Quote:
Originally Posted by jammies
You think wrong - the main criticism is that their rip-off site rated the candidates, so their obvious intent was to use Civic Camp's reputation to advance their own agenda. Do you not see how this being brought online shortly before the civic elections makes it obvious that the intent was not to satirize or parody? Only the most naive, or the most partisan, could possibly think the timing of this has anything to do with legitimate political criticism and not sleazy opportunism.
|
I would agree with you 100% had it not been for the Admin acknowledgement in the comments section of the 'candidate ratings' that they choose their candidates in a biased manner, and then used a winking face.
This post doesn't exist and I am 100% onside with you.
- And ofcourse the timing of the ratings was done to coincide with the election, otherwise if there is no election, what candidates do you have to rate?
I think people on this Board and making a big deal out of this and misinterpreting the website's objectives.
This is just my opinion.
And for the record, I am not a huge fan of Jon Lord. I don't think he would make a great Mayor. I think he would make a great MLA or Councillor (as he has shown in the past). He has his faults and had said some pretty stupid things, but he has also raised issues like 'rising taxes' which will resonate with alot of people.
I think if the Manning Center took in donations and wasn't a registered not-for-profit organization and held candidate forums and said it was un-biased, then I would be critical of them too!
It works both ways!
I just think everyone needs to be held accountable.