Why for the first time in my life I won't vote PC next Provincial Election

[llama64]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

other than higher government royalties, everything you listed seems to fit with conservative ideology

Or more properly, Tory ideology.

West coast libertarianism seems to be seeping into Alberta a lot more often these days and getting confused with Conservatism.

I'm willing to give Stelmach a shot before passing judgement.

[habernac]

Originally Posted by PowerPlayoffs06

I dont see the big deal about front license plates. You get 2 from the registry anyway, it's not going to cost any more, and if it gets rid of any "Get In, Sit Down, Shut Up and Hold On" plates, I'm all for it.

we haven't received two from registries in years.

[Slava]

I think that there are actually 3 rw parties now? Wildrose, Alberta Alliance and Social Credit...I couldn't tell you what the difference is between them though except that the AA actually has someone elected.

I couldn't agree more though that a socially moderate and fiscally conservative party would run rampant through much of the province, not to mention federally! Hopefully its not left to my grandchildrens children before one surfaces and is given a chance.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by llama64

Or more properly, Tory ideology.

Exactly. Ironically, Tory ideology has never really flown here until very recently. Tory ideology is much more stuffy, historical conservatism... status quo, social conservatism, forays into fiscal control for political ends (National Policy is the best example of Tory ideology in this regard), etc.

Alberta has had four dynasties that have been significantly different than this.

Dynasty 1: Liberals
These weren't the same Liberals that exist now, sometime in the 1950s, the Liberals and Conservatives almost had an ideology flip. At the time of the Liberal Dynasty in Alberta, they were more fiscally conservative and socially neutral (for the day). Ironically, what would steamroll Alberta's electorate today.

Dynasty 2: United Farmers of Alberta
The beginning of rural populism. Fiscally ambiguous and socially ambiguous with a clear labour and rural agenda. Kind of a joke, as they were ousted by sex scandals. A truly backwards party.

Dynasty 3: Social Credit
Originally a very socially conservative and fiscally leftist populist party based on the fuzzy logic of the Social Credit theory. Aberhart failed to achieve this, but under Manning was transformed into a more fiscally conservative and increasingly secular social conservative government.

Dyanasty 4: Progressive Conservative
Originally billed as a breath of fresh air... all the fiscal conservatism of a tory, but with none of the stale, backwards and nepotistic social conservatism, the first signs of a libertarian lean. As well, the first time the Conservative party was able to be anything more than an urban alternative to the rural populist parties. Truly "Progressive" by Alberta standards. Klein took the party even further to a (in retrospect) ridiculously damaging fiscal conservatism, and the social conservatives started to seep in from Social Credit, WCC, etc. Now under Stelmach, a decidedly rural streak runs through the party at a time when urban status and requirements are at its highest. A return to a more Tory mindset, oddly enough, with rural Alberta in mind as the desired audience, rather than rich, white elites, as is the typical Tory target.

[Sylvanfan]

^^^
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in each case when a new party took over, it wasn't one of the traditional opposition parties. It was a newer upstart party that basically had to form to beat a party that had pretty much beat itself out of power, but not badly enough to make anyone want to choose the traditional opposition. In other words if one of these new parties could get their act together, they very well could find themselves in power come say 2013. This current dynasty has run longer than any before, and the party is showing the signs of cracking.

[PowerPlayoffs06]

Originally Posted by habernac

we haven't received two from registries in years.

Really? I could have swore my wife got 2 plates when she got her car a couple years ago. Ahh well... I've still got my spare.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by PowerPlayoffs06

I dont see the big deal about front license plates. You get 2 from the registry anyway, it's not going to cost any more, and if it gets rid of any "Get In, Sit Down, Shut Up and Hold On" plates, I'm all for it.

When I purchased my new vehicle the registry gave me one plate.

[Incinerator]

Originally Posted by Snakeeye

Vote Alberta Alliance then.

The left wing parties are just as dysfunctional as their federal counterparts are.

+1, as it stands right now the AA is the only feasible alternative, everything else will just crank up whatever Farmer Ed is up to by a couple notches.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

^^^
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in each case when a new party took over, it wasn't one of the traditional opposition parties. It was a newer upstart party that basically had to form to beat a party that had pretty much beat itself out of power, but not badly enough to make anyone want to choose the traditional opposition. In other words if one of these new parties could get their act together, they very well could find themselves in power come say 2013. This current dynasty has run longer than any before, and the party is showing the signs of cracking.

In all cases but the Progressive Conservatives. They were around since the beginning, but essentially had a revamp at some point (adding the Progressive Party).

History says it won't be any current party at present. It will either be an upstart party, or a party that experiences significant change. (Wouldn't it be the funniest thing (and 98% impossible) if the Liberal Party and the Alberta Alliance somehow merged to become that centre-right fiscally conservative, socially libertarian party we all want).

[sadora]

It's this tendency to want to control everything in a society why I never vote for the Tories.

Totalitarianism is a term employed by some political scientists, especially those in the field of comparative politics, to describe modern regimes in which the state regulates nearly every aspect of public and private behavior.

Personally, I never want to see my society go towards this direction.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by sadora

It's this tendency to want to control everything in a society why I never vote for the Tories.

Totalitarianism is a term employed by some political scientists, especially those in the field of comparative politics, to describe modern regimes in which the state regulates nearly every aspect of public and private behavior.

Personally, I never want to see my society go towards this direction.

