Quebec Election October 1, 2018

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

NPD-Q was an outright failure.

So was the CCF in Saskatchewan in the 1930s. The truth is, the left has been rallying around Quebec Solidaire and its predecessor parties for at least a decade, and long before Thomas Mulcair took Outrement for the NDP in 2007. When it comes to left-wing organizing, QS has a huge structural advantage over the NPD-Q. That might change. It was the economic and social policies that attracted people to QS, and as Pondering said upthread, most likely people gravitated towards QS in spite of the sovereignty issue, not because of it. I heard Masse recommit her efforts to the sovereigntist project. If she continues on this track, and if support for sovereignty remains as low as it is, this represents a major opening for the NPD-Q.

  Not actually the case about the Saskatchewan CCF.  It's predecessor party, the Farmer-Labour group, took 5 seats and 23.26% of the vote in 1934.  In 1938, The CCF became the Official Opposition, doubling its caucus to 10 seats-although it fell to 18.73%, mainly due to the sudden rise of Social Credit, the appearance of the small, more left-wing "Unity" party, and the perception that the second CCF leader, George Hara Williams, was too close to the CP-then took 47 seats nd 53.13% of the vote, forming a majority government, in 1944, in only the second election it contested under the CCF banner.

As per the PQ, I am disappointed that Jean-Martin Aussant wasn't elected, but that was in part due to the popularity of the mayor of Pointe-aux-Trembles.

I hate the CAQ, but don't forget that Ontarians have elected a government that is at least as ecocidal and reactionary.

Ken Burch wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

CAQ wins majority. Where do we go from here?

Did your riding stay safely PLQ?  

As to the road ahead...I think this may the end for the PQ.   They hadn't been truly sovereigntist since the mid-Nineties.  The haven't been left-of-center(the other pillar of pequiste identity) since 1980 or so.  They weren't able to out-xenophobe the caquistes and won't ever manage that.  My guess is a good chunk of the remaining PQ rump faction will defect to the caquistes, any remaining left-pequistes may cross over to QS or to sit as pro-QS independents.  NPD-Q was an outright failure.  The PLQ's only hope for the future is to actually become small-l liberals again, but their corporate backers will never allow them to do that.

Yeah it went Liberal. QS finished in 2nd over 4 000 votes less.

I really have nothing to celebrate about tonight. The worst case scenario happened. In three words,Québec is fucked.

I really don't care about 2022,it is cold comfort. And these rightwing insurgencies happening all over Canada, I have to hold my breath and hope the LPC win again in 2019. Not out of love but we cannot go back tothe CPC with far right governments in Québec and Ontario. That will just inflame things and we'lll see an immediate repeal of anything and everything progressive (not that there is a bounty of them) left in this country.

I'm getting older, I can't afford sucking things up for 6 years. I think I can now kisss good-bye my nurse and doctor and my insurance on drugs I'm dependant on just to function.

People in my situation are totally fucked. A plague on all those who voted for these pricks. A pox.

On Monday, that non-francophone base still delivered — though reluctantly. In the six ridings with the most non-francophones, the Liberals won an average of 69 per cent of the vote. But preliminary turnout figures show that an average of just 55 per cent of eligible voters actually cast a ballot. That is down nearly 19 points from the turnout in these ridings in 2014.

It was Québec Solidaire that pushed the PQ aside. It won six seats on the island of Montreal, including two gains at the expense of the PQ — one of them the seat of leader Jean-François Lisée, who announced after losing that he would be stepping down. QS emerged as the second choice of Montrealers with 22 per cent of the vote on the island. The PQ managed barely half that.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/grenier-quebec-results-1.4846595

 

As always would love to see QS become agnostic on sovereignty - as CAQ did, to good effect. I suspect it would yield equally large boosts in support over time. But as they haven't, and the NDPQ is a joke, we are in for some bad years. (Admittedly, yes, not as bad as Ontario, but bad nevertheless, with racist dog-whistles to become routine government policy and big oil to remain in power, now more secure than ever.) 

But it's not likely that QS will shift away from sovereignty given the politics of the Montreal left - and despite the wonderful news of 10 seats, less likely with Sol Zanetti and Catherine Dorion now MNAs. They are truly admirable, but they are Option Nationale caucus within QS. Any move away from sovereignty risks splintering QS, and I suspect that both Manon and GND are fairly committed to the social projet of sovereignty too. All the more so as CAQ will boost the Conservatives' chances in Quebec as well as those of Bernier's party federally. 

