Quebec General Election 2012 (4th September)

[canadian1]

Those results seem very probable, Teddy. At this point, we've got to take account of the new boundaries, which have just gone into effect (as of Saturday the 21st). I wouldn't be surprised if the CAQ won all three new ridings.

[canadian1]

They stuck with him in '93, they'll stick with him now.

That was nineteen years ago. Things are different now: an excessively curly headed breath of fresh air he is absolutely not these days.

100% agreed.

[canadian1]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/quebecvotes2012/story/2012/08/20/quebec-votes-anglophone-voter-turnout-ridings.html

VERY bad news for Charest; if his core supporters (anglos, west island, minorities) don't vote... CAQ or even the PQ could snap up some of these ridings. Could we see an 89' repeat? I know their is no Anglo-centic party this time so that could limit the loss; but if there is such a low turnout that could mean squeaker wins for another party other then the PLQ

That's not news; those are voter turnout statistics from the last election. The only thing that article says about this election is that anglo voter turnout may be higher.

The very reason those "core supporters" didn't vote in the past is because their votes didn't make a difference. Charest won those ridings easily without them, since plenty of other anglos/minorities did bother to vote. The notion that the PQ could win seats on the West Island is ludicrous.

Charest is essentially a dead man walking, but not on the West Island, and voter turnout statistics from 2008 aren't helpful information.

[canadian1]

That's disgusting race-baiting.

What is?

The previous post. Sure, I suppose than language-baiting is more accurate, but I doubt it's a word.

It was intended to mock Marois as being on par with oppressive dictators, not attacking anyone per se. Apologies if it was offensive.

Well, Marois takes her positions because they is a public for that.
In any case, despite the Anglo opposition to language laws, the Franco population overwhelmingly support them.

Oh my! I wonder why that might be!

[canadian1]

That's disgusting race-baiting.

What is?

The previous post. Sure, I suppose than language-baiting is more accurate, but I doubt it's a word.

It was intended to mock Marois as being on par with oppressive dictators, not attacking anyone per se. Apologies if it was offensive.

Well, Marois takes her positions because they is a public for that.
In any case, despite the Anglo opposition to language laws, the Franco population overwhelmingly support them.

Oh my! I wonder why that might be!

Historical reasons. The Anglophone minority ruled the economy of Québec until the 60's (for example, it was very hard to get a loan if you were French, the access to the high-ranking positions in businesses was blocked because they didn't talked English, many businesses were working in English only and customers were insulted if they talked French and were refused to be served....). Let's let than the Anglo minority abused their power and than this is the coilback.

That was sarcasm. It seems obvious to me that Francophones would support language laws that are meant to benefit only them.

Do you really think "coilback" is a legitimate justification for laws that, whatever their intended purposes, impose a significant burden on minorities?

[canadian1]

Found 2 errors in the Chapleau riding where the Greens "won" massively while the Liberals got 1 or 0 votes in a safe Liberal ridings.

An error in data switiching Lib and Green I imagine. I hope the map is not full of mistakes.

It might not be La Presse's fault, but rather the fault of Elections Quebec. Once in a while you will see results from a poll that make no sense because someone somewhere a long the line switched the numbers. In this case, someone put the Liberal numbers in the green spot and vise-versa. I've seen it happen on the federal level too.  I remember watching the 2004 election, when Peter Mansbridge declared that the Marxist-Leninist Party was ahead in one of the Mississauga ridings due to a similar tabulation error.

I remember that quite clearly!