Sharan Kaur is a partner at Sovereign Advisory, and former deputy chief of staff to Canada’s former minister of finance, Bill Morneau.

Andrew MacDougall is a director at Trafalgar Strategy, a U.K.-based consultancy. He is also a former director of communications to former prime minister Stephen Harper.

Here is what they had to say:

Mark Carney, Liberal Party

What is their message out of the gate?

“In the early days of the campaign, Mark Carney and the Liberals are trying to do four things at once: (1) introduce Carney to Canadians; (2) persuade Canadians that Carney is the man for these dangerous times; (3) run away from Justin Trudeau’s policy and legacy; and 4) slate Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre.

Carney spent his first few days as prime minister addressing the worst of Trudeau’s tattered legacy. The rest will be harder. Past leaders, such as Paul Martin and Jean Chrétien, were seasoned pros before becoming PM. Carney, despite his impressive CV, is a blank page. Hence his borrowing Mike Myers’s credibility.” —Andrew MacDougall

“Out of the gate, Carney pulled the rug out from under Poilievre by copying his top campaign promises. Prime Minister Mark Carney cut the consumer carbon tax, rolled back the capital gains tax reforms and is taking the GST off the purchase of homes under $1 million.” —Jen Hassum

“Mark Carney and the Liberal party have articulated a clear message: policies must evolve as Canada faces a pivotal moment in its history. With President Trump threatening tariffs and annexation, serious leadership is essential. Based on recent polling, many Canadians appear to believe Carney is the right choice for managing Canada-U.S. relations. He has shunned the catchy one-liners and political theatrics of Pierre Poilievre. Carney seems to be looking to reposition the Liberal Party towards the centre, prioritizing Canadians’ needs while emphasizing a robust economic agenda.” —Sharan Kaur

What advantages do they have?

“The Liberals’ main advantage is in what they no longer have: Trudeau. For the past 10-plus years, he was the Liberal party. Now, he’s cruising through Canadian Tire on his way to occupying the lowest reputational rung of former prime ministers. The fact that Liberal polling figures began to recover the second Trudeau left office is a sign of how unhappy most people were with his performance.

This would normally be a problem, but Carney’s CV and experience of political turmoil — be it the global financial crisis, the Scottish referendum or Brexit — should be enough to simultaneously fill the Trudeau void and turn the page on his tenure.” —Andrew MacDougall

“Mark Carney is a brand new leader for the Liberals, and seems to be perceived as separate from Trudeau. The Liberals’ polling numbers have spiked since Trudeau resigned and Trump started threatening the country — though that was before Carney was selected and before Canadians got to know him. In a time of economic uncertainty, he is being branded as Canada’s homegrown international banker who has returned to save Canada. Carney’s leadership race and federal election campaign will likely use billionaire business moguls such as Michael Bloomberg and American and Canadian movie stars (like Mike Myers) to make the case that he is the right person for this moment.” —Jen Hassum

“The Liberals have several advantages in this election, notably with new leader Mark Carney, who has extolled his extensive experience and a deep understanding of the economy. Amid the “Trump effect,” and the vitriol directed at Canada by President Trump, Canadians have united in demanding strong leadership. If Carney can embody the desire for strength and expertise, it will make the Liberal party an appealing choice. Furthermore, amid lukewarm sentiment towards Poilievre and frustration with Trudeau, Carney emerges as a refreshing option.” —Sharan Kaur

What is their vulnerability?

“The main vulnerability for Carney and the Liberals is the sad state of the Canadian economy. Yes, the U.S. is weighing on it now, but it was already at a low ebb when Trump 2.0 entered the Oval Office. Canada’s growth is anemic, and its immigration system is a mess. It has fallen way behind on the construction of major infrastructure and the provisioning of new homes. That is the Liberals’ fault.

What’s more, the decisions and philosophies that brought Canada to its proverbial knees are things Carney supported — literally until last week. Ordinary people might remember this and look upon it unkindly.” —Andrew MacDougall

“Liberals enacting Conservative policies might not play well with progressives, who value solutions to climate change and tax fairness. That he’s aligned more with Poilievre on these issues, rather charting his own path, might disappoint Canadians who have initially rallied behind him before they got to know him.

Carney also has a habit of leaning too far into his experience as the chair of a U.S.-headquartered asset management corporation or bank governor, which might not play well with blue-collar voters who may view this resume as a red flag. Carney also needs to think before making any off-the-cuff quips to ensure he doesn’t accidentally sound smug or out-of-touch — like recommending Canadians cut Disney Plus subscriptions.” —Jen Hassum

“Mark Carney’s vulnerability lies in the need to distance himself from Trudeau and the former prime minister’s policies. As he finds his footing in the political landscape, the pressure of a quick election cycle opens the door to potential missteps. Rapid campaigning can lead to misunderstandings or missed opportunities. As a rookie politician, Carney also has a tendency to misspeak; responding with grace is crucial. The Liberals must keep their focus on Canadians, emphasizing what’s at stake with the ongoing threats of annexation and tariffs while solidifying Carney’s image as a sincere, competent leader.” —Sharan Kaur

Jagmeet Singh, NDP

What is their message out of the gate?

