Alberta Election Thread - Election Day April 16 2019

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Nah. I think the centrists got good exposure and this was the platform to deliver basic messages. There is a middle ground and alot of people sitting on the fence can see where there votes can go. No left wing ideology, not right wing sliminess and lying. Centrists won this by a long mile IMO.

I agree with Slava. Every time Khan opened his mouth and inserted himself in the debate I thought: "WTF are you even doing here? This isn't the Calgary-Mountainview all candidates forum at the Renfrew community association hall. You and your party are utterly irrelevant and your continued existence makes Mandel's presence irrelevant as well " The Mandel / Khan sideshow for the champion of the middle 7-8% of the electorate was an abomination and honestly took time away from debate between those who could actually be running the province in two weeks.

There should be only one party between the Alberta party and the Alberta Liberal party. It should have happened 3 or 4 elections ago and if it did, this and the last election would probably have been a whole lot different. The NDP and the UCP are probably both going to end up with over 40% of the popular vote. Whenever the bookends of the political spectrum own that much real estate it tells you that the 'centrist' voice or voices are either ineffective at resonating with voters and/or just plain too dispersed.

[Ozy_Flame]

Nah, I disagree. I think most Albertans are centrist, they just need to see the options. Would have preferred Greg Clark there, and really just sold the message as the moderate balance between economy and social values.

I think many Albertans are probably becoming more open to a minority government with a centrist party playing a balance of power role. That would be ideal if possible this year.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I agree with Slava. Every time Khan opened his mouth and inserted himself in the debate I thought: "WTF are you even doing here? This isn't the Calgary-Mountainview all candidates forum at the Renfrew community association hall. You and your party are utterly irrelevant and your continued existence makes Mandel's presence irrelevant as well " The Mandel / Khan sideshow for the champion of the middle 7-8% of the electorate was an abomination and honestly took time away from debate between those who could actually be running the province in two weeks.

There should be only one party between the Alberta party and the Alberta Liberal party. It should have happened 3 or 4 elections ago and if it did, this and the last election would probably have been a whole lot different. The NDP and the UCP are probably both going to end up with over 40% of the popular vote. Whenever the bookends of the political spectrum own that much real estate it tells you that the 'centrist' voice or voices are either ineffective at resonating with voters and/or just plain too dispersed.

So your reasoning is 'nevermind anyone else, we should only hear from the giant ###### and the turd sandwich'?

Have to disagree with you there. Alberta needs to know there are other options out there. Even if they're not realistically going to lead, they're still going to get seats, and that's important. Liberals and AP aren't the same ideology, why should they be the same thing.

Just be glad the FCP and AIP weren't there

[Travis Munroe]

Just finished watching...
I thought Notley struggled to hit on anything besides talking about the UCP. Her answering of questions like she is auditioning for a movie role and reminded me of Trudeau.
Khan ... I learned that he is the only one to do a lot of things and he loved sharing that.
Kenney was as advertised... A hot head who missed some opportunistic rebutles imo. I feel the most comfortable in a Alberta recovery sooner than later under him and am prepared to roll the dice on the other policies but could see myself being a strong AP supporter next election if Kenney doesn't deliver on the economy which is easier said than done.
Mandel was like the grandpa at the table keeping the brother and sister from fighting. If Khan wasn't there, he would have got more air time and I would have liked to of heard more from him. With just 3 of them, he would have been under more scrutiny which is something I would have liked to of seen... I know the backlash for the UCP and NDP but would like know about the AP

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Nah, I disagree. I think most Albertans are centrist, they just need to see the options. Would have preferred Greg Clark there, and really just sold the message as the moderate balance between economy and social values.

I think many Albertans are probably becoming more open to a minority government with a centrist party playing a balance of power role. That would be ideal if possible this year.

I know you’re going to love this, but this is just naive, wishful thinking. I don’t mean that as an insult either, because you sound like me a decade or 15 years ago. The truth is the “centrists” (AKA Alberta Liberals that are now split into two factions) are more concerned with being right and having good policies than they are with actually winning. Both leaders exemplified this last night; they tell you how these other two have failed and we’re the middle ground, that they’re the only ones who can do whatever it is they’re prattling on about. And then they get ~5-6% and elect a new leader.

I’ve worked on a few winning and mostly losing campaigns, and I have no doubt that the centrists this time around are heading for irrelevance. It’s inconceivable that two weeks out people are flocking to these campaigns in the numbers required to win.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by btimbit

So your reasoning is 'nevermind anyone else, we should only hear from the giant ###### and the turd sandwich'?

Have to disagree with you there. Alberta needs to know there are other options out there. Even if they're not realistically going to lead, they're still going to get seats, and that's important. Liberals and AP aren't the same ideology, why should they be the same thing.

