Is there any candidate whose victory would compel you leaving the party (or no longer supporting it)?
By - ScarredShogun
My future support of the Green Party of Canada depends entirely on what the new leader does, and the direction the party takes. What candidates say during campaigns and what they do after they're elected can often be very different. Of all the candidates, there's only one with any experience in elected office.
As well, given the First-Past-the-Post electoral system, my support is also informed by who the local Green Party electoral district association nominates to be the party's candidate. I can see a situation where I support my local Green candidate with donations, volunteer time, and my vote, but not support the national party.
i think the leader is just the talking head for the overall dynamic of the party?...so ya i agree it will still be the same party and whatever changes 'they' make the people can continue along supporting them or not
hopefully whoever wins will push harder for the environment and make canada a world leader in environmental protection for other countries to follow and adopt
i hope whoever wins has a real 'want' to get in the news or create news or 'new' news media types
If Kuttner, Haddad, or Lascaris win...I stay.
If Paul or Murray win....my vote is open for Greens, NDP, or Liberals depending on how the election pans out but good chance I’d go NDP because I like Jagmeet.
If anyone else wins...this party isn’t worth my vote.
I'd add Howard to the list of leaders whose platforms would be worth evaluating at election time. Not a straight no, but not a default win for my vote either.
Merner and West would face an uphill battle for my vote, I think.
That pretty much sums it up.
Well, I'm not even in the party to begin with... But I would consider joining or at least voting for the Greens if Kuttner, Lascaris, Haddad, or maybe even Howard win. If Paul, Merner, West, or Murray win, I'm voting NDP for sure.
Likewise, I lean NDP but feel lukewarm on them, Paul Manley is my local MP and I’d wholeheartedly help him keep his seat *if* Haddad or Lascaris take the helm.
Edit: or Kuttner for that matter
Edit 2: yes! Downvote and alienate non members expressing potential interest in your party. That’s a winning strategy.
If Annamie or West wins I'm out of the Green Party. Lascaris is the only one with a bold vision and the grit to follow through, i like Haddad too.
What similarities do you see between Paul and West? They're nothing alike.
I never said they were alike. I said I would leave the party if either of them won.
Kuttner or bust
Why just Kuttner? Gun policy?
More than just that, but as a left wing gun owner that is a bonus. I love Canada being self sufficient, resources being allocated to mental health. Enshrining Canadian citizens rights to privacy from illegal spying from corporations, urban gardens and shorter work weeks. There’s plenty more, they are just all around the best candidate to come along
Kuttner is much broader than gun policy. ~~Her~~ Their platform is effectively a middle ground between that of Paul and Lascaris. Radical, but not unachievable.
FYI Amita's pronouns are they/them
I bought a three-year membership when I signed up to vote, with the intention of sticking around regardless of who the leader is, since policy is supposed to be grassroots driven in this party. But I will probably less actively involved depending on who the leader ends up being.
I voted Green and joined up before I even realized any of this was going on. I'm here because I believe in the party's core values. None of the other parties take environmental or democratic issues seriously. If someone I don't like wins, that won't change that.
No, and I'm surprised by some of the drastic talk that's been going on. It's still the GPC and members make the platform, not the leader. Also, these candidates aren't as far apart as some suggest. Also also, I don't know about you but I care A LOT about HOW my party does politics, and none of the larger parties come close to the level of honesty, intellectual rigour or fair play that will get my vote (why doesn't anybody talk about this? I guess I'm a hopeless naif). Also also also, we ain't gonna win anything any time soon, so we can always go to the centre or make the great leap leftward with the next leader if we so desire with little lost.
I would not leave the party regardless of the leader. HOWEVER if it's not Lascaris, Haddad or Kuttner I will be incredibly concerned about the future of this party.
Neoliberalism is a cancer.
Reminder that [only 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions.](https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change) Environmentalism and capitalism are incompatible. You are lying to yourself otherwise. An establishment candidate will do nothing. The Overton window of Canadian politics needs to shift.
So if an “establishment” Green is made leader, where will you turn?
Where GPC policy is driven from the bottom up and not imposed from the top down, how will your withdrawal from party support/involvement help shift the Overton window?
My values simply do not align with centrism. I am not upholding centrist politics as a viable narrative, whereas it is already split between 4 parties in parliament. This is how the NDP went awry.
i mean, i agree the window needs to shift, but a centrist/right GPC will pry away the progressive conservative barnacles from the CPC's ship. If the Green messaging is to the right (fiscally, not culturally.) but their policies are to the left (aka The Reverse-Trudeau), i am pretty down for that.
