Lol, and you think you are being at all useful in this conversation?
Now you're asking a lot.
Lol, and you think you are being at all useful in this conversation?
I don't think anyone is confused about these points.
The report states that these calls did happen and they did mislead and antagonize voters.
The report also states that there is not enough evidence to prove malicious intent.
People on either side of this debate seems to simply disagree on what this means.
Conservative supporters keep claiming that this means that they never did anything wrong and all the scrutiny was wrong and unwarranted.
People who are more critical are focusing on the fact that the report confirms that these calls did take place, and that saying that there is not enough evidence to prove intent is a far cry from proving that nothing wrong took place and that all the scrutiny was unwarranted.
I read the report (their report) there is nothing to suggest the Conservative Party deliberately misdirected voters.
I don't know how to say this more clearly. We agree on the facts, you simply interpret them differently. Repeating the same facts that we agree on over and over again doesn't move this conversation forward.
What conversation? You don't converse, you argue semantics.
Well that sure explains the last federal result. And it REALLY explains the last few Ontario results.we do not have sophisticated voting public in Canada , just the brain washed.