We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
President Joe Biden speaks as he announces a new plan for federal student loan relief during a visit to Madison Area Technical College Truax Campus, in Madison, Wisconsin, on April 8, 2024.
The battle for Gen Z
With President Joe Biden and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau facing upcoming elections, the battle is on to capture young voters. Biden will face former President Donald Trump next November, and the next Canadian election is due by the fall of 2025, but both contests are already underway. Younger folks in both countries are turning increasingly sour on the status quo as they face affordability challenges and feel left behind.
Trudeau has expressly said his government was focusing on Gen Z and millennials, “restoring fairness for them.” And on Tuesday, his government unveiled its “Gen Z budget,” going all in on measures for parents with younger children (new cash for childcare and a school food program), students (interest-free student loans), and housing policy aimed at opening space in the market for younger buyers who’ve been shut out in recent years (with a first-time buyer, 30-year mortgage amortization period and tax breaks for home purchases).
In the US, young voters are focused on affordability, abortion rights, the environment, and student debt, and Democrats will need those folks to turn out on Election Day if they hope to retain the White House and make gains in Congress. Those 43 and under are frustrated with the housing market. Democrats are working to get on abortion rights on the ballot in key states, and the Biden administration is touting the impact of its Inflation Reduction Act on the environment. The president also hopes efforts to eliminate student debt will help alleviate some cost-of-living concerns for young voters.
But Biden is also facing a backlash from Gen Z voters over Gaza and US funding for Israel. The president had hoped tougher talk on Israel would boost his reelection bid, but that’s been complicated by Iran’s attack – although the administration has told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that it won’t support reprisals against Iran.
Both Biden and Trudeau need younger voters to turn out to vote for them. In 2016, Biden dominated the Millennial and Gen Z vote by about 20 points over Trump. And while Canada’s Liberals managed a minority government in 2021 with a youth vote that was likely a near-split with the Conservatives, younger voters played a crucial role in Trudeau’s 2015 majority government victory.
This means the coming months will see increasing efforts focused on wooing younger generations.
Biden and Trudeau: A political eclipse?
Why are Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau getting so badly eclipsed by the great totality of critics? Can good policies seize back the agenda of a lagging campaign?
President Biden is busy touting his positive economic record but is baffled when it gets eclipsed by issues like his age. He rightly touts creating 300,000 new jobs in March and dropping the unemployment rate to 3.8%, but the headlines still say he looks like a guy who might as well have watched a solar eclipse alongside Moses.
Want to brag about the bullish stock market? Biden could, but that’s overshadowed by news this week about stubbornly high prices on gas, rent, and groceries. Want to shed some light on an economic recovery? Nice try. Word that the Fed may delay rate cuts clouds it over. How about projecting US strength in the world and containing a wider war with Iran, which the US has been doing? That’s undermined by the Hamas-Israel war and the casualties in Gaza that the US appears to have little influence over.
Meanwhile, every day Donald Trump does something so astronomically weird – selling golden shoes or hawking mash-up Constitution-Bibles – that all political telescopes end up turning his way first. So all that good economic result and that big fundraising advantage, so far, has not done much for Biden.
In Canada, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is also having trouble staying unblocked. After eight long years in office, you now need to consult with Stephen Hawking on black holes to figure out if any light can escape from the event horizon of the Liberal campaign. This morning,Abacus Data released a poll showing the Conservative Party is 20 points ahead of the Liberals, the highest ever.
That kind of polling eulogy is why Mr. Trudeau is hemorrhaging leaks about his upcoming April 16 federal budget in order to recapture the penumbra of popularity he had when he was first elected. Can these new shiny programs do the trick?
- On April 1 came the CA$1 billion national school food program to ensure over 400,000 kids get school meals annually over the next five years.
- Then came the new national defense policy, “Our North, Strong and Free,” which focuses on Arctic and cyber security, increasing spending by CA$8.1 billion over the next five years, which will push Canada’s spending up to 1.76% of GDP. It’s not quite at the NATO prenup agreement of 2%, but closer.
- There is another CA$1.5 billion for a new Canada Rental Protection Fund to spur more affordable housing and rental units and then, boom, another $600 million in loans and funds to help new owners and renters.
- Oh yes, and CA$2.4 billion for the AI industry to make sure Canada doesn’t take the Large Language Model hit on the chin.
Has it worked? Have the giant budget leaks reframed the Trudeau government’s political fortunes? And more broadly for any government, can new ideas actually change political fortunes?
So far, the evidence is scant. The Abacus poll actually asked the question, “do budgets move votes?” and used the national school food program as a case study. Turns out, most folks didn’t even know about it yet. “Less than half of Canadians were aware of the program announcement” and worse, “parents with kids aged 3 to 14 years of age were actually less likely to be aware of the announcement (41%) than everyone else.”
