Brand management -

Brand management


Angus Reid surveys a thousand Canadians and finds that “almost two thirds … think the Guelph occurrence is ‘probably’ or ‘definitely’ one of many that took place in the last federal campaign,” including 47% of Conservative supporters. Respondents were then asked how likely each of the federal parties was to “provide false and misleading information to voters through telephone calls with pre-recorded messages during a political campaign.”

Only a third of respondents in Canada think the Green Party (32%) and the New Democratic Party (NDP) (33%) are “very likely” or “moderately likely” to rely on this tactic. In Quebec, 32 per cent of respondents think the Bloc Québécois is likely to use robocalls with misleading information.

A majority of Canadians believe the Liberal Party (55%) and the Conservative Party (63%) are likely to provide false and misleading information to voters through telephone calls with pre-recorded messages during a political campaign. In fact, two-in-five Canadians (39%) think the Tories are “very likely” to rely on this tactic.


Brand management

  1. What I’m most curious are those who are in the overlap between the 63% believing the CPC is likely to provide false and misleading information to voters and the 60% support they receive in the polls.

    Absolute best case scenario is 23% of Canadians feel they’re likely to do this and still support them.   WTF? Almost 1 in 4 Canadians think this is just fine and dandy? Somebody should slap those people’s parents.

    • Are we slapping all parents of people who vote for dodgy political parties or just parents of Cons? I would be delighted if all Canadians stopped rewarding bad behaviour instead of whingeing about how everyone but their team is corrupt. 

      cbc ~ “It all started with rumours and whispers about a fund that had been set up in the wake of the 1995 referendum on Quebec sovereignty to help promote federalism …. ”

      winnipeg free press ~ “Manitoba MP Niki Ashton is fighting back against opponents in the NDP leadership race she says are playing dirty …. “

      • We don’t know that there’s any overlap between the people who support any of the other parties and the people who feel they’re likely to engage in this kind of behavior. They could be distinct groups.

        But if there is, then HELL YES!

        I don’t care who you are or who you vote for. If you support a party or group that you think is using dirty tricks to try to keep people from voting, you are a piece of crap, unworthy of being in this country and deserving of public ridicule and humiliation until you leave.

  2.  ‘In fact, two-in-five Canadians (39%) think the Tories are “very likely” to rely on this tactic.’

    Surely Cons aren’t surprised that their reputation and image are in tatters.

    •  Unless this 39% is the same 39% that voted for the Cons in the last election.

  3. Frankly I’m surprised that so many people think the Liberals were involved in this. Given the evidence to date it suggests people think they were poisoning their own well?

    Seems like no matter what they do the Liberals have been effectively tarnished for the long haul.

    No wonder the CPC isn’t taking a hit here. They’ve managed to cover their opponents and themselves with enough mud that the average person doesn’t seem to recognize a difference.

    • Surprised as well…..the media has often reported that the Liberals are just down on their luck with donations, so where do people assume the Liberal have the money to even do something so pervasive?

    • You’re interpreting it wrong. The question wasn’t whether they were involved in this specific incident, but whether they are likely to do the same thing.  You can be sure that pretty much every CPC supporter said so.. that’s what they comfort themselves with at night after all, that as bad as their party is, surely the others are even worse.  So that probably brings you up to that 32-33%  that say the greens/NDP would do it — I’d imagine that’s pretty close to the CPC base level of support — the diehards. Which means it’s only another 22% (hey look, isn’t that rather close to the NDP vote percentage?) think that both the CPC/Liberals are the same in these matters.

      No, the only surprise for me is that so many think the CPC would in spite of the support levels they have.

      • The stakes are much, much higher than most people or commentators realize. Harper won his “majority” with 6,848 votes. That’s the difference between a Conservative candidate getting elected and the second place candidate in the 14 closest races that the Conservatives “won.”

        For instance, in Nipissing-Timiskaming the Conservatives “won” the riding with a mere 18 votes. In Etobicoke Centre it was just 26 votes. Out of the 14.7 million votes cast across Canada that is an infinitesimally small margin for a majority — it’s 0.048 per cent.

        • There is simply nothing that can justify a Conservative winning for you, is there? You know, other parties won close races too… are those also illegitimate in your view?

          • Cheating is certainly no way to justify anything, so I suggest you don’t attempt it.

            And I was PC for 30 years….Harp’s gang is not conservative.

    • Maybe I can help with the puzzelment that many of you feel when you find out that most Canadians just don`t agree with your narrow positions.

      What happens is that when you spend all your time on blogs and work and social circles with your like-minded people, I think you guys become so isolated that you no longer understand what is important to real people in the real world out there.

      • 60% of Canadians didn’t vote for Harper.

        HIs base will vote for him even if he eats live puppies on TV.

        The problem is in a voting system that allows such a huge variance in result, from just a few votes

        Talk about ‘real people’ and the ‘real world’ is meaningless. 

        • “Talk about ‘real people’ and the ‘real world’ is meaningless.”

          I’d say that pretty much sums up the Liberal Party’s world view.

          • It will be their slogan in the next election.

          • No, it sums up YOUR view.

            All human beings are ‘real people’ and we all live in the ‘real world’.

            So unless you think you’re running into plastic people or AIs on a regular basis, I suggest you give up meaningless phrases.

          • Which phrase did I use that was meaningless? The part where I was quoting *you*?

      • Pfffft… seems like the only appropriate response here.

        I was a life long conservative voter until the merger of the CRAP and PC party. Since then I’ve found little to recommend them, or any other party for that matter.

        More over, the only places I comment are the major Canadian newpapers, in which opinions from across the spectrum are the norm. You hardly seem “like minded” to me.

        I believe in developing an informed opinion based on facts and patterns developing from facts, not innuendo, which is all you hyper partisans ever seem to offer.

        So you have opposable thumbs and managed to fire off a nonsense comment.

        Is that all you have to offer?

        • Easynow, I`m just trying to help.
          You start out your comment by stating that you are surprised that many people think the Liberals are involved in robocalling.
          I don`t think that should be surprising to an objective mind.
          Of course Liberals used robocalling.
           Of course there are people in the Liberal Party who would use most any method possible to advance an election win.
          And of course their is a history of shenanigans in the LPC, and if you know anything about the abilities of those who have been in the backroom of the Liberal Party, you would know they are not exactly choirboys.

          • I saw what you did there…so let’s review.

            a)  everyone uses robocalling…

            b) it’s what is said in the robo-call that is the issue here

            c) Libs and Dippers had no reason to give their own people the wrong information on voting. Cons did.

      • “What happens is that when you spend all your time on blogs and work and
        social circles with your like-minded people, I think you guys become so
        isolated that you no longer understand what is important to real people
        in the real world out there.”

        So what’s your excuse?

  4. I think any party might reasonably distribute misleading information, though I think the CPC is most likely.  But in terms of actually trying to prevent you from getting you to your polling station, so far it seems like that’s just a Harper thing. 

  5. If Wherry is going to obsess over cover this story 24/7, then why not post polling results that aren’t favourable to his agenda? What is he so terrified of? The truth? Lord forbid.

      • He’s gonna make up some numbers like 39 > 61.

      • How about the well publicized poll, one which you apparently missed, done by Nanos showing Tory support unaffected by these silly accusations? Why be sharp when you can be nasty, right?

        • I would be too proud of that when more people surveyed think the Cons are capable of this criminal behavior. The link’s at the top of the article. 

          • Look, you hate Conservatives. Thanks for showing up. Next.

          • No, I hate Harper — big difference. Have fun with your pompoms. Next.

          • lol, whatever. But at least you admit you hate. That might be a start.

          • He’s the only one Dennis –ever in my 56 years in the planet, the only one. 

          • Here is what you wrote, and you went beyond smearing Harper only:

            I would be too proud of that when more people surveyed think the Cons are capable of this criminal behavior.


          • Well Dennis, that was the conclusion of the survey. I don’t purposefully make things up. 

        • Asking for evidence is nasty?

          • Being so obsessed with getting your opponents so that you don’t look for obviously available evidence might well be.

          • I have a life.

          • Then stop bothering me when you don’t have all the facts, or don’t want to have them. Geez.

          • you are so aggressively defensive.

          • lol, whatever. Thanks for showing up.

    • I noticed a couple days after the Liberals admission of guilt in the Vikileaks affair that this blog had only one report of that guilty admission and 26 stories on roboleaks.

      I was told by an oldtimer on this site that since the Vikeleaks Liberal connection was only a couple days old then there was not enough time for any follow up reports.

      I said I would be patient and wait for the avalanche of Vikileaks follow up reports. Well, it`s been 10 days and our host has still only posted one report on the Liberal guilty plea and there is probably 60 stories on robocall. Probably an example of  ” Much of Canada`s msm is Conservative “.

      • These people aren’t interested in the truth. They only want to attack people they disagree with.

        • Here’s a mirror — have a look.What do you see? Hypocrisy personified?

          • Didn’t I already tell you that “I know you are but what am I” as a response doesn’t really bolster your credibility? It suggests you have the mind of a child. Do you know what that means?

          • Right Dennis what ever Dean instructed you to say. I think I’ll pass on you’re posts. They’re not worthy of my time.

          • The reason you’re so easy to deal with is because I have a mind of my own, and the truth. But thanks for stopping by. Nobody asked you to, by the way.

          • Baa, baa Dennis, baa baa.

          • No Dennis, you’re just another angry guy with an ax to grind who has deluded himself into thinking that they’re the sharpest knife in the drawer. A dime a dozen these days.

