Harper government near 'tipping point'?

105 posts / 0 new
Last post
Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture
Harper government near 'tipping point'?

Smile  ----------------------------->

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

This article appeared in the G&M in March 2011, before the May 2011 election:

 

On the road to the Harper government's tipping point

Now, fast forward to just over a year later, with the government again mired in scandals: RoboCalls/electoral fraud and the F35s/misleading Parliament, one might reasonably ask, is the Harper government again near the 'tipping point', despite having majorities in both the House of Commons and the Senate? Certainly no one but the Conservatives themselves have any confidence in the Harper government today.

ETA: possibly there are other government scandals since the 2011 election that I've missed - maybe others can list them?

Unionist

Boom Boom, the Harper government survived countless scandals for 5 1/2 years of minority government - prorogation, Bev Oda's lies, Peter Mackay, Afghan detainees, contempt of Parliament, KAIROS, Rights and Democracy, I'm sure I'm forgetting many - and they survived because the so-called opposition parties were too disconnected from people's needs and focused on their own self-serving petty partisan interests that they were incapable of putting aside that pettiness for more than two or three days at a time and destroy Harper and his regime.

Now that they can't count up to a majority of votes in the House - and with the Harper government totally united in military fashion - what exactly will make this government reach a "tipping point"?

I'm not saying it can't happen. But if it does, it will only be at the hands of some (as yet invisible) mass movement of people that rolls right past the impotent politicians and makes change immediate and inevitable. A movement like Occupy (but one which actually tries to realize its own slogans by connecting with real-live permanent mass movements rather than being stuck on tents, no offence intended) - or the Québec students - or some unpredictable upsurge in the peace or environmental or other movement which shakes the creaky foundation of this unjust social order and captures the imagination of millions.

But phony phone calls during elections? Or "accounting issues" in estimating the cost of fighter jets (note that no one in the so-called phony "opposition" even questions the need for fighter jets)? Don't start inviting people over for the victory party. All this will pass into forgetfulness.

ETA: Oh yeah. Lawrence Martin's "tipping point" article of March 2011. Things sure tipped all right. Harper went on to win a majority government two months later. If you want to galvanize public opinion and defeat the enemy, you need an organized opposition. There wasn't one then. There isn't one now.

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I've been in favour of a 'general strike' for quite a while now. Apparently I'm alone in that sentiment.  Frown

Unionist

A general strike would definitely be one of the weapons (or maybe the weapon of choice) to bring about the downfall of the regime. The question is: Who would organize it? Who would participate in it? What would the demands be? I'm ready to start working on it if you are. Actually, I know you are.

thorin_bane

I think you are wrong unionist. It is no longer about a lot of pot shots. Harpo has been in governmnet for 6 years. He can no longer blame everything on the libs and with his so called majority he is responsible for any fallout. He also cant blame the opposition like he did in his minority. Mishabdling money is bad, but they are doing an exceptional job of showing how incpotetant they are and showing contemp and entitlement. Something even their swing voters are pissed off about. Oh sure sask adn alberta will be reform blue, but they could lose ontario. They can't just ignore the 70% of the population to the east of manitoba, or manitoba for that matter. Add to it that the failure of rightwing tax cuts are coming home to roost and it may be peopel are ready to turn things around.

thorin_bane

Wow sorry about the errors in the last post Innocent

NorthReport

Climate change could well be the trigger to do Harper in but unfortunately it won't come before the next election

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I'm limited in terms of what I can do, as I'm living on a disability pension and my health is in decline - added to my disability is a recent diagnosis of osteoporisis in both hands, and possibly arthritis as well. All I can do, really, is encourage others from the sidelines. Those in better physical and financial health have to lead and organise. I forget the name of that Senate Page who showed leadership in her protest a year or so ago, but I certainly encourage her to be a leader in the movement of protest against Harper.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Oh - thanks, NR, you triggered my memory there - the Harper government's treatment of those who stand in the way of the Northern Gateway Pipeline is another item in  the list of Harper's misdoings.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I'm guessing the country is sick and tired of Harper, and don't forget he has a majority only because of the messed-up FPTP voting system we have - a majority of the electorate voted against the Conservatives if I remember correctly.

