maplesyrup Posted March 23, 2004 Report Posted March 23, 2004 Every political party seems to have a challenge looming for them in Quebec, as Canadians rush ahead towards a spring election. We know the Bloc and the Liberals are there, but if the NDP and the CPC are going to make inroads in Quebec, where will they be? Urban or rural? In Montreal? Realistically do these other parties have a chance in Quebec? We need democracy across our land. The Quebec problem Quote An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't. Anatole France
August1991 Posted March 23, 2004 Report Posted March 23, 2004 The fact of the matter is the NDP and the CPC will not get any seats in Quebec. I also don't see the Liberals getting more than 20 now. The Bloc will get 55. Unless something changes (what?), this election is a foregone conclusion in Quebec. More seriously, we may well be watching the next step in this neverending "Canadian" saga. For the first time in a long time, English Canada may well have in Harper someone who speaks for English Canada. Quote
maplesyrup Posted March 23, 2004 Author Report Posted March 23, 2004 That sounds pretty divisive. The Liberals alternate between an English and French leader. I suppose that is what keeps them in power. Quote An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't. Anatole France
August1991 Posted March 24, 2004 Report Posted March 24, 2004 I suppose it sounds that way, but I don't mean it as such. It's just that the last time English Canada had a leader who spoke for English Canada was, well, Pearson and Diefenbaker. (Clark? Turner? Campbell?) I don't know if English Canadians trust Harper. But maybe he's ready made for it. He's arrived at a time when Canadians have a deep distrust of politicians and his major asset is his stubborn, Clyde-Wells style honesty. Many English Canadians seem to think that separatism is some kind of strategy in a poker game. It's not. (And I'm not saying that to raise the stakes. Rather, I see it as a strange dance that in truth started in 1960 - well, maybe 1759.) Let's see how this unfolds. Quote
maplesyrup Posted March 24, 2004 Author Report Posted March 24, 2004 What is the Bloc s purpose? What are they actually hoping for? I have heard people outside Quebec say they would vote for them if they could. Quote An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't. Anatole France
August1991 Posted March 24, 2004 Report Posted March 24, 2004 I have heard people outside Quebec say they would vote for them if they could. They are frustrated perhaps, but absolutely silly. What are they actually hoping for? The independance, sovereignty, of Quebec. What is the Bloc s purpose? In the context of Quebec, that's a good question. I think the separatists (indépendantistes, souverainistes) were tired of watching Quebecers voting for Trudeau. There had been efforts to get voters to boycott federal elections. The boycotts didn't work. (BTW, the word "boycott" has special significance in Quebec.) So, the BQ started as an alternative (another word in Quebec) and then people asked, "but what would the BQ députés do if they win?" (Well, there was Mulroney, Meech Lake, etc. etc. But the Trudeau sweeps started the idea. Mulroney made it obvious.) What is the Bloc's purpose? I think it is to offer a non-Liberal way for people in Quebec to vote. But I think your question,maplesyrup, really is: "What does Québec want?" (IMHO, it's still a good question.) How about North America's Sweden? You know, Abba and Volvo. (Celine Dion and Bombardier.) Quote
maplesyrup Posted March 24, 2004 Author Report Posted March 24, 2004 1993.10.25 Liberal 177 295 5,647,952 41.3 % Bloc Québécois 54 75 1,846,024 13.5 % Reform 52 207 2,559,245 18.7 % New Democratic Party 9 294 939,575 6.9 % Progressive Conservative 2 295 2,186,422 16 % Other 1 989 488,453 3.6 % Total 295 2,155 13,667,671 100 % Government--177, Opposition--118, Majority--59 1997.06.02 Liberal 155 301 4,994,377 38.5 % Reform 60 227 2,513,070 19.4 % Bloc Québécois 44 75 1,385,821 10.7 % New Democratic Party 21 301 1,434,509 11 % Progressive Conservative 20 301 2,446,705 18.8 % Other 1 467 211,482 1.6 % Total 301 1,672 12,985,964 100 % Government--155, Opposition--146, Majority--9 2000.11.27 Liberal 172 301 5,252,031 40.8 % Canadian Alliance 66 298 3,276,929 25.5 % Bloc Québécois 38 75 1,377,727 10.7 % New Democratic Party 13 298 1,093,868 8.5 % Progressive Conservative 12 291 1,566,998 12.2 % Other 0 545 290,220 2.3 % Total 301 1,808 12,857,773 100 % Government--172, Opposition--129, Majority--43 The Bloc has had fairly steady support since they first elected candidates in Ottawa, hovering between 11 and 13%, and the latest poll gave them 12%. I wonder if Quebeckers will support the Bloc in the next election, as Martin was supposed to be very popular there. Quote An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't. Anatole France
