How much should I care about this political scandal?

[Oexmelin]

There's no problem with negative campaigning, or trying to supress your opponents vote, for example.

[Maximus]

trying to supress your opponents vote, for example.

Do you mean trying to suppress the people's vote?

[Eddie Teach]

As long as it's just influence and not coercion.

[HVC]

There's no problem with negative campaigning, or trying to supress your opponents vote, for example.

I assume he means suppress by negative campaigns (like turn out) rather then like through disenfranchisementor something.

Anyways, i'm surprised BB would continue to back a someone with a  grey moral area (what happened to conservative and upright morals), and an obviously closeted homosexual*.


*only partially a joke

[merithyn]

There's no problem with negative campaigning, or trying to supress your opponents vote, for example.

"There's no problem..."? Please tell me that this didn't come across the way that you meant it. Because if this is what you meant, I'm sorely disappointed in you.

[Maximus]

As long as it's just influence and not coercion.

Even that is beyond the pale. Because what it is actually doing is reducing the confidence in, and the legitimacy of, the government.

[Barrister]

There's no problem with negative campaigning, or trying to supress your opponents vote, for example.

"There's no problem..."? Please tell me that this didn't come across the way that you meant it. Because if this is what you meant, I'm sorely disappointed in you.

Depends on how it is done.

Robo-callers telling people that the election was moved to Wednesday is very bad.

Releasing polls that show your candidate is way out ahead, your opponents voters shouldn't even bother voting, is fine.  I mean it's hard-nosed, but we're not using the marquis of queensbury rules here.

[Maximus]

...I think you have bigger issues than whether or not to care about this scandal.

[Admiral Yi]

Suppress is a loaded term Beeb.  It means evil Republicans cheating sweet black grannies out of their vote.

Negative campaigning is not particularly laudable, but it is within the Pale.  Flying a false flag is not IMO.

[dps]

I'd say it's a major red flag at least--it seems to me that using the "kamikaze" wouldn't have much bothered anyone if he hadn't lied about it.  If he's willing to lie about something that nobody would have cared about, it has to make you wonder what else he may be lying about.

That isn't factoring in any possible criminal violation of campaign finance law, since it's not clear there was any such violation.

EDIT:  to be clear, I'm just taking your word for it that using the "kamikaze" candidate wouldn't have bothered people much in the context of the selection of a party leader in Canada. 

[Maximus]

Negative campaigning is not particularly laudable, but it is within the Pale.  Flying a false flag is not IMO.

Negative campaigning to try to get people to vote for you rather than your opponent, ok.

Negative campaigning to try to get people to not vote, not ok.

[Admiral Yi]

Negative campaigning to try to get people to not vote, not ok.

Disagree.  It's a continuum.  Vote for me, don't vote, vote for the other candidate.

Egg McMuffin's candidacy was essentially a placeholder for tribal Republicans to abstain from voting from Trump.  He wasn't seriously running for president. 

[Maximus]

Except for the fundamental difference that people who are voting are supporting the democratic process while people who aren't voting, especially those who aren't voting out of apathy or disillusionment, are delegitimizing it. And the level of polarization and corruption we are seeing now is a direct result of low confidence in the democratic process.

[Monoriu]

It doesn't sound like it will affect you directly, unlike say a proposal to increase taxes.  There is nothing you can do about it.  So you shouldn't care.  Even if you "care", it won't have the slightest effect on the outcome.  This is somebody else's business.  Somebody else will take care of it.

Having said that, the Kenny guy seems like a bad person if you ask me.  It is party politics, but financing another candidate for the only purpose of trying to undermine his opponent, then proceed to cover up and lie about it, is pretty dirty party politics even using the usual low bar for party politics.     

[crazy canuck]

Negative campaigning to try to get people to not vote, not ok.

Disagree.  It's a continuum.  Vote for me, don't vote, vote for the other candidate.

Egg McMuffin's candidacy was essentially a placeholder for tribal Republicans to abstain from voting from Trump.  He wasn't seriously running for president.

Really, you don't understand the difference between trying to convince someone not to vote for the other candidate and trying to convince a person not to vote at all?