Has Canadian politics become more Americanized since Trump?

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Canadian politics has been polarized and heavily influenced by America for a long time. However, I've noticed ever since Trump's campaign and now presidency, Canadian politics has become more Americanized than ever.

Canada's Liberal Party is seemingly become a clone of the Democratic Party and Canada's Conservative Party is becoming more and more like the Republican Party. There used to be a decent distinction not too long ago.

Online, especially on Twitter, I've seen so many Canadian conservative voters who are carbon copies of Republican/Trump voters. I see them ranting about "Trudeau and the liberals being fascist socialists like Hitler and the Nazis", "protect Canadian gun rights and our rights to freedom", "Canada's multiculturalism experiment is failing", "Trump is the best and Canada should have a strong leader like him", "support life and ban abortion unlike the Trudeau the baby killer", etc. The 2019 election seemed to confirm the increased polarization and Americanization of Canadian politics.

I don't know if this is because I'm American and I don't know much about Canadian politics before 2015/2016 but has Canadian politics always been like this? Has Canada's politics become more Americanized since Trump took office?

[SevenEleven]

I voted unsure, much of these trends were fairly noticeable under Harper and geopolitical realities are going to continue to link Canadian and US politics, so it is what it is.

[T'Chenka]

Yes and no.

It has become more like American politics, but it was 85% of the way there already. All the ingredients were in place in terms of voter ideology, and Trump's 15/16 election campaign simply cooked the meal.

Three massive differences though are the huge influence of the Bloc Quebecois party in Quebec, our Bernie-crat leftists having their own large(ish) third party (New Democratic Party) and our versions of Pelosi (actually Hoyer) and McCarthy getting to be Prime Minister if they win the House Of Commons (Representatives) with us having no third co-equal branch of power besides congress and the courts.

[CumbrianLefty]

To a degree, Trump is part of a more general trend towards the right doing "populist" rhetoric/politics and polarisation around "culture war" issues. Follower as much as leader in other words.

[jaymichaud]

If anything I see America following the Tories/Liberals/NDP/Greens model in the near future. AOC even quote tweeted something about it a few months ago.

[DC Al Fine]

I don't know if this is because I'm American and I don't know much about Canadian politics before 2015/2016 but has Canadian politics always been like this? Has Canada's politics become more Americanized since Trump took office?

I wouldn't use the intensity of rhetoric on Twitter as a proxy for much of anything. That said, to the extent that it's true, it's been true for a lot longer than Donald Trump's been in poliics. There's this weird phenomenon where people idealize the old Canadian right as this milquetoast ultra-centrist force that never had a harder edge until X (usually the Reform Party) happened, and it's just not true.

The Tories and their predecessors have long been the rural Anglo party and have acted accordingly, which means they've long been relatively pro-gun and skeptical of multiculturalism. The religious right is a lot less prominent here, but they found a home in the Tories long before Trump. The Trudeau hate is in part because his father was PM in the 70's and early 80's and was the most despised-by-Tories leader we've ever had. Heck even the populist tone has an antedecent in Diefenbaker using harsh attacks to win elections in the 50's.

I do think Canadian politics is becoming more Americanized, but it's process that started long before Trump.

[Lechasseur]

I don't know if this is because I'm American and I don't know much about Canadian politics before 2015/2016 but has Canadian politics always been like this? Has Canada's politics become more Americanized since Trump took office?

I wouldn't use the intensity of rhetoric on Twitter as a proxy for much of anything. That said, to the extent that it's true, it's been true for a lot longer than Donald Trump's been in poliics. There's this weird phenomenon where people idealize the old Canadian right as this milquetoast ultra-centrist force that never had a harder edge until X (usually the Reform Party) happened, and it's just not true.

The Tories and their predecessors have long been the rural Anglo party and have acted accordingly, which means they've long been relatively pro-gun and skeptical of multiculturalism. The religious right is a lot less prominent here, but they found a home in the Tories long before Trump. The Trudeau hate is in part because his father was PM in the 70's and early 80's and was the most despised-by-Tories leader we've ever had. Heck even the populist tone has an antedecent in Diefenbaker using harsh attacks to win elections in the 50's.

I do think Canadian politics is becoming more Americanized, but it's process that started long before Trump.

And didn't Reform rise because Mulroney was too milquetoast for a lot of Tories?

[Continential]

I don't know if this is because I'm American and I don't know much about Canadian politics before 2015/2016 but has Canadian politics always been like this? Has Canada's politics become more Americanized since Trump took office?

