[Gunnair]

Quote:

‘Winning one seat when 308 were up for grabs is no more historic than winning at the weekly parish bingo game. About the same odds, too.’

People are using the word “historic” to describe the election of a Green party candidate to the House of Commons. That the candidate in question was the leader of the party, Elizabeth May, perhaps aided the hyperbole. The press tends to be kindly to the (political) lone free-ranger. But hyperbole it is, and grossly so.

The repatriation of the constitution was historic. The moon landing was historic. But can we rightly land the full weight of that fine adjective on Elizabeth May’s third go at winning a riding — each one in a different time zone? Winning one seat when 308 were up for grabs is no more historic than winning at the weekly parish bingo game. About the same odds, too.
Perhaps the term historic was meant as a verbal ointment to soothe over how badly the Green party did everywhere else. It was victorious, its cup overfloweth, in the most western-most redoubt of Sannich-Gulf-Islands. But elsewhere? Elsewhere, the rain barrels were nearly as dry at the end of the campaign as when it began.

Far from historic, the Greens did terribly. This is their third full national campaign. They have had the benefit of their “high-profile” leader, and a largely sympathetic press for their overriding cause of global warming. They have enjoyed the subsidy-per-vote, which gave them over a million dollars last time.

In the election just previous, Ms. May, furthermore, had the great benefit of a pass from the Liberal party. Stéphane Dion, seeing an ecological soulmate, withdrew a Liberal candidacy in her riding. This left her facing Peter McKay undistracted by any meeker rivals. (She lost anyway.)

In short, up to now, the party of ecology, the warming earth and all the daughters of Gaia, has had every card in the political deck to help it along.

What has it accomplished? In three general elections, the Greens have run about 300 candidates each time. Essentially, that means there have been a total of about 900 district elections in which Green candidates have solicited Canadian voters to elect them. In 899 instances, voters have said (rather forcefully if you check the numbers): “No, thanks.”

This year only, they have, finally, elected one. And that one only after ransacking the country for the most winnable seat, and making the winning of that seat the party’s absolutely highest priority for the entire election. Some may want to call that history. I’d call it an immense concentration of effort for a very limited goal.

What else does it say?

In my view something considerably more significant than any soft claims of historic accomplishment. It says that the point of view embraced by the Greens, their increasingly apocalyptic warnings, and the condescension with which they deal with non-supporters and critics, has not been persuasive. It says their reading of the Canadian public is deeply deficient. That despite the hype of the great Gore machine, and lesser deities such as David Suzuki pounding the message for over a decade, a party totally invested in Kyoto and its economic nightmares cannot in 2011 score more than a single member of Parliament.

Far from global warming, or what they call “carbon pollution” being of deep and serious concern to Canadians, the election of a single member tells us it is a marginal concern at best. I would define marginal concern as one that gets 4% of the vote, its third time out, in a national election.

Why, the NDP did better with a woman who, on her first go, didn’t campaign at all, spent part of the campaign in Las Vegas, and never even visited the riding.
You want historic? Now that’s historic.
National Post

Rex Murphy offers commentary weekly on CBC TV’s The National, and is host of CBC Radio’s Cross Country Checkup.

.

[EyeBrock]

Rex is a good chap.

[Gunnair]

EyeBrock wrote:

Rex is a good chap.

He is.

[Scape]

When life hands you a lemon make lemonade is and should be the Green party axiom. They need to toot their own horn on this to get as much mileage as they can s when they do break ground on policy they can stake a claim to it. Yes, the green vote was down but the vote was far more polarized then ever before either. There is no way for the Greens to make inroads with wide but thin national support and to get a seat was a do or die situation for them. May did the right thing for her party and her cause by putting all her eggs in one basket this time and all the crooning by those who want to see her fail or that think her cause is illegitimate in the eyes of the voter had best not gloat in their schadenfreude because that is exactly the arrogance that brought the greens to prominence in the 1st place.

[Gunnair]

As it stands, Green policy is vague at best (at least to me) and right now, the only traction they are getting, and I don't think it's much, is May's victory. Fair enough she made inroads here, but she got voted in on her name, not necessarily on a Green party platform.

[Thanos]

It's much more likely that May will use her free platform to consistently rail about the unfairness of the electoral system and to keep yammering about bringing in PR. After all it's the system's fault*, and not the Green's inherent unelectability, that's to blame for more Greens not picking up seats.

*Always. It's always the system's fault and never anyone or anything else's.

[Gunnair]

Thanos wrote:

It's much more likely that May will use her free platform to consistently rail about the unfairness of the electoral system and to keep yammering about bringing in PR. After all it's the system's fault*, and not the Green's inherent unelectability, that's to blame for more Greens not picking up seats.

*Always. It's always the system's fault and never anyone or anything else's.

I kinda agree. I hope she can show what the Green Party is capable of but I wonder if she'll become a one trick pony or a one issue wonder as she flogs electoral reform.

That said, maybe electoral reform might get some more attention with May working it.

[Thanos]

Which opens again the question of why electoral reform is even needed. Every prior government in Canada's history has managed to put together some kind of national mandate. Why change this just to reward the smaller fish who obviously can't?

[EyeBrock]

First past the post makes sure local issues are front and centre. For a huge country like Canada, its a good fit.

Win your local riding or go find another job.

[Gunnair]

EyeBrock wrote:

First past the post makes sure local issues are front and centre. For a huge country like Canada, its a good fit.

Win your local riding or go find another job.

How do you figure?

[EyeBrock]

You have to get votes in your riding to win. As in local.

[ShepherdsDog]

There should be a residency requirement for candidates, so they actually know many or most of the people they are representing.

[Gunnair]

EyeBrock wrote:

You have to get votes in your riding to win. As in local.

I'm not following your logic on how that brings locals issues to the front.

[commanderkai]

Gunnair wrote:

EyeBrock wrote:

You have to get votes in your riding to win. As in local.

I'm not following your logic on how that brings locals issues to the front.

Well, in my opinion anyway, the best way to win in your riding is to do your best for your constituents. Local problems and issues, be it jobs, high cost of living, crime, pollution, etc. will be brought up when the candidate campaigns in his or her riding, and, if elected, must achieve some success in combating the issues.

Windsor West, for example, has a terrible job climate, and, as such, whoever is elected in Windsor West will have to try to address said local issues at the provincial or federal level(depending on if it was the MP or MPP)

[Gunnair]

commanderkai wrote:

Gunnair wrote:

EyeBrock wrote:

You have to get votes in your riding to win. As in local.

I'm not following your logic on how that brings locals issues to the front.

Well, in my opinion anyway, the best way to win in your riding is to do your best for your constituents. Local problems and issues, be it jobs, high cost of living, crime, pollution, etc. will be brought up when the candidate campaigns in his or her riding, and, if elected, must achieve some success in combating the issues.

Windsor West, for example, has a terrible job climate, and, as such, whoever is elected in Windsor West will have to try to address said local issues at the provincial or federal level(depending on if it was the MP or MPP)

Well, unless you happen to be in the governing party, or the local issue is amazingly sexy, that doesn't always work. With only rookie NDP (save for Victoria) and May, the Island is preparing to enter a political wasteland.