Transcript
Annalise
0:01
Welcome to The Strategist, episode 1050. I'm your host, Annalise Klingbeil, and with you, as always, Stephen Carter, Corey Hogan.
Carter
0:10
That was so good. That was your best one.
Annalise
0:13
I'm pumped to be here. It's been a couple weeks. Well,
Carter
0:17
Well, I went back to
Annalise
0:18
to try and... I met Corey Hogan in person, and now we are reaching a new deadline. For the very first time.
Annalise
0:23
I met him for the very first time in person, and
Annalise
0:27
then we didn't talk for two weeks. And I'm pumped to be back, guys. We
Carter
0:34
We had Zane. And yeah,
Carter
0:37
yeah, well, we've got you now. So everything's going to be looking up.
Annalise
0:42
up. I was on my deathbed and you had Zane.
Annalise
0:47
Are you feeling better? I'm a little sick still. You can probably hear it in my voice, but I'm much better
Corey
0:53
was earlier. I can tell it's coming through as birds and some background noise, I think. I think that's what it sounds
Carter
0:58
sounds like. yeah annalise like when she talks actually in the jungle right now
Carter
1:02
yeah so weird in
Annalise
1:05
in a jungle how
Annalise
1:06
how are you guys doing how how how are things uh
Carter
1:09
uh i did the shits on afl this weekend uh my buddy got eight out of nine and i got five out of nine i dropped from the top five percent to like top 25 percent it's
Carter
1:20
it's fucking gong show so
Carter
1:22
so i don't know what any
Corey
1:24
was it it's all made up it's i it's a chat gpt steven carter we just threw in a few things and this is what he does yeah yeah
Carter
1:31
so angry but it'll be okay i'm feeling confident that i'll rebound next week uh a little bit easier next week i'll be able to how
Annalise
1:39
how long how long does the afl season last for that's
Carter
1:42
that's about uh six months oh wow yeah is that
Corey
1:46
that like six australian months or six north american six
Carter
1:49
six winter australian months so it goes for a long time okay
Carter
1:55
yeah they're pretty the
Annalise
1:56
the whole six months that's the question if
Corey
2:02
if you if you call this talking about this is about as much as we ever get do
Corey
2:06
do you try and talk
Annalise
2:07
talk to other people about it carter listen
Carter
2:08
listen there is a whole community on the discord talking about afl football and uh i'm a little upset that you're not you know picking it up joining with us but whatever the
Carter
2:20
rest of the weekend uh i thought about gardening but i didn't because it's the middle of winter still you
Annalise
2:26
you garden that's so that's so cute i
Carter
2:28
i don't garden so much as i have a garden plot how's that heather gardens heather does some stuff okay so you you don't
Annalise
2:35
i do less i do garden because it sounded cool well
Carter
2:39
it so i thought i'd bring it
Annalise
2:42
cool let's uh we've got lots to talk about cory
Annalise
2:45
cory didn't tell us what What
Carter
2:46
he did this weekend, though, don't you want to know?
Annalise
2:49
See, now that I've met Corey in person, I
Annalise
2:52
don't need to make this weekend small talk with Corey now that I've met him in person. I don't need to do that.
Carter
3:01
good. It's just a whole
Annalise
3:04
It's a whole different relationship now.
Annalise
3:06
Okay, we're going to move into our first segment. Our first segment
Annalise
3:11
segment is called Government Funded Media. media um
Annalise
3:14
um big week guys big week on twitter um it all started earlier this week when twitter labels um npr as state affiliated media um which is the same term it uses for propaganda outlets in places like russia and china this was later and you guys can maybe clarify because i've been very offline this week um later changed to government funded media media.
Annalise
3:41
While all this is happening, conservative leader Pierre Polyev, he writes to Twitter, he writes to Elon Musk and says, like, you got to label CBC content as the same thing. And then today, I think it's today, this evening, there it is. Twitter has labeled the CBC as government funded media. So far, as far as I can tell, it's like this at CBC account. It's not the CBC news news account, or Radio Canada. So CBC's director of media relations, they put out a statement this evening, just a little bit ago. It says, Twitter's own policy defines government-funded media as media where the government may have varying degrees of government involvement over editorial content. And that's clearly not the case with CBC.
Annalise
4:27
So let's dig in. Kind of lots to pick apart here in Elon Musk's Twitter. But strategy-wise, Corey, let's start with you. what's what's cbc's next move here well
Corey
4:38
well cbc is a little bit boxed in by what npr has done which is just get the hell off the platform yeah and so that is sort of going to set the baseline expectation i will say i think the situation's a little bit different obviously twitter's policies are shall we say in a state of flux and the reality is there's probably nobody around to update the effing website that has twitter's policies to begin with but clearly elon musk has determined that government funded state funded that's something more than what twitter previously said look if it captures npr of course it's going to capture cbc that's just a reality and here's another reality cbc is far more funded by the government than npr is so in some ways the the options in front of cbc are not great but they're going to have to decide what their walk away way position is here i don't think they're going to change elon musk's mind i don't think they want to leave twitter so i suspect they will say boo
Corey
5:35
boo we're reviewing our options and if anything just push for this label to be applied to more things because frankly if npr can be covered by this label almost any canadian media outlet can be we were saying this on the pod last time but with all of the money that's gone to post media with all of the money that's gone to all of these various channels across Canada as part of the government's programs.
Corey
5:56
Frankly, it's more than the 1% NPR gets, so they should all have government funded on the list.
Annalise
6:02
Carter, do you want to jump in?
Carter
6:04
Yeah, I think that that's right. I think that leaving Twitter as NPR did, I'm not sure that's going to be as easy an option for the CBC. I mean, NPR, I'm sure they have a small small, uh, revenue base from the government. Um, but the CBC is kind of like Canada as Canada's broadcaster, uh, keeping in mind that many of these, many of our communities wouldn't even have news access if it wasn't for the CBC. Uh, they have to, I think, stay on, on Twitter in order to, uh, share their, share their stuff a little bit more. Now they're not sharing a tremendous amount. I mean, I'm sure that they get more listeners, uh, just, you know, from, and clicks just from clicking this stuff right like it it doesn't it doesn't drive their business twitter but i think that they have to stay on twitter and not pop off like uh like npr did but nonetheless uh this is kind of a gone show pause
Annalise
6:58
pause there for a second carter why do you think they have to why
Annalise
7:01
why do they have to stay on if they're on all these other platforms and if they're let's say they don't get a lot of traffic to their stuff from twitter you're saying it's like a public duty i
Carter
7:10
i think it's The CBC feels that their mandate is to be communicating with Canadians on every medium possible to ensure that Canadians have the best opportunity to get information, to get news wherever they may be, keeping in mind that we are the second largest landmass of a country. So it's huge, right? Right. And it's it's not just, you know, speaking to all of us in Calgary, but it's speaking to everybody across the nation, regardless of where you live or how you get your your services. So that may include, you
Carter
7:48
you know, being on Twitter and having a higher profile on Twitter than NPR. NPR has a different mandate than the CBC. CBC's mandate is to communicate, in my opinion, with as many people as possible, as many Canadians as possible. And that means doing it where they are to steal the phrase from Nenji's campaign. So I think that that's why it's a little bit different. I think, you know, why is the CBC so interested in podcasting? It's not just to make us angry, right? Not just to come in and upset us. It's because that's where people are. Now that we cultivated the audience for political programming, CBC slides right in and takes advantage, right? right? You
Annalise
8:30
You can learn more at westofcenter.ca. Corey, it looks like you want to say something there.
