I need to know who’s running Eby’s campaign and, more importantly, what Eby did to piss them off.
Because at this point, his campaign team is doing a better job of destroying his political career than his opponents ever could.
Forget opposition research. Someone needs to investigate his campaign manager. 😂
Alberta separatists: “Smith’s a traitor! She’s a federalist! Kick her out!”
The left: “Smith’s a separatist! She’s tearing Canada apart!”
Reality: Smith can’t win.
Block the vote? She’s silencing Albertans.
Allow the vote? She’s destroying Canada.
Respect the result? She’s betrayed her base.
Meanwhile in Quebec… the new premier openly advocates independence, challenges the oath to the King and wants the Crown’s representative removed from his swearing-in.
In Alberta, even following a democratic process for separation sparks outrage. In Quebec, the premier can openly pursue independence under the banner of sovereignty.
@ABDanielleSmith, maybe your mistake was calling it a referendum.
Should’ve called it “Alberta Souveraineté”
@Robin1959553@MarcNixon24 Smith has been handed a clear mandate. Now let’s see if she can deliver.
I don’t agree with every move she’s made, but I think she knows how to play well with others to get wins for Alberta.
Stage 1.
The movement is celebrating 24% while conveniently ignoring the elephant in the room.
Frustration with Ottawa doesn’t automatically equal a desire for independence.
For many Albertans, separation was a bargaining chip, not the endgame. The movement gave them a way to send Ottawa a message.
And let’s not forget, this was a non-binding vote with an exit ramp built in.
The movement is mistaking protest votes for committed separatists.
24% voted to pursue the process. That doesn’t mean 24% are ready to leave Canada.
There’s a BIG difference between demanding Ottawa’s attention and being prepared to build a country.
Blaming Smith is easier than admitting the movement failed to convince Albertans.
You had multiple leaders, competing organizations, different strategies and plenty of egos. Everyone had a playbook, but nobody was running the same play.
You managed to organize a petition. That’s a long way from having a unified, credible plan to separate from Canada.
You can argue about the Clarity Act and ballot wording all day, but you haven’t proven a different question would’ve changed the result.
Maybe instead of blaming Smith for the outcome, it’s time to examine why the movement couldn’t deliver the support it needed.
You can’t blame the referee every time you lose the game.
I don’t think the goal of Smith’s address was to get everyone pumped up. It was to acknowledge the vote, respect the outcome, and communicate what comes next.
I get the desire for her to come out swinging, draw hard lines and take shots at Carney. But what would that actually accomplish for Alberta?
Smith has a balancing act ahead of her. She needs to represent all Albertans, not just the loudest voices in the room.
And let’s stop pretending the 24% who voted Option 2 are all committed separatists. It was a non-binding vote on whether to pursue another referendum. Some undoubtedly saw it as leverage with Ottawa, not a commitment to leave Canada.
There’s a big difference between having legitimate grievances and having a realistic, organized plan to separate. Right now, the movement has plenty of passion and opinions, but serious questions remain about its leadership, structure and execution.
Smith’s job wasn’t to deliver a rallying cry for one faction. It was to acknowledge the democratic result, bring people together and explain how she intends to move forward.
Being fired up might feel good. Actually governing requires more than that.
Smith has a tall order ahead, but Albertans just handed her a mandate for greater provincial control, not separation.
Criticizing her record is fair. But writing her off before she’s had a chance to act on that mandate accomplishes what, exactly?
This is a recurring problem on the right. If the outcome doesn’t meet every expectation, suddenly the whole thing is a failure.
Democracy isn’t a one-way street. You don’t get to demand that your voice be heard and then dismiss the majority when they disagree with you.
You can hold firm to your ideals while recognizing that 76% of voters didn’t support the separatist path.
Smith now has to deliver, and Albertans have every right to hold her accountable.
But refusing to work within the democratic system because you didn’t get your preferred outcome isn’t a strategy.
You can’t demand cooperation while refusing to participate.
That’s how you end up further from the outcome you wanted.
The Alberta independence movement has so many competing factions and self-appointed leaders, they can’t even agree on a strategy. More infighting than the House of Commons and enough drama for its own reality show.
My take? The movement became a pawn in a much bigger political game, with frustrated Albertans using the threat of separation to get Ottawa’s attention.
I get that you don’t want to entertain this possibility, but dismissing it doesn’t make your argument stronger. 300,000 signatures do not automatically equal 300,000 people committed to leaving Canada.
Signing a petition to put independence on the table is not the same as voting to separate in a binding referendum. For some Albertans, it may have been less about leaving Canada and more about forcing Ottawa to finally listen.
I’m not denying that genuine separatists exist. I’m challenging the assumption that every signature represents an unwavering commitment to independence.
There’s a big difference between demanding a voice and demanding a divorce.