Buddy Kat

Any one of those issues should be a tipping point of no return and the contempt issue did cause an election ..the problem was - it was a fixed election.

This is the whole entire arguement,  as cons and media say "But we won a majority"..big problem is it was now discovered to be a fixed and fraudulent majority, and instead of convincing appointed senators and mp's of the seriousness and having those appointed and elected reps do something about it , the people will have too ..too bad but that's how it's turning out.

As people are so whimpy and selfish and sitting pretty it's going to be hard to budge Canadians off their obese ass's and fight for there democracy, this will be up to the media....however I firmly believe that over the next year there are probably para military or lone wolf hero's out there that are most likely planning to do something about it...after a year of inaction you would think those people would be thrown over the edge....loyal and patriotic people can only take so much..so the big thing to me is ..it's not whether the cons have reached a tipping point ..it's when are Canadians with balls and weapons going to reach THEIR tipping point?

F%^^^ the cons, whatever happens to them now has been well earned, deserved  and firmly planted in the history books...and can be justified thru the lens of fight for freedom , law and democracy.

 

 

New http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zky2bn0Gtyg New

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-QvXax88J8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0eQgUpkJ1Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns8LD5Q8ecc

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Jason Kenney and Immigration had a misstep if I remember correctly, can't remember the details.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

The Harper government cutting programs more out of ideological spite rather than any real financial savings....

 

CanadaApple

The Harper Government has done so many things wrong, it's hard to keep track. I'm starting to think it's some kind of strategy they have.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

No.

Sean in Ottawa

What makes a tipping point? Once you answer that, then the answer to the opening question becomes rather painfully obvious.

The answer of course is timing.

It is not about the actual scandal so much as the timing of it.

Took at the most famous, text book, tipping points and scandals.

Tipping points (All Federal ones for a generation):

Liberal downfall Harper elected: The tipping point was an RCMP investigation that in the end found nothing wrong as well as the Sponsorship scandal that at the time had not yet grown to the iconic status it did after the Conservatives won and were able to capitalize on it.

Conservative downfall Chrétien elected: The Conservatives went in to the 1993 election way ahead of the Liberals and ended up decimated. The tipping point was an ad that made fun of Chrétien's face and an arrogant comment that elections were no time to discuss policy. The party lost half its support in days.

Liberal downfall Mulroney elected: The Liberals were way ahead. The momentum changed direction slightly with the Mulroney comment "you have no option sir" over patronage appointments completed by Turner requested by an outgoing PM. On the scandal metre, really not that much. On this, I think the history books are quite wrong. We were lead to believe this was what brought down Turner in part because it was a clever assertive twist of Mulroney's. In my opinion what brought down Turner was something else, his bum patting of the Liberal female president. That turned off women for obvious reasons and made men realize this was a man from the past. The election was over. Had Turner not bum-patted, he probably would have won the election in spite of the big bad debate.

Conservative downfall Trudeau elected: Clark introduced a gas tax, lost his luggage and was seen as a bumbler unable to know what the votes in the House would do. He lost the election,

As I say, these are all the turning points of that last generation. All that I am old enough to remember going back to when I was in high school but still paying attention.

What they all have in common-- All of them happened either during or just before an election. Every one. The other thing? They are all minor and with time likely would have not been a big deal. One more thing-- all those changes of government really happened during the election as the losing party was in it all the way almost to the end and was knocked off by something minor.

Let's consider the stuff that did not create a tipping point?

Trudeau: wage and price controls reversal; War Measures Act (did not hurt him in Quebec where it was unpopular)

Clark: interestingly the most short-lived government did not have a major scandal to list here.

Mulroney: Where to start? After everything: a major recession, the GST, free trade adjustments, arrogance, the Progressive Conservatives could have come back to power and were leading into an election. Campbell blames the loss on Mulroney rather than accept that the turning point was a couple small mistakes she made and she is responsible for. Canadians like to think they would not have re-elected the PCs but that is after-the-fact revisionism as we were poised to have Campbell mania based on nothing more than a created media frenzy floated on hot air.

Chrétien: Many things come to mind: selling out his supporters with brutal cuts in 1995; breaking a promise on the GST; breaking a promise on Free Trade; acting like a thug; looking foolish as he did quite often. None of that hurt him.

