NDP Ex-MPs to rock Couillard's world?

413 posts / 0 new
Last post
Pondering

MegB wrote:
Pondering, for the sake of not derailing the thread I'm going to ask you to stop responding to Lagatta's posts, as she has clearly indicated that she does not want any further contact with you.

Lagatta derailed the thread when she chose to attack me personally in post 227. 

I assume that were I to disobey I would be banned so do we have the same rule for Lagatta? If she responds to one of my posts she gets banned?

I would appreciate it if you would confirm that this is a two way street.

As an aside for the record my relatives do not work for the oil industry or any other particularly evil industry so I don't know why Lagatta accuses them of being ecocidal or me of defending them. I wasn't aware they needed defending.

I have no idea what connection that has to this thread. Lagatta wanted to get into it.

MegB

You know Pondering, I'd be more sympathetic if you weren't so constantly at the centre of so many squabbles here at babble. Lagatta has been clear that she isn't going to engage you. I strongly suggest you do the same.

Unionist

MegB wrote:

Mobo2000 wrote:

Meg:   Just to clarify, if a babbler blocks another babbler, does that mean they no longer see the blocked babbler's posts, past or future?  

Actually, as far as I know babblers can only block private messages from other babblers. When I block a babbler it disables their ability to post. If there's a way for one babbler to block another, it's a new feature that I don't see.

Our old friend Fidel was quite the computer whiz, and he wrote code which worked extremely well at blocking all posts from individual babblers. I tested it, but never used it on a consistent basis. And I'm not sure if it will work with the most recent "up"grade of babble. Not being a skilled masochist, I've always been pretty good at ignoring posts and posters that are more about provoking people than provoking thoughtful reflection.

If anyone wants me to dig up and share Fidel's old code, send me a PM.

Pondering

MegB wrote:

You know Pondering, I'd be more sympathetic if you weren't so constantly at the centre of so many squabbles here at babble. Lagatta has been clear that she isn't going to engage you. I strongly suggest you do the same.

I don't need you to be sympathetic just fair. I supported Trudeau for 2015 and I'm against prostitution. That put targets on my back.

Just because Lagatta is planning to ignore my posts for now doesn't mean she won't change her mind.

You are telling me I cannot respond to her posts. I just want the rule to go both ways.

That doesn't seem like an unreasonable request.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

So...your intent is to keep trying to goad lagatta4 into further verbal battles?

Your decision is to refuse to respect lagatta4's wishes and to refuse to leave her be?

Btw, Pondering, you do not have targets painted on you.  No one here is persecuting you.  No one is trying to silence your presentation of your views on the issues of the day.

If you receive strong, at times harsh responses, it's because you take a harsh, confrontational, at times condescending and at times downright arrogant tone towards those you trade posts with here-you refuse to let any discussion come to an end, you belabor points for what sometimes sounds like the SAKE of belaboring points, and on some subjects(especially Quebec sovereignty)you appear to be willing to settle for nothing short of complete recantation of the position you oppose, even if its a position(SUCH as Quebec sovereignty)that is clearly going to be a dead letter for decades to come and on which no one on this board has the authority to speak for whichever organizations you are demanding recantation FROM.

You also have the habit of endlessly repeating straw(persons?) such as the canard that no one here other than you, and possibly no one else on the entire North American left,  is interested in discussing "economic management"-which is a bizarre statement in the Occupy/Bernie Sanders/Quebec student revolt era in which economic issues have been acknowledged as vital by all of us.   Instead of acknowledging that it's simply a case of other people on the Left holding to the belief that other issues, in addition to economic management, are of importance, you imply that anyone who centers or even mentions any other issues is automatically denying that economic management matters.

You would get a far less adversarial reaction from the others on this board, in my view, if you eased back on the "I get it and none of the rest of you" do tone in your posts.  You may well "get it"-but you are never the only one here who "gets it" and it's entirely possible to "get it" without being in absolute and unquestioning agreement with every single component of your personal economic/political analysis.

It's not that you voted Liberal in 2015, or that you're a Quebec federalist, OR that you're "against prostitution"(btw, I'm not sure anybody here is actually in FAVOR of prostitution-it's simply that some have differing views than you as to how to address prostitution as a personal, social, and economic phenomenon).   It's that you tend to present your view on any issue, in a way nobody else here ever quite does, as the ONLY valid view.   

Do you understand what I'm saying here?

 

Pondering

Ken Burch wrote:
 So...your intent is to keep trying to goad lagatta4 into further verbal battles?

No. I am not addressing Lagatta and I don't intend to.  I just don't want a double standard in which Lagatta can change her mind but I can't.

I went back on this thread. It's not very deep. The only thing I said to Lagatta was to ask her if she really believed that QS could lose the three seats they have due to the NDPQ.  I was not rude. I did not needle her. I did not belabour a point. It was a sincere question which was ignored.

I challenge you or Meg to point to the post(s) that invited Lagatta's personal attack. It's unfair to put it down to my style or whatever when the evidence is right in front of your eyes. We haven't had any other recent discussions so there is nothing in any other threads that could be considered an agravating factor.

My comments on economic management were specifically because when I mentioned it you accused me of being a Blairite or something to that end. You mentally edited what I said to add the word "sound" then expanded on what that means in activist speak.  Had you not defined "economic management" as Blairite I wouldn't have felt the need to defend "economic management" as central to a left wing platform. 

Many posters here are dogmatic, insistent on their own views, arrogant, etc. It doesn't justify personal attacks.

If you look in the Sex Worker Forum you will find posters who are in favor of sex work. The point is my views on a couple of very hot topics are counter to the grand majority of posters. They are issues people feel strongly about and it tends to result in personal attacks or both deliberate and accidental erroneous paraphrasing that misrepresent my views.

You're a prime example with your assumption that I was promoting Blairite economics.

Pondering

To get back on topic you said this Ken:

...even if its a position(SUCH as Quebec sovereignty)that is clearly going to be a dead letter for decades to come ...

Sovereignty is not a dead letter in Quebec as an electoral issue. Peladeau's fist bump lost him the election. The topic came up in the media due to the merger of Quebec Solidaire and Option Nationale. It also came up in Legault's end of year interview mere days ago.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/francois-legault-and-the-c...

