Front Burner - Weekend listen: Power & Politics’ campaign wrap

Episode Date: April 26, 2025

It's almost election day, and our colleagues at Power and Politics have been putting out a weekly wrap, where political strategists break down what the biggest federal election stories actually mean for the campaign.This week, former Justin Trudeau adviser Laura D'Angelo, former Harper government staffer Michael Solberg and former Alberta NDP strategist Zain Velji talk platforms -- do they matter, at this stage in the campaign game? And especially for a party like the Conservatives, who keep polling behind the Liberals? The strategists also have thoughts on tensions between Pierre Poilievre and conservative premiers, and weigh in with what they think are the most under-the-radar election stories of the week.To hear more of Power and Politics daily: https://link.mgln.ai/8DXaye

On the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz comes an unprecedented exhibition about one of history's darkest moments. Auschwitz, not long ago, not far away, features more than 500 original objects, first-hand accounts and survivor testimonies that tell the powerful story of the Auschwitz concentration camp, its history and legacy, and the underlying conditions that allowed the Holocaust to happen. On now exclusively at Rom. Tickets at rom.ca. This is a CBC Podcast. Hi everyone, it's Jamie. If you are a regular listener, a front burner, you know that we've been going really hard on politics lately. We know there's an incredible appetite for

this from our listeners. So if you're someone who's got even more room for the nitty gritty, we want to put you onto power and politics, CBC's only political daily. They've zeroed in on the top issues every day of this campaign, including on Saturdays with special raps like the one that you are about to hear. This is a team that's going to stay with you well after the votes are counted. And in fact, former Frontburner producer Derek Van Der Waag actually edits their podcast. Hi, Derek. We miss you a lot. OK, over to David Cochran now for a final weekend wrap before Election Day.

Hey, it's David, and we're at the end of the final full week of the election campaign. Voters head to the polls on Monday, but it's only been days since the major parties finally release their platforms. A fourth liberal term with Mark Carney, whose reckless liberal plan will add even more debt than Trudeau. There's a phantom growth that comes from the sky in his platform that arrives and changes his numbers. Reports suggest conservative leader Pierre Paulyev's own seat may be in danger, and rumors are swirling about his tensions with conservative premiers.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves and let's see what happens on the 28th. And a campaign that started with US President Donald Trump's threats is ending with them too. I have to be honest. As a state, it works great. Plus, our strategists will tell you what they're looking for as the results roll in on Monday. So let's do it.

Joining me are Michael Solberg. He is a former staffer in the Stephen Harper government. Zain Belgi is a former strategist for the Alberta NDP. And Laura D'Angelo was an advisor to former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Good to see you all, gang. We're almost at the end. Here we go. Cannot believe it.

Finally. Okay, this week, you know, on top of the major party platforms being released during or after the advanced voting period, there was also quite a bit of contention over math. That's a good way to end a campaign. Listen to this. The choice is this. A fourth liberal term with Mark Carney, whose reckless liberal plan will add even more debt than Trudeau, or a new conservative government with a responsible plan to save $125 billion and

put us back on the path to growth and security. There's a phantom growth that comes from the sky in his platform that arrives and changes his numbers even though he doesn't have a plan to fight against President Trump. Okay, look, I know you all promised there would be no math, so I'm not going to make you go through estimated tax revenue and all these sorts of things, but Laura, do the platforms even matter in an election like this, the way it has gone, the way it has polarized?

Does anybody care what's actually in the books? It's such a good question. I hope they care what's in the books, because it is important. And all of the platforms came late. Canadians deserve time with them, time to think through them, analyze them. But we've talked a lot on the show

how this particular election is so vibes based. I do think, you know, Canadians care about substance here, but they care about substance around a really particular question. How are the leaders responding to Donald Trump? And that I don't know if it needed a platform. Yeah, Michael, I don't know if it needed a platform,

it just became a platform that Mark Carney used again and again and again, and a reason to go get behind the podium and bring it back to that central issue. So the policy proposals and the costing tables and the different accounting multipliers that were used and not used, none of that really matters in this election, does it? No, I don't think it does.

