2022 Conservative Party of Canada leadership election

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

There was a newspaper article suggesting a new party could be formed of conservatives more centrist and Liberals. I don't know how big blue Liberals represent. It could be people who would feel comfotrable with the old Progressive Conservative party who are now Liberals because they don't like the new Conservative party for its style or positions.

My own political views are such that I would love to see a "blue Liberal-red Tory" kind of party. More fiscally conservative and hesitant about sweeping government programs or overreach, but socially on the progressive side of things and wary of MAGA-type elements. Unfortunately, I don't think there's much appetite for this kind of politics, at least not enough to upset the existing political battle lines. A conservative coalition in Canada necessarily includes some pretty hard-right elements, if you went further left than O'Toole I think the PPC would really cause some damage.

And the Liberals have all but abandoned "blue liberalism". I'm sure some still exist, including in the government caucus, but they're clearly comfortable enough with Trudeau and Freeland who have not governed as blue liberals. Pre-Trudeau blues like Scott Brison, Bill Casey and Ralph Goodale are gone, and Bill Morneau was allegedly removed for not backing the kind of spending Trudeau wanted.

And on the right, of course, look at all the energy behind Poilievre. The least right-wing of the five permanent and interim leaders the CPC has had, O'Toole, was also the one who had the most internal opposition. Let's not forget that prior to the CPC being founded, Reform/Alliance had already replaced the PCs as the dominant party of the right.

O'Toole seemed to do well until he was on the defensive on gun policy and vaccines. Someone like Charest could make it easier for voters looking for change but not extreme. But it probably wouldn't work if a big part of the party is not happy and shoot from the inside. Charest is good at campaign, good at debate and good at attacking opponents. Ontario is the most important and I admit I don't know what would work best there.

It's still an open question whether that early election bump was people liking O'Toole or just being angry at Trudeau for calling it in the first place. There's probably some truth to both explanations. O'Toole and his allies have argued that the final collapse came down to the Delta Wave and re-focusing on the pandemic/vaccines, while his opponents to the right have argued that his flip-flopping on key issues demotivated CPC voters - again, probably some truth in both narratives.

I think O'Toole's defensiveness certainly hurt him. There's a difference between a moderate tory who passionately speaks for his principles versus a moderate tory who is desperate to show that he's not a big bad right-winger. O'Toole started the campaign as the former but ended it as the latter, and that kind of apologetic defensiveness exudes weakness, which is not what people want in a leader.

I don't know much about Charest, but I do think O'Toole's demise has confirmed a pre-existing view among many right-wingers that moderation is not the key to power, so he will have a tough time convincing them otherwise.

It's strange that so far only one person is running. I guess many putchists were ready with Poilievre. I don't know when the rules for the leadership will be announced, maybe others will declare interest then.

I think it's because anyone with an interest in the job not named Pierre Poilievre knows that they're likely to lose. By and large, the base likes Poilievre, and he has a lot of name recognition.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

The issue with Pierre is that despite his populist platform and rethoric he's too much of an ideloige and has a distinct track record. The liberals will be able to easily bury him with their traditional anti conservative message which he won't able to respond too credibly.

[DL]

I think one big problem with Poilievre goes beyond his rabidly rightwing policies. The guy is utterly charmless and is from central casting as "the mean guy". You watch him speak and he is grim humourless, sarcastic and seems like he would take pleasure from tearing the wings off flies in his spare time. He is NOT a nice person at all.

I'm not saying that to be successful a party leader has to be "Mr. Nice guy" - but there has to be some personality trait people can connect with. Poilievre is yet another beady-eyed, hyperpartisan life long political nerd who was probably holed up in his bedroom at the age of 16 reading the Virtue of Selfishness by Ayn Rand. Poilievre manages to make Stephen Harper look like Mr. Congeniality

I know there is a segment of the far right that is attracted to mean-spirited, pitiless politicians (one need only look at Trump) - but I think that among Canadians as a whole, this will be a liability.

