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.
Tuesday, May 29, 2018
"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.
to be fair, horwath is also promising to take some production offline, which would in theory reduce prices, if it weren't for the need to absorb the payouts.
the only way to reduce prices is to use more electricity. it's counter-intuitive, but it's the way the system was designed; we were supposed to have electric cars by now. things like expanded subway and rail lines, or a push for new streetlights, would actually help to lower costs. christmas lights all year? art installations? you get the point.
i benefit from wynne's plan; i get free hydro, although i'm going to be looking for something all inclusive for august, too. if ford wants to carry through with it, great. but, horwath would actually raise my electrical bill from $0 to something more than $0, and because i'm dealing with small sums it's substantive percentages of total income. if i take them at face value, i'd be better off with ford than horwath - and i'm at the absolute bottom of the income scale.
https://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/8623194-hydro-sparks-election-debate-but-parties-promises-don-t-add-up/
the only way to reduce prices is to use more electricity. it's counter-intuitive, but it's the way the system was designed; we were supposed to have electric cars by now. things like expanded subway and rail lines, or a push for new streetlights, would actually help to lower costs. christmas lights all year? art installations? you get the point.
i benefit from wynne's plan; i get free hydro, although i'm going to be looking for something all inclusive for august, too. if ford wants to carry through with it, great. but, horwath would actually raise my electrical bill from $0 to something more than $0, and because i'm dealing with small sums it's substantive percentages of total income. if i take them at face value, i'd be better off with ford than horwath - and i'm at the absolute bottom of the income scale.
https://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/8623194-hydro-sparks-election-debate-but-parties-promises-don-t-add-up/
i got lucky and found a good spot.
i got unlucky and had it taken over by a terrible person.
this place sucks...
i can find another good spot, i'm sure.
http://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/apartment-rental-rates-in-windsor-lowest-in-nation-study-says
i got unlucky and had it taken over by a terrible person.
this place sucks...
i can find another good spot, i'm sure.
http://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/apartment-rental-rates-in-windsor-lowest-in-nation-study-says
so, the same thing happened this morning that happened yesterday, although i have to point that a big part of it was that it was so cold in here...so i sat down to warm up and passed out.
*shrug*
this is the adjustment i'm going to make: i'm going to start looking early tomorrow morning, and make some calls before i eat.
i guess i'm back to rebuilding for the night.
*shrug*
this is the adjustment i'm going to make: i'm going to start looking early tomorrow morning, and make some calls before i eat.
i guess i'm back to rebuilding for the night.
if we had a right-leaning liberal government in ontario, it wouldn't matter - it couldn't get worse, right?
we don't.
the sitting liberal government in ontario is actually by far the most left-leaning in the country.
it's just not the right time to make the gamble, especially not given horwath's historical tendencies to lean to the right.
we don't.
the sitting liberal government in ontario is actually by far the most left-leaning in the country.
it's just not the right time to make the gamble, especially not given horwath's historical tendencies to lean to the right.
i don't remember bob rae either, but i'm educated enough on the history to understand what the ndp are all about: they're a controlled opposition party that campaigns on the left and governs on the right, which is where their history in fire and brimstone prairie populism is.
their founder, tommy douglas, was basically a nazi.
throughout the years, there's always been reasons to keep them out. they've held homophobic positions, racist positions, xenophobic positions, backwards positions on trade, weird positions on the constitution, bizarre positions on sovereignty, scary ideas about electoral reform - ideas that smart people have, in the end, usually rejected. sometimes, they produce good mps, and you want them on committee. but, you've generally wanted to keep the way they think - this "progressive" ideology - out of government, because it just leads to calvinism and eugenics, in the end.
the liberals have always been the more secular and more humanist party. and, they've always done the heavy lifting, in the end.
their founder, tommy douglas, was basically a nazi.
throughout the years, there's always been reasons to keep them out. they've held homophobic positions, racist positions, xenophobic positions, backwards positions on trade, weird positions on the constitution, bizarre positions on sovereignty, scary ideas about electoral reform - ideas that smart people have, in the end, usually rejected. sometimes, they produce good mps, and you want them on committee. but, you've generally wanted to keep the way they think - this "progressive" ideology - out of government, because it just leads to calvinism and eugenics, in the end.
the liberals have always been the more secular and more humanist party. and, they've always done the heavy lifting, in the end.
the ndp are famous in canada for running on great platforms, and then not carrying through with any of it - or even doing the exact opposite.
rae won primarily on universal auto insurance, which never happened.
the 2015 election aside, where the liberals and ndp switched roles, the liberals usually run less flashy and more realistic campaigns, then tend to actually follow through with it.
so, you need to be constantly weighing that out.
but, the ndp will not do anything in their platform; they never do.
rae won primarily on universal auto insurance, which never happened.
the 2015 election aside, where the liberals and ndp switched roles, the liberals usually run less flashy and more realistic campaigns, then tend to actually follow through with it.
so, you need to be constantly weighing that out.
but, the ndp will not do anything in their platform; they never do.
it's not just bob rae. i mean, if you're talking about the ontario election, you cite bob rae as the obvious betrayer.
in the end, bob rae became a liberal, but it was clear he always was; i think andrea horwath is a conservative.
but, it's not just bob rae, it's the entire party, at every level of government. the sad truth is that there is not a single example of an actual left-wing ndp government. not even one. they're batting 0.
rachel notley is a pawn of the oil industry - veritably as far right as jason kenney. thomas mulcair lost because he ran to the right of justin trudeau. roy romanow has been praised by the fraser institute (the canadian heritage foundation, for those unclear). darrell dexter, greg selinger, ujjal dosanjh - every single one of them betrays their own base and lines up behind capital, in the end.
andrea horwath herself was heavily criticized four years ago for running to the right of the liberals.
you can fool me once, and you can fool me twice. but, after the thirty-seventh time? i'm not getting fooled again.
the knowledgeable political geek should realize that this isn't as obvious as a novice mind might think. it's not at all clear if horwath or ford are going to push bigger cuts, even if it is clear that ford will run deeper deficits.
it's not just bob rae; the ndp have never been what they claimed they were.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/05/22/consigning-the-bob-rae-monster-to-the-pages-of-history.html
in the end, bob rae became a liberal, but it was clear he always was; i think andrea horwath is a conservative.
but, it's not just bob rae, it's the entire party, at every level of government. the sad truth is that there is not a single example of an actual left-wing ndp government. not even one. they're batting 0.
rachel notley is a pawn of the oil industry - veritably as far right as jason kenney. thomas mulcair lost because he ran to the right of justin trudeau. roy romanow has been praised by the fraser institute (the canadian heritage foundation, for those unclear). darrell dexter, greg selinger, ujjal dosanjh - every single one of them betrays their own base and lines up behind capital, in the end.
andrea horwath herself was heavily criticized four years ago for running to the right of the liberals.
you can fool me once, and you can fool me twice. but, after the thirty-seventh time? i'm not getting fooled again.
the knowledgeable political geek should realize that this isn't as obvious as a novice mind might think. it's not at all clear if horwath or ford are going to push bigger cuts, even if it is clear that ford will run deeper deficits.
it's not just bob rae; the ndp have never been what they claimed they were.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/05/22/consigning-the-bob-rae-monster-to-the-pages-of-history.html
and, i'm now through april, 2016.
50 days left to go. 150 pages.
i need to eat & get looking...
the stench today appears to be cigarettes, and this is something that happens periodically; i don't know exactly where it's coming from, but it's enough that i've had to use the puffer. again: it's just overwhelming.
who smokes like this in a residential space? who is that selfish and clueless?
the people in this city are just horrible assholes. they just don't have any concept of decency, or self-respect. it's absurd, really/
50 days left to go. 150 pages.
i need to eat & get looking...
the stench today appears to be cigarettes, and this is something that happens periodically; i don't know exactly where it's coming from, but it's enough that i've had to use the puffer. again: it's just overwhelming.
who smokes like this in a residential space? who is that selfish and clueless?
the people in this city are just horrible assholes. they just don't have any concept of decency, or self-respect. it's absurd, really/
i actually don't think that the causes of transsexuality - or homosexuality - are being approached from the right angles.
i don't think that the reimer study proves anything more than that identity cannot be enforced. and, there is absolutely no convincing evidence of a genetic cause for any of this at all, whatsoever. i'll acknowledge some logic in the ideas of prenatal exposure, but i would expect these to have measurable physical consequences - like hermaphrodism - rather than abstract effects on brain chemistry that are easy to imagine but difficult to actually demonstrate.
i think that the proper idea has more to do with what psychologists call conditioning, and that the orientations and identities we see in front of us are complex things that are the result of chaotic interactions - it is learned in the sense that it is not genetic, but a lot of it is learned in an unconscious manner. identity & orientation are consequently stochastic & non-linear phenomena that can't be reduced to any specific or easy to understand cause. the cause of my own dysphoria is likely entirely different than the cause of another person's, as they both come out of random conditioning processes.
but, at the end of the day, i'm an autonomous being, and i made the decision to transition. i would react pretty violently to suggestions otherwise, as it would be a denial of agency.
i think the real issue here is a kind of scam by the pseudo-left to try and work through the contradictions in dealing with equality and what religion says about equality. if you look at this carefully, these ideas are broadly legal, rather than scientific in origin (although there are some unconvincing studies that attempted to demonstrate these legal ideas). what these people want to do is bridge a gap - they're told that these are "sinful" choices, so they react by trying to argue that it isn't a choice at all.
