Total votes province-wide in Alberta's 2012 General Election. MLA's elected: PC 61, Wildrose 17, Liberal 5, NDP 4.Vote totals in West Central constituencies (Drayton Valley-Calmar, Innisfail-Sylvan Lake, Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills, Red Deer-North, Red Deer-South, Rimbey-Rocky Mountian House, Sundre, Spruce Grove-St. Albert, Stony Plain, West Yellowhead, Whitecourt-Ste. Anne). MLA's elected: PC 7, Wildrose 3.Vote totals in North Alberta constituencies (Athabasca-Sturgeon-Redwater, Barrhead-Morinville-Westlock, Bonnyville-Cold Lake, Fort McMurray-Conklin, Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo, Grande Prairie-Smoky, Grande Prairie-Wapiti, Lac La Biche-St. Paul-Two Hills, Peace River, Dunvegan-Central Peace-Notley, Lesser Slave Lake) MLA's elected: PC 10, Wildrose 1.Vote totals in South Alberta constituencies (Airdrie, Banff-Cochrane, Cardston-Taber-Warner, Chestermere-Rockyview, Cypress-Medicine Hat, Highwood, Lethbridge-East, Lethbridge-West, Little Bow, Livingstone-Macleod, Medicine Hat, Strathmore-Brooks). MLA's elected: Wildrose 8, PC 3.Vote totals in East Central constituencies (Battle River-Wainwright, Drumheller-Stetter, Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville, Lacombe-Ponoka, Leduc-Beaumont, Strathcona-Sherwood Park, Vermilion-Lloydminster, Wetaskiwin-Camrose). MLA's elected: PC 6, Wildrose 2.Vote totals in Edmonton constituencies (including St. Albert and Sherwood Park). MLA's elected: PC 13, NDP 4, Liberal 2Vote totals in Calgary constituencies. MLA's elected: PC 20, Liberal 3, Wildrose 2.
36 replies on “alberta election results 2012: regional breakdown.”
Crunching numbers: the PCs beat Wildrose by about 124,000 votes, about the same number that the Liberals lost compared with the previous election. In short, had those traditionally Liberal voters not abandoned base camp to “strategically” vote PC, the Liberals would likely have at least twice as many seats and be holding the balance of power in Alberta’s first ever minority government legislature. Facepalm.
The NDP is typically quite content with 10% of the popular vote and a caucus that fits in a compact car, but if the Liberal and Alberta parties want to leave the lovable loser division and actually compete for a shot at the title in 2016, it’s time to trash the toxic Liberal name and merge under the Alberta party banner.
Actually, the Liberals lost by 250,000 in 2008
I agree with Herbert that some kind of merger needs to take place. There are too many parties with very similar platforms and ideology. The Redford PCs are the new Liberals … er, I mean “Progressives”. Therefore I would also add that the PCs should drop the word Conservative and merge with the Liberals and Alberta Party to become the Alberta Progressive Party. The Wildrose should add the word Conservative to become the Wildrose Conservative Party. The NDs should take in the Evergreen/Green Party supporters and rename to the New Democratic Green Party.
I like your suggestions, Kim. Works for me.
How can a Party be both Progressive and Conservative at the same time? Is that not an oxymoron?
Beg to differ with the “loveable loser” comment. In the 2008 election, the Alberta Party got 42 votes, as compared to 17,171 this time around. Just by extrapolating to conclude what they could have gotten had they run 87 candidates, we can imagine them to have received approximately, 30,000 votes. I would suggest that growth rate isn’t a losing growth rate.
However, I have to agree that the while “right/left” thingy has shifted under our feet and people who are looking for a moderate centrist approach to politics need to re-evaluate how to move forward. With many NDs now believing the Orange Wave is about to swamp Alberta, getting them to look at finding a tent-of-another-name will be nigh on impossible.
And I know there are lots of Liberals who have visions of somehow getting Albertans to fall in love with their brand again… but come on… it’s been since 1925 and here we go again with 5 seats.
The Alberta Party has the best name in the progressive game. We didn’t do as well as we’d hoped, but we ran respectable campaigns (no bozo moments) and learned a great deal.
And… I rather drop all those tags like “progressive/liberal/conservative/libertarian” and go with names that have less baggage. Then people would actually have to read platform and listen to message.
