Green Party Troubles

61 posts / 0 new
Last post
Brachina
Green Party Troubles

http://greencanada.wordpress.com/2013/01/27/unite-the-progressives-not-m...

This explains why Emay wants cooperation deseperately. Very informative, the Greens maybe in big trouble organizationally.

In a way its the opposite of the approach the NDP has taken, where the NDP has focused on building riding accoasations across Canada, especially Quebec, and has boosted funraising to become less dependant on the prevote subsidy.

Not to mention the reputation self inflicted damage over the less then green sewage position.

And of course May will be at the debates, which is a huge disadvantage for the Greens :p

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Do you really want to knock Wonder Woman?

Brachina

LMAO

autoworker autoworker's picture

Brachina wrote:
LMAO

It's typical for Liberal wannabes to kick 'em when they're perceived to be down. Concentrating scarce resources where they can achieve results is a sensible, 'horserace' strategy, until the other parties have the guts to implement fair voting. Meanwhile, the Official Opposition should stop calling itself democratic. BTW: Does this analysis now apply to the BQ as well?

Brachina

In part yes, the loss of the per vote subsidy will hurt the Bloc more then the NDP, Tories, or Liberals, but only focusing on Quebec means they can at least conserve some resources.

And the interesting part isn't lose of the pre vote subsidy, which the NDP opposed removing, but the ego driven transformation of the Greens by Emay that even Harper would envy. The Green Party is now nothing more then the Emay party. Her ego and selfishness destroyed the Greens promising Quebec wing.

Its now thing to focus resources on winnable ridings, its another to take that to the point were the party and the grassroots rot around you.

Who fires talent that build what that Quebec Organizer did in what a year?

And the NDP is very democractic, we support portional representation, abolishing the Senate, and so on. Doesn't mean we have to like the Emay.

And the comparison to the Liberals from you,Automaker is laughable.

autoworker autoworker's picture

It's all well and good for the NDP to pay lip service to PR and Senate abolition, when it suited them, but now that the horserace favours it with OO status, the idea remains stone cold, let alone simmering on the back burner.

Brachina

Simmering on the back burner? Are under the impression that the NDP is in government? Its not. The NDP still supports those positions, its can't put them in place.

Policywonk

Brachina wrote:
Simmering on the back burner? Are under the impression that the NDP is in government? Its not. The NDP still supports those positions, its can't put them in place.

If things work out as expected, we will see whether PR gets put on the front burner in BC.

janfromthebruce

policywonk, this is the federal NDP. I don't have a say in what happens in BCNDP. But at the federal level we have policy on both abolishing the senate and electorial reform to PP.

And for autoworker to suggest that we would just scrap a policy position supported, long ago, at convention, and part of your last campaigne and also before, is plain silly.

It's good that liberals finally adopted it and thus welcome to the 21st century of democracy. That said, this latest Liberal/Green strategy just reminds me of "strategic voting". Which was code to vote Libera.

It worked out well for the Libs because prior to the NDP becoming the OO, it was the party who came first or second in the riding where all those strategic voting sites "favoured". That had favoured the Libs but in 2015 it will favour the NDP.

So now the new ploy is this pick one out of 3 to run in ridings with a con winner. Let's see how many strategic voting sites start up in 2015 - I'm thinking not a lot.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

I think Elizabeth May has been one of the best actors in parlilament in the current session. I think the NDP would do well to support her and the Green Party rather than wage petty, small-minded attacks on her.

janfromthebruce

actually nobody is attacking her in what I've noticed in the big politics. Not sure what the NDP needs to support her on: just because she wants to have one party doesn't mean the NDP has to go along because she is one of the best actors.

Obviously many NDP did support her in being rewarded with best parliamentarian but I don't like how she craps on the NDP anytime she wants and the NDP is suppose to remain silent.

Each party does what they want with the money they have. The NDP decided to built local riding associations, and the Greens, under May decided not to. That's the way it goes.

Unionist

Catchfire wrote:

I think Elizabeth May has been one of the best actors in parlilament in the current session. I think the NDP would do well to support her and the Green Party rather than wage petty, small-minded attacks on her.

What do you have against petty, small-minded attacks?

