GDT: The Alberta Election 2012 - The Morning After - PC Majority Government

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Dion

Are you suggesting the comparisons to 2004 are wrong?

I think there's a major difference: the Martin Liberals had control of the center of the Canadian political spectrum, and chose to give it up to move left, yielding the center-right (and arguably the absolute center) to the Tories.

Here, the PCs are claiming the center of the Alberta political spectrum, at a time when the balance of power in the province is becoming more centrist.
The Cretien Grits were brilliant at holding the center and doing enough fiscally to reach out to the right and enough socially to reach out to the left. They typically figured out who their biggest rival was and then edged in that direction to crush them.
A centrist party should be able to rule Alberta for a long time, if they're smart; they can move right just enough in the next election to sap any Wildrose momentum, at the same time using fear of the WRA to retain most of their center-left support.

[Resolute 14]

..

[photon]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Here's one of Raj Sherman's tweets:

In his defence though, he was trying to paint BOTH Wildrose and PC as scary.

Not much of a defense, and yeah that definitely qualifies as that kind of message, and I agree that's a terrible thing to tweet.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I think that if you want to see where Canadian politics went off the rails, go back to when the federal Liberals began running attack ads against the mysterious hidden agenda of the federal Conservatives. They changed their focus from attacking policy and record to attacking hidden demons that only they could see. And that has continued almost with out break for many years now. Soldiers... with guns... in our streets.

Were they the first? There's been attack ads going both ways for as long as I can remember (though much much less than in the US).

Even if they were the first, I don't think it's an ideological thing that being liberal requires one to run attack ads, so I don't think it's fair to blame it on the left.. better to blame it on the ones who did it, not on what side of the political spectrum they happen to be on.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

For some, it has gotten to the point of zealotry - e.g.: Bridget Depape. People who are so utterly convinced that the problem with the federal Conservatives, and now Wildrose, isn't that their policy is bad, but that they are, simply, evil. That, frankly, is ridiculous and damaging to Canadian politics.

Totally agree on the zealotry, Canada isn't nearly as bad as the US but I did see it this election, from both sides. I listened to QR77 this morning a bit and the reactions from some people you'd think that Alberta had just converted to communism or something.

In the US at a high level the fanaticism even makes it harder for the government to govern!

I think it's a bigger problem with society though, not just politics.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

Did it go off the rails after the Reform party ad with a picture of Jean Chretien (and his polio stricken face as the focus) asking whether this is the face we wanted representing Canada? If that's your position, I call BS!

That ad spelled the end for Kim Campbell and the federal conservatives and had nothing to do with the Reform Party. In terms of the reform versus Liberals, the Liberal Party actually fired the first shots in the attack ad campaigns and Chretien demonizing the West and particularly Alberta to cater to the East.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

If PC's hold onto their right flank then Wildrose is destined for the dust heap. Far right parties simply have limited appeal to the median voter - the voter you need to capture to win elections.

Barring major scandal, economic upheaval, or the emergence of a viable governing alternative on the left, the PCs are on solid ground.

I predict that this is Wildrose's zenith.

The Wildrose got 35% of the vote and showed a lot of strength in the South/Rural ridings, meanwhile for the umpteenth election in a row the left wing parties got a combined 20% of the vote concentrated in a few ridings with little indication of branching out to new voters/areas and you think that the left is the group that the PC's have to look out for?

If anything with Redford and some of the new PC MLA's they are going to occupy the left side of the voting in the Province and it will be a much more moderate Wildrose that attracts the right/center voters that were dumb enough/scared enough to stick with the PC's.

I understand that people want to believe that their view of voting will eventually become the norm but I fail to see anything that indicates a left of center party is going to be a threat to the PC's that already seem to be there now with the leadership they have.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

That ad spelled the end for Kim Campbell and the federal conservatives and had nothing to do with the Reform Party. In terms of the reform versus Liberals, the Liberal Party actually fired the first shots in the attack ad campaigns and Chretien demonizing the West and particularly Alberta to cater to the East.

If you do not count the xenophobic Reform Party ads talking about how Chretien, Charest and Bouchard were all from Quebec.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by photon

Were they the first? There's been attack ads going both ways for as long as I can remember (though much much less than in the US).

Even if they were the first, I don't think it's an ideological thing that being liberal requires one to run attack ads, so I don't think it's fair to blame it on the left.. better to blame it on the ones who did it, not on what side of the political spectrum they happen to be on.

