There’s 2 parts to this equation: A) Conservatives are extremely enthused to get rid of Trudeau. B) Poillievre looks like he would actually not be a Trudeau if he gets in.
That’s all it takes right now. That he can speak well is a bonus.
Science is looking at data. Policy is making decisions. Anytime somebody says a policy is science, they lie. It’s merely a choice, and they could have chosen a different policy, none of which impacts the underlying science.
That depends on who is editing the website. If every mention of them as “Indian” or “Savage” is deemed offensive, and only “indiginous” or “first nation” is appropriate, then nothing would remain.
But if for a made up example Macdonald once said “We ought to exterminate all of them”, that still should not be removed from the site. It should be left with a disclaimer that “we disagree”.
The effect of this action is to actually remove all record of Macdonald on anything related to FN peoples, from the website. If the Canadian Government historically did anything immoral, it should not now hide such. At best it should put a disclaimer on the webpage “This content is historical records of previous governments and does not necessarily reflect beliefs of the current government”. To selectively hide the record is a bad move.
You must mean <4%, but your number is way high. Still, you have a point: 4000 out of 100 000 000 is not that many. In a population that size, people die every day. Show me more people are dying than normal, not merely that peole die because people are always dying.
The charts seem to say unvax are doing terribly. But read the comment by F. Tinning below. It proposes the choice of data was very misleading.