Few parties would consider a second place finish a small victory, but for the often marginalized Green Party in Canada, second place helps to dispel the myth that no one would vote Green as a serious choice in a federal election. Even tonight as the Liberals win a seat that is largely pointless to them, as it doesn’t change their standing in the House of Commons, there are partisan bloggers moving to marginalize Elizabeth May’s accomplishment in London, Ontario. For a widely discounted party like the Greens to finish second, and ahead of the currently governing party’s candidate, isn’t an indication of burnout like Jason Cherniak is suggesting. It’s an indicator that the voters want an alternative to the Liberals and Conservatives and NDP who have run the show in Parliament for so long now it’s clear even the NDP are a party more concerned about maintaining the status quo than acting in a progressive manner.
Ask yourself how the Liberal support could drop by 5%, Conservative 5%, NDP 10% and the Green support increase by 20%.
(5 + 5 + 10) = 20
It seems the NDP are the alternative party that ought to be quaking in their boots next election, not the Greens. Granted, May is a party leader which complicates things, but I’d guess that the result tonight bodes well for the Green Party - and is no harbinger of doom. Stealing 20% of the popular vote from ALL parties, not just the NDP (which is a common misconception about the Greens) is never a harbinger of doom (except for perhaps the parties losing the 20%).
For Jason’s theory to be right, that “she lost when it would be safe to vote for any opposition,” May will have to do worse than 26% of the popular vote in Cape Breton in the coming general election. Judging by her charisma, and ability to attract media coverage that approaches equal airtime to established parties, I’d say Jason will have egg on his face. Or if he means ‘no better than a second place finish’, he may unfortunately be right by the skin of his teeth, given Canada’s outdated First Past The Post electoral dinosaur system. If I were more of a betting person I’d be inclined to make a friendly wager with Mr. Cherniak on May’s coming victory in the Maritimes - something where the loser would feature the opposing leader’s face on his blog for a week.
“I don’t think she will ever do better than this.” We’ll see, Jason. Yes we will see.
Congratulations to Mr. Pearson for the Liberal win. And a heartfelt “better luck next time” goes out to the 2 alternative parties, the Conservatives and NDP. I hope CAP and PCP will do better in future elections, since we need more variety in the House, not homogeneous white haired white guys in suits. [Note to Haskett voters: Homogeneous does not mean homosexual.] (And I just remembered, I saw Ali G’s movie about him getting to sit as an MP in Britain. “Ali G Indahouse” [5/10], which was an interesting reminder that “Keeping It Real” is not on the list of most political party’s platforms.)
CTV News tonight framed the London byelection result this way: “May fell short…”. That’s an interesting way to frame the loss. I think it reflects Jason’s spin, where a party that most people consider a 5th place non-factor in Canadian politics, trounces the NDP, and beats the Conservatives in a byelection during a pregnant minority government situation. We just don’t know how many more months are left until the Tories are due.
If May were truly at the top of her game now, why did CTV’s Robertson apparently give her a chance to win, in the way her worded her loss? The leaders of “fringe” “alternative” parties are never expected to get a quarter of the popular vote in any election.
Why is the most well known Liblogger out pouring cold water on what is clearly a positive sign for the Green Party? I reject the idea that it was a “safe vote” and electors felt they could freely support whoever they ideologically agreed with, even if it lost the seat to their arch-rival. That’s not what we were hearing in the blogosphere, where Liberal bloggers were attacking Haskett the Conservative as if the future of Canada depended upon a Pearson victory.
2006 January
Lib 40.12% votes
NDP 23.74
Cons. 29.90
Green 5.49
Party Candidate Votes % Votes
Liberal Glen Pearson 13,287 34.9%
Green Party Elizabeth May 9,864 25.9%
Conservative Dianne Haskett 9,309 24.4%
N.D.P. Megan Walker 5,388 14.1%
Canadian Action Will Arlow 53 0.1%
Independent Robert Ede 77 0.2%
PC Party Steve Hunter 145 0.4%
Voter turnout: 38,123 of 89,139 registered electors (42.8%)
You may be wondering about the title. It refers to a bit of an inside joke, where if something fantastic yet unlikely were to happen, I’d remark that, “I’d go dancing naked down the street,” to celebrate the event. When said in the Winter, amidst deep snow and -30 C Wind Chill, it’s especially comical to me anyway.
@hotmail.com
![[EFC Blue Ribbon - Free Speech Online]](http://www.efc.ca/images/efcfreet.gif)
Adrian MacNair | 28-Nov-06 at 12:09 am | Permalink
Yeah it’s just what we needed. Another Liberal. And still no representation of our Party. If the other parties had any respect whatsoever they wouldn’t have run candidates. And who are these people who are voting Liberal? From what planet do they come and how can we aim our death star at it?
