Right. Carney was the best possible candidate the Liberals could put forward, technically he was the incumbent, but he wasn't actually an MP and carried no personal baggage for Trudeau's decade in office (unlike Singh or potentially Freeland if she had been interim PM).
Even with that, the Liberals only won by eating the NDP vote while th…
Right. Carney was the best possible candidate the Liberals could put forward, technically he was the incumbent, but he wasn't actually an MP and carried no personal baggage for Trudeau's decade in office (unlike Singh or potentially Freeland if she had been interim PM).
Even with that, the Liberals only won by eating the NDP vote while the Conservatives actually gained seats. Not exactly a resounding victory for the incumbent party.
I agree he was the best possible candidate and I’m kind of confused how you interpreted me arguing against any of that with what I wrote. You said Carney wasn’t the incumbent, he was and that’s what I took issue with as well as explaining the background of why he was the incumbent. You never specified MP in the post I responded to.
Right. Carney was the best possible candidate the Liberals could put forward, technically he was the incumbent, but he wasn't actually an MP and carried no personal baggage for Trudeau's decade in office (unlike Singh or potentially Freeland if she had been interim PM).
Even with that, the Liberals only won by eating the NDP vote while the Conservatives actually gained seats. Not exactly a resounding victory for the incumbent party.
I agree he was the best possible candidate and I’m kind of confused how you interpreted me arguing against any of that with what I wrote. You said Carney wasn’t the incumbent, he was and that’s what I took issue with as well as explaining the background of why he was the incumbent. You never specified MP in the post I responded to.
I didn't feel the need to put all of the caveats and context into my comment because the people who read these threads are already well aware of them.