Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's a strange response. Haven't we gone over this in the Canadian politics thread that it doesn't matter what any Conservative leader says that they won't touch those issues that many just don't believe them nor trust them. I just don't trust her. That's not a lie.

There are only 2 choices this next election, and it comes down to who you think is a more capable leader. Smith or Notley. Now, if you want to sit her and tell me Smith is more intelligent, more capable, and has better ideas go ahead. But don't expect people to respect that choice, because it puts you in the same camp as selfish science denying paste eaters.

[Inglewood Jack]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

the alternative is also the devil.

and that my friends is how the Smith 2023-2027 term came to pass

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

And don’t you mock people for treating Conservatives that way?

Hey man. I'm just saying that turnabout is fair play. As annoying as you think my quote it's the same from the other side seeing it many, many times in the Canadian politics thread. If people can't trust the CP for their past why should I trust Notley given her past? Because you support her therefore I should follow? Sorry but it doesn't work that way.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

There are only 2 choices this next election, and it comes down to who you think is a more capable leader. Smith or Notley. Now, if you want to sit her and tell me Smith is more intelligent, more capable, and has better ideas go ahead. But don't expect people to respect that choice, because it puts you in the same camp as selfish science denying paste eaters.

My choice is my own. I don't need your approval or respect for how I vote. How you feel is how Canadians feel when people vote for Trudeau.

[Sliver]

I didn't trust her, either. I was concerned she'd take an ideological stand against O&G and hurt the industry and the province. In fact, she turned out to be an excellent premier, so I went from never even considering NDP to being an actual supporter in large part because of her. Had she left the party, I would really have to learn about the new leader as I think my old bias against the NDP would creep in and I'd be concerned yet again for O&G in Alberta. I'm thankful she's here - it's heartening to have a no-brainer option for an intelligent, eloquent and incredibly competent leader and I can't wait to cast my vote for her.

Thinking she should leave? I don't get that. By any measure she's proven herself to be a good person and a very good leader. And she's thoughtful enough to want what's best for all Albertans while being mindful that we're all Canadians, too. And compared to Danielle Smith? They're not even playing the same game. Danielle Smith is the pigeon ####ting all over the chess board and screeching she's the winner while Notley is Grandmaster Magnus Carlsen by comparison.

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's a strange response. Haven't we gone over this in the Canadian politics thread that it doesn't matter what any Conservative leader says that they won't touch those issues that many just don't believe them nor trust them. I just don't trust her. That's not a lie.

I don't trust any Canadian politician at any level.

[Izzle]

In my circle in Calgary, and admittedly a personal experience, there are way more people who live up with EE's view. This makes me extremely skeptical of all the recent favorable polling coming out of Calgary. I still maintain that Calgary will be the one to send Danielle Smith back to the premiership in the next election (whenever that may be).

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Tacopuck

IMO it boils down to a "Easier to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission" scenario.

Which is totally consistent with the rule of law

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

My choice is my own. I don't need your approval or respect for how I vote. How you feel is how Canadians feel when people vote for Trudeau.

I agree and its tougher in Alberta where you can really just pick between 2 parties or waste your vote on some party that will get 1%. Voting for the mythical Alberta party is basically the same thing as staying at home.

I do think its valuable to ask yourself what could a party that you vote for to lose your vote. Parties shift over time and you have to make sure they are calibrated to what you believe in and you aren't just voting for a 'team'.

[Superflyer]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I'd argue that the NDP should have replaced Notley. I have an extremely difficult time voting for a person that was anti-pipeline and anti-Alberta oil until she got in a position where she had to drop it for optics. She may be a more competent premier but we all know deep down she opposes the industry that puts food on the table for Albertans. It's no different than people that won't vote for Conservative because of their past position on abortion or LGBT issues.

So the person who signed a contract to transport oil by rail when pipelines were not being built, which caused big issues, or the person who stopped wine from BC when they would not let pipelines get built, which also lots of people complained about, just did it for optics? Man she hates oil so much.

Then there is Smith who has already attacked other industries including the billion dollar a year one of film. Saying that they have to hire people who are not vaxed or they cannot film here. Meanwhile decisions like that come from the head offices in Hollywood, not from the director or something. Also do you think things like Universal are just going to say, "Oh no we have to let the unvaxed in!!" or will they just choose a different location?