I mean, look, it should. It's an exercise in democracy. Voters should have a look under the hood in terms of what they're being asked to endorse, but I still don't think it matters. In fact, I have a hot take and probably an unpopular one, because it's not democratic, but I don't think parties should release platforms

during a writ period, because all it does is make them vulnerable. I mean, look, the liberals were enjoying a big lead and a significant one, but they put out their platform, and by many accounts, it was unpopular, or at least makes them vulnerable. You have economists like Trevor Toome poking holes in it,

saying that it's going to hamper growth. And then you have bad sound bites from Mark Carney saying, well, trust me, I'm an economist. I have more experience than Trevor Toome. It just puts you on your back foot in a way that you didn't have to be had you not released your platform at all. And that's true of Pierre Poliev as well. And look, if I'm in the driver's seat next time we have one of these elections, God forbid,

I would just put out a political communications tool that broadly spoke to my high-level policies. Canadians aren't going to go through a profit and loss statement or through the costing tables. In fact, when I looked at the Conservatives ones, I felt like I needed a degree in rocket science to understand it. So I wouldn't release them at all. So Zain, my takeaway from that is Michael is saying, let me run the next conservative campaign and I will hide my plan from Canada.

Is that your takeaway, Zain? While the body is still warm too. Wow. What a pitch. I mean, listen, if we didn't have costed platforms, when would we have Mark Carney talking about phantom growth like he was reading an audiobook? Listen, at the end of this day, I don't know why any of these parties released them, because Mike's last point, I think, is a very important one.

We're in a campaign where you're communicating. And communicating means when you've already sold people, you stop selling. And that's a lesson for the liberals here, which is they open up a vulnerability. And of course, Mark Carney continues to be a very lucky man, so he's not going to pay a political price for it, or at least it seems like he isn't. But he opened himself up to a massive vulnerability by adding a lot of Trudeau-era-style programs to it, talking about a debt and deficit number that people are going to look backwards rather than forwards in terms of his leadership too.

And then with the conservatives, honestly, I don't know why they did this because not only is it the bad headlines and the questioning around their tax cut versus the liberal one potentially being better in the short term and all these sub-narratives, but they burnt a day on it, a day they really needed to turn things around. And I don't think anyone in the conservative camp thought the platform was going to turn things around. It was almost like one of those, we have to do it, so we're doing it, and we're doing it on a day that we just are going to burn on this thing and see what happens because

of it. And I think that's a really poor way to run a campaign, which is the obligatory we have to do it day. Who says you have to do it? There is no broader Bible that decrees upon you, any political party, that this is something you have to do. And I think more and more campaigns will have to start looking at this as not a day to be defensive, but as a day to say, let's just take whatever hit we're going to to not release

a platform and do something on the offensive. I think that's going to start becoming the new culture of campaigns going forward, because I don't think any of the three parties, despite the amazing proposals that they all had, had a good day when they dropped their particular policy platform for Canadians. Yeah, look, I think platforms cost transparency. It is important for people to understand where you're going.

So when I say it doesn't matter, I mean, I don't know if that's what mattered to voters in making their choice. But you know Laura, I think that Mark Carney wanted to show he has a serious plan for the economy. It's a Trudeau style deficit but it's on economic spending which is not Trudeau style, you know. And I was surprised that Pierre Pellet came so late given they'd asked for an election for so long. You would think they would be able to hit day one with a clear plan, right?

But do we go back to UK-style manifestos next time? What do you think? I don't know, but it's a great point. They had two years to put this platform together, and they were begging for an election for two years, and instead we got 30 pages, I think only 17 of which had policy on them. The rest were pictures of Pierre Poliev.

It really was just a lookbook of him. The reality is he didn't talk about Donald Trump or the US very much. We know that's not the ballot question that Pierre Poliev wants, but it seems to be the ballot question he's getting, especially given the last 24 hours or so. And so it's really surprising that they didn't put a little bit more in the window. And there was a lot in the liberal platform that to Michael's point did get picked apart and Zanes, but there were some really interesting social policy pieces in there as well. I have to highlight as an IVF mom, I have to highlight the fact that in that platform,

they have $20,000 for one round of IVF to every Canadian. You do not have to be diagnosed with a condition. This applies to same-sex couples. It applies to all families. There are some really big pieces in that liberal platform that also are not getting attention as a result. Okay, interesting. Some things that are getting attention,

though we spoke last week about what was going on between Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Pierre Poliev. Well, this week it's gone east, sources told CBC and this has also been reported on the Globe and Mail of tensions between Poliev's people and Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston. And yesterday when reporters asked Ford whether a recent video for Houston was maybe a test for a federal leadership bid. This is how Ford responded.

Let's see what happens. Let's not get ahead of ourselves and let's see what happens on the 28th. But that's what I can say about that. Alright, so Michael, unlike you, Doug Ford's not getting ahead of himself. He's got this smile at the end. He's close with Tim Houston. What do you make of this story coming out that Jenny Byrne was fighting with Tim Houston's people?

