'Tis Election Day!

So, we're straggling off to the polls today through the remnants of a late-winter/early-spring snowfall. Well, in all likelihood, something less than 50% of registered voters are doing that. It's provincial election day here, and this time, there's actually some interest in what the results are going to be! The Tories will be ecstatic if their majority grows, or at least doesn't shrink too much (except the legion of Tories who hate Ed Stelmach - they're hoping for disaster, but not enough of a disaster to cost them any real power). The Liberals will call it a success if they increase their seat count, and they'll be over the moon if they could actually force the Tories into a minority government. I don't the NDP are going to be happy at all; they're trailing the Liberals in most places, and will be lucky to hang on to what they've got. The Wildrose Alliance thingy will be happy if everybody in the rest of Canada dies. And the Alberta Greens will be pleased if somebody just notices them.

My prediction - Tory majority, again, with perhaps some modest gains by the Liberals. I see the NDP keeping roughly the same number of seats. The Wildrose Alliance folks could double their seat-count, which would give them two (is the era of Link Byfield, MLA, upon us?). The Greens will continue to get no love in this neck of the woods.

A Provincial Election. We Haz It.

Alberta premier calls election
Jason Markusoff and Archie McLean, edmontonjournal.com
Published: Monday, February 04

EDMONTON - And they're off - and they're all in favour of ending health-care premiums.

Conservative Leader Ed Stelmach formally announced a March 3 election this afternoon, hours after his government's throne speech said the Tories would eliminate health care premiums by 2012.

Safe to say, this is not a surprise election call... The Tory candidate in our riding actually showed up on my doorstep on Sunday morning, waving campaign literature (politely accepted) and asking permission to put up a sign (politely declined). He seemed an pleasant chap, but I'm still not voting for him.

Conventional wisdom on this one is that the Conservatives will probably lose some seats, but I don't think anybody really expects them to lose the election. There is the outside possibility that we'll end up with a minority government, but I think even that's a long-shot. Part of the problem is that none of the opposition parties really show much sign of having the ability to make a run at ousting the Tories. Parallels have been drawn between Ed Stelmach and Harry Strom, but I think they overlook the fact that, when the Socreds were finally ousted from government, the man doing the ousting was Peter freakin' Lougheed. Kevin Taft and Brian Mason, while excellent fellows both, are a bit lacking in the charisma department compared to Lougheed.

Much more importantly, though, is that the upcoming provincial election means that it's time for another Oi! Thump! Election Guide! It will begin as soon as I've figured out what form the snark will take this time around!

Only A Couple More To Go

Todays candidate in the line of fire is...

Ted Morton

• Who He?: A former U. of Calgary poli sci professor, who leapt into politics a while back apparently because we offended God in some way. Was one of our hilarious "senators in waiting" before deciding that provincial politics was a better way to get his grubby hands on the reins of power. He's very much the right-of-right's candidate.
  
  
• Why Should Progressives Support Him?: Only because of the possibility that he would be so dreadful as premier that nobody would vote for his party, perhaps even to the point where he might take Harper down with him.
  
  
• Why Should We Not?: Because he's a contemptible human being, whose only method of campaigning for political office is to try to set people against each other (Albertans against The Rest of Canada, straights against gays, Edmonton against Calgary, etc. etc.). Because he was the mastermind of the jaw-droppingly cynical attempt to weasel the province out of allowing gay marriages right before the leadership campaign. Because the only people he hates more than he hates gays are non-Albertan Canadians. Because every single element of his political ideology involves fucking people over. Because Lorne Gunther endorsed him. I could go on, but you get the idea.
  
  
• Is He Likely To Pick Fights With Homeless People?: No, he might get hurt. He'll have his followers beat the homeless for him, probably on live TV.
  
  
• How are his chances?: Depressingly good. He's still considered an underdog to Dinning, but should make the second ballot easily. After that, it'll depend on which of the two of them the other candidates support.

Todays's Wanna-Be Premier

Presenting...

Lyle Oberg

• Who He?: MLA since 1993, and has held a number of cabinet portfolios. Recently booted out of the Tory caucus, then bizarrely reinstated. Was a medical doctor in private life, a fact which he is apparently quite fond of pointing out to people.
  