“How can a Party be both Progressive and Conservative at the same time? Is that not an oxymoron?”
It is in normal life. However, politics is a realm of reality distortion. Politicians can twist themselves in all sorts of shapes and so they can be both progressive and conservative sometimes.
They can also lie very well.
Agree with you mustafa. Nothing is defined in political parties. They make themselves into whatever they think they need to be at any one time. It is interesting to have platforms, then see them dance on the election trail. But usually everything is so general that they can skate j. Elections are not wonky labels, platforms, or policy. Most votes are emotional- brand is familiar, scare issue arises, candidate slips and says or does something wrong, unforeseen tactics such as union pressure. Unfortunate but true.
These are very interesting breakdowns. It shows that the election was much closer than the seats reflect. Does that matter? Time will tell
Great analysis dave
Hey, now that stalwarts like MacDonald and Taft are gone, Liberals will probably end up merging with/consuming the Alberta Party over the next four years – take the name and the brand, combine the teams, and place Sherman or Hehr in as leader, and away we go!
I just wished the campaign like changealberta.ca would have united the left. I get the ethical Delma with a campaign like this AND the results we see for the pc’s ans liberals are ‘strategic voting gone wrong’ but at least it was something
I just wished the campaign like changealberta.ca would have united the left. I get the ethical Delma with a campaign like this AND the results we see for the pc’s ans liberals are ‘strategic voting gone wrong’ but at least it was something
In response to Reality Check, while you are right about the PC margin of victory over the Libs (approx. 500,000 to 250,000) in 2008, my statement was that the Liberal vote in 2012 was about 124,000 lower than it was in 2008.
And Will, your points are well taken but the fact remains that your team was the only one represented in the last legislature that was shut out in this election – zero seats, tied with the SoCreds, Separatists, Commies and EverGreens. I urge a merge; the Liberal/Alberta parties’ Judean People’s Front vs. People’s Front of Judea shtick is stale. Frankly, had the two parties merged a year or two ago under your team’s name, Monday’s election could well have been a three way race.
As someone with political experience, I don’t think progressive and conservative are oxymorons – rather its a reality of politics today. One day the people plead to control spending, lower taxes etc… then when you introduce measures to do just that, perhaps a rise in user fees for the arena for example -the exact same people are at your door asking how dare you! The people want taxes to be lower, certain taxes to be canceled but they also want more – more infastructure, better access to health care, more services. If you cut a program your a big bad conservative. If you spend on program your a nasty progressive. And its the exact same people calling you both names.
Hummm seems every one wants change but after 41 years no one is really willing to let the ball roll….. Once change starts its easier to create more change.
Smal ltown mayor- think you have some big time experience!
It is so true. Look at the election results: the voters were outraged at the transistional allowances of those who chose not to run again, the no meet pay, and the contracts and employment to party connections. But then they voted for bad Behavior again. Now there is outrage over the transistional payments for again. When you reward bad behavior, it repeats
Uses everyone wants something, then you say you have to pay for it, and then boy they get angry- best line is- its the goats responsibility- well yes, but it is the taxpayer who has to pay. I have never figured out why there is such a disconnect. Nice to have stuff, but you have to pay for stuff. And when it comes to cuts, everyone points at the other guy- not my program, it’s too important. Everyone is for cuts, as long as it does not affect them. And politicians play to both sides. It is too bad we could not have grown up discussions about govt and what it should and should not be doing. There are some lessons to be learned from the European collapse – will we learn them before we get to that state of affairs?
Small town mayor probably knows the answer
“…How can a Party be both Progressive and Conservative at the same time? Is that not an oxymoron?…” Not with a modicum of knowledge about Canadian history. At Confederation, and for years afterwards, the party of John A. Macdonald was known as the “Liberal-Conservative Party”. This was because it arose in pre-Confederation Canada (now Ontario & Quebec) out of a merger between traditional Conservatives and pro-confederation Liberals. They later dropped the “Liberal-” tag. Then, in 1942, they added the prefix “Progressive” as a condition of Manitoba Premier John Bracken, a leader of the Progressive Party, joining the Conservative party. The Progressive Party, while mildly centre-leftish in its economic policies, also incorporated some of the neo-conservative populist ideas we now associate with federal Reform & Alberta’s Wildrose parties, like a distrust of party discipline and the sense of Western alienation.
