You know, I work a pretty stressful job, and I think a lot of that stress and anger came from, in some twisted way, a misguided faith of sorts. I did believe that people were, at the very least, capable of making the most sensible decision when given overwhelming evidence of good vs. bad choices; that they intentionally make bad choices either because they weren't given enough information or were acting intentionally selfish or duplicitous in some way. So whenever I had to deal with someone trying to exploit a loophole or arguing about how they swear they are going to x and such place and will pay at a later time (when you know they won't do so), it would frustrate me, because I did believe that they were capable of making better choices.

This election is proof that people are just genuinely dumb and hopeless, to a far and large extent. Choosing to omit your own vote, or willingly voting for him, is beyond imagination. We have seen so much of what he has done in the past 8 years now, at minimum. They know what he will likely do in the next 4 years. And they still chose him. Or chose not to participate.

So I'm choosing not to feel angry at people anymore, to not give a shit if they break the rules for whatever reason they justify. Because why be angry at something if you have lost faith in it being better?

I refuse to recognize the existence of Manitoba, no matter the correct answer /s

So I ran the math on the election outcome on this, as someone who lives in the riding directly:

32401 / 116259 = ~ 27.9% (Voter turnout)

27.9 * 0.574 (Percentage of vote which went to Jivani) = 16.01%

16% of the electorate gets to decide a candidate for the remaining 84%. I don't know about anyone else, or whether it's just supposed to be the way that things go, but it gives me a real ick feeling when I see a number like that. Maybe if it was something closer to 30% or something along those lines, I could at least begrudgingly accept that this is such a solid Conservative riding, but only 16%?!

I just really hate voter apathy, guys. Come on, we had 4 days of early voting, mail-in voting, the actual vote day itself, you can legally request time off work to go vote if you need it... was it that difficult to get out and vote, or am I just missing some other context?!

Obviously the filthy casual didn't know how to parry.

Oh it's definitely a great city builder, I quite enjoy it myself! Even when it comes down to putting down housing, you can adjust the size of the plots to perform different functions, whether it is to grow large veggie crops, whether you need housing for specific specialized individuals, whether you just need to cram as many families as you can into one housing unit, assigning specific families to work at nearby locations, I could go on and on!

And there is a peaceful mode if you want to avoid the wartime strategy bits, but even those seem to be rather enjoyable, at least from the initial experience I have had with it. Very much looking forward to seeing what the expanded final product is going to look like, it is definitely a game worth all the praise!

There's always a selfish reason for why the Ford government would do this, and it doesn't surprise me that this is coming out.

Though to be fair, this is also from the same Ford family of guys who read the god-damn newspaper while they are driving on the Gardiner-Express. Of course they would be personally offended that they are - checks the notes - punished for breaking a driving violation.

Saudi Arabia: "I am assuming direct control."

EA: "Wait, I know this line..."

SA: "I am the vanguard of your destruction. This corporation is over."

EA: "Fffffuuuuuuuck..."

Well, whatever O'Toole wants is far beyond his control, at this point. Maybe if he ran a better campaign he could have nipped this problem in the bud, or maybe he could have entirely empowered the crazies, but that's neither here nor there. He lost, he's resigning, and the problem is beyond his fixing now - who knows if his appeal will even reach the ears that it needs to.

This is going to be a Canadian problem as a whole to resolve, and it's a simple solution: if you do not want radicalized politics to take over, do not vote for the radicals to take over your party or Parliament. Say what you will of the other parties, but radicalism and reactionism are largely a Conservative issue, and I imagine the voters will more than kindly respond to the idea of trying to turn things up a notch.

Oh, are you talking about House Centipedes? Great for controlling other insects in your house!

And also, at my current phase in my life, the closest thing I'll have to some creature cuddling me at night.

2 Hot takes:

1. This is, what? The fourth election the Conservatives have lost in a row? The third since the Liberals first ran for retaining their position as the governing party, at the least. If they aren't winning with moderate candidates, and they aren't winning with reformist far-right candidates, how can the Conservatives justify to their own party that they can competently prove themselves to be a governing party when seemingly no leadership style is shaking the Liberals?

This is likely going to lead to the Conservatives splitting between the reformers and the moderates once more, as either is going to believe the other side is inhibiting their ability to lead a new government. Reformers will likely solidify everywhere between the East of the Rockies and West of Ontario (Eastern BC and all the Prairie Provinces, I'm thinking), while the Conservatives will have to once again fight for representation largely in Ontario and (maybe) the Atlantic Provinces.

