So you're saying we could get 178k people and hold a referendum on whether the Albertans agree to have Family Day become a monthly paid statutory holiday - on the third Friday of every month?
Longest referendum ballot challenge?
This sounds like a fun can of worms! Can't wait for the debate in the newly renamed "Ledgy McLedgeface"!
That's very useful context that I wasn't aware of - thanks for sharing!
For others interested: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Quebec_referendum#Opinion_polling
Yep agree. I like having the numbers with these headlines, to avoid people getting the wrong impression.
E.g. "70-75% of Albertans oppose separatism, comparable to Quebec"
Provides similar information - but doesn't give the impression that everyone wants to separate. Its a threat, but let's not give it any extra credibility than it deserves?
There's polling from Angus Reid on this; it's not particularly popular - not enough to come close to winning a referendum, but it's still an uncomfortably high number of people who don't value Canada.
https://angusreid.org/smith-shapiro-sovereignty/
Me as well. I don't remember where / how I got the CD. Linux as a desktop has come so far since then!
This brought back some memories: https://www.mandrakelinux.org/
I'm in an Alberta riding which is very likely to go CPC, but exercising my right to vote is also my civic duty.
So while it might not affect the outcome this time, my vote contributes to popular vote metrics, turnout, and in the case where there's lots people who happen to surprise (it is within the margin of error), my vote might in fact be the deciding vote that sways a riding.
It's a shame when people value democracy so little they can't be bothered to vote.
I highly recommend taking a look through pages like this: https://www.policyalternatives.ca/news-research/platform-crunch-3-every-party-is-promising-tax-cuts-and-cash-transfers/
Its really interesting to see how the proposed changes actually benefit different income brackets. TLDR: Proposed income tax changes from the Conservatives and Liberals predominantly benefit the richest tax bracket(s). If you happen to be in those tax brackets, I can see how conservative policies might 'appeal' to that demographic.
In general, when parties propose tax cuts (unless very thoughtfully targeted), they benefit the rich - who already have ample financial resources to pay for things they might need (like healthcare, private education for their children, etc.), while those who get net benefit from taxation through services are net losers from tax cuts... Because cutting taxes necessitates some reductions in service funding to balance the books. (I'm always fascinated when low income voters vote conservative as opposed to NDP.)
That would sum it up nicely; however, It'd be unfair to not mention the 77 million Americans that voted for this clown, the 90 million people who neglected their right & responsibility to vote, and the 75 million americans who voted against him.
Voting matters...until it doesn't.
I'm also a subscriber - and that was my initial reaction as well - but perhaps if they can get more Canadians (to whom that ad appeals) reading the Globe instead of Postmedia, we end up in a better place?
I still think it's a bad look if they just ran partisan ads supporting a specific party - I wonder how many stories they ran as promotional / paid content? Hopefully a blend of stories?
This clip by 22 minutes is pretty solid: https://youtu.be/NsFo_ZvMC8I or: https://yewtu.be/watch?v=NsFo_ZvMC8I
It'd be a much better headline inverted. (Unfortunately less clicks?)
Now that said, there's also the effect where this type of article stokes nationalism in the majority of the population - and that may play into a shift away from supporting the UCP and by extension/relation the CPC in some cases.
I'm seeing many more canadian flags on houses these days. 🇨🇦
I'll just leave this here; perhaps some citizens will provide some feedback during the public consultation process.
Hebrew & Christian Bibles, along with the Qur'an have passages that include:
So... if we're going to ban books (which we generally should not), it seems that the offending versions of religious texts should be amongst the contenders for 'age inappropriate' content. Some versions paraphrase or omit some of the most egregious passages); however, even commonly circulated editions such as the New International Version (NIV) include passages about sex, violence, and bodily authority / consent.
The point of course, is that the so-called 'freedoms' that the UCP like to push seems to involve a whole lot of limiting freedoms of those they don't agree with...