March 17, 2025 • 53 mins
A Canadian Polling Expert breaks down the upcoming 2025 election. David Coletto joins to discuss the key factors shaping the race, including Pierre Poilievre’s challenges, Mark Carney’s rise, Trump’s influence, affordability concerns, media dynamics, and shifting voter mindsets with host Aaron Pete.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Aaron Pete (00:00):
Welcome back to another episode of the Bigger
Than Me podcast.
Here is your host, aaron Peet.
What is going to happen in thenext election?
I'm speaking with the CEO ofone of Canada's leading polling
firms.
We discuss Pierre Pommier, markCarney, the Trump tariffs, new
media versus traditional mediaand what will happen in the 2025
(00:20):
federal election.
My guest today is David Coletto.
David, you have previously beenrecognized by the Hill Times as
one of the most influentialpeople, one of the top 100 most
influential people in Canada,and it's a privilege to have you
on the show.
Would you mind first brieflyintroducing yourself?
David Coletto (00:39):
Well, thanks, Aaron, for the introduction and
welcoming.
I'm David Coletto.
I am a dog dad, a husband, bornand raised in Toronto but live
in Ottawa.
I am a political scientist bytraining, got a PhD in political
science from the University ofCalgary, but my day job is
getting to ask thousands ofCanadians hundreds of questions
(01:02):
every week.
As the founder and the head ofpolling firm Abacus Data, which
we have offices in Ottawa,Toronto and Halifax and I've got
a great team of almost 20people.
Aaron Pete (01:13):
Wow, okay, we have to start with some of the most
pressing questions.
What is happening in Canadianpolitics federally right now,
from your perspective?
David Coletto (01:22):
What isn't happening, I guess, is the
question.
It's a fascinating moment.
Look, three months ago, aaron,if we were doing this interview,
I would have been prettycertain that Pierre Polyev and
the Conservatives were going toform the next government.
You fast forward, you know, twoand a half months and we're
going to have some numbers outsoon.
That shows the horse racebetween the liberals and the
(01:44):
conservatives continuing totighten, like other pollsters
have shown.
We see the broader, I think,public opinion landscape really
shifting, where you know, donaldTrump and his administration as
a top issue is now up to numbertwo on our list.
50% of Canadians put it in theirtop three issues.
(02:05):
It's up 11 points in two weeks,and I think he and what he is
doing and saying and threateningis really, I think, focusing
most Canadians' attention onthat and has completely reshaped
the political landscape, alongwith the fact that Justin
Trudeau announced hisresignation and I don't know, by
(02:27):
the time this airs, maybeofficially no longer the prime
minister of Canada, and that,too, has given people the
opportunity to imagine votingliberal again.
I think he was like this damthat would just prevent them
from getting past it, and sowe're in an environment now
where I think you know, we couldbe in a federal election in a
few days.
It is going to be a verycompetitive election.
(02:49):
It's going to be one, I think,that Canadians are paying very
close attention to, and you knowthe entire trajectory of our
country.
It feels like could becompletely switched in the
course of just 60 plus days.
Aaron Pete (03:06):
You described those three issues, one of them being
Trump's approach to Canada.
What are the other two?
David Coletto (03:14):
So the other biggest issue is affordability.
The cost of living remains thetop issue.
61% of Canadians put it intheir top three issues.
It's been there for a long,long time, and the other sets of
issues are all kind of bunchedtogether.
The economy, housing andhealthcare round out the top
five.
But really, you know cost ofliving is holding, but that
(03:35):
Trump factor is really pushingup and you know it's got
momentum right now, More andmore people engaged on it,
thinking about it, angry aboutit, and so that's the mix of
issues I think Canadians arethinking about as we likely head
to the polls soon.
Aaron Pete (03:50):
What happened with Pierre Polyev, why are, like I
understand and maybe we can divemore into people being able to
reconsider the Liberal Party,but like what is the decline in
their momentum?
David Coletto (04:03):
I think it's a few things I mean.
One is he was a very effectiveleader of the opposition, and he
is a very effective leader ofthe opposition.
He convinced Canadians, whenJustin Trudeau was the prime
minister, that it was time for achange.
You know, we saw, you know,close to 85% of Canadians at the
height of that number, whichwas near the end of 2024, just
(04:23):
before Trudeau resigned ofpeople who said they wanted a
change in government.
He was very effective at makingthat case, but in his story,
you know, justin Trudeau was thevillain.
People were deeply anxious aboutcost of living.
I describe it as, like you know,a scarcity mindset had taken
hold in the country.
People thought the things theyneeded in their life were more
(04:46):
expensive, harder to get, and ifthey had them, they might lose
them, and so Pierre Paglia spokedirectly to that.
What happened, though, in themeantime is, you know, one
villain left the stage and abigger, badder, more scary
villain entered, one that wasexternal to the country.
That, I think, has made it hardfor him, or harder for him to
(05:06):
figure out, to make himself thehero in that story.
Right, he was the hero in theprevious version of that story,
and today he's not, and so he'strying to figure out, I think,
how to offer himself up as acandidate for prime minister, as
somebody who's going to leadour country at a time when that
scarcity mindset that I talkedabout, that had been basically
(05:28):
the view for two years, hasbecome one where I describe as
almost precarity, broaderuncertainty, deeper uncertainty
around the world that's beingdriven not by things happening
here, but by this external force, donald Trump.
Aaron Pete (05:45):
That's really interesting, particularly the
scarcity mindset that's set in.
Is there something about hisapproach that people don't feel
like he's the person topotentially go up against this
bigger, badder villain?
I see the Liberals putting outads basically saying that he
would be a puppet to, that hewould be more aligned with, that
(06:05):
he wouldn't be able to stand upto.
Is that playing into this insome significant factor?
David Coletto (06:09):
It is, and I think it's part of the problem
that he has as ConservativeParty leader in that you know if
I'm going to visualize, youknow the way that his coalition
was built right.
If you looked at even up untilthe last few weeks, close to 40
to 42 percent of Canadians saidthey were going to vote
Conservative.
That reached 46, 48 percent atthe end of 2024.
(06:30):
That group was made up of thecore Conservative base, which I
think is about 34, 35 percent ofthe vote in this country, and
new voters, people who had notvoted Conservative in the last
two, three elections, maybepeople who have not voted before
the last two, three elections,maybe people who've not voted
before their younger,particularly young men had come
to that Conservative coalition.
The thing that was holding ittogether think about the glue
(06:53):
was a dislike for Justin Trudeau, a desire for change, and so
almost no matter what PierrePolyev did, he was likely going
to get those people to come tohis side because that was the
primary motivator.
But as Trudeau sort ofcontinues to be in the rearview
mirror, that glue is weakened,right, so it's it's it's it's
weakening that that coalitiontogether, the thing they all
(07:14):
agreed on, is no longer thereand then you basically get
donald trump as this like, like,like spike, that kind of smacks
right into the middle of it andbreaks this coalition open.
Because you see this, even today, even though Donald Trump's
negatives have reached a recordhigh in Canada, one in four
conservative supporters stilllike Donald Trump.
(07:35):
They have a positive impressionof him, but two-thirds don't.
And so I think, polyev, youknow it's not to say that you
know he has demonstrated anylove for Donald Trump, but the
perception in people's minds isthat he is somebody who would
have been cheering on Trump inthe last presidential election
versus Kamala Harris, andthere's too much similarity
(07:56):
there.
So I think that is what'scaused him problem.
That's why I described, youknow, polyev, having a Trump
problem in that, in the old, oldversion of Canadian politics,
justin Trudeau was this likewedge breaking liberal
supporters apart.
They've now all come togetherbecause they all agree on one
thing they don't like DonaldTrump.
And that same thing is nowcausing problems within the
(08:18):
conservative voter coalition.
Aaron Pete (08:21):
There's something interesting.
You also said, and it justmakes me think, that for a
period it felt like Canadianswere angry In a similar way
maybe and you can correct me ifI'm wrong that they were angry
with Stephen Harper when he wasleaving, that there was just a
strong frustration and a desirefor significant change.
And now, based on how I'munderstanding what you're saying
(08:43):
, there's a fear.
There's a fear of what thefuture looks like, and I think
Pierre is doing his best to looklike for lack of a better term
an alpha male.
He's wearing tighter shirts,he's got the aviators on, he's
bringing this energy to alphas.
In that sense, I don't know ifthat comforts anybody.
(09:06):
I think we're hoping thatcooler heads prevail.
David Coletto (09:08):
I think you've nailed it on the head right.
I think that, again, that whatpeople, the job people were
hiring for three months ago isdifferent than the job they're
hiring for today.
And I think you know that shiftfrom anger and real, deep
frustration with how things wereworking in Canada with the cost
of everything you know, thatshift from anger and real, deep
frustration with how things wereworking in Canada, with the
cost of everything you know, andthe carbon tax was that perfect
(09:30):
issue that exemplified that andall the decisions that Justin
Trudeau's government were making, that just made people angrier
and angrier every time theytried to do something To a world
now where actually a growingnumber of people are looking for
that sense of security right.
Who can guide us through this?
I like to think of the analogyof like the captain of a ship
(09:52):
through a rough storm, and weactually asked Canadians between
Polyev and Carney who do youthink best fits that description
, and they're basically tied onthat right.
And so that's an indicator tome that that's what this
election, when it comes, islikely going to be about.
It's going to be about who canrepresent my interests, who can
(10:14):
protect me, who can guide us,brand that being that vehicle
for that anger that youdescribed, aaron.
But Canadians aren't so angryanymore at the federal
government or at Canadianpolitical leaders.
They're really angry and have adeep sense of betrayal at
(10:35):
Donald Trump and the USgovernment.
And so Carney comes along assomebody who is not a politician
, who has no elected politicalexperience, which in some cases
could be a vulnerability, aliability, but in this case I
think people are like they'rekind of sick with all
politicians, and so he has thisperfect opportunity, in a way
(10:58):
that the storm that the perfectstorm that's been created,
actually is made for a MarkCarney in this environment.
And so he's got the experienceon paper, he's got the calm,
quiet, boring, bland demeanorthat I think is appealing to a
lot of voters, maybe not enough,maybe not all of them, but
enough at least to make thisvery competitive politically.
Aaron Pete (11:20):
I'm not a politically biased person I
suspect you're the same that weunderstand that there's ebbs and
flows and, as we've justwatched, one political party is
popular and their ideas arepopular one day and that changes
the next day depending on thecircumstances and, from my
perspective, great voters adaptand understand those changes.
(11:40):
Growing up, I've spoken topeople who've gone.
I voted for those people andthey didn't deliver on the
things that I wanted them to.
So I'm never voting again andit's like OK, but like there's
lots that goes into thispolitical process that's far
more complicated, that shape howpeople make decisions.
But one thing that I have as acriticism of the Conservative
Party that I like your feedbackon is they don't ever, from the
(12:04):
ones that I've interviewed, theydon't come across as
compassionate.
Even on issues they care aboutand they say that they care
about the best interest ofCanadians they lack compassion.
The one that I would raisepersonally is the mass grave
story for Indigenous people.
I'm First Nations, I'm a FirstNations councillor.
I understand the argumentsbeing put forward by
(12:24):
conservatives that we are notunearthing the bodies and
therefore we are not providingphysical evidence of their
claims, and that makes usvulnerable to their critiques,
and I'm alive to that.
But the way they say it is notat all compassionate, as people
perhaps on the liberal or leftside are where they're like.
