Video proof that CBC’s VoteCompass is rigged


I brought this up yesterday (see here) when I watched a daytime CBC host (I didn’t catch his name but the reporter giving the demo was Taylor) say at the end of the segment that another reporter had told him that by clicking “don’t know” on all the questions, the VoteCompass results showed you to be Liberal.

Apparently it wasn’t by clicking “don’t know” but “neither agree or disagree” where you get this result as the video above shows.

Now, will the CBC pull this flawed and proven biased survey from its website?


Guergis using old Conservative campaign signs

The question about whether Helena Guergis could get any more pathetic has been answered…

Guergis is running as an “Independent Conservative” according to her website and although felt returning the election rebate of $35,000 was the right thing to do, she didn’t think returning the Conservative lawn signs was though. You see, one screwed up the Conservatives and one helped her. Principles are a one-way street with Guergis apparently.

I would be curious to find out who actually owns the signs as I’m under the impression that a candidate may not have funds etc during a non-writ period.

I would also like to know if it’s OK for an independent to use the capitalized word “Conservative” in their election advertising as it is very clear about who may and may not use registered political party names.

CBC host admits on-line voting preference slants Liberal

I just watched a CBC News host admit at the end of a segment on how great their VoteCompass was in determining where one stands in their voting preference, that a journalist told him that when one clicked on “don’t know” on all the answers and it came up “Liberal”.

I tried to replicate the same results but when I came to party leadership competency section, the survey became stuck and wouldn’t advance past this section (3 attempts). see VoteCompass survey here

Why is the CBC pushing such a poorly designed survey that skews the results? Is this something a “neutral” publicly funded news organization should even be involved in?

Update: More proof in this Sun story that this survey slants Liberal here

Globe finds Quebec students would make profit from Liberal grant

This is what happens when you make political policies on the fly and have a leader who doesn’t have a clue about them.

The Liberals have promised a $1,000-$1,500 “learning passport” (perfectly named after Iggy huh?) grants for students attending accredited university, college or CÉGEP costing an estimated $1B.

Besides education being a provincial responsibility, the Globe and Mail asked why the Liberals would give a minimum of $1,000 to students attending Quebec CEGEPs when the cost to attend is just $500? (see here)

CTV uses Harper-hating professor as “coalition expert”

My eyes couldn’t have gotten much wider when I saw well-known anti-Conservative Errol Mendes being interviewed on CTV’s Election 2011 today as an expert on coalition governments. (see here)

There can be no way that the people who booked Mendes didn’t know about his tin-foil hat episode when he ran to the Toronto Star saying that the Conservative Party was digging up dirt on him and his buddy, the Afghan torture-claiming Amir Attaran (see here).

Roger Smith from CTV has done the same using Attaran multiple times as an “expert” without disclosing his bias (see here).

This is not a coincidence and can only be explained as a deliberate attempt by CTV to deceive its viewers.

%d bloggers like this: