Rachael Notely: at a perilous turning point

31 posts / 0 new
Last post
indigo 007 indigo 007's picture
Rachael Notely: at a perilous turning point
Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

You managed to spell BOTH of her names wrong, not just in this post, but in the URL you link to.

So, as an expert on Rachael Notely, tell us all about Rachael Notely, beginning with who she even is. 

quizzical

lol

Rachel needs to get elected again for AB people's sake.

if for that to happen it means supporting the pipeline then she needs to do it.

if for that to happen she needs the full 5 years and an election in 2020 then she needs to do it.

if she needs to shut the tap to where i live BC then she needs to do it.

i can't stress enough what a mess AB will be in if another hater conservative government gets in.

we need another 4 years at least to get more women's programs in place and the meaness out.

Aristotleded24

quizzical wrote:
lol Rachel needs to get elected again for AB people's sake. if for that to happen it means supporting the pipeline then she needs to do it. if for that to happen she needs the full 5 years and an election in 2020 then she needs to do it. if she needs to shut the tap to where i live BC then she needs to do it. i can't stress enough what a mess AB will be in if another hater conservative government gets in. we need another 4 years at least to get more women's programs in place and the meaness out.

I don't follow the logic. In order to stop a right-wing hater government from getting elected in Alberta, we need to hope that Rachel Notley gets re-elected even if she gets re-elected by doing things the right-wing hater government would have done in any case?

That's if you accept the idea that pipelines are successful to her re-election, or that she will be re-elected should a pipeline get built. I don't. Even if a pipeline does get built, there is enough there for Kenney and company to claim credit for forcing the NDP in that direction. The fact is, Notley was elected on a platform of reducing Alberta's reliance on oil and gas, however she has capitulated to the industry by leaving royalty rates untouched and is just as obnoxious about insisting on pipeline construction as Harper was. I hope she gets re-elected too, but she made her own decisions in that respect, and it's not the responsibility of residents of other provinces to sacrifice their drinking water and their natural environment in order for that to happen.

quizzical

you totally did not read the actual words used.

just went with your impression of what you wanted to think they were saying.

JKR

quizzical wrote:
lol

Rachel needs to get elected again for AB people's sake.

if for that to happen it means supporting the pipeline then she needs to do it.

if for that to happen she needs the full 5 years and an election in 2020 then she needs to do it.

if she needs to shut the tap to where i live BC then she needs to do it.

i can't stress enough what a mess AB will be in if another hater conservative government gets in.

we need another 4 years at least to get more women's programs in place and the meaness out.

In any case, I think the Alberta NDP government has a slim chance of holding onto power now that the right has united to avoid vote splitting in the next election.

NorthReport

The right-wing anti equality Liberals are presently deader than a doornail in Alberta. Maybe Rachel should fund their resurgence

Aristotleded24

quizzical wrote:
you totally did not read the actual words used. just went with your impression of what you wanted to think they were saying.

Except Kenney's been advocating a get-tough-on-BC approach to the pipeline issue, which is exactly the stance Notley is taking. If the people you vote in are doing the same bad things as the people you just voted out, or if the people currently elected implement the same bad policies as the other guys are getting, what's the point?

Aristotleded24

JKR wrote:
quizzical wrote:
lol Rachel needs to get elected again for AB people's sake. if for that to happen it means supporting the pipeline then she needs to do it. if for that to happen she needs the full 5 years and an election in 2020 then she needs to do it. if she needs to shut the tap to where i live BC then she needs to do it. i can't stress enough what a mess AB will be in if another hater conservative government gets in. we need another 4 years at least to get more women's programs in place and the meaness out.
In any case, I think the Alberta NDP government has a slim chance of holding onto power now that the right has united to avoid vote splitting in the next election.

Can we please stop with this nonsense of pretending that voters think and move along a one-dimensional political line that us political junkies like to divide into "right" and "left," and acknowledge that people have many reasons for voting the way they do? It's early days, but opinion polling since the UCP formation show the NDP trending slightly upwards, with the UCP going down. Let's see how many roads, hospitals, and schools the incumbent MLAs can get their pictures taken in front of next year.

