As we have been saying here for quite some time now, Uber needs to be run out of town. What's not to understand about that!
Election results suggest Christy Clark misread popularity of Uber
At the risk of sounding flippant, the B.C. Liberals' ride-sharing promise appears to have been an uber miscalculation. And it cost them big time in this election.
http://www.straight.com/news/909061/election-results-suggest-christy-cla...
Martyn Brown: Bringing out the Irish in B.C. politics
It's time to examine the impact of ride-sharing on the Emerald Isle
Silence is for suckers, losers, and spectators who have no skin in the game.
http://www.straight.com/news/882816/martyn-brown-bringing-out-irish-bc-p...
It didn't take long for Kevin Falcon to surface again.
If Weaver Chooses to Ally with BC Liberals, Here’s Why
Six reasons the Green leader might just decide it’s OK to prop up the party most people voted against.
https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2017/05/12/Greens-Weaver-BC-Liberals-Ally/
Where Great Bear Rainforest Protection Is a Lie
How the Clark government let donors plunder Phillips Arm while calling it a rare grizzly bear ‘jewel.’
https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2017/05/08/Great-Bear-Rainforest-Protection-Lie/
In Courtenay-Comox, in not only the previous election, but in the 3 previous elections, the NDP were the beneficiaries of the Absentee vote.
Just sayin'
B.C.’s election outcome is still uncertain. And it’s all thanks to their bizarrely generous voting system
But when you adjust for that trend, or just look at the very close seats, you notice that the New Democrats seemed to have an additional advantage, usually on the order of a hundred net votes or so. This advantage does not seem to be particular to any part of B.C., and it explains how two close seats flipped NDP-ward in 2013’s final count. In all 32 seats where the New Democrats ended election night ahead—every single one—the absentee votes, once counted, added to the original NDP margin over the Liberals.
The Courtenay-Comox riding is a slightly shifted version of a different constituency on the old electoral map, Comox Valley. Some people have suggested that absentee ballots in the riding might lean ideologically conservative—that is, toward the Liberals—because of the presence of CFB Comox, an air base whose main business is maritime patrol and rescue. When UBC economist Kevin Milligan looked into election data this week, however, he found that the New Democrats gained from the counting of absentee votes in Comox Valley—not only in 2013, but in the two B.C. general elections before that too.
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/colby-cosh-b-c-s-election-outc...
Premier in denial after voters 'hammer' her best politicos
The preliminary post-mortems trickling out of party headquarters put the blame on identified supporters who did not, in the end, come out and vote. Such excuse-making was an embarrassing comedown for a party that at the outset of the campaign was always boasting of its superior organization and resources.
To be sure, political parties commonly put the blame on organizers for disappointing results. Perhaps a few heads will roll on the campaign team.
A more pointed critique emerged Thursday from Kevin Falcon, the second-place finisher to Clark in the 2008 leadership race. In a remarkably candid interview with Rob Shaw of The Vancouver Sun, Falcon explained why the party got “hammered” (as he put it) in Metro Vancouver and the Lower Mainland.
He cited lack of progress on transportation projects that would have benefited the entire region and blamed the government for picking an ill-advised fight with Metro Vancouver mayors. Plus there was the failure to deal with the festering controversy over campaign finances.
“I think the public recognized that B.C.’s economy is the envy of the nation, I just don’t think it was enough,” explained Falcon.
“I think the perceived ethical issues, the campaign finance issues that were never really addressed, I think that really gnawed away at people, and it bothered them and that was reflected in a negative vote.”
Falcon expressed sympathy for the woman who defeated him for the leadership — “I feel bad for the premier” — facing, as she does, a precarious balance of power in the legislature that may or may not go in her favour.
But he also faulted the Liberals for engaging in “just a little too much politics and not quite enough policy initiative,” he said. On that score, who could he be thinking of other than Clark herself?
So while the premier has so far refused to acknowledge any failings on her part in the recent setback of a campaign, it would appear that her once and perhaps future rival is not going to let her escape that easily.
http://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/vaughn-palmer-premier-in-deni...
Forget group hugs, leaders cuddle with Green's kingmaker
http://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/vaughn-palmer-forget-group-hu...
Expect Christy Clark to hang tough
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/expect-christy-clar...
The Liberals control Elections BCElections BC's logo literally says right on it "A non-partisan Office of the Legislature".
Unless you're floating some kind of "deep state" theory, or some Dale Gribble silliness.
in our community if you weren't BC Liberal partisan you couldn't get job at the polls if you wanted to.
Thanks quizzical.
As I said, let's at least try and live in the real world of dirty, rotten, scuzzy politics, eh!
Thanks quizzical.
... for that anecdote.
As I said, let's at least try and live in the real world of dirty, rotten, scuzzy politics, eh!