Maybe we don't have all theinformation.
(12:45):
We're willing to learn more.
We want to work with you tofigure that out.
On issues of the LGBTQcommunity, they come across so
harsh that it's hard to have anunderstanding or a common ground
because they don't soundcompassionate to the issues, and
I think Pierre Pauliev isguilty of this challenge as well
that it doesn't come from aplace of compassion and for
(13:06):
Canadians that feels like animportant, key piece of the
metrics in making a decision onwho's going to lead the country.
Am I off base here?
What are your feedback on whatI've had to say?
David Coletto (13:16):
I don't think you're off base.
I think we shouldn'toveremphasize, though, that what
you describe is what allCanadians want, right.
I think we have to recognizethat we, although we don't see
ourselves as polarized anddivided as say the United States
, there is still very differentviews on a lot of those issues
you described that animatepeople on both sides, but where
(13:36):
I think the Conservatives nowfind themselves in a weaker
position, exactly as youdescribe it, is because, prior
to the moment we're in right now, I think, while they may not
have demonstrated compassion inthe word you use to a lot of
people, I still believePierre-Paul Yves felt empathetic
(13:57):
to the anxiety around scarcity,that people were feeling right,
and I'd like you to about likewhat scarcity does to the
average person.
It basically, if you think aboutthat, you know hierarchy of
needs, the Maslow's hierarchy ofneeds, that triangle right, and
the items at the bottom arephysiological security and
personal security.
(14:18):
Can I feed myself, Can I housemyself?
You know, do I feel safe?
So many Canadians, over thelast two years, have basically
moved down that list and so it'sin their minds.
It's not because they are lesscompassionate, it's and I'm not
saying the Conservatives, I'msaying Canadians, the public,
it's that they're not able tothink about things like
(14:40):
Indigenous reconciliation orsocial justice, or even climate
change, frankly, has fallen downas people's material concerns
have become front and center,right, and so pierre poly of, I
think, was very good atconnecting with people, enough
people at that level, and so hecould ignore all those other
things and they could, and hedidn't have to, you know, smile
(15:01):
very often, or he didn't have todemonstrate a warmth, um warmth
and a compassion, I think, asyou described.
But in a world today where thatanger, that frustration has
shifted to, as you perfectlydescribed, as fear, we are
actually seeking a compassionateset of hands, right, somebody
who understands what thisuncertainty is doing to us.
(15:25):
Right, like when Donald Trumpfirst announced his plan to
bring in 25% tariffs on allimports from Canada.
I am certain that almost everyCanadian household you know if
you live with somebody elsewe're looking at each other and
asking ourselves what does thismean for me?
I don't know.
I need somebody to help guideme, and I think you know.
(15:46):
In Ontario anyways, we saw aprovincial election there, where
Doug Ford has this interestingability to be both at once
compassionate, showing that hecares, at the same time as being
tough and able to stand up tothe bully, and I think he, for
enough Ontarians, was the kindof leader that they were looking
for and hence why he was easilyre-elected, despite being a
(16:08):
conservative, in that election.
Aaron Pete (16:12):
How much does scarcity play a role in
elections overall?
Because within my community weface this and I've called it
famine mentality.
I think scarcity mentality isprobably a better term and you
just see that when we're doingsomething for some people, they
feel like they're getting lessor that that's somehow taking
away from them and there becomeslike a competitive mindset that
(16:35):
there's not enough to go aroundand so how are we going to
divvy things up?
And it can really stop progressin communities in a significant
way, Totally and it's what somecall zero-sum thinking.
David Coletto (16:47):
Right, it is exactly as you described.
So if I have something and youdon't, I'm going to be
protective of it.
I'm not going to share, and ifI don't have something and you
do, I'm going to want it.
I'm going to be protective ofit and not going to share, and
if I don't have something andyou do, I'm going to want it.
I'm going to want to supportleaders or anything that helps
me get a piece of that thingthat we believe.
It's very perceptual, I thinkin your community might be more
real than it is in othercommunities in Canada, where you
(17:10):
know we've never been wealthieras a country than we are today,
and yet the perception is we'renot, and so that perception is
everything and it drives us tofight over these scarce
resources.
So I think I do think it'schanged our thinking.
But again, what Donald Trump hassingle handedly done is reset
(17:31):
that mindset in so many peoplewho said look, you know our
country isn't that bad.
Our country actually is prettygreat, and I am going to rally
around our flag and I'm going tolook to a more collective
response to this.
I'm going to do my part.
I'm not going to buy Americanproducts.
I'm not going to travel to theUS anymore, and so that
(17:53):
collectivism, I think for many,has taken over the individualist
fight for scarce things,because now we're all in it
together, we have a common enemy, and that common and I'm using
that term more symbolically Istill hope we don't think he's
an enemy but nonetheless thatcommon enemy in our framing
(18:16):
unites us right and brings ustogether.
So I think it is changing thatmindset, which is why I think
it's going from scarcity toprecarity.
Aaron Pete (18:24):
We talked about how Justin Trudeau leaving has
perhaps given a sigh of reliefto Canadians, the Liberal Party
community, and I'm wondering howmuch has it played a role that
Mark Carney is now the leader.
Who is Mark Carney fromCanadians' perspectives?
David Coletto (18:42):
Well, I think many Canadians have gotten to
know a little bit about him.
But I would say, you know he'sgoing to become prime minister,
probably as the least familiarprime minister we've had in a
really long time, in the sensethat there's close to a third of
Canadians who probably knownothing about him.
They haven't been payingattention to the leadership race
, they don't remember him orweren't alive when he was, you
(19:06):
know, bank governor of the Bankof Canada, and so he's very much
a blank slate.
But I think what many people,even if they only know one thing
about him they know he's aneconomist, they know he's led,
you know, the banks in Canadaand in England and I think
they're projecting on him a hopethat he can figure this out
(19:27):
Right.
You know, just, I don't alwaysuse individual conversations.
I have, but my mother, who Ithink is like that typical baby
boom swing voter, lives insuburban Toronto and she texted
me the other day after watchingthe leadership convention on the
weekend, the little pieces ofit, and said you know, maybe
(19:47):
because he's not a politician wecan trust him more, maybe he'll
be more honest, right, which Ithink that comment goes to the
underlying concern that peoplehave about politicians generally
, about the fact that they, youknow and Justin Trudeau was part
of that and Pierre Polyev hasbeen a politician for most of
his life.
In a weird way, being sort ofthat non-politician right now,
(20:10):
having very little politicalexperience, may absolutely be an
asset for Mark Carney.
So I think there's still Iwouldn't believe, I don't
believe views of him are bakedin.
I think a campaign when he isfront and center, when the
stakes are higher, are going toreally illuminate, I think, to
people who he is and what hestands for.
(20:32):
But I'm not sure people reallyknow the guy.
Pierre Polyev is far morewell-known and people feel more
familiarity with him.
Like him or not, mark Carney isstill someone who I think
people's views will be shapedover time.
Aaron Pete (20:48):
You've talked quite a bit about through almost like
a storytelling lens, and I'mjust curious how much of the
work that you do is taking innumbers and understanding the
broader context and putting thatin a story form.
How important is that in yourwork?
David Coletto (21:06):
I think it's essential and I think it's
actually not to toot our ownhorns at Abacus, but I think
it's one of the things we becomereally well known for is right,
like it's one thing for me tosay, well, 40 percent of
canadians think this and 30percent think this, and drown
you with numbers, right, aaron?
Like that would be a boringconversation.
Um, you probably wouldn't getthe the point even, um, and so
(21:31):
what I try to do is make surethat my conclusions, my
interpretations of what's goingon, are grounded in research,
are grounded in high quality,you know, surveys, or when we do
qualitative research, withconversations with people, but
make it make sense, right.
And so when I try to find theseprevailing frameworks, that or
(21:54):
mindsets as I like to thinkabout, I think it helps us
understand, kind of, why peopleare doing what they're doing,
right.
If we go to the core of it, Ithink my number one job as a
market researcher is to identifythe unmet needs of any audience
, whether it's your customer,whether it's your voter, whether
it's your employees or teammember, and so understand.
(22:16):
But it's not enough just to say, well, 60% want this.
It's to understand why and howhas that evolved over time and
so, yeah, it's my favorite partof my job is to sort of ask a
whole bunch of questions, lookat the data, but then say to
myself, like okay, but take astep back.
And if I was writing achildren's book about this, what
would I write?
(22:37):
You know, sometimes it's morecomplicated and you've got to
really think about how do yousimplify it, but sometimes it's
just obvious and we get lost innumbers and so we got to get
outside of it.
Aaron Pete (22:47):
You know where do you learn that skill set,
because that is likely notsomething you learned in school
on how to do, and so so do youlike, is movies helpful, like
how would you stay connected tothat and how does that inform
where you get that informationfrom?
David Coletto (23:04):
It's a great question.
I don't know how, If I had togo back and say, oh, if I was
going to write a book on how todo what I do, I don't know if I
could point to the exact moments.
Because you're right, and Iteach a class at Carleton
University in polling and publicopinion and if you ask my
students, I like drill into themthe importance of telling the
story, of finding that nuggetand making an impact with
whatever audience you'respeaking to, because ultimately
(23:26):
they want to take your researchand do something with it.
And if they don't know whatyou're concluding or saying, how
can they act on it?
Because that's what goodresearch does is it allows you
to make better decisions.
But in terms of how I got here,you know, I think it was a mix
of just doing this for almost 20years and learning through
(23:47):
practice, right where I would doa work and then I would present
it to my clients or toaudiences and you know I could
tell by whether they got it ordidn't.
That you know I would just needto keep refining and thinking
about the way that you do it.
But perhaps the best trainingfor me was public speaking.
I do probably like 30 or 40presentations a year, big
(24:10):
audiences small, and it's alwaysthinking about you know, what
does this audience need to getaway, get out of this?
What are the five key things?
And oftentimes, the best way todeliver that is not just with a
bunch of charts and data, butactually a very clear story.
And so, yeah, you know, I'velearned from, like, excellent
(24:32):
communicators and speech writers, and I guess it's just, you
know, living in the world ofpolitics, uh, and surrounded by
it.
You learn that way.
Um, you know I'm a huge fan ofthe West wing, and so I, you
know, you think about thestories that come out of that,
and some of your listeners mightbe too young to even.
It's crazy that I think aboutthe West wing as being like an
old, classic TV show, but it, it, it was that you, you know, I
(24:56):
think, personification of anideal political world.
That, and the writing was justso good that I always think of
that when I think about how tomake sense of what's going on
out there and make it make sensefor people and the consumers of
the work we do.
Aaron Pete (25:13):
Correct me if I'm wrong again, but in 2015, it
felt like the main story was ayoung man versus older
individual ready for freshchange, and in this election it
feels like younger man notnecessarily super helpful to the
conversation.
(25:34):
Older, wiser man, lots of yearsof experience is what we're
looking for and, like I know,that was embedded in that
liberal campaign was exactlywhere most people or at least a
(25:59):
plurality enough people were.
David Coletto (26:01):
After close to a decade of Stephen Harper right
and Stephen Harper for I'm notgoing to judge his prime
ministership, but he was notJustin Trudeau he was very
different, more serious, morelike steel-eyed, more strategic.
