these are very bad numbers for a democratic candidate in michigan, and reflective of the 13% turnout:

EPIC-MRA[296][F]	July 24–31, 2026	600 (LV)	± 4.0%	43%	46%	—	11%
SoCal Strategies (R)[219][A]	July 28–30, 2026	640 (LV)	± 3.8%	41%	42%	—	17%
Mitchell Research & Communications[297]	July 28–29, 2026	672 (LV)	± 3.8%	45%	45%	—	10%
Glengariff Group[298][O]	July 22–24, 2026	600 (LV)	± 4.0%	39%	49%	1%	11%

the first number is for the scruffy homeless-looking abdul el sayed. the second number is for the more presentable looking mike rogers.

michigan has not elected a republican senator since the early 90s. the margin has been narrowing in recent years, but the republicans have not won this state in decades. that makes it a reliable democrat-electing state. in fact, debbie stabenow reliably got over 50% and carl levin often got over 60%.

so why are these numbers so low? why can this guy barely poll at 40% when numbers in the state have recently been reliably 50+ for the democrats?

the first thing to note is that the republicans are actually polling about what they usually do; republican senate candidates usually poll in the mid to high 40s. it's rare for them to poll lower than 45%. this same candidate got 48% in 2024, and lost to elissa slotkin, who is turning out to be a very good senator. he will almost certainly get around 48% again.

what's happened is that large amounts of usually democratic voters are saying "i don't like this guy" by telling pollsters that they're undecided, and it's not because he's left-wing. he's not leftwing at all. like most arabs, he's extremely right-wing and accurately described as a quasi-fascist.

that undecided likely does not mean "undecided between the republicans and democrats". that 10-15% undecided is the actual left of the democratic party, who is uncomfortable with supporting a right-wing democrat and may decide not to vote at all. that's what just happened in the primary - very low turnout allowed the right-wing fringe candidate to win. if that is repeated in the general, the republicans will win in michigan for the first time in over 30 years and this tactic of putting scruffy homeless-looking people on the bill to appeal to a 2% minority will expose itself as foolish.

mr el-sayed's task is that he needs to convince the party's left to vote for him, instead of stay home, while not alienating moderates too deeply. he's not likely to succeed.

if turnout goes down by 10% in the end, the results will look something like:

mike rogers - 53%

sayed - 42%

others - 5%

and that would be the worst outcome for democrats in michigan in decades, by far. it is very likely what is coming.

greta thunberg has been completely brainwashed by islam.

it's actually a helpful case study for the secular left. she happen to be retarded, and less able to protect herself from brainwashing than others, and look what they've done to her. it's absolutely frightening, and a clear warning of the dangers posed by the religious right in co-opting the political left. let her be the poster child for the dangers of islamic brainwashing.

we live in an idiocracy with a judiciary made up of fucking idiots. i've been constantly frustrated by the sheer stupidity of the judges i've had to deal with, their overwhelming incompetence when faced with simple tasks involving analyzing clear evidence, their inability to process simple logic, their inability to follow their own instructions and their frequent levels of deep corruption.

i've already decided that the courts are a waste of time. canadians need to find ways to get to just outcomes outside of the legal system, because the legal system is broken.

today's astonishing order features an adjudicator that didn't understand grade school math, and wanted an expert witness to explain to him how to read a graph. i did not foresee this, but i'm not sure it matters much. i'm an expert witness on grade school math, and i told them that, but an expert witness is only required to explain grade school math to people that failed it. 

i don't think any level of testimony would have helped this guy understand something that he clearly lacked the basic education to understand. little less than sending him back to adult high school to learn basic math would have been helpful. he did not understand how to read the graph and was not going to understand how to read it. but if that's the person who's holding the gavel, what do you do?

there is no longer an appeals process in canada, due to vavilov. bad rulings with errors that might have previously been corrected on appeal are no longer allowed to have appeals to them heard at all. in the absence of a working appeals process, errors of fact and law become established as precedent and repeated in future rulings. the result is the co-option of case law and the perpetuation of nonsense built up on top of itself via stare decisis.

