- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh says his party will bring forward a motion of non-confidence to bring down the Trudeau government in the next sitting of the House of Commons.
“The Liberals don’t deserve another chance,” Singh wrote in a letter on Friday. “That’s why the NDP will vote to bring this government down.”
The Conservatives will win either way. There’s nothing in the next 10 months that would prevent the Conservatives from winning short of PP beating up children.
Voting no confidence now allows the NDP to viably compete for seats like Ottawa Centre where the liberals are weak and rebuild their influence and standing in the house. I don’t see why it’s the duty of every left-leaning party to prop up the Liberals as the natural governing party. Waiting 10 months isn’t going to cause the NDP to sweep into government, it might at best just delay the inevitable if they’re lucky, but more likely delaying will catastrophically wipe out their party by making them look like Liberal stage props.
It’s the third party fallacy all over again.
Maybe Turdeau should have fucking followed through on election reform like he promised then.
There is no fallacy. It’s a solid split between NDP and Liberals. And that’s really being propped up by the East. In the West it’s Conservative vs NDP.
It’s about optics.
Canada is one of the last few full democracies out there, and seeing how the United States has already failed, to give up and surrender sends a strong message to other nations that democracy just doesn’t work.
Its not giving up and surrendering for the NDP to not support thr liberals. Unconditionally supporting them no matter what because of fear of the conservatives would be surrendering.
Well, Jagmeet said just the other day that what Conservatives have been doing (with these non-confidence votes), was a game, and that he wasn’t going to play.
Now, all of a sudden, he’s caved?
Something either happened behind closed doors, or he’s surrendered.
That’s how I see it, and I could be totally wrong.
So you’re saying that if a viable parliamentary democracy is functioning as intended, it has failed?
I guess that depends on your definition of functioning.
Just the other day, the NDP leader said this: "We’re not going to vote in favour of any of their games because that’s what (the Conservatives are) doing. They’re playing games,” Singh told reporters after the vote was tallied. (SOURCE)
And now he wants to play games with our future by handing Conservatives more power?
We all know that the Conservative party in Canada and the Republicans in the US are not acting in good faith to bring benefit to the people, so is this how our democracy is supposed to work?
We have a democracy FOR THE PEOPLE, and if the people aren’t benefiting from these “games”, then it’s not functioning as intended.
In my opinion, of course.
Democracy’s success isn’t measured by how one person feels about an incoming government - it’s based on the strength of democratic institutions, and liberal democracies are further characterized by strong civil societies and human rights regimes. If the majority of Canadians want a Conservative government in power - why do you feel that preference shouldn’t be accepted?
It doesn’t sound like you even want a democracy, you just want a one-party autocracy, given that you feel that people shouldn’t be allowed to have fluid political preferences. That’s a failure of democracy - a one party state with all decisions made by someone on Lemmy.
I’m not happy about an incoming Conservative majority government either, but my gut reaction isn’t to start claiming that democracy in Canada has failed. I’m able to calmly acknowledge that there’s a party right now that is probably going to win a plurality of votes and ridings because the majority of voters align with their messaging. That’s not a failure of democracy, that’s a success of democracy.