Calgary North Hill Under the Radar

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by First Lady

You're not the guy that I turned down at the door the other day.... asking me out on a date... are you?

Nah, I'm in a better part of town.

Underestimating one's opponent is never a good thing to do publicly. At worst, you give them ammunition to turn it into mud-slinging. I think the public tires of that style of politics.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Yeah, no kidding. I guess that's why they count ballots.

Not really.

There are a few ridings where the PC candidate is promised a win.

Mine for example. There is no way anyone else will even get a look.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Azure

There are a few ridings where the PC candidate is promised a win.

That's the fault of the electorate. I don't like that any more than you.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Underestimating one's opponent is never a good thing to do publicly.

I have not underestimated him. Unknowns and virtual unknowns are often successful. Stelmach for example.

At worst, you give them ammunition to turn it into mud-slinging. I think the public tires of that style of politics.

As I have said, it is a comment that could be applied to me; hardly amounts to mudslinging.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by First Lady

I have not underestimated him. Unknowns and virtual unknowns are often successful. Stelmach for example.

The man has held various public offices for twenty years. Surely, somebody's heard of him.

There's a little more work to it than simply getting a name on a ballot.

Originally Posted by First Lady

As I have said, it is a comment that could be applied to me; hardly amounts to mudslinging.

No, I wrote it's the sort of thing that may lead to mudslinging-style politics.

Partisan politics have gotten too petty. Whatever happened to "my worthy opponent?" Or is that just for concession speeches?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

That's the fault of the electorate. I don't like that any more than you.

Well there is you difference between the 'given' riding...and a riding that is 'unknown.'

How you turned that into a personal attack is beyond me.

[Slava]

I hope its a close riding, honestly. I hope for all of the ridings to be close on election day, and for the Tories to lose a lot of seats!

Honestly this just drives my main pet issue....electoral reform!

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Azure

Well there is you difference between the 'given' riding...and a riding that is 'unknown.'

How you turned that into a personal attack is beyond me.

It's quite clear that the candidate was referred to as being "unknown" by the public by the other candidate. Rather hypocritical comparing the resumes of both.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

The man has held various public offices for twenty years. Surely, somebody's heard of him.

Just to clarify, this comment must be regarding Stelmach. Given Kyle is 27 years old; I am pretty sure he has not held positions since he was 7 years old.

Prior to Stelmach winning the leadership, he was a virtual unknown to Albertans.

Similarly both Kyle and I are unknowns in Calgary North Hill. I would say the only ones that will benefit from name recognition would be Pat Murray, who has run here before and John Chan, who has run here federally.

There's a little more work to it than simply getting a name on a ballot.

I agree completely.

Partisan politics have gotten too petty. Whatever happened to "my worthy opponent?" Or is that just for concession speeches?

I have never said he was unworthy. Just that we are coming in on equal ground so far as individual name recognition. He does have benefit of party name recognition.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Just to clarify, this comment must be regarding Stelmach. Given Kyle is 27 years old; I am pretty sure he has not held positions since he was 7 years old.

Yes, Stelmach.

Originally Posted by First Lady

Similarly both Kyle and I are unknowns in Calgary North Hill. I would say the only ones that will benefit from name recognition would be Pat Murray, who has run here before and John Chan, who has run here federally.

I think you underestimate the intelligence of the public. That might be good for TV show producers and other pop culture mavens, but not so much for politicians (at least the honest ones).

Surely there's some folks in Calgary North Hill who know who the Public School Board Trustees are?

Originally Posted by First Lady

I have never said he was unworthy. Just that we are coming in on equal ground so far as individual name recognition.

Disagree.

Originally Posted by First Lady

He does have benefit of party name recognition.

You've really got your work cut out for you. Not only do few people know you, you represent "The Party Formerly Known As The Party Formerly Known As."

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

I think you underestimate the intelligence of the public.

Again, I have not said that. It is common knowledge incumbents and those who have previously ran; have an edge over newcomers.
Otherwise you would not be claiming that Kyle would have the advantage of name recognition.

Surely there's some folks in Calgary North Hill who know who the Public School Board Trustees are?

Sure they are Lynn Ferguson and George Lane. As I pointed out earlier, Kyle was not a school trustee in Calgary North Hill.

You've really got your work cut out for you.

I am fully aware of that and have not claimed otherwise.



What puzzles me is that while you claim "it is not personal" you continue to attack me?

All these statements have been made by you, regarding me in this thread:

Hell, most folks probably think Jane Morgan was the chick from The Gong Show.

She's as arrogant as those she derides.

Well, I'm certainly not voting for an Anti-Education candidate.

Rather hypocritical comparing the resumes of both.

Not only do few people know you, you represent "The Party Formerly Known As The Party Formerly Known As."

