To the Point for the Week of February 8, 2026
To the Point for the Week of February 8, 2026
The Ontario Liberal Party’s leadership race takes shape that may include a dark horse candidate. President Trump muses about leaving CUSMA.
ONTARIO
The Race Takes Shape
The Ontario Liberal Party at last formally initiated their third leadership race since 2020 by announcing the core rules governing the contest a week ago today. Branded as “Our Choice,” the leadership race will exclusively have online voting. No mail-in or in-person paper ballot voting will be available to party members, which the party says is to make the process more accessible. The vote will be a preferential ranked ballot system. Party members will be able to rank their candidates by preference, and points will be allocated by voting association and awarded proportionally based on each candidate’s share of the vote. Voting will take place between November 9th and November 20th and the results will be announced at the leadership convention on Saturday, November 27th.
While the voting rules have been announced, the candidate registration fees, nomination timelines, and spending rules are still waiting for confirmation. No matter. Perceived front-runner Nathaniel Erskine-Smith (we like to refer to him as NES) is not wasting any time.
Four hundred people reportedly participated in an online event for NES on February 11th where the soon-to-be former MP for Beaches–East York and future provincial candidate for Scarborough Southwest outlined his path to becoming Premier of Ontario. NES needs some stars to align to get into the ring with Premier Ford in 2029. Here’s what the path looks like: win the Scarborough Southwest nomination, cakewalk the by-election, and resist challengers to secure the leadership. Having a seat in the Ontario legislature will be more than Bonnie Crombie had going for her leadership in 2023.
NES is indeed the perceived front-runner and likely winner. Other candidates are still humming and hawing, sizing up their chances of winning the leadership, or at the very least, calculating how they can leverage their own support for a seat at the cabinet table. As we have noted in previous issues of To the Point, this is standard practice for leadership races.
The fun thing about leadership races is the prospects of an upset. A dark horse candidate emerges, with no political experience, but is potentially viewed as a disruptor to the norm, a phenomenon that can be particularly enticing to young people or those who otherwise would not participate in the political process (see Republican Presidential Nomination Race circa 2015).
Enter Eric Lombardi.
The thirty-one-year-old tech and finance entrepreneur is positioning a potential leadership run as one of real generational change based on a “growth agenda.” Lombardi is dead set on reversing what he calls twenty-five years of managed decline in the province and intends to focus his leadership campaign on housing and long-term economic stagnation.
His growth agenda sounds more centre-right than centre-left. Lombardi says Ontario’s future rests in improving productivity, attracting investment, and (gasp!) competitive markets. Ontario’s weak per-person economic growth drags down the entire country, according to Lombardi, and he argues if Ontario maintained its pre-2000 growth trends, average incomes in Ontario would be $22,000 higher with a corresponding 30% increase in living standards. Lombardi has also argued that Ontario’s ills aren’t simply a result of taxes and spending, but rather a result of poor institutions that suffer from politicized and ad hoc decision making. This ultimately forces Ontario to be governed like a planned economy that scares off long-term investment.
Lombardi’s potential advantage is both his advocacy and expertise in housing. More Neighbours Toronto was a volunteer YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) founded by Lombardi that became one of the more recognized and influential housing advocacy organizations in the city. He also chaired Build Toronto, a think tank that focused on Toronto’s critical housing, governance, infrastructure, and competitiveness issues.
What Lombardi lacks in political experience he makes up for in solid housing policy ideas, insisting housing is an “economic and fairness” challenge, as opposed to another policy file to be tackled. He proposes strengthening property rights to add density, particularly in the “missing middle” and mid-rise sectors. As well, Lombardi has often spoken about the need to reset the province–city relationship with stable capital funding, major reform of land use and permitting, and better institutions to deliver big infrastructure like transit and power.
Lombardi comes across as a very fresh face. He is remarkably social media savvy. Much of Lombardi’s notoriety is largely cultivated online, despite his many real-world accomplishments in housing advocacy. No political experience whatsoever, as far as we know, is compensated by a clear, big-picture framing of the state of Ontario’s economy that makes his “why am I running” easy to digest. He also has policy depth and institutional focus, again, without any political experience. His extensive writings in both right- and left-leaning publications demonstrate an ability to communicate beyond slogans and have gained a loyal following on both sides of the political aisle, where he is recognized as a straight-shooter who tells it like it is. All factors that could pose a threat to NES.
A leadership run would ultimately place him in underdog status, however. NES has institutional capacity, name recognition, and fundraising capabilities. He’s been to the dance before, and he’s got on brand new shoes. The perception is that NES sees this leadership race as his to lose. And he does not intend to lose.
