Central Nova..... Green Ship sinks, takes NDP with it.

91 posts / 0 new
Last post
madmax
Central Nova..... Green Ship sinks, takes NDP with it.

 

madmax

I was just checking the previous results in Central Nova.

The NDP Candidate in 2006 received 13,861 votes running against a Strong Conservative and a Solid Liberal Campaign.

Yet, in 2008, without having to face the Liberals, and Asking for the NDP to Support her, and receiving that support, as the NDP vote went down significantly, the very hyped up Elizabeth May came 1,000 votes SHORT of the NDP Candidate just 2 years prior.

Clearly in the name of Stopping Harper, or Ousting MacKay, people were mislead by the media hype to back May and she didn't come remotely close. The posters on Babble indicated from the start that it would be wrong to back May and they were right.

The Liberals won't be as stupid/naive not to field a Candidate in Central Nova next time, and if May couldn't get the job done under these gift like concessions from voters and leaders, she won't be able to do it in the future.

Even worse, Mays strategy allowed the CPC vote to increase in a time of declining voter turnout.

Don't get fooled again [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]

MacKay just got a free ride courtesy of the Green Party strategy.

Brilliant... Good Job....

2006 NDP Candidate 13861 Against all parties
2008 GP LEADER 12,620 With Liberal Capitulation.

Thanks for taking the NDP and Liberals down with you, Conservatives are celebrating....in Central Nova.

Erstwhile Erstwhile's picture

Oh, c'mon, clearly you didn't get the memo. The NDP [i]owed[/i] that seat to EMay, just as they owed a number of other seats to the Liberals.

Big ol' Dipper meanies...

V. Jara

Yeah, EMay was such a PERFECT fit for Central Nova. How could the voters there be so myopic? [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]

JeffWells

I'm a Dipper who doesn't resent competing with the Greens for votes, because that's democracy. May, on the other hand, vilifies Jack and the NDP at every turn from some bizarre and undemocratic sense of entitlement.

janfromthebruce

quote:


Originally posted by madmax:
[b]I was just checking the previous results in Central Nova.

The NDP Candidate in 2006 received 13,861 votes running against a Strong Conservative and a Solid Liberal Campaign.

Yet, in 2008, without having to face the Liberals, and Asking for the NDP to Support her, and receiving that support, as the NDP vote went down significantly, the very hyped up Elizabeth May came 1,000 votes SHORT of the NDP Candidate just 2 years prior.

Clearly in the name of Stopping Harper, or Ousting MacKay, people were mislead by the media hype to back May and she didn't come remotely close. The posters on Babble indicated from the start that it would be wrong to back May and they were right.

The Liberals won't be as stupid/naive not to field a Candidate in Central Nova next time, and if May couldn't get the job done under these gift like concessions from voters and leaders, she won't be able to do it in the future.

Even worse, Mays strategy allowed the CPC vote to increase in a time of declining voter turnout.

Don't get fooled again [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]

MacKay just got a free ride courtesy of the Green Party strategy.

Brilliant... Good Job....

2006 NDP Candidate 13861 Against all parties
2008 GP LEADER 12,620 With Liberal Capitulation.

Thanks for taking the NDP and Liberals down with you, Conservatives are celebrating....in Central Nova.[/b]


One could make a couple of assumptions here, although a better analysis would include an on-the-ground "little research project."
As a researcher this would be my "theory to practice" questions that I would want to disprove. Here goes:
[LIST]Central Novian people most important voting intention was to ensure a "local candidate" won.
[LIST]Due to the hype of the campaign and glare of media and outsiders pushing local voters to vote EMay (who was a known outsider) woke up "the dead" so to speak. So those who did not normally vote, voted for the "local horse" most likely to beat EMay. Rather than Lorifice getting this local "normally don't vote disgruntled voter" it went to McKay. You could also say that this vote could have easy gone to Lorifice as this voter was non-partisan politically except for the local preference. These disgruntled voters received a sense (due to media glare) of their "vote making a difference", as May hyped "that this was a close race" between her and McKay. It was not.
[LIST]Local voters who normally vote progressive or NDP voters switched their alliance to "stop May" believing that (through media hype) it was a close race between the local candidate but front runner McKay and May. This voter also saw May as an outside interloper who would not represent them locally and that is what motivated them to switch their normal NDP alliance to keep McKay in. He would be considered the "lesser of" two evils. [/LIST]

So May work up the "dead voter" and ensured some progressives switched alliances to ensure "the local" won. If May was "strategic" she would fold up her tent and move where the "grass is greener" cause she will never win against the "local person."

West Coast Greeny

No offense, but Louise Lorefice was no Alexis MacDonald. She wouldn't have won there either.

madmax

Lorifice didn't win.

Nor do I believe that Jack Layton or anyone went into the riding to aid Lorifice, but allowed May to lose on her own character and platform as leader of a "National Political Party" who performed in National Televised Debates.

No offence but

Elizabeth May is no......

Alexis MacDonald

People view MacDonald as a success

I don't believe one can view May in the same way considering the kid gloves, media hype, TV and that she spent ALOT of time in the riding prior and during the campaign.

Clearly MacDonald outperformed the Leader of the Green Party.

Lorifice was a victim of circumstance.

Little help from the NDP, and a media circus repeating every word of the GP Leader as Gospell.

Lorifice was not a weak Candidate. I would expect that should May run again in Central Nova and Lorifice run again.

It will be back to Last Place for the GP leader.

Malcolm Malcolm's picture

As Jan said, we'd need some research, but I have a sense that Lorefice also bled "anti-carpetbagger" votes to Peter McKay, who seemed better placed to send Liberal Lizzie packing back to Upper Canada.

Trevormkidd

quote:


Originally posted by West Coast Greeny:
No offense, but Louise Lorefice was no Alexis MacDonald. She wouldn't have won there either.

No kidding. Excluding Central Nova the NDP vote dropped by 10,000 (8%) in the other 10 Nova Ridings. Perhaps that is because they expend more energy on Elizabeth May than on the NDP.

madmax

I have been reading Letters to the Editor from people who campaigned for the NDP in 06 and supported May in 08. She believes that Liberals Voted for MACKay and that NOT enough NDP came to May or Liberals. But Clearly the NDP numbers are down, and the Liberals, well they got Zero Votes and we don't know how they voted or if they stayed home.

But it is clear,

MAY WAS WORSE then the Previous NDP Candidate for drumming up voter support to take on MACKay.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Hello sore losers! NDP gained seats because of favourable votes splits caused by the Green Party. Even a surface reading of the poll tallies shows that the NDP neither gained ground, nor lost it in terms of the popular vote, while the increase in the standing of the Greens came at the expense of the Liberals.

FPTP finally pays of the the NDP, but the whining will never end, apparently.

Erstwhile Erstwhile's picture

quote:


Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]Hello sore losers! NDP gained seats because of favourable votes splits caused by the Green Party. Even a surface reading of the poll tallies shows that the NDP neither gained ground, nor lost it in terms of the popular vote, while the increase in the standing of the Greens came at the expense of the Liberals.

FPTP finally pays of the the NDP, but the whining will never end, apparently.[/b]


Hm, y'know, I thought with the Liberal win in Parkdale-High Park you'd be happy! The NDP wasn't taught enough of a lesson for you yet?

largeheartedboy

quote:


Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]
FPTP finally pays of the the NDP, but the whining will never end, apparently.[/b]

Totally cueball, the NDP got may more seats than the 18% of the popular vote they got. Wait, they didn't and got totally screwed (again!) by our undemocratic voting system.

Cueball Cueball's picture

As I said the whining never ends. Now blame FPTP, even though the vote splitting effect clearly gave the NDP more seats under the manifestly biased electoral system, than they normally would, [i]if the Greens had not been sinking Liberal candidates.[/i]

Whine away.

