Alberta Election Thread - Election Day April 16 2019

[crazy_eoj]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1108500914061479936

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

This sign vandalism has already begun, and it's ugly. NSFW tags used because of language.

NSFW!

https://twitter.com/user/status/1108772120652242945

That is horrific.

[Regorium]

What's with conservative writers (Rick Bell, Krause etc.) and writing in line break separated sentence fragments?

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Regorium

What's with conservative writers (Rick Bell, Krause etc.) and writing in line break separated sentence fragments?

She's not a conservative writer.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

On the bolded: That's the exact argument NDP partisans are making on Reddit. Nothing is ever their fault. It's still all the PC's that are to blame.

Yeah, I think you need to look at it on an issue by issue basis. While I agree that minimum wage should be higher (and I'm not even a true proponent of a living minimum wage, but it's unfortunately one of the few levers at our disposal unless we completely overhaul how we look at wages and COLA), it was poorly timed and rolled out rather foolishly. I have less issues with the royalty review because I think it would have been criticized no matter when it was done.

That said, I think the UCP, unless they go all slash and burn on the public sector, are going to reap the rewards of the NDP's investment in infrastructure, which was unfortunately playing catch-up for a lot of years of PC neglect (especially under Klein).

Probably the biggest misconception people have, IMO, is that sending Kenny to fight battles with Horgan and Trudeau is going to achieve more success than Notley's approach. People are going to respond with "well it can't get much worse," but at least those three are on amicable terms and there is an appetite on Trudeau and Notley's behalf to get shovels in the ground. My fear is that Kenny goes scorched-Earth and completely sets things back. Furthermore, getting into a B.C. vs. Alberta battle might even strengthen Horgan's popularity in B.C.

It's also my opinion that the main reason Horgan is fighting this as hard as he is is because the Greens hold the balance of power in BC and, after coming away empty-handed on Site C, LNG expansion, and electoral reform, the Greens really have only one reason to keep the current government propped up. If Horgan doesn't at least give the appearance that he's fighting this, then it wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Greens and Liberals attempt to trigger an election. The trickier aspect of that is that the BC NDP are performing fairly well by most standards and the current leader of the BC Liberals has proven himself to be an completely out-of-touch gaffe machine, so it could end up returning an NDP majority.

I appreciate MBates' analysis of the potential for re-opening the constitution with a referendum, but even if that comes to pass, the amending formula is very clearly laid out and I'm hard-pressed to see how Alberta comes away with even a moral victory. There's even a chance that QC and FN groups come away from those discussions stronger than they did going in.

So the tl;dr of this is, be careful what you wish for and maybe keep your expectations realistic.

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

This sign vandalism has already begun, and it's ugly. NSFW tags used because of language.

NSFW!

https://twitter.com/user/status/1108772120652242945

Seriously? Stay classy Alberta...

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

This sign vandalism has already begun, and it's ugly. NSFW tags used because of language.

NSFW!

https://twitter.com/user/status/1108772120652242945

Other than the scrawled-on racial slur on the side, is any of that actually targeting the candidate?

Trying to decipher it, it looks like it says:

NSFW!

You f---ed over the wrong girl
Dylan Bradley stop f---ing 12 year olds

There doesn't seem to be anyone named Dylan Bradley affiliated with the Alberta Party.


Not to excuse the racial slur because it's unacceptable, but I don't think anyone should be treating this as a political attack. I'm sure if it had been a similar sign for her UCP opponent, Prasad Panda, there would have been an equally offensive slur on it too.

[Resolute 14]

Yeah, that looks less like a political attack and more like edgy teenagers. That said, if they get caught, they're likely to regret their choice of medium.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Seriously? Stay classy Alberta...

TIL a couple of edgelords represent 4.5 million people.

[llwhiteoutll]

Apparently the NDP couldn't find any recent evidence to back up their claim Kenny has "been fighting against LGBTQ rights his entire life and continues that fight today" since their newest hit piece uses his involvement in a 1980's campaign to overturn a San Francisco law as "evidence". I'm going to guess that his expressed regret over his statements back then and his actions of support in more recent years will be left out of the ad.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Yeah, that looks less like a political attack and more like edgy teenagers. That said, if they get caught, they're likely to regret their choice of medium.

Honestly, anything as obvious and overt as that is often the result of someone on the same team looking to bring the other team down or gain publicity. So many of the recent "hate crime" spraypaintings in Canada/US of late ended up being hoaxes perpetrated by the community being attacked.

