Alberta Election Poll (new poll added)

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Leaning Alberta Party at this point but their announcements last week that focused on children are not a good selling point to me and give me reason to look again at other alternatives. Frustrated at this point that all the parties have big negatives.

what part of their announcements regarding children turned you off the party? seems odd.

is this a bad thing?

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...-leader-mandel

At an Edmonton campaign announcement Thursday at Al-Mustafa Academy, Mandel pledged to increase to $690 million a year the funding for school boards to aid students with disabilities and challenges.
“Complexity in classrooms has changed dramatically over the last couple of years. And teachers need more support,” Mandel said.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I have heard that gripe a lot this past week, almost exclusively from people who want fiscal conservatism and were disappointed that the AP's first big policy announcement was that they're going to dole out hundreds of millions of dollars. It sends a message about what their campaign is going to be about, and it's not the sort of pragmatic budget dissection that some people want to see from the centrist party.

I don't have a kid, so it doesn't directly benefit me, but governments do actually have to spend money on education (surprise!) so it doesn't bother me one way or the other. My reaction was "oh, they're trying to get a bunch of the NDP's 2015 votes. I guess they've determined that that ground's softer than trying to pick a fight with Kenney et al. at this stage. Fair enough."

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Slava

The thing with the AP is that they have a completely innocuous platform. Like they’re in favour of everything and against nothing it seems, and because they’re a non-factor they won’t get dragged into any discussion or things like that. Because of that they’re everyone’s second choice.

Isn't that pretty much how the NDP ended up in power? They were all anti-pipeline, saying a bunch of NDPish things, until they suddenly were leading the polls and were like 'oh we can win this'. They became far more centrist than a typical NDP government, knowing they got in as a protest vote. They went from 10% of total votes to 40% in just 3 years.

The UCP is no different then Prentice or Redford's conservatives, and I can't stand that, even though I am conservative. Why can't they separate the religious right crap out and not ever talk about it? The UCP reminds me a lot of the Canadian Alliance when Stockwell Day was in charge, except Kenney is way more unlikable. Why the heck would they choose such an unlikable leader?

Alberta Party will be the protest vote in this election, and while I can't see them winning much, they could certainly surprise.

[Joborule]

So why is Alberta Party so popular on this forum, but not in the public according polls? Because it seems like based on posts in this thread and the poll, the Alberta Party should have a legitimate shot of winning lots of seats then.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Joborule

So why is Alberta Party so popular on this forum, but not in the public according polls? Because it seems like based on posts in this thread and the poll, the Alberta Party should have a legitimate shot of winning lots of seats then.

Because you will never find an internet forum with a demographic make-up that mirrors society at large.

[crazy_eoj]

Alberta Party platform reads just like the Redford/Stelmach PC's. Which should be no surprise considering who the majority of members are.

Lots of empty platitude statements and increased funding for everyone. However no actual plan to solve our fiscal issues nor make the tough decisions necessary to bring a bright future back to this province.

I would think because of the strong leftward bend of this message board it simply allows some people on the fence to lean further left than they otherwise might. However, the AP is really not an option in this election for most Albertans.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

what part of their announcements regarding children turned you off the party? seems odd.

is this a bad thing?

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...-leader-mandel

At an Edmonton campaign announcement Thursday at Al-Mustafa Academy, Mandel pledged to increase to $690 million a year the funding for school boards to aid students with disabilities and challenges.
“Complexity in classrooms has changed dramatically over the last couple of years. And teachers need more support,” Mandel said.

Well, an expert in that field is quoted in that very article as wondering what Mandel is going on about, so....

Ignoring good vs bad, the obvious question is: Does this proposal justify a nearly $700 million price tag? That's just over an 8% increase on the current education budget. I'd love to see the cost-benefit analysis on that one.

Counting ESL learners in January instead of September is... completely pointless. In fact, it makes less sense than to do it at the start of a school year. I do agree with his promise to maintain private school funding though.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Because you will never find an internet forum with a demographic make-up that mirrors society at large.

