Ontario Election 2018

[TML fan]

Ford's a moron.  At least he hasn't done anything that I wasn't expecting of him yet. 

I mean that's the sad thing. This is what people voted him in for. So he could bring back a sex ed program that was developed in 1998.

Personally I'm looking forward to the increased incidence of teenage pregnancy I'll get to diagnose in the ER.  Nothing says good sexual education policy like "I pushed a baby out of me therefore I know everything about parenting".

I don't think the Sex Ed cirriculum was ever designed to teach kids how to be parents.

 

[TML fan]

Jesus, no Green initiatives anywhere at all in any capacity. That is genuinely frightening. Not to mention putting a greater dependency on Oil and Gas which, ultimately, will just lead to more Middle East interference and occupation culminating in more terrorism. Nothing like an ignorant, selfish criminal in your corner!

In other Joke Premier news, depsite Hydro One being privatived, Ford was able to oust its CEO for a mere 400K......Of course, the only way for this guy to agree to leave and give up his meaty position and severance would be to give him incentive...so how about nearly 10 million in stock options and a 170K yearly pension? They sure showed him!

Yeah, but he kept a promise! A worthless one, but a promise no less! 

 

[hockeyfan1]

Ford's a moron.  At least he hasn't done anything that I wasn't expecting of him yet. 

I mean that's the sad thing. This is what people voted him in for. So he could bring back a sex ed program that was developed in 1998.

Personally I'm looking forward to the increased incidence of teenage pregnancy I'll get to diagnose in the ER.  Nothing says good sexual education policy like "I pushed a baby out of me therefore I know everything about parenting".

B]I don't think the Sex Ed cirriculum was ever designed to teach kids how to be parents.[/b]

On that count alone, no, but it (Sex Ed in general) provides invaluable advice to those who may not know the difference between abstinence and compilation.

It is often erroneously believed that teaching teenagers about the birds & the bees may actually whet their appetite and further peek their curiosity, that they will engage in if not more sex.

Perhaps parents out there feel uneasy to let a teacher who is unrelated to them teach their offspring about this most delicate of subject matters, which, up to a point, is understandable.  People need to remember that no matter how or what they raise their kids as parents, as good a job they do hoping that their young will continue onto the path of responsibility in their lives, inevitably, they cannot determine just what path at some point on the road to adulthood the teenagers will want to explore.

I've always believed that without any sense of direction, education, or even forward thinking, confusion and improper and/or genuine wrongful decision-making will occur, unless steps are taken ahead if time, both at home and most importantly, at school.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I've always believed that without any sense of direction, education, or even forward thinking, confusion and improper and/or genuine wrongful decision-making will occur, unless steps are taken ahead if time, both at home and most importantly, at school.

Most importantly at school? Really?

 

[herman]

This thread is my new aesthetic:
https://twitter.com/ErynnBrook/status/1017545073569878016

 

[hockeyfan1]

I've always believed that without any sense of direction, education, or even forward thinking, confusion and improper and/or genuine wrongful decision-making will occur, unless steps are taken ahead if time, both at home and most importantly, at school.

Most importantly at school? Really?

Don't kids spend most of their days going to school?  I'm just reiterating why Sex Ed should be part of the curriculum at some point in their educational lives.  Maybe not "more importantly" but important enough.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Sorry... this was the best place I could put this...

I know twitter polls aren't exactly what you would call scientific or even accurate, but JFC people:

https://twitter.com/ezralevant/status/1022077944385208320

 

[Coco-puffs]

Sorry... this was the best place I could put this...

I know twitter polls aren't exactly what you would call scientific or even accurate, but JFC people:

https://twitter.com/ezralevant/status/1022077944385208320

I'd imagine that Ezra's followers (and the majority of the people voting in that poll) certainly lean one way politically and thus I'm not surprised by those results.  Why would they believe the libs?

 

[Strangelove]

Sorry... this was the best place I could put this...

I know twitter polls aren't exactly what you would call scientific or even accurate, but JFC people:

https://twitter.com/ezralevant/status/1022077944385208320

I'd imagine that Ezra's followers (and the majority of the people voting in that poll) certainly lean one way politically and thus I'm not surprised by those results.  Why would they believe the libs?

