5846 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

You don't think the Greens will take Victoria, but Saanich will?

[lanforod]

Oh c'mon, I'm sure you can tell the difference between Saanich-GI and Esquimalt-JDF (that part I messed up with the JDF, oops). I've added Cowichan.

 

My goofs, thanks for pointing them out 

 

I live in Saanich. So I was looking for Saanich + some other places. I knew it wasn't Saanich GI, so I actually went and looked up what those other places were on the riding name, and saw its Esquimalt, Sooke. So made the correct educated guess.

Sometomes you don't like to admit you screwed up eh?

[Benezet]

A lot of his supporters maintain he was forced to be a witness...

Do you have anything to back up your claim?

[Mike K.]

Do you have anything to back up your claim?

 

Sure, it's all over the place. Ask a Rankin supporter about Bilcon and they'll tell you he had no choice but to testify, and that's what David Broadland's post is all about on the previous page.  VV's Facebook page was inundated with similar comments as well when we shared Focus' article. You're welcome to look those comments up at http://www.facebook....vibrantvictoria

[HB]

Green has some momentum in Victoria but I thing the base is mainly Orange

[Benezet]

You're welcome to look those comments up at http://www.facebook....vibrantvictoria

Sorry, the post you mentioned Is not to be found.

[Mike K.]

It's there, but you'll have to go back a week.

[Benezet]

It's there, but you'll have to go back a week.

I did that. Oh well.

[Mike K.]

Here you go: https://www.facebook...53644991354362/

 

There's also a lot of similar commentary in the comments section of all sorts of articles raising this issue.

 

Comments from VV's Facebook page are below. As you can see,Rankin's supporters appear to be very misinformed over this issue and believe all he did was appear as a witness, not that he'd accepted work on behalf of Bilcon first, and was only subsequently called up as a witness as a result of his employment and the conclusions he reached.

 

"He was only participating as an expert witness about the process."

 

"You mean he gave legal testimony?! What a bastard! What was he supposed to do? Lie?"

 

"Murray was acting as a Lawyer." - yes, he is a lawyer, but no, he's not Bilcon's lawyer

 

Maybe not every member of the public understands what an expert witness is, or the fact Rankin had no choice in the matter when summoned - oh he had a choice. He chose to get accept paid work from Bilcon.

 

"Way to spread disinformation. Keep up the shitty work."

 

"It's easy to see there is no inconsistency between his role as an expert witness and his not supporting ISDS in trade agreements." - again with the expert witness stuff. 

 

"This kind of misinformation and willful misinterpretation of this fact is very bizarre." - no misinformation. But the truth does put Rankin in an odd spot.

 

"Excuse me - his expert testimony was written about the Joint Review Panel's decision under the authority of the EA Act and the jurisdiction of that tribunal. So yes, it has everything to do with the EA Act, and the reason his expert opinion was sought." - his expert opinion was paid for by Bilcon. It wasn't sought because some court needed his testimony.

 

"Not sure what the intention of this post is, without including context it comes across as a condemnation of his actions, which have been grossly misinterpreted." - if you're in support of Rankin, I'm sure you'd like to believe the facts are misinterpreted.

 

The following comment comes from a guy that had to be banned after going on a bit of a rampage (those comments are not reproduced here). A grown man, no less:

 

"Wow, VibrantVictoria; could you be more partisan? He was called as an expert witness. Shitty reporting."

 

VV's response: "You're welcome to think that, but we're posting an article published by Focus Magazine. We're not reporting this story, only sharing it just as we would a story on other candidates. This is an article of interest to many Victorians."

 

"Shitty reporting, shitty excuses. That's like me reposting an article from a Nazi website and saying, "What? It's not me! Don't shoot the messenger!" Amateurs."

 

Sometimes the truth hurts.

[sam]

The dialogue on VV's FB page is much like that on other FB pages, like Rankin's and Robert's, for example. Kind of an echo chamber, same people opposing and defending. In general, both sides misrepresented the issue to some degree, but the misrepresentation that Rankin was “compelled to testify in court” seems organized. A NAFTA tribunal in not a court. Rankin was not compelled to testify just because he was “an expert witness.”

 

The role of an “expert witness” in such a proceeding has been misrepresented in many pro-Rankin comments on social media. Bilcon would have been looking for an opinion that would support its claim. Rankin would have understood that. Rankin provided an opinion, not “the truth” as so many FB commenters have put it. The dissenting tribunal judge, Professor Donald McRae, explicitly disagreed with the opinion Rankin provided. Neither were telling “the truth” and neither were lying. They were both giving their opinions. Rankin was never compelled to provide that opinion. He was paid to provide that opinion. So was McRae.

 

At the time Rankin agreed to work for Bilcon (through Appleton), Denise Savoie was about one year into her second term as MP. Did Rankin have any expectation that he would get an opportunity to run for Savoie's seat? The timing suggests not. The NDP likely were aware of his Bilcon connection when he was vetted as a candidate. That it wasn't a problem for the NDP says a lot about their current claim of concern about Investor-State Dispute Settlement tribunals in trade agreements.

 

Maria Manna lost her candidacy when she was held to account for something she wrote on FB. Same thing with Cheryl Thomas. Rankin's opinion, expressed in a different setting, will have actual consequences for Canadian taxpayers and the environment. Should Rankin be similarly held accountable for the opinion he expressed?  

 

David Broadland

[Mike K.]

Can you imagine if a Conservative candidate had engaged in this process? Rankin's supporters and the NDP would be all over it.

[Princess Chica]

Can you imagine if a Conservative candidate had engaged in this process? Rankin's supporters and the NDP would be all over it.

murray rankin "chose" to work for Bilcon and the NDP continues to put a spin on that ,suggesting that he had no choice, I am at least satisfied that the story got out, and at least some people ( my-self included ) have changed their vote from NDP to Green....in fact this story encouraged me to get out and volunteer for Jo-Ann Roberts and the Green party in Victoria

[Mike K.]

