Most Canadians say Canada is Broken

[Argus]

Sixty one percent of Canadians feel the country is broken, and they have no confidence on current mainstream politicians. They long for a 'strong leader' and don't much care if he or she breaks rules to get things done. This is a sentiment rising throughout the world as people tire of the simpering phoneys who infest modern democratic politics.

The good news for Trudeau in this is that none of the leaders facing him can even be remotely considered 'strong', and certainly not Andrew Scheer.

The majority of Canadians think politicians aren’t concerned with people like them and experts don’t understand them. They say society is “broken” and the economy is rigged in favour of elites.That’s according to the findings of a new Ipsos poll, which shows that populist attitudes — as well as nativist (or anti-immigrant) sentiments — have gained new ground in Canada.

https://globalnews.ca/news/5860959/canadians-society-politics-ipsos-poll/

[eyeball]

The country has been broken for decades in terms of how governments have primarily worked to serve the interests of wealth and power. Progressives (as opposed to Liberals and Conservatives) have known this for decades too.

From the article. 

That’s according to the findings of a new Ipsos poll, which shows that populist attitudes — as well as nativist (or anti-immigrant) sentiments — have gained new ground in Canada.

No, all this shows is that conservatives are waking up to the fact something is wrong but they still can't figure out what or why exactly. All they think they know for sure is that it can't possibly have anything to do with what progressives have been pointing out and that only more of the same, more authority and power for government is the solution. 

Edited September 7, 2019 by eyeball

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

Sixty one percent of Canadians feel the country is broken, and they have no confidence on current mainstream politicians. They long for a 'strong leader' and don't much care if he or she breaks rules to get things done. This is a sentiment rising throughout the world as people tire of the simpering phoneys who infest modern democratic politics.

The good news for Trudeau in this is that none of the leaders facing him can even be remotely considered 'strong', and certainly not Andrew Scheer.

The majority of Canadians think politicians aren’t concerned with people like them and experts don’t understand them. They say society is “broken” and the economy is rigged in favour of elites.That’s according to the findings of a new Ipsos poll, which shows that populist attitudes — as well as nativist (or anti-immigrant) sentiments — have gained new ground in Canada.

https://globalnews.ca/news/5860959/canadians-society-politics-ipsos-poll/

It's tough to say how strong Andrew Scheer is imo.

He's trying to win an election, and he knows that Trudeau's only strength/path to victory is his awesome virtue-signalling campaign, so he's effectively disarming Trudeau by looking as dangerous as a beach ball while at the same time he's standing up for Canadian values & rule of law. It's like one of those guys who juggles a chainsaw with a teacup and a water balloon.

Scheer knows that Trudeau going into a debate without a chance to make baseless accusations is like a swimmer going across the English Channel in plate armour. The crappy thing for the debate stage is that Trudeau can get his virtue-signalling in at Bernier's expense now. Bernier is literally screwing the country six ways from Sunday.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

 more authority and power for government is the solution. 

Yes, this is the new conservatism somehow: anti-corporation, anti-trade, pro-government.  Meh.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yes, this is the new conservatism somehow: anti-corporation, anti-trade, pro-government.  Meh.

And the left wing view is government should control everything, all business, all speech, what you can read and see and say, how you behave, what you think, what your society is to look like; everything. All hail the government and its apparatchiks. They know what's best for us!

Edited September 7, 2019 by Argus

[eyeball]

32 minutes ago, Argus said:

And the left wing view is government should control everything, all business, all speech, what you can read and see and say, how you behave, what you think, what your society is to look like; everything. All hail the government and its apparatchiks. They know what's best for us!

The problem is that conservatives don't know what's best for government which is to monitor every level of it to an extent that would make Orwell himself blush.

The reason why is that conservatives view this as an affront to them - an attack on rich powerful interests is an attack on them... preventing politicians from lying or outlawing in-camera lobbying is an attack on the free speech of conservatives.

Yes, conservatives really are that fucking stupid.

Edited September 7, 2019 by eyeball

[Dougie93]

Strong leader is a dead end. 

Centralized power is the problem. 

Decentralizing is the only way to take control of your own destiny.

Don't look to leaders,  look to the people to make choices for themselves.

[Queenmandy85]

We all had the opportunity to put in politicians we like but most voters did not participate in the 2015 election or the NDP and CPC leadership races. Voting is only the end result. How many of you worked on the campaign of the candidate of your choice? Not just the election, but the nomination. How many people did you drive to the polls? How many friends did you call on behalf of the person you wanted? 

If you don't campaign, don't complain. If you don't get the MP and PM you want, you didn't try hard enough. Stop whining, get off your ass and get out the vote for your candidate.

[Dougie93]

Voting for an MP simply centralizes power since they are all selected and groomed to be cronies,

All parties will be the same, everything will be run out of the PMO as an effective dictatorship, which the source of most corruption, incompetence and dysfunction.

There will only be change if by radical democratic overthrow of the entrenched elites, the only votes that count are the ones which bring the Confederation down at Quebec.

