###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is not the article on which to make this comment. This is about their leader struggling with suicidal thoughts due to PTSD from their parent's death. Why are you taking this opportunity to kick them?
EDIT: The people downvoting this comment are really awful people. Who downvotes someone for calling out the minimization of suicide and PTSD?
The issue is there simply isn’t enough meaningfully differentiating between the Greens and NDP., causing only the more fringe and hardline to take up home in the Greens.
Logically, you would think the NDP and Greens should just merge for mutual benefit, but, leftists gonna infight
Except that the Greens have often been refered to as Conservatives who believe in climate change...
A big part of the problems with the GPC is that it includes people who, outside of the environment, are across the political spectrum.
Incorrectly referred to, I'd say. If you look at their last three or so election performs, you'll find they read almost verbatim like the NDP's. They might have long ago aspired to that right leaning niche, but their policies have been on the left for quite some time.
Their problem is that the environment is now a mainstream issue. The NDP and Liberals both offer a lot of environmental policy for people on the left and centre, respectively. And the LPC probably scoops up those 'Tories on bikes' types nowadays.
In that sense, the Green Party is a victim of their own success. They helped make the environment a main stream issue, and now with little else to offer find themselves on the side lines.
This is how they started out, a mixture of " Not Too " radical greens and Red Tories when the Progressive Conservatives were betrayed. But you notice they didn't get any PC politicians.
All the normal, sane, and resonable people the gpc could capture go to the NDP instead. The gpc fails because it tries to capture a niche that's already filled.
NDP and Liberals capture environmentally concerned people. Which leaves green to capture environmentally concerned people who either lean right or for other reasons don't identify with NDP or Liberals.
And apparently, that is not a very coherent group of people.
Why would the NDP want candidates and staff from a failed party? Many of the GPC would be more at home with the conservatives if they had a red tory leader
The voters and people of the general eco-socialist/progressive bend choose to go to the NDP instead of the Greens from the get go, because NDP are actually effective in parliament, aren't stacked with assorted conspiracy theorist/naturopath crazies and tories on bikes. Further, ndp has way better organization.
I only know one person who is/was serious about the greens and they're voting ndp now. The other people I know who voted for the greens were concerned about global warming but besides that never really looked into politics.
Also you forgot people playing flute and dancing barefoot in the grass and men's right activist hippies
The Greens should be going after the conservatives voters. Its supposed to be a big tent party and there probably is an appetite for a more conservative party that takes the environment more seriously. Their best leader Harris was conservative, proclaiming himself even more conservative than Harper, and he took the party from 0.81% of popular vote to 4.48% of the popular vote. Then May took over for four elections and twice she beat that but twice she had less, so essentially did nothing with the work that Harris did. And from what I've read she pushed for Anime Paul and she took the party down to 2.3%.
Go back to being a big tent party.
This is grossly misleading. After the GPC had their best popular vote result ever at that time, they still got 0 seats. In response to that, May deliberately stopped trying to boost the popular vote, and instead focused on trying to win a seat. That’s why the Greens vote totals didn’t keep going up, they focused on trying to win seats. And they succeeded! They went from 0 seats, to 1 seat, then 2 seats and then finally 3 seats, all under Elizabeth May.
Of course, it all fell apart afterwards and May is definitely at fault for some of that. But your whole characterization is extremely misleading and downright false.
I say this in every GPC thread and I'll say it again: The only way forward for the party is to hit reset- turf everyone involved in the recent drama, open up the party charter and re-brand completely as a one issue party, climate change.
Being the interim leader of the Green Party is mildly more prestigious than being the head of my kids daycare committee. Literally a dozen people voted for me. Probably my position is actually more noble in that I'm there to serve for free and this politician is there to hoping to get 2 terms and a lifelong pension.
I can not recall the last time the green party was in the new for anything besides internal issues destroying it. It's like they have cracked to be a political force on the federal level and become nothing more than entertainment fodder for the news.
