Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
Now that you say that, you're absolutely right--that must be her strategy.
But this is in my view based on a fundamental misunderstanding of Alberta conservatism, which is in my view not generally social conservatism. At least, not in Calgary--where I think you have a lot of socially liberal entrepreneurial types who think along the lines that Cowboy89 set out.
For that reason, it's a mistake (IMO) for the PCs to try to compete with the WRA for social conservatives. Social conservatives are going to vote Wild Rose anyway--they've been waiting for a farther-right option for 35 years, and if there were an even farther right option, they'd vote for them too. Instead, the PCs need to do what they've done for the last three decades, which is to keep their fingers on the Alberta "middle," which has always been fiscal conservatism and social liberalism.
|
You're probably right. But a lot of the old guard in rural Alberta that would normally vote PC view Redford as 'too liberal'. So they have to do something in terms of damage control.
Alberta conservatism hasn't been unified really in the last decade or even longer anyways. Look at how Stelmach won the leadership of the PCs. You had Dinning verses Morton. "Calgary conservatism" like you describe, and then the stronger bible belt esq conservatism allowed everyone's second choice to win.