Elizabeth Running in Central Nova is a Brilliant Strategic Move: 15 Reasons

Elizabeth’s decision to run in Central Nova is brilliant strategically, for more than a dozen reasons:

1. First off, and most importantly the riding is winnable. In 2000 Peter Mackay won 49.1% of the vote while the Alliance candidate won 7.45% -- for a combined 55.65%. When the Canadian Alliance took over the PCs MacKay won the riding in 2004 but the combined right support fell by 12.4% (almost 6,000 vote reduction). MacKay’s own support fell by a staggering 3,000 votes.

In the 2006 election McKay’s support fell further from 43.26% to 40.66%. In fact he only won the riding by just 3,273 votes. So the first point is the MacKay is vulnerable, his support personally, support for the Canadian Alliance Conservative Party has been falling and he’s just holding onto the seat by the skin of his teeth.

Remember he was, after all, the leader of the Progressive Conservative party of Canada. A party with a proud history -- a party that he turned the ownership of over to the Canadian Alliance in December 2003.

As Jim Johnston says in one of his replies to a blog: ". . . concerning Peter MacKay. In the last election, when the Conservatives gained 6% across Canada, his support dropped 3%, a total of 9% off the trend. Why? He will forever be the person who represented the demise of the Progressive Conservative party, and there are a large number of Progressives in this riding (and across Canada for that matter) who are looking for a home."

And finally on this first point, Elizabeth and she has a great expression: "Central Nova may have been a safe Progressive Conservative seat historically. But it has never been a safe Alliance seat."

2. Central Nova is a highly split riding. These are the ridings that can be won with the lowest threshold. Imagine four parties each with 25% of the vote. The party that gets 25% + one vote wins the seat. So a highly split riding is the ideal riding for Elizabeth to run in.

. . . . . . . . . . . . 2000 . . . . . . . 2004 . . . . . . . 2006 . . . .’06% . . . . .% Change
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00-06
Con . . . . . . . .19,298. . . . . 16,376. . . . . . 17,134. . . .40.66%. . . . . . -8.44%
PC+ Alliance . 22,228. . . . . 16,376. . . . . . 17,134. . . .40.66%. . . . . -15.89%
Lib . . . . . . . . .12,585 . . . . . 9,986. . . . . . .10,349 . . . .24.55% . . . . . -7.46%
NDP . . . . . . . . 4,498 . . . . . 10,470 . . . . . .13,861 . . . .32.89%. . . . . . 21.45
Green . . . . . . . n/a . . . . . . . .1,105. . . . . . . 671 . . . . . .1.59% . . . . . . +1.59%

Applying the Shifts from London North Centre.
The impact the Green Party had on other parties in the London North Centre campaign was profound. In London North Centre the Conservatives lost 5.5% of the vote -- but that was 18.4% of their support! The Liberals lost 5% -- or 13% of their vote and the NDP vote collapsed 10% -- or 40.8% of their support.

London North Centre Results
. . . . . . . . . . . . . (A) . . . . . . . . (B) . . . . . . . . . .Diff . . . . . . (D) % fall. . . .100-D
. . . . . . . . . . . .2006 % . . . .By-Election. . . . . A-B . . . . (A-B)/A
Cons . . . . . . . . . 29.9% . . . .24.5%. . . .. . . . -5.5% . . . . . 18.4% . . . . . .81.6%
NDP. . . . . . . . . . 23.8% . . . .14.1%. . . . . . . .-9.7% . . . . . 40.8%. . . . . .59.2%
Liberals. . . . . . . 40.1% . . . .34.9%. . . . . . . -5.2%. . . . . .13.0%. . . . . .87.0%

Column A = 2006 General election %
Column B = By-election %
Column C = Difference i.e. A-B
Column D = percentage loss of vote to Green Party
Column E = percentage retained vote in face of fully funded Green campaign

Taking the percentage impact that the Green Party had on other parties in the LNC by-election and applying it to the 2006 general election result for Central Nova shows a very, very interesting picture. Now I realize the ridings are different, but hang with me. . .

With Elizabeth running a fully funded aggressive campaign, the Conservatives (using LNC results) would lose 18.4% of their vote or 3,153 votes. The NDP would lose 40.8% of their vote or 5,655 votes, the Liberals would lose 13% of their votes or 1,345 votes. This would give the Green Party an additional 10,153 votes for a total of 10,824 votes:

18.4% of Con 2006 Central Nova vote (17,134) = 3,153
40.8% of NDP vote (13,861) = 5,655
13.0% of Lib vote (10,349) = 1,345
Total votes Green Party would win from old-line parties = 10,153

Result of Central Nova 2007 Election applying LNC percentages:
Con = 17,134 - 3,153 = 13,981
Greens = 10,153 + 671 = 10,824
Lib = 10,349 - 1,345 = 9,004
NDP = 13,861 - 5,655 = 8,206

The results of this projection is that it's a horserace between MacKay and Elizabeth. It's “the perfect split riding in Canada as the calculus shows.
Conclusion: Central Nova is winnable because it is the ideal split riding!

