Accountability Now
-
Posts
2,890 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Accountability Now
-
-
1 minute ago, Moonbox said:
So it's bad that they correct themselves?
For something as sensitive as this they should be printing a retraction article clearly letting people know they made the mistake. Not burying it at the bottom of the previous article where no one that previously read the article will find
How many tImes do you return to a site to read the SAME article? And if so. Do you read to the very bottom to look for corrections?
it’s done in bad faith…plain and simple
-
11 minutes ago, Aristides said:
The last election cost 600 million, how much do you want to spend on national referendums? We elect governments to govern.
Adding a few questions to the election ballot would cost peanuts. You are now claiming that I’m asking for a referendum which is not what I said and therefore makes your argument a straw man argument
As usual, you’re not actually listening to what I’m saying. You acknowledge that things have changed since the election yet the Liberals are standing by their claim that Canadians voted for them hence they want these claims.
1. Even at the time, only 32% of Canadians voted for them. Not even the largest amount
2. Things have changed yet they don’t acknowledge the change and hold onto an election platform that is clearly outdated because they think they speak for Canadians.
-
2 minutes ago, Aristides said:
You have an election when Delta is the dominant variant and then Omicron comes along after the election. Do you want to have referendums on everything between elections.
So if you know that things have changed since October then why don’t the Liberal party? Why do they say they speak for Canadians because of the election
-
8 minutes ago, Aristides said:
With four or five parties holding seats there is almost no chance of one getting over 50%. I wouldn't object to some things being on a ballot but when you have emergencies which are in constant flux, that is not possible. Omicron didn't exist before the the last election and Covid didn't exist before the previous election.
But the way to handle Covid certainly was available before the last election as it was laid out in each parties platform. Again, I’m not saying they should have changed the system for this issue however it’s just wrong to say the second place popular vote actually speaks for Canadians.
-
5 hours ago, Aristides said:
Since WW1 there have only been four elections where the winning party has had 50% or more of the popular vote. 50.0% in 1984, 53.7% in 1958, 50.0% in 1953 and 50.1% in 1949.
Exactly. So to say any party speaks for Canadians is categorically false. The only way this would be true is if a key election issues were polled with the ballots and the winning party acted on those results.
-
3 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:
Vaccine mandate was clearly an election platform and the nation voted for a government with that platform and the elected government implemented what they promised not something they hided during the election.
Keep in mind, the winning party was actually second place in the popular vote and only had 32.6% of voters actually vote for this platform. Hardly the nation, as is the case with most Canadian elections. With that said, even if the Liberals had 51% of the vote it does not automatically mean they were voted in for that reason. People often vote for one key issue that matters to them and don’t really care about the rest.
I’ve often said that when voting, people should also provide answers on 3-4 major issues. This way the elected leaders can see what the voters really want rather than assuming each of their voters wanted EVERYTHING in their platform
-
1
-
-
The part to the media that bothers me the most is the corrections. The news will issue their story with false data which everyone reads and remembers….then a time after initial print, they realize the error and subtly correct it in the article with the only mention of the correction at the bottom of the page.
Here’s a prime example
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/beta.ctvnews.ca/national/coronavirus/2021/12/16/1_5709786.html
Correction:
A previous version of this article stated that the risk of contracting a serious side-effect after COVID-19 vaccination is less than one in a million. The correct figure, based on data reported to the Public Health Agency of Canada, is roughly one in 10,000.
So the initial article left 99% of the readers thinking vaccination causes a serious side effect in one out of 1,000,000 yet the true number is actually 1 out of 10,000. No wonder why people are so misinformed!!
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:
Okay sorry then you are not as self entitled and arrogant as those lawless saboteurs.
Just to be clear…I support the truckers cause and reasoning but I will never support a blockade
-
2 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:
What!!!!!. Are you saying the million or so people of Ottawa should have abandoned their homes in the middle of winter and moved to another city just because a few thousand lawless saboteurs can keep honking day and night. If you really meant that then you are as self entitled and arrogantly and crazy as those protesters are.
It was meant to sound stupid and sarcastic just like Aristedes comment about the unvaccinated should have just sucked it up and got the shot. Perhaps it was lost on you??
-
1 hour ago, Aristides said:
You know, if people who didn't like vaccines had just shut up and not got vaccinated governments might not have had to do much.
You know if the people of Ottawa didn’t want to hear honking, they could have just moved. Right????
-
1
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, Boges said:
They're less pertinent to Hospitalizations.
