Follow us on social

google cta
Mark Carney Canada elections liberal party

Trump catapulted Canada's liberals to victory - but maybe not enough

Thanks to the Conservatives' strong performance, Mark Carney's party will only form a minority government — the sixth in the past eight elections.

Analysis | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

Monday’s federal election in Canada has returned the Liberal Party, now led by former central bank governor Mark Carney after Justin Trudeau’s departure earlier this year, to power for a fourth consecutive term.

The result represents a stunning — and, by historical standards, shockingly rapid — turn of events. As recently as January, opinion polls were consistently showing a massive 25-point Conservative Party lead, driven by Trudeau’s deep and abiding unpopularity after more than nine years in office.

Carney replacing Trudeau as prime minister undoubtedly helped the Liberals to turn the page, although some may argue in style more than in substance. But this dramatic comeback would not have been possible without Donald Trump’s repeated threats to turn Canada into America’s 51st state. The Tories’ defeat owes itself in no small part to their inability to pivot quickly enough away from their longstanding “everything is broken” anti-Trudeau message and embrace the prevailing anti-Trump zeitgeist.

Canadians have long stopped treating Trump’s threats as a joke — and the president in a recent interview for TIME magazine admitted he was “not trolling.” While it remains unclear what tangible measures the administration will take to advance the president’s annexationist vision, Trump’s inability to put this obsessive rhetoric aside will no doubt complicate any post-election trade negotiations between Canada and the United States.

The results of the election present a further complicating factor. The Liberals will only form a minority government — Canada’s sixth in the past eight elections — thanks to a strong performance by the Conservatives in the country’s most populous province of Ontario. Despite the loss, Tory Leader Pierre Poilievre led his party to its highest share of the popular vote since 1988, rebuilding his party’s image with younger voters thanks to a message focused on housing and affordability.

A polarized electorate has made this the first federal election since 1958 in which the two leading parties combined for more than 80 percent of the vote, facilitated by the devastating collapse in support for the left-wing New Democratic Party (NDP). This is, in fact, the first federal election since 2000 in which any party has succeeded in passing the 40 percent threshold — something that both the Liberals and Conservatives achieved in Monday’s vote.

Yet despite their high popular vote share, the Liberals were only able to capture 169 seats (pending any recounts), three short of the threshold necessary for a majority in Parliament. The difference between a minority and majority government ultimately rested on just 611 votes in three ridings. Given this close margin, the election of the speaker of the House, possible floor crossings to the Liberals, and future by-elections in the event of a resignation will all take on added significance. But in the meantime, Carney’s government will have to rely on outside support to pass legislation.

Given Trump’s threats, the need for Canada to find more reliable export markets has gained renewed impetus. But moving forward with new east-west infrastructure to reduce Canada’s dependence on the United States may prove complicated as long as the Liberals rely on NDP or Bloc Québécois votes in the House of Commons.

Canadian politics have grown increasingly partisan over the past two decades. Yet with minority governments increasingly the norm, the ability of the Liberals and Tories to put their differences aside where the national interest is concerned will be a non-negligible factor shaping the extent of Canada’s leverage in its relationship with the U.S., both during the Trump presidency and beyond.


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

Top photo credit: Canada's Liberal Party leader, Mark Carney, attends a federal election campaign rally at Sheraton Vancouver Airport Hotel in Richmond, British Columbia, Canada, on April 7, 2025 (Harrison Ha/Shutterstock)
google cta
Analysis | QiOSK
Does Israel really still need a 'qualitative military edge' ?
An Israeli Air Force F-35I Lightning II “Adir” approaches a U.S. Air Force 908th Expeditionary Refueling Squadron KC-10 Extender to refuel during “Enduring Lightning II” exercise over southern Israel Aug. 2, 2020. While forging a resolute partnership, the allies train to maintain a ready posture to deter against regional aggressors. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Patrick OReilly)

Does Israel really still need a 'qualitative military edge' ?

Middle East

On November 17, 2025, President Donald Trump announced that he would approve the sale to Saudi Arabia of the most advanced US manned strike fighter aircraft, the F-35. The news came one day before the visit to the White House of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has sought to purchase 48 such aircraft in a multibillion-dollar deal that has the potential to shift the military status quo in the Middle East. Currently, Israel is the only other state in the region to possess the F-35.

During the White House meeting, Trump suggested that Saudi Arabia’s F-35s should be equipped with the same technology as those procured by Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quickly sought assurances from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who sought to walk back Trump’s comment and reiterated a “commitment that the United States will continue to preserve Israel’s qualitative military edge in everything related to supplying weapons and military systems to countries in the Middle East.”

keep readingShow less
Think a $35B gas deal will thaw Egypt toward Israel? Not so fast.
Top image credit: Miss.Cabul via shutterstock.com

Think a $35B gas deal will thaw Egypt toward Israel? Not so fast.

Middle East

The Trump administration’s hopes of convening a summit between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi either in Cairo or Washington as early as the end of this month or early next are unlikely to materialize.

The centerpiece of the proposed summit is the lucrative expansion of natural gas exports worth an estimated $35 billion. This mega-deal will pump an additional 4 billion cubic meters annually into Egypt through 2040.

keep readingShow less
Trump
Top image credit: President Donald Trump addresses the nation, Wednesday, December 17, 2025, from the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Trump national security logic: rare earths and fossil fuels

Washington Politics

The new National Security Strategy of the United States seeks “strategic stability” with Russia. It declares that China is merely a competitor, that the Middle East is not central to American security, that Latin America is “our hemisphere,” and that Europe faces “civilizational erasure.”

India, the world's largest country by population, barely rates a mention — one might say, as Neville Chamberlain did of Czechoslovakia in 1938, it’s “a faraway country... of which we know nothing.” Well, so much the better for India, which can take care of itself.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.