If Andrew West or Annamie Paul win I don't see future electoral success for the party. Their foreign policy stances are akin to neoliberal ones, and at that point the GPC just becomes the Liberal party for me.
I would wait until there was another party or candidate that aligned with my views but I'm not going to donate for Paul or West to reinforce the status quo. At that point I might as well join the Liberals, they'll have more influence.
There you go throwing neoliberalism around again. Nobody running is a neoliberal.
You legitimately don't understand the definition and you've never once tried to explain it here. I've provided the definition in other threads. You just keep saying that's not it without providing any evidence. I think you don't know what it is. Regardless, hard to engage in discourse with you if you don't give me your position. I know what neoliberalism is, I've studied it in university. Annamie Pul and Andrew West believe in neoliberal solutions, in the in the context of the green party elections, they are the neoliberal candidates.
How about the Oxford Dictionary:
a modified form of liberalism tending to favor free-market capitalism.
"social and political issues surrounding neoliberalism"
Again, you are just making up a definition to slur candidates you don't like. They are not the Koch Brothers or spouting and Ayn Rand dogma. Please, very specifically, explain the neoliberal solutions that people are professing. Balancing a budget isn't neoliberal.
Balancing a budget no matter what is actually the number one example of neoliberalism.
If you're quoting the dictionary to understand economic theory, chances are you don't know much.
Can I recommend a book for you to read? Check out Philip Mirowski's Never let a serious crisis go to waste: how neoliberalism survived the economic crisis. This will give you a good understanding of the economic theory and the anti-political implications of neoliberalism.
> Balancing a budget no matter what is actually the number one example of neoliberalism.
So really, the only "neoliberal" is Andrew West, who probably won't win anyway.
Are any of the candidates saying to balance the budget "no matter what"? Nope. None of the candidates are neoliberalists.
I know what neoliberalism is and that it's horrible, and that's why people are throwing it around as a scare tactic here.
He wanted a definition. Oxford's is concise.
Guy thinks Centrism is neoliberalism. It's a slur perpetuated in Lascaris' platform.
Annamie Paul called capitalism the driver of climate change, but yeah, she's a neoliberal centrist shill, right?
Some people really fall for rhetoric.
Calling it names isn't enough.
If anyone, it would be Lascaris. Most of his policies aren't practical at all, he's condescending and incapable of compromise.
If we try to compromise on climate change, we die.
If we don't compromise, we don't get anything done. There aren't enough socialists in the country to elect Dimitri to be the Prime Minister of a Green Majority government. Therefore, we have to work with others. Dimitri is incapable of that because he's speaking a different language than the non-socialist majority of the country.
I’ve been a Green Party voter for 12 years but if either Haddad or Lascaris win I am out. That would be a move too far to the left and a signal
that this party no longer represents my priorities.
Yeah I am in the same boat. I just can’t support either of them. Everyone else has a chance to get my vote.
Great. See ya.
Well then you are uneducated to what neoliberalism is. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
The Liberals and NDP are neoliberals
All candidates are running on the same platform. I can see how people are confused what with the candidates visions and what not. The GPC is different from other political parties the members create the platform not the leader having a vision.
Merner and Murray topped my ballot because electability is important to me.
I've been reviewing the debates and those two, especially Murray, have really impressed me. Murray in particular because of his "been there, done thats." I trust him to know what works. I'm glad he's an option.
Ya Murray has won greater than 50% of the elections he has been in. His experience and high profile would definately do us some good.
His experience really sets him apart from almost every other candidate. A lot have great resumes, but only Murray is a career politician. I don't know if he's my first pick, but he's higher on my list than I thought he'd be at the beginning.
The two candidates that would deter me from supporting the GPC are Haddad and dimitri.
I'll happily support the GPC if Amite Kuttner, Andrew West, Glen Murray, David Merner, Annamie Paul, or Courtney Howard become leader.
Haddad and Dimitri are 2/3 of the people I voted for.
Which party do you recon you'll leave for if the human rights socialists win?
Why do you have to frame your question in a way that implies the other candidates aren't pro human rights?
Asking the important questions.
Well if we are talking the 2019 election I probably would vote Trudeau.
Maybe O'Toole will support LGBT and climate action enough for me to vote for him in the next election. Not like Trudeau can even meet Harper's targets.
At the end of the day probably which ever party puts forward the most moderate candidate.
