Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Green party increases vote, but fails to win a seat

UNNATI GANDHI

Globe and Mail Update

Latest comment posted at 4:00 PM EDT 11/10/07

Party triples its popular vote, though electoral reform — which would have helped it — is defeated. ...Read the full article

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

  1. Anonymous Coward from Oakville, Canada writes: Who is this Nelson Wiseman guy? He seems to be a 'rent-a-quote' fellow. But what has his track record of predictions been like? Has anyone actually compared his previous predictions with what has turned out to be the case?

    Just because he's in the U of T blue book for reporters doesn't mean he always has to be the source of all quotations political. He seems to throw out various poorly-reasoned arguments for causes like anti-MMP, simply relying on his status as a U of T professor. He shouldn't be given a free pass just because of that.

    Please try some more energetic reporting, guys, or at least think about why you run straight to him every time.
  2. gilles monenemie from Montreal, Canada writes: For a wiseman he isn't too brilliant in his analysis. His last name should be fossilfool. As times change, so do political movements. The greens have legs, but he wouldn't see that sitting in his cozy chair in hiz cozy job. Fat Cat Ontario Forever should hang from his door.
  3. Rochelle Zorzi from Toronto, Canada writes: Nelson Wiseman does not appear to have read the Green Party platform before passing judgement on the party. The platform is based on social, environmental, and fiscal sustainability, which is a foundation that I haven't seen in any of the other parties' platforms. They are pretty much the exact opposite of a one-issue party.
  4. Morgan Wade from Canada writes: And unfortunately, this academic they keep going to is lazy himself. He may have been around for a long time and studied a few elections in his time, but he's clearly phoning it in now. The Greens are not a single-issue party. They may be framed as such by the traditional parties, this may be the accepted, received wisdom among academic types, or the perpetuated stereotype within the media, but it's just untrue. You just have to take a quick look at the Green platform, it's all there. And his comment "What's happened is that environmentalism has been incorporated into the discourse of all the parties - it's like health care. So they've become neutralized" also rankles. I heard very little from the other three parties in this election about environmental matters, particularly about the biggest challenge of our generation, climate change. And how have the Greens become neutralized? Their percentage of the popular vote tripled in this election! That's without the automatic media coverage the other three always get and that's without being part of the leader's debate. The other three parties saw their popular vote percentage stay roughly the same, though the NDP grew a little, nothing like the Greens. It seems that Wiseman is saying what he wishes were so, not what is actually so.
  5. Jason Meahan from Canada writes: Wiseman:
    -the Greens are a single issue party
    -they did well this election because they focussed on multiple issues
    _________________________________
    -the Greens will not do well in the future because they are a single issue party

    Cognitive dissonance is an alluring mistress.
  6. Nathan Weatherdon from Canada writes: An old man with an old man's views, and a small c conservative at that, doesn't think that an up and coming party will be a big deal.

    I recall a two hour lecture in Wiseman's Canadian Politics class that was supposed to be about inequality, and the two minutes he actually spent talking about it was to say it wasn't a big deal.

    He knows his stuff and he knows his history, but I can't help but think that this guy is in a poor position to evaluate the political climate in the present day and age.
  7. Timothy Nessus from Somewhere, Canada writes: ""and nobody's going to cover them for the next four years.""

    ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

    HOWEVER, this is ONLY IF all the Jack A**es at the GP DO NOT change their ways.

    You see, the problem with the GP is NOT their plans, programs or ideas. They have been more or less streamlined and centralized (politically speaking), which is OK.

    HOWEVER, their beliefs do NOT match their actions. The GP does NOT understand that it is ALL about providing a SERVICE to the voters. NOW, NOW is the time to begin for the NEXT election.

    It is NOT about costs, it is NOT about marketing, it is NOT about personalities. It is ALL about SERVICE.... which at the GP... I am sorry to say... is non-existant.

    AND, I did, indeed voted for the GP.
  8. Nathan Weatherdon from Canada writes: Timothy - I'm curious what you mean by services to the voters. I'm not sure I understand what you're suggesting the Green Party should be doing.

    I personally think the surge of the Green Party in this election is the beginning of the story of the party who's coming into the political scene.
  9. dormant green from Canada writes: I believe the movement towards the Greens is real and can be sustained. But only if they make themselves integral to local communities by identifying and helping to solve problems faced by those communities.
    If they can begin to be seen as a party which can get things done on a local level then people can begin to trust that they can tackle the bigger problems. The Green beliefs hold the key to many of these solutions. It is now time to put the beliefs into action.
  10. David R from Canada writes: Now that election reform has been defeated, the Greens stand no chance of ever winning a seat. Although in many riding they are coming in third or second place, but really what does that matter with first past the post. Unless you take the riding you get nothing. Until Ontario gets real reform, a vote for the Green party is a wasted vote.
  11. Ted Harrison from Canada writes: dormant green, I agree with you. While the issues the GP's concerned with are of much larger scope than individual ridings, under FPTP ideas specific to individual ridings must be developed and promoted more pointedly if they're to start getting candidates elected. Much of their platform is actually already very pertinent locally, but the specific linkages probably need to be spelled out so that people are aware of them.

    Tim, what service issues should the GP be addressing?
  12. Peter Stern from Mississauga, Canada writes: Regarding the UofT guy's statement that "nobody's going to cover them for the next four years." The way I see it... that coverage isn't necessary because every time I see the smog hanging over the city of Toronto, it's a big advertisement to vote Green. Every time another person gets diagnosed with Asthma, it's another big advertisement to vote Green. I personally have asthma. I also have kids. And I see the smog hanging over Toronto regularly in the summer. If this guy knew what he was talking about, then we would only have Liberals and Conservatives throughout the country... and "fringe parties"... um like The Bloc in Quebec... could never win a seat anywhere - let alone have any influence. If this guy wasn't asleep at the wheel, he'd realize that it has only been the last couple of elections that the Green Party has seriously tried to get votes and win some ridings. And if he actually checked out the Green Party's web site, he'd realize that they are not a one-issue party. Having environmental sustainability as a key platform issue that differentiates them from everyone else doesn't make them a one-issue party. It takes time to build momentum. And the momentum suggests that it's just a matter of time before the Greens start winning some seats. The only time the Greens have to worry about losing my vote is when we go through a few years of ZERO smog days and have a declining number of asthma sufferers.

Join the Conversation, Leave a Comment

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

You must be logged-in to submit a comment — login now!

Not registered with globeandmail.com? Register now. It is quick and free.

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top