Well the NB province seem pretty divided when u look at the card and it’s almost a split in the middle without much changes .
Selfish as nothing to do with conservative or liberal either .

Regardless like I said , with such tiny electorate, nothing meaningful imo can be derived from this election on the larger Canadian panel.
Like this result would be a vote against trudeau for example holds no water for me .

It's probably more an issue with my understanding than your intention... Ton Anglais est meilleuer a mon Francais.

As for a bad economy, we haven't seen that yet. The government hasn't been given a reason to stop safety-net spending: greater economic hardship is going to come when those programs come to a stop. Past recessions haven't resulted in civic division and destabilization, but there's enough black swan events (that our connectivity magnifies like never before) that you may have something.

That being said, an election in NB where the PCs pick up a couple seats is still not meaningful.

IMO, no chance Trump had a personal view on the tariffs from an economic or manufacturing standpoint. Slapping tariffs on foreign countries can be explained to him - and can be advertised to the general public - in short, concise sound-bites, so he went for it.

No more than Ford's excellent approval numbers in Ontario is - COVID competence played into the PC's hands in New Brunswick. Anyone who's arguing that the results augur a PC government come next federal election is speaking from an established and biased viewpoint.

Now, the French-English divide in NB is interesting, but what would Canadian politics be without the French and English agreeing on nothing?

The one thing I am seeing is that many of these Safety Spending Programs are being abused greatly. As for CERB I have spoken to have had employees asked to be laid off so they could collect CERB. They came back as soon as CERB ended. I know so many folks that took the $40,000 loan put it in the bank for the free $10,000 . I know many folks that took the payroll protection but could have made it without.

No question a large amount of folks needed the CERB but like you said when these programs end t hat is when we will see the hurt.

Im not sure as quickly as you needed to get this out there how the government could have done it different. My guess is many bars and restaurants will go under.

As for blaming governments most premiers are getting good reviews. Take Rob Ford many saw him as an idiot but it seems voters are pleased with the job he is doing. The only premier that ranks lower is Jason Kenney

The majority of all industries ( minus the American aluminum lobby obviously) were against the raise of aluminum tariffs because their cost of production would go up too much but specifically the White House didn’t care ( election coming with cash contribution maybe as something to do with it ?) and went with the lobby despise many experts opinions ....

Ahaha noted !

I have to disagree on the economy part .
You canT say great economy when the government ( I’m not saying he shouldn’t have did it ) made a huge deficit that probably will effect a lot of stuff for a couple of years .

I’m condemning for a long time now towards Trump fake success economically because his making huge deficit despite full employment in the states , I can’t let go this concept when trudeau did the same thing.... even Tho he did it at a much lower Level than Trump .

It's far from a great economy, but until the spending stops, we won't approach "terrible enough economy to cause civil unrest" territory.

As for affecting things for a couple years, that's optimistic: hope you're right. Neither country has approached government defects with any sense of responsibility for a long time now. I think we need another Paul Martin to hack and slash.

You do not hear that often a liberal to rein in the deficit

Unfortunately hack and slash doesn't buy votes. Look at how angry public sector unions get anytime a government attempts to cut their wages, just think of the children!!

Max Bernier ran on cutting government spending last election but everyone was too busy screaming racist at him to read his platform.

It would be nice if I could look up some numbers that the completely terrible Fraser Institute hasn't manipulated into nothingness

There's been virtually no difference in Liberals vs Conservatives increasing the national debt. I wish lozen would actually do some research cause I would like to see a uke vs lozen discussion that isn't one side bringing the facts vs the Trump loving Albertabot

Good Ole Ralphie did. He went on TV and compared it to a home budget said this is what your spending and this is what your taking in and won in a landslide.

Max Bernier would have destroyed Trudeau. French CDN and no way Trudeau can call him a racist with him on video with his body painted black prancing around like a monkey. Though the conservatives had to pick the anti abortionist who came across as anti LGBQT2S

Paul Martin under Chrétien was finance minister the last time a government did more than pay lip service to paying down th debt. Granted a lot of the stuff was low hanging fruit (shutting down embassies) but neither party since has come close.

I actually think this is one of those things that comes from trump. For whatever reason, he has long been in support of raising tarrifs, it's one of those positions he's articulated for decades, back into when he was semi-lucid. I remember reading there was a bit of an internal WH battle among those that wanted to go along with trump on this, and those that oppose, but as time went on the people against tarrifs have largely been weeded out, and now the general principle gets applied to canada and china alike.

The current gargantuan deficits for this year, next year, and likely dwindling after that are unprecedented in scale to face an unprecedented crisis, and I think appropriate. But let's ignore this blip. What - exactly - do you people who worry about the deficit think the problem is with long term, persistent, structural deficits that are modest in size? What is the e precise social or economic consequence you are worried about?

Also, can we give a bit of credit to THANK YOU JUSTIN TRUDEAU AND TEAM for being pretty ****ing masterful in handling the aluminum situation? I know, I know, this is a middle move, the game isn't over, but getting the US to retreat hours before the carefully vetted Canadian sanctions - aiming to particularly punishing in swing states - went into effect? Damn, that was well played.

It’s not sustainable and you end up defaulting or a devalued currency.....for everyone , regardless your social class.
And that is very bad .
Obviously it’s not a big risk just yet and we have lot commodity and very good diversified economy .
But it’s not a reason for not doing a better job !
When a country lose money we basically lose all money at one point .
Look at the US, they owe over 100 trillions in debt for the elderly and Medicare .
I don’t want to get there !

I would rather be like Norway but look what Alberta did , shrug .

Low interest rates can hide the problem for now, but servicing a debt that high is going to take more and more of the federal budget. "Just print some more money" is only a viable short term solution.

And let's not call this a 'blip'.

Yeah I was wrong on this one and they let it play out. Weird thing is the US has set quota's which Canada has not agreed to. I realize she is part of his team but I give most of the credit to Freeland

One issue is the lack of resource revenue from Alberta and Sask ( Alberta alone has contributed 20 billion a year on average). This has to be made up and Health care is a killer as populations get older. Its provincial but a huge chunk of cash comes from the feds. Post Covid this will be a challenge as the liberals want a green economy

Given that we now have the technology, shouldn't we do away with representative democracy and just go with direct democracy?

Im not sure what you mean by this?

Probably referring to direct democracy, that voters vote directly on issues and have the power to bring up referendums or propose changes to law / constitution.

Using it as a replacement for representative democracy is uncharted territory, no country using only direct democracy exists in the world today.

You do have the Swiss model which uses some direct democracy to complement representative democracy, a radical variant of "subsidiarität", the political principle that issues in a democracy should be handled at their immediate level. But the Swiss model is often misunderstood. Switzerland is a federal republic with a representative government with some level of direct democracy. In the cantons (a political unit somewhat similar to US states) you have higher levels of direct democracy.

Hah. No we don't. Not if you use the word "technology" to mean referendums via smartphone app.

As tame deuces explained, direct democracy is where individuals vote on issues, instead of representative democracy where you elect individuals to vote on issues. Presumably we could just log on to the government website and all vote on various matters that need deciding, as well as propose laws or changes to laws and regulations ourselves.

I feel like direct democracy would offer substantial advantages. There would be no issue with special interests and patronage. It would be much easier to effect change, and for people to have their voices heard.