tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6929537540404873123.post4603960789112178770..comments2023-10-04T06:59:20.803-06:00Comments on The Enlightened Savage: Calgary West - the AftermathEnlightened Savagehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872131888278838737noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6929537540404873123.post-39388570951231279442009-04-03T12:39:00.000-06:002009-04-03T12:39:00.000-06:00Thanks for your detailed and careful analysis of t...Thanks for your detailed and careful analysis of the situation, ES. While I recognize Another Source's point about the distinction between legalities and political realities, there has been so much past litigation surrounding Rotten Rob's nominations that it is a sure thing that the party will want to see that this process, however it unfolds, is technically squeaky-clean. That is really going to constrain both sides of the issue in terms of possible shenanigans.<BR/><BR/>This situation really highlights the heavy burden which the national party organization has put on challengers to incumbents. Getting a 66% RESPONSE RATE is a major accomplishment in most open processes, much less getting that proportion on one side of an issue. I wish the challengers the best of luck. They might want to stay organized to challenge for election to the party's national board if rules like this are going to set the stage in constituencies.One Alberta Voternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6929537540404873123.post-72090252718302488052009-04-02T21:17:00.000-06:002009-04-02T21:17:00.000-06:00Holy cow!!! What a very detailed posting. 66% of a...Holy cow!!! What a very detailed posting. 66% of all party members in Calgary West? Interesting number. There is no way everyone will get active enough to respond to that. Not 66%. <BR/><BR/>I'm not a Conservative party member. Obviously I would love to see Rob go.Seener Beanerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15556544454784059314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6929537540404873123.post-21826591585385616362009-04-01T21:34:00.000-06:002009-04-01T21:34:00.000-06:00Your post is a very eloquent and accurate depictio...Your post is a very eloquent and accurate depiction of how EDAs are supposed to run. However, if you don't mind my saying so, you're being more than a bit naive about how riding-level politics works.<BR/><BR/><B>The Board candidates were all in favour of a NOMINATION CONTEST - NOT in favour, necessarily, of Dumping Rob Anders.</B><BR/><BR/>But in practice, we know perfectly well that's EXACTLY why they were there.<BR/><BR/>The only reason EDA takeovers like this happen is so one side can gain an advantage over their opponents, either to win a local nomination race, or as part of a wider strategy. (When all those Liberal EDAs were being replaced back in 2001-02, do you think it was because Paul Martin's supporters were enthusiastic about bringing "accountable and transparent" governance to their ridings?)<BR/><BR/><B>But, in the interim, the business of the party needs to be done. The board and the nominee have to ensure election readiness, so that if the government falls tomorrow, they're ready to go to bat and to support their party's nominee in the riding - Rob Anders - in the 41st General Election.</B><BR/><BR/>That's what they're *supposed* to do, but by no means do they *have* to do it.<BR/><BR/>Maybe they only care about winning the nomination for Donna Kennedy-Glans and if that doesn't work out, they'll just walk away.<BR/><BR/>Maybe if they don't win the nomination, they'll deliberately try to sabotage the Conservatives' chances. (Perhaps by releasing damaging claims about Anders in the middle of an election)<BR/><BR/>Maybe they're allied with someone else in the party, who is working a different angle (like Paul Martin 2002)<BR/><BR/>Or, maybe they really are all about grassroots democracy, transparency and accountability.<BR/><BR/>We shall see.Another sourcenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6929537540404873123.post-56497543047461832552009-04-01T16:44:00.000-06:002009-04-01T16:44:00.000-06:00Great Post... If I recall, there was a deadline to...Great Post... If I recall, there was a deadline to purchase memberships before the AGM ( and thus likely affecting the ability to be part of the 2/3 majority) so would this restrict any challenge? Anyways...it is going to be interesting...calgary rantshttp://www.calgaryrants.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.com