Yes. Liberals aren’t your friends. They appropriated queer politics to do exactly this. People have been warning against this for decades.
They are not being tricked into doing this, this is the second time the Liberal party alone has tried this along with other proposals from Cons and other internet authoritarianism policies like lawful access. They know what it is for and they understand the consequences of who it’ll effect. It just so happens queer people (racialized people, indigenous people, disabled people, etc.) are also disproportionately politically active and challenging to liberal capitalism, and liberals have had an exceedingly difficult time shutting that down online through censorship alone.
It is not only distortive but also dangerous to accept that this is out of stupidity and ignorance. They are attacking us. “Elbows up,” awards for the people who voted for Carney because they didn’t think a minority govt with a stronger NDP presence was possible.
Two generational NDP ridings in my area flipped Con because of Liberal voters. So, I can’t say I particularly give a shit about how this would hypothetically empower the PC Party, since our local needs will definitely be ignored in the foreseeable future anyway, maybe forever if a Lib gets elected next. The fact is that a minority government, either PC or Liberal, would have far less power at its disposal to enact these common neoliberal policies. Instead, “Elbows Up,” we have a majority Liberal parliament that is aggressively slashing environmental protections, funnelling public wealth into private corporations for "sovereignty-"based mining and fossil fuel drilling, and implementing authoritarian internet surveillance policies; of course, all without consideration of indigenous peoples or First Nations. Wow, what a difference.
Don’t act like you’re considering the trans genocide rhetoric that PP was running on either, because it’s not like Carney has done anything to address the spread of anti-trans hatespeech or the restricted access to gender-affirming care achieved through privatization. Is it better because now it isn’t talked about at all besides by the victims?
Cool, FPTP in Parliamentary systems does not result in a two party system. Therefore no, your generic Americanism of ‘if you don’t vote for the lesser evil you’re voting for the greater evil’ is objectively and totally incorrect in every possible interpretation of Canadian politics or parliamentary politics in general.
I know you people are basically more American than European, but that doesn’t meant you have to keep yourselves at their intelligence level.
You’re really going to try to talk to me about my own political system and call me America for not knowing better?
It’s you who doesn’t understand our system, and I never mentioned once a two party state.
We are not a two party state, I don’t like the liberals, and the only thing I said was that An NDP vote in most ridings for our last election would be in effect a vote in favor of the Tory in that riding. As in most ridings the liberals were the most likely to beat the Tories.
We need to vote strategically in our system of we don’t want to throw away our votes or support Tories.
That’s the reality of our system, I’m not that interested in the fantasy version where we vote NDP and then everyone gets a rainbow and a family doctor and an education
It’s you who doesn’t understand our system, and I never mentioned once a two party state.
Yes, yes you did. You said:
and the only thing I said was that An NDP vote in most ridings for our last election would be in effect a vote in favor of the Tory in that riding. As in most ridings the liberals were the most likely to beat the Tories.
This is a two party system that you’re describing.
This is not what you have. A vote for a party is a vote for that party (or coalition). It is not a vote for whom you believe is the enemy party because its not for your preferred party.
Americans use the exact same reasoning, which resulted in the last two presidents having approval ratings under 40% within 2 years. "If you don’t vote for ‘shitty compromise which is objectively as bad as this other party but marginally different, you’re just voting for the other party.’
We need to vote strategically in our system of we don’t want to throw away our votes or support Tories.
No. You have a parliamentary system. This is specifically designed to not devolve or degenerate into a two party system via ‘strategic’ aka American-style voting decisions. You vote for what you want. The more parties that win seats, the less power any party has, and the need for coalitions increases, which results in a better outcome than the American-style system you’re ascribing to Canada.
You have the solution to two-party politics. You have the solution to strategic voting. It’s already implemented. You just need to not ruin it by doing American-style politics. That’s it.
That’s the reality of our system, I’m not that interested in the fantasy version where we vote NDP and then everyone gets a rainbow and a family doctor and an education
No, if everyone voted for the party that most represented their interests, then no single party has power and a coalition will have to form to produce a PM. Then you get a half rainbow, a chiropractor, and free American college; which is a half measure but infinitely better than sabotaging yourself because you think this is a team sport.
Because if you vote for Party A and x number of people vote for party A, Party A gets x number of seats. You have a parliamentary system. Seats are awarded based on the percentage of votes. You vote for Party B Party A gets fewer seats, you are awarding mediocrity. If Party A and B are actually similar, then they will form a coalition and simply out number Party C making Party C unable to do anything.
You do not have a two party system. You have a Parliamentary system. You do not have a winner take all zero sum system, you have a parliamentary system.
I love how you made this comment within minutes of someone else giving you a single downvote. You are wrong because you misunderstand how power in this system works and how people who aren’t in positions of power must navigate the politics of this system to their benefit, not because people think that FPTP isn’t a real thing or a factor in elections here.
I’m still not wrong. For most people in Canada Voting NDP in the last election would effectively have amounted to a pro Tory vote in the majority of ridings
Absolutely there is, and I would have loved to have voted for a competent NDP candidate in my riding if they had any prayer of winning either my riding or doing anything meaningful at all on a federal level.
I’m still not wrong though.
You wishing the NDP could have run and won in any significant numbers and without risking a PP victory doesn’t make it so, and people voting NDP just because they like NDP policy wouldn’t have changed that
Yes. Liberals aren’t your friends. They appropriated queer politics to do exactly this. People have been warning against this for decades.
They are not being tricked into doing this, this is the second time the Liberal party alone has tried this along with other proposals from Cons and other internet authoritarianism policies like lawful access. They know what it is for and they understand the consequences of who it’ll effect. It just so happens queer people (racialized people, indigenous people, disabled people, etc.) are also disproportionately politically active and challenging to liberal capitalism, and liberals have had an exceedingly difficult time shutting that down online through censorship alone.
