Meanwhile, Back in Alberta...

The Chief Electoral Officer releases a list of recommendations based on the March, 2008 General Election.

It's a pretty comprehensive list (including allowing inmates the right to vote - sorry, but no), however the 2 recommendations getting the most public attention are the proposed change to how Deputy Returning Officers are hired, and the suggested implementation of fixed election dates.

Premier Stelmach has already announced he has every intention of letting Elections Alberta recruit and hire DRO's, to avoid some of the ugliness of the last campaign. He has even hinted strongly they should be ready to go by the next provincial election, which will be held "in 2012, on or around the same time (March)" - I'm going to hold you to that, Mr. Premier. King Eddie, however, stopped short of endorsing the recommendation for fixed election dates.

Now, there's plenty of room for disagreement on this issue... in fact, there's word that several provincial Tories will be bringing the fixed election date issue to the Alberta PC AGM at the start of October. I'm willing to listen to arguments that have nothing to do with partisan advantage about why fixed election dates are a bad idea - although, going INTO those discussions, I confess I'm a fan of fixed election dates. I think they're good policy (when FOLLOWED - not mentioning any names), and if Ed wants to ensure his re-election in 2012, all he has to do is legislate the next election date - Albertans absolutely LOVE electoral reforms that make things at least SEEM more fair and transparent... Triple E senate, fixed election dates, right of recall, there was even talk about term limits for a while... this is the bread and butter of the old Reform Party, which was the last political entity that actually made the Alberta PC's nervous (there had been talk of going provincial when it seemed Ottawa would shut them out forever). Adopting any or all of those planks as part of an electoral reform package might level the playing field a bit (which might stand to hurt the PC's EVENTUALLY), but by virtue of the fact that Albertans would know that Ed made those changes when he didn't have to, and when he had something to lose by so doing, they'd reward him for it. Remember: One of the reasons Washington is so revered is because he gave up some of the powers that Congress was trying to give him.

The quote that raised my eyebrow in Spock-esque fashion this morning was this:

"I've looked at municipalities that have had fixed election dates since their inception and voter turnout has been extremely poor, much lower than what we experienced in the last election"

Well, yeah... but those are municipalities. Canadians, for whatever reason, are more likely to show up and vote in elections if the winner's official residence is further away. Take Calgary's voters, for example:

2007 Municipal Election (fixed): 209,748 votes cast for Mayor.
2008 Provincial Election (non-fixed): 279,719 votes cast
2006 Federal Election (non-fixed): ~429,207 votes cast

Now, this doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me - municipal politicians are the ones who make the decisions that affect you most on a day-to-day basis - but that's a post for another time. The fact is, whether or not Ed is sure that fixed dates will HELP voter turn-out... they certainly can't HURT it, can they?

Consider the case of San Jose, California... it has a similar population to Calgary, and fixed election dates for municipal, state and (of course) federal elections.

2006 Mayoral Election: 125,775 votes cast
2006 Gubernatorial Election: ~400,000 votes cast
2004 Presidential Election: ~600,000 votes cast

Again, the municipal numbers are way lower - but I don't see that as having anything to do with the fact that it's a fixed election date... it's just about the fact that it's a municipal election, and the voters (foolishly, in my opinion) don't care. The state election had a fixed date, and voter turn-out was FAR higher than Calgary's participation in the Alberta General Election of 2008.

Now, I know we're not them, and they're not us... but, they've got fixed election dates there, and UNlike Alberta, where the jump from voter participation in municipal and state/provincial races was less than 50%, their vote count more than doubled (they have even less of an excuse than we do, as their mayoral and gubernatorial elections happened on the same day, in the same polling stations).

So, to sum up: Ed and I disagree on this issue. Don't worry, I'm not going to let it affect the relationship we've spent so much time cultivating - we'll still go fishing, crack open a couple of cold ones... but, where Ed looks at the recommendation and sees no reason to believe it will HELP, I look at it and see no reason it could HURT. I mean, he's already said "on or around (March of 2012)"... so what does it hurt to enshrine that date in law?

It will be interesting to see how the government responds if the fixed date issue is put to a vote and passes at the PC AGM... on the one hand, you've got frustrated grassroots party members who feel the AGM's are just an expensive waste of time, and that caucus ignores the results of the discussions anyhow... on the other hand, you've got all sorts of back-room strategists who want to leave the door open to pick-and-choose their date... ultimately, I've got to trust my Premier to do the right thing. He hasn't led me astray yet.

And in the world of politics, when consensus is unavailable, the only real currency you have is trust. Following many of the CEO's recommendations would engender that trust with a large number of Alberta's intelligent, moderate, not-rabidly-partisan electorate. And THAT, Dear Edward, is a ticket to another majority...

and another...

and another...

Greens Open Calgary Centre Riding Office

From Kevin Colton, Campaign Manager for Natalie Odd:

"The Calgary Centre campaign is happy to announce that our downtown store-front office is open and ready for business! We are having an office opening party this Friday night, Sept. 19 @ 7:00 pm. We are willing and able to share the office with campaigns in other ridings, so everyone from the Calgary area is invited to attend.

The office address is 608 7th St. SW and the phone number is 403-668-6606. You can't miss it for the wall of Green Party signs we have plastered in the windows."

The Battles for Crowfoot and Edmonton Centre

Crowfoot

The riding of Crowfoot covers a fairly wide swath of Central Alberta, sharing boundaries with the City of Calgary and heading East and North from there. I'd like to tell you that this is going to be a race, that campaigns matter, and that 3 weeks is a long time in politics - but the result here is all but guaranteed. In 2004, Conservative Kevin Sorenson won this riding by 40,000 votes, capturing 82.5% of votes cast. Remember when John Ashcroft lost a U.S. Senate election to a dead opponent? Kevin Sorenson could go into a coma and win this riding with 75% of the votes cast.

Kevin Sorenson (CPC) - Sorenson has been this riding's MP since 2000, when he won 70% of votes cast as a member of the Canadian Alliance. He registered 80% support in the 2004 election, and 82.5% in 2006. It appears that Sorenson is aiming to, at this rate, be the first MP ever elected unanimously. The Camrose-area farmer isn't too likely to find himself in the cabinet, but he's more than making up for it with his committee work-load.

Sharon Howe (Lib) - A 2-time candidate for the Alberta Liberals (1997 and 2004), Sharon Howe is a former Air Force brat who shares a love of mine - old maps. The community-minded Howe is going to have plenty of time to write her next book after this bloodbath is over.

Ellen Parker (NDP) - Ellen Parker was actually the runner-up in this riding in 2006, having previously finished 3rd in 2004. Now, you'd think this makes her due to win this time around, and you might be right - but it's still not going to happen. Look for the substitute teacher and activist to pull in her usual 6-8% of the votes.

Cameron Wigmore (Grn) - Wigmore ran for the Greens here in 2006, pulling in nearly 5% of the vote. The saxophonist and music teacher, who has been living in B.C., maintains a blog, so bonus marks from the Enlightened Savage. There seems to be a little confusion, as Wigmore is identified in several media outlets as the Green candidate in Crowfoot, yet he's not listed on the Green Party website or, more reliably, on daveberta's list of Alberta candidates.

Take a look at: Kevin Sorenson. When the result is already assured, some candidates take it easy, and some work harder than ever. Which type is Sorenson?

Edmonton Centre

Edmonton Centre, most will recall, is the former home riding of "Landslide Annie" herself, Anne McLellan. The popular former Deputy Prime Minister was defeated in 2006 by Conservative Laurie Hawn, who is seeking re-election this time around. The riding historically has been a pretty even mix of conservative and liberal voters, as evidenced by the close results here federally, and the fact that the riding is mostly shaded red on the map of provincial ridings. Hawn is facing a re-invigorated Liberal opponent in Jim Wachowich, and (as it always is), this downtown-area riding will be one to watch as the polling numbers come in on October 14th.

Laurie Hawn (CPC) - Laurie Hawn ran for MP here in 2004, losing narrowly to McLellan. Never one to surrender, the retired Air Force Lieutenant-Colonel took another stab at it in 2006, and won by 3,000 votes. Most recently having served as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence, Hawn is hoping to hold this seat for the Tories - a tall order, considering his Liberal opponent. His website features a banner with a particularly spooky-looking Stephen Harper. Hawn has a blog, but it hasn't been updated since March of 2007. Insert your own Tory campaign platform joke here.

Jim Wachowich (Lib) - Jim Wachowich is a lawyer and consumer's advocate, who asserts out that the riding's strong representation under Anne McLellan is sorely lacking under the current MP. The Wachowich campaign is going gang-busters in trying to win this riding back for Big Red, and nothing inspires a more tenacious effort than the swift kick in the pants they collectively received in 2006. Wachowich is apparently winning the sign wars in the riding (for what little that's worth), and is by all accounts setting a blistering pace on the door-knocking front. The campaign is organized, the candidate is energized - now, can the message resonate with the voters?

Donna Martyn (NDP) - Donna Martyn finished third in this riding in 2006, and has also previously run for the Alberta NDP in the riding of Edmonton Riverview in 2004. This school-teacher is an advocate for the rights of those with disabilities and mobility challenges, and succesfully complained to the Alberta Human Rights Commission regarding the lack of 24-hour taxi service for mobility-challenged users in Edmonton. While this is a strong part of Edmonton for the provincial New Democrats, many provincial NDP supporters cast their federal ballots with the Liberals, hoping for a left-friendly result. This is likely to be the case this time as well, as those same New Democrat supporters saw what happened when they voted their conscience instead of strategically in 2006, and ended up with a Conservative MP.

David Parker (Grn) - David Parker was the leader of the Alberta Greens from 1996-2001. He ran unsuccessfully twice in Edmonton Goldbar and twice in Edmonton Centre provincially, as well as twice in the federal riding of Edmonton Centre. Parker blogs, which is always a good sign (I firmly believe that the better a person's blog entries, the more inclined people should be to vote for them if and when they run for office - but I may be a bit biased). That said, Parker's goal here is simply to win the party's traditional 3,000-or-so votes, and hold the banner high. He'll do both of those, but don't expect too much more.

Margaret Saunter (CH) - Margaret Saunter ran in the provincial riding of Edmonton Centre in 2008, capturing 0.46% of votes cast. Saunter also finished 14th in the Ward 4 City Councillor race for Edmonton in 2007. While she is not listed on the Christian Heritage Party website as a candidate as yet, Saunter will be trying to poach votes from Laurie Hawn based on the Conservative Party's deplorable record of showing respect for plurality and for Canadians of different faiths. Oh, the shame!

Savannah Linklater (Ltn) - The Libertarians get into the act with candidate Savannah Linklater. Linklater is the Deputy Leader of the party, and will have a hard time convincing folks in one of the reddest parts of Red-monton that the best government is no government at all.

Take a look at: Jim Wachowich. This riding has spent a lot of time in Liberal hands, and the party organization is strong here. Wachowich isn't the favourite to take the riding - that goes to the incumbent - but he's not much of an underdog, either. If I'm still up at 2 a.m. Mountain Time on October 15th, it'll likely be this riding I'm watching.

Headlines That Reflect a Disconnect With Reality

"Harper agrees to release of Afghan war cost report". This is being made a big deal of by the MSM as a "TRUE costing of the war in Afghanistan".


You want the TRUE Afghan war cost report? You read it here first.

Prescott Shipway, Sergeant

Andrew Grenon, Corporal

Chad Horn, Private

Mike Seggie, Corporal

Shawn Eades, Sergeant

Stephan Stock, Sapper

Dustin Wasden, Corporal

Erin Doyle, Master Corporal

Josh Roberts, Master Corporal

James Arnal, Corporal

Colin Wilmot, Private

Brendan Downey, Corporal

Jonathan Snyder, Captain

Richard Leary, Captain

Michael Starker, Corporal

Terry Street, Private

Jason Boyes, Sergeant

Jérémie Ouellet, Bombardier

Michael Hayakaze, Trooper

Étienne Gonthier, Corporal

Richard Renaud, Trooper

Eric Labbe, Corporal

Hani Massouh, Warrant officer

Jonathan Dion, Gunner

Nicolas Beauchamp, Corporal

Michel Levesque, Private

Nathan Hornburg, Corporal

Raymond Ruckpaul, Major

Christian Duchesne, Master corporal

Mario Mercier, Master Warrant officer

Simon Longtin, Private

Jordan Anderson, Corporal

Cole Bartsch, Corporal

Colin Bason, Master corporal

Matthew Dawe, Captain

Jefferson Francis, Captain

Lane Watkins, Private

Stephen Bouzane, Corporal

Christos Karigiannis, Sergeant

Joel Wiebe, Private

Darryl Caswell, Trooper

Darrell Priede, Master corporal

Matthew McCully, Corporal

Anthony Klumpenhouwer, Master corporal

Patrick Pentland, Trooper

Allan Stewart, Master corporal

David Greenslade, Private

Kevin Kennedy, Private

Donald Lucas, Sergeant

Brent Poland, Corporal

Christopher Stannix, Corporal

Aaron Williams, Corporal

Kevin Megeney, Corporal

Robert Girouard, Chief Warrant officer

Albert Storm, Corporal

Darcy Tedford, Sergeant

Blake Williamson, Private

Mark Wilson, Trooper

Craig Gillam, Sergeant

Robert Mitchell, Corporal

Josh Klukie, Private

Glen Arnold, Corporal

David Byers, Private

Shane Keating, Corporal

Keith Morley, Corporal

Mark Graham, Private

William Cushley, Private

Frank Mellish, Warrant officer

Richard Nolan, Warrant officer

Shane Stachnik, Sergeant

David Braun, Corporal

Andrew Eykelenboom, Corporal

Jeffrey Walsh, Master corporal

Raymond Arndt, Master corporal

Kevin Dallaire, Private

Vaughan Ingram, Sergeant

Bryce Keller, Corporal

Christopher Reid, Corporal

Francisco Gomez, Corporal

Jason Warren, Corporal

Anthony Boneca, Corporal

Nichola Goddard, Captain

Matthew Dinning, Corporal

Myles Mansell, Bombardier

Randy Payne, Corporal

William Turner, Lieutenant

Robert Costall, Private

Paul Davis, Corporal

Timothy Wilson, Master corporal

Glyn Berry, Diplomat

Braun Woodfield, Private

Jamie Murphy, Corporal

Robbie Beerenfenger, Corporal

Robert Short, Sergeant

Ainsworth Dyer, Corporal

Richard Green, Private

Marc Leger, Sergeant

Nathan Smith, Private

Volunteers, each and every one of them. Killed halfway across the world while selflessly trying to improve the lives of complete strangers. None of them WANTED to die, but all of them knew it COULD happen - and yet still they went.

THAT is the cost of this war.

Whether you agree with the mission or not, whether you think they should come home right now, in 2011, or 5 years ago... if you think the cost of this mission is measured in dollars, you're completely out of touch with reality.

98 broken families. 98 young Canadian men and women dead. That is the cost of this war. Whether that cost has been worthwhile is up to each of us to decide for ourselves - there's not even unanimity among the 98 families who have paid that price.

So, no matter if the monetary cost has been 8 Billion, or 10 Billion, or more... even at $10 Billion, that's $500 for each taxpayer. Sure, I've got things I'd rather spend $500 on than taxes...

But ask Chad Horn's family what this war cost them. I don't think they'll be talking about their tax dollars.

Turner vs. CPAC vs. Janke - The Blogosphere Gets It Right

See, the aggravating thing about the internet, Garth Turner, is that it's not simply a tool you can use to glorify yourself and score political cheap-shots against your opponents. Sometimes, being the "best-known politician on the blogosphere" can come back to bite you.

Judge for yourself...

Angry in the Great White North sees something amiss in the CPAC coverage of Garth Turner door-knocking in his riding of Halton. Shouldn't Garth know that guy? The son of his campaign manager?

Doesn't SEEM like Garth knows his campaign manager's son... After all, if he DID know the guy, this would be a set-up, right? Dishonest. Speaking to poor character. So, we'll take Garth at his word, that he doesn't know the son of his campaign manager. At least, with the facts coming to light, Garth would no doubt be happy to post a response on his campaign website? No? Well, surely he'll be more than happy to discuss the issue and clear the air with CPAC's Peter van Dusen, right?

Party on, Garth.



UPDATE: 9/16 11:07 am

Garth owns it. Daylight IS the best disinfectant, after all. Now, what about his Tory opponent?

Quick Update

Nation, I've been out of action for the past few days with a bit of a bug. I'm back on the up-swing, and will get caught up on the riding-by-riding profiles within the next few days.

Thanks for the patience...

Ironic Liz May Quote of the Day

"We appeal to Reformers who ... believe their party was a grassroots democracy and found out that (the Tories had) the most top-down autocratic-style of government in Canadian history."

Good call... I think everyone agrees that the Greens are a grassroots party, where the leader would never, for example, show up at nomination meetings to endorse their preferred candidates and attack those candidates who oppose their own leadership.

After all... that would be a top-down, autocratic style of leadership...

