An “insignificant lead” huh? Not exactly the sort of words I would use considering that the Liberals went from “zero chance of winning” to “barely the most likely to win”. Frankly, just getting to this point is a massive upset to the degree that PP should resign on the spot just so the Cons have any sort of chance of not being the #1 cause for a new majority Liberal government.
While anything is possible and this can change on a dime, frankly speaking Carney is basically the only leader right now that has both integrity and vision. None of his competitors have either and it is well known that they don’t. How can anybody vote for someone who has no idea what they want for the future of Canada aside from just being it’s leader?
It’s exactly the sort of words I would use, given what the words mean. Statistical significance is a technical term, meaning that the results are likely to be representative of the true value in the population, and not some editorial flair meant to undercut the shift in polls.
The margin of error is larger than the polling advantage measured in the survey, which means the reported lead is statistically insignificant, and that they were just as likely to find that the CPC held a narrow lead if they were to have shuffled their call list during the survey period.
My issue is the use of the word within the context of the matter. Whether the Liberals hold any sort of lead, or if it means much in the long term doesn’t really matter. What’s important in this article is the changes that’s shown up over the last week or so with all their numbers.
For the first time this election, the Liberals have taken popularity from the Conservatives, and by a large amount according to these polls. But the article title is basically trying to put emphasis and downplay the fact that they have a lead at all. The amount is tiny, yes, and from a technical standpoint is certainly is insignificant, but looking at the charts, what’s important is the meteoric rise they’ve achieved in the polls.
While I’m not really a fan of the Liberals (they’re more like my least currently hated party than anything), this title feels like it’s seriously slanted by trying to downplay and ignore what’s actually significant. It’s like how Kim Jon Un was “elected by the majority” sort of thing, though maybe that comparison isn’t charitable either.
An “insignificant lead” huh? Not exactly the sort of words I would use considering that the Liberals went from “zero chance of winning” to “barely the most likely to win”.
“insignificant” is not qualifying their current state, it’s just qualifying by how much they’re leading right now.
Carney is basically the only leader right now that has both integrity and vision. None of his competitors have either and it is well known that they don’t.
Did I miss any integrity damning scandal for the other Liberal candidates? They all seem to have a decent track record.
What is interesting but disappointing here is that Conservatives lead with under 35s. I thought that Conservatism here would die off with the boomers but clearly not.
To some degree its because the majority of children are born to non liberal household as liberals are usually trying to not have too many kids. We also tend to let kids be free to form their own opinions. This means that the right always has more pull with youth unless said youth are born close enough to a point of history where the horrors wrought from the wars of fascists are fresh in their minds.
Gen Z represents a generation that has forgotten said horrors.
I thought that Conservatism here would die off with the boomers but clearly not.
Me too, but when the culture wars started to solidify in people’s minds, that was when the progressives lost the plot of the next generations.
Teenagers are mean. Specially men. And if by the time they’re 18 they’re knees deep on the other side of this perceived culture wars, it’s a done deal for life. They’ll vote for Satan himself if that will “trigger the libs”. We have a generation that is partly proud of a president shitposting about turning Gaza into a Trump resort. This level of inhumanity was something the boomers themselves would not understand.
Social medias. That’s it. They are the ones consuming the dog shit right wing content that the tech oligarchy is serving them. Theybare falling for it.
Young men are very conservative right now.
There’s a lot of right wing content like Joe Rogan and Andrew Tate that is popular in that age group. YouTube is a massive rabbit hole for that stuff.
It’s also not easy for them to get jobs and housing is unaffordable to them. There’s a strong anti “woke” sentiment that men are getting left behind by feminism and that masculinity is being punished in society.
I don’t think we can just brush it off as simply toxic masculinity, there’s truth to men’s issues that need to be addressed: men are pursuing post secondary education less than ever, they don’t believe they can get ahead, male suicide is higher, male loneliness is higher, there aren’t enough clear role models of men in jobs like teaching, the traditional archetype of men as providers is becoming unattainable as cost of living increases faster than wages.
We can’t treat this the way Tate and co do with their greedy take everything you can hostile approach, but Pollievre and the right wing speak directly to their anger and acknowledge them in a way nobody else is.
Anyway, that’s my rant. The men’s liberation community has some good discussions (don’t know how to link it on Mlem).
I’m an egalitarian/humanist and that includes supporting feminism. There’s room to help everyone.
YouTube is a massive rabbit hole for that stuff.
I think it’s so effective in part because nobody else seems to be acknowledging the concerns of this demographic. When young men wonder why life sucks, the first ones to hear them and provide an answer - any answer - win their votes.
Yeah, and the answers they get are just like empty calorie junk food ideas instead of healthy solutions.
It feels good to get mad, it feels good to be taking what you think you deserve.
Meanwhile it’s not easy to work on yourself and build up your community or step out of your comfort zone.
I hope we can get better at actually engaging these young adults and showing results on improving their problems. We are failing them today.