Canada is a lost cause, crony culture is too deeply entrenched in Ottawa, the Ottawa emperor has no clothes, and everybody knows it.

[dialamah]

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

How many of you worked on the campaign of the candidate of your choice?

I did,  First time ever, maybe the only time.  I also was a scrutineer.

[Dougie93]

I will write cheques if there is a candidate I feel deserves the support, the only vote that really counts is where you park your equity; money is speech.

If somebody comes to my door to campaign, I will meet with them

but they usually flee in the face of my focused attacks on their parties idiotic positions on pretty much everything

Since they all uphold the same nonsensical elite consensus, they are all contemptible and utterly full of shit.

Edited September 8, 2019 by Dougie93

[Argus]

11 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

We all had the opportunity to put in politicians we like but most voters did not participate in the 2015 election or the NDP and CPC leadership races. Voting is only the end result. How many of you worked on the campaign of the candidate of your choice? Not just the election, but the nomination. How many people did you drive to the polls? How many friends did you call on behalf of the person you wanted?

There was honestly no one in the Conservative leadership campaign I felt strongly enough about to go and work for. Likewise, I was disenchanted with Harper, who had become "Mr. Pragmatic" and put little effort into change or improvement as opposed to simply treading water. Still, for the first time ever I gave him money, not because I was much enormoured of him but because I could see that Trudeau was a disaster in the making.

I have been voting for forty years and never seen a candidate at any level I felt any particular respect or enthusiasm for. You want me to go and work for them, to devote my precious time to getting some bland, dull person elected? Why the hell would I do that?

Edited September 8, 2019 by Argus

[Queenmandy85]

Doug, politics is a paricipation sport. Just writing a cheque is like buying a ticket to a hockey game. It doesn't make you a hockey player. Do you attend meetings, stay in contact with the Riding Association executive, attend policy conventions?

OTOH, it shouldn't need saying but if your views are not shared by a lot of people, chances are your views are not viable. It may be time to re-examine your position.

[Argus]

Look at the Americans. A population of 327 million people. The Republican primary was full of ridiculously incompetent, incapable lunatics and idiots with maybe one guy (Bush) who might have made a decent candidate.

This time around the Democrats are having another mass jamboree of candidates. And not one of them is worth a bowl of spit. Biden is about the only one who isn't a frenzied lunatic certain to widen the divisions in the country, and he's in his 70s.

Democracy is simply not working any more. No one who is decent, honorable, intelligent and capable bothers to get involved in politics. Instead its filled with greasy, self-serving narcissists, grifters and liars.

[Yzermandius19]

13 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Doug, politics is a paricipation sport. Just writing a cheque is like buying a ticket to a hockey game. It doesn't make you a hockey player. Do you attend meetings, stay in contact with the Riding Association executive, attend policy conventions?

OTOH, it shouldn't need saying but if your views are not shared by a lot of people, chances are your views are not viable. It may be time to re-examine your position.

Hardly anyone shares Dougie views, and no matter how hard he sells them on the truth, voters aren't going to want to hear it, they'd rather vote for a politician who blows sunshine up their asses instead. Unpopular truths do not win elections.

Dougie isn't trying to sell anyone, and even if he was, it would just cause the electorate to double down on the derp. Why worry about things that are beyond his control and even if they were under his control he wouldn't force on anyone? 

Take his opinion or leave it, stop asking him to get politically involved by running for office or attending lame meetings that solve nothing, like it would make any difference when it obviously won't, and the downsides of doing so are legion for no actual gain whatsoever.

Edited September 8, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Argus]

10 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Doug, politics is a paricipation sport. Just writing a cheque is like buying a ticket to a hockey game. It doesn't make you a hockey player. Do you attend meetings, stay in contact with the Riding Association executive, attend policy conventions?

Do you know what those things are like? Think high school cliques where everyone is always elbowing each other for 'likes'.  Not to mention no one in HQ gives a damn what riding associations want or think or say. Source: My mother worked in a riding association, then an MPs - later cabinet minister's office.

Quote

OTOH, it shouldn't need saying but if your views are not shared by a lot of people, chances are your views are not viable. It may be time to re-examine your position.

Let's look at the last Tory leadership campaign. One candidate, not a very good candidate, Kellie Lietch, said immigration needed reforming and proposed that all prospective immigrants be interviewed and tested for values and adapability to Canada. Every other candidate derided her proposal as dangerous and unCanadian. This despite polls taken at the time showing 81% of Conservative party supporters liked the idea. There is a huge disconnection between the leadership of political parties, and the grassroots membership - and an even worse one between them and the public in general.

They just DO NOT CARE what people want. It's all about winning niche voters with special, tailored promises. Why do you think the major parties love immigration so much? Ethnic groups are great! They can be catered to as a niche group with special ethnic reps who propose specific policies meant to please them. Why do you think Trudeau proposed doubling the number of elderly immigrants coming in? Because it was good for Canada? Of course not! That was specifically aimed at immigrant voters. Likewise his absurd behaviour in India was aimed at pleasing Sikh voters. His predecessor's refusal to name the Tamil Tigers as a terrorist group was aimed at Tail voters. And the Tories can be just as bad. Jason Kennie was very good at finding niche policies for particular ethnic groups in hopes of winning their support. And why do you think the Tories suddenly announced we'd move our embassy to Jerusalem if they get elected?

