The $64,000 Question, as they used to say, is whether urban voters in Alberta are growing disaffected with Alberta’s United Conservative Party Government because of Danielle Smith’s divisive separation referendum or with Danielle Smith herself.
I say it’s the referendum and predict that if the Remain side wins decisively on Oct. 19, many of Premier Smith’s troubles in Calgary will quickly go away. Some things that ought to bother voters in Alberta’s largest city – and for that matter the UCP’s currently rock solid base in rural Alberta – don’t seem to trouble them that much.
For example, the UCP’s sustained effort to dismantle and privatize public health care and its cavalier attitude about human rights when it comes to whomever the party considers the wrong kind of humans – i.e., unionized schoolteachers.
Now, it’s important to note that the evidence that the UCP has slipped so far that it’s tied with the NDP province wide, and that the Opposition party has a bigger lead in voter preference in the city of Calgary, is one poll, albeit by an Alberta pollster with a solid record of getting these things right. The polling industry is in agreement, by the way, that the NDP holds a strong lead in the Orange redoubt of Edmonton.
Every pollster, as even the estimable Janet Brown sometimes admits, gets it wrong occasionally, so angry supporters of the separatist-dominated UCP should wait along with the rest of us to see if anyone else can confirm the findings of Ms. Brown’s latest poll that the Opposition party is now ahead in Calgary at 46 per cent to the UCP’s 38 per cent.
The Janet Brown Opinion Research poll thus put the two parties in a dead heat at 41 per cent each province wide, with the NDP leading 44 per cent to 37 per cent in Edmonton and the UCP ahead 48 per cent to 31 per cent outside the two major cities.
Anyway, what the secessionist crowd really had its collective knickers in a twist about was another finding of Ms. Smith’s poll, which was done for the CBC, which showed support for the separation side of the Smith-Government-composed separation question slipping.
In this most recent Janet Brown poll, 23 per cent of the 1,200 respondents said they supported commencing the legal process to bring about a binding separation referendum, as the UCP’s deceptive referendum wording put it, down from 27 per cent in a survey by the same pollster in April. Seventy-two per cent of the respondents said they would vote to remain in Canada.
That was enough to unleash a huge swarm of infuriated bots on the Internet attacking Ms. Brown, her poll, anyone who talked about its results, and of course the CBC. Realistically, though, that was always likely to happen as soon as secession-curious voters began to think about the costs of leaving Canada and cotton on to the deceptive nature of the pitch by some of the movement’s rather unsavoury leaders, who claim that Albertans voting to break up Canada merely “sends a message” to Ottawa.
Just sayin’, but operators of the separatist bot farms in the United States would be better off not asking who the hell Ms. Brown is in their posts, since that’s an excellent way to tell folks that you’re not from Alberta without telling them that you’re not from Alberta.
Another interesting finding of the poll was that Mark Carney’s popularity in Alberta continues to rise, with voters “very impressed” with the prime minister up six points to 52 per cent since Ms. Brown’s previous poll in April. That compares to 30 per cent for Premier Smith and 25 per cent for Opposition Leader Naheed Nenshi. Mr. Carney also towered over federal Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre in the poll, at 26 per cent in the same category.
So, the memorandum of agreement between Ottawa and Alberta seems to be “working well for Mark Carney and his popularity, but Danielle Smith doesn’t seem to be benefitting from her part in creating the MoU,” Ms. Brown told the CBC.
This is probably because Mr. Carney is delivering essentially the kind of Progressive Conservative government that Albertans chose in their own province 12 times between 1971 to 2015, when Rachel Notley’s NDP finally broke their hold on power. It was the longest uninterrupted dynasty in Canadian political history. So it’s quite possibly less likely that he will lose popularity in Alberta any time soon than in other parts of Canada.
Other than that, Ms. Brown’s poll also shows that the UCP’s mad rush to make Alberta North America’s dumping ground for AI data centres does not seem to be paying dividends for the premier or her party.
Over-enthusiastic NDP supporters need to remember that Premier Smith’s effective strategy has been and will continue to be that all the UCP really needs to do to remain in power is to hold onto a few Calgary seats and keep its rural Alberta base happy.
