Alberta Election Thread - Election Day April 16 2019

[CaptainCrunch]

The good thing is that its a relatively short campaign, only 13 days left.


Get ready for the sweet release

[Looch City]

That's what I'm saying, nothing like a good Red Mile run to cheer everyone back up.

It's really perfect timing.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by V

I would propose that not all children need to be protected from their parents. I know I didn’t use green text, but I thought that was pretty clear.

The legislation doesn’t prevent kids from telling their parents themselves.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Actually surprised how divisive some of CP has become. Look at prior election threads and it was at least civil discourse based on some common centrist beliefs I think pretty much all Calgarians agree with.

Now we're into the 2-party USA mentality here where you're either on my side or you're the enemy and must be crushed.

Notley set the tone for this election campaign early with the overheated rhetoric and personal attacks. They really don't have a record to stand against so chose this route instead. With the huge amount of third party dollars being spent by Unions (and US foundations apparently) this only amplifies things.

The UCP policy of allowing individuals to be able opt-out of union dues for political uses will likely make a huge impact in reigning in these attack ads and forcing some accountability on the number one advertisers in recent elections.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

That's what I'm saying, nothing like a good Red Mile run to cheer everyone back up.

The playoffs Just wait for the Flames to lose games 1 and 2 at home and be down 0-2 on the 16th. Then on the morning of the 16th, Connor McDavid speaks to the media and demands a trade.

PEAK CHAOS

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Notley set the tone for this election campaign early with the overheated rhetoric and personal attacks.

Yeah, she probably also secretly planted candidate sleepers because it's certainly not the UCP's fault that their candidates have been:

• refusing to believe that homosexuals can have true love
• white nationalists afraid of immigrants replacing them
• vocal about transexual people being perversions
• tied to conversion therapy groups
• believe that the UN controls our borders

I kind of sort of agree that the Jason Kenney attack ad from his past was a bit unsavory, it's been a long time people can change. But when he's still fighting over GSA, it's clear he hasn't changed enough.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by GGG

Don’t forget 50/50 diploma exams which disadvantage albertans applying to universities outside Alberta and the elimination of discovery/inquiry based learning and New Math(Whcih needs tweaks as it requires more repetition but the concepts are amazing).

Last year when my kids were applying to schools they were told by more than one out of province university that they scale/factor marks from the provinces in order to equalize them as much as possible. Alberta students were 'boosted' compared to other provinces. There didn't seem to be any disadvantage that we could distinguish. The universities aren't stupid, they can track entrance marks by province and compare to how the students perform when they get to university and from there can compare grades from different provinces fairly accurately.

[IliketoPuck]

Looks like the NDP campaign to focus the attention of the debate on anything but their abysmal fiscal and economic track record is working.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Looks like the NDP campaign to focus the attention of the debate on anything but their abysmal fiscal and economic track record is working.

I'm wondering where I can focus on the UCP's (or PC or WR or Reform or SC or whatever form we're going to credit them with) non-abysmal fiscal and economic track record, and where it can be found.

Maybe it's somewhere in the abyss where our Heritage Fund is supposed to be.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

I'm wondering where I can focus on the UCP's (or PC or WR or Reform or SC or whatever form we're going to credit them with) non-abysmal fiscal and economic track record can be found.

Maybe it's somewhere in the abyss where our Heritage Fund is supposed to be.

It's locked in the diamond-encrusted vault in the middle of their Sky Palace

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Looks like the NDP campaign to focus the attention of the debate on anything but their abysmal fiscal and economic track record is working.

To be fair, the UCP is making it pretty damn easy for them.

[Rando]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Last year when my kids were applying to schools they were told by more than one out of province university that they scale/factor marks from the provinces in order to equalize them as much as possible. Alberta students were 'boosted' compared to other provinces. There didn't seem to be any disadvantage that we could distinguish. The universities aren't stupid, they can track entrance marks by province and compare to how the students perform when they get to university and from there can compare grades from different provinces fairly accurately.

Yikes. Heard things like this before. It's an issue I'll be dealing with two years from now. Got lucky she takes after the better half and has always taking to academia well but it's a concern.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

... under the proposed UCP education act, private school students will be funded at 100 per cent of their public school counterparts. ...

Why shouldn't they be funded the same? Their parents pay the same education taxes.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Notley set the tone for this election campaign early with the overheated rhetoric and personal attacks. They really don't have a record to stand against so chose this route instead. With the huge amount of third party dollars being spent by Unions (and US foundations apparently) this only amplifies things.

