With less than a week of campaigning left, the combination of polls, personality, and policy suggests the Alberta electorate firming up in favour of Danielle Smith and the United Conservative Party..Let’s start with the polls. In late April, the UCP looked to be comfortably ahead. Smith had replaced Jason Kenney. That meant that any previous mistakes, mostly connected to the COVID-19 event, could be blamed on him — if not by her, then by a traditionally conservative electorate. This had happened before when Ralph Klein finally wore out his welcome and was repeated with the subsequent removals of Stelmach, Redford, and Prentice..That is, the very early polls likely reflected Alberta history more than the current electoral contest..By mid-May polls showed little more than inconsistencies when aggregated over the entire province. When broken down by regions, which with smaller samples meant larger margins of error, it looked as if Edmonton was solidly NDP, as might be expected in a government town. Calgary looked divided and outside the two big cities (excluding Lethbridge) small town and rural Alberta was strongly supporting the UCP..This is pretty much conventional wisdom among pollsters and academics who find it hard to distinguish casting a vote, which is a real decision with real consequences, and giving your opinion in response to a survey question, which is neither. Moreover, because most academics do not favour the UCP, they are quite willing to interpret mixed and ambiguous results as evidence of support for the NDP..This bias in favour of the progressives is, of course, amplified by the legacy media, especially the CBC and the columnists at the Calgary Herald..In addition, there are still a sizeable number of “undecided” respondents who for many reasons may not be undecided so much as reluctant to share their intentions with pollsters. There is also the comparatively lower turn-out rate for younger voters who tend disproportionately to support the NDP; that also has to be factored into the mix..The complexity of polling data and its inconsistencies may be the result of different sampling methods and different ways of collecting data. In any event, all these considerations should remind us that Prime Minister Diefenbaker may not have been amiss when he said, “dogs know best what to do with polls.” That said, my hunch is that, come election day, the UCP will outperform the pre-election polls..What about the personality contest?.Prior to the leaders’ debate, Rachel Notley was more favourably viewed than Danielle Smith. The polling numbers on this issue (again) varied, but were consistently in Notley’s favour..The debate may have changed the balance. Notley, so far as I could tell, seemed, if not angry, then deeply disappointed that Albertans might be so foolish even as to consider supporting Smith. As we are reminded daily, this is the default attitude of progressives..In contrast, Smith smiled almost constantly, not least of all when she admitted she had made mistakes and was not perfect. And her closing statement, an emotional confession of Alberta patriotism, completely outshone Notley’s sour repetition of her criticism of UCP policy on health care..I would say Smith won the debate on points, in the sense of being able to project her personality directly to the voters without the usually hostile filter of the legacy media getting in the way. So did Notley, but the personality on display was nothing as warm as that of Smith. As David Staples, a reporter for the Edmonton Journal (and formerly banned by the NDP from asking questions), put it: Notley attacked; Smith rallied people around her. That’s why she won..Policy and personality are connected, much as personality and polls are. By mid-May Smith and the UCP were viewed as being more qualified to manage the oil and gas sector of the economy whereas Notley and the NDP were thought to be stronger supporters of healthcare..The lower numbers for the UCP on healthcare may have been the result of NDP charges that their opponents would charge patients for visits to doctors — which was untrue. Notley also said the EMS services had deteriorated when in fact they had significantly improved under the UCP..On the oil and gas file, the NDP had from the start a major problem with the remarks of Kevin Van Tighem, their candidate in Livingstone-Macleod, nestled in the southwest corner of the province. At one point he said that oil sucks and that Albertans were both suckers and “angry entitled rednecks.” He also compared oil and gas companies to slave owners and their employees to slaves. Not surprisingly he tried to walk back his remarks and explained “everybody’s insights evolve.” With insights like those, no wonder Notley has problems..Van Tighem was not alone. Samir Kayande (Calgary Elbow) said that the oil and gas industry “must go away.” Druh Farrell (Calgary Bow) told us to quit obsessing