[GT] - Alberta debate 2023 - rumble in the rose bush

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Lol, Hopefully you bring these same points up in the Canadian Federal thread for the Liberals..

This is big boy politics my man.

“You show me a good loser, and I’ll show you a loser.”

Aren't you a failed political strategist?

[Ferarri]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Lol, Hopefully you bring these same points up in the Canadian Federal thread for the Liberals..

This is big boy politics my man.

“You show me a good loser, and I’ll show you a loser.”

Or you know you could demand better from your leader? Nobody is blaming people like yourself for having right wing ideologies but rather the lack of moral conviction to hold people accountable for their lack of ethics or integrity. But rather the sheep call this “big boy politics”

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

You said the NDP dissolved the balancing pool.

That is 100% false.



Care to explain how I’m the one with misinformation?

If you live in an alternate universe whereby the NDP bumbling of the electricity file did not necessitate the dissolution of the balancing pool, I'm ready to hear it.

When the PPAs went away, so did the need for the balancing pool.

But you know this, right?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Lol, Hopefully you bring these same points up in the Canadian Federal thread for the Liberals..

This is big boy politics my man.

“You show me a good loser, and I’ll show you a loser.”

Lol, you’d think reading this kind of thing that Smith won that in a walk. I don’t think that was the case. I think on healthcare and education she looked foolish. She held her own in the economics portion. When it came to the trust issue though, she just got hammered. When the ethics commissioner reports that you contravened the Conflict of Interest Act, it’s pretty difficult to explain that you’re someone people should trust.

And honestly, while Smith might’ve seemed comfortable saying things, it came off as pretty disingenuous to me.

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1659391533437849600

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Slava

Lol, you’d think reading this kind of thing that Smith won that in a walk. I don’t think that was the case. I think on healthcare and education she looked foolish. She held her own in the economics portion. When it came to the trust issue though, she just got hammered. When the ethics commissioner reports that you contravened the Conflict of Interest Act, it’s pretty difficult to explain that you’re someone people should trust.

And honestly, while Smith might’ve seemed comfortable saying things, it came off as pretty disingenuous to me.

I was admittedly watching with orange coloured glasses but my biggest takeaway was how easily Smith told flat out lies with a smile.

Don't think either side got a knock-out punch and it was pretty close IMO. I'd call the first half even, maybe a slight edge to Smith, second half tilted towards Notley.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Yoho

https://twitter.com/user/status/1659391533437849600

Hopefully you read that, because I don’t think it says what you think it does.

[DoubleK]

I can't help but feel like this election has devolved into Alberta's Trump v Hillary moment.

Notley's message tonight came across as "Vote for me, cuz I'm not her."

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

If you live in an alternate universe whereby the NDP bumbling of the electricity file did not necessitate the dissolution of the balancing pool, I'm ready to hear it.

When the PPAs went away, so did the need for the balancing pool.

But you know this, right?

The PPAs would have expired at the same time no matter what whether they stayed with generators or were taken over by the government.
Sure I’ll grant that the NDP screwed up and this the government had to take over the PPA’s, but that has nothing to do with the timing of dissolving the balancing pool.
I get it, you know a few words and people tell you they mean the NDP did bad, but it’s pretty clear you either dint really understand what you’re talking about or you’re grossly mischaracterizing how things work.

Either way, please go ahead and tell me how I’m the one dishing misinformation when you just staring complete falsehoods as fact.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

The PPAs would have expired at the same time no matter what whether they stayed with generators or were taken over by the government.

Sure I’ll grant that the NDP screwed up and this the government had to take over the PPA’s, but that has nothing to do with the timing of dissolving the balancing pool.

I get it, you know a few words and people tell you they mean the NDP did bad, but it’s pretty clear you either dint really understand what you’re talking about or you’re grossly mischaracterizing how things work.



Either way, please go ahead and tell me how I’m the one dishing misinformation when you just staring complete falsehoods as fact.

From the balancing pool website.

Following the PPA terminations in 2015 and 2016, the Government of Alberta enacted changes to the Electric Utilities Act in December 2016 that allow the Treasury Board to make loans to the Balancing Pool at the recommendation of the Minister of Energy and to guarantee the Balancing Pool’s obligations.

The Government of Alberta also enacted changes in 2016 to the Balancing Pool Regulation that established the Consumer Allocation for 2017 at a rate of $1.10/MWh for an estimated annual collection of $65 million. From 2017 to now it has been necessary for the Balancing Pool to implement a charge through the Consumer Allocation to recover the losses associated with the PPAs.

Their duties were completed in 2022. The UCP had to introduce legislation to wind down a Crown corp. If you need me to concede that the NDP wasn't in power to advance that legislation, I will concede that.