Jerrymac- thanks. That was a nice review of ki story. Thanks again for posting it
Sorry- I meant history
Progressive Conservative is not an oxymoron. It describes Canadian centrism very well. At the moment, three political parties fit somewhere in the realm of socially progressive and fiscally conservative. Nationally, the NDP is moving into this space and you’ll probably see the Wildrose find a unique spot on this continuum as well, over the next few years.
Alberta party got 17,171 votes.
What’s that, about 1 vote for every 25 tweets?
Excellent analysis, something to bookmark and review for gems.
If the Alberta Party has such an exciting name and it’s pastel colors are so pleasing why are not many Albertans changing their vote?
The PC political machine is mighty and Alison Redford makes a Great Propoganda Queen who uses emotional fear marketing to heights never seen in Alberta since WWII.
The day any party becomes a threat to the PC’s is when they attack viciously.
Alberta Liberals have with stood many kicks but none as hurtful as having our own Liberals voting for Alison and watching Liberals get beet up in the polls.
The PC’s are the bad guy not the Wildrose who have never been in power.
Rene, Alison Redford’s message was clear and consistent throughout the campaign: The choice is between a party looking to the future, or a party fixated on fighting past battles already lost. I believe that was a fair statement and the electorate in their collective wisdom agreed. Liberals and NDs can continue jumping up and down trying to be noticed, the fact is history shows there’s never been much appetite for either party in Alberta, and apparently still isn’t much.
The Liberals really need to consider if they have anywhere left to move on the spectrum. They tried everything since being ousted in 1921(!). In recent years they have ran as a centre-right party coming to clean up after a big-spending PC party and they lost (1989, 1993). They ran as a centre-left party that would fix the damage done by a rightist, budget-cutting PC party (1997-2001), and they have run from the centre-left when the PC party is also leaning to the centre (2004, 2008) or even left (2012), by basically promising to outspend the big spenders. Each time they have been beaten, and not by small margins. This is not a slight against their strategy or integrity, but it suggests that something is wrong here.
Now the NDs have been equally hopeless but you kind expect that from a party with a history of zeal for an ideology Albertans have never warmed to (socialism). The Liberals have never had much time for ideology federally or in other provinces, where they have always been about following the political winds and gaining power. Without the prospect of power to sustain them, how much futility are Liberal donors and volunteers willing to endure? Also keep in mind that the federal Liberals have been practically shut out of Alberta for almost a century, and you begin to see that perhaps it’s the name (and the baggage associated with it) that is the problem.
I think the Alberta Party, likewise, should be open to a merger since it’s clear that the political scene is too crowded right now for them to make inroads. Ultimately if the NDs or EG were willing to join in merger talks, that would be all to the better.
I am considering taking out a Grit membership to go with my AB Party one so I can propose the merger at every meeting they have.
Now the NDs have been equally hopeless but you kind expect that from a party with a history of zeal for an ideology Albertans have never warmed to (socialism). The Liberals have never had much time for ideology federally or in other provinces, where they have always been about following the political winds and gaining power. Without the prospect of power to sustain them, how much futility are Liberal donors and volunteers willing to endure? Also keep in mind that the federal Liberals have been practically shut out of Alberta for almost a century, and you begin to see that perhaps it’s the name (and the baggage associated with it) that is the problem.
I think the Alberta Party, likewise, should be open to a merger since it’s clear that the political scene is too crowded right now for them to make inroads. Ultimately if the NDs or EG were willing to join in merger talks, that would be all to the better.
I am considering taking out a Grit membership to go with my AB Party one so I can propose the merger at every meeting they have.
Tom, the fear factor never came out until the last week. TV adds were every 5 minutes. Every radio channel in Alberta carried the message Beware of Danielle Smith and Wildrose Party.
It will not matter if the oposition is NDP, Liberal, Alberta Party, Rhino Party, or the Wildrose, if they are a threat to the PC’s they will be attacked. Not unique to Liberals or NDP.
Amazing how Redford was upset about the RCMP yet, Alberta Sheriffs are increasingly taking over RCMP and local forces jobs. Or Dani bucks…already done by PC’s remember Ralph bucks.
Or racist remarks, what about Ralph’s remarks about the homeless? Or NEP which Alison is now working out–that was a bad Liberal idea.
Yep, Alison is Propoganda Queeen of the Century.
