Quote:
Originally Posted by powderjunkie
Do you think these more transient PR's are more likely to vote than current citizens? Because if only 46.8% of eligible Calgarians could be bothered to vote in the last election I'm really curious what portion of PR's who give an insufficient amount of #### about this city will turnout...
I recognize the words Purple and Nenshi.
You said the current line in the sand is the bellwether of democracy. I'm sure some other cowboy said the same thing in early 1960. Before Indigenous Canadians could vote [without losing their treaty status]. But current line in the sand = perfect...the base principle was absolutely infallible and we have only had to iron out some really really minor kinks and we definitely got all of them so of course it is ludicrous to consider it further https://electionsanddemocracy.ca/vot...-rights-canada
If you took that as a personal insinuation of racism I don't know what to tell you |
I don't care what a Cowboy said in 1960 or that historically the bars for citizenship were racist, sexist or otherwise. They objectively are not today. It's completely irrelevant for this discussion.
The current standards for citizenship are pretty universal and having somewhat of a higher barrier than PR status implies a permanence that makes a lot of sense to consider for alignment of interests with making decisions in the best interest for the city, province or country. The onus should rather be on city council and those that support that viewpoint to demonstrate that they aren't and what problems they aim to address when they propose a motion such as they did yesterday.