JKR

Aristotleded24 wrote:

JKR wrote:
quizzical wrote:
lol Rachel needs to get elected again for AB people's sake. if for that to happen it means supporting the pipeline then she needs to do it. if for that to happen she needs the full 5 years and an election in 2020 then she needs to do it. if she needs to shut the tap to where i live BC then she needs to do it. i can't stress enough what a mess AB will be in if another hater conservative government gets in. we need another 4 years at least to get more women's programs in place and the meaness out.
In any case, I think the Alberta NDP government has a slim chance of holding onto power now that the right has united to avoid vote splitting in the next election.

Can we please stop with this nonsense of pretending that voters think and move along a one-dimensional political line that us political junkies like to divide into "right" and "left," and acknowledge that people have many reasons for voting the way they do? It's early days, but opinion polling since the UCP formation show the NDP trending slightly upwards, with the UCP going down. Let's see how many roads, hospitals, and schools the incumbent MLAs can get their pictures taken in front of next year.

It will be instructive to see how things shake out in Alberta during the next 13 months. I think Notley has performed exceedingly well, especially considering the cards she has been dealt with low oil prices.

If the right-left dichotomy is nonsense, why did the PC's and Wildrose unite as Reform and the PC's did at the federal level? I think people's general idea of whether government should play a bigger or smaller role in their lives and whether they should be taxed more or less by government is a very important aspect determining how people vote, so I think the right-left dichotomy is instructive. Also, I think many Albertans view the NDP and Liberals as bring parties more influenced by other areas of Canada while they see conservative parties as being more "natural" to Alberta.

quizzical

Aristotleded24 wrote:

quizzical wrote:
you totally did not read the actual words used. just went with your impression of what you wanted to think they were saying.

Except Kenney's been advocating a get-tough-on-BC approach to the pipeline issue, which is exactly the stance Notley is taking. If the people you vote in are doing the same bad things as the people you just voted out, or if the people currently elected implement the same bad policies as the other guys are getting, what's the point?

no. kenney is taking the approach the NDP has taken before they got to it. distinct difference.

Rachel is not doing the same bad things in all the 81 percent of other things in the province.

they are implimenting people based policies not corporate.

truth is talking tough on the pipeline really costs nothing to her already supportive political base. even saying your going to shut the tap off costs nothing. not even to bcers. but gains are huge targeting the anti-kenney voters.

the bc wine brouhaha made bc wineries record profits and gave them millions in free advertising. and no trade boycott happened.

she can't turn the tap off if kinder morgan doesn't want her to. but saying so again playing to anti-kenney conservative voters is good politicking.

people or families in AB are on the edge and need help the tea party ugliness can take hold or be destroyed. i'm in favour of bold face politics and getting saner politics, education and social programs in place to get rid of them.

there was a shoot out on hwy 16 yesterday or day before i guess between a gun toting kid who had killed a girl who told him she didn't want to date him. he is now dead after running around the province for a week and an RCMP was grazed. this attitude is growing in AB and you can see it with them having the highest family violence rates in Canada. by far.

if Rachel has to play politics to get in again when really the province under anyone can do sfa then imv she should.

her approval rating grows higher daily and now you even hear pipeliners begrudgingly say good things. give her another 4 years and the insane stranglehold might be gone.

LB Cultured Thought

quizzical wrote:
this attitude is growing in AB and you can see it with them having the highest family violence rates in Canada. by far.

By far! Other than...Nunavut, the Northwest Territories, the Yukon, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Quebec.

https://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2017001/article/14698/tbl/tbl2.6-...

6079_Smith_W

JKR wrote:

Also, I think many Albertans view the NDP and Liberals as bring parties more influenced by other areas of Canada while they see conservative parties as being more "natural" to Alberta.

Some might think that, but it is a myth both in and outside Alberta.

The CCF was founded in Calgary. Its predecessor the UFA was also an Alberta progressive party, and it was the first place the movement held political power. Some people there might not like the NDP, but they aren't from somewhere else. In many ways they were born in Alberta.

As  for Notley's tactics, I think actually turning off the taps would be a mistake, but the fact is she can't force the pipelines anywhere outside the province, so I agree with quizzical she has nothing to lose, except perhaps when it comes to her reptation among progressives outside the province. Even the interim NDP leader here in SK weighed in on her side. The new leader has wisely stayed out of it.