about pipelines and declining employment in hydrocarbon industries. And there were other deep green comments from NDP candidates in Lethbridge and Edmonton..All of which gave Smith and the UCP major targets: a vote for Notley is an endorsement of the Trudeau-Singh policy of a “just transition,” a policy that demands the entitled rednecks go away. Smith has made it very clear that a UCP government would oppose the “just transition,” as has Premier Moe in Saskatchewan. Notley has not..Incidentally, if Trudeau were serious about any kind of transition for the Alberta economy he would not have dumped $13 billion in Ontario to help out Volkswagen. Probably there was no “business case” to invest here, which again underlines the real purpose of his transition, to destroy the Alberta economy. This is why a vote for Notley is a vote for Trudeau..The second major policy choice Albertans will make concerns taxes. The NDP had placed clever attack signs around Calgary suggesting Danielle Smith was flaky. They read: “What will she do next?” The UCP put up a small sign in from of the NDP one with the answer: “Cut Taxes.”.The NDP said they would increase corporate taxes by some 38% (last time it was only a 20% hike). Just about every economist who has gone on record about this NDP proposal would have agreed with Jack Mintz: it was a bad idea that would lead to over a billion dollars in lost investment and over 30,000 lost jobs. The only economist of note to have demurred is Todd Hirsch, formerly of Alberta Treasury Branch and currently on the NDP payroll. He said: “I haven’t done the analysis” of what the tax increase would cost. Why not, Todd?.As for the future, the UCP plans on expanding the Taxpayer Protection Act, which currently protects us from a provincial sales tax, by requiring referenda to pre-approve any income tax or business tax increases. Again, in contrast, the NDP would not say whether they plan on reintroducing a carbon tax. In the 2015 election campaign they were equally silent about a carbon tax during the campaign. Maybe they haven’t done the analysis either?.Bottom line? As Yogi Berra said of the 1973 NL pennant race, "it ain’t over till it’s over." But on polls, advantage UCP. On personality, advantage NDP, but the UCP is closing in. On policy: no contest, a big UCP victory..The likely result? A UCP win, which is a prelude to the real showdown with Justin and Jagmeet. And Yogi, as Mets manager, won the pennant.
With less than a week of campaigning left, the combination of polls, personality, and policy suggests the Alberta electorate firming up in favour of Danielle Smith and the United Conservative Party..Let’s start with the polls. In late April, the UCP looked to be comfortably ahead. Smith had replaced Jason Kenney. That meant that any previous mistakes, mostly connected to the COVID-19 event, could be blamed on him — if not by her, then by a traditionally conservative electorate. This had happened before when Ralph Klein finally wore out his welcome and was repeated with the subsequent removals of Stelmach, Redford, and Prentice..That is, the very early polls likely reflected Alberta history more than the current electoral contest..By mid-May polls showed little more than inconsistencies when aggregated over the entire province. When broken down by regions, which with smaller samples meant larger margins of error, it looked as if Edmonton was solidly NDP, as might be expected in a government town. Calgary looked divided and outside the two big cities (excluding Lethbridge) small town and rural Alberta was strongly supporting the UCP..This is pretty much conventional wisdom among pollsters and academics who find it hard to distinguish casting a vote, which is a real decision with real consequences, and giving your opinion in response to a survey question, which is neither. Moreover, because most academics do not favour the UCP, they are quite willing to interpret mixed and ambiguous results as evidence of support for the NDP..This bias in favour of the progressives is, of course, amplified by the legacy media, especially the CBC and the columnists at the Calgary Herald..In addition, there are still a sizeable number of “undecided” respondents who for many reasons may not be undecided so much as reluctant to share their intentions with pollsters. There is also the comparatively lower turn-out rate for younger voters who tend disproportionately to support the NDP; that also has to be factored into the mix..The complexity of polling data and its inconsistencies may be the result of different sampling methods and different ways of collecting data. In any event, all these considerations should remind us that Prime Minister Diefenbaker may not have been amiss when he said, “dogs know best what to do with polls.” That said, my hunch is that, come election day, the UCP will outperform the pre-election polls..What about the personality