Edit: Mayor Rob Ford admits to smoking crack

11617182022

Comments

  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    This is a Rob Ford thread ...
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • BS44325BS44325 Posts: 5,722
    lukin2006 said:

    This is a Rob Ford thread ...

    Rob Ford was pushing a tea party agenda before the tea party became cool.
  • BS44325BS44325 Posts: 5,722
    edited July 2016
    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    If you deny that teapartiers are radical, then you just can't claim that the ones you're calling radical are.

    I get why you would think small government conservatives who are primarily concerned with spending and deficits are radical but that is just not the case.
    That is absolutely NOT all that teapartiers are generally about.
    Yes it is. Think of a Ven Diagram with small government/spending in the middle. In the outer circles there would be social conservatives, neocons, isolationists, libertarians, and even democrats. These are different groups who find commonality on spending. The movement began under Bush and continued through Obama with it's peak occurring during the run up to the Affordable Care Act. The democratic party, as always, had to turn the opposition into a bunch of racists which is maybe why you are so confused. This is why the racism charges are failing to stick today.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 42,272
    All I'm getting from you is that as far as you're concerned, there aren't any radical conservatives until you reach, say, the Westboro Baptists, but anyone left of centre is a radical liberal.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • BS44325BS44325 Posts: 5,722
    PJ_Soul said:

    All I'm getting from you is that as far as you're concerned, there aren't any radical conservatives until you reach, say, the Westboro Baptists, but anyone left of centre is a radical liberal.

    You are not getting that from me. You are getting a description of what the Tea Party is.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 42,272
    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    All I'm getting from you is that as far as you're concerned, there aren't any radical conservatives until you reach, say, the Westboro Baptists, but anyone left of centre is a radical liberal.

    You are not getting that from me. You are getting a description of what the Tea Party is.
    No, I'm getting it from everything you've said.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • BS44325BS44325 Posts: 5,722
    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    All I'm getting from you is that as far as you're concerned, there aren't any radical conservatives until you reach, say, the Westboro Baptists, but anyone left of centre is a radical liberal.

    You are not getting that from me. You are getting a description of what the Tea Party is.
    No, I'm getting it from everything you've said.
    I'm sorry but there is nothing "radical" about wanting small government or limits on spending. You might want to consider that it is your own radicalism which prevents you from seeing that.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 11,174
    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    All I'm getting from you is that as far as you're concerned, there aren't any radical conservatives until you reach, say, the Westboro Baptists, but anyone left of centre is a radical liberal.

    You are not getting that from me. You are getting a description of what the Tea Party is.
    No, I'm getting it from everything you've said.
    I'm sorry but there is nothing "radical" about wanting small government or limits on spending. You might want to consider that it is your own radicalism which prevents you from seeing that.
    Wanting the abolishment of the EPA, IRS, FDA, Fed Reserve, National Parks, and practically all Federal level government is absolutely radical.

    You don't know the tea party as well as you think you do.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 42,272
    edited July 2016
    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    All I'm getting from you is that as far as you're concerned, there aren't any radical conservatives until you reach, say, the Westboro Baptists, but anyone left of centre is a radical liberal.

    You are not getting that from me. You are getting a description of what the Tea Party is.
    No, I'm getting it from everything you've said.
    I'm sorry but there is nothing "radical" about wanting small government or limits on spending. You might want to consider that it is your own radicalism which prevents you from seeing that.
    You are ignoring everything else about the tea party, lol. If you want to only focus on two things out of many, sure. If you want to actually look at the whole picture, no.
    And I am not radical, not even remotely close to radical, and am now specifically requesting that you not call me that. I take it as a misrepresentation of my beliefs and my position. You have absolutely no reason to think I am or say I am, so stop it.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • BS44325BS44325 Posts: 5,722
    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    All I'm getting from you is that as far as you're concerned, there aren't any radical conservatives until you reach, say, the Westboro Baptists, but anyone left of centre is a radical liberal.

