April 23 2012: Alberta Provincial Election

[First Lady]

LOL Slava "undecided" *snicker*

[corporatejay]

This guy thinks supporting corporations is "going to the left".

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Which one is Slava?

Thanks Trout.

Vic = Slava

[Senator Clay Davis]

It all depends right? Al Sharpton gets painted that way because his actions show that. He never is there for a black on white crime, whereas a white on black crime will get him there (with TV cameras of course) ASAP. MLK was also a black man, but advocated for more than just black rights (women's rights, ending poverty, ending Vietnam), so he was rightly viewed as someone who fought for all rights, not just blacks rights.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Rerun

The truth is that these are isolated incidents. Every party attracts the occasional nutter candidate. Unfortunately as a result of the nomination process these people get nominated as a party rep without being properly screened and its like this with every party. No way a party has time to do a thorough background check on every person who is vying for nomination in every riding.

Mistakes happen and ridings elect the wrong candidate to represent their party without knowing all the facts.... and sometime they keep on electing them (ie Rob Anders) for what ever god knows misguided reason.

Anyways, just because a party has the occasional kook doesn't mean the whole party is nuts.... just like if you have the occasional idiot on Cp it doesn't mean all CP'ers are idiots.

I take these nutjobs with a grain of salt knowing that no way in hell will they ever close to the reins of power.

But the problem is that the party has largely glossed over their rank-and-file candidates and instead chosen to focus entirely on their leader. So when an issue like this pops up, we, as a voting public, lack the perspective to say where the rest of the party fits. All we've really heard from in the media are the leader and the nutters. Maybe that's in part the fault of the media, but it's something that they could have definitely prepared for and addressed.
I felt from the beginning that the Wildrose needed to focus on themselves as a team, give us some star candidates outside of Smith so we'd feel comfortable with the government and cabinet that they'd create.
This whole incident confirms something that a lot of people suspected all along: that there are a few nutters in the WRA. Like you say, not a shock, and every party has a couple. I think a lot of people were prepared to vote for them despite that, given an apparently very strong leader. But if the leader isn't strong enough to stand up when someone says something really offensive, then it magnifies all those concerns that a lot of people might have been willing to overlook. It does raise the question of where the balance of power within the party lies.

I made up my mind a while ago who I was going to vote for. But I was talking to my parents this week. They're highly christian, rural, lifelong conservative voters. They had made the decision to vote for the WRA this time around, and now have switched back to the conservatives in the last couple days as a result of these comments and the lack of response to them from Smith. I'm sure they're not alone in that... the question is how many people will be making the same decision.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Slava is undecided. He's deciding which party he wants to vote against Wildrose for.

[troutman]

Slava is "average".

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by troutman

Slava is "average".

Is that quote from his wife?

[troutman]

Commercials = 40 minutes

Fear-mongering by Slava = 40 seconds

[Senator Clay Davis]

Well done First_Lady, well done. I actually had people looking at me when I was laughing.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by octothorp

But the problem is that the party has largely glossed over their rank-and-file candidates and instead chosen to focus entirely on their leader. So when an issue like this pops up, we, as a voting public, lack the perspective to say where the rest of the party fits. All we've really heard from in the media are the leader and the nutters. Maybe that's in part the fault of the media, but it's something that they could have definitely prepared for and addressed.
I felt from the beginning that the Wildrose needed to focus on themselves as a team, give us some star candidates outside of Smith so we'd feel comfortable with the government and cabinet that they'd create.
This whole incident confirms something that a lot of people suspected all along: that there are a few nutters in the WRA. Like you say, not a shock, and every party has a couple. I think a lot of people were prepared to vote for them despite that, given an apparently very strong leader. But if the leader isn't strong enough to stand up when someone says something really offensive, then it magnifies all those concerns that a lot of people might have been willing to overlook. It does raise the question of where the balance of power within the party lies.

I made up my mind a while ago who I was going to vote for. But I was talking to my parents this week. They're highly christian, rural, lifelong conservative voters. They had made the decision to vote for the WRA this time around, and now have switched back to the conservatives in the last couple days as a result of these comments and the lack of response to them from Smith. I'm sure they're not alone in that... the question is how many people will be making the same decision.

All good points. IMO she should have come down harder on those candidates who made the stupid comments... but she's new and she's in the front end of the learning curve. Give her time and give her the benefit of a doubt. She'll do better with time.

[troutman]

These are "average voters"? Sounds like they are all political bloggers.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by troutman

Commercials = 40 minutes

Fear-mongering by Slava = 40 seconds

Today's lesson that I already knew... the left lies.

[First Lady]

Slava is doing very well.

Goes to show, oral communication is superior to the typed word.

[Knalus]

An earthquake releasing dangerous CO2 in the middle of a town? That's the dumbest thing I've heard this month. Wow.

[troutman]

Who is going to call?

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Knalus

An earthquake releasing dangerous CO2 in the middle of a town? That's the dumbest thing I've heard this month. Wow.

I was dumbfounded too.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Knalus

An earthquake releasing dangerous CO2 in the middle of a town? That's the dumbest thing I've heard this month. Wow.

Now I don't know much about the whole technical side of the whole carbon capture thing, but when he was saying it, all I could think was is this person on crack?

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Knalus

An earthquake releasing dangerous CO2 in the middle of a town? That's the dumbest thing I've heard this month. Wow.

What, you've never heard of killer carbon clouds wreaking havoc on cities

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by Jacks

What, you've never heard of killer carbon clouds wreaking havoc on cities

Yeah, I have. But those exist at very specific locations, all of them volcanic.

If the CO2 had a chance of leaking like that, the Natural Gas would have long ago, and we wouldn't have an industry in this province.