Why Harper won't get a majority, and why it matters

[August1991]

Ipsos Reid put Conservative support in Quebec at 18 percent, far behind 40 percent for the Bloc Quebecois, which promotes Quebec sovereignty and fields candidates only in the province.

Angus Reid equally put Bloc support in Quebec at 40 percent, with 28 percent backing Harper's conservatives.

Link

In 2006, the BQ received 42.1% and the Conservatives 24.6% of the popular vote in Quebec. Polls now put the results as roughly similar. IOW, the Tories will get about 10 seats in Quebec and if they're extremely lucky, as many as 15. To win a majority, Harper needed at least 20-25 seats in Quebec. He won't get them, and here's why - and why it matters.

----

The Tory campaign in Quebec has been disastrous. After about 3 years of perfect pitch tones in Quebec, Harper has made two main gaffes. First, he cut $47 million from cultural funding and second, he announced changes to the Youth Offenders Act. As such, these were not the gaffes. The gaffes were the ensuing spin.

On culture, the Tories have in fact increased spending and the cuts were simply normal housekeeping. But that's not the spin and the Tories didn't counteract it well enough. To use Richard Nixon's famous phrase, "The Conservatives gave the opposition a sword."

On youth crime, Duceppe was able to portray Harper as a guy who would send 14 year old boys into an adult male prison.

To understand in teh English Canadian context how these were gaffes, the 2008 election in Quebec was initially a replay of the 2006 election in English Canada. It was all about *scary, scary* Harper, the neo-con Bush about to destroy modern civilization as we know it. In English Canada, that meme failed in 2006 and is barely being used in 2008. In Quebec in 2008, the *scary, scary* Harper meme works - and Harper has only himself to blame.

As someone who usually defends Harper, I was disheartened to hear Duceppe correctly say that Quebec deals with youth offenders its own way. On this, Harper is wrong and Duceppe is right. Furthermore, Harper is also wrong on State support for "culture". In Quebec, it works. In general, the abuse comes from the federal government (sponsorship scandals) but not teh government in Quebec.

I knew the game was up when I heard Verner defend Harper's openness in a debate in Quebec City. At this point, I thought, she shouldn't have to say this.

-----

So, why does this matter?

The success of the *scary, scary* Harper meme in Quebec is coupled with a more fundamental point. Quebecers were surprised and even open to a WASP (a bloke) who would take their side. Harper seemed to be that guy. This election has shown otherwise.

For federalists, this is unfortunate because there was a period, a year or so ago, when the Conservatives had the chance to become les Bleus of Canada's past, replacing the BQ (and the ADQ even had the chance to take the place of the PQ). It appears these chances have been lost.

Harper has not only thrown away his majority, but he's also thrown away a golden opportunity to make Canada whole. The conduct of the 2008 campaign has shown Quebecers that English Canada is clueless.

Last point: It would be easy to blame Michael Fortier for this state of affairs. I'm surprised that Harper gave him so much prominence. (He'll lose in Vaudreuil anyway. While he can swim in the shark-infested waters of Montreal, he doesn't get Québec.) But Fortier is not the problem.

Harper would never make the mistakes in Ontario or Alberta that he has made in Quebec. IOW, in federal politics, Quebec doesn't matter.

[jdobbin]

Harper would never make the mistakes in Ontario or Alberta that he has made in Quebec. IOW, in federal politics, Quebec doesn't matter.

Quebec always matters. The problem is that the Duceppe remains a better campaigner than Harper. Who is the master strategist?

I said in the beginning that the one thing that might hurt the Tories from winning a massive majority was the BQ.

The Liberal vote continues to collapse but with no major gains in Quebec, it is going to be very hard to do that.

And...let's not forget about the economy. It has made Harper defensive and it is easier to run a economy that fires on cylinders than one that might be starting to sputter.

[August1991]

Quebec always matters.

Its 75 seats may matter but given Harper's tactics in Quebec in this election, a federal PM doesn't get it - hence, it doesn't matter.

Apparently, Quebec is more confusing to an English Canadian federal politician than Puerto Rico is to a Democratic candidate seeking primary votes.

----

IOW, Harper has done more than throw away a chance at a majority; he's also thrown away a chance to make Canada whole.

