Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Dan's avatar
Sep 4Edited

I don’t like calling people cancerous. It would be better to call him fundamentally unserious. Because that is what he is. He is an unserious person.

Ripping up an agreement to support a government, without saying specifically what the Liberals refused to implement and without a realistic ultimatum, shows you are not a serious person. The NDP had some leverage to influence policy and take credit for some of the policies. Now, both the leverage and the ability to claim credit are gone. How does that help the NDP?

In the meantime, the Liberals are busy announcing free school lunches and meeting with happy seniors who were finally able to have their teeth fixed. 34 dimensional chess on the part of Singh, obviously.

Expand full comment
Ryan H's avatar

“… save the right trending seats by cutting back on the social progressivism and focusing solely on economic populism or they can try and become a party for social liberals and progressives”

This is the only bit I disagree with. There’s almost no inherent conflict between more economically populist positions and the current social progressivism. There’s even a lot of popular economic policies that fit better within a socially progressive framework than a conservative one.

The problem isn’t that the NDP is pairing their socially progressive policies with unpopular economic policies, the problem is that they basically don’t have an economic platform at all.

Expand full comment
6 more comments...

No posts