Abacus Data has a new on-line survey of 1534 Canadians randomly selected from a panel of 500,000 Canadians. They weighted the responses to "match census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada's population" demographics.
Not sure that weighting is reliable or even possible. The Harper government killed the long form census so we likely don't have a reliable base line to weigh against. Harper did not want reliable statistical evidence contradict or undermine his political agenda.
Prime Minister Trudeau's first policy move after being elected was to return the long form census so it may be possible that Abacus Data has those results to "weigh" against. Are the results using this methodology truly representative of Canadian opinion and values? I don't know but I have a serious suspicion of on-line panel responses. Are they anything more than allegedly random samples using questionable sources where certain responses are weighted to induce or deem a representative sample?
That said, lets take a look at what the survey purports to discover in the context of what political policy should be on climate change if a political party wants to be reflective of the will of citizens and victorious at election time.
Abacus says that back in the day "...politicians who chose to be early champions of action to reduce emissions were running a certain amount of political risk." Carbon emission consequences were not fully formed in the public consciousness. However, "Today in Canada, the risk equation has changed. the bigger political peril lie in appearing indifferent to a matter of widespread and growing public perception."
If this survey is accurate half of Canadian voters (49%) won't even consider a party or a candidate that doesn't have a plan to combat climate change. Only 6% prefer a party or a candidate that ignores the issue.
If ignoring the issue of climate change is the same as denying it exists then are Conservatives, including those in Alberta, in trouble next election? Yup, but only if climate change is an election is a significant enough issue in the minds of voters. Consider this survey finding. "The rest (44%) are 'willing to consider' a party that doesn't make the climate a priority."
Abacus' analysis on the 44% says "For Canada's conservative parties and candidates, an optimistic read of these numbers is that the Conservatives cold win without an ambitious plan given that half of the population don't consider this policy a pre-requisite for their support." They go one to warn Conservatives that ignoring the climate change issues would be "tying on hand behind their backs, leaving them no room for error."
Environmentalism has changed in Canada and is now a "moderate" concern for 78% of Canadians. Only 11% see themselves as "ardent" environmentalists and another 11% are indifferent. There are 68% of us how attribute climate change to human and industrial causes, 21% say its just natural phenomenon and 2% are climate change deniers.
Obviously one way to defeat the KenneyCons (a.k.a. the UCP) in Alberta is to elevate climate change action into a ballot box issue. How might that happen? Well we need to be sure the voting public understands and appreciates the consequences of inaction or inept half-hearted action on climate change.
That may already be the case given the Abacus survey found 85% of us said "...taking no action on climate change will be severe, very severe, or catastrophic across a wide range of areas..." including agriculture, human health and insurance access, taxpayer costs of rebuilding after disasters to name a few. The momentum is for action so says 63% versus 37% who want" to do little or nothing" about climate change.
Here's the kicker for inert Conservatives on climate change. There is an enormous moral responsibility as 91% say taking action on climate change is a duty to future generations. While 47% believe the damage is already done, we are past the tipping point and there is "...little chance we could stop climate change at this point." Contrast that with 87% who feel there is "already lots of evidence we can cut emissions when we try." And, get this shift, 79% believe "...combating climate change will open up economic opportunities."
So the old-line HarperCons climate change denier stance is no longer tenable as sound political platform. The environment is not perceived as a trade-off with the economy nor is it a barrier to growth, in fact is is a catalyst for growth, responsible sustainable growth and a competitive advantage.
Will the KenneyCon UCP base in Alberta, that now is really the same old HarperCon fundamentalist social conservative crowd, accept this shift in public perception and deny being deniers? Will a UCP shift to rhetoric on responsible sustainable economic development that stewards the environment be credible to Alberta progressive voters?
I'm betting no to both propositions. That doesn't mean the UCP loses the next election. But making the integrated comprehensive mutually positive relationship between the environment and the economy as a major ballot box issue is a great start to defeating Kenney next election,
If you want to dig deeper into the Abacus survey the link is here...
Sunday, November 12, 2017
Saturday, November 11, 2017
Greg Clark Steps Down as Alberta Party Leader
In a surprise move the Alberta Party is in the hunt for a new leader. With recent consolidation of the uber-right in the UCP there are a lot of free-floating former progressives in the former party of Lougheed who are looking for a home.
The Alberta Party has had a number of false-positive political test results around thwarted floor crossings from the Stelmach government and the Sherman Liberals. Never able to raise sufficient funds to really be a contender they were able to elect thier Leader Greg Clark in the last provincial election.
