Queenmandy85

That was included in the figure of 75. There were a lot of cases of thyroid cancer from Chernobyl, but, as of 2008, only 15 deaths. Chernobyl was the worst accident but it was the anomaly. When you consider the consequences of the greenhouse effect, nuclear power is looking pretty good. We are already near the Like I said, that is a failure of the education system. We can mass produce small, safe reactors for sale around the world.

More people died in motor vehicle accidents in Saskatchewan in 2016 (125 deaths) than have ever been killed in nuclear power accidents world wide (75). People trust vehicles, why not nuclear power.

Add to that, the transition to nuclear power with sales of small local reactors and fuel world wide, and western Canada is in for a prosperous future. Antipathy to nuclear power is an indictment of the education system.

Obviously, you are not a discriminating beer drinker.

What it comes down to is does the United States want to do business with Canada or not. If not, there are consequences for workers in both countries. No deal is temporary, a bad deal is forever, for both countries.

I always follow Frank Howard's lesson. Howard was an MP who called a news conference to announce he was being blackmailed. He said he had been convicted of car theft when he was a teenager and spent time in jail. Rather than give in the the blackmailer to keep it secret, he broadcast the event himself. Never give in to blackmail or bullying. The US is not blackmailing or bullying Canada. It is merely using it's size to persuade Canada to accept a deal that puts Canada at a disadvantage. The problem is, if Canada accepts, the US is more likely to go for more and more. It is better to take the hit now than than a lot more hits later. It is a policy that has served Israel for decades. In the long run, it will be better for both countries. Frank Howard was re-elected with a larger vote total in the next election.

That may say something about US politics but from the dozens of MP's I've met over the years, it isn't true in Canada.

Our politicians are a pretty good reflection of the population, except for the fact that they work 80 hours a week, give up on a career for severals years (if it is a law practice, they will take a 75% pay cut), miss time with family, and work to get problems with the EI system for one of their bosses who calls them a crook and a liar. Other than that, they are just like you.

That is why you need to get involved in the nomination. Unless the party leader axes your candidate, you have some say. To avoid the evils, make sure you get behind a good candidate. Maybe one that will work to eliminate the leader's power to block a nomination.

If someone is too go*****med lazy to get off their a*s to go to a polling station, even getting a ride from a campaign organization, they don't deserve a vote. Voting is THE most important part of democracy. You get time off from work, the campaign will provide child care, rides to the polls, etc. There is no excuse for not showing up at the polls. Voting is not enough. If you don't get out and campaign for your candidate, both in the nomination process and the election, you have no right to complain about the result.

Aside from putting forward a decent platform and good candidates, getting out the vote is vital. Some elections are won or lost with the ground game. 1. Canvass - identify the vote. 2. Election day- ensure EVERY supporter gets to the polls. 1972. A Conservative supporter was working in a cafe. It was 45 minutes until the polls closed. She called the campaign office and asked if every one on the list had voted. Yes. What about the guys out on the construction site? Well, no. Who's on the list? She jumped into a van and drove out to the site, picked up only the conservative voters (identified by the canvassers) and got them to the polls with five minutes to spare. There were ten of them. The Tory won by 8 votes.

Remove the requirement for a party leader to endorse a candidates nomination papers. We need parties to increase the likelihood of majority governments, but they should not have precedence over MP's. If the Liberal backbenchers want to remove their leader, all they should need to do is vote no confidence.

Most of an MP's work load is looking after constituents' problems such as problems with pension cheques etc. Our system is responsible government, not representative government. As Lord North said, each Member of Parliament represents all (Canadians). PR denies the opportunity to vote for an independent. It also means that if a member quits the caucus, they lose their seat. It means being stuck with minority governments leading to frequent elections. It means disasters like BC has where a caucus of 3 members holds the government hostage. Rather that a temporary situation, PR makes it permanent.

What about a run-off election in those ridings where the leading candidate doesn't get a majority. That keeps it local and each MP has a firm mandate. PR entrenches the power of the parties and the voters of Kootenay-East end up with a party bagman from Toronto as their MP. Parties already have too much power. Under PR, you would never have any independents.

A politician who tries to change a voter's view on an issue is telling the voter "I'm smarter than you." Not the best idea for electoral success. A good government tries to be a reflection of the people. That's why I find it funny to hear all the garbage about how bad politicians are.

Just for historical accuracy, Trudeau promised a deficit. It was the CPC and the NDP who promised a balanced budget.

What draws a major party to the left or the right is not a fringe party. It is the electorate. The centre is defined by the voters. It is where the bulk of the electorate resides. The first rule in politics is (as in sales) the voter is always right. The Trudeau government and Sheer's CPC are reacting to what the voters want. That is not only good politics, it is democracy.

No dairy cartel in France? I always thought of French agriculture being a very powerful lobby. Perhaps I was mis-informed. I agree regarding "I don't think that Scheer or Harper's freedom hating views of being against gay marriage, being against choice with respect to abortion..."

My take on Bernier is that his feelings were hurt that the party did not elect him, so he decided to blow it up on his way out the door. He ignores the fact that Sheer won. What does that make Max? A LOSER. Now he will appeal to his base and share the electoral wilderness with the NDP and all the other Losers. He is not just a loser, he is stupid. He left secret cabinet documents in the house of a Hells Angel's girlfriend. He ignores the science of climate change. His idea of fighting the trade war imposed on us by Trump is to whimper, "we surrender." As James Moore pointed out, Max would give away supply management and get nothing in return. Elections are won by winning the centre, red tories and blue liberals. Parties which are contenders form policies based on what analysis tells them the voters want, whether it is energy, trade or immigration. Go off on some idiotic ideological tangent and you face disaster. Do what the voters want. Its what we call democracy. Max is an idiot.

Deleted by author

I am going out on a limb here. I have not seen anything that meets the threshold for conviction in an impeachment process. My understanding is the high crime or misdemeanour must constitute a threat to the democratic institutions of the republic, not a run of the mill felony.

My concern is that group of supporters who would view any evidence against the President as a conspiracy by the "deep state" to launch a coup. They would see any attempt to remove President Trump as justification to use violence. Sort of like some of the extreme antifa on the left.

While Vice President Pence is a more experienced politician, his views are reported to be more extreme. I am not worried for Canada, just concerned for Americans. The dynamic of President Trump's supporters is different from past Presidents. I can understand their skepticism of any move to remove him. How would that manifest its self? As I said, as a Canadian, this could be none of my business were it not for my American friends.

Back to POTUS, I don't know which concerns me more, President Trump not being impeached or being impeached. I am reluctant to speculate on the politics of another country, but the US has a great impact on the rest of us. The Vice President scares me more than Mr. Trump and I worry about the reaction to Mr. Trump's removal by his supporters. My hope is that they would respect the process, but I do feel uneasy.

Ever hear of Randolph Scott or J. Edgar Hoover?