125

A crowd-measuring contest


 

For whatever reason, when asked yesterday to account for the individuals turned away and ejected from his campaign events, Stephen Harper asserted that his tour was drawing more people “than all the other parties combined.” Today he claimed that this explains the criticism he is receiving from other party leaders.

“We’ve had thousands of people, far more people come out to hear us than the other guys have,” Mr. Harper said. “When the other guys are complaining we’re turning people away – and they can’t get people –I think that tells you how this campaign is going.”

Crowd-measuring is the most imperfect of sciences, but herein a quick survey of reported crowd estimates.

Mr. Harper has reportedly drawn audiences of 250, 700, 600, 1,000, 700, 750, 350, 800, 400 and 500. That excludes one event—in Covehead, PEI—for which I could not find an estimate.

For the sake of comparison, Michael Ignatieff has reportedly drawn audiences of 1,000, 800, 500, 700, 800, 800, 500 and 200. No audience was reported for a town hall meeting in London, Ontario, but a check with a couple reporters on the Liberal tour pegs the audience at about 450.

So that’s about 6,050 over ten events for Mr. Harper and 5,750 over nine events for Mr. Ignatieff. That’s an average of 605 for Mr. Harper and an average of 639 for Mr. Ignatieff.

(I’ve not done a similar survey for Jack Layton’s events, but through the first seven days, the NDP claimed total crowds of 1,600.)


 

A crowd-measuring contest

  1. LOL only if you include security people Stephen.

  2. LOL only if you include security people Stephen.

  3. I wonder if the CPC takes its count before or after they cherry-pick the crowd…

  4. I wonder if the CPC takes its count before or after they cherry-pick the crowd…

    • Well, they do know how many people they invited.

      • And how many they booted out after rescinding their invitations.

  5. Were I a CPC supporter I'd be so embarrassed at that response.

  6. Were I a CPC supporter I'd be so embarrassed at that response.

    • yep

  7. "Yer just jellus, 'cause they like me bester than you!"

  8. "Yer just jellus, 'cause they like me bester than you!"

  9. Well, they do know how many people they invited.

  10. Seriously? He's trying to suggest that these people were turned away because of a lack of room? What the hell kind of show is he running where he registers more people than he has room for?

  11. Seriously? He's trying to suggest that these people were turned away because of a lack of room? What the hell kind of show is he running where he registers more people than he has room for?

    • It's very bad optics, in any arm of show business, to book a venue that's too large; empty seats look terrible.

      • Because turning people away has him looking so good right now.

        One of the primary things a government is responsible for is being able to organize.
        If they can't even organize their own campaign events properly, what does that say to their ability to organize Canada?

        • To be fair, this is the party that couldn't budget its national ad buys properly and had to resort to clever book keeping to keep going in the last few weeks of a prior election.

          Lord know's that turned out so well for them too…

        • It's on thing to turn people away on a first-come, first-served basis. Turfing people because your intelligence gathering operations reveal them to be someone who has been in the presence of other parties' candidates is something else.

    • This is likely why the new policy is to just tell people they won't be let in.

    • What the hell kind of show is he running where he registers more people than he has room for?

      Little known fact: in between campaigns, the CPC team does bookings for Air Canada.

  12. It's very bad optics, in any arm of show business, to book a venue that's too large; empty seats look terrible.

  13. Harper's fudging numbers again?? Shocking!!

    I don't know what's worse, the fact that the worst caretaker prime minister in Canadian history outright asserts the validity of most of his incorrect numbers, or the fact that he is supposed to be an economist and STILL gets his numbers wrong consistently.

    I suppose when you spend more money than any government in the history of Canada the math starts to get a little tough to handle. I mean, so many zeros and all…

    I am so embarrassed that he is the prime minister.

  14. It is appearing more and more like no-one is prepping Harper for his daily tangle with the media. Almost every day he gratuitously makes something up that causes him problems. I know the CPC will argue that their base and target voters like it when he attacks people, and don't mind obvious lies, and that the other 60 per cent of the country can go to hell. But really, these gaffes are so avoidable. Is it because no-one preps him?

    And what of the much-heralded CPC prowess in social media? If so, how did they miss out on a twitter and FB organized campaign in Guelph to get students to go all glee club and ask to be cheered on because they want to vote too, dammit. The CPC apparently treated them like a visiting Hell's Angels chapter. Is the CPC not doing ANY social media monitoring?

