gdp's Comments

Macleans.ca : "That's kind of the sentiment we're getting at"

Mon, 9 May 2011 03:56:02 +0000

Actually, we've seen that the incumbent advantage is often much more fickle than is often believed. Kim Campbell - 1993 - being an obvious example. John Turner - 1984 being another.

Macleans.ca : The untold story of the 2011 election: Chapter 5

Mon, 9 May 2011 03:46:18 +0000

Wow. That is shocking, damning evidence that the election was rigged. Even pollsters with rigourous methodology and trained staff could not get it right. But your exit polling methods sound unassailable. 47 friends and friends of friends... plus 7 in Montreal. The ultimate stratified random sample!! Clearly you need to summarize the results of your scientific survey and present it in a court of law, so this travesty can be righted. Or should I say lefted?

Macleans.ca : The untold story of the 2011 election: Chapter 5

Mon, 9 May 2011 03:41:35 +0000

It's in the May 16 Macleans - which came out on Thursday, May 5. That makes no sense at all, I know. But such is the magazine industry. Magazines are dated two weeks ahead to make them seem more current. Kind of like the auto industry - where 2012 models are already hitting the show rooms.

Macleans.ca : The untold story of the 2011 election: Chapter 5

Mon, 9 May 2011 03:35:57 +0000

He's been posting the same link to the same nonsensical blog for a week. Clearly he has - um..... issues.

Macleans.ca : No country for good men

Mon, 9 May 2011 02:42:07 +0000

What is it with you "progressive" types that you must resort to gay baiting as soon as someone angers you? I thought that was kind of... you know, the sort of thing you were against?

Macleans.ca : No country for good men

Mon, 9 May 2011 01:53:18 +0000

He's going to dismantle your cherished version of Canada, or so we hope.

Macleans.ca : No country for good men

Mon, 9 May 2011 01:49:59 +0000

And that wonderful platform of the Liberals was enough to capture 18% of the vote. But blame negative advertising if you like.

Macleans.ca : No country for good men

Mon, 9 May 2011 01:47:46 +0000

Three in a row. That's a hat trick. Ladies, please feel free to send your fan mail to ragingranter@gmail.com.

Macleans.ca : No country for good men

Mon, 9 May 2011 01:45:11 +0000

Of course you meant 'tween'. Twelve year old tween with braids. And you don't scratch Tim Horton's cups, you roll up the rim to win. Other than that, a wonderfully coherent and insightful post.

Macleans.ca : No country for good men

Mon, 9 May 2011 01:31:08 +0000

So people who don't travel much all read comics and live in caves? Thanks for reinforcing my point.

Macleans.ca : "That's kind of the sentiment we're getting at"

Mon, 9 May 2011 01:18:04 +0000

Restricted, but not banned. Numerous PSAC and other government unions advertised against the Conservatives this election.

Macleans.ca : The Twitter effect

Mon, 9 May 2011 01:10:48 +0000

Of course, that's why the Globe and Mail ran 9 stories on a university student who was kicked out of a Conservative rally. Nine before I quit counting that is.

Macleans.ca : "That's kind of the sentiment we're getting at"

Mon, 9 May 2011 01:06:18 +0000

Journalists have a long standing practice of not naming names if the source wishes to remain anonymous. In fact, they've been known to go to jail to protect sources. It's a fundamental principle of journalism in fact. While they also have an obligation to limit their use of "unnamed sources" - an obligation few live up to these days - they certainly are not in the habit of exposing those informants who wish not to be named, and for good reason.

Macleans.ca : "That's kind of the sentiment we're getting at"

Mon, 9 May 2011 01:00:19 +0000

Yet your foot remains planted firmly in your mouth from the above comment. Live and learn I guess.

Macleans.ca : "That's kind of the sentiment we're getting at"

Mon, 9 May 2011 00:59:55 +0000

And you linking to the same nonsensical blog repeatedly is not ignorant how?

Macleans.ca : "That's kind of the sentiment we're getting at"

Mon, 9 May 2011 00:54:30 +0000

I too wish for more backbencher independence. But the US has exactly that, which means that the allegedly independent members of Congress are owned individually, instead of as a group. Campaign finance legislation might somewhat alleviate that, but I'm not sure by how much.

Macleans.ca : "That's kind of the sentiment we're getting at"

Mon, 9 May 2011 00:53:02 +0000

Without official polls, there would be endless "leaks" of unofficial polls, resulting in even more obsession with polls. Or at least that is one possible scenario.

Macleans.ca : "That's kind of the sentiment we're getting at"

Mon, 9 May 2011 00:52:06 +0000

I'm not sure what you're saying. Do even small donations corrupt democracy? I doubt that.

Macleans.ca : "That's kind of the sentiment we're getting at"

Mon, 9 May 2011 00:49:09 +0000

Not without good reason. Media is infotainment, not information. A famous economist (last name of Simon I think) said this about the media: We don't consumer information. Information consumes us. That is not to say the media should be ignored completely and forever. But I prefer to scan the Internet in the days and months and even years after an event happens, when cooler heads can prevail and more of the story becomes clear. So many media sensations ("Vaccine crisis" anyone?) turn out to be such a complete fabrication, it is just insulting.

Macleans.ca : "That's kind of the sentiment we're getting at"

Mon, 9 May 2011 00:44:20 +0000

I said that.... Holy crap! The game's on!! Gotta go.