Green Party Party of Canada Adds Toughness, Grit: Georges Laraque Named Deputy Leader - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Housley4Prez · 07-31-2010, 12:54 PM

GEORGES LARAQUE NAMED A DEPUTY LEADER OF GREEN PARTY

In the "let's add credibility" department of the Green Party of Canada, Elizabeth May adds an NHL ToughGuy to their roster to beat up the opposition, and to serve as a linemate and bodyguard as she rides across Canada via rail.

Gotta admit, Georges is and has always been an interesting character. I much prefer a story like this, compared to the stories from a few years ago of Tie Domi having an affair with Belinda Stronach in a bid to get into the political realm.

ComixZone · 07-31-2010, 12:57 PM

It's alright, the other parties can still bully the green party all they want because Laraque will deem it as all part of life as they're politicking well within the range of "the code", and thus sit on his hands before ultimately being told to go home.

Joborule · 07-31-2010, 02:22 PM

Green party is such a joke, but good for Laraque nonetheless.

CaptainCrunch · 07-31-2010, 02:32 PM

AS the Green Party spirals to joke status under the leadership of Elizabeth May.

Until they get serious, they have no impact on the Canadian Political Landscape.

FanIn80 · 07-31-2010, 04:57 PM

Yet another example of why fringe parties need to go.

JohnnyB · 07-31-2010, 05:57 PM

I don't see anything wrong with this. Laraque seems to have a history of involvement with causes that fit with Green values, and it's not like they're looking to him as genuine leadership. He's just getting involved on the PR side of things, and he does seem to genuinely fit the party.

Flames Draft Watcher · 07-31-2010, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Yet another example of why fringe parties need to go.

The less parties we have to choose from, the further we stray from any sort of true democracy. A 2 party system is no democracy.

bcb · 07-31-2010, 07:27 PM

I would have pegged Andrew Ference for this position, but maybe he's already taken by the NDP.

Poe969 · 07-31-2010, 07:33 PM

so in about 3 months they're going to tell him that he isn't wanted and to go home. He'll say that he's going to "read up" during the next off season and that he'll be one hell of a Deputy Leader for another party for next season only to do something really stupid.

Its kind of funny that its with the green party since last year most of the Canadians thought he was yellow!

Poe969 · 07-31-2010, 07:39 PM

oh ya, if we're talking about Laraque then we have to post this picture. I mean what does this guy think about????

http://stayclassy.net/wp-content/upl...s-Octane-7.png

I'm on my wifes lap top and its not letting me cut and paste the picture, but its the shot from the beer commercial of him playing hockey with a girl with a big butt

Devils'Advocate · 07-31-2010, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

AS the Green Party spirals to joke status under the leadership of Elizabeth May.

Until they get serious, they have no impact on the Canadian Political Landscape.

Election_____votes____% of popular vote
1984_______26,921________0.21%
1988_______47,228________0.36%
1993_______32,979________0.24%
1997_______55,583________0.43%
2000______104,402________0.81%
2004______582,247________4.32%
2006______665,940________4.48%
2008______941,097________6.80%

And they are currently at 12% in the polls. As a sometimes Green voter, I really, really hope this "spiraling to joke status" keeps up.

CaptainCrunch · 07-31-2010, 10:46 PM

Well once we start giving out seats based on percentage then we can say something.

But seeing as they have no seats or representation in government they are a non entity.

Considering that they had less then 10% of the national support in the last election means that they don't have a message that resonates with Canadians.

At their height the Rhino party of Canada garnered over 110,000 votes in the 1980 election, I'm more impressed with the fact that a comedy party got 2.4% of the vote as opposed to a serious party getting 6%.

Maybe once Elizabeth May is bounced people within and outside of the Green Party will be taken more seriously.

Devils'Advocate · 08-01-2010, 08:58 AM

Well, they SHOULD give out seats based on percentages. That is 6.8% of Canadians that have zero representation in parliament and IMO, that is wrong. It's a very sorry state of affairs that a party with 33% of the vote could have a majority government even if the other 57% don't want that party in power.

