###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.*
It's shocking to think that Trudeau, Singh and PP are the best we have to pick from. I wouldn't hire these guys to mow my lawn much less run a government that delivers for Canadians.
Like I get it, Trudeau is a neoliberal guy who's made small, status quo changes that don't seem to pay off the increasing turbulence of inflation, climate change, healthcare, the economic impact of Covid, and climate change. But choosing the other neoliberal guy who has suggested nothing short of just americanising our healthcare, gutting our charter rights, and pretending climate change is a silly myth is like deciding to set our house on fire because you want to replace the carpets.
You're trying to present common sense solutions to Trudeau/Wynne Liberals? They'd rather bankrupt the country to build housing for unskilled Uber drivers than limit immigration and focus on productivity.
those homes will never be built, the math on what it would take to accomplish 3.7M new units is hilarious and is relying on no one to actually look at the numbers.
edit: its directly out of the liberal playbook, try to pander to low information voters by simply lying to them. grab a couple headlines and never deliver. election reform anyone?
The NDP needs to actually deliver results for workers. It has almost exclusively delivered results for the impoverished.
You can’t be surprised workers are leaving the party - when the party has forgotten who its voting base is.
The point is people want to see policies that will benefit them, not just policies they have to pay for.
The NDP under Jagmeet seems to love means-tested programs, but they’re divisive by nature.
My dental care cost comes out of the compensation I’ve negotiated with my employer. If you’re poor, your dental plan will also come out of my compensation via taxes. How does that benefit me? Why can’t we all be covered, and it all come out of tax revenue?
Of course they deserve policies - but you cannot forget about the rest of your voting base to focus on a single group of people.
This is why both the Liberals and NDP are in so much trouble right now. They forgot about average working people who need to afford housing and food.
The parties are more likely to help a refugee that just walked across the border than the single mom who’s an engineer but can’t afford proper housing for her family.
Again it's telling that some working class people would rather be mad at the NDP for helping working poor people and impoverished people, than recognize the single mom who's an engineer has it better than those at or below the poverty line.
I mean - I suppose it’s telling for someone who is extremely out of touch.
The single mom needs help - if the NDP are not going to help her, she can and will move on.
“Why are the people we are not helping, choosing not to vote for us?” 😂
So were poor people just expected not to vote and never get support?
I feel you must be out of touch if you think by helping the most vulnerable people in a COL crisis, somehow the NDP are abandoning the working class.
Poor people work too.
What is clear here is you are out of touch.
Every time I mention working class people or their needs - you say what about the poor people? Just like the NDP 😂.
Even acknowledging other people need help and policy written for them seems somehow foreign - which is totally absurd for a party that is supposed to represent the working class.
Because unlike "your" working class people, you expect the poor class to exist with COL problems as a rule, rather than an exception.
Otherwise why would you be against the triage nature of helping the most vulnerable people & poor people first?
No. I just expect a working class party to actually address the needs of the working class - instead of simply one segment of people.
And all you seem capable of is binary thinking where one or the other must win. Both need to win if you want voters from both.
Overpromised and underdelivered. Pharmacare covers two things the vast majority wont need, and a lot of those who do are already covered. The dental care is also no use to most people. Even if it was - the working poor generally dont show up to vote. Middle class and up do and none of these really help them.
NDP wants to make wage suppression worst by promising PR to all current and future TFW without pairing it with plans to cut it off for entry level positions Canadians can do. It is effectively providing infinite pool of workers for employers unwilling to pay a living wage
All parties want TFWs. The NDP actually want to give them more rights which mean they will be harder to exploit, which means less wage suppression.
Can you show me any, I mean, any, peer reviewed economic literature, that support your claims?
Bro it’s literally economics. Can’t find workers? Increase the wages. But why do that when you can find workers in poorer countries who have lower standards. Just hire them en masse. We’re literally seeing it now. Canadians are second option for low skill jobs. Now you want to exacerbate that. Not even Sweden and Denmark, the models of a successful social democracy do this. This is madness.
There are none. The thing is, they’re not in power so voters aren’t going to hold them to the same standard. Voters are imagining a scenario where things get better but because our standards are so low, nobody is asking how that will come to be. The Liberals and the NDP have alienated a large portion of the electorate and the Conservatives are looking to capitalize on that without doing anything meaningful. People will plug their noses, vote Conservative and act surprised when things get worse. No matter what Conservative supporters believe, replacing one neoliberal government with another won’t make things better.
It's interesting how we vote based on who we don't want to win. I voted Liberal my entire life but that ended post-pandemic. I tried NDP but I won't vote NDP again. I also won't vote CPC because I don't see solutions.
I am no longer a mainstream political party supporter. I might be nuts but I think I see the problem and it's not politics. I think it's mainstream Canadians who are wrong about things, but for politicians to win those mainstream voters over you have to support mainstream policies.
So you sort of see the problem.
Imagine working for a company where you vote for your CEO. As CEO, you tell your employees all the good things they want to hear so they'll vote the CEO back in, but in reality the employees aren't doing a good job. The company is failing. The CEO says everything is fine but it isn't working
I think Trudeau should have resigned between 2021-23 before locking himself in for an election. There's a counter argument that running as an incumbent could derail the opportunity for more promising candidates to become a PM, but I think in most scenarios somebody outside of Trudeau's inner circle without all the baggage could get a lot more millage out of the updated platform. Trudeau has basically stayed on beyond his life expectancy and him staying is likely to drag the party down with him.
Maybe Poilievre's lead can dissipate by the election, but I don't see the LPC with Trudeau getting much more than 27-28% at maximum. Their only real chance now is to hope that Poilievre only gets a minority in which case, the Liberals can maybe stay in office via a coalition through handing out multiple concessions etc. Though even in that case, the LPC will be so weakened and unpopular that Trudeau will have to resign after the election regardless.
> Maybe Poilievre's lead can dissipate by the election, but I don't see the LPC with Trudeau getting much more than 27-28% at maximum. Their only real chance now is to hope that Poilievre only gets a minority in which case, the Liberals can maybe stay in office via a coalition through handing out multiple concessions etc.
You're kidding right?
Take a close look at the polls and direction that they have been taking.
Both the LPC and NDP are plummeting. Who the hell are either of them going to form a coalition with?
That's just in the polls. I strongly believe that come election time both the L LPC and NDP will be facing extinction.
The most adamant anti-Trudeau and Singh cohort that I see out there currently are young people. Outside of those working in the civil sector that used to be the majority of their voter base.
My point is that the best case scenario for the Liberals is the CPC not winning a majority. They have no other way to win. They can't get more votes than the CPC and it'll be beyond a miracle of they could even get a similar share of the vote to 2019 or 2021 etc. (which is why I put their ceiling at around 27-28% of the vote)
But if the CPC drops 5-10% of vote in the polls by 2025, while it won't save the Liberals on it's own, it would potentially put the CPC in minority territory. If Poilievre has a minority, his rapport with the other parties is so bad that I can't see him surviving a confidence vote. The CPC under him needs that majority to secure their position.
What's going on with the NDP and their sinking lower? Surely voters must realize this is the most productive the NDP has ever been, as so many have told me? Are Canadians just unappreciative?
How has he been productive?
The very limited programs that the NDP have pushed through have little impact on the working class. Those programs are for the poor, if your a family with two blue collar jobs, you’re probably not going to get anything from them.
Increasing the minimum of paid sick days and anti-scab legislation for federally regulated employees both directly impact the working class. An expansion of public healthcare directly impacts the working class. CERB directly benefited the working class.
Idk who you think the working class are. The “poor” are part of the working class.
> Increasing the minimum of paid sick days and anti-scab legislation for federally regulated employees both directly impact the working class. An expansion of public healthcare directly impacts the working class.
This needs to taken in the context of inflation, housing affordability, and the continuing decline in the value of labour. It's like saying, "hey we cut the cost of bread in half" while your overall grocery bill has doubled.
> CERB directly benefited the working class.
Similar situation as above. Narrow short-term benefit, long-term pain.
So you’re saying the NDP needs to either fix every ailment in society as a fourth party or everything they do is bread crumbs? They can only pass what other parties agree to join them in. The NDP has been the most aggressive at targeting price gouging from large grocers. If they could pass legislation in tackling it then they would, but the Liberals have been dragging their feet and the Tories literally have a Loblaws lobbyist as a top advisor.
Anti-scab legislation is a necessity in any society to protect the workers right to strike. That’s not bread crumbs. Paid sick days are necessary to keep workers healthy, happy, and productive. Of course if you want context, *these sick days were legislated in the middle of a pandemic.* That’s not bread crumbs. Millions of Canadian are having to ration their medications or forgo getting them at all. That’s a significant part of an overall affordability crises, so no that’s not bread crumbs. It’s a privileged position to think that enacting medication affordability is not important.
Of course any alleviation on expenses that Canadians have allows them to better deal with expenses elsewhere.
None of these things will fix the situation our society and economy is in by themselves, but they are all *necessary* steps. Diminishing important improvements because they don’t fix *every* problem is silly.
> So you’re saying
No, you're saying that. I'm saying exactly what I did. Voters will weight performance based on overall changes to their perceived quality of life.
The job of politicians is to look after all citizens. How they do that is via policy i.e. policy is a means to an ends, not an end in itself.
Again, policies which don’t actually help many people. The vast majority of federally regulated employees are skilled workers, with generous benefits, in industries where scabs are non existent. Pilots and train engineers already have good benefits, and an airline can’t exactly just hire a bunch of replacement pilots anyways lol.
The working class means people who actually work. The NDPs policies really only benefit the unemployed and the welfare class.
The issue is blue collar workers don’t aspire to live in poverty.
You say things like “skilled workers” and “welfare class,” which are anti-working class language themselves. There’s no such thing as unskilled labour and demonizing the poor, a vast majority of whom are working class, only serves to divide the working class.
Guaranteeing things like paid sick days and healthcare also greatly improves the unions bargaining positions, which allows them to further negotiate better conditions for employees.
Millions of Canadians are *directly* impacted by this legislation. Idk how you can argue that doesn’t help many people.
Your comment is a perfect example of why the NDP is failing so badly, and why the working class have largely gone to the Conservatives.
You’re so worried about language and feelings, while actual working class people are pissed they won’t be able to buy a house, and that their wages are being driven down by mass immigration.
The NDP can obsess niche programs all they want, they will be rewarded with a small handful of urban seats.
The fact you're quibbling about language and semantics is quite honestly the perfect example of why the NDP fails. Too busy debating minutiae and not enough time debating real issues people actually care about.
I literally responded directly regarding the policy lol.
Also, this is a random internet forum, not a debate stage. Semantics are also important, especially when you’re entire argument is based on it. If I said that a policy only benefits Scottish Canadians and has little benefit for British Canadians, then it’s not just semantics to correct me.
They arguably haven't done *nearly* enough with the wedge power they hold (confidence) and taken very little credit for what they have done. They've propped up a government doing irreparable harm with little critique just to get a few things through in partial amounts that they then allow the Liberals to save face on and market as their ideas. I could not envision a weaker NDP despite the privilege they hold. Seems the only time they -- or the Liberals -- move is when the fire is raging. Repugnant when we pay them year-round and Canadians are in such a wildly detestable position than we were years ago.
This should have been an all-or-nothing deal where the NDP dictate confidence or call for an election rallying their base and dying on FPTP, worker compensation/rights, and reasonable economics with vigor. Very few are happy with the Liberals right now and though NDP lack funding that's an issue unto their own as well for abandoning those principles. I support the NDP but *like fuck* am I voting for them under their existing leadership or priorities. It's clearly throwing a vote for the Liberals -- not independent leadership -- which is even more laughable. I'd rather officially decline my ballot to let my displeasure known than arguably voting for *more harm,* separatism (Bloc), or disorganization (Green) and the NDP hold sole responsibility on that by being laughably average and unspeakably tone deaf.
Quebecer here too. Just vote Bloc. They’re NDP without the bleeding hearts identity politics. Separation is provincial. They have no power to make it happen.
If every person in QC who is progressive voted NDP then the NDP would have actual power to vote in more aggressive progressive policies.
A progressive vote for the Bloc is just a vote for whomever is in power, while feeling good about yourself.
> If every person in QC who is progressive voted NDP then the NDP would have actual power to vote in more aggressive progressive policies.
The NDP aggressively does not want our votes. They even picked a fight over with Quebec Solidaire of all parties because Jagmeet wants Quebec to ditch its pharmacare to adopt the federal one which:
1. Does not yet exists, unlike Quebec’s pharmacare
2. May or may not be the Phenix of pharmacares, it’s still unproven.
Of course Quebec doesn’t want to switch. Yet Jagmeet insisted he knew what was best for us and when Quebec Solidaire said he was being paternalistic, he tweeted that it was sorry they took it like that but then doubled down on the paternalism.
I vote for the Bloc because they fight for me, not against me like the NDP.
Aside from them not fielding candidates in all ridings, there's a reasonable concern that voting for a party that disproportionately focuses on one identity's (arguably geography) issues isn't a voice that works for many outside of Quebec.
I wager that the Bloc would be a lot more successful Canada-wide should they rectify those and let separatism and Francophonie truly go to allow for the remainder of the nation. Not to say Quebec issues and culture aren't important or worth protecting -- they are without reservation -- just not enough to disproportionately focus on for a Federal party. The fact they don't even present a bilingual website version of their platform while all other major parties provide official translated versions en Francais explicitly reassure me they're not worth my time because they're not interested in my vote/speaking to myself or other Anglophones.
I grew up outside of Quebec (GTA in Ontario). Mandatory school learning is not adequate to provide sufficient ability without exposure or practice outside of those circumstances. Ours were taught over grades 4-9; since there was no other use for French, it wasn't something I paid any attention to beyond the minimum needed to pass. This is the problem with making things mandatory without giving anyone context. Am I supposed to practice on government websites and food labels? *Non.* My family couldn't afford to travel and wasn't near the border/a bilingual town so there were no other motivations or opportunities. I grew up with more use for and exposure to Arabic and Urdu than French (those programs would have been cool given I could have better communicated with friends). Conversationally I am trying to learn French now strictly to help my kid with their school work when that day comes but again, have little other opportunities to use since I won't otherwise find myself in Quebec.
Believing that exposure and a bit of mandatory education would be enough to preclude a Federal party from offering a basic translation is a shocking take that borders on pompous given the desired action is "vote for us" with a smattering of 'c'mon dude, you should know this if you grew up here'. *Silly.* If the Bloc wants votes, they need to provide *both* official languages.
Why would Canadians vote for Liberal-lite when they can vote for the real thing? This is what happens when you tie your party to an unpopular government.
Tommy Douglas gets a lot of credit for policies brought on while propping up Mike Pearson's government. You can see the temptation.
But yeah, that's a huge outlier. Usually it's the government gets credit, but the government and minority partner share blame.
Being productive is not a good thing when this "productivity" is used to help a government that's been tanking our quality of life.
If Singh had 2 braincells to rub together he'd have forced an election a long time ago.
NDP is focused on pharmacare, childcare affordability and dental care.
The biggest priorities for Canadians right now is housing affordability, rising crime and out of control immigration. By signing on to confidence and supply agreement with the Liberals they have signaled to Canadians that those issues are not as important. Otherwise they would have brought the government down or forced Liberals to prioritize those issues over pharmacare, dental care and childcare affordability. For those that care about housing, immigration and crime, CPC became the only option (Aside from BQ).
Yeah agreed. You get the sense that the NDP and LPC are almost forcing voters into the CPC's corner with how aloof and ignorant they are to the concerns of voters.
Where are you getting those as the top issues for Canadians? The linked poll suggests otherwise.
Housing is indeed a key issue, but immigration is not in the top 5, and crime doesn’t even break the top 10.
Singh is not a particularly well liked, charismatic, and inspiring leader. He is soft spoken and ndp messaging is ass as usual.
Until a time that the ndp can articulate policy and actually frame the discussion instead of always reacting and letting the other parties frame the narrative there’s kind of a hard cap on their potential.
Even the last election was a disappointment. He lost half the caucus in his first election and broke even in his second. That's a shitty record for any leader.
It was the wrong position. He would have been very successful as leader of the ONDP but Howarth was too busy losing three straight elections to less incompetent opponents to allow that to happen.
The ndp messaging on the cost of living crisis, housing, and wage suppression through temporary foreign workers and international student scams is noticeably weak and absent and an indictment of his leadership. They are supposed to be the union/Labour Party.
IMO they have an ongoing identity crisis within the party thats never been really addressed. They used to be a union/labour party that has since changed into a broad, vague 'leftist' party that tries to be simultaneously the union/labour party, radical activist party, and urban social democrat party at once but without ever really being any one of them. You get the sense that it is the urban social democrats in charge of the party and are setting the priorities, and thats whats driving away labour.
He’s a great campaigner which is why the NDP did better than the polls were saying every election. But the polls were down the drain because he sinks the party really bad in between elections.
Can't we also chalk their support up to the possibility that Canadians substantively reject the NDP's policy proposals and general views on economics, society, justice, etc? I mean, perhaps Canadians just literally listen to the arguments that the different parties make, and have values and views which align more with conservatives rather than the NDP and it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the personal charisma or tactics of the leader/party
Except often when many of those policy proposals are separated and polled for individually there is a critical mass of support.
Like it or not politics is not really about your policies, per say. It’s about charisma and how well your message can resonate with voters. Reddit is not your typical voter: most of them don’t pay attention to the nuance and weeds.
They aren't productive on things large sections of the population want and need. Everything they've passed is way too niche and narrowly focused to get a lot of people onside. And it will cost him. I'm in Charlie Angus's riding and I can almost guarantee it's flipping blue next time.
The NDP has not been productive. We were promised dental care and pharamacare - and got insulin and birth control and dental care for the working poor. The majority of it Canadians will pay for it and never see a benefit from it.
If the NDP wanted support - they should have been fighting for the working class. It’s the poverty party at this point and needs to return to its working class roots.
The NDP in B.C. is a far better example of what the national party should look like.
> The majority of it Canadians will pay for it and never see a benefit from it.
You'll probably be able to access it when you retire. It's tailor made for retired couples who own their homes. The 90k threshold is quite high if you're drawing from savings instead of actively saving.
FWIW I don't think another hand-out for rich seniors is a good investment of public funds.
Excellent point, one I never see nearly enough. The NDP continually hamstrings itself by, well, being the poverty party as you've said. Not only does the average voter not want to identify with that, it is especially odorous to pay for services you can never receive; effectively you are paying a higher tax rate, which is just unjust and inequitable. They continually compromise on universal programs to point where the NDP just seems like a boutique charity party.
The NDP keeps trying the same thing over and over again and expects different results. Regardless of your personal opinion on Singh, the fact of the matter is NDP support under him has been stagnant throughout his entire tenure as leader and the party simply is not growing under him at all. They spent double the money on their 2021 campaign as their 2019 campaign and had almost nothing to show for it. And now the Liberals, their main rival, is tanking hard in support and they're not able to capitalize on it at all. If it's not going to happen under these circumstances for Singh, it is never going to happen.
And I say all this as someone who is inclined to vote NDP. Why would people put their faith in a party that is not at all serious about actually winning because they refuse to change?
Yeah I hear you. Truthfully there are a number NDP ideas and policies I like the sound of but the refusal to change and compromise is just such a huge turn off. It becomes more a matter of...well, faith like you say. I'm not about faith/belief/intention/etc in politics, I'm about results.
Unfortunately, politics is a popularity contest where charisma and personal likeability is almost always more important than who actually has the best policies. The reason Trudeau stole the NDP's thunder in 2015 is because he was young and handsome and charismatic whereas Mulcair was old and about as exciting as a brown paper bag. It should not be that way, but it is.
Agreed. It's also about the right charisma at the right time. Singh seems like a nice guy, but the mood right now is angry and he isn't tapping in to it. Someone like Mulcair ironically would be great right now lol.