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Izzle

In my circle in Calgary, and admittedly a personal experience, there are way more people who live up with EE's view. This makes me extremely skeptical of all the recent favorable polling coming out of Calgary. I still maintain that Calgary will be the one to send Danielle Smith back to the premiership in the next election (whenever that may be).

Opposite for me, most of my circle are trained tradespeople and some professionals. Unless they are lying all have voted conservative in the past with the exception of the Prentice debacle and now I would say 90% are in the get rid of Smith/this version of the UCP for good camp.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Superflyer

So the person who signed a contract to transport oil by rail when pipelines were not being built, which caused big issues, or the person who stopped wine from BC when they would not let pipelines get built, which also lots of people complained about, just did it for optics? Man she hates oil so much.

Then there is Smith who has already attacked other industries including the billion dollar a year one of film. Saying that they have to hire people who are not vaxed or they cannot film here. Meanwhile decisions like that come from the head offices in Hollywood, not from the director or something. Also do you think things like Universal are just going to say, "Oh no we have to let the unvaxed in!!" or will they just choose a different location?

You need to understand I'm not supporting Smith. For the first time ever, I may not vote at all.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Hey man. I'm just saying that turnabout is fair play. As annoying as you think my quote it's the same from the other side seeing it many, many times in the Canadian politics thread. If people can't trust the CP for their past why should I trust Notley given her past? Because you support her therefore I should follow? Sorry but it doesn't work that way.

What do you mean fair play? If you mock people for doing it against the conservatives, the only fair play is that you’re saying you deserve to be mocked for it. Which is fine.

It’s not that you should follow who I support, your decisions mean nothing to me, but coming here and saying you don’t trust her when she’s actually governed in a way that shows your distrust is unfounded and then calling her “the devil” just opens you up to people calling you out for being a “blue no matter who” idiot. Which again, is fair play. So as long as you’re not going to sit around and pretend you aren’t, then it’s all good.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's a strange response. Haven't we gone over this in the Canadian politics thread that it doesn't matter what any Conservative leader says that they won't touch those issues that many just don't believe them nor trust them. I just don't trust her. That's not a lie.

The issue a lot of people have with conservative leaders is that they say a lot of horrible things during their leadership campaigns, and then when they get elected they say "Oh don't worry about that, I was just saying that to get the leadership". Now that I've got that, I'll totally govern in a reasonable way, pinky swear, now please vote for me in a general election. PP doesn't have any sort of track record for us to trust him that he won't follow through on his more hairbrained ideas.
Danielle Smith did the same thing , after she won leadership she promised to rein things in, but here we are with a stupid Alberta Sovereignty act.

In the case of Rachel Notley, your saying you don't trust her. Why?
She's show us how she will govern. She worked with Ottawa to actually get some pipeline access built. She improved the royalty framework, which is a benefit to industry and the province.
So from an economic standpoint, she's shown us how she will govern. Do you think she'll pull an about face on that?

Why don't you trust her? What specifically has she done that makes you think she's untrustworthy?
Just about everything she's turned around on, have been exactly the kind of things UCP voters would want (and in a lot of cases aren't things the UCP would actually do), but at least she's owned it and can explain why she's turned around on it.
Hell, if there's anyone who shouldn't trust her, it's the real hard core federal brand NDP supporters.

She's shown herself to actually be pretty "Conservative" when it comes to economics (let's not get into the fact that Conservative governments do not handle the economy in the way most conservative voters think "Conservative" means), and from a social perspective she's certainly more progressive than the UCP.

At this point, if you go by actual policy, the NDP are way closer to being Progressive Conservatives than the UCP.
At this point the UCP, might as well just change their name to Wildrose Party. Actually, that might be a really good idea, might be the best way to get Danielle to leave the party.

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Sliver

I didn't trust her, either. I was concerned she'd take an ideological stand against O&G and hurt the industry and the province. In fact, she turned out to be an excellent premier, so I went from never even considering NDP to being an actual supporter in large part because of her. Had she left the party, I would really have to learn about the new leader as I think my old bias against the NDP would creep in and I'd be concerned yet again for O&G in Alberta. I'm thankful she's here - it's heartening to have a no-brainer option for an intelligent, eloquent and incredibly competent leader and I can't wait to cast my vote for her.

