John Stone

If Quebec ever did decide to secede Canada would need a strong negotiator - preferably not a Quebecois. There seems to be an understanding that the Republic of Quebec would have sovereignty over what is deemed Quebec territory now. Like the U.S., Canada's State / Provincial and International boundaries evolved over time. The argument could be that Quebec sovereignty is limited to what it was on or before Canada became a dominion. There is no question that the St. Lawrence seaway would remain an international waterway. All that being said, the Republic of Quebec would be helpless against an American economic and cultural onslaught. Canada might be better off negotiating the boundaries, sans Quebec tho - arguably Newfoundland could retain Labrador. This argument applies to all 10 Provinces and likely the (3) Territories. oh yeah, lets not forget the Indigenous - they have legitimate land claims as well.

Those that don't study history are doomed to repeat it. Really it's all p/o the specie' road to self destruction. Arguably I suppose we might have been better off with the Nazi - they were rumored to keep the trains running on time -there is that.

Canada is p/o a Non Nuc Proliferation Treaty ............... However, a version of Canada's CANDU reactor has been a player in India's nuclear weapons development. The reactor was understood to be used to produce domestic nuclear energy. The sale to India had been controversial due to its potential to produce weapons grade plutonium. India's first nuclear test, named the Smiling Buddha was detonated using enriched plutonium from this reactor. Apparently India convinced the Canadian government that they had no interest in nuclear weapon proliferation. Smiling Buddha seems so apropos for a moniker. Of course Pakistan, not to be outdone ........... developed their own a few (uneasy) years later. Ironically equal and opposite (MAD) has kept the peace and limited the belligerents to conventional weapons. (adults became involved) Quite likely, if Ukraine had retained this threat they would not have been invaded

...................I play hockey...def know the legend. The Feds provided the funding? Love to hear how or who decided on the name.

.............. why the fk would you name a bridge worth 4 billion after a hockey player?? A hockey rink maybe, hockey stick, elbow pads?? Bridge?? Damn - Canada must have some historical figures - indigenous maybe.

The odd part is that people don't support Trump because of his business acumen .......... which u have cast some doubt on. His secret weapon is his rhetoric ......... rhetoric that targets controversial topics and by extension generates disagreement and divide to opposing viewpoints. It is what got him elected twice. .............. and will likely win the political right an encore in the House. The mid-terms are going to be controversial regardless of the winner - as designed? Then the gloves really come off. Win or lose ...........there might be blood.

Most would agree that it's a global economy (Europe / Asia / South America / North America / Australia) - always will be Although the U.S. is the largest economy globally - it is not as large as the global economy. To be competitive in the global economy u need to corner the market or ............. produce the goods and or services cheaper. Not sure how a tariff addresses those concerns -seems counterproductive ........... and domestically expensive. The strategy seems to be to use coercion to force compliance on ?? A tariff makes domestic consumers pay more - it is a tax on the domestic market, promotes instability in production planning and reduces a country's global share of the economy. That said, Trump didn't get to be a multi billionaire by being stupid - granted he did have a few speed bumps accumulating his wealth.

............... I'm guessing overflight by drones.

Some believe that a warning shot is a waste of ammunition................. not always. It does have the effect of keeping their heads down.

Trump is definitely punching 'up' if he attacks Iran with any degree of strength.... this ain't Venezuela. Iran is playing 3D chess - they're hoping for a regional conflict ................ might work. Israel sees a potential existential threat - they're correct - don't trust anyone.

................ let's cut to the chase - it's society's fault.

..........fer fk's sake - give the man his due, Trump is a megalomaniac, not a narcissist He's both? Noted!

tomayto, tomahto

The most accurate description I've heard came from a far right political supporter, 'Trump is awe-full' Describes someone you're in awe of while at the same time critical to a degree?

re: And saying what people wanted to hear is kind of the opposite of controversy Trump? I'd argue a good strategy with Trump would be to expect the unexpected, first, most and always. Granted he loves preaching to the choir .........haha. I do believe they attend his popular rallies (red meat notwithstanding)so as to hear what controversial statements he'll make, or his defense of controversial statements he's made - all good .................. did I mention the media?

I think Israel realizes that they've sown the wind re: the next generation of freedom fighters. They accept the challenge .............. they will deal with the threat with U.S. support .........or not ..............while they're able. Netanyahu sees the threat clearly ....... his actions are reasoned and logical ....... and the World will reap the dividends. Iran and by extension radical Islam don't function using cost vs. benefit calculus ........ proof? Gaza. ................................ 9/11?

Indeed .......... I think we can agree that redistricting is most effective in a two party, partisanship environment. The founding fathers, including Washington, Madison and Adams expressed deep concerns about the dangers of political factionalism and the potential for a two party political system. They warned that such divisions could create an ‘us versus them’ mentality, eroding the common good in favor of narrow, partisan interests.

I think u would agree that Trump is and remains a controversial figure in style, speech and actions? To paraphrase, Trump was not concerned to state long and loud what most people thought. .......... and damn the torpedoes re: critics - they were old school. What was surprising was that it worked .............. twice! A nod to the competition .......... Hildebeest / Biden (Harris) .............. I'll be blunt .......... their non-controversial style lost it for them (oooold school) ..on the other hand there is likely only a person like Trump every generation or so when the planets align? The question is whether Trump's style is a trend or just a flash-in-the-pan. The World seems to indicate it's a trend - Democracy is dying - built on expected norms. In style, there is no U.S. political figure in history like him - not even close - u have to compare him to historical global figures.

I’m not going to debate the morals of political hacks – winning is all that matters and the proof of the cooking is in the eating (winning) In the prehistoric age an individual like Trump would have little chance of winning the presidency (twice). Today, technology and by extension communication has created an environment much removed from when the dinosaurs roamed the earth. (the anachronistic GOP) Trump’s opposition (twice)? What??? Who would deny that Trump is a controversial figure in politics. His communication style (??) and use of social media to channel his populist agenda is unparalleled. The question is whether he is a phenomenon or a trend going forward. Globally, it is a trend.

Tucker's oxygen is controversy - if it doesn't exist he invents it. It has made him a millionaire. As entertaining as I find him (and I suspect a lot feel the same) he is a light weight. Enjoy.

I applaud ur optimism. Ironic that the World was most rational / predictable during the Cold War. Equal and opposite in terms of offense kept the adults in their lane. Similar to faith - Islam vs. Christianity ............now the kids have the (or will have) crowd pleasers ............. standby.

re: ..........It doesn't matter how Gerry-mandered any district is when the State is still popular-vote... culpa mia ......... it is the State's popular vote that determines the awarding of electoral votes. That said, gerrymandering can have an impact on House of Representative distribution and by extension Executive power / Legislation.

dude ..............I'm not going to flog a dead horse except to say gerrymandering can significantly affect presidential elections by manipulating electoral district boundaries - which by extension distorts representation and influence an election outcome - case closed!

.............. i'm getting a pudgy!