Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 05-16-2022, 05:23 PM   #581
Lubicon
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvp2003 View Post
#2 is pretty good actually, the other ones are pretty standard. But it's always good to see these bets as it means there is actually something on the line for teams in both cities which is good for Alberta sport.
Lubicon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2022, 06:03 PM   #582
corporatejay
Franchise Player
 
corporatejay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Exp:
Default

Gondek will probably change the rules of the contest halfway through anyway.
__________________
corporatejay is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to corporatejay For This Useful Post:
Old 05-16-2022, 09:19 PM   #583
Yoho
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: North America
Exp:
Default

I wonder who came up with the face paint ideaÖ

https://twitter.com/user/status/1517566785381302272
Yoho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2022, 11:30 PM   #584
81MC
#1 Goaltender
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Exp:
Default

MFers couldn’t sport their team jerseys for the official announcement?
__________________
No, noÖIím not sloppy, or lazy. This is a sign of the boredom.
81MC is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to 81MC For This Useful Post:
Old 05-16-2022, 11:35 PM   #585
OptimalTates
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Exp:
Default

Kings should follow suit next time they have a chance for the facepaint bet.
OptimalTates is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2022, 09:35 PM   #586
tvp2003
Franchise Player
 
tvp2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 81MC View Post
MFers couldnít sport their team jerseys for the official announcement?
Not sure about Edmonton but this is from Calgaryís announcement:



Gondek sporting the red 2003-07 jersey; not sure what Spencer is doing there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by corporatejay View Post
Gondek will probably change the rules of the contest halfway through anyway.
Okay, that was funny.
tvp2003 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2022, 01:02 PM   #587
Lubicon
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 81MC View Post
MFers couldnít sport their team jerseys for the official announcement?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvp2003 View Post
Not sure about Edmonton but this is from Calgaryís announcement:



Gondek sporting the red 2003-07 jersey; not sure what Spencer is doing there.



Okay, that was funny.
Sohi was out of town at the time so a little tough to do a photo op in a jersey etc.
Lubicon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2022, 05:50 PM   #588
getbak
Franchise Player
 
getbak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Exp:
Default

Just when you think Chu couldn't get any worse...



...of course he has a knock-off jersey.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
getbak is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
Old 05-30-2022, 05:42 PM   #589
tvp2003
Franchise Player
 
tvp2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

$1.6M spent by a third party advertiser on the last municipal election:

https://livewirecalgary.com/2022/05/...ipal-election/
tvp2003 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2022, 06:28 PM   #590
calgarygeologist
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvp2003 View Post
$1.6M spent by a third party advertiser on the last municipal election:

https://livewirecalgary.com/2022/05/...ipal-election/
Money well spent as Calgary's Future managed to get most of their candidates elected and we now have a progressive council.
calgarygeologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2022, 06:38 PM   #591
timun
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

Preferable to the alternative, anyway...
timun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2022, 08:00 PM   #592
Wormius
Franchise Player
 
Wormius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Somewhere down the crazy river.
Exp:
Default

Is it just me or has council been a lot quieter?
Wormius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2022, 11:29 PM   #593
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarygeologist View Post
Money well spent as Calgary's Future managed to get most of their candidates elected and we now have a progressive council.
Not really

All candidates came from two PACs who spent the most. A conservative PAC and a progressive PAC. We now have a 2 party system in municipal politics without even a primary system to select Candidates.