it's a neat legal argument, granted. and, we should be grateful when it has worked to get people out of trouble for sodomy charges, for example. but, the evidence does not support this.
further, as an atheist, i don't feel any imperative to align my views with those of some church. i don't care if some imam or some pastor somewhere thinks my decisions are "sinful", or feel any need to bow down to their authority on the matter. i'm perfectly willing to look them in the eye and tell them they're wrong to question my choices, and have no right to tell me my behaviour is immoral. and, i'd really like to see the left adopt this position.
for the foreseeable future, though, this debate is likely to carry on without any meaningful resolution. so long as the money is there, scientists will keep looking for something that isn't there. at the end of it, we'll at least be able to understand that and start looking for another explanation.
but, i don't think there's a single cause; i think it's best understood using chaos theory and unintentional subconscious psychological conditioning, rather than using genetics.
i don't think that the reimer study proves anything more than that identity cannot be enforced. and, there is absolutely no convincing evidence of a genetic cause for any of this at all, whatsoever. i'll acknowledge some logic in the ideas of prenatal exposure, but i would expect these to have measurable physical consequences - like hermaphrodism - rather than abstract effects on brain chemistry that are easy to imagine but difficult to actually demonstrate.
i think that the proper idea has more to do with what psychologists call conditioning, and that the orientations and identities we see in front of us are complex things that are the result of chaotic interactions - it is learned in the sense that it is not genetic, but a lot of it is learned in an unconscious manner. identity & orientation are consequently stochastic & non-linear phenomena that can't be reduced to any specific or easy to understand cause. the cause of my own dysphoria is likely entirely different than the cause of another person's, as they both come out of random conditioning processes.
but, at the end of the day, i'm an autonomous being, and i made the decision to transition. i would react pretty violently to suggestions otherwise, as it would be a denial of agency.
i think the real issue here is a kind of scam by the pseudo-left to try and work through the contradictions in dealing with equality and what religion says about equality. if you look at this carefully, these ideas are broadly legal, rather than scientific in origin (although there are some unconvincing studies that attempted to demonstrate these legal ideas). what these people want to do is bridge a gap - they're told that these are "sinful" choices, so they react by trying to argue that it isn't a choice at all.
it's a neat legal argument, granted. and, we should be grateful when it has worked to get people out of trouble for sodomy charges, for example. but, the evidence does not support this.
further, as an atheist, i don't feel any imperative to align my views with those of some church. i don't care if some imam or some pastor somewhere thinks my decisions are "sinful", or feel any need to bow down to their authority on the matter. i'm perfectly willing to look them in the eye and tell them they're wrong to question my choices, and have no right to tell me my behaviour is immoral. and, i'd really like to see the left adopt this position.
for the foreseeable future, though, this debate is likely to carry on without any meaningful resolution. so long as the money is there, scientists will keep looking for something that isn't there. at the end of it, we'll at least be able to understand that and start looking for another explanation.
but, i don't think there's a single cause; i think it's best understood using chaos theory and unintentional subconscious psychological conditioning, rather than using genetics.
Tuesday, May 22, 2018
drugs are fun when they're used sparingly to enhance the effects of events and experiences, but being addicted to drugs is a type of self-induced slavery, a type that the people around a drug addict have no responsibility to bear the effects of.
i don't care if this woman gets the help she needs to control her addiction.
i just want her carcinogenic, nausea-inducing, rancid shit out of my face.
i don't care if this woman gets the help she needs to control her addiction.
i just want her carcinogenic, nausea-inducing, rancid shit out of my face.
it's 10:00 pm on a fucking tuesday.
people do things like shower and read at 10:00 on a tuesday.
they don't sit around and get so fucking stoned they can't see.
you fucking loser...
and, it's like....be a fucking loser...i don't care...but go be a fucking loser in a parking lot, or in a field. don't do it somewhere where everybody else has to fucking deal with it.
you self-centered, worthless piece of shit.
it just makes me so fucking angry that these people can still exist, that people are raised so fucking terribly that they lack basic concepts of decency and respect for the people around them - or the self-respect to not be responsible for stinking up the whole goddamned block.
how does somebody have such little respect for themself that they don't care if people have made multiple requests to stop fucking blazing all the time? how can people have such little regard for their own integrity that they can look somebody in the eye and say "i am a habitual marijuana smoker, and i don't care if it makes everybody else sick".
it's revolting.
repulsive.
and remarkable that anybody could sanction this kind of behaviour.
there is no excuse for this. there really isn't.
people do things like shower and read at 10:00 on a tuesday.
