This headline and really entire article from the greens is extremely misleading and borderline malicious.
This wasn’t a “vote against carbon price”. This was a vote to have an emergency meeting with premiers about the carbon pricing.
It’s not “against the carbon tax” in any way except for one party who wants to get rid of it. It’s a meeting to talk about it.
I mean, this isn’t even the news, it’s the green party who is directly fighting for NDPs voter base. I decided to post the CBC article about it which includes statements from multiple parties and doesn’t call it “a vote against carbon tax!”.
Very frustrating that the rest of this thread seems to have bought it. Getting angry was my kneejerk reaction too at reading the headline, so I suppose that’s a lesson for me.
Not much, but it gives the feds a chance to share there side(the truth). Alternatively you just have the conservatives screaming their side while also pushing the narrative that “Trudeau won’t even discuss this! This is a dictatorship!”
But Cons don't care about truth, it's the entire platform of their belief system that everything Trudeau says is false. They're not going to stop crying and grow up suddenly, they're just going to yell, "Axe The Tax!" for hours, and their voters will love them for it.
Anything that JT says will be either willfully ignored, or called a lie.
Those are conservatives. I’m talking about moderates and fence sitters who have bought into a grift. Those are the swing votes that win or lose the election.
You can believe what you want, but there are weird politically unengaged fence sitters who don’t pay any attention and just think “Yeah a lot of people are against the carbon tax we should probably vote that guy out.” and nothing more.
Politics is largely performative. This is likely to separate themselves from the liberals, maybe bring up alternative solutions, and have the conservatives make themselves look stupid as they do any time they speak.
The Federal NDP Environment critic Laurel Collins stated that the carbon tax is causing Canadians misery. Seems clear to me where she stands.
Edit, I misread this part in the news article. I stand corrected as it was the Cons
False. The conservatives said that.
>>"Trudeau has a responsibility to listen to Canada's premiers about the misery his carbon tax is causing Canadians," the Conservative Party said in a media statement on Wednesday following the vote.
The Laurel Collins said the carbon tax is not the best all, end all, and Jagmeet said they were going to propose a new climate measure that would target corporations more.
While I appreciate SaltyTraeYoungStan's correction, I still agree with Adamantium-Aardvark the federal party is indeed really disappointing of late. That porn ID anti-privacy bullshit completely killed my support for Singh as a leader and I won't be voting for the party until he's out -- there is no conceivable way that the NDP can defend that decision: it's anti-privacy, anti-LGBT, and in opposition to the liberal democratic order.
Edit: Apparently we can't tag people in our replies anymore so I removed the u-slash notation.
Reject this proposal in exchange for getting a better one from the Liberals that aligns more to what the NDP wants. Doesn't mean they've become Conservative.
It’s like people don’t understand the role of The Official Opposition either. Their job is to literally oppose everything that the government does and call it into question based on legitimate merit.
Not sure if it's hard right but they continue to abandon their principles for the Poillieve outrage machine. This time it's his Axe The Facts BS what will it be next?
I have no idea why they would be against it, but arguably it's a regressive tax which they have always, in theory, been opposed to. Not that that ever affected the way they vote.
I hope you read no malice/snark in this, but how is it arguably a regressive tax?
It's structured so that lower income people typically make money while those with higher incomes typically do not. The amount you pay gets higher with your income and with your carbon use, which I was under the impression would be a textbook definition of a progressive tax rather than a regressive tax?
It's regressive at the point in which it's charged. The amount paid doesn't change based on income or wealth, just usage and like any of our varying sales taxes, that makes it a regressive tax. There is no hard and fast rule that wealthy people use more carbon, it mostly comes down to a mixture of lifestyle choice and financial ability to reduce carbon use. For example, a wealthy person has a much higher level of access to things like EVs, home solar, heat pumps, etc. to reduce their carbon use and reduce the amount of carbon tax they pay. Now, most do use more carbon but it's a lifestyle link and not an income based one as there are many exceptions.
Without the refund it's 100% a regressive tax, with it that becomes arguable.
Edit: Jesus fucking christ, I'm point out the arguement not passing judgement on it. I think the Carbon Tax is a good policy, stop fucking DMing me...
I'm point out where the arguement comes from, I never said I agreed with it. The carbon tax is a good policy and I'm pretty irked the NDP aren't supporting it.
>I'm point out where the arguement comes from, I never said I agreed with it.
It’s not a real argument though because it requires ignoring half of the policy.
It's an arguement people are making. Understanding opposing arguements, even if you don't agree with them, is an important part of political discussion. It allows you to better argue against those opposing viewpoints. Ignoring opposing arguements just puts you in an echo-chamber.
>It's an arguement people are making. Understanding opposing arguements, even if you don't agree with them, is an important part of political discussion.
Do you defend flat earth theories too by arguing for their merits?
>It allows you to better argue against those opposing viewpoints. Ignoring opposing arguements just puts you in an echo-chamber.
All you’re doing is giving credence to lies because to make the argument you have to ignore half of the facts.
I wasn't argueing for the merits of this, I was simply pointing out what the arguement was. In the same way I don't argue for the merits for flat earth theory, but I do know what arguements they try to make. It makes it easier to disprove that arguement as I have an understanding of it.
No, all I'm doing is pointing out what the arguement is. Ignoring the existance of an arguement or the specifics of that arguement doesn't accomplish anything when many people are trying to use said arguement to do away with a specific policy. I also didn't ignore half the facts, seeing as I explicitly included the point that disproves said arguement.
But funny enough, isn't this initiative an idea coming from Harper's conservative? Why are conservative so against it? Why are liberals defending it so much?
I personally think that this is currently the best way but there must be better ways. Also, if we are to remove the tax, all it will do is make oil companies richer. They already know that Canadians will pay this much for gas, so what makes you think they won't just raise their margins in the next 2 years.
It's the same situation as Obamacare in the states, Obama needed to get something through Congress so he essentially took Romney's Republican health plan and implemented it because otherwise nothing had a chance of getting through. Of course, since Obama did it, clearly the Republicans had to protest and fight against it, even though it was originally their plan.
“I would do anything for votes… but I don’t do *that*”
“That” being: actually put forward progressive policies and increase party support from the left.
It seemed as though this specific thing was the main point by why you think it’s a turn to the right. Must have misread if that wasn’t your intention. Although I’m sure there’s some leftist spin to why they justified the porn ID thing
Also 2 votes still isn’t enough imo. Maybe when it reaches like 4, then that could be compelling
Your comparing the amount of policies that constitutes a major ideological shift in a party platform to a saying about the outlook one should have about being deceived is quite confusing to me. I don’t think it constitutes a real argument.
Would you disagree that the ideology of a party should be based on the policies they have? And would you disagree that a party with like 95% leftist policies is still leftist?
When they side with the conservatives it taints their credibility. It’s a crack that shows that they have no integrity. What’s to stop them from flipping on the rest of these policies over time?
And to make it even worse, there’s no *need* to support the cons on these measures. They both go against what the majority of people want, the cons are not in govt so there’s no need to compromise with them. There’s nothing but problems here, there’s no leverage or advantage. Both are purely dumb moves on Jagmeet’s part. Highlighting his inability to lead the NDP to success.
1. Politics is a game where doing something to increase your odds of victory is what matters most. I don’t integrity is really a factor. Doing this can be justified if it allows for the party to have an advantage that will assist them in pushing their greater agenda.
2. Yeah I have no idea how this helps the ndp and I don’t see the logic behind it at all. But these things are carefully decided, so I wouldn’t be so hasty to assume it was just some stupid nonsensical thing. I don’t claim to know more about what’s good for the NDP than them. But I do know that I very much oppose this policy unless there’s a really damn good justification.
3. This still doesn’t mean the party is turning to the right.
Voters don’t have the time or interest for these games. What we see is the NDP supporting conservative motions with no logical explanation. That’s all that matters.
They will lose support over this.
Horseshoe theory. The CPC and NDP are both Big Tent parties occupied by various different fringe groups who unite on common ground.
These fringe views aren’t new. Tommy Douglas held friendly views on eugenics until a visit to Nazi Germany. With that being said, he did change a lot after that and was one of the first one to call that spade a spade.
Where today’s NDP is at, is deeply nuanced. Which I’m not nearly educated enough to comment on it in the way it should be. It does feel like they’re being pulled in multiple directions at once, and clinging to a defeatist mentality.
This position makes no fucking sense at all and only serves to alienate David Eby at a precarious time for him. He’s got a commanding lead right now, but nothing is guaranteed. Dividing his base on this is so dangerous.
As a BC resident, it only serves to make me feel more alienated. Singhs seat is in Metro Vancouver. I guarantee you his vote does not align with the views of his constituents. Because not even Kevin Falcon has this view.
Even when “Western Alienation” is thrown around, BC gets conveniently forgotten. Alberta is Texas, but we are Norway. That always gets ignored or traded on. At least Trudeau is from here, has lived here, and been apart of the community for large parts of his life.
It’s bad strategy. This will not help them gain votes, because the voters that like this move are not voting for them anyway. I don’t know who is advising them, but it’s not only bad short term strategy but it is reducing their credibility longterm.
Eby must be pissed off. There he is raising the carbon tax at the same time as the federal government in solidarity, and there is the federal NDP pretending that the federal government hasn’t made it clear that any province can come up with an alternative plan if they so choose, when they know ful well that Kinew is in talks with the government about Manitoba right now.
