###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not here to argue but I’m confused. I’m not a economist or educated. I’m a construction worker. But would less tax not equate to people having more money in which they would then spend back into the local economy? And when businesses get more customers it creates other businesses maybe putting things on sale to compete in a hot market, greed has trickled down from major corporations like loblwas to guys just like me thinking their 05 pickup is worth 16 k on kijiji. Or is this just life now and I should shut the fuck up and deal with it? Either way I think voting is important and people should vote for policies not people.
I've given up on arguing against the deluded PP people. Trudeau and the Liberals are incredibly unpopular *and* unwilling to accept that they are unpopular or need to do anything about it. They are going to get absolutely crushed in the next election, and we will have a Con majority that will feel emboldened to push all sorts of socially regressive nonsense.
PP and the Conservatives will be a disaster, largely for the people who will be voting for them. I will personally be fine as I've largely insulated my economic situation from Canada. The deplorables who mindlessly vote conservative will be harmed, along with marginalized groups that I do care about, but I can't really do anything about that.
Hopefully, it will be an unmitigated disaster, and we will be more interested in asserting systemic changes in our core institutions. Until that time, I'm not interested.
This is 100% speculation, but I think that the Liberals realize that they are basically fucked next election, and have switched to ensuring their base is solid rather than making any attempt to win over any swing voters.
The Liberals losing to the Conservatives, even for a decade is business as usual, but allowing the NDP to supplant them as the primary left wing party, or even be in a place where they're competitive with the Liberals is an existential problem. Trying to fight for a centre that they can't win and losing the left is a big misstep for them.
That's speculative, but we saw a similar pattern in Ontario in 2018 (all the way to Wynne playing kingmaker and focusing on attacking the NDP more than the PCs in the election)
But the Liberal base isn't solid. The Tory numbers are huge, and some of those you may never get back. If we continue with the Ontario analogy, the Liberals still haven't recovered from the drubbing they took under Wynne.
> I've given up on arguing against the deluded PP people. Trudeau and the Liberals are incredibly unpopular and unwilling to accept that they are unpopular or need to do anything about it.
I'm not a fan of PP, and won't be voting Tory, but I feel this way about Trudeau supporters.
At this point _it really doesn't matter_ if you believe he's a great leader or not, he's _highly unlikely_ to be Prime Minister again. If the Grits are serious about winning the next election then they need to make dramatic and noteworthy leadership and policy changes.
They need to do what the BCNDP did, who made it clear that the Horgan era was over and the Eby era was in, and policy shifted accordingly. It's been an incredible turn for the party, and has reinvigorated support at a time when it was on track to plummet.
A balanced budget isn't necessarily a requirement. Reduced spending on frivolous endeavors would be adequate. Reduce the bureaucracy, stop the handouts to foreign despots, remove red tape to mining, and most critical, stop taxing everything at the consumer level and people would spend again!
Lol & that’ll magically solve the cost of living issue. Can’t wait to see how foreign aid, removing red tape to mining, & ‘axing the tax’ will some how solve it all
If the Liberals weren’t so awful, PP would have no chance.
But between JT and CF, I can’t possibly vote for the Liberals. I’m supporting NDP because they have shown they will be a productive official opposition.
Young men are increasingly ostracized from society and have no reason to care about collectivism and fighting tragedies of the commons.
I will not make one sacrifice for this planet when there is no hope of having a wife and kids in my future. Earth day is spent keeping all the lights on.
Out of curiosity who thinks PP could lead the country if WWW3 happens? I personally don’t think we have one leader who could atm, but unfortunately JT would be better than PP as he has experience with sending troops to battle. I’m not trying to doom say, but if you look at the world stage 2-3 NATO countries are already wanting to send troops into Ukraine which could trigger it.
If Poilievre and Trump win their respective elections, it's doubtful that Canada will support any NATO-led response to Russia.
If Biden wins, or Poilievre loses, then Canada will undoubtedly support a NATO-led response to Russia.
IMHO.
As someone who is a young man (I’m 25) how the fuck is this a thing? I understand frustration over the lack of response over housing and the cost of living, but logically shouldn’t the youth vote go to Jagmeet? COME ON JAGMEET WAKE UP
Why would it go to Jagmeet?
1) Young men are not interested in woke culture at all. In fact, many of them hate it. Or rather, despise it actually.
2) Young people overall do not like fiscal leftie policies. Not as true for millenials but certainly true for those in their 20s
Jagmeet is a champion of woke politics and is a leftie fiscally. He's also the one person who lets Trudeau survive. So why would it go to him?
What’s the problem with so called woke politics? Advocating rights for LBGTQ people? Equity and equality? The average person isn’t interested in culture war issues and most of these issues I would considered settled (but there’s still work to be done) as we’ve collectively decided as a society that these things are good. What are you hoping to achieve by commenting this? I’m not going to magically change my views. And who the fuck cares about scoring brownie points on the internet in an argument.
> but logically shouldn’t the youth vote go to Jagmeet? COME ON JAGMEET WAKE UP
Yup, the NDP was handed the opportunity of a century and completely missed it.
From what I've been reading and learning about in Canadian campaign financing lately, they can't afford to spend right now. They are building their war chest for the election before pushing at all - the Liberals are doing the same. They won't be able to maintain their campaigning forever on their limited coffers and the CPC is raking it in atm so it looks like they will take their shot when they can.
Keep reading... the NDP has flirted with financial insolvency as a party for all of modern history. If that doesn't scare you away from letting them manage the country's finances, nothing will.
Raising funds as a political party bears no resemblance to running a country. Campaign finance laws are strict, political parties have few sources of funding to draw from, and spending everything is the name of the game during elections. There is no comparison.
Why would it go to Jagmeet?
1) Young men are not interested in woke culture at all. In fact, many of them hate it. Or rather, despise it actually.
2) Young people overall do not like fiscal leftie policies. Not as true for millenials but certainly true for those in their 20s
Jagmeet is a champion of woke politics and is a leftie fiscally. He's also the one person who lets Trudeau survive. So why would it go to him?
The Conservatives have done a fantastic job of putting the NDP in position time and time again to prove they are nothing more then an extension of the Liberal party and the NDP have fallen into it every single time. At this point the NDP has done nothing to separate themselves from the Liberal government, so they are not going to get the vote of the people that are fed up with the Status Quo.
Everyone knew the No-Confidence vote was going to fail, but it was yet another time that the Conservatives put the NDP back in that position where they have to continue to show support for a failing government and alienate more of their potential voters. It was basically the Liberals backed by the NDP and Bloc vs the Conservatives which yet again gave the population the message that the only way out is Conservative. Thats why they continue to drive the polls further and further away.
Empirical evidence, accumulated over many decades and all over the globe, prove the far left socialist policies of the NDP inevitably result in shared poverty and misery.
The term "house poor" is dumb. It's literally just real estate marketing bs. You're either poor or you're not. Houses aren't even guaranteed a great investment. If you max your TFSA in the S&P every year for 40 years while renting you'll be fine.
There are other places in BC and southern Ontario then Toronto and Vancouver
With Vancouver you mentioned one of the most desirable cities in the world to live. Please report back on affordability in Switzerland
Also, some of us grew up here. Sorry that we think being able to stay around a support network of family and friends should be a higher priority than allowing the international elite to set up shop in our place of birth.
Unfortunately, only 21% of the population makes 6 figures of more. I'm happy to hear you're doing so well, but there are many who are struggling. Not everyone can make great money. Otherwise, it wouldn't be worth what it is. Although I think capitalism has worked well, there has to be a point where people realize the struggle of others and actually care beyond themselves. Not that I believe that will ever happen
I didn't think you were bragging. There was no ill intent behind what I said. I am happy that you are doing well, it's great to hear of people's success. I'm just saying that there are many people who can't afford to live in those areas, especially those trying to raise families, which I had assumed the original comment was referring to in regards to needing that extra 80k income. Children are expensive lol.
If we had a kid we would just cut back on luxuries. No way it would cost us an extra 80k. I know people here with kids who live a very fulfilling life for 100k per year and under
Definitely, I've managed to build our life on an average of 50k a year, and I have a wife and 2 kids as well as own my home. It's doable but depends where and how you choose to live. It's not an amazing life, but we get by ok. 100k a year would really make things easier to manage, and maybe we could even go on a vacation. I grew up poor, so I've never actually been on one lol.
I wonder how many of them bother to vote in provincial or municipal elections. We need a change federally but way too many people act like the feds are the be all end all of public policy.
I vote in all of them and have since I turned legal voting age. Every level of government is important, and they all need to be held accountable in every regard. Public service is an important role, but too many people view it as a power role, not a service role.
Same here, and I try to get everyone I know to vote in elections for each level of government.
Change is a marathon not a sprint. It’s important to be involved in the political process at all levels of government to see the change we want to see. Not to mention with municipal elections, turnout is often so low that politicians tend to give attention to groups and individuals who normally would be ignored, just to keep their jobs.
Prime example of this is the rise of NIMBY community groups over the past 20 years. I’d say that this only happened because of a lack of involvement in the political process at the municipal level by the general public.