There are no "mandates" on ages 5-12 either
We’re talking spread not hospitalizations. Kids make up a large portion of the cases and are counted as Unvaccinated. If you want to remove them then the percentages would be even closer
-
31 minutes ago, Boges said:
It's more like 90%. Children shouldn't be considered.
Why. Do they not count for cases?
-
33 minutes ago, blackbird said:
Simple math.
Ive shown you the simple math. 76% from 80%. Not worthy of a mandate
-
6 minutes ago, Boges said:
Well the situation evolves on both sides.
Just like how the Alpha wave was much more pathogenic to younger people than the original strain, but people still factor in the original strain data as evidence that only people over 60 are at risk.
Sure. I’m fine with things evolving as long as you acknowledge the change and acknowledge if and when you were wrong. Omicron changed the game but some people act like nothing is different even when the numbers show otherwise
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, blackbird said:
The result for health measures is to slow down the spread and protect the population.
76% of the cases from fully vaxxed. How exactly is that slowing down the spread?
-
1
-
-
Just now, blackbird said:
Omicron: Vaccinated are less likely to spread BA.2, study finds (cnbc.com)
Quote
Transmission rates among unvaccinated people were higher with BA.2 compared to BA.1, indicating unvaccinated people were carrying a higher viral load with BA.2. Although fully vaccinated people are more likely to catch BA.2 than the previous strain, they are less likely to spread it to others, researchers found.
People who received a booster were even less likely to transmit the virus than people who were fully vaccinated.
“This indicates that after a breakthrough infection, vaccination protects against further transmission, and more so for BA.2 than BA.1,” the scientists found.
The study also noted that the higher susceptibility to infection and greater transmissibility of BA.2 will likely result in more extensive spread of the virus among unvaccinated kids in schools and day care. Unquote
Not peer reviewed. It’s a pre-print. I’d love to educate you on the difference but it would be a waste of time.
In BC this week…76% of the cases are from the fully vaxxed who are 80% of the population. Other provinces show similar if not closer numbers yet you are insisting that draconian mandates are needed when there is no benefit. Again…stop lying
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, West said:
It's also debatable if it actually stopped the spread with other variants. Plenty of breakthrough delta cases as well
That’s where they fall back to semantics saying it reduces spread, not stop. Again, their goal posts have moved so many times that the field is covered in holes
-
2 minutes ago, blackbird said:
And how much BA2 is out there. LMFAO
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, blackbird said:
It always amazes me that people on here don't bother searching a reading a few sources. Almost all health authorities agree on this.
It always amazes me when people post shit that’s out of date. Your post is from Nov 23….well before Omicron. Things changed with Omicron. Maybe you should too
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, blackbird said:
Vaccinations and mandates reduce spread
Wrong
10 minutes ago, blackbird said:reduce hospitalizations.
Barely right but nothing to brag about
-
23 minutes ago, Boges said:
But their tactics are appalling and will only help the political factions they oppose. That's why JT won't engage with them, he doesn't want to dignify their behaviour with a response. They're not worth the waste of oxygen.
I don’t agree with the blockades but I wouldn’t say they are appalling. There are a small minority of those involved doing appalling things but that happens with most protests. One still has to prove that the people doing those things are actually with the convoy
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, West said:
It's also debatable if they actually prevent hospitalizations as hospitalizations are now roughly equivalent based on population size.
Exactly. Cases used to be the big talking point as there was a major difference but that became even. Hospitalizations are the same. They are closing the gap based on population which puts them to the new talking point of ICU.
Even if they can show a subtle difference that can benefit the vaccinated, one must ask why they are bragging about it when vaccines are supposed to provide substantial benefit. It’s like the Edmonton Oilers bragging about beating a Pee Wee hockey team 3-2. Sure they can show they score more but they should never talk of a victory that shallow.
-
3 minutes ago, myata said:
This would be about 11th or 17th time he's having this kind of observation here. I fully expect the ultimate number could be lost somewhere in the natural infinity.
The sad thing is he has no interest in actually debating things honestly as it might lead to him learning something
-
3 hours ago, blackbird said:
Vaccinated people are far less likely to be hospitalized.
So who is lying?
Hospitalizations is not spread. You said vaccines reduce spread and now have flipped your story to hospitalizations.
Your recent response shows that you are either completely ignorant to the differences or you are willfully lying which is a forum violation. Which is it?
-
4
-
Trucker's Convoy
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
Well...looks like the NDP and Liberals want mandates to continue. Vote in HC to reject the plan to end mandates with NDP and Libs voting it down.