@KJB
If there is to be a merger, I would want the Grits to join with the EG party. They stand for something.
not the Alberta Party who simply want to listen!
Alberta Party members were not satisfied with the Alberta Liberals and other parties they came from so why would they want to join up again?
The NDP said no to join. So its the Evergreen or join the Wildrose to take down the Progressive Conservatives.
@Rene
I would have been happy if the PCs would have lost, b/c 41 years in office is unhealthy for democracy. But WR has to offer something that centerists can be interested in, otherwise it won’t happen. As bad as we want change, it has to be progress not regress.
For the time being centrists are better served by building the AB Party into an alternative to the PCs.
Hi KJB,
Agree with you on the PC’s being in power too long. So long that AB universitys are giving donations etc. would never happen in any other province in Canada.
And building AP, absolutely not. Any party that is looking to dismantle another party to increase their membership is not for me.
Alberta did not need another political party at this time. I would vote Wildrose before tories or AP.
True Grit here.
[…] Daveberta beat me to posting regional numbers, and this table gets at the same idea, but his compiles the aggregate vote totals in a region, whereas I compare popular vote averages across regions. I compiled similar tables for the 2008 election, which can be seen here. (See the bottom of this post for some notes on methodology.) […]
Yes! The Alberta Party achieved success like never before. With focussed campaigns in target areas we did really well. The nasty vote splitting from other Parties cost us seats, but after they merge with us we will prevail! We already had calls of support from NDP and Liberals who want to jump on board.
And so it begins — all the centre-left parties making their plans for how “it’s going to be different as we continue to work alone …. next election.” How often have those of us old enough to have been around the block a few times have heard this said! (But of course, those who cannot learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.)
Let me ask this. If your special and perfect party were lucky enough to win power, how on earth do you think it would hold onto it if it is not able to sit down at a table, discuss, negotiate, argue, compromise, banter, suggest, assuage, deal-make, cooperate, delegate, and generally work with other power groups? Perhaps THIS is the reason why Albertans never vote for any of these parties in large numbers – they sense the immaturity and inability of these parties, their execs, and leaders to negotiate anything, which means they would give poor governance.
Those voting in the Ps (not the PCs) won the election and will now have to live with it. Unfortunately, those of us who rejected the Ps won’t have another opportunity to voice our opinion for another four years. Let’s hope that by this time, there will be a choice of a strong/pragmatic/credible centrist party that is neither dysfunctionally P nor dysfunctionally socially conservative. The AB Party still has a political framework – all it needs is the people that will make it work. Many of those who were early promoters of the existing AB Party must have decided to throw in with the Ps (where they were likely more at home anyway).
The only option left for now is to become part of one or more lobby groups as the Ps are great in governing by knee jerk reactions. Those who chose not to vote may as well be counted as voters for the Ps.
Let’s keep a running count of all the schools that become fully renovated under Redford as well as the 50 new schools – all done without a provincial sales tax. And this is only one of Redford’s ludicrous election promises.
Unfortunately, it will be very hard to hold the pc’s feet to the fire as I still cannot figure out what her promises really were, and who speaks for her! She was ” going to run on the budget”, then threw 50 schools and 70 renos in, told the docs she would evaluate clinic model pilots with them, and then announced 140 more ( docs went into apoplexy),. But then Stephen carterhones into the ruther
Ford show and says it is only true for schools and clinics IF and when there is a surplus, but then she was in the paper the day after the election saying she had to get going on the 50 schools to have them completed in 3 years. So when is the real promise going to stand up. I have a feeling that she and her staff have left all the room to skate either way!
What happens if the RCMP finds the robo call boiler room was paid for by the PC- is this room for by election as she said she would not tolerate dirty tricks ( not saying it was the PC- just running the what if).
Payback of no meet- will not happen! Suspension of transistion- cannot happen cause it is not her decision. What is the scale? When first mentioned way back when, it was to be released before the election, then it wasn’t.
So I actually have no idea what she stands for except National Energy Strategy. Should go read this on the website- it is more than oil, it is all energy. Some of it made my hair stand up, so good luck. There seems to be carbon cap and trade- will this become a mechanism to redistribute AB wealth to Ontario? After all, if anyone cares to look at the original UN stuff on global warming, it was in fact engineered to redistribute wealth from wealthy to poor countries.