The Battle For British Columbia

Ah, British Columbia... the home of the 2010 Olympic Winter Games, Arts, Culture, History, and a political scene that makes even the most devoted politics-watcher cringe. This is one of the few places in this country where, at any given time, voters can elect a Conservative, New Democrat, or Liberal with equal likelihood - and now the Greens are elbowing into the picture, as well. The timing of this post in fortuitous, as new polls came out just yesterday that will help in handicapping the races here.

The only universal truth in BC these days is that the carbon tax recently implemented by Premier Gordon Campbell (whose BC Liberal Party is far closer to Alberta's PC's than anything else) has been ridiculously unpopular. The voters of BC don't necessarily associate the BC Liberals with their federal cousins, but they DO see red at the mention of FURTHER taxes on carbon and emissions - which is making the Green Shift an extremely hard sell to folks in Lotusland.

Now, I'm a big believer in the old adage that there are 3 types of lie: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics. I don't put a lot of stock in surveys and public opinion polls, and I'd highly recommend that you don't, either. That said, the pollsters talked to a LOT more British Columbians than I have lately, so we'd be remiss if we ignored the polling results altogether.

IF the polls ring true (they won't), the Conservatives are looking at picking up as many as 10 seats in BC on October 14th. This is made possible, in large part, by the migration of frustrated Liberal and NDP voters to the Greens. Ridings that are particularly vulnerable, based on the 2006 election numbers, current polling, and just plain TALKING to folks who live there, include:

• Esquimalt - Juan de Fuca (currently held by the Liberals)
• West Vancouver - Sunshine Coast - Sea-to-Sky Country (Liberal)
• Vancouver Island North (NDP)
• Vancouver Quadra (Liberal)
• Richmond (Liberal)

Vancouver-Kingsway, which has been in the Tory tally since David Emerson crossed the floor, is most likely to return to Liberal hands. In fact, there are generally perceived to be only 3 truly "safe" Liberal seats in the entire province: Kingsway, Vancouver Centre, and Vancouver South.

It should be noted that in 2006, BC had more support for the Liberals than any other non-Atlantic province except for Ontario. That said, the Green Shift plan is taking off like a lead balloon here - wrong time, wrong place - and left-leaning voters who WOULD have been more willing to park their votes with Jack Layton and the NDP are instead finding themselves inclined to support the Greens - since they know the Greens, who would tax carbon even more than the Liberals, have no chance to get elected and actually make it happen.

All told, if current trends continue, the vast majority of BC ridings will likely be coloured Blue on the network maps. Whether or not this is a good thing for BC, or for the country, is open to debate. And, of course, there's the actual campaigns, both national and local... campaigns MATTER. A few incidents here or there, and it's a whole other ballgame. The debates may be a big game-breaker, as well. But at THIS point, the Tories look like they're taking much of the province outside the major urban centres, and even a healthy number of sites WITHIN the urban centres.

Looking for a number? With the help of the Hill and Knowlton Federal Election Predictor, call it:

• NDP - 6 seats
• Liberal - 3 seats
• Conservative - 27 seats

Not happy with that idea? Don't shoot the messenger... volunteer for your local Liberal, New Democrat or Green. BE the change you want to see on the political map. Sure, it's EASIER to stay home, read the blogs, and then complain about Stephen Harper for the next 4-ish years. But nothing worth doing is ever easy. If you support a party other than the Tories, then get out and actually SUPPORT the party. Knock on doors, deliver fliers, volunteer at the campaign office... after all:

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
- Margaret Mead

Danny Williams Is Dead Wrong

Premier Danny Williams of Newfoundland and Labrador represents everything that is wrong with Canadian politics.


I don't pretend to be familiar with a local of Danny's domestic policies. Apparently, they're doing pretty well on the Rock these days, so he must be doing something right. The way in which Williams is injecting himself into this federal election campaign, though, is absolutely wrong.


First of all, Williams insists that his caucus members "declare themselves" either as with or against his "ABC" (Anyone But Conservatives) movement. Essentially, he wants them to "out" themselves. How lonely do you think that 1 caucus member who refused to declare himself feels?

The bigger problem, here, is the notion of an "Anybody But _______" movement at all. All too often, Canadians go to the polls not sure who they're voting FOR, only that they are dead set AGAINST a certain party.

"I've got to keep Harper from getting a majority."

"I'm voting against those damn, crooked Libranos..."

"I'm sure not going to vote for those commie NDP idiots..."

Nation, voter participation levels are dropping across the country. One of the root causes of this, in light of this recent trend, should be self-evident: People in Canada don't vote FOR anyone, because they don't believe they have anyone TO vote for. They vote Tory because they hate the Liberals. They vote Green to spite the Tories. The campaigns embrace this, and advertise to appeal to these voters - "vote for us, we hate Dion, too". Maybe they voters are getting informed, and not finding a candidate they feel they can get behind. Maybe they're not finding a party leader who appeals to them. But if either of those is true, the parties are dropping the ball, and it's something they need to remedy sooner rather than later.

This is lazy politics... "vote against Harper, because he's a jerk.". Williams has spent the last 2 years foaming at the mouth at the mere mention of Harper's name. Every time he spouts off about the Tories, it loses more and more effectiveness, until eventually people will just tune him out. But the most insidious suggestion of Danny Williams is that "it doesn't matter who you vote for, as long as it's not Stephen Harper".

I'd think, as a sitting politician, Danny Williams would be very MUCH aware of the fact that it does, in fact, matter who you vote for. As Premier of a burgeoning oil-producing province, Williams should take a good, long look at the Green Shift before he tells people who they should vote for, or against.

Topping this off, of course, is the fact that it's a fundamentally cowardly act to tell people not to vote for one party without instead endorsing another. If you've got 4 parties running and you attack one of them, the other 3 are happy with you. If you have true courage of your convictions, have the guts to stand up and SUPPORT one of those parties, earning the ire of the other 3. Make a compelling case for the party you feel will make your constituents' lives BETTER, instead of jumping up and down, trying to tell them that Stephen Harper will make their lives worse.

And by the way, Danny, the people of Newfoundland are smart enough to know that it's not good political analysis and a hard look at the federal parties and their policies that have you speaking out against the Tories - it's a personal grudge.

Stop being lazy, Danny. If you want to play in the federal field, take the time and show the courage to study the parties and make a recommendation to your people about who they should vote FOR. You're their elected leader - stop acting like a pouting 6 year-old, and lead them TO somewhere... after all, Moses didn't just point, and tell his people to run, in any direction they chose, out of Egypt - he led them in a uniform direction, to the Promised Land.

... and they followed him for 40 years, Danny. You could be the next Joey Smallwood yet.

The Battles For Calgary Northeast and Edmonton - Sherwood Park

Calgary Northeast

For its short 20-year history, this riding has been coloured blue on the electoral map. Tucked away in the North-Easternmost section of the city, the imaginatively-named riding was represented first by Alex Kindy, and since 1993 by former cop Art Hanger, who squeaked by in 2006 with only 65% of the votes cast, for a paltry 18,000 vote win over the Liberal candidate. Hanger is retiring, and not seeking re-election. The riding has a voter participation problem, averaging 50% (or LESS, in some elections) of eligible voters bothering to turn up and mark an "x". The riding includes a high number of foreign-born voters, and both provincially and municipally is notorious for ethnic politics and electoral shenanigans.

As of press time, there were only 3 registered candidates in Calgary Northeast:
EDIT 01/10/08: Added independent Roger Richard

Devinder Shory (CPC) - Devinder Shory is a local lawyer and advocate for justice and tax reform (both big issues in the local community). He's involved in many community initiatives, and won the Tory nomination this past February in a hotly-contested battle. The father of 3 has moved his elderly parents into the family home, and if they're anything like the POES (Parents Of Enlightened Savage), would probably very much appreciate the chance to get out of town and work in Ottawa. This was an extremely solid riding for Art Hanger, but he carried it as much on personality as on party loyalty. It will be interesting to see if Shory can duplicate Art's past success.

Sanam Kang (Lib) - Sanam Kang is a recent addition to this race, taking over the Liberal Party nomination just a month ago after the previously nominated candidate stepped aside earlier this year. A local businessman, Kang identifies education as one of his top priorities. Kang is backed by the same team that delivered the provincial riding of Calgary McCall into Liberal hands in Alberta's recent provincial election. The Liberals typically poll between 20 and 25% in this riding, but still flushed from the provincial victory earlier this year, can Team Kang win this riding for the born-and-raised Calgarian? Unlikely... but in Calgary Northeast, FAR from impossible.