Corey
8:36
Yeah, I don't actually think that's, I don't agree with Stephen. I think the reason why CBC has to stay on Twitter is because it would seem like too much of a political statement if they left Twitter. So here's the irony, and here's the thing to unpack. CBC is actually publicly funded, right? It might not be a state broadcaster like RT, but it is publicly funded, and it would seem very political to walk away from twitter in these supercharged times so i think ultimately cbc's options are between bad and terrible and they're going to pick bad which is to sit there and take their lumps and have this stupid label applied to them that suggests something otherwise because leaving twitter is just going to rile up a whole other group of people it's just going to be ammunition for people saying see cbc doesn't even want to have you know truth in advertising talk to people who disagree with them all of that bullshit and as a result They're kind of stuck. They're stuck where they are. And it has very little to do with whether CBC needs to be in Iqaluit, frankly. It has everything to do with the fact that this is a tense moment. And let's not lose sight of the fact that the leader of the opposition sent a letter to Elon Musk saying, these guys are state media, make sure you label them state media. Well, why confirm all of that to Elon Musk? Why confirm that to Pierre Polyev? Why confirm that to Canadians? What a
Carter
9:53
a dick move by Polyev, too. Like, just an absolute dick move.
Annalise
9:57
Well, and then his response today, he's tweeted that, you know, CBC has been, quote, officially exposed as, quote, Trudeau propaganda, not news.
Annalise
10:09
I don't know. Do you want to weigh into
Annalise
10:11
into that aspect of all of this?
Corey
10:18
Jesus, what do you say about that? You request this label. This label is obviously being given for much looser cases like NPR. CBC gets this label. You use this as evidence of something different even than what you originally – you're
Corey
10:32
you're using it as evidence of something different than what it is, right? Again, if NPR is going to get that label, of course CBC is going to get that label. Does that mean that NPR or CBC, for that matter, is a government spokesperson? No, of course it doesn't. And so it's a real twerking of the issue. It's a real misconstruing of the issue. And it's real unfortunate. But here we are. This is not particularly new territory for Pierre Polyev. And again, I think CBC's best move here is not to take the bait. Do
Annalise
11:01
Do you think, Carter,
Annalise
11:02
Carter, do you think like what Pierre Polyev is doing hits and he's taking a page out of, you know, what Donald Trump has done? Like, I just think of how different
Annalise
11:12
different the trust within the media and then you bring up CBC specifically is compared to even
Annalise
11:17
even four years ago, 10 years ago, that sort of thing. Like, do you think, is
Annalise
11:20
is he doing this just because this is him or is this winning him votes? I
Carter
11:26
I don't think it's winning him votes. I mean, I think that he is able to fundraise off of it. I think that the people who think the CBC is biased will always think the CBC is biased and they get to fundraise off of that. And that's their primary impetus for taking this attack. I mean, you
Carter
11:42
you know, Stephen Harper did not defund the CBC. He may have made cuts, but it didn't amount to what Pierre Polyev is suggesting, which is essentially deconstructing it completely and turning it into some sort of a private broadcaster, or better yet, just leaving the space completely. completely so i i think that this is a um this
Carter
12:04
this is a problematic move from pierre pauliev not because you know the cbc is perfect in every way shape or form i i i'm just not going to take that position but because it's just not based on a foundation of truth the foundation of truth is the cbc works very hard to be balanced it is the number one radio broadcaster in a lot of markets it is an important television broadcaster across the country. It is and does play a significant role in Canadian culture.
Carter
12:37
The stuff that Pierre does, what he does is he brings in a layer of falsehood within his truths. And I just think that that is extremely dangerous when we're dealing dealing with, with, with politics. Um, people always say politicians lie. Well, truth is we don't lie so much as we speak to people who are different than you. And this is, but this is a blatant lie. This, this, and some of the things he's been doing of late are just, just simply lies. That's it. There's no, there's no second, there's no second, uh, level to it. It's just him lying about, about a bias that just isn't there.
Annalise
13:18
So how, what's the answer to that? Like, how do do you combat that what's what are other parties to do well
Carter
13:25
well i think that the problem is as soon as you start fighting for it you start looking like it does matter i mean if trudeau starts saying how great the cbc is i think that you know he's reinforcing the primary um the primary attack on the cbc right it does his bidding i think if you're the cbc you should do what you always did which is put out uh accurate reporting uh from both sides uh that takes your smacks at the at at the Liberals as often as it takes a smack at the Conservatives because both of them often need a smack. But this isn't, you
Carter
13:58
you know, I think that where things get really interesting is if and when Pierre Polyev decides to make this a central campaign issue and the CBC has to try and cover its potential own demise. I think that, you know, it's going to get really difficult for the CBC as they move along. I don't envy them to be in that position.
Annalise
14:21
cory anything to add there yeah
Corey
14:24
yeah well i just think if you're trudeau steven's right you don't take the bait you don't take the bait now you don't take the bait later um it would just reinforce the message and frankly it's losing ground for the liberals um pierre
Corey
14:36
pierre polyev is doing it in a way that is a little off putting in my opinion the way he's approached these uh particular issues issues really is not um not that appealing to a lot of canadians but um but the reality is defunding the cbc reducing funding for the cbc that's more popular than not uh by about 10 points so it's an issue that the cbc wins on so put aside any of kind of the moral arguments the ethical arguments there's a political argument to be made here which is you don't fight on territory that is is better for the other guy so if you're justin trudeau you you don't take the bait you do not take the bait so
Carter
15:13
so but one question i have and maybe annalise you'll know this what is the cbc how's it doing in ratings like do people do canadians watch it because i certainly watch it and i certainly listen to it and it's one of my go-to locations for news it's not my only place but i certainly go to the cbc and i and i can get a really good sense of what's really happening happening what's it what are its numbers are it's declining does anybody know like i think one of the reasons that we struggle with this is we don't actually have openness about where the cbc is and how important it is to society i know it's the number number one rated um morning show but i don't know much more well
Annalise
15:51
well i think too and i don't i don't know what their numbers are um but
Annalise
15:56
but i think it's also that changing environment right like all tv ratings are lower now than they used to be because people go online for their news so are we going to get all of these online sites to you know like before the the herald for example when i was there could you'd have your nad bank or whatever they're called numbers that were like there are this many subscribers with clicks it's different it's a different measurement yeah
Corey
16:21
yeah in some ways it's more measurable but also in many ways i think steven it's it's beside the point it's not the ratings it's the coverage it's what you were talking about earlier in terms of this is this is the only outlet or the primary outlet at least in television and radio in a lot of different geographies and
Corey
16:38
so big questions big conversations about the cbc in our future i think because there is also the reality that an internet connection uh replaces some of what the need for cbc was bluntly like if we're going to be totally frank about it and so cbc does need to carve out a niche that is 21st century friendly But, but, but this is going to be a tricky one for them. It's tough to be, as
Corey
17:02
as you put it, Stephen, covering your own demise or potential demise. If, if this actually becomes an election issue in some way, shape or form. yeah
Carter
17:11
yeah i had a really good looks like you wanted
Annalise
17:13
wanted to say i had
Carter
17:13
had a really good point good super good point yeah oh no well
Annalise
17:18
well one thing i wanted to ask too is with the like with npr saying hey we're done my understanding correct me if i'm wrong is that their reporters can make their own choice so if you have and and let's say it's not cbc but there's other outlets in the coming days weeks that also have labels that take that hard stance of like we're done do you think in order to make that point, they need to say, us
Annalise
17:42
us and everyone who works for us is done with Twitter? Like, if NPR is gone, but all of their reporters are still on Twitter, does it even matter?
