Paul Samyn's Failure to Distinguish
On September 21, 2021, Winnipeg Free Press editor Paul Samyn wrote, in an email I received:
Carville made those comments in a piece for The Hill in 2014, but that same vexing question resonates today as we look at some of the success Bernier’s anti-vaxx stance as leader of the People’s Party of Canada had at the ballot box Monday night.
Bernier didn’t win his seat. His party didn’t elect a single MP. But there was enough in that platform built upon anger over COVID restrictions and mandatory vaccinations to capture 5.1 per cent of all ballots cast. In case you are wondering, that’s more than twice the share of votes the Green Party attracted.
The Carville comments that Samyn referred to were:
A chief complaint of many Republicans is that Asian-Americans and Jews strongly support and vote for Democrats despite the affluent economic standing many have achieved. Similarly, Democratic strategists struggle to understand why 77 out the 100 poorest and most government-dependent counties in the United States voted for Mitt Romney in 2012.
Samyn argues that people who voted for the People’s Party of Canada didn’t understand their true interest and “were willing to shoot themselves in the foot in many ways Carville never imagined.”
It’s possible he’s right, but he doesn’t make the case. The reason? Bernier opposed vaccine mandates. Nothing that Samyn quoted has Bernier opposing vaccines. Samyn fails to make a basic distinction between being against mandatory vaccine and being against vaccines. When you fail to make such distinctions, you are going to be mystified a lot of the time.
That distinction is not difficult. Let’s try a few others.
I think it’s a good idea for over 90% of people to get married. Therefore everyone should be required to marry.
I think that eating food every day is a good idea. Therefore everyone should be required to eat food daily.
I think that exercising at least 6 times a week is a good idea. Therefore everyone should be required to exercise at least 6 times a week.
Do you agree with me on each of the first sentences in the 3 paragraphs above? If so, then surely you must agree with each conclusion.
Or is there another possibility?