  
• Why Should Progressives Support Him?: There's nothing particularly odious in his campaign platform (beyond his stance on youth justice - see below), although there's not much to make progressives stand up and cheer either. He's not afraid to speak his mind, either, even when doing so gets him in hot water.
  
  
• Why Should We Not?: Well, he did stoop to indulge in the anti-youth silliness at a recent campaign forum, for which he was rightly slapped down by Dave Hancock and Gary MacPherson. He also has a reputation for being belligerent and confrontational, and not just in political circles either (there have long been tales of Obergian bad behaviour in pubs around the Legislature Building). In short, there's a pretty good supply of evidence that he's an asshole.
  
  
• Is He Likely To Pick Fights With Homeless People?: Oh my, yes. And probably with everybody else, too.
  
  
• How are his chances?: Poor, since nobody really likes him, and he keeps sticking his foot in his mouth. He could, conceivably, slip through to a second ballot, but's that's as far as it's going to go.

Provincial Tory Leadership Candidates: Two For The Price Of One!

Since I missed yesterday...

Jim Dinning

• Who He?: Was provincial treasurer back in the day, and is usually given "credit" for being the brains behind Klein's budget savagry during the early 90s. Has been out of politics for some time, a fair amount of which he's apparently spent plotting his path to becoming Premier.
  
  
• Why Should Progressives Support Him?: Well, he's certainly the best-organized of the candidates, doubtless due to the long time he's been preparing for this. He also seems to be a competent sort of public official, without any major ideological axes to grind. Lastly, he's received the endorsement of Peter Lougheed, and, despite Ralph Klein's blatherings to the contrary, a thumbs-up from the man who introduced Alberta's human rights act does count for something.
  
  
• Why Should We Not?: As treasurer, he introduced policies that hurt a whole lot of people; he essentially fixed Alberta's financial situation by pounding on the people least able to bear said pounding (despite the fact that his on-line bio claims that the budget was balanced by Albertans "from all walks of life"; that's patently not true). There's also something a bit disturbing about the fact that he's been manoeuvring for policial power for so long.
  
  
• Is He Likely To Pick Fights With Homeless People?: No, which is only fair given that his policies put a good number of them on the streets to begin with...
  
  
• How are his chances?: Right now, he's the odds-on favourite, and it would be stunning if he didn't at least make it to a second ballot. He's really the only candidate with a chance to win on the first ballot, and unless Ted Morton finds a lot more support in these last few days, Dinning will be the next Premier of the province.

And, moving right along,

Dave Hancock

• Who He?: Former Tory cabinet minister in Alberta, holding major portfolios such as Advanced Education. He's also been Government House Leader recently.
  
  
• Why Should Progressives Support Him?: Along with Gary MacPherson, he's one of the only guys in this race who can actually be described as "progressive." He was a decent Advanced Education minister, and has done some good things in working against domestic violence. He's quite strong on environmental issues, and at a recent candidates' forum actually had the guts to call out Ted Morton and Lyle Oberg over their bloodthirsty, hang-'em-high rhetoric concerning youth justice.
  
  
• Why Should We Not?: Very few reasons. He does come across as too confrontational sometimes (although on occasion that's been a welcome trait - see above), and he's sounded silly recently while accusing other candidates of trying to undercut his campaign.
  
  
• Is He Likely To Pick Fights With Homeless People?: Not even slightly.
  
  
• How are his chances?: Unfortunately very slim. He just doesn't have the support to get by Jim Dinning, Ted Morton, and Mark Norris (and maybe even Lyle Oberg).

Another Day, Another Tory Leadership Candidate

Victor Doerksen

• Who He?: Long-time MLA, former Minister of Innovation and Science. Primarily known for his attempt to have Of Mice And Men banned from schools on the grounds that too many characters in the book use the Lord's name in vain.
  
  
• Why Should Progressives Support Him?: Despite his reputation as a fundy nut-case, he's got some interesting and even progressive ideas about child-raising and family finances in general.
  
  
• Why Should We Not?: Well, the fact that he demanded the banning of a work of literature is a problem. Also the fact that he seems bizarrely un-motivated; even Ralph Klein, who'd been his boss for more than a decade, expressed shock when Doerksen actually threw his hat into the ring.
  
  
• Is He Likely To Pick Fights With Homeless People?: Only the ones who read Steinbeck.
  
  
• How are his chances?: Not a chance in Hell. The people who don't remember him unkindly for the book-banning thing are all supporting Ted Morton.

Continuing On With The Provincial Leadership Candidates!

Gary McPherson

• Who He?: Local community leader, heavily involved in community associations (particularly sports-related) and disability-related issues.
  
  
• Why Should Progressives Support Him?: He's probably the most progressive candidate of the bunch, although that really isn't saying much. For someone portrayed as a "one-issue" candidate, he's got a fairly decent grasp of the issues, at least as far as one can tell (see below).
  
  
• Why Should We Not?: There aren't really too many reasons not to support Gary McPherson, although his lack of experience in politics may raise some red flags (he's never been elected, although he's served on a number of government committees). The "one-issue" thing is dogging him a bit as well, and he could afford to be much more specific in terms of exactly what his plans for Alberta are.
  
  
• Is He Likely To Pick Fights With Homeless People?: No. I think a Gary McPherson premiership would be fairly free of that sort of tomfoolery.
  
  
• How are his chances?: Zilch. He's got no real body of support, and pragmatism rather than anything else is going to send potential McPherson voters into other camps.

In other news, Friday Archaeology Blogging is to follow, although possibly not until tomorrow!

Release The Hounds!!! (Provincial Edition)


Arf!Arf!Arf!Arf!Arf!Arf!

Yeah, it's that time again, when we pick on people whose only crime (sometimes) is to aspire to political office. This time, we're going after the candidates to become the next Tory leader here in Alberta, filling the large, beer-stained boots belonging to Ralph Klein. Over the next few days, we'll be picking on the various contenders to be our next premier. Let's start with, oh, Ed Stelmach.

Ed Stelmach

• Who He?: Longtime Tory provincial cabinet minister. Not known for anything, good or bad, in particular.
  
  
• Why Should Progressives Support Him?: Good ideas on preserving wetlands and other sundry environmental matters. Or, at least he's making the right noises in that direction.
  
  
• Why Should We Not?: Dangerously vague on a number of issues (i.e. Arts, homelessness), which leads one to suspect that he actually intends to pretty much ignore them. Is trying to portray himself as "tough on crime", without having any notions about how to reduce the crime rate. Wants to build more prisons.
  
  
• Is He Likely To Pick Fights With Homeless People?: Not really, although it's a bit hard to tell.
  
  
• How are his chances?: Slim. There nothing that really sets him apart from the others, and he'll be happy to make to a second ballot.

Last, and Certainly Least...

We have the Western Block Party.

Where to start with these losers... Well, let's begin by talking about a party whose leader vanished from sight shortly before the election was called. We could also mention that said leader has ties to neo-Nazis, and that he's pretty much a pillock in general. We could go on, but I think you get the idea. Whiny, greedy, cruel little chickenshits, the lot of them, but fortunately no threat to anything.

If this party were an animal, it would be: passed out drunk.



Position on environmental concerns? The environment is our slave (Note: this is probably very similar to the WBP's policy on women).

Attitude towards our friends to the South? Grovelling sycophancy, for the most part.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? 100%. Which is ironic...

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? After careful consideration of the many complex issues involved in this election, I have decided not to support the Western Block Party. Because they're fucking twits.

Nearly Done!

The penultimate party is the Progressive Canadian Party.

Ah, the party comprised of those Progressive Conservatives who had souls when the old PCs merged with the Reform Alliance thingy. It actually would not take much to get me to vote for these guys, particularly in this election, except that, once again, they are not running in my riding. God, I hope I don't pick up my ballot on Monday and find out that there are only three candidates to chose from. Anyway, the Progressive Canadian Party is almost as left-wing as the NDP, overall, and actually seem like quite decent folks. Pity they haven't got a prayer in this election.

If this party were an animal, it would be: A bengal tiger, or some other animal that is in danger of being wiped out by conservatives.



Position on environmental concerns? Would keep Kyoto.

Attitude towards our friends to the South? Hard to tell, actually.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? I'm guessing maybe 3%, if the conservative part of their past reared its head. Not very likely, in any case.

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? No, see above.

Hey, We Might Actually Get This Thing Done...

...as we push on, and arrive at the New Democratic Party.

What the fuck is it with nauseating colour schemes on party websites this time around? Yeesh. Anyway, the mildly socialistic NDP are in some danger of losing the political power they got last time. On the other hand, they are also in danger of holding the balance of power opposite a minority conservative government, which would be frickin' hilarious to watch.