Martin: He had few scandals as PM actually and was brought down before he was able to do much. However, his record as finance minister was lauded in spite of the fact that he just balanced the books on the backs of provincial programs through slashed transfers. His more careful record as PM necessitated by a minority government saw him agree to an NDP series of amendments that could have been popular. Those things somehow did not help.

What does this teach us?

The big deals, big scandals are not tipping points. The stuff close to or during an election campaign is. This is only a tipping point if the Cons, drunk on their success and ability to get away with stuff continue to do this sort of thing into the next election. If they stop the meanness a few months before and talk up their successes, bribe people with the money they have stolen and stack the process, they can steal the next election even better than the last.

Sure the Cons are beatable but they have not even started losing yet and if you think this will be easy -- have another think-- just look at history. Oh, and the NDP hit 40% in the polls in 1987 with 45% in Quebec.

 

 

NorthReport

How long were the NDP at 40% in the polls in the 80s?

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Good post, Sean. If the Cons continue as they are, at what point does the population say "enough!"? I guess that would be a tipping point. There would have to be a long series of polls putting the Cons at the bottom, I suppose. We're not there yet.

North Star

As much as deep down inside I'm an ardent socialist that would love to nationalize the commanding heights of the economy, I won't go out and say Harper has reached a tipping point. The tipping point will occur when the middle classes start to get angry. This is happening slowly but surely in Ontario, but still hasn't reached the tipping point. When suburban 905'ers start burning effigies of Harper then we will know it has happened. Right now the depressed middle classes in Ontario are concentrated in places like Windsor, London and Hamilton where industry has been hit the hardest.   It's sure as hell not going to happen out west  anytime soon though. An NDP government in 2015 majority or minority barring is going to depend (barring a collapse in resource values) on how many people in Manitoba & BC can be convinced to support the NDP. I think Ontario & everything east of it can be won.

Sean in Ottawa

North Report-- I think a couple months. However they went up slowly and were generally doing well for the better part of a year. In my opinion the NDP could have won the 1988 election but blew it by trying to play safe and ceding the important issue of the election to the Liberals. The 1988 election started with an understanding among quite a few New Democrats that we could win the election. The NDP read the polls and decided to fight on familiar ground: Ed was a nice guy, NDP was most trusted on the environment and social policy. We did not talk about finance because we thought that was a weakness. In so doing we destroyed the campaign. The election was fought, not on whether was nice or could be trusted but on Free Trade. We let the Liberals come out on the issue. We never called the Liberals on their hypocrisy (Modern Free Trade was the brainchild of Don MacDonald, a Liberal-- easy to see the Chrétien Liberals later embracing it now isn't it?). The NDP avoided conversations about economics thinking we could not win and in so doing made winning impossible. This is the decision that was a turning point in the NDP campaign. We blew the election.

 

Sean in Ottawa

Boom-Boom-- turning point could be when the habits they have cannot be controlled and stopped before an election. More important, I have a theory about politics that some of these things are a bit like termites. They do do damage. They are not seen and often don't bring down the house. However, a small scandal in an election and the whole thing can come down as those things are remembered -- not with the role of a turning point -- but as a weakening and supporting caste of reasons to throw the bums out. These scandals have weakened the Cons at the core of their credibility to govern. We are too far from an election for that to destroy them but if something happens then, they will fall. Essentially, the termites have done the damage-- now we just need a moderate wind against them in the next election. However if that wind does not come, they can still win and over time replace the worst rotten timbers with new ones.

Put another way, history likes turning points and dramatic turnarounds. It is often however, more core reasons that cause change. Those core reasons weaken the structure so the turning point becomes fatal rather than just one more thing forgotten during the ages.

