| Posted by Jesus Died For Somebody's Sins |
10/28/2006 12:36 AM | remove |
I believe the answer was "non", twice actually.
|
 |
| Posted by nostra-YOUPPI! |
10/28/2006 4:07 AM | remove |
and factor in the fact that it was so close and some predominatly english neighborhoods voted oui and when a recount was requested the ballots went missing!
|
|
| Posted by Charlie_Dunver |
10/28/2006 5:27 AM | remove |
"predominately english neighborhood voted oui".
I d love to hear more about that. LOL!
|
|
| Posted by nostra-YOUPPI! |
10/28/2006 2:31 PM | remove |
there were a few reports, also the first time in canadian history that they didnt require people from multiple parties at the tables to make it a non partisan vote. In a federal election you have the scrutateur representing the party who is elected in the circumscription and the ADRO represents the party who came in second in the previous election. That way any descisions on ballot rejection are made by people representing different parties, it wasnt the case in the 95 referendum, Also in a federal and provincial election those other people at the table are volunteers from any political party who wants a volunteer present. in 95 they were denied access to many polling stations because they were "too small" there were a lot of irregularities in that vote.
|
|
| Posted by Charlie_Dunver |
10/28/2006 10:18 PM | remove |
ok, but I still dont see the connection. Are you saying that large numbers of "anglos" were prevented from voting?
|
|
| Posted by maZe |
10/29/2006 12:22 AM | remove |
Actually, I worked for the referendum and it was the case in 95. There was 2 neutral officials, then one rep. from the yes camp and one rep from the no camp. 4 people by poll.
|
|
| Posted by nostra-YOUPPI! |
10/30/2006 12:37 PM | remove |
the neutral officials in a federal election are provided by political parties, this time in most ridings in 95 the "neutral"officials were apointed by the Provincial DG of elections. and some polling stations did not have the 2 reps because of space in the locations. I know in one particular riding the 2 neutral reps were members of the same political party. In federal elections the neutral reps are chosen from a pool of people put forth by the 1st and 2nd place parties in the previous election, it ensures neutrality to have to equals of opposite political ideologies. but once again the DG of elections claimed the NO camp didnt produce enough people in some ridings to provide reps so both were named by the yes camp. I was in a riding association at the time and we had a list of observed irregularities that took up 3 binders.
|
|
| Posted by maZe |
10/31/2006 12:12 AM | remove |
In any election or referendum, it's up to each camp to come up with enough observers to cover all polling stations. If they didn't find any, well, that's their problem. They did legally had the opportunity to be there.
|
|
| Posted by Charlie_Dunver |
10/31/2006 12:43 AM | remove |
it s more like the bottom line is were there any irregularities? Most people dont give a shit who is "manning" the polls a s long as their vote counts.
|
|
| Posted by mewthree |
1/25/2008 2:04 PM | remove |
nice to learn the technicals behind the vote counting system...
I am glad that Non won.
|
order your copy of Access All Areas today!
