Alberta Election 2012

[madmax]

Redford sounds like a female Dalton McGuinty. She's totally going to get pwned in Alberta.

Redford sounds like a wornout Conservative campaigning for a worn out conservative party.

Edited April 20, 2012 by madmax

[TheNewTeddy]

Are we rating the leaders based on looks? Cause Sherman would take tops. Then Smith then Redford, then Mason.

[nittanylionstorm07]

Are we rating the leaders based on looks? Cause Sherman would take tops. Then Smith then Redford, then Mason.

Sherman would definitely be tops in the "crazy ideas from Uranus" department.

[madmax]

Redford is saying anything to get elected and this is why she will lose.

She can work with the Libs and the NDP but not the WildRose because their policies are too different...

http://www.inews880.com/Channels/Reg/LocalNews/story.aspx?ID=1690635

LOL..... its virtually the same Party.. You might call them PCs in a hurry.

[dpwozney]

During the televised debate, reference was made to supposed “same-sex marriage” rights.

If a government does not call a same-sex relationship a marriage, what rights have to be allegedly denied to the people in the same-sex relationship?

If a government does not call a same-sex relationship a marriage, why can’t the people in the same-sex relationship have just as many rights, and the same rights, that they would have if the government did call their same-sex relationship a marriage?

With all the problems of recognition of so-called “same-sex marriages” in various other jurisdictions, and people residing in various other jurisdictions being unable to get so-called “same-sex divorces”, obviously, a so-called “same-sex marriage” is not the same thing as an opposite-sex marriage.

Having different words, to refer to different things, is a good thing.

If people of the same sex, who thought they were married in the “Province of Alberta”, cannot get a divorce while residing in any of most states in the U.S.A. or in the U.K., were they ever really married in the first place?

Edited April 21, 2012 by dpwozney

[madmax]

If people of the same sex, who thought they were married in the “Province of Alberta”, cannot get a divorce while residing in any of most states in the U.S.A. or in the U.K., were they ever really married in the first place?

looks like this kind of discussion is derailing the Wild Rose.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Redford sounds like a wornout Conservative campaigning for a worn out conservative party.

Wildrose is the Conservative Party.

PC's are the actual party of political change (that has a chance at winning). Trying to invest a little of the oil windfall in society.

That's the problem in more than one way for the PC's though.

Alberta's electorate doesn't want change. They just want a different face to pretend that they voted for change doing the same Corporatist crap. That is their version of "change".

Edited April 21, 2012 by MiddleClassCentrist

[dpwozney]

looks like this kind of discussion is derailing the Wild Rose.

Do you really think the Wild Rose party is being derailed because Danielle Smith stated she is “pro-gay marriage” and “If we’re elected, a Wildrose government is not going to be legislating on contentious moral issues”?

[madmax]

Do you really think the Wild Rose party is being derailed because Danielle Smith stated she is “pro-gay marriage” and “If we’re elected, a Wildrose government is not going to be legislating on contentious moral issues”?

Yes

[dpwozney]

If people of the same sex, who thought they were married in the “Province of Alberta”, cannot get a divorce while residing in any of most states in the U.S.A. or in the U.K., were they ever really married in the first place?

“According to Canadian law, we only recognize marriages if they are valid in the place where the couple resides. This means that if a couple came to Canada to marry because they couldn’t get married where they live, then according to this rule, it would not be a valid marriage in Canada either”, said “Professor Brenda Cossman from the faculty of law at the University of Toronto”, according to this April 10 Global News article.

[madmax]

“According to Canadian law, we only recognize marriages if they are valid in the place where the couple resides. This means that if a couple came to Canada to marry because they couldn’t get married where they live, then according to this rule, it would not be a valid marriage in Canada either”, said “Professor Brenda Cossman from the faculty of law at the University of Toronto”, according to this April 10 Global News article.

Well I know that multiple wives aren't accepted here.. but are legal in other countries.

There are countries where divorce is illegal. THere may still be countries which don;t recognize a 2nd marriage.

Thing is.. if the marriage is legal in Canada, its legal in Canada.

[madmax]

Do you really think the Wild Rose party is being derailed because Danielle Smith stated she is “pro-gay marriage” and “If we’re elected, a Wildrose government is not going to be legislating on contentious moral issues”?

I answered with one word to this post earlier and that was a simple

YES...

