Alberta PC's way out front

[darklord700]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Pr...395/story.html

I sense a rift developing in the PC. To me, it is very obvious why Redford awarded Mar his cushy Asia job, to send him far away to weaken his influence in the party.

This will be a sizzling hot potato for Redford to handle. Mar's clout in the PC is far greater than I once imagined.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

What is surprising is that you act like anyone should care much.
1. Every politician is a hypocrite
2. Going against the party line is a fantastic way to get censured by the party leader.For me to give a damn about this, you would have to show me that they were speaking their own mind rather than parroting what they were told to support.
3. Even then, I wouldn't care, as they currently oppose this idiotic law.
4. Despite your loud and empty protestations, the fact that Wildrose and the PCs have diverging opinions on this is evidence that they are not as similar as you are trying to make them out to be.

But then, you can't try and push the people wanting a change to the Liberals if you don't spend all your time trying to paint that picture, can you?

I think that bolded part sums it up best. You're a pure partisan so it really doesn't matter. You will vote WRA regardless.

The reality is that these MLAs were completely in agreement with the legislation. If they disagreed and it was bad for them to say so they could've simply said nothing, but instead they came out in favour.

So in the end you have a pretty clear picture of whats going on here. The Wildrose was against Stelmach. He's gone and now they have to try to put a reason forward for their existence. They're trying to distance themselves from the PC's and show that they are somehow different. Instead its a group of disaffected Tories with no notable differences than what we've arelady seen, aside from some social conservatives who clearly feel more comfortable with the Wildrose than they did with the PC's.

[RinkRat]

Well for the first time in my fathers life he's not voting for the P.C's, probably something to do with sucking up to the teachers.....even after they had billions injected into their pensions. Yet the Special forces pension plan remains unfunded as all contributions were drained into general revenue and spent...

[Slava]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Which is kind of funny since one of his biggest issues with the Wildrose is that he feels all they do is point out problems with the PC's.


Personally, as a WRP supporter, I don't feel defensive. I want to know more about some of these positions as well. I don't for one minute believe the party (or any party) is infallible.
Specific to the (old) .05 law; I asked Jonathan Denis about it on Facebook last night. While he gave me some information, it still wasn't everything I was looking for.


There are obvious PC supporters here?

The difference is that I'm not running to replace the government. The Wildrose has not put forward policies or a costed out platform at all. Its all smoke and mirrors. Even the alleged "budget" was a sham. Can you imagine for a minute running a business with a document like that as a "budget"? It would be a train wreck.

I know that no one believes me here, but I am actually undecided as to who I'll vote for. The Wildrose says that they are some great panacea and frankly I just don't see it.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by Slava

Even the alleged "budget" was a sham. Can you imagine for a minute running a business with a document like that as a "budget"? It would be a train wreck.

The budget put out by Redford that heavily counting on oil sand tax revenue is a much more of a shame by my book too. Voting base on budget or platform is like picking a girl for a dance based on her character.

[Rathji]

^

I honestly think Slava might end up voting PC in this election, and it worries him!

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by darklord700

The budget put out by Redford that heavily counting on oil sand tax revenue is a much more of a shame by my book too. Voting base on budget or platform is like picking a girl for a dance based on her character.

How else should you vote? I like brunettes so I should vote for the WRA?

Your going to be shacking up with that girl from the dance for upwards of 4 years, she better not be a bitch.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by darklord700

The budget put out by Redford that heavily counting on oil sand tax revenue is a much more of a shame by my book too. Voting base on budget or platform is like picking a girl for a dance based on her character.

Well we have to have some way to choose who to vote for! If you can't vote based on budget or platform there isn't a whole lot left!

I am curious though, in what way is the oil sand tax revenue a sham to you? I have my own misgivings, but you go first and then I'll tell you my issue with it.

Originally Posted by Rathji

^

I honestly think Slava might end up voting PC in this election, and it worries him!

Ya, I hate to say it, and I haven't spoken those words yet, but its a definite possibility.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by Rathji

How else should you vote? I like brunettes so I should vote for the WRA?

