You can bet that the Cons, Greens and NDP will be spending the maximum in this riding.

I’m also betting a substantial number of former Liberal voters will be staying home this time around.

I don’t think May will quite cut it. I was thinking of voting Green but not anymore – I would never vote for a prime ministerial candidate who doesn’t think she’s the best person for the job.

This is a very good analysis of the situation in Central Nova. I think that this one will be almost impossible to predict. There are a lot of factors that can’t be accounted for, such as the fact that a lot of the local Liberals are upset with Dion for robbing them of the right to run a candidate. These core Liberal supporters could well determine the outcome. They may rebuke Dion by parking their votes with the NDP or McKay. Or they may just stay at home. Should be a good show, at any rate. Make some popcorn.

DemocraticSPACE.com: May has a good shot of winning Central Nova…

There’s been a few pooh-poohing May’s chances of winning McKay’s seat, but Greg Morrow of DemocraticSPACE.com – who’s well respected for his polling analysis – has a post explaining that yes, it is very conceivable May can win….

Could May win – maybe
Could pigs fly – never know.
I’ve always thought that you had some sense in terms of analysis but this is sophomoric at best.
Hello, elections are not math quizzes.
There is
a) no guarantee of an NDP drop
b) no guarantee of the Greens benefiting from the Liberal absence.
c) a good chance some pissed of Grit will run as an independent
d)nothing from London that can be extrapolated to this race, other than maybe offend the locals and you don’t do well.
e) a pretty strong chance that Peter McKay might just get a plurality thanks to former Liberals who don’t like people from away ganging up on the home town boy. (And many do not see May that way at all)
f) a good chance that May and Dion are flippin idiots along with anyone else who thinks this isn’t going to just piss a whole lotta people off.

its possible for the greens to win, but its no guarentee. Right now, however, I think the momentum is in thier favour.

Robertson the Bruce — obviously nobody knows what will happen in such an unusual circumstance. But you will note I did a similar back-of-the-napkin analysis for the November 2006 by-election in London North Centre. This is what I came up with vs. what actually happened — it wasn’t so far off (slightly underestimated how many people would shift from NDP to Green):

Party	Candidate	Predicted	Actual
	Glen Pearson	33-35%	34.86%
	Elizabeth May	22-24%	25.84%
	Diane Haskett	23-25%	24.48%
	Megan Walker	17-19%	14.10%
-	Others	approx. 1%	0.71%

Well, I believe that it will be fought as if it were a three-way race. But I still think MacKay has the only real shot at winning.

Even so, it’s going to be a DAMN fun riding to watch.

The Fifth Player, Not a Fifth Wheel…

I have a prediction to make. Now that the Liberals and the Greens have announced their alliance in Central Nova, somewhere in this country over this weekend, a political cartoon will run. It will feature Liberal leader Stephane Dion dressed……

Greg:

I appreciate your thoughtful analysis more than you know. I think a lot of Liberals WANT this to be a good deal so badly they are willing to just assume and predict McKay will be defeated because of the May-Dion deal or at least have a harder time. You, on the other hand, have done your usual job of actually spending the time to analyze the real possibilities, probabilities and improbabilities.

You are usually more accurate than the paid political pundits so yours is the first post I’ve read that gave me a moment of pause. So out of respect for your good analysis, I will respond with some of my own.

But there are some assumptions you make which are critical to your conclusion which I don’t think can be supported.

1. Direct comparisons of performances across different ridings are extremely inexact, perhaps particularly in this case. For one, you had a strong Liberal Party riding with an incumbent that replaced that incumbent with another Liberal so regardless of how strong the opposition McKay has that and the others, especially the Liberals, in Central Nova and especially the Greens, do not. London is 2 hours from Toronto and a ton of Green volunteer support came from commuters.

2. You said “A warm relationship between Dion and May suggests that a good number of Liberals in Central Nova will probably be comfortable voting for May. Let’s say 3/4 do” and “And since there is no Liberal candidate, we can expect most of that drop to benefit the Greens”. I don’t think there is any evidence that this will be the case. At all. And possibly just the opposite. Dion made this decision without any consultation with the local riding association or the Nova Scotia Liberal caucus. They were extremely upset about the decision. Some will go NDP and some CPC, but most will stay home I suspect. There are a lot of Liberals who were already treading the line between NDP or CPC. The Liberals cannot hand the vote over to the Greens in nearly as strong numbers as you suggest.

3. At the same time, the traditional Green vote is more of a protest vote, formed because of the view that the traditional parties were defective including the prior Liberal government, and suddenly their leader is endorsing the Liberal Party. What effect does this have on their enthusiasm?

4. You don’t seem to have factored in the differences between a by-election, when the local candidates and races get a lot of daily media attention, and a general election when the federal leaders of the national party do. The CPC will be running national ad campaigns as well as local ad campaigns from which McKay will benefit. There will be a lot more attention paid.

5. You have not factored into your analysis incumbency, not just of McKay but of government. McKay is not just an opposition MP this time but a cabinet minister who has brought lots of goodies home to Nova Scotia. He is a Central Novan and Nova Scotian with an important seat at the cabinet. Will Central Nova residents easily give up that representation? Certainly some or many will, but most won’t.

One factor you also didn’t consider which supports your claim is that Alexa McDonough may be stepping down and so the new candidate will be a virtual unknown in all likelihood. Even if she doesn’t, she’s already lost once to McKay and voters tend to not like winners who turn into losers which would help May (and a little bit McKay too).

The CPC vote won’t shrink though and I think that is the key. There is a deep anger against Harper from people who would never have voted for him in the first place, but not with other Canadians. With other Canadians, some like him, some don’t, most are fairly indifferent. So there is as much if not more space for him to grow or keep constant.

Wish it weren’t so, but I don’t see how the Greens (1%) plus the Liberals (24%) can beat the Conservatives (40%).

Heck I could have told you that the NDP was in trouble the day Stephen Maynor was made to feel he had to drop out- to the displeasure of a lot of dippers in London who then stayed home. Not exactly a new phenomenon that. Maynard runs the London North Centre story is likely much different. The point is it reveals nothing, absolutely nothing about Central Nova.
Liberal+ Green does not equal a McKay defeat. It does reveal that Dion and May are the crassest of politicos. It seemed both of them learned a partisan thing or two from their old political bosses.
The score today is political opportunism 1 – the Environment – no score.

3. At the same time, the traditional Green vote is more of a protest vote, formed because of the view that the traditional parties were defective including the prior Liberal government, and suddenly their leader is endorsing the Liberal Party. What effect does this have on their enthusiasm?

The protest/populist vote in NS swings NDP, and has since at least 1998. As for “traditional Green vote”, in Central Nova that works out to a couple hundred people.

Ted,

When you increase spending in a riding by 75 times, you are going to see a significant jump in the vote for that party. It appears your conclusion (1% + 24% < 40%) seems to have not acknowledged that fact. I have begun a pretty detailed analysis of every riding in the country that looks at spending and performance. So the numbers I suggest vis-a-vis relationship between spending and performance aren’t drawn from London, but are averages from the first part of my analysis (I used London as an example for the obvious reason that May was running and the Greens spent $80k here). So your points #1 and #4 are not entirely relevant (though I understand that since I used London to illustrate what happens when a party spends more, it may appear that I’m saying the same thing will happen). I wasn’t clear on that.

That being said, your point #2 is a good one and one that I didn’t factor in. But Liberals are smart too. If MacKay loses, that brings the Liberals one seat closer to government. There’s no advantage for Liberals to give MacKay a free pass.

#3 — I don’t think the Greens are primarily a protest vote, so I reject the premise.

#5 — incumbency of government is reflected in the polls. that’s why the CPC has remained ahead of the liberals. but for all the ups and downs, we’re at about where we were last january. incumbent of the candidate is a factor, but there is diminishing returns. the first election after a new MP is elected gets a incumbency boost, the second elections less so, the third barely a boost and thereafter there is no impact. Mackay’s been around long enough that i doubt his incumbency status will give him any lift.

Again, I’m not by any means suggesting the above *will* happen, I’m just suggesting one possible avenue that could get May to within striking distance of Mackay, which some people flat out refuse to examine. Mark my words: the Greens will be spending a lot of $ here (one of perhaps only two ridings where they can reasonably win). Mackay may still win, but it will be close, and certainly a lot closer than most people are saying.

It’s an interesting analysis. To be honest I’m hesitant to use a Southern Ontario riding in trying to extrapolate how well May will do in Central Nova.

Voters in rural Atlantic Canada tend to cast their vote based on local candidates rather then party affiliation.

This means that voters are going to vote more on a MacKay versus May basis rather then on a Tory-Green basis. That will make this riding a challenge for May since MacKay and his family have such a high profile in the riding.

I’m not saying that May can’t win this seat but it would be a huge upset if she did.

Watched the news and the only reasons I heard from the residence as to why Mackay will win was “He’s a hometown boy” Well now If this is the only thing people can come up with I can only except a close race or a low voter turnout. I’m Alexis doesn’t run, the NDP will go down atleast 5% plus the 5 % the Greens are likely to steal.

If you are looking at spending though, how can you discount my points #1 and #4? In a general election, the CPC across Nova Scotia and the country will be spending far more than just what it is spending in Central Nova. National or provincial ad campaigns, campaign literature, databases, hired campaign and advertising strategists, etc. etc. McKay gets the benefit of a lot of that spending and May doesn’t have anything near the equivalent.

