WAP Leadership race down to two... - Page 10 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Nehkara · 10-18-2009, 08:45 AM

I am impressed by this because Smith is pro-Universal Health Care from what I have heard. This next election may be the first time in my life I vote for a party considered to be conservative. Honestly I don't mind, as long as the social policies are more center-left.

Go Danielle!

Resolute 14 · 10-18-2009, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Special One

I don't think this party is as right-wing as people are making out. I heard their new leader on the radio on Thursday and she sounded very reasonable. Pro-choice, pro-gay rights, anti-government spending. In short, the perfect social liberal, fiscal conservative. She's got my vote in the next provincial election.

When will they come up with candidates for the next election? (sometime in late 2012 or very early 2013 I'm assuming). To be taken seriously as a political party they must somehow raise the funds to compete in all 83 ridings.

They are currently attempting to form constituency associations in each riding. Candidate nominations will likely follow shortly after.

killer_carlson · 10-18-2009, 09:29 AM

her biggest challenge is to reduce the stigma that is attached to the party in order to attract credible candidates.

Come out fiscally conservative and hit a couple high profile social issues and step to the left of Stelmach on them - pro gay rights, pro universal health care and environmentally sensible - and she wins the next election.

Nehkara · 10-18-2009, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

her biggest challenge is to reduce the stigma that is attached to the party in order to attract credible candidates.

Come out fiscally conservative and hit a couple high profile social issues and step to the left of Stelmach on them - pro gay rights, pro universal health care and environmentally sensible - and she wins the next election.

I don't think I have ever agreed with a post more in all my time on CP. Well said!

Shazam · 10-18-2009, 10:21 AM

More left??? I thought people wanted a more right-leaning party.

Nehkara · 10-18-2009, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

More left??? I thought people wanted a more right-leaning party.

Fiscally right, socially left.

Shazam · 10-18-2009, 10:24 AM

As nice as that sounds, it's really, really, really hard to do. Most left leaning social policies require money to implement.

I don't see any reason to think that WAP members won't pork barrel themselves like any other politician would.

troutman · 10-18-2009, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nehkara

Fiscally right, socially left.

Isn't that the Green Party?

Nehkara · 10-18-2009, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troutman

Isn't that the Green Party?

The most successful political parties take the ideas of other parties and package them together into a more palatable, more attractive package. I also don't think the Green Party knows what it is or wants to be other than its stance on the environment.

Resolute 14 · 10-18-2009, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

As nice as that sounds, it's really, really, really hard to do. Most left leaning social policies require money to implement.

More accurately, social libertarian. Smith's social platform doesn't exactly mirror the NDP. I will say it doesn't mirror the Liberals either, but I can't say for sure since I don't think the Liberals even know what they stand for anymore.

Speaking of which, David Swann's comments regarding Smith's victory really underscore the lack of leadership and direction that party has today. Where Smith is talking about what she wants to do, and the direction she wants to take her party, Swann could only muster the same, tired partisan attack that only reflects poorly on himself.

At the same time, it does point to his own belief that the WAP is a threat. Though, ironically, the only thing he can hope to accomplish by trying to discredit the WAP is to push voters back to the PCs, which will cost the Liberals seats in the next legislature.

Someday the Liberals will figure out that their party policy needs to be something more than "We're not the PCs", but it is patently obvious that that will not occur under Swann.

And that, more than anything, is what has lent the WAP credibility in the eyes of the public. People want an alternative, and Swann isn't it. Smith has two years to prove that she is.

Shazam · 10-18-2009, 11:26 AM

It's funny that a woman would be a neo-feudalist, but whatever floats her boat.

Yeah_Baby · 10-18-2009, 11:28 AM

Swann is such a clown.

Shazam · 10-18-2009, 11:53 AM

I wish I could find some articles from her while she was at the Herald. She had some doozies.

I'm not sure your definition of "libertarian" jibes with her definition.

Azure · 10-18-2009, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Special One

I don't think this party is as right-wing as people are making out. I heard their new leader on the radio on Thursday and she sounded very reasonable. Pro-choice, pro-gay rights, anti-government spending. In short, the perfect social liberal, fiscal conservative. She's got my vote in the next provincial election.

When will they come up with candidates for the next election? (sometime in late 2012 or very early 2013 I'm assuming). To be taken seriously as a political party they must somehow raise the funds to compete in all 83 ridings.

Being socially liberal and fiscally conservative makes you a libertarian.

Although she is pro-universal health care, so she's not as libertarian as many would make out.

As for the money side of the equation, Jane Morgan could chime in, but I think raised quite a bit of money last go around. I assume that would increase with the increase in popularity.

TurnedTheCorner · 10-18-2009, 12:15 PM

If WAP wants to win, why would they choose a woman leader? lol

Azure · 10-18-2009, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

Meh.

I was never impressed with Smith as a writer nor an editor at the Herald. Her articles were poorly thought out and muddled.

Carrying a deficit is not the end of the world. The PCs suck because they're so reactive. I do not see how the WAP would be any different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

More left??? I thought people wanted a more right-leaning party.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

As nice as that sounds, it's really, really, really hard to do. Most left leaning social policies require money to implement.

I don't see any reason to think that WAP members won't pork barrel themselves like any other politician would.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

It's funny that a woman would be a neo-feudalist, but whatever floats her boat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

I wish I could find some articles from her while she was at the Herald. She had some doozies.

I'm not sure your definition of "libertarian" jibes with her definition.

Wow.

Talk about full out whining.

Hilarious.

Shazam · 10-18-2009, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

Being socially liberal and fiscally conservative makes you a libertarian.

Although she is pro-universal health care, so she's not as libertarian as many would make out.

As for the money side of the equation, Jane Morgan could chime in, but I think raised quite a bit of money last go around. I assume that would increase with the increase in popularity.

Seriously, within your very loose definition of libertarian, do you think there should be laws against discrimination in the workplace?

How about OSHA? What's your opinion on GAAP?

Do you give business entities free reign? Within your definition of rule of law, who metes out justice?

Azure · 10-18-2009, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

If WAP wants to win, why would they choose a woman leader? lol

Whats wrong with a woman leader?

Surely you're not a sexist bigot.

Shazam · 10-18-2009, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

Wow.

Talk about full out whining.

Hilarious.

You may be too young to remember Smith's columns.

Try going to the library and looking some up. You can use your muscles to lift those heavy books.

Azure · 10-18-2009, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

Seriously, within your very loose definition of libertarian, do you think there should be laws against discrimination in the workplace?

How about OSHA? What's your opinion on GAAP?

Do you give business entities free reign? Within your definition of rule of law, who metes out justice?

Are you being obtuse on purpose? Or are you just into full out whining mode like David Swann because you can't stand that the WRA has in 1 year provided the alternative to the Tories that the Liberals in 20 years weren't able to do?

Being libertarian doesn't mean I'm against ALL government involvement in the economy or the workplace. Nor does it mean that in Canada, I would be against government funded health care. It just means that I want the government to stay out of my personal life. You know, so they don't decide who I can marry, or what choices I make with my kids, or the choices a woman makes with her body, etc, etc.

Far as I'm concerned, you're just whining. Let me guess, Liberal supporter?

Quite hilarious. Especially considering the sheer stupidity of suggesting that ANYONE would believe that discrimination in the workplace is a good thing.