Federal Elections

[DTcrawler]

I'm sure they will save a seat on board for their Rebel News friends. Though to be fair most would not consider those morons to be "journalists".

What a fall from grace the CPC has seen since the Harper era.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by DTcrawler

I'm sure they will save a seat on board for their Rebel News friends. Though to be fair most would not consider those morons to be "journalists".

What a fall from grace the CPC has seen since the Harper era.

Harper also broke norms refusing to address the Ottawa Press Gallery.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by LeadingEdgeBoomer

Today the CPC announced that reporters will not be allowed to travel on the Leader's campaign bus and airplane. That breaks a decades long tradition.

The Libs and the NDP say they will allow it as usual.

Strange decision as it will lead to accusations of being afraid of the media.

On par for the course.

In other news, Chandra Arya, who was kicked out of the leadership race, will not be allowed to run for his seat in Nepean.

https://www.cbc.ca/lite/story/1.7489486

[LeadingEdgeBoomer]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

On par for the course.

In other news, Chandra Arya, who was kicked out of the leadership race, will not be allowed to run for his seat in Nepean.

https://www.cbc.ca/lite/story/1.7489486

Arya was kicked out and Chiang had to drop out or he may have been kicked out.

The CPC has now booted out four of their candidates, the latest happened today. A fellow named Patel in Etobicoke.

It do not seem to remember an election campaign where that many candidates were shown the door by their own party. Am I wrong about that?

[Richard Eade]

Welcome to the new reality – where no-one is ‘Pure’.

Remember all those times we told the kids to be careful about what they put out on ‘The Web’? Pointing out that things put online will never disappear? Well, AI has now become the greatest leap forward in recovering all of that ‘stuff’. And anyone can do the research. It might be something that went up as a joke (which can later be stripped of its context), or an old idea that has since been moved away from; it doesn’t matter.

With AI and the permanence of ‘The Web’ we all now live in ‘Glass Houses’. But there are plenty of people still willing to throw stones.

[J.OT13]

No one posted this already? I'm sure we've all heard, but posting with delight:

Liberal Bruce Fanjoy topples Pierre Poilievre in Carleton
Conservative leader projected to lose his longtime Ottawa riding
CBC News · Posted: Apr 29, 2025 4:48 AM EDT | Last Updated: 3 hours ago

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is projected to lose his longtime rural Ottawa seat to Liberal Bruce Fanjoy.

Poilievre had won the area seven times in a row going back to his first win in 2004. While official results are not available, the preliminary results suggest Fanjoy won by about 3,800 votes, getting just over 50 per cent support.

"We've focused on the work that we had to do all along and believ[ing] that if we did the work, if we met enough people and spread a positive message, that the numbers would take care of themselves," Fanjoy said on CBC Radio's Ottawa Morning on Tuesday.

He attributed his victory to worry about the American president's threats toward Canada.

"People in Carleton are very concerned about Donald Trump and the tariffs and what that means for our economy," he said.

"They're been looking for serious leadership and they saw that in in Mark Carney's Liberals."

Fanjoy said he would work to earn the support of Carleton voters who did not support him "by showing up, by listening, by providing solutions."

Prime Minister Carney congratulated Fanjoy in his own victory speech.

"And for those who were elected, particularly those Liberals who were elected, I am looking forward to working together to deliver for Canadians," Carney said.

Responding to a supporter calling out Fanjoy's name, Carney continued: "Yes, Bruce Fanjoy. I'm looking forward to working with Bruce Fanjoy. Fantastic. He will be a great MP."

Record-tying candidate list

Fanjoy lives in the village of Manotick, where he built a carbon-neutral house.

He worked in business and marketing before stepping back to be a parent and volunteer — and now MP-elect.

The advocacy group Longest Ballot, which tries to get as many candidates as possible on a ballot to call attention to the idea of an independent electoral reform process, told CBC News it targeted Carleton.

Because of this, there were a record-tying 91 candidates on the final ballot. CBC did not project the winner until nearly 5 a.m. ET, more than eight hours after polls closed.

