• Victor Villas@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    How much farther right does the centrist party needs to go before the far-right option drops of the table and the “leftist” option becomes viable as the new center? The southern neighbour has shown us: too much

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Lmao, thinking the Liberals are far right, because they tabled a budget based on actual finances and economics is honestly, just asinine.

      You people need to stop getting your news from social media. You use the outrage machine and you find someone who will make everything seem outrageous. Congratulations.

      Maybe try the sober second thought machine instead?

      • Victor Villas@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        thinking the Liberals are far right

        That’s not what I said

        because they tabled a budget based on actual finances and economics

        What are you even talking about, I didn’t even mention the budget

    • wampus@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Gotta admit, I’m not too clear on what you’re positing here. Yes, there’s the possibility that the liberals could go too far to the right – similar to how they’d gone too far to the left recently – and as a result essentially eliminate support for far right parties. I personally don’t think it’s too likely that either ‘extreme’ would get fully squashed, as there will always be a small segment that thinks things haven’t gone far enough.

      Our southern neighbour is just, in absolute chaos at the moment. I don’t really see how anything from their current situation or their historic style of government translates to Canada’s electoral stuff in this case. In addition to having multiple parties, the structure of the legislature is also quite different. Realistically, having more parties that represent better wedges of the Canadian landscape is a net win for how well the government’s actions likely align to the people’s will.

      I mean, the cons going in for that hard-right bullshit, was basically a political choice based on them figuring they wouldn’t lose the fiscally conservative/socially progressive support from the party. PP embraced US/Trump style bullshit, because he was confident his supporters who hated that, had no where to go.

      • Victor Villas@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        22 hours ago

        Your comment was long so I guess it’s on me for not highlighting which part I was commenting on:

        I’m sure part of the hope is that the liberals will shift right far enough, that the cons won’t have a viable path to full control of the government.

        I’m saying this hope is misguided. The cons are solidifying as Canada’s far right and the Liberals will never be right of center enough to make the Cons not viable.

        similar to how they’d gone too far to the left recently

        lol I’ll read this as “too far for their own good” instead of “too far for the common good”, then I could see how that could be a thing

        I don’t really see how anything from their current situation or their historic style of government translates to Canada’s electoral stuff

        And yet, PP is copying the homework

        • wampus@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Conservative floor crossers are a clear data point that refutes your proposition. I mean, it’s pretty much literal proof to the contrary.

          Similarly, the liberals right leaning bias, having gained increased support from moderate right wingers, is making more far left supporters reconsider their support of the libs – making it fair to reason that the NDP will see a bit of a bump next time.

          If memory serves, the harder-right social sorts were basically annihilated in the late 90s. In 1993, the conservatives had just 2 seats. The reform party from western Canada was originally a more socially neutral / fiscally progressive movement – it didn’t focus at all on women’s rights, though it did propose some modest reforms to things like immigration and the approach to quebec. It only really became more stupid, when it morphed into the Alliance, and then absorbed the Eastern conservatives to try and gain national support – and with those eastern cons came the social bullshit. But long and short, a fiscally conservative but socially progressive or neutral party likely still has the potential to undercut the far right conservatives.

          • Victor Villas@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            19 hours ago

            Conservative floor crossers are a clear data point that refutes your proposition.

            As much as a record snow storm refutes global warming. What would really refute me would be an election cycle where conservatives stop gaining seats while flirting with far right ideology. I yearn to see it, I just won’t bet on it.