Add six more to the list -

Add six more to the list


NDP MP Joe Comartin says his campaign reported four to six calls about polling station changes to the returning officer in Windsor-Tecumseh. And yesterday’s Postmedia report adds an interesting note in that regard.

There were also several complaints from New Democrats in Windsor-Tecumseh, Ont., including a call to the home of MP Joe Comartin, directing them that their polling station had moved. New Democrat volunteer Andrew McAvoy received a live call directing him to an address where there was no polling station.

Those calls came from the same number listed as the Poutine phone.

Windsor-Tecumseh isn’t referenced on Elections Canada’s list of ridings where polling station changes occurred.

Meanwhile, there are now reports of calls purporting to convey polling station changes in Mount Royal, Lac-Saint-Louis, Edmonton CentreKingston and the Islands and Hamilton East-Stoney Creek.


Add six more to the list

  1. Meanwhile, there are now unverified self-serving reports made by butthurt partisan campaign workers of calls purporting to blah blah blah, not counting the Conservative ones, of course, which I am ignoring in the interest of trying to manufacture a scandal.”

    Fixed it for you.  Shouldn’t you be updating your resume instead of buying more rope?

    • Dan Gardner:

      In March, 1954, newspapers in Seattle reported that some car windshields were damaged in a city 80 miles away. Vandalism was suspected. But then something strange happened.

      People started to find car windshields speckled with tiny pits. Reports multiplied. Within a couple of weeks, the police had taken 242 calls from concerned citizens reporting damage to more than 1,000 cars. 

      But since this story was broken last week by the intrepid journalists Glen McGregor and Stephen Maher, reporters, politicians, and party officials have been working feverishly to find more incidents. In that atmosphere, the risk of something like a Seattle Windshield Pitting Epidemic becomes very real.

      If we look very closely at the 2011 election and discover countless examples of inappropriate or illegal use of phone calling, we may conclude there was an unprecedented effort to manipulate voters and rig the election. And given the novelty of the tactic, and the scale of its deployment, we could also conclude that a sophisticated organization with extensive resources was responsible for most or all of it.

      But we didn’t make a similar examination of past elections. What if we had? Maybe we would have discovered a similar level of inappropriate or illegal use of phone calling. And if that were the case, it would suggest that this behaviour is endemic to Canadian electioneering. And it would be much less plausible that a single sophisticated organization was responsible in 2011.

  2. Conservative voters also recieved incorrect directions from the robocalls, according to easily verifiable records. 

    This is probably the single most enlightening fact of this story, yet one the media is straining not to disclose.  The only rational reason is that it runs counter to the storyline that this was some nefarious plot hatched up by Conservative leaders. 

    Given that there is positive evidence which shows this wasn’t some conservative plot, and zero evidence that it was, it appears that the (largely leftist) media are willingling going along with what appears to be a Liberal smear campaign. 

    • Link please.

      • Fuddle you, that’s argument via attrition and it is getting really old.  Unless you are a complete moron you can google it yourself and stop wasting peoples’ time and demanding that they educate you for free.  

        When I fact checked Aaron’s ass yesterday I didn’t incessantly demand that he post proof (beyond a perfunctory request that was naturally ignored) I researched it myself, and you can do the same.  Now start googling.

        • It was easily known where proof to what Aaron had said could be found.  Chesterton asserts there are easily verifiable records that show Conservatives received incorrect directions from the robocalls.  I haven’t been able to find such, perhaps that makes me a moron. Fine. I’ve been called worse by better and lived through it.

          So I say again:

          Link please.

          • If you’ve ever posted a link here, instead of sneer/smear/disappear, I’ve never seen it.  Besides, on two occasions I’ve had completely innocuous comments with links deleted here, once at Wells’ blog, and once at Wherry’s.  

            Wells once deleted a comment with a link to the US government accounting office referencing health care costs which in no possible way was offensive.  He’s just *that* much of an expletive.Apparently – and you can check with Wells, he’ll tell you – there is some super-secret and even superer-random rule here against posting links in the comment section, which I have only seen invoked against conservative commenters.

          • I expect that’s because you haven’t looked. Here’s a couple from the last couple days or so:


            Now.. does not looking make you a moron? Or does that logic only apply when it’s not being applied to you?

            As to your personal experience with links or comments being deleted, Disqus is still a bit flakey, though nowhere near as much as the forum software they were using previously. I’m betting these posts you’re talking of were in the previous system, yes?

            And, all of that said.. none of it bears any relation to my very first point.



        • Since Harper’s position seems to be that it’s the opposition’s responsibility to produce evidence of malfeasance, shouldn’t the same onus apply when the Cons make their own counter-charges?