Oh, I doubt very much they were the first. Negative campaigning is likely as old as democracy. But I do think the Liberal attacks noted were the catalyst of the worsening situation we are encountering. And while Alberta was a right-centre battle, I do think the overall polarization is right-left with the centre getting squeezed out. That's pretty much what happened in the federal election, and it isn't a good thing in my mind. I don't like the federal Liberals because they've made it clear for 30+ years now that they don't like Alberta, but Canada needs three strong national parties.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Oh, I doubt very much they were the first. Negative campaigning is likely as old as democracy. But I do think the Liberal attacks noted were the catalyst of the worsening situation we are encountering. And while Alberta was a right-centre battle, I do think the overall polarization is right-left with the centre getting squeezed out. That's pretty much what happened in the federal election, and it isn't a good thing in my mind. I don't like the federal Liberals because they've made it clear for 30+ years now that they don't like Alberta, but Canada needs three strong national parties.

But before that you were probably fine with the Federal Liberals, they the party of the National Oil Policy (NOP).

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Slava

I'm not sure what to do about the phone calls. I think that the easy answer is no robocalls, but people do hate the actual calls as well. I get the phone calls at my house as well, so I definitely see the annoyance, but then a part of me thinks "its just a phone call".

I also think that as a guy who has employed these for political use, the reality is it works. (Not saying the robocalls here, but specifically the GOTV calls we did yesterday). We can see the correlation between who we call and who shows up. I would also say that people posting in this thread might be surprised how many votes this can be worth. I talked to a lot of people yesterday and a lot of them would say something like "when is the election?".

I guess the phone calls just aren't that big of a deal to me, so I don't see why some people get so upset. Plus, its an election and they're pretty important to me. So if I get more calls than I like I just don't answer or take the call and move along with my day.

The main thing I disagree with is that the parties and candidates are provided my contact information by Elections Alberta, and I apparently have no say in the matter.

According to Alberta's Personal Information Protection Act, if I give my dry cleaner my name and phone number so they can call me if I forget to pick up my clothes, they can't use that information for marketing purposes without my express permission.

The right to vote is a fundamental right I have as an adult Canadian citizen. To ensure the sanctity of the election process, Elections Alberta collects the contact information for all eligible voters. Then, without any notification, that information is provided to the candidates and parties running in an election.

Whether true or not, my perception is that the politicians crafted the Privacy laws but gave themselves an exemption because they felt that their ability to contact the voters directly was too important.

The fact is, a lot of spammers don't think their message is spam, but it doesn't change the public's thoughts on it.

It would be nice if the registered voters list was provided the same level of privacy protection as a dry cleaner's customer list.



Also, with the technological changes that have occured in recent years, it's much easier to "robo-call" than ever before. As we've heard in the Federal election robocall scandal, all you need is a list of phone numbers, a recorded message, and a credit card to pay for it. It no longer requires a human being physically involved in the process. That has made the whole process a lot easier for the campaigns to use (and abuse).


Plus, I've never really lived in a riding where there was any doubt over who was going to win (although, at the end of the day, it appears this election fell into that same category), so this is the first time I've ever been targetted by such relentless campaigning. Maybe people in other parts of the country are numb to it by now, but I'm not.


I don't have any problem with campaigns calling people who have expressed an interest in supporting the candidate to remind them to vote and offer a ride to the polls. That's a whole other thing than using an externally sourced voters list to spam the voters.

[Dion]

Wildrose strategist Vitor Marciano said by his count, one in five votes that went to the PCs came from people who had previously gone with the Liberals or NDP.

"Literally there are about 100,000 missing centre-left votes and I'm pretty sure I know where they are — with the PCs," said Marciano.

He said published polls in the campaign matched what the Wildrose was seeing in internal surveys. But the last minute exodus of left-centre support to the PCs caught them off guard, particularly in central and northern rural ridings, Marciano said.

"A certain percentage of our voters decided on Sunday or Monday they were worried about us having too big a majority and switched to the PCs," he said.

"In the last few days a lot of people decided to hold their nose and vote Conservative because of the Wildrose."

Mason dismissed Redford's theory that the switchers changed their votes out of love for the PCs rather than fear of the Wildrose.

Redford, he said, was the main stoker of those fears.

"How many times did she say she was frightened of the Wildrose in this campaign? A number of times."