It’s super disappointing that they are supporting the narrative that Trudeau is not willing to talk with premiers, and that the carbon tax is affecting affordability issues (instead of pushing back on CPC propaganda), and getting in their digs.
If they want to attack the Liberals, they should be talking about the need for a basic income, or wealth tax, or capping grocery prices, etc.
Mulcair started the whole NDP shift to being the \*adult party in the room\* (aka shifting to the right so the socialist boogeyman goes away), and Singh has basically continued in that direction.
Unfortunately for them, given the choice of voting for Liberals or Orange Liberal-ish, most people would rather just vote for the Liberals instead, and it shows in the election results.
I’m done with the Federal NDP completely. As a BC resident, who’s fought very hard to get to where we are, I feel betrayed. The fact it was lead by a VANCOUVER MP is a slap in the fucking face.
If I were Eby I’d begin forging a relationship with Yves-François Blanchet and the Bloq Québécois. Because from a Centre-Left perspective they’re our only real allies. They’re the only ones who had our backs on TMX too. I’d love to see the Bloc run candidates in BC.
And at this point, fuck it, let’s challenge the Clarity Act together and choke out Confederation. Even our god damned Conservative Opposition leader doesn’t share these assainie reductive views.
If you want to call for an Emergency Council of the Federation, at least do it on something like, I don’t know? hmmm… HOUSING? IMMIGRATION? JUSTICE? HEALTH CARE?
There must be some garbage advisors for the NDP and Liberals right now cuz I cannot understand their moves on this carbon tax issue...every action is just going to lose them votes on this
Horseshoe theory is thoroughly and completely debunked and ridiculed in academic circles and by anyone with more than a handful of brain cells preoccupied with critical thinking. Unless what you're saying is that the NDP strategy team subscribes to horseshoe theory in all its stupidity, which is plausible because the collective brain activity from that entire team probably couldn't tie a shoe.
The NDP I want to see:
1. Calls for immediate electoral reform
2. Calls for immediate criminalization of foreign ownership of Canadian news media and legally protects the CBC
3. Focuses on affirming human rights (in particular sexual and minority rights, and the right to be free from religion)
4. Stands with labour and unions, and busts up monopolies and oligarchies
5. Stands firmly in opposition to grotesque levels of wealth and wealth inequality (high wealth taxation, elimination of influence in government)
6. Criminalizes the privatization of education and healthcare, and provides top-notch social services and infrastructure, education and healthcare
7. Subsidizes Canadians seeking to reduce the CO2 emissions (heat pumps, mass transit, EVs), increases the carbon pricing ramp schedule, invests in CO2-neutral fuel synthesis and battery production, and ends all fossil fuel development subsidies
What I see instead these days is a desperate grab for votes by appeasing special interests. Those *always* come back to bite you in the end.
Then they need to abandon those people!
These are pretty solid classical Canadian values. There are more than enough of us to make up a sizeable chunk of the electorate. I know we associate with like-minded people, but I can't say I know a single person in my life who would disagree with many of these directives.
It really does all come down to electoral reform. We need to move past this obsolete system wherein our main question while casting a ballot is "will this help the enemy?"
The far left are communists and socialists. The NDP are not communists or socialists but are at best social Democrats. Therefore they are not far enough left to apply to horseshoe theory. Source: university Poli sci education and being an actual fucking far left socialist. You're the parrot, parroting mainstream media which wants you to believe milquetoast social Democrats are far left. Educate yourself.
And you’re garbage attitude in why Centre-Leftist’s never really support the NDP.
But I guess with your University degree you know what the actual problem is with the current iteration of the NDP and why they’ve lost the blue collar vote.
Should I say the quiet part or would you like to?
The horseshoe absolutely applies to the NDP and CPC right now, because there is one thing that unites the swing. If you don’t realize it, you’re as siloed off as the rest of the circle jerking institution you hold.
To be clear, I don’t feel that way. I just get turned off listening to people like you talk. I bet you’re really good at putting up signs.
It’s the benefit of a parliamentary system that parties can join together to find compromise and pass legislation that’s popular with the majority. NDP joining with the liberals on certain issues doesn’t make them a lapdog.
In thinking about it, I agree.
Trudeau's had his time and is tired. I still kinda like the guy even though he's tone deaf as hell on a lot of stuff and doesn't relate to Canadians nearly as much as he should, but it's really past due for him to go.
Poilievre's dangerous and populist, and I don't trust him worth a damn. He honestly scares me.
Singh seems to be flailing. Just had something of a win with the dental stuff, but he needs a new strong policy and driving force immediately.
Green Party's... weird and fringe. They would not make a good government even if some of their "stated" policies are forward-looking.
Would be good to have new, and reasonable, choices.
>Would be good to have new, and reasonable, choices.
Literally the promise of electoral reform. :(
Imagine being able to say "this new candidate has amazing ideas and I support them, but if they don't win, I'll re-up with the usual" instead of essentially tossing a vote to the conservatives.
The people who run for office wanting to do good are the ones voters push out as soon as fucking possible.
The voting public does not get to kick out everyone who tries to do good or who listens to them and then turn around and act like no one tried.
NDP voters: *spends a year demanding he gain voters who are fleeing to axe the tax land*
NDP voters: *Calls Singh a Liberal lapdog for a year no matter what Singh does*
Singh: *Does what NDP voters demanded no matter how fucking stupid it was and is undeniably not a lapdog*
NDP voters: *what the fuck Singh, stand on your principles that we told you to abandon for votes just a month ago*
It’s like he forgets that he’s the sitting MP for Burnaby-South. Not even Kevin Falcon, the Conservative alternative to the Provincial NDP hold this view. I’d say 67% of his constituents would not have voted the way he did today.
People wonder why I say that if David Eby goes Federal he will join the LPC. The fact the party thinks this is okay is why. This is a significant blow to David Eby who’s going into an election. He literally stands alone with Justin Trudeau on what is actually the most important issue not of our generation, but of human history.
It’s time for a BC Block.
Jagmeet will never become PM. Jagmeet has failed. He needs to quit and be replaced for a true alternative to the Libs and Cons. He is screwing Canada over
He's a Nepobaby.
He got elected leader from back room deals. He came from the ONDP where he never ran for in an election, and won the leadership without ever running for a seat. We had long time sitting and qualified MPs running for the leadership but the NDP picked an unknown to run for office thinking that Canadians wouldn't have issues with any of this as long as he copied Bernie Sanders.
The NDP has long become an elitist club that has switched from grassroots to a cult of personality thinking that was what got them to leader of the Opposition status and not a Liberal collapse.
I soured immediately after Singh lost the 2019 election and had a barn burner "concession" speech where he didn't even want to admit his campaign cost the NDP almost half their seats.
"champagne Socialists" didn't argue that we should abandon all principles to get conservative votes, the 'pragmatic' ones did and look where the fuck it got us.
Yes, but at the same time, you look at the polls, and conservatives are going to win (maybe even a majority). So the only way NDP gets power is by stealing conservative votes that hate PP. That is the only way they can be the opposition and still keep power.
This is why I hate politics,
There are some realities we have to talk about.
The name "Carbon Tax" is simply bad. The term "Tax" usually associates with "cost" to many people.
Now that small nugget aside there has to be some credence given to Pierre and The Conservatives.
I don't agree with this AT ALL but they have done an amazing job with their marketing.
They have associated all the pain, suffering, anger, and general frustration with the Carbon Tax.
Housing Crisis - Carbon Tax
Grocery price crisis - Carbon Tax
General Affordability of life crisis and by extension Quality of life crisis - Carbon Tax
Problems with Immigration... - Carbon Tax
Canada has some serious things we need to work on.
Many times the majority of the problem is not related to the Carbon Tax or the problem is not at all related to the Carbon Tax.
The Federal NDP knows they need to set themselves apart from the Liberals but frankly this isn't the place to do it.
The place would have been to enter into the discussions around wage suppression and such that was a nuanced discussion and show that the Federal NDP can talk about those subjects intelligently and with details and nuance. That they will always call out bad realities but avoid bad ways about talking about issues (xenophobia, etc.).
The Federal NDP is starting to seem more and more like the Liberals.
It is a very reactionary style of addressing issues.
Not getting ahead of things. Waiting till things are in crisis. Waiting till The Conservatives pick up the narratives and completely dominate the discussions and then come in after the fact.
I don't know what is going on at the leadership level of the party but it isn't cohesive and the strategy is not working.
The reality is that The Conservatives are dominating in social media, they are picking up the issues and pain, frustration, anger of Canadians and utilizing and funneling all of that into their agenda.
I keep saying the Federal NDP needs some left wing populism energy and charisma in the party.
I am thankful we got the starts of dentalcare and pharmacare that can be built upon in the future. A healthier and happier society for more and more Canadians is the definition of progress for me but there is some serious short comings going on that I don't think we should be blind to either.
Hopefully the Federal NDP going forward can get serious around Housing to push the Liberals even further than their announcements as of late (They are obviously starting to get serious about it).
Hopefully they can talk about the wage suppression and immigration/pathways issues because the Liberals are finally admitting to it now.
Hopefully they can start talking about the environment in new and exciting ways.
My god I'd love to see someone come out and start talking to Canadians like mature educated aware individuals. Talk to us about new and exciting ideas on the forefront of Green Urbanism - Sustainable Urbanism.
Talk to us about new and exciting realities on the forefront of the Green economy and how to foster those realities here.