If this party were an animal, it would be: A cute little squirrel, one which is capable of killing a dog.



Position on environmental concerns? The environment must be protected!

Attitude towards our friends to the South? Ambivalence.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? 0%

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? It's a possibility.

Closer, closer...

Well, we could hardly talk about the Communist Party of Canada without describing their nemeses, the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada.

Last time out, these guys were all about the Hardial Bains, but he's conspicuous by his absence from the website this time around. Also conspicuous by its absence from the website is something that is not a hideous red-and-yellow colour scheme. But enough about that. The MLPC seems to have garnered a few ideas from the Bloc on the subject of Quebec independence, and there's lots of stuff about defending the rights of workers, which is both predictable and good. Oh, and I take back the Hardial Bains comment; here he is!

If this party were an animal, it would be: A bear, but not the same bear as the Communist Party of Canada.



Position on environmental concerns? As long as the workers aren't getting screwed over...

Attitude towards our friends to the South? Hatred.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? 0%

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? Except for the Quebec thing, I'd be tempted to, but they're not fucking running in my riding, dammitall.

Smokin'

Next up in the rapid-fire election guide, we have the Marijuana Party.

This is truly a one-issue party. No, really. Actually, they have a fair bit to say about internet regulation as well, but at heart, these guys are all about freein' the bud. A worthy effort, probably, since criminalization of marijuana is moronic and expensive (mostly moronic). And, you have a like a political party that uses an obscenity, albeit an asterisked obscenity, in their party platform.

If this party were an animal, it would be: A marijuana plant.



Position on environmental concerns? Legalizing hemp is probably a good environmental thing to do.

Attitude towards our friends to the South? Visceral fear.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? Probably not very high.

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? They are running exactly one candidate in Alberta, and he's not in Oi! Thump!'s riding.

I Think Some Parties Are Going To Get Left Out Of The Election Guide...

But here's the Libertarian Party, anyway.

The Libertarians have cleaned up the train wreck that was their web site last time out, but there still the same old Libertarians at heart. I was interested to note that they are still clinging to the hoary old pseudo-economic logic for supporting and encouraging price gouging during times of national calamity. Nice, guys. Anyway, they're definitely the party for lazy people who don't give a rat's ass about other folks.

If this party were an animal, it would be: A rat. Yes, sometimes the obvious choice is the best one.



Position on environmental concerns? They really don't care.

Attitude towards our friends to the South? They don't like Americans; apparently our neighbours aren't libertarian enough for them.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? 0%. This may be the only issue on which I agree with the Libertarians.

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? You couldn't pay me to.

Moving Right Along

And here we have the dreaded Liberal Party.

Well, they're going to get spanked on Monday, probably given a wee timeout to think about their past sins. And what sins are those, you ask? Well, let's begin with a calculated (and successful) attempt to wrest the party away from somebody who wasn't actually doing that bad a job, and then subsequently failing to live up to standards. And unless Ralph Klein rides to their rescue once again, there's going to be some fairly spectacular bloodletting in the Liberal party after this election.

If this party were an animal, it would be: A beached whale.



Position on environmental concerns? Whatever will attract voters.

Attitude towards our friends to the South? Probably better than we think it is.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? 0%

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? Probably not.

Oi! Thump! Suddenly Realizes That The Election Is, Like, 3 Days Away, And Decides To Get Its Ass In Gear On This Election Guide Boondoggle

Here's the Green Party.

Ah, the Green party. Starting to get the support due a major party, but none of the respect. One of these days, these guys are going to put some people in Parliament, but it probably won't happen in the strategic voting nightmare that is going to be this election. Oh, and keeping them out of the leaders' debates is fucking undemocratic, so stop it. One piece of criticism: Let's just say that there's an early 1980s issue of Owl Magazine on Line 1, and it wants its election signs back.

If this party were an animal, it would be: A nightingale. Nice voice, awfully hard to see.



Position on environmental concerns? Um, hello? The Green party?!??

Attitude towards our friends to the South? Foreign policy ain't really their thang, but they are protectionist to a degree.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? Zilch.

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? Probably.

Part Whatever of the Election Guide

Today we've got the First Peoples National Party of Canada.