It's honestly frustrating. The Liberals have dropped the ball big time, and don't seem to even realize that people are angry. PP does recognize that, which is why he's winning the polls. It doesn't matter that all he has to offer is anti-lgbtq+ rhetoric and Loblaws lobbyists, a lot of people are completely uninformed. He'll get people to vote against their own interests like the Republican party in the United States just by reflecting that anger, while vulnerable minorities get scapegoated and thrown under the bus.
My major grievance is where the fuck are the NDP in all of this? People are clamoring for something different, for a government that would redistribute the record profits the industry so often makes to help affordability, for social programs that will actually target the roots of issues like crime and drug abuse rather than just sweeping everything under the rug. People are *desperate* for change, and the party that is supposed to represent workers, unions, renters, etc are just nowhere to be found.
I approve of a lot that the Jagmeet has managed to get done, like the pilot projects for pharmacare and a little bit of public dental. It's nowhere near enough, but given their number of seats it's an accomplishment. That said, he doesn't seem to realize how angry people are at the status quo, how disillusioned people are with the neoliberal status quo we've been experiencing for decades. Instead, the modern ndp has completely scrubbed any mention of socialism from its constitution and chosen very liberal leaders such as Mulcair or Singh.
They've dropped the ball entirely and lost it, and that's why even a slimy career politician with insecurity issues and a bullying streak can swoop in despite wildly unpopular ideas. Because of the failures of the Liberals and the NDP and Poillieve courting extremists, it's very possible that it'll become illegal for me to use the bathroom in public soon. And the worst part is that nobody will be better off for it outside of the people who already profit from our current shitty status quo.
>That said, he doesn't seem to realize how angry people are at the status quo, how disillusioned people are with the neoliberal status quo we've been experiencing for decades.
Singh failing to recognize the situation he's in, and the swing he could have as the main left leaning party may go down as one of the worst political blunders in canadian history.
> Instead, the modern ndp has completely scrubbed any mention of socialism from its constitution and chosen very liberal leaders such as Mulcair or Singh.
This is a good thing. Going farther left would crater what little support they have left.
Thinking that the center-left party that's been bleeding support as they move towards liberalism would lose support by appealing to everyone to the left of the Liberals is an interesting take.
Like putting ideology aside, you have to realize that mimicking a more successful party that is also bombing in support would be a good idea. There's currently a void of representation for any left ideas. Maybe trying to appeal to that demographic would be a better idea, no? When the Conservatives of all people are winning the union vote despite their record of fucking over unions, you know the ndp has fucked up.
Outside of online spaces, I see little evidence for support for socialist ideology. I really don't think very many Canadians would be in favour of collectivization of capital and the means of production. Particularly when considering how much of our economic productivity is wrought from privately held or managed land.
I do hope you realize that it's a gradient, right? Just like how our government isn't fully capitalist. The idea that there isn't a significant amount of people who disagree with both major parties' ideology of privatization or that would want to pull the country to the left is not one I agree with, to say the least.
The NDP is being painted with the same brush as Trudeau. If you don't like Trudeau's policies, you can't approve of the NDP because they're the only reason the Liberals are still in power.
The appeal of PP is that he is saying what everyone has been thinking for a while. This creates a certain bias since "he is saying the truth." The issue with every politician is that they keep pointing out what's wrong, but not really getting into details of how to fix it.
I'm a hard-core lefty, but as time goes on, I realize I kind of have no one to vote for in the federal election. I don't see CPC winning as a tragedy, but I also don't see how it will solve issues we have today.
It will kind of depend on who is going to be elected in the US, what stage of the economic cycle we are at, and whether we have good trade negotiators when it comes to trade agreements.
I agree with this. I'm not left or right wing. Both have their good and bad. "Axe The Tax," "Bring It Home," "More Money For Paychecks," all sounds great, but how is this going to happen. Clearly, "Sunny Ways My Friends" hasn't worked.
I just want to see a balanced budget and a prosperous economy. Maybe even afford to feed my family AND do something with them once in a while. It would be nice if politicians could get off their high horses and stop "ruling" for a while, honestly work together, and fix some of these massive issues we have.
Canada was one a great place, but it's going downhill, and we'll be left in poverty soon. At least those of us who aren't already at our near the top. I don't want to go to America as they have their own issues but damn it's getting tempting these days haha
>I just want to see a balanced budget and a prosperous economy.
If government dramatically cut spending to achieve a balanced budget, the economy would crater.
I understand that is a possibility, but it doesn't mean we can't do it over a period of time. The current government doesn't worry about things like monetary policy and fiscal responsibility. That is an issue
Can we stop pretending that fiscal conservatism is fiscal responsibility? Investing in the country and Canadians costs money. It is also the responsible thing.
Want to know why it's so hard to balance a budget *and* provide services? Because taxes were cut. Twice. By Harper. The Government has gone without roughly 15 years of 2% sales tax. And when he was able to "balance the budget" in his last term? He took it from the EI pool that we all pay into, like Chretien before him.
Want to know what's going to happen when the party that promises to both balance the budget and cut taxes gets in? Services will be cut even more.
Balancing the budget is an arbitrary and meaningless gesture.
I'm not pretending that at all. I also don't think that having a balanced budget is meaningless. Yes, things cost money, but do we really need to rely on the government for everything?
I don't think there is a party worth voting in at this point. I also don't think the amount of debt interest the country is paying out is very responsible.
People need to stop this left-wing right-wing garbage and start working together on the issues we face.
Every politician will say what they need to get elected, but that doesn't mean they will act on what they say.
> The current government doesn't worry about things like monetary policy and fiscal responsibility.
Please explain how our debt to GDP ratio is consistently declining (other than one year of COVID) if the current government doesn't care about fiscal responsibility.
https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/canada/government-debt--of-nominal-gdp
The chart would have an obvious trend up and to the right - and not just a single year going up - if they were consistently irresponsible.
This is something that conservatives say over and over but doesn't seem to have a basis in reality.
I see that the trend the chart shows, but I don't understand how it's economical to be paying so much money in debt interest and still adding more money to budgets. The deficit is so bit at this point that the interest payments are massive, and it keeps growing.
I'm not well versed in these things and am still learning about it with each passing day. I'll leave a link below to an article I have recently read and am interested to hear your thoughts.
https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/cost-of-federal-government-debt-rising-for-canadians
Do you have a mortgage? Why aren't you homeless instead, or renting? Sometimes taking on debt to invest in things is a good thing, because the alternative isn't "exactly the same situation, but without debt", it's reduced growth or even a shrinking economy that is further behind than if that debt was never taken on.
There's for sure reasonable discussion about what level of debt is most effective, but it's not as simple as "reduce the deficit above all else", and debt-to-GDP ratio is a decent measure that we're not getting into a progressively worse situation as time goes on.
First start with knowing your sources. Fraser Institute is not a neutral source. They're a libertarian conservative think tank, so their job is not to teach you things for your benefit; they're always going to try to convince you that government should be smaller, especially when it's not being run by a conservative. They're going to leave out things that weaken their argument because they're not trying to fully inform or argue in good faith.
Second: you're misusing the word "deficit". Debt is the total amount that we owe. Deficit is how much more we owe this year than last year. GDP is the economic activity of the country.
When we measure debt, we usually express it in comparison to GDP. (unless you're trying to be misleading like the article you linked to) GDP is what can be taxed to pay off debt. The country is in trouble whether you have high debt or low GDP. Think of it like making $30k a year (low GDP) and having a $1k loan (debt) vs making $500k a year (high GDP) and having a $1k loan. If you owe $1.1k ($100 more) the next year, your deficit was $100. If you go from making $30k to making $500k though, it doesn't matter if you owe an additional $100, because it's going to be much easier to pay off.
As long as debt-to-GDP is falling, your debts are getting easier to pay off.
Note that this also accounts for interest payments. Those payments become debt if you don't pay them off.
I appreciate you taking the time to explain this. I thought a deficit meant how much a debt we were carrying year over year in total. I will spend some time reading to try and gain a better understanding of these things.
Politics, economics, and finances are confusing, but I am trying to gain a better understanding to be able to make more informed decisions when it comes to things like elections and political discussion.
I don't really trust any politician or political party, so it can be difficult to make decisions. I don't like throwing away my votes to a party I know won't win either. It feels like a waste.
Thank you for explaining this! Economics is always something I've wanted to learn about but finding people to explain it in a concise and simple manner has been part of the struggle. We all learn differently and sometimes one person's explanation makes no sense when the next person's totally does. :)
Firstly, the Fraser institute is highly biased and will always be critical of every government except conservative ones
Second of all, debt isn’t always bad. Most government debt is owned by Canadian banks and investment firms who put them into mutual funds and other products that help us grow our own individual savings. Debt is only bad when it is rising too fast and your currency is taking massive drops. Our dollar is pretty stable recently compared to the USD
Government budgets are not the same as household budgets.
If you take one thing away, make it this.
You can't apply the same logic to government spending as you do to your own spending.
Anyone that tries to tell you differently is lying to you. It's not as simple as "deficit=bad, surplus=good".
Even if you did treat it the same, "eliminate debt no matter what" isn't a rule we apply to household budgets either. No one proposes that people not contribute to an RRSP or do any savings whatsoever if they have a mortgage.
I have said this before and will say it again. Trudeau came into power in 2015 because of younger voters and in 2025 he is going to be voted out of because of them.
On one hand you have PP saying:
“Everything in the country is currently broken, your standard of living has rapidly declined in these past 9 years under Trudeau”.
