Tag Archives: Doug Ford

Good Cop, Bad Cop, and the Ghost of Ronald Reagan

Posted on by
Reply

The latest Canada-U.S. flare-up could almost be mistaken for political theatre. On one side of the stage, Ontario Premier Doug Ford channels a hard-nosed populist energy that plays perfectly to American conservative media. On the other, Prime Minister Mark Carney performs the part of the calm, worldly statesman who reassures allies that Canada still wants dialogue. Together they have turned a difficult trade moment with Donald Trump into something that looks suspiciously like a good-cop, bad-cop routine.

The flashpoint came when Ford’s government released an advertisement in mid-October quoting Ronald Reagan’s 1987 radio address on free trade. Using Reagan’s own words, “Over the long run, such trade barriers hurt every American worker and consumer. High tariffs inevitably lead to retaliation by foreign countries.” The ad struck a nerve south of the border. Ford’s communications team framed the clip as a warning to Trump not to reignite trade wars that would hurt both economies. The Reagan Foundation objected, calling it a misrepresentation and claiming no permission had been granted to edit the footage, but the real explosion came from Trump himself.

Within hours, Trump denounced the video as “fake,” accused Canada of using “fraudulent propaganda,” and declared that “all trade negotiations with Canada are hereby terminated.” The social-media fireworks were vintage Trump – equal parts bluster and strategy. Yet the Canadian side, particularly Carney, appeared unruffled. His office reiterated that Canada remained open to dialogue and emphasized the importance of “mutual respect.” It was classic de-escalation language, signalling steadiness in the face of chaos.

Ford, meanwhile, looked quite comfortable being the villain of the week in Washington. His supporters at home applauded the move as patriotic spine, and conservative talk shows in the U.S. replayed the Reagan clip endlessly. For Ford, this was not just about Ottawa’s trade posture, it was also domestic optics. Standing up to Trump sells well in parts of Ontario, but so does invoking Reagan, a hero to many small-c conservatives. The ad’s provocation was almost certainly deliberate.

Carney’s response complemented Ford’s aggression in a way that looked suspiciously coordinated. While Ford’s office blasted American protectionism, Carney quietly engaged in back-channel diplomacy. Reports from Washington described him as “measured but firm,” assuring Trump that Canada sought cooperation but could not accept one-sided terms. The effect was to let Ford raise the temperature so Carney could later cool it down, extracting concessions or at least opening a channel for reason.

For all its drama, the episode underscored a larger point about Canadian strategy. With Trump back in the White House and America’s politics as volatile as ever, Canada seems to be experimenting with pressure and persuasion in tandem. Ford’s bluster makes Carney’s calm look even more statesmanlike, while Carney’s civility makes Ford’s fury appear authentic rather than reckless. It is a risky dance, but one that may keep Trump guessing and Canada’s interests protected.

Whether the Reagan ad was a blunder or a calculated feint, it has achieved something no memo ever could: it reminded Washington that Canada can still play hardball, and that even ghosts from the Gipper’s era can be drafted into the game.

Finally, as a side note, perhaps Ford is double dipping a little bit, by using the Bad Cop routine to catalyze a run at the federal Conservative leadership. 

Sources:
Business Insider,
Politico,
AP News,
The Independent,
Reuters.

The Ford-Poilievre Equation: Will Ontario’s Voting Patterns Derail Federal Conservative Hopes?

Posted on by
Reply

With Doug Ford calling a provincial election for February 27th, 2025, the bigger question is how will this move affect Pierre Poilievre’s federal election ambitions? 

The notion that Ontarians prefer to separate their provincial and federal allegiances stems from an observable—but not universal—trend in Canadian voting patterns. Historically, Ontarians have been seen as pragmatic voters who often prioritize balance in governance, particularly when one party’s policies become too dominant at one level of government. This sentiment can manifest as a counterweight strategy: if a party governs provincially, voters may feel the need to elect a different party federally to avoid over-concentration of power. However, the reality is nuanced, and many factors interplay with this perceived pattern.

Historical Context and Party Dynamics
For much of Canada’s modern political history, Ontario has served as the battleground that determines national election outcomes. Given its population and seat count in the House of Commons, the province holds disproportionate influence over which federal party forms government. Historically, there have been instances when Ontarians demonstrated a preference for contrasting party control. For example:

1995–2003: While Mike Harris and the Ontario Progressive Conservatives implemented the controversial “Common Sense Revolution,” Ontarians repeatedly supported Jean Chrétien’s Liberal Party at the federal level. Voters may have been wary of similar austerity measures being implemented federally.

2003–2018: During the Ontario Liberal Party’s 15-year rule, the federal Liberal Party experienced both opposition and government periods. However, the Stephen Harper years (2006–2015) saw Ontarians lean Conservative federally, even while backing the Liberals provincially—a testament to their selective pragmatism.

Doug Ford and Ontario Politics
Doug Ford’s premiership has been polarizing. His government’s handling of issues like healthcare, education, and pandemic management has garnered both staunch support and fierce criticism. A victory in the upcoming February 27th election would reinforce Ford’s leadership in Ontario and demonstrate voter confidence in his provincial policies. However, his association with the federal Conservative Party—though unofficial—could complicate federal dynamics.

