Elizabeth May Has HAD IT w/ Jagmeet Singh "LIES & SMEARS" & Calls Him "DESPERATE"

69 posts / 0 new
Last post
Mighty Middle
Elizabeth May Has HAD IT w/ Jagmeet Singh "LIES & SMEARS" & Calls Him "DESPERATE"

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May says she is “losing respect” for NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, over what she claims is his repeated use of the abortion issue to distinguish their respective parties, which are gripped in a tight race for third place. 

“I don’t want to sound harsh because I do want to work with Mr. Singh after the election, but I am losing respect for him because this is not open for debate,” May said in a telephone interview with CTV News on Monday from Vancouver.

May, however, says Singh is continuing to talk about abortion in a “desperate” attempt to sway voters. But according to her, the opposite is happening. She claims NDP voters are calling Green campaign offices to complain about how Singh and the NDP are taking jabs at the Greens. 

“It never occurred to me the smears and lies thrown at the Green Party would be coming from the NDP,” May said.  “I guess he is desperate.  That is not a fact. That is called a lie ...Our platform, if he chooses to read it, calls for expanding access to abortion services in those parts of the country that are inadequately serviced.”

https://election.ctvnews.ca/may-says-she-s-losing-respect-for-singh-over...

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

May tries to suck and blow at the same time. You cannot run saying we will not whip our MP's and then claim that you can guarantee how they will vote on any issue. If the candidates in question have stated opinions on issues then one must presume that if elected as an MP they could very well vote how they believe since that is also a fundamental tenant of the Green platform.

NorthReport

At an all candidates meeting recently the NDP candidate said to the Green candidate "How Dare You" (a take-off on Greta's comments) assume that the Greens are the only party concerned with environment issues.  It was well received by the audience.

quizzical

 May a good Christian smear while accusing Jagmeet of doing  just what she is doing.

Christian pros at smearing never cease to amaze me.  no wonder the world is fked

 

pietro_bcc

May spent her career smearing the NDP rather than working with them and now she's offended that 1% of what she threw at the NDP is coming back to her.

If anything the NDP should double down and add attacks about how Elizabeth May supports building new refineries to increase extraction at the tar sands.

JKR

This might make a NDP-Green merger a bit more difficult but the upcoming disproportional FPTP election results may still almost demand a merger.

Misfit Misfit's picture

She is retiring from what I remember. If that’s the case she will be gone.

BertramPotts BertramPotts's picture

Oh yay, the 3rd and 4th place parties (and the two leftmost parties) are spending all their time bickering with each other again, what a great use of all our time. 

NorthReport

May is a right-winger and a waste of time. What is she going to get this election 3 or maybe 4 seats. Who cares. Until she is removed as leader it's pointless. And even then as we speak she is making overtures to JWR, another right-winger to replace her.

BertramPotts BertramPotts's picture

Elizabaeth May is a red tory running a party that has mostly left wing positions (if a somewhat sloppy policy shop), after this election there will be a handful of other Green MPs who all came of age after red tories stopped being a thing. The left needs a better approach to our vote split than name calling, as I fear we're going to find out in 20 days. 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

The terms a Green-NDP merger, IMHO, would have to include THESE provisions:

1) May's immediate resignation as leader and her agreement never to play any meaningful role again in how the GPC is run or what it stands for:

2) The democratization and decentralization of both parties-which would also mean the abolition of the pointless NDP policy requiring anyone who joins the federal party to also be a member of the provincial or territorial party in the jurisdiction where they live;

3) The immediate establishment of an small-g "green" and small-l "labour" working group, with the small-l labour contingent coming from the labour grassroots as opposed to being chosen by the calcified, old-line trade union leadership.

4) An official apology from the GPC for all the years May spent falsely blaming the NDP for the election of the Harper government.  

5) An agreement that the new party's name would include neither the words "Green" or "New Democratic"-it would need to be a new name for new era.

None of which will happen before May's departure from the scene, of course.

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

quizzical wrote:

 May a good Christian smear while accusing Jagmeet of doing  just what she is doing.

Christian pros at smearing never cease to amaze me.  no wonder the world is fked

 

And, of course, there are the comments she never really renounced or even apologized for in which she claimed women who had abortions were making a "frivolous choice".

BertramPotts BertramPotts's picture

Ken Burch wrote:

The terms a Green-NDP merger, IMHO, would have to include THESE provisions:

1) May's immediate resignation as leader and her agreement never to play any meaningful role again in how the GPC is run or what it stands for:

2) The democratization and decentralization of both parties-which would also mean the abolition of the pointless NDP policy requiring anyone who joins the federal party to also be a member of the provincial or territorial party in the jurisdiction where they live;

3) The immediate establishment of an small-g "green" and small-l "labour" working group, with the small-l labour contingent coming from the labour grassroots as opposed to being chosen by the calcified, old-line trade union leadership.

