Alberta Provincial By-Elections - Fall 2014 Editions

[c.t.ner]

Interesting article from Duane Bratt of The Calgary Herald on the signs on private property in the three Calgary ridings.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/po...351/story.html

If anything I think this bodes much stronger for Dirks and the Wildrose then what The Alberta Party's poll says. Gotta expect that given the low polling numbers of the PCs and general negativity towards the brand right now, there's going to be quiet a few quiet supporters for them.

Interesting to see how Calgary West shapes up. Might be a strong indication that Taylor will win the riding.

[c.t.ner]

Originally Posted by Bunk

http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/119...ed-is-greater/

Re: Dirks

Ok? Wrong? Unethical? Business as usual?

discuss

Tough grey area in my opinion. While it's obviously bad optics in the middle of the campaign, at the same time an MLA is suppose to champion the concerns of his constituents. I think where it crosses into the sketchy ethical levels is that Driks is just a candidate, but still wields power as the Minister of Education.

That being said, if you changed the context of the story and the Liberals, NDP or Wildrose were the sitting government with a high profile candidate in a tight race, i don't think a single one of those parties wouldn't have pulled the same move.

[killer_carlson]

I think this move by Dirks is a question to Elbow voters. Can you be bought?

My bet is that the answer is "yes"

[Senator Clay Davis]

Every party attempts vote buying in one form or another. Standard operating procedure in politics, incentivizing voters to vote for them. Remember Dani bucks? One of the most blatant vote buying attempts ever.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by c.t.ner

Interesting article from Duane Bratt of The Calgary Herald on the signs on private property in the three Calgary ridings.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/po...351/story.html

If anything I think this bodes much stronger for Dirks and the Wildrose then what The Alberta Party's poll says. Gotta expect that given the low polling numbers of the PCs and general negativity towards the brand right now, there's going to be quiet a few quiet supporters for them.

Interesting to see how Calgary West shapes up. Might be a strong indication that Taylor will win the riding.

Here are my thoughts.

My reading of that article is that the political scientists are testing a hypothesis that signs are a barometer of election results. Their methodology, however, will not confirm or falsify this hypothesis, because it is highly flawed, for at least the following reasons:

1. They fail to account for any number of variables, including whether signage simply indicates that a campaign has more money, and therefore more voter contact at the door and on the phone.

2. They fail to consider whether, rather than measuring voter intentions, lawn signs may actually AFFECT voter intentions.

For these reasons, even a positive result isn't going to confirm their hypothesis. In addition, as they admit, this would be highly impractical in a general election. This raises a third problem, which is that byelections are a bit unique--people are less afraid to vote for a party that they might shy away from in a general election simply to "send a message" to the incumbent. Add to that the fact that turnout is usually low, this magnifies the effects of voter enthusiasm. In fact, lawn signs are much likelier to be a measure of enthusiasm than of voter intention, and as such a result in a byelection is not all that useful in the context of measuring voter intentions more generally.

With that said, it is interesting that Clark is in second place in lawn signs in Elbow. I will be watching with interest, as a centrist voter. My view is that the liberals are in big (well, even bigger) trouble in this province if they can't beat Clark in Calgary Elbow in this byelection. This one isn't about winning a seat--it's about winning credibility as a potential opposition party.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Every party attempts vote buying in one form or another. Standard operating procedure in politics, incentivizing voters to vote for them. Remember Dani bucks? One of the most blatant vote buying attempts ever.

What about Ralph bucks by former premier Ralph Klien?

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

I think this move by Dirks is a question to Elbow voters. Can you be bought?

My bet is that the answer is "yes"

Well, if he starts doing stuff that actually affects MY daughter's school, let's revisit this.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Dion

What about Ralph bucks by former premier Ralph Klien?

Same thing of course. Doing or promising something to curry favor with voters is one of the tactics used by virtually all political parties. I can't think of any party who hasn't done it in some form. That's why I said it's SOP

[c.t.ner]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

In fact, lawn signs are much likelier to be a measure of enthusiasm than of voter intention, and as such a result in a byelection is not all that useful in the context of measuring voter intentions more generally.

With that said, it is interesting that Clark is in second place in lawn signs in Elbow. I will be watching with interest, as a centrist voter. My view is that the liberals are in big (well, even bigger) trouble in this province if they can't beat Clark in Calgary Elbow in this byelection. This one isn't about winning a seat--it's about winning credibility as a potential opposition party.

This is probably one of the most interesting aspects of this study, in my opinion. While Clark may have a strong number of signs, I feel that his support will be pretty enthusiastic to wear their support on their sleeve over supporters of the PCAA or to an extent the Wildrose at the moment. So would the ration between Clark's signs and say Dirks/Fletcher's signs be disproportionate? I.e. is there more value in Dirks/Fletchers over Clark's signs?

