I had the opportunity to meet and talk with over 100 Wildrose Alliance Party members yesterday at their Leadership Convention in Edmonton. I was asked by the WAP Executive Director to do a presentation on social media, a subject that stirs my political passions. As an unrepentant Red Tory I wondered if the WAP (and I) knew what we were getting into but it was a very enjoyable event for me and the feedback on Twitter and face-to-face makes me believe the feeling was mutual.
The leadership campaign of Danielle Smith took over 75% of the membership support, a very conclusive result for sure. Congratulations are in order and I have to admire any citizen, regardless of stripe, who offers their time and talent as a political candidate in the service of the greater public good. The media was all over this party leadership, partly because of the strong showing in the Calgary Glenmore by election and the dismal third place shellacking the Stelmach PC’s endured.
The December 2008 Alberta Liberal leadership got minimal media coverage by comparison but the times were very different then. The melting Alberta economy was in full flight as the recession cum depression and commodity price collapse dominated the headlines. The WAP did not have the same media headline competition and in fact became the political story for a month or so before the leadership convention.
The leadership campaign voter and party membership numbers from both of these contests are underwhelming. In both the Liberal and WAP contest only about 71% of the members bothered to show up to vote. Does that mean 30% of those Albertans who paid for the party membership did so just to get the party membership seller off their back? Likely!
The Liberals only sold 6258 party membership for their leadership contest and 4599 of them bothered to vote. The WAP sold just over 11,600 party memberships and 8296 of them bothered to vote. The new leader of the WAP, Danielle Smith took over 75% of the voter turnout with 6295 ballots. One needs to put 6300 party supporters in perspective. Consider that in the 2008 Alberta election 37 winners in individual constituencies had more supporters than Smith did based on the entire province.
The WAP today is a long way from any reality as an alternative to the power of the Progressive Conservative support. The WAP knows that but the next election is 3 years away, coincidentally the same time Premier Stelmach recently predicted in his TV fireside speech that provincial surpluses would return.
One other very interesting implication from the WAP leadership was the party’s reluctance and tactical maneuvering to avoid disclosing the vote results. The pre-count concession by the very socially conservative candidate Mark Dyrholm was used as an excuse to avoid disclosing the vote results. They eventually unenthusiastically released the count. In fact as I write this, almost 24 hours later, the vote count is still not on the WAP website, just linked to the blog post of the Executive Director.
For the record, Smith got 6295 votes and Dyrholm got 1905 votes. This is a dramatic rejection of the anti-abortion, anti-homosexual, patriarchal, family-values political agenda of the far right base of the party mergers that became the Wildrose Alliance. Interestingly Dyrholm in a province-wide leadership campaign got fewer votes than Craig Chandler did in his third place finish the 2008 election in Calgary Egmont. OUCH!
This leadership rejection result will not sit well with the traditionalist base of the new WAP and I can’t see them going away quietly. Appeasement of socially conservative political agenda will be one of Smith’s first and toughest challenges as the WAP goes about the Province the hammer out a policy platform. There is already a WAP platform on their website that induced over 11000 Albertans to join up. What does Smith want to see changed, why and to what?
So now the WAP is a new party, with a new seat and a new leader. I think we need some hardnosed political perspective on the implications of this new party. I encourage every Albertan who is concerned about the future of this province to read the WAP policy platform and to reflect upon how it aligns with their values. If you agree, get on board with the WAP. If you disagree, you have a more complex set of political participation questions to consider.
What if the PC's send Premier Stelmach a harsh political message at the November 7th party leadership review? That will that trigger more dramatic consequences for Alberta than what happened at the WAP leadership tussle yesterday. Time for Albertans to get ready for any one of a range of possible scenarios coming out of that crucial vote. What the PC party says to Premier Stelmach then will promise to have a serious impact on all of us right now. That political conversation will be happening mostly on Twitter at #PCAGM so sign up and tune in.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Harper Cons Put Party Logo on a "Ceremonial" Federal Government Grant Cheque
This is not governing - it is just cheap political gamesmanship. Harper government putting a PC logo on a federal government cheque is not proper. Can we ever come to trust these guys to do what is best for Canada and not just politrical power. Sure it was a "ceremonial" grant cheque because the real thing would never be allowed by the administration.
Come Mr. Prime Minister, these are tough times. Think about us as a country as you go about the nation spending borrowed money that future generations will have to repay for years. This is not just your public relations stunt platform, it is about the viability and ability of the country to survive the worst recession in 70 years.
Who in their right minds can trust this bunch when they constantly pull such stupid and insipid pranks?
Come Mr. Prime Minister, these are tough times. Think about us as a country as you go about the nation spending borrowed money that future generations will have to repay for years. This is not just your public relations stunt platform, it is about the viability and ability of the country to survive the worst recession in 70 years.
Who in their right minds can trust this bunch when they constantly pull such stupid and insipid pranks?
Obama and the Problematic Prize
My friend David Kilgour published this piece in the Washington Post last week. I picked it up on The Mark News site, where I contribute a thought or two on occasion.
