Jump to content
270soft Forum

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. I think you misplace Cruz's focus and leadership. It's not of religious conservatives. It's Conservatarians.
  3. I think if realignment is going to occur it will be mostly from some shift among Republicans. The infighting between Sanders/Warren/Gabbard wings and the Biden/Clinton/Obama wings is not really that significant. They pretty much agree on most things, it's more about focus and priority. The Republican tribes are much more varied, and it is unclear which way it's going to break. I'd argue that moderate Republicanism would be a winning scenario if they find a way to make it at least somewhat populist. Republican governors in Blue states have among the highest--if not the highest--approval ratings. If the part mirrored them, they'd probably win over moderates from the Democrats. They just need to think of a way to not be too isolating to populists conservatives. I should also note, that by saying moderate, I'm not saying to return to a moderate Republicanism of the past, but something new--- Socially tolerant Republicans (Charlie Baker, Larry Hogan, Phil Scott, Susana Martinez, Nikky Haley) meet a toned down version of Trumpism, basically the more popular Trump policies, but reframed to be less offensive and reformed to be more effective. The big losers in this would be the Cruz wing (social conservatives) and the Graham wing (war hawks). Democrats would have to either respond by contesting for the middle, veering left and hoping that they can normalize far-left views on a large scale, or (and I doubt this happens) make a play for the ignored war hawks and/or social conservatives. The reason why I choose to isolate the Cruz and Graham wings from a hypothetical realignment is that these are the parts of the party that are dying. Neocons are fading fast, at least for now. Religion in America has been declining with each new generation, which hurts social conservatives in the long game. The new social conservatives will be relatively social conservative compared to a newer leftward center in the social spectrum, I think.
  4. Today
  5. Sorry, you're only allowed to switch to supporting Jackson. Haha, no worries. I think shifting support around is probably a realistic reflection of how things would go.
  6. (I question how much I'm allowed to do this...) How about Marshall instead.
  7. Actually, we might have to do some debate in the Federalist chat. Don't mark any of us down for certain until the opposition has answered please 😛
  8. *Relative to Canada's centre.
  9. No, not as well, but still doing fine. Trudeau is an Obama-type candidate - high charisma, thin resume when taking office, 'pragmatic progressive'. The Liberal party is generally centre or centre-right on economics, centre-left on social policies.
  10. Not sure what you mean here. The Yukon is a territory. No necessary connection with First Nations, but having said that the Yukon is about 20% indigenous peoples.
  11. Depends on the platform he would have run on. He moved to the right after leaving the Conservative party. He's more charismatic than Scheer, but he isn't fluent in English and so it makes it difficult to understand him at times.
  12. As I said earlier today Bloc officially consult jurists to trigger a recount in Quebec city. This is the seat of the Liberal Minister Jean Yves Duclot.
  13. All is fair in love and war (and politics ). The other parties are waiting for a chance to cripple them.
  14. I think a big reason for the Liberals hanging onto a minority is that the Conservative leader Scheer was underwhelming to many Canadians. It seems Scheer's plan was to be as boring as possible. If I were a Conservative party member, I would be looking carefully at who could replace him before the next election. i think at this moment trudeau are hillary and scheer are similiar to mccain/romney boring weak candidate
  15. yukon and anothers are natives territory or what ? ?
  16. you think if bernier have win conservative leadership will have more voters /seats? ? he looks ok comparated with boring scheer despite this if i vote in canada will vote for him
  17. Is the Canadian economy doing as well as the American economy? How does Trudeau compare as a candidate/nominee to say Biden, Warren, Sanders, etc. or to Obama?
  18. My guess is the other major reason for the Liberals hanging onto a minority is that the economy is doing fairly well.
  19. I think a big reason for the Liberals hanging onto a minority is that the Conservative leader Scheer was underwhelming to many Canadians. It seems Scheer's plan was to be as boring as possible. If I were a Conservative party member, I would be looking carefully at who could replace him before the next election.
  20. No. Longest serving Prime Minister was 21 1/2 years.
  21. If the government fails a confidence vote, it falls. If things are looking good for an election for whichever parties, that is a reason to let the government fail. The Liberals themselves might want an election relatively soon if polling is looking good. Or they might not. A typical length for a Canadian government in these conditions is about 2 years, the maximum would be the term limit of 4 years. Canadians want good relations with the U.S., as it's our largest trading partner. Canadians want someone who will stand up for Canadian interests and values, but they don't want to unnecessarily antagonize the States, IMO. I didn't perceive much about Trump in the election.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...