Should the Green Party be asked to a Leadership Debate

[Machjo]

About 4% of Canadians support the Green Party and growing. More than all other "fringe" parties combined. Yet they have no representation in Parliament or a voice. Which part of a democracy did you say you support again?

Hey, last election I'd almost voted Green, and this time around it's the same candidate. I'll certainly consider him. However, May does not represent my riding, and at the end of the day, the plurality wins in each riding, end of story. What does it matter what the candidate's affiliation is?

 

[TenPenny]

I corrected you NOT on this once before.

I guess you don't realize that altering a signed document can be considered fraud.

I corrected your quote, or should I say, no, I didn't change it if I'm a Conservative.

 

[Avro]

"No need for name calling" - Say's Avro..........................Now I think I'm finally getting the gist of the game- no nasty remarks to Avro, but it's quite alright for him to accuse people of theft from the taxpayer and employer, sleeping on the job, asking for help after all your resources are exhausted through no fault of your own and people having the audacity to be so ignorant as to not be able to take care of themselves in dire straits. The reason I was able to twig on to this so quickly is because I've met other filthy rich people who riches were realized through no effort on their part- just lucky to have ancestors who saved their money. :lol:



I think you're the liar. What specifically was the charge for and when is his court date? (For a guy who posts as much as you do I'm surprised you didn't learn to spell)

There, there.....let it all out.

 

[petros]

They run in every riding don't they? Then they are a full on national political party and if we want to maintain the illusion of democracy then the green socialists get their word on the podium as well.

 

[Colpy]

I guess you don't realize that altering a signed document can be considered fraud.

I corrected your quote, or should I say, no, I didn't change it if I'm a Conservative.

Go back, read the definition again.

You'll get it sooner or later.....there is a vital factor missing for this to be fraud....

And, BTW, I have never defended Oda's actions. I just don't think they are criminal.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Elizabeth May is the leader of a legitimate political party that's running candidates in 308 seats and got a million votes in the last election. In any system of proportional representation the party would have had seats in the House. Seems like a no brainer to me: of course she should be part of the leaders' debates. Besides, she's bloody minded and entertaining and we all know she's never going to be Prime Minister so she can say whatever she likes, the debates would be improved by her candor. It's always refreshing and enlightening to me to hear what people who have nothing to lose have to say on the issues of the day.

 

[Corduroy]

BTW, Ms May is in the running for the most irritating woman on the face of the planet.

I never get nominated

 

[Colpy]

I never get nominated

You'll just have to try harder.......

Shouldn't be hard, you've got the Socialist Greenie thing down already.

 

[JLM]

Elizabeth May is the leader of a legitimate political party that's running candidates in 308 seats and got a million votes in the last election. In any system of proportional representation the party would have had seats in the House. Seems like a no brainer to me: of course she should be part of the leaders' debates. Besides, she's bloody minded and entertaining and we all know she's never going to be Prime Minister so she can say whatever she likes, the debates would be improved by her candor. It's always refreshing and enlightening to me to hear what people who have nothing to lose have to say on the issues of the day.

It's always a little presumptuous for one who has nothing to lose and knows she has very little to gain to go yapping off about stuff she's knows full well she'll never have to contend with...................but YES let her in the "debate", where she could possibly self destruct. Is "debate" the proper word? I had "circus acts" in mind. :lol:

There, there.....let it all out.

So when are you going to answer my question? Or are you just going to let the whole wide world know that nothing you say has any credibility? :lol:

 

[Liberalman]

May does not deserve a seat at the televised debate because
the Green party does not have any MPs.

She was given a chance last election but that never produced
an elected MP.

Doesn’t matter that her party got a hundred thousand votes.

If May is allowed to be included in the debates so
should the leaders of the other registered federal political parties listed below.



Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party
of Canadahttp://www.environmentvoters.org/







Canadian Action Party


Christian Heritage Party of Canada


Communist Party of Canada


First Peoples National Party of Canada




Liberal Party of Canada


Libertarian Party of Canada


Marijuana Party


Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada


People's Political Power Party of Canada


Pirate Party of Canada


Progressive Canadian Party


Rhinoceros Party


United Party of Canada


Western Block Party

 

[Omicron]

May does not deserve a seat at the televised debate because
the Green party does not have any MPs.

She was given a chance last election but that never produced
an elected MP.

Doesn’t matter that her party got a hundred thousand votes.

If May is allowed to be included in the debates so
should the leaders of the other registered federal political parties listed below.



Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party
of Canada

Canadian Action Party

Christian Heritage Party of Canada

Communist Party of Canada

First Peoples National Party of Canada
http://www.elections.ca/#Liberal
Libertarian Party of Canada

Marijuana Party

Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada

People's Political Power Party of Canada

Pirate Party of Canada

Progressive Canadian Party

Rhinoceros Party

United Party of Canada

Western Block Party

Yeah, but none of those have a candidate in every riding.