Oh and read the article by Lovelace , the father of climate change who at 92 indicates that he should not have been so ” alarmist” or ” extremist”. ( univ of Edinburgh ). And perhaps that is why the IPCC is in such a disgrace ( but why let facts get in the way).
So again will the real “Redford agenda” stand up. Actually don’t care what it is, just want to know what to measure her performance against. I suspect it will be against ” thin air and lawyer speak”l
Last thing – the percent votes should have translated into a closer seat count than it did- will that matter?
[…] Wildrose Critics The new Wildrose Official Opposition Caucus captured some earned media this week by releasing their list of critic positions. Leader Danielle Smith will take personal responsibility for “Cities” (i.e.: Calgary and Edmonton), where her party faired poorly during the recent election. […]
[…] Wildrose Party was also strongly rebuked in Edmonton, where in total votes it placed behind both the Progressive Conservatives and the New Democrats. Voters in only one urban Edmonton-area constituency gave the party more than 30% support (in […]
36 replies on “alberta election results 2012: regional breakdown.”
Crunching numbers: the PCs beat Wildrose by about 124,000 votes, about the same number that the Liberals lost compared with the previous election. In short, had those traditionally Liberal voters not abandoned base camp to “strategically” vote PC, the Liberals would likely have at least twice as many seats and be holding the balance of power in Alberta’s first ever minority government legislature. Facepalm.
The NDP is typically quite content with 10% of the popular vote and a caucus that fits in a compact car, but if the Liberal and Alberta parties want to leave the lovable loser division and actually compete for a shot at the title in 2016, it’s time to trash the toxic Liberal name and merge under the Alberta party banner.
Actually, the Liberals lost by 250,000 in 2008
I agree with Herbert that some kind of merger needs to take place. There are too many parties with very similar platforms and ideology. The Redford PCs are the new Liberals … er, I mean “Progressives”. Therefore I would also add that the PCs should drop the word Conservative and merge with the Liberals and Alberta Party to become the Alberta Progressive Party. The Wildrose should add the word Conservative to become the Wildrose Conservative Party. The NDs should take in the Evergreen/Green Party supporters and rename to the New Democratic Green Party.
I like your suggestions, Kim. Works for me.
How can a Party be both Progressive and Conservative at the same time? Is that not an oxymoron?
Beg to differ with the “loveable loser” comment. In the 2008 election, the Alberta Party got 42 votes, as compared to 17,171 this time around. Just by extrapolating to conclude what they could have gotten had they run 87 candidates, we can imagine them to have received approximately, 30,000 votes. I would suggest that growth rate isn’t a losing growth rate.
However, I have to agree that the while “right/left” thingy has shifted under our feet and people who are looking for a moderate centrist approach to politics need to re-evaluate how to move forward. With many NDs now believing the Orange Wave is about to swamp Alberta, getting them to look at finding a tent-of-another-name will be nigh on impossible.
And I know there are lots of Liberals who have visions of somehow getting Albertans to fall in love with their brand again… but come on… it’s been since 1925 and here we go again with 5 seats.
The Alberta Party has the best name in the progressive game. We didn’t do as well as we’d hoped, but we ran respectable campaigns (no bozo moments) and learned a great deal.
And… I rather drop all those tags like “progressive/liberal/conservative/libertarian” and go with names that have less baggage. Then people would actually have to read platform and listen to message.
“How can a Party be both Progressive and Conservative at the same time? Is that not an oxymoron?”
It is in normal life. However, politics is a realm of reality distortion. Politicians can twist themselves in all sorts of shapes and so they can be both progressive and conservative sometimes.
They can also lie very well.
Agree with you mustafa. Nothing is defined in political parties. They make themselves into whatever they think they need to be at any one time. It is interesting to have platforms, then see them dance on the election trail. But usually everything is so general that they can skate j. Elections are not wonky labels, platforms, or policy. Most votes are emotional- brand is familiar, scare issue arises, candidate slips and says or does something wrong, unforeseen tactics such as union pressure. Unfortunate but true.
These are very interesting breakdowns. It shows that the election was much closer than the seats reflect. Does that matter? Time will tell
Great analysis dave
Hey, now that stalwarts like MacDonald and Taft are gone, Liberals will probably end up merging with/consuming the Alberta Party over the next four years – take the name and the brand, combine the teams, and place Sherman or Hehr in as leader, and away we go!
