The NDP's strategic voting conundrum in the next election

[frandroid]

Dilemna for the NDP in the next election:
On one hand, asking Canadians on the left not to vote strategically for the Liberals
On the other hand, asking environmentally conscious Canadians to vote strategically for the NDP rather than for the Greens. mrputter even caught me thinking that way recently.

It's quite clear that the Greens will have a strong chance of picking up more votes in the next election. culpster was surprised recently that the NDP hadn't jumped on Elizabeth May regarding her ambiguous comments on abortion, and I theorized that the NDP right now has decided not to pick any fights with the Greens, lest the Greens get more media attention. I'm sure the corporate media out there would feast on and feed a Green/NDP feud. Avoidance is a safe strategy for now, since Layton doesn't want to commit to an environmental vision anyway and would rather play the tactician instead. But I think the NDP will have to bring out the artillery and figure out how they will deal with the Greens in the next election, or else the Greens might tip some NDP seats in BC to the Conservatives and the Liberals, and maybe reinforce some Liberal seats in Toronto at the expense of the NDP. May could even win a riding.

Layton's lack of clear demands on the environment (other than "Kyoto", which doesn't particularly distinguish the NDP from the pack) will more and more drive the NDP to ask potential Green voters to vote strategically, which will lead the NDP nowhere, except in ridings where the NDP is the incumbent, maybe.

Comments

[sabotabby]

I know I've been nominating a lot of people to be first up against the wall come the revolution lately, but can I change my vote to "progressives" who vote Green? Elizabeth May was an advisor to Mulroney, and I heard that the Green Party is full of ex-Tories.

[frandroid.livejournal.com]

And Mulroney got us on track for Kyoto at the Rio conference. Your point? ;]

Yeah, the Greens are full of ex-Tories partly due to Jim Harris. I wouldn't be surprised that May is also somewhat on the right. But the point is that some people think that there's no point fighting the class war if we're left with a desertified Gaia.

So anyway, don't forget to compost the bodies.

[theoria.livejournal.com]

Why is there a "vote split" - the NDP, you say above, has no environmental policy to speak about and the GP isn't a center-left party. Their constituencies are quite different.

[frandroid.livejournal.com]

I ran for the NDP in 2004 and they had a decent Env. policy that year, even beating out the Greens' own according to Greenpeace and Sierra Club. In 2006 it was a bit more equal but the NDP was also ranked up there. In 2004 I met a Green candidate who had committed before the programme came out who was quite dejected, and wished he had run for the NDP instead.

Also, May may try to bring the party to the left of where it was in the last two elections? Pure conjecture, but it wouldn't hurt. I mean the Greens' best hope really is BC. The scene there is really polarized, so sitting in the centre is not really useful, so who knows what she'll do.

Anyway, to answer your question more explicitly, I know people in Vancouver whose vote decision is between Green and NDP. Not necessarily because the parties overlap, but because they perceive each party to be the best party to address some of the issues they are concerned with, although not the same issues for each party.

[theoria.livejournal.com]

Given Harper's announcements the past few weeks, disgruntled Tories concerned about winter not arriving until mid-January may come back to the party leaving the GP with what is a generally socially and fiscally conservative (i.e., right of center) set of non-environmental policies. There is a general view - albeit incorrect - that the GP and the NDP are essentially the same: i.e., left of center parties. The NDP certainly is, but, as things stand now and as they have stood in the past, this is a serious mis-apprehension of the GP. Mind you, the GP hasn't gone out of its way to correct this mis-apprehension, in part for the reasons you mention above. It'd be the NDP's benefit to make this difference clear.

[frandroid.livejournal.com]

So you may wonder what I'm talking about in terms of environmental policy... The NDP can talk green in its electoral programme (which no one but wonks read) and does it very well, but it has few "special ideas" of its own, nor is trying to market anything right now. Its special ideas are currently being co-opted by Harper for non-Kyoto initiatives, but since Layton didn't market them first, he can't claim any moral victory.

Mostly related...

[zenko.livejournal.com]

I am beginning to be concerned with the Conservative government actually showing the ability to.... well, govern. Even though it may be a cheap ploy to buy support, Harper has shown surprising political acumen in the last few weeks. Most of the programs they have announced are things the Liberals had planned, but the Cons actually implemented them in a very short time frame, while the Liberals did waste their time in office. I would never vote for the man, but I respect the fact that he pretty much admitted his environmental stance was wrong, and has done a rapid about-face.

This brings me to another point: hope. I have never in my life felt the slightest glimmer of hope that the environment would actually be An Issue, and that it would be taken seriously by those in power, but in the last month the media has been saturated with articles about Global Warming, Doom & Gloom, etc. Environmental awareness has suddenly become mainstream: if even the Cons are on board, it must be.

Re: Mostly related...

[frandroid.livejournal.com]

Apparently 10 multinationals, including GE, met with Bush today (Pacific time; I'm already tomorrow ;]) asking for mandatory emissions caps. I don't think that the MNCs are completely self-less: I think the EU will enforce some standards extra-territorially, so the largest companies have the most to lose, but still. I share your excitement :]

Harper is turning a bit around, but a big chunk of the money is to put directly in taxpayers' pockets rather than forcing any industry to do anything. There's still no Kyoto plan. So even though Harper sees the polls and tries to react, I think it's mostly cosmetic and still hasn't done anything really significant. Anyway. Any move by Tories in the right direction puts pressure on the other parties to push ever further on the issue.