Liberal Party of Canada Leadership Election Concludes Successfully with Simply Voting's Secure Online System
The election, which concluded on March 9, 2025, saw significant engagement, with 151,899 members securely casting their ranked ballots through Simply Voting's platform, representing nearly 93% of verified members. With 85.9% of the vote, Carney defeated the former finance minister Chrystia Freeland, the former government house leader Karina Gould and the former member of parliament Frank Baylis. He also dominated in all 343 ridings, showing he has Liberal support across the country.
A Secure and Transparent Voting Process
The contest followed a ranked ballot system, ensuring that the winning candidate had broad support across the country rather than just securing the highest number of votes.
"The challenge was complex, requiring the seamless integration of Canada Post's Identity+ service, the Liberal Party's custom voter registration platform and our voting system, ensuring secure, real-time synchronization across all components,' said Brian Lack, President of Simply Voting.
Liberal Party officials praised the seamless experience of using Simply Voting's system. 'Simply Voting was a great partner in this process, their technology worked flawlessly and ensured a secure, fair, and robust Leadership race,' said Azam Ishmael, National Director of the Liberal Party of Canada.
Simply Voting's platform ensured the highest level of election integrity through its robust security features, including strong encryption, anonymous electronic ballots, and instant tabulation of results. The system allowed party members from across the country to participate securely, reinforcing confidence in the democratic process.
About the Liberal Party of Canada
The Liberal Party of Canada is one of the country's major political parties, dedicated to the principles of individual freedom, responsibility, and human dignity within a framework of a just society. Committed to providing equal opportunity for all persons, the party emphasizes the enhancement of Canada's unique and diverse cultural community and the preservation of the Canadian identity in a global society.
For more information about the Liberal Party and their initiatives, please visit www.liberal.ca.
About Simply Voting Inc.
Simply Voting Inc. is a Canada-based company specializing in secure online voting solutions for organizations across various sectors, including local governments, political parties, professional associations, educational institutions, and unions. With a focus on security, simplicity, and reliability, Simply Voting has been trusted to conduct thousands of elections worldwide.
For more information about Simply Voting and its services, please visit www.simplyvoting.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Black America Web
an hour ago
- Black America Web
Brown Kills DEI Programs, Regains $50M In Federal Funding
Source: Anadolu / Getty Since taking office in January, President Trump has wasted no time in weaponizing federal funds to force schools to drop their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. On Wednesday, Brown secured $50 million in frozen federal research grants after becoming the latest university to abandon its DEI programs. According to CNN, the Trump administration agreed to restore research grants from the Department of Health and Human Services, drop an investigation into the school, and allow Brown to be eligible to receive future federal funds. For its part of the deal, Brown agreed to pay out $50 million in grants to Rhode Island-based workforce development programs, adopt the Trump administration's definition of 'male' and 'female,' and not engage in unlawful racial discrimination in admissions or university programming.' Of course, by 'unlawful racial discrimination,' they mean continuing programs dedicated to DEI. Brown agreed to submit data to the federal government to prove they're not engaging in race-based admissions. Brown also agreed to make the school's campus more hospitable for Jewish students, which likely means silencing any criticism of Israel. Education Secretary Linda McMahon praised the deal, saying it's a step towards reversing 'the decades-long woke-capture of our nation's higher education institutions.' You know, I liked McMahon much better when she was poorly selling Stone Cold Stunners and not single-handedly dismantling decades of progress in the American education system. President Trump celebrated the deal in a post on Truth Social. 'Congratulations to Brown University on the settlement made with the United States Government. There will be no more Anti-Semitism, or Anti-Christian, or Anti-Anything Else!' Trump wrote. 