Critics argue that Ford’s policies, including his cuts to social programs and controversial land-use decisions, such as opening portions of the Greenbelt for development, might alienate centrist Ontario voters from Pierre Poilievre’s federal Conservative Party. Many Ontarians may see the potential of a Conservative majority at both levels as a risk to maintaining a balanced political environment, especially if Ford’s policies are seen as misaligned with their values.

Federal Conservatives and Pierre Poilievre
Pierre Poilievre’s leadership of the federal Conservative Party marks a shift toward a more populist, right-wing approach. While this strategy has energized parts of the Conservative base, particularly in Western Canada, it remains uncertain how it will resonate with Ontario’s diverse electorate. The province’s suburban and urban voters, who tend to swing elections, may view a Ford-Poilievre tandem as too ideologically extreme.

If Ontarians re-elect Ford, Poilievre may face an uphill battle convincing the province’s moderate voters that his federal policies differ meaningfully from Ford’s. This could weaken the Conservative Party’s ability to make significant inroads in the 905 region, a critical area surrounding Toronto that often decides federal elections.

Counterarguments and Complexities
While the separation of provincial and federal voting patterns is an observable trend, it is far from absolute. Some commentators argue that shared governance by the same party can actually strengthen voter confidence if the party is performing well. For instance, Doug Ford’s ability to deliver on infrastructure projects, such as highway expansions, may enhance perceptions of Conservative competence, benefiting Poilievre federally. Additionally, the collapse of the Ontario Liberal Party and the challenges faced by the NDP at the provincial level leave limited alternatives for voters disenchanted with Ford.

Voter behavior is increasingly issue-driven rather than party-driven. Federal and provincial elections are often fought on vastly different platforms. Healthcare, education, and municipal matters dominate provincial elections, while federal campaigns focus on national defense, the economy, and foreign policy. Ontarians may see Ford and Poilievre as addressing separate issues, reducing the perceived risk of a Conservative double government.

While there is historical precedent suggesting that Ontarians often prefer different parties at the provincial and federal levels, it would be reductive to assume that Doug Ford’s re-election would automatically weaken the federal Conservative Party’s chances of winning a majority. Ontarians are pragmatic voters who weigh numerous factors beyond party labels. However, should Ford’s government face mounting criticism or become embroiled in scandals, this could cast a shadow on Poilievre’s campaign, particularly among centrist voters. Conversely, if Ford’s policies resonate with Ontarians and his government appears competent, it could bolster the case for a Conservative federal government.

Ultimately, the outcome will hinge on voter perceptions of leadership, policy, and governance at both levels—a dynamic interplay that defies simple predictions.

Is Ford Coming for Poilievre? 

Posted on by
Reply

The idea that Ontario Premier Doug Ford may be positioning himself as a future contender for the leadership of the federal Conservative Party – and ultimately the role of Prime Minister – is worth serious consideration, especially given Ford’s political trajectory and unique approach to conservatism.

Ford’s Political Ambition
Doug Ford has consistently demonstrated a knack for navigating and surviving in the political spotlight. As Premier of Ontario, Ford has carefully cultivated a “common man” image, appealing to a broad swath of voters, including blue-collar workers and suburban families – key demographics for any federal election. His brand of conservatism is less ideologically rigid than Pierre Poilievre’s; Ford focuses on pragmatism and populist messaging, which could make him a strong contender in federal politics.

While Ford has repeatedly stated he is focused on Ontario, his actions suggest he is not averse to expanding his influence. His willingness to work with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on infrastructure projects and economic initiatives may be positioning him as a centrist alternative to Poilievre’s more hardline, ideological approach. This strategy could help Ford appeal to swing voters in urban areas and ridings that Poilievre might struggle to win.

Tensions with Poilievre
Ford and Poilievre’s relationship has been notably distant. Ford has avoided openly endorsing Poilievre or closely aligning with him, even during the latter’s rise to federal Conservative leadership. This distance hints at a potential rivalry, or at the very least, an unwillingness to be overshadowed by Poilievre on the national stage.

Poilievre’s leadership style, which leans heavily on ideological conservatism and combative rhetoric, may alienate moderate voters – a gap Ford could exploit. Ford’s track record of winning elections in a diverse province like Ontario demonstrates his ability to bridge divides and appeal to a broader electorate, including centrists who might find Poilievre’s approach too polarizing.

Ontario, the Powerhouse of Canadian Politics 
Historically, Ontarians have shown a preference for balancing power between provincial and federal governments, often avoiding having the same political party in charge at both levels. This dynamic could spell trouble for Doug Ford if Pierre Poilievre’s federal Conservatives win the next election. A federal Conservative victory might shift Ontario voters toward the provincial Liberals or NDP in an effort to counterbalance federal policies, particularly if there is dissatisfaction with Conservative governance nationally. Ford’s political calculus must account for this trend, as maintaining his grip on Ontario could become significantly more challenging with a Conservative government in Ottawa. This precarious balance might also incentivize Ford to consider a move to federal politics, especially if he perceives his provincial support waning.

While Ford has not explicitly declared any federal ambitions, the possibility that he could eventually seek Pierre Poilievre’s job cannot be dismissed. His pragmatic approach to conservatism, ability to appeal to diverse voters, and political survival instincts make him a viable alternative for a party looking to broaden its appeal. Whether by design or by opportunity, Ford may very well see himself as Canada’s next Conservative Prime Minister-in-waiting.