Should the Green Party be asked to a Leadership Debate


Mowich
Conservative
+1
#1
Seems that Jackie and Ig are onside with this - no comment from the Conservatives or Bloc yet. I might be more open to having them in the debate were it not for the shrew who leads the party. Her addition last time was a complete farce. From a female's point of view, her inability to keep her yap shut and let others finish their statements; her continual use of slogans and questionable 'facts'; and her persistent nasty edge did nothing to advance women in politics. It says much about the Green Party that they cannot find anyone better to represent them. Their cause might be better championed by Adriane Carr, IMHO.
 
mentalfloss
#2
I haven't seen the last debate, but all party leaders are slanderous aren't they?

Don't they all have a right to debate?
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
+3
#3  Top Rated Post
If Green wins a seat, there'll be no debate over the debate next time. If they can win a seat without "as seen on TV" to their credit, they'll deserve it too....
 
TenPenny
-1
#4
I think the networks are being a bit silly imposing rules that don't have any particular grounding in anything. I'm pretty sure they're happy to accept the money for showing Green commercials, don't know why they're being dicky about the debate.

Just more evidence that the CBC is in the pockets of Harper, I guess.
 
In Between Man
Free Thinker
+2
#5
I would rather have the Green Party attend the debate instead of the Bloc because at least the Green Party runs across the country!
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#6
Invite the hamsters to the debate! Are you serious? Global warming lunatics. CO2 twits. People who believe that burying their bagged trash in a big hole out on the fringes is addressing some problem.
 
s_lone
+3 / -1
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by alleywayzalwayzView Post

I would rather have the Green Party attend the debate instead of the Bloc because at least the Green Party runs across the country!

Here's a reasonable solution:

English debate: Harper, Iggy, Jack and Liz.... No Bloc.

French debate: Harper, Iggy, Jack and Gilles ... No Elizabeth May. Her French was poor and she was just a nuisance to the discussion in the last French debate.
 
Corduroy
+2
#8
From a female's point of view, I think we should have moved past the point where we think a poor public performance by a woman makes women look bad. Elizabeth May represents the Green Party not women.
 
Colpy
Conservative
+3
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by CorduroyView Post

From a female's point of view, I think we should have moved past the point where we think a poor public performance by a woman makes women look bad. Elizabeth May represents the Green Party not women.

Unfortunately (insert crocodile tears here) the Greens do not have a seat in Parliament.

The Green Party has been a poor public performance with or without Elizabeth May.

If the Greens, why not the Communist Party, both Marxist-Leninist and whatever other branch there is???? Or the Heritage Party, or the Marijuana Party, or whatever other fringe bunch you can think of???

The traditional minimum for consideration is a single seat in Parliament. IMO they screwed up ignoring that last time, as May whined so skilfully....................time to correct that mistake.

The bloody things are disgusting enough as it is.
 
DaSleeper
+1
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

Unfortunately (insert crocodile tears here) the Greens do not have a seat in Parliament.

The Green Party has been a poor public performance with or without Elizabeth May.

If the Greens, why not the Communist Party, both Marxist-Leninist and whatever other branch there is???? Or the Heritage Party, or the Marijuana Party, or whatever other fringe bunch you can think of???

The traditional minimum for consideration is a single seat in Parliament. IMO they screwed up ignoring that last time, as May whined so skilfully....................time to correct that mistake.

The bloody things are disgusting enough as it is.

Noww now...Don't go badmouthing The Northern Ontario Heritage Party (external - login to view)
It's coming back from the early '70s
 
TenPenny
#11
I think there's a case to be made that any party that gets the 2% vote level that gives them tax money should be allowed at the debate. And the Greens net about the same number of votes as the Bloc.

Let's not forget that when the PC party was down to 2 seats, they were allowed into the debate, even though at the time, under the rules, they should have required 12 seats.

Furthermore, and this is the funniest part, the Liberals and the NDP must have already agreed to the terms that excludes the Greens, since the terms of the debate is negotiated between the broadcasters and the parties, so for the Liberals and NDP to suddenly pretend they support the Greens being there is a bit funny.
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by DaSleeperView Post

Noww now...Don't go badmouthing The Northern Ontario Heritage Party (external - login to view)
It's coming back from the early '70s

Aren't they provincial and know what it means?
 
DaSleeper
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

Aren't they provincial and know what it means?