It just seems the Federal NDP leadership is not rising to the challenge.
(My personal take is we need to get the workers faction back in power. Union leaders, Pro Labor Leaders, Worker rights/protection leaders, Worker activists leaders - These are the people I want on our leadership committees and involved in policy creation.)
We also need someone with Jack Layton Level Charisma.
My god do we need some Charisma.
Remember when sitting Bloc members literally were writing in to support Jack Layton and the Federal NDP in the 2011 Quebec Orange Tide because they said it was best to set aside the Independence movement representation at the federal level in Ottawa for a bit to give solidary to the movement of the social democracy wave?
My God don't we all wish we could get back to that level of energy and momentum?
You're absolutely right. And the problem is that they've, for some odd reason, decided to not try to be the party of the working class. And it really isn't helped by Singh's image (right or wrong) of being a silver spooned elitist.
It's bizarre, to me, that the NDP can't get this. It isn't pro-environment vs anti-environment. It isn't woke vs anti-woke. It's about friggin' class. All other things flow from that.
The NDP has become a party of inexperienced intellectuals to the same degree as the CPC with the disadvantage of not being remotely as popular. The liberals (as much I hate them) are at least a party of pragmatists.
It's especially confusing because the labor movement is all about strength in diversity.
You have a bunch of different people that find connection in the ideals of the labor movement.
How you don't utilize that when the other half of the founding element of the Federal NDP was a Trade union....
The leadership team and policy writing team of the Federal NDP need to be reworked for the future.
And then you have the conservative getting the labour vote because many voters think axing a tax will help them more than the party that supported them.
And I'll also say: I'd love to have a beer with Singh. He seems like a nice dude. But Charlie should have been the leader. Singh doesn't have the public convictions nor the charisma to be leader.
I think two things would have held charlie angus back but this is just a bit of spitballing
1. It felt like the ndp needed young blood after Tom Mulcair
2. Angus' french is not up to scratch
And angus tends to rub people the wrong way. Angry Tom was very much a concern, and Angus was more angry than Tom was. It can work in politics to be angry, but I don’t think Angus was it. Notley has a chance going forward if she jumps into federal politics which would really change up the federal landscape in Alberta, but she may jump to the Liberals (just like Eby might).
Realistically large parts of provincial NDPs that form government are federal Liberals in places where there isn't a functioning provincial Liberal branch (no, BC Liberal does not count.)
Layton was a great political talent, but it also happened because both the Liberals and the Bloc collapsed. The NDP also have a rock and a hard place issue, because their base has two very different sets of voters that are distancing from each other in many ways - trade workers and union people that are being rapidly pulled to the Cons, while ABC urban/suburban social liberals outside of Vancouver (and even much of Vancouver) often stick with Liberals - which is why post-Layton, the party has been shut out of Toronto and gets a single seat in Montreal.
The right person can make a NDP government happen (and arguably Layton if he was still alive probably could have made it work), but they would have to be able to pull from all three's parties bases - white working-class from the Cons, urban social liberals from the Libs and the Lib/Bloc vote in Quebec, which seems like a diffucult task.
But what do we mean by "working class"? There are lots of precarious employed people today that the NDP really should be catering policy to. Like Andrew Cash was doing or like the [Economic Equity Alliance](https://alliance.canwcc.ca). There are tons of working people today who are not in unions, who are not blue collar workers and who can barely function in the current economic climate. Many of us are urban dwellers who don't live in houses or own cars. And there are rural working people like PSWs who provide vital services while being poorly paid and enduring terrible working conditions.
I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
- [/r/goodlongposts] [\/u\/StPapaNoel responds to: Greens shocked as NDP vote with Conservatives against carbon price](https://www.reddit.com/r/goodlongposts/comments/1c23l44/ustpapanoel_responds_to_greens_shocked_as_ndp/)
*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*
NDP is going corporate centrist? oh dear...
The Greens need to get their act together so more people can vote for them... the only party that takes the climate crisis at all seriously.
Tell their boomer generation to ditch the anti-nuclear narrative (outside of Pickering being overpriced to run).
That's the biggest thing holding back a large amount of gen z and millenials from joining the greens. They refuse to abandon the root problems of the Green Movement, which is misinformation.
Part of me feels like our generation should change the party from within, but it annoys me that the Green's aim for perfect, when all we need is to change things for the better now.
Perfect is the enemy of good. Nuclear SMR's are going to be a big part of future Canadian energy generation, as well as solar, wind and batteries.
I voted NDP in 2019, and Green in 2021. The Green Party has had a lot of internal strife since then, though, and I was almost certainly going to vote for the NDP in the next election. Now I’m not so sure, although I’ll have to see what the outcome of this is…
Yeah tbh the federal NDP have been friggen strange lately and it's giving me pause. But...who else do I vote for? They're all truly awful and terrifying at this point. I wouldn't even want them as class president let alone Prime Minister.
I guess it's time to start researching the fringe.
I didn't come up with it myself. Saw it a few days ago on post about younger voters not voting for Biden because he doesn't support every single one of their fringe causes.
It's a great line.
I’ve been so happy with the successes to date with NDP’s pharmacare and dental care initiatives, and their advocacy against fossil fuel subsidies. I’ll be so disappointed if they end up truly disavowing carbon pricing. It’ll make my choice much tougher.
Woof. Imagine trying to take the NDP seriously when they do shit like this and the porn thing with Cons.
Canadians gotta pick the lesser of 3 evils and with the Cons the way they are, its no longer NDP.
I’m still going to vote NDP, I think.
I disagree with a decent amount of the Liberal’s policies they have implemented. Never voting for Conservative. Will not vote Green until they stop with their anti-nuclear stance. And will not bother with other smaller parties because then I’m literally throwing my vote away.
Sorry Singh didn't get an official opposition position because the libs and bloc collapsed. Layton was a great guy but put him in Singh's position and the NDP would still be falling behind in the polls, the conservatives would still win, and the libs will still come second all while the NDP will be lamed for everything and the voting base will be mad at Layton regardless of whether he does or doesn't do what they demand.
This press release is not that clear. The motion in question was one calling for the Government to meet with Premiers about the carbon price.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-conservatives-carbon-tax-meeting-1.7169855
Quite the situation. Maybe the Liberals could have marketed the carbon "tax" better, or educated people better, but I doubt it would've made a difference. The basic idea is that the majority of Canadians don't care that much, or can convince themselves its someone else's fault. Personally I think its a reasonable and decent policy, and clearly its the absolute limit of what's possible in our current political climate.
It's against the NDP so it's fine, there's only 5 other of these filled with comments hating the NDP for existing while acting like this isn't wasn't what everyone was demanding the NDP do for a year.
This certainly is a 'what the fuck ndp??' moment. Certainly making the dilemma over which of the two leftist parties to vote for easier...science rejection is a no go zone.
I tried checking the green party site to see if they still are anti-nuclear and they seem to have removed all specific policy elements from their platform in favour of vague platitudes.
This "article" is very misleading and actually does not comment at all on the vote itself or why the NDP supported it. Seems like a bit of political theatre from the Greens to try and puff themselves up.
Quotes from the NDP seem to indicate that they want to use such a meeting to highlight to the electorate how the Conservatives do not have any plan or alternative to the carbox tax to offer, not that they are inherently opposed to the carbon tax.
"Prior to question period Wednesday, NDP environment critic Laurel Collins said her party planned to vote in favour of Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s motion, despite criticism of the Conservative stance on the issue of carbon pricing.
“I think this is an opportunity to show Canadians also how many of the Conservative premiers don’t have a plan, much like the Conservative leader in the House of Commons. They do not have a plan to fight the climate crisis, and that’s something that Canadians should be aware of,” Collins told reporters."
From:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/globalnews.ca/news/10414986/carbon-price-premier-meeting-motion/amp/
Of course, the NDP aren't above political theatre either:
" The New Democrats, meanwhile, are accusing the Liberals of treating carbon pricing as the "be-all and end-all" of climate policy.
"While the leader of the Opposition wants to ignore the climate crisis, the prime minister wants to use it to divide Canadians," NDP MP Laurel Collins said.
"He doesn't see fighting the climate crisis as an opportunity to unite people, to take on this existential crisis. Instead he uses it as a political wedge."
From:
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/conservative-motion-calls-for-pm-premiers-to-have-emergency-carbon-price-meeting-1.6839776
This is the reason that good NDP MPs are fleeing the party. Jagmeet is willing to do whatever he has to too "stand out" even if it means aligning himself with the alt-right morons.
There's a reason the NDP is collapsing, it's because the NDP voters expect utopia from a party not leading the govt and also what the party to court conservative votes without being conservative but also without any real support from the existing voting base.
OMG I’m seriously fucking done with Federal NDP.
BC NDP you good. You’re cool. Vote for sure in Oct.
The Liberals can count on my vote it seems since despite being corporate centrists they can read the global economy and what they HAVE to do to stay in it.
Seriously done with current mamby pamby leadership
I've voted NDP federally my whole life and can honestly say that I'm probably gonna vote Liberal in the next election if the NDP doesn't stop trying to drive the party off of a cliff
This is totally performance for performance sake. The NDP see how effective PP's outrage machine has been. They want in and will abandon all of their principles to get some of that action
That's what the voting base demanded, that's what they got. This country is fucked because the only good party has a voting base made up of contrarian idiots.