they don't sit around and get so fucking stoned they can't see.
you fucking loser...
and, it's like....be a fucking loser...i don't care...but go be a fucking loser in a parking lot, or in a field. don't do it somewhere where everybody else has to fucking deal with it.
you self-centered, worthless piece of shit.
it just makes me so fucking angry that these people can still exist, that people are raised so fucking terribly that they lack basic concepts of decency and respect for the people around them - or the self-respect to not be responsible for stinking up the whole goddamned block.
how does somebody have such little respect for themself that they don't care if people have made multiple requests to stop fucking blazing all the time? how can people have such little regard for their own integrity that they can look somebody in the eye and say "i am a habitual marijuana smoker, and i don't care if it makes everybody else sick".
it's revolting.
repulsive.
and remarkable that anybody could sanction this kind of behaviour.
there is no excuse for this. there really isn't.
no, this is an old argument for me, because i used to get accused of being a pessimist all of the time. it's actually not even true.
whenever pessimism vs optimism is presented to you, what is actually being presented to you is really just a false dichotomy, but it's intriguing because it obscures a more fundamental division, which is realism vs magical thinking. pessimists and optimists are really two sides of the same coin: they're both existing in the realm of fantasy, of magical thinking, of utter delusion. the real counter to both optimism and pessimism (which are the same thing...) is realism.
the volume of water in the glass is 50% of it's maximum capacity.
get it?
whenever pessimism vs optimism is presented to you, what is actually being presented to you is really just a false dichotomy, but it's intriguing because it obscures a more fundamental division, which is realism vs magical thinking. pessimists and optimists are really two sides of the same coin: they're both existing in the realm of fantasy, of magical thinking, of utter delusion. the real counter to both optimism and pessimism (which are the same thing...) is realism.
the volume of water in the glass is 50% of it's maximum capacity.
get it?
so, what do we know about doug ford so far, anyways?
- he opposes an imaginary carbon tax
- he was going to open the greenbelt to development, but then decided not to *winkwink*
- he wants to cut taxes for people that don't pay taxes
- he wants alcohol & marijuana in corner stores
- he's going to slash revenues, and has no idea how he's going to pay for it.
- he's supposedly opposed to teaching sex ed in schools
- he opposes safe injection sites & wants to spend billions of public dollars on helping addicts
i thought "strong economic leadership" didn't make any sense. how do you campaign against this? how do you campaign for this?
have you seen idiocracy?
i'm not really in support of carbon taxes, but nobody is actually proposing one; i don't think poor people should pay taxes, but we already don't....and i don't have any particular aversion to beer at the corner store, but it's hardly a ballot question. nor do i really care about deficits.
the sex ed thing is a red flag, but i'm not sure how seriously i can take a guy that wants to eliminate sex ed and liberalize alcohol sales. it's a rather confused muslim that votes for that, isn't it? i'm thinking he's more likely to open a beer store across the street from your mosque than he is to protect your kids from their own sexuality.
the most contentious thing seems to be the billions wasted on trying to save addicts, which i'd argue would be better spent elsewhere - and closing these injection sites, which save taxpayers billions by stopping the spread of diseases. but, this doesn't seem to be very consistent with conservative party policy, does it?
so, the weird thing about doug ford is that he might not be that different from kathleen wynne, really. he keeps saying he'll carry through with what she's doing. the deficits might just be a little bigger. and, the policies might actually be a little more liberal.
i'm not endorsing this guy; i realize his aim is to sell off the province. but, this is the era we're in. would he move faster than the liberals or the ndp in selling off resources? who knows, really. all he really sold off in toronto was the garbage collection, right?
i'm never going to vote for the conservatives, myself; it's ideological, really. but, he seems less scary and more just kind of daft. and, i'm getting the impression that he's going to sleepwalk through a term or two and then fall asleep at the door on his way out.
- he opposes an imaginary carbon tax
- he was going to open the greenbelt to development, but then decided not to *winkwink*
- he wants to cut taxes for people that don't pay taxes
- he wants alcohol & marijuana in corner stores
- he's going to slash revenues, and has no idea how he's going to pay for it.