In other words-- we still will need a well-timed catalyst and that has to come at the time of the election as I showed in my last post. This stuff is only half the job.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Some great stuff here - keep it coming! I like especially the idea of burning Harper in effigy. Laughing

Sean in Ottawa

North Star wrote:

As much as deep down inside I'm an ardent socialist that would love to nationalize the commanding heights of the economy, I won't go out and say Harper has reached a tipping point. The tipping point will occur when the middle classes start to get angry. This is happening slowly but surely in Ontario, but still hasn't reached the tipping point. When suburban 905'ers start burning effigies of Harper then we will know it has happened. Right now the depressed middle classes in Ontario are concentrated in places like Windsor, London and Hamilton where industry has been hit the hardest.   It's sure as hell not going to happen out west  anytime soon though. An NDP government in 2015 majority or minority barring is going to depend (barring a collapse in resource values) on how many people in Manitoba & BC can be convinced to support the NDP. I think Ontario & everything east of it can be won.

I don't agree. The more the middle class hurts, the more they may disengage. People are stuck in social structures and don't like to parade failure. They also want to believe in hope. So when things are bad they want to think they can get better, they can find a job. A member of the middle class has lots to lose even when things go wrong. They also try until they are utterly defeated to turn things around. That is why the middle class rarely rebels. (By class I mean middle income as I don't actually believe in class-- but those with a history of middle income are what we often call middle class. That said I don't want to start a debate over what the middle class is since that has been threads by themselves.)

So, I don't agree that this will be the tipping point to changing the government and I sure would not want to wait for that.

The sad thing is it might be the tipping point to changing a political system and political culture. Even if the NDP wins without this tipping point you speak of the NDP will have to be cautious and may be inclined to move much more slowly and will have a lot less public support for important initiatives. This is the tipping point that might cause people to question their political mythology. Apparently even the difficulties in the US were not enough to cause it there.

All this said, I think the next 3 years are going to be extremely uncomfortable for what we now consider middle income earners. Those who have less will get hammered. The Cons will use all the propaganda they have to blame the most vulnerable and immigrants for the plight of the middle class. They must not be allowed to win that propaganda war.

Buddy Kat

I don't think people get it..the tipping point already happened when the cons were found in contempt...they fixed the election and assassinated the true leader as insurance...That's what the history books will probably show ...200 seats ..like really ..I can't wait to see the math on WHAT party would of won (which party came in 2nd in those 200 ridings)..and who the leader should of rightlfully been...this all looking like an exercise in playing "Ent"....by the time the truth pops out we'll all be standing lin line wondering what happened to our 2 years of social security payments..

Sean in Ottawa

Depends on what you mean by tipping point.

If you mean the beginning of the end that the history books will point to then sure. But that is meaningless as all governments end. What matters for people living under them is when and why.

I am talking about the thing that makes this one end at a particular time, the thing that makes the ending at that time inevitable-- to me that is what a tipping point it-- the point where it cannot turn back.

The start towards an end that takes years to get to and does not push an end into a particular time is not a tipping point.

I think you are speaking about a start rather than a tipping point. If we all agreed that a tipping point has already reached then we would be saying we agree that the Cons cannot win the next election no matter what. We are not at that stage and far from it. The only reason why we know they will lose is all governments lose eventually.

A tipping point is a catalyst that usually happens during or just before an election.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Good point, Sean - the Cons are probably digging their own (electoral) graves now and the tipping point will follow. I don't get why the Cons are more or less stable in the polling right now.

North Star

Sean you are right that many middle income people are suffering, but I see a lot doing fine. There are regional disparities between those middle income earners as well as industry disparities. Those enjoying a middle class lifestyle who are autoworkers are obviously more nervous than TD Canada Trust employees. I do think that significant parts of the middle class would rebel instead of just trying to find a job to get by. Those in manufacturing and even the public service are the most likely to do this because they are unionized and can see their situation as being clearly a result of attacks on the idea of public services or in the case of those who worked in factories, Harper's love for energy and resource extraction companies. I don't neccessarily see bank tellers becoming militant even if wage growth continues to stagnate. Even if my predictions come true I still believe it will be primarily confined to Ontario & Quebec. Harper might even be able to get more votes from what's left of Western Liberals and socially liberal economic migrants to the West by warning of the socialist hordes from the East. You may not put much belief in class but prepare to see class become more pronounced especially for a North American context.

Sean in Ottawa

North Star I assume you mean income groups not class -- right? That is the distinction I make.

 

I agree that many in the middle class are not suffering that much yet-- but then again I am one of those saying we have no tipping point as yet.

