Tories changing Election Canada

[Wilber]

Is a scam not a scam because no one fell for it? Is a criminal act not a crime because it didn't succeed?

[Keepitsimple]

Is a scam not a scam because no one fell for it? Is a criminal act not a crime because it didn't succeed?

It's a criminal act. You go to jail for attempted robbery. You should pay the penalty for attempting to defraud voters - and if that means going to jail, then so be it.

But my point still stands: The fraudulent Liberal robocalls in Guelph ultimately had more of an effect on votes than did the Conservative one. Not one person has claimed that they were prevented from voting - but you can bet that at least some people were swayed by the nasty Liberal robocall.

[Wilber]

It's a criminal act. You go to jail for attempted robbery. You should pay the penalty for attempting to defraud voters - and if that means going to jail, then so be it.

But my point still stands: The fraudulent Liberal robocalls in Guelph ultimately had more of an effect on votes than did the Conservative one. Not one person has claimed that they were prevented from voting - but you can bet that at least some people were swayed by the nasty Liberal robocall.

So because no one was fooled, that makes it OK.

[Keepitsimple]

So because no one was fooled, that makes it OK.

Can I be any clearer than I already was? Here - I'll try again......it seems you can't take yes for an answer.

It's a criminal act. You go to jail for attempted robbery. You should pay the penalty for attempting to defraud voters - and if that means going to jail, then so be it.

[guyser]

Can I be any clearer than I already was? Here - I'll try again......it seems you can't take yes for an answer.

It's a criminal act. You go to jail for attempted robbery. You should pay the penalty for attempting to defraud voters - and if that means going to jail, then so be it.

Ok , then you agree someone should be in jail for this .

Glad to clear that up.

[Keepitsimple]

Ok , then you agree someone should be in jail for this .

Glad to clear that up.

There's nothing to clear up. Why is it so hard for you and On Guard to comprehend? I actually don't remember any Conservative-leaning poster saying it isn't or shouldn't be a crime. It's a crime. If it's not, it should be.....and if the courts decide jail time is warranted, off they go in handcuffs......but you know how "tough" our judges are so I wouldn't hold my breath.

Since I've been overly forthcoming with you - would you reciprocate and give me your thoughts on what you think about the fruadulent Liberal robocall - details of which I posted a few posts back? Regardless of the current law, do you think that should be a crime?

[guyser]

Robocalls should be, Conservative Party member bragged about doing them.

Nothing more.

[Keepitsimple]

Robocalls should be, Conservative Party member bragged about doing them.

Nothing more.

Ok , then you agree someone should be in jail for the Liberal robocalls.

Glad to clear that up.

[On Guard for Thee]

Well the I guess Elections Canada is lying to us. They claim to have toted up 31,000 complaints.

[Keepitsimple]

Well the I guess Elections Canada is lying to us. They claim to have toted up 31,000 complaints.

Are you just trying to keep the mis-information campaign alive? You should actually read some of the articles that were posted. I wouldn't say they were lying, exactly - but they admitted they may have confused things - the 31,000 were actually "contacts" - not complaints....mostly as a result of the opposition encouraging constituents to write in via form letters. Is this clear to you now? Once again:

Elections Canada initially decided to refuse to comment on the investigation, only to go on to issue a statement stating that it had received 31,000 contacts from Canadians in relation to the 2011 general election.

The statement was wrongly understood to mean that the majority of the contacts were individual complaints, which would have been a huge increase in comparison to previous ballots. However, Elections Canada later stated that 700 specific complaints had been received.

Those numbers have now been updated to refer to 40,000 contacts, and 800 specific complaints.

Edited February 28, 2014 by Keepitsimple

[Topaz]

When it comes to problems that EC finds with ALL the parties, its seems the NDP and the Liberals, deal with it and put it behind them. When it comes to the Tories, they deny, then they spend tax dollars going to court, like the "in and out" scam they are found guilty, they SHOULD go to jail but instead they end up with a plea deal of $50,000 fine and then the late Sen. Findley goes back to the senate as nothing ever happen.

[waldo]

But my point still stands: The fraudulent Liberal robocalls in Guelph ultimately had more of an effect on votes than did the Conservative one. Not one person has claimed that they were prevented from voting - but you can bet that at least some people were swayed by the nasty Liberal robocall.

Ok , then you agree someone should be in jail for the Liberal robocalls.

Glad to clear that up.

there most certainly was nothing fraudulent about the content of the Liberal Guelph robocalls (the very small number that there were, over the very small time period)... those calls honesty conveyed the abortion position of the Harper Conservative candidate. What the calls didn't include was a message advising who/what originated the calls... and for that, per Election Canada rules, the Liberal party was fined ~$4000

your attempt to create a false equivalency to the Harper Conservative Guelph robocalls is noted. We have enough past MLW threads that include the down & dirty details of what occurred in that regard... many Canadians eagerly await what the immunity agreement with 'Christian Conservative' will ultimately bring forward!

.