Vinay Dey (NDP) - Vinay Dey was nominated in August to carry the NDP banner into this traditionally hostile riding. With the NDP averaging less than 8% support in Calgary Northeast for most of the past 20 years, Dey is hoping (like his leader) to capitalize on the perceived hunger for "change" in the country and in this riding. He was the subject of a feature in MacLean's magazine in 2003. Vinay is the President of the National Indo-Canadian Council, and is a veteran candidate for the NDP, having run for them in 3 provincial contests and in the 2004 federal election (in Calgary - Nose Hill). (h/t to daveberta)

Roger Richard (Ind.) - Roger Richard got into the race in Calgary Northeast at the behest of disgruntled Conservative Party members, who felt that some shenanigans had gone on in the riding's nomination process. Richard has been a lightning rod for controversy in the campaign thus far, with the most recent news being that he has been ordered to modify his campaign literature, which was deemed too similar to that of Conservative Party candidate Devinder Shory. Roger ran unsuccessfully for the PC's in Calgary East in both 1997 (2nd place) and 2000 (3rd place), and has stated publicly that he would sit as a member of the Conservative Party caucus if elected. An e-mail from myself to him was not returned.

Take a look at: Devinder Shory. He's young and enthusiastic, but running against an experienced opponent from one party, and a hot hand from the other - rookie mistakes can be deadly in a riding like this. There's also been talk of funding issues within his campaign. He'll either take the riding by storm, or flame out gloriously.

Edmonton—Sherwood Park

A riding on the far Northeast fringes of Alberta's OTHER big city, ESP is a suburban riding which includes the city of Fort Saskatchewan. Sharing even more in common with it's southern neighbour of Calgary Northeast, this riding voted a measly 64% for the Conservative candidate in 2006 (Ken Epp), who is retiring and not running in this election. Liberal support in the riding is traditionally around 20% and focused within Edmonton Proper, but was down in 2006. Voter turn-out overall tends to run a little northwards of 60%. Average household income is a shade over $100,000 per year, so the average voter here isn't RICH, but they're not doing too badly, either.

Tim Uppal (CPC) - Uppal is a young (34) veteran of the political scene. Twice defeated in federal elections by David Kilgour, Uppal lost the Tory nomination race in the riding of Edmonton - Mill Woods - Beaumont in 2006, and is taking another shot at it in this traditional Tory stronghold. The former Residential Mortgage Manager is a party insider, and was named the Outstanding Young Edmontonian for 2005 by the Junior Chamber of Commerce. He has taken his campaign to Facebook, and at press time had nearly 300 supporters there. This is a solid Tory riding, so Uppal shouldn't have TOO much to worry about - but then again, you can only lose so many times before the stink becomes too heavy to wash away.

James Ford(Ind) - James "Jimmy" Ford is an independent candidate, and like all independents he faces a tough task. That said, he's clearly a passionate and engaged citizen, whose website forsakes a lot of the flashy "style" points (fancy graphics, etc.) that you can't really afford when you're running against campaigns with $50,000 budgets. The private management consultant is running as an "Independent conservative", so clearly he knows what the riding's history is. He's got a list of community involvement that blows the mind. Ford's candidacy stems from a dissatisfaction with the nominating rules in place for the Conservatives that saw Uppal win the nomination. He feels (and who can blame him?) that "6 months residency - no citizenship required" is a pretty questionable minimum requirement to nominate a candidate for MP.

Rick Szostak (Lib) - Rick Szostak is a Professor at the University of Alberta, and holds a PhD from Northwestern University in Economics (but really, who doesn't?). Szostak, who knows a little something about economics, suggests that Alberta should lead the world in the development of environmentally friendly technology, so best make use of our natural and intellectual resources to strengthen our, and therefore Canada's, economy. Doesn't sound like a raging socialist. As I said, the riding itself tends to support the Libs at around 20%, but there's a big chunk of voters that stay home on polling day. Rick's task is to get enough of them to come out that he can capitalize on the introduction of a new Tory candidate, and try to turn this riding Red for the first time in its history.

Take a look at: Tim Uppal. Either this is the election where he finally gets over the hump, or it's the straw that breaks the camel's back, and sends him permanently into the party's back-rooms. The party already has great organization in this riding, but how many of those hard-core supporters left with Epp?

Tory Calgary Campaign Office Openings

This is presented as informational only - I am not endorsing any candidates in this election, and will be happy to post any such information for any other campaign, for any party.

JIM PRENTICE CAMPAIGN EVENT (Calgary Centre-North)

Please join us this Friday, September 12th
Molly Malone's Irish Pub in Kensington, Calgary
Starting at 4:00 pm
Have some fun on the campaign trail
As always the beer will be cold and the politics hot!
Appies will be served


LEE RICHARDSON CAMPAIGN OFFICE OPENING (Calgary-Centre)

Date: Monday, September 15, 2008
Time: 7:00pm - 9:00pm
Location: Lee Richardson Campaign Headquarters
Street: 1136 10 AVE SW Calgary, AB
Meet the candidate and the team, show your support and pick up your lawn sign! H'orderves and drinks will be served.

Tories Suspend Communications Director

UPDATED 9/11 10:10 AM

Ryan Sparrow, Communications director for the Tories was suspended from the campaign indefinitely for making an inappropriate remark to a member of the media.

The comment in question was in response to a statement issued by the father of a Canadian soldier killed in action in Afghanistan. The father said that if Canada left Afghanistan before mission objectives were completed, that his son would have given his life in vain.

Sparrow's response when fed the quote was allegedly that the father was a supporter of the Liberals and Michael Ignatieff.

Good on the Tories for acting on the comments so quickly, we're trying to dig up the comments AFTER the fact.

Seven Years Ago Today...

Lest We Forget.

We Shouldn't Care About Who Cares...

Okay, Nation, so it's election time, and each party is going to do its damnedest to portray the other parties as out-of-touch, cold, unfeeling monsters who are the puppets of their respective interest groups. I get that. Some leaders (not mentioning any names) make that characterization a lot easier than others.

What drives me around the bend, though, is when I hear people whose vote counts as much as mine saying that they aren't going to vote for someone because "He doesn't CARE about _______".

"Stephane Dion doesn't CARE about the West."

"Stephen Harper doesn't CARE about the environment."

"The Greens don't CARE about the economy."

Oh, spare me.

Nation, we're not electing a "care-r in chief", here. We're electing people to tend to the day-to-day business of governance. Now, I can understand that you'd want someone in power, ideally, who shared your priorities. If your number 1 issue is funding for the arts, you want someone who you believe will support them. But that's not what we're talking about here... we're not talking about who will actually MANAGE these issues appropriately, or even FUND them appropriately... we're talking about who CARES, as though that caring somehow makes them qualified to fix the problems involved. Paul Martin tried to tell us he cared about EVERYTHING - look how well THAT worked out for him.

I care about finding a cure for cancer. I am however patently unqualified to find one. Does the fact that I CARE about finding a cure qualify me to be Surgeon General? If we held an election for Surgeon General, and I ran on the fact that I CARED about finding a cure, would that be a good enough reason to elect me? When I apply for my next job, I'm going to tell them I CARE about turning a profit. "Can you actually run a profitable company?", they'll ask me. "No... but I CARE about turning a profit.".

I'm sure I'll get the job.

I don't need to know if Stephane Dion cares about the economy. In fact, even if I *DID* need to know, there'd be no way for me TO know. He'd say he does - but he might be lying. His opponents would say that he DIDN'T care - but then again, maybe THEY'D be lying. All I need to know is if he has ideas that will help him manage the economy effectively. Whether doing so or not makes him happy and leaves him feeling fulfilled is completely irrelevant to me.

The reality is, none of us knows what ANY of these people really, truly care about, deep down inside. Maybe Liz May hates tress. Jack Layton might find working families disgusting. Gilles Duceppe could find French a grotesque language, Stephane Dion might have utter disdain for carbon taxes (in fact, I'm pretty sure he said as much a while back) and Stephen Harper might hate everything (as a Leafs fan, I know he's probably tempted). I don't know if any of those are the case, and I don't... CARE... if any of those statements are true.

I don't need to know what these people love - even if it were possible for me to do so without having to "take their word for it". All I need to know is what they say they're going to do, and what they're capable of doing effectively.

Whether they care about this issue, or that one?

[Shrug] I couldn't care less.

Leader's Debates - Mark Your Calendars

The Leader's Debates will take place on the evenings of October 1st and 2nd (not sure which is English, and which is French).

Stay tuned for more.

Greens to Debate?

We're hearing now that the decision not to invite Elizabeth May to the Leader's Debate is being reconsidered, with both the NDP and Conservative campaigns indicating that, although they'd be less than pleased, they would still, in fact, show up (and avoid looking like pouting 7 year-olds on the national stage).

This is absolutely the right decision, and I hope the networks get it right this time. 10% of Canadian voters supported this party WITHOUT having heard them in a face-to-face debate with the other leaders. If Duceppe can run in 57 ridings and get into the debate, then the Greens should have a chance to plead their own case as well.

