The NDP Candidate in 2006 received 13,861 votes running against a Strong Conservative and a Solid Liberal Campaign.

Yet, in 2008, without having to face the Liberals, and Asking for the NDP to Support her, and receiving that support, as the NDP vote went down significantly, the very hyped up Elizabeth May came 1,000 votes SHORT of the NDP Candidate just 2 years prior.

Clearly in the name of Stopping Harper, or Ousting MacKay, people were mislead by the media hype to back May and she didn't come remotely close. The posters on Babble indicated from the start that it would be wrong to back May and they were right.

The Liberals won't be as stupid/naive not to field a Candidate in Central Nova next time, and if May couldn't get the job done under these gift like concessions from voters and leaders, she won't be able to do it in the future.

Even worse, Mays strategy allowed the CPC vote to increase in a time of declining voter turnout.

Don't get fooled again

MacKay just got a free ride courtesy of the Green Party strategy.

Brilliant... Good Job....

2006 NDP Candidate 13861 Against all parties
2008 GP LEADER 12,620 With Liberal Capitulation.

quote:

---

Originally posted by madmax:
I was just checking the previous results in Central Nova.

The NDP Candidate in 2006 received 13,861 votes running against a Strong Conservative and a Solid Liberal Campaign.

Yet, in 2008, without having to face the Liberals, and Asking for the NDP to Support her, and receiving that support, as the NDP vote went down significantly, the very hyped up Elizabeth May came 1,000 votes SHORT of the NDP Candidate just 2 years prior.

Clearly in the name of Stopping Harper, or Ousting MacKay, people were mislead by the media hype to back May and she didn't come remotely close. The posters on Babble indicated from the start that it would be wrong to back May and they were right.

The Liberals won't be as stupid/naive not to field a Candidate in Central Nova next time, and if May couldn't get the job done under these gift like concessions from voters and leaders, she won't be able to do it in the future.

Even worse, Mays strategy allowed the CPC vote to increase in a time of declining voter turnout.

Don't get fooled again

MacKay just got a free ride courtesy of the Green Party strategy.

Brilliant... Good Job....

2006 NDP Candidate 13861 Against all parties
2008 GP LEADER 12,620 With Liberal Capitulation.

Thanks for taking the NDP and Liberals down with you, Conservatives are celebrating....in Central Nova.

---

One could make a couple of assumptions here, although a better analysis would include an on-the-ground "little research project."
As a researcher this would be my "theory to practice" questions that I would want to disprove. Here goes:

Central Novian people most important voting intention was to ensure a "local candidate" won.
[LIST]Due to the hype of the campaign and glare of media and outsiders pushing local voters to vote EMay (who was a known outsider) woke up "the dead" so to speak. So those who did not normally vote, voted for the "local horse" most likely to beat EMay. Rather than Lorifice getting this local "normally don't vote disgruntled voter" it went to McKay. You could also say that this vote could have easy gone to Lorifice as this voter was non-partisan politically except for the local preference. These disgruntled voters received a sense (due to media glare) of their "vote making a difference", as May hyped "that this was a close race" between her and McKay. It was not.
[LIST]Local voters who normally vote progressive or NDP voters switched their alliance to "stop May" believing that (through media hype) it was a close race between the local candidate but front runner McKay and May. This voter also saw May as an outside interloper who would not represent them locally and that is what motivated them to switch their normal NDP alliance to keep McKay in. He would be considered the "lesser of" two evils.

Nor do I believe that Jack Layton or anyone went into the riding to aid Lorifice, but allowed May to lose on her own character and platform as leader of a "National Political Party" who performed in National Televised Debates.

No offence but

Elizabeth May is no......

Alexis MacDonald

People view MacDonald as a success

I don't believe one can view May in the same way considering the kid gloves, media hype, TV and that she spent ALOT of time in the riding prior and during the campaign.

Clearly MacDonald outperformed the Leader of the Green Party.

Lorifice was a victim of circumstance.

Little help from the NDP, and a media circus repeating every word of the GP Leader as Gospell.

Lorifice was not a weak Candidate. I would expect that should May run again in Central Nova and Lorifice run again.

quote:

---

Originally posted by West Coast Greeny:
No offense, but Louise Lorefice was no Alexis MacDonald. She wouldn't have won there either.

---

But it is clear,

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Hello sore losers! NDP gained seats because of favourable votes splits caused by the Green Party. Even a surface reading of the poll tallies shows that the NDP neither gained ground, nor lost it in terms of the popular vote, while the increase in the standing of the Greens came at the expense of the Liberals.

FPTP finally pays of the the NDP, but the whining will never end, apparently.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

FPTP finally pays of the the NDP, but the whining will never end, apparently.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Hello sore losers!

