Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHAnswersCanadian Party AffiliationStarted 11yrs agoActive 3mos ago

Green

The Green Party of Canada is a federal political party in Canada that was founded in 1983. Since its founding, the party has supported policies strengthening participatory democracy, nonviolence, social justice, sustainability, respect for diversity and ecological wisdom. The Greens have always had leftist and centrist factions that have been ascendant at different times in the party’s history. Many Greens also claim that this traditional left-right political spectrum analysis does not accurately capture the ecological orientation of the Green Party that is neither pragmatic or princi…  

Read more

28 Replies

 @ISIDEWITHasked…5mos5MO

In a world focused on reducing carbon footprints, what personal changes would you be willing to make for a cleaner planet?

 @9RPRTKVfrom Nova Scotia  answered…5mos5MO

Increase purchase of local goods, increase public transportation, decrease single use plastics.

 @9RPNFCWfrom Saskatchewan  answered…5mos5MO

Nothing until the major contributors like China and India make changes. My personal changes will have zero global impact.

 @9RHQQ4Tfrom Prince Edward Island  answered…5mos5MO

Restrictions on single use plastics. Increased recycling. Increased bike use and walking when the locations support it

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

How would you feel if your next car was electric, and what factors would influence your decision?

 @9TT5LZ5from Alberta  answered…3mos3MO

I personally don't like electric cars, i would never want a electric car

 @ISIDEWITHasked…5mos5MO

What’s one action you’d expect from a political party that claims to prioritize the environment?

 @9RBS6XLfrom Nova Scotia  answered…5mos5MO

Reducing/removing subsidies for oil companies and directing their efforts to renewable energy sources. Increasing EV charging infrastructure across the country.

 @ISIDEWITHasked…5mos5MO

How do you foresee the transition to a green economy affecting everyday consumer choices and prices?

 @9RHQQ4Tfrom Prince Edward Island  answered…5mos5MO

We will deal with it if we still want a planet to live on

 @ISIDEWITHasked…5mos5MO

How important is it for a country's leadership to set ambitious targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and why?

 @9RPNFCWfrom Saskatchewan  answered…5mos5MO

Not at all. Canada barely contributes to the worldwide issue. Even if we went carbon negative, zero global impact would occur. Until large polluters like China and India make massive change, all of our efforts are wasted.

 @ISIDEWITHasked…5mos5MO

How do you think prioritizing environmental protection over economic growth would impact your future career possibilities?

 @9RBJ6W3New Democraticfrom Ontario  answered…5mos5MO

False dichotomy; there is no long-term economic growth without long-term environmental protection.

 @ISIDEWITHasked…5mos5MO

Do you believe that investing in renewable energy can create more job opportunities than traditional energy sectors?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

If a law was passed to heavily tax pollution, how might this change your or your family's daily life?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

Imagine a world where green spaces outweigh concrete jungles in cities; how would that affect your mental health and lifestyle?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

What personal sacrifice would you be willing to make to ensure a sustainable future for the next generation?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

How would you propose schools incorporate environmental awareness and action into their curriculum?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

Considering the debate on sustainability vs. economic growth, where do you stand and why?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

What inventive methods can you think of to reduce waste in your daily life?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

How do you think the emphasis on green technology advancements will shape the future job market?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

In what ways do you believe individuals can hold large corporations accountable for environmental harm?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…5mos5MO

What role do you think communities should play in promoting sustainable living practices?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

What does a 'green' future look like to you, and what do you find most exciting about it?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…5mos5MO

Can big environmental policies really make a difference if individuals don’t change their habits?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…5mos5MO

How would you balance the need for protecting wildlife with the demands of growing cities?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…5mos5MO

Do you think a shift towards green politics could influence international relations, and in what way?