  15. This is likely why the new policy is to just tell people they won't be let in.

  16. What the hell kind of show is he running where he registers more people than he has room for?

    Little known fact: in between campaigns, the CPC team does bookings for Air Canada.

  17. Is the CPC not doing ANY social media monitoring?

    Of course they are! It's apparently really convenient for producing blacklists…

  18. Is the CPC not doing ANY social media monitoring?

    Of course they are! It's apparently really convenient for producing blacklists…

    • I get that point, but then how does one totally miss a social media-organized Glee Club event of student puppies who just want to say welcome and hello?

      And have you looked at the elxn41 twitter feed? Conservatives seem even more rare there than undecided voters at a Harper rally.

      Or are the CPC supporters all gabbing away on their own secure channels?

  19. If this gets people comparing numbers instead of talking about CPC strong arm tactics, it's a success.

  20. If this gets people comparing numbers instead of talking about CPC strong arm tactics, it's a success.

    • Excellent point. Best response to this is to simply say, "The numbers speak for themselves on this, so even Mr. Harper must realize it's wrong to kick people out because of what's on their facebook pages, as now he's lying about it."

  21. Aaron, I'm normally a fan, but this crap has got to stop.

    600 versus 639! You don't say! And you did that math yourself?

    Follow-up idea: can you stop and use this crowd-measurement tool to tell me how much money the federal government is expected to borrow over the life of a Liberal, Conservative or NDP government, at what interest rates? And do party spending projections anticipate current levels of health inflation?

    The national IQ is really flushing itself down the toilet in this election, I've got to say.

  22. I get that point, but then how does one totally miss a social media-organized Glee Club event of student puppies who just want to say welcome and hello?

    And have you looked at the elxn41 twitter feed? Conservatives seem even more rare there than undecided voters at a Harper rally.

    Or are the CPC supporters all gabbing away on their own secure channels?

  23. Aaron, I'm normally a fan, but this crap has got to stop.

    600 versus 639! You don't say! And you did that math yourself?

    Follow-up idea: can you stop and use this crowd-measurement tool to tell me how much money the federal government is expected to borrow over the life of a Liberal, Conservative or NDP government, at what interest rates? And do party spending projections anticipate current levels of health inflation?

    The national IQ is really flushing itself down the toilet in this election, I've got to say.

  24. Because turning people away has him looking so good right now.

    One of the primary things a government is responsible for is being able to organize.
    If they can't even organize their own campaign events properly, what does that say to their ability to organize Canada?

  25. Can you imagine anyone trying to "prep" Stephen Harper? He has no ears and his eyesight for crowd numbers is questionable.

    "I make the laws."

  26. Can you imagine anyone trying to "prep" Stephen Harper? He has no ears and his eyesight for crowd numbers is questionable.

    "I make the laws."

  27. I think his response is actually a pretty cute spin. I haven't noticed much this kind of dancing on his feet (since he takes so few questions and does so few unscripted performances) from PMSH, but this is a great example of "deliberately misunderstanding" the negative context behind the question and turning it into a positive response. Chrétien was an ace at this kind turnaround… "people are getting turned away from our events? yeah, I was sorry to hear that too, it's a shame our campaign is so popular, there's just no more room!"

  28. I think his response is actually a pretty cute spin. I haven't noticed much this kind of dancing on his feet (since he takes so few questions and does so few unscripted performances) from PMSH, but this is a great example of "deliberately misunderstanding" the negative context behind the question and turning it into a positive response. Chrétien was an ace at this kind turnaround… "people are getting turned away from our events? yeah, I was sorry to hear that too, it's a shame our campaign is so popular, there's just no more room!"

    • True. Somehow it doesn't have the same pizazz coming from Harper. He needs to unlearn his english a little.

  29. When the other guys are complaining we're turning people away – and they can't get people.

    We should just end all this flaccid chatter and get right to the heart of the matter:

    who has the biggest penis?

  30. When the other guys are complaining we're turning people away – and they can't get people.

    We should just end all this flaccid chatter and get right to the heart of the matter:

    who has the biggest penis?

    • Well, there is precedent for that – the 1974 song "Show Us The Length" by Toronto's Stringband. It was about beauty contests, but still…..

