Search results

One could only hope.

the UCP consistently polls above the provincial NDP. All the mismanagement, scandals, the Alberta health care system on the brink, being a separatist party, all of that doesn't seem to matter as long as it's not the NDP to a plurality of Alberta voters. And as long as the electorate is willing...

Oh, certainly anything can be brought to the courts. I just don't see the courts touching it. What Alberta/Smith seems to be asking for is another Meech Lake or Charlottetown, which is fully within their rights to do so. Doesn't stop the rest of Canada from telling them to bug off though.

With the right amount of polish the act of looking like you're doing something can be even more rewarding that actually doing something.

Going over quickly the questions in question, most seem to be "lets work with the other provinces to change the constitution on ____" To which the courts cannot really rule on the constitutionality of a question seeking to change the constitution. Again this being separate from the referendum...

Except unless the fed open up a constitutional convention those questions mean squat. The only one the province can act on unilaterally is the separation one and that is a hypothetical.

What can parliament or the courts do about a hypothetical?

Given the situation she got herself in by getting into bed with the separatists, and the collapse of the validity of the separatist initiative in the courts, she was faced with two choices. She could fight to get the separatist question on the ballot and lose due to the courts. She at that...

Leopard is starting to eat face.

Thank goodness the clarity act is not at play here.

Out of all the bad choices she backed herself in this is probably the best way out of it without needing to go to war with the courts and with the hope that she keeps her job. I'll give her credit for that.

Well, you heard the man, she llst her base.

So the referendum question is on whether or not to have a referendum. This is.....actually smart. Shouldn't run afoul of the courts and duty to consult. Also listens to both sides. Will it be enough for Rath? Probably not.

I'm very confused. Spending billions to build infrastructure that doesnt currently exist but would get a fair bit of use is too expensive for some (HSR), but spending billions to build infrastructure that is redundant and will likely not be used except in the most extreme of circumstances is...

Ukraine should say no. USA will get the tech, Ukraine will get nothing from America.

Now now... How were we all to know that this guy would do all the things he said he was going to do?

That's easy. Trump and family have traded 700m in stocks this year. All of congress traded 650m. Literally using the office to enrich himself and his family more than every member of congress, who we all know to be ridiculously corrupt.

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/19/treasurys-yields-inflation-traders-fed-interest-rates.html 2007....2007....why do I feel like something happened around then...

Rubio or Vance take the loss in 2028, american public sours on the dems because of "reasons" and forget all about Trump and MAGA and Eric wins in 2032 and its the same stupidity all over again. From a Canadian context, don't take the Dems winning as anything but a temporary interlude. Plan for...

Because the Dems will get a veto proof majority?