So despite the NDP’s favourable numbers and encouraging recent win in the traditionally Conservative-voting Calgary-Shaw riding, overcoming the UCP’s structural edge in Alberta is always going to be an uphill fight for the party that requires an engaged, energetic and popular NDP leader. The UCP’s planned Texas-style gerrymandering will make the road even steeper.
Either Smith is an evil genius worthy of more than an apron at a roadside diner, or she let her megalomania get out way out in front of her, and she lost the reins. We will see soon enough I reckon.
” a decisive remain win and Smith’s problems in Calgary go away” … how many Calgary UCP riding associations have seperatist controlled boards? With ~ 3 weeks to stew in their own juices until the clown party’s AGM, I am not as sanguine her problems will subside at all, in Calgary or anywhere else in Alberta.
And yes, Nenshi & the ABNDP have a very tough row to hoe. Too much reliance on Napoleon’s adage in regards to interferring with an enemy. Not near enough aggression (other than Ms. Pancholi).
As for the gerrymandering, when Smith tries it (not if), I fully expect a constitutional challenge to the SoC, and she will lose. Which could also be what she wants.
As someone who knows Danielle Smith well, I can assure everyone that she’s dumb as a post. Cunning is not intelligence. Glibness is not genius. She is both cunning and glib, but not smart. Fortunately for Smith, most of her supporters are even dumber than she is. Example, hitching her wagon to Dennis Modry and his separatist buddies. Where is Dennis these days? Kicked to the curb as ‘no longer useful?’
HH: Last I heard he was rather plaintively trying to explain on Facebook. Alas, as they say, when you’re explaining, you’re losing. DJC
Dennis? Oh he is working to pay off his $1.3 misappropriation. Where’s Jeff Wray? Well that’s easier to tell. Just listen, with your hand to your ear, and you’ll hear the bull moose, plaintively crying about his $100M misappropriation lawsuit. Wray is the remain’s best walking talking advertisement for its position to stay.
Rath, shurely. DJC
There is a lot to say about Brown’s poll and CBC’s excellent analysis of it.
First of all she knows what to ask and how to ask it to get insight beyond the usual horse race questions. Secondly, she has a reputation for accuracy and picking up on trends. Although in this case the poll confirms what the recent by election already told us. Smith is in trouble, particularly in Calgary.
As for the $64.000 question, will this last past the referendum? Who knows. It is possible the outcome of it will take some pressure off Smith, but I feel if Smith is not willing to be an unequivocal separatist, they will likely take their show to another party. So in other words, it could ead to other problems as well.
Also, another important thing that could be overlooked in the poll is Smith’s support dropped a lot in rural areas. Yes it is also due to the referendum, but AI data centres too. This may mean the NDP does not have to rely only on Calgary.
Every political honeymoon ends sooner or later. Smith’s has been longer than expected. Often it ends from a combination of a change in circumstances and an accumulation of things. I feel Smith may be at this point now.
Rural areas, that is where they farm and raise cattle and both need water. Don’t think those farmers are going to be happy with a lack of water if these centers are going to use water they need These centers also, from what I’ve read use a lot of electricity/energy. that would result in an increase in the cost of electricity and that will not make voters happy.
Would not consider Smith all that bright. She may know what some Albertans want but the rest, she seems to ignore. If there is an attack on education, it couldn’t end poorly for her. I do recall a very long time ago in B.C. one WAC Bennett lost the provincial election. Not long before that a columnist reported on how teachers were going door to door explaining to parents what the impact of Socred education policies were doing to their children’s education.
Ms. Smith seems to be more interested in private health care than continuing as normal. When times are good that may work but when money gets tight people can’t afford that private care and that will not end well for Ms. Smith’s career.
Things are up in the air these days. There are a couple of wars happening. The U.S.A. or rather trump doesn’t seem all that interested in continuing to trade with Canada unless there are large tariffs and lets not forget trump’s attitude towards Canada. Albertans may decide its safer to stay with the rest of us than go out on their own and perhaps have to deal with trump on their own.