Although the smart money is still on Jason Kenney, he is probably the best opponent she could wish for. His leadership was after all a hostile takeover that started with Stephen Harper backing Wildrose when Alison Redford was premier. There are more than a few who would feel uncomfortable voting for him.

 

 

voice of the damned

Smith:

You're correct about the UFA; even the tour guides at the Alberta Legislature mention the party as a predecesor of the NDP(or at least used to). Minor point of correction, though, the United Farmers Of Ontario took power a couple of years before the UFA, though the UFA had a longer duration in office.

I'm not sure how much significance most Albertans attach to the CCF being founded in Calgary in 1931. Certainly, the party has never done well federally in Alberta, and even the UFA was voted  out in 1935. I've always had the impression that it was just sort of a fluke that the founding convention happened to be held in Calgary, though given the provincial scene, the founders might have expected some growth in the province.

It's true that the aura of hostile "otherness" attached itself much more easily to the Liberals than to the NDP, despite the federal New Democrats supporting, if not outright inspiring, most of the policies that made the Liberals so disliked in Alberta. I don't know if that's because people just didn't know what positions the federal NDP was taking(they weren't the government, after all), or the Liberals association with French Canadians and immigrants evoked xenophobic resentment in a way that the WASPier NDP never did.

 

 

quizzical

LB Cultured Thought wrote:

quizzical wrote:
this attitude is growing in AB and you can see it with them having the highest family violence rates in Canada. by far.

By far! Other than...Nunavut, the Northwest Territories, the Yukon, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Quebec.

https://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2017001/article/14698/tbl/tbl2.6-...

Not accurate to 2017. Number 1 province 3 behind NWT and Nunavit only.

Lots of articles about it on line.

quizzical

6049smith people out of province who are concerned and may feel her reputation lowered over this hopefully understand playing a long game is more important.

AB does not need Kenney. Especially women children and seniors.

for a province supposedly so religious the violence perpetuated by the mens is nasty and getting nastier.

6079_Smith_W

Thanks for the reminder about Ontario, VOTD.

Though I think the fact UFA members played a role in founding the CCF made it more than just a fluke. The first elected CCF member was Chester Ronning, in Camrose, though he contested the seat for the UFA.

 

6079_Smith_W

@ Quizzical

Plus,  if anyone is influenced from down east it is Kenney, and not just because he is from Ontario. I am sure there are plenty within the new PC party who are thinking about that, his style, and his social conservatism. I'm not in the know enough to actually know (plus most of my friends are in Redmonton) but I wonder how much of his win was because people just held their noses because they assumed he was the best horse.

I'm sure bagkitty has a better perspective on all this.

 

 

quizzical

Smith imv his win was nonsensical.

really can't see him winning if Rachel keeps it going.

Redeer and area can't make a premier or upc win.

sadly many incumbents are getting harassed out by someone or something.

JKR

quizzical wrote:

really can't see him winning if Rachel keeps it going.

Have you seen the recent Alberta opinion polls? They have the UCP running far ahead of the NDP. A huge NDP comeback is still possible but given these poll numbers I can see the UCP winning the next election.

LB Cultured Thought

quizzical wrote:
LB Cultured Thought wrote:

quizzical wrote:
this attitude is growing in AB and you can see it with them having the highest family violence rates in Canada. by far.

By far! Other than...Nunavut, the Northwest Territories, the Yukon, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Quebec.

https://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2017001/article/14698/tbl/tbl2.6-...

Not accurate to 2017. Number 1 province 3 behind NWT and Nunavit only. Lots of articles about it on line.

I doubt government workers could get 2017 data out by now, but if you can find it please share. I went and found 2016 census data and...still wrong! In fact, 2016 data matched 2014 and 2015 data, which isn't surprising in the least. Fair bet 2017 data matches once again?

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54893-eng.pdf

LB Cultured Thought

quizzical wrote:
for a province supposedly so religious the violence perpetuated by the mens is nasty and getting nastier.

Third lowest in religious people actually, following Yukon and BC. The "supposedly" seems to only be in your own personal opinion.

voice of the damned

quizzical wrote:
for a province supposedly so religious the violence perpetuated by the mens is nasty and getting nastier.

Well, as you say, supposedly. I believe Alberta has, or in any case had, the second-highest percentage of people, after British Columbia, listing None on the religion section of the census.