The crowded field turned into a two-horse race with Fanjoy and Poilievre getting more than 80,000 combined votes. The third-place NDP picked up about 1,200, the Greens and United Party were in the triple digits, and every other candidate fell below 100 votes.

Carleton now stretches from Renfrew County to Prescott-Russell because of the independent review that followed the 2021 census.

It added communities such as Constance Bay and Fitzroy Harbour to Metcalfe, Osgoode and Stittsville. It also took the area of Piperville and Anderson roads from Orléans, and more land west of Highway 416 from Nepean.

Findlay Creek moved to Ottawa South.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ca...leton-pierre-poilievre-results-1.7515695

[J.OT13]

I wasn't expecting Skippy to lose, even as I was watching him trail from behind all night. Of all the elections, this is the one he loses?

[phil235]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I wasn't expecting Skippy to lose, even as I was watching him trail from behind all night. Of all the elections, this is the one he loses?

Bizarre, but quite satisfying. I wasn't expecting that, but apparently cozying up to the convoy actually cost him.

[J.OT13]

Let's meet our new best friend Bruce Fanjoy. A guy who's held real jobs, believes in sustainability and is involved with the community. Nice change!

I'm a fan! He brings me joy!

Who is Bruce Fanjoy? Meet the man who won Pierre Poilievre's riding

Bruce Fanjoy has a business degree and previously worked in marketing for a large firm. Here's how he won Pierre Poilievre's Carleton riding

Joseph Brean, Postmedia
Published Apr 29, 2025

If all politics is local, Bruce Fanjoy had a headstart in his race against a national figure. Looking him up in the archives of his local newspapers turns up the kind of stories people cut out and put on the fridge.

Here he is, an assistant coach of for 10-year-old hockey players, successfully encouraging them to raise money for pediatric palliative care at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario by reading 100 books in 30 days, and then meeting Roch Carrier and getting a signed copy of The Hockey Sweater as a reward. Here he is volunteering with Bike Ottawa at a vigil for a cyclist killed by a motorist.

And here he is, a hockey dad with some connections, getting former Ottawa Senators captain Daniel Alfredsson in touch with a 12-year-old boy who broke two vertebrae playing defence for the local peewee AA team.

That kind of reputation is campaign gold on the front porch of ridings like Carleton, south of Ottawa, even if you are running against Pierre Poilievre, leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, who has held it since it was recreated in 2015 out of three ridings, one of which he also held since 2004, seven wins in all. Fanjoy estimated he knocked on 15,000 doors before the campaign even began, often encountering skeptics.

“One of the impacts of someone holding a riding for as long as Pierre Poilievre has held Carleton is some people forget it doesn’t have to be that way,” Fanjoy recently told the Ottawa Citizen. “I believed from the beginning that there was a path to victory…. A lot of people are looking for an alternative. I wanted to make sure I gave Carleton a strong, thoughtful, solutions-focused alternative to someone who hasn’t accomplished anything in 20 years of service.”

Fanjoy has a business degree and previously worked in marketing for a large consulting firm. His wife Donna Nicholson is a cardiac anesthesiologist and professor at the University of Ottawa. They have two grown children. Lately, he has overseen the construction of a new family home in Manotick, on the Rideau River near the historic mill, built according to “passive” design principles to minimize the home’s energy consumption, which he promotes as an environmentalist.

National politics has a way of feeling local for the people of Carleton, and local politics has a way of feeling national.

It wasn’t just that the local MP was a prime minister in waiting for so long. It was also that the way he got there involved giving sympathetic attention to the Freedom Convoy that occupied downtown Ottawa in 2022.

Local attitudes on the convoy protest were not exactly the same as some national attitudes, the ones about pandemic skepticism and federal government overreach that aligned with Poilievre’s project to form a government to replace Justin Trudeau and his Liberals. Donald Trump’s trade wars were a shock campaign issue that focused attention on Poilievre’s response, evidently to Fanjoy’s benefit.

In the end, it was Poilievre who got replaced. The race was tight, but Fanjoy won by almost 4,000 votes, with more than 50 per cent of the total in a race that included 89 other candidates in a strange electoral reform protest that made ballots awkwardly long.