We do have a residual disgust setting in... but that could reflect on all politics rather than just one party -- this is what often happens

jdman jdman's picture

Boom Boom wrote:
I don't get why the Cons are more or less stable in the polling right now.

 

Well that would be because the people of Canada want a stable government. Not some sideshow.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I just want this Harper government to be over. Frown

quizzical

We could not get any more of a sideshow than what we have right now. As for 'stable' I guess that reality resides in the definition you have of "stable"

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

The "Harper Government" has been a sideshow since the beginning. Maybe that's what the electorate wanted in the beginning, but I think now we're all tired of this garbage. The RoboCalls and F35s just add to our discomfort with these jerks.

 

jdman jdman's picture

Boom Boom wrote:

 The RoboCalls and F35s just add to our discomfort with these jerks.

You mean those robots got to you too???

The only ones that have been implicated in any of the robo-BS is the liberals. Big surprise there.....Oh why have we not heard a thing about it since then??? oh thats right, it does not implicate the Cons.

And as for the F-35's, have you ever been a member of the airforce? Or for that matter, the military at all?

Well guess what.... they need new stuff regularly, as it gets outdated, and is inefective as technology expands.

Is this really all you have to whine about? I mean come on.....

Unionist

jdman wrote:

Well that would be because the people of Canada want a stable government.

A "stable" government?

As in, one that smells of horse shit?

I think you're right. I was wondering what that odour was...

Thanks!

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Laughing

Fidel

jdman wrote:
Well that would be because the people of Canada want a stable government. Not some sideshow.

Jim Stanford, May 2011 wrote:
So how do you like economic stability so far?

In the first week of stability-inducing majority government, Canada's economy experienced:

- A decline of almost 400 points over the week in the TSX composite, the worst weekly loss all year.

- A decline of almost 2 U.S. cents in the value of the loonie.

- Turmoil in commodity and futures markets, sparked in part by new U.K. rules limiting speculative positions in the silver market. The resulting downturn spread to other commodity prices (including oil) which had also been bid up by speculators.

- A miserable GDP report (issued the Friday before the election) showing that Canada's real output was actually declining in February, casting doubt on the viability of the recovery.

- A jobs report issued this Friday that had a positive headline number (58,000 more Canadians working in April), but was gloomy in the details. 70 percent of those jobs were part-time, and almost two-thirds were in the public sector - many of them at Elections Canada working on an election that Mr. Harper said all along was "unnecessary" and economically damaging. In the goods-producing side of the economy, employment was falling (largely reflecting the impact of a sky-high loonie on manufacturing).

 

TSX losses ground after disappointing U.S. jobs numbers April 12-12

Yeah our 24 percenters in Ottawa re looking very beatable in 2015 if they continue this torrid pace of stability.

The only things really trending up are gross national debt and continuing "market uncertainty."

Harper is entirely beatable.

quizzical

jdman wrote:
The only ones that have been implicated in any of the robo-BS is the liberals. Big surprise there.....Oh why have we not heard a thing about it since then??? oh thats right, it does not implicate the Cons.

seems you're a bit  uninformed read this thread

http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/harpers-black-ops-scandal-robo...

jdman jdman's picture

Well i have not missed a day of work. Then again i am not a "specialist" in some obscure field of work, that has no demand. Nobody i know is looking for work either, I know a lot of people.

jdman jdman's picture

Fidel wrote:

We'll have jdman switching to the NDP before long. Wink

 

Not bloody likely, i have that crap jammed down my throat enough while i am at work. USW member, what a disgrace, i know...

Fidel

We'll have jdman switching to the NDP before long. Wink

quizzical

jdman wrote:
Well i have not missed a day of work. Then again i am not a "specialist" in some obscure field of work, that has no demand. Nobody i know is looking for work either, I know a lot of people.

What's that got to do with any of your bogus claims or anything at all ? and i use bogus as a nice word in reference to what you don't know about what you are spouting

Hoodeet

Boom Boom wrote:

Jason Kenney and Immigration had a misstep if I remember correctly, can't remember the details.

