hmm. i would've rt'd the hell out of this in 2015, but trump winning changed my world view. this is an unfair comparison, but for illustrative purposes, hillary clinton also thought the "left" (or whatever the fuck her version of that word means) could win through "policy" and "substance" alone.
the unfortunate reality is that most people simply don't give a fuck about good or substantive policy; many of them just want to feel seen and heard, and to use your language, feel sanctimonious about their views.
it's a bit like retail investing in this current environment. yes, eventually fundamentals bear out and getting super hyped on the stock of the day will end poorly, but for increasingly longer and longer periods of time, the flavour of the day is the one to jump on because it is what is at the top of mind for the substantive majority that only pay attention to the surface stories. an election cycle might be about that length of time. real time example - look at the insanity of the DXYZ fund over the last couple days.
polievre "refusing" to "condemn" an alex jones endorsement - for whatever the fuck that means - may sway an otherwise on-the-fence millennial voter who is disillusioned by the liberals and trudeau on housing and inflation and is considering the cpc... but cannot overlook an "alignment" with a rwnj that has been sued for nearly 10 figures as a sandy hook denier. you can question how rachel gilmore phrased the question, but in today's political sphere, it's a valid one IMO.
i'd contrast that to say nobody outside of people who are highly engaged (ie. your readership, in all fairness) will know that anthony housefeather did anything, regardless of the downstream outcomes.
now, the voter that i made up may only represent an insignificant minority, and most swing voters will make up their mind on something else (freedom of association seems to be a hallmark of the post-woke/anti-woke era) - but i certainly don't think gilmore's question and those like it has any chance of backfiring (that voter thinks the leftist media is not substantive enough/focused too much on illegitimate/slanderous connections and it draws them to polievre/the right)
i'll wrap up by saying i think you're 100% spot on for the RBG/sotomayer situation, and that the underlying point has a lot of clear merit. i just don't know that it carries weight in public perception the way that people in politically engaged bubbles/spheres think it does.
I share your frustration. Progressive Canadians are making Poilievre's rise way too easy. But social media might reveal the way most voters actually think; i.e., superficially and emotionally. I'm an experienced political observer and can't remember a time when most people ever understood policy choices, let alone voted on that basis. I do wish, however, that the left would explain how policies affect people on an individual or family level. Translate complexity into personal. Use plain language to help voters understand how partisan choices will affect them directly. Stunts to get clicks in the echo chamber are not useless, but cannot be all. We need to spell it out in terms most people can understand.
the woke libertarian progressive position is to ALLOW open air drug scenes. the good liberal position of former socialist michael shellenberger is shelter first, housing earned, crimes enforced, treatment or jail.
There are plenty of people who ride whatever vehicle that will get them the farthest in politics. They are opportunists. Does modern liberalism have any real value set? Does it believe in individual liberty and international norms? Housefather ran into the arms of Israel for personal gain. I will say this too about Conservatives. Recall in 2006 when Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener was deliberately killed by the IDF and the Harper government and DND covered it up? That's treason. Any politician who differs is also a traitor. Now a second Canadian solider is dead, by Israel's IDF. Anything from the member from Mount Royal, Pierre Trudeau’s old riding, on this?
I give him no credit for realizing he has no employable skill set outside of politics. That MP seat belongs to the public not him. Let him run as an independent, if he is so "virtuous". He isn't. He's an opportunist.
As for Ms. Gilmore, that is what she does. She exposes far right hypocrisy and politicians ties to extremism. That -despite your claim- takes integrity, because there is no upside to exposing neo-Nazis and degenerates like Alex Jones, who exploit the credulous rubes and mentally challenged; unless death threats are your objective. She was fired for exposing right wing perfidy. No one reads books these days, so having policy is fine, but front line engagement is what she does and she does it well.
Liberals love norm enforcement and selling right wing policies, cloaked in identity politics. They aren't radicals. At best incrementalists, which is really just Burkean Conservatism. That's why JT has been sandbagging for Jabba da Ford and Fishy Francois as they privatize and push the economy into disrepair through cronyism and corruption.
We are fighting incipient fascism on a global level. Every major country (France, Germany, Italy, USA, India, Russia, and China) already is or could be run by authoritarians and/or fascists in a short time. Does anyone think Housefather's deferment to Israel is going to advance liberal democracy?
Housefather is responsible to the people in his riding and to Canadian democracy. In my book he failed. Gilmore is an independent journalist. The fact that Conservatives hate her, the CBC, and every other entity not scribing for fascists or plutocrats, like Elmo, should be indicative of what is the correct frame to understand this situation.
.. was thinking this morning .. the Real Battle is ‘Get Money - Religion - ‘Yellow Media
the complete Fluck OUT - Away From & ‘STAY OUT’ of ‘Elected Governance’
I would have already done away with Whipped Votes.. as well as ‘tracked’ Exactly what an elected ‘Honourable RESIDENT’ of said Riding did as far as ‘actively & accurately comprehending & Reflecting - the Dreams Needs & Wishes of their Constituents..
