Has Redford done any good for Alberta?

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Makarov

"Incompetence" and "disaster" seem to overstatements, at best.

Its also interesting to note that all other parties (as well as many posters here) predicted that WRP's election platform was also a "disaster". The difference between the WRP and the PCs is that one was elected, is making real decisions, and is therefore being scrutinized, whereas the other was not, is doing nothing, and is therefore not being scrutinized.

Well, judging by the terrible performance of Redford in recent polls, it seems that many Albertan's would judge the premier as 'incompetent' or her performance as a 'disaster'.

The same is not true for the opposition parties, no matter how you try to spin it. Whatever 'nothing' Danielle Smith is doing, it seems to be working for her quite well.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Well, judging by the terrible performance of Redford in recent polls, it seems that many Albertan's would judge the premier as 'incompetent' or her performance as a 'disaster'.

The same is not true for the opposition parties, no matter how you try to spin it. Whatever 'nothing' Danielle Smith is doing, it seems to be working for her quite well.

Wildrose Party: We have nothing to say currently, but please don't look at editorials we've written in the past!

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Wildrose Party: We have nothing to say currently, but please don't look at editorials we've written in the past!

Actually, their current policy documents are awesome. Which is your favorite?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Actually, their current policy documents are awesome. Which is your favorite?

Tough call. I'm somewhat partial to conscience rights, but I also did get a good chuckle out of the Dani-dollars. Which one is your favorite?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Makarov

"Incompetence" and "disaster" seem to overstatements, at best.

Its also interesting to note that all other parties (as well as many posters here) predicted that WRP's election platform was also a "disaster". The difference between the WRP and the PCs is that one was elected, is making real decisions, and is therefore being scrutinized, whereas the other was not, is doing nothing, and is therefore not being scrutinized.

I wouldn't say that the PC's are making decisions as much as doing panic filled scrambles as they keep getting caught in scandals, dishonesty, half baked electoral retreats.

Redford has done a thorough job of earning her 30% approval rating.

The other problem with that party is they have an entitlement opportunity and are completely getting caught out of left field and then coming across as petulant baby's.

Unless the PC's gas Redford there's next to nothing to prevent a Wildrose majority in the next election.

The problem is that the senior members of that party that would step in to replace her are just as unpopular.

Lukazuk, Gorner, Horne, Denis, Hughes and Johnson have come across as the incompetent gang who couldn't shoot straight.

This government is pretty much an outright disaster

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Slava

Tough call. I'm somewhat partial to conscience rights, but I also did get a good chuckle out of the Dani-dollars. Which one is your favorite?

Well as a legacy policy I could understand the intellectual position of conscience rights, but that policy will be dropped if the last AGM was any indication. It's nice to have a party with such an open member driven policy structure.

Dani-Dollars was an interesting idea, but what was really important would be having the ability to spend surplus dollars instead of piling debt upon our children like the PC's or hugely raising taxes and killing jobs like the Liberals would.

My favorite policies have to be the Health Care reforms that are so badly needed in this province. Modelling ourselves after much more efficient and successful jurisdictions seems to be such a no-brainer but instead we hear more stories of waste and abuse every day.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

My favorite policies have to be the Health Care reforms that are so badly needed in this province. Modelling ourselves after much more efficient and successful jurisdictions seems to be such a no-brainer but instead we hear more stories of waste and abuse every day.

Oooooh, this is my favourite one! I can't believe no one else thought of modelling ourselves after more efficient and successful healthcare systems!

Wait, which actual healthcare systems did the WRP suggest that we model our's after again? I can't remember?

[SebC]

I'm a big fan of funding municipal infrastructure through surpluses, given that it's the exact opposite of the stable, predictable funding that Nenshi wants.

[Slava]

I forgot, the other awesome policy they have is recall. If I had more time to waste I would try this one out on my MLA who happens to be a Wildrose MLA. I think with a little effort that I could collect 10% in signatures! (as could anyone in basically any riding in the province for any party...which is why these things are so ridiculous)

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

That's a weak argument and you know it.

Unless of course you're suggesting that governments MUST always follow through on their promise regardless of changing economic conditions.

If that's the the case, you must have been outraged when Harper increased spending in an attempt to head off a major recession.

Interesting that you chose to dodge the question (which is sadly typical of Redford's unwavering defenders here): how many lies and broken promises are you willing to ignore before you actually look at Redford's performance rather than continue to try and deflect, deflect, deflect? Two promises broken here, and they are merely the latest on an ever-growing pile.

Head on question: Do you think Redford made the right call reneging on these two promises, cutting education funding and causing programs, such as nursing, to get cut? More importantly, can you even answer the question without trying to deflect the answer toward something that is not Redford and the government?

You're better than that. At least make arguments you actually believe in, instead of making partisan potshots.

If you aren't going to call out all partisan potshots, then spare me the sanctimonious commentary.

[NuclearPizzaMan]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

(which is sadly typical of Redford's unwavering defenders here):.

I'm not sure that "She sucks, but did you see the crazy lady she was running against?!" counts as unwavering defense, but ok.

[transplant99]

pages later and still no one can commend Redford on the "good" she has done (you know...the original reason for this thread and all) and are STILL deflecting criticism towards the WRA who arent even in power and what *might* happen if they were.

So telling as to the answer to the OP and oh so easy to predict.

[Resolute 14]

In fairness Transplant, Makarov did have a post where he stated some good things he felt she's done. It was kind of lost in all of the "crap, keep deflecting the topic" nonsense thought.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by transplant99

pages later and still no one can commend Redford on the "good" she has done (you know...the original reason for this thread and all) and are STILL deflecting criticism towards the WRA who arent even in power and what *might* happen if they were.

So telling as to the answer to the OP and oh so easy to predict.

It's cute that you guys think that we're defending Redford by presenting her as the lesser of two evils.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Oooooh, this is my favourite one! I can't believe no one else thought of modelling ourselves after more efficient and successful healthcare systems!

Wait, which actual healthcare systems did the WRP suggest that we model our's after again? I can't remember?

The one's listed in their policy documents. You have read them, right?

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

It's cute that you guys think that we're defending Redford by presenting her as the lesser of two evils.

From the guy who hasn't read a single policy document, your endorsement definitely isn't much of a real defense.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

The one's listed in their policy documents. You have read them, right?

Yeah they cite France, Germany and Belgium, all of whom have a mixed system where those without means suffer. Sounds like a good plan chief.

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

From the guy who hasn't read a single policy document, your endorsement definitely isn't much of a real defense.

Oh I've read them, but collaborated documents don't mask the horrific ideals of the party leaders.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Yeah they cite France, Germany and Belgium, all of whom have a mixed system where those without means suffer. Sounds like a good plan chief.

If by 'suffer' you mean measurable societal health care outcomes are better than Alberta, all while costing less, then sign us up for the suffering.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

It's cute that you guys think that we're defending Redford by presenting her as the lesser of two evils.

Deflect some more!!!

Any answers to the original post yet?

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

If by 'suffer' you mean measurable societal health care outcomes are better than Alberta, all while costing less, then sign us up for the suffering.

Yeah France's immigrant population is certainly filled with satisfied customers.