Thanks to Mark Francis for posting Respected democraticSPACE blog predicts Central Nova winnable by May The democraticSPACE blog predicts that May can win (see http://democraticspace.com/blog/2007/04/can-elizab...) The blog uses much of the logic and arguments which were presented here first.

3. Liberals won't run a candidate in Central Nova. This blog was written before Dion announced that the Liberals would not run a candidate in Central Nova and May announced the Greens would not run a candidate in Dion's riding. This leader to leader courtesy increases the chances of Elizabeth winning the riding. In other words I believe the riding was winnable before the announcement -- they are even better now.

Factors outlined below all can tip the balance for Elizabeth to win.

4. The Only National Leader in Atlantic Canada. Elizabeth will be the only national leader running in Atlatic Canada. As Filip Vanicek wrote in response to this blog: "[This] point was made to me by a Fredericton Green member, [a] former NDP candidate. Here is his take: The 1997 election as a possible historical guidepost to what may happen in the next election. In 1997 an NDP leader from the Maritimes (Alexa McDonough), running in a seat that the NDP had never won, and yet on election the NDP won 6 seats in Nova Scotia and 2 in New Brunswick. With a leader from the region, the NDP suddenly looked more attractive.

This is in fact why the NDP is so vitriolic in response to the announcement that the Liberals will not run a candidate in Central Nova -- their strength in the region could collapse as in LNC.

5. Our Staggering Financial Efficiency. Here's the great news: we are the most efficient party in Central Nova in terms of a return on our spending

. . . . . . . . . . . .2006 % . . . . . Vote. . . . $ Spent. . . . . $/Vote
Liberals. . . . . . . 24.55% . . . .10,349. . . . $42,271.56. . . . .$4.08
Conservatives. . 40.66% . . . .17,134. . . . $56,051.98 . . . . $3.27
NDP. . . . . . . . . . 32.89% . . . .13,861. . . . $30,275.27 . . . . $2.18
Green Party . . . . 1.59%. . . . . . . 671. . . . . . .$901.04. . . . .$1.34

The actual expense limit for this riding was $75,650.95 in 2006 – MacKay who spent the most only spent 74% of the actaul expense limit. If we run a fully funded campaign in this riding – i.e. $75K – we can beat MacKay – as we are the most efficient party in Canada in terms of votes won per dollar spent.

Our experience in London North Centre (LNC) shows that when we went to a fully funded campaign – in the case of LNC that was $88,000 – it was a completely new ball game. As we run a fully funded, maximum spending campaign in Central Nova in this upcoming election -- we'll be on a equal footing with the old-line, traditional parties.

6. St. Francis Xavier University is in the riding. One of the reasons that we did so well in London North Centre is that it is a university town. We won the majority of university polls.

7. Elizabeth is from Nova Scotia. She has lived in Nova Scotia for most of her adult life. She has roots there. As Elizabeth notes in her blog “Why Central Nova?” (see www.greenparty.ca/en/node/1167) Elizabeth writes: “Nova Scotia has been my home since 1973.”

8. High Profile Race. Elizabeth and Peter both running for the same seat is going to focus a lot of media attention on the riding. Who wins? Eastern Canada. Nova Scotians. Central Nova voters. Because media attention will be focused on the issues of the riding/province/East coast. This guarantees coverage for East Coast issues across the whole country. It also guarantees that the key Issues the Green Party is talking about -- like climate change -- will get a higher profile. (see Canadians trust Greens more than any other party to deal with climate change at www.greenparty.ca/en/node/1242.

9. Atlantic Canada – Canada’s ignored region. The Conservative Party’s strategy has focused primarily on Quebec, and to some extent Ontario. With 100% of the seats from Alberta, that is Harper’s strength. But Atlantic Canada has been ignored.

As Elizabeth says in her blog “Nova Scotia, and Atlantic Canada in general, are increasingly forgotten and un-represented. It is time to have a national leader of a political party in the House of Commons working for the people of Atlantic Canada.”