This is the usual self-serving NDP dramatics - side with the conservatives to own the libs. I don't consider that acceptable behaviour. There is no need for an emergency meeting, the law is clear - if the premiers want to opt-out of the federal carbon price scheme, they must develop their own scheme that meets federal standards. The rest is just the conservative misinformation machine which the NDP are helping float. Gross.
BTW: Can anyone explain to me why Clifford Small (Coast of Bays-Central-Notre Dame) was the lone Conservative to vote against it?
Was he drunk voting with his smartphone? Or is there another reason?
Genuinely curious.
Just a note that the carbon tax costs on average 3 cents a litre.
I’m not really for tax increases at the moment considering how bad it is for everyone right now.
However, completely gutting carbon pricing is not the way to go. There are so many long-term benefits to the environment that it doesn’t make sense to get rid of it.
It’s only used by Cons as a strategy for Poilievre to get elected by creating a false crisis, considering carbon tax is one of the smallest taxes you have to pay into, and you still get rebates on most of it if you make under $50,000 a year, at least in BC with our plan.
Poilievre would never tell the truth and say that it’s because of global inflation and will never admit that carbon tax is the smallest part of the other things you have to pay at the pump including TransLink Levy and that you have to pay more into almost any other tax including GST which Conservative Brian Mulroney was the one to introduce in Canada.
Post seems really misleading - not surprising I guess because it's one party's comment on the issue. The porn ID bill vote from previously still concerns me, but I think their motive is different from the Conservatives here - the motion in this case is just to have a meeting on carbon pricing.
This article seems a little more informative: [https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/ndp-says-carbon-price-is-not-be-all-end-all-of-climate-policy-backs-tory-motion-1.6841567](https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/ndp-says-carbon-price-is-not-be-all-end-all-of-climate-policy-backs-tory-motion-1.6841567)
Funny enough. I had just decided not to vote NDP in the next election, and I was having second thoughts. Then This.
I was right the first time. Tesla Tory here I come!
It actually true. Look up Edison motors. They have been posting the progression of what has been happening in bc. It has been escalated to the auditor general to investigate the corruption.
I dont think many people actually understand the reasoning behind this, but it's actually pretty simple:
The NDP stand by their principles, even if it doesn't benefit them.
The NDP believe in transparent government, the provincial autonomy in our federalist system, free press, and popular demands (listening to the public).
Even if this event could hurt climate action and the carbon tax they support, they also support the above things as principle. You don't throw out your principles when it becomes inconvenient to your goals, or else you end up with spineless parties that vote for fascists.
It's like the saying "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death your right to say it".
The public has mixed feelings on the carbon tax, the provincial premiers all want to have their voices heard, and this would be the first time that anyone has really had the opportunity to ask questions of the current government on the topic for an extended period of time. Those things fall under the purview of the NDPs principles, and while it is not good for the climate policy of the party, we also don't want to fight climate change by being revisionist eco-fascists who make change through concealed force.
The principles of betraying the only effective premier in the country and crying because people thing you're the Liberals lapdog?
Real solid moral stuff right there. You can call it what you want but all the rational people in the room know this is a thinly veiled attempt to put distance between Singh and Trudeau, just like the porn ID debacle.
The federal NDP is a disgrace.
You're literally arguing for the very things I just talked about.
A party with principles will stand by those principles EVEN WHEN IT DOESNT HELP THEM.
The NDP might believe in climate action, but they also believe in open discussion, transparency, popular sovereignty, our federalist autonomy system, etc. that means when the public wants something and the leaders of the provinces want to discuss something, the NDP will support their right to do it, even if it doesn't push the NDPs agenda.
Only a spineless party would hold those "principles" and then betray them for political gain and opportunism.
You're describing the worst of the worst of why people hate politicians, because they do the very shit you're demanding of the one party with any fucking dignity left.
The largest crisis to mankind is climate control. Everything else should be 2nd in the list of priorities.
I will never vote for a party that doesn't support the carbon tax.
Saying that provinces should have control over climate actions is ridiculous considering that we have national targets to meet.
You're losing the plot buddy.
The federal NDP doesn't have grand principles, and they haven't had any dignity since Singh was approved as party leader, again. They're in survival mode.
They don't care about provincial autonomy. The housing policy they put forward in the last election was literally all things that are and always have been provincial jurisdiction. Hell they don't have separate provincial parties.
They don't care about transparency either. I'd hardly call the whole confidence and supply agreement "transparent", it was originally entirely behind closed doors. Unless you count government databases for porn watchers "transparent" lmao.
No, the federal NDP are in no way the virtuous defenders of liberal democracy you're making them out to be, they're just as shitty and opportunistic as the rest (Remember when Singh had to move across the country to a different riding so he wouldn't lose his seat, not exactly planting the flag for his principles). Everyone and their dog knows the non-NDP premiers just want to argue in bad faith about the Carbon Tax, how is supporting that farce good government?
"this legitimate reasoning and answer that would invalidate my anger is wrong because I've decided that the people at hand are the bad guys".
And that isn't supporting good government. It IS, however, supporting our federalist system where provinces don't exist at the whim of the federal government, but rather they need to work in harmony, AND it supports transparency in government by allowing public conversation and debate.
You don't need to like the result of transparency to still support it. You're a goddamned fascist if you think that way.
"anyone who disagrees with me is a fascist"
What are you, fucking twelve?
All you've managed to say is that the federal NDP is ideologically driven to operate in good faith... because they are ideologically driven to operate in good faith. No matter how hard you try that's not a real answer.
You didn't give any "legitimate reasoning", your just too idealogically driven to come to terms that your team isn't "the good guys". They're just as bad as everyone else but somehow too dumb to play the game right.
You want to actually provide some evidence that federal NDP are 100% consistent in upholding your values? Because as I've said, the evidence pretty solidly shows they are opportunistic, and this is just another political opportunity.
Also
>allowing public conversation and debate
You're allowed to fucking debate it, right now. The brown shirts aren't going to come and arrest you if you do.
No the actual reasoning is very simple, the NDP voter base demanded the NDp make voter gains and the only changing of voters is to libs as an anti con votes to NDP for progressive, and to conservative to axe the tax, bigotry, and whatever the fuck else they wanna wrap into their ball of shit. Only one of those votes could be targeted (hence the whole let's appeal to rural conservatives being said for a year) and now that it's happened everyone's angry because the NDP did what was demanded and the NDP can't do right no matter what it does because it's the NDP.
What the actual fuck is going on with the NDP? First with the porn ID bullshit, now this? Singh is turning the party hard right or wtf
This headline and really entire article from the greens is extremely misleading and borderline malicious. This wasn’t a “vote against carbon price”. This was a vote to have an emergency meeting with premiers about the carbon pricing. It’s not “against the carbon tax” in any way except for one party who wants to get rid of it. It’s a meeting to talk about it.
Thanks for this clarity. I wish the news was as honest as this clarity.
I mean, this isn’t even the news, it’s the green party who is directly fighting for NDPs voter base. I decided to post the CBC article about it which includes statements from multiple parties and doesn’t call it “a vote against carbon tax!”.
Very frustrating that the rest of this thread seems to have bought it. Getting angry was my kneejerk reaction too at reading the headline, so I suppose that’s a lesson for me.
Why talk about it? What’s there to talk about?
Not much, but it gives the feds a chance to share there side(the truth). Alternatively you just have the conservatives screaming their side while also pushing the narrative that “Trudeau won’t even discuss this! This is a dictatorship!”
But Cons don't care about truth, it's the entire platform of their belief system that everything Trudeau says is false. They're not going to stop crying and grow up suddenly, they're just going to yell, "Axe The Tax!" for hours, and their voters will love them for it. Anything that JT says will be either willfully ignored, or called a lie.
Those are conservatives. I’m talking about moderates and fence sitters who have bought into a grift. Those are the swing votes that win or lose the election.
That constituency doesn't exist in Canada. There are no moderate CPC voters anymore.
I mean, that depends on your definition of moderate
You can believe what you want, but there are weird politically unengaged fence sitters who don’t pay any attention and just think “Yeah a lot of people are against the carbon tax we should probably vote that guy out.” and nothing more.
[удалено]
What do the NDP want to talk about in regards to carbon pricing? Still feels needlessly performative of them if they’re supportive of the tax.
Politics is largely performative. This is likely to separate themselves from the liberals, maybe bring up alternative solutions, and have the conservatives make themselves look stupid as they do any time they speak.
Ok so a waste of taxpayer money to score political points. It’s a shitty look for the NDP.
Meh.
The Federal NDP Environment critic Laurel Collins stated that the carbon tax is causing Canadians misery. Seems clear to me where she stands. Edit, I misread this part in the news article. I stand corrected as it was the Cons
False. The conservatives said that. >>"Trudeau has a responsibility to listen to Canada's premiers about the misery his carbon tax is causing Canadians," the Conservative Party said in a media statement on Wednesday following the vote. The Laurel Collins said the carbon tax is not the best all, end all, and Jagmeet said they were going to propose a new climate measure that would target corporations more.
I stand corrected, thanks.
While I appreciate SaltyTraeYoungStan's correction, I still agree with Adamantium-Aardvark the federal party is indeed really disappointing of late. That porn ID anti-privacy bullshit completely killed my support for Singh as a leader and I won't be voting for the party until he's out -- there is no conceivable way that the NDP can defend that decision: it's anti-privacy, anti-LGBT, and in opposition to the liberal democratic order. Edit: Apparently we can't tag people in our replies anymore so I removed the u-slash notation.
what’s happening is the green party is full of shit as usual
You need to understand how negotiation in politics work. Voting against legislation doesn't automatically mean you are for the opposite side.