This friction narrative just keeps popping up throughout this campaign. Yeah, I don't know. Of course, I don't know who the sources are here. I suspect they haven't been door knocking or haven't donated or haven't worked with the conservatives in a long time. Because if they had, they would know that Premier Houston's principal secretary is downstairs below the conservative war room right now

working on electing Pier Polyev as the next prime minister. Steve Chowdhury, have I got that name right, Jude, am I saying that right? Exactly, and Premier Houston's wife is working on a Pier Poly of local campaign in Nova Scotia And I'll add that Peer Poly of is spoken to Premier Houston before and during the campaign. So no, this is noise This isn't a real story It's fun to talk about but it's not real and I won't say any more on than that. Okay

Zane I heard some of this when I was in Nova Scotia for the provincial election Okay, Zane, I heard some of this when I was in Nova Scotia for the provincial election. So, you know, I never got to the point where we reported it because there's always a bit of tension going on in election cycles and you might distance yourself from the federal party for different reasons, like the liberals did it with Trudeau at that time. But, you know, what do you make of this coming out

at this stage in the campaign? Yeah, I don't know if it's strategic or not, if someone's trying to make a point or not. I wouldn't speculate too much about that. Other than to point out that, you know, there has been, when we entered the peer poly of leadership race back in 2022, we really did call it like a soul-searching mission for what the conservatives were going to be. And because Peer's victory was so, you know so unanimous and so singular that he crushed the competition, it was very clear that it was going to be, we're going to be populist conservatives. That didn't mean that all the progressive conservatives, whether in title or in just

pure sentiment, went away. And part of me wonders right now if this is a bit of a revival or a rearing of the head of those who weren't necessarily bought in to the type of conservatism Piropoliev was selling, not just today, that's leading him to an election result that may look like a loss, but also may just have to keep their mouth shut in 2022 because he was so undeniable and in 2023 and four because he was so undeniable. There is something to be said to that, that there are type of conservatives across the country, Ontario, Nova Scotia, even here in Alberta, that look at the politics of Pierre

Poliev and say, well, okay, this is a slam dunk, but now it's not so much a slam dunk and these people maybe have a bit more wind behind their back to speak up whether they put out video strategic or not. Yeah, Laura, there have been a lot of conservatives I've talked to over the years who have been tough on text but soft on television, you know, which tells you something about the dynamic going on in the party. I don't think from this video Tim Euston's gone for the federal job. I just think he wanted to do a pro-Nova Scotia thing because he is a very patriotic blue-noser,

right? I mean, what are your thoughts, though, on the tensions in the back rooms that have been reported here? I think that Zane is hitting the nose on the head, or hitting it, right? I think there's a bit of a war happening with conservatives across Canada, because to a certain extent, the vision of conservativism that Pierre Polly have has put forward is quite specific. It is populist, and it also didn't leave a lot of room for other conservatives across the country to insert themselves into that or have

influence there. And I think that that worked great when they were high in the polls but as that has changed over the past couple of months all of the sudden you know Canadians and conservatives are willing to push back a little bit and ask for something different. And I think we're seeing that come out, not really with these premiers saying the quiet part loud, they're still saying it quietly, they're just saying it with a really big platform. Right, so Michael, just to close the loop on this,

you know, when Cory Tonnike was criticizing the campaign, people said, oh, Doug Ford wants to be federal leader, and now that Houston's done the video, like, oh, does he want to be federal leader? I don't actually think either one of those guys intends to do that. I mean, we don't even know what's gonna happen on Monday, but I have no sense Premier Houston or Ford

have big federal ambitions. I mean, how do you see it? No, I don't either. Premier Houston just elected himself and so did Premier Ford. Yeah. I mean, and they're both very popular and you know I'm sure they'd be credible, have credible political careers ahead of them should they choose to do that. I think

Doug Ford likes being mayor of Ontario and I'm sure Premier Houston is enjoying the mandate that he was just given now. Did you call him mayor of Ontario? He has a municipal vibe. I agree with you. Keep going, sorry. But, you know, I don't know why we're having this discussion. Pierre Poliev on Monday could have as high as 42% of popular support. The guy could be Prime Minister on Monday, so I don't think it's a conversation worth having right now. There is something to be said, if I can quickly add, David.

There is a difference, maybe a difference without a distinction for some folks watching, but there is a difference between leading the Conservative Party of Canada and leading the Conservative movement. And I think these two certainly want to put themselves in a pole position to lead the Conservative movement, even if they want to keep their current job, because it's very much about directionality, not so much about the title and the position in Ottawa. Michael, if we ignored all conversations, it's not worth having. I wouldn't have a show someday.

