this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2025
222 points (95.1% liked)

Canada

9386 readers
1191 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dharmacurious@slrpnk.net 18 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Obligatory it's bullshit, will never happen, et cetera preface...

The problem with splitting it into multiple states is that each new state would get 2 senators. Our house is capped, the amount of reps we have is how many have, which means they can fuck around with the numbers a bit and potentially take democratic seats away to give to state of Canada, but with the Senate, if it were to split it into 10 new states, we'd have to add 20 additional senators, all of whom would be Democrats (or, at least, most of them). Some of the Canadian parties might last for a bit, but eventually the two party would take over, and they'd all become Democrats, and it would fuck the Republicans. Better to keep it as a single state, do some fuckery on who loses seats to add Canadian reps to the house, and only add 2 senators. Much easier to buy 2 senators than 20.

But honestly, the smartest route would be to make Canada a territory. No senators, no reps, no voting for president. But still citizens. Give it the Puerto Rico treatment.

[–] HonoredMule@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Honestly, I think there is a path down which I could accept a Canada-U.S. merger. But it starts with adopting our Westminster-style political system and adding the electoral reform we need. While we could accept some specific institutions of theirs replacing ours, there isn't a single part of the U.S. political system itself that's remotely acceptable.

A Canada lead by Democrats is still a big step backward for us, even if we kept our services like healthcare at current levels.

[–] dharmacurious@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Question from the American here. Does it ever bother folks that you don't get a direct say in who the prime minister is? It's a superior system to the bullshit we've got going on down here, and clearly, being able to directly vote for the head of state/government doesn't guarantee shit, I've always felt like it not being able to choose the PM was kind of shitty

[–] SaffronDovovan@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago

It doesn’t bother me. Everyone has the chance if they don’t have a membership in another party, to become a member of the party of their choice and vote for the leader that may or may not become PM. So we do get to vote for PM in that way.

I read somewhere that the PM only gets about 25% of the decisions made making which seems to be different than the usa. I prefer it to be that way.

There are some ignorant people here who haven’t bothered learning about our parliamentary system that mistakenly thinks ours works like the usa… and thankfully we don’t - and they seem to come out of the woodwork on occasion and object. So you may hear some rumblings like that.

On the whole, we are happy with our system.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)