How that translates into a big potential problem nobody knows, especially considering we are talking about a provincial government. Its not like they would ban same-sex marriage and abortion tomorrow if they were elected today.
On the other hand, its nice to know the PCs can get away with almost a decade of ridiculous policies without having to be accountable simply because Albertans are scared of a supposed fringe part of the WR Party being more social conservative than they like.
Perhaps those social issues are important to Albertans?
Also, WRP supporters seem to put a great deal of stock in the fact that the WRP hasn't made any "governing errors" (in contrast to the Progressive Conservatives.) Unfortunately for the WRP, this alone is not particularly persuasive. Indeed, the WRP shares this bragging point with every party in Alberta (except of course the Progressive Conservatives. )
__________________
"Life of Russian hockey veterans is very hard," said Soviet hockey star Sergei Makarov. "Most of them don't have enough to eat these days. These old players are Russian legends."
On the other hand, its nice to know the PCs can get away with almost a decade of ridiculous policies without having to be accountable simply because Albertans are scared of a supposed fringe part of the WR Party being more social conservative than they like.
The Wildrose failed to present policies of the quality that would make accepting their bozo eruptions a good trade off. It's not just the risk side of the equation that they need to work on, but also the reward side.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Makarov
Perhaps those social issues are important to Albertans?
Also, WRP supporters seem to put a great deal of stock in the fact that the WRP hasn't made any "governing errors" (in contrast to the Progressive Conservatives.) Unfortunately for the WRP, this alone is not particularly persuasive. Indeed, the WRP shares this bragging point with every party in Alberta (except of course the Progressive Conservatives. )
The vote buying and the fear mongering campain is something the PC supporters must be proud of. Good luck getting the teachers and public sector unions voting for the PC's next time. They won't be suckered a second time.
The vote buying and the fear mongering campain is something the PC supporters must be proud of. Good luck getting the teachers and public sector unions voting for the PC's next time. They won't be suckered a second time.
So who do you think they'll go vote for? Its a tough sell for the Wildrose to say to a public servant "hey, we think you're all overpaid and waste too much, so support me on election day." People think of their wallet when they vote.
The vote buying and the fear mongering campain is something the PC supporters must be proud of. Good luck getting the teachers and public sector unions voting for the PC's next time. They won't be suckered a second time.
If the Wildrose is promising bigger spending cuts than the PCs (as they did in this election), then the PCs will retain the union vote. And the Wildrose pretty much has to keep promising to spend less than the PCs, or they'll be seen as attempting precisely the sort of vote buying that they accused Redford of.
The vote buying and the fear mongering campain is something the PC supporters must be proud of. Good luck getting the teachers and public sector unions voting for the PC's next time. They won't be suckered a second time.
There is the fear of the Wildrose Party actually obtaining power that will cause a lot of the centrists to vote PC in the next election. People may not get "suckered" into wanting to vote for the PC's because of what the PC's promise to do, but rather for what the Wildrose promise to do.
The Wildrose failed to present policies of the quality that would make accepting their bozo eruptions a good trade off. It's not just the risk side of the equation that they need to work on, but also the reward side.
Fair enough. But at least criticize them on their ACTUAL policies instead of their SUPPOSED social conservative views.
There's probably no chance in hell that I'm going to vote for the PC's in the next election, I didn't trust them on this election but the idiots in the Wildrose pulled a midnight change in my voting due to the open mouth insert idiocy syndrome.
If the Wildrose pushes the more radical ideas out I will probably vote for them. If not I'll find the nearest Marxist Leninist Candidate and cram his name on my ballot.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Fair enough. But at least criticize them on their ACTUAL policies instead of their SUPPOSED social conservative views.
Can't it be both?
Let's not forget that these social conservatives aren't some anonymous party members. They were actual candidates accepted by the party. Let's also not forget the "conscience rights" thing that came straight from Danielle Smith.
As far as policy goes, "we'll fund municipal infrastructure when we have surpluses" is precisely the opposite of what I'd advocate for as a Keynesian.
I also want to mention that there's also a bit of a funny effect where the Wildrose has attracted the social conservative, rural crowd and that alone makes the the conservative, rural party (in the eyes of some voters, at least). It's not entirely fair, but it's something they must contend with. How do they convince urban voters to support them where their power base is clearly rural? Yet if urban voters were to support them, then their power base could shift.
I see things like their landowner rights policy as something which is clearly beneficial to rural voters yet detrimental to urban voters (surely accomodating landowners when building things like power lines costs money). Wouldn't voting for them essentially be voting against my own interest?
The Wildrose has a long way to go to be a solid alternative to the PCs. They might get elected regardless, but picking the lesser choice out of spite is not a path that appeals to me.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
So who do you think they'll go vote for? Its a tough sell for the Wildrose to say to a public servant "hey, we think you're all overpaid and waste too much, so support me on election day." People think of their wallet when they vote.
Then they complain to anyone who will listen about how a promise was broken which I find ridiculous. You got what you voted for so suck it up and wait till the next election. I know a nurse who said a memo was sent to all union members to vote for Redford as they feared what Smith was going to do.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard
There is the fear of the Wildrose Party actually obtaining power that will cause a lot of the centrists to vote PC in the next election. People may not get "suckered" into wanting to vote for the PC's because of what the PC's promise to do, but rather for what the Wildrose promise to do.
You mean all the fear mongering that got the PC's the win? I didn't buy the garbage that Redford was selling. Smith made some mistakes during the election but I give her credit for admitting to such and making the effort to move away from the extreme policies the WR had. I have a great deal of respect for people who are willing to admit the mistakes they made.
When was the last time Redford apologised for anything other than making excuses or passing the buck? It's never her fault and she can't be trusted.
How that translates into a big potential problem nobody knows, especially considering we are talking about a provincial government. Its not like they would ban same-sex marriage and abortion tomorrow if they were elected today.
On the other hand, its nice to know the PCs can get away with almost a decade of ridiculous policies without having to be accountable simply because Albertans are scared of a supposed fringe part of the WR Party being more social conservative than they like.
I think it is obvious that it because a problem because the general population of Alberta thought it was a problem. Either because of the way it was handled or wasn't handled.
You can't claim to be separate from a statement someone makes when you stand up and defend them when asked about it, regardless of why you are defending them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Fair enough. But at least criticize them on their ACTUAL policies instead of their SUPPOSED social conservative views.
How about their PERCEIVED social views? Politics is about 100% about perception. It has nothing to do with the reality of what will be better for the province and everything to do with what the public thinks the people (and party) they are voting for represents. If the party cannot correct that perception then I think they will have issues.
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
Then they complain to anyone who will listen about how a promise was broken which I find ridiculous. You got what you voted for so suck it up and wait till the next election. I know a nurse who said a memo was sent to all union members to vote for Redford as they feared what Smith was going to do.
Well that's kind of my point though. If a party came and said "we're going to do this and it will negatively impact all financial advisors" I would vote against them. If another party said they wouldn't do that, I would vote for them instead. Obviously if they went back I would be angry though...why shouldn't I be? Voters might be apathetic, but to think they'll ignore an obvious threat to their own livelihood is just naive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dion
You mean all the fear mongering that got the PC's the win? I didn't buy the garbage that Redford was selling. Smith made some mistakes during the election but I give her credit for admitting to such and making the effort to move away from the extreme policies the WR had. I have a great deal of respect for people who are willing to admit the mistakes they made.
When was the last time Redford apologised for anything other than making excuses or passing the buck? It's never her fault and she can't be trusted.
This is actually quite interesting to me. At what point do the policy changes and eliminations make them 'just another party'? Obviously I'm talking about the idiot candidates spouting off, but about actual policies. If the Wildrose jettisoned their private health approach (purely as an example), resource revenue cheques and conscience rights are they still different enough to represent any sort of change?
Oh you mean the thread created by a Wild Rose fan boy went off track? It was a weak attempt to bash Redford and the PC's and it backfired on the WR fanboy.
None the less, it remains telling that you have been completely unable to answer the question that was posed. The only response you could have made was to deflect, as usual, to try and distract from the glaring faults of your party and its leadership.
You're basically the Ignatief Liberals at this point. "I have no ideas and no understanding of how to run this province, but man, those other guys are scary because I say so."
The Following User Says Thank You to Resolute 14 For This Useful Post:
You mean all the fear mongering that got the PC's the win? I didn't buy the garbage that Redford was selling. Smith made some mistakes during the election but I give her credit for admitting to such and making the effort to move away from the extreme policies the WR had. I have a great deal of respect for people who are willing to admit the mistakes they made.