The UCP policy of allowing individuals to be able opt-out of union dues for political uses will likely make a huge impact in reigning in these attack ads and forcing some accountability on the number one advertisers in recent elections.

That’s hilarious. It’s as if Kenney hasn’t been running off his mouth attacking the NDP since he bought his fancy blue truck with his federal paycheck. The tone has been there for two years, the NDP just decided to fight dirty back.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Well, I'm on the same side of the issue as you, but I don't love this take either. Is that what you propose, that laws be made on the basis of what people who are directly implicated by the outcome of those laws think the law should be? How could that possibly be an objective and unbiased method? Let's let sentencing guidelines for murder be dictated by murderers and their victims' families, while we're at it - they have first hand experience, after all.

The discussion has moved past this, but i’ll just clarify. I didn’t intend to suggest what you’re saying, only that there is enough non-hypothetical information out there from people actually directly impacted by policies like this that is worth seeking out.

Not that you have to agree or disagree with the UCP policy. Just that everyone from policy makers to people forming opinions on those policies could gain some valuable perspective from people directly affected.

...and that only gay people should make all policies from now on. You’re welcome in advance.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Last year when my kids were applying to schools they were told by more than one out of province university that they scale/factor marks from the provinces in order to equalize them as much as possible. Alberta students were 'boosted' compared to other provinces. There didn't seem to be any disadvantage that we could distinguish. The universities aren't stupid, they can track entrance marks by province and compare to how the students perform when they get to university and from there can compare grades from different provinces fairly accurately.

Is that just true in Canada or of North America as well?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

The UCP policy of allowing individuals to be able opt-out of union dues for political uses will likely make a huge impact in reigning in these attack ads and forcing some accountability on the number one advertisers in recent elections.

Not sure what you’re basing that bold prediction on. After the US Supreme Court ruled against public sector Unions in the Janus case(which basically made all public sector jobs right to work) there was barely any decline in Union membership and a number of jurisdictions saw increased membership numbers.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Janus Supreme Court case here’s the basic rundown: Mark Janus was a longtime public sector worker who after years of paying his dues suddenly decided to be the main plaintiff in a fight to not have to pay union dues, the case was initiated by Illinois state governor/billionaire Bruce Rauner. Janus claimed he loved his job but didn’t feel he should have to pay dues, even though his union would still be legally required to represent him in the event he wanted them to. His case and legal team were funded by the Illinois Policy Institute, an anti-union conservative group with about $7M in annual revenue to work with each year. After the 5-4 ruling in favour of Janus (made a by a court who the majority of its judges were appointed by republicans) he almost immediately quit his job that he “loved” and was given a position with...the Illinois Policy Institute.

Crazy_eoj if you don’t like Unions(who have and will always have less money to spend than large corporations) making political contributions because it counters the contributions from corporations(who have and will always have much more money than Unions to spend) why don’t you just advocate to abolish all political contributions so that candidates can run on their character and platform instead of on who has the most money behind them? I hope this isn’t simply an issue of you only wanting the interests of certain groups being lobbied, as that seems like it would be a fairly hypocritical position.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The discussion has moved past this, but i’ll just clarify. I didn’t intend to suggest what you’re saying, only that there is enough non-hypothetical information out there from people actually directly impacted by policies like this that is worth seeking out.

Not that you have to agree or disagree with the UCP policy. Just that everyone from policy makers to people forming opinions on those policies could gain some valuable perspective from people directly affected.

...and that only gay people should make all policies from now on. You’re welcome in advance.

Yeah, I'd take two years of queer policy. It would be good. So let's sketch out what that looks like.

[AFireInside]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Why shouldn't they be funded the same? Their parents pay the same education taxes.

If those private schools don't discriminate on who they accept based barriers like high tuition/fees or any other reason then sure fund them.

If wealthy families want their kids to go to schools that only other wealthy families can afford then they can pay for it out of their own pocket.

It's the same as the government subsidizing Teslas. Tax dollars shouldn't be subsidizing luxury items.

In the situation where the school is a special needs school then that could be different.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Why shouldn't they be funded the same? Their parents pay the same education taxes.

On thing that gets way overlooked in this debate, that I just recently learned, is that private schools aren't required to take students that need special attention/resources such as ESL, or kids with disabilities.

So when every student is given the same funding, the schools that are required to take those students end up with students that on average require more funding, but are funded at the same per capita level.

Essentially private schools, when getting full funding, wind up with a higher ratio of funding/required resource/student.