Quebec Election 2012 -Unpredictable

[Newfoundlander]

A Charet "Win" will only continue to "legitimize" the comments behind "Liberal scandal", "Liberal lack of transparency" and money laundering. Mobster ties can now also be brought into the Liberal Branding. This woud be a HUGE win for Steve Harper.. "Once a Liberal always a Liberal"....

Actually, regardless of the outcome, Its a win for Steve Harper.. With Mulcair 100%(!!!) silent on the seperation debate and Student Riots.... Harper has simply added to his war-chest of Mulcair "Attack adds",,,,, And rightfully so!

In the words of Mr.Smithers...."Eeeexcellent".....

Because Harper has been so outspoken on the student riots and separatism?

[bleeding heart]

Because Harper has been so outspoken on the student riots and separatism?

That's different. Harper is merely the Prime Minister.

[Fletch 27]

As a mater of fact yes.. he has been.. Even the CBC just last night commented on pnp about the weak message (NO message) mulcair was sending. Harper showed leadership and urging to keep Canada together. Even Bob Rae was touted as bettering Mulcairs LACK of comment of position..

Because Harper has been so outspoken on the student riots and separatism?

[TheNewTeddy]

The Canada of 2012 is not the Canada of 1995. If the NDP came out in favour of a Referendum if and when it happens (IE, the NDP is not opposed to the idea of a Referendum, nor is it going to force it's members to vote NO) the NDP would not lose nearly as much support as you might suspect. Same is true for the Tories.

[PIK]

Because Harper has been so outspoken on the student riots and separatism?

Mulcair will be forced to back the separtists, he has boxed himself into a corner and harper knows it. Harper has again shown his excellent leadership skills. The NDP are in the big leagues now and it is showing they are not prepared. Time to go back to your 3rd party status, promising the world, knowing you will never have to deliver.

[Wild Bill]

In the words of Mr.Smithers...."Eeeexcellent".....

Not to nitpick but of course you meant Mr. Burns!

Smithers is his gay, overworked personal assistant.

[punked]

As a mater of fact yes.. he has been.. Even the CBC just last night commented on pnp about the weak message (NO message) mulcair was sending. Harper showed leadership and urging to keep Canada together. Even Bob Rae was touted as bettering Mulcairs LACK of comment of position..

You do know out off the leaders the only on the ground during the 1995 referendum was Mulcair right? While Harper was leading his own Alberta separatist movement Mulcair was actually fighting (and I mean in a leadership role) to keep Quebec in Canada. Maybe pick up a book before you run your mouth off because when this question comes up in a debate Mulcair will be the only one who can say "I was there, I fought for Canada, it was a hard fight and if it ever happens again you know which side I will be on." Don't be an idiot your team wants to bring this up it will only play to Mulcair's strengths and his story which you clearly know NOTHING ABOUT.

[Wild Bill]

You do know out off the leaders the only on the ground during the 1995 referendum was Mulcair right? While Harper was leading his own Alberta separatist movement Mulcair was actually fighting (and I mean in a leadership role) to keep Quebec in Canada. Maybe pick up a book before you run your mouth off because when this question comes up in a debate Mulcair will be the only one who can say "I was there, I fought for Canada, it was a hard fight and if it ever happens again you know which side I will be on." Don't be an idiot your team wants to bring this up it will only play to Mulcair's strengths and his story which you clearly know NOTHING ABOUT.

Punked, that was then and this is now! Mulcair had no conflict of loyalties back then. He does now! It is a simple fact that to keep his Quebec support he is going to have to kiss some separatiste butt!

He walks a tightrope. He has existing support in the rest of Canada which will not like to see any apparent favoritism towards Quebec, even when there isn't any! The Liberals often had the same problem in their history, when they had so much of their caucus from Quebec yet tried to claim they were the only true national party.

Mulcair may indeed be a much better fighter for unity than his opponents but that's not the issue here. He has to be pragmatic if he wants to win. I am going to find how he handles this over the next few months fascinating, to say the least.

[punked]

Punked, that was then and this is now! Mulcair had no conflict of loyalties back then. He does now! It is a simple fact that to keep his Quebec support he is going to have to kiss some separatiste butt!

He walks a tightrope. He has existing support in the rest of Canada which will not like to see any apparent favoritism towards Quebec, even when there isn't any! The Liberals often had the same problem in their history, when they had so much of their caucus from Quebec yet tried to claim they were the only true national party.

Mulcair may indeed be a much better fighter for unity than his opponents but that's not the issue here. He has to be pragmatic if he wants to win. I am going to find how he handles this over the next few months fascinating, to say the least.

He has already promised to bring a second federalist option to Quebecers for the next provincial election by bringing back the NDPs provincial wing. He has a history of fighting for federalism and has never said anything that should make anyone think he is soft on separatists. The position people take with the NDP is they believe in democracy and that if there is a large enough vote a province should be allowed to leave the country. That is it.

Quebec wants in. They have voted for a federalist party and now people like Fletch want to make an issue of it. These people should be celebrating years of them telling Quebec they would be better if they just accepted Canada have paid off. Instead they try to make a boogey man out of a FEDERALIST leader of a FEDERALIST party which has never been for separation. Whats the issue? Well there is no issue so the Conservatives around here have decided to make one. That is wrong for our country.

[Wild Bill]

He has already promised to bring a second federalist option to Quebecers for the next provincial election by bringing back the NDPs provincial wing. He has a history of fighting for federalism and has never said anything that should make anyone think he is soft on separatists. The position people take with the NDP is they believe in democracy and that if there is a large enough vote a province should be allowed to leave the country. That is it.

Quebec wants in. They have voted for a federalist party and now people like Fletch want to make an issue of it. These people should be celebrating years of them telling Quebec they would be better if they just accepted Canada have paid off. Instead they try to make a boogey man out of a FEDERALIST leader of a FEDERALIST party which has never been for separation. Whats the issue? Well there is no issue so the Conservatives around here have decided to make one. That is wrong for our country.

Punked, you and I can say anything we want and make any predictions we care to make but it doesn't matter a whit!

It all depends on the voters in Quebec. The Pequistes have drawn more than a few votes for a long time now. That means there are a significant number of voters who back separatism. Many of the new MPs in the NDP Quebec caucus have some separatiste history.

Those MPs have to attract enough votes to get re-elected! They are not all going to do that by ignoring the separatist element. What's more, it seems most of the votes they did get in Quebec came from people who knew little or nothing about the NDP.

You can blow it off all you want but it seems obvious that Mulcair's problem is real. If he can't solve it, he will hand Harper a larger majority and perhaps the Liberal Party a new lease on life.

If he can't succeed, it won't likely be a total loss. Jack gave his party a foothold in Quebec that they never had before. No matter what happens it's not likely they will lose everything and go back to the way things were. The NDP now likely has a permanent position in Quebec, IMHO. Their fortunes might wax and wane in the province over the coming years, just like the other parties but they at last are a player in a province with a large number of seats to offer.

Things are more interesting now in Canadian federal politics then perhaps they've ever been.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Wild Bill

[August1991]

Mulcair would be crazy to get involved in Quebec provincial politics, whether it be student boycotts or empty-talk about a referendum. Even Trudeau only gave three speeches during the 1980 referendum.

He has already promised to bring a second federalist option to Quebecers for the next provincial election by bringing back the NDPs provincial wing.

I think that this idea will go absolutely nowhere. QS is in a sense the Quebec wing of the NDP.

With respect to one's current/past opinion of sovereignty, the "don't ask, don't tell" policy seems to work best right now. Many NDP MPs/supporters in Quebec are like Legault - let's avoid talking about this for awhile.

-----

The PQ is bleeding support to Option nationale/Québec solidaire. Marois cannot rise above 33% despite facing an extremely weak government. I don`t think the effects of the debates have yet shown up in the polls. The PQ may fall as low as 25% by 4 Sept.

Part of this is due to Marois herself and part is due to the fact that many people simply do not want to have another debate now on Quebec sovereignty.

OTOH, it will be interesting to watch how many voters switch from the PLQ to the CAQ, in particular in the traditional Liberal seats with allophones/anglophones. Many of those voters switched from the Liberals to the NDP in the past federal election and while Legault is no Mulcair, the voters are once again looking for an alternative.

[TheNewTeddy]

My numbers say 20% of PLQ voters off-island have already switched to the CAQ

[Rue]

The vote will be sucked out of the Liberals to the alternative nationalist party which sounds more and more like the old Union Nationale party and the seperatist support will be sucked to the alternative seperatist party Parizeau the racist anti semitic elitist baboon openly endorsed.

Marois and Charest are not liked. Both are seen as arrogant, aloof, unfriendly, corupt and not interested in the masses.

We will probably have a minority coalition but I hope the alternative nationalist party will sneak in and rest control with Liberal support.It could very well be the 2 seperatist parties forge the coalition that comes out in charge.

It was a blessing the pig Parizeau showed up and dissed Marois in public to seperatists. Nothing better than saying these seperatists stick each other up the butt.

Say now I better not use that language. Someone will excuse me of being inappropriate and report me to Rob Ford.

Edited August 28, 2012 by Rue

[August1991]

The vote will be sucked out of the Liberals to the alternative nationalist party which sounds more and more like the old Union Nationale party and the seperatist support will be sucked to the alternative seperatist party Parizeau the racist anti semitic elitist baboon openly endorsed.

