Debate Quebec Election 2007

[August1991]

Dumont to Charest: "You're more popular in Winnipeg than in Montmagny!"

Charest spoke like a senior political leader, a PM, but too comfortable and a "patapouffe". Boisclair was technocrat. Dumont was too youthful and strident, playing a good hand poorly.

There was no knock out punch. No mention of cocaine although Dumont raised the collapse of the Laval viaduct and made Charest look in the camera and promise solemnly that he cared about Quebecers. In general, one effective tactic was for Boisclair to keep repeating the same question to Dumont. (About Quebec's so called "margin of manoeuvre".) To Dumont, Charest was also effective in playing the experienced politician telling the younger guy that his ideas were half-baked.

The debate was more civilized than I exepected. These guys are all professional politicians. They've been in the game since they were in their teens.

If English-Canadians saw or understood the debate, they would have been appalled. It was a debate from an entirely different planet. Indeed, I think many Quebecers didn't see themselves in this debate. No one was prepared to haul off, leave the standard path and view the questions differently. Dumont came closest but it was barely a whisper. (Dumont raised the idea of reasonable accomodation in his final speech only.) At the same time, sovereignists heard nothing of themselves in the debate.

Quebec faces many fundamental questions and yet this debate largely avoided them.

Conclusion and my call?

No major change from the pre-debate polls. We're aiming for a minority government. Charest as PM with support of the ADQ. The ADQ will get official status.

[jdobbin]

Conclusion and my call?

No major change from the pre-debate polls. We're aiming for a minority government. Charest as PM with support of the ADQ. The ADQ will get official status.

Any idea on what party will take Official Opposition? Or no change there?

[jdobbin]

Dumont to Charest: "You're more popular in Winnipeg than in Montmagny!"

Most people in Winnipeg wouldn't know Charest if they tripped over him.

[Bakunin]

Charest was good in 2003, people expected alot today, he failed imo.

Dumont had a hard time facing boisclair but he did pretty well against charest.

Boisclair attacked the whole time, he did better than i expected, he didn't make his program look good but he made the 2 other program look bad.

What we will hear tomorow from the debate ? The Document that dumont used against charest i bet Landry is laughing out loud right now.

[bilanglomo]

I am an anglophone in and ADQ riding. I am not so appalled as I am confused. What exactly was PM Charest refering to concering Mr. Dumont's speech in Toronto. I am originally from London,Ontario so I would be interested to know.

The ADQ have certainly shown nothing in the way of 'inclusion' here in the Beauce and in fact my impression from my experience and interaction during the four years I've been here is that 'anglophones and minorities - visible or not' are openly and blatantly excluded here. It seems to be a matter ill-placed of protectionist pride. So I'd really like to know what, if anything, Mr. Dumont said in Toronto that would change the dismal impression I have. I haven't been able to get an answer of any kind from my ADQ MNA.

Is the ADQ for seperation or not ... can anybody tell me that before the vote.

I lived here before - quite successfully, from 1982 - 1990. My contribution was welcome in the job market at that time because anglophones with any business competency were in short supply. They still are but now the quality of english and english market savy offered is dismissed in lieu of hiring young, bilingual, francophones that we hope will not move away once they have acquired some professional experience. The salary incentives are not great here. I don't know why professional bilingual young people would want to stay in a closed society, but that's the theory anyway.

Mr. Charest seems to support - in theory - the notion of a 'unified' and 'inclusive' Québec but I'd like to see more oversight into the actual discriminatory service delivery in this area. He seems to turn a blind eye because we are of course - the invisible minority here.

For me, Mr. Boisclair, appears to promise the most 'inclusion' for all Québecois and Québecoise regardles of age, ethnic background, language ... didn't I read something about that kind of protection somewhere else ... but the seperation issue still scares me. Where would I fit in a soverign Québec once my vote is cast.

It occurs to me that in an independant Québec, my contributions might actually be seen and valued as the assets they are, rather than the threat they are suspected to be in the current circumstance.

So I could either go for the status quo and hope for improvement and accountability ... go for the PQ and hope for inclusion in something different ... or go for the ADQ and get more of what has already done me in ...

I remain as confused and undecided as I was when this began ... I appreciate the comments here though ...

[August1991]

Boisclair attacked the whole time, he did better than i expected, he didn't make his program look good but he made the 2 other program look bad.

IMV, Boisclair was too cool, too urban. Preppie.

What we will hear tomorow from the debate ? The Document that dumont used against charest i bet Landry is laughing out loud right now.

Maybe you're right. I wonder if Dumont realised that to get attention, this was the only way to raise this question - during the debate.

If it works, it will be serious. Dumont was correct to say that Charest's "commission" is an attempt to avoid the problem.

[Bakunin]

IMV, Boisclair was too cool, too urban. Preppie.

That's nothing new to the debate, he his what he his, an urban technocrat.

Maybe you're right. I wonder if Dumont realised that to get attention, this was the only way to raise this question - during the debate.

If it works, it will be serious. Dumont was correct to say that Charest's "commission" is an attempt to avoid the problem.

The thing is that during a campain, most tv journalist become crazy, they want an hollywood like election and either if the document is right or not, its like the parizeau thing in 2003, people don't care who's right, they will look at charest and say that he clearly lost the debate and his campain is slowly falling apart and charest will have to defend himself and when you defend yourself your not gaining vote, our trying to maintain them and its really hard to turn the campain, his best chance is the federal budget. I predict the exact same thing as 2003, except i don't think the pq will have a majority government because i doubt the adq will lose support in quebec region.

[Charles Anthony]

Conclusions from last night:

Ottawa has a 99% chance of securing a playoff spot.

Toronto is still holding onto its 1% chance and Montreal still has a reason to dream.

The NHL schedule was planned many moons ago for these three Eastern teams and this debate just happened to be on the same night. Hmm...

Charest's biggest gaffe: he used his "rabbit from a hat" metaphor twice. I thought Charest was tap dancing well enough until he repeated the metaphor. That made him sound (I can not say "look" because I had to catch it on the radio) weak.