Lurker > Proto_Spark

I'm Canadian, so I'm not at risk until either late next year or late 2028 when Trump invades Canada to declare a state of emergency and prevent an election and declare himself dictator.

saspa posted...

Train to... busan? A Korean movie that predates Parasite? Could it be?

Train to Busan was a big deal when it first came out, because it was sort of a last gasp of "zombie stuff can actually be really good" before the trend started fully dying out.

It has 2(3?) sequels that are also pretty decent watches. Though I don't think either is quite as good.

I was debating finally upgrading my Series S. That's not gonna happen anymore.

I basically only buy games on sale anymore, but I guess its good I blew the money I did to buy all the games I did during their spring sale last week.

Enclave posted...

They're more like 3 parties rather than 2 but yes what you've posted here is in-line with what I've been saying about the apparent civil war brewing in the party.

It'll be interesting to see how much they fracture - because in a worst case scenario (for them) they could split into a ton of parties, basically forming regional conservative parties. But that also means they'll effectively never hold government again, so I think a split into effectively "I don't want to vote liberal, but basically them" and "social conservatism" factions is also likely.

Though it'll also be really interesting to see how much a PC split hurts the liberal party. A lot of liberal seats, especially in this election, came from "we don't want to go far-right", and if the conservatives aren't likely to form government, I wonder how many of those seats might stay liberal.

By default, the Conservative Party is gonna run a "do we keep him" investigation because they lost the election, regardless of blowing the big lead. PP saying he'll continue as leader doesn't really matter if they decide to kick him anyways.

Though if PP decides to fight it, he can split the conservative party into the 2 parties it actually is - which will effectively stop the conservatives from ever holding a majority government again, but will actually be more representative of the weird mismatch of conservative voters.

gikos posted...

then i hope it happens and that keeps the liberals on their toes and not go to the right like most centrists liberals are doing it in EU countries

Liberals are typically much more willing to go left for the NDP than right to court the conservatives, and because the current government the liberals + NDP is enough to reach the 50% +1 threshold to pass stuff, its likely this will continue.

That's not to say the liberals are gonna start moving further left, but we'll be getting things a bit more to the left than we likely would with a liberal majority.

At least historically, this government is much more likely to go left than go right, but we live in strange times so who knows for sure.

gikos posted...

hope the NDP recover tho cuz last thing cananda needs is no partying pushing the liberals party like in the UK which sadly has become utter garbage
they threw immigrants and trans people under the bus and one of their MP is pushing to publish news of immigrants committing crimes which will stoke the hate against them even more

I believe if the NDP is able to stick around until the next election (they lose a lot of funding by losing party status IIRC) they'll recover fine. A lot of seats that would normally have gone NDP either went Liberal or conservative to due the nature of this election and the momentum pushing to a lot of vote splitting from the NDP (and NDP having a pretty weak campaign didn't really help)

I fully expect a lot of the seats the NDP lost can go back to NDP in the next election.

TheGreatEscape posted...

yeah I know but if you want your leader to have some exposure it helps to have him sit at the commons. I really doubt they'd name an unelected leader unless someone really popular comes out of nowhere and runs for it.

I agree, but I wouldn't be surprised if one of the people from the ridings that typically go NDP run for leadership - when the vote isn't splitting could easily lead to more NDP seats and the leader getting back into the commons. And we could always get special elections triggered if some ridings are really unhappy with their NDP representative going conservative.

Its not like its helping much, I'm thinking it moves from the ~7 or so people who were elected this year to a pool of ~12-15 of people who are consistently elected outside of the very special circumstances of this election.

TheGreatEscape posted...

I think the handful of NDP MPs have to start thinking about who they want as leader now too. With 7 elected, that's a small pool.

I'm thinking Boulerice, the only surviving MP in Quebec, will take a shot at it

The leader of the party doesn't officially need to hold a seat. And we're likely to see some special elections in the next few years from a bunch of these safe-NDP seats that went conservative due to vote splitting going back to the NDP.

But also, part of the reason Jagmeet was around as long as he was is that there wasn't a ton of competition for that leader spot. It's gonna be a fun race.

So in 2015, redistricting broke up the Carleton-Nepean riding into multiple, making Pierre Pollievre move to the specific "Carleton" riding.

Not only was that the one he lost today, but the "Nepean" side of that riding - that was the seat Mark Carney just won.

I think that's really funny.

Enclave posted...

He didn't step down. Maybe it'll change since he lost his seat but at the moment it looks like the party is gearing up for a civil war.

The Party really should be multiple conservative parties. As a tentpole, it's too awkwardly covering too many things, most of which even other conservatives don't agree with. But without this unity, the conservatives can never come close to winning. So I think they're going to desperately try to keep the party together.