The PQ is polling a distant third and has set aside the promise of a quick sovereignty vote. "At each and every election, the ballot question ends up being on the sovereignty of Quebec," Mr. Legault says. "For us, it's clear. Our project is within Canada. This will be the first election in years that the real issue will be a worn-out, corrupt government, not the sovereignty of Quebec."

Not because the topic of sovereignty is dead, but because the two leading parties are non-sovereignist. The PQ is dying because it's sovereignist. The QS isn't but they aren't growing either. I have no idea if it's the sovereignist issue.

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/as-quebec-enters-election-year-pq-ma...

The Parti Québécois is in deep trouble heading toward the Oct. 1 vote, shunned by younger voters and a distant third in opinion polls....

The PQ “is becoming a little bit the party of a generation and a party of the (outlying) regions,” said Christian Bourque, executive vice president of the polling firm Léger Marketing. He sees no clear escape for the PQ from its steady decline in public support....

A Léger poll published Dec. 2 ... put the Coalition at 36 per cent, the Liberals at 32 per cent, the PQ at 19 per cent and the left-wing Québec Solidaire at 11 per cent....

Bourque said that what remains of PQ support is concentrated outside major cities and among those aged 55 and over, leaving a shaky sovereigntist edifice.

“Sovereignty is not dead, but it is certainly being marginalized,” he said. “It is a movement that is aging quickly.”

He identifies three pillars that historically supported the push for independence, and says they have crumbled for the younger generation.

“Being dominated by ‘the English’ is not relevant. They have never known that era of Quebec,” he said. Similarly, with a National Assembly dominated by francophone Quebecers, the complaint that the levers of power are in the hands of others no longer applies.

“And the third one is recognizing yourself in a linguistic/ethnic brand of nationalism, and that doesn’t resonate anymore in the culturally diverse Quebec we live in today,” he said.

Those three pillars are defined by Christian Bourque, executive vice president of the polling firm Léger Marketing not by me.

CAQ 36%, Liberals 32%, PQ 19%, QS 11%.

I don't expect QS or the PQ to renounce sovereignty which is why I expect both will remain stagnant and we are facing a contest between horrible and OMG it could be worse! (Liberals and CAQ). It's like Clinton and Trump.

Yes, I am pissed of and frustrated about it. Come next October, if we are LUCKY, the Liberals will keep power.

I agree with Alan. It`s frustrating that the NDPQ didn`t start up sooner because maybe they would be in first place instead of CAQ as the non-sovereignist alternative.

Quebec has historically been far more left-wing than is suggested by our two leading right-wing parties. You have to at least consider the possibility that the reason two right wing parties are in the lead is because they are the only non-sovereignist options.

QS sovereignists are not motivated by the 3 pillars as described by Bourque but most sovereignists are. Legault is appealing directly to that in his vow to reduce immigration and have stricter rules around religious wear while declaring his love for Canada. This is the man in first place in Quebec. If he wins it would be catastrophic for many people especially the most vulnerable.

I agree that sovereignty is a lost cause for the foreseeable future. Electorally being bound to a lost cause leads to losing. The NDPQ is not bound to a lost cause.

JKR

Pondering wrote:

I agree with Alan. It`s frustrating that the NDPQ didn`t start up sooner because maybe they would be in first place instead of CAQ as the non-sovereignist alternative.

From way out here in Vancouver it seems perplexing that the NDPQ is being established when QS is finally polling in the mid-teens, especially considering that just a few months ago QS were almost hitting 20% in a four-way race. With all these parties running, a party could win a phoney FPTP "majority" government with 1/3 or even less of the vote. Would that kind of phoney "majority" government be considered legitimate? Are any of the political parties supporting electoral reform?

Mobo2000

Unionist:   I think that Fidel code is what I was thinking of -- I had thought it was just a feature of the board, but apparently not.   And good advice -- I try not to be a skilled masochist either, but sometimes I slip up.  Perhaps a case in point below.

Ken:    To my eye your post 256 is a timely demonstration of Pondering's point that she has a target on her back.   Obviously something in her tone or posting style grates or comes off as arrogant to you, but you don't provide examples or postive suggestions, and your post doesn't respond to the issue based stuff she actually says.    This is not my fight and I don't want to argue it with you.   But I do want to say here that whle I may not agree with Pondering on several issues, in my opinion Pondering's style is not arrogant.   I read it as attempting to be careful and precise, and I appreciate her voice here.  

Pondering

JKR wrote:

Pondering wrote:

I agree with Alan. It`s frustrating that the NDPQ didn`t start up sooner because maybe they would be in first place instead of CAQ as the non-sovereignist alternative.

From way out here in Vancouver it seems perplexing that the NDPQ is being established when QS is finally polling in the mid-teens, especially considering that just a few months ago QS were almost hitting 20% in a four-way race. With all these parties running, a party could win a phoney FPTP "majority" government with 1/3 or even less of the vote. Would that kind of phoney "majority" government be considered legitimate? Are any of the political parties supporting electoral reform?

Last I saw they were at 11% not the mid teens. I'm pretty sure they got a bump from Nadeau-Dubois (very popular student activist) but they have no leader. They have two spokespeople, one male one female, and an administrative leader, but they don't have anyone to take the position of Premier as far as I know, or maybe that would be the administrative leader but he wouldn't be a spokesperson. I think their ceiling is quite low because they are just too unconventional and electorally on the wrong side of sovereignism and generally farther left than Quebecers are willing to go. It's one thing to win in Montreal's coolest neighbourhoods and another to win provincially.

If either CAQ or the Liberals win a phoney majority they will be considered as legitimate as any other Quebec government. My guess is most Quebecers would be relieved they won't have to face an election for another 4 years.

QS probably supports PR, I'm not sure, but it is even less of an issue than in the rest of Canada. Quebec's big issues are the economy and maintaining Quebec culture.

I'm very curious to watch PR play out in BC. I'm going from the assumption that it will pass.

JKR

What are the NDPQ's polling numbers like?

NorthReport

 

 

 

Leger appears to be a right-wing organization. Perhaps the next CROP poll might be more helpful in ascertaining QS support, but until pollsters start asking about NDPQ support, I doubt they are going to be much of a factor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_general_election,_2018

 

pietro_bcc

JKR wrote:

What are the NDPQ's polling numbers like?

