The Remanded

*** BC Elections Update - May 20 *** A shameful display today in the legislature, adopting a report without actually engaging with the public. 1. Elections BC acted without authority 2. You didn’t allow in-person presentations 3. You didn’t allow added input from the public. 4. You didn’t examine any of elections BC’s investigations & determinations that included electoral fraud April 8th. 5. You didn’t allow the public to have access by request election material. 6. You didn’t follow-up with the 200k+ Surrey-Guildford case which EBC stated they would continue to investigate following the withdrawal. 7. You didn’t followup with any of the changes I highlighted in my submission regarding vote total changes 7 months after the election. 8. You didn’t engage with anything the media misrepresented in their coverage. 9. You never took the time to understand why portions of the public hold the views they do regarding any elections held outside of BC in how it effected 2024 BC Election. 10. You engaged with none of it and this report is an absolute spit in the face of every British Columbian. Not one MLA could object to the adoption of this report…..seriously not one MLA ? Is that because you didn’t actually take the time to listen to the One British Columbian that put the time in ? I could go on and on but the effort one person has put in, in knowing no MLA will give a crap…there’s just no point anymore. Just rinse away the issues & concerns of the public without a blink of an eye. When it comes to Election Integrity & improvements this Legislative assembly doesn’t work for the people of this province & hope the committee members don’t get re-elected. We Keep Going

@ShellyUrquhart @ShareawareCdn whats gone?

@ShareawareCdn @TheRemanded It's gone?

~ Opinion and media commentary ~ *** Bought in Vancouver (BIV) and the Anatomy of a Timed Hit *** Ten days before a provincial leadership vote, Bought in Vancouver (BIV) publishes allegations that a frontrunning candidate's campaign broke federal election funding rules. The sourcing is a single investigator's email describing a complaint. Not a finding. Not a charge. Not a confirmed investigation. Bought in Vancouver (BIV)'s own published text acknowledges the allegations are unproven. The candidate's legal team calls the claims "patently false and potentially defamatory" and formally warns against publication. The party's independent oversight committee reviews the identical material and concludes, in its own published words, "not enough credible evidence to take further action." Bought in Vancouver (BIV) publishes regardless. On the day of her press conference, the candidate states publicly that Elections Canada had provided neither formal nor informal notice of any investigation to herself or her financial agent. That statement appears in the record. Its prominence in Bought in Vancouver (BIV)'s subsequent coverage is a matter readers can assess for themselves. Critics have noted that unverified allegations published inside a campaign window, where insufficient time exists for adjudication or meaningful rebuttal, function as electoral intervention regardless of intent. The documented sequence here invites that observation. When the candidate holds a press conference and declines questions, a second aligned outlet enters the narrative and makes a specific editorial choice. Not that she left. Not that she departed. That she fled, in a black SUV with tinted windows. That single word runs verbatim across thirty-plus community papers province-wide, simultaneously, presenting as independent local coverage what is in fact two aligned outlets, one narrative, one network. The word itself warrants scrutiny. "Flees" implies flight from culpability. Its use presupposes the unproven allegations have substance. CBC, Globe and Mail, CTV, and Global News covered the same press conference. None used that language. None reached the same editorial framing. When every major independent outlet arrives at a measurably different conclusion than Bought in Vancouver (BIV) and its aligned network, that divergence is a matter of public record. Pattern recognition is not accusation. It is, at minimum, a question Bought in Vancouver (BIV)'s readers deserve to ask. ~ MEDIA COMMENTARY AND OPINION Editorial commentary on matters of public interest. All factual claims are drawn from published sources and on-record statements. "Bought in Vancouver (BIV)" is a fictional construct used for illustrative commentary purposes. ~

*** Coordinated Disclosure and the Findlay Complaint *** Katy Merrifield is working on Caroline Elliott's BC Conservative leadership campaign, having joined after resigning as Pierre Poilievre's Director of Communications in early April 2026, days before the complaint was filed April 17. Elliott is Findlay's direct competitor in the same race. The Commissioner's office has published no names. BIV published no names. The complaint's contents are confidential under the Canada Elections Act, and only the complainant is not bound by that confidentiality. Merrifield's phrase "named in the allegations" requires knowledge of the complaint's contents, not its media coverage. The factual question: a senior communications professional working for a rival leadership candidate publicly named an individual from a confidential Elections Canada filing during an active voting window. Where did that information come from? hrm...

