Time for an Audit
As has been widely announced, 88% of Liberals voted for Martin on the leadership endorsement, as they called it at the convention. This is about what I expected since I talked to a lot of Liberals at the convention who said they would have voted “yes” for a convention if it wasn’t for the precarious state of the minority government.
What is interesting is that only one number was released. The Liberal party constitution calls for the leadership review to occur at both the riding level and at the national convention. Yet only one number was released. Did they simply average the two votes? Did they add them all together? Or did they only release the higher of the two?
As has been widely announced, 88% of Liberals voted for Martin on the leadership endorsement, as they called it at the convention. This is about what I expected since I talked to a lot of Liberals at the convention who said they would have voted “yes” for a convention if it wasn’t for the precarious state of the minority government.
What is interesting is that only one number was released. The Liberal party constitution calls for the leadership review to occur at both the riding level and at the national convention. Yet only one number was released. Did they simply average the two votes? Did they add them all together? Or did they only release the higher of the two?
posted by calgarygrit at
4:14 p.m.
1 Comments:
According to CPAC, they only release one number, the average of the 2 (I think). now how they weight that average, whether it's total votes (where the riding level votes would all but eliminate the actual delegate votes) or some other weighting scheme is another question.
By
UWHabs, at 11:43 p.m.
Post a Comment
<< Home