I wouldn't use the intensity of rhetoric on Twitter as a proxy for much of anything. That said, to the extent that it's true, it's been true for a lot longer than Donald Trump's been in poliics. There's this weird phenomenon where people idealize the old Canadian right as this milquetoast ultra-centrist force that never had a harder edge until X (usually the Reform Party) happened, and it's just not true.

The Tories and their predecessors have long been the rural Anglo party and have acted accordingly, which means they've long been relatively pro-gun and skeptical of multiculturalism. The religious right is a lot less prominent here, but they found a home in the Tories long before Trump. The Trudeau hate is in part because his father was PM in the 70's and early 80's and was the most despised-by-Tories leader we've ever had. Heck even the populist tone has an antedecent in Diefenbaker using harsh attacks to win elections in the 50's.

I do think Canadian politics is becoming more Americanized, but it's process that started long before Trump.

And didn't Reform rise because Mulroney was too milquetoast for a lot of Tories?

It rose because the Red Tories like Mulroney and Clark always won the leadership elections and the Red Tories would work with Liberals over the Blue Tories.

[King of Kensington]

It was under Diefenbaker that the Prairies became a Conservative stronghold (the party used to be centered in Ontario and the Maritimes).  Although his politics were different, the Diefenbaker base looks a lot like the Conservative base today.  He combined economic populism with cultural conservatism.

Diefenbaker was described as a "Red Tory" but the definition has shifted to business-friendly social liberals. 

[King of Kensington]

As for the question of the thread, you could see a lot of Obama '08 in Trudeau's 2015 campaign.  The links and parallels between the LPC and the US Democrats seem tighter today.

In contrast, I didn't see much Clinton in the Chretien Liberals (although they worked together in the Third Way governing networks) or Bush in Harper (as much as progressives tried to say he was "exactly like" GW Bush). 

[CumbrianLefty]

Mulroney a "Red Tory"?

He was often presented as Canada's answer to Thatcher at the time.

[King of Kensington]

Mulroney a "Red Tory"?

He was often presented as Canada's answer to Thatcher at the time.

Joe Clark was the "Red Tory", Mulroney was the more right-wing Bay Street candidate at the 1983 convention. 

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Well first, I don't think noise on Twitter is very representative of the Canadian population--after all, Twitter thought the PPC was going to sweep the nation.

You're right in making the observation that Canadian politics are getting more Americanized. But this really isn't something new, it's something that has been happening throughout Canadian history. The long-term trajectory of English Canada has been Americanization, whether we like it or not, and a more American style of politics is a consequence of it. I'll go into it further if anyone is interested, but both the major Canadian parties have been borrowing from their American counterparts for a very long time.

So I don't think this is a new, unique phenomenon by any means. However, there are some ways in which Canada is genuinely different from the US, and that prevents Canada from going full-on America.

For one, the Liberal base isn't as broad a tent as the Democratic Party's base--this is both a weakness and a strength. It's a weakness when they're out of power, because the base isn't that big. But it means more party discipline and message control. Think about it: the Democratic Party has a base that ranges from AOC to Joe Manchin. In Canada, AOC would be NDP and Manchin would be CPC. The internal divisions that haunt the Democratic Party don't haunt the Liberals. The Liberal Party knows its base: middle-class, professional types, mostly living in major metro areas; non-Franco Quebecers; the atlantic provinces. Keep them happy, and you're in the clear. Hard-left types are mostly in the NDP, meaning there isn't a centrist-leftist divide within the Liberal Party apparatus. But on election day, a lot of those hardcore lefties will vote Liberal anyway, fearing a Conservative gov't.

As for the Tories, well, it's the opposite. You're right, a big chunk of their base is made up of hardcore right wingers that would fit right into a MAGA rally. But they're only one part of the coalition. The Conservative Party of Canada has to accommodate a HUGE spectrum of voters--from disaffected Liberals, to the religious right, to the MAGA right, to libertarians, etc etc. You see this conflict all the time in Canada. When it comes to abortion, the Tories always have to toe a really fine line between pro-choice and pro-life to avoid alienating any part of the base. Their message on immigration also has to toe this thin line, because they know their base, but they also know you'll never win a Canadian election without those immigrant-heavy suburbs.

