Harper and the PQ
December 9, 2008 - 11:06pm
Yesterday's election in Quebec, from my understanding, showed an unexpected result in that the PQ got more many more seats than what was expected or predicted. It seems to me that the only factor could be Harper's fear mongering over the Block.
If true, doesn't that make Harper the one who really threatened national unity?
Why isn't anyone making political hay while the sun shines?
First of all, there's no evidence I've seen that that is true. None. The PQ got unusually few seats in 2007, the ADQ got spectacularly too many, there were reasons at the time (such as Boisclair and reasonable accommodation and Charest a bit too aimless etc.), and things have gone back to normal. The ADQ seats went mostly back to the PQ, some (fewer) to the Liberals.
The PQ popular vote was nothing special. Thanks to FPTP (thank god in this case), they got a bit more than double the ADQ vote and more than 7 times the seats!!
You could just as easily speculate that Harper "helped" the Liberals, because their seat count grew.
In any event, to play the "Harper helped the separatists" card is less disgusting than "the Coalition helps the separatists" card - exactly how???
I'm not saying that we should play that card, at all -- or that it is a good card to play if it implies Quebeckers can't be trusted to choose their own representatives. But I think it is a valid question.
I was watching CTV's coverage last night and I heard 3 different PQ MNAs say that in their opinion, Harper's negativity towards Quebec had made some contribution to their surprise success. They weren't sure what exactly, but they thought he had helped galvanize people.
There were no doubt other factors (the collapse of the ADQ and the fact that there was low voter turnout, which probably meant that a lot of PQ voters went out to vote, while many Liberals stayed home, being among them).
Anyway, if Quebec MNAs can posit that Harper's irresponsible behaviour had unexpected political repercussions, then the rest of us are naturally more likely to wonder.
"First of all, there's no evidence I've seen that that is true. None. "
"Prime Minister Stephen Harper's comments about Quebec separatists gave the Parti Quebecois a major boost and helped the sovereigntist party close in on the Liberals in the provincial election, a leading pollster said Tuesday.
In a reversal of the historic election-day trend, the PQ performed far better than expected and closed so much of the gap between itself and the Liberals that it nearly deprived Charest of a majority.
The PQ's share of the popular vote was just seven percentage points less than the Liberals - this after polls just days ago placed it 14 points behind - and it held Charest's troops to a three-seat majority.
Jean-Marc Leger, president of Leger Marketing, said a poll suggested 14 per cent of Quebecers changed their vote on the last day, with half making that flip-flop while at the ballot box.
Leger said the largest contributor to the discrepancy between pre-election polling and the final outcome Monday was Harper's anti-Quebec rant in the home stretch of the campaign."
http://www.news1130.com/news/national/article.jsp?content=n1209133A
"Prime Minister Stephen Harper's comments about Quebec separatists gave the Parti Quebecois a major boost and helped the sovereigntist party close in on the Liberals in the provincial election, a leading pollster [Léger Marketing] said Tuesday.
This "leading poster" can't remember things from one day to the next. He's very much like the MSM in that way.
Here's what Léger was predicting on Nov. 25, before Harper's anti-Québec rant ever happened:
What was the actual popular vote of the PQ on Monday?
35 percent!!
"Major boost" indeed!
And I wonder how Léger would explain that the ADQ, the only nakedly pro-Harper party, instead of getting 12% as projected, actually got 16%?
I was watching CTV's coverage last night and I heard 3 different PQ MNAs say that in their opinion, Harper's negativity towards Quebec had made some contribution to their surprise success.
Yes, politicians tend to be brilliant and unbiased political analysts.
As my post above shows, the PQ popular vote turned out almost exactly as predicted.
The only party that did better (much better) in popular vote than the pollsters projected was...
... hold for it .....
The ADQ! Instead of 12%, it polled around 16%. That's 33.3% better than predicted!
Analyze that!
Leger may have some credibility problems, but a CROP poll had the PQ at 29%.
http://tinyurl.com/66ockb
Leger may have some credibility problems, but a CROP poll had the PQ at 29%.
http://tinyurl.com/66ockb
And just to wind up with how accurate polling results are, Here are the seat projections made by these brilliant scientific polling firms prior to the election:
PLQ 82
PQ 41
ADQ 2
À partir du sondage Léger Marketing
PLQ 78
PQ 45
ADQ 2
À partir du sondage Angus Reid
PLQ 66
PQ 58
ADQ 1
Which poll do you prefer?