And Justin Trudeau came alongat a time when people and this
is important back to my originalstory around scarcity people
(26:22):
weren't generally feeling thatthings were scarce, and so,
after coming out of thefinancial crisis and the Great
Recession, which didn't hitCanada as hard as it did the US
or the UK I think we could talkabout gender equity and
Indigenous reconciliation andclimate action, because we were
ready to, we wanted to, it wastime, and Trudeau exemplified a
(26:47):
view and a belief that we wanted.
Canada wanted to be noticedagain right, and so it was.
You know, even to this day, Iwould travel to when I was
visiting family in Italy on thesummer and my like 70 year old
aunt, who doesn't speak anyEnglish, still knew who our
prime minister was.
I don't think she knew whoStephen Harper was at any point
(27:09):
during his time, and so that, Ithink, was the dynamic.
And so today, you know, when Ilook at the zeitgeist of the
public.
I think you are right.
I think they're looking forsecurity.
I think that is ultimately whatpeople want, and they're not
looking for somebody who's goingto eliminate the scarcity.
Scarcity is still there, thatperception of things, but it's
(27:30):
no longer driven by baddecisions in Ottawa.
It's being driven by really baddecisions coming out of
Washington.
Aaron Pete (27:39):
The other piece.
I'm just Stephen Harper to me.
I was not a fan of him as hewas exiting stage left in 2015.
I had done a criminology degree, learned a lot about mandatory
minimum sentencing and theimpact it had on Indigenous
communities but people morebroadly.
That it wasn't a strong policyfrom my perspective overall and
so I had negative connotationstowards him.
(28:01):
Now, in the what I would saywild times we're in, there's
something about me that goesmaybe things weren't so bad in
2008.
We got out pretty okay andthings aren't as bad as I
thought they were, and maybe wecould use some normalcy around
here and maybe that approachisn't so bad.
And now Justin Trudeau, I wouldsay, is in the same situation.
Where he's, there was avisceral dislike for him.
(28:23):
There were F Trudeau signs onpeople's vehicles.
They hit a critical mass ontheir dislike.
Is that just common that?
Of course they have like a10-year shelf life.
Then over time we look morefondly as years go by.
Or is Justin Trudeau's legacyreally going to be locked in
with with the reflections wehave today on him?
David Coletto (28:42):
I think every prime minister, for the most
part, is viewed more favorably10-20 years later than they are
the time they leave.
Think of, you know, when BrianMulroney passed away, it was an
outpouring of support and he wasone of the least popular prime
ministers when he resigned thatwe had ever seen.
So, I think, justin Trudeau, Ithink history will be kinder to
Justin Trudeau, particularlygiven what he's done in the last
(29:03):
few weeks.
You know, we even see hisapproval rating starting to rise
pretty quickly as people cometo recognize that there were
some strengths there.
He's a great, I think, and thisis my opinion, but I think he
and I think a lot of peoplewould reflect this he's very
good in a crisis, right.
But what he lacked was astrategic vision of where to
take the country, and so inbetween the crises, he could
(29:24):
never get things back on trackin people's minds.
And I think the other thing isthat leaders come along for the
moment, right.
And so, after, you know, anumber of years of liberal
government, after thesponsorship scandal and this may
be way before your time, aaron,but like in 2004 and then 2006,
stephen Harper was the, I think, the moment, the guy that
(29:45):
people wanted at that momentStability, strength.
And then, if you remember, in2011, after the financial crisis
, you know they were askingCanadians to give them a strong,
stable, majority conservativegovernment, and they got one in
2011.
They were asking Canadians togive them a strong, stable,
majority conservative government, and they got one in 2011.
You fast forward to today andit almost feels like that's what
Canadians are looking for aswell.
Right, the financial crisis wasnot as severe, I think, in
(30:06):
people's minds, as the Trumpcrisis could be, and so you know
, I think you're going to hearboth Mark Carney and Pierre Poly
of asking for a strong, stable,majority government, because
they need that, because peopleare going to want stability.
Minority government isn'tstable.
A majority government is, and Ithink they're looking for calm,
(30:26):
sensible leadership.
And that ballot question isstill sort of teetering on like
a seesaw between like is thisabout scarcity or is this about
precarity?
And it's not decided yet, but Istill think the momentum is
moving towards a place whereMark Carney is in a more
(30:48):
favorable position to win as aresult.
Aaron Pete (30:51):
From your perspective, what are the big
political differences between,like boomers, gen X, millennials
and Gen Z?
David Coletto (30:59):
I think that you've got to start with how
they get information, I think,before you can get anywhere else
, right?
I don't think the differencebetween you know, gen Z or
Zoomer I hate that term is witha boomer right now in terms of
where they're getting theirinformation right.
We know from our research thatmillennials and Gen Z are far
(31:21):
more likely to be listening topodcasts.
One in four Canadians under 30say their primary news source,
their primary news source isTikTok.
Okay, less than like 10% ofboomers are on TikTok, right,
and they are much more likelystill to be watching mainstream
broadcast news and listening tothe radio and reading, you know,
(31:43):
the Toronto Star or the Globeand Mail maybe not in paper form
anymore, but still going tothose sites and relying on that
traditional news source is thatyou can actually have two people
living in the same householdacross different generations and
be living in a very differentperceived world.
Right that they aren't exposedto the same things, they aren't
(32:04):
consuming the same information,they aren't being influenced by
the same people in terms of thestory.
So that's the first point, thething that I've seen, at least
at this moment.
So that's the first point, thething that I've seen, at least
at this moment, is the bigchange in views that baby
(32:25):
boomers in particular have hadtowards the liberals.
I think I even wrote a piecethat said you know, hey, boomer
like, or, ok, boomer like, why?
The why the boomers might bethe saviors for the Liberal
Party.
No-transcript CBC News is onsomewhere, right, it's just on.
(33:02):
Most people your age, aaronprobably never turn on a TV or
stream any of that content, andso that is a very different
experience.
Look, I think there's still abig gap, though I look at what
particularly under 40 Canadiansare, and I'm no longer there
anymore.
As a geriatric millennial in mynow mid-40s, I still believe
(33:27):
there's this sense that thiscountry has left young people
behind, that it's impossible tobuy a home, that the employment
market doesn't feel that secureand the hope for opportunity
isn't there.
Add on climate change and abunch of global insecurity, and
I still feel that young peopleare still in that scarcity
(33:49):
mindset, much more than olderfolks who have the benefit,
typically speaking, of morewealth.
They've paid off their home, ifthey own their home, and so
they can worry about the bigexistential crises like Trump,
and not be so focused on likehow am I going to pay the rent
and I still think that's a bigproblem.
So I think we could see a big,a larger generational divide in
(34:11):
our politics perhaps, but goingthe other way than we've
typically seen, where youngerpeople are more likely still to
be conservative-oriented votersand older folks are navigating
towards the safe harbor of MarkCarney and the Liberals.
Aaron Pete (34:26):
How do you think about that switchover?
I know a lot of people areworried when people are getting
their information from TikTok,and I know young people who say
the Globe and Mail or theNational Post are not always
that reliable and have gottenbig issues wrong over the years,
so they're not safe fromcriticisms either.
(34:47):
And I think about it evenwithin the realm that I'm in
that I have a fiduciary duty tolearn more about journalism, to
practice good interviews, tomake sure I ask tough questions
to politicians if they come on,because we're moving in this
direction, which I think is goodLonger form conversations, less
(35:08):
scripted, more opportunity toconnect with a person, but not
the same level of standards andconsistency as CTV, news or CBC
is going to bring to a standardquality interview, and so we
have to start to humbleourselves and integrate those
pieces in order to make surethat we're delivering key
information to listeners.
(35:29):
How do we make sure thatthere's that balance and that
one group isn't getting badinformation?
David Coletto (35:34):
Well, I hope, first, that everyone in your
kind of position who has anaudience takes it as seriously
as you do, because I don't thinkthey all do, and I think some
have an agenda and push thatagenda and you know, what you
have able to build with anaudience is something that very
few can do anymore, which is,you know, people will spend half
an hour to 45 minutes listeningto an interview you do and they
(35:56):
build a even though it's aone-way still medium.
They don't get to talk to you,aaron, like I am doing right now
, but they still get comfortablewith you.
I have a number of podcaststhat, like I'm so comforted by
their voices that they can putme to sleep right, like they're
just familiar.
I trust them, and withfamiliarity comes trust.
And so I do think that is adynamic that's happening, that
(36:19):
the rise of long form iscreating opportunities for
people to learn about a lot ofnew things and in depth, in ways
they wouldn't before.
But it depends on who they'relistening to and who they're and
end up building relationshipswith.
And so, yeah, I think, I think,I think it is a responsibility,
and I'm and I'm so happy tohear that you, you understand it
(36:39):
, but I am worried that noteverybody does.
And in a world where you know,for most Canadians, but
particularly those under 40,youtube is like the primary
platform in which most peopleget information about everything
.
(37:03):
Tendency, if you want it to andI say want, because you keep
consuming the same kind ofinformation that you could get
locked into both a deep rabbithole of things that you probably
shouldn't be exposed to, butalso you can isolate yourself
from everything else.
If you're only interested in,like hockey, you can basically
surround yourself with contentthat's only about that and you
never get exposed to anythingelse that's going on in the
world.
Right, that's different thanwhat it was even when I was
(37:25):
growing up, where you still wereexposed to, you know,
journalism about a number ofdifferent things.
Right, if I had one piece ofadvice for every younger person
listening to this, or anybodyreally, and I tell my team all
this time read a publicationlike the Economist every week,
if you can.
Right, and sometimes it's verytechnical, but it gives you this
(37:48):
broad-based understanding ofwhat's going on in other parts
of the world, beyond just evenour own borders, and linking the
business and politics andsociety all together.
I think we lack context anymore, and without context, we can't
have perspective, and I thinkwe've got to find and without
context, we can't haveperspective, and I think we've
got to find a way to get peoplemore perspective on things.
Aaron Pete (38:08):
I agree.
I would add context, and Ithink maturity is something that
I hope we see more of.
In the US it's become two teams, and I think we're vulnerable
to that here in Canada but aneagerness to seek out the
complexity in things, the nuancein complex dialogues, and to
not want it to be black or white, for it, to want it to be more
(38:32):
complicated and to see that asan opportunity for growth and to
learn more.
Like when you go into historyon anything, you realize that
there is so much to know andeven this historian did not in
this information and there wasmore to read here, and so, I
think, just making sure that wehumble ourselves in that sense
as well.
The other piece that I think isreally important from my
(38:53):
perspective to understand is themedia dynamics with politics is
, I think, changing.
Pierre Pauliev, I think, startedthis movement of being willing
to go on the Jordan Petersonsand do long-form interviews with
individuals who he might bemore politically aligned with,
and we saw Justin Trudeau startto step back from the Christmas
(39:16):
interviews and making himselfavailable for the town halls
that he had famously started in2015 and just taking questions
from the audience, and that'sperhaps my one fear with Mr
Carney is that we did see him goon Jon Stewart, that he did
have an interest in certainmedia, just as Pierre Palliev
did, and my hope, my dream,would be that these politicians
(39:39):
go.
I want to find the toughestinterview like a real interview,
not while Pierre Polyev'seating an apple, but a really
tough interview that challengeshis perspective, that brings
different ideas on how he couldapproach things, and if he could
manage that well, I feel likethere'd be a lot more trust in
him, and same with Mr Carney,and so I'm wondering how are
(40:00):
politicians going to approachnew media and old media moving
forward?