Michelle

quote:


Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]Hello sore losers! [/b]

Dude, this is trolling and you know it. Cut it out.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Well its a bit much the NDP blaming the Greens for killing their chances, when its pretty clear, despite whatever happened in Central Nova, it was the NDP that increased its share of seats, despite no meaningful increase in its popular vote sharem because of favourable vote splits.

Michelle

Okay, so great, say that. But don't insult the others, okay?

Mojoroad1

Guess I'll put it in here...assuming May survives as leader (doubtful)...has she essentially boot-locked herself to run in CN?

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Mojoroad1 ]

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The voters decided on who got elected. The parties merely tried to sell them their own particular bill of goods. The Bloc and Cons received a big FPTP bonus this time around and the Liberals came out almost even. The NDP and Greens took the big seat hit from FPTP.

Bloc 50 seats 16.2% of seats 10.0% of vote
[should be 30.8 seats according to vote]

Conservative 143 46.4% of seats 37.6% of vote [should be 116(115.8) seats according to vote]

Green Party 0 seats 0.0% of seats 6.8% of vote
[should be 21 (20.9) seats according to vote]

Liberal 76 24.7% of seats 26.2 of vote
[should be 81 (80.60 seats according to vote]

NDP 37 12.0% of seats 18.2% of votes
[should be 56 seats according to vote]

So the Greens lost out on 21 seats, the NDP on 19 and the Libs on 5.


quote:

Originally posted by Cueball:
[QB]As I said the whining never ends. Now blame FPTP, even though the vote splitting effect clearly gave the NDP more seats under the manifestly biased electoral system, than they normally would, [i]if the Greens had not been sinking Liberal candidates.[/i]QB]

If we had PR maybe people would vote for the party they actually want to represent them not the lesser of two evils.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Maybe. Have I ever said otherwise? But suggesting that vote splitting by the Greens damaged the NDP here is pushing it. I think rather the opposite.

By the way, I reviewed the debate video recently, and it was May who said "reform the electoral system" in response to the question "what would the first thing you would do if elected PM?"

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

quote:


Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]Maybe. Have I ever said otherwise? But suggesting that vote splitting by the Greens damaged the NDP here is pushing it. I think rather the opposite.

By the way, I reviewed the debate video recently, and it was May who said the first thing she would do if elected PM would be to reform the electoral system.

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ][/b]


I have never said anything about the vote splitting hurting the NDP.

So can you talk about anything without just lumping every poster into some sort of pool where you can attribute anything said by one [pick your party faithful]to all supporters of that party.

Your getting rather boring because of your inability to see any nuances in any position except your own. I get the fact you don't like the NDP, so who the fuck cares. If you want to talk about issues you will likely get less blow back than the constant harangue against parties that are not actually posters on this site. A political party is a non-human and the humans who belong to parties bring similar but not identical views to those parties.

Cueball Cueball's picture

I am not sure what your problem is, because I never said you said anything about "vote splitting hurting the NDP." I am responding to the particular theme of this thread, which is "Green Ship sinks, takes NDP with it."

You responded: "If we had PR maybe people would vote for the party they actually want to represent them not the lesser of two evils."

I said: "Maybe." And then reiterated my original point.

Where is the dispute?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

quote:


Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]I am not sure what your problem is, because I never said you said anything about "vote splitting hurting the NDP." I am responding to the particular theme of this thread, which is "Green Ship sinks, takes NDP with it."

You responded: "If we had PR maybe people would vote for the party they actually want to represent them not the lesser of two evils."

I said: "Maybe." And then reiterated my original point.

Where is the dispute?[/b]


Sorry no dispute! It merely felt like you were banging me over the head with the same point without actually responding but merely reiterating it over and over again but obviously that is not a dispute but merely you repeating it over and over again.

What was that point again?

Cueball Cueball's picture

My point was that the NDP seems to have done better than expected with precisely the same vote share as they got in the last election, in all probability because the Greens sapped some of the Liberal vote. So, I think "Green Ship sinks, takes NDP with it", is a little off the mark.