So we've got to roll with it, buddy. And I wouldn't be here either then. Look, let's get to the third topic. This is Donald Trump. He's overshadowed this entire campaign. He's reinserted himself into this election and the stretch run with new comments on the 51st state. I have to be honest. As a state, it works great. As a nation, considering the fact that most of the nation, you know, 95 percent of Canada, what they do is they buy from us.

All right, so Zane, you know, he was really loud, then kind of quiet, and then it flared back up. I mean, he is still the inescapable factor in this campaign. And will continue to be. And you know, this will extend far beyond the campaign. And will continue to be. And this will extend far beyond the campaign. So I think even his absence over the course of the last 15 to 20 days prior to this last outburst, many were like, oh, this is going to perhaps not drive people in the polls. And you saw some softness in Quebec and in other places for the Liberals.

But I think most Canadians have captured the fact that the unpredictability of Donald Trump is here to stay, at least for the next four years. So yeah, like, and I think it was perhaps a failing of the Liberals to maybe not kind of extend that narrative when Trump doesn't present himself every 10 days as a booster shot for you on your campaign. But, you know, he's here, he's here to stay. And I think this just adds to the further narrative of the Carney question that he is so looking for, in fact, potentially desperate for that that rad can piece comes out in some way.

Not to say that I know who the sourcing was on that, but it is kind of mysterious to see in the final days that that rad can piece of the Trump call with the 51st state comments come out at the same time when they need that booster shot at the end. Look, Laura, he just did an interview to celebrate his 100 days in office. It's only been 100 days. There's 1,461 days in a presidential term. I didn't need the quantifying. Yeah, 1,360 to go.

Your thoughts? I mean, Donald Trump is gonna Donald Trump, right? That is the one certain thing we know is that we can't predict what's going to happen. And the last 24 hours or so have proven that. And it also is serving to remind Canadians that they need a prime minister who can lead through this. And we know that Mark Carney can handle serious negotiations like this. He is an experienced, experienced person who can stand up to Donald Trump and lead Canada through this. And to Zane's point, it is fortuitous that this is coming back up now, but it also is it's not out of thin air.

There are rumors that Donald Trump is going to be in Detroit on April 29th, right? Waving at Canada. He is ready to start negotiating again. He is ready to start this back up. And whatever sparked his relative quiet over the last 15 to 20 days, Canadians can't rely on that. And they need to feel confident in the Prime Minister they're electing. Okay. Apparently, technically, next Wednesday is 100 days. So there's even more time left in the mandate than I said.

Oh, beautiful. So there you go. I want to fact check myself when I have to. Michael, your quick thoughts on this, a quick look ahead to what you're watching for on Monday. Sure. I mean, obviously, Trump is material to the election. He's defined, arguably, the main ballot box question.

But I think more so, we need to look beyond even Monday. I think it's the first challenge of whoever we elect on Monday has to walk into this mess. But fortunately, fortunately, this is my thesis here. I think Trump is going to, his decisions here are not going to be dictated by what Canada has to say. I think it's going to be dictated by what the GOP has to say, who frankly are at risk of losing their majority in the House come midterms if they continue down this path. And I think he's going to face enormous pressure from GOP colleagues, GOP leadership, major industry, his own cabinet. You're already seeing all sorts of signs of this. So I don't think

Canada is as much of the equation as his own party is as they're risking losing significant arms of influence should they lose in their midterms which is now just a year and a half or so away. Yeah the the midterm elections could change everything if there's a repudiation in the Senate and congressional elections. Okay, let's have a quick look ahead to what you're watching for Monday when the results are going to be coming in. Zane, let's start with you.

What have you got your eye on? Vote efficiency. I think it is a fun thing to talk about as it relates to the liberals, how efficient their vote is across the country, how 40 some odd percent can really nicely give them a solid majority. But what I'm looking for is actually vote efficiency for the new Democrats. I think there is a pathway for the new Democrats to poll where they are right now, high single digits but still retain official party status by getting a good share of their incumbents

re-elected. And you've seen this sort of math work for them very recently in Ontario. And the New Democrats know how to do this. They know how to singularly focus their ground operation on viable areas with incumbents that are popular, make a case to those areas about why strategic voting is not necessary, because we have these dynamics.

And I think they can surprise Canadians on Monday with getting party status, with putting themselves in a position Because of vote efficiency not the same type of vote efficiency that spreads itself beautifully and thinly across the country to form government But the same type that saves the party and then who knows if the softness is true for the liberals in Quebec Potentially have another role in the next Parliament. So that's kind of what I'm looking at is new Democrat vote efficiency heading into Monday night. Right. Yeah, they need a surgical level of efficiency. So Laura, what are you watching for on Monday? I'm watching for two key things and I'll keep them both quick.