    • I don't think we need to know, at least we know who will say that thousands.
      We know who full of it

    • Thanks for the tip: Now I get why the Green Party leader was prematurely withdrawn from the televised debates. Some say she wouldn't have handled the thrust and parry well enough, but I think even a quick glans at the situation clearly shows she just got shafted, and deserves to be quite pissed off with everyone.

  31. "We've had thousands of people, far more people come out to hear us than the other guys have,” Mr. Harper said."

    Let's be fair here AW, can't blame the PM for that…

    …those were likely Flaherty's figures after all.

  32. Kady O'Malley on Twitter today: "I honestly can't come up with another explanation here. He [Harper] said there were "literally" thousands of people showing up. #elxn41"

    …"Okay, so either Stephen Harper is knowingly saying things that simply aren't true re: rally #s/ejections, or he's being misinformed. #elxn41"

  33. Kady O'Malley on Twitter today: "I honestly can't come up with another explanation here. He [Harper] said there were "literally" thousands of people showing up. #elxn41"

    …"Okay, so either Stephen Harper is knowingly saying things that simply aren't true re: rally #s/ejections, or he's being misinformed. #elxn41"

    • or it was a half decent joke (whether it's an appropriate joke, or appropriate situation for joking is another matter)

  34. You miss the point. The PM asserted that his turnouts are larger then all the other parties combined. As an excuse for why people are being turned away it verges on the ludicrous.

  35. The RCMP has finally got around to reminding its officers that it is not their job to eject people for no good reason from Harper's rallies, it is only their job to protect Harper. They promised to stop doing this from now on. So, I guess that is progress. Too bad the RCMP were so confused about what their job is that they get mixed up and think they are employed by the CPC.

  36. The RCMP has finally got around to reminding its officers that it is not their job to eject people for no good reason from Harper's rallies, it is only their job to protect Harper. They promised to stop doing this from now on. So, I guess that is progress. Too bad the RCMP were so confused about what their job is that they get mixed up and think they are employed by the CPC.

    • Maybe they were trained at the G20.

  37. Pardon me while I engage in a particular reflex action: an involuntary inhalation of air accompanied by simultaneous eardrum-stretching, followed by a loud exhalation of breath.

  38. "So that's about 6,050 over ten events for Mr. Harper and 5,750 over nine events for Mr. Ignatieff. That's an average of 605 for Mr. Harper and an average of 639 for Mr. Ignatieff"

    bbbbbbbbbbut he's an economist, right?

  39. Pardon me while I engage in a particular reflex action: an involuntary inhalation of air accompanied by simultaneous eardrum-stretching, followed by a loud exhalation of breath.

    • You should specify the orifice …

      • The mouth, and to a lesser extent the nose. Those are the only orifices involved in inhalation. If you've been inhaling through any other orifice, I suggest you seek medical help immediately.

        • Huh. A more detailed study of anatomy and physiology is suggested.
          And a field trip to a Tiajuana club might be rewarding … educationally, of course.

    • FAscinating fact: As a frog, Crit_Reasoning's eardrums, such as they are, are attached directly to his lungs!

    • Damn, you're contagious!

  40. "So that's about 6,050 over ten events for Mr. Harper and 5,750 over nine events for Mr. Ignatieff. That's an average of 605 for Mr. Harper and an average of 639 for Mr. Ignatieff"

    bbbbbbbbbbut he's an economist, right?

    • Economists across Canada blush; except for the Fraser Institute ones, who have lost the ability to blush.

  41. Excellent point. Best response to this is to simply say, "The numbers speak for themselves on this, so even Mr. Harper must realize it's wrong to kick people out because of what's on their facebook pages, as now he's lying about it."

  42. You should specify the orifice …

  43. Harper keeps a straight face when telling whoppers. Obviously, a well practiced talent.
    How reporters keep a straight face (literally or in print) when reporting his nonsense is beyond me.

  44. Harper keeps a straight face when telling whoppers. Obviously, a well practiced talent.
    How reporters keep a straight face (literally or in print) when reporting his nonsense is beyond me.

    • I wonder if twitter is helping them to express scepticism more easily.

    • They can't always keep a straight face. Remember the PPG's reaction to Paul Martin's reassuring words that Belinda Stronach's just-created ministry had absolutely nothing at all to do with head counts in the House of Commons. He ultimately had to confess "I can count!"
      http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2005/05/17/st

  45. Well, there is precedent for that – the 1974 song "Show Us The Length" by Toronto's Stringband. It was about beauty contests, but still…..