    You are not getting that from me. You are getting a description of what the Tea Party is.
    No, I'm getting it from everything you've said.
    I'm sorry but there is nothing "radical" about wanting small government or limits on spending. You might want to consider that it is your own radicalism which prevents you from seeing that.
    You are ignoring everything else about the tea party, lol. If you want to only focus on two things out of many, sure. If you want to actually look at the whole picture, no.
    And I am not radical, not even remotely close to radical, and am now specifically requesting that you not call me that. I take it as a misrepresentation of my beliefs and my position. You have absolutely no reason to think I am or say I am, so stop it.
    That capitalism comment on the other thread though...
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 42,272
    edited July 2016
    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    All I'm getting from you is that as far as you're concerned, there aren't any radical conservatives until you reach, say, the Westboro Baptists, but anyone left of centre is a radical liberal.

    You are not getting that from me. You are getting a description of what the Tea Party is.
    No, I'm getting it from everything you've said.
    I'm sorry but there is nothing "radical" about wanting small government or limits on spending. You might want to consider that it is your own radicalism which prevents you from seeing that.
    You are ignoring everything else about the tea party, lol. If you want to only focus on two things out of many, sure. If you want to actually look at the whole picture, no.
    And I am not radical, not even remotely close to radical, and am now specifically requesting that you not call me that. I take it as a misrepresentation of my beliefs and my position. You have absolutely no reason to think I am or say I am, so stop it.
    That capitalism comment on the other thread though...
    I didn't make that up. Google it. It's not a radical theory at all. It's a common theory. It also didn't suggest that I think Capitalism should be thrown out the window. It's just a part of Capitalism that is a problem (at least under human guidance. If only a computer controlled the system it would work). That isn't radical. Seriously, at this point I can't say ANYTHING that you don't consider radical unless it completely lines up with your own views.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • BS44325BS44325 Posts: 5,722
    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    All I'm getting from you is that as far as you're concerned, there aren't any radical conservatives until you reach, say, the Westboro Baptists, but anyone left of centre is a radical liberal.

    You are not getting that from me. You are getting a description of what the Tea Party is.
    No, I'm getting it from everything you've said.
    I'm sorry but there is nothing "radical" about wanting small government or limits on spending. You might want to consider that it is your own radicalism which prevents you from seeing that.
    Wanting the abolishment of the EPA, IRS, FDA, Fed Reserve, National Parks, and practically all Federal level government is absolutely radical.

    You don't know the tea party as well as you think you do.
    This is actually interesting because doing all of the above would certainly be a "radical' departure from the way things are being done now. That being said the tea party tends to be all over the map on some of these. There is probably pretty wide support on the abolishment of the EPA, IRS and Department of Education but the others are a bit mixed. Also the people who wish to abolish want to see control of these areas returned to the states so it is not as if they want no government at all but simply local control. I am not sure if that is radical at all. I will have to dwell on this but you raise a good point.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 11,174
    BS44325 said:

    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    All I'm getting from you is that as far as you're concerned, there aren't any radical conservatives until you reach, say, the Westboro Baptists, but anyone left of centre is a radical liberal.

    You are not getting that from me. You are getting a description of what the Tea Party is.
    No, I'm getting it from everything you've said.
    I'm sorry but there is nothing "radical" about wanting small government or limits on spending. You might want to consider that it is your own radicalism which prevents you from seeing that.
    Wanting the abolishment of the EPA, IRS, FDA, Fed Reserve, National Parks, and practically all Federal level government is absolutely radical.

    You don't know the tea party as well as you think you do.
    This is actually interesting because doing all of the above would certainly be a "radical' departure from the way things are being done now. That being said the tea party tends to be all over the map on some of these. There is probably pretty wide support on the abolishment of the EPA, IRS and Department of Education but the others are a bit mixed. Also the people who wish to abolish want to see control of these areas returned to the states so it is not as if they want no government at all but simply local control. I am not sure if that is radical at all. I will have to dwell on this but you raise a good point.
    This is where I think small government people lose some credibility, because local officials are more easily corrupted by every measure. It's a great deal cheaper/easier to buy influence with local and state officials, the probability of conflicts of interest skyrockets, and personal pursuits play a larger role in governance. There is very little vision for the future at large, instead there is a singular focus on short term gain... If state's rights had triumphed to the degree prescribed by the Constitution, there would be far fewer public spaces, pollution would be ridiculously out of control, whole areas of the country would be Christian caliphates, the Bible would be held as equal to the Principia, and slavery might still exist to this day.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 42,272
    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    All I'm getting from you is that as far as you're concerned, there aren't any radical conservatives until you reach, say, the Westboro Baptists, but anyone left of centre is a radical liberal.

