Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

[Jarnhamar]

I don't know about ports but you do realize that with airports, the federal government is just the landlord. Major airports are already operated by non-profit authorities.

Sure, but once the priority becomes maxing revenue and profitability you're going to inevitably increase corporate and private sector influence over infrastructure (that used to be treated primarily as public service).

It will be ironic if we see Liberal supporters defend that considering how often Conservatives get accused of being too close to big business.

 

[brihard]

Yes, an election would be a silly game when there is a near zero percent probability of the CPC, Bloc, or NDP looking for an election. The last time a PM played a game like that, they came out with the same result they went in with. Even with a minority, the LPC were not being prevented from governing, and seemed to be cooperating with the CPC quite effectively. That's what Canadians want from their elected leaders. Carney was elected because he wasn't seen as the old LPC all over again. Acting like the old LPC and calling an unneeded election would poke some pretty big holes in that image.

Internal dissent is not going to be quieted by election that gives everybody else the chance to poke holes in the government's performance, and the about-face on multiple issues that until recently were LPC defining ideas. A few years of steady approval, and getting some concrete accomplishments is what will right the ship inside the LPC.

So, I don’t mean quieting dissent in terms of shutting people up. I mean removing the leverage than a bare one or two vote majority can give party backbenchers when every single vote counts. Just to clarify what I meant there.

Hack was more sharp than necessary, so my apologies for going too far with that term.

You say you're not for any party, but on here the record pretty clearly shows that you have supported the actions of those who keep the LPC in power longer, like when Singh was playing 8D chess by keeping the LPC afloat during the lowest lows of Trudeau's/LPC's popularity. I'm not holding it against you, merely pointing out that from the other side of the screen you come across as pretty heavily slanted in a particular direction, despite protestations to the contrary.

I see the misunderstanding now.

I look at things and do my best analysis of what it means. In the case of political acts, that doesn’t mean I necessarily politically support a given position or agree with it. In the case of the NDP propping up the LPC with the supply and confidence agreement, that was pure game theory. The NDP cannot form government outright; their best realistic strategic position is as the kingmaker to an LPC minority. That’s their natural and arguably only relevant partner. So, with what pieces were where on the chessboard at that time, it was the best pragmatic option for the NDP. Others were saying they should also force the election; that of course would be an absurd move- zero chance they come out of it better, particularly given the likelihood of a CPC victory at the time. So, I said that supporting the LPC was what made sense for the NDP to do; it was their only COA they gave them any chance at policy wins.

That’s not me being a fan of the NDP, or a fan of anyone in particular or just generally who props up an LPC government. I can just look at the board and imagine what move I’d consider in their shoes. Sometimes it can be really hard to tell what would gain or lose positional advantage… That particular case was just very obvious. For the same reason it was obviously in CPC’s favour to try to get an election in late 2024 before PM Trudeau was replaced, but they lacked the Parliamentary power to get it.

I hope this clarifies what positions I specifically am (and am not) taking or have taken, and why? “What makes sense for that guy” often isn’t “What I personally prefer”.