Depending on much Mandel can grow the Alberta Party over the next year the 2019 election could prove to be very interesting. I can see a lot of people seriously considering them because they find the NDP either too far left and/or not capable of getting the economy back on track or they find Kenney too socially conservative.

Its one of the reasons my wife and I checked them out. Not saying where we are headed. but Seeing the people in the room that night I can see a very centre party. Now when they have their policy convention, that will be worth noting. My join just to get my voice heard on this.

With the UCP polling around 50% in Alberta, there is really only space for one moderate/ left party in the province if the goal is forming a government. The NDP is well established, especially in Edmonton, and any other party would have a tough time driving NDP support low enough to have a reasonable chance in most ridings. The way I see it, unless the NDP can convince progressive voters to abandon the Liberals and Alberta Party, we are pretty much guaranteed UCP government for the foreseeable future. However, if Notley can sell herself as a moderate, I think she has a much better chance against Kenney than most realize. Remember that Lougheed managed to end Social Credit from a progressive platform. Notley I think has tried to emulate the politics of that time with her centrist positioning and Captain Alberta persona on trans mountain.

What I find funny, being from BC but following AB politics, is how people categorize the AB NDP as "left wing". In any other province, the current AB NDP gov't would probably be considered rather centrist.

Yeah, and other than the carbon tax, if you had put Notley and her policies at the head of a conservative government, you probably wouldn't have seen a fraction of the disgusting vitriol slung at her.

Three years since the Alberta NDP won in a landslide... Hope it happens again next year! Happy Cinco de Mayo...:cool:

Bringing in all of those radicals from B.C. initial to help them get started was something she probably regrets the most. If she had followed her gut like she's doing now--at least I think that's what she's doing--she never would have implemented a carbon tax at this time. Other than that and jacking up the minimum wage so fast she hasn't done that bad. Yeah, the debt is way higher but at least she's still building badly needed infrastructure and us losing out on billions of dollars in royalty payments is more the fault of others than hers.

Depending on how "radical" the UCP platform ends up being after this weekend Rachel could be in a lot better position.

While I personally support a carbon tax, with hindsight it probably wasn't the best idea politically as it didn't appear to achieve the goal of giving us 'social license' to build pipelines. The NDP tried their hardest to do the right thing, cap oilsands emissions and introduce carbon taxes, but this was completely ignored by pipeline opponents. There does seem to have been a shift in opinion recently though in general support over how Notley has handled the pipeline issue specifically in recent months - I think she has handled it as well as could possibly be expected, only ramping up threats as a last resort. I think Jason Kenney's approach of going in guns blazing from the start would have backfired badly and we would be in a worse position.

If the UCP lose the next election, I think it will be for their social policies as they are clearly out of step with the general population. The recent silence and vote walkout on the subject of restricting protests around abortion clinics was not only morally backwards, but utterly cowardly. How pathetic is Kenney if he can't even bring himself, or his party, to defend their moral stance? And they would be the first to tell you that they are paragons of moral virtue.

^ I thought they walked out because they saw the bill as an infringment upon free speech, freedom of expression, freedom to protest.

Anyway, I'm not going to the ballot box next year and voting on a single social issue. In fact, I find it best to just leave social issues out of it all.

I'm so torn on what to do this election.

The NDP are running around like drunken sailors on shore leave spending money the province doesn't have.

The UCP is complete tire fire, it's almost like they took the worst elements of the PC/Wildrose parties and fed it HGH.

Liberals aren't a going concern in Alberta, and probably never will be.

I can't really see the Alberta Party mobilizing quickly enough to present a viable option for 2019.

Is the best outcome a minority of one form or another? :shrug:

There's still a full year to go which is plenty of time for the Alberta Party to get further organized. I can see them even "stealing" away some financial support that would have gone to the UCP after their convention this past weekend. I'm not thrilled that they (AP) have some Nenshi insiders but hopefully they would be overwhelmed by new people who are less radical.

If things don't change drastically by next May or whenever Rachel calls the election--we need to implement true fixed election dates!--then a minority government probably is the best thing.

It would be best to leave social issues out of the picture but the media is already having a field day reliving the Lake of Fire days of 2012. If the UCP is going to win they'll have to beat the NDP and the media.

If that's their position, then vote on it. But they know their social policies are backwards and would be unpopular, so they cower and use lame excuses as to why they are not voting. It's pathetic.

The UCP only have themselves to blame. The NDP introduced a modest and sensible bill, and the UCP couldn't even bring themselves to state their opinion and vote accordingly. If the media criticize them for this, that's completely fine as the troglodytes deserve it.

Why should social issues be left out? They are a big part of society.

You guys that are thinking of voting for the AB Party are nuts.

It's run by Mandel, a PC'er who we kicked out of government! He didn't even win his local riding last time. DO NOT vote this weasel back in, keep him far, far away.

Essentially, the debt incurred by the NDP is the cost to Albertans for removing the PC party. Now it's time to clean it up.

The party clearly wants to make a variety of social issues part of their platform

“You want to be called the Lake of Fire party? This is your opportunity,” warned McIver sounding as if his comments had been written by the NDP. “Don’t be called the Lake of Fire party, I’m begging you. This will really severely hurt our chances at winning. Don’t do that to yourself.”

Another two MLAs pleaded with delegates to vote no.

“We should not go down this road,” said Rimbey-Rocky Mountain House-Sundre MLA Jason Nixon.

“Please vote against this resolution,” added Chestermere-Rocky View MLA Leela Aheer.

But a majority of delegates ignored those pleas and supported the views of Pastor Brian Coldwell, who argued the resolution supported parental rights. “It’s not about anti-gay. It’s about fundamental, God-given freedoms.”


http://edmontonjournal.com/news/poli...vative-pothole

And this is not the media doing this. The columnist who wrote this is as conservative as they get.

The problem they have is not owning it. That they themselves are acting as though it's poison empowers their opponents.
It's what enables the "hidden agenda" narrative, it makes them look like opportunists, and it makes them look spineless.

I'm somewhat socially conservative and I know that some of the social conservative causes are non-starters. But you would think that a conservative party would be willing to actually talk about them and to consider where compromise would make sense.

The problem is that the carbon tax was too closely tied to social licence, and that too much of it went to fund expensive green-ish pet projects. Rebates were necessary politically (and a good seed of a Guaranteed annual income) but it should have been framed as necessary revenue tool to reduce the need for other tax increases. If they would have addressed the revenue hole I'm pretty sure that I would be voting for them again. As it is I'm not sure.

It really does though. The UCP's base coming across as a bigoted, intolerant group will be something that will turn off moderate conservatives and play right into the NDP's talking points

Those people are certainly there, and some of the "Bozo Eruptions" were actually regressive/hateful. Others were simply impolitic. And then there are socially conservative positions that can be rationally defended, rationally debated... All three may inflame the leftist twitterati who were never going to vote conservative ever, but if they could condemn #1, explain and apologize for #2 and actually engage #3 they could actually get some respect from centrists.