CdnFox

That's a perfect example. You're so disturbed that you have to Fake quote me with stuff I never said and then argue with that because you can't deal with the reality. Either kind of person who goes to their room, closes the door, gets out their little dolls or action figures and imagines themselves as the hero yelling at the bad guy and making up the conversation. Did you honestly think i'd care about what some drunk basement dweller on the internet pretended i said but didn't? Wow

That's not likely to slow down till after xmas. He's trolling trudeau hard, i think he's trying to pressure him to step down. If he does it'll be complete caos and when he throws the tarrifs on jan 20 whoever the interim leader is will be easy to push around. Justin was being insulting about trump before he got elected and was warned repeatedly and publicly that this could have a backlash, then he went and called americans racist misogynists and pissed him off more, now he's giving "the governer" both barrels to reduce sympathy and make him look weak before a trade war.

I think you underestimate the depth of his sense of entitlement. This is how liberals think. It's liberal elite even more so. He's going to be rich after this but then he'll have to spend his own money if he wants $1,000 to play dinners while he's flying somewhere. That's not okay. If he sticks it out he gets one more summer of traveling all over the world at the taxpayers expense eating the best food, staying in the best places, and trying to make contacts to make money when he gets done with politics. That multi-million dollar pension just isn't going to be enough you know

you were told that the US gained intel from it, but I think they already know how balloons work. Except maybe Biden. And OAC. And Kamala. And Omar. NVM, you're right: 40% of Americans learned something from that. This is got to be one of my favorite replies from him of all times China flies a balloon over the US, the US shoots it down, and he thinks we recovered Intel. They were surveilling the united states for god's sake, the united states already knows about the united states Does he really think that they opened up the balloon and there were intelligence experts there reviewing the footage and saying things like "Did you know we had tanks?" or "My God! There's a macdonalds on 4th and Elm? I had no idea,,,,, You get Intel when you look at footage about OTHER countries, not your own you twit!!!

They absolutely would consider it a threat. Everyone here recognizes that you're a dangerously messed up person. There is something seriously wrong with you. Maybe its just the booze, but you're not all right. You really should think about it for a bit. You're literally idol worshipping a cold blooded killer.

LOL holy shit i've broken you

Sure but that's because you're a disgusting individual with no actual moral values. Imagine someone so bench and broken that they are outraged that someone might believe another person was autistic and yet at the same time advocate for the slaughter and murder of individuals who are innocent and have committed no crime like some deranged psychopath. A normal person would not be in favor of school shootings or CEO shootings. But both you and the school shooters share something in common, you believe that it's okay if other people die as long as you feel like it.

So basically he's Harley Quinn then

Sorry but they almost all operate within range of a major airport or are expected to and you absolutely can land your plane in a major airport

I take it "they" were the voices in your head? How are we going to get triggered? Our guys probably going to win the largest landslide in Canadian history and you will have thrown your vote away having blown 10 years completely failing to make things work with your agenda If we get triggered it'll be triggered by hilarity

End of February that singh gets his pension

There are no victims beneath him. The guys company sells a product. If you don't like the product you can buy someone else's product. Or just not have a product. Or create your own product. When you purchase the product the terms are spelled out. If you have an expectation that they can't deliver on or haven't promised then that's kind of on you. If you feel these companies should be providing more guarantees or quality of service requirements then have legislators make that law. But it is asinine to say that because a company sold you a product and didn't violate the terms and conditions of their product and you don't like the product that it's okay to kill somebody that works for the company.

LOL looks like you hit a sore point with him

Unless he prorogues parliament That may not be an option. After jagmeet has his pension in February even the NDP will probably want to bring him down. They're suffering in the polling as well as a result of their efforts to keep him propped up. So it will likely be a spring election if he doesn't check parliament down to prevent a confidence vote until the summer.

Well... not that this is entirely unexpected but i still can't believe how high the cpc is polling Abacus data poll Abacus Data Poll: Post-Freeland resignation, Trudeau’s net favourability drops to -43 as only 19% want him to stay on as Prime Minister. CONSERVATIVES 45 LIBERALS 20 NDP 18 And that probably gets worse for both the liberals and NDP over the next week or so. Conservatives polling at 45%. It is possible they may yet hit 50% before the election. And that's not just a voters who showed up but that's what the entire nation is polling. The NDP and liberals may suffer from low voter turnout similar to what we saw in the Ontario election. If things go wrong for the liberals during the campaign they might lose official party status

I actually read her resignation letter when she put it out. To be honest I just assumed everyone had

