Thursday, May 31, 2018
this actually isn't the first time this has happened, either.
the reality is that this kind of paranoia is baked into the structure of the american right. it's not just trump. and, the nixon=trump comparison is apt, but it's not just that, either.
check the annals of history: due to his opposition to star wars, and general reluctance to partition the world into two parts, reagan actually honestly believed that the elder trudeau was a communist spy. like, that he was working for the kremlin. taking orders. a useful idiot. maybe he could have helped them write a constitution? but, it's not a joke, it's a historical fact. and, there's good evidence that it's the actual reason he stepped down.
it's also widely believed in canada that jean chretien was pushed out under heavy republican pressure for his refusal to go into iraq.
then, there was the time that lyndon johnson beat up lester pearson (who had years earlier won a nobel peace prize) for criticizing the american role in vietnam.
nobody remembers that igor guy anymore.
so republicans (and some democrats.) have had a hard time dealing with canadian liberals, and have often tended to view them as suspicious, as foreign agents, as communist sympathizers. trump is cartoonish, but he's not an isolated example.
the reality is that this kind of paranoia is baked into the structure of the american right. it's not just trump. and, the nixon=trump comparison is apt, but it's not just that, either.
check the annals of history: due to his opposition to star wars, and general reluctance to partition the world into two parts, reagan actually honestly believed that the elder trudeau was a communist spy. like, that he was working for the kremlin. taking orders. a useful idiot. maybe he could have helped them write a constitution? but, it's not a joke, it's a historical fact. and, there's good evidence that it's the actual reason he stepped down.
it's also widely believed in canada that jean chretien was pushed out under heavy republican pressure for his refusal to go into iraq.
then, there was the time that lyndon johnson beat up lester pearson (who had years earlier won a nobel peace prize) for criticizing the american role in vietnam.
nobody remembers that igor guy anymore.
so republicans (and some democrats.) have had a hard time dealing with canadian liberals, and have often tended to view them as suspicious, as foreign agents, as communist sympathizers. trump is cartoonish, but he's not an isolated example.
is canada a national security threat to the united states?
i can think of one thing, and you need to use this funny corporate logic about lost profits again, and that comes down to the oil exports.
i've made many arguments over many years that the americans consider canada's oil resources to be a strategic asset that belongs to them, and that they view any effort to export it as a threat. further, they consider the reserve to be of longterm strategic importance. that is, they wish to save our oil for later.
from the perspective of america's leadership, all of the pipelines and all of the geography and all of the export destinations are to be interpreted strictly through a national security filter around access to a strategic resource, rather than through an environmental filter or even through a profit motive. and, you know america is serious about something when it's more important than profits for shareholders.
if you think i'm crazy, mentally remove yourself from your body and float over north america for a moment. look out at the chaos and dominance projected by american hard power for the purpose of controlling the flow of oil. look at the bloodshed. look at the violence. look at the destruction of property. and, ask yourself: would america merely shrug as canada twins pipelines to export a resource it considers it's own to it's dominant competitor, in china?
and, who are these political leaders in canada facilitating this?
it's funny corporate logic. but, it's real, if you're in the pentagon, or the state department - or the white house.
i can think of one thing, and you need to use this funny corporate logic about lost profits again, and that comes down to the oil exports.
i've made many arguments over many years that the americans consider canada's oil resources to be a strategic asset that belongs to them, and that they view any effort to export it as a threat. further, they consider the reserve to be of longterm strategic importance. that is, they wish to save our oil for later.
from the perspective of america's leadership, all of the pipelines and all of the geography and all of the export destinations are to be interpreted strictly through a national security filter around access to a strategic resource, rather than through an environmental filter or even through a profit motive. and, you know america is serious about something when it's more important than profits for shareholders.
if you think i'm crazy, mentally remove yourself from your body and float over north america for a moment. look out at the chaos and dominance projected by american hard power for the purpose of controlling the flow of oil. look at the bloodshed. look at the violence. look at the destruction of property. and, ask yourself: would america merely shrug as canada twins pipelines to export a resource it considers it's own to it's dominant competitor, in china?
and, who are these political leaders in canada facilitating this?
it's funny corporate logic. but, it's real, if you're in the pentagon, or the state department - or the white house.
should nafta be renegotiated every five years?
well, it makes sense to me to suggest it should be re-evaluated on some regular basis of time, yes - although i don't know how important a five year interval is, or how appropriate the term "renegotiate" is.
one of the weird things about this process is how much pomp it's requiring, and we may be the ones going the furthest overboard. i understand why the government of canada is a little reluctant to have it's ministers of trade & foreign policy tied up in permanent trade negotiations with it's closest ally. the government is handling this at it's highest level because it sees it as of the utmost importance. but, maybe periodic reviews could be handled by the ambassador in the future, or even delegated to a separate department. there are going to be corruption & capture issues present, but we know the ministers are relying very heavily on their aides, anyways; enough that the necessity of this layer of formality is maybe up for some question.
that said, the american side is really not projecting the kind of trust required to institutionalize something that probably ought to be, at this point. trump may be technically right to make the request, but trudeau's reaction is not irrational, and the nature of it is, in large part, trump's actual own fault. i know trump likes to try and push his "partners" around. but, as a sovereign country, we would like to trust our allies and other partners we make agreements with - and i think that's reasonable.
if some resolution to the current reciprocity dispute presents itself soon, there will no doubt be further discussions again at some point in the future, and i would actually support periodic review being implemented at that time on something like a fifteen or twenty year period - but certainly not a less than eight year period, or one that appears to be designed for the american election cycle.
well, it makes sense to me to suggest it should be re-evaluated on some regular basis of time, yes - although i don't know how important a five year interval is, or how appropriate the term "renegotiate" is.
one of the weird things about this process is how much pomp it's requiring, and we may be the ones going the furthest overboard. i understand why the government of canada is a little reluctant to have it's ministers of trade & foreign policy tied up in permanent trade negotiations with it's closest ally. the government is handling this at it's highest level because it sees it as of the utmost importance. but, maybe periodic reviews could be handled by the ambassador in the future, or even delegated to a separate department. there are going to be corruption & capture issues present, but we know the ministers are relying very heavily on their aides, anyways; enough that the necessity of this layer of formality is maybe up for some question.
that said, the american side is really not projecting the kind of trust required to institutionalize something that probably ought to be, at this point. trump may be technically right to make the request, but trudeau's reaction is not irrational, and the nature of it is, in large part, trump's actual own fault. i know trump likes to try and push his "partners" around. but, as a sovereign country, we would like to trust our allies and other partners we make agreements with - and i think that's reasonable.
if some resolution to the current reciprocity dispute presents itself soon, there will no doubt be further discussions again at some point in the future, and i would actually support periodic review being implemented at that time on something like a fifteen or twenty year period - but certainly not a less than eight year period, or one that appears to be designed for the american election cycle.
Nowhere else in Ontario are Kathleen Wynne's Liberals polling
worse than in southwestern Ontario. That makes the region a microcosm of
the entire election — with the PCs dominant in the rural parts, the New
Democrats well-positioned to pick up urban Liberal seats and the
overall winner to be decided between the two.
this is the exact wrong analysis.
the fact that the liberals are polling worse in southwestern ontario than they are anywhere else makes the projections there inapplicable to places that they are polling better. when you see a situation where a party is doing worse in a specific area than they are anywhere else, you don't take that as the rule and extrapolate it, you eliminate it as an outlier. grenier is merely exposing his own biases, but that is the status quo in this election: the entire media establishment decided the liberals were hopeless before the writ even dropped.
if the liberals are underperforming their average in the southwest then that necessarily implies that they're overperforming it elsewhere, doesn't it eric? yeah. that's right. it does, doesn't it?
if you look at the graph in the article, it seems to me like a lot of liberals are voting strategically to defeat the pcs in areas that are both historically strong pc ridings and ridings where liberals are currently being seen as distant and toronto-centric. i've talked to some people in windsor, and while the logic is often blurry, the basic idea is that they think the liberal party doesn't care about the region and the ndp will spend more money here. the people here seem to feel abandoned by capital flight, are attaching that to liberal policies, are concluding that liberals only care about toronto, are feeling personally distraught by this and are concluding, for whatever specious reason, that the ndp have a deeper personal investment in ensuring the region thrives. unfortunately, it may be a self-fulfilling prophecy, as the liberals really do need to focus entirely on toronto, because it's the only place they can win.
if the result of a 20% swing from the liberals to the ndp in southern ontario is that a handful of seats swing from red to orange, that's going to skew the polls pretty hard - but not make a really big difference at queen's park.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-southwestern-ontario-1.4684641
this is the exact wrong analysis.
the fact that the liberals are polling worse in southwestern ontario than they are anywhere else makes the projections there inapplicable to places that they are polling better. when you see a situation where a party is doing worse in a specific area than they are anywhere else, you don't take that as the rule and extrapolate it, you eliminate it as an outlier. grenier is merely exposing his own biases, but that is the status quo in this election: the entire media establishment decided the liberals were hopeless before the writ even dropped.
if the liberals are underperforming their average in the southwest then that necessarily implies that they're overperforming it elsewhere, doesn't it eric? yeah. that's right. it does, doesn't it?
if you look at the graph in the article, it seems to me like a lot of liberals are voting strategically to defeat the pcs in areas that are both historically strong pc ridings and ridings where liberals are currently being seen as distant and toronto-centric. i've talked to some people in windsor, and while the logic is often blurry, the basic idea is that they think the liberal party doesn't care about the region and the ndp will spend more money here. the people here seem to feel abandoned by capital flight, are attaching that to liberal policies, are concluding that liberals only care about toronto, are feeling personally distraught by this and are concluding, for whatever specious reason, that the ndp have a deeper personal investment in ensuring the region thrives. unfortunately, it may be a self-fulfilling prophecy, as the liberals really do need to focus entirely on toronto, because it's the only place they can win.
if the result of a 20% swing from the liberals to the ndp in southern ontario is that a handful of seats swing from red to orange, that's going to skew the polls pretty hard - but not make a really big difference at queen's park.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-southwestern-ontario-1.4684641
i was initially flabbergasted that wynne thought that she might gain any insight into the existing situation by studying the last american election, but as i'm going through my notes on the rebuild, i'm realizing that the parallel is actually rather stark, you just need to be a little abstract to get it.
the 2018 ontario election may have a similar trajectory to what the 2016 american election would have been like had bernie sanders run. i'm seeing a number of parallels come up, including sanders starting to swing clinton's core supporters near the end.
i think bernie peaked too early, though.
the 2018 ontario election may have a similar trajectory to what the 2016 american election would have been like had bernie sanders run. i'm seeing a number of parallels come up, including sanders starting to swing clinton's core supporters near the end.
i think bernie peaked too early, though.
corporate tax rates have never been demonstrated to have any effect on job creation or the broader economy at all, whatsoever. that's some class a flunkie harpernomics, is what that is.
kathleen wynne knows better than this. why is she doing this to herself?
this is one of those political questions that an empirical analyses tends to write off as irrelevant. horwath's plan to boost the tax rate by a single measly percent is likely to help in servicing the debt and have little other consequence, but do you want to help service the debt? why? i don't mind paying out interest on bonds to seniors. if you're going to cut that, you need to shift money into social services, and she's doing it. but, this is all just juggling, really, to try to appeal to a somewhat shallow understanding of things. this is just pointless emotional masturbation, at the end of the day: maybe it makes somebody feel good to stick it to the banks by voting for a 1% tax increase, or it makes somebody feel good to stand up for "free enterprise" by rejecting that.
but, there will not be any measurable consequence, one way or the other. it's just an empty endorphin rush.
i must have a personal preference? no. i'm a robot. if there's no consequence, it doesn't matter. but, some of the lateral movements might matter - you might prefer things juggled a specific way.
i have no interest in the topic.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/05/29/wynne-pledges-to-pump-another-900-million-into-helping-companies-expand-and-create-jobs-over-the-next-decade.html
kathleen wynne knows better than this. why is she doing this to herself?
this is one of those political questions that an empirical analyses tends to write off as irrelevant. horwath's plan to boost the tax rate by a single measly percent is likely to help in servicing the debt and have little other consequence, but do you want to help service the debt? why? i don't mind paying out interest on bonds to seniors. if you're going to cut that, you need to shift money into social services, and she's doing it. but, this is all just juggling, really, to try to appeal to a somewhat shallow understanding of things. this is just pointless emotional masturbation, at the end of the day: maybe it makes somebody feel good to stick it to the banks by voting for a 1% tax increase, or it makes somebody feel good to stand up for "free enterprise" by rejecting that.
but, there will not be any measurable consequence, one way or the other. it's just an empty endorphin rush.
i must have a personal preference? no. i'm a robot. if there's no consequence, it doesn't matter. but, some of the lateral movements might matter - you might prefer things juggled a specific way.
i have no interest in the topic.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/05/29/wynne-pledges-to-pump-another-900-million-into-helping-companies-expand-and-create-jobs-over-the-next-decade.html
i actually liked the instant run-off voting.
i know. it's crazy. i voted liberal...and...get this....i did so because i liked their ideas.