FEDERAL
US Pro-CUSMA Voices Grow as Trade Deal Review Nears
President Trump reportedly mused this week about exiting the Canada–US–Mexico Agreement. Speaking to sources on a condition of anonymity, Bloomberg reported that Trump has been canvassing his aides asking for reasons not to leave the trade agreement he negotiated, while an official in US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer’s office made it clear that affirming the terms of the 2019 trade deal was not going to be a rubber stamp. The official said the President is keeping all options open to address pain points identified by the administration and that, in the event of CUSMA’s collapse, the administration would pursue separate bilateral agreements with Canada and Mexico. Speaking to Fox News this week, Greer described the Mexicans as being more pragmatic in discussions, while the strained relations with Canada have made discussions more difficult.
What may turn out to be more difficult than discussions with Canada is the chorus of political and business voices south of the border that are ramping up their defense of CUSMA ahead of the July review. Towards the end of 2025, a cavalcade of critical US industry groups, including automotive, energy and manufacturing, initiated a full court press on the administration to ensure their voices to keep CUSMA are heard loud and clear. Formal hearings and testimony; ad campaigns; commissioned reports and studies; and targeted lobbying campaigns of key players in the House of Representatives and Senate all focused on ensuring the administration understood that tearing up the deal wouldn’t just hit Canadian exporters, but would drive up costs, kill investment, and put American farmers, factory workers and consumers on the front lines of the fallout.
While active in the above-mentioned efforts, the US agricultural industry, a key pillar in the Trump coalition, has turned their lobbying campaign up to eleven by forming a forty-member organization of farmers, ranchers, food producers and processors backing the deal. The Agricultural Coalition for USMCA is combining targeted advertising (including on Trump’s Truth Social), direct lobbying of Congress, the White House and Trump himself, and a new economic report quantifying how CUSMA boosts exports, jobs and wages in rural America. The coalition is attempting to frame CUSMA as a pillar to America’s rural economies and incomes. The objective: make it economically and politically costlier for President Trump to walk away from the deal.
Trump also faced the most significant rebuke of these tariff policies, especially towards Canada, in a rare bipartisan vote in the House. The resolution sought to end the national emergency declared by the President in order to justify tariffs outside the scope of CUSMA. Its significance isn’t lost as the midterm elections quickly approach and Republicans worry about the economic fallout of the President’s tariff agenda.
And that’s the point.
For all the speculation about whether President Trump will tear up CUSMA, the political guardrails are becoming clearer by the week. The President can keep “all options open.” He can float bilateral deals. He can signal frustration with Ottawa. But he is not operating in a vacuum.
Congress has already shown it is willing to push back. Last April, the Senate voted to block Canada-focused tariffs, with Republicans joining Democrats. Now the House has followed with a narrow 219–211 rebuke of the fentanyl-justified tariffs aimed at Canada. That is not symbolic. That is political risk made visible.
Tariffs that can be tied to higher grocery prices, more expensive auto parts, and investment uncertainty in swing districts are a different animal than abstract trade enforcement rhetoric. Lawmakers know it. Industry knows it. Farm groups know it.
And increasingly, the White House knows it too. In other words, this is no longer Ottawa versus Trump. It’s Trump versus the economic coalition that helped elect him. For Prime Minister Mark Carney, that matters.
It means Canada is not heading into the July review alone against an unconstrained White House. There is bipartisan discomfort in Congress. There is organized resistance in industry. There is visible anxiety in rural America. The threat to exit is real enough to take seriously. But it is politically expensive.
That gives Canadian negotiators more room to be firm. It strengthens the credibility of a steady, rules-based posture. And it weakens the narrative that Canada must concede to avoid catastrophe.
Make no mistake: the review will be contentious. Greer’s comments about strained relations are not theatre. But the collapse scenario is not simply a function of presidential will. It would require Trump to override parts of his own coalition. That is a much higher bar than a headline about “musing” suggests.
Christopher Mourtos, writing on behalf of ONpoint Strategy Group
ABOUT TO THE POINT
To the Point – ONpoint Strategy Group's weekly roundup – cuts through the noise to deliver insight and analysis of key federal, provincial, and municipal stories shaping Canada's policy and political landscape. Designed for decision-makers and thought leaders, this newsletter is your go-to resource for staying ahead. Share these trusted insights with your network to spark meaningful conversations. Simply hit forward or follow ONpoint Strategy Group on X and LinkedIn to spread these valuable perspectives."
About ONpoint Strategy Group:
ONpoint Strategy Group is all about helping clients make an impact where it counts. Specializing in government relations and strategic execution, our team—Nico Fidani-Diker, Mariana Di Rezze, David Morgado, Christopher Mourtos, Ellen Gouchman, and Brandon Falcone—works closely with clients to navigate complex political landscapes and bring their goals to life. With a practical, results-driven approach, we build strong relationships, craft winning strategies, and make sure every step brings clients closer to meaningful outcomes. We’re passionate about making sure our clients are heard, supported, and positioned for success.