It is not only distortive but also dangerous to accept that this is out of stupidity and ignorance. They are attacking us. “Elbows up,” awards for the people who voted for Carney because they didn’t think a minority govt with a stronger NDP presence was possible.
I mean I agree with you mostly but the vote was for Carney or conservatives. Voting NDP for most people would be effectively a vote for the Tories.
Two generational NDP ridings in my area flipped Con because of Liberal voters. So, I can’t say I particularly give a shit about how this would hypothetically empower the PC Party, since our local needs will definitely be ignored in the foreseeable future anyway, maybe forever if a Lib gets elected next. The fact is that a minority government, either PC or Liberal, would have far less power at its disposal to enact these common neoliberal policies. Instead, “Elbows Up,” we have a majority Liberal parliament that is aggressively slashing environmental protections, funnelling public wealth into private corporations for "sovereignty-"based mining and fossil fuel drilling, and implementing authoritarian internet surveillance policies; of course, all without consideration of indigenous peoples or First Nations. Wow, what a difference.
Don’t act like you’re considering the trans genocide rhetoric that PP was running on either, because it’s not like Carney has done anything to address the spread of anti-trans hatespeech or the restricted access to gender-affirming care achieved through privatization. Is it better because now it isn’t talked about at all besides by the victims?
So the NDP lost in your riding and your still arguing that I should have voted for them in mine?
You do not have a two party system, you have a parliamentary system.
That’s correct, thanks for telling me something I learned in grade 2 social studies.
I also learned what first past the post voting was in grade 2 social studies.
Cool, well, maybe you should read about it in your adult life too.
Thanks yeah I have, that’s why I didn’t throw my vote away giving it to the guy definitely coming a distant 3rd place and risking a Tory winning
Cool, FPTP in Parliamentary systems does not result in a two party system. Therefore no, your generic Americanism of ‘if you don’t vote for the lesser evil you’re voting for the greater evil’ is objectively and totally incorrect in every possible interpretation of Canadian politics or parliamentary politics in general.
I know you people are basically more American than European, but that doesn’t meant you have to keep yourselves at their intelligence level.
You’re really going to try to talk to me about my own political system and call me America for not knowing better?
It’s you who doesn’t understand our system, and I never mentioned once a two party state.
We are not a two party state, I don’t like the liberals, and the only thing I said was that An NDP vote in most ridings for our last election would be in effect a vote in favor of the Tory in that riding. As in most ridings the liberals were the most likely to beat the Tories.
We need to vote strategically in our system of we don’t want to throw away our votes or support Tories.
That’s the reality of our system, I’m not that interested in the fantasy version where we vote NDP and then everyone gets a rainbow and a family doctor and an education
Yes, yes you did. You said:
This is a two party system that you’re describing.
This is not what you have. A vote for a party is a vote for that party (or coalition). It is not a vote for whom you believe is the enemy party because its not for your preferred party.
Americans use the exact same reasoning, which resulted in the last two presidents having approval ratings under 40% within 2 years. "If you don’t vote for ‘shitty compromise which is objectively as bad as this other party but marginally different, you’re just voting for the other party.’
No. You have a parliamentary system. This is specifically designed to not devolve or degenerate into a two party system via ‘strategic’ aka American-style voting decisions. You vote for what you want. The more parties that win seats, the less power any party has, and the need for coalitions increases, which results in a better outcome than the American-style system you’re ascribing to Canada.
You have the solution to two-party politics. You have the solution to strategic voting. It’s already implemented. You just need to not ruin it by doing American-style politics. That’s it.
No, if everyone voted for the party that most represented their interests, then no single party has power and a coalition will have to form to produce a PM. Then you get a half rainbow, a chiropractor, and free American college; which is a half measure but infinitely better than sabotaging yourself because you think this is a team sport.
Thanks for confirming you truly don’t understand our politics or system at all.
Assume I want to vote for party A, party B is acceptable to me, party C is unacceptable to me.
Polling shows party B and C are virtually neck and neck, party A is unlikely to win.
I vote for party B, party B wins, we get a chiropractor.
I vote for party A, party C wins, and we get fascism.
Explain to me why I should take a principled stance and vote A anyway. After all they’re who I most want to vote for
Because if you vote for Party A and x number of people vote for party A, Party A gets x number of seats. You have a parliamentary system. Seats are awarded based on the percentage of votes. You vote for Party B Party A gets fewer seats, you are awarding mediocrity. If Party A and B are actually similar, then they will form a coalition and simply out number Party C making Party C unable to do anything.
You do not have a two party system. You have a Parliamentary system. You do not have a winner take all zero sum system, you have a parliamentary system.
Down voting me doesn’t make FPTP not real
I love how you made this comment within minutes of someone else giving you a single downvote. You are wrong because you misunderstand how power in this system works and how people who aren’t in positions of power must navigate the politics of this system to their benefit, not because people think that FPTP isn’t a real thing or a factor in elections here.
I’m still not wrong. For most people in Canada Voting NDP in the last election would effectively have amounted to a pro Tory vote in the majority of ridings
No, but being wrong makes you wrong.
There is a world where the NDP is a viable candidate, and Layton proved that.
Absolutely there is, and I would have loved to have voted for a competent NDP candidate in my riding if they had any prayer of winning either my riding or doing anything meaningful at all on a federal level.
I’m still not wrong though.
You wishing the NDP could have run and won in any significant numbers and without risking a PP victory doesn’t make it so, and people voting NDP just because they like NDP policy wouldn’t have changed that
Why only the past?
Because the election happened in the past