What started as talk-radio fantasy has now triggered calls for an RCMP investigation, a showdown with First Nations leaders, and fresh questions about who actually gets to decide Canada’s future.
Fred, Danielle Smith and the UCP never campaigned on separation, she has no mandate for Separation. I think the outcome of the last provincial election would have been much different. Unlike Quebec that has a separatist party, they have campaigned on separation. If they are elected, they have already said they will have another referendum on separation. Quebecers know full well what they are voting for.
The UCP was elected to govern Alberta within Canada.
Separation was not a central election issue, nor was it presented to voters as a defining mandate.
If it had been, Albertans would have gone to the polls fully aware that a vote for the government was also a vote to pursue independence.
Quebec's separatist movements have generally been much more transparent.
Parties such as the Parti Québécois were explicit about their intentions, and voters knew exactly what was on the ballot.
That's why many Albertans are asking a reasonable question...
If a government wants to pursue something as consequential as breaking up the country, shouldn't it first seek a clear electoral mandate for that objective?
Whatever side someone takes on separation, changing the future of a province...
and potentially Canada itself... is too significant to arrive through the back door.
Fred, this article was spot-on as usual. Certainly Danielle Smith knows about the connection between Alberta's Separatist movement and the MAGA enthusiasts south of the border. Yet she continues with her treasonous comments. It's common knowledge that a sizeable cohort of UPC supporters and some UCP MLAs are separatists at heart, and Maple MAGAs as well. A sleazy politician who is unable to stand up for Canada, that's DS. Holding on to power is more important to her than the good of the country. We're viewing this scenario now, in real time, in the US.
Fred, Danielle Smith and the UCP never campaigned on separation, she has no mandate for Separation. I think the outcome of the last provincial election would have been much different. Unlike Quebec that has a separatist party, they have campaigned on separation. If they are elected, they have already said they will have another referendum on separation. Quebecers know full well what they are voting for.
That's an important distinction, MizWolf.
The UCP was elected to govern Alberta within Canada.
Separation was not a central election issue, nor was it presented to voters as a defining mandate.
If it had been, Albertans would have gone to the polls fully aware that a vote for the government was also a vote to pursue independence.
Quebec's separatist movements have generally been much more transparent.
Parties such as the Parti Québécois were explicit about their intentions, and voters knew exactly what was on the ballot.
That's why many Albertans are asking a reasonable question...
If a government wants to pursue something as consequential as breaking up the country, shouldn't it first seek a clear electoral mandate for that objective?
Whatever side someone takes on separation, changing the future of a province...
and potentially Canada itself... is too significant to arrive through the back door.
Fred, this article was spot-on as usual. Certainly Danielle Smith knows about the connection between Alberta's Separatist movement and the MAGA enthusiasts south of the border. Yet she continues with her treasonous comments. It's common knowledge that a sizeable cohort of UPC supporters and some UCP MLAs are separatists at heart, and Maple MAGAs as well. A sleazy politician who is unable to stand up for Canada, that's DS. Holding on to power is more important to her than the good of the country. We're viewing this scenario now, in real time, in the US.
Jerry, I think that's the political tightrope she's trying to walk.
The problem is that once you legitimize a separatist movement by building a pathway for it, you don't get to control where it goes next.
History is full of politicians who thought they were managing a fringe movement, only to discover the movement was managing them.
What stands out to me is that Alberta faces real challenges that deserve serious attention.
But separation doesn't solve any of them.
It simply creates a whole new list of problems involving treaties, pensions, trade, currency, borders, and investment.
At some point, every leader has to decide whether they're feeding public frustration or actually governing.
Canadians have a right to expect the latter.