[Central Lake]

There was a newspaper article suggesting a new party could be formed of conservatives more centrist and Liberals. I don't know how big blue Liberals represent. It could be people who would feel comfotrable with the old Progressive Conservative party who are now Liberals because they don't like the new Conservative party for its style or positions.

My own political views are such that I would love to see a "blue Liberal-red Tory" kind of party. More fiscally conservative and hesitant about sweeping government programs or overreach, but socially on the progressive side of things and wary of MAGA-type elements. Unfortunately, I don't think there's much appetite for this kind of politics, at least not enough to upset the existing political battle lines. A conservative coalition in Canada necessarily includes some pretty hard-right elements, if you went further left than O'Toole I think the PPC would really cause some damage.

And the Liberals have all but abandoned "blue liberalism". I'm sure some still exist, including in the government caucus, but they're clearly comfortable enough with Trudeau and Freeland who have not governed as blue liberals. Pre-Trudeau blues like Scott Brison, Bill Casey and Ralph Goodale are gone, and Bill Morneau was allegedly removed for not backing the kind of spending Trudeau wanted.

And on the right, of course, look at all the energy behind Poilievre. The least right-wing of the five permanent and interim leaders the CPC has had, O'Toole, was also the one who had the most internal opposition. Let's not forget that prior to the CPC being founded, Reform/Alliance had already replaced the PCs as the dominant party of the right.

O'Toole seemed to do well until he was on the defensive on gun policy and vaccines. Someone like Charest could make it easier for voters looking for change but not extreme. But it probably wouldn't work if a big part of the party is not happy and shoot from the inside. Charest is good at campaign, good at debate and good at attacking opponents. Ontario is the most important and I admit I don't know what would work best there.

It's still an open question whether that early election bump was people liking O'Toole or just being angry at Trudeau for calling it in the first place. There's probably some truth to both explanations. O'Toole and his allies have argued that the final collapse came down to the Delta Wave and re-focusing on the pandemic/vaccines, while his opponents to the right have argued that his flip-flopping on key issues demotivated CPC voters - again, probably some truth in both narratives.

I think O'Toole's defensiveness certainly hurt him. There's a difference between a moderate tory who passionately speaks for his principles versus a moderate tory who is desperate to show that he's not a big bad right-winger. O'Toole started the campaign as the former but ended it as the latter, and that kind of apologetic defensiveness exudes weakness, which is not what people want in a leader.

I don't know much about Charest, but I do think O'Toole's demise has confirmed a pre-existing view among many right-wingers that moderation is not the key to power, so he will have a tough time convincing them otherwise.

It's strange that so far only one person is running. I guess many putchists were ready with Poilievre. I don't know when the rules for the leadership will be announced, maybe others will declare interest then.

I think it's because anyone with an interest in the job not named Pierre Poilievre knows that they're likely to lose. By and large, the base likes Poilievre, and he has a lot of name recognition.

Sorry I am new to the site and don't know how to quote sections of a post. But I remember you creating a thread of a scenario of proportional representation where there were like six political parties. I was thinking of a scenario under the current FPTP system where there are three major political parties.

So imagine the LPC and NDP merge into a party dominated by progressives. We can call that Party A. Liberals unhappy with the merged party stay out. These unhappy Liberals create a new party with Conservatives who want a progressive conservative party. Think Kelly McParland, Globe and Mail writers. We can call this Party B. Then the remaining Conservatives take NDP voters unhappy with the merged party into the fold. Conservatives also bring Liberals unhappy with Party A and Party B into the fold. We can call this Party C.
Then we have a scenario in loose terms:

Party A: Progressive, Culturally Liberal and Economically Liberal
Party B: Culturally Liberal, Economically Conservative
Party C: Culturally Conservative, mix of Economically Right and Left, Populist

[mileslunn]

Yeah, personally, I think outside of wave elections, Halton Region is pretty much gone for the Conservatives.

I think for Milton that is largely true.  Oakville and Burlington while not easy if party avoids social conservatism, still has potential as O'Toole in 2021 and Harper 2015 came fairly close in those two, Scheer did poorly.  Both are higher income and while most not in top 1% who had taxes hiked, large deficits may make some worried about tax hikes.  Oakville North-Burlington unlike those two is more your quintessential middle class suburb not upper middle class and that is probably the better route long term.

Problem for Tories with Milton is while pretty far out, lower density, its full of ex 416 voters thus why no longer winnable.  I believe its the part of GTA where housing is least expensive so lots of young families that cannot afford the 416 are moving there.

[King of Kensington]

The Liberals won Oakville by 7 points in 2019 and 6 points in the last election, not a dramatic difference.

The way the CPC is headed, I don't expect O'Toole's successor to be particularly establishmentarian or "Oakville-friendly."

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

There was a newspaper article suggesting a new party could be formed of conservatives more centrist and Liberals. I don't know how big blue Liberals represent. It could be people who would feel comfotrable with the old Progressive Conservative party who are now Liberals because they don't like the new Conservative party for its style or positions.

My own political views are such that I would love to see a "blue Liberal-red Tory" kind of party. More fiscally conservative and hesitant about sweeping government programs or overreach, but socially on the progressive side of things and wary of MAGA-type elements. Unfortunately, I don't think there's much appetite for this kind of politics, at least not enough to upset the existing political battle lines. A conservative coalition in Canada necessarily includes some pretty hard-right elements, if you went further left than O'Toole I think the PPC would really cause some damage.

And the Liberals have all but abandoned "blue liberalism". I'm sure some still exist, including in the government caucus, but they're clearly comfortable enough with Trudeau and Freeland who have not governed as blue liberals. Pre-Trudeau blues like Scott Brison, Bill Casey and Ralph Goodale are gone, and Bill Morneau was allegedly removed for not backing the kind of spending Trudeau wanted.

And on the right, of course, look at all the energy behind Poilievre. The least right-wing of the five permanent and interim leaders the CPC has had, O'Toole, was also the one who had the most internal opposition. Let's not forget that prior to the CPC being founded, Reform/Alliance had already replaced the PCs as the dominant party of the right.

O'Toole seemed to do well until he was on the defensive on gun policy and vaccines. Someone like Charest could make it easier for voters looking for change but not extreme. But it probably wouldn't work if a big part of the party is not happy and shoot from the inside. Charest is good at campaign, good at debate and good at attacking opponents. Ontario is the most important and I admit I don't know what would work best there.

It's still an open question whether that early election bump was people liking O'Toole or just being angry at Trudeau for calling it in the first place. There's probably some truth to both explanations. O'Toole and his allies have argued that the final collapse came down to the Delta Wave and re-focusing on the pandemic/vaccines, while his opponents to the right have argued that his flip-flopping on key issues demotivated CPC voters - again, probably some truth in both narratives.

I think O'Toole's defensiveness certainly hurt him. There's a difference between a moderate tory who passionately speaks for his principles versus a moderate tory who is desperate to show that he's not a big bad right-winger. O'Toole started the campaign as the former but ended it as the latter, and that kind of apologetic defensiveness exudes weakness, which is not what people want in a leader.

I don't know much about Charest, but I do think O'Toole's demise has confirmed a pre-existing view among many right-wingers that moderation is not the key to power, so he will have a tough time convincing them otherwise.

It's strange that so far only one person is running. I guess many putchists were ready with Poilievre. I don't know when the rules for the leadership will be announced, maybe others will declare interest then.

I think it's because anyone with an interest in the job not named Pierre Poilievre knows that they're likely to lose. By and large, the base likes Poilievre, and he has a lot of name recognition.