*** Wild Card Scenarios: All Four Modeled Outcomes *** Companion to the BC Conservative Leadership Race 2026 Final Analytical Conclusion · May 25, 2026 Four alternative ballot orderings were modeled based on confirmed transfer signals from the six-platform grassroots sweep. Each scenario tests what happens when a candidate other than Fulmer is eliminated first. In every case the confirmed transfer signals were applied consistently. Milobar eliminated first. Fulmer survives to Ballot 2 with his Findlay-aligned base intact. When Fulmer is eliminated on Ballot 2 his transfers flow predominantly to Findlay per the mutual transfer signal confirmed across X, Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram. Black is eliminated on Ballot 3. The final ballot becomes Elliott versus Findlay. Under both Black transfer scenarios modeled, Findlay leads or wins. Under the grassroots signal scenario Findlay wins approximately 48 percent to Elliott's 33 percent. Under the Pallas Data scenario Findlay leads Elliott 41 percent to 40 percent. Findlay eliminated first. Requires her verified count to fall below Fulmer and Milobar. Not supported by any confirmed data given her endorsement weight of 136.5 points across 10 MLAs and confirmed rural activation signal. Without Findlay available as a transfer destination, Fulmer's confirmed second choice signal toward her cannot be fulfilled. Fulmer is eliminated on Ballot 2 with transfers flowing toward Black as the next available preference, a modeled assumption not a confirmed signal. The final ballot becomes Black versus Elliott. Black wins approximately 38 percent to Elliott's 34 percent. Elliott's transfer ceiling remains the lowest of all remaining candidates across all confirmed signals. Black eliminated first. Requires his verified count to fall below Fulmer and Milobar. Not supported by confirmed data given his first ballot polling floor of approximately 21 percent in the most current member-specific poll. Without Black as a transfer destination, Milobar and Fulmer transfers consolidate behind Findlay. The final ballot becomes Findlay versus Elliott. Findlay wins approximately 52 percent to Elliott's 28 percent. Elliott eliminated first. The least probable scenario across all available data. She leads every member-specific poll and holds a confirmed first-ballot riding-point lead of approximately 323 points under the corrected 93-riding regional model. Polymarket prices her at 90 percent on $65,319 in confirmed volume. Without Elliott in the race Fulmer transfers reach Findlay intact on Ballot 2 per the confirmed mutual transfer signal. Milobar transfers partially reach Findlay on Ballot 3. The final ballot becomes Findlay versus Black. Findlay wins approximately 54 percent to Black's 27 percent, the widest margin of any scenario modeled. Across all four wild card scenarios and the standard model one finding is consistent: Elliott does not win in any scenario where she is not present on the final ballot. The standard model produces two possible outcomes: Findlay wins on Ballot 4A if Black transfers break toward her per the grassroots signal, Elliott wins on Ballot 4B if Black transfers break toward her per the Elliott-commissioned Pallas Data poll. Across the four wild card scenarios Findlay wins three. In the Findlay-first scenario the final ballot becomes Black versus Elliott, where Elliott's transfer ceiling remains the lowest of all remaining candidates across all confirmed signals. Thank you for spending the time to engage with these posts. Source & support info in the comments to follow.

Scrutineers verify what's placed in front of them at their specific polling location. They don't audit province-wide procurement. The unresolved question is: does the total number of machines procured match the total number deployed? Elections BC confirmed in writing they don't report that number publicly, and the procurement contracts worth over $2.5M in public funds had those quantities redacted. So there is no baseline figure to verify against. Scrutineers signing ballot box seals doesn't close that gap. You can't confirm all equipment was accounted for if the starting number is secret.

