Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Saying Nenshi is “too arrogant” is one of the weirder critiques I’ve heard given that we have a premier whose pandering to eschatological extremists and conspiracy theorists on the far right is basically an existential threat to our polity.

And she’s also, you know, pretty arrogant. When is the last time she admitted she was wrong about, well, anything? Even when confronted with inconvenient facts she tends to gaslight and double down.

We don’t need a “nice guy” to run against Smith. We need someone who can win and then steer this province back toward normality while the Conservatives do some internal housecleaning so that they can stop being a doomsday cult and start being a political party again. Nenshi seems like the best choice right now. He’s smart, he’s willing to attack idiots when he sees them, he’s a competent leader and he’s someone who listens to experts instead of Rebel news.

But sure, maybe you don’t love his personality. Ok. I just think if that’s your reaction to him in this situation, it might be time for some soul-searching as to why.

I dont even care about that, if I'm honest.

I would like sound, reliable fiscal policy and I'm not all too bothered at the moment which team it comes from.

And I dont expect it 'now.' I understand that our country at the moment has been fiscally pounded 7 ways from Sunday at every level.

I've even said that I believe that Fiscal Conservatism in my time is dead. And until I see evidence otherwise I'm going to stick to that statement. But I've also said that I do not hold to social Conservatism.

So if the Conservatives want to get it together and become 'not a Doomsday Cult' which, kudos to you, gave me a good laugh because you nailed it!

If they want to do that, then...good for them? But its going to take a lot to convince me.

[Locke]

Oh...and as for Nenshi being an arrogant prick?

We should get him a purple baseball bat wrapped with barbed-wire...

Because one of the beauties of his arrogance? He shuts bull#### down....immediately!

Thats for you TWD fans!

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Like what? Give me some examples.

I’m not a progressive on most issues, no. But that doesn’t mean I’m conservative. Moderate liberal is a pretty common political stance, just one that’s under-represented in online discourse.

I will point it out next time it comes across that way.

Look at your posts in the zoning skid. You have many posts arguing that people are justified in being upset. You don’t take the anti-zoning position but you argue against people arguing for zoning changes by suggesting people are reasonable to be upset while leaving your support of zoning changes to be a one liner.

So the perception is you agree with those who don’t want to change because that is what you spend your time discussing. Essentially it allows you to argue the position while being able to say you don’t hold the position.

Classic liberalism essentially is just libertarianism touting the elimination of the restriction of government in people’s lives. It is a fairly right wing economic stance and laisiz fair on social issues. So if it makes you feel better to call yourself classically liberal go ahead.

[Ozy_Flame]

There is a particular hubris in expressing self-professed political views that fall in this absolute narrow gap between progressive and conservative values; that you have tweaked your political portfolio so well that you are able to fill the sweet spot of moderate that absolves themselves from any division or fervor of either side.

And yet there exists a space for militant moderation; a home occupied by those who neither own or disavow political activities because it doesn't fit their political wheelhouse no matter what the issue. They're the self-professed neutral centrist that 'takes the best of both worlds' and takes responsibility for none.

We may as well call people like that the Quito egg, because they've transcended gravitational pull on both sides.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GGG

I will point it out next time it comes across that way.

Look at your posts in the zoning skid. You have many posts arguing that people are justified in being upset. You don’t take the anti-zoning position but you argue against people arguing for zoning changes by suggesting people are reasonable to be upset while leaving your support of zoning changes to be a one liner.

So the perception is you agree with those who don’t want to change because that is what you spend your time discussing. Essentially it allows you to argue the position while being able to say you don’t hold the position.

Classic liberalism essentially is just libertarianism touting the elimination of the restriction of government in people’s lives. It is a fairly right wing economic stance and laisiz fair on economic issues. So if it makes you feel better to call yourself classically liberal go ahead.

I believe reasonable people can disagree about important things. The overriding aim of a liberal society is to find a way for people who disagree about important things to get along so our society and public institutions can continue to function without tearing itself to pieces. The habit of treating people who disagree with you as enemies and then attributing the worst motives to them - which is how political discourse typically goes online - is illiberal. Which is why I often take issue with it.

I’ve said I approve of the blanket rezoning of Calgary. But I don’t think most of the people who don’t want to see their street rezoned are contemptible, stupid, or malicious. Showing some empathy for them isn’t conservative - it’s liberal.

And again, that outlook is not rare out in the real world. Lots and lots of voters are moderates. They’re just less likely to engage in political discourse online than highly partisan types.

https://www.deseret.com/2022/1/14/22...s-republicans/

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Saying Nenshi is “too arrogant” is one of the weirder critiques I’ve heard given that we have a premier whose pandering to eschatological extremists and conspiracy theorists on the far right is basically an existential threat to our polity.

And she’s also, you know, pretty arrogant. When is the last time she admitted she was wrong about, well, anything? Even when confronted with inconvenient facts she tends to gaslight and double down.