It's a pretty interesting study and I'm glad that they're both taking it on, to me this had way more klout than most of the recent analysis of Social Media sharing in relation to Voter intention (and I say that after spending two elections looking at it myself).

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Same thing of course. Doing or promising something to curry favor with voters is one of the tactics used by virtually all political parties. I can't think of any party who hasn't done it in some form. That's why I said it's SOP

Parties certainly do make promises curry favour, but even you should be capable of telling the difference between making promises to buy votes and a single, unelected candidate using his position to bypass his own party's procedures for personal gain. This isn't Dirks making a promise. This is Dirks actively screwing other parts of Calgary for his own benefit.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Hey I agree its very poor optics, but my point was more that every party would do the same in the same circumstances because it's the smart political thing to do. Of course it looks bad, but you think the people in that constituency care? Of course everyone else hates it, but of course if the roles were reversed they'd be all for it in their constituency.

People will almost always vote to maximize their own utility, and parties will always try to say and do the things that ensure they appear to be trying to maximize voters utility. It's just politics. It's funny cause I think very little of Dirks but can't actually be mad at him for doing what everyone else would do in the same situation.

[killer_carlson]

with Ralph bucks it went to every Albertan.

What Dirks did was re-allocate resources to his own riding, presumably because the polls were getting a little close for comfort.

It's appalling to think this would occur so boldly. Will the voters hold them accountable or will they jump onto the gravy train? If they stick with the gravy train, then the popular vote next election won't be which party are you voting for, it will be "is my PC MLA cabinet material"?

[RedHot25]

Some fun, last minute shenanigans in Cgy-Elbow: http://blogs.calgaryherald.com/2014/...r-on-the-left/

One little private message on social media – that’s all it took Saturday to send the Calgary-Elbow byelection campaign into fits of temper and name-calling.

The Liberals, via candidate Susan Wright, alleged that the Alberta Party secretly tried to manipulate them into a endorsement, merger, or some other secret deal.

“There was talk they wanted to cut a deal to get us out of the race,” Wright said in a press release Saturday afternoon.

“The direct message we received on Twitter from Alberta Party campaign team member Marc Doll certainly lends credence to rumors they wanted me to drop out,” Wright adds in the statement, which took 24 hours to craft after back-and-forth with Liberal Leader Raj Sherman.

The Alberta Party says it’s all nonsense. “Why on earth would be want to merge with them?” says campaign strategist Stephen Carter.

Marc Doll said in a direct message to Liberal MLA David Swann:

“Interesting crossroads,” he said. “I think your numbers saying what ours are. Do you see any path that could be a win-win for everyone?”

Swann replied: “What r u thinking?” (He’s a doctor and that’s the way they write prescriptions.)

Doll’s reply isn’t public, but Swann says he essentially dropped the matter.

“I feel like I was being used for bait, as a dupe,” says Swann

[SebC]

That article starts with the assumption that cooperation would be bad. I disagree.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Of all the political controversies I've seen in my life, that has to be the goofiest.

[Resolute 14]

That looks like more of Carter's shenanigans to try and keep his candidate (and, notably, himself) in the news, and the Liberals were dumb enough to take the bait.

[Slava]

Obviously the numbers show Dirks winning and Carter trying to eke out a few more votes in the dying stages. I do think that things are grim for the ALP, but I don't see that as automatically good for the Alberta Party. A lot of those would be votes go to the PC's, Green's, NDP and even Wildrose. Or of course just stay home.

If Clark beats Wright, but loses, does that mean anything significant? It's a by election, so the chance to make noise is now, but who knows what that means for the next general election. It's really interesting to see.

[Dion]

Wildrose files complaint over 'homophobic' anonymous robocalls

In a complaint lodged Saturday with Tom Lowry, the CRTC’s director of telecommunications enforcement, Wildrose communications adviser Vitor Marciano complained that voters who identified themselves as supporting the party’s candidates in previous polling calls were being targeted by a robocalls campaign.

Marciano said robocalls were received by Wildrose supporters in all four byelection ridings Saturday. Each time, a recorded message stated that Wildrose party Leader Danielle Smith had marched in a pride parade “where men danced naked in front of children.” The recorded voice then asks, “Is that consistent with your values?”

The recording does not identify on whose behalf the calls are being made, Marciano said, and are in clear violation of election laws. The calls came from three numbers with prefixes that indicate they originated in Oregon and Washington state. The numbers seem to be connected to a polling company, but return calls to those numbers were answered by a recorded message.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/al...348/story.html

[killer_carlson]

So gang.... what are the predictions?

My guesses:

Calgary Foothills: Prentice
Calgary Elbow: Clark (in a close one as right wing vote gets split and the Liberal/NDP vote goes to the AB Party)
Calgary West: PCs. PCs pull out a close one

Edmonton Whitemud: Mandel wins, with the NDP running a strong second.

[Kjesse]

Prentice is door knocking in Calgary West today, whatever that tells you.