April 23 2012: Alberta Provincial Election

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

More importantly, what did you have for lunch?

Tuna sandwich... but thats not important... whats really important is how long you've been driving and do you still get po'd because your bus is late? If only your mom & dad would let you have your own car.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Tuna sandwich... but thats not important... whats really important is how long you've been driving and do you still get po'd because your bus is late? If only your mom & dad would let you have your own car.

You get that the bus was late thread was a satire right? By you treating as something that was serious you're showing your ignorance. And I own my own car thanks.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

I agree to a certain extent, in that I think there is a real need for the BC regime to be subjected to a thorough appellate review. But in the meantime, having read the decision of the BCSC here, its reasoning makes no sense: I'm therefore pretty comfortable saying that, at least, the constitutionality of the .05 regime is highly questionable.

Damn law school students - our foremost constitutional law experts. I say that with love.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Are advanced polls open on weekend?

Yes they are open tomorrow (Saturday)

9:00 AM to 8:00 PM You can find out where you vote here: http://wtv.elections.ab.ca/wtWhereDoIVote.cfm?MID=WH1

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

You get that the bus was late thread was a satire right? By you treating as something that was serious you're showing your ignorance. And I own my own car thanks.

Dad finally bought one for you eh? Good for you. Moved out of their basement yet?

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Dad finally bought one for you eh? Good for you. Moved out of their basement yet?

Actually I haven't lived at home for 8 years. But thanks for your concern.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

Actually I haven't lived at home for 8 years. But thanks for your concern.

I forgot... they threw you out didn't they. I wonder why?
Could it possibly be because you're an annoying little piece of ####?

[jayswin]

^^^^^^

[First Lady]

Sheesh, time out guys. You are beginning to sound like political parties.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Rerun

I forgot... they threw you out didn't they. I wonder why?
Could it possibly be because you're an annoying little piece of ####?

Hey if you want to have a lovers spat with someone do it on PM, the best thing about this thread has been the fact that it has stayed on topic remarkably well for a political thread and it doesn't need either of your petty pissing contests.

Also I also get offended by the Downfall joke videos, but only because they aren't funny not because I am daft enough to think that anyone is calling someone Hitler...

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Maybe we should have a poll for this? I'm kind of interested to see how CP will be voting on Monday.

Ok... back on track... enough of this squabling with YB.

Yeah.. would be interesting but I wouldn't believe any poll on here. Too many people would screw around with it... sort of an internal CP Jihad.

Would be interested to know how many people here are voting in the advance polls. Seems to get more and more popular every year.

[kn]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Would be interested to know how many people here are voting in the advance polls. Seems to get more and more popular every year.

I'll be voting tomorrow. I think it's a convenient alternative now that you don't have to have an excuse.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

It really shouldn't exist, but its pretty obvious that people in minority enclaves tend to vote for minority candidates, since the perception is they will react to issues specific to them sooner than someone who isn't as connected to their community. Is it stupid? yes. Is it backwards? yes. Does it happen anyway? Yes, ask PC candidate Muhammad Rasheed.

I don't believe that ethnic voters are more likely to vote for candidates of the same ethnicity in any meaningful way (at least not in liberal western democracies.) For a relatively anecdotal example, in Calgary's last mayoral election, Nenshi's worst results came from ridings on Calgary's east side with the most muslim and South Asian residents (see results and riding profiles.)

Also, how many black voters in the United States would have voted for Herman Cain over Bill Clinton? This study on partisanship and ethnicity concluded that partisan political group identification was far more dominant than ethnic group identification among American latinos.

More importantly, this study from the University of Oxford considered thi exact question in the context of the 2010 British General Election and concluded as follows:

To summarize the main results of this paper are that white British voters are less likely to vote for Muslim candidates, but there is insufficient evidence that minority candidates in general face an ethnic penalty at the ballot box. While there are slight, and statistically insignificant, indications that Muslim voters are more likely to vote for Muslim candidates than others, there is no sign that ethnic minority voters prefer to vote for ethnic minority candidates in general or even co-ethnic candidates.

So, it may be a perception that this occurs, but it seems to be imagined. And in my view, it is unacceptable for candidates to exploit these sorts of imagined, racially-based perceptions.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

I agree to a certain extent, in that I think there is a real need for the BC regime to be subjected to a thorough appellate review. But in the meantime, having read the decision of the BCSC here, its reasoning makes no sense: I'm therefore pretty comfortable saying that, at least, the constitutionality of the .05 regime is highly questionable.

