B.C. Election 2013

[George+]

Green votes usually drop from polls, on Election Day,
As people realize they could get the Liberals again.

[fluffy]

Or they'll climb as people realize they've got garbage to chose from?

[Logitack]

susanne anton tweeting today.... apparently it is against the law for candidates to be electioneering/campaigning, even on twitter! LOL

[Veovis]

I had never heard of that rule before.

I think it's pretty funny.

Either that or someone funny made an account called elections BC and is running around having fun.

Either way I'm amused.

[Logitack]

anton has now deleted all her tweets from today LOL

[Logitack]

The penalty for breaking the law could include up to a $10,000 fine and a year in jail. “The penalties are up to the chief electoral officer’s discretion,” said Ken Faris ( Elections B.C. spokesman). “Since the B.C. Liberals responded to our request (to take the offending tweets down), we’re not going to pursue the issue any further.”
http://adultaddstrengths.com/2009/05/12 ... ction-act/

[maple leaf]

Thats pretty good ,the leader doesn't even know how to vote and the candidates don't know the rules about electioneering.
Does anyone know what the penalty is for a party if they over spend during the writ period.The Liberals had ad's on Global news every night 5-6 time per hour, if not more and last night every 5-10 minutes and that was just Global.They say money buys an election ,we will see I guess.The next one will be on a more fare playing field if the NDP wins and puts a stop to corporate and Union donations.

[LoneWolf_53]

The next one will be on a more fare playing field if the NDP wins and puts a stop to corporate and Union donations.

I'd have to see that to believe it, and by see it, I mean it's still a donation even if it's been craftily laundered somehow, and found it's way to the party via the back door.

[Veovis]

I think what you will end up seeing is just like what the unions often already do. Put out flyers, ads, TV spots etc all against "everyone but this guy", but we're not endorsing this guy, just denouncing all the rest.

Except we'll see it on a completely increased scale.

Then if those rules do get pushed in, watch for legal battles that show they are unbalanced on one side verses the other to tie it up.

Then a bunch of other silliness I imagine.

[LoneWolf_53]

Yep sounds about like what I'd expect. I mean look at how they already flaunt the rules openly, and seemingly without any sense of impunity.

As an example if the BCTF takes out ads which do all but point blank say go and vote NDP, it's still a political contribution/involvement on the behalf of the NDP.

I'm sure you're correct in that there will be legal challenges, undoubtedly many of them, and at tax payers expense of course, oh, and studies, don't forget the studies.

[flamingfingers]

..and studies, don't forget the studies.

Preferable to look at the situation and ramifications of certain decisions rather than the "Ready, Fire, Aim" approach that has maintained over the past especially 2 years..

[Urbane]

Thats pretty good ,the leader doesn't even know how to vote and the candidates don't know the rules about electioneering.

Are you referring to Dix campaigning at the seniors' centre where the advance poll was or do you give him a free pass for that?

[Urbane]

Preferable to look at the situation and ramifications of certain decisions rather than the "Ready, Fire, Aim" approach that has maintained over the past especially 2 years..

So are you saying that Dix should have waited for the study to be completed, as he had promised, rather than break his promise with "Ready, Fire, Aim" re Kinder Morgan?

[Veovis]

Spending 20 million on a study vs 20 million on a system that didn't work great. I'll take the later simply since at least some services were provided and not just a "study".

A study won't feed any of the poor, or educate children.

None the less with the election rules, corporations currently give to political parties and say "here ya go" union give and say "that's it" *nudge* *nudge* *wink* *wink* and then spend more.

Take them both out of play and you will have the corporations writing their own attack ads with far less recourse than elected officials would have, but just like the unions don't "support the NDP" with their ads neither would the companies that put out ads.

I think it would get a lot uglier than it already is and people would hate it a lot more.

The problem with change is it's not always for the better, what sounds good can often be a nightmare. Currently I think there are better places to spend out money than on studies that may not really have impact on the things that really matter. Those things are best left for the more prosperous times that come and go.

Heck isn't Walter Grey in because a lot of people in Kelowna got tired of how much was being spent on studies by city hall?

[LoneWolf_53]

..and studies, don't forget the studies.

Preferable to look at the situation and ramifications of certain decisions rather than the "Ready, Fire, Aim" approach that has maintained over the past especially 2 years..

So where were the studies before the Fast Ferry fiasco was allowed to happen?

Didn't look like they cared much about studies in that example, where the agenda was to create jobs for unions regardless the cost, or cautions given. It was full speed ahead, despite being warned by experts, of problems that needed to be addressed.

Are studies a good idea for all decisions, or just the ones where the NDP are looking to employ a few of their friends, and in the process also put off the decision making for a few decades? I mean history seems to show the NDP swinging both ways, depending on the wind.

One would have to be blind to not take note the NDP studies kick in any time there's an issue they wish to stall, or there's some party faithful that could use an income, or as is often the case, both, as they view it as a way to kill two birds with one stone. I sure don't need another NDP term in office to figure that one out.