April 23 2012: Alberta Provincial Election

[Slava]

The Wildrose isn't making friends with some journalists. I've read the other two, but this seems to be the most cantankerous of them yet: http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/201...se-correction/

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Slava

The Wildrose isn't making friends with some journalists. I've read the other two, but this seems to be the most cantankerous of them yet: http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/201...se-correction/

Damn liberal media.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Slava

The Wildrose isn't making friends with some journalists. I've read the other two, but this seems to be the most cantankerous of them yet: http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/201...se-correction/

He has the right to express his opinion, they have the right to defend themselves. Poor media, he actually calls this bullying.

Love this quote:

The news media in Alberta are perhaps more sensitive to potential bullying by politicians because of the province’s history. In the lobby of the Edmonton Journal, we have proudly displayed a Pulitzer Award the newspaper received for fighting the Accurate News and Information Act of 1938 under which the Social Credit government of the day “would have compelled each newspaper in the province, when called upon to do so by a government official, to publish the government’s rebuttal of criticism that had appeared in the newspaper.”

They are actually using an example from freaking 1938?
What a maroon.

[Ironhorse]

Originally Posted by Jacks

He has the right to express his opinion, they have the right to defend themselves. Poor media, he actually calls this bullying.

Love this quote:

They are actually using an example from freaking 1938?
What a maroon.

In Edmonton it is tradition to live in the past and pull up old glory days from a by-gone era.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Slava

The Wildrose isn't making friends with some journalists. I've read the other two, but this seems to be the most cantankerous of them yet: http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/201...se-correction/

It is silly to fight the media in this way, but Wildrose was right. Thomson was misrepresenting their arguments. Cute little rebuttals like this: "Hmm, I was just using the $300 figure the Wildrose threw out." shows how disingenuous his arguments were, because he deliberately left out the context of where the $300 figure comes from.

Wildrose probably shouldn't bother responding to these opinion pieces, but Thomson does come off clearly agenda driven there.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

It is silly to fight the media in this way, but Wildrose was right. Thomson was misrepresenting their arguments. Cute little rebuttals like this: "Hmm, I was just using the $300 figure the Wildrose threw out." shows how disingenuous his arguments were, because he deliberately left out the context of where the $300 figure comes from.

Wildrose probably shouldn't bother responding to these opinion pieces, but Thomson does come off clearly agenda driven there.

That $300 figure has been quoted basically everywhere though. Its not as though he made it up and was way off base.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by SebC

Interesting. I feel this makes my point. Alberta needs to spend above average.

Well when you start there you might as well just throw out any semblance of fiscal conservatism.

Based on our foolish and wasteful past, Alberta needs to spend less and stop causing needless inflationary increases across the country. (see: BC teachers strike)

There are many ways in which this is possible: population growth creating above-average infrastructure requirements, spending directed to other things instead of infrastructure, undertaxation. The funny thing is your analysis completely ignores what our infrastructure requirements are. But if you look at how we closed hospitals (in Calgary) then had to expand and build new ones to get that capacity back, I don't know how anyone can say we never had an infrastructure deficit.

Well you are using anecdotes to try and prove a point. But you ignore the undeniable fact that even when we closed hospitals we were spending more than our neighbors who were building new hospitals. Where did the money go?

If you want an example of a current infrastructure deficit, well Highway 63 (the one that goes to Fort McMurray) is a good example. Let's see: boom creates population growth and commercial activity. This boom creates a lot of revenues for the province, but the province doesn't put those revenue into twinning the highway fast enough. Now, it's the deadliest highway in Alberta and a huge problem. This is how a growth drives infrastructure demands. It's an infrastructure deficit because we are behind on needed construction.

Once again, painting a needed infrastructure project as a deficit doesn't prove anything. Of course people need roads and hospitals. But why does it cost us 50% more per person to provide those things than it did 10 years ago, when inflation has been only 10%?

Why do we need to outspend our neighbours by huge amounts in order to deliver the same services? Saskatchewan and BC have both seen similar growth profiles, and yet we have far outspent the both of them. Their limitations would be very similar to ours and they would face identical inflation factors.

Even the Wildrose agrees we need to finish twinning it. (http://www.fortmcmurraytoday.com/Art...aspx?e=3522819). I wonder what they think its per km costs will be, compared to other provinces where labour is cheaper. ()

Ignoring the fact that road construction isn't noticably more expensive in Alberta versus Saskatchewan or BC (within 5%), you will find in the Wildrose platform they fully support continuous and predictable funding of vertical infastructure like road construction, something the PC's haven't done and may be one explanation as to why they have wasted so much capital.


I have to wonder why nobody cares how much has been squandered by the current government. You all claim about a lack of infrastructure, yet the facts are plain: we pay far more for infrastructure than any province, double the average, and yet don't see a return on that investment. And your solution is to..... Give them MORE money??

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by sevenarms

My $300 would go to into my bank account and my spending habits would not change at all. I think most Albertans would do the same.

I think most Albertans would agree they can find something good to spend any extra amount on.

It's unfortunate that most left leaning voters seem to believe their neighbors are mindless fools who can't be trusted with their own money.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

I think most Albertans would agree they can find something good to spend any extra amount on.

It's unfortunate that most left leaning voters seem to believe their neighbors are mindless fools who can't be trusted with their own money.

Yes, that's EXACTLY what left leaning voters think.

