Warning shot: Canada’s red vs. blue race mirrors our southern neighbours

Opinion

It was far closer than the pollsters predicted.

But Mark Carney and the Liberals did manage to squeak out a victory Monday night.

The result: a rare fourth consecutive term in office for the Liberal party. It was unclear late last night if it would be another minority or a majority.

The biggest story of this election was how it became virtually a two-party race, the likes of which Canada has not seen in modern political history.

The question now is, what does this mean for the political landscape in Canada going forward?

Granted, in Canadian federal politics, only the Liberals or Conservatives ever form government — whether a minority or majority — at least in modern-day history. In that sense, federal elections in Canada are usually two-party races.

The NDP has historically played a significant role in Parliament and represented a legitimate third choice for voters.

That all but dried up Monday, as this election left the NDP gasping for political oxygen. The party, once considered the “conscience of Parliament,” garnered only about five per cent of the vote (at press time) and were poised to win fewer than the 12 seats needed for official party status.

It’s a result that speaks volumes not only about the direction voters have chosen, but also about where our democracy could be headed.

For decades, Canadians took a quiet pride in the idea that we weren’t like the Americans. Our politics, while spirited, rarely devolved into the kind of binary, scorched-earth combat you’d see south of the border. We had choices — real ones — between a spectrum of voices in Parliament.

But those days may be fading.

Carney, the former Bank of Canada and Bank of England governor, brought the Liberals a kind of economic gravitas they’d been sorely lacking. His campaign, polished and pragmatic, struck a chord with middle-class voters who were growing weary of ideological sparring and wanted competence over charisma.

Carney’s message was clear: stability, leadership, and a steady hand on the economic tiller. It worked to some degree. He pulled in support from urban progressives, centrists, and some disaffected Tories. He managed to consolidate the left and the middle of the political spectrum, but not enough to win a majority government.

By contrast, Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives appealed to a portion of Canadian voters who were thirsty not only for change, but comfortable with an ultra-right brand of populist politics that has traditionally been more common south of the border.

The degree of polarization between the two main parties is not something Canadians are used to.

The real story in this election wasn’t just Carney’s victory — it was the narrowing of the field. The NDP’s collapse didn’t just cost them seats, it cost Canadians a meaningful alternative. The political diversity that once defined Canada is giving way to a simplified, polarized duopoly: Liberals vs. Conservatives. Red vs. Blue. Sound familiar?

That dynamic may work in a country like the U.S., where the system was designed around it. But in Canada, where our parliamentary democracy was built to accommodate multiple voices and regional interests, it’s a poor fit.

What happens to the voters who once found a home in the NDP’s pragmatic progressivism? Or those who lean Green but now feel their vote is a lost cause? Where do they go in a system that increasingly demands you pick one of two teams?

The risk is that they disengage entirely. And when voter turnout falls and cynicism rises, democracy suffers.

Some will cheer Carney’s narrow victory as a rebuke to ultra-right populism, which is a fair assessment.

Others will mourn the NDP’s demise as a loss for working-class Canadians, also fair. But we should all be concerned about what this election reveals: a Canada inching closer to an American-style brand of politics, one marked by polarization and fewer choices.

Winnipeg Free Press | Newsletter

Paul Samyn | Editor's Note

Wednesdays

A weekly dispatch from the head of the Free Press newsroom.

Sign up for Paul Samyn | Editor's Note

Sign Up

I agree to the Terms and Conditions, Cookie and Privacy Policies, and CASL agreement.

We still have time to course-correct. Electoral reform, a renewed focus on grassroots democracy, and a re-commitment to the idea that governing means listening — not steamrolling — could all help to restore the balance.

The NDP has been down before and made political comebacks, but this election felt very different than previous ones. The degree of polarization between the two main contenders was fierce.

This wasn’t just an election, it was a warning.

We’re not immune to polarization and we’re not guaranteed the luxury of choice. If we don’t protect the pluralism that’s long defined our politics, we may soon find ourselves wondering how we became the very thing we once vowed never to be.

tom.brodbeck@freepress.mb.ca

Tom Brodbeck
Columnist

Tom Brodbeck is an award-winning author and columnist with over 30 years experience in print media. He joined the Free Press in 2019. Born and raised in Montreal, Tom graduated from the University of Manitoba in 1993 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics and commerce. Read more about Tom.

Tom provides commentary and analysis on political and related issues at the municipal, provincial and federal level. His columns are built on research and coverage of local events. The Free Press’s editing team reviews Tom’s columns before they are posted online or published in print – part of the Free Press’s tradition, since 1872, of producing reliable independent journalism. Read more about Free Press’s history and mandate, and learn how our newsroom operates.