275
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] khannie@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago

Could one of you good folks explain to an outsider how this Muppet is still in elected office?

Like he's infamous on the far side of the Atlantic in the drugs and private jet and "fuck the poors" way. I haven't seen anything that would justify voting for him.

[-] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago

Many ontarians are really stupid. His "buck a beer" and literally no other platform to run on struck a chord with people who decided they got tired of the liberals

[-] burnitdown@beige.party 2 points 2 weeks ago

@T00l_shed @khannie

if most Ontarians didn't vote, then most Ontarians didn't vote for Doug Ford. so who voted for Doug Ford, and what does that system represent?

"not my party, not my leader" never goes out of style if you're an anarchist.

[-] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

If you didn't vote, you implicitly accepted the outcome.

[-] burnitdown@beige.party 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

@T00l_shed nope. if you vote, you are responsible for what you chose. i didn't choose what you chose. you did.

[-] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

I did vote, not for dofo, but if you dont vote, you agree with the outcome. If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice. And in this case if you didn't vote in ontario, you implicitly agree with the outcome of the election, as you decided not to participate, and allowed others to make the government choice for you.

[-] burnitdown@beige.party 0 points 2 weeks ago

@T00l_shed if i don't vote, i don't vote. i choose other courses of action. the people who voted for Doug Ford voted for Doug Ford. the people who did not vote did not vote for anyone.

here's the nonsense logic of what you're saying: most of eight billion people in the world who also didn't vote in the Ontario election also voted for Doug Ford because they didn't vote. but the people who did vote for Doug Ford, they're your best friend and you're okay with their decision. so you don't really have any problem with Doug Ford.

implicit agreement is not a thing. that's the opposite of consent. that's you putting the responsibility for things going wrong, in a system that is designed make things go wrong, on everyone but the people who caused the problem. that is bullshit.

[-] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

here's the nonsense logic of what you're saying: most of eight billion people in the world who also didn't vote in the Ontario election also voted for Doug Ford because they didn't vote. but the people who did vote for Doug Ford, they're your best friend and you're okay with their decision. so you don't really have any problem with Doug Ford.

Fucking TIL the population of Ontario is 8 billion. Thanks for learning me

[-] burnitdown@beige.party 0 points 2 weeks ago

@T00l_shed

that's not what i said. try again.

reading comprehension is not your strong suit, i can tell.

[-] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I literally quoted you and you said that's not what you said? Amazing

[-] burnitdown@beige.party 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

@T00l_shed

you quoted me, but then you claimed i said something i did not say.

let's try again. if the people who didn't vote for Doug Ford are responsible for the election of Doug Ford, then let's include everyone else in the world, not just Ontario. the whole world is responsible for electing Doug Ford then, because they did not vote for Doug Ford, except for the people who voted for Doug Ford.

since your argument is that not voting for Doug Ford is voting for Doug Ford, why not draw that out to its fully ridiculous conclusion? it's a ridiculous statement to begin with, to say that people who didn't do a thing actually did do the thing by not doing it, but the people who did do the thing by doing the thing did nothing at all. somehow they are absent from this equation.

why won't you hold the people who did vote for Doug Ford responsible for voting for Doug Ford? they are the people who voted for Doug Ford. that is the decision they made.

[-] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

2 things.

1)why won't you hold the people who did vote for Doug Ford responsible for voting for Doug Ford? they are the people who voted for Doug Ford. that is the decision they made.

Who says I dont?

  1. you quoted me, but then you claimed i said something i did not say.

I "quoted you" I didn't add anything to what you said

Also your argument is a stupid strawman. You're making up an argument that has nothing to do with what I said falsely representing my argument. Please stop responding

[-] burnitdown@beige.party 0 points 2 weeks ago

@T00l_shed

you don't because you haven't.

it's not a strawman, and it's not stupid.

if the people who didn't vote for Doug Ford are responsible for the election of Doug Ford, why make it only about Ontario? the whole rest of the world didn't vote for Doug Ford either.

children can't vote, did they vote for Doug Ford by not being old enough to vote?

those who do not have a permanent address, perhaps because they can't afford housing, can't vote. did they vote for Doug Ford by not being able to afford astronomical rent?

[-] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Bye bye now have a great life

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 weeks ago

i didn't choose what you chose.

You chose not to vote against the worse option.

You don't get to try and weasel out of your responsibility that easily.

[-] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Neutrality sides with the winner.

If you didn't vote, you voted for Ford.

[-] burnitdown@beige.party 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

@PhoenixDog nope. if you voted for Ford, then you voted for Ford. if you didn't vote for Ford, then you didn't vote for Ford. abstention is not neutrality. words have meaning. you are responsible for your choices, or else you make irresponsible choices.

to be able to vote, you must have a permanent address. everyone who does not have a permanent address because they can't afford housing, did they vote for Doug Ford? children can't vote, did they vote for Doug Ford by not being old enough to vote?

why won't you put the responsibility for having voted for Doug Ford on those who marked a ballot for Doug Ford?