Moreover, this forum is geographically dispersed. The green party last federal election received 602,944 votes, and only won one seat, their support was only a few people here a few people there. Bloc Québécois received 821,144 and won 10 seats, their voting was simply more condensed geographically. Just because the AP has support doesn't mean that it is condensed enough to win many seats.

The poll is a better indication the political leanings of our discourse than anything.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Alberta Party platform reads just like the Redford/Stelmach PC's. Which should be no surprise considering who the majority of members are.

Lots of empty platitude statements and increased funding for everyone. However no actual plan to solve our fiscal issues nor make the tough decisions necessary to bring a bright future back to this province.

I would think because of the strong leftward bend of this message board it simply allows some people on the fence to lean further left than they otherwise might. However, the AP is really not an option in this election for most Albertans.

I agree completely, still I think that groundless promises is simply a political reality, and not necessarily an AP specific short coming.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Joborule

So why is Alberta Party so popular on this forum, but not in the public according polls? Because it seems like based on posts in this thread and the poll, the Alberta Party should have a legitimate shot of winning lots of seats then.

Speculating here, but...

I think this poll could reflect who many CPers would like to vote for, and not who they will vote for in the polling booth.

If you desperately want the NDP out of office, then a vote for the Alberta Party is risky, obviously due to the potential AP/UCP split.

[Ozy_Flame]

Any vote that is a vote not for your preferred candidate is a risky one IMO.

[Weitz]

I don't think the AP platform on financials really lines up with the UCP. I'm not sure why they are viewed as a Socially left, Fiscally Right party. I didn't really get that feeling from their website, which is why I can't vote for them. Maybe that changes over the next few weeks.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Here is the 2018 2019 Alberta Party Shadow Budget.

https://abpartycaucus.ca/wp-content/...ow-Budget-.pdf

You can very easily, from that one document, discern if the Alberta Party's fiscal strategy is adequately hawkish for your tastes.

But it's just nonsense to say, as eoj did above, that they have "no actual plan to solve our fiscal issues". There's literally a budget. That constitutes a very clear plan. You may well criticize their spending priorities or other aspects of the plan, poke holes in it as you see fit, suggest that further detail is needed, or otherwise argue about why it's not a good plan if that's your view. But it's just not open to anyone to honestly say they have "no plan".

[Lubicon]

[QUOTE=GordonBlue;7048315]what part of their announcements regarding children turned you off the party? seems odd.

is this a bad thing?

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I have heard that gripe a lot this past week, almost exclusively from people who want fiscal conservatism and were disappointed that the AP's first big policy announcement was that they're going to dole out hundreds of millions of dollars. It sends a message about what their campaign is going to be about, and it's not the sort of pragmatic budget dissection that some people want to see from the centrist party.

I don't have a kid, so it doesn't directly benefit me, but governments do actually have to spend money on education (surprise!) so it doesn't bother me one way or the other. My reaction was "oh, they're trying to get a bunch of the NDP's 2015 votes. I guess they've determined that that ground's softer than trying to pick a fight with Kenney et al. at this stage. Fair enough."

Mostly this. Two of their bigger announcements were a $1 billion child care plan and state funded dental care for children under $12. It's not the kids part that I disagree with, it is expanding spending in areas that we already have alternatives in. They just happened to focus on children last week and most of their policies don't align with me. We'll see where they stack up as the election goes on and they roll out their stands on other issues.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Here is the 2018 2019 Alberta Party Shadow Budget.

https://abpartycaucus.ca/wp-content/...ow-Budget-.pdf

You can very easily, from that one document, discern if the Alberta Party's fiscal strategy is adequately hawkish for your tastes.

But it's just nonsense to say, as eoj did above, that they have "no actual plan to solve our fiscal issues". There's literally a budget. That constitutes a very clear plan. You may well criticize their spending priorities or other aspects of the plan, poke holes in it as you see fit, suggest that further detail is needed, or otherwise argue about why it's not a good plan if that's your view. But it's just not open to anyone to honestly say they have "no plan".