Not that I think non-religious people are more likely to engage in domestic violence. Probably less so, comparatively, depending on what kind of religion they're being compared to.

voice of the damned

Cross-posted with LB. Going by his stats, I stand corrected. I assume the well-known statistic is "province with the second lowest".

In fairness to quizzical, by using "supposedly", he could be trying to indicate that it is NOT his personal opinion, but that of others. Certainly, the religious right in Alberta likes to portray the province as a bastion of their own style of Christianity. And certain progressives elsewhere in Canada, seeking to reassure themselves that the rest of the country could not possibly have anything in common with wacko Alberta(Brad Wall and the Ford Brothers notwithstanding) are happy to propogate that narrative as well.

voice of the damned

JKR wrote:
quizzical wrote:
really can't see him winning if Rachel keeps it going.
Have you seen the recent Alberta opinion polls? They have the UCP running far ahead of the NDP. A huge NDP comeback is still possible but given these poll numbers I can see the UCP winning the next election.

Yeah, at this point, I'm thinking that the NDP government is probably disliked to the point where people who would previously have been put off by the social conservativism of Kenney and Company will just hold their noses and vote UCP anyway.

But we'll wait and see what happens with Notley's populist tub-thumping on pipelines. Also, what fate has in store for the Lougheed-esque Alberta Party(God, I hate that name) and its elderly, bow-tied, technocratic leader.

 

6079_Smith_W

The question is where those religious (and presumably socially conservative) people are. And that is in rural areas and smaller towns and cities, particularly in southern Alberta.

 

voice of the damned

6079_Smith_W wrote:

The question is where those religious (and presumably socially conservative) people are. And that is in rural areas and smaller towns and cities, particularly in southern Alberta.

IOW, most of the green areas on this particular map...

https://tinyurl.com/yd8b27yp

Which incidentally bears a striking resmeblance to this map, from the last election before 2012 that the religious divide played a role in how people voted...

https://tinyurl.com/y8zblww9

 

 

 

 

6079_Smith_W

And note Grant Notley's constituency on that last map.

It is also a question how much Kenney will try to implement religious politics by stealth, as his boss did on abortion, and how much he will keep blundering into issues like this:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/alberta-ndp-to-bring-in-la...

After all, the two most vocal anti-abortion propoponents in the federal party - Brad Trost and Maurice Vellacott - spent most of their time fighting their own party (in a weird turnaround, both from urban ridings).

Will Kenney be able to hold the ideological line like Harper did if he is in control of a health ministry? And if he is in a political landscape where he doesn't have to play that game to get support why would he?

voice of the damned

6079_Smith_W wrote:

And note Grant Notley's constituency on that last map.

Yep. Spirit River-Fairview.

As for Kenney running religious politics under the table...

I think he could get away with that in the campaign, if the showdown is basically UCP vs. NDP, and the latter's popularity remains where it is now. People will either ignore the dog whistles, or pretend not to notice them, to justify voting UCP.

But if he tries to implement that stuff once in government, a lot of his voters will say "Look, JK, we voted for you to get rid of Notley, not to de-fund abortion or firewall gay marriage." He might have a bit more success than Harper did with mostly symbolic resolutions(eg. "This House deplores sex-selection feticide"), but that'll be about it.

The historical precedent here would be when Klein pandered to his right-flank by agreeing to defund abortions except in cases where "medically neccessary", and then asked the doctors' association to decide what constituted medical neccessity. When the doctors refused, Klein declared the issue dead.

It's true Klein was much less of a SoCon than Kenney(he was personally pro-choice), but the fact remains, there was no widespread demand among Albertans to ressurrect abortion-defunding after he let it die.

 

Unionist

voice of the damned wrote:
In fairness to quizzical, by using "supposedly", he could be trying to indicate that it is NOT his personal opinion, but that of others.

In fairness to quizzical, she is a "she".

 

voice of the damned

Unionist wrote:

voice of the damned wrote:
In fairness to quizzical, by using "supposedly", he could be trying to indicate that it is NOT his personal opinion, but that of others.

In fairness to quizzical, she is a "she".

 

Ah, I don't think I ever knew that. Thanks for the heads-up, and apologies to quizzical.