Marciano, a veteran provincial and federal campaigner, said the late- stage migration was breathtaking with 12-point swings in some places.

"I can't think of a swing that size in the last 48 hours in any other Canadian or American election. I think it was unprecedented," he said.

"This is why we hold elections and we don't decide governments based on polls."

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/can...148770295.html

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Slava

Did it go off the rails after the Reform party ad with a picture of Jean Chretien (and his polio stricken face as the focus) asking whether this is the face we wanted representing Canada? If that's your position, I call BS!

Sorry for a couple of corrections.

1. Progressive Conservative Party of Canada as has been covered before.

2. Bells Palsy not Polio.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

But before that you were probably fine with the Federal Liberals, they the party of the National Oil Policy (NOP).

Bit before my time. As such, my understanding of the NOP is limited to what Wikipedia says.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by moon

The Wildrose got 35% of the vote and showed a lot of strength in the South/Rural ridings, meanwhile for the umpteenth election in a row the left wing parties got a combined 20% of the vote concentrated in a few ridings with little indication of branching out to new voters/areas and you think that the left is the group that the PC's have to look out for?

If anything with Redford and some of the new PC MLA's they are going to occupy the left side of the voting in the Province and it will be a much more moderate Wildrose that attracts the right/center voters that were dumb enough/scared enough to stick with the PC's.

I understand that people want to believe that their view of voting will eventually become the norm but I fail to see anything that indicates a left of center party is going to be a threat to the PC's that already seem to be there now with the leadership they have.

If there's no credible alternative on the left then the PC's absorb that vote which can be highly mobilized in the event of a far-right threat which is what happened. That's my point.

I think the 35% for Wildrose is a high watermark for a couple of reasons. First, Wildrose caught lightning in a bottle with both the corruption scandal and the narrative of "change." Once the sentiment that "change is necessary" in a political base starts to take hold it is extremely difficult to counter. Which is basically what happened to the PCs earlier in the campaign. It's like fighting against the tide coming in. An electorate gradually accepts that it's time for a new party, a new group of people because the old one is stagnant. After 40 years, it was due for the PCs.

I think that a good 10 points of that 35% is related to the need for change at the cost of change. However a good 10 points in the opposite direction swung against them due to concerns of the party's ideology.

For that I think the brand is tainted now and will require not just soul searching in the party but a coring out of many of the factors that brought people into the party in the first place to be able to compete with the broad swath of moderate, generally unassociated/undecided voters. Because don't fool yourself, amidst the polling trends leading up to election day this was as strong of a repudiation of a party and it's ideas as I've ever witnessed from a group of voters that not only woke up but reversed against the change narrative with days and hours left.

What will happen with that coring out? Will the party lose its base, mobilization and momentum? Who knows. I do think there is a chance for teh wildrose to present themselves as a moderate conservative party that can credibly govern for the betterment of Albertans. I would use these four years to reign in significantly the wingnuts (kick them out) and build a plank that was a credible alternative to government. Basically, they need to emulate the federal conservative strategy and then lie in wait and hope that the PCs shoot themselves in the foot. How this will rest with their vocal, unwieldy and influential base remains to be seen if the party can transition to one of happenstance populism to one that can govern.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Bit before my time. As such, my understanding of the NOP is limited to what Wikipedia says.

It was the policy, put forward by the Calgary Chamber of Commerce and adopted by the Federal Government which forced refineries east of the Ottawa River to purchase higher priced Alberta oil. Thanks Ontario for helping create the Alberta Oil industry, we will always be thankful for your benevolence and kindness in subsidizing our province. Of course, when the Federal Liberals wanted to amend the energy policy, we got very upset because by that time we were making a lot of money and did not want the awful federal government to take our money.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

For that I think the brand is tainted now and will require not just soul searching in the party but a coring out of many of the factors that brought people into the party in the first place to be able to compete with the broad swath of moderate, generally unassociated/undecided voters. Because don't fool yourself, amidst the polling trends leading up to election day this was as strong of a repudiation of a party and it's ideas as I've ever witnessed from a group of voters that not only woke up but reversed against the change narrative with days and hours left.

What will happen with that coring out? Will the party lose its base, mobilization and momentum? Who knows. I do think there is a chance for teh wildrose to present themselves as a moderate conservative party that can credibly govern for the betterment of Albertans. I would use these four years to reign in significantly the wingnuts (kick them out) and build a plank that was a credible alternative to government. Basically, they need to emulate the federal conservative strategy and then lie in wait and hope that the PCs shoot themselves in the foot. How this will rest with their vocal, unwieldy and influential base remains to be seen if the party can transition to one of happenstance populism to one that can govern.