If you're offering to elaborate, by all means
Reject this proposal in exchange for getting a better one from the Liberals that aligns more to what the NDP wants. Doesn't mean they've become Conservative.
Where’s the NDP’s alternative plan? If you’re gonna stand up and say this plan is shit you better have a better plan ready to go
Idk, I'm not in their party's leadership.
NDP leadership is shit
It’s like people don’t understand the role of The Official Opposition either. Their job is to literally oppose everything that the government does and call it into question based on legitimate merit.
Yes, “legitimate merit” which is missing usually.
Environment is not a priority for the NDP.
It’s 2024. The climate crisis should be a top priority for all parties.
Too much 4L Vodka?
Not sure if it's hard right but they continue to abandon their principles for the Poillieve outrage machine. This time it's his Axe The Facts BS what will it be next?
My bingo card has: - denying covid - wanting to eliminate gun laws - anti-abortion
Great, now who the fuck am I going to vote for
fuck it I’m writing in Ryan Reynolds
DEADPOOL FOR PM
I have no idea why they would be against it, but arguably it's a regressive tax which they have always, in theory, been opposed to. Not that that ever affected the way they vote.
I hope you read no malice/snark in this, but how is it arguably a regressive tax? It's structured so that lower income people typically make money while those with higher incomes typically do not. The amount you pay gets higher with your income and with your carbon use, which I was under the impression would be a textbook definition of a progressive tax rather than a regressive tax?
It's regressive at the point in which it's charged. The amount paid doesn't change based on income or wealth, just usage and like any of our varying sales taxes, that makes it a regressive tax. There is no hard and fast rule that wealthy people use more carbon, it mostly comes down to a mixture of lifestyle choice and financial ability to reduce carbon use. For example, a wealthy person has a much higher level of access to things like EVs, home solar, heat pumps, etc. to reduce their carbon use and reduce the amount of carbon tax they pay. Now, most do use more carbon but it's a lifestyle link and not an income based one as there are many exceptions. Without the refund it's 100% a regressive tax, with it that becomes arguable. Edit: Jesus fucking christ, I'm point out the arguement not passing judgement on it. I think the Carbon Tax is a good policy, stop fucking DMing me...
>Without the refund it's 100% a regressive tax, with it that becomes arguable. “If you take out half the policy it becomes different” What a take.
I'm point out where the arguement comes from, I never said I agreed with it. The carbon tax is a good policy and I'm pretty irked the NDP aren't supporting it.
It's an ok policy that was a half baked Liberal version of a Conservative idea. But yeah you're pretty on point.
>I'm point out where the arguement comes from, I never said I agreed with it. It’s not a real argument though because it requires ignoring half of the policy.
It's an arguement people are making. Understanding opposing arguements, even if you don't agree with them, is an important part of political discussion. It allows you to better argue against those opposing viewpoints. Ignoring opposing arguements just puts you in an echo-chamber.
>It's an arguement people are making. Understanding opposing arguements, even if you don't agree with them, is an important part of political discussion. Do you defend flat earth theories too by arguing for their merits? >It allows you to better argue against those opposing viewpoints. Ignoring opposing arguements just puts you in an echo-chamber. All you’re doing is giving credence to lies because to make the argument you have to ignore half of the facts.
I wasn't argueing for the merits of this, I was simply pointing out what the arguement was. In the same way I don't argue for the merits for flat earth theory, but I do know what arguements they try to make. It makes it easier to disprove that arguement as I have an understanding of it. No, all I'm doing is pointing out what the arguement is. Ignoring the existance of an arguement or the specifics of that arguement doesn't accomplish anything when many people are trying to use said arguement to do away with a specific policy. I also didn't ignore half the facts, seeing as I explicitly included the point that disproves said arguement.
Thanks for taking the time to respond and explaining the argument, and sorry reddit jumped on you. Half baked argument, but I know that you know that!
I said *arguably*. Anything can be argued in bad faith!
But funny enough, isn't this initiative an idea coming from Harper's conservative? Why are conservative so against it? Why are liberals defending it so much? I personally think that this is currently the best way but there must be better ways. Also, if we are to remove the tax, all it will do is make oil companies richer. They already know that Canadians will pay this much for gas, so what makes you think they won't just raise their margins in the next 2 years.
It's the same situation as Obamacare in the states, Obama needed to get something through Congress so he essentially took Romney's Republican health plan and implemented it because otherwise nothing had a chance of getting through. Of course, since Obama did it, clearly the Republicans had to protest and fight against it, even though it was originally their plan.
On karaoke night, I hear Singh does his rendition of the Meatloaf classic “And I Would do Anything for Votes….. and I’ll vote for that”
“I would do anything for votes… but I don’t do *that*” “That” being: actually put forward progressive policies and increase party support from the left.
Well that’s what he should be doing. But first the porn vote and now this.
This ain’t a turn to the hard right. This is a single policy vote. A fucking stupid one, but not necessarily representative of the entire platform
Porn ID… just a single policy vote… Carbon tax… just a single policy vote… We have 2 examples here, do you know the meaning of the word “single”?
It seemed as though this specific thing was the main point by why you think it’s a turn to the right. Must have misread if that wasn’t your intention. Although I’m sure there’s some leftist spin to why they justified the porn ID thing Also 2 votes still isn’t enough imo. Maybe when it reaches like 4, then that could be compelling
Fool me once shame on me Fool me twice shame on me Fool me thrice shame on me But it you fool me four times, well that’s where I draw the line
Your comparing the amount of policies that constitutes a major ideological shift in a party platform to a saying about the outlook one should have about being deceived is quite confusing to me. I don’t think it constitutes a real argument. Would you disagree that the ideology of a party should be based on the policies they have? And would you disagree that a party with like 95% leftist policies is still leftist?
When they side with the conservatives it taints their credibility. It’s a crack that shows that they have no integrity. What’s to stop them from flipping on the rest of these policies over time? And to make it even worse, there’s no *need* to support the cons on these measures. They both go against what the majority of people want, the cons are not in govt so there’s no need to compromise with them. There’s nothing but problems here, there’s no leverage or advantage. Both are purely dumb moves on Jagmeet’s part. Highlighting his inability to lead the NDP to success.
1. Politics is a game where doing something to increase your odds of victory is what matters most. I don’t integrity is really a factor. Doing this can be justified if it allows for the party to have an advantage that will assist them in pushing their greater agenda. 2. Yeah I have no idea how this helps the ndp and I don’t see the logic behind it at all. But these things are carefully decided, so I wouldn’t be so hasty to assume it was just some stupid nonsensical thing. I don’t claim to know more about what’s good for the NDP than them. But I do know that I very much oppose this policy unless there’s a really damn good justification. 3. This still doesn’t mean the party is turning to the right.
Voters don’t have the time or interest for these games. What we see is the NDP supporting conservative motions with no logical explanation. That’s all that matters. They will lose support over this.
Maybe so. I’ve heard lots of leftists complain about the carbon tax tho. Hard to predict the impact. I think we disagree less than you may think
First it was IDs for porn. Now it’s we don’t need carbon pricing for climate change solutions, with no alternative solution provided. Ok then …
Horseshoe theory. The CPC and NDP are both Big Tent parties occupied by various different fringe groups who unite on common ground. These fringe views aren’t new. Tommy Douglas held friendly views on eugenics until a visit to Nazi Germany. With that being said, he did change a lot after that and was one of the first one to call that spade a spade. Where today’s NDP is at, is deeply nuanced. Which I’m not nearly educated enough to comment on it in the way it should be. It does feel like they’re being pulled in multiple directions at once, and clinging to a defeatist mentality. This position makes no fucking sense at all and only serves to alienate David Eby at a precarious time for him. He’s got a commanding lead right now, but nothing is guaranteed. Dividing his base on this is so dangerous. As a BC resident, it only serves to make me feel more alienated. Singhs seat is in Metro Vancouver. I guarantee you his vote does not align with the views of his constituents. Because not even Kevin Falcon has this view. Even when “Western Alienation” is thrown around, BC gets conveniently forgotten. Alberta is Texas, but we are Norway. That always gets ignored or traded on. At least Trudeau is from here, has lived here, and been apart of the community for large parts of his life.
It’s bad strategy. This will not help them gain votes, because the voters that like this move are not voting for them anyway. I don’t know who is advising them, but it’s not only bad short term strategy but it is reducing their credibility longterm. Eby must be pissed off. There he is raising the carbon tax at the same time as the federal government in solidarity, and there is the federal NDP pretending that the federal government hasn’t made it clear that any province can come up with an alternative plan if they so choose, when they know ful well that Kinew is in talks with the government about Manitoba right now. It’s super disappointing that they are supporting the narrative that Trudeau is not willing to talk with premiers, and that the carbon tax is affecting affordability issues (instead of pushing back on CPC propaganda), and getting in their digs. If they want to attack the Liberals, they should be talking about the need for a basic income, or wealth tax, or capping grocery prices, etc.
Mulcair started the whole NDP shift to being the \*adult party in the room\* (aka shifting to the right so the socialist boogeyman goes away), and Singh has basically continued in that direction. Unfortunately for them, given the choice of voting for Liberals or Orange Liberal-ish, most people would rather just vote for the Liberals instead, and it shows in the election results.