[On Guard for Thee]

Are you just trying to keep the mis-information campaign alive? You should actually read some of the articles that were posted. I wouldn't say they were lying, exactly - but they admitted they may have confused things - the 31,000 were actually "contacts" - not complaints....mostly as a result of the opposition encouraging constituents to write in via form letters. Is this clear to you now? Once again:

Calling someone to misdirect them and therby suppress their vote is illegal. Whether those attempts were successful or not is beside the point. I'm no legal expert but I think I am correct in saying that, for examplr, attempted robbery is equally as illegal as robbery.

[On Guard for Thee]

I'm certainly no fan of finding yet another way to spend taxpayer dollars, but if you want to change the way we are allowed to vote, then I think that may be a worthy reason to do so. Take it on the road, let Canadian's decide. Or are we gettin' set up again? If we get another round of robocalls (would they be that stupid) then EC can't even discuss it under this "unfair elections act". I'll tell you what, if I get a robocall sending me to the wrong place, I'll damn sure discuss it.

[Keepitsimple]

Calling someone to misdirect them and therby suppress their vote is illegal. Whether those attempts were successful or not is beside the point. I'm no legal expert but I think I am correct in saying that, for examplr, attempted robbery is equally as illegal as robbery.

Don't you read the posts? You are quoting exactly what I said several posts ago. It's the attempt that matters.....and if it's not a crime, it should be. That doesn't change the fact that there were not 31,000 complaints. They were contacts, almost all of which were people writing in to voice their concern - egged on by opposition MP's encouraging their constituents to do so. Go back and read the article. It's getting tiresome to provide information that you completely ignore.

[waldo]

It's getting tiresome to provide information that you completely ignore.

tiresome? Yes, your attempt at revisionism is exactly that! Your repeated attempts to shift the focus on robocalls away from Harper Conservatives is quite tiresome. Simple, per the Justice Mosely ruling on the 'likely source', who accessed the Conservative CIMS database?

[On Guard for Thee]

Don't you read the posts? You are quoting exactly what I said several posts ago. It's the attempt that matters.....and if it's not a crime, it should be. That doesn't change the fact that there were not 31,000 complaints. They were contacts, almost all of which were people writing in to voice their concern - egged on by opposition MP's encouraging their constituents to do so. Go back and read the article. It's getting tiresome to provide information that you completely ignore.

Well the article's I read talk about 31,000 complaints. And it's quite a stretch you are making to assume that noone wes deprived of their vote among that large a number. Quite easy to imagine a scenario were someone got the bogus call and by the time they found out had to continue on to work or drop the kids off, or whatever. Maybe never voted, maybe never even complained.

[Keepitsimple]

Well the article's I read talk about 31,000 complaints. And it's quite a stretch you are making to assume that noone wes deprived of their vote among that large a number. Quite easy to imagine a scenario were someone got the bogus call and by the time they found out had to continue on to work or drop the kids off, or whatever. Maybe never voted, maybe never even complained.

The article you read was incorrect - and if you would have actually read my post #74, you would have known why......they were contacts - not complaints - and the vast majority were instigated by opposition MP's who encouraged constituents to write in - and in many cases they provided email form letters. And yes - not one person has stepped forward to say they were prevented from voting because of a robocall - not one! The fact that to this day, you were still under the impression that there were 31,000 complaints says a lot about Elections Canada and the media in general, don't ya think? Once more:

Elections Canada initially decided to refuse to comment on the investigation, only to go on to issue a statement stating that it had received 31,000 contacts from Canadians in relation to the 2011 general election.

The statement was wrongly understood to mean that the majority of the contacts were individual complaints, which would have been a huge increase in comparison to previous ballots. However, Elections Canada later stated that 700 specific complaints had been received.

Those numbers have now been updated to refer to 40,000 contacts, and 800 specific complaints.

Edited March 3, 2014 by Keepitsimple

[waldo]

And yes - not one person has stepped forward to say they were prevented from voting because of a robocall - not one!

I believe I recall member 'madmax' countering this repeated claim of yours... I'll see if I can find that/his post.

and uhhhh, by the by, again Simple: per the Justice Mosely ruling on the 'likely source', who accessed the Conservative CIMS database?

[waldo]

I believe I recall member 'madmax' countering this repeated claim of yours... I'll see if I can find that/his post.

and uhhhh, by the by, again Simple: per the Justice Mosely ruling on the 'likely source', who accessed the Conservative CIMS database?

here you go:

Funny thing though.....not one person in all of Canada has come forward to say that a Robocall actually prevented them from voting. One could easily argue however, that the Liberal "mistake" had a very real effect on some voters.

A signed affidavit indicates that 150 to 200 voters in Guelph showed up at a phony vote location at the Quebec Street Mall and some voters ripped up their voter identification cards in anger

That is the intent of voter suppression....

Funny thing..., I figure I should feed you information you have forgotton from the Robocall thread..