4) An official apology from the GPC for all the years May spent falsely blaming the NDP for the election of the Harper government.  

5) An agreement that the new party's name would include neither the words "Green" or "New Democratic"-it would need to be a new name for new era.

None of which will happen before May's departure from the scene, of course.

 

I think all you really need is number 2, everything else would flow from that. You sure aren't going to be able to sell a merger to Greens with preconditions about who gets to run, but Elizabeth May (or any other Green) could never hope to win a fair vote of our combined voter bases/members/donors anyway. 

After this election we really need to start getting serious about this, if the PCs and Wildrose can figure it out why can't we? 

Misfit Misfit's picture

Ken Burch wrote:

The terms a Green-NDP merger, IMHO, would have to include THESE provisions:

1) May's immediate resignation as leader and her agreement never to play any meaningful role again in how the GPC is run or what it stands for:

2) The democratization and decentralization of both parties-which would also mean the abolition of the pointless NDP policy requiring anyone who joins the federal party to also be a member of the provincial or territorial party in the jurisdiction where they live;

3) The immediate establishment of an small-g "green" and small-l "labour" working group, with the small-l labour contingent coming from the labour grassroots as opposed to being chosen by the calcified, old-line trade union leadership.

4) An official apology from the GPC for all the years May spent falsely blaming the NDP for the election of the Harper government.  

5) An agreement that the new party's name would include neither the words "Green" or "New Democratic"-it would need to be a new name for new era.

None of which will happen before May's departure from the scene, of course.

 

the Old Undemocratic Chartreuse Party?

Misfit Misfit's picture

How about Chartreuse Old Undemocratic Party or COUP?

Misfit Misfit's picture

Kelly Elected Environmental Party (KEEP)

Misfit Misfit's picture

Kelly Outrageously Olive Khaki party (KOOK)?

Misfit Misfit's picture

Chartreuse Old Olive Kelly party (COOK)? Slogan could read: “Books You Can Finally Put YourTrust In?”

bekayne

Misfit wrote:

Chartreuse Old Olive Kelly party (COOK)? 

Image result for it's a cookbook

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

I shouldn't be enjoying this, but I am.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

They could also gain instant name familiarity by calling themselves "The Red Green Party" http://www.grapegrowersofontario.com/sites/default/files/Red%20Green.jpg

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

They could also gain instant name familiarity by calling themselves "The Red Green Party" : 

 

voice of the damned

BertramPotts wrote:

Elizabaeth May is a red tory running a party that has mostly left wing positions (if a somewhat sloppy policy shop), after this election there will be a handful of other Green MPs who all came of age after red tories stopped being a thing. The left needs a better approach to our vote split than name calling, as I fear we're going to find out in 20 days. 

If the Greens are just Red Tories under a new brand, how does it make sense to propose a merger with the NDP? Back in the days of the original Red Tories, I don't recall anyone saying that Flora MacDonald or Dalton Camp would have been perfect fits with the NDP. 

NorthReport

One party is right-wing and one party is left wing.

There will never be a merger of the NDP and the Greens. 

Aristotleded24
quizzical

Misfit wrote:

She is retiring from what I remember. If that’s the case she will be gone.

i think this would depend on whether or not her husband gets elected or is just playing the spoiler.

JKR

NorthReport wrote:

One party is right-wing and one party is left wing.

There will never be a merger of the NDP and the Greens. 

And because of FPTP, if they continue to split their vote and don’t merge neither of them might ever taste power.

voice of the damned

JKR wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

One party is right-wing and one party is left wing.

There will never be a merger of the NDP and the Greens. 

And because of FPTP, if they continue to split their vote and don’t merge neither of them might ever taste power.

Considering the Greens and Red Tories as identical, the Canadian political spectrum runs as follows(leftmost at the top)...

NDP

Liberal

Red Tories/Greens

Conservatives

So, why would the NDP leapfrog over the Liberals to join with people who are even further to the right? It just doesn't add up, ideologically.

NorthReport

The NDP needs to get its own media cough cough Canadian labour movement

JKR

You don’t join with the enemy, you campaign against them, otherwise you end up being like a party that says it is concerned about climate change and  then buys a pipeline No wonder the wheels are starting to come off the Liberal bus

pietro_bcc

The slogan of the Greens in this election is "not left, not right, forward together". Its right there in the slogan "not left" They acknowledge it, yet for some reason some on the left still insist its a left wing party.

Misfit Misfit's picture

pietro_bcc wrote:

The slogan of the Greens in this election is "not left, not right, forward together". Its right there in the slogan "not left" They acknowledge it, yet for some reason some on the left still insist its a left wing party.