'Woke is officially DEAD at Brown. Thank you for your attention to this matter!' You know, I liked Trump much better when he was poorly selling Stone Cold Stunners and not continually making me embarrassed that America is where I call home. This is the second such deal the Trump administration has reached within a week, as the administration also reached a settlement with Columbia University. In that deal, Columbia similarly agreed to drop its DEI initiatives and end race-based admissions. Columbia also agreed to pay a $200 million fine to the federal government and another $21 million to settle an investigation by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Columbia caught Trump's ire almost as soon as his first term began over the pro-Palestine protests that had taken place at the school. In response to the President's criticism, the university canceled a course on the role race plays in the media and sanctioned students who participated in pro-Palestine protests. The Trump administration has taken a pronounced focus on DEI initiatives in colleges and universities. In February, the Department of Education (DOE) sent a 'Dear Colleague' letter to several schools threatening their federal funding if they continued with their DEI initiatives. The DOE teamed up with the Justice Department to launch the 'Civil Rights Fraud Initiative' wtih the sole purpose of investigating whether schools are complying with the Trump administration's anti-DEI mandate. The result has been several people losing their jobs, countless schools shuttering their DEI departments, and several schools even pulling back from the long-held tradition of affinity graduations. Could you imagine if the federal government put the same amount of effort into solving the cost of living crisis as they do into making it harder for Black and brown students to get an education? What a world that could be. SEE ALSO: UVA President Resigns Over Trump's Anti-DEI Investigation UNC Asheville Dean Of Students Fired For Pro-DEI Comments SEE ALSO Brown Kills DEI Programs, Regains $50M In Federal Funding was originally published on
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The two ways Trump's tariffs on Canada could collapse — despite his fight to keep them
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Time's up. On Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump raised the tariff rate on Canadian goods not covered under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) from 25 to 35 per cent, saying they 'have to pay a fair rate.' The White House claims it's because of Canada's failure to curb the 'ongoing flood of fentanyl and other illicit drugs.' U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data, however, show that fentanyl seizures from Canada make up less than 0.1 per cent of total U.S. seizures of the drug; most smuggling comes across the Mexican border. But the future of Trump's policy also rests on shaky ground, and the tariffs could come crashing down even if Canada can't reach a deal at some point. Imposed through a controversially declared 'national emergency' under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the tariffs come with essentially three paths for relief to Canadian exporters and their American customers: the courts and the economy. And there's always the wildcard: that the president changes his mind. Without relying on that, National Post looks at two very possible ways out of all this: The courts: There is a big question hanging over whether Trump's tariffs are even legal under the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress powers over trade. Trump has bypassed that by claiming he's using presidential IEEPA emergency powers. On Thursday, the Washington, D.C.-based Federal Circuit Court of Appeals convened an en banc hearing for oral arguments in challenges to Trump's use of IEEPA. The 11 judges questioned whether the law meant for sanctioning adversaries or freezing assets during emergencies grants Trump the power to impose tariffs, with one judge noting, 'IEEPA doesn't even mention the word 'tariffs.'' The White House, meanwhile, says the law grants the president 'broad and flexible' emergency powers, including the ability to regulate imports. 'Based on the tenor and questions of the arguments, it appears that the challengers have the better odds of prevailing,' Thomas Berry, the CATO Institute's director of the Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, said in a statement. 'Several judges peppered the government's attorney with skeptical questions about why a broad term in IEEPA like 'regulate importation' should be read to allow the president to unilaterally impose tariffs.' Trump's lawyers claim his executive order provides the justifications for the tariffs — in Canada's case, fentanyl. But Berry said 'those justifications would not matter if IEEPA simply does not authorize tariffs in the first place. That is the cleanest and simplest way to resolve this case, and it appears that the Federal Circuit may be leaning toward that result.' A decision is expected this month, and if it's a resounding push back from the judges' panel, said Andrew Hale, a senior policy analyst at Heritage Foundation, the Supreme Court may not even take up the case. If so, he says, 'these Liberation Day tariffs and everything that's been imposed under emergency legislation, IEEPA, that all evaporates.' At that point, the White House would not be able to declare across-the-board tariffs against countries. Instead, it would have to rely on laws allowing tariffs to be imposed on specific products that are found to threaten U.S. national security, like those currently imposed on Canadian steel and lumber. The economy: The other path to tariff relief is through economic pressure. If Americans start to see higher prices and economic uncertainty, and push back at the ballot box — or threaten to do so — it could force Trump to reverse course. The most recent figures show that U.S. inflation, based on the Consumer Price Index, hit around 2.7 per cent in July. That's a slight rise, fuelled by rising prices for food, transportation and used cars. But it's still close to the Federal Reserve target of two per cent. U.S. unemployment rose slightly to 4.2 per cent in July, while far fewer jobs were created than expected, and consumer confidence rose two points but is still several points lower than it was in January. Overall, most economists agree that risks of a U.S. recession over the next 12 months are relatively low, but skepticism over growth remains high. 