this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025

246 points (99.2% liked)

World News

46090 readers

3048 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

246

Canada election sees record high early voting, figures show (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 days ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Summary

A record 7.3 million people have cast their ballots over four days of advanced voting in Canada’s election, marking a 25% increase over the 5.8m advanced ballots cast in the 2021 vote.

There are further indications the election campaign dominated by threats from Donald Trump has galvanized voters, including unusually high ratings for two debates last week.

Prime Minister Mark Carney is the frontrunner, though Pierre Poilievre’s Conservative party is incrementally gaining ground.

This year, polling points to a two-party Liberal-Conservative race.

top 26 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] SufferingSteve@feddit.nu 26 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Two party systems spells doom. It enforces us vs them.

It's the first indicator that something is wrong with the democratic system. Basically, democracy requires multiple opinions and have to be more nuanced than yes/no, or party1/party1. It has to be a discussion amongst the currently elected parties until an acceptable solution for the majority of members is reached. Thus only having two opposing parties will basically crumble democracy, since the discussion, the basis of democracy will not happen, and the minority will always loose.

[–] JustTesting@lemmy.hogru.ch 20 points 2 days ago (1 children)

sort of. Having a system that allows multiple parties, like in many European countries, certainly helps with representation and discourse. But looking at Europe, it certainly doesn't prevent a right-wing drift towards authoritarianism. There's sooo many other things needed for a healthy democracy, like education/literacy, strong independent institutions, unions etc.

You can just end up with two right wing parties, an extreme and a moderate one, but the moderate one catering to the extreme positions of the extreme party (and being mostly moderate in name only), and both of them forming a majority government and drifting to authoritarianism, even if there are many parties.

[–] whereisk@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

We only know what ends up in our eyes and ears and while some of us have the ability to remember and cross check and actively hunt for info and compare most of us don’t have the inclination or time.

Unless/until we put algorithmic feeds back in a box we’re due for a new dark age.

[–] ToadOfHypnosis@lemm.ee 37 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Hopefully with a lefty candidate that will piss off the Orange idiot and his daddy Muskrat.

[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wouldn't call carney and the liberals lefty, there centrists. The left NDP party under Singh has been losing ground as people have ben rallying around the liberals to make sure the conservatives don't win.

Still would probably piss off trump and his crew. They just probably won't get much progress, but considering the direction of a lot of other western countries not backsliding into fascism is pretty good.

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Singh has the charisma of a rock. The NPD died with Jack Layton and that is a damn shame.

I just hope that the NPD can find it's footing again because we need a strong left leaning party

[–] garbagebagel@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I think Wab Kinew should go federal and take lead of that party. I think choosing an indigenous person might still be a bit too progressive for some parts of Canada but I genuinely think he could do really well.

[–] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 days ago

So did America and look at us now.

[+] GuardYaGrill@sh.itjust.works -44 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Here’s hoping for a conservative government.

[–] Zacpod@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Lol, no. We don't need a Heritage Foundation puppet like they have in the US.
You really think PP has the spine to stand up to Trump? He's a puppet for the Heritage Foundation just like half the conservatives down south.

Conservatism is an epically failed viewpoint.

I can understand your desire for change, to be fair. But you see what happened in the US when they went that way? Same shit show up here if PP gets in.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 day ago

Yeah but the evil libs made it harder for him to shoot guns, which is really what's important here.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Lol keep sucking that flaccid PP.

[+] GuardYaGrill@sh.itjust.works -23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Appreciate you solidifying one of the many reasons why I didn’t vote liberal.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The key reasons being that you're a selfish, ignorant, gun-nut loser.

But sure, add "people are mean to me when I advertise that I'm a shithead" to the list. Your thin-skin is pretty standard for Conservatives.

[+] ohshit604@sh.itjust.works -8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Your thin-skin is pretty standard for Conservatives.

Conservatives?? Your liberal government removed minimum sentencing for reoffending criminals and then complained about the increase in crime.

But yes, let’s target licensed hunters and sports shooters because it’s clearly their fault. Obviously PAL holders receiving daily background checks was not enough.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 day ago

In case anyone else is thinking of blindly parroting this spoonfed talking point, you should know that

Research in Canada and the United States has found no evidence that MMPs have deterred crime; rather, some studies suggest that MMPs can result in overly harsh penalties and disparities, that they increase costs to the criminal justice system as a result of higher levels of incarceration, and that lengthier sentencing may actually increase recidivism

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2017001/article/54844-eng.htm

If you'd like to see this nonsense further dismantled: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_O3_yyTqgE

[–] null@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 day ago

God, you Conservative gun-nuts are the pinnacle of cringe.

[+] GuardYaGrill@sh.itjust.works -7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The key reasons being that you're a selfish, ignorant, gun-nut loser.

But sure, add "people are mean to me when I advertise that I'm a shithead"

Your thin-skin is pretty standard for Conservatives.

Further solidifying my previous statement.

Perhaps instead of hurling insults the second someone opposes you, have a constructive conversation? Lmao

[–] null@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Further solidifying my previous statement.

"I turned Conservative because of a mean comment online"

What a self-own.

