babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
OSCE sending team to monitor Federal Election
October 10, 2015 - 7:22pm
So we officially have a questionable electoral process. Gread job, steve.
Quote:
A team of international observers is assessing Canada's election process, including potential implications of the recently-passed Fair Elections Act and "systemic issues" that could include robocalling.
The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights sent a team to Ottawa on Oct. 5 for a two-week mission.
http://www.embassynews.ca/news/2015/10/10/osce-looking-at-impact-of-fair...
Do we really have a "questionable electoral process"? We're like some banana dictatorship now? Because nobody investigated robocalls? Because an elector can't draw a picture of themself on a piece of paper and use it as ID?
I think that this is more the result of a handful of folk practically begging for this kind of oversight to make their partisan point. Look how bad we are! How can we look down on North Korea, if voters need some kind of identification???"
This is one of the most appalling things about the Harper Era in Canada.
And one of the reasons why the Conservatives are very different than the Liberals, or even the old Progressive Conservatives.
I don't ever remember there being so much electoral fraud under any other Prime Minister, Liberal or PC.
Harper & his operatives have gone out of their way to break every election law they can.
A few months ago Alice Funke wrote a piece about the ways in which Harper re-wrote the elections laws this year to stack the deck even more in his favour against the Opposition parties.
THAT is why progressive voters must never forget that whatever flaws the Liberals & NDP may have, they are nothing like the Conservatives at the end of the day.
They were here in 2006, on a more routine mission.
This time they have specific concerns.
Yes, that makes it questionable.
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/international-group-to-monitor-ca...
You aren't concerned, Magoo? More than half the people I have spoken to has experienced some sort of glitch or mistake. Three people I know of personally have been told to vote 100 km away from where they are supposed to. Our polling station is over a km out of town on a highway, accessible only by car.
Of the three in my family who voted yesterday, all of us experienced problems.
I have always thought that CPC electoral fraud is a much, much more serious concern than the Duffy-Wright Scandal.
But the latter is much sexier & juicier to the media, so it gets almost all the coverage while the uncomfortable matter of electoral fraud gets scant attention.
So you figure that Harper finally has Elections Canada in his right pocket?
Or was there an unnoticed clause in the "Fair Elections Act" that specifies some minimum number of "glitches"?
Or what? What are these overseers supposed to look out for? More to the point, what will they be looking out for that our own electoral overseers cannot? (or... have been ordered by Harper not to?)
From the Ottawa Citizen article:
Nor should one breath easier knowing the OSCE is on the job. Crooked as a dog's hind leg. Par example, we might end up getting an equivalent to this, a heavily stacked deck of right-wingers and UCC ultranationalists openly biased in favour of the Western pro-NATO agenda , which is what Canada sent to Ukraine to do this same job.
http://ipolitics.ca/2014/05/20/canadian-election-observers-prepare-to-ta...
Harper is a sociopath.
He is obsessed with maintaining power at all costs.
As Farley Mowat told author Michael Harris, Harper is the most dangerous politician ever elected in Canada.
"What are these international observers supposed to be looking for?"
Once you are so immersed in the corrupt system, you lose any sense of what a real democracy is supposed to look like....
How about the right to vote for the candidate of your choice, instead of candidates selected or denied by a party elite...How about not allowing a Party with now over 7% support if you can believe any polls, being denied access to leadership debates?
How about the fact that there is no equal contest...who ever has the bucks gets the media coverage...or how about how can you have a fair election when the mass media is controlled by the Government, and the corporatocracy?
How about the fact that the combined media manipulation and pollster manipulation (has anyone forgot how off the polls were last time re the NDP in Quebec?) overpowers the voting system?
Let alone all the scandals of voter suppression ad nauseum!
Hey! How about the fact that the voter is not being offered a choice? AllParties being globalists, imperialists, corporatists? And if not? The silence treatment!
Yes if we can just train people to think right (brainwashing) we can just make everyone feel good about the so called non corrupt, corrupt system!
No, what we need is a grass roots movement demanding popular democracy and end to corporatocracy...
Boycott the system, boycott the corporates...build a community based decentralized economic/social system from the bottom up...ready to replace the present system...with enough support!
From my reading...people are beginning to get frustrated...mad...and after the debacle of the election results, combined with the collapsing economics? Look out!
I can't see why a party should feel obligated to support someone just because you like them. If a party doesn't support them they're still free to run for office, and you're still free to vote for them. I don't really see any need for international policing here.
Pretty much every country with a multi-party system has some sort of threshold for official party status, and there will always be a few -- or perhaps even many -- parties that don't meet that threshold. I don't really see any need for international policing here.
Any party that successfully fundraises from its supporters can have the bucks and can spend them as they wish. I don't really see any need for international policing here.