---

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Mojoroad1 ]

Bloc 50 seats 16.2% of seats 10.0% of vote
[should be 30.8 seats according to vote]

Conservative 143 46.4% of seats 37.6% of vote [should be 116(115.8) seats according to vote]

Green Party 0 seats 0.0% of seats 6.8% of vote
[should be 21 (20.9) seats according to vote]

Liberal 76 24.7% of seats 26.2 of vote
[should be 81 (80.60 seats according to vote]

NDP 37 12.0% of seats 18.2% of votes
[should be 56 seats according to vote]

So the Greens lost out on 21 seats, the NDP on 19 and the Libs on 5.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
[QB]As I said the whining never ends. Now blame FPTP, even though the vote splitting effect clearly gave the NDP more seats under the manifestly biased electoral system, than they normally would, if the Greens had not been sinking Liberal candidates.QB]

---

By the way, I reviewed the debate video recently, and it was May who said "reform the electoral system" in response to the question "what would the first thing you would do if elected PM?"

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Maybe. Have I ever said otherwise? But suggesting that vote splitting by the Greens damaged the NDP here is pushing it. I think rather the opposite.

By the way, I reviewed the debate video recently, and it was May who said the first thing she would do if elected PM would be to reform the electoral system.

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

---

So can you talk about anything without just lumping every poster into some sort of pool where you can attribute anything said by one [pick your party faithful]to all supporters of that party.

You responded: "If we had PR maybe people would vote for the party they actually want to represent them not the lesser of two evils."

I said: "Maybe." And then reiterated my original point.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
I am not sure what your problem is, because I never said you said anything about "vote splitting hurting the NDP." I am responding to the particular theme of this thread, which is "Green Ship sinks, takes NDP with it."

You responded: "If we had PR maybe people would vote for the party they actually want to represent them not the lesser of two evils."

I said: "Maybe." And then reiterated my original point.

Where is the dispute?

---

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

I can really see many people thinking both that they would like to vote strategically against the conservatives, and vote for a strong environmental program,. Had the Greens not been around, I think that decision would have been a lot easier for people to make.

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Maybe. Have I ever said otherwise? But suggesting that vote splitting by the Greens damaged the NDP here is pushing it. I think rather the opposite.

By the way, I reviewed the debate video recently, and it was May who said "reform the electoral system" in response to the question "what would the first thing you would do if elected PM?"

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

---

People who vote Liberal seem quite happy to vote Green when given no Liberal candidate. This indicates that when they are offered the choice, the vote will be more likely to split, unfavourably for both.

Overall NDP vote did not change substantially, here from election to election... am I right?

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

You are wrong.

The NDP Candidate challenged Peter MacKay without a handout from the Liberals as May had and still ended up with more votes then May Received.

This election all the stars were aligned and she was a major disappointment.

Only on Babble did I read comments and posts that May was not the strong suit that everyone was playing her up to be.

Beyond the rabid partisan Greens who obviously know they are looking at a major failure from their leader in terms of Seat choice (Central Nova) and strategy (Strategic Voting)...

I told you strategic Voting Doesn't work and Central Nova proves it.

May had strategic Voting and she ended up with less then the NDP Candidate who took on all comers in 2006.

Elizabeth is no Alexis.

2006 Election result
DISTRICT: Central Nova
Candidate Party Vote Count Vote Share Elected
Peter G. MacKay CON 17134 40.66% X
Alexis MacDonald NDP 13861 32.89%
Dan Walsh LIB 10349 24.56%
David Orton GRN 671 1.59%
Allan H. Bezanson ML 124 0.29%

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
And, if anything, what happened in Central Nova back my view up, because the Liberal vote converted to Green votes. There is no reason to think that the reverse would not also be true. They did not convert NDP.

People who vote Liberal seem quite happy to vote Green when given no Liberal candidate. This indicates that when they are offered the choice, the vote will be more likely to split, unfavourably for both.

Overall NDP vote did not change substantially, here from election to election... am I right?

[ 16 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

---

Wrong, and others have shown why. And I think that even NDP folks voted McKay to keep the carpetbagger out and her media circus.

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: janfromthebruce ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by janfromthebruce:

Wrong, and others have shown why. And I think that even NDP folks voted McKay to keep the carpetbagger out and her media circus.

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: janfromthebruce ]

---

Yeah, I noticed that. Somehow 5000 votes abandoned the NDP and went to Elizabeth May. What can I say? Sorry, in this riding the NDP were unable to hold onto their vote, against the national trend.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

Yeah, I noticed that. Somehow 5000 votes abandoned the NDP and went to Elizabeth May. What can I say? Sorry, in this riding the NDP were unable to hold onto their vote, against the national trend.