- he's supposedly opposed to teaching sex ed in schools
- he opposes safe injection sites & wants to spend billions of public dollars on helping addicts
i thought "strong economic leadership" didn't make any sense. how do you campaign against this? how do you campaign for this?
have you seen idiocracy?
i'm not really in support of carbon taxes, but nobody is actually proposing one; i don't think poor people should pay taxes, but we already don't....and i don't have any particular aversion to beer at the corner store, but it's hardly a ballot question. nor do i really care about deficits.
the sex ed thing is a red flag, but i'm not sure how seriously i can take a guy that wants to eliminate sex ed and liberalize alcohol sales. it's a rather confused muslim that votes for that, isn't it? i'm thinking he's more likely to open a beer store across the street from your mosque than he is to protect your kids from their own sexuality.
the most contentious thing seems to be the billions wasted on trying to save addicts, which i'd argue would be better spent elsewhere - and closing these injection sites, which save taxpayers billions by stopping the spread of diseases. but, this doesn't seem to be very consistent with conservative party policy, does it?
so, the weird thing about doug ford is that he might not be that different from kathleen wynne, really. he keeps saying he'll carry through with what she's doing. the deficits might just be a little bigger. and, the policies might actually be a little more liberal.
i'm not endorsing this guy; i realize his aim is to sell off the province. but, this is the era we're in. would he move faster than the liberals or the ndp in selling off resources? who knows, really. all he really sold off in toronto was the garbage collection, right?
i'm never going to vote for the conservatives, myself; it's ideological, really. but, he seems less scary and more just kind of daft. and, i'm getting the impression that he's going to sleepwalk through a term or two and then fall asleep at the door on his way out.
again: i don't see a reason to think that we're dealing with large shifts, just yet. i still think we have a lot of people that haven't decided, and it's producing funny polls.
but, i don't know of a scenario in ontario where the ndp finished second and the conservatives finished first.
the 2011 federal election is probably not the best predictor, because the conservatives polled relatively high and the ndp & liberals split almost cleanly. that doesn't appear to be likely this time.
i suspect the numbers may in the end look a little more like the 2008 federal election, although it's not clear which party will end up in second and which will end up in third. the numbers then were:
conservatives - 39% / 52 seats
liberals - 34% / 38 seats
ndp - 18% / 17 seats
it's dangerous to invert the liberals & ndp and conclude they'll end up with the same number of seats after the inversion; if the ndp are running at 34% and the liberals are running at 18%, you can't really conclude that the ndp will get 38 seats or the liberals will get 17 seats.
but, i think this is the type of parliament we're on the way towards - one where the conservatives have a plurality of seats, but the ndp & liberals together have a majority.
while the fake polling isn't a convincing argument, i'm beginning to concede the point that wynne is burying herself, and that an ndp shift is becoming inevitable - it's just a question of trying to accurately quantify it.
it's way too early to start modelling. but i don't see an obvious parallel, right now.
but, i don't know of a scenario in ontario where the ndp finished second and the conservatives finished first.
the 2011 federal election is probably not the best predictor, because the conservatives polled relatively high and the ndp & liberals split almost cleanly. that doesn't appear to be likely this time.
i suspect the numbers may in the end look a little more like the 2008 federal election, although it's not clear which party will end up in second and which will end up in third. the numbers then were:
conservatives - 39% / 52 seats
liberals - 34% / 38 seats
ndp - 18% / 17 seats
it's dangerous to invert the liberals & ndp and conclude they'll end up with the same number of seats after the inversion; if the ndp are running at 34% and the liberals are running at 18%, you can't really conclude that the ndp will get 38 seats or the liberals will get 17 seats.
but, i think this is the type of parliament we're on the way towards - one where the conservatives have a plurality of seats, but the ndp & liberals together have a majority.
while the fake polling isn't a convincing argument, i'm beginning to concede the point that wynne is burying herself, and that an ndp shift is becoming inevitable - it's just a question of trying to accurately quantify it.
it's way too early to start modelling. but i don't see an obvious parallel, right now.
so, this is a good demonstration of the absurdity of applying a universal swing.
even if it is true that the liberals are down 15 points and the ndp are up 15 points, it won't apply to every riding. and, i think there's reason to believe that the way it will apply will not particularly help the ndp a lot at all.
we'll see, though.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4212098/ontario-election-simulation-map/
even if it is true that the liberals are down 15 points and the ndp are up 15 points, it won't apply to every riding. and, i think there's reason to believe that the way it will apply will not particularly help the ndp a lot at all.
we'll see, though.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4212098/ontario-election-simulation-map/
i'm just imagining the scenario of a drunk person looking for a beer at 12:30.
if they're in town, they can find a bar. do i think it makes any difference if they try to get served at a bar or a store? well, you're going to run into hardasses either way, right. some bars serve anybody. some stores are pretty strict. the rules are going to be the same in either circumstance. so, what actual difference does it make? the server is a random variable, and you're just applying a prejudice towards one type or another.
you could argue that the bartender knows now much they've had to drink - which is true until they go to another bar.
maybe the more enlightened perspective is to put responsibility for drunkeness on the drunk, and not on the servers?
now, suppose this person is not in town. there may be a store a mile away, but the nearest bar is 20 miles away. is it a better idea to tell them to drive to the bar or let them pick it up at the store?