that's right. i knew that the liberals support irvs, or stvs, and i knew the ndp supported pr. and, i voted for the liberals! because i supported the irv!
well, it wasn't a single issue thing, but you get the point.
then, to my confusion, when the liberals win, all anybody is talking about is the ndp's ideas. bizarre, that. i thought the ndp lost, and the liberals won?
i think, in the end, the liberals realized that the stv would help the ndp at the expense of the conservatives and decided that was a bad idea.
too bad.
i know. it's crazy. i voted liberal...and...get this....i did so because i liked their ideas.
that's right. i knew that the liberals support irvs, or stvs, and i knew the ndp supported pr. and, i voted for the liberals! because i supported the irv!
well, it wasn't a single issue thing, but you get the point.
then, to my confusion, when the liberals win, all anybody is talking about is the ndp's ideas. bizarre, that. i thought the ndp lost, and the liberals won?
i think, in the end, the liberals realized that the stv would help the ndp at the expense of the conservatives and decided that was a bad idea.
too bad.
i don't think that giving parties the right to appoint people to the legislature is in any remote way described using the word "democracy".
that's a system of oligarchy that removes any concept of accountability.
the funny thing about it is that the ndp supports abolishing the senate. but, what they really want to do is abolish the house and replace it with the senate, isn't it? the way that a system like this works itself out is that you get appointed in return for financial contributions of some sort. it's a way to put these seats up for sale.
i'd like to see a move towards more direct democracy, not towards a more technocratic concept of government. we need more accountability, not less of it; we need more power for people, and less power for so-called representatives.
this is the third try at this. canadians are clear that they don't like the status quo. but, hopefully the ndp is on the cusp of starting to understand that pr isn't the right path towards substantive democratic reform.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-bc-unveils-its-proposed-question-for-voters-in-electoral-reform/
that's a system of oligarchy that removes any concept of accountability.
the funny thing about it is that the ndp supports abolishing the senate. but, what they really want to do is abolish the house and replace it with the senate, isn't it? the way that a system like this works itself out is that you get appointed in return for financial contributions of some sort. it's a way to put these seats up for sale.
i'd like to see a move towards more direct democracy, not towards a more technocratic concept of government. we need more accountability, not less of it; we need more power for people, and less power for so-called representatives.
this is the third try at this. canadians are clear that they don't like the status quo. but, hopefully the ndp is on the cusp of starting to understand that pr isn't the right path towards substantive democratic reform.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-bc-unveils-its-proposed-question-for-voters-in-electoral-reform/
this is a good start; let's hope that, whatever happens after the election, the idea gets picked up on a little further.
if they can get highrises composting first, that's a natural first step to a green bin. this government is incrementalist; that's a constant.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/building-code-changes-ban-on-landfill-organics-aimed-at-condos-apartments-1.4661100
if they can get highrises composting first, that's a natural first step to a green bin. this government is incrementalist; that's a constant.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/building-code-changes-ban-on-landfill-organics-aimed-at-condos-apartments-1.4661100
but, it really is laughable, the whole line of thought - the idea that the conservatives have a more efficient vote, or that they're going to make the government more efficient, against all empirical historical evidence to the contrary.
if i was doug ford, i'd be more concerned about the efficiency of my liver.
if i was doug ford, i'd be more concerned about the efficiency of my liver.
Wednesday, May 30, 2018
do the tories have better "vote efficiency"?
no. not even close. they have no chance in most urban ridings, and the riding maps people are using seem to be stuck in the 50s - as ford's campaign, itself, is.
these are people that think the 905 is 'rural'; it hasn't been anything of the sort for decades. suburban, perhaps. but not rural. and, the cities in the region are actually growing very quickly. the liberals swept the 905 last time around for the exact reason that it's urban.
what the conservatives do have is an advantage in geography, as they do do better in rural areas, and that does give them more safe seats. but, if you take a look at that closely, inefficient is a better term to use than efficient. they're going to get 70% in some of these ridings, then get 12% in half of toronto. they need huge swings to win a mere handful of seats; whether they run at 25 or 35 is likely only a small difference in seats exchanged.
the liberals have the opposite problem - they're uncompetitive outside toronto - but they have what could be described as efficiency, and they're the party that this idea of vote efficiency should be applied towards. pulling them down 15% might seem catastrophic, but if it's all in ridings they'll never win anyways, it doesn't matter.
so, then, are the ndp inefficient? the reality is that they win a lot of close races. the disadvantage they've had is that they don't have a similar-sized base, so they need to rely on efficiency to win. i suspect this is in the process of changing.
the fact is that the exact same people made the exact same error in 2015, and it's probably rooted in a geography error rather than a mathematics one - if it isn't the internalization of campaign propaganda. go take a drive through the 905 and tell me it's "rural" in 2018.
people are living in london and working in toronto, nowadays.
no. not even close. they have no chance in most urban ridings, and the riding maps people are using seem to be stuck in the 50s - as ford's campaign, itself, is.
these are people that think the 905 is 'rural'; it hasn't been anything of the sort for decades. suburban, perhaps. but not rural. and, the cities in the region are actually growing very quickly. the liberals swept the 905 last time around for the exact reason that it's urban.
what the conservatives do have is an advantage in geography, as they do do better in rural areas, and that does give them more safe seats. but, if you take a look at that closely, inefficient is a better term to use than efficient. they're going to get 70% in some of these ridings, then get 12% in half of toronto. they need huge swings to win a mere handful of seats; whether they run at 25 or 35 is likely only a small difference in seats exchanged.
the liberals have the opposite problem - they're uncompetitive outside toronto - but they have what could be described as efficiency, and they're the party that this idea of vote efficiency should be applied towards. pulling them down 15% might seem catastrophic, but if it's all in ridings they'll never win anyways, it doesn't matter.
so, then, are the ndp inefficient? the reality is that they win a lot of close races. the disadvantage they've had is that they don't have a similar-sized base, so they need to rely on efficiency to win. i suspect this is in the process of changing.
the fact is that the exact same people made the exact same error in 2015, and it's probably rooted in a geography error rather than a mathematics one - if it isn't the internalization of campaign propaganda. go take a drive through the 905 and tell me it's "rural" in 2018.
people are living in london and working in toronto, nowadays.
one of the polls released yesterday is more interesting than the others.
this is an actual poll:
https://innovativeresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/OntarioThisMonth_WhatDoThePhonesSay.pdf
...and what does it say?
undecideds are at 13%.
now, let's keep in mind that this is a low ball and that the margin of error puts the range for the pcs up to 31%. but, nobody is going to vote for doug ford at the last minute. so, some recent evidence is forcing me to concede a point i wasn't previously - the pcs may actually be finally starting to actually lose ground. or, to put it another way, they may be having difficulty merely holding the support from the last election, when they got 31%.
ford may be looking at leading the pcs to a decrease in popular support. well, he talks to people like they're fucking idiots...
that would indicate that essentially all of the movement that's happening right now is from the liberals to the ndp, and then you need to get worried, because most of the ridings in this province are battles between the liberals and the conservatives.
the liberals weren't going to win very many seats outside of toronto, anyways, so it doesn't matter what they're running at in most of the province. the key indicator is not the 905 but the 416.
and...
see, this is more believable than the mainstreet data, but you have to keep in mind that the margins of error start getting very high when you're dealing with small sample sizes (like 101). and, it's hard to know exactly what to make of this. the liberals are clearly down substantively, but it would seem as though the conservatives are as well. based on this poll, at least, it would seem as though the concern is less about the liberals splitting the vote with the ndp and more about the liberals splitting the vote with the conservatives: this would indicate that it's the conservatives that are losing the most ground in toronto, at the expense of the ndp (which is also picking up support from the liberals). i'm left to conclude that the liberals and ndp have a week to wage the battle of toronto - and that ford doesn't matter much.
if the liberals are going to hold toronto, they're going to need to rely on their ground game, which means they need good brand recognition.
liberals seem to prefer horwath over wynne, at this point - and the media has been beating the snot out of her for forever, so it's not surprising. but, they still call themselves liberals, when asked. and, those numbers should be skewed higher in toronto.
based solely on this poll - an actual poll, but one that doesn't fit the media narrative - i would not expect the tories to win any more seats than they already have, and for the liberals to hang on relatively well around toronto.
if the ndp & liberals split the undecided vote you end up with something like:
ndp: ~50 (35%)
tories: ~30 (27%)
liberals: ~30 (23%)
...and the ndp are going to be working on razor thin pluralities that could easily see the seat totals with the liberals flipped, even if the vote totals end as suggested. there will be more than 20 liberal-ndp fights that swing on a few points.
(just based on this one poll...)
this is an actual poll:
https://innovativeresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/OntarioThisMonth_WhatDoThePhonesSay.pdf
...and what does it say?
now, let's keep in mind that this is a low ball and that the margin of error puts the range for the pcs up to 31%. but, nobody is going to vote for doug ford at the last minute. so, some recent evidence is forcing me to concede a point i wasn't previously - the pcs may actually be finally starting to actually lose ground. or, to put it another way, they may be having difficulty merely holding the support from the last election, when they got 31%.
ford may be looking at leading the pcs to a decrease in popular support. well, he talks to people like they're fucking idiots...
that would indicate that essentially all of the movement that's happening right now is from the liberals to the ndp, and then you need to get worried, because most of the ridings in this province are battles between the liberals and the conservatives.
the liberals weren't going to win very many seats outside of toronto, anyways, so it doesn't matter what they're running at in most of the province. the key indicator is not the 905 but the 416.
and...
if the liberals are going to hold toronto, they're going to need to rely on their ground game, which means they need good brand recognition.
based solely on this poll - an actual poll, but one that doesn't fit the media narrative - i would not expect the tories to win any more seats than they already have, and for the liberals to hang on relatively well around toronto.
if the ndp & liberals split the undecided vote you end up with something like:
ndp: ~50 (35%)
tories: ~30 (27%)
liberals: ~30 (23%)
...and the ndp are going to be working on razor thin pluralities that could easily see the seat totals with the liberals flipped, even if the vote totals end as suggested. there will be more than 20 liberal-ndp fights that swing on a few points.
(just based on this one poll...)
you don't really think you know somebody all that well after you talk to them in a smoking section at a bar, do you?
i'm trying to project myself as who i feel i am. you might get a wrong first impression, and i can't fix that. but, i can reinforce that your first impression is wrong and that i'm sure i'm making the right choice.
i hope i'm at least projecting that i'm comfortable with myself, i'm at ease and i'm having a good time. you might want to think about whether or not that would be true if i was presenting myself differently, before you start drawing conclusions from faulty first impressions.
you might find my "male side" is actually a lot less friendly, very nervous and not a lot of fun at all, actually. at least, that's the lesson people in my past should have learned.
i'm trying to project myself as who i feel i am. you might get a wrong first impression, and i can't fix that. but, i can reinforce that your first impression is wrong and that i'm sure i'm making the right choice.
i hope i'm at least projecting that i'm comfortable with myself, i'm at ease and i'm having a good time. you might want to think about whether or not that would be true if i was presenting myself differently, before you start drawing conclusions from faulty first impressions.
you might find my "male side" is actually a lot less friendly, very nervous and not a lot of fun at all, actually. at least, that's the lesson people in my past should have learned.
i'm going to say this again.
i'm not ideologically opposed to tariffs. not rigidly, at least. although, if i was an american, i wouldn't want to put tariffs on europe - i would want to trade with europe. i would want to put tariffs on countries like china and mexico that have lower wage standards. this could in theory be used to protect american capital.
if america is putting steel tariffs on europe, it is neither to increase production in america nor to create jobs in the united states but to decrease labour benefits in europe. this is using tariffs for the reasons that free trade is usually used: as an attack on workers.
if you're an american capitalist, and you're not smart enough to be a fordist (which is the case for essentially all capitalists nowadays), your aim is always to reduce the amount paid to workers because this is seen as a reduction in profit. you would reduce workers to slaves, if you only could - because you're too short-sighted to care about the sustainability of the system and are blinded by immediate profit.
it would follow that you would want "free trade" with mexico because it would decline the labour standards in your own country, and you would also want tariffs with europe because it would decline the labour standards on that continent - which you're no doubt just as invested in.
today, capital is not multinational but transnational. it accepts no national boundaries. it has no allegiance to any value system, nor does it have any attachment to the workers in any specific country.
and, if you're a really savvy capitalist, and you've got a good stooge in office that the uneducated workers think is on their side, you can get away with this - by telling them that the tariffs are there to protect their jobs, when they're actually there to hurt the people they should be in solidarity with: workers across the ocean.
so, we have two problems with this. the first is that these tariffs will not help american workers, and are not intended to; they're designed to help european capital. this is the layer of governance where nato really exists: transnational capital flowing across the atlantic.
the other problem is that tariffs are hard. in this particular circumstance, you should expect european capital to attack it's workers rather than retaliate. people in europe are going to lose hard-fought for benefits. this is the collusion that is happening, and american shareholders will be the biggest winners in the end. but, in a different situation, where the tariffs are real, you need an economic general to co-ordinate the process, and trump is not the person - nor does he have these people around him.
the saddest part is that american steelworkers will support this, because they really are that ignorant, and because capital won the fundamental battle with nafta: it taught workers to see each other as competitors across national boundaries, rather than as comrades that need to stand in international solidarity with a common cause.
trump is not undoing nafta, he's spearheading the next attack in the class war.
i'm not ideologically opposed to tariffs. not rigidly, at least. although, if i was an american, i wouldn't want to put tariffs on europe - i would want to trade with europe. i would want to put tariffs on countries like china and mexico that have lower wage standards. this could in theory be used to protect american capital.
if america is putting steel tariffs on europe, it is neither to increase production in america nor to create jobs in the united states but to decrease labour benefits in europe. this is using tariffs for the reasons that free trade is usually used: as an attack on workers.
if you're an american capitalist, and you're not smart enough to be a fordist (which is the case for essentially all capitalists nowadays), your aim is always to reduce the amount paid to workers because this is seen as a reduction in profit. you would reduce workers to slaves, if you only could - because you're too short-sighted to care about the sustainability of the system and are blinded by immediate profit.
it would follow that you would want "free trade" with mexico because it would decline the labour standards in your own country, and you would also want tariffs with europe because it would decline the labour standards on that continent - which you're no doubt just as invested in.
today, capital is not multinational but transnational. it accepts no national boundaries. it has no allegiance to any value system, nor does it have any attachment to the workers in any specific country.
and, if you're a really savvy capitalist, and you've got a good stooge in office that the uneducated workers think is on their side, you can get away with this - by telling them that the tariffs are there to protect their jobs, when they're actually there to hurt the people they should be in solidarity with: workers across the ocean.
so, we have two problems with this. the first is that these tariffs will not help american workers, and are not intended to; they're designed to help european capital. this is the layer of governance where nato really exists: transnational capital flowing across the atlantic.
the other problem is that tariffs are hard. in this particular circumstance, you should expect european capital to attack it's workers rather than retaliate. people in europe are going to lose hard-fought for benefits. this is the collusion that is happening, and american shareholders will be the biggest winners in the end. but, in a different situation, where the tariffs are real, you need an economic general to co-ordinate the process, and trump is not the person - nor does he have these people around him.
the saddest part is that american steelworkers will support this, because they really are that ignorant, and because capital won the fundamental battle with nafta: it taught workers to see each other as competitors across national boundaries, rather than as comrades that need to stand in international solidarity with a common cause.
trump is not undoing nafta, he's spearheading the next attack in the class war.
they're claiming the tories are on the brink of a majority, and the liberals are likely to get less than ten seats, but that's a dramatic misrepresentation of the data.
to begin with, they're using this screwy online polling data, which is just damaging the model. garbage in, garbage out. then they're aggregating it without compensating for time, essentially ruining it altogether.
based on what he's come up with here, i think it's pretty clear that you can expect the liberals to hold on to at least 20 seats - maybe 30 - and that the only plausible outcome right now remains a tory minority.
again: if reliable data comes in pushing a reliable liberal collapse in the 416, that changes. but, i'm not currently convinced that the liberals have lost their base.
the floor is probably 20. that's probably the worst that the liberals will ever do. ever.
http://maps.lispop.ca/ontario_projections/
to begin with, they're using this screwy online polling data, which is just damaging the model. garbage in, garbage out. then they're aggregating it without compensating for time, essentially ruining it altogether.
based on what he's come up with here, i think it's pretty clear that you can expect the liberals to hold on to at least 20 seats - maybe 30 - and that the only plausible outcome right now remains a tory minority.
again: if reliable data comes in pushing a reliable liberal collapse in the 416, that changes. but, i'm not currently convinced that the liberals have lost their base.
the floor is probably 20. that's probably the worst that the liberals will ever do. ever.
http://maps.lispop.ca/ontario_projections/
i actually got out of that weekend feeling pretty healthy.
no blackouts. no substantive hangovers. not even that tired. well, not after that initial crash, anyways.
one of the key indicators is how my gastrocnemius feels. it is often the case that after several long days of dancing or walking, enough strain gets put on the back of my calves that they seize up a little - and i can get some sharp pains in there that i have to deal with by stretching. nothing this weekend...
maybe it's because the bicycle eliminated the walking. and, if i had walked it would have added an extra hour, at least, to each of the three nights. but i think i just paced myself well.
i crashed this morning, so i'm not going to get any apartment hunting done. i'm going to get something to eat and hit the reconstruction.
june will likely be a little bit quiet in terms of the party schedule. we'll see, though.
no blackouts. no substantive hangovers. not even that tired. well, not after that initial crash, anyways.
one of the key indicators is how my gastrocnemius feels. it is often the case that after several long days of dancing or walking, enough strain gets put on the back of my calves that they seize up a little - and i can get some sharp pains in there that i have to deal with by stretching. nothing this weekend...
maybe it's because the bicycle eliminated the walking. and, if i had walked it would have added an extra hour, at least, to each of the three nights. but i think i just paced myself well.
i crashed this morning, so i'm not going to get any apartment hunting done. i'm going to get something to eat and hit the reconstruction.
june will likely be a little bit quiet in terms of the party schedule. we'll see, though.
i don't know why my firefox started multiprocessing all of a sudden, but i've got it back off, now.
i purchased this laptop, refurbished, in mid-2009. it's a model from 2006. it runs, and technically with multiple cores, but it can't handle multiple instances of firefox that want to take multiple gb of ram at the same time. that's just going to make the machine unusable.
i will not be connecting expensive hardware to the internet in the future. i will be keeping all desktops completely offline. when this laptop machine eventually dies, i'll replace it with something cheap from a pawn shop and use it as a sacrificial offering of an access point.
the internet is simply not safe and there's nothing anybody can do about it except avoid taking nice things into it.
anyways. back to what i'm doing..
i purchased this laptop, refurbished, in mid-2009. it's a model from 2006. it runs, and technically with multiple cores, but it can't handle multiple instances of firefox that want to take multiple gb of ram at the same time. that's just going to make the machine unusable.
i will not be connecting expensive hardware to the internet in the future. i will be keeping all desktops completely offline. when this laptop machine eventually dies, i'll replace it with something cheap from a pawn shop and use it as a sacrificial offering of an access point.
the internet is simply not safe and there's nothing anybody can do about it except avoid taking nice things into it.
anyways. back to what i'm doing..
conservatives don't think before they vote. they don't care.
they vote c. always. no matter what. which means it doesn't actually
matter what they do in office, conservatives always hold their base.
and, liberals don't want to vote for conservatives.
so, when liberals run on the right, they get squeezed.
it doesn't matter if the conservative candidate is a beer-swilling idiot that wants to run deficits and may literally not be able to count to 100 (in french). conservatives will vote for this person, anyways. they don't care. they don't think. they just vote.
it looked like an angle, but it wasn't. it never was. it's a trap. and, wynne fell right into it.
and, liberals don't want to vote for conservatives.
so, when liberals run on the right, they get squeezed.
it doesn't matter if the conservative candidate is a beer-swilling idiot that wants to run deficits and may literally not be able to count to 100 (in french). conservatives will vote for this person, anyways. they don't care. they don't think. they just vote.
it looked like an angle, but it wasn't. it never was. it's a trap. and, wynne fell right into it.
i want to be clear: i thought wynne had a perfectly good chance going into this thing.
and, she could still hold the base in toronto.
and i still like her policies the best.
but, she's run the worst campaign i've ever seen. every day, almost, she's holding a press conference to push some stupid right-wing talking point. and, she's just unloading ammunition into her feet. every time you tell her she's shooting herself, she shoots harder. by the end, she's going to be like the black knight.
it's just a flesh wound.
they need to force her out, like, minutes after the election is done.
and, she could still hold the base in toronto.
and i still like her policies the best.
but, she's run the worst campaign i've ever seen. every day, almost, she's holding a press conference to push some stupid right-wing talking point. and, she's just unloading ammunition into her feet. every time you tell her she's shooting herself, she shoots harder. by the end, she's going to be like the black knight.
it's just a flesh wound.
they need to force her out, like, minutes after the election is done.
the russian narrative is probably bunk. they're probably upgrading their own collection worms.
but, what you want to do is keep your encryption algorithms up to date. it's hard to know what the state really has operating; terrabyte chips in parallel at data centres? it's just brute force. a quantum computer should be able to rip apart any existing encryption system, but if you get enough chips in parallel, you've got the same thing.
unless you're a mob boss yourself, you should be less concerned about the state decrypting your data, and more concerned about making life harder for people trying to steal your credit card #.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4237529/fbi-reboot-router-russian-malware/?utm_source=Other&utm_medium=MostPopular&utm_campaign=2014
but, what you want to do is keep your encryption algorithms up to date. it's hard to know what the state really has operating; terrabyte chips in parallel at data centres? it's just brute force. a quantum computer should be able to rip apart any existing encryption system, but if you get enough chips in parallel, you've got the same thing.
unless you're a mob boss yourself, you should be less concerned about the state decrypting your data, and more concerned about making life harder for people trying to steal your credit card #.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4237529/fbi-reboot-router-russian-malware/?utm_source=Other&utm_medium=MostPopular&utm_campaign=2014
Tuesday, May 29, 2018
ontario did have a stable tory majority up until 1985.
that was over 30 years ago.
since then, we've undergone a major generational change. and, today, there are wide swaths of the province where there are less native-born citizens than immigrants. in 1968, the country was almost totally white; today, there are wide swaths of toronto where white people are literal minorities.
the canada that exists today has essentially no meaningful connection to the canada that existed in the past. and, one is being generous as pointing to patriation as a new starting point; i wouldn't even bother looking at data from before the last referendum. canada as we know it today is really a creation of the last generation.
again: i prefer the sitting government's policies. and, i'm savvy enough to know that i'm watching politics. but, in tapping into this rather trumpian concept of moral indignation and self-righteous conservatism (traits usually associated with progressivism, not liberalism), wynne is trying to appeal to a past that not only never existed, but never existed in a country that no longer exists; she's selling a fantasy reality to voters that don't exist, and never existed.
again: causality is hard to determine. i'm pointing a lot at the media. but, at the very least wynne is not helping herself at all - and hasn't been since day one.
this is a co-ordinated strategy of potentially disastrous miscalculation.
that was over 30 years ago.
since then, we've undergone a major generational change. and, today, there are wide swaths of the province where there are less native-born citizens than immigrants. in 1968, the country was almost totally white; today, there are wide swaths of toronto where white people are literal minorities.
the canada that exists today has essentially no meaningful connection to the canada that existed in the past. and, one is being generous as pointing to patriation as a new starting point; i wouldn't even bother looking at data from before the last referendum. canada as we know it today is really a creation of the last generation.
again: i prefer the sitting government's policies. and, i'm savvy enough to know that i'm watching politics. but, in tapping into this rather trumpian concept of moral indignation and self-righteous conservatism (traits usually associated with progressivism, not liberalism), wynne is trying to appeal to a past that not only never existed, but never existed in a country that no longer exists; she's selling a fantasy reality to voters that don't exist, and never existed.
again: causality is hard to determine. i'm pointing a lot at the media. but, at the very least wynne is not helping herself at all - and hasn't been since day one.
this is a co-ordinated strategy of potentially disastrous miscalculation.
"fuck tha police" is a cultural slogan, it's not a threat to power or a statement of defiance. it's a multi-million dollar industry. it's the status quo.
what this actually is is just another example of kathleen wynne putting her foot in her mouth. and, the more she insists on appealing to some imaginary concept of a silent majority, the more her numbers collapse.
the reality is that her moral indignation at a "fuck tha police" sign probably just cost her 3-5 points in downtown toronto, where she needs to win to avoid annihilation. and, she probably doesn't understand why she sounds racist when she says what she's saying.
sadly, the dog whistles are coming from kathleen wynne this election, not from doug ford. and, there's some sad underlying truth to it: the liberals are the party of upper-class white torontonians, and don't seem to really understand the world from outside of their bubble.
they've been doing this since before the election. and i pointed out here quite a while ago that the party has this weird conservative streak, and that it could very well be a wildcard in the election.
wynne needs to be trying to win the votes of the people she just alienated by attacking a slogan at the heart of their movement. and, she's not remotely cognizant of what she just did.
what this actually is is just another example of kathleen wynne putting her foot in her mouth. and, the more she insists on appealing to some imaginary concept of a silent majority, the more her numbers collapse.
the reality is that her moral indignation at a "fuck tha police" sign probably just cost her 3-5 points in downtown toronto, where she needs to win to avoid annihilation. and, she probably doesn't understand why she sounds racist when she says what she's saying.
sadly, the dog whistles are coming from kathleen wynne this election, not from doug ford. and, there's some sad underlying truth to it: the liberals are the party of upper-class white torontonians, and don't seem to really understand the world from outside of their bubble.
they've been doing this since before the election. and i pointed out here quite a while ago that the party has this weird conservative streak, and that it could very well be a wildcard in the election.
wynne needs to be trying to win the votes of the people she just alienated by attacking a slogan at the heart of their movement. and, she's not remotely cognizant of what she just did.
i agree. this is terrible.
he's got the preposition definite article completely wrong. it's despicable. like he's never even heard the fucking song.
could we could all consult our album covers for a second?
so, we're in agreement: fuck tha police. not fuck "the" police. like you're some tight-ass, grammar correcting, fucking cracker or something.
he's got the
could we could all consult our album covers for a second?
so, we're in agreement: fuck tha police. not fuck "the" police. like you're some tight-ass, grammar correcting, fucking cracker or something.
there is now a 0% chance that i'm going to vote for the liberals in the next federal election.
sorry.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4238702/ottawa-buy-trans-mountain-pipeline-project-4-5b/?utm_source=Article&utm_medium=MostPopular&utm_campaign=2014
sorry.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4238702/ottawa-buy-trans-mountain-pipeline-project-4-5b/?utm_source=Article&utm_medium=MostPopular&utm_campaign=2014
this isn't a poll.
and it's just regurgitating tory media talking points.
so, don't take this very seriously...