I don’t think they insist. They assume or believe that the Green Party is progressive because of the environmental focus. It is a reasonable assumption to make but it isn’t the case. They haven’t looked at the fine print and most people won’t take the time to bother.

NorthReport

Correct

JKR

NorthReport wrote:

JKR

You don’t join with the enemy, you campaign against them,...

Whether they are actually on the left or not, over the last few years the Green Party has gained popularity with people on the left side of the political spectrum. For the last few years the Greens have been on an upward trajectory and it seems likely that the Greens will get around 10% of the votes in this election. The Greens recent gains seems to have come at the expense of the NDP who will likely get well under 18% of the vote which would be worse than what the NDP has usually received in most elections since the NDP’s inception in the 60’s. Singh and the NDP have run a very good campaign but because the left of centre vote is being split the NDP is currently struggling just to get to 16% which historically is not good for the NDP. I think the left in Canada can not afford to wait for either the Greens or NDP to implode and having the NDP and Greens continue to split the vote in ongoing future elections is a recipe for disaster for the left. 

NorthReport

Every election the right-wing press try to build up the Greens with their nonsensical polls but come every election surprise, surprise, the Greens fade in the home stretch The reality is the Greens never had that support to begin with and it’s just a charade 

NorthReport

There is only one reason why the NDP is showing less support in the polls. From the moment Jagmeet won the leadership there was this massive 24/7 attack on him from the media, the Liberals, and some babblers. 

Now with the ‘Trudeau Blunders’ the Conservatives are pulling away from the Liberals, and the vicious attacks on Singh, have left voters now with no credible alternative to the Conservatives.

The Liberals will be somewhat relieved however because the worst case scenario for the Liberals is not a Conservative government, but a strong showing by the NDP.

JKR

NorthReport wrote:

Every election the right-wing press try to build up the Greens with their nonsensical polls but come every election surprise, surprise, the Greens fade in the home stretch The reality is the Greens never had that support to begin with and it’s just a charade 

The Greens have only been around as a credible party since 2004 so I’m not sure if their short track record is that meaningful. I think their “green” brand is gaining popularity because of our global environmental breakdown. I guess the election results will show how much potential the NDP and/or Greens have of gaining political power in Ottawa over the foreseeable future. Both the NDP and Greens would best be served by a Liberal minority government where they could try to get some of their policies considered. The Conservatives are not about to go anywhere near NDP or Green policies.

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

If anything the Green Party is the White Party.    It has the least diverse slate of candidates of any major federal party...even less diverse than the PPC!    Despite problems, the NDP has nominated the most diverse slate of candidates of any party.

Elizabeth May needs to go.   Alex Tyrell, the leader of the Quebec Green Party seems a little more reasonable.   The Quebec Greens describe themselves as being eco-socialist.   They've been involved in the campaign against Bill 21.   They're folks that NDP supporters would be able to at least talk to.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

pietro_bcc wrote:

The slogan of the Greens in this election is "not left, not right, forward together". Its right there in the slogan "not left" They acknowledge it, yet for some reason some on the left still insist its a left wing party.

I always hated the "not left, not right" formulation-to me, it has always been code for "nobody has any right to hold us to anything"-in other words, that its a commitment to be yet another party of the status quo.

Mobo2000

I laughed @ post 22.   And I would vote for the Red Green Party.    Now on tour!

http://www.redgreen.com/on-tour.html

BertramPotts BertramPotts's picture

voice of the damned wrote:

BertramPotts wrote:

Elizabaeth May is a red tory running a party that has mostly left wing positions (if a somewhat sloppy policy shop), after this election there will be a handful of other Green MPs who all came of age after red tories stopped being a thing. The left needs a better approach to our vote split than name calling, as I fear we're going to find out in 20 days. 

If the Greens are just Red Tories under a new brand, how does it make sense to propose a merger with the NDP? Back in the days of the original Red Tories, I don't recall anyone saying that Flora MacDonald or Dalton Camp would have been perfect fits with the NDP. 

I didn't mean to suggest all Greens are red tories just EMay, it's an obsolete label since the PC's don't exist anymore and their successor paty led by Andrew Scheer has no place for them. I doubt 1 in 10 of  the Green Party's base even know what a red tory was.

Elizabeth May started her career in that world and it does explain a lot of her positions and instincts but calling the Green Party a right wing party is pretty myopic. Ostenisbly they reject the "left" and "right" labels but when they submit their political positions to CBC's vote compass they very carefully make sure they land just sligthly to the left of the NDP. They may not be the canniest political operators but they certainly know what their voters look like and what policies they want, we should know it too since they are pulling from the same voter pool we are. 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

voice of the damned wrote:

JKR wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

One party is right-wing and one party is left wing.

