#1
How would the election go?

A while back, the NDP proposed a cap on credit-card interest rates so that the poor would pay less interest. I supprtedthe idea but for a totally different reason: it would deter banks from issuing credit cards to candidates in the first place.

So how would it plat out if the two main parties presented the same platform but with totally different rationales?

Another example. One party wants to raise the minimum wage si that the poor can earn more. Another proclaims that it too wants ti raise the minimum wage so as to force low-wage workers out of the workforce and into trades and professional education programmed. In other words, it explicitly intends ti legislate them out of work.

Another example. One party wants to impose rent ceilings ti help the poor find more affordable rental accommodation. Another party proposes debt ceilings outside of the central business district so as to deter further construction and suburban sprawl in those areas while acknowledging that it would create rental shortages in those areas but that that's the intent.

I think it would change the whole dynamic of the election campaign. Neither party could criticize the other's policies since they'd be the same. Instead, the campaign would shift to disputing each other's rationales behind the policy positions. I imagine it would make it awkward when the other supports the same position but on a totally different rationale. I must admit that it would make for an interesting election.