QS Quebecers have understood the nature of the animal

QS: Quebecers have understood the nature of the animal

QS activists met at the end of the week to take stock of the last campaign.

The results, while not bad, were disappointing.

Throughout the weekend, they pretended not to see what defies the eyes of an honest observer.

Comfortable

They pointed to the taxes proposed by the party, which allowed their opponents to portray them as an extremist and isolated formation.

The problem is quite simply that the measures that QS wants to introduce would only be possible with drastic tax increases.

The activists also deeply regretted that the QS caucus is not the same: seven men, four women. Pretty frightening.

But what distinguishes QS and we voluntarily refrain from naming it?

In June 2022, Léger conducted a poll asking supporters of each party whether they would vote yes or no on sovereignty in a hypothetical referendum.

Of those who chose to vote for QS, 39% would have said yes to sovereignty and 61% would have said no.

In short: over 60% of QS supporters are federalists. However, QS officially describes itself as a sovereign.

Suppose you are in a party that has an important goal that you fundamentally oppose.

You denounce that goal, you try to change it, or you give up.

None of that with the QS federalists.

How is it to be explained that they feel so comfortable in this officially sovereignist formation?

It’s easy because they can see it’s not really a priority.

In its early days, QS described itself as a sovereignist because it targeted the PQ.

From that moment on, the only independent Québec that would please him would be one that corresponded in every way to his vision of an ideal society.

By attaching a number of conditions to this project, you ensure it will be pushed back and you can continue to woo the Federalists.

QS knows its best hunting ground is in Montreal, where voters are overwhelmingly Federalist.

His about-face to banning religious symbols for certain workers—first yes, then no—was the first hint of his duplicity.

His about-face on the appointment of Amira Elghawaby was another example of his identity opportunism.

The portrayal of Paul St-Pierre Plamondon as an extremist for raising fundamental questions about immigration is a third example of QS’s hypocrisy on the national question.

Anyone seriously concerned about Quebec’s French-speaking identity can’t help but put immigration at the forefront of their concerns.

Fraud

A reader asked me when voters would see how much QS misrepresents.

To see this party stagnate at 15% for years and struggle to establish itself outside of Montreal, I would say many Quebecers have already noticed.

Who is Gaston Miron