I was hesitant to use the word myself... but the shoe definitely fits, and you're right... I can't support a party like that.

[llama64]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

In all cases but the Progressive Conservatives. They were around since the beginning, but essentially had a revamp at some point (adding the Progressive Party).

History says it won't be any current party at present. It will either be an upstart party, or a party that experiences significant change. (Wouldn't it be the funniest thing (and 98% impossible) if the Liberal Party and the Alberta Alliance somehow merged to become that centre-right fiscally conservative, socially libertarian party we all want).

First, we don't all want a socially libertarian party. Second, are you confusing Liberal ideology with libertarian ideology? I'm not sure based on your post.

Alberta is dominated by populist politics. The actual platforms rarely matter, just that the people feel like they get their say in things. Nearly every regime in Alberta has grown from a populist base, including the Reform party on a federal level.

However, Alberta's population has changed rather radically in recent times. The cities have become more cosmopolitan and the rural attitudes have started to be displaced in favor of more moderate views. The current PC's are starting to respond to that.

While I don't discount the strength of a populist movement in Alberta, I highly doubt that anything will arise to challenge the current regime until it does something so abhorant that it pisses off the majority of us. Not everyone works in Oil & Gas, and a majority of Albertans support the raising of royalty rates.

[llama64]

Originally Posted by sadora

It's this tendency to want to control everything in a society why I never vote for the Tories.

Totalitarianism is a term employed by some political scientists, especially those in the field of comparative politics, to describe modern regimes in which the state regulates nearly every aspect of public and private behavior.

Personally, I never want to see my society go towards this direction.

Heh, when I think of Tories, I think of the Vogons from Douglas Adam's Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy.

That and white curly wigs.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by llama64

First, we don't all want a socially libertarian party. Second, are you confusing Liberal ideology with libertarian ideology? I'm not sure based on your post.

Libertarian... as in this definition:

Libertarians support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence. Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties.

[llama64]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Libertarian... as in this definition:

Libertarians support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence. Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties.

Cool, just curious. It's a major pet peeve of mine

That would also explain the 98% improbability.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Table 5

vote for someone with good environmental policies...that is something we can all benefit from.

If all they had was good environmental policy and not some Europa style social policy that would be an alternative.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by WesternCanadaKing

They want to raise the drinking age to 19? COME ON, I'M SO FREAKIN CLOSE DON'T DO THIS TO ME STELMACH.

Every year or so someone brings up raising the drinking age to 19 and it never happens.

I've been hearing it since I was at least 13, and I'm 34 now.

[greerb]

I'm from Saskatchewan and really can't stand Stelmach.

- Raising the royalties? Why? There is only one reason that Saskatchewan didn't have the oil boom that Alberta had/has. Sky high royalties. If Stelmach wants to level the playing field let him we'll take the boom. The oil companies won't drill as much in Alberta and look to Saskatchewan as a viable source. Or roads could use the money!!!

- Adding a second licence plate? Saskatchewan got rid of their front plate about 2 years ago TO SAVE MONEY.

- Bar age to 19? What's the difference. If a minor wants to drink they will find a way. I'm sure the kids are more knowledable these days and choose not drink and drive. I know more older people who drink and drive than younger people. And I'm 27. BTW Sask. has the highest D&D stats in Canada last I read, and our age limit is 19. Do they realize how many 18 year old Sask kids go to Alberta just to drink? If they raise the limit the bars close to the borders will lose lost of buisness.

- Minimum drink prices? Like that will stop people from drinking? They will just think about where they will get thier alcohol from. Going to a bar or going to a friend's house with a case of beer. Though I'm sure if one will pay $7 for a beer at a hockey game, they will pay $5 at a bar.

[JohnnyFlame]

I certainly would use alcohol consumption and smoking as well to fund an increased environmental effort. Who cares if smokers have to pay through the nose -- ridiculous stupid habit should be taxed to the hilt. Up it and up it and up it and give non smokers tax breaks. lower healthcare etc.

Do the same with drinkers --Hey if they want to drink like a fish then tax the heck out of them. They can pay for the constant stream of people they kill while sloshed in their vehicles or to pay for the wives treatment when they beat the snot out of them in their dufus drunken stupor. I would do the same with drugs --legalize and tax it to the maximum.

Just rake in the cash and put it to good use!!!!!!

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

I think that there are actually 3 rw parties now? Wildrose, Alberta Alliance and Social Credit...I couldn't tell you what the difference is between them though except that the AA actually has someone elected.

So this is why my ears were ringing....

Quick lesson on differences for you.

#1, Wildrose is not a registered party. They are struggling to get the required signatures by the deadline. They would actually benefit if Stelmach would call an election. Then they just need to run 42 candidates and they do not need to meet the signature requirment. Additionally; their policies are very thin right now. As I understand it they have nothing at all in them regarding Education.

#2, Social Credit, is all but dead. Most of their members have gone to other parties. The 30 or 40 remain only because they cannot let go of their money theories or the mandatory teaching of intelligent design in the classroom. And now that they are calling for a 30% increase to the royalities, even Liberals are blushing.

#3, The Alliance is on a very promising up swing.... there has been a significant shift since Stelmachs Royalty announcement; membership and contributions are going strong.

I couldn't agree more though that a socially moderate and fiscally conservative party would run rampant through much of the province, not to mention federally! Hopefully its not left to my grandchildrens children before one surfaces and is given a chance.

What is your definition of "socially moderate"?