The Hamilton Spectator: The Liberal party’s old habit of blaming voters instead of listening to them must end

Original Publications: The Hamilton Spectator

April 22, 2025

By Dr Yaser Haddara, Chair of the board of CMPAC, The Hamilton Spectator

In 2015, Justin Trudeau led the Liberals from third place to a majority government. But barely a year into his mandate, he broke one of his signature promises — electoral reform.

This kind of hubris has long been the blind spot of the Liberal party — a deep-seated belief that Canada’s natural political order is Liberal rule. When voters turn against them, the instinct is not reflection — but blame. The message becomes: You’ll regret this.

We’ve seen shades of this attitude elsewhere.

In 2016, Hillary Clinton famously dismissed millions of Americans supporting her opponent as a “basket of deplorables.” She lost that election. Kamala Harris, when confronted by pro-Palestinian protesters, responded, “If you want Donald Trump to win, then say that.” It’s a lazy playbook: Demand support by warning that the alternative is worse.

And in Canada, the reflex to belittle rather than listen, has surfaced time and again.

On the carbon tax, Liberal ministers have often dismissed rural and working-class concerns, suggesting critics “don’t understand how it works” or are “misinformed.”

Even some Liberal MPs admit voters are tired of being talked down to. One MP recently acknowledged many people are simply “sick and tired of being preached to.”

Already in this federal election, there are signs that this mindset is creeping into the Carney campaign. With polls tightening, every vote must be earned — not assumed.

Pierre Poilievre has all but written off Canadian Muslims. Mark Carney may be more polished, but his campaign appears equally reluctant to engage in meaningful dialogue.

Yet Canadian Muslims are no different from any other voters. We care deeply about affordability, housing, health care, and Canada’s role in an increasingly unstable world. We want a government that advances reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, takes decisive action on the climate crisis, will confront rising Islamophobia, is prepared to challenge discriminatory laws like Bill 21 in Quebec, and upholds human rights — whether in Ukraine, Sudan or Gaza.

On Gaza specifically, our concerns are not isolated. They reflect the convictions of millions of Canadians, including many Liberal supporters. Polling commissioned by the National Council of Canadian Muslims shows that a clear majority of Canadians — across provinces and party lines — are deeply troubled by the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. They want action, not platitudes.

That means suspending arms exports to Israel and supporting international accountability — including the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant.

These are not fringe demands. Seven in 10 Liberal voters support Canada recognizing the ICC’s arrest warrant. And yet, despite courageous voices within the Liberal caucus, the instincts of the Carney campaign appear to lean toward dismissal and deflection.

At a recent rally, when asked, “What about the children in Gaza?” Carney responded not with empathy — but with sarcasm. “Very clever,” he repeated, again and again.

To be clear, the Muslim community has not rejected the Liberal party. In fact, we’ve chosen to support courageous Liberal candidates — those who are listening, engaging and committing to action. That there are such voices stands in contrast to the whipped, lockstep approach of past leadership — and of the current Conservative Party.

It’s a promising development.

The question for Carney is this: If he wins, will those independent voices within the Liberal caucus shape the ethos of his government? Or will they be sidelined?

If Carney and the Liberals choose to ignore or belittle voters’ legitimate concerns — especially on matters of life and death — and to marginalize the courageous voices within their own ranks, they risk alienating voters in the same way Democrats in the U.S. did. They may very well lose this election.

And if that happens, turning around to blame the voters would be — to borrow a phrase — not very clever.