Will Green Party ever get elected?

Baxter Basics

New Member
Aug 26, 2007
12
0
1
And after October 10 you may not have to resort to "strategic voting",to keep someone OUT of power - if the proportional vote referendum goes through, then everyone can properly vote with the knowledge that it WILL make a difference.
 

jwmcq625

Nominee Member
Sep 14, 2007
95
1
8
The Green's stand about as much chance of getting elected as a snowball does of lasting in hell. Elizabeth May and the Green seem to be a one-issue party, and God knows we don't need another NDP lookalike, that for all intents and purposes would raise taxes to fulfill all of their hair-brained social programs. Thanks, but no thanks!
 

YoungJoonKim

Electoral Member
Aug 19, 2007
690
5
18
Well, I guess we will just wait another 100 years til we get a party that is committed to do anything for greener country. Oh wait..oil will run out..
nah.."let's be happy, don't worry"
 

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
67
It's a shame they weren't invited to the Ontario debate. Federally, I'd give the Greens a look before the Libs or the separatist Bloc anyday.
 

calmecam

New Member
Oct 3, 2007
16
4
3
Eventually They Will

Will the Green Party ever form the government, likely not, but the question was: Will the Green Party ever get elected.

The answer to that question is: eventually yes.

There was NO Green Party on the radar a few years ago. Then they surfaced to little fanfare. They came back and ran candidates in all ridings, and gained enough votes (at least 5%) to have official party status with regard to our election financing laws.

Now they are polling at about 10% nationally.

The Greens' popularity is concentrated, in particular, with younger voters who are tired of seeing the world in terms of left and right.

The Green story is akin to that of the tortoise and the hare... slow but steady will win the race.

In certain areas of the country, the Greens are competitive with the NDP and even with the Liberals... it may not be in the coming election, but it is only a matter of time before there will be Green Party MPs in the HoC.

The changes to federal political party financing as brought in by Jean Chretien make it so that your vote gives the party of your choice (provided it gains a mininum share of the national vote) $1,75 to run it's next campaign.

The Greens get more than enough votes to qualify for that funding, so if you don't want to reward the Liberals, Conservatives or NDPers with your vote (and your $1,75), then Green is now, more than ever, a viable and legitimate choice.
 

calmecam

New Member
Oct 3, 2007
16
4
3
Elizabeth May is NOT a hippie-chick.

She worked very, very closely with Brian Mulroney during his term in office and that led to him being declared the "greenest" of all our PMs.

Unlike other politicians who only look for opportunities to slam their rivals, she actually gives credit when credit is due if one of her opponents does something right, and she will call those to the mat who do not. At least with her, you know you are going to get the actual facts and not spin.

The Greens are surprisingly very much like the Progressive Conservatives we used to know before the party was hi-jacked by the Reformers.

Take the time to read their platform. You might be surprised!
 

Graeme

Electoral Member
Jun 5, 2006
349
1
18
I think there is a good chance of them winning some seats, probably in the election. But I highly doubt they will ever form a government.

But then again, you're talking to the guy who predicted the Liberals would have a majority government by now. :lol:

As opposed to winning those seats in the next lower house lottery?? (although I think they would have a better chance there!)

THE ONLY WAY a green member will get in will be in a by-election, and one that won't change the dynamics of the house, in other words the green party member will be pretty much useless even if they did get elected. Then by the next election they would be ousted again.

A one issue party won't make it in, it is only thanks to hugely unionized electoral districts that the NDP make it in. While they aren't a one issue party they are a one purpose party. They do okay B.C. Where there are a lot of close races but thanks to the overwhelming unionization of fishing and forestry, they can win a few seats. In Ontario It's Hamilton and Windsor: again HUGE unionization. It is actually pretty suprising that they get some high-profilers in downtown toronto, but those districts are generally hand picked by the senior NDPers as the place with the largest niche vote that don't like the two Majors. In otherwords they slide up the middle to take the race. (sneaky sneaky)

Then the last place the NDP win is WAAAAAY up north again for the same reason as they can win a seat or two in toronto, the niche vote.
 

calmecam

New Member
Oct 3, 2007
16
4
3
The Green Party USED to be a one-issue party, but ever since they started running candidates in every riding, they have a full policy platform that deals with taxes, crime, social issues, etc.

Rather than simply thoughtlessly spewing out the "party lines" of the traditional parties who think Canadians are too stupid or too busy to inform themselves, take the time to actually read the party platform.

You'll find that the Green Party no longer is a one-issue party, and even that the party is the one MOST like the good old fashioned Progressive Conservatives we grew to know and love (as opposed to the Republican-lite Reformers who now constitute the current Conservative Party of Canada that the media continue to misrepresent by calling them "Tories" which is lead by a man who seems to hate everything for which Canada has traditionnally stood).
 

jwmcq625

Nominee Member
Sep 14, 2007
95
1
8
Will Green party ever get elected?

The answer is NO! They are essentially a one issue party, and we already have the NDP, and they will never be elected either, thank God for small blessings! We do not need another party that wants bigger government, and wants government to be all things to all people, from birth to death. Essentially that is what the Liberals, NDP and and the Greens want. For a change, I want to be able to keep what little money I have, instead of giving it to government so it can be wasted on yet another new bureaucracy. I am sick and tired of supporting big government while the poverty rate in Canada continues to increase, and the rich get richer.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
And after October 10 you may not have to resort to "strategic voting",to keep someone OUT of power - if the proportional vote referendum goes through, then everyone can properly vote with the knowledge that it WILL make a difference.
Yeah notice the complacency with regard to that... what a disappointment.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
The answer is NO! They are essentially a one issue party, and we already have the NDP, and they will never be elected either, thank God for small blessings! We do not need another party that wants bigger government, and wants government to be all things to all people, from birth to death. Essentially that is what the Liberals, NDP and and the Greens want. For a change, I want to be able to keep what little money I have, instead of giving it to government so it can be wasted on yet another new bureaucracy. I am sick and tired of supporting big government while the poverty rate in Canada continues to increase, and the rich get richer.
I could second this.
 

