Phendrana Drifts

So I'm working out this problem today, which to some degree is personal (who do I vote for and what do I do this week), but is also an exercise in political acumen (which has taken a beating this campaign, as what I predict can pretty much be guaranteed to work out to the opposite).

Politics is often the art of determining probabilities. In this case, what could happen on Saturday and what would have to happen to get there. Working out from a group of e-mails and conversations I've been having all day (and to some degree, plagarizing directly, apologies if you are re-seeing words or seeing your own thoughts), I see this. Six possible scenarios:

2nd ballot Dinning win - Dinning grows to 50% or more from the fear of a Ted Morton government. Dinning has a crack campaign team, who despite losing momentum may figure out how to get it back - especially if those MLA's supporting Dinning get off their asses and work for it.
2nd ballot Morton win - Morton sells enough memberships in one week to surpass Stelmach and Dinning combined. Possible, depends on whether he has tapped out his support base for the first ballot. If so, no chance. If there is room for membership growth, well... Less likely than Dinning taking it on the second ballot, but still very much possible.
2nd ballot Stelmach win - An extreme longshot, given that Dinning + Morton was 56.4% this last vote. While I think Stelmach has the most room to grow, I'm not sure there is that much room.
3rd ballot Dinning win - As mentioned earlier, it is difficult to conceive, as many Stelmach supporters will choose Morton as their second choice, and all Morton supporters will choose Stelmach as theirs. If he remains in the thirties or even low fourties on the second ballot, I can't see him finishing it.
3rd ballot Morton win - Stelmach's supporters choose Morton to throw him over the top. Unless Jim gets in the high forties, I think Stelmach's supporters will send Ted to the big chair. In the cold light of this afternoon, I think this is the most likely of the six scenarios.
3rd ballot Stelmach win - Stelmach comes in 2nd or 1st, and the supporter of the candidate that drops off picks Stelmach as their second choice. If Stelmach comes in second or first on the second ballot and whoever is first doesn't have 50%, Ed is the premier-designate, at least that is how I see it. What is holding this option back is that right now, all things being equal, Ed Stelmach will not be second or first.

For the purposes of probabilities, even a high 40's % would qualify as a win because if you're at 48% and the person left off the ballot had 20%, you would only need 10% of their supporters to list you as their second choice to put you over the top.

In many respects it boils down to this in my mind - if no one gets it on the second ballot and Stelmach is in the top two, then Stelmach will win. If no one gets it on the second ballot and Stelmach is not in the top two, then Morton wins. In any case, Dinning can only win on the second ballot and by the laws of mathematics and the PC party, that will only be the case if Morton plus Stelmach are less than Dinning. That is far from the case right now.

Important to note too that if Stelmach doesn't successfully make this a three-way race, that will make it Morton vs. Dinning. And unless the winner, be it Morton or Dinning, has some sort of leadership skills beyond parallel and continues making our party a big tent party, this party will be sunk.

6 Comments:

At 5:33 PM, Ken Chapman said…

This next week is not for the faint of heart Duncan.
Stelmach is the true agent of positive change in this final ballot. He is the only one that will bring the party back to the people to whom it belongs and respect the needs of all the people of this province...not just the powerful or the parochial.

He is the real bridge builder. Dinning only wants a bridge over the Morton firewall. Stelmach want to build a bridge to the future not just over a problem.

Corporatist vs. Fundamentalist is not a good choice for a new Alberta governance model. Positive activitist citizenship is a better model.

Stelmach is not an option or a compromise candidate - he is a preferred PROGRESSIVE choice. That is why Hancock is there and without hesitation.

Stelmach was the only guy to mention environment, education, respect and dignity in his closing remarks last night.

Stelmach is about shared values. The others are about getting and controlling the levers of power.
At 11:40 PM, Anonymous said…

Duncan, you and I will disagree on a lot of things but I think the last two senarios are exactly where we are headed.

The Dinning camp rode out on the pony express when they failed so miserably to grow after four years...

So there you have it.

Chapman, sigh, I dont even know what to say to people who are so blinded against people of faith.

Hard right, extremists, fundementalists... I hear that so often from "progressives". Where is your sense of tolerence?

Vote for us but have no say? Shut up and do what we say or just go away?

I think it is exactly that mind set which put Dinning in this pickle in the first place.
At 8:17 AM, Duncan said…

I don't know if we disagree on that much (I still consider myself very much a conservative)...
At 1:01 PM, Chris said…

Your assessment of the possible outcomes of the leadership context at this point concur with my own thinking about the matter. The rural nature of Stelmach and Morton's support is indicative that they are each other's natural second choice. While Dinning has made this week of the campaign about Ted Morton so it seems unlikely his supporters are going to go to Ted as their second choice.

I think Stelmach's problem will be that he starts off with too much distance to make up to overtake either Morton or Dinning. While he did recieve a significant number of enorsements its hard to say how deliverable that support is, herding cats and what not. The old reform machinery is also seemingly shifting into high gear at this point considering Ted's chance to succeed probably around even.
At 5:03 PM, Duncan said…

I think you are even underplaying Ted's odds - I think they are better than even.
At 10:13 AM, Tyler said…

Ken, what's your sense of whether you agree with Duncan that Ed's voters would have Ted as a second choice? Ed's Dave's and Mark's supporters largely are a vote against a Calgarian. But why would they put Ted, who is not only a Calgarian but an American, as a second choice?

<< Home

Twitter Updates

6 Comments: