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

91 posts / 0 new

Fri, 2008-10-17 17:40

Policywonk

quote:

Somehow 5000 votes abandoned the NDP and went to Elizabeth May.

Not necessarily. The NDP lost over 6000 votes actually. But there were over 4000 fewer votes cast and many NDP as well as Liberal supporters may not have voted. I doubt many NDP supporters voted Conservative, but obviously some Liberal supporters did (MacKay got 1105 more votes), leaving over 9000 Liberal supporters who probably voted Green or didn't vote (some may have voted NDP). Thus the NDP vote that went Green could have been less than 3000, but was likely more.

Fri, 2008-10-17 17:47

#53

Cueball

quote:

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

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][/b]

What is going on? Some disgruntled riding president starts a web-site, then appologizes and takes it down a day later after a phone with Elizabeth May? Some movement for leadership change.

Fri, 2008-10-17 18:03

#54

madmax

Actually Greens I am online with are wondering if they should even have a party or riding association anymore.

Seems they are broke and broken and just don't feel as enthusiastic as you Cueball.

They also don't seem to have that Tommy Douglas feel about them, because they are not New Democrats.

It isn't pleasant those results nor their effect on the election or to the LPC.

Obviously the NDP voter was fooled in Central Nova and that is too bad because May wasn't even close.

Sun, 2021-11-28 21:55

#55

jfb

Fri, 2008-10-17 18:08

#56

Cueball

quote:

Originally posted by madmax:
[b] Actually Greens I am online with are wondering if they should even have a party or riding association anymore.
Seems they are broke and broken and just don't feel as enthusiastic as you Cueball.
[/b]

Ahh today I am to be labelled a Green Party supporter. Had to happen sometime, I suppose. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Fri, 2008-10-17 18:16

#57

remind

Actually cue, you are stretching/reaching yet again, that was not stated, nor even implicated.

Fri, 2008-10-17 18:17

#58

Cueball

No? Ok. Are all NDP'rs connected telepathically like the Borg, or do you just send PM's back and forth? I am sure Max can speak for himself.

Fri, 2008-10-17 18:30

#59

remind

Doesn't matter if he could, or could not have, I read the posts, and am free to answer or give opinion just on my own little accord. Plus I thought you were tired of invective usage? But no worries, I understand, you were/are merely playing avoidance again and deflecting away from the rebuttals of your posts that you did not like and are trying to take it back into the personal and make people defensive, as opposed to rationally discussing, or acknowleging error, on the points you were grossly wrong about.

Fri, 2008-10-17 18:30

#60

It's Me D

quote:

Are all NDP'rs connected telepathically like the Borg

Well they do seem to love Sweden... Borg is Swedish right [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]

Fri, 2008-10-17 18:34

#61

Cueball

Max's rebuttal amounted to hearsay about some people he was talking to online, the protestation of her one-time rival, and a riding president who later appologized.

quote:

OTTAWA — The website emaygoway.ca lasted just a few hours before Green Leader Elizabeth May persuaded the disgruntled Green to take it down.

Very exciting.

Fri, 2008-10-17 18:38

#62

Cueball

quote:

Originally posted by It's Me D:
[b]
Well they do seem to love Sweden... Borg is Swedish right [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img] [/b]

Fri, 2008-10-17 19:00

#63

remind

quote:

Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]Max's rebuttal amounted to hearsay about some people he was talking to online, the protestation of her one-time rival, and a riding president who later appologized. [/b]

I believe his personal observations are equal to yours that you feel should stand alone, and they also stand upon what was expressed here by John Ogivlie, Daniel Grice, and mimeguy along with the comments by GP members that were cited in the G&M. Moreover, the very abscence of many GP members here also give testimony to where they are at in respect to how this election played out for them.

They have some serious thinking to do, after all they are a party that is nearly 30 years old and they yet to have a break through of any type, at any level of government. Their dew has worn off, long ago, no matter how hard EMay trys to spin it that they are a "new" party, they aren't.

And allegedly making 10% in some 38 ridings out of 307 is hardly a testiment to their strength. GP memebers took a heavy financial blow, they are 2 million in debt as a party and that is not even individual candidate debt.

Fri, 2008-10-17 19:13

#64

Cueball

Yes, but what is particularly disinteresting about all of this chatter about this topic is overtly partisan nature of the commentary, since as we can see, not a single GP supporter among those you have mentioned who post here, have come forward to make any noise on this topic whatsoever. At least at this venue it seems that the groundswell of popular revolt against Elizabeth May's leaderhsip is coming from the NDP, and the NDP alone.

I can see why some, or many GP people might be upset with May on this issue, while on the other hand she also went a long way to raise the profile of the party, increase its vote share, get it into the "debate" (actually an election promise more or less), and run as a national campaign. So "dumping" Elizabeth May is not simply an issue of getting rid of unsuccesful leadership, as is the case with Dion, but is actually a complex issue because the results are mixed.

Fri, 2008-10-17 19:21

#65

Cueball

quote:

Originally posted by Trevormkidd:
[b]At a time when every major party (and most of the fringe parties too) lost votes, the Green Party increased their vote count by 42%. That doesn't guarentee May's position as leader of the GPC - afterall Harris increased the Green vote from 0.8% to 4.3% in '04 and many members still wanted him dumped (he only received 56% support to stay on in a leadership race in 2004).
Despite our differences, and despite disagreeing with Green policy on several issues, when a leadership review comes May can expect my vote.
The hate that NDP supporters on babble have for May doesn't worry me. If they started to like her then I would be worried.[/b]

quote:

Originally posted by West Coast Greeny:
[b] I don't think may should be forced out. She's still the best person for the job. But there are going to be alot of people within the party who won't be so generous, who do see the NDP as the same as the Liberals as the same as the Conservatives, and who will try to force May out. The problem is that her leadership alone almost carried the party through this election. It lived and died on it. If she's not at the helm of the party next election, I see the party having a hard time surviving.
[/b]

Fri, 2008-10-17 19:50

#66

remind

Well cue, you must be pretty interested, in it all, as you keep on keeping on. [img]tongue.gif" border="0[/img]

Fri, 2008-10-17 19:53

#67

Cueball

No worries, I understand, you were/are merely playing avoidance again and deflecting away from the rebuttals of your posts that you did not like and are trying to take it back into the personal and make people defensive, as opposed to rationally discussing, or acknowleging error, on the points you were grossly wrong about.

So far there is no great groundswell of movement to remove Elizabeth May from the leadership of her party. There is some chatter on the internet, encouraged largely by NDP partisans, and a few other isolated voices, and a G&M writer looking for a story.

Even here Greens are weighing the elecion in the balance, and despite some misteps, seem to be comfortable with Elizabeth May continuing. I guess at least until some plausible alternative presents itself.

Time will tell.

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Fri, 2008-10-17 21:14

#68

remind

Yes I agree, the results could be mixed, and I noted above that it is something that they have to think deeply about, on many many levels. They are in a difficult situation.

They tried to play the naive childhood innocence card for as long as they could, while being almost 30 years old. The merry bunch of amatuers disguise grew stale and they had to make a move, somehow, to gain relevance. They either had to create an actual party from their movement, or admit their irrelevancy, mistakes in choices and get poltically involved elsewhere.

They made the mistake of thinking they could do both, while shafting the NDP. It was going to be a win win win for them. Now they are left holding a severely damaged house, which is filled with severely damaged goods. That their leader was using them, for a different game entirely did not matter as they felt they had to do something, and believed it was now or never. They were also wrong on those accounts.

It is actually very sad, as a lot of good people got hurt, badly, and it needed to have not been that way.

Sat, 2008-10-18 06:33

#69

nicky

So what would have happened in Central Nova had May not run? Here are a few thoughts.

1. The most obvious point is that May lost to Mackay by 14.2 %. Alexis MacDonald only lost by about half that margin, or 7.9% in 2006. Here are the 2006 and 2008 numbers

Con 40.7 46.6
NDP 32.8 19.6
Lib 24.6 0.0
Green 1.6 32.4
Others 0.3

Although their percentages were similar, MacDonald polled more raw votes than May: 13,836 to 12,620.

