Greens now number three

[LittleRunningGag]

According to the Greens site, they are now polling in the number three position.

http://www.greenparty.ca/en/news/thirdplace

Today, for the first time in our 24-year history, we are polling as one of Canada's top three parties in a national survey of voter intentions.

Do you know what this means? It means that people, tired of scandal-ridden politics and inaction on the issues that count, are putting their trust and hope in us. It means that we are emerging as Canada's new third party. It means that we can win seats.

...

The latest Strategic Counsel survey for the Globe and Mail/CTV News shows that the Green Party with 13% has overtaken both the NDP (12%) and the Bloc Quebecois (11%) for the first time ever. As a resident of British Columbia, I am also thrilled to note Green support in the west now stands at a strong 18%, ahead of the fourth-place NDP (16%).

What a commentary on the state of politics in Canada. The middle parties are so useless that mainstream voters are starting to move to the fringes. I wonder when the CHP will start picking up seats. :-?

 

[karrie]

I voted green in the last election, largely because I couldn't stomach my other options.

It would be nice to see things shaken up.

 

[iARTthere4iam]

I am not going to be giving any of my votes to the greens. I would, however, like for them to have some voice in parliment, some of their ideas are very good. Too many of their ideas are silly.

 

[karrie]

My sentiments exactly. When I cast my vote, I knew there was no risk of them winning the election. But I would have loved if they'd earned a position of having a voice at the very least.

 

[YoungJoonKim]

Wow, such an astonishing advancement...
Impressed, truly...

 

[Canucklehead]

I'll have to go search out their current and older political views since the last time I looked they may be green but they are/were as right wing as the conservatives

 

[YoungJoonKim]

I'll have to go search out their current and older political views since the last time I looked they may be green but they are/were as right wing as the conservatives

Well, yes, in some cases
They did offer income tax cuts..but they are plain LEFT last time I checked [2 years ago]

 

[Canucklehead]

Well, yes, in some cases
They did offer income tax cuts..but they are plain LEFT last time I checked [2 years ago]

The last I heard of them in any detail was a few years ago. They were all for privatisation, tax cuts, creating a more business friendly environment ... which makes sense because the party was originally founded by business people with an slant on preserving the environment. This gave them a leftist slant in the media's eyes since it was their main platform. Other than that, the media hasn't said much about their policies.

 

[jwmcq625]

No! Now it seems that they are leftists who what government to be all things to all people from birth to death. Great just what we need three left wing parties, The Reds, Orange and Greens. They are talking universal daycare, and like the Liberals and the NDP are citing Quebec as an example at $7.00/day. The truth is that according to an article I read in Canada Free Press, the Quebec program is anything but a successin fact it is unsustainable. The people it was supposed to help (the poor), are not able to gain access to the spaces because they are all going to higher income families who have political connections. Just aother program like the failed gun registry to throw money at with no hope it will achieve any positive outcomes.

 

[Baxter Basics]

It is a very promising sign that their popularity is rising. Their ideas are good, and it's about time that people are waking up to the fact that if we don't look after this big blue globe, all the tax cuts and daycare and economy are worth sh_t anyway. We are sucking this planet dry faster than it can regenerate, and it's about time we realize that.

 

[s243a]

I don't like the greens but I suppose they are better then the NDP. As far as if they are left or right I thought they were more proposing a tax shift then a tax cut. That is replace say some income tax with a carbon tax. Although if they want universal daycare they'll need a tax grab and not a tax shift.

 

[karrie]

I don't like the greens but I suppose they are better then the NDP. As far as if they are left or right I thought they were more proposing a tax shift then a tax cut. That is replace say some income tax with a carbon tax. Although if they want universal daycare they'll need a tax grab and not a tax shift.

