The more I think of this, the more I think that the Green Party should be in the debates.
If the Green Party had 100 seats, it wouldn't be an issue, would it? Suddenly it comes back to the number of seats. Sure, the seat is from a floor-crosser, but it's still a seat nonetheless.
I don't buy the argument that it would be like "just another Liberal at the debate." Are they separate parties or not? Even if what the Greens and Liberals argue are closely related, it doesn't matter. A hollow argument echoed is still a hollow argument, and a good argument echoed is still a good argument. Refute it or shut up. Are these to be debates or not?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by REDL|NE
What about the fact the the leaders of the Green Party and the Liberals have a promise not to run candidates in each others ridings? Does this play a role?
|
In this matter? No. This is merely one of many political deals that typically happen. It only affects two ridings, and the leaders' ridings at that. The NDP often strikes deals with the Liberals, often when it comes to confronting the Tories. This doesn't mean the NDP and the Liberals are closely related in their politics; it's merely a power play.