Bryan

Yes!!! Oh, yes, please let that be true!!!

Seems to me, that experience would be exactly why he'd want to avoid getting into trouble again. If he deliberately wanted to poach, he could have found someone to do it in Zimbabwe for a few hundred bucks. Even doing it fully above board can be done for under $20K if you look around. Why would he pay $50K (if he really did), unless he really believed he was getting the real thing? The scam would be if they took his money with the promise of a legitimate, legal hunt, complete with all necessary permits. If what he ended up getting was not what he paid for, he got ripped off.

Something doesn't add up about this story. ZImbabwe is a very poor country. People are starving. If skirting local laws just to poach was his intent, he easily could have done so for a small fraction of what he's alleged to have paid. The reason you pay tens of thousands of dollars upfront is to get the people who know the regulations to make sure all permits are in order, and everything is on the up and up. Forget an internet backlash, or a fine, the consequences could be ending up in a third world prison. You pay that kind of money to make sure you're not put in that kind of situation. It seems far more likely that Dr. Walt is a victim of a scam rather than the guilty party.

She didn't have to change it.

She's so outraged that she went to the media over it.

I'm being 100% upfront and honest, which is 180 degrees from where you're coming from. Nobody claimed anything about a momentum tracker, or combining first and second choices. YOU claimed the undecided data was not in the Post stories, and that was categorically false-- It's right there, in the first few paragraphs. Moving the goal posts by pretending that you meant something else doesn't change that.

I don't disagree, and that is how I definitely act if I get pulled over. I have, however, witnessed more than a few incidents that didn't go that way -- the person being detained literally did nothing at all, and the police officer began the interaction with an assault, and a flat out refusal to explain what he was doing and why. Police should not be given the opportunity to lie and or change their story later though. Having an actual reason why they are asking you to do what ever they are requesting is the minimum we should expect from them. If they don't have one, they can't claim that it's a lawful order. You shouldn't even have to ask, the explanation should be in the question.

Both decided and undecided numbers are in the article. It's nobody's fault if you don't read them. That is not the undecided data, those are the combined first and second choice numbers. Last time you voted federally, were you asked to combine or rank your choices, or to pick just one?

Yes. ABSOLUTELY. The undecided numbers are right there in your own Edmonton Journal link: Same as the graphic I posted. Same as the actual poll data.

Absolutely, yes. Both decided and undecided voters are factored in, and both sets of data are presented. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/conservative-support-among-voters-jumps-as-childcare-cheques-doled-out-poll

Sure, I can go with that. You can't say it either way, because unlike the other pollsters, we haven't seen the difference between their polls and election results. I was simply pointing out that their numbers aren't as far divergent from the other recent polls as it appears at first glance, not that I have any insight as to their accuracy.

None of the pollsters said that their MOEs were anywhere near as big as how far off they were. That is exactly what has happened. Derek and I both posted the links for you. Look at the pre-election numbers, then look at the election results: CPC real support is ALWAYS higher than the most of the polls say they will be (especially EKOS and Forum). An indicator off by 4-6% to the left almost every time. They are not exact at all, they are consistently wrong, well outside of their stated MOE.

Forum is not much different, they also consistently under report CPC support, right up until election night. Post is displaying a break from the bias it used to have, by not using a company that has proven itself conclusively to be unreliable. The links have been provided several times, it's not my fault you won't read them, nor my job to make you. If you deliberately choose to live in ignorance, good for you.

It's not, and I fully explained why. If EKOS says CPC support is 31%, that consistently has been shown to mean that it's really 35 or 36. Mainstreet is only a showing a couple of points above that. That's demonstrably false. The poll shows both decided and undecided (as well as several other factors), and gives detailed breakdowns for each. Polling process? EKOS and Forum both use IVR too.

It matters because a person who feels their rights are being violated could end up escalating the situation for no reason, and because police officers also tend to escalate situations for no reason. If the officer's rationale for the order is on tape on the dashcam, the person being detained has a reasonable expectation that things will work themselves out in the end as long as they remain calm and comply right now.

For us, the reasons vary depending on when we go: Number one by far is a reprieve from harsh winters. We mix our time between adventure and relaxing (and both can be de-stressing compared to the daily grind at home), but the sunshine is always the critical factor. That mid-winter getaway happens every single year no matter what, even if we absolutely cannot afford it. Secondary are event based trips. Sports tournaments for our kids more often than not -- we're going to be in (insert city here)for a day or two anyway, might as well add a few more days and get to see the place.

Harper's message has been far more consistent than the opposition's.

It's not that simple. The reasons for the request do matter. If it's retaliation for her refusal to put out the cigarette, that may not be lawful order either. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/07/23/the-law-of-the-sandra-bland-traffic-stop/ Again, the problem for a person being detained is you can't ask the question "why". That should be the minimum you should be able to expect, but a police officer is not going to argue with you on the side of the road. It comes down to training, IMO. Police should be taught to explain themselves more instead of barking orders. Tell me the reason. Yes, you should still comply, even if you disagree with the rationale given, but at least now you know what to tell the judge instead of guessing and or giving the officer a chance to change his story.

I agree with 90+ percent of what you're saying in this thread. Being calm and polite is critical to keeping an interaction with the police civil. Even if the police are completely in the wrong, the time to argue that is in front of a judge, not with the guy holding a gun who has already shown disrespect for your rights. BUT... The term "lawful police order" is one that gets misused frequently, especially by police. Just because a police officer says it, that doesn't make it lawful. There actually does have to be a law on the book concerning that particular incident. If there is no "must extinguish cigarette during roadside stop" law on the book, the order to do so is not lawful. Of course, again, the time to argue that is in court -- not on the side of the road.

Derek didn't make anything up. You can go and look at the polling leading up to any election. Here are the numbers for 2011: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_the_Canadian_federal_election,_2011 The votes that CPC actually gets are consistently higher than most of the pollsters report. When you see EKOS or Forum report CPC support, you have to add 4-6 points to get the real number. Look, I'm not defending Mainstreet, I know nothing about them. I'm just saying that their numbers don't show as big of a jump as it might appear.

It's going to be an interesting campaign. It's going to be really easy for all of the other parties to paint him as a liar -- no matter what he answers, they'll be able to pull up a quote of him saying the opposite.

It's probably a combination of several factors. The UCCB surely helped to boost CPC numbers, but so did the NDP bringing up coalition talk. A weakening global economy also historically favours the incumbent (even those who favour change start feeling like this might be the wrong time to do it.) But keep in mind that most of the polls we have been seeing are by pollsters like EKOS who have a history of exaggerating opposition support. As Derek pointed out here: #2994 , you generally have to add between 5 and 8 points to their CPC numbers to get what actually happens on voting day. That alone makes the Mainstreet numbers (if accurate) actually not much of a change at all.

http://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/2015/07/24/conservative-christmas-in-july/ 5147.... that's a big sample.

They are reducing the bills for my grandkids as well. It's the opposition who want to institutionalize higher program spending, higher taxes, and introduce new social programs.

My taxes have gone down every year since the Conservatives have been in power. In every single one of those years, the opposition parties and their supporters have insisted that next year they will go up, and every single time those people have been wrong. Tax time is especially the time where it solidifies in my mind why I vote Conservative -- they take less of my money from me. The complaints from the opposition parties only serve to even further reinforce the point -- they want to take more of your money away from you, and they don't like it when people get to keep their own money. That they further insult the people benefitting from getting to keep more of their own money by calling it a "bribe", and you have exactly the reason why CPC support jumps right back up when people are actually checking off their ballots.