By the way, 7000 votes would have lost in the last election too.

---

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Taks for example, Left Jab's lecture about the duty of party leaders to resign, if they don't win their own seat. Well, that may very well be the case for a major national party with decades, if not a century of history behind it, but for a small party essentially running its first full slate of candidates in a national election, the Greens did pretty well, and increased their vote. Not only that their leader came pretty close to winning her seat, and she proved popular with media.

Dumping May at this point in time might very well be something that the Greens would consider, but this campaign has hardly proved to be a complete bust for them, and in fact if any party did well here in terms of its objectives, the Greens are it. Increasing the national vote share, appearing as an equal contender in the media, and otherwise establishing itself as a true national force.

quote:

---

When the CCF allied with the Canadian Labour Congress to form the New Democratic Party (NDP) in 1961, Douglas defeated Hazen Argue at the first NDP leadership convention and became the new party's first leader. Douglas resigned from provincial politics and sought election to the House of Commons in the riding of Regina City in 1962, but was defeated. He was later elected in a by-election in the riding of Burnaby—Coquitlam, British Columbia.

---

Tommy Douglas

Guess Tommy should have resigned from the leadership of the NDP eh, Remind?

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

Tommy Douglas

Guess Tommy should have resigned from the leadership of the CCF eh, Remind?

---

""Bloc 50 seats 16.2% of seats 10.0% of vote
[should be 30.8 seats according to vote]

Conservative 143 46.4% of seats 37.6% of vote [should be 116(115.8) seats according to vote]

Green Party 0 seats 0.0% of seats 6.8% of vote
[should be 21 (20.9) seats according to vote]

Liberal 76 24.7% of seats 26.2 of vote
[should be 81 (80.60 seats according to vote]

NDP 37 12.0% of seats 18.2% of votes
[should be 56 seats according to vote]

So the Greens lost out on 21 seats, the NDP on 19 and the Libs on 5. ""(thanks kropotkin)

Is the real problem.

If we can not have even talk of proportional representation even from the party who owned it maybe we should start with just proportional and at the very least fair vote to seat ratios.
It obviously will be more difficult without a real media or even journalistic integrity most times now in Canada.
But the real problem in all of it sadly is just the basic greed and ignorance of the human animal ....period.
Must be.

Watching Richmond BC Chinese canadians cheer-lead and yelp with sadistic glee as harper explained and talked about jailing 14 year old .....er by the way ...Canadian kids.

We live in a time of wide spread cloned ignorance .......complete growth based ignorance ....instant gratification ignorance ...isolation from reality ignorance and we are using the very best weakness in all humans to perpetrate it.
Greed.

Oh how I wish to live to see the lights really go out as I know over half will be lost before the freezer defrosts.
It all just becomes a Blindenburg group ? ...911...haliburton...florida vote count ...type conspiracy until when one stops steps back and really analyzes all the basic sheeple stupidity nicely laid out.
After blatant and open mean spirited character type attacks on dion himself (like chretien's lip problems) are ignored as media just spoon feeds the Masses that he is just an inspector clue-so(bumbling)type and anything else they are to think for the next day and a half instead of real things like the broken election promise wasting 300 million ....the little problem of coastal cities being new submarine tourist parks .....yes just all in the guise of forwarding their original choice and plant here.... mr usa ....iggy..yes back to running their other horse in the plan or party ...point being ?
remove all interference from what was canada as they get on with their original plan and extract all our oil and of course the real prise ..our water.

Until guys like I read here can say they know those others above are really their only hope at all and really just their quirky left leaning brothers ...all the brave party hack talk here will not remove the pain the real man in the real street will now feel moving forward ....yes as the dog eat dog is back in town
and here we still can not even grow a thread on how to grow and reunite the left.

I wrote all the senior liberals I could find, Jack Layton and Liz.........No one responded.

Seems the games the quest and the country ....the world ...the people ....secondary.

I would like to start talking about how we can unite the left so that 36 % can not continue to bully us 64 % just because our own stupidity shows up in our self perpetuating political stupidity against each other.

For heavens sake if harper can reunite racists bible thumpers and gun totting bullies into one force we surely can get the likes of some of you all into the same force?

How about we start with all of you who think the greens and their members should all just be executed please just pipe up here and all of you rest then now realize you are on that at least on the same team?

Just so sad for all of Canada really.

I miss ignorance as it is or must have been bliss.

The goal posts were eased for the Green Leader. And she still lost. As well as the easy by- election. Those were two very easy seats to grab for a party with no "baggage" or history because they have had the fortune (Mis) to have never ever elected anyone ever.

Bottom Line is the Gps start whining about proportional rep, and have yet to thank the Liberals for gifting them a riding without contention. Unfortuneately, they didn't succeed.