i'm not suggesting that this is a pressing issue; i'm not going to vote for or against beer in corner stores. i don't really care one way or another. but, kathleen wynne is embarrassing herself, and doing an incredible disservice to her party brand in thrusting out unfounded right-wing scare-mongering.
we need rational discourse, not the perpetuation of poorly thought through absurdities designed to act at the emotional level.
wynne isn't just running on an ndp platform, she's acting like an ndp leader. she's perpetuating all of the reasons i tend to avoid voting for this party, without really encapsulating any of the reasons i might think about it.....
even using the term "progressive" is bizarre. liberals are not "progressives", they're liberals. we fought prohibition, we didn't enact it. the ndp are progressives, in the prairie gospel sense. the conservatives are progressives in the populist farmers sense. the liberals are not and never have been nor have ever had anything to do with progressive politics.
the liberals may indeed require an extended period in the wilderness to figure out who they are. it's a shame. based purely on policy, they seemed to be doing alright. then, the writ dropped and it exposed a party that doesn't know what it is, any more.
i still don't really want to vote for the ndp. i want to vote for the liberals. but, the liberals don't seem to understand what being a liberal means any more....
i dunno what to do.
i don't think the conservatives are serious contenders in this riding, so it probably doesn't matter if i stay home.
if they're in town, they can find a bar. do i think it makes any difference if they try to get served at a bar or a store? well, you're going to run into hardasses either way, right. some bars serve anybody. some stores are pretty strict. the rules are going to be the same in either circumstance. so, what actual difference does it make? the server is a random variable, and you're just applying a prejudice towards one type or another.
you could argue that the bartender knows now much they've had to drink - which is true until they go to another bar.
maybe the more enlightened perspective is to put responsibility for drunkeness on the drunk, and not on the servers?
now, suppose this person is not in town. there may be a store a mile away, but the nearest bar is 20 miles away. is it a better idea to tell them to drive to the bar or let them pick it up at the store?
i'm not suggesting that this is a pressing issue; i'm not going to vote for or against beer in corner stores. i don't really care one way or another. but, kathleen wynne is embarrassing herself, and doing an incredible disservice to her party brand in thrusting out unfounded right-wing scare-mongering.
we need rational discourse, not the perpetuation of poorly thought through absurdities designed to act at the emotional level.
wynne isn't just running on an ndp platform, she's acting like an ndp leader. she's perpetuating all of the reasons i tend to avoid voting for this party, without really encapsulating any of the reasons i might think about it.....
even using the term "progressive" is bizarre. liberals are not "progressives", they're liberals. we fought prohibition, we didn't enact it. the ndp are progressives, in the prairie gospel sense. the conservatives are progressives in the populist farmers sense. the liberals are not and never have been nor have ever had anything to do with progressive politics.
the liberals may indeed require an extended period in the wilderness to figure out who they are. it's a shame. based purely on policy, they seemed to be doing alright. then, the writ dropped and it exposed a party that doesn't know what it is, any more.
i still don't really want to vote for the ndp. i want to vote for the liberals. but, the liberals don't seem to understand what being a liberal means any more....
i dunno what to do.
i don't think the conservatives are serious contenders in this riding, so it probably doesn't matter if i stay home.
i stopped this morning right before i got to the end of season 5.
there's now less than 2 months and less than two hundred pages before i get to the hookup with the blog, and the project flips over to archiving...
the audio closure also began in mid 2016, meaning i should be able to do some alter-reality work soon, too.
i wanted to eat and get to looking through listings this morning. instead, i crashed hard after the smoothie and feel like i should wait until tomorrow.
i wasn't as productive over the second half of the weekend as i'd have liked to have been. and all the listings i saw last week were for july...if can get a good 24 hours in, i think that's a better use of time tonight....
how's the air quality?
it's sporadic. she smoked a nasty joint last night, and it was still lingering deep into the morning. as mentioned, i slept all day - and i'm waking up feeling pretty awful. but, what i am is dehydrated, and i actually think it's partially from the air conditioner.
we're getting some nice hot & humid days this week, so i should be able to keep the windows open to fight the air. it really hasn't been warm enough out to turn the a/c on at all this spring. again: i don't understand these people. you turn the a/c on when it's 20 degrees out? what? i'd still have the heat on...20 degrees is cold...
what i'm going to say is that she's stopped smoking, except when it's raining. of course, that's the worst, because i can't always open the windows in the rain. but, you have to keep in mind that she has no legal obligation to smoke outside, either. this is a frustrating situation where nobody seems to know what the law is, and nobody seems to much care what it would be, if they did. it makes it difficult to react legally; neither the tenants nor the landlords care about the law or behave in ways consistent with it or intend to have to deal with it. anarchism isn't the idea that we don't follow laws, it's the idea that we don't need cops to force us to, and they're actually both failing that test, here - these are people that need a state to tell them what to do, because they can't figure it out on their own.