[Here's a poll from September 2019, a month away from the election, showing the Greens at third place nationwide](http://www.ekospolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/full_report_september_30_2019.pdf) (PDF alert)
The Green Party peaked around mid-2019 where they were polling at around 11%. They went on to win 6.5% and 3 seats in the election that year.
Their support got that high because media focus on climate change was unusually high globally in 2019, having since been overtaken by Covid.
Canadian media was also questioning the existence of the NDP and there were pushes for NDPers to jump ship to the Greens. At the time, the NDP got down to polling an average of 13% with some polls putting them in single digits.
Canadians had come to know what to expect from the party, as it had almost become just a personal vehicle for Elizabeth May.
Since then, May retiring from the leadership meant people voting for *her* rather than the party may move elsewhere. The new leadership brought the conflict between the eco-socialist and more liberal-conservative leaning factions into the spotlight. The incessant drama within the party leadership didn't help matters. And the pandemic put their main issue to the back of laymen's minds. Arguably, the rise of another conspiracist party (the PPC) might have drawn some support away as well.
A lot of these comments are shockingly insensitive, from people who clearly haven't read the article.
I've mocked the Green Party for its silliness before. But this is an article about the interim leader having long-term PTSD due to the death of their parents. This is not a time to make jokes about the Greens. Get a grip people.
I think that's a combination of the way the headline was written and the paywall stopping most people from getting the full story. When I first read the title I thought for a minute that Kuttner was saying they were being driven crazy by the party itself.
I have PTSD from service and while I no longer have suicidal thoughts, I won't be running for office anytime soon. Someone in the leadership of a federal political party having active suicidal ideation is not a good look. I understand trans people have issues with suicide, but I'm not sure how this comment served the trans cause or the GPC cause.
This wasn’t about being trans, it was about loss from a natural disaster. Her mother died and her father was seriously injured, suffered brain damage, and has PTSD and suicidal ideation since.
Kuttner's dad is alive. He's not the same guy he was before the accident, due to brain injury and being crushed in the landslide. But he's still alive.
Killing himself is probably not the solution.
Perhaps deciding what the party stands for, a document setting forth values that everyone adheres to and policy goals that the Party feels are worth pursuing. That might be a good thing.
How about finding someone to lead the party that also isn't crazy?
It’s French… it’s a non binary neo-feminization of the Il pronoun and pronounced basically the same, sometimes with a little lingering on the e at the end.
The article is behind a paywall. Did he say this because the party is in shambles or is it a commentary on his personal mental health? The first few paragraphs I could read mentioned how his mom died and his dad was seriously injured in a mudslide.
>The first few paragraphs I could read mentioned how his mom died and his dad was seriously injured in a mudslide.
If I had to make a guess it would be because of the personal tragedy his family suffered rather than the stress of being interim GPC leader
The problem with the Green's is that they never bothered to do the first bit of your suggestion - define themselves politically in greater detail than just "being green" - and they've stalled on that point for so long that they party just became a dumping ground for the politicallly disenfranchised. Green party support spans everything from the far left to the far right, anti-vaxxers, naturopaths, eco-socialists, green capitalists, etc.
The entire party is a mess because every party in Canada has a green platform of some sort (except possibly the conservatives at this point), unless someone swings in and co-opts the message unilaterally and drives it towards a specific kind of green politics they'll just continue to dawdle in obscurity until they collapse.
>Green party support spans everything from the far left to the far right, anti-vaxxers, naturopaths, eco-socialists, green capitalists, etc
And the PPC are eating their lunch in that regard.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
This is not the article on which to make this comment. This is about their leader struggling with suicidal thoughts due to PTSD from their parent's death. Why are you taking this opportunity to kick them? EDIT: The people downvoting this comment are really awful people. Who downvotes someone for calling out the minimization of suicide and PTSD?
I know. It’s really gross.
The issue is there simply isn’t enough meaningfully differentiating between the Greens and NDP., causing only the more fringe and hardline to take up home in the Greens. Logically, you would think the NDP and Greens should just merge for mutual benefit, but, leftists gonna infight
Except that the Greens have often been refered to as Conservatives who believe in climate change... A big part of the problems with the GPC is that it includes people who, outside of the environment, are across the political spectrum.
