Some amount of conflict is inherent to democracy — particularly so in a political system that prominently features His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition. And hyperbole has probably existed for as long as humans have been able to communicate.

But has any Canadian politician in recent memory embraced rhetorical conflict as enthusiastically as Pierre Poilievre?

For the Conservative leader, there seems to be no such thing as overstatement. And he seems to feel it’s almost always worth going on the attack.

  • Troy@lemmy.ca
    21·
    6 days ago

    Wake me up when they have a platform published.

    I really hope Trudeau does a last-hour electoral reform shenanigan, as a legacy statement or something. Then I can stop having to decide between strategic voting and throwing my vote away. Alas.

    • Evkob@lemmy.ca
      9·
      6 days ago

      He won’t, and if he does it’s inevitably going to be ranked ballots which unfairly favours the Liberal Party and won’t have the desired effect of increasing the representation of people who vote anything other than Lib or Con.

      Why would the current government do electoral reform years (and two elections) after failing to deliver on the promise that “2015 will be the last federal election under first-past-the-post”?

      Plus public opinion of Trudeau is so poisoned that, at this point, his supporting of electoral reform would likely just make it even more unpopular amongst the electorate.

      • kent_eh@lemmy.caEnglish
        2·
        5 days ago

        and if he does it’s inevitably going to be ranked ballots

        I think that illustrates part of the difficulty faced by the calls for changing the electoral system. There are multiple other systems, each with their positives and negatives. Determining which is the “best” one to use is not a straightforward process.

        There will be shouts of unfairness from multiple factions no matter which would be ultimately chosen.