The problem with your approach is that the NDP WILL BE ELECTED. You underestimate the level of woke in our province.

So just for shits and giggles, who in the UCP, would you like to see take Smith's place? Am not leaning on one side or another. Just wondering what people think?

FOR ALBERTA!

Took a week to think about what happened last Monday, here is a comprehensive analysis with a suggested path foward.

X ALGORITHM UPDATE 🚨 X just stopped cutting new posts first, and that should help small accounts (I check it daily with Claude and share updates worth sharing with you) tl;dr: - X can only check 2,800 posts each time you open your feed - new posts used to be last in line, so they got cut first - now everything gets cut equally, new posts included - posts labeled low quality or misinfo now show a warning, and people can't like, reply or share them - no score changes this time lesson learned: your new posts now get a fair chance to be seen. Your first 2 hours still matter most. full details: - How it worked until this week Every time someone opens For You, X collects around 3,700 posts it could show them: posts from people they follow, popular posts, posts liked by similar people, and brand new posts. But X only has time to check 2,800 of them. So it just took the first 2,800 in line. Brand new posts were at the back of the line. When there were too many, they were the ones left out... and a post that never gets checked can't be shown. - What changed Now everything gets cut by the same amount. 25% too many? Every type of post loses 25%, new posts included. Nobody goes first. - Why small accounts should care Those brand new posts are under 2 hours old, with under 8 likes and under 500 views. That's where most posts from smaller accounts are. My read: they now get a fair chance instead of being cut first. How often X actually hits the 2,800 limit isn't in the code, so I can't tell you how big the difference is. - Low quality and misinfo posts now show a warning If X labels your post as low quality or misinformation, people who don't follow you see a warning on it, and they can't like, reply, repost, bookmark or share it. The code doesn't say what gets a post that label. Here's a recap of what you should be doing: - a new post gets its extra push only in its first 2 hours and first 200 views, so post when your people are online - likes carry more weight than ever at 0.66 each - people sticking around pays, the time-spent score is 50% higher than two weeks ago - a read of 10+ seconds after someone opens your post adds 0.4 - the boost favors the post with the best like rate from its first viewers - accounts up to 50K can get one fresh original lifted to roughly 16th - nothing beats a copy link share, it scores 20 - replies, quotes and DM shares each score 5 - talk with your mutuals, replies between you score 20 instead of 5 - originals are the only posts that travel outside your follower base - the 1st and the 32nd like each open a new route to strangers - your 2nd post in the same feed is worth 62% of the first, so pick your best one - videos still need 10+ seconds to qualify for the video lists - earning a follow adds 4 - a pinned post with a bad link can flag the account for 7 days, worth a quick check What you should NOT be doing: - posts that get labeled low quality or misinfo now carry a warning, and nobody outside your followers can like or share them - video alone won't carry you, an open counts 0.02 and the watch 0 - hide-worthy posts cost more, "not interested" sits at -52.27 - a post at 3am burns its 2 hour window before anyone sees it - a tap that turns into a bounce is worth only 0.3 - replies and reposts don't get past your followers - insults get your post hidden from anyone who doesn't follow you - adult media in 3 of your last 5 posts puts a label on your account - disguised content in videos gets checked from 64 likes, harder at 512 - self-reply chains under big accounts risk being zeroed - one account label and non-followers stop seeing you entirely - low-rated links don't belong in your pinned post - recycled wording can get tagged as copypasta spam - strangers tagged plus a low quality link is a pattern X flags - engagement bait has no size exemption - several posts in a row end up competing with each other - hashtag stacks add nothing - bookmarks are still worth 0 - 48 hours in, For You is finished with a post

Canadian politician Danielle Smith announces an expansion of the covid vaccine program in Alberta.

I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about what comes next for the Alberta independence movement. The October 19 referendum demonstrated something important. We built a substantial grassroots movement, but we also saw what happens when that movement goes up against an established political and media apparatus. I believe there are three possible paths forward. 1. Form a new independence party. Some point to Quebec as the model. But Alberta’s political environment is fundamentally different. Quebec has a multiparty political landscape, while Alberta currently functions much more like a two-party system dominated by the UCP and NDP. A new independence party could split the conservative vote across dozens of constituencies. The risk is an NDP government, four years in opposition and potentially no realistic opportunity for another referendum until 2031 or later. 2. Force a UCP leadership change. Even if independence advocates successfully replaced Danielle Smith, what happens next? A potentially bitter leadership contest, a divided UCP and limited time to rebuild unity before the 2027 election. The risk is marching a fractured conservative party into an election against a comparatively united NDP. And even a successful leadership change wouldn’t automatically create the public support necessary to win a referendum. Once again, the potential consequence is an NDP government and years of delay. 3. Build from within the existing conservative coalition. This approach has its own immediate challenge. Premier Smith’s recent statements about maintaining a united pro-Canada position have created a serious disagreement with independence advocates who want to remain active in the UCP. I believe that disagreement needs to be addressed through short-term negotiation and a workable understanding that allows both sides to coexist. There is common ground: maintaining conservative unity and avoiding an NDP government, while allowing independence advocates to continue expressing their views and building public support. That doesn’t require Danielle Smith to endorse independence. Nor should it require independence supporters to abandon their convictions. Meanwhile, the movement can continue growing outside party politics. If Mark Carney’s government fails to address Alberta’s longstanding grievances, that could further change public opinion and the political incentives facing provincial leaders. But the most important part of this strategy is institutionalizing the independence movement. We need more than a large grassroots following. We need sustained influence through UCP memberships, constituency associations, policy conventions, elected representatives, caucus discussions and eventually the machinery of government. That kind of influence takes time to develop. It requires organization, patience and continued public support. One of my biggest takeaways from October 19 is that a future referendum campaign should not depend entirely on grassroots organizations competing against the full weight of established political institutions. The next phase needs to be about building the organizational capacity and institutional relationships that were missing or limited in this campaign. For me, the ultimate objective isn’t simply getting another referendum on the ballot. It’s building a movement capable of winning one. Every strategy should be judged against that objective.

Mitch Sylvestre has released his full response to recent statements made on social media. Read his statement in its entirety, in his own words. albertaprosperityproject.com…

There's no upside in this for me. Some people are going to hate me for it, (many already do,) It'll cost me friends, credibility and time I never have enough of anyway. I'm doing it because it's my responsibility as a director of APS, and APP is worth protecting. Here's the full story. 4 parts. I won't be commenting on social media any further about this issue until there are changes that you need to know about.

Ok I found 123 different times that Eby said "Trump" during one of his press conferences held since the election was called on September 22nd. (I put a counter in the top right of the frame of the supercut). Here are all the ones I found in order. Did I miss any? #bcpoli