  46. The mouth, and to a lesser extent the nose. Those are the only orifices involved in inhalation. If you've been inhaling through any other orifice, I suggest you seek medical help immediately.

  47. To be fair, this is the party that couldn't budget its national ad buys properly and had to resort to clever book keeping to keep going in the last few weeks of a prior election.

    Lord know's that turned out so well for them too…

  48. It's on thing to turn people away on a first-come, first-served basis. Turfing people because your intelligence gathering operations reveal them to be someone who has been in the presence of other parties' candidates is something else.

  49. or it was a half decent joke (whether it's an appropriate joke, or appropriate situation for joking is another matter)

  50. No, you, Wherry and the other hangers-on are missing the point – this is an incredibly inconsequential thing to obsess about. It doesn't just verge on the ludicrous, it zips over the line at light speed.

    Put more simply: when Normals hear that X people attended the rally of Y party, they don't actually care if it was X(0.6). Getting hung up on this will leave you totally surprised at the actual outcome of the election.

  51. No, you, Wherry and the other hangers-on are missing the point – this is an incredibly inconsequential thing to obsess about. It doesn't just verge on the ludicrous, it zips over the line at light speed.

    Put more simply: when Normals hear that X people attended the rally of Y party, they don't actually care if it was X(0.6). Getting hung up on this will leave you totally surprised at the actual outcome of the election.

    • I think the issue is that SH is making sh!t up as he goes along. Agreed that the real story is that non-died-in-the-wool conservatives aren't allowed in the presence of our PM, and that the CPC has an intelligence gathering apparatus for identifying possibly disloyal individuals for exclusion from their campaign.

    • You're right. We should just concentrate on how Stephen Harper is keeping Canadians away from his political events because they might not agree with him.

    • No, with respect, I don't think you get the point; part of the reason today's political dialogue has become so rife with pork pies is that politicians have taken communications advice to heart – keep repeating the three key points you want to make regardless of the question. The media just gave up. So the politicians realized that they could take a step further and keep repeating exaggerated claims to boot. In the face of attempts to clarify, they just kept brazening their way on repeating the exaggerations. Etc…

      By actually treating bogus claims – and I mean by anyone/any party – seriously, the media can begin to rectify the dysfunction in public dialogue. It isn' that this claim is so egregious, it's that practically every utterance potentially strays from the truth. There needs to be a consequence for that, or the marketplace begins to accept it.

      • That's a nice sentiment, but it doesn't reflect reality. When the media are obsessing for days on end whether there were 1000 or 600 people at a rally, it serves largely to make them appear petty and unserious, not hard-hitting truth-seekers – especially when the most obsessive coverage is both the most trivial, and focused on one party. I will believe that Rallygate is earnest, agenda-free coverage when similar pressure is brought to bear on equally inconsequential statements by Ignatieff or Layton.

        Again, I'm just calling it from the perspective of non-political types. I've been right so far this campaign; Normals have not demonstrably cared enough about TORTURE TORTURE TORTURE, prorogation, contempt, income trusts, Bev Oda, limited pool questions, etc. for any of those things to be primary issues.

        • Now I think you are misrepresenting what the media is doing. You say obsessing, I say taking at face value and checking against easily verifiable facts. What's more amusing is that they are doing it and suddenly expecting there to be a correlation between utterance and reality.

          As for your second point about "normals"; more's the pity. If you are right and people are so removed from their governance and leadership that human rights values, democratic values, trust values, integrity values and the other unspoken values in your list are not resonating with them, then there really is a problem. These shouldn't be political "types" issues. Sadly, I do not believe you are wrong.

        • What media are obsessing or even asking questions about size of rallies, AVR? Can you please provide on example?

          The person who raised this as an issue was the Prime Minister of Canada and he raised it to avoid answering a difficult question that makes him look bad.

          And there is the nut of the problem for Stephen Harper. This is the microcosm of his campaign and his regime.

          In the larger scheme of things, kicking these veterans and students out of pretend public events is truly a non-event. It's an important and significant thing to these many (and growing) number of individuals of course, but not big in the grand scheme of things. Soudas got that and immediately apologized and tried to move on.