Nobody is obligated to vote for the party that the National Post endorses, or the Toronto Star endorses, or rabble.ca endorses. I don't really see any need for international policing here.
Perhaps here at rabble, but I don't personally believe the average person is glued to the polling results they way we weirdos are. I don't really see any need for international policing here.
Nonsense. There are 22 federal parties in Canada and sorry, but they're not all corporate sellouts, beholden to their neo-liberal masters. The problem is, people don't seem too interested in voting for them (preferring, as you do, to pretend that they're somehow forced to choose from only four). I don't really see any need for international policing here.
Maybe they'll be mad enough to consider giving their vote to a party other than the Cons, the Libs, or the NDP. Or, maybe they'll just shake their wee fists in the air and curse the mainstream media for making them vote Conservative again.
Anyway, I just don't see anything so horrible in our electoral system that we require someone to come from somewhere else to scold us for it. This is starting to remind me of those people who call 911 because the pizza place didn't give them the double cheese they asked for.
The reasons you discounted might not constitute electoral fraud Magoo; I share your opinion on all of them, except that some of the criminal activity in past elections, and concerns over the Fair Elections Act DO involve the fairness of party spending.
But in fact, the team did have specific concerns this time around beyond their more routine observation in 2006. I just quoted them above.
I disagree that it is a matter of pride that we don't need them here, even if they have a real concern this time. I am thankful for their presence.
Canada sends observers to monitor elections that are jsut as free and fair as those in Canada. (I've actually done this job.) Not perfect, of course, but largely fair.
Shouldn't Canada also be willing to accept international scrutiny? (Not policing - observing.) Can't Canada learn, as well as teach and preach?
@ VOTD
I don't expect that, but it is enough that they raised concerns and are here for that reason.
But didn't Canada address robocalls? Will electoral observers somehow prevent robocalls in the future?
As for campaign spending, that's just policy, isn't it? Couldn't we change that any time we want? Having electoral observers fly over from some other country to police those policies would be like flying observers over on tax filing day to "observe and monitor" our tax laws.
My sense is that the folk who are saying "Oh, yes, please please please scold us" are folk who feel that somehow if "electoral observers" say that the NDP should have endorsed Morgan Wheeldon then now they'll be shamed into having to do so. Because look at us, right? Democracy is so dead in Canada that we need an external agency to show us the way.
I don't really see any need for Canada to "teach and preach". If we need reciprocity, I'd rather we acheive it by not bothing to go monitor whether some other country's unofficial party gets the same podium time as their official parties at debates. I don't seen any more need for that than I see for this.
I'd make an exception for those countries that are genuinely unlikely to run free and fair elections. There's a world of difference between ballot boxes "disappearing" and the CBC having a clear and obvious crush on some party (insert rolly-eyes).
But funny enough, didn't Jimmy Carter proclaim Venezuela to have the bestest elections in the history of ever? Meanwhile, the opposition candidate who would otherwise be opposing the President's WIFE in Venezuela's upcoming elections is mysteriously jailed on trumped up and vague charges. Not to mention the ruling party using state-owned media as it's exclusive microphone for campaigning and electioneering.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Cuba have ONE party? The only party you can vote for in Cuba? Here in Canada we have 22, and yet some Canadians moan and groan that "we have NO CHOICE!!!". That's 21 more than Cuba, but we need international observers to monitor our supposed lack of choice.
And in the last election in Zimbabwe, there were widespread reports of opposition voters being beaten or raped for not supporting the ruling party. The main opposition leader was, himself beaten if I recall correctly. And yet I also recall plenty of babblers continuing to show support for the ruling party despite this. Not only did they not require any kind of international oversight, they didn't even require mild criticism.
Again, sorry, but you just don't call 911 because the pizza place screwed up your order. No matter how mad you are.
Who is doing that? That is kind of an odd and completely unsubstantiated way to spin it.
Or maybe you have no concern at all about possible injustice in other countries (I don't think so).
And even if you do, so what? We do have international monitors; they aren't just to rap the knuckles of "bad" countries, or tell us how much more civilized we are, and they are an important part of our global society.
(though given where Canada already stands in some international measures, I think it is no longer a question of us being among the best examples)
And it is kind of interesting how some politicians - our Mr. Harper and George Bush, to name two - get their back up when international organizations dare to look at their policies and actions.
Anyone who thinks we need international observers to educmacate us on what should constitute an official party, or to finally verify, once and for all, that the CBC is nothing more than the official communications wing of the Liberal Party.
I do. But I don't have any concern over some other country's definition of an official party. And as I noted, it seems like lots of people have a similar lack of concern over countries who have ONE party on every ballot, or countries where the ruling party can plaster their own election slogans all over polling stations. So given that, I'm supposed to welcome our international overseers?
