I think the country runs best when there is a competent opposition. Having a dysfunctional official opposition is a bad thing for democracy, and not something anyone should wish for. Even if we disagree with the stance of the opposition, we should want them to be at minimum, logical, representative of the principles of the people who cast votes for them, and an effective check on the government.

And anyway, in Canada, federally, we do not have a single electable pro-trump politician. So, if there's something to be thankful for, maybe it's that.

[–] MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca 7 points 1 week ago

Oh, I fully agree about wanting a competent, reasonable Opposition. But this Opposition doesn't strike me entirely as such, regardless of the leader. I'd much prefer a better Opposition but I'm happy this Opposition self sabotaged by choosing to be led by a man who utterly repels such a large swathe of the electorate.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Even if we disagree with the stance of the opposition, we should want them to be at minimum, logical, representative of the principles of the people who cast votes for them, and an effective check on the government.

Being competent is only good when one is not evil (which rightwing politicians are almost by definition). Also there's no relation between being competent and representing the people who voted for them, and only acting as a check on the government when it tries to do something good is worse than not doing so at all. An effective opposition not acting in the interest of the people just becomes a ratchet holding back progress.

[–] voluble@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

when one is not evil (which rightwing politicians are almost by definition).

In the Canadian context, could you explain who you are talking about, and why you think they are evil?

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I mean, the CPC in general for scapegoating immigrants, supporting Israel, ignoring climate change and anti-worker pro-rich policies? It's basic conservative stuff, and it pretty much universally makes the non-1% world a worse place to live.

[–] HeroicBillyBishop@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

....and suddenly there is silence

well said

[–] voluble@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

LPC is advancing hard on all those files. Curious to know what you make of that.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I consider anyone who supports these things to be an evil asshole who shouldn't be allowed within ten miles of authority. That does include most LPC MPs and especially Carney, yes. Why do you ask?

[–] voluble@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

I'm trying to understand the point you're making.

[–] BinzyBoi@piefed.ca 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Glad that instead we got a conservative leader who speaks out both sides of his mouth...

Edit: To clarify, I'm talking about Carney here, I see him and the Liberals as a conservative party.

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yea, thank god we instead have a conservative who’s first reaction to the US/Israel attacks was “Canada will unconditionally support the US” and who only bery slowly afterwards changed his stance.

The only thing good about this is the floor crossing to be able to point to the Liberals next elections and say to all the “strategic” voters that they’re literally voting for conservatives and/or a party which was attractive to Conservatives. We shouldn’t need that, because oh my god, but whatever, I guess.

[–] MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

14% of the NDP party members have crossed the floor, should people on the other side, centre right who voted Liberal be concerned they are also "literally voting for the NDP and/or a party which was attractive to the NDP"?

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago

Probably not, because there is a reason you listed NDP floor crossers as a percentage rather than an absolute value.