Fiscal conservatives are never and have never been “fiscally conservative”. Rather than being conscious of and considerate about how they spend our communal resources, they have always just believed that there should be no communal resources, and the rich should get to run roughshod over us all.
Yes fiscally responsible like a ridiculous hwy that he needs to make new laws to build, a ridiculous tunnel under an existing hwy, removing newly built bike lanes, spening millions to rush booze to shelves to undermine a government labor strike, various land scandas. The list goes on and on highlighting these excellent examples of fiscal responsibility.
I’d say Doug Ford is old-style conservative in that he’s not particularly ethical, he’s up for a bit of corruption if it makes him and his friends money, he thinks about business before people, and he doesn’t particularly care if poor people suffer. But he’s also not really that interested in culture wars or enthusiastic about authoritarian fascism, and that’s what distinguishes him from someone like Poilievre. For Doug Ford as long as he can get on with his own schemes, he doesn’t really care how other people live. It’s not compassionate but it’s not hateful, just narrowly self-interested and somewhat amoral, and this is how he’s an old-fashioned conservative. Poilievre by contrast wants to police how people live and govern by reactionary moral judgements, wants to impress Trump and the far right, wants to be perceived as a strongman himself despite having no such credentials and giving off incel-doing-weights-in-the-basement vibes, and wants to punish people. Doug Ford is damaging while Pierre Poilievre is poisonous.
Doug Ford is far from fiscally conservative. I’d offer that he’s a different brand of populist than Poilievre.
Fiscal conservatives are never and have never been “fiscally conservative”. Rather than being conscious of and considerate about how they spend our communal resources, they have always just believed that there should be no communal resources, and the rich should get to run roughshod over us all.
Yes fiscally responsible like a ridiculous hwy that he needs to make new laws to build, a ridiculous tunnel under an existing hwy, removing newly built bike lanes, spening millions to rush booze to shelves to undermine a government labor strike, various land scandas. The list goes on and on highlighting these excellent examples of fiscal responsibility.
True. I meant to highlight the differences and keep it simple. Quite right that Doug isn’t the old party, just a different flavour of the Reform guys.
I’d say Doug Ford is old-style conservative in that he’s not particularly ethical, he’s up for a bit of corruption if it makes him and his friends money, he thinks about business before people, and he doesn’t particularly care if poor people suffer. But he’s also not really that interested in culture wars or enthusiastic about authoritarian fascism, and that’s what distinguishes him from someone like Poilievre. For Doug Ford as long as he can get on with his own schemes, he doesn’t really care how other people live. It’s not compassionate but it’s not hateful, just narrowly self-interested and somewhat amoral, and this is how he’s an old-fashioned conservative. Poilievre by contrast wants to police how people live and govern by reactionary moral judgements, wants to impress Trump and the far right, wants to be perceived as a strongman himself despite having no such credentials and giving off incel-doing-weights-in-the-basement vibes, and wants to punish people. Doug Ford is damaging while Pierre Poilievre is poisonous.
I’d agree, the mobster kind of populist