Following the provincial election results, maybe it is time to get more involved with and volunteer with the MSU
If the 2025 Ontario provincial election was your first time voting, you may have woken up disappointed last Friday morning. I am told you get used to this feeling and admittedly, three elections in, it feels, if not less disappointing, less catastrophic.
It’s hard not to feel like a lost election is a catastrophe though, especially when a flawed electoral system and low turnout contributed to a party that received votes from less than 20 per cent of the province’s population holding on to power. It is even harder when one of the election’s few local highlights is Hamilton West-Ancaster-Dundas, the riding that is home to McMaster, where only 55 per cent of registered voters casted their ballots.
When we promote voting and elections as the most important element of politics, it's difficult to see past these disappointments. But, if we treat voting as the bare minimum of political engagement, we can recognize the opportunities for political action that are all around us, especially as students.
if we treat voting as the cornerstone, only the foundation, the bare minimum of political engagement, we can recognize the opportunities for political action that are all around us, especially as students.
In Jan. 2019, the first of Doug Ford's provincial governments in Ontario announced the Student Choice Initiative, a directive designed to categorize student fees into two categories: essential and ancillary. What at first may look like an effort to save students money was challenged in court by the Canadian Federation of Students as a brazen attack on student organizing.
Far from just an opportunistic move to gain the support of students who may not have been informed about the services their student union fees make possible, Doug Ford’s move was an attack on the principles of student unionism. This attack demonstrates the conservative, individualistic value system that fuels his party.
Regardless of their flaws, student unions are valuable mechanisms for students to engage in politics. Students can get involved in politics through their university unions not just through municipal, provincial, or federal lobbying, but by participating and volunteering for services, clubs, community centres, and media.
While many of us stew over our collective frustration at another conservative government whose election platform promises no meaningful alleviation to the difficulties of student life, we should be thoughtful about where we direct our energy. You may see calls to donate to local charities, or feel pressure to put your co-op or internships to good use at an NGO doing good work in the community.
While working with or donating to charities and NGOs can help people, student unions are vehicles of collective and community power in a way that charities can't always be.
Far from just a service provider, our student union is a vehicle to pool our collective resources. It is a way by which to develop, through an admittedly imperfect democratic process, ways to support one another and to implement these supports by engaging community members and giving them the skills they need to provide them.
The McMaster Students Union allows students to express meaningful solidarity with one another, whether through voting in a referendum to provide hundreds of free meals a day or working in the union-owned restaurant that is going to make those meals.
The MSU allows students to express meaningful solidarity with one another, whether through voting in a referendum to provide hundreds of free meals a day, or working in the union-owned restaurant that is going to make those meals.
This solidarity is inherently political and building a stronger MSU is a way, maybe the best way, for students to express their opposition to a political project that has attempted to crush solidarity in favour of an obsession with individualism.
While the Student Choice Initiative was defeated, student unions still need students to work to strengthen them. Students need to engage themselves and other students in the collective effort of union life; only our engagement can strengthen the MSU's foundation in the principle of solidarity.
When I woke up last Friday Morning, I was disappointed at the results of the provincial election. But, I know the work that I do along with my colleagues at the Silhouette and the MSU is a more impactful form of community work and action than voting once every four years.
If you are one of the many students upset by the results of the provincial election, don’t just accept defeat. Don’t just promise to vote next time. Do something tangible and politically meaningful with your short time as a student and get involved with the MSU.
Despite few changes overall in the provincial legislature, two Hamilton ridings elected different MPPs in last week's provincial election
After a month-long campaign period, polls for Ontario’s 2025 provincial election on Feb. 27 came to a close with little change in the makeup of the provincial legislature. A total of 10 seats changed this election cycle. However, one fifth of these seat changes occurred in the Hamilton area with two ridings electing a different representative.
Riding-level results
Hamilton West-Ancaster-Dundas, the riding that is home to McMaster’s main campus and much of the student body saw incumbent NDP candidate Sandy Shaw re-elected by a slimmer margin than both of her previous wins. Unofficial results show that voter turnout in Hamilton West-Ancaster-Dundas was around 10 per cent higher than the provincial average.
Unofficial results show that turnout in HamiltonWest-Ancaster-Dundas was around 10 per cent higher than the provincial average.