August1991 Posted March 24, 2004 Report Posted March 24, 2004 1993.10.25 Bloc Québécois 54 1,846,024 1997.06.02 Bloc Québécois 44 1,385,821 2000.11.27 Bloc Québécois 38 1,377,727 Downward trend? Ah, gee whiz. You have no idea how this has been analyzed, examined, cut apart and décortiqué in Quebec. Another example of your efforts? Mark Steyn has started into this idea that Europe will disappear because Europeans don't have kids. (Selon Steyn, America is the future because Americans have kids.) Steyn's analysis is so simplistic, I think he's a nationalistic Quebecer. IOW, people in Quebec are obsessed by all these numbers (and this nonsense) and they typically draw the wrong conclusion, like Steyn, that they're finished. (For Quebecers- themselves. For Steyn- Europeans.) People such as Steyn and Quebecers use demography, and the environment, to express a political opinion. I'm tired of seeing this. Steyn is boring because he uses Quebec to present something "new" to the world. (Steyn's a journalist; he can write but not count.) Count? Numbers do matter. But not demographics. I remember watching the referendum in 1995 on TV5 (I was abroad). The yes won until it got to Montreal. Canada will never be the same, I thought. Any person can see this. Preston Manning seems to understand it. Now then. Chretien and the Canadian flag sponsorships were maybe the last gasps. (Is Martin naive about why this was done?) Or, who counts best? Martin, Manning or Chretien? (Steyn? He doesn't know what "marginal" means. I bet Chretien knows, "dans ses tripes".) Quote
maplesyrup Posted March 24, 2004 Author Report Posted March 24, 2004 The Bloc support has been fairly steady. But it is always easy to attack when one is in opposition, isnt it? The hard-line approach towards the provinces does not seem to work, caving in does not sound very constructive either. Seeing as in some quarters there is this push to reduce taxes/government, maybe we need to abolish the provinces. I wonder what the results would be if we held a referendum on this topic. Quote An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't. Anatole France
maplesyrup Posted March 24, 2004 Author Report Posted March 24, 2004 good article by Larry Zolf Looks like once again Quebeckers are going to decide who wins the election. INCROIXABLE! Thinking the unthinkable http://www.cbc.ca/news/viewpoint/vp_zolf/20040324.html Quote An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't. Anatole France
August1991 Posted March 25, 2004 Report Posted March 25, 2004 The link is bad, MapleSyrup, but I found the Larry Zolf article through the CBC web site. Thanks! Larry Zolf. (Sorry, I know the guy better than Warren Kinsella.) Zolf is an antenna, that leans left. An entertainer. His article? I suspect that he spoke to some old friends on the phone, got a few ideas and then wrote the same stuff we do here. (He's smart. He gets paid for it.) Ontario will decide the next election. I'm anxiously waiting for the next polls. Harper has the potential to form a majority government (if he's really, really lucky). Can he get 60 in Ontario? (Clark got 57 in 1979. The circumstances are similar.) Now, what if Harper has a minority? There might be some BQ members who cross the floor. Or far, far more likely: some Liberals from Quebec.... (Whatever happened to Jack Horner?) Quote
maplesyrup Posted March 25, 2004 Author Report Posted March 25, 2004 With the media coverage there would be something wrong if the CPC didnt obtain spike in polls. It will come back down. Ontario is going to get too crowded for anything like that. Quote An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't. Anatole France
August1991 Posted March 25, 2004 Report Posted March 25, 2004 The hard-line approach towards the provinces does not seem to work, caving in does not sound very constructive either. It's much more serious, MapleSyrup. Martin has opened a can of worms. I don't think he did it for personal gain, but he did it. This gives an inkling to Quebec thoughts: CTV Bedard Sponsorship Bear in mind: The scandal started because Chretien genuinely wanted to make Canada present in Quebec. What motivates Bedard? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.