2. Central Nova was obviously a potential NDP target based not just on the 2006 results but on a growing trend, both federal and provincial, towards the NDP in the riding. As I argued in a post before the election:

posted 14 September 2008 03:42 PM
________________________________________
I've read a couple times that the good NDP result in Central Nova in 2006 was attributed to Alexis MacDonald more than the party. Therefore these votes stand to be poached by Elizabeth May.
I therefore looked at the vote for the provincial NDP in the last election, June 2006. I've added the votes in the three Pictou seats, Antigonish and the 3 polls in Eastern Shore and the 20 polls in Guysborough Sheet Harbour that are in Central Nova
Federal
Con 17,134 40.7%
NDP 13,861 32.9
Lib 10,349 24.6
Green 671 1.7
Provincial
Con 15,539 43.3%
NDP 12,599 35.0
Lib 7,232 20.1
Green 626 1.7

These figures suggest a solid and rising party vote for the NDP in Central Nova. MacDonald may have been an estimable candidate but her absence from the ballot may not result in a melting away of the NDP vote to May.

3. Outside of Central Nova the NDP did relatively well. The overall results for 2006 and 2008, including Central Nova were

Lib. 37.2 29.8 -7.4
NDP 29.8 28.9 -0.9
Con 29.7 26.1 -3.6
Green 2.7 8.0 +5.3
Ind 0.7 6.6 +5.9

If we apply these same swings to the 2006 Central Nova results we get:

Con 37.1
NDP 31.9
Lib 17.2
Green 6.9

4. Now, let’s eliminate the Central Nova results which were obviously atypical of the overall Nova Scotia results owing to May’s candidacy and the lack of a Liberal. For the 10 remaining ridings the percentages are: [2006 and 2008]

Lib 38.4 32.9 -5.5
NDP 29.5 30.0 +0.5
Con 28.6 24.1 -4.5
Green 2.7 5.7 +3.0
Ind 0.7 7.4 +6.7

Replicating these swings produces this notional result in Central Nova:

Con 36.2
NDP 33.3
Lib 19.1
Green 4.6

5. Colchester Cumberland M. Valley was of course another atypical riding owing to Bill Casey’s successful run as an independent. There was also no Green candidate. To get a truer picture of the overall Nova Scotia swings we should eliminate it as well. Without it and Central Nova the cumulative results in the other nine Nova Scotia ridings were for 2006 and 2208:

Lib. 39.9 35.5 -4.4
NDP 30.5 31.8 +1.3
Con 26.0 25.8 -0.2
Green 2.8 6.3 +3.5
Ind 0.6 0.7 +0.1

These swings would produce this result in Central Nova:

Con 40.5
NDP 34.1
Lib 20.2
Green 5.1

With some further strategic voting by Liberal and Green supporters it might have been much closer.

6. Perhaps the most comparable riding to central Nova was South Shore St Margaret’s. It has a similar mix of small town and rural electors with an incumbent Conservative MP. Here are the results from 2006 and 2008:

Con: 36.8 36.1 -0.7
NDP 28.5 33.7 +4.8
Lib 28.4 23.7 -4.7
Green 2.9 5.2 +2.0
Other 3.4 1.3 -1.9

If we apply these swings to Central Nova we get:

Con 40.0
NDP 37.6
Lib 19.9
Green 3.6

These figures would have brought Mackay within 2.4% of defeat.

But there is another factor to consider. In South Shore the NDP was only ahead of the Liberals by a whisker in 2006. An effective tie for second place is not conducive of strategic voting. It is noteworthy that voteforenvironment.ca did not even make a recommendation to vote NDP instead of Liberal. In Central Nova the NDP was clearly the alternative on the 2006 figures. It is reasonable to assume that there would have been greater strategic shift there from the Liberals to the NDP in order to defeat Mackay. It may well have been greater than 2.4%.

Conclusion:

If May had not run in central Nova, it is impossible to say whether Mackay would have been defeated. It does seem likely, however, that the NDP would have been within range of knocking him off and at least would have come much closer to doing so than May actually did.

Sun, 2008-10-19 13:24

#70

madmax

That is some compelling data.

I wouldn't doubt that the GP leader has setback any opportunity of taking out MacKay by the NDP.

I don't believe May will run in Central Nova again. I don't believe she wants to continue to watch parliment from the gallery.

Expect her double talk, right out of the riding.

But even so, I believe the damage has been done to the NDP in the riding, and worse for the Liberals, but that isn't Mays fault. That's Dions.

Sun, 2021-11-28 21:55

#71

jfb

Sun, 2008-10-19 14:16

#72

joshmanicus joshmanicus's picture

quote:

Originally posted by KenS:
[b]I doubt there was any of that at all.[/b]

Your from NS, what was going on in Central Nova?

