Alberta Election Tuesday April 16 2019

344 posts / 0 new
Last post
Aristotleded24

WWWTT wrote:
In my opinion, I do not believe the political divide is between the vague left vs right. But between materialism vs selflessness. 

Those who were/are employed in the oil industry, directly/indirectly earned a sizeable income to maintain a materialistic lifestyle encouraged/fueled by the ICM. 

Kenney is betting on the voters, addicted to materialism, and now suffering from withdrawal, will lash out at the ANDP in hopes to return to the materialism during the hi oil $ per barrel days. 

I actually believe that in this Alberta election, the voters are more aware that materialism is an evil waiting for hard times to reap pain on the unprepared.

Here is what really bothers me about this whole thing. I can remember when oil was booming, and there was a sense of entitlement in Alberta. Hands off our oil, this is provincial jurisdiction. If you don't have jobs where you live, move. That's what they said as unemployed people from across the country poured into Alberta to work in their economy. I remember watching Manitoba send many people there for that reason. Now, all of a sudden oil has crashed. It's important for the federal government to help out. It is in the national interest to have a pipeline! Funny how conveniently they forget about the provincial rights argument when BC has said no (and my home province of Manitoba will eventually say no to oil going through the port of Churchill). Why can't these unemployed oil workes in Alberta do what the rest of us did and move to where the jobs were?

What hypocrisy! That sentiment is very vocal, however I would hope that it is not majority sentiment in Alberta.

Aristotleded24

Misfit wrote:
The NDP is a very sophisticated party. When she won the election in 2015, NDP  advisors from all across Canada camein to help her including from Saskatchewan where the NDP governed for about a half a century.

I'm sure the NDP in Manitoba had advice in the 2016 election after 17 years of government, and that the NDP in BC had advise in 2013. Remind me how both of those campaigns went for the NDP?

Unionist

Strong arguments, A24. I agree. Waiting to hear the rebuttals.

Misfit Misfit's picture

What data do you have A24 that Notley’s campaign doesn’t have?

The Ontario Liberals lost. The Alberta PC’s lost four years ago, Bill Davis lost. Pauline Marois of the PQ lost. All political parties in Canada have lost elections. That is a reality and not anything unique to the NDP. All political parties have had political advisors when they have lost. It all comes down to this and is nothing unique to the NDP...

Shit happens!

Unionist

Yes, Misfit, but I believe A24 was responding to your comment about the NDP being a "sophisticated party", with advisors, etc. You're quite right. Electoral success doesn't hinge much on that.

Aristotleded24

My point, Misfit, is that advice is all over the place. Sometimes it turns out great, like when the Ontario NDP copied the same tactics that had boosted their federal counterparts to second place in the 2011 election. Sometimes it doesn't work. Sometimes it is tone-deaf. Sometimes it involves refighting the last campaign when the voting public has moved on. Sometimes it involves imposing what worked in one region without regard to what could be different regional dynamics.

Aristotleded24

Misfit wrote:
What data do you have A24 that Notley’s campaign doesn’t have?

I'm sure Greg Selinger, Lorne Calvert, Adrian Dix, Darrel Dexter, and Thomas Mulcair all had access to data that I didn't. What does that prove?

Misfit Misfit's picture

It is very easy to be an armchair critic and say that they ran their election all wrong. All political parties have data and internal polling and a huge campaign team. They have access to information that we don’t have.

These political advisors work with the information that they have, and in the end, only one political party wins.

you can argue until you are blue in the face that if they had campaigned differently that the results would have been quite different.

the reality is that Alberta is a fiscally and socially conservative province. They have voted for right wing parties up until four years ago. We all knew that an NDP re-election now was very slim at beat even as far back as four years ago.

So Rachael Notley ran a campaign and her chance of re-election while not impossible is now very slim. Some will argue that her campaign focus is what cost her the election. I believe that just like the NDP federal inroads in Quebec in 2011, the NDP never has had nor likely ever will have a solid support base that can sustain them beyond one term.

it would be cool to go into the United Ststes and campaign for single desk health care delivery and increased social services and government funded daycare and dental care and pharmacarw. I don’t care how well I campaign, my chances of resonating with the mass majority of Americans is slim to none. It is not impossible but it is not the campaigning that is the problem but rather the target market.

quebec does not identify with the NDP  Alberta does not identify with the NDzp and the United States does not identify with social democracy. 

 

NorthReport

Just can't wait for another pissing contest attacking the NDP, eh Unionist!

The person behind the scenes who lead the NDP to success in BC's last election came from the Prairies. 

NDP BCers including campaign chair helped Notley win the last Alberta election   

Don't let the barn door hit you on your way away from the manure pile.

Unionist wrote:

Strong arguments, A24. I agree. Waiting to hear the rebuttals.

NorthReport
NorthReport

NDP Leader Rachel Notley says Alberta elections tend to yield surprise results

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/leader-profile-on-notley

NorthReport
bekayne
Misfit Misfit's picture

 

This is arguably criminal. Left-wing censorship pure and simple.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

My guess is the ACP trolls mounted a coordinated campaign against specific accounts to get them banned under twitter's rules. Of course that is not as sexy an explanation as twitter directly interfering in the election. But according to Freeland we should all quiver at the possibility that Russian spies can manipulate the internet.

WWWTT

Misfit wrote:

It is very easy to be an armchair critic and say that they ran their election all wrong. All political parties have data and internal polling and a huge campaign team. They have access to information that we don’t have.

These political advisors work with the information that they have, and in the end, only one political party wins.

you can argue until you are blue in the face that if they had campaigned differently that the results would have been quite different.

the reality is that Alberta is a fiscally and socially conservative province. They have voted for right wing parties up until four years ago. We all knew that an NDP re-election now was very slim at beat even as far back as four years ago.

So Rachael Notley ran a campaign and her chance of re-election while not impossible is now very slim. Some will argue that her campaign focus is what cost her the election. I believe that just like the NDP federal inroads in Quebec in 2011, the NDP never has had nor likely ever will have a solid support base that can sustain them beyond one term.

quebec does not identify with the NDP  Alberta does not identify with the NDzp and the United States does not identify with social democracy. 

 

Agreed Misfit

Aristotleded24

Misfit wrote:
It is very easy to be an armchair critic and say that they ran their election all wrong. All political parties have data and internal polling and a huge campaign team. They have access to information that we don’t have.

We're all armchair critics. That's what Internet discussion boards are all about. Plus, being in a democracy, I have the right to decide whether or not I like what a particular party is doing.

Misfit wrote:
These political advisors work with the information that they have, and in the end, only one political party wins.

I don't trust political advisors at all. They tend to be in their own world, tone deaf to the struggles of people in their daily lives (how many of them know what it's like to struggle to make ends meet) and especially NDP advisors seem to connect better with their counterparts in other parties than the working classes the NDP is supposed to represent. I watched the NDP blow several elections that were theirs to win, including 2 municipal elections right here in Winnpeg, the 2013 provincial election in BC, the 2014 provincial election in Ontario, and the 2015 federal election. Most regular people don't care about politics, and somehow mainstream political organizations haven't picked up on that yet.

Misfit wrote:
the reality is that Alberta is a fiscally and socially conservative province. They have voted for right wing parties up until four years ago. We all knew that an NDP re-election now was very slim at beat even as far back as four years ago.

So Rachael Notley ran a campaign and her chance of re-election while not impossible is now very slim. Some will argue that her campaign focus is what cost her the election. I believe that just like the NDP federal inroads in Quebec in 2011, the NDP never has had nor likely ever will have a solid support base that can sustain them beyond one term.

it would be cool to go into the United Ststes and campaign for single desk health care delivery and increased social services and government funded daycare and dental care and pharmacarw. I don’t care how well I campaign, my chances of resonating with the mass majority of Americans is slim to none. It is not impossible but it is not the campaigning that is the problem but rather the target market.

quebec does not identify with the NDP  Alberta does not identify with the NDzp and the United States does not identify with social democracy.

Do you believe in the ideas you espouse or don't you? That's one thing I admire about Christian fundamentalists is that they believe their way is in people's best interests, and they go out and make that argument anywere and they don't care what kind of opposition they face. Sure, people might identify as "right wing," social democracy," "liberal" or whatever, but how many of them can actually tell you what that means when you press them on it? I think the media and the pundit class like to divide people up into neat categories and predict how they will vote because it sell papers and generates ratings. Real 3-D people are much more comlpicated than that. To take a real life example, Bernie Sanders believes that policies like taxing the rich and single payer health care will help people in West Virginia. So what does he do? He hosts town halls in counties that overhwelmingly went for Trump, and these people are cheering on what he says. Or consider that most people view West Virginia as a more conservative state, and even self-identified conservatives in West Virginia supported Sanders in higher numbers than Liberals did. Why? Sanders treats voters as real live people and he communicates with them accordingly.

So to my original question, does the idea of lessening economic dependence on boom and bust and other NDP ideas make sense for Alberta? If it does, then make that argument loudly and clearly.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

 ..both notley and kenney are selling fantasies. it's not the province of bc that is preventing the pipeline but indigenous folk..specific to the court decision. horgan is selling the same fantasy only with fracked gas.

Bill McKibben: Green New Deal Is a Chance to “Remake Not Just a Broken Planet, But a Broken Society”

quote:

BILL McKIBBEN: We started, the year after some of us started this Keystone resistance, and which turned into a big resistance against pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure, in general, following the lead of indigenous people up in Alberta. The next year, a bunch of us—Naomi Klein and I and others—started this fossil fuel divestment campaign to get institutions to sell their stock. Well, it worked better than we thought it would. It’s become, by some measures, the largest anti-corporate campaign of its kind ever. I think we’re now at $8 trillion worth of endowments and portfolios that have divested in part or in whole.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..soon alta will be facing it's own challenge and still on my point that fantasies being sold. 

TarSands Trial Legal Backgrounder

quote:

Impacts on Beaver Lake Cree territory by the numbers: Canada and Alberta have issued up to 19,000 ‘individual authorizations’ (permits) which translates into 300 individual industrial projects that take up more than 90 per cent of Beaver Lake Cree traditional territory. As a result, the once-pristine forest and hunting grounds are now covered with 35,000 oil and gas sites, 21,700 kilometres of seismic lines, 4,028 kilometres of pipeline and 948 kilometres of road – with devastating effects on caribou populations and fish species.

Case trajectory to date: The Beaver Lake Cree first launched a constitutional challenge for infringement of Treaty rights in 2008. Canada and Alberta responded by attempting to have the case dismissed, unsuccessfully. Upon appeal, the Court ruled that no further “delaying tactics” should be permitted in this litigation, and that Canada’s complaint in particular “flies in the face of the Supreme Court of Canada” and its previous decisions.

NorthReport

The Victory Speech Alberta Will Never Hear

We let oil turn our citizens into subjects. Now we must turn it around.

https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2019/04/16/Victory-Speech-Alberta-Will-Never-Hear/

NorthReport

It is going to be a tough for NDP fans tonite but thanks to all those who supported Rachel Notley and the Alberta NDP 

Election results here:

https://results.elections.ab.ca/wtResultsPGE.htm

Hurtin Albertan

Well, shit.

Aristotleded24

NorthReport wrote:
It is going to be a tough for NDP fans tonite but thanks to all those who supported Rachel Notley and the Alberta NDP

UCP majority has been called.

Not the result many here were hoping, for but I think there's an important context that is missing. It's always disappointing for a government to be defeated. If, however, you remove the 2015 results from the equation, the results for the NDP would be considered a breakthrough by that standard. Approximately 35% of the popular vote, approximately 20 seats. Never before has the NDP done this well as an official opposition. They're in a good position to critique this government.

In the end, people seemed to be angry about the state of the economy and took it out on the NDP. With the NDP coming in just at the start of the oil crash, it appeared they were the ones responsible. Now Kenney has to deliver on his promises, and there is a good chance that he can't. Perhaps having the oil and gas industry continuing to struggle under a right-wing government will cause people to reflect and finally direct their anger towards the oil companies for that.

I'll have more to say later on. For now, routine congratulations to Kenney and the UCP for forming the government. He will soon learn that there is more to governing than yelling, screaming, threatening, and throwing a temper tantrum when things don't go his way.

NorthReport

I think the previous election was a fluke, a one-off because the right was split, and the NDP had a very popular leader as well.

The Alberta Party, not only did it's support not drop from the polls, but it gained, and is presently at 10.2%

The shit will now hit the fan with the carbon tax, and the pipeline (watch out BC, sharp curves ahead).

