MichaelS
Senior Member
Would he vote for Notley though? That seems to be the bind my dad seems to be in. Absolutely can't stand Kenney, but is no big fan of the NDP either. Feels quite frustrated that there is not a viable option out there.
|
|
|
Covid-19
- Thread starter Mountain Man
- Start date
In a non-scientific poll of coworkers, friends and family, I think there are a quite a few others in that same situation. They've encountered a lifetime of publicity that the NDP is evil, and still find it hard to vote for them, even though they can't stand Kenny and the Wild Rose type idiots.
Whenever I've run into these conversations with people in that situation, my advice is, look, even if you don't like the NDP or some of its members, at least consider voting for them as a longterm strategy. It'll send a clear hard message to the UPC party. If the right wing side who are now united lose the election, they have to take a hard look in the mirror. They can't use a split vote as an excuse, and there are no other excuses. They simply lost because they're out of touch, and they aren't tuned into the young progressive population...and that young progressive population is the growing demographic of the province.
UrbanRED
Active Member
I have to agree with this. I reckon the NDP brand hurts them, by association with the federal party (not as much as the Liberal brand hurts the Liberals... but still). I think a lot of people I know are having deep regrets with this Kenney government, and taking a second look at the ANDP. The Alberta NDP is far more centrist than the federal party, so I reckon they are a little more palatable.
My thesis on Alberta politics has always been that Albertans are closer to the centre than they think, but their identity is right-wing and so they vote right-wing. If you need proof, look at local elections where party names aren't a factor and both Edmonton and Calgary tend to vote in centre-left mayors.
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
I get the sense that a lot of NDP members in Alberta think that the NDP is basically a prairie party and the natural vehicle for centre-left governance in this province (see Saskatchewan and Manitoba), and are annoyed that so many voters have some vague sense that the NDP is anti-Albertan, even if they are closer to the NDP on actual policy grounds.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
This goes back ages to the old single-party regime of the PCs. Decades of Alberta elections wins were always some combo of appealing to strong public services and low taxation, while hitting on the social themes of the day you needed. Generally, it was to tell the cities the PCs aren't scary right-wingers and to remind the rural folks that they are a social conservative party. The actual party landed somewhere in between, ever oscillating to keep the game going between centre-right and centre-left on most issues. This strange balance was further strengthened by the complete capture of the political system by a single industry that promoted political stability with jobs and money (in return for regulatory control).
Well documented in this thread, the only way to square that low-tax/high service circle was decades outsized taxation growth from higher than anywhere incomes and oil and gas royalties. Large job and wage growth kept the workforce happy even without resorting to social political movements to get workers what they want - much to the pleasure of industry owners. The cracks, of course, appear every time the economy crashes, nearly ending the PC dynasty every decade or so. Starting this decade, the effects of internet-fuelled social polarization were the final nail in the coffin of a centrist PC party dynasty that couldn't maintain it's own contradictions.
I do think there's a sizable former PC voter population out there that still wishes Alberta was like it was and acts the way you describe - they don't like to vote NDP or Liberal for decades of being told they are evil and "far left wing", but their actual interests are closer to their platforms than they often admit. Some of these are the ones wishing for another iteration of the Alberta Party - just a mild centrist party without the baggage of a left wing brand. Weary of political conflict and crisis, lots of interest to go back to the good ol' days where there wasn't much choice but you usually got what you wanted anyways.
With that said, that a centralist conservative party hasn't emerged in what on paper should be fertile ground for it, should be the proof that this is a failing location in the political spectrum today. I get the sense that the former PC voter group is shrinking fast - some have seen through their bias to realize the NDP are far more centrist and reasonable than they thought, which is why the NDP weren't and aren't being swept away from the political landscape (they actually lead by 20+ points). At the same time the former PC voter that were always frustrated for not being able to vote as socially right as they would like can finally voice how they really feel with an invermectin-fuelled slip towards conspiracy, separatism, political violence and fascism. Many of these are also ditching the UCP now as well.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
That’s what puzzles me though, as Notley is extremely competent and very much a viable option. Everything in her record as premier proves this.