No it didn't. Generally speaking that's not true. But where it is true it is usually a result of government policy which severely impacts the middle classes rather than a result of the rich getting rich. l Again some of that is untrue entirely and the portions that are true are generally not a result of the rich getting rich. A lot of what you're talking about is government spending and government unions. Tuition isn't going up because anybody else got rich With regards to wages versus inflation until very recently americans were actually gaining on inflation Bureau of Labor Statistics Data As you can see even adjusted for inflationary dollars Americans wages have been going up faster than inflation until covid with the exception of a few of the economic downturns. LIkewise hours worked has stayed pretty stable too, other than economic recessions or covid Average weekly working hours U.S. 2023 | Statista You're going to hate this. That had nothing to do with the 1%. That had to do unfortunately as an unfortunate and unexpected byproduct of women's lib Prior to the 1970s a woman was not allowed to include her income in the calculation for how much of a mortgage a married couple could have or their credit. It was assumed that she would get pregnant and leave the workforce shortly to raise a family This was understandably seen as bias and misogynistic. Women lobbied to have this changed successfully Beginning in the '70s women's income could be included in the men's. And guess what started happening to the price of homes. Women discovered that they could earn a small amount of income and add that to the amount and size of a home they could buy. Slowly the price of home started to go up. This led to inflationary pressures brought on as well by other government factors which continued through the 80s and 90s and now what we have is that you cannot afford a home without two incomes. In Canada of course that became extremely exacerbated by the fact that we began to experience a population increase greater than our ability to produce homes and from about 2009 to 2010 onward that began to have an impact, accelerating radically in 2015 and onward It has absolutely zero to do with corporations or corporate profits or the like. The vast majority of employment in Canada, and I do mean the vast majority, has always traditionally been small to medium-sized business. Not mega corporations. Remember when Justin Trudeau claimed that small business was a scam and added additional taxation to them back near the start of his terms? And everything he's done since then has been paid for by the consumer, not the rich with the exception of new taxes which caused the rich to get their investment out of the country We are now for the first time seeing more business leaving Canada than arriving and our standard of living is nose diving quickly. Most economists agree now that we have been in a recession for over a year, hidden by population growht, but that our gdp per capita is dangerously plummeting. Our problem is that we don't have enough interest in rich people to come here and invest the money and build our economic engine I understand that you don't like the idea of a system where some people benefit outrageously more than other people even if all people benefit more than they would have. But that is the only way to make everybody better off

Absolutely, but the way you phrased it in the initial post that we were discussing was a lot more political than the way you just explained it here. You are of course correct and I'm not arguing with your underlying premise Sure, but haven't we been down this road before? Remember when we could solve North America's problems if we just banned alcohol ? Banning weed would stop children from doing it for sure. etc I get the intuitive belief that if you have a problem with gun violence that banning the gun rather than worrying about the violence would solve the problem. There is a certain logic to it on a superficial level. But as you dig down it turns out that the person is the problem and not the tool just was as was in the case with alcohol bans etc. Which is fine and all, but my problem is is that it has evolved to a point where it is extremely difficult to even have a conversation anymore about real solutions. The democrats want to ban guns and so they won't talk about effective solutions and the republicans don't want their guns banned so they won't listen to anything the other side has to say because they are aware that they are hostile. Which leaves about like 50 people in the middle and the entire country who then get pounded by both sides

All right, you win that round but I'll be back....

honestly that really could actually go either way As far as political leadings go Although to me it's sort of suggests that you didn't have a political leaning and was just interested in the effect and subject of multiple killings. For sure someone of that mentality will do what they can to try and maximize the discussion about them afterwards.

It is ridiculous beyond belief to pretend that the Chinese of all people could possibly produce technology capable of transmitting data video or sound over long distances on a network at will. There is no hua-wei they could do it. Ohhhh... wait a second....

Yes, but they commission those polls to be wrong. They ask the questions in such a way as to get the results they wish. Here is a shockingly accurate reinactment of how that works This show was almost shut down in enland btw for being 'too accurate' and therefore 'mocking the gov't. It's completely worth watching this clip

Couldn't we just get Tim Walz and Biden to handle this? I hear they both have shotguns....

Sure. All valid. I'm not really questioning your underlying premise very much, you're right. I was just pointing out that it is possible to have a bad result and even a consistently bad result without malice. It's important to remember the public polls are done for free by the polling companies and they put less energy into it than they do for the polling that the parties pay for but are internal. So you have to remember what you're getting. Somebody gives you free cookies you're not allowed to complain that they're oatmeal With regards to the numbers, as I said the numbers are always dependent on voter turnout and that is impossible to predict accurately, nobody has gotten that right ever. There is some plausible reason to believe that liberals will tend to answer polls more frequently even though they don't necessarily turn up at the polling stations more frequently. The rest of us are working and tend to hang up So you have to take that with a grain of salt. Everybody knew that trump was likely to outperform his polling numbers. And that's because he's very hard to pull because many of the people who vote for him are the type who will tell pollsters to f off and die Fake pulling data can possibly influence an election but probably not as much as you think unless it is grossly exaggerated. If you make it seem your candidate is doing way better than they should a lot of times voters don't show up to vote thinking they've got it in the bag. That has actually cost many candidates who were legitimately ahead of Elections because their voters thought there's no point everybody's voting for this guy already I don't he doesn't need my vote. Likewise, show your candidate is too low and people may decide that he's already lost there's no point in getting involved and you could repress turnout. I agree that if there is any kind of deliberate attempt to put the thumb on the scale those people should be held to account and should be civilly liable to the party they have injured. I just wanted to point out that there are legitimate reasons why you can see discrepancies even consistent discrepancies as a result of certain modeling and methodology which is 100% legitimate But this is also why I have repeated a million times that you have to look at polls as something that produces trends rather than absolute predictors of outcome. They are more valuable in showing who has momentum and what the trends are and giving a general ballpark of where the parties are at and even then you get some real shockers like BC when Christy Clark won against the NDP.

Funny story but it is actually not uncommon to have "lawnsign" polls and they can actually be fairly accurate And the famous food polls (buy red muffin if you're voting liberal, blue for conservative, etc etc) which have also proven strangely effective They only become misleading if you present them as being something OTHER than what they are or otherwise 'weight the scale' without disclosing that. If you pretend the lawnsign poll is a more standard poll when it isn't, that's a thing. or if you only travel around select parts of town. etc.