adamyyc
Active Member
Anecdotally, I don’t think Calgary-Elbow will be a toss-up. I think the NDP should win by a reasonable margin given Smith didn’t hold a by-election when Schweitzer left.
|
|
|
Alberta Provincial Politics
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
ByeByeBaby
Active Member
That's such a weird article. The poll is fine I'm sure -- Janet Brown is as good a pollster as any -- but the "could still lose the election" framing is weird. The article says:
which seems to completely ignore that the NDP won two seats outside Calgary and Edmonton in the last election when they lost, and if the NDP wins 18 seats in Calgary, they're highly likely to expand on those two in other areas, both the 6 seats in the Edmonton halo and a handful of rest-of-the-province seats. The NDP is likely to pick up one Edmonton halo seat for every 4ish seats they pick up in Calgary, and the other viable rest-of-the-province seats are each a little unique, but a situation where the NDP gains a majority of seats in Calgary will likely lead to a couple of other gains.
Here's the quadrant results of the poll by the way, from Janet Brown's twitter:
Fascinating.
Last edited:
It's a weird article but in the end the headline is more or less saying what we already knew. The NDP could get more than half the seats in Calgary, but could still lose if they get less than 19. I feel the election will come down to the 4 highlighted ridings in Calgary, and to a lesser degree the Edmonton halo. If they can do well in the Edmonton halo and win a couple of those ridings, it would take pressure off of having to win 20 in Calgary.
Last edited:
JWhite
Active Member
I’m telling you this as someone who has traditionally voted conservative - A vote for the UCP is a wasted vote, and only serves to further empower the far right element in the UCP.
We need a shakeup, and even for those who don’t like the NDP, an NDP victory at the very least could be short term pain for long term gain. A message needs to be sent to the UCP that we’re tired of rednecks running the province.
If the NDP turned out to be the disaster you predict, they would be voted out the next election. If they get in they’ll be on thin ice, so by voting for them you’re not risking much.
Make the conservatives earn the right to be in power.
Last edited:
DougB
Active Member
One time wastes of money are less damaging that ones like growing payrolls as they can more easily be reversed.
darwink
Senior Member
It is pretty easy to cut payrolls if you're willing to have less stuff done. Albertans haven't shown a desire to have less stuff done, so it isn't a surprise that fiscal conservatives are continually disappointed.
DougB
Active Member
The choice is between herpes (NDP) and syphilis (UCP). At least syphilis has a cure. Long term spending commitments like expanding public sector payrolls or introducing new programs are very difficult to reverse. I truly believe that all in compensation (salary plus benefits plus sick days plus pension) for public sector employees should be substantially lower than in the private sector as they enjoy certainty around continuity of employment and retirement. I also truly believe that government has funded programs well past the point of diminishing returns, i.e. each new dollar of government spending produces at least as many negative side effects as benefits. Finally, I consider balanced operational budgets to be an absolute requirement and could never.be convinced otherwise. If spending on say education and health can't produce enough productivity and therefore tax revenue to self fund, the spending isn't worth it.
potatopizzafan
Active Member
Sounds like a good way too scare off all the good talent to the private sector.
Unknown User
New Member
Following with this analogy, would re-electing the UCP be more along the lines of not trusting that the medical professional's cure works and therefore ignoring getting treatment or is it more that since there is a cure (never ending resource revenues?) we disregard everything and continue with our risky behavior? What is the cure? I'd argue, from a social perspective, that re-electing the UCP is like polio, or whooping cough or small pox, something that should be effectively eradicated in Alberta but we seem to be encouraging the growth of.
Is productivity the right word here? I'm definitely not understanding what you are trying to say. Surely the value of these institutions (and other government run services) goes beyond operating them cash neutral? Is this an efficiency argument? Is the balanced operational budget statement in reference to the NDP borrowing to fund operations when resource revenues cratered? What do the 2 have to do with each other? I understand improved efficiency would create better value but did you expect the NDP to cut services to the level of revenue in that situation? No level of efficiency gains was going to solve that issue.
ByeByeBaby
Active Member
What about if someone elects a government that promises to cut public sector employment, or who cuts public sector wages, or who hijacks public sector worker pension funds so that they can redirect investments to suit their cronies? No certainty there.
Look, it's okay to be honest and say you think we should have a worse health care system or a worse education system so that you can pay slightly less in taxes; you don't need to tie yourself in knots inventing a bunch of abstract principles. It'll be easier on all of us.
ByeByeBaby
Active Member
Looking at that quadrant-by-quadrant poll again, here's how the poll differs from the 2019 election* (ignoring the 'orphans'):
The NDP are up 12% in the NE, 14% in the SE, and 17% in both the NW and SW. Which is interesting and perhaps encouraging from their point of view. Here's the Calgary ridings again:
The NE ridings are all at the top end of the chart; the NDP doesn't need to gain much to win those. Meanwhile, the SE ridings are mostly at the bottom; these are the ridings that would be more likely to expand a majority government, so it's less important if their margins go up here. The big battlegrounds are mostly in the NW.
And just for fun since I've done the work, here's the winner by margin of victory:
------
* allocating to the best of my ability; there are a handful of polling stations split between quadrants, where I used the centroid. There are a handful of polling stations that were combined for reporting, and I used the first one listed. A solid percentage of the vote was not allocated to physical polling stations; this is mostly advance, but also includes mobile and special polls; I allocated them to quadrants proportionally by party -- e.g. of the vote in Calgary-Acadia that was located at polling stations, 46% of the Alberta Party was at SE polling stations, so I assumed that 46% of the AP advance voting was also based in the SE.
The NDP are up 12% in the NE, 14% in the SE, and 17% in both the NW and SW. Which is interesting and perhaps encouraging from their point of view. Here's the Calgary ridings again:
The NE ridings are all at the top end of the chart; the NDP doesn't need to gain much to win those. Meanwhile, the SE ridings are mostly at the bottom; these are the ridings that would be more likely to expand a majority government, so it's less important if their margins go up here. The big battlegrounds are mostly in the NW.
And just for fun since I've done the work, here's the winner by margin of victory:
------
* allocating to the best of my ability; there are a handful of polling stations split between quadrants, where I used the centroid. There are a handful of polling stations that were combined for reporting, and I used the first one listed. A solid percentage of the vote was not allocated to physical polling stations; this is mostly advance, but also includes mobile and special polls; I allocated them to quadrants proportionally by party -- e.g. of the vote in Calgary-Acadia that was located at polling stations, 46% of the Alberta Party was at SE polling stations, so I assumed that 46% of the AP advance voting was also based in the SE.
Just build it
Active Member
Cutbacks to public service can happen if the NDP went on a hiring spree and voting public wasn’t happy about it. It’s happened before.
Like jwite said, the UCP needs a shakeup and voting them out would send the message that a shakeup is needed.
darwink
Senior Member
What if taxes are set at a level where that is impossible.
a couple more articles regarding the election.
www.politico.com
Calgary voters look off to their right and see Danielle Smith. That's a problem for UCP
338Canada: Win Calgary, win Alberta
With seven weeks to go until voting day, it’s Danielle Smith’s race to lose.
www.politico.com
Chinook Arch
Active Member
Many people think it’s decision between dollars, and social values. The perception is that the UCP will be better for the economy, and better for people’s wallet. I’m not saying that will be the case, but that’s a perception for many.
On the other hand, there is the perception that the NDP would be better for social issues, like health and education, LGBQT etc.. I personally believe that is the case, and not solely a perception.
Full transparency here, I’m not in love with the NDP, but I will be voting for them because I’m putting the social issues ahead of any perceived financial issues.