Friday, April 13, 2007

Electoral Dealings for Make Benefit the Green and Liberal Parties

So, of course the big news roaming around the internets is the fact that the Green Party and the Liberal Party have entered into an agreement of sorts not to oppose the other party's leader in the next federal election.

My first reaction went something like this:

"The Conservatives govern like Liberals. The Liberals govern like, well, Liberals. The Greens are now endorsing the Liberals. Who do I vote for now?"

In addition, I remembered reading this comment last week by Green leader, Elizabeth May, on her blog:
4. That said, Peter has shown some really serious errors in judgment. He should not have broken his word to David Orchard (the pact that sealed his victory, going down in history as the last-ever leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada) and turning it over to Alliance and Stephen Harper. The Progressive Conservative Party was cannibalized by the Alliance Party. The loss of the adjective “progressive” was more than grammatical. The heart was torn out of Canadian politics. The loss of the traditional, principled Progressive Conservative counter-weight to the ethically flexible Liberals has cost this country dearly.

Emphasis mine.

Clearly she's targeting the Red Tory vote, who traditionally voted PC, but now feels uncomfortable marching over to the Liberal Party.

That's my demographic in a nutshell, so I was willing to give the Greens a shot.

Maybe I need more time to digest this a bit.

If the Green Party had said, instead, they were only going to target the ridings they had the best shot of winning - I would have swallowed it a little bit better, perhaps.

See, one of the things missed in the dual press releases is that, for some of us, the Liberal Party is still simply not a viable voting option, so I can't get all excited about "non-aggression pacts" between the leaders, or potentially between other candidates.

No comments: