Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
It's particularly problematic since it's easy for voters to see that bias--it confirms something many already believe about the Liberal party, with some historical justification. Those kinds of image problems are very hard to repair, and unfortunately what you generously call the "malleability" of the party on certain issues looks like pandering to some voters, particularly if there's a lack of trust.
I don't mean to be down on the party--I've voted for them in the past. But it's helpful to be clear-eyed about their brand problems in this province, which go way back. Honestly, I wonder to what extent Chris Turner is benefiting from that--as a more palatable alternative to the Tories to some voters who might have supported Richardson before but are looking for a new home now given their dissatisfaction with Harper (and with their CPC choice in this byelection).
|
The thing is, repairing the relationship between Albertans and the Liberal party would be accelerated if Albertans were to extend an olive branch to the party. Electing Locke does that, electing Turner doesn't.
The election of a Liberal would also present a vastly greater threat to the Conservatives than electing a Green. And I think we do want to threaten them, so that they don't just treat us as an obedient cash cow (expressed by cancelling our rec centre funding, for example).