McMaster student Joshua Bell lost his race in Flamborough-Glanbrook to incumbent Conservative candidate Donna Skelly. Bell came in second place, garnering 15,135 votes to Skelly's 23,790.
Hamilton-Centre was one of two Hamilton ridings to see change last Thursday. Incumbent MPP Sarah Jama–who had been elected as an NDP candidate for the riding in 2022 but was removed from the party in 2023 and has since been serving as an independent–was unseated by NDP candidate Robin Lennox. Despite a different individual now serving as MPP, this result continues Hamilton-Centre’s unbroken streak of NDP victories since its re-creation in 2007.
Hamilton-Mountain also switched party hands to conservative Monica Ciriello. The seat had been held since 2011 by NDP MPP Monique Taylor, who did not seek re-election in 2025. The race was a close one—NDP candidate Kojo Damptey, the acting senior manager of McMaster's Office of Community Engagement, came in third, less than 2000 votes behind liberal candidate Dawn Danko. Danko herself finished only 2,016 votes behind Ciriello.
Hamilton East–Stoney Creek saw conservative incumbent Neil Lumsden re-elected by an 11 per cent margin, over second place liberal candidate Heino Doessing.
Provincial results
At the provincial level, the Ontario Liberal Party saw the largest number of seat changes, gaining 5 seats. The Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario gained one seat and the Ontario NDP lost one seat. The Green Party held on to the same two seats it held prior to the election.
Turnout was slightly higher for this election compared to the 2022 provincial election, increasing by around one per cent.
Following Doug Ford's third election victory, he and his party will hold power for up to another four years before having to compete in another election. The next provincial election is required to be held on or before June 7, 2029.
Strategic voting may seem like a tool to combat a flawed system, but in reality, it is just another symptom of our elections' flaws
As we approach the upcoming provincial election, the overwhelming likelihood of a Conservative majority is pushing many students to consider voting strategically.
While the sentiment behind strategic voting — to avert the victory of a least-preferred party by voting for whichever other candidate has the best chance of winning — makes sense in certain circumstances, strategic voting is a critically flawed strategy that students should reconsider.
While many progressive organizations, such as unions, parties and community organizations, throw their weight behind strategic voting each election, there is little historical evidence to suggest they gain anything from subordinating their values to vote against Conservatives rather than for their preferred candidates.
As Larry Savage, a Brock University professor who has studied strategic voting, suggested in a 2022 article, there are a number of flaws with the strategy that make it an almost useless approach.
The first flaw he outlines is the inconsistency of tactical voting recommendations. Organizations often struggle to agree on which candidate to endorse as the strategic vote. Because of a critical lack of riding-level polling for most elections, recommendations can often contradict one another.
He also suggests that strategic voting campaigns often struggle to adapt to mid-campaign shifts in polling, leading to outdated or incorrect recommendations.
One strategic voting website's mishandling of Hamilton Centre, an important riding for many McMaster students, provides a clear example of strategic voting's issues. In making recommendations on how to vote in Hamilton-Centre, Smartvoting.ca demonstrated a number of flaws inherent in strategic voting.
This election for Hamilton-Centre is unprecedented in the riding’s 18-year history. For every election since the riding was recreated in 2007, the NDP candidate has won. From 2007 to 2022, this candidate was Andrea Horwath, who became the Ontario NDP leader in 2009. After the last provincial election, Horwath resigned as party leader to run for Hamilton mayor and Sarah Jama was elected MPP under the NDP for Hamilton Centre.
Now, after being removed from the Ontario NDP, Jama is running as an independent against the NDP’s newly declared candidate, Robin Lennox. Both candidates have ties to the McMaster community.
With no apparent direct polling at the riding-level, SmartVoting.ca has made recommendations for Hamilton Centre’s election. Their recommended strategic vote, possibly due to a lack of direct polling at the riding level, has now changed at least twice — from NDP to Sarah Jama and now back to NDP — which gave Jama enough time to proclaim herself in one Instagram post as the “best chance to make sure we keep this riding safe from Ford.”
It is particularly telling that according to SmartVoting’s own projection, the Conservatives stand no chance of winning Hamilton-Centre. Yet, instead of suggesting people vote based on their beliefs, they made a recommendation anyway. This choice is not an indictment of SmartVoting itself, but an indictment of the systemic flaws of strategic voting as a whole.