Exactly. She's fairly central in the political spectrum IMO, and certainly level headed and cooperative minded.
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
It's not just that. Her political incentives all point to the centre. Her path to victory is basically centrist voters in Calgary. Her base will come with her because they personally like her and because there's no left-wing alternative. Even if there was, the NDP's "base" are public sector unions who are, by definition, pretty pro-establishment and status quo oriented. The NDP's base is very, very different from the rural, religious fringe that Kenney is trying to satisfy. Moreover, Notely is focused on winning over centrists while taking her base for granted. Kenney is trying to hold his base while taking centrists for granted.
Notley's challenge: can I appeal to centrists who don't like deficits and tax hikes, without alienating public sector unions who don't like budget cuts?
Kenney's challenge: can I appease rednecks who think the WHO is trying to inject them with microchips, without alienating centrists who want competent government?
This election will really just come down to whether centrists get over their "I just think Conservatives will be better for the economy" bias.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Kenny still has lots of time to pull his head out of his ass, though he needs Covid to actually end soon for that to even be possible.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
Is there any precedent for a premier resigning? Didn’t Redford resign? I mean Kenney hasn’t really had a scandal, but I imagine a pretty significant faction of the UCP are pushing for his resignation.
Also in relation to the economy aspect, the Notley crew did pretty great considering the cards they were dealt. Certainly better than the UCP have done, even considering the virus (the response to which they have bungled worse than any other province).
Also in relation to the economy aspect, the Notley crew did pretty great considering the cards they were dealt. Certainly better than the UCP have done, even considering the virus (the response to which they have bungled worse than any other province).
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Perhaps we have different definitions of this word. He hasn't lacked scandals, he has more resilience to not be taken down by scandals despite being one of the least popular politicians in Alberta's history.
Top of my head of scandal or scandal-adjacent Kenney projects:
- UCP leadership scandal
- COVID handling (in general)
- "Aloha Gate", Sky Palace whiskeys & general inability to set example, follow laws or punish those that don't
- Sole-sourced contract to friends as part of Allan Commission
- Sole-sourced contract to friends as part of the War Room
- Lost $1.5B of public money on bet on the US election
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
Fair enough 
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
If Kenney survives to the election, he’ll be the first PC/WRP/UCP leader to last more than one election since Ralph Klein in 2004. That’s how difficult it has become to lead any conservative party in this province.
ByeByeBaby
Active Member
Lord help me, I've been looking at vaccine data to see what the impact of the $100 incentive is.
If you look at the AB website, you can see that the vaccine doses have been pretty flat since the start of August; they were up to 50-60K per weekday in May and June, then declined substantially in July to around 10K per day. Here's the four weeks of daily vaccine totals before the incentive was announced on September 3; first dose in red second dose in blue (not stacked):
There's a clear day of week effect (Sundays are particularly low), but there's also something of a trend; the first dose is increasing through time and the second dose is decreasing. The overall total is remarkably constant the three weeks before the announcement, but it hides these two trends.
I've estimated a fairly simple model (log-linear form) with parameters for the days of the week and a trend parameter for both the first and second dose using the three weeks of data before the announcement; not all parameters are statistically significant, but I kept them all anyways. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Here's the model with the observed data; it's a pretty good fit. (It should be; there's 21 observations and 8 parameters.)
One challenge with the announcement is that not only are there underlying trends, but it was made the day before a holiday weekend. I assumed that the holiday is better treated as another Sunday than a typical Monday; this is consistent with the August civic holiday where the Sunday had 1232 first doses and 3804 second, and the holiday Monday had 1230 firsts and 3355 second (the Tuesday after the holiday had 2997 firsts and 8449 seconds).
The Alberta website has vaccines through the 8th, but the numbers on the 8th seem a little low so perhaps there's some straggling data reporting. Here's the first five days with the incentive versus the model:
There is a clear spike in both first and second doses, especially the first couple of days after the announcement, this is consistent with more people hearing about the incentive and getting their shots.