When was the last time Redford apologised for anything other than making excuses or passing the buck? It's never her fault and she can't be trusted.
What has Smith apologized for? As for fear mongering there was some of that in the election, however I would argue that the Wildrose has been much more guilty of it in relative to the PCs... you don't remember the "Same Old PCs" advertisements with such great lines as, "Maybe they don't care about you"... "Higher taxes for every Albertan who enjoys a good beer" ... "what do the PCs want to do with your taxes, give it to more bureaucrats and juicy contracts for their friends"
Also I don't recall Smith issuing any apologies or admitting that she was wrong.
You mean all the fear mongering that got the PC's the win? I didn't buy the garbage that Redford was selling. Smith made some mistakes during the election but I give her credit for admitting to such and making the effort to move away from the extreme policies the WR had. I have a great deal of respect for people who are willing to admit the mistakes they made.
Wait, so was there fear mongering or were the WRA policies too extreme?
If it is the former, then Smith is admitting to mistakes she didn't make just for positive press (considerably less noble than admitting one's own mistakes wouldn't you say), if it is the latter then your accusations that it was just fear mongering to get the PCs a win are wrong because they were obviously legitimate fears that did not resonate with the populace.
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard
What has Smith apologized for? As for fear mongering there was some of that in the election, however I would argue that the Wildrose has been much more guilty of it in relative to the PCs... you don't remember the "Same Old PCs" advertisements with such great lines as, "Maybe they don't care about you"... "Higher taxes for every Albertan who enjoys a good beer" ... "what do the PCs want to do with your taxes, give it to more bureaucrats and juicy contracts for their friends"
Also I don't recall Smith issuing any apologies or admitting that she was wrong.
How is that fear-mongering when its mostly true?
The Following User Says Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
Well that's kind of my point though. If a party came and said "we're going to do this and it will negatively impact all financial advisors" I would vote against them. If another party said they wouldn't do that, I would vote for them instead. Obviously if they went back I would be angry though...why shouldn't I be? Voters might be apathetic, but to think they'll ignore an obvious threat to their own livelihood is just naive.
Voters should have been smart enough to realise that "Alison spend alot" wouldn't be able to deliver on all those campaign promises. I'm no financial guru but I knew there was going to be trouble down the road. I sometimes wonder if voters have their heads in the sand.
Quote:
This is actually quite interesting to me. At what point do the policy changes and eliminations make them 'just another party'? Obviously I'm talking about the idiot candidates spouting off, but about actual policies. If the Wildrose jettisoned their private health approach (purely as an example), resource revenue cheques and conscience rights are they still different enough to represent any sort of change?
I think it can represent change if it's a move in the right direction. Smith was a rookie in the election and made some bad moves and comments. The idiot candidate fiasco was handled wrong and she admitted to it later. The next election will be one that Smith has to win is she hopes to remain as leader
The thing I hate is how polices can be spun by the opposition to make a party look bad. Redford made the WRP to look like monsters with her fear mongering and the gullible voters bought it. the idoit candidates were never going to be elected and her private health approach was going to sink public health care.
None the less, it remains telling that you have been completely unable to answer the question that was posed. The only response you could have made was to deflect, as usual, to try and distract from the glaring faults of your party and its leadership.
You're basically the Ignatief Liberals at this point. "I have no ideas and no understanding of how to run this province, but man, those other guys are scary because I say so."
Alison Redford has been premier for 18 months. Her government is still in its infancy (when one considers how long it takes to draft and enact any meaningful or complex legislation, let alone the policy development work that precedes it.)
There are a number of encouraging signs (in my view):
(1) the proposed carbon tax;
(2) complete redrafting of the Municipal Government Act (draft copy to tabled in spring of 2015) that will hopefully dramatically alter the relationship between the province and its municipalities (and Calgary and Edmonton in particular);
(3) reinstatement of healthcare funding for gender reassignment surgery;
(4) successfully lobbying Siemens to move their Canadian energy research division to Calgary (this was apparently carried out during the much criticized trip to the London Olympics btw); and
(5) Ms. Redford's forceful campaigning in the United States for the Keystone pipeline.
__________________
"Life of Russian hockey veterans is very hard," said Soviet hockey star Sergei Makarov. "Most of them don't have enough to eat these days. These old players are Russian legends."
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Makarov For This Useful Post:
