Why no women candidates for PM? Quite a few seem qualified.

[ironstone]

Mulcair is clearly the most competent leader, but leads an unappealing party.

I don't know who the real Mulcair is.Is he the one that didn't report the offer of a bribe?Is he the one who praised some of Margaret Thatcher's policies?Mulcair,one time Liberal who may have entertained the idea of joining the Conservatives?

One good thing I can say about Mulcair is that I don't think he personally has a dislike for Israel and it's inhabitants that most NDP members have.

I do think the NDP has more weak candidates than the other two mainstream parties.Apparently in past elections,federal and provincial,some of them didn't even bother to campaign,yet they still won.Ruth Ellen Brosseau comes to mind.

http://www.ottawasun.com/2015/08/18/meet-the-ndp

I don't really care about the gender of the candidates,I just want people that are honest,competent,and believe in policies that benefit our country.

[PIK]

PM Harper is the most competent leader by far. The others will sell us down the river and disband the military.

And been the most honest out of the 3. Mulcair has a very left wing part of his party he is going to have to make happy. That right there is doom for this country. And justins chicken in every pot policies , just shows how out of touch the liberal party has become.

[Argus]

Mulcair is clearly the most competent leader, but leads an unappealing party.

No, I think Harper is quite competent, though he's definitely unappealing.

[Topaz]

You have to be talking about Harper's hair piece, the one that goes over the crown of his head??

[cybercoma]

I am a bit curious we do not see more women in leadership roles in Canada. Beverly McLachlin, Olivia Chow, Eve Adams, Carolyn Parrish and others are young, bright, and known to be resourceful, creative, and objective. Is there a reason there seems to be a gender barrier to the Canadian throne?

As to your question in the thread title, we don't have any candidates for PM.

Edited September 24, 2015 by cybercoma

[G Huxley]

with less than 4% of the vote. I don't think so.

The vote results aren't in this election. She has enough candidates in the party she is leading to potentially become the next Prime Minister if Canadians vote for them. May is in fact a PM candidate, whether you like it or not.

[Smallc]

The vote results aren't in this election. She has enough candidates in the party she is leading to potentially become the next Prime Minister if Canadians vote for them.

But they aren't going to, no matter how many debates you might want her to be in. That's reality.

[G Huxley]

The future is always uncertain. If there is not the possibility for change then we don't live in a democracy.

[Smallc]

The future is always uncertain. If there is not the possibility for change then we don't live in a democracy.

That doesn't follow from what I said. May is nothing.

[SpankyMcFarland]

May is an excellent campaigner. I must say the current crop of Conservative female ministers aren't that impressive. Agglukaq in particular is out of her depth. Raitt, Leitch and Rempel would be my picks. Raitt seems fairly reasonable and would not annoy me on a daily basis if she was running the shop. Rempel seems capable enough but she has to lose that smirk.

[ToadBrother]

The vote results aren't in this election. She has enough candidates in the party she is leading to potentially become the next Prime Minister if Canadians vote for them. May is in fact a PM candidate, whether you like it or not.

In hypothetical terms yes. In real terms no. It seems fairly likely that they she will again be the only member of the Green Party in Parliament after the next election.

[Argus]

Caught this on Bloomberg this morning and think it relevant.

Women are underrepresented in leadership positions for plenty of reasons: They’re stereotyped as being less competent than men, they aren’t as aggressive, and there’s

a perception that they can’t lead and raise a family at the same time. Now, research from Harvard Business School adds yet another reason to the list: Women aren’t in leadership positions because they just don’t want the jobs as much as men do.

... “Women expect more stress, burden, conflicts, and difficult trade-offs to accompany high-level positions,”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-25/women-don-t-want-promotions-as-much-as-men-do

Edited September 26, 2015 by Argus

[G Huxley]

In hypothetical terms yes. In real terms no. It seems fairly likely that they she will again be the only member of the Green Party in Parliament after the next election.

Democratic elections are hypothetical if they are fixed then it's a dictatorship. Ask any Egyptian what that's like.

The Greens have a very good chance of picking up another seat in my riding. The by election came to within 1000 votes and we just elected the first Provincial Green MLA. I didn't even believe that the Greens were actually going to have an MLA elected here in that one. I casted my vote and the hypothetical became a reality all of a sudden.

Edited September 26, 2015 by G Huxley

[ToadBrother]

Democratic elections are hypothetical if they are fixed then it's a dictatorship. Ask any Egyptian what that's like.

The Greens have a very good chance of picking up another seat in my riding. The by election came to within 1000 votes and we just elected the first Provincial Green MLA. I didn't even believe that the Greens were actually going to have an MLA elected here in that one. I casted my vote and the hypothetical became a reality all of a sudden.

Wow, two whole seats...

[G Huxley]

Like the Progressive Conservatives antecessors to the current conservative party in 1993.

[cybercoma]

Like the Progressive Conservatives antecessors to the current conservative party in 1993.

The Progressive Conservative antecessors were the PC Party (2 seats), the Reform Party (52 seats), and the Bloc Québécois (54 seats). All totalled you're looking at 108 seats.

[cybercoma]

And before you tell me the BQ didn't come from the PC party, you better look up who Mulroney's Minister of the Environment was.

[G Huxley]

I said antecessors to the conservative party. Are you really saying the Bloc Quebecois were the antecessors to the conservative party?

[G Huxley]

As for the Reform party they were allowed in debates with 0 seats.

[cybercoma]

As for the Reform party they were allowed in debates with 0 seats.

In 1993, the PC Party collapsed with the formation of the Bloc Québécois. The Reform Party was let into the debates because they had a significant portion of the vote in early polling. You know, that point you keep missing about the Green Party.

Edited September 27, 2015 by cybercoma

[G Huxley]

Democracy shouldn't be decided by polls. The only poll that counts is the one on election day.

Your previous argument was lack of seats. And both the PCs and Reform had the same number of seats at one point or less and yet they were let in the debates.

Edited September 27, 2015 by G Huxley

[cybercoma]

Democracy shouldn't be decided by polls. The only poll that counts is the one on election day.

Democracy shouldn't be decided by polls, except y'know the poll that decides the composition of government.

[G Huxley]

The only poll that counts is the one on election day. The opinion polls shouldn't be used to make the process unfair.

[cybercoma]

The only poll that counts is the one on election day. The opinion polls shouldn't be used to make the process unfair.

The process is very fair. You refuse to acknowledge how small the Green Party's support truly is.

[G Huxley]

They have as many MPs in the house as the PCs in 92. No if it was fair they'd have a chance at the debate. In order to build support you need fair face time in the debates. If not then it's rigged in favour of the elite oligarchy, which is pretty obvious anyway by the desperation by the oligarchy to keep the Greens from the debates.

Edited September 27, 2015 by G Huxley