Why would they believe an independent, venerated Canadian news agency over a foreign terrorist organization?

This is a question that actually has to be asked in 2018?

 

[L K]

The ring on my can of tuna broke off before I could open the can.  I expect ISIS will claim responsibility for it in the next hour or so.

 

[louisstamos]

The ring on my can of tuna broke off before I could open the can.  I expect ISIS will claim responsibility for it in the next hour or so.

Take my pen knife, my good man...

 

[Kin]

Why would they believe an independent, venerated Canadian news agency over a foreign terrorist organization?

This is a question that actually has to be asked in 2018?

That's been one of the great victories for people like Trump and his supporters. Getting people to automatically dismiss the work of a news organization because their perceived editorial bent isn't perfectly aligned with their own political views. There are lots of news sources who are to the right of me who still have journalists doing real work(the WSJ, the Globe and Mail) no matter how much I disagree with their opinion pages.

Also, it's pretty sad that an organization like the CBC is seen as Left Wing because Conservatives seem to have uniformly adopted the position that a well-informed public, whether by news or education, isn't the government's purview.

 

[Phileas Fogg]

That's been one of the great victories for people like Trump and his supporters. Getting people to automatically dismiss the work of a news organization because their perceived editorial bent isn't perfectly aligned with their own political views. There are lots of news sources who are to the right of me who still have journalists doing real work(the WSJ, the Globe and Mail) no matter how much I disagree with their opinion pages.

Absolutely. But I don't think that a lot of the media is doing the public much of a service, either. A lot of non-editorial pieces are being influenced heavily by bias, even in mainstream papers, and it's difficult to get through too many articles without feeling like you're being told what to think. The Toronto Star in particular, of which I was a 30 year subscriber, has devolved horribly in this regard, and I assume it has to do with it's internal financial pressures, which has affected other outlets as well.

I'd love to see a news hub with relatively unbiased content, and editorialized commentary with "duelling viewpoints" - the first on one side of the page, and then a counterpoint directly across on the other side, so one could understand and consider the merits of each perspective. It's difficult to be a 90s era liberal any more, because it seems you're being shoved hard left or hard right by the media.

 

[Kin]

A lot of non-editorial pieces are being influenced heavily by bias, even in mainstream papers, and it's difficult to get through too many articles without feeling like you're being told what to think.

I don't want to turn this into a whole thing but I really don't think that's true.

 

[Bender]

That's been one of the great victories for people like Trump and his supporters. Getting people to automatically dismiss the work of a news organization because their perceived editorial bent isn't perfectly aligned with their own political views. There are lots of news sources who are to the right of me who still have journalists doing real work(the WSJ, the Globe and Mail) no matter how much I disagree with their opinion pages.

Absolutely. But I don't think that a lot of the media is doing the public much of a service, either. A lot of non-editorial pieces are being influenced heavily by bias, even in mainstream papers, and it's difficult to get through too many articles without feeling like you're being told what to think. The Toronto Star in particular, of which I was a 30 year subscriber, has devolved horribly in this regard, and I assume it has to do with it's internal financial pressures, which has affected other outlets as well.

I'd love to see a news hub with relatively unbiased content, and editorialized commentary with "duelling viewpoints" - the first on one side of the page, and then a counterpoint directly across on the other side, so one could understand and consider the merits of each perspective. It's difficult to be a 90s era liberal any more, because it seems you're being shoved hard left or hard right by the media.

Also not to make a thing out of this, the problem with point, counter-point is the facts don't always line up 50/50. For example, just off the top of my head, newspapers actually do do a lot of 50/50 coverage of this, or at least there is a 50/50 split in terms of yes or no amongst an aggregate number of news outlets. The issue here is that there is almost unanimous consensus that humans are a driving cause of global warming due to greenhouse gas emissions, yet there is this idea that doing a subject justice is to give air time/paper space to show the opposing viewpoint, even though it's not commemesurate with the level of consensus (97%~ of scientists).

I do think the political spectrum has generally shifted harder right than it has left, and in some ways it is reflective in newspapers, but I think non-op pieces of most mainstream papers do a pretty good job of sorting the facts, unless it's patentedly obvious they're pandering yellow-media rather than true news outlets (Fox, Sun etc.). 

