Quote:
Originally Posted by flamey_mcflame
Let me get this straight. You don't want parties on a televised debate that will tear it apart?? Then why would you want the BQ there??
|
I don't. I merely stated that they couldn't be allowed in one debate, yet excluded from the other based only on language. Exclude them on valid grounds: that they have no interest in running the country, same as the Grens. Well...I suppose the Greens have "interest," but if they ever got the chance to do it, they'd soil their diapers so fast when confronted with "reality" that it's fair to say they'd never try again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flamey_mcflame
The Green Party will likely get 8-10% of the popular vote, I doubt the NDP wil get 18% of the vote. Yet, because their voters are concentrated in certain regions of the country, they are considered an extremely legitimate party that deserves almost equal billing to the Conservatives and the Liberals.
|
They got 4.5% last time. Getting 8% this year would be absolutely shocking when there's so much on the line this time. While 4.5% is well above the levels of other fringe parties, it still qualifies as nothing more than protest vote level...it's one in 22 for pete's sake! As for the NDP and concentrated support...the reason we have distinct electoral districts is that regions have different needs and desires...the ultimate fact, though, is that the Greens have never found enough support among ANY group to elect an MP. The other 4 parties have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flamey_mcflame
Rather than using extreme statements, maybe you should focus on the fact that the Green Party isn't the Mary Jane party or the Communist party. They garner a significant portion of the vote and consider that this party has made significant inroads in the last decade when it comes to vote gathering.
|
They are media darlings because they have such "noble" environmental goals. In reality, May appears to be a communist (her latest announcement was in support of a guaranteed livable income...guess I'll just stop working and go fishing), and any Green supporters I've ever met are cut from the same cloth as supporters of the MJ party, or the Marxist-Leninist party. They have taken the position of being the default protest vote, but that doesn't mean they've become a serious party.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flamey_mcflame
This country is not a two party system like the U.S. where individuals have to choose one or the other. If you have criteria for which party should or should not be allowed to represent themselves on national debates, please express them.
|
1) Significant support.
2) Intent to actually lead the country, on all issues
Greens have neither.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flamey_mcflame
And you should also question why Jarack Layton and Sweaters Harper are so insistent on not letting the Green Party in. I'll give you the NDP's reason right now. The NDP is the supposed alternate choice after the two main parties. The possibility of the Green's replacing them as that alternate has become a credible threat to their power and base. I'm not sure why the Conservatives wouldn't want them there. Right now, the conservatives must be the luckiest party in Canadian history. You have three left leaning parties splitting votes and only one right of center party.
|
You've got the NDP reasons right. The Cons' reasons are simple: when 1 person is the incumbent and the remainder are vying for his job, the incumbent tends to have more than his share of attacks from the others. Why would the Cons want this, in addition to the reduction in total "face time" to only 12 minutes per hour?
Quote:
Originally Posted by flamey_mcflame
If there is no right of center alternative prior to the next election. I'm gonna run as a pseudo Neo-Con. I'll rail against homosexuals, immigrants, atheists and uppity city folk. Maybe I'll be able to steal 5-7 points from the Conservatives. Then the conservatives will realize how fortunate they have it right now. Lucky Blue punks.
|
Good luck. I'd love to see another right-of-centre alternative that would be led by a smarter group of people. This latest "puffin" gaffe by the Cons sure makes me question their intelligence. However, it's Mr. Dion's policies that make me question his intelligence. For this election, I'm forced to vote for the least dangerous policies, even though I'm not sure that the Con leadership has any political saavy at all.