David does a short and precise analysis of the context surrounding President Obama's winning of the Nobel Peace Prize. He questions the the wisdom of the award and even more so, its acceptance.
Obama has done a great job of undoing much of the hate and harm inherent in the former Bush administration. His commitment to a bi-partisan solution to issues like healthcare reform have mistakenly assumed a rational Republican response. Criticism of Obama's policy accomplishments after only 9 months in office are premature at best.
Repubicans are stuck in the adversarial model of politics. The don't want the best policy or even a good policy, they only want to win the political argument about the policy. The power Obama holds in control of the White House, the Senate and the House. This will soon result in President Obama exerting some pure political muscle to make things happen.
Coddling conservatives for consensus is past. President Obama can silence his critics by flexing his political power to serve the purposes for which he was elected in the first place.
David does a short and precise analysis of the context surrounding President Obama's winning of the Nobel Peace Prize. He questions the the wisdom of the award and even more so, its acceptance.
Obama has done a great job of undoing much of the hate and harm inherent in the former Bush administration. His commitment to a bi-partisan solution to issues like healthcare reform have mistakenly assumed a rational Republican response. Criticism of Obama's policy accomplishments after only 9 months in office are premature at best.
Repubicans are stuck in the adversarial model of politics. The don't want the best policy or even a good policy, they only want to win the political argument about the policy. The power Obama holds in control of the White House, the Senate and the House. This will soon result in President Obama exerting some pure political muscle to make things happen.
Coddling conservatives for consensus is past. President Obama can silence his critics by flexing his political power to serve the purposes for which he was elected in the first place.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Today the WAP is Far From a Serious Threat to Stelmach, but Tomorrow?
I have been following the media on the class project poll on Albertan's voter intentions now, over two years in advance of a practical reality of an actual election. Some perspective needs to be put on all this. First, the results are meaningless in any practical sense of measuing voter intention when voters don't intend to vote when the question is asked. What the polls does say, is the obvious, Albertans are tiring of what they are seeing as the ineptness of the Stelmach governance approach.
So what! The media coverage of the Glenmore by election, the pending Wildrose leadership vote and speculation on the outcome add a publicity presence that amplifies voter attention. But that is a far cry from settling voter intention when there is no election in the offing. Take the results of such polls as good gossip fodder but not much more.
This poll, and its results, could use a bit more scrutiny than the MSM has had the time, space or inclination to give it. I found the results very interesting, especially if you go beyond the sound bite level of analysis. The methodology in the study says they took the sample of 1,201. The admittedly deemed some sample numbers by "statistically weighted where necessary to even better reflect the demographic distribuion of the Alberta population." This means where the sample size for gender, for example, was not reflective of the population in a region the researchers took the small unrepresentative sample size they had and apparently boosted its relative impact to make it look like it was reflective of the actual gender distribution of 50/50. Why not do the job right and stay sampling in the region until you got a real gender balance outcome?
Here is what I mean. If in the north region they had 200 participants but 150 of them were male, they would take the data from the 50 females and enhance the impact of that number say 3 times to equal the male data. Hardly an accurate take on what may be happening in hte minds of females in the region. They also don't tell us exactly where they did the weighting, how much they "weight in" and what was the base data results they artificially amplified. Nor to they tell us the sample size in all the regional results nor the margin or error to be attributed to those results.
I would also like to know the wording of all the questions, and the order they asked them in and how many people were called but refused to answers. If they had to make 10,000 calls to get 1200 to participate we have a very high degree of self-selection happening and the randomness is weaker.
I don't offer this criticism only on this poll but on all polls. The professionals make the same mistakes and the results are misleading and meaningless in the same ways.
Now lets look at those results. The media reports are focused on "decided voters" but you have to wonder how one becomes a "decided voter" when there is no practical possibility of a pending election. Also the results said 957 of 1115 participants had already made up their minds about the next election. A stretch at best. With 14% saying they were "Undecided" and we know 60% of Albertan did not even vote last time it is hard to reconcile the high percentage of "decided" voters to these realities.
Therefore I think the more interesting and reliable numbers are in the All Respondents findings. The second most popular option there is a combination of Undecideds (14.2%) and Other Parties (7.3), which is larger than the Wildrose support. The "decided" results show that, for now, the WAP is a parking lot for disgruntled PC supporters.
The regional breakdown is even more interesting, but I have suspicions about its reliability for reasons already stated and it is not clear if the results reported are on All Participants or just "Decided" voters. I think it is only on the "Decided" voter because the overall bar graph is based on the "Decided" voters but it is far from clear. I also wonder where the "statistacal weighting" was applied, why, how much and on what base data.
That aside the rural north and south PC support is holding rather well in the 45% range. WAP is the "threat" but it is not much of a threat at the 24% level. Stelmach has not much to worry about in his country support if these results are accurate. But the mainly rural caucus tht leads the Stelmach inner circle are spooked by these results for sure.
