2 Wildrose MLAs to cross to PCs

[mariners_fever]

Originally Posted by troutman

Describes 99% of all politicians.

Agreed.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

There is a lot of celebration and glee here about the struggles of the Wildrose on this thread.
I am no longer involved with the party but I think they have done a great job in Alberta to date.
They may never be the ruling party but I think they have accomplished a lot as the official opposition and it would be a blow to Alberta politics if they disappeared from the picture completely or had their role reduced drastically.

The Liberals with 5 seats and the NDP with 4 don't get much of a budget and don't have as much money to spend on research (reading bills and getting professional opinions).

The PC's have backtracked on some really terrible ideas in the past five years or so after the Wildrose fought hard to highlight them.

I hate the social conservative aspect of the Wildrose party and hated the hyper vocal left wing types equally as much which is why I typically avoid these conversations.

The Wildrose tried to ride the coattails of voter anger right into power. It failed. They tried to make the voters even angrier, and succeeded...in eliminating the easiest person they could defeat in an election, thus hastening their own demise as the replacement is virtually unbeatable by them.

Ignoring the policies altogether, the Wildrose was simply a very poorly run political party. It seems to most they had no other plan besides voter anger. And all it took was one major misstep and they were finished as a viable political party.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by troutman

Anyone who disagrees with me is hyper and vocal.

Not at all. Most people are reasonable. There is however, a small group of people who are incredibly vocal. I had a coworkers wife call be a homophobic woman beater at a company event. She based this solely on the fact that she was told I was on the board of directors for the party and therefore evil. It is tiring, and can sour you of politics.

I really do like most political debate and have a lot of respect for the parties and people who put in their time. It is just that the loudest voices are usually the most extreme on both sides.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

The Wildrose tried to ride the coattails of voter anger right into power. It failed. They tried to make the voters even angrier, and succeeded...in eliminating the easiest person they could defeat in an election, thus hastening their own demise as the replacement is virtually unbeatable by them.

Ignoring the policies altogether, the Wildrose was simply a very poorly run political party. It seems to most they had no other plan besides voter anger. And all it took was one major misstep and they were finished as a viable political party.

That's the thing though.
I supported the Wildrose because I did not like the direction that the PCs were taking and saw the WRA as the best choice to defeat them. If they can scare the PCs into scrapping the bad parts of their party and help usher in a new era of great PC rule then I am happy. You see it as a failure of them to get elected, I see it as a win for Albertans.

If Prentice can to run a high quality government then I will vote for him.

[Kjesse]

The times I've voted for WR in the past have been when (1) I like their candidate and (2) I've been fed up with the PC's.

For example, in 2012 I wanted the PC's to lose my riding, but I couldn't force myself to vote for Andrew Constatinidis... because he had Rob Anders stench all over him. So no WR vote.

In the by-election, Mike Ellis was a decent candidate but Sheila Taylor was decent too. And I wanted the PC's to lose some seats even though I much prefer Prentice as Premier to Smith. So WR gets my vote.

Then with this convention fiasco, its just clear that Smith never learned the lesson she should have when her failure to turf two of her candidates outright after the Lake of Fire incident (or least say she would if she could, completely denounce them and ask them to resign as party members). She needed to show leadership at that moment and came across as weak, perhaps even afraid of her "grassroots" base.

Now she basically steps away from blame for the convention vote and says she wasn't around during the vote about the equality rights resolution. That is not leadership. It was incumbent on her to stand in front of the grassroots and explain that it was important to be inclusive. But she failed to do so. Part of me thinks it could be because she herself secretly holds those views.

The end result is, I no longer see the WR as a viable alternative. I expect Prentice to run the PC's in a disciplined and ethical manner. I'm not going to vote WR again based on where they are today, but that could change. That change would require real leadership however.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

That's the thing though.
I supported the Wildrose because I did not like the direction that the PCs were taking and saw the WRA as the best choice to defeat them. If they can scare the PCs into scrapping the bad parts of their party and help usher in a new era of great PC rule then I am happy. You see it as a failure of them to get elected, I see it as a win for Albertans.

If Prentice can to run a high quality government then I will vote for him.

Good comment - at the very least WR forced the PCs to re-organize.

[CaptainCrunch]

It makes me tough when it comes to the next election because I lost so much respect for my PC MLA that I doubt I can find a way to vote for him, after voting for him before.