....but, it's still putting the liberals ahead in the 416.
the mainstreet data is more reliable. but, this pushes home the point: that if the liberals can find a way to sweep toronto again, in the end, then it doesn't matter if they're running at 7% in the rest of the province.
toronto has roughly half the province's population. (7 + 35)/2 = 21. so, if they are running at 21 percent provincially, and are running at 7% outside of toronto, that means they must be running in the mid to high 30s in toronto.
they are the toronto party. they've been that way for years. they still win, though.
like i say: i trust the mainstreet data better. i'm just pointing out it could be wrong and the results are potentially profound if it is.
and it's just regurgitating tory media talking points.
so, don't take this very seriously...
....but, it's still putting the liberals ahead in the 416.
the mainstreet data is more reliable. but, this pushes home the point: that if the liberals can find a way to sweep toronto again, in the end, then it doesn't matter if they're running at 7% in the rest of the province.
toronto has roughly half the province's population. (7 + 35)/2 = 21. so, if they are running at 21 percent provincially, and are running at 7% outside of toronto, that means they must be running in the mid to high 30s in toronto.
they are the toronto party. they've been that way for years. they still win, though.
like i say: i trust the mainstreet data better. i'm just pointing out it could be wrong and the results are potentially profound if it is.
the beer test.
is that what ford's focus on beer-o-nomics is really about? i dunno.
i think i can understand why some out of touch tory elitists might think ford wins beer tests, but, it's a pretty bizarre understanding of the ontario electorate. i bet doug ford could win a beer test in wisconsin, or maybe upstate new york, but in downtown toronto?
doug ford is the guy that wants to buy me a beer, and that i try to get away from all night.
so, would i rather have a beer with one of the other two, then?
i might rather smoke a joint with andrea horwath, rather than have a beer with her. i have no idea what her habits are. but, beer drinking is more about talking about the weather, whereas toking is when you get into the fun intellectual discussions and poke at each other's ideas a little bit.
kathleen wynne is like the person at the other end of the bar, and while i wouldn't doubt that she's enjoying her beer (or glass of wine, or margarita, as it may be), any discussion would be likely to be terse and maybe a little awkward. it's a class thing, actually.
but, the point i wanted to make is this: if this is really about beer tests, the tories have an insulting and downright outdated concept of ontarians.
is that what ford's focus on beer-o-nomics is really about? i dunno.
i think i can understand why some out of touch tory elitists might think ford wins beer tests, but, it's a pretty bizarre understanding of the ontario electorate. i bet doug ford could win a beer test in wisconsin, or maybe upstate new york, but in downtown toronto?
doug ford is the guy that wants to buy me a beer, and that i try to get away from all night.
so, would i rather have a beer with one of the other two, then?
i might rather smoke a joint with andrea horwath, rather than have a beer with her. i have no idea what her habits are. but, beer drinking is more about talking about the weather, whereas toking is when you get into the fun intellectual discussions and poke at each other's ideas a little bit.
kathleen wynne is like the person at the other end of the bar, and while i wouldn't doubt that she's enjoying her beer (or glass of wine, or margarita, as it may be), any discussion would be likely to be terse and maybe a little awkward. it's a class thing, actually.
but, the point i wanted to make is this: if this is really about beer tests, the tories have an insulting and downright outdated concept of ontarians.
so, this is what i was looking for: some actual data. don't misunderstand me: i'd like a larger sample size. but, aggregating data doesn't work like you think it does.
the most important bar here is the number for toronto. this is the first data i've seen that suggests that the fortress in toronto is cracking. trying to determine causality in context is perilous, but i'm going to suggest that all of the media telling people that the liberals can't win is finally seeping into the base - and they've flipped over to the ndp in droves.
if i'm right, and the media strategy was to prop the ndp up to try to split the vote, then this appears to have backfired. and, it may provide an answer to a long-running dispute that i've had with right-leaning liberal party supporters, who argued that ignatieff got beat by strategic voters moving to the conservatives to stop the ndp. that was the most transparent pile of bullshit from the start.
one of the things the media is forgetting to tell you is that the liberals have been uncompetitive outside of toronto (and ottawa) for years, anyways - and that there are enough seats in toronto that they could win by being the toronto party. they did that in 2014. so, this narrative isn't a new development. but, what is a new development is that idea that they're running in third in toronto, and, if that's true, they're going to get decimated pretty badly.
i know not to put everything into one poll, but we only have one poll.
and, i'm still skeptical about how well this polling is doing in measuring the breadth of the movement that's happening, or in modelling actual turnout on the ground.
https://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/ndp-surge-past-pcs-into-the-lead/
the most important bar here is the number for toronto. this is the first data i've seen that suggests that the fortress in toronto is cracking. trying to determine causality in context is perilous, but i'm going to suggest that all of the media telling people that the liberals can't win is finally seeping into the base - and they've flipped over to the ndp in droves.
if i'm right, and the media strategy was to prop the ndp up to try to split the vote, then this appears to have backfired. and, it may provide an answer to a long-running dispute that i've had with right-leaning liberal party supporters, who argued that ignatieff got beat by strategic voters moving to the conservatives to stop the ndp. that was the most transparent pile of bullshit from the start.
one of the things the media is forgetting to tell you is that the liberals have been uncompetitive outside of toronto (and ottawa) for years, anyways - and that there are enough seats in toronto that they could win by being the toronto party. they did that in 2014. so, this narrative isn't a new development. but, what is a new development is that idea that they're running in third in toronto, and, if that's true, they're going to get decimated pretty badly.
i know not to put everything into one poll, but we only have one poll.
and, i'm still skeptical about how well this polling is doing in measuring the breadth of the movement that's happening, or in modelling actual turnout on the ground.
https://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/ndp-surge-past-pcs-into-the-lead/
it was a long day and i crashed hard at the end.
there was a moment when i stopped drinking - around 4:00 - where i had to sit down for a minute due to overheating. it was like 40 degrees, and highly humid, in the second club. i eventually went out for some fresh air around 6:00 and then couldn't acclimatize back to it, so i left. but, the night is clear all the way through.
i'll update this post after i get my habitual nachos.
(it is now after 3:00 on the 30th)
====
this night was meant to be very long, starting at about 14:00 on monday and going until early on tuesday - 6? 7? 8? it wasn't clear how this was going to work....
it was more like 15:30 when i got to the actual bar, which was somewhere i hadn't been to before. i figured if i'm going to the tv lounge i should dress in drag, right?
(i'm not a transvestite, and i don't dress in drag)
the fact is that it was so hot out that i didn't have to use the washroom at all, for the entire 10 hours i was there, despite drinking seven beers over the period. again: 7 drinks in ten hours isn't excessive at all, it's just a long day drinking. i guess my body decided it didn't have any extra fluid to excrete.
the reason i went to this party is that it was supposed to focus on 'german techno', which is somewhat of an unclear description, as it could refer to anything. i think i was expected something a little more atmospheric and electro-gazey, tangerine dream set to a hard beat sort of thing, but instead walked into what was essentially a dungeon somewhere in east germany that was playing very minimalist digital hardcore at a fast bpm. i kind of felt like blixa bargeld should have come out of nowhere and hit me over the head with a gong, before preceding to the light the place on fire - or that david bowie should have appeared as an apparition and complained that that fucking wanker eno was getting all of the credit for his work. i went in there a few times early in the night and had some fun doing aerobics, but it became pretty clear early on in the night that the actual party was happening outside. staub, itself, appeared to be pretty much dead.
the fact is that it was fucking beautiful outside. 30+ degrees well into the night. the humidity was still thick in the air when i left at around 1:30. not a cloud in the sky. just fucking perfect weather. who wants to spend a night like that locked in a dungeon doing cardio when there's a well-populated dance party happening on a patio a few feet away?
that said, i would have probably stayed in the german techno club if one of two things were true: (1) if the music outside sucked or (2) if the party inside picked up. i could be wrong, but i don't think the party inside ever picked up. and, the music outside had a sparse, british feel to it that i'd actually usually prefer over anything german. i picked up a few autechre samples.
it seems like the party outside was actually partially organized by some kids from pittsburgh, so i seem to have gone to a detour records festival as much as the german techno festival i meant to go to. but, listen: i should be happy that i had an escape from an empty party.
staub may want to think about publishing line-ups in the future.
the first set i got into was marc lansley, who seems to be a little obscure, but something i want to take a closer note of because i actually found it to be one of the most interesting sets i've heard in real time. he did something i wish more people did, which was play with the syncopation. so, he had us dancing to 16th note articulations on shuffle beats, and what not. it was less exquisite, and more just awkward - cracked out beats for lack of a better term. samples crashing into each other and creating a mess. and, while a couple of people were looking around wondering how they got to this strange place, i found the deviation from orthodoxy to be rather exhilarating. detroit has no market for art techno, but if there are people listening, let it be known that i'd love to see more sets like this. i can't find anything substantive online.
the next two sets were the kids from pittsburgh, and it was a little looser and a bit funkier. a bit more soul. i danced a bit, but i was in and out of the dungeon - and left to get smokes around 21:30. i didn't go back in the dungeon after i got back.
i caught most of the next set, and spent the bulk of it dancing. i'm going to claim it wasn't particularly memorable, but that i had a good time with it nonetheless. it got me moving without making me cringe...
i was in the yard there for much of the last set, but i spent a good deal of it sitting. it was a little funkier, more soul, and i tend to interpret that as sort of cringey.
i got to the second bar a little before 2:00 and think i got most of all of the sets. i only bought one drink here and finished it a little after 4:00 and had to sit down around 4:30-4:40-ish; what i was doing was sweating, and i was less drunk and more dehydrated. i just had to let the wave pass. you get that or you don't. but i was legit drenched by the time i stood up. so, i caught whatever was on from 2:00-4:30. again: it got me dancing with no clear complaints. asher perkins kicked me on the way past me, presumably to "wake me up", and i caught what i think was the bulk of his set, after 5:00. i've seen him spin enough that he did actually seem to kick me to get up, which is a lot i guess, and what i'll say is he's definitely filling out his sound a little: there's just more and more stuff happening. he really filled the place up. i was out around 6:00, then back in, and then out again around 6:30 - after experiencing some fresh air, my body told me to stay out and breathe it in. i just wasn't getting enough oxygen in there. and, this party ended at 7:00...
so, if i was there from 2:00-6:30 i must have caught most of everything, even if i'm not totally sure if i was actually a foot away from antwon faulkner for an hour or not. it was dark. and i was dancing...
there was a moment when i stopped drinking - around 4:00 - where i had to sit down for a minute due to overheating. it was like 40 degrees, and highly humid, in the second club. i eventually went out for some fresh air around 6:00 and then couldn't acclimatize back to it, so i left. but, the night is clear all the way through.
i'll update this post after i get my habitual nachos.
(it is now after 3:00 on the 30th)
====
this night was meant to be very long, starting at about 14:00 on monday and going until early on tuesday - 6? 7? 8? it wasn't clear how this was going to work....
it was more like 15:30 when i got to the actual bar, which was somewhere i hadn't been to before. i figured if i'm going to the tv lounge i should dress in drag, right?