You can't say that here! How dare you say such things! The locals will be up in arms!
Haddad will not likely win her own seat and will set the GPC back. Dimitri would do better if he stuck to basics and away from the Middle East politics (it's not like the GPC will be making policy on that in the next few years).
> Dimitri would do better if he stuck to basics and away from the Middle East politics (it's not like the GPC will be making policy on that in the next few years).
It's actually really annoying how focused Lascaris is on the Middle East. It's like he thinks it's still 2003.
You're a saint!
I’m okay with anyone except Haddad winning. But even if she were to win I’d have to see what she really does as leader because it can be different from campaigning, so I wouldn’t immediately nor support the greens
It is dreadfully awful that we can't communicate about this kind of stuff on this sub without toxic people down voting everything cause it gives them a little dose of serotonin.
You're the toxic one buddy. You've been jumping on comments with snide remarks all over the place trying to discourage the sharing of ideas. If anyone's made people defensive on this sub, it's you.
Isn't that what you're doing too? You jump on every thread against Lascaris like it's a personal attack.
Lies! SolarDesalination you are the one who perpetually spreads misinformation.
Glen Murray, David Merner, Annamie Pail & Andrew West for me, tho West wouldn’t make it to the end.
as an exclusive GPC/NDP voter, I don't care who the leader ends up being, but the platform they run on in the next election. plus my riding candidate's qualifications.
Hell I put West at 4th on my ballot because I see the strat in bleeding green voters from the LPC/CPC.
Unlikely. Tangible climate action is a top priority for me and the other parties tend to forget about it all too easily.
If Paul, Merner, or Howard wins, I'm enthusiastically contributing to the party.
If Kuttner, West, or Murray win, I'll wait and see how they position themselves as leader but will adopt a "let's participate in party politics and ensure they stick to social democratic principles" approach.
If Haddad or Lascaris wins...I'll let my 2019 three-year GPC membership expire and focus on provincial NB Green politics. Would be politically homeless for the first time federally.
The only reason the NB Greens are doing well is both because the NDP is virtually non-existent in NB and in that they serve the role of being the closest thing to an anti-establishment party and should unashamedly embrace it. On a federal level, it can't be tip-toed around. The party needs to move left.
I'm from a Green NB riding.
I'm from Memramcook-Tantramar/Beauséjour. The Greens have been so successful because they have 1) replaced the NDP as the social democratic option 2) they have taken votes from old Liberals, old Tories who are sick of how these traditional parties uphold the status quo in NB 3)They have mobilized people who have never voted before 4)They do politics differently.
The NB Greens have eaten the NDP's lunch when it comes to progressivism. Ideologically there's no real difference between the NB Greens and NB NDP; they only differ in that the NB Greens have greater electoral success. It's partly why former NDP members like myself have moved over to the Green party. Why stick with the irrelevant NB NDP when the NB Greens can give you the same social democratic values we're looking for and actually manage to get MLAs elected?
As for the federal party...Despite being a longtime NDP supporter, I had no choice but to vote Green in 2015 and 2019 because the Green platform was slightly at the left of the NDP (and the same thing provincially in 2014). I literally voted against my membership in order to support the most left-wing option out there. After that (and seeing how incompetent the NDP is under Singh, and how they have ignored NB) I realized that I was only remaining an NDP member out of attachment for the Tommy Douglas & Jack Layton legacies. I said, "fuck it" and switched over my membership to the Greens.
Even if the GPC stays as it was under May, it will still remain Canada's most left-wing party. As it is right now, the party is staunchly left-wing. Maybe it's not as left-wing as eco-socialists would like, but it is THE left-wing option in this country. And you shouldn't mistake an appetite for anti-establishment social democracy for an appetite for outright socialism. The latter remains very marginal in NB.
I am from that same riding, yes. And do not worry-- I am not mistaking the two. I personally do have a taste for socialism however, and have voted accordingly.
Your comment is eloquently put, and I do agree with the narrative, however I hold doubts over the Greens' status as the most "left-wing" on a larger scale. Undoubtedly they are in some geographic contexts throughout Canada (New Brunswick included), but in many others they remain what might be considered center to center-right economically. There's a reason while they're referred to as conservatives on bicycles. There primarily seems to (generally) be little weight given to labour and the labour vote-- though perhaps that is subject to change in the next election cycle or two. In social terms, yes, they are certainly more progressive, but that doesn't mean anything unless it is wholly intersectional.