The NDP supports proportional rep. They also are able to win seats, much as the CCF did before them.

The GPs appear to be more like the Natural Law Party and the National Party of the 90s. No critical mass, and no mass appeal.

quote:

---

Thirteen other candidates exceeded 4%, and another 18 exceeded 3%. Even the lowest-placing candidate, with 2.89%, received a higher percentage than the national share of the Green Party of Canada.

During the election, the party sued the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation to try to force it to allow Hurtig to participate in the leaders' debates, but was not successful.

---

Sound Familiar

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: madmax ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Guess Tommy should have resigned from the leadership of the NDP eh, Remind?

---

Usually you are not so sloppy in your rational process, cue.

First, I never said EMay should not run again, that was you changing the parameters and moving them off of your own invectives, while hassling others about theirs and stretching facts more than a bit.

Secondly, Tommy had already been Premier of Sask, for 5 straight terms, before the alliance and the creation of the NDP. He was a tested politician that had proven he could win over and over again. He sought the by-election run, later that same year, and won. The CCF/NDP already had been able to acheive governance of a province. Something the GP has never been able to do in the 20+ years they have been around in Canada. Yes over 20 years now cue, it is not like they are some new kid on the block..

Let members not leaders decide.

Still keep different wings or parties EDA's if need be but have a final one winner local election of their own candidates to then go on to the federal ballot.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Not only that their leader came pretty close to winning her seat, and she proved popular with media.

---

May did not come close to winning her seat. What did happen is that McKay increased his vote total from 2006.

Let's have fun with math and compare:
2008
McKay - 18,239 45.60%
May - 12,620 32.24
total - 5,610 13.36% in difference

2006
McKay - 17,134 40.66
Alexa - 13,861 32.89
total - 3,273 7.77 in difference

NDP Alexa M. received 2,377 or 5.59% more votes against McKay in a field of 5 candidates than May did in a field of 4 candidates. Furthermore, Alexa did that without 2nd party support, without free advertising by Aveez, without votefortheenvironment strategic voting help, without media fawning.

Let me be blunt, losing by over 5000 votes "is not close". In other races, it would be considered a "landslide" of defeat of the 2nd placed candidate, which it was.

Only a koolade drinking Green could actually say that "May" came close.

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: janfromthebruce ]

quote:

---

"I am not in any way attracted to any other party," she said, suggesting perhaps the Green party’s role in the Canadian system is to act as a social conscience.

"I’ve been offered to run for other parties and I’m not interested," she said.

"We may fulfill a role such as Tommy Douglas when the CCF was young and fresh," she said.

"I don’t know that our ultimate quest is for me to become prime minister."

If good, Green party ideas are adopted by other parties, she says that’s fine with her.

---

You would never know that this is going on....

quote:

---

Somehow 5000 votes abandoned the NDP and went to Elizabeth May.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by madmax:
Elizabeth May Thinks She is Tommy Douglas

You would never know that this is going on....

May Fends off Calls for resignation

---

Seems they are broke and broken and just don't feel as enthusiastic as you Cueball.

They also don't seem to have that Tommy Douglas feel about them, because they are not New Democrats.

It isn't pleasant those results nor their effect on the election or to the LPC.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

What is going on? Some disgruntled riding president starts a web-site, then appologizes and takes it down a day later after a phone with Elizabeth May? Some movement for leadership change.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by madmax:
Actually Greens I am online with are wondering if they should even have a party or riding association anymore.

Seems they are broke and broken and just don't feel as enthusiastic as you Cueball.

---

Ahh today I am to be labelled a Green Party supporter. Had to happen sometime, I suppose.

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Are all NDP'rs connected telepathically like the Borg

---

quote:

---

OTTAWA — The website emaygoway.ca lasted just a few hours before Green Leader Elizabeth May persuaded the disgruntled Green to take it down.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by It's Me D:

Well they do seem to love Sweden... Borg is Swedish right

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Max's rebuttal amounted to hearsay about some people he was talking to online, the protestation of her one-time rival, and a riding president who later appologized.

---

I believe his personal observations are equal to yours that you feel should stand alone, and they also stand upon what was expressed here by John Ogivlie, Daniel Grice, and mimeguy along with the comments by GP members that were cited in the G&M. Moreover, the very abscence of many GP members here also give testimony to where they are at in respect to how this election played out for them.

They have some serious thinking to do, after all they are a party that is nearly 30 years old and they yet to have a break through of any type, at any level of government. Their dew has worn off, long ago, no matter how hard EMay trys to spin it that they are a "new" party, they aren't.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trevormkidd:
At a time when every major party (and most of the fringe parties too) lost votes, the Green Party increased their vote count by 42%. That doesn't guarentee May's position as leader of the GPC - afterall Harris increased the Green vote from 0.8% to 4.3% in '04 and many members still wanted him dumped (he only received 56% support to stay on in a leadership race in 2004).