(i'm not a transvestite, and i don't dress in drag)
the fact is that it was so hot out that i didn't have to use the washroom at all, for the entire 10 hours i was there, despite drinking seven beers over the period. again: 7 drinks in ten hours isn't excessive at all, it's just a long day drinking. i guess my body decided it didn't have any extra fluid to excrete.
the reason i went to this party is that it was supposed to focus on 'german techno', which is somewhat of an unclear description, as it could refer to anything. i think i was expected something a little more atmospheric and electro-gazey, tangerine dream set to a hard beat sort of thing, but instead walked into what was essentially a dungeon somewhere in east germany that was playing very minimalist digital hardcore at a fast bpm. i kind of felt like blixa bargeld should have come out of nowhere and hit me over the head with a gong, before preceding to the light the place on fire - or that david bowie should have appeared as an apparition and complained that that fucking wanker eno was getting all of the credit for his work. i went in there a few times early in the night and had some fun doing aerobics, but it became pretty clear early on in the night that the actual party was happening outside. staub, itself, appeared to be pretty much dead.
the fact is that it was fucking beautiful outside. 30+ degrees well into the night. the humidity was still thick in the air when i left at around 1:30. not a cloud in the sky. just fucking perfect weather. who wants to spend a night like that locked in a dungeon doing cardio when there's a well-populated dance party happening on a patio a few feet away?
that said, i would have probably stayed in the german techno club if one of two things were true: (1) if the music outside sucked or (2) if the party inside picked up. i could be wrong, but i don't think the party inside ever picked up. and, the music outside had a sparse, british feel to it that i'd actually usually prefer over anything german. i picked up a few autechre samples.
it seems like the party outside was actually partially organized by some kids from pittsburgh, so i seem to have gone to a detour records festival as much as the german techno festival i meant to go to. but, listen: i should be happy that i had an escape from an empty party.
staub may want to think about publishing line-ups in the future.
the first set i got into was marc lansley, who seems to be a little obscure, but something i want to take a closer note of because i actually found it to be one of the most interesting sets i've heard in real time. he did something i wish more people did, which was play with the syncopation. so, he had us dancing to 16th note articulations on shuffle beats, and what not. it was less exquisite, and more just awkward - cracked out beats for lack of a better term. samples crashing into each other and creating a mess. and, while a couple of people were looking around wondering how they got to this strange place, i found the deviation from orthodoxy to be rather exhilarating. detroit has no market for art techno, but if there are people listening, let it be known that i'd love to see more sets like this. i can't find anything substantive online.
the next two sets were the kids from pittsburgh, and it was a little looser and a bit funkier. a bit more soul. i danced a bit, but i was in and out of the dungeon - and left to get smokes around 21:30. i didn't go back in the dungeon after i got back.
i caught most of the next set, and spent the bulk of it dancing. i'm going to claim it wasn't particularly memorable, but that i had a good time with it nonetheless. it got me moving without making me cringe...
i was in the yard there for much of the last set, but i spent a good deal of it sitting. it was a little funkier, more soul, and i tend to interpret that as sort of cringey.
i got to the second bar a little before 2:00 and think i got most of all of the sets. i only bought one drink here and finished it a little after 4:00 and had to sit down around 4:30-4:40-ish; what i was doing was sweating, and i was less drunk and more dehydrated. i just had to let the wave pass. you get that or you don't. but i was legit drenched by the time i stood up. so, i caught whatever was on from 2:00-4:30. again: it got me dancing with no clear complaints. asher perkins kicked me on the way past me, presumably to "wake me up", and i caught what i think was the bulk of his set, after 5:00. i've seen him spin enough that he did actually seem to kick me to get up, which is a lot i guess, and what i'll say is he's definitely filling out his sound a little: there's just more and more stuff happening. he really filled the place up. i was out around 6:00, then back in, and then out again around 6:30 - after experiencing some fresh air, my body told me to stay out and breathe it in. i just wasn't getting enough oxygen in there. and, this party ended at 7:00...
so, if i was there from 2:00-6:30 i must have caught most of everything, even if i'm not totally sure if i was actually a foot away from antwon faulkner for an hour or not. it was dark. and i was dancing...
Monday, May 28, 2018
but, to be clear. a few points.
1) i don't think the pcs are collapsing. i've been arguing for months that they were never running that high in the first place, but that the inflated numbers are a relic of the process, given that the conservatives have the most dedicated base; i told you from the start that the numbers would come down as the numbers fill in. all of the polling everywhere says that conservatives of all types in canada have almost no potential to swing anybody. so, when you see these between election polls that have the conservatives at 45%, all it really means is that everybody else actually looks at evidence before they make a voting decision, rather than decide what brand they want to vote for two or three years away from making the actual choice.
the conservatives were running in the mid-30s the whole time.
2) millennial voters may have been unreliable voters when they were younger, as gen x voters and baby boomer voters were when they were younger, too. but, understand that if you were born in 1980 then you're 38 years old, now. this year should be the first batch of voters born in the twenty-first century. millennials aren't the youth vote anymore. you should expect them to start voting more reliably, now - and focus your scorn on the younger generation. but, what that means is that we may be seeing the creation of a rigid ndp base and, if that is true, the same processes would apply to the ndp that do to the conservatives, and their vote would also be inflated.
i believe that the ndp numbers are currently being inflated and that they are running in the high 20s.
3) liberals are just feeling frustrated & disenfranchised. the factors that are inflating the totals of conservatives & dippers must also be under-estimating the totals of liberals. that's zero-sum.
i think the liberals are currently running in the mid 20s.
this is about what we've got right now, then:
conservatives: 33
ndp: 29
liberals: 25
undecided: 9
greens: 4
1) i don't think the pcs are collapsing. i've been arguing for months that they were never running that high in the first place, but that the inflated numbers are a relic of the process, given that the conservatives have the most dedicated base; i told you from the start that the numbers would come down as the numbers fill in. all of the polling everywhere says that conservatives of all types in canada have almost no potential to swing anybody. so, when you see these between election polls that have the conservatives at 45%, all it really means is that everybody else actually looks at evidence before they make a voting decision, rather than decide what brand they want to vote for two or three years away from making the actual choice.
the conservatives were running in the mid-30s the whole time.
2) millennial voters may have been unreliable voters when they were younger, as gen x voters and baby boomer voters were when they were younger, too. but, understand that if you were born in 1980 then you're 38 years old, now. this year should be the first batch of voters born in the twenty-first century. millennials aren't the youth vote anymore. you should expect them to start voting more reliably, now - and focus your scorn on the younger generation. but, what that means is that we may be seeing the creation of a rigid ndp base and, if that is true, the same processes would apply to the ndp that do to the conservatives, and their vote would also be inflated.
i believe that the ndp numbers are currently being inflated and that they are running in the high 20s.
3) liberals are just feeling frustrated & disenfranchised. the factors that are inflating the totals of conservatives & dippers must also be under-estimating the totals of liberals. that's zero-sum.
i think the liberals are currently running in the mid 20s.
this is about what we've got right now, then:
conservatives: 33
ndp: 29
liberals: 25
undecided: 9
greens: 4
last night is absolutely clear. no blurry moments. well paced.
although, i enjoyed the reaction from the bartender when i went to get a last beer at the very end of the night.
"yeah. right."
she just wanted to go home. understandable.
i think it was more about how well i was standing after drinking & dancing all night than anything else, it was an expression of disbelief, but you have to understand how much exercise i get anyways - i'm just kind of healthy at a sort of bionic level. if my bac spikes, it spikes. but it's a separate process than my actual ability to really effortlessly push myself all night, on pretty much any night. i can dance or bike or walk essentially at will. if i have to stop, it's going to be because my feet get sore, not because of exhaustion.
but, for the record: i had two shots of jager about 10:30, a tall can of mike's at about 11:30 and then slowly drank seven beers (by my best count) over what was in total about a 12 hour party. that's 11 drinks in 12 hours, although the drinking took part mostly over the first 9. that's not excessive by any definition, it's just a long night.
i picked the texture after party because the line-up was stacked; if you have tastes similar to mine, that was the line-up of the weekend kind of thing. i don't follow djs the way i follow rock musicians, or even electronic composers, so i'm not going to pretend i have a deeper understanding of things than i do, but the sets last night were dark and minimal and a little bit noisy - they were the proper crossover for somebody into old industrial music and the dirtier side of hardcore, trying to find an appropriate party at a house festival. the floor was a little packed at first but started to clear out nicely for the last two sets. so, the dancing was good for the last half of the night.
i stayed at the bar late to catch the billed artists, but the party largely moved to the park a little after four. i made it there eventually, and spent a few hours there before i went home. it was gospel when i left...
a fun night...
i made it home about noon, and i've been up and down, sleeping without sleeping. it's like a sauna in here; i love it. keeping me up, though. i more listened to the debate than watched it. tomorrow is an even longer day - about 20 hours of mostly straight dancing - so i'd better get ready for it by sleeping a little bit this morning.
although, i enjoyed the reaction from the bartender when i went to get a last beer at the very end of the night.
"yeah. right."
she just wanted to go home. understandable.
i think it was more about how well i was standing after drinking & dancing all night than anything else, it was an expression of disbelief, but you have to understand how much exercise i get anyways - i'm just kind of healthy at a sort of bionic level. if my bac spikes, it spikes. but it's a separate process than my actual ability to really effortlessly push myself all night, on pretty much any night. i can dance or bike or walk essentially at will. if i have to stop, it's going to be because my feet get sore, not because of exhaustion.
but, for the record: i had two shots of jager about 10:30, a tall can of mike's at about 11:30 and then slowly drank seven beers (by my best count) over what was in total about a 12 hour party. that's 11 drinks in 12 hours, although the drinking took part mostly over the first 9. that's not excessive by any definition, it's just a long night.
i picked the texture after party because the line-up was stacked; if you have tastes similar to mine, that was the line-up of the weekend kind of thing. i don't follow djs the way i follow rock musicians, or even electronic composers, so i'm not going to pretend i have a deeper understanding of things than i do, but the sets last night were dark and minimal and a little bit noisy - they were the proper crossover for somebody into old industrial music and the dirtier side of hardcore, trying to find an appropriate party at a house festival. the floor was a little packed at first but started to clear out nicely for the last two sets. so, the dancing was good for the last half of the night.
i stayed at the bar late to catch the billed artists, but the party largely moved to the park a little after four. i made it there eventually, and spent a few hours there before i went home. it was gospel when i left...
a fun night...
i made it home about noon, and i've been up and down, sleeping without sleeping. it's like a sauna in here; i love it. keeping me up, though. i more listened to the debate than watched it. tomorrow is an even longer day - about 20 hours of mostly straight dancing - so i'd better get ready for it by sleeping a little bit this morning.
Sunday, May 27, 2018
i thought you were supposed to forfeit the argument when you bring up a frivolous hitler comparison? but, that's kind of a fascist rule, isn't it. no debate for you.
the condescension coming from ford, who is now taking advantage of poorly thought through negative trump comparisons by actually aping his whole schtick, is starting to get painful. he's using the kind of verbal sales techniques that they train people to use in pyramid schemes, which is perhaps even an apt comparison. it would be painfully transparent if you were to bump into somebody in a store trying to sell you a warranty plan on a vacuum cleaner by talking to you like that, but watching him extrapolate that unsavoury experience to a camera broadcasting in prime time was physically nauseating; i felt embarrassed for conservative supporters, embarrassed for ford nation and a little embarrassed for the province. i want to be clear that the really cringey part isn't where he's taking the level of discourse, which is down several grade points, but the dripping contempt for voters' intelligence that is exposed in the process of doing so. doug ford doesn't just think you're stupid, he thinks you're a hopeless fucking idiot that can't even figure out google; it must be hard for us to type with those knuckles dragging through the sand, but the kids use alexa instead of google nowadays anyways, right?
hey, alexa. what's a demagogue?
wynne held her own, and drew attention to some of the weird parts in the ndp platform, or just about the ndp over all. i don't think the ndp are actually going to ban back-to-work legislation. horwath's reaction was pretty terrible for a nominal socialist; she reacted to a question about class conflict with an appeal to class harmony. as though electing the ndp will finally put an end to that pesky class war with a group hug and an appeal to solidarity as humans. people are people, too. maybe somebody gave her a copy of reflections on the revolution and told her it was das kapital. the root cause of labour conflict is the accumulation of profit, andrea. i'm all for getting to that root cause, but it's an end, not a means to it. it was actually an absolutely classically conservative approach to labour. but, even so, it was disingenuous: of course the ndp is going to use back-to-work legislation at some point. where wynne came off well in this exchange is that she forced horwath to defend what is really an indefensible position that she can't go off message on.
as i've said, my understanding of the election right now is that liberal voters don't know what to do. i don't know if it works or not, but i think wynne won a few points tonight.
the condescension coming from ford, who is now taking advantage of poorly thought through negative trump comparisons by actually aping his whole schtick, is starting to get painful. he's using the kind of verbal sales techniques that they train people to use in pyramid schemes, which is perhaps even an apt comparison. it would be painfully transparent if you were to bump into somebody in a store trying to sell you a warranty plan on a vacuum cleaner by talking to you like that, but watching him extrapolate that unsavoury experience to a camera broadcasting in prime time was physically nauseating; i felt embarrassed for conservative supporters, embarrassed for ford nation and a little embarrassed for the province. i want to be clear that the really cringey part isn't where he's taking the level of discourse, which is down several grade points, but the dripping contempt for voters' intelligence that is exposed in the process of doing so. doug ford doesn't just think you're stupid, he thinks you're a hopeless fucking idiot that can't even figure out google; it must be hard for us to type with those knuckles dragging through the sand, but the kids use alexa instead of google nowadays anyways, right?
hey, alexa. what's a demagogue?
wynne held her own, and drew attention to some of the weird parts in the ndp platform, or just about the ndp over all. i don't think the ndp are actually going to ban back-to-work legislation. horwath's reaction was pretty terrible for a nominal socialist; she reacted to a question about class conflict with an appeal to class harmony. as though electing the ndp will finally put an end to that pesky class war with a group hug and an appeal to solidarity as humans. people are people, too. maybe somebody gave her a copy of reflections on the revolution and told her it was das kapital. the root cause of labour conflict is the accumulation of profit, andrea. i'm all for getting to that root cause, but it's an end, not a means to it. it was actually an absolutely classically conservative approach to labour. but, even so, it was disingenuous: of course the ndp is going to use back-to-work legislation at some point. where wynne came off well in this exchange is that she forced horwath to defend what is really an indefensible position that she can't go off message on.
as i've said, my understanding of the election right now is that liberal voters don't know what to do. i don't know if it works or not, but i think wynne won a few points tonight.
see, this is a good projection of the narrative constructed by the corporate media in canada, which has been been brutally ripping apart kathleen wynne for months.
it's the articles that summarize the points that give away that there's a storyteller. and, something similar is being constructed for justin trudeau - an orderly collapse through trips to india and equity rights, things that ought to seem like crowd pleasers, beyond their absolute irrelevance.
i'm going to say this again: the liberal party of canada has to do something about the conservative media monopoly.
http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/marin-wynne-took-herself-and-the-liberals-down
it's the articles that summarize the points that give away that there's a storyteller. and, something similar is being constructed for justin trudeau - an orderly collapse through trips to india and equity rights, things that ought to seem like crowd pleasers, beyond their absolute irrelevance.
i'm going to say this again: the liberal party of canada has to do something about the conservative media monopoly.
http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/marin-wynne-took-herself-and-the-liberals-down
Saturday, May 26, 2018
the trip-metal show last night was experiential more than anything else; i got to see drew mcdowall & martin rev on the same bill, which has a shelf-life of about five years: they'll both be dead soon. i didn't catch any of the other sets.
drew mcdowall is of course known for his work with coil. he's now 57. this is one of the best records of all time:
martin rev was half of the hyper-seminal act, suicide. he's now 70 years old. this is one of the most important records of the latter half the twentieth century:
it seemed like it should have been an industrial night, so i tried to get to city club before midnight to avoid cover and didn't get there in time. for some reason, i always spend the whole night outside whenever i'm at city club; i remember paying cover (and i had a stamp), and i remember dropping my can of beer and quickly picking it back up in the hallway on the walk to the back of the club (the truth is that i'm a klutz; that could have happened cold sober on a good day), but i couldn't have actually been in the bar for more than a few minutes, because all i really remember is talking out in the front. i think i left a full drink in there and never went back to get it. the night is pretty much there, it's just a tad blurry from about 2-4; i'm thinking i went in for a few minutes a bit before 2:00, and then went back out and pretty much stayed there. also, the bar closed at 4:00 again, after advertising sets running until 5:00. sometimes they close at 3:00. i actually meant to go back in around 4:00, but they were kicking people out. did komprezzor even spin? was he even there? so, i meant to catch some dirty techno sets, but it didn't really happen, i was just outside smoking all night.
which isn't terrible. it was a gorgeous night. the real point of last night was that it was gorgeous, so maybe it worked out better, anyways.
i did leave with a couple guys, but i'd been talking to them outside, and the idea was just to carry on the conversation. the straight guy was well behaved and sober, but the gay guy was a bit drunk and kind of grabby. i'm pretty tolerant up to a point; i don't take much offence to the odd ass grab, but i'm going to punch you in the face if you take it much further than that. i don't do the proportional reaction thing: i'm going to not react at all until a line gets crossed, and then i'm going to beat the shit out of you. a lot of it comes down to not having the same cultural associations attached to touching that your average, you know, white christian girl does. the rational fact is that having my ass grabbed by a drunk gay guy does not actually harm me in any way. it just doesn't. but, the moment i feel like i'm actually being harassed, i'm going to react like a frightened primate, because that's what i actually am.
bicycle note notwithstanding, the projection i got from these guys is that they were trying to get me off the street, and i appreciated that. we had a drink. smoked a bit. and i left.
tonight is a longer night, time to get ready.
drew mcdowall is of course known for his work with coil. he's now 57. this is one of the best records of all time:
martin rev was half of the hyper-seminal act, suicide. he's now 70 years old. this is one of the most important records of the latter half the twentieth century:
it seemed like it should have been an industrial night, so i tried to get to city club before midnight to avoid cover and didn't get there in time. for some reason, i always spend the whole night outside whenever i'm at city club; i remember paying cover (and i had a stamp), and i remember dropping my can of beer and quickly picking it back up in the hallway on the walk to the back of the club (the truth is that i'm a klutz; that could have happened cold sober on a good day), but i couldn't have actually been in the bar for more than a few minutes, because all i really remember is talking out in the front. i think i left a full drink in there and never went back to get it. the night is pretty much there, it's just a tad blurry from about 2-4; i'm thinking i went in for a few minutes a bit before 2:00, and then went back out and pretty much stayed there. also, the bar closed at 4:00 again, after advertising sets running until 5:00. sometimes they close at 3:00. i actually meant to go back in around 4:00, but they were kicking people out. did komprezzor even spin? was he even there? so, i meant to catch some dirty techno sets, but it didn't really happen, i was just outside smoking all night.
which isn't terrible. it was a gorgeous night. the real point of last night was that it was gorgeous, so maybe it worked out better, anyways.
i did leave with a couple guys, but i'd been talking to them outside, and the idea was just to carry on the conversation. the straight guy was well behaved and sober, but the gay guy was a bit drunk and kind of grabby. i'm pretty tolerant up to a point; i don't take much offence to the odd ass grab, but i'm going to punch you in the face if you take it much further than that. i don't do the proportional reaction thing: i'm going to not react at all until a line gets crossed, and then i'm going to beat the shit out of you. a lot of it comes down to not having the same cultural associations attached to touching that your average, you know, white christian girl does. the rational fact is that having my ass grabbed by a drunk gay guy does not actually harm me in any way. it just doesn't. but, the moment i feel like i'm actually being harassed, i'm going to react like a frightened primate, because that's what i actually am.
bicycle note notwithstanding, the projection i got from these guys is that they were trying to get me off the street, and i appreciated that. we had a drink. smoked a bit. and i left.
tonight is a longer night, time to get ready.
found this on my bicycle this morning.
initially thought i got ticketed.
the bar closed a bit early. so, i went around the corner and had a drink with a straight guy & a gay guy and left when the sun came up. i'm not sure i deserved the free drink, but i appreciated it.
but, it made me chuckle that somebody would do this. guess they didn't get a chance to talk to me.
of course i'm not going to call, but i might reverse directory it.
initially thought i got ticketed.
the bar closed a bit early. so, i went around the corner and had a drink with a straight guy & a gay guy and left when the sun came up. i'm not sure i deserved the free drink, but i appreciated it.
but, it made me chuckle that somebody would do this. guess they didn't get a chance to talk to me.
of course i'm not going to call, but i might reverse directory it.
Friday, May 25, 2018
ford's path to victory was always reliant on his ability to swing ethnic conservatives on social issues, without losing too much support in the more traditional tory base, which is fiscally conservative, but rather socially liberal. this is a different country; we don't have a prominent christian right, here. i mean, it exists. but it's perpetually marginalized. it's the biggest difference between the two countries, and you can see it evidenced in policy, from gay marriage to abortion rights.
it's a contradiction that the conservatives need to resolve to form a government: their future is ethnic voters that want social conservatism and big government (not dissimilar to rural whites in the united states), but their past is fiscal conservatives that want responsible spending and libertarian social policy. that's a tightrope to walk. and it required a smart leader to navigate it.
ford has managed to alienate everybody. he fired the kingmaker, tanya allen granic, who was organizing support against sex ed. the beer in the corner store thing seems stupid and trivial to white people, but it's going to be a big deal for muslims, which is who wynne was really talking to - at the expense of her own party brand. but, by talking about this stuff, he scared people. on top of that, he speaks so vaguely about spending to a base that cares deeply about it that he has projected an aura of absolutely no credibility on fiscal concerns whatsoever. i think he even promised to run deficits.
so, what he had to do was build support in ethnic communities by pushing right-wing social messaging, while holding wealthy whites by appealing to their pocket books, and he's really done the exact opposite, alienating both groups of people.
i will say that: it's really a massive accomplishment to cut the tory base up. bravo, doug. that's been solid for decades. i guess if anybody could do it, it was going to be a ford brother.
this doesn't change any of the long term demographic realities i've been talking about. but, my fears of a realigning election appear to have been misfounded; the rejection of doug ford appears to be rather total. it's a tripartisan conclusion across race and class: this guy can't be running things.
but, again, that doesn't mean these people are going to vote ndp. it's more likely that they don't vote at all.
what if we get something like 15% turnout? is there a concept of quorum in the westminster system?
it's a contradiction that the conservatives need to resolve to form a government: their future is ethnic voters that want social conservatism and big government (not dissimilar to rural whites in the united states), but their past is fiscal conservatives that want responsible spending and libertarian social policy. that's a tightrope to walk. and it required a smart leader to navigate it.
ford has managed to alienate everybody. he fired the kingmaker, tanya allen granic, who was organizing support against sex ed. the beer in the corner store thing seems stupid and trivial to white people, but it's going to be a big deal for muslims, which is who wynne was really talking to - at the expense of her own party brand. but, by talking about this stuff, he scared people. on top of that, he speaks so vaguely about spending to a base that cares deeply about it that he has projected an aura of absolutely no credibility on fiscal concerns whatsoever. i think he even promised to run deficits.
so, what he had to do was build support in ethnic communities by pushing right-wing social messaging, while holding wealthy whites by appealing to their pocket books, and he's really done the exact opposite, alienating both groups of people.
i will say that: it's really a massive accomplishment to cut the tory base up. bravo, doug. that's been solid for decades. i guess if anybody could do it, it was going to be a ford brother.
this doesn't change any of the long term demographic realities i've been talking about. but, my fears of a realigning election appear to have been misfounded; the rejection of doug ford appears to be rather total. it's a tripartisan conclusion across race and class: this guy can't be running things.
but, again, that doesn't mean these people are going to vote ndp. it's more likely that they don't vote at all.
what if we get something like 15% turnout? is there a concept of quorum in the westminster system?
the ekos numbers in the last federal election were an actual outlier, and in the end it seemed to be that his methodology had a problem with undecided voters, who really only made up their mind to vote liberal at the very last minute. i suggested to him that he should publish undecideds.
he's not publishing these numbers.
i can speculate that he's dealing with the same basic concern, which is that his system is being broken by an electorate that doesn't want to give him a straight answer - because it doesn't have one. that's consistent with the other numbers i'm seeing.
...which isn't to say that i think he's making up numbers. i don't doubt that this is what he has. but, it seems to be reflecting low engagement, rather than a surge of young people swinging ndp. if young liberals & young conservatives just refuse to vote, or are tuning out of the system altogether due to awful choices, the historically solid - but smaller - ndp base looks dominant because they're the only people that are still bothering to show up. they're the only people still excited, the only people still into this.
voter apathy usually helps the conservatives. this is is usually explained by demographics, but it might also have something to do with the conservatives having a more robust grassroots - and they do. maybe a part of the reason that conservatives have higher voting retention is that they're more involved in the selection process. but, conservatives don't like their own guy this time, either. that's unusual.
it may be the ndp that has the most engaged base this election. and, if voter engagement amongst conservatives & liberals is really falling by up to 40%, they may win accidentally due to voter suppression.
it's not hard to believe that the ndp have the most engaged and dedicated voting base amongst young activists; if they're the only young people that bother to vote this election, you get that exaggerated skew out of nowhere.
this at least makes sense to me; it would be less that horwath is swinging all of these liberals all of a sudden, and more that the ndp is the only party that hasn't cratered with it's own support base. and, that is indeed sort of what happened in 1990, right?
but, as mentioned in the analysis, and also by mainstreet, the key variable appears to be turnout modelling. if the liberal ground game in toronto holds, or the conservatives can get the old folks excited after all, the calculation changes.
i'm just trying to get the point across so this isn't misunderstood: there doesn't appear to be a surge towards the ndp so much as there seems to be an extreme level of apathy setting in with the other two parties, which could allow the ndp to double the percentage of their vote, even as they don't actually swing anybody.
but, again: that might not translate into actual seats.
i'm still waiting on the mainstreet numbers.
http://www.ekospolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/full_report_may_25_2018.pdf
he's not publishing these numbers.
i can speculate that he's dealing with the same basic concern, which is that his system is being broken by an electorate that doesn't want to give him a straight answer - because it doesn't have one. that's consistent with the other numbers i'm seeing.