There will never be a merger of the NDP and the Greens. 

And because of FPTP, if they continue to split their vote and don’t merge neither of them might ever taste power.

Considering the Greens and Red Tories as identical, the Canadian political spectrum runs as follows(leftmost at the top)...

NDP

Liberal

Red Tories/Greens

Conservatives

So, why would the NDP leapfrog over the Liberals to join with people who are even further to the right? It just doesn't add up, ideologically.

The GPC base and activists aren't "Red Tory".  That's May herself-and it's been May who has had rigid control over the party's public face.

If she had enough MPs to be over the "official party status" hump with a margin to spare, she'd expel Manly in a heartbeat-she's essentially silenced him in the House as it is.

NorthReport

Left wing voters need to find a way to promote their ideas in Canada which are constantly blocked or diminished by Canada's mainstream media.

Part of the challenge is the undue influence of the USA.

NDP MPs need to lobby the CLC to somehow set up their own television network to articulate the left wing point of view. 

How sweet it would be to have Hassan Yussuff speak to Canadians on television for 1/2 hour each week.

NorthReport

And speaking of May if she had any class she would already have called Jagmeet and apologised to him for what he was just subjected to about being told to cut off his turban. How fucked is Canada for its people to do that!

Aristotleded24

There are many people who support the Greens who are disenchanted with all other political parties. I believe those people deserve better leadership than Elizabeth May, who has shown herself to be a political operative capitalizing on green politics to advance her own political career.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

There are many people who support the Greens who are disenchanted with all other political parties. I believe those people deserve better leadership than Elizabeth May, who has shown herself to be a political operative capitalizing on green politics to advance her own political career.

And May has a peculiar notion of what it means to advance a political career-it often seems as if her sole objective, as leader of her party, has been to help make sure the NDP never moved past the Liberals as the main non-Conservative party.

Aristotleded24

As far as merging the Green and NDP parties, you would have very practical problems across the country. Do you think that Green partisans in BC who are angry with the BC NDP over Site C and LNG want anything to do with that party? Here in Manitoba, the Greens and NDP are in direct competition for the provincial seat of Wolseley. Why would Green partisans in Wolseley want to join up with a party they have been working very hard to defeat? In Ontario, the NDP is polling very well even though the Greens have a seat there. Why the rush? Go to New Brunswick and PEI, it's the opposite situation, where the Greens are doing well in public opinion polls, with the NDP barely registering on the radar there. Why do the Greens in these provinces, under these circumstances, need to bother with a party that in each case cannot crack single digit support?

It's fine in theory to say, "well, these parties line up and are close on the political spectrum, therefor they should merge." In reality, these parties all exist as separate parties for a reason.

iyraste1313

engaged in this dubious election process accidentally....took part at the Union of BC Indian Chiefs Assembly where they had an all candidates forum...at Musqueum...Elizabeth May showed up for the Greens, did her introductory talk...which was okay, then skipped out for a high school talk? Leaving the candidates discussion for a High School meeting?

Pretty bad, something which will not be forgotten by the many many chiefs present.......

Jody and Jenny kwan were great!

voice of the damned

NorthReport wrote:

And speaking of May if she had any class she would already have called Jagmeet and apologised to him for what he was just subjected to about being told to cut off his turban. How fucked is Canada for its people to do that!

I think I might have missed this one. Who told Jag to cut off his turban, and how were they connected to Elizabeth May?

voice of the damned

^ Okay, just found the video with the old man. "When in Rome etc".

What's the connection to the Greens?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

This article is the answer to May's crocodile tears. You can't have it both ways and she is trying to. I think people need to wake up to who the Green candidates are because many of them believe that not being whipped means they get to vote how they want on issues, so why read the platform just ask the candidates directly.

In recent weeks, PressProgress made attempts to contact over 200 Green candidates and question them about their positions on abortion. In total, 35 Green candidates supplied responses to a list of questions.

Even though May walked it back, over two-thirds (70%) of candidates indicated they agreed with their leader’s initial statement to CBC News that Green MPs should be allowed to have free votes on any piece of legislation, no matter the topic. Another 23% said they agreed with their leader, but offered caveats or said their position was more “nuanced” than what May told CBC News.

When asked if Green MPs should also be allowed to have free votes on legislation that would reopen the abortion debate, more than half (62%) agreed it should be up to individual Green MPs to cast votes according to their personal opinions.

Only one-in-five candidates (19%) agreed with May’s revised position that Green MPs should not be allowed to break party ranks on abortion. Another 19% said Green MPs should defer to their constituents on abortion.

https://pressprogress.ca/we-asked-dozens-of-green-party-candidates-what-...

Misfit Misfit's picture

moved to correct thread.

Pages