Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Are you looking for proof in the form of a signed letter from the other premiers?

Or would it suffice to explain to you that the other provinces telling Smith to go offer concessions that have a greater negative impact on their industries while asking for a carve out on the tariffs that primarily benefits industries in Alberta doesn’t make any sense?

Nevermind, i got my proof.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Alberta has tried numerous times and with numerous policies to win the hearts and minds of the rest of Canada. The Liberal party (who are just agents of Central Canada's tyranny of the majority) came after Alberta anyway.

As people have said here: appeasement doesn't work.

Not taking this approach isn’t appeasement. This approach doesn’t give us greater leverage in getting carve outs or in getting infrastructure built. It’s a short sighted move. I say that as someone who wasn’t opposed to her going down to speak with Trump.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Not taking this approach isn’t appeasement. This approach doesn’t give us greater leverage in getting carve outs or in getting infrastructure built. It’s a short sighted move. I say that as someone who wasn’t opposed to her going down to speak with Trump.

You're worried about burning bridges.

But there are no bridges.

It's a quaint idea that the other provinces individually or as the nation of Canada care one single little tiny bit about Alberta. If you want to create a sense of common purpose then the only place to start is by redefining Confederation. Because Canada as it stands is designed to ensure antagonism between the provinces... And certainly with the federal govt. All the provinces do it to an almost identical degree

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

You're worried about burning bridges.

But there are no bridges.

It's a quaint idea that the other provinces individually or as the nation of Canada care one single little tiny bit about Alberta. If you want to create a sense of common purpose then the only place to start is by redefining Confederation. Because Canada as it stands is designed to ensure antagonism between the provinces... And certainly with the federal govt. All the provinces do it to an almost identical degree

How is this approach helping to improve confederation and get more of Alberta’s products to overseas markets?

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

You're worried about burning bridges.

But there are no bridges.

It's a quaint idea that the other provinces individually or as the nation of Canada care one single little tiny bit about Alberta. If you want to create a sense of common purpose then the only place to start is by redefining Confederation. Because Canada as it stands is designed to ensure antagonism between the provinces... And certainly with the federal govt. All the provinces do it to an almost identical degree

You have an incredibly simplistic view of Canadian federalism.

Also, for the record, there are literal bridges between Alberta and other provinces.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Canada seems to be the weakest link, and Alberta the strongest. Otherwise why is everyone complaining about Alberta? Smith is playing this whole situation masterfully. She's certainly the most relevant political figure in Canada right now.

The “she’s playing this masterfully” is really an amazing trolling line, so kudos to you. It’s awesome!

But let’s pretend that’s the case. What has she accomplished? She went down and met with him (same as Trudeau, so I guess he was also playing this masterfully), and what exactly does she have to show for that?

[para transit fellow]

this is an american poscaster ( with a known anti-trump bias) who does not have a good opinion regarding the Smith expedition to Mara-lago

https://x.com/i/status/1879239073392665041

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by para transit fellow

this is an american poscaster ( with a known anti-trump bias) who does not have a good opinion regarding the Smith expedition to Mara-lago

https://x.com/i/status/1879239073392665041

Yeah, I have been watching that guy for a few weeks now. He is very pro Canada and anti trump. Some really good videos.

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

Because Doug Ford wants to block energy exports and she doesn't?

Does Doug Ford realize that his energy from Alberta goes through the states before it hits Ontario?

But it isn’t counted as an export to the us, it transits through and isn’t subject to tarrifs.

It’s clear she’s not at all speaking for all the premiers.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

How is this approach helping to improve confederation and get more of Alberta’s products to overseas markets?

Its not obvious those goals are compatible under the current version of Confederation.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by Whynotnow

But it isn’t counted as an export to the us, it transits through and isn’t subject to tarrifs.

It’s clear she’s not at all speaking for all the premiers.

ok what am i missing here?

Ford wants to ban energy exports which a large chunk from Alberta and she is the one not playing nice?

Fill in the blanks, thanks!

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Slava

The “she’s playing this masterfully” is really an amazing trolling line, so kudos to you. It’s awesome!

But let’s pretend that’s the case. What has she accomplished? She went down and met with him (same as Trudeau, so I guess he was also playing this masterfully), and what exactly does she have to show for that?

We don't know yet what the outcomes are.

But she's doing all of the right things both with Trump and her approach to the rest of Canada.

[Looch City]

She's doing all of the right things for herself.

Classic grift. And you're falling for it lol

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Looch City

She's doing all of the right things for herself.

Classic grift. And you're falling for it lol

That's why we have elections.

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

ok what am i missing here?

Ford wants to ban energy exports which a large chunk from Alberta and she is the one not playing nice?

Fill in the blanks, thanks!

Sure, first of all I am opposed to curtailing energy exports, but we also can’t eliminate it as a way to retaliate and gain leverage. The issue I have with her actions is that they are purely out of self interest and may appear to be at odds with other strategies. This plays exactly into Trumps hands as we can’t even come up with a cohesive approach. Granted all of that is not on her, as we have a pretty big vaccuum on the national level.

I think she could afford to be less extreme in her stance here, she could say for instance “we need to do what is best at the national level to rectify this situation. I don’t think shutting off exports is our path ahead but it can’t be seen as an impossible outcome”. Has she even denounced Trump on the 51st State thing?

So she puts out her position - let’s not do this, but also leaves it open as a threat.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Its not obvious those goals are compatible under the current version of Confederation.

We’ve already achieved those goals under the current version of confederation. While it hasn’t always been ideal but it isn’t obvious that those goals will be more compatible as a result of Smith’s approach. So I guess that means you’ll start arguing that your current argument isn’t valid now?

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Whynotnow

Sure, first of all I am opposed to curtailing energy exports, but we also can’t eliminate it as a way to retaliate and gain leverage. The issue I have with her actions is that they are purely out of self interest and may appear to be at odds with other strategies. This plays exactly into Trumps hands as we can’t even come up with a cohesive approach. Granted all of that is not on her, as we have a pretty big vaccuum on the national level.

I think she could afford to be less extreme in her stance here, she could say for instance “we need to do what is best at the national level to rectify this situation. I don’t think shutting off exports is our path ahead but it can’t be seen as an impossible outcome”. Has she even denounced Trump on the 51st State thing?

So she puts out her position - let’s not do this, but also leaves it open as a threat.

The key point to realize in all of this is that Alberta's interests and the US's interests are more closely aligned than Alberta's interests are to the rest of Canada People find this to be an uncomfortable truth. But the blame for that lies squarely at the feet of Eastern Canadian politicians.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

The key point to realize in all of this is that Alberta's interests and the US's interests are more closely aligned than Alberta's interests are to the rest of Canada People find this to be an uncomfortable truth. But the blame for that lies squarely at the feet of Eastern Canadian politicians.

You have a funny way of reframing your personal opinions as truths others aren’t equipped to handle.

I don’t expect the delusions around your own sense of relevance to change, but if you want people to do anything but roll their eyes, you ought to give them a little more credit.

I know the “maverick truth teller” motif is hot in far right circles, but it doesn’t play as well outside the echo chamber where merit is not just given based on political leanings.

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

The key point to realize in all of this is that Alberta's interests and the US's interests are more closely aligned than Alberta's interests are to the rest of Canada People find this to be an uncomfortable truth. But the blame for that lies squarely at the feet of Eastern Canadian politicians.

I disagree entirely, that our goals are not aligned. Our goal should be to strengthen Canada globally, and yes Eastern politicians are part of the problem, but dint pretend we’ve had a string of big idea leaders and fence builders here in our fair province. It’s an uncomfortable truth to some that we also need to improve our standing in confederation, that starts with not throwing a fit every single time you can.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You have a funny way of reframing your personal opinions as truths others aren’t equipped to handle.

I don’t expect the delusions around your own sense of relevance to change, but if you want people to do anything but roll their eyes, you ought to give them a little more credit.

I know the “maverick truth teller” motif is hot in far right circles, but it doesn’t play as well outside the echo chamber where merit is not just given based on political leanings.

Can you not counter that statement?

All you do is dish out a heavy dose of platitudes