They've yet to be included in a poll.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

pietro_bcc wrote:

JKR wrote:

What are the NDPQ's polling numbers like?

They've yet to be included in a poll.

Any theories on why that is?  The pollsters all know the NPD-Q will be standing.

pietro_bcc

Ken Burch wrote:

pietro_bcc wrote:

JKR wrote:

What are the NDPQ's polling numbers like?

They've yet to be included in a poll.

Any theories on why that is?  The pollsters all know the NPD-Q will be standing.

I don't know their motivation for doing so, but the Conservative Party of Quebec faces the same challenge, when they're included in the polls they tend to get 2-3% (not great, but certainly deserving of placement in a poll.) Yet they usually aren't included so they're just lumped in with "others". Personally I think they should include all the minor parties that receive a marginal amount of media attention (Green, NPDQ and Conservative.) If they receive at least 1% of support include their results in the poll, if not include them in "others".

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
If they receive at least 1% of support include their results in the poll, if not include them in "others".

Are you talking about reportage (i.e. any option that receives a negligible amount of responses can go in the "other" category) or the wording of the poll itself (i.e. any option that historically receives a negative amount of responses need not be listed as an option, but instead can a presumed member of "other")?

NorthReport

Which pollsters want to give the NDPQ a boost? Not many I would hazard, a guess so of course they will not be asking about the NDPQ in their polling anytime soon. After all it is not like the right-wing Green party which corporate media supports.

Unionist

JKR wrote:

From way out here in Vancouver it seems perplexing that the NDPQ is being established when QS is finally polling in the mid-teens, especially considering that just a few months ago QS were almost hitting 20% in a four-way race. With all these parties running, a party could win a phoney FPTP "majority" government with 1/3 or even less of the vote. Would that kind of phoney "majority" government be considered legitimate? Are any of the political parties supporting electoral reform?

There is no reason for another left party in Québec. QS's ambiguity and unclarity on the independence issue doesn't help. They should simply declare (as they have) that they will convene a constituent assembly to consider how Quebecers should express their sovereignty - and leave it at that. They should welcome support irrespective of individuals' inclinations for or against secession, federation, etc. The people can and will decide that question. Social and economic change are more urgent and more uniting.

And yes, QS supports proportional representation - see for example pages 10-11 of their program.

Pondering

There was no reason for another right wing party in Quebec either yet the CAQ was born and is in first place. CAQ has 36% support, the Liberals 32%, together that is 68% of the vote. The PQ which has become ever more right wing has another 19%. That is 87% of the vote going to the right. QS has 11%. Even under PR the right would have a massive majority.

Is that because 87% of Quebecers are that right wing? I admit I don't know. I'm not a pollster, but I don't think so. I think Quebecers are more attuned to thinking about collective well-being and the preservation of community. 

It's possible we only "need" one left wing party but if so the evidence leans to replacing QS because however wonderful the party is they have failed to generate broadbased support. Under FPTP or PR they have no power in the 3 seats they occupy. They don't seem to have a plan to turn things around. I don't want them to disband. They represent an important constituency. I have no problem if they win their seats democractically. 

I was going to say that they aren't big enough to demand left loyalty but it doesn't matter how large or small a party is. There should be as many parties as it takes for people to feel represented. If there is no need for the NDPQ then they will fail miserably and disappear to wherever they came from. If the NDPQ garner a lot of votes QS will have to accept that they failed to represent that portion of the left. 

The QS representatives are all highly respected in their communities and beyond. I don't know if for a fact but I think they would be very difficult to unseat. 

Denying voters a choice is forcing a weird form of strategic voting on them. My personal reaction to that would be to vote for the other guy or abstain. I'm not stupid. I will see who is doing how well in the run up to election day. I can decide to vote strategically myself if I feel a split vote may lead to a PQ win. 

The more parties there are taking a piece of the pie the more likely a minority government will be elected. 

So far the NDPQ isn't even on the polling charts. If they get on the charts maybe QS should consider merging with them instead of or along with ON. That would give them a chance to put the sovereignty issue aside. 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

When there are "too many" left-of-centre options on the ballot:  "This is only going to split the Left vote and guarantee Conservative governments for the next 20 years!"

When there's only one left-of-centre option on the ballot:  "They just expect me to hold my nose and vote for them just because they're better than Conservative governments for the next 20 years?

Pondering

I got a thank you note from QS with hearts in the title!

I have to say they are much less annoying in their pleas for cash than the NDP.

Ami-e solidaire,

Nous voulions prendre un petit moment pour vous remercier. Grâce à votre don à Québec solidaire en 2017, nous avons pu atteindre nos objectifs de financement pour l’année. Ce n’est pas rien : nous avons réussi à amasser 316 000 $ en contributions. Sans vous, nous n’aurions pu y arriver!

Ce fut une année charnière pour notre parti et celle qui vient ne sera pas de tout repos. Grâce aux 3557 donateurs et donatrices, nous serons bien préparés pour affronter la période préélectorale au retour des vacances.

Prenez le temps de bien recharger vos batteries.

Merci encore!!! 
 

Sylvain
Responsable du financement

Les électeurs et électrices du Québec peuvent contribuer jusqu'à 100$ par année à un parti politique. Vous pouvez vérifier votre dossier de dons sur le site du DGEQ.

© 2017 Québec solidaire  Voir ce courriel dans une fenêtre de navigation

Vous recevez trop de courriels? Changez vos préférences. Si vous n'êtes plus intéressé-e à Québec solidaire, supprimez votre courriel de cette liste.

I haven't donated to the NDPQ yet so I will have to way and see how they are. 

 

Pondering

Ken Burch wrote:

If you receive strong, at times harsh responses, it's because you take a harsh, confrontational, at times condescending and at times downright arrogant tone towards those you trade posts with here-you refuse to let any discussion come to an end, you belabor points for what sometimes sounds like the SAKE of belaboring points, and on some subjects(especially Quebec sovereignty)you appear to be willing to settle for nothing short of complete recantation of the position you oppose.....

It is impossible to discuss topics intelligently if people deny reality. The right calls it alternative facts. I have no patience with it. I don't know if people are being deliberately obtuse or self-delusionary but not all opinions are equal. There is nothing wrong with basing an opinion on ideals or ethics rather than facts but those too can be presented as supporting arguments.  I have admitted to being wrong or changed my opinion when presented with logical arguments or information I didn't previously have.  But no, I don't capitulate to unsubstanciated declarations. It's true that nobody owes me an explanation of their position or why they disagree with me but it's not a political discussion if they don't. It's just a pronouncement that has no chance of persuading me or anyone else reading.

You have stated that the sovereignty movement is a non-issue or not a threat but it is a threat because it is standing in the way of Quebec becoming more progressive.  While Quebec is in no danger of separating political parties insisting on pushing sovereignty as a number one issue lose enormous support because the grand majority of Quebecers don't want to even hear the word. It isn't that they aren't in favor of sovereignty, or against sovereignty, just raising the topic  at all turns people off.  It closes ears probably even of supporters who don't want to be reminded of the failure. It's true I don't have actual proof that Quebecers are voting for CAQ and the Liberals because they aren't sovereignist and they are focused on the economy. But there is certainly a mountain of evidence that points in that direction. For example, why would the PQ work so hard to reassure voters that there will be no referendum if it wasn't turning off voters?

Unionist has said there is no need for another party on the left in Quebec. I have no idea what he bases that opinion on.  I'm presenting an argument that there is enormous need for a party on the left in Quebec.  That is what this thread is supposed to be about isn't it?

Others here are strongly opposed to an NDPQ.  No one seems to have a reason they are willing to share other than it's disloyal to QS or a threat to QS.

I'm presenting factual information to support my argument(s).

  1. QS is about as democratic as the NDP.
  2. QS, in joining with ON, is doubling down on sovereignty.  It is the first issue they will address if elected.
  3. QS is a group of movements banded together who are undermined by the merger with Option Nationale.
  4. Sovereignty as a topic is a huge turn-off for most Quebec voters.
  5.  Quebec Liberals are like BC Liberals, CAQ is even farther right and racist and they are in the lead.

This is from Canadian Dimension and I only saw it today. 1, 2 and 3 above are supported by this article from Canadian Dimensions. I don't think 4 and 5 should be controversial claims.  These are the facts. QS has virtually zero chance of winning the next election or the one after that or the one after that. Even if the NDPQ is a long shot at least it's a shot. The alternative is right wing governments for the foreseeable future.

Pasted from <https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/quebec-solidaire-clarifies-its-support-for-independence>

Many QS militants, in particular, deplored the fact that they had been given no opportunity to experience dialogue or collaboration with ON as a prelude to a unification of the parties.

...

Some members protested their inability to amend the agreement with its 18 different provisions, as well as the party leadership’s insistence that it could be approved by a simple majority of votes at the congress even though it entailed some changes in the party statutes (which require a two-thirds majority for amendment).…..

In a pre-congress interview, QS spokesman Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois said the recent events in Catalonia had “opened up our thinking about the need for a clear and positive approach” to Quebec independence. They reveal, he said,

the profoundly revolutionary nature of the independence process, which entails a rupture with the dominant political system…. Catalonia is a good reminder that independence cannot be achieved only from above, in the salons of Outremont, with experienced constitutional scholars. The political forces that are going to lead the Quebec people toward independence are going to have to have the potential to generate a powerful social mobilization. ….

This thinking was reflected in the congress debate on fusion with ON, and in particular in the new centrality of the fight for Quebec independence that fusion entails….

  • ON is to continue to exist within QS as a “collective” with special rights not allowed to the other half-dozen or so collectives in the party. Under the QS statutes, members promoting specific orientations for the party (for example, secularism, ecosocialism, degrowth, animal rights, etc.) are allowed to organize within the party as a recognized collective, provided they comprise at least 10 members and abide by the party’s “fundamental values.” They are not given representation in leading bodies of the party, however.Under the agreement, ON will constitute a distinct collective with its own funding and representation in leading bodies, and at least three ON members will be nominated in 2018 as candidates in electoral constituencies deemed “winnable” for QS.
  • ON leader Sol Zanetti will be presented as the leading party spokesman on “issues surrounding the independence of Quebec.”
  • The ON collective will organize a “university” on independence in the spring of 2018, with the right to organize this event each year, provided it is self-financed.
  • The unified party will republish an ON publication, the Livre qui fait dire oui [the “Book that leads to a yes”], although the “sovereign” Quebec it advocates is totally neoliberal in its economic program and conflicts in major respects with the QS program.
  • A party congress after the 2018 election will review the QS program with a view to “aligning it with the ON program” – the program of a party that has always said the independence it proposes is “neither left nor right” in its political content.

As might be expected, the sudden announcement of this ON-QS agreement aroused considerable controversy in the ranks of both parties. Many QS militants, in particular, deplored the fact that they had been given no opportunity to experience dialogue or collaboration with ON as a prelude to a unification of the parties. Instead, some noted, ON had run a candidate against QS in a recent by-election in Quebec City, and (unlike the PQ, which desisted) had even run against Nadeau-Dubois when he was the QS candidate to succeed party leader Françoise David in Gouin riding last spring.

Some members protested their inability to amend the agreement with its 18 different provisions, as well as the party leadership’s insistence that it could be approved by a simple majority of votes at the congress even though it entailed some changes in the party statutes (which require a two-thirds majority for amendment).

But the substantive criticism, the subject of the most controversy in QS, was the agreement’s inclusion of amendments to the party’s program providing that a Québec solidaire government would act from the outset as the government of an independent Quebec, and its proposed Constituent Assembly would develop a draft constitution of an independent Quebec that would then be submitted to a popular referendum for approval.

Furthermore, some of the platform proposals left for later adoption by the party executive omit important parts of the party’s adopted program. A blatant example is in the platform draft on the environment and climate change, which omits the QS program’s target of a 67% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030 needed to comply with the COP 21 Paris accords, as well as the party’s opposition to carbon taxes and carbon markets, and its call for free public transit; Québec solidaire has been unique among political parties in Canada in adopting these demanding targets and demands. Incredibly, a 24-page pamphlet circulated at the QS congress by the Réseau écosocialiste likewise omits these demands, as did a pre-congress article by a Réseau leader attempting to prioritize platform proposals from an ecosocialist perspective.

