Toronto is definitively south-central, though nobody calls it that, instead saying GTA/GTHA/Golden Horseshoe, etc. I can’t find any sources that say Toronto is in Southwestern Ontario, so I don’t think there’s any support for what your saying (Wikipedia, Ontario Tourism for 2 counter examples).

Like Fort Frances is on the border and it’s Western Ontario but you would still call it Northern

Yes, because we first divide Ontario into Northern & Southern. If you just said Fort Frances was in Western Ontario, it would cause confusion which is why it’s “Northwestern Ontario” (EDIT Wikipedia also agrees with me on this one).

Toronto isn’t in Southwestern Ontario though.

That’s not how legislation is typically written. Anyways, just because someone states their purpose doesn’t mean that’s actually their intentions. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

I’m more than happy to support any measures which actually increase safety, but prohibiting these guns is just for show. Putting forward ineffective legislation like this wastes political capital which could have instead been used to actually make our society safer.

They literally say:

“Now the whole idea of independence is a messy social construct with a bunch of issues that I won’t get into right now.”

(Emphasis mine). They are not just saying, “it’s complicated.” They literally use the word “issues.”

It’s not a strawman. I am all for gun safety, but the rifles that have been recently “prohibited” are simply models that “look scary” while their sporterized counterparts have had their classification unchanged.

Please point out any. I know there are models that fit European standards instead of North American, but they aren’t arbitrarily banned because “they look scary.”

🤞the bastard is the one to the south 🤞

While this is definitely a positive, I worry it’s a repeat of what happened in the Ontario election: Likely voters want to get-it-over-and-done-with so they go as soon as practical. In the case of Ontario’s election, it was just a shift that a larger percentage of voters went to the Advanced Polls, not that a larger percentage of people voted.

Actually, not like gun laws because we don’t ban “scary looking” models of vehicles. In generally we don’t even ban provably deadlier models or limit their usage based on need. Any idiot can buy a jacked-up F150 and drive it on any public road.

Don’t treat this kind of projection as remotely reliable at the riding level, it doesn’t actually tell you anything about what’s happening in your locality.

338Canada’s record has been pretty darn good. Saying, “it doesn’t tell you anything” is downplaying not only their historical accuracy, but also the effort they put into their methodology.

They aren’t perfect. For example, I lived in Kitchener Centre where the Greens were out of 338Canada’s MOE 2 elections in a row, but on the whole, they’ve been pretty accurate.

Also the 2024 election.

Almost all of the polls were within the MOE. The polls said it was a toss up, and it was.

Also the bc provincial election last year. Pretty sure the last federal election polls Also were wrong.

The results for both of these were very close to what the polls predicted. Not sure why you felt they were off?

Polls are instantly biased by the type of people that answer polls, or the audience that the polls are based on.

Very true, which is the job of pollsters to adjust for. And, as I’ve said, I think they are pretty good at their jobs.

I keep hearing statements like this, but they’re not backed up by data. Polls are rarely “wrong” and aggregators such as 338Canada do a pretty good job of predicting local races. While there are are some historically bad misses (many pollsters for the 2016 US Presidential Election), IMHO the biggest issues is people not understanding what polls actually mean, and the media doing a terrible job of explaining them.

…that’s exactly what I said…

3 days seems like a good “default” but I agree I’d definitely like the option to make it shorter.

You assumed by, “save you a click,” they’d read and summarized the article? No, they are such a big brain, they know everything without even having to read the article!

In my (limited) experience driving in Toronto, I agree with you about congestion and speed. Except in the middle of the night, any time I’ve seen someone speeding in Toronto, they’re weaving between cars, making it even more important to enforce!

I just get a 404 error.

According to Wikipedia, 150,000 Active personnel and 1,657,000 in Reserves.

Don’t get me wrong, I love the Greens. I voted for Mike Morrice twice and would have voted Aislinn Clancy if I hadn’t already moved. I would love to see the Greens on the debate stage, but they knew the rules and chose to fall out of line with them.

I’m also not sure why you think if a party isn’t national, that they don’t count. At the time the election was called, the BQ represented 10% of Canadians. Do you think those voices shouldn’t count? Do you think nationalism and patriotism should be a prereq to get into the debate? I’m really trying to figure out where your argument lands because it sounds like you are against dictators, but also want to dictate specifically who can and can’t be on the debate stage which would be the actions of a …

I have much less interest in sitting through a debate between 4 people, when 1/4 of the time will be dedicated to a guy talking about one province’s interests, and where that party doesn’t even run outside of that province.

I know you might not interest in listening, but at the time the writ was drawn up, he had 33 seats, which was over 10% of the total. If a party can muster 10% of the seats, they almost certainly should be included in the debate!