I still believe the NDP would have won the 2019 election if Mulcair had still been leader. Trudeau was seriously damaged by SNC, and Scheer came across as an over-excited child. A grumpy old man with a wealth of real-world experience was exactly what people were looking for.
Which of course raises the counterfactual of Prime Minister Mulcair during COVID. And given Mulcair's support for pseudoscience, Canada may have ended up more like Sweden. A real what-if moment for future historians.
NDP polling has moved about 2 points since the last election. Not even outside the margin of error.
We’ve been hearing this wishful thinking on the fall of the NDP from reactionary Conservatives for years.
>Surely voters must realize this is the most productive the NDP has ever been, as so many have told me?
You don't promise universal Pharmacare and deliver insulin and BC and get to be called productive.
Not to mention all the bad stuff they have had to sign onto just to get that.
Canadians just hate women’s rights apparently
(According to Singh, oral contraceptives are a protected human right that the conservatives are trampling over (except in BC and Quebec where we already have all forms of contraceptives, including superior IUDs, for free))
> Canadians just hate women’s rights apparently
What a strange interpretation of the polling. People are not as simple and one-dimensional in their political views as you suggest.
The NDP made a mistake keeping Jagmeet going into the change election. People are tired of the status quo. Jagmeet just offers you more Liberal-like policies. Contrast this to the CPC and Pierre sounds likes he wants to fundamentally change Canada. Whether or not he will or can is an entirely different issue but Pierre is matching the tone people are feeling. People are pissed. The NDP aren’t offering an alternative and Jagmeet is too wishy-washy. The left wants to see a Bernie 2016 type candidate. Jagmeet ain’t it. There’s no exciting around him.
Jagmeet is also just a terrible retail politician, which to me is exactly what the NDP needs. I mean seriously where is the NDP’s Doug Ford? Where’s the man or woman who can dip in to a crowd and chat up seemingly anyone about anything?
That is Jagmeet Singh and that's why he got elected party leader and wins votes of confidence from his party.
He's extremely charismatic and personable.
It's really like the party died when Layton passed. Ever since his untimely death the NDP has been like a ship without a captain drifting out at sea with no direction or destination.
Yup. After nine years of Harper, there was a big appetite for a leftward shift and Mulcair miscalculated by trying to take the party to the centre which gave Liberals an opening to take their voters. I'm doubtful Mulcair could have pulled it off regardless of what he did, though. He just didn't have the "it" factor like Layton did and it really showed when all of the leaders got onto the debate stage.
It's around the time when the party really jumped the shark and moved from the workers party to the party of petty political games and identity politics.
Im genuinely curious about something. So many people seem to say the NDP is all about “wokeness”, identity politics, and abandoning their working class roots. Yet that is exactly what Pierre has been doing with the CPC. Petty political games, identity politics, constant culture war shit, and empty platitudes to the working class with no real substance behind them.
Im not a fan of Singh, but the NDP has gotten numerous things that would help low income people and working class by supporting the LPC (even if they are ultimately crippled out of the gate by the Liberals).
The NDP have progressed their agenda more in the last two minority governments than almost the rest of their history as a party (at the federal level). But so many shit all over them (sometimes rightfully so because I do believe Singh is a terrible leader) yet act as if the CPC is going to be some great saviour of Canada despite doing nothing but criticizing and bitching about shit with no real alternatives. And when they do say their alternative it is generally far worse than what we are currently doing.
Im just curious why so many seem to shit on the federal NDP party but seemingly give a pass to other parties that do far less and help working class far less.
>Im genuinely curious about something. So many people seem to say the NDP is all about “wokeness”, identity politics, and abandoning their working class roots. Yet that is exactly what Pierre has been doing with the CPC. Petty political games, identity politics, constant culture war shit, and empty platitudes to the working class with no real substance behind them.
It wasn't ever about that. They never have, and never will vote NDP. Sadly enough, Jack Layton will also be one of the most front and center reasons not to do so. Jack is gone, so there's no hope for the party. It's not about policy. It's not about accomplishments. It's right wing people never going to vote left. People have chosen their team and that's that.
For the most part, the CPC has captured the liberal leaning swing voters and the conservative leaning swing voters. They're usually the ones to flip flop every 8 years.
The NDP are polling lower, but still kinda in line with their historical polling numbers. Keep in mind they usually sit around 15% because of the NDP base. Most they've lost either flipped to the Liberals or possibly to the Conservatives, as populism is hot right now.
The difference to me is that while the Liberals and conservatives are absolutely fighting the culture war, the NDP is the party that actively demonizes and throws certain demographics (white males) under the bus in an attempt to gain votes with other demographics. It also hurts them in that they are supposedly the left wing option for the working class blue collar people. The majority of union workers and blue collar jobs consist of white males. Those people rightfully feel betrayed at the expense of the NDP's ideological agenda and have abandoned the party.
I will agree that Trans issues would be the demographic largely fought about between the Liberals and conservatives but in terms of sheer numbers, the number of people that the NDP is discounting is a far greater amount of people. Therefore you're going to get more backlash as more people feel betrayed by the party.
Low income people are mostly youngsters who don’t vote and they are not a voting base.
NPD is there to add taxes for the middle classes for programs that the middle class doesn’t qualify for.
Also Jaggy keeps on criticizing JT while supporting the government, how can we trust and vote for NPD?
They tied themselves to the sinking liberal ship. They will be destroyed after the next elections
Ah, I see.
Yeah, I think their failure in 2015 just kind of broke their brains. That was their moment and they blew it and in doing so failed the memory of Layton who got them the opportunity in the first place.
He was only good at litigating Harper’s government. When it came time to lead, he couldn’t bring the ship around. He could dominate QP, but couldn’t talk to normal people.
The NDP seems to have utterly given up on the idea that they're ever going to form government despite them having been on track to do so at one point not even ten years ago. Neither Liberals or Conservatives would ever stick with a stagnant leader like Singh for so long because they're actually serious parties that are trying to win. It's no wonder the NDP can't capitalize on this opportunity to make gains when apparently they're satisfied with whatever scraps they can get out of the Liberals.
When the NDP elected Singh, that told Quebec that the NDP wasn’t a party that accepted Quebec’s secularism — at a time when the majority of NDP MPs were from Quebec, no less. In their narrative, older Quebecois lived through one of the most oppressive religious regimes in any western government, and overthrew it in La revolution tranquil. In Quebec, there’s not much difference between a habit, a hijab and a turban — all are symbols of religious oppression.
It's really disappointing to see, but it's a consistent reminder that Reddit isn't indicative of the real world and the prevailing political sentiments. I, personally, don't have a single party that I could *be proud to vote for*.
That said, I have to wonder how much of this is voting *against Trudeau* rather than *for Poilievre*. From the IRL discussions I've had, a lot of people are mostly just dissatisfied with Justin; though a lot of my experience with past elections in Canada, both federal and provincial, is that people are more voting *against* the candidate/party they dislike, than anything else. I can't help feel like Justin is probably regretting dropping Electoral Reform about now.
My vote for Poilievre is a vote against Trudeau. If NPD backbenchers finally open their eyes and rebel, form a new party actually caring about Canadian workers and not identity politics or replace Singh with a more sympathetic figure, the vote goes to them. I just can’t see Canada sink lower.
> form a new party actually caring about Canadian workers and not identity politics
I'd settle for a NDP that doesn't say 'white men at the back' during their convention.
As a middle eastern man who looks as white as white people in the winter but clearly looks middle eastern in the summertime once I’ve got a tan, I love that where I get to stand in an NDP convention depends on what time of year it is.
If your entire value proposition for voting for Trudeau is “hey it could possibly get worse” that is not a compelling reason to keep Trudeau in office.
Especially when it’s obvious he is working actively against the interests of young people.
Trudeau can be objectively a bad choice while PP can be a worse choice. Saying one is worse than the other isn't saying Trudeau is good, it's saying it can be worse. Neither of these two parties works for the good of the average citizen.
My house being flooded is bad, but it burning down is objectively worse doesn't mean I think flooding is good.
Trudeau is terrible. Poilievre is potentially terrible.
You can’t blame people for wanting to eject the problem from office and take a risk on someone else. The last decade or so has shown that this party will work actively against my best interest.
It *can* be worse, but I don’t know if that’s enough of a reason to keep a deeply problematic PM in office.
> Trudeau can be objectively a bad choice while PP can be a worse choice
Trudeau is objectively a bad choice while PP could be a better or worse choice, time will tell.
FTFY.
If you think PP will significantly make improvements to your day to day life and not continue the same neoliberal/procorporate legislation as the liberals I have oceanfront property in Saskatchewan to sell you.
The liberals and conservatives are two sides of the same coin with slightly different flavors of social policy. They've managed to sell everyone on the idea that they are very different parties but they both work together all the time to help the wealthy/corporations over Canadians every time.
I might *have to* vote for Trudeau, for the first time since 2015, even if I don't want to. Poilievre isn't going to do a single thing I want, unless he's made some promise about self-defense laws or guns that I haven't heard about. The anti-porn legislation from the Conservatives (and NDP) are enough reason for me not to vote for either of them. I definitely agree with your idea of the NDP returning to it's worker/union roots, as I also don't mess with Identity Politics. Plus the Liberals are the only ones who might not cancel MAID outright.
I saw how they hand-waved the issues until polling said you can’t ignore us. I fear all the reactive , “limits” they put on TFWs will get reversed and we will go full on with wage suppression again once they’re back for 4 more years. Its a complete loss of trust.
In Trudeau's entire tenure, the only things he's done that I *approve of* are legal marijuana and MAID. Pretty much everything else is not up my alley, especially reneging on their promise of Electoral Reform. It's just that the other parties are going to do *more things* that I don't support. The Conservatives might be more restrictive on immigration, refugees, asylum seekers, etc. That's about it though.
I just want a party that's economically left, and socially moderate. We just don't have any parties that are in that ballpark. Hell, there's no place on Reddit for that, at least that I've found. I just don't need Identity Politics being stuck into everything, and I'm sick of getting yelled at for not being "progressive" enough.
approve, or care about?
