Frances Bula header image 2

The oppo research on civic-election candidates starts to seep to the surface

October 28th, 2011 · 58 Comments

I predicted weeks ago that we’d be seeing nasty stories surface about various candidates in the Vancouver civic election. I’m sad to see that I was completely right.

No election seems to be complete these days without someone digging up a candidate’s bad report card, stupid Facebook photos, previously unrevealed lawsuit, and the rest.

First out of the box was the revelation of a silly “date matrix” site created by NPA candidate Jason Lamarche from his old Langara College days, where he rated various women on their intelligence and performance in bed. (One of the many stories published/broadcast here.)

Silly, and not surprising, considering some of the less-than-mature tweets Lamarche has been sending out during the campaign. (Slagging one of his critics as a guy who still lived in his parents’ basement was probably the low point to date.)

Vision people claim they had nothing to do with this story emerging but if someone connected with them didn’t leak this to media, I will eat the Gregor Robertson flyer that just arrived in my mailbox last night, which is fairly large and glossy.

Even if they didn’t leak it, they certainly filled up the twitterverse with their outrage over Lamarche’s alleged transgressions, thereby overplaying their hand and leading to some backlash from commentators, who noted that Lamarche’s background didn’t bother them when he was running the campaign for Vision candidate Sarah Blythe in 2008.

It makes me wonder if that might alter the game plan for revealing information about other NPA candidates, some of whom have left a trail through the local courts.

Clearly, it would be nice to establish a narrative of a weak NPA team by having negative stories about more than one candidate. And it’s easy to do, since the NPA team is very green and it doesn’t look as though there was the kind of candidate screening that alerted anyone to these kinds of background problems.

But there’s always the danger of overdoing it.

On the other side, we’ve seen the story about the company that Mayor Robertson founded, Happy Planet, moving to Burnaby also mysteriously emerge this week, as we march towards voting day on Nov. 19.

Funny, the company moved in February and yet the story only comes out now, just in time to supposedly make the point that the mayor’s own company doesn’t believe Vancouver is a good place to do business.

I don’t expect this will be the last little scoop to suddenly make its way to newsrooms in the coming weeks.

I’m still waiting, as I said in earlier blog posts, for negative stuff from inside city hall to possibly fall into the hands of waiting reporters. There are an awful lot of unhappy staff from there, either still working or recently resigned.

Happy democracy, everyone.

 

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Andrea C.

    I have never been able to make it through a single one of GR’s numerous posts. It would be like continuing to stare at a flasher after he’s just opened his trenchcoat wide and is waving his teeny peeny about.
    But some people seem to like that sort of quality in a writer….

  • Chris

    Looks like Jason Lamarche is under fire again:
    http://m.ctv.ca/bc/20111101/bc_jason_lamarche_urban_dictionary_111101.html

    It’s sad that someone is digging through his online past, but sadder still he’s denying this one. Don’t give in Jason. The article really makes him look like a liar.

    I found the entries made by downtownj in urban dictionary: http://www.urbandictionary.com/author.php?author=downtownj

    Sure, some of them are a bit racy, but that’s the whole point of urbandictionary. He also added handy definitions for words like: binner, click fraud, 337, proverb, phisers, and 3 musketeers.

  • Frances Bula

    @Chris. This all sadly reminds me of that piece of dialogue in the Ides of March, where some researcher comes into the office saying he hasn’t been able to definitively nail down a piece of dirt on the opponent. The strategist say, “Well, go with it anyway. We can’t prove it but we don’t have to. Let them spend the day denying it and our job is done.”

  • spartikus

    berating me for conveying a story about the conflict between Andrea Reimer and Adriane Carr’s husband

    Actually I objected to your reliance on “office gossip”. ie. Telling us what other people think, opinions that can’t be independently confirmed. AKA “Hearsay”.

    “No choice” is stating they feel Sean Bickerton is trying to usurp credit for Sandy Garissino’s work. “No choice” may be right, they may be wrong, but they are giving their own personal opinion.

    There’s a difference.

  • ThinkOutsideABox

    Actually I objected to your reliance on “office gossip”. ie. Telling us what other people think, opinions that can’t be independently confirmed. AKA “Hearsay”.

    That italicized above, is just your opinion. Go back to the linked post and point out where you can point to the “difference” to the type of claim No Choices makes.

    No Choices stating someone “tried to steal credit” for something is well within the territory of attempting to state an observed fact.

    There is no difference you could point to without it appearing to be just your opinion.

    The real difference where it matters is how it has manifested since and the roots of it which I conveyed: civic greens split away with Adriane Carr running.

    Again some of us know, some of us just google about it.

  • spartikus

    In your original comment, you described things which aren’t in the public domain, you weren’t a personal witness too and which could not be independently corroborrated from a source that was.

    That Bickerton “tried to steal credit” is No Choice’s opinion of public events.

  • ThinkOutsideABox

    you weren’t a personal witness too…

    wrong assumption spartikus

  • spartikus

    I have no way of confirming if that is true, TOAB. I think you’re forgetting I also said it might be an accurate characterization of what transpired. There’s just no way for someone like me to know.

    It’s simply the nature of internet discussions where participants use pseudonyms.