Green Party of Canada

356 posts / 0 new
Last post
addictedtomyipod

Atlas wrote:
I just received a mailout from Elizabeth May and the Green Party. It was all about "democracy" and how "democratic" and "principled" the Greens are. Yet, EMay couldn't move fast enough to admit NDP MP Bruce Hyer into her caucus notwithstanding he has no democratic mandate whatsoever from his voters to do so. Democracy is about allowing the voters to choose their representative, and there is no question whatsoever that Hyer would never have been elected as a Green in Thunder Bay. Rather than congratulate EMay for her shrewdness in doubling her caucus (from 1 to 2), she should be taken to task for violating the essential principles of democracy and opportunistically putting her own Party interests over those of the voters, and democratic principles. And if she is so sure that the voters of Thunder Bay want a Green MP, than she should compel Hyer to resign and put that question to the test of the voters, where the decision truly, and democratically, belongs.

I 100% agree Atlas. As usual Lizzie will twist into a pretzel to explain anything they do in their favour.  She claims that voters don't vote for a Party, but an MP, so that is why floor crossing is OK.  The fact that most voters vote based on Party principals and not the MP is conveniently lost on her.  In fact Lizzie engages in many arguments that point out that political Party's are dinosaurs and that they should not exist at all.  The fact that she is the leader of a Party is also convieniently lost on her.  

It drives me crazy that the Greens make all these claims to be different, non-partisan or more democratic when they are no different, if not worse, than the others.

Pondering

addictedtomyipod wrote:

It drives me crazy that the Greens make all these claims to be different, non-partisan or more democratic when they are no different, if not worse, than the others.

That's how I feel about the NDP these days. Maybe that is what Elizabeth May is reacting to.

DLivings

Here's (post #85) a re-blog of references to E May's liberal leanings and dislike for the ndp.

NorthReport

It is quite simple really:

Right-wing = Liberal, Conservative or Green

Left-wing = NDP

Debater

DLivings wrote:

Here's (post #85) a re-blog of references to E May's liberal leanings and dislike for the ndp.

Have you examined some of the genuine reasons why Elizabeth May dislikes the NDP?

1.  NDP tried to bar her from the debates a couple elections ago.  She posted about this again on Twitter last week and said that although Dion argued she should be in the debates, Layton opposed it.  I believe Duceppe also supported her.

2.  Mulcair has treated May with disrespect and been very cold towards her.  May says that she has a more friendly working relationship with Justin Trudeau in the House of Commons.  Mulcair forbade the NDP caucus from responding to May's letter suggesting electoral co-operation last year.  Although Trudeau turned her down, he at least gave her the dignity of listening to her.

DLivings

Debater wrote:

DLivings wrote:

Here's (post #85) a re-blog of references to E May's liberal leanings and dislike for the ndp.

Have you examined some of the genuine reasons why Elizabeth May dislikes the NDP?

1.  NDP tried to bar her from the debates a couple elections ago.  She posted about this again on Twitter last week and said that although Dion argued she should be in the debates, Layton opposed it.  I believe Duceppe also supported her.

2.  Mulcair has treated May with disrespect and been very cold towards her.  May says that she has a more friendly working relationship with Justin Trudeau in the House of Commons.  Mulcair forbade the NDP caucus from responding to May's letter suggesting electoral co-operation last year.  Although Trudeau turned her down, he at least gave her the dignity of listening to her.

Your comments (#2) don't reflect the reality that May's attitude towards the Liberals and the ndp predates Mulcair by a decade, and the refernce to Layton is irrelevant for the same reason.

Debater

You may be right that May has been more positively inclined towards the Liberals than the NDP for a while.

But it doesn't fully explain why Mulcair felt he had the right to forbid NDP MP's from even talking or responding to Elizabeth May's letter, and why he totally ignored her.  He could have given her the dignity of a response.