Whether he was nudged, pushed or saw a personal obligation to resign to help refresh the Alberta Party through a leadership contest, that is the stuff of pundit and partisan pontification. In the real world it matters not.
We have a two-party system at present that sees each other as extremist, be it the "socialist" left or "social conservative" right. The reality is the majority of Alberta voters are in the centre but nobody is really resonating with this progressive majority of Albertans. The Alberta Party is an unfulfilled potential and the Notley NDP is making moves more towards the centre while the UCP is moving farther to the radical religious right.
The three partisan options potentially to be offered to Albertans can be described as Arrested, Closed or Open. The NDP was elected as a reaction against the social conservative Wildrose and the self-serving entitled mindset of the PCs. The political surveys, while fraught with methodological faults, a consensus seems to be forming.
That is a growing perception that the NDP has peaked and further progress is "Arrested" or Stalled. Barriers towards further progress have emerged that need to be overcome. They may lack the insight to perceive or to explain what is happening so that the barriers can be overcome. Political dissonance on wedge issues may still emerge to help them sustain power and establish them as an authentic and preferred option for change.
That is a growing perception that the NDP has peaked and further progress is "Arrested" or Stalled. Barriers towards further progress have emerged that need to be overcome. They may lack the insight to perceive or to explain what is happening so that the barriers can be overcome. Political dissonance on wedge issues may still emerge to help them sustain power and establish them as an authentic and preferred option for change.
The UCP is Closed in that they are psychologically blind to seeing alternatives to their fiscal hawkishness, social conservative base and climate change denier beliefs. They can't even see their barriers to achieving a broader "big tent" political acceptance, never mind overcome them. Their internal divisive history makes change difficult. Their membership is threatened by change and fight to perfect yesterday. They wish to return Alberta to a Bible-Belt social policy with simplistic economic policy while ignoring environmental concerns.
The Alberta Party is Open to realizing the potential of change as as evidenced by the resignation of its leader. The Alberta Party has had many barriers to becoming a significant political force but they are aware of them and open to new ways to overcome them. Recent boost in membership from disenfranchised progressives and centrists and the potential for some serious fundraising show the Alberta Party is able to more more freely to adapt and adjust to the shifting political culture of Alberta.
They are not locked in the Left versus Right outdated political perception trap. They are open to accepting individual differences and not locked into habitual patterns of the other conventional parties. They accept that change is and complex so they are not prone to jumping on the politics-as-usual simplistic bandwagons. They are more likely to have good listening skills, be accepting of differences and be non-judgmental about various approaches to life.
We may be closer to the next election and to the last one. So time is of the essence for all parties. I have no idea what will happen but nothing is guaranteed for any political party in Alberta these days.
Sunday, July 23, 2017
USA Style Dark Money Has Come Into Alberta's Politics
Alberta's laws on reforming Election Financing has come a long way since the Notley government came to office. We really needed to "clean up our act" on donor disclosures, contribution limits and political accountability.
But recently, in Alberta, we have seen the arrival of American-style Political Action Committees (PACs). They are being formed and operating outside the spirit and intent of recent Notley electoral reform efforts. Some recent legislative review is needed for some context on what has been going on around political finance reform...and what still needs to be fixed.
STEP 1:
Eliminate Corporate, Union and Employee Organization Political Donations.
The Notley government's very first piece of legislation upon being elected in 2015 was "An Act to Renew Democracy in Alberta."
It was a law designed to eliminate corporate, union and employee organizations who bargain collectively from making donations into Alberta electoral politics.
Prohibited contributions included those to, "registered" candidates in nominations, elections and by-elections. Contributions from these sources were also disallowed to "registered" constituency organizations. Something long over due and studiously ignored by the former PC government.
Step 2:
Reduce Levels of Political Contributions by Individuals
In December 2016 they took their "second step" introducing Bill 35 the Fair Elections Financing Act. The stated motive behind this law, as recorded in Hansard on December 6, 2016, was to "...rein in political spending by political parties and reduce individual contribution limits. Third parties would also no longer fund their agendas through anonymous contributions for political advertising."
The Notley government said they were getting "big money and special interests influences out of deciding elections," then adding transparency and a "level playing field for all candidates and parties...and give democracy back to Albertans." Good stuff!
The goals was to assure Albertans "...that ideas and not money would determine success or failure at the polls...that Alberta's political leaders would be chosen based on what they stand for and not be influenced by how much money was spent during political campaigns."