Sun, 2008-10-19 19:09

#73

ForestGreen

quote:

Originally posted by nicky:
[b]
If May had not run in central Nova, it is impossible to say whether Mackay would have been defeated. It does seem likely, however, that the NDP would have been within range of knocking him off and at least would have come much closer to doing so than May actually did.[/b]

But are you accounting for the fact that Alexa was not running there anymore? Take a look at the actual 2008 results.
Say Elizabeth May withdrew before the election, and the Liberals were still out of the picture. About 26 or 27% of the 32% that went Green (about 80-85% of that vote) would have had to go to the NDP. Actually more, when you consider the remainder that would go to the Conservatives .. So we're talking over 90%. Do you really think that would have happened? In every riding there are centrist or centre-right voters that might consider a Green vote that would not go over to the NDP. You're making quite an assumption here.

Sun, 2008-10-19 19:22

#74

madmax

The only thing that is apparently clear, is that with no Liberal Candidate, Elizabeth May Received Less votes then the Previous NDP Candidate. That is a fact. Therefore the GP Leader received less Centre, Centre Right, Left and Right voters then did the Previous NDP Candidate who was more successful in the riding.

The Vote of GP Leader has been established. It is less then that of previous NDP candidate Alexis Macdonald.

If you are suggesting that the NDP had a strategy to make the LPC candidate stand down, they did not. If you are suggesting that had an LPC candidate stood down for an NDP candidate, one thing is abundently clear. The NDP would have received more votes, as would have MacKay, and just as many Liberals would have stayed home.

The skewing of the results is the tragic decision of Dion and May. It resulted in capitulation for the LPC in Central Nova. A stronger result for MacKay. A weakening of the NDP and a failure of the Leader of the GP to simply exceed the NDP challenge to Mackay of only 2 years ago.

All Sizzle no Steak
All Hat no Horse
Got an East Coast phrase anyone....

[ 19 October 2008: Message edited by: madmax ]

Sun, 2008-10-19 19:30

#75

ForestGreen

quote:

Originally posted by madmax:
[b]The only thing that is apparently clear, is that with no Liberal Candidate, Elizabeth May Received Less votes then the Previous NDP Candidate. That is a fact. Therefore the GP Leader received less Centre, Centre Right, Left and Right voters then did the Previous NDP Candidate who was more successful in the riding.
The Vote of GP Leader has been established. It is less then that of previous NDP candidate Alexis Macdonald.
If you are suggesting that the NDP had a strategy to make the LPC candidate stand down, they did not. If you are suggesting that had an LPC candidate stood down for an NDP candidate, one thing is abundently clear. The NDP would have received more votes, as would have MacKay, and just as many Liberals would have stayed home.
The skewing of the results is the tragic decision of Dion and May. It resulted in capitulation for the LPC in Central Nova. A stronger result for MacKay. A weakening of the NDP and a failure of the Leader of the GP to simply exceed the NDP challenge to Mackay of only 2 years ago.
All Sizzle no Steak
All Hat no Horse
Got an East Coast phrase anyone....
[ 19 October 2008: Message edited by: madmax ][/b]

No - I am taking issue to the argument that preceded my post. Why are you suddenly shifting the topic here? Stop trying to put words in my mouth. I meant exactly what I meant to say. Nothing more.

Sun, 2008-10-19 19:35

#76

ForestGreen

Basically Elizabeth May was a less established candidate in a less established party. You can say what you will about that, but I don't buy the argument that she prevented a possible win here by the NDP candidate.
And only a week ago, people were still saying that the Greens were running distant third, and that their presence might actually be helping the NDP.

Sun, 2021-11-28 21:55

#77

jfb

Sun, 2008-10-19 21:44

#78

remind

quote:

Originally posted by ForestGreen:
[b]Basically Elizabeth May was a less established candidate in a less established party. [/b]

Apparently being the leader of a party has a draw all of its own, as we can see by the votes in LNC, in the by-election and EMay's results there, and what they were in the subsequent general election for a normal GP candidate. And we can see that in effect in CN, so she has no barrier as a less established candidate. And she had perfect conditions. Somethings that I underestimanted hugely.

