Both the Globe and Mail and the Munk Debates are anti-Democratic in th

[G Huxley]

"Canadians want Greens' Elizabeth May at future debates: poll"

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/canadians-want-greens-elizabeth-may-at-future-debates-poll

Canadians overwhelmingly believe in Democracy, while the Globe and Mail, The Munk Debates, Harper and his defender Mulcair have shown that they do not.

Mulcair can forget my vote for this just like when his predecessor Jack Layton tried to keep May out of the debates. The NDP should take the word Democratic out of their name. As for Harper with his Bushite loyalty oaths to attend his campaign ralleys and anti-democratic authoritarian antics to sideline the other parties from the debates, he never had my vote to begin with.

It is a shame because I was hoping anybody even Mulcair would end one of the worst governments in Canadian history, but now he's lost my support.

We are either a democratic country or an authoritarian oligarchy. Harper, Mulcair, The Globe and Munks are clearly in favour of the latter.

Edited August 15, 2015 by G Huxley

[waldo]

I don't read Mulcair actively opposed to May attending; from what I interpret he put forward an initial qualification that he would only appear at debates where all party leaders were in attendance - my understanding of this is it was targeted towards Harper's ongoing charade over refusing to appear at so-called 'Consortium sponsored' debates. Now that Mulcair has confirmed his attendance at the Munk debate it is being suggested (by some) that he is going against his initial caveat (for all party leaders to appear). The Liberal party has asked for May to be present/invited...

in any case, the official "Munk line": only the leaders of parties officially recognized in the House of Commons were invited: requirement - 12 seats

Edited August 15, 2015 by waldo

[Keepitsimple]

in any case, the official "Munk line": only the leaders of parties officially recognized in the House of Commons were invited: requirement - 12 seats

....and that's the way it should be - I'd even go with half that requirement as long as the seats were in more than one province.

[Topaz]

Yeah, May doesn't have the numbers but she is very smart and appears to know more than the three guys. She's like a "second thought" MP, she will tell them were they are wrong and therefore guiding anyone watching the debates. I would like her there.

[socialist]

....and that's the way it should be - I'd even go with half that requirement as long as the seats were in more than one province.

When is the next debate? I would like to see the Libertarian leader invited. Most Canadians don't understand Libertarian views.

Edited August 15, 2015 by socialist

[Bryan]

Most Canadians don't understand Libertarian views.

I think a lot more people would identify as libertarian if they knew what it was.

[GostHacked]

Yeah, May doesn't have the numbers but she is very smart and appears to know more than the three guys. She's like a "second thought" MP, she will tell them were they are wrong and therefore guiding anyone watching the debates. I would like her there.

I watched the 2hr debate between Harper, Mulcair, May and Trudeau. Just in how they acted and how they spoke, I think I mark the X next to May's name. The over-talking, the double talk, and mudslinging between Harper, Muclair and Trudeau was embarrassing to me as a Canadian. May did point out that this is a problem in the debates and campaigns, which is only a problem because this carries out in Parliament sessions. They act like children. May had the look of, 'what am I doing here debating children' on her face in many instances during the debate.

Harper was calm, but really said nothing. He is has become the master of that. Muclair is quite careful with his words, and seems to espouse some confidence, but again, not saying too much. Trudeau being the worst among them, to the point he is nearly hyperventilating, such an amateur. May was calm, did not over-talk other candidates (as much) as the others did.

Overall just in the debates I would go with May first, Mulcair second.

[socialist]

I watched the 2hr debate between Harper, Mulcair, May and Trudeau. Just in how they acted and how they spoke, I think I mark the X next to May's name. The over-talking, the double talk, and mudslinging between Harper, Muclair and Trudeau was embarrassing to me as a Canadian. May did point out that this is a problem in the debates and campaigns, which is only a problem because this carries out in Parliament sessions. They act like children. May had the look of, 'what am I doing here debating children' on her face in many instances during the debate.

Harper was calm, but really said nothing. He is has become the master of that. Muclair is quite careful with his words, and seems to espouse some confidence, but again, not saying too much. Trudeau being the worst among them, to the point he is nearly hyperventilating, such an amateur. May was calm, did not over-talk other candidates (as much) as the others did.

Overall just in the debates I would go with May first, Mulcair second.

Harper has to remain calm when it is 4 against one which included Paul Wells.

[G Huxley]

It's shocking to see how many Canadians don't know the meaning of the word Democracy and clearly don't believe in it.

[waldo]

It's shocking to see how many Canadians don't know the meaning of the word Democracy and clearly don't believe in it.

notwithstanding the Munk Centre's weasel rationale, I haven't found anything that speaks to why the Globe & Mail has chosen not to invite May... in any case, the options are for either Mulcair/Trudeau to boycott the debate... and then play into the Harper Conservative spin of that... or show up and take Harper on! Trudeau has asked for May to be invited... not sure what else he can do; I haven't found anything that has Mulcair speaking against May being invited.