'Our outlook is for slower growth in the U.S., but no recession,' said Gus Faucher, chief economist of The PNC Financial Services Group. He notes that the 'tariffs are going to be a drag' because they are a tax increase on imports. Economists have said price inflation from tariffs is not yet being felt in the U.S. but believe it's inevitable. 'Trump's tariff madness adds a great deal to the risks of a recession,' said Steven Hanke, professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University who served on President Ronald Reagan's Council of Economic Advisors. 'With tariffs, Americans are going to be paying a big new beautiful sales tax on goods and services imported into the U.S., and taxes slow things down. Taxes don't stimulate.' It is surprising that higher U.S. prices haven't happened yet, said Jonathan Gruber, chairman of the economics department at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. But he explained that it's likely a reflection of the duration of contracts and the fact that import sellers haven't yet put up prices — 'because they were hoping it wouldn't be real, like they'd wake up from this nightmare.' 'I think we start to see the effect on prices by the end of the year,' said Gruber. The trouble for Canada, however, is that the Canadian economy is starting from a much weaker position, with higher unemployment, lower consumer confidence, and a slowing GDP, on top of the trade tensions. So, trying to wait things out for the U.S. to feel the pinch will be even more painful for Canadians. And any American downturn will also reverberate north. 'As Uncle Sam goes, so goes Canada,' said Hanke. Gruber agrees with that, but with a caveat. 'It's all bad in the short run and good in the long run,' he says. He believes the U.S. is 'weak and getting weaker' and that Canada should start taking advantage of how the U.S. is making opportunities for other countries to invest in themselves. 'We're not investing in our future. We're killing our education. We're killing our research. We're not allowing in immigrants,' he said, explaining the weakening of the U.S. economy. 'We're basically setting the stage for long-run economic slower growth.' Meanwhile, China is doubling down on investment, research and other longer-term policies. 'Canada and other countries need to do the same,' Gruber said. And as for when a backlash could lead to a reversal in the U.S., Gruber points to two factors. 'It's got to be high inflation, and Trump's opponents need to make sure that the voters understand that's Trump's fault.' National Post tmoran@ Former U.S. ambassador on Canada negotiating with Trump: 'You may not have the best hand' Carney 'disappointed' after Trump hits Canada with higher tariffs Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our newsletters here.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Badly Bruised Universities Are Rushing to Cut Deals With Trump
(Bloomberg) -- As a growing number of the wealthiest US colleges capitulate in their battles with the Trump administration, the strain from lost and frozen federal funding is putting pressure on the remaining holdouts to cut a deal. Seeking Relief From Heat and Smog, Cities Follow the Wind Chicago Curbs Hiring, Travel to Tackle $1 Billion Budget Hole PATH Train Service Suspended After Fire at Jersey City Station NYC Mayor Adams Gives Bally's Bronx Casino Plan a Second Chance Universities targeted by Donald Trump's crackdown on diversity programs and other policies he says show a liberal bias are essentially bleeding at the negotiating table after taking on debt, laying off hundreds of staff and slashing spending. As the fall semester approaches, they may be increasingly eager to ink accords that will stanch the flow. Cornell and Northwestern, both of which announced steps to address major budget shortfalls this year after the federal government suspended research funds, are now close to agreements with the White House, Bloomberg News has reported. Brown, Columbia and the University of Pennsylvania reached accords over the past month. But amid those settlements, new universities are being targeted. Most recently, the University of California at Los Angeles and Duke joined Harvard, Northwestern, Princeton and others in losing access to federal grants that are the financial lifeblood of large research institutions. It all adds up to an unprecedented pressure campaign that's roiling the world of higher education, reverberating through faculty, student and alumni groups and clouding the outlook for the type of medical and scientific research that takes place at the colleges. The multitrillion-dollar tax law signed last month also hikes the tax on income from endowments for some of the wealthiest private schools. As the Trump administration gains leverage, colleges' bruised budgets could drive them toward making agreements quicker. 