contest?.Prior to the leaders’ debate, Rachel Notley was more favourably viewed than Danielle Smith. The polling numbers on this issue (again) varied, but were consistently in Notley’s favour..The debate may have changed the balance. Notley, so far as I could tell, seemed, if not angry, then deeply disappointed that Albertans might be so foolish even as to consider supporting Smith. As we are reminded daily, this is the default attitude of progressives..In contrast, Smith smiled almost constantly, not least of all when she admitted she had made mistakes and was not perfect. And her closing statement, an emotional confession of Alberta patriotism, completely outshone Notley’s sour repetition of her criticism of UCP policy on health care..I would say Smith won the debate on points, in the sense of being able to project her personality directly to the voters without the usually hostile filter of the legacy media getting in the way. So did Notley, but the personality on display was nothing as warm as that of Smith. As David Staples, a reporter for the Edmonton Journal (and formerly banned by the NDP from asking questions), put it: Notley attacked; Smith rallied people around her. That’s why she won..Policy and personality are connected, much as personality and polls are. By mid-May Smith and the UCP were viewed as being more qualified to manage the oil and gas sector of the economy whereas Notley and the NDP were thought to be stronger supporters of healthcare..The lower numbers for the UCP on healthcare may have been the result of NDP charges that their opponents would charge patients for visits to doctors — which was untrue. Notley also said the EMS services had deteriorated when in fact they had significantly improved under the UCP..On the oil and gas file, the NDP had from the start a major problem with the remarks of Kevin Van Tighem, their candidate in Livingstone-Macleod, nestled in the southwest corner of the province. At one point he said that oil sucks and that Albertans were both suckers and “angry entitled rednecks.” He also compared oil and gas companies to slave owners and their employees to slaves. Not surprisingly he tried to walk back his remarks and explained “everybody’s insights evolve.” With insights like those, no wonder Notley has problems..Van Tighem was not alone. Samir Kayande (Calgary Elbow) said that the oil and gas industry “must go away.” Druh Farrell (Calgary Bow) told us to quit obsessing about pipelines and declining employment in hydrocarbon industries. And there were other deep green comments from NDP candidates in Lethbridge and Edmonton..All of which gave Smith and the UCP major targets: a vote for Notley is an endorsement of the Trudeau-Singh policy of a “just transition,” a policy that demands the entitled rednecks go away. Smith has made it very clear that a UCP government would oppose the “just transition,” as has Premier Moe in Saskatchewan. Notley has not..Incidentally, if Trudeau were serious about any kind of transition for the Alberta economy he would not have dumped $13 billion in Ontario to help out Volkswagen. Probably there was no “business case” to invest here, which again underlines the real purpose of his transition, to destroy the Alberta economy. This is why a vote for Notley is a vote for Trudeau..The second major policy choice Albertans will make concerns taxes. The NDP had placed clever attack signs around Calgary suggesting Danielle Smith was flaky. They read: “What will she do next?” The UCP put up a small sign in from of the NDP one with the answer: “Cut Taxes.”.The NDP said they would increase corporate taxes by some 38% (last time it was only a 20% hike). Just about every economist who has gone on record about this NDP proposal would have agreed with Jack Mintz: it was a bad idea that would lead to over a billion dollars in lost investment and over 30,000 lost jobs. The only economist of note to have demurred is Todd Hirsch, formerly of Alberta Treasury Branch and currently on the NDP payroll. He said: “I haven’t done the analysis” of what the tax increase would cost. Why not, Todd?.As for the future, the UCP plans on expanding the Taxpayer Protection Act, which currently protects us from a provincial sales tax, by requiring referenda to pre-approve any income tax or business tax increases. Again, in contrast, the NDP would not say whether they plan on reintroducing a carbon tax. In the 2015 election campaign they were equally silent about a carbon tax during the campaign. Maybe they haven’t done the analysis either?.Bottom line? As Yogi Berra said of the 1973 NL pennant race, "it ain’t over till it’s over." But on polls, advantage UCP. On personality, advantage NDP, but the UCP is closing in. On policy: no contest, a big UCP victory..The likely result? A UCP win, which is a prelude to the real showdown with Justin and Jagmeet. And Yogi, as Mets manager, won the pennant.