But to insinuate that the NDP had nothing to do with it is pure misinformation.

But you know this, right?

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

I can't help but feel like this election has devolved into Alberta's Trump v Hillary moment.

Notley's message tonight came across as "Vote for me, cuz I'm not her."

Haha, no it did not. At all. On both points.

This was a pretty milquetoast debate on the whole. That anyone is declaring a winner or loser based on this debate is really showing their ass.

Smith came off as polished albeit robotic and smug. She lied a ton, but her composure and ability to pull towards her base did exactly what it was meant to do. She never took the bait on the ethics report or healthcare criticisms.

Notley came off as unprepared to start, and competent to finish. She underestimated her opponent, and once she adapted she was fine. She went too hard on 2 or 3 points she really thought would stumble Smith, but it didn't. She hit at the shoulders and despite starting rough, she finished strong.

Jbo hit it exactly: this debate didn't move the needle in the slightest. Smith wasn't as unhinged or flabbergasted as Notley expected, and Notley wasn't as elitist or anti-Albertan as Smith banked on.

This was nothing like Clinton/Trump. It just kinda happened.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Yamer

Haha, no it did not. At all. On both points.

At all? She opened with trust and closed on trust.

The NDP is clearly all in on the anti-Danielle vote.

Remember what Hillary's platform was v Trump?

Me either.

[Patek23]

Notley is a poor public speaker and it showed. Surprised anyone feels like she won anything as her erratic demeanor was extremely off putting. And I say this as a person who generally but not always votes conservative and was hoping Notley would impress me. Im likely just to abstain from voting which essentially is a net positive for the NDP. But ya, Notley was extremely underwhelming.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

At all? She opened with trust and closed on trust.

The NDP is clearly all in on the anti-Danielle vote.

Remember what Hillary's platform was v Trump?

Me either.

At all.

Every campaign is anti-opponent. Smith hammered Notley's record, and vice versa. I don't understand how you believe this is special.

If you can't remember the platform it seems kinda silly to declare a comparative, no?

[driveway]

Please, please stop quoting & responding to yoho. They are a troll who adds no value and has nothing of substance to say. It ruins the effectiveness of the ignore function when people quote their nonsense.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Yamer

At all.



Every campaign is anti-opponent. Smith hammered Notley's record, and vice versa. I don't understand how you believe this is special.



If you can't remember the platform it seems kinda silly to declare a comparative, no?

Clearly we aren't going to agree on anything.

Maybe that water is wet?

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Patek23

Notley is a poor public speaker and it showed. Surprised anyone feels like she won anything as her erratic demeanor was extremely off putting. And I say this as a person who generally but not always votes conservative and was hoping Notley would impress me. Im likely just to abstain from voting which essentially is a net positive for the NDP. But ya, Notley was extremely underwhelming.

Since she's such a "poor public speaker" I'm sure you'd be happy to go up in a televised debate against her?

This debate had two very effective communicators. I would not call either of them a poor public speaker.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

From the balancing pool website.




Their duties were completed in 2022. The UCP had to introduce legislation to wind down a Crown corp. If you need me to concede that the NDP wasn't in power to advance that legislation, I will concede that.

But to insinuate that the NDP had nothing to do with it is pure misinformation.

But you know this, right?

You said:

You understand that rates only spiked after the NDP dissolved the Balancing Pool, bought out the PPAs and was moving towards a capacity market, right?

1) rates went up well before legislation was tabled to eliminate the balancing pool
2) the need to wind down the balancing pool is because PPAs were expiring, this is completely unaffected by who currently owned them

The balancing pool being dissolved has nothing to do with anything the NDP did, and it certainly isn’t the reason electricity costs rose before that happened.

Was/is there a cost that is due to the NDP having to take over the PPAs?
Yes.
Is that the reason for the balancing pool being dissolved?
No.

I would say “you know this right” but I’m pretty sure I know the answer and I think it would be more appropriate to ask “you think you can understand that?”

Also, one major reason for recent spikes in power prices are because we are an energy only market, and a pretty unique one at that. A capacity market is a much better market for reliability and stable prices. So saying prices spiked because the NDP were “going to a capacity market” is just plain stupid. How exactly does the NDP investigating going to a capacity market 4 years ago create price spikes last year.

Again you seem to have heard some words that someone told you mean the NDP is bad, but you clearly don’t know how to actually use them in a coherent sentence.

[DoubleK]

You clearly have an agenda that is divorced from reality.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Clearly we aren't going to agree on anything.

Maybe that water is wet?

Really? Feels like a bit of a cop out, unless it's a very subtle joke.

I'm just as content not talking anymore.