Not saying this is the case here, but wouldn't surprise me one bit. If someone truly hated her, they wouldn't be dumb enough to give her massive amounts of publicity and sympathy. Not saying it was her or her campaign, but a supporter potentially; not like we have those terms popping up on other Asian-Canadian candidates in any other riding or election.

[Flames0910]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Apparently the NDP couldn't find any recent evidence to back up their claim Kenny has "been fighting against LGBTQ rights his entire life and continues that fight today" since their newest hit piece uses his involvement in a 1980's campaign to overturn a San Francisco law as "evidence". I'm going to guess that his expressed regret over his statements back then and his actions of support in more recent years will be left out of the ad.

Actions of support??? Gunna need a source on that one.

When he was Immigration Minister he pulled LGTBQ rights from the citizenship guide (2010).

Internal documents show an early draft of the guide contained sections noting that homosexuality was decriminalized in 1969; that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation; and that same-sex marriage was legalized nationally in 2005.

Drafts and other internal documents related to the guide were obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act.

"Homosexuality was decriminalized in 1969 and more recently, civil marriage rights to same-sex couples was legalized nationwide in 2005," the earliest draft of the guide says under the section Towards a Modern Canada.

And in the section on citizenship rights, the early draft said: "Equality Rights - Canadians are protected against discrimination based on race, gender, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or age."

Neither sentence survived the minister's red marker.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...article571718/

[Voodooman]

Originally Posted by mrkajz44

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills or something here as I don't understand why the carbon tax should be discussed at all. They can't just "scrap" the carbon tax as the federal carbon tax backstop will then just kick-in, no? The reality is that the carbon tax in Canada is here to stay and to campaign that it'll just suddenly disappear seems misleading.

No, you hit the nail pretty much right on the head. If Alberta scraps the carbon tax, the feds impose their plan the very next day. Instead of revenue coming into provincial coffers, it gets re-distributed in the form of refundable tax credits to Alberta citizens. Ontario residents are eligible for the Climate Action Incentive on their 2018 tax returns; a family of 4 qualifies for $307.

While there is a chance that the federal program won't survive a fall election or the court challenges, neither of these events has any reasonable assurance of happening. Not to get into a federal politics debate, but I don't think Scheer can get elected, and lets be honest, people have short memories, and the SNC thing will blow over. And the court challenge doesn't seem to be worrying the feds in any significant fashion.

All this to say, voting UCP because you think Kenney will kill the carbon tax, which will immediately raise oil by $25 a barrel, and return 25,000 jobs to Alberta is sheer fantasy. All scrapping the carbon tax does at this point is take money out of provincial revenue while simultaneously providing the Liberals with a cash tax credit they can campaign on. And I would not be surprised to see the feds promise to switch it to a pure refund program (like Ralph Bucks) during a fall campaign. And who doesn't want to vote for the guy who sends a $300 cheque every year?

Kenney would be much smarter to campaign on modifying the program, and focusing on the key element of retaining provincial control. For a guy who has such a problem with Ottawa (amongst many, many other problems, character deficiencies and moral shortcomings), turning over control of anything related to the resource sector seems so foolish.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by Flames0910

Actions of support??? Gunna need a source on that one.

When he was Immigration Minister he pulled LGTBQ rights from the citizenship guide (2010).



https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...article571718/

Not including wording in the final version of a guide that wouldn't considered exhaustive is hardly an effort to roll back the clock on LGBTQ rights. It didn't change the law and it wasn't an attempt to change the law.

However, Kenny has touted Canada as a haven for gay refugees and his office worked with the Iranian Railroad for Queer Refugees to fast track gay Iranians into Canada. In 2016 he supported the removal of the traditional definition of marriage from the CPC policy book.

Shockingly enough, people can change their views on things. If they need a decades old recording to back up their claims, I'd say it's a pretty shaky claim to be making, especially when there are more recent events that directly refutes it.

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Probably the biggest misconception people have, IMO, is that sending Kenny to fight battles with Horgan and Trudeau is going to achieve more success than Notley's approach. People are going to respond with "well it can't get much worse," but at least those three are on amicable terms and there is an appetite on Trudeau and Notley's behalf to get shovels in the ground. My fear is that Kenny goes scorched-Earth and completely sets things back. Furthermore, getting into a B.C. vs. Alberta battle might even strengthen Horgan's popularity in B.C.