This final chart shows the difference between the model and the observed data:
The model is a pretty good fit, and there's a clear bump of several hundred more vaccines per day in the days after the announcement. The filled area represents my best quick estimate of the additional people who got vaccines after the 3rd, and it's probably fair to say most of these are due to the incentive.
Overall, in the first five days there seems to have been roughly 4500 more vaccines provincewide than would be expected based on recent trends; around 3000 more first vaccines and 1500 more second vaccines. (This is consistent with what I would expect; the incentive would be more likely to bring people off the fence than to accelerate people who already found the time for their first shot.)
Unfortunately, because of the free rider problem, everybody who was getting a vaccine in this time period is getting paid -- and remember there are 50,000 vaccines per week. Over these five days -- assuming everyone collects -- there was $1.6 million for first doses and $1.8 million for second doses. That works out to roughly $530 per new (marginal) first dose and $1150 per new second dose, or $740 per new dose (ignoring first or second status). More unfortunately, I'm guessing that the response to the incentive will drop off over time (it seems to in the five days of data we have), so this will likely only get more expensive and less effective.
If you look at the AB website, you can see that the vaccine doses have been pretty flat since the start of August; they were up to 50-60K per weekday in May and June, then declined substantially in July to around 10K per day. Here's the four weeks of daily vaccine totals before the incentive was announced on September 3; first dose in red second dose in blue (not stacked):
There's a clear day of week effect (Sundays are particularly low), but there's also something of a trend; the first dose is increasing through time and the second dose is decreasing. The overall total is remarkably constant the three weeks before the announcement, but it hides these two trends.
I've estimated a fairly simple model (log-linear form) with parameters for the days of the week and a trend parameter for both the first and second dose using the three weeks of data before the announcement; not all parameters are statistically significant, but I kept them all anyways. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Here's the model with the observed data; it's a pretty good fit. (It should be; there's 21 observations and 8 parameters.)
One challenge with the announcement is that not only are there underlying trends, but it was made the day before a holiday weekend. I assumed that the holiday is better treated as another Sunday than a typical Monday; this is consistent with the August civic holiday where the Sunday had 1232 first doses and 3804 second, and the holiday Monday had 1230 firsts and 3355 second (the Tuesday after the holiday had 2997 firsts and 8449 seconds).
The Alberta website has vaccines through the 8th, but the numbers on the 8th seem a little low so perhaps there's some straggling data reporting. Here's the first five days with the incentive versus the model:
There is a clear spike in both first and second doses, especially the first couple of days after the announcement, this is consistent with more people hearing about the incentive and getting their shots.
This final chart shows the difference between the model and the observed data:
The model is a pretty good fit, and there's a clear bump of several hundred more vaccines per day in the days after the announcement. The filled area represents my best quick estimate of the additional people who got vaccines after the 3rd, and it's probably fair to say most of these are due to the incentive.
Overall, in the first five days there seems to have been roughly 4500 more vaccines provincewide than would be expected based on recent trends; around 3000 more first vaccines and 1500 more second vaccines. (This is consistent with what I would expect; the incentive would be more likely to bring people off the fence than to accelerate people who already found the time for their first shot.)
Unfortunately, because of the free rider problem, everybody who was getting a vaccine in this time period is getting paid -- and remember there are 50,000 vaccines per week. Over these five days -- assuming everyone collects -- there was $1.6 million for first doses and $1.8 million for second doses. That works out to roughly $530 per new (marginal) first dose and $1150 per new second dose, or $740 per new dose (ignoring first or second status). More unfortunately, I'm guessing that the response to the incentive will drop off over time (it seems to in the five days of data we have), so this will likely only get more expensive and less effective.
Attachments
darwink
Senior Member
Can’t ignore the spillover from other provinces vaccine passports—they get massive spikes and we get a smaller one since fewer people are directly effected.