this post was submitted on 06 May 2025
79 points (96.5% liked)

Canada

9636 readers
973 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The problem facing the Conservatives is as obvious as it is intractable β€” unless real change is made. The form of neoconservativism ushered in by Stephen Harper has morphed into angry authoritarianism under Pierre Poilievre. It will not sell in Canada and the electoral record proves it.

all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] shawn1122@lemm.ee 40 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (5 children)

Liberals need to be careful here. This was destined to be a conservative landslide if not for foreign interference. Unless Carney is more effectual than a typical new PM with a minority government, the next election will be an easy Conservative win with or without PP at the helm.

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

if not for foreign interference

I guess that really depends on your definition of interference. Conservatives lost because Canadians took one look at the reality of Trump and decided "fuck that...we don't want a politician who acts like him, even in any small way."

Poppingfresh was leading only because the only person we were more sick off than him was Trudeau. Once Trudeau was out of the picture, voters basically said "Oh thank Christ...we don't have to vote for Maple Maga."

Trump being an ass doesn't count as interference. And it's ultimately Poppinfresh's fault that he refused to pivot away from Trump-style rhetoric and polemics when even his own advisors were telling him it was a losing strategy.

[–] Dearche@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

That still doesn't account for the roughly 40% of votes that went to him during the election.

I think foreign interference was real and quite pervasive, but people didn't realise it was foreign interference because it was so blatant. I mean, most of the big social media companies are owned by far right US companies, and all private Canadian news outlets are owned by far rights as well. And every single one of those touted far right rhetoric constantly with almost no left representation.

Hell, just ask the average Canadian where they get their Canadian news, and I'll bet a third will say Facebook, despite Meta banning Canadian news from the platform because they didn't want to pay taxes.

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 hours ago

Yeah. I get what you're saying now. Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you were saying that the only reason Liberals won was because of foreign interference on their behalf.

Yes, I know very well how pervasive right wing misinformation is. I live in a part of Canada that is surrounded by it. (Saskatchewan).

[–] shawn1122@lemm.ee 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

The ballot question didn't come down to PPs similarities to Trump. That was a factor, but ultimately the Liberal win was driven by Trump threatening Canadian sovereignty, which qualifies as foreign interference.

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Trump threatening Canadian sovereignty

While I agree that that was definitely a big part of it.

I'll have to disagree when you say that PP's similarity to Trump didn't factor in. It most certainly did. In fact it's the primary reason that PP wanted DESPERATELY to get an election done before Trump's inauguration. because even before that he had been getting comparisons between his brand of populist rhetoric and Trumps.

He badly needed an election before the idea of a Trump presidency became the reality of a Trump presidency. And he knew it. He knew Trump's stink on him would sink him, and he was right.

[–] shawn1122@lemm.ee 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

I said that it was a factor. But he likely would have still won even with those comparisons based on polling in December and January. There are many in Canada thwt are accepting towards MAGA and nearly everyone else was tired of the Liberals. Ultimately, it was Trump threatening repeatedly to annex Canada that tipped the election.

[–] Oderus@lemmy.world 11 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I think it had more to do with Trudeau being PM for almost 10 years and people were looking for change. If he stuck around, Liberals would potentially be third place. Because the Liberals found someone much better than Trudeau, it made Pierre even less likeable and he was either unable or unwilling to be more moderate to steal votes from other parties. Even in the last week, Pierre was talking about ending 'wokeism' and removing the ban on plastic straws. Those 2 issues aren't issues more Canadians care about so why even mention it? He needed to appear more centrist which is where Carney is.

If the CPC can find a relatable leader that doesn't court the extreme-right in Canada, they have a great chance of forming government. That's a big if.

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 hours ago

The CPC deeds to de-reform itself and go back to pre-Preston Manning/Stephen Harper days. Until then, they're all complicit, regardless of who leads them.

Much like MAGA took over the Republican Party, The Reform Part (later the Canadian Alliance) essentially took over the narrative after first breaking off from and then later rejoining the Progressive Conservatives.

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 14 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Carney doesn't play word games like the others do (see the English debate for reference). He is honest and loves Canada.

What will happen is he'll run circles around almost everyone else and they'll be pissed off he's beaten them ... cause he's smart. (Today's visit with Trump will be interesting to watch.)