I may be overly dramatic in such a declaration. To be honest, this game is not over yet. Yet I truly thought that Harper would get about 30 seats in Quebec and this would help the ADQ. The culture cuts and the youth offender changes were justified but heavy handed. In Quebec, these moves simply show that Harper and the Conservatives are not part of Quebec. They are foreigners. The federal Liberals would never make such mistakes.

Edited October 5, 2008 by August1991

[Smallc]

Its 75 seats may matter but given Harper's tactics in Quebec in this election, a federal PM doesn't get it - hence, it doesn't matter.

I'm not seeing how you connect those two assertions. Just because Stephen Harper doesn't completely understand Quebec, that doesn't mean that it doesn't matter to him.

[August1991]

I'm not seeing how you connect those two assertions. Just because Stephen Harper doesn't completely understand Quebec, that doesn't mean that it doesn't matter to him.

The implication is that the only truly national party in Canada is the Liberal Party.

Let's see how this plays out but I think Harper has thrown away a golden opportunity.

[Smallc]

The implication is that the only truly national party in Canada is the Liberal Party.

It has been proven in the past that Conservatives can gain support in Quebec. Even if they don't in this election, it doesn't prove that at all.

[blueblood]

No, I'd say Quebecers have thrown away to make Canada whole, it's easy to play the blame game. Harper has thrown bone after bone. He is pitching the idea of fiscal conservatism and crime and punishment. If Quebecers want to play this minority nonsense and be back at the polls within a year that's their problem.

If quebecers want to waste their votes by voting an irrelevant powerless fringe party that logjams parliament and does nothing for quebec that is their problem. When they realize that a majority Liberal or Tory gov't that actually does something for them, the better it will be for everyone.

It's not saying much for quebec voters if they can be swayed by the scary scary portion.

Where is the ADQ support?

Federalism is give and take, it's a crying shame quebecers don't realize that.

This is like the land disputes with the aboriginals, when a government stands up and not caves in is when these problems will be solved.

Canada is extensively regionalized, it's just that the other regions know how to play the give and take game. When Quebec realizes that it's not all take, the quicker we can get on with our lives and have the country ran a lot more smoothly.

Instead of quebecer's blaming harper, they can look in the mirror.

Edited October 5, 2008 by Charles Anthony
re-copied Opening Post deleted

[Smallc]

No, I'd say Quebecers have thrown away to make Canada whole, it's easy to play the blame game. Harper has thrown bone after bone. He is pitching the idea of fiscal conservatism and crime and punishment. If Quebecers want to play this minority nonsense and be back at the polls within a year that's their problem.

If quebecers want to waste their votes by voting an irrelevant powerless fringe party that logjams parliament and does nothing for quebec that is their problem. When they realize that a majority Liberal or Tory gov't that actually does something for them, the better it will be for everyone.

So your asserting that their views, as Canadians, are less meaningful than yours, because they don't vote the way you do?

[August1991]

It has been proven in the past that Conservatives can gain support in Quebec. Even if they don't in this election, it doesn't prove that at all.

Mulroney set Harper up - Mulroney gave Harper a chance to correct all the errors of Macdonald. Moreover, Harper was a WASP.

Harper had the chance to get 30 or seats in Quebec (outside of Montreal) but I think he's thrown that chance away. He may win a majority based on ridings elsewhere in Canada but if his lack of success in Quebec becomes known, he'll lose that chance too. (Ontario and Maritime voters tend to choose a national leader.)

----

I think Harper's main desire is to make Canada a true democracy with two federal parties. To achieve this, he must make the Tories viable in Quebec.

Federal politics in Canada are based on region - not ideology. Harper and his Tories, like the NDP and Greens, are an anglo party.

[blueblood]

So your asserting that their views, as Canadians, are less meaningful than yours, because they don't vote the way you do?

They are every bit as meaningful. I wouldn't care if they voted Liberal. It's one vote to a customer, if they choose to want to continue this gongshow, that's their problem. Their selfishness is screwing themselves over and the rest of Canada.

[Jobu]

Mulroney set Harper up - Mulroney gave Harper a chance to correct all the errors of Macdonald. Moreover, Harper was a WASP.

Harper had the chance to get 30 or seats in Quebec (outside of Montreal) but I think he's thrown that chance away. He may win a majority based on ridings elsewhere in Canada but if his lack of success in Quebec becomes known, he'll lose that chance too. (Ontario and Maritime voters tend to choose a national leader.)