In a speech late on election night, Poilievre spun an upbeat message about high vote share and increased seat count that bodes well for the party he pledged to continue leading. But for a leader to lose his own seat is electoral embarrassment, especially when it comes as a late surprise.

Before the election, Fanjoy told National Post’s Stephanie Taylor that he saw Poilievre’s status as an apparent prime minister in waiting as an opportunity.

“Carleton, because of circumstance, has a remarkable opportunity to make a statement on the type of politics and direction that we want Canada to go in,” he said. “Although it’s technically just one of 343 ridings in the election, this one carries extra significance.”

Rumours started spreading that Carleton was in trouble for the Tories just before election day, with stories that internal Liberal polling suggested a possible upset, a ten point Conservative lead dropping to five. Then, Carleton reported the highest advance turnout in the country. Something was happening.

The Ottawa Citizen reported Fanjoy was unavailable for comment when his close victory was first projected by media “because it’s 4 a.m.” But he made a brief speech to supporters around midnight at the Manotick Legion, when victory was starting to look possible.

“I will never forget what this feels like,” he said.

Poilievre, watching the results in downtown Ottawa having already conceded the Liberals won the election that so recently seemed his to lose, probably felt the same thing.

https://ottawasun.com/news/politics/federal_election/carleton-who-is-bruce-fanjoy-pierre-profile

[Richard Eade]

When one of your main campaign slogans is “Boots not Suits” is it any wonder that a riding with a large percentage of ‘suits’ rejects you?

I do worry about the discontent that the CPC was stoking the fire under. I think that it has heightened the feelings that people are hard done by because they have to work hard for their future. It reinforces the idea that the government should be providing much more – while being much less intrusive. It says that you are ‘owed’ something, and that you don’t have to work for it.

When my father bought his small, 3-bedroom house, it cost about 10 times his annual salary. He had a 30-year mortgage at 3.5%. He eventually died in that house, about 65 years later, having never found the need to move. This, it seems is unacceptable these days. The average house in Ottawa is (apparently) about $650,000, and the average family income is more than $65,000, yet homes are now considered unaffordable. Absolutely, there are places where house prices are outrageously high – but that is because people are still willing to pay those prices.

I read the articles where the home builders say that they NEED the governments to give them all manner of concessions if smaller, cheaper, houses are to be built. The real problem is that the mark-up is not as high for smaller homes. It is just like the auto manufacturers dropping small, low profit, cars, in favour of higher margin big SUVs. If something is going to take a space in the assembly line (house or vehicle), then the builder wants to make it something that has the highest profit. Ergo, house builders NEED governments to ‘top up’ any loss of profit, if the governments want cheaper houses built.

A big problem is that if the selling price of houses is initially low, then the price will get bid up. It wasn’t too many years ago that houses were routinely selling for thousands (or even tens of thousands) OVER the list price. I would expect that to occur again. The builder gets a concession from the governments to build homes that sell for less, but the price then gets bid up past the point of ‘affordability’ that those governments desired. I doubt very much that a ‘first-time buyer’ who gets their house at a reduced price (because of a subsidy) will not want to sell that house with a subsidy.

There are market forces in play that were not accounted for in the CPC platform, yet over and over again we heard that the government was going to make everything affordable. That taxes were going to be cut, but billions of extra dollars were going into forcing cheap houses to be built.

And how were they going to ‘encourage’ municipalities to reduce development fees? By reimbursing the municipality 50% of what it was losing. Yes, cash-strapped municipalities were expected to happily give up 50% of their development fees. BUT, if they didn’t, then there would be limits on other (unrelated) payments from the Federal government – yes, blackmail.

Honestly though, being told that the government was going to make life easy – that you would be able to get what you want without extra effort – has a certain allure. The problem is that the seed of discontent has now been planted.

PS The CPC was not the only party that preached that everyone was being hard-done-by, and that their government would make life easy.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

When one of your main campaign slogans is “Boots not Suits” is it any wonder that a riding with a large percentage of ‘suits’ rejects you?

I do worry about the discontent that the CPC was stoking the fire under. I think that it has heightened the feelings that people are hard done by because they have to work hard for their future. It reinforces the idea that the government should be providing much more – while being much less intrusive. It says that you are ‘owed’ something, and that you don’t have to work for it.