I can't tell you how everyone should vote but I know how everyone votes. Some people voted for Redford because she's a woman and for Mar because he's Asian. Based on look, I would vote for Smith over Redford for sure.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well we have to have some way to choose who to vote for! If you can't vote based on budget or platform there isn't a whole lot left!

Ya, I hate to say it, and I haven't spoken those words yet, but its a definite possibility.

Well, Redford is certainly a Liberal - is there any doubt about that? Really? I'd rather vote for a real Liberal than one pretending to be a Tory. Of course, that would mean voting for Raj and I am not insane. Maybe if/when Kent Hehr is in charge of the party.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by Slava

I am curious though, in what way is the oil sand tax revenue a sham to you? I have my own misgivings, but you go first and then I'll tell you my issue with it.

My issue with oil sand revenue is oil prices have nowhere to go but down. We are already at $100/bbl, you think it's gonna go higher? Also, there're a lot of operational difficulties from the major producers. To me, this is a pre election budget that doesn't tell you we are in a tough time. If and when PC got re-elected, Redford could simply say things didn't turn out too well so sorry, here's the Alberta Sales tax.

[GP_Matt]

You have come back to this budget that the WRA put out a few times now claiming that it is not detailed enough. Their budget documents can be found here. http://www.wildrosecaucus.ca/media/2...ative-2012.pdf

It is an overview of their broad spending plans. Some of the detail that you are looking for is simply unattainable for an opposition party. The Alberta government has an entire department dedicated to budgeting I am not sure how or why you expect a volunteer organization to get the resources to duplicate that work. The other issue is that I don't think the WRA can get all of the information that is required. I am sure that they can't ask a department to provide a review of their spending.

I also took a look online to see what the Liberal and NDP party came up with for alternate budgets and couldn't find any document that provided their alternative. They had random ideas spread around their sites but nothing that provided an overview and certainly nothing that went into the level of detail that you require. Can I assume that you are leaning towards the government in power as they are the only ones who have the resources to fully cost everything they propose?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Slava

I think that bolded part sums it up best. You're a pure partisan so it really doesn't matter. You will vote WRA regardless.

I won't deny that I am a committed voter - but that was already obvious given the alternatives are blue Liberals, red Liberals or orange communists. But you misconstrue my statement. I don't care about their having to toe the PC party line in the past because they currently oppose a bad law.

Seriously, Slava, what the hell were you expecting? For anyone to change their minds because a bad opinion held in the past has been corrected in the present? Only you would see that as a problem. And only then because you are at least as partisan as anyone else here.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Rathji

From my perspective, and I am always expecting him to, I certainly don't see Slava as trying to get people to support the Liberals, so much as pointing out problems with the WRA platform.

.

I have a monthly breakfast meeting with a Liberal strategist, someone active in the inner gears of the party and his current line - as recently as last week - was the PC's are trending to 81 seats, a margin of victory they're seriously worried about, thinking its way too much.

He says the PC's put a "political lightweight" up against Danielle Smith in Highwood to give her a chance as they'd rather see her in the legislature where they can better control her. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

His comments were interesting given he's in the opposition camp and they contrast with the recent polling showing a closer race.

Cowperson

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

I think that bolded part sums it up best. You're a pure partisan so it really doesn't matter. You will vote WRA regardless.

No one party will match your individual beliefs in every respect. Thus people end up aligning with one party or another. They become willing to overlook the small things they don't agree with because they are able to see the bigger picture and the long term objectives.

The reality is that these MLAs were completely in agreement with the legislation. If they disagreed and it was bad for them to say so they could've simply said nothing, but instead they came out in favour.

That's not exactly true in the PC caucus environment. They MUST follow and support party line, there is no other option. This is one distinct difference with the Wildrose. Our MLA's are free to speak their minds and they don't have to vote in unison on motions.

aside from some social conservatives who clearly feel more comfortable with the Wildrose than they did with the PC's.

Actually there are some social conservatives who are indeed more at home with the PC's now (as ironic as that sounds). They like the "social controls" the PC's have implemented. Higher taxes on cigarettes/liquor, limited happy hours, minimum drink prices, going towards zero tolerance drinking & driving, restrictions on where cigarettes can be sold, limited the number of VLT's in pubs, etc, etc.

Originally Posted by RinkRat

Well for the first time in my fathers life he's not voting for the P.C's, probably something to do with sucking up to the teachers.....even after they had billions injected into their pensions. Yet the Special forces pension plan remains unfunded as all contributions were drained into general revenue and spent...

He might enjoy this read. Pretty good laundry list of reasons the PC's need to go.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...medium=twitter

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well we have to have some way to choose who to vote for! If you can't vote based on budget or platform there isn't a whole lot left!

How about the party's past performance? The WRP, more than any other opposition party, has been able to hold the government accountable. They have stalled, reversed, and/or amended many positions based on challenges from the Wildrose.

How about looking at your local candidate? I think many people fall into this category. They couldn't tell you the first thing about the party budget. And so far as platform, they go on what they've heard from local candidate. Some don't even look at that, they compare all the candidates and like a job interview, narrow it down to right person regardless of party affiliation.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

I have a monthly breakfast meeting with a Liberal strategist, someone active in the inner gears of the party and his current line - as recently as last week - was the PC's are trending to 81 seats, a margin of victory they're seriously worried about, thinking its way too much.

He says the PC's put a "political lightweight" up against Danielle Smith in Highwood to give her a chance as they'd rather see her in the legislature where they can better control her. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

His comments were interesting given he's in the opposition camp and they contrast with the recent polling showing a closer race.

Cowperson

The guy won in a three person open nomination race where over 1200 votes were cast. I am pretty sure the Tories did not put him there, perhaps if it was an acclamation, but the guy clearly won a nomination battle.

I would guess that there is little to no chance that Redford gets either a higher precentage of the seats in the Leg than Ed did nor will she get a higher percentage of the popular vote. If that is the case, the PC's will have no choice but to turn on her and fire her after the election. A precedent has been set.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by EdWard

I would guess that there is little to no chance that Redford gets either a higher precentage of the seats in the Leg than Ed did nor will she get a higher percentage of the popular vote. If that is the case, the PC's will have no choice but to turn on her and fire her after the election. A precedent has been set.

To me, as a politician, this is what Redford has been doing for the last 6 months. Sending Mar to Asia is certainly one. I think Reford is still insecure as the premier or party leader. She has been trying to placate the PC MLA's by doing just a fake health care review, sending everything to some ethnic committee, or sending MLA pay to some review committee.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by EdWard

The guy won in a three person open nomination race where over 1200 votes were cast. I am pretty sure the Tories did not put him there, perhaps if it was an acclamation, but the guy clearly won a nomination battle.

I would guess that there is little to no chance that Redford gets either a higher precentage of the seats in the Leg than Ed did nor will she get a higher percentage of the popular vote. If that is the case, the PC's will have no choice but to turn on her and fire her after the election. A precedent has been set.

Generally the interest in running against a party leader is low. You are basically cannon fodder. Typically it will be a tough go, so it doesn't necessarily draw out the truly dedicated. As it is the PC running against Danielle isn't even taking any time off of work until the writ drops, which speaks volumes to me.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Well, Redford is certainly a Liberal - is there any doubt about that? Really? I'd rather vote for a real Liberal than one pretending to be a Tory. Of course, that would mean voting for Raj and I am not insane. Maybe if/when Kent Hehr is in charge of the party.

Please, Kent Hehr will be a PC MLA in the election after this one. The PC party is now 'Progressive' enough and has lost enough of the 'Conservative' part to be the perfect home for him. The Liberals are going to be wiped out of existance when it's apparent there's no difference between them and the NDP and that the PC's now have the back of the Public Unions. A lot of the traditional Liberal support in the past came from the "Ralph cut our wages 5% in the mid 90s, fata him" crowd or the "Rich Province, Poor Student" crowd who wanted handouts for Post Secondary education. Redford scooped up all these folks with her last week deal to propel her to power in the PC leadership race. It's clearly her strategy to consolidate the leftties and keep the Red Tories.