The funny thing is, the result we got is just about what I've been predicting (though with a few fewer seats) since Smith became leader. Even when she briefly passed the Stelmach PCs in the polls and people started asking if she could form government, I figured the tide would break. But for those damned election polls that got everyone's hopes up (or down, as the case may be).

Your last paragraph there is the key. Wildrose did start as a small, very right party. But as it has grown, that faction will become marginalized. With 35% support, there is greater opportunity to find those better candidates. And with 17 MLAs and official opposition status - all elected as Wildrose - there is the opportunity to show they can be an effective government in waiting. But Smith and co. had a lot of work to do to get from here to there.

But going back to my polarization comments, if Wildrose can grab more of the centre, the PCs are going to have to push harder for more of the left. If Redford is smart, she would actively court more of the right and recover as much of the traditional base as she can.

[kn]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

For that I think the brand is tainted now...

Yup. They will face the same "intolerance, homophobic, racist" attack in four years even with careful selection of candidates and crafting of policy. And that's why I think you're looking at 10-15 years of work to be seen as a legitimate alternative, not 4. They will have to be seen as a part of the political fabric of the province, with solid ideas, and a government-in-waiting. That won't happen in one election cycle, especially since I think the province is in solid hands under Redford's stewardship.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by Dion

Are you suggesting the comparisons to 2004 are wrong?

I'm saying there is not necessarily a correlation between what happened federally in 2004 and what happened in Alberta in 2012. The fact that Tom Flanagan worked on both campaigns does not mean history is destined to repeat itself as WRP would seem to think.

At this point there is as much likelihood that the WRP will turn out to be more like the Alberta Liberals than the Harper Conservatives.

I have to laugh because the election is a day old, we're years away from the next election and WRP-ers are telling themselves that, like Harper, they'll form the next government. Kind of reminds me of a west coast hockey team.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Except, you aren't. Even in your own post, you are equating the entire party to a couple individuals. Your own defence only proves your hypocrisy. Wildrose got 35% of the votes. Are you going to stand here and tell me that 35% of Albertans stand for what idiots like Hunsperger and Leech said?

And Slava and Makarov - Redford likely knew the moment Hunsperger was named a candidate what his blog contained. Trash Wildrose for not dumping him if you like, but don't stand here and pretend Redford's big argument about how scared she was was anything but a cynical attempt at pushing the agenda of fear. It was a political ploy, and ultimately a highly successful one.

Surprise, Resolute is putting words in my mouth. Where did I equate the Party to a couple individuals? I took exception to WRP not only welcoming these idiots into their Party and giving them a platform to speak, but for failing to condemn their remarks as not representing the values of Albertans.

I'm not sure what your problem with my comments are as your Leader has as much as said that it was the socially conservative aspects of Party policy that turned off Alberta voters.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I think that if you want to see where Canadian politics went off the rails, go back to when the federal Liberals began running attack ads against the mysterious hidden agenda of the federal Conservatives. They changed their focus from attacking policy and record to attacking hidden demons that only they could see. And that has continued almost with out break for many years now. Soldiers... with guns... in our streets.

Talk about a selective memory. I guess the Conservative fear-mongering on 'the rise of violent crime' despite statistical evidence to the contrary doesn't count.

But Harper isn't happy with just fear-mongering, he's using that fear to justify wasteful spending on new prisons and on an omnibus crime bill while downloading the cost of implementing that policy down to the provinces.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by octothorp

I think there's a major difference: the Martin Liberals had control of the center of the Canadian political spectrum, and chose to give it up to move left, yielding the center-right (and arguably the absolute center) to the Tories.

Here, the PCs are claiming the center of the Alberta political spectrum, at a time when the balance of power in the province is becoming more centrist.
The Cretien Grits were brilliant at holding the center and doing enough fiscally to reach out to the right and enough socially to reach out to the left. They typically figured out who their biggest rival was and then edged in that direction to crush them.
A centrist party should be able to rule Alberta for a long time, if they're smart; they can move right just enough in the next election to sap any Wildrose momentum, at the same time using fear of the WRA to retain most of their center-left support.

Thank you for putting it better than I did.