2022 Conservative Party of Canada leadership election

[DC Al Fine]

Charest said he opposes Bill 21 and wants to intervene against it at the Supreme Court, which is Brown's position and could cause the Quebec caucus to quit. Did not expect that. Poilievre's view, at least 2 years ago, was personal opposition but Quebec has the right to pass it and he wouldn't support a court challenge.

Wow that's a gutsy move. Full credit to Charest where due

[Central Lake]

People on the Charest team deny a pact with Patrick Brown.

Hypothetically in a general election where would Charest run. Sherbrooke? a Quebec City area riding?

[MaxQue]

People on the Charest team deny a pact with Patrick Brown.

Hypothetically in a general election where would Charest run. Sherbrooke? a Quebec City area riding?

Not Sherbrooke, it is unwinnable for any Conservative at the moment. They got 13% last time and even star candidate André Bachand only got 16% in 2008.

[DC Al Fine]

People on the Charest team deny a pact with Patrick Brown.

Hypothetically in a general election where would Charest run. Sherbrooke? a Quebec City area riding?

Not Sherbrooke, it is unwinnable for any Conservative at the moment. They got 13% last time and even star candidate André Bachand only got 16% in 2008.

Yeah I'd probably just find some safe seat for him to run in a by-election and have him stay there.

[RogueBeaver]

https://twitter.com/abbas_rana1/status/1501956981917163523

[DL]

If Patrick Brown runs for the leadership it likely means he will NOT be running for re-election as mayor of Brampton since the deadline to file is before the date when the winner of the Tory leadership is to be announced. I wonder who might run for mayor now? Maybe Brampton will finally get a South Asian mayor.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

People on the Charest team deny a pact with Patrick Brown.

Hypothetically in a general election where would Charest run. Sherbrooke? a Quebec City area riding?

There's always the option of asking a sitting MP of the CPC to step down so he can get a seat through a by-election. Last time this happened was in 2000 (only months before Chretien called a snap election), when then-PC member Scott Brison stepped down to give Clark a chance to win a seat. Jagmeet Singh didn't do this and waited for an NDP-favourable byelection to emerge naturally, but it's not clear yet that Singh has set a new precedent. I could see a relatively low-profile Tory in a safe seat, like Joël Godin or Bernard Généreux being asked to do this, then Charest runs in a winnable non-Tory Quebec riding in the next election, like one of the Beauport ridings - although redistricting could affect which seat he picks.

Like MaxQue said, running in Sherbrooke as a Tory seems like a fool's errand. Charest would do better than any other Tory there, but it's still a big task to win a seat where they only got 1/8 of the vote in the most recent election. Compton-Stanstead (Sherbrooke suburbs and surrounding farmland) is a bit more winnable, but if I were him I'd stay on the safe side and stick to the Quebec City area.

[DL]

There's always the option of asking a sitting MP of the CPC to step down so he can get a seat through a by-election. Last time this happened was in 2000 (only months before Chretien called a snap election), when then-PC member Scott Brison stepped down to give Clark a chance to win a seat. Jagmeet Singh didn't do this and waited for an NDP-favourable byelection to emerge naturally, but it's not clear yet that Singh has set a new precedent.

The Tories are the official opposition and have over 100 seats so if Charest were to become leader, chances are there would be several MPs who would be happy to step aside for him. The NDP had a much smaller caucus when Singh won and there were not that many seats that were good fits for him. He also did not set a new precedent since Alexa MacDonough and Jack Layton both became federal NDP leader's without having seats and neither of them entered parliament through a byelection - they both waited until the next general election.   

[Хahar 🤔]

A Léger poll  that is not great news for Charest if he wants to play the electabilty, winnability card.

With Charest as leader, voting intentions are:
LPC 33
CPC 28
NDP 20
BQ 8
PPC 7
Green 3

With Poilievre:

LPC 34
CPC 30
NDP 21
BQ 8
PPC 3
Green 3

With Charest PPC is up and CPC lower. It will be interesting to see regional numbers when the details are published.

People's Party votes are largely in safe Conservative ridings with minimal effect on the actual result, so if those results are accurate than a Conservative Party led by Charest would need a significantly smaller share of the vote to win than a Conservative Party led by Poilievre. Of course, that's a pretty nuanced argument and a difficult one to make.