I am not speaking against social movements here. I think social movements are great. What I'm talking about is electoral politics and who will be running the province after the next election. For the sake of argument lets assume QS will win five seats or less in the next election.  CAQ is in first place with the Liberals a close second. The PQ lags far behind. Pick your poison or please do explain to me why NDPQ is a bad idea.

pietro_bcc

Raphael Fortin won the leadership and I voted for him, despite initially supporting Raymond Cote for being more left wing.

Fortin simply outworked Cote and deserved the win. I received 2 calls from his campaign during the election and none from Cote, Fortin was very active in trying to get people's votes while at least in Montreal Cote was silent and with that degree of effort I couldn't see him gain any headway in the province. Fortin's platform was responsive to what the members wanted and seemed to be effected by the debates, I'm reasonably happy with it and wish him good luck.

I think he has a fine chance.

lombardimax@hot...

I wonder if any federal MPs or NDP people were involved in the contest, as endorsers or volunteers?

 

pietro_bcc

----

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

We thought Couillard was bad?

https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/new-poll-has-caq-forming-majority-government...

We've ain't seen NOTHING yet.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

It's not possible to stop that by voting PLQ-the Liberals are doomed to defeat no matter what, with that poll any recovery for them is impossible.

And if the PLQ did someh0w come back and stay in office, what meaningful differences would there be between them and the CAQ?  Both are xenophobic...both are anti-Muslim...both are totally committed to destroying the social welfare state(there is no such thing as a "progressive" faction of the PLQ or any faction at all that is even close to anti-austerity).

What's the point in even pretending there's a difference between the PLQ and the CAQ?

pietro_bcc

The CAQ are peaking too soon. If I had to guess I'd say that the Liberals will win again, with the CAQ as official opposition and the PQ reduced to a few seats. But its still 8 months away so who knows what will happen between now and then.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Ken Burch wrote:

It's not possible to stop that by voting PLQ-the Liberals are doomed to defeat no matter what, with that poll any recovery for them is impossible.

And if the PLQ did someh0w come back and stay in office, what meaningful differences would there be between them and the CAQ?  Both are xenophobic...both are anti-Muslim...both are totally committed to destroying the social welfare state(there is no such thing as a "progressive" faction of the PLQ or any faction at all that is even close to anti-austerity).

What's the point in even pretending there's a difference between the PLQ and the CAQ?

Frank Legault is a Trump fan. He wants to govern just like him. He's also an unprincipled asshole who is all over te place depending on who he thinks he needs to woo at that moment. He's power hungry. He's a seperatist one day and a federalist the next. He also wants to gut our social safety net as much as he can. At least the PLQ for the most part,left our social safety net alone.He wants to govern the province like a business.

I live in a social housing unit. When Legault doubles my rent as he cuts spending for such things,I'll go back to your misinformed comment.

So you're fucking damned straight there's a difference.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

dp

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

pietro_bcc wrote:

The CAQ are peaking too soon. If I had to guess I'd say that the Liberals will win again, with the CAQ as official opposition and the PQ reduced to a few seats. But its still 8 months away so who knows what will happen between now and then.

Thanks for the shred of hope. You're right,a lot can change in 8 months. I hope.

pietro_bcc

The only pollster that is really showing a clear CAQ majority is Leger (which is generally the best in Quebec), but Mainstreet and the new IPSOS show different results. https://www.ipsos.com/fr-ca/news-polls/la-caq-se-classe-en-tete-des-inte...

As the election gets closer I think the CAQ will fade, at least I hope it will.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

You'd think they'd start including the QNPD in the polls, since they know it will be fighting the next election.

Pondering

pietro_bcc wrote:

The only pollster that is really showing a clear CAQ majority is Leger (which is generally the best in Quebec), but Mainstreet and the new IPSOS show different results. https://www.ipsos.com/fr-ca/news-polls/la-caq-se-classe-en-tete-des-inte...

As the election gets closer I think the CAQ will fade, at least I hope it will.

I'm on the same page. I do think there is a chance for a Liberal revival. People are annoyed with the Liberals right now and none too happy with the PQ. They know they are answering a poll not really voting. This is a good way to punish the Liberals. Make em shake in their boots. I just can't believe Quebecers would vote in the CAQ. Of course I didn't think Trump could become president either so there's that.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

As far as the NDPQ is concerned, we don't really need a pretend leftist party when we have a real one in Quebec Solidaire. 

I must vote for the party most likely to defeat the Mike Harris-style La Meute-pandering neofascist CAQ. I lived in Ontario under Mike Harris, and I suffered because of it. If the PQ or QS become the main contender against the CAQ, I will vote for them. But now it is the Liberals. 

The economy is going well in Quebec. Unemployment is at its lowest rate ever. Massive transit plans are underway, including a high-speed link between Montreal and Quebec. Couillard has also mused about getting thousands of disabled people out of poverty, which I heartily support. You can bet CAQ will cancel those plans.

 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

progressive17 wrote:

As far as the NDPQ is concerned, we don't really need a pretend leftist party when we have a real one in Quebec Solidaire. 

I must vote for the party most likely to defeat the Mike Harris-style La Meute-pandering neofascist CAQ. I lived in Ontario under Mike Harris, and I suffered because of it. If the PQ or QS become the main contender against the CAQ, I will vote for them. But now it is the Liberals. 

The economy is going well in Quebec. Unemployment is at its lowest rate ever. Massive transit plans are underway, including a high-speed link between Montreal and Quebec. Couillard has also mused about getting thousands of disabled people out of poverty, which I heartily support. You can bet CAQ will cancel those plans.

 

Preach it,brother. I'm on the same wave length.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

alan smithee wrote:

progressive17 wrote:

As far as the NDPQ is concerned, we don't really need a pretend leftist party when we have a real one in Quebec Solidaire. 

I must vote for the party most likely to defeat the Mike Harris-style La Meute-pandering neofascist CAQ. I lived in Ontario under Mike Harris, and I suffered because of it. If the PQ or QS become the main contender against the CAQ, I will vote for them. But now it is the Liberals. 

The economy is going well in Quebec. Unemployment is at its lowest rate ever. Massive transit plans are underway, including a high-speed link between Montreal and Quebec. Couillard has also mused about getting thousands of disabled people out of poverty, which I heartily support. You can bet CAQ will cancel those plans.