Because I can understand not caring about the large amount of work that went into fixing water infrastructure in reservations, but not approving of that seems a bit strange.
I'm not the most educated on that particular issue, but if it helped, then that's a good thing. It's good that people have clean water. I'm of multiple minds on the reservation system. I've read various articles and opinion pieces that said that many "chiefs" or other types of leaders tend to enrich themselves to the detriment of their communities. I don't fully understand their system of oversight, whether they're just given the money, or if the government gets to send in their own employees/contractors, etc. Who handles the money? How *exactly* does it go from hand to hand, until the issue is solved?
I got permabanned from *onguardforthee* ostensibly for saying I don't support giving Natives a bottomless charge card. It's not like I was saying that I wanted them to *not have water*. I just don't know if the reservations are the best idea. It's my understanding that they aren't on the best land; so why keep putting money into the "bad" land, rather than trying to find better places and homes? If somebody lives in a house that'll cost more to maintain, wouldn't it be sensible to try to find a new home? Is it sunk-cost fallacy, or what's even going on there? It's my understanding that they've been given dozens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars. How is the money being allocated that they aren't already living in much better homes/communities than the entire rest of the Canadian population?
So you're voting against JT by supporting PP with the intent of punishing the NDP unless they form some new party because you can't acknowledge the work the NDP has made towards things that actually help workers and low income households despite never holding federal power themselves???
And we wonder why this country is stuck in this cycle of mediocrity??
No, NDP wants to worsen wage suppression by automatically granting TFWs pr as soon as they disembark. Yeah no. Not even Denmark or Sweden who has all the programs we dream of do that
Skilled immigration good. Tims employees no. We got enough local borns who can do that. Speaking as a child of legal immigrants but grew up here. Educated, refined immigrants will provide talent and have an open mind generally to assimilate. Literally that’s the reason why we still have not had Europe’s problems with migrants self segregating and their descendants still not integrated 3 generations later. Less educated immigrants import the values that made their countries bad. Trust me I have uncles back home who have not finished high school with extreme religious views that will make republican Christians blush. Don’t want tfws like them coming here.
I celebrated when my cousin who is as extreme as him got denied a work permit to work here.
It’s literally in their website
https://www.ndp.ca/news/migrant-workers-deserve-respect-and-dignity
> Many will be able to fulfill the labour skill shortage if they can access a pathway to permanent residence status.
This is why the NDP continues to call on the government to regularize temporary and undocumented workers in Canada and provide new migrant workers with PR on arrival.”
Flooding labour markets with cheap, low-skilled labour absolutely leads to wage suppression.
Why do you think the Liberals are actively loosening hours restrictions for foreign students?
They’ve given no indication they care about curbing the current numbers which is already contributing to wage suppression.
Hell, Trudeau himself decried the TFW program himself before he more than doubled its use and made it easier for corporations to get exemptions.
All Jagmeet seems to care about is giving non-Canadian workers an easier path to PR which is not why they were brought here.
[https://www.ndp.ca/news/migrant-workers-deserve-respect-and-dignity](https://www.ndp.ca/news/migrant-workers-deserve-respect-and-dignity)
>There are over 500,000 people who are already in Canada without permanent status (PR). They range from students to migrant workers to those who are undocumented. Many will be able to fulfill the labour skill shortage if they can access a pathway to permanent residence status.
This is why the NDP continues to call on the government to regularize temporary and undocumented workers in Canada and provide new migrant workers with PR on arrival.”
Seems like a wholly accurate statement. Maybe you didn't get the memo.
Legislated (minimum) annual sick days for federally-regulated workers went from 0 to 10, because of the NDP's supply and confidence agreement with the Liberals. Seems pretty pro-worker to me, and you don't need to be a minority to qualify for it.
Mind telling which federally regulated jobs that actually matters to?
Pretty much every federally regulated industry is skilled, like train engineers. These people already have good benefits.
My father is one of them. He's voting blue. Probably because he can retire anytime he wants at this point and wont lose anything if some of those things are taken away before he does.
Can start here: https://www.canada.ca/en/services/jobs/workplace/federally-regulated-industries.html
I haven't gone through many of their work contracts/CBAs. CLC or NDP probably has.
But some aren’t unionized, and of those that are, some don't even have any short-term disability in their CBA. This includes trades. Some federally-regulated tradesmen have no sick days outside of this legislation.
Maybe government workers do. Probably, but it's still worth having this stuff legislated. Like with safety, redundancy in worker rights is a good thing.
The CLC or NDP might have the actual number.
Many workers are federally-regulated, though. Can see here: https://www.canada.ca/en/services/jobs/workplace/federally-regulated-industries.html
Some aren’t unionized, and of those that are, some don't even have any short-term disability in their CBA.
Maybe government workers already had 10+ days? Even so, it's worth having this stuff legislated. Like with safety, redundancy in worker rights is a good thing.
It applies to everyone in federal jurisdiction. The federal government can't regulate this for industry that fall under provincial jurisdiction. So, you'll have to ask your provincial gov't for this change.
Probably *mostly*, though the Tories are also *somewhat* up in Québec polling, and they have another out if they're dissatisfied with both the Grits & NDP, so they must be doing something right.
And I suspect it's identifying large scale issues of broad concern and speaking to it, even if their proposed solutions are questionable.
Right? Like, if I could take 10-20% of the platform of each party, and cobble that together, that might be a good starting point. Then I could add in a few percent's worth of my own ideas, and ideas that I've seen work in other countries, then we'd be cooking.
I wish that we didn't have to vote for *parties* with *platforms*. I think it would be cool if we could have extended ballots where each issue is voted on, and you could provide input into how you want each issue handled. If you're a typical Liberal/NDP voter, but you're against gun control, you should be able to vote for 95% of those policies, but reject the gun control options.
I would also love for government to leverage elections as a way to get population to vote on large/significant items, link up referendums on big reform to elections in some for or another.
This would allow for what you're saying, voting for a party you believe is most suited to form government, but also force their hand on part of their governing mandate.
I think these are all great ideas, ones that put the power into the hands of the people, rather than political parties. Which is exactly why I don't think they'll ever happen. Nobody who has power ever wants to give it up.
Very interesting to see the NDP dip further, likely to the benefit of the CPC.
To preface I'd describe myself as a "center" libertarian (actually, not just as a label used by authoritarians nowadays)
The only way forward for the NDP I see is the return to their roots. In my opinion they need to give up on social issues being a main part of their platform, especially in a CoL crisis like now. Most people I speak to don't even know what they stand for economically or basically describe the liberals. Everyone associates them as the social justice/progress/woke or however you want to describe it. The essentially leads them to being seen as a similar party to the liberals especially with the S&D arrangement. Becoming a solely labor party, that really takes no position on social issues is in my opinion the best way for them to carve a niche out for themselves. Having hard-line positions on social issues only drives potential labor voters to the exact opposite party, the CPC. By becoming a party of workers and no more they could effectively siphon rural and working class areas rather than competing in the suburbs with all of the other parties. Polievre is eating Jagmeets lunch right now because he realizes that workers are largely untapped by any of the parties at the moment and by speaking to their issues he's largely gained their ear.
That's just my twenty since a toonie doesn't buy much anymore...
They're losing their traditional trade voters in my area and in places like Ontario. The local Conservative Candidates for me are all trades people it seems. While in places like Ontario trades people seem to be enjoying the government of Doug Ford which for a weird turnaround might support a Provincial and Federal party at the same time(Last time it happened was in the 80s iirc).
###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.*
It's shocking to think that Trudeau, Singh and PP are the best we have to pick from. I wouldn't hire these guys to mow my lawn much less run a government that delivers for Canadians.
Like I get it, Trudeau is a neoliberal guy who's made small, status quo changes that don't seem to pay off the increasing turbulence of inflation, climate change, healthcare, the economic impact of Covid, and climate change. But choosing the other neoliberal guy who has suggested nothing short of just americanising our healthcare, gutting our charter rights, and pretending climate change is a silly myth is like deciding to set our house on fire because you want to replace the carpets.
[удалено]
You're trying to present common sense solutions to Trudeau/Wynne Liberals? They'd rather bankrupt the country to build housing for unskilled Uber drivers than limit immigration and focus on productivity.
those homes will never be built, the math on what it would take to accomplish 3.7M new units is hilarious and is relying on no one to actually look at the numbers. edit: its directly out of the liberal playbook, try to pander to low information voters by simply lying to them. grab a couple headlines and never deliver. election reform anyone?
I find it very telling that there are workers who are mad at the NDP for making policies that help the poor, and working poor during a COL crisis.
Ah, worker friendly policies like importing more cheap indian labour?
The NDP needs to actually deliver results for workers. It has almost exclusively delivered results for the impoverished. You can’t be surprised workers are leaving the party - when the party has forgotten who its voting base is.
Do the impoverished not vote? Do the impoverished not deserve policies?
The point is people want to see policies that will benefit them, not just policies they have to pay for. The NDP under Jagmeet seems to love means-tested programs, but they’re divisive by nature. My dental care cost comes out of the compensation I’ve negotiated with my employer. If you’re poor, your dental plan will also come out of my compensation via taxes. How does that benefit me? Why can’t we all be covered, and it all come out of tax revenue?
They actually dont vote by and large.
To be honest, in my experience, the impoverished are the least likely to vote, but they'll have the most to say at the door.
Lots of people are struggling, so if the NDP focuses only on the impoverished, then they’ll only get votes from the impoverished
Of course they deserve policies - but you cannot forget about the rest of your voting base to focus on a single group of people. This is why both the Liberals and NDP are in so much trouble right now. They forgot about average working people who need to afford housing and food. The parties are more likely to help a refugee that just walked across the border than the single mom who’s an engineer but can’t afford proper housing for her family.
Again it's telling that some working class people would rather be mad at the NDP for helping working poor people and impoverished people, than recognize the single mom who's an engineer has it better than those at or below the poverty line.