She is the only woman leader on Parliament Hill right now, and it does not look good on Mulcair.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

The Green Party's stunning success in the Canadian House of Commons followed a series of daredevil moves by the most brilliant constitutional lawyer in Canada, Stephane Dion. This is a man who wants Clarity in his water as well as his Bill. Now run by a former Mulroney PC, the Green Party is in the same political position as the PC Party was in 1993. As Brian Mulroney often says, "Lorsque."

The Green Party is a spoiler party for the Liberals. At 7% nationally, it is in the perfect position to help the Liberals through to their agenda, which is to talk progressive and build pipelines. Now, Justin Trudeau is making the Marijuana Party another Liberal adjunct, which is probably designed to ensure the Green Party splits against itself. The last time I looked at a picture of a cannabis leaf, it was green.

Anyone who has an eye for design knows that Red and Green are never to be seen, except at Christmas. The mixture is brown, which always seems to go down, as Al Gore used to say.

A stereotypical Green Party fanatic has no car, but thinks that Atlas Shrugged is the greatest book ever written.

autoworker autoworker's picture

The Greens are poised to surprise in B.C..

autoworker autoworker's picture

The Greens are poised to surprise in B.C..

Debater

montrealer58 wrote:

Now, Justin Trudeau is making the Marijuana Party another Liberal adjunct, which is probably designed to ensure the Green Party splits against itself.

Sounds like Justin Trudeau is quite the Machiavellian strategist.

PrairieDemocrat15

NorthReport wrote:

It is quite simple really:

Right-wing = Liberal, Conservative or Green

Left-wing = NDP

More like:

Right-wing to right-of-centre =  Con, Lib, Grn

Centre to slightly left-of-centre = NDP

One of the saddest developments in Canadian politics is how the Green Party is panning out. The rise of Green parties in almost every other country has meant the rise of a party that challeneges social democratic and social liberal parties from the left. Even Green parties in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and the US are mostly to the left of the established, major left-leaning parties. Not in Canada.

Aristotleded24

DLivings wrote:

Debater wrote:

DLivings wrote:

Here's (post #85) a re-blog of references to E May's liberal leanings and dislike for the ndp.

Have you examined some of the genuine reasons why Elizabeth May dislikes the NDP?

1.  NDP tried to bar her from the debates a couple elections ago.  She posted about this again on Twitter last week and said that although Dion argued she should be in the debates, Layton opposed it.  I believe Duceppe also supported her.

2.  Mulcair has treated May with disrespect and been very cold towards her.  May says that she has a more friendly working relationship with Justin Trudeau in the House of Commons.  Mulcair forbade the NDP caucus from responding to May's letter suggesting electoral co-operation last year.  Although Trudeau turned her down, he at least gave her the dignity of listening to her.

Your comments (#2) don't reflect the reality that May's attitude towards the Liberals and the ndp predates Mulcair by a decade, and the refernce to Layton is irrelevant for the same reason.

I'll also add that Jack was the only major federal leader to congratulate her being elected on election night, and he did so to loud cheers from his crowd.

Debater

PrairieDemocrat15 wrote:

Centre to slightly left-of-centre = NDP

Er, no.

Not when it's now led by a former Liberal, who served in the cabinet of an ex-Mulroney Tory and who has been working overtime to move the NDP to the 'centre'.

addictedtomyipod

Lizzie publicly endorsed Dion for PM and that is why Jack Layton objected to her being in the debate. She could have used the stage to pump up Dion.

NorthReport

Liberals aren't right-wing but their leader moved his company off shore to avoid canadian taxes, canadian labour laws, and canadian environmental protection laws. Sure the liberals aren't right-wing. Laughing

Pondering

PrairieDemocrat15 wrote:
One of the saddest developments in Canadian politics is how the Green Party is panning out. The rise of Green parties in almost every other country has meant the rise of a party that challeneges social democratic and social liberal parties from the left. Even Green parties in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and the US are mostly to the left of the established, major left-leaning parties. Not in Canada.

Depends on how you look at it. If many Greens are former PCs then that weakened the Harpercons keeping "the right" split rather than taking socialist type voters from the NDP or progressives from the Liberals which went to the NDP during the orange wave.