Corey
17:50
Well, it's a good question, because there are certainly outlets where, like, if you're the New York Times at NY Times, that means something. That's kind of, that's shareable, that's credible. But the reality is, in terms of actual social media engagement, I would bet, if you look right now that the more prominent media personalities are getting far more engagement on their social media activity than the cbc news posting of it right or the you know whatever corporate accounts that the cbc decides to put the content out through and that's because people want to mix it up with an actual personality they want to have conversations with the actual writers the actual pundits and um and so in a way you're right maybe they're not losing a lot by losing the official channel because these people can still share it and in fact it might be a better fit for these more personality driven times we find ourselves in anyhow yeah
Carter
18:45
yeah and i think that i think we're talking about this like this is the airwaves in uh the 1940s when when the government was handing out um licenses right this is going to be there forever i think there's an argument to be made and a very strong argument to be made that this is nothing like the 1940s. This looks more like MySpace than it looks like television forever. I mean, there's a very
Carter
19:12
very real chance, a non-zero chance for sure, that we're not talking about Twitter in two years, that Elon Musk just simply drives the thing right into the ground. He's got enough money to keep it afloat. But, Corey, you and I have talked, well, mostly you, because you're the numbers guy but you've talked at at length about what it you know what the costs are to musk to keep this thing open uh given the amount of debt that he likely incurred in order to uh to secure the deal you
Carter
19:43
if he if he's incurring that much debt you know does this even continue and i just don't think we need to worry about it the same way that we were worried about handing out television licenses and radio frequencies in the 1930s and 19 1940s well
Corey
19:58
well your Your point about frequencies is a good one, because there's another thing that CBC has been dealing with over decades now that has fundamentally changed the game, which is it used to be a combination of infrastructure and content, right?
Corey
20:11
It was repeaters, it was broadcast stations, it was television stations. Now it's a lot more just about the content, right? You know, they still have most of those other things I've talked about, but they're of less importance in a world that is moving to IP, right? right? Like
Corey
20:28
internet protocols, I mean. And so that's an interesting shift. And that's an awkward shift. And the value of CBC in the future is much less about the fact that there is a physical station in the community, I suspect, than it is that the community is being covered. And those stories are being, you know, discussed because they're being supported by professional journalists who are looking into those things. And again, that changes the game a bit for CBC. And that makes things a little interesting, especially in these charged times where everybody's motives are are always being uh questioned yeah
Annalise
20:59
well that like can you not do that good work and share that work without being on
Annalise
21:05
on twitter like i don't maybe it would be an interesting social experiment but get an entire newsroom and all their reporters off
Annalise
21:11
off twitter get them stopping getting their story ideas from twitter all that and and i i don't know i just think it would i think twitter has really really changed
Annalise
21:20
changed things in recent years and maybe it would be cool to see what it would be like to go back and not be on twitter that's
Corey
21:28
that's a it's an idealistic view but i think one of the things is twitter journalists are on twitter because twitter is useful right i mean you can chase a dozen different stories at the same time you don't need to be working the phones it's a very you're able to sift through things as they're occurring and i just until there is an equivalent tool that allows you to get that kind of economy of scale of information watching i just i don't think Twitter's going anywhere, right? That's my personal feeling on it. And so even, I would suspect even NPR, quote unquote, quitting Twitter, they're still watching Twitter. They're still getting
Corey
22:03
ideas from Twitter. And
Corey
22:04
And that's just the stranglehold Twitter has on the market right now. But that's, to Carter's point, that's not a given forever. So we'll see.
Annalise
22:11
Substack notes, Carter, is the future. The new Twitter. Okay,
Carter
22:15
Okay, I will jump right on that. That
Annalise
22:17
That was a joke.
Annalise
22:19
Okay, moving on to our next segment. i missed
Carter
22:22
missed the fucking joke this is the worst day it's okay um
Annalise
22:26
um we're gonna stick we're gonna stick with this media uh conversation that we're having next segment is called one question please uh
Annalise
22:36
you guys did have you talked oh is this like a did you talk about this thing
Annalise
22:42
okay i didn't list i didn't listen you just there's been such a flurry of episodes lately i've not you're welcome is
Annalise
22:48
you were i've not caught up to date so i want to make sure zane did not talking about
Carter
22:52
you know cory do
Carter
22:53
do any of the producers listen like or like any of the hosts like we're
Annalise
22:57
we're how many episodes have gone out in the past three days four
Carter
23:02
you know how i know we fucking recorded
Annalise
23:04
recorded how many we
Carter
23:05
we fucking recorded how
Annalise
23:07
many hours four hours that's four hours that
Carter
23:11
that is that's called dedication is
Annalise
23:15
is because you care about your listeners so much yeah
Carter
23:17
yeah we do care about the listener so
Carter
23:19
much the one okay
Annalise
23:20
okay one question please okay
Carter
23:22
did you just ask it the
Annalise
23:25
the one listener who left during intermission at the live show
Annalise
23:31
that's that's who this is for okay uh one
Annalise
23:33
one question please on friday daniel smith did a press conference um you would think it would have been good news good coverage good headlines it was a friday she was in calgary she's got a bunch of people behind her and she is talking about the topic of a new Premier's Council on multiculturalism.
