Psst - guys - the election is over; you may have seen that; it was in all the papers.
You might find this thread more appropriate for ongoing discussions:
Noted. I looked, but couldn’t find anything more appropriate.
By “the nature of how he was elected”, you mean “by the clear favor of the electorate”?
What’s with this crazy talk???
In a Constitutionally directed manner whereby a free and fair election was held by a nonpartisan agency? Where’s the con?
I hope you mean “stand up for,” and even then… I mean, c’mon, you know that isn’t true, right? Canada is a wonderful country and I love it, but loving your country doesn’t mean you pretend it has some some pretty immoral or hypocritical things, and doesn’t continue to do so.
Yes, thank you, I meant “stand up for its principles”. I was going to blame too many late-night martinis, but from the time of the post, it was probably due to too little early-morning coffee! 
And yes, I stand by that statement. Countries are like people – none of them are perfect, but in many cases, their heart is in the right place, with a culture of empathy and compassion. There are other places in the world that have certain specific advantages like great weather or higher per-capita income, but overall, on balance, there’s no place in the world I’d rather live in than Canada.
Bump.
The unsuccessful candidate in Terrebonne, Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, who lost by one vote, is trying to appeal to the Supreme Court.
After the election, a voter came forward who had her mail -in ballot returned.
Quebec Superior Court ruled that it was an error but not sufficient to overturn the election.
Unsuccessful candidate announced she will appeal to the SCC.
You would think that since the goal is to represent the entire riding she would gracefully concede, wish her opponent all the best and dive into working on her next campaign
Would be hilarious if that happened before the SCC heard her arguments.