10. Four words: Two million Progressive Conservatives. When the Progressive Party of Canada won 2.2 million votes in 1993 but only two seats in Parliament it highlighted how ludicrous our electoral system is. The Bloc Quebecois by contrast won 400,000 fewer votes but won 54 seats. In 1997 the PC party under Jean Charest won 2.4 million votes won 20 seats – one seat fewer than the NDP which only won 1.4 million votes. In 2000 under Joe Clark the PCs won 1.6 million votes and 12 seats.

The point being that the PCs support averaged two million votes in these three elections. Some two million voters were left without a home when the Progressive Conservative Party was taken over by the Canadian Alliance. By running in Central Nova – Elizabeth is sending a very strong message that if you’re a former PC – the party to vote for is the Green Party.

Peter MacKay won the leadership of the PC party promising to never merge with the Canadian Alliance. Once elected that's exactly what he did. This, I believe is why the combined right vote in Central Nova has plummeted by 16% since 2000.

I was once a Progressive Conservative. Now that the PC party no longer exists, would I go to the Conservative Party today? No. Liberal? No. NDP? Ugh ugh. Elizabeth running in Central Nova will draw attention to this and has a unique opportunity to pull those two million PC voters into the Green Party.

Many former PC activists all across Canada are looking for a political home. We welcome them.

11. Not Playing Favourites. In London North Centre Elizabeth ran to win her seat in what was a “safe” Liberal seat – safe that is until we ran. In this case it’s a conservative seat. I ran in my home riding where of Toronto Danforth, the riding Jack Layton, the leader of the NDP decided to run. Through our actions we are showing that we are agnostic – the Green Party is running against Conservative, Liberal and NDP.

12. Courageous. As Chris Alders said in his blog – we are not a party that takes the path of least resistance – or as Elizabeth says there is no “safe” Green Party seat. The Green Party doesn’t do the calculus of political expediency – we take challenges head on. While all the old line traditional parties are burying their head in the sand about the depth of the challenge we face about climate change – we are speaking out. During the 2006 election climate change was not debated once. Not once by the leaders of the old-line parties. If it is so important to them how could they as a group remained silent on the issue in four debates – six hours of TV?

13. Central Nova is a coastal riding surrounded by the Atlantic Ocean to the South and the Northumberland Straits to the North. Climate change is melting the glaciers, mountain top snow, icebergs, Artic, Greenland and Antartica. If as scientists tell us, the Greenlands ice and snow melts and ocean levels rise 20 feet -- what better riding/community to understand the threats to their way of life, communities, than the people of Central Nova?

Peter MacKay’s party is one that is subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of $1.4 billion a year. Subsidizing climate change. Subsidizing putting Nova Scotian coastal communities underwater. Alberta won’t be flooded, but many in Nova Scotia will.

And two special bonus reasons:

14. Canada’s Foreign Policy is horrific From fighting Bush’s war in Afghanistan, to undermining the once proud international reputation as peace keepers, to opposing global negotiations on climate change.

15. Maritimers haven't forgotten Harper calling them "defeatist," and having a "can't do attitude," a "culture of defeat," and a "spirit of defeatism." Members of the Nova Scotia legislature voted unanimously condemning Harper, as leader of the Canadian Alliance for these comments.(see Harper plans to battle 'culture of defeatism' in Atlantic Canada at www.cbc.ca/news/story/2002/05/29/harper_atlntc0205...) And Former Prime Minister and Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party Joe Clark said the Alliance leader was treading dangerous waters. "All of us should be very careful to not apply false caricatures to a region."

Very kindly Thunder Bay Indymedia (http://thunderbay.indymedia.org/news/2004/06/14198...) has collected some of Harper's thoughts on Atlantic Canada for our reading pleasure:

"There is a dependence in the region that breeds a culture of defeatism," (CBC News, May 30, 2002)

"I think in Atlantic Canada . . . there is a culture of defeat that we have to overcome. . . Atlantic Canada's culture of defeat will be hard to overcome as long as Atlantic Canada is actually physically trailing the rest of the country." (New Brunswick Telegraph Journal, May 29, 2002)

"There's unfortunately a view of too many people in Atlantic Canada that it's only through government favours that there's going to be economic progress, or that's what you look to …That kind of can't-do attitude is a problem in this country but it's obviously more serious in regions that have had have-not status for a long time." (Toronto Sun, May 31, 2002)

“I've taken my position and frankly it's the same position that I took all through the [Alliance] leadership race. I delivered [speeches] everywhere I went, including in the Maritime provinces on several occasions, about the spirit of defeatism in the country and what drives it and how we have to address it.” (National Post, May 31, 2002)

For these 15 reasons, and many more I believe that running in this riding is a brilliant strategic choice.

In the LNC campaign from the outset I knew we could win that riding. Now we know we can.