Just be glad the FCP and AIP weren't there

They’re nearly identical. The policy “differences” are negligible, and certainly not enough to differentiate them for the average voter. And I hate to say it, but they quite likely won’t be winning seats. They might win a seat each, but plural seats and balance of power talk seems extremely unlikely. I know the polls have been wrong before, but there hasn’t been a poll with these guys anywhere near multiple seats, or enough to hold a balance of power unless it’s a government short of a majority by one seat. The projections are far greater than that (by something like 20 seats).

[PsYcNeT]

It's like 2 pages of "Whoa whoa there, pump the brakes. We already have two parties bud. Lets not muddy the waters here."

I suppose seeing a doubling of available voting options broke some people.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

It's like 2 pages of "Whoa whoa there, pump the brakes. We already have two parties bud. Lets not muddy the waters here."

I suppose seeing a doubling of available voting options broke some people.

Lol. There have been multiple parties for decades, this isn’t new. They just never seem to get anything organized until the writ is dropped and that’s just not good enough.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

It's like 2 pages of "Whoa whoa there, pump the brakes. We already have two parties bud. Lets not muddy the waters here."

I suppose seeing a doubling of available voting options broke some people.

Well we had 1 relevant party for much of our voting lives so even having two is strange and confusing, four is ridiculous.

[Red Slinger]

I went into the debate leaning towards one party and came out of the debate undecided. What a terrible display.

I thought Notley would do better. She was not particularly well spoken and she focused too much on dragging Kenney down instead of policy. She came into the debate as the most authentic leader and left as just another politician.

Kenney was the most polished but had his 'slimy career politican' vibe on. He was sometimes effective, sometimes ineffective and sometimes annoying. I don't think he ever really addressed the misgivings that many people have about him and some of his candidates.

I was leaning towards voting AP prior to the debate but I had concerns about party leadership. Mandel's general lack of enthusiasm and appearance was off-putting but not the end of the world. I felt like he didn't really talk policy much and instead wanted the electorate to just trust him. When he pulled a re-usable hanky out of his pocket to wipe him nose like my 85 year old father does, he almost lost me right there. This is the guy that's going to fight for Alberta? He seemed like he would be most passionate about the jello flavour being served at the seniors facility. Once again Alberta Party, you had a chance to do something this election and you blew it (with your re-usable hanky).

Kahn was stiff, repetitive and inconsequential. He had 2-3 stock answers for every question which indicated to me that he doesn't really understand most of the issues in detail.

I suspect that those that were already decided prior to the debate likely felt like their guy/gal won. Naively, I was hoping the debate would clear some things up for me. Count me in as someone who is firmly undecided. Ugh.

[stang]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Considering i have to bank overtime hours instead of getting them paid out, Kenney can go ahead and pound sand if he wants to roll banked hours back to from time and half.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Overtime pay and banked time are different, which is the reason for the correction. My “outrage” was not based on the incorrect information in the Fort Mac article, it was based on the policy. I’d implore you to actually read it.

I get banked time, not overtime pay. This policy directly effects the way this gets calculated, and while I trust my employers to just continue on with the status quo, Kenney can still pound sand.

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Haven't been following this thread much, has the UCP getting rid of the 1.5x banked time rules been discussed?


https://www.reddit.com/r/Calgary/com...straight_time/


I was in the air on who I was supporting or even if I was going to vote at all, but this seals my vote for the NDP. Being IT you end up working a lot of after hours to get changes done, and having those banked at 1.5 was a huge help. UCP cancelling that for no other discernable reason than "NDP did it so it must be bad" is pathetic

This probably was already posted but I skipped a bunch of pages, but it’s the same OT rules as it was 18 months ago

https://twitter.com/jkenney/status/1...869619200?s=12

Edit I have no idea how to embed a tweet

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Slava

I know you’re going to love this, but this is just naive, wishful thinking. I don’t mean that as an insult either, because you sound like me a decade or 15 years ago. The truth is the “centrists” (AKA Alberta Liberals that are now split into two factions) are more concerned with being right and having good policies than they are with actually winning. Both leaders exemplified this last night; they tell you how these other two have failed and we’re the middle ground, that they’re the only ones who can do whatever it is they’re prattling on about. And then they get ~5-6% and elect a new leader.

I’ve worked on a few winning and mostly losing campaigns, and I have no doubt that the centrists this time around are heading for irrelevance. It’s inconceivable that two weeks out people are flocking to these campaigns in the numbers required to win.

This election was never about winning to the AP (whom I support); it was simply about raising the profile and listening to Albertans. Mandel was never end game, just there to raise visibility as a more notable politician. They will find a new leader before the next election.

As I have mentioned, it is about playing the long-game and refining their position and platforms to match modern, progressive Albertans who care about the province's finances. This isn't about ideological lines. They want to - and do - listen to Albertans and find that balance. Many people are seeing it, even if the town halls and awareness in the cities and communities on a two-horse race. The debate last night was critical to more understanding of moderate positions with a vision.