 

[hockeyfan1]

That's been one of the great victories for people like Trump and his supporters. Getting people to automatically dismiss the work of a news organization because their perceived editorial bent isn't perfectly aligned with their own political views. There are lots of news sources who are to the right of me who still have journalists doing real work(the WSJ, the Globe and Mail) no matter how much I disagree with their opinion pages.

Absolutely. But I don't think that a lot of the media is doing the public much of a service, either. A lot of non-editorial pieces are being influenced heavily by bias, even in mainstream papers, and it's difficult to get through too many articles without feeling like you're being told what to think. The Toronto Star in particular, of which I was a 30 year subscriber, has devolved horribly in this regard, and I assume it has to do with it's internal financial pressures, which has affected other outlets as well.

I'd love to see a news hub with relatively unbiased content, and editorialized commentary with "duelling viewpoints" - the first on one side of the page, and then a counterpoint directly across on the other side, so one could understand and consider the merits of each perspective. It's difficult to be a 90s era liberal any more, because it seems you're being shoved hard left or hard right by the media.

Also not to make a thing out of this, the problem with point, counter-point is the facts don't always line up 50/50. For example, just off the top of my head, newspapers actually do do a lot of 50/50 coverage of this, or at least there is a 50/50 split in terms of yes or no amongst an aggregate number of news outlets. The issue here is that there is almost unanimous consensus that humans are a driving cause of global warming due to greenhouse gas emissions, yet there is this idea that doing a subject justice is to give air time/paper space to show the opposing viewpoint, even though it's not commemesurate with the level of consensus (97%~ of scientists).

I do think the political spectrum has generally shifted harder right than it has left, and in some ways it is reflective in newspapers, but I think non-op pieces of most mainstream papers do a pretty good job of sorting the facts, unless it's patentedly obvious they're pandering yellow-media rather than true news outlets (Fox, Sun etc.). 

The Toronto Star was always seen as an editor's paper and the Toronto Sun as a reporter's paper back in the day.  Many former Star writers joined the Sun for the simple reason they felt they could write more freely here rather there.  Back in the '80's/'90's, used to read both papers and there was quite a comparison between the lib-left Star and the centre-right Sun.

The media was accused of not reporting the news the way it's meant to be but rather to sell papers.  All media is influenced by it's ownership and each may be biased as to whom they answer to and/or whom it generally purports to be (right, left, socialist, etc.).  That includes TV media (CNN, FOX, etc.).

 

[hockeyfan1]

The Ford government just announced that they will nearly halve the size of Toronto Council at City Hall reducing it from 44 to 25 councillors.  The government claims it (the reduction) will save the city and taxpayers $25M.

The government will also cancel the municipal elections for Regional Council Chair for both the regions of Peel & York.  For some, this is seen as a  necessary initiative, particularly in Mississauga (Peel) echoed by Mayor Bonnie Crombie who saw this creation of regional chairperson in terms of a  "super-mayor".  To the Ford government, many have said that it's Ford's way of stopping the candidates former Conservative party leader Patrick Brown and rival Stephen DelDuca (Liberal) from seeking the chairperson job.

However it plays, Premier Ford is certainly making waves and is no stranger to it usurping what he sees as unnecessary, wasteful, as a huge opponent of government-induced programs (climate change, environment, ex. cap & trade, etc.)., who is not afraid of placing his stamp on this province's makeover, for better or worse.

https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/07/26/ford-to-slash-toronto-city-council-to-25-councillors-from-47-sources-say.html

 

[Kin]

Shockingly, cutting benefits for the poor and disabled wasn't something Ford decided to let people know about pre-election:

https://globalnews.ca/news/4363514/ontario-tories-basic-income-social-assistance/

 

[CarltonTheBear]

https://twitter.com/CBCHamilton/status/1024647080277680129

It's nice to see a number of school boards around the province doing this.

 

[cabber24]

https://twitter.com/CBCHamilton/status/1024647080277680129

It's nice to see a number of school boards around the province doing this.

My kids school board released a letter basically stating that although guidelines may change they will continue a current sex ed curriculum.