There's a valuable lesson in here to be learned by May, though: You have to, HAVE TO, answer the question "who should the next Prime Minister be?" with the response "me". She made her bed in this mess, and just about set her party back another 4 years in so doing. If she gets the chance to appeal directly to voters in this debate, she had better make sure to point out that Mr. Dion's plan is the "least bad" of the other parties, but that her party's plan is what we really need (whether or not you believe that is besides the point). No asking Canadians to support their local Liberal, or to "vote strategically" - you're being given the spot to argue in favour of YOUR party, YOUR candidates, and YOUR policies... Otherwise, she'll just be proving Harper, Layton and Duceppe right in their assertion that she just wants to be there to heap praise on Dion and the Green Shift, and all-but pie Harper in the face.

The broadcasters and other parties might be getting this right, Liz... make sure you do the same. If you come across as the Green wing of the Liberals, then voters will never take your party seriously as a separate entity again.

***

UPDATE as of 3:04 pm: Liz is in.

The Battle for the Yukon

Yukon

The Yukon Territory has a total population of just over 30,000 people, and holds the distinction of being the LEAST religious riding in the country, with about half of its residents identifying themselves as "religious". The political scene in the territory is, to put it mildly, highly malleable - the Liberals are right-wing, the Yukon Party (formerly the PC's) are in the middle, and the conservative leader was first elected as a member of the NDP. Yeah... my head hurts, too. Federally, the riding has elected representatives from all 3 main parties, including former Deputy PM (under Mulroney) Erik Nielsen (brother of actor Leslie, of Naked Gun fame), and NDP leader Audrey McLaughlin. Liberal Larry Bagnell is the incumbent here, having held the seat since 2000. In 2006, he won the seat by 3,500 votes over the 2nd-place Conservative candidate.

There are currently 3 registered candidates in the Yukon:

Larry Bagnell (Lib) - Larry Bagnell has served as the MP for this riding for the past 8 years, having narrowly won it (by a margin of 70 votes) in 2000. He's a very popular figure in Whitehorse, as the perception is that unlike most politicians, he has actually achieved measurable results for the riding with the awarding of the Canada Winter Games in 2007 and the associated investments in infrastructure, including the huge Canada Games Centre. The former executive with Industry Canada knows how the political game is played in the Yukon, and it will be tough going for anyone trying to dislodge him... when Yukoners decide they like their elected officials, they tend to keep them around - Erik Nielsen represented the riding for 30 years.

Darrell Pasloski (CPC) - Pasloski is a popular pharmacist and entrepreneur in Whitehorse. The father of 4 is heavily involved in community sports - as you might expect from someone with kids who play just about every sport from swimming to horseshoe pitching (STILL waiting for that to be an Olympic event...). While he'll be in tough against a popular incumbent, Darrell stands to benefit from the Harper Government's pro-Northern policies and from his own gregarious nature. In a riding where the firmness of a candidate's handshake and whether they look you in the eye still matter, Pasloski's political destiny is in his own hands.

John Streicker (Grn) - Streiker is a lecturer at Yukon College who has devoted much of his energies to the study of climate change. He may be the only holder of a Master's degree in Engineering who runs a community centre, doing so in his home community of Marsh Lake. He's a quilter, an artist, and a long-shot (the Greens have never broken 600 votes in this riding)... but then, if there are ANY ridings in this country that can see, first-hand, the effects of climate change on a day-to-day basis, surely it's the ridings in the North. Let's be honest, here, folks: Nobody moves to the Yukon for the thriving night-life or the fast pace of life in Whitehorse. It's the environment, and the people. It's a common value held by most of the people who live in the territory. And THAT is a recipe for success, if the Greens can figure out how to translate it into results at the polling booth.

Take a look at: Darrel Pasloski. He may be a political neophyte, but he's well-liked, and running for a party that has been focusing on the North. Adding to the "perfect storm" politically is the fact that Larry Bagnell, popular as he is, is running for the party of the Green Shift, in a riding where most people have to heat their homes with oil-burning furnaces - 10 or more months each year (that'd be one of those "bad things" Dion wants to tax). Making people feel valued is a good way to get elected, and the Tories have been doing that to the people of the North for the past 3 years - let's see if it pays off for Darrell.

Foul Ball, Gilles.

Gilles Duceppe has decided to attack a Tory candidate based on her religious affiliations.

I'm no Opus Dei member - but religious beliefs should be absolutely, 100% off-limits in the realm of public debate.

I don't care if this woman is Catholic, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, a Rastafarian, Scientologist, Mormon, Evangelical or Wiccan. A candidate's faith - or lack thereof - is an issue between them and their God(s/dess/desses). There is absolutely no place for this in any election, and Duceppe owes the candidate, and all Canadians of ALL faiths, an apology.

If you want to talk about her public comments on a given issue, that's fine. But to say that "she belongs to this religious group, they believe this, and we think that's wrong" is gutter politics of the worst kind.

The irony of Duceppe's foul ball? Quebec is 83.2% Catholic. Many of course are Lapse Catholics, but the majority would still be mass-attending Catholics - including many BQ candidates, one would have to guess. I don't know how up-to-date Gilles is on the teaching of the Catholic Church, but the new Pope, and therefore the Church, isn't exactly a big fan of the 2 issues Gilles cited - abortion, and same-sex marriage.

How many of his own candidates did Duceppe just condemn for their own, private religious beliefs? How many Quebecois did Duceppe just insult in the most personal of ways? Tune in on October 14th to find out.

The Battles for Edmonton Strathcona and Calgary West

Edmonton - Strathcona

Edmonton Strathcona is an interesting riding to watch. Sandwiched between North and South Edmonton, it is home to many of Edmonton's Francophones, and hosts some of the city's oldest neighbourhoods - as well as the University of Alberta campus. Since 1953, Strathcona has been represented by 2 Liberals, 1 SoCred, 4 Progressive Conservatives, a Reform Party MP, and by current MP Rahim Jaffer (first as a Reform member, then the Canadian Alliance, and now as a member of the Conservative Party). Jaffer won the riding in 2006 by a margin of 5,000 votes over returning NDP candidate Linda Duncan. Strathcona has higher-than-average voter turn-out, with 70% of eligible voters casting a ballot in 2006.

There are currently 3 registered candidates in Strathcona:

Rahim Jaffer (CPC) - Rahim Jaffer was first elected to represent the riding of Edmonton Strathcona as a Reform Party MP in 1997, at the ripe old age of 25 (my GOD, what have I DONE with my life?!?). He gained national recognition in 2001 when a staffer masqueraded as Jaffer on a radio call-in show - an event that the people of Strathcona were happy to move past, as Jaffer was handily re-elected afterwards. Rahim most recently chaired the Conservative Caucus, and is seen by many as a rising star in the Tory Caucus. He earned an enemy-for-life of The Enlightened Savage when he proposed to fellow Tory MP Helena Guergis. Jaffer doesn't have a whole lot to worry about in this riding, but he can't take victory for granted - he's up against a strong challenger in Linda Duncan, and much of this constituency is in the provincial hands of Liberal and New Democrat MLA's - so they're not shy about voting for parties on the left.

Claudette Roy (Lib) - A long-time resident of Strathcona, Claudette Roy is a former teacher and icon of Edmonton's Francophone community, who was appointed to the Order of Canada in 2000. Also extremely active in the Catholic Church, Roy's credentials as a leader in her community are simply staggering. She has served on or chaired the boards of several museums, sworn-in new citizens, been deeply involved in Alberta's Centennial celebrations, and also plays a mean piano. While this riding wasn't very kind to the Liberals in 2006, they've got a great candidate in Roy this time around - her biggest challenge is going to be in defying the perception of her as a "niche" candidate - the token Francophone candidate in a french-speaking part of town. Her biography should clear up THAT misconception really quickly - now, if only the wizard on her campaign hadn't posted it as a .pdf on her website. Note to Liberal web-wizards: A lot of the residents of Strathcona are over 70. Think about it.

Linda Duncan (NDP) - Linda Duncan is an international environmental law consultant with a resume that would make major law firms all over the globe drool. Her credentials in the environmental law field have many whispering that she would be an excellent choice for the next leader of the federal Green Party. Formerly the Chief of Enforcement for Environment Canada, Duncan put a scare into the Conservatives in 2006 when she came within 5,000 votes of unseating popular incumbent Jaffer - while spending $20,000 less than the Jaffer campaign. Intensely likeable, Duncan is popular with older voters - a traditional "bedrock demographic" of the Conservatives, and another reason for Rahim to get out and knock on those doors.

Take a look at: Linda Duncan. Her volunteers are energized, her party is emboldened by their results in 2006, and her credentials are impeccable.