“Jagmeet Singh and the NDP are trying to reorient the focus back to regular people and ask: who will defend you against rising prices and Trump’s tariffs? All Canadians are ready to stand up to Donald Trump; Singh is trying to distinguish himself early on with his campaign speeches and ads hitting on domestic issues like cost-of-living, housing, health care.” —Jen Hassum

“Honestly, what is the point of today’s NDP — not to mention Jagmeet Singh? The party should have spent the past four years peeling off the Liberals’ disaffected left-wing support. A leader like Ed Broadbent or Jack Layton would have made hay with the past 15 years of economic policy and its impact on the working class.

Instead, the slow-off-the-mark NDP campaign is all imprecise talk about being on people’s “side” and fighting for “you” over the “billionaires.” Without better-defined policy, the NDP could soon be fighting to save their furniture.” —Andrew MacDougall

“Jagmeet Singh and the NDP have struggled to convey a compelling message. Singh’s approach often feels slow and unsteady, giving the impression of grasping at straws rather than addressing the electorate’s pressing concerns. His recent focus on disparaging Mark Carney’s private sector success detracts from presenting substantive alternatives. With plummeting poll numbers and an inability to position himself as a viable contender against threats like Donald Trump, Singh has repeatedly fallen short of resonating with Canadians. While the Liberal party has adapted to centre politics, the NDP appears mired in outdated vibes and memes, diminishing their authenticity.” —Sharan Kaur

What advantages do they have?

“Jagmeet Singh may face challenges this election cycle, but he benefits from the NDP’s strong grassroots campaigns. While the party might appear sidelined, local candidates often thrive, tapping into community support that can lead to unexpected successes. Singh also enjoys the loyalty of ideological NDP voters who consistently back their party, ensuring a steady base despite broader political shifts. However, while this advantage does not necessarily translate into more seats, it does provide consistency in voting among their ideological base, lending some stability to the NDP’s position in an uncertain electoral landscape.” —Sharan Kaur

“The short writ period works to the NDP’s advantage. Nobody, not even Singh, expects the party to do well. Broke and demoralized, the NDP has at least been given the shortest possible period during which to avoid messing things up further. It’s the best thing the party could have hoped for.

To be charitable, there are early signs that Carney is not the most likeable of fellows. And Poilievre is famously unlikeable. Can Singh capitalize on not being either of them? Perhaps — but that presumes Canadians are in the market for likability right now, when it’s more likely they’re looking for a jerk with a plan.” —Andrew MacDougall

“In an election that is purely a leadership question, Singh is the only leader who is naming and shaming Canada’s current villains: Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and their billionaire friends.

Of the leaders, Singh is the only one with a track record of pushing for historic policy changes like dental care and pharmacare (hence the slogan “in it for you.”) The NDP is known for their ground game and I expect the NDP to once again defy pollsters by defending their existing seats and picking up new ones.” —Jen Hassum

What is their vulnerability?

“The good news is Canadians know that Singh won concessions on dental care and pharmacare. The bad news is that voters also remember the policy changes were enacted via a Supply and Confidence agreement with Justin Trudeau’s government. Over the course of many years, Conservatives have chipped away at Singh’s image, and this has inevitably softened NDP support. But to the chagrin of Conservatives, these former NDP voters aren’t leaning toward Poilievre but are now considering Mark Carney.” —Jen Hassum

“Jagmeet Singh faces significant vulnerabilities as leader of the NDP, particularly since Justin Trudeau’s departure has diminished his political relevance. He struggles to present himself as a serious contender against formidable opponents like Donald Trump, which undermines his appeal to a broader electorate. Moreover, Singh’s tenure has not yielded major gains for the NDP, raising questions about his effectiveness as a leader. Additionally, his approach often alienates the business community, potentially limiting support from moderate voters. These factors combine to create an image of vulnerability that hinders his ability to position the NDP as a viable alternative in the current political landscape.” —Sharan Kaur

“The problem for the NDP is that their entire body is one big Achilles heel. The party and its leader are so weak that Trudeau made them look like supplicants for the better part of four years — and no amount of talk about dental care will make that have been worthwhile.

As well, the causes of the progressive left have angered a lot of voters over the past five or six years. It doesn’t matter that Trump is everything the NDP stands against, because voters won’t pick a party on its knees whose leader couldn’t even stand up to Trudeau, much less Trump.” —Andrew MacDougall

Pierre Poilievre, Conservative Party

What is their message out of the gate?

