[QuickTidal]

Mentalist, on 05 June 2018 - 04:40 PM, said:

Yup, sad state of affairs.

Here's hoping for an NDP minority govt.

*prays*

I think that's all we can hope for at this point. I'd LOVE to believe that the NDP have a better shot...but I was in rural Ontario on the weekend and it's nearly universally blue PC signs...ugh... Why is it the very people who will be most screwed over/neglected by Ford, are the ones who want to vote him in?

[Vengeance]

QuickTidal, on 05 June 2018 - 04:46 PM, said:

Mentalist, on 05 June 2018 - 04:40 PM, said:

Yup, sad state of affairs.

Here's hoping for an NDP minority govt.

*prays*

I think that's all we can hope for at this point. I'd LOVE to believe that the NDP have a better shot...but I was in rural Ontario on the weekend and it's nearly universally blue PC signs...ugh... Why is it the very people who will be most screwed over/neglected by Ford, are the ones who want to vote him in?

Because they feel neglected by everyone and that nobody understands how hard their life is. Thus the feel good about sticking it to other people rather then saying what people do to make my life better instead they will vote for someone who says that he will stick it to insert equivalent of liberals here. Even though doing so will come back to sting them much more so then liberals.

Also a person is smart, People are dumb... - Agent K

[QuickTidal]

Vengeance, on 05 June 2018 - 05:19 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 05 June 2018 - 04:46 PM, said:

Mentalist, on 05 June 2018 - 04:40 PM, said:

Yup, sad state of affairs.

Here's hoping for an NDP minority govt.

*prays*

I think that's all we can hope for at this point. I'd LOVE to believe that the NDP have a better shot...but I was in rural Ontario on the weekend and it's nearly universally blue PC signs...ugh... Why is it the very people who will be most screwed over/neglected by Ford, are the ones who want to vote him in?

Because they feel neglected by everyone and that nobody understands how hard their life is. Thus the feel good about sticking it to other people rather then saying what people do to make my life better instead they will vote for someone who says that he will stick it to insert equivalent of liberals here. Even though doing so will come back to sting them much more so then liberals.

Also a person is smart, People are dumb... - Agent K

Yeah, sad truth.

[Mentalist]

You'd think it's obvious that the party with the most money to spend on ads (most of which are only there to belittle the competition) are gonna be the most removed from the "common man" (since, y'know, THE MONEY), but apparently not.

[QuickTidal]

Mentalist, on 05 June 2018 - 06:17 PM, said:

You'd think it's obvious that the party with the most money to spend on ads (most of which are only there to belittle the competition) are gonna be the most removed from the "common man" (since, y'know, THE MONEY), but apparently not.

The Liberal/Wynne Hate Level is so high it's choking everyone below it into lunacy.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 05 June 2018 - 06:21 PM

[worry]

I don't know much about Canadian politics in particular, but a fairly universal rule of thumb is: the lesser of two evils will do less evil, and the greater of two evils will do more evil, relatively speaking.

[Gintokian]

Luv2B_Sassy, on 05 June 2018 - 07:24 PM, said:

I don't know much about Canadian politics in particular, but a fairly universal rule of thumb is: the lesser of two evils will do less evil, and the greater of two evils will do more evil, relatively speaking.

What if there are 3 evils? And they're all equally evil?

[worry]

Wow, that's a lot of evil to spring up in one place! Like Hellmouth levels. In that case, I'd probably advise existential dread.

Still, more immediately, I guess you vote for whoever you think can be most easily or most often pressured to do the right thing.

[Gintokian]

Ah yes, existential dread it is, I'm looking forward to it.

Not sure if the meaning of "doing the right thing" is understood in politics. "Doing the right thing for me" definitely is.

[Nevyn]

Luv2B_Sassy, on 05 June 2018 - 07:50 PM, said:

Wow, that's a lot of evil to spring up in one place! Like Hellmouth levels. In that case, I'd probably advise existential dread.

Still, more immediately, I guess you vote for whoever you think can be most easily or most often pressured to do the right thing.