Hoodeet (JW)

Are you thinking of the staged citizenship ceremony with the civil servant stand-ins?  Oh, that was more of a failing-grade class project for Theatre 101 in community college (not to be offensive to community colleges).

jdman jdman's picture

Fidel wrote:
And as soon as the very neoliberal Obama is re-elected

 

You lost me after this line. I dont see him winning anything. Definitly a one shot wonder, much like the orange crush fad we had last time.

He will be gone, and some other moron will take over the reins.

Sean in Ottawa

Hey JDman are you here to debate or just taunt people?

If you are up for a debate then let's discuss some facts or issues but if you are here just to annoy-- fill your boots becuase you won't be here long.

Otherwise, hey, welcome to Babble.

Since you are such a strong booster of the F-35-- mind saying why the governemnt could not have advanced the real number it knew they would cost instead of the fake number?

If you think only the Liberals did Robo calls, how come your campaign worker in Guelph "retired" so early? And why is such a good loyal company like Racknine involved?

While you are at it how do you justify cutting Katimavik so abruptly that the people who had paid a deposit and planned around it this year are suddenly without any options-- could it not have been wound down with a year notice to not leave people hanging?

I am sure there are other good questions-- do you want to start there?

Right now there is a sense that your government is an interesting blend of nasty and incompetent. Care to defend? By defend I don't mean smear someone else-- just explain why their actions are so reasonable in your view.

 

jdman jdman's picture

quizzical wrote:

jdman wrote:
Well i have not missed a day of work. Then again i am not a "specialist" in some obscure field of work, that has no demand. Nobody i know is looking for work either, I know a lot of people.

What's that got to do with any of your bogus claims or anything at all ? and i use bogus as a nice word in reference to what you don't know about what you are spouting

what are you on about now?Undecided

Fidel

jdman wrote:

Fidel wrote:

We'll have jdman switching to the NDP before long. Wink

 

Not bloody likely, i have that crap jammed down my throat enough while i am at work. USW member, what a disgrace, i know...

 Yes, Canada's economic fortunes were tied to the U.S. economy in 1989 and 1994.

And as soon as the very neoliberal Obama is re-elected, they will work to reduce wages by an average of 30% in America and push unemployment way up in that country and using countries like Greece as their method of madness.

Bottom line is that nothing of the right wing ideology wafting over the border will save the Harpers in 2015. The Harpers have nothing up their sleeves and no plan of their own to save themselves with any kind of right wing agenda for real economic growth. They are sitting tight and hoping in vain for a boost from the U.S. economy that just isn't on. I'm sorry about it, too. You should think about voting NDP in order to drag your party back to their senses if they had any in the first place. Harpers are ruled by bankers and a relatively tiny number of rich people here and around the world. Central planning by a handful few never turns out well.

Fidel

 Why waste your vote on the Harpers? They will be steamrolled by an Orange Crush, mark my words.

jdman jdman's picture

To me, the f35 deal isnt a big deal. Military needs new stuff....buy it. Simple as that. Costs, who cares what it costs. What does freedom mean to you?

If you want peace, prepare for war.

Again, a simple concept, that none of you seem to grasp.

Hoodeet

jdman wrote:

Boom Boom wrote:

 The RoboCalls and F35s just add to our discomfort with these jerks.

You mean those robots got to you too???

The only ones that have been implicated in any of the robo-BS is the liberals. Big surprise there.....Oh why have we not heard a thing about it since then??? oh thats right, it does not implicate the Cons.

And as for the F-35's, have you ever been a member of the airforce? Or for that matter, the military at all?

 

Well guess what.... they need new stuff regularly, as it gets outdated, and is inefective as technology expands.

Is this really all you have to whine about? I mean come on.....

Hoodeet (JW)

The F-35s ARE a problem for several reasons: they are not proven to be safe (so I wonder about your c oncern about the well-being of air force personnel),  they were decided on with a no-bid process, the cost overrun  and the hidden cost of maintenance was either  not foreseen by the govt (incompetence) or concealed (corruption and obeisance to the Pentagon and the U.S. MIC).   But this has been all over the internet and even in the mainstream press, so your complaint about the objections is pretty unfounded.

quizzical

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
Hey JDman are you here to debate or just taunt people?

didn't take long for me to figure out this person is not real.

Pages

Topic locked