@TheRemanded Ask the party scrutineers who were there on election night and also signed the results and the seals on the ballot boxes that are warehoused for 10 years after the election.

*** Elections BC Confirms: Ballot Box and Tabulator Numbers Are Secret *** Elections BC has confirmed in writing that the total number of ballot boxes and tabulators deployed in the 2024 provincial election is not publicly reported. Their stated reason: it is not legally required. Furthermore, contracts worth over $2.5 million in public funds, which would have revealed the total number of tabulators procured, have had those quantities redacted from disclosed records. This means British Columbians cannot independently confirm that all ballot boxes and machines paid for and deployed were accounted for in the final results. We Keep Going

@LenChaston Posted the correction. Thank you

@TheRemanded In "Key difference from standard model", you say "also recieves Milobar's partial transfers through Findlay on Ballot 2." Re: partial transfers. I have modelled the 4 ballots, and a key principle I used was that only the votes/points earned in 1st ballot transfer. Right?

Correction: Milobar-First Wild Card Scenario The Key Difference from Standard Model section incorrectly states that Findlay receives Milobar's partial transfers on Ballot 2. Under ranked ballot IRV rules only the eliminated candidate's votes transfer on each ballot. Milobar is eliminated on Ballot 1 and his votes transfer once at that point. What Findlay receives on Ballot 2 is Fulmer's transfers only, per the confirmed mutual Fulmer-Findlay transfer signal. The final ballot outcomes shown in the visual remain accurate. Only that descriptive line requires correction. @LenChaston thank you 🙏

Source & Support: All transfer signals confirmed from Grok social analysis and six-platform grassroots sweep May 2026. Endorsement data verified through public X audit. Regional riding-point model corrected to 93 ridings. Polling: Pallas Data May 4, 2026, Elliott-commissioned, n=1,253 members; Mainstreet Research March 22, 2026, Milobar-commissioned, n=2,578 members. Polymarket data confirmed from live market screenshot May 25, 2026 at 9:18 AM PT. All figures are estimates. Results announced May 30, 2026 at 6 PM PT. buymeacoffee.com/theremanded

@MikeO8875676571 Thanks, I found it annoying how much inference, editorial and partisan a lot of content is. Prefer to just read something and critically figure out the conclusion on my own. This way I can just share it without much argument which is a waste of energy.

@TheRemanded Fantastic analysis. I appreciate your commitment to remaining objective. Refreshing!

8/8 Source Information & Hobby Independent Support: All data current to May 25, 2026. Polymarket data confirmed from live market screenshots at 9:18 AM PT and 10:30 AM PT. Verified voter figure of approximately 27,500 is an insider estimate not officially confirmed by the party. All allegations against Kerry-Lynne Findlay remain unproven. Academic sources: Clinton and Huang, Vanderbilt University 2024; Sonnenfeld, Tian, and Scaramucci, Yale School of Management. Polling: Pallas Data May 4, 2026, Elliott-commissioned, n=1,253 members; Mainstreet Research March 22, 2026, Milobar-commissioned, n=2,578 members. LEOC authority confirmed from BC Conservative Party published Leadership FAQs at conservativebcdotca. Polymarket Market Context label confirmed from live market screenshot May 25, 2026. buymeacoffee.com/theremanded