Moreover stop with the nonsense about a less established party. Just how long does it take to get established anyway? As the GP is 25 years old in Canada, and this is its 7th election cycle, if it was going to become anything at all, it would have done so by now. This lack of established rhetoric s severely lacking credibility. It is as empty as the "we're a merry bunch of amatuers trope.

quote:

[b]You can say what you will about that, but I don't buy the argument that she prevented a possible win here by the NDP candidate. [/b]

I believe you are wrong, and that Lorifice would have had a good shot at it. Nicky's numbers are compelling.

Mon, 2008-10-20 03:41

#79

nicky

Forrest Green : I think my assumptions are modest ones.

First the NDP seems to have a solid base in CN, judging by the provincial election results which were actually better than Alexis MacDonald's.

Second, if the trends through the rest of Nova Scotia were reflected in CN, the NDP, if May had not run, would have given Mackay a run for his money and cetainly have come closer than May did.

Your suggestion that the NDP would have to take 90% of the Green vote is misplaced. It assumes there would be no Liberal as there obviously would have been in May's absence. Mackay obviously was the second choice of many Liberal voters. I suspect that the NDP would have held its 2006 vote and attracted some extra support just like it did in most ridings in Nova Scotia, particularly those in which it was competitive.The Conservative vote was flat in Nova Sclotia so it is likely that the NDP would have reduced if not eliminated Mackay's 8% margin.

Mon, 2008-10-20 07:54

#80

madmax

Forest Green said

quote:

No - I am taking issue to the argument that preceded my post. Why are you suddenly shifting the topic here? Stop trying to put words in my mouth. I meant exactly what I meant to say. Nothing more.

Mr Forest Green the topic is, "Green Ship sinks, takes NDP with it." Which is exactly what happened. I have put no words in your mouth.

You wish to speculate on many points and ignore the valid points regarding the NDP trends put forth by Nicky, and the serious challenge that NDP candidates have garnered against the CPC incumbent.

The harsh reality is that the May Deal, and the Green Party choosing to target a riding where the NDP put forth the biggest challenge to Mackay, has succeeded in weakening 2 parties, the Liberals and the NDP in the riding. The reality is that the Green Party Leader has lost all credibility in Central Nova as "the one" who could defeat the Conservatives and Peter MacKay.

This is a terrible result for the Leader of a party that wants National Recognition and wants to be treated equally.

Elizabeth Mays own words from April 6th 2007

quote:

Why Central Nova?
Submitted by Elizabeth May on 6 April 2007 - 6:39pm.
It is the question of the moment. Everywhere I go, on web sites and blogs, I stand accused of doing something: (pick one)
1)stupid
2)egomaniacal
3)deluded
4)courageous, but still stupid, or
5)selfish.
This is all because I decided to run in Central Nova. True, this criticism is most severe the farther one is from Nova Scotia and the least aware one is of life in Central Nova.

Apparently the blogs were correct on accounts 1 through 5.

Sun, 2021-11-28 21:56

#81

jfb

Mon, 2008-10-20 09:12

#82

ForestGreen

quote:

Originally posted by nicky:
[b]Forrest Green : I think my assumptions are modest ones.
First the NDP seems to have a solid base in CN, judging by the provincial election results which were actually better than Alexis MacDonald's.
[/b]

I agree that the Greens haven't built up the solid base, and didn't have the organization that the NDP (lists of committed voters, volunteer base), and that the Greens are relatively unknown in many parts. The provincial party base is almost non-existent out there too from what I have heard compared to BC or Ontario. Many people here in Alberta don't know much about the Green platform, and until recently didn't know anything about Elizabeth May.
This is what I was referring when remind took issue to my statements:

quote:

Moreover stop with the nonsense about a less established party. Just how long does it take to get established anyway? As the GP is 25 years old in Canada, and this is its 7th election cycle, if it was going to become anything at all, it would have done so by now. This lack of established rhetoric s severely lacking credibility. It is as empty as the "we're a merry bunch of amatuers trope.