Also, voter turn-out and riding organization is also an advantage. In a single by-election, the Greens, with limited resources, can focus on one riding. In a general election, they won’t come nearly together in the same way even though they will make a bigger effort. May herself can’t dedicate nearly as much time to her own riding campaign as she did in the by-election. That is particular important given that she did not live in either riding she has campaigned for.

I don’t think it is as simple as 1% + 25% falls short, but we’re sort of playing the game of percentages there and not raw vote. I have no doubt that the Greens will significantly increase the number of votes they will get, but so will the Conservatives.

As for Liberals voting Green because they don’t want Conservatives… my feeling in the riding and talking with family is that the anger towards Harper is only felt by people who would never have voted CPC anyway so there is no Conservative bleeding. And in Central Nova, many/most who were Liberal were either close to the NDP line or close to the CPC line. Depending on how things go, and there are a lot of ifs, I’d expect the anti-Conservative vote to gravitate toward the NDP more than an untried and never before elected party, even if it is their leader.

As for incumbency, this is their first incumbent campaign. They were in opposition before. McKay has been dumping money into NS like you wouldn’t believe. Despite the press, if you looked back at the budget and the new equalization, Nova Scotia went up by the most by far and not Quebec.

And you really can’t underestimate the value to a local riding of having your MP have a significant (or perceived significant) place at the cabinet table.

You have convinced me that it won’t be a crushing defeat for the opposition or even a cakewalk for the CPC. We will have succeeded in ensuring that McKay spends more of his time and the CPC spends more of its money in Central Nova.

The campaign and the Liberal Party official endorsement of the Green Party will also, however, ensure that the Greens do better across the country, effectively ensuring more vote splitting in more ridings.

But Peter McKay won’t be looking for a new job after the next election.

Oh, and all I meant by a “protest” party – probably an inexact word in this case – is that a lot of people who vote for that party are voting for them because they have not seen in the other parties what they wanted or believed in. I didn’t mean that there are a lot of otherwise CPC/Liberal/NDP voters voting Green though that is clearly the impression I left.

My wife for example has voted Green because she doesn’t like any of the other parties, thinks the environment is important, and is not going to not vote. So she goes Green because they are different, and they are independent.

We’ll see what happens with them now.

You’re analysis shows what is perhaps the best case scenario for May, which pretty much has her tied with MacKay. That scenario in addition to favourable media attention on the race gives her a chance. But that’s it; May’s best hope is to squeak by the winner. In fact, whoever wins in this riding will probably have a very narrow plurality of votes.

MacKay will likely lose votes for several reasons; he’s been losing popularity for a while already and many in the east disapprove of the budget and of Harper.

The NDP might lose some votes to the Greens and will lose many if the media makes it seem like May has the best chance of beating MacKay. But at the moment, the NDP is more likely to pick up votes from the CPC which puts them in a solid second place at the moment. If people pick up on this, than many Liberal voters might be going to the NDP, as they often do, putting the NDP over the top of MacKay.

Sadly, this race will be driven by optics, more than substance, so it really depends how the parties and media frame this one.

The Greens are being set up as diametrically opposed to the Conservatives here (which is ironic, considering May and many Greens worked for the old Progressive Conservatives). In this case, few (if any) Conservative votes will go to the Greens. Some NDP votes might go to the Greens, but these votes will probably be balanced out by the ones the NDP gains from the Conservatives.

Liberal votes will likely be split between Greens, the NDP, a Liberal running as an Independent, and those who refuse to vote. Dion’s biggest mistake is that he’s looking at this as if it’s still the Liberal Leadership Convention; he’s remembering how Kennedy brought over nearly all his supporters to his camp. The local politics of Central Nova is very different than a partisan convention, and more likely to result in the split I just described.

I think it’s too soon to offer predictions on this one. At the moment, it looks like it should be a close three-way race. Campaign money and media optics will be the biggest factors here.

It’s a big risk for both Dion and May. And no matter what happens, it shows the poor condition our democracy is in — elites trying to engineer what they think is right in the absence of proportional representation.

This will be an interesting race to watch. Personally, I think Elizabeth May would be a great addition to Parliament.

Before this deal was struck, I was hoping both the Liberals and Dippers would give a pass to May wherever she ran. Although after May announced Central Nova I did have some doubts about her strategy. I’m still not sold this the best riding for her. But I agree there are several factors in her favour and working against MacKay.

One additional factor to consider is that even though the May/Dion relationship is warm, there are a number of Liberals disappointed with the decision including a number in Central Nova.

May could very well get 75% of Liberal support, but will it be at the same strength as previous elections. After talking to a Liberal friend of mine from Nova Scotia, I am less sure. Liberals want to support Dion because he is the party leader, but I do believe some could stay sore and decide to stay home and not vote – especially if the national campaign fails to ignite.

I guess we will have to wait and see. I know this will be one I’ll watching as the campaign develops.

Your analysis leaves out two important factors relating to the Green vote in 2006.

The 2006 Green vote in Central Nova bucked the national trend by being lower than the 2004 vote (most of the country held steady or increased). This was for two reasons: the 2006 candidate was a far-left misanthrope (not the terms he might choose, of course) who alienates many Green Party members, not to mention voters. And the Green vote cratered across the Atlantic provinces due to Jim Harris’ insensitive handling of the seal hunt issue and fratricidal attacks by several disaffected Atlantic Green candidates and organizers.

Given that the leader is far more respected in Atlantic Canada, the general malaise of 2006 will lift, and since she’s nowhere near as outside-the-mainstream as her predecessor in CN, she won’t be held back by that, either. If you are going to do calculus based on previous vote results, using 2004’s numbers adjusted up slightly would give you a more accurate base than 2006’s pitiful CN showing. It should be more like 3% than 1%. (Only 2 points more, but 3 times as much).

One of the commenters notes that Dion did not consult with the local Liberal riding association, so they may sit it out. That may be the case, but the local riding association is only a few hundred people, if that – most Liberal voters are just that, voters, not party members. They won’t be so offended, they’ll just shrug and pick another party.

The wild card is how the local Liberal executive will react to this news. Will they run an independent candidate or lend their workers to the May campaign? The local Liberals may also stay away from the Green campaign altogether. I just don’t see this one breaking May’s way as a result of the Liberal-Green pact. My experience with the riding (went to school there) is that Liberals won’t be happy with losing their right to vote for their party’s candidate and may even buck their leader on this one.

Erich thinking the Liberal activits don’t matter in the riding is the same kind of arragonace Dion and May don’t get. Maybe it’s because they entered politics at the elite level they don’t understand the actual mechanics of running a campaign. A great campaign team can win it for a poor candidate. A great candidate cannot win with a poor campaign team. These are people who give up countless hours of their time volunteering to knock on doors, put up signs, raise money for the campaign. If the Liberal activists stay home, as I suspect they will, then this is a lock for McKay with a potential upswing for the NDP.
The thing I don’t get is this- if the Liberals and Dion are so great why not join them? Why run candidates against a Liberal anywhere? Why even have a Green Party at all?

Having worked on 5 election campaigns, I’m quite familiar with the importance of the local team, Jimmy Pseudonym. But unless you think the Liberal campaign team will actively work against Elizabeth, their absence does not doom her campaign. Some may help her, some may help other parties, many may stay home. So what? Was anyone expecting them to work for her? She wasn’t, she’s been building her own campaign team, just as she did in LNC – except now she has practice and experience and warning (unlike the snap LNC by-election). Where will she find them? The 100 local supporters who came to her nomination meeting are a good start – that’s more than double the number who showed up to our riding’s NDP nomination this week, and they get 12% of the vote here in a much more populous riding.

Although much has been made of volunteers from across the country coming to LNC to help,the fact is that 75% of the volunteer hours were put in by local supporters. In Central Nova, May has a far stronger base to build on than LNC, so her local machine will be larger and more effective. If the third-place CN Liberal machine doesn’t back her up, she won’t be crying all the way to the ballot box. She’ll graciously accept any help they give, but rely on growing Green party support to win the seat.

Do you get this? The Liberals and Dion aren’t so great that Greens support them – but we’ll cooperate with them where we have common goals, like defeating MacKay and taking real action on climate change. You don’t have to agree with someone 100% to cooperate on something – if you did, then there would never be any cooperation except among mindless clones. Not running against each others’ leaders is exchanging a mutual courtesy, not capitulating or denying differences.

As a complete nonpartisan it is hilarious to see the Greens now engaging in the same old spin game. It really is funny and oh so revealing. I admire anyone who wants to put themselves through the grinder of an election. But that admiration does not extend to those who think the little people are expendable as long as they get want they desire. That is what these two ‘leaders’ have done well beyond the borders of their respective ridings.
I’ve been working on environmental change, like lots of other people, for a long time and would relish change. However, this does nothing, absolutely nothing, to advance change and May has just given a pass to one of the main roadblocks. This is naked power politics and anyone who actually cares about grassroots democracy let alone real action on the environment should be outraged not spinning for partisan ends.

For what it’s worth, I’m mostly appalled at all of the flak May and Dion are getting for this decision. People complain loudly about how political parties don’t make any attempt to cooperate, then, when two parties do make an attempt to cooperate, they get attacked for “backroom dealing”. At least be consistent in criticism!