Edited September 8, 2019 by Argus

[Argus]

4 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Hardly anyone shares Dougie views, and no matter how hard he sells them on the truth, voters aren't going to want to hear it, they'd rather vote for a politician who blows sunshine up their asses instead. Unpopular truths do not win elections.

What about popular ones? Most Canadians want to see major health care reforms to improve the system. The politicians have no interest. Most Canadians want immigration reduced. The politicians have no interest. Most Canadians would support a grand, transformative new policy on natives if it were intended to pull them into the mainstream and off their isolated reserves. Politicians have no interest.

[Yzermandius19]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

What about popular ones? Most Canadians want to see major health care reforms to improve the system. The politicians have no interest. Most Canadians want immigration reduced. The politicians have no interest. Most Canadians would support a grand, transformative new policy on natives if it were intended to pull them into the mainstream and off their isolated reserves. Politicians have no interest.

Popular truths sell very well, as do popular lies. It's the unpopular truths and unpopular lies that don't sell, how true something is seems to make little difference whatsoever.

[Queenmandy85]

14 minutes ago, Argus said:

I have been voting for forty years and never seen a candidate at any level I felt any particular respect or enthusiasm for. You want me to go and work for them, to devote my precious time to getting some bland, dull person elected? Why the hell would I do that?

Your participation begins in the nomination process. If nobody steps forward that you think would be competant, you need to recruit someone. You need to build a campaign around them and get out the vote. 

When I say politics is our national sport, it is an analogy. It means we need to camaign hard to win, but staying within the rules of sportsmanship and keep stupid ideolgy out of it. It means that the day after the vote, you laugh and share a beer with your former opponents because when all is said and done, governments have an extremely narrow range of options and the party lable really doesn't make much difference.

I have to ask what about Canada is broken? The economy is pretty good, the government is functioning. We have a new NAFTA agreement and a workable relationship with the US. The pipeline impass will probably be resolved after the next BC Provincial election unless Weaver gets to be Premier (unlikely).

MacKenzie King understood that a government needs to recognise a problem early, formulate a solution, but do nothing until the public also sees the problem and demands the government do something.

Our weakness is in our education system. We are graduating citizens who are not fully educated in Math, Chemistry, Physics, History and Politics.

[Yzermandius19]

When the vast majority of people do not share your views, it doesn't matter how much you get out the vote. No sane person, who would be a great candidate if the only the rubes elected him, will be recruited to pitch ideas that they will never sell the rubes on, what benefit would that be to them?

Edited September 8, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Queenmandy85]

6 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

When the vast majority of people do not share your views, it doesn't matter how much you get out the vote.

When you are the only one in the battalion who is in step, you are the one who needs to change.

I am a militant Monarchist but I am not stupid enough to believe anyone else believes that. Harper was was smart to shut down any effort to re-ignite the abortion debate or the same-sex marriage debate. Government is there to administer and solve problems.

[Yzermandius19]

6 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

When you are the only one in the battalion who is in step, you are the one who needs to change.

I am a militant Monarchist but I am not stupid enough to believe anyone else believes that. Harper was was smart to shut down any effort to re-ignite the abortion debate or the same-sex marriage debate. Government is there to administer and solve problems.

Nah. I ain't changing to go along with the crowd, f*ck the crowd, they don't know sh*t. If they don't share my views, why should I even care?

Candidates I like aren't going to start winning elections any time soon, that just the way she goes, get used to it. Stop living in a fantasy world where that's going to change if the fringe outsiders just participated more, because it's not. You simply want to believe that you can change politics if you just try, how extremely naive of you, you can only change it if the rubes agree with you, and if they don't, trying to convince them will give you nothing but a headache.

Edited September 8, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Queenmandy85]

3 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Nah. I ain't changing to go along with the crowd, f*ck the crowd, they don't know sh*t. If they don't share my views, why should I even care?

At least you don't whine and complain about it.

[Yzermandius19]

15 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

At least you don't whine and complain about it.

If they want to vote for some bullsh*t, I can't do anything about it. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink, and I don't expect them to drink. The reason they aren't drinking has nothing to do with me or the few who agree with me, not trying hard enough to lead them to water, and has everything to do with them not wanting to drink.

Edited September 8, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Doug, politics is a paricipation sport. Just writing a cheque is like buying a ticket to a hockey game. It doesn't make you a hockey player. Do you attend meetings, stay in contact with the Riding Association executive, attend policy conventions?

OTOH, it shouldn't need saying but if your views are not shared by a lot of people, chances are your views are not viable. It may be time to re-examine your position.

My views are not shared by a lot of people?

I'm stunned to learn this

Who doesn't defend and uphold God, Queen, Country?