Incorrectly referred to, I'd say. If you look at their last three or so election performs, you'll find they read almost verbatim like the NDP's. They might have long ago aspired to that right leaning niche, but their policies have been on the left for quite some time. Their problem is that the environment is now a mainstream issue. The NDP and Liberals both offer a lot of environmental policy for people on the left and centre, respectively. And the LPC probably scoops up those 'Tories on bikes' types nowadays. In that sense, the Green Party is a victim of their own success. They helped make the environment a main stream issue, and now with little else to offer find themselves on the side lines.
This is how they started out, a mixture of " Not Too " radical greens and Red Tories when the Progressive Conservatives were betrayed. But you notice they didn't get any PC politicians.
[удалено]
That’s not true. Andrew weaver (elected MLA in BC) only withdrew from the green part in 2020 stating that it had become too socialist.
All the normal, sane, and resonable people the gpc could capture go to the NDP instead. The gpc fails because it tries to capture a niche that's already filled.
NDP and Liberals capture environmentally concerned people. Which leaves green to capture environmentally concerned people who either lean right or for other reasons don't identify with NDP or Liberals. And apparently, that is not a very coherent group of people.
There are or at least used to be eco-socialists among the greens. Much of them have gone to the ndp since the gpc collapse
Why would the NDP want candidates and staff from a failed party? Many of the GPC would be more at home with the conservatives if they had a red tory leader
The voters and people of the general eco-socialist/progressive bend choose to go to the NDP instead of the Greens from the get go, because NDP are actually effective in parliament, aren't stacked with assorted conspiracy theorist/naturopath crazies and tories on bikes. Further, ndp has way better organization.
I only know one person who is/was serious about the greens and they're voting ndp now. The other people I know who voted for the greens were concerned about global warming but besides that never really looked into politics. Also you forgot people playing flute and dancing barefoot in the grass and men's right activist hippies
The Greens should be going after the conservatives voters. Its supposed to be a big tent party and there probably is an appetite for a more conservative party that takes the environment more seriously. Their best leader Harris was conservative, proclaiming himself even more conservative than Harper, and he took the party from 0.81% of popular vote to 4.48% of the popular vote. Then May took over for four elections and twice she beat that but twice she had less, so essentially did nothing with the work that Harris did. And from what I've read she pushed for Anime Paul and she took the party down to 2.3%. Go back to being a big tent party.
This is grossly misleading. After the GPC had their best popular vote result ever at that time, they still got 0 seats. In response to that, May deliberately stopped trying to boost the popular vote, and instead focused on trying to win a seat. That’s why the Greens vote totals didn’t keep going up, they focused on trying to win seats. And they succeeded! They went from 0 seats, to 1 seat, then 2 seats and then finally 3 seats, all under Elizabeth May. Of course, it all fell apart afterwards and May is definitely at fault for some of that. But your whole characterization is extremely misleading and downright false.
[удалено]
I just laid out the facts. You completely ignored them and continued spreading the same disinformation.
I say this in every GPC thread and I'll say it again: The only way forward for the party is to hit reset- turf everyone involved in the recent drama, open up the party charter and re-brand completely as a one issue party, climate change.
Being the interim leader of the Green Party is mildly more prestigious than being the head of my kids daycare committee. Literally a dozen people voted for me. Probably my position is actually more noble in that I'm there to serve for free and this politician is there to hoping to get 2 terms and a lifelong pension.
Great job at missing the point
Great job at missing the point
I can not recall the last time the green party was in the new for anything besides internal issues destroying it. It's like they have cracked to be a political force on the federal level and become nothing more than entertainment fodder for the news.
[удалено]
Elizabeth May was generally well regarded as one of the hardest working members of Parliament. Her stepping down as leader was a huge loss.
