Eternal optimist

Obviously the correct answer is to just rename them the Edmonton E's. Also, never clarify what the E stands for - adds to the mystery.

Just call them the Oilers they've already got the losing part down lol.

Defending Marxism with utilitarianism is quite an interesting stance... personally, I despise utilitarianism, people can use it to justify even the most heinous of acts for the greater good. Also, fun fact, Karl Marx is well-known to have lost quite a bit of money in the stock market as a speculator, probably one of the reasons he hated capitalism so much lol. God why did I have to take the philosophy course in university.

Kinda cool, right?

If you're wondering about lawsuits and stuff like that, the Manitoba Court Registry offers a free-to-use tool that allows you to search entities by their legal name across multiple divisions: https://web43.gov.mb.ca/Registry/NameSearch Doesn't give too much information unfortunately, but you can at least see if stuff was filed (such as a Statement of Claim) - for example, if you type in "Winnipeg Football Club" you can see they filed a Statement of Claim against Jeff Reinbold for $14,500 back in 1998. Of course, for the IGF debacle, the lawsuit may have been filed in the US, in which case it wouldn't show up there ... I don't know I'm not a lawyer.

Just to cheer everyone up, lets remember that time in 1912 Teddy Roosevelt was shot and did the following: - Survived - Convinced the mob of supporters not to harm the assassin. - Gave his speech anyways (which was 84 minutes btw) - Mocked the assassination attempt as part of his opening https://www.businessinsider.com/teddy-roosevelt-assassination-attempt-2017-6 Unfortunately, he was unsuccessful in his bid, but still, pretty cool story.

Personally, as much as I'd like to see the CFL again this year - I think they're underestimating the impact injuries have on this situation. Football is a violent sport, what happens when a player gets hurt? Normally you'd fly in another body, and the other guy would recover on IR or whatever... under COVID though... imagine you have a linemen go down you'd have to... 1) Fly in a new player, potentially exposing the entire league to COVID, not only that said player would have to self-quarantine 2) Retain a much higher level of reserve players in your initial 'bubble', likely ballooning salary costs for the league that's already suffering 3) Coax Nik Lewis out of retirement.

Wait people are getting paid to do this and I've been an introvert for free?!? I knew I was being scammed...

TBurgess, man... stop digging.

Fun fact: The New England Patriots trademarked the phrases "19-0" and "Perfect season" before playing (and losing) the 2008 Superbowl.

Amazing how many of those names were changed recently.... also, how on earth did somebody think naming a team after Jack the Ripper was a good idea?

That is such a bad pun... you're making a mockery of a serious issue here...

The other problem too is Indigenous communities historically have lower voter turnout, likely due to lack of trust in government agencies, so a referendum would likely have skewed results unfortunately.

I have used the chat function twice, both times the Bombers ended up losing. As a superstitious statistician, I could not at this point allow for it to become a trend and ceased using it thereafter.

The floodway was an example to support your side of the argument...?

Oh, but it is! Several times in the Canadian Federal Elections, including 2019, was the political party in power determined not by majority rules (i.e. popular vote), but by voter distribution. Regardless, my point still stands - expecting an entire nation to have 50% support of anything that is not a no-brainer is downright impossible. Nothing would get done. Not only that, there are plenty of issues that, despite public opposition, were for the greater good, long-term. I doubt the Red River Floodway would ever have been built if a 50%+ approval from public was required. Another bad decision made by the public that did get 50%+ approval was the Brexit referendum, which is still reeking havoc for Britain economically.

Above 50% of the Canadian population required to look into it is a ridiculously high standard. For perspective, the highest % for popular vote for a party in a federal election was 56.93% (1917) ... and that was back when things were much more a two-horse race.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/we-charity-contract-morneau-1.5644839 Seriously how can this party be this brazen and stupid?

Yep, one grants rights, the other takes them away.

I was just pointing out the dichotomy between numerical assignment, and how it can be (in some instances) good (that is, a SIN # providing social support etc.) and in other cases bad (in the case of residential school numbering). I was not attempting to discount or justify the Residential School system.

Dude, you cannot be serious. This is blatant conflict of interest. You'd have to be incredibly naive to think stuff like this doesn't happen behind closed doors anyways. What bothers me, is the fact Trudeau failed to recuse himself from the decision, I mean, if you're gonna be crooked, fine, they're all dogs anyways. But to be so brazen about it? That's just insulting the intelligence of the Canadian public. The fact that nobody in the PM's office stood up and was like "didn't your (insert relative here) do work for them? Doesn't this look bad?" shows either gross incompetence, a complete disregard for public well-being (and greed), or both. If anything the fact Margaret has been a speaker for that long should be an argument against assigning them such a large contract, in the political world you should not only maintain actual independence, but also perceived independence as well. I wish I could decline my ballot in the next federal election.

How is this different than the Social Insurance Number system still in use today? To clarify, I just meant that the government still uses numerical means of identifying its' citizens. I am not condoning, or supporting the residential school systems or its' historical atrocities.

Well I don't know about the other people in here but I am definitely offended.

Hold on, isn't this establishing what is - or isn't, acceptable based upon a groups skin color or ethnicity? Wouldn't this be a step backwards?

Sure, but instead of selling concentrated bleach, why not dilute it with water? Why even BOTHER with bleach? Why not just straight up lie and sell water? You weren't offering a cure to begin with and wouldn't tap water be the cheaper option anyways?!?