Green party’s growing support may be soft, polls say
Jack Aubry, CanWest News Service, Canada.com
OTTAWA — The Green party’s doubling in popular support, as reflected in national polls during the past year, has coincided with the environment becoming the top-of-mind issue in the country. But some pollsters think the support may not translate into more votes for leader Elizabeth May and her party in the next election.
For her part, May said Wednesday she is confident that the surge in support to more than 10 per cent, which started after she became leader last August, will continue to grow after the Green party releases its platform in the fall. She added that she hopes it will force broadcasters organizing the leadership debates to allow her to participate during the next campaign.
July 26th, 2007 at 7:54 am
The Greens have been perpetually dogged by the fact that it hasn’t mounted an effective ITV/GOTV campaign that allows it to translate its polling numbers into voting numbers.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:13 am
The Greens will continue to be dogged about not having an effective ITV/GOTV until they honestly believe in the political process instead of just participating in it as an activist action.
Just showing up, running a candidate and putting up some signs is not effective politics. Strategy, messaging, media, organization and a large volunteer all play important roles and yet the Greens just expect it all to materialize at election time (i.e. playing strategic voting games, expecting the media to report everything Greens say without filtering, volunteers showing up in droves with the necessary experience). How a party that seems to have policy grounded in reality seems to operate organizationally in delusional optimism is mind-numbing.
ITV and GOTV are a combination of strategy and organization and are completed by the volunteers. Without the latter, you’ll never have the former. Without ITV and GOTV, the chances of winning are extremely limited at best.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:40 am
GOTV and ITV become increasingly critical as we gain support. However, it is not nearly as important as letting people know what the Greens stand for. According to a recent Angus Reid Pol, 49% of respondants didn’t know what the Green Party stands for.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:40 am
Indeed. Most of the people I work with (young, 30-something, university educated, environmental professionals) don’t even know what the GPC exactly stands for…that’s alarming.
Reasons: a) politics is not a mass activity in Canada; b) Greens don’t have seats and time is not not our side - having a 6 or 7 year history of participating in national elections is not enough; c) most people still think we are tree-huggers and vegans…well, they’re partially correct; d) there is a fatigue with activism that sets in when you have a serious, permanent job; and a plethora of other reasons.
Having said that, people I know are not negative about GPC. They just have a feeling the organization does not warrant of vote of confidence, based on lack of coverage, lack of Green candidates they have heard of…and lack of any real power.
So, let’s face it…the public response pegs the GPC where the party is and should be…a political minnow in a sea of big fish. The big fish might have serious issues but so does the little minnow.
July 26th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
For me, the most critical thing we need to do is build the organization itself up. If the organization, be it a local EDA or a larger collection of Greens, the infrastructure needs to be there. Without it, nobody can determine what is lacking, what needs to be done and who’s going to do it.
No infrastructure means that there isn’t a common place for volunteers to collect so then we can’t find people to do ITV/GOTV which means we lack a vital piece for doing proper strategy which means we have no idea where to effectively campaign which means we don’t get our message out which means we don’t get more volunteers…. then the circle starts all over again.
While I can agree that messaging is important and Jan has drawn together a strong list of compelling reasons not to vote Green, we need to stop, look around and evaluate why? For me, my analysis has led to the lack of organizing and infrastructure development. The Party walks into too many elections under-prepared and understaffed. This results in running an entire campaign, for 6 - 8 weeks, in a reactive state instead of a proactive one. Having the infrastructure there beforehand means that volunteers, funds, materials and strategy are already in place when an election is called then its only a matter of implementing a plan and reacting to minor issues. Its a much more effective use of resources and demonstrates that we are capable of governing.