It would be nice to see the Right-wing splitting their votes the same way the Left does for NDP and Liberals, if for no other reason than to help make Minority governments more prominent in Canada as a whole; however,

1. Doug Ford might genuinely abandon the Provincial government and use this as a chance to catapult his brand to the Federal level. He could also (maybe?) be the first politician to serve on a Municipal, Provincial and Federal level within a single career. As much of a shit-show as he is, he also undeniably can win seats in Ontario, most crucially in the Toronto area, and the Federal Conservatives really need someone who can do that.

It's been a fucking decade, man...

The guy has 34 felony counts on him, as is. What's one more legal violation, at this point?

So Indexes are supposed to be a little more rigid than just having companies being "removed on a whim" - you would more likely find that on a mutual fund, which are individually managed, versus an index. That being said, I did look into the difference between Dow and S&P 500, and... well, yeah, the former is selected by a committee who generally pick for the top 30 performing companies, while the latter is just a list of the 500 largest publicly traded companies. I think it is generally not used as a good indicator of economic health, as opposed to the S&P (based on a quick Wikipedia read).

I think a few people might consider it only because it's been running since 1896, and there haven't really been a lot of changes as to who gets on / off the Dow (58 since inception). So honestly, more than anything else, it's just really bad PR for investors who might care that Intel is doing so poorly that it's being kicked off one of the longest-running indexes, which is never good news. Might rattle them enough to where they start demanding big changes, which is likely what Intel needs.

Stay-at-school suspension for 4 years.

Confiscating their drugs, forcible confinement... you serious? They'll just get more when they get the chance; they're addicts, and there are markets for them to find drugs, there's no easy way of stopping addicts from getting what they need. Confiscating or 24 hour confinement just ends the immediate risk of use, there's no saying that won't stop them from getting another hit by the next day (or even guarantee that they haven't already used it by the time they're confiscated / confined).

You're advocating for punishing people effectively for being poor and addicted to drugs. That's kind of a fucked up opinion, and opening SCSs does not mean you aren't thinking of the children - it's also keeping addicts off the streets and away from exposing that lifestyle to children, but on a more humane and practical level.

Average Canadian: "Oh yeah, I got this one easy bud!"

Alright, for your final test: how do you spell Quebec?

AC: "Oh, for sure, that one there is easy! It's, uh... Q, for... uh..."

...

AC: "Q... for... Kay-beck..."

The fact that they had a regular-service bar at their workplace but WE can't have one at ours is the real injustice facing all of Canada today!

/s

Well, I have to see it differently. 3 months in jail for advocating for the downfall and (inevitably consequential, I would say) death of a particular group of people seems pretty trivial, considering that this guy has had a long history of writing these materials. I would say even if these aren't "unapproved writings", they sure are fucking reckless - this is someone advocating for hateful people to lash out at another group. He writes for a Neo-Nazi website, he's quite literally a Nazi. This is the equivalent of a corporation getting a financial fine for [insert corporate crime / corruption here] that amounts to no less than a slap on the wrist, it would mean effectively nothing to continue doing what he's doing.

You could argue that maybe he did, in fact, change his ways. Maybe he really is not the guy he was any longer. But for any aspiring paid hate-mongering writers, this isn't enough of a deterrent to stop them from whipping up the hate in our neighbours. I think we've all seen the kind of nonsense that happens South of the border when radically hateful propaganda hits too much of the masses - I personally feel that it's in our interest to not have our national discourse go down that dark and dreary path, or else it's more Trucker blockades, Jan. 6th Capitol riots and other awful things to come.

Good, challenge Ford. Don't let him get away with dumb shit like this.

To be fair, yes, Canada has the second-largest land mass on the planet. ~90% or more of that landmass is largely inhospitable for larger communities though, whether it's the Canadian Shield and the fact we can't grow any crops on that or dig through tough rocks, the Tundra and Arctic (where it is way too cold to grow anything, much less settle), vast distances of forests - it is a lot tougher to build infrastructure in most of Canada, leaving it pretty much to the places already with larger population sizes. And even then, most people are still choosing to go to the three cities and immediate outlying areas where the most economic influence and possible social connections are - Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal.

It would seem deceiving, given how large Canada is, but there are very few places outside of those major metro centres where people want to live, or can even live comfortable lives and be productive. Honestly, given how little good land is available in Canada, it would make far more sense to cut down on suburban developments and focus on higher-density, transit-minded communities. Single-family homes are way too inefficient for what we actually need, and having politicians and citizens who demonize quadplexes and other high density options do not help at all.