I agree with the people who say the whole left/centre/right thing is becoming less and less informative as the parties morph and in many ways all move towards the "centre". 

The NDP supports Energy East which is 1/3 larger than Keystone and transports oil right across major Canadian waterways and population centres to be shipped off the East Coast with just as much or more unrefined. It's madness.

Of course the Liberals support Keystone so they are no better on that file, and Harper wants all pipelines. I think Elizabeth May was promoting refining in Alberta for a long time.

None of the parties are addressing the elephant in the room. The speed of development of the oil sands. They aren't going to shut down tomorrow but that doesn't mean expanding them by 30 or 40% is at all economically required for Alberta to continue thriving. Albertan's need to be hit over the head with information on the sovereign wealth funds of other oil rich countries like Norway. The oil will not last forever. Unbridled growth negatively impacts quality of life as infrastructure is overcome and jobs go unfilled.  No one is making these arguments, not the Greens and not the NDP.

 

Debater

Pondering wrote:
I agree with the people who say the whole left/centre/right thing is becoming less and less informative as the parties morph and in many ways all move towards the "centre".

I agree.

Parties are becoming more & more alike in many ways.  The NDP is more like the Liberals now than at any time in modern history, and the NDP is also becoming more like the Conservatives as they move towards Free Trade under Mulcair, and with a leader like Mulcair who is a Liberal.

The fact that the leader of the NDP is now a Liberal and that the Interim Leader of the Liberals was an NDPer has probably further cemented in the mind of voters the idea that the parties are very similiar.  I also think that contributes to lower voter turnout.

PrairieDemocrat15

Debater, I'm not going to discuss the NDP's move to the right (which happened a long time ago, was accelerated under Layton, and hasen't really changed under Mulcair) beyond saying that your Liberals are well to the right of the NDP, so the more right-wing or centrist you try to portray the NDP, the more right-wing you make the Liberals seem.

swallow swallow's picture

Debater wrote:

PrairieDemocrat15 wrote:

Centre to slightly left-of-centre = NDP

Er, no.

Not when it's now led by a former Liberal, who served in the cabinet of an ex-Mulroney Tory and who has been working overtime to move the NDP to the 'centre'.

I agree, the NDP is a centre-right party. They are just a bit slower in their rush to neo-liberalism than the Conservatgives and the Liberals. 

But you know, of course, that there is no affiliation betwene the Quebec Liberals (a big tent of supporters of three different federal parties) and the federal Liberals. 

iyraste1313

simple really:

Right-wing = Liberal, Conservative or Green

Left-wing = NDP

A slight error in your formula...NDP left wing? With its support of imperialist movements, NATO? Capitalism?

Whew! I can´t believe you actually printed that!
The NDP and the Greens have one thing in common...they both pretend to offer an alternative, fooling the voters who potentially by their idealism, could actually create something serious in opposition to the police state that is Canada...

But of course as long as we have the populace brainwashed into believing the lies of the CBC et al people will continue to take these debates over supposed differences seriously.

I can´t help but recall the interview on the Canadian Brainwash Corporation with paul dewar over NDP´s supposed opposition to engaging ISIL, because it was not sanctioned by the broader coalition of NATO...unbelievable! 

 

 

robbie_dee

autoworker wrote:
The Greens are poised to surprise in B.C..

Indeed if the Vancouver municipal elections are any guide the party really seems to be on the rise on the west coast.

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-voters-elect-la... Vancouver voters elect largest green caucus in Canadian history[/url]

Quote:

The Green party is celebrating what it called an historic win in Vancouver’s civic election, a vote that saw the largest Green caucus ever elected assert its place on council and the city’s park and school boards.

Four of the party's seven candidates were given the nod from voters on Saturday in an election with the highest turnout in more than a decade.

"This is a huge win for the Greens," said former Green party leader and re-elected Vancouver city councillor Adriane Carr.

"In fact, by electing four Greens to the three governance bodies in Vancouver, we have just elected — Vancouverites have just elected — the largest Green caucus in Canadian history."

