The Quebec election: a 3-way race
Wed, 2007-02-14 15:06
#1
The Quebec election: a 3-way race
Wed, 2007-02-14 15:06
#2
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/politics.shtml?sh_itm=4c2f65cfd8d83bfb6b5ae1b7edf76... Cameron's column is a good place as any to start:[/url]
quote:
The election has a lot riding on it. Boisclair and the PQ are anti-federalist, and want to hold a winning third referendum. A PQ electoral victory would put the national unity issue front and centre in Ottawa, giving Stйphane Dion a considerable advantage (given his public ownership of the unity file) in the next federal election, anticipated as early as this spring.Stephen Harper wants to help Jean Charest, a former federal Conservative leader, claim a second mandate. Harper is prepared to risk alienating some supporters west of the Ottawa river to do it, by giving a public profile to his plan to increase federal fiscal transfers to Quebec. The first step was this week with Harper and Charest doing a photo op to announce, again, that Ottawa was providing money for a green fund that will benefit Quebec.
But Harper also has a second runner in the Quebec election race, Mario Dumont and the Action Dйmocratique (ADQ) which worked hard for Harper in the last election, and helped deliver him his ten Quebec seats. The ADQ holds five seats in the National Assembly and its territory was fertile ground for the Harper Conservatives.
This election - it'll be called next week - is boldly going where no Quebec election has gone before:
1) The PLQ has lost a ton of support since the last election.
2) The PQ is polling pretty much where it was in 2003.
3) The ADQ is a couple of points ahead of where it was in 2003.
4) The other parties - Quйbec Solidaire and the Greens - have gone from nothing to well over 10%.
This is going to be a wild ride. The PLQ is losing support to the ADQ, the PQ and probably the Parti Vert. The PQ is picking up swing votes from the PLQ, and losing them to QS and the PV. The ADQ is leading in the Quebec City region, but still tanking in Montreal.
We may be looking at the first minority Quebec govt in over 130 years.
[ 14 February 2007: Message edited by: Stephen Gordon ]
Wed, 2007-02-14 17:09
#3
I'm going to predict a slim liberal minority with an ADQ official Opposition. Andre Boisclaire will prove a worse campaigner than Paul Martin.
Wed, 2007-02-14 17:56
#4
Yeah, that's the big question. Boisclair hasn't held up well under pressure in the past year or so, so he could well crash and burn. But as Michel C. Auger [url=http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20070214/CPBLOGUES07/70213202/-1/]note..., expectations about him are now so low, that a decent performance during the debate could give him a big boost. I personally lean towards the crash-and-burn scenario, but it's not at all a foregone conclusion.
Wed, 2007-02-14 18:29
#5
Looking back on my analogy to Paul Martin, I'm beginning to think Stockwell Day might be a better analogue. Paul Martin came off as uninterested and desperate, Stockwell Day came off as disconnected. I'm not sure if he'll learn - poor judgment is poor judgment. Paul Martin was a bad politician for eighteen months in a row, as was Stockwell Day. You might be tempted to believe he'll be more scripted during a campaign, but a campaign involves a lot of high-pressure 12 hour days and answering random questions off the top of the candidates head. That he argued for removing the cross from the Quebec National Assembly shows how clued out he is in terms of instincts.
What I'm wondering, is whether or not Quebec Solidaire succeeds in becoming a real party. I don't think the greens will though.
[ 14 February 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]
Wed, 2007-02-14 23:35
#6
Political meltdown scale:
Martin govt.
.
. < -------- Boisclair
Rae govt.
.
Day opposition
.
.
.
(Glen) Clark govt.
.
The Progressive Conservatives
BC SoCreds
Thu, 2007-02-15 08:39
#7
Can we please stop referring to the premier of Quebec as the "Prime Minister" of the province? Such a use is simply a lazy translation from the French, and only feeds pseudo-separatist prejudices. It's bad enough that English media refer to the provincial parliament as the "National Assembly". Whose nation would that be?
Thu, 2007-02-15 08:48
#8
quote:
Originally posted by toddsschneider:
[b]Can we please stop referring to the premier of Quebec as the "Prime Minister" of the province? Such a use is simply a lazy translation from the French, and only feeds pseudo-separatist prejudices. [/b]
Actually, It was only in the last 30 years or so that the title Premier of Ontario was changed from Prime Minister of Ontario.
The use of Prime Minister has nothing to do with seperation or lazy translation. It is factually correct.
If Bill Davis had not thought that to change the title in Ontario then it would still be in play today.
Thu, 2007-02-15 08:50
#9
Boom Boom
What surprises me no end is Harper making reference to "Canada and Quebec" in his speeches. Quebec is still part of Canada.