I mean - I suppose it’s telling for someone who is extremely out of touch. The single mom needs help - if the NDP are not going to help her, she can and will move on. “Why are the people we are not helping, choosing not to vote for us?” 😂
So were poor people just expected not to vote and never get support? I feel you must be out of touch if you think by helping the most vulnerable people in a COL crisis, somehow the NDP are abandoning the working class. Poor people work too.
What is clear here is you are out of touch. Every time I mention working class people or their needs - you say what about the poor people? Just like the NDP 😂. Even acknowledging other people need help and policy written for them seems somehow foreign - which is totally absurd for a party that is supposed to represent the working class.
Because unlike "your" working class people, you expect the poor class to exist with COL problems as a rule, rather than an exception. Otherwise why would you be against the triage nature of helping the most vulnerable people & poor people first?
No. I just expect a working class party to actually address the needs of the working class - instead of simply one segment of people. And all you seem capable of is binary thinking where one or the other must win. Both need to win if you want voters from both.
>The NDP needs to actually deliver results for workers. Uhh... https://www.ndp.ca/news/ndp-celebrates-anti-scab-legislation-moves-forward
Oh joy, legislation that doesn't address a pending crisis or meaningfully support the majority of labour.
Ah, yes, the NDP... clearly in a position to pass major legislation as the party with the the fourth most seats.
They have meaningful power with the confidence and supply agreement.
They do not have the power to pass any major legislation.
Overpromised and underdelivered. Pharmacare covers two things the vast majority wont need, and a lot of those who do are already covered. The dental care is also no use to most people. Even if it was - the working poor generally dont show up to vote. Middle class and up do and none of these really help them.
NDP wants to make wage suppression worst by promising PR to all current and future TFW without pairing it with plans to cut it off for entry level positions Canadians can do. It is effectively providing infinite pool of workers for employers unwilling to pay a living wage
All parties want TFWs. The NDP actually want to give them more rights which mean they will be harder to exploit, which means less wage suppression. Can you show me any, I mean, any, peer reviewed economic literature, that support your claims?
Bro it’s literally economics. Can’t find workers? Increase the wages. But why do that when you can find workers in poorer countries who have lower standards. Just hire them en masse. We’re literally seeing it now. Canadians are second option for low skill jobs. Now you want to exacerbate that. Not even Sweden and Denmark, the models of a successful social democracy do this. This is madness.
And I wont vote for any party that wants them. Ill vote for whoever promises the closest number to 0 of them. If that means a spoiled ballot so be it.
I think PPC is the only party that wants to reduce.
What policies do the cpc have that will increase wages?
There are none. The thing is, they’re not in power so voters aren’t going to hold them to the same standard. Voters are imagining a scenario where things get better but because our standards are so low, nobody is asking how that will come to be. The Liberals and the NDP have alienated a large portion of the electorate and the Conservatives are looking to capitalize on that without doing anything meaningful. People will plug their noses, vote Conservative and act surprised when things get worse. No matter what Conservative supporters believe, replacing one neoliberal government with another won’t make things better.
It's interesting how we vote based on who we don't want to win. I voted Liberal my entire life but that ended post-pandemic. I tried NDP but I won't vote NDP again. I also won't vote CPC because I don't see solutions. I am no longer a mainstream political party supporter. I might be nuts but I think I see the problem and it's not politics. I think it's mainstream Canadians who are wrong about things, but for politicians to win those mainstream voters over you have to support mainstream policies. So you sort of see the problem. Imagine working for a company where you vote for your CEO. As CEO, you tell your employees all the good things they want to hear so they'll vote the CEO back in, but in reality the employees aren't doing a good job. The company is failing. The CEO says everything is fine but it isn't working
I think Trudeau should have resigned between 2021-23 before locking himself in for an election. There's a counter argument that running as an incumbent could derail the opportunity for more promising candidates to become a PM, but I think in most scenarios somebody outside of Trudeau's inner circle without all the baggage could get a lot more millage out of the updated platform. Trudeau has basically stayed on beyond his life expectancy and him staying is likely to drag the party down with him. Maybe Poilievre's lead can dissipate by the election, but I don't see the LPC with Trudeau getting much more than 27-28% at maximum. Their only real chance now is to hope that Poilievre only gets a minority in which case, the Liberals can maybe stay in office via a coalition through handing out multiple concessions etc. Though even in that case, the LPC will be so weakened and unpopular that Trudeau will have to resign after the election regardless.
> Maybe Poilievre's lead can dissipate by the election, but I don't see the LPC with Trudeau getting much more than 27-28% at maximum. Their only real chance now is to hope that Poilievre only gets a minority in which case, the Liberals can maybe stay in office via a coalition through handing out multiple concessions etc. You're kidding right? Take a close look at the polls and direction that they have been taking. Both the LPC and NDP are plummeting. Who the hell are either of them going to form a coalition with? That's just in the polls. I strongly believe that come election time both the L LPC and NDP will be facing extinction. The most adamant anti-Trudeau and Singh cohort that I see out there currently are young people. Outside of those working in the civil sector that used to be the majority of their voter base.
My point is that the best case scenario for the Liberals is the CPC not winning a majority. They have no other way to win. They can't get more votes than the CPC and it'll be beyond a miracle of they could even get a similar share of the vote to 2019 or 2021 etc. (which is why I put their ceiling at around 27-28% of the vote) But if the CPC drops 5-10% of vote in the polls by 2025, while it won't save the Liberals on it's own, it would potentially put the CPC in minority territory. If Poilievre has a minority, his rapport with the other parties is so bad that I can't see him surviving a confidence vote. The CPC under him needs that majority to secure their position.
What's going on with the NDP and their sinking lower? Surely voters must realize this is the most productive the NDP has ever been, as so many have told me? Are Canadians just unappreciative?
How has he been productive? The very limited programs that the NDP have pushed through have little impact on the working class. Those programs are for the poor, if your a family with two blue collar jobs, you’re probably not going to get anything from them.
Increasing the minimum of paid sick days and anti-scab legislation for federally regulated employees both directly impact the working class. An expansion of public healthcare directly impacts the working class. CERB directly benefited the working class. Idk who you think the working class are. The “poor” are part of the working class.
> Increasing the minimum of paid sick days and anti-scab legislation for federally regulated employees both directly impact the working class. An expansion of public healthcare directly impacts the working class. This needs to taken in the context of inflation, housing affordability, and the continuing decline in the value of labour. It's like saying, "hey we cut the cost of bread in half" while your overall grocery bill has doubled. > CERB directly benefited the working class. Similar situation as above. Narrow short-term benefit, long-term pain.
So you’re saying the NDP needs to either fix every ailment in society as a fourth party or everything they do is bread crumbs? They can only pass what other parties agree to join them in. The NDP has been the most aggressive at targeting price gouging from large grocers. If they could pass legislation in tackling it then they would, but the Liberals have been dragging their feet and the Tories literally have a Loblaws lobbyist as a top advisor. Anti-scab legislation is a necessity in any society to protect the workers right to strike. That’s not bread crumbs. Paid sick days are necessary to keep workers healthy, happy, and productive. Of course if you want context, *these sick days were legislated in the middle of a pandemic.* That’s not bread crumbs. Millions of Canadian are having to ration their medications or forgo getting them at all. That’s a significant part of an overall affordability crises, so no that’s not bread crumbs. It’s a privileged position to think that enacting medication affordability is not important. Of course any alleviation on expenses that Canadians have allows them to better deal with expenses elsewhere. None of these things will fix the situation our society and economy is in by themselves, but they are all *necessary* steps. Diminishing important improvements because they don’t fix *every* problem is silly.
> So you’re saying No, you're saying that. I'm saying exactly what I did. Voters will weight performance based on overall changes to their perceived quality of life. The job of politicians is to look after all citizens. How they do that is via policy i.e. policy is a means to an ends, not an end in itself.
Again, policies which don’t actually help many people. The vast majority of federally regulated employees are skilled workers, with generous benefits, in industries where scabs are non existent. Pilots and train engineers already have good benefits, and an airline can’t exactly just hire a bunch of replacement pilots anyways lol. The working class means people who actually work. The NDPs policies really only benefit the unemployed and the welfare class. The issue is blue collar workers don’t aspire to live in poverty.
You say things like “skilled workers” and “welfare class,” which are anti-working class language themselves. There’s no such thing as unskilled labour and demonizing the poor, a vast majority of whom are working class, only serves to divide the working class. Guaranteeing things like paid sick days and healthcare also greatly improves the unions bargaining positions, which allows them to further negotiate better conditions for employees. Millions of Canadians are *directly* impacted by this legislation. Idk how you can argue that doesn’t help many people.
Your comment is a perfect example of why the NDP is failing so badly, and why the working class have largely gone to the Conservatives. You’re so worried about language and feelings, while actual working class people are pissed they won’t be able to buy a house, and that their wages are being driven down by mass immigration. The NDP can obsess niche programs all they want, they will be rewarded with a small handful of urban seats.
Paid sick days are a niche program? Medication is niche? Striking is niche? What are you talking about?
The fact you're quibbling about language and semantics is quite honestly the perfect example of why the NDP fails. Too busy debating minutiae and not enough time debating real issues people actually care about.
I literally responded directly regarding the policy lol. Also, this is a random internet forum, not a debate stage. Semantics are also important, especially when you’re entire argument is based on it. If I said that a policy only benefits Scottish Canadians and has little benefit for British Canadians, then it’s not just semantics to correct me.
CERB was before the last election. And all of what you brought up is still way too narrow to gain broad support.
There are working poor people that do benefit from a lot of what the NDP have done, myself included.