Thinking she should leave? I don't get that. By any measure she's proven herself to be a good person and a very good leader. And she's thoughtful enough to want what's best for all Albertans while being mindful that we're all Canadians, too. And compared to Danielle Smith? They're not even playing the same game. Danielle Smith is the pigeon ####ting all over the chess board and screeching she's the winner while Notley is Grandmaster Magnus Carlsen by comparison.

Well said,

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

My choice is my own. I don't need your approval or respect for how I vote. How you feel is how Canadians feel when people vote for Trudeau.

If you think someone who doesn't listen to experts, believes she has all the answers, makes endless mistakes, believes in conspiracy theories and has failed at literally everything she has ever entered is somehow going to be an effective leader, all I can think is you would be happy with a team blue dictatorship, because there is no line bad enough for them to cross for you. I just can't comprehend how you can think this is a good direction fro the Conservative movement. Abandoning facts and reality is pretty poor ground to stand on.

[Misterpants]

Originally Posted by Sliver

I didn't trust her, either. I was concerned she'd take an ideological stand against O&G and hurt the industry and the province. In fact, she turned out to be an excellent premier, so I went from never even considering NDP to being an actual supporter in large part because of her. Had she left the party, I would really have to learn about the new leader as I think my old bias against the NDP would creep in and I'd be concerned yet again for O&G in Alberta. I'm thankful she's here - it's heartening to have a no-brainer option for an intelligent, eloquent and incredibly competent leader and I can't wait to cast my vote for her.

Thinking she should leave? I don't get that. By any measure she's proven herself to be a good person and a very good leader. And she's thoughtful enough to want what's best for all Albertans while being mindful that we're all Canadians, too. And compared to Danielle Smith? They're not even playing the same game. Danielle Smith is the pigeon ####ting all over the chess board and screeching she's the winner while Notley is Grandmaster Magnus Carlsen by comparison.

If you want to use the chess analogy, Smith is that chess player putting the vibrator up her butt to cheat.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

You need to understand I'm not supporting Smith. For the first time ever, I may not vote at all.

So if that is the case, wouldn't the best course of action to be to vote NDP, give them a strong victory, and have the UCP dump Smith, perhaps abandon the crazy far right and moderate the party? Sitting out just gives them a chance to think they are moving tn the right direction with the party. Sure, we get 4 years of intolerable NDP but at least after that there is some hope of a return to rational conservatism?

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

If you think someone who doesn't listen to experts, believes she has all the answers, makes endless mistakes, believes in conspiracy theories and has failed at literally everything she has ever entered is somehow going to be an effective leader, all I can think is you would be happy with a team blue dictatorship, because there is no line bad enough for them to cross for you. I just can't comprehend how you can think this is a good direction fro the Conservative movement. Abandoning facts and reality is pretty poor ground to stand on.

All of that into account, for whatever reason(s) the fact is failure follows her around. It's really all you need to know.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by MBates

Apologies in advance for a bit of a long and dense post...

What you set out above is the reason why people who care about the rule of law are speaking very loudly against this. A law that says you shall ignore laws you know apply to you so long as a group of people you know have no legal authority tell you to ignore the laws?

All as a method to get politicians in Ottawa to...respect the parameters of the law?

There is a reason Alberta is coming out of this looking like a laughing stock.


Best I can tell, there are a couple major deceptions that are being employed to give this approach its appeal to a large swath of the population who do not understand how our system works.

One major problem with the scheme of the 'Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act' is apparently even recognized by the name of the Act: federal laws apply to all persons throughout the united federation called Canada.

Your relationship with the federal government is between you and it...not one by proxy via the Edmonton Legislature or the UCP Cabinet.

For example, if you refuse your legal obligation to remit your federal taxes you pay the penalties and go to jail - not some performative buffoon politician trumping up the idea it is better to ask for forgiveness than permission to ignore the Income Tax Act.

<snip>

I love that they included language to exempt themselves from any consequences. How does granting yourself the right not to be punished for breaking laws you've given yourself the right to break work??