[I reference here some of the "predictions" I made in my April 14 post - see below]
The clearest conclusion is that Premier Redford won her gamble that Alberta had fundamentally changed over the past few years and become a province that is young, urban, multi-cultural and outward looking. On the other hand, Wildrose's call to reinforce traditional "cowboy values" did not resonate. Some policies from the past that were brought forward, including: direct payments from the surplus to citizens, "firewall" proposals such as a provincial police force and an Alberta Pension Plan not only did not resonate but produced a backlash - during the campaign.
Then there were the "bozo eruptions" highlighting the rapid growth of a Wildrose Party that didn't have time to properly vet its candidates. One of these - Allan Hunsperger's year old article about gays ending up in an "eternal lake of fire" were well deserved rebukes. Anyone who subscribes to these 12th Century dogmas is an embarrassment to their church, let alone their constituency. [He did, though garner over 2000 votes, some 17% of the total and ahead of 3 other candidates - so go figure.] The other prominent "bozo" - Ron Leech - was running in a thoroughly multi-cultural constituency. He was aware of divisions between people of Pakistani and East Indian background - not to mention Sikh-Hindu-Muslim frictions. He tried to say [during an interview on a Punjabi radio station] that he could be perceived as apart from this factionalism because of his "old stock" background. However, these nuances quickly were lost and he became part of the "scary narrative". His successful PC opponent, Manmeet Bhullar, put it best when he commented “Mr. Leech lives in the past, we’ll let him stay in the past.” More than the multi-cultural angle, this statement captures the irony that whereas in 1971 when Peter Lougheed overthrew the tired 36 year long Social Credit regime, he represented the young, energetic, "hip" generation - the threat to the PC's in the 2012 election came from a Wildrose Party that too easily had its views and personnel characterized as old-fashioned and "uncool".
Wildrose is taking consolation from the facts that it moved from 4 to 17 seats (in an 87 seat legislature) and that it's percentage of the popular vote overall was close to 35%. These are being claimed as a basis upon which to grow. However, if my analysis above is correct, it's hard to see how Wildrose can grow. The bulk of their support is from older, Alberta-born, rural voters. All of these elements are decreasing in numbers and influence. The complete shut-out of the Wildrose in both Edmonton and Calgary [2 partially rural Calgary fringe seats being the exception, perhaps] and even PC victories in urban Red Deer and Lethbridge - islands in a Wildrose sea - point to Wildrose being born as a spent force.
Some will also argue that there is time for Danielle Smith and her winnowed caucus to grow and mature as the official opposition. However, it's hard to imagine the PC's being more vulnerable than they have been in the last 2 years. The arrogance, entitlement and corruption were close enough to the surface to be visible but those Albertans who voted (about 57%) by and large opted for the usual garden variety politics rather than the "scary" alternative of a thorny Wildrose, blooming wild and unpruned.
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Saturday, April 14, 2012
Alberta Election Patterns
Thanks to those who urged me to get back to this blog especially with an election on!
I was probably among the first to point out the "3 and out" pattern in Alberta's political history, many years ago when I taught a course on Western Canadian History. During the current campaign there have been a number of references to this pattern even though it was broken by Premiers Stelmach and Redford.
Briefly, the pattern was: long periods in power by a party with huge majorities; then a pivotal election when the governing party was overwhelmingly defeated by an entirely new party who won a large majority. On top of this was the pattern that each governing era featured three premiers. Thus it went:
Liberals: 1905 - 1921 - Premiers Rutherford, Sifton, Stewart
United Farmers of Alberta: 1921 - 1935 - Premiers Greenfield, Brownlee, Reid
Social Credit: 1935 - 1971 - Premiers Aberhart, Manning, Strome
Progressive Conservatives: 1971 - 2012 - Premiers Lougheed, Getty, Klein - AND then - Stelmach, Redford
Some are pointing to this overall pattern as foreshadowing a large scale victory by newcomer Wildrose in 2012.
Another dichotomy that has emerged in the campaign is between "traditional Alberta" and "modern Alberta". Candidate Danielle Smith has put forward "cowboy values" [Play fair. Speak the truth. Keep your promise.] as central to Alberta's identity. Premier Redford is conspicuously distancing herself from the traditional with the slogan "Not your father's PC Party" and appealing to what she sees as a new liberal, urban, multi-cultural, secular Albertan. Each is gambling their electoral success on which Alberta will vote on April 23, 2012.
The two paradigms intersect over the question of; "Will Alberta continue its tradition of a political monoculture where there are very small numbers of Opposition MLAs. From current polling results it appears that Albertans generally are turning to Wildrose with the significant exception being Edmonton.
Finally, it certainly seems to be time for a change as a culture of corruption and entitlement has settled over the PCs. The polls are increasingly pointing to a Wildrose majority. However, historical events are never as "inevitable" as they always appear in retrospect. Will Redford reprise the fall of Kim Campbell or will Smith be in the tradition of Nancy Betkowski. On April 24th it will all be much clearer.
I was probably among the first to point out the "3 and out" pattern in Alberta's political history, many years ago when I taught a course on Western Canadian History. During the current campaign there have been a number of references to this pattern even though it was broken by Premiers Stelmach and Redford.
Briefly, the pattern was: long periods in power by a party with huge majorities; then a pivotal election when the governing party was overwhelmingly defeated by an entirely new party who won a large majority. On top of this was the pattern that each governing era featured three premiers. Thus it went:
Liberals: 1905 - 1921 - Premiers Rutherford, Sifton, Stewart
United Farmers of Alberta: 1921 - 1935 - Premiers Greenfield, Brownlee, Reid
Social Credit: 1935 - 1971 - Premiers Aberhart, Manning, Strome
Progressive Conservatives: 1971 - 2012 - Premiers Lougheed, Getty, Klein - AND then - Stelmach, Redford
Some are pointing to this overall pattern as foreshadowing a large scale victory by newcomer Wildrose in 2012.
Another dichotomy that has emerged in the campaign is between "traditional Alberta" and "modern Alberta". Candidate Danielle Smith has put forward "cowboy values" [Play fair. Speak the truth. Keep your promise.] as central to Alberta's identity. Premier Redford is conspicuously distancing herself from the traditional with the slogan "Not your father's PC Party" and appealing to what she sees as a new liberal, urban, multi-cultural, secular Albertan. Each is gambling their electoral success on which Alberta will vote on April 23, 2012.
The two paradigms intersect over the question of; "Will Alberta continue its tradition of a political monoculture where there are very small numbers of Opposition MLAs. From current polling results it appears that Albertans generally are turning to Wildrose with the significant exception being Edmonton.
Finally, it certainly seems to be time for a change as a culture of corruption and entitlement has settled over the PCs. The polls are increasingly pointing to a Wildrose majority. However, historical events are never as "inevitable" as they always appear in retrospect. Will Redford reprise the fall of Kim Campbell or will Smith be in the tradition of Nancy Betkowski. On April 24th it will all be much clearer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)