When my father bought his small, 3-bedroom house, it cost about 10 times his annual salary. He had a 30-year mortgage at 3.5%. He eventually died in that house, about 65 years later, having never found the need to move. This, it seems is unacceptable these days. The average house in Ottawa is (apparently) about $650,000, and the average family income is more than $65,000, yet homes are now considered unaffordable. Absolutely, there are places where house prices are outrageously high – but that is because people are still willing to pay those prices.

I read the articles where the home builders say that they NEED the governments to give them all manner of concessions if smaller, cheaper, houses are to be built. The real problem is that the mark-up is not as high for smaller homes. It is just like the auto manufacturers dropping small, low profit, cars, in favour of higher margin big SUVs. If something is going to take a space in the assembly line (house or vehicle), then the builder wants to make it something that has the highest profit. Ergo, house builders NEED governments to ‘top up’ any loss of profit, if the governments want cheaper houses built.

A big problem is that if the selling price of houses is initially low, then the price will get bid up. It wasn’t too many years ago that houses were routinely selling for thousands (or even tens of thousands) OVER the list price. I would expect that to occur again. The builder gets a concession from the governments to build homes that sell for less, but the price then gets bid up past the point of ‘affordability’ that those governments desired. I doubt very much that a ‘first-time buyer’ who gets their house at a reduced price (because of a subsidy) will not want to sell that house with a subsidy.

There are market forces in play that were not accounted for in the CPC platform, yet over and over again we heard that the government was going to make everything affordable. That taxes were going to be cut, but billions of extra dollars were going into forcing cheap houses to be built.

And how were they going to ‘encourage’ municipalities to reduce development fees? By reimbursing the municipality 50% of what it was losing. Yes, cash-strapped municipalities were expected to happily give up 50% of their development fees. BUT, if they didn’t, then there would be limits on other (unrelated) payments from the Federal government – yes, blackmail.

Honestly though, being told that the government was going to make life easy – that you would be able to get what you want without extra effort – has a certain allure. The problem is that the seed of discontent has now been planted.

PS The CPC was not the only party that preached that everyone was being hard-done-by, and that their government would make life easy.

Lmao, your exactly the reason why I hope the LPC do bring in a capital gains tax on principle residences.

The CPC rightfully preached that boomers/nimbys got in the way of housing being built by pushing astronomical costs into new residents, something hat is backed by data, which is why the LPC essentially copied there housing platform, among many other things.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Lmao, your exactly the reason why I hope the LPC do bring in a capital gains tax on principle residences.

The CPC rightfully preached that boomers/nimbys got in the way of housing being built by pushing astronomical costs into new residents, something hat is backed by data, which is why the LPC essentially copied there housing platform, among many other things.

I'd like to read that data. Can you post it, or point me to it?

[Richard Eade]

On the radio this morning, a resident of Carleton Riding was saying that he was a Conservative voter, and voted for Pierre – but that he hoped that the party replaced Pierre with a new leader. His opinion, and apparently that of many of his friends in the riding, was that Pierre was a good MP, but not the person that they wanted as PM. He felt that that was the reason that Pierre lost in the Carleton Riding.

Admittedly, this is one opinion, but how much validity would be in that sentiment with regard to the masses, do you think?

I know that Pierre is being credited with a sizable up-tick in popular vote for the CPC, but is that a fair assessment? Is it possible that the swell of CPC votes was not for Pierre, but instead were ABC (Anybody But Carney) votes. That they were strategic votes to try to prevent Carne and/or /the Liberals from getting a majority, or even into power with a minority.

So, in your opinion, was it A) that the initial surge for the CPC due to a strong dislike for Trudeau, personally, and any alternative would be preferred? B) because there was a general feeling across the country that Liberal government policies had gone too far and were interfering too much in people’s choices, and that the CPC was preaching more freedom? C) that Pierre was such a charismatic personality that people flocked to him? D) all, or some combination, of the above?

[I am not discounting all of the work that Fanjoy put into campaigning. He spent years getting to know the riding and its people. It is very possible that the people simply found a person that they felt better represented them.]