The actual position is that many people believe a large amount of money pooled for a collective good is better than distributing the same amount in negligible sums for individual benefit. I think it's possible to have an honest and intelligent debate around that position, and I can see compelling cases being made for both sides. Your strawman argument, on the other hand, has no place in this thread.

Nobody here (except those who wish to purposely distort the position of others with whom they disagree) has ever said that people "can't be trusted with their own money".

[Tinordi]

fotze cannot be trusted with his own money

[FLAMESRULE]

One thing that really needs to be considered for the infrastructure / construction issue is that of course we're going to spend more here than anywhere else in the country for a very simple reason...it costs more for EVERYTHING!! You're competing against O+G for labour, materials, and people. Alberat is the most expensive place to live, work, and run a business in the country.

I'm not sure how you'd go about comparing "apples to apples", but some type of indexing to house price, average income, etc. would need to be done to compare how efficient our gov't is compared to BC/ON/PEI etc.

[Slava]

The latest poll has:

Wildrose 43%
PC 30%
NDP 12%
ALP 11%

This one is from ThinkHQ and I would say that is a huge shock. I think most of us knew the Wildrose was doing well, but 43% is a big number.

[IntenseFan]

^ I think they are running closer than that, although WRA has likely pulled a bit of a lead from the statistical tie they had last week.

Now, as my thesis has been similarities to the 2006 Federal election, I predict that soft Liberal and NDP supporters will start to think about lending strategic support to the PCs. Additionally, voters wary of a WRA majority will lead to that party losing some soft support back to the PCs. I think the next poll will show WRA with a modest lead, but in minority territory.

Again, my opinion may be coloured by the fact that a WRA minority is the result I want to see.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by IntenseFan

^ I think they are running closer than that, although WRA has likely pulled a bit of a lead from the statistical tie they had last week.

Now, as my thesis has been similarities to the 2006 Federal election, I predict that soft Liberal and NDP supporters will start to think about lending strategic support to the PCs. Additionally, voters wary of a WRA majority will lead to that party losing some soft support back to the PCs. I think the next poll will show WRA with a modest lead, but in minority territory.

Again, my opinion may be coloured by the fact that a WRA minority is the result I want to see.

Are you going with a Wildrose minority as your prediction? I think that would be really interesting on a few fronts:

A) how many PCs cross the floor?
B) how does Smith build support and what policies does she sacrifice to do it?
C) who supports them? I can't see the NDP or Liberals there....and the whole campaign is against the PCs, so there could be some bad blood there.

Interesting to say the least...

[Azure]

I honestly don't get why they're doing that well.

The PCs haven't done a great job by any means, but we're talking about a party that has held power for 30 years, and they're being run to the ground by a party that has never held power, and was formed only a few years ago. Not only that, but their policies are vague, even if I DO support them.

Weird.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Slava

Are you going with a Wildrose minority as your prediction? I think that would be really interesting on a few fronts:

A) how many PCs cross the floor?
B) how does Smith build support and what policies does she sacrifice to do it?
C) who supports them? I can't see the NDP or Liberals there....and the whole campaign is against the PCs, so there could be some bad blood there.

Interesting to say the least...

I would say enough to form a majority if the WRA gets any kind of minority.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by IntenseFan

I predict that soft Liberal and NDP supporters will start to think about lending strategic support to the PCs.

I think that has already happened.

Originally Posted by Slava

A) how many PCs cross the floor?
B) how does Smith build support and what policies does she sacrifice to do it?
C) who supports them? I can't see the NDP or Liberals there....and the whole campaign is against the PCs, so there could be some bad blood there.

The other parties would have to keep them alive for the first 12-18 months and then we'd be into an early election.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Azure

I honestly don't get why they're doing that well.

The PCs haven't done a great job by any means, but we're talking about a party that has held power for 30 years, and they're being run to the ground by a party that has never held power, and was formed only a few years ago. Not only that, but their policies are vague, even if I DO support them.

Weird.

Ya, I wonder whats going on behind the scenes. I've heard a few things but I don't think I'll post them, mostly because its unsubstantiated. If its true though, the PCs are basically out. Its weird, but they barely seem to be putting up a fight, despite what they should have at their disposal.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Azure

I honestly don't get why they're doing that well.

The PCs haven't done a great job by any means, but we're talking about a party that has held power for 30 years, and they're being run to the ground by a party that has never held power, and was formed only a few years ago.

The PC's campaign has been a disaster so far.
It's actually been 40 years.
I think they are doing well because Conservative voters have been waiting for an option for 10 years now as the PC's have been drifting left.
They wouldn't have called the election if they had a choice, perfect storm against them.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Azure

I honestly don't get why they're doing that well.

The PCs haven't done a great job by any means, but we're talking about a party that has held power for 30 years, and they're being run to the ground by a party that has never held power, and was formed only a few years ago. Not only that, but their policies are vague, even if I DO support them.

Weird.

Many of our candidates have been out door knocking for months.

To use my home area as example.

From Kyle Fawcett, March 30:

The election is in full swing, and we've been working like mad here in Calgary-Klein. We've knocked over 1000 doors and had great conversations with people from all walks of life.

From Jeremy Nixon, April 1:

As of yesterday my team and I have knocked 13,000 doors and 800 supporters have taken #wrp lawn sign. Thank you #yycklein for your support!