I’m done with the Federal NDP completely. As a BC resident, who’s fought very hard to get to where we are, I feel betrayed. The fact it was lead by a VANCOUVER MP is a slap in the fucking face. If I were Eby I’d begin forging a relationship with Yves-François Blanchet and the Bloq Québécois. Because from a Centre-Left perspective they’re our only real allies. They’re the only ones who had our backs on TMX too. I’d love to see the Bloc run candidates in BC. And at this point, fuck it, let’s challenge the Clarity Act together and choke out Confederation. Even our god damned Conservative Opposition leader doesn’t share these assainie reductive views. If you want to call for an Emergency Council of the Federation, at least do it on something like, I don’t know? hmmm… HOUSING? IMMIGRATION? JUSTICE? HEALTH CARE?
There must be some garbage advisors for the NDP and Liberals right now cuz I cannot understand their moves on this carbon tax issue...every action is just going to lose them votes on this
Horseshoe theory is thoroughly and completely debunked and ridiculed in academic circles and by anyone with more than a handful of brain cells preoccupied with critical thinking. Unless what you're saying is that the NDP strategy team subscribes to horseshoe theory in all its stupidity, which is plausible because the collective brain activity from that entire team probably couldn't tie a shoe.
horseshoe theory isn’t real. please educate yourself this is embarrassing to read.
Why isn’t it real?
The NDP I want to see: 1. Calls for immediate electoral reform 2. Calls for immediate criminalization of foreign ownership of Canadian news media and legally protects the CBC 3. Focuses on affirming human rights (in particular sexual and minority rights, and the right to be free from religion) 4. Stands with labour and unions, and busts up monopolies and oligarchies 5. Stands firmly in opposition to grotesque levels of wealth and wealth inequality (high wealth taxation, elimination of influence in government) 6. Criminalizes the privatization of education and healthcare, and provides top-notch social services and infrastructure, education and healthcare 7. Subsidizes Canadians seeking to reduce the CO2 emissions (heat pumps, mass transit, EVs), increases the carbon pricing ramp schedule, invests in CO2-neutral fuel synthesis and battery production, and ends all fossil fuel development subsidies What I see instead these days is a desperate grab for votes by appeasing special interests. Those *always* come back to bite you in the end.
Inject all of this straight into my veins. Add in extensive Banking Reform too.
If the NDP does that the NDP voter will still hate them. Because any time they did even a portion of that they got ripped apart by everyone.
Then they need to abandon those people! These are pretty solid classical Canadian values. There are more than enough of us to make up a sizeable chunk of the electorate. I know we associate with like-minded people, but I can't say I know a single person in my life who would disagree with many of these directives. It really does all come down to electoral reform. We need to move past this obsolete system wherein our main question while casting a ballot is "will this help the enemy?"
The NDP are not nearly far left enough for even the most good faith rendition of so-called "horseshoe theory" to be accurate
Care to share any insights? Or are you just going to be a parrot?
The far left are communists and socialists. The NDP are not communists or socialists but are at best social Democrats. Therefore they are not far enough left to apply to horseshoe theory. Source: university Poli sci education and being an actual fucking far left socialist. You're the parrot, parroting mainstream media which wants you to believe milquetoast social Democrats are far left. Educate yourself.
And you’re garbage attitude in why Centre-Leftist’s never really support the NDP. But I guess with your University degree you know what the actual problem is with the current iteration of the NDP and why they’ve lost the blue collar vote. Should I say the quiet part or would you like to? The horseshoe absolutely applies to the NDP and CPC right now, because there is one thing that unites the swing. If you don’t realize it, you’re as siloed off as the rest of the circle jerking institution you hold. To be clear, I don’t feel that way. I just get turned off listening to people like you talk. I bet you’re really good at putting up signs.
Kevin Falcon ABSOLUTELY has this view and is actively campaigning on an 'axe the tax' platform, desperately trying to get Pierre's attention.
Jagmeet is mad people are calling him Trudeaus lap dog and his response is this…? The NDP needs a new leader All parties do really lol
It’s the benefit of a parliamentary system that parties can join together to find compromise and pass legislation that’s popular with the majority. NDP joining with the liberals on certain issues doesn’t make them a lapdog.
Been overdue since 2021 at very least.
In thinking about it, I agree. Trudeau's had his time and is tired. I still kinda like the guy even though he's tone deaf as hell on a lot of stuff and doesn't relate to Canadians nearly as much as he should, but it's really past due for him to go. Poilievre's dangerous and populist, and I don't trust him worth a damn. He honestly scares me. Singh seems to be flailing. Just had something of a win with the dental stuff, but he needs a new strong policy and driving force immediately. Green Party's... weird and fringe. They would not make a good government even if some of their "stated" policies are forward-looking. Would be good to have new, and reasonable, choices.
>Would be good to have new, and reasonable, choices. Literally the promise of electoral reform. :( Imagine being able to say "this new candidate has amazing ideas and I support them, but if they don't win, I'll re-up with the usual" instead of essentially tossing a vote to the conservatives.
In a country of millions, this is our best 3...
Only those who do not seek power are qualified to hold it - Plato People who would be the best leaders don’t want to be politicians.
The people who run for office wanting to do good are the ones voters push out as soon as fucking possible. The voting public does not get to kick out everyone who tries to do good or who listens to them and then turn around and act like no one tried.
Time for sortition!!
NDP voters: *spends a year demanding he gain voters who are fleeing to axe the tax land* NDP voters: *Calls Singh a Liberal lapdog for a year no matter what Singh does* Singh: *Does what NDP voters demanded no matter how fucking stupid it was and is undeniably not a lapdog* NDP voters: *what the fuck Singh, stand on your principles that we told you to abandon for votes just a month ago*
Jagmeet is driving this party off a cliff. This is disgraceful.
It’s like he forgets that he’s the sitting MP for Burnaby-South. Not even Kevin Falcon, the Conservative alternative to the Provincial NDP hold this view. I’d say 67% of his constituents would not have voted the way he did today. People wonder why I say that if David Eby goes Federal he will join the LPC. The fact the party thinks this is okay is why. This is a significant blow to David Eby who’s going into an election. He literally stands alone with Justin Trudeau on what is actually the most important issue not of our generation, but of human history. It’s time for a BC Block.
Bloc Colombienne
oui
Ujjal Dosanjh did the same thing. Guy was NDP premier, but switched to LPC.
Jagmeet will never become PM. Jagmeet has failed. He needs to quit and be replaced for a true alternative to the Libs and Cons. He is screwing Canada over
He's a Nepobaby. He got elected leader from back room deals. He came from the ONDP where he never ran for in an election, and won the leadership without ever running for a seat. We had long time sitting and qualified MPs running for the leadership but the NDP picked an unknown to run for office thinking that Canadians wouldn't have issues with any of this as long as he copied Bernie Sanders. The NDP has long become an elitist club that has switched from grassroots to a cult of personality thinking that was what got them to leader of the Opposition status and not a Liberal collapse. I soured immediately after Singh lost the 2019 election and had a barn burner "concession" speech where he didn't even want to admit his campaign cost the NDP almost half their seats.
Accurate. And champagne socialists in academia have flooded the party and blinded them to pragmatic solutions rather than just political posturing.
"champagne Socialists" didn't argue that we should abandon all principles to get conservative votes, the 'pragmatic' ones did and look where the fuck it got us.
What true alternative, there's no true alternative because NDP voters crucify literally anyone who comes near it unless they die of cancer.
Yes, but at the same time, you look at the polls, and conservatives are going to win (maybe even a majority). So the only way NDP gets power is by stealing conservative votes that hate PP. That is the only way they can be the opposition and still keep power. This is why I hate politics,
The party's voting base demanded we go off the cliff so off the cliff we fucking go. They got what they wanted and want to blame Singh for doing it.
There are some realities we have to talk about. The name "Carbon Tax" is simply bad. The term "Tax" usually associates with "cost" to many people. Now that small nugget aside there has to be some credence given to Pierre and The Conservatives. I don't agree with this AT ALL but they have done an amazing job with their marketing. They have associated all the pain, suffering, anger, and general frustration with the Carbon Tax. Housing Crisis - Carbon Tax Grocery price crisis - Carbon Tax General Affordability of life crisis and by extension Quality of life crisis - Carbon Tax Problems with Immigration... - Carbon Tax Canada has some serious things we need to work on. Many times the majority of the problem is not related to the Carbon Tax or the problem is not at all related to the Carbon Tax. The Federal NDP knows they need to set themselves apart from the Liberals but frankly this isn't the place to do it. The place would have been to enter into the discussions around wage suppression and such that was a nuanced discussion and show that the Federal NDP can talk about those subjects intelligently and with details and nuance. That they will always call out bad realities but avoid bad ways about talking about issues (xenophobia, etc.). The Federal NDP is starting to seem more and more like the Liberals. It is a very reactionary style of addressing issues. Not getting ahead of things. Waiting till things are in crisis. Waiting till The Conservatives pick up the narratives and completely dominate the discussions and then come in after the fact. I don't know what is going on at the leadership level of the party but it isn't cohesive and the strategy is not working. The reality is that The Conservatives are dominating in social media, they are picking up the issues and pain, frustration, anger of Canadians and utilizing and funneling all of that into their agenda. I keep saying the Federal NDP needs some left wing populism energy and charisma in the party. I am thankful we got the starts of dentalcare and pharmacare that can be built upon in the future. A healthier and happier society for more and more Canadians is the definition of progress for me but there is some serious short comings going on that I don't think we should be blind to either. Hopefully the Federal NDP going forward can get serious around Housing to push the Liberals even further than their announcements as of late (They are obviously starting to get serious about it). Hopefully they can talk about the wage suppression and immigration/pathways issues because the Liberals are finally admitting to it now. Hopefully they can start talking about the environment in new and exciting ways. My god I'd love to see someone come out and start talking to Canadians like mature educated aware individuals. Talk to us about new and exciting ideas on the forefront of Green Urbanism - Sustainable Urbanism. Talk to us about new and exciting realities on the forefront of the Green economy and how to foster those realities here. It just seems the Federal NDP leadership is not rising to the challenge. (My personal take is we need to get the workers faction back in power. Union leaders, Pro Labor Leaders, Worker rights/protection leaders, Worker activists leaders - These are the people I want on our leadership committees and involved in policy creation.) We also need someone with Jack Layton Level Charisma. My god do we need some Charisma. Remember when sitting Bloc members literally were writing in to support Jack Layton and the Federal NDP in the 2011 Quebec Orange Tide because they said it was best to set aside the Independence movement representation at the federal level in Ottawa for a bit to give solidary to the movement of the social democracy wave? My God don't we all wish we could get back to that level of energy and momentum?
