this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
71 points (94.9% liked)

Canada

7185 readers
272 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


๐Ÿ Meta


๐Ÿ—บ๏ธ Provinces / Territories


๐Ÿ™๏ธ Cities / Local Communities


๐Ÿ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


๐Ÿ’ป Universities


๐Ÿ’ต Finance / Shopping


๐Ÿ—ฃ๏ธ Politics


๐Ÿ Social and Culture


Rules

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

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] Crankpork@beehaw.org 45 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Anyone who would put the Conservatives ahead of the Liberals on anything hasnโ€™t been paying attention.

I wish we had better options. The NDP could have this in the bag if they actually tried.

[โ€“] alabasterhotdog@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Anyone saying they'd vote Liberal instead of any other parry likely isn't a renter. Or you know, you could recognize that different people have different reasons for voting. Agree on your point about the NDP tho, that they're not making hay in the current socioeconomic context is pretty damning on party leadership.

[โ€“] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Anyone saying theyโ€™d vote Liberal instead of any other parry likely isnโ€™t a renter.

I rent. I vote Liberal. I'll do it again.

The rules are simple:

  1. pick a party with a plan (a) that benefits canadians (b) that they can implement ( c) and with enough popularity to win an election (d).
  2. repeat every election.

Except: (a) isn't conservatives' strong point (b) isn't conservatives' strong point ( c) isn't the greens' strong point (d) isn't the oranges' strong point until we have better voting

It was liberal last time. Until the average IQ goes up and people realize the cons are still schlepping some trickle-down scam and stop perpetuating their mess, we won't get a better party into play.

Don't split the vote. Minority Red is better than cruel blues.

[โ€“] skankhunt42@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 year ago

I rent, I vote NDP. Singh has a temper but he's a good guy.

https://www.narcity.com/jagmeet-singh-conservatives-laughing-canadians-cant-afford-groceries

I have friends who rent who would "love to vote NDP but they're never going to win so they vote Liberal as to not throw away their vote". Fuck. The system is broken if people need to vote like this.

I can't wait for my generation to be old enough to be elected.

[โ€“] Guns4Gnus@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

Well, or strategically voting.

I'm just thankful that strategic voting allows me a party closer to my ideals in an ABC scenario.

load more comments (3 replies)
[โ€“] TemporaryBoyfriend@lemmy.ca 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

One more time for the people at the back: POLLS ARE VOTER MANIPULATION

Polls and their news coverage gives people the impression that the outcome has been decided and demoralize / frustrate voters. It's why Thug Ford won a majority in Ontario with just 17% of eligible voters.

SHOW THE FUCK UP TO VOTE, AND BRING THREE FRIENDS.

Reality has a well-known liberal bias.

load more comments (5 replies)
[โ€“] psvrh@lemmy.ca 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

From housing affordability to climate change, Trudeau attempted to reach out directly to the demographic thatโ€™s helped him win past elections

Really? From the guys who

  • Did nothing about housing since 2015
  • Won't do anything about housing that might inconvenience developers and landlords in any way
  • Is talking all sorts of "studies" and "consultations" on housing...
  • ...but bought a five billion dollar oil pipeline without having to go on any such consultative exercises.

Please. The Liberals know what they need to do to fix housing (regulation on investment & speculation, massive and direct public housing) and they know that it'll help the youth vote. They don't want to do it, though, because their donor class would scream and they--the Liberals--are allergic to direct public spending.

Until they can find a "market-based solution" they won't do a damn thing.

And anyone who looks to the conservatives when they're feeling "economically anxious" hasn't paid attention to the complete trainwreck that austerity policy is. Think things suck now? Wait until the conservatives get in and do the exact same thing, only with more service cuts and tax breaks for the very rich.

[โ€“] Sir_Osis_of_Liver@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Almost everything you've listed is provincial jurisdiction. We don't have a national securities regulator because the last attempt at one was struck down by the SCC. Most business regulation is provincial, zoning is provincial, property taxes are provincial etc.

The BoC controls interest rates, but they act independently, the PM has no control over what they do beyond who they appoint to run it.

The only way they can get involved is with federal-provincial agreements. The provinces have deep connections with developers, so they're not going to do anything about the real issues of restrictive zoning and so on. Just look at Doug Ford and the Green Belt fiasco.

If you want to fix housing, go after the province. Agree or not with what they did, interprovincial pipelines are a federal responsibility.

[โ€“] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago

I'm quick to pounce on both-sides-ism, but OP seems to make a clear criticism of the Liberals policy history without venturing there. On several portfolios, they have done pretty good work, but to imply that they can do nothing on housing affordability is disingenuous. The feds used to fund public housing, and they could do it again. They could work directly with municipalities if the provinces object (which they probably wouldn't).