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Cueball Cueball's picture

More like: "Green Ship sinks, takes Dion with it".

This is a much more honest summary. Dion was a candidate with one issue where he had considerable credibility, and that was the environment. In fact the Liberals launched their campaign on the issue of the environment. In this election, however, the Greens, simply by the fact that their platform is almost entirely centered on the issue of the environment, undermined any singular special value that Dion's "Green" credentials might have had.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

In the two ridings I was watching very closely in BC the Green vote did not rise that much but the Liberals collapsed and that vote went primarily to the Cons with some to each of the Greens and the NDP. In Burnaby Douglas the Lib went from 33% to 19.4 % and in Van Isl North they went from 12.8% to 4.2%. In VIN the greens beat the liberals but they only had 8% compared to a losing NDP vote of 41.4%

In CN I doubt if the NDP would have won without the May hooplah but I think the Green's would have run in fourth place without all the Liberal help.

Cueball Cueball's picture

I don't doubt that the conservatives also poached some Liberal votes, and this also contributed, but I think the overall tally speaks volumes about what happened, and in particular, I think, the Dion was very hurt by the fact that he could not claim any special environmental cred, in the light of the preassure from the Greens, especially when they kicked off their campaign on this theme.

I can really see many people thinking both that they would like to vote strategically against the conservatives, [i]and vote for a strong environmental program,[/i]. Had the Greens not been around, I think that decision would have been a lot easier for people to make.

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

janfromthebruce

quote:


Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]Maybe. Have I ever said otherwise? But suggesting that vote splitting by the Greens damaged the NDP here is pushing it. I think rather the opposite.

By the way, I reviewed the debate video recently, and it was May who said "reform the electoral system" in response to the question "what would the first thing you would do if elected PM?"

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ][/b]


Actually, that was not the topic of conversation. It was the fact that May's running here ensured McKay received 1000 more votes than he got last time with 4 oppositional candidates running there rather than 3 this time. It was a good observation and I put forth some possible reasons why this happen.

Cueball Cueball's picture

And, if anything, what happened in Central Nova back my view up, because the Liberal vote converted to Green votes. There is no reason to think that the reverse would not also be true. They did not convert NDP.

People who vote Liberal seem quite happy to vote Green when given no Liberal candidate. This indicates that when they are offered the choice, the vote will be more likely to split, unfavourably for both.

Overall NDP vote did not change substantially, here from election to election... am I right?

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Mojoroad1

...Givin the Kid glove - media induced "two party race" horseshit, May pulled into a weak 2nd place. Liberals, as suggeted by Jan, and others, voted more Con "home grown" than they did for May. That's proven in the vote count.

madmax

No Cueball

You are wrong.

The NDP Candidate challenged Peter MacKay without a handout from the Liberals as May had and still ended up with more votes then May Received.

This election all the stars were aligned and she was a major disappointment.

Only on Babble did I read comments and posts that May was not the strong suit that everyone was playing her up to be.

Beyond the rabid partisan Greens who obviously know they are looking at a major failure from their leader in terms of Seat choice (Central Nova) and strategy (Strategic Voting)...

I told you strategic Voting Doesn't work and Central Nova proves it.

May had strategic Voting and she ended up with less then the NDP Candidate who took on all comers in 2006.

Elizabeth is no Alexis.

I expect the NDP vote to recover from the nonsense that happened in Central Nova.

NorthReport

2008 election result
Party Candidate Votes Percentage Elected

CON Peter MacKay 18,239 46.60 X
GRN Elizabeth May 12,620 32.24
NDP Louise Lorefice 7,657 19.56
CHP Michael MacKay 427 1.09
CAP Paul Kemp 196 0.50

2006 Election result
DISTRICT: Central Nova
Candidate Party Vote Count Vote Share Elected
Peter G. MacKay CON 17134 40.66% X
Alexis MacDonald NDP 13861 32.89%
Dan Walsh LIB 10349 24.56%
David Orton GRN 671 1.59%
Allan H. Bezanson ML 124 0.29%

The NDP were within 8% of winning in 2006, yet May, even as a party leader, was more than 14% behind in 2008. Thanks Greens for helping to elect another Conservative MP.

janfromthebruce

quote:


Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]And, if anything, what happened in Central Nova back my view up, because the Liberal vote converted to Green votes. There is no reason to think that the reverse would not also be true. They did not convert NDP.