From nicky:

quote:

[b]Second, if the trends through the rest of Nova Scotia were reflected in CN, the NDP, if May had not run, would have given Mackay a run for his money and cetainly have come closer than May did.[/b]

You still have to take into account the difference between the two candidates. I believe from everything I've heard that Alexa MacDonald was the stronger candidate.

quote:

[b]Your suggestion that the NDP would have to take 90% of the Green vote is misplaced. It assumes there would be no Liberal as there obviously would have been in May's absence. Mackay obviously was the second choice of many Liberal voters. I suspect that the NDP would have held its 2006 vote and attracted some extra support just like it did in most ridings in Nova Scotia, particularly those in which it was competitive.The Conservative vote was flat in Nova Sclotia so it is likely that the NDP would have reduced if not eliminated Mackay's 8% margin.[/b]

I was working with the hypothesis of there being no Liberal for two reasons:
1) Many people thought Elizabeth May should withdraw because she was splitting the vote, and couldn't win.
2) According to the much cited poll on CTV, the NDP was shown to be picking up more vote than either the Greens or the Conservatives, so they didn't seem to be at a disadvantage here.

If you tried to factor the Liberals back in, would it help the NDP vs. the Conservatives? Hard to say, but I would think that more Liberals would have gone to the NDP or Greens rather than the Conservatives in the end. Or at least, it would be pretty well split.
Why do you say 'MacKay was obviously the second choice' of many Liberal voters. What do you base that on? If it is on the fact that the NDP vote was lower than predicted, and the Conservative vote was higher, then it is a circular argument.

Sun, 2021-11-28 21:56

#83

jfb

Mon, 2008-10-20 19:41

#84

Robo

quote:

Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]NDP gained seats because of favourable votes splits caused by the Green Party. ...[/b]

Where are the seats picked up by the NDP as a result of the increase in Green vote in the riding? The seats gained were St. John's East, Welland, five seats in northern Ontario, Churchill, Edmonton-Strathcona, and Vancouver-Kingsway. Which of these was an NDP victory caused by an increase in the Green vote in that riding?

Let's use Welland as one example. If you compare the share of votes cast between the 2006 and 2008 elections:
NDP went up 2.3%
Con went up 3.1%
Grn went up 2.1%
Liberal went [b]down[/b] 7.6%
The shrinking of the Liberal vote caused the NDP victory in Welland -- a pattern I broadly see repeated in the ridings picked up by the NDP.

I'd be interested in which ridings would even your "surface reading of the poll tallies" suggest that the "NDP gained seats because of favourable votes splits caused by the Green Party". Maybe you'll suggest that the strength of the Green vote in St. John's East led to Jack Harris' victory there! [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]

[ 20 October 2008: Message edited by: Robo ]

Thu, 2008-11-06 11:19

#85

madmax

A PLAN

[url=http://communities.canada.com/edmontonjournal/blogs/internetthing/archiv... else gets it[/url]

quote:

ELIZABETH MAY! WE HAVE A RIDING FOR YOU!
Elizabeth May is making her concession speech. I really think she should run in Edmonton East in 18 months or so, when we have another federal election, against this man:

The comments flesh it out.

quote:

Adam Snider said:
I'm no fan of Peter Goldring, but I'm afraid I'm missing the joke.
October 15, 2008 2:50 PM
Joe said:
Well that would fit her pattern of choosing seats, there are many similarities between Central Nova and Edmonton East:
1) In both ridings, the NDP came second in the last election, with the Liberal support fading
2) In both cases, the NDP have some support in the area provincially, and the local NDPers have done the heavy lifting involved in softening up a Tory incumbant
3) Neither riding has the slightest history of any signifigant Green support or organization
In other words, running in either seat allows May a platform to sideline the NDP, re-elect a Tory, and not bother the Liberals in an area they want to target.

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

Sun, 2021-11-28 21:57

#86

jfb

Thu, 2008-11-06 15:00

#87

madmax

Elizabeth May is frequently called a flake. I didn't choose to include it, because I was more interested in the logic behind the choice of the Edmonton Riding.

I found a blog posting of yours from over a year ago, that lays out the same reasons as why Central Nova was choosen. It is almost the same point by point reasoning, and you concluded what would happen in the riding of Central Nova in April 2007. Infact, you were 100% correct. I should dig that up. (I discovered you blog alot [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]

Obviously with the hindsight of Central Nova, these bloggers logically applied the GP strategy/logic to another similar riding.

The people of Central Nova gave May a humilating defeat that was seen nationally across Canada.

The losers in this were not just May but the NDP and all the people who put years of hardwork into the riding.

May is what she is.