Sheesh.

Are you a closet Liberal, or what?

 

socialdemocrati...

I don't know about best actor... but she's one of the better actors.

Remember when she pretended she was an environmentalist, then ran to the right of the Conservatives in a by-election? Even the Conservatives were like "uh... yeah, I know we said we were for sewage treatment, but if May doesn't care..."

I'd also say her "let's cooperate" act is pretty decent, since she's happy to do it to help the Liberals, but never seems to suggest doing it when it will help the NDP.

She also had a pretty good performance when she stopped mid sentence due to some mumbling, and blamed the NDP for "shouting" her down.

I'd say Justin Trudeau probably has her beat in acting ability, if only because he was a supply drama teacher for three years.

addictedtomyipod

The NDP mentioned in question period today the disgusting move by Harper to add 5 more senators to an already bloated expensive bunch of yes men for Harper.  That hardly seems backburner to me.  They want the senate gone....

The Green party financial troubles has E.May worried.  There is no possible way to keep the party going with the per vote subsidy gone.  Their grassroots riding associations are thin to non-existant in many ridings. Their loss in both Calgary Center and Victoria by-elections, after pulling out all the stops and spending lots of money, must have been a bitter pill for her to swallow. 

I might like her if she didn't keep attacking the NDP more than she does Harper CONS and makes me wonder if she works for them.

Looks like a floor crossing to the Libs or going Independant is in her future.

autoworker autoworker's picture

Brachina wrote:
Simmering on the back burner? Are under the impression that the NDP is in government? Its not. The NDP still supports those positions, its can't put them in place.

That hasn't precluded the BQ from calling for the repeal of the Clarity Act. Will the OO support them in their effort?

autoworker autoworker's picture

@jan: It would be "silly" if I actually suggested they "scrap" their positions on PR, and the Senate.

autoworker autoworker's picture

@addictedtomyipod: Good for them on the Senate appointments. You're more current than me. Now that they're batting .500 on those two issues, what about PR?

grangerock

Although EMay may not officially be working for Harper, she is doing his job in BC by attacking Mulcair--she is putting politics before climate change

addictedtomyipod

autoworker wrote:
@addictedtomyipod: Good for them on the Senate appointments. You're more current than me. Now that they're batting .500 on those two issues, what about PR?

 

Geez, autoworker, maybe I should ask the Mulcair NDP to react to your every whim and desire when you have one.  I could ask them to call autoworker to see what the flavour of his day is.   

 

autoworker autoworker's picture

addictedtomyipod wrote:

autoworker wrote:
@addictedtomyipod: Good for them on the Senate appointments. You're more current than me. Now that they're batting .500 on those two issues, what about PR?

 

Geez, autoworker, maybe I should ask the Mulcair NDP to react to your every whim and desire when you have one.  I could ask them to call autoworker to see what the flavour of his day is.   

 

Actually, you might want ask them about this new "Unity Act" snake oil they're peddling. Also, on second thought, I think I was being too generous in scoring their Senate bunt a hit. BTW: I like pistachio.

currents

E. May can at least say that she voted unlike the NDP against the Libya excursion and the bombing of Sirte, a war crime in any book. Please check this week how Mulcair and the NDP will handle the Mali affair. I am afraid that we know already the answer.

contrarianna

Unionist wrote:

Catchfire wrote:

I think Elizabeth May has been one of the best actors in parlilament in the current session. I think the NDP would do well to support her and the Green Party rather than wage petty, small-minded attacks on her.

What do you have against petty, small-minded attacks?

Sheesh.

Are you a closet Liberal, or what?

That's the nature of party camp follower politics in Canada--atavistic tribalism;  hocky-fan mentality allegences--and to paraphrase Seinfeld on sports fans and team jerseys--"in the end, we are all just cheering for laundry" (and mostly dirty laundry at that).

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

EMay was good on P&P tonight - really lit into Harper on cutting back environmental oversight, and on the rumour that Environment will be combined with Natural Resources (Harper said today he has no such plan).

Then with regard to Idle No More said C38 and C45 are absolutely good targets because of the effect they will have not just on First Nations but on all of us. That was an hour ago, so I'm not certain she said these mass protests have to continue in one form or another. But C45 is absolutely not acceptable - and the deal with the Chinese that allows them to launch a global lawsuit against Canada if we don't fill the terms of it  - the Nexen CNOOC deal - absolutely has NOT to be ratified.

EMay said Harper did not campaign for any of this nonsense in the last election and has no mandate to proceed with any of it, majority government or not.

addictedtomyipod

 

 

What I saw was an attempt by Evan Soloman trying to make a big story out of nothing.  She asked a question in the House based on rumour and speculation, took the answer from Harper as the only choice and that is it.  May had her moment of media  attention and she was happy with that.

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

So, when Mulcair talks about the same thing, it's a big story, but when EMay addresses the same topics, it's nothing? Thanks for clearing that up. Smile

grangerock

I saw your anaylsis of the P&P interview with EMay, so I watched.  Nothing new to add but the usual rumour suggestion.  EMay has close connections to Conservatives because she once worked with them, but I agree with addicted to my ipod that in this case it was to get attention.  I'm sure she gets leaks before the other opposition from her "friends"--always good to get any opposition to Harper.

Bluegreenblogger

grangerock wrote:

  EMay has close connections to Conservatives because she once worked with them, but I agree with addicted to my ipod that in this case it was to get attention.  I'm sure she gets leaks before the other opposition from her "friends"--always good to get any opposition to Harper.

Uh, EMay was not a Conservative, she was a public servant, who worked as a special advisor on the Acid Rain treaty. It was the Progressive Conservatives, not the CRAP and it was nearly 30 years ago! I cannot think of a single PC who is still hanging around since that time, so your supposition is not accurate. Besides, I know EMay well enough (despite our differences) to say that she is no friend to the CPC.

nicky

If you know Ms May, bgb, well enough to asert, despite much evidence to the contrary, that she is no friend of the Conservatives, perhaps you can tell us why she spends more time attacking the NDP than any other party?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Because NDP voters fit the profile of the Greens targeted voters?  They obviously hope to convince NDP voters to switch to a party that does not have the negatives that they are asserting the NDP has.

nicky

But Kropotkin, doesn't that in fact make her a friend of the Conservatives?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Only if one subscribes to the theory that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. i agree that it will likely have the effect of helping the Conservatives but that still doesn't make May Harper's friend it only means they are mutual enemies of the OO.

KenS

I am most definitely not a fan of eMe. But its ridiculous to say she spends more time attacking the NDP. Its just that you take note of every time she does, and probably hear about it through the grapevine if and when it doesnt make the news.

Like most politicians, most of what eMe says doesnt make the news. And her daily dose of attacking the Cons and Harper is not news. It only becomes news when she succeeds at givin itg a different spin than the purveyors of 'news' can get from the NDP and Libs. [Which she does pretty well at, considering.]

For what its worth [not much], it looks to me like since being elected, and possibly going back further, eMe has actually softened some of her long ingrained personal antipathy to the NDP- that goes WAY way back. Roughly speaking, she seems to have gone from being a somewhat irrational NDP hater [and baiter] to someone who behaves as you would have to expect a competitor of the NDP in her position.

And to give 'credit' where it is due..... This unity of progressives foolishness- foolish because it is not what it claims for itself- is pervasive on the left side of the room... it gets some oxygen among the NDP base as well. I suspect she isnt any different than the rest of them- she believes in this unity stuff. We're compelled to humour you all. Why should she be humoured less?

Bluegreenblogger

@nicky; I disagree with your assertion that May attacks the NDP more frequently than any other party. It just is not the case. Perhaps it is more the case that you are filtering your information through a partisan lens? Possibly you do not notice the permanent attack the Conservatives mode EMay is in, because you are filtering them out.

I believe that Elizabeth May has a much closer affinity for the Liberal Party. In fact, I would bet you folding money that if the Liberals form a Government anytime soon, then EMay will sit as Environment Minister.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

nicky wrote:
perhaps you can tell us why she spends more time attacking the NDP than any other party?

Perhaps for the same reason NDP supporters spend, and have spent for years, a great deal of their time attacking a single MP with non-party status?

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I watch Question Period and the politics shows on CBC and CTV, and I think it's just nuts to suggest EMay attacks the NDP more than any other party. She's a constant thorn in the side of Harper, and I'm surprised there's babblers here who haven't noticed that. I do agree that she has some Liberal bias, though.

KenS

More than a bias to the Liberals. She comes from a place very enthralled with the Liberals, and their 'place' as Gods answer to what Canada needs.

But again, I think she had and showed more antipathy to the NDP before she was in politics.

Ippurigakko

Elizabeth may used to be NDP candidate in 1980s.... is it weird?

KenS

I dont think so.

addictedtomyipod

Interesting to see that no one here seems to be able to pin down the political leanings of Lizzie May.  I have noticed that she manages to tell everyone what they want to hear, witness the recent Victoria by-election..  But I still believe that she does hold a certain extra jab for the NDP.

There is a reason that in an election that former CON voters vote for her.  She clearly doesn't attack their ideology and will take their vote, alongside every other party's.  They are all just as usefull on the road to stardom.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

addictedtomyipod wrote:

There is a reason that in an election that former CON voters vote for her.  She clearly doesn't attack their ideology and will take their vote, alongside every other party's.  

I don't know what you're basing that on. EMay has criticised Harper on everything from the tar sands subsidies, PPP's, the recent China takeovers (CNOCC/Nexen), lack of concern for First Nations, the F35s, very strong opposition to the C38 and C45 omnibus bills,  and what have you.

addictedtomyipod

Boom Boom wrote:

addictedtomyipod wrote:

There is a reason that in an election that former CON voters vote for her.  She clearly doesn't attack their ideology and will take their vote, alongside every other party's.  

I don't know what you're basing that on. EMay has criticised Harper on everything from the tar sands subsidies, PPP's, the recent China takeovers (CNOCC/Nexen), lack of concern for First Nations, the F35s, very strong opposition to the C38 and C45 omnibus bills,  and what have you.

 

If you evaluate poll leanings in previous elections, it shows that a large portion of her support is from CON voters.  She claims to be an umbrella party anyway.  She takes all voters but particularly attracts rich environmentalists.  That is why Saanich Noarth & the Islands was such a good fit for her.  You don't really believe that voters pay attention to what she says outside an election do you?  Most don't.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

addictedtomyipod wrote:

 

If you evaluate poll leanings in previous elections, it shows that a large portion of her support is from CON voters.  She claims to be an umbrella party anyway.  She takes all voters but particularly attracts rich environmentalists.  That is why Saanich Noarth & the Islands was such a good fit for her.  You don't really believe that voters pay attention to what she says outside an election do you?  Most don't.

Nevertheless, it is still bullshit to say she doesn't attack Con ideology.

KenS

Sorry to burst your bubble addicted, but eMe could never win if she was geared / positioned as you think.

And where do you get the idea that no one pins down her political leanings. A few people have done so, a couple of us with quite a bit of experience of her [mine runs back decades].

Like I said, she came to politics VERY geared to the Liberals, and I would say seems to have acquired some disctance from them. But to understand that you have to straetch your two dimensional notion of politics that are left or right. [Not to mention that historically a substantial minority of left oriented people have been most comforatble with the Liberals... though that has recently vanished.]

Do you judge all politicians the same by who they cater to? You win elections by catering to who is available. For the GPC that definitely includes bygone PC types [more liberals really] and even some Conservative leaners [especially the conservationists and environmentalists among them].

David Young

Ippurigakko wrote:

Elizabeth may used to be NDP candidate in 1980s.... is it weird?

Where did you come up with this one, Ippurigakko?

She formed her own party called the 'Small Party' in 1980, and ran as one of its 12 candidates in that election against Allan J. MacEachern in Cape Breton Highlands-Canso, earning 272 votes.

If you know that May was ever an NDP candidate, please produce some proof to back that claim!!!

Otherwise, a retraction is in order.

 

addictedtomyipod

I know it is difficult for people to undrstand that E. May caters to the CON vote.  This is the reality that most do not want to have as they prefer to have some sort of hero to take them to the promised land. 

The fact is that this politician plays to an ideology like every other.  The best thing is to realize that she uses power and influence like all of us and does not run around wearing some sort of ideological halo.

nicky

It is very far from clear that the Greens attract many former Conservatives voters.