so, the landlord is illegally asking her to smoke outside, and she's mostly doing it, but it's not any kind of real solution. when she does decide to smoke inside, it lingers for days and makes me sick. the landlord is refusing to implement a real solution, which would be patching up the holes in the floor. he's really behaving illegally towards both of us, creating this false scenario of imaginary compromise. and, i think he's clueless enough to show up in court and say "i asked her to smoke outside...." and think that absolves him of liability. it doesn't. if he's not going to fix the floors, he needs to pay me out.
so, i'm going to work until i'm so hungry i have to stop.
there's now less than 2 months and less than two hundred pages before i get to the hookup with the blog, and the project flips over to archiving...
the audio closure also began in mid 2016, meaning i should be able to do some alter-reality work soon, too.
i wanted to eat and get to looking through listings this morning. instead, i crashed hard after the smoothie and feel like i should wait until tomorrow.
i wasn't as productive over the second half of the weekend as i'd have liked to have been. and all the listings i saw last week were for july...if can get a good 24 hours in, i think that's a better use of time tonight....
how's the air quality?
it's sporadic. she smoked a nasty joint last night, and it was still lingering deep into the morning. as mentioned, i slept all day - and i'm waking up feeling pretty awful. but, what i am is dehydrated, and i actually think it's partially from the air conditioner.
we're getting some nice hot & humid days this week, so i should be able to keep the windows open to fight the air. it really hasn't been warm enough out to turn the a/c on at all this spring. again: i don't understand these people. you turn the a/c on when it's 20 degrees out? what? i'd still have the heat on...20 degrees is cold...
what i'm going to say is that she's stopped smoking, except when it's raining. of course, that's the worst, because i can't always open the windows in the rain. but, you have to keep in mind that she has no legal obligation to smoke outside, either. this is a frustrating situation where nobody seems to know what the law is, and nobody seems to much care what it would be, if they did. it makes it difficult to react legally; neither the tenants nor the landlords care about the law or behave in ways consistent with it or intend to have to deal with it. anarchism isn't the idea that we don't follow laws, it's the idea that we don't need cops to force us to, and they're actually both failing that test, here - these are people that need a state to tell them what to do, because they can't figure it out on their own.
so, the landlord is illegally asking her to smoke outside, and she's mostly doing it, but it's not any kind of real solution. when she does decide to smoke inside, it lingers for days and makes me sick. the landlord is refusing to implement a real solution, which would be patching up the holes in the floor. he's really behaving illegally towards both of us, creating this false scenario of imaginary compromise. and, i think he's clueless enough to show up in court and say "i asked her to smoke outside...." and think that absolves him of liability. it doesn't. if he's not going to fix the floors, he needs to pay me out.
so, i'm going to work until i'm so hungry i have to stop.
Monday, May 21, 2018
two sentences in the platform on the gai.
but, what we've seen from the ndp is better encapsulated in the following part of the platform:
"The focus of the social assistance system should be helping people overcome barriers, get out of poverty and participate in society. "
that is what you're going to actually get from them. and, as such, i don't really trust them to follow through on a ubi; it's not really consistent with their ideological positions.
the tendency of "progressive" parties to push producerist policy is just typical calvinist bullshit: what they support is using the government's resources to send people to work, which in the end is just a process of trying to maximize profit for investors. it's this idea that the government is a human resources department for capital, and that, ultimately, it is work that sets us free. perfectly backwards. perfectly orwellian. you might naively point to religion as some kind of force of purity, but it was marx himself that made the point that religion is the tool that capital uses to brainwash workers with, and this is the analysis that any leftist would utilize - but progressives have never been leftists, they've always been conservatives.
i happen to seek freedom from labour, i don't need or want the government to help me to find a job, i want to abolish wage slavery. as the liberals are a bourgeois party, the focus on calvinism or producerism is less, and so they do seem to appeal more to the interests of artists.
i flipped through this, and my immediate take is that most of this just isn't going to happen, or is being presented sort of bizarrely. for example, they do state in the platform that their pharmacare plan only covers 125 drugs, but then they repeatedly refer to it as "universal pharmacare", which isn't really true. the liberal plan covers less people, but offers coverage for thousands of drugs for the people it's covering.
i sent my ndp mpp an email about getting estrogen covered under odsp once and he didn't reply. it's nice to see the promise, but i wouldn't bet on it. and, i'd be better off with the gai, if i have to choose.