7/8 PolyMarket Context s

🧵 1/8 *** Polymarket vs. Grassroots: What the Data Actually Shows *** BC Conservative Leadership Race 2026 · May 25, 2026 The BC Conservative Party is choosing its next leader by ranked ballot across 93 provincial ridings worth 100 points each. 41,621 members were eligible by the April 18 deadline. Approximately 27,500 completed identity verification. As of May 25, 16,235 have voted with approximately 11,265 outstanding. Voting closes May 29 at 8 AM PT. Results announced May 30 at 6 PM PT. Polymarket, an online prediction market, shows total confirmed volume of $259,709 as of May 25 at 9:18 AM PT with Caroline Elliott priced at 90 percent. Polymarket's Market Context section, labeled as an experimental AI-generated summary and explicitly stating it "plays no role in how this market resolves," references Elliott's lead as reflecting leading first-preference support in member surveys. Those surveys are the Pallas Data May 4 poll commissioned by the Elliott campaign and the Mainstreet Research March 22 poll commissioned by the Milobar campaign. No neutral member-specific poll exists for this race. Individual trading volumes: Elliott $65,319, Findlay $34,598, Fulmer $34,278, Black $32,314, Milobar $30,437. Findlay and Fulmer carry near-equal volume despite market probabilities of 6 and 1 percent respectively, with Findlay's Buy No price at 96.4 cents confirming the majority of non-Elliott trading is concentrated on those candidates not winning. Elliott held between 75 and 80 percent from May 19 through May 22. Following the publication of the LEOC statement and Findlay campaign response regarding the federal probe, her price dropped to approximately 61 percent at 9:30 PM on May 22 with Findlay rising to approximately 17.8 percent. Under the party's own published Leadership FAQs, LEOC may only recommend disqualification to the Board of Directors, which holds the sole authority to remove a contestant from the ballot. The price recovered above 80 percent on May 23 when voting opened and continued rising to 90 percent by May 25. Across six independent platforms the membership signal presents a materially different picture from the candidate-commissioned surveys Polymarket's AI summary cites. Facebook rural and Interior member groups in Fraser Valley, Vancouver Island, and northern BC show documented shifts from Elliott to Findlay among self-identified members. Under a system awarding equal points to all 93 ridings regardless of member count, geographic distribution of votes directly determines the outcome. The most consistent confirmed signal across X, Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram is that Fulmer supporters list Findlay as their second choice and Findlay supporters list Fulmer as their second choice. Under the ranked ballot system Fulmer is projected to be eliminated on the first ballot with second choice votes redistributing to remaining candidates. Iain Black holds approximately 1,684 riding points under the corrected 93-riding regional model. When eliminated on the third ballot his points redistribute. The Elliott-commissioned Pallas Data poll placed Black supporters second choice at 25 percent Elliott and 19 percent Findlay. The grassroots signal across six platforms places that ratio closer to 35 percent Findlay and 22 percent Elliott. These two figures produce opposite final results. Vanderbilt University researchers Clinton and Huang, analyzing more than 2,500 markets with over two billion dollars in transactions during the 2024 US presidential campaign, found Polymarket accurate 67 percent of the time. Polymarket's own aggregate data shows markets over $100,000 in volume were accurate 84 percent of the time. Yale School of Management researchers Sonnenfeld, Tian, and Scaramucci documented that thin political markets can be moved by a single actor for tens of thousands of dollars. This market moved 26 percentage points on approximately $112,000 in additional volume between early May and May 24. The 2025 Canadian federal election is the most instructive comparison. Pierre Poilievre entered 2025 at 89 percent probability on Polymarket and closed election day at 22 percent. Mark Carney won. That market corrected over months as new public information emerged continuously. This leadership market has four days remaining with no comparable incoming public information before May 29 close. Polymarket prices Elliott at 90 percent based on an experimental AI-generated summary citing candidate-commissioned surveys and explicitly disclaimed as playing no role in how the market resolves. The grassroots analysis across six membership-specific platforms prices the race at approximately 43 percent each for Elliott and Findlay, capturing second choice flows, rural riding-point activation, and membership sentiment. These are two instruments with different information access applied to the same event. May 30 at 6 PM PT determines which was more accurate for a closed membership race with a ranked ballot. Following this Write are the Visuals & Charts Below in this Mini Thread.

I’ll be commenting on the PolyMarket shortly.