Not quite. The PQ is still polling in the low 30s and the PLQ still has the West Island.

And your characterization of Parizeau is about as accurate as your spelling. I am always surprised how English Canadian nationalists justify their own prejudices while finding outrageous anyone else's meagre claim to pride.

Anyhoo...

========

Here's my prediction: a PQ minority with a CAQ official opposition. The PLQ vote is concentrated and ineffective in terms of seats in the National Assembly. The CAQ support is concentrated in Quebec City, off-island Montreal region, south of Quebec City and ridings along the St. Lawrence. That's not enough to win more seats than the PQ. At the same time, the PQ will lose too many votes to QS to get over 63 seats. PQ: 58, CAQ: 40, PLQ: 20, QS: 2.

In all honesty though, this election is too weird to call. There are simply too many ridings where vote-splits will mean an elected MNA with as little as 35% of the vote.

The only certainty is that Charest will not be Quebec's PM after next week.

Harper will name Charest Canada's Ambassador to Paris before the end of the year. While it goes through re-education camp and seeks a new leader, the PLQ will prop up a PQ government.

If Marois becomes PM, Harper will politely listen to her demands and then show her the door. She will get no mileage from him. He knows as well as she does that the last thing she wants anytime soon is to hold a referendum.

[Guest Derek L]

Not quite. The PQ is still polling in the low 30s and the PLQ still has the West Island.

And your characterization of Parizeau is about as accurate as your spelling. I am always surprised how English Canadian nationalists justify their own prejudices while finding outrageous anyone else's meagre claim to pride.

Anyhoo...

========

Here's my prediction: a PQ minority with a CAQ official opposition. The PLQ vote is concentrated and ineffective in terms of seats in the National Assembly. The CAQ support is concentrated in Quebec City, off-island Montreal region, south of Quebec City and ridings along the St. Lawrence. That's not enough to win more seats than the PQ. At the same time, the PQ will lose too many votes to QS to get over 63 seats. PQ: 58, CAQ: 40, PLQ: 20, QS: 2.

In all honesty though, this election is too weird to call. There are simply too many ridings where vote-splits will mean an elected MNA with as little as 35% of the vote.

The only certainty is that Charest will not be Quebec's PM after next week.

Harper will name Charest Canada's Ambassador to Paris before the end of the year. While it goes through re-education camp and seeks a new leader, the PLQ will prop up a PQ government.

If Marois becomes PM, Harper will politely listen to her demands and then show her the door. She will get no mileage from him. He knows as well as she does that the last thing she wants anytime soon is to hold a referendum.

I think, as an outsider that only has a passing interest in Quebec politics, and as I understand, your assessment seems spot on……….I’ll add, with a PQ victory, I’ll assume the PQ mantra of "identité" will Create further Quebec-centric demands of Ottawa………As you rightly suggested, Harper will tell Mme. Marois to blow it out her arse.......But what effect will a PQ win have on the Federal NDP? Will the NDP be supportive of many of the PQ’s positions, thus possibly alienating themselves in the ROC? Will they ignore them and risk alienating their own base in Quebec?

I think a PQ win, is a win for Harper in 2015.……………

[August1991]

As you rightly suggested, Harper will tell Mme. Marois to blow it out her arse.......But what effect will a PQ win have on the Federal NDP? Will the NDP be supportive of many of the PQ’s positions, thus possibly alienating themselves in the ROC? Will they ignore them and risk alienating their own base in Quebec?

Giving a little more thought to this, if I were Harper facing a Quebec PM Marois, I would either encourage/provoke her to hold a referendum or even hold a referendum in Quebec myself.

Legault talked about les caribous in the PQ who want to jump over the cliff. Well, maybe Harper should give them directions.

-----

The federal NDP Quebec caucus is truly a mixed bag of federalists, sovereignists, écolos, feministes, syndicalistes who share generally the term gauchistes. (It`always amuses me that leftists - who prone the monopoly power of the State - can never agree among themselves and always splinter into various sects.)

A Quebec referendum (or even talk of a referendum) would likely split the NDP Quebec caucus, as well as the CAQ.

-----

Current polls put support for sovereignty in Quebec at 28%. Some 37% of PQ voters do not want a referendum. IOW, people are voting for the PQ because they want to get rid of Charest and they are suspicious of Legault, the only other alternative. At that, the PQ can only garner about 34% of the vote and if it forms a majority government, it will be because of riding level vote splits.

Meanwhile, the caribou have taken over the PQ and they will conclude that 34% for the PQ plus 9% for QS and 2% for ON adds up to 50% plus one. The Parizeau thesis is that to win a referendum, the PQ must talk about sovereignty and provoke a crisis with Ottawa.

[bleeding heart]

(It`always amuses me that leftists - who prone the monopoly power of the State - can never agree among themselves and always splinter into various sects.)