[Don Vito Corleone]

I have to say I really can’t see how Charest wins this. He left office incredibly unpopular in Quebec and remains so today, and just by virtue of being Premier of Quebec he did a lot of things which won’t go over well in the West. I guess the fact he’s the only candidate who’s fluently bilingual will help him out some, but still.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

I have to say I really can’t see how Charest wins this. He left office incredibly unpopular in Quebec and remains so today, and just by virtue of being Premier of Quebec he did a lot of things which won’t go over well in the West. I guess the fact he’s the only candidate who’s fluently bilingual will help him out some, but still.

Poilievre is the overwhelming frontrunner. Charest's best hope is that Brown does better than expected and Brown voters rank Charest second, and a big enough chunk of Lewis voters (who are likely to disproportionately be single-issue so-cons) don't rank anyone second - believe it or not, a lot of Lewis votes disappeared after the second round of the last election, suggesting that many in the Lewis/Sloan so-con bloc weren't interested in anyone who didn't share their specific views.

[Continential]

I wish Maxine Bernier would enter.

Bridges burned with the CPC.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

I keep thinking Poilievre is Quebec, instead of the more interesting franco-albertan. Does anyone know how well he speaks french ?. Will his name have any effect at all in Quebec ?

[RogueBeaver]

https://twitter.com/MichaelChongMP/status/1502283289981333508

[mileslunn]

While I would love idea of Charest being leader or some other moderate, I just don't see it happening.  Membership of party is quite right wing and if MacKay was too moderate, no way they will go for Charest who base likes even less.  That being said if he somehow did pull it off, I suspect you would see a huge exodus of MPs particularly in Prairies but also BC Interior and Rural Ontario.  So he could choose any of those ridings until election.  It would be a sign party plans to return to PC roots as while a merger, clearly Reform side is in charge and PC side junior partner.  O'Toole unlike Scheer and Harper came from PC side but had to act like a Reformer to win leadership and big reason dumped was this.

I think future of party is one of two things happening:

1.  They lose again and unless a really bad loss unlikely to learn and stay on right.  Its why I've predicted all along party doesn't return to power until around 2030 (note if Liberals in power as long as last time, it would be in 2028 change happens).  But if bad enough lose like Labour in UK, maybe it forces shake up.  But with how many people loathe Liberals, I doubt party falls below 100 seats.  Tories have a very high floor in seats, but very low ceiling thus why always looks like close to winning but cannot get over top.

2.  Fatigue of Liberals is so bad Tories do under Poilievre win.  Unless Poilievre is a one term wonder, that will cement party's shift right.  Whether country goes along long term or not is a different story.

But point is as much as I want a moderate to lead party, I think there is a greater than 90% chance Poilievre is next leader.

[Poirot]

I could see a relatively low-profile Tory in a safe seat, like Joël Godin or Bernard Généreux being asked to do this, then Charest runs in a winnable non-Tory Quebec riding in the next election, like one of the Beauport ridings - although redistricting could affect which seat he picks.

Like MaxQue said, running in Sherbrooke as a Tory seems like a fool's errand. Charest would do better than any other Tory there, but it's still a big task to win a seat where they only got 1/8 of the vote in the most recent election. Compton-Stanstead (Sherbrooke suburbs and surrounding farmland) is a bit more winnable, but if I were him I'd stay on the safe side and stick to the Quebec City area.

Godin supports Charest. He sais his goal is to save the Conservative party, be united and stay progreesive conservative. He thinks Charest can unite the social right and progressive conservatives.  He will think of his political future if the party is not progressive conservative. He fears a split if another candidate is elected leader.

They need a compromise candidate because it seems many will be unhappy with Charest and could leave, while others fear the direction with Poilievre and could leave.

There are 6 Quebec MPs supporting Charest. One is neutral because of his role but Berthold has held many jobs with the provincial Liberals during Charest's time  that my guess is he would support him. People are loyal to Charest. There are three undeclared yet. If they want a better role if Poilievre wins, it might makes sense to support him.