EDIT 9/11 9:44 am - Linda Duncan will be on the Rutherford Show today during the 10 o'clock hour.

Calgary West

In the past 3 federal elections, a conservative has won Calgary West by a combined 69,000 votes over the next closest challenger - which has sometimes ALSO been a conservative. There's also a maverick streak in the people of this riding that can't be ignored - in 2006, the 3rd-place finisher here spent a grand total of $200 on their campaign. That's right, for the price of a Playstation 2, you can be the third-place finisher in Calgary West. This riding has seen its share of controversy with its current MP, Rob Anders. Last election, the people at voteoutanders.com encouraged the people of Calgary West to consider parking their vote with a candidate less likely to embarass them (that's be just about anyone). And while the rules of the Conservative Party ensured, yet again, that Anders would be the CPC nominee in this election, the voters of Calgary West don't just have the same old list of leftist candidates from which to choose this time around - a moderate conservative is running as an Independent. So, while there's little doubt that Calgary West will again elect a conservative MP, the question begs to be asked - will they elect a Conservative, or a conservative?

EDIT 01/10 3:50 PM - The incumbent reportedly failed to show up at a scheduled Bow Cliff Senior's Forum in the riding - effectively sending the implied message that he had better things to do than talk to seniors (solid politics, as a Conservative - seniors NEVER vote, especially not for conservative candidates).

Other All (or Most, Rob) Candidates Forums Scheduled Include:

Thursday, October 9 12:00 pm - 2:00 pm University of Calgary (MacEwan Hall)
Friday, October 10 7:00 pm - 8:15 pm Varsity Community Centre

Rob Anders (CPC) - Rob Anders called Nelson Mandela a communist and a terrorist - and then refused to take Mandela's resultant phone call. He went "missing" during the election of 2006 (allegedly stashed out of harm's - as in, media microphone's - way by Harper's people), and recently compared the government of China to the Nazis (riiiight - but it was Harper skipping the Opening Ceremony that they were mad about). His nomination in Calgary West for the Conservatives was overturned by a judge, and yet Rob's back anyway. And let's not forget THIS gem. Anders has as much chance getting a seat at the cabinet table as I do - which is to say, none at all. In fact, there's talk that many federal Tories in the rest of Canada are hoping he goes down to defeat, so they can get him off the slate of candidates in the future (claiming to be a tolerant, modern, progressive party from whom mainstream Canada has nothing to fear is a hard sell when you've got Rob on the ticket). ALL of that said, Anders has routinely won this riding by some of the largest margins in the country. Devotion to Anders himself? To their former MP, Stephen Harper? Or to the only conservative on the ballot? With Kirk Schmidt running this time around, we'll see. I just know that if I lived in Calgary West, then REGARDLESS of my political leanings, I'd do whatever it took to get rid of the stigma of my neighbourhood as being "represented by Rob Anders".

Jennifer Pollock (Lib) - Jennifer Pollock is a former chair of the Calgary Board of Education, and captured 20% of the vote in this riding in 2006. She maintains a blog on her website - with all of one posting - so bonus marks from E.S. on that account. The hockey mom (of four) obtained a Bachelor's of Zoology in the 70's, and recently graduated from U of C's law faculty and was called to the bar... not a lot of lawyers in this town with an undergrad degree that required dissection of scat, I'll bet. Pollock is an unlikely Liberal, in that she spends a lot of time talking about how Ottawa needs more Calgary, and not the other way around. Let's not fool ourselves, though: It will take a miracle for this riding to go Liberal - they last elected a federal Liberal here in 1940, when gas went for 18 cents a gallon and a new home would break the bank at $6,500.

Teale Phelps Bondaroff (NDP) - Bondaroff is no stranger to Calgary politicos, having run for everything but dog catcher in the past 5 or so years. He was the Alberta NDP candidate in Calgary Bow in this year's Provincial Election (he got 500 votes), as profiled by a devastatingly handsome blogger here. Teale protested the University of Calgary decision to disallow credit card payment of tuition fees by rolling a wheelbarrow full of coins to the payment office. He gained 5,000 votes for the NDP in this riding in 2006, at age 19. The NDP website has precious little information on Teale, despite the fact that he's run for them before. Bondaroff is also on Facebook, and is on the record as a supporter of the establishment of a provincial park in the eastern region of Kananaskis - a cause he and I have in common. An avid debater, Teale is just going to keep getting better and better at this "election" thing, until he wins one some day. That day is coming - but it won't be October 14th.

Randall Weeks (Grn) - Weeks also ran for the Alberta Greens in Calgary Bow earlier this year, provincially (830 votes). An auditor for an oil company, Weeks is the rare Green who realizes that destroying the economy to save the environment is foolhardy. He has what can charitably be described as a "voracious dislike" of the incumbent - can't say he's anywhere NEAR alone in that regard. The Greens registered 10% of the vote in this riding in 2006, while spending a minuscule $200 on the local campaign. The biggest challenge for Weeks is going to be to capitalize on the Tory discontent in the riding, as there's a palatable Independent option for the Tories running in the riding this time around.

Kirk Schmidt (Ind) - Kirk Schmidt has gotten a lot of attention from this blog in the past year, and with good reason. He's a straight shooter who understands the economy, and the power that an Independent - and therefore the people of that Independent's constituency - wield in a minority government situation. He has committed to sitting as an Independent, separate from any party caucus, if elected. Kirk also blogs, and is a frequent reader of this blog and is a F.O.E.S. If fiscal accountability, social policies that reflect mainstream Canada from a decade more recent than the 1950's, and progressive environmental policies that won't cripple the economy all sound appealing to you, Kirk might be your candidate. If wielding an incredible amount of power as a voter in Calgary West in the (assumed) upcoming minority parliament sounds appealing to you, Kirk might be your candidate. The reality is, Schmidt represents the ideal citizen, and the ideal voter: Someone who has their own opinions, but is willing to listen to the opinions of others, and then make an informed decision free of party loyalty or dogma. Let's remember: For an Independent, EVERY vote in the House is a "free vote" - where they get to vote on behalf of the people in their riding, and not the lobbyists who paid for their party's campaign ads.

Take a look at: Kirk Schmidt. The people of Calgary West aren't neanderthals, they're small-c conservatives who can't bear the thought of marking an "x" next to a Liberal or Dipper. Now that they've got the option of getting rid of Anders and still voting for a small-c conservative like themselves, will they?

It's Not Easy Being Green

Elizabeth May has been left out of the Leader's Debate. Again.

Not surprisingly, the blogosphere is up in arms. And rightly so - we bloggers are big on that whole "freedom of speech" thing... it's our bread and butter.

The precedent for having the Green leader present at the debates has been set. The presence of 5 party leaders at the debates, although unwieldy, was the norm in the mid-to-late 1990's. The Greens have the national support to justify it. They're running candidates in all 308 ridings - more than can be said for the Bloc. They had a sitting MP at dissolution.

The consortium of broadcasters which determine the format and rules for the debate indicated that 3 other party leaders indicated opposition to the inclusion of the Greens - and so, citing a fear that the legitimacy of the debate would be thrown into doubt if any (or all) of those 3 party leaders chose not to participate as a result, they decided that May would have to stay home on Debate Night.

Now, I happen to agree with the assertion that Liz May has thrown her political allegiances into doubt with her "non-compete clause" with the Liberals in the riding of Central Nova. Further, I (like Stephen Harper) fully expect that at some point in this campaign, May will endorse the Liberals, or at least endorse Dion as Prime Minister. But that is neither here nor there - the fact that the other party leaders should have any say whatsoever in who gets to debate and who doesn't is simply ludicrous. If the leader of the Conservative Party chooses not to participate in the only nationally televised debate because he doesn't like who else was invited, then I'm sorry, but the event doesn't lose legitimacy - the leader does. And if the leaders of the Conservatives, Bloc, and NDP all stayed home, then Dion and May should have taken advantage of the chance to present a publicly-funded, hour-long infomercial on why the other parties sucked.

Elizabeth May should be in the debate, pure and simple. It will need to be public pressure that does the trick, though - any legal recourse will be stalled and delayed until the votes have already been counted. With May in the debate, the Greens would either be delighted or horrified at the outcome - depending on which side of the bed Liz got up on that morning.

She can be a cutting, witty, informed and incisive debater. She can also come across as whiny, sarcastic, and extremely unlikeable (for evidence of this, see her response today, where she basically accused the other leaders and consortium members of sexism - Liz, for god's sake, we've had female leaders in the debates before - in fact, we had a conservative Prime Minister who was a woman!). For the sake of her party, I'd hope she was having one of her better days.