People who vote Liberal seem quite happy to vote Green when given no Liberal candidate. This indicates that when they are offered the choice, the vote will be more likely to split, unfavourably for both.

Overall NDP vote did not change substantially, here from election to election... am I right?

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ][/b]


Wrong, and others have shown why. And I think that even NDP folks voted McKay to keep the carpetbagger out and her media circus.

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: janfromthebruce ]

KenS

I doubt there was any of that at all.

Cueball Cueball's picture

quote:


Originally posted by janfromthebruce:
[b]

Wrong, and others have shown why. And I think that even NDP folks voted McKay to keep the carpetbagger out and her media circus.

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: janfromthebruce ][/b]


Yeah, I noticed that. Somehow 5000 votes abandoned the NDP and went to Elizabeth May. What can I say? Sorry, in this riding the NDP were unable to hold onto their vote, against the national trend.

By the way, 7000 votes would have lost in the last election too.

janfromthebruce

quote:


Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]

Yeah, I noticed that. Somehow 5000 votes abandoned the NDP and went to Elizabeth May. What can I say? Sorry, in this riding the NDP were unable to hold onto their vote, against the national trend.

By the way, 7000 votes would have lost in the last election too.[/b]


What national trend? NDP took more votes overall in NS than the liberals, so what national trend are you talking about?
It's more to the point that Central Novian's didn't like the "carpetbagger" and their home county made into a media circus.

Left J.A.B.

Folks this is a NATIONAL leader that lost her own riding. That is close to unheard of for a serious party. What the NDP did or didn't do is irrelevant.

Any normal leader would resign their seat in a situation like this. (Well unless you are John Tory). That May has tried to make the case the Greens are a legit national party, and didn't immediatly resign says an awful lot about her hubris. If May doesn't resign Greens should be calling for her to. If you cannot carry your own seat as a leader, you are either a fringe candidate, or a drag on your party.

Cueball Cueball's picture

All the invective does not strike a pose of confidence, rather desperation. If I were to judge by what I see on this site, I would think it is the NDP that is coming apart, not the Greens or the Liberals.

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

remind remind's picture

LMAOOOOO, so then cueball, what does it mean in your respect, as that is all that we are hearing from you?

Cueball Cueball's picture

It means that if I say anything at all negative about NDP policy, you read it as invecitve.

Taks for example, Left Jab's lecture about the duty of party leaders to resign, if they don't win their own seat. Well, that may very well be the case for a major national party with decades, if not a century of history behind it, but for a small party essentially running its first full slate of candidates in a national election, the Greens did pretty well, and increased their vote. Not only that their leader came pretty close to winning her seat, and she proved popular with media.

Dumping May at this point in time might very well be something that the Greens would consider, but this campaign has hardly proved to be a complete bust for them, and in fact if any party did well here in terms of its objectives, the Greens are it. Increasing the national vote share, appearing as an equal contender in the media, and otherwise establishing itself as a true national force.

May did some good politics here, she cleared the decks of Liberal opposition, she got herself in the debate, etc. etc. All NDP'rs seem to be able to do in response is talk about how unfair it all is.

remind remind's picture

No cueball, it means you have gotten down right personal in your invectives, but are still chastizing others for what you consider to their invectives. And indeed further added an invective, by your invective comment, I invite you to take the mote out of your own eye.

The rest of your comment stretches things more than a bit!