David Coletto (40:03):
Well, I think I mean I love your idealism.
Unfortunately, I'm notoptimistic that you know, any
political leader of anypolitical stripe is going to see
the benefit of engaging morewith you know journalists and
good journalists than less.
And then the reason is for theexact conversation we're having
(40:24):
is that that media market hasfragmented so much that, from a
political marketing perspective,it no longer makes any sense to
sit for a 20-minute interviewwith the host of CBC the
National, like you may have doneand you would have thought was
a win, an opportunity to speakto millions of people at one
time.
That doesn't happen anymore,right?
(40:45):
And so Pierre Polyev, to hiscredit, knows who his audience
is, and so he goes on the JordanPeterson podcast and we did
some research on this knowingfull well that the number one
audience for that podcast isyoung men, and he can speak
directly to them and you'reright in probably a medium
that's a little more friendly,more aligned with his worldview,
(41:08):
and so it's less risky.
But that's the nature of theenvironment today, right, and
you hear any politicalstrategist tell you today it's
like earned media almost doesn'tmatter in their minds when
they're running a campaign.
It matters, I think, in termsof good civic literacy and good
democratic debate.
(41:29):
But unfortunately, it's waymore effective to spend, you
know, half a million dollars andput your ads on YouTube than it
is going and speaking with youknow Vashi Kapelos on her show
or with any host of one of theevening or late night news
programs.
So the incentives aren't thereanymore and I think I'm a
(41:53):
realist and I recognize that,like, the incentive drives the
behavior.
And so even for somebody likeMark Carney, who should feel
comfortable and we should wanthim to feel comfortable
answering tough questions,because it's a tough job that
he's applying for and that he'sactually going to get in the
next few days Um, I still don'tthink he's going to.
So we've got to find other ways, I think, of holding them
(42:15):
accountable, which I think is intransition right now.
Aaron Pete (42:19):
I think that's the wild desire and I'd be
interested to see if this istrue from your perspective.
I don't think we wantpoliticians who are being this
strategic about who they'regoing on.
I think we want real people whoare coming to represent the
people they serve.
Idealism to like what I think,what previous prime ministers
(42:41):
throughout history would havedone that there was this mindset
of you go in front of thecamera, you look at dead in the
eyes and you go.
Hey, canada, I have failed yougreatly on this approach and I
should have done A, b, c, d andI could have done it better and
for that reason, I'm choosing toresign, or I'm choosing to move
out of this position, or I'mchoosing to move that person out
(43:02):
of this position.
I have made a mistake and Iwant to hold myself accountable
to you Canadians.
Is that idealism?
Am I lost in the 1960s?
David Coletto (43:11):
Well, I think it's still idealism.
I'm not confident that we'regoing to see anyone come out and
say, well, I'm going tocompletely change it, but I
think you are giving voice towhat most people want.
Right, when my mother says, Ilike Mark Carney, maybe because
he's not a politician andpoliticians aren't honest,
(43:32):
that's going to fade pretty fast, likely when Mark Carney
becomes.
He is a politician now and he'sgoing to have to campaign in
the environment as you describeit.
So I think there's a place forand it's not just out of pure
idealism or what is right forthat politician who has enough
self-confidence to say I'm goingto be the person and the leader
(43:56):
that people want me to be.
And I actually think there's aspace for that in Canada.
Still, I don't think we're aspolarized as the US.
I don't think our mediaenvironment is as partisan as it
is in the US.
I'm just not sure that thepeople around those leaders are
going to encourage them to do it, and so I'm with you, aaron, I
(44:17):
hope that that's where we getand I think you know, maybe it's
idealism on my part I thinkthat the next generation of
political leaders I think we'regoing to come, hopefully, with
that with that in mind, becausethat's what they want too.
They want to hear their whetherit's their, their political
leader, whether it's theiremployer, whether it's, you know
, the person who owns thecompany that they do business
(44:40):
with.
They want to hear from theperson and want to be able to
hold them accountable or thankthem for the good work they've
done.
Aaron Pete (44:54):
Two more brief questions.
One what do you foresee in thisupcoming election?
Are the NDP and the Blocirrelevant in this upcoming
election and how do you processthat?
David Coletto (44:59):
Yeah, I wrote a piece just recently on the NDP.
I think they're in deep troublepolitically because of a
climate that we described onthis interview.
That is leaving very littleroom for both of them frankly,
both the New Democrats and theBloc a few months ago in part
(45:19):
because even Quebecers,francophone Quebecers, who would
probably be the last to fly theCanadian flag rally, are
joining in.
They're just as anxious andworried and upset and angry at
Donald Trump as Canadians inother parts of the country, and
so that Quebec nationalistfervor is no longer as strong, I
(45:40):
think, as it was.
Even Leger, another pollingfirm, showed that a few days
after Trump's first tariffthreat, support for independence
in Quebec dropped 10 points,literally in like three days.
So the bloc is going to have ahard time, but the NDP in
particular, I think, is going tobe challenged, even though you
would normally look at thisscenario and say, wow, former
central banker, former Goldmansachs executive, this should be
(46:03):
prime ndp time to go after theliberals.
The liberals are moving kind ofto the right and that should
create space for the ndp.
The problem is, when we're in akind of crisis mentality, it has
a tendency of making it abinary choice, and I and I you
know, for anyone who's listening, who is at all interested in UK
politics in the 2017 generalelection in the UK, in England,
(46:28):
after the Brexit vote, you sawan increase in the share of the
two largest parties.
The third, fourth, fifthparties saw their vote drop as
the choice became likepro-Brexit party, anti-brexit
party, right, and so I think theNDP is going to have a really
hard time navigating that.
You know, jagmeet Singh, I canjust visualize sort of in the
(46:49):
back being like hey guys, whatabout me?
What about me?
Because there's going to besuch a sharp choice between
Polyev and Carney that wheredoes Singh fit into all of that?
Aaron Pete (47:00):
Right?
Is nationalism good for us,this movement towards
nationalism?
David Coletto (47:08):
It's more of a question, I think, for
economists, I think from apublic opinion perspective, it
can be, as long as it's apositive nationalism.
I think we've seen versions ofa negative one.
I think we've seen versions ofa negative one.
You can look at some countriesin Europe and even Donald
Trump's version of nationalism Idon't think is a positive thing
(47:28):
.
It's one that basically sayslike we're better than everybody
else and let's just beat oneverybody else, as opposed to
we're better than everybody elseand let's guide them to a
better place, which was like theold American exceptionalism.
We now have a new version whichwas like the old American
exceptionalism.
We now have a new version whichis like bully exceptionalism.
But in the Canadian context, Ithink it is a good thing right
(47:51):
now.
I think the public psyche aroundour own country has been kind
of down for the last number ofyears, that we weren't as proud
to be Canadians.
There were lots of reasons thatwe could point to that.
People said, oh, you know, oureconomy's not as strong or you
know, and a lot of politicalleaders were helping fuel that
(48:13):
kind of negativity towards ourcountry.
But I think in this moment, allbeing said, I think nationalism
is good.
I think it's bad when itprevents us from seeing beyond
our own borders and recognizingand I think Canada has always
been a place where we know wearen't the biggest, we know we
aren't the strongest, but wecan't really bully people and
(48:40):
tell them what to do, and soI've found myself more often
these days, you know, inmeetings putting a Canadian flag
on my lapel, or walk down theneighborhood and see Canadian
flags out on houses that youwould only see on Canada Day.
They're out there now.
Don't think that's a bad thing.
I think it's increasing ourmood.
And last point, I'll make itjust from a data perspective
(49:15):
Increasing our mood.
And last point, I'll make itjust from a data perspective For
basically two years, barely aquarter of Canadians felt that
their country was headed in theright direction.
This was like we were in a funk.
We were in this us and we'reseeing that country in the right
direction number starting to goup and moving pretty quickly,
and so that's giving me someoptimism that this is all not a
bad thing to happen right now.
Aaron Pete (49:33):
Oh, he almost stole my last question.
David, you've been able towatch the ebbs and flows of our
country in a really deep way asa First Nations councillor.
I've done a lot of surveys.
We're doing a comprehensivecommunity plan right now and
it's been very humbling to beable to see the statistics still
.
Speak with people and get thoseanecdotal stories, but really
see the vibes and what actuallypeople think on issues and get
(49:57):
113 responses out of 650 andstart to get a gauge on what the
community actually wants andwhere we're going and those ebbs
and flows of good times 2008not being a good time and the
positive Is there any hope youcan leave people with as we look
at the negativity and all ofthis uncertainty?
How do we keep that hope?
David Coletto (50:17):
Well, look, I think you know one of the most
fascinating periods of my lifewas was doing research around
COVID, right, and if youremember that, we try to forget
that moment, but it was a scarymoment for everybody.
Um, but in that scary moment, Ithink we found, uh, we changed
some of the values that we had,we changed the way we did things
(50:39):
and, I think, in a lot of ways,for the better.
There's still a lot of pain andsuffering and harm done by by
that event, but it left us in adifferent place and, in some
ways, I think, better ways thatwe haven't been challenged
(51:05):
before.
I think I see it in the data.
I see a renewed interest in us,you know, being entrepreneurial
and being builders and makersof things.
Again, we see us looking beyondNorth America and saying, well,
there's a bigger world outthere.
Right, like, let's engage withAsia and Europe.
And you know, we released asurvey earlier this week that
showed like more people thinkit's a good idea to join the EU
(51:25):
than not.
Right, that may never happenand probably not a good idea,
given the bureaucracy of thatarrangement, but that's not the
point.
The point is we're now beingforced to look beyond that
North-South relationship whichis, I think, always going to be
important when Donald Trumpeventually leaves the US will
never not be our most importantpartner.
(51:45):
But I think, I hope that youknow by saying I'm not going to
travel to the United States thisyear, I'm going to go to Mexico
, or I'm going to go to SouthAmerica, I'm going to go to Asia
.
That's going to expose peopleto new ideas and new
opportunities.
So that's the optimism I have.
I'm a glass half full kind ofguy all the time and so, as
(52:11):
anxious inducing as this worldis at this moment, I'm always
mindful of that.
Thomas, I think Pinker book,you know, enlightenment, now
that I am someone who stillbelieves I would rather be born
today than I would have.
Sorry, steven.
Aaron Pete (52:21):
Pinker.
David Coletto (52:21):
Thank you.
I would rather be born todaythan at any point previously,
and unfortunately most peoplearen't there, but I'm going to
be the one who keeps tellingthem and reminding them that
there's a lot better reason tobe alive today than, you know,
1950 for a whole bunch of people.
Aaron Pete (52:39):
Mr Coletto, it has been an honor to speak with you.
Very rare that I get to speakwith someone who's reached what
I would call self-actualizationin that Maslow's hierarchy of
needs, because you bring acalmness to these really
complicated issues.
Of course you have a pulse onwhat's going on.
There's something very calmingabout how you're delivering the
(53:00):
information that I really,really appreciate, because these
are very intimidating, scarytimes for so many people trying
to figure out how they're goingto run their business under this
and how the federal governmentis going to play a role and all
of these never-ending questions.
But your ability to share thisinformation and tell us where
other Canadians are at, I think,really helps bring the
(53:20):
temperature down in the room andI'm just honored to share this
time with you.
David Coletto (53:25):
I appreciate that , aaron, and thanks so much for
having me on your show.
Welcome back to another episode of the Bigger
Than Me podcast.