The Wildrose started out somewhere too, and really, by all rights, a generally centrist party led this province for decades, and the current government is more to the centre than a normal NDP party.

I'll watch patiently, but I'm not going to throw my vote away on two other parties I strongly disagree with. And I've very happy to support the "third" option.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Slava

They’re nearly identical. The policy “differences” are negligible, and certainly not enough to differentiate them for the average voter. And I hate to say it, but they quite likely won’t be winning seats. They might win a seat each, but plural seats and balance of power talk seems extremely unlikely. I know the polls have been wrong before, but there hasn’t been a poll with these guys anywhere near multiple seats, or enough to hold a balance of power unless it’s a government short of a majority by one seat. The projections are far greater than that (by something like 20 seats).

Think about what you're saying here

They don't get your support because they care more about policies than they do about winning.

The ucp care so little about policies they are willing to scrap them if it means attaining power. Whatever it takes to attain power, for powers sake.

To cowboys point above that the liberals and Alberta party should've merged, why? To compromise their political beliefs to Garner more power? Are we better off with fewer political parties who are willing to do whatever it takes to seize the reigns, or are we better off with diverse political parties and views that give citizens options that reflect their own desires?

The ucp is a naked admission that while there were substantial differences between PC and wildrose, the most important thing was attaining power. Differences can be put aside in the pursuit of power.

Rather than change policy platform to appeal to more voters, just combine entities to pool votes, political integrity be damned. Give voters less choice so you can scoop up a larger share. That's anti-democratic.

We are all worse off with less representation.

[OMG!WTF!]

I can't find it online, but the ndp commercial on Global this morning is hilarious. Basically it's a guy in his kitchen talking about how his family has always voted conservative but he doesn't trust Kenney. The end is great..to paraphrase....I may not like everything Rachel Notely does but at least I can trust her". To do things you don't like?



How do you run a commercial for your own party that admits you've done some dumb things? What a sad election we have. "I'm bad but not terrible so vote for me"

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Slava

They’re nearly identical. The policy “differences” are negligible, and certainly not enough to differentiate them for the average voter. And I hate to say it, but they quite likely won’t be winning seats. They might win a seat each, but plural seats and balance of power talk seems extremely unlikely. I know the polls have been wrong before, but there hasn’t been a poll with these guys anywhere near multiple seats, or enough to hold a balance of power unless it’s a government short of a majority by one seat. The projections are far greater than that (by something like 20 seats).

They aren't "nearly identical". The liberals are closer in terms of policy to the NDP than the AP. They likely will be winning seats - the AP is likely winning one and has a chance at two. The Liberals are likely winning Khan's seat.

You are right that it's extremely unlikely that there will be any sort of minority government, much less a minority government narrow enough for either or both of them to be the tipping point. But that doesn't suggest they should merge. The reality is that the Alberta liberals are effectively the David Khan party. He's basically an independent, he just wants a party banner so that he can justify being included in debates and have a recognized brand.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

I can't find it online, but the ndp commercial on Global this morning is hilarious. Basically it's a guy in his kitchen talking about how his family has always voted conservative but he doesn't trust Kenney. The end is great..to paraphrase....I may not like everything Rachel Notely does but at least I can trust her". To do things you don't like?



How do you run a commercial for your own party that admits you've done some dumb things? What a sad election we have. "I'm bad but not terrible so vote for me"

Considering their only hope is people rejecting Kenny, doesn't surprise me. Might as well call a spade a spade.

"Notley 2019: Sure my platform is garbage, but did you see the boogeyman down the street?"

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

"Notley 2019: Incompetent, but Not Evil".

[Tron_fdc]

I'm not voting AP in the hopes they form government. I'm voting AP for 2 reasons:

1) I won't vote NDP or UCP for all the reasons contained in this thread
2) if the AP can begin to raise their profile through good campaigning and solid ideas that people like, and that in turn causes either the NDP or UCP to begin to adopt those policies or lose their support, then I see that as big a win as I can hope for.

It's not about whether or not they can form the next government.

[Hockeyguy15]

I'm pretty sure my riding is a lock for the UCP, and since I won't be voting for them I think I will vote AP and hope they can grow into a legitimate party next election.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

I'm not voting AP in the hopes they form government. I'm voting AP for 2 reasons:

1) I won't vote NDP or UCP for all the reasons contained in this thread
2) if the AP can begin to raise their profile through good campaigning and solid ideas that people like, and that in turn causes either the NDP or UCP to begin to adopt those policies or lose their support, then I see that as big a win as I can hope for.

It's not about whether or not they can form the next government.

I'm starting to feel the same way. Frankly, the lot of 'em are one big dumpster fire (I've never once used that term before - but it seems fitting here).

The NDP has zero chance of getting my vote, so it would be easy to vote UCP. But at this point, I'm less concerned about being part of the "winning side" than I am about never having to face such a sad field of candidates again. Spoiled for choice, we are not.