As shocking as it is for me to find myself agreeing with Liberal leadership, former Ontario Liberal leader Steven Del Duca was right in the last election when he chose to run not as a “strategic choice” against Doug Ford, but on his party’s values and ideas. Strategic voting, similar in spirit to the often-proposed merger of Ontario Liberals and the Ontario NDP, is, as prominent Liberal Tim Murphy suggested about the proposed merger, a victory of shallow tactical politics over principles and values.
Strategic voting is symptomatic of a fundamentally flawed electoral system — a winner-takes-all approach that, for many, has turned voting on beliefs and principles into voting based on negative opinions of a right- or left-wing boogeyman. SmartVoting itself recognizes its purpose — but not the doom-and-gloom anti-Conservative rhetoric that fuels its use — as symptomatic of our first-past-the-post system and fails, like many other strategic voting services, to centre advocacy for electoral reform.
Strategic voting is symptomatic of a fundamentally flawed electoral system — a winner-takes-all approach that, for many, has turned voting on beliefs and principles into voting based on negative opinions of a right-or left-wing boogeyman.
Change-minded students should vote based on their genuine beliefs. We stand a far better chance of changing the results of the provincial election by actually voting for our values than by a few of us voting strategically.
And whoever your MPP ends up being, write to them to demand electoral reform.
Staring down the barrel of two conservative landslides, progressive students should aim to revive electoral reform to democratically empower themselves and others
On the eve of an Ontario election, set to take place on Feb. 27 and a looming federal election likely sometime this summer, conservatives at the provincial and federal level appear to be ascendant. But it shouldn't have to be like this. If students can get organized, it may not have to be.
Canada’s federal election was given a timeline when, on Jan. 6, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that he will be resigning as liberal leader and requested that parliament be kept on leave until a new leader was chosen. This next leader will likely face an election soon after parliament resumes at the end of March, as NDP leader Jagmeet Singh has indicated his intention to vote with the other opposition parties for an election.
When asked what he regretted most by reporters at the announcement of his resignation, Justin Trudeau cited his abandonment of electoral reform during his first term as leader after the 2015 election.
It was after that election, when the Liberals won a majority in the federal parliament, that they convened a committee of all the parties in parliament to propose a path for electoral reform. When all four opposition parties, including the conservatives, came back with a proposal Justin Trudeau didn't like, the Liberals abandoned their promised reform entirely.
When all four opposition parties, including the conservatives, came back with a proposal Justin Trudeau didn't like, the Liberals abandoned their promised reform entirely.
Nine years later, this proposal for proportional representation — where parties would gain seats proportional to their share of the popular vote, not based on the number of ridings they win — looks like a pretty good deal.
Ontario’s upcoming snap-election looks to be a secure win for Doug Ford. Despite his record of a massive cut to OSAP, being under RCMP investigation for corruption and most recently making bike lanes all but impossible to build, no opposition party appears to be mounting a serious challenge in the polls.
Students, generally in the age group least likely to vote in Canada, could change the election by turning out en-masse. While students absolutely should vote in the upcoming election, McMaster students alone are not well positioned to make a difference in the progressive seats of Hamilton-Centre and West-Hamilton-Ancaster-Dundas.
Politically active students might have better luck starting or joining party-affiliated clubs on campus, which offer a chance to organize and make their voices on policies such as electoral reform heard. Some political parties even allow student organizations to vote on party affairs and policy.
Despite current polling data, all hope is not lost, as progressive students may have a strange ally in their quest to stop conservative majorities at the Provincial and National level: Donald Trump.
Donald Trump’s inauguration in January 2025 caused great political change north of the border. Provincially, it was Doug Ford’s supposed reasoning for calling an election. Federally, it spells a much different story. It is possible one of the main factors behind a recent decline in Conservative polling.
While this decline is not yet critical, as tensions with the United States of America continue to build and the liberal leadership race continues, the polls may continue to slide.
If Ontario is a long-shot, changing the Federal Election results seems like a possibility. But without a clear vision and without organizing, students can't hope to change either. Ontario’s election is our chance to get organized and serves as a warning of what lacking the infrastructure – only one party has a campus affiliate – for organizing means. But our vision should be clear, young people need electoral reform.
