Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Dion

Rachel Notley will have her hands full with Danielle Smith





https://edmontonjournal.com/news/pol...danielle-smith

She just said high oil prices are bad for Alberta. High Energy prices is good for Alberta.

[chedder]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

^
Warning, David Staples like typing detected.

Hah. As absolutely pathetic as he is as an Oiler shill, I mean superfan, he's an even worse writer when it comes to anything serious. How this man is employed is a miracle.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Yes, they are marginal. 90% + have received at least one dose, and not all of those who haven't been vaccinated share the view you described. It's the very fact that those are her positions, and those people signed up for memberships to have her represent that view. It's a tiny fraction of Alberta. I bet if you polled the people who voted for her, well over 30% would be unvacinated. Her supporters do not represent the typical Albertan, they are outliers. Which is why the whole process is a farce. If she is going to campaign in a general on those points, she is going to get destroyed.

Just the fact that she shares these views is pretty reprehensible. Imagine what AHS would look like if all Albertans followed her crockery? No one vaccinated, hospitals crippled, healthcare workers all quit. Ivermectin sales throguh the roof, no hydroxychloroquine available for those who actually need it. What a wonderful society she represents. But hey, at least everyone had the freedom to choose to screw over the rest of us! I've said it before, Libertarinaism is incompatible with functioning society, and she is a dyed in the wool, self admitted libertarian.

Not all people who got vaccinated agree with it. Some just got it. And it trickles down. Lockdowns, closed businesses, wearing masks, wfh, remote school for kids.

Just because people aren't full out anti-vaxxers doesn't mean they are entirely happy with the role of government over the past 2 and a half years. It's more grey than you think.

I'll give you an example. My work sent everyone to work from home on March 16, 2020. At some point you had to provide proof you had one shot. Then at some point you had to provide proof that you had two shots. This is all while working from home. We went back to the office on April 6, 2022 on a hybrid schedule and you no longer had to provide proof you were vaccinated. So you had to be vaccinated while working at home but it was lifted when you went back to the office. Does that make sense. Now sure we have a 90+% vaccination rate but that doesn't mean people are happy with the politics of having to provide private information.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I'll give you an example. My work sent everyone to work from home on March 16, 2020. At some point you had to provide proof you had one shot. Then at some point you had to provide proof that you had two shots. This is all while working from home. We went back to the office on April 6, 2022 on a hybrid schedule and you no longer had to provide proof you were vaccinated. So you had to be vaccinated while working at home but it was lifted when you went back to the office. Does that make sense. Now sure we have a 90+% vaccination rate but that doesn't mean people are happy with the politics of having to provide private information.

Do you work for the government?

[b1crunch]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Not all people who got vaccinated agree with it. Some just got it. And it trickles down. Lockdowns, closed businesses, wearing masks, wfh, remote school for kids.

Just because people aren't full out anti-vaxxers doesn't mean they are entirely happy with the role of government over the past 2 and a half years. It's more grey than you think.

I'll give you an example. My work sent everyone to work from home on March 16, 2020. At some point you had to provide proof you had one shot. Then at some point you had to provide proof that you had two shots. This is all while working from home. We went back to the office on April 6, 2022 on a hybrid schedule and you no longer had to provide proof you were vaccinated. So you had to be vaccinated while working at home but it was lifted when you went back to the office. Does that make sense. Now sure we have a 90+% vaccination rate but that doesn't mean people are happy with the politics of having to provide private information.

Not sure how that is the Alberta government's fault, unless you work for the provincial government. Even then, they obviously only imposed that rule on their own employees and not the general public. Regardless, your point stands, that not all people that got vaccinated agreed with all government measures.

[Fuzz]

Let us get this straight: Apparently will be only one by-election in Alberta before the next general election.

That by-election will take place in a rural electoral district handpicked to make it easy for premier designate Danielle Smith to win a seat in the provincial Legislature.

Ms. Smith offered this explanation during an episode of CBC’s Power & Politics television program yesterday.

“We’re only going to have one by-election, so we’ll be able to save on that expense,” Ms. Smith responded to reporter David Cochrane’s question about the cost of having an extra by-election when there’s already an electoral district with no MLA...

...Mr. Cochrane: “Why not just run in Calgary? I mean, it’s there, was available, and you wouldn’t have needed to have this second seat to come open?”

