n2burns

According to Wikipedia, 150,000 Active personnel and 1,657,000 in Reserves.

Don't get me wrong, I love the Greens. I voted for Mike Morrice twice and would have voted Aislinn Clancy if I hadn't already moved. I would love to see the Greens on the debate stage, but they knew the rules and chose to fall out of line with them.

I'm also not sure why you think if a party isn't national, that they don't count. At the time the election was called, the BQ represented 10% of Canadians. Do you think those voices shouldn't count? Do you think nationalism and patriotism should be a prereq to get into the debate? I'm really trying to figure out where your argument lands because it sounds like you are against dictators, but also want to dictate specifically who can and can't be on the debate stage which would be the actions of a ...

I have much less interest in sitting through a debate between 4 people, when 1/4 of the time will be dedicated to a guy talking about one province’s interests, and where that party doesn’t even run outside of that province.

I know you might not interest in listening, but at the time the writ was drawn up, he had 33 seats, which was over 10% of the total. If a party can muster 10% of the seats, they almost certainly should be included in the debate!

It appears to be still working on old.reddit. I no longer have an account there, but occasionally check on communities I miss here and RES still seems to be chugging away.

One comment does not a whole commenter make! I've had a few cases where someone acts poorly on one post, but is usually a conscientious and interesting commenter. Personally, I want to see more conversation, so I'm hesitant to ban people, but if your math is different, that's fine!

Sure, but even in the most orange-pilled places, there are still cars, and occasionally reasons to drive. And if individuals/small groups need to get somewhere inaccessible by bikes/public transit, etc., I'd rather they drive something like this instead of a vehicle that's literally the size of a tank.

I think your title meant to say, "Canada is the only G7 countries without a foreign intelligence agency."

After a reboot all the data is encrypted and needs a pin/fingerprint to unlock.

Just to clarify, it needs a PIN/password to unlock after reboot. Biometrics like fingerprint aren't available until the device has been decrypted.

I think Poilievre is also preying on people not understanding how our judicial system works. When someone is "eligible for Parole after 25 years" the key word is eligible. Our most heinous criminals will die in prison, but at a certain point, they have to right to go before the parole board, and I think that's a good thing.

I wouldn't say that's the case. Doug Ford got huge push-back for using it, to the point he repealed a piece of legislation that invoked it. Similarly, I don't think Poilievre would experience "no real consequences".

Plus, as pointed out in the article, "The clause can only override certain sections of the charter." IANAL, but I'm sure this (and Poilievre's other proposals to invoke the clause) will be reviewed by the courts.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Personally, I don't think it'll have a large impact, but I honestly don't know.

Thanks for the clarification!