Taking some solace in the election of Christine Labrie and others to the new 10-member, gender-balanced, regionally-balanced QS caucus. It's more national than the PLQ, confined mostly to Montreal & Laval now, and the PQ, a rump party strong mosly in eastern and northern regions with no Montreal seats. QS with 6 in Montreal, 2 in Quebec and 2 in the regions is the most balanced caucus geographically, in fact. 

lagatta4 wrote:

 social housing? That will provide you a measure of protection that is difficult for the bastards to take away. I live in a housing co-op and friends and my next-door neighbour spent years planning, securing and building a brand-new co-op in Mile-End, a rapidly gentrifying area. It has about 50 units, including 3-bedroom units for families, and units adapted for disabled people (my neighbour is disabled and is having a great deal of difficulty climbing the two flights of stairs to the top storey of our triplex).

 

This is just another thing I have serious worries about. The total defunding of Social housing in Québec. I REALLY don't trust CAQ on any social issue. They are the reason I toyed around with voting Liberal. They are just not anywhere as right wing as CAQ. Not a popular opinion but I think it stands true.

The Journal were so happy about CAQ's victory, you could almost taste the collective ejaculation they shot out.

I expect the absolute worse and I'm trying to deal with it. I was happy about QS and all their gains but it means absolutely nothing with a CAQ majority. I suspect Legault will govern to the right of Lucien Bouchard. What a fucking nightmare.

I am not sure that you can say Quebec is or is not right wing. It has produced some fairly extreme people and movements on the right. It has historically been governed by right wing parties. It has spend over 50 years split only nationalist lines and only with a retreat of that split can we start to see where it stands.

I think the signs are there that Quebec has a significant right-left split that has been shoved aside over the nationalist debate. From what I have seen in Quebec personally, as well as a reading of history, I would argue that Quebec is not one or the other but substantially both. More right than much of the rest of Canada and more left as well. The wings are wider. This means in a FPTP system without a nationalist debate (which ironically might be more stable) the province could rocket back and forth from left to right.

Historically you can see this in Queebc governments in the early 20th century but things are different now. There is no longer a religious hold and that has not been replaced with an entrenched discussion of left-right politics due to the long pre-occupation with nationalist politics that took all the air out of any other debate.

Sorry to be so grim but Quebec could see a period like what the UK saw in the 70s -- a pendulum from one end to the other with each government ripping up whatever the previous government had done.

Also it would be extremely naive to think that the nationalist option in Quebec is anything other than dormant or just below surface. If the right-left politics becomes problematic, then it will come to the surface. I believe that the desire for a political state by the Quebec nation is not going to melt away as some may think. It is a dream that might skip a generation but wil come back fueled by enthusiasm and idealism.

Ironically, Quebec might even eventually find itself wanting that mushy middle that here we all deride in order to stop the lurching.

In short I disagree -- there is no philosophical consensus on left-right politics in Quebec. It is indeed right wing -- at the same time as left.

I have come to detest natinalism of all forms (including Canadian). Nationalism is a horrible thing but it is attractive beyond a tribal sense right into the basis of the core evolution of people. If we are to be civilized we must contain it yet nationalism is considered by many to be a product of evolution instead of the more basic my cave against your cave.

Hey Montreal! This Happened in Your City! (and vid)

https://twitter.com/MuslimIQ/status/1046851320282517506

"Two women deface a Muslim political candidate's ad (QS). Who are these vandals...?"

Absolute worst possible result, now the racists will feel ascendent and these sorts of racial and religious attacks will grow in frequency and severity. Hopefully the Liberals will choose a new leader who is at least somewhat to the left and they'll actually be a somewhat appealing party for the first time in a very long time. I'm still happy with my vote and how my home riding voted. I'm proud that Montreal resisted the CAQ's call towards hatred.

I'm glad that the party of the charter of values is dead, but the CAQ will basically implement the charter by another name anyway, in any case nice to see the PQ fading away.

Ontario Premier Doug the slug was interviewed on CAQ's win and seemed quite excited and enthusiastic after a phone call with Legault, about how much he thought they have in common and how much he was looking forward to working with him on a lot of common issues, etc etc.