----

I think Harper's main desire is to make Canada a true democracy with two federal parties. To achieve this, he must make the Tories viable in Quebec.

Federal politics in Canada are based on region - not ideology. Harper and his Tories, like the NDP and Greens, are an anglo party.

So... the LPC, who may be down to less than 5 seats West of Ontario and will pick up only a handful or two east of Ontario, are a "national" party?

Why don't we wait for the votes to be counted before we proclaim that Quebec will not turn to the CPC? There's still a week left, and the latest big-sample poll had the CPC and BQ a lot closer than Nick Nanos and his +/- 10% MOE rolling polls.

[DrGreenthumb]

I would just like to take the opportunity to thank quebec voters in advance for saving Canada from the torture of a Harper majority, thank you Duceppe and the wise people of quebec.

[August1991]

So... the LPC, who may be down to less than 5 seats West of Ontario and will pick up only a handful or two east of Ontario, are a "national" party?

Yes, they are.

Jobu, I suggest you read a few books in French and English about Canadian history. I happen to like Robert Rumilly and John Dafoe. But you could do no better than the American, Mason Wade.

Edited October 5, 2008 by August1991

[jdobbin]

Federal politics in Canada are based on region - not ideology. Harper and his Tories, like the NDP and Greens, are an anglo party.

Duceppe has just run a better campaign. I don't think it means anything else than that.

[August1991]

Duceppe has just run a better campaign. I don't think it means anything else than that.

It means alot more than that.

Harper is a clueless anglo. People in Quebec may not vote for Dion this time but they know that the federal Liberals understand Quebecers.

As I say, let's see how this plays out. Canadian politics are not ideological; they are regional. Mulroney would never have made the errors of Harper and I think Harper has thrown away a golden opportunity.

The federal Liberal Party is successful because it understands Canada's regions: it joins French and English Canada. Is this bad? The greatest problem in this modern world is not ideology but region. Canadian federal Liberals bridge the impossible, and they have done this for over a century - since Laurier. Canadian federal Conservatives are still incapable of achieving this bridge.

[blueblood]

It means alot more than that.

Harper is a clueless anglo. People in Quebec may not vote for Dion this time but they know that the federal Liberals understand Quebecers.

As I say, let's see how this plays out. Canadian politics are not ideological; they are regional. Mulroney would never have made the errors of Harper and I think Harper has thrown away a golden opportunity.

The federal Liberal Party is successful because it understands Canada's regions: it joins French and English Canada. Is this bad? The greatest problem in this modern world is not ideology but region. Canadian federal Liberals bridge the impossible, and they have done this for over a century - since Laurier. Canadian federal Conservatives are still incapable of achieving this bridge.

That's like saying Dion is a clueless Franco, Franco politicians have pissed off the west time and time again as well. Franco politicians have come west and made large gaffes that have enraged us. I and many rural westerners will never vote Liberal because of Trudeau and Chretien and their screw the west attitude. The Liberal party understanding the prairies is nonsense.

Westerners have voted Liberal, and that was due to either purge the tories or it was before Trudeau. When the dust settles, Westerners are willing to play ball, Quebecers aren't.

Harper reached out to Quebecers, they just spat in his face.

Edited October 5, 2008 by blueblood

[jdobbin]

As I say, let's see how this plays out. Canadian politics are not ideological; they are regional. Mulroney would never have made the errors of Harper and I think Harper has thrown away a golden opportunity.

No, Mulroney made other critical errors. Those errors broke apart the PCs into three parts.

The federal Liberal Party is successful because it understands Canada's regions: it joins French and English Canada. Is this bad? The greatest problem in this modern world is not ideology but region. Canadian federal Liberals bridge the impossible, and they have done this for over a century - since Laurier. Canadian federal Conservatives are still incapable of achieving this bridge.

If the Liberals had truly understood Quebec, they would not have selected Dion. He has been saddled with the Clarity Act and the issue won't go away.

[August1991]

No, Mulroney made other critical errors. Those errors broke apart the PCs into three parts.

Give credit where credit is due. Mulroney tried.

If the Liberals had truly understood Quebec, they would not have selected Dion. He has been saddled with the Clarity Act and the issue won't go away.

Dion? The Conservatives have never, ever, in all their history chosen a truly Quebec leader. In 1976, the Conservatives avoided a Quebec Wagner and Mulroney to choose a Clark - their first Roman Catholic.

