5

Change, but not separation


 

Stephen Harper interprets the Quebec election result.

“The people of Quebec voted for change, a pretty strong desire for change…. At the same time, I think it was pretty clear they were denying any kind of a mandate to pursue the separation of Quebec or the division of the country,” he said. “That’s certainly how we interpret it, and that’s how the government of Quebec will be forced to interpret it, one way or the other.”


 

Change, but not separation

  1. Or maybe all they wanted was the separation and not any of the other crap the PQ represents? It certainly could be looked at either way, now couldn’t it?

    Besides, Mr. Harper, you’ve already shown us through your minority governments what the minority mandate really means.. it simply means you confine your changes to taking place in the back rooms instead of where the public can see it.

  2. I see…If Harper thinks 32% of the popular vote is “a pretty strong desire for change”, then he must think the 39.6% his Cons got in the last election was a galloping, thundering landslide.

    Explains a lot.

    • Even more so when you consider the spread between the libs and the PQ was under 1% of the popular vote. Some analyst this guy Harper; or should i say a suspiciously partisan bit of analysis? Par for the course for him.

  3. Sounds like the right read to me. Obviously they wanted a change, else they wouldn’t have voted for it. If they also wanted separation there would be a referendum being set up right now, since the PQ is more than happy to oblige as soon as they think it’s got popular support.

    • “The people of Quebec voted for change, a pretty strong desire for change…”

      Did they though? It’s debatable. Don’t quibble with the second part of his analysis…but then he probably has access to the same news sources as you and i.

Sign in to comment.