Pierre officially doesn't need a seat to be leader (Mark Carney only just won his seat and has been leading the party a few months now), but is typical. As leader of the party, PP can also sort of just take a seat from someone else.

What's crazy is that Carleton (PP's riding) is a full-out conservative stronghold. It's a huge flip for the liberals and is like, the 2nd or 3rd time ever that area hasn't voted conservative. That's how much of a loser PP was.

What's even funnier, is the seat Mark Carney won, was also PP's seat until ~2015.

Jeff_AKA_Snoopy posted...

A reminder to all those who aren't Canadian, that the Conservatives are really the only right wing party at all anymore in Canada. There WAS a small splinter group (and they still exist) but they get like, less than 0.7% of the vote or something?

Technically there are a couple right wing parties because Canada officially will have like 5-8 candidates running in many ridings, but the only ones that really matter will be the liberal party, and depending where you live, NDP or maybe the one riding that typically goes Green. Even the Conservative Party really should be 2-3 separate parties, given its a conglomeration of every random nutcase that would fall under "conservative" - but if they did they'd never win anything so that's unlikely to happen.

The PPC was on the upswing, getting about 5% of the national popular vote in the 2021 election (an increase from 2019), but not focused enough to grant any seats. They've been pretty quiet since Covid ended, so we'll have to wait and see until all the votes are fully counted to see if they made any ground this time. Pollievre also leaned into the far-right conservative base pretty hard, which probably would have eaten away at much of the PPC's base.

Enclave posted...

It was largely strategic voting that did in the NDP.

Singh hasn't really been popular for a while - he comes off as attention-grabby and nobody is really sure what the NDP is actually supposed to represent with him at the helm, because he's taken a lot of the emphasis off of like, strong unions.

But yeah, the thing that really did the NDP in was a lot of people in NDP ridings strategically trying to vote liberal to be anti-conservative, which ironically gave a lot of those seats to the otherwise more distant conservative.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Yeah, so for a majority government, the liberals needed to win 172 seats, and (as of now, they have 168 seats, with a handful of places still counting) so they have nearly majority power, but not quite.

The NDP and Green Party (the two other prominent left-ish parties in Canada) have 7 and 1 seats respectively, meaning they now have a lot of power to be able to push a lot of liberal policies farther left. Being just shy of a majority also means it'll be really hard to trigger another election at a poor time for the liberals, since they'll need basically everyone but them to agree to triggering an election.

It also means if the conservatives (or anyone really) wants to pass a bill the liberals don't like, they need everyone else to vote in favour to get it passed. Not impossible, but not likely.

Basically, we have a fairly safe, looks to be somewhat-left-leaning government for like, comfortably 3-5 more years.

Heptade posted...

Why would the Bloc ever be fully on-board with the Conservatives on anything that matters? They are mostly center-left and if you go on their website, the first article of their political platform translates to "oppose the Trump menace".

Because they are Quebec first more than anything else. But the point was moreso they would effectively be able to decide anything. Add to that while on paper Quebec leans centre left, Quebec politics are also pretty socially conservative - they just don't vote conservative because Quebec has its own minority culture they pretty adamantly protect.

It's not likely they'd be fully on board with the conservatives, but the fact they'd be able to partner with the cons to help the cons get a vote passed gives them a ton of power. If both the liberals and conservatives can partner with the Bloc to get something passed, its a history-making level of power for the Bloc.

We're still possibly in a good timeline - Currently leading is Liberals 163 - NDP 8 - Green 1 - meaning that the three of them can in fact hit a plurality of seats and we can actually have stuff get done.

IcyWind14 posted...

It means the Bloc are the real winners. I don't know if they've ever held power like they do now, they literally are sole decider of who governs.

Yeah. currently Full Cons + Full Bloc means majority, and liberals + NDP + Greens still need at one Bloc to vote for what they want.

This ultimately means unless we get some last-minute liberal gains (which isn't impossible - the only polls really left are early voting which should lean liberal) very little is gonna happen for the next couple years.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


They do, but most of them don't vote. Also, A renewed liberal party and weak NDP meant most NDP strongholds were split down the middle, which ironically led to a lot of conservative gains.

This isn't really a sign that conservatism is taking a hold here - conservatives will vote conservative and literally nothing can change their minds - however the sort of natural state of Canadian politics is a liberal minority government. It's a stronger Conservative Party than is normal, and much weaker NDP/Bloc, but its not too out of the norm.

Well of course. Donald Trump won the election and is therefore the official biggest, most special-est boy. Why would polls suggest he isn't the biggest most special boy ever?

