February 1st, 2019 | C. Wang

By-elections usually fail to get out the vote. Normal general election voters can’t help but to notice that a general election is happening due to media coverage and cultural chatter. People who never bother themselves with politics suddenly feel the need to vote. By-elections are different, because the locality of the race means no massive media coverage. Most people in a riding don’t even know a by-election is happening. Consequently turn out is horrific and the people who participate are typically hardcore partisans. The big question will be... which partisans are most motivated? According to a Mainstreet poll last November, residents were asked about their voting intentions. 35.9% of decided and leaning voters in Burnaby South said that they would vote Liberal in the upcoming by-election, while 29.3% said that they would vote Conservative. 

February 1st, 2019 | R. Rados

They're barely out of high school and we're losing them already. Generation Z, or the post-Millennial generation, is proving to be the most liberal generation yet—according to a new poll from Pew Research. It's not terrible to be socially liberal, but almost two-thirds of these post-Millennials say the government should do more to solve their problems. That's up from Millennials and Generation X, who all grew to love government over the past century. The only light at the end of this tunnel is the possibility that Generation Z could still out-grow their political views. In my early twenties I was a raging, hardcore libertarian. Libertarianism is one of the smarter, pre-adulthood political ideologies, but I eventually outgrew it and came to appreciate a healthy balance. I eventually transitioned from a libertarian into a moderate pro-capitalist who understands there are certain things the government can fix and certain things it can't and shouldn't. 

February 1st, 2019 | T. Carter

The most embarrassing of Democrat prospects for 2020 is this woman. She has managed to escape accusations of racism and white privilege following a stunt in which she tried to prove a kinship to native Americans by claiming native American ancestry. When Donald Trump and conservatives offered to pay for a genetic test, Warren called their bluff and published the results of her own DNA test. Thinking the results proved her native ancestry, it was quickly revealed, even in mainstream media, that nearly half of native-born, white Americans share the same amount of small, insignificant native American ancestry as Warren. Elizabeth Warren's native ancestry was so small and insignificant that she could not claim an official, legal membership with any native band or tribe in America. Some native tribes were upset by Warren's claims of ancestry and pointed to the fact that DNA tests are not accurate and that they cannot prove a definitive, tribal ancestry of any kind, as per the New York Times.

February 1st, 2019 | S.P.

During the now infamous Covington Catholic Boys incident during the March For Life, Ohama tribe elder and fake Vietnam veteran, Nathan Phillips, boldly and righteously stated something to the brilliant effect of, “This is indigenous land. We have never had walls here.” Forget the obvious fake news cycle that spawned out of this ludicrous and misrepresented stand-off, how about the glaring irony of Mr. Phillip's quote? Let us analyze this beauty of a statement for its unnoticed irony. “This is indigenous land. We have never had walls here.” Well, Mr. Phillips, perhaps that is why your ancestors lost their land to white colonists. We could almost leave this just at that, but Poletical has a minimum word requirement, so I shall take you a bit deeper. Even in modern day Canada, our First Nations rely on the very idea of borders and imaginary walls. In fact, without borders, there would be no First Nations left anywhere in North America. The very notion of having a separate “nation” within a nation—where different rights, customs and traditions define the residents—depends on borders and barriers. These borders do not necessarily need to be physical, but it cannot be argued that physical barriers would not improve security and defences around First Nation communities in dire and disorderly situations.