The largest chunk of folks that would go Green as a second choice are Liberals when polled if that is any indicator.
>but in many others they remain what might be considered center to center-right economically. There's a reason while they're referred to as conservatives on bicycles.
The only place where that was the case was in BC. The BC Greens under Weaver were certainly not left-wing. But all other provincial Greens were more like the federal party. And with Furtseneau at the helm, the BC Greens will take a leftward shift for sure.
>There primarily seems to (generally) be little weight given to labour and the labour vote-- though perhaps that is subject to change in the next election cycle or two.
Well the GPC has called for the same labour measures as the NDP. Calling for a $15/h minimum wage for instance. It is true that unlike the NDP, they've not been known as the party of unions. But police wise I don't see any difference. Both want to further protect workers.
>In social terms, yes, they are certainly more progressive, but that doesn't mean anything unless it is wholly intersectional.
Not only socially. Economically too. Honestly as far as I can tell, the only differences between the GPC and NPD are that the Greens 1) don't whip votes, 2) adopt a typically more decentralized approach, 3) the raison d'être of the GPC is the environment (compared to the NDP and social democracy).
Other than that they're similar in practice. The GPC may have had its right-wing BC Greens and the NDP its pro-pipeline prairie counterparts. But leave that out and there would be no reason not to merge these parties into the "Green Democrats".
>The largest chunk of folks that would go Green as a second choice are Liberals when polled if that is any indicator.
Having been part of the base of both NDP and GPC parties, I find little difference. NB New Democrats are mostly social democratic. NB Greens are mostly social democratic. It is true that Greens attract single-issue environmentalist voters in their midst though.
Green Tories and Green Liberals have had to hold their noses on the economics for quite some time. Though many of them were convinced by the party emphasis on fiscal responsibility even though the platforms were going much further left than they were comfortable with. I think these wings of the base are why you're seeing the LPC as the second choice option. That and the weird Green vs NDP hate that's been popping up since the last election.
>Would be politically homeless for the first time federally.
Socialists: "First time?"
Haha ;) I guess if there's some people who can empathize with political orphans, it is socialists.
I'm politically super hard to please. But I try (for my own sanity) to give a chance to local candidates/leaders/parties who I feel can give me at minimum 70% of what I'm looking for.
Like I supported Layton and Mulcair even though their platforms were too centrist for my taste. Same with May. Because I had faith in their abilities to manage the country and thought that they would implement things like 15$/h & some social programs I was looking for if in power. And I thought that they could be pushed by the membership (I'm mostly thinking of Mulcair here) to go further left. Alas...
I think I've said this already, but I place a lot of emphasis on the leader and local candidates when assessing if I'll support the party. Even if there is someone who matches my ideals 100% (never has happened, probably never will), if I feel that they're not competent enough or lacking leadership skills, I won't support them. I'd rather support a competent person who shares fewer of my ideals than an incompetent one who matches me more.
Tl;dr--I'm a weird oddball who people have a hard time putting in one political box.
If Haddad or Lascaris become leader to me the GPC will be akin to NDP and I may as well vote NDP because they have better chance of winning. I will stick with the GPC with the other six candidates because they really stand out as potentials to defeat Trudeaus neoliberals.
I would like to support a green candidate but they are shadow figures of concept to me. I don't know their names, faces, or what they stand for, what their trying to accomplish or how their trying to do it.
I rarely get anything on reddit about their policies making front page, or about their candidates or message.
Until this moment I didn't even know there was a green party reddit page.
It's hard for Green politicians to get media exposure. If you're up for some reading, the bios for every candidate are up on the GPC site, and each candidate's site lays out their platform. Voting is still open for almost a week so you've got time to get to know their policies and vote, provided you became a party member (by donating $10 or more within the last year or $25 or more within the last 3 years).
I'm up for some light reading, do you have a link?
Here's a link to the various debates and interviews for each of the leadership candidates.
One of these people is going to win in the next week, so scroll down to the bottom of that page or click on their profiles to find out what they're all about. Enjoy your research.
If Annamie, Glen, Andrew, or Amita win I will support the GPC. If Merner, Lascaris, Haddad win I'm out. I love my guns and Trudeau taking my AR-15 or I am a criminal makes me sad. I joined the GP because Bruce Hyer my NDP MP was kicked from the NDP and joined the GPC cause he supported guns and was one of two GPC MPs. I want climate action and I need my guns but if the GPC elect the clowns I'm voting conservative because they are the only party rational about guns.
Annamie Paul or Andrew West for me.