Cooperating on legislation within government is one thing. This on the other hand is an attempt to manipulate the outcome of an election in a riding ignoring the wishes of local people. Big frikkin difference.

If Jimmy Newt disagrees with something, it becomes spin? Who said any “little people” were expendable? Our antiquated first-past-the-post system says that 1.5 million people could vote Green next election, 10% in every riding in Canada, and not elect a single MP. What about those “little people”, what makes their votes expendable?

And how does it hurt the environment to help May get elected? Certainly whether a Green runs against Dion or not makes little difference, he got 60% of the vote in his riding last time, more than all the other 4 parties combined.

If the only way you think you can help the environment is by voting Green in Laurentian (or Liberal in Central Nova), then you have a strange take on environmental politics.

No-one is manipulating the outcome of an election – every voter is free to choose from anyone on the ballot. If you don’t like the choices, you can stand for election yourself.

(Sorry, I meant “voting Green in Saint-Laurent” – slip of the keyboard)

Are the Greens not running a candidate in Saint-Laurent—Cartierville? I suppose it makes sense, but it isn’t as if Dion is in any danger in his seat.

I said does nothing for, not hurt. Demonstrate how supporting the Liberals who have done nothing on the environment when they had the chance is a positive. Please demonstrate how punishing McKay for destroying May’s former political home, the PCs as she is quoted as saying in the Star is a positive for the environment.
I guess Erich will be promoting Liberals and Greens not run in the number of ridings the NDP lost out on because of FPTP. What about all those poor souls? What this all about a squeeze play on the NDP needed by both the Greens and Liberals and not the issues. Oh say it isn’t so the Greens aren’t as pure as we all thought.

This is a completely cynical move made behind closed doors to try and subvert the democratic process. If May and Dion were sincere about democracy they would have held town meetings in Central Nova, met the Liberal and Green riding associations and asked for their approval. Instead it’s all done in the backroom with no democratic input. The NDP refused May’s overtures because it is a democratic party and the local riding association decides who its candidate will or will not be. Jack Layton cannot, dictatorially, decide to not run a candidate in favour of the leader of another party, especially one with Ms Mays “social reactionary views”. I think the Greens can look forward to a whole scale leftist witch hunt, now that Ms May and her former Tory backroom pals are running the show. The Greens have grabbed the spotlight all right, but most Canadians don’t like what they see.

The only Reason Layton is making a big he-haw about the whole thing is that the Greens and the liberals will rip apart there support. If this would benefit the party, he would be very much in favour of this.
Watching CBC I heard both sides of the story, some are not in favour of the decision locally, however some are able to see the bigger picture and the probability of gains for the Liberal and Green parties.
Its not anti-democracy, this decision will not result in anything horrific happening to our legislative assembly, we’d just have one less conservative and one more green in parliament. Also Jimmy, I don’t see why your making such a big fuss about this? There has been been bigger mistakes made by political leaders then this. I don’t think of this as a mistake, however it is a brilliant play by Elizabeth May.
Callwood, You are not able to speak for “most canadians”. Your an individual against this and thinks that the majority of canadians agree with you. Also, I’m positive that half of that majority doesn’t even care about this, Many who do probably don’t vote Green or Liberal anyway, and most of them weren’t even thinking about an election!

Matt, then why the backroom, “Mulroney” style deal? Why not talk to the voters of Central Nova and see what they think, in a series of public forums? Why do Ms May and Dion feel they have the right to decide whether a Riding Association can field a candidate? Is the Green party a dictatorship run for the sole benefit of its leaders? Why doesn’t Ms May hold some public meetings with her candidates and Riding representatives to gauge opinion? Matt, your dismissal of public opinion seems to indicate a rather weak support for the democratic process.

What critics of the Dion/May pact miss , is that the climate crisis changes EVERYTHING .
Its not just light bulbs and kpLs .Our entire global economy is based on cheap oil ,and free pollution .Stephan Harper is idealogically incapable of dealing with the climate crisis .
Without the climate crisis it is very unlikely that E May would be leader of the Greens ,or S Dion Leader of the Liberal Party .If there was no climate crisis there would be no chance of E May unseating P MacKay .
Central Nova is a very conservative area , and it is in many ways typically Canadian .It was the industrial heartland of the province,in MacKays father’s days .It retains some heavy industry ,agriculture, tourism , forestry , and a fishery , all of these industries are in decline (over historic periods),except it’s University , which appears to be thriving , and the popualtion is in decline.As in all Maritime communities ,local men are away working in Alberta .
Central Nova was settled by highland Scots , and incorporates several First Nations areas ,and a significant African-Canadian population .
Cenral Nova is exactly the kind of place that can send Ottawa a clear message , that climate change must be addressed .

As does the sense this is no big deal. Every vote counts, and so does every voter. As a democrat I believe we should doing more to open up the democratic process and shove it down to the grassroots level. This incidence is revealing in the extreme about the elitist distrust for the people of Central Nova first and foremost, and the people of Canada in general. This is one of the most anti-democratic thing I have seen in some time and the unmitigated gall of then saying oh we are just cooperating like Canadians want us too. Yes Canadians want more cooperation in Ottawa. No they do not want some party leaders to tell them who they can, and more importantly who they can’t vote for. That Greens can’t get this through their heads suggest they don’t have a very mature understanding of our democratic system or a clue what responsibilities come with be a part of the electoral process. It isn’t a moot court exercise. For good or ill it is the conrnerstone of the nation we have built.

I would like to believe “The climate crisis changes EVERYTHING” but it seems that nothing has changed at all. When Ms May is questioned about the environment she seems clueless, and the Greens don’t even seem very interested in the environment, but Ms May sure seems determined to win her seat, even going so far as to endorse Dion, who has been a complete failure as environment minister. Yet the Greens seem determined to attack the NDP which has been actively promoting green policies and trying to accomplish concrete goals in the Commons. Perhaps I’m being cynical but I find the Green
Party’s far right origins and their leader’s reactionary beliefs to be disturbing. The Green
party seems to be a vehicle purpose built to provide, ex-conservatives, like Ms May with a good living, at the expense of the millions of Canadians who really want profound environmental change but want to do so in a fair and socially progessive way. Ms May professes to be “green” but a whole lot of Tory “blue” always seems to show beneath her “green” veneer.

Just to add to this, Ms May seems determined to try and unseat Peter MacKay over his perceived betrayal of David Orchard, so the leader of the Green party is making decisions based upon old Conservative party grudges, not upon what is best for the environment. Will the real Ms May please standup?

And who is now a Liberal- David Orchard! Some reports suggest he was helping this process along. If so this is one more reason that the Leader of the Green party is neither a leader or all that green- unless it is with envy.

a couple problems with this analysis

1) 3/4 of the liberal vote is not going to go to the greens, alot of local liberals are missed off about this deal and alot will probably stay home, of the 10 000 votes the liberals got last time, expect like 3000 to stay home and about half of the remaining (3500) to got to the greens.

2)On the weekend CBC just did alot of interviews on the street in Antigonish where they found the strongest support for the NDP in that part of the riding which is running a popular candidate from that area, Lousie Lorefice will retain a significant amount of the NDP base in Antigonish

3)Pictou and New Glasgow are rural working class areas who don’t necessarily identify with environmental activists (alot of dirty industry there that people rely on)they’ll stick with the Conservatives or the NDP.

- you can’t just make predictions based on math you have to know the local conditions and people, its the only way you can get a read on the situation.

I’ve been a Green Party member (since 1996) and candidate. I definitely am from the left wing of our party, an ex-NDP (I just value the environment more than pandering to unions and university professors). Elizabeth May is a fine leader for the Greens – she’s very bright, accomplished and she has a solid record as an environmental activist. She’s a substantial improvement on Jim Harris, who was much too conservative for about half of us, which is why he stepped down.

Now, this Central Nova deal. The Liberal Party is not in essence an ecologically sensitive political party, although Dion seems like a decent guy. But, with a few highprofile Greens defecting to run for the Liberals, with this deal and several of us getting elected, the Liberals are going to owe us, and they’re going to have to come through.

It will be a couple of elections before the Greens will be contenders for power, enough time for the NDP to disintegrate (it has long ago run out of useful new ideas) and a good chunk of its activists to wander left to the Greens. So, as a short-term alliance, good for Ms. May, but not for long, since the Greens are fundamentally a new politics party, and not “Liberals in a hurry.”

Will she take it? It will tell us how seriously and deeply the ecological crisis has pentrated the public consciousness to see how a traditionally conservative riding like CN goes. I don’t think so, which is a pity – idealism, brains and very hard work aren’t always enough to overcome voting habits in the absence of a “kick the b**tards out” sentiment, which just isn’t there outside of the chattering classes and the university professors.

my 2 cents and a bit.

Sam, sorry but May running in Central Nova has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with Ms May trying to settle an old score. Old line politics at its worst.

Callwood’s Ghost — give me a break. May choose Central Nova because it is the closest riding to her home in Cape Breton without having to displace a Liberal MP. She wants to defeat the Conservatives because she feels they are a threat to our environment. It has nothing to do with Peter MacKay (although by running against one of the CPC ministers, she will force him to be in his home riding more, which takes away a significant public figure for the CPC’s national campaign). May recognizes the obvious — that the Greens aren’t going to win government; her best-case scenario is a Dion-led government backed by Green MPs, that is a Liberal-Green coalition. If so, why would she want to defeat a Liberal? Honestly, these conspiracy theories are so juvenile.