It's both a weakness and a strength.

As for "monopoly power of the state"...this is selective perception. Statists arise from the Right every bit as much as from the Left...and they move comfortably around the Centre, as well.

[Guest Derek L]

Giving a little more thought to this, if I were Harper facing a Quebec PM Marois, I would either encourage/provoke her to hold a referendum or even hold a referendum in Quebec myself.

Legault talked about les caribous in the PQ who want to jump over the cliff. Well, maybe Harper should give them directions.

As I said, a PQ win, is a win for Harper………..let the federal NDP and PQ fight over to whom will eat the cake.

The federal NDP Quebec caucus is truly a mixed bag of federalists, sovereignists, écolos, feministes, syndicalistes who share generally the term gauchistes. (It`always amuses me that leftists - who prone the monopoly power of the State - can never agree among themselves and always splinter into various sects.)

A Quebec referendum (or even talk of a referendum) would likely split the NDP Quebec caucus, as well as the CAQ.

To add to the opinion of many that Quebec is a temptress easily scorned………..As a (Western, WASP) Tory the allure of Quebec (in a political sense) lost it’s lustre several decades ago…..

Current polls put support for sovereignty in Quebec at 28%. Some 37% of PQ voters do not want a referendum. IOW, people are voting for the PQ because they want to get rid of Charest and they are suspicious of Legault, the only other alternative. At that, the PQ can only garner about 34% of the vote and if it forms a majority government, it will be because of riding level vote splits.

Meanwhile, the caribou have taken over the PQ and they will conclude that 34% for the PQ plus 9% for QS and 2% for ON adds up to 50% plus one. The Parizeau thesis is that to win a referendum, the PQ must talk about sovereignty and provoke a crisis with Ottawa.

A redux of the Bloc in 2015 perhaps?

[Guest Derek L]

So the PQ does have a chance for a slim majority:

Suburbs hold sway over PQ’s bid for majority government: poll

According to pollster Jean-Marc Léger, the PQ will form the next government based on the results of this newest poll. However, close races in the seven ridings just north of Montreal may decide whether Ms. Marois can form a majority or a minority government and if the CAQ will form the official opposition.

So with a majority, how long until we see a referendum on sovereignty? Sure glad the federal CPC isn’t in bed with Quebec…….Have the Federal NDP even spoke on the Provincial election yet? Who do they endorse?

[Guest Derek L]

Interesting piece from the National Post:

PQ election win would mean cautious journey toward Quebec referendum

For Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a Parti Quebecois government would present a major challenge and a 180-degree shift from the federalist Charest Liberals, according to Maioni.

“This will be the first time in his mandate that he will be faced not just with a sovereigntist government in Quebec, but a left-leaning government,” she said.

I disagree with this point, PM Harper has demonstrated that he govern without (But not so much against) Quebec……….As pointed out by August, I’m sure the Prime Minster will welcome a PQ government, a government that should favour handing over more controls to the Provinces.

A PQ government could cause even more problems for NDP Leader Tom Mulcair, whose party rose to Official Opposition status largely because of its success in Quebec in the last federal election.

But Mulcair has so far avoided wading into key issues in the province, such as the debate over tuition increases. The party’s policy to recognize a 50%-plus-one referendum decision would also come under renewed scrutiny, if the PQ moves toward holding one.

“He’s going to have make things a lot clearer than they have been,” Maioni said, adding that a PQ win could, perhaps, lead to a resurgence of the Bloc Quebecois at the federal level.

“If the PQ does do well in Tuesday’s election, that means something is going on within the body politic, and that means all the seats they won are going to be less and less safe.”

This very well could impact the NDP in 2015, who won’t only be attacked by the CPC, a possible resurgent Bloc, a Liberal Party quick to point to the NDP being in bed with separatists within their Quebec caucus, and a the PQ government lobbing political grenades from within the current NDP “stronghold”…………

[TheNewTeddy]

This election, unintentionally I think, asks one major question.

Can Canada ever work, as it is, without serious and major reform.

If the PQ wins a majority, the answer is no.

[Guest Derek L]

This election, unintentionally I think, asks one major question.

Can Canada ever work, as it is, without serious and major reform.

If the PQ wins a majority, the answer is no.

I guess we’ll know that answer in just over 24 hours…………..The question could be asked, would this experiment called Canada still work without Quebec?

[TheNewTeddy]

Yes, and it would work wonders.

[Smallc]

Can Canada ever work, as it is, without serious and major reform.

If the PQ wins a majority, the answer is no.

How do you figure that? Sovereignty sits at 28% in Quebec. A PQ win says nothing about whether Canada works.

[TheNewTeddy]

The PQ's whole plan for government is to make trouble. They will make trouble with 50% support or 5% support.