But all of this is moot and completely besides the point, unless the voters rise up and tell the mysterious "consortium" that they have, through their stated preferences, already decided they want to hear from the leader of the Greens. The air waves don't belong to Global, CTV, and the rest. They belong to us - and we want to see the ballet or car crash that is Elizabeth May in the debates.

- E.S.

Let's Get It On!

Nation, we all know where we stand on the election, which has now been officially set for October 14th - the day after Thanksgiving. The 39th Parliament has been dissolved, and we're going to the polls. All because Stephen didn't want to have to face the electorate with the stigma of his government having been "defeated" on a confidence motion.

I myself will be casting a ballot in the Prime Minister's home riding ("home" riding being a bit of a misnomer, as his Calgary home is actually in another riding altogether). However, the millions of eligible Canadian voters who rely on this site to form their opinions won't be satisfied with a daily re-cap of the electioneering happening in Calgary South-West. They expect more from the Lord of the Bloggers - and they shall have it.

The Enlightened Savage will be your official Albertan headquarters for non-partisan coverage of this Federal election, Canada's 40th. I say non-partisan, because I'm not in love with ANY of the parties that are running in this election - and I don't know if I trust any of them to exercise my franchise for me free of any outside influence or agenda. So, I'm personally going to do what we should ALL do - vote for the candidate in my riding most likely to represent my views accurately in the House of Commons. Who that is, I'm not sure yet. But, much like callers to the Wild Rose Forum on CBC Radio One this past week (the guests were 2 wonderful gentlemen named Nenshi and Chapman, I believe), I'm not happy about the election call, but I'm going to cast an informed vote because that's the price to be paid for living in a representative democracy. My coverage, though, will be as non-partisan as possible.

So what you will NOT be reading here is "Stephen Harper is the devil and he doesn't care about the environment and David Suzuki said it so it must be true". Or, "Stephane Dion is an egghead intellectual who hates Alberta". We're going to raise the level of debate in this election - and you're going to help me with your comments. There will be frequent polls on the right-hand side of this site, starting with today's. There will be a lot of well thought-out debates going on in the comments sections of these posts. And when we're done, Canadian voters will have the government they deserve - either because they paid attention and voted appropriately, or because they didn't.

Alberta has 28 ridings. 9 other provinces will get a brief look, as will the territories. As always, if anything comes up that demands attention, you'll find it here. For each Alberta riding, you'll get information about the riding, a brief look at the candidates themselves (and a link to their websites, if available), as well as analysis as to which candidate among the list you should take a closer look at... either because they deserve more support than they may otherwise get, or because they deserve far LESS support than they're likely to get.

The provisional schedule looks like this:

September 9: Edmonton—Strathcona, Calgary West
September 10: Yukon Territory
September 11: Calgary Northeast, Edmonton—Sherwood Park
September 13: British Columbia
September 14: Crowfoot, Edmonton Centre
September 16: Saskatchewan
September 17: Calgary East, Wild Rose
September 18: Manitoba
September 20: Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, Calgary Southeast
September 22: Quebec
September 23: Edmonton—St. Albert, Lethbridge
September 24: Northwest Territories
September 26: Edmonton—Spruce Grove, Fort McMurray—Athabasca
September 27: Calgary Southwest, Edmonton—Leduc
September 29: Ontario
October 1: Macleod, Peace River
October 2: Prince Edward Island
October 3: Calgary Centre-North, Medicine Hat
October 4: Nunavut
October 5: Red Deer, Vegreville—Wainwright
October 6: Nova Scotia
October 7: Westlock—St. Paul, Calgary Centre
October 9: Newfoundland & Labrador
October 10: Wetaskiwin, Calgary—Nose Hill
October 11: New Brunswick
October 12: Edmonton East, Yellowhead

Also on the right-hand side of the page, find the box labelled "Voter's Tool-Kit", which should help all voters across the country figure out which riding they live in, and other information vital to making an INFORMED choice on October the 14th.

Once more unto the breach, dear friends...

- E.S.

Helping Out the Dems...

Nation, I'm not going to have a whole lot of time in the next month or so (no idea why) to talk about the American election, so I thought I'd get a little bit in now.

The DNC has come and gone, the RNC is in full swing, and still the Democrats are suffering from a bit of confusion when it comes to packaging their message.

Now, don't get me wrong - the Democrats are typically phenomenal when it comes to talking about themselves, and their plans... the Republicans didn't have to stretch too far to spoof-deify Obama in their ads, because the average American voters was already halfway there, based on all the wonderful things we'd been hearing about Obama for the past few months. Where they run into problems is in being critical of their opposition... specifically, they're having a devil of a time criticizing John McCain. They're trying to paint him with a "4 more years of Bush" brush, to some success, but every time a senior Democrat stands up to talk about John McCain, they start off the same way:

"I like John McCain, he's a friend of mine. He's a great senator, and has served our country bravely..."

Okay, fine. We get it. I'd like to think (but can't say for sure) that most American soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen are sufficiently politically aware that you could attack McCain's policies without the preamble, and they wouldn't assume you hate all members of the Armed Forces. But that's neither here nor there... the point is, the Democrats are floundering in looking for the 30 second sound-byte... the preamble takes too long, the subsequent criticism takes too long, and the precious "quick 30", with actual footage of them speaking, is lost.

HERE'S what they should be saying (This one's on the house, guys).

"John McCain is a distinguished war hero and a great senator. He's a good man. However, he's a good man with bad ideas, taking bad advice. He deserves our respect and our admiration, but his service of this country doesn't automatically qualify him to lead this country and its economy. His policies are wrong for America, and as such he should not, and MUST not, be President of the United States."

Not saying I believe that statement... but, as a bit of a wordsmith myself, the lack of focus on the part of the Democrats and their speechwriters is driving me up the wall. So there you go, gang. Just make sure to credit The Enlightened Savage, Canadian Blogger Extraordinaire, in the briefing notes. :)

They Might Just Be Starting To Get The Hang of This "Interweb" Thing...

Nation, the Conservative Party of Canada has been accused, rightly in most cases, of being the party of "Old, White guys". Resultantly, there's a perception of a lack of computer savvy among the party membership as a whole, and a lack of technological understanding at the higher levels.

Imagine my surprise, then, to find THIS posted on the CPC website, about their policy convention (scheduled a month or so after the election we were promised we wouldn't have until 2009).

Holy CRAP... are the Tories starting to understand the role that Bloggers can play in getting out the message?

The Blogosphere, of course, has a small "l" liberal slant to it, just by the nature of the medium and the demographics that utilize it most frequently. But still... if the Tories are starting to "get it" about the impact this medium can have, that doesn't bode well for the Liberals, who until now have reaped the rewards of a virtually uncontested title to the hearts and minds of bloggers.

"Come see how we do things - you might even like us, and decide to say nice things about us. We respect your writing and your influence, and consider you what you've been privately calling yourself for years - an alternative, but equal, form of media - entitled to the same type of access and credentials as the traditional main-stream media".

Not their words - mine. But that's the implied message. It's a surprise - but a pleasant one. Let's see if other conservative parties - especially the PC's here in Alberta - follow suit (likely too late for the Alberta PC's - their AGM is in less than a month).

Not that the federal Tory offer does all that much good to me - you're required to submit your given name. Based on some of the things I'm about to say about some of their candidates, that might not work out so well for me. So I'll be taking a pass. But I'd be interested to see which bloggers DO take them up on their offer, and whether they're as inclined to offer credentials to a Scott Tribe or daveberta as they would to members of the Blogging Tories or the late, great, much-lamented Alberta Tory (who, you'll recall, I ran out of the blogosphere months ago).

I have my suspicions, but time will tell... too late for the election, but it WILL tell nonetheless.

Oh, Drop the Bloody Writ, Already...

Nation, a Federal Election is coming. I'm not happy about it, but there it is.

I suppose it could be worse... were the Harper government to survive until the legislated election date of October 2009, the ensuing election would take place at nearly the exact same time as my own wedding and subsequent honeymoon, thus depriving Canada of its most highly respected political blogger, or depriving me of... well, getting married. At least this way, they'll only mess up my impending move to a shiny, new home.

I don't want this election. Chances are, YOU don't want this election, either. In fact, MOST Canadians don't want an election right now. It will be an exercise in democracy costing taxpayers $300 Million, and a chance for bloggers to wax righteously about the decline of citizen participation when, YET AGAIN, we set an all-time record for low voter turn-out. But at the end of the day, we're going to (in all likelihood) have another minority government, and probably one that looks suspiciously like the one we've got now.

