What makes you think there is "a disconnect between Danielle Smith's moderate social conservatism and the views of typical WRA supporters"?
Who or what is a typical Wildrose supporter?
Well you'd have a far better idea than I would, my sample size is relatively small. In talking to people back home in rural Alberta who support the party (at least two of whom claim to be card-carrying party members), I've had several people say that they support the the Wildrose Alliance because of its strong social values like an opposition to gay marriage. And when I've pointed out that this actually goes against the party's official platform, I've been greeted by head shakes or answers like "We'll see."
On the other hand, urban supporters of the party that I've spoken with seem to have a perspective that matches the party line pretty closely. So I'm very curious to see if when push comes to shove, (ie. when candidates at the riding level are trying to strike a balance between the official party line and what socially conservative voters want to hear), will the message really be consistent?
I'm someone who's very seriously considering the WRA as a voting option next election; I'm totally sold on Danielle Smith, but I really want to hear how in-line with her message the rest of the party is during an election campaign. Honestly, even one dumb comment from a fringe candidate or party official about gay marriage, abortion, capital punishment etc. (even allowing that the provincial government has little if any impact on these areas) would be enough to scare me off as a voter.
Interesting post from Don Braid (http://communities.canada.com/calgar...signation.aspx) - he seems to be implying there was an internal rebellion over the past few weeks, and states "events have shown that even the wilder reports from the inside were true."
The man is gutless. Won't face the electorate. No vision. No plan. Unleashed Leipert on healthcare... Brought us Stephen Duckett. Just about killed the oil & gas industry here. Looked like & acted like a buffoon in office. Thanks for nuthin' Stelmach. Leave now.
By 2008, the Conservatives had raised royalties in Alberta by 25% of what a panel had recommended. However, the NDP and Liberal parties within Alberta were outraged by what they perceived as “such a small increase” imposed on the oil and gas companies.
Alberta NDP platform position, 2008. They vowed if they were elected, they would raise royalties substantially more than the Conservatives had. Read this article with Brian Mason outlining NDP party position on royalties.
Alberta Liberal platform position, 2008...same as with the NDP, they vowed to raise royalty rates significantly higher than what the Conservatives had. This is what Taft had to say
Both the NDP and Liberal party had researched what Alaska was doing and thought Alberta should move in that same direction.
So all 3 political parties in Alberta were raising the royalty rate...even though Ralph Klein was against it. Alberta did not have any political party that would not raise royalties further....and most chose the path of least resistance, the Conservatives….because they were afraid of change and were not really sure what would happen with further increases in royalties.
And, I think part of the blame for the whole royalty fiasco has to be put directly at the feet of the oil and gas companies themselves. Perhaps if the oil and gas companies were better educators and better communicators, they could have got their message out to the general public but such was not the case. Educators and communicators they are not. They took out a full page ad in the major newspapers of Alberta, outlining their concerns about increased royalty rates…..but they did so using such technical language that it became mumbo jumbo for the readership. Now while the oil and gas companies may be short on communication skills, they are also not always the big boogey man that that masses make them out to be either.
And Ed Stelmach basically got in by default, by a new runoff structure, and also up the middle splitting the other two Conservative factions, the one faction wanting some change (Ralph has to go, he has been in too long) and the other faction wanting change at all costs. In fairness to Ed, it is almost impossible to govern trying to appease two opposing factions within your own party.
And as some will say, Stelmach is the best Premier Saskatchewan ever had.
Stelmach used the "Anyone But Calgary" ideology to his advantage during his leadership campaign. Therefore, I never thought of him as ever including Calgary (or me) in his vision of Alberta. To me, he was strictly an exclusionist & I have never supported him. Well PC's, you got your "Anybody but Calgary" Premier. Hope you liked it. The Tories got what they deserved with Stelmach & quite frankly, I'll never vote for them again.
the problem he ran into with the royalties was that he failed to properly set public expectation prior to the report being released. The debate on whether to increase or decrease royalties should have been had when the panel was gathering their information, not after the fact. by doing it after the fact Stelmach was either pandering to the lefties and screwing Calgary, or screwing the lefties for the benefit of Calgary.
The other big mistake was introducing the possibility of a government flip flop on decisions. Royalties, booze taxes, etc. At least with Klein when he said the government was going to do something, you could bank on the fact it would be done. There is value in certainty.
