Thursday, March 22, 2012

Can someone explain?

I'm offended as anyone else at the robocalls scandal, but this picture, put up recently by Saskboy and apparently influenced by the, erm, objective website, deserves some explanation before I explode it all into tiny little dust particles.

I mean, it's pretty obvious something's wrong, right? How do you determine the number of voters who actually had their votes changed or denied by the robocalls, and then determine the swing it'd take to overtake the Conservatives based on that number?

How do you know anything about anything in this case? You don't. You can't determine how these ridings would've gone based simply on the number of people making complaints. Not only are the complaints varied - not all +30,000 of them were of a similar nature to the Guelph calls, and I doubt all of them are actually legitimate, or are people that weren't just getting the standard robocalls we all get and complained anyways - but as far as I've seen, most of them of the Guelph nature didn't even have the desired effect!

I await someone's response. Preferable whoever Brian-Michel LaRue is.


  1. The explanation is simple. 107+48=155 and 155 is the smallest possible majority.

  2. LOL. Awesome Teddy, awesome.