We all knew this was coming though. She’s spent the past couple years doing things to embolden the separatists with a wink and a nudge. She continually flirts with the separatists and gives them the tools to try to get sovereignty into the agenda both figuratively and literally in the way of a referendum question (which was hopefully usurped before they could make that happen). Now she just sits there smirking while her membership boos the idea of working with Canada and rejects the notion of a new relationship with Ottawa. It’s gross, but this is where we are.
Janet Brown had it at 37% in May. Suspect that almost all of that 37% comes from the UCP voting universe. I would have an impossible time believing the level of support has sunk to below 25%.
I think the numbers are nowhere near that high. I think that if there was a real referendum (somehow), and people actually thought about this and examined it seriously, the in favour is under 10%.
I think the numbers are nowhere near that high. I think that if there was a real referendum (somehow), and people actually thought about this and examined it seriously, the in favour is under 10%.
Angus Reid has it at 36% with 65% of UCP voters supporting separation.
I would be fairly confident in saying that a majority of UCP voters support separatism. Maybe you are right and the polling is wrong but polling has consistently shown a number far far higher than 10%.
The problem with politics and society is that the vast majority of normal people could not be bothered to join a party and go to these sorts of events. This leaves an easy avenue for these extreme, never-happy nutjobs to go right up the middle and dictate a party's mandate and direction.
There has to be a better way but I don't know what it is.
And, I don't believe a majority of UCP voters want to separate. They just vote blue because they can't think critically.
Last edited by chedder; 11-29-2025 at 08:39 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to chedder For This Useful Post:
It would be interesting to see what the average UCP voter, who is for seperation, believes about what that actually looks like.
Do they believe the outrageous fantasy numbers the hardcore seperatists spout about pensions and taxes, or how the UN mandates tidewater access for landlocked countries(no really, thats out there), how we would get paid to join the US.
It would be interesting to see what the average UCP voter, who is for seperation, believes about what that actually looks like.
Do they believe the outrageous fantasy numbers the hardcore seperatists spout about pensions and taxes, or how the UN mandates tidewater access for landlocked countries(no really, thats out there), how we would get paid to join the US.
Most that I've talked too really don't have a clue what to actually expect, they just want to do it because something something Trudeau immigrants.
I asked one guy who he'd think would actually buy our goods with no access to the coast and all he said was 'That's for the politicians to figure out'
Most don't seem to believe me when I say Alberta would be independent shorter than Texas was before the US waltzes in and takes over the place. The ones that are okay with it naively think they'd have voting rights.
None of these polls matter in the grand scheme of things, because separation will never happen. It's nothing more than a ridiculous fantasy pipe dream for the Maple MAGA lunatics who make up a very tiny percentage of Alberta's population. The vast majority of Albertans don't want anything to do with that insane bulls***, including a majority of traditional conservative voters who aren't bats*** crazy.
The Following User Says Thank You to direwolf For This Useful Post:
None of these polls matter in the grand scheme of things, because separation will never happen. It's nothing more than a ridiculous fantasy pipe dream for the Maple MAGA lunatics who make up a very tiny percentage of Alberta's population. The vast majority of Albertans don't want anything to do with that insane bulls***, including a majority of traditional conservative voters who aren't bats*** crazy.
This is the part that confuses me at times.
Separation is, well, I wouldnt call it a 'fantasy pipe dream' largely because people tend to be happy when, against all odds, those come true whereas I think Alberta Separation would be an unmitigated nightmare the likes of which we can't even imagine.
"Careful what you wish for...you just might get it..."
However...going back to the threat of Quebec separation, what it can be...is 'the big stick' to try and get what you really want. That strategy did work for Quebec and it worked rather well.
The caveat to that is...'is this a strategy?' Is it a game? A political game being played? Because in Alberta's case? I'm not so convinced. These people seem F###ing crazy! I mean legitimately unhinged. I dont think they have the mental wherewithal to be making political maneuvers of this magnitude. I get the feeling that the people behind this move aren't doing it for political points or maneuvering but rather actually really and genuinely want this.
And that to me is very concerning.
No one should truly want this.
No one should want an Alberta Pension Plan. No one should want an Alberta Police Force. No one should want Alberta Separation.
And yet...here we are.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Locke For This Useful Post:
The problem with politics and society is that the vast majority of normal people could not be bothered to join a party and go to these sorts of events. This leaves an easy avenue for these extreme, never-happy nutjobs to go right up the middle and dictate a party's mandate and direction.
There has to be a better way but I don't know what it is.
And, I don't believe a majority of UCP voters want to separate. They just vote blue because they can't think critically.
I would say that it is a degree worse than that because the party themselves add extra barriers. It is one thing to join the party and try to be an active participant but the UCP will only give you a voice in the party if you physically show up to the AGM.
