Re: oh no Canada

[robert <http://dummy.us.eu.org/robert>]

Canada, with all its problems, still seems better, on average, than the
U.S.A.  I would definitely have voted for the NDP if I had been a
Canadian, in any case, even if that ends up putting an idiot in the PM's
seat.

 > From: Noelle <noelle>
 > Date: Sun, 12 May 2024 14:02:58 -0700 (PDT)
 >
 > and then the response by Canadians on electoral-vote.com
 > 
 > P.C. in Toronto, Canada, writes: F.H. in St. Paul asked for a 
 > Canadian opinion on a Chicago Tribune article about thinking twice 
 > before moving to Canada in the event of a Second Coming of the 
 > Orange Jesus.
 > 
 > First, the article was substantially correct in its facts save for 
 > the suggestion that "pushing pro-business policies" would somehow 
 > have fixed the mess created by pro-business policies (there; no 
 > doubt now that I am a Canadian).
 > 
 > Second, it is true that PM Justin Trudeau came to the table as the 
 > bilingual (very important) anointed one from a Quebec-based (even 
 > more important) political clan. But he was never the sharpest tack 
 > in the box. He thrived by virtue of his Kennedy-like cosmetic 
 > qualities and survived because he was astute enough to surround 
 > himself with very sharp tacks. And, like Joe Biden, Trudeau appears 
 > to be a decent human being, something that cannot be said for either 
 > Trump or our own version of him, Pierre Poilievre.
 > 
 > Third, as to this Canadian's answer to the question of whether it 
 > would be worthwhile to move should things go south in the south? I 
 > can only say that no matter how shaky things appear to be in the 
 > Great White North, it surely cannot be as bad as what you Americans 
 > seem determined to do to yourselves come November 5th. And I say 
 > this even as my fellow Canucks appear hell-bent on assisting our own 
 > version of Trump to slither onto the throne. (Yes, you read 
 > correctly. We are, after all, still a monarchy. What can I say? You 
 > still have the Electoral College and we still have a monarch.)
 > 
 > R.B. in Calgary, AB, Canada, writes: F.H. in St. Paul asks about 
 > OpEd on Canadian politics. Frankly, it feels to me far more like a 
 > piece written by a Canadian conservative than anything even faintly 
 > objective, and pretty far from any kind of broad-brush explanation 
 > of Canadian politics. (I mean really, "don't move to Canada because 
 > those crazy Canucks are jacking up the capital gains tax! The 
 > horror, the horror!")
 > 
 > I won't go into the details either, but it is actually sort of 
 > accurate in listing all of Justin Trudeau's downsides and problems. 
 > What it does NOT do, which voters must, is consider the 
 > alternatives. Canadian voters, as elsewhere, mostly cast negative 
 > ballots, in the sense they are voting against a hated alternative, 
 > not voting for a positive choice. Trudeau, in terms of electoral 
 > prospects, is in a very similar position to Biden in the U.S.; not a 
 > very appetizing option at all, but at the very least not the other 
 > guys, who, quite frankly, are kinda terrifying these days. Like 
 > Biden, he's got to feel cautiously optimistic about his electoral 
 > prospects.
 > 
 > The big difference up here is the NDP (currently propping up Trudeau 
 > in a minority government). This is kind of like the Sanders-AOC wing 
 > of the Democrats having their own party and being much empowered 
 > thereby: highly unlikely to ever win an election, but absolutely 
 > capable of extorting a modicum of progressive policy from the 
 > government (for example, Canada is slowly and reluctantly 
 > introducing pharmacare and "denta-care," at this point restricted to 
 > seniors and children, but with a view to universality/single-payer 
 > in the future). The NDP do to the Liberals kinda what the Freedom 
 > Caucus does to the Republicans in the U.S. Congress, except from the 
 > opposite direction. I would expect the Tribune's editors Do Not 
 > Approve...
 > 
 > Quite frankly, I expect the next federal election will very likely 
 > produce pretty much what the last one did. The conservatives decided 
 > to double down on the cray-cray (what the Trib calls "populism"), 
 > much to the delight of a portion of their base, but that alone will 
 > almost certainly prevent them from getting over the top—the insane 
 > segment of the Canadian electorate is substantially smaller than in 
 > the U.S., I think, and loathed by the majority. More interesting is 
 > how the NDP will fare: will the usual pattern, of the Liberals 
 > getting all the credit for whatever the NDP forced out of them, 
 > repeat, so the "socialists" take an electoral beating, or will 
 > Canadian voters for once recognize and reward where the good stuff 
 > came from? I expect the former, actually...
 > 
 > Yes, I tend to vote NDP (I have actually voted at one time or 
 > another for each of the major parties, as I tend to vote very 
 > locally), but I am not a member of the Party and am acutely aware of 
 > their own issues and somewhat cray-cray wing. I suppose at the end 
 > of the day I too tend to vote against, much more than vote for.
 > 
 > C.M.W. in Myrtle Beach, SC, writes: You notice how in today's Q&A 
 > F.H. in St. Paul suggests you take time off so that they can post 
 > some CANADIAN news?
 > 
 > Clearly an attempt to further the invasion by seizing control of 
 > your site!
 > 
 > (V) & (Z) respond: Unless, of course, we've already been 
 > compromised, eh.
 > 
 > On Sun, 12 May 2024, Noelle wrote:
 >  > https://www.startribune.com/move-to-canada-better-think-twice/600363904/?refresh=true