The choice in this election is between:

• A left wing party with little governing experience who have promised over 10 billion in spending increases, funded through deficits and tax increases only on wealthy, and who had a major math error in the costing of their platform
• A middling party that have been in power over a decade, who are now universally reviled and running on a platform almost as left wing as the left wing party, also through deficit spending. They have also already conceded they can't win and begged voters to return individual MPs to block the other two parties.
• And a right wing party which ousted its leader scarce months ago in a #metoo scandal, and was taken over by a populist who has never served in provincial government, shows ignorance of how any of it works, and despite being the right wing guy, has promised as much new "spending" as the NDP, but on every type of tax cut imaginable, including gas taxes. He has not costed his promises at all, and the only thing he has even hinted at to pay for all this are a few billion in "efficiencies" he has promised to find without elaborating.

Lesser evil is a fine theoretical approach that most would defer to in most elections. But here, determining that is non trivial. Most non partisans and a host of major media have been hand wringing over the fact that they want none of the leaders to be premier, none of the parties to have power, and don't actually want any of the platforms to be enacted as given.

[Gintokian]

Nevyn, on 05 June 2018 - 08:08 PM, said:

Luv2B_Sassy, on 05 June 2018 - 07:50 PM, said:

Wow, that's a lot of evil to spring up in one place! Like Hellmouth levels. In that case, I'd probably advise existential dread.

Still, more immediately, I guess you vote for whoever you think can be most easily or most often pressured to do the right thing.

The choice in this election is between:

• A left wing party with little governing experience who have promised over 10 billion in spending increases, funded through deficits and tax increases only on wealthy, and who had a major math error in the costing of their platform
• A middling party that have been in power over a decade, who are now universally reviled and running on a platform almost as left wing as the left wing party, also through deficit spending. They have also already conceded they can't win and begged voters to return individual MPs to block the other two parties.
• And a right wing party which ousted its leader scarce months ago in a #metoo scandal, and was taken over by a populist who has never served in provincial government, shows ignorance of how any of it works, and despite being the right wing guy, has promised as much new "spending" as the NDP, but on every type of tax cut imaginable, including gas taxes. He has not costed his promises at all, and the only thing he has even hinted at to pay for all this are a few billion in "efficiencies" he has promised to find without elaborating.

Lesser evil is a fine theoretical approach that most would defer to in most elections. But here, determining that is non trivial. Most non partisans and a host of major media have been hand wringing over the fact that they want none of the leaders to be premier, none of the parties to have power, and don't actually want any of the platforms to be enacted as given.

Hence our collective existential dread.

[worry]

It's non-trivial in all elections.

[amphibian]

EmperorMagus, on 05 June 2018 - 02:17 PM, said:

amphibian, on 05 June 2018 - 12:41 PM, said:

I can't trust you to not like Jordan Peterson. Why are you surprised the Ford brand of populism has oomph? You're actually not that far from liking Ford if Peterson is your guru.

I don't know where the hell you get the idea from that Peterson is my 'guru'. Personally, I think the piece of shit should be fired from his job, his books should be destroyed, and his fans should be made to go to a class explaining all the ways the man is wrong about almost everything. But you do you. I'm sure baseless snarky comments make you all giggly inside.

Now, I don't deny what Mentalist or Nevyn said is true, but I don't think that's an acceptable defence for voting Ford. At the end of day, regardless of how busy a person is, everybody has the time to spend fifteen minutes listening or reading the CBC. An organization with the institutional goal of presenting accurate info to Canadians. Some people decide that it's worth it do so, others don't think so.

Staying ignorant is, flat out, a decision that people make rather than just the flow of life. If people had time for politics during the great depression, they have time for it now. Those who pretend they don't are willfully lazy.

I confused you with Gothos. My full apologies and I was wrong to say that about to you.

Gothos being a Peterson supporter is what irked me.

[LinearPhilosopher]

Mentalist, on 05 June 2018 - 04:01 PM, said:

No one needs to justify their vote.