It is Provincial....but I seem to recall that in the begining they wanted to join with Manitoba to make a single province....but it was mostly bar talk around election time
 
Corduroy
+1
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

Unfortunately (insert crocodile tears here) the Greens do not have a seat in Parliament.

The Green Party has been a poor public performance with or without Elizabeth May.

They were the only political party that participated in the last debate that gained votes in 2008 election. They've increased their vote counts in every one of the past 5 elections. The last election was their largest gain ever. Sure, you can call over a decade of increasing public support a poor public performance.

Quote:

If the Greens, why not the Communist Party, both Marxist-Leninist and whatever other branch there is???? Or the Heritage Party, or the Marijuana Party, or whatever other fringe bunch you can think of???

Nearly 7% of the popular vote is hardly fringe. The Christian Heritage (next largest after the Greens) didn't even crack a fifth of a percent. Every other party couldn't make a tenth of a percent. The Greens are small, they have no seats, but they cannot be compared to parties like the CHP or Communist Party, which are practically unremarkable.

Quote:

The traditional minimum for consideration is a single seat in Parliament. IMO they screwed up ignoring that last time, as May whined so skilfully....................time to correct that mistake.

There is no traditional minimum consideration. It was completely made up by broadcasters, but even then, they wouldn't have ignored it last time by allowing May to participate in the debate. The Greens had a seat in Parliament when the election was called.
 
Omicron
+3
#15
Any party able to rouse up a candidate in every single riding deserves a place at the podium.
 
CDNBear
+1
#16
Well that excludes the Bloc and sometimes all the parties...

Good call Omi.
 
Corduroy
+2
#17
It now includes the NDP

Layton shrugs off candidate’s decision to drop out and back Liberals - The Globe and Mail
 
CDNBear
#18
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1963529/
Quote:

“I’ve been thinking about this for the past month,” Mr. Dolby said in a telephone interview with The Globe and Mail. “I am really afraid if Stephen Harper got a majority what he would do to the country.”

Ya, like EAO said, he'd turn us into another state and we'd go on war crime binges.
Quote:

Mr. Dolby, the president of his local branch of the Canadian Auto Workers union,

Why am I not surprised.

I would have insinuated it was Avro, but he's been a member of CUPE for over 20 years I hear.
Quote:

His roots, he said, are in social justice and he belongs to several nonprofit organizations.

No way! Say it isn't so.
Last edited by CDNBear; Mar 30th, 2011 at 05:18 PM..
 
Colpy
Conservative
+3
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by CorduroyView Post

They were the only political party that participated in the last debate that gained votes in 2008 election. They've increased their vote counts in every one of the past 5 elections. The last election was their largest gain ever. Sure, you can call over a decade of increasing public support a poor public performance.

Nearly 7% of the popular vote is hardly fringe. The Christian Heritage (next largest after the Greens) didn't even crack a fifth of a percent. Every other party couldn't make a tenth of a percent. The Greens are small, they have no seats, but they cannot be compared to parties like the CHP or Communist Party, which are practically unremarkable.

There is no traditional minimum consideration. It was completely made up by broadcasters, but even then, they wouldn't have ignored it last time by allowing May to participate in the debate. The Greens had a seat in Parliament when the election was called.

FINE!

I am willing to consider Ms. May as a participant in the debates.....as long as every candidate has their mike controled by the moderator....when their time is up, it goes to off.

BTW, Ms May is in the running for the most irritating woman on the face of the planet.
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by MowichView Post

Seems that Jackie and Ig are onside with this - no comment from the Conservatives or Bloc yet. I might be more open to having them in the debate were it not for the shrew who leads the party. Her addition last time was a complete farce. From a female's point of view, her inability to keep her yap shut and let others finish their statements; her continual use of slogans and questionable 'facts'; and her persistent nasty edge did nothing to advance women in politics. It says much about the Green Party that they cannot find anyone better to represent them. Their cause might be better championed by Adriane Carr, IMHO.

Since there is zero percent chance of her being the leader, I'd say not. The other alternative would be to make a rule that anyone who talks out of turn is out. Either way would suit me. To be quite truthful I have no recollection of her other than the name so don't know first hand that she's nasty, but your word is good enough for me. Actually I think they are ALL nasty.
 
weaselwords
No Party Affiliation
#21
There's 19 parties running candidates in this election. If the Greens are allowed in why not Doug Christie's Western Block or any of the other fringe parties. The only reason the Greens got in last debate even with the public outcry was the fact they had one sitting member in the Commons. This time they don't.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#22
OMG!