i also don't think their claim that the liberals have pushed through deep cuts to health care is factually accurate; they actually brought in a special health tax. i spend a lot of time in the health system, and my only complaint is that the doctors seem to be too socially conservative. i've never faced unreasonable delays or experienced any of the things that the ndp are talking about.
at the end of the day, these are specific changes that will benefit specific people, so it's less about whether one health care plan is better than the other, and more about whether you're in a specific target group. if you're in the group that the liberals are targetting, you're obviously better off with a drug plan that covers thousands of medications; if you're not, the very limited coverage being offered by the ndp is better than nothing. it's something similar with the child care. so, it's a weird election on that level - there isn't really an objectively correct choice, not even over traditionally determined demographic groups.
nobody is offering universal plans, so it comes down to who you're being targeted by. and, that's a prescription to split the vote....
i don't get the same kind of personal commitment from horwath that i get from wynne; this is almost the exact opposite of what she told us four years ago, so it's feeling like she's just making shit up to get elected. it comes off as shady, slimy & opportunistic. i'm more inclined to believe that the 2014 version was the real andrea horwath, and so i'm left to conclude that you should be expecting her to govern on her right. at least the liberals have a record you can consult to understand where they sit: horwath just tells you what she thinks you want to hear, and changes her views as quickly as she realizes it isn't.
again: i don't want a change of government right now, and i'm uneasy about believing what the ndp is telling me. i don't think that voting ndp right now is a good idea. and, i think you should read this a bit more carefully, and compare it carefully to the 2014 platform, if you're convinced that it is.
https://www.ontariondp.ca/sites/default/files/Change-for-the-better.pdf
but, what we've seen from the ndp is better encapsulated in the following part of the platform:
"The focus of the social assistance system should be helping people overcome barriers, get out of poverty and participate in society. "
that is what you're going to actually get from them. and, as such, i don't really trust them to follow through on a ubi; it's not really consistent with their ideological positions.
the tendency of "progressive" parties to push producerist policy is just typical calvinist bullshit: what they support is using the government's resources to send people to work, which in the end is just a process of trying to maximize profit for investors. it's this idea that the government is a human resources department for capital, and that, ultimately, it is work that sets us free. perfectly backwards. perfectly orwellian. you might naively point to religion as some kind of force of purity, but it was marx himself that made the point that religion is the tool that capital uses to brainwash workers with, and this is the analysis that any leftist would utilize - but progressives have never been leftists, they've always been conservatives.
i happen to seek freedom from labour, i don't need or want the government to help me to find a job, i want to abolish wage slavery. as the liberals are a bourgeois party, the focus on calvinism or producerism is less, and so they do seem to appeal more to the interests of artists.
i flipped through this, and my immediate take is that most of this just isn't going to happen, or is being presented sort of bizarrely. for example, they do state in the platform that their pharmacare plan only covers 125 drugs, but then they repeatedly refer to it as "universal pharmacare", which isn't really true. the liberal plan covers less people, but offers coverage for thousands of drugs for the people it's covering.
i sent my ndp mpp an email about getting estrogen covered under odsp once and he didn't reply. it's nice to see the promise, but i wouldn't bet on it. and, i'd be better off with the gai, if i have to choose.
i also don't think their claim that the liberals have pushed through deep cuts to health care is factually accurate; they actually brought in a special health tax. i spend a lot of time in the health system, and my only complaint is that the doctors seem to be too socially conservative. i've never faced unreasonable delays or experienced any of the things that the ndp are talking about.
at the end of the day, these are specific changes that will benefit specific people, so it's less about whether one health care plan is better than the other, and more about whether you're in a specific target group. if you're in the group that the liberals are targetting, you're obviously better off with a drug plan that covers thousands of medications; if you're not, the very limited coverage being offered by the ndp is better than nothing. it's something similar with the child care. so, it's a weird election on that level - there isn't really an objectively correct choice, not even over traditionally determined demographic groups.
nobody is offering universal plans, so it comes down to who you're being targeted by. and, that's a prescription to split the vote....
i don't get the same kind of personal commitment from horwath that i get from wynne; this is almost the exact opposite of what she told us four years ago, so it's feeling like she's just making shit up to get elected. it comes off as shady, slimy & opportunistic. i'm more inclined to believe that the 2014 version was the real andrea horwath, and so i'm left to conclude that you should be expecting her to govern on her right. at least the liberals have a record you can consult to understand where they sit: horwath just tells you what she thinks you want to hear, and changes her views as quickly as she realizes it isn't.
again: i don't want a change of government right now, and i'm uneasy about believing what the ndp is telling me. i don't think that voting ndp right now is a good idea. and, i think you should read this a bit more carefully, and compare it carefully to the 2014 platform, if you're convinced that it is.
https://www.ontariondp.ca/sites/default/files/Change-for-the-better.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)