I do wonder if Canada becomes an associate member of the E.U. and Alberta has seperated what happens to them if things get a little tense with the USA. Will Alberta be asked if they wish to be an associate member of the EU or will be ignored. Of course they could ask to re join Canada. Might be cheaper to stay with the gang as it now is. Ms. Smith is such a ding bat, rushing off to mar a lago to smile at the idiot in the W.H. and pretend she is important. She should remember donni only remembers you if he wants something from you.
Of course the UCP and Danielle Smith are in political trouble. Other big trouble too. It’s exactly why they have to resort to gerrymandering ridings. Edmonton and Calgary would easily kick the UCP to the curb. I would not not be surprised if even rural ridings get NDP MLAs elected. In so many ways, the UCP and Danielle Smith are quite bad.
I’ve been wrong before but I think this election could see an NDP victory in an unusual riding or two, I would be looking at the ridings that are a solid mix of urban/rural or suburban/urban. There’s a lot of people in this province who just want a competent government and couldn’t care about the culture war nonsense either way. The NDP would be wise to observe this.
I might be wrong or missed something, but I don’t think Smith has engaged and got the First Nations folks on side with the pipeline, nor is there a private sector proponent jumping in with billions of dollars to build the pipeline either. As the October 1 deadline is quickly approaching, the smart move for PM Carney would be to say we want the pipeline to the west coast, but reject it for now claiming she has not done the work or met the conditions of the MOU. This way Smith can’t come back and say it’s Ottawa’s fault. Until the pipeline is approved, I don’t see Smith’s popularity gaining any ground. Also people wake up and read the referendum questions closely, it tells a very clear story of where her head is at.
The $64,000.00 question is where do I begin to dislike Smith and the UPC. How about the use of the notwithstanding clause, the privatization of health care and Alberta education. Let’s not forget all the coal and silica mining, logging the headwaters of the Highwood and who needs wildlife anymore? Taking us back to coal and oil, no need for re-newable energy. Bikes, don’t use gas, so let’s get rid of all the bike lanes. The banning of books, by people that can’t read. Allowing David Parker and others to take our voters list, with no repercussions and, her own little healthcare scandal. Throw separatism into the mix and then ask me why I don’t support the UPC.
One striking thing about the referendum battle is both sides feel betrayed by Smith. That will hurt her whatever the vote result. The best thing that can happen for Nenshi, progressives, and Alberta generally is cleavage (not that kind, you lechers) on the right in the aftermath.
If the seppies lose on October 19th, expect an uprising in the UCP that “Kenneys” her right out of office. Will she be replaced by a more mainstream conservative, or an even more extreme nut job? I’m not optimistic.
Who’s on deck ? Dreeshan ? lurch ? Lmao. Don’t make me laugh. The end of Danielle Smith’s UCP will be the end of the UCP as a coalition.
I think it’s remarkable that although there are ten referendum questions there are no polls as far as I can tell on the other nine, even now.
Not sure why a huge swarm of infuriated seppie-bots should react so negatively to Ms Brown’s latest survey of support for secession in Alberta: the fact that it has fallen by four points since the previous survey should be interpreted as voters starting to to look at secession details more seriously, starting to appreciate the difficulties involved and, unsurprisingly, some find it too tall an order, perhaps especially those voters whose motivation was merely “to send a message to Ottawa” and have since discovered they have something better to do.
Enthusiasm was bound to cool when the separatists’ proposition of unilateral secession could not withstand the slightest examination, not even when they explained that a declaration of independence needs only the official recognition of a single other nation to gain international legitimacy —and when this falsehood blew down too, they argued that negotiations were already underway with a foreign power which, they said, would like to help break up the Canadian federation. Any more such ‘xplainin’ and voters might ask, If that were really the case and the benefactor were the same thug who insisted he would take Greenland whether Greenlanders, Danes and NATO liked it or not, then why bother with a referendum at all? When the implied question is really whether one has enough guts to be an outlaw, it’s little wonder support falls off a tad.