DodogamaRayBrst posted...

Have the non-Trumpers won yet?

Yes. We probably won't know the full extent for a little while until the final polls are finally counted, but the liberals have won and we're basically waiting to see by how much.

Justin2Krelian posted...

Wouldnt all 3 minor parties (PP seems to have no seats) support the Liberals? If so, they would win easily.

The Bloc Qubcois is a tricky group, because they basically have zero interest in Canada as a country - they don't even run candidates outside of Quebec. Its not quite at the level of "they support the liberals"

And without the Bloc or conservatives, the liberals currently can't reach a majority of votes.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Well every media outlet in Canada sans-CBC is owned by rich conservatives. Trumpism is here in Canada strong regardless of how much we might want to fight it, and for like, the last decade its been Trudeau's fault every time you stub your toe.

Jeff_AKA_Snoopy posted...

Getting closer now between Liberal and Conservatives. 155-149

There are a ton of really close ridings, so as the last polls come in we'll probably see some flux here - I've also seen currently 157-148 Liberal-Conservative

I don't know if its actually true, but I've heard advance polls are last, which would definitely skew liberal.

TC didn't include it, and its not done, but is looking like:

Liberal party wins a minority
Conservatives very close behind

Liberals don't have enough of a minority with the NDP to claim majority status, so nothing is going to happen for a couple years until another election is called.

Ideally, the last handful of ridings lead to a high minority liberal government, or some NDP gains to keep them an official party, because its not gonna be great if the non-conservatives can't reach a plurarilty of seats.

Basically, this is a win, but it needed to be a bigger one.

faramir77 posted...

Disagree, I think a Liberal minority government just means that we'll be back to the polls within a year, at the most.

Only if Libs + NDP aren't enough to claim a majority. If NDP can't maintain official party status, they'll need the threat of dissolving a liberal government to stay alive, and the cons will immediately call for an election if they have the power to.

Srk700 posted...

Not Poilievre thats for sure. Hes Canadas version of Trump apparently.

Well, Canada's version of Trump if Trump also had no charisma. so Trump if you removed literally the only positive attribute Trump has.

Alucard188 posted...

They need nine more seats to form a majority, I believe.

It'll be a tough government if at least Liberal + NDP can't get a majority, because the cons will refuse to play with the liberals at all and BQ is tough to ever deal with.

Scardude posted...

This is more akin to war time action and temporary. If liberals want to keep the ndp on their side. They will need to do better right now. Temporary truce won't last long and ndp voters will go back.

I mean, if NDP loses their "official" party status, there may not be much of a party to go back to. NDP needs 4 to 5 more seats and some of them are iffy.

faramir77 posted...

If the Liberals get a majority, it will be very, VERY slim. But there may still be a small chance of it happening.

Yeah, looking like a "just-short-of-majority" minority government. Which tbh is probably a good choice - NDP is getting slaughtered here, and would probably be more than happy getting pandered to by the liberals while they lick their wounds and try to find... some way of actually moving forward (probably without Singh, people don't seem to actually like him much).

18 Ridings to still report -
Lib - 160
Con - 133
BQ - 24
NDP - 8

__starsnostars posted...

Still to be determined.

It did do good. The right people won. We're yet to see how good Canada did.

kirbymuncher posted...

I imagine all the conservative voters in canada must be real annoyed at trump right now, he basically completely sank what would otherwise have been an extremely easy win

It's interesting, because what I've gathered about this Canadian election here, is that the conservatives had a ton of energy, largely because of hate to Justin Trudeau. People were going conservative, but pretty quickly abandoned them the second Trudeau was gone.

So all of these people who may have been leaning conservative were on the side of "the status quo isn't working, we need a change", but also had zero belief that the conservatives would actually solve anything.

There's gonna be units in political science classes for the next century about how the conservatives blew this election.

Enclave posted...

But they cannot actually announce who won districts until voting has ended for the day across the country. So basically we won't know actual results until after BC polls close which is I THINK 7pm? Of course if there's lines in some areas that time can get pushed back. Results from out east should come in pretty quickly since they'll be counting before polls close in the west but they just can't release the results.

Yeah the times are staggered across the country so the polls all finish at about the same time. So we'll hear nothing for about another 7-8 hours.

https://www.elections.ca/content2.aspx?section=faq&dir=votinghours&document=index&lang=e

But we tend to count votes pretty quickly, so even in a lot of close ridings, we'll probably know who is making government by the end of the night.

Enclave posted...