 

[mentalfloss]

They run in every riding don't they? Then they are a full on national political party and if we want to maintain the illusion of democracy then the green socialists get their word on the podium as well.

Chavez approved.

If May is allowed to be included in the debates so
should the leaders of the other registered federal political parties listed below.

And so should their voters, and the voters children, and their future spawn!

Look, for all intents and purposes, your suggestion is a bit unreasonable - even for a representative democracy. The Green party has enough of a backing to give it a go. Sure, it's partly an arbitrary decision based on a smaller metric, but I think 4% is enough to give her a voice.

It's not going to change much, unless the other parties are actually afraid of her, lol

 

[Liberalman]

Yeah, but none of those have a candidate in every riding.

Does not matter if they have a candidate in every riding because the Green party had that in the last election never got any candidates elected.

The independent MP should be on the televised debates before the Green party when May gets off her behind and gets people elected then it will be different but for now she is not worth listening and wasting time.

 

[Avro]

Chantel Herbert sums it up nicely.

Why Elizabeth May doesn’t belong in election debates

 

[mentalfloss]

Chantel Herbert sums it up nicely.

Why Elizabeth May doesn’t belong in election debates

So, instead of having a nice and full debate encompassing a wide spectrum of issues Canadians care about - it's better to have a crappy debate with less people involved and less things to talk about. This was the reason the last debate sucked, wasn't it?

 

[TenPenny]

So, instead of having a nice and full debate encompassing a wide spectrum of issues Canadians care about - it's better to have a crappy debate with less people involved and less things to talk about. This was the reason the last debate sucked, wasn't it?

Exactly. It amounts to the established parties being scared of anything new or different. The fact that it might bring new/younger/more voters to the table seems to escape them. Lots of people on this forum complain about voter apathy, yet don't want to do anything that might get more people interested in the 'debate'.

If the party qualifies for government money, they should be at the debate.
It's so simple even Iggy could understand it, and maybe explain it to the Conservatives.

In reality, this sums up the whole issue:

the head of the consortium acknowledged the criteria for inclusion can change from one election to another. “There are no written criteria,” said Troy Reeb, the vice-president of news for Shaw Media, which includes Global TV.

There are no written criteria. The major parties, along with the media, decide on the rules.

If Ignatieff and Layton agree that May should be there, all they have to do is quit the game. Does anyone believe that someone won't vote for them because they boycott the debate? They could hold an alternative media event, and get more publicity that way.

Come on, Iggy. Show the power of your convictions.

 

[Liberalman]

Exactly. It amounts to the established parties being scared of anything new or different. The fact that it might bring new/younger/more voters to the table seems to escape them. Lots of people on this forum complain about voter apathy, yet don't want to do anything that might get more people interested in the 'debate'.

If the party qualifies for government money, they should be at the debate.
It's so simple even Iggy could understand it, and maybe explain it to the Conservatives.

If that is true then include the other leaders of the registered parties.

I would love to see just Harper and Ignatieff debate one on one. But it won't happen because Harper would lose big time.

Remember in the last election Harper almost won a majority but his loose lips sank him.

 

[Omicron]

Chavez approved.



And so should their voters, and the voters children, and their future spawn!

Look, for all intents and purposes, your suggestion is a bit unreasonable - even for a representative democracy. The Green party has enough of a backing to give it a go. Sure, it's partly an arbitrary decision based on a smaller metric, but I think 4% is enough to give her a voice.

It's not going to change much, unless the other parties are actually afraid of her, lol

4% is more than enough.

Social-psychologists have studied stuff like this, and the magic number is 3% (technically 3.3%) or about 1/30.

When any trend/social-attitude/fashion-statement/dietary-fad/whatever cracks the 3% barrier its ability to affect behavior of the social group becomes significant, and has to be taken seriously.

The fact that May's got 4% (technically 3.8%) and can now grab the media-time to be able to pressure the broadcast-committee to let her into the debate is a textbook example of how the clout changes and what it means you can do to the rules once you've cracked the 3% barrier.

 

[Avro]

So, instead of having a nice and full debate encompassing a wide spectrum of issues Canadians care about - it's better to have a crappy debate with less people involved and less things to talk about. This was the reason the last debate sucked, wasn't it?

The debates would suck with or without May.

 

[Mowich]

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. :lol: Actually I think they are ALL nasty.

And they are all opportunists too, JLM. :smile:

I was against the GP leader being invited last time too but shut up when she was included thinking I might learn something. What I learned was that after snivelling and whining about her inclusion, she conducted herself in a manner that could be called rude were one being kind - obnoxious were one being truthful. She interrupted the leaders at every chance, speaking over them and continuing to screech after the moderator more or less told her to shut her yap. One would think, given the chance to debate, that the hag might have taken the chance to show that she could bring something besides utter contempt of the process to the debate.