This is what the NDP has accomplished:

http://www.ndp.ca/page/5091

You can spin this all you want, but May is simply using the Greens as a vehicle to re-fight her old Tory grudge matches.

“The Green vote is typically drawn from all three parties in roughly a 2 NDP:1 Liberal:1 CPC relationship.”

I am just wondering, Mr Morrow, where this stylized statistic comes from. Is it fairly applicable across the country, or is it drawn from areas of relative Green strength?

I am pleased to see that you place considerable emphasis on the issue of finances, as that can be the critical ingredient in turning fourth place parties into first place parties in a given district overnite.

The general Liberal-Green cooperative framework which allowed the Liberals to hold London North while raising Elizabeth May’s profile is going to be much harder to replay during a general election. For one thing, turnout will be far higher. But more importantly, the mystery and suspense are gone, that cat is not just out of the bag, it’s onstage being publicly acknowledged by both the Green and Red Leaders. A voting scheme already announced in public has little private cachet in cafes, bars, beauty salons, barber shops, and taxi cabs, not when it’s already been on the nitely news.

Hey Greg
I don’t know how to post a link but look up the story in the Star where May says explicitly that this is about revenge for McKays action on destroying her old party. Then I would expect a public acknowledgment for Callwood’s Ghost.

Layton’s comments about the voters being denied a chance to hear opposing views made me laugh as he did the same thing to us here in Newton North Delta by denying a candidate ,previously approved to run for the ndp with a 14 year old cannabis record as the reason ,, hypocrites when it suits them

I look forward to Ms May taking out the man who thinks women don’t remember his DOG comments

I just worry old Condoleeza Rice doesn’t jump in and help her boy friend and get the CIA to find some old 5 year comment of May’s to remove her and all the million good things she has said for years,,, like the Green candidate in Vancouver

We have a historic oppurtunity to pass the NDP amended Clean Air Act:
Full list of NDP amendments passed:

* Short-, medium- and long-term greenhouse gas targets.
* Earlier deadline for regulating the industrial sector.
* A hard cap on greenhouse gas emissions from big polluters.
* Leading and mandatory standards for smog-producing “air contaminants”
* Leading vehicle fuel efficiency standards.
* A cap and trade carbon market.
* Protection for government authority to regulate air pollutants and greenhouse gases.
* Effective provincial equivalency rule.
* Authority to designate “significant areas” for environmental protection.
* Programs reviewed annually.
* Building retrofit fund.

If we can get this passed, it would mean that Canada would become a leader on combating climate change, yet the Greens just don’t seem to care about this and seem to want to play petty, partisan politics, to settle a score that, in theory, should have nothing to do with the Green Party.

This is the best analysis and discussion I’ve seen on the web so far! Thanks!

I posted on my blog on this as well.

I live in London North Centre and listened quietly to all the experts and naysayers during the last federal by-election here, which Elizabeth May and the Green party almost stole right from under the noses of every would-be political pundit watching the race. I know what Elizabeth is capable of during an election campaign. She will quickly charm the voters and local media of Central Nova with her wit, sincerity, and forceful convictions. Strange things happen during election campaigns. I’ve learned never to write this woman off.

I have to say that I can’t really agree with the way you’ve drawn your conclusions. As a resident of Calgary, I can tell you that a Conservative could spend a buck and a quarter and still receive the overwhelming majority of votes. In my view, there may be a statistical correlation between dollars spent and votes obtained but there is no real relationship between these things.

The entire issue, from my perspective, is whether or not this abdication by the Liberals results in any significant movement in votes away from the Liberals and to the Greens? You’re assuming that a certain percentage of votes will move that way but there’s no one who today can say for certain how many will move. It may be that those votes go to the ND instead. Perhaps they may even go to the Conservatives because, heaven help us, some Canadians actually approve of the job they’re doing.

To me, the real issue here isn’t whether this will result in a Green victory. That’s such an up-in-the-air things it’s almost not worth discussing until an election is called. To me the real issue is why the Liberals would even do this. The nice guy in me says they did it to further the inclusion of more voices in Parliament. The realist in me says that Liberals are no different than those gals in heels and lots of makeup who hang out on street corners in bad parts of town looking to pick up guys to do you know what with them.

The one and only reason the Liberals are doing this is to deny one seat to the Conservatives in the hope that the next Parliament will again be as close as this one.

Thank you for the vote prediction – this is very interesting. I am a member of the Green Party, so I am certainly biased, but there are a couple of points I would like to make.

1. To “Callwood’s Ghost”: Like you, I mourn the passing of a great woman. But I would not be so bold as to put words into her mouth. Perhaps it would be better to speak under your own name.

2. Let us all remember that this entire Dion-May deal would never happen under a fair electoral system. Our electoral system punishes all parties (and independent candidates) except those with the most power. Our system does not even pretend to accurately reflect the will of the people, which is what a democracy is supposed to do. Is it any wonder that whatever party is in power (Liberals or Conservatives) does not wish to change the system that bestows power upon them. This isn’t a left vs right issue: the Reform Party – Progressive Conservative merger would be just as unnecessary as the May-Dion deal if we had a democratic electoral system.

For more information on electoral reform, see Fair Vote Canada. For those readers in Ontario, you will have a chance to vote on a new electoral system in a referendum on Oct 10 of this year, at the same day as provincial election day (for more information see http://www.citizensassembly.gov.on.ca/en-CA/home%20page.aspx.

I dream of a Canadian democracy that accurately represents the will of the people. What a shame that such a simple dream is not yet realized.

AS per usual, there are responses from Green Party members, and none of these mention the environment…and none of them are prepared to address the fact that the leaders of both the Liberals and Green parties are prepared to sacrifice local democracy and input into this decision. It seems as though the environment is something that the Greens are willing to sacrifice for petty political reasons, or maybe they think that Dion was good for the environment? Why isn’t Ms May and the Green Party calling for passage of the NDP amended Clean Air Act? Isn’t there a single Green party member who thinks this is important? Please don’t try to change the subject by attacking my choice of name.

CG has a short memory. Any deal that May-Dion made is alot better and on the up than what MacKay did when he scumbagged PC members to win the leadership and saying it was ok to go back on a written deal because it was Orchard followers. I’ve voted across the whole spectrum – except i’ve never voted Green before (and I don’t know where its going this time), but I do hope May wins, its about time politics was done in a more positive, cooperative way.

So DNP, you accept that May is using the Green Party to re-fight old Conservative Party grudges. Once again the environment is missing from the discussion.

Actually I think the environment was the ONLY reason why this deal was made. Two party leaders finally look past politics, drop the child play, and are fighting for the future of human kind. Anyone who has children understand the importance of global warming, and what may affect them in the future. Its very refreshing to see Ms. May & Dion caring more about an issue that means more to them then some stupid party running for an undemocratic government!

To the person attempting to speak for the late June Callwood:

The new Clean Air and Climate Change Act is much improved. The NDP deserves credit for helping its revisions. As does the Liberal Party. As does the Green Party (yes, the Green Party contributed to the discussions). I’ll be honest – I thought the old Clean Air Act was so bogus that it wasn’t even worth revising, it was simply worth killing it and starting from scratch. But the new act is a good one (not perfect, but very good). Congratulations all around – let’s celebrate the improved act instead of each party trying to hog credit for it. The Clean Air Act revisions illustrate the benefits of political cooperation with respect to the environment.

Jay, Stephane Dion, was Minister of Environment of Canada for years, and he had a solid majority in the HoC, yet we got absolutely nothing from him or the Liberals on the environment, yet Ms May is endorsing Dion for PM! Why?… because he has sold her a bloc of liberal votes, so that she might get a seat in Central Nova. Why isn’t Ms May endorsing the NDP’s Jack Layton as her choice of PM? The NDP is the only party represented in the HoC with a strong environmental policy, a policy judged to be “greener” than the Green’s in the last election. Ms May is prepared to sacrifice the environment for narrow, personal, political gain, rather than standing on principle. Again, why isn’t Ms May calling for passage of the Clear Air Act? Instead of condemning Jack Layton for, his perceived, failing to give her a pass into the HoC, Ms May should be heaping praise on Jack and the NDP for for principled and steadfast support for the environment. The Clear Air Act as it now stands would never have been created without the NDP, yet it seems that some people just don’t want to acknowledge this fact.

It seems as though Ms May’s political virtue is for sale to the highest bidder. I suspect that if Peter MacKay had offered to step aside, that Ms May would be endorsing Steven Harper as her choice for PM.

I myself wouldn’t even endorse Layton, if we’re going to talk about whos playing politics the most lets talk about Layton, He is so concerned his party may lose votes that he rejects the idea of Elizabeth in the debates, and rejects the idea that Dion & May should be able to look beyond politics so climate change could be a bigger priority with Mr. Harper and his mangy caucus. This is to me, further proof that the Government is to valuble to be held in the hands of power hungry professionals. I’m 14 years old, and I believe I could do a better job then many of those MP’s & back benchers. It takes an idiot to stand up there like John Barid or Jack Layton, to scream over everyone else, but it takes just a few passionate canadians to make atleast most of the right choices for Canadians.

well CG
it is because jack layton has lied to,,,
too many and shown that his principals depend on who he is talking to at that very second.
He lied to senior ndp working with me at the Quebec city convention in September.