However it'd be nice if people realized that they should be making rational, informed decisions when voting. In a perfect world. Because (on paper), that's the basic premise of how democracy is supposed to provide society with the most practical, utilitarian decision-makers that best address the society's concerns.

But we've been gradually losing this sense of... civic responsibility? (For lack of better word), where all (or most) citizens have the sense of "we're all in this together" , and we're moving towards the sports fans-like tribalism in politics where it's "our guys" against "their guys"

And I'm not sure how you get back to that. I mean, it should be education, but (from personal experience), the "civics" mandatory half-course in high school was a joke.

I'll weigh in a little bit here and also on Emps point.

Civic responsibility has been on the wane for years if not decades. Its not a new phenomena. It's disillusionment with the current system. A system where regardless of voting red or blue nothing much changes in your day to day life. I am a busy guy. I do not have time to be a polotical junky or start studying the shit out of politcs. My rationale for voting was
Wynne is incompetent:see Energy contracts we are locked into for how many years,
Ford: When i cared to follow politics, Ford was Trump lite, and him being in power was to everyone detriment. I can't see his brother being all that different.

I quite frankly don't have the time to follow i have many more priorities in my life and given how little politics impact my life and how little as an individual i can influence it, its time not well spent. And i'd like to think I am a very well educated individual, with an open mind as well as being a professional. So it comes as little surprise that so many would like to vote for ford. Ford appeals to the emotion and pathos trumps logos almost always.

And in regards to emps point, the CBC has some very real biases and spins in its news. Outwardly it may appears unbiased but its not that way in reality. Most conservatives hate CBC as well as the fact that knowing people who've worked there, the writers were always worrying about how to spin stories in order to get approved. While CBC is not as overt and does try an present alternate views, its not always considered the same.

Finally, JT was my last real hope for democracy with his promise of abolishing FPTP. That in hindisght was a blatant lie as no politician is going to go for electoral reforms if it makes it harder to get a job. Politicians are like anyone else. they have interests and agenda whether its putting a vision into place or they simply like the job for itself. I can easily see our democracy turning into the binary system the US have where both parties only really represent maybe 20-30% of the total population and everyone else votes out of a lack of alternatives in a few decades.

This post has been edited by LinearPhilosopher: 06 June 2018 - 01:21 AM

[Mentalist]

Good points, LP, and I largely agree.

My general point was that while the waning of civic responsibility is certainly an ongoing process, I do feel that the advent of social media and the associated polarization of political discourse accelerated the process and made the dissilusionment even more pronounced.

(I also agree that FPTP is not an effective system). And I honestly hope we can avoid a 2 party system, since that can easily end up being a no-win situation for the country.

[Nevyn]

To give an idea just how bad the options have gotten, the Globe and Mail editorial board today endorsed "no one".

They said people should decided by local race candidates specifically and let the chips fall where they may. Not super useful this late because an undecided voter the day before or of an election isn't going to have much time to get to know local candidates.

But this may be unprecedented.

the editorial

Quote

Mr. Ford is unfit to be premier. No one should be fooled by his performance in the election campaign – a tightly scripted production built around a series of populist slogans recited off a teleprompter, followed by curt Q&As with reporters kept at a safe distance.

We all know this populist chancer too well. Unleashed by the constraints of the campaign, Mr. Ford will return to the form we remember from Toronto’s experience.

Quote

The NDP is a problem of another kind. Ms. Horwath has campaigned on a platform that has the value of being true to her party’s beliefs. It is filled with new spending on social programs, paid for by deficit spending combined with higher taxes on the wealthy and a higher corporate-tax rate.

It’s the real NDP deal, but that is precisely the issue: Ms. Horwath has made it clear she will not sway from her party’s ideology.

This is not the moment for Ontario to embrace immoderation of that kind. The United States under Donald Trump is disrupting traditional trade assumptions. The stress on businesses in Canada’s largest province is immense. Without confidence of economic stewardship, investment will fall. The last thing Ontario needs now is an ideologically rigid left-wing government that is unable to countenance concessions from unions, or cutbacks in government spending.