Perhaps instead of hurling insults the second someone opposes you, have a constructive conversation? Lmao

Why, so you can ignore it?

[+] GuardYaGrill@sh.itjust.works -6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why, so you can ignore it?

I didn’t ignore it, read it, gave it a +1 and moved on. I didn’t disagree with their comment so any input made by me would have be unnecessary.

Everyone has the right to their own opinion.

I turned Conservative because of a mean comment online

I turned conservative when every liberal became radically defensive over the smallest issues.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I didn’t ignore it, read it, gave it a +1 and moved on. I didn’t disagree with their comment so any input made by me would have be unnecessary.

Good lord, that's such bullshit. If you agreed with what they said, then you wouldn't be out here still supporting the Cons. They even directly asked you a question, which you ignored. Stop lying.

I turned conservative when every liberal became radically defensive over the smallest issues.

Yeah, fucking human rights getting in the way of the important things like shooting muh little guns.

Conservatives are the absolute champions at bitching and complaining about non-issues. Go shoot your guns at some Bud Light, loser.

[+] GuardYaGrill@sh.itjust.works -6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Good lord, that's such bullshit. If you agreed with what they said, then you wouldn't be out here still supporting the Cons.

You’re out here calling me nuts yet I can feel the anger through your text, I will never understand why y’all preach acceptance then turn around and pull this.

They even directly asked you a question, which you ignored. Stop lying.

Again I didn’t feel it necessary to add anymore input, I’m not forced to respond like how you aren’t forced to respond.

Yeah, ~~fucking human rights~~ regulations getting in the way of the important things like ~~shooting muh little guns.~~ wilderness survival.

Fixed that for you.

Conservatives are the absolute champions at bitching and complaining about non-issues.

While I support the gay, bi and trans folks the entire 2021 Liberal campaign was solely that, I would argue and say it was a non-issue before they brought attention to it.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You’re out here calling me nuts yet I can feel the anger through your text, I will never understand why y’all preach acceptance then turn around and pull this.

Classic fake pearl-clutching nonsense. I have never preached accepting hateful ideologies.

Again I didn’t feel it necessary to add anymore input, I’m not forced to respond like how you aren’t forced to respond.

Of course you're not forced to respond. Just don't pretend you're looking for "constructive conversation" when you are just going to ignore it (or far more likely, aren't capable of engaging in it).

Fixed that for you.

Why am I not surprised that you turned it into a LARP fantasy. So fucking cringe.

While I support the gay, bi and trans folks

Let's be clear -- you actively and publicly oppose them when you advocate to vote Conservative. PP is vocally anti-trans-rights.

I would argue and say it was a non-issue before they brought attention to it

Yeah, it was much easier to just keep them in the margins so you didn't have to think about them. That's certainly true.

Not surprising though, its a studied fact that right-leaning people are more self-centered on average.

[–] garbagebagel@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So why did you vote conservative? Was it simply "I don't want liberal" or do you actually like their policies? (Genuine question I'm not trying to insult you)

[–] GuardYaGrill@sh.itjust.works -3 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

So why did you vote conservative?

Before I applied for my RPAL/PAL I cared very little about politics, once the government started banning a hobby I actually enjoyed is when it pushed me to register and vote.

While I support a good handful of liberal policies the whole situation felt like their focus (especially when it comes to crime) was in the complete wrong direction.

The housing market hasn’t gotten any better in the last 4 years, Canada is continuously growing but yet our homeless population is ridiculously high. Having coked out fentanyl zombies roam our streets is also something I highly disagree with.

Also as seen in my other comments from my experience liberals can’t handle someone opposing their ideas, while i admit, I see a lot of hate towards the LGBTQ+/BLM folks you simply can’t force everyone to like who you are.

I can go on longer but my break is about to end so I’ll leave this here. Thank you for responding respectfully.

[–] garbagebagel@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

Also as seen in my other comments from my experience liberals can’t handle someone opposing their ideas, while i admit, I see a lot of hate towards the LGBTQ+/BLM folks you simply can’t force everyone to like who you are.

So from this statement, what I'm hearing you say is that hating on LGBTQ and racialized folks is okay just because they're existing and asking to be "liked". Is that right? They should expect that people will hate them and try to take their rights away and they should just shut up and accept that?

To put it in another perspective, if I saw someone who looked like you and was open about their love for guns, and I made the assumption that because of the gun, they are a violent criminal, then would it be okay for me to be outwardly hateful towards you? Would it be okay for me to try to ban you from going to the gun range just because I think that makes you a violent criminal? Would you just accept that?

Do you see the parallels?

Based on the gun comments, you clearly understand what it's like to feel like your rights are being stripped from you. So do you think it's fair for you to minimize the feelings of others who feel the same, and who are acting out to defend themselves in the same way that you are?

To address your other comment, I completely agree that the liberals didn't do enough to address homelessness, but I also strongly believe that incarcerating people who are struggling with mental health/substance issues is not the answer and will only lead to higher cost for taxpayers to put and keep those people in jail.

I don't expect you to answer to any of this, btw. Just food for thought. I'm always interested to see why "the other side" thinks the way they do.