Annalise
23:53
That's the story. Then
Annalise
23:54
Then it's time for media questions. And surprise! Smith says she's no longer taking follow-up questions. Every reporter who gets a question through, they only get one question. No follow-up. Why? It's an election. That's why. Direct quote. So there was some outrage about this. There There was a lot of upset reporters on Twitter. There was some headlines about it. And then she doubled down on this yesterday on her weekend radio show, saying, you know, the people who were standing behind her on Friday, they could have fainted if she stood up there and she took follow-ups. So the new policy, because it's the election, even though the election has not been called, is one question per media outlet per press conference. um i obviously have thoughts about this but strategy wise and cory i want to start with you because you did the the ucp strategy at our live show can you like walk me through what the thinking is here like what what the point at a time when you know um media
Annalise
24:59
media already like maybe not super happy with you what the point of saying like one question per media outlet per press conference what's what's the strategy here what's the win yeah
Corey
25:12
yeah this is an extreme version of something that politicians of both stripes all stripes really have been doing for a while which is trying to control the answers that they provide in a way that gets the stories that they want and look here's the simple reality um if you only have one question and no follow-up you can literally ask me anything i can literally say anything and we're not going to have any of that awkwardness of you saying you didn't answer my question and grinding me a little bit harder on it and and that's just it moves on to the next thing in some ways the questions are incidental to the answers right it becomes just a way for you to say the things you want to say for as long as you want to say before you call the end of the press conference and um the follow-up is really what makes it journalism in my opinion right it's you know it's i was saying on twitter it's the difference between journalism and stenography you asking me something and me telling you something and you writing it it is not particularly compelling journalism journalism has to probe and and figure out and part of why people sometimes think journalists are partisan is because their job is to to challenge assertions that are made by people and say well hold on that doesn't make any fucking sense that doesn't follow with the eight things you said before or this person over here says something entirely differently respond to it and and without that back and forth i think it's really it's barely journalism right you get the benefit of the t up but you don't get any of the volley you don't You don't get any of the back and forth that you need for it actually to be journalism. But to your question, how would you think the conservatives are going to do this, particularly with the media in the state they are? Because the media is in the state they are. Like, what's to lose? Do you think that there's going to be reduced opinions of Danielle Smith in the press corps because of this? I mean, I feel like they're already pretty low based on her actions to date. So, in
Corey
26:57
in for a penny, in for a pound might be the thinking here. I'm not convinced it will work, but obviously they don't want any of the awkward back and forth. They don't want follow-ups. They think they can control the agenda more with just the one question. it obviously has nothing to do with the fact that we're in a election or a campaign period or anything like that at all because then you would just have fewer questions right or you would ask the press gallery what they want to do um but that's not what's happening this is to control message and i i think they're making the calculation people won't care or it's too much of a process story and the public's not going to pay attention carter
Annalise
27:33
carter do you think it feeds into um this narrative that the ndp wants and the ndp is trying to tell that smith is
Annalise
27:39
not accountable and that she can't be trusted absolutely
Carter
27:42
absolutely it feeds into it but you know what else feeds into it danielle
Carter
27:45
danielle smith answering questions um she's not good at it every time she opens her mouth she winds up with a brand new story uh well i too was at the live show you may remember i presented a different strategy uh but while i was at that you were there no
Carter
27:59
no yeah i was i was there while i was there i learned quite a bit about what uh certain cory hogan was was recommending for the strategy and i'd have to say there must have been some ucp operatives in the crowd because this is the very first thing that they've really done to show the you know do not talk don't don't you get your message out through to your through your own channels don't worry about other channels those channels are not available uh to this leader she can't do it um that's okay not everybody can do every channel it is smart for them to remove her from that situation she's only going to screw it up and uh i i think that there's a certain amount of actual um i don't want to say praise but i can admire the strategy or the the self you
Carter
28:47
you know knowing thyself right the awareness to say yeah we're going to get killed if we answer questions three times a day multiple questions from reporters so we'll do one we'll say we'll stay stay on message and uh our message will be all that they can report because it's all that we'll say uh
Carter
29:05
uh of course forgetting the process will always trump um where they are you know like what you know the what they're actually talking about is
Annalise
29:14
is that all they can report though because i mean no
Annalise
29:19
mean are there no ways that they can tell the story that and then i would have asked these questions and she didn't answer them and what she said contradicts what she said here Like, then the journalism just becomes essentially like, fact
Annalise
29:34
fact checking on the public record. I don't know, Corey, jump
Corey
29:37
jump in. Yeah, no, I mean, like, Don Braid can do that. Rick Bell can do that. Most of the people in that room can't do that. It would be very difficult to do even in television, right? So you have to, you know, sort of appreciate that this is a tried, tested, and true tactic. It used to drive people nuts when Stephen Harper did this. But I'll tell you, you
Corey
29:57
you can write that process story once,
Corey
30:01
once, maybe twice. You can write a story about the reaction to the process story, maybe another time to get it up to three times total. But it's not news after a while
Corey
30:11
that she's not taking questions. And she's doing it before the election. It's still a couple of weeks to go. It's going to be very tough to have more than passing mentions to this media strategy, talking to the public. And it's going to seem so kind of backhanded and so cryptic that it will go over the heads of a lot of voters who aren't really tuned into what is proper process at press conferences, right? Like, in some ways, it seems totally fair. You ask a question, I give you an answer. Isn't that what a press conference is? is yeah
Corey
30:39
well no it's not again it's the back and forth it's the challenging of ideas it's going deeper but to a lot of people it will seem totally fine and the other thing that cannot be lost in all of this is it fucking works the reason politicians have been doing this is because it works and i think the last thing the ndp want to do is take the bait and and try to do the opposite right try to say i'll take all comers i'll answer as many questions as you want i'll be for here for as long as you want because you know what they will never get another message driven on another day if that becomes the case because they'll go up and they'll start talking about whatever they want to talk about and for an hour they'll be whipsawed all around every other issue getting response to other people's issues and you're not going to drive the agenda so the ndp need to realize that there is a middle ground between doing what danielle smith is doing this total shutdown and this total openness that would mean an absolute loss of message control like maybe do do it for a gimmick once here's my one hour press conference take all comers but you cannot do that every day you cannot be that contrast every day carter
Annalise
31:44
carter i was gonna ask you cory just kind of gave you some good hints though but because you did the ndp strategy at the live show um what's what's your strategy what's the ndp's move this week you know the the couple days after smith says one question per per outlet per press conference you
Carter
32:01
you know i kind of like their move today they had an announcement today and they didn't have rachel notley at the announcement um you know when the and the ucp tried to to make a thing of it rachel notley won't even answer questions about her own policy okay let them let them play that game do your own campaign this isn't the media's campaign it's not you know it's not danielle smith's campaign it's it's the ndp and rachel notley's campaign do what you're going to do talk about the issues you want to talk about don't worry Corey, you know, don't do a, I mean, I differ from Corey a little bit in saying that I don't think you want to do a drop, you know, I got questions to get drop strategy because it doesn't, it won't get anything. It won't achieve, won't help you achieve your longer term goals. Focus only, only on winning this election. Everything else is extraneous.
