Is Doug ford done?

[nobbie48]

How would you vote, considering that the leader of the party only leads because a bunch of hidden supporters lets him or her.

PC? Supporting big business

NDP? Supporting unions

Liberal? They scare me the most because I don't know who they're supporting.

 

[GreyGhost]

How would you vote, considering that the leader of the party only leads because a bunch of hidden supporters lets him or her.

PC? Supporting big business

NDP? Supporting unions

Liberal? They scare me the most because I don't know who they're supporting.

Dont liberals support everyone currently alive? Using the money of those to be born in the future.

 

[Mad Mike]

So a bunch of people who donate to a group that they support CAN buy an add agreeing or disagreeing with the government.....and some can't? Why? Do you think the use of the notwithstanding clause is something that should be used to prop up a government?

That's OK, what's not OK is very large special interest groups putting their foot on the scale. What's wrong with reasonable limits on what an group can spend to influence an election? Last election the top 15 spenders were unions and associations that collect their income from the public purse.

The adds were almost 100% negative, and designed to influence the spender's own agenda, which almost always boiled down to more spending public spending for their interest.

Unions have restrictions on endorsement ads in Ontario, so they do the opposite - attack ads. Big dollar advertising also influences the press - op-ed, editorials, coverage spin comes with big ad dollars.

Do you really think we need unions and PSU associations meddling and interfering in our elections? I don't. My preference it to leave the oxygen for political parties - let them duke it out on the public stage.

How would you vote, considering that the leader of the party only leads because a bunch of hidden supporters lets him or her.

PC? Supporting big business

NDP? Supporting unions

Liberal? They scare me the most because I don't know who they're supporting.

Liberals are the party of panderers, they will support whomever promises them votes.

 

[Lyndsay]

How would you vote, considering that the leader of the party only leads because a bunch of hidden supporters lets him or her.

PC? Supporting big business

NDP? Supporting unions

Liberal? They scare me the most because I don't know who they're supporting.

Don't be too sure about NDP supporting unions. They say they are, but back when Bob Rae got surprised and forced to make a government, they came down hard on the government unions and set them back a few years. Right or wrong I won't get into, but it shocked a bunch of NDP/Union supporter types at the time.

 

[Mad Mike]

Don't be too sure about NDP supporting unions. They say they are, but back when Bob Rae got surprised and forced to make a government, they came down hard on the government unions and set them back a few years. Right or wrong I won't get into, but it shocked a bunch of NDP/Union supporter types at the time.

For those who remember, the Rae election win in the early 90s was heavily influenced by unions who were flooding the media with agenda ads.

The campaigns were so successful, the Bob Rae woke up as Premier - which was as much a surprise to him as it was to Ontario. Much of the province looked at the results and mumbled to themselves “holy ****, what have we done?”

Liberals later set restrictions on special interest political influence spending, specifically targeting unions as they were meddling most, to prevent unions from influencing future elections.

 

[sburns]

Well hiring back the guy who sneaked out on vacation, then resigned, is not cool - for any party.

 

[GreyGhost]

Well hiring back the guy who sneaked out on vacation, then resigned, is not cool - for any party.

Who says he snuck out? Wankers. All of them.

 

[800over]

What's wrong with reasonable limits on what an group can spend to influence an election?

Umm....would you say reasonable limits would pass an constitutional challenge? Please don't be so obtuse. The law was literally struck down by the courts. Saying there should be limits but avoiding the fact they had to use the NWC is obviously intentional. Unions can't spend money how they like....but let's raise the limits that private business' can donate to parties (which mostly benefits the PCs). This is exactly the same "foot on the scale " BS you are against, but from the other side.

 

[mimico_polak]

There should just be a hard limit. X dollars whether they come from public, private or citizen.

OR

We have Y dollars for an election. There are Z number of parties. Y/Z = A dollars for each party.

have at it.

 

[Mad Mike]

Umm....would you say reasonable limits would pass an constitutional challenge? Please don't be so obtuse. The law was literally struck down by the courts. Saying there should be limits but avoiding the fact they had to use the NWC is obviously intentional. Unions can't spend money how they like....but let's raise the limits that private business' can donate to parties (which mostly benefits the PCs). This is exactly the same "foot on the scale " BS you are against, but from the other side.

Kathleen Wynne wrote the law, unions were onside with her as they saw conservative groups as a threat, they didn’t shoot her down.

Ford changes the time window from 6 to 12 mos and now a liberal judge says no way as unions go apeshit. What changed other than lengthening the spending window?

For those who are old enough to remember, in the early 90s we saw union advertising tip the scales on an election - so much so that the outcome even surprised them. After that they backed off, but 30 years go by and they are gearing up to do it again.