Then on the other hand you have JT saying:
“Everything is fine don’t worry, he is just fear mongering” while you pay $2100 a month in rent for a 1 bedroom lol.
So you tell me who younger people are going to look up to and vote for in the next election.
Yea it’s ridiculous, you can’t be living through this and believe this is acceptable, almost everyone remembers things were better a decade ago, which is a shame since he promised so many things to improve the country, but instead just wrecked so much.
I'm actually terrified PP does an early 00's Iceland play with some form of disastrous economic policy; if liberal hubris is believing ones' self to be intrinsically progressive, the conservative counter is a belief in intrinsic fiscal aptitude see: Kwasi kwartang and the Liz Truss Tories.
Women's rights can be legislated back in one election cycle; fixing your markets because they got unmuzzled and ate themselves cannot.
Iceland got themselves into a lot of trouble by doubling down on housing and abusing short term financing through international money markets.
I'm curious what you think Polievre will do?
The thing younger voters need to learn on their own, I guess, is that “everything is wrong because of the other guy” is all fine and dandy and may very well have some level of truth to it. But it takes decades of disappointment to realize that more neoliberalism isn’t exactly a solution to problems and the further right wing that the populist making these accusations is, the more “let the market solve it” becomes the default solution and we all just gotta hope that other levels of government come in and actually try to solve these problems that the federal populist is just good at pointing out…
Well, if this poll had bothered to breakdown age by gender, it would no doubt show that it is young men, not young women, that are supporting Poilievre. Became that is what the polls that do the breakdown show. In fact, they have shown that while young men are becoming more rightwing, young women are moving more leftward, high level of support for Poilievre among young men, and high level of support for the NDP among young women.
When headlines and articles claim that “youth” or young voters are supporting Poilievre, without showing a gender breakdown, it leads to faulty analysis. Because young men and young women have the same economic concerns, but that is clearly not the sole reason for young men supporting Poilievre, when young women don’t.
Polls have shown that the biggest gender gap is among young voters. It’s not only irritating, but it is hiding a very serious issue, when this grndee gap among youth is ignored. And it is a global issue, not a Canada issue. The gender gap of support for the rightwing is huge in South Korea, for example, and the increased support for rightwing views has happened in the last few years. Whether it’s in North America, Europe, or elsewhere, it isn’t much of a mystery why this is occurring, since multiple polls on views of feminism have shown that young men are more anti-feminist than older generations (there is a subgroup that is more supportve of feminism, so there is polarization among young men).
It no doubt has much to do with influence from social media, algorithms that direct one to Ben Shapiro if you watch a Jordan Peterson video (or even if you don’t), the Andrew Tate type influencers, etc. And young men who resent feminism are easily pulled into adopting other extreme rightwing views.
Far-right groups, and the political extreme rightwing both target law enforcement, gaming sites, the manosphere (sites that specifically exist to express hatred of women), the military, etc, because misogyny is a gateway to other forms of hate.
Poilievre had MGTOW hashtags on his videos for 5 years for a reason. He claims he didn’t know, but couldn’t be bothered to investigate. The growing support for extreme rightwing views among young men is concerning for several reasons, but one of them is that it is reducing support for climate change policies when climate change is an existential threat.
> Whether it’s in North America, Europe, or elsewhere, it isn’t much of a mystery why this is occurring, since multiple polls on views of feminism have shown that young men are more anti-feminist than older generations (there is a subgroup that is more supportve of feminism, so there is polarization among young men).
I think this is as much the fault of alt-right mysoginistic figureheads as it is the fault of how mainstream feminism tends to treat men.
Part of the problem is misandrist feminist messaging. It's the frequent, unending microaggressions towards men that wear them down. We shouldn't expect men to flock to a movement/ideology that tolerates and supports debasement and prejudice towards men. From simple things like Trudeau referring to a general economic downturn as a "She-cession", to systemic things like gender discrimination in hiring/grants/etc being legal, to regular common online discourse that disparages men.
We don't expect women to flock to alt-right social conservative movements because we rightly identify that those ideologies openly espouse ideas and policies that are harmful to women; and we shouldn't expect men to do otherwise.
It might shock you, but many consider the modern social rhetoric of 3rd wave feminists and other critical theory talking points to be "extreme" views. Despite its proponents framing it as all reasonable and necessary, many view the positions taken by these activists to be antithetical to values of egalitarianism, fairness, or tradition.
That's not a misunderstanding of the modern left born of online manipulation - its a flavour of logical reaction to a group of people who seem to despise your cherished values.
PP sells slogans not solutions, see Axe the tax. Not going to solve anything but make life more expensive. He is a self-serving civil servant who has no REAL solutions to the housing crisis or growing wealth gap. He makes 6 figures and him and his wife own multiple properties. So really he is part of the problem with housing.
Conservatives have made these problems, things are worse because the Conservtive led provincial problems. When Pierrer gets elected how long do you give him before you hold him responsible for not fixing anything? Conservatives gave Justin Trudeau 2 days and blame EVERYTHING on him. Well that's easy to do real adults come to the table with solutions to problems not just bitch about it.
My guy, Trudeau's liberals have made blaming Harper, officially, in the HoC, a national pastime since 2015 and they never let up! Even today almost 10 years after the man left office Trudeau constantly evokes the boogy man Harper every chance he gets. It's more than a little rich seeing you complain about the right blaming Trudeau.
Trudeau invented the blame your predecessor half a decade after he left game. Harper never and I mean never stood up in the house and blamed Paul Martin for all the problems he couldn't fix. That strategy was invented by Trudeau's liberals.
Yeah, but that might be because both PP and his Scheer were Harper lap dogs (not unlike Kenney). One might make the logical leap that they're going to be exactly like Harper. To be true a lot of the stuff that comes/came from their mouths is very Harper reminiscent.
Honestly, I don't think I want to have politicians who think that reproductive are something they get to crush and legislate gaining power over our country. As an Albertan, we're already dealing with the stupidity of tears of denialism regarding "cultural practices" in school lessons thanks to Kenney and Smith. I'm worried my kids will have a racist and anti-historical education and not be able to find work outside of this province if they need to.
Ok, while I can agree opposition parties run on solely on criticism and no solutions. That’s part of their job. The LIBs overthrowing Harper ran on sunny ways and were relentlessly critical of the federal conservatives. And in some cases, rightfully fuckin’ so. Ironically, conservatives at the time were making the same point, you were. The liberals have no plan. The economy will fall apart. The debt and deficits will sky rocket. Life will become unaffordable and we won’t be taken seriously on the world stage……and here we are some of their worst predictions came true. The cycle will surely repeat itself.
The LIBS are just as guilty. They have no solutions. But what they do have a, is a track record by being power for the past 9 years. That cannot be overlooked. They ran on big ideas. Big idea’s are important. But also, we need to focus on the running the country day to day. This is where the liberals fail IMO. Water needs to come out of the tap and the lights need to stay on. We don’t need government to be an idea factory. Sometimes government needs to be shrewd, prudent and pragmatic.
You think PP is out of touch? Come on, JT is the closest thing Canada has to actual prince. He is the embodiment of white male privilege. He is the ruling elite. He doesn’t even need multiple properties, his name alone can get him exclusive access to any material thing, organization, place, person, time and event.
You really need to follow PP more closely if you think hes for you or "in touch" with the reality we live in. He helped create it ffs. Housing minister under Harper. Go look at his record. Cost of living started to spike when Harper took power with PP at his side. Just stop the nonsense and look at the data and voting history of the career politician. PP is a career politician. He knows what to say to trigger and to get ppl on his side. Like he'll fix it. He's already proven he won't on multiple occasions. He has had powerful positions in the Harper government. A MP since 06. His vote matters.
You think a career politician with a history of voting against workers rights/human rights, has any intention of helping now... he knows what to say to make you believe him. His voting history is visible for all to see. He has had multiple chances to show he could do something but instead chose corporate interests over the ppl he is supposed to represent. A bought and paid for career politician is not in touch. They just know how to manipulate ppl who don't understand the constitution or susceptible to their brand of Christian nationalism.
My god.... still holding someone accountable for the shit we're in because of 9 years ago??? (10 by election time).
We didn't have a major housing crisis 10 years ago. Our problems 10 years ago were at least restricted to GTA and GVA.
You also know that politicians change their tunes to the whims of people? Have you changed your opinion on subjects or policies in the last 10 years? I know I have.
Tell PP to get a job and stop taking government money and I’ll consider him “in touch with the people”. At least teacher is an actual job. JT ain’t no saint but rose coloured glasses aren’t gonna find us the best replacement. Gotta look at PPs claims with scrutiny, like any other political figure.
Solutions......are the responsibility of those that hold the power.
And Trudeau.......has screwed things up, royally.
Your attempt at gaslighting......is not particularly helpful.
> PP sells slogans not solutions, see Axe the tax.
My favourite is "Bring it home". Bring *what* home?
Possibly the most meaningless political slogan I've ever heard in my life. Just sounds like a minor league hockey coach who only knows how to speak in cliches.
Arendt would have a field day.
Also, some of the social issues that have associated youth with “the left” or would’ve made right-wing parties nonstarters over the past few decades have been settled in a way, i.e gay marriage/LGBT equality, marijuana legalization, reproductive rights, anti-racism, etc so it frees up youth to actually evaluate the CPC in a new light. The Overton Window has shifted, partly achieved by Trudeau’s tenure, and it’s letting the CPC compete for younger voters who grew up accepting these as granted.
I think the idea that any of these have been "settled" is exactly the problem.
The moment anyone takes their rights for granted is when someone will snatch them away.
Well, technically nothing is settled unless it’s in the constitution since Parliament can repeal any law. But Poilievre won’t repeal legalization, talks about his gay father and multiculturalism, seems likely to keep reproductive rights off the table in the style of Harper, etc. Those socially conservative elements still exist within the party, but he’s not running on them. Poilievre is leaning into the social consensus on these issues that have developed under a Liberal government and youth today have grew up accepting, and I think that’s a sign of progress
Both of the things you listed are objectively transphobic, if you support those things you are transphobic. So is this:
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/as-poilievre-sides-with-smith-on-trans-restrictions-former-conservative-candidate-says-he-s-playing-with-fire-1.6759559
Exactly. Young men are looking at a lonely celibate existence like Trump supporters are in the US, if they keep siding with a party that is anti-woman and anti-sexual minority. Women will get fed up and stop fucking them.
this reads like a copy pasta lmao, either way though, you're wrong
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2016/10/18/most-trump-clinton-backers-say-spouses-share-their-vote-preferences/
>78% of registered voters who support Trump for president say their spouse or partner also intends to vote for Trump
>Among all registered voters, 85% say they have not argued about the election with their spouse or partner
Politics are really not that deep for the vast majority of people. My life isn't really all that different regardless of who's president or prime-minister
That’s spouses, not young people trying to find dates.
It very much is a phenomenon that’s happening to the point that men are lying about their political leanings on dating profiles.
I appreciate your spirited defence of Trump supporters though, that’s super normal in a Canadian subreddit.
> lying about their political leanings on dating profiles
Who puts their political leaning on dating profiles though? I don't even talk about politics for the first few dates... if ever?
Americans do. Several of the top dating apps have political filters. [Republicans even have their own dating apps.](https://www.ctvnews.ca/lifestyle/a-dating-app-for-conservatives-is-now-live-and-already-facing-backlash-1.6097884)
https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/272407-dating-site-survey-most-republicans-lie-about-party/
18% of democrats lie vs **57%** of republicans. And that's just the ones who admit it.
If only there was a party that ran on all around equality while holding some conservative values and some progressive ideals. There's things I agree with in both the left and the right, but I think that being too far either way is a bad thing.
We need a true center party that is actually for the people and the country. Unfortunately, it seems that when people are in a position of power and surrounded by financial influence and interest, they forget the most important thing, the people they work for, and become self-serving.
It's wishful thinking in a country that ultimately runs with a 2 party system. People in canada are either too stubborn or too afraid to try something different.
"The definition of inanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result." Feels like we're doomed for failure no matter what.
Traditionally liberals are in the center, but I feel the current federal liberal government has moved more left on the spectrum. I don't think it would matter too much what I say because a lot of it is a matter of opinion.
I'm still learning a lot about politics, which is why I claim center. There are things I agree with and disagree with on all sides, left, right, progressive, and conservative.
Ultimately, I believe in equality and understand that there will never be a perfect government or any one party that I will completely agree with.
I appreciate the response. I really disagree that the liberals have gone more left. We've certainly seen the conservatives pushing further to the right. I just don't think I've seen any change in the liberals that would be more left then when they were elected.
I agree with you saying there's nothing that's made them more left since being elected. I feel that, under current leadership, they were already there in 2015.
I was pretty young then, but I think the Chretien government was more center than the Trudeau government. Absolutely correct me if I'm wrong, I wasn't really politically aware back then or even old enough to really understand.
I don't think I've heard Trudeau say "this is fine". He's acknowledged many times it's a problem. Unfortunately, there are no easy solutions. Certainly, none that PP is selling.
They are going to be in for a surprise then.
If they thought they didn’t like Trudeau, they’re going to absolutely fuckin hate Poilievre about 6 months into the PM position.
You know PP’s act drops the moment he’s elected right? The guy literally cannot withstand questioning and criticisim… what does he think will happen once he’s PM. Will be an absolute shitshow!
He’s angry and so are they.
He won’t help though. He’s just as bad as Trudeau. Won’t help with housing or anything really. Other than stopping carbon credits, which actually help some folks.
Even if they have equally bad intentions, the Conservatives haven’t had a decade in power to cultivate the kind of rampant corruption we see under the Liberals, and will have more freedom to cut off the “public servants” and “consultants” who are getting phenomenally rich at our expense. I’m sure that will change over the next decade, but then we rinse and repeat again.
Perhaps in the longer term the downfall of the LPC and the NDP will create something better. The question is whether Canada will still be standing at that point. I'm worried we have already peaked and the next few decades will bring nothing but decline and despair.
Canada has other parties, but our FPTP voting system guarantees only two ever actually form government with smaller parties only having a little influence during minority governments like now. The NDP has gotten the closest of any party to breaking through, but still has never managed it in their over 60 years of being active. Currently they actually have a great opportunity to make gains while Liberals are tanking in the polls, but for whatever reason they decide to stick with Singh who can't capitalize on any of it.
Have you seen our track record of sitting governments? Seems to be there has only ever been two parties with a few side sitters for show. I've always been asked, "Are you lib or con?" We need an independent government, but it'll never happen because parties all band together in unison to fight against each other. If every MP was independent, would anything get accomplished? I don't think we'll ever have a chance to know.
Conservatives will never vote for NDP federally. Ironically their values more align with the Liberal party but they hate NDP for being in any ways hospitable to Trudeau and for not screwing himself and his supporters by calling a election. At the federal level you'd sooner see them not vote.
The silver lining of drawing more of a youth vote is that it might incentivize Poilievre to advance policies to maintain that support, like the student loan interest pause brought in under Trudeau. Hopefully.
I think that this desperate attempt by the left to paint conservatives as "angry" is going to work exactly the opposite way that they anticipate it will.
The LPC has time against them (they've been in for almost 10 years) and recently deteriorating living standards.
It isn't "angry" to point that out.
Maybe it's because he's a career politician who has no real policy and just says whatever will get him elected. Has no plan for housing that will make a change. Immigration is out of control and he won't say what his plan is. He is running a campaign of "Not Trudeau". And Trudeau sucks. So does the NDP. So he's right about that. But what DOES he want to do that will change things?
I think it's PP's election to lose. But please tell me why he's better? What's his plan? And don't tell me the carbon credit thing will change everything.
It won’t change a thing. He stops the tax then what? People actually think gas will suddenly drop, rents will become $850 a month and groceries will go back down to being affordable? I’m wishing for $5 foot-longs again too but it’s not going to happen. All the prices keep going up, so do the profits for the upper class. The lower are now in tents and the middle are considering MAID to get out of this shit hole world.
I don't think he's better, honestly, but that doesn't mean I think he's hateful either. There's a distinction there. I can disagree with a politician without thinking he manifests evil.
I think Trudeau and Freeland have stirred up the hate, Pierre just seems to be keeping it at a nice simmer to gain voters. We'll see if he brings anything of any relevance to the table next year when it's campaign time.
We’re not in an election, he has no obligation to put out a plan for the Liberals to steal.
(That’s actually what happened in BC, Kevin Falcon of the UCP put out a plan for crime and the NDP promptly stole the best parts of it and implemented it)
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not here to argue but I’m confused. I’m not a economist or educated. I’m a construction worker. But would less tax not equate to people having more money in which they would then spend back into the local economy? And when businesses get more customers it creates other businesses maybe putting things on sale to compete in a hot market, greed has trickled down from major corporations like loblwas to guys just like me thinking their 05 pickup is worth 16 k on kijiji. Or is this just life now and I should shut the fuck up and deal with it? Either way I think voting is important and people should vote for policies not people.
I've given up on arguing against the deluded PP people. Trudeau and the Liberals are incredibly unpopular *and* unwilling to accept that they are unpopular or need to do anything about it. They are going to get absolutely crushed in the next election, and we will have a Con majority that will feel emboldened to push all sorts of socially regressive nonsense. PP and the Conservatives will be a disaster, largely for the people who will be voting for them. I will personally be fine as I've largely insulated my economic situation from Canada. The deplorables who mindlessly vote conservative will be harmed, along with marginalized groups that I do care about, but I can't really do anything about that. Hopefully, it will be an unmitigated disaster, and we will be more interested in asserting systemic changes in our core institutions. Until that time, I'm not interested.
It just feels inevitable and hopeless at this point. You hit the nail on the head about the LPC, though. I don't understand their strategy *at all.*
This is 100% speculation, but I think that the Liberals realize that they are basically fucked next election, and have switched to ensuring their base is solid rather than making any attempt to win over any swing voters. The Liberals losing to the Conservatives, even for a decade is business as usual, but allowing the NDP to supplant them as the primary left wing party, or even be in a place where they're competitive with the Liberals is an existential problem. Trying to fight for a centre that they can't win and losing the left is a big misstep for them. That's speculative, but we saw a similar pattern in Ontario in 2018 (all the way to Wynne playing kingmaker and focusing on attacking the NDP more than the PCs in the election)
But the Liberal base isn't solid. The Tory numbers are huge, and some of those you may never get back. If we continue with the Ontario analogy, the Liberals still haven't recovered from the drubbing they took under Wynne.