What does that tell us? That no one is listening to Trudeau – that he’s being tuned out? Or is it more that the media is so fragmented that it takes more time to sell programs these days? Or, maybe that program got drowned out by the other four or five other announcements that spilled out.
Instead of selling voters on one big, new idea to frame the election, Trudeau has set out a smorgasbord of bureaucratic bonanzas with no central theme. Restaurants that serve buffets rarely get Michelin stars.
But here is where the political eclipse gets really weird: The programs being pitched by the Liberal leader … are extremely popular, even with people who oppose Trudeau.
“68% of current Conservative supporters think [the national school food program] is a good or acceptable idea,” according to the Abacus poll. And even stranger, “2 in 3 of those who have a very negative impression of Justin Trudeau think it's a good idea.”
That means even if you have ideas people really like, sometimes it will not change voter intention. “It is like the Prime Minister is a shepherd with no flock,” Abacus CEO David Coletto told me. Biden has the same issue. Even though the economic numbers are good, the narrative frame of negativity is hard to shatter.
That doesn’t mean that opposition leaders – Pierre Poilievre or Donald Trump – have a lock on winning. There is lots of time ahead, and campaigns matter. Trump will have to do more than be a vindictive doomsayer campaigning as the Count of Counterfactuals (“none of these terrible events would have happened if I were President!!!,”he says of inflation and the war in Ukraine, claims which are, of course unprovable), and Poilievre might have to get off Mean Street and move to Main Street. But at least people are listening to them.
Politicians think if people look directly at their records, they will see something truly beautiful. But it turns out that direct scrutiny often blinds the electorate to their message, and voters either turn away or grab a set of glasses the opposition conveniently gives them in order to change their view.
And that’s why a political eclipse is so fascinating: When even the best policies, the ones people really like, no longer illuminate the way, it’s hard to know which way to look.
– Evan Solomon, Publisher
Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau visits the offices of artificial intelligence tech company ScaleAI in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, on April 7, 2024.
Canada and US take steps on AI safety
Most of the money will be for investments in computing infrastructure, but $50 million is to establish a Canadian AI Safety Institute to protect against “advanced or nefarious AI systems.” Trudeau predicted the money would help spur investment in the industry — an old-fashioned industrial policy aimed at keeping Canada from falling behind in the international race to develop the technology — but the government will also spend $200 million encouraging sectors to adopt technologies.
The recently announced US policy will require federal agencies to “assess, test, and monitor” the impact of AI, “mitigate the risks of algorithmic discrimination,” and provide “transparency into how the government uses AI.”
Unlike the United States, Canada is moving ahead with legislation that will update privacy laws and require businesses to ensure the “safety and fairness of high-impact AI systems.”
Both governments are trying to develop the technology while taking steps to make sure that potential dangers are understood and prevented. AI pioneers and researchers are warning that AI poses a wide variety of little-understood risks, ranging from impoverishing musicians to human extinction.
Houses are seen under construction in a neighbourhood of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Betting big on housing
Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government is going all-in on housing. The government has been rolling out announcements ahead of the official budget drop on April 16, a departure from the tradition of politicos trying to keep a tight lid on plans.
This week, as the country grapples with a housing affordability crisis, the government announced CA$6 billion in funding for home building and municipal infrastructure. But a few provinces, including Alberta and Ontario, pushed back, complaining about the strings attached to some of the cash, which would require provincial governments to permit builders to put up fourplexes without needing special approval.
Alberta is complaining the feds want to “nationalize” housing, which is a provincial constitutional responsibility, but a policy area in which the national government has been involved for decades.
On Thursday, Trudeau announced another $1.5 billion to protect and extend affordable rental stock, which is desperately needed in a country, where the average one-bedroom apartment goes for nearly $2,200 a month.
Stateside, the General Accounting Office said last year that the country was facing a shortage of affordable housing that’s been a growing supply since the early 2000s – and a broader supply shortage that isn’t helping matters.The average rent in the US is now just under $2,100 a month. But Congressional fights over funding have led to limited cash for making affordable housing more prevalent.
Smooth sailing for LNG amid Biden’s pause, Trudeau’s hesitation, and Johnson’s political gamble?
If you thought America’s liquefied natural gas policy had nothing to do with Russia’s war in Ukraine, think again. LNG is all over the news right now, thanks to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) cooking up a plan to link the issues.
Meanwhile, north of the border, Canada is having its own LNG squabbles as the future of the multibillion-dollar industry is being debated. Tensions between the federal government, which is increasingly weary of fossil fuel mega-projects, and provincial governments keen on resource revenue, are shaping the debate.