One is really kind of inside baseball. I'm watching to see those texts I'm getting from people in the liberal war room telling me where they've been deployed and where they're volunteering, which writings, because that shows where the liberals are really targeting it. That's the targets, yeah. Yeah. And the second thing I'm really watching is, to Zane's point, the vote efficiency and where

those writings are rolling in there is a chance here that depending on where parties win their seats, which could look very different than other elections we've seen before, that the influence of power inside of the various caucuses could really shift and that could drastically change policy across the country and decisions any incoming government is making. Okay, Michael, what are you watching for on Monday, man? Yeah, to Zane's point, I think the NDP could play

spoiler in some writings, but just like the PPC did frankly for the conservatives in 2021. But you know what else can be a spoiler? An under-reported conservative vote. So what I'm watching for is whether or not we have these kind of phantom or quiet or even embarrassed conservatives that are sometimes coined. There's many examples of this occurring in the past. Most recently in the US, famed pollster and seltzer underpolled conservatives, and we saw ultimately the results there. So I'm wondering if there is a quiet contingent

of conservative voters that haven't been captured in that vote, but who are gonna go out on Monday. Okay, if that's the case, it could be young men in particular who Pierre Poliev is connected with and don't always show up in these things. We saw that in places like the Brexit referendum, and that could be a wild card going into Monday. [♪ music playing, fast-paced beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive beat with percussive On the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz comes an unprecedented exhibition about one of history's darkest moments. Auschwitz, not long ago, not far away,

features more than 500 original objects, first-hand accounts and survivor testimonies that tell the powerful story of the Auschwitz concentration camp, its history and legacy, and the underlying conditions that allowed the Holocaust to happen. On now exclusively at ROM. Tickets at ROM.ca. Dear Canadian exporters, what you do matters more than ever. And in the face of uncertain times, Export Development Canada has your back.

Whether you're navigating currency fluctuations, need additional working capital, or are mitigating supply chain risks, we can help you overcome the challenges. It's what we've been doing since 1944. Because the world needs more Canada. Together, let's give it to them. Visit edc.ca slash export for more. All right, Laura, Michael, Zane, let's get into it with your under the radar picks for the campaign so far and what you're looking for.

And Michael, you kind of want to pick up where we left off, right, about pollsters. They seem to say that the path to victory for the conservatives, really narrow, really uncertain, but you were talking about maybe there's shy conservatives out there not captured in this. What are you thinking? Yeah, you bet. I think it's worth extrapolating further from the TV segment. This is for your podcast subscribers only, David.

Of course. This brilliant analysis. But look, the polls are what they are, and they indicate that we're headed to our liberal government, for sure. I think everybody except for Greg Lyle and Innovative Research Group has indicated that. So I think an interesting did interesting narrative though to combat is whether or not the polls are wrong uh... or they're just not capturing

uh... a cohort of voters that it tends to go out and vote on election day you mention the tb segment young men in particular that's very true or at the populations which frankly some pollsters of hard time accessing or waiting properly uh... so i i want to see and i think perhaps the best way to frame what I see is under the radar,

is are the polls going to be right? And I think there is at least some historical examples where they've struggled to get it right. Or we could end up with a different iteration of government which they're predicting, which right now is the liberal majority. What if we're headed for a liberal minority? That's way more interesting and frankly, fragile than obviously a majority.

So I think it could be significant and something we all wanna talk about in the days to follow Monday. Yeah, look, the minority is certainly in the range of outcomes. And Michael, just to clarify, you saying the polls might be wrong just because of hurting or errors,

not that they're fake, like some crazy people are saying to me on social media. It was the liberals last year, it's the conservatives this year. So, you know, that's just how it's going. So Laura, I mean, what are your thoughts there? I mean, you'd think every liberal you talk to would be full of hope, but there's this like PTSD

from two years of being 20 points down that just won't let them get to the promised land emotionally just late in the campaign. Do you think there's a possibility for a big error here? I mean, listen, I'm right there with you on the PTSD. It is entrenched in my liberal soul right now. I actually agree with Michael here. I think there is a chance that pollsters are not capturing

a couple of different segments of the population, a big one, and we've talked about it before on the podcast are young men., those voters 18 to 24. There have been massive swings in the way they vote and in the numbers they vote in, election over election. And, you know, I think it was something like 58% in 2015 and 46% in 2021. That's, there's 10 points in there, 12 points in there, that if the conservatives can pull that vote could have a massive impact on the election. And I think that it's something that does get missed.