Here is your host, aaron Peet.
What is going to happen in thenext election?
I'm speaking with the CEO ofone of Canada's leading polling
firms.
We discuss Pierre Pommier, markCarney, the Trump tariffs, new
media versus traditional mediaand what will happen in the 2025
(00:20):
federal election.
My guest today is David Coletto.
David, you have previously beenrecognized by the Hill Times as
one of the most influentialpeople, one of the top 100 most
influential people in Canada,and it's a privilege to have you
on the show.
Would you mind first brieflyintroducing yourself?
David Coletto (00:39):
Well, thanks, Aaron, for the introduction and
welcoming.
I'm David Coletto.
I am a dog dad, a husband, bornand raised in Toronto but live
in Ottawa.
I am a political scientist bytraining, got a PhD in political
science from the University ofCalgary, but my day job is
getting to ask thousands ofCanadians hundreds of questions
(01:02):
every week.
As the founder and the head ofpolling firm Abacus Data, which
we have offices in Ottawa,Toronto and Halifax and I've got
a great team of almost 20people.
Aaron Pete (01:13):
Wow, okay, we have to start with some of the most
pressing questions.
What is happening in Canadianpolitics federally right now,
from your perspective?
David Coletto (01:22):
What isn't happening, I guess, is the
question.
It's a fascinating moment.
Look, three months ago, aaron,if we were doing this interview,
I would have been prettycertain that Pierre Polyev and
the Conservatives were going toform the next government.
You fast forward, you know, twoand a half months and we're
going to have some numbers outsoon.
That shows the horse racebetween the liberals and the
(01:44):
conservatives continuing totighten, like other pollsters
have shown.
We see the broader, I think,public opinion landscape really
shifting, where you know, donaldTrump and his administration as
a top issue is now up to numbertwo on our list.
50% of Canadians put it in theirtop three issues.
(02:05):
It's up 11 points in two weeks,and I think he and what he is
doing and saying and threateningis really, I think, focusing
most Canadians' attention onthat and has completely reshaped
the political landscape, alongwith the fact that Justin
Trudeau announced hisresignation and I don't know, by
(02:27):
the time this airs, maybeofficially no longer the prime
minister of Canada, and that,too, has given people the
opportunity to imagine votingliberal again.
I think he was like this damthat would just prevent them
from getting past it, and sowe're in an environment now
where I think you know, we couldbe in a federal election in a
few days.
It is going to be a verycompetitive election.
(02:49):
It's going to be one, I think,that Canadians are paying very
close attention to, and you knowthe entire trajectory of our
country.
It feels like could becompletely switched in the
course of just 60 plus days.
Aaron Pete (03:06):
You described those three issues, one of them being
Trump's approach to Canada.
What are the other two?
David Coletto (03:14):
So the other biggest issue is affordability.
The cost of living remains thetop issue.
61% of Canadians put it intheir top three issues.
It's been there for a long,long time, and the other sets of
issues are all kind of bunchedtogether.
The economy, housing andhealthcare round out the top
five.
But really, you know cost ofliving is holding, but that
(03:35):
Trump factor is really pushingup and you know it's got
momentum right now, More andmore people engaged on it,
thinking about it, angry aboutit, and so that's the mix of
issues I think Canadians arethinking about as we likely head
to the polls soon.
Aaron Pete (03:50):
What happened with Pierre Polyev, why are, like I
understand and maybe we can divemore into people being able to
reconsider the Liberal Party,but like what is the decline in
their momentum?
David Coletto (04:03):
I think it's a few things I mean.
One is he was a very effectiveleader of the opposition, and he
is a very effective leader ofthe opposition.
He convinced Canadians, whenJustin Trudeau was the prime
minister, that it was time for achange.
You know, we saw, you know,close to 85% of Canadians at the
height of that number, whichwas near the end of 2024, just
(04:23):
before Trudeau resigned ofpeople who said they wanted a
change in government.
He was very effective at makingthat case, but in his story,
you know, justin Trudeau was thevillain.
People were deeply anxious aboutcost of living.
I describe it as, like you know,a scarcity mindset had taken
hold in the country.
People thought the things theyneeded in their life were more
(04:46):
expensive, harder to get, and ifthey had them, they might lose
them, and so Pierre Paglia spokedirectly to that.
What happened, though, in themeantime is, you know, one
villain left the stage and abigger, badder, more scary
villain entered, one that wasexternal to the country.
That, I think, has made it hardfor him, or harder for him to
(05:06):
figure out, to make himself thehero in that story.
Right, he was the hero in theprevious version of that story,
and today he's not, and so he'strying to figure out, I think,
how to offer himself up as acandidate for prime minister, as
somebody who's going to leadour country at a time when that
scarcity mindset that I talkedabout, that had been basically
(05:28):
the view for two years, hasbecome one where I describe as
almost precarity, broaderuncertainty, deeper uncertainty
around the world that's beingdriven not by things happening
here, but by this external force, donald Trump.
Aaron Pete (05:45):
That's really interesting, particularly the
scarcity mindset that's set in.
Is there something about hisapproach that people don't feel
like he's the person topotentially go up against this
bigger, badder villain?
I see the Liberals putting outads basically saying that he
would be a puppet to, that hewould be more aligned with, that
(06:05):
he wouldn't be able to stand upto.
Is that playing into this insome significant factor?
David Coletto (06:09):
It is, and I think it's part of the problem
that he has as ConservativeParty leader in that you know if
I'm going to visualize, youknow the way that his coalition
was built right.
If you looked at even up untilthe last few weeks, close to 40
to 42 percent of Canadians saidthey were going to vote
Conservative.
That reached 46, 48 percent atthe end of 2024.
(06:30):
That group was made up of thecore Conservative base, which I
think is about 34, 35 percent ofthe vote in this country, and
new voters, people who had notvoted Conservative in the last
two, three elections, maybepeople who have not voted before
the last two, three elections,maybe people who've not voted
before their younger,particularly young men had come
to that Conservative coalition.
The thing that was holding ittogether think about the glue
(06:53):
was a dislike for Justin Trudeau, a desire for change, and so
almost no matter what PierrePolyev did, he was likely going
to get those people to come tohis side because that was the
primary motivator.
But as Trudeau sort ofcontinues to be in the rearview
mirror, that glue is weakened,right, so it's it's it's it's
weakening that that coalitiontogether, the thing they all
(07:14):
agreed on, is no longer thereand then you basically get
donald trump as this like, like,like spike, that kind of smacks
right into the middle of it andbreaks this coalition open.
Because you see this, even today, even though Donald Trump's
negatives have reached a recordhigh in Canada, one in four
conservative supporters stilllike Donald Trump.
(07:35):
They have a positive impressionof him, but two-thirds don't.
And so I think, polyev, youknow it's not to say that you
know he has demonstrated anylove for Donald Trump, but the
perception in people's minds isthat he is somebody who would
have been cheering on Trump inthe last presidential election
versus Kamala Harris, andthere's too much similarity
(07:56):
there.
So I think that is what'scaused him problem.
That's why I described, youknow, polyev, having a Trump
problem in that, in the old, oldversion of Canadian politics,
justin Trudeau was this likewedge breaking liberal
supporters apart.
They've now all come togetherbecause they all agree on one
thing they don't like DonaldTrump.
And that same thing is nowcausing problems within the
(08:18):
conservative voter coalition.
Aaron Pete (08:21):
There's something interesting.
You also said, and it justmakes me think, that for a
period it felt like Canadianswere angry In a similar way
maybe and you can correct me ifI'm wrong that they were angry
with Stephen Harper when he wasleaving, that there was just a
strong frustration and a desirefor significant change.
And now, based on how I'munderstanding what you're saying
(08:43):
, there's a fear.
There's a fear of what thefuture looks like, and I think
Pierre is doing his best to looklike for lack of a better term
an alpha male.
He's wearing tighter shirts,he's got the aviators on, he's
bringing this energy to alphas.
In that sense, I don't know ifthat comforts anybody.
(09:06):
I think we're hoping thatcooler heads prevail.
David Coletto (09:08):
I think you've nailed it on the head right.
I think that, again, that whatpeople, the job people were
hiring for three months ago isdifferent than the job they're
hiring for today.
And I think you know that shiftfrom anger and real, deep
frustration with how things wereworking in Canada with the cost
of everything you know, thatshift from anger and real, deep
frustration with how things wereworking in Canada, with the
cost of everything you know, andthe carbon tax was that perfect
(09:30):
issue that exemplified that andall the decisions that Justin
Trudeau's government were making, that just made people angrier
and angrier every time theytried to do something To a world
now where actually a growingnumber of people are looking for
that sense of security right.
Who can guide us through this?
I like to think of the analogyof like the captain of a ship
(09:52):
through a rough storm, and weactually asked Canadians between
Polyev and Carney who do youthink best fits that description
, and they're basically tied onthat right.
And so that's an indicator tome that that's what this
election, when it comes, islikely going to be about.
It's going to be about who canrepresent my interests, who can
(10:14):
protect me, who can guide us,brand that being that vehicle
for that anger that youdescribed, aaron.
But Canadians aren't so angryanymore at the federal
government or at Canadianpolitical leaders.
They're really angry and have adeep sense of betrayal at
(10:35):
Donald Trump and the USgovernment.
And so Carney comes along assomebody who is not a politician
, who has no elected politicalexperience, which in some cases
could be a vulnerability, aliability, but in this case I
think people are like they'rekind of sick with all
politicians, and so he has thisperfect opportunity, in a way
(10:58):
that the storm that the perfectstorm that's been created,
actually is made for a MarkCarney in this environment.
And so he's got the experienceon paper, he's got the calm,
quiet, boring, bland demeanorthat I think is appealing to a
lot of voters, maybe not enough,maybe not all of them, but
enough at least to make thisvery competitive politically.
Aaron Pete (11:20):
I'm not a politically biased person I
suspect you're the same that weunderstand that there's ebbs and
flows and, as we've justwatched, one political party is
popular and their ideas arepopular one day and that changes
the next day depending on thecircumstances and, from my
perspective, great voters adaptand understand those changes.
(11:40):
Growing up, I've spoken topeople who've gone.
I voted for those people andthey didn't deliver on the
things that I wanted them to.
So I'm never voting again andit's like OK, but like there's
lots that goes into thispolitical process that's far
more complicated, that shape howpeople make decisions.
But one thing that I have as acriticism of the Conservative
Party that I like your feedbackon is they don't ever, from the
(12:04):
ones that I've interviewed, theydon't come across as
compassionate.
Even on issues they care aboutand they say that they care
about the best interest ofCanadians they lack compassion.
The one that I would raisepersonally is the mass grave
story for Indigenous people.
I'm First Nations, I'm a FirstNations councillor.
I understand the argumentsbeing put forward by
(12:24):
conservatives that we are notunearthing the bodies and
therefore we are not providingphysical evidence of their
claims, and that makes usvulnerable to their critiques,
and I'm alive to that.
But the way they say it is notat all compassionate, as people
perhaps on the liberal or leftside are where they're like.
Maybe we don't have all theinformation.
(12:45):
We're willing to learn more.
We want to work with you tofigure that out.
On issues of the LGBTQcommunity, they come across so
harsh that it's hard to have anunderstanding or a common ground
because they don't soundcompassionate to the issues, and
I think Pierre Pauliev isguilty of this challenge as well
that it doesn't come from aplace of compassion and for
(13:06):
Canadians that feels like animportant, key piece of the
metrics in making a decision onwho's going to lead the country.