Consider the results in SGI over the last 3 elections where the Conservative vote has remained relatively stable and where that of the 3 opposition parties has fluctuated wildly. 

2006  C 37 N 27 L  26 G 10

2008  C 43 N  6  L 39  G 10

2011  C 36 N 12  L 6   G 46

It seems more than probable that May was able to consolidate the anti-Conservative vote behind her.

There is also a lot of polling, notably by Ekos, that shows that Green voters prefer the NDP and the Liberals as their second choices by huge margins over the Conservatives.

Doubtless there are a number of Conservatives who might consider voting Green, mostly those old Progressive Conservatives who are aghast at what their party has become, but this is not a big number. The Greens' room to grow is by attracting other opposition votes and, ironically, helping re-elect the Conservatives.

Interested Observer Interested Observer's picture

Finally, a somewhat mature EMay thread. Smile

 

addictedtomyipod wrote:

I know it is difficult for people to undrstand that E. May caters to the CON vote.  This is the reality that most do not want to have as they prefer to have some sort of hero to take them to the promised land. 

The fact is that this politician plays to an ideology like every other.  The best thing is to realize that she uses power and influence like all of us and does not run around wearing some sort of ideological halo.

So in your world, getting people to not vote for your enemy and instead vote for you, is bad? You do realize the Ndp does this as well, right? In much of the West, voters switch back and forth between the Ndp and the Conservatives, does that mean the Ndp caters to the Conservatives as well?

Unionist

Oceania The NDP has always been at war with Eastasia the Green Party. Since the beginning of your life, since the beginning of the Party, since the beginning of history, the war has continued without a break, always the same war.

addictedtomyipod

'

contrarianna

nicky wrote:

It is very far from clear that the Greens attract many former Conservatives voters.

Consider the results in SGI over the last 3 elections where the Conservative vote has remained relatively stable and where that of the 3 opposition parties has fluctuated wildly. 

2006  C 37 N 27 L  26 G 10

2008  C 43 N  6  L 39  G 10

2011  C 36 N 12  L 6   G 46

It seems more than probable that May was able to consolidate the anti-Conservative vote behind her.

There is also a lot of polling, notably by Ekos, that shows that Green voters prefer the NDP and the Liberals as their second choices by huge margins over the Conservatives.

Doubtless there are a number of Conservatives who might consider voting Green, mostly those old Progressive Conservatives who are aghast at what their party has become, but this is not a big number. The Greens' room to grow is by attracting other opposition votes and, ironically, helping re-elect the Conservatives.

That post seems accurate. It follows my experience, though I certainly don't speak for all voters who have voted Green.

I voted without fail NDP when in the Victoria riding, and would have voted NDP in the last election had I still lived there (I regretted the Green Party fielded a candidate there in the last election, splitting the anti-Con vote of a strong NDP base--But remember it is May who has repeatedly sought anti-Con candidate selection  with other parties including the NDP, only to be rejected by the NDP brass out of hand and by most of the NDP partybots on this site --aghast at the thought diluting the  NDP team:
http://www.greenparty.ca/article-link/2013-02-04/im-trying-instill-spiri...

Moving to Saanich-Gulf Islands, I voted in 2008 for a Liberal for the first (and I hope last) time. Popular environmentalist Briony Penn ran as a one-time Lib candidate and I correctly observed that she would have the best chance to beat the well-connected Con, Gary Lunn.
Unfortunately, that was the pilot run for Robofraud and the newly-hatched Con voter database targeting non-Con voters. (I and friends got that call). This was perhaps the first riding stolen by robofraud.

In 2008 I saw Elizabeth May as, by far, the Candidate most likely to beat Lunn. Though not a Green Party member I haven't regretted that vote. Though I have many criticisms of May, she has performed better than most.

addictedtomyipod

Frankly, E. May's performance matters very little.  What I find the most troubling is why does she insist on leading  a fringe party and not decide to back another party to get what she claims she cares for?  She spends most of her time attacking the NDP, another progressive party.  She has opened a can of worms in her riding that we are left to deal with and she provides no apologies or answers for.

Pages