Xenophobia is nothing new in Quebec and it hasn't grown that much. It is a far more accurate word than racism. Fear of cultural encroachment and assimilation has always been central to the separatist movement. When it started that was mostly aimed at the Anglophone community or the English, as we were known then because there were hardly any immigrants or minorities and they were limited to Montreal many in enclaves. They were part of the English community back then so immigrants weren't singled out. The French feared assimilation in the same sense as indigenous peoples do. Not just language, culture too. 

Elite Quebecers realized more and more that they need immigrants to keep up Quebec's shrinking population. Low birth rates and the exodus of anglophones and head offices hit Quebec demographics hard. 

So, elite Quebecers started emphasizing language as the only issue and emphasized immigrant assimilation through French schools. That doesn't mean that they convinced most separatists that language was the only or primary issue, nor was social justice although both were part if it. Multiculturalism is viewed with suspicion in most of Quebec (not Montreal, and probably not Quebec City). Youth and the educated in cities are more open to multiculturalism. 

CAQs rise is not due to an increase in xenophobia. Xenophobia is solidly entrenched in the old separatist movement which is why appealing to that was so successful. 

The PLQ have held power for almost 15 years based on being non-separatist. The first non-separatist party to rise since forever has beaten them. It isn't a coincidence. 

Xenophobia and left wing politics are not mutually exclusive. A person can be left wing and still fear the encroachment of  outsiders. People do not fall into the neat categories politicians wish they would. 

Gérald Godin won in Mercier not the hinderland of Quebec. Montreal, especially downtown Montreal, has always been an outlier because this is where all the immigrants have come. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/12/how-did-quebecs-nationalis...

Martin Patriquin

Thu 12 Jul 2018 11.00 BST

Godin’s words, which now form a mural behind Mont Royal metro station, still ring true 35 years later. Nearly 87% of the 50,000 immigrants arriving in Quebec each year settle in Montreal, bolstering the province’s moribund birthrate and curbing its demographic decline. Godin, like PQ premier René Lévesque, was adamant that immigrant communities and institutions would survive and thrive in an independent Quebec.

What’s more, given their ever-increasing demographic and electoral weight, Godin saw recruiting new Québécois to his cause as a matter of necessity. In his vision, these new arrivals would adopt both French and a Quebec first identity – and eventually vote to separate from Canada.

It was a bold vision, and so far it has been a failed one. Despite Godin’s best efforts, the Parti Québécois has consistently failed to convince immigrants to its side. In 1995, about a year after Godin’s death, the PQ held a referendum on Quebec sovereignty. The “No” side won by all of about 54,000 votes. In his concession speech, the PQ premier, Jacques Parizeau, blamed “money and some ethnic votes” for the loss.

It was the beginning of a drift into ethnic nationalism that has continued essentially unabated to this day. In 2013, as part of a re-election gambit, the PQ introduced the “Quebec values charter”, which sought to ban “conspicuous” religious accoutrements – kippas, hijabs, turbans, along with novelty-sized crucifixes –from the bodies of its public sector workers.

.... allophones are 18 times more likely to vote for the Liberal party, which favours remaining in Canada, than the PQ.

Sure QS has attracted visible minorities and immigrants but as a whole they radically favor unity and it is no surprise to me. Many come from countries that are either economically or politicly unstable. Even when that isn't the case most chose to immigrate to Canada and are focused on establishing themselves in the country as it exists. Working towards breaking it up is nonsensical. 

When it began, which is when I am harkening back to, they were separatists. Throughout the world the term used for people who want to secede from a country is separatists. It isn't a dirty word. It isn't insulting. It's just  straightforward. Sovereignist as in sovereignty association,  is some brand new weird relationship cooked up which Quebec does not have the power to impose. The people of Canada already have self-rule, independence, and that includes people in Quebec. Who, by the way, have repeatedly rejected becoming a separate country from Canada. 