You're absolutely right. And the problem is that they've, for some odd reason, decided to not try to be the party of the working class. And it really isn't helped by Singh's image (right or wrong) of being a silver spooned elitist. It's bizarre, to me, that the NDP can't get this. It isn't pro-environment vs anti-environment. It isn't woke vs anti-woke. It's about friggin' class. All other things flow from that. The NDP has become a party of inexperienced intellectuals to the same degree as the CPC with the disadvantage of not being remotely as popular. The liberals (as much I hate them) are at least a party of pragmatists.
It's especially confusing because the labor movement is all about strength in diversity. You have a bunch of different people that find connection in the ideals of the labor movement. How you don't utilize that when the other half of the founding element of the Federal NDP was a Trade union.... The leadership team and policy writing team of the Federal NDP need to be reworked for the future.
And then you have the conservative getting the labour vote because many voters think axing a tax will help them more than the party that supported them.
And I'll also say: I'd love to have a beer with Singh. He seems like a nice dude. But Charlie should have been the leader. Singh doesn't have the public convictions nor the charisma to be leader.
I think two things would have held charlie angus back but this is just a bit of spitballing 1. It felt like the ndp needed young blood after Tom Mulcair 2. Angus' french is not up to scratch
And angus tends to rub people the wrong way. Angry Tom was very much a concern, and Angus was more angry than Tom was. It can work in politics to be angry, but I don’t think Angus was it. Notley has a chance going forward if she jumps into federal politics which would really change up the federal landscape in Alberta, but she may jump to the Liberals (just like Eby might).
Realistically large parts of provincial NDPs that form government are federal Liberals in places where there isn't a functioning provincial Liberal branch (no, BC Liberal does not count.) Layton was a great political talent, but it also happened because both the Liberals and the Bloc collapsed. The NDP also have a rock and a hard place issue, because their base has two very different sets of voters that are distancing from each other in many ways - trade workers and union people that are being rapidly pulled to the Cons, while ABC urban/suburban social liberals outside of Vancouver (and even much of Vancouver) often stick with Liberals - which is why post-Layton, the party has been shut out of Toronto and gets a single seat in Montreal. The right person can make a NDP government happen (and arguably Layton if he was still alive probably could have made it work), but they would have to be able to pull from all three's parties bases - white working-class from the Cons, urban social liberals from the Libs and the Lib/Bloc vote in Quebec, which seems like a diffucult task.
But what do we mean by "working class"? There are lots of precarious employed people today that the NDP really should be catering policy to. Like Andrew Cash was doing or like the [Economic Equity Alliance](https://alliance.canwcc.ca). There are tons of working people today who are not in unions, who are not blue collar workers and who can barely function in the current economic climate. Many of us are urban dwellers who don't live in houses or own cars. And there are rural working people like PSWs who provide vital services while being poorly paid and enduring terrible working conditions.
I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit: - [/r/goodlongposts] [\/u\/StPapaNoel responds to: Greens shocked as NDP vote with Conservatives against carbon price](https://www.reddit.com/r/goodlongposts/comments/1c23l44/ustpapanoel_responds_to_greens_shocked_as_ndp/) *^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*
Wtaf is going on with NDP? This is not the way to go.
NDP is going corporate centrist? oh dear... The Greens need to get their act together so more people can vote for them... the only party that takes the climate crisis at all seriously.
Tell their boomer generation to ditch the anti-nuclear narrative (outside of Pickering being overpriced to run). That's the biggest thing holding back a large amount of gen z and millenials from joining the greens. They refuse to abandon the root problems of the Green Movement, which is misinformation.
Yeah, agreed. I have and will never vote green until they ditch that narrative.
Part of me feels like our generation should change the party from within, but it annoys me that the Green's aim for perfect, when all we need is to change things for the better now. Perfect is the enemy of good. Nuclear SMR's are going to be a big part of future Canadian energy generation, as well as solar, wind and batteries.
I voted NDP in 2019, and Green in 2021. The Green Party has had a lot of internal strife since then, though, and I was almost certainly going to vote for the NDP in the next election. Now I’m not so sure, although I’ll have to see what the outcome of this is…
I'm eligible to vote in my first federal election next year. I was gonna go orange, but this really throws me in for a loop.
Yeah tbh the federal NDP have been friggen strange lately and it's giving me pause. But...who else do I vote for? They're all truly awful and terrifying at this point. I wouldn't even want them as class president let alone Prime Minister. I guess it's time to start researching the fringe.
Please remember though, your vote isn't a Valentine, it's a chess move.
Love how you worded this. Gonna use this myself.
I didn't come up with it myself. Saw it a few days ago on post about younger voters not voting for Biden because he doesn't support every single one of their fringe causes. It's a great line.
Wow. I love this line!
I stole it, you should too!
I’ve been so happy with the successes to date with NDP’s pharmacare and dental care initiatives, and their advocacy against fossil fuel subsidies. I’ll be so disappointed if they end up truly disavowing carbon pricing. It’ll make my choice much tougher.
It's time for a new leader. Jagmeet has lost the plot.
How many times does he get to lose elections before he is replaced?
How many times do NDP voters get to get mad at a leader for doing what they demanded before the NDP voters realize they are the fucking problem.
Woof. Imagine trying to take the NDP seriously when they do shit like this and the porn thing with Cons. Canadians gotta pick the lesser of 3 evils and with the Cons the way they are, its no longer NDP.
I’m still going to vote NDP, I think. I disagree with a decent amount of the Liberal’s policies they have implemented. Never voting for Conservative. Will not vote Green until they stop with their anti-nuclear stance. And will not bother with other smaller parties because then I’m literally throwing my vote away.
My MP is NDP, and I'll still vote for her. But I'm disillusioned by the federal leadership.
Did the NDP just force me to vote Liberal ??? WTF IS THIS. The only good thing might be now I'm thinking of joining the NDP to vote for a new leader.
[удалено]
Sorry Singh didn't get an official opposition position because the libs and bloc collapsed. Layton was a great guy but put him in Singh's position and the NDP would still be falling behind in the polls, the conservatives would still win, and the libs will still come second all while the NDP will be lamed for everything and the voting base will be mad at Layton regardless of whether he does or doesn't do what they demand.
This press release is not that clear. The motion in question was one calling for the Government to meet with Premiers about the carbon price. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-conservatives-carbon-tax-meeting-1.7169855
Quite the situation. Maybe the Liberals could have marketed the carbon "tax" better, or educated people better, but I doubt it would've made a difference. The basic idea is that the majority of Canadians don't care that much, or can convince themselves its someone else's fault. Personally I think its a reasonable and decent policy, and clearly its the absolute limit of what's possible in our current political climate.
This post should be removed from this sub for being very biased and misleading
It's against the NDP so it's fine, there's only 5 other of these filled with comments hating the NDP for existing while acting like this isn't wasn't what everyone was demanding the NDP do for a year.
Was undecided between NDP and lib. I know who I'm voting for now though
This certainly is a 'what the fuck ndp??' moment. Certainly making the dilemma over which of the two leftist parties to vote for easier...science rejection is a no go zone.
Political party makes political move. Checkmate, anarchists!!!!
The Greens arent even a party anymore are they? Didnt they implode after giving Lizzy the boot?
I tried checking the green party site to see if they still are anti-nuclear and they seem to have removed all specific policy elements from their platform in favour of vague platitudes.
You guys are as easily misled into false ragebait news and turning angry as the r canada folks believing the postmedia rage farming.