Despite our differences, and despite disagreeing with Green policy on several issues, when a leadership review comes May can expect my vote.

The hate that NDP supporters on babble have for May doesn't worry me. If they started to like her then I would be worried.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by West Coast Greeny:
I don't think may should be forced out. She's still the best person for the job. But there are going to be alot of people within the party who won't be so generous, who do see the NDP as the same as the Liberals as the same as the Conservatives, and who will try to force May out. The problem is that her leadership alone almost carried the party through this election. It lived and died on it. If she's not at the helm of the party next election, I see the party having a hard time surviving.

---

So far there is no great groundswell of movement to remove Elizabeth May from the leadership of her party. There is some chatter on the internet, encouraged largely by NDP partisans, and a few other isolated voices, and a G&M writer looking for a story.

Even here Greens are weighing the elecion in the balance, and despite some misteps, seem to be comfortable with Elizabeth May continuing. I guess at least until some plausible alternative presents itself.

Time will tell.

[ 17 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

They tried to play the naive childhood innocence card for as long as they could, while being almost 30 years old. The merry bunch of amatuers disguise grew stale and they had to make a move, somehow, to gain relevance. They either had to create an actual party from their movement, or admit their irrelevancy, mistakes in choices and get poltically involved elsewhere.

They made the mistake of thinking they could do both, while shafting the NDP. It was going to be a win win win for them. Now they are left holding a severely damaged house, which is filled with severely damaged goods. That their leader was using them, for a different game entirely did not matter as they felt they had to do something, and believed it was now or never. They were also wrong on those accounts.

1. The most obvious point is that May lost to Mackay by 14.2 %. Alexis MacDonald only lost by about half that margin, or 7.9% in 2006. Here are the 2006 and 2008 numbers

Con 40.7 46.6
NDP 32.8 19.6
Lib 24.6 0.0
Green 1.6 32.4
Others 0.3

Although their percentages were similar, MacDonald polled more raw votes than May: 13,836 to 12,620.

2. Central Nova was obviously a potential NDP target based not just on the 2006 results but on a growing trend, both federal and provincial, towards the NDP in the riding. As I argued in a post before the election:

posted 14 September 2008 03:42 PM
________________________________________
I've read a couple times that the good NDP result in Central Nova in 2006 was attributed to Alexis MacDonald more than the party. Therefore these votes stand to be poached by Elizabeth May.
I therefore looked at the vote for the provincial NDP in the last election, June 2006. I've added the votes in the three Pictou seats, Antigonish and the 3 polls in Eastern Shore and the 20 polls in Guysborough Sheet Harbour that are in Central Nova
Federal
Con 17,134 40.7%
NDP 13,861 32.9
Lib 10,349 24.6
Green 671 1.7
Provincial
Con 15,539 43.3%
NDP 12,599 35.0
Lib 7,232 20.1
Green 626 1.7

These figures suggest a solid and rising party vote for the NDP in Central Nova. MacDonald may have been an estimable candidate but her absence from the ballot may not result in a melting away of the NDP vote to May.

3. Outside of Central Nova the NDP did relatively well. The overall results for 2006 and 2008, including Central Nova were

Lib. 37.2 29.8 -7.4
NDP 29.8 28.9 -0.9
Con 29.7 26.1 -3.6
Green 2.7 8.0 +5.3
Ind 0.7 6.6 +5.9

If we apply these same swings to the 2006 Central Nova results we get:

Con 37.1
NDP 31.9
Lib 17.2
Green 6.9

4. Now, let’s eliminate the Central Nova results which were obviously atypical of the overall Nova Scotia results owing to May’s candidacy and the lack of a Liberal. For the 10 remaining ridings the percentages are: [2006 and 2008]

Lib 38.4 32.9 -5.5
NDP 29.5 30.0 +0.5
Con 28.6 24.1 -4.5
Green 2.7 5.7 +3.0
Ind 0.7 7.4 +6.7

Replicating these swings produces this notional result in Central Nova:

Con 36.2
NDP 33.3
Lib 19.1
Green 4.6

5. Colchester Cumberland M. Valley was of course another atypical riding owing to Bill Casey’s successful run as an independent. There was also no Green candidate. To get a truer picture of the overall Nova Scotia swings we should eliminate it as well. Without it and Central Nova the cumulative results in the other nine Nova Scotia ridings were for 2006 and 2208:

Lib. 39.9 35.5 -4.4
NDP 30.5 31.8 +1.3
Con 26.0 25.8 -0.2
Green 2.8 6.3 +3.5
Ind 0.6 0.7 +0.1

These swings would produce this result in Central Nova:

Con 40.5
NDP 34.1
Lib 20.2
Green 5.1

With some further strategic voting by Liberal and Green supporters it might have been much closer.

