How do Canadian political conservatives differ from American political conservatives?
Really enjoyed Alan Dillman's answer. Just a few extra thoughts:Canadians, on the whole, are more pragmatic and less dogmatic. Most of us are centrists that vote by candidate and not by party. We like pendulum swings that keep us close to the middle. Canadians are much less politically engaged. We generally trust that the people running for office are reasonably competent. Federal elections are short and uneventful affairs. Media coverage is minimal and uncontroversial (except for the pseudo-partisan newspapers, but few take them seriously). We don't amplify the voices of our politicians beyond what it necessary.The whole spectrum is shifted left in Canada. Our conservatives are fairly progressive by most standards. We all want a balance of socialism and libertarianism. We want our government to provide universal health-care and a strong safety-net, but we reject the idea of the government having much say over our private lives. We don't begrudge taxes, provided that the money is spent prudently. We're ok with regulations that serve a greater good, but prefer them enforced sensibly and with a soft hand. I live in possibly the most conservative region in Canada, and most here would identify as moderates (using the US scale) on all issues except business regulation. Most actually feel slightly uncomfortable about how conservative Harper is (hence his limited mandate for most of his tenure). There just wasn't a viable Liberal candidate that offered a credible alternative.Conservatism isn't married to evangelicalism in Canada. Most evangelicals are conservatives, but in a much more subdued way. It would be somewhat rare for someone within a church to publicly declare which party they voted for, and direct church support of a party or candidate would be frowned upon strongly. (There are exceptions in some small, rural communities, but they're strongly in the numerical minority.) You'll find a sizeable minority of evangelicals on the liberal side (though often with measured reservations on social issues like abortion and gay marriage). When they speak about liberalism, they'll typically restrict their criticisms to those limited subjects. The number of people that would identify with the "hard right" is rapidly dwindling as the post-evangelical wave continues.
To explain the political divisiveness in America is it possible that a malevolent group with totalitarian aims is intentionally trying to divide us?
Who would that group be? At one time the US had a communist party that was directed by Moscow. It never had a lot of influence, though it was successful at recruiting industrial spies.The US is plagued by sectional differences that have existed since the colonial era. Those differences erupted into a Civil War in the 1860s. Those differences erupted during the Civil Rights era. Today the division between conservative and liberal is often a North South split, somewhat altered by the change over 150 years. So, it includes rural America, both North and South.That sectional split is no longer about race but about the structure of the Federal government. It isn’t created by malevolent strangers. It has been brewing for over 200 years.
Why do liberals think Russian "trolls" are out to disrupt our politics?
I'm guessing by this question that you don't spend much time on Twitter. If you did, and you happen to disagree with Trump/MAGA, you would see the Russian trolls and bots in real time. You would quickly learn how to "spot a bot" (check the profile, do an advanced search, read their timeline). The bots are evident by their repetition of certain phrases and sheer number of tweets, sometimes 500 times an hour for 18 straight hours. The trolls are often real people so they are harder to detect based on the profile, but they aren't as proficient in English as Americans and sometimes they forget to turn off their location (hello, St. Petersburg troll!). The trolls never post anything but pro-Trump and hashtag MAGA sentiments. No family pics, no dog pics, no random stream of consciousness tweets about movies, nothing other than Pro-Trump propaganda. They aren't there "to get everyone." The Russian trolls and bots are there for one purpose only; to sow discord amongst Americans and to push the Trump agenda. If you really want to see what all the uproar is about, start by reading the links below. I'm guessing you probably won't because it will clash with your notion that it's just "liberals gone crazy." The fact that Trump and many Republican senators, I.e John Cornyn, have interacted and retweeted these bots and trolls is what makes this whole thing so dangerous for American democracy. These bots and trolls push a fake agenda, for example: the "release the memo" debacle, amplified by trump and his followers. It servesno purpose other than to discredit law enforcement and to sow doubt. It's called propaganda. It's what Trump is counting on when the verdict comes in about his long history of money laundering, racketeering, and treasonous actions.Almost half of Trump's Twitter followers appear to be fakeHow to Check If a Twitter Account Is a BotHow Twitter Bots and Trump Fans Made #ReleaseTheMemo Go ViralTwitter: More than 677,000 U.S. users engaged with Russian troll accountsTwitter: There were more Russian trolls than we thoughtPro-Kremlin Twitter Trolls Take Aim at Robert MuellerRussian Bots Retweeted Trump's Twitter 470,000 TimesTwitter found more than 50,000 Russia-linked accounts that actively shared election-related material — and Trump interacted with them hundreds of times
Why do conservatives fear big government?
The most simple answer is the power of compulsion!Let’s try the following examples, see if you can name who perpetrated it:Imprison citizens for speaking out against tax policy?Imprison citizens for reading the constitution aloud in public?Imprison a business owner because they sell their services (tires / dry cleaners, etc) for less than what the government requires them to be sold for? aka minimum sale priceIn order to artificially keep prices high, force farmers to slaughter and dispose of 10s of thousands of pigs while 25% to 30% of the country is starving.In order to artificially keep prices high, force farmers to dump out millions of gallons of fresh milk, while a high percentage of the country faces malnutrition.Ok, got it? Which European countries and leaders are responsible for these atrocities? In order, they are:United States - Woodrow WilsonUnited States - Woodrow WilsonUnited States - FDRUnited States - FDRUnited States - FDRYou see, constitutional conservatives like myself don’t simply hate government — we actually want and know we need government. We also realize that governments are vested with the powers the people give them, by way of our constitution. The government works for us — we do not work for the government.It really is that simple. In the United States, we believe, and it has been proven time and again, that the worst atrocities committed against man-kind are committed as a result of government compulsion — slavery ring a bell?The government exists ONLY to secure our natural god given rights — anything more, we the people need to enumerate them with those powers; if we don’t, they can’t simply assume the powers and ask for forgiveness later. Unfortunately, over the past 100 years of progressive rule, that is exactly what has happened. They’ve turned our constitutional republic into an administrative fiat that circumvents our constitutional protections every day.
What do you think about president Richard Nixon and how he was like as a president?
Had it not been for Watergate, Nixon would have an entirely different image. I didn't learn this until a couple years ago, but President Ronald Reagan often sought Nixon's council on foreign affairs. Nixon was paranoid, but not without reason. There really were a lot of people always biting at his heels. He wanted approval, but was not a very likeable person. He wanted his legacy to be that he opened up China, which he actually accomplished. Nixon thought in big, sweeping terms. He wasn't some tiny detail- obsessed person like Carter. As President he made some brilliant moves, and some mistakes. In retrospect, the gas price freeze during the OPEC oil embargo was probably a mistake, but it also might have been a necessity at the time. We didn't know how long the embargo was going to last, and if oil companies started price gouging, it could have had serious repurcussions for the economy. What about all the goods transported via rail and truck? It could have sent the economy into a huge recession. We will never know.