April 23 2012: Alberta Provincial Election

[Slava]

Even if that's true, you still don't push/punch the guy! I just can't see any justification really.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

Even if that's true, you still don't push/punch the guy! I just can't see any justification really.

Not trying to justify AT ALL.


In related news..

This struck me as funny.....

This is the third police-related incident in which Lukaszuk has been involved in the past year.

Last November, he used his car to corner two “teenage pranksters” after they posed as police officers.

WTF? (I'm going to a special place for lol when I read that.)

Read more:

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by First Lady

I not huge fan of the Sun News, so I always have huge grain of salt handy when reading. But this piece is written by Monte Solberg, who I respect immensely. I know his father, and my father knew him as well.

He gives a statistic I wasn't aware of.



Entire piece: Wildrose makes hay as PCs lose their way

If this is true....just...stunning.

Shows how far away from small c conservatism they have drifted. Thats an NDP level of mismanagement and "pig at the eavestrough" mentality, nevermind being liberal.

[c.t.ner]

If it pleases the court of public opinion, I offer as an example a single piece of startling evidence.

In January, Calgary's School of Public Policy released a report showing wage increases for Alberta's public sector employees ate up 95% of the total increase in government revenues between 2000 and 2010, far outstripping public sector wage growth in other provinces.

Yes, that's right, 95%, which happens to rhyme with "all our future spent."

Not to slam on Monte as I follow him on Twitter and he sounds like an informed politico, but I'd like to see the context of the report in the opinion piece he wrote. As the basis for his article it's hard to take the information at face value without a reference to the actual report or at least a link showcasing the context or original text that it comes from.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by c.t.ner

Not to slam on Monte as I follow him on Twitter and he sounds like an informed politico, but I'd like to see the context of the report in the opinion piece he wrote. As the basis for his article it's hard to take the information at face value without a reference to the actual report or at least a link showcasing the context or original text that it comes from.

Did a quick search of their website. Found this report from January.

http://policyschool.ucalgary.ca/site...age-growth.pdf

I haven't read it, so not sure if right one, but title was close to topic.

[flamingreen]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Did a quick search of their website. Found this report from January.

http://policyschool.ucalgary.ca/site...age-growth.pdf

I haven't read it, so not sure if right one, but title was close to topic.

I just wish in that paper he did a province by province comparison to Alberta from 2000 - 2010. He shows what each spent in 2010 but not in 2000. It would be nice to see what the percentage change was for each province and not when all of them are lumped as a whole.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Jacks

http://www.calgaryherald.com/Lukaszu...434/story.html
One of them is a liar. The PC's better hope that Lukaszuk is the one telling the truth or this could hurt them.

Actually, it doesn't matter who's telling the truth. According to those statements, "Al" is guilty of assault either way.

Also, I echo what Slava said. No doorknocker is there for 15 minutes after being asked to leave. What could he possibly gain from making an angry voter even more angry?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by First Lady

I not huge fan of the Sun News, so I always have huge grain of salt handy when reading. But this piece is written by Monte Solberg, who I respect immensely. I know his father, and my father knew him as well.

He gives a statistic I wasn't aware of.



Entire piece: Wildrose makes hay as PCs lose their way

Its such a weird statistic. It would be interesting to read that report and see what it actually means though. Sometimes these statistics are really misleading and that 95% figure is used to make it seem worse than it really is.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Actually, it doesn't matter who's telling the truth. According to those statements, "Al" is guilty of assault either way.

Also, I echo what Slava said. No doorknocker is there for 15 minutes after being asked to leave. What could he possibly gain from making an angry voter even more angry?

If you're conspiracy minded, a groundswell of support for being the poor, innocent victim of an attack by a supporter of the party that is kicking you all over the province?

I suspect that, as always, the truth is somewhere in the middle of the two stories, though probably closer to Lukaszuk's version. That said, three police incidents in the last year for this guy? Is he actively seeking trouble or something?

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

If you're conspiracy minded, a groundswell of support for being the poor, innocent victim of an attack by a supporter of the party that is kicking you all over the province?

I suspect that, as always, the truth is somewhere in the middle of the two stories, though probably closer to Lukaszuk's version. That said, three police incidents in the last year for this guy? Is he actively seeking trouble or something?

Unfortunately, we may never know the whole truth. I just feel that "Al's" story doesn't quite add up, but that's just my opinion.

I don't know anything about Lukaszuk, and I'm not a Tory, so I really don't have a dog in the fight, but I've been around politics enough to know that staying for 15 minutes after being asked to leave just isn't what doorknockers do.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Actually, it doesn't matter who's telling the truth. According to those statements, "Al" is guilty of assault either way.

Doesn't really matter. IF somehow evidence shows that Lukaszuk was being a jerk then he looks bad having a confrontation with a 67 year old pensioner with asthma and liver failure. I'm not saying that's what happened just that this is politics and the court of public opinion is what counts here.

Originally Posted by Slava

Anyone who's ever been door knocking for a political party knows that you're not there for 15 minutes. It has nothing to do with trying to convince anyone of anything and the only purpose is to say hello and identify people voting for you. He would've known within a second that this guy wasn't voting for him and it's on to the next one. It is more about volume than it is about anything else.

Again I don't know what happened but Lukaszuk mentioned in the article that he likes to door knock houses with opposing lawn signs so that he can talk to anyone else in the house who may have different opinions. Maybe the guy answered the door, told him to piss off, Lukaszuk said I want to talk to your wife, guy tells him to get off his property grabs his sweater and shoves him back then it escalates? Pure speculation but then that's what we're all doing. Makes as much sense as the guy opens the door and starts swinging.