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Admittedly, this is one opinion, but how much validity would be in that sentiment with regard to the masses, do you think?

My personal view is that Pierre had a huge advantage in the anti-liberal sentiment that was everywhere and he blew it based on his personal dislikeability and his relentless focus on the negative.

I was actually pleasantly surprised that the attack ads and negative campaigning weren't effective. Bodes well for our politics.

[LeadingEdgeBoomer]

Originally Posted by phil235

My personal view is that Pierre had a huge advantage in the anti-liberal sentiment that was everywhere and he blew it based on his personal dislikeability and his relentless focus on the negative.

I was actually pleasantly surprised that the attack ads and negative campaigning weren't effective. Bodes well for our politics.

I feel that the surge in CPC support was due to a dislike of Trudeau, and some of his policies. Trudeau was strong on social issues, but weak on economic issues. When the election was called the Conservative support remained largely static, but third party voters did not like PP and went to Carney to stop PP, plus Carney with his economics background looked like a good choice for economic issues.

I personally disliked that for months prior to the election, that PP kept saying that Canada is Broken. That phrase played into hands of both Quebec and Western separatists. Why stay in a broken Canada? Actually, Canada is not broken. We have a lot going for us.

[daud]

Regarding Carleton Riding...

I live in Carleton Riding and am not one bit surprised that Pierre Poilievre lost his seat. I don't actually think Pierre did anything wrong in his campaign. Frankly, he held up really well nationally against a seasoned opponent with global experience in finance and business at a time when that is the biggest concern-global trade. Were it not for Trump, Poilievre probably would have won the election.

The demographics of the riding of Carleton has changed dramatically in the past 5 years. There has been a huge amount of construction of suburban homes in Barrhaven and Riverside South. Almost all (not an exaggeration) of these new residents are New Canadians mostly from India, Asia and to a lesser degree Arab and Latin American countries New Canadians have largely always voted liberal so the result was not a shock to me at all.

Also, I'm quite fine with the result and very happy to have all our new neighbours bringing more diversity to our city.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by daud

Regarding Carleton Riding...

I live in Carleton Riding and am not one bit surprised that Pierre Poilievre lost his seat. I don't actually think Pierre did anything wrong in his campaign. Frankly, he held up really well nationally against a seasoned opponent with global experience in finance and business at a time when that is the biggest concern-global trade. Were it not for Trump, Poilievre probably would have won the election.

The demographics of the riding of Carleton has changed dramatically in the past 5 years. There has been a huge amount of construction of suburban homes in Barrhaven and Riverside South. Almost all (not an exaggeration) of these new residents are New Canadians mostly from India, Asia and to a lesser degree Arab and Latin American countries New Canadians have largely always voted liberal so the result was not a shock to me at all.

Also, I'm quite fine with the result and very happy to have all our new neighbours bringing more diversity to our city.

That's one factor for sure. But without the NDP collapse he still wins. Without some of the swing voter civil servants switching to the Liberals given the huge animosity PP clearly has for it he also might have eked it out. (Both of those trends were Ottawa wide so we know it wasn't only about PP or even the hardwork of Fanjoy

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by LeadingEdgeBoomer

I feel that the surge in CPC support was due to a dislike of Trudeau, and some of his policies. Trudeau was strong on social issues, but weak on economic issues. When the election was called the Conservative support remained largely static, but third party voters did not like PP and went to Carney to stop PP, plus Carney with his economics background looked like a good choice for economic issues.

I personally disliked that for months prior to the election, that PP kept saying that Canada is Broken. That phrase played into hands of both Quebec and Western separatists. Why stay in a broken Canada? Actually, Canada is not broken. We have a lot going for us.

Agreed, Canada is not ‘broken’. That said, there certainly are grievances which need to be dealt with.

I also agree that Trudeau led much more of a social agenda – while he reckoned that a budget will balance itself.

An example was Trudeau’s 2015 commitment to end Long-Term Drinking Water Advisories (LT-DWA) for First Nations. More was done during his terms that had been done previously. Has it succeeded in removing all of the LT-DWAs? Nope, but it has made significant progress. And it is continuing (I hope)



Trudeau went too far, too fast on some of his pet issues, and he ignored, as you point out, the economic side of government. I think that these excesses opened up the opportunity for an opportunist to hammer away on the problems people were having. A person might have only disliked a few of the Trudeau policies, but when those were exaggerated to sound like the world was ending, they took on more importance.