It would have been easy though with Erin O'Toole since he saw the writing on the wall and realised that the Conservatives needed to shift more to the centre. Much of the party wasn't ready for that though and thus after his loss he was replaced with Poilievre who was appealing to the more far right portion of the party.

tbf, the last like 10 years the conservative playbook has been "every time you stub your toe its Trudeau's fault" and O'Toole would only be able to do so much to limit that.

I do agree O'Toole would probably have kept it laid back enough that he'd probably be able to at least steer the party back onto something after Trudeau stepped down.

Enclave posted...

What's kinda funny is that if the Cons were still running O'Toole as party leader? They probably would have swept this election.

If they were still running a con who could do anything they probably would have swept this election. It honestly wasn't even that big of a pivot they needed to do, and they couldn't do it.

Trudeau resigned and gave them like 3 full months to offer anything besides "Trudeau bad" and they couldn't.

IcyWind14 posted...

If the conservatives lose this election, Poilievre's done as leader. The CPC has booted every leader to lose to the liberals since Trudeau and he'd be no exception.

Even if he wasn't, it's pretty unlikely we'd have an election in 2028. If we get any majority, next election is 2029. If we get a liberal minority, I feel an early election would probably be 2027, two years makes sense. Could still last til 2029 though. And if we end up with a conservative minority, next election will probably be this October.

There's gonna be like, textbooks in political science classes about how the Conservatives managed to bungle such a open victory this badly.

PP is even at risk of losing his own seat, he's almost definitely done as party leader if the cons lose. And the cons have gotten so unpopular they probably wouldn't even be allowed to form a minority government. We'll probably get some kind of liberal/Bloc/NDP coalition government instead of letting the cons do anything.

Enclave posted...

Now that said, he strikes me as the sort who won't want to step down so I imagine either the party will have to replace him or the party will tell him in private if he doesn't step down he'll be replaced.

The last couple elections the PC leader has gotten booted right after losing the election. But each new leader has also gotten increasingly more right-wing, and it'll be interesting to see what happens after Pierre gets to boot, given his loss here is a very direct statement that Canadians don't want the MAGA stuff up here, which has been like, all of Pollievre's career, much less his entire time as party leader.

If Pierre doesn't step down, it might tear the whole party apart. Any of the "reasonable conservatives" who might realize that the big move is not wanting Trump-style politics here will want to push closer to the centre, while all the Maple MAGA types who want a new reich will insist the party move farther to the right. The Conservative Party as it is is already a really awkward mismatch of every random stupid "conservative" person, none of which seem to particularly like each other.

So, if ICE suspects you of being an illegal alien...

• They can break into your house by signing the warrant themselves without judicial approval
• They can "deport" you to a prison camp in El Salvador
• Even if you aren't here illegally, the Trump administration has set the precedent they will refuse to help get you home if you, an active citizen of the United States, are "accidentally" deported.

So are we at "just nazi shit again" yet, or do we still have a few more steps?

I ordered a Samsung S9 tablet like a month ago because it was on a pretty steep sale with the S10 about to come out. It was supposed to be delivered by like, March 24, a couple days after I ordered it.

11AM that day, I got an email from Walmart saying it was delayed, and to stay tuned for more information. Okay, sure, whatever. 2 weeks later, I still haven't heard anything, and am quietly refunded. I haven't been told anything - am I going to get re-charged once they finally have it in stock? So I wait another 2 weeks with literally zero information before I give up an order an iPad from somewhere else. It arrived Tuesday, and last night Walmart finally went "yeah we're cancelling your order" - I still have received zero actual information about it.

This isn't even like a "from overseas" complaint, just Walmart's online ****ing blows.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/3/379d9915.jpg

McMarbles posted...

Its like calling a Bactrian camel a camel.

Oh wait, they do.

Think about a Panda bear vs. Koala Bear vs. Red Panda. None of these things are related, but because of their names someone who doesn't have a pre-existing background in the topic can make the fair assumption they are from the same group when they aren't.

Or because regional variants are effectively divergent evolution, it's like saying that bat is a bird. Or that Mammoth skeleton and that elephant are the same thing.

McmadnessV3 posted...

I mean that is a thing that species do in real life.

That is a thing that happens in real life, but still calling Alolan Vulpix a Vulpix is bad science.

GuerillaGorilla posted...

Sure. That's the main explanation. To me though it seems too much of a drastic change to be considered the same pokemon. An animal adapting it's fire spitting organ to spit something drastically different like ice instead and still be considered the same animal just doesn't sit with me.

I think the real problem is in taxonomy rather than how different they are. Under no situation would an Alolan Sandshrew still be called Sandshrew.

Which also raises more questions now that we have actual lookalike species like Wiglett or Toedscool which makes it super muddy of "okay, where do we have convergent evolution compared to radiation by adapting to a new environment, and why is the latter seemingly less important that it doesn't necessitate a name change?"