Principals of the secession movement have of late found themselves preoccupied with related legal problems; respite from their cocksure imperiousness that Albertans can do whatever the hell they want has happily afforded a little more clarity. The referendum question now asks: should the Alberta government commence the legal process to bring about a binding separation referendum—yes or no? Well, a very little more clarity…
Every day Albertans—and many in the ROC—are learning more about Numbered Treaties, the Constitution, referenda, secession, &c so many will know by now that currently there is no “legal” process to bring about secession (in case Danielle Smith’s various disingenuous definitions of law have confused that point). Leave aside what extent any referendum can be “binding” on a parliamentarian to vote this way or that, if the question is simply asking whether there should be a referendum on secession, then the answer is clear—and it’s about time too!
The Constitution and established law would instruct that if any province’s voters want to hold a referendum on secession they would first need to amend the Constitution, for the exercise is totally moot if there is no constitutional mechanism by which a province may secede. This SCoC ruling is a quarter century old; it also ruled that the amendment would have to say a secession requires the approval of all ten provincial legislatures and the federal HoC.
Doubtlessly that’s a burr under the seppies’ saddle, but instead of risking further erosion of support by rounding up a gang of self-deputized pistoleros demanding secession be done any other way, they should probably just cool it and join the growing majority who are learning there’s only one legal process to do separation. And a referendum —even a referendum on whether to have another referendum—is putting the cart before the horse.
The Constitution needs amending first, thus the citizens of any province who want to separate from Canada must convince their provincial government to initiate the process of asking the other provinces which one if any would approve inserting an amendment in to the Constitution, a process that requires all eleven sovereign Canadian parliaments approve of a secession.
The amending formula is: seven provincial legislatures which represent at least half the national population, plus the federal HoC are required to approve an amendment. It’s probably necessary, in order to avoid the wrath of Jeff and the Smith&Parker Gang, to remind that even if these criteria are achieved, that’s only the amendment. Like, Whoa!—pull up on them reins, Hoss! You ain’t “free” just yet!
Once inserted into the Constitution (first), you still need unanimous approval of provinces and the feds for a secession to be completed. If you’re starting to realize just how long this process would take, then you might agree that if you want to separate you best get the process underway ASAP.
Now, remember, hombres: work on the amendment first cuz if you make out like you’re going straight to secession, you’ll prob’ly spook the herd. Amending the Constitution is about rounding it up, not stampeding it over a cliff. Inserting the rules for secession into the centrefold of our Constitution ain’t the same as actually doing it. Indeed, because the secession criterion is ambiguous—that is, some provinces might interpret it as making secession easier (if not easy) whilst others might ratify it for the opposite reason, that it would make it harder to achieve. IMHO, this might be one of the few amendments that would stand a chance of being ratified.
Every step will rankle the seppies. First off, they can’t make the >50% of national population criterion by combining all four Western provinces (32.4%). The addition of all the other provinces with lesser populations (38.8%) still ain’t enough. Sure, Ontario and Alberta combined makes it (39.1% + 12.1% = 51.1%), but, Hoss, still gonna need five more provinces. If y’all can swallow the anti-Quebec bigotry your doting old sage wrote his mealticket on, might find it a tad easier to make stats—that is, if Quebec gets a decent quid pro quo for its potential ratification. Remind, this is a high stakes game, y’all gotta watch don’t get Aces and eights—like some combination of provinces raising the bet by seeking a amendment that instead categorically forbids secession (Ontario, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, PEI, and New Brunswick the Atlantic could pull it off if the HoC approved). Could happen. Pack some extra coffee, sugar ‘n’ beans, hombres, the trial(s) is long. And that’s just the amendment!
I’m not sure, these points considered, whether a refresher course on the principles of democracy can do anything about covering that nasty II4I brand that Westerners’ votes should count for extra because 60% of Canada’s population lives in Quebec and Ontario. Well, sometimes you just can’t fix stupid. Let’s just work on secession first, okay?
To answer the headline question: ‘Yes’.
We were not planning to vote for Danielle Smith, the UCP ( aka Wildrose/Alberta Separate/Take Back Alberta) before the referendum was announced.
The referendum results will not impact our vote in the next elections.
Even if Danielle crys us a river with her crocodile tears!
By all measures we should be Conservative voters…..but certainly not UCP voters.