Carter
32:53
Pretty good stuff. Good stuff. I wanted to say, yeah,
Annalise
32:58
super, super good. stuff it's too bad you don't have a powerpoint to go along oh my god uh really
Carter
33:05
carter it was a good
Annalise
33:06
good are you guys can are you gonna release your powerpoints so people can like follow along as they listen no
Annalise
33:13
yours was so good though no you know what that's
Carter
33:16
that's why this was
Carter
33:17
was so bad that's
Corey
33:18
that's why people pay that's what you get 30 bucks that's what you get quit
Carter
33:22
quit your fucking And
Annalise
33:22
And a real intermission, and
Annalise
33:25
and then questions afterwards. Exactly.
Annalise
33:28
Yeah, a real intermission, a real host who knew she was hosting. Yeah, a
Annalise
33:32
a super professional. You did a great job,
Carter
33:34
job, Annalise. That was your very first live show. You did a great job.
Annalise
33:38
job. Yeah, it was my first time meeting Corey. It was my first time attending and hosting a live show. It was fun. It was big,
Annalise
33:45
Okay, moving on to our next segment. Our next segment is called A Public Health Guarantee. tea um
Annalise
33:53
why would that a sigh because
Carter
33:55
because oh my god i'm just gonna pull out the one that jason kenney made and just recycle the fucking paper he wrote the exact same note i think on the same piece of cardboard what
Annalise
34:06
a joke did kenny have a large health care card behind him so i'll just debrief for um okay
Annalise
34:12
people who maybe catch up yeah
Annalise
34:14
yeah i'll just do a little catch up here so on tuesday day smith um she stood at a lectern um the sign said public health guarantee she's got a big alberta health care card and she promised um she promised the ucp will not make albertans pay to see a doctor or get medical treatment she promised you'll only need a health care card not your credit card um this is a bit different than what she has previously said throughout her career including in a 2021 paper for the university of calgary school of public policy the presser came AIM is recent polling shows health care remains a top issue and it's an issue we know the NDP lead on. So there's there's our summary of kind of where we're at. Let's I don't know. There's lots that we like talking about health care. There's lots to talk about here and there's strategy here. And there's like this question of which Smith voters should believe. And also like this kind of bold, I don't know, bold, maybe. Carter, you have thoughts. Tell us. Tell us what you think. you
Carter
35:14
know which one should we believe right i mean that's always going to be the first thing that the ndp get to go to because she's taken all the positions on health care uh and on top of that her language was not 100 clear um you
Carter
35:31
sounds clear but it sounds like the
Carter
35:35
the you know won't have to pay out of your pocket it has this really weird kind of a clarifying tone to it that i just don't trust well do i have to pay out of my health care savings account maybe that's how we're getting around this it feels like they're trying to get around something rather than stating an absolute principle and i think that that's where i've always struggled with the ucp on their health care stuff and before that it was the the pcs and and you know alice and redford made a tremendous amount of uh headway on that issue because no one trusted anybody and so we were were able to pick up quite a bit of support and and get you
Carter
36:14
know get through it based on what we were promising to do on health care i just don't think that danielle smith's got a shred of credibility on health care i don't think that jason kenney had it before her and that's why they have to do stunts like signing a public health guarantee you know who didn't have to sign a public health guarantee rachel notley tell me rachel notley didn't have to sell a sign of public health guarantee because everybody knows it'll be public health if rachel notley is there but i still paid for my private mri the last time the uh the ndp were in power i mean this is such a bullshit argument and uh the only thing is it's a bullshit argument that's just being completely lost by the ucp they don't they don't belong on this land they shouldn't be here they shouldn't be taking this this position um but here they are trying to win something that is absolutely absolutely unwinnable so what
Annalise
37:09
what should they be doing strategy wise when it comes to right before an election on health care we know it's a a top issue and that the ndp do well on it what what should the ucp be doing health
Carter
37:19
health care is the most expensive element in the in the alberta budget and if we're going to have the health care system that we want as albertans we need to have the economy to drive it and there's only one party here today that can actually drive an economy that can afford the health care spending that we have today highest health healthcare spending per capita that has ever happened is happening under danielle smith right now and the only way we can afford it is because she's making the economy boom again so
Annalise
37:46
so so not bring it up and when it is brought up just pivot to economy pivot
Carter
37:50
pivot to your to your core always pivot to your core cory
Annalise
37:53
cory what's what are your thoughts on this uh this big old topic yeah
Corey
37:57
yeah it's so i want to underline some of what steven said the the idea that you're not going to have to pay out of pocket it does remind me that jason kenney's promise was that it was going to be uh publicly funded health care right and it's the words that are not being used that you have to pay close attention to here um because why not just say like you're never gonna have to pay for health care right like why out of pocket what does that mean maybe that's a rhetorical flourish but our radar is up after after many years of these kinds of games being played with us and i feel like the the grander the guarantee, the more suspicious we are at this point. The fine print is right in front of us though, folks. We look at it and that is the thing that the UCP has to deal with. And the reality is people don't really trust them on healthcare very much. Polling backs that up. And that gets to the point that Stephen was making at the end there, which I think is super important to underline. This is really bad ground for the UCP.
Corey
38:55
What the fuck are they doing standing in the middle of this field yeah
Corey
38:58
like they didn't just do this announcement they then followed it up with a pile of advertisements social media activity all of this going on to talk about what great champions of health care they are uh as recently as i think it was today maybe it was yesterday danielle smith was saying you know the ndp were charging 40 a day for basic health care And we got rid of that. Well, what it appears they got rid of was a $40, you know, charge for staying at an addiction center, $40 a day for like 500 beds. Total cost if every one of those beds was full and being paid full price would be like $8 million a year, right? Right. Yeah.
Corey
39:39
But it wasn't even that because most of the time it was subsidized based on means that is not $40 a day for basic healthcare in most people's eyes, but they continue to be banging this drum. They continue to be talking about healthcare all of the time.
Corey
39:51
I don't really get it. I
Corey
39:53
I don't get it at all. I don't know why they're sitting there and taking their lumps on it because every time they open their mouth on this, people don't trust them. People jump down their throats and they're just reinforcing a negative about them, which is that they cannot not be trusted because let's be frank $40
Corey
40:06
$40 a day is pretty unbelievable spin I'm pretty sure we'd all remember if we were paying $1,200 a month for fucking health care oh
Corey
40:14
during the NDP era we weren't and we know we weren't so these claims are a bit incredulous and it just makes all of their claims a bit incredulous and why are they standing in this field so
Annalise
40:24
so what what are they doing like I I know you asked that a few times Corey but you guys you guys are the strategists here Is there not a strong team behind them? Do they think the $40 a day works? Like, actually, what are they doing?
Corey
40:41
Let's apply the principle of charity. I would never say there's not a strong team. I will. We don't know the nature of the team. We don't know what's going on there.
