Queenmandy85

It matters because the POTUS has the ability to start a nuclear war which will kill 90% of the earth's population in the first week. It matters because the U.S. can help mitigate climate change along with China, India Russia and Europe.

The problem is the decline in participation by the electorate. Politics in Canada used to be our national sport. We were very good at it. However, it has become a spectator sport rather than participatory. It is not enough to get out and vote. If people want to hold politicians to account, they have to get out and nominate and elect people who will perform well. If you don't campaign, you can't complain. If we elect good politicians, they will write good laws and the SCC will not have to do it for them.

Impact asked: " When will we hold our elected officials to account?" Next election day.

In 1972, George McGovern campaigned on peace in Viet Nam and lost all 50 states to President Nixon, only carrying Washington DC. Mr. Trump has admitted to bragging about committing sexual assault and is projected to carry 24 states.

Trump has failed to cultivate the media. This indicates a lack of foresight. Politics is the art of building support.

Just so you are aware, I am and always have been, a Progressive Conservative.

Trump would say that is good business.

But why did anyone care enough to even bring it up? You can bet that all those who were making it an issue had girlfriends or boyfriends on the side.

My Evangelical friends are always going on about a return to 'traditional marriage.' Traditional marriage is the arranged union between a man and a woman's / girl's property and/or status.

I am curious why President Clinton's girlfriends are an issue. Lincoln had an affair, FDR died in the arms of his mistress, Wilson, Harding, Eisenhower, Kennedy, all had affairs. Probably the only Presidents who did not have affairs were Nixon and Carter. Men like to play around. Like Kissinger said, power is the greatest aphrodisiac.

No I'm not.

Reading some of the posts on this thread is like watching the Monty Python sketch about the argument. I'm not seeing the exchange of ideas. It comes down to Clinton having more experience in Government. Trump has none. Running a business requires a completely different skill-set than running a country.

I thought the OP was a pretty good description of my boomer generation, living in a broken down VW van on West 4th Ave. in Vancouver, lounging around the steps of the Courthouse an Library, then going to University forever to avoid getting a job. University was cheap and easy in those ancient times. I think Socrates was in my class.

A ticket is not a judgement of guilt or innocence. It is a statement of evidence. This is what the officer saw, did, and heard. If the recipient of the ticket believes he is innocent, he should exercise his option to plead his case in court. His employment status should be a matter between himself ( and his union) and his employer.

He should follow Ali's example. Ali took a stand, pled his case in Court and took his punishment. Snowden should argue his case in Court and take whatever the Court decides. I'm sure he knew what he was committing to when he acted.

I'm not sure but, statistically, more people died in car accidents on 11Sep01 than were killed in terrorist attacks.

I like Chong's stand on parliamentary reform but I would have to go with Raitt, or even better, Ambrose.

To paraphrase a Conservative campaign slogan, better Clinton sick than Trump stupid. Even if she were in a coma, she would make a better POTUS than Trump.

You talk about her being 70 as over the hill. Give me a break. My brother is over 70 and is in great shape. When My dad was in his mid- 70's, he was racing hydroplanes. 70 is not old.

An easy way around this is to never use drugs. If this reduces the employment value of some one who has used pot, it makes me more valuable. I see it as a win.

Judges are appointed by the Crown on advice from the Prime Minister.

The electric chair is an American tradition. In Canada, the traditional means of execution is hanging. The person employed to carry out the execution is Arthur Ellis. If we are going to execute people in this country, we should do it properly.

Your alternative is to spend a lot more money to hang them?

What about people like George Lemay or Lucien Rivard. Neither was ever charged with murder although when Rivard was finally returned to Texas, he received a sentence or 20 years without parole for possession of a single roach. Lemay spent six months in a Florida jail. He allegedly committed the lime pit murders in Quebec. Is it fair that a mentally disturbed person is executed and yet professional hit men for the mafia go free. Murder is rare in this country and most are crimes of passion or committed by people suffering from mental disturbance or incapacity. The experience of the U.S. in recent years shows that people are executed due to poverty and/ or mental illness. Put the enormous cost required to hang someone towards finding better treatment for offenders. I work near the Regional Psychiatric Centre in Saskatoon where some of the most dangerous offenders have been held. Why do we not invest in research that would treat them more effectively. Finally, if it is wrong for a citizen to kill a defenceless individual, how do you justify the Crown executing a defenceless individual. We are talking about a person who has their hands tied behind their back, their feet bound, a hood over their head, and a noose around their neck. That is no different than first degree murder. Vengeance is Mine sayeth the Lord.

It is very difficult for an accused to not say anything. It is also too common for a police officer to make an assumption of guilt before all the evidence is in and even harder to change his / her mind when the evidence doesn't support the assumption. Both suspects and police officers are human.