I agree that the willingness to concede is a major difference between Nenshi and Smith. With Nenshi, we have some claims from Jeromy Farkas that Nenshi certainly does have a bit of an ego. But the crucial element I see is that it doesn't affect his ability to operate his position; he doesn't need the spotlight to be on him (or off him, in the case of criticism for someone else) and he'll openly accept accommodate opposing views if you have supporting evidence to your opinion. That step alone makes me far more willing to accept any potential faults on ego.



We've seen Smith double down on unpopular policy (or continue right until the last second and call it off with an abrupt shift in tone). An even keeled leader alone is a huge plus come next election...at least, for my vote.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Saying Nenshi is “too arrogant” is one of the weirder critiques I’ve heard given that we have a premier whose pandering to eschatological extremists and conspiracy theorists on the far right is basically an existential threat to our polity.

And she’s also, you know, pretty arrogant. When is the last time she admitted she was wrong about, well, anything? Even when confronted with inconvenient facts she tends to gaslight and double down.

We don’t need a “nice guy” to run against Smith. We need someone who can win and then steer this province back toward normality while the Conservatives do some internal housecleaning so that they can stop being a doomsday cult and start being a political party again. Nenshi seems like the best choice right now. He’s smart, he’s willing to attack idiots when he sees them, he’s a competent leader and he’s someone who listens to experts instead of Rebel news.

The next election won’t be about you. If Nenshi wins the NDP nomination, his strategists aren’t going to give a moment’s thought to you and the others in this thread who hate the UCP. Those votes are money in the bank, and feeding your righteous anger won’t make them count more.

The election will be about persuading tens of thousands of people who voted UCP in the last election to check a box beside their NDP candidate this time around. Nenshi’s prominence in Calgary is an asset there. But as a known quantity, he also comes with baggage. Part of that baggage, as acknowledged by his own team, is that he comes across as arrogant. If that’s a handicap to persuading tens of thousands of Calgarians who voted UCP last election to switch their vote, why wouldn’t you want to see him tone it down?

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The next election won’t be about you. If Nenshi wins the NDP nomination, his strategists aren’t going to give a moment’s thought to you and the others in this thread who hate the UCP. Those votes are money in the bank, and feeding your righteous anger won’t make them count more.

The election will be about persuading tens of thousands of people who voted UCP in the last election to check a box beside their NDP candidate this time around. Nenshi’s prominence in Calgary is an asset there. But as a known quantity, he also comes with baggage. Part of that baggage, as acknowledged by his own team, is that he comes across as arrogant. If that’s a handicap to persuading tens of thousands of Calgarians who voted UCP last election to switch their vote, why wouldn’t you want to see him tone it down?

I think you're making a worth while point in the post, Nenshi needs to win votes from people who chose the UCP.

That said, you also proved another point in this thread, that Nenshi is being held to a standard that no one in the UCP is.

That together pro0ves my point that the NDP has a 0% chance of winning no matter who their leader is unless the UCP split the vote by breaking into two parties.

[Ozy_Flame]

I disagree with that. They performed admirably last election with no vote split, with the same leader as before, and didn't lose Calgary seats by all that much. They basically captured the two big city vote, a resounding accomplishment on its own.

In 2027, the province is also going to be more full of young progressives who are arriving in droves for better house prices.

The NDP is a much stronger party today than they were in 2016. Anyone who doesn't believe that isn't paying attention.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I disagree with that. They performed admirably last election with no vote split, with the same leader as before, and didn't lose Calgary seats by all that much. They basically captured the two big city vote, a resounding accomplishment on its own.

In 2027, the province is also going to be more full of young progressives who are arriving in droves for better house prices.

The NDP is a much stronger party today than they were in 2016. Anyone who doesn't believe that isn't paying attention.

It would be a resounding accomplishment if the opponent was a rational traditional Conservative. Against Smith they should have buried her in a train car. Unfortunately we've seen the voting public tends to respond better to lies and bull#### than reality, and decades of Conservative leaning media in this province have contributed to the mis-education of the populace, including Smith, who lost her radio show because of her continued relentless deceit. Because of this reality, I have doubts anyone can defeat a blue party, unless the vote is split between 2 blue parties.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I believe reasonable people can disagree about important things. The overriding aim of a liberal society is to find a way for people who disagree about important things to get along so our society and public institutions can continue to function without tearing itself to pieces. The habit of treating people who disagree with you as enemies and then attributing the worst motives to them - which is how political discourse typically goes online - is illiberal. Which is why I often take issue with it.

I’ve said I approve of the blanket rezoning of Calgary. But I don’t think most of the people who don’t want to see their street rezoned are contemptible, stupid, or malicious. Showing some empathy for them isn’t conservative - it’s liberal.