Sorry I am new to the site and don't know how to quote sections of a post. But I remember you creating a thread of a scenario of proportional representation where there were like six political parties. I was thinking of a scenario under the current FPTP system where there are three major political parties.

So imagine the LPC and NDP merge into a party dominated by progressives. We can call that Party A. Liberals unhappy with the merged party stay out. These unhappy Liberals create a new party with Conservatives who want a progressive conservative party. Think Kelly McParland, Globe and Mail writers. We can call this Party B. Then the remaining Conservatives take NDP voters unhappy with the merged party into the fold. Conservatives also bring Liberals unhappy with Party A and Party B into the fold. We can call this Party C.
Then we have a scenario in loose terms:

Party A: Progressive, Culturally Liberal and Economically Liberal
Party B: Culturally Liberal, Economically Conservative
Party C: Culturally Conservative, mix of Economically Right and Left, Populist

Just to be clear, I don't think such a party is not possible, I just don't think it's currently viable under FPTP. In the event you cited of an NDP-LPC merger, I could see something like that potentially taking hold, but that event is itself pretty unlikely. As for a CPC split, I guess that's slightly more likely, but most moderate tories would rather have a CPC government that's further to the right than they would like, than any Liberal government.

Under a PR system, we would almost definitely see splits take shape, there's no way the current frankenstein coalition of the CPC would stick together if the electoral system was more favourable to a multi-party system. But adopting PR is also very unlikely. But under FPTP, such a party would almost certainly be doomed to fail, unless "success" is defined as "getting Andrew Coyne's endorsement

[MaxQue]

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1863855/jean-charest-course-direction-parti-conservateur

Article from Radio-Canada saying that Charest and Tasha Kheiriddin have decided to run, but reserve themselves the right to pull out last minute later.

Also, it seems Leslyn Lewis is preparing another run and Patrick Brown is thinking about it, but the timing of the municipal elections (October 2022) is a problem for him.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Jean Charest is gaining support in Eastern Canada to lead Conservatives


Interesting. The Charest rumours always seemed more like Laurentian daydreaming than an organic desire by the base, and maybe it still is, but having the endorsement of four sitting MPs (Perkins, Vien, Rayes and Nater) isn't nothing. Three of those names are hardly bigshots, but Alain Rayes was Scheer's Quebec deputy.

I still don't think Charest can defeat Poilievre. A path to a Charest victory would require him to basically sweep Quebec and Atlantic Canada, and get enough support from the more "urbane" wing of the CPC in Ontario and Western Canada (esp. Ontario & BC) to get over 50%. This isn't an unthinkable path - problem is, leadership races are also about signing up new or lapsed members, and with Poilievre's internet reach, I think he can outperform Charest on that front.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1863855/jean-charest-course-direction-parti-conservateur

Article from Radio-Canada saying that Charest and Tasha Kheiriddin have decided to run, but reserve themselves the right to pull out last minute later.

Also, it seems Leslyn Lewis is preparing another run and Patrick Brown is thinking about it, but the timing of the municipal elections (October 2022) is a problem for him.

Welp, here we go!

Not surprised Lewis is preparing, she's the standard bearer for the social conservative/religious right wing, she won't get the leadership but any influence she can gain by running will help her profile and career. Tasha Kheiriddin is...a long shot. I've expressed my distaste for Patrick Brown, no need to beat a dead horse.

In a Poilievre/Charest/Kheiriddin/Lewis/Brown run, I would think it comes down to Poilievre vs Charest with Lewis in third. Lewis' presence undoubtedly helps Poilievre down-ballot.

[Continential]

Genuine question: How big is Brown’s ego?

[DC Al Fine]

Genuine question: How big is Brown’s ego?

Not as big as his libido apparently.

[MaxQue]

Genuine question: How big is Brown’s ego?

Probably smaller than Tasha's?

[DC Al Fine]

Genuine question: How big is Brown’s ego?

Probably smaller than Tasha's?