the last time we saw this in western culture was during the dark ages, when volumes of nonsense were written on the back of the ignorance of aristotle. we are falling back into the backwards judeao-muslim-christian ideological frameworks that we emerged from during the enlightenment.

our utterly broken court system has repeatedly astonished me. the point of failure is the incompetent judiciary, installed through insufficiently rigorous hiring processes. too many people get hired because of how they look and when they're screened for qualifications it's to align with a market libertarian ideology that is inconsistent with the crux of canada's settled common law, which is about individual rights. we're seeing the entire legal edifice collapse, and it's being replaced by this horrible catholic civil law that nobody voted for and few people want. but people aren't aware of what's happening, which is a massive quiet counter-revolution in the guts of the legal system.

canadians need to put a focus on electing secular politicians before it's too late, if it isn't already. it's extremely important. we're on the brink of a collapse into totalitarianism, and we've lost the courts without realizing what was happening. fixing the courts will come as a corollary of a move back towards secular governance. 

i was really looking forward to being able to just bike home after the show, or after the bar closes, at 3:00 am or whatever. i was looking forward to the freedom of not having to worry about tunnel bus hours anymore.

if they stick to these extremely restricted hours, trump might end up being right - not many people are going to want to use the bridge between 8:00 and 20:00. what if somebody wants to bike over to the hockey game? i'd imagine that would be the highest traffic use of a pedestrian bridge between detroit and windsor, is canadians going to see the red wings.

they'd have to leave before 16:00 and wouldn't be able to come back until 8:00 am. that would be utterly useless.

the path should be open 24/7, or at least have expanded hours from 4:00 am to 11:00 pm or something. 8-20 or 8-16 is completely useless to anybody expect joggers, and that'll get old in a few weeks.

the path on the bridge is only open from 8:00-20:00 in the summer and from 8:00-16:00 in the winter. so, if i'm going over for a concert that starts at 21:00 or a party that starts at 00:00, i need to cross in the early evening, and the thing i was hoping it would solve - having to find something to do until 8:00 am - is left unresolved. i'll still have to sit in the diner until 7:30 am. 

fuck it.

i'd rather use the tunnel bus. bring the bus with the bike rack back.

i don't understand who in their right mind would think that occupying latvia, which is a russian colony by any understanding of it's history and which has absolutely no value to canada whatsoever, would have greater strategic value to canadian interests than maintaining peacekeeping forces in congo or sudan, where brutal genocidal conflicts involving expanding arabic colonialism are raging and threatening to trigger into a third world war. 

canada should pull it's forces out of europe and put them in africa, not pull it's forces out of africa and put them in europe.

but what's going on here is the continuation of carney's trump wannabe foreign policy, where he criticizes america first for the cameras, but legislates it at every possible opportunity.

putting canadian troops in latvia does not make the world safer or expand canadian interests. however, removing canadian troops from africa makes the world a more dangerous place and harms canadian interests, by generating further push factors for immigration, by further encouraging systemic overpopulation and by increasing the likelihood of the spread of dangerous diseases.

trying to create a debate between whether we have fires because of climate change or mismanagement is politically slimy and erecting a false dichotomy. it's an example of the moral depravity of modern liberalism. the point is that a consequence of climate change - and the fact that we have failed to stop it by continuing to burn carbon - is that we now have an obligation to dramatically increase the amount we are spending on managing the forests, and the governments in ontario and elsewhere have been slashing budgets in a dumb attempt to find "efficiencies" instead. this is a failure in policy that voters should hold them accountable for. trump's position is not coherent, but he's right, and i'd support his proposals.

i'm reminded of the catastrophe in walkerton, where slashes to water management by the provincial government led to outbreaks in disease you expect in third world countries. we rightfully held mike harris accountable for that. we need to hold doug ford accountable for this.

canadians are going to have to get used to the reality that our governments are going to have to spend dramatically higher sums on forest management because we have failed to meet our climate obligations. the actuaries warned us about this - they told us the math was clear, that the consequences would cost dramatically higher sums than the preventive measures. we didn't listen, we just kept burning fuel. we fought against attempt to force us to change. and now we have to pay up and face the music and, if we won't, the rest of the world should impose those costs on us for failing in our responsibilities to ourselves and our neighbours.