SpankyMcFarland

Freeland sees NAFTA as the least worst policy to run on. Most people see her record as strong there. How this plays out in the next federal election is entirely dependent on Trump. If he goes completely mad with the tariffs and Danielle Smith succeeds in dividing west from east then we could have a genuine contest on our hands.

I don’t think she should have gone down to Florida to meet Trump off her own bat and push a separate agenda from the rest of Canada. That’s behaving like a foreign minister or prime minister of a country. At the very least it’s dangerous. If PP wants to bring us together he will have to change his tune so much.

That’s just shouting, not debate.

I think a public Trump endorsement of PP could be dangerous for the Tories. Poilievre could then be painted as a foreign puppet.

This is a potential vulnerability for the Conservatives, especially when some of their more rabid supporters are cheering Trump on. Freeland has experience negotiating trade deals. Both she and Carney will be anxious to make the next federal election about Trump and the threat he poses to Canada rather than the Liberal record in power.

Climate change is making home insurance less profitable in many US states, not just Florida and California. As this article points out, some consequences will be hard to avoid: fewer mortgages and fewer homes in riskier areas. It’s hard to see how individual states can cope with this problem by themselves. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/05/13/climate/insurance-homes-climate-change-weather.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Should we let Trump bid on NWT or Nunavut while he’s at it? I’d say China is watching these developments with interest.

In my little corner of Canada, I’ve been advocating for PR for decades to precisely zero effect. While people may politely listen to the deranged foreigner and look concerned or reply to a poll that something should be done, they haven’t the slightest intention of making it a priority. Perhaps if we have a few more 1993 election results they will wake up but I doubt it.

In fairness to Trudeau, there was zero enthusiasm for electoral reform from the Canadian public. There is at least one good thing about FPTP. It often gives a disproportionate number of seats to the larger parties which is a blessing given their morbid fear of coalitions.

Carney has no parliamentary experience. He hasn’t earned the right to run for this post. Politics is a fiendishly difficult line of work. Nobody should be walking into the job.

This is not news to anyone in Britain so there’s no need for more inquiries at this stage - just action. Note that Starmer has been in charge only for one very rocky year so far. What did the Tories do about this in the previous fourteen?

Platform screen doors are becoming more common in subways and have numerous advantages. I was suprised to see an early version of them was first used in the Soviet Union sixty years ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_screen_doors https://www.railengineer.co.uk/the-elizabeth-lines-platform-screen-doors/ .

The first question that should be asked of the party and these contenders: what is this race for, exactly? To lead the party into one election or a little bit longer or for two elections? If it’s just the one, many can do it. But if it’s to rebuild the party after what will probably be a big defeat, then at least one of these candidates doesn’t look fit for purpose. Try as I might, I can’t visualize Mark Carney three years from now pumping the flesh in Bumblefrig nowhere after yet another ghastly chicken dinner and pretending to listen to a horde of tedious hicks when he could be dispensing wisdom at Davos. I also don’t like the idea of some banker waltzing into a job he hasn’t earned the hard way as an MP. Freeland would have the will to face the outback but she’ll be older too. And as for Christy Clark, is she even a Liberal at all? There’s an argument to jump a decade and look for somebody in their forties. My own preference would be for Freeland and I’d keep her on for the next time, initially at least, if she got a decent haul of the popular vote. The seat count should be irrelevant although I realize MPs may not share that view - FPTP will make it look far worse than the fall in the popular vote. Bear in mind I thought Garneau was a better bet than the young man with sunny ways last time out so my instincts in these races are usually very wide of the mark. One other feature - absolute no hopers throwing their names about as possible contenders just to big themselves up in the party, or so they hope. More frequently, they invite ridicule from their peers.

1. In deaths that might be asphyxial, video evidence of the events preceding death is extremely valuable, sometimes at least as important as the autopsy itself as in the George Floyd case. Asphyxial deaths can leave notoriously non-specific findings at autopsy. 2. From the news item above, the Medical Examiner in this case was also the pathologist who performed the autopsy so she already would have extensive knowledge of the case. 3. Yes, it’s prudent to have all the results ordered in front of one before finishing the report on the case. 4. Forensic pathology is an inexact science. Pathologists must always guard against being too dogmatic, a fate that befell one of the most famous British pathologists, Sir Bernard Spilsbury, and multiple pathologists in cases allegedly involving child sexual abuse.

Damage from fires in California is only going to increase despite any government intervention to change firefighting resources. Conservatives used to be realistic about the limitations of government.