They also regulate mortgage rules. Term lengths, stress tests, capital gains rules, etc. There are plenty of levers they could pull to make it easier for new home owners, and harder for real-estate speculators. They could also provide low interest mortgages, or interest relief, to designated groups.

[โ€“] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The Feds have all sorts of their own levers they could pull to reign in the housing market. To date, the only levers they've pulled are to increase demand (RRPS withdrawls, shared equity (LOL), FHSA).

[โ€“] SamuelRJankis@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I think it should be clearer the Liberals has only done things where people pump even more money into real estate.

I really don't understand why there's any debate whether they would do anything for prices when the person who was their Housing Minister flipped houses and said investor like him was doing Canadians a solid.

load more comments (2 replies)
[โ€“] FaceDeer@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Wonder if they'll suddenly remember about electoral reform if they find themselves on the wrong side of first-past-the-post.

[โ€“] psvrh@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago

Nope, because they know that FPTP means they stand a chance at a majority in the future.

PR would mean permanent minority status, which, in turn, means both a) less corporate cash, and b) increased pressure to actually deliver on popular policy, rather than be caretakers for five years.

[โ€“] ikidd@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

FPTP has benefitted the Liberals far more than any other other parties put together over the last 60 years.

[โ€“] Ulrich_the_Old@lemmy.ca 26 points 1 year ago (10 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.

[โ€“] TemporaryBoyfriend@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 year ago

Because the media is owned by the far-right billionaire class.

[โ€“] grte@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year 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.

load more comments (8 replies)
[โ€“] gifferqqq@artemis.camp 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The most pressing issue for young people is housing/cost of living. Whether or not this is typically the responsibility of the federal government, paying only lip service to the issue or saying not my problem enrages people. The federal government needs to actually show some leadership and find some way to incentivize more housing (and specifically denser and affordable housing) at the local level or build it themselves.

While I definitely fault the libs for not doing more, I'm not impressed with the conservative or NDP takes on this issue either.

[โ€“] nicktron@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A lot of us are pissed at the lie about changing FPTP as well.

That's why I won't vote Liberal again. I wanted legalized weed and better elections.

[โ€“] xfint@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 year ago

Jagmeet has run out the clock too. The NDP should be making moves. The time is right. As usual they will not. Conservatives will fall ass backwards into power.

[โ€“] yeather@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 year ago (7 children)

It's almost like young Canadians are tired of seeing useless policies that don't benefit them be passed into law time and time again by the Liberal government. Good riddance Trudeau.

[โ€“] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 25 points 1 year ago

There is no political situation so bad it cannot be made worse by voting in elitist scumbags whose entire platform is 'screw you hair guy'

[โ€“] pbjamm@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That kind of thinking is what got Trump elected and look at the wonders that did for the USA.

"Liberalism isnt working fast enough, lets try fascism" was a bad strategy

[โ€“] psvrh@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, you're not wrong. You're actually eerily accurate.

People look to systems like fascism when liberalism succumbs to the political version of enshittification, more concerned with short-term political calculus, not offending anyone and ensuring donor cash continues to flow--all at the expense of the welfare of society.

Don't want angry Nazis? Don't make people feel like they have no hope, because some demagogue will come around peddling false hope and rage-farming instead.

[โ€“] pbjamm@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

What this fails to account for is that the party of nazis and demagogues is heavily responsible for that hopelessness. They somehow manage to successfully pass the blame to the other party who at least are trying to relieve that a little bit, around the margins. This is a case of perfection being the enemy of good, and it is stupid and self destructive in the extreme.

[โ€“] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It'll be much better when all those useless policies get passed by the guy in the blue tie.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[โ€“] Pxtl@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's housing. Which isn't 100% fair since that issue is primarily provincial/municipal. But liberals have always known that the Canadian media (and thus voters) is too dumb for federalism and have never let that stop them from meddling in prov/muni issues before.

I'll never support PP. Between environmental issues, LGBTQ issues, and his general skeevyness, I could never. But I don't blame anybody who is getting renovicted and finding no place to live for noticing he's the only one talking sense on the subject.

[โ€“] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Tories want to build 1 million houses in three years.

NDP 500k in ten years.

Both short of the 3.5 million housing delta identified by CMHC.

I get it, this isn't an easy problem, but fuck if we haven't skipped to the "we tried nothing and we're out of ideas" phase.

Immediate repeal of single family zoning and parking minimums, replace building tax with land tax.

"But my provincal/municipal freedoms!" Fucking keep them. You don't have to implement any of the federal suggestions, you just don't get federal funding to roads or transit.