Ms. Smith: “Well, there’s, uh, only one by-election that’s, uh, going to be held and so, the, to me it’s, uh, it’s, I really like representing a rural riding. I think this is one of the problems that we have had, is that we have not listened to our rural voices and I want our rural communities to know that we are going to make sure that we are responsive to their needs, and I, I think there’s no better way of doing that than running in a rural riding.”

https://albertapolitics.ca/2022/10/t...anielle-smith/

Pretty pathetic start, Danielle. Apparently she also realizes she has zero hope in the cities.

[Macman]

But what’s the big deal for Smith moving one riding over for a by-election when Singh moved across the country when he was chosen NDP leader? Seems like a non issue to me.

If there’s one thing I’m glad to see it’s Smith taking on Trudeau and see if she can move him from his typical canned responses to everything.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Macman

But what’s the big deal for Smith moving one riding over for a by-election when Singh moved across the country when he was chosen NDP leader? Seems like a non issue to me.

If there’s one thing I’m glad to see it’s Smith taking on Trudeau and see if she can move him from his typical canned responses to everything.

What specifically does taking on Trudeau look like and what specific benefits does in get for Albertans compared to Kenny, Notley or Redford previously.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by GGG

What specifically does taking on Trudeau look like and what specific benefits does in get for Albertans compared to Kenny, Notley or Redford previously.

Odds that Macman doesn't come back with the typical conservative canned responses to anything Trudeau related? Probably pretty low.

I'm willing to say that there didn't even need to be a favorable outcome for Albertans. But she should be seen as owning the NDP - liberal coalition.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Macman

But what’s the big deal for Smith moving one riding over for a by-election when Singh moved across the country when he was chosen NDP leader? Seems like a non issue to me.

If there’s one thing I’m glad to see it’s Smith taking on Trudeau and see if she can move him from his typical canned responses to everything.

She just said they are only having one by-election so they can save money. Only one riding needs a by-election, and it's not the one she is running in. The only reason that one will be vacant is because someone resigned so she could run there. Here excuse for not having one in Calgary is BS. You can tell by the stammering that even she knows it. Like I said, not a great start.

[PepsiFree]

Smith is by far the least intelligent and well-spoken out of her, Kenney, and Notley. Taking on Trudeau? She’s going to embarrass herself and our province. She makes Trudeau look like an over-educated philosopher.

And the issue isn’t moving one riding over, it’s pretending she is doing it for any other reason than the fact that she can’t win the Calgary riding. Everyone knows that’s why, she could just be honest and say she’s going with the better bet.

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

It's so funny how strongly some people seem outraged over the voting results. It costs $10 to vote. $10, that's it. 180,000 people paid this $10 to vote out of 4.5M eligible voting population. You could have helped voting someone else rather than bitching about it now.

You should probably log back in and say your account was hacked or something. Might be the dumbest post in internet history.

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by Slava

Sure, there are global factors and I wouldn't ignore those. How about the idea of a royalty review thrown in for good measure? Or how about the appointment of Tzeporah Berman to the oilsands advisory committee?

I feel like the NDP gets a pass for the global issues, because they obviously can't control the OPEC output and things of that nature. I'm not convinced that those two decisions are a great response to that issue though.

And this thread is hilarious. I said that the WRP and NDP are polar opposites and the response is basically "they're closer than you think".

Far right wing and centre left aren’t polar opposites.

If on the other hand, you went with bat#### crazy and sane, you’d have a fine example of polar opposites.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

https://albertapolitics.ca/2022/10/t...anielle-smith/

Pretty pathetic start, Danielle. Apparently she also realizes she has zero hope in the cities.

She wants to be there for ALL Albertans... Well except Calgary -Elbow

[btimbit]

Can't believe this wingnut is in charge. Embarassing.

Our premier is someone that thinks Malaria medicine has a 100% cure rate for COVID, and that cancer patients should just see naturopaths until at least stage 4.

Is being led by an absolute nutjob really worth it just to stick to to Trudeau?

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Izzle

She wants to be there for ALL Albertans... Well except Calgary -Elbow

Calgary-Elbow; the notorious socialist wasteland no conservative leader could ever expect to win.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

You should probably log back in and say your account was hacked or something. Might be the dumbest post in internet history.

Look who’s talking about dumbest posts and logging back.

[Macman]

Originally Posted by GGG

What specifically does taking on Trudeau look like and what specific benefits does in get for Albertans compared to Kenny, Notley or Redford previously.

Didn’t Trudeau just decline to help with energy to Germany, a lot of that would have come from Alberta. There’s also the growing homeless issue not just in AB but all across the country. So she could start by saying Trudeau should be a better advocate for Canadians.

[surferguy]

She could start by calling a general election right now.

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Look who’s talking about dumbest posts and logging back.

Killer retort, Pee Wee.