Corey
40:50
The polls show that health care is a very important issue for Albertans. And it may be that that is even more stark than we realize. Maybe the polling that goes beyond kind of the Angus Reads, Ipsos's, when you really get into it, you find that this is perhaps even disqualifying for undecided voters. Maybe they can see things that we can't see. We know they have more information than us. We have to assume they're at least halfway as competent. And perhaps they just think that they're in trouble if they don't have answers on healthcare. And so they're desperately trying to get answers. still doesn't mean it's an optimal strategy but the reality is it
Annalise
41:28
carter same question for you what are they doing i
Carter
41:30
i think there's two two answers and and one of them is that a lot of campaigners think that they need to be everywhere all the time uh that they need to make sure that everybody can you know like if you're worried about health care well we've got an answer for that it's not going to cost us anything danielle smith invested a lot of money in health care let's not give up that ground because we feel we're actually really strong on it regardless of public perception they're just going to try and own that space
Carter
41:58
i i think that's a silly strategy i think that you should always go where you are more likely to succeed rather than trying to own all the different pieces um so i think that that could be one of the of the core reasons that they're there and the other is that you
Carter
42:17
you know like they They did make a significant investment in health care. I think that they have an audience. And again, we're not sure what their polling is telling them, but perhaps they have an audience that has a actual liking
Carter
42:31
liking of what the UCP is doing in health care.
Carter
42:35
I'm not sure. It feels like they're trying to compete on the same space as the NDP, but maybe they think that they've differentiated and they're winning a different crowd.
Corey
42:47
Well, but the problem I have with that, and you know, I was the one who just said apply the principle of charity, is their ads are like, the NDP are making these claims. That's wrong. Like they're repeating the charge in these particular claims. Really
Carter
43:00
Really bad ads, Corey. I mean, how charitable do we want to be here?
Corey
43:04
It tells us one of two things, right? It tells us either, boy,
Corey
43:08
boy, I've never seen somebody lead with their chin like this. It either tells us they really do not understand the fundamentals of political communications, or, and
Corey
43:18
and I will throw an or on the table here,
Corey
43:20
everybody in Alberta believes that. And so they feel they're better off directly approaching it, taking it head on, just like in 2015. I remember, you'll recall, there was the ad where Justin Trudeau said, the conservatives say, I'm not ready. Well, here's what I'm ready for, and went on for his ready for change, right? And I've mentioned this on the pod before, but, you know, you and I, we pilloried that ad. We're
Corey
43:43
like, what the hell is he doing? You know, leading with his chin, you know, starting with a negative, all of those things that we say. And we talked to our good friend, Dan Arnold, who
Corey
43:53
who ran advertising and research for, you know, Justin Trudeau's government at times. He said, what you don't appreciate is that was zero risk because everybody in Canada already thought that. So we decided we were better off to approach it head on. So perhaps it's a situation like that. But again, super
Annalise
44:16
carter what again with the the ndp strategy cap on what um what
Annalise
44:22
what should the ndp be
Annalise
44:24
be doing on this file right now well
Carter
44:27
well i mean i think they've already they've already made a significant uh announcement about health care i i think that um you know what they're doing right now with their announcements is that they seem to be um timing things so that they get a pretty decent lift over weekends uh so they had a big announcement today about crime and safety um and that lifts them into the next week i don't think you want to be doing if you're the ndp you don't want to be hitting your big home run hits every single day so you don't want to be doing uh health care every day but there's a lot of things that you know your audience wants and you want to get them as excited as possible and i think that that's what they should be doing right now and based on what i'm seeing that's what they are doing i mean we we just got the janet brown poll uh we talked a little bit about that on the last pod um cory and i remember it well um but the the you know i think
Carter
45:24
think that things have shifted i think the next pot and the next poll could be really interesting because um we're starting to see daniel smith's negatives really get baked in and the first rule rule of good political strategy is when your when your opponent is in the middle of killing themselves don't get in the way do
Annalise
45:46
do you think let's
Annalise
45:47
let's talk about that kind of future poll sort of situation let's say a
Annalise
45:52
couple weeks from now poll bad numbers keep going in this direction for the ucp what knowing
Annalise
45:59
knowing kind of what is happening internally with that party like what uh uh, do
Annalise
46:05
do they just eat their leader? Like what happens? It's
Corey
46:08
It's too late. They can't right there. This is, they're, they're so strapped in right now. We're sitting here on April 16th. Like this is it. Like we're on, like if this was a federal race, this would be starting in a week. You
Corey
46:21
You know, this is, uh, you know, as much as people were saying, well, we're not in an election period when Danielle Smith said, well, I'm only taking one question because it's election period. we're in a de facto election period we all know it here we are the ads are running ad nauseum i mean every single bloody youtube video has one of them from one of the two parties at the top of it it feels like right now yeah
Corey
46:42
and and so we're just we're just uh you know we're there and it's too late for the ucp to make any changes whatsoever if
Corey
46:50
if the polls show in the next couple of weeks that the ucp have declined to a point where like it almost doesn't look competitive you know the eye of Soran, the media will turn to the NDP and start asking questions like, are they ready? They'll start being more critical. You can expect a bit of a tightening, a bounce back. You always get it. But ultimately, I think that if that's the case, it's not, you know, the reality is, as much as we talk about campaigns matter and stuff, if they've spent the last four weeks sliding, that's kind of campaign period light. We're sort of in it. And I don't know that they'll find an easy way to recover and you'll probably see not an abandonment of the leader in
Corey
47:29
in the sense of like a coup but you'll see everybody starting to say well
Corey
47:33
well i'm going to do whatever it takes to protect my own riding expect to see a couple of candidates be vaguely critical of central campaign first maybe they'll say things about the leader in terms of like she's just not resonating i know her heart's in the right place but she's not resonating but you know i've been always here for my constituents they'll tell themselves this fairy tale that they can win if they just put a a bit of distance between them and the leader, you'll see the cracks form, you won't see a damn fully break.
Carter
47:59
Yeah, in that scenario, Annalise, I think there's two things that are really actually problematic for the NDP. I think that if the NDP looks like they're going to win in, you know, a runaway, then you'll start to see the reluctant UCP voters, which we talked about at the live show, if people paid their $30. So I'm not going to explain it in detail. But if they if it's
Corey
48:21
it's also also it's like it's literally on the live stream yeah it's like on the feed
Carter
48:29
cutting our own throats you can get
Annalise
48:31
get right into it well no carter they were paying to see your powerpoint that's
Annalise
48:36
were paying to see was that super
Annalise
48:43
powerpoint uh powerpoint that was practiced timed all that okay
Carter
48:48
you're hurting my my feelings now and it's it's upsetting here are the two things you don't want you do not want the less engaged or the the the reluctant ucp voters to feel like they have to go and vote for daniel smith to stop you um that would be uh you know kind of hitting it a little too far and smashing into the front windshield of your of your own car um you just don't want to have to have that now Now, that's still a problem, I think, that most NDP strategists would be okay having. You know, you'd rather have that than fighting to the death here. The other thing is, you don't want the rumors of elect us and we'll deal with her later. Elect us and, Daniels, you know, when was the last time a party leader saw two elections with the right? You know, oh, yeah, that's right. It was Ralph Klein. I'll tell you something. She's not Ralph Klein. Danielle
Carter
49:47
Danielle Smith is no Ralph Klein. And they'll start talking that way. And the voters may hear that and start thinking, you know what, I can take a risk on Danielle Smith, because I trust these hooligans to take each other out before, you know, she gets a chance to really wreck the province.