__________________
"OOOOOOHHHHHHH those Russians" - Boney M
Stelmach used the "Anyone But Calgary" ideology to his advantage during his leadership campaign. Therefore, I never thought of him as ever including Calgary (or me) in his vision of Alberta. To me, he was strictly an exclusionist & I have never supported him. Well PC's, you got your "Anybody but Calgary" Premier. Hope you liked it. The Tories got what they deserved with Stelmach & quite frankly, I'll never vote for them again.
Given I am extremely well familiar with how Stelmach ran his Calgary campaign and can say for a damn certain fact that he never ran a ABC campaign, you're totally off base.
I'm not a huge fan of how Stelmach performed, but that is a flat out lie.
__________________
"OOOOOOHHHHHHH those Russians" - Boney M
He used ABC to his advantage as the non Calgary candidate. A clear choice between the 2 Calgary candidates Morton & Dinning. He never once spoke up during the leadership race, especially when it was narrowed down to 3 candidates as to how devisive that was. Never. Because he knew he could win because of it.
If Calgarians didn't feel the way I do towards Stelmach, how come his approval rating in this city has always been so low? If he cared about Calgary then why did he go ahead with the royalty regime knowing it would hurt oil & gas companies & all the industries attached to it? If you say he had no way of knowing then that is even more damning because how could he have been so stupid to surround himself with clueless syncophants giving him bad advice?
How come he had to open up a Premier's office down here to so much fanfare? Because he never cared about Calgary until his approval rating was nearly below sea level here. Until that happened he didn't need us. Then, when his popularity went into free fall, he wanted people like me to say Ed cares. Bull. He was just about the rest of the province, not Calgary. The Tories, by electing him leader said, "Screw Calgary".
Stelmach was THEIR candidate, not OURS. He never was & it is clear that he never would be. I am hopeful the Tories will now become yesterday's party like the SoCreds. Big, fat, sassy & needing to be chopped down like a big tree for good.
Last edited by Golden Jet; 01-25-2011 at 06:23 PM.
the problem he ran into with the royalties was that he failed to properly set public expectation prior to the report being released. The debate on whether to increase or decrease royalties should have been had when the panel was gathering their information, not after the fact. by doing it after the fact Stelmach was either pandering to the lefties and screwing Calgary, or screwing the lefties for the benefit of Calgary.
The other big mistake was introducing the possibility of a government flip flop on decisions. Royalties, booze taxes, etc. At least with Klein when he said the government was going to do something, you could bank on the fact it would be done. There is value in certainty.
And Klein was never afraid to say "oops, we goofed". Klein might not have been the smartest in the party, but he did what he could do best, and that is lead....and he surrounded himself with people that did have the smarts to run the various departments in government.
Anything along the lines of admitting error would have stood Stelmach in better faith too. But he and the CP party never did that. Instead they had a review of the royalty process and then said according to the results of the review, we now will reduce royalties.
As soon as the rigs started heading east in droves, Stelmach should have changed direction of the ship...and admitted that it was obvious that by increasing royalties, they had made Alberta non-competitive within the oil and gas industry.
Stalling and letting more rigs head east only made the problem worse.
Last edited by redforever; 01-25-2011 at 06:17 PM.
Well you'd have a far better idea than I would, my sample size is relatively small. In talking to people back home in rural Alberta who support the party (at least two of whom claim to be card-carrying party members), I've had several people say that they support the the Wildrose Alliance because of its strong social values like an opposition to gay marriage. And when I've pointed out that this actually goes against the party's official platform, I've been greeted by head shakes or answers like "We'll see."
Back in the day; there was a reference in the old policy set about a marriage being between a man and woman.
Some uppity board (read: me) put forth a motion to remove it. And was successful; this was also long before the arrival of Libertarian Danielle.
I can assure you if there were any hint of this coming back, myself and many, many others would close the doors on the party.
Quote:
On the other hand, urban supporters of the party that I've spoken with seem to have a perspective that matches the party line pretty closely. So I'm very curious to see if when push comes to shove, (ie. when candidates at the riding level are trying to strike a balance between the official party line and what socially conservative voters want to hear), will the message really be consistent?