 

 

 

Aristotleded24

Just listened to Notley speak. She gave a very spirited and upbeat defense of her time in government, and reminded people of the deck of cards she was handed. I agree with the pundits who said if she had spoken like that on the campaign trail, the numbers might have been different.

Aristotleded24

Saw Kenney's speech as well. He essentially ripped off Doug Ford, and rattled off empty rhetoric about growing the economy. He had the gall to mention the well-being of new Canadians after his temporary foreign worker program trapped them in low-paying jobs at the mercy of their employer. May Albertans come to see him as the phony that he is.

voice of the damned

Well, Edmonton seems to have held firm for the dippers. I was actually thinking the UCP might make more inroads there, because the Conservatives have on occassion done not entirely badly there, including during the tenure of supposed Calgary Uber Alles man Klein.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Just clisked at Elections Alberta-had no idea the night had been so comprehensively dismal for the Freedom Conservatives.  .5% of the vote?  Jesus!

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Just listened to Notley speak. She gave a very spirited and upbeat defense of her time in government, and reminded people of the deck of cards she was handed. I agree with the pundits who said if she had spoken like that on the campaign trail, the numbers might have been different.

Is she staying on as leader or standing down?

bekayne

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Saw Kenney's speech as well. He essentially ripped off Doug Ford, and rattled off empty rhetoric about growing the economy. He had the gall to mention the well-being of new Canadians after his temporary foreign worker program trapped them in low-paying jobs at the mercy of their employer. May Albertans come to see him as the phony that he is.

Or the RCMP

voice of the damned

Ken Burch wrote:

Just clisked at Elections Alberta-had no idea the night had been so comprehensively dismal for the Freedom Conservatives.  .5% of the vote?  Jesus!

I was surprised the Alberta Party did as badly as they did in the seat count, with even Mandel coming in third in the city where he was a popular mayor for years. Guess politics in Alberta is headed for a BC-style polarization, at least for a while.

voice of the damned

Ken Burch wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Just listened to Notley speak. She gave a very spirited and upbeat defense of her time in government, and reminded people of the deck of cards she was handed. I agree with the pundits who said if she had spoken like that on the campaign trail, the numbers might have been different.

Is she staying on as leader or standing down?

No word, yet, as far as I can tell. My guess would be she stays. She's too much of an asset for the party, probably the most popular leader of a losing party the country has seen in a while.

jerrym

Ken Burch wrote:

If Notley leads the NDP to defeat(and it's looking more and more like she will)it will be because-with the exception of things like the farmworkers legislation and the measures to protect LGBTQ kids and their straight student allies-she has assumed that she has to carry on the "Alberta against the world" tradition-a choice which led her to irreporably damage her party's chances of holding power by raging against the rest the NDP on the pipeline issue and her arrogant refusal to to acknowledge even the basic validity of the Leap Manifesto, a concept with which she might have engaged by proposing, say, a compromise which would have pushed the timeline for the transition from fossil fuels from 20 years to 40.   Had she done that, and were she running a re-election campaign centered on presenting and defending the solid progressive achievements of her government, Notley would likely be neck-and-neck with Kenney and have a good chance of beating him. 

Notley might have done slightly better if she had emphasized her government's accomplishments more, but with the economic recession still hurting the economy and the Cons united in a single party, it was all but guaranteed that she was going to lose.

On the other hand, abandoning any pretense of dealing with the global climate change existential crisis by proposing a forty year period of adjustment means abandoning environmental principles in the hopes of winning a few more votes that are highly unlikely to come the NDP's way since those who do not see the crisis are not likely to be won over by this 'compromise'. Such a 'compromise' would definitely shift votes away from the NDP.