I just wished the campaign like changealberta.ca would have united the left. I get the ethical Delma with a campaign like this AND the results we see for the pc’s ans liberals are ‘strategic voting gone wrong’ but at least it was something
I just wished the campaign like changealberta.ca would have united the left. I get the ethical Delma with a campaign like this AND the results we see for the pc’s ans liberals are ‘strategic voting gone wrong’ but at least it was something
In response to Reality Check, while you are right about the PC margin of victory over the Libs (approx. 500,000 to 250,000) in 2008, my statement was that the Liberal vote in 2012 was about 124,000 lower than it was in 2008.
And Will, your points are well taken but the fact remains that your team was the only one represented in the last legislature that was shut out in this election – zero seats, tied with the SoCreds, Separatists, Commies and EverGreens. I urge a merge; the Liberal/Alberta parties’ Judean People’s Front vs. People’s Front of Judea shtick is stale. Frankly, had the two parties merged a year or two ago under your team’s name, Monday’s election could well have been a three way race.
As someone with political experience, I don’t think progressive and conservative are oxymorons – rather its a reality of politics today. One day the people plead to control spending, lower taxes etc… then when you introduce measures to do just that, perhaps a rise in user fees for the arena for example -the exact same people are at your door asking how dare you! The people want taxes to be lower, certain taxes to be canceled but they also want more – more infastructure, better access to health care, more services. If you cut a program your a big bad conservative. If you spend on program your a nasty progressive. And its the exact same people calling you both names.
Hummm seems every one wants change but after 41 years no one is really willing to let the ball roll….. Once change starts its easier to create more change.
Smal ltown mayor- think you have some big time experience!
It is so true. Look at the election results: the voters were outraged at the transistional allowances of those who chose not to run again, the no meet pay, and the contracts and employment to party connections. But then they voted for bad Behavior again. Now there is outrage over the transistional payments for again. When you reward bad behavior, it repeats
Uses everyone wants something, then you say you have to pay for it, and then boy they get angry- best line is- its the goats responsibility- well yes, but it is the taxpayer who has to pay. I have never figured out why there is such a disconnect. Nice to have stuff, but you have to pay for stuff. And when it comes to cuts, everyone points at the other guy- not my program, it’s too important. Everyone is for cuts, as long as it does not affect them. And politicians play to both sides. It is too bad we could not have grown up discussions about govt and what it should and should not be doing. There are some lessons to be learned from the European collapse – will we learn them before we get to that state of affairs?
Small town mayor probably knows the answer
“…How can a Party be both Progressive and Conservative at the same time? Is that not an oxymoron?…” Not with a modicum of knowledge about Canadian history. At Confederation, and for years afterwards, the party of John A. Macdonald was known as the “Liberal-Conservative Party”. This was because it arose in pre-Confederation Canada (now Ontario & Quebec) out of a merger between traditional Conservatives and pro-confederation Liberals. They later dropped the “Liberal-” tag. Then, in 1942, they added the prefix “Progressive” as a condition of Manitoba Premier John Bracken, a leader of the Progressive Party, joining the Conservative party. The Progressive Party, while mildly centre-leftish in its economic policies, also incorporated some of the neo-conservative populist ideas we now associate with federal Reform & Alberta’s Wildrose parties, like a distrust of party discipline and the sense of Western alienation.
Jerrymac- thanks. That was a nice review of ki story. Thanks again for posting it
Sorry- I meant history
Progressive Conservative is not an oxymoron. It describes Canadian centrism very well. At the moment, three political parties fit somewhere in the realm of socially progressive and fiscally conservative. Nationally, the NDP is moving into this space and you’ll probably see the Wildrose find a unique spot on this continuum as well, over the next few years.
Alberta party got 17,171 votes.
What’s that, about 1 vote for every 25 tweets?
Excellent analysis, something to bookmark and review for gems.
If the Alberta Party has such an exciting name and it’s pastel colors are so pleasing why are not many Albertans changing their vote?
The PC political machine is mighty and Alison Redford makes a Great Propoganda Queen who uses emotional fear marketing to heights never seen in Alberta since WWII.
The day any party becomes a threat to the PC’s is when they attack viciously.
Alberta Liberals have with stood many kicks but none as hurtful as having our own Liberals voting for Alison and watching Liberals get beet up in the polls.
