Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc
Coletto retweeted an analysis I saw a while ago that I posted about here before but couldn't find it at the time.
https://x.com/DavidColetto/status/1883122101298868225?t=gLJphrpmP5E0d8e4Z0uF1g&s=19
The narrative that being "socially progressive and fiscally conservative" is some sweet spot is totally false. Only 6% of the electorate is like that. The opposite combination - being fiscally progressive and socially conservative - is actually much more common at 21% of the electorate.
Overall:
-24% are progressive both economically & socially
-17% are conservative both economically & socially
-6% are conservative economically but progressive socially
-21% are progressive economically but conservative socially
On social issues 30% are progressive and 36% are conservative.
On economic issues 45% are progressive and only 23% are conservative.
So the "conventional wisdom" - that everyone is socially progressive and only economics is the basis for difference between left & right, meaning the conservatives have to appeal to "balanced budget+ social liberalism" to be electable - is actually complete hogwash.
Canadians overwhelmingly prefer - by a margin of more than two to one - left wing economic policy. But on social cultural policy Canadians are more divided with a slight plurality actually being conservative.
Coletto then goes on to note that the CPC is very popular right now with the "socially conservative + economically progressive" side of the quadrant which feels very alienated by the "pink haired politics" of the LPC and the NDP.
This also suggests that PP will become very unpopular shortly after taking office, Starmer style, as he'll interpret his win as a mandate of austerity when it's not.
It also suggests the logical approach for Carney or Freeland is not to move right on economics, but to stay the course on being economically progressive while moving right on social-cultural issues. |
Coletto is making some sweeping conclusions here, using 10 positions each to gauge respondents' alignment to social and economic left–right axes. For transparency, those statements are as follows:
Social
-Abortion should be legal in all or most circumstances.
-Canada is the greatest country in the world.
-It is more important to protect the right of Canadians to own guns.
-The government should deal with illegal immigration by increasing border security and enforcement.
-Transgender athletes should be able to play on sports teams that match their current gender identity.
-The government should prevent people from engaging in hate speech against certain groups in public.
-The best way to deal with drug addiction is to expand harm reduction strategies such as safe consumption sites to reduce the risks associated with drug use.
-Racism is built into our society, including into its policies and institutions.
-We need to reallocate funding from police departments to social services.
-There are still significant obstacles that make it harder for women to get ahead than men.
Economic
-Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most people.
-I would rather have a bigger government providing more services.
-The fact that some people in the [sic] Canada are rich and others are poor is a problem that needs to be fixed.
-Government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest.
-Free trade agreements have generally hurt Canadians.
-It is the responsibility of government that everybody has healthcare coverage.
-Business should always try to make as much profit as possible.
-We should raise taxes on people making more than $250,000 a year.
-It should be illegal to own more than one home in Canada.
-There should be a cap on the amount of greenhouse gas emissions the oil & gas sector can emit.
The results can be found
here.
Generally, I am skeptical of any approach that breaks down issues or beliefs into discrete social and economic categories. I would argue that there is a strong economic dimension to most of the statements classified as social issues here, and even stronger social dimensions to the economic issues.
Putting this objection aside, I would also argue that the statements used here are not particularly useful at measuring the political climate in Canada at this time. Some are too broad and open to different interpretations: Do you disagree with the "greatest country" statement because you reject the idea that any country is greatest or because Canada is a genocidal colonial state or because Canada is a socialist Sodom? Do you disagree that safe injection sites are the
best solution to drug addiction issues because you believe safe injection sites encourage addicts to keep using or because you think a robust healthcare system that prevents addiction in the first place would be better?
Others seem to miss the mark: A ban on owning more than one home, for example, is rather fringe in the discourse on the housing crisis. Indeed, some topics included here seem to be pulled more from the US political discourse, while many topics at the fore in the Canadian political discourse are missing (e.g., truth and reconciliation, public broadcasting, CanCon regulations, the role of the private sector in healthcare,
legal immigration, childcare, supply management, minority language rights, etc.).
I am also curious how representative their sample is of the Canadian population as a whole. Like, did they even offer the survey in French?
On a broader level, I would caution against using an analysis like this as a basis or buttress for our understanding of the political landscape in Canada. Publication bias is a thing, and articles about most people agreeing on most things aren't going to get many clicks or much social media engagement.
In his analysis of the survey results, Coletto divides Canadians into four competing tribes, and I get it feels good/validating to see your team "winning". But this is—quite literally in this case—a two-dimensional understanding of a complex and evolving body politic. At the end of the day, I quite earnestly believe that (aside from a few fringe idealogues, hopeless contrarians and the terminally online) Canadians still respect each other and recognize the value of engaging/working with others despite different opinions on issues x, y or z.
Prev
Linear Mode