The seeds of discontent are easy to sow. Look how broad the CPC platform was. It pointed out that there were MAJOR catastrophes everywhere. Not all of it resonated with everyone, but it didn’t have to. It just had to reinforce one or two negative feelings for any given person. And, of course, the one sowing the malcontent advertised that they were the only alternative that can remove the burdens inflicted by the others.

It’s a dangerous path to follow, as Trump is finding. Accentuating the negative leaves lasting resentment. If, for any reason those issues can not be solved immediately, people can quickly turn against the ‘savior’. Unfortunately, the bad feelings do not fade as fast. Those are left to linger, and fester.

[J.OT13]

Pierre Poilievre didn't just lose his seat. He also likely lost his home
Elections Canada reported the Liberals' Bruce Fanjoy captured Poilievre's Ottawa-area riding


Author of the article:By Stephanie Taylor, Christopher Nardi
National Post
Published Apr 29, 2025

OTTAWA — Before Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre finds a new seat in the House of Commons, he will likely have to find a new home.

Early Tuesday morning, it became clear that Poilievre had lost his bid for re-election in Carleton, the suburban Ottawa riding he’s represented since 2004. Around 3:30 p.m. ET, Elections Canada reported the Liberals’ Bruce Fanjoy captured Poilievre’s Ottawa-area riding by about 4,300 votes.

The loss complicates Poilievre’s announcement that he plans to stay on as party leader.

But it also likely throws a wrench into his living situation.

Shortly after he was elected leader of the Conservative Party, Poilievre moved into Stornoway house, the taxpayer-funded official residence of the leader of the Opposition.

But according to the Official Residences Act, Stornoway is reserved for the “Leader of the Opposition in the House of Commons”. Since Poilievre lost his seat, he is no longer recognized as the official leader of the opposition.

That means that in all likelihood, Poilievre and his family will have to move out to make space for the next party leader in the House of Commons. He also loses out on a $215,090 annual budget for residence staff and services and a $2,000 annual vehicle allocation.

Without a seat in Parliament, Poilievre will not be able to return to the House of Commons when it resumes. That makes things more awkward for the Conservative leader, who must now find a way to regain a seat, while also soothing party concerns about its loss.

To regain a seat, one of the party’s newly elected representatives would have to step aside, which would trigger a byelection, where Poilievre would need to run. Poilievre, originally from Alberta, has called Ottawa home since he first came to Parliament Hill in the early 2000s.

The timing of a byelection call is also out of his control. It is up to the prime minister, who can wait up to six months to call one to fill a vacant seat. Byelection campaigns can also last between 36 and 50 days, opening the possibility that Poilievre may not return to the House of Commons this year, depending on its sitting schedule.

Poilievre spent election night on Monday trailing Fanjoy, a businessman who officially became the Liberal candidate in June 2024.

He had won the riding seven straight times, almost losing only once, when former prime minister Justin Trudeau rose to power in 2015.

This election, the Liberals took special interest in the riding, with Fanjoy having spent the past two years knocking on doors and seeing hundreds of Liberals raise their hand to volunteer to try to defeat Poilievre.

The large rural riding boasted the highest turnout of any riding for advanced polls, according to Elections Canada. In all, around 81 per cent of eligible electors cast a ballot.

The area is also home to many federal public servants, whom Fanjoy made direct appeals to, arguing that Poilievre intended to make job cuts.

The Liberal also campaigned on drawing parallels between Poilievre’s political style and that of U.S. President Donald Trump, a connection that dogged Poilievre throughout the campaign.

Fanjoy had hoped to target more moderate Conservatives, turned off by Poilievre’s right-wing populism.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/f...s-to-remain-party-leader-as-liberals-win

[J.OT13]

LeDroit interview with Fanjoy: https://www.ledroit.com/actualites/polit...bruce-fanjoy-RHD65H2QPJD6HASYIQP722MRBA/