Check out their ongoing leadership race: a candidate, Derek Sloan, suggested that Canada's Chief Health Officer is doing China's bidding, and questioned her loyalty to Canada. She happens to be of Chinese descent. I can't post a link because I haven't made enough posts on this website, but I'd suggest looking up the following: Rookie Belleville, Ont., MP gets blowback for ‘racist’ comments against Canada’s top doctor

Is it a dogwhistle? Who knows, the whole point of dogwhistling is that it's impossible to prove. But it's clearly inappropriate and distasteful for a sitting MP to make, especially one who is running to be the party leader (and thus, the Prime Ministerial candidate). Now Sloan isn't going to win the race, but he's been able to meet the strict fundraising and membership requirements, so there clearly is a base. So this relatively minor distasteful molehill gets made into a mountain in this country, because there's no obvious position for the Tories to take. If they stand by Sloan, they risk alienating moderate voters and ESPECIALLY Chinese-Canadian voters, who have been voting pretty reliably Conservative for a few election cycles now. But Sloan obviously has appeal among the far-right twitter set you mentioned, and the Tories don't want to alienate those people either. So the entire existence of the Conservative Party is founded on eggshells, which makes running an effective campaign extremely difficult in a parliamentary system. Instead they have been focusing on destroying Trudeau's credibility so much that they win by default. This will bear fruit inevitably, but in doing so they may relegate themselves to a protest party.

I guess I kinda went off topic, so I'll bring it back here: yes, Canadian politics have gotten more Americanized. But that's not so much Trump as it is the inevitable conclusion of sharing a continent for over 150 years. However, there are real differences that make Trump-style politics tricky in Canada.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

If you want a Canadianified "Trump"-style approach, just look at how the Fords built their brand. But note that the differences are very evident. Ford Nation is something that is very immigrant-dominated, and if anything almost a minority phenomenon (heavily Chinese and visible minority areas in the 905 and outer 416). The Ford Nation thing is not Trump-esque in policy; but it is Trump-esque in styling, at least as much as you can get in Canada while still being electorally viable. The PPC is arguably more Trump-esque but, as laddicus finch pointed out, was weak electorally, so clearly they are not somewhere to look to for a viable model if you want to actually win an election.

No right-wing government will be formed in Canada for a long, long time that is not premised on accepting multi-cultural dogma that is predominant in Canadian politics.

[T'Chenka]

No right-wing government will be formed in Canada for a long, long time that is not premised on accepting multi-cultural dogma that is predominant in Canadian politics.

I'll just add to the pile on top of pro-multiculturalism...

-  pro-choice LAWS
- universal healthcare
- gay rights (not necessarily trans rights though).

Conservatives do better when they virtue signal that they're pro-life in their personal lives, and they tend to do well with anti-trans dog whistling, as long as it's subtle enough and they non-enthusiastically claim to be pro-trans when pressured.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

No right-wing government will be formed in Canada for a long, long time that is not premised on accepting multi-cultural dogma that is predominant in Canadian politics.

I'll just add to the pile on top of pro-multiculturalism...

-  pro-choice LAWS
- universal healthcare
- gay rights (not necessarily trans rights though).

Conservatives do better when they virtue signal that they're pro-life in their personal lives, and they tend to do well with anti-trans dog whistling, as long as it's subtle enough and they non-enthusiastically claim to be pro-trans when pressured.

The fulcrim of any such winning coalition seems to be a mix of libertarianism (so against the most extreme kinds of gun control at the very least, among other things), and fiscal conservativism, right?

[T'Chenka]

No right-wing government will be formed in Canada for a long, long time that is not premised on accepting multi-cultural dogma that is predominant in Canadian politics.

I'll just add to the pile on top of pro-multiculturalism...

-  pro-choice LAWS
- universal healthcare
- gay rights (not necessarily trans rights though).

Conservativees do better when they virtue signal that they're pro-life in their personal lives, and they tend to do well with anti-trans dog whistling, as long as it's subtle enough and they non-enthusiastically claim to be pro-trans when pressured.

The fulcrim of any such winning coalition seems to be a mix of libertarianism (so against the most extreme kinds of gun control at the very least, among other things), and fiscal conservativism, right?

Yeah I guess that sounds about right. Conservative leaders usually have to appease lots of little sub-groups with hard-right views on specific topics to win, without appeasing them too much and alienating the relatively large group of centrist swing voters / occasional voters that decide most of our elections. It's like trying to attract and retain Trump voters AND non-leftist Hillary voters by not being Sanders. Delicate balancing act.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

No right-wing government will be formed in Canada for a long, long time that is not premised on accepting multi-cultural dogma that is predominant in Canadian politics.

I'll just add to the pile on top of pro-multiculturalism...

-  pro-choice LAWS
- universal healthcare
- gay rights (not necessarily trans rights though).