    You are not getting that from me. You are getting a description of what the Tea Party is.
    No, I'm getting it from everything you've said.
    I'm sorry but there is nothing "radical" about wanting small government or limits on spending. You might want to consider that it is your own radicalism which prevents you from seeing that.
    Wanting the abolishment of the EPA, IRS, FDA, Fed Reserve, National Parks, and practically all Federal level government is absolutely radical.

    You don't know the tea party as well as you think you do.
    This is actually interesting because doing all of the above would certainly be a "radical' departure from the way things are being done now. That being said the tea party tends to be all over the map on some of these. There is probably pretty wide support on the abolishment of the EPA, IRS and Department of Education but the others are a bit mixed. Also the people who wish to abolish want to see control of these areas returned to the states so it is not as if they want no government at all but simply local control. I am not sure if that is radical at all. I will have to dwell on this but you raise a good point.
    This is where I think small government people lose some credibility, because local officials are more easily corrupted by every measure. It's a great deal cheaper/easier to buy influence with local and state officials, the probability of conflicts of interest skyrockets, and personal pursuits play a larger role in governance. There is very little vision for the future at large, instead there is a singular focus on short term gain... If state's rights had triumphed to the degree prescribed by the Constitution, there would be far fewer public spaces, pollution would be ridiculously out of control, whole areas of the country would be Christian caliphates, the Bible would be held as equal to the Principia, and slavery might still exist to this day.
    All excellent points.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 42,272
    edited August 2016
    Erm, I'm not posting this gleefully. The video just released to the public (previously not released by the courts but used in court) of Rob Ford smoking crack and mumbling a lot while his weirdo friend Elena Basso blabs on about shit including how she wants to shove her foot up Trudeau's ass that has been released to the public isn't a fun watch. It's pretty sad and awkward. But hey, it's the Rob Ford smokes crack thread, so I guess the video of Rob Ford smoking crack belongs here.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/rob-ford-crack-video-watch-1.3143013?cid=
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 15,149
    lukin2006 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    Poor Michael. It must suck to be gay and a member of Toronto's most homophobic family.

    :confused:

    Poor Michael. It must suck to be gay and a member of Toronto's most homophobic family.

    Qu'est-ce que le wha, lol?
    Whoops... inside info I shouldn't have shared. My bad. I just feel bad for the kid.



    Inside info's different from what I honestly feared: that his speech impediment (or whatever the pc term is) was being childishly made fun of (thankfully not).

    As I told someone in discussing this, (if true) it's somewhat a point of pride that this is how I found out about this (international Internet message board), since it's been a non-issue locally. Because most in this city would agree (I hope), who cares?

    And PJSoul, I hope I'm not an asshole, even though I happily ride the Ford train, lol.
    lukin2006 said:

    Why in death can people not leave rob ford alone. And who fucking cares about Michael Fords sexuality ... that's his business.

    I should be clear that the individual who provided the info was sharing an opinion. Michael Ford did not out himself to this person. I don't know if he is gay for sure, and I don't care if he is. Really the point I was making is that "Ford Nation" probably would care if he was gay, and that it was "Ford Nation" that elected him. Furthermore I imagine the Ford Family Closet wouldn't be the easiest to come out of. I wish him the best gay or not, and as I said I hope he flips the script and re-writes the Ford family political book.



    Thankfully your last comment puts us back to (in my opinion) "Who knows? Who cares?" Regarding Michael's sexuality, and I do agree with what you're saying to an extent. Rob's non-attendance at most Pride events is a matter of record, and casts a certain light (right or wrong) on these types of issues.

