Sunday, September 13, 2015

Recommended Sunday Morning Read...How A Vote For A Green Could (Still) Elect A FedCon.


I stumbled across Taylor Lewis' blog via the Twittmachine.

And I can't figure out how I didn't know about it and his writing already.

Because it's really good stuff.

On Friday Mr. Lewis posted up a breakdown/analysis of Elizabeth May's five claims that voting Green won't elect Conservatives.

The entire post is really, really worth a read (and I will be returning to it often), but here is Mr. Lewis' kicker:

...Elizabeth May calls vote splitting rhetoric “fear mongering.” Andrew Weaverhas called it a form of voter suppression. While I am sympathetic to their concerns, the data says what it says. If the Conservatives start consistentlytanking in the polls, then ABC voters might consider the Green candidate in areas, say, west of the Okanagan.

If the Conservatives maintain their base Canada-wide, though, then current polls don’t suggest the Greens are an option, unless you can point to strong riding-level polling and a Green candidate who has worked years to build up a profile.

Furthermore, Harper has cheated in every election he has won, and there’s no reason he won’t this time. He has stacked the deck against us with actualvoter suppression tactics, and progressives need to be vigilant and at times pragmatic in order to defeat him. Sources like will help.

What the Green Party needs is for Canadians to elect a government that will end First Past The Post; that, at least, is a realistic possibility, as the NDP is committed to mixed member proportional representation and the Liberals are committed to some type of electoral reform, such as PR or ranked ballots, pending further study (for what it’s worth the Law Commission of Canada recommended MMPR in a 2004 report).

Don’t mistake this as being patronizing; Speaking as a one-time Green voter, I would love a situation where a strong Green caucus could push for a basic livable income and stymie the other parties’ half-measures on environmental protections.

It just isn’t going to happen this time...

Now go and read the entire thing.

Because it really is clear-eyed, detailed, well-researched and even-handed analysis.




Danneau said...

We have a fine Green candidate, for whom I'd like to vote. Dipper is also a good man, but the very thought of sending a Con back to Ottawa fills me with loathing. A lot of my current discourse is directed at engaging folks in the voting process and attempting to convince of the necessity to remain vigilant and vocal with whatever formation pulls the strings back east.

North Van's Grumps said...

I'm voting for Claire Martin.

Since 1975, every election, provincial or federally, I've cast my tradesman ballot in North Vancouver, and each time my hopes, my expectations, of my chosen NDP candidate has been denied by the majority (BIG BLUE MACHINE) / (BigRedScooter) voters.

This year, I'm Going Green, Claire Martin.

I'm not voting 'strategically' to keep Stephen Harper's Conservatives or Justin Trudeau's Liberals out, I'm casting my ballot for someone that truly connects with my values.

John's aghast said...

Taylor Lewis makes a very compelling argument. I believe Harper's 'new hire', Lynton Crosby, is already at work disseminating anti refugee information which may be detrimental to the Lib/NDP position.
Be very careful on October 19th. That goes for you to NVG.

Taylor Lewis said...

Thanks kindly for sharing my post and for your support!


e.a.f. said...

that was a very, very interesting read. it is something which should be read by all who are having a think about voting Green. In our area, when I ADDED the green vote to the ndp vote, they would have been able to pass the b.c. lieberals and/or the federal cons.

Elizabeth May, is a politician and she wants to make gains. she isn't interested in what is good for the country, just for Elizabeth may.

If we wake up the morning after the election with a con government, Elizabeth May will have to face herself and the what awaits the country then.

My biggest concern, after our loss of democracy will be our loss of medical system. People are talking about the environment, the refugees, the economy, etc. I'd suggest people start thinking about our health care system. Harper wants to cut $38 Billion out of it.

We have already reached a point where some medications are not "handed" out until stage 4 cancer is "home" while its in stage 1 to 3, you pay $500 per month.

We are an aging population, fewer and fewer employers offer extended health care. if we vote for the Cons, we are headed to an American style health care system. B.C. is almost there and Harper doesn't care. Its our health this time.

Anonymous said...

