G Huxley

You make a selective quote. I said in addition: "but the countries have massive amounts of seats allotted to what you refer or others refer to as fringe parties e.g. the pirate party in Sweden."

Yes and they have a more democratic attitude.

Re: Australia the Greens have 10 seats in the Australian Senate.

I think there should be a second national debate for candidates lower than that.

Unsure, but the countries have massive amounts of seats allotted to what you refer or others refer to as fringe parties e.g. the pirate party in Sweden.

Democracy is about having a choice. Many other countries have democracy in a way that I envision it including Sweden, Germany and Australia.

Who said she has to be in a position to lead a coalition? This isn't winner takes all politics. This is supposed to be a democracy. Theoretically anyone can win. The votes are decided on election day not in advance. She certainly has enough candidates running to win.

I don't consider having choice in a democracy 'to be messy.' In fact I welcome diverse opinions.

That is absurd. As part of a coalition she could easily be a potential leader in a next government.

EKOS polls have almost consistently shown that he is the last. http://www.ekospolitics.com/

29.7 per cent chose Harper as preferred PM according to the Nanos link you provided.

I've said previously if a party can field 20 candidates nationally then they should be allowed in the debates. That would require 20,000 signatures and 20 national candidates to have gone through with the registration process.

I know exactly what Democracy is 'rule by the people' and that it has always been necessary to struggle for it. "No one is trying to prevent democracy (certainly not here)." Keeping May out of the debates is an attempt to prevent Democracy. "No one is sidelining her...other than the Canadian public." On the contrary the Canadian public in polls overwhelmingly say that May should be allowed to participate in the debates.

And for Democracy, but what is good for the country and good for Democracy are one and the same.

According to Nanos Harper has not even a third of the populace wanting him to be PM. That means the vast majority of Canadians do not want Harper as the next PM.

"She has no chance of forming government. I care not one iota about her sex or gender." She isn't given a chance, because you are using undemocratic tactics to sideline her and her party.

What these threads have shown is that Democracy is something that can't be taken for granted for. It must be fought for, just as our ancestors fought for Democracy. The struggle of the authoritarians to prevent Democracy in Canada is as apparent as ever.

Sexist.

"That must be why they Greens are in the lead, and Harper is the one seen most desirable as the PM." According to current polls Harper is the least desirable as the PM.

"No, we don't. We have 3 serious contenders, and those other people." To suggest that May isn't serious is simply dishonest and mendacious.

"She certainly knows her stuff, but her ideas don't play to the majority of Canadians - hence her party's current standing in the polls. " On the contrary May has been polled as the most respected leader by Canadians and Harper the least.

"To be clear, I don't even think the Greens have a case here. If Munk just wants to invite leaders of parties with 'official status', that is their prerogative afaic" It goes against their claim to be a non partisan organization however.

Choice is very overwhelming for some. To them democracy is just too complicated.

"The more people on the stage, the more difficult the debates become, and the less meaningful they become overall." How does less more ideas and people represented make them less meaningful?

Naturally as a conservative you don't want others to have a voice. I'm sorry that you consider democracy a waste of your time.