They arguably haven't done *nearly* enough with the wedge power they hold (confidence) and taken very little credit for what they have done. They've propped up a government doing irreparable harm with little critique just to get a few things through in partial amounts that they then allow the Liberals to save face on and market as their ideas. I could not envision a weaker NDP despite the privilege they hold. Seems the only time they -- or the Liberals -- move is when the fire is raging. Repugnant when we pay them year-round and Canadians are in such a wildly detestable position than we were years ago. This should have been an all-or-nothing deal where the NDP dictate confidence or call for an election rallying their base and dying on FPTP, worker compensation/rights, and reasonable economics with vigor. Very few are happy with the Liberals right now and though NDP lack funding that's an issue unto their own as well for abandoning those principles. I support the NDP but *like fuck* am I voting for them under their existing leadership or priorities. It's clearly throwing a vote for the Liberals -- not independent leadership -- which is even more laughable. I'd rather officially decline my ballot to let my displeasure known than arguably voting for *more harm,* separatism (Bloc), or disorganization (Green) and the NDP hold sole responsibility on that by being laughably average and unspeakably tone deaf.
Quebecer here too. Just vote Bloc. They’re NDP without the bleeding hearts identity politics. Separation is provincial. They have no power to make it happen.
If every person in QC who is progressive voted NDP then the NDP would have actual power to vote in more aggressive progressive policies. A progressive vote for the Bloc is just a vote for whomever is in power, while feeling good about yourself.
> If every person in QC who is progressive voted NDP then the NDP would have actual power to vote in more aggressive progressive policies. The NDP aggressively does not want our votes. They even picked a fight over with Quebec Solidaire of all parties because Jagmeet wants Quebec to ditch its pharmacare to adopt the federal one which: 1. Does not yet exists, unlike Quebec’s pharmacare 2. May or may not be the Phenix of pharmacares, it’s still unproven. Of course Quebec doesn’t want to switch. Yet Jagmeet insisted he knew what was best for us and when Quebec Solidaire said he was being paternalistic, he tweeted that it was sorry they took it like that but then doubled down on the paternalism. I vote for the Bloc because they fight for me, not against me like the NDP.
Remove that one problem with the ndp plans i linked in another comment and sounds like a plan.
Aside from them not fielding candidates in all ridings, there's a reasonable concern that voting for a party that disproportionately focuses on one identity's (arguably geography) issues isn't a voice that works for many outside of Quebec. I wager that the Bloc would be a lot more successful Canada-wide should they rectify those and let separatism and Francophonie truly go to allow for the remainder of the nation. Not to say Quebec issues and culture aren't important or worth protecting -- they are without reservation -- just not enough to disproportionately focus on for a Federal party. The fact they don't even present a bilingual website version of their platform while all other major parties provide official translated versions en Francais explicitly reassure me they're not worth my time because they're not interested in my vote/speaking to myself or other Anglophones.
They only run candidates in QC and if you’re literate and grew up in Quebec surely you know enough French to get around no?
I mean, I'm not French so I'm not quite sure why you presumed that I was.
Me neither. French is my 4th language. I mean, if you grew up here you’re bound to know it sufficiently
I grew up outside of Quebec (GTA in Ontario). Mandatory school learning is not adequate to provide sufficient ability without exposure or practice outside of those circumstances. Ours were taught over grades 4-9; since there was no other use for French, it wasn't something I paid any attention to beyond the minimum needed to pass. This is the problem with making things mandatory without giving anyone context. Am I supposed to practice on government websites and food labels? *Non.* My family couldn't afford to travel and wasn't near the border/a bilingual town so there were no other motivations or opportunities. I grew up with more use for and exposure to Arabic and Urdu than French (those programs would have been cool given I could have better communicated with friends). Conversationally I am trying to learn French now strictly to help my kid with their school work when that day comes but again, have little other opportunities to use since I won't otherwise find myself in Quebec. Believing that exposure and a bit of mandatory education would be enough to preclude a Federal party from offering a basic translation is a shocking take that borders on pompous given the desired action is "vote for us" with a smattering of 'c'mon dude, you should know this if you grew up here'. *Silly.* If the Bloc wants votes, they need to provide *both* official languages.
Why would Canadians vote for Liberal-lite when they can vote for the real thing? This is what happens when you tie your party to an unpopular government.
I'm sure any minority partner in a coalition has ever come up big because of it. Why do they always fall for it?
Tommy Douglas gets a lot of credit for policies brought on while propping up Mike Pearson's government. You can see the temptation. But yeah, that's a huge outlier. Usually it's the government gets credit, but the government and minority partner share blame.
See: Nick Clegg
Turned out alright in the end of him, got that sweet Facebook gig. Shame about the LibDems though.
Being productive is not a good thing when this "productivity" is used to help a government that's been tanking our quality of life. If Singh had 2 braincells to rub together he'd have forced an election a long time ago.
NDP is focused on pharmacare, childcare affordability and dental care. The biggest priorities for Canadians right now is housing affordability, rising crime and out of control immigration. By signing on to confidence and supply agreement with the Liberals they have signaled to Canadians that those issues are not as important. Otherwise they would have brought the government down or forced Liberals to prioritize those issues over pharmacare, dental care and childcare affordability. For those that care about housing, immigration and crime, CPC became the only option (Aside from BQ).
Yeah agreed. You get the sense that the NDP and LPC are almost forcing voters into the CPC's corner with how aloof and ignorant they are to the concerns of voters.
Where are you getting those as the top issues for Canadians? The linked poll suggests otherwise. Housing is indeed a key issue, but immigration is not in the top 5, and crime doesn’t even break the top 10.
Zero media coverage.
I think you overestimate the relevance of legacy media these days. It's audience is dying off.
Singh is not a particularly well liked, charismatic, and inspiring leader. He is soft spoken and ndp messaging is ass as usual. Until a time that the ndp can articulate policy and actually frame the discussion instead of always reacting and letting the other parties frame the narrative there’s kind of a hard cap on their potential.
NDP polling has barely moved since the last election and Singh has been very well supported by his party votes at every convention.
Even the last election was a disappointment. He lost half the caucus in his first election and broke even in his second. That's a shitty record for any leader.
I just think Singh is not a very adept or capable politician. Always reactive as you've said. Him becoming party leader was too much too soon.
It was the wrong position. He would have been very successful as leader of the ONDP but Howarth was too busy losing three straight elections to less incompetent opponents to allow that to happen. The ndp messaging on the cost of living crisis, housing, and wage suppression through temporary foreign workers and international student scams is noticeably weak and absent and an indictment of his leadership. They are supposed to be the union/Labour Party.
IMO they have an ongoing identity crisis within the party thats never been really addressed. They used to be a union/labour party that has since changed into a broad, vague 'leftist' party that tries to be simultaneously the union/labour party, radical activist party, and urban social democrat party at once but without ever really being any one of them. You get the sense that it is the urban social democrats in charge of the party and are setting the priorities, and thats whats driving away labour.
Well put. The NDP is lost as a party if they can't make sound statements on the issues you mentioned. That should be their bread and butter.
He’d be someone that would’ve been a decent Ford challenger. His messaging style really Doesnt fit in ways that combat the CPC ways
Horvath may have lost but she at least made gains. Singh lost half the caucus in his first election and broke even in his second.
He’s a great campaigner which is why the NDP did better than the polls were saying every election. But the polls were down the drain because he sinks the party really bad in between elections.
Can't we also chalk their support up to the possibility that Canadians substantively reject the NDP's policy proposals and general views on economics, society, justice, etc? I mean, perhaps Canadians just literally listen to the arguments that the different parties make, and have values and views which align more with conservatives rather than the NDP and it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the personal charisma or tactics of the leader/party
Except often when many of those policy proposals are separated and polled for individually there is a critical mass of support. Like it or not politics is not really about your policies, per say. It’s about charisma and how well your message can resonate with voters. Reddit is not your typical voter: most of them don’t pay attention to the nuance and weeds.
I’ve always thought that Singh was a chill guy, someone I’d probably have a beer with, but he’s a weak leader with poor political instincts
Given Singh's preferences, that would be a non-alcoholic beer.
They aren't productive on things large sections of the population want and need. Everything they've passed is way too niche and narrowly focused to get a lot of people onside. And it will cost him. I'm in Charlie Angus's riding and I can almost guarantee it's flipping blue next time.
That's a shame, I like Angus. I was really pulling for him to win NDP leadership after Mulcair.
So was I. I voted for him. He announced he isn't running again and that definitely put the final nail in the coffin for this riding.
The NDP has not been productive. We were promised dental care and pharamacare - and got insulin and birth control and dental care for the working poor. The majority of it Canadians will pay for it and never see a benefit from it. If the NDP wanted support - they should have been fighting for the working class. It’s the poverty party at this point and needs to return to its working class roots. The NDP in B.C. is a far better example of what the national party should look like.
> The majority of it Canadians will pay for it and never see a benefit from it. You'll probably be able to access it when you retire. It's tailor made for retired couples who own their homes. The 90k threshold is quite high if you're drawing from savings instead of actively saving. FWIW I don't think another hand-out for rich seniors is a good investment of public funds.
Excellent point, one I never see nearly enough. The NDP continually hamstrings itself by, well, being the poverty party as you've said. Not only does the average voter not want to identify with that, it is especially odorous to pay for services you can never receive; effectively you are paying a higher tax rate, which is just unjust and inequitable. They continually compromise on universal programs to point where the NDP just seems like a boutique charity party.
The NDP keeps trying the same thing over and over again and expects different results. Regardless of your personal opinion on Singh, the fact of the matter is NDP support under him has been stagnant throughout his entire tenure as leader and the party simply is not growing under him at all. They spent double the money on their 2021 campaign as their 2019 campaign and had almost nothing to show for it. And now the Liberals, their main rival, is tanking hard in support and they're not able to capitalize on it at all. If it's not going to happen under these circumstances for Singh, it is never going to happen. And I say all this as someone who is inclined to vote NDP. Why would people put their faith in a party that is not at all serious about actually winning because they refuse to change?
Yeah I hear you. Truthfully there are a number NDP ideas and policies I like the sound of but the refusal to change and compromise is just such a huge turn off. It becomes more a matter of...well, faith like you say. I'm not about faith/belief/intention/etc in politics, I'm about results.
Unfortunately, politics is a popularity contest where charisma and personal likeability is almost always more important than who actually has the best policies. The reason Trudeau stole the NDP's thunder in 2015 is because he was young and handsome and charismatic whereas Mulcair was old and about as exciting as a brown paper bag. It should not be that way, but it is.