I might have to do a write in vote and put an X down for Diego Santifan (There must be someone with that name somewhere)

[crazy_eoj]

It seems that both of these MLA's quit after Danielle Smith demanded that the caucus support the statement rejected by membership on the floor of the convention regarding equality. They feel their socially conservative viewpoints will be better served in the PC party if the WRA is forcing them to do anything.

Too funny.

[Antithesis]

Interesting to see the Wildrose seeming to collapse right now, but there's a lot of time between now and a required provincial election. I was open to voting for them, but I have absolutely no problem saying that the "lake of fire" bozos really steered me away from that, along with being concerned with some of their policy on education. Additionally, I find the whole "find and reduce inefficiencies" thing really tired. It's almost beyond cliche at this point ... like how could anyone actually bring that up in a serious manner?

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Given the NDP and Liberals are as different from each other as either is the PCs or Wildrose, what you end up with would not represent anything anyone on either side wants now.

You're forgetting Alberta politics is basically which side of Centre-Right do you fall. I'd argue the Alberta NDP and Liberal (And Alberta Party) parties all fall in a pretty close area to the left of PCs. Sure there are some differences, but not insurmountable if they ever want to move the province's direction. We're not talking BC Green vs WRP scale differences between the 3 here....

Using 2012 results, a combined Lib/NDP/AP party would probably take half of Edmonton's seats (8/9), one of Lethbridge's, and 4 in Calgary. Presto, without any change in voter sentiment (ie Implosion of WRP), you've got the "Left Party" taking as much as the WRP did.

Add in a few factors pushing voters their way (become a viable option, PC leftists moving over, better candidates, no vote splitting) and we've got our selves a respectable opposition.

[Dion]

Smith responds to defections......

“I have always believed the politics should be about principle,” Smith said, before talking about two MLAs in the Wildrose Party that had crossed the floor from the PCs.

“Today I was proud to be in the legislature with [MLAs] Rob Anderson and Heather Forsythe at my side.

“Rob and Heather crossed the floor from government to opposition, because of principle. They gave up the perks of power to serve Albertans, not for personal gain, but because they wanted to put Albertans first.

“Today we saw the opposite, the principles Wildrose stands on remain as important to Albertans as ever before, we believe in balanced budgets and staying out of debt, we believe more money doesn’t solve every problem Alberta has. We believe in empowering MLAs to stand up for their constituents with free votes, we believe in decentralized healthcare and better outcomes for patients and vulnerable Albertans. And we believe in providing a strong, and principled alternative to an old and tired government.

“Until today, these were the principles my former colleagues espoused as well, they were the principles they were elected to stand on. Now, they will have to answer for their actions, both in their constituencies and in the legislature.”

http://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/they-will...-pcs-1.2116701

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

The Wildrose tried to ride the coattails of voter anger right into power. It failed. They tried to make the voters even angrier, and succeeded...in eliminating the easiest person they could defeat in an election, thus hastening their own demise as the replacement is virtually unbeatable by them.

Ignoring the policies altogether, the Wildrose was simply a very poorly run political party. It seems to most they had no other plan besides voter anger. And all it took was one major misstep and they were finished as a viable political party.

LOL this is one of the funnier things I've read in awhile on here.

The popularity of the Wildrose, to no surprise, coincided with the decision of the PC party to move their party to the left; most notably through the levels of ridiculously high spending, over reliance on royalty revenues, and return to deficit spending.

As the Liberals and NDP never offered any different policy for Albertan's to consider, outside of increasing taxes or even higher spending, it only makes sense that a fiscally conservative party moved to take the position previously occupied by the PC's... controlled spending, reduction of deficit. The anger voters focused on really was only precipitated when Redford usurped the PC leadership by promising provincial unions she would move the party even further left. And we all know how that ended up!

We have yet to see what Prentice does with the reigns of the PC's, but it seems logical that the large majority of Albertan voters will still vote for the PC's or Wildrose next election, deciding between a liberal or conservative party.

[Minnie]

I'm somewhat surprised about Towle. And, very interested to see what happens going forward - although I imagine it will be as others have voiced in this thread.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Ducay

At what point do the left leaning parties wise up and merge to try and pull the left vote and become the opposition?

PCs occupy such a large swath of the spectrum, you'd think they'd (lefties) try and capitalize on it.

#anyonebutWRP

If the WRA collapses and the PCs reunite, it leaves one of the leftist parties opposition by default, but makes collaboration less likely as the chances of winning anything significant would go down dramatically? Why compromise your ideals for power if the amount of power offered won't make a difference anyways?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

LOL this is one of the funnier things I've read in awhile on here.