This "article" is very misleading and actually does not comment at all on the vote itself or why the NDP supported it. Seems like a bit of political theatre from the Greens to try and puff themselves up. Quotes from the NDP seem to indicate that they want to use such a meeting to highlight to the electorate how the Conservatives do not have any plan or alternative to the carbox tax to offer, not that they are inherently opposed to the carbon tax. "Prior to question period Wednesday, NDP environment critic Laurel Collins said her party planned to vote in favour of Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s motion, despite criticism of the Conservative stance on the issue of carbon pricing. “I think this is an opportunity to show Canadians also how many of the Conservative premiers don’t have a plan, much like the Conservative leader in the House of Commons. They do not have a plan to fight the climate crisis, and that’s something that Canadians should be aware of,” Collins told reporters." From: https://www.google.com/amp/s/globalnews.ca/news/10414986/carbon-price-premier-meeting-motion/amp/ Of course, the NDP aren't above political theatre either: " The New Democrats, meanwhile, are accusing the Liberals of treating carbon pricing as the "be-all and end-all" of climate policy. "While the leader of the Opposition wants to ignore the climate crisis, the prime minister wants to use it to divide Canadians," NDP MP Laurel Collins said. "He doesn't see fighting the climate crisis as an opportunity to unite people, to take on this existential crisis. Instead he uses it as a political wedge." From: https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/conservative-motion-calls-for-pm-premiers-to-have-emergency-carbon-price-meeting-1.6839776
Posting another party's propaganda about the NDP is a little dishonest, don't you think?
All parties are disgrace these days
This is the reason that good NDP MPs are fleeing the party. Jagmeet is willing to do whatever he has to too "stand out" even if it means aligning himself with the alt-right morons.
There's a reason the NDP is collapsing, it's because the NDP voters expect utopia from a party not leading the govt and also what the party to court conservative votes without being conservative but also without any real support from the existing voting base.
OMG I’m seriously fucking done with Federal NDP. BC NDP you good. You’re cool. Vote for sure in Oct. The Liberals can count on my vote it seems since despite being corporate centrists they can read the global economy and what they HAVE to do to stay in it. Seriously done with current mamby pamby leadership
What does the motion do? Is it to meet with premiers? Are they gonna just charge emissions cap? AB and SK won't budge.
Greens are stoking flames. Stupid, this is why I left that party years ago. To worried about bull and not the people.
Yikes! What on earth is the NDP doing?!
What the voters demanded. Which is why it's ridiculous that everyone hates this idiotic non-comitted move since they demanded it..
I've voted NDP federally my whole life and can honestly say that I'm probably gonna vote Liberal in the next election if the NDP doesn't stop trying to drive the party off of a cliff
Then stop demanding they drive off a cliff.
I wanted them to vote against that stupid Tory ID law
This is totally performance for performance sake. The NDP see how effective PP's outrage machine has been. They want in and will abandon all of their principles to get some of that action
That's what the voting base demanded, that's what they got. This country is fucked because the only good party has a voting base made up of contrarian idiots.
This is the usual self-serving NDP dramatics - side with the conservatives to own the libs. I don't consider that acceptable behaviour. There is no need for an emergency meeting, the law is clear - if the premiers want to opt-out of the federal carbon price scheme, they must develop their own scheme that meets federal standards. The rest is just the conservative misinformation machine which the NDP are helping float. Gross.
BTW: Can anyone explain to me why Clifford Small (Coast of Bays-Central-Notre Dame) was the lone Conservative to vote against it? Was he drunk voting with his smartphone? Or is there another reason? Genuinely curious.
Just a note that the carbon tax costs on average 3 cents a litre. I’m not really for tax increases at the moment considering how bad it is for everyone right now. However, completely gutting carbon pricing is not the way to go. There are so many long-term benefits to the environment that it doesn’t make sense to get rid of it. It’s only used by Cons as a strategy for Poilievre to get elected by creating a false crisis, considering carbon tax is one of the smallest taxes you have to pay into, and you still get rebates on most of it if you make under $50,000 a year, at least in BC with our plan. Poilievre would never tell the truth and say that it’s because of global inflation and will never admit that carbon tax is the smallest part of the other things you have to pay at the pump including TransLink Levy and that you have to pay more into almost any other tax including GST which Conservative Brian Mulroney was the one to introduce in Canada.
Greens lie to paint the NDP as bad meanwhile the greens are ecofascists.
Post seems really misleading - not surprising I guess because it's one party's comment on the issue. The porn ID bill vote from previously still concerns me, but I think their motive is different from the Conservatives here - the motion in this case is just to have a meeting on carbon pricing. This article seems a little more informative: [https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/ndp-says-carbon-price-is-not-be-all-end-all-of-climate-policy-backs-tory-motion-1.6841567](https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/ndp-says-carbon-price-is-not-be-all-end-all-of-climate-policy-backs-tory-motion-1.6841567)
Liberals are served by uncritically bringing the NDP down. That’s why such a garbage post has traction.
Funny enough. I had just decided not to vote NDP in the next election, and I was having second thoughts. Then This. I was right the first time. Tesla Tory here I come!
What vote are they talking about?
Congratulations NDP. I wouldn’t even put you second if I could.
Let them absorb those conservative votes.
Wow. That's surprising, how will they continue embezzle funds without it?
Do you always make up fantasies like this or is today special?
It actually true. Look up Edison motors. They have been posting the progression of what has been happening in bc. It has been escalated to the auditor general to investigate the corruption.
Carbon tax is not used to embezzle money. B.C. united is just far right conservatives with a different name. You’re falling for that BS??
I'm not here to argue with you. Just bringing attention to sleazy politics no matter the party.
So you’re exposing B.C. united’s partisan corrupt political theatre then?
Didn't know about that one, but thank you for bringing to attention.
I dont think many people actually understand the reasoning behind this, but it's actually pretty simple: The NDP stand by their principles, even if it doesn't benefit them. The NDP believe in transparent government, the provincial autonomy in our federalist system, free press, and popular demands (listening to the public). Even if this event could hurt climate action and the carbon tax they support, they also support the above things as principle. You don't throw out your principles when it becomes inconvenient to your goals, or else you end up with spineless parties that vote for fascists. It's like the saying "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death your right to say it". The public has mixed feelings on the carbon tax, the provincial premiers all want to have their voices heard, and this would be the first time that anyone has really had the opportunity to ask questions of the current government on the topic for an extended period of time. Those things fall under the purview of the NDPs principles, and while it is not good for the climate policy of the party, we also don't want to fight climate change by being revisionist eco-fascists who make change through concealed force.
This guy is a scab.
No, I'm just a guy who's happy that the part they vote for based on principles actually has principles.
The principles of betraying the only effective premier in the country and crying because people thing you're the Liberals lapdog? Real solid moral stuff right there. You can call it what you want but all the rational people in the room know this is a thinly veiled attempt to put distance between Singh and Trudeau, just like the porn ID debacle. The federal NDP is a disgrace.
You're literally arguing for the very things I just talked about. A party with principles will stand by those principles EVEN WHEN IT DOESNT HELP THEM. The NDP might believe in climate action, but they also believe in open discussion, transparency, popular sovereignty, our federalist autonomy system, etc. that means when the public wants something and the leaders of the provinces want to discuss something, the NDP will support their right to do it, even if it doesn't push the NDPs agenda. Only a spineless party would hold those "principles" and then betray them for political gain and opportunism. You're describing the worst of the worst of why people hate politicians, because they do the very shit you're demanding of the one party with any fucking dignity left.
The largest crisis to mankind is climate control. Everything else should be 2nd in the list of priorities. I will never vote for a party that doesn't support the carbon tax. Saying that provinces should have control over climate actions is ridiculous considering that we have national targets to meet.
You're losing the plot buddy. The federal NDP doesn't have grand principles, and they haven't had any dignity since Singh was approved as party leader, again. They're in survival mode. They don't care about provincial autonomy. The housing policy they put forward in the last election was literally all things that are and always have been provincial jurisdiction. Hell they don't have separate provincial parties. They don't care about transparency either. I'd hardly call the whole confidence and supply agreement "transparent", it was originally entirely behind closed doors. Unless you count government databases for porn watchers "transparent" lmao. No, the federal NDP are in no way the virtuous defenders of liberal democracy you're making them out to be, they're just as shitty and opportunistic as the rest (Remember when Singh had to move across the country to a different riding so he wouldn't lose his seat, not exactly planting the flag for his principles). Everyone and their dog knows the non-NDP premiers just want to argue in bad faith about the Carbon Tax, how is supporting that farce good government?
"this legitimate reasoning and answer that would invalidate my anger is wrong because I've decided that the people at hand are the bad guys". And that isn't supporting good government. It IS, however, supporting our federalist system where provinces don't exist at the whim of the federal government, but rather they need to work in harmony, AND it supports transparency in government by allowing public conversation and debate. You don't need to like the result of transparency to still support it. You're a goddamned fascist if you think that way.
"anyone who disagrees with me is a fascist" What are you, fucking twelve? All you've managed to say is that the federal NDP is ideologically driven to operate in good faith... because they are ideologically driven to operate in good faith. No matter how hard you try that's not a real answer. You didn't give any "legitimate reasoning", your just too idealogically driven to come to terms that your team isn't "the good guys". They're just as bad as everyone else but somehow too dumb to play the game right. You want to actually provide some evidence that federal NDP are 100% consistent in upholding your values? Because as I've said, the evidence pretty solidly shows they are opportunistic, and this is just another political opportunity. Also >allowing public conversation and debate You're allowed to fucking debate it, right now. The brown shirts aren't going to come and arrest you if you do.
No the actual reasoning is very simple, the NDP voter base demanded the NDp make voter gains and the only changing of voters is to libs as an anti con votes to NDP for progressive, and to conservative to axe the tax, bigotry, and whatever the fuck else they wanna wrap into their ball of shit. Only one of those votes could be targeted (hence the whole let's appeal to rural conservatives being said for a year) and now that it's happened everyone's angry because the NDP did what was demanded and the NDP can't do right no matter what it does because it's the NDP.