Thu, 2007-02-15 08:52
#10
A provincial premier truly is the "prime minister" of the cabinet of the province. We still have "first ministers conferences". The term is accurate, and not really a problem.
Thu, 2007-02-15 08:56
#11
quote:
Originally posted by johnpauljones:
[b]Actually, It was only in the last 30 years or so that the title Premier of Ontario was changed from Prime Minister of Ontario.[/b]
Although I agree with the main point you made, the use of "Premier" is far older than that!
[url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,758206-2,00.html]TIME magazine, Sept. 20, 1937[/url]
See the reference to "Premier Hepburn" of Ontario. I'm sure some more youthful researchers will find older references than that.
Thu, 2007-02-15 09:00
#12
You are correct with the reference to the media Unionist but the title on the door to the suite of offices had the following title until Bill Davis changed it.
Prime Minister of Ontario.
Thu, 2007-02-15 09:04
#13
quote:
Originally posted by johnpauljones:
[b]You are correct with the reference to the media Unionist but the title on the door to the suite of offices had the following title until Bill Davis changed it.Prime Minister of Ontario.[/b]
[img]tongue.gif" border="0[/img] Thanks for the info. The guards would never let me near enough that office to check for myself.
ETA: I found a reference from [url=http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/05/metislands.shtml]November 21, 1881[/url], in the testimony of R. Gerrie before a Commission of Inquiry in Manitoba:
[quote]Norquay had answered that he should go out and buy, and he would see that the purchases were put through. “He was the Premier, and it was the law, he said, that [they] should pass.” When Gerrie was asked during the commission hearings if he were enlisting the whole government in his enterprise he replied, “Of course.” [40]
[ 15 February 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]
Thu, 2007-02-15 09:06
#14
really just go to second floor of leg [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]
now says office of premier of Ontario
Thu, 2007-02-15 16:47
#15
[url=http://democraticspace.com/blog]Greg Morrow[/url] has updated his [url=http://democraticspace.com/blog/2007/02/quebec-election-update-no-7/]seat projections:[/url]
PQ: 62
PLQ: 51
ADQ: 12
63 is a majority. He uses a 5-poll rolling average, so did a quick run-through using the most recent 2 Lйger polls, which has the PLQ with a solid lead, and the ADQ above 20%. This would shake loose a few marginal PQ seats in the projection, and I got something like
PQ: 55
PLQ: 54
ADQ: 16
So small swings at the provincial levels are going to make a big difference for seat counts.
Thu, 2007-02-15 16:51
#16
You guys and your double entendre thread titles.
I expected something about a sex scandle.
Thu, 2007-02-15 17:05
#17
Meh - unless it involved Bonhomme Carnaval, Youppi and Baptiste X (the Royal 22 Regiment's [url=http://www.museocapitale.qc.ca/photos/citad3.jpg]mascot[/url]), it wouldn't rate anything more than a wire story on page 47 on the [i]Journal de Montrйal[/i]. On a slow news day, that is.
![http://www.museocapitale.qc.ca/photos/citad3.jpg]mascot[/url]](http://www.museocapitale.qc.ca/photos/citad3.jpg]mascot[/url]){kind=link}
[ 15 February 2007: Message edited by: Stephen Gordon ]
Thu, 2007-02-15 19:18
#18
quote:
Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:
[b]You guys and your double entendre thread titles.I expected something about a sex scandle.[/b]
You know, alot of three-ways are just two guys going at it with the third guy kind of watching awkwardly trying to poke his way in.
Thu, 2007-02-15 23:09
#19
I really hope we don't see a minority government in Quebec as it will virtually guarantee the racist ADQ holding the balance of power.
A year ago, I would have bet my house on a PQ majority. Thanks to Boisclair we now have this nightmare scenario.
Fri, 2007-05-04 16:57
#20
quote:
Originally posted by johnpauljones:
[b]Actually, It was only in the last 30 years or so that the title Premier of Ontario was changed from Prime Minister of Ontario.
The use of Prime Minister has nothing to do with seperation [sic] or lazy translation. It is factually correct.
If Bill Davis had not thought that to change the title in Ontario then it would still be in play today.[/b]
Bill Davis was not alone. Current usage has all the "first ministers" of all the provinces, called premiers.
From Wikipedia:
'"Premier" is also the title of the heads of government in sub-national entities, such as the provinces and territories of Canada ... In some of these cases, the formal title remains "Prime Minister" but "Premier" is used to avoid confusion with the national leader. In these cases, care should be taken not to confuse the title of "premier" with "prime minister". In these countries, terms such as "Federal Premier" or "National Premier" were sometimes used to refer to prime ministers, although these are now obsolete. In Canadian French, provincial leaders are known as "premiers ministres", which translated literally means "first minister". A loose translation is "prime minister".'
To call the premier of Quebec the "prime minister" of the province, is out of date ... at best.