Can anyone convince me Mr Housefeather’s tremulous outrage reflects his Riding or only his personal religious beliefs ? Is he prone to ‘situational ethics’
ps.. Can anyone tell me What Canada & Canadians ‘have to show’ for 20 Years of Poilievre becoming a Multi Millionaire - while Running his Mouth as self anointed ‘Smartest Guy In Every Room’ unless Stephen Harper Is in the Room
hmm. i would've rt'd the hell out of this in 2015, but trump winning changed my world view. this is an unfair comparison, but for illustrative purposes, hillary clinton also thought the "left" (or whatever the fuck her version of that word means) could win through "policy" and "substance" alone.
the unfortunate reality is that most people simply don't give a fuck about good or substantive policy; many of them just want to feel seen and heard, and to use your language, feel sanctimonious about their views.
it's a bit like retail investing in this current environment. yes, eventually fundamentals bear out and getting super hyped on the stock of the day will end poorly, but for increasingly longer and longer periods of time, the flavour of the day is the one to jump on because it is what is at the top of mind for the substantive majority that only pay attention to the surface stories. an election cycle might be about that length of time. real time example - look at the insanity of the DXYZ fund over the last couple days.
polievre "refusing" to "condemn" an alex jones endorsement - for whatever the fuck that means - may sway an otherwise on-the-fence millennial voter who is disillusioned by the liberals and trudeau on housing and inflation and is considering the cpc... but cannot overlook an "alignment" with a rwnj that has been sued for nearly 10 figures as a sandy hook denier. you can question how rachel gilmore phrased the question, but in today's political sphere, it's a valid one IMO.
i'd contrast that to say nobody outside of people who are highly engaged (ie. your readership, in all fairness) will know that anthony housefeather did anything, regardless of the downstream outcomes.
now, the voter that i made up may only represent an insignificant minority, and most swing voters will make up their mind on something else (freedom of association seems to be a hallmark of the post-woke/anti-woke era) - but i certainly don't think gilmore's question and those like it has any chance of backfiring (that voter thinks the leftist media is not substantive enough/focused too much on illegitimate/slanderous connections and it draws them to polievre/the right)
i'll wrap up by saying i think you're 100% spot on for the RBG/sotomayer situation, and that the underlying point has a lot of clear merit. i just don't know that it carries weight in public perception the way that people in politically engaged bubbles/spheres think it does.
I share your frustration. Progressive Canadians are making Poilievre's rise way too easy. But social media might reveal the way most voters actually think; i.e., superficially and emotionally. I'm an experienced political observer and can't remember a time when most people ever understood policy choices, let alone voted on that basis. I do wish, however, that the left would explain how policies affect people on an individual or family level. Translate complexity into personal. Use plain language to help voters understand how partisan choices will affect them directly. Stunts to get clicks in the echo chamber are not useless, but cannot be all. We need to spell it out in terms most people can understand.
This fucking sucks man
the woke libertarian progressive position is to ALLOW open air drug scenes. the good liberal position of former socialist michael shellenberger is shelter first, housing earned, crimes enforced, treatment or jail.
Thanks for this piece. Really enjoyed it.
I am so sure we can actually compare the actions of a MP who has some real political leverage with the ones of social media influencer like Rachel
There are plenty of people who ride whatever vehicle that will get them the farthest in politics. They are opportunists. Does modern liberalism have any real value set? Does it believe in individual liberty and international norms? Housefather ran into the arms of Israel for personal gain. I will say this too about Conservatives. Recall in 2006 when Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener was deliberately killed by the IDF and the Harper government and DND covered it up? That's treason. Any politician who differs is also a traitor. Now a second Canadian solider is dead, by Israel's IDF. Anything from the member from Mount Royal, Pierre Trudeau’s old riding, on this?
I give him no credit for realizing he has no employable skill set outside of politics. That MP seat belongs to the public not him. Let him run as an independent, if he is so "virtuous". He isn't. He's an opportunist.
As for Ms. Gilmore, that is what she does. She exposes far right hypocrisy and politicians ties to extremism. That -despite your claim- takes integrity, because there is no upside to exposing neo-Nazis and degenerates like Alex Jones, who exploit the credulous rubes and mentally challenged; unless death threats are your objective. She was fired for exposing right wing perfidy. No one reads books these days, so having policy is fine, but front line engagement is what she does and she does it well.
Liberals love norm enforcement and selling right wing policies, cloaked in identity politics. They aren't radicals. At best incrementalists, which is really just Burkean Conservatism. That's why JT has been sandbagging for Jabba da Ford and Fishy Francois as they privatize and push the economy into disrepair through cronyism and corruption.
We are fighting incipient fascism on a global level. Every major country (France, Germany, Italy, USA, India, Russia, and China) already is or could be run by authoritarians and/or fascists in a short time. Does anyone think Housefather's deferment to Israel is going to advance liberal democracy?
Housefather is responsible to the people in his riding and to Canadian democracy. In my book he failed. Gilmore is an independent journalist. The fact that Conservatives hate her, the CBC, and every other entity not scribing for fascists or plutocrats, like Elmo, should be indicative of what is the correct frame to understand this situation.
.. was thinking this morning .. the Real Battle is ‘Get Money - Religion - ‘Yellow Media
the complete Fluck OUT - Away From & ‘STAY OUT’ of ‘Elected Governance’
I would have already done away with Whipped Votes.. as well as ‘tracked’ Exactly what an elected ‘Honourable RESIDENT’ of said Riding did as far as ‘actively & accurately comprehending & Reflecting - the Dreams Needs & Wishes of their Constituents..
Can anyone convince me Mr Housefeather’s tremulous outrage reflects his Riding or only his personal religious beliefs ? Is he prone to ‘situational ethics’
ps.. Can anyone tell me What Canada & Canadians ‘have to show’ for 20 Years of Poilievre becoming a Multi Millionaire - while Running his Mouth as self anointed ‘Smartest Guy In Every Room’ unless Stephen Harper Is in the Room
Solid.