The provincial Liberal members of the National Assembly will be allowed to support a candidate in the federal conservative race, and some are planning to help Charest, but other parties like CAQ and provincial Conservative plan to publicly stay out of it.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

https://twitter.com/MichaelChongMP/status/1502283289981333508

 

I'd much have preferred Chong as the standard bearer for moderate Tories rather than Charest or possibly Brown. But Chong is associated with supporting a carbon tax, and he knows the base won't accept that (then again - so is Brown and arguably Charest, but they're hoping to pull off a pivot)

[mileslunn]

I could see a relatively low-profile Tory in a safe seat, like Joël Godin or Bernard Généreux being asked to do this, then Charest runs in a winnable non-Tory Quebec riding in the next election, like one of the Beauport ridings - although redistricting could affect which seat he picks.

Like MaxQue said, running in Sherbrooke as a Tory seems like a fool's errand. Charest would do better than any other Tory there, but it's still a big task to win a seat where they only got 1/8 of the vote in the most recent election. Compton-Stanstead (Sherbrooke suburbs and surrounding farmland) is a bit more winnable, but if I were him I'd stay on the safe side and stick to the Quebec City area.

Godin supports Charest. He sais his goal is to save the Conservative party, be united and stay progreesive conservative. He thinks Charest can unite the social right and progressive conservatives.  He will think of his political future if the party is not progressive conservative. He fears a split if another candidate is elected leader.

They need a compromise candidate because it seems many will be unhappy with Charest and could leave, while others fear the direction with Poilievre and could leave.

There are 6 Quebec MPs supporting Charest. One is neutral because of his role but Berthold has held many jobs with the provincial Liberals during Charest's time  that my guess is he would support him. People are loyal to Charest. There are three undeclared yet. If they want a better role if Poilievre wins, it might makes sense to support him.

The provincial Liberal members of the National Assembly will be allowed to support a candidate in the federal conservative race, and some are planning to help Charest, but other parties like CAQ and provincial Conservative plan to publicly stay out of it.

Party to stay united needs some like Peter MacKay, James Moore, Rona Ambrose, or Brad Wall.  First was a Progressive Conservative but as architect of merger, he enjoys respect from right side of party most former PCs do not.  If you look at endorsements in 2020, he got many from Reform side to endorse him.

James Moore comes from Reform side and from West, but is from BC and Lower Mainland where party struggles.  Also despite Reform roots, he was very moderate and probably only ran for them as PCs were dead in BC when he came to office but his policies much more like PC wing or moderate wing nowadays.

Rona Ambrose well respected cabinet member and from Alberta which will make base happy as base strongest in Prairies.  But she is also likeable and moderate so acceptable to moderate wing.

Brad Wall as a successful premier of Saskatchewan is well liked by both sides and as premier he did a good job of uniting both the more right wing rural faction (which Moe panders too) and the more urban centrist faction thus why unlike predecessor Elwin Hermanson, he was able to breakthrough into two main cities.

Sadly none of those four likely to run.  Now maybe after party loses again under Poilievre, one of them may realize its only way to save party.  Liberals are quite vulnerable, but Tories great at shooting themselves in foot.  They should learn form British counterparts not GOP.  British Tories are still conservative not liberal lite, but they have a winning mentality and can pivot as public opinion changes.  GOP is more about ideological purity but US unlike Canada has a strong right wing base where they can get away with it.  Still GOP's move to ideological purity is why several states they used to win like California are no longer winnable.  And states most culturally similar to Canada tend to be solid blue ones, not purple and especially not red ones.

[adma]

But with how many people loathe Liberals, I doubt party falls below 100 seats.  Tories have a very high floor in seats, but very low ceiling thus why always looks like close to winning but cannot get over top.

Not so much "how many people", but *where* those people are.  Or for the Cons to fall below 100 at this point, the Libs/NDP are going to have to finagle a few more breakthroughs in Prairie cities...

[mileslunn]

But with how many people loathe Liberals, I doubt party falls below 100 seats.  Tories have a very high floor in seats, but very low ceiling thus why always looks like close to winning but cannot get over top.

Not so much "how many people", but *where* those people are.  Or for the Cons to fall below 100 at this point, the Libs/NDP are going to have to finagle a few more breakthroughs in Prairie cities...