The English did not oppress the French in the past century. If anyone was oppressing them it was the Catholic Church and the Quebec government that was elected by the people. French people didn't go into big business as much and big anglophone companies had head offices in Montreal. Sure companies should have operated more in French but since when does big business ever take the harder path? Bosses do what is easiest for themselves. French ones are no better. Quebec City has always been totally French. I do not agree that English people and businesses in Montreal, however oppressive, were the primary oppressors in Quebec. The English weren't luring immigrants to their schools. The French Catholic schools didn't want them. They were "others" just like the English. It would have stayed that way too if the wealthy of Quebec didn't need immigrants in order to stay wealthy. Montreal is a bubble of anglo and allophones so the relationship between communities is quite different. Montreal is also a university city and attracts French people who enjoy the multi-culturalism many of whom come to take their CEGEP in English. 

This one is old, from 2007, but contains interesting statistics. 

 The same poll also revealed a sentiment that may surprise those who think the province always has one foot outside Confederation: 85 per cent of French Quebecers said they were proud to be Canadian, the highest it's been in 20 years.

... Even former Péquiste premier Bernard LANDRY says "being Canadian isn't dishonourable" - high praise from a man who once referred to the Canadian flag as "a piece of red rag."

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/separatism-weakening-i...

 

Being oppressed by the English (or other imperialists ... including the French in Africa) and by the Church are not mutually exclusive - look at Ireland.

Martin Patriquin is a contrarian and the Guardian should have known better than to take him as an authority without a counterpoint.

I don't have time to waste on angryphones; too much work to do resisting the CACA. The above comment was on par with the typical ones about Indigenous peoples in many media outlets. Bubbles, in the largest French-speaking city in the Americas?

Cripes, denying national oppression.

 

Ken Burch wrote:

That rant from the Quebec-hating Martin Patriquin is from 2007.  What possible point is there in linking to it now? 

 

It's actually from July 2018. The subsequent quote from Wikipedia was from 2007.

True, but that is far truer in terms of dominant or oppressor nations (and particularly major imperialist powers) than dominated, oppressed or confiscated peoples. Is Idle no more a nationalist movement? - rather a transnational one - but it is certainly a positive movement that oppresses no one, and has cast off the macho elements of certain earlier Indigenous movements within the Canadian state and elsewhere.

Unionist wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

 

That rant from the Quebec-hating Martin Patriquin is from 2007.  What possible point is there in linking to it now? 

 

It's actually from July 2018. The subsequent quote from Wikipedia was from 2007.

I stand corrected.  It still makes no sense for anyone to be lashing out at sovereigntists when sovereigntism seems to be extinct.  What's the point of STILL being in a paranoid rage about it?(not directed at you, U).  

 

BTW, QS DID just effectively wipe the PQ off the map.  The PQ no longer has any structural integrity as a party.  Its remaining MNA's will likely start defecting either to the CAQ or QS(I'm thinking it will be about a 5-4 split between them on that).  

The point is, there's simply no reason to be fixated on the idea of a ref.  There wasn't going to be a ref no matter who won this.  Anybody looking at the results, even QS had they managed to pull of an upset, would have seen that the votes for sovereignty weren't there among the electorate.

Can you please just let the ref thing go already?  It's a dead horse.

There will likely never be a referedum again in Quebec on separation because the people of  Quebec don't want it. Even if there were a referendum it would lose. That's the point. It isn't a threat it's an albatross.

For decades the PQ has served as the centre left party of Quebec even as they drifted right. Since 95 they have only won by promising not to have referendums and the Liberals have dominated anyway. Now that the PQ is fading  away much of their support has gone to the CAQ. 

I think we are probably facing a 90% chance that the next 2 decades will be the Liberals and CAQ flipping power back and forth. 

The only hope I see for changing that is to have a centre-left party. The NDPQ is the obvious solution. It's either that or accept perpetual CAQ/Liberal governments. 

I know it's unlikely but if we do get PR having a left of centre party that can pull moderates away from the right. It's crazy not to have a centre left party in a country that cleaves to the centre. That's just a recipe for endless right and centre right governments. It doesn't mean that an extreme left party is going to have a better chance of winning. If anything it moves the Overton window to the right. Next to the CAQ the Liberals transform into centre left without altering their policies. 

 

Should have put this in a different thread.

Quote:

Are you really going to keep bringing them up until every party formally promises never to have one?  If so, why?

I propose a compromise:  instead of the parties having to "promise not to have one", what if they "don't promise to have one"?

Really, if it's never going to happen, as you say, that shouldn't be so hard for a party to say, should it?