 

Preach it,brother. I'm on the same wave length.

I wasn't advocating for the NPDQ(I've repeatedly said there's no need for the party and that, at the very least, if it fights the next Quebec election it should have the decency not to contest any of the ridings currently held by QS.  

I was simply observing that, with all the hoopla about the NPDQ coming into existence, you'd think they'd start including it in the polls.

cco

progressive17 wrote:

As far as the NDPQ is concerned, we don't really need a pretend leftist party when we have a real one in Quebec Solidaire. 

I must vote for the party most likely to defeat the Mike Harris-style La Meute-pandering neofascist CAQ. I lived in Ontario under Mike Harris, and I suffered because of it. If the PQ or QS become the main contender against the CAQ, I will vote for them. But now it is the Liberals. 

The economy is going well in Quebec. Unemployment is at its lowest rate ever. Massive transit plans are underway, including a high-speed link between Montreal and Quebec. Couillard has also mused about getting thousands of disabled people out of poverty, which I heartily support. You can bet CAQ will cancel those plans.

 

The bizarre quadrennial self-justification of "progressives" voting for the Harrisite PLQ has begun once again, I see. "We have a left-wing party, there's no need for a new one! And I won't be voting for either one, no matter whether the CAQ stands a chance in my riding!" Complete with wholesale swallowing of Couillard's "economy" propaganda, faith in transit plans announced right before an election that won't be completed until a couple more mandates in the future, if at all, and credit for "musings" about getting people out of poverty that add up to $73/month for 84,000 severely disabled people.

I invite those who are currently musing about how the PLQ's not so bad after all to peruse this handy thread. A Montréaler in 2018 voting PLQ to stop the CAQ is like a Torontonian in 2000 voting PC to stop the Alliance. The parties aren't competing with each other in your riding, they're not particularly distinguishable in ideology or integrity, and they stand at least half a chance of merging before the following election.

All of the supposed "progressive PLQ voters" who have refused to vote PQ or QS all these years because of federalist sentiment now have that option they were waiting on. If you're voting right-wing federalist to stop the other right-wing federalists, it may be time to come to terms with the fact that you're a conservative.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

cco wrote:
progressive17 wrote:

 

All of the supposed "progressive PLQ voters" who have refused to vote PQ or QS all these years because of federalist sentiment now have that option they were waiting on. If you're voting right-wing federalist to stop the other right-wing federalists, it may be time to come to terms with the fact that you're a conservative.

Hyperbole.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

cco wrote:
progressive17 wrote:

As far as the NDPQ is concerned, we don't really need a pretend leftist party when we have a real one in Quebec Solidaire. 

I must vote for the party most likely to defeat the Mike Harris-style La Meute-pandering neofascist CAQ. I lived in Ontario under Mike Harris, and I suffered because of it. If the PQ or QS become the main contender against the CAQ, I will vote for them. But now it is the Liberals. 

The economy is going well in Quebec. Unemployment is at its lowest rate ever. Massive transit plans are underway, including a high-speed link between Montreal and Quebec. Couillard has also mused about getting thousands of disabled people out of poverty, which I heartily support. You can bet CAQ will cancel those plans.

 

The bizarre quadrennial self-justification of "progressives" voting for the Harrisite PLQ has begun once again, I see. "We have a left-wing party, there's no need for a new one! And I won't be voting for either one, no matter whether the CAQ stands a chance in my riding!" Complete with wholesale swallowing of Couillard's "economy" propaganda, faith in transit plans announced right before an election that won't be completed until a couple more mandates in the future, if at all, and credit for "musings" about getting people out of poverty that add up to $73/month for 84,000 severely disabled people.

I invite those who are currently musing about how the PLQ's not so bad after all to peruse this handy thread. A Montréaler in 2018 voting PLQ to stop the CAQ is like a Torontonian in 2000 voting PC to stop the Alliance. The parties aren't competing with each other in your riding, they're not particularly distinguishable in ideology or integrity, and they stand at least half a chance of merging before the following election.

All of the supposed "progressive PLQ voters" who have refused to vote PQ or QS all these years because of federalist sentiment now have that option they were waiting on. If you're voting right-wing federalist to stop the other right-wing federalists, it may be time to come to terms with the fact that you're a conservative.

Are there going to be that many ridings in or near Montreal where the main contest is PLQ vs. CAQ?  I was under the impression that the battle there would be PLQ vs. PQ vs. QS(with CAQ mainly winning seats in Quebec City and "the regions".

lagatta4

The weird thing is that there are some who would normalise leftists voting for bourgeois parties.

Unionist

lagatta4 wrote:

The weird thing is that there are some who would normalise leftists voting for bourgeois parties.

Interesting. For the benefit of all, especially those outside Québec, please indicate which of the following you would characterize as "bourgeois parties". I'm especially interested in your take on the NPDQ, the Green Party, and the PQ:

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Ken Burch wrote:

Are there going to be that many ridings in or near Montreal where the main contest is PLQ vs. CAQ?  I was under the impression that the battle there would be PLQ vs. PQ vs. QS(with CAQ mainly winning seats in Quebec City and "the regions".

Ken,the pecking order is no longer like that. And if you see me and progressive17 talking about voting Liberal is because you do not have a handle on CAQ. This is going to be a race against CAQ and PLQ.

Both me and progressive17 understand that a CAQ government is not an option. Personally,I wouldnt sleep at night knowing that I didnt try something to stop this.

Yes,the PLQ is not my party,I have not voted for them as long as I have been voting but those are the only 2 choices in a horse race,neither of those 2 parties are QS or even the PQ  and polls are suggesting a CAQ majority.  It must not happen.

The NDPQ is not going to magically win a majority or a minority government this year. In fact I predict they will finish well behind QS which is the party 4th in line right now. And,as I hate to say it,they cannot defeat the CAQ and I'm not going to throw my vote away or contribute to splitting the vote.

Sometimes you have to hold your nose and go with what is less dangerous. A centrist PLQ or a far right CAQ, I know my choice.. So I'm doing something I have never done in the hopes that the keys to this province are not handed to Legault.