6. Perhaps the most comparable riding to central Nova was South Shore St Margaret’s. It has a similar mix of small town and rural electors with an incumbent Conservative MP. Here are the results from 2006 and 2008:

Con: 36.8 36.1 -0.7
NDP 28.5 33.7 +4.8
Lib 28.4 23.7 -4.7
Green 2.9 5.2 +2.0
Other 3.4 1.3 -1.9

If we apply these swings to Central Nova we get:

Con 40.0
NDP 37.6
Lib 19.9
Green 3.6

These figures would have brought Mackay within 2.4% of defeat.

But there is another factor to consider. In South Shore the NDP was only ahead of the Liberals by a whisker in 2006. An effective tie for second place is not conducive of strategic voting. It is noteworthy that voteforenvironment.ca did not even make a recommendation to vote NDP instead of Liberal. In Central Nova the NDP was clearly the alternative on the 2006 figures. It is reasonable to assume that there would have been greater strategic shift there from the Liberals to the NDP in order to defeat Mackay. It may well have been greater than 2.4%.

Conclusion:

I wouldn't doubt that the GP leader has setback any opportunity of taking out MacKay by the NDP.

I don't believe May will run in Central Nova again. I don't believe she wants to continue to watch parliment from the gallery.

Expect her double talk, right out of the riding.

quote:

---

Originally posted by madmax:
That is some compelling data.

I wouldn't doubt that the GP leader has setback any opportunity of taking out MacKay by the NDP.

I don't believe May will run in Central Nova again. I don't believe she wants to continue to watch parliment from the gallery.

Expect her double talk, right out of the riding.

But even so, I believe the damage has been done to the NDP in the riding, and worse for the Liberals, but that isn't Mays fault. That's Dions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by KenS:
I doubt there was any of that at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by nicky:

If May had not run in central Nova, it is impossible to say whether Mackay would have been defeated. It does seem likely, however, that the NDP would have been within range of knocking him off and at least would have come much closer to doing so than May actually did.

---

The Vote of GP Leader has been established. It is less then that of previous NDP candidate Alexis Macdonald.

If you are suggesting that the NDP had a strategy to make the LPC candidate stand down, they did not. If you are suggesting that had an LPC candidate stood down for an NDP candidate, one thing is abundently clear. The NDP would have received more votes, as would have MacKay, and just as many Liberals would have stayed home.

The skewing of the results is the tragic decision of Dion and May. It resulted in capitulation for the LPC in Central Nova. A stronger result for MacKay. A weakening of the NDP and a failure of the Leader of the GP to simply exceed the NDP challenge to Mackay of only 2 years ago.

All Sizzle no Steak
All Hat no Horse
Got an East Coast phrase anyone....

[ 19 October 2008: Message edited by: madmax ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by madmax:
The only thing that is apparently clear, is that with no Liberal Candidate, Elizabeth May Received Less votes then the Previous NDP Candidate. That is a fact. Therefore the GP Leader received less Centre, Centre Right, Left and Right voters then did the Previous NDP Candidate who was more successful in the riding.

The Vote of GP Leader has been established. It is less then that of previous NDP candidate Alexis Macdonald.

If you are suggesting that the NDP had a strategy to make the LPC candidate stand down, they did not. If you are suggesting that had an LPC candidate stood down for an NDP candidate, one thing is abundently clear. The NDP would have received more votes, as would have MacKay, and just as many Liberals would have stayed home.

The skewing of the results is the tragic decision of Dion and May. It resulted in capitulation for the LPC in Central Nova. A stronger result for MacKay. A weakening of the NDP and a failure of the Leader of the GP to simply exceed the NDP challenge to Mackay of only 2 years ago.

All Sizzle no Steak
All Hat no Horse
Got an East Coast phrase anyone....

[ 19 October 2008: Message edited by: madmax ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ForestGreen:
Basically Elizabeth May was a less established candidate in a less established party.

---

Apparently being the leader of a party has a draw all of its own, as we can see by the votes in LNC, in the by-election and EMay's results there, and what they were in the subsequent general election for a normal GP candidate. And we can see that in effect in CN, so she has no barrier as a less established candidate. And she had perfect conditions. Somethings that I underestimanted hugely.

Moreover stop with the nonsense about a less established party. Just how long does it take to get established anyway? As the GP is 25 years old in Canada, and this is its 7th election cycle, if it was going to become anything at all, it would have done so by now. This lack of established rhetoric s severely lacking credibility. It is as empty as the "we're a merry bunch of amatuers trope.

quote:

---

You can say what you will about that, but I don't buy the argument that she prevented a possible win here by the NDP candidate.

