Talk:2008 Alberta general election

Untitled

I changed the reference to seats elected by the Liberals from 17/16 to 16, and the Tories from 61/62 to 62.

I think it's not really accurate to say the Liberals were elected in Edmonton Castle Downs, only to have the election overturned. There was only one vote. People didn't vote again and change their minds afterward. The recounts are part of the process, and when all was said and done, the Tories came out with more votes in that riding.

actually your wrong and denying what really happened, Chris Kibbermannis had already been doing his MLA duties was listed as an MLA on the Alberta Legislature website, a number of recounts had already been held in his favor and a judicial recount brought on by the Progressive Conservatives found more votes some time after the election, this is very important. In the end Chris Kibbermannis decided to concede because he could not afford the legal battle --Cloveious 05:40, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Elections Alberta records only one result - the final result. There was one vote, not two. If the Liberal had been elected, and the judge ordered a by-election (sometimes happens if there are disputed ballots that make up more than the margin of victory) then wikipedia should record two results. But there was only one vote, and the judge determined what was, to his/her mind, the the most accurate reflection of that election. That's what we should stick with.

Nobody was saying there was 2 votes, the standings were changed at the Alberta court of appeals by Judicial recount, thats what it says because thats what happened. It went well beyond Elections Alberta the election results were held up in the Liberals favor a number of times, this wasn't an election night change that happened because a poll was late to report or a few votes were in doubt, this change did not happen when everyone woke up the next morning. It is important to tell the truth on what happened and not just delete parts you don't like. Here on the Elections Alberta web page was the Edmonton Castle Downs election night vote [1] seems nice and recorded to me. The standings had the Liberals at 17, and the PC's at 62 until the end of January that is fact. It is important to note the standings changed and how. He was a member-elect for 2 months. This is one of the most important stories to come out of the 2004 election, and it does certainly have an impact on this one as Edmonton Castle Downs will be a high profile race. These actions constitute nothing more then historical revisionism and it makes me sick, you should be ashamed and I will not accept that we just stick with it. --Cloveious 04:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The rhetoric is way over the top. I amended it to reflect the final result, but kept the footnote in. Louarab 21:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Not likely to happen in 2007.

Rather in early 2008, compare http://www.dailyheraldtribune.com/z_noelection103.lasso -- consequently, I've moved this page. —Nightstallion (?) 14:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

The page should have been moved to "27th Alberta general election" which is the standard when we don't know the year, not "Next Alberta general election". I will request an admin move it as you've created "27th Alberta general election" thus preventy a lay user such as myself from doing it. - Jord 14:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Name Change

It's all but a done deal that this election will be called within a week. Can we not moe this to the "2008 Alberta general eletion" page now? Nickjbor (talk) 05:10, 4 February 2008 (UTC) http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080203/alta_elxn_080203/20080203?hub=Canada

Issues

Now that the election date is set, we'll have to thoroughly implement neutral point of view and reliable sources, especially for the "issues"" section. As it stands now, it's full of weasel words and has no references. --Qyd (talk) 18:48, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

More accurate issues would be affordable housing, healthcare, education and the royalty review and everyone's favorite buzzwords "change" and "plan". These resonate with the average voter much more than lack of female representation, lack of urban representation and lack of multicultural representation. Someone pull their heads out of the sand and read the Herald/Journal! Danny Hertz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.70.60.144 (talk) 04:47, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Agree with Sinebot's comments above. Phendrana (talk) 18:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

What's the point of this Issues section? If its point is to speculate about potential issues in a way that is completely biased and devoid of references, mission accomplished. The section needs to be rewritten. One further note: the fact that an opinion section of the Herald or the Journal focuses on an issue does not mean the election will focus on that issue. Tfundy (talk) 21:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Key Dates

Feb 18 is the last day for cand's to be nominated as per elections alberta - http://www.elections.ab.ca/elect2008/wtKeyDates.cfm?MID=KD1

Also, if a riding has a cand, it will be listed here - http://www.elections.ab.ca/elect2008/wtParties.cfm

Nickjbor (talk) 07:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

==note of interest==

If the Liberal Party wins this election, it would be historic in a small sense, because never in Alberta history has a party regained power in an election. The Liberals governed from 1905 to 1921 (and they governed the NWT from 1897 to 1905), and have never governed again. The United Farmers Party governed from 1921 to 1935, and never governed again; even a derivative, possibly the NDP, has never governed in Alberta. The Social Credit Party governed from 1935 to 1971, and has never governed again. The Progressive Conservatives took power for the first time in 1971, and their predecessors, the Conservative Party, never governed Alberta. So, if the Libs win, historic first; if any other party won, it would continue the historic pattern with a new party taking its first turn. GBC (talk) 16:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Target Ridings

The "target ridings" section of this article makes reference to the fact that the Liberals lost the Edmonton-Castle Downs seat by less than 0.1% This is incorrect. As the article itself references, PC candidate Thomas Lukaszuk won over Liberal candidate Chris Kibermanis by a count of 7,165 against 5,085. Certainly a much wider margin than 0.1% What gives? 72.28.80.14 (talk) 15:23, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

That table refers to the 2004 election, since performance in the 2004 election is likely to determine which ridings a party target's in the 2008 election. The Liberals were obviously, on the basis of 2004, hopeful of picking up Edmonton Castle Downs. Obviously, it didn't turn out that way. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 18:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Alberta general election, 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071008090156/http://www.albertagreens.ca/blog/edwin_erickson/2006/11/03/candidate_update to http://www.albertagreens.ca/blog/edwin_erickson/2006/11/03/candidate_update

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:14, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alberta general election, 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080912065454/http://www.thestrategiccounsel.com/our_news/polls/Alberta%20Jan%2010-13%20-%20Election.pdf to http://www.thestrategiccounsel.com/our_news/polls/Alberta%20Jan%2010-13%20-%20Election.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:34, 30 June 2017 (UTC)