Strange, what's missing from this blog is the voice of the conservative supporters. Do they exist or is Harper stuffing the ballot box?

Anonymous said...

I am too lazy to look...

How will residency requirements affect voting students who have just moved to start the school year? Does it matter if it's the for the first time, or they are returning to class after summer break?

Seems like there are a bunch of riding's that could swing on a youth vote if there are enough eligible and engaged students.

Anonymous said...

Of foreign influence

Section 331 of the Canada Elections Act, which forbids non-residents from attempting to "induce electors" to vote for, or against, a candidate during the writ period.

scotty on denmanc said...

Thanx for the link, Ross, it's an important read.

I'd hoped May would have prioritized a Con defeat, not just for honour or altruism in this critical election, but for legitimate, self-serving reasons: the prospect for getting the thing her party needs most, proportional representation, is zero if Harper gets back in, whereas both bigger opposition parties have committed to electoral reform.

How could it be that Greens would risk their influence, such as it is, becoming widely perceived as only what keeps getting Harper re-elected by vote-splitting?

May has lauded political cooperation many times; what's the matter with now, especially when so much is at stake?

Bill said...

NVG - Did you get Saxton's toilet paper, um, flyer? The sickening part is the one about giving police the tools(C51) to chase criminals "including terrorist activities". I find that waste of a tree and Harper propaganda revolting. But when the fear card is the last one in the deck, shamelessly play it....

Anonymous said...


Tieleman, The Tyee:

"Be Mercenary, Greens, but Be Upfront about It":

"...Green party in action in British Columbia has shown itself to be "more" in a big way: more partisan, more mercenary and more hypocritical in political maneuvering -- to defeat opposition Members of Parliament instead of Conservatives.
Nowhere is that more obvious than in Victoria, where New Democrat MP Murray Rankin's riding has become the Green party's number one target in Canada.

Most observers would find that a bizarre choice of priorities, since Rankin is an internationally recognized environmental lawyer with a track record of achievements.

But for the Greens, it's apparently become power over principle -- because they are determined to remove Rankin rather than crush a Conservative elsewhere.

"There are going to be ridings like Victoria, where we are in a position to win, that we will be going after... with everything we got," Green party president Dave Bagler said in April..." (Just on CBC radio, Greens will not run against Liberal in Kelowna Lake Country)

North Van's Grumps said...

Gee when Andrew Coyne writes an editorial piece for Post Media (Vancouver Sun and National Post) on Mike Duffy, Coyne discloses his connections to .... Nigel Wright

Bill Tieleman? puts down Greens and promotes NDP? Who's Bill working for now?

Anonymous said...

One thing for certain, Harper has this all analyzed and figured out, within each riding and even to the numbers within probably several hundred, even though he will mainly focus on the ones that will get him re-elected a majority. Remember also, that the similarities to Harper/G. Campbell's political playbook are so similar, in fact, I think they both have it down to a science in terms of how elections are won. Like Harper or not, in this way he's very slippery and smart (super smart). What's his new adviser he just hired on and kicked the old one out, the one that got UK Cameron re-elected a majority when all the polls were showing similar scarey things for the Cons there (he's the best in the business so they say).
It's still over a month yet until Oct. 19th and sooo much can happen.
I believe what we're going to see now is a focus on Trudeau and Mulcair's weaknesses vs Harper's so-called economic strengths (such as budget surplus) et al, and he'll be relying on the corporate media to sell this.
I believe also that the young and poor people vote is essential to changing the tide, all the more reason they've helped make interest in politics discouraging and difficult for these groups.


RossK said...

Thanks Everybody for your thoughts.

I think Peter, directly above, has hit the nail of the pragmatic aspect of what is going to go down over the next few weeks squarely on the head.

I'll be coming back to this stuff with future posts - especially the stuff about what is going on in individual ridings which is critical for making Strategic Voting decisions.


North Van's Grumps said...

@ Peter

Sounds like the UK voters had their sights on booting Cameron out and then they got stuck with him for another term.

Canadians have an opportunity here NOT to make the same assumption. Send a clear message to the Conservative Party of Canada: trash