I doubt that the police will say anything so we'll probably never know.

[Resolute 14]

Well, on top of now three police incidents, Lukaszuk also pissed off Airdrie residents by telling them to call their MLA (Anderson) and tell him to get off Lukaszuk's back. I think there is enough background here to argue that he's the type that will lash back when provoked.

Most likely, I suspect Lukaszuk knocked on the door and was met by an immediately hostile Michalchuk who told him to get lost. Instead of just turning and going, Lukaszuk probably tried to press for a conversation/said something and got spun around by the home owner. The "15 minutes" bit is the least believable, but I'm not sure I buy the punch in the back either. Probably an additional push rather than an outright punch.

[Jacks]

The other question is how did Stephen Carter find out about this so fast?

Did Lukaszuk (or his assistant) make an immediate call to the war room to report the incident?

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Most likely, I suspect Lukaszuk knocked on the door and was met by an immediately hostile Michalchuk who told him to get lost. Instead of just turning and going, Lukaszuk probably tried to press for a conversation/said something and got spun around by the home owner. The "15 minutes" bit is the least believable.

The 15 minutes has to be an exaggeration I agree with you.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...-knocking.html

However, the resident of the home insists he never punched Lukaszuk and only touched him when the candidate refused repeated requests to leave.
"He just stood there and started arguing and saying 'Why don't you like me?' and 'What have I ever done to you?' " Al Michalchuk said. "He just wouldn't leave."

[Slava]

I can't even believe you're trying to defend this or look for scenarios that somehow justify it. I get that he's a PC and you've left the fold, but its reprehensible no matter what party. I would feel the same way if it was a WRA candidate or an Evergreen. The part about him going to houses with opposition signs doesn't mean he's looking for a fight either; lots of husbands and wives vote differently.

While its a little different, its similar to the sign wars. I don't like it when any party/candidate has signs broken or vandalized. I don't agree with their policies maybe, but I do fully support the process for them to get the message out.

[c.t.ner]

Originally Posted by Jacks

The other question is how did Stephen Carter find out about this so fast?

I'd gander that as Campaign Manager the first thing that happened after the cops arrived was a call out to the main campaign head office. Don't see anything wrong with that, with at the speed news travels with social media there is no way that Lukaszuk or any of his campaign aids would be able to just walk away and not have it spun by other campaigns.

I don't see anything wrong with this. If it was the WRP or the Liberals that got in a scuffle with a citizen I imagine the first call after the cops arrived would have been to the campaign office to tell their side of the story and explain what happened.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Jacks

The other question is how did Stephen Carter find out about this so fast?

Did Lukaszuk (or his assistant) make an immediate call to the war room to report the incident?

The 15 minutes has to be an exaggeration I agree with you.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...-knocking.html

Why does it matter? Why did the WRA retweet the comments about Danielle Smith not having kids and issue a press release. (hint: its because there's an election going on!)

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Slava

I can't even believe you're trying to defend this or look for scenarios that somehow justify it.

Ya, unlike how you instantly jumped to Lukaszuk's defense
You guys said there is no way the events could have happen differently, I offered a theory (with a disclaimer) so chill out.

Originally Posted by Slava

Why does it matter? Why did the WRA retweet the comments about Danielle Smith not having kids and issue a press release. (hint: its because there's an election going on!)

This is little different don't you think? The tweet was on the INTERNET for anyone to see, if someone had overheard her saying that in a bar and then made a big deal about it nobody would have cared. This incident happened with no one else around to see unless they were told about it specifically. Did he call the war room right away "quick, put out a news release, some rabid WR supporter just attacked me ... okay I gotta let you go now and phone the police, get the news crews here now"?

There are two sides to every story, the truth is probably in the middle.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Ya, unlike how you instantly jumped to Lukaszuk's defense
You guys said there is no way the events could have happen differently, I offered a theory (with a disclaimer) so chill out.


This is little different don't you think? The tweet was on the INTERNET for anyone to see, if someone had overheard her saying that in a bar and then made a big deal about it nobody would have cared. This incident happened with no one else around to see unless they were told about it specifically. Did he call the war room right away "quick, put out a news release, some rabid WR supporter just attacked me ... okay I gotta let you go now and phone the police, get the news crews here now"?

There are two sides to every story, the truth is probably in the middle.

I jumped to his defence because there are wackos out there. I don't know much about him, but like I say I have a hard time believing the account from the homeowner. It makes no sense at all.

This isn't that different in terms of how it spread; political parties try to capitalize on these things. You missed think its seedy or uncouth, but thats just reality on any side of the spectrum. It happened in the mayors race as well with Nenshis office being vandalized, again with the childless comments on Smith and now this. Maybe I'm too jaded, but this gives a lot of earned media and while the situation isn't ideal, that's still a big benefit for the victim.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Slava

Maybe I'm too jaded, but this gives a lot of earned media and while the situation isn't ideal, that's still a big benefit for the victim.

The only point I was trying to make initially is that this could blow up in their face if the "earned media" turns sour. The other residents of the riding will form their own opinions as to who is telling the truth and vote accordingly.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Jacks

The only point I was trying to make initially is that this could blow up in their face if the "earned media" turns sour. The other residents of the riding will form their own opinions as to who is telling the truth and vote accordingly.

Well the funniest thing to me is that I wasn't actually posting my comment about defending the homeowner in response to you. It was more for Resolute, but you posted at the same time and got caught in the crossfire!