Would they need a tax grab? It seems to me that restructuring is a possible fix. No one seems to want to shift where tax money is allotted to.... if money's going to a useless endeavor, we'll keep it going there so as to not piss anyone off, and just hike rates to cover our new needs.... but the greens were talking about changing tax priorities as one of the main components of their election campaign. I don't recall any promises for lower taxes either. They seemed pretty flat out that we'd be taxed, that taxes were needed for programs and we'd just have to suck it up for the good of the environment. It seemed like the basis of a party that wouldn't hesitate to take money away from some of the areas that are less needed for the country as a whole (arts grants etc), even if it upset a few people.

 

[s243a]

Would they need a tax grab? It seems to me that restructuring is a possible fix. No one seems to want to shift where tax money is allotted to.... if money's going to a useless endeavor, we'll keep it going there so as to not piss anyone off, and just hike rates to cover our new needs.... but the greens were talking about changing tax priorities as one of the main components of their election campaign. I don't recall any promises for lower taxes either. They seemed pretty flat out that we'd be taxed, that taxes were needed for programs and we'd just have to suck it up for the good of the environment. It seemed like the basis of a party that wouldn't hesitate to take money away from some of the areas that are less needed for the country as a whole (arts grants etc), even if it upset a few people.

Okay, which programs do they plan to cut to pay for universal daycare? How much will they this raise? How much do they think that universal daycare will cost? On another note do we really want to be dependent on government for our Child care? I believe that people should be able to opt out of government programs like health care, education and childcare and be compensated somewhat in returned tax dollars for opting out? Why does government need to be involved in Child care anyway? There is no significant infrastructure requirements for daycare. Anyone can set up a daycare in their own home. What do they need the government for?

 

[karrie]

Okay, which programs do they plan to cut to pay for universal daycare? How much will they this raise? How much do they think that universal daycare will cost? On another note do we really want to be dependent on government for our Child care? I believe that people should be able to opt out of government programs like health care, education and childcare and be compensated somewhat in returned tax dollars for opting out? Why does government need to be involved in Child care anyway? There is no significant infrastructure requirements for daycare. Anyone can set up a daycare in their own home. What do they need the government for?

I don't even know if they're aiming for universal child care. I could care less frankly. But, the idea that tax grabs would be needed just seemed to be an assumption... especially if a government can provide child care across the board and thus get more women paying taxes. All I was saying is it might not be as needed if a government restructures its taxes. Right now in some of the towns I've lived in, working isn't always an option because child care is unavailable (even unregistered day homes).

And frankly, I'd rather opt out of supporting anthropological digs and arts programs than opt out of universal health care or education.

 

[Niflmir]

Seriously, that "Cultural heritage fund" just seems to be a slush fund for buying voters. "Oh, you voted in one of our MP's, sure we'll fund your local hero who saved a dog parade." An exaggeration, but some of the funding mandates border on insanity.

 

[missile]

I think the new popularity of the Greens is due to the loss of support for the failed NDP.

 

[Tonington]

A lot of support from Greens is coming from the youngest voters. The green movement is more than just a shifting trend, most young kids realize the implications of our present practices.

At campuses and high schools, the green movement is more popular than young Liberals and young Conservatives. I won a prize at my campus, free tire rotation or something, I gave away because I don't own a car. The greens were there with two identical cars, with two different tire pressures. You push both of them, and see how difficult it is in an under inflated tire. That's just simple stuff, but they were also putting on stuff for bicycles too. I got a free tune-up on my bike from one of the kiosks.

What have the other parties done for students?

 

[karrie]

What have the other parties done for students?

hmmmm.... I voted green in the last election, but I still can't help but get the chills when I read this statement T. It brings to mind youth indoctrination programs run across the world for a host of horrible groups.

 

[Tonington]

Let me phrase it another way. How have the other parties engaged youth to become active in the state of our country, when voter turnouts have been flat for years?

 

[karrie]

lol... sorry T, but no matter how you phrase it, it's still the scenario you painted (giving away prizes and services) that struck me as comparable.

I totally understand what you mean (and I'm not saying I disagree with their tactics), but it just stuck out in my mind that there's a thin line there, ya know?