69
'Getting squeezed on both sides': Liberals a distant third among younger voters (www.ctvnews.ca)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/canada@lemmy.ca
64 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The federal Liberals are seeing a dive in popularity among younger voters, once the core of their base, falling 23 points behind the Conservatives by the end of August, according to new polling from Nanos Research.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 26 points 2 years ago (4 children)

The part I do not understand is why the press have chosen Squinty McProudBoy and his base of racists, assholes, idiots, fascists, nazis, white supremacists, misogynists, and anti choice jerks. Also zero policies other than Trudeau bad. Plus he is a rich entitled land baron who has never held a job outside politics. trump lite is not what Canada needs or will ever need.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago

    You ever see that graphic of newspaper endorsements over the years? It's very blue. Particularly the American owned papers. No one's looking into that foreign interference though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago

    Pretty sure he was a Drama Teacher,l. Like the time he grabbed a person in the House of Commons and dragged em though a group of people even though there was a completely open area to their left.

    He's a twat that's for sure

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Perhaps for the same reason why the press focuses on Trudeau and Squinty McProudBoy for Prime Minister despite them not being electable. The Prime Minister position is appointed. It means nothing to us.

    I am sure the answer is, despite meaning nothing, because that is what the audience is interested in. People like to hear about famous people. The guy who lives next door that you can actually elect, and who will actually be important in your life, isn't famous enough for us to want to pay attention.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Perhaps for the same reason why the press focuses on Trudeau and Squinty McProudBoy for Prime Minister despite them not being electable. The Prime Minister position is appointed. It means nothing to us.

    Doesn't that imply someone else is going to be elected? And while the post is technically appointed, they're very much the figureheads of their parties in a given election.

    The rest I totally agree with, though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Doesn’t that imply someone else is going to be elected?

    Yes, what I figuratively referred to as the guy who lives next door. Maybe not literally the guy next door, but someone who lives in your general area of the country, who is familiar with the people who live in your area of the country. This is who matters. They are who you are going to have to talk to every week for the following four years as you exercise your democratic obligation. You'd better like him!

    they’re very much the figureheads of their parties in a given election.

    That might be pertinent if we had a party-based electoral system. There are party-based electoral systems. Many think Canada should adopt one of them. But, for better or worse, we haven't. We chose, and continue to use, the electoral system that encourages people to vote for individuals rather than parties. As such, this doesn't mean much either.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    I mean, seating in parliament is by party, and the government approved by the crown is all Liberal ministers. My local MP does absolutely nothing of note except occasionally campaigning and following the marching orders from his own party.

    You're right, the powdered wig guys in Britian centuries ago probably were envisioning it that way when they wrote the rules, but that's absolutely not how the system works in practice.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    We certainly stand by the right to freedom of association. But that is, again, only of concern to those in the union. It's not of concern to the population at large. Our concern is only with picking someone local who we want to talk to on the regular. That is why we go through this hiring process, to select the person we want to talk to for the four years that follow, so that we will talk to them and not run away and hide from our democratic obligations. People have a tendency to do just that – that is, undemocratically never speak to their representative again – if they don't like the person, which entirely defeats the purpose of hiring a representative in the first place. Choose wisely.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    The way it is in practice is the only way, and it's not going to change unless the system itself does. The rest is legal fiction.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago*

    Yes, we already discussed at length how the media focuses on the celebrities because people only care about celebrities. That is as true in politics as it is Hollywood or anywhere else. Such is human nature.

    But they don't matter. It's just entertainment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent