2007-06-13, 08:11 AM
A seat that has been PC for the past 30 something years has fallen to the Liberals.
Total votes were ~29,500 in a riding of about ~38-39K.
Lib - 4,801
PC - 4,017
No one else had more than 600 votes.
2007-06-13, 08:16 AM
Discuss? Ok, I count 20,000 missing votes.
2007-06-13, 08:27 AM
HAHAHA...Ya, there is that...more of a punishment by not voting. BUT, that turnout was alot higher than the 30-40% that usually vote, especially in a by-election.
2007-06-13, 09:27 AM
No, I think he meant that 29,500 - 4,801 - 4,017 = 20,682 which means there were at least 34 other candidates who got no more than 600 votes!
2007-06-13, 10:49 AM
I don't think is was a liberal win, as much as a "Screw You" to the new premier Ed Stelmach. Calgarians (esp. Mayor Bronconnier) are quite upset with how Steady Eddie is shifting our tax dollars to the rural areas, when there is such a large infrastructure deficit in this city.
2007-06-13, 03:04 PM
And yet those of us in rural areas are wondering why all the money is heading up North. Still I am surprised the Liberals took the seat.
2007-06-13, 05:01 PM
Since I don't know who the candidates were, was it that the Liberal candidate was that much better than the Tory candidate?
2007-06-13, 05:08 PM
Considering it's a by-election, and the winning margin is 800 votes in a 40,000 person constituency, I'd guess no. :p
2007-06-13, 07:01 PM
Let me apologize for misinformation. I was up early and must have had sleep in my eyes. According to the radio all day, the acutal turnout was more like 22%. I'll go back and check my source.
I read the graph wrong. Actual voters were 10,500.
2007-06-13, 07:19 PM
If I was the Liberal candidate I wouldn't be running out and buying a new car or anything. This is likely to be short term. If the Tories lose as a government it will be to another 'right' wing party. Unless, of course, the Liberals lose a couple of their loony tunes like David Schwann and this new guy.