The PC’s are the bad guy not the Wildrose who have never been in power.
Rene, Alison Redford’s message was clear and consistent throughout the campaign: The choice is between a party looking to the future, or a party fixated on fighting past battles already lost. I believe that was a fair statement and the electorate in their collective wisdom agreed. Liberals and NDs can continue jumping up and down trying to be noticed, the fact is history shows there’s never been much appetite for either party in Alberta, and apparently still isn’t much.
The Liberals really need to consider if they have anywhere left to move on the spectrum. They tried everything since being ousted in 1921(!). In recent years they have ran as a centre-right party coming to clean up after a big-spending PC party and they lost (1989, 1993). They ran as a centre-left party that would fix the damage done by a rightist, budget-cutting PC party (1997-2001), and they have run from the centre-left when the PC party is also leaning to the centre (2004, 2008) or even left (2012), by basically promising to outspend the big spenders. Each time they have been beaten, and not by small margins. This is not a slight against their strategy or integrity, but it suggests that something is wrong here.
Now the NDs have been equally hopeless but you kind expect that from a party with a history of zeal for an ideology Albertans have never warmed to (socialism). The Liberals have never had much time for ideology federally or in other provinces, where they have always been about following the political winds and gaining power. Without the prospect of power to sustain them, how much futility are Liberal donors and volunteers willing to endure? Also keep in mind that the federal Liberals have been practically shut out of Alberta for almost a century, and you begin to see that perhaps it’s the name (and the baggage associated with it) that is the problem.
I think the Alberta Party, likewise, should be open to a merger since it’s clear that the political scene is too crowded right now for them to make inroads. Ultimately if the NDs or EG were willing to join in merger talks, that would be all to the better.
I am considering taking out a Grit membership to go with my AB Party one so I can propose the merger at every meeting they have.
Now the NDs have been equally hopeless but you kind expect that from a party with a history of zeal for an ideology Albertans have never warmed to (socialism). The Liberals have never had much time for ideology federally or in other provinces, where they have always been about following the political winds and gaining power. Without the prospect of power to sustain them, how much futility are Liberal donors and volunteers willing to endure? Also keep in mind that the federal Liberals have been practically shut out of Alberta for almost a century, and you begin to see that perhaps it’s the name (and the baggage associated with it) that is the problem.
I think the Alberta Party, likewise, should be open to a merger since it’s clear that the political scene is too crowded right now for them to make inroads. Ultimately if the NDs or EG were willing to join in merger talks, that would be all to the better.
I am considering taking out a Grit membership to go with my AB Party one so I can propose the merger at every meeting they have.
Tom, the fear factor never came out until the last week. TV adds were every 5 minutes. Every radio channel in Alberta carried the message Beware of Danielle Smith and Wildrose Party.
It will not matter if the oposition is NDP, Liberal, Alberta Party, Rhino Party, or the Wildrose, if they are a threat to the PC’s they will be attacked. Not unique to Liberals or NDP.
Amazing how Redford was upset about the RCMP yet, Alberta Sheriffs are increasingly taking over RCMP and local forces jobs. Or Dani bucks…already done by PC’s remember Ralph bucks.
Or racist remarks, what about Ralph’s remarks about the homeless? Or NEP which Alison is now working out–that was a bad Liberal idea.
Yep, Alison is Propoganda Queeen of the Century.
@KJB
If there is to be a merger, I would want the Grits to join with the EG party. They stand for something.
not the Alberta Party who simply want to listen!
Alberta Party members were not satisfied with the Alberta Liberals and other parties they came from so why would they want to join up again?
The NDP said no to join. So its the Evergreen or join the Wildrose to take down the Progressive Conservatives.
@Rene
I would have been happy if the PCs would have lost, b/c 41 years in office is unhealthy for democracy. But WR has to offer something that centerists can be interested in, otherwise it won’t happen. As bad as we want change, it has to be progress not regress.
For the time being centrists are better served by building the AB Party into an alternative to the PCs.
Hi KJB,
Agree with you on the PC’s being in power too long. So long that AB universitys are giving donations etc. would never happen in any other province in Canada.
And building AP, absolutely not. Any party that is looking to dismantle another party to increase their membership is not for me.
Alberta did not need another political party at this time. I would vote Wildrose before tories or AP.
True Grit here.