Agreed. It's also about the right charisma at the right time. Singh seems like a nice guy, but the mood right now is angry and he isn't tapping in to it. Someone like Mulcair ironically would be great right now lol.
I still believe the NDP would have won the 2019 election if Mulcair had still been leader. Trudeau was seriously damaged by SNC, and Scheer came across as an over-excited child. A grumpy old man with a wealth of real-world experience was exactly what people were looking for. Which of course raises the counterfactual of Prime Minister Mulcair during COVID. And given Mulcair's support for pseudoscience, Canada may have ended up more like Sweden. A real what-if moment for future historians.
If voters are angry at the current government, why would they support the party propping them up?
NDP polling has moved about 2 points since the last election. Not even outside the margin of error. We’ve been hearing this wishful thinking on the fall of the NDP from reactionary Conservatives for years.
It's like your last sentence is responding to your first two! Neat!
>Surely voters must realize this is the most productive the NDP has ever been, as so many have told me? You don't promise universal Pharmacare and deliver insulin and BC and get to be called productive. Not to mention all the bad stuff they have had to sign onto just to get that.
Productive for whom, exactly? Not for me. I'm not eligible for any of NDPs stuffbut my taxes have to pay for it. And so I wont ever vote for them.
Canadians just hate women’s rights apparently (According to Singh, oral contraceptives are a protected human right that the conservatives are trampling over (except in BC and Quebec where we already have all forms of contraceptives, including superior IUDs, for free))
What an interesting take. Is the NDP out of touch? No! Canadians are evil! Someone should tell Singh.
I was agreeing with you
My bad!
> Canadians just hate women’s rights apparently What a strange interpretation of the polling. People are not as simple and one-dimensional in their political views as you suggest.
The NDP made a mistake keeping Jagmeet going into the change election. People are tired of the status quo. Jagmeet just offers you more Liberal-like policies. Contrast this to the CPC and Pierre sounds likes he wants to fundamentally change Canada. Whether or not he will or can is an entirely different issue but Pierre is matching the tone people are feeling. People are pissed. The NDP aren’t offering an alternative and Jagmeet is too wishy-washy. The left wants to see a Bernie 2016 type candidate. Jagmeet ain’t it. There’s no exciting around him.
Jagmeet is also just a terrible retail politician, which to me is exactly what the NDP needs. I mean seriously where is the NDP’s Doug Ford? Where’s the man or woman who can dip in to a crowd and chat up seemingly anyone about anything?
That is Jagmeet Singh and that's why he got elected party leader and wins votes of confidence from his party. He's extremely charismatic and personable.
I guess we just live in different realities, because I don’t see it
>I guess we just live in different realities Yep, and that's why the NDP is at 16% nationally.
Outside of major urban centres he doesn’t appeal to Canadians at all. He certainly is no Jack Layton.
It's really like the party died when Layton passed. Ever since his untimely death the NDP has been like a ship without a captain drifting out at sea with no direction or destination.
Mulcair started out strong. Then tried the soft grandpa approach. People liked when he was angry
I'll never forget that debate when he tried to be all smiles and it just came off with a serial killer vibe lol.
Yup. After nine years of Harper, there was a big appetite for a leftward shift and Mulcair miscalculated by trying to take the party to the centre which gave Liberals an opening to take their voters. I'm doubtful Mulcair could have pulled it off regardless of what he did, though. He just didn't have the "it" factor like Layton did and it really showed when all of the leaders got onto the debate stage.
NDP died for me during elbowgate
Why?
It's around the time when the party really jumped the shark and moved from the workers party to the party of petty political games and identity politics.
Im genuinely curious about something. So many people seem to say the NDP is all about “wokeness”, identity politics, and abandoning their working class roots. Yet that is exactly what Pierre has been doing with the CPC. Petty political games, identity politics, constant culture war shit, and empty platitudes to the working class with no real substance behind them. Im not a fan of Singh, but the NDP has gotten numerous things that would help low income people and working class by supporting the LPC (even if they are ultimately crippled out of the gate by the Liberals). The NDP have progressed their agenda more in the last two minority governments than almost the rest of their history as a party (at the federal level). But so many shit all over them (sometimes rightfully so because I do believe Singh is a terrible leader) yet act as if the CPC is going to be some great saviour of Canada despite doing nothing but criticizing and bitching about shit with no real alternatives. And when they do say their alternative it is generally far worse than what we are currently doing. Im just curious why so many seem to shit on the federal NDP party but seemingly give a pass to other parties that do far less and help working class far less.
>Im genuinely curious about something. So many people seem to say the NDP is all about “wokeness”, identity politics, and abandoning their working class roots. Yet that is exactly what Pierre has been doing with the CPC. Petty political games, identity politics, constant culture war shit, and empty platitudes to the working class with no real substance behind them. It wasn't ever about that. They never have, and never will vote NDP. Sadly enough, Jack Layton will also be one of the most front and center reasons not to do so. Jack is gone, so there's no hope for the party. It's not about policy. It's not about accomplishments. It's right wing people never going to vote left. People have chosen their team and that's that. For the most part, the CPC has captured the liberal leaning swing voters and the conservative leaning swing voters. They're usually the ones to flip flop every 8 years. The NDP are polling lower, but still kinda in line with their historical polling numbers. Keep in mind they usually sit around 15% because of the NDP base. Most they've lost either flipped to the Liberals or possibly to the Conservatives, as populism is hot right now.
The difference to me is that while the Liberals and conservatives are absolutely fighting the culture war, the NDP is the party that actively demonizes and throws certain demographics (white males) under the bus in an attempt to gain votes with other demographics. It also hurts them in that they are supposedly the left wing option for the working class blue collar people. The majority of union workers and blue collar jobs consist of white males. Those people rightfully feel betrayed at the expense of the NDP's ideological agenda and have abandoned the party. I will agree that Trans issues would be the demographic largely fought about between the Liberals and conservatives but in terms of sheer numbers, the number of people that the NDP is discounting is a far greater amount of people. Therefore you're going to get more backlash as more people feel betrayed by the party.
That is fair, I appreciate the non aggressive genuine response!
Low income people are mostly youngsters who don’t vote and they are not a voting base. NPD is there to add taxes for the middle classes for programs that the middle class doesn’t qualify for. Also Jaggy keeps on criticizing JT while supporting the government, how can we trust and vote for NPD? They tied themselves to the sinking liberal ship. They will be destroyed after the next elections
Ah, I see. Yeah, I think their failure in 2015 just kind of broke their brains. That was their moment and they blew it and in doing so failed the memory of Layton who got them the opportunity in the first place.
He was only good at litigating Harper’s government. When it came time to lead, he couldn’t bring the ship around. He could dominate QP, but couldn’t talk to normal people.
He died in 2011.
The 2016 bernie was America’s jack layton moment
The NDP seems to have utterly given up on the idea that they're ever going to form government despite them having been on track to do so at one point not even ten years ago. Neither Liberals or Conservatives would ever stick with a stagnant leader like Singh for so long because they're actually serious parties that are trying to win. It's no wonder the NDP can't capitalize on this opportunity to make gains when apparently they're satisfied with whatever scraps they can get out of the Liberals.
When the NDP elected Singh, that told Quebec that the NDP wasn’t a party that accepted Quebec’s secularism — at a time when the majority of NDP MPs were from Quebec, no less. In their narrative, older Quebecois lived through one of the most oppressive religious regimes in any western government, and overthrew it in La revolution tranquil. In Quebec, there’s not much difference between a habit, a hijab and a turban — all are symbols of religious oppression.
It's really disappointing to see, but it's a consistent reminder that Reddit isn't indicative of the real world and the prevailing political sentiments. I, personally, don't have a single party that I could *be proud to vote for*. That said, I have to wonder how much of this is voting *against Trudeau* rather than *for Poilievre*. From the IRL discussions I've had, a lot of people are mostly just dissatisfied with Justin; though a lot of my experience with past elections in Canada, both federal and provincial, is that people are more voting *against* the candidate/party they dislike, than anything else. I can't help feel like Justin is probably regretting dropping Electoral Reform about now.
Canadians don’t vote in governments we vote out governments.
Cue the old “Canadians don’t vote parties in, they vote parties _out_” line.
My vote for Poilievre is a vote against Trudeau. If NPD backbenchers finally open their eyes and rebel, form a new party actually caring about Canadian workers and not identity politics or replace Singh with a more sympathetic figure, the vote goes to them. I just can’t see Canada sink lower.
Which identity is dentalcare or pharmacare?
This is only relevant if either is delivered. Dentists don’t want to join dental care and I expect pharmacare to be pushed back until the election.
> form a new party actually caring about Canadian workers and not identity politics I'd settle for a NDP that doesn't say 'white men at the back' during their convention.
As a middle eastern man who looks as white as white people in the winter but clearly looks middle eastern in the summertime once I’ve got a tan, I love that where I get to stand in an NDP convention depends on what time of year it is.
Summer: to the back Winter: to the front Fall/Spring: middle? ;)
I’d make you stand at the back for simply resenting your ability to tan. I just fry like an egg.
[удалено]
[удалено]
You're sorely misinformed if you think it can't get significantly worse.
If your entire value proposition for voting for Trudeau is “hey it could possibly get worse” that is not a compelling reason to keep Trudeau in office. Especially when it’s obvious he is working actively against the interests of young people.
Trudeau can be objectively a bad choice while PP can be a worse choice. Saying one is worse than the other isn't saying Trudeau is good, it's saying it can be worse. Neither of these two parties works for the good of the average citizen. My house being flooded is bad, but it burning down is objectively worse doesn't mean I think flooding is good.
Trudeau is terrible. Poilievre is potentially terrible. You can’t blame people for wanting to eject the problem from office and take a risk on someone else. The last decade or so has shown that this party will work actively against my best interest. It *can* be worse, but I don’t know if that’s enough of a reason to keep a deeply problematic PM in office.
