During the four long years of the Trump administration, I developed a compulsion to keep track of what was going on in the White House. It felt a lot like the need to always keep one eye on a toddler for fear they’d strangle themselves or burn the house down. Not that I could actually stop Trump from doing anything, but at least I’d know if he had a tantrum and launched nukes at a hurricane or something.
I was reminded of that compulsion yesterday. I got on a plane pretty early in the morning. When we landed, my phone was alive with texts and DMs, all saying some version of “OMG! That tape!!” I leave the province for a few days, and all hell breaks loose.
The tape and its content are old news by now. There’s lots of excellent commentary, including an insightful Twitter thread from Jared Wesley making a compelling case that the tape demonstrates incredibly poor judgement from both the Premier and her staff.
So what happens next? Are we on the eve of a moment of accountability for the Premier? Short version: no.
Long version: with the legislature not sitting, the only way to hold a Premier to account is to remove them as party leader. So it would take a caucus revolt, backed by the party’s executive, to remove the leader. And with mere weeks to go until the election and half the seats on the UCP executive being held by individuals who share Pastor Pawlowski’s view that the Premier should have done more, not less, on the Pastor’s behalf, that’s not going to happen.
It was a challenge to draw a flowchart to game this out, because the ‘low probability’ section was so very crowded. Things that just aren’t going to happen: an actual defamation suit, despite the frequent use of the word by the Premier’s office. A Premier’s crisis of conscience, causing her to resign in the best interest of the party. A caucus revolt on the eve of an election.
Are there other cabinet ministers who might experience this as a tipping point, and decide to exercise their ability to exit by announcing that they aren’t going to run? I suppose it’s possible. Health Minister Jason Copping, for example, is unlikely to hold his seat and could construct a narrative about his time in politics from an eleventh hour departure. But the more likely response from ministers will be some version of Kaycee Madu’s supportive comments today (against the unlikely backdrop of a prepper convention, or so it seemed).
What is likely? A concerted effort to move on. More funding announcements. A deluge of Government of Alberta ads. Some faux outrage at something the Prime Minister said, or thought, or might think.
Will these revelations move votes? Hard to say. Are there a group of undecided voters out there who are inclined to be concerned about the Premier’s lapses of judgement, but still had open minds about whether the Premier had actually tried to exert pressure on prosecutors? Are there undecided voters who have just tuned in, only to discover that the Premier is cozy with the convoy? Maybe. But I suspect that the Premier’s judgement and sympathies are already baked in to most voters’ intentions.
At the end of the day, the only group who can and might hold the Premier accountable are voters. Whether they will remains to be seen.
IF I were Danielle Smith I would be very worried about two things.
The first, obviously, is Rachel Notley. Her visible opponent.
The second....well that would be the Take Back Alberta Group.
If Smith does manage to eke out a victory, who will actually hold the balance of power within the UCP?
Will it be Danielle Smith or will it be the TBA folks? This should make Ms. Smith very nervous. After all....what happened to her predecessor can easily happen to her if she does not 'tow the line'.
IF Danielle Smith fails to win Government the writing will be on the wall. In big capital letters.
She will be in a bind either way.