They don't have a lot of seats in Quebec and Atlantic Canada to begin with and a complete shut out in either seems very unlikely.  Yes did in Atlantic Canada in 2015 but that was a one off likely not to be repeated anytime soon.  Still I could see them dropping to as low as 3 seats there only winning the so called Baptist Belt seats in New Brunswick (Tobique-Mactaquac, New Brunswick Southwest, and Fundy-Royal).  Rural Ontario is pretty solidly conservative and even in bad elections Tories still win lion's share so 25 seats probably floor there.  BC Interior too so 10 seats probably floor there.

For Prairies, Tories are vulnerable in some urban seats but Liberals and NDP at least in Alberta & Saskatchewan (not so much Manitoba) have image of being hostile to those regions.  I think best way to win there is have a lot of strategic voting and perhaps hope Notley throws her support behind one party.  Sure lots of people in Alberta despise Notley, but they are types that will always vote for right wing parties anyways and they are not a majority either. 

But my point is more Tories double down on their right wing ideology, the more seats that will fall out of reach many their already difficult path to 170 while go from steep uphill climb to impossible.  Liberals at least after 2011 disaster were forced to do a major shake up, but because Tories have far more safe seats, they are not likely to ever lose badly enough to force this.  Victory will always appear close even if not.

[adma]

But my point is more Tories double down on their right wing ideology, the more seats that will fall out of reach many their already difficult path to 170 while go from steep uphill climb to impossible.  Liberals at least after 2011 disaster were forced to do a major shake up, but because Tories have far more safe seats, they are not likely to ever lose badly enough to force this.  Victory will always appear close even if not.

Well, that is true; which is why I merely suggested "under 100" as within the realm of possibility.  The Cons aren't likely to fall to the 34-seat depths of Iggy, or even 77 seats a la Dion, unless really crazy 1993-style splits in the right or even grander grand coalitions on the centre and left come to be.

[DC Al Fine]

https://twitter.com/CanadianPolling/status/1502411681686822920?t=KWs-Isw9b9n6ckW...

Speculation about the Poillievre losing 20+ seats against what will be a ~10 year old government is just a tad premature.

Guys we went through this all of six months ago in the last election. Atlas doomered about the Tories chances and speculated about a Liberal thousand year reich... and we got O'Toole briefly taking the lead in the polls and status quo ex ante in the end.

[Hatman 🍁]

Early polling suggests Skippy will get the crazies back into the Tory fold, but has no room to grow amongst blue Liberals. Charest's numbers among blue Liberals are slightly better, but not particularly encouraging.

[mileslunn]

Early polling suggests Skippy will get the crazies back into the Tory fold, but has no room to grow amongst blue Liberals. Charest's numbers among blue Liberals are slightly better, but not particularly encouraging.

I think Tories realistically need Liberal unpopularity to be high enough if they want to unite various sides and I don't see that at this point.  By nature more Canadians lean towards Liberals than Tories so all things equal, Liberals have natural advantage.  Its why over past century, Liberals have spent 2/3 of time in government and Tories 1/3 and usually Liberal time in office is quite a bit longer than Tory ones.  History would suggest we are a long ways from change.  If last as long as Chretien/Martin, then change would happen in 2028.  If as long as Pearson/Trudeau then not until 2036 or if as long as King/St. Laurent not until 2037.  Note I doubt it takes until 2036 or 2037 for Tories to win but just saying if you look at history, if Liberals were to lose next election it would be shortest time in office.

Yes if we look at how long most Tory ones are different story as for Mulroney and Harper it would be in 2024 so right around when next election happens and for Diefenbaker it would have been 2021 and 2020 for RB Bennett. 

By same token, Laurier is last PM to win four elections in a row (Trudeau sr, did win four but only three in a row, lost to Joe Clark then won in 1980) so that is one thing Tories have in their favour but my guess is Freeland not Trudeau will be Liberal leader next election.

[King of Kensington]

Early polling suggests Skippy will get the crazies back into the Tory fold, but has no room to grow amongst blue Liberals. Charest's numbers among blue Liberals are slightly better, but not particularly encouraging.

Sounds about right.  He can pull back the PPC vote, but has no appeal to blue Liberals.  And map does not favor the "win back the PPC" strategy as it piles up the votes where not needed.