“The Conservatives’ message for this campaign was meant to be “We’re not Trudeau.” But with that angle gone, we’re already seeing early forays into Poilievre’s family backstory, along with a hefty policy plank in the form of a “family” tax cut.

The broader Conservative message is that it was the Liberals who drove Canada into the ditch, and so it cannot be the Liberals who are entrusted with pulling us out. This will mean positioning Carney as a sort of continuity-Trudeau which, but for the spectre of U.S. President Donald Trump, would be an easy thing to do.” —Andrew MacDougall

“His core message is now unclear. It’s hard for Canadians to grasp what “bring it home” means exactly — an attempt at a Canadian “Make America Great Again”? And at this time when sentiments toward American are at all-time lows? What Poilievre needs right now to right his ship are clear, feel-good messages about Canada that Canadian voters can get behind — and that hopefully bring some clarity and meaning to his latest slogan, “Canada First.”” —Jen Hassum

“Pierre Poilievre’s message has been clear since becoming leader of his party: he first sought to portray Justin Trudeau as unfit, and then later, Mark Carney as part of the same Liberal legacy. Utilizing catchy one-liners and slogans, Poilievre’s strategy has relied on personal attacks to connect with voters. But despite being a very disciplined communicator, he has struggled to engage Canadians with substance, failing to present himself as a statesman. While his approach initially garnered attention, the “Trump effect” has shifted public sentiment; Canadians are increasingly wary of a combative leader.” —Sharan Kaur

What advantages do they have?

“Not having been in government for the last decade, Pierre Poilievre has spent his time as a vocal opposition member, freely criticizing government measures without the responsibility of actual governance. This stance has allowed him to concentrate on political rhetoric, promising change without the need to account for past decisions. Poilievre capitalizes on public frustration with the current government, framing himself as an outsider who can challenge the status quo. This positioning enables him to connect with frustrated voters looking for a fresh voice, allowing him to articulate bold criticisms (while also avoiding the complexities of actually implementing policies).” —Sharan Kaur

“The main advantages for Team Conservative are their resources and organization. Trudeau may be gone, but that’s no guarantee that the Liberals under Carney are ready to fight or even to pull in the same direction. The Conservatives are highly motivated and organized.

They also have the more experienced leader in Poilievre. Yes, he’s a “career politician,” but that comes with its advantages, too. This will be Poilievre’s eighth federal campaign, albeit his first running the show. He will have the stamina to go the distance, as well as the experience to handle unexpected bumps in the road.” —Andrew MacDougall

“Pierre Poilievre’s advantage is the $40 million in fundraising brought in when Conservative their polling numbers were high and his campaign message was clear: opposition to Trudeau, and a commitment to cancel the so-called carbon tax. While the Liberals under Mark Carney have taken the wind out of his policy crusade, Poilievre still has that war chest with which the Conservatives can flood the Canadian media landscape with paid advertising, and remind people why they were disenchanted with the Liberals in the first place.” —Jen Hassum

What is their vulnerability?

“Canadians are overwhelmingly against joining the United States and view MAGA-aligned leaders or celebrities with suspicion. Just look at Wayne Gretzky. Canadians know of Poilievre’s infamous interview with Jordan Peterson, and the fact that Elon Musk has endorsed the Conservatives. Poilievre’s opponents are no doubt going to remind Canadians over and over of his and his team’s alignment with American conservatives. Keep your eyes out for old pictures of Poilievre’s team members wearing MAGA-hats.” —Jen Hassum

“As ever with the Conservatives, tone is their biggest weakness. A bit of insouciance and fire directed at the media and other elites cut one way when Trudeau was at the wheel and Canada was floundering. It cuts another way with Trump gnashing his teeth and looking to grab Canada by the unmentionables.

The distinction between being unapologetically conservative and being a jerk is a fine one, and Poilievre will have to keep on the right side of it. That people such as Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and other elements of the Conservatives’ support are still MAGA-adjacent will hurt.” —Andrew MacDougall

“Pierre Poilievre’s strategy of inciting anger and adopting an aggressive demeanour risks undermining his credibility. This approach has often alienated key stakeholders, including the media and the business community. He is dogged by allegations that he and his inner campaign team are “MAGA” supporters, which creates divisions even among conservatives wary of the implications of aligning with such unpredictable politics. While Poilievre often leans on zingers and catchphrases, this tendency fails to inspire confidence in his leadership. Additionally, his tone, which draws plaudits from the likes of Elon Musk and conservative personality Jordan Peterson, further estranges moderates within his party who value sensible dialogue over divisive rhetoric.” —Sharan Kaur