...which isn't to say that i think he's making up numbers. i don't doubt that this is what he has. but, it seems to be reflecting low engagement, rather than a surge of young people swinging ndp. if young liberals & young conservatives just refuse to vote, or are tuning out of the system altogether due to awful choices, the historically solid - but smaller - ndp base looks dominant because they're the only people that are still bothering to show up. they're the only people still excited, the only people still into this.
voter apathy usually helps the conservatives. this is is usually explained by demographics, but it might also have something to do with the conservatives having a more robust grassroots - and they do. maybe a part of the reason that conservatives have higher voting retention is that they're more involved in the selection process. but, conservatives don't like their own guy this time, either. that's unusual.
it may be the ndp that has the most engaged base this election. and, if voter engagement amongst conservatives & liberals is really falling by up to 40%, they may win accidentally due to voter suppression.
it's not hard to believe that the ndp have the most engaged and dedicated voting base amongst young activists; if they're the only young people that bother to vote this election, you get that exaggerated skew out of nowhere.
this at least makes sense to me; it would be less that horwath is swinging all of these liberals all of a sudden, and more that the ndp is the only party that hasn't cratered with it's own support base. and, that is indeed sort of what happened in 1990, right?
but, as mentioned in the analysis, and also by mainstreet, the key variable appears to be turnout modelling. if the liberal ground game in toronto holds, or the conservatives can get the old folks excited after all, the calculation changes.
i'm just trying to get the point across so this isn't misunderstood: there doesn't appear to be a surge towards the ndp so much as there seems to be an extreme level of apathy setting in with the other two parties, which could allow the ndp to double the percentage of their vote, even as they don't actually swing anybody.
but, again: that might not translate into actual seats.
i'm still waiting on the mainstreet numbers.
http://www.ekospolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/full_report_may_25_2018.pdf
forum, living up to it's reputation.
official rebuttal: c'mon.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/05/25/ndp-surges-ahead-in-poll.html
official rebuttal: c'mon.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/05/25/ndp-surges-ahead-in-poll.html
i was initially thinking i had a good pick between two solid parties tomorrow night, and now i'm thinking neither one is really worth it, whether i can get in to the latter or not.
so, do i want to go to trip metal and go home early? that means catching the 1:00 bus, meaning i could probably catch the whole show. but, i think everybody playing is over 65.
the show starts at 4:00 pm.
i'm as picky about techno as i am about anything else, and i've learned the hard way that i'm not just going to ignore it in a blur of inebriation. there's lots of things happening tomorrow night, i'm just not particularly excited about any of it.
i am excited about staying out on a warm night. this is the first really seriously nice night of the year. but not at the expense of pissing away $100 on lacklustre sets.
the other two nights are better and will cost less.
i'm just worried that, if i go to the trip-metal thing, then i won't want to go home after.
ergh.
so, do i want to go to trip metal and go home early? that means catching the 1:00 bus, meaning i could probably catch the whole show. but, i think everybody playing is over 65.
the show starts at 4:00 pm.
i'm as picky about techno as i am about anything else, and i've learned the hard way that i'm not just going to ignore it in a blur of inebriation. there's lots of things happening tomorrow night, i'm just not particularly excited about any of it.
i am excited about staying out on a warm night. this is the first really seriously nice night of the year. but not at the expense of pissing away $100 on lacklustre sets.
the other two nights are better and will cost less.
i'm just worried that, if i go to the trip-metal thing, then i won't want to go home after.
ergh.
Thursday, May 24, 2018
think about it.
what do hardcore techno and hardcore punk have in common?
the beat.
bass-snare ------> bass-clap.
it's actually the same basic premise, the same actual formula. and, so it's easy to hear how one became the other, by changing the instrumentation.
and, the transition point was industrial music.
what do hardcore techno and hardcore punk have in common?
the beat.
bass-snare ------> bass-clap.
it's actually the same basic premise, the same actual formula. and, so it's easy to hear how one became the other, by changing the instrumentation.
and, the transition point was industrial music.
it's not that i doubt the truth of any of this, it's just that it's only one story of the origin of techno.
i could tell you the story of british rave music, the second summer of love and it's originators in what was called industrial music - the scene that developed out of throbbing gristle and psychic tv, and extrapolated itself dramatically through the early warp records catalogue. but, americans have this strange aversion to european anything. this origin story develops techno not out of detroit or berlin but as a corollary of the british punk scene. the first ravers were actually british punks!
a third origin story begins in new york and intersects through the beginnings of hip-hop and the downtown art scene, including the important work of steve reich, and falling together into experimental acts like suicide. and, martin rev is going to be in detroit this weekend.
a fourth origin story begins in japan with the yellow magic orchestra, while a fifth develops from progressive rock and jazz fusion through the vector of early video game programming.
there is no question that detroit has claim to a certain strain of electronic music, but i'm not even certain that 'techno' is really the right name for it. the electronic music from detroit is a variant of house music, and broadly lacks the symphonic or jazz-focused development that most people associate with the term 'techno'. detroit is not the home of the techno crescendo, for example, which is the obvious defining characteristic of what that word means.
but, i think the error here is trying to lay claim to something that was spontaneous and happening everywhere at the same time. fans of punk rock will understand this dilemma, as it is claimed by a number of places, including detroit - which may legitimately have the earliest claim, if it doesn't have the best one. but, everybody knows this is really just silly. punk may have been invented in new york, but it was formed in england, and done best in california.
what detroit can say about techno is that it invented detroit techno - which is tautological.
and, i will say this as plainly as i can: detroit has a reputation of being a place that is hanging on to things. it might want to let this go. the rest of the world knows the truth, detroit - you're not fooling anybody.
https://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/detroit-is-techno-city-and-techno-is-black/Content?oid=12291432&utm_source=widget&utm_medium=articleblog&utm_campaign=rightrail&utm_content=TabbedPopularity
i could tell you the story of british rave music, the second summer of love and it's originators in what was called industrial music - the scene that developed out of throbbing gristle and psychic tv, and extrapolated itself dramatically through the early warp records catalogue. but, americans have this strange aversion to european anything. this origin story develops techno not out of detroit or berlin but as a corollary of the british punk scene. the first ravers were actually british punks!
a third origin story begins in new york and intersects through the beginnings of hip-hop and the downtown art scene, including the important work of steve reich, and falling together into experimental acts like suicide. and, martin rev is going to be in detroit this weekend.
a fourth origin story begins in japan with the yellow magic orchestra, while a fifth develops from progressive rock and jazz fusion through the vector of early video game programming.
there is no question that detroit has claim to a certain strain of electronic music, but i'm not even certain that 'techno' is really the right name for it. the electronic music from detroit is a variant of house music, and broadly lacks the symphonic or jazz-focused development that most people associate with the term 'techno'. detroit is not the home of the techno crescendo, for example, which is the obvious defining characteristic of what that word means.
but, i think the error here is trying to lay claim to something that was spontaneous and happening everywhere at the same time. fans of punk rock will understand this dilemma, as it is claimed by a number of places, including detroit - which may legitimately have the earliest claim, if it doesn't have the best one. but, everybody knows this is really just silly. punk may have been invented in new york, but it was formed in england, and done best in california.
what detroit can say about techno is that it invented detroit techno - which is tautological.
and, i will say this as plainly as i can: detroit has a reputation of being a place that is hanging on to things. it might want to let this go. the rest of the world knows the truth, detroit - you're not fooling anybody.
https://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/detroit-is-techno-city-and-techno-is-black/Content?oid=12291432&utm_source=widget&utm_medium=articleblog&utm_campaign=rightrail&utm_content=TabbedPopularity
on third thought...
the modern cathedrals show is actually over at 4:30 - there's a "chill out" set to close it down. so, i'm really only going to get an ~4 hour set of...moderately interesting techno...if i get there a bit after midnight. the headliners are on from 1:30-4:30, so that's three hours. if we get the advertised set...
terrence dixon doesn't have an endpoint to his set, so it could in theory go to 4:00. & kenny larkin seems a bit boomy, but, i am going to be drinking and looking to dance, after all. so, if i get there a bit before midnight (it's closer), or closer to 11:00 (if i leave early for it), i'm looking at an hour or two of silly techno, and at least two hours of something more interesting. it could be three hours. if we get a longer set on the deck...
if i go to the magic stick, and it's done early, i'm sure to end up in the neighbourhood of the tangent gallery, at least. they've been clear that nobody's buying tickets at the door. but, if i show up at 3:30, and twenty people have left, what do they do?
i may have nothing better to do than try.
and, if they're running late..
hrmmn.
i'm using paypal money, which means the cover for the other two nights is unbudgeted; it's not free, but it doesn't come out of anything meant for anything else. the other parties are all free. outside of beer money, this is the only thing coming out of my pocket.
i'll see how i feel tomorrow afternoon, i guess; i could end up at the magic stick, after all.
what i want is for the line-up at the magic stick to be staggered just a tad later, and in a way that people aren't competing with each other.
the modern cathedrals show is actually over at 4:30 - there's a "chill out" set to close it down. so, i'm really only going to get an ~4 hour set of...moderately interesting techno...if i get there a bit after midnight. the headliners are on from 1:30-4:30, so that's three hours. if we get the advertised set...
terrence dixon doesn't have an endpoint to his set, so it could in theory go to 4:00. & kenny larkin seems a bit boomy, but, i am going to be drinking and looking to dance, after all. so, if i get there a bit before midnight (it's closer), or closer to 11:00 (if i leave early for it), i'm looking at an hour or two of silly techno, and at least two hours of something more interesting. it could be three hours. if we get a longer set on the deck...
if i go to the magic stick, and it's done early, i'm sure to end up in the neighbourhood of the tangent gallery, at least. they've been clear that nobody's buying tickets at the door. but, if i show up at 3:30, and twenty people have left, what do they do?
i may have nothing better to do than try.
and, if they're running late..
hrmmn.
i'm using paypal money, which means the cover for the other two nights is unbudgeted; it's not free, but it doesn't come out of anything meant for anything else. the other parties are all free. outside of beer money, this is the only thing coming out of my pocket.
i'll see how i feel tomorrow afternoon, i guess; i could end up at the magic stick, after all.
what i want is for the line-up at the magic stick to be staggered just a tad later, and in a way that people aren't competing with each other.
the conservatives won a large number of seats in toronto in the 2008 federal election by using media to run the leader of the party, stephane dion, into the ground.
very few toronto liberals voted for the conservatives or ndp, but enough avoided voting altogether that it got harper a lot closer to a majority.
if main street is right, and turnout is down by as much as 40%, that might be the right model to look at. and, if it is, and the depressed turnout is overwhelmingly liberal in past voting intentions, it might be the case that the second-place parties end up winning seats by default - because liberals have completely tuned out.
the liberals have a strong base in toronto. it might be easier and more likely to suppress than swing.
but, they also have a strong ground game and this has been underestimated before.
as i've pointed out a few times: if toronto holds liberal, we could see provincial numbers swing all over the place, and very few seats actually change hands. the vote is strongly concentrated; if they get wiped out outside toronto, and yet hold it, they could end up third in the popular vote, and still win the most seats. you'd need them running in the high 20s, minimum, though. but, if liberals don't vote, in the end, it's hard to imagine any outcome besides a tory win.
people hate this woman. i get it. but, if she has the best ground game in the most populous region, it doesn't matter.
the tories don't have a large enough swing to compete where they haven't already won. and, the ndp need a 10+% swing to be serious, not a 5% one.
we'll see what the numbers say tomorrow. but i'm still holding to a likely pc minority.
very few toronto liberals voted for the conservatives or ndp, but enough avoided voting altogether that it got harper a lot closer to a majority.
if main street is right, and turnout is down by as much as 40%, that might be the right model to look at. and, if it is, and the depressed turnout is overwhelmingly liberal in past voting intentions, it might be the case that the second-place parties end up winning seats by default - because liberals have completely tuned out.
the liberals have a strong base in toronto. it might be easier and more likely to suppress than swing.
but, they also have a strong ground game and this has been underestimated before.
as i've pointed out a few times: if toronto holds liberal, we could see provincial numbers swing all over the place, and very few seats actually change hands. the vote is strongly concentrated; if they get wiped out outside toronto, and yet hold it, they could end up third in the popular vote, and still win the most seats. you'd need them running in the high 20s, minimum, though. but, if liberals don't vote, in the end, it's hard to imagine any outcome besides a tory win.
people hate this woman. i get it. but, if she has the best ground game in the most populous region, it doesn't matter.
the tories don't have a large enough swing to compete where they haven't already won. and, the ndp need a 10+% swing to be serious, not a 5% one.
we'll see what the numbers say tomorrow. but i'm still holding to a likely pc minority.
it would be nice to get a second opinion, but he's the only scientific pollster in the field, right now.
https://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/ontario-campaign-2018-state-of-the-race/
https://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/ontario-campaign-2018-state-of-the-race/
the mainstreet poll should be out tomorrow, i think. we'll see if it picks up the same movement to the ndp or not.
if it doesn't, the media will reject it as an "outlier". wrong.
it's the only scientific poll in the field. you can't be an outlier, when the sample size is one.
rather, what it will demonstrate - again - is that the "online polling" is merely propaganda.
if it does pick up the same trend, what we'll need to look at is how it's being quantified. i would not be surprised, at this point, to see some firming of ndp support at the expense of the liberals - if for no other reason that the media is pushing it down so strongly. but, i would be very surprised to see the ndp competing with the tories for first place.
i think that what the polling is going to reveal is the following:
1) are undecideds remaining steady, or are they beginning to shift one way or another?
