You Really Do Need to Pay Attention to Politics | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Politics

You Really Do Need to Pay Attention to Politics

Published

 on

“Divisive,” “corrupt,” and “messy.” That’s how Americans described the state of our politics when asked to do so by Pew last year. Other popular answers included “polarized” and “dysfunctional.”

Those of us who feel that way may be tempted to tune out this election year. To participate in politics is to encounter many otherwise lovely people at their most upset, angry, and uncharitable. To withdraw from it is, for many, to avoid stress, annoyance, and maybe even negative psychological outcomes associated with daily political engagement.

Opting out sounds sensible in that telling. But if affable, pragmatic, constructive sorts opt out of civic life, repelled by its disagreeableness, the future will be shaped to a growing degree by unreasonable zealots who will make our politics more stressful and dysfunctional. Avoiding that future requires a bigger share of circumspect people to participate.

You can already see the ill effect that negative polarization has had on politics. Since 2016, voter turnout has been relatively high, but not because the public is enthusiastic about what’s going on in the country. Americans think of people in the other party as immoral, dishonest, and close-minded. Donald Trump is especially adept at drawing to the polls both his biggest sycophants and voters who abhor him and want him defeated more than anything. If only as a calming influence, I want more Americans who are alienated by negative polarization to participate, not just in elections, but in political life more broadly.

That doesn’t mean becoming an aggrieved shitposter on social media, or blocking traffic to impose your priorities on others, or subjecting colleagues to the bombastic talk-radio monologue that raised your blood pressure on the way to work, or spending social gatherings with family and friends berating them for their political beliefs. If you cannot conceive of any approach to politics other than polarizing conflict, withdraw with my blessing.

However, if you lament that social media is too often used to attack rather than to understand or persuade, or you can empathize with people on different sides of society’s thorniest debates, or you hate to see people who love one another ruin their relationships over ideological disputes, or you think there are plenty of positive sum compromises that would improve the status quo, Uncle Sam needs you in 2024.

What I have in mind may be less unpleasant than you imagine. The idea isn’t that you become a political junkie, treating the events of each news cycle as if they are of world-changing importance, or even that you stay permanently engaged. After this year, take all of 2025 off from politics! In fact, you don’t even need to opt in for this entire year––it would be enough to participate in politics starting after the last whistle in today’s Super Bowl and to keep it up ’til November 5, when the general election will decide matters through 2026.

Politics needn’t make demands on you every day. But you will need to research candidates and vote. And stop skipping the primaries, as I’ve sometimes done myself, as if you can discharge your civic duty solely in the general election.

“In U.S. elections since 2000, the average turnout rate for primary elections is 27% of registered voters,” the nonpartisan Constitution Center reports. “In contrast, the average turnout rate for general elections is 60.5% of registered voters.” If you share my belief that primary electorates are generally not sending their best to general elections, changing turnout in a way that alters the primary electorate is a promising way to alter outcomes. Whereas ceding primaries to the same partisans who created the current iteration of the Republican and Democratic Parties nearly guarantees that, once the general election rolls around, you’ll be dissatisfied with the choices, not just for the presidency, but for all the other down-ballot offices you can influence.

Beyond casting ballots in the primary and general elections, choose engagement that’s both effective and sustainable. If you hate doing something, you’re unlikely to stick with it. Plus, the sorts of political engagement that are bad for mental health, such as doomscrolling through headlines and bickering with family members, tend to be totally ineffective anyway.

Instead, give campaign contributions to a candidate whom you particularly like and to the opponent of a candidate who strikes you as particularly pernicious. Or identify a cohort of people whom you find reasonable and help get them registered to vote. Or organize a peer-to-peer effort to get out the vote among acquaintances with temperaments like yours. Or contact a campaign that’s in a close race and ask what they need most from volunteers. Spending a few hundred dollars or a few days of effort is enough for you to have far greater influence than people who waste hours every day on fruitless online arguments about politics.

“We grow justly weary of our politics,” the late Charles Krauthammer once wrote. But politics, “in all its grubby, grasping, corrupt, contemptible manifestations,” is not something prudently ignored. “For all the sublimity of art, physics, music, mathematics and other manifestations of human genius,” he argued, “everything depends on the mundane, frustrating, often debased vocation known as politics. Because if we don’t get politics right, everything else risks extinction.”

That is stressful and annoying, given the unpleasantness of our politics, but it’s still true. So relax through the final quarter of Sunday’s game, settle your bets, and scrape that last bit of seven-layer dip from the dish––then crack open one more beer, consult a primary-election calendar, register to vote if you haven’t already, and help make the future a bit more pleasant for everyone.

Conor Friedersdorf is a staff writer at The Atlantic and the author of the Up for Debate newsletter.

Source link

Politics

Political parties cool to idea of new federal regulations for nomination contests

Published

 on

 

OTTAWA – Several federal political parties are expressing reservations about the prospect of fresh regulations to prevent foreign meddlers from tainting their candidate nomination processes.

Elections Canada has suggested possible changes to safeguard nominations, including barring non-citizens from helping choose candidates, requiring parties to publish contest rules and explicitly outlawing behaviour such as voting more than once.

However, representatives of the Bloc Québécois, Green Party and NDP have told a federal commission of inquiry into foreign interference that such changes may be unwelcome, difficult to implement or counterproductive.