In any event, to play the "Harper helped the separatists" card is less disgusting than "the Coalition helps the separatists" card - exactly how???
Isn't this just a demonstration of the disgust for playing "the Coalition helps the separatists" card. By the way I don't see any political groups pushing this.
At least one pollster thinks Harper helped the PQ;
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/1095088.html
At least one pollster thinks Harper helped the PQ;
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/1095088.html
If you read from the beginning of the thread, you will notice that this one pollster (Léger) had predicted a 34% vote for the PQ before Harper started his rant, and they ended up with 35%. So, this one pollster has a serious problem - he thinks people forget his polls from one month to the next. On the other hand, maybe he's right.
If you read from the beginning of the thread, you will notice that this one pollster (Léger) had predicted a 34% vote for the PQ before Harper started his rant, and they ended up with 35%. So, this one pollster has a serious problem - he thinks people forget his polls from one month to the next. On the other hand, maybe he's right.
I don't disagree per se, but given Harpers very divisive language I can't see it not helping the Bloc and the PQ.
If I was a Quebec voter I would be really angry at the language Harper has been using. It is divisive and dismissive. If he continues, and he very well may if the coalition lives, sovereignty will be on the table again. And polls will have to indicate it. Either that or sovereignty is dead. I don't think it is. But I live in Ontario
I don't disagree per se, but given Harpers very divisive language I can't see it not helping the Bloc and the PQ.
That's not a very persuasive argument.
Both Jean Charest and Pauline Marois, for example, loudly and publicly condemned Harper for his comments, and both came to the defence of the BQ. Also, Charest has long since publicly renounced and distanced himself from any attachment to Harper. Do you think Quebeckers who support Charest are any less proud of Québec, or hostile to Harper's poisonous demagogy, than Quebeckers who support the PQ?
Moreover, the one party which actually speaks well of Harperite policies (the ADQ) did better on election night - significantly better - than all the pre-election polls indicated.
So what you may think is "obvious" just based on thinking it over, becomes quite different when you actually have to go out and look at some facts.
The pro-Harper ADQ went from 31% to 16% and lost 80% of its seats. Pretty hard to see that as anything but a repudiation of the kinds of rightwing policies Harper and Dumont represent.
There is no question in my mind that Harper's anti-"separatist" (sic.) rant had an impact. I think that a lot of soft-nationalists who were bored with the PQ and Marois and who were toying with voting forsmall protest parties or were going to stay home - instead got riled uyp and voted PQ as a way to spite Harper and his message of hate.
I don't know why you're being so resistent to that possibility.
No, it's not. It's based on how I feel.
I'm sure they are all proud of Québec. But I have a soft spot for people seeking sovereignty, anywhere in the world.
They lost official party status. They may have done better than the polls indicated but I'm thrilled with the result. I'm also thrilled that Québec solidaire won a seat.
Could be. Then again, Harpers comments may take some time to sink in.
The pro-Harper ADQ went from 31% to 16% and lost 80% of its seats. Pretty hard to see that as anything but a repudiation of the kinds of rightwing policies Harper and Dumont represent.
Well of course. Everyone in Québec hates Harper. I hope you noticed the threads on the federal election. Where exactly did you see me suggest that people like Harper? This thread is about whether Harper helped the PQ, Stockholm. The answer is, I've seen no evidence to that effect. Please scroll up and see the data.
Ummm, please scroll up and read the data.
Let's make a little distinction here. Harper's comments (I believe) certainly helped the BQ in Québec. I think they were mostly irrelevant with respect to the PQ.
I'm not at all resistant to the possibility. I'm more resistant to the actuality. For the third time, scroll up - and see if you can find any evidence.
Before the shit hit the fan with Harper histrionic attacks on the BQ and on so-called separatists, all the polls were projecting a landslide 13-14% margin for the Quebec Liberals over the PQ - then it turned into a relatively narrow 7% margin and just a bare majority. The only intervening events was Harper's francophobic rampage.
Ok, Stockholm, you win. Don't scroll up. Don't read the actual data. Good night.