          Harper on the other hand dismisses it as a "staff" issue which is arrogant and 'pass the buck' cowardly. Pressed some more, he outright lies. The press want to make a hill out of a molehill and Harper turns it into a mountain. The issue is done and over and forgotten if he treats the individuals decently. Instead, not only doesn't he, but he starts lying.

          So it is perfectly reasonable, when the Prime Minister of Canada stands up in public and starts bald face lying about even minor stuff for the media to call him on it.

          • That's way too sensitive a word filter. Read exactly what you think I said originally for "crankiness:"

            You need to pay more attention to Twitter – it's where the loudest media [crankiness] and self-pity has been showing up this election, viz. Wells' longpost about bubbles today.

    • This comment was deleted.

      • Don't you get it yet? He's jerking you people around with the numbers thing – because it works, and will have exactly zero impact on the Normals.

    • "Put more simply: when Normals hear that X people attended the rally of Y party, they don't actually care if it was X(0.6). Getting hung up on this will leave you totally surprised at the actual outcome of the election. "

      Nice try, but the numbers are actually beside the point. When normal hears his or her PM called out for exaggerating his numbers, no one cares. When it is used as a lame ass excuse for why people may be turned away from his events they will care – eventually.

    • I can't tell you how tired I am of being told by conservatives what I should and should not care about. Put an effing sock in it.

      • I can't tell you how tired I am of being told by liberals that every single microscandal they come up is the single most important event in Canadian history, and proof positive that Stephen Harper will surely destroy the country and abolish democracy for all time. Kindly stuff it likewise, sir.

        • The scandals each have varying degrees of badness. It's their totality that's very unsettling.

  52. I think the issue is that SH is making sh!t up as he goes along. Agreed that the real story is that non-died-in-the-wool conservatives aren't allowed in the presence of our PM, and that the CPC has an intelligence gathering apparatus for identifying possibly disloyal individuals for exclusion from their campaign.

  53. You're right. We should just concentrate on how Stephen Harper is keeping Canadians away from his political events because they might not agree with him.

  54. He's a lobbyist and a politician. He has a masters in economics.

  55. No, with respect, I don't think you get the point; part of the reason today's political dialogue has become so rife with pork pies is that politicians have taken communications advice to heart – keep repeating the three key points you want to make regardless of the question. The media just gave up. So the politicians realized that they could take a step further and keep repeating exaggerated claims to boot. In the face of attempts to clarify, they just kept brazening their way on repeating the exaggerations. Etc…

    By actually treating bogus claims – and I mean by anyone/any party – seriously, the media can begin to rectify the dysfunction in public dialogue. It isn' that this claim is so egregious, it's that practically every utterance potentially strays from the truth. There needs to be a consequence for that, or the marketplace begins to accept it.

  56. I don't think we need to know, at least we know who will say that thousands.
    We know who full of it

  57. And how many they booted out after rescinding their invitations.

  58. That's pretty talented, too. Baird, despite his impressive abilities, can't keep a straight face all the time.

  59. Well he lies to himself about it and he believes himself, so option 1 and option 2 are BOTH true.

  60. That's a nice sentiment, but it doesn't reflect reality. When the media are obsessing for days on end whether there were 1000 or 600 people at a rally, it serves largely to make them appear petty and unserious, not hard-hitting truth-seekers – especially when the most obsessive coverage is both the most trivial, and focused on one party. I will believe that Rallygate is earnest, agenda-free coverage when similar pressure is brought to bear on equally inconsequential statements by Ignatieff or Layton.

    Again, I'm just calling it from the perspective of non-political types. I've been right so far this campaign; Normals have not demonstrably cared enough about TORTURE TORTURE TORTURE, prorogation, contempt, income trusts, Bev Oda, limited pool questions, etc. for any of those things to be primary issues.

  61. Maybe they were trained at the G20.

  62. Economists across Canada blush; except for the Fraser Institute ones, who have lost the ability to blush.

  63. I wonder if twitter is helping them to express scepticism more easily.

  64. "Put more simply: when Normals hear that X people attended the rally of Y party, they don't actually care if it was X(0.6). Getting hung up on this will leave you totally surprised at the actual outcome of the election. "

    Nice try, but the numbers are actually beside the point. When normal hears his or her PM called out for exaggerating his numbers, no one cares. When it is used as a lame ass excuse for why people may be turned away from his events they will care – eventually.