Call me a conservative,call me pro-establishment,I don't care what you call me. That's not important. Making sure CAQ is defeated is important. VERY important.

Pondering

I have to agree on CAQ. They could do enormous damage. 

I could be wrong but I don't think the QS seats are at risk. I don't believe anyone who votes for QS will vote for the NDPQ. Their platforms will be extremely different. Compared to QS the NDP is right wing. There is no reason for the NDP to refrain from running in any ridings. They are probably more competition for the PQ who has deserted their centre left flank. 

The only level at which strategic voting matters is the riding level.  People who vote and consider strategic voting know that. I really don't see why QS sees the NDPQ as a rival when they are so much farther right than QS and non-sovereignist. The grand majority of non-sovereignists don't vote QS. And now that they have become even more dedicated to sovereignty as a condition to the merger any who did will likely stop. 

The NDPQ could attract disaffected PQ voters some of whom have probably gone CAQ.

As someone mentioned, they aren't even being mentioned in the polls yet in which case there seems little reason to feel so threatened by the existence of the NDPQ. 

pietro_bcc

Ken Burch wrote:

cco wrote:
progressive17 wrote:

As far as the NDPQ is concerned, we don't really need a pretend leftist party when we have a real one in Quebec Solidaire. 

I must vote for the party most likely to defeat the Mike Harris-style La Meute-pandering neofascist CAQ. I lived in Ontario under Mike Harris, and I suffered because of it. If the PQ or QS become the main contender against the CAQ, I will vote for them. But now it is the Liberals. 

The economy is going well in Quebec. Unemployment is at its lowest rate ever. Massive transit plans are underway, including a high-speed link between Montreal and Quebec. Couillard has also mused about getting thousands of disabled people out of poverty, which I heartily support. You can bet CAQ will cancel those plans.

 

The bizarre quadrennial self-justification of "progressives" voting for the Harrisite PLQ has begun once again, I see. "We have a left-wing party, there's no need for a new one! And I won't be voting for either one, no matter whether the CAQ stands a chance in my riding!" Complete with wholesale swallowing of Couillard's "economy" propaganda, faith in transit plans announced right before an election that won't be completed until a couple more mandates in the future, if at all, and credit for "musings" about getting people out of poverty that add up to $73/month for 84,000 severely disabled people.

I invite those who are currently musing about how the PLQ's not so bad after all to peruse this handy thread. A Montréaler in 2018 voting PLQ to stop the CAQ is like a Torontonian in 2000 voting PC to stop the Alliance. The parties aren't competing with each other in your riding, they're not particularly distinguishable in ideology or integrity, and they stand at least half a chance of merging before the following election.

All of the supposed "progressive PLQ voters" who have refused to vote PQ or QS all these years because of federalist sentiment now have that option they were waiting on. If you're voting right-wing federalist to stop the other right-wing federalists, it may be time to come to terms with the fact that you're a conservative.

Are there going to be that many ridings in or near Montreal where the main contest is PLQ vs. CAQ?  I was under the impression that the battle there would be PLQ vs. PQ vs. QS(with CAQ mainly winning seats in Quebec City and "the regions".

According to the polls I've seen the CAQ is 2nd in Montreal so they do have a chance of getting some Montreal seats, Point aux Trembles and Bourget are in play for the CAQ. Also likely the Laval ridings.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

pietro_bcc wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

cco wrote:
progressive17 wrote:

As far as the NDPQ is concerned, we don't really need a pretend leftist party when we have a real one in Quebec Solidaire. 

I must vote for the party most likely to defeat the Mike Harris-style La Meute-pandering neofascist CAQ. I lived in Ontario under Mike Harris, and I suffered because of it. If the PQ or QS become the main contender against the CAQ, I will vote for them. But now it is the Liberals. 

The economy is going well in Quebec. Unemployment is at its lowest rate ever. Massive transit plans are underway, including a high-speed link between Montreal and Quebec. Couillard has also mused about getting thousands of disabled people out of poverty, which I heartily support. You can bet CAQ will cancel those plans.

 

The bizarre quadrennial self-justification of "progressives" voting for the Harrisite PLQ has begun once again, I see. "We have a left-wing party, there's no need for a new one! And I won't be voting for either one, no matter whether the CAQ stands a chance in my riding!" Complete with wholesale swallowing of Couillard's "economy" propaganda, faith in transit plans announced right before an election that won't be completed until a couple more mandates in the future, if at all, and credit for "musings" about getting people out of poverty that add up to $73/month for 84,000 severely disabled people.

I invite those who are currently musing about how the PLQ's not so bad after all to peruse this handy thread. A Montréaler in 2018 voting PLQ to stop the CAQ is like a Torontonian in 2000 voting PC to stop the Alliance. The parties aren't competing with each other in your riding, they're not particularly distinguishable in ideology or integrity, and they stand at least half a chance of merging before the following election.

All of the supposed "progressive PLQ voters" who have refused to vote PQ or QS all these years because of federalist sentiment now have that option they were waiting on. If you're voting right-wing federalist to stop the other right-wing federalists, it may be time to come to terms with the fact that you're a conservative.

Are there going to be that many ridings in or near Montreal where the main contest is PLQ vs. CAQ?  I was under the impression that the battle there would be PLQ vs. PQ vs. QS(with CAQ mainly winning seats in Quebec City and "the regions".

According to the polls I've seen the CAQ is 2nd in Montreal so they do have a chance of getting some Montreal seats, Point aux Trembles and Bourget are in play for the CAQ. Also likely the Laval ridings.

Thanks for the update on that.  You'd think Montreal would be the one place the CAQ could never make a breakthrough.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

pietro_bcc wrote:

 A Montréaler in 2018 voting PLQ to stop the CAQ is like a Torontonian in 2000 voting PC to stop the Alliance. The parties aren't competing with each other in your riding, they're not particularly distinguishable in ideology or integrity, and they stand at least half a chance of merging before the following election.

 

Oh please. There is not much of a semblance to Mike Harris' PC  party to the PLQ.

I have a disability. When the Liberals first won my cheque was cut a whole whopping $24 a month. Since then my cheque has increased over $50 from where it originally was years ago.

I don't remember having to live on PB & Jam sandwiches.