Show us how Elections BC follows the orders of the government of the day, eh!
I'm being serious. Put up or shut up.
By-the-way which riding was it (Jodie Wickens's riding perhaps) where the Liberals, oh sorry, Elections BC, had printed at least some of ballots with an "X" in the Liberal Candidate's box? Typo, eh. No doubt about that whatsoever!
How long can we go without the BC Ledge being recalled?
Green election surge puts B.C. in centre of climate debate: Walkom
Fledgling Greens want to fight climate change and show they are not a single-issue party
https://www.ourwindsor.ca/opinion-story/7310858-green-election-surge-put...
Should be a piece of cake for the NDP to agree. Liberals not so much.
https://news.google.ca/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theglobeandmail.c...
By-the-way which riding was it (Jodie Wickens's riding perhaps) where the Liberals, oh sorry, Elections BC, had printed at least some of ballots with an "X" in the Liberal Candidate's box? Typo, eh. No doubt about that whatsoever!
That's your proof that Elections BC report to the Liberal government?
The party in power always seems to find ways to create extra votes for themselves either through addition mistakes or doctored ballots did everyone check to ensure the ballot boxes were empty to start with Amazin'
As if that addition mistake would ever have seen the light of day had it not. Favoured the Liberals
For the Liberals, the problem with Kevin Falcon is he has a history of being a right-wing ideologue. I wouldn't call him particularly charismatic either.
Mike de Jong can't help it but he often has a clueless or slightly pissed off look on his face. I've heard he is not up-to-speed with technology.
Of the Liberal cabinet ministers, the one I'm most worried about is Todd Stone. He was so easily re-elected in bellwhether Kamloops, which I think reflects on his personal popularity in his district. Based on his performance in the last few years, in a difficult portfolio, I fear he may have the "royal jelly." He is also relatively new to the scene, first elected in 2013.
magoo the election jobs are hard sought after in economically depressed areas. advanced polling wasn't just a couple of days here in BC it was weeks worth of good pay.
The BC Liberals did not “win a minority government”.
quote:
The content of the speech that Clark delivered needs to be immediately unpacked, as does the unfortunate language most of the media is using to report the results of this election (which would cause any civics professor more than just a little pause). The BC Liberal leader gave the equivalent of a "victory speech", trying to shape the narrative into one dependent on some non-existent rule based on "the popular vote" (41% Liberal, 40% NDP, 16% Green) and "we won the most seats" (the seat count, as it stands right now, is 43 Liberal, 41 NDP, 3 Green). These two things are actually irrelevant in the case of a hung parliament. All that matters, in this case, is who can command the confidence of the legislature.
What Christy Clark is trying to do, here, is to get out ahead early in an attempt to shape the narrative to one where she could hang on to power with some legitimacy, by claiming some nonsense about winning the popular vote (and it truly is nonsense). As I mentioned above, not only is the popular vote actually irrelevant, but even if it were relevant, actually the majority of British Columbians (56%) voted for a change in government in this election.
In the week before the 2017 BC election, Alliance Against Displacement (AAD) staged an “anti-election week of action;” a massive effort to interrupt the bi-partisan attempt to bury homelessness and poverty as election issues. The week of action was made up of mobilizations of the campaigns in the communities where AAD is actively supporting community struggles against displacement, poverty, and dispossession.
The Downtown Eastside 10 Year Tent City started the week of action, by setting up tents on a city-owned lot and demanding homes not shelters. Then a news conference on the Surrey Strip refused the state strategy of policing the poor rather than eliminating poverty. And in Maple Ridge and Victoria, the Anita Place Tent City and Reeson Park campers, along with Super InTent City veterans exposed the need for homes not shelters, and for regular social housing not “supportive” institutional housing projects. Finally, the Stop Demovictions Burnaby campaign raised up a housing platform report card and a call for “the housing we need” with a mass anti-election canvassing drive, a news conference, and a public education townhall.
Rather than try to summarize the arguments and dynamics of each of these campaigns and actions, we are publishing the links to the statements, reports, and calls to action that have come out of each of these local movements. In all, they make up a powerful portrait of the reality of the politics in BC that both the NDP and Liberals want us to ignore. Homelessness, poverty, and the police state are the future awaiting us unless we refuse the pragmatism and uniform free market fundamentalism of electoral politics. The radical grassroots politics of AAD’s anti-election week of action challenge the logic of capitalism and settler colonialism, and the shallow, false promises of electoral hucksters. We encourage our readers to read these reports and statements and to support the actions that they represent....
What is going on here? The Liberal appointed Elections BC has over 150,000 ballots that have not been counted yet? Why have then not been counted by now? Where are these ballots? What are the controls in place to safeguard them? Why is that not being discussed? Why were these ballots not counted election nite, or within a day or two of the election? We have already had ballots printed up with an X beside the Liberal candidate and we have had math problems which all of a sudden favour the Liberals. What's wrong with this picture!