I'm someone who's very seriously considering the WRA as a voting option next election; I'm totally sold on Danielle Smith, but I really want to hear how in-line with her message the rest of the party is during an election campaign. Honestly, even one dumb comment from a fringe candidate or party official about gay marriage, abortion, capital punishment etc. (even allowing that the provincial government has little if any impact on these areas) would be enough to scare me off as a voter.
I think if you look at the leadership results; over 76% in favor of Danielle, you get a pretty good grasp of where the members stood at that point in time.
Since then, what has happened? Well, I would hazard a guess that any hard core social conservatives have moved on. Reasonable social conservatives can understand how a freedom loving (defending) stance also works in their favor.
I would also guess that any who were reluctant to join prior to the outcome of the leadership race (for some of the exact reasons you point out); have now joined and are 100% behind DS.
When it's all said and done I would wager very few of the 13,000 members are hardcore social conservatives. (by hardcore I mean the radical ones)
The Following User Says Thank You to First Lady For This Useful Post:
First Lady, lets make a deal. You run for the PC leadership and we'll all vote for you. Sell yourself out.
How about you Slava, what provincial party would you associate with? You strike me as a touch to the left (relatively speaking of course).
Well I would say I'm fairly centrist. I won't give you the cliche labels here though (fiscal conservative/social moderate).
I'm free market all the way. I have a small business and frankly the capitalist system is how I make a living so I'm totally biased. Socially though I'm more left....I think that we should help people out who need help. I think that we should spend the money and improve education and healthcare (which in turn helps that free market economy of course!).
Its hard for me to say which party I most identify with though. I am not a card carrying member of any at this point. One MLA is a very good friend of mine (Liberal). I know a lot of very good people working for the Alberta Party, and dare I say I know good people who are members of the WRA and PCs.
Purely policy-wise I could see myself as being somewhat comfortable with a Dinning or Alison Redford PC party though (I admittedly don't know everything about her positions, but she strikes me as a red Tory).
The more I think about this though, the more I think that this ends badly for the Wildrose. Maybe Danielle should just throw her hat in the ring for the PCs...
Its not that bad. I live there. Sure, its more blue collar, but the university is better and the roads are managed better. You should clarify what is terribly wrong with edmonton, besides the oilers.
Its not that bad. I live there. Sure, its more blue collar, but the university is better and the roads are managed better. You should clarify what is terribly wrong with edmonton, besides the oilers.
Heh, hating on Edmonton is as much of a CP meme as the Fata.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
Thats why Flames fans make ideal Star Trek fans. We've really been taught to embrace the self-loathing and extreme criticism.
i don't think this will amount to much. Idiot Albertan voters will still turn out in droves to elect the next PC lackey to take his place in a few months.
Yes it would have been much smarter for the voters to have voted for the incompetent idiots running the other "major" parties in the province that not only couldn't organize an orgy in a brothel but didn't come close to representing most Albertans views.
What idiots those Albertan voters are for choosing by far the best choice of parties that were offered to them.
Its not that bad. I live there. Sure, its more blue collar, but the university is better and the roads are managed better. You should clarify what is terribly wrong with edmonton, besides the oilers.
The people, the weather, the smell, the people, the Oilers, the Eskimos, the people, the mullets, the Irocs, the people, the lack of things to do, the people, the sweat pants, the people.
That should give a good sense of what is wrong with that crap hole.
The people, the weather, the smell, the people, the Oilers, the Eskimos, the people, the mullets, the Irocs, the people, the lack of things to do, the people, the sweat pants, the people.
That should give a good sense of what is wrong with that crap hole.
Tough talk coming from someone who lives in Lethbridge.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
Thats why Flames fans make ideal Star Trek fans. We've really been taught to embrace the self-loathing and extreme criticism.
If Calgarians didn't feel the way I do towards Stelmach, how come his approval rating in this city has always been so low? If he cared about Calgary then why did he go ahead with the royalty regime knowing it would hurt oil & gas companies & all the industries attached to it? If you say he had no way of knowing then that is even more damning because how could he have been so stupid to surround himself with clueless syncophants giving him bad advice?
The royalty screwup didn't help anyone (except perhaps the extreme left that would rather see the oil sands shut down than a prosperous Alberta). It was a miscalculation, plain and simple, which is not to say that he shouldn't have known better.
