Alberta Politics Thread v2

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

What, you just gonna ignore the Liberals? They have a party too you know! Right? They still exist, don't they? Hrmmm...

Hah - I'm the last person who would; I've actually never voted for anyone other than David Swann in any election in this province. But are "they" even fielding candidates besides David Khan this time?

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by transplant99

What cracks me up is the claim that the NDP and supporters are the party of "love and hope and optimism"....until you dont agree with them.

Then its attack and division...no problem.

I'd bet a large portion of Albertans who have suffered through an insolvency or unemployment over the past 4 years don't give a flying #### about love and optimism.

[crazy_eoj]

No children at the UCP Election kick-off.

NSFW!

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Hah - I'm the last person who would; I've actually never voted for anyone other than David Swann in any election in this province. But are "they" even fielding candidates besides David Khan this time?

They list 10 candidates on their website...yikes.

https://www.albertaliberal.com/teamkhan2019

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

I'd bet a large portion of Albertans who have suffered through an insolvency or unemployment over the past 4 years don't give a flying #### about love and optimism.

No man you have it all wrong...

THATS what will build pipelines dont ya know?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Whereas the UCP has made it very clear how they will get the pipelines built. Wait, they haven't because it's not up to the province of Alberta and the NDP would have had them built if possible?

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Ark2

I understand the point that you are trying to make, but I don't think it adheres to reality. While in theory you are supposed to vote for your local representative, in practice, they will most likely be a back-bench MP that yields no power and will be whipped into towing the party (IE the PMO) line. Voting for an MP while completely ignoring the fact that the leader of that MP's party is an absurdly under-qualified candidate for the position of prime minister is far more irresponsible than simply voting by which leader you prefer.

That way of thinking is just wrong on so many levels and is far more likely to lead to lame duck representative being elected than your preferred method of voting. There are far too many alternative outcomes possible that make voting only for a leader such a dangerous play for voters, with the following 2 being the most obvious:

1.) A minority government would place far more importance on each and every MP or MLA elected to place significant influence beyond the party line.

2.) The leader you have irrationally voted for winds up not winning their own riding or a new leader is chosen for a variety of reasons (retirement, illness, death, scandal) during the term.

No matter which way you spin it, you cannot simply assume your representative will be some insignificant backbencher. It happens, of course but our democracy just doesn't work effectively under those assumptions. Even a small player who is any good is going to make strides to improve their riding. It's unfortunate that some of these people don't get the chance to do it simply because of misguided voters not doing what is best for their own ridings.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by transplant99

They list 10 candidates on their website...yikes.

https://www.albertaliberal.com/teamkhan2019

Elections Alberta has 42 candidates listed: http://efpublic.elections.ab.ca/efNC...NDARYYEAR=2019

That's even less than last election. They should just pack it up.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Whereas the UCP has made it very clear how they will get the pipelines built. Wait, they haven't because it's not up to the province of Alberta and the NDP would have had them built if possible?

We don't need to do anything. Just impose a job-killing carbon tax, and our social license will magically make them appear.

Right?

[troutman]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

No children at the UCP Election kick-off.

Also, no women or minorities.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by troutman

Also, no women or minorities.

Um? I'd take another look or watch the video.

Its a rig crew from Total (Savanna) by the way.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Whereas the UCP has made it very clear how they will get the pipelines built. Wait, they haven't because it's not up to the province of Alberta and the NDP would have had them built if possible?

He has made it very clear what he will do as premier to pressure Ottawa to make it happen.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

We don't need to do anything. Just impose a job-killing carbon tax, and our social license will magically make them appear.

Right?

Has Kenney released a platform of how he plans to get pipelines built and provide jobs back into the O+G sector?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Because when you protest vote, you aren't actually voting for someone. You're voting against someone else.

I guess I'm thinking of the circumstance where I could say, "screw the NDP, they've done a terrible job in government and I certainly can't vote for them. But I can't vote for the UCP, either, given how shady and scummy they've recently revealed themselves to be; plus I'd prefer not to have a homophobe as premier and I'm pretty convinced that Kenney is one. I know the Alberta Party isn't going to win in my riding, and I think they made the wrong choice of leader and I'm not exactly enthusiastic about them, but they're relatively unoffensive and I don't hate anything about them, so I'm going to vote for them even though I'm not particularly excited about it".

That to me sounds like a protest vote, but it also sounds like a perfectly reasonable decision making process.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The scenario I can envision is one of hating both Notely and Kenney for reasons already discussed ad nauseam, and finding Mandel's excuse of "my guy was sick" for incompetently failing to get his paperwork in despite having four months to do so to be lacking. All three leaders are uninspiring in their own ways. And few people naive enough to think we vote for anything but a party or leader.

That'd be a ludicrously weak reason to disqualify the AP as an option, and voting for a candidate isn't naive at all (especially if it's a candidate for a small party)... You just appear to have different priorities and are basing your statements here on the assumption that they're the right ones. Given that you seem to think the party's leader matters most in terms of who you should vote for, they're precisely the wrong priorities, in my opinion.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Muta

Has Kenney released a platform of how he plans to get pipelines built and provide jobs back into the O+G sector?

Step 1

https://www.rmoutlook.com/article/uc...ments-20190314

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Step 1

https://www.rmoutlook.com/article/uc...ments-20190314

Okay, but... that's really, really stupid.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Step 1

https://www.rmoutlook.com/article/uc...ments-20190314

we cant get a pipeline built that the feds bought and you think kenney will stop equalization payments?

i have a bridge in ny for sale if you're interested

[Muta]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Step 1

https://www.rmoutlook.com/article/uc...ments-20190314

Uh, right from that article:

...James Muir, an associate professor with the department of history and faculty of law at the University of Alberta, cast doubt on Kenney’s promise.

“The referendum would have no legal effect and his reference to the Quebec referendum either suggests he doesn’t understand constitutional law or he’s using it to essentially lie to people,” said Muir, explaining the Supreme Court decision was about how a province can separate from Canada not about how it can amend the constitution.

In the event the UCP party is elected and decides to hold a referendum, Muir said it would be nearly impossible to amend the constitution.

“Section 36 is a section that can only be amended with a general procedure as laid out in section 38, that would require the House of Commons, the Senate and at least seven provinces representing at least 50 per cent of the population voting in favour of it,” said Muir.

He also criticized Kenney for misleading the public about how equalization actually works and using it to stir up resentment towards the rest of Canada.

“He knows how it works, that’s why I’m saying he’s lying about it,” said Muir, explaining Kenney was part of the federal cabinet when equalization was renegotiated with the provinces.

“He’s lying about it to make Albertans angry at the rest of the country, which serves a political purpose for him.”

[GGG]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

It doesn't seem like there's any indication that Kenney was involved in the money trail at all.

Everything I've seen and read points to Cam Davies. He's the one under investigation by the RCMP. He's the one who placed corporate money in the accounts of individuals to finance his candidate.

The Macleans article explicitly says

So what are you seeing that's different?

.

Happy Mann’s quote of “They have to decided if Happy’s money was Happy’s money” in regards to his donation to Calloway.

Also Kenny’s denial that this ever happened switching to to it happened but no money changed hands does not look good and leads one to believe there is more.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Muta

Uh, right from that article:

It doesn't prevent him from holding the referendum though...much like how Quebec did the same thing in regards to separation, it spurred massive change and in fact garner a massive amount of national attention.

Thats why its step 1. If the feds then want to just ignore what that mandate would mean, then thats up to them.

What it will do is spur serious and real discussion.

Its time for this province to fight back and if its a dirty fight they want, so be it. Notley wont do that, particularly to BC. UCP will.