Am I off base here?
What are your feedback on whatI've had to say?
David Coletto (13:16):
I don't think you're off base.
I think we shouldn'toveremphasize, though, that what
you describe is what allCanadians want, right.
I think we have to recognizethat we, although we don't see
ourselves as polarized anddivided as say the United States
, there is still very differentviews on a lot of those issues
you described that animatepeople on both sides, but where
(13:36):
I think the Conservatives nowfind themselves in a weaker
position, exactly as youdescribe it, is because, prior
to the moment we're in right now, I think, while they may not
have demonstrated compassion inthe word you use to a lot of
people, I still believePierre-Paul Yves felt empathetic
(13:57):
to the anxiety around scarcity,that people were feeling right,
and I'd like you to about likewhat scarcity does to the
average person.
It basically, if you think aboutthat, you know hierarchy of
needs, the Maslow's hierarchy ofneeds, that triangle right, and
the items at the bottom arephysiological security and
personal security.
(14:18):
Can I feed myself, Can I housemyself?
You know, do I feel safe?
So many Canadians, over thelast two years, have basically
moved down that list and so it'sin their minds.
It's not because they are lesscompassionate, it's and I'm not
saying the Conservatives, I'msaying Canadians, the public,
it's that they're not able tothink about things like
(14:40):
Indigenous reconciliation orsocial justice, or even climate
change, frankly, has fallen downas people's material concerns
have become front and center,right, and so pierre poly of, I
think, was very good atconnecting with people, enough
people at that level, and so hecould ignore all those other
things and they could, and hedidn't have to, you know, smile
(15:01):
very often, or he didn't have todemonstrate a warmth, um warmth
and a compassion, I think, asyou described.
But in a world today where thatanger, that frustration has
shifted to, as you perfectlydescribed, as fear, we are
actually seeking a compassionateset of hands, right, somebody
who understands what thisuncertainty is doing to us.
(15:25):
Right, like when Donald Trumpfirst announced his plan to
bring in 25% tariffs on allimports from Canada.
I am certain that almost everyCanadian household you know if
you live with somebody elsewe're looking at each other and
asking ourselves what does thismean for me?
I don't know.
I need somebody to help guideme, and I think you know.
(15:46):
In Ontario anyways, we saw aprovincial election there, where
Doug Ford has this interestingability to be both at once
compassionate, showing that hecares, at the same time as being
tough and able to stand up tothe bully, and I think he, for
enough Ontarians, was the kindof leader that they were looking
for and hence why he was easilyre-elected, despite being a
(16:08):
conservative, in that election.
Aaron Pete (16:12):
How much does scarcity play a role in
elections overall?
Because within my community weface this and I've called it
famine mentality.
I think scarcity mentality isprobably a better term and you
just see that when we're doingsomething for some people, they
feel like they're getting lessor that that's somehow taking
away from them and there becomeslike a competitive mindset that
(16:35):
there's not enough to go aroundand so how are we going to
divvy things up?
And it can really stop progressin communities in a significant
way, Totally and it's what somecall zero-sum thinking.
David Coletto (16:47):
Right, it is exactly as you described.
So if I have something and youdon't, I'm going to be
protective of it.
I'm not going to share, and ifI don't have something and you
do, I'm going to want it.
I'm going to be protective ofit and not going to share, and
if I don't have something andyou do, I'm going to want it.
I'm going to want to supportleaders or anything that helps
me get a piece of that thingthat we believe.
It's very perceptual, I thinkin your community might be more
real than it is in othercommunities in Canada, where you
(17:10):
know we've never been wealthieras a country than we are today,
and yet the perception is we'renot, and so that perception is
everything and it drives us tofight over these scarce
resources.
So I think I do think it'schanged our thinking.
But again, what Donald Trump hassingle handedly done is reset
(17:31):
that mindset in so many peoplewho said look, you know our
country isn't that bad.
Our country actually is prettygreat, and I am going to rally
around our flag and I'm going tolook to a more collective
response to this.
I'm going to do my part.
I'm not going to buy Americanproducts.
I'm not going to travel to theUS anymore, and so that
(17:53):
collectivism, I think for many,has taken over the individualist
fight for scarce things,because now we're all in it
together, we have a common enemy, and that common and I'm using
that term more symbolically Istill hope we don't think he's
an enemy but nonetheless thatcommon enemy in our framing
(18:16):
unites us right and brings ustogether.
So I think it is changing thatmindset, which is why I think
it's going from scarcity toprecarity.
Aaron Pete (18:24):
We talked about how Justin Trudeau leaving has
perhaps given a sigh of reliefto Canadians, the Liberal Party
community, and I'm wondering howmuch has it played a role that
Mark Carney is now the leader.
Who is Mark Carney fromCanadians' perspectives?
David Coletto (18:42):
Well, I think many Canadians have gotten to
know a little bit about him.
But I would say, you know he'sgoing to become prime minister,
probably as the least familiarprime minister we've had in a
really long time, in the sensethat there's close to a third of
Canadians who probably knownothing about him.
They haven't been payingattention to the leadership race
, they don't remember him orweren't alive when he was, you
(19:06):
know, bank governor of the Bankof Canada, and so he's very much
a blank slate.
But I think what many people,even if they only know one thing
about him they know he's aneconomist, they know he's led,
you know, the banks in Canadaand in England and I think
they're projecting on him a hopethat he can figure this out
(19:27):
Right.
You know, just, I don't alwaysuse individual conversations.
I have, but my mother, who Ithink is like that typical baby
boom swing voter, lives insuburban Toronto and she texted
me the other day after watchingthe leadership convention on the
weekend, the little pieces ofit, and said you know, maybe
(19:47):
because he's not a politician wecan trust him more, maybe he'll
be more honest, right, which Ithink that comment goes to the
underlying concern that peoplehave about politicians generally
, about the fact that they, youknow and Justin Trudeau was part
of that and Pierre Polyev hasbeen a politician for most of
his life.
In a weird way, being sort ofthat non-politician right now,
(20:10):
having very little politicalexperience, may absolutely be an
asset for Mark Carney.
So I think there's still Iwouldn't believe, I don't
believe views of him are bakedin.
I think a campaign when he isfront and center, when the
stakes are higher, are going toreally illuminate, I think, to
people who he is and what hestands for.
(20:32):
But I'm not sure people reallyknow the guy.
Pierre Polyev is far morewell-known and people feel more
familiarity with him.
Like him or not, mark Carney isstill someone who I think
people's views will be shapedover time.
Aaron Pete (20:48):
You've talked quite a bit about through almost like
a storytelling lens, and I'mjust curious how much of the
work that you do is taking innumbers and understanding the
broader context and putting thatin a story form.
How important is that in yourwork?
David Coletto (21:06):
I think it's essential and I think it's
actually not to toot our ownhorns at Abacus, but I think
it's one of the things we becomereally well known for is right,
like it's one thing for me tosay, well, 40 percent of
canadians think this and 30percent think this, and drown
you with numbers, right, aaron?
Like that would be a boringconversation.
Um, you probably wouldn't getthe the point even, um, and so
(21:31):
what I try to do is make surethat my conclusions, my
interpretations of what's goingon, are grounded in research,
are grounded in high quality,you know, surveys, or when we do
qualitative research, withconversations with people, but
make it make sense, right.
And so when I try to find theseprevailing frameworks, that or
(21:54):
mindsets as I like to thinkabout, I think it helps us
understand, kind of, why peopleare doing what they're doing,
right.
If we go to the core of it, Ithink my number one job as a
market researcher is to identifythe unmet needs of any audience
, whether it's your customer,whether it's your voter, whether
it's your employees or teammember, and so understand.
(22:16):
But it's not enough just to say, well, 60% want this.
It's to understand why and howhas that evolved over time and
so, yeah, it's my favorite partof my job is to sort of ask a
whole bunch of questions, lookat the data, but then say to
myself, like okay, but take astep back.
And if I was writing achildren's book about this, what
would I write?
(22:37):
You know, sometimes it's morecomplicated and you've got to
really think about how do yousimplify it, but sometimes it's
just obvious and we get lost innumbers and so we got to get
outside of it.
Aaron Pete (22:47):
You know where do you learn that skill set,
because that is likely notsomething you learned in school
on how to do, and so so do youlike, is movies helpful, like
how would you stay connected tothat and how does that inform
where you get that informationfrom?
David Coletto (23:04):
It's a great question.
I don't know how, If I had togo back and say, oh, if I was
going to write a book on how todo what I do, I don't know if I
could point to the exact moments.
Because you're right, and Iteach a class at Carleton
University in polling and publicopinion and if you ask my
students, I like drill into themthe importance of telling the
story, of finding that nuggetand making an impact with
whatever audience you'respeaking to, because ultimately
(23:26):
they want to take your researchand do something with it.
And if they don't know whatyou're concluding or saying, how
can they act on it?
Because that's what goodresearch does is it allows you
to make better decisions.
But in terms of how I got here,you know, I think it was a mix
of just doing this for almost 20years and learning through
(23:47):
practice, right where I would doa work and then I would present
it to my clients or toaudiences and you know I could
tell by whether they got it ordidn't.
That you know I would just needto keep refining and thinking
about the way that you do it.
But perhaps the best trainingfor me was public speaking.
I do probably like 30 or 40presentations a year, big
(24:10):
audiences small, and it's alwaysthinking about you know, what
does this audience need to getaway, get out of this?
What are the five key things?
And oftentimes, the best way todeliver that is not just with a
bunch of charts and data, butactually a very clear story.
And so, yeah, you know, I'velearned from, like, excellent
(24:32):
communicators and speech writers, and I guess it's just, you
know, living in the world ofpolitics, uh, and surrounded by
it.
You learn that way.
Um, you know I'm a huge fan ofthe West wing, and so I, you
know, you think about thestories that come out of that,
and some of your listeners mightbe too young to even.
It's crazy that I think aboutthe West wing as being like an
old, classic TV show, but it, it, it was that you, you know, I
(24:56):
think, personification of anideal political world.
That, and the writing was justso good that I always think of
that when I think about how tomake sense of what's going on
out there and make it make sensefor people and the consumers of
the work we do.
Aaron Pete (25:13):
Correct me if I'm wrong again, but in 2015, it
felt like the main story was ayoung man versus older
individual ready for freshchange, and in this election it
feels like younger man notnecessarily super helpful to the
conversation.
(25:34):
Older, wiser man, lots of yearsof experience is what we're
looking for and, like I know,that was embedded in that
liberal campaign was exactlywhere most people or at least a
(25:59):
plurality enough people were.
David Coletto (26:01):
After close to a decade of Stephen Harper right
and Stephen Harper for I'm notgoing to judge his prime
ministership, but he was notJustin Trudeau he was very
different, more serious, morelike steel-eyed, more strategic.
And Justin Trudeau came alongat a time when people and this
is important back to my originalstory around scarcity people
(26:22):
weren't generally feeling thatthings were scarce, and so,
after coming out of thefinancial crisis and the Great
Recession, which didn't hitCanada as hard as it did the US
or the UK I think we could talkabout gender equity and
Indigenous reconciliation andclimate action, because we were
ready to, we wanted to, it wastime, and Trudeau exemplified a
(26:47):
view and a belief that we wanted.
Canada wanted to be noticedagain right, and so it was.