[…] Daveberta beat me to posting regional numbers, and this table gets at the same idea, but his compiles the aggregate vote totals in a region, whereas I compare popular vote averages across regions. I compiled similar tables for the 2008 election, which can be seen here. (See the bottom of this post for some notes on methodology.) […]
Yes! The Alberta Party achieved success like never before. With focussed campaigns in target areas we did really well. The nasty vote splitting from other Parties cost us seats, but after they merge with us we will prevail! We already had calls of support from NDP and Liberals who want to jump on board.
And so it begins — all the centre-left parties making their plans for how “it’s going to be different as we continue to work alone …. next election.” How often have those of us old enough to have been around the block a few times have heard this said! (But of course, those who cannot learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.)
Let me ask this. If your special and perfect party were lucky enough to win power, how on earth do you think it would hold onto it if it is not able to sit down at a table, discuss, negotiate, argue, compromise, banter, suggest, assuage, deal-make, cooperate, delegate, and generally work with other power groups? Perhaps THIS is the reason why Albertans never vote for any of these parties in large numbers – they sense the immaturity and inability of these parties, their execs, and leaders to negotiate anything, which means they would give poor governance.
Those voting in the Ps (not the PCs) won the election and will now have to live with it. Unfortunately, those of us who rejected the Ps won’t have another opportunity to voice our opinion for another four years. Let’s hope that by this time, there will be a choice of a strong/pragmatic/credible centrist party that is neither dysfunctionally P nor dysfunctionally socially conservative. The AB Party still has a political framework – all it needs is the people that will make it work. Many of those who were early promoters of the existing AB Party must have decided to throw in with the Ps (where they were likely more at home anyway).
The only option left for now is to become part of one or more lobby groups as the Ps are great in governing by knee jerk reactions. Those who chose not to vote may as well be counted as voters for the Ps.
Let’s keep a running count of all the schools that become fully renovated under Redford as well as the 50 new schools – all done without a provincial sales tax. And this is only one of Redford’s ludicrous election promises.
Unfortunately, it will be very hard to hold the pc’s feet to the fire as I still cannot figure out what her promises really were, and who speaks for her! She was ” going to run on the budget”, then threw 50 schools and 70 renos in, told the docs she would evaluate clinic model pilots with them, and then announced 140 more ( docs went into apoplexy),. But then Stephen carterhones into the ruther
Ford show and says it is only true for schools and clinics IF and when there is a surplus, but then she was in the paper the day after the election saying she had to get going on the 50 schools to have them completed in 3 years. So when is the real promise going to stand up. I have a feeling that she and her staff have left all the room to skate either way!
What happens if the RCMP finds the robo call boiler room was paid for by the PC- is this room for by election as she said she would not tolerate dirty tricks ( not saying it was the PC- just running the what if).
Payback of no meet- will not happen! Suspension of transistion- cannot happen cause it is not her decision. What is the scale? When first mentioned way back when, it was to be released before the election, then it wasn’t.
So I actually have no idea what she stands for except National Energy Strategy. Should go read this on the website- it is more than oil, it is all energy. Some of it made my hair stand up, so good luck. There seems to be carbon cap and trade- will this become a mechanism to redistribute AB wealth to Ontario? After all, if anyone cares to look at the original UN stuff on global warming, it was in fact engineered to redistribute wealth from wealthy to poor countries.
Oh and read the article by Lovelace , the father of climate change who at 92 indicates that he should not have been so ” alarmist” or ” extremist”. ( univ of Edinburgh ). And perhaps that is why the IPCC is in such a disgrace ( but why let facts get in the way).
So again will the real “Redford agenda” stand up. Actually don’t care what it is, just want to know what to measure her performance against. I suspect it will be against ” thin air and lawyer speak”l
Last thing – the percent votes should have translated into a closer seat count than it did- will that matter?
[…] Wildrose Critics The new Wildrose Official Opposition Caucus captured some earned media this week by releasing their list of critic positions. Leader Danielle Smith will take personal responsibility for “Cities” (i.e.: Calgary and Edmonton), where her party faired poorly during the recent election. […]
[…] Wildrose Party was also strongly rebuked in Edmonton, where in total votes it placed behind both the Progressive Conservatives and the New Democrats. Voters in only one urban Edmonton-area constituency gave the party more than 30% support (in […]