Did Rob Ford cheat?
- Thread starter fuji
- Start date
He would've still won by a lot if he hadn't raised or spent all that money. People wanted change from Miller.
Adding a subway is not pissing away money.
Rob Ford has invited the public on how to tackle the $774 million budget deficit.
You can register here for that www.torontoservicereview.ca
Adding a subway is not pissing away money.
Rob Ford has invited the public on how to tackle the $774 million budget deficit.
You can register here for that www.torontoservicereview.ca
There are degrees to an allegedly "crooked campaign" and I don't see this as particularly material in such a landslide result.
Looks more like sore losers who don't have a life.
Last time I checked being a sore loser was not against the law. Violating election is however. lol
You're probably right that it wouldn't have changed the outcome (though it might not have been a landslide with a fairly run election) but it does speak to his lack of ethics, his willingness to commit fraud, and his general dishonesty.
How relevant is this, coming from a Ford hater?
Let's see how this affects his approval rating, if at all.
Unlike you, most people don't see reality as just black or white.
If this is as relevant as you think, his approval rating should soon plummet.
I didn't ask you about his approval rating. I didn't ask you what other people think. I'm asking you what YOU think. Or are your thoughts determined by the opinion polls?
What do you personally think of having for mayor an untrustworthy liar who has no respect for the law and appears willing to commit fraud?
What do you personally think of having for mayor an untrustworthy liar who has no respect for the law and appears willing to commit fraud?
Unlike you, I would not presume to know all the facts nor would I assume that every minor allegation is a major fact.
• Ford’s campaign filings appear to wrongly list some functions, including his March 26, 2010, campaign launch, as fundraisers, and therefore exempt from the $1,305,066.65 spending cap. Revenue collected at the door was $7,655, plus $250 in “pass the hat cash,” while total expenses were $34,371.72. Adding even one of the questionable events to campaign spending would push Ford past the legal limit, Rosenthal says.
Apparently this fundraiser was not very successful.
Is the implication that this expense was a bribe?
• Invoices to the campaign from family company Doug Ford Holdings Inc. raise the possibility the campaign borrowed improperly from a company that is not a bank or recognized lending institution. If any of the invoices weren’t repaid, the campaign accepted a corporate donation, which is illegal under Toronto’s election bylaw, he argues.
That is a question, not a statement of fact.
• A news report about Ford supporters with campaign shirts and signs on a bus shortly before he signed his nomination papers suggests the campaign improperly incurred expenses before he was a candidate.
No evidence of who paid for the shirts and not a big deal in any case.
No. The implication is that Ford was fraudulently pretending that it was a fundraising event when everybody knew that it was actually a campaign event. That the "fundraising" was tacked on to a regular campaign stop as a smoke screen to hide the illegal spending.
Yes. And it's a very, very good question.
It doesn't matter who paid for it. If it was paid for by a third party and then the materials donated to the campaign that has to be recorded as a campaign contribution.
That is not the allegation.
The allegation is about the timing.
Perhaps it would have taken a few hours after the signing to get the shirts.
• A news report about Ford supporters with campaign shirts and signs on a bus shortly before he signed his nomination papers suggests the campaign improperly incurred expenses before he was a candidate.
Nobody said that a sore loser was crooked, just a sore loser.
Last time I checked though, people are innocent until proven guilty.
