Voter fraud reported in Ontario

Kitchener-Waterloo and apparently a Winnipeg riding as well.

Well, it seems the "religious right" has allowed themselves to yet again be corrupted and tarnished morally by affiliation with the Straussian crowd.

The Liberals have no money to do this...so...we all know who likes to hang around with fraud artists.

So, does anyone work in "law enforcement" and can answer the question ... how hard is it to do what is portrayed in all the police procedural shows and "dump" the phone records so that the origin of the calls can be traced?

On the topic of voter fraud: I notice that Elections Canada has, yet again, NOT taken out advertisements in the media clearly outlining sections 132-134 of the Elections Act:

Quote:

132. (1) Every employee who is an elector is entitled, during voting hours on polling day, to have three consecutive hours for the purpose of casting his or her vote and, if his or her hours of work do not allow for those three consecutive hours, his or her employer shall allow the time for voting that is necessary to provide those three consecutive hours.

Time at convenience of employer

(2) The time that the employer shall allow for voting under subsection (1) is at the convenience of the employer.

Transportation companies

(3) This section and section 133 do not apply to an employee of a company that transports goods or passengers by land, air or water who is employed outside his or her polling division in the operation of a means of transportation, if the additional time referred to in subsection (1) cannot be allowed without interfering with the transportation service.

No penalty for absence from work to vote

133. (1) No employer may make a deduction from the pay of an employee, or impose a penalty, for the time that the employer shall allow for voting under subsection 132(1).

Hourly, piece-work or other basis of employment

(2) An employer who pays an employee less than the amount that the employee would have earned on polling day, had the employee continued to work during the time referred to in subsection 132(2) that the employer allowed for voting, is deemed to have made a deduction from the pay of the employee, regardless of the basis on which the employee is paid.

Prohibition

134. No employer shall, by intimidation, undue influence or by any other means, interfere with the granting to an elector in their employ of the three consecutive hours for voting, as provided for in section 132.

I remember raising this (the importance of EC publicizing this information) with the returning officer for my riding (Calgary Centre) on more than one occasion. Indeed, at an all party meeting (at the time Reform, Progressive Conservative, NDP and Liberal) called by the returning officer shortly after 2000 election both the Reform and PC representatives agreed on the importance of this (the Liberal was vehemently opposed) and requested action be taken on it. I was pressing that the information be included on the voter registration card sent to all eligible voters.

This is of particular concern with staggered voting hours, and of particular concern in Western Canada:

Quote:

Newfoundland Time Zone: 8:30 am - 8:30 pm
Atlantic Time Zone: 8:30 am - 8:30 pm
Eastern Time Zone: 9:30 am - 9:30 pm
*Central Time Zone: 8:30 am - 8:30 pm
*Mountain Time Zone: 7:30 am - 7:30 pm
Pacific Time Zone: 7:00 am - 7:00 pm

Given the "traditional" 9-5 working day, it is simply not possible for an average working voter in the west of the country to have the three consecutive hours required under the Act unless they are allowed to come in late or leave early. And yet Elections Canada consistently refuses to publicize the "right" of the workers to have and the "responsibility" of the employers to allow for these three hours. Talk about vote suppression.

It's not so easy to track down where these are coming from. It's fairly easy to spoof a from phone number - look at the tricks telemarketers play to get their message through. Seeing as this is illegal, I have no doubt there is a nice bit of subterfuge about the locations the calls are coming from. It's easy and fairly cheap to just fake the whole thing.

I don't believe I got this call, but then again, we don't answer the phone unless we KNOW who it is.

Elections Canada warns of false poll location information

Quote:

A few hours before Sunday's late announcement from Washington DC that Osama bin Laden had been killed by the U.S. military, when this extraordinary Canadian election was still the lead story in the Canadian corporate media, the CBC published this doozy of a development:

"Elections Canada is warning voters not to trust anyone but the agency itself [ie. Elections Canada] about where they should vote on Monday after reports that some voters are being told to go to the wrong polling stations -- some up to an hour away from their homes."

The full story can be read here.

Harper just finished talking on a punjabi radio station in BC and told audience how a con govt will be better than an NDP govt.

And I thought nobody was allowed to campaign today. Guess rules dont apply to the Dear Leader

Except , of course that all three leadership candidates are campaigning today, according to the news

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/05/02/cv-elec... Canada strikes back[/url]

Not just in Ontario is this happening

Quote:

Reports are coming in from key swing ridings in Ontario and other other provinces that voters are being called at home with false information that their voting locations have changed, and in some instances sending voters an hour in the wrong direction.

Spokeswoman Francine Bastien said Elections Canada has confirmed that complaints are coming in from several key ridings - ridings many are aware that are important to the success of Stephen Harper and the Conservatives.

http://www.examiner.com/canada-headlines-in-canada/canada-election-hampe...

Unlike the US, caller ID phone spoofing is not illegal or regulated in Harper's  "law and order" Canada--but the resulting election fraud is illegal

No doubt encouraged by what might be seen as a "pilot project" in Saanich-Gulf Islands last election where investigations of spoofed calls ( falsely leading back to NDP headquarters) were dropped both by Elections Canada and the RCMP for the most specious of reasons.

http://thetyee.ca/News/2009/03/20/PhoneFraudCharge/

I, and many acquaintances received these messages which I can attest were very professional and well crafted.

Tommy_Paine wrote:

It would be interesting to know if the people called had a commonality.   Maybe they all lived in a poll that voted heavily for a certain party.  Maybe their names came off a canvassing list, and were specifically targeted by the preference they might have given.

I would not jump to any conclusions about who may be behind it, until we see information along those lines.

Guelph, Kitchener-Waterloo and Winnipeg South Centre were all Tory/Liberal or Liberal/Conservative marginals in the last election(two won by the Libs, the other by the Cons).