It's also my opinion that the main reason Horgan is fighting this as hard as he is is because the Greens hold the balance of power in BC and, after coming away empty-handed on Site C, LNG expansion, and electoral reform, the Greens really have only one reason to keep the current government propped up. If Horgan doesn't at least give the appearance that he's fighting this, then it wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Greens and Liberals attempt to trigger an election. The trickier aspect of that is that the BC NDP are performing fairly well by most standards and the current leader of the BC Liberals has proven himself to be an completely out-of-touch gaffe machine, so it could end up returning an NDP majority.

I appreciate MBates' analysis of the potential for re-opening the constitution with a referendum, but even if that comes to pass, the amending formula is very clearly laid out and I'm hard-pressed to see how Alberta comes away with even a moral victory. There's even a chance that QC and FN groups come away from those discussions stronger than they did going in.

So the tl;dr of this is, be careful what you wish for and maybe keep your expectations realistic.

I don't think Notley is on amicable terms with either of those guys. I don't think she ever was with Horgan and she was with Trudeau until he did nothing of consequence to fight BC's obstructionism after buying the pipeline. I think you hit the nail on the head with Horgan having to keep fighting this for the sake of his Government, but that proves the opposite of your point that all three being chummy will get this done. Horgan is feeling no downside for all the obstructionist anti-constitution crap he's pulling and that needs to change. It's clear that the amicable approach has not worked on our end of seeing a pipeline get built, it's clear Trudeau won't do anything unless he's forced to and Horgan's job as Premier depends on him fighting this until the end. Kenney is going to be more forceful at pushing pressure points and leverage which is the high risk high reward strategy but playing nice has gotten us nowhere, which is sad but the reality of the situation.

If Alberta cut off refined gasoline to the LM and raised gas prices to $3.00 do you think BCers would cast their ire on Horgan or Alberta? Honest question I'm curious.

[Nyah]

Originally Posted by mrkajz44

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills or something here as I don't understand why the carbon tax should be discussed at all. They can't just "scrap" the carbon tax as the federal carbon tax backstop will then just kick-in, no? The reality is that the carbon tax in Canada is here to stay and to campaign that it'll just suddenly disappear seems misleading.

I'd imagine their plan is to contest the federal carbon tax as unconstitutional, much like Saskatchewan is in the midst of doing.

[Voodooman]

Originally Posted by Nyah

I'd imagine their plan is to contest the federal carbon tax as unconstitutional, much like Saskatchewan is in the midst of doing.

And in the meantime, the federal plan would be imposed, much as it is in Saskatchewan as of April 1. Even if the feds lose in court, they will appeal the decision, and keep the legislation in place during the appeal period (as a "voluntary registration", with massive penalties to those who don't register should the courts eventually uphold the feds plan).

Also, does it seem like good policy making to put all your eggs in the court challenge basket, especially in light of the TMX decision by the Federal Court of Appeal? Does SK (and Kenney, I guess), really think that the court that ruled against a resource expansion project is going to uphold a decision to repeal a pollution tax? I think not.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Seriously? Stay classy Alberta...

Unfortunately, on these things I believe we have many Albertans who are anything but classy.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

I don't think Notley is on amicable terms with either of those guys. I don't think she ever was with Horgan and she was with Trudeau until he did nothing of consequence to fight BC's obstructionism after buying the pipeline.

It's not entirely a BC obstructionism issue. There are FN challenges to consider. Whether those challenges are legitimate or relevant is up to the courts to decide and there's not much the either government can do on that front that wouldn't circumvent constitutional law. I realize the irony in saying this with what's going on with SNC, but we're governed by the rule of law and sometimes that's a messy and prolonged process.

In the long run, I'd rather our laws be given due process than have the governments of the day decide on a case-by-case basis which laws are relevant and which ones aren't. Hell, half the reason we're in the predicament we are is because the BC premiers of the previous centuries acted unilaterally and illegally.

If Alberta cut off refined gasoline to the LM and raised gas prices to $3.00 do you think BCers would cast their ire on Horgan or Alberta? Honest question I'm curious.

Likely Alberta, to be honest. I'd also argue that Kenny going scorched-Earth on BC and QC is going to put Scheer in an awkward position during the federal campaign.

[Ozy_Flame]

Kenney going scorched earth does nothing except flair up hostilities with various parties, all of which we need to work with to get things done. Even then, we have the NEB on board who already confirmed they think pipelines are needed and will have the next consultation done this spring for TMX, so I'm not sure why we have to be antagonistic. There's a way to do this with class and tact, but going in fist fighting is not that way. We have to be patient. It will happen.