I don't think that it's a matter that their message doesn't resonate with Canadians... the reason they poll at 12% but usually end up with less than that is because people have that feeling that they are throwing their vote away if they don't vote for one of the major three parties... or in some ridings, the major two parties. When I discuss the Green platform with people, most think it has some very good ideas in it. They just can't see voting for a party that is unlikely to have a chance at winning their riding. I think that if we had proportional representation the number would be much higher than 12%.

transplant99 · 08-01-2010, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Well, they SHOULD give out seats based on percentages.

No they shouldn't. its simply not how the system works or is set up.

At any rate this is WAY off topic for the main board...maybe should move it to the OT board.

CaptainCrunch · 08-01-2010, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Well, they SHOULD give out seats based on percentages. That is 6.8% of Canadians that have zero representation in parliament and IMO, that is wrong. It's a very sorry state of affairs that a party with 33% of the vote could have a majority government even if the other 57% don't want that party in power.

I don't think that it's a matter that their message doesn't resonate with Canadians... the reason they poll at 12% but usually end up with less than that is because people have that feeling that they are throwing their vote away if they don't vote for one of the major three parties... or in some ridings, the major two parties. When I discuss the Green platform with people, most think it has some very good ideas in it. They just can't see voting for a party that is unlikely to have a chance at winning their riding. I think that if we had proportional representation the number would be much higher than 12%.

At the end of the day we're not in a representation by % system, we've never been and we probably never will be.

And polls for the Green's reduce during campaigns because Elizabeth May gets more camera time, and the woman's a flaming lunatic.

Matty81 · 08-01-2010, 10:12 AM

Now he too can fall asleep every night with hopes of winning votes away from viable left of center parties with no chance of every sitting himself. Dream big Georges.

JiriHrdina · 08-01-2010, 10:17 AM

Moved to the o/t board - there's really not much of a hockey angle here ....and now people can get into the political discussion freely.

SebC · 08-01-2010, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

The less parties we have to choose from, the further we stray from any sort of true democracy. A 2 party system is no democracy.

A 2 party system is the logical outcome of first past the post. If the NDP and the Greens simply dispanded, we'd get a Canadian government that is closer to what they believe in. Matty81 hit the nail on the head... fringe parties actually hurt their own causes.

I'm all for a multitude of parties, but only if the electoral system that supports them. First past the post is not a very good democratic system, as it elevates a plurality to the status of a majority, and that's not right.

Flames Draft Watcher · 08-01-2010, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SebC

A 2 party system is the logical outcome of first past the post. If the NDP and the Greens simply dispanded, we'd get a Canadian government that is closer to what they believe in. Matty81 hit the nail on the head... fringe parties actually hurt their own causes.

I'm all for a multitude of parties, but only if the electoral system that supports them. First past the post is not a very good democratic system, as it elevates a plurality to the status of a majority, and that's not right.

Agreed. I've had a problem with First Past the Post for a long time.

People wonder why there is voter apathy? Its cause in most places in the country your vote is literally meaningless if you aren't voting along with the majority.

I wrote a paper presentation on proportional representation for a low level Poli Sci. I see a lot of benefits, with few drawbacks. Its a pity that it does not seem to get as serious recognition as it should as an issue. About the only benefit that poli sci class had was to make me more convinced of the systemic issues in our supposed democracy.

We can't call ourselves a democracy when the majority of people aren't being represented at all. First past the post is a complete joke of a system.

SebC · 08-01-2010, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

People wonder why there is voter apathy? Its cause in most places in the country your vote is literally meaningless if you aren't voting along with the majority.

Minor quibble: under first past the post, a lot of votes with the majority are also wasted votes.

I prefer single transferrable vote to proportional representation as it preserves local representation without giving up much fidelity to voter intent, but I'd still go with pure proportional representation over first past the post.