Stelmach: voting for the WRA will benefit the Liberals.
Pop quiz: in how many Conservative-won ridings was the Liberal vote at least half of the combined Conservative/WRA vote (i.e. the minimum number that could possibly result in a Conservative/WRA vote split electing a Liberal) in the last election?
Answer: 22
How many of those were outside of Edmonton and Calgary?
Answer: 4. And three of those were St. Albert, Medicine Hat, and Lethbridge West.
So if 100% of the WRA's growth in the next election comes from the P.C.s (a dubious proposition, given the number of voters inclined to vote for the strongest available opposition party, especially in Calgary's current political climate),
and if voting patterns in the last election are a good indicator of voting patterns in the next election,
and if the PC-WRA vote is split in each riding in exactly the way that most benefits the Liberals,
then the Liberals will 31 seats in the next election. That's nearly half of what the P.C.s won in the last one!
Terrifying.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Monday, October 12, 2009
Geez, am I ever out of touch
I didn't even know he was running. But I pretty much reflexively support any candidate who promises to raise taxes, so I wish he'd have stuck around.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Restrain your equines
Before we get too excited about this business of the Wildrose Alliance being the natural successor to the United Farmers of Alberta, Social Credit League, and Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta - parties that came seemingly out of nowhere to topples Alberta dynasties - there are a few things worth remembering:
1. This isn't the first time the Wildrose Alliance has had a seat. Hell, it isn't the first time Paul Hinman's had a seat. He won one in the 2004 election, granted under the banner of the Alberta Alliance rather than the Wildrose Alliance (though the label changed part way through the term, once the Alberta Alliance merged with the Wildrose Party). That was hailed as a brave new threat to the Klein Conservatives on the right. The Alliance had secured a foothold, said conventional wisdom, and the next election might be like 1967, when Peter Lougheed led the hitherto moribund Tories to winning a shocking six seats from the unassailable Ernest Manning. And then 2008 rolled around. The breakthrough did not come. In fact, Hinman lost his seat.
This situation can be distinguished from the last one on a few bases: in 2008, there was a strong feeling of "give Ed a chance", while the sense now is that he's worn out his welcome in a few short years. In 2004, Hinman eked out a narrow victory over Conservative incumbent Bryce Jacobs; in 2009, Hinman blew the Conservative out of the water. 2004's victory was in a rural riding; 2009's was in an urban one, exactly where the WRA wasn't supposed to make inroads. So there are signs that something is indeed happening here, but we ought perhaps to be slightly more deferential to Stephen Stills in evaluating what it is.
2. This isn't the first time a surprising by-election result has been seen as a portent of shocking things on the horizon. In 2007, Liberal Craig Cheffins' victory in Klein's Calgary-Elbow seat was seen as a sign of an imminent Liberal breakthrough in Calgary. In 2008, the Conservatives continued their dominance of the city, including Calgary-Elbow. In 1982, Gordon Kesler of the separatist Western Canada Concept won an Olds-Didsbury by-election handily. That one attracted national attention, just as Hinman's has. Six months later, the WCC ran candidates in 78 of 79 ridings. All of them lost. Kesler's 1,400 by-election victory in Olds-Disbury turned into a 5,800 vote defeat in Highwood. Daryl Jaddock, his replacement as WCC candidate in Olds-Didsbury, lost by 2,300 votes. While conventional wisdom is trumpeting the significance of Hinman's victory, it might remember that it has always maintained, quite correctly, that by-elections are different beasts from general elections.
3. The Progressive Conservatives hold 72 of 83 seats. The Wildrose Alliance holds one. The Conservatives won 53% of the vote in 2008. The Wildrose Alliance won 7%, in what was supposed to be their breakthrough election (by comparison, the Conservatives got 20% in 1967, in what actually *was* their breakthrough election).
It's too early to predict with any accuracy what the 2012 (?) election will bring. But let's not go nuts in the meantime.
1. This isn't the first time the Wildrose Alliance has had a seat. Hell, it isn't the first time Paul Hinman's had a seat. He won one in the 2004 election, granted under the banner of the Alberta Alliance rather than the Wildrose Alliance (though the label changed part way through the term, once the Alberta Alliance merged with the Wildrose Party). That was hailed as a brave new threat to the Klein Conservatives on the right. The Alliance had secured a foothold, said conventional wisdom, and the next election might be like 1967, when Peter Lougheed led the hitherto moribund Tories to winning a shocking six seats from the unassailable Ernest Manning. And then 2008 rolled around. The breakthrough did not come. In fact, Hinman lost his seat.
This situation can be distinguished from the last one on a few bases: in 2008, there was a strong feeling of "give Ed a chance", while the sense now is that he's worn out his welcome in a few short years. In 2004, Hinman eked out a narrow victory over Conservative incumbent Bryce Jacobs; in 2009, Hinman blew the Conservative out of the water. 2004's victory was in a rural riding; 2009's was in an urban one, exactly where the WRA wasn't supposed to make inroads. So there are signs that something is indeed happening here, but we ought perhaps to be slightly more deferential to Stephen Stills in evaluating what it is.
2. This isn't the first time a surprising by-election result has been seen as a portent of shocking things on the horizon. In 2007, Liberal Craig Cheffins' victory in Klein's Calgary-Elbow seat was seen as a sign of an imminent Liberal breakthrough in Calgary. In 2008, the Conservatives continued their dominance of the city, including Calgary-Elbow. In 1982, Gordon Kesler of the separatist Western Canada Concept won an Olds-Didsbury by-election handily. That one attracted national attention, just as Hinman's has. Six months later, the WCC ran candidates in 78 of 79 ridings. All of them lost. Kesler's 1,400 by-election victory in Olds-Disbury turned into a 5,800 vote defeat in Highwood. Daryl Jaddock, his replacement as WCC candidate in Olds-Didsbury, lost by 2,300 votes. While conventional wisdom is trumpeting the significance of Hinman's victory, it might remember that it has always maintained, quite correctly, that by-elections are different beasts from general elections.
3. The Progressive Conservatives hold 72 of 83 seats. The Wildrose Alliance holds one. The Conservatives won 53% of the vote in 2008. The Wildrose Alliance won 7%, in what was supposed to be their breakthrough election (by comparison, the Conservatives got 20% in 1967, in what actually *was* their breakthrough election).
It's too early to predict with any accuracy what the 2012 (?) election will bring. But let's not go nuts in the meantime.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)