Do I you feel threatened by me in some way?

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by First Lady

As I pointed out earlier, Kyle was not a school trustee in Calgary North Hill.

Can you name more than one alderman? I'm sure lots can. Same goes with Trustees. You do realize that city wards aren't exactly gated, insular enclaves.

Trustees are in the news throughout their term. Also-ran candidates once every blue moon (when there's an election).

You truly do underestimate the electorate's intelligence.

Originally Posted by First Lady

Do I you feel threatened by me in some way?

Not at all.

You might have thinner skin than you'd like to admit, though.

I must admit though I'm not a fan of the far-right fringe. I think they represent some of the worst, small-minded folks in society. Anyone who hangs with them I view with suspicion.

[Rathji]

Am I the only one who sees that Reggie and First Lady are coming across in bad light here? I am over tired so my perception may be skewed.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Am I the only one who sees that Reggie and First Lady are coming across in bad light here? I am over tired so my perception may be skewed.

It's reminiscent of a movie scene where two people fight and claw and then suddenly start making out.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Can you name more than one alderman? I'm sure lots can. Same goes with Trustees. You do realize that city wards aren't exactly gated, insular enclaves.

Certainly not. But not everyone has children in the public system, those who do, few pay attention to their trustees unless there are issues. Sad, but that is the reality.

You truly do underestimate the electorate's intelligence.

Not at all, I just don't think being a school trustee outside of the area will carry the weight you seem to think it will. Clearly we have differing views on this.

You might have thinner skin than you'd like to admit, though.

Thanks for the concern, however I am no stranger to forum battles.
I have been burned by far more skilled debaters than you.

I must admit though I'm not a fan of the far-right fringe. I think they represent some of the worst, small-minded folks in society. Anyone who hangs with them I view with suspicion.

Well, there, now we have some honesty coming through. You think I am far-right and and small-minded.
Perhaps we should have a beer some time and you will see how far off base you are.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Certainly not. But not everyone has children in the public system, those who do, few pay attention to their trustees unless there are issues. Sad, but that is the reality.

Yes, there are often issues.

Originally Posted by First Lady

Well, there, now we have some honesty coming through. You think I am far-right and and small-minded.
Perhaps we should have a beer some time and you will see how far off base you are.

Personally, I think Libertarians like yourself would be better off in a Libertarian Party (I think its still kicking around) than to associate with the assorted bigots of variable stripes that flock to these sort of parties. They're a real dog's breakfast and thank god they'll never form a government because of their factional nature.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Personally, I think Libertarians like yourself would be better off in a Libertarian Party (I think its still kicking around) than to associate with the assorted bigots of variable stripes that flock to these sort of parties. They're a real dog's breakfast and thank god they'll never form a government because of their factional nature.

I am a Libertarian?

I might have some leanings that way, but certainly not one by the purest definition.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Am I the only one who sees that Reggie and First Lady are coming across in bad light here? I am over tired so my perception may be skewed.

Its called Reggie has a personal problem with Jane, shown by his numerous personal attacks, and instead of admitting he is wrong about the 'unknown' comment, he'll continue to attack her in any way possible.

I think its pretty obvious who has taken the higher ground and refused to resort to the exact thing Reggie was complaining about, and who is the HYPOCRITE and is doing the exact thing he accused others of doing.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Azure

Its called Reggie has a personal problem with Jane, shown by his numerous personal attacks, and instead of admitting he is wrong about the 'unknown' comment, he'll continue to attack her in any way possible.

I think its pretty obvious who has taken the higher ground and refused to resort to the exact thing Reggie was complaining about, and who is the HYPOCRITE and is doing the exact thing he accused others of doing.

I agree. It seems that somehow in someway the Byfield's, Hinman, or some of the other usual suspects associated with the Wildrose Alliance personally harmed him. While First Lady's posts would be considered solicitation/advertising had she been a first time poster, her history here suggests she's more than willing to personally discuss a variety of issues with concerned voters through this medium and thus that shouldn't be discouraged.

In an election that many on here have suggested the choices being limited or of poor quality, one has to at least give some props to someone willing to provide another option from the two mainstream parties and not shoot them down as being 'fringe' and 'small minded,' especially when the only criticisms being offered is of the wording of her blog and completely devoid of any talk of any real issues.

[Thunderball]

First Lady has always tried to provoke intelligent debate, and all the intent was with this is to show that her riding is a volatile one and is definitely not a safe seat. Just like how we tend to swing towards the Flames on most discussions, she had a slant towards herself. Fair enough... its not like this was her first post.

I'm a little surprised with the amount of vitriol spewed her way by one of the more prominent members of CP. Legitimate discussion on topical issues should always be encouraged. Its not like this is the neverending fruitless religion debates that rage through.