[-] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

abstention is not neutrality. words have meaning

You're absolutely right. ABSTENTION is not neutrality. Did you cast a ballot? Even a blank ballot? You can cast what's called a "ruined ballot" and it still counts as a vote.

Not voting at all, not casting a ballot at all is neutrality, not abstention. Watch any parliamentary preceding. When they take votes, the speaker asks every individual. Those there vote yay or nay. If they don't, they literally say the words "I abstain". Then they ask the reps who aren't there to vote. No one is in the seat to vote.

They are two very VERY different terms.

It's not that difficult.

Go fucking vote. Vote for your dog. Just vote. Not voting votes for the winner.

You don't get a pass because you're too fucking lazy to support democracy. "But I don't like any party" then vote for an independent. But cast a fucking ballot.

to be able to vote, you must have a permanent address. everyone who does not have a permanent address because they can't afford housing, did they vote for Doug Ford? children can't vote, did they vote for Doug Ford by not being old enough to vote?

Let's at least TRY to be honest. We know the percentage of "voter turnout" vs "eligible voters". Not a single person who works with Elections counts children and homeless people as "non-voters". Take that fucking strawman back to the farm field and leave it there.

Just because you want to rationalize people who are eligible to vote not doing so because they're lazy, uninterested pieces of shit that are literally a bigger problem than Ford and his party.... Doesn't give you a pass.

If people actually WANTED to gain political knowledge, WANTED to vote, Ford wouldn't still be Premier. But people are lazy, dumb, uneducated, and don't care.

I'm nearly 40. I've voted in every provincial and federal election I could have since I could. I stay connected to politics. I learn. I want to learn. I want to be educated. Because I know politics affects everything from policy to groceries to gas prices to housing to road infrastructure to schools to.....

Refusing to participate in democracy is a choice. A shit choice, an uneducated choice, and an ignorant choice.

[-] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago
[-] burnitdown@beige.party 1 points 2 weeks ago

@wonderingwanderer

want to say that to my face and see what happens?

[-] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago

Oh, you're so tough. Pretending to fight people on the internet. I'm not intimidated by you. I'm also not childish enough to get into a cockfight with you.

You're still a fucking idiot though.

[-] burnitdown@beige.party 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

@wonderingwanderer if you're so brave to call me an idiot then come say that to my face and see what happens.

you won't respond to reason, so you can have the alternative.

[-] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 weeks ago

I never claimed it takes any bravery to call you a fucking idiot. I merely called you a fucking idiot. Post your address and I'll come ring your doorbell and call you a fucking idiot.

Reason? You haven't said anything remotely reasonable. That's why I called you a fucking idiot. There's no point trying to reason with you.

[-] burnitdown@beige.party 0 points 2 weeks ago

@wonderingwanderer

no, you won't be coming to my house. you are a coward who hides behind a keyboard and calls people idiots when they call your ridiculous reasoning into question.

bye fascist. eat shit. if you ever meet me, get ready to get hit.

[-] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 weeks ago

You're the one hiding behind a keyboard talking tough. I simply called you a fucking idiot. Did that hurt your little feefees? You're the one who said to come say it to your face, and now you won't tell me where you are? And you think that makes me a coward? What a fucking idiot.

What "reasoning" of mine did you call into question? I never presented any "reasoning" in this thread, because you're not worth trying to reason with. I just called you a fucking idiot, cause that's what you are.

And now you're calling me a fascist? Just because I called you a fucking idiot? Be fucking serious. There are actual fascists out there wreaking havoc in the world right now, and calling people on the internet fascists just because they pointed out that you're a fucking idiot, only serves to water down the term 'fascist' and obfuscate things further for the actual fascists.

People like you are the reason why whenever I call out fascism, idiots say shit like "you can't just call someone a fascist because you disagree with them." I don't. I only call people fascists if they're fascists. And yes, I disagree with fascists. But I'm perfectly capable of disagreeing with someone without calling them a fascist, if they're not a fascist.

if you ever meet me, get ready to get hit.

Wow, what a fucking loser. I thought you were just a fucking idiot, but it turns out you're a fucking idiot loser. Who talks like that on the internet? You could walk past me tomorrow and you wouldn't even recognize me. Even if you somehow did, I'd let you break your knuckles on me before I even fight back. And then you'd find out what the pavement tastes like.

[-] khannie@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

buck a beer

It's some slogan in fairness. Alliteration and everything.

I presume buck is dollar in this context? Did he deliver on one dollar beers?

[-] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

As far as I recall all he was doing was lowering the legal bottom limit beer could be sold for. And yes, we use a buck to refer to a loonie sometimes

[-] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Did he deliver on one dollar beers?

For a hot minute. Surprisingly it was really poorly made, and breweries couldn't justify the cheap price for the cost of ingredients since none of it was subsidized by the provincial government.

He just expected breweries to take the loss.

[-] khannie@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

He just expected breweries to take the loss.

Hahaha. I'm rolling around here. Genuinely. Hahahaha.

this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2026
275 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

11948 readers
395 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS