The Green Party of Canada support base is 10,000 to 12,000 membership as of September 2008 according to the wikipedia – way more then 3,000, get your fact right

As always, the real story is not in the overall standings that show the Conservatives with 35% of the decided vote; Liberals 34%; NDP 17%; Bloc 9%; and Greens 6%.

http://ottsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Weston_Greg/2007/11/15/4657972-sun.html

One could write a book on that, but in brief, for me eco-capitalism means using the tools at hand to solve problems in a pragmatic way that pays multiple dividends (economic, environmental, social, etc.) It does not mean an endorsement of the status-quo economy that is dependent on growth and is determined to turn as much of the Earth’s resources as it can into waste as quickly as possible.

Have you followed the “limits to growth” link above? That’s probably a better place for this conversation.

http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?section=gen&document=ec90557&dir=bkg&lang=e&textonly=false

So the GPC will pull in less than $1 million per year from its supporters. The Conservatives, Liberals, and more recently the NDP have suggested in the next election, all will spend the maximum amount of, I believe, $17 million.

Sorry, but if you think these modest gains in donations are something worth bragging about, then you’ve set your standards extremely low. Particularly given the immense amount of media coverage your leader and the GPC have received over the past year, and the public funding provided.

It looks to me like you have a core group of less than 3,000 supporters who donate on average less than $100 quarterly.

Most don’t really care that Farley Mowat, Ann Murray, Margaret Atwood, or Robert Bateman support the party’s leadership or the party. Sure , some do. Most don’t.

It’s a different era.

One would be hard-pressed to find a good reason why the Conservative Party would outlaw corporate donations.

The significant point in most of these polls that is almost always overlooked is the spread between the two main parties, the Conservatives and the Liberals. In this poll, both are sitting at 32%. Some suggest a majority for either party is not possible until one reaches 40%. Others suggest it is not the absolute number that results in a majority, but rather the relative support (a spread of 14% required).

So, why do I raise this point? Because with fixed election dates for federal elections, unless one party starts tracking upward, approaching majority territory, there is a good chance there will be no election until Oct ’09. If one of the main parties breaks out, the support will likely come from the soft (perhaps protest) of the GPC. You’ll be back in single digits.

Maybe a better indicator of firm support would be fundraising efforts of the respective parties. From the latest quartely figures I’ve seen, it appears that the GPC comes up well short on this measure. Where’s the benefit of all of this “Trippi” strategy I’ve been hearing for so long?

Reality check, from the November 5th issue of The Hill Times: “The Green Party is the only party to consistently increase its donations throughout this year. At the end of March this year, it raised $158, 017.20 from 2,669, while in the second quarter it raised $205,855.74 from 2,801 people. The third quarter returns showed the Greens increasing their fundraising to $222,148.47 from 3, 143 people.” -CT

It appears to me way too much emphasis has been placed on these types of polls, however transitory. While they may provide comfort to some, and serve as positive feedback, I would caution about placing much weight on them.

Complacency results otherwise. There is much not to be complacent about.