I read the Sivia decision and I'm clearly have less concerns than you. In my view, the license suspensions are clearly not punitive, and therefore don't attract Charter scrutiny. I would have to look more closely at the fines imposed by the Alberta legislation, and I find the distinction between deterrent fines and punitive fines to be a problematic distinction to draw in many cases (both with respect to the question of whether they are intra vires the provincial government and whether they attract s. 8 Charter protections), but it seems to me that it is the license suspensions which most people are really annoyed by anyway (although perhaps I'm wrong about that.)

In any event, I don't want to ruin this thread with a bunch of law nerd discussion. And obviously, just because legislation is constitutionally valid does not mean that it is good legislation.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Makarov

I don't believe that ethnic voters are more likely to vote for candidates of the same ethnicity in any meaningful way (at least not in liberal western democracies.)

Depends on what you define "ethnic voters" as. If I'm a 3rd generation Canadian from one of those "ethnic" countries (whatever that is), perhaps you're right. But I've been led to believe that 1st generation and perhaps even some 2nd generation Canadians tend to block vote.... which to me seems logical as they probably feel more comfortable voting for someone that comes from the same background that they do. New country, new customs, in some cases new language.. Why wouldn't they want to vote for someone more like them that has the same concerns they do?

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Depends on what you define "ethnic voters" as. If I'm a 3rd generation Canadian from one of those "ethnic" countries (whatever that is), perhaps you're right. But I've been led to believe that 1st generation and perhaps even some 2nd generation Canadians tend to block vote.... which to me seems logical as they probably feel more comfortable voting for someone that comes from the same background that they do. New country, new customs, in some cases new language.. Why wouldn't they want to vote for someone more like them that has the same concerns they do?

Because people of the same ethnicity don't all have the same concerns? And even to the extent that the majority of an ethnic group might have similar concerns, the studies that I have read, and common sense suggests (i.e., most black voters won't vote for Herman Cain, no matter how black he is), that those voters tend to vote as a bloc for the candidate or party which best addresses those concerns, not the candidate from their ethnicity (where they aren't the same of course.)

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Because people of the same ethnicity don't all have the same concerns? And even to the extent that the majority of an ethnic group might have similar concerns, the studies that I have read, and common sense suggests (i.e., most black voters won't vote for Herman Cain, no matter how black he is), that those voters tend to vote as a bloc for the candidate or party which best addresses those concerns, not the candidate from their ethnicity (where they aren't the same of course.)

Most black voters in the States aren't 1st or 2nd generation US citizens (which was kind of the point in my response to you about ethnic voting)... and if they were, I doubt they would identify with Cain, even though he is black. They probably have as much chance of identifying with him as I have identifying with those spoiled rich broads on that new tv show Real Housewifes of Vancouver

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Most black voters in the States aren't 1st or 2nd generation US citizens (which was kind of the point in my response to you about ethnic voting)... and if they were, I doubt they would identify with Cain, even though he is black. They probably have as much chance of identifying with him as I have identifying with those spoiled rich broads on that new tv show Real Housewifes of Vancouver

Firstly, Leech made no such distinction between Muslims/Sikhs and new immigrants in his comments.

Second, as the the studies I linked to suggest (including one that focused on Latinos in America, which, as the fastest growing ethnic group in America, is surely made up of millions and millions of new immigrants), ethnic voting blocs, to the extent that they exist, identify with candidates/party who speak to their concerns, not to candidates of the same ethnicity (although obviously sometimes the candidate/party who speaks to that groups concerns is also a member of that ethnic group.)

Lastly, this is all really a collateral issue (although an interesting one.) The real problem that I have with Leech's supposedly new-and-improved comments are that he is effectively saying this to his Muslim/Sikh voters: Look, the non-Muslim and non-Sikh decision-makers/power holders in your government (i.e., old white people like me) hold the mistaken and stereotypical belief that "you people" only vote for "you people" candidates, and therefore they won't take your "you people" candidate seriously. However, they will take me seriously because I am white and therefore wasn't elected solely because I am one of "you people". Therefore you should vote for me. I find that appalling.

[Flickered Flame]

Originally Posted by kn

Paula Simons made a several great comments tonight on the Rod Breakenridge show but I wanted to bring attention to this one in particular (paraphrased):

She said that she has no doubts that Danielle Smith is not racist or homophobic, but by failing to come out early and condemning what Huntsperger said, Smith has given license to those who are racist and homophobic to think that their beliefs are validated.

I agree 100% with this. It is like when we deal with bullying issues at schools. If we (teachers) ignore the problem, it justifies the bully's behavior and actually allows the issue to grow and become a much bigger issue.

[killer_carlson]

I think the pcs will win a bunch of the rural seats as well.

As much as the pcs will try to frame this as something otherwise, if there wr does win, it will be because they take as many or more urban seats from the pcs.