A false equivalency. And you would have to be a fool to think CAQ is no worse. They will be a REAL right of right of centre party. If you think austerity was bad under PLQ rule,well hold on to your hat,you AND I have not seen anything yet.

Unlike the PLQ a CAQ government is going to attack me,everyone in the same situation as me and those who have it worse than me. This whole laissez-faire attitude about CAQ makes me want to laugh and vomit at the same time.

It's not like QS or the PQ stand any chance this election. What am I supposed to do? Are you going to pay my rent when Legault puts a chainsaw to social services? Are you going to find me another doctor or nurse or pay for my meds?

The REAL Harrisite government is the one coming up around the bend. The fucking CAQ and their Donald Trump loving leader.

So spare me with your condemnation and ridicule. Maybe YOU should pull your head out of your ass. 

lagatta4

My neighbour is severely disabled, and has been having a very hard time climbing the stairs in our typical triplexes. And he absolutely does not want to go into an HLM for seniors or worse, a "care" facility aka threshold to death. His brother has the same condition and is in one of those. Fortunately he is moving to another co-op, a newbuild, possible only through the pressure of Projet Montréal and Québec solidaire éluEs. (I don't know if the feds were involved, Boulerice's people would certainly have stepped in; they work hand in hand with the QS staff where I live).  This new co-op is due south of ours, in the northwestern Plateau, la coop Mile-End (though it is in the area west of St-Denis and east of St-Laurent, not always seen as part of Mile-End. We are thrilled - there are several flats accessible for disabled people, and several others with three bedrooms for families.

The QLP would NEVER have supported such an initiative. Opposition parties can often punch above their weight if supported by communities and social action.

It would be useless to vote for the libs where I live in any event - the only contest here will be between QS and the PQ.

cco

I believe that's me you were quoting, alan, not pietro. I'm glad the PLQ hasn't caused you much personal damage. It's caused me plenty, particularly as a student at various points during Charest's tenure. Supporting the second-farthest-right party to block the farthest-right was a bad argument during J.S. Woodsworth's time, and it's a bad argument now. I wouldn't have supported the Alberta PCs to block Wildrose, either. The CAQ/ADQ came out of the PLQ, and they'll probably return there one day as part of a unite-the-right movement. QS/NPDQ "don't stand a chance" the same way the federal NDP doesn't stand a chance -- that is, as the result of millions of individual voters deciding they don't stand a chance. (The same voting population, incidentally, that took the NDP from nowhere to a QC landslide federally in 2011.) And when the PLQ knows they can blackmail people into voting for them because either the PQ or the CAQ are "so much worse", their policy trajectory will continue to move rightwards. One of these days the PLQ leader will be André Arthur. And as can be seen south of the border, second-worst hostage-based voting doesn't work for long. A party whose only selling point is "Look how bad the alternative is!" will eventually lose.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

cco wrote:

I believe that's me you were quoting, alan, not pietro. I'm glad the PLQ hasn't caused you much personal damage. It's caused me plenty, particularly as a student at various points during Charest's tenure. Supporting the second-farthest-right party to block the farthest-right was a bad argument during J.S. Woodsworth's time, and it's a bad argument now. I wouldn't have supported the Alberta PCs to block Wildrose, either. The CAQ/ADQ came out of the PLQ, and they'll probably return there one day as part of a unite-the-right movement. QS/NPDQ "don't stand a chance" the same way the federal NDP doesn't stand a chance -- that is, as the result of millions of individual voters deciding they don't stand a chance. (The same voting population, incidentally, that took the NDP from nowhere to a QC landslide federally in 2011.) And when the PLQ knows they can blackmail people into voting for them because either the PQ or the CAQ are "so much worse", their policy trajectory will continue to move rightwards. One of these days the PLQ leader will be André Arthur. And as can be seen south of the border, second-worst hostage-based voting doesn't work for long. A party whose only selling point is "Look how bad the alternative is!" will eventually lose.

Sorry for the insult I wrote at the end of my last comment. Understand that I am very concerned aboout my future,something that wouldn't concern me if the race was between the PLQ and the PQ.

Unfortunately,this election is like a colonoscopy with barbed wire and flames. The PQ have no one to blame but themselves for being irrelevant. They stand for nothing and the party has never recovered from the Lucien Bouchard era.

Honestly,I never voted for the PLQ,I never dreamed I would but the alternative is much,much worse and I'm helpless because I rely on disability to survive. I'm medically certified unable to work. My sickness makes it impossible to hold a job. I'm scared to be honest with you.Legauly is a demagogue a narcissist who has been doing everything in his power from trying to entice Anglophones to vote for him,then trying to entice sovereignists to vote for him,then back to the English community and just recently called for a new Quiet Revolution. He's an unprincipled asshole who is desperate for power and thinks the province should be run exactly like a business and not as the best interests of society (you really can't run a government like a business,just look South at the Trump administration,that's what they are doing and it's a complete horror show)

I usually vote my conscience. I vote QS and I'vd been voting for them since the old UFP party. They are not going to win the election this year.They have no chance,which is something that pains me to say but I'm just being realistic.

The NDPQ are not really an option because they just recently became a party in Quebec again and I can't even tell you the name of the party's leader. I don't see them fairing any better than QS,they should have become a party YEARS ago back when Jack Layton turned the province Orange. They are not positioned to win this election whether I vote for them or not. I have to resign myself to the fact that CAQ will most likely win and win a majority. It's a horse race in Montreal between the PLQ and CAQ which both surprises me and makes me depressed at the same time. CAQ has the regions in their back pockets,they will probably win Laval,I feel sick just writing down the words.

My riding is traditionally a Liberal strong hold. If it's a dog fight between those 2 parties in my riding,I feel I have no choice but to try to defeat CAQ.

I'm confused and disgusted. And as I said,I seriously fear my future,this is the sole reason why I'm even entertaining the thought of voting PLQ. But in the next few months,the fate of the election will be written on the wall,I may not have to vote against my values. By then CAQ will be gauranteed victory and I will just throw in my vote to QS knowing that it's all over.

What you said about the PLQ and what you say about the PLQ is true. I just don't buy them being worse than CAQ and I'm very sorry Charest fucked you over as a student. I seriously feel your pain and understand your disdain for the PLQ.

I'm just very concerned about my survival. That is all.

Pages