You know, even to this day, Iwould travel to when I was
visiting family in Italy on thesummer and my like 70 year old
aunt, who doesn't speak anyEnglish, still knew who our
prime minister was.
I don't think she knew whoStephen Harper was at any point
(27:09):
during his time, and so that, Ithink, was the dynamic.
And so today, you know, when Ilook at the zeitgeist of the
public.
I think you are right.
I think they're looking forsecurity.
I think that is ultimately whatpeople want, and they're not
looking for somebody who's goingto eliminate the scarcity.
Scarcity is still there, thatperception of things, but it's
(27:30):
no longer driven by baddecisions in Ottawa.
It's being driven by really baddecisions coming out of
Washington.
Aaron Pete (27:39):
The other piece.
I'm just Stephen Harper to me.
I was not a fan of him as hewas exiting stage left in 2015.
I had done a criminology degree, learned a lot about mandatory
minimum sentencing and theimpact it had on Indigenous
communities but people morebroadly.
That it wasn't a strong policyfrom my perspective overall and
so I had negative connotationstowards him.
(28:01):
Now, in the what I would saywild times we're in, there's
something about me that goesmaybe things weren't so bad in
2008.
We got out pretty okay andthings aren't as bad as I
thought they were, and maybe wecould use some normalcy around
here and maybe that approachisn't so bad.
And now Justin Trudeau, I wouldsay, is in the same situation.
Where he's, there was avisceral dislike for him.
(28:23):
There were F Trudeau signs onpeople's vehicles.
They hit a critical mass ontheir dislike.
Is that just common that?
Of course they have like a10-year shelf life.
Then over time we look morefondly as years go by.
Or is Justin Trudeau's legacyreally going to be locked in
with with the reflections wehave today on him?
David Coletto (28:42):
I think every prime minister, for the most
part, is viewed more favorably10-20 years later than they are
the time they leave.
Think of, you know, when BrianMulroney passed away, it was an
outpouring of support and he wasone of the least popular prime
ministers when he resigned thatwe had ever seen.
So, I think, justin Trudeau, Ithink history will be kinder to
Justin Trudeau, particularlygiven what he's done in the last
(29:03):
few weeks.
You know, we even see hisapproval rating starting to rise
pretty quickly as people cometo recognize that there were
some strengths there.
He's a great, I think, and thisis my opinion, but I think he
and I think a lot of peoplewould reflect this he's very
good in a crisis, right.
But what he lacked was astrategic vision of where to
take the country, and so inbetween the crises, he could
(29:24):
never get things back on trackin people's minds.
And I think the other thing isthat leaders come along for the
moment, right.
And so, after, you know, anumber of years of liberal
government, after thesponsorship scandal and this may
be way before your time, aaron,but like in 2004 and then 2006,
stephen Harper was the, I think, the moment, the guy that
(29:45):
people wanted at that momentStability, strength.
And then, if you remember, in2011, after the financial crisis
, you know they were askingCanadians to give them a strong,
stable, majority conservativegovernment, and they got one in
2011.
They were asking Canadians togive them a strong, stable,
majority conservative government, and they got one in 2011.
You fast forward to today andit almost feels like that's what
Canadians are looking for aswell.
Right, the financial crisis wasnot as severe, I think, in
(30:06):
people's minds, as the Trumpcrisis could be, and so you know
, I think you're going to hearboth Mark Carney and Pierre Poly
of asking for a strong, stable,majority government, because
they need that, because peopleare going to want stability.
Minority government isn'tstable.
A majority government is, and Ithink they're looking for calm,
(30:26):
sensible leadership.
And that ballot question isstill sort of teetering on like
a seesaw between like is thisabout scarcity or is this about
precarity?
And it's not decided yet, but Istill think the momentum is
moving towards a place whereMark Carney is in a more
(30:48):
favorable position to win as aresult.
Aaron Pete (30:51):
From your perspective, what are the big
political differences between,like boomers, gen X, millennials
and Gen Z?
David Coletto (30:59):
I think that you've got to start with how
they get information, I think,before you can get anywhere else
, right?
I don't think the differencebetween you know, gen Z or
Zoomer I hate that term is witha boomer right now in terms of
where they're getting theirinformation right.
We know from our research thatmillennials and Gen Z are far
(31:21):
more likely to be listening topodcasts.
One in four Canadians under 30say their primary news source,
their primary news source isTikTok.
Okay, less than like 10% ofboomers are on TikTok, right,
and they are much more likelystill to be watching mainstream
broadcast news and listening tothe radio and reading, you know,
(31:43):
the Toronto Star or the Globeand Mail maybe not in paper form
anymore, but still going tothose sites and relying on that
traditional news source is thatyou can actually have two people
living in the same householdacross different generations and
be living in a very differentperceived world.
Right that they aren't exposedto the same things, they aren't
(32:04):
consuming the same information,they aren't being influenced by
the same people in terms of thestory.
So that's the first point, thething that I've seen, at least
at this moment.
So that's the first point, thething that I've seen, at least
at this moment, is the bigchange in views that baby
(32:25):
boomers in particular have hadtowards the liberals.
I think I even wrote a piecethat said you know, hey, boomer
like, or, ok, boomer like, why?
The why the boomers might bethe saviors for the Liberal
Party.
No-transcript CBC News is onsomewhere, right, it's just on.
(33:02):
Most people your age, aaronprobably never turn on a TV or
stream any of that content, andso that is a very different
experience.
Look, I think there's still abig gap, though I look at what
particularly under 40 Canadiansare, and I'm no longer there
anymore.
As a geriatric millennial in mynow mid-40s, I still believe
(33:27):
there's this sense that thiscountry has left young people
behind, that it's impossible tobuy a home, that the employment
market doesn't feel that secureand the hope for opportunity
isn't there.
Add on climate change and abunch of global insecurity, and
I still feel that young peopleare still in that scarcity
(33:49):
mindset, much more than olderfolks who have the benefit,
typically speaking, of morewealth.
They've paid off their home, ifthey own their home, and so
they can worry about the bigexistential crises like Trump,
and not be so focused on likehow am I going to pay the rent
and I still think that's a bigproblem.
So I think we could see a big,a larger generational divide in
(34:11):
our politics perhaps, but goingthe other way than we've
typically seen, where youngerpeople are more likely still to
be conservative-oriented votersand older folks are navigating
towards the safe harbor of MarkCarney and the Liberals.
Aaron Pete (34:26):
How do you think about that switchover?
I know a lot of people areworried when people are getting
their information from TikTok,and I know young people who say
the Globe and Mail or theNational Post are not always
that reliable and have gottenbig issues wrong over the years,
so they're not safe fromcriticisms either.
(34:47):
And I think about it evenwithin the realm that I'm in
that I have a fiduciary duty tolearn more about journalism, to
practice good interviews, tomake sure I ask tough questions
to politicians if they come on,because we're moving in this
direction, which I think is goodLonger form conversations, less
(35:08):
scripted, more opportunity toconnect with a person, but not
the same level of standards andconsistency as CTV, news or CBC
is going to bring to a standardquality interview, and so we
have to start to humbleourselves and integrate those
pieces in order to make surethat we're delivering key
information to listeners.
(35:29):
How do we make sure thatthere's that balance and that
one group isn't getting badinformation?
David Coletto (35:34):
Well, I hope, first, that everyone in your
kind of position who has anaudience takes it as seriously
as you do, because I don't thinkthey all do, and I think some
have an agenda and push thatagenda and you know, what you
have able to build with anaudience is something that very
few can do anymore, which is,you know, people will spend half
an hour to 45 minutes listeningto an interview you do and they
(35:56):
build a even though it's aone-way still medium.
They don't get to talk to you,aaron, like I am doing right now
, but they still get comfortablewith you.
I have a number of podcaststhat, like I'm so comforted by
their voices that they can putme to sleep right, like they're
just familiar.
I trust them, and withfamiliarity comes trust.
And so I do think that is adynamic that's happening, that
(36:19):
the rise of long form iscreating opportunities for
people to learn about a lot ofnew things and in depth, in ways
they wouldn't before.
But it depends on who they'relistening to and who they're and
end up building relationshipswith.
And so, yeah, I think, I think,I think it is a responsibility,
and I'm and I'm so happy tohear that you, you understand it
(36:39):
, but I am worried that noteverybody does.
And in a world where you know,for most Canadians, but
particularly those under 40,youtube is like the primary
platform in which most peopleget information about everything
.
(37:03):
Tendency, if you want it to andI say want, because you keep
consuming the same kind ofinformation that you could get
locked into both a deep rabbithole of things that you probably
shouldn't be exposed to, butalso you can isolate yourself
from everything else.
If you're only interested in,like hockey, you can basically
surround yourself with contentthat's only about that and you
never get exposed to anythingelse that's going on in the
world.
Right, that's different thanwhat it was even when I was
(37:25):
growing up, where you still wereexposed to, you know,
journalism about a number ofdifferent things.
Right, if I had one piece ofadvice for every younger person
listening to this, or anybodyreally, and I tell my team all
this time read a publicationlike the Economist every week,
if you can.
Right, and sometimes it's verytechnical, but it gives you this
(37:48):
broad-based understanding ofwhat's going on in other parts
of the world, beyond just evenour own borders, and linking the
business and politics andsociety all together.
I think we lack context anymore, and without context, we can't
have perspective, and I thinkwe've got to find and without
context, we can't haveperspective, and I think we've
got to find a way to get peoplemore perspective on things.
Aaron Pete (38:08):
I agree.
I would add context, and Ithink maturity is something that
I hope we see more of.
In the US it's become two teams, and I think we're vulnerable
to that here in Canada but aneagerness to seek out the
complexity in things, the nuancein complex dialogues, and to
not want it to be black or white, for it, to want it to be more
(38:32):
complicated and to see that asan opportunity for growth and to
learn more.
Like when you go into historyon anything, you realize that
there is so much to know andeven this historian did not in
this information and there wasmore to read here, and so, I
think, just making sure that wehumble ourselves in that sense
as well.
The other piece that I think isreally important from my
(38:53):
perspective to understand is themedia dynamics with politics is
, I think, changing.
Pierre Pauliev, I think, startedthis movement of being willing
to go on the Jordan Petersonsand do long-form interviews with
individuals who he might bemore politically aligned with,
and we saw Justin Trudeau startto step back from the Christmas
(39:16):
interviews and making himselfavailable for the town halls
that he had famously started in2015 and just taking questions
from the audience, and that'sperhaps my one fear with Mr
Carney is that we did see him goon Jon Stewart, that he did
have an interest in certainmedia, just as Pierre Palliev
did, and my hope, my dream,would be that these politicians
(39:39):
go.
I want to find the toughestinterview like a real interview,
not while Pierre Polyev'seating an apple, but a really
tough interview that challengeshis perspective, that brings
different ideas on how he couldapproach things, and if he could
manage that well, I feel likethere'd be a lot more trust in
him, and same with Mr Carney,and so I'm wondering how are
(40:00):
politicians going to approachnew media and old media moving
forward?
David Coletto (40:03):
Well, I think I mean I love your idealism.
Unfortunately, I'm notoptimistic that you know, any
political leader of anypolitical stripe is going to see
the benefit of engaging morewith you know journalists and
good journalists than less.
And then the reason is for theexact conversation we're having
(40:24):
is that that media market hasfragmented so much that, from a
political marketing perspective,it no longer makes any sense to
sit for a 20-minute interviewwith the host of CBC the
National, like you may have doneand you would have thought was
a win, an opportunity to speakto millions of people at one
time.