My self I am busy moving the 150,000 ex-marijuana party members we got to join the ndp with jacks biggest lie to now quit and join the GREENS.
Wait I will prove it !!!

Yes the ndp have some green policy but they lack any kind of credibility with a lot of folks like me , under its current leadership.

I myself was an ndp supporter for over 30 years

The Green Party definitely have green policy (you agree?)and we will help this country whether anonymous party hacks like that or not.
You make it sound like no one else can do it.
You are very wrong

If layton wants cooperation why couldnt he have answered the phone?

I know why!!!!

To respond to “Callwood’s Ghost’s” comments:

“Stephane Dion, was Minister of Environment of Canada for years…yet we got absolutely nothing from him or the Liberals on the environment”
Dion was Min of Environment for a year and a half (July 2004 – Jan 2006). He didn’t make big domestic changes in his short time, and you are right to criticize this. But he did good work internationally, helping the international community agree on a Kyoto extension at the Montreal meeting just before the Conservatives won election. Dion didn’t accomplish as much as I’d wish he had, but under Paul Martin I doubt anyone could’ve made big changes.

“Why isn’t Ms May endorsing the NDP’s Jack Layton as her choice of PM?”
Perhaps because Jack Layton didn’t return her calls inviting cooperation.

“The NDP is the only party represented in the HoC with a strong environmental policy, a policy judged to be “greener” than the Green’s in the last election.”
NDP deserves credit for this. The Sierra Club endorsed the NDP’s environmental policy over the Green Party’s because the NDP’s had more details (though I thought it was in the 2004 election not 2006, but either way). This compelled the Green Party to reform its environmental policy, and it is not incredibly strong. To repeat: thank you to the NDP for being environmentally progressive in the House of Commons.

“Again, why isn’t Ms May calling for passage of the Clear Air Act?”
Actually, Elizabeth May and the Green Party are indeed calling for passage of the revised act. See their March 30 press release.

“The Clear Air Act as it now stands would never have been created without the NDP, yet it seems that some people just don’t want to acknowledge this fact.”
As I said before, congratulations to the NDP and Liberals. The revised act required action from committee members from both parties, and they really worked their butts off. They deserve credit.

“It seems as though Ms May’s political virtue is for sale to the highest bidder. I suspect that if Peter MacKay had offered to step aside, that Ms May would be endorsing Steven Harper as her choice for PM.”
Do you not feel this is a bit overboard?

I have nothing against the NDP. I respectfully disagree with many of their policies. If Canada had a fair democracy then people could vote for the party of their choice without compromise, and our house of commons would actually represent the people. In the meantime, a spirit of competition and antagonism exists among parties and their supporters instead of cooperation. Cooperation seems so much nicer, more effective, and more Canadian. I hope readers will realize the importance of electoral reform – it overlaps with every other issue.

Sorry, I just want to correct a mistake of mine.

I meant to say the Green Party’s environmental platform is “now incredibly strong” not “not incredibly strong.” One letter can make a big difference!

Matt Casselman: thank you for getting involved in political discussion at your age!

Jay, my last statement may seem extreme, but it is a fact that the NDP turned down Ms May’s attempt to barter for Central Nova, but then did a deal with the Liberals. Yet her pattern of behavior seems to suggest that she would have made a deal with the Tories, if she could have.

I have a suggestion for the Green Party. Ms May could have launched a public appeal for NDP support and outlined her reasons for doing so. She could have tried to build some bridges publicly both at the leadership and grassroots levels to meet with Layton. This could have been the basis for some sort of alliance or understanding between the two Parties, but a closed door deal between the two leaders is just not possible for Layton or any other NDP leader.

By your own admission the NDP has/had a stronger environmental platform than the Green Party, and the NDP is also further to the left, in terms of social policy, so Layton would have had a tough time trying to explain why he would block the nomination of an NDP candidate in Central Nova, in favour of Ms May, when the NDP ran a strong 2nd in that riding.

I suggest the Greens could begin publicly calling for dialogue and perhaps try to create a forum where such dialogue could take place out in the open. However, I also think the Green Party should be willing to have its candidates lay out their platforms but call upon the voters to vote NDP, until such time as we have some system of proportional voting in Canada. This kind of principled position would build a bridge of trust between the two Parties.

The NDP has fought a decades long battle for social justice in this country, and at every turn we are constantly being tempted to enter into easy deals at the expense of the democratic process, while at the same time party democracy is held dearer in the NDP than any other party. Our opponents and the opponents of social progress have been predicting the NDP/CCFs demise since the day the party was formed, 70 odd years ago, and we are still here, still fighting for a better Canada. It may seem a strange thing to say, but most New Democrats are willing to stand on principle, even if it hurts. We wouldn’t have kept up such an incredibly difficult, uphill battle for so long, if we didn’t have a high tolerance for pain and a willingness sacrifice for what is right.

One of the common themes I see here, and from the Green supporters for May subverting democracy, is this: The first past the post system is unfair because it subverts the overall plurality of voters, therefore it’s fair to subvert democracy in order to get rid of McKay (sorry, but I didn’t really read that this was about the environment)in the house of commons. In other words, the means justify the ends. Not only is this a slippery slope where any ‘means’ can justify desired ends, but more disturbing is the fact that “principle” is swept away to justify the ends.

Excuse me “Callwoods Ghost” but according to the sierra club the Greens scored higher with there platform then the NDP did! Also, I recieve the Green newsletters and letters from the leader, Ms. May has tried to contact Mr. Layton on the subject many times but refuses to get back to her. A shame really, If Mr. Layton was actually interested in the kyoto accord and improving our environment, Mr. Layton would have been involved in the deal, if not involved, he should not be to quick to critisize this, it may backfire when a few columists write “Hey, do you think Layton objects to the “Grit-Green” alliance because his party may lose votes?” “Why yes, I think thats exactly why Layton refuses to believe theres politicians willing to put beliefs first.”

Also “Callwoods Ghost” As a green, I’m going to also claim the Greens are just as passionate as you socialists over at the NDP, while your passionatly trying to say that hard working Canadians ought to give there tax money to high school drop outs, The Greens are fighting for the environment, something that effects us all. Along with beefing up there platform so the words “fringe and green” will no longer be used in the same sentence.

“janfromthebruce” you may not have heard anything about the environment with the deal because 1 of the 2 deal makers is not represented in the house of commons because the fptp system is keeping them from electing 12 + MP’s to properly demonstrate what the Greens are all about. The deal is more about getting a stronger voice and sending a stronger messege to the government then kicking out Mackay. The same messege would have been made with most other cabnet members however elizabeth chooses to run in a riding where she feels most comfortable, and defeat a cabnet minister to make sure Harper can not shrug it off as some tiny troubles.

OTTAWA CITIZEN ARTICLE

Read it guys.

I tried to write a long little rant of my own but it wasn’t posted? Anyway, enjoy the Ottawa citizens rant instead.
Thanx Jay Fitzsimmons as well!

Of Course in 2006, Ms May was one of the people deciding which party was “greener”, and the Greens won…go figure!

http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/media/item.shtml?x=915

“Callwood’s Ghost” suggests:
“I also think the Green Party should be willing to have its candidates lay out their platforms but call upon the voters to vote NDP, until such time as we have some system of proportional voting in Canada.”
The Green Party has many former Progressive Conservatives in its ranks, in addition to former NDPers, Liberals, and a lot of people like me who never saw any party that attracted them until the Greens. I agree that cooperation among the Liberals, Bloc, NDP, and Greens would be a good idea for the sake of our environment, but cooperation is not a one-way street. Cooperation is not Greens telling all supporters to vote for NDP. In order for NDP-Green cooperation to occur (and I hope it does), the NDP leader has to do nothing more than pick up the phone and find a mutually agreeable compromise. Cooperation – it’s a good thing.

“Of Course in 2006, Ms May was one of the people deciding which party was “greener”, and the Greens won…go figure!”
So when Sierra Club analyses go in favour of the NDP they are credible, and when they go in favour of the Greens they are not?

I can understand arguments such as that from janfromthebruce who don’t like sketchy means justifying noble ends because this is a slippery slope. I have two points in response:

1. Putting aside whether Canada’s current electoral system is fair or not, math dictates that cooperation is beneficial within the system. Vote-splitting is a real occurrence in our current system, and cooperation can prevent it. Hence the “Unite the Right” PC-Reform merger a few years ago. Within the current electoral system, cooperation makes sense.

2. If you do not like deals such as the May-Dion agreement or “Unite the Right”, then channel your criticism to the electoral system that fosters such agreements among all parties. Advocate for electoral reform. With a fair electoral system, deals like this would disappear. Not to mention the will of the people would be accurately represented!

Who said Elizabeth was involved with the Greens then? She just considered running as a leadership candidate afterwards, NOT BEFORE! She could have been voting for anybody then! Also May was not the only one who decided who was greenest as well. ALSO lets talk about the NDP once again. How dare the NDP say that May was wrong about strategic voting, In British Columbia when ridings were close, the NDP asked the Greens to not run. That was more then once! This isn’t the start of something aweful, this isn’t the first time this has happened, if your going to talk about strategic voting, lets start with Layton and the NDP!