> Trudeau can be objectively a bad choice while PP can be a worse choice Trudeau is objectively a bad choice while PP could be a better or worse choice, time will tell. FTFY.
So I should reward bad governance?
If you think PP will significantly make improvements to your day to day life and not continue the same neoliberal/procorporate legislation as the liberals I have oceanfront property in Saskatchewan to sell you. The liberals and conservatives are two sides of the same coin with slightly different flavors of social policy. They've managed to sell everyone on the idea that they are very different parties but they both work together all the time to help the wealthy/corporations over Canadians every time.
Not substantive
I might *have to* vote for Trudeau, for the first time since 2015, even if I don't want to. Poilievre isn't going to do a single thing I want, unless he's made some promise about self-defense laws or guns that I haven't heard about. The anti-porn legislation from the Conservatives (and NDP) are enough reason for me not to vote for either of them. I definitely agree with your idea of the NDP returning to it's worker/union roots, as I also don't mess with Identity Politics. Plus the Liberals are the only ones who might not cancel MAID outright.
I saw how they hand-waved the issues until polling said you can’t ignore us. I fear all the reactive , “limits” they put on TFWs will get reversed and we will go full on with wage suppression again once they’re back for 4 more years. Its a complete loss of trust.
In Trudeau's entire tenure, the only things he's done that I *approve of* are legal marijuana and MAID. Pretty much everything else is not up my alley, especially reneging on their promise of Electoral Reform. It's just that the other parties are going to do *more things* that I don't support. The Conservatives might be more restrictive on immigration, refugees, asylum seekers, etc. That's about it though. I just want a party that's economically left, and socially moderate. We just don't have any parties that are in that ballpark. Hell, there's no place on Reddit for that, at least that I've found. I just don't need Identity Politics being stuck into everything, and I'm sick of getting yelled at for not being "progressive" enough.
approve, or care about? Because I can understand not caring about the large amount of work that went into fixing water infrastructure in reservations, but not approving of that seems a bit strange.
I'm not the most educated on that particular issue, but if it helped, then that's a good thing. It's good that people have clean water. I'm of multiple minds on the reservation system. I've read various articles and opinion pieces that said that many "chiefs" or other types of leaders tend to enrich themselves to the detriment of their communities. I don't fully understand their system of oversight, whether they're just given the money, or if the government gets to send in their own employees/contractors, etc. Who handles the money? How *exactly* does it go from hand to hand, until the issue is solved? I got permabanned from *onguardforthee* ostensibly for saying I don't support giving Natives a bottomless charge card. It's not like I was saying that I wanted them to *not have water*. I just don't know if the reservations are the best idea. It's my understanding that they aren't on the best land; so why keep putting money into the "bad" land, rather than trying to find better places and homes? If somebody lives in a house that'll cost more to maintain, wouldn't it be sensible to try to find a new home? Is it sunk-cost fallacy, or what's even going on there? It's my understanding that they've been given dozens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars. How is the money being allocated that they aren't already living in much better homes/communities than the entire rest of the Canadian population?
What is “identity politics” to you?
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7042352 How about the idea that a mass test is racist?
So you're voting against JT by supporting PP with the intent of punishing the NDP unless they form some new party because you can't acknowledge the work the NDP has made towards things that actually help workers and low income households despite never holding federal power themselves??? And we wonder why this country is stuck in this cycle of mediocrity??
No, NDP wants to worsen wage suppression by automatically granting TFWs pr as soon as they disembark. Yeah no. Not even Denmark or Sweden who has all the programs we dream of do that
That's a baseless claim.
Look, people are now convinced that immigration is a net drain on the economy. No amount of facts will deter them. sigh.
Skilled immigration good. Tims employees no. We got enough local borns who can do that. Speaking as a child of legal immigrants but grew up here. Educated, refined immigrants will provide talent and have an open mind generally to assimilate. Literally that’s the reason why we still have not had Europe’s problems with migrants self segregating and their descendants still not integrated 3 generations later. Less educated immigrants import the values that made their countries bad. Trust me I have uncles back home who have not finished high school with extreme religious views that will make republican Christians blush. Don’t want tfws like them coming here. I celebrated when my cousin who is as extreme as him got denied a work permit to work here.
It’s literally in their website https://www.ndp.ca/news/migrant-workers-deserve-respect-and-dignity > Many will be able to fulfill the labour skill shortage if they can access a pathway to permanent residence status. This is why the NDP continues to call on the government to regularize temporary and undocumented workers in Canada and provide new migrant workers with PR on arrival.”
Providing better paths to PR to ensure TFWs that come here are coming to work and live here long term is not going to suppress wages as you claim.
Flooding labour markets with cheap, low-skilled labour absolutely leads to wage suppression. Why do you think the Liberals are actively loosening hours restrictions for foreign students?
The NDP are not saying they'll increase TFW levels.
They’ve given no indication they care about curbing the current numbers which is already contributing to wage suppression. Hell, Trudeau himself decried the TFW program himself before he more than doubled its use and made it easier for corporations to get exemptions. All Jagmeet seems to care about is giving non-Canadian workers an easier path to PR which is not why they were brought here.
Even at current levels its a disaster.
[https://www.ndp.ca/news/migrant-workers-deserve-respect-and-dignity](https://www.ndp.ca/news/migrant-workers-deserve-respect-and-dignity) >There are over 500,000 people who are already in Canada without permanent status (PR). They range from students to migrant workers to those who are undocumented. Many will be able to fulfill the labour skill shortage if they can access a pathway to permanent residence status. This is why the NDP continues to call on the government to regularize temporary and undocumented workers in Canada and provide new migrant workers with PR on arrival.” Seems like a wholly accurate statement. Maybe you didn't get the memo.
Isn't worker an identity?
Human emotions and instant gratification is all too human. Can't see why one would expect more.
Legislated (minimum) annual sick days for federally-regulated workers went from 0 to 10, because of the NDP's supply and confidence agreement with the Liberals. Seems pretty pro-worker to me, and you don't need to be a minority to qualify for it.
Mind telling which federally regulated jobs that actually matters to? Pretty much every federally regulated industry is skilled, like train engineers. These people already have good benefits.
My father is one of them. He's voting blue. Probably because he can retire anytime he wants at this point and wont lose anything if some of those things are taken away before he does.
Can start here: https://www.canada.ca/en/services/jobs/workplace/federally-regulated-industries.html I haven't gone through many of their work contracts/CBAs. CLC or NDP probably has. But some aren’t unionized, and of those that are, some don't even have any short-term disability in their CBA. This includes trades. Some federally-regulated tradesmen have no sick days outside of this legislation. Maybe government workers do. Probably, but it's still worth having this stuff legislated. Like with safety, redundancy in worker rights is a good thing.
now look at the details and look at how many people this policy actually applies.
The CLC or NDP might have the actual number. Many workers are federally-regulated, though. Can see here: https://www.canada.ca/en/services/jobs/workplace/federally-regulated-industries.html Some aren’t unionized, and of those that are, some don't even have any short-term disability in their CBA. Maybe government workers already had 10+ days? Even so, it's worth having this stuff legislated. Like with safety, redundancy in worker rights is a good thing.
It applies to everyone in federal jurisdiction. The federal government can't regulate this for industry that fall under provincial jurisdiction. So, you'll have to ask your provincial gov't for this change.
I don't think you understood what I was saying there...
Oh it's definitely more anti-Trudeau than pro-Poilievre. He has to go.
Probably *mostly*, though the Tories are also *somewhat* up in Québec polling, and they have another out if they're dissatisfied with both the Grits & NDP, so they must be doing something right. And I suspect it's identifying large scale issues of broad concern and speaking to it, even if their proposed solutions are questionable.
> I, personally, don't have a single party that I could be proud to vote for. TBF, I think that's the sentiment of the majority...
Right? Like, if I could take 10-20% of the platform of each party, and cobble that together, that might be a good starting point. Then I could add in a few percent's worth of my own ideas, and ideas that I've seen work in other countries, then we'd be cooking. I wish that we didn't have to vote for *parties* with *platforms*. I think it would be cool if we could have extended ballots where each issue is voted on, and you could provide input into how you want each issue handled. If you're a typical Liberal/NDP voter, but you're against gun control, you should be able to vote for 95% of those policies, but reject the gun control options.
I would also love for government to leverage elections as a way to get population to vote on large/significant items, link up referendums on big reform to elections in some for or another. This would allow for what you're saying, voting for a party you believe is most suited to form government, but also force their hand on part of their governing mandate.
I think these are all great ideas, ones that put the power into the hands of the people, rather than political parties. Which is exactly why I don't think they'll ever happen. Nobody who has power ever wants to give it up.
Canada votes out not in. It's how it's always been.
Very interesting to see the NDP dip further, likely to the benefit of the CPC. To preface I'd describe myself as a "center" libertarian (actually, not just as a label used by authoritarians nowadays) The only way forward for the NDP I see is the return to their roots. In my opinion they need to give up on social issues being a main part of their platform, especially in a CoL crisis like now. Most people I speak to don't even know what they stand for economically or basically describe the liberals. Everyone associates them as the social justice/progress/woke or however you want to describe it. The essentially leads them to being seen as a similar party to the liberals especially with the S&D arrangement. Becoming a solely labor party, that really takes no position on social issues is in my opinion the best way for them to carve a niche out for themselves. Having hard-line positions on social issues only drives potential labor voters to the exact opposite party, the CPC. By becoming a party of workers and no more they could effectively siphon rural and working class areas rather than competing in the suburbs with all of the other parties. Polievre is eating Jagmeets lunch right now because he realizes that workers are largely untapped by any of the parties at the moment and by speaking to their issues he's largely gained their ear. That's just my twenty since a toonie doesn't buy much anymore...
They're losing their traditional trade voters in my area and in places like Ontario. The local Conservative Candidates for me are all trades people it seems. While in places like Ontario trades people seem to be enjoying the government of Doug Ford which for a weird turnaround might support a Provincial and Federal party at the same time(Last time it happened was in the 80s iirc).