Now the results have come in and I think if we look back in this thread, you can pinpoint the fall of the WR when they went off message.

[The_Squid]

The more things change, the more they stay he same it seems......

PC strong majority.

[cybercoma]

I answered with one word to this post earlier and that was a simple

YES...

Now the results have come in and I think if we look back in this thread, you can pinpoint the fall of the WR when they went off message.

I believe it's the same problem the Reform had under Manning. Populism looks great on paper. In practice, every wingnut that opens his/her mouth damages the reputation of the party, since there is no mechanism for dealing with them.

[cubed]

well at least the Wildrose didn't get the majority.

Tho I really wish Albertians would wake up and realize that the center point on the political spectrum ISN'T the gates to hell. What's a center-lefty to do in this province?

[Michael Hardner]

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out in Alberta and Ottawa.

[cybercoma]

Interesting indeed. This was a rejection of Harper-style conservatism, as it was no big secret that they were supporting the WRP. I wonder if this will be inspiration enough for someone to bring back a more progressive conservative party on the federal level.

[Jack Weber]

Interesting indeed. This was a rejection of Harper-style conservatism, as it was no big secret that they were supporting the WRP. I wonder if this will be inspiration enough for someone to bring back a more progressive conservative party on the federal level.

That's probably going to take an election OR a whole bunch of events that might...I don't know...Make the federal Conservatives look either:

1.Corrupt

2.Incompetent

3.Combinations of 1 & 2

I fell asleep before any of the results came in,so....

I take it the kooks on the right got kicked down a few pegs?

[capricorn]

This was a rejection of Harper-style conservatism, as it was no big secret that they were supporting the WRP.

Yes, some Conservative MPs publicly supported WR. Yet from the federal government's standpoint a Redford government is the best of all options. It's no secret that Smith and her WR party would have worked to decrease the equalization dollars Alberta sends to Ottawa. IMO, on this point alone Harper will have an easier time negotiating any adjustments with Redford than with Smith.

Overall, the ingredients of the Prime Minister’s majority are not that different from Redford’s and he can’t afford to risk Ontario to please Alberta’s most conservative elements.

A Wildrose challenge to the fiscal arrangements between Ottawa and the provinces, in particular in the matter of equalization, would have had Harper sitting on an uncomfortable Ontario/Alberta picket fence.

From a larger federal perspective, there are other significant side benefits to the Alberta outcome.

Redford wants to play a larger leadership role on the national scene on behalf of Alberta.

That’s a timely development, especially from a unity perspective.

Over the past few weeks, Smith’s pointed barbs at Quebec’s social model and her (over-simplistic) suggestions that it is living off Alberta’s wealth have been front-page news in the province.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1167314--alison-redford-s-victory-a-plus-for-stephen-harper

[fellowtraveller]

Do you really think the Wild Rose party is being derailed because Danielle Smith stated she is “pro-gay marriage” and “If we’re elected, a Wildrose government is not going to be legislating on contentious moral issues”?

No, and Wildrose has not been derailed either.

[fellowtraveller]

Overall, the ingredients of the Prime Minister’s majority are not that different from Redford’s

Geez, somebody east of Lloydminster noticed that finally..... but they didn't catch that it started a couple of years before Redford.

[TheNewTeddy]

Imagines a very very small strip of Saskatchewan, top to bottom, where people notice things very well

But seriously

Your comment misses one important point.

Redford is at the absolute left edge of said coalition, while Harper as at the absolute right edge. They do run the same coalition, Federally and Provincially, but the two are nothing alike.

[August1991]

I haven't read through this entire thread but can someone explain to me why (almost) all the northern Albertan rural ridings went PC? Is it the difference between oil and cattle?

[Michael Hardner]

I haven't read through this entire thread but can someone explain to me why (almost) all the northern Albertan rural ridings went PC? Is it the difference between oil and cattle?

Submitted as an idea only: Rural ridings are older and less susceptible to trendy upstart parties ?

Discuss and moo.

[waldo]

I haven't read through this entire thread but can someone explain to me why (almost) all the northern Albertan rural ridings went PC? Is it the difference between oil and cattle?

Submitted as an idea only: Rural ridings are older and less susceptible to trendy upstart parties?

Discuss and moo.

for a couple, see Alberta Bible Belt and Wildrose pandering to rural landowners over perceived "loss of landowners rights"...