Is it me or does it seem like the internet era has taken away incumbent advantage and actually put incumbents at a massive disadvantage? I'm not here to attack or defend what Trudeau has actually done, only to posit the idea that once you become a leader in the political landscape there is a very effective machine whose only job is to attack you, personally, as much as possible anywhere you're perceived to be vulnerable. If you've followed US politics for the last decade the perfect example of this is "tan suit".
When Trudeau first took office, he was the meme of being Canada's young and handsome PM, and he enjoyed a good few years of "honeymoon" period that many leaders can only wish for.
It does absolutely work both ways, but there's a non-incumbent advantage in that, until an opp emerges all the non-incumbent has to do is attack whereas the incumbent has to defend.
I think the problem is that a large and growing part of the population is in a constant state of dissatisfaction, if not downright anger, often being fed or demanding simple solutions to complex problems. At that point it doesn't seem to matter if those solutions actually work as long as they promise change. And when it becomes clear they won't or require long term planning people will just demand new leadership and the cycle continues.
Let's face it. Most problems require patient approaches. Often changes that are made won't show their effects until years or decades later. Unfortunately that encourages short term thinking towards the next election in government and population alike.
It's an interesting theory, but there are other hypotheses out there. One I've heard a lot is that the post-pandemic inflation surge hit everyone, and made all incumbents unpopular. I suppose that if the anti-incumbent results across the globe continue for several more years, we will be able to rule that out?
It's also easier to lie about what the current government has done wrong, there are no laws against it.
You can just lie at a velocity never seen before on this planet, spread falsehoods via social media, breed outrage, spread conspiracies and then elected.
"The bitterness and rivalries seen in the partisan 1796 campaign got worse in the 1800 rematch between Adams and Jefferson. At one point in that race, Jefferson’s supporter, notorious pamphleteer James Calendar, claimed that Adams was a hermaphrodite, while Adams’ people said Jefferson would openly promote prostitution, incest, and adultery..."
It's a matter of how widely something is disseminated and how strongly it's reinforced. The question isn't what's the grossest propaganda you can find in the history of political campaigning, the question is what's the grossest propaganda you can find that gained wide acceptance.
Inflation, distrust of authorities after COVID, deliberate (and automated) spread of disinformation, outright war in Europe, climate change becoming increasingly obvious with nobody doing anything about it (but people very angry any time somebody attempts to do something about it... etc)
It's not a fun time, and I'd hate to be "in charge"
I follow US politics regularly, but I hadn't heard of this so I don't know how well it's known... but it has it's own page so maybe I'm in the minority here.
Indeed, Trudeau had the whole state-funded media to use as his propaganda apparatus on his side - and it's why free speech is under threat trying in Canada and elsewhere, them trying to manufacture consent by so-called "hate speech" for the fascists to gain more control to censor-suppress dissidents who see what they really are.
The machine isn't against the incumbent, it wants to move things to the right. This is why Obama gets mainstream media outrage for superficial things like wearing a tan suit. Also it is why Biden (correctly) got a lot of negative coverage for being too old to serve but people like Trump or Kay Ivey relatively get a pass.
The right also had incumbent disadvantage this year. See:
- Britain's Tory defeat.
- India's and Hungary's main party still winning, but by less than expected. India's main party no longer holds a majority in Parliament.
- In South Korea, the liberal opposition has won the majority of seats in the National Assembly.
Even in developing countries, incumbent disadvantage is almost everywhere. Look at the map in https://abcnews.go.com/538/democrats-incumbent-parties-lost-.... And in a couple examples where the majority gained (Mexico, Dominican Republic, Moldova) they are the left.