​Carr is the only candidate ever elected to a major Canadian city council under the Green party banner. Now she has company on the Vancouver park and school boards.

Green party candidates Stuart Mackinnon and Michael Wiebe snapped up the last two spots for commissioners on Saturday, beating out Vision Vancouver candidate and former West End Residents Association president Brent Granby by 1,300 votes in the midst of a near-rout of park board positions by the NPA.

The Green Party's Janet Fraser was also elected to the Vancouver School Board Saturday.

addictedtomyipod

Greens have opened their campaign offices in Victoria, Bruce Hyers riding and will in her riding on Feb 10.
They are very aggressive already.

Debater

Aggressive?  Compared to whom?  Seems to me that all the parties are being very competitive right now and are into campaign mode.  The Greens are hardly alone.

Anyway, tonight the Greens are acclaiming Elizabeth May's hand-picked star candidate Jo-Ann Roberts in Victoria.

Centrist

Debater wrote:
Anyway, tonight the Greens are acclaiming Elizabeth May's hand-picked star candidate Jo-Ann Roberts in Victoria.

Yeah. Prior and during election 2011, the Greens never experienced anything akin to this:

Major poli headaches await. Unfortunately. 

 

grangerock

Elizabeth May has always been praised (eg. by Tzaborah Berman) for putting the environment before party politics.  So why is she targeting one of the greenest MPs in Canada?  How will this help get rid of Harper?  She is no different than any other politician--but perhaps worse because she is always putting herself on a pedestal--eg. "I'm the hardest working MP"  "I work 4x's harder than any other MP" . . .

Unionist

grangerock wrote:

Elizabeth May has always been praised (eg. by Tzaborah Berman) ...

That's Tzeporah. It's a Hebrew word. Means "bird".

 

grangerock

Thanks for the correction--I was too lazy to look it up.

NDPP

Unionist wrote:

grangerock wrote:

Elizabeth May has always been praised (eg. by Tzaborah Berman) ...

That's Tzeporah. It's a Hebrew word. Means "bird".

 

These hustlers Berman and May are birds of a feather...

How Tides Canada Controls The Secret North American Tar Sands Coalition

http://wrongkindofgreen.org/2013/10/24/how-tides-canada-controls-the-sec...

"Berman is simply the public face of capitalism's last ditch effort to save itself..."

NorthReport
NorthReport

KEYSTONE XL: THE ART OF NGO DISCOURSE – PART III | BEHOLDEN TO BUFFETT

http://wrongkindofgreen.org/2013/10/25/keystone-xl-the-art-of-ngo-discou...

Centrist

grangerock wrote:

Elizabeth May has always been praised (eg. by Tzaborah Berman) for putting the environment before party politics.  So why is she targeting one of the greenest MPs in Canada?  How will this help get rid of Harper?

Frankly, gets even worse on Van Isle. Last night the Greens selected Fran Hunt-Jinnouchi as their candidate in the neighbouring riding of Cowichan-Malahat-Langford. Hunt-Jinnouchi certainly has quite a respectable CV and I didn't even know that she was FN.

The Cowichan Valley also has a large FN base that has voted strongly NDP. Suspect that she will attract a chunk of that FN vote along with the surging Green vote in the Cowichan Valley - based upon both BC 2013 provincial results and 2014 muni results:

 

One must remember that newly redistributed C-M-L (which Jean Crowder mostly represented) would have beeen won by the NDP by a razor-thin 0.61% in 2011 when the NDP peaked in BC at 33% popular vote share. 

I also understand that NDP HQ (suspect Anne McGrath) delayed the NDP C-M-L nomination meeting twice as they were not confident that the 5 announced candidates would be "competitive enough" for the riding. The 6th candidate jumped in back in the fall - Georgia Collins (who was also endorsed by Nathan Cullen, Megan Leslie and Randall Garrison). Superb candidate. But Georgia lost narrowly last weekend to Alistair MacGregor.

With the NDP candidacy, this Green surge, (not to mention fed Lib uptick), I have no doubt now that the Cons will pick this seat up. Have been banging the war drums trying to ensure a proper response to the Greens but to no avail. Sigh.