Not that it holds any real-world weight, but it is interesting that so far out of 28 member-only responses to the election poll 13 are in support of the Green party. In second place is a tie between the Cons and the NDP, each with 7.

[pherthyl]

Not that it holds any real-world weight, but it is interesting that so far out of 28 member-only responses to the election poll 13 are in support of the Green party. In second place is a tie between the Cons and the NDP, each with 7.

Funny how interested you are in this poll when you put so little stock in national polling that you predict a Harper majority.

[Mike K.]

I'm curious about the collective mood of VV's members. I'm not using the results to make any sort of prediction.

 

National polls can be very misleading as we saw in the BC election a couple of years ago.

[jklymak]

I'm not really clear on the Rankin controversy, and I'm by no means a supporter of his. If Canada is to have trade and industry then companies need to be treated fairly and the nationality of the company has nothing to do with it. Rankin need not approve of the particular environmental law or the particular plans of a company to testify that they were not treated fairly by the process. The guy was doing his job as a lawyer and I don't think that fact disqualifies him or makes him disloyal to Canada in any way shape or form.

Edited by jklymak, 18 October 2015 - 11:20 AM.

[Mike K.]

If we were to follow past predictions, Danielle Smith with the Wildrose would have been elected premier of Alberta in 2012.

 

In B.C., the NDP would have won by a landslide in 2013 over Christy Clark and the federal conservatives wouldn’t have waltzed to a majority victory in 2011.

 

“Sample sizes are getting smaller and smaller, fewer and fewer people are answering polls,” Taras said. “And then you know people don’t tell the truth. Most people tell people they’re going to vote but then many Canadians don’t vote.

 

http://globalnews.ca...ity-government/

 

Interesting idea in the article, that counting lawn signs on private property may be a much more accurate means of predicting support then calling a bunch of random folks who may say they support one party over another but won't actually show up to vote.

[sebberry]

http://thinkpol.ca/2...ction-in-a-row/

 

 

Conservatives facing criminal investigation over election law violation for the 4th election in a row

 

The Conservative Party of Canada is facing a criminal investigation over allegations that one of its candidates ordered senior members of his campaign team to tear down opponents’ election signs while putting up his own, making it the fourth time in as many elections that the ruling party has come under a criminal probe over election law violations.

The Peel Regional Police has launched an investigation over the incident that was caught on camera by a Liberal volunteer on Tuesday night, Detective Paul McNairn confirmed last evening.

 

[...]

 

[Mike K.]

Stephen Lewis, former head of the Ontario NDP, is in Victoria today where he just gave a speech at Rankin's HQ on Yates.

"They verge on angelic perfection," Lewis said about Rankin and Garrison.

[bluefox]

I'm predicting a Liberal plurality of seats and votes, and hopefully they work with the NDP so we don't end up back at the polls in a year or two. I personally would love to see a coalition government with the best ideas of both parties put into action, but for some reason Canadian governments have historically been coalition-averse.

 

Nationally, my guess is we'll see roughly:

• 135 Liberals;
• 100 Conservatives;
• 90-100 NDP;
• 1-2 Greens;
• 1 of those Forces et Démocratie incumbents;
• A couple of independents, and;
• Anywhere between 1-10 Bloc MPs.

The final NDP and Bloc numbers depend on what happens in Quebec, as historically, if the Liberals gain popularity there, so do the Bloc. The Bloc are in a position right now where they could gain a bunch of seats back or, just as likely, be completely wiped off the map. The NDP did so well last time in Quebec because they were (correctly) positioned as a bridge between federalist Quebecers and traditional social-democratic separatists that felt voting for the Bloc was fruitless. If the NDP can't hold onto them, those two groups will diverge back to the Liberals or the Bloc.

 

In the Capital Region:

• Victoria (NDP hold): I could see Jo-Ann squeaking out a win over Murray Rankin. She's definitely in second but I feel like Galloway's showing in 2012 was the result of latent May-mania left over from the election the year before. The Greens have really tried to capitalize on that spill-over again by trying to convince people that they're really voting for Elizabeth May, and the Liberal candidate dropping out is a wild card that could swing the seat, but I don't think it'll be enough to bring down Rankin, who, objectively, is one of the best MPs Victoria's ever had.
• Saanich-Gulf Islands (Green hold): The Conservatives seemed to be increasingly confident over the course of the campaign that they could steal this seat back. A couple of people connected to the Tory campaign said in late September that they were transferring resources in from other ridings, so they obviously feel they are close enough. Also, apparently, the Boyd campaign has ID'd more voters than Lunn's campaign did in 2011. May will still win but it could be an interesting night.
• Esquimalt-Saanich-Sooke (NDP hold): There seems to be some confusion over who's in second since the riding boundaries changed. I would say it's more likely that David Merner or Frances Litman is second rather than Shari Lukens, but that wouldn't have been the case at the start of the campaign. Lukens is a prototypical Conservative candidate but, ironically, an odd choice for a party that almost won the seat in 2011 and was probably targeting it at the outset. If voters here want to prevent a Conservative win, they'll coalesce around Randall Garrison and re-elect him. I don't think he's in much danger anyway.
• Cowichan-Malahat-Langford (NDP hold): As above, now that the boundaries have changed on the West Shore, the question is who's really in the race. Another solid choice by the Greens, but this is an orange-blue race now that Langford is a significant contributor to the demographic makeup of the riding. I think Alistair MacGregor will eke out a win, but I don't buy that he's as far ahead of his competition as the polls are suggesting.

Edited by bluefox, 18 October 2015 - 12:11 PM.