Thank you, Dave - always valuable. Two points. You note that elections are often surprising, so here is my thought about what could really surprise almost everyone. So many voices are saying what Rabin Mohamed just wrote in the National Post: “one thing that’s all but guaranteed is that election night will be a nail-biter”. I believe that elections often crystallize public opinion in one direction or another. If Smith wins, the margin may seem modest (but could still be 47-40). If Notley wins, my bet is that she will win 50+ seats (say, 51-36). Why might that happen? Likely, that trust gap that you describe could have a big coalescing impact. Of course, even in that case, the vote percentage margin could remain pretty narrow, due to differing vote efficiencies. But on election night, a 15 seat margin would not seem close at all.
Second point is more a handful of questions. Don’t the huge sums of money that have poured in mostly matter in this pre-election period (which is almost over)? And has either party outgunned the other in ad spending up till now, or produced much more effective messaging? During the election itself, don’t strict limits constrain the parties from spending all the money they have on hand? And since the election results (and swing ridings) will mostly centre on Calgary and the donut around Edmonton, won’t advertising and ground game dollars spent there quickly reach a (saturation) point of diminishing returns?
Good points Morrey Ewing. On the second point you're correct that money in politics does reach a certain 'saturation point', before other factors matter more. But at least in Alberta we have an opposition party, the New Democrats, who are on an equal financial footing. Which should lead to what has been said 'an election night nail-biter'.
Thank you, Dave - always valuable. Two points. You note that elections are often surprising, so here is my thought about what could really surprise almost everyone. So many voices are saying what Rabin Mohamed just wrote in the National Post: “one thing that’s all but guaranteed is that election night will be a nail-biter”. I believe that elections often crystallize public opinion in one direction or another. If Smith wins, the margin may seem modest (but could still be 47-40). If Notley wins, my bet is that she will win 50+ seats (say, 51-36). Why might that happen? Likely, that trust gap that you describe could have a big coalescing impact. Of course, even in that case, the vote percentage margin could remain pretty narrow, due to differing vote efficiencies. But on election night, a 15 seat margin would not seem close at all.
Second point is more a handful of questions. Don’t the huge sums of money that have poured in mostly matter in this pre-election period (which is almost over)? And has either party outgunned the other in ad spending up till now, or produced much more effective messaging? During the election itself, don’t strict limits constrain the parties from spending all the money they have on hand? And since the election results (and swing ridings) will mostly centre on Calgary and the donut around Edmonton, won’t advertising and ground game dollars spent there quickly reach a (saturation) point of diminishing returns?
Good points Morrey Ewing. On the second point you're correct that money in politics does reach a certain 'saturation point', before other factors matter more. But at least in Alberta we have an opposition party, the New Democrats, who are on an equal financial footing. Which should lead to what has been said 'an election night nail-biter'.