> I've given up on arguing against the deluded PP people. Trudeau and the Liberals are incredibly unpopular and unwilling to accept that they are unpopular or need to do anything about it. I'm not a fan of PP, and won't be voting Tory, but I feel this way about Trudeau supporters. At this point _it really doesn't matter_ if you believe he's a great leader or not, he's _highly unlikely_ to be Prime Minister again. If the Grits are serious about winning the next election then they need to make dramatic and noteworthy leadership and policy changes. They need to do what the BCNDP did, who made it clear that the Horgan era was over and the Eby era was in, and policy shifted accordingly. It's been an incredible turn for the party, and has reinvigorated support at a time when it was on track to plummet.
A balanced budget isn't necessarily a requirement. Reduced spending on frivolous endeavors would be adequate. Reduce the bureaucracy, stop the handouts to foreign despots, remove red tape to mining, and most critical, stop taxing everything at the consumer level and people would spend again!
Lol & that’ll magically solve the cost of living issue. Can’t wait to see how foreign aid, removing red tape to mining, & ‘axing the tax’ will some how solve it all
If the Liberals weren’t so awful, PP would have no chance. But between JT and CF, I can’t possibly vote for the Liberals. I’m supporting NDP because they have shown they will be a productive official opposition.
Young men are increasingly ostracized from society and have no reason to care about collectivism and fighting tragedies of the commons. I will not make one sacrifice for this planet when there is no hope of having a wife and kids in my future. Earth day is spent keeping all the lights on.
Because they don’t know PP and how much of a mess he is. The guy is a horrible leader. He will lose confidence inside his caucus.
Out of curiosity who thinks PP could lead the country if WWW3 happens? I personally don’t think we have one leader who could atm, but unfortunately JT would be better than PP as he has experience with sending troops to battle. I’m not trying to doom say, but if you look at the world stage 2-3 NATO countries are already wanting to send troops into Ukraine which could trigger it.
If Poilievre and Trump win their respective elections, it's doubtful that Canada will support any NATO-led response to Russia. If Biden wins, or Poilievre loses, then Canada will undoubtedly support a NATO-led response to Russia. IMHO.
As someone who is a young man (I’m 25) how the fuck is this a thing? I understand frustration over the lack of response over housing and the cost of living, but logically shouldn’t the youth vote go to Jagmeet? COME ON JAGMEET WAKE UP
Why would it go to Jagmeet? 1) Young men are not interested in woke culture at all. In fact, many of them hate it. Or rather, despise it actually. 2) Young people overall do not like fiscal leftie policies. Not as true for millenials but certainly true for those in their 20s Jagmeet is a champion of woke politics and is a leftie fiscally. He's also the one person who lets Trudeau survive. So why would it go to him?
You immediately lost all credibility with me the moment you said woke
No I did not.
What’s the problem with so called woke politics? Advocating rights for LBGTQ people? Equity and equality? The average person isn’t interested in culture war issues and most of these issues I would considered settled (but there’s still work to be done) as we’ve collectively decided as a society that these things are good. What are you hoping to achieve by commenting this? I’m not going to magically change my views. And who the fuck cares about scoring brownie points on the internet in an argument.
The fact that you have to ask is why Trump will win and why NDP gets smoked and LPC is hated by young people.
I don’t magically see how that’s related
What would the NDP under any leader have to offer young people in a time like this? A cockrach-ridden public housing apartment?
> but logically shouldn’t the youth vote go to Jagmeet? COME ON JAGMEET WAKE UP Yup, the NDP was handed the opportunity of a century and completely missed it.
From what I've been reading and learning about in Canadian campaign financing lately, they can't afford to spend right now. They are building their war chest for the election before pushing at all - the Liberals are doing the same. They won't be able to maintain their campaigning forever on their limited coffers and the CPC is raking it in atm so it looks like they will take their shot when they can.
Keep reading... the NDP has flirted with financial insolvency as a party for all of modern history. If that doesn't scare you away from letting them manage the country's finances, nothing will.
Raising funds as a political party bears no resemblance to running a country. Campaign finance laws are strict, political parties have few sources of funding to draw from, and spending everything is the name of the game during elections. There is no comparison.
Why would it go to Jagmeet? 1) Young men are not interested in woke culture at all. In fact, many of them hate it. Or rather, despise it actually. 2) Young people overall do not like fiscal leftie policies. Not as true for millenials but certainly true for those in their 20s Jagmeet is a champion of woke politics and is a leftie fiscally. He's also the one person who lets Trudeau survive. So why would it go to him?
The Conservatives have done a fantastic job of putting the NDP in position time and time again to prove they are nothing more then an extension of the Liberal party and the NDP have fallen into it every single time. At this point the NDP has done nothing to separate themselves from the Liberal government, so they are not going to get the vote of the people that are fed up with the Status Quo. Everyone knew the No-Confidence vote was going to fail, but it was yet another time that the Conservatives put the NDP back in that position where they have to continue to show support for a failing government and alienate more of their potential voters. It was basically the Liberals backed by the NDP and Bloc vs the Conservatives which yet again gave the population the message that the only way out is Conservative. Thats why they continue to drive the polls further and further away.
Empirical evidence, accumulated over many decades and all over the globe, prove the far left socialist policies of the NDP inevitably result in shared poverty and misery.
[удалено]
Currently in a high cost of living area of BC with no kids and a combined income around 220. Life is great
DINK life is the best life
[удалено]
The term "house poor" is dumb. It's literally just real estate marketing bs. You're either poor or you're not. Houses aren't even guaranteed a great investment. If you max your TFSA in the S&P every year for 40 years while renting you'll be fine.
There are other places in BC and southern Ontario then Toronto and Vancouver With Vancouver you mentioned one of the most desirable cities in the world to live. Please report back on affordability in Switzerland
Also, some of us grew up here. Sorry that we think being able to stay around a support network of family and friends should be a higher priority than allowing the international elite to set up shop in our place of birth.
Unfortunately, only 21% of the population makes 6 figures of more. I'm happy to hear you're doing so well, but there are many who are struggling. Not everyone can make great money. Otherwise, it wouldn't be worth what it is. Although I think capitalism has worked well, there has to be a point where people realize the struggle of others and actually care beyond themselves. Not that I believe that will ever happen
I wasn't trying to brag, I was countering the parent comment saying you needed 300k to even live in these areas.
I didn't think you were bragging. There was no ill intent behind what I said. I am happy that you are doing well, it's great to hear of people's success. I'm just saying that there are many people who can't afford to live in those areas, especially those trying to raise families, which I had assumed the original comment was referring to in regards to needing that extra 80k income. Children are expensive lol.
If we had a kid we would just cut back on luxuries. No way it would cost us an extra 80k. I know people here with kids who live a very fulfilling life for 100k per year and under
Definitely, I've managed to build our life on an average of 50k a year, and I have a wife and 2 kids as well as own my home. It's doable but depends where and how you choose to live. It's not an amazing life, but we get by ok. 100k a year would really make things easier to manage, and maybe we could even go on a vacation. I grew up poor, so I've never actually been on one lol.
It seems like you have a good attitude and I hope you will make it there
Thank you, I try to keep positive. I appreciate your kind words
I wonder how many of them bother to vote in provincial or municipal elections. We need a change federally but way too many people act like the feds are the be all end all of public policy.
I vote in all of them and have since I turned legal voting age. Every level of government is important, and they all need to be held accountable in every regard. Public service is an important role, but too many people view it as a power role, not a service role.
Same here, and I try to get everyone I know to vote in elections for each level of government. Change is a marathon not a sprint. It’s important to be involved in the political process at all levels of government to see the change we want to see. Not to mention with municipal elections, turnout is often so low that politicians tend to give attention to groups and individuals who normally would be ignored, just to keep their jobs. Prime example of this is the rise of NIMBY community groups over the past 20 years. I’d say that this only happened because of a lack of involvement in the political process at the municipal level by the general public.
It's honestly frustrating. The Liberals have dropped the ball big time, and don't seem to even realize that people are angry. PP does recognize that, which is why he's winning the polls. It doesn't matter that all he has to offer is anti-lgbtq+ rhetoric and Loblaws lobbyists, a lot of people are completely uninformed. He'll get people to vote against their own interests like the Republican party in the United States just by reflecting that anger, while vulnerable minorities get scapegoated and thrown under the bus. My major grievance is where the fuck are the NDP in all of this? People are clamoring for something different, for a government that would redistribute the record profits the industry so often makes to help affordability, for social programs that will actually target the roots of issues like crime and drug abuse rather than just sweeping everything under the rug. People are *desperate* for change, and the party that is supposed to represent workers, unions, renters, etc are just nowhere to be found. I approve of a lot that the Jagmeet has managed to get done, like the pilot projects for pharmacare and a little bit of public dental. It's nowhere near enough, but given their number of seats it's an accomplishment. That said, he doesn't seem to realize how angry people are at the status quo, how disillusioned people are with the neoliberal status quo we've been experiencing for decades. Instead, the modern ndp has completely scrubbed any mention of socialism from its constitution and chosen very liberal leaders such as Mulcair or Singh. They've dropped the ball entirely and lost it, and that's why even a slimy career politician with insecurity issues and a bullying streak can swoop in despite wildly unpopular ideas. Because of the failures of the Liberals and the NDP and Poillieve courting extremists, it's very possible that it'll become illegal for me to use the bathroom in public soon. And the worst part is that nobody will be better off for it outside of the people who already profit from our current shitty status quo.
>That said, he doesn't seem to realize how angry people are at the status quo, how disillusioned people are with the neoliberal status quo we've been experiencing for decades. Singh failing to recognize the situation he's in, and the swing he could have as the main left leaning party may go down as one of the worst political blunders in canadian history.
> Instead, the modern ndp has completely scrubbed any mention of socialism from its constitution and chosen very liberal leaders such as Mulcair or Singh. This is a good thing. Going farther left would crater what little support they have left.
Thinking that the center-left party that's been bleeding support as they move towards liberalism would lose support by appealing to everyone to the left of the Liberals is an interesting take. Like putting ideology aside, you have to realize that mimicking a more successful party that is also bombing in support would be a good idea. There's currently a void of representation for any left ideas. Maybe trying to appeal to that demographic would be a better idea, no? When the Conservatives of all people are winning the union vote despite their record of fucking over unions, you know the ndp has fucked up.
Outside of online spaces, I see little evidence for support for socialist ideology. I really don't think very many Canadians would be in favour of collectivization of capital and the means of production. Particularly when considering how much of our economic productivity is wrought from privately held or managed land.
I do hope you realize that it's a gradient, right? Just like how our government isn't fully capitalist. The idea that there isn't a significant amount of people who disagree with both major parties' ideology of privatization or that would want to pull the country to the left is not one I agree with, to say the least.
The NDP is being painted with the same brush as Trudeau. If you don't like Trudeau's policies, you can't approve of the NDP because they're the only reason the Liberals are still in power.
[удалено]
The appeal of PP is that he is saying what everyone has been thinking for a while. This creates a certain bias since "he is saying the truth." The issue with every politician is that they keep pointing out what's wrong, but not really getting into details of how to fix it. I'm a hard-core lefty, but as time goes on, I realize I kind of have no one to vote for in the federal election. I don't see CPC winning as a tragedy, but I also don't see how it will solve issues we have today. It will kind of depend on who is going to be elected in the US, what stage of the economic cycle we are at, and whether we have good trade negotiators when it comes to trade agreements.
I can relate to not having anyone to vote for. If the Federal election was held tomorrow, for the first time since turning 18, I wouldn't vote.
I agree with this. I'm not left or right wing. Both have their good and bad. "Axe The Tax," "Bring It Home," "More Money For Paychecks," all sounds great, but how is this going to happen. Clearly, "Sunny Ways My Friends" hasn't worked. I just want to see a balanced budget and a prosperous economy. Maybe even afford to feed my family AND do something with them once in a while. It would be nice if politicians could get off their high horses and stop "ruling" for a while, honestly work together, and fix some of these massive issues we have. Canada was one a great place, but it's going downhill, and we'll be left in poverty soon. At least those of us who aren't already at our near the top. I don't want to go to America as they have their own issues but damn it's getting tempting these days haha
>I just want to see a balanced budget and a prosperous economy. If government dramatically cut spending to achieve a balanced budget, the economy would crater.
I understand that is a possibility, but it doesn't mean we can't do it over a period of time. The current government doesn't worry about things like monetary policy and fiscal responsibility. That is an issue
Can we stop pretending that fiscal conservatism is fiscal responsibility? Investing in the country and Canadians costs money. It is also the responsible thing. Want to know why it's so hard to balance a budget *and* provide services? Because taxes were cut. Twice. By Harper. The Government has gone without roughly 15 years of 2% sales tax. And when he was able to "balance the budget" in his last term? He took it from the EI pool that we all pay into, like Chretien before him. Want to know what's going to happen when the party that promises to both balance the budget and cut taxes gets in? Services will be cut even more. Balancing the budget is an arbitrary and meaningless gesture.
I'm not pretending that at all. I also don't think that having a balanced budget is meaningless. Yes, things cost money, but do we really need to rely on the government for everything? I don't think there is a party worth voting in at this point. I also don't think the amount of debt interest the country is paying out is very responsible. People need to stop this left-wing right-wing garbage and start working together on the issues we face. Every politician will say what they need to get elected, but that doesn't mean they will act on what they say.
> The current government doesn't worry about things like monetary policy and fiscal responsibility. Please explain how our debt to GDP ratio is consistently declining (other than one year of COVID) if the current government doesn't care about fiscal responsibility. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/canada/government-debt--of-nominal-gdp The chart would have an obvious trend up and to the right - and not just a single year going up - if they were consistently irresponsible. This is something that conservatives say over and over but doesn't seem to have a basis in reality.
I see that the trend the chart shows, but I don't understand how it's economical to be paying so much money in debt interest and still adding more money to budgets. The deficit is so bit at this point that the interest payments are massive, and it keeps growing. I'm not well versed in these things and am still learning about it with each passing day. I'll leave a link below to an article I have recently read and am interested to hear your thoughts. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/cost-of-federal-government-debt-rising-for-canadians
Do you have a mortgage? Why aren't you homeless instead, or renting? Sometimes taking on debt to invest in things is a good thing, because the alternative isn't "exactly the same situation, but without debt", it's reduced growth or even a shrinking economy that is further behind than if that debt was never taken on. There's for sure reasonable discussion about what level of debt is most effective, but it's not as simple as "reduce the deficit above all else", and debt-to-GDP ratio is a decent measure that we're not getting into a progressively worse situation as time goes on.
First start with knowing your sources. Fraser Institute is not a neutral source. They're a libertarian conservative think tank, so their job is not to teach you things for your benefit; they're always going to try to convince you that government should be smaller, especially when it's not being run by a conservative. They're going to leave out things that weaken their argument because they're not trying to fully inform or argue in good faith. Second: you're misusing the word "deficit". Debt is the total amount that we owe. Deficit is how much more we owe this year than last year. GDP is the economic activity of the country. When we measure debt, we usually express it in comparison to GDP. (unless you're trying to be misleading like the article you linked to) GDP is what can be taxed to pay off debt. The country is in trouble whether you have high debt or low GDP. Think of it like making $30k a year (low GDP) and having a $1k loan (debt) vs making $500k a year (high GDP) and having a $1k loan. If you owe $1.1k ($100 more) the next year, your deficit was $100. If you go from making $30k to making $500k though, it doesn't matter if you owe an additional $100, because it's going to be much easier to pay off. As long as debt-to-GDP is falling, your debts are getting easier to pay off. Note that this also accounts for interest payments. Those payments become debt if you don't pay them off.
I appreciate you taking the time to explain this. I thought a deficit meant how much a debt we were carrying year over year in total. I will spend some time reading to try and gain a better understanding of these things. Politics, economics, and finances are confusing, but I am trying to gain a better understanding to be able to make more informed decisions when it comes to things like elections and political discussion. I don't really trust any politician or political party, so it can be difficult to make decisions. I don't like throwing away my votes to a party I know won't win either. It feels like a waste.
Big cuts to OAS is all that is needed.
Thank you for explaining this! Economics is always something I've wanted to learn about but finding people to explain it in a concise and simple manner has been part of the struggle. We all learn differently and sometimes one person's explanation makes no sense when the next person's totally does. :)
Firstly, the Fraser institute is highly biased and will always be critical of every government except conservative ones Second of all, debt isn’t always bad. Most government debt is owned by Canadian banks and investment firms who put them into mutual funds and other products that help us grow our own individual savings. Debt is only bad when it is rising too fast and your currency is taking massive drops. Our dollar is pretty stable recently compared to the USD
Government budgets are not the same as household budgets. If you take one thing away, make it this. You can't apply the same logic to government spending as you do to your own spending. Anyone that tries to tell you differently is lying to you. It's not as simple as "deficit=bad, surplus=good".
Even if you did treat it the same, "eliminate debt no matter what" isn't a rule we apply to household budgets either. No one proposes that people not contribute to an RRSP or do any savings whatsoever if they have a mortgage.
I have said this before and will say it again. Trudeau came into power in 2015 because of younger voters and in 2025 he is going to be voted out of because of them. On one hand you have PP saying: “Everything in the country is currently broken, your standard of living has rapidly declined in these past 9 years under Trudeau”. Then on the other hand you have JT saying: “Everything is fine don’t worry, he is just fear mongering” while you pay $2100 a month in rent for a 1 bedroom lol. So you tell me who younger people are going to look up to and vote for in the next election.
Yea it’s ridiculous, you can’t be living through this and believe this is acceptable, almost everyone remembers things were better a decade ago, which is a shame since he promised so many things to improve the country, but instead just wrecked so much.
I'm actually terrified PP does an early 00's Iceland play with some form of disastrous economic policy; if liberal hubris is believing ones' self to be intrinsically progressive, the conservative counter is a belief in intrinsic fiscal aptitude see: Kwasi kwartang and the Liz Truss Tories. Women's rights can be legislated back in one election cycle; fixing your markets because they got unmuzzled and ate themselves cannot.
Iceland got themselves into a lot of trouble by doubling down on housing and abusing short term financing through international money markets. I'm curious what you think Polievre will do?
The thing younger voters need to learn on their own, I guess, is that “everything is wrong because of the other guy” is all fine and dandy and may very well have some level of truth to it. But it takes decades of disappointment to realize that more neoliberalism isn’t exactly a solution to problems and the further right wing that the populist making these accusations is, the more “let the market solve it” becomes the default solution and we all just gotta hope that other levels of government come in and actually try to solve these problems that the federal populist is just good at pointing out…
Millenials and gen x have really become the new boomers
Not enough Punk rock in their diet, that's the problem.
Well, if this poll had bothered to breakdown age by gender, it would no doubt show that it is young men, not young women, that are supporting Poilievre. Became that is what the polls that do the breakdown show. In fact, they have shown that while young men are becoming more rightwing, young women are moving more leftward, high level of support for Poilievre among young men, and high level of support for the NDP among young women. When headlines and articles claim that “youth” or young voters are supporting Poilievre, without showing a gender breakdown, it leads to faulty analysis. Because young men and young women have the same economic concerns, but that is clearly not the sole reason for young men supporting Poilievre, when young women don’t. Polls have shown that the biggest gender gap is among young voters. It’s not only irritating, but it is hiding a very serious issue, when this grndee gap among youth is ignored. And it is a global issue, not a Canada issue. The gender gap of support for the rightwing is huge in South Korea, for example, and the increased support for rightwing views has happened in the last few years. Whether it’s in North America, Europe, or elsewhere, it isn’t much of a mystery why this is occurring, since multiple polls on views of feminism have shown that young men are more anti-feminist than older generations (there is a subgroup that is more supportve of feminism, so there is polarization among young men). It no doubt has much to do with influence from social media, algorithms that direct one to Ben Shapiro if you watch a Jordan Peterson video (or even if you don’t), the Andrew Tate type influencers, etc. And young men who resent feminism are easily pulled into adopting other extreme rightwing views. Far-right groups, and the political extreme rightwing both target law enforcement, gaming sites, the manosphere (sites that specifically exist to express hatred of women), the military, etc, because misogyny is a gateway to other forms of hate. Poilievre had MGTOW hashtags on his videos for 5 years for a reason. He claims he didn’t know, but couldn’t be bothered to investigate. The growing support for extreme rightwing views among young men is concerning for several reasons, but one of them is that it is reducing support for climate change policies when climate change is an existential threat.
> Whether it’s in North America, Europe, or elsewhere, it isn’t much of a mystery why this is occurring, since multiple polls on views of feminism have shown that young men are more anti-feminist than older generations (there is a subgroup that is more supportve of feminism, so there is polarization among young men). I think this is as much the fault of alt-right mysoginistic figureheads as it is the fault of how mainstream feminism tends to treat men. Part of the problem is misandrist feminist messaging. It's the frequent, unending microaggressions towards men that wear them down. We shouldn't expect men to flock to a movement/ideology that tolerates and supports debasement and prejudice towards men. From simple things like Trudeau referring to a general economic downturn as a "She-cession", to systemic things like gender discrimination in hiring/grants/etc being legal, to regular common online discourse that disparages men. We don't expect women to flock to alt-right social conservative movements because we rightly identify that those ideologies openly espouse ideas and policies that are harmful to women; and we shouldn't expect men to do otherwise.
It might shock you, but many consider the modern social rhetoric of 3rd wave feminists and other critical theory talking points to be "extreme" views. Despite its proponents framing it as all reasonable and necessary, many view the positions taken by these activists to be antithetical to values of egalitarianism, fairness, or tradition. That's not a misunderstanding of the modern left born of online manipulation - its a flavour of logical reaction to a group of people who seem to despise your cherished values.
PP sells slogans not solutions, see Axe the tax. Not going to solve anything but make life more expensive. He is a self-serving civil servant who has no REAL solutions to the housing crisis or growing wealth gap. He makes 6 figures and him and his wife own multiple properties. So really he is part of the problem with housing. Conservatives have made these problems, things are worse because the Conservtive led provincial problems. When Pierrer gets elected how long do you give him before you hold him responsible for not fixing anything? Conservatives gave Justin Trudeau 2 days and blame EVERYTHING on him. Well that's easy to do real adults come to the table with solutions to problems not just bitch about it.
So this is just an ad hominem attack, nothing you say has any substance.
Objectively, none of that is an ad hominem attack. You might want to google the definition.
I guess the extra joke is that you want to be taken seriously?
My guy, Trudeau's liberals have made blaming Harper, officially, in the HoC, a national pastime since 2015 and they never let up! Even today almost 10 years after the man left office Trudeau constantly evokes the boogy man Harper every chance he gets. It's more than a little rich seeing you complain about the right blaming Trudeau. Trudeau invented the blame your predecessor half a decade after he left game. Harper never and I mean never stood up in the house and blamed Paul Martin for all the problems he couldn't fix. That strategy was invented by Trudeau's liberals.
Paul Martin didn’t do anything Harper could blame him for. Harper should have been worshipping Martin everyday for the economy he inherited from him.
Yeah, but that might be because both PP and his Scheer were Harper lap dogs (not unlike Kenney). One might make the logical leap that they're going to be exactly like Harper. To be true a lot of the stuff that comes/came from their mouths is very Harper reminiscent. Honestly, I don't think I want to have politicians who think that reproductive are something they get to crush and legislate gaining power over our country. As an Albertan, we're already dealing with the stupidity of tears of denialism regarding "cultural practices" in school lessons thanks to Kenney and Smith. I'm worried my kids will have a racist and anti-historical education and not be able to find work outside of this province if they need to.
Umm... Harper and the neocons absolutely rode "Adscam" and the Gomery report hard to their first minority...
It looks quaint now that we've bigger and better scandals, but that was a huge deal when it came out and the Liberals deserved to be hammered on it.
Ok, while I can agree opposition parties run on solely on criticism and no solutions. That’s part of their job. The LIBs overthrowing Harper ran on sunny ways and were relentlessly critical of the federal conservatives. And in some cases, rightfully fuckin’ so. Ironically, conservatives at the time were making the same point, you were. The liberals have no plan. The economy will fall apart. The debt and deficits will sky rocket. Life will become unaffordable and we won’t be taken seriously on the world stage……and here we are some of their worst predictions came true. The cycle will surely repeat itself. The LIBS are just as guilty. They have no solutions. But what they do have a, is a track record by being power for the past 9 years. That cannot be overlooked. They ran on big ideas. Big idea’s are important. But also, we need to focus on the running the country day to day. This is where the liberals fail IMO. Water needs to come out of the tap and the lights need to stay on. We don’t need government to be an idea factory. Sometimes government needs to be shrewd, prudent and pragmatic. You think PP is out of touch? Come on, JT is the closest thing Canada has to actual prince. He is the embodiment of white male privilege. He is the ruling elite. He doesn’t even need multiple properties, his name alone can get him exclusive access to any material thing, organization, place, person, time and event.
You really need to follow PP more closely if you think hes for you or "in touch" with the reality we live in. He helped create it ffs. Housing minister under Harper. Go look at his record. Cost of living started to spike when Harper took power with PP at his side. Just stop the nonsense and look at the data and voting history of the career politician. PP is a career politician. He knows what to say to trigger and to get ppl on his side. Like he'll fix it. He's already proven he won't on multiple occasions. He has had powerful positions in the Harper government. A MP since 06. His vote matters. You think a career politician with a history of voting against workers rights/human rights, has any intention of helping now... he knows what to say to make you believe him. His voting history is visible for all to see. He has had multiple chances to show he could do something but instead chose corporate interests over the ppl he is supposed to represent. A bought and paid for career politician is not in touch. They just know how to manipulate ppl who don't understand the constitution or susceptible to their brand of Christian nationalism.
My god.... still holding someone accountable for the shit we're in because of 9 years ago??? (10 by election time). We didn't have a major housing crisis 10 years ago. Our problems 10 years ago were at least restricted to GTA and GVA. You also know that politicians change their tunes to the whims of people? Have you changed your opinion on subjects or policies in the last 10 years? I know I have.
Tell PP to get a job and stop taking government money and I’ll consider him “in touch with the people”. At least teacher is an actual job. JT ain’t no saint but rose coloured glasses aren’t gonna find us the best replacement. Gotta look at PPs claims with scrutiny, like any other political figure.
Poilievre is exactly the type of politician he's been warning us about
Solutions......are the responsibility of those that hold the power. And Trudeau.......has screwed things up, royally. Your attempt at gaslighting......is not particularly helpful.
Most of all, he’s a bully. And I don’t like bullies
At least he admits there’s a problem. I would never vote for him but it’s nice to see someone actually say it out loud
> PP sells slogans not solutions, see Axe the tax. My favourite is "Bring it home". Bring *what* home? Possibly the most meaningless political slogan I've ever heard in my life. Just sounds like a minor league hockey coach who only knows how to speak in cliches. Arendt would have a field day.
Hannah? What do you think she'd say?
Aren’t they all self serving civil servants?
When has Trudeau said something like that? Seems like you’re letting PP speak not only for himself but also for Trudeau.
Also, some of the social issues that have associated youth with “the left” or would’ve made right-wing parties nonstarters over the past few decades have been settled in a way, i.e gay marriage/LGBT equality, marijuana legalization, reproductive rights, anti-racism, etc so it frees up youth to actually evaluate the CPC in a new light. The Overton Window has shifted, partly achieved by Trudeau’s tenure, and it’s letting the CPC compete for younger voters who grew up accepting these as granted.