 

 

 

NorthReport

Thanks Centrist for making clear what is at stake by people supporting the Greens.

NorthReport

Thanks Centrist for making very clear what is at stake by people supporting the Greens.

Debater

The Greens have the right to try and elect more MP's - just like all the other parties.  If they are going to be taken more seriously, they will obviously want to elect more MP's.  And the best way for them to do that is by targetting the most winnable ridings on Vancouver Island.

Now that Elizabeth May has won her own seat, it will presumably free her up to spend more time outside her riding in 2015 than she could in 2011.

The question about the debates still remains, though.  Will May be allowed in?

Aristotleded24

Debater wrote:
The question about the debates still remains, though.  Will May be allowed in?

If the standard is having an elected MP or your leader elected, then May should by rights be in the debates.

nicky

Surely it is time to set some threshold well in advance in order to determine who gets in the debates. Every election we face this uncertainty.

May was allowed in in 2008 because she had one MP who crossed the floor. The Greens had polled 4.5% in '06. She got 6.8% of the vote in '08 but no seats.

So she wasn't allowed in in 2011. Then she got 3.9% and one MP. She now has Hyer who crossed the floor.

Some wd argue she has less standing than after 2008, having lost almost half her party's votes.

Now she has also fewer MPs than the Bloc, which also got more votes than the Greens. The New Force and Democracy party also has 2 MPs. Are we going to have a debate with 6 leaders? Thereby leaving Harper largely unscathed and insulating the insipid Justin from attack?

In the UK there is currently a proposal for multiple debates with all partes included to begin with. The last debate will be betwwenn Labour and the Conservatives alone. Maybe we should be looking at a  similar format to keep the debates from descending into a crowded farce.

 

Debater

You always have to get in a dig at Justin Trudeau, don't you Nicky?  Even when the topic has nothing to do with him.

The Green Party has 2 MP's, and so does the BQ as well as F&D.  So the Broadcast Consortium or whoever is in charge of these things is going to have a complicated situation on their hands.  What is the threshold for being in the debates?  Because all 3 of these smaller parties each have 2 MP's in Parliament (although of the 3 the BQ is the only one whose leader isn't elected yet).

Centrist

Firstly, I never understand why the BQ leader is always in the English debates. The BQ leader is only for Quebec and the vast majority of PQ voters who are anglophone don't vote BQ. Period. Leave the PQ-only party leaders totally out of the English debates.

As for the Green leader in the English debate that's a tricky one. Look at what has recently happened in Britain with the exclusion of the Green leader from the debates. A huge brouhaha:

Quote:
Green membership surge takes party past Lib Dems and Ukip

Party signs up 2,000 in a day amid blaze of publicity over exclusion from general election leaders’ debates

The Green party now has more members than Ukip and the Liberal Democrats after gaining more than 2,000 supporters in the last day alone.

The surge in support coincides with a blaze of publicity for the Greens over their exclusion from the proposed televised leaders’ debates because they are not considered a major party. The criteria for being classed as major does not include membership but is based on a party’s standing in opinion polls and success in elections.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/15/green-party-membership-s...

Quote:
The Green Party continues to surge in popularity, as shown by three polls

It's bad news for Labour, as three separate pollsters show a split in left-wing voting intentions.

Time for the Greens to whack the celebratory curly kale on the hob, as they storm ahead in three separate polls.

 - An ICM poll for the Guardian yesterday found Natalie Bennett's party to be on 9 per cent, the highest in two decades from that particular pollster.

 - Confirming the "Green Surge" by lifting the party into double figures, Lord Ashcroft's latest polling earlier this week put the Greens on 11 per cent.

 - A YouGov poll for the Sun out this morning gives them its highest rating ever from that pollster, 10 per cent.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/green-party-continues-surge...

 

Debater

The BQ has always been in the English debates -- going back to 1993.  I'm not sure how it could be justified to change it after 20+ years.  The purpose of the BQ being in the English debates isn't obviously about getting Anglophone votes -- it is about being present to have an influence over the debate and make sure the BQ's position gets represented, which is something that Francophones watching the English debate may be interested to see.