Matt, did I claim that Ms May was a Green then?

Matt, the Greens have run a distant 3rd in every riding, in BC including Ms Carr’s in the 2005 election, asking a candidate who will garner 4 or 5% of the vote, is not quite the same as asking a Candidate to step aside when that party won 33% of the vote and ran 2nd, in that riding. In any event, had the Greens withdrawn their candidates or more likely simply campaigned, but asked the voters to vote NDP, would have build a bridge of trust, so that when the electoral system was reformed, the Greens could run to win. However, the Green Party never did withdraw a candidate, did they?

ok then lets keep the debate on whos greener away from this debate because the answer must be rather clear then.
Now 4-5% is underestimating the results the Greens got in many ridings in B.C and actually in the 2005 provincial election the Greens in Carr’s riding were less then 5% away from second also in ridings like West Vancover-Garibaldi where the Greens came second, look who didn’t win, the NDP. The Greens in many ridings play the role of spoiler and when the races were tight between the Ndp and another party the Ndp asked the Greens to step down. The Greens didn’t. Now that was strategic voting, However the deal between May-Dion is alittle awkward because two party leaders are finally able to overcome the rivalry and fight for a better cause.

With that said, I’m really forgetting about the issue for now and hoping that those damn conservatives get over those rigged results that nobody bought and prepare to accept that Kyoto is going to happen one way or another. :D

Also if your implying that the Greens aren’t a force to be handled seriously lets discuss London North Center. 26% for the Greens while the Ndp placed a distant forth with 14%

Funny how no one has taken me up on the offer to attack Stephen Lewis. As if that isn’t the most revealing part about the true reasons and nature of this deal. Hint it ain’t about the environment kiddies, it’s bare knuckled partisan politics at it’s worse.

“Callwood’s Ghost” said:
“I suggest the Greens could begin publicly calling for dialogue and perhaps try to create a forum where such dialogue could take place out in the open.”
Elizabeth May has been publicly urging any NDPer she can find to open up such a dialogue. eg- two weeks ago in front of hundreds of people at the Integrate This! Teach-in in Ottawa. Unfortunately the NDP has not responded to her calls for cooperation.

“I also think the Green Party should be willing to have its candidates lay out their platforms but call upon the voters to vote NDP, until such time as we have some system of proportional voting in Canada.”
Having Green candidates run but urge supporters to vote NDP is hardly cooperation. Cooperation is a two-way street. Besides, Green supporters come from all parts of the political spectrum: former Progressive Conservatives, Liberals, NDPers, and many folks like me who never felt any party represented my views until the Greens. We are not just some NDP spoiler – many of us have serious misgivings about NDP policies, while acknowledging the NDP’s many good policies in certain areas.

“Of Course in 2006, Ms May was one of the people deciding which party was “greener”, and the Greens won…go figure!”
So when Sierra Club analyses come out in favour of the NDP they are credible, but when they don’t they are rigged? Insinuating Elizabeth May tampered with results is a big accusation to make.

Janfromthebruce disagrees with the May-Dion agreement because it is an example of sketchy means justifying supposedly noble ends. I can understand this point, and have two things to say about it.

1. Putting aside whether our current electoral system is fair or not, one must agree that vote-splitting is a real concern within the system. This is why the PC-Reform “Unite the Right” merger occurred, why Buzz Hargrove and others urge NDP supporters to vote strategically Liberal, and so on. Why are these deals present in every party? Because the current electoral system favours such deals. Under the current electoral system, deals and agreements make sense.

2. If you do not like such deals and agreements, as is your right, then focus your anger upon the electoral system that favours such deals. Advocate electoral reform. With a fair electoral system, such deals would disappear. This is one of the biggest reasons why I advocate electoral reform: it allows people to vote with their heart for the party they want instead of “strategically” for the lesser-evil.

So if you like our current electoral system (few do), then you must agree that vote-splitting is a valid concern and cooperation makes sense. If you do not like these deals, then channel your frustration at the root cause of the deals: our antiquated electoral system.

Jimmy Nuetron, I don’t understand your offer to attack Stephen Lewis. He is a good man, and I don’t know why you would attack him.

The Green Party is trying to change politics. We consistently urge other parties to copy our policies because we want action more than party glory. Yes we are willing to compromise. Yes we are willing to cooperate. Yes, we will tell the world exactly how we are cooperating with other parties, and why we are doing so (hardly back-room deals if you ask me). We freely acknowledge and complement other parties for accomplishments, such as the revisions of the formerly pathetic Clean Air Act. And you know what? Canadians seem to quite like our style and our message. Bickering is very unbecoming. Cooperating is much more effective. Let’s work together for a better Canada.

Wasn’t this to be between Dion and May? Layton is far worse at back room deals then the Greens ever were. Even in the 2004 election, according to Jim Harris and one NDP strategist Layton came to Harris to see if he would consider not running candidates and support his party. Also Jimmy Other then May admitting that Dion would be a god choice for the environment, not once did she endorse Dion as being the better man for the job, the deal was to get May in to parliament so she and possibly Ms. Carr could start fighting on the issue of climate change them selves. Recently on the current shes stressed that this was tolleration for the liberals, she also tried to contact the NDP btw. She also said that she still thought that she was by far the best person for the job. if you’d like to argue with me, go to the green website or whereever you intend on getting the clip and listen for your self.

Tried to go to the Green website wouldn’t let me in.
I have a question. How is this quote- “There’s something wrong with Jack Layton if he’d rather open up discussions with the Taliban than the Green party,” Ms. May said” doing politics differently.
To me this is very, very offensive and puts a lie to all the fancy words about how this deal is all about the environment and not about political opportunism. It is exactly the kind of thing I would expect for Stephen Harper. No doubt all you Greens will excuse this too, but at some point you will have to wake up and realize the Saint Elizabeth has rather clay feet and is destroying the credibility of the Green voice on climate change. I won’t hold my breath waiting for a non-spin response though

Not sure why this disappeared, but here it is again, slightly edited.

Message to Greens

If you are going to portray not talking about making backroom deals as a virtue at least be honest. Ms. May lied to reporters about doing this deal. Ms May was talking to Stephen Lewis who said clearly it was a non-starter and rejected the idea outright.
Hmmm where is all the criticism of Stephen. Couldn’t be this is all about politics as ususal. Show your courage start attacking Stephen Lewis as not being supportive enough of progressive causes. After all he rejected this kind of undemocratic backroom deal outright, right off the bat from media reports. What you say people from all backgrounds like and respect Stephen Lewis and it wouldn’t look good politically. Oh come on now, have courage, Greens have been suggesting that not electing McKay and electing May is a step to saving the planet for heavens sake. That’s a big deal surely worth attacking one of the most respected Canadians in the world. Of course saving the planet is a tall order for one MP to acheive, especially when in reality the NDP was the best suited to de-elect McKay, but many Greens are suggesting we MUST elect May to save the planet. Who knew Ms. May was some kind of superhero defending the planet all on her own.

What a bunch of partisan, hypocritical, ego-centric supporters the Greens have been revealed to be. I wouldn’t take a call from this ego-driven typical politician either. She is nothing more than a huckster of the worse kind.

If the Greens want to win seats in the House do it the old fashion way. You know talk to voters, build a base of support, actually have a coherent platform, speak to the hearts and minds of average voters and their every day concerns, like how will I pay for my rent next month, will I be able to keep my job, will I be able to send my children to post-sec eduction. Until you do that voters will rightly reject electing Green party MPs. You do not deserve a seat you have to earn it.

Wow Jimmy, You really must think that I’m going to buy that. Heres a letter to members, Not edited at all. Enjoy.

Dear member of the Green Party of Canada,

Assuming our technology works, this message will reach you very close to the time that the Leader of the Liberal Party and I jointly hold a press conference in Halifax, Nova Scotia.

Today, we change the face of Canadian politics. Today we will demonstrate that the Green Party is a serious political party, running to win in ridings across Canada. We will also be making it clear that the planet does not have time for the old, tired, cynical game of politics. We do not have time for games at all. We are serious and we need to put our country and the planet first.

That is why Stéphane Dion, a man whom you know I admire on a personal basis, and I will announce that our respective parties will not be fielding candidates in each others’ ridings. Our joint statement is found at the end of this message.

I have discovered a lot about politics since becoming Leader of the Green Party less than eight months ago. I have discovered that there is a nastiness to partisanship that exceeds sense. It is essentially a form of tribalism, and quite primitive tribalism at that. As Leader of the Green Party, some would prefer I never said that Mr. Harper’s policies are the biggest threat to our planet and our country, even though they know that to be true. They would prefer I never said that Mr. Dion is a man of integrity (even if we can all agree his Party has appalling baggage). I promised when I ran for leadership to be a relentless truth-teller. Even if that might be to a short-term disadvantage.

The Green Party will always put principle and progress above petty partisanship. So I am proud of what Stéphane and I have agreed to do. In addition to not running against me in Central Nova, he has signaled a willingness to reform our electoral system. This is real progress toward Green goals.

You should also know that the door remains open to Jack Layton and the NDP to find some way to cooperate to achieve progress particularly in rapid reduction of greenhouse gases to meet Kyoto targets. I have been attempting to reach Jack Layton for months. I hope there is still some chance of cooperation.