There's also this argument, we know, you know, the spin that has been out there that pollsters just aren't capturing these new conservative voters that we're seeing on the ground. And I think there is a chance that is happening. I think that it is, you know, unlikely at this point, but certainly most liberals are, you know, we have a tough time believing that all of this could be true. And we also don't want to measure the drapes, right? This is a really important election. It really, really matters. And every vote counts and liberals are focused on getting that out for exactly the fear that Michael's laying out there.

Yeah, Zane, it's a rare moment in time where you see the liberals leading consistently in the polls and they're refusing to get smug about it. I don't know what they make of it, right? If they win, oh David. Yeah, let's talk Tuesday. But you know Zane, if you went online and made the argument Michael just made, your mentions would be full of, oh that's Hopium, that's Copium. But we've seen some of these things happen.

The Brexit referendum is the thing I always look at. I know it's binary and different than a multi-party regional Writing based national Canadian election, but you do miss things if you're not looking for them Oh, I I could see a universe where the top line numbers Invert or reverse from what we're seeing right so we're like roughly a good David You could tell me like a 42 38 39. I could easily see that going the other way I could easily see it going like 42, 41, like being in conservatives in the lead there. But your other point, regional riding level, that's what makes this tougher as a miss,

right? Because if we miss, if this is a polling miss, it has to miss at the regionals so badly. Like Ontario has to be a swing by several, half a dozen points in order for the, or more. I'm giving, I'm being charitable. Or more for the conservatives to have a real shot at taking the majority of the seats there. Quebec has to be a massive under sampling of BQ vote, for example, and perhaps even conservative vote to that regard. So it's going to have to be multiple polling failures that compound to one thing. Now, have we seen a perfect storm in this election?

Yes, it's called the liberal campaign. Am I expecting a perfect storm of polling failure? No, but we have seen one perfect storm, so what's to say another can't exist? Especially when you kind of, you know, and one of the things I want to talk about, and I won't do it right now, is just some of the other underlying media and other sort of metrics to look at beyond polling and rally size that could speak to the fact that conservative strength is there in a significant way. Yeah, look, maybe the people are always sending me messages, you know, from online, our right,

and the liberals just paid for all the polls to show that they were winning to rig this thing. Because, you know, that's out there too. And I say that's where Michael is going. I want to be very clear. But Zane, let's get to what you want to talk about. You want to talk about the parties and their use of social media and the impact all of that had on this campaign. What's your take there?

Yeah, yeah. Less social, but more so kind of like the undercurrents of things like podcasts. And if you just Google Pyrrhe Pol Ev right now on YouTube, and I encourage people to do it, and search Pierpoli Ev podcast, you will see two to three podcasts, Canadian based, that have several hundred thousand views each. And you might not think of anything of that, and maybe that's right, you shouldn't. But these are not just Manisfier podcasts or business podcasts or news podcasts or some podcasts with his wife doing lifestyle family things.

At a certain point, that is getting reach. And I'm not just saying that, the view counts alone indicate that that's getting reach. And at a certain point, those people are going to be part of a different ecosystem. So this is not the same Trump Manosphere argument. This is our own version of it. But there are subsidiary media opportunities for campaigns, and Poliev is exploiting them disproportionately. I know that Carney has gone on The Daily Show and Nardois and other things, so it's not

like he hasn't touched it, and same with Jagmeet Singh. But Poliev has done the vast majority of them. And that could also be reaching, persuading, and then, of course, not getting a feedback loop on some of the people that this medium could be reaching. So listen, this is not a cover my butt sort of segment where we're kind of saying if the conservatives win, but there is this thing, we just have not talked about it enough, mainly because I don't think we've wanted to get influence with the US and throw out buzzwords like the Manosphere and the kind of, this is not that, this is a podcast as a medium,

other sort of YouTube and other places as a medium that have literally millions of views and engagement on this content that is worth noting. At the very least noting, not predicting, but at the very least noting at this point. Well, on that, like the numbers are big, it's hard to know if they're actually Canadian, right? Because I don't know if that's cracked on those platforms.