Ontario’s election is our chance to get organized and serves as a warning of what lacking the infrastructure – only one party has a campus affiliate – for organizing means.
Proportional representation, an electoral system that awards seats in parliament based on the amount of votes a whole party gets, could enable more parties to gain seats and work together in forming and running a government. It could also prevent the parliamentary majorities that swing Canadian politics drastically on sometimes less than 40 per cent of the vote.
Students are, as mentioned above, overwhelmingly part of the age demographic least likely to vote. Their reasoning, according to Elections Canada, is a feeling that governments don't really respond to their voices or votes.
Without student organizations and pressure, electoral reform might never regain the momentum it had in 2015. But if we as students get organized now and demand electoral reform, we could change how students feel about the impact of their vote and empower students to play a larger role in determining the future of the country.
What you need to know ahead of the Ontario Provincial Election taking place on Feb. 27, 2025
On Jan. 28, 2025, Premier Doug Ford announced that the 43 Parliament of the Province of Ontario would be dissolved and that an early election would be held on Feb. 27, 2025.
For those living in the Hamilton West– Ancaster–Dundas electoral riding, the area in which McMaster University’s main campus resides, four candidates are running to represent the riding as Member of Provincial Parliament. These candidates include Green Party candidate Guy Bisson, Liberal Party candidate Julia Brown, Progressive Conservative Party candidate John Demik and NDP candidate Sandy Shaw.
About the candidates
Green Party candidate Guy Bisson is a retired public service lawyer and resident of the district. As a member of the Green Party he advocates for sustainable solutions for housing and development while maintaining a focus on preserving green spaces and aspects of historic lands. Bisson criticizes Ford’s government for what he claims is a lack of care toward healthcare, education, the justice system and the environment.
“Ford is putting too great an emphasis on profits for the Premier’s developer friends,” said Bisson.
Liberal candidate Julia Brown has experience in public service governance. She worked with the Ontario government in operations and communications for the premier and the minister of education. She has been actively involved in various local initiatives aimed at improving public services such as helping create financial assistance programs for those attending Mohawk College.
“I’m running for MPP Hamilton West- Ancaster-Dundas because life has become harder for all of us under Doug Ford . . . The middle class is in crisis,” said Brown.
Progressive Conservative candidate John Demik is a construction professional with over 37 years of experience in general contracting, including more than three decades in management. His platform expresses a focus on creating jobs, improving infrastructure and supporting community safety initiatives. “We can tackle the challenges we face, create good-paying jobs, improve local infrastructure and support families in building a better future,” said Demik.
NDP candidate Sandy Shaw was the first–ever elected female board chair of First Ontario Credit Union. Shaw is the current MPP for the district and has held the position since June 2018. She has a background in social work and finance. Shaw’s platform focuses on social justice, environmental sustainability and economic equality. She advocates for affordable housing and tenant rights, improved childcare services and initiatives to protect conservation lands.
Voting information
To vote in the upcoming election, all voters must confirm their voter registration by Feb. 17, 2025. Registering will allow you to receive a voter information card detailing when and where to vote. This information would be applicable if you wish to vote in person at a licensed ballot box location. To vote, one must have with them a piece of ID that includes a full name and address. The deadline to vote by mail is Feb. 21, 2025.
Eligible voters must vote in the riding where they are registered based on their home address. However, if you are temporarily away from your home riding, you can still vote by mail or at any Elections Canada office. You can visit any Elections Canada office across the country and vote via special ballot. Offices are open up to six days before election day.
According to Elections Ontario, information on the location of polls with be available online beginning Feb. 14, 2025. With the election fast approaching, make sure you meet the proper requirements to vote by Feb. 27, 2025.
On June 7, Ontarians will be casting their vote to elect their Legislative Assembly. For those voting in the West Hamilton-Ancaster-Dundas riding, the riding in which McMaster resides, voters have four choices: the incumbent Ted McMeekin from the Liberal Party, Ben Levitt of the Progressive Conservative Party, the National Democratic Party’s Sandy Shaw and Peter Ormond, representing the Green Party.
Each of these parties have a unique approach to three major issues the McMaster Students Union has highlighted in the past couple of years: tuition, transportation and affordable housing.