'It seems like they want to get deals done now,' said Brendan Cantwell, a professor at Michigan State University who focuses on the political economy of higher education. 'It's almost like a dam is broken. I would not be at all surprised if we saw a cascading set of agreements.' Federal funding has been used as a cudgel by the Trump administration, which has criticized what it says is a failure by academic institutions to crack down on antisemitism during campus protests over Israel's war in Gaza. The moves also come amid a broader campaign against diversity efforts and accusations of political bias. The fallout has already started. Northwestern said it would cut more than 400 jobs to save 5% on labor costs, with university officials calling the past few months some of the most difficult in its 174-year history. The Trump administration in April paused $790 million in research funding for the Evanston, Illinois-based school because of potential civil rights violations. At Cornell, leaders in June warned that drastic financial austerity measures were on the table after hundreds of millions of dollars in federal research contracts were terminated or frozen. 'The spring semester was unlike anything ever seen in higher education,' they wrote in a letter to students and staff. 'We have been using institutional resources to try to plug these funding holes in the short term, but these interim measures are not sustainable.' Late last month, the government froze $108 million in research funding to Duke University, or about 20% of its federal revenue, three Trump administration officials told Bloomberg. Duke is in talks with government officials on a settlement, according to an administration official. Duke's press office didn't provide a comment on the funding loss or the status of government talks. A Duke official, who asked not to be identified discussing internal deliberations, said the school is reconsidering its budget amid the funding loss, but that it hopes an end to the freeze will come soon. Cornell and Northwestern have declined to comment on any settlement talks. Trump Agreements On July 23, Columbia University agreed to pay $221 million in a deal that was promptly criticized for infringing on academic freedom at the school. Brown announced a deal on July 30, agreeing to give $50 million over 10 years to workforce development organizations in its home state of Rhode Island in exchange for the reimbursement of at least $50 million in unpaid federal grants. Shortly before reaching the deal, Brown took out a $500 million loan — a sign of how strained the school's finances had become. Brown, the least wealthy of the Ivy League schools with an endowment of $7.2 billion, had previously warned in June of 'significant' cost-cutting measures to offset the federal funding. The Trump administration's higher-education crackdown has exposed just how dependent some of the elite, research-focused universities are on the government. They're essentially 'major federal contractors' and stopping the stream would be catastrophic for many of them, according to Cantwell. 'Think about Booz Allen or Raytheon,' Cantwell said. 'If they said, 'All your federal funding will be frozen for 9 months,' you can imagine how those firms might react.' The Trump administration has dealt a harsher financial blow to Harvard than any other university in its crosshairs, freezing billions of multiyear research grants and contracts. The school estimates that the moves by the administration, as well as the endowment tax increase, will cost about $1 billion annually. Harvard's Kennedy School already cut staff. 'The unprecedented challenges we face have led to disruptive changes, painful layoffs, and ongoing uncertainty about the future,' Harvard President Alan M. Garber said in a letter to the campus. Garber has told faculty that a settlement with the government isn't imminent and the university is considering resolving its dispute through the courts, the Harvard Crimson reported Monday. Larry Ladd, who served as Harvard's budget director and now advises schools at the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges, said he can't criticize any college for coming to a deal with the Trump administration given what's at stake for their campuses. 'Schools are likely facing pressure to use endowment and tuition revenue, which are typically used to support students, to support some of their research enterprise instead,' Ladd said. 'They don't want to do that because they want to continue to support students. There's that pressure as well.' Lynn Pasquerella, president of the American Association of Colleges and Universities, said campus leaders are being put in an 'untenable position' and worries that federal funds will continue to be weaponized by the Trump administration, even if schools make deals. 'The concern is the more we capitulate through making these agreements, the more the administration will be empowered to continue along these lines,' she said. --With assistance from Janet Lorin and Akayla Gardner. AI Flight Pricing Can Push Travelers to the Limit of Their Ability to Pay How Podcast-Obsessed Tech Investors Made a New Media Industry Russia Builds a New Web Around Kremlin's Handpicked Super App Everyone Loves to Hate Wind Power. Scotland Found a Way to Make It Pay Off Government Steps Up Campaign Against Business School Diversity ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