Specific nomination, election and by-election spending limits were set for political parties and candidates. Individuals could only donate a maximum total of $4000 per calendar year to all provincial political activities. Corporations and Unions could no longer "second" their staff to work to a campaign and keep them on the company payroll. All good stuff in the service of the admirable policy objectives.
The Wildrose was on-side and noted, in debate, that rather than a $4,000 personal contribution limit, they wanted an even lower $1,000 personal limit. They also rightly noted, that nothing had been done to stop sitting governments from abusing taxpayer sourced advertising dollars to boost an incumbent government profile leading up to an election.
By all accounts the revised system of campaign finance controls is working as intended. However the world has changed. The perpetual campaign nature of modern politics and the rise of the influence of the ubiquitous Internet means the old election writ-triggering model is out of date and out of touch. All the good intentions of fair limits, disclosure and eliminating big money backroom back-scratching anonymous influences are bring thwarted.
Step3:
Enter the Political Action Committees!
Elections Alberta tracks Third Party Advertisers both, politically and in elections. There are some "Election Advertisers" who have recently de-registered and other registrants who have not yet disclosed any information at all.
The "Political Advertisers" are even more interesting. All seven of the registered entities filed 6 months of fund raising for 2017, The Alberta Federation of Labour disclosed $490k from 24 union locals. Next was the Merit Contractors Association coming in at $194k but no details on where that money came from. That is followed by the Alberta Advantage Fund, a diverse group in at $178k. The others have raised between Zero and $25k.
These are all legitimate initiatives legally involved in election or political advertising and operating within the spirit and intent of the disclosure laws.
However, what is emerging is a number of politically active operations akin to American Political Action Committees, known as PACs. They are not registered as Third Party Advertisers because they are not active in election or political advertising.
The operations I know of, and there may be more, are the emerging Alberta Together centrists effort initiated by former Edmonton Mayor Stephen Mandel. There is the left leaning, Progress Alberta operation headed by Duncan Kinney. Full disclosure, I have been to events sponsored by both of these groups, and will continue to do so but have not donated to either of them and will not do so.
There is a coalition of conservative groups called Alberta Can't Wait, the Alberta Prosperity Fund and Unite Alberta. The latter admitted to funding part of Jason Kenney's PC Leadership Campaign.
This raises red flags about PAC political activities, because they claim to be beyond election and political advertising disclosure requirements. What is at risk with this non-disclosure is the return to backroom back-scratching politician-based influence dealings funded by big-money anonymous donors. This is not good for democracy, regardless of the quality of the intent.
Benign Citizen Engagement Groups or Secretive Political Operations?
These Alberta PACs are alleging that they are not engaged with or within any political party operations or candidate support. Their fund raising is said to be for advocacy and issues management efforts.
As a result they are third-party political action organizations with agendas and operate outside the current laws of donor disclosure and contribution limits. Operating without donor disclosure means they are essentially aligned with what has become known as Dark Money that has taken control of the American political culture.
We see these PACs organizing events, commenting and pressing on issues of concern to them as a good thing for an informed citizenry enabled for more critical thinking.
However, in the case of Unite the Right PAC, it raised $508,000 from 2,129 donors for the Jason Kenney PC leadership run. These funds were raised before the leadership writ was issued and therefore believed to outside the legal disclosure requirements.
That money was in addition to the $1,505,894.13, also raised and disclosed, within the campaign financing laws relating to Mr. Kenney's PC leadership campaign.
Mr. Kenney "promised" to disclose the identity and details of Unite the Right pre-writ anonymous donors. He has since reneged on that promise.
To be fair the Kenney PC leadership has released the names of 63 Unite the Right pre-writ donors who contributed $118,745 of the total raised. But what about the rest and why not disclose, as promised?
"Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant" - Justice Louis Brandeis
The question remains; what is the Kenney campaign hiding and why not fulfill the political promise to disclose the full pre-writ donor details? They claim to have a "subsequent" legal opinion claiming privacy constraints against disclosure.
But that is exactly the kind disclosure concerns behind the recent legal changes to the campaign financing laws.
Kenney should release the legal opinion so we could test its analysis and assess its veracity. Kenney could also offer to return those non-disclosed donors dollars to those who do not wish to be disclosed.
This may require some retroactive legislative capacity and a supervised systems by Elections Alberta to verify the return system. Is that OK, so long as it respects the privacy of those who contributed to the Kenney PAC scheme? Or is the public entitled to know all those who participated in the pre-writ non-disclosure Kenney campaign fund raising scheme?