Obviously the behind the scenes people who actually run BC want a new leader for the Liberals as Clark failed to deliver for them.
http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-vote-was-rebuk...
What about the NDP leader? Is the NDP going to sit idly by and watch the Liberals pick an exciting new face for the next election, and do nothing themselves? That's a sure-fire way to lose the next election. Who are the possible candidates when Horgan decides to step down? Rob Fleming? Doug Routley? Spencer Herbert? Bowinn Ma? David Eby? Sel1na Robinson? How old is Harry Bains? Who Else?
Perhaps Squamish Nation put Bowinn Ma over the top! Let's not forget this.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/squamish-nation-vot...
The Liberal appointed Elections BC has over 150,000 ballots that have not been counted yet? Why have then not been counted by now?
In BC a registered voter may vote at any polling station in the province. If it's not at their home poll, it's an abentee ballot. These cannot be counted on election night because the ballots have to be sent back to confirm that the voter is registered at their home poll and has not already voted. There is nothing new about this, last election was the same.
So Elections BC accepted the Liberal recount requests but not the ones from the NDP. Just amazin' how every single thing Elections BC does appears to favour the Liberals.
Liberal pre-marked ballots
Math that favours the Liberals
And now the recounts.
Elections B.C. probes Liberal Party fundraising
Any thoughts on that? Doesn't really support your unsupportable theory that Elections BC reports to Clark, NR.
Maybe it's just pretend... to throw the Sheeple off the trail.
The NDP has asked for a recount in 3 Liberal won seats. What's the criteria to have a recount?
Always happy to lay out the facts. It is automatic for Courtenay Comox because of the closeness. The NDP in the other three ridings must be making specific claims about "errors" in the count. Don't worry NR it goes to a Judge although the Liberals have appointed a lot of Judges. When it comes to a judicial recount there is no doubt in my mind the system will work properly.
Judicial recount – election
A judicial recount is conducted by the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and may include some or all of the ballots and certification envelopes for an election. A voter, candidate, candidate’s representative or District Electoral Officer may make an application for a judicial recount if they believe errors were made in the acceptance or rejection of certification envelopes or ballots, or if the ballot account is not correct. In the event of a tie vote, or if the difference between the first two candidates is less than 1/500 of the total ballots considered, the District Electoral Officer must make an application for a judicial recount. An application must be made within six days after the declaration of official results following the conclusion of final count. [s.139-143]
Appeal of judicial recount
A candidate in an election may appeal the decision of the Supreme Court to the Court of Appeal. An appeal must be commenced within two days after the results of a judicial recount are declared. The time set for the hearing of the appeal must be no later than 10 days after the Court of Appeal receives the notice of appeal. [s. 144-145]
It is interesting that Vancouver False Creek is getting a recount while closer races aren't. They found a serious problem, I guess.
magoo the election jobs are hard sought after in economically depressed areas. advanced polling wasn't just a couple of days here in BC it was weeks worth of good pay.
OK. But I'm not certain what I said that you're replying to. Was it when I said "follow the money"?
"Follow the money" is just a conspiracy theory heuristic, and pretty much a cliche. I'm not opposed to anyone working on an election.
[quote=Mr. Magoo]magoo the election jobs are hard sought after in economically depressed areas. advanced polling wasn't just a couple of days here in BC it was weeks worth of good pay.
OK. But I'm not certain what I said that you're replying to. Was it when I said "follow the money"?
"Follow the money" is just a conspiracy theory heuristic, and pretty much a cliche. I'm not opposed to anyone working on an election.[/quote]
you thanked me for my ancedotal info.
i'm telling you if it's here at our polling station it's throughout Elections BC. i'm betting every polling station and the head office have all staff BC Liberal.
Much appreciated... I wasn't sure what you were referring to.
But now you've assured us that unless you're ready to be part of Team Clark, you can't get arrested in this town. No good-paying job for you unless you're willing to make tiny little dots on ballots, AS CHRISTY DEMANDS.
And someone please correct me if I'm wrong -- seriously, please do -- but do not all parties have the right to appoint a scrutineer at all polling stations, to ensure that their interests aren't thwarted, by, say, some Liberal-appointed and Liberal-payed official of Elections BC throwing non-Liberal ballots in the green bin?
Last time I checked Scrutineers were not guarding the absentee ballots until they are counted.
I saw some NDP'ers working the polling station in my town although I didn't know all of them so I have no idea what the other workers' politics were.
If our District Electoral Officers are trying to rig the election then we are way further down the rabbit hole than I thought. Here is a link to the list if anyone wants to research who they are. Ultimately they are responsible for keeping ballot boxes safe from tampering by locking them up.
