Amazon.com Widgets

Would Canada be better off, socially and mentally, without divisive figures such as Rachel Marsden?

  • Rachel Marsden A Mess

    I believe Canada would be better off in all facets without figures like Rachel Marsden. Marsden has proven herself as a drama queen and she often accuses her male counterparts of wrong acts after having relations with them. She has also been known to stock and harass her exes. I think when a person acts in this way, they do not deserve time in the spotlight.

  • People like Rachel speak out for democracy.

    Canada would not be better off, socially and mentally, without divisive figures such as Rachel Marsden. Canada needs people like Marsden to keep balance in the political arena. Commentators do have value when it comes to politics because they give the general public information to absorb and help them make decisions.

  • No, I don't think Canada would be beter off without figures such as Rachel Marsden.

    I think it's healthy to have public figures that are divisive like Rachel Marsden, people like that often make people think about another side of an issue perhaps the more unpopular side but I think we should always be considering both sides of an issue and what different people are saying.

  • We need competiting opinions

    A country is not better off when there are not competing opinions to have a debate. I think that you need to have competing ideas in order to grow or to at least defend your ideologies against them. Even if most people don't agree, we need people like Rachel Marsden.

  • She's not divisive.

    No, Canada would not be better off, socially and mentally, without divisive figures such as Rachel Marsden, because she is not particularly decisive. She has her opinions, but she is conservative. A person wouldn't be labeled as divisive and out of line just because they are more conservative than normal people.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.