Conservativees do better when they virtue signal that they're pro-life in their personal lives, and they tend to do well with anti-trans dog whistling, as long as it's subtle enough and they non-enthusiastically claim to be pro-trans when pressured.

The fulcrim of any such winning coalition seems to be a mix of libertarianism (so against the most extreme kinds of gun control at the very least, among other things), and fiscal conservativism, right?

Yeah I guess that sounds about right. Conservative leaders usually have to appease lots of little sub-groups with hard-right views on specific topics to win, without appeasing them too much and alienating the relatively large group of centrist swing voters / occasional voters that decide most of our elections. It's like trying to attract and retain Trump voters AND non-leftist Hillary voters by not being Sanders. Delicate balancing act.

And all this merely puts them within striking distance of the Liberals. The Liberals still have to be weakened for this strengthened conservative movement to actually win government.

[King of Kensington]

The Conservatives also function as a regional grievance party of the Prairies.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The Conservatives also function as a regional grievance party of the Prairies.

Which is both sort of a safety guarantee (they will never go the way of the PCs), but also a curse (makes it harder for them to win Ontario, BC, or Atlantic Canada).

[T'Chenka]

No right-wing government will be formed in Canada for a long, long time that is not premised on accepting multi-cultural dogma that is predominant in Canadian politics.

I'll just add to the pile on top of pro-multiculturalism...

-  pro-choice LAWS
- universal healthcare
- gay rights (not necessarily trans rights though).

Conservativees do better when they virtue signal that they're pro-life in their personal lives, and they tend to do well with anti-trans dog whistling, as long as it's subtle enough and they non-enthusiastically claim to be pro-trans when pressured.

The fulcrim of any such winning coalition seems to be a mix of libertarianism (so against the most extreme kinds of gun control at the very least, among other things), and fiscal conservativism, right?

Yeah I guess that sounds about right. Conservative leaders usually have to appease lots of little sub-groups with hard-right views on specific topics to win, without appeasing them too much and alienating the relatively large group of centrist swing voters / occasional voters that decide most of our elections. It's like trying to attract and retain Trump voters AND non-leftist Hillary voters by not being Sanders. Delicate balancing act.

And all this merely puts them within striking distance of the Liberals. The Liberals still have to be weakened for this strengthened conservative movement to actually win government.

Exactly. The Liberals have to just not f___ up and they've basically got federal politics by the bollocks.

I suggested in the Canada megathread that the Conservatives shift a little bit left. IMO it would help them a lot. They would anger their die-hard supporters, but ultimately 90%+ of those die-hards are still going to vote Conservative, they're just gonna pinch their noses a little bit when they do it. There are a lot of centrist voters that could be potentially won that way, and you also back the Liberals into a corner. Do they become the party that's almost the same as the Conservatives or almost the same as the NDP?

[Lechasseur]

It was under Diefenbaker that the Prairies became a Conservative stronghold (the party used to be centered in Ontario and the Maritimes).  Although his politics were different, the Diefenbaker base looks a lot like the Conservative base today.  He combined economic populism with cultural conservatism.

Diefenbaker was described as a "Red Tory" but the definition has shifted to business-friendly social liberals. 

I'd have been a Red Tory (One Nation Conservative in the UK) in the old sense (like Diefenbaker) but not in the later sense (the business friendly social liberal sense).

[Lechasseur]

As for the question of the thread, you could see a lot of Obama '08 in Trudeau's 2015 campaign.  The links and parallels between the LPC and the US Democrats seem tighter today.

In contrast, I didn't see much Clinton in the Chretien Liberals (although they worked together in the Third Way governing networks) or Bush in Harper (as much as progressives tried to say he was "exactly like" GW Bush). 

Ironically, I believe you had people who worked on Obama's campaign in 2008 who worked on David Cameron's campaign in the UK in 2015 (along with people who worked on John Howard's campaigns in Australia, so quite the mix on David Cameron's campaign team).

[Lechasseur]

Mulroney a "Red Tory"?

He was often presented as Canada's answer to Thatcher at the time.

Mulroney was right-wing compared to Joe Clark for sure, but he was pretty liberal when compared to his contemporaries Thatcher or Reagan.

Joe Clark was the "Red Tory", Mulroney was the more right-wing Bay Street candidate at the 1983 convention. 

[Lechasseur]

The Conservatives also function as a regional grievance party of the Prairies.

Which is both sort of a safety guarantee (they will never go the way of the PCs), but also a curse (makes it harder for them to win Ontario, BC, or Atlantic Canada).

That being said, the strategy for winning Atlantic Canada wouldn't be the same as for winning BC for example.