    That said, my feeling is that enough time has passed that (both sides) a honest and open discussion should be possible regarding Rob and his life. I know up-thread I took serious exception with some of the things said about him, but that was literally in the first days after he'd died. It's been months now, and the only people who (I think) might have the right to be offended would be his family, and I'm guessing none of them are active members here, lol.
    Discussing Rob Fords legacy including his addictions ... no problem, trash talking someone's behaviour because of said addiction is not cool to me.
    addiction is considered a disease; yes. however, it is not the same as having cancer or aids. you are in complete control of your own recovery. you can choose your cure. for that reason, yes, I feel I can judge a person's behaviour even while under the influence. it's also the reason the courts don't accept "I was drunk/high" as a defence.

    I've been around my drunken douchebag former brother in law falling on my kids enough to know that while I can empathize with his issues, he is not excused for them.
  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 963
    PJ_Soul said:

    Erm, I'm not posting this gleefully. The video just released to the public (previously not released by the courts but used in court) of Rob Ford smoking crack and mumbling a lot while his weirdo friend Elena Basso blabs on about shit including how she wants to shove her foot up Trudeau's ass that has been released to the public isn't a fun watch. It's pretty sad and awkward. But hey, it's the Rob Ford smokes crack thread, so I guess the video of Rob Ford smoking crack belongs here.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/rob-ford-crack-video-watch-1.3143013?cid=

    I get what you're saying, and understand posting it here, but in a more general sense I don't see any benefit to the public in making this video public (on the same say the RCMP release the "martyr video" from yesterday's incident, equally questionable to me). Sad to watch, in any case, even more so for his (likely) still-grieving family. As I said above, I think enough time has passed that we can openly talk about Ford's policies, behaviours and legacies, I just honestly don't see any legitimate benefit to this video's release to the public, other than to titillate.
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 42,272
    edited August 2016

    PJ_Soul said:

    Erm, I'm not posting this gleefully. The video just released to the public (previously not released by the courts but used in court) of Rob Ford smoking crack and mumbling a lot while his weirdo friend Elena Basso blabs on about shit including how she wants to shove her foot up Trudeau's ass that has been released to the public isn't a fun watch. It's pretty sad and awkward. But hey, it's the Rob Ford smokes crack thread, so I guess the video of Rob Ford smoking crack belongs here.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/rob-ford-crack-video-watch-1.3143013?cid=

    I get what you're saying, and understand posting it here, but in a more general sense I don't see any benefit to the public in making this video public (on the same say the RCMP release the "martyr video" from yesterday's incident, equally questionable to me). Sad to watch, in any case, even more so for his (likely) still-grieving family. As I said above, I think enough time has passed that we can openly talk about Ford's policies, behaviours and legacies, I just honestly don't see any legitimate benefit to this video's release to the public, other than to titillate.
    No, I don't really see the point either, except that there are laws and shit when it comes to freedom of and access to information. I assume it was released only because of those. Fair enough, whoever icky the content is. I definitely support its release for this reason as opposed to not releasing it, because that would just set a bad precedent. Plus, shameful or not, embarrassing or not, I figure the public probably does have a right to see the hard evidence of their elected officials smoking crack. That he's dead isn't really a relevant factor, however uncomfortable that fact makes it.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • DarthMaeglinDarthMaeglin TorontoPosts: 963
    PJ_Soul said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    Erm, I'm not posting this gleefully. The video just released to the public (previously not released by the courts but used in court) of Rob Ford smoking crack and mumbling a lot while his weirdo friend Elena Basso blabs on about shit including how she wants to shove her foot up Trudeau's ass that has been released to the public isn't a fun watch. It's pretty sad and awkward. But hey, it's the Rob Ford smokes crack thread, so I guess the video of Rob Ford smoking crack belongs here.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/rob-ford-crack-video-watch-1.3143013?cid=