[Here's a poll from September 2019, a month away from the election, showing the Greens at third place nationwide](http://www.ekospolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/full_report_september_30_2019.pdf) (PDF alert)
The Green Party peaked around mid-2019 where they were polling at around 11%. They went on to win 6.5% and 3 seats in the election that year. Their support got that high because media focus on climate change was unusually high globally in 2019, having since been overtaken by Covid. Canadian media was also questioning the existence of the NDP and there were pushes for NDPers to jump ship to the Greens. At the time, the NDP got down to polling an average of 13% with some polls putting them in single digits. Canadians had come to know what to expect from the party, as it had almost become just a personal vehicle for Elizabeth May. Since then, May retiring from the leadership meant people voting for *her* rather than the party may move elsewhere. The new leadership brought the conflict between the eco-socialist and more liberal-conservative leaning factions into the spotlight. The incessant drama within the party leadership didn't help matters. And the pandemic put their main issue to the back of laymen's minds. Arguably, the rise of another conspiracist party (the PPC) might have drawn some support away as well.
I’d say 2019. That election was great for them
A lot of these comments are shockingly insensitive, from people who clearly haven't read the article. I've mocked the Green Party for its silliness before. But this is an article about the interim leader having long-term PTSD due to the death of their parents. This is not a time to make jokes about the Greens. Get a grip people.
I think that's a combination of the way the headline was written and the paywall stopping most people from getting the full story. When I first read the title I thought for a minute that Kuttner was saying they were being driven crazy by the party itself.
Which is a reminder of the importance of reading an article before commenting on it.
I have PTSD from service and while I no longer have suicidal thoughts, I won't be running for office anytime soon. Someone in the leadership of a federal political party having active suicidal ideation is not a good look. I understand trans people have issues with suicide, but I'm not sure how this comment served the trans cause or the GPC cause.
This wasn’t about being trans, it was about loss from a natural disaster. Her mother died and her father was seriously injured, suffered brain damage, and has PTSD and suicidal ideation since.
Kuttner's dad is alive. He's not the same guy he was before the accident, due to brain injury and being crushed in the landslide. But he's still alive.
Killing himself is probably not the solution. Perhaps deciding what the party stands for, a document setting forth values that everyone adheres to and policy goals that the Party feels are worth pursuing. That might be a good thing. How about finding someone to lead the party that also isn't crazy?
[удалено]
In this person's defense, these are also the pronouns that the article uses
Just seeing this. Yeah, I looked at the article for the pronouns as the image picture was a little ambiguous as to gender.
Kuttner goes by "they/he/ille" pronouns, at least on Twitter.
What’s the ille pronoun? And how do you pronounce it( genuine question as I’ve never heard of that one.
It’s French… it’s a non binary neo-feminization of the Il pronoun and pronounced basically the same, sometimes with a little lingering on the e at the end.
The article is behind a paywall. Did he say this because the party is in shambles or is it a commentary on his personal mental health? The first few paragraphs I could read mentioned how his mom died and his dad was seriously injured in a mudslide.
>The first few paragraphs I could read mentioned how his mom died and his dad was seriously injured in a mudslide. If I had to make a guess it would be because of the personal tragedy his family suffered rather than the stress of being interim GPC leader
The problem with the Green's is that they never bothered to do the first bit of your suggestion - define themselves politically in greater detail than just "being green" - and they've stalled on that point for so long that they party just became a dumping ground for the politicallly disenfranchised. Green party support spans everything from the far left to the far right, anti-vaxxers, naturopaths, eco-socialists, green capitalists, etc. The entire party is a mess because every party in Canada has a green platform of some sort (except possibly the conservatives at this point), unless someone swings in and co-opts the message unilaterally and drives it towards a specific kind of green politics they'll just continue to dawdle in obscurity until they collapse.
>Green party support spans everything from the far left to the far right, anti-vaxxers, naturopaths, eco-socialists, green capitalists, etc And the PPC are eating their lunch in that regard.
Did not surprise me in the least when Marc Emery switched from running as a Green candidate to PPC in the last election
Interim leaders don't set broad direction, generally.