  65. Now I think you are misrepresenting what the media is doing. You say obsessing, I say taking at face value and checking against easily verifiable facts. What's more amusing is that they are doing it and suddenly expecting there to be a correlation between utterance and reality.

    As for your second point about "normals"; more's the pity. If you are right and people are so removed from their governance and leadership that human rights values, democratic values, trust values, integrity values and the other unspoken values in your list are not resonating with them, then there really is a problem. These shouldn't be political "types" issues. Sadly, I do not believe you are wrong.

  66. What media are obsessing or even asking questions about size of rallies, AVR? Can you please provide on example?

    The person who raised this as an issue was the Prime Minister of Canada and he raised it to avoid answering a difficult question that makes him look bad.

    And there is the nut of the problem for Stephen Harper. This is the microcosm of his campaign and his regime.

    In the larger scheme of things, kicking these veterans and students out of pretend public events is truly a non-event. It's an important and significant thing to these many (and growing) number of individuals of course, but not big in the grand scheme of things. Soudas got that and immediately apologized and tried to move on.

    Harper on the other hand dismisses it as a "staff" issue which is arrogant and 'pass the buck' cowardly. Pressed some more, he outright lies. The press want to make a hill out of a molehill and Harper turns it into a mountain. The issue is done and over and forgotten if he treats the individuals decently. Instead, not only doesn't he, but he starts lying.

    So it is perfectly reasonable, when the Prime Minister of Canada stands up in public and starts bald face lying about even minor stuff for the media to call him on it.

  67. I can't tell you how tired I am of being told by conservatives what I should and should not care about. Put an effing sock in it.

  68. True. Somehow it doesn't have the same pizazz coming from Harper. He needs to unlearn his english a little.

  69. So the RCMP was guilty of removing suspected Liberals from Conservative election events.

    We should acknowledge that this is an improvement over the activities of the Force in 2006, where they basically elimnated the Liberals from the election.

  70. So the RCMP was guilty of removing suspected Liberals from Conservative election events.

    We should acknowledge that this is an improvement over the activities of the Force in 2006, where they basically elimnated the Liberals from the election.

    • And this time they admitted to doing it. That's an improvement. Although, still disturbing how much trouble RCMP officers have remembering who they actually work for and what their job is.

  71. And this time they admitted to doing it. That's an improvement. Although, still disturbing how much trouble RCMP officers have remembering who they actually work for and what their job is.

  72. yep

  73. Are we really doing this now?

  74. Huh. A more detailed study of anatomy and physiology is suggested.
    And a field trip to a Tiajuana club might be rewarding … educationally, of course.

  75. Thanks for the tip: Now I get why the Green Party leader was prematurely withdrawn from the televised debates. Some say she wouldn't have handled the thrust and parry well enough, but I think even a quick glans at the situation clearly shows she just got shafted, and deserves to be quite pissed off with everyone.

  76. I can't tell you how tired I am of being told by liberals that every single microscandal they come up is the single most important event in Canadian history, and proof positive that Stephen Harper will surely destroy the country and abolish democracy for all time. Kindly stuff it likewise, sir.

  77. That's way too sensitive a word filter. Read exactly what you think I said originally for "crankiness:"

    You need to pay more attention to Twitter – it's where the loudest media [crankiness] and self-pity has been showing up this election, viz. Wells' longpost about bubbles today.

  78. Don't you get it yet? He's jerking you people around with the numbers thing – because it works, and will have exactly zero impact on the Normals.

  79. The scandals each have varying degrees of badness. It's their totality that's very unsettling.

  80. FAscinating fact: As a frog, Crit_Reasoning's eardrums, such as they are, are attached directly to his lungs!

  81. Damn, you're contagious!

  82. They can't always keep a straight face. Remember the PPG's reaction to Paul Martin's reassuring words that Belinda Stronach's just-created ministry had absolutely nothing at all to do with head counts in the House of Commons. He ultimately had to confess "I can count!"
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2005/05/17/st

  83. As long as he can still spin something, Harper knows he can get away with anything. It's been proven time and again. What benefit does telling the truth provide when lying all this time has worked so well for him?

  84. As long as he can still spin something, Harper knows he can get away with anything. It's been proven time and again. What benefit does telling the truth provide when lying all this time has worked so well for him?

Sign in to comment.