And so are considerations about what’s happening down south. In January, the Biden administration suspended pending approvals of LNG exports to countries with which it doesn’t have a free trade agreement. It’s waiting on the Department of Energy to sort out what these exports mean in terms of costs to US consumers and climate impact. The pause came in no small part thanks to the efforts of climate change activists.
Observers suspect Trudeau can’t get too far from Biden on the issue, and cross-border climate activists used Biden’s more aggressive climate policies to try to box in Trudeau. In January, Biden’s LNG pause put Canada’s LNG export policy in the spotlight, pressuring the country to enact its own moratorium (which it hasn’t done) – especially if it hopes to meet its 2030 climate goals. Also, the LNG market is only so big and may be headed for a glut, so US projects or exports – or a lack thereof – shape Canadian calculations.
When the US suspended new LNG approvals in January, President Joe Biden was quick to point out that the pause wouldn’t affect existing exports to US allies in the “near term.” But in the long-term? A lot depends on the global market, geopolitical considerations, and domestic politics, including climate activist pressure on Biden – who faces a reelection battle in November.
Biden was nonetheless keen in January to make everyone aware the US remains the top LNG exporter and that the energy source wasn’t going to stop flowing overnight. In fact, the administration expects export capacity to more thandouble by 2028, and last year the country’s LNG project approvals were record-setting.
The trade authorization review is important because it calls into question how viable LNG projects and exports will be long term in a world in which climate policies are moving away from fossil fuels, which are facing increasing competition from renewables. But it may also be up for negotiation.
Biden wants desperately to get an aid bill through Congress to fund Ukraine’s defense efforts against Russia. The Senate has passed a bill, but it’s stalled in the House, where Johnson has held it up.
Facing pressure from his own party, who oppose the Ukraine aid package, Johnson – who is also fighting to retain his gavel – has dreamed up a trade that involves putting the aid bill to a vote and backing it in exchange for Biden reopening the LNG taps. Trouble is, that may not be enough for GOP hardliners, or at least not enough of them to get the thing passed, which would compromise not only the Ukraine aid deal but Johnson’s speakership and political career.
The plan wasn’t initially warmly embraced, particularly among the right-wing GOPers more focused on border policy than LNG. On the other side of the aisle, Democrats weren’t super enthusiastic about it either, and climate change activists and politicians are pressuring Biden to reject the deal. On Tuesday, Reuters reported that White House sources said the administration was open to the deal, pending a look at the full plan, but a White House spokesperson said the report was untrue and that President Joe Biden stands behind the pause. All of this back-and-forth and crossed wires suggests Johnson’s deal might be more of an opening bid than a final one.
Noah Daponte-Smith, a US analyst at Eurasia Group, says this is merely “the negotiating stage,” noting that whether the Ukraine package gets through Congress is another matter. Johnson is trapped between his own party and Democrats, both of whom he needs if the Ukraine bill has any chance of passing.
The Democrats want a clean bill – with no extra measures – which means they aren’t interested in LNG additions. Even Johnson isn’t “enormously committed” to LNG, according to Daponte-Smith, but the speaker is running out of options.
“I think he wants to hold on to the gavel and this is something convenient he can put forward to the Republican caucus,” he says.
The border deal is a non-starter for the Ukraine package, Daponte-Smithe says, given that former President Donald Trump has declared it dead.
And it’s not just the US squabbling over LNG.
Last week, Canadian Energy and Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkison said the Liberal government wasn’t interested in funding future LNG projects. Beyond what’s already in the works, no more LNG projects will open in Canada unless the private sector is willing to go it alone. As of December, there were eight LNG projects in development worth over CA$100 billion, which includes the LNG Canada project, which Ottawa sank CA$275 million of public money into back in 2019, calling the project an investment “up to $40 billion” that “will lead to 10,000 middle-class jobs.” How times have changed.
Ottawa is turning its back despite Greece recently expressing interest in buying LNG from Canada – as have Japan and Germany. A few years ago, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau wasn’t convinced of the upsides to shipping LNG to Europe, and Wilkinson’s latest comments suggest the PM hasn’t changed his mind. Of course, just because there’s demand for Canadian LNG today doesn’t mean there will be tomorrow, and the IEA expects slower demand growth in the years to come.
LNG opponents suggest the future for the energy source is dim and are calling for Canada not to see any US slowdown on LNG as an opportunity to fill the gap. Since nuclear starts and restarts are on the rise in Asia, and renewables projects are soaring globally, the world faces a potential oversupply of gas.
Neither the US nor Canada are going to fully halt export and development anytime soon. But the fact that the Biden administration and Trudeau government are even the slightest bit weary of LNG projects is a major development in energy and climate policy.
US President Joe Biden attends a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit to Israel last October.
Biden’s criticism of Israel overshadowed by military aid
Trudeau called the deaths “unacceptable” and said the “world needs very clear answers as to how this happened.” Canada is calling for a full investigation into the incident, and its top diplomat, Mélanie Joly, says Israel needs to respect international law.
"This conflict has been one of the worst in recent memory in terms of how many aid workers have been killed," Biden said. "This is a major reason why distributing humanitarian aid in Gaza has been so difficult — because Israel has not done enough to protect aid workers trying to deliver desperately needed help to civilians.”
These words marked some of the harshest criticism of Israel from Biden since the Hamas attacks on Oct. 7. But even as Biden urges Israel to do more to protect civilians, his administration continues to supply the Jewish State with arms.
Even as tensions grew between the White House and Netanyahu over his plans to invade Rafah, the Biden administration authorized the transfer of thousands of bombs to Israel last month – including 1,800 MK84 2,000-pound bombs – as well as 25 F-35A fighter jets and engines. The administration is now urging Congress to approve the sale of $18 billion worth of F-15 fighter jets to Israel.
Biden’s balancing act. There’s a disconnect between Biden’s increasingly sharp criticism of Israel and his resistance to calls for changes in US policy toward the Jewish State. A number of prominent Democrats are urging the US to condition military aid to Israel, as words have not been enough to shift Netanyahu’s approach to Gaza so far. But Biden is seemingly reluctant to embrace drastic shifts in policy, even as he faces criticism from progressives, likely because he wants to avoid angering pro-Israel voters and lawmakers. He’s also been a strong supporter of Israel throughout his long career in Washington, and the US-Israel relationship is likely to remain robust long after the Gaza war end.
Still, Biden’s rhetorical rebuke of Israel may not be enough to appease voters critical of ongoing US military assistance, and recent Gallup polling shows that a majority of Americans (55%) now disapprove of Israeli military actions in the enclave.
Canada's Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre speaks during a Question Period in the House of Commons on Feb. 14, 2024.
Poilievre tries to bring down the government
It’s political stunt season in Ottawa. It may be a long one, too, as the country counts down the days to the next federal election, due by fall 2025. On Wednesday, Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre issued a no-confidence motion over the government’s planned carbon tax increase.
The motion is expected to fail – it never stood a chance. The debate began this afternoon, but the Liberals aren't going to torpedo their own government, and their New Democratic Party partners aren’t keen to send voters to the polls. But the motion isn't about inducing an election; it's about preparing for one.
Poilievre is trying to frame the next election as a contest about affordability. He’s painting the Liberals and New Democrats as big government tax-and-spend robbers reaching deep into the pockets of a tapped-out population that simply can’t stand another (modest) tax increase. He’s even calling it “a carbon tax election.”
The carbon levy is set to rise 23%, which accounts for roughly 3 cents more per liter at the pumps. Poilievre will hammer this message in the months to come and won’t let voters forget who voted to keep the government afloat whenever they do head to the polls.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken arrives in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on March 20, 2024, for renewed cease-fire talks.
Are Canada and the US losing patience with Israel?
Canada is halting future arms sales to Israel as the Trudeau government continues to raise concerns about the Jewish State’s war against Hamas in Gaza. That announcement came Tuesday after the House of Commons passed a nonbinding motion calling for the government to work toward a two-state solution, to halt military exports to Israel, and to demand a cease-fire. It also called on Hamas to release the hostages.
In 2022, Canada sent about $21 million in military support to Israel – making the country a top destination for Canadian arms exports. Apart from the loss of equipment, there's also the symbolic cost of the ban: Canada counts itself among countries, including Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Japan, that have stopped shipments to Israel.
The motion was supported by the vast majority of Liberals along with MPs from the New Democratic Party, Green Party, and Bloc Quebecois. Canada also recently put a temporary halt on non-lethal military exports to Israel.
The Netanyahu government says it will stay the course, and its top diplomat issued sharp criticism of Ottawa’s recent move.
But even Israel’s top ally, the US, appears increasingly fed up. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is heading back to the region to work toward a cease-fire, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has called for new Israeli elections, and President Joe Biden is reportedly mulling possible conditions on military aid to the country.
On Wednesday, Blinken announced that the US submitted a draft resolution to the UN Security Council calling for an “immediate cease-fire” in Gaza in conjunction with the release of hostages. This represents a significant shift in Washington’s stance on the war, signaling that while it continues to support Israel — it wants to see a truce ASAP. Before this, the US repeatedly vetoed resolutions calling for a cease-fire in Gaza — and opposed the use of the term “immediate” in a draft resolution submitted by Algeria last month. No vote has been scheduled on the new resolution yet.