Annalise
50:10
okay um super insightful carter just
Carter
50:14
just you know what you say it
Carter
50:18
it like you meant it a little bit
Carter
50:22
i wanted to cycle back harder can
Carter
50:26
can we tag that use that as a promo can we tag that but it is i think we can yeah yeah i
Annalise
50:31
i wanted to circle back on one thing with the um a promo you
Carter
50:35
you guys guys do promos we're going to we haven't told you everything but here's what's happening because we're going into an election you didn't tell me i
Annalise
50:42
i was hosting let's let's let's keep moving okay you
Annalise
50:45
you don't want me to tell you i wanted to circle okay i wanted to circle back on one thing which is with the public health guarantee does it not okay let's say let's say i'm a ucp door knocker and i'm knocking on door after door and they're like but health care but health care but health care can i not just now say like oh but didn't you see we have a public health guarantee you don't need your credit card you just need your health care card like does it not give them a story to tell there yeah
Corey
51:12
yeah it absolutely does and i'm sure that was part of the thinking and frankly that that would have been a okay strategy right if their entire intention was to put it in the pantry so they can pull it out when the guests come and that's what they want to eat right you have an answer to that question now and then you would take that bridge back to the economy and say like oh yeah we have this health care guarantee and by the way we're investing more in health care than has ever been done before because we can afford to now that the economy is back on track.
Corey
51:40
Boom. Great. Wonderful. Not what's happening. What's happening is they are proactively putting that message out through paid channels, which is very different, right? That's not me saying, I have this concern on ground you're weak on, give me an answer. That's me saying, hey, let me tell you about this ground that I'm weak on that I actually think I'm not weak on. And in fact, the phrasing of their ads is pretty close to that. So, you know, as dreadful as that might sound, that is kind of what they're doing. But, you know, the idea that you would have answers to questions, especially for something as important as healthcare, of
Corey
52:11
of course, that's what a politician should do. It's the same reason the NDP need to have answers on crime and the economy, not
Corey
52:18
not necessarily the issues that people trust the NDP on. Got to have answers. There was, you know, the press conference we were talking about today
Corey
52:27
touched on that, right? And now there's something for NDP candidates to say on the door too.
Annalise
52:34
let's leave it there and move into our lightning round. Aren't you going to say how insightful his answer was?
Carter
52:38
not going to say how insightful?
Annalise
52:39
insightful? It was good. Well, I've complimented Corey a few times
Annalise
52:43
times tonight, Carter, and I know if I compliment him too much, you get upset. So I'm just going to move on to lightning rounds. Okay.
Carter
52:51
Okay. First question, lightning round.
Annalise
52:54
Elon Musk's Twitter. Guys, lightning round. When
Annalise
52:57
When will the three of us lose our blue check marks? When's that going to happen?
Carter
53:03
Belge gets a blue checkmark.
Corey
53:06
Well, he doesn't have $8. I know,
Corey
53:09
right? He's a new
Carter
53:12
It's never going to happen.
Corey
53:12
happen. I think it's happening this week. I suspect it'll be in the next couple of days here.
Carter
53:17
Oh, I'm not emotionally ready. I'm going to need more time. Are
Annalise
53:21
Are you going to pay $8? There's
Carter
53:23
There's no way I'm ever paying $8 to get a checkmark. Just does not matter that much to me.
Corey
53:32
I mean, it matters that much to me, but I'm far too, far too proud. I'm not going to do it. Yeah.
Annalise
53:39
Okay. Going to be a big week on Twitter for the three of us. Next question. Not
Corey
53:45
Not Zane, though. Never
Annalise
53:46
Never had Zane. Zane won't care. No, not Zane. Nothing to lose. No
Annalise
53:50
Guys, there are a whole lot of dead mice in the walls of the prime minister's official residence. At 24 Sussex, yeah. Yeah, like a lot. i don't know if you read the story there's
Annalise
54:03
there's a lot of dead mice yeah well they
Corey
54:06
they are they are load-bearing mouse skeletons like
Corey
54:10
can't move them i've
Annalise
54:12
i've i rented a heritage home that had a lot of mice in it but like this is this is next level there's a lot it's it's also a federal heritage building um my lightning round question so keep this short but carter let's start with you and then we'll move to cory sure what should we do with 24 sussex drive tear
Carter
54:29
tear it down and build something brand spanking new that's
Carter
54:35
that's it that's the answer it was really insightful it's
Corey
54:37
it's lightning round yeah
Carter
54:38
yeah that's what you said you make it quick and i did and you seem to be caught off guard by it i
Annalise
54:43
caught off guard because even
Annalise
54:44
even in lightning round you normally give more than four words cory what should we do steven's
Corey
54:49
steven's exactly right here's the thing about 24 sussex it's not special it's not fucking special but
Corey
54:56
but in the federal heritage
Annalise
54:57
heritage building no that
Corey
54:58
that stuff It's not special. It's not special. Let me say it again. It's not special. Why do we have this house? We have this house because the federal government decided at one point they wanted to own all of the land along the river. So they bought it. And it was just some dude's house. And they said, you know what, maybe we'll make it the prime minister's house. And they threw a bunch of 50s-style bolt-ons, asbestos-filled bolt-ons, in order to make it, quote-unquote, good enough for the prime minister. They took a not-special house, they added not-special additions at a very not-special time for construction, and it's fallen the fuck apart for the last 70 years. Tear it down. It means nothing. It means nothing. nothing it has had relatively few prime ministers in it and it just sucks it sucks architecturally it sucks from cultural standpoint it was like designed by like some scottish lumber magnate for his family it doesn't matter it's not a special building tear it down make a special building carter
Annalise
55:58
carter do you see cory's passion in that answer that's what i was you said it was It was the lightning round, and you asked me to keep it short. You have a theater background. You can still have passion when you say your stuff. I do what you tell me to do,
Annalise
56:12
Okay, Carter, what do you think should be built there?
Carter
56:16
A new house for the prime minister.
Corey
56:22
think you could build something really impressive, something that brings in architectural cues that are meaningful to this country. You could bring in, you know, touches from various First Nations, perhaps the Anishinaabe in this area, right? Like this is in the Ottawa Valley. And maybe we could have connections to more of the First Nations of Canada. Perhaps we could talk about the architectural trends that have occurred in Toronto and Vancouver and Calgary even, and bring in something that actually means something to this country and isn't just some dumbass,
Corey
56:54
dumbass, you know, lumber magnet trying to
Carter
56:57
to build something that
Corey
56:57
that looks like it's from Scotland. Which it is not, but something that's actually meaningful to this country. It could be done, it could probably be done for less than it would cost to restore this bloody house. And then we should actually put it in a place of pride and treat it right and maintain it, rather than whatever the hell we've done with this piece of garbage, which hasn't been in any meaningful way represent or upgraded since the late 80s.
Annalise
57:21
Corey, you should make a PowerPoint about this, a good, snappy one, like I know you can do, and then you should lead the charge because your passion, you've got a lot of passion for this topic. I love it. I said the
Carter
57:35
the exact same things, and I'm getting—
Corey
57:37
getting— But shorter. But shorter, Stephen. It was too short.
Annalise
57:41
Carter, it's the lightning round, so we're going to move on to the next question. Oh, my God.
Annalise
57:48
okay the alberta party came out with quite the tweet thread a couple days ago the
Corey
57:53
the alberta party the what no
Corey
57:55
no one's heard of uh
Annalise
57:57
so in case you didn't see it which most people did not because it had very few shares and views
Corey
58:02
views you know the strategist account parodied this tweet chester was on something that parody actually has more social engagement than the The original tweet by the Alberta Party. So
Annalise
58:15
So for our listeners, this is what the original tweet thread said. It
Annalise
58:20
It said like... Stop laughing! These people are paid professionals that are doing this. It said like, guess what, guys?
Annalise
58:27
You know, there's an election next month. And
Annalise
58:30
And we've been really quiet lately. But
Annalise
58:33
But this is intentional. Do
Annalise
58:35
Do you know why? Because in 2019, we
Annalise
58:38
we were so busy trying to run 87 candidates and 87 ridings that
Annalise
58:43
we didn't win any. And
Annalise
58:46
so this time around, we're going to do things differently. We've got a different strategy. Instead of doing like 87 candidates and 87 ridings, we're going to focus on getting an MLA elected.
Annalise
59:01
Get people elected. says carter
Annalise
59:03
carter do you want to give a little summary of what chester's thread says no
Annalise
59:08
really don't because i
Carter
59:08
i don't have control of the of that account i don't know what happens on it and
Annalise
59:13
i know you read it i know i read
Carter
59:15
read it here's what you read
Carter
59:15
read it though so i was just
Carter
59:17
wondering something very similar that i can't recall okay so the
Annalise
59:20
the lightning question is
Annalise
59:22
is um steven carter how many mlas will the alberta party elect this zero
Annalise
59:29
uh same question for you and then i'll do like a sub lightning round question oh
Corey
59:34
oh um well when you consider zero uh as the obvious answer i
Corey
59:40
i i think they'll somehow lose one like they'll have taken off the books like one of the ones that they've previously won how yeah that's funny what how
Carter
59:47
how can you go for that long an answer when it really it's the lightning round you
Carter
59:52
you know like dig in like make it zero it's
Carter
59:56
zero zero just Just take a stand. Who are you insulting
Carter
59:58
insulting right now, Corey?
Annalise
1:00:02
Okay, so the next question is, Stephen Carter, what did you think of the Alberta Party thread and like the strategy behind their strategy now?
Carter
1:00:11
Well, there was no strategy behind the Alberta Party thread. They thought that they were doing something that would gain them attention or sound, I guess, provocative. It did not. Nothing happened. No one cared. and I think that that really summarizes the Alberta party I also tweeted something about vote splitting I've long maintained I don't believe in vote splitting multiple candidates just simply lowers the number of votes that are required for any other candidate to win and the Alberta party is all over it they are retweeting it, they think it's the best thing ever I did say that it only mattered if you had a competitive three competitive candidates the Alberta party will not be competitive it will not matter so
Corey
1:00:56
so here's what i would say what
Corey
1:00:59
what are you doing
Corey
1:01:01
notion that like there is there is a strategy here and that they're going silent because they're like there was a real gap in the logic between yeah we've been really silent you know we did all of this stuff in 2019 anyways stay tuned we're going to do something different this time like these things Things do not necessarily follow. You didn't win any seats in 2019. That didn't happen because you were too loud, because you were too much in the conversation in the month before the election. Like, is that the thesis that the Alberta party is carrying right now? They're like, shit, guys, you know what? Our problem was we were too relevant. Too many people talking about us. We peaked too early. And then everybody got tired and went to the UCP and NDP. That's not how I remember 2019. It's
Carter
1:01:46
It's not how it went.
Corey
1:01:46
That's not how anybody remembers 2019. Like, it's just a ridiculous thing to say. You know, this is like, this is, what can I say? This is like, I'm trying to think of a metaphor, an example, but let's just say, let's just be really clear about what it is without a metaphor. This is a party that has done absolutely nothing for a month and is now trying to make it into a virtue. They're trying to be like, oh, but that was always the strategy. Just wait until we knock your fucking socks off with our thinking about politics differently. We're so different with our politics. We don't even show up. We're the fucking Alberta party. We're so great at this. Like, no,
Corey
1:02:22
no, no. In fairness. No, you're not in this. You're
Corey
1:02:26
in this election. You're not. This
Carter
1:02:28
This is more than we've spoken about them to this point.
Corey
1:02:32
That's a great point. It actually has spurred a lot of conversation. It's true. How
Annalise
1:02:36
How many MLAs do you think they'll have running? I mean, last time, obviously, they had 87. They were very focused on that. Well, they will have
Annalise
1:02:44
that are MLAs. How many will they have running?
Carter
1:02:47
many candidates? Like, yeah,
Annalise
1:02:49
yeah, across the province.
Annalise
1:02:51
You think 15, Carter? Yeah.
Corey
1:02:53
I think they'll have like a ridiculous number, like 50 or 60. You think they'll
Corey
1:02:59
I don't, you know, I
Corey
1:03:01
I just feel in my heart of hearts that they are just going to throw themselves on the ballot in a bunch of different places. Oh,
Corey
1:03:11
We'll see. I'll bet you it's, let's, here's a question for you. Do you think they will have more
Corey
1:03:16
more or fewer candidates than the Alberta Liberal Party in this election?
Carter
1:03:20
election? Oh, my God. We should put money on this. This should have money.
Annalise
1:03:22
money. I think they'll have more.
Carter
1:03:25
Ooh, I'm going to take under. I'm going to take the under.
Carter
1:03:29
Okay. What are you taking,
Corey
1:03:30
So you set the... No, I was the guy who asked the question, so it's fine.
Carter
1:03:35
God, this is so confusing when we have two hosts and one strategist.
Annalise
1:03:41
We're going to leave it there. that's a wrap on episode 1050 of The Strategist my name is Annalise Klingbeil with you as always Stephen Carter, Corey Hogan