    I get what you're saying, and understand posting it here, but in a more general sense I don't see any benefit to the public in making this video public (on the same say the RCMP release the "martyr video" from yesterday's incident, equally questionable to me). Sad to watch, in any case, even more so for his (likely) still-grieving family. As I said above, I think enough time has passed that we can openly talk about Ford's policies, behaviours and legacies, I just honestly don't see any legitimate benefit to this video's release to the public, other than to titillate.
    No, I don't really see the point either, except that there are laws and shit when it comes to freedom of and access to information. I assume it was released only because of those. Fair enough, whoever icky the content is. I definitely support its release for this reason as opposed to not releasing it, because that would just set a bad precedent. Plus, shameful or not, embarrassing or not, I figure the public probably does have a right to see the hard evidence of their elected officials smoking crack. That he's dead isn't really a relevant factor, however uncomfortable that fact makes it.
    I'm wondering if it's even worth looking into whether there is precedent for the release of evidence from trials that don't proceed to verdict. This seems like a political move, though I admit I'm likely wrong (have some knowledge of our legal system, but I'm hardly an expert, lol). As another thread's been getting into (Canadian Politics Redux), we do have some fairly political courts here in Canada, with a definite tendency towards liberalism.
    "The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."

    10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 42,272
    edited August 2016
    I'm going to give the judge the benefit of the doubt here, and assume it was not a political move on her part. There would be absolutely no political motivation for this judge to do that. It was just a plain old legal decision related to freedom of info and the press IMO.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    Doug Ford promises ‘there’s no politician safe’ from being exposed in new tell-all book

    http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/doug-ford-promises-political-and-media-names-will-be-named-in-new-tell-all-book
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 42,272
    edited September 2016
    lukin2006 said:

    Doug Ford promises ‘there’s no politician safe’ from being exposed in new tell-all book

    http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/doug-ford-promises-political-and-media-names-will-be-named-in-new-tell-all-book

    Lol, he's such an idiot. The way he "revealed" this "bombshell" is a fucking joke. This crazy press conference with a giant blown up photo of Rob Ford next to him, and acting all blustery and self-righteous about it, while most people there were expecting him to announce he was running for something. Bizarre.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • BS44325BS44325 Posts: 5,722
    People who said Trump couldn't possibly win never had Rob Ford as a mayor.
  • Heard he made the short list to head up the DEA.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 None Of Your Business...Posts: 2,280
    Doug Fords a fucking loser...
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 42,272
    Doug Fords a fucking loser...
    A big huge one, lol.... Now let's see if Ontario can save itself from him. Just that we're not 100% positive that it won't is disturbing.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 None Of Your Business...Posts: 2,280
    PJ_Soul said:
    Doug Fords a fucking loser...
    A big huge one, lol.... Now let's see if Ontario can save itself from him. Just that we're not 100% positive that it won't is disturbing.
    He is going to win ... unless he says something incredibly stupid.  But so far he’s stuck to the script.  This liberal government is long past its expiration date.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 42,272
    PJ_Soul said:
    Doug Fords a fucking loser...
    A big huge one, lol.... Now let's see if Ontario can save itself from him. Just that we're not 100% positive that it won't is disturbing.
    He is going to win ... unless he says something incredibly stupid.  But so far he’s stuck to the script.  This liberal government is long past its expiration date.
    Where does the NDP stand there? Sounds like people in Ontario have forgotten they're an option... And considering the other options, they must be a pretty legit alternative, no? 
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • qontheboardqontheboard Posts: 570
    edited March 13
    PJ_Soul said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    Doug Fords a fucking loser...
    A big huge one, lol.... Now let's see if Ontario can save itself from him. Just that we're not 100% positive that it won't is disturbing.
    He is going to win ... unless he says something incredibly stupid.  But so far he’s stuck to the script.  This liberal government is long past its expiration date.
    Where does the NDP stand there? Sounds like people in Ontario have forgotten they're an option... And considering the other options, they must be a pretty legit alternative, no? 

    Andrea Horwath (Ontario NDP leader) has demonstrated that she can barely lead a PTA meeting let alone the province. She ran a conservative platform to try and beat the Liberals and lost a lot of support. Unfortunately Doug Ford will win. There is no longer a left leaning media in Ontario (apart from the Toronto Star, and who reads newspapers anymore?), leaving all the right leaning media to hate on Wynn. The campaign of hate against Wynn has been a 100% success.

    Post edited by qontheboard on
Sign In or Register to comment.