Some ethical and moral questions obviously impinge on any such process. Could it be developed as part of a new modern, comprehensive go-forward legislative arrangement for better disclosure requirement to cover PACs.
Step 4:
NOW WHAT?
Modern politics has become perpetual election campaigning machine. Writ periods are no longer reasonable time frames to control donor disclosures and apply funding limits in Alberta's political culture.
Without continuous full disclosure and annual limits on all PAC donations regardless of policy or political influencing purposes we run the risk of seriously diminishing our democracy and, quite possibly, enabling political corruption.
We need new disclosure and contribution limit laws more aligned with the contemporary realities of Alberta's modern political culture. It cannot be delayed. Accepting non-disclosure or benign indifference to Dark Money in Alberta's politics is a clear and present danger to our democracy.
The NDP government recently said they saw no reason to revisit its recent election reform agenda. Given the rise of PACs and their donor secrecy, the perpetual nature of electoral politics, and the disclosure avoidance tactics of the Kenney PC leadership pre-writ fund raising, that reluctance has vanished.
We need to revisit and revise our political contribution laws to build on the good work done to date and enhanced to accommodate legitimate PAC influence efforts but with full and real-time detailed disclosure.
And that is a good thing for returning public trust in our political processes. And that is a necessary thing to strengthen and protect our democracy.
But recently, in Alberta, we have seen the arrival of American-style Political Action Committees (PACs). They are being formed and operating outside the spirit and intent of recent Notley electoral reform efforts. Some recent legislative review is needed for some context on what has been going on around political finance reform...and what still needs to be fixed.
STEP 1:
Eliminate Corporate, Union and Employee Organization Political Donations.
The Notley government's very first piece of legislation upon being elected in 2015 was "An Act to Renew Democracy in Alberta."
It was a law designed to eliminate corporate, union and employee organizations who bargain collectively from making donations into Alberta electoral politics.
Prohibited contributions included those to, "registered" candidates in nominations, elections and by-elections. Contributions from these sources were also disallowed to "registered" constituency organizations. Something long over due and studiously ignored by the former PC government.
Step 2:
Reduce Levels of Political Contributions by Individuals
In December 2016 they took their "second step" introducing Bill 35 the Fair Elections Financing Act. The stated motive behind this law, as recorded in Hansard on December 6, 2016, was to "...rein in political spending by political parties and reduce individual contribution limits. Third parties would also no longer fund their agendas through anonymous contributions for political advertising."
The Notley government said they were getting "big money and special interests influences out of deciding elections," then adding transparency and a "level playing field for all candidates and parties...and give democracy back to Albertans." Good stuff!
The goals was to assure Albertans "...that ideas and not money would determine success or failure at the polls...that Alberta's political leaders would be chosen based on what they stand for and not be influenced by how much money was spent during political campaigns."
Specific nomination, election and by-election spending limits were set for political parties and candidates. Individuals could only donate a maximum total of $4000 per calendar year to all provincial political activities. Corporations and Unions could no longer "second" their staff to work to a campaign and keep them on the company payroll. All good stuff in the service of the admirable policy objectives.
The Wildrose was on-side and noted, in debate, that rather than a $4,000 personal contribution limit, they wanted an even lower $1,000 personal limit. They also rightly noted, that nothing had been done to stop sitting governments from abusing taxpayer sourced advertising dollars to boost an incumbent government profile leading up to an election.
By all accounts the revised system of campaign finance controls is working as intended. However the world has changed. The perpetual campaign nature of modern politics and the rise of the influence of the ubiquitous Internet means the old election writ-triggering model is out of date and out of touch. All the good intentions of fair limits, disclosure and eliminating big money backroom back-scratching anonymous influences are bring thwarted.
Step3:
Enter the Political Action Committees!
Elections Alberta tracks Third Party Advertisers both, politically and in elections. There are some "Election Advertisers" who have recently de-registered and other registrants who have not yet disclosed any information at all.
The "Political Advertisers" are even more interesting. All seven of the registered entities filed 6 months of fund raising for 2017, The Alberta Federation of Labour disclosed $490k from 24 union locals. Next was the Merit Contractors Association coming in at $194k but no details on where that money came from. That is followed by the Alberta Advantage Fund, a diverse group in at $178k. The others have raised between Zero and $25k.
These are all legitimate initiatives legally involved in election or political advertising and operating within the spirit and intent of the disclosure laws.
However, what is emerging is a number of politically active operations akin to American Political Action Committees, known as PACs. They are not registered as Third Party Advertisers because they are not active in election or political advertising.