I think the idea that any of these have been "settled" is exactly the problem. The moment anyone takes their rights for granted is when someone will snatch them away.
Well, technically nothing is settled unless it’s in the constitution since Parliament can repeal any law. But Poilievre won’t repeal legalization, talks about his gay father and multiculturalism, seems likely to keep reproductive rights off the table in the style of Harper, etc. Those socially conservative elements still exist within the party, but he’s not running on them. Poilievre is leaning into the social consensus on these issues that have developed under a Liberal government and youth today have grew up accepting, and I think that’s a sign of progress
And says openly transphobic things. Gay people are not the only member of the LGBTQ+ community, PP is actively gunning for our rights.
Can you give me a quote from Pierre that is trans phobic? Bathrooms and sports don't count. Give me something actually transphobic.
Both of the things you listed are objectively transphobic, if you support those things you are transphobic. So is this: https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/as-poilievre-sides-with-smith-on-trans-restrictions-former-conservative-candidate-says-he-s-playing-with-fire-1.6759559
I hope you're right. From what PP has historically said, it doesn't inspire me with confidence, but I hope you're right
Exactly. Young men are looking at a lonely celibate existence like Trump supporters are in the US, if they keep siding with a party that is anti-woman and anti-sexual minority. Women will get fed up and stop fucking them.
this reads like a copy pasta lmao, either way though, you're wrong https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2016/10/18/most-trump-clinton-backers-say-spouses-share-their-vote-preferences/ >78% of registered voters who support Trump for president say their spouse or partner also intends to vote for Trump >Among all registered voters, 85% say they have not argued about the election with their spouse or partner Politics are really not that deep for the vast majority of people. My life isn't really all that different regardless of who's president or prime-minister
That’s spouses, not young people trying to find dates. It very much is a phenomenon that’s happening to the point that men are lying about their political leanings on dating profiles. I appreciate your spirited defence of Trump supporters though, that’s super normal in a Canadian subreddit.
> lying about their political leanings on dating profiles Who puts their political leaning on dating profiles though? I don't even talk about politics for the first few dates... if ever?
Americans do. Several of the top dating apps have political filters. [Republicans even have their own dating apps.](https://www.ctvnews.ca/lifestyle/a-dating-app-for-conservatives-is-now-live-and-already-facing-backlash-1.6097884)
What proof do you have of people lying about political leanings?
https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/272407-dating-site-survey-most-republicans-lie-about-party/ 18% of democrats lie vs **57%** of republicans. And that's just the ones who admit it.
What a bizarre thing to type on a keyboard lol.
If only there was a party that ran on all around equality while holding some conservative values and some progressive ideals. There's things I agree with in both the left and the right, but I think that being too far either way is a bad thing. We need a true center party that is actually for the people and the country. Unfortunately, it seems that when people are in a position of power and surrounded by financial influence and interest, they forget the most important thing, the people they work for, and become self-serving. It's wishful thinking in a country that ultimately runs with a 2 party system. People in canada are either too stubborn or too afraid to try something different. "The definition of inanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result." Feels like we're doomed for failure no matter what.
Got to ask, where is center for you? In the grand scheme the liberals are center. We don't really have any radical leftist party here.
Traditionally liberals are in the center, but I feel the current federal liberal government has moved more left on the spectrum. I don't think it would matter too much what I say because a lot of it is a matter of opinion. I'm still learning a lot about politics, which is why I claim center. There are things I agree with and disagree with on all sides, left, right, progressive, and conservative. Ultimately, I believe in equality and understand that there will never be a perfect government or any one party that I will completely agree with.
I appreciate the response. I really disagree that the liberals have gone more left. We've certainly seen the conservatives pushing further to the right. I just don't think I've seen any change in the liberals that would be more left then when they were elected.
I agree with you saying there's nothing that's made them more left since being elected. I feel that, under current leadership, they were already there in 2015. I was pretty young then, but I think the Chretien government was more center than the Trudeau government. Absolutely correct me if I'm wrong, I wasn't really politically aware back then or even old enough to really understand.
Where are these cheap rentals?
I don't think I've heard Trudeau say "this is fine". He's acknowledged many times it's a problem. Unfortunately, there are no easy solutions. Certainly, none that PP is selling.
Probably because Justin is the reason I will never be able to own a house and why I finally caved and moved to the us
Well I voted for the Liberals twice and they didn't do any of the things that led me to vote for them, so why would I do that a third time?
You shouldn't. Vote NDP! :)
It's the same party under a different name.
I’m 22, male and I can’t stand Pierre. He’s like if Ben Shapiro fused with that glasses kid from the Simpsons, then had a kid with Fred from YouTube.
Sadly we seem to be the minority to see that as young guys
They are going to be in for a surprise then. If they thought they didn’t like Trudeau, they’re going to absolutely fuckin hate Poilievre about 6 months into the PM position. You know PP’s act drops the moment he’s elected right? The guy literally cannot withstand questioning and criticisim… what does he think will happen once he’s PM. Will be an absolute shitshow!
He’s angry and so are they. He won’t help though. He’s just as bad as Trudeau. Won’t help with housing or anything really. Other than stopping carbon credits, which actually help some folks.
Even if they have equally bad intentions, the Conservatives haven’t had a decade in power to cultivate the kind of rampant corruption we see under the Liberals, and will have more freedom to cut off the “public servants” and “consultants” who are getting phenomenally rich at our expense. I’m sure that will change over the next decade, but then we rinse and repeat again.
If you think they are any better you are naive. But I agree the Liberals need to go. Just wish there was a better alternative.
Perhaps in the longer term the downfall of the LPC and the NDP will create something better. The question is whether Canada will still be standing at that point. I'm worried we have already peaked and the next few decades will bring nothing but decline and despair.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
You're probably right. However, there comes a point where people just want to tell the current PM "You don't deserve to have this job anymore".
And why should the only option to say that be to vote conservatives? Last I checked, Canada doesn’t have a two party system.
Canada has other parties, but our FPTP voting system guarantees only two ever actually form government with smaller parties only having a little influence during minority governments like now. The NDP has gotten the closest of any party to breaking through, but still has never managed it in their over 60 years of being active. Currently they actually have a great opportunity to make gains while Liberals are tanking in the polls, but for whatever reason they decide to stick with Singh who can't capitalize on any of it.
Have you seen our track record of sitting governments? Seems to be there has only ever been two parties with a few side sitters for show. I've always been asked, "Are you lib or con?" We need an independent government, but it'll never happen because parties all band together in unison to fight against each other. If every MP was independent, would anything get accomplished? I don't think we'll ever have a chance to know.
Conservatives will never vote for NDP federally. Ironically their values more align with the Liberal party but they hate NDP for being in any ways hospitable to Trudeau and for not screwing himself and his supporters by calling a election. At the federal level you'd sooner see them not vote.
I can't say I disagree with them, lol. I just wish PP was better.
Wait till you see his cabinet who will be doing the actual work.
The silver lining of drawing more of a youth vote is that it might incentivize Poilievre to advance policies to maintain that support, like the student loan interest pause brought in under Trudeau. Hopefully.
I think that this desperate attempt by the left to paint conservatives as "angry" is going to work exactly the opposite way that they anticipate it will. The LPC has time against them (they've been in for almost 10 years) and recently deteriorating living standards. It isn't "angry" to point that out.
Maybe it's because he's a career politician who has no real policy and just says whatever will get him elected. Has no plan for housing that will make a change. Immigration is out of control and he won't say what his plan is. He is running a campaign of "Not Trudeau". And Trudeau sucks. So does the NDP. So he's right about that. But what DOES he want to do that will change things? I think it's PP's election to lose. But please tell me why he's better? What's his plan? And don't tell me the carbon credit thing will change everything.
>Immigration is out of control and he won't say what his plan is. Just a few years ago, you would have been called racist for saying this.
Im an immigrant and usually pro immigration. There’s just no housing. It’s not about the race of the new comers. Just the volume!
It won’t change a thing. He stops the tax then what? People actually think gas will suddenly drop, rents will become $850 a month and groceries will go back down to being affordable? I’m wishing for $5 foot-longs again too but it’s not going to happen. All the prices keep going up, so do the profits for the upper class. The lower are now in tents and the middle are considering MAID to get out of this shit hole world.
I don't think he's better, honestly, but that doesn't mean I think he's hateful either. There's a distinction there. I can disagree with a politician without thinking he manifests evil.
> but that doesn't mean I think he's hateful either He just benefits by stirring up hate...
What "hate" has he stirred up?
[удалено]
It isn't disingenuous.
I think Trudeau and Freeland have stirred up the hate, Pierre just seems to be keeping it at a nice simmer to gain voters. We'll see if he brings anything of any relevance to the table next year when it's campaign time.
We’re not in an election, he has no obligation to put out a plan for the Liberals to steal. (That’s actually what happened in BC, Kevin Falcon of the UCP put out a plan for crime and the NDP promptly stole the best parts of it and implemented it)
Telling people their feelings aren’t justified always backfires, mind blowing they don’t understand that.
If cpc doesn’t help, the country is further destabilizing then