These two PACs and their major donate now select Council for us.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Old 05-30-2022, 11:34 PM   #594
Dan02
Franchise Player
 
Dan02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvp2003 View Post
$1.6M spent by a third party advertiser on the last municipal election:

https://livewirecalgary.com/2022/05/...ipal-election/
That's pretty impressive, Calgary's public unions bought city council with their own money.
Dan02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2022, 11:41 PM   #595
Mr.Coffee
damn onions
 
Mr.Coffee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormius View Post
Is it just me or has council been a lot quieter?
Oh, I wouldn't call a discussion to spend $87 billion by 2050 on climate change being all that quiet. That's $3.1B / year. 2021 total expenses were $3.979B...

wow. Mind you, it's just a discussion, but holy ####.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...mate-emergency
Mr.Coffee is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Mr.Coffee For This Useful Post:
Old 05-30-2022, 11:54 PM   #596
SebC
tromboner
 
SebC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: where the lattes are
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG View Post
Not really

All candidates came from two PACs who spent the most. A conservative PAC and a progressive PAC. We now have a 2 party system in municipal politics without even a primary system to select Candidates.

These two PACs and their major donate now select Council for us.
Did they win because of the money, or did they attract the money because they were able to win? In any case we still get to choose which "party" we support.

Last edited by SebC; 05-30-2022 at 11:58 PM.
SebC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2022, 12:07 AM   #597
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC View Post
Did they win because of the money, or did they attract the money because they were able to win?
Well in your first post you state Iím glad they spent so much money because it got us a progressive council. So obviously you believe that money gave them an advantage. The two PAC slates winning and I believe going 1/2 in every race (Iím not 100% sure on the last one) shows that the progressive candidates and conservative candidates not selected by the PACs did not have a chance.

Now did the PACs pick electable candidates, absolutely. However itís still the PAC picking which candidate is the most electable progressive rather than individuals picking between the most electable progressive. Now this does reduce vote splitting which is good but instead of being the most electable candidate you now need to be the most electable progressive or most electable conservative. Candidates in between no longer have a chance. As this process is carried out in more elections we will see a greater distance between the sets of candidates which overall isnít good.

In the end if we are going to have party politics at least we should have primaries to narrow down the field.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2022, 12:32 AM   #598
SebC
tromboner
 
SebC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: where the lattes are
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG View Post
Well in your first post you state I’m glad they spent so much money because it got us a progressive council. So obviously you believe that money gave them an advantage.
I think you are referring to calgarygeologist's post - it wasn't mine! I do agree that money creates an advantage. But I also think that they money follows electable candidates. It's mutual reinforcement, and ultimately it's the more popular candidates that get reinforced. The progressive side in particularly tends to emphasize "ABC" and avoiding vote splits.

Also, don't primaries in general create polarization? A "party" establishment usually values electability (i.e. capturing the median voter) more than the party supporters, no?

Last edited by SebC; 05-31-2022 at 12:41 AM.
SebC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2022, 10:28 AM   #599
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee View Post
Oh, I wouldn't call a discussion to spend $87 billion by 2050 on climate change being all that quiet. That's $3.1B / year. 2021 total expenses were $3.979B...

wow. Mind you, it's just a discussion, but holy ####.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...mate-emergency
Wow. That would require property taxes to ~double. Probably this is just to socialize the idea of spending huge amounts of money on this, and they'll end up compromising on only a 40% increase in taxes for this over a 12 year period or something like that.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2022, 10:47 AM   #600
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC View Post
I think you are referring to calgarygeologist's post - it wasn't mine! I do agree that money creates an advantage. But I also think that they money follows electable candidates. It's mutual reinforcement, and ultimately it's the more popular candidates that get reinforced. The progressive side in particularly tends to emphasize "ABC" and avoiding vote splits.

Also, don't primaries in general create polarization? A "party" establishment usually values electability (i.e. capturing the median voter) more than the party supporters, no?


Primaries create polarization so itís not an ideal solution but itís better than king making which promotes polarization AND king making.

Also if you had the open California primary model where everyone gets to vote at the best two candidates advance to final Ballot regardless of party and have a ranked ballot for it.

The main point is that King Making is bad. The public is not selecting between electable candidates. A small group of well monied people are.

For example the people in charge deciding whether new neighbourhoods get approved are being selected by the people who want new neighbourhoods. And the people who are selecting councillors are the same groups who would like to see success in union contract negotiations.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:13 AM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021