I think AOC might need a bit more "experience" to get away with properly running for President. The better choice is to do something like challenge Chuck Schumer for his Senate seat (given damn near everyone is still furious at Schumer). In 2028 its also the time Chuck Schumer's senate seat is up for re-election, and AOC unseating him would also make a firm statement that the "establishment" needs to change.

But she's just starting to actually gain big momentum, she's not far enough to run for president yet.

Southernfatman posted...

I can't tell if Peterson and Rogan are just that stupid or just full of shit. Well ok, they're both, but you get what I mean. No way they didn't hear or see the warning signs. They just wrote them off as "libs being hysterical" and went on their way.

I think it's even worse. Peterson isn't upset at anything the republicans are actually doing, because he's fully in favour of whatever 4th reich shit the republicans want to enable. But the people actually in charge don't believe anything - they're all just rich grifters who want to make more money. None of them have a "vision" for a better America, they just want to rip out the copper wire before the building collapses.

That's why he's trying to say it's "new" on the right. Because his kind of psychopath is the one he wants running things. Peterson isn't upset about "psychopaths" on the right, but he's upset that grifters are in charge and not full-blown nazis like he wants.

Peterson wants more people like RFK, who is legitimately insane, but also legitimately seems to have an idea for change. Its a terrible one with no food inspections and polio returns, but he actually has a vision here, and is literally the only one in the Trump administration who seems to be trying to do anything but put money into his own pocket.

That sounds so cool and I hope so much it gets translated into English because I would buy 20.

Well, probably only 1, but I'm excited enough I'd be willing to buy 20.

Now that what the conservatives have been wanting to do for 80 years are just out in the open and obvious, all of the "sane" ones have to distance themselves from it because regular people know what's going on is 40 layers of screwed up.

Don't worry, even if there's a fair election in 2026, Peterson will still be voting for Trump and his "destroy the world and return to serfdom" policy.

LonelyStoner posted...

Good for Larry David.

Maher has to be one of the scummiest side-flippers in celebrity history. He leans towards whichever political party is currently in power. Hes a spineless creep who gives off huge pedophile vibes.

tbf, he's always been a "I'm-better-than-you-social-libertarian" type. He isn't necessarily going MAGA here, just taking the obvious response here of "everyone thinks Trump is dumb, I need to take the enlightened approach and be different" like he's 14 and needs to argue about stuff. If he has a bad take, he's gonna fight you on it, because Maher needs self-awareness in order to get off of his high horse and Maher is unwilling to do so.

Of course Trump could win over someone like Maher over with the combination of A) fluffing up Maher's ego; and B) Trump sucking being the "popular" choice.

Here's an actual link to this article if anyone wants to read. It's a trip.

https://www.regenerator1.com?utm_source=navbar&utm_medium=web

My favourite part is even the comments the guy is saying its a joke... kind of? It did get like comments and then he turned comments off.

What a world we live in that this guy will happily just outwardly state "yeah I made an AI that can do my job for me, and then I wanted to fuck it".

This dude needs help. But this is kind of also just expected by stupid tech bro standards.

Everyone knows the most important thing for Maher is his own ego. Its no shock he's taking the "I'm enlightened and just know better than you stinky normies" because Trump is so overwhelmingly unpopular everyone outside of his cult hates him.

Maher has shown repeatedly he'd rather stick on his high horse than acknowledge anything he's ever done was bad, this is just the logical extension of that behaviour.

From a later season episode, but this has stuck with me since I heard it like 15 years ago and I can't explain why.

*builds a border wall*
*5 seconds pass*
"Did you miss us? cuz we missed you"
"That's why we built a door!"

There could be some really cool things to come out of this in a perfect world.

If you can just skip boss fights, then there's no worry of needing to make them "too easy" for most gamers and can go ham with boss stuff. Or if its some kind of mechanic like you can sneak around the boss and just never face them if you don't get caught could also be really cool.

Especially in a game like Death Stranding, where it's primarily a story-based game and having proper boss encounters could be detrimental to the story you're trying to tell. Dying to a boss 14 times can do a lot to remove tension in a scene or story when you keep dying and nothing happens.

It's not something I think should be in every game, but this is a concept that can definitely be done well. Its not like you even have to skip the boss if you don't want to.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/5/57a1b854.jpg

HylianFox posted...

WTF is it gonna take for America to grow a pair and get rid of this guy

He's clearly not well, among being an obvious POS

America voted for this.

Its not like Trump lied about anything, he literally ran on tariffing the world into a new global recession-depression.