My theory on that, David, and you could tell me if I'm wrong, is that unlike American Contact, where there's a lot of Canadian eyeballs interested, on the Pure Polyev content, I don't really know who's interested in hearing this guy outside of Canada. He hasn't really punched through in the US, other. other than kind of in a meme-ified way. I'm not saying it's safe to assume every view is Canadian, but I don't think it's the same relationship that we share with watching Trump content on the other side of the border on a Joe Rogan podcast

or an Andrew Schultz podcast. Yeah, Michael, it's interesting on that, right? That, you know, Pierre Pauly and his wife have done a series of podcasts reaching out to people. He didn't do a single mainstream English language national interview in this campaign. Neither did Mark Carney, neither did Jagmeet Singh. You know, Singh and Carney, I think their big

English national interviews were with Nardwar the human serviette, though Carney did sit down with Mark Critch, like I'm not even the first CBC journalist in the group chat to get an interview with the Prime Minister, Critch beat me to it. I mean, but it shows you how much things have shifted away from traditional media to all these other platforms, right? Yeah, no, for sure.

And I wonder if it has to do with, you get your message out, obviously, through media, but they're going to less traditional means to do that. And the question is whether or not it moves votes. And I think broadly speaking, leaders here have denied that and believe that being on the doors and accessing voters directly is the best way to kind of mobilize that vote.

And I think this ultimately leads to the question of, what are future elections going to look like? What are the benchmarks being set in larger jurisdictions like Germany and the US in particular? Like how do you access support? Because the core of a campaign is identifying your support because you're trying to ID the people you know can go out and vote for you or theoretically would

and then make it not theoretical, actually get them to the polls. But if they're not gonna answer their door, which most people don't do anymore, and I've knocked on thousands of doors and I can tell you it's difficult, they don't answer their phone, certainly not like they used to. Well then how do you access them? Is it through the TV? Is that not intimate or long form enough? Is it through social media? And probably it has to be. But obviously we're headed for I think a bit of a renaissance here in terms of an enlightenment towards new technologies

or new interesting, savvy and innovative ways to access voters because politicians seem to be, at least in Canada, straying from the traditional media as a way of kind of getting their message out. Yeah, and I think... There's also... Go ahead, Zane. Yeah. I was just going to add on that because I think that's such a great point by Michael, which

is that especially with the podcast universe, as someone who has his own podcast, there is a parasocial relationship that people can form with you after hearing you, maybe not even on a consistent basis, but hearing two hours of you, they feel like they know you a lot more. You could argue that that sort of vulnerability, openness, whatever that might require after a couple of hours of hanging with someone, allows you to actually expand your pool of potential voters because you've brought people in rather than just spew talking points out. And I think that parasocial sort of style of relationship

that podcasts and audio provide, I think will be, like my bullish prediction is gonna be, that is gonna be part of our politics at an increasing pace going forward, even more so than the growth of video, I would say. Yeah, and Laura, you know, it let you know my thinking, how I approach this thing. Like, I got a two-hour daily TV show,

but I try to incorporate some of that longer form, more in-depth conversational style from a podcast to an old-school political show, because I just don't think the old rigid format of the aggressive accountability interview all the time is what politicians and viewers and voters want. They want to hear some answers, get some understanding, and actually get to know the people who hold these positions in a meaningful way.

So Laura, I mean, do you think this, we're on the cusp of this, where do you think we're on the cusp of this transition and how it all works? I actually think we're in the transition and the parasocial relationship that Zane talks about is where I was going. I think that there is a really big difference between watching a politician give an interview on TV when you normally have to be sitting at your computer or your iPad or your TV to watch it and plugging your AirPods in or your headphones and puttering around your house, right? Even if you were just listening, there is an intimacy there when you are folding your

laundry or your kids' laundry and listening to someone talk about their life that does not exist to the same extent in traditional media. And I think that we've actually, we are in that transition. We've been witnessing this since 2015 and 2011 with, you know, in 2011 when you hear stories about the first tweets during a campaign, and 2015 when, you know, particularly the liberals really use social media effectively and you, we've seen that progression.

This progression to podcasts, to Zane's point, but also using social media differently than we have in the past, understanding that different demographics use social media differently, and using in the past, understanding that different demographics use social media differently, and using that to connect with voters and Canadians in a much more intimate way, in a way that builds a parasocial relationship

like any other social media influencer is where our elections are headed. Yeah, it's remarkable. And I'm like, I turned 52 about a week after the election. When I run into people my age or older who know the show, they say, oh, I watch you all the time. And then when I run into young people like you three and even younger, they're like,

oh, I listen to your podcast all the time. They don't even know we're a TV show. It's like, whatever we gotta do, man. Just keep giving us the follows and subscribes. All right, Laura, let's get to your pick. You want to bring it back to the humanity of this election and what people learned about all of these leaders and the candidates. Yeah, and I think it's a natural progression, actually,

to what Zane's talking about with this humanizing paratsocial relationship. But I think one of the things that has been interesting for me as a millennial woman who spends all of my time on Instagram is seeing the humanizing aspects and the content that the parties are putting out, which are much more about these human moments of leaders with other people.