Cueball Cueball's picture

quote:


When the CCF allied with the Canadian Labour Congress to form the New Democratic Party (NDP) in 1961, Douglas defeated Hazen Argue at the first NDP leadership convention and became the new party's first leader. [b]Douglas resigned from provincial politics and sought election to the House of Commons in the riding of Regina City in 1962, but was defeated.[/b] He was later elected in a by-election in the riding of Burnaby—Coquitlam, British Columbia.

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Douglas]Tommy Douglas[/url]

Guess Tommy should have resigned from the leadership of the NDP eh, Remind? [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

quote:


Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Douglas]Tommy Douglas[/url]

Guess Tommy should have resigned from the leadership of the CCF eh, Remind? [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img] [/b]


And thus we have the Burnaby Douglas Riding.

[img]wink.gif" border="0[/img] [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img] [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]

I'd give her one more kick at the can for amusements sake. She should stay on until she loses two byelections and a general election.

Cueball Cueball's picture

The point is very simple. The goal posts are different for established national parties, and new ones.

sway

No !
It means..........

""Bloc 50 seats 16.2% of seats 10.0% of vote
[should be 30.8 seats according to vote]

Conservative 143 46.4% of seats 37.6% of vote [should be 116(115.8) seats according to vote]

Green Party 0 seats 0.0% of seats 6.8% of vote
[should be 21 (20.9) seats according to vote]

Liberal 76 24.7% of seats 26.2 of vote
[should be 81 (80.60 seats according to vote]

NDP 37 12.0% of seats 18.2% of votes
[should be 56 seats according to vote]

So the Greens lost out on 21 seats, the NDP on 19 and the Libs on 5. ""(thanks kropotkin)

Is the real problem.

If we can not have even talk of proportional representation even from the party who owned it maybe we should start with just proportional and at the very least fair vote to seat ratios.
It obviously will be more difficult without a real media or even journalistic integrity most times now in Canada.
But the real problem in all of it sadly is just the basic greed and ignorance of the human animal ....period.
Must be.

Watching Richmond BC Chinese canadians cheer-lead and yelp with sadistic glee as harper explained and talked about jailing 14 year old .....er by the way ...Canadian kids.

We live in a time of wide spread cloned ignorance .......complete growth based ignorance ....instant gratification ignorance ...isolation from reality ignorance and we are using the very best weakness in all humans to perpetrate it.
Greed.

Oh how I wish to live to see the lights really go out as I know over half will be lost before the freezer defrosts.
It all just becomes a Blindenburg group ? ...911...haliburton...florida vote count ...type conspiracy until when one stops steps back and really analyzes all the basic sheeple stupidity nicely laid out.
After blatant and open mean spirited character type attacks on dion himself (like chretien's lip problems) are ignored as media just spoon feeds the Masses that he is just an inspector clue-so(bumbling)type and anything else they are to think for the next day and a half instead of real things like the broken election promise wasting 300 million ....the little problem of coastal cities being new submarine tourist parks .....yes just all in the guise of forwarding their original choice and plant here.... mr usa ....iggy..yes back to running their other horse in the plan or party ...point being ?
remove all interference from what was canada as they get on with their original plan and extract all our oil and of course the real prise ..our water.

Until guys like I read here can say they know those others above are really their only hope at all and really just their quirky left leaning brothers ...all the brave party hack talk here will not remove the pain the real man in the real street will now feel moving forward ....yes as the dog eat dog is back in town
and here we still can not even grow a thread on how to grow and reunite the left.

I wrote all the senior liberals I could find, Jack Layton and Liz.........No one responded.

Seems the games the quest and the country ....the world ...the people ....secondary.

I would like to start talking about how we can unite the left so that 36 % can not continue to bully us 64 % just because our own stupidity shows up in our self perpetuating political stupidity against each other.

For heavens sake if harper can reunite racists bible thumpers and gun totting bullies into one force we surely can get the likes of some of you all into the same force?

How about we start with all of you who think the greens and their members should all just be executed please just pipe up here and all of you rest then now realize you are on that at least on the same team?

