Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Election 2011

The Liberals, Bloc, and NDP all say they'll vote against the budget.

Whether they fall on the Liberal opposition day Friday, the Bloc sub-ammendment Thursday, or by Harper going to the GG before then, the 40th Parliament is about to end.


  • Just please, God, no Elizabeth May in the debates this time.

    By Anonymous Casual Observer, at 5:21 p.m.  

  • I actually enjoyed May's presence in the debates. She wasn't always 100% relevant, but she brought up some good elements in the melee. Besides, the share of the vote that the Greens get in each election should be enough for them to be included in the debates, elected members or not.

    By Anonymous Doctacosa, at 5:36 p.m.  

  • Add another vote for "No to May."

    She added absolutely nothing to the debate.

    She added her voice to an existing chorus without a single unique note.

    No one asked her a single question, nor questioned a single policy.

    If you want to add someone, go back in time and add Mel Hurtig to the 1993 debates (or, if you prefer, remove Manning and Bouchard from said debate).

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 6:06 p.m.  

  • The Green party received the same percentage of votes, at about 10%, as the BQ. Unlike the BQ, however, the GP's votes are national. So how can someone justify excluding Liz May but not Duceppe? May should be in the debates even though personally I will not be voting Green.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:19 p.m.  

  • I personally would be fine with excluding May. EXCEPT, if she were excluded, we'd waste the first week of the campaign arguing over whether or not she should be included, so it's better just to put her in and talk about real issues.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 8:09 p.m.  

  • Nope - it should be for party leaders who actually had a seat and won an election. She adds nothing but a shrill voice and little else. If I can be happy about something with this election, it's that it will be her third kick at the can and she won't be elected. She'll get dumped and she can go back to macrame and eating macrobiotic food and preaching about how we're all going to hell if we don't start driving sail powered cars.

    By Anonymous Casual Observer, at 10:09 p.m.  

  • "The Green party received the same percentage of votes, at about 10%, as the BQ"

    That's very generous rounding on your part. The Greens received 6.78% of the vote while the Bloc received 9.98%.

    Also, when comparing vote percentages, it isn't really fair to compare a national party to one that only runs in 75 ridings. Kind of like comparing apples to oranges.

    The Greens won 6.8% of the vote in ridings where they ran candidates. The Bloc won 38.1% of the vote in ridings where they ran candidates.

    As others mentioned, the Bloc has actually won seats, lots of 'em. The Green Party never has.

    While I strongly dislike the Bloc, I can definitely see the argument to including them and not the Greens

    By Anonymous Matthew, at 1:18 a.m.  

  • For several years, I've been supporting the following rules. A party leader is allowed in the leaders' debates if:

    1) They have at least one MP/MLA/whatever who was elected as a member of that party (i.e. floor crossers don't count)


    2) They are running candidates in every single riding (currently 308 federally).

    This would have allowed the Greens into the debates in 2004 and 2006, but not 2008. Which is ironic, because I deliberately designed this criteria in 2004 so that they *would* be included.

    By Anonymous The Invisible Hand, at 5:16 a.m.  

  • Another historical event happen in Canada.

    By Anonymous cowboy boot, at 10:22 a.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home