Of the parties covered, two have released official platforms: the NDP and the Green Party. The Liberal Party released the Ontario budget back in March 2018, which makes up of what the Liberals plan on implementing. The PC Party has not released an official platform since the party leadership shifted from Patrick Brown to Doug Ford, and thus all points listed are taken from press releases or other media outlets and their coverage.
Tuition
In the past few years, the McMaster Students Union has committed itself to advocating for lower tuition, typically through their membership in the Ontario University Student Alliance. OUSA has released documents and blog posts advocating for the lowering and control of international students’ tuitions,tuition freezesand other like-minded initiatives. Previous MSU board members have also advocated for tuition freezes, such as former MSU president Ehima Osazuwa and his Tuition Task Force.
The Liberal Party has committed itself to creating more Ontario Student Assistant Program tuition grants for low-income students to pay the average cost of one year’s tuition.
The NDP, on the other hand, promises to offer tuition grants to all students who are eligible for OSAP. The NDP also plans on wiping any student loan interest either owed or paid to the government by any student who currently holds a provincial loan.
The Green Party plans on offering interest-free loans, meanwhile the PC Party has not made a discernible statement on post-secondary tuition.
Transportation
The MSU has advocated for better transportation multiple times, most notably with their delegations to City Hall in support of a light rail transit. Former MSU vice president (Education) Blake Oliver held multiple meetings with relevant city hall officials during her term to advocate in favour of bringing LRT to Hamilton.
In addition, improving transportation has been a major topic for MSU presidential candidates. Ikram Farah, the current MSU president, plans on working with Metrolinx to improve GO bus transit by extending key bus lines to run later into the evening.
The Liberal Party promises to invest $79 billion into different transportation projects all over the province and match a federal infrastructure grant of $5 billion, of which roughly $4 billion will go to improving public transit.
The NDP promises to invest over $800 million in transit all over the province, but most notably promises to immediately start construction on Hamilton’s LRT project, in addition to a number of other projects all over the province.
Since the Ford campaign has not put out a clear platform, it is still unclear what the PC Party plans to do with respect to public transit. The PC Party does, however, plan on taking a different approach to the LRT project by putting it to a vote, noting that the city will still receive funding for other infrastructure projects if it is voted down.
When it comes to public transit, the Green Party is squarely focused on making it more environmentally friendly and sustainable by phasing out combustion engines, as an example.
Affordable Housing
In the past year, the MSU’s main advocacy team worked extensively on projects aimed to improve the living standards of students. Both former MSU vice president (Education) Ryan Deshpande and current MSU vice president (Education) Stephanie Bertolo worked on projects such as the Landlord Wiki project, aimed to improve the experiences of student tenants. Such problems are a part of the larger affordable housing crisis going on in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area.
The Liberal Party promises to invest over $1 billion in affordable housing, with the aim of eliminating chronic homelessness in Ontario by 2025. The Liberal Party also promises $547 million over five years to improve social housing to make the buildings more sustainable.
The NDP’s approach to affordable housing is interwoven into their approaches to other issues such as mental health and the opioid crisis, but overall they plan on building more than 30,000 housing units for those marginalized.
To address the affordable housing crisis, the PC Party plans to allow some development in the Green Belt, the world’s largest protected green space.
If elected, the Green Party would institute a rule requiring all new developments include a minimum of 20 per cent affordable homes, in addition to other approaches such as laneway housing.
Each party offers its own approach to addressing the major issues highlighted by the MSU in the past years. If you wish to learn more about each candidate, you may check each party’s website for more information.
Recently, the Sil took to the streets to find out what McMaster thinks about Ontario elections. You can watch the full video here.
On May 28 in the MUSC Atrium, the McMaster Students Union hosted an all-candidates debate with four candidates in the Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale riding for the upcoming June 12 provincial election.
The participants were Raymond Dartsch of the Green Party, Alex Johnstone of the New Democratic Party (NDP), Ted McMeekin of the Liberal Party, and Donna Skelly of the Progressive Conservatives (PC). Libertarian Party candidate Glenn Langton and Freedom Party of Ontario candidate Barry Spruce were absent.
It was an engaging and well-attended debate. The candidates had the opportunity to offer their perspectives on important issues within the riding before focusing on post-secondary education (PSE).
Opening Statements set the tone for the debate
Raymond Dartsch began by sharing his hopes for the GP’s success in this election. “It’s not a far-fetched idea that a candidate of the Green Party gets elected,” he said.