Also true

[DC Al Fine]

It occurs to me that as Premier of Quebec, Charest criticised the removal of the long gun registry after Harper won his majority. Conservative Party members were not exactly the long gun registry's biggest fans. Another headwind for Charest.

[DL]

Doesn't Charest also believe that climate change exists and introduced a carbon tax in Quebec? Another thing that would make him ANATHEMA to the vast majority of Tory members

[Poirot]

A cap and trade system.

He opposed destroying the gun registry.
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/quebec-premier-calls-end-of-gun-registry-unacceptable
The Quebec government went to court for the federal government to hand over the data but lost 5-4 at the Supreme Court (three Quebec judges in the minority).

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

So just based on what we've talked about on this thread, Charest has taken stances antithetical to the majority of Conservatives on gun control and carbon pricing. Then there's the whole working as a legal representative for Huawei while the two Michaels were detained in China thing which won't endear him to anyone, least of all Conservatives

[Poirot]

Maybe it's more people asking him to run and takes his time to give an answer because it could be his last chance to have a path to become Prime Minister. Poilievre probably has a big lead at the start. Charest's appeal could be he offers a better chance to get votes from moderates, centrists, disenchanted Liberals, more Quebec votes and he is a very good campaigner. But the conservative membership is probably not looking for that. It would be hard for him to win. He would need new members and it's probably easier to sell membership to people with a cause or ideology.

It seems there are at least 7 Quebec MPs willing to support Charest. So they are looking for someone other than Poilievre (maybe they will endorse him if he is the sure winner). Two Harper appointed Senators and organizers are supporting Poilievre.

Quebec politics bewilders me.

Most of the Quebec Tory caucus are CAQuists. I get why they wouldn't want Poillievre, but Charest as a PLQ Premier seems like a bad fit as well. Is it as simple as backing a fellow Quebecer or am I missing something else?

I think they see someone who is good at politics and can win (but maybe not the party leadership considering opinions of party members). They prefer a positioning more progressive conservative than prairie populist.

During Charest's time it was the mostly the ADQ, CAQ was created just before Charest's last election. Deltell and Rayes were in the ADQ. I imagine they have said things about Charest as opponents.

It seems there are many links of Quebec caucus with the Quebec Liberal Party and Charest. Dominique Vien was in Cabinet. Richard Lehoux was a PLQ candidate under Charest. I read today that Joël Godin and Luc Berthold were staff for PLQ Cabinet ministers.

Rayes is doing a media round promoting Charest. If a lot of members don't want Charest and some don't want Poilievre, maybe some other candidate could come as a party unifier.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

It kinda speaks to the malaise of the CPC that it's probably coming down to Poilievre vs Charest. Poilievre made his name as the most cutthroat partisan in the game, absolutely loved by the base, but also speaks to the worst image non-Tories have about the party. To borrow an old UK term, they're seen by many as the "nasty party", and Poilievre isn't going to help with that impression. Charest is controversial in Quebec and sure to be controversial in the rest of Canada given his stances on a number of things.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Maybe it's more people asking him to run and takes his time to give an answer because it could be his last chance to have a path to become Prime Minister. Poilievre probably has a big lead at the start. Charest's appeal could be he offers a better chance to get votes from moderates, centrists, disenchanted Liberals, more Quebec votes and he is a very good campaigner. But the conservative membership is probably not looking for that. It would be hard for him to win. He would need new members and it's probably easier to sell membership to people with a cause or ideology.

It seems there are at least 7 Quebec MPs willing to support Charest. So they are looking for someone other than Poilievre (maybe they will endorse him if he is the sure winner). Two Harper appointed Senators and organizers are supporting Poilievre.

Quebec politics bewilders me.

Most of the Quebec Tory caucus are CAQuists. I get why they wouldn't want Poillievre, but Charest as a PLQ Premier seems like a bad fit as well. Is it as simple as backing a fellow Quebecer or am I missing something else?

I think they see someone who is good at politics and can win (but maybe not the party leadership considering opinions of party members). They prefer a positioning more progressive conservative than prairie populist.

During Charest's time it was the mostly the ADQ, CAQ was created just before Charest's last election. Deltell and Rayes were in the ADQ. I imagine they have said things about Charest as opponents.

It seems there are many links of Quebec caucus with the Quebec Liberal Party and Charest. Dominique Vien was in Cabinet. Richard Lehoux was a PLQ candidate under Charest. I read today that Joël Godin and Luc Berthold were staff for PLQ Cabinet ministers.

Rayes is doing a media round promoting Charest. If a lot of members don't want Charest and some don't want Poilievre, maybe some other candidate could come as a party unifier.

Probably fair to say that, as much as ADQ/CAQ-istes and Liberals may disagree on Quebec politics, they find a lot more common ground in federal politics than they do with the Poilievre wing of the party.

[Continential]

Could Lewis reach the final round or would it be hard for her to do so since Pollievre is running?

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Could Lewis reach the final round or would it be hard for her to do so since Pollievre is running?

Poilievre's not a religious right candidate. I'm sure they would mostly break for him in a simple Poilievre/Charest race, but if Lewis is on the ballot, she'll get a lot of first picks.

My prediction based on the candidates and likely candidates so far would be:
1. Poilievre
2. Charest
3. Lewis (her votes mostly breaking for PP after she's dropped off in Round 2 or 3)
4+ Brown, Kheiriddin, whoever else runs really

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

I think one big problem with Poilievre goes beyond his rabidly rightwing policies. The guy is utterly charmless and is from central casting as "the mean guy". You watch him speak and he is grim humourless, sarcastic and seems like he would take pleasure from tearing the wings off flies in his spare time. He is NOT a nice person at all.

I'm not saying that to be successful a party leader has to be "Mr. Nice guy" - but there has to be some personality trait people can connect with. Poilievre is yet another beady-eyed, hyperpartisan life long political nerd who was probably holed up in his bedroom at the age of 16 reading the Virtue of Selfishness by Ayn Rand. Poilievre manages to make Stephen Harper look like Mr. Congeniality

I know there is a segment of the far right that is attracted to mean-spirited, pitiless politicians (one need only look at Trump) - but I think that among Canadians as a whole, this will be a liability.

Harper had a reputation pre-leadership of being a rabid right-winger from the reform party. He was able to move past-it. Poilievre might be able to make a similar transition.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

I think one big problem with Poilievre goes beyond his rabidly rightwing policies. The guy is utterly charmless and is from central casting as "the mean guy". You watch him speak and he is grim humourless, sarcastic and seems like he would take pleasure from tearing the wings off flies in his spare time. He is NOT a nice person at all.

I'm not saying that to be successful a party leader has to be "Mr. Nice guy" - but there has to be some personality trait people can connect with. Poilievre is yet another beady-eyed, hyperpartisan life long political nerd who was probably holed up in his bedroom at the age of 16 reading the Virtue of Selfishness by Ayn Rand. Poilievre manages to make Stephen Harper look like Mr. Congeniality

I know there is a segment of the far right that is attracted to mean-spirited, pitiless politicians (one need only look at Trump) - but I think that among Canadians as a whole, this will be a liability.

Harper had a reputation pre-leadership of being a rabid right-winger from the reform party. He was able to move past-it. Poilievre might be able to make a similar transition.

I think there's a personality difference though. Harper was across-the-board pretty conservative and could be harshly critical of the Liberals, but he hated the spotlight and preferred to stay quiet on things that could hurt him. Poilievre is a bit more of a loose cannon and loves the cameras, and the combination of the two means he's said some pretty stupid things (residential school survivors should learn the importance of hard work, etc). In a way, he's temperamentally more like Ford, but ideologically more like Harper.