Our polling station workers were running by their own set of rules.  The woman in front of us was told that she could not vote despite showing her voter card and her drivers license.  She had brought not only her baby but her two pre-school kids along so she hadn't bothered to bring a purse or any other ID.  The poll worker was extremely rude and kept insisting that if the woman did not have more ID, that she should leave because she would not be permitted to vote.  Luckily, when I picked up our voting cards off the counter as we headed out to vote, I inadvertantly picked up the pamphlet detailing ID requirements, in which it is clearly stated that a piece of government issued photo ID with an address on it is sufficient - it even uses the example of a driver's license.  I showed it to the poll worker who still insisted that was not correct.  We finally got the supervisor of the station to come over and he confirmed that, in his mind, a driver's license alone was not sufficient despite the pamphlet clearly stating that it was - WTF?  Finally, my husband pulled out his cell phone and said he was going to call the RCMP to report a case of electoral fraud (not that the RCMP would have come or would have done anything) and the supervisor relented, allowing the woman to vote.  Of course by this time she was very flustered, her kids were screaming and crying, etc. so I wouldn't be surprised if she didn't bother voting next time.  What was maybe the funniest part of the episode was that when I showed my voter card and my driver's license, the worker asked me for an additional piece of ID - WTF!  Despite having more ID, I just stared her down until she handed me the ballot.

The other thing that was very strange at our polling station was that there were all the tables for the different poll numbers, but all of them had no voters going to them whereas our table had a really long line-up.  When we arrived, there were 30-40 people lined up ahead of us (and after the fiasco with the woman in front of us) it was much longer than that when we left, yet still there were no voters at the other tables.  It's not a big deal at all but we just can't figure out why there never were any voters at the other poll numbers during the 45 minutes or more that we were there yet the line for our poll number just kept getting longer.

So, in spite of there being a Conservative majority now, I'm curious if any culprits will be found for these instances of phone-based fraud.

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Those who received the calls-- can you remember being canvassed? That could be the source.

You can match phone numbers to addresses easily. A canvasser records who tells them they won't vote for them, who has a sign for another party. Once matched up with a phone list you can now target the opposing party for the fraud and leave your votes in place. If you disrupt 5% that should be enough to flip a close race.

We received a call in Guelph telling us our polling station had been changed to a location on the other side of the city. They were saying on the local radio station that later in the day the message changed to one saying that the polls were already closed.

What is particularly interesting to me is that as far as we could tell, the technology used was exactly the same (right down to the same strange scratchy sound) as was used in some phony polls conducted prior to the last general election. Those calls, it was reported, originated from an automatic dialer owned by the brother of Tory MP Rod Bruinooge, from Winnipeg. That voice message also changed, oddly, halfway through the poll, just as this message apparently changed halfway through the day for no apparent reason. NB we also found out recently that in the last election, three Alberta ridings actually bankrolled the Conservative candidate in Guelph.

I was canvassed in fact and had a lovely chat with that pleasant gentleman in which I explained that we could never in a million years vote Conservative. (I didn't mention that his candidate was among the worst of the lot.) In my case I'm not sure if my phone number would be easily associated with my address. But I do know that our Liberal incumbent has my phone number, because he had to intercede for me with StatsCan. So there may have been a leak.

Kara wrote:

Our polling station workers were running by their own set of rules.

As a DRO, the first thing I ask for is a drivers license (or equivalent). I think most would prefer that, especially if they are really busy. It stands alone as a valid piece of ID. The voting card is handy for everyone but is not actually a piece of ID. Unless it appeared fake or something, no DRO in their right mind would turn down a drivers license.

I talked to a trainer of DROs and Poll Clerks. In our area, most were new this election and received insufficient training. In the polling station where I worked, half the DROs failed to seal the ballot boxes incorrectly and it was obvious. An incorrectly sealed ballot box is something a Supervisor should catch right way. But even our Supervisor was inexperienced (this may have been his first time working in a polling station), poorly trained, and had to lean on the few experienced workers various times through the day.

One poll worker fell asleep for at least fifteen minutes, while other poll workers and voters uncomfortably looked on. I caught the poll clerk in my station crossing off wrong names a couple of times, and I had to make sure he entered stuff correctly. He was a bright young man too, just poorly trained. I know stuff was being done wrong all around me but I was too busy to concern myself.

What I would suggest is some sort of test (perhaps online) for new polling station staff, to ensure they know their jobs. Even for experienced staff because this is something you do for one day every few years, and stuff is easily forgotten.

These days, if someone loses a close race, they should definately pursue a recount as there are certainly more mistakes than there used to be.

Lachine Scot wrote:

Admittedly the address on all my government ID didn't match my voting location.  Is that an exception to your statement "DRO in their right mind would turn down a drivers license" ?

Were you on the voters list?

Lachine Scot wrote:

Yes, I was.

Actually, being the list might not matter in this case. It sounds like the DRO was correct, your drivers license alone wasn't enough. You may have had something else with your address, like insurance for a vehicle, that might have made the process quicker.

Often a spouse, friend or neighbour will vouch in a situation like this. If such a person is around.

This page explains it better than I can:

http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=ids&document=index&...

Polling station misinformation calls were reported in BC too. It was reported on CBC radio throughout the day. Not sure about which riding.

I don’t think the ID rules are onerous, actually, but they need to be better publicized (—a list on the Voter Information Card) and the people interpreting them to be a) familiar with them and b) honest. I worked as a DRO Monday and there was only one person I wasn’t able to give a ballot, but given what we’ve seen of their flexible interpretation of right and wrong, I hate to think how many people might have been sent packing by DROs who were ethically disordered Con supporters.