One third of Alberta would be completely happy with that option as well, so it's tough to get too cocky about it.
It's honestly amazing that America somehow allowed a sitting president to go 4 years without releasing a healthcare plan, and while running for re-election still hasn't released a healthcare plan, and is still considered by some to be a viable candidate.
Don't even need to get started on allowing a sitting President to dodge releasing their taxes for 4 years.
One third of Alberta would be completely happy with that option as well, so it's tough to get too cocky about it.
I'm not sure what impact an America healthcare plan would have on a Canadian? I would certainly be more cognizant of a Canadian politician's comprehensive platform than an American politician's. I mean. The last mayoral election for Calgary was essentially decided by one candidate not having a complete platform. For mayor. I couldn't imagine a state/provincial or national candidate not having a full platform and getting any kind of traction, let alone one doing it TWICE and getting any traction.
Still nothing illegal about President Trump not releasing his tax returns.
Hilarious how THAT is somehow a talking point from the parrots, but the illegal leaking of that very same information - totally cool. Yup, all good. l m a o smh
KHL Fantasy Hockey League Keep 8
3-C 3-RW 3-LW 6-D 2-G
Forward 5-G 3-A 1.0 STP
D-Men 6-G 4-A 1.5 STP
.35 Shot .4 Hit .4 Block .1 FOW
Goalie 6.5 Win .25 Save -2.5 GA 2-SO
C- Larkin, Hischer, Horvat, R. Thomas
LW- Stamkos, Hyman, Kreider, Lehkonen,
RW- Laine, Marchessault, Toffoli. Buchnevich
D- Doughty, Burns, Letang, Andersson (IR), Faulk, Toews, Pionk, Petry
G- Vasilevskiy, Copley, Andersen
Correct. Not illegal. Just the first sitting President to do so in 40 years. Almost like there's something in there to hide. Or a lot to hide. Which, coincidentally, has now been shown by the (also not illegal) releasing of them. Plus isn't the Trumpet talking point that they were fake or not complete or some other hand waivy bullshit to falsely explain it away? Once again, and as always, it can't be both. It's gotta be hard to continually pretzel yourself so much trying to keep the conflicting talking points straight.
Not really what I'm doing at all. I'm saying that someone making a decision based on a singular factor impacting them would probably make a different decision when required to consider a multitude of factors impacting them. In this instance, 32% are saying they would vote for Trump based on a singular reasoning in terms of self impact. Most of the other disqualifying factors are of "no impact". However if it was a Canadian election, than those disqualifying factors (like no healthcare plan) switch to "significant impact", so we can't really say what the percentage would be in that instance, however it would likely (but not guaranteed to be) lower.
I would also point out that 68% of the popular vote would be the 5th highest in US election history, and the highest since 1820, which would indicate that the other candidate is not a viable candidate. The don't have to receive zero votes to be not viable.
Fancy way to justify Trump. You sound quite trumpety.
Is that on the same level as raping a 14-year old in Jeffery Epstein's mid-town condo?
epstein.PNG
@SmittysRant
The truth is one third of Albertans have "reasons" to choose Trump. Just liek Americans. Spinning the "reasons" is just a shell game. We are no better here in Alberta than in Alabama.