I had convinced myself and others that I have little interest in politics and that I’m not as consumed by it as others. This is true, in the sense that my manic sense of independence does not allow me to belong to a political party. My party has always been and will remain, my country.
I maintained this position despite Charlotte Baruch assertions that “…there is no private domain of a person’s life that is not political, and there is no political issue that is not ultimately personal.”
I can’t say that my rabid interest in the recent Federal Elections in Canada was deeply personal. Nevertheless, it made me realize that I’m only pretending to be dis-interested in politics. To paraphrase Jessye Norman, I’m too passionate about, involved in, or caring of, the social and political issues of my world, to have only a passing interest in politics.
The Liberal Party’s victory in Canada’s election was stunning. In terms of the share of the popular vote, it was a narrow victory. However, in terms of political comebacks and shifting political landscapes, there are few like it.
Two months before the elections, public opinion polls gave the Conservatives, led by Pierre Poilievre, a whopping 25% lead over the Liberals, which was led by PM Justin Trudeau. Yet, by the time the dust of the elections had settled, the Liberals had increased their share of the popular vote by 11.1 % compared to the 2021 election, gained 27 seats, and secured 43.7% of the vote. Interestingly, the Conservative Party gained 24 seats to deny the Liberals the 3 seats they needed to form a decisive majority government.
Shockingly, the Conservatives lost Poilievre who lost his seat. However, he seems set to return after the winner of an ultra-safe seat resigned to allow him to contest it.
The outcome of this election offers several valuable lessons for students of politics as well as practicing and aspiring politicians. Here are some of my takeaways.
Firstly, it underscored the importance of competent leadership in shaping a party’s fortunes and public perception. The resurgence of the Liberals was massively influenced by the change in leadership from Trudeau to Mark Carney, a former head of the Banks of Canada and England respectively, who brought the fresh perspective and credibility needed to help restore public confidence in his party. Trudeau had become deeply unpopular, mainly because of a series of ethics scandals that undermined public trust in his leadership and that proved that he was not the champion of transparency and the rule of law that he claimed to be. The message here for practicing and aspiring politicians, is simple: don’t be hypocritical; believe what you say and behave as you believe.
Instructively, Trudeau made a clean exit from the scene and took no part in the election campaign, thus allowing Carney to distance himself from his (Trudeau’s) unpopular policies, while drawing on his own impressive background in economics and finance, to cast himself as a reformer and as a credible leader for uncertain economic times. His focus on economic stability and sovereignty resonated with voters concerned about trade relations and national prosperity, demonstrating the value of expertise in leadership.
The second lesson for Caribbean leaders like Dr. Keith Rowley is that when you say you’re done, “take your bundle and leave and go.” Don’t loiter. Dr. Rowley resigned from his dual roles as Prime Minister and Political Leader of the Peoples National Movement (PNM) in Trinidad and Tobago, yet he hung around so long that he was the one who publicly conceded his Party’s resounding defeat by the UNC in the April 2025 elections.
Dr. Rowley is not the first to have committed such folly. Sir John Compton did the same thing in Saint Lucia in 1996, except that he was asked by his successor, Dr. (now Sir) Vaughan Lewis to stay on as Senior Minister with responsibility for finance. To his credit, Sir John returned to power in 2006. It’s highly unlikely Mr. Rowley will emulate that feat.
Thirdly, the results showed the extent to which external threats can unite a nation and shift political dynamics. The proverbial elephant in the minds of Canadian voters was President Donald Trump’s oft expressed desire to have Canada become the US’s 51st State. Mr. Trump framed his vision as a win-win for both countries. However, this allowed the Liberal Party to position itself as a defender of Canada’s sovereignty, contrasting with the Conservative Party’s perceived alignment with Mr. Trump’s rhetoric. This is not to say there was zero support for Mr. Trump’s proposal. Polls suggest that many Manitobans favoured it. Indeed, it can be said that those voters who gave the Conservatives a net increase in their share of the popular vote, and an additional 24 seats, were not perturbed by Mr. Trump’s desire and/or his tariffs.
My fourth takeaway is the impact strategic voting can have on an election, when voters prioritize defeating a perceived, greater threat over ideological alignment. In the past 3 Federal election cycles in Canada, the Liberals benefited from this strategy at the expense of minority parties. This happened again in 2025, leading to the near demise of the National Democratic Party (NDP).
Fifthly, the gains made by both parties suggests the reinstatement of the two-party system in Canada. Indeed, this appears to be a global trend, notwithstanding the performance of Nigel Farage’s Reform Party in recent Local Government Elections in the UK.
My final takeaway is that the youth vote must never be taken for granted. In 2015, Canada’s youth voted in record numbers for the Liberal Party. However, 10 years later, they rallied “bigly” behind the Conservatives, driven by concerns over inadequate housing, rising housing costs, the cost of living, and escalating crime. And they did so, despite the promises made by PM Carney to address these challenges.
Canada’s elections have made me realize that the fire of politics burns fiercely within me.