Their plan is to copy the NDP numbers, which as we know have been off by many orders of magnitude. I give them credit for being slightly more conservative in their estimates but the NDP has been awful with their projections. Plus there is very little detail on how they are going to account for so many of their 'empty platitudes'.

Let's review their major announcements thus far:

- ID Card. Is this costed? Is the implementation included in the budget, because I don't see it?

- Childrens Dental covered in public health care. Is this costed in the budget? They appear to be spending less than the NDP plans so not sure how they are doing it for free.

- Reducing class sizes and doubling the # of TA's. - There is an increase of about 100 million/year in education funding. Not sure if that is enough to cover this promise.

I mean we can go on but there's plenty of other promises with either no money or no details attached to that policy (yet). "The Alberta Party, recognizes that chronic under-funding of First Nations, Metis and Inuit, communities has affected educational outcomes of students. The Alberta Party will enter into a mutually agreed upon process to address the on-reserve and on-settlement Education funding gap." "An Alberta Party government would enhance existing immigration services in French to better assist this growing community establish and integrate themselves into our province. "

Bottom line to me is there there is no plan to decrease spending significantly. No plan to increase revenues significantly.

Their plan is to layer on further debt, somehow fund a lot of promises, and try to be all things to all people. It's the exact PC playbook and it's a big reason why the province is in such a fiscal mess.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Bottom line to me is there there is no plan to decrease spending significantly. No plan to increase revenues significantly.

Their plan is to layer on further debt, somehow fund a lot of promises, and try to be all things to all people. It's the exact PC playbook and it's a big reason why the province is in such a fiscal mess.

There are literally billions of dollars of extra revenue and cut costs in the budget Corsi linked.

Check it out.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Well, an expert in that field is quoted in that very article as wondering what Mandel is going on about, so....

Ignoring good vs bad, the obvious question is: Does this proposal justify a nearly $700 million price tag? That's just over an 8% increase on the current education budget. I'd love to see the cost-benefit analysis on that one.

Counting ESL learners in January instead of September is... completely pointless. In fact, it makes less sense than to do it at the start of a school year. I do agree with his promise to maintain private school funding though.

he didn't say he'd add 690 million, but bring funding up to 690 million.

I do get the point that it may be questionable to throw money at a problem without understanding it.

I just didn't think the ideas on their own would be something to drive someone from voting AP.

[Flames0910]

Something I've wondered about the UCP budget, and not sure if anyone has done the research —but how do they square removing the carbon tax and cutting the corporate tax rate with balancing the budget and/or eliminating the deficit?

They're proposing to remove billions of dollars of revenue and replace them with...trickle down economics? spending cuts?
(honest question, because isn't that a massive revenue gap?)

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Flames0910

Something I've wondered about the UCP budget, and not sure if anyone has done the research —but how do they square removing the carbon tax and cutting the corporate tax rate with balancing the budget and/or eliminating the deficit?

They're proposing to remove billions of dollars of revenue and replace them with...trickle down economics? spending cuts?
(honest question, because isn't that a massive revenue gap?)

They aren't going to balance for many years. If their numbers are to be believed on the uptick in economic activity from a corporate tax cut, it still is a net negative from the current tax structure, which includes the carbon tax. As such, you can expect deficits to get even bigger and debt to rise faster, at least in the next term. This is how conservative governments have generally operated in North America for the good part of a generation. Even if they get closer to balance, it'll still rely heavily on oil and gas royalties for close to 1/5th of operating revenue, which continues to be short-sighted insanity.

[c.t.ner]

In fairness to the Alberta Party, NDP and UCP all of the announcements last week and this week haven't really explained how these items will be paid for. The NDP announced $1 billion dollars for flood mitigation without costing and even the UCP's 30 Milllion dollar Oil & Gas war room had no explanation about costing or where the funds for that would come from.

Usually parties release costed budgets in the 2nd-3rd week of the campaign once all the platform items have been released. Given the track record of the party in general, I'd expect some explanations about the costings next week.