Graeme

Electoral Member
Jun 5, 2006
349
1
18
The Green Party USED to be a one-issue party, but ever since they started running candidates in every riding, they have a full policy platform that deals with taxes, crime, social issues, etc.

Rather than simply thoughtlessly spewing out the "party lines" of the traditional parties who think Canadians are too stupid or too busy to inform themselves, take the time to actually read the party platform.

You'll find that the Green Party no longer is a one-issue party, and even that the party is the one MOST like the good old fashioned Progressive Conservatives we grew to know and love (as opposed to the Republican-lite Reformers who now constitute the current Conservative Party of Canada that the media continue to misrepresent by calling them "Tories" which is lead by a man who seems to hate everything for which Canada has traditionnally stood).

maybe you haven't read the Green Part Policy yourself, it is ALL environment they pretend to write about something else, but everything they write leads back to the envronment.

"candidates in every riding" HA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
the 19-25 year old goofs that are still in school, don't count as candidates, they are place holders so there is someone to put up the bloody green party signs, ANYONE who believes the green party is anything like the Progressive Conservatives is smoking a little to much of the good stuff, and is WAY to gullible.

Oh the boring old fear mongering about the "SCARY" conservative party *YAAAAWN* time to get a new shtick there buddy.
 

Niflmir

A modern nomad
Dec 18, 2006
3,460
58
48
Leiden, the Netherlands
maybe you haven't read the Green Part Policy yourself, it is ALL environment they pretend to write about something else, but everything they write leads back to the envronment.

"candidates in every riding" HA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
the 19-25 year old goofs that are still in school, don't count as candidates, they are place holders so there is someone to put up the bloody green party signs, ANYONE who believes the green party is anything like the Progressive Conservatives is smoking a little to much of the good stuff, and is WAY to gullible.

Oh the boring old fear mongering about the "SCARY" conservative party *YAAAAWN* time to get a new shtick there buddy.

Having a clear principle that defines your party is far different than being a one-issue party. A broad and comprehensive platform based on a single principle is not one issue. The overwhelming gulf that the Green party must currently cross is not that of possessing a comprehensive platform that represents the views of many Canadians, they must convince Canadians to break out of the Liberal-Conservative dichotomy that entrenches public opinion and cripples our ineffective electoral system.

Our current electoral system favours regional, "pave our roads for votes" platforms. A party which strives for national unity to move forward on international issues in a democratic and accountable fashion will always have problems. Currently most of these sorts of international agreements happen in extra-parliamentary meetings, free of democratic accountability.

Clearly, if the electoral system was altered in favor of plurality of representation, the green party would be elected: they have enough constituents as is. Barring that, which seems likely in this Liberal-Conservative entrenchment they must work hard like the NDP did to achieve local concentrations of voters. In either case the time scale for election may be on the order of decades, barring some environmental cataclysm clearly linked to anthropogenic climate change.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Anyone who actually reads the green party platform will see that they are not a one issue party. As Niflmir says, there is a difference between one issue platform and a platform based on a singular principle. Marijuana party, one issue platform. Green party clearly is not. Though I doubt that detractors would actually read their platform before making such statements.
http://www.greenparty.ca/en/platform2006/green_party_vision
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,367
2,953
113
Toronto, ON
Anyone who actually reads the green party platform will see that they are not a one issue party. As Niflmir says, there is a difference between one issue platform and a platform based on a singular principle. Marijuana party, one issue platform. Green party clearly is not. Though I doubt that detractors would actually read their platform before making such statements.
http://www.greenparty.ca/en/platform2006/green_party_vision

We will reform the tax system so that our spending better reflects the goals of a healthy and safe Canada.

As someone who earns more than $45K/year I find this statement enough to prevent my voting for them. Reforming is usually a nice word for increasing.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Well, they won't be for everybody. They want to lower taxes for people under 45,000 a year, but that doesn't mean increasing it necessarily for say a 50,000 earner. The crux of their tax plan is to shift more taxes to corporations. Corporate taxes fell by 8% while corporate profit bloomed. Also to study different regimes say between us and other developed nations, to find a best of kind of thing.
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,367
2,953
113
Toronto, ON
Well, they won't be for everybody. They want to lower taxes for people under 45,000 a year, but that doesn't mean increasing it necessarily for say a 50,000 earner. The crux of their tax plan is to shift more taxes to corporations. Corporate taxes fell by 8% while corporate profit bloomed. Also to study different regimes say between us and other developed nations, to find a best of kind of thing.

They need to be more specific. That is one of the reasons I can't support them. The canidates I have heard and the platform I have read has always been very vague and unclear. That is relative to the big 3 parties which are certainly not the models of clarity either.
 

Niflmir

A modern nomad
Dec 18, 2006
3,460
58
48
Leiden, the Netherlands
They need to be more specific. That is one of the reasons I can't support them. The canidates I have heard and the platform I have read has always been very vague and unclear. That is relative to the big 3 parties which are certainly not the models of clarity either.

Clear rhetoric is the third rail for our parliamentary system. Voters in Canada are far too reactionary. One clear statement and the failings of your governance will be made clear, sealing your political fate. A vague promise can always be made to seem accomplished.