The public loses when special interests are allowed to put their finger on the scales.

 

[800over]

Kathleen Wynne wrote the law, unions were onside with her as they saw conservative groups as a threat, they didn’t shoot her down.

Ford changes the time window from 6 to 12 mos and now a liberal judge says no way as unions go apeshit. What changed other than lengthening the spending window?

For those who are old enough to remember, in the early 90s we saw union advertising tip the scales on an election - so much so that the outcome even surprised them. After that they backed off, but 30 years go by and they are gearing up to do it again.

The public loses when special interests are allowed to put their finger on the scales.

When you can't answer my question about the NWC....then I guess that shows which side you put your money with.
Exactly how is a Union different from the political party...and in what hellscape do you think it is fine for one to spend and not the other?

Again you are talking nonsense when you say "finger on the scales" about the Unions and not the government. Why can I give my money to the reigning government party and not a union that supports my interests? cause it is fine to give the PC party $1000 if i own a business and they can spend it on attack ads against Trudeau (which apparently is ok by your hypocritical stance or are you against those when they are a political party?).

I guess for Mad Mike the law only applies to those we disagree with.

 

[nobbie48]

Kathleen Wynne wrote the law, unions were onside with her as they saw conservative groups as a threat, they didn’t shoot her down.

Ford changes the time window from 6 to 12 mos and now a liberal judge says no way as unions go apeshit. What changed other than lengthening the spending window?

For those who are old enough to remember, in the early 90s we saw union advertising tip the scales on an election - so much so that the outcome even surprised them. After that they backed off, but 30 years go by and they are gearing up to do it again.

The public loses when special interests are allowed to put their finger on the scales.

Thirty years ago the internet interference wasn't there. Just another loony tune factor screwing the voters mind.

What, 60% of the people out there can't pay off their credit cards but they get to elect the ones in charge of Canada's billions of debt.

 

[mimico_polak]

Thirty years ago the internet interference wasn't there. Just another loony tune factor screwing the voters mind.

What, 60% of the people out there can't pay off their credit cards but they get to elect the ones in charge of Canada's billions of debt.

We know that politics is nothing more than being voted high school King/queen popularity contest. Just with more at stake.

If we actually voted as a country for what’s best for ALL, not just special interests, we’d all be better off.

Foig Ford didn’t win because he was a good pick, he won because people have had enough of Wynne and the Liberals.

 

[killvino]

We know that politics is nothing more than being voted high school King/queen popularity contest. Just with more at stake.

If we actually voted as a country for what’s best for ALL, not just special interests, we’d all be better off.

Foig Ford didn’t win because he was a good pick, he won because people have had enough of Wynne and the Liberals.

As @nobbie48 mentioned, most of the country can't even name all the provinces, do basic math or anything most 5th graders do.

Most of us here can research and figure out what is best for us. We are a tiny minority, most people do not know anything about politics, economics, or laws to know right from wrong from a pile of twitter ********.

Problem is the general public is dumb as nails and vote based on headlines + word of mouth.

There is never a right/wrong, politics is juggling everything, economy, environment, future generations, housing, health, etc. There is no best for all, hence why we have opposing parties/viewpoints.

 

[sburns]

Problem is the general public is dumb as nails and vote based on headlines + word of mouth.

I wouldn't say that, that is a bit harsh. I believe most are just tuned out. Too busy just living their lives to care for Politics much, in realty it's a gong show anyhow, and something people don't want to spend valuable time on which they have very little influence over. I am pretty sure all the political parties know this and work these kinds of odd's in their favour when creating their messages.

 

[Freddy F]

I wouldn't say that, that is a bit harsh. I believe most are just tuned out. Too busy just living their lives to care for Politics much, in realty it's a gong show anyhow, and something people don't want to spend valuable time on which they have very little influence over. I am pretty sure all the political parties know this and work these kinds of odd's in their favour when creating their messages.

Totally agree. And I think many of the intelligent types have tuned out just as much as the not-too-bright folks. Some have researched things to the nth degree and as a result, have decided not to get vaccinated just yet. My brother in law and sister fall into that description. smart folks but they think they're smarter than everyone else....which is actually not being smart. BTW, I saw you used Rever, (well I THOUGHT it was you), I was looking for something like that, I'm trying it out!

 

[sburns]

BTW, I saw you used Rever, (well I THOUGHT it was you), I was looking for something like that, I'm trying it out!

Yes I do use Rever. I tried a bunch last year, but with Rever I found it was the easiest of the bunch to export the route as an image. Other then that all I really use any of those apps would be to track the ride.