2) how seriously do we need to take the idea of a hung parliament?
if it doesn't, the media will reject it as an "outlier". wrong.
it's the only scientific poll in the field. you can't be an outlier, when the sample size is one.
rather, what it will demonstrate - again - is that the "online polling" is merely propaganda.
if it does pick up the same trend, what we'll need to look at is how it's being quantified. i would not be surprised, at this point, to see some firming of ndp support at the expense of the liberals - if for no other reason that the media is pushing it down so strongly. but, i would be very surprised to see the ndp competing with the tories for first place.
i think that what the polling is going to reveal is the following:
1) are undecideds remaining steady, or are they beginning to shift one way or another?
2) how seriously do we need to take the idea of a hung parliament?
hrmmn.
i might end up staying in tomorrow; the late party doesn't seem worth it, but then the early party doesn't, either.
i made a kind of a bad gamble, in thinking the line-up at the magic stick was actually better than the one at modern cathedrals, and if i was going to show up late after trip metal, anyways, i'd probably have a better time at the magic stick. the tickets were also cheaper...and there was no warning of an increase in price....
i figured if i got to the magic stick at 12:00 and stayed there until 4:00, i could get a coffee at the old diner around 4:30, leave a little after 5:00 and catch the early bus to get ready for the next day, which starts at 22:00 and runs until the next afternoon. less crazy than staying at tangent until 6:00, but tangent has been raided more than once, too - there's no guarantee they'll be open until 6:00. if tangent does get raided, i'm the one laughing at the stick right?
but, they've since doubled the price of the ticket (to the same cost as the modern cathedrals show) and put the two djs i wanted to see on at the same time. these particular djs are the most interesting ones playing anywhere on that night, they really are, but i'm not really interested in paying $30 for a two hour set and spending it bouncing between areas - and then having to find a late party somewhere else, anyways.
modern cathedrals is now sold out.
i'm wondering if my secret hideout might be open. it's not far from the modern cathedrals show. and, are they really going to turn people away once people start exiting, fucked up on whatever? i probably wouldn't get there until 1:00, anyways.
ack.
if i can't find a late party, i'll probably stay in tomorrow. that's ok, i've got two long nights planned afterwards.
i might end up staying in tomorrow; the late party doesn't seem worth it, but then the early party doesn't, either.
i made a kind of a bad gamble, in thinking the line-up at the magic stick was actually better than the one at modern cathedrals, and if i was going to show up late after trip metal, anyways, i'd probably have a better time at the magic stick. the tickets were also cheaper...and there was no warning of an increase in price....
i figured if i got to the magic stick at 12:00 and stayed there until 4:00, i could get a coffee at the old diner around 4:30, leave a little after 5:00 and catch the early bus to get ready for the next day, which starts at 22:00 and runs until the next afternoon. less crazy than staying at tangent until 6:00, but tangent has been raided more than once, too - there's no guarantee they'll be open until 6:00. if tangent does get raided, i'm the one laughing at the stick right?
but, they've since doubled the price of the ticket (to the same cost as the modern cathedrals show) and put the two djs i wanted to see on at the same time. these particular djs are the most interesting ones playing anywhere on that night, they really are, but i'm not really interested in paying $30 for a two hour set and spending it bouncing between areas - and then having to find a late party somewhere else, anyways.
modern cathedrals is now sold out.
i'm wondering if my secret hideout might be open. it's not far from the modern cathedrals show. and, are they really going to turn people away once people start exiting, fucked up on whatever? i probably wouldn't get there until 1:00, anyways.
ack.
if i can't find a late party, i'll probably stay in tomorrow. that's ok, i've got two long nights planned afterwards.
fell asleep again this morning. argh. and, i ate early, too, to prevent it. *shrug*.
the air quality is certainly suspect in these early crashes, but it's hard to tie together anything substantive. i'm happy it's nice and warm in here, anyways.
my drugs are now fully covered, which gives me an extra $85/month, which i may very well spend on rent. it expands the scope of what's available, anyways.
i got a hold of somebody about a non-smoking apartment, but it's available for june 1st. if i break the lease, i won't get my last month's back, so i'd be breaking it for july 1st, as of right now (and not paying june). and, after june 1st, it's going to be rigid for august (meaning i won't pay july). i'll need to wait until the next showing.
and, i've decided, for that reason, i should wait until next week to make any more calls. i don't want to be tempted, and after i pay june's rent there's no longer a choice.
that means i'll need to find something over the weeks of june.
still need to call a dentist...
the air quality is certainly suspect in these early crashes, but it's hard to tie together anything substantive. i'm happy it's nice and warm in here, anyways.
my drugs are now fully covered, which gives me an extra $85/month, which i may very well spend on rent. it expands the scope of what's available, anyways.
i got a hold of somebody about a non-smoking apartment, but it's available for june 1st. if i break the lease, i won't get my last month's back, so i'd be breaking it for july 1st, as of right now (and not paying june). and, after june 1st, it's going to be rigid for august (meaning i won't pay july). i'll need to wait until the next showing.
and, i've decided, for that reason, i should wait until next week to make any more calls. i don't want to be tempted, and after i pay june's rent there's no longer a choice.
that means i'll need to find something over the weeks of june.
still need to call a dentist...
also: when i was a child, i never cried.
not that i remember, it's what my mom said.
i was apparently highly non-vocal all around, but just started talking in full, flowing sentences one day, out of the blue. it was apparently concluded by some doctors that i had decided against speaking. i just didn't want to talk.
was i an existentialist as a toddler? was life already so absurd, that there wasn't any point in speaking? did i realize that nothing good comes out of arguing, so i'm better off being quiet?
in hindsight, i don't think this is far from the truth. i might suggest that what was happening was actually a lack of emotion, and reflective of a personality disorder; i was a little sociopath, really. aren't all toddlers sociopaths? not in an introverted sense, like this.
she says it was clear that i understood her, but i just refused to actually respond. until i did, one day. and instantly converted myself from a borderline autism case into a highly precocious gifted gift.
fine lines.
not that i remember, it's what my mom said.
i was apparently highly non-vocal all around, but just started talking in full, flowing sentences one day, out of the blue. it was apparently concluded by some doctors that i had decided against speaking. i just didn't want to talk.
was i an existentialist as a toddler? was life already so absurd, that there wasn't any point in speaking? did i realize that nothing good comes out of arguing, so i'm better off being quiet?
in hindsight, i don't think this is far from the truth. i might suggest that what was happening was actually a lack of emotion, and reflective of a personality disorder; i was a little sociopath, really. aren't all toddlers sociopaths? not in an introverted sense, like this.
she says it was clear that i understood her, but i just refused to actually respond. until i did, one day. and instantly converted myself from a borderline autism case into a highly precocious gifted gift.
fine lines.
what i think is that hip-hop is the absolute pinnacle of gramscian hetero-patriarchal conditioning, using quasi-scientific methods, and that the effectiveness of this strategy is clear from the empirical results: the target audience is a perfect representation of the status quo. it's not just kanye west.
your hip-hop records are just corporate brainwashing, intended to teach you to love capitalism and the systems of control that uphold it.
your hip-hop records are just corporate brainwashing, intended to teach you to love capitalism and the systems of control that uphold it.
there still hasn't been any scientific polling released since the weekend.
and, no - it's not the case that you can argue that the unscientific polls are convincing if they're consistent with themselves. fallacy.
i'm not arguing that the unscientific polling is necessarily wrong; it might be correct, by coincidence. or, it's trajectory might be continuing evidence of the argument i presented previously - that the media is trying to split the vote.
i'll need to consult some scientific polling before i can present an analysis of this.
and, no - it's not the case that you can argue that the unscientific polls are convincing if they're consistent with themselves. fallacy.
i'm not arguing that the unscientific polling is necessarily wrong; it might be correct, by coincidence. or, it's trajectory might be continuing evidence of the argument i presented previously - that the media is trying to split the vote.
i'll need to consult some scientific polling before i can present an analysis of this.
my teeth.
if you're curious.
i have never had a cavity, and rarely go to the dentist. i have all of my teeth, still. in fact, i have some crowding in the back - a few extra.
it was now quite a while ago that i went to the dentist for the first time in years, and what he did was fill in a couple of gaps with some kind of cement. i can't remember what the procedure was called, but he literally just drew it in.
since then, i've drank a lot of coffee, and picked up some stains on the cement in my mouth. it's not the prettiest thing, but it's just cosmetic.
i never made it to the follow-up, because i moved to windsor from ottawa. and i was waiting to quit smoking before i booked another appointment. and then after i quit i just never got around to it.
i'm going to have my phone open this morning. and i'm going to try and book an appointment.
i repeat: it's coffee stains. it's cosmetic. i'm going to guess they'll paint over them; my teeth are, in fact, actually flawless.
if you're curious.
i have never had a cavity, and rarely go to the dentist. i have all of my teeth, still. in fact, i have some crowding in the back - a few extra.
it was now quite a while ago that i went to the dentist for the first time in years, and what he did was fill in a couple of gaps with some kind of cement. i can't remember what the procedure was called, but he literally just drew it in.
since then, i've drank a lot of coffee, and picked up some stains on the cement in my mouth. it's not the prettiest thing, but it's just cosmetic.
i never made it to the follow-up, because i moved to windsor from ottawa. and i was waiting to quit smoking before i booked another appointment. and then after i quit i just never got around to it.
i'm going to have my phone open this morning. and i'm going to try and book an appointment.
i repeat: it's coffee stains. it's cosmetic. i'm going to guess they'll paint over them; my teeth are, in fact, actually flawless.
i want to be clear though.
when you kill a fly (and i'm actually fairly good at catching them with my bare hands), there is a fly carcass that you then need to retrieve and flush.
but, when you kill a moth, it often vanishes into some alternate dimension - because it's just water.
i've pulled two of these things out of my hair tonight and they're just water. no carcass. just kersplat. but they're like two-three times the size of a house fly.
if they were may flies, i'd be getting swarmed, right? or there would be a swarm outside. there's not.
hrmmn.
when you kill a fly (and i'm actually fairly good at catching them with my bare hands), there is a fly carcass that you then need to retrieve and flush.
but, when you kill a moth, it often vanishes into some alternate dimension - because it's just water.
i've pulled two of these things out of my hair tonight and they're just water. no carcass. just kersplat. but they're like two-three times the size of a house fly.
if they were may flies, i'd be getting swarmed, right? or there would be a swarm outside. there's not.
hrmmn.
no.
wait.
that can't be right; they're aquatic in that phase.
hrmmn. not certain what these bugs are, then. they fly, land in your hair, are about 2-3 cm long and are squished into water on quite minimal force.
i haven't see any roaches in here since december, but the ones i saw were climbing species and i'm wondering if it's humid enough for them to fly....which would be creepy...
they could be very small mayflies? ugh. i've killed two tonight, but, like i say, they just squished into water on immediate contact - i'll have to see if i can get one in a good enough condition to study.
wait.
that can't be right; they're aquatic in that phase.
hrmmn. not certain what these bugs are, then. they fly, land in your hair, are about 2-3 cm long and are squished into water on quite minimal force.
i haven't see any roaches in here since december, but the ones i saw were climbing species and i'm wondering if it's humid enough for them to fly....which would be creepy...
they could be very small mayflies? ugh. i've killed two tonight, but, like i say, they just squished into water on immediate contact - i'll have to see if i can get one in a good enough condition to study.
you know, they don't have mayflies in ottawa.
that's two, tonight. i guess they came in the window...they just fall right on you...
i remember seeing them last year when i biked out to tecumseh to see a neurologist. just swarms of them all over the store....first time i'd seen one, creeped me out...
i just hate getting bugs in my hair. ick. and it's nice to knoiw what they actually are.
i think they're mayflies, anyways. the nymphs...
that's two, tonight. i guess they came in the window...they just fall right on you...
i remember seeing them last year when i biked out to tecumseh to see a neurologist. just swarms of them all over the store....first time i'd seen one, creeped me out...
i just hate getting bugs in my hair. ick. and it's nice to knoiw what they actually are.
i think they're mayflies, anyways. the nymphs...
Wednesday, May 23, 2018
collective bargaining ought to be absolute to a point, there does need to be a concept of essential services that can't be shut down, but nobody should take the ndp seriously when they claim some pure adherence to it.
every government passes back to work legislation.
it's dirty but it's necessary, sometimes.
every government passes back to work legislation.
it's dirty but it's necessary, sometimes.
my hydro bill would be about $30/month - $10 for electricity and $20 for delivery. and i don't use a/c. ever. in fact, i complain about the neighbours when they do...
i get a $70 rebate under the hydro plan.
so, i get about $35 a month, credit.
so, my credit at enwin is currently about $150. i don't know if they pay it out at the end, or not.
under horwath's plan, if taken at face value, i'd go from $0 to $20.
i'd rather pay $0 than $20.
i get a $70 rebate under the hydro plan.
so, i get about $35 a month, credit.
so, my credit at enwin is currently about $150. i don't know if they pay it out at the end, or not.
under horwath's plan, if taken at face value, i'd go from $0 to $20.
i'd rather pay $0 than $20.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)