Indeed, the only people who seem to WANT a federal election right now are the parties themselves... they have, or seem to have, enough confidence in their platforms and their campaign teams that they believe despite the polls, their party will make significant and unexpected gains - perhaps enough to win a majority. Either that, or they believe their opponents will screw up enough that there won't be any heavy lifting to do. With this in mind, embracing the inevitability of the fact that an election is coming, let's take a look at what the parties are hoping for, and gambling on...

Conservative Party of Canada (Stephen Harper)

The Tories want an election because they think Dion hasn't been able to coalesce enough support within his own ranks to run a solid campaign. They're hoping to score a few more seats out West, and possibly in newly oil-rich Newfoundland (don't hold your breath, guys), by focusing on the "Green Shift Boogeyman".

What they're gambling on: That voters have completely ignored the "In/Out" proceedings, and that they paid more attention to the GST cuts and good day-to-day management than they did to the Income Trusts flip/flop and Harper's "benevolent dictator" schtick.

Liberal Party of Canada (Stephane Dion)

The Liberals feel they've served their penance for AdScam, and thus they're ready to take back their rightful place as Canada's governing party. The only problem is, many Canadians - including self-identified Liberals - don't feel their leader is up to the job of Prime Minister. They're hoping to gain back some traction pitting central Canada against those "greedy bastards in the West" with the Green Shift, and if they haven't already put together ads linking G.W. Bush, John McCain and Stephen Harper as an "axis of neo-con evil", they need to get on it, pronto.

What they're gambling on: That the appetite for "change" coming out of the U.S. Election is strong enough to convince Canadians that they want it as well - by bringing into power the party that has ruled for 33 of the past 45 years (and 13 of the last 15). And that disgruntled Liberal supporters who stayed home or cast a vote for the Tories or NDP in 2006 have decided 2 years on the "wrong side of the house" is enough, and come back to the fold. AND that someone with a microphone will find Rob Anders with about a week to go in the election.

New Democratic Party of Canada (Jack Layton)

Jack Layton is telling all the world that he doesn't want an election right now - which is ironic, as he's spent the vast majority of the past 2 years voting against the government on just about every single confidence motion that's come forward. Indeed, Layton has been BEGGING for an election since about 5 minutes after Stephane Dion won the leadership of the Liberals. He's counting on the fact that the Tory "not a leader" ads have sufficiently stigmatized Dion that he can capture some of the soft leftist support the Liberals traditionally hold. He's probably not going to - it's a 2 horse race, and everyone wants to back a winner.

What they're gambling on: That Dion is going to make a major mistake during the campaign, shifting exasperated Liberals over to the NDP side for this-go-round. And that Union leaders will jump on the bandwagon once they realize what the Green Shift is going to mean for manufacturing jobs.

Bloc Quebecois (Gilles Duceppe)

The BQ is looking nervously over its shoulder at the gong show that is the Parti Quebecois provincially, and knowing that unless they can paint Harper as a wolf in sheep's clothing and take back the seats the Tories won in 2006, they're headed for the same fate. With Harper far from shy in his pandering to the people of Quebec these past 2 years, the Bloc is in for a long, tough fight.

What they're gambling on: A slip-up in the Tory campaign that allows one of the Western stalwarts (again, I'm betting on Rob Anders) to make an "on-the-record" comment about what they believe "Stephen Harper REALLY thinks about Quebec...". Failing that, an endorsement from Celine Dion?

Green Party of Canada (Elizabeth May)

The Greens are starting to stake out the same kind of territory federally that the Alberta Liberals have, provincially... pouting, and blaming the voters for being stupid enough not to elect them. So long as this party's leadership looks and seems more like a local PETA chapter than a political party that can run the day-to-day business of government if elected, voters will continue to reject them. The recent putsch of most of the people in the Greens who actually know how to, well, run a campaign is probably going to negatively impact their efforts to get elected. The Greens would DEARLY love to elect at least ONE M.P. this time around... but if they do, it will be DESPITE the party's leadership, not because of it.

What they're gambling on: An invitation to the televised debates, and that the other leaders will develop rabies shortly beforehand. A heat-wave in September that sees the average temperature in Whitehorse sitting at plus 45. Peter MacKay decides not to run for re-election.

Good to be back - now, let's get this over with.

Just close your eyes and think of England...

- E.S.

From the Desk of Hillary Rodham Clinton...

"These past months have been historic times for our party, and for our country. Millions of Americans young and old, from every walk of life, every race and creed, have come forward and done what so many have claimed they would never do - take an active and real role in their nation's future. I feel truly humbled that so many of those people chose to support my bid for the Democratic Party nomination for President - to them, no words can possibly express my thanks for your time, energy, enthusiasm and support. This experience has further cemented my belief in our system, our party and our process, and I want all of you to know that this is by no means the end of my own journey - I look forward to serving the people of New York as their senator for 8 more years during the administration of President Obama, at which point I can tell you all that I intend to help our party and our nation make history yet again.

The question that our party faces at this time is how best to reflect the stated preference of those millions of Americans who preferred that I be the Decmocratic Party nominee for President. There has been much debate in the media and on the internet about whether I should formally be nominated at our upcoming convention. To those supporters, I say this: Your votes were cast to send a message - and that message has been received, loud and clear. It has been received by myself; it has been received by our party leadership; it has been received by the next President of the United States, Barack Obama; and it has been received by the world at large. You said that WE WANT TO BE HEARD, and I am here today to tell you that with Barack Obama as our next Commander-in-Chief, we will BE heard.

With that mission accomplished, then, I wish to make it perfectly clear that I in no way intend to stand for or accept nomination at our upcoming convention. The people have spoken and made their choice, and as committed Democrats it is our duty, obligation and honour to stand behind that choice, Barack Obama. Our party must unite behind Senator Obama and ensure the future prosperity and international reputation of our nation by putting all of our energies behind winning the White House this November, and giving the common people back their voice in the halls of power."

Of course, Hillary didn't write this. Neither did any of her speech writers, or campaign staffers. *I* wrote it, just now. But this SHOULD have been written, and released, by someone connected with her campaign over a week ago.

The fact that it wasn't should make Democrats very nervous indeed, as they eye polling numbers in places like Florida.

Discuss: Would Hillary knowingly capitalize on the divide within her party to try and get McCain elected, in order to take him on in 4 years? With John Edwards political career in shambles, would she rather take the Democratic mantle as "next-in-line" and run against an incumbent 76 year-old McCain than against a yet-to-be-determined Republican after 8 years of Obama?

Let The Games Begin!

Hello, Nation - long time, no speak. I haven't been ignoring you on purpose, I've just been rather busy getting all of the paperwork in order for the HOME I PURCHASED over the past few weeks. Yes, myself and the soon-to-be Mrs. Savage have decided to leave the realm of the renters, and will be joining the great debt-ridden group known as "home owners". Which I'm looking forward to with a giddyness that's difficult to put into words - even for me. :)

Rest assured, however, I have noticed what's been going on all the while. And I've got to say, while the anticipation for the big event this summer has been off-the-charts (sometimes ridiculous) in the past few months, I can't believe that it's finally here.

That's right... a federal election is coming this fall.

...

Sorry... what?

...

What's going on in Beijing?

...

Oh.

Whoops.

(Do you suppose the E.S. Nation can get some athletes to qualify in time for 2010? "Now entering the stadium...")

Getting back to things that actually matter... the hype surrounding the possibility of a fall election call has been building for weeks now, with Harper all but DARING Dion to bring down the government, and Dion musing that he might just take Stephen up on his offer. Sensing that this might be his shot, Dion is said to be mustering the troops and making all the fundraising calls you'd expect with a federal election call a few weeks away. The polls suggest that the election results are NOT a foregone conclusion, and might actually be decided by the quality of the campaigns themselves - which would be a nice change in Canadian politics.

I will readily admit that to political junkies like myself, a shuffling of the federal deck is a tantalizing prospect. Indeed, the idea of a federal election in the near future ALMOST makes me forget that my possession date for the new house is scheduled for the same week that the writ might come. Thanks, fellas... hope the missus won't mind moving by herself, while I'm busy blogging.

I'd encourage bloggers of all stripes to familiarize themselves with the policies not just of the party that they personally support, but of ALL of the parties, as those policies stand at this time. After all, we only notice the big, sudden shifts in direction (in the name of political expediency/ass-kissing) when we first take note of the previous course.

Hold onto your hats, kids... it's going to be an interesting month or so as the rhetoric kicks into high gear...


(Oh, by the way - for the record, I am a HUGE fan of the Olympic Games. I performed in the Opening Ceremonies in Calgary in 1988. China? Not such a big fan. Doping and cheating? Ditto. But the romantic idealist in me loves the "fantasy" of the Olympics - so, to our Olympians, who I know would be reading this right now if China allowed access to Blogger sites, I say: "Citius, Altius, Fortius". Give 'em hell, gang.)