The Canada Elections Act currently provides for limited regulation of federal nomination races and contestants.

For instance, only contestants who accept $1,000 in contributions or incur $1,000 in expenses have to file a financial return. In addition, the act does not include specific obligations concerning candidacy, voting, counting or results reporting other than the identity of the successful nominee.

A report released in June by the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians expressed concern about how easily foreign actors can take advantage of loopholes and vulnerabilities to support preferred candidates.

Lucy Watson, national director of the NDP, told the inquiry Thursday she had concerns about the way in which new legislation would interact with the internal decision-making of the party.

“We are very proud of the fact that our members play such a significant role in shaping the internal policies and procedures and infrastructure of the party, and I would not want to see that lost,” she said.

“There are guidelines, there are best practices that we would welcome, but if we were to talk about legal requirements and legislation, that’s something I would have to take away and put further thought into, and have discussions with folks who are integral to the party’s governance.”

In an August interview with the commission of inquiry, Bloc Québécois executive director Mathieu Desquilbet said the party would be opposed to any external body monitoring nomination and leadership contest rules.

A summary tabled Thursday says Desquilbet expressed doubts about the appropriateness of requiring nomination candidates to file a full financial report with Elections Canada, saying the agency’s existing regulatory framework and the Bloc’s internal rules on the matter are sufficient.

Green Party representatives Jon Irwin and Robin Marty told the inquiry in an August interview it would not be realistic for an external body, like Elections Canada, to administer nomination or leadership contests as the resources required would exceed the federal agency’s capacity.

A summary of the interview says Irwin and Marty “also did not believe that rules violations could effectively be investigated by an external body like the Office of the Commissioner of Canada Elections.”

“The types of complaints that get raised during nomination contests can be highly personal, politically driven, and could overwhelm an external body.”

Marty, national campaign director for the party, told the inquiry Thursday that more reporting requirements would also place an administrative burden on volunteers and riding workers.

In addition, he said that disclosing the vote tally of a nomination contest could actually help foreign meddlers by flagging the precise number of ballots needed for a candidate to be chosen.

Irwin, interim executive director of the Greens, said the ideal tactic for a foreign country would be working to get someone in a “position of power” within a Canadian political party.

He said “the bad guys are always a step ahead” when it comes to meddling in the Canadian political process.

In May, David Vigneault, director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service at the time, said it was very clear from the design of popular social media app TikTok that data gleaned from its users is available to the Chinese government.

A December 2022 CSIS memo tabled at the inquiry Thursday said TikTok “has the potential to be exploited” by Beijing to “bolster its influence and power overseas, including in Canada.”

Asked about the app, Marty told the inquiry the Greens would benefit from more “direction and guidance,” given the party’s lack of resources to address such things.

Representatives of the Liberal and Conservative parties are slated to appear at the inquiry Friday, while chief electoral officer Stéphane Perrault is to testify at a later date.

After her party representatives appeared Thursday, Green Leader Elizabeth May told reporters it was important for all party leaders to work together to come up with acceptable rules.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 19, 2024.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

New Brunswick election candidate profile: Green Party Leader David Coon

Published

 on

 

FREDERICTON – A look at David Coon, leader of the Green Party of New Brunswick:

Born: Oct. 28, 1956.

Early years: Born in Toronto and raised in Montreal, he spent about three decades as an environmental advocate.

Education: A trained biologist, he graduated with a bachelor of science from McGill University in Montreal in 1978.

Family: He and his wife Janice Harvey have two daughters, Caroline and Laura.

Before politics: Worked as an environmental educator, organizer, activist and manager for 33 years, mainly with the Conservation Council of New Brunswick.

Politics: Joined the Green Party of Canada in May 2006 and was elected leader of the New Brunswick Green Party in September 2012. Won a seat in the legislature in 2014 — a first for the province’s Greens.

Quote: “It was despicable. He’s clearly decided to take the low road in this campaign, to adopt some Trump-lite fearmongering.” — David Coon on Sept. 12, 2024, reacting to Blaine Higgs’s claim that the federal government had decided to send 4,600 asylum seekers to New Brunswick.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 19, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

New Brunswick election profile: Progressive Conservative Leader Blaine Higgs

Published

 on

 

FREDERICTON – A look at Blaine Higgs, leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick.

Born: March 1, 1954.

Early years: The son of a customs officer, he grew up in Forest City, N.B., near the Canada-U.S. border.

Education: Graduated from the University of New Brunswick with a degree in mechanical engineering in 1977.

Family: Married his high-school sweetheart, Marcia, and settled in Saint John, N.B., where they had four daughters: Lindsey, Laura, Sarah and Rachel.

Before politics: Hired by Irving Oil a week after he graduated from university and was eventually promoted to director of distribution. Worked for 33 years at the company.

Politics: Elected to the legislature in 2010 and later served as finance minister under former Progressive Conservative Premier David Alward. Elected Tory leader in 2016 and has been premier since 2018.

Quote: “I’ve always felt parents should play the main role in raising children. No one is denying gender diversity is real. But we need to figure out how to manage it.” — Blaine Higgs in a year-end interview in 2023, explaining changes to school policies about gender identity.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 19, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version