Please be prepared for this historic step to be misunderstood and deliberately mis-characterized. Adriane Carr, Deputy Leader, is running in Vancouver Centre. We have made it a priority that she win, defeating Liberal incumbent Hedy Fry (by the way, Mr. Dion never asked me to withdraw or alter any other ridings than those of the leaders.) Across Canada, Greens will be running against Liberals. We have significant (huge, when one considers NAFTA and other policy areas) disagreements.

Campaigns of Greens across Canada must be stronger and we must elect a solid caucus, not one or two MPs in the next election. Thus, it is clear we are not “endorsing” Liberals. The Green Party is emphatically against strategic voting. But in the archaic first past the post system, how else is the Green Party to work to ensure the democratic will of the majority is heard? How else can we signal cooperation , not competitiveness, is our core value?

Your support through letters to the editor, etc would be appreciated. Thanks for your support, for your patience, and if you have misgivings, for your openness to the potential for real change. We live in interesting times and they just got a lot more interesting.

Elizabeth

Also Jimmy I AM POSITIVE you are not as involved with the greens as I and if your saying that your beloved Jack isn’t just turning the tables on May so his “backroom deals” (or attempts) wouldn’t be mentioned. Also If your saying that these replies to your comments are accepted, Your absoloutly right, However you’ve been replying to everyone elses comments as well. Jimmy, where do you get these comments by the way? Give me the links to these pages? I’d really love to know. If your going to have me believe this current B.S your going to have to prove it. Thanks & Happy Freakin’ Friday

I would ask that people tone down the nastiness here. Civil debate, no problem. But let’s not reduce this to name-calling and hyperbole.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotia/641668.html
Not sure how to post a link, but if not it is from the Halifax Chronicle Herald, my old hometime paper that I happen to read online as often as I possibly can. The story title is “Layton a hypocrite about deal, May says”

The other one is from the Toronto Star
http://www.thestar.com/article/203056
“The move was a reprisal, May says”

CTV
May says Layton has refused to talk with Greens
(In which Ed Broadbent reveals May was trying to get Lewis involved her spin is yet again too cute by half)

The story in whcih Broadbent reveals Lewis closed her down imediately rejecting the idea is in the Globe under the title Dion, May confirm election deal. It is not avaialbe online without a subscription

It would seem that some Greens only read the positive news on the Greens, or don’t keep up on political news in general.
So since I have confirmed that May said that about the Taliban will you be demanding a retraction from your leader?

I am almost sorry to have point out the truth of the matter. I am sorry for all the people who have put their faith in Ms May only to find out that she is just using the Green Party to settle an old Tory score:

“The move was a reprisal, May says

Apr 14, 2007 02:30 AM

“OTTAWA–Green Party Leader Elizabeth May has vowed to make Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay pay for a controversial decision to merge the former Progressive Conservative party with the right-wing Canadian Alliance…”

http://www.thestar.com/article/203056

Hey, I agree with that! I’m sure she didn’t say that because In every other article I’ve read its because she thinks she can do the best job on the environment. Can you link me to that news article please?

-Sorry Greg!

This is going to go on for a very long time, I can go on forever on this issue :D

Ah so the links are there, now you want to end the discussion. That is a tactic I expect from my 7 year old. Those comments were made, they are repugnet. Do you condemn Elizabeth May for using such Harperesque language or not? That’s the question.

And will you challenge others on the Green party website blogs to do the same, or is it just all rah-rah all the time

Actually Jimmy I’m only 7 years older then your daughter, also I’d love to continue this debate with you however I’m not going to believe a single word that came out of your mouth about that press release untill I see proof of when and where she said this. Nobody’s perfect when it comes to being leader of a political party, I personally dislike Mr. Layton in the extreme, not because hes bad for the environment, just that he reminds me of a puppy dog clawing at your legs. Elizabeth is a far better leader then Jack, she has far better credentials on the issue of the environment, and if she needs to play politics while leader of a political party, so be it. Shes new to the political scene and I welcome her new ideas on how politics should work.
Jimmy, how do you except me to condemn anyone if there is no such proof of anyone ever saying anything. Now thats the question.

The links are there- follow them. 8 post up from here. I read it, as I said in the Halifax Chronicle, I expect they may be elsewhere too.
I’m not trying to be patronising and it is nice to see passion in a young person, but don’t always assume your side is on the side of the angels.

The posts are indeed degenerating into name-calling on both sides now, unfortunately.
(Matt, I appreciate your passion for the Greens, but our party tries to turn the other cheek – many Canadians like that our party refuses to be baited into accusations and insults by the old parties).

I still don’t understand why anyone would take issue with Stephen Lewis. Elizabeth May wanted so badly to talk to Jack Layton that she asked a mutual friend to act as a go-between of sorts. He declined, apparantly. I don’t see how this can be spun as a bad thing.

With respect to Elizabeth May’s quote “There’s something wrong with Jack Layton if he’d rather open up discussions with the Taliban than the Green party.”

There are differences between this quote and Harper’s insults towards the Liberals (and anyone else who questions him). Stephen Harper said in the House of Commons on March 21, 2007:
“I can understand the passion that the leader of the Opposition and members of his party feel for Taliban prisoners. I just wish occasionally they would show the same passion for Canadian soldiers.”

This comment by Harper is downright offensive. Whereas May’s statement is factually true (Layton really is in favour of opening up a dialogue with the Taliban and really does not want to open up a dialogue with the Green Party of Canada), Harper’s statement is blatantly false (of course the Liberals, like everyone else, care about Canadian soldiers).

Elizabeth May’s statement is true, it’s just a matter of whether it is politically correct to say it or not. I would have personally avoided the comparison May made, but it is valid.

I don’t think insults to her character will carry much weight among most Canadians. Even people who intend to vote against May generally acknowledge she’s a good person who has dedicated her life to environmental and social justice.

Elizabeth May is not a miracle-worker. She is just a person, and as an MP will not be able to save the world. But she will try. You might call her a dreamer, but she’s not the only one. The presence of her and other elected Green MPs (I hope) may indeed shift the power of politics towards environmental progress. Dion wants May in Parliament not just for her single vote on certain policies they share, but to push some of Dion’s right-wing Liberal MPs towards environmental advocacy. It’s a way for Dion to show even the most jaded Liberal MP: “See, Canadians care deeply about the environment – there’s the Green MPs they elected over there. Let’s wake up and take positive action or else we’ll lose votes.”

Anyways, I don’t think the average Canadian cares much one way or the other about the May-Dion agreement. Folks in this forum are passionate about Canadian politics, while so many Canadians don’t even bother to vote (young Canadians are especially disenfranchised with our current political system). If we want all Canadians to be more engaged in our democracy, we need to change politics. Even if you don’t like the May-Dion deal, can you at least respect their attempt at trying something new for a shared benefit of our environment?

And please, let’s focus comments on ideas as opposed to name-calling and sweeping generalizations.

The fact that Ms May put old Conservative rivalries ahead of the environment, should make even the most fervent Green Party supporter think twice about her leadership.

Excuse me, but I read the article, and no where did it say thats her only reason. She did say that he’ll pay for his actions. (Which I agree with.) Just to make sure everyone gets this, NOWHERE in that article did it say that Mackay’s decision to sell out the party was her only reason to attempt to defeat him. So, even an NDPer such as yourself should make sure to reread the material before blindly critizing a wonderful environmental advocate and fresh party leader.

“May told the Star yesterday she plans to build a political coalition that will punish MacKay for breaking a promise not to sell out the old PC party, which he merged with the Canadian Alliance in 2003.”

Seems pretty clear to me. Ms May seems more “recyled” than “fresh”…

“…MacKay for breaking a promise not to sell out the old PC party, which he merged with the Canadian Alliance in 2003″

seems like MacKay is a sleazy politician.

I think we can all agree on that!

MaccKay part yes, Elizabeth May no. I relly don’t care if one of the reasons May chose Central Nova was to get MacKay back. Nor do I think thats the biggest reason either. NDP and the Conservatives recently decided to form an alliance to keep the troops in till 2009. As much as I agree with supporting our troops this is not what the NDP promised throughout 2006.

Matt, the Liberals moved a motion to keep our troops in Afghanistan till Feb 2009. The NDP tried to amend the motion to call for an immediate pullout, but the Liberals defeated the amendment, and the NDP will not agree to any motion that does not call for an immediate pull out. Tomorrow the NDP will try and move a motion to pull out immediately, and then we’ll see if Dion and the Liberals will support that.

I looked at those numbers from the Angus Reid Poll that just came out. 22% of Canadians said that they would vote for Elizabeth May if they lived in Central Nova. Using the figures that showed party breakdown, and how people from each party were likely to vote, and applying it to the previous election results from Central Nova, the numbers are almost identical to last election, with the Greens replacing the Liberals at 24-25%, NDP at 35%, and Conservatives at 39-40%. Since the Greens are a little less popular in Nova Scotia, where 16% indicated they would vote for Elizabeth May, I applied a correction factor which would give the Greens 18% of the vote. Of course, things depend on the three candidates’ reputations in the riding, and how that may change between now and election time after campaigning. With the Greens sitting at 18-25%, and the NDP close behind the Conservatives, it seems that anything is possible right now. What do you think?

