Quebec: April 7, 2014

[cp]

Whether or not TVA shills for Peladeau I fully expect he'll run for the leadership. It always struck me a bit fishy that someone so prominent in business would willingly give it up to run for office in a contested election, even if it meant a spot in Cabinet. Has there been any polling in his district to indicate whether or not he'll win? Saint-Jerome has been a rather swingy riding lately. With the PQ down and the CAQ up PKP might be SOL.

On a different note, and at the risk of jumping the gun a bit, what was the last time that a ruling party voluntarily submitted to an election - not voted down via non-confidence or obliged by term limits - and lost outright (i.e. not 'returned with a minority/reduced majority)?

[cp]

For the other question: PKP ran because he wanted to be premier after an interval at Finance. If he can't be premier he'll leave fairly quickly.

Has that been documented somewhere? It seems like a plausible explanation, for sure, but I'd be surprised if even someone like him would be so brazen as to say it out loud.

To clarify, those governments that served two terms had come to the end of their mandate (or very nearly to the end). I would count those as having been forced into an election by term limits. As a contrasting example, David Peterson's Ontario Liberal government had a majority in 1990 and had several years left in its term; he called an election early and was defeated. I'd count that as 'voluntarily submitting to an election'.

[cp]

1976? The one that elected the PQ for the first time and ushered in a generational shift in Quebec politics? Yikes! Not the most auspicious precedent for Marois.

[cp]

Hmm, seems like a pretty common tactic in Quebec politics after all. There's probably a good poli sci paper in analyzing how effective early election calls are for governments in Canada, but damned if I'm going to research/write it!

[cp]

Do let us know if there are any rich McGill students in veils who try to vote

On a more serious note, how likely is it that the CAQ could outperform the current seat projections? Usually 20% is the tipping point for a party to start picking up seats in a FPTP system and the momentum seems to be on the CAQ's side. They're running neck and neck with the PQ, which is what happened during the ADQ break out in 2007, but back then the PLQ was only a couple points ahead rather than 20. 

[cp]

Speaking of predictions, I'll add my two cents:

Seats:
PLQ: 66
PQ: 42
CAQ: 15
QS: 2

PV:
PLQ: 42.5%
PQ: 26.5%
CAQ: 24%
QS: 6%
Others: 1%

I also consider to be possible, but not as likely, an outcome that sees the PLQ get over 75 seats at the expense of the CAQ with negligible changes in the PV.

Bonne chance tout le monde!

[cp]

You know what they say about great minds . . .

It's just a coincidence this time, though. Or perhaps an unconscious repetition, as I read your blog earlier but wasn't thinking about it when I sat down to decide what I thought would happen.

My thinking was that a PLQ majority was more likely than a minority, that the CAQ would do no better than they did last time but not much worse, and that QS and the PQ would turn out their vote just as efficiently as one would expect.

[cp]

And quite a projection it is! You've got PKP going down to an 8-point defeat. From your mouth to their ears!

[cp]

Jeez, that didn't take long. 19 minutes?

[cp]

Where are you getting the elected numbers from?

[cp]

New budget and secular charter will be enacted. Probably a short June session similar to '03. Regular fall session in October as usual. 4 elections in 7 years has been quite enough.

Says who? I would have thought that given the results of the election the PLQ would feel comfortable not bringing up the Chartres right away, especially if they could pull it out of their pocket in a few years if their poll numbers decline.

Another item on the agenda: euthanasia.

Long overdue.