The operations I know of, and there may be more, are the emerging Alberta Together centrists effort initiated by former Edmonton Mayor Stephen Mandel. There is the left leaning, Progress Alberta operation headed by Duncan Kinney. Full disclosure, I have been to events sponsored by both of these groups, and will continue to do so but have not donated to either of them and will not do so.
There is a coalition of conservative groups called Alberta Can't Wait, the Alberta Prosperity Fund and Unite Alberta. The latter admitted to funding part of Jason Kenney's PC Leadership Campaign.
This raises red flags about PAC political activities, because they claim to be beyond election and political advertising disclosure requirements. What is at risk with this non-disclosure is the return to backroom back-scratching politician-based influence dealings funded by big-money anonymous donors. This is not good for democracy, regardless of the quality of the intent.
Benign Citizen Engagement Groups or Secretive Political Operations?
These Alberta PACs are alleging that they are not engaged with or within any political party operations or candidate support. Their fund raising is said to be for advocacy and issues management efforts.
As a result they are third-party political action organizations with agendas and operate outside the current laws of donor disclosure and contribution limits. Operating without donor disclosure means they are essentially aligned with what has become known as Dark Money that has taken control of the American political culture.
We see these PACs organizing events, commenting and pressing on issues of concern to them as a good thing for an informed citizenry enabled for more critical thinking.
However, in the case of Unite the Right PAC, it raised $508,000 from 2,129 donors for the Jason Kenney PC leadership run. These funds were raised before the leadership writ was issued and therefore believed to outside the legal disclosure requirements.
That money was in addition to the $1,505,894.13, also raised and disclosed, within the campaign financing laws relating to Mr. Kenney's PC leadership campaign.
Mr. Kenney "promised" to disclose the identity and details of Unite the Right pre-writ anonymous donors. He has since reneged on that promise.
To be fair the Kenney PC leadership has released the names of 63 Unite the Right pre-writ donors who contributed $118,745 of the total raised. But what about the rest and why not disclose, as promised?
"Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant" - Justice Louis Brandeis
The question remains; what is the Kenney campaign hiding and why not fulfill the political promise to disclose the full pre-writ donor details? They claim to have a "subsequent" legal opinion claiming privacy constraints against disclosure.
But that is exactly the kind disclosure concerns behind the recent legal changes to the campaign financing laws.
Kenney should release the legal opinion so we could test its analysis and assess its veracity. Kenney could also offer to return those non-disclosed donors dollars to those who do not wish to be disclosed.
This may require some retroactive legislative capacity and a supervised systems by Elections Alberta to verify the return system. Is that OK, so long as it respects the privacy of those who contributed to the Kenney PAC scheme? Or is the public entitled to know all those who participated in the pre-writ non-disclosure Kenney campaign fund raising scheme?
Some ethical and moral questions obviously impinge on any such process. Could it be developed as part of a new modern, comprehensive go-forward legislative arrangement for better disclosure requirement to cover PACs.
Step 4:
NOW WHAT?
Modern politics has become perpetual election campaigning machine. Writ periods are no longer reasonable time frames to control donor disclosures and apply funding limits in Alberta's political culture.
Without continuous full disclosure and annual limits on all PAC donations regardless of policy or political influencing purposes we run the risk of seriously diminishing our democracy and, quite possibly, enabling political corruption.
We need new disclosure and contribution limit laws more aligned with the contemporary realities of Alberta's modern political culture. It cannot be delayed. Accepting non-disclosure or benign indifference to Dark Money in Alberta's politics is a clear and present danger to our democracy.
The NDP government recently said they saw no reason to revisit its recent election reform agenda. Given the rise of PACs and their donor secrecy, the perpetual nature of electoral politics, and the disclosure avoidance tactics of the Kenney PC leadership pre-writ fund raising, that reluctance has vanished.
We need to revisit and revise our political contribution laws to build on the good work done to date and enhanced to accommodate legitimate PAC influence efforts but with full and real-time detailed disclosure.
And that is a good thing for returning public trust in our political processes. And that is a necessary thing to strengthen and protect our democracy.
Sunday, April 30, 2017
Albert'a Political Uncertainty Continues
First a disclaimer. I don't think we can rely on "opinion" polls done through the Internet as being representative because they are not random and often "weighted" by taking a small response segment and over-valuing it in an attempt to be more reflective on the population distribution.