Thu, 2008-11-06 16:21

#88

remind

quote:

Originally posted by madmax:
[b]The losers in this were not just May but the NDP and all the people who put years of hard work into the riding.
May is what she is.[/b]

Personally, I still believe people are over looking just what exactly May is. The blogger points you put forth say this at the end:

quote:

[b]In other words, running in either seat allows May a platform to sideline the NDP, re-elect a Tory[/b], and not bother the Liberals in an area they want to target.

I do not believe it is about not bothering the Liberals at all, and see that the most important point is the first part in bold.

There is a long end game being played here, and it is not with the Liberals, they were just a convenient tool to be used.

Moreover, with Prentice now environment minister (think old PC member), and Obama in office, and the Fraser Institute and Harper making noises about an environmental plan with the new US Democratic administration, there is more coming down the pipes.

In fact, May just released a press point about Harper's new plans today, interesting that she knew what was up, me thinks, enough to write about it already. And IMV, she is suggesting that the CPC need help to meet Obama's environmental plan. As she appears to be all of sudden all on board for cap and trade, but yet we heard nothing good about the very same plan that the NDP has, coming from her, and the GP during the election.

quote:

Canada must have a real climate change plan to interest U.S. President-elect Barack Obama in negotiating a climate change agreement between Canada and the United States, say the Greens. Canada will also have to provide some assurance it won’t turn its back on the deal a few years down the road, the way the Harper government abandoned the Kyoto Protocol.
“Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon can’t truly believe there are any similarities between the Harper government’s approach and Mr. Obama’s plan,” said Green Party leader Elizabeth May.
[b]The Obama plans include mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050 using a market-based cap and trade system.
“Mr. Obama has a real climate change plan with caps of industrial greenhouse gas emissions.[/b] Mr. Harper has no caps and encourages industry to increase emissions by relying on intensity targets.[b] This means a fundamental change in Canadian policy is needed to make a deal with an Obama administration,” said Ms. May.
The Green Party of Canada supports the former Environment Commissioner’s call for a mobilization of the federal government to meet the climate crisis.[/b]

[url=http://www.greenparty.ca/en/releases/06.11.2008c]http://www.greenparty.c...

Frankly, I believe her "alleged" hatred of Harper is just a smokescreen, for a much deeper action/outcome.

Sun, 2021-11-28 21:57

#89

jfb

Wed, 2008-11-12 20:22

#90

nicky

There may be a lot of harmles self-delusion in May's memo but there is one particularly dangerous mendacity as well. Her assertion that the Greens did not significantly split the vote is, "to be as objective as possible" (or whatever such phrase she uses) just not true.

Polls showed that the NDP and Liberals (and BQ in Quebec) would have been the second and third choice of Green voters. The Conservatives were their last choice. The numbers were roughly NDP 35%, Libs 25% and Cons 10%. In ridings where the NDP was out of contention one might have expected a greater second preference for the Liberals among Green voters. Where the NDP were out of contentions the opposite might well be the case.

Using these fairly safe assumptions it seems reasonable to conclude that the Greens delivered about 15 seats to Harper.

From the Liberals,11 seats: West Nova, Egmont, St John, Kitchener Centre, Kitchener Waterloo, London W, Mississauga Erindale, Oak Ridges, Nunavut, N Vancouver and Saanich.

From the NDP, 4 seats: South Shore St Margaret's; Saskatoon Rosetown Biggar, Surrey N, and Vancouver Island North. (and perhaps Central Nova as well)

What is more frightenening is to contemplate the effect on the distribution of seats if the Greens had polled the 10 to 12% many polls gave them rather than the 7% they actually received on election day. Harper would almost certainly have a majority today.

May does not want to acknowledge this harsh truth because it can lead to a large reduction of the Green vote in the next election. She wants her supporters to think naively and wrongly that voting Green does not help the Conservatives.

Wed, 2008-11-12 23:32

#91

remind

nicky wrote:
What is more frightenening is to contemplate the effect on the distribution of seats if the Greens had polled the 10 to 12% many polls gave them rather than the 7% they actually received on election day. Harper would almost certainly have a majority today.

May does not want to acknowledge this harsh truth because it can lead to a large reduction of the Green vote in the next election. She wants her supporters to think naively and wrongly that voting Green does not help the Conservatives.

Excellent point!

___________________________________________________________
"watching the tide roll away"

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

Pages