomever captures that turf irrespective of their party affiliation.
Mark Carney is not Stephen Harper.
What is fair to say, is that Mark Carney, as Governor of the Bank of Canada, was in the same room as Stephen Harper and Jim Flaherty, where I’m sure they asked Carney for his advice to help structure economic and fiscal policy during that era. There was agreement on that front. It was the 2008 economic crisis, and we needed unity as a country, even if the captain steering the ship wasn’t elected by all Canadians.
Was Carney a Harper Conservative? Not necessarily. Carney, in his role, could have prevented Harper from going further right or implementing worse policies. Harper and Flaherty obviously respected Carney to listen to him. The LPC was a disaster as an alternative due to years of infighting that not many Canadians considered a serious option at the time.
If YOU could influence policy, and you had the ear of the captain who you don’t agree with, but is willing to listen to you, wouldn’t you? The LPC is a big tent party, and has been doing big tent politics far longer than the NDP or the CPC has. They’re good at it, and being centrists, it gives the flexibility to welcome differing schools of thought.
There’s room in the LPC for right-wing leaning ideas if it’s pragmatic. That does not make them Harper’s CPC, and even Poilievre’s CPC is no longer Harper’s CPC, so what option do the moderates have? The LPC simply responded to the mood of the country.
Crazy the NDP arent really relevant in this space despite there being a big space for a left wing party with ideals this time.
[removed]
[removed]
The liberals are dead center under Carney not left or right .
I would like to know why the Canadian Government had allowed foreign ownership to news and TV networks in Canada .
Much of the Canadian media Canadians consume — especially English-language newspapers and news websites — is owned or influenced by a handful of big corporations, including U.S. investment firms and American interests. This means U.S. politics and narratives can shape what Canadians hear and see, especially outside outlets like CBC and Quebec media. �
Wikipedia +1
In the United States, major conservative figures and Republican–aligned media networks control a large share of domestic TV and news coverage. There is also significant investment from foreign money — for example, Jared Kushner’s firm backed by Saudi capital competing for major U.S. media assets — which raises questions about how narratives are influenced even in the U.S. political sphere.
This concentration of media ownership and foreign investment can skew political messaging, fuel partisan divides, and spread narratives that many Canadians would otherwise reject — especially on issues like guns, abortion, and social policy. That’s why it’s important to pay attention to who owns the media and where their incentives lie.
📌 Canadian Media Ownership Resource
You can see lists and analysis of media ownership in Canada here:
👉 Wikipedia — Media ownership in Canada (shows major companies and concentration):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_ownership_in_Canada �
Wikipedia
This page explains how most Canadian news outlets are part of a small number of large companies — and not all are Canadian-controlled.
Rage bait. Carney reversing the carbon tax, imposing visas on abuse prone countries, and mandatory minimums and bail reform is responsive to Canadians’ concerns.
Even then, the carbon tax wasn’t bringing back a Harper policy. Neither is imposing visas or criminal justice changes. Harper didn’t dream up of those ideas either.
in europe, they understand liberal means right-wing. here, we need to get our foot stepped on a thousand times before we even question their position.
Here we see the 2026 Poilievre playbook; they’ve realized they’re never going to convince Canadians to elect them directly, so instead they’ll try and get the centre-left to leave the Liberals.
You’re making it sound like “they changed their minds”. Most Liberals in parliament today were not in parliament when Harper was PM. It’s a new crew, with a new leader. I’m happy our political parties can evolve with the times and adopt policies that make sense. So tired of this rigid partisan approach where a party can’t ever change their mind
Conservatives are so butt hurt about a Liberal government in power that they cannot even celebrate the fact that a progressive government is actually using some of their ideas from way back.
Some Conservatives and their shilling media partners cannot seem to look past it but instead conjure up boogiemen of the past, like Trudeau.
I think a lot of people are exposing their age with the Harper-Carney comparisons. Carney has moved back to the centre on some of Trudeau’s crazier policies, but he’s also moved to the left of Trudeau and far away from Harper on foreign policy. Recognizing Palestine is something Trudeau wouldn’t do, and especially not evangelical Harper.