You never play a game using someone else's rules. You either change the rules or change the game.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 7 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

You didn't respond to the other person's point in any meaningful way, just saying.

[–] bitwise@lemmy.ca 5 points 9 hours ago

You never play a game using someone else's rules. You either change the rules or change the game.

Telegraphed?

[–] small44@sopuli.xyz 1 points 8 hours ago

He was forced to say that he don't believe there is a genocide in gaza. He avoided all allegations related to brookfield. There is no politicians that don't play word games

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

Liberals need to be careful here.

Liberals put a Bank of England shill, O&G bagman, and anti-immigrant reactionary into the PM's office. This isn't an issue of being careful. They've ceded to the conservatives on policy and now they're just arguing over aesthetics. Exactly the same fumble Dems made in 2020 when they nominated Biden.

Carney will only be effectual at transferring wealth from the wealthier to the wealthiest. The economic situation in Canada will continue to constrict the working class and people will continue ingesting fascist media out of the internet fire hose. Conditions will not improve. Y'all jettisoned Trudeau but you're still stuck with Trudeau-ism.

[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 6 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

Yup, that's important. The thing is that Carney also needs to appeal to those that don't really pay attention to politics on a regular basis. Those that finally went to voted this election can possibly be like: "I voted last time and it made no difference".

[–] small44@sopuli.xyz 3 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Politicians should stop lying and avoiding certain questions carney already mastered the art of deflection

[–] shawn1122@lemm.ee 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Politicians have always deflected. This is not a new skill.

[–] small44@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 hours ago

I didn't say otherwise

[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

What has he needed to deflect about?

[–] small44@sopuli.xyz 2 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Brookfield link to deforestation and human rights abuses in Brazil when he was Vice Chair and Head of Transition Investing at Brookfield Asset Management .

He attempted to deflect about rhe term genocide but Singh was able to pressure him to say he don't believe there is a genocide

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I think he's right to deflect on Brookfield though. Governance of asset management is very complicated, so it's very easy to misrepresent an honest answer to an objective question. If the question is not relevant and has high potential of being used for misinformation, I think it's best to deflect. The only other option is to openly say "I could objectively answer this question with a 2 hour long explanation that you're probably not educated enough to understand" and that's not going to fly well either.

[–] small44@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Deflection is never good, it make a lot of people losing trust

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I don't disagree that it makes people lose trust, I'm just saying that a practicable straight answer would also make people lose trust

[–] small44@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 hours ago

I think people forgive honest people wrong doing

[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago

Thanks for the info, I appreciate it.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 33 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Honestly, I think they could run literally anybody and they'll eventually win government. Canadians will only allow the Liberals to win so many times before deciding it's someone else's turn.

[–] miss_demeanour@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

They need to do better than PP.
Both Harper and Mulroney are Bronze Adonisis by comparison.

[–] tama@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Careful though, Stephen Harper is tied up in a bunch of global white supremacy R&D

But he plays keys in rock-ish ensembles - he almost looks chill!
Not Carney finger-signing chill, though.

[–] Albbi@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Were Andrew Sheer or Erin O'Toole any better? I haven't seen anyone I'd be comfortable being prime minister from the Conservatives for a long time.

[–] miss_demeanour@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

No, they weren't.
Which is the big issue. As the GP alluded, Canadians get 'tired' of the same old Liberal gov't in an 8-10 year span, and plug our noses and vote whatever iteration of 'Tory' is most tolerable: fiscal responsibility (supposedly) and all that. But then they defund rehab and social programs, and throw weed smokers in jail....
I voted for Clark way back bc he platformed tax relief/credit on home mortgage interest! Sadly, his gov't spun out in mere months.

tmi, I digress....

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -2 points 4 hours ago

RIP Future PM Doug Ford. You would have kept it real.

[–] toastmeister@lemmy.ca -1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

The problem with the Liberals is our performance since 2015, second to worst performance in the OECD on a per capita basis, and mass immigration to hide falling GDP growth while basic services go unmet. Trump may have scared people, likely in order to push an energy corridor through the east to defund Russia, but in 4 years we will be back here I think as Carney still wants to maintain an immigration rate of 420k a year; into a housing and doctor shortage, to maintain the illusion of economic growth. Prefab wont do anything, since the problem isnt the cost to build a house, its all mostly land value and taxes.