Thursday, October 16, 2008

We're Number Six! We're Number Six!

We all knew the order the major parties would finish on election night - there were few surprises there. However, the real battle, was the race for 6th through 19th. Yet due to the intense media bias against them, we didn't hear their stories:

I don’t know about you, but I would have rather heard stories about Sinclair Stevens running to be Prime Minister, than about Jack Layton running to be Prime Minister. (and Stevens' controversial move to focus on the "dinning room table" rather than the kitchen table)

I would have rather heard about vote splitting on the far far left, than on the left.

I would have rather heard stories about the marijuana party’s war room than about the Conservative Party’s. (guess which one was more mature?)

I would have preferred Jane Taber focus on “anonymous Animal Alliance insiders” than “Liberal sources”.

And how come we never heard about the leadership struggles going on inside the “work less” party? (probably because they only ran one candidate)

So I applaud these parties for overcoming the media bias and tying the Greens in the seat count. I sincerely hope they are all considered for inclusion in the 2010 debates.

6. Christian Heritage: 26,722 votes (average: 453 per candidate)
7. Marxist-Leninist: 8,753 votes (148 per candidate)
8. Libertarian: 7,382 votes (284 per candidate)
9. Progressive Canadian: 5,920 votes (592 per candidate)
10. Communist: 3,639 votes (152 per candidate)
11. Canadian Action: 3,508 votes (175 per candidate)
12. Marijuana: 2,319 votes (290 per candidate)
13. 2,263 votes (323 per candidate)
14. Newfoundland and Labrador First: 1,801 votes (600 per candidate)
15. First Peoples National: 1,640 votes (274 per candidate)
16. Animal Alliance Environment Voters: 529 votes (132 per candidate)
17. Work Less: 423 votes (423 votes per candidate)
18. Western Block: 195 votes (195 voters per candidate)19. People’s Political Power: 185 votes (93 per candidate)



  • Odd that there's a Marxist-Leninist and a Communist Party... Is there a split in the Communist ranks? I wonder if there's snipping between the two groups.

    By Blogger sharonapple88, at 6:57 p.m.  

  • The Work Less party ran one candidate and got 423 votes... they sort of lived their motto.

    By Blogger sharonapple88, at 7:13 p.m.  

  • To be fair to the Greens, these 14 parties received 65,281 votes in total while the Greens got 940,684. That's a big difference.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:28 p.m.  

  • I think there should be some award, maybe called the John Turmel Award, for the worst showing.

    In this case, Turmel couldn't even win his own award:

    Manuel Couto, Marxist-Leninist, Guelph: 29 votes, lowest in Canada. He also had the lowest %: 0.049240%

    And what is it with Guelph? It had the largest number of candidates (10). Maybe that explains Turmel's good/bad showing: 58 votes.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:06 a.m.  

  • Sharon, from what I understand the two parties hate each other. One is Soviet in orientation, the other is Maoist. Or something like that.

    What I find even more hilarious is that the folks on FreeDominion pretend the Christian Heritage Party is poised to be the new version of Reform, thanks to Stephen Harper's relentless "socialist, liberalism"

    By Blogger Reality Bites, at 10:19 a.m.  

  • In case you're curious about 2006 election ... (votes per candidate):

    Green 2162
    Independent 860
    Christian Heritage 640
    Progressive Canadian 578
    Marijuana 403
    Libertarian 300
    Western Block 274
    First Nations 268
    Canadian Action 182
    Communist 149
    Marxist-Leninist 135
    Animal Alliance 72

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 11:27 a.m.  

  • Sharon, from what I understand the two parties hate each other. One is Soviet in orientation, the other is Maoist. Or something like that.

    That's funny. I'd love to hear the arguments between those two groups.

    By Blogger sharonapple88, at 10:38 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home