Robo

Debater wrote:

You always have to get in a dig at Justin Trudeau, don't you Nicky?  Even when the topic has nothing to do with him.

How is this different than you having to always get digs in about Tom Mulcair?

Debater

Robo wrote:

Debater wrote:

You always have to get in a dig at Justin Trudeau, don't you Nicky?  Even when the topic has nothing to do with him.

How is this different than you having to always get digs in about Tom Mulcair?

Where do I do that?  Cite some examples.  I rarely take personal shots at Mulcair.  I don't go out of my way to try and make nasty comments.

Usually what I post about Mulcair are factual discussions of his poor by-election results which are based on actual numbers & facts.

Beware the analogy of false equivalency.

Robo

Debater wrote:

Where do I do that?  Cite some examples.  I rarely take personal shots at Mulcair.  

"Let me count the ways."  In a thread about the Sudbury provinical by-election, you yesterday posted that Tom Mulcair was "increasingly right wing".  This is just one example -- I do not have the urge to go searching for others.  I have pointed out on numerous threads across Babble that you accuse others of doing things that you do yourself.  What on earth does your view on some statement made by Mulcair have to do with a thread about an Ontario by-election?  You take "pot shots" regularly, yet complain when others do so..

And, with respect to "false equivalency", the reason no one can take single lines about policy that Justin T has made out of context is that he has chosen to make virtually no policy statements of any sort.  Is it a wonder that people comment on his vacuousness in such circumstances?

Debater

The comment I made about Tom Mulcair was in reference to actual policies & positions that he is taking - it was not a personal attack on him.  Mulcair is apparently open to supporting Harper's anti-terrorism bill.  An NDP supporter had called Trudeau "increasingly right-wing" and so I was just countering by pointing out that it makes Mulcair increasingly right-wing if he's supporting Harper's legislation then, too.

I don't constantly try to insult Mulcair's intelligence or talk about his looks, etc.  I was commenting on the report in La Presse about Mulcair's openness to supporting the Conservative legislation.  That's called political analysis - not a personal attack.

NorthReport

Harper will decide who is in and who is out for the debates. In 2011 he didn't want May in so she wasn't. 

Canadian leaders debates

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_leaders_debates

 

 

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

Quote:
I can´t help but recall the interview on the Canadian Brainwash Corporation with paul dewar over NDP´s supposed opposition to engaging ISIL, because it was not sanctioned by the broader coalition of NATO...unbelievable!

I remember the good old days when the NDP called for Canada to withdraw from NATO and NORAD.

Quote:
Elizabeth May has always been praised (eg. by Tzaborah Berman) for putting the environment before party politics.  So why is she targeting one of the greenest MPs in Canada?  How will this help get rid of Harper?

Having said that, former Green Party leader Mike...oops I mean Jim Harris ran in Toronto Danforth in 2004 against Jack Layton who was trying to get into the house for the first time post leadership race.   Whatever criticism anyone might have of Jack Layton, he had tons of eco-cred from his work at Toronto City Hall.    Jim Harris had none.

Then in 2006, he ran next door against Marilyn Churley in Beaches -East York.    Churley was one of the more progressive members of the Ontario NDP caucus and had a long standing record fighting for local environmental issues in the east end of Toronto.    He acted as a spoiler, allowing Maria Minna, one of the most useless do nothing members of the federal Liberal caucus to get re-elected.

Jim Harris' record on eco-activism on east end Toronto envrionmental issues?    Zilch!

There are truly progressive Green parties in some other parts of the world, but the Green Party of Canada isn't one of them.   The GPC is an eco-capitalist party...Tories with composters.

 

Unionist

radiorahim wrote:

There are truly progressive Green parties in some other parts of the world, but the Green Party of Canada isn't one of them.  