I think so much of the conversation around Mark Carney in particular is that he is a policy wonk, he's a businessman, he's a deeply experienced leader, all of which is true. What's fed to me through the algorithm are his moments with kids. It's him in homes with families painting Easter eggs and making matzo ball soup. It's him talking to kids at whistle stops as opposed to big rally content and big policy content. And there's a little bit of that for Pierre Poliev too. It is obviously not getting pushed to me in my particular algorithm,

but I'm sure Michael can talk about what's in his. But I think that what's really interesting is parties are realizing that that humanizing moment that people see as they're scrolling is what is so valuable. And when you tie that back to, you know, Mark Kearney's leadership moment, for example, with his daughter Cleo giving, you know, Mark Kearney's leadership moment, for example, with his daughter

Cleo giving, you know, a big introduction speech to him, you start to see that he is more than just a central banker and they're really trying to build that, especially in the final week. Yeah, and people often lose sight, Michael, when they're covering politics or watching politics that broadly these are normal human beings doing difficult jobs under difficult circumstances, acting in good faith to the best of their ability and just see them as something to defeat or destroy. And you do get these rare moments like when Pierre Polyev talked about his daughter, his six-year-old Valentina being nonverbal.

That's a big moment of vulnerability throughout there as a dad who's running to be prime minister. Yeah, 100%. And I wish we'd see more of that, especially at a Pierre. And one of the clips that the Conservatives chose to boost post the debate was when he spoke about just, you know, the honor that he has from representing and trying to earn the trust of Canadians. And he looked to Mark Carney and Chuck Mead and and Yves-Francois Blanchette and said, and you guys too, like you guys get this too. And there was like this odd camaraderie there

which humanized Pierre and I think everybody on that stage. And you wanna see more of that. And I think social media is a great way to do it. And I think actually an evolving thesis that I have now just from this segment is social media is someone who frankly creates in places ads for a living, also in a creative and digital agency. So we do this for work. You get lots of feedback from that

where you don't from traditional media. You can see how many people are clicking it, who they are, their demographics, where they're from. And data is really king when you're trying to win an election, but you can't just have a totally data-driven campaign. In fact, I think this is also vibes-driven campaign. And what I mean by vibes is that humanizing stuff helps. Having the real casual conversations

that people have around the coffee table. These are the types of things that people talk about and can move votes. Okay, Zane, we gotta wrap this up because I've gotta get to a rehearsal for the big election night show on Monday. So bring it home, buddy, as we get you to do every week. Bring it home, three for three. I don't wanna keep you from it.

Listen, I think everything that's been said here is correct. And I think each candidate has had wonderful moments, right? Like Mark Carney on Nard War talking about his deep Canadian music knowledge, like who knew, right? Jugmeet Singh, I just heard an interview of him recently with Ryan Jesperson of Real Talk. Canadian music knowledge, like who knew, right? Jagmeet Singh, I just heard an interview of him recently with Ryan Jesperson of Real Talk. I mean, this guy is polling at single digits

and is like the happiest camper, most genuine person. And you're like, you know, I like, you know, you're like, you can't not like Jagmeet Singh with what he's trying to do in terms of, you know, how he's trying to present himself. And then Pyrr Poliev, like Anita Poliev is a revelation. She's been fantastic. She gave him the VO that launched his campaign and his upward trajectory.

She's been great on the stump. She's awesome in these podcasts. If you're interested in the Poliev story, she's tremendous. I'd argue that she's way more interesting than her husband and And like just a dynamic personality, like really, really fascinating. And like you can see how that unit works together and it gave me a much more greater appreciation. So, you know, absolutely right. And I just wish we'd seen more of it.

I wish campaigns prioritize more of it. I wish they wouldn't do mandatory, obligatory policy proposals. I've read to spend time more on this, even though that does sound anti-democratic. But here we are. Hope I brought it home David. Mark Carney big fan of the clash who knew right? Yeah or Donald Webster like what? Yeah I know but you know he better hope he wins or might be London Calling when it's all over. Alright we gotta say goodbye. Laura I know I'm an old man I had to get into dad jokes just to remind you kids that you're dealing with a Gen Xer here. Alright, Laura, Michael, Zane, it's been great every Friday.

We'll talk to you next week when we know all the results. Thanks so much, David. See you, David. Cheers. That's it for today. If you liked this episode, please follow the pod and catch our next live show on CBC News Network. We're on weekdays at 5 p.m. Eastern Time. I'm David Cochran. Thanks for listening.