---

First the NDP seems to have a solid base in CN, judging by the provincial election results which were actually better than Alexis MacDonald's.

Second, if the trends through the rest of Nova Scotia were reflected in CN, the NDP, if May had not run, would have given Mackay a run for his money and cetainly have come closer than May did.

quote:

---

No - I am taking issue to the argument that preceded my post. Why are you suddenly shifting the topic here? Stop trying to put words in my mouth. I meant exactly what I meant to say. Nothing more.

---

Mr Forest Green the topic is, "Green Ship sinks, takes NDP with it." Which is exactly what happened. I have put no words in your mouth.

You wish to speculate on many points and ignore the valid points regarding the NDP trends put forth by Nicky, and the serious challenge that NDP candidates have garnered against the CPC incumbent.

The harsh reality is that the May Deal, and the Green Party choosing to target a riding where the NDP put forth the biggest challenge to Mackay, has succeeded in weakening 2 parties, the Liberals and the NDP in the riding. The reality is that the Green Party Leader has lost all credibility in Central Nova as "the one" who could defeat the Conservatives and Peter MacKay.

This is a terrible result for the Leader of a party that wants National Recognition and wants to be treated equally.

Elizabeth Mays own words from April 6th 2007

quote:

---

Why Central Nova?
Submitted by Elizabeth May on 6 April 2007 - 6:39pm.
It is the question of the moment. Everywhere I go, on web sites and blogs, I stand accused of doing something: (pick one)

1)stupid
2)egomaniacal
3)deluded
4)courageous, but still stupid, or
5)selfish.

This is all because I decided to run in Central Nova. True, this criticism is most severe the farther one is from Nova Scotia and the least aware one is of life in Central Nova.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by madmax:
Forest Green said

Apparently the blogs were correct on accounts 1 through 5.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by nicky:
Forrest Green : I think my assumptions are modest ones.

First the NDP seems to have a solid base in CN, judging by the provincial election results which were actually better than Alexis MacDonald's.

---

quote:

---

Moreover stop with the nonsense about a less established party. Just how long does it take to get established anyway? As the GP is 25 years old in Canada, and this is its 7th election cycle, if it was going to become anything at all, it would have done so by now. This lack of established rhetoric s severely lacking credibility. It is as empty as the "we're a merry bunch of amatuers trope.

---

From nicky:

quote:

---

Second, if the trends through the rest of Nova Scotia were reflected in CN, the NDP, if May had not run, would have given Mackay a run for his money and cetainly have come closer than May did.

---

quote:

---

Your suggestion that the NDP would have to take 90% of the Green vote is misplaced. It assumes there would be no Liberal as there obviously would have been in May's absence. Mackay obviously was the second choice of many Liberal voters. I suspect that the NDP would have held its 2006 vote and attracted some extra support just like it did in most ridings in Nova Scotia, particularly those in which it was competitive.The Conservative vote was flat in Nova Sclotia so it is likely that the NDP would have reduced if not eliminated Mackay's 8% margin.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ForestGreen:

I was working with the hypothesis of there being no Liberal for two reasons:
1) Many people thought Elizabeth May should withdraw because she was splitting the vote, and couldn't win.
2) According to the much cited poll on CTV, the NDP was shown to be picking up more vote than either the Greens or the Conservatives, so they didn't seem to be at a disadvantage here.

If you tried to factor the Liberals back in, would it help the NDP vs. the Conservatives? Hard to say, but I would think that more Liberals would have gone to the NDP or Greens rather than the Conservatives in the end. Or at least, it would be pretty well split.
Why do you say 'MacKay was obviously the second choice' of many Liberal voters. What do you base that on? If it is on the fact that the NDP vote was lower than predicted, and the Conservative vote was higher, then it is a circular argument.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
NDP gained seats because of favourable votes splits caused by the Green Party. ...

---

Where are the seats picked up by the NDP as a result of the increase in Green vote in the riding? The seats gained were St. John's East, Welland, five seats in northern Ontario, Churchill, Edmonton-Strathcona, and Vancouver-Kingsway. Which of these was an NDP victory caused by an increase in the Green vote in that riding?

Let's use Welland as one example. If you compare the share of votes cast between the 2006 and 2008 elections:
NDP went up 2.3%
Con went up 3.1%
Grn went up 2.1%
Liberal went down 7.6%
The shrinking of the Liberal vote caused the NDP victory in Welland -- a pattern I broadly see repeated in the ridings picked up by the NDP.