That doesn't happen anymore,right?
(40:45):
And so Pierre Polyev, to hiscredit, knows who his audience
is, and so he goes on the JordanPeterson podcast and we did
some research on this knowingfull well that the number one
audience for that podcast isyoung men, and he can speak
directly to them and you'reright in probably a medium
that's a little more friendly,more aligned with his worldview,
(41:08):
and so it's less risky.
But that's the nature of theenvironment today, right, and
you hear any politicalstrategist tell you today it's
like earned media almost doesn'tmatter in their minds when
they're running a campaign.
It matters, I think, in termsof good civic literacy and good
democratic debate.
(41:29):
But unfortunately, it's waymore effective to spend, you
know, half a million dollars andput your ads on YouTube than it
is going and speaking with youknow Vashi Kapelos on her show
or with any host of one of theevening or late night news
programs.
So the incentives aren't thereanymore and I think I'm a
(41:53):
realist and I recognize that,like, the incentive drives the
behavior.
And so even for somebody likeMark Carney, who should feel
comfortable and we should wanthim to feel comfortable
answering tough questions,because it's a tough job that
he's applying for and that he'sactually going to get in the
next few days Um, I still don'tthink he's going to.
So we've got to find other ways, I think, of holding them
(42:15):
accountable, which I think is intransition right now.
Aaron Pete (42:19):
I think that's the wild desire and I'd be
interested to see if this istrue from your perspective.
I don't think we wantpoliticians who are being this
strategic about who they'regoing on.
I think we want real people whoare coming to represent the
people they serve.
Idealism to like what I think,what previous prime ministers
(42:41):
throughout history would havedone that there was this mindset
of you go in front of thecamera, you look at dead in the
eyes and you go.
Hey, canada, I have failed yougreatly on this approach and I
should have done A, b, c, d andI could have done it better and
for that reason, I'm choosing toresign, or I'm choosing to move
out of this position, or I'mchoosing to move that person out
(43:02):
of this position.
I have made a mistake and Iwant to hold myself accountable
to you Canadians.
Is that idealism?
Am I lost in the 1960s?
David Coletto (43:11):
Well, I think it's still idealism.
I'm not confident that we'regoing to see anyone come out and
say, well, I'm going tocompletely change it, but I
think you are giving voice towhat most people want.
Right, when my mother says, Ilike Mark Carney, maybe because
he's not a politician andpoliticians aren't honest,
(43:32):
that's going to fade pretty fast, likely when Mark Carney
becomes.
He is a politician now and he'sgoing to have to campaign in
the environment as you describeit.
So I think there's a place forand it's not just out of pure
idealism or what is right forthat politician who has enough
self-confidence to say I'm goingto be the person and the leader
(43:56):
that people want me to be.
And I actually think there's aspace for that in Canada.
Still, I don't think we're aspolarized as the US.
I don't think our mediaenvironment is as partisan as it
is in the US.
I'm just not sure that thepeople around those leaders are
going to encourage them to do it, and so I'm with you, aaron, I
(44:17):
hope that that's where we getand I think you know, maybe it's
idealism on my part I thinkthat the next generation of
political leaders I think we'regoing to come, hopefully, with
that with that in mind, becausethat's what they want too.
They want to hear their whetherit's their, their political
leader, whether it's theiremployer, whether it's, you know
, the person who owns thecompany that they do business
(44:40):
with.
They want to hear from theperson and want to be able to
hold them accountable or thankthem for the good work they've
done.
Aaron Pete (44:54):
Two more brief questions.
One what do you foresee in thisupcoming election?
Are the NDP and the Blocirrelevant in this upcoming
election and how do you processthat?
David Coletto (44:59):
Yeah, I wrote a piece just recently on the NDP.
I think they're in deep troublepolitically because of a
climate that we described onthis interview.
That is leaving very littleroom for both of them frankly,
both the New Democrats and theBloc a few months ago in part
(45:19):
because even Quebecers,francophone Quebecers, who would
probably be the last to fly theCanadian flag rally, are
joining in.
They're just as anxious andworried and upset and angry at
Donald Trump as Canadians inother parts of the country, and
so that Quebec nationalistfervor is no longer as strong, I
(45:40):
think, as it was.
Even Leger, another pollingfirm, showed that a few days
after Trump's first tariffthreat, support for independence
in Quebec dropped 10 points,literally in like three days.
So the bloc is going to have ahard time, but the NDP in
particular, I think, is going tobe challenged, even though you
would normally look at thisscenario and say, wow, former
central banker, former Goldmansachs executive, this should be
(46:03):
prime ndp time to go after theliberals.
The liberals are moving kind ofto the right and that should
create space for the ndp.
The problem is, when we're in akind of crisis mentality, it has
a tendency of making it abinary choice, and I and I you
know, for anyone who's listening, who is at all interested in UK
politics in the 2017 generalelection in the UK, in England,
(46:28):
after the Brexit vote, you sawan increase in the share of the
two largest parties.
The third, fourth, fifthparties saw their vote drop as
the choice became likepro-Brexit party, anti-brexit
party, right, and so I think theNDP is going to have a really
hard time navigating that.
You know, jagmeet Singh, I canjust visualize sort of in the
(46:49):
back being like hey guys, whatabout me?
What about me?
Because there's going to besuch a sharp choice between
Polyev and Carney that wheredoes Singh fit into all of that?
Aaron Pete (47:00):
Right?
Is nationalism good for us,this movement towards
nationalism?
David Coletto (47:08):
It's more of a question, I think, for
economists, I think from apublic opinion perspective, it
can be, as long as it's apositive nationalism.
I think we've seen versions ofa negative one.
I think we've seen versions ofa negative one.
You can look at some countriesin Europe and even Donald
Trump's version of nationalism Idon't think is a positive thing
(47:28):
.
It's one that basically sayslike we're better than everybody
else and let's just beat oneverybody else, as opposed to
we're better than everybody elseand let's guide them to a
better place, which was like theold American exceptionalism.
We now have a new version whichwas like the old American
exceptionalism.
We now have a new version whichis like bully exceptionalism.
But in the Canadian context, Ithink it is a good thing right
(47:51):
now.
I think the public psyche aroundour own country has been kind
of down for the last number ofyears, that we weren't as proud
to be Canadians.
There were lots of reasons thatwe could point to that.
People said, oh, you know, oureconomy's not as strong or you
know, and a lot of politicalleaders were helping fuel that
(48:13):
kind of negativity towards ourcountry.
But I think in this moment, allbeing said, I think nationalism
is good.
I think it's bad when itprevents us from seeing beyond
our own borders and recognizingand I think Canada has always
been a place where we know wearen't the biggest, we know we
aren't the strongest, but wecan't really bully people and
(48:40):
tell them what to do, and soI've found myself more often
these days, you know, inmeetings putting a Canadian flag
on my lapel, or walk down theneighborhood and see Canadian
flags out on houses that youwould only see on Canada Day.
They're out there now.
Don't think that's a bad thing.
I think it's increasing ourmood.
And last point, I'll make itjust from a data perspective
(49:15):
Increasing our mood.
And last point, I'll make itjust from a data perspective For
basically two years, barely aquarter of Canadians felt that
their country was headed in theright direction.
This was like we were in a funk.
We were in this us and we'reseeing that country in the right
direction number starting to goup and moving pretty quickly,
and so that's giving me someoptimism that this is all not a
bad thing to happen right now.
Aaron Pete (49:33):
Oh, he almost stole my last question.
David, you've been able towatch the ebbs and flows of our
country in a really deep way asa First Nations councillor.
I've done a lot of surveys.
We're doing a comprehensivecommunity plan right now and
it's been very humbling to beable to see the statistics still
.
Speak with people and get thoseanecdotal stories, but really
see the vibes and what actuallypeople think on issues and get
(49:57):
113 responses out of 650 andstart to get a gauge on what the
community actually wants andwhere we're going and those ebbs
and flows of good times 2008not being a good time and the
positive Is there any hope youcan leave people with as we look
at the negativity and all ofthis uncertainty?
How do we keep that hope?
David Coletto (50:17):
Well, look, I think you know one of the most
fascinating periods of my lifewas was doing research around
COVID, right, and if youremember that, we try to forget
that moment, but it was a scarymoment for everybody.
Um, but in that scary moment, Ithink we found, uh, we changed
some of the values that we had,we changed the way we did things
(50:39):
and, I think, in a lot of ways,for the better.
There's still a lot of pain andsuffering and harm done by by
that event, but it left us in adifferent place and, in some
ways, I think, better ways thatwe haven't been challenged
(51:05):
before.
I think I see it in the data.
I see a renewed interest in us,you know, being entrepreneurial
and being builders and makersof things.
Again, we see us looking beyondNorth America and saying, well,
there's a bigger world outthere.
Right, like, let's engage withAsia and Europe.
And you know, we released asurvey earlier this week that
showed like more people thinkit's a good idea to join the EU
(51:25):
than not.
Right, that may never happenand probably not a good idea,
given the bureaucracy of thatarrangement, but that's not the
point.
The point is we're now beingforced to look beyond that
North-South relationship whichis, I think, always going to be
important when Donald Trumpeventually leaves the US will
never not be our most importantpartner.
(51:45):
But I think, I hope that youknow by saying I'm not going to
travel to the United States thisyear, I'm going to go to Mexico
, or I'm going to go to SouthAmerica, I'm going to go to Asia
.
That's going to expose peopleto new ideas and new
opportunities.
So that's the optimism I have.
I'm a glass half full kind ofguy all the time and so, as
(52:11):
anxious inducing as this worldis at this moment, I'm always
mindful of that.
Thomas, I think Pinker book,you know, enlightenment, now
that I am someone who stillbelieves I would rather be born
today than I would have.
Sorry, steven.
Aaron Pete (52:21):
Pinker.
David Coletto (52:21):
Thank you.
I would rather be born todaythan at any point previously,
and unfortunately most peoplearen't there, but I'm going to
be the one who keeps tellingthem and reminding them that
there's a lot better reason tobe alive today than, you know,
1950 for a whole bunch of people.
Aaron Pete (52:39):
Mr Coletto, it has been an honor to speak with you.
Very rare that I get to speakwith someone who's reached what
I would call self-actualizationin that Maslow's hierarchy of
needs, because you bring acalmness to these really
complicated issues.
Of course you have a pulse onwhat's going on.
There's something very calmingabout how you're delivering the
(53:00):
information that I really,really appreciate, because these
are very intimidating, scarytimes for so many people trying
to figure out how they're goingto run their business under this
and how the federal governmentis going to play a role and all
of these never-ending questions.
But your ability to share thisinformation and tell us where
other Canadians are at, I think,really helps bring the
(53:20):
temperature down in the room andI'm just honored to share this
time with you.
David Coletto (53:25):
I appreciate that , aaron, and thanks so much for
having me on your show.
Popular Podcasts
Cold Case Files: Miami
Joyce Sapp, 76; Bryan Herrera, 16; and Laurance Webb, 32—three Miami residents whose lives were stolen in brutal, unsolved homicides. Cold Case Files: Miami follows award‑winning radio host and City of Miami Police reserve officer Enrique Santos as he partners with the department’s Cold Case Homicide Unit, determined family members, and the advocates who spend their lives fighting for justice for the victims who can no longer fight for themselves.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.