If wildfires burning down a large part of Fort McMurray, the record wildfires that drove 65,000 from their homes for up to two months in BC in 2017, the new record wildfires set in BC in 2018 that burned the equivalent of 40% of Nova Scotia, the warnings that it is already too late to save the Arctic as we know it, and even the warnings today from the head of  the Bank of England and the Bank of France  that a “massive reallocation of capital” is necessary to prevent global warming above the 2°C maximum target" and “If some companies and industries fail to adjust to this new world, they will fail to exist,” (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/17/mark-carney-tells-gl...), doesn't convince you that 40 year plans are dead, I don't know what will. We face desertification in western Canada as rainfall decreases, evaporation increases with temperatures, and runoff from disappearing glaciers disappear, to say nothing of the similar risks to the billions in India, China and the rest of the Himalayan glacier countries dependent on glacial water, as well as sea level rise that not only threatens many island nations but coastal cities around the world where a large part of the globe's population lives. Canada, which has the world's longest coast, already is facing enormous risk. Even a BC Liberal government report determined that Metro Vancouver will need to spend $9.5 billion to protect it. Sea level rise is also having an impact right now on PEI's, New Brunswick's and Nova Scotia's coast that will only get much worse. Protecting New York City alone is estimated to cost $100 billion.

"If warming is not mitigated and follows the RCP8.5 sea level rise projections, the global annual flood costs without adaptation will increase to $14 trillion per year for a median sea level rise of 0.86m, and up to $27 trillion per year for 1.8m. This would account for 2.8 per cent of global GDP in 2100." (https://phys.org/news/2018-07-sea-world-trillion-year.html) I haven't even touched on many of the global warming problems that place the world in peril since that would take too long. 

We need a Green New Deal that combines social policy with combatting global warming and we need it now. 

Last week Norway's Labor Party withdrew its support for Arctic oil exploration producing a majority of the legislature favouring this (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-08/norway-is-walking-awa...). China is aiming to become the renewable energy superpower. It already has 29% of renewable energy patents and last year had 45% of new renewable energy investment. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdudley/2019/01/11/china-renewable-en...) Even Even Saudi Arabia is making major investments in preparing for life after oil.(https://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/saudi-arabia-prepa...)

There are two possible futures: the world shifts fast enough to avoid catastrophic global climate change or we don't. If we don't, you won't have to worry about social policy. If the world does avoid the worst case scenario while Canada continues on with the getting the last drop out of the tar sands mentality, which NDP candidate Linda McQuaig criticized in the last election and was ostracized for both inside and outside the party, then Canada and Alberta is in danger of becoming a leader in what will be the new buggy whip industry. 

Even in the US change is occurring quickly. Coal is dying as an industry despite Trump because it is too expensive. Renewables are becoming increasingly cost competitive, even with natural gas. Furthermore, there is growing evidence that methane gas (which has more than 25 times the heating effect of carbon dioxide) emissions from natural gas development are much higher than previously thought.

For around 10 years, the conventional wisdom in the energy sector has been that natural gas is ascendant. Coal is dirty, and it’s getting expensive, but it’s too early to jump all the way to renewable energy. To get from the fossil fuel present to the renewable future, we will need ... a bridge.

Natural gas is meant to be that bridge, a way to reduce our emissions relative to coal while we work on scaling up renewables. (The shift from coal to gas is a big part of why US emissions have declined over the past few years.) ...

 Recent forecasts suggest that it may be cheaper to build new renewables+storage than to continue operating existing natural gas plants by 2035. 

That means natural gas plants built today could be rendered uncompetitive well before their rated lifespan. They could become “stranded assets,” saddling utility ratepayers and investors with the costs of premature decommissioning.

Meanwhile, gas’s environmental reputation has suffered from a series of reports, most recently a study in Science, showing that gas’s lifecycle methane emissions are much higher than previously estimated and could seriously dent gas’s climate advantage over coal. (See author and activist Bill McKibben for an extensive exploration of this point.)

According to the consultancy Lazard, the all-in, “levelized cost of energy” (LCOE) from some renewables is already lower than the LCOE of a lot of fossil fuels in many cases, even without subsidies and without environmental benefits factored in. Wind is the cheapest energy of all, and utility-scale solar is competitive with the cheapest natural gas.

In the Midwest, wind is cheapest. In the Southwest, solar is cheapest. As costs continue to fall, areas where renewables beat new CCGT will grow and spread.

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/7/13/17551878/natural-ga...

 

 

JKR

Ken Burch wrote:

Just clisked at Elections Alberta-had no idea the night had been so comprehensively dismal for the Freedom Conservatives.  .5% of the vote?  Jesus!

The right has clearly learned not to split their vote. Former PC’ers and Wildrosers are celebrating within their United Conservative Party now because of that. The NDP would have had a chance at winning again if the right had split their vote again.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

JKR wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Just clisked at Elections Alberta-had no idea the night had been so comprehensively dismal for the Freedom Conservatives.  .5% of the vote?  Jesus!

The right has clearly learned not to split their vote. Former PC’ers and Wildrosers are celebrating within their United Conservative Party now because of that. The NDP would have had a chance at winning again if the right had split their vote again.

We all know trying to merge the NDP, the Liberals and the Alberta Party wouldn't have made any difference.   Such a merger would have meant having no policies and pretty much governing as a right-wing provincial Liberal government like they tend to get in the Maritimes or like they had in Manitoba before 1969.

JKR

Ken Burch wrote:

JKR wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Just clisked at Elections Alberta-had no idea the night had been so comprehensively dismal for the Freedom Conservatives.  .5% of the vote?  Jesus!

The right has clearly learned not to split their vote. Former PC’ers and Wildrosers are celebrating within their United Conservative Party now because of that. The NDP would have had a chance at winning again if the right had split their vote again.

We all know trying to merge the NDP, the Liberals and the Alberta Party wouldn't have made any difference.   Such a merger would have meant having no policies and pretty much governing as a right-wing provincial Liberal government like they tend to get in the Maritimes or like they had in Manitoba before 1969.

I guess the solution would be electoral reform to fix the vote splitting problem caused by FPTP plurality voting. Too bad the Alberta NDP government didn’t support electoral reform when it had the chance.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

JKR wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

JKR wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Just clisked at Elections Alberta-had no idea the night had been so comprehensively dismal for the Freedom Conservatives.  .5% of the vote?  Jesus!

The right has clearly learned not to split their vote. Former PC’ers and Wildrosers are celebrating within their United Conservative Party now because of that. The NDP would have had a chance at winning again if the right had split their vote again.

We all know trying to merge the NDP, the Liberals and the Alberta Party wouldn't have made any difference.   Such a merger would have meant having no policies and pretty much governing as a right-wing provincial Liberal government like they tend to get in the Maritimes or like they had in Manitoba before 1969.

I guess the solution would be electoral reform to fix the vote splitting problem caused by FPTP plurality voting. Too bad the Alberta NDP government didn’t support electoral reform when it had the chance.

Agreed.  Probably they were afraid they'd have to form a coalition with the Greens or some sort of newly formed green-socialist party that might push them towards accepting someting like the Leap.

robbie_dee

The UCP won 55% of the vote. Assuming, unrealistically, that the party votes would be the same under PR then Jason Kenney would still have won a majority. More likely, in this counterfactual, the PCs and the Wildrose never would have merged if the ANDP government had adopted PR after 2015. But we would probably still be looking at a right wing coalition government of some type today.

Sean in Ottawa

Ken Burch wrote:

JKR wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

JKR wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Just clisked at Elections Alberta-had no idea the night had been so comprehensively dismal for the Freedom Conservatives.  .5% of the vote?  Jesus!

The right has clearly learned not to split their vote. Former PC’ers and Wildrosers are celebrating within their United Conservative Party now because of that. The NDP would have had a chance at winning again if the right had split their vote again.

We all know trying to merge the NDP, the Liberals and the Alberta Party wouldn't have made any difference.   Such a merger would have meant having no policies and pretty much governing as a right-wing provincial Liberal government like they tend to get in the Maritimes or like they had in Manitoba before 1969.

I guess the solution would be electoral reform to fix the vote splitting problem caused by FPTP plurality voting. Too bad the Alberta NDP government didn’t support electoral reform when it had the chance.

Agreed.  Probably they were afraid they'd have to form a coalition with the Greens or some sort of newly formed green-socialist party that might push them towards accepting someting like the Leap.

I doubt that that was the fear. The assumption was probably that the only hope of the NDP coming to power in ALberta would be if a majority right woudl be split. PR makes power virtually impossible.

I doubt that this will remain the case in another generation.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The NDP backroom bigwigs in both Alberta and BC have been captured by the sweet talkers in the oil and gas industry. Another bunch of NDP hacks convinced the path to reelection is chasing the votes of people who have been conditioned to spit at the mere mention of the NDP. Who knows what could have been if Notley had gone left but instead she chose to abandon her campaign promise to try and properly regulate the oil and gas industry and become a vocal and belligerent supporter.