I'd be interested in which ridings would even your "surface reading of the poll tallies" suggest that the "NDP gained seats because of favourable votes splits caused by the Green Party". Maybe you'll suggest that the strength of the Green vote in St. John's East led to Jack Harris' victory there!

[ 20 October 2008: Message edited by: Robo ]

Somebody else gets it

quote:

---

ELIZABETH MAY! WE HAVE A RIDING FOR YOU!
Elizabeth May is making her concession speech. I really think she should run in Edmonton East in 18 months or so, when we have another federal election, against this man:

---

The comments flesh it out.

quote:

---

Adam Snider said:
I'm no fan of Peter Goldring, but I'm afraid I'm missing the joke.

October 15, 2008 2:50 PM
Joe said:
Well that would fit her pattern of choosing seats, there are many similarities between Central Nova and Edmonton East:

1) In both ridings, the NDP came second in the last election, with the Liberal support fading

2) In both cases, the NDP have some support in the area provincially, and the local NDPers have done the heavy lifting involved in softening up a Tory incumbant

3) Neither riding has the slightest history of any signifigant Green support or organization

In other words, running in either seat allows May a platform to sideline the NDP, re-elect a Tory, and not bother the Liberals in an area they want to target.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by madmax:
A PLAN

Somebody else gets it

---

You cut off the last bit the commenter made in reference to May:

quote:

---

Elizabeth May is a flake, and the sooner the Green Party is through with her, the better off Canada will be.

---

I found a blog posting of yours from over a year ago, that lays out the same reasons as why Central Nova was choosen. It is almost the same point by point reasoning, and you concluded what would happen in the riding of Central Nova in April 2007. Infact, you were 100% correct. I should dig that up. (I discovered you blog alot

Obviously with the hindsight of Central Nova, these bloggers logically applied the GP strategy/logic to another similar riding.

The people of Central Nova gave May a humilating defeat that was seen nationally across Canada.

The losers in this were not just May but the NDP and all the people who put years of hardwork into the riding.

quote:

---

Originally posted by madmax:
The losers in this were not just May but the NDP and all the people who put years of hard work into the riding.

May is what she is.

---

Personally, I still believe people are over looking just what exactly May is. The blogger points you put forth say this at the end:

quote:

---

In other words, running in either seat allows May a platform to sideline the NDP, re-elect a Tory, and not bother the Liberals in an area they want to target.

---

I do not believe it is about not bothering the Liberals at all, and see that the most important point is the first part in bold.

There is a long end game being played here, and it is not with the Liberals, they were just a convenient tool to be used.

Moreover, with Prentice now environment minister (think old PC member), and Obama in office, and the Fraser Institute and Harper making noises about an environmental plan with the new US Democratic administration, there is more coming down the pipes.

In fact, May just released a press point about Harper's new plans today, interesting that she knew what was up, me thinks, enough to write about it already. And IMV, she is suggesting that the CPC need help to meet Obama's environmental plan. As she appears to be all of sudden all on board for cap and trade, but yet we heard nothing good about the very same plan that the NDP has, coming from her, and the GP during the election.

quote:

---

Canada must have a real climate change plan to interest U.S. President-elect Barack Obama in negotiating a climate change agreement between Canada and the United States, say the Greens. Canada will also have to provide some assurance it won’t turn its back on the deal a few years down the road, the way the Harper government abandoned the Kyoto Protocol.

“Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon can’t truly believe there are any similarities between the Harper government’s approach and Mr. Obama’s plan,” said Green Party leader Elizabeth May.

The Obama plans include mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050 using a market-based cap and trade system.

“Mr. Obama has a real climate change plan with caps of industrial greenhouse gas emissions. Mr. Harper has no caps and encourages industry to increase emissions by relying on intensity targets. This means a fundamental change in Canadian policy is needed to make a deal with an Obama administration,” said Ms. May.

The Green Party of Canada supports the former Environment Commissioner’s call for a mobilization of the federal government to meet the climate crisis.

---

http://www.greenparty.ca/en/releases/06.11.2008c

quote:

---

Originally posted by madmax:
Elizabeth May is frequently called a flake. I didn't choose to include it, because I was more interested in the logic behind the choice of the Edmonton Riding.

I found a blog posting of yours from over a year ago, that lays out the same reasons as why Central Nova was choosen. It is almost the same point by point reasoning, and you concluded what would happen in the riding of Central Nova in April 2007. Infact, you were 100% correct. I should dig that up. (I discovered you blog alot

Obviously with the hindsight of Central Nova, these bloggers logically applied the GP strategy/logic to another similar riding.

The people of Central Nova gave May a humilating defeat that was seen nationally across Canada.

The losers in this were not just May but the NDP and all the people who put years of hardwork into the riding.

May is what she is.

---