Adrian MacNair | 28-Nov-06 at 12:14 am | Permalink
Oh and 42% voter turnout… thanks for giving a shit about Canada, London. People who complain about life, but don’t vote, are like eunuchs who take Viagra. Or is that impotent men who take ginger instead of ginseng? Help me out here.
scout | 28-Nov-06 at 12:47 am | Permalink
adrian, maybe just go with neo-cons and antler velvet.
congrats to elizabeth may.
Saskboy | 28-Nov-06 at 8:54 am | Permalink
I don’t think it’s sunk in to everyone in Ontario yet, that voting Liberal is voting for the same old problems. The Conservatives may be headed in a better direction in dealing with convicted criminals, but it would be nice to elect a party that doesn’t cancel programs for women. I heard encouraging talk yesterday from Flaherty about how he realizes that there’s little incentive for people to work when the government claws back so much money that people living on social assistance do better if they sit at home or get paid under the table. How he solves the problem will determine my opinion of his motives. Are they to improve the economy and people’s lives, or will they be ultra-conservative moves to keep people in the poor house.
Devon Rowcliffe | 28-Nov-06 at 12:10 pm | Permalink
Most people are voting Liberal because they see the Grits as the best means of toppling Harper’s neo-con government, not because the majority of people love the Liberals. There are still may scars that have yet to be healed.
If Elizabeth May participates in the next televised leaders’ debate, the Green Party WILL win seats, even within a first-past-the-post electoral system.
Saskboy | 28-Nov-06 at 12:17 pm | Permalink
I think you’re on the nose there Devon. IF May had won last night, it could have meant as many as 10 Green seats in the next election, but now we’ll probably only pick up a couple. Still that will be enough to break the ice. I have fun reminding people that the Reform Party started with a single seat, and is now the New Government of Canada just 13 years later. The Greens could very well be a minority government as early as 2020 if they keep building, and eventually form a single party with the NDP and disgruntled Tories and Grits. I think the NDP’s days are numbered, since they’ve not made a real stab at governing in their ~50 years now, so they’d be well advised to get on board the Green train to rejuvenate their image.
Adrian MacNair | 28-Nov-06 at 6:32 pm | Permalink
Jim Flaherty couldn’t find the ills of society with a popup book and a phonetics tape. It’s so typical to scapegoat the people of welfare, but them Conservatives do not, nor have they ever, had a solution to the welfare problem. Not once. Not ever. Their work for welfare program makes no sense because it simply utilizes labour for prices they would otherwise be unable to pay. For instance, if the government actually had to hire a city worker to do what work for welfare people do, they’ll have to start giving them benefits and a 6000% pay raise.
Let’s be honest. The ills of society are not based on how many people are on welfare. It’s the lamest easiest excuse in the political handbook to kick a guy lying on the street in the teeth and then blame him for bleeding all over the sidewalk and not doing enough to ensure he had his head out of the way when you went to kick him in the face. The only solution to welfare is governmental social reforms and programs. Otherwise all you get is Toronto and Vancouver. Lower welfare rolls, thousands of people begging you for spare change and sleeping in alleyways. Think Harris solved the welfare crisis? Laughable. Toronto’s homeless population is an embarrassment only exceeded by Vancouver’s 18,000 strong who sleep here because it’s the only city in Canada that doesn’t go into refrigeration during winter. Yeah, the Liberals really “solved” welfare in B.C. by limiting it to two years. Way to go assholes. Now we have so many crackhead homeless in the downtown core that it looks like a lineup to see Star Wars Phantom Menace (BEFORE WE FOUND OUT IT SUCKED ASS).
Saskboy | 28-Nov-06 at 9:27 pm | Permalink
I guess Flaherty has already proved his stripes. I was too slow to rush to judgement ;-)
scout | 28-Nov-06 at 10:30 pm | Permalink
right on, adrian. too many welfare recipients aren’t able to work…..mentally ill, physically disabled, yadda yadda.
and where’s the incentive for a single parent to work 9-5 at a 7-11 for minimum training wage (thanks campbell) at $6/hour….or anyone for that matter? poverty level is $15/hour. the kids come home from school at 3, so there’s either daycare costs or latchkey kids. nuh-uh!
it’s been one bad band-aid solution after another.
we need care and facilities (not institutes) for the mentally ill and addicts with proper programs to help those who want to be helped along. some of the homeless are stuck there…they are into the ‘family’ of it and won’t give it up, but there’s those who would at least appreciate models like portland’s ‘dignity village’. http://www.outofthedoorways.org/
politicians dont seem to think of asking the homeless themselves want they want….government has a knack for dictating what should be done.