Just so sad for all of Canada really.

I miss ignorance as it is or must have been bliss.

Have fun here fellas.
Leaving and coming back is like never leaving.
Same old same old.

madmax

The Green Party is almost 30 years old. There are alot of parties newer then the Green Party.

The goal posts were eased for the Green Leader. And she still lost. As well as the easy by- election. Those were two very easy seats to grab for a party with no "baggage" or history because they have had the fortune (Mis) to have never ever elected anyone ever.

Bottom Line is the Gps start whining about proportional rep, and have yet to thank the Liberals for gifting them a riding without contention. Unfortuneately, they didn't succeed.

The NDP supports proportional rep. They also are able to win seats, much as the CCF did before them.

The GPs appear to be more like the Natural Law Party and the National Party of the 90s. No critical mass, and no mass appeal.


quote:

Thirteen other candidates exceeded 4%, and another 18 exceeded 3%. Even the lowest-placing candidate, with 2.89%, received a higher percentage than the national share of the Green Party of Canada.

During the election, the party sued the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation to try to force it to allow Hurtig to participate in the leaders' debates, but was not successful.


Sound Familiar

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: madmax ]

remind remind's picture

quote:


Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]Guess Tommy should have resigned from the leadership of the NDP eh, Remind? [/b]

Usually you are not so sloppy in your rational process, cue. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]

First, I never said EMay should not run again, that was you changing the parameters and moving them off of your own invectives, while hassling others about theirs and stretching facts more than a bit.

Secondly, Tommy had already been Premier of Sask, for 5 straight terms, before the alliance and the creation of the NDP. He was a tested politician that had proven he could win over and over again. He sought the by-election run, later that same year, and [b]won[/b]. The CCF/NDP already had been able to acheive governance of a province. Something the GP has never been able to do in the 20+ years they have been around in Canada. Yes over 20 years now cue, it is not like they are some new kid on the block..

Thirdly, EMay cannot be compared to Tommy in anyway shape or form, nor the GP with the CCF/NDP and this occasion is no different. [img]tongue.gif" border="0[/img]

sway

Vote L.N.G the common sense party!

Let members not leaders decide.

Still keep different wings or parties EDA's if need be but have a final one winner local election of their own candidates to then go on to the federal ballot.

Any one?

janfromthebruce

quote:


Originally posted by Cueball:
[b] Not only that their leader came pretty close to winning her seat, and she proved popular with media.[/b]

May did not come close to winning her seat. What did happen is that McKay increased his vote total from 2006.

Let's have fun with math and compare:
2008
McKay - 18,239 45.60%
May - 12,620 32.24
[b]total - 5,610 13.36% in difference[/b]

2006
McKay - 17,134 40.66
Alexa - 13,861 32.89
[b]total - 3,273 7.77 in difference[/b]

NDP Alexa M. received 2,377 or 5.59% more votes against McKay in a field of 5 candidates than May did in a field of 4 candidates. Furthermore, Alexa did that without 2nd party support, without free advertising by Aveez, without votefortheenvironment strategic voting help, without media fawning.

Let me be blunt, losing by over 5000 votes "is not close". In other races, it would be considered a "landslide" of defeat of the 2nd placed candidate, which it was.

Only a koolade drinking Green could actually say that "May" came close. [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: janfromthebruce ]

madmax

[url=http:////http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotia/1085050.html]Elizabeth May Thinks She is Tommy Douglas[/url]


quote:

"I am not in any way attracted to any other party," she said, suggesting perhaps the Green party’s role in the Canadian system is to act as a social conscience.

"I’ve been offered to run for other parties and I’m not interested," she said.

"We may fulfill a role such as Tommy Douglas when the CCF was young and fresh," she said.

"I don’t know that our ultimate quest is for me to become prime minister."

If good, Green party ideas are adopted by other parties, she says that’s fine with her.


You would never know that this is going on....

[url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081016.wgreens17/BN... Fends off Calls for resignation[/url]

Pages