On Friday, while I was enjoying a break from the sunny Prairie weather in cold and rainy Halifax, Hal Danchilla’s Canadian Strategy Group sent out a press release saying it had eased its paucity of NDP types by persuading Ken Georgetti, the former president of the Canadian Labour Congress, and Moe Sihota, a former B.C. NDP cabinet minister and party president, to swell its ranks as “strategic counsel.”

To those unfamiliar with the argot of lobbying, strategic counsel are lobbyists, or slightly less politely, schmoozers with an agenda. No matter what anyone tells you, they are paid – and often paid very well – for their connections.

https://albertapolitics.ca/2015/06/tory-linked-lobbying-firm-hires-forme...

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The most telling thing for me is that when they ran in 2015 the NDP got 603,459 votes and only 536,220 this election with more people voting than in 2015.  Obviously their own voters gave them a failing grade. They either lost one out of every ten voters and attracted no new supporters or attracted some of those oil friendly votes they were looking for and lost even more of their base. I suspect they lost a part of the 2015 base that understands climate change and gained a minuscule number of new centrists. Given the Greens dismal support the interesting question is where did those voters go or did they just not go to the polls.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Well, 2015 proved that right-wing victory in Alberta is not inevitable, that change is possible.  Notley ran a pretty good government, and her only real mistake was trying to appease the oil industry when the oil industry was never going to BE appeased.  She should have turned the oil companies into Crown Corporations and then used some of their proceeds to buils in-province refineries, while putting the refineries and the drilling sites under the democratic control of the oil workers.  

Instead, on that issue she tried to out-Kenney Kenney, and she had to have known the whole time that she could never pull that off.

But there were a lot of achievements and the showing Monday gives the party a base to build on for 2023.  

As the legendary British socialist Tony Benn once put it "Every generation must fight the same battles again and again and again.  There is no final victory and there is no final defeat".

JKR

I think with the right united in Alberta under the UCP banner, the UCP will have a very long run in office against a fractured opposition. The UCP run could be as long as the Alberta PC Party’s run  was or as long as the Alberta Social Credit Party’s was.

quizzical

kropotkin1951 wrote:

The most telling thing for me is that when they ran in 2015 the NDP got 603,459 votes and only 536,220 this election with more people voting than in 2015.  Obviously their own voters gave them a failing grade. They either lost one out of every ten voters and attracted no new supporters or attracted some of those oil friendly votes they were looking for and lost even more of their base. I suspect they lost a part of the 2015 base that understands climate change and gained a minuscule number of new centrists. Given the Greens dismal support the interesting question is where did those voters go or did they just not go to the polls.

i'm betting once the advance pools are counted they beat their 2015 vote totals. 

and you're wrong they couldn't have gone anymore "left" or they woulda lost more seats.

there's going to be bad buyer's remorse by this time next year or sooner. 

once they find out they're not going back to work 'next week' things will get ugly.

they want their "coke and prostitutes" back afterall. 

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

quizzical wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

The most telling thing for me is that when they ran in 2015 the NDP got 603,459 votes and only 536,220 this election with more people voting than in 2015.  Obviously their own voters gave them a failing grade. They either lost one out of every ten voters and attracted no new supporters or attracted some of those oil friendly votes they were looking for and lost even more of their base. I suspect they lost a part of the 2015 base that understands climate change and gained a minuscule number of new centrists. Given the Greens dismal support the interesting question is where did those voters go or did they just not go to the polls.

i'm betting once the advance pools are counted they beat their 2015 vote totals. 

and you're wrong they couldn't have gone anymore "left" or they woulda lost more seats.

there's going to be bad buyer's remorse by this time next year or sooner. 

once they find out they're not going back to work 'next week' things will get ugly.

they want their "coke and prostitutes" back afterall.

I hope you are right. The government did many good things but I still think that fishing for votes from oil industry workers was just flat out misguided. Her attacks on BC and demands that the "national interest" should prevail over the self determination of the people who live on the Coast or the indigenous leadership of unceded territories were over the top and IMO have done lasting damage to the NDP brand.