At 11:06 AM on election day election officer Anita Hawdur sent an e–mail to legal counsel Karen McNeil titled: "URGENT Conservative campaign office communication with electors." Hawdur reported that returning officers were also calling to ask about the calls. A further email was sent from legal counsel to Ronnie Molnar, the deputy Chief Electoral Officer who in turn emailed a senior director: “This one is far more serious. They have actually disrupted the voting process

[Keepitsimple]

Well the article's I read talk about 31,000 complaints. And it's quite a stretch you are making to assume that noone wes deprived of their vote among that large a number. Quite easy to imagine a scenario were someone got the bogus call and by the time they found out had to continue on to work or drop the kids off, or whatever. Maybe never voted, maybe never even complained.

On Guard - to be clear, the final reported tally was 1394 complaints scattered across 234 ridings. We know that at least 600 came from Guelph leaving about 800 scattered across the other ridings - an average of a little more than three per riding. That should help put some context as to why no one has stepped forward to complain that they couldn't vote because of a robocall. I posted the original link to correspond to your figure of 31,000. Here's more up-to-date article. It really does beg the question as to how you still thought the number of complaints was 31,000 - didn't you catch it in the wide-spread media reports that slammed the online campaign?

By mid-August, Elections Canada had received 1,394 complaints "alleging specific occurrences" in 234 of Canada's 308 federal ridings, the lawyer for the elections watchdog says.

That's up from the more than 700 specific complaints that the commissioner's office publicly reported in March to clear the air after an online campaign attracted 30,000-plus expressions of concern by Canadians.

Link: http://news.ca.msn.com/top-stories/robocall-complaints-rise-to-1394-specific-occurrences

Edited March 3, 2014 by Keepitsimple

[Keepitsimple]

I believe I recall member 'madmax' countering this repeated claim of yours... I'll see if I can find that/his post.

and uhhhh, by the by, again Simple: per the Justice Mosely ruling on the 'likely source', who accessed the Conservative CIMS database?

As usual, there is a kernal of truth to what you've said.....there is one - and I guess we'll have to take Daniel Speik's word.

Daniel Speik, of Saint-Colomban, Quebec, says he didn’t vote in the last election because of robocalls that told him his polling station had moved.

A few days before the election, Speik received two or three automated calls, in French, identified as coming from Elections Canada, telling him his polling station had moved, much like more than 1,000 Canadians who have filed complaints about deceptive election calls.

But Speik is the only complainant, in court documents so far made public, to say that the call stopped him from voting.

Link: http://o.canada.com/news/at-least-one-voter-says-robocall-stopped-him-from-voting/

Edited March 3, 2014 by Keepitsimple

[waldo]

As usual, there is a kernal of truth to what you've said.

Link: http://o.canada.com/news/at-least-one-voter-says-robocall-stopped-him-from-voting/

a kernel? I quoted you back the posts from member 'madmax'... where he countered your continued theme of 'not one single". Of course, as you are prone to do, you continually resurrect your posts/claims that have been dealt with in the past. Nice to see you find your own counter to your own repeated claims!

more pointedly, since you appear in firm revisionist mode, do you maintain robocalling is ok... just depending on how far and how well it permeates?

and again, "per the Justice Mosely ruling on the 'likely source', who accessed the Conservative CIMS database?"

[Keepitsimple]

a kernel? I quoted you back the posts from member 'madmax'... where he countered your continued theme of 'not one single". Of course, as you are prone to do, you continually resurrect your posts/claims that have been dealt with in the past. Nice to see you find your own counter to your own repeated claims!

more pointedly, since you appear in firm revisionist mode, do you maintain robocalling is ok... just depending on how far and how well it permeates?

and again, "per the Justice Mosely ruling on the 'likely source', who accessed the Conservative CIMS database?"

Now you're just being completely silly. I've taken the time to confirm that there was indeed one person who claimed to have been prevented from voting. I even provided a link for you. One person amongst 1394 complaints across 234 ridings. This is a perfect example of why I keep referring to you as a narcissist. You have absolutely no contrition - no sense of fair play. I've gone to reasonable lengths to let OnGuard know that there never were 31,000 complaints and that no one was prevented from voting. That was the thrust of our posts before you jumped in as is your norm - with over-the-top rantings. Now that one person claims to be a victim - you call it revisionist history! Oh my, Waldo

Edited March 3, 2014 by Keepitsimple

[waldo]

Now you're just being completely silly. I've taken the time to confirm that there was indeed one person who claimed to have been prevented from voting. I even provided a link for you. One person amongst 1394 complaints across 234 ridings. This is a perfect example of why I keep referring to you as a narcissist. You have absolutely no contrition - no sense of fair play.

no - I advised I recalled a post from member 'madmax' that countered your repeated, over and over and over again, claims of "not one". I advised I would look for that post... I did... and I provided it. Why is that, as you declare it, "silly"? Are you now simply going to, once again, ignore the affidavit?

as I mentioned, this is but another example of you simply repeating claims of yours that have been previously refuted. You do it quite regularly in regards your past unsubstantiated claims concerning AGW/CC... and many times, I've highlighted your refuted recycling of your past claims.

your continued narcissist insult is noted.

.