Ok, so we've needed a Native voice in Parliament for the longest time (Fun fact: Canadian aboriginals didn't even get the vote until 1961). And, lo-and-behold, the FPNPC has stepped forward! Their platform is predictable, involving raising the status and well-being of Natives in the economic and social spheres, and their platform reads like what Dept. of Indian Affairs ought to be doing. An interesting bunch, to say the least...

If this party were an animal, it would be: I really have no idea.

Position on environmental concerns? Very, very in favour. They actually have enviromentalism enshrined in the "spiritual" section of their platform.

Attitude towards our friends to the South? They're anti-NAFTA, but generally seem fairly friendly.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? Unknown.

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? No candidate in our riding, but we'd seriously consider it if there were.

Next up, it's the Greenies!

Whatsit Six of Our Election Guide

Presenting... The Conservative Party of Canada!

At this point, they can taste it. It's right there, so close, only a couple of weeks not even until they can, um, well, what can they do, should the current poll numbers hold up and they form the next government? Well, not as much as you'd think. They're not going to ban gay marriage, because the courts would slap them silly. Nor will they use the notwithstanding clause to push it through, since doing something that stupidly petty would mean that the next election results for them will make Kim Campbell look like a landslide winner. They won't send us to Iraq, although they would probably like to. Their best friends to the South of us are going through a bit of a rough patch, so cozying up to them isn't really an option. That pretty much leaves wrecking the economy, and, although they'll give it their best shot, the Canadian economy is fairly resilient. So they'll muddle along until the Canadian populace decides that the Liberals have been punished enough, and then they'll go away again. In the meantime we'll get to laugh at Stephen Harper.

If this party were an animal, it would be: A pet rock. Not terribly interesting, and useful only for breaking things.



Position on environmental concerns? They're in favour of environmentalism, as long as nobody offers them any money at all to be otherwise.

Attitude towards our friends to the South? Alternates between being slavishly sycophantic and pretending not to be slavishly sycophantic.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? 0%. See above.

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? No.

Next in line is, I believe, the First Peoples National Party of Canada.

Now Where Were We...

Ah, yes, we were up to the Communist Party of Canada.

While many parties of this ilk in North America would be ashamed to be thought of as socialist, the CPC proudly displays its old-school political leanings, as befits one of Canada's oldest political parties. And, actually, the name pretty much sums it up; shockingly, they have a left-wing platform. While winning seats is pretty much beyond them, they'll be looking to make up some ground on their arch-rivals, the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada, who womped them by a nearly 2-1 margin last time around. I'd be more optimistic about their chances if they actually gave candidate information on their web-site. And if they actually ran candidates in Saskatchewan, the freakin' birthplace of Canadian socialism, which they don't seem to have done last time around.

If this party were an animal, it would be: A bear, of course. What did you think I was going to say?



Position on environmental concerns? In favour!

Attitude towards our friends to the South? I don't think they like the Bush boys, much.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? 0%

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? Oi! Thump! is thinking about it.

We're back to the biggies in the next chapter, as we run the rule over the Conservatives.

The Fourth Circle of the Oi! Thump! Election Guide

Where our intrepid adventurers encounter the dreaded Christian Heritage Party.

Well, not so much dreaded, as mocked. Whereas to the south of us the religious right is a potent political force, it just ain't so up here. What there is of it is generally represented by the long-suffering Christian Heritage Party, a walking argument for proportional representation. "But Oi! Thump!," you say, "wouldn't rep-by-pop mean that these numbskulls would actually get seats in parliament?" Indeed it would, gentle reader, and wouldn't you pay to see these guys spewing Question Period vitriol at whatever group they were hating on at that particular moment? It would ensure the success of left-wing legislation for years.

If this party were an animal, it would be: A chipmunk, or perhaps a chp-monk. Ok, ok, I was just leaving.



Position on environmental concerns? Oddly enough, quite strong (in a good way) on alternative energy sources.

Attitude towards our friends to the South? Depends which friends to the south we're talking about. They're working overtime during this campaign not to look like Ralph Reed North, but the connection's there.

Percent likelihood that they'll try to repeal gay marriage? 1,258,416,873.54%. If these folks didn't try to bring back the death penalty for sodomy, we'd be a bit surprised.

Is Oi! Thump! voting for them? Hmmm, lemme think....

In the on-deck circle: the Communist Party of Canada!