Another thing to consider is that many people simply aren’t that engaged, and the news ecosystem on both sides of the border has deteriorated to the point where it’s very easy to go through life with bad information, or no information at all.

It’s probably not that hard for a low-information voter to be swayed by big talk, even if they’re not a cultist.

I think it’s a nuanced question - I’ve heard that the Cuban community in Florida is very Republican because they’re seen as stronger against the Cuban regime.

In other cases, I think people are very willing to vote for people who promise to help them with their most immediate problems (regardless of how credible those promises are), and overlook the rest.

And we should never underestimate the willingness of people to close a door behind them once they’ve gotten through it.

One thing he doesn’t touch on (much) is that a significant number of NDP supporters - probably “working class” supporters - seemed to flip to the Conservatives, and not the Liberals.

The party is going to have to reckon with that, too.

It’s probably another move to distance himself from Trudeau’s choices.

That’s up to the CPC.

Carney said a byelection should be held as quickly as possible to give Poilievre an opportunity to win a seat in the House of Commons, if that’s what the Conservative Party wants.

Carney’s message is that he’s not interested in playing Parliamentary games. I’m not convinced it’s a good idea, but it’s an interesting move.

No sitting PM wants to be seen spending millions on “their” house, and costs have skyrocketed thanks to decades of neglect.

On top of that, the house itself doesn’t really meet the needs of the role, and both the house and grounds are considered inadequate from a security perspective.

That is definitely an assumption you could make.

Yeah, I’m gonna go ahead and blame a technical glitch, and totally not human error.

Fixed.

politics favors short-term thinking

So does biology. Immediate gratification wins out over delayed gratification almost every single time.

It’s so weird to hear it referred to as “Netflix series” in the American trades…

In any case, I’ve been meaning to check it out. The buzz has been positive, and CBC has been promoting the hell out of it.

These are strange times indeed.

This election was so weird in so many ways, I think it will be some time before we fully understand what it all means.

It’s a weird situation. Like it or not, Polievre just achieved the highest Conservative vote share since the 1980s.

That he still lost is astonishing, and it’ll be a while before anyone can sort out the path forward.

But I suspect they’ll keep him around.

Yeah, they’ll probably just parachute him into an Alberta riding. We’re not rid of him yet.

A few scattered thoughts on this:

• The NDP are leaderless, and are therefore agendaless until they can get organized again.

• They’re also probably broke, and in no position to fight another election.

• While they certainly hold a good position in the new HoC, there’s bound to be some introspection about how that worked out for them last time.

Direct link to “Echo Beach” because it’s a banger.

That probably means you keep good company - I would trust polls over anecdotes.

It’s worth noting that in the months preceding the 1995 referendum, the “yes” movement was hovering around 37%. They managed to propel that to 49.42% result in the referendum itself.

Definitely not to be taken lightly.

That poll is cited in the piece, and the fact that separatist sentiments in AB and SK are roughly on par with QC (where it’s still treated as a serious threat) is kind of the central point.

I reject the framing of DEI as a “right buzzword.” Don’t let them co-opt it.

Unless the story is completely fabricated, I don’t see an angle here. If anything, the slant of the article is pro-DEI, which is…not what I would expect from American propaganda in 2025.