It is highly unlikely that Ms May can win this riding without NDP support, and NDP support isn’t going to happen. Ms May should recognize this and pick another riding, or else the Greens will find themselves shut out of another parliament. Again, we have to wonder what Ms May is thinking here. This is not a winnable riding for the Greens.

The NDP is running a first timer, nobody for a candidate, With Alexis not running the Greens should take about the same number of votes from the NDP if not more then they did in LNC also taking say 5% from the light conservatives

The NDP is supporting the Conservatives in keeping the troops there untill 2009
Greens: 35-40 at least
Conservatives: 35ISH
NDP: 20-25
Other: 0-5

Matt, the NDP moved a motion in the house, today, to withdraw our forces immediately, but I guess it’s too much for someone of your tender years to understand, and of course the Liberals are speaking against the motion.

Lets say that 2/3 of the former Liberals vote for May, and 1/2 of the former NDP voters, that still only tallies to:

16 Lib
16 NDP
2 Green
=
34%. This riding is not winnable by May.

You honestly don’t think that any conservatives will vote green. it only takes about 3-4 of the conservative vote to win

Some of the Liberal vote will move to the Tories and some will move to the NDP, this will offset any Tory move to May, and of course some of the Tories will vote NDP as well. The numbers just aren’t there for May.

There may be 1% of liberals voting Conservative TOPS Some will go to the NDP however the NDP are running a very poor candidate, more will move to the Greens. and enough Conservatives to get Elizabeth in.

The thing is, Elizabeth May started out well behind the other candidates in LNC, say around 10%, and moved up to second place (26%) within a number of weeks. Starting at around 20%, and working from there to 40% actually seems less difficult.
The question is, will there be intense campaigning in Central Nova? It’s a common Tory tactic to avoid debates and publicity if ahead coming into an election. (I suppose it can be a tactic for any incumbent with an advantage).
If Elizabeth May chose another riding, she wouldn’t have Lib backing, which counts for about 10%, or more, come election time. She may have ended up doing the right thing. MacKay actually had less share of the vote than the Liberals did in their Cape Breton ridings.

It’s worth looking at the Wikipedia page for Central Nova:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Nova

A couple things I gathered there:
- The riding has traditionally voted more Liberal than NDP, and even
had a Liberal MP in the 1990’s (‘93-’97), with Roseanne Skoke who
captured 43.6% of the vote. The most the NDP ever captured before
Alexis MacDonald was 17.7% in 1980. The traditional Liberal vote in
this riding would be more in the area of 30-35%
- The riding has also been strongly conservative, accounting for
48-61% of the vote. The 40.66% Conservative vote in 2006 shows a
lagging popularity for Peter MacKay. (The effects of being a cabinet
member since 2006 may spike his popularity, but I doubt it would be
by much).”

The Liberals only captured the seat due to the Conservative/Reform parties splitting the vote. Going back 40 years, the Liberals only captured more than 30% of the vote in 7 of 12 elections. Many Liberals are extremely angry about the May-Dion deal:

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/15540

Look at Dion’s approval ratings, they are much lower than the LPC polling numbers!

And of course Canadians are fuming mad about the May-Dion pact:

http://www.angusreidstrategies.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=news&newsid=46&page=1

Ms May has destroyed both the Liberals and the Green Party. I am hoping that Jack Layton and the NDP’s principled stand on the environment, Afghanistan, and the May-Dion pact will be enough to stem voters from moving the Conservatives, otherwise Ms May has given Harper a majority government. So much for helping the environment, eh Liz?

From the Angus Reid Poll:
“Asked who they would vote for in the next federal election if they resided in Nova Scotia’s Central Nova riding—where May is to run without Liberal opposition—35 per cent of respondents across Canada say they would support Conservative candidate Peter MacKay. May is second with 22 per cent, followed by NDP candidate Louise Loriface with 16 per cent. Support for MacKay is highest in Alberta (69%), May is popular in Manitoba and Saskatchewan (27%), and Loriface leads in Atlantic Canada, with 30 per cent. Liberal voters would be more likely to support the NDP candidate (53%) in this riding than the Green leader (41%).”

You can ignore the non Atlantic Canada voter opinions, since they don’t live in Central Nova…
Basically, 13% of the 24% who voted Liberal will vote NDP, which if the NDP core vote holds, means they will win it with 46% of the vote, while Ms may can look forward to an awesome 12%, but then even many of the Green voters will probably move to the NDP, leaving Ms May with 11% . Ms May has really dropped a bombshell into the Cdn political scene, unfortunately the shrapnel appears to be mostly causing damage to the Greens and Liberals. I would be cheering, if I could be assured that Harper won’t use the fatal weakening of the Liberals and get a majority…imagine 5 years of Harper Majority government!

Elizabeth May didn’t start out very popular in lnc either, she worked her way up in the polls. Also If Elizabeth allegedly destroyed the Greens, why are they still polling at 12% according to the last (decima?) poll.

Callwood’s Ghost, I really don’t understand your reasoning. Why would Elizabeth May be significantly less popular in Central Nova than the rest of the Atlantic region?
Also I think your NDP figures are a little off. The NDP vote was significantly higher last election than it normally is, because of a prominent candidate. You didn’t take that into account. Also, if the rest of Canada says that they may vote NDP in that scenario, that would reflects the NDP’s national reputation more than that of an unknown local candidate.
Also your claim that Elizabeth May has destroyed the Greens and the Liberals is a little overdramatic. Both the Libs and Greens are up slightly in the polls since the announcement was made. Also a significant number of Canadians who disapproved of the deal were Conservative. What would you expect, since they have the most to lose with this May-Dion pact? A slight majority of Liberals actually approved of it.

“Why would Elizabeth May be significantly less popular in Central Nova than the rest of the Atlantic region?” Well, that’s what the poll tells us: “… Loriface leads in Atlantic Canada, with 30 per cent. Liberal voters would be more likely to support the NDP candidate (53%) in this riding than the Green leader (41%).”

This was a national survey, so May comes out ahead nationally over Loriface, who is not a party leader and has no national exposure, but in Atlantic Canada, where Loriface is better known, she comes out ahead of May. It is obvious that Liberals are not happy with this deal, and the presumption that they will have no choice but to vote for May, seems to be a false one.

Dion’s polling numbers are so low, I don’t see how he can continue, since even Liberals can’t stand him, and his numbers have gone down since the pact, and May’s endorsement of him, or should I say her “kiss of death”.

Callwood’s Ghost – According to recent polls, the Conservatives have dropped significantly in Atlantic Canada, to perhaps the high twenties, around 28% if you average the last few polls. (Look at http://pollingreport.ca/index.php?catID=5). Before the Budget, they were somewhere in the mid thirties or even higher. The Liberals seem to have gained, although perhaps not as much as the NDP. The Greens may have picked up a point or so.
Factoring that in, it levels the playing field a bit, and may bring Peter MacKay into the thirties in terms of popular vote.
As for Loriface, I don’t know what kind of exposure she has in Nova Scotia, but reports seem to be saying she is an unknown candidate, or at least not the calibre of her predecessor.

Nationally, Harper’s approval rating is down slightly from last month, but I don’t remember seeing any decline for Dion. I suspect what happened is that people who disliked May or Dion previously will have their dislike entrenched.

Again, as far as the May-Dion deal goes, both Liberals and NDP were more approving than disapproving from the Dion deal, at least nationally, according to the Angus Reid poll. That’s what really counts. I doubt May would gain many of the Conservative votes anyway, maybe just a few that have become disenchanted with the Conservatives and are unwilling to vote NDP.

Callingwood wrote “Why would Elizabeth May be significantly less popular in Central Nova than the rest of the Atlantic region?” Well, that’s what the poll tells us: “… Loriface leads in Atlantic Canada, with 30 per cent. Liberal voters would be more likely to support the NDP candidate (53%) in this riding than the Green leader (41%).”
=
But I asked you why you thought EMay’s support was lower in Central Nova than the rest of the Atlantic. I already took into account the discrepancy between Atlantic Canada and the rest of Canada. Atlantic Canada’s support was about 6% lower for May, or about 3/4, however you want to look at it.

Sorry, it’s Callwood, not Callingwood!

:)

MPs reject NDP call for immediate end to Afghan mission

Canadian Press

April 30, 2007 at 7:23 PM EDT

Ottawa — The House of Commons has overwhelmingly rejected an NDP motion calling for an immediate end to Canada’s combat mission in Afghanistan.

Conservative, Liberal and Bloc Québécois MPs joined forces Monday to defeat the motion by a vote of 225 to 28.

New Democrats were alone in calling for an immediate withdrawal of Canadian troops from the counter-insurgency campaign in Kandahar province.

They want Canada to redouble its commitment to development and aid instead.

Last week, the NDP formed an unlikely alliance with the Tories to shoot down a Liberal attempt to ensure that the combat mission does not drag on beyond February 2009.

That’s the end of Canada’s current military commitment in Afghanistan.

The New Democrats said they couldn’t support the motion because they want an immediate end to the combat mission.

Good calculations, but you forgot one thing. I’m willing to bet that at least 10% of voters are still smarting from 4 days of Front Page headlines “Bowow cries Central Nova member” and well over two months of “would the honourable member from Central Nova please stop licking himself.” And for a conservative who really hates MacKay, maybe the Green party is hell on earth, but at least it’s better than the NDP!