- Reaction score
- 18,405
- Points
- 1,280
One of the few times I agree with him. If only I believed him given his previous aiding the government in stonewalling the China committee investigations. Even more shameful coupled with the CCP’s targeting of Jenny Kwan.
But why can they? If they can’t vote in an election why should they be allowed to vote for a specific candidateI think we’re arguing the same thing.
The false documentation alleged wasn’t the age or the citizenship (or lack thereof), it was that they weren’t from his district - because it was an internal LPC candidate election.
TIL that non-citizens can vote in those.
Because the election rules are set by government, while the nomination rules are set by the individual parties. That's part of the discussion about whether Big Government should have a hand in telling political parties how to do their business. Some say the integrity of how candidates are picked is just important as the integrity of how members are elected by voters, while others say politics should be left to the parties, not the government of the day (or, to use an American analogy, Team Elephant wouldn't want a Team Donkey government to tell them how to do politics internally, and vice versa).But why can they? If they can’t vote in an election why should they be allowed to vote for a specific candidate
So far, Team Red is "concerned" & letting the cops do their work (whatever that might be at this point) without naming names, and Team Orange says "kick the f@#$%^&*kers out". Interesting response from Team Blue on this one re: naming names, via a Canadian Press story ....
And do what exactly?Time for the GG/King to step in ?
Nothing - I do not think there is anything either one could doAnd do what exactly?
And do what exactly?
There is legislation governing party financing; they could legislate the nomination rules if there was the will.Because the election rules are set by government, while the nomination rules are set by the individual parties. That's part of the discussion about whether Big Government should have a hand in telling political parties how to do their business. Some say the integrity of how candidates are picked is just important as the integrity of how members are elected by voters, while others say politics should be left to the parties, not the government of the day (or, to use an American analogy, Team Elephant wouldn't want a Team Donkey government to tell them how to do politics internally, and vice versa).
There is legislation governing party financing; they could legislate the nomination rules if there was the will.
Those calling for heads on a spike might not be so enthusiastic if it turns out they are wearing their team ball hat.
Agreed. I worded that poorly. I meant to say those parliamentarians or politicians calling for heads to roll. It's a great sound bite to stand up and beat on the government of the day but they want to hope their bench is clean.I don't care what team they are on the treasonous bastards should be, well we don't do that anymore.
Which may be why some are reluctant to ask too many questions or reveal names.Agreed. I worded that poorly. I meant to say those parliamentarians or politicians calling for heads to roll. It's a great sound bite to stand up and beat on the government of the day but they want to hope their bench is clean.
Agreed re: anything’s possible given the will, but it’s the most partisan folks, I suspect, who’ll howl loudest about Team A wanting to change Team B and C’s rules.There is legislation governing party financing; they could legislate the nomination rules if there was the will.
Those calling for heads on a spike might not be so enthusiastic if it turns out they are wearing their team ball hat.