kelownabomberfan

Andrew Harris

Just trying to figure out who is the bigger dumpster fire right now, Saskatchewan or Montreal.

I don't bash the Riders as much when they are down, but of course I remember the 1980's when bashing the Riders was like picking on a person in a coma. I am enjoying the circus going on there right now though.

I actually didn't mind Bill Clinton so much.

As stupid as those tweets are, they had me howling with laughter. Imagine Obama or even George Bush Jr. tweeting out that they fired someone because they were a "loser". This is extremely entertaining if nothing else. And yes, what a sad indictment of himself indeed.

Bryan Bennett. And Rod Black gave the credit to Taylor Loffler on that tackle.

There was a big special teams tackle during the game by Bennett I believe, though Rod Black gave the credit to Loffler. I couldn't tell if it was #16 or #18 on the jersey. I think it was Bennett though and Rod was just wrong as usual.

that or WWE wrestling.

Toronto back in the Pinball coaching days had a saying "Fit in or F off". I remember Pinball saying that was the Argo philosophy. O'Shea would know all about it, having played there at the time.

Replace "ticket to" with "bag of weed at" in that sentence and you may get him to show up.

Jim Jones was more sane.

Said Bob Irving in 1987 when asked about the Bombers putting Chris Carter on their neg list.

This is puzzling...

Cheer for Lions because....well someone has to. No one here in BC is doing it.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/politics/opinion-how-donald-trump-just-keeps-winning/ar-BBLHlEy?ocid=spartanntp

It’s not what they’re doing. It’s how they’re doing it that will occupy the judge’s attention. And there’s probably enough leeway in the Constitution, the charter of rights and the relevant legislation that the NDP-Green power play will at least get to a vote in November. So some of the valid complaints about how fixed this fall’s referendum is, how self-serving it is and how skewed the process has been to date are just background noise in a courtroom. Nonetheless, two-thirds of the petition against the referendum is an everything-but-the-kitchen-sink encyclopedia about the inequities in the referendum. The strictly legal arguments, by contrast, amount to a modest 10 pages. They’re based on the premise that changing the voting system is a constitutional change, so the provincial constitution would have to be changed under a section of the 1867 Constitution Act. Another point is that the referendum results bind governments because they are presumed to represent a clear statement by the electorate. But this two-stage ballot doesn’t offer a clear choice, they argue. The first question offers a choice only between the status quo and a general undefined concept (“proportional representation”). And the second preferential ballot on three choices of PR systems has a lot of details missing that are left to the government’s future discretion. An additional wrinkle: Some voters on the second question will have voted against changing on the first choice. So they’ll be ranking the systems on the basis of which they dislike the least. The argument is that can’t be counted as a vote in favour, and would invalidate the results. Also listed as a legal point are the restrictions on advertising spending during the campaign, something the plaintiffs think violates their free-speech rights. The overall argument is that that upcoming referendum, with its no-minimum-turnout threshold, uncertain questions and arbitrary government design, doesn’t measure up to democratic standards. The case is brought by the Independent Contractors and Businesses Association, which is becoming the omnibus challenger of all NDP moves (the Trans Mountain Pipeline stall, community benefits agreements, etc.). Association president Chris Gardner is joined by a low-profile union leader as a plaintiff. Ken Baerg is the director of the Canada West Construction Union, an unaffiliated organization with members in B.C. and Alberta. Their game plan is to get the referendum postponed until the legal flaws are corrected. They say they support a referendum on voting systems, but one that’s done in a more fair and transparent manner. In the meantime, they’re active on the No side. https://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/columnists/les-leyne-injunction-bid-on-vote-reform-will-be-longshot-1.23393048

I think everyone should have the right to vote (if they are a citizen anyway) and so I don't care if they want to vote for the fringe lunatic on the ticket. I just don't want that fringe lunatic being my MLA/MP and being rewarded for their bad ideas with a six figure salary. I don't want Nazis or Communists being a part of my government. Their ideas are horrible and wrong. In first past the post, these nuts are weeded out. Fine by me. But I don't say that people shouldn't have the right to vote for them. As for Italy I'd say the exact opposite - a small minority has spoken and because of their flawed voting process that small minority has now created a giant mess. I prefer our system - it's so much better and creates so much stability.

When I look at what a mess European countries are that have prop rep, including Italy, I really lose all interest in that form of voting. It took Germany what, eight months to form a government? First past the post isn't perfect, that's for sure, and we are seeing one of the downsides of it here in BC right now with the unholy alliance of NDP and Greens doing a terrible job. For me though the disaster we have now is also a great example of why we DON'T want to go to a system that allows more insane zealots to have seats in our government. Usually, first past the post keeps the nutbars on both sides of the spectrum out. As I said, look at Italy, you have Nazis and Communists running the country right now. It's insane.

I believe that this website explains it: https://biv.com/article/2018/06/what-bcs-three-proposed-systems-proportional-representation-could-mean-voters Everyone can see right through this though. The NDP/Greens think by changing the system they will get more seats. No one here but a small minority wants that, especially after how terrible they have been at governing here so far since they usurped power. The NDP have been accused of trying to make the process extremely confusing too, in order to try and get a better result for themselves. This entire process of reviewing our voting system has been a giant waste of taxpayer money, but that's what the NDP does best.

We will see. I remain unconvinced.

Both statements above are untrue. Other than the Libtard comment. That I agree with 100%.

Good point.

Ohio stayed Republican tonight. And yet all we hear is how much the Republicans suck. Fair enough. So what's the problem? Why are they still winning? Saying that it's because voters are stupid is a sure fire way to keep losing. There is a bigger picture here.

not sure the Democrats are any different, and if you think so, you're pretty naive. Here in BC we have the BC NDP and the Greens feverishly trying to change our election laws to bring in some form of voting that guarantees that they will keep power. No matter what side of the spectrum, you have crazy people who hate democracy.