Quote:

May said the decision not to allow her in the election debates, which are planned for some time in April, is about shutting out a voice that will talk about climate change, First Nations issues and foreign policy.

From CBC.ca

Face palm;

the poor Indians, the poor Palestinians, the poor Planet....

She may even win "most irritating woman on the Planet"

Or at least the compensation prize, Miss Self Righteous.
 
dumpthemonarchy
Free Thinker
+2
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by alleywayzalwayzView Post

I would rather have the Green Party attend the debate instead of the Bloc because at least the Green Party runs across the country!

That's a key point, the Bloc only runs in one province and have no chance of electing a govt. The Greens on the other hand have a theoretical chance of becoming the govt by running candidates in all provinces.

That said, I'm totally sick of Eliz May. If she doesn't win a seat, its time to vanish. The party looks like a loser keeping her around so long.
 
TenPenny
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by CorduroyView Post

There is no traditional minimum consideration. It was completely made up by broadcasters, but even then, they wouldn't have ignored it last time by allowing May to participate in the debate. The Greens had a seat in Parliament when the election was called.

Actually, it used to be that you had to be recognized as a party in the House; that was dumped the year that it would have meant the PCs didn't get into the debate as they only had 2 seats.

I think that using the yardstick of 2% of the vote, which qualifies the party for federal funding, is a useful yardstick.
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
+1
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by weaselwordsView Post

There's 19 parties running candidates in this election. If the Greens are allowed in why not Doug Christie's Western Block or any of the other fringe parties. The only reason the Greens got in last debate even with the public outcry was the fact they had one sitting member in the Commons. This time they don't.

From what I can gather May is rude and obnoxious- do we really need MORE of that in politics?

Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

Actually, it used to be that you had to be recognized as a party in the House; that was dumped the year that it would have meant the PCs didn't get into the debate as they only had 2 seats.

I think that using the yardstick of 2% of the vote, which qualifies the party for federal funding, is a useful yardstick.

Yep, that probably makes sense- BUT if they are loud and obnoxious make it 3%.

Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

That's a key point, the Bloc only runs in one province and have no chance of electing a govt. The Greens on the other hand have a theoretical chance of becoming the govt by running candidates in all provinces.

That said, I'm totally sick of Eliz May. If she doesn't win a seat, its time to vanish. The party looks like a loser keeping her around so long.

Yep, about as "theoretical" as my chance of being Prime Minister?
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
#26
This just in: Green Leader Elizabeth May sues for seat in House of Commons.

News at six....
 
TenPenny
#27
Rude and obnoxious, sure she is. But Harper is unethical and supportive of fraud on the part of his cabinet ministers.

I'll take rude over tolerating fraud any day of the week. Harper disgusts me, he obviously is ethically-challenged.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

Rude and obnoxious, sure she is. But Harper is unethical and supportive of fraud on the part of his cabinet ministers.

I'll take rude over tolerating fraud any day of the week. Harper disgusts me, he obviously is ethically-challenged.

It doesn't have anything to do with obnoxious. Her party doesn't hold a seat.

The only reason she was invited in last time was because Dion and Layton used her to prop up their offensive on Harper in the debate.
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

Rude and obnoxious, sure she is. But Harper is unethical and supportive of fraud on the part of his cabinet ministers.

I'll take rude over tolerating fraud any day of the week. Harper disgusts me, he obviously is ethically-challenged.

But how do you know she doesn't have those "qualities" as well? They are ALL ethically challenged, as a matter of fact I'd go one step further and say corrupt.
 
Avro
No Party Affiliation
+1
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_SoldierView Post

It doesn't have anything to do with obnoxious. Her party doesn't hold a seat.

The only reason she was invited in last time was because Dion and Layton used her to prop up their offensive on Harper in the debate.


I'd love to see you prove that considering most of the votes she would get would be at the exspense of the NDP and Liberals.

Or did you just make that up?
 

Similar Threads

37
What do you think of the Green Party?
by CamTheCat | Oct 18th, 2005
21
Leadership Debate
by Andem | Jun 17th, 2004
no new posts