The result is not the best possible version of the "truth" but more likely a rather blatant misrepresentation of opinion. The Mainstreet Research poll I am about to reference suffers from these shortcomings and even used the much discredited 2011 "Census" results as the basis for demographic weighting. That said, what else did they have to "weigh" the demographics in their survey responses? Garbage in - Garbage out!
They used their proprietary Chimera IVR process to get responses. I still can't get the smile off my face. IRONY ALERT! The Chimera origins are from an "imagery incongruous monster" from Greek mythology said to be a "fire-breathing she-monster with a lion's head, a goat's body, and a serpent's tail." Even the dictionary definition made me smile when applied to the reliability of such survey results; "a thing that is hoped or wished for but in fact is illusory or impossible to achieve." Just like the reliability of the methodology of this "opinion" poll.
That said, presuming we can't rely on the findings there are some things of interest to be gleaned from these results. Mostly what we seem to be able to say is that the political culture in Alberta is in an existential flux, especially regionally.
Edmonton is strongly NDP at 45%. The Edmonton"progressives" seem to have left the Progressive Conservative party in and gone NDP or undecided at 16%. They have not moved to the Alberta Party or Liberal centrist options. The conservative core in Edmonton at 21% has not seen a Jason Kenney leadership bump and actually dropped 1%. The Wildrose base in Edmonton is static at 26% but in second place, which has to worry the big dark money behind the Kenney PC leadership.
Calgary Conservatives have seen themselves as the breeding ground for Premiers for sure in the PC dynasty. It is not surprising that the core PC conservatives are big-time Calgary-based Kenney supporters at 38%. What is more surprising is that NDP is number 2 at 26% and the WRP is 22%, worse than they do in Edmonton. The Alberta Party and Liberals have their largest support levels in Calgary too at 7% each. Note both party leaders come from Calgary.
The 'Rest of Alberta" a.k.a. "rural Alberta" is not in any existential flux. They are solidly conservative with a 75% combined Kenney(27%)/Jean 48% support. It would be interesting to see if there is an urban-rural split in places like Grande Prairie, Lethbridge, Medicine Hat, Red Deer and Fort McMurray.
The aggregate Alberta numbers are pretty misleading as a result of these regional influences and the reality that all politics are local. They may also be misleading due to the "weighing" of results to try and reflect demographics. For example, the 65+ age group is only 11% of Alberta's population but makeup 14% in the sample size.
The survey has 33.5% participants in the 18-34 age group but Alberta has about 24% in the same grouping so they get significantly over-represented. Note that 41% of 18-34 survey segment supported Brian Jean's WRP, 17% for Kenney Conservatives and 18% for Notley's NDP. Likely another misleading result as a result. Another misleading concern is the survey asks how you would vote for today, on a decided and leaning basis but has the Liberal option with David Swann as its leader. He isn't the leader. They are in a leadership contest now.
The other interesting aspect is the Undecideds. The largest segment is in Edmonton at 16% and the least is Calgary at 13%. On the preference on who should be leading a merged PC and WRP it is overall uncertain. First, the question is misleading because the parties can't merge legally.
The regional differences come into play. Calgary is split equally between Kenney and Jean at 27%. Edmonton and the Rest of Alberta favour Jean. In Edmonton "Someone Else" beats both men at 26% and Unsure is at 32%. Overall it is a 53% share for Kenney and Jean but 47% split between None of the Above or Unsure. Not a strong indication of interest in the future of the conservative political culture in Alberta, regardless of regions.
So while we can't rely on the science-based reliability of the results I think we can surmise that Alberta is not yet made up its mind nor set the direction of its political future. It is not a clear choice between Left or Right.
The Next Alberta is more likely to be a centrist progressive government if the results of a 2009 real survey of political values based on the 2006 Long From reliable Census trend into the 2017 population. That research found 63% of Albertans identified strongly with progressive values. Fixing the vacuum of political options in the progressive political center in Alberta is where the potential is for real change in our political culture.
So far it is still an open question about who, if anyone, will fill that vacuum... effectively.
Monday, April 03, 2017
KEITH OLBERMANN ON TRUMP PANICKING
Keith Olbermann, formerly on NBC I believe, is doing an informative series of Video Blogs on Trump administration.
He is worth a watch...and a careful listen. Even worth a YouTube subscription.
Interesting that Russia is the largest number of links to this blog since I started commenting more on Trump "foibles." Proof the "bots" are "alive and well."
He is worth a watch...and a careful listen. Even worth a YouTube subscription.
Interesting that Russia is the largest number of links to this blog since I started commenting more on Trump "foibles." Proof the "bots" are "alive and well."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)