The only people who are obsessed with Singh “keeping his word” about this issue would never have voted for the NDP anyway, so you can stop pretending it’s something you actually care about on any objective or moral ground.
We get it, CPC sycophants are mad. Get over it.
I don't care about whether or not he keeps his word but I'm very interested in knowing how NDP voters and loyalists would view it. Do they care at all about what Singh's says and does? Are they loyal to a fault? If they don't support back pedaling on his words would those voters switch to the Liberals or just not vote?
Was it a lucky hand he got? Sure. Could somebody have done better with it? Maybe. Would Jack Layton have been a more effective NDP leader if he triggered an election when the CPC wanted to?
I believe Jack Layton would have done what was best for Canada. First, he probably would not have made a deal to form a coalition with the Liberals. Second, had he done so, he wouldn't have allowed a corrupt, incompetent, and ineffective Federal Government to drag on for such a long time. IMO he would have voted non-confidence at the earliest opportunity.
I don't care about whether or not he keeps his word but I'm very interested in knowing how NDP voters and loyalists would view it. Do they care at all about what Singh's says and does? Are they loyal to a fault? If they don't support back pedaling on his words would those voters switch to the Liberals or just not vote?
I can’t see them voting Liberal if the reason they’re turning on Singh is because he keeps propping up the Liberals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flamesfever
I believe Jack Layton would have done what was best for Canada. First, he probably would not have made a deal to form a coalition with the Liberals. Second, had he done so, he wouldn't have allowed a corrupt, incompetent, and ineffective Federal Government to drag on for such a long time. IMO he would have voted non-confidence at the earliest opportunity.
the way I see it
Noble, but wouldn't have accomplished anywhere near as much NDP driven policy as Singh has been able to do. Hence why Singh has been the most effective NDP leader since Douglas.
Last edited by Roughneck; 01-06-2025 at 08:02 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Roughneck For This Useful Post:
I don't care about whether or not he keeps his word but I'm very interested in knowing how NDP voters and loyalists would view it. Do they care at all about what Singh's says and does? Are they loyal to a fault? If they don't support back pedaling on his words would those voters switch to the Liberals or just not vote?
Yeah man I know. You asked this question 24 hours ago and you got an answer then.
But it’s also framed as a bit of a dumb question. “Do NDP voters and loyalists care at all about Singh says and does?” well yeah man, obviously, and obviously they aren’t a monolith so different people care differently about different things he says/does.
Or are you asking because you actually don’t care about PP says or does and are just going to blue no matter who so you genuinely can’t imagine an alternative way of thinking? In which case your question at least makes sense.
I don't care about whether or not he keeps his word but I'm very interested in knowing how NDP voters and loyalists would view it. Do they care at all about what Singh's says and does? Are they loyal to a fault? If they don't support back pedaling on his words would those voters switch to the Liberals or just not vote?
Most of them probably just accepted the fact that he wasn’t going to call for a significantly earlier election a long time ago and stopped letting it rent space in their heads.
There’s really zero change in the outcome if he says he won’t call for one or threatens to call for one and doesn’t. The credibility of a politician that in all likelihood isn’t going to have any real power after the election regardless of when it is just isn’t worth worrying about. Especially when there’s really not a whole lot anyone can do to force his hand.
The Following User Says Thank You to iggy_oi For This Useful Post:
I believe Jack Layton would have done what was best for Canada. First, he probably would not have made a deal to form a coalition with the Liberals. Second, had he done so, he wouldn't have allowed a corrupt, incompetent, and ineffective Federal Government to drag on for such a long time. IMO he would have voted non-confidence at the earliest opportunity.
the way I see it
So you think he would have not worked with the liberals to secure Daycare, Dental, and Pharma care for low income and working Canadians. Dental and Pharma being direct results of the coalition Layton would have done the same types of things.
You can hate Singh if you want but he dramatically changed the state of social programs without holding power.
This idea that an early election without a viable choice to be made is what’s best for Canada is an interesting one.
Why would an election with one choice for Prime Minister be better than one with two?
Last edited by GGG; 01-06-2025 at 09:40 PM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Or was he the luckiest in terms of having two minority governments who needed his support?
I don't think he was a better leader than Jack Layton. He had timing and circumstance in his favor.
I agree Layton was a better leader, I think he would have done very similar things in using leverage to extract concessions from the government. I’d suspect it would have been more around city building like transit and affordable housing. Certainly Layton was more likeable.
However you only can play the hand you are dealt and luck certainly plays a part. But because of circumstance Singh was able to do things and therefore was more effective.
I didn't think it was possible to hate PP more than I already do for his antivaxxer support, does he have a history of biblical buffoonery? I can't really identity what's on that shelf, I hope you're joking.
lol. I don't know what those gold books are behind him. It's one of those cringe photo ops of pretending to be knowledgeable by having books behind you in an at home interview.
Like are those encyclopedias from 1982? hahaha can't believe there are idiots who are going to vote for him.
__________________ Peter12 "I'm no Trump fan but he is smarter than most if not everyone in this thread. ”
lol. I don't know what those gold books are behind him. It's one of those cringe photo ops of pretending to be knowledgeable by having books behind you in an at home interview.
Like are those encyclopedias from 1982? hahaha can't believe there are idiots who are going to vote for him.
Guess if you put any faith in the polls there are a lot of idiots in canada. Because the seat totals are going to be in the 245 range for PP and 6 for the Liberals.
These might be a stupid question, but I'll ask it anyway.
Can the Governor General refuse the PM's request to prorogue parliament if it isn't really in the best interest of the people at this time? Like seriously, this is a Liberal Party problem right now and it seems really unfair to not have our government working over the next few months. I know it would be unprecedented, but the GG is technically above the PM, and there seems to be too much at stake to prorogue parliament for what is essentially an internal party problem.
Even if having parliament ends up forcing an election, to frickin' bad for the Liberals. Pick a leader quickly, or have the election without one. Heck, they'd probably actually do better.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
These might be a stupid question, but I'll ask it anyway.
Can the Governor General refuse the PM's request to prorogue parliament if it isn't really in the best interest of the people at this time? Like seriously, this is a Liberal Party problem right now and it seems really unfair to not have our government working over the next few months. I know it would be unprecedented, but the GG is technically above the PM, and there seems to be too much at stake to prorogue parliament for what is essentially an internal party problem.
Even if having parliament ends up forcing an election, to frickin' bad for the Liberals. Pick a leader quickly, or have the election without one. Heck, they'd probably actually do better.
Answer to that one is yes.
The Following User Says Thank You to Goriders For This Useful Post:
Guess if you put any faith in the polls there are a lot of idiots in canada. Because the seat totals are going to be in the 245 range for PP and 6 for the Liberals.
Thank god for idiots.
Just so you're brain doesn't short circuit when election results come out, you do realize polls are a snapshot of voter sentiment at a point in time, right? And that these sentiments can quickly change as situations change, because not every voter who may have answered yes to PP in December 2024 is going to vote that way? I understand it's a tough concept for single party simpleton voters to grasp, but in short, things change. Not everyone is a locked in idiot, so your thanking of God for that is very premature.