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

Vetting Fiasco: Trump's Defense Pick Caught in Sexual Assault Allegation Storm

CNN commentator and New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman said President-elect Donald Trump’s team missed Pete Hegseth’s payoff to a sexual assault accuser when they vetted him to be secretary of defense.Hegseth is among a raft of cabinet picks facing tough confirmations, and who aren’t being subjected to the customary FBI checks, instead being vetted by private firms. Over the weekend, Hegseth’s attorney dropped the bomb that there was a confidential settlement with a woman who accused the former Fox News host of sexual assault. On Monday night’s edition of CNN’s The Source with Kaitlan Collins, Haberman revealed that her sources in Trump world did not know about the payoff, which was missed in the vetting “because it was a private settlement”HABERMAN: There’s more concern from some people around Trump than there is from Trump himself, about this whole issue. Trump has really dug in, and has told advisers that he is going to stick with Hegseth. Now, we’ll see if anything else emerges.They did do a vet, we are told. This did not show up, this issue, because it was a private settlement, according to the people, who were briefed on what took place. Trump really likes Pete Hegseth. But this did introduce the thing Trump doesn’t like, which is an element of surprise and a negative headline. And so, we will see where this goes.

▲  59 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2mos2MO

Inside the Podcast Revolution: Trump’s Unfiltered Strategy and Harris’s ‘Meltdown’ Risk

Tech billionaire Elon Musk attributed President-elect Trump’s election victory, at least in part, to the lengthy podcast interviews he did during the campaign.In an interview late Tuesday with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, Musk said Trump’s podcast appearances showed the American public that he was a normal person.“I think it made a big difference that President Trump and soon-to-be Vice President Vance went on lengthy podcasts,” Musk said in the interview.“I think this really makes a difference because people look at, like, Joe Rogan’s podcast, which is great, and Lex Fridman’s and the All-In podcast, and, you know, to a reasonable-minded, smart person — who’s not, like, hardcore one way or the other — they just listen to someone talk for a few hours and that’s how they decide whether, you know, you’re a good person, whether they like you,” he added, according to a clip highlighted by Mediaite.Trump conducted many interviews with new media during his campaign, as well as with legacy news organizations such as Fox News.Last month, he joined Joe Rogan’s podcast for a 3-hour long interview. The celebrity host later endorsed his candidacy.His opponent, Vice President Harris, did not appear on Rogan’s podcast because, according to “The Joe Rogan Experience” host, the Harris campaign only had an hour and required him to travel to her. Rogan said he felt “strongly” that the “best way to do” an interview with the vice president would have been in his studio in Austin, Texas.Musk recalled posting on his social platform X account that “nothing would do more damage” to Harris’s campaign than going on Rogan’s podcast, “because she would run out of non-sequiturs after about 45 minutes.”“You can’t hide for three hours,” Carlson replied.Musk added, “Yeah, like, hour two and three would be a complete melted puddle of nonsense. So it would just be absolute game over. That’s why she didn’t go on.”“But on the other hand, Trump, he’s there, and there’s no, there’s no talking points,” the Tesla CEO continued. “He’s just being a normal person who’s having a conversation, and doing three hours of Rogan, no problem.”

▲  349 replies

Active 14hrs ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…7 days7D

Defense Bill Blocks Transgender Care To Minors

The Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a defense policy bill directing $895 billion toward the Pentagon and other military activities, moving over the objections of some Democrats who opposed a provision added late in the negotiations that would deny coverage for transgender health procedures for minors.The 85-to-14 vote, coming a week after a divided House passed the same measure, cleared the bill for President Biden’s signature.Most Republicans and many Democrats supported the measure, which provides a 14.5 percent pay raise to junior enlisted service members and a 4.5 percent pay raise for all other service members. It also expands access to meal assistance, housing and child care programs that benefit those in uniform.But several Democrats withheld their backing in protest of a provision preventing TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization” for children under 18.The language, which would affect the gender-transitioning children of service members, was recently added to the measure at the insistence of Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, who refused to bring a defense bill to the House floor without it, according to aides familiar with the negotiations.Twenty-one Democrats, led by Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, proposed an amendment to strip the provision from the bill, but the matter was never brought to a vote. Several of them took to the floor on Tuesday to lodge their objections.“It’s flat-out wrong to put this provision in this bill and take away a service member’s freedom to make that decision for their families,” Ms. Baldwin said, estimating that the provision could negatively affect as many as 6,000 to 7,000 military families.

▲  1913 replies3 agree