Saturday, November 07, 2009

Stelmach gets 100% in review



Well, according to the Edmonton Sun. In reality, Stelmach comes in at 77.4%, right below the 78% I'd predicted.

So what does it mean? Well, it's humbling for a man who won 72 of 83 seats just a year and a half ago.

But it's certainly enough for Stelmach to stay on as leader. The ambiguous leadership review zone is usually in the high 60s - Clark stayed with 66.5% in '81 and quit with 66.9% in '83, while John Tory stayed (then quit) with 66.8% earlier this year. I can't think of someone getting a total this high and leaving, although Bernard Landry did resign after getting a similar 76.2% in 2005 (but, of course, the PQ had superstar Andre Boisclair waiting in the wings).

But Stelmach is the Premier, whereas all the aforementioned were in opposition, coming off dissapointing election results. He has given no sign of backing down so, baring a caucus mutiny, Stelmach will be the man trying to keep the 40 year old dynasty alive next election.

Which, if you think about it, probably makes Danielle Smith and David Swann the big winners of the night.

Labels:

posted by calgarygrit at 9:32 p.m.

11 Comments:

  • Yes. I suspect that the reason that Smith has been so quiet on the H1N1 thing is that she didn't want to twist the knife in too deep, since she benefits greatly from this outcome.

    Interesting, too, that Swann has really shown some mojo on the same file -- maybe his background, maybe some fresh thinking in the Liberal camp. But the poll (there's only been one) has not been great. Too late for that party, yet again?

    By Anonymous Naheed, at 9:56 p.m.  

  • Well, I'm not surprised, because the Tories needed someone to rally behind and, despite all of his shortcomings, Stelmach could possibly turn this around with enough change and strategic planning on his side.

    Had the Tories dumped Stelmach, they could have been seen in a weaker light, because I'm not so much sure it is Stelmach that is the entire issue, as it is the Tories altogether...

    And Naheed, you're absolutely right; Swann has shown some gusto for Alberta, and that will mean a lot come election time. Maybe not so much as the idea of "change," but maybe enough to retain a large Liberal base and cause the right-wing to fracture itself apart.

    By Blogger Kyle H., at 10:01 p.m.  

  • The next oil boom is already in its nascent changes.

    All that horizontal multistage fraccing technology making BC a force in natural gas, and Saskatchewan in light oil, the technology that created that natural gas bust, is beginning to be applied to aging conventional oilfields in Alberta.

    The grumpy Calgary investment bankers and oilmen will soo be happy again. Drilling and oil service jobs will be returning to rural Alberta.

    If Stelmach doesn't lose his head, and uses that rural Ukrainian common sense, things are going to be looking fine in two years in time for the next election.

    Sorry to disappoint you guys looking for excitement in Alberta politics. This year will be about as exciting as it gets.

    By Blogger whyshouldIsellyourwheat, at 10:16 p.m.  

  • Probably would have been better for Albertans if Stelmach failed his review.

    Although Albertans appear to be keen on getting rid of Stelmach, when push comes to shove, I don't think anyone really wants to put an unproven party and leader in charge. My support for the WAP was motivated almost entirely from a belief that if we scared the Cons enough, they would bring in a new leader. I'm sure I'm not alone.

    By Blogger McLea, at 11:15 p.m.  

  • I dunno, CG. I'm not an Albertan, I don't have a dog in this fight, etc.

    But it seems ol' Steady Eddie has a bit of a history of doing better than expected, like in the AB PC leadership and in the last election.

    Past performance is no guarantee of future results, of course. But even if I were in either the WRA or the Alta Liberals, I wouldn't be too quick to carve Stelmach's political tombstone.

    By Anonymous jason hickman, at 11:43 p.m.  

  • I put this on my blog, but its good here as well

    "Ed Stelmach has won over 77% in his leadership review, and will stick around as Premier of Alberta. This itself might not be news, but what results from this may well be. If you remember, there were roomers of possible defectors sitting in the PC Caucus that were going to switch to the WAP. With Stelmach staying, and no change visible on the horizon, if anyone is going to switch, now is the time to do it. As we mentioned before on this blog, we expect the real number to be closer to 2 and not the 10 that has been speculated. We also project that if this is to happen, it will happen on Monday (after the defectors take Sunday to think). If Tuesday morning comes and there are no defectors, there may well never be.

    The more interesting possibility is what I call a 'passive defection'. That a Tory in a rural riding (one the WAP could well win on it's own) would resign his seat. This would give Smith (WAP Leader) a place to run and win."

    By Blogger Unknown, at 11:50 p.m.  

  • U see some examples in this thread for why Stelmach still has support. He has "rural Ukrainian common sense"; a challenger with a superior resume is nonetheless an "unproven" newcomer relative to the incumbent ministers etc etc

    By Blogger Brian Dell, at 6:54 a.m.  

  • Eddy's 77% makes Danielle Smith the next Alberta Premier.

    What a breath of fresh in Canada . . . a Libertarian leader in a country so infected with progressives & liberals.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:24 a.m.  

  • Volkov, you wrote, "....with enough change and strategic planning on his side."and "...I'm not so much sure it is Stelmach that is the entire issue, as it is the Tories altogether..."

    That's EXACTLY why the Tories are coming under fire, they've ably demonstrated again and again that they're not capable of planning, strategic or not. I think it's just not in their bones.

    The "bust" that we're experiencing right now is partly due to their ideological refusal to adequately control the pace of oil sands development, leading to higher prices for labour and materials than would have been the case if they had moderated the development.

    And the recent furore over the H1N1virus immunizations show that they're not very quick on their feet when changing circumstances require responsive planning.

    And Fred? If you are in any way at all a "social conservative", you won't be very pleased with a "Libertarian" government; it wouldn't necessarily implement policy that limits individual choices in any arena. ANY arena.

    "Libertarianism" is closer to "classical" Liberalism (something, admittedly, we haven't experienced in this country for quite some time, if ever) than any kind of "conservatism".

    Yes, the "Leviathon" would be diminished, but don't expect state support for agriculture, the oil industry, families, etc. at the same time

    By Blogger Party of One, at 10:54 a.m.  

  • Is the WRA the party of social conservatives, the Ted Morton, Focus on the Family types? The Macleans article on Smith suggests she isnt but that many in the party are. Just asking....

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:55 a.m.  

  • Anon - Basically. Even if Smith herself isn't, most of the SoCons would be in the Wild Rose and they'll have a bunch of candidates much farther right than Ted Morton in the next election.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 9:15 a.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home