Donna Skelly, as might be expected from a former TV journalist, was always smiling and unmistakeably confident, but addressed the student audience too formally.
Johnstone, a former school-board trustee, began by highlighting her community experiences at McMaster and Hamilton. She was evidently the most nervous of the four, but recovered steadily.
Both Skelly and Johnstone made remarks about the state of provincial employment and debt rates under Liberal leadership.
Ted McMeekin combined personal anecdotes and past achievements as the incumbent MPP. McMeekin appeared as the most comfortable of the candidates, aiming to relate with the audience on their shared love of McMaster and the MSU.
McMeekin and Skelly: head to head on almost everything
In most of her answers, Skelly attacked Liberal governance, and on numerous occasions directed her accusations at McMeekin. Skelly spoke many times about the Liberal’s “blunders,” “corruption,” and “mismanagement.”
McMeekin concluded some of his own responses by rebutting PC platform points that Skelly hadn’t brought up.
While Skelly emphasized PC’s fiscal discipline, in particular in terms of cutting public sector jobs, McMeekin criticized the Tory plan as standing on “the backs of those who need us most.” Skelly stated that we have to “bite the bullet” with regards social cuts, while McMeekin countered that Ontario can only rebuild through investment, not cuts.
McMeekin responded well to criticism. A veteran to the area’s politics, he handled attacks against him and the Ontario Liberals calmly and maturely.
His responses to questions pertaining to PSE and to the criticisms of Skelly and Johnstone included a fine level of detail and knowledge of McMaster, its funding, and current projects. There is no doubt that McMeekin is well-informed on these issues given his incumbency.
McMeekin laughed off a number of Skelly’s attacks, though he did respond to Skelly’s accusations about the public investigation of officials in the Premier’s office. He told the audience, rather passionately, that he thinks if someone in Queen’s Park has done something wrong, the “bastard ought to pay for it.”
McMeekin conceded that Skelly’s attacks about the Gas Plant closure were fair, but that this didn’t pose a big problem for his overall performance in the debate.
The majority of Skelly’s statements were about issues unrelated to PSE. Skelly’s strategy might have worked for a different audience, but her repetitive attacks did not appear to have any effect on university students who wanted to hear about tuition and employment.
As much as Skelly liked to attack the Liberals’ platform, she failed to respond to McMeekin’s criticism of the Progressive Conservatives’ plan to tie marks to OSAP funding, Dartsch’s remarks about her support for the Niagara-GTA highway back in 2011, and Johnstone’s claim that the PC platform makes education inaccessible.
Johnstone garners audience support
Johnstone’s energy and natural tone, along with her emphasis on accessible education, garnered her support from the audience throughout the debate. The majority of the audience’s applause went to her.
She criticized both McMeekin and Skelly on their respective party platforms, while agreeing with Skelly on the Liberals’ fiscal irresponsibility and with McMeekin on the PC’s attack on social services.
She jumped into some of the more heated points of the debate, but overall came across as a constructive critic instead of a relentless attacker. Johnstone focused far less on attacking the Liberal government and more on bringing forth NDP’s tuition plans.
She did not miss a chance to remind the audience to vote for the NDP this election.
Dartsch emphasizes the importance of fresh ideas
Although Dartsch didn’t have a strong presence and seemed tired during the debate, he captured the audience’s attention with his honesty and refreshing approach to the election. He did not push for himself or his party, but for open debate and new ideas.
However, Dartsch was stumped by some questions, noting that he’s been too busy being a working parent with five kids to keep up with post-secondary news – a comment that might have left a bad taste in the mouths of some of the most involved students on campus. Dartsch went back and forth between making impressive, well thought-out points, and repeating previous statements and admitting to a lack of knowledge on some topics.
Final Remarks
There was no clear “winner” in Wednesday’s debate. Overall, Johnstone and McMeekin out-performed both Skelly and Dartsch.
Skelly’s performance appealed to strong PC supporters, yet failed to engage undecided members of the audience due to her forced delivery, which at times sounded patronizing and too rehearsed.
Dartsch missed the opportunity to make a strong impression on McMaster students.
Johnstone and McMeekin gave the most natural and relatable answers. Both were friendly, and unlike their opponents they appeared to understand the purpose of the debate, and used this to their advantage.