The popularity of the Wildrose, to no surprise, coincided with the decision of the PC party to move their party to the left; most notably through the levels of ridiculously high spending, over reliance on royalty revenues, and return to deficit spending.

As the Liberals and NDP never offered any different policy for Albertan's to consider, outside of increasing taxes or even higher spending, it only makes sense that a fiscally conservative party moved to take the position previously occupied by the PC's... controlled spending, reduction of deficit. The anger voters focused on really was only precipitated when Redford usurped the PC leadership by promising provincial unions she would move the party even further left. And we all know how that ended up!

We have yet to see what Prentice does with the reigns of the PC's, but it seems logical that the large majority of Albertan voters will still vote for the PC's or Wildrose next election, deciding between a liberal or conservative party.

It will be interesting to see how Prentice deals with the low oil prices in his 2015 budget and weather he will introduce higher taxes, toll roads, health care premiums and a possible sales tax.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Minnie

I'm somewhat surprised about Towle. And, very interested to see what happens going forward - although I imagine it will be as others have voiced in this thread.

I'm not. There is a deep fracture in the party in how the party should move forward. She likes the vision that Smith has but members within the party are doing thier best to take the party in a different direction. There's no unity in WRP and it's going to bring down the party.

[Ducay]

Danielle Smith gave an interview about the MLAs crossing the floor today, and as expected: It was all negative and smear, as always. She really doesn't get it does she? She's gotta be one of the worst politicians and tacticians I've ever seen in a major provincial party.

When negative tactics fail, apparently the best approach is to keep using them.

"Kerry was a friend and we spent a lot of time together," she said. "I thought she was a great advocate for the vulnerable, I thought she was a great advocate for seniors and I think that's the shame — that her voice is now going to be silenced on the government's side. That's what happens when you're in the PC caucus.

"In the end, some people don't turn out to be who you thought they were, so we're going to move on with the caucus that we have."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...ovan-1.2850679

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Danielle Smith gave an interview about the MLAs crossing the floor today, and as expected: It was all negative and smear, as always. She really doesn't get it does she? She's gotta be one of the worst politicians and tacticians I've ever seen in a major provincial party.

When negative tactics fail, apparently the best approach is to keep using them.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...ovan-1.2850679

Only smearing going on there is your smearing of Danielle Smith. How's the Gander, Goose?

If only the Wildrose could get strong leadership like Raj Sherman or whoever the leader of the other fringe party is... they could finally see some results!

[Slava]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Only smearing going on there is your smearing of Danielle Smith. How's the Gander, Goose?

If only the Wildrose could get strong leadership like Raj Sherman or whoever the leader of the other fringe party is... they could finally see some results!

What do you see for the future of the Wildrose? That's a serious question. I look at the people that are presumably waiting in the wings for the leadership and there isn't a lot compelling there. Smith was rolling along pretty well, until Prentice came in, but failed to capitalise. Now she says she will resign if they don't win in 2016. That looks like a more daunting task today than it was a couple weeks ago when she made that announcement. It reminds me of Ralph Klein announcing that he would retire a few years down the road, and people were less than impressed to stay on behind him.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Slava

What do you see for the future of the Wildrose? That's a serious question. I look at the people that are presumably waiting in the wings for the leadership and there isn't a lot compelling there. Smith was rolling along pretty well, until Prentice came in, but failed to capitalise. Now she says she will resign if they don't win in 2016. That looks like a more daunting task today than it was a couple weeks ago when she made that announcement. It reminds me of Ralph Klein announcing that he would retire a few years down the road, and people were less than impressed to stay on behind him.

Honestly I don't think the Wildrose has much of a chance of forming government in the next election because of Prentice. Like you I don't see a natural evolution for the leader, but I think Smith's push to make the Wildrose a party focused on reduced spending and balanced budgets is what made them the official opposition in the first place.

The socially conservative element of the party has always wanted to be a stronger voice within (and outside?) the party, but the libertarian leaning Smith has always been able to bring into focus that any broad base of support for the Wildrose has to be found within a socially moderate agenda focused instead on the shared valus found within fiscal conservatism. This is where the Wildrose has made inroads.

I think Smith leaving would be a real loss for the party as a mainstream player. Even right now she struggles to present her preferred image of the party as socially moderate, and perhaps is a source of her willingness to move on.

If the party isn't able to move further away from social conservatism it will never form government. If it moves any further towards social conservatism it will likely not be a viable opposition party either, and that's the fear I would have with new leadership.