That said, I do agree with VOTD that it's unlikely that these monitors are going to come back with a scathing list of conditions under which Canada can reasonably claim to be a democracy. But I hope that the hopeful are ready for whatever the observers DON'T say. In other words, if they find it reasonable and democratic for a party to cut ties with a guy who sneaks a quick piss in someone's mug then I hope everyone will stop their whining about candidates losing party support, and quit pretending that it's the end of democracy. The impartial, international observers will have spoken!
Okay, well I don't have a problem with our official party rules, and I don't believe everyone in the CBC is under party control. So I guess I don't qualify as one of your masochists.
I still have no problem with election monitors, and in this case, given this new law, recent cuts and proven fraud, I think it is an especially good idea.
I am curious as to why you take such an offense to it, though.
Yeah, that's what I'm curious about too. Did the OSCE pee in your cornflakes or something? I'm not sure what point is being made with the 911 pizza analogy.
Canada does teach and preach, all the time, by the way. This govenrment more than ever. So, let's learn and listen, from time to time, as well. No one is harmed by it.
Because it really reeks of the politics of desperation, the politics of last resort.
What do I mean by that?
Well, when a black(ish) Democrat wins the Presidential election, don't bother trying to find a sane and sensible Republican candidate who might beat him next time. Just question whether he was actually born in the United States, filibuster any bill he promotes, and ceaselessly refer to him using his "Muslim" middle name.
If you can't seem to convince Canadians of the merits of Proportional Representation, and they seem determined to vote against it in four different referenda from East to West, then don't bother trying to convince them any more, and consider trying to make it a Charter challenge, based on the Charter's clear language that we all have a right to STV.
And if you've been insisting for years that we have bad governments because the CBC is deeply in the pocket of the Liberals, or because parties are allowed to not support sages and truth-tellers, don't keep wasting your time trying to make your points intelligently or persuasively -- get someone to fly over from the U.K. to scold everyone who wouldn't listen to you when you said it.
For the record, I'm not going to pretend I'm actually Swedish if some observers come over to make sure we're not imprisoning opposition candidates or whatever.
I'll unpack it.
If the pizza place gets your toppings wrong, I totally get that that could be a problem for you. A LIFE SIZED problem. A problem that you, as a grownup, should be able to somehow solve or deal with without needing some external authority to fix it for you.
Last resort? What and who are you talking about?
I already posted upthread that they decided in June to send a mission. It has been in the works since May.
Magoo, you seem to be very agitated about all of this. It's just a monitoring mission. No one is planning to invade Canada. And it's the OSCE, not a crazed gang of Chavistas.
Very well. As I noted above, I'm not going to deny being Canadian -- out of shame -- because they're here. But as long as they're here to tell us what's wrong, I'll also apply "the exception proves the rule" -- that's fair, right?
But since you mention "Chavistas" now I'm curious -- do you think that imprisoning opposition candidates on vague, political charges is an electoral problem for a country, or no? And if you say "yes, it is" then what should be done about it?
Further to OSCE 'monitoring' which I referred to upthread as 'crooked as a dog's hind leg.' The OSCE monitoring mission in E Ukraine is strongly suspected of passing targeting information back to Kiev and stacking the deck on supposed 'violations' by 'rebel' forces, in favour of the West-backed Ukrainian coup regime. Locals repeatedly notice that bombing accuracy on E Ukraine targets radically improves after their visitations, and that when their villages and towns are shelled or bombed, OSCE hardly ever notices.
OSCE is well known to align itself with Western and pro-NATO interests - there is some further information on their dodgy history and activities in this older article here:
"...We should be wary about organizations like the OSCE that seek to involve themselves in our electoral process. The OSCE in particular has a terrible record in the newly democratic countries of Central Europe, where it normally operates. According to groups that follow the conduct of the OSCE, this organization does much more to undermine free elections than to promote them.
According to Paul, 'In Bosnia in 1996, for example the OSCE gave its seal of approval to parliamentary elections despite the fact that an impossible 107 percent of the possible voting age population had voted. In 1998, the OSCE observer team that was to monitor the ceasefire between the Serbs and Albanians was caught sending targeting information back to the US and European Union in advance of the US-led attacks on Serbia.
This year, the OSCE approved the election of Mikheil Saakashvili in the former Soviet Republic of Georgia with a Saddam Hussein-like 97 percent of the vote! There are dozens more examples..."
http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/19367-international-election-monit...
Did he order the truck? Because that looks like a parking lot. Why did he order seven automobiles?
I am so sorry I ordered the truck to shred Chris Alexander but apparently he did not fit in due to an appendage.
Now calm your dirty minds -- the appendage in question was apperently his ego which saved him from becoming
s
h
r
e
d
d
i
e
s
.
Like Harper, Trudeau and Mulcair - Alexander is a true servant of empire: (and vid)
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/chris-alexander-vladimir-putin-s...