[Gintokian]

Oh boy, well speaking as an undecided voter, guess I have 7 hours to figure out which of my local candidates are the best, Kevin Flynn or Stephen Crawford.
Although they piss me off as well, both are saying how they want to save a certain golf course in Oakville because it may be turned into housing. So they want to spend a bunch of money trying to save it but it is insanely expensive to golf there so the majority of people won't get anything out of it. Our tax money's going to go to saving the super rich's golf course, which I don't give a shit about.

[QuickTidal]

Gintokian, on 07 June 2018 - 02:52 PM, said:

Oh boy, well speaking as an undecided voter, guess I have 7 hours to figure out which of my local candidates are the best, Kevin Flynn or Stephen Crawford.
Although they piss me off as well, both are saying how they want to save a certain golf course in Oakville because it may be turned into housing. So they want to spend a bunch of money trying to save it but it is insanely expensive to golf there so the majority of people won't get anything out of it. Our tax money's going to go to saving the super rich's golf course, which I don't give a shit about.

Glen Abbey? I used to live on the other side of the ravine from it (grew up in Oakville) and even worked the Open one year at a concession stand (My first actual "job"), but yeah, it's WAY too expensive and not exactly worth saving.

Just look at the rest of their platform and make the best decision you can.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 07 June 2018 - 02:59 PM

[Nevyn]

Gintokian, on 07 June 2018 - 02:52 PM, said:

Oh boy, well speaking as an undecided voter, guess I have 7 hours to figure out which of my local candidates are the best, Kevin Flynn or Stephen Crawford.
Although they piss me off as well, both are saying how they want to save a certain golf course in Oakville because it may be turned into housing. So they want to spend a bunch of money trying to save it but it is insanely expensive to golf there so the majority of people won't get anything out of it. Our tax money's going to go to saving the super rich's golf course, which I don't give a shit about.

Personally I'd start by looking at riding polling, then based on that pick the candidate who would block the PCs.

For Oakville it seems to be Flynn, which is convenient because it also could not contribute to an NDP majority.


As for the issue of saving Glen Abbey, as a frequent Canadian Open host (and likely other pro tourneys), and an iconic Canadian course, your riding would get some benefit from it even if you were not golfing it. First, economic impact when fans come to watch the tourneys. Second, the people who CAN afford to play there (either wealthy or middle class playing a bucket list round) also potentially bringing spending into the community.

Now, whether that is worth saving the course when the land is incredibly valuable to develop, at a time where the Greenbelt plus GTA nimbyism is constraining housing supply so there are limited places to grow is certainly up for debate. Just pointing out that you don't have to golf there to have a green space that attracts affluent visitors be a net benefit.

This post has been edited by Nevyn: 07 June 2018 - 03:08 PM

[Gintokian]

QuickTidal, on 07 June 2018 - 02:59 PM, said:

Glen Abbey? I used to live on the other side of the ravine from it (grew up in Oakville) and even worked the Open one year at a concession stand (My first actual "job"), but yeah, it's WAY too expensive and not exactly worth saving.

Just look at the rest of their platform and make the best decision you can.

Oh cool! I'm just off 8th line so not too far away.

Their platforms are fairly similar really, although apparently Stephen Crawford has two sets of twin girls as well as twin cats, doesn't impact the election but that's just bizarre.

Nevyn, on 07 June 2018 - 03:04 PM, said:

As for the issue of saving Glen Abbey, as a frequent Canadian Open host (and likely other pro tourneys), and an iconic Canadian course, your riding would get some benefit from it even if you were not golfing it. First, economic impact when fans come to watch the tourneys. Second, the people who CAN afford to play there (either wealthy or middle class playing a bucket list round) also potentially bringing spending into the community.

Now, whether that is worth saving the course when the land is incredibly valuable to develop, at a time where the Greenbelt plus GTA nimbyism is constraining housing supply so there are limited places to grow is certainly up for debate. Just pointing out that you don't have to golf there to have a green space that attracts affluent visitors be a net benefit.

That is true, although Oakville has a lot of affluence without the visitors but I get what you mean.