You are right that Albertan voters voted for a return to the coke and prostitute economy of rapid oil and gas expansion. Never believe an Albertan that promises not to piss away the next oil boom.

quizzical

no i don't  think they damaged the NDP "brand" in the least esp not in AB.

there's room now.  people have gotten used to good roads. functioning hospitals. they'll notice. they'll be angry they were sucked in when road tolls go in and medical fees go back in along with cuts.

and some BCers who were thinking about buying in AB won't now. and women may move to BC to be safe again.

they trusted "Rachel" not so much the NDP. 

 

voice of the damned

Krop wrote:

You are right that Albertan voters voted for a return to the coke and prostitute economy of rapid oil and gas expansion.

Can we please lay off insinuations about the alleged spending habits of workers in the oil industry? What they're spending their money on shouldn't matter if the issue is enviromental degradation.

If green energy takes off as predicted, you think the white-colllar tech workers making the stuff will be spending all their money on vitamins and feminist encounter seminars?

 

WWWTT

Disappointed to see Notley lose. She should stay on as leader of the opposition because without her the ANDP would have done worse. 

Isn’t easy for the NDP is it?  

Pondering

Misfit wrote:

the reality is that Alberta is a fiscally and socially conservative province. They have voted for right wing parties up until four years ago. We all knew that an NDP re-election now was very slim at beat even as far back as four years ago.

....I believe that just like the NDP federal inroads in Quebec in 2011, the NDP never has had nor likely ever will have a solid support base that can sustain them beyond one term.

quebec does not identify with the NDP  Alberta does not identify with the NDzp and the United States does not identify with social democracy. 

Yes to Alberta, no to Quebec. Quebec does not identify with any particular political party period. We would vote NDP or a brand new party tomorrow if we thought we would profit from it. Quebec has gone Conservative, NDP, Liberal, and Bloc in recent history. Alberta is ideologically free market and Conservative. 

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Here is what really bothers me about this whole thing. I can remember when oil was booming, and there was a sense of entitlement in Alberta. Hands off our oil, this is provincial jurisdiction. If you don't have jobs where you live, move. That's what they said as unemployed people from across the country poured into Alberta to work in their economy.

So true. Alberta seems to have become a professional victim. Playing the victim no matter what the situation is the right wing fallback position. Some Albertans seem to think this is the same as Quebec getting their way by being the squeaky wheel but Quebec wasn't demanding the rest of the country risk their land. 

Alberta takes the attitude that people are stopping pipelines just to be mean or that they can't stop pipelines if they drive cars or they can't stop pipelines if we import from elsewhere or pretends that piping bitumen is the same as piping other oils. 

epaulo13 wrote:

..soon alta will be facing it's own challenge and still on my point that fantasies being sold. 

TarSands Trial Legal Backgrounder 

I have found that very odd. Albertans are falling for it too. They really seem to believe they have the legal right to put pipelines through provinces and indigenous lands.

Aristotleded24 wrote:
 Most regular people don't care about politics, and somehow mainstream political organizations haven't picked up on that yet.

Many people here haven't picked up on that yet. They still think people will priorize other issues over economic well-being. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

voice of the damned wrote:

Krop wrote:

You are right that Albertan voters voted for a return to the coke and prostitute economy of rapid oil and gas expansion.

Can we please lay off insinuations about the alleged spending habits of workers in the oil industry? What they're spending their money on shouldn't matter if the issue is enviromental degradation.

Actually on this board degradation of women also counts as a valid concern. Neither quizzical not I made this idea up and no I will not stop talking about it.

But several researchers say that while it’s not all workers, there is a link between camps and violence against women.

“When there’s a large-scale industrial development, when there’s construction camps that are co-located, we have documented increases in the rates of sexual assault, the rates of sexualized violence, the rates of prostitution, the rates of sexually transmitted infections,” said Ginger Gibson, director of the Firelight Group, which does research in Indigenous and local communities in Canada.

Firelight’s 2017 report cites a 38 per cent increase in sexual assaults reported to RCMP during the first year of construction on an industrial project in Fort St. James, British Columbia.

It also notes a “sharp increase” in sex trafficking in Fort McMurray and Grande Prairie, attributed to the rise in “increased income of young men, social isolation from families and relationships, and the hypermasculine context of camps.”

https://www.thestar.com/edmonton/2018/12/04/link-between-rural-work-camp...

 

Pages