Reminds me of this:

Unionist, on March 23, 2014 wrote:

I was chatting with the leader of the Parti Vert the other day, asking why they don't find a way to join forces with QS - given that they (the Greens) have done a good shift to the left (as lagatta was mentioning upthread) and now describe themselves as "eco-socialists". The two main points I understood in his response were: 1. They promote independence - we're neutral on that issue. 2. They promote a secular charter (albeit without the ban on religious symbols in the public service) - we are totally opposed to any such thing at this time, because it's a pure wedge issue and is totally unnecessary.

Funny - I kind of agree with him on both counts - at least, I'm open to that conversation. But I don't think, in our system, you can afford to simply vote for the party which happens to be saying more of the things you like than the other parties. I'm still going with QS.

Sorry for the drift - but when you mentioned "some other parts of the world", I immediately thought of Québec lol!

 

Debater

radiorahim wrote:

Having said that, former Green Party leader Mike...oops I mean Jim Harris ran in Toronto Danforth in 2004 against Jack Layton who was trying to get into the house for the first time post leadership race.   Whatever criticism anyone might have of Jack Layton, he had tons of eco-cred from his work at Toronto City Hall.    Jim Harris had none.

Then in 2006, he ran next door against Marilyn Churley in Beaches -East York.    Churley was one of the more progressive members of the Ontario NDP caucus and had a long standing record fighting for local environmental issues in the east end of Toronto.    He acted as a spoiler, allowing Maria Minna, one of the most useless do nothing members of the federal Liberal caucus to get re-elected.

Jim Harris' record on eco-activism on east end Toronto envrionmental issues?    Zilch!

There are truly progressive Green parties in some other parts of the world, but the Green Party of Canada isn't one of them.   The GPC is an eco-capitalist party...Tories with composters.

But both Toronto-Danforth and Beaches-East York were Liberal-held ridings when Jim Harris ran in them.  So that's another example of a Green Leader running in Liberal-held seats.

So who were the Greens really running against?  Why do the NDP make it all about them and not acknowledge that the Greens run against the Liberals as well?

And btw, the Green Party predates Elizabeth May & Jim Harris.  It was created in 1983, back when Pierre Trudeau was Prime Minister.  So what does that tell us?  It's been around for several decades.  It has its own history that pre-dates Elizabeth May & Stéphane Dion and certainly wasn't created to help Pierre Trudeau.

NorthReport

Thanks for the refresher course radiorahim

Jim Harris knew he didn't have a chance of winning.

The Green Leader obviously ran in those seats to knock out or knock down the progressive pro-environment NDP if he could. 

janfromthebruce

radiorahim wrote:

Quote:
I can´t help but recall the interview on the Canadian Brainwash Corporation with paul dewar over NDP´s supposed opposition to engaging ISIL, because it was not sanctioned by the broader coalition of NATO...unbelievable!

I remember the good old days when the NDP called for Canada to withdraw from NATO and NORAD.

Quote:
Elizabeth May has always been praised (eg. by Tzaborah Berman) for putting the environment before party politics.  So why is she targeting one of the greenest MPs in Canada?  How will this help get rid of Harper?

Having said that, former Green Party leader Mike...oops I mean Jim Harris ran in Toronto Danforth in 2004 against Jack Layton who was trying to get into the house for the first time post leadership race.   Whatever criticism anyone might have of Jack Layton, he had tons of eco-cred from his work at Toronto City Hall.    Jim Harris had none.

Then in 2006, he ran next door against Marilyn Churley in Beaches -East York.    Churley was one of the more progressive members of the Ontario NDP caucus and had a long standing record fighting for local environmental issues in the east end of Toronto.    He acted as a spoiler, allowing Maria Minna, one of the most useless do nothing members of the federal Liberal caucus to get re-elected.

Jim Harris' record on eco-activism on east end Toronto envrionmental issues?    Zilch!

There are truly progressive Green parties in some other parts of the world, but the Green Party of Canada isn't one of them.   The GPC is an eco-capitalist party...Tories with composters.

 

exactly and I remember it well. Think about why Jim Harris would switch up his ridings, election to election in where he would run.

Pages