          If you’re going to get all sanctimonious and finger-waggy, maybe you need to produce more tangible evidence to support the Cons’ flimsy allegations.

    • Chesterson, are you Pierre Poutine?

  3. Elections Canada appear to be keystone cops who can’t seem to locate village idiot. How long will this investigation take? We are approaching a year since EC was first informed about these calls but no conclusions yet. Pierre Poutine is one crafty fellow.

    “Details of the phone account are contained in a series of sworn statements by Elections Canada investigator Al Mathews to support requests for court orders to produce records as part of the agency’s ongoing investigation.”

  4. They called Comartin’s home advising of a fake pollling station move?

    And we’re just hearing about this now???

    You know what…I can understand not hearing about this from the average Joe on the street until the sh!t starts to hit the fan. But a fake polling station move call was made to Comartin’s home, and we’re just hearing about it now??? That doesn’t seem credible. Why didn’t he speak up in May when these calls hit the national news?

    Wouldn’t the CPC make a point of excluding the contact information of actual opposition candidates/MPs from their GOTV database?

    • Sounds like Comartin’s office did the right thing by reporting the misleading calls to an Elections Canada employee, the riding’s returning officer. If he’d run to the media first, I can only imagine what the CPC spin squad would have emitted in response.

    • And we’re just hearing about this now???

      Of course; only now is it convenient to suddenly “remember” these things.

    • As to the CPC excluding him, why? If they’re keeping track of people who won’t vote CPC.. he’s definitely one of them.

      And again I’ll point out, I expect most people who got these calls thought it was random assholes, of which there likely exist some on both sides. As such, report it to EC, and forget about it, as it’s not really noteworthy.

      However, once we start to see a pattern emerge, we realize that “Wait a second. This is noteworthy.. it’s another instance in the pattern.”

      • Because it would make sense to ensure the other candidates themselves would be on a “do not call” list.

        And I’m not sure your assumption holds if the “random asshole” is introducing him/herself as representing the Conservatives.

        • Perhaps not, but there’s nothing that indicates the person who called Comartin’s home did such.

          • Well, if it’s the same call center in Thunder Bay, yes there is…the word of the agents that they were told to identify themselves as calling on behalf of the Conservatives.

  5. What about the 2008 elections and the brakes lines that were cut in Guelph and other southwestern Ontario ridings?

    The problem is not that journalists cover these things too much, it’s that they don’t cover them enough.  We’ve let things slide.

    Our prime minister appointed as Minister of Justice a man he knew had pleaded guilty to electoral fraud – how complacent is that !!!  Electoral fraud is not frowned upon by our prime minister; it’s not only tolerated; it’s REWARDED – the appointment of Doug Finley to the Senate while he was still under investigation for electoral fraud being another.

    • You just make it so personal, that can’t see straight.

      • Would Claudia Lemire, Opinionated mother of three, with a little one in the backseat, take it personally if something like this happened to her:

        “Long-time St. Paul’s resident Terry Walker also found his brakes didn’t work this weekend, but didn’t realize his brake line had been cut until his mechanic confirmed it yesterday morning. When a police officer came to his house to investigate yesterday they checked around the house to see if there was any other damage and they found anti-Liberal graffiti in silver paint defacing the side of his house. The graffiti read: “Liberals lie. Mayor of Toronto lies.”

        I make it personal because it has become personal.  This is not a politician attacking another politician.  This is about citizens being targeted by vandals because of their political opinions. If persons don’t get passionate about getting to the bottom of such actions they will occur again and again, as they have in 2008 and 2011. Responsible politicians should never reward electoral fraud; it’s encouring their reoccurence. 

        Why do you choose to put the blinkers on?

        • Hmmmm…..

          So are you sure the CPC, the Conservative Party of Canada did this, do you have irrevocable proof that they commited this acts of vandalism? Because as far as I am concerned 1) In this country you are innocent till proven guilty. 2) I need proof, tangible proof that CPC did this and that they were orders by the big honchos there. Because if it is some blind partisan little fellow, it doesn’t count.

          I have no problem telling you this: If Stephen Harper or his cabinet or any of his campaign managers have committed election fraud, they should be persecuted to the extent of the law and the election should be null.

          I believe that something illegal happened in Guelph, but there is so far no big conspiracy pointing fingers. Besides that all of it is BS, no proof whatsoever.

          I have no blinkers on but common sense.

          • You can fool 36% most of the time, I guess…

          • Innocent until proven guilty?

            Tell that to Helena Geurgis.

        • As I’ve already mentioned, a neighbour had her house vandalized simply because she had a Liberal lawn sign.