And again, that outlook is not rare out in the real world. Lots and lots of voters are moderates. They’re just less likely to engage in political discourse online than highly partisan types.

https://www.deseret.com/2022/1/14/22...s-republicans/

I'd argue you are just as guilty of ascribing the worst motives to those of us who have the audacity to be upset about the actual monsters in the legislature who are actively working to tear down our institutions. But hey, if you think it's more important to continue to point out that we can be mildly hyperbolic and caustic in our criticism/venting, you do you. I'll continue to be mildly hyperbolic and caustic in my criticism/venting of the ####heads in the Leg for attacking vulnerable people and making my province a worse place to live. (But really I just do it for the internet points)

If it makes you feel better we can just specify that the reasoning for resisting rezoning is contemptible and stupid from otherwise intelligent and good-hearted people, just like the reasoning for voting UCP or for being irrationally over-critical of the NDP compared to their "conservative" counterparts is contemptible and stupid.

Some of us have made that distinction at times. But it really shouldn't be necessary...we can all be grownups and acknowledge that when I call a UCP voter a morally bankrupt loser I am not actually attacking the core of their integrity in their everyday life - I just think they were just a morally bankrupt loser when they put the X mark beside the morally bankrupt monster's name (and also every time they cowardly turn a blind-eye to the latest example of idiocy from the clowns they elected).

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

In 2027, the province is also going to be more full of young progressives who are arriving in droves for better house prices.

I'm not sure this is as definitive or accurate as you claim.

Plus, we've been hearing a lot of media reports and speculation that the UCP government is driving away progressives (NDP voters.) Look on Reddit or media reports about healthcare professionals leaving Alberta because of the government. The net might just be a wash for progressive migration.

[Ozy_Flame]

You think there's just as many healthcare professionals leaving the province than net migration of all people's into the province?

Numbers please.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The next election won’t be about you. If Nenshi wins the NDP nomination, his strategists aren’t going to give a moment’s thought to you and the others in this thread who hate the UCP. Those votes are money in the bank, and feeding your righteous anger won’t make them count more.

The election will be about persuading tens of thousands of people who voted UCP in the last election to check a box beside their NDP candidate this time around. Nenshi’s prominence in Calgary is an asset there. But as a known quantity, he also comes with baggage. Part of that baggage, as acknowledged by his own team, is that he comes across as arrogant. If that’s a handicap to persuading tens of thousands of Calgarians who voted UCP last election to switch their vote, why wouldn’t you want to see him tone it down?

This kind of dismisses those who didn't vote however; an NDP win could easily come from persuading those who didn't bother voting last time around. The sentiment of the UCP dragging out a win seemed more inevitable last time around sadly.

This path is honestly less difficult than persuading moderates that Nenshi isn't going to offend their sensibilities of decorum or whatever

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

You think there's just as many healthcare professionals leaving the province than net migration of all people's into the province?

Numbers please.

I'm just using healthcare professionals as an example because the media likes to report on that movement and they are largely NDP supporters.

Migration of progressives out extends beyond just healthcare and we don't have numbers on how many progressives are leaving because of the UCP but internet ramblings tend to lead one to believe that they are rushing for greener pastures.

Would you care to share your numbers showing how many young progressives are coming to Alberta who will be helping lead the NDP to victory?

[Ozy_Flame]

I don't have numbers. No one does until a few years from now when pollsters can look back and analyze the data. All I'm saying is if you're inviting people into your province, and you're attracting 100's of thousands of young voters looking for homes and jobs into the big cities, you're going to change the demographics of voters.

It's not just conservatives who need affordable homes. It's everybody. And people are willing to forego politics to get their basic needs met.

[Muta]

Young people are generally more progressive / liberal overall, and young people are flocking to Alberta right now like it's going out of style. I would agree with Ozy that it has a real chance of skewing the demographics in the next several years, and not in the UCP's favour.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

How about all the voters who aren’t loyalists of either - the people you need to get onside in order to win elections?

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Have you heard me praise PP?

Not accusing you of either being a PP praiser or a loyalist; this is just the way of politics now. It's certainly annoying, but sound bites and pwnage is what gets people to the polls.

I think the general feeling is that people like you will hold your nose and vote anyway.

Of course, i don't want to equate Nenshi snark with PPs schtick. They are wildly different. Nenshi answers questions. He has a cadence and facial expression that sometimes gives off condescension vibes.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Muta

Young people are generally more progressive / liberal overall, and young people are flocking to Alberta right now like it's going out of style. I would agree with Ozy that it has a real chance of skewing the demographics in the next several years, and not in the UCP's favour.

At least not this brand of conservatism populism. The UCP aren't doing themselves any favors by keeping to the far-right. The NDP has moved markedly to the center, a move that will continue under Nenshi (assuming he wins, which I think is likely).

The UCP is basically a governing party of rural and small city representatives. They have a lot of work to do to make up the ground in their two biggest cities (Edmonton particularly), and their policies and actions have most certainly not endeared them to urban progressives and centrists.

I also think most people moving to Alberta are not doing it because they're conservatives; it's for house prices, taxation policy, and wages. That appeals to people on both sides of the spectrum. There's a good chance a ton of these people would stay in Ontario or BC if they could.

[Robbob]

Plus aren't all the older or ultra conservatives leaving the country because of Trudeau and such.