The real political story from this poll is in the big cities. We are told constantly in the media and in conversations that Calgary does not like Premier Stelmach. Well compared to Edmonton, they sure do. He has 38% support in Calgary but only 31% support in Edmonton. Calgary has decided the political threat to Stelmach should be the WAP at 27%. In Edmonton disgruntled citizens feel the Liberals should be the threat at 27.5%. The PCs and Liberals are essentially tied in Edmonton with these numbers being within the margin of error. The WAP trails the NDP in Edmonton and that is the place in Alberta where change and flux of political fortunes are being played out. Edmonton, not Calgary, is the political caldrun of a yearning for change based on these numbers.
The WAP is a political force but this poll is precious little proof of its power. Premier Stelmach is in trouble with Albertans but the drama has just begun and the story is far from being told. Read these opinion polls like you would poetry. It is more about the imgination and imagery they induce than the facts they prove.
So what! The media coverage of the Glenmore by election, the pending Wildrose leadership vote and speculation on the outcome add a publicity presence that amplifies voter attention. But that is a far cry from settling voter intention when there is no election in the offing. Take the results of such polls as good gossip fodder but not much more.
This poll, and its results, could use a bit more scrutiny than the MSM has had the time, space or inclination to give it. I found the results very interesting, especially if you go beyond the sound bite level of analysis. The methodology in the study says they took the sample of 1,201. The admittedly deemed some sample numbers by "statistically weighted where necessary to even better reflect the demographic distribuion of the Alberta population." This means where the sample size for gender, for example, was not reflective of the population in a region the researchers took the small unrepresentative sample size they had and apparently boosted its relative impact to make it look like it was reflective of the actual gender distribution of 50/50. Why not do the job right and stay sampling in the region until you got a real gender balance outcome?
Here is what I mean. If in the north region they had 200 participants but 150 of them were male, they would take the data from the 50 females and enhance the impact of that number say 3 times to equal the male data. Hardly an accurate take on what may be happening in hte minds of females in the region. They also don't tell us exactly where they did the weighting, how much they "weight in" and what was the base data results they artificially amplified. Nor to they tell us the sample size in all the regional results nor the margin or error to be attributed to those results.
I would also like to know the wording of all the questions, and the order they asked them in and how many people were called but refused to answers. If they had to make 10,000 calls to get 1200 to participate we have a very high degree of self-selection happening and the randomness is weaker.
I don't offer this criticism only on this poll but on all polls. The professionals make the same mistakes and the results are misleading and meaningless in the same ways.
Now lets look at those results. The media reports are focused on "decided voters" but you have to wonder how one becomes a "decided voter" when there is no practical possibility of a pending election. Also the results said 957 of 1115 participants had already made up their minds about the next election. A stretch at best. With 14% saying they were "Undecided" and we know 60% of Albertan did not even vote last time it is hard to reconcile the high percentage of "decided" voters to these realities.
Therefore I think the more interesting and reliable numbers are in the All Respondents findings. The second most popular option there is a combination of Undecideds (14.2%) and Other Parties (7.3), which is larger than the Wildrose support. The "decided" results show that, for now, the WAP is a parking lot for disgruntled PC supporters.
The regional breakdown is even more interesting, but I have suspicions about its reliability for reasons already stated and it is not clear if the results reported are on All Participants or just "Decided" voters. I think it is only on the "Decided" voter because the overall bar graph is based on the "Decided" voters but it is far from clear. I also wonder where the "statistacal weighting" was applied, why, how much and on what base data.
That aside the rural north and south PC support is holding rather well in the 45% range. WAP is the "threat" but it is not much of a threat at the 24% level. Stelmach has not much to worry about in his country support if these results are accurate. But the mainly rural caucus tht leads the Stelmach inner circle are spooked by these results for sure.
The real political story from this poll is in the big cities. We are told constantly in the media and in conversations that Calgary does not like Premier Stelmach. Well compared to Edmonton, they sure do. He has 38% support in Calgary but only 31% support in Edmonton. Calgary has decided the political threat to Stelmach should be the WAP at 27%. In Edmonton disgruntled citizens feel the Liberals should be the threat at 27.5%. The PCs and Liberals are essentially tied in Edmonton with these numbers being within the margin of error. The WAP trails the NDP in Edmonton and that is the place in Alberta where change and flux of political fortunes are being played out. Edmonton, not Calgary, is the political caldrun of a yearning for change based on these numbers.
The WAP is a political force but this poll is precious little proof of its power. Premier Stelmach is in trouble with Albertans but the drama has just begun and the story is far from being told. Read these opinion polls like you would poetry. It is more about the imgination and imagery they induce than the facts they prove.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Reprehensible Greenwash on CO2 Emissions!
I am on a holiday in Hawaii but all of my surfing has been on the Net. I could not let this extreme example of greenwash go by without sharing. http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2009/10/09/plants_need_co2/index.html?source=newsletter
And now out of Bangkok we hear Saudi Arabia complaining that they need economic support if climate change legislation passes? Spare me! Quit using oil profits to fund terrorists is a place to start revising your economy.
And now out of Bangkok we hear Saudi Arabia complaining that they need economic support if climate change legislation passes? Spare me! Quit using oil profits to fund terrorists is a place to start revising your economy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)