Canada is a country of region, not ideology. The federal Liberals understand this.

[blueblood]

No, Mulroney made other critical errors. Those errors broke apart the PCs into three parts.

If the Liberals had truly understood Quebec, they would not have selected Dion. He has been saddled with the Clarity Act and the issue won't go away.

I agree, Mulroney went too far and the West made tory brass pay the price. When my riding went Liberal red in 93, that is nothing but pure disgust at Mulroney's gaffe.

Canada is a country of region, not ideology. The federal Liberals understand this.

There are other regions other than Quebec, the federal Liberals and Quebecers do not understand this and that is why they are virtually shut out of the west. What is sad is that the west compromised, they fixed the tory party and Quebecers who are centre right are too pig headed to compromise as well.

I might change my prediction of what will happen to Harper, in the west there is grumbling that Harper is pandering too much to Quebec. If this doesn't work out, heads might roll.

For a centre right gov't to have any major traction in Ottawa, there must be a new centre right autonomous party in quebec like the ADQ that will vote with the tories in parliament on some issues. The Bloc is too left wing. It would be almost the Tories and Liberals best interest to write off Quebec and try and work with two Quebec parties representing the right and left. Pandering too much to Quebec has sent the tories to oblivion once, and it may do so again...

[PoliticalCitizen]

On youth crime, Duceppe was able to portray Harper as a guy who would send 14 year old boys into an adult male prison.

And May told Harper judges can do this today if they find the offender deserves it.

But I agree that we owe the Conservatives' defeat in Quebec to Duceppe.

[marksman]

That's like saying Dion is a clueless Franco, Franco politicians have pissed off the west time and time again as well. Franco politicians have come west and made large gaffes that have enraged us. I and many rural westerners will never vote Liberal because of Trudeau and Chretien and their screw the west attitude. The Liberal party understanding the prairies is nonsense.

Westerners have voted Liberal, and that was due to either purge the tories or it was before Trudeau. When the dust settles, Westerners are willing to play ball, Quebecers aren't.

Harper reached out to Quebecers, they just spat in his face.

You're saying Westerners are willing to play ball but that they'll never vote Liberal. You've got a strange definition for playing ball. And a strange way of deciding how to vote you're basing your decision on someone who's dead and someone who's no longer running.

You say Quebec is being selfish and screwing over Canada just because they're not voting the way you want them to but they could say the same about you. When will you stop being selfish and vote the way they want so that Canada doesn't get screwed by another of what you call minority government gongshow?

Instead of blaming voters why aren't you questioning the parties they're not voting for? It's not selfish to vote for what you want. That's probably what you're doing so why criticize others for the same thing.

[myata]

Quebec has already quite calmed down long before Harper came to power. What other new and fresh ideas did he bring to this country, so that it'd really matter he'd get his majority? I don't really see any major new undertaking, idea, project that'd go differently with CPC's desired majority.

I think it's much simplier. Harper is a control freak and he desires power for power's own sake.

[Wild Bill]

<snip>

They are foreigners. The federal Liberals would never make such mistakes.

LOL! No, they never would make such mistakes!

They simply would have headed out to a restaurant like Bourbon Street in Pointe Claire, sat down and started handing out envelopes full of cash...

Harper may not totally understand Quebec, but at least he's not a crook!

Anything crooked he may have done pales in comparison to Adscam, like a kid stealing candy to a Charles Manson.

If you're right, then how soon Quebecois forget! Kinda puts the lie to "Je me souviens"

[cybercoma]

n federal politics, Quebec doesn't matter.

And why should they? They've predominantly elected a protest party in successive elections for the last 15 years. If Quebec would like to matter in federal politics, perhaps they should put down the idea secession, stop being so regionally focused and start getting involved nationally, rather than dividing the country along cultural and linguistic lines. This has disrupted parliament by making it more difficult for majorities to be won by any party besides the Liberals, consequently creating gridlock in the House. Edited October 5, 2008 by cybercoma

[Jobu]

Yes, they are.

Jobu, I suggest you read a few books in French and English about Canadian history. I happen to like Robert Rumilly and John Dafoe. But you could do no better than the American, Mason Wade.

History is just that, history.

The federal Liberals are currently about as "national" of a party as the BQ.