They do that intentionally in order to load the room with the "right" people and thus those people control the party. All of the other membership is just along for the ride and act as the piggybank to the people who are "in the room".
IMO, the government should be stepping in to both modernize and digitize the political parties to not only ensure that all members get to have a voice in the party but also to ensure that the parties are not being manipulated by China and India. Party membership should be linked to unique government identifiers like SINs to ensure that real people are joining and not a pile of foreign actors.
At the same time that they are validating the membership to ensure they are all real citizens of Canada they could also provide features like digital voting so members who cannot drive X hours to attend party events in person could still attend virtually and have a voice in the party.
Anything we can do to secure the parties and make them more accessible to the citizens is good for our democracy.
Separation is, well, I wouldnt call it a 'fantasy pipe dream' largely because people tend to be happy when, against all odds, those come true whereas I think Alberta Separation would be an unmitigated nightmare the likes of which we can't even imagine.
"Careful what you wish for...you just might get it..."
However...going back to the threat of Quebec separation, what it can be...is 'the big stick' to try and get what you really want. That strategy did work for Quebec and it worked rather well.
The caveat to that is...'is this a strategy?' Is it a game? A political game being played? Because in Alberta's case? I'm not so convinced. These people seem F###ing crazy! I mean legitimately unhinged. I dont think they have the mental wherewithal to be making political maneuvers of this magnitude. I get the feeling that the people behind this move aren't doing it for political points or maneuvering but rather actually really and genuinely want this.
And that to me is very concerning.
No one should truly want this.
No one should want an Alberta Pension Plan. No one should want an Alberta Police Force. No one should want Alberta Separation.
And yet...here we are.
I mean... it seems a bit crazy to say it but considering the US does this to other countries, is it really so hard to believe they would do it to us?
All of your questions make a lot more sense when you think that there is a group of rich people who have a lot to gain in a destabilized or separated Alberta as they could then swoop in and harvest our resources at a fraction of the cost for even bigger profits than they make now.
I would say that it is a degree worse than that because the party themselves add extra barriers. It is one thing to join the party and try to be an active participant but the UCP will only give you a voice in the party if you physically show up to the AGM.
They do that intentionally in order to load the room with the "right" people and thus those people control the party. All of the other membership is just along for the ride and act as the piggybank to the people who are "in the room".
IMO, the government should be stepping in to both modernize and digitize the political parties to not only ensure that all members get to have a voice in the party but also to ensure that the parties are not being manipulated by China and India. Party membership should be linked to unique government identifiers like SINs to ensure that real people are joining and not a pile of foreign actors.
At the same time that they are validating the membership to ensure they are all real citizens of Canada they could also provide features like digital voting so members who cannot drive X hours to attend party events in person could still attend virtually and have a voice in the party.
Anything we can do to secure the parties and make them more accessible to the citizens is good for our democracy.
It"s interesting that you bring up having citizenship requirements for party membership because other leftists here have criticized the UCP for having a motion and passing it that would disallow membership to permanent residents of Canada and other non citizens.
None of these polls matter in the grand scheme of things, because separation will never happen. It's nothing more than a ridiculous fantasy pipe dream for the Maple MAGA lunatics who make up a very tiny percentage of Alberta's population. The vast majority of Albertans don't want anything to do with that insane bulls***, including a majority of traditional conservative voters who aren't bats*** crazy.
How to shut up a separatist: bet them $10,000 that it will not happen within 10 years.
It"s interesting that you bring up having citizenship requirements for party membership because other leftists here have criticized the UCP for having a motion and passing it that would disallow membership to permanent residents of Canada and other non citizens.
It's interesting you ignore the reality that the reason the UCP membership is doing this is because they are anti-immigrant racists, and we know that is the reason because of how they behave and speak and call in to radio shows and get "that's interesting, I'll look into that" approval from the premier. It's one thing to have a rational discussion about democracy, it's another to do it because you are xenophobic wiffle.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
It"s interesting that you bring up having citizenship requirements for party membership because other leftists here have criticized the UCP for having a motion and passing it that would disallow membership to permanent residents of Canada and other non citizens.
Ya, the difference is that I am fine expanding the scope to include permanent residents. The point that I care about is wanting to ensure that party membership is validated to ensure the integrity of the party.
Also, people should have to sign up themselves. Like if it is a petition to recall an MLA or kick off a referendum. The fact that the UCP want to allow one person to sign up other people into the party (and pay money on their behalf) is really shady and acts as a loop hole for super-donors to sign up all of their family members as a way to send more money to the party than is allowed within the rules. Nothing about that feels like "democracy".
After that, if we are using our digital systems to validate people are who they say they are then it would be an easy enough thing to go one step further and enable virtual accessibility to the parties for people who want to participate but cannot drive to Edmonton / Red Deer / etc. for the AGM.