"Why do you want to kill the ~~American~~ Canadian dream of the single family house?" I don't. There is nothing stopping you from building a single family house, it just won't be illegal to build other houses/buildings/dwellings.

"I need parking minimums so I always have somewhere to park" good for you. Parking is a service, you you should start paying for it like people pay for every other fucking service. Business and homes are still allowed to build parking, they just aren't forced to.

"Land tax, what the fuck? I have lots of land" yeah, and that downtown parking lot shouldn't be paying next to zero on taxes, while it's subsidized by 1,000 people living on shoeboxes on the same footprint.

I'm sorry, this topic riles me up.

[โ€“] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Keep in mind that parking minimums, and the tax structure that means parking lots pay tax on their current "best use" value, not what they could be worth if they were used for something else like housing, are municipal and provincial. There may be a way for the feds to "outlaw" those practices, but it would be tricky to do legally. Otherwise, all they have is the occasional transit project $ carrot.

Yup

"But my provincal/municipal freedoms!" Fucking keep them. You don't have to implement any of the federal suggestions, you just don't get federal funding to roads or transit.

The fed spend ~15 Bn a year on infrastructure. I'm going to guess provinces and municipalities very much like slices of that pie.

I assume most municipalities (like more organizations) rely heavily on plagiarism of policy. If so, I'd suggest that a pre-prepared policy package would do well.

[โ€“] i_r_weldr@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thank god somebody who finally has something to say other than hurr hurr small pp.

I can't help but wonder if his ridiculous appearance is designed to his his ridiculous policies.

At the risk of sounding defeatist, where got two parties feeding us shit; and we're debating if vanilla or chocolate flavoured shit is better, instead of upgrading to eating mud.

[โ€“] Dearche@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They shouldn't be in third place. They should be fourth or fifth place, behind the Rhinoceros Party, Centrist Party, and the Communist Party, or perhaps even the People's Party.

None of the top parties will decide to work hard to make meaningful and positive change if a fire isn't lit under all of them, and there's no fire greater than an insignificant party suddenly becoming a legitimate threat.

[โ€“] jadero@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And strategic voting has to be actually strategic. All of the parties play the long game, so we have to as well. If we never show them what we really want by voting for the people and policies we want, even when we think there is little chance of victory, none of them will ever see that we like those policies and people.

Given that we have no "none of the above" option that would force the election to be rerun with different candidates, the best strategy now is to vote for one of the fringe parties, ideally one that is satirical. At this point, there is no party that stands for what actually benefits the masses, so we might as vote for the jokers. Could it really be any worse than the mainstream parties that seem to be actively working against our interests?

[โ€“] Dearche@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

The Rhinoceros Party then.

Besides, I like Rhinos, so that can't hurt :P

[โ€“] Pagliacci@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't know much about Canadian politics, but...

The data shows the Liberals in a distant third place for 18-29 year olds with 15.97 per cent, compared to the Conservatives and the NDP with 39.21 per cent and 30.92 per cent respectively.

Itโ€™s a dip for the Liberals, who were at 26.8 per cent at the beginning of August for the same age group. And itโ€™s a boost for the Conservatives, who are up from 29.3 per cent at the beginning of the month.

That large of a swing over the course of a month seems like a red flag for the data. Did something happen that would explain the shift?

[โ€“] Nintendo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

there has been a slight shift in sentiment of liberal attitude and policy after a tumultuous time of controversy for the party in the last few years, particularly the Justin T black face incident coming to light and whatnot. but with that said, it hasn't swung the kids into full conservative social values that will make them vote conservative when it comes time to. this poll certainly is trying to capitalize on the zeitgeist instead of what people's actual values and actions are/will be.

[โ€“] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


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.

โ€œThat means that the Liberal coalition that was built in 2015, the movement led by (Prime Minister) Justin Trudeau, is slowly unraveling, and they've got to reverse this trend if they want to have any chance to hold on to government.โ€

From housing affordability to climate change, Trudeau attempted to reach out directly to the demographic that's helped him win past elections.

The prime minister is also meeting with his youth advisory board this week to hear its most โ€œpressing concerns,โ€ with the aim of informing future policy decisions.

Aside from a handful of exceptions, the Liberals have mostly stayed in third place among voters aged 18-29 since the beginning of the year, according to Nanos Research.

For voters in the 30-39 age range, while thereโ€™s been a closer back-and-forth between the Liberals and the NDP since January, the Conservatives have fairly consistently come out ahead, something Nanos chalks up to โ€œeconomic anxiety.โ€


The original article contains 762 words, the summary contains 189 words. Saved 75%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next โ€บ