Or, if so, why?  Are the parties and their supporters the ones who can't let go?

You know nobody's actually ever going to hold one again.

..never say never. i repeat corporate dominated politics is the threat not sovereignty. sovereignty is one tool in a tool box that could be used to emancipate. if qs (democratically) sees it this way then that's the way it is. it doesn't make it wrong just because others disagree. nor just because others think qs would maybe gain power if they dropped it. and it's not that qs is going to try and trick people into it.

..here is one very good reason to want to leave canada who's political leaders agree to this. it seem that the corporate politics are getting more extreme by the minute.

NAFTA 2.0 Enshrines Deregulation for all of North America

Trump’s re-negotiated NAFTA, now called the USMCA, pushes food safety and other forms of deregulation to new extremes, making it more difficult to undo the damage even after Trump leaves office, says Patrick Woodall of Food and Water Watch

 

Ken Burch wrote:

So is there any hope of avoiding a far-right federal government being elected in 2019?

Sadly the answer to that question is no. The business community is going to lean very hard on the Liberals to deliver the same sort of policies that we would expect under the Conservatives. The NDP is collapsing. This will allow Trudeau to play the identity politics game and win over centre-left voters, and show how nice he is to minorities compared to the "scary" Conservatives. These are the foundational blocks necessary for the Liberals to win the next election, possibly with a bigger majority than they have now. This will obscure the reality that the important aspects of policies that effect people's lives will essentially be the same under the Liberals as we can expect under the Conservatives.

Excluding provincial and municipal governments from setting environmental regulations and laws so they could be harmonized at the federal level would be fabulous for business. To achieve it the constitution of Canada would have to be changed with the agreement of the provinces. 

If the Liberals and Conservatives ran on that policy they would lose massively to whomever else was running. There is just no way they could convince Canadians to give up local control over the environment no matter how much their taxes would be reduced. There is no way provincial premiers would bargain away control over the environment. 

If any party runs on complete privatization of health care they would lose. 

Independence maintains 35 to 45% support, I think closer to 35% and shrinking. The majority of immigrants and youth are against forming a new country. The rise of CAQ will only underline to immigrants the need for the protection of federal law. As to youth they aren't afraid of losing their language nor of immigrants. They don't want to live through the economic upheaval of separation from Canada which would take place as they are trying to establish themselves. There are no English bosses forcing them to speak English. They want to learn English for the economic benefits it brings. 

Having policies that go directly against the majority screams "you listen to us" when it is a topic that has been debated to death for a half-century. I want a government that listens to me.

QS has reasons different from the PQ and CAQ. QS does not feed on xenophobia. Were PR in place today they would have 20 seats. They have risen fast having only been established in 2006. Putting that into perspective, CAQ, who is sovereignist but has renounced referendums, was founded in 2011. 

Neither of these parties has risen purely on their strengths. The PQ had lost its purpose. It wasn't progressive anymore and the referendum debate within the party doomed them. CAQ is the PQ  minus referendums. QS is the far-left of the PQ. Independence is probably core to the philosophy of many QS members. I suspect if they were asked they would see the logic behind putting referendums on the backburner just as CAQ has done while remaining committed long term. Recognize the reality that they have to prove themselves at the provincial level and prove that were Quebec independent a CAQ would never again be elected. 

Prime Minister Legault would be worse than Premier Legault. QS is promoting putting the province at risk of that. I'm sure QS would write a great progressive constitution but what would stop the next government from changing it? 

I am told it doesn't matter because QS can't win. Exactly my point. They can't win. 

QS formed in 2006 and has about 16% support. CAQ formed in 2011 and is now leading a majority government. 

QS's success in Quebec is impressive as they are considerably farther left than the NDP but it seems they will win just enough to ensure that power alternates between 2 right wing parties. That doesn't leave me feeling celebratory. QS is trying to sell this as showing momentum, an indicator that they will continue to grow. It is more likely close to their ceiling because of a few unnecessary extreme policies.

I do not want to live the rest of my life under Quebec right wing governments. I need a left wing party in Quebec that can win an election. 

The right listens to the majority so that they can appear to give the people what they want without giving up their right-wing ideology.

By "the right" I mean everyone right of the old NDP including the current NDP if they don't go after neoliberalism in the next platform.