By-the-way which riding was it (Jodie Wickens's riding perhaps) where the Liberals, oh sorry, Elections BC, had printed at least some of ballots with an "X" in the Liberal Candidate's box? Typo, eh. No doubt about that whatsoever!
Were those actual ballots or sample ballots?
By-the-way which riding was it (Jodie Wickens's riding perhaps) where the Liberals, oh sorry, Elections BC, had printed at least some of ballots with an "X" in the Liberal Candidate's box? Typo, eh. No doubt about that whatsoever!
Were those actual ballots or sample ballots?
They were actual ballots but the mistake was caught before the election and all the parites were told about it and protocols were put in place in case some of them got used inadvertently.
http://vancouversun.com/news/politics/b-c-election-2017-ballots-misprint...
Of course the Lieutenant-Governor has the authority to do as you say. However, I have a sneaking suspicion that the L-G would rather leave it to the legislature to decided who the government will be. We can look at the two recent minority Conservative federal governments to see how things may go here.
It is absolutely up to the L-G to decide who may test the confidence of the legislature by presenting a throne speech and trying to get a majority of MLAs to vote in favour of it. Nobody may do this without the approval of the L-G; and generally some proof that the confidence of the legislature can be obtained, is needed.
From Left Turn:
This is not quite how it happens. Because the Liberals have the most seats, Christy Clark gets the first chance to convince the Lieutenant-Governor that she can form a government. The Lieutenant governor gets to decide if she thinks Clark can form a government. If she thinks Clark can form a government, she will ask Clark to present a throne speech. If the Lieutenant-Governor does not think that Clark can form a government, she would then meet with John Horgan and give him a chance to convince her that he can form a government.
That's not how it works. The fact that the Liberals have two more seats than the NDP has nothing to do with who the LG asks to form a government. Because Christy Clark is the incumbent premier she continues to be premier until she either resigns or is dismissed. Even if the seat count was reversed and the NDP had 43 seats and the Liberals had 41 - Clark as the incumbent would still have the first shot at trying to pass a Throne Speech and forming a minority government
By convention, as the incumbent, Clark gets the first chance to convince the L-G that she can obtain the confidence of the legislature, regardless of how many seats she has. If she can convince the L-G that she can obtain the confidence of the house, the L-G will ask Clark to present a throne speech. If the L-G does not think that Clark can obtain the confidence of the legislature, she will not ask Clark to present a throne speech.
If it is obvious that Clark cannot obtain the confidence of the house, she will not try to convince the L-G that she can.
If Clark cannot convince the L-G that she can gain the confidence of the legislature, but Horgan can, the L-G will ask Horgan to present a throne speech, WITHOUT giving Clark the chance to present one.
NOBODY is allowed to present a throne speech without being asked to by the L-G.
If the L-G thinks that NOBODY can obtain the confidence of the legislature, she could send us back into another election without askingg anybody to present a throne speech.
Incumbency and election results, on their own, entitle NOBODY to present a throne speech!!!
On CBC radio Vancouver they had a guest (Friday am?) who spoke about the problems with our minority government conventions. Often they are interpretted in different ways and often they are ignored. New Zealand, Britain and Australia have all codified their rules and we should also. The guest said they have a list of 10 suggested rules, but I can't for the life of me remember which group he was from. Anyone else listen to the show?
Elections BC's logo literally says right on it "A non-partisan Office of the Legislature".
Oh, well, that settles it then.
The BC Liberals have stacked every other government branch and agency with their own, I'm not sure how Elections BC could be immune. Even if no one is appointed, it's very easy to influence hiring.
I wouldn't be worried about ground level staffers, but decisions higher up could certainly influence things. We know it happens elsewhere. Why would anyone assume it couldn't happen here?
What could Election BC do realistically. Hasn't it been said in this thread that the NDP has a history of winning the absentee ballot count? Weren't the already voted ballots a printing error and therefore not pencil and by definition spoiled. And how would they get into the ballot box in a way that would would keep the ballot total matching the voter log book?
I totally believe that Christy is corrupt and is capable of corrupting people around her. The voting system however has evolved with layers of scrutiny because Christy is far from the first corrupt politician. Let's focus on the ample examples of CC abusing power, gaming the system and just being a shitty human being. We don't need to look far. There is no need to invent stuff.
On CBC radio Vancouver they had a guest (Friday am?) who spoke about the problems with our minority government conventions. Often they are interpretted in different ways and often they are ignored. New Zealand, Britain and Australia have all codified their rules and we should also. The guest said they have a list of 10 suggested rules, but I can't for the life of me remember which group he was from. Anyone else listen to the show?
Short of changing BC's constitution to rewrite the rules around how governments are formed following elections, the L-G retains 100% control over who may test the confidence of the legislature, and is bound by NO conventions, however established they may be.