          • Then why can’t you respond with any kind of substance? Why do you have to resort to this knee-jerk nonsense? And with whom am I angry exactly? It’s you, Wherry and Co. who engage in these endless attacks 24/7. Then you attack me for daring to question all the silliness. Man.

          • Dennis, you’ve personally insulted me then you expect me to be nice and play con-con kissy face. Go stuff it!

          • What personal insults? Everything I have said is based on what you have written here. That you don’t have a decent reply isn’t my fault. Sorry.

          • Knock it off, Napoleon! Make yourself a dang quesadilla!

          • Hey, jerk! Next.

          •  “:It suggests you have the mind of a child. Do you know what that means?” 
            Have fun spinning that one Dennis Del Mastro.

          • Simply accusing me of what I’m accusing you of, without a shred of justification, is what? Mature?

            I accused you of having a mind of a child for what you specifically wrote on here. If you don’t like it, improve your act. Yes?

          • Begone troll,. That’s all you are and that’s all you’ll ever be. 

          • This is exactly what I’m talking about. You can’t respond with or to substance. You are a child. Next.

      • What else should be posted, Ellen? You do understand what “news” means, right? It means not “olds”.  

        The problem you’re having is that we keep finding *new* allegations and areas where there might be voter suppression, so it keeps getting reported.

        • Yeah, that`s probably it. I will just be more patient.

          • Learn to read.

            Patience won’t make a whit of difference if there’s no new information about the Vikileaks thing. Given that we know who did it, that it was apologized for, that there’s no new Vikileaks coming out.. I expect that’ll be the last you see of the story.

        • Let’s throw out a connector to get this thread really hopping:  think of how much easier it will be to get to the bottom of future “robocall”-type scandals once C-30 is enacted.

          Discuss among yourselves.

      • Hmmm let’s see: They did it, got found out, apologized and now we’ve moved on because there’s no more to tell.

        Unless you know something the rest of us don’t?

        Meanwhile the election fraud story is just getting going with no end in sight.

        My guess is you’re bothered by the optics of it but have nothing more to offer. Again.

      • What would there be to report until he appears before the committee? 

        • Oh, C’mon guys, Ellen is looking for news about Vickileaks. Let’s give here some…

          Yesterday, the Conservatives tried to bring forward a motion in Committee to call Mr. Vickileaks to testify before that committee. Despite the fact that they were warned -repeatedly- that they were trying to bring it before the wrong committee, and despite the fact that the (Conservative) Chair of the committee ruled their motion out of order (“Wrong committee, Gentlemen”), despite all of that the Conservatives on the committee – lead by the oleaginous Dean Del Mastro –  promptly voted to overturn the Chair’s ruling and proceeded to debate a motion that was clearly ‘out of order’ and thereby ensured that whatever else transpired in that committee, on that day, would be a complete and utter waste of time, money and effort. 

          Mr. Del Mastro, apparently in full recognition that he was squandering our money and our resources and was wasting the time of dozens of well-paid public servants, then decided to skip out on the meeting. Apparently he had  heard the siren call of a working video camera and, like a lemming drawn to a cliff, he was drawn away from the complete clusterfu*k of which he was the primary architecht, so that he could make a complete ass of himself in yet another venue.

          Don’t believe me, look it up.

          • LOL – All stories lead to Del Mastro.  Good to hear the committees are doing meaningful work. 

          • He probably got his inspiration from Toews, Palliser, Poilievre circa 2004/5. 

          • I guess that came from the Con manual on how to disrupt committees. Kind of sweet when they use it on their own and it backfires.

  6. I believe quarterly reports on political contributions to each of the parties will be due later this month (or April, perhaps I’m mistaken).

    In addition to seeing what the impact in polls would be, I would be most curious to see what the impact of these revelations have been on political donations – especially to the CPC (compounded with the Lawful Access bill and proposed changes to OAS).

    • And sticking it to our Vets!

  7. I anxiously await the next poll – and Wherry’s diligent reporting of same – about when Canadians think Harper stopped beating his wife.

    • I thought that the questions regarding Harper’s marriage had been resolved long ago by Norman Spector.

      • We are forbidden to discuss that – didn’t you get the memo?

    • Lovely strawman you’ve built there. Does burning it down keep you warm at night?

      • The post is about as blatant example of a push poll as you can get.  How is my musing about an even more blatant example a straw man?

        • According to your side ‘ real people’ don’t pay any attention to this sort of thing, so what’s the problem?

          • One surmises from your response you do, thereby proving the assertion.

          • I am not considered a ‘real’ person by your side. 

  8. And let’s not forget that it was the all-seeing, all-knowing Melder
    of Minds strong and stable Leader who appointed Deano for our
    enlightenment and entertainment. Surely that means something.

    • At this point, I can only think there couldn’t have been a better choice.  Good old Dean, he breaths new life into the story everytime he opens his mouth.