[Smallc]

she has no chance of winning. It's that simple.

[Vancouver King]

Good on JT for calling for May's inclusion in coming debate. Perhaps he was feeling magnanimous after his first debate win.

[waldo]

she has no chance of winning. It's that simple.

Greens are typically polling around 5%... some polls have had them as high as 7%. Of course they have no chance of winning - is that the level for inclusion in debates? What the Green Party certainly has a chance to do, is further erode the votes for both the NDP and Liberal parties. From that standpoint alone, you would think the Harper Conservatives would want her to appear... well, except it appears Harper has difficulty with her!

this most recent May debate appearance was strikingly different from some in the past where she truly did step above/beyond her weight... clearly, she/they took that criticism to heart and opted to present a 'calmer, more seasoned' candidate.

[bush_cheney2004]

she has no chance of winning. It's that simple.

Ms. May is not trying to win a majority or even a minority in the election, just wants to increase the number of Green seats to keep the party viable.

Plus she is an American !

Edited August 15, 2015 by bush_cheney2004

[waldo]

Plus she is an American !

been there, done that!

[G Huxley]

It's not about whether or not May will or will not become the next prime minister, it's about the voices of all Canadians being heard and represented in a Democratic process, and there being an actual visible choice for Canadians to decide on. We either believe in Democracy and have the election process be Democratic or we forgo Democracy and go down the road of authoritarian oligarchy. Harper and the NDP have shown that they are happy with the latter so far as it is to their own political benefit.

The other parties should have just continued the old debate and if Harper didn't show it would have been clear to the Canadian electorate what an anti-Democratic weasel/stooge he is. Instead Mulcair chose the low road which is to go along with Harper's anti-Democratic political hijinx.

It should not be forgotten that the Globe and Munks helped deraill real Democracy from appearing in Canada.

Edited August 15, 2015 by G Huxley

[Topaz]

Ms. May is not trying to win a majority or even a minority in the election, just wants to increase the number of Green seats to keep the party viable.

Plus she is an American !

Born American yes but she NOW a CANADIAN.

[Smallc]

Born American yes but she NOW a CANADIAN.

I wonder what you'd say if Harper had been born somewhere else?

[G Huxley]

May has lived most of her life here and been a citizen of Canada for most of her life. It's a moot point.

[Smallc]

May has lived most of her life here and been a citizen of Canada for most of her life. It's a moot point.

I agree. If it were Harper, I promise, Topaz wouldn't.

[-1=e^ipi]

May makes the debates more interesting.

Anyway, I think there is a bigger underlying issue here.

Why do we only have debates during election time? Why can't party leaders debate important issues outside of elections and do so relatively frequently? Then there wouldn't be such a rush to cram everything in such a small time period and you could have all sorts of debates that have different combinations of party leaders and discuss different issues.

And no I don't consider question period or parliament to be a proper debate.

[Vancouver King]

For May supporters some good news: poll tracker is currently predicting a doubling of seats for the Greens - from 1 to 2 MPs.

A fitting reward for a great first debate effort.

[G Huxley]

Vancouver King incidentally that pickup seat would most likely be across the water in my riding.

[poochy]

it's about the voices of all Canadians being heard and represented in a Democratic process

No actually it isnt, the debate gives Canadian's a chance to hear from those who might be our next PM, or who at least have something approcahing a chance, by your standards, everyone should be invited, i have opinions, why am i not invited? No? Thats too broad a definition? OK, so what is the criteria? What is the imaginary line that you want to draw? Because that is all it is, a made up line, and in this case since she has no chance to win anything, and because her views are on the fringe of Canadian politics, she is only a distraction. She is in fact being used by other parties, in particular the liberals, to attack the pm, and even Mulcair, which I notice you didnt mention, no mention of them at all in fact.

Of course the fringe left knows this and is just fine with it, a means to an end, so much for those lofty principles of democracy, Also, if you are further to the left than the NDP it's no wonder most Canadians consider her politics to be mostly irrelevant, not to mention her performance earlier in the year, but that sort of hateful irrationality seems to be celebrated by the people who vote for her, which speaks volumes. Of course you always go back to that same well, about how our democray isnt working, no actually, it works just fine, you are on the outside looking in because that's where you chose to be, and no, it's not becuase you are smarter than eveyone else.

[G Huxley]

If you don't believe other parties should have a fair chance in their run for government then you don't believe in Democracy plain and simple. No surprise here you are one of many Canadians who don't know the meaning of the word Democracy or believe in it.

At least most Canadians according to the poll in fact the overwhelming number of Canadians about 8 out of 10 do and believe that May should be in the debate. So if it was a Democracy the Demos would have their day here, but as it's an oligarchy they aren't.

Also polls